Sharia law "misunderstood"

Excerpts from an email I received from an attorney (link follows):

President Barack Obama's adviser on Muslim affairs, Dalia Mogahed, has provoked controversy by appearing on a British television show hosted by a member of an extremist group to talk about Sharia Law.

Miss Mogahed, appointed to the President's Council on Faith-Based and Neighbourhood Partnerships, said the Western view of Sharia was "oversimplified" and the majority of women around the world associate it with "gender justice".

The White House adviser made the remarks on a London-based TV discussion programme hosted by Ibtihal Bsis, a member of the extremist Hizb ut Tahrir party. ...... They called for Sharia Law to be "the source of legislation" and said that women should not be "permitted to hold a [u]position of leadership[/u] in government".

Miss Mogahed made no challenge to these demands and said that [u]"promiscuity" and the "breakdown of traditional values" were what Muslims admired least about the West[/u].... Sharia in its broadest sense is a religious code for living, which decrees such matters as [/u]fasting and dressing modestly[/u]..... It also includes the controversial "Hadd offences", crimes with specific penalties set by the Koran and the sayings of the prophet Mohammed. These include death by stoning for [u]adultery and homosexuality and the removal of a hand for theft[/u]. ...... The video of the broadcast has now been prominently posted on the front page of Hizb ut Tahrir's website. [I was not able to locate the video referenced here in the forest of links Google listed.]....... [u][b]Americans understand by example[/u][/b], it’s not as if we are an ignorant mass of people.....

[url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/6274387/Obama-adviser-says-Sharia-Law-is-misunderstood.html]Link to article.[/url]

This struggle over LAW, exposes many things about our sin nature. Adultery, homosexuality, theft, the importance of family, headship, the fruit of secular law? [b]It is difficult to expose a lie, the root of it, when it makes use of truth. (Matthew 4:6).[/b]

Oh that the example of Christ were made large in our Land!

Too much for a post of a reasonable length, sscott.

Both the speakers here may be in the natural. The argument is certainly taking place in the secular world. The natural man (audience) knows certain things just are not right. The fact of laws existing, world-wide, demonstrate that. It doesn't matter whether you are talking about beheading a woman who files for divorce (one persons point) or adultery and stealing (the other's). In both cases, the hearers of this television debate are not dumb.

When a belief system, any organization, points to things that are not right AND SAYS SO BOLDLY, the truth at any level “arrests” the mouth of hearers. We see this in politics all the time. It can be used to cloud the human mind and persuade.

Although the argument/temptation that took place in Matthew 4:6, that specific wave, is taking place on a different level, there was a lie in the root of what Satan said. [b]It is difficult to expose a lie, the root of it, when it (the lie) makes use of truth[/b]. It is probably impossible for unbelievers. But going to the root is the way. This television argument is left at the dead-end of each pointing to examples (bad fruit). Such arguing will stay stuck at that dead-end.

Where are the examples of Christ-like behavior, of the Light of Truth, on earth, that Americans (all men, everywhere) would see the reality of the Truth of God by. That poverty of examples hampers all our evangelism. Believers know the root of good fruit is not the LAW. Examples teach. Even “dead” Muslims sense/know LAW is not the way to peace, good behavior (the end of wrong behavior).

As I have labored to elaborate on this, I am considering what a WITNESS REVIVAL will have to Muslims: [b]the restoration of morality without LAWs that cut off hands or heads[/b].

In our current atmosphere of war -- prayer, and specifically prayer for revival, is a good weapon choice.

Thanks sscott for pointing out the parallel in the Old Testament. It is an example of LAW and of course the proof of what LAW cannot do.

I would think that a Muslim would sense/agree that their LAW does not accomplish what it sets out to (at least on some level). And the serious ones must feel the burden and discouragement of it.

Sorry for so many words