Islam, Muslims and Violence

[DesiTrix]

Many non-Muslims have many misconceptions about Islam. One is "terrorism"... These people need to learn that Islam is a religion. Muslims are people who follow the religion. In every society there are bad apples. So please read the follow website and understand.

As an historical phenomenon, violence has been expressed in different forms, with varying objectives, and has had many affiliations, religious and otherwise. Some observers related it to the inherently violent nature of the beliefs of the perpetrators, some attributed it to lack of knowledge or understanding, and others described it as the form of expression of the oppressed, the weak, and is used as a last resort.

Since September 11, 2001, Islam and the world of Muslims have been standing center stage on the international media theater. Headlines have often been decorated with words like “terrorist”, “Muslim”, “Al-Qaeda” and, sometimes reaching back to “Koran” or going as basic as “Islam.” Many bombings have raised questions on Islam; is it originally a violent religion? Does it have any ethical considerations for the killing of civilians? Why do Muslims hate America?

If such questions were subjected to the simplistic accusation-vs.-defense approach, no true understanding of the phenomenon can be achieved. Therefore, IslamOnline presents this folder to provide our readers with more in depth material that will hopefully provide the context necessary for comprehending this often occurring phenomenon. Readers are invited to find out more about the position of violence in Islam in comparison to other religions, and how it applies, if at all, in our current international political scene...

http://www.islamonline.net/English/In_Depth/Violence/index.shtml

[DesiTrix]

Here is a question and answer from the site..

Question by Funshyboy: Dear sir, how can you explain the verse: "Kill them wherever you find them..."? And also the verse "Fight them till there is no more Fitna (oppression...)? Also in the Sunnah, we have the well-know Hadith of the Prophet that goes as thus: "I'm ordered to fight people till they testify to the oneness of Allah and that I am the Messenger of Allah..." Don't you think that these texts show that Islam sees that "sword" alone is the tool of making people embrace Islam? Don't you agree with me that these texts and other fall into the hand of extremist people like Al-Qaeda and so on? Thanks

--

Answer: The problem here is quoting one part of this verse (2: 191) because the remaining part says "and drive them away from wherever they drove you away, for oppression is worse than killing." Therefore, this verse does not give a license to kill even idolatrous Arabs who are meant in this verse but only those who committed aggression and oppression against Muslims by driving them from their homes and towns without justification. So it is a case of legitimate fight against severe oppression which the Qur'an describes as "worse than killing".

The same verse also continues to prohibit Muslims from fighting near the Sacred House unless the enemies fight against them first.

If you continue in the same section, you will find that the next verse indicates that if the oppressors desist from fighting and aggression, then Allah is indeed Forgiving and Merciful. The following verse clearly states that the reason for fighting is "to stop oppression especially that the common oppression at that time which took the form intimidation, torture to death or murder of those who chose Islam. This is why the verse says: "until persecution is no more and the choice of religion is between the person and God". The same verse continues to say that if they desist (i.e. from oppression) then there should be no more hostility except against the oppressors.

As to the hadith you mentioned, please refer to the other answers in the same session for explanation.
http://www.islamonline.net/livedialogue/english/Browse.asp?hGuestID=ls0mM5

[DaSuckaPunch]

Bro people have tried endlessly to explain.....but people wana carry on with their bullshit misconceptions,what you've posted aint gonna help,trust me.

[vimi]

all these religion topics are getting too old now
u people need to move on

[HiGHland~Heather]

all these religion topics are getting too old now
u people need to move on

Actually in a strange way I agree.

DesiTrix, I have read your posts and I sense sincerity in them so I am sure you obviously have good intentions.

But I think banning religious topics from the forum was to protect all in question. For some reason, there are a lot of rampant hindu/sikh people completely obsessed with Islam and Muslims due to current political climate and just need an excuse to start their spoouting their biased BS.

We shouldn't have to defend Islam (actively or reactively) to a bunch of strangers who, being 'desi' should know better and probably have Muslim acquaintances whose duty it is to inform them of the truth.

And lame-asses shouldn't be posting the same repetitive Islamophobic sh*t to incite enmity.

Personally, I come here to see useless and perhaps intriguing discussions not flame or retarded thoughts - there's enough of that on the Fox 'news'.

Just a thought. :)

[adren@line]

Quran Chapter 9 permits Muslims to kill idolaters wherever they find them (meaning innocent men, women, and children), as long as they do not kill them during the sacred months and as long as the idolaters arent in a treaty with the Muslims. The only other prohibition is that if an idolater seeks protection, the Muslim must give it as long as they preach Islam to the idolater.

That means that any Muslim can walk into a Hindu temple, kill a few dozen Hindu children, and walk out, and it will be perfectly Islamic, as long as they do not do it during the sacred months, as they are random Hindus that are not engaged in a treaty with the Muslims.

So as we can see....
Islam DOES promote violence and hate.
The historical context IS NOT mentioned in the Quran.

period.

There is absolutely no reason why Islam should be respected by non Muslims, nor is there a reason why non Muslims should respect religious Muslims AS Muslims.

All of the evidence is in the Quran, which speaks of how non Muslims are evil, liars, wicked, misguided, dumb, and how they are going to hell and how they are fit to be converted or killed.

These themes are repeated over and over and over again.
Its all in the Quran, so there is nothing to refute.

[adren@line]

And btw, ive done this argument a million times.

Proving that Islam does not promote violence as judged by the Quran and the history of Muslims is an impossible task.

The majority of the evidence proves that Islam IS about violence, hate, and war
The minority of the evidence proves that Islam ISNT about violence, hate, and war

[bill]

And btw, ive done this argument a million times.

Proving that Islam does not promote violence as judged by the Quran and the history of Muslims is an impossible task.

The majority of the evidence proves that Islam IS about violence, hate, and war
The minority of the evidence proves that Islam ISNT about violence, hate, and war

You've been proven wrong a 'million' times, but like I've said before it's not others' responsibility to cater to your stupidity so go on believing what you will.

[adren@line]

The Quran also states that Muslims should emulate the Prophets.

Both Prophet Mohhamed and Prophet Abraham killed idolaters by the hundreds and raided idolater temples and places of worship and smashed and destroyed the idols.

A follower of the QUran would heed its advice and enter a Hindu temple and destroy its idols.

This is the same principle in which the Taliban found justification to destroy the giant Buddhist statue (idol) in Afghanistan, and it is also why people like Mohhamed of Ghazni, the Khiljis, Aurangzeb, etc all found justification in burning and looting Hindu temples by the thousands.

It is estimated that over 60 temples alone in Kashmir have been destroyed or ransacked by Muslims since the 1980's, an act that is justified by Islam:

http://www.kashmir-information.com/Atrocities/Temples/temples7.html
YEAR 1986:
SRINAGAR, FEBRUARY 20-21
1. Ganpatyar temple, Srinagar - Stoned - Window panes broken.
2. Bhairav temple, Maisuma - Stoned - minor damage
3. Temple in front of Gurudwara at Amiradadal - ransacked - no damage
to the building.
4. Shiv temple, Jawaharnagar - attempted arson - minor damage to a window,
5. Bhairav Mandir, Karan Nagar - attempted arson - Carpet burned, no
damage to the building.
6, Shiv temple near secretariat - attempted arson - minor damage.
7. Shiv Mandir, Chota Bazar-60-70 rioter tried to attack the temple; police
fired four rounds in the air - no damage,
8. Narayan Math Mandir in Tulsi Bagh - attempted arson and stoning -
minor damage to windowpanes and door.

ANANTNAG DISTRICT, FEBRUARY 20 -21
9. Gautam nag mandlr at Sarnal - set on fire - heavy damage; 3 out of four
rooms destroyed.
10. Shivalay Mandir, Nai Basti - heavy stoning, attempt to destroy and
ransack - damage worth Rs. 10,000.
11. Temple at Wanpoh on Khanabal-Qazigund Road - set on fire- extent of
damage not known.
12. Another temple at Vanpoh - set on fire - extent of the damage not known.
13. Temple at Aishmuqam - attempt at ransacking - one idol damaged.
14. Temple at Dhanbogund, Kulgam - set on fire - extent of damage not known.
15. Navgam temple, Shangas - Heavy stoning - extent of damage not known.
16. Achhabal temple near Navgam - Heavy stoning - extent of damage not known.
17-20. Four temples in Lokbhavan village of Thana Qazigund - attempted
ransacking
21. Harish Chandra Seva Mandir, Beejbehara - ransacking - idols destroyed.
22. Devi Mandir, village Karebal Beejbehara - ransacking - Idols damaged.
23. Shivalay Mandir, Janglat Mandi, Anantnag town - ransacking - extent
of damage not known.
24. Temple of Dyalgam - attempt at ransacking - extent of damage not known.
25. Temple at Fatehpura village, Qazigund Tehsil - set on fire - extent of
damage not known.
26. Temple at village Siligam, Thana Aishmuqam - attempt at ransacking.

PULWAMA DISTRICT, FEBRUARY 20-21
27. Shiv Mandir at village Koil, Thana Pulwama - attempted arson.
28. Temple at village Trisal, Thana Pulwama -AttPmpted ransacking -
idols, microphone taken away; compoundwall of the adjacent cremation ground broken.

BARAMULLA DISTRICT, FEBRUARY 20-21
29. Kali Mandir in Jamla Kadal Mohalla, Sopore - attempted arson, local
people foiled the attempt - no damage.
30. Fatapura temple, Sopore - stoning - minor damage.

ANANTNAG DISTRICT, FEBRUARY 24-25
31.Chandi Puiarl temple, VYosu Thana Qazigund) - Arson - damage worth Rs. 20,000.

BADGAM DISTRICT, FEBRUARY 24-25
32. Sharda Devi temple, Yalkot (Thana 8adgam) - attempt to arson - one part burnt.
33.Shiv Temple, Sanghampura - (Thana Biru) - attempt to arson - verandah damaged in arson.
34. Shiv Mandir, Magam (Thana Vodura) - attempt to arson - minor damage.

BARAMULA DISTRICT, FEBRUARY 24-25
35. Temple in Bandipore - arsoned - minor damage.
36. Temple in Bandipore - arsoned - minor damage.


YEAR 1988:
SRINAGAR DISTRICT, AUGUST 15
1. Ram Mandir, Maharajganj, Srinagar - attempt to arson - minor damage.
2. Shiv Mandir, Sarafkadal, Srinagar - stoned - minor damage.

BARAMULLA DISTRICT, AUGUST 18
3. Shiv Mandir, Bandipur - arsoned - Heavy damage.
4. Shri Raghunath Mandir, Barmulla - explosion in Mandir - minor damage.

PULWAMA DISTRICT, AUGUST 21
5. Shiv temple, Shopian - Fully destroyed; heavy damage.
6 . Local tempIe in Tral - Arsoned - Heavy damage.

ANANTAG DISTRICT, AUGUST 19
7. Devi Mandir, Anantnag - arsoned - minor damage.

DODA DISTRICT, OCT0BER 27
8. Basaknag mandir, Bhadrawah - arsoned - minor damage.


YEAR 1989:
SRINAGAR DISTRICT (MARCH 24 TO NOV. 2)
1. Shri Ram mandir's Hall, Barbarshah Srinagar - explosion - minor damage.
2. Shiv Mandir Chota Bazar, Srinagar, Fully damaged.
3. Shri Raghunath Mandir, Srinagar - attempt to arson - minor damaqe.
4. Building of Ramkrishna Ashram, Chota Bazar, Srinagar-arsoned-minor damage.

PULWAMA DISTRICT, OCTOBER 3
5. Suchcha Nath Mandir, Shopian - arsoned - heavy damage.

BADGAM DISTRICT, OCTOBER 21
6. Shri Ram Mandir, Badgam - destroyed; idols looted - heavy damage.
7. Rama Mandir, Udhampur - heavy damage.

DODA DISTRICT
8. Supernag Temple - Idols looted and temple burnt.
9. Siv Mandir Kiratwar - explosion on 2nd Nov. - minor damage.
10. Buichhal Mandir - explosion on 10th Nov. - heavy damage.
11. Temple in Kulharad village - arsoned on 12th Nov. - heavy damage.
12 Temple in Bharat village - arsoned on 12th Nov. - heavy damage.


YEAR 1990:
SRINAGAR DISTRICT
1. Arya Samaj Mandir and School, Srinagar - explosion an 10th Feb. Minor damage
2. Shri Raghunath Mandir, Srinagar - attempted arson on 24th Feb., minor damage.
3. Arya Samaj Mandir and School Wazir Bagh, Srinagar - explosion on 21st July - heavy damage.
4. Shri Ram Mandir, Babarshah Srinagar - Conference Hall attacked with rocket on 2nd Sept . - minor damage .
5. Shitalnath Mandir, Srinagar - arsoned on 18th Nov. - heavy damage.

ANANTNAG DISTRICT
6. Lakshmi Mandir, Bijbehara - arsoned on 4th August - Heavy damage.

BARAMULLA DISTRICT
7. Sharda Mandir, Kalusa, 8andipur-arsoned on 7th Nov.- Heavy damage.

KUPWARA DISTRICT
8. Handura Mandir - Precincts desecrated and idols stolen on 13th Nov. -
heavy loss in the form of disappearance of idols.


YEAR 1991:
ANANTNAG DISTRICT
1. Nagbal Mandir, Anantnag - Explosion - Minor damage
2-3. Shri Raghunath Mandir, Anantnag - Explosion, Grenade thrown - minor damage

SRINAGAR DISTRICT, APRIL 13
4-5. Shri Raghunath Mandir, Srinagar - seven houses of Hindus and two temples arsoned - minor damage.


YEAR 1992:
All arsoned; and minor damages:
1. Raghunath Mandir, Karafali Mohalla, Srinagar - 8 May.
2. Anantnag - 7 December
3. Srinagar - 7 December
4. Kulgam, Anantnag - 7-8 December.
5. Shiv Mandir, Sherpore Kund - 7-8 December.
6. Temple at Karichhama - Tang Marg, Baramulla - 7-8 December.
7. Temple in Baramulla on Kungar Tang Road - 7-8 December.
8. Shri Vishnu Temple, on the Bank of River Jhelum 7-8 December.
9. Kuvi Utraso Temple Anantnag - 7-8 December.
10. Temple of Chitergund, Anantnag - 7-8 December.
11. Temple of Bana Mohalla, Srinagar -7-8 December.
12. Karfali Mohalla, Srinagar -7-8 December
13. Samshan Bhoomi Temple, Karannagar, Srinagar - 7-8 December
14. Narsingh Bagh - Shadipur Temple, Ganderbal, Srinagar - 7-8 December.
15. Nandkishore Temple, Sumbal, Baramulla - 7-8 December.
16. Temple of Pahalgam, Anantnag - 7-8 December.
17-22. Verinag, Anantnag - 8 December.
23. Temple in Tragaon, Kupwara -9 December.
24. Temple in Pattan, Baramulla - 9 December.

[adren@line]

You've been proven wrong a 'million' times, but like I've said before it's not others' responsibility to cater to your stupidity so go on believing what you will.

lol.

no I havent been proven wrong.
I if I had been then I wouldnt keep posting it over and over.

The fact remains that your historical context is not in the Quran, so you can try to find comfort in the idea that you think I have been proven wrong.

[Octane]

Quran Chapter 9 permits Muslims to kill idolaters wherever they find them (meaning innocent men, women, and children), as long as they do not kill them during the sacred months and as long as the idolaters arent in a treaty with the Muslims. The only other prohibition is that if an idolater seeks protection, the Muslim must give it as long as they preach Islam to the idolater.

That means that any Muslim can walk into a Hindu temple, kill a few dozen Hindu children, and walk out, and it will be perfectly Islamic, as long as they do not do it during the sacred months, as they are random Hindus that are not engaged in a treaty with the Muslims.

So as we can see....
Islam DOES promote violence and hate.
The historical context IS NOT mentioned in the Quran.

period.

There is absolutely no reason why Islam should be respected by non Muslims, nor is there a reason why non Muslims should respect religious Muslims AS Muslims.

All of the evidence is in the Quran, which speaks of how non Muslims are evil, liars, wicked, misguided, dumb, and how they are going to hell and how they are fit to be converted or killed.

These themes are repeated over and over and over again.
Its all in the Quran, so there is nothing to refute.

Adrencrap again your old sad tricks.
Where is the authoratative analysis to back up your claims?
Again you proove your obsessive stalker nature. You continue to prove my point, everytime.

[bill]

lol.

no I havent been proven wrong.
I if I had been then I wouldnt keep posting it over and over.

The fact remains that your historical context is not in the Quran, so you can try to find comfort in the idea that you think I have been proven wrong.

Likewise that you think you have not been proven wrong.

[Octane]

The Quran also states that Muslims should emulate the Prophets.

Both Prophet Mohhamed and Prophet Abraham killed idolaters by the hundreds and raided idolater temples and places of worship and smashed and destroyed the idols.

A follower of the QUran would heed its advice and enter a Hindu temple and destroy its idols.

This is the same principle in which the Taliban found justification to destroy the giant Buddhist statue (idol) in Afghanistan, and it is also why people like Mohhamed of Ghazni, the Khiljis, Aurangzeb, etc all found justification in burning and looting Hindu temples by the thousands.

It is estimated that over 60 temples alone in Kashmir have been destroyed or ransacked by Muslims since the 1980's, an act that is justified by Islam:

http://www.kashmir-information.com/Atrocities/Temples/temples7.html
YEAR 1986:
SRINAGAR, FEBRUARY 20-21
1. Ganpatyar temple, Srinagar - Stoned - Window panes broken.
2. Bhairav temple, Maisuma - Stoned - minor damage
3. Temple in front of Gurudwara at Amiradadal - ransacked - no damage
to the building.
4. Shiv temple, Jawaharnagar - attempted arson - minor damage to a window,
5. Bhairav Mandir, Karan Nagar - attempted arson - Carpet burned, no
damage to the building.
6, Shiv temple near secretariat - attempted arson - minor damage.
7. Shiv Mandir, Chota Bazar-60-70 rioter tried to attack the temple; police
fired four rounds in the air - no damage,
8. Narayan Math Mandir in Tulsi Bagh - attempted arson and stoning -
minor damage to windowpanes and door.

ANANTNAG DISTRICT, FEBRUARY 20 -21
9. Gautam nag mandlr at Sarnal - set on fire - heavy damage; 3 out of four
rooms destroyed.
10. Shivalay Mandir, Nai Basti - heavy stoning, attempt to destroy and
ransack - damage worth Rs. 10,000.
11. Temple at Wanpoh on Khanabal-Qazigund Road - set on fire- extent of
damage not known.
12. Another temple at Vanpoh - set on fire - extent of the damage not known.
13. Temple at Aishmuqam - attempt at ransacking - one idol damaged.
14. Temple at Dhanbogund, Kulgam - set on fire - extent of damage not known.
15. Navgam temple, Shangas - Heavy stoning - extent of damage not known.
16. Achhabal temple near Navgam - Heavy stoning - extent of damage not known.
17-20. Four temples in Lokbhavan village of Thana Qazigund - attempted
ransacking
21. Harish Chandra Seva Mandir, Beejbehara - ransacking - idols destroyed.
22. Devi Mandir, village Karebal Beejbehara - ransacking - Idols damaged.
23. Shivalay Mandir, Janglat Mandi, Anantnag town - ransacking - extent
of damage not known.
24. Temple of Dyalgam - attempt at ransacking - extent of damage not known.
25. Temple at Fatehpura village, Qazigund Tehsil - set on fire - extent of
damage not known.
26. Temple at village Siligam, Thana Aishmuqam - attempt at ransacking.

PULWAMA DISTRICT, FEBRUARY 20-21
27. Shiv Mandir at village Koil, Thana Pulwama - attempted arson.
28. Temple at village Trisal, Thana Pulwama -AttPmpted ransacking -
idols, microphone taken away; compoundwall of the adjacent cremation ground broken.

BARAMULLA DISTRICT, FEBRUARY 20-21
29. Kali Mandir in Jamla Kadal Mohalla, Sopore - attempted arson, local
people foiled the attempt - no damage.
30. Fatapura temple, Sopore - stoning - minor damage.

ANANTNAG DISTRICT, FEBRUARY 24-25
31.Chandi Puiarl temple, VYosu Thana Qazigund) - Arson - damage worth Rs. 20,000.

BADGAM DISTRICT, FEBRUARY 24-25
32. Sharda Devi temple, Yalkot (Thana 8adgam) - attempt to arson - one part burnt.
33.Shiv Temple, Sanghampura - (Thana Biru) - attempt to arson - verandah damaged in arson.
34. Shiv Mandir, Magam (Thana Vodura) - attempt to arson - minor damage.

BARAMULA DISTRICT, FEBRUARY 24-25
35. Temple in Bandipore - arsoned - minor damage.
36. Temple in Bandipore - arsoned - minor damage.


YEAR 1988:
SRINAGAR DISTRICT, AUGUST 15
1. Ram Mandir, Maharajganj, Srinagar - attempt to arson - minor damage.
2. Shiv Mandir, Sarafkadal, Srinagar - stoned - minor damage.

BARAMULLA DISTRICT, AUGUST 18
3. Shiv Mandir, Bandipur - arsoned - Heavy damage.
4. Shri Raghunath Mandir, Barmulla - explosion in Mandir - minor damage.

PULWAMA DISTRICT, AUGUST 21
5. Shiv temple, Shopian - Fully destroyed; heavy damage.
6 . Local tempIe in Tral - Arsoned - Heavy damage.

ANANTAG DISTRICT, AUGUST 19
7. Devi Mandir, Anantnag - arsoned - minor damage.

DODA DISTRICT, OCT0BER 27
8. Basaknag mandir, Bhadrawah - arsoned - minor damage.


YEAR 1989:
SRINAGAR DISTRICT (MARCH 24 TO NOV. 2)
1. Shri Ram mandir's Hall, Barbarshah Srinagar - explosion - minor damage.
2. Shiv Mandir Chota Bazar, Srinagar, Fully damaged.
3. Shri Raghunath Mandir, Srinagar - attempt to arson - minor damaqe.
4. Building of Ramkrishna Ashram, Chota Bazar, Srinagar-arsoned-minor damage.

PULWAMA DISTRICT, OCTOBER 3
5. Suchcha Nath Mandir, Shopian - arsoned - heavy damage.

BADGAM DISTRICT, OCTOBER 21
6. Shri Ram Mandir, Badgam - destroyed; idols looted - heavy damage.
7. Rama Mandir, Udhampur - heavy damage.

DODA DISTRICT
8. Supernag Temple - Idols looted and temple burnt.
9. Siv Mandir Kiratwar - explosion on 2nd Nov. - minor damage.
10. Buichhal Mandir - explosion on 10th Nov. - heavy damage.
11. Temple in Kulharad village - arsoned on 12th Nov. - heavy damage.
12 Temple in Bharat village - arsoned on 12th Nov. - heavy damage.


YEAR 1990:
SRINAGAR DISTRICT
1. Arya Samaj Mandir and School, Srinagar - explosion an 10th Feb. Minor damage
2. Shri Raghunath Mandir, Srinagar - attempted arson on 24th Feb., minor damage.
3. Arya Samaj Mandir and School Wazir Bagh, Srinagar - explosion on 21st July - heavy damage.
4. Shri Ram Mandir, Babarshah Srinagar - Conference Hall attacked with rocket on 2nd Sept . - minor damage .
5. Shitalnath Mandir, Srinagar - arsoned on 18th Nov. - heavy damage.

ANANTNAG DISTRICT
6. Lakshmi Mandir, Bijbehara - arsoned on 4th August - Heavy damage.

BARAMULLA DISTRICT
7. Sharda Mandir, Kalusa, 8andipur-arsoned on 7th Nov.- Heavy damage.

KUPWARA DISTRICT
8. Handura Mandir - Precincts desecrated and idols stolen on 13th Nov. -
heavy loss in the form of disappearance of idols.


YEAR 1991:
ANANTNAG DISTRICT
1. Nagbal Mandir, Anantnag - Explosion - Minor damage
2-3. Shri Raghunath Mandir, Anantnag - Explosion, Grenade thrown - minor damage

SRINAGAR DISTRICT, APRIL 13
4-5. Shri Raghunath Mandir, Srinagar - seven houses of Hindus and two temples arsoned - minor damage.


YEAR 1992:
All arsoned; and minor damages:
1. Raghunath Mandir, Karafali Mohalla, Srinagar - 8 May.
2. Anantnag - 7 December
3. Srinagar - 7 December
4. Kulgam, Anantnag - 7-8 December.
5. Shiv Mandir, Sherpore Kund - 7-8 December.
6. Temple at Karichhama - Tang Marg, Baramulla - 7-8 December.
7. Temple in Baramulla on Kungar Tang Road - 7-8 December.
8. Shri Vishnu Temple, on the Bank of River Jhelum 7-8 December.
9. Kuvi Utraso Temple Anantnag - 7-8 December.
10. Temple of Chitergund, Anantnag - 7-8 December.
11. Temple of Bana Mohalla, Srinagar -7-8 December.
12. Karfali Mohalla, Srinagar -7-8 December
13. Samshan Bhoomi Temple, Karannagar, Srinagar - 7-8 December
14. Narsingh Bagh - Shadipur Temple, Ganderbal, Srinagar - 7-8 December.
15. Nandkishore Temple, Sumbal, Baramulla - 7-8 December.
16. Temple of Pahalgam, Anantnag - 7-8 December.
17-22. Verinag, Anantnag - 8 December.
23. Temple in Tragaon, Kupwara -9 December.
24. Temple in Pattan, Baramulla - 9 December.


Thats your source HAHAAHAH!! OMG you are such a dork. You have no authoratative works at all. Nothing. Pathetic.

[Octane]

lol.

no I havent been proven wrong.
I if I had been then I wouldnt keep posting it over and over.

The fact remains that your historical context is not in the Quran, so you can try to find comfort in the idea that you think I have been proven wrong.


Yes you have on numerous occasions you have been bitch slapped. Ofcourse you keep posting over and over as anyone with your obsessive pathology would. You know nothing community college boy. Your source above from some arcane website is proof of that.

The fact is that your butt hurt that Muslims came in and put your chia pets on the Bar-b.

[zai_alam]

Quran Chapter 9 permits Muslims to kill idolaters wherever they find them (meaning innocent men, women, and children), as long as they do not kill them during the sacred months and as long as the idolaters arent in a treaty with the Muslims. The only other prohibition is that if an idolater seeks protection, the Muslim must give it as long as they preach Islam to the idolater.

That means that any Muslim can walk into a Hindu temple, kill a few dozen Hindu children, and walk out, and it will be perfectly Islamic, as long as they do not do it during the sacred months, as they are random Hindus that are not engaged in a treaty with the Muslims.

So as we can see....
Islam DOES promote violence and hate.
The historical context IS NOT mentioned in the Quran.

period.

There is absolutely no reason why Islam should be respected by non Muslims, nor is there a reason why non Muslims should respect religious Muslims AS Muslims.

All of the evidence is in the Quran, which speaks of how non Muslims are evil, liars, wicked, misguided, dumb, and how they are going to hell and how they are fit to be converted or killed.

These themes are repeated over and over and over again.
Its all in the Quran, so there is nothing to refute.

Is your understanding of the Qur'an based on the original semitic text, or an english translation? :think:

[Octane]

Im done you bore me with your factitious tripe. You offer no real academic proof or analysis, what you do offer is your conjecture.

[larki_jatti]

And btw, ive done this argument a million times.

Proving that Islam does not promote violence as judged by the Quran and the history of Muslims is an impossible task.

The majority of the evidence proves that Islam IS about violence, hate, and war
The minority of the evidence proves that Islam ISNT about violence, hate, and war
At no point do the basic texts of Islam enjoin terrorism and murder.
At no point do they even consider the random slaughter of uninvolved bystanders.

[bill]

Verse 3:7

He it is Who has revealed the Book to you; some of its verses are decisive(muhkamaat), they are the basis(ummu) of the Book, and others are mutashabihat; then as for those in whose hearts there is perversity they follow the part of it which is ambiguous(-mu-tashabih), seeking to mislead/discord and seeking (to give it their own?) interpretation. But none knows its interpretation except Allah. And those who are firmly rooted in knowledge say: We believe in it, it is all from our Lord; and none do mind except those having understanding

If that isn't enough: it is also the property of any literary work that it be open to context and interpretation, and Quran, by the virtue of being a collection of words, is a literary work and is therefore open to context and interpretation.

Like I've said before it's not hard to 'disprove' your rantings, but it is hard to change your mind because of your irrational stubborness. Either way, believe what you will.

[Le_Gendarme]

At the time when Columbus claimed the new world for his king and queen.
They sent more ships to support him.

And after 150 years they killed 400 million native indians as they call them.

They didnt label that as terrorism at that time.

[bill]

At the time when Columbus claimed the new world for his king and queen.
They sent more ships to support him.

And after 150 years they killed 400 million native indians as they call them.

They didnt label that as terrorism at that time.

It's only terrorism if Adrenaline thinks so.

[bill]

Is your understanding of the Qur'an based on the original semitic text, or an english translation? :think:

There is nothing in the English translations (that I've read), once studied without prejudice, that supports terrorism.

[Le_Gendarme]

The Holy Quran is a very complicated book.

It can yet guide and misguide the reader if he or she doesnt understand the true meaning and context of the verse.

Non Muslims should not just take one verse without reading the whole context of the chapter.

[rex_maximus]

Verse 3:7

He it is Who has revealed the Book to you; some of its verses are decisive(muhkamaat), they are the basis(ummu) of the Book, and others are mutashabihat; then as for those in whose hearts there is perversity they follow the part of it which is ambiguous(-mu-tashabih), seeking to mislead/discord and seeking (to give it their own?) interpretation. But none knows its interpretation except Allah. And those who are firmly rooted in knowledge say: We believe in it, it is all from our Lord; and none do mind except those having understanding



dude, could you explain the above verse? it sounds to me like its saying that some verses carry ambiguity in them, which can only be resolved by God.

[zai_alam]

There is nothing in the English translations (that I've read), once studied without prejudice, that supports terrorism.

Bill, do you have a sound understanding of semitic languages?

[adren@line]

Likewise that you think you have not been proven wrong.

true...which leads to another point:

It doesnt really matter if Muslims say I have been proven wrong or if I say that I havent been proven wrong.

The fact is that not one single non-muslim or non-Hindu third-party has stated that I have been proven wrong. Not once. And I have argued on this topic quite a bit.


The only people who think I have been proven wrong are Muslims

Not a single atheist, agnostic, parsi, sikh, jain, jew, whatever. And plenty of people have read my arguments... word for word.

And I can bet that most third parties agree with what I have said, assuming they follow they follow the debates in sequential order.

In-fact, here is an article written by non-Hindu and non-Indian documenting the Muslim-on-Hindu violence in India , from a non anti-Islamic source that is sourced and referenced:


http://americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=4616&search=bostom

[bill]

true...which leads to another point:

It doesnt really matter if Muslims say I have been proven wrong or if I say that I havent been proven wrong.

The fact is that not one single non-muslim or non-Hindu third-party has stated that I have been proven wrong. Not once. And I have argued on this topic quite a bit.


The only people who think I have been proven wrong are Muslims

Not a single atheist, agnostic, parsi, sikh, jain, jew, whatever. And plenty of people have read my arguments... word for word.

And I can bet that most third parties agree with what I have said, assuming they follow they follow the debates in sequential order.

In-fact, here is an article written by non-Hindu and non-Indian documenting the Muslim-on-Hindu violence in India , from a non anti-Islamic source that is sourced and referenced:


http://americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=4616&search=bostom

Wtf kind of argument is this? "THEY DIDNT REPLY SO I MUST BE RIGHT!!!!1!!!" No. That doesn't mean shit. Seriously, are you that desperate for arguments that you'll resort to this crap?

Oh and I know plenty of non-muslims that think you're just trolling with your anti-muslim campaign. But still, that doesn't mean shit.

[bill]

Do you have a sound understanding of semitic languages?

Not a sound understanding; but what I meant was it didn't matter whether you read the Semitic or English version: neither one condones terrorism.

dude, could you explain the above verse? it sounds to me like its saying that some verses carry ambiguity in them, which can only be resolved by God.

Sort of. There are figurative verses in the Qur'an which can be misinterpreted for 'evil' (as Adrenaline has shown) but they can quite easily be benevolently translated/interpreted as well. However, because in Islam and because no one person has authority of truth over another, this issue can only be absolutely resolved by Allah.

That's the short explanation.

[Le_Gendarme]

adren@line what is your problem with Islam.

What is confusing you ?

[bill]

adren@line what is your problem with Islam.

What is confusing you ?

Oh god not again. Seriously, let's not get into this for the millionth time.

[Felonius Monk]

Speculation warning. I can't back this up.

Most terrorism can be explained in socio-economic terms. Poor and unemployed young people (a) need a direction to channel their frustration/anger and (b) seek something that gives them an identity and a sense of purpose. The only sense in which Islam seems to tie into it is that Islam (on the surface) demands a greater committment to the faith than most other religions in terms of the role it plays in your life. I believe that makes Muslims more vulnerable to be being manipulated on the basis of faith, especially those who take their faith very literally. I believe I also saw a study somewhere that suggested the poor are usually the most deeply religious. Add it all together and it makes at least intuitive sense that we have a lot of terrorism coming out of dirt poor Islamic nations in spite of the fact that the goals of these outfits have nothing to do with Islam.

The Mohammed cartoons are a great case in point. All the violence came in areas that are essentially poor and seems to have been instigated by regional political leaders.

[Le_Gendarme]

Oh god not again. Seriously, let's not get into this for the millionth time.

Maybe all of you take his comments in offense.

I put my cause in Allah's hand.

He shall guide whoever he wants and misguide whoever he wants.

Ill try to clear up things.

[DesiTrix]

If people will not read through the website regarding this whole issue, then there is no point for this thread, mod please close it.

[CremeDeLaCreme]

Adrenaline is seems like your idea of violence and Islam stretches only to the sub-continent.

Perhaps you could kindly note other major battling faiths from around the world. The crusades has been and always will be the most violent and bloodiest faith led battle. Is it your deep hatred for Islam that makes you blind to other sources and issues?

[adren@line]

Thats your source HAHAAHAH!! OMG you are such a dork. You have no authoratative works at all. Nothing. Pathetic.

mmhmmmmm.

typical Muslim.

youll probably beleive anything that makes America look bad with all of the bullshit conspiracy theories that exist, but will attack any source that makes your cult look bad.

Yes you have on numerous occasions you have been bitch slapped. Ofcourse you keep posting over and over as anyone with your obsessive pathology would. You know nothing community college boy. Your source above from some arcane website is proof of that.

The fact is that your butt hurt that Muslims came in and put your chia pets on the Bar-b.
I think its you thats butt-hurt. :)
You seem to have this incessant need to reply to my every post these days.

Anyways, your just another Muslim who thinks I have been proven wrong, not a third party, so it doesnt mean shit.

[zai_alam]

Not a sound understanding; but what I meant was it didn't matter whether you read the Semitic or English version: neither one condones terrorism.



Sort of. There are figurative verses in the Qur'an which can be misinterpreted for 'evil' (as Adrenaline has shown) but they can quite easily be benevolently translated/interpreted as well. However, because in Islam and because no one person has authority of truth over another, this issue can only be absolutely resolved by Allah.

That's the short explanation.

Bill, I'm in the process of learning how to read classical qur'anic arabic (which will give the foundation to also learn and understand hebrew and aramaic).

It's much more intricate and poetic when read in the original text and makes you realise how sterile english is :lol:

adrenaline, you should really try and understand the nature of semitic languages and then read the Qur'an in it's original form. It may surprise you. I'm not having a go at you, I just think it's an area which may be of interest to you since you seem to have formed such a staunch opinion in your mind about what you think the verses in the Qur'an mean.

[adren@line]

Wtf kind of argument is this? "THEY DIDNT REPLY SO I MUST BE RIGHT!!!!1!!!" No. That doesn't mean shit. Seriously, are you that desperate for arguments that you'll resort to this crap?

Oh and I know plenty of non-muslims that think you're just trolling with your anti-muslim campaign. But still, that doesn't mean shit.

no I never said that it makes me right.

I said that it doesnt matter if YOU think I am wrong or that if I THINK I am right.

Its a matter of a third party verifying either, and going by my past experiences, not a single third party has backed up the Muslim claim that I have been proven wrong.

On the flip-side, I have gotten plenty of pms and emails from NON HINDUS who agree with what I have stated.

So please tell me how many Sikhs, Jains, Parsis, atheists, agnostics, Christians, etc agree with the Muslim POV that have read my arguments.

[adren@line]

Adrenaline is seems like your idea of violence and Islam stretches only to the sub-continent.

Perhaps you could kindly note other major battling faiths from around the world. The crusades has been and always will be the most violent and bloodiest faith led battle. Is it your deep hatred for Islam that makes you blind to other sources and issues?

Christianity has a worse track-record than Islam. I have stated that over , again and again.

But that is irrelevant today in regards to Hindus, who have no major conflicts with Christians, nor did they (sans the British occupation)...

Muslim-Hindu conflict dates back to the late 600's, and continues today.

[adren@line]

Bill, I'm in the process of learning how to read classical qur'anic arabic (which will give the foundation to also learn and understand hebrew and aramaic).

It's much more intricate and poetic when read in the original text and makes you realise how sterile english is :lol:

adrenaline, you should really try and understand the nature of semitic languages and then read the Qur'an in it's original form. It may surprise you. I'm not having a go at you, I just think it's an area which may be of interest to you since you seem to have formed such a staunch opinion in your mind about what you think the verses in the Qur'an mean.

There is no way I am going to learn Arabic.
Most Muslims dont even know Arabic, so why should I learn it?

[DesiTrix]

no I never said that it makes me right.

I said that it doesnt matter if YOU think I am wrong or that if I THINK I am right.

Its a matter of a third party verifying either, and going by my past experiences, not a single third party has backed up the Muslim claim that I have been proven wrong.

On the flip-side, I have gotten plenty of pms and emails from NON HINDUS who agree with what I have stated.

So please tell me how many Sikhs, Jains, Parsis, atheists, agnostics, Christians, etc agree with the Muslim POV that have read my arguments.

Rather than asking undeducated people like me, why don't you go and ask educated learnt scholars? I am 100% sure they will answer your question.

[DesiTrix]

adren, have you even read "Chapter 9" as you stated... ;) do you want me to copy it onto here?

[CremeDeLaCreme]

There is no way I am going to learn Arabic.
Most Muslims dont even know Arabic, so why should I learn it?

This just about sums you up

[zai_alam]

There is no way I am going to learn Arabic.
Most Muslims dont even know Arabic, so why should I learn it?

Because it will make you a wiser person :lol:

[adren@line]

Rather than asking undeducated people like me, why don't you go and ask educated learnt scholars? I am 100% sure they will answer your question.

I have read scholary answers to the same questions I have asked on here.
Its all the same. They talk about some non existant historical context, some sketchy hadith, and reference everything BUT the QUran.

Its quite funny.
If you look into Q and A articles about violence in Islam, these scholars will go on and on and on with all kinds of non-Quranic garbage, hardly referencing the Quran except maybe one or twice, while solely relying on secondary commentary, hadiths, and some other crap that isnt reflective of the Quran, which represents the core and most important aspect of Islam.

[DesiTrix]

I have read scholary answers to the same questions I have asked on here.
Its all the same. They talk about some non existant historical context, some sketchy hadith, and reference everything BUT the QUran.

Its quite funny.
If you look into Q and A articles about violence in Islam, these scholars will go on and on and on with all kinds of non-Quranic garbage, hardly referencing the Quran except maybe one or twice, while solely relying on secondary commentary, hadiths, and some other crap that isnt reflective of the Quran, which represents the core and most important aspect of Islam.

Now how are you suppose to understand when you have a closed up mind like that?

[adren@line]

This just about sums you up

ofcourse.

Most Muslims dont see a need to learn Arabic to undersand Islam.
Thats a fact.

Look up the statistics on Arabic speakers.

If followers of the faith dont need to learn Arabic to understand Islam, a non-Muslim such as myself surely doesnt, because they followers themselves dont place importance on the language.

[adren@line]

Now how are you suppose to understand when you have a closed up mind like that?

Its not having a close-mind.

Look at articles by Muslims who answer questions about the violence in the Quran.

Its full of secondary commentary and other junk, not Quranic qoutes.

[adren@line]

anyways, im out for now.

Ill continue this later..

[rex_maximus]

it seems that in order to understand the quran properly and to NOT misinterpret it, it is imperative for a person to have a good knowledge of the arabic language.

but obviously, every person in the world is not going to know arabic. and acc to you guys, translations don't even come close to the real thing.

so how are non-arabic speaking people supposed to figure out the true teachings of the quran?

also, if the quran is the divine word, then why is it so narrowly restricted to one language and one culture?

[DesiTrix]

Its not having a close-mind.

Look at articles by Muslims who answer questions about the violence in the Quran.

Its full of secondary commentary and other junk, not Quranic qoutes.


"other junk" - buddy, that is junk to you because you despise Islam. The Quran, Sunnah, Hadiths...are all part of Islam not just the Quran.

[bill]

no I never said that it makes me right.

I said that it doesnt matter if YOU think I am wrong or that if I THINK I am right.

Its a matter of a third party verifying either, and going by my past experiences, not a single third party has backed up the Muslim claim that I have been proven wrong.

On the flip-side, I have gotten plenty of pms and emails from NON HINDUS who agree with what I have stated.

So please tell me how many Sikhs, Jains, Parsis, atheists, agnostics, Christians, etc agree with the Muslim POV that have read my arguments.

I love red herrings.

[DesiTrix]

it seems that in order to understand the quran properly and to NOT misinterpret it, it is imperative for a person to have a good knowledge of the arabic language.

but obviously, every person in the world is not going to know arabic. and acc to you guys, translations don't even come close to the real thing.

so how are non-arabic speaking people supposed to figure out the true teachings of the quran?

also, if the quran is the divine word, then why is it so narrowly restricted to one language and one culture?

The Arabic used in the Quran is not the Arabic that we know of today.

A person does not need to understand Arabic to understand the meaning of the Quran.

The translations are the closest, that is why you have many (the 3 most popular: YusufAli, Shakir, Pickthal)

It is not restricted to one language or culture. It is for all.
That is why you have the Hadiths/Sunnah(sayings of the Prophet(s)).
and you have highly educated scholars who devote their lives to understanding Islam so they can teach to others.

Now we come to
The challenge in the Quran from Allah: to produce one chapter like the Quran.
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/dyktb.html

[larki_jatti]

ofcourse.

Most Muslims dont see a need to learn Arabic to undersand Islam.
Thats a fact.

Look up the statistics on Arabic speakers.

If followers of the faith dont need to learn Arabic to understand Islam, a non-Muslim such as myself surely doesnt, because they followers themselves dont place importance on the language.
Actually, it can be difficult in some places to get the entire correct meaning of an ayah or hadith unless you know Arabic. It's really encouraged to learn it, and in Islamic schools its one of the basic courses.

[bill]

Speculation warning. I can't back this up.

Most terrorism can be explained in socio-economic terms. Poor and unemployed young people (a) need a direction to channel their frustration/anger and (b) seek something that gives them an identity and a sense of purpose. The only sense in which Islam seems to tie into it is that Islam (on the surface) demands a greater committment to the faith than most other religions in terms of the role it plays in your life. I believe that makes Muslims more vulnerable to be being manipulated on the basis of faith, especially those who take their faith very literally. I believe I also saw a study somewhere that suggested the poor are usually the most deeply religious. Add it all together and it makes at least intuitive sense that we have a lot of terrorism coming out of dirt poor Islamic nations in spite of the fact that the goals of these outfits have nothing to do with Islam.

The Mohammed cartoons are a great case in point. All the violence came in areas that are essentially poor and seems to have been instigated by regional political leaders.

I read a study which said that terrorists are usually taken from the middle class citing the 7/7 bombings of the London Tubes. Before that I was willing to agree with your POV but now I'm not so sure. I think socio-economics does play a very important part in it but there are other historical occurances we are discarding.

[rex_maximus]

The Arabic used in the Quran is not the Arabic that we know of today.


so how do we know what its really talking about?

A person does not need to understand Arabic to understand the meaning of the Quran.


r u sure about that? i've heard time and again that translations couldn't possibly capture the full meaning of the verses. doesn't this imply haivng a very good knowledge of arabic? then you said the quranic arabic isn't even used any more?!?

It is not restricted to one language or culture. It is for all.

then why do muslims refer to many events in the quran and hadiths being relative to the arabic lifestyle and the time period of its inception? for eg. wars are justified by the explanation that wars were common and frequent among the tribal arabs. prophet mohammed's marriage to aisha is justfied by the explanation that girls matured and married at an earlier age during those times.


That is why you have the Hadiths/Sunnah(sayings of the Prophet(s)).
and you have highly educated scholars who devote their lives to understanding Islam so they can teach to others.

why are the scholars having to put in so much time and effort? is it because the quran is esoteric and hard to understand? if so, how is the common man expected to comprehend its message? or is it becuase the quran requires a good control over arabic? in that case, what do non arabic speakers do?

[rex_maximus]

Actually, it can be difficult in some places to get the entire correct meaning of an ayah or hadith unless you know Arabic. It's really encouraged to learn it, and in Islamic schools its one of the basic courses.

...?

[rex_maximus]

where everybody go???

[-Stax0-]

...?

What part of 'unless you know Arabic' you didn't understand? She's absolutely right. Arabic is much different than english or any other language out there, much more complicated, many more root words. One thing can mean something else if taken out of context.

[HiGHland~Heather]

so how do we know what its really talking about?



Actually the Qur'anic arabic is known as fusha and is used formally in the Arab world today i.e. in newspapers, but is not generally used in common conversation.



r u sure about that? i've heard time and again that translations couldn't possibly capture the full meaning of the verses. doesn't this imply haivng a very good knowledge of arabic? then you said the quranic arabic isn't even used any more?!?


Translations are the next best thing, which is obviously true since that implies that someone doesn't know arabic in the first place therefore they require a translation. BUT it certainly has its flaws since the arabic language is so rich and includes ideas and encompasses actions that cannot be literally translated into one single word.

This is why there are always commentaries on the Qu'ran to accompany the Arabic and explain it a little more in-depth.



then why do muslims refer to many events in the quran and hadiths being relative to the arabic lifestyle and the time period of its inception? for eg. wars are justified by the explanation that wars were common and frequent among the tribal arabs. prophet mohammed's marriage to aisha is justfied by the explanation that girls matured and married at an earlier age during those times.


Are you implying we don't have wars any more? What planet are you living on, there are thousands of them going on including civil and intra-continental ones!

The Qu'ran nor the prophet's actions need to be justified, simply explained to those who don't know or are ignorant.



why are the scholars having to put in so much time and effort? is it because the quran is esoteric and hard to understand? if so, how is the common man expected to comprehend its message? or is it becuase the quran requires a good control over arabic? in that case, what do non arabic speakers do?

God will guide whom He will and bless them with true understanding.

Anyone can read and follow things literally, and still succeed to a certain extent with the little 'knowledge' they have acquired, but true understanding requires a lot of study and dedication and pondering thus is the meaning of life.

Buddhists spend their entire lives trying to reach nirvana, and a Muslim should try to spend their lived trying to understand God's words, but still whether they are blessed with real understanding is up to God Himself.

17:85 AND THEY will ask thee about [the nature of] divine inspiration. [101] Say: "This inspiration [comes] at my Sustainer's behest; and [you cannot understand its nature, O men, since] you have been granted very little of [real] knowledge."

22:74 No true understanding of God have they [who err in this way]: for, verily, God is most powerful, almighty!


And to adren@line (who obv has way too much , ur like an energiser bunny on crack1)

Context is important in absolutely everything, since the Qu'ran was revealed in particular verses which were specifically directed at certain events that happened to the prophet in his lifetime e.g. If Allah(swt) is telling the prohpet to 'say' something then it is common sense to find out exactly what the situation was.

And no the Qu'ran was always meant to be accompanied by the sunnah since Allah commands us to follow the prophet....

I'll leave you with this. The Qu'ran deals with thousands of issues in only 114 chapters, however the prophet's exemplary life complemented everything in the Qu'ran and to be a living example so that people could easily understand what is required of them.

If you don't understand this, nothing more I can say if God has chosen this state of ignorance for you.

I can only pray that it is only temporary.




7:157 those who shall follow the [last] Apostle, the unlettered prophet whom they shall find described in the Torah that is with them, and [later on] in the Gospel: [124] [the prophet] who will enjoin upon them the doing of what is right and forbid them the doing of what is wrong, and make lawful to them the good things of life and forbid them the bad things, and lift from them their burdens and the shackles that were upon them [aforetime]. [125] Those, therefore, who shall believe in him, and honour him, and succour him, and follow the light that has been bestowed from on high through him-it is they that shall attain to a happy state."

[paulie walnuts]

can some muslim please post and explain the verses adrenaline is referring to?

i would like to evaluate the context myself.....and by that, i mean that you guys should do all the work and i'll just read it.

[HiGHland~Heather]

can some muslim please post and explain the verses adrenaline is referring to?

i would like to evaluate the context myself.....and by that, i mean that you guys should do all the work and i'll just read it.

Look up to the 2nd post in the thread. ^

Basically in the beginning of Surah Taubah (9) it mentions being free of all treaties that were signed with the mushrikeen. The treaties being referred to were the ones with the people of Makkah who had continuously flouted these treaties and angered the muslims. So because of their breaking of this contract, these verses were declared specifically referring to them and also generally applicable in the same circumstances.

Muslims have treaty with, say, group x
Group x constantly break this treaty and are in flagrant violation of their oaths
Muslims (as allowed by God) are allowed to dissolve the treaty and then declare war on those people who

a)broke the treaty,
b)are plotting against you with your enemies and
c) have taken away your right (I take this as meaning persecution since that is what the Quraysh were guilty of)

Excepting those of the idolaters with whom ye (Muslims) have a treaty, and who have since abated nothing of your right nor have supported anyone against you. (As for these), fulfil their treaty to them till their term. Lo! Allah loveth those who keep their duty (unto Him).

So if they haven't done any harm to you, don't harm them.

For the ones with whom you are told to fight:

It is referring to the combatants of war ( I thought that was obvious :rolleyes: ) the strict rules of war aren't mentioned here since they are mentioned in many other places and obviously displayed through the sunnah.

From the surah above, you are not allowed to harm those who have not harmed you. How the heck can women (non-combatants) and children be of harm??

Actually, I think there are similar rules regarding violence at any place of worship, not just the harem. so there goes you temple theory :nuts:


I have better things to do anyway. See ya.

[rex_maximus]

What part of 'unless you know Arabic' you didn't understand? She's absolutely right. Arabic is much different than english or any other language out there, much more complicated, many more root words. One thing can mean something else if taken out of context.

it seems that in order to understand the quran properly and to NOT misinterpret it, it is imperative for a person to have a good knowledge of the arabic language.

but obviously, every person in the world is not going to know arabic. and acc to you guys, translations don't even come close to the real thing.

so how are non-arabic speaking people supposed to figure out the true teachings of the quran?

also, if the quran is the divine word, then why is it so narrowly restricted to one language and one culture?

http://forums.ratedesi.com/showpost.php?p=5467910&postcount=48

sometimes, it helps to read previous posts.

[bill]

Yes, understanding the Qur'an requires effort. So?

[Space-Cowboy]

Yes, understanding the Qur'an requires effort. So?


As it does with all religions..... I can already see where this thread is going.... please junk.

[dandiwal_jatt]

we are having the same kind of discussions over and over again
getting kinda boring

[Le_Gendarme]

There is a difference between Jihad-Fi-Sabillilah and Jihad-e-Hurriyat.

Afghanistan was not jihad-fi-Sabillilah.

The mughal rulers were not doing Jihad-Fi-Sabillilah ! they did it for thier own agenda.

[rex_maximus]

Actually the Qur'anic arabic is known as fusha and is used formally in the Arab world today i.e. in newspapers, but is not generally used in common conversation.




Translations are the next best thing, which is obviously true since that implies that someone doesn't know arabic in the first place therefore they require a translation. BUT it certainly has its flaws since the arabic language is so rich and includes ideas and encompasses actions that cannot be literally translated into one single word.

This is why there are always commentaries on the Qu'ran to accompany the Arabic and explain it a little more in-depth.



so someone who doesn't know arabic is obviously getting a low quality interpretation, correct?

why is the word of God best understood only in one particular type (fusha) of one particular language?



Are you implying we don't have wars any more? What planet are you living on, there are thousands of them going on including civil and intra-continental ones!

no, i was refering to the infamous verse that instructs muslims "to kill idolators where ever they find them"....unless they request for refuge, in which case they have to either accept conversion, or else be forced to dhimmitude. this doctrine most obviously biased. its exact analogy would be for americans to instruct iraqis to either renounce islam and accept american ideals, or else pay for a tax IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY. a lot of muslims have tried to explain that verse to me by saying that the verse put into its context was refering to the inter tribal wars in arabia at the time.

The Qu'ran nor the prophet's actions need to be justified, simply explained to those who don't know or are ignorant.


with all due respect, every thing in the universe needs to be justified. there has to be some logic by which humans can make rational decisions. to you, questioning the quran or the prophet mohammed may be blasphemous, but if you don't, how do know for yourself its noble...or more importantly, WHY its noble? how do you draw the line between devotion and dogma?

Buddhists spend their entire lives trying to reach nirvana, and a Muslim should try to spend their lived trying to understand God's words, but still whether they are blessed with real understanding is up to God Himself.

true. but buddhists fully acknowledge the fact that the true nature of the universe and the divine are boundlessly complex. on the other hand, muslims claim that the quran contains absolutely everything required for the salvation of humans. they also claim that the quran is a book for any and all people, a 'perfect and universal manual for life' if you will....hence they encourage everyone to follow it. correct?

now if this was really the case, why would even highly educated scholars need to:

a) have a good knowledge of "fusha" arabic to understand the quran?
b) put everything in the context of the place and time where the quran was written to decipher its ACTUAL message?
c) spend monumental time and effort to comprehend that which is meant to be comprehensible by even the common man?

[Enammmmm]

I dont know why you people bother with posters like Adrenaline.


He probably is the number one fan/member of the Masonry and wants to be a proud servant of the Anti-Christ.

[bill]

As it does with all religions..... I can already see where this thread is going.... please junk.

Your powers of foresight are a wonder to behold.

[bill]

true. but buddhists fully acknowledge the fact that the true nature of the universe and the divine are boundlessly complex. on the other hand, muslims claim that the quran contains absolutely everything required for the salvation of humans. they also claim that the quran is a book for any and all people, a 'perfect and universal manual for life' if you will....hence they encourage everyone to follow it. correct?

Did the verse I quoted on the first page just slip your mind or something?

To you, what is "the salvation of Humans" and what exactly do you think the Qur'an says about it and try to answer without the usual "as muslims say" trappings.

[Space-Cowboy]

Your powers of foresight are a wonder to behold.


Then bow down before me in bewilderment.







Religious debates were banned from the SD for a reason. I agree with that reason.

[bill]

Then bow down before me in bewilderment.







Religious debates were banned from the SD for a reason. I agree with that reason.

Brilliant. Now don't let me see you post in here again.

[Space-Cowboy]

Brilliant. Now don't let me see you post in here again.

But it's much more fun to pester you.

[Le_Gendarme]

Brilliant. Now don't let me see you post in here again.
What is this character your portraying brother ?

What shall he think of muslims now ?

[bill]

I don't represent the muslim community and I get sick of people posting in religious topics saying they don't like religious topics. It's pointless because it adds nothing worthwhile. Yes, you're an anti-conformist badass. Now let us, who's asses are not so bad as yours, continue with our futile effort in understanding things that interest us.

[Space-Cowboy]

What is this character your portraying brother ?

What shall he think of muslims now ?


Why do you generalize like this? I have MANY Muslim friends, GOOD friends of mine. They respect that I'm a follower of the Vedic, I respect their Quranic teachings. It boils down to RESPECT. I don't ask them to justify the Quran because I respect that they have faith in it. They've never tried to convert me, nor will they ever ask me to justify my philosophies because they RESPECT my faith in Hinduism.

[Space-Cowboy]

I don't represent the muslim community and I get sick of people posting in religious topics saying they don't like religious topics. It's pointless because it adds nothing worthwhile. Yes, you're an anti-conformist badass. Now let us, who's asses are not so bad as yours, continue with our futile effort in understanding things that interest us.


See... I'd believe that if you actually had an interest in trying to understand. When have you EVER shown an interest to try and understand Hindu/Vedic teachings? When has some of the Hindu fanatics on this site ever shown an interest in trying to learn the true Quranic teachings? 99% of the case, the shit all boils down to a "my religion is better than yours because yours sucks" flame thread......... and after seeing the first thousand of them go by.... it just kinda gets fucking boring......... dunno bout you.

[Felonius Monk]

I read a study which said that terrorists are usually taken from the middle class citing the 7/7 bombings of the London Tubes. Before that I was willing to agree with your POV but now I'm not so sure. I think socio-economics does play a very important part in it but there are other historical occurances we are discarding.
Yeah, I agree its an oversimlipification. There is a historical context to examine these questions in, and of course the use of religion as a political tool is a somewhat grey area, since most religions are intrinsically political in themselves in some degree.

This study - is it centered exclusively on England? The london bombings weren't the actions of a large and well organized organization, so they can't really be taken as representative of terrorism as a whole. Organized terrorism is slightly different kettle of fish... the poor and the disaffected are often the easiest to recruit. The other thing to consider is that middle-class means different things in different parts of the world. Like in India - unemployment is still very much a part a concern for what is commonly referred to as the middle class. I met some firebrand right-wing hindus in Delhi last year. They weren't terrorists (or i don't think they were) but they were extremists at the very minimum. All of them were educated. Most of them had initially come to Delhi in search of employment. I can't trace the exact evolution of how they ended up in that particular outfit, but I think there's a correlation.

[Le_Gendarme]

Why do you generalize like this? I have MANY Muslim friends, GOOD friends of mine. They respect that I'm a follower of the Vedic, I respect their Quranic teachings. It boils down to RESPECT. I don't ask them to justify the Quran because I respect that they have faith in it. They've never tried to convert me, nor will they ever ask me to justify my philosophies because they RESPECT my faith in Hinduism.

In today's world muslim's dont understand Islam.

They are misguided by some people who are seeking thier own personal intrest and use Islam as a tool.

For me Islam is peace for all mankind.

I dont want to get into a long discussion about it because this is a wrong place.

But in summary people have forgotten the teachings of the Prophet.

[bill]

See... I'd believe that if you actually had an interest in trying to understand. When have you EVER shown an interest to try and understand Hindu/Vedic teachings? When has some of the Hindu fanatics on this site ever shown an interest in trying to learn the true Quranic teachings? 99% of the case, the shit all boils down to a "my religion is better than yours because yours sucks" flame thread......... and after seeing the first thousand of them go by.... it just kinda gets fucking boring......... dunno bout you.

What are you talking about? I'm referring to your "OMG I HATE RELIGIOUS THREADS CLOSE THIS" attitude. I don't pollute Hindu/Vedic threads saying that shit, I keep out of it because it does not interest me. If I want to learn about religion I go to the library, if I want to discuss it, I sometimes come here. I don't know enough about Hinduism to discuss it, so I don't.

[dopekhor]

adnrealine, just to sum it since u brought facts and figures fo muslims destroying hindu temples can u please bring forward some credible testimony which supports your claim, 12 out of every 100 poeple in india are muslims, and in todays world minority cant do shit to majority. If the hindus could break down a 600yr old mosque on live tv and the person who lead this became a deputy prime minister how can muslims get away with vandalizing temples cuz if they did they'd start riots bigger then the 1947 one

[bill]

Yeah, I agree its an oversimlipification. There is a historical context to examine these questions in, and of course the use of religion as a political tool is a somewhat grey area, since most religions are intrinsically political in themselves in some degree.

This study - is it centered exclusively on England? The london bombings weren't the actions of a large and well organized organization, so they can't really be taken as representative of terrorism as a whole. Organized terrorism is slightly different kettle of fish... the poor and the disaffected are often the easiest to recruit. The other thing to consider is that middle-class means different things in different parts of the world. Like in India - unemployment is still very much a part a concern for what is commonly referred to as the middle class. I met some firebrand right-wing hindus in Delhi last year. They weren't terrorists (or i don't think they were) but they were extremists at the very minimum. All of them were educated. Most of them had initially come to Delhi in search of employment. I can't trace the exact evolution of how they ended up in that particular outfit, but I think there's a correlation.

Make a topic with that post above so it can be discussed without the added vitriol that's plaguing this thread.

[Space-Cowboy]

In today's world muslim's dont understand Islam.

They are misguided by some people who are seeking thier own personal intrest and use Islam as a tool.

For me Islam is peace for all mankind.

I dont want to get into a long discussion about it because this is a wrong place.

But in summary people have forgotten the teachings of the Prophet.

You speak of the Saudis? Are there outspoken Muslim scholars who would be willing to start movements to take vocal and/or physical actions against them [the regime]?

[rex_maximus]

Did the verse I quoted on the first page just slip your mind or something?


no.

your verse simply contradicts islam's claim as being the perfect religion for all people.

the quran is held to be the perfect manuscript for humans, written for all men.

your verse implies inherent ambiguity in the quran, that which cannot be resolved by people.

To you, what is "the salvation of Humans" and what exactly do you think the Qur'an says about it and try to answer without the usual "as muslims say" trappings.

to me, salvation of humans = eternal afterlife.

form what i understand, all abrahamic religions promise a heavenly afterlife for its adherents, and a hellish one for non-adherents....both of which are said to be eternal.

islam claims that the quran contains the knowledge of this 'salvation', and instructs exacty how to attain it.

if so, this knowledge should be freely available and comprehensible by everyone. yet as we know, the quran:

a) is only truly understood by those with a good knowledge of fusha arabic.
b) contains un-resolvable ambiguities.
c) has to be taken in context of the time and location of its revelation.

[Le_Gendarme]

You speak of the Saudis? Are there outspoken Muslim scholars who would be willing to start movements to take vocal and/or physical actions against them [the regime]?

Not just saudi's !

The entire muslim population including me !

As Muslim's after the Prophet Muhammad, it is the duty of every single muslim to invite other people to Islam.

Peacefully.

[Space-Cowboy]

What are you talking about? I'm referring to your "OMG I HATE RELIGIOUS THREADS CLOSE THIS" attitude. I don't pollute Hindu/Vedic threads saying that shit, I keep out of it because it does not interest me. If I want to learn about religion I go to the library, if I want to discuss it, I sometimes come here. I don't know enough about Hinduism to discuss it, so I don't.

You think that attitude was always there? I used to like these kinds of debates. But you know as well as I do where they all lead. In the end, where there should be discussion and appreciation for each others' peoples, there's only flame and hatred and misunderstanding. Conversely to what you said, I don't know enough about Islam, so I didn't add anything to the thread. I'd watch intently, reading what people had to say, wanting to take in pieces of new information. But time after time, it all spiraled towards mindless bullshit. So yea, that IS why I have that attitude.... ---I want learn and converse with people and have fun whilst doing it [because my actual real life studies of Accounting and Economics isn't so colourful... clearly]--- .....but it's impossible with all the flame filled distractions.

[bill]

no.

your verse simply contradicts islam's claim as being the perfect religion for all people.

the quran is held to be the perfect manuscript for humans, written for all men.

your verse implies inherent ambiguity in the quran, that which cannot be resolved by people.



to me, salvation of humans = eternal afterlife.

form what i understand, all abrahamic religions promise a heavenly afterlife for its adherents, and a hellish one for non-adherents....both of which are said to be eternal.

islam claims that the quran contains the knowledge of this 'salvation', and instructs exacty how to attain it.

if so, this knowledge should be freely available and comprehensible by everyone. yet as we know, the quran:

a) is only truly understood by those with a good knowledge of fusha arabic.
b) contains un-resolvable ambiguities.
c) has to be taken in context of the time and location of its revelation.

1. That's not a contradiction.
2. You think the entirety of Qur'an is about attaining salvation?

[Le_Gendarme]

no.

your verse simply contradicts islam's claim as being the perfect religion for all people.

the quran is held to be the perfect manuscript for humans, written for all men.

your verse implies inherent ambiguity in the quran, that which cannot be resolved by people.



to me, salvation of humans = eternal afterlife.

form what i understand, all abrahamic religions promise a heavenly afterlife for its adherents, and a hellish one for non-adherents....both of which are said to be eternal.

islam claims that the quran contains the knowledge of this 'salvation', and instructs exacty how to attain it.

if so, this knowledge should be freely available and comprehensible by everyone. yet as we know, the quran:

a) is only truly understood by those with a good knowledge of fusha arabic.
b) contains un-resolvable ambiguities.
c) has to be taken in context of the time and location of its revelation.

The Quran is indeed the perfect book for Humanity with the Teachings of Muhammad S.A.W.

But to understand it you cannot base yourself on one verse.

For example :

You have to kill the person. Who enters your property.

Now they are people who will just take what they like. "You have to kill the person" because they like it.

But wont keep in mind the whole context and conditions imposed on it.

[Space-Cowboy]

Not just saudi's !

The entire muslim population including me !

As Muslim's after the Prophet Muhammad, it is the duty of every single muslim to invite other people to Islam.

Peacefully.


True, but you'll have to understand that the vast majority of peoples are content with the religion they have. Sure invite them.... but once they give a simple 'no thanks' that should be enough. The worst people for this are actually Jehovas Witnesses.... a simple 'no' isn't enough... they keep coming and coming and coming.... until you get hostile towards them. Just respect people's decisions when we say 'no thanks' that's all we want.... again, the Jehovas peoples are the worst for this.

[Space-Cowboy]

adnrealine, just to sum it since u brought facts and figures fo muslims destroying hindu temples can u please bring forward some credible testimony which supports your claim, 12 out of every 100 poeple in india are muslims, and in todays world minority cant do shit to majority. If the hindus could break down a 600yr old mosque on live tv and the person who lead this became a deputy prime minister how can muslims get away with vandalizing temples cuz if they did they'd start riots bigger then the 1947 one

Dude!! Don't bring Hindus into this.... ! :o This is going to spark this into another religious flame thread!

[DesiTrix]

True, but you'll have to understand that the vast majority of peoples are content with the religion they have. Sure invite them.... but once they give a simple 'no thanks' that should be enough. The worst people for this are actually Jehovas Witnesses.... a simple 'no' isn't enough... they keep coming and coming and coming.... until you get hostile towards them. Just respect people's decisions when we say 'no thanks' that's all we want.... again, the Jehovas peoples are the worst for this.

Yes that is absolutely correct.
Allah guides who He wills.

InshAllah, He will correct our methods of invitation.

[Le_Gendarme]

True, but you'll have to understand that the vast majority of peoples are content with the religion they have. Sure invite them.... but once they give a simple 'no thanks' that should be enough. The worst people for this are actually Jehovas Witnesses.... a simple 'no' isn't enough... they keep coming and coming and coming.... until you get hostile towards them. Just respect people's decisions when we say 'no thanks' that's all we want.... again, the Jehovas peoples are the worst for this.

I agree,

As for us guidance is given by Allah himself.
He choses the one's who will become Muslims.

And you cannot force someone into converting.

[Le_Gendarme]

Yes that is absolutely correct.
Allah guides who He wills.

InshAllah, He will correct our methods of invitation.

The prophet invited 10 years in Makkah.

Only to have 125 muslims.

He did it with peace, people insulted him, throwed rocks at him.

Yet god sent the angels who asked him if they should crush the people who had abused them.

He denied saying that from thier childrens maybe muslims will rise.

[Felonius Monk]

Make a topic with that post above so it can be discussed without the added vitriol that's plaguing this thread.
Done. In serious disc. Hopefully it won't get moved here.

[rex_maximus]

1. That's not a contradiction.
2. You think the entirety of Qur'an is about attaining salvation?

1.the quran is held to be the perfect manuscript for humans, written for all men.

your verse implies inherent ambiguity in the quran, that which cannot be resolved by people..........hence it is obviously not perfect for all men, hence contradiction.

2. i'm not talking about what else the quran delves into. i'm talking about its supposed status as 'the perfect manuscript, for all men, containing all the info needed for salvation'.....to imagine it is all that is wishful thinking at best.

[Space-Cowboy]

I agree,

As for us guidance is given by Allah himself.
He choses the one's who will become Muslims.

And you cannot force someone into converting.


You'll have to understand that's where peoples who are Islamaphobes' frustrations come from. People, under the guise of Islam, but with alterior motives in mind, come in, and forcefully convert peoples under penalty of death. And thus, people will get the wrong idea. And yes, this can occur with any religion, and yes the Christian Crusades were the biggest example of this.

[dopekhor]

Dude!! Don't bring Hindus into this.... ! :o This is going to spark this into another religious flame thread!
isnt that what adrenaline likes? ;)

[Le_Gendarme]

You'll have to understand that's where peoples who are Islamaphobes' frustrations come from. People, under the guise of Islam, but with alterior motives in mind, come in, and forcefully convert peoples under penalty of death. And thus, people will get the wrong idea. And yes, this can occur with any religion, and yes the Christian Crusades were the biggest example of this.

Converting someone under the sword or the death penalty is like playing God.

We shall all taste death one day and God shall judge us keeping in mind diffrent religious beliefs.

Greed and Religion is a bad combination and we have seen consequences.

[Space-Cowboy]

isnt that what adrenaline likes? ;)

Yea, well, he's also lamed... most shit disturbers on the forums have been.


I've already said this many times..... our respective religions have become a tool for the rich and powerful to push forward their own respective agendas.

[Space-Cowboy]

Converting someone under the sword or the death penalty is like playing God.

We shall all taste death one day and God shall judge us keeping in mind diffrent religious beliefs.

Greed and Religion is a bad combination and we have seen consequences.


You're referring to the Catholic Church of the Middle Ages?

[Le_Gendarme]

You're referring to the Catholic Church of the Middle Ages?

not quite.

Mughals for instance
The Last Rulers of the Ottoman Empire.

[dopekhor]

Yea, well, he's also lamed... most shit disturbers on the forums have been.


I've already said this many times..... our respective religions have become a tool for the rich and powerful to push forward their own respective agendas.with that said there is nothing left to argue about

[Space-Cowboy]

not quite.

Mughals for instance
The Last Rulers of the Ottoman Empire.

I didn't mind the Ottoman Empire, those peoples made great advancements in medicine, many of which is still used today.

[Space-Cowboy]

with that said there is nothing left to argue about


huh? :sarb:

[dopekhor]

You'll have to understand that's where peoples who are Islamaphobes' frustrations come from. People, under the guise of Islam, but with alterior motives in mind, come in, and forcefully convert peoples under penalty of death. And thus, people will get the wrong idea. And yes, this can occur with any religion, and yes the Christian Crusades were the biggest example of this.
dude thats not true, the islamic empire stretched from china to spain and if the sword was used to bring in people into the religion, more then half the world would have been muslims.

[dopekhor]

huh? :sarb:
what i ment was that these days the rich and powerful use religion to manupilate peoples mind and use it to their advantage, esp in the subcontinent where people follow religion blindly

[Space-Cowboy]

dude thats not true, the islamic empire stretched from china to spain and if the sword was used to bring in people into the religion, more then half the world would have been muslims.

I'm not talking about the entirety of Islamic Empires. A few bad seeds.... every religion has 'em, look at the corrupt Popes and Archbishops of Mideval Catholicism. In that same way, the fact of the matter is, there HAVE been a few bad Muslim rulers,.... who even as PEOPLE simply fell short. It is what I meant when I said the bad and corrupt ones forget their faith's teachings and use religion for their own agendas. Take Aurangzeb for example......, forget his political career, ... he IMPRISONED HIS OWN FATHER....... whatever happened to "honour thy father and thy mother". I'm not saying the Islamic Empire is on trial by ANY means..... but there HAVE been corruptions, as with any religion.

[Le_Gendarme]

I'm not talking about the entirety of Islamic Empires. A few bad seeds.... every religion has 'em, look at the corrupt Popes and Archbishops of Mideval Catholicism. In that same way, the fact of the matter is, there HAVE been a few bad Muslim rulers,.... who even as PEOPLE simply fell short. It is what I meant when I said the bad and corrupt ones forget their faith's teachings and use religion for their own agendas. Take Aurangzeb for example......, forget his political career, ... he IMPRISONED HIS OWN FATHER....... whatever happened to "honour thy father and thy mother". I'm

Very good point.

[dopekhor]

I'm not talking about the entirety of Islamic Empires. A few bad seeds.... every religion has 'em, look at the corrupt Popes and Archbishops of Mideval Catholicism. In that same way, the fact of the matter is, there HAVE been a few bad Muslim rulers,.... who even as PEOPLE simply fell short. It is what I meant when I said the bad and corrupt ones forget their faith's teachings and use religion for their own agendas. Take Aurangzeb for example......, forget his political career, ... he IMPRISONED HIS OWN FATHER....... whatever happened to "honour thy father and thy mother". I'm not saying the Islamic Empire is on trial by ANY means..... but there HAVE been corruptions, as with any religion.
oh yes the bad seeds :no:

what i hate is that people allways look at the bad seeds 1st

[Space-Cowboy]

oh yes the bad seeds :no:

what i hate is that people allways look at the bad seeds 1st


But see I don't look at the bad seeds first..... well..... I do, but in a different way. It should be all our duties to point out the corruption in ALL faiths, Hindu, Muslim, Christian, etc. so that the evils are rooted out and the over all faith becomes stronger. If you were working for a company and you saw someone fudging the accounting books, wouldn't you wanna blow the whistle on them?..... cuz if not, ENRON happens.... and we don't want that.

[Le_Gendarme]

end of my transmission :p

Good night u all :wavey:

[dopekhor]

But see I don't look at the bad seeds first..... well..... I do, but in a different way. It should be all our duties to point out the corruption in ALL faiths, Hindu, Muslim, Christian, etc. so that the evils are rooted out and the over all faith becomes stronger. If you were working for a company and you saw someone fudging the accounting books, wouldn't you wanna blow the whistle on them?..... cuz if not, ENRON happens.... and we don't want that.
what i ment was even if people were looking at a family of angels they'd over look their good deeds and point at the single bad deed they ever commited. Peoples view towards others should change or else we never gonna reach anywhere

[Space-Cowboy]

what i ment was even if people were looking at a family of angels they'd over look their good deeds and point at the single bad deed they ever commited. Peoples view towards others should change or else we never gonna reach anywhere


Well that's a different philosophical debate entirely.... and it really boils down to whether or not one views the world in an optimistic or a pessimistic light

[HiGHland~Heather]

so someone who doesn't know arabic is obviously getting a low quality interpretation, correct?

Isn't that the case with all 'translations' of any book?


why is the word of God best understood only in one particular type (fusha) of one particular language?

Because that was the only language of the prophet to whom the message was given..................do'h?

wth, did u hope for one copy in every single language imaginable??!!



no, i was refering to the infamous verse that instructs muslims "to kill idolators where ever they find them"....unless they request for refuge, in which case they have to either accept conversion, or else be forced to dhimmitude.

What is dhimmitude exactly? Sorry its not a term in Islam.

If you're referring to the status of a non-Muslim in an islamic state, then they are actually given extra protection.....and i won't even bother going into it! :hand:


this doctrine most obviously biased. its exact analogy would be for americans to instruct iraqis to either renounce islam and accept american ideals, or else pay for a tax IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY. a lot of muslims have tried to explain that verse to me by saying that the verse put into its context was refering to the inter tribal wars in arabia at the time.

Actually the entire war is based on Americans fighting the Iraqis until they accept their ideals (namely democracy and secularism etc). And I'm pretty peeved but I have to pay a tax in my country too, don't you?

Even if taken out of context, the words are crystal clear.

If you are at peace and you are not harming them and they are not you, then remain so.

If they are conspiring against you, harming you in some way then fight them until they are Muslims..........this until does not mean until they convert to Islam, its used in the conditional sese i.e. you cannot a fellow Muslim.

In the time of prophet(saw) Abu Sufyan was his avowed enemy, and even plotted to kill the prohpet, but once he turned to Islam....all enmity was wiped away and they became as brothers in peace.

Not all makkans became Muslim, of course but the ones that remained idolators were at peace with the Muslims and lived and let live.


on the other hand, muslims claim that the quran contains absolutely everything required for the salvation of humans. they also claim that the quran is a book for any and all people, a 'perfect and universal manual for life' if you will....hence they encourage everyone to follow it. correct?

Actually the Qu'ran contains the word of God and is complete only for men/women of understandig, for everyone else the sunnah is essential to this understanding as I explained before, one verse can mean so much and one issue may be dealt with in the Qu'ran and to the average person it may seem confusing due to alnguage or perhaps intelligence/knowledge deficit then once you look at the sunnah the actions of the prophet make everything apparent.


now if this was really the case, why would even highly educated scholars need to:

a) have a good knowledge of "fusha" arabic to understand the quran?
b) put everything in the context of the place and time where the quran was written to decipher its ACTUAL message?
c) spend monumental time and effort to comprehend that which is meant to be comprehensible by even the common man?

a) Don't scholars need to have a good understanding of a language before they attempt to claim expertise on a bok they can't even read? Do pundits not know sanskrit?

b)You can't claim to be a knowledgeable person without knowing the context, because a lot is explained through the context, even though an ayah alone is sufficient it is better explained through the context. Its not deciphering, its not some secret code, its to gain a deeper understanding, these are the words of God after all - they're not just one-dimensional.

c)Do you not know the difference between reading and studying something? Average Muslims read the Qu'ran mainly for spiritual upliftment due to the blessings associated with it and obviously for some level of understanding. Actually each individual person is not meant to read the Qu'ran and interpret it in their own way!! The scholars and men of understanding are those that have studied the entire Qu'ran alongside hadith and lots of tafsir and are the ones who are qualified to determine usool-fiqh etc.

An average person can read it, but must not take one ayah and start making fatwas because they all complement one another - it is an entire book! Thus if something is stated in one part, then the conditions laid down in another part still apply since no part of the Qu'ran is abrogated.

[adren@line]

Quran Chapter 9:

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/009.qmt.html

009.003
YUSUFALI: And an announcement from Allah and His Messenger, to the people (assembled) on the day of the Great Pilgrimage,- that Allah and His Messenger dissolve (treaty) obligations with the Pagans. If then, ye repent, it were best for you; but if ye turn away, know ye that ye cannot frustrate Allah. And proclaim a grievous penalty to those who reject Faith.
PICKTHAL: And a proclamation from Allah and His messenger to all men on the day of the Greater Pilgrimage that Allah is free from obligation to the idolaters, and (so is) His messenger. So, if ye repent, it will be better for you; but if ye are averse, then know that ye cannot escape Allah. Give tidings (O Muhammad) of a painful doom to those who disbelieve,
SHAKIR: And an announcement from Allah and His Messenger to the people on the day of the greater pilgrimage that Allah and His Messenger are free from liability to the idolaters; therefore if you repent, it will be better for you, and if you turn back, then know that you will not weaken Allah; and announce painful punishment to those who disbelieve.

009.004
YUSUFALI: (But the treaties are) not dissolved with those Pagans with whom ye have entered into alliance and who have not subsequently failed you in aught, nor aided any one against you. So fulfil your engagements with them to the end of their term: for Allah loveth the righteous.
PICKTHAL: Excepting those of the idolaters with whom ye (Muslims) have a treaty, and who have since abated nothing of your right nor have supported anyone against you. (As for these), fulfil their treaty to them till their term. Lo! Allah loveth those who keep their duty (unto Him).
SHAKIR: Except those of the idolaters with whom you made an agreement, then they have not failed you in anything and have not backed up any one against you, so fulfill their agreement to the end of their term; surely Allah loves those who are careful (of their duty).

009.005
YUSUFALI: But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.
PICKTHAL: Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
SHAKIR: So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

009.006
YUSUFALI: If one amongst the Pagans ask thee for asylum, grant it to him, so that he may hear the word of Allah; and then escort him to where he can be secure. That is because they are men without knowledge.
PICKTHAL: And if anyone of the idolaters seeketh thy protection (O Muhammad), then protect him so that he may hear the Word of Allah, and afterward convey him to his place of safety. That is because they are a folk who know not.
SHAKIR: And if one of the idolaters seek protection from you, grant him protection till he hears the word of Allah, then make him attain his place of safety; this is because they are a people who do not know.


This chapter states to kill idolaters and pagans wherever a Muslims finds them.

The exceptions:

1. The Muslim must wait till after the sacred months
2. The Muslim must take any idolater that seeks refuge as long as they preach Islam to that idolater
3. The Muslim cannot kill an idolater they have made a treaty with.

So going by the LOGIC of this incredibly violent and idiotic verse that GOD suposedly revealed to Mohhamed, its OK for a Muslim to kill any random Hindu man, woman, or child , because random Hindu children are not engaged in a treaty with Muslims.

Sounds like violent Arab-cult nonsense to me.

Counter Arguments:

#1. You have to take historical context into account.

Refutation:
The historical context is not mentioned in the Quran.
I dont care what Muslims say, it is not.

Further, Muslims state the the Quran is for all men and for all times.
Now they are saying that entire chapters only applied to Mohhamed and his band of Arabs in 600AD.

So which one is it?
Is the Quran obsolete and only relevant to Mohhamed or is it for everyone at any given moment?

Self defeating beliefs


#2: You must learn Arabic to reeeeealllly understand the verse.

Refutation:
Most Muslims dont even know Arabic.
Look up the statistics for world-wide Arabic speakers and its hardly anything compared to the entire population of Muslims.

Further, the english translations that were sourced are considered the most acccurate and were translated by Muslims themselves who are considered scholars in the Quran and in Quranic Arabic.




-------------------------


As we can see, no rational person would believe in Islam.

It is not a religion of peace, and it does not promote equality, and it does not promote tolerance.

The only way to make Islam look like a sensible, non cultish, non violent religion is to attach all kinds of other crap to Islamic beliefs like hadiths, secondary commentary, etc, etc and assume that they take precedence over the Quran.

Muslims will say it till their blue in the face that the Quran does not promote the killing of innocent people (like Hindus). They, however, will NOT reference chapter 9 nor will they use much of the Quran to back up their claims. They will use outside sources such as hadiths, historical context, and what some Mullah said to back up their arguments, not the quran, because the idea that Islam does not promote the slaying of innocent Hindus contradicts what is in the Quran, which is supposed to take precedence over all other sources in Islam.

[adren@line]

And btw, my intentions all along have not been to make Muslims change their minds about their "religion" and convert out.

the way I see it, the more they follow the religion, the further along the path of self-destruction they will advance.

The point of all of this is to expose Islam to non-Muslims with qoutes from the Quran itself.

I challenge any non-Muslim to read the Quran keeping in mind that they are non-Muslims, and then see exactly how non-Muslims are reffered to in the Quran, how they are described, and how they are to be treated by Muslims.

Again, read it while actively keeping in mind that YOU are a non-Muslim.

DO not listen to the typical Muslim bullshit excuses about why these verses exist , because they will reference all kinds of other crap that isnt in the Quran, when the Quran is the most important text in Islam ( a statement that no Muslim would ever disagree with...atleast in theory).

To understand the Quran is to understand the root of Islamic terrorism and the hate of Muslims towards non-Muslims.

[Le_Gendarme]

And btw, my intentions all along have not been to make Muslims change their minds about their "religion" and convert out.

the way I see it, the more they follow the religion, the further along the path of self-destruction they will advance.

The point of all of this is to expose Islam to non-Muslims with qoutes from the Quran itself.

I challenge any non-Muslim to read the Quran keeping in mind that they are non-Muslims, and then see exactly how non-Muslims are reffered to in the Quran, how they are described, and how they are to be treated by Muslims.

Again, read it while actively keeping in mind that YOU are a non-Muslim.

DO not listen to the typical Muslim bullshit excuses about why these verses exist , because they will reference all kinds of other crap that isnt in the Quran, when the Quran is the most important text in Islam ( a statement that no Muslim would ever disagree with...atleast in theory).

To understand the Quran is to understand the root of Islamic terrorism and the hate of Muslims towards non-Muslims.

2. When Surah al-Tawbah was revealed more than twenty years had passed since the appointment of the Prophet to the prophetic mission and during this period the strong logic of Islam regarding the prevention of idol-worship had reached the ears of the polytheists of the Peninsula. In case therefore an insignificant group still persisted in polytheism and idol-worship its reason was only their fanaticism and obstinacy. Hence the time had now arrived that the Prophet of Islam should use the last remedy for the reformation of the society destroy all images of idol-worship by force consider it (i.e. idol-worship) a transgression against humanity and annihilate the source of hundreds of other indecent habits in the society.

However the orientalists who consider this action to be opposed to the principle of freedom of faith which is the basis of Islam and the foundation of modern culture have ignored one point that is the principle of freedom of faith is respectable only so long as it does not harm the prosperity of the individual and the society. Otherwise in accordance with the dictates of reason and the course adopted by the thinkers of the world it should be opposed to the utmost extent.

For example in modern Europe on account of some wrong ideas some sensual men support the movement of nudism in the society and on the basis of an idea and a logic which is only childish (viz. covering of a part of the body is a source of excitement and therefore corrupts the morals) they form secret clubs and become naked there before others! Does human intellect permit that these people should be allowed to continue their activities on the plea of 'freedom of faith' and should it be said that their 'faith' must be respected? Or is it necessary that to protect the welfare of these people as well as
of the society we should fight against this way of thinking which is totally foolish? This method (i.e. prevention of corruption by force) is not employed by Islam only but intelligentsia of the world put up a tough fight against all movements and ideas which result in harm to the interests of a society and in fact such a fight is a war against the foolish beliefs of the depressed people.

Idol-worship was nothing more than a handful of superstitions and ridiculous beliefs which brought hundreds of abominable habits in its train and the Prophet had paid sufficient heed towards the guidance of the idolaters. Time had therefore arrived that he should as a last resort use military force to destroy this source of corruption.

[rex_maximus]

2. When Surah al-Tawbah was revealed more than twenty years had passed since the appointment of the Prophet to the prophetic mission and during this period the strong logic of Islam regarding the prevention of idol-worship had reached the ears of the polytheists of the Peninsula. In case therefore an insignificant group still persisted in polytheism and idol-worship its reason was only their fanaticism and obstinacy. Hence the time had now arrived that the Prophet of Islam should use the last remedy for the reformation of the society destroy all images of idol-worship by force consider it (i.e. idol-worship) a transgression against humanity and annihilate the source of hundreds of other indecent habits in the society.

However the orientalists who consider this action to be opposed to the principle of freedom of faith which is the basis of Islam and the foundation of modern culture have ignored one point that is the principle of freedom of faith is respectable only so long as it does not harm the prosperity of the individual and the society. Otherwise in accordance with the dictates of reason and the course adopted by the thinkers of the world it should be opposed to the utmost extent.

For example in modern Europe on account of some wrong ideas some sensual men support the movement of nudism in the society and on the basis of an idea and a logic which is only childish (viz. covering of a part of the body is a source of excitement and therefore corrupts the morals) they form secret clubs and become naked there before others! Does human intellect permit that these people should be allowed to continue their activities on the plea of 'freedom of faith' and should it be said that their 'faith' must be respected? Or is it necessary that to protect the welfare of these people as well as
of the society we should fight against this way of thinking which is totally foolish? This method (i.e. prevention of corruption by force) is not employed by Islam only but intelligentsia of the world put up a tough fight against all movements and ideas which result in harm to the interests of a society and in fact such a fight is a war against the foolish beliefs of the depressed people.

Idol-worship was nothing more than a handful of superstitions and ridiculous beliefs which brought hundreds of abominable habits in its train and the Prophet had paid sufficient heed towards the guidance of the idolaters. Time had therefore arrived that he should as a last resort use military force to destroy this source of corruption.


wtf???

idol worship is unacceptable ONLY to abrahamic relgions, for completely idiosyncratic reasons that make NO sense whatsoever to anyone NOT subscribing to abrahamic philosophy.

just because you guys believe idol worship is a sin, why should everyone else? more importantly, what right do you or anyone else have to force your doctrines on us? thats exactly what the US and israel are doing in afghanistan/iraq and palestine respectively. just because one party believes in some ideal/s doesn't justify the use of massive force to coerce others and force them into accepting your idealogy.

[HiGHland~Heather]

wtf???

idol worship is unacceptable ONLY to abrahamic relgions, for completely idiosyncratic reasons that make NO sense whatsoever to anyone NOT subscribing to abrahamic philosophy.

just because you guys believe idol worship is a sin, why should everyone else? more importantly, what right do you or anyone else have to force your doctrines on us? thats exactly what the US and israel are doing in afghanistan/iraq and palestine respectively. just because one party believes in some ideal/s doesn't justify the use of massive force to coerce others and force them into accepting your idealogy.

I do believe idol worship is a corruption on the earth and is the greatest sin against God, as He so states Himself.

But idol worship was particularly outlawed in the harem - the heart of Islam, elsewhere it is tolerated since everyone is free to practice their religion as long as they do not conspire agaisnt the Muslims or strike enmity with them as can be seen from the Qu'ranic verses that relate to treaties with polytheists.

[HiGHland~Heather]

I challenge any non-Muslim to read the Quran keeping in mind that they are non-Muslims, and then see exactly how non-Muslims are reffered to in the Quran, how they are described, and how they are to be treated by Muslims.

Again, read it while actively keeping in mind that YOU are a non-Muslim.

Actually many of my non-muslim friends have read the Qu'ran and found it amazing, some read it and felt it was another holy book pretty much the same as the bible except without all the contradictions within the gospel.

In fact, a girl I know was Hindu Brahmin and read the Qu'ran in her own time without any influence from anyone and is now one of the best examples of a Muslim woman I know, and she also married a Hindu revert!!

Of course you find it offensive, because idolatry is offensive and repelled by God in the Qu'ran - no-one expects you to be happy about it. But that's life and that's our belief so move along because you aren't revealing any particular 'secrets' mon ami!!



YUSUFALI: (But the treaties are) not dissolved with those Pagans with whom ye have entered into alliance and who have not subsequently failed you in aught, nor aided any one against you. So fulfil your engagements with them to the end of their term: for Allah loveth the righteous.


Im gonna have to repeat myself again aren't I :rolleyes:

Although we must disagree with the practise of polytheism, there should be no violence or fighting or enmity with the following groups of people:

1) those with whom you have a treaty
2) those who have not failed you, broken oaths etc.
3) those who have not conspired against you and helped others to fight you

The example I can give now is, US has fiercely helped Israel against the Muslim & Christian Palestinians thus they have now explicitly declared war on them, by siding with the enemy.

Either with us or without us - heard of that before?

Even if I look from a non-Islamic perspective, there is nothing wrong in that at all! So if someone declares war on you or helps your enemies, they are still supposed to be your allies?? :wtf:


And don't even bring the whole women and children aspect into this, since you know fine well (if you have any knowledge of Islam) that there are strict rules of battle and any 'fighting' is left to combatants only (men or women).

[Le_Gendarme]

Actually many of my non-muslim friends have read the Qu'ran and found it amazing, some read it and felt it was another holy book pretty much the same as the bible except without all the contradictions within the gospel.

In fact, a girl I know was Hindu Brahmin and read the Qu'ran in her own time without any influence from anyone and is now one of the best examples of a Muslim woman I know, and she also married a Hindu revert!!

Of course you find it offensive, because idolatry is offensive and repelled by God in the Qu'ran - no-one expects you to be happy about it. But that's life and that's our belief so move along because you aren't revealing any particular 'secrets' mon ami!!


Im gonna have to repeat myself again aren't I :rolleyes:

Although we must disagree with the practise of polytheism, there should be no violence or fighting or enmity with the following groups of people:

1) those with whom you have a treaty
2) those who have not failed you, broken oaths etc.
3) those who have not conspired against you and helped others to fight you

The example I can give now is, US has fiercely helped Israel against the Muslim & Christian Palestinians thus they have now explicitly declared war on them, by siding with the enemy.

Either with us or without us - heard of that before?

Even if I look from a non-Islamic perspective, there is nothing wrong in that at all! So if someone declares war on you or helps your enemies, they are still supposed to be your allies?? :wtf:


And don't even bring the whole women and children aspect into this, since you know fine well (if you have any knowledge of Islam) that there are strict rules of battle and any 'fighting' is left to combatants only (men or women).



The war in Islam has it's rules !

No Women and No Children must be involved or should be hurt.
You shall not cause damage to tree's,animals,other people's property.

And the war in Islam is Army vs Army when both sides want to kill eachother.

No Civilians, No Women, No Children.

[rex_maximus]

I do believe idol worship is a corruption on the earth and is the greatest sin against God, as He so states Himself.

But idol worship was particularly outlawed in the harem - the heart of Islam, elsewhere it is tolerated since everyone is free to practice their religion as long as they do not conspire agaisnt the Muslims or strike enmity with them as can be seen from the Qu'ranic verses that relate to treaties with polytheists.

believe what you want. just leave others out of it.

i believe you should not accept any human to be a prophet. its illogical and a sin against God. do you agree? no? what if i show up in your house, your neighbourhood, your country.....and start imposing my belief on you? by force. how would that be?

[Le_Gendarme]

believe what you want. just leave others out of it.

i believe you should not accept any human to be a prophet. its illogical and a sin against God. do you agree? no? what if i show up in your house, your neighbourhood, your country.....and start imposing my belief on you? by force. how would that be?

Nobody imposed Islam on you.

We muslim's invite people to Islam you are free to choose.

[rex_maximus]

Nobody imposed Islam on you.

We muslim's invite people to Islam you are free to choose.

waht about the the arabs, turks, and persians who came and imposed it on my people for hundreds of years? what about the impositions made on non-muslims in islamic countries? what about the constant rant of the followers of abrahamic relligions that idolatry and polytheism need to be wiped out by any means necessary? what about the islamic quest for a global islamic state, where nothing other than islam will be tolerated, where apostacy is punishable by death?

don't try to give me these convinient righteous ones when you know very well that all of the above are facts.

[Le_Gendarme]

waht about the the arabs, turks, and persians who came and imposed it on my people for hundreds of years? what about the impositions made on non-muslims in islamic countries? what about the constant rant of the followers of abrahamic relligions that idolatry and polytheism need to be wiped out by any means necessary? what about the islamic quest for a global islamic state, where nothing other than islam will be tolerated, where apostacy is punishable by death?

don't try to give me these convinient righteous ones when you know very well that all of the above are facts.

You used the word imposed would you like to show some figures and clarify who are your people and how many were converted by force !


And yes we want a global Islamic state whats wrong with that ?

[rex_maximus]

Isn't that the case with all 'translations' of any book?

Because that was the only language of the prophet to whom the message was given..................do'h?

wth, did u hope for one copy in every single language imaginable??!!

absolutely. why not? you claim its the divine word of God. the ultimate truth. the formula for salvation. why is it available in only one version of one particular language? why were all the prophets sent only to middle eastern countries?

what books are you talking about? most books are translated just fine in many different languages. what is the message of these books? who are they addressed to? if they contain the divine word of God, why are they restricted to one language? why is their translation vague and inferior? why should everyone be compelled to achive expertise in one language to coprehend the message?

What is dhimmitude exactly? Sorry its not a term in Islam.

shows how much you know.

If you're referring to the status of a non-Muslim in an islamic state, then they are actually given extra protection.....and i won't even bother going into it! :hand:

very convinient. even so, you don't "even have to bother going into it" since i know exactly what the status of non-muslims is in an islamic state. they are second class citizens. protection is not bestowed magnanimously to them, it is charged via jizya. why should people have to pay a tax IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY, if they don't believe in your ideals?

most of all, with this kind of philosophy....how can you say anything against israel and zionism AT ALL?? the jews are behaving exactly the same way as muslims do. they believe they are the chosen people of God. they believe israel is their God give land. They don't give a crap about whether you agree with them or not. hence palestinians and all other gentiles are considered inferior. their only backing is their personal religious beliefs. how is this any different from what the muslims do? how can you cry foul about what the jews do, when your own treatment of non-muslims is no different?


Actually the entire war is based on Americans fighting the Iraqis until they accept their ideals (namely democracy and secularism etc). And I'm pretty peeved but I have to pay a tax in my country too, don't you?

exactly. how is this any different from muslims invading other countries and imposing islam? how do you think the iraqis would respond to the americans invading their land, setting up their own government, and demanding that the iraqis pay tax to america in order for 'protection'? the tax you pay in what ever country you're in goes to support the country and the society you ELECTED AND SUPPORT. would you still pay this tax to say the jews if tomorrow they show up, take your country by force, and impose judaism and judeo philosophy all over the land....in return of 'protection'?


Actually the Qu'ran contains the word of God and is complete only for men/women of understandig, for everyone else the sunnah is essential to this understanding as I explained before, one verse can mean so much and one issue may be dealt with in the Qu'ran and to the average person it may seem confusing due to alnguage or perhaps intelligence/knowledge deficit then once you look at the sunnah the actions of the prophet make everything apparent.

so the quran and the sunnah/hadiths together should be complete, right? the hadits tells of the prophet marrying a 9 year old girl. it tells of the prophet having multiple wives. it tells of the prophet marrying his son's wife. it tells of the prophet fighting many war, and undoubtedly killing people. how do you explain that? the only way you can explain that is by relating these events to the specific time and location of its occurance. that means these events are NOT relevent to people lliving in different time, different places, different cultures. then how do the quran and sunnah/hadiths qualify as the universal doctrines fit for all men and all times?

[Le_Gendarme]

absolutely. why not? you claim its the divine word of God. the ultimate truth. the formula for salvation. why is it available in only one version of one particular language? why were all the prophets sent only to middle eastern countries?

what books are you talking about? most books are translated just fine in many different languages. what is the message of these books? who are they addressed to? if they contain the divine word of God, why are they restricted to one language? why is their translation vague and inferior? why should everyone be compelled to achive expertise in one language to coprehend the message?


shows how much you know.



very convinient. even so, you don't "even have to bother going into it" since i know exactly what the status of non-muslims is in an islamic state. they are second class citizens. protection is not bestowed magnanimously to them, it is charged via jizya. why should people have to pay a tax IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY, if they don't believe in your ideals?

most of all, with this kind of philosophy....how can you say anything against israel and zionism AT ALL?? the jews are behaving exactly the same way as muslims do. they believe they are the chosen people of God. they believe israel is their God give land. They don't give a crap about whether you agree with them or not. hence palestinians and all other gentiles are considered inferior. their only backing is their personal religious beliefs. how is this any different from what the muslims do? how can you cry foul about what the jews do, when your own treatment of non-muslims is no different?




exactly. how is this any different from muslims invading other countries and imposing islam? how do you think the iraqis would respond to the americans invading their land, setting up their own government, and demanding that the iraqis pay tax to america in order for 'protection'? the tax you pay in what ever country you're in goes to support the country and the society you helped form. would you pay this tax to say the jews if tomorrow they show up, take your country by force, and impose judaism and judeo philosophy all over the land....in return of 'protection'?



so the quran and the sunnah/hadiths together should be complete, right? the hadits tells of the prophet marrying a 9 year old girl. it tells of the prophet having multiple wives. it tells of the prophet marrying his son's wife. it tells of the prophet fighting many war, and undoubtedly killing people. how do you explain that? the only way you can explain that is by relating these events to the specific time and location of its occurance. that means these events are NOT relevent to people lliving in different time, different places, different cultures. then how do the quran and sunnah/hadiths qualify as the universal doctrines fit for all men and all times?

Which Hadeeth's are you refering too ?

The tax non muslim pay is similar to Muslim's giving Zakat.

[rex_maximus]

You used the word imposed would you like to show some figures and clarify who are your people and how many were converted by force !


do you really want to get into that?

fine.

here's one of 3 million sources:

http://americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=4616&search=bostom

And yes we want a global Islamic state whats wrong with that ?

nothing....other than the fact that there are people in the world who may NOT want to accept your philosophy, who probably WILL NOT accept your philosophy.

apply it to yourself. tomorrow, someone walks upto you and starts preaching their religion to you. they give you countless reasons and evidence why they think their faith is the one true faith. will you renounce islam and accept their religion? of course you won't. religion is of supreme importance to every person. there's nothing that I or anyone else can say to make you give up islam.....after all, its your RELIGION!!!! then how do you expect anyone else to give up their religion for islam? sure, there are people that convert to islam everyday, as is true for every other religion. but there are people in every religion who are VERY faithful and headstrong about their religion. do you really think its realistic to expect these people to ever renounce their faith?

more importantly, back in the times of the islamic conquest of india, religion was far more important to people than it is now. do you really think people back then simply gave up their faith and embraced islam without any coercion, no matter what they were preached by mullahs? does that even seem possible?

the formation of a state where islam (or any other single doctrine) is the ONLY philosophy globally is just not credible. it is definitely not achievable without force. and it calls for the eradication and subjucation of all other schools of thought. can you not see why such a scenario would be opposed by every non-muslim?

[HiGHland~Heather]

what books are you talking about? most books are translated just fine in many different languages. what is the message of these books? who are they addressed to? if they contain the divine word of God, why are they restricted to one language? why is their translation vague and inferior? why should everyone be compelled to achive expertise in one language to coprehend the message?


There are always limitations in translations and if you do not know that fact, then you are obviously not aware of much. Everything is 'restricted' as you say to one language - its original language, it may be translated freely but you have to accept that will not be as accurate.

If someone wants to truly know their way of life I think learning another language is a very very small price to pay....how about ancient sanskirt?


shows how much you know.


'dhimmitude' is not a term ever used by the prophet(pbuh) himself not the sahaba, or ansar or salaf or even any Muslim, its a derogatory tem coined by orientalists and xenophobes.


very convinient. even so, you don't "even have to bother going into it" since i know exactly what the status of non-muslims is in an islamic state. they are second class citizens. protection is not bestowed magnanimously to them, it is charged via jizya. why should people have to pay a tax IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY, if they don't believe in your ideals?


Jizya is the tax non-Muslims pay since they don't pay Zakah, which is obligatory on Muslims.

If you look at history, the Muslims were very much welcomed by many nations e.g. in Spain.


so the quran and the sunnah/hadiths together should be complete, right? the hadits tells of the prophet marrying a 9 year old girl. it tells of the prophet having multiple wives. it tells of the prophet marrying his son's wife. it tells of the prophet fighting many war, and undoubtedly killing people. how do you explain that? the only way you can explain that is by relating these events to the specific time and location of its occurance. that means these events are NOT relevent to people lliving in different time, different places, different cultures. then how do the quran and sunnah/hadiths qualify as the universal doctrines fit for all men and all times?

It is timeless and even applicable today.

A girl can be married when she has physically matured, whenever that may be. And there are several girls from my school who were mothers by the age of 12 so yes it certainly is possible.

Multiple wives - still valid.

Adoptive sons are not your blood relations, and should not even carry your name so there is still nothing wrong with it.

Wars - Yep, last time I checked they are still happening.

Therefore the Quran and sunnah do qualify as the universal doctrines fit for all men and all times!

Woah, im really bored of this now.

:blink:

[rex_maximus]

There are always limitations in translations and if you do not know that fact, then you are obviously not aware of much. Everything is 'restricted' as you say to one language - its original language, it may be translated freely but you have to accept that will not be as accurate.

If someone wants to truly know their way of life I think learning another language is a very very small price to pay....how about ancient sanskirt?

i agree. forget just learning another language, one needs to change their entire way of life, perform meditation, adhere to a strict lifestyle, push oneself to the limits of consciousness etc. to name but a few things.

which is why the average man is far from being capable of absorbing the truth. which is why hinduism/buddhism don't claim to be fit for all.

its completely the opposite with abrahamic religions. they claim to be PERFECT, and perfect for all. this is obviously not the case.

moreover, you didnt answer my questions, so i'll rephrase for your convinience:

absolutely. why not? you claim its the divine word of God. the ultimate truth. the formula for salvation. why is it available in only one version of one particular language? why were all the prophets sent only to middle eastern countries?


and then some:

why does God need everyone to follow a religion? why isnt worship of Him enough, no matter what the religion is? after all, every religion ultimately preached worship of God. better yet, why does God need us to worship him at all? He is perfect, isn't He? so why does he need us to remind him of that? why would he dislike anyone following other religions? if he dislikes something or if he is prone to anger, that means he's not perfect. why does God care what we do and what we don't do? doesn't God control absolutely everything? then surely, he must be controlling our actions also. there can be no free will, because if our will was 'free', then it means God has no control over it. how is that possible? why would God decide to send prophets only to the middle east? why would he decide not to send any more? if he loves us, why would he send anyone to hell, that too forever? what does he gain by that? what do we gain by that? what good at all comes out of that? a punishment is meant to help someone improve and change their ways. what good does a punishment do, if it lasts forever?

these are just a fraction of the problems with organized religion. i could present a million more. maybe you should spend some time and think about these things.

[DesiTrix]

rex_maximus

What is your belief?

[rex_maximus]

rex_maximus

What is your belief?

how does it interest you?

[snoop786]

Pick up the Quran and read the Quran have all the ans.

[DesiTrix]

how does it interest you?
I would like to know. If you are really interested in learning about Islam, you shouldn't be afraid of saying what you believe in.

[rex_maximus]

I would like to know. If you are really interested in learning about Islam, you shouldn't be afraid of saying what you believe in.

i'm not afraid of anything.

i have read a large part of the yusufali translation of the quran. i also have a large number of friends who are very learned in islam.

[DesiTrix]

So tell us, what do you believe in?

[rex_maximus]

So tell us, what do you believe in?

http://forums.ratedesi.com/showpost.php?p=5489149&postcount=39

[adren@line]

Idol-worship was nothing more than a handful of superstitions and ridiculous beliefs which brought hundreds of abominable habits in its train and the Prophet had paid sufficient heed towards the guidance of the idolaters. Time had therefore arrived that he should as a last resort use military force to destroy this source of corruption.

such an attitude is the product of backwards Semitic thought and "philosophy" which is based completely on the fact that all Semitic faiths are antagonistic faiths that exist solely to refute another faith and prove that their faith is right.

They are based on opposition.
Judaism is based on the opposition of Semitic polytheism and idolatry.
Christianity is based on the opposition of Judaism.

Islam is based not only on the opposition to Judaism and Christianity (in which
Islam assumes it is the "completion" of both), but also in opposition to Arab idolotry.

They are all antagonistic faiths that live and breathe to dispove others, even though they all fail miserable with their simplistic logic.


I do believe idol worship is a corruption on the earth and is the greatest sin against God, as He so states Himself.

But idol worship was particularly outlawed in the harem - the heart of Islam, elsewhere it is tolerated since everyone is free to practice their religion as long as they do not conspire agaisnt the Muslims or strike enmity with them as can be seen from the Qu'ranic verses that relate to treaties with polytheists.


Idol-worshippers are more peacefull than Muslims.

Idol-worshippers are more productive than Muslims.

Idol worshippers are more developed than Muslims and collectively are more intelligent than Muslims.

All facts.

Compare Buddhist and Hindu countries with one of the many Islamic shitholes and my point is easily proven.

Buddhism has played a major role in much of Asia.
Compare India with any of its neighbors.

Its quite funny that Muslims trump Islam as some kind of historical gift to the idolotrous Arabs, always reffering to them as savages and uncivilized.

Well here are the facts:
Muslims are no better.

In-fact, after the death of the Prophet, the Muslims started killing each other off. They started invading everyone that they could, they massacred thousands of people, and they installed their backwards and idiotic culture to whom-ever they could.

The fact, as backed by history, is that most of the major Islamic historical figures were warlords, violent, barbaric, and/or simply made a living killing people, which is what Mohhamed did.

Compare HIM to a man like the Buddha.

no contest. Compare Mohhamed to Jesus (a REAL man of peace)....

no contest.

Actually many of my non-muslim friends have read the Qu'ran and found it amazing, some read it and felt it was another holy book pretty much the same as the bible except without all the contradictions within the gospel.

In fact, a girl I know was Hindu Brahmin and read the Qu'ran in her own time without any influence from anyone and is now one of the best examples of a Muslim woman I know, and she also married a Hindu revert!!

Of course you find it offensive, because idolatry is offensive and repelled by God in the Qu'ran - no-one expects you to be happy about it. But that's life and that's our belief so move along because you aren't revealing any particular 'secrets' mon ami!!

Ive read about many people who have read the Quran and were "amazed" by it as well.

It relates to their intelligence.

The fact remains that the worlds intellects are not converting to Islam in any sizeable amount.

It also relates to the fact they they didnt have a strong attachment to their religious identity before-hand.

Any self-respecting Hindu will in no way, shape, or form respect Islam or the Quran.

Although we must disagree with the practise of polytheism, there should be no violence or fighting or enmity with the following groups of people:

1) those with whom you have a treaty
2) those who have not failed you, broken oaths etc.
3) those who have not conspired against you and helped others to fight you

The example I can give now is, US has fiercely helped Israel against the Muslim & Christian Palestinians thus they have now explicitly declared war on them, by siding with the enemy.

Either with us or without us - heard of that before?

Even if I look from a non-Islamic perspective, there is nothing wrong in that at all! So if someone declares war on you or helps your enemies, they are still supposed to be your allies??
you missed the verse after it , didnt you?
You have to read the verses in succession.

which is here:

009.004
YUSUFALI: (But the treaties are) not dissolved with those Pagans with whom ye have entered into alliance and who have not subsequently failed you in aught, nor aided any one against you. So fulfil your engagements with them to the end of their term: for Allah loveth the righteous.
PICKTHAL: Excepting those of the idolaters with whom ye (Muslims) have a treaty, and who have since abated nothing of your right nor have supported anyone against you. (As for these), fulfil their treaty to them till their term. Lo! Allah loveth those who keep their duty (unto Him).
SHAKIR: Except those of the idolaters with whom you made an agreement, then they have not failed you in anything and have not backed up any one against you, so fulfill their agreement to the end of their term; surely Allah loves those who are careful (of their duty).

009.005
YUSUFALI: But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.
PICKTHAL: Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
SHAKIR: So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.



For one, you only took Yusafali's translation into accunt

Two, the translations can be interpreted to mean a number of things, including the idea that at the "end of the term', it is OK to kill the idolaters wherever the Muslim finds them.

The next clause can be translated to "forbidden months", which can relate to the "end of the term", in which it is forbidden to slay the idolaters.

And don't even bring the whole women and children aspect into this, since you know fine well (if you have any knowledge of Islam) that there are strict rules of battle and any 'fighting' is left to combatants only (men or women).
sorry, but your combatants only clause is not in the Quran, specifically in chapter 9.

It says to "slay the idolaters wherever you find them", something all three translations agree with.

[snoop786]

such an attitude is the product of backwards Semitic thought and "philosophy" which is based completely on the fact that all Semitic faiths are antagonistic faiths that exist solely to refute another faith and prove that their faith is right.

They are based on opposition.
Judaism is based on the opposition of Semitic polytheism and idolatry.
Christianity is based on the opposition of Judaism.

Islam is based not only on the opposition to Judaism and Christianity (in which
Islam assumes it is the "completion" of both), but also in opposition to Arab idolotry.

They are all antagonistic faiths that live and breathe to dispove others, even though they all fail miserable with their simplistic logic.





Idol-worshippers are more peacefull than Muslims.

Idol-worshippers are more productive than Muslims.

Idol worshippers are more developed than Muslims and collectively are more intelligent than Muslims.

All facts.

Compare Buddhist and Hindu countries with one of the many Islamic shitholes and my point is easily proven.

Buddhism has played a major role in much of Asia.
Compare India with any of its neighbors.

Its quite funny that Muslims trump Islam as some kind of historical gift to the idolotrous Arabs, always reffering to them as savages and uncivilized.

Well here are the facts:
Muslims are no better.

In-fact, after the death of the Prophet, the Muslims started killing each other off. They started invading everyone that they could, they massacred thousands of people, and they installed their backwards and idiotic culture to whom-ever they could.

The fact, as backed by history, is that most of the major Islamic historical figures were warlords, violent, barbaric, and/or simply made a living killing people, which is what Mohhamed did.

Compare HIM to a man like the Buddha.

no contest. Compare Mohhamed to Jesus (a REAL man of peace)....

no contest.


Ive read about many people who have read the Quran and were "amazed" by it as well.

It relates to their intelligence.

The fact remains that the worlds intellects are not converting to Islam in any sizeable amount.

It also relates to the fact they they didnt have a strong attachment to their religious identity before-hand.

Any self-respecting Hindu will in no way, shape, or form respect Islam or the Quran.


you missed the verse after it , didnt you?
You have to read the verses in succession.

which is here:



For one, you only took Yusafali's translation into accunt

Two, the translations can be interpreted to mean a number of things, including the idea that at the "end of the term', it is OK to kill the idolaters wherever the Muslim finds them.

The next clause can be translated to "forbidden months", which can relate to the "end of the term", in which it is forbidden to slay the idolaters.


sorry, but your combatants only clause is not in the Quran, specifically in chapter 9.

It says to "slay the idolaters wherever you find them", something all three translations agree with.
Don’t Judge Islam based on your so called Hindu chaste system mentality you guys are the number one racist people in the world worse than red necks in this modern age still look down on one other just coz they are of lower chaste.

[Slater_uk]

ITS ONLY DUM PEOPLE THAT BELIEVE IN THAT OSAMA DID THE 9/11 AND MUSLIMS SHOULD BE BLAIMED. IF DUM AMERICANS AND ENGLISH BELIEVE THEY CAN HATE US FOR THE 9/11 AND 7/7 THEN WE GOT 11 TIMES MORE RIGHT TO HATE THEM FOR THE IRAQ WAR.

YOU LOT SHOULD CHECK OUT WWW.SHOUTWIRE.COM THERES ALOT OF DUM AMERICANS THERE THAT BELIEVE IN ANYTHING BUSH TELLS THEM TO I JUST DISS THEM TELL THEM THERE A DISGRACE TO THE HUMAN RACE BECAUSE OF THEIR STUPIDITY YOU LOT SHOULD JOIN ME THERE.

[s1n6h]

To: Slater_uk, people are always blaming the bush administration, Arabs, Jews?…but until someone can come up with proof that it was bush and his team, you can pretty much blame anyone…hey how about the yellow tele-tubby ?

[Space-Cowboy]

Don’t Judge Islam based on your so called Hindu chaste system mentality you guys are the number one racist people in the world worse than red necks in this modern age still look down on one other just coz they are of lower chaste.


Caste system was banned long time ago.