I am quite frankly, sick and tired, of this propoganda being spread about Islam's brilliance by PM. So I think it is about time, we look at it objectively.

What I am about to reveal in this thread, about Islam, will probably make you sick, maybe even resent Islam, and muslims. However, that would be irrational, as Islam itself, though it's origins are barbaric, and primitive, is not an entirely "evil" religion, although it does come close to one.

Having said that, it is an extremely primitive religion, and in some way, its the closest thesis we have to the Clingon empire.

Let us analyze some passages from Islam's most holiest of books, the Quran, and the Hadeeth. It is difficult to arrive at a consensus on Islam, as there are so many contradictions. Where it says X is Y, it will contradict it by saying X is Z later. Example "Love one another" then "Kill the non-believers"

Passages from the Quran:

“Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits, for Allah does not love transgressors”. 2:190

- This passage is advocting violence for the interest of God. However, at the same time, it says it should be in limitation? What are those limitations?

“And slay them (the infidels) wherever you catch them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out, for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter” 2:191

- This statement which follows abvocates murder against wrong doers. So what happend to the limitation as prescribed above.

“And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and Faith in Allah; but if they cease, let there be no hostility except to those who practise oppression”. 2:193

- This suggests a continued campaign against oppressors, sounds like the Jihad's of today. However, the 2nd line, does not entirely suggest oppression, as it associates oppression with "Faith in Allah" In other words, let the "Faith in Allah" prevail over the oppressors. Untill they cease their hostility. Does oppressors mean non-muslims in this context, and their hostility, their alternate beliefs?

“Fighting is prescribed for you, and you dislike it. But it is possible that you dislike a thing which is good for you, and that you love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knows, and you know not” 2:216

- This suggests, we are suppose to fight, and it's God's will. There is also more deeper implications felt by this passage. That our emotional being that is marred by inflicting pain on others, is our ignorance, and we should not let that come in our way.

"Let those fight in the cause of Allah who sell the life of this world for the Hereafter. To him who fighteth in the cause of Allah, whether he is slain or gets victory soon shall we give him a reward of great (value)" 4:74

- This is a disturbing passage. If one fights for Islam, he is right, and he will be rewarded, in life, or after life. It sounds like brainwashing.

Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the Religion of truth, from among the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued" 9:29

- My suspicision is confirmed. This passage blatently suggests, violence against non-muslims, untill they convert to Islam. Thus "Islamic fundamentalists" that force conversions with viloence, are in fact, being instructed to do, from Islam itself.

But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the pagans wherever ye find them, and 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” 9:5

- This further reinforces the above passage, and here it suggests a pro-active role of Islamic conversions, by seeking non muslims, and converting them. Thus, the Islamic crusades, and how it spread, by forcing non-muslims to convert, or perish, is preached in this passage.

The Hadeeth

The Hadeeth are the sayings of Muhammad, the prophet of Islam.
Muhammed is reveered as a great saint, a torchbearer of love and peace, and some of his teaching indeed do preach love. At the same time, some his teachings are full of malice and hate and he sounds like am evil tyrant.
Let's examine them:

Ibn Haban in his Sahih, vol. 14, p. 529, narrates: Muhammad said: “I swear by Him who has my soul in his hands, I was sent to you with nothing but slaughter.”

- I am not sure what to make of this. He is a prophet of God, yet he's sent for slaughter?

In his Musnad (vol. 2, p. 50) Imam Ahmed narrates by Ibn Omar: “the Prophet said: ‘I was sent by the sword proceeding the judgment day and my livelihood is in the shadow of my spear and humiliation and submission are on those who disobey me.’”

- Here he clearly outlines his agenda. He professes to being sent be God, and he will slaughter and humilate those who disobey him. That sounds more like, being sent by Satan.

Omar Ibn al-Khatab said: “I heard the prophet of Allah saying: ‘I will cast Jews and Christians out of the peninsula and I won’t leave any one in it but Muslims.’” (Sunan Abu Dawud, vol. 2, No. 28, from the Muhaddith program[2])

- That sounds like Hitler almost. Muhammed is clearly outlining an ethnic cleansing initative. Something that we today, look at, as evil.

Ibn Ishaq and al-Waqidi report that the prophet said the morning after the murder (of Kab Ibn al’Ashraf), “Kill any Jew you can lay your hands on.” (El beddayah wa alnihaya – Ibn Katheer – vol. 4 – in the chapter on killing Ka’ab bin al’Ashraf)

- That is Hitler!

We will not examine some of the murders commited by Muhammed, and his followers, simply against perpetrators of free-speech:

Ibn Ishak said: “The apostle said, “Kill any Jew that falls into your power.” Thereupon Muhayyisa ãÍíÕÉ b. Masud leapt upon Ibn Sunayna, a Jewish merchant with whom they had social and business relations, and killed him. Huwayyisa ÍæíÕÉ was not a Muslim at the time though he was the elder brother. When Muhayyisa killed him Huwayyisa began to beat him, saying, ‘You enemy of God, did you kill him when much of the fat on your belly comes from his wealth?’ Muhayyisa answered, ‘Had the one who ordered me to kill him ordered me to kill you I would have cut your head off.’” (El badyah wa alnihaya – Ibn Katheer – vol. 4 – in the chapter on killing Ka’ab bin al’Ashraf)2

`Umayr’s Expedition To Kill Abu Afak
Mohammad once killed a man named (al-Harith b. Suwayd). When Abu Afak wrote a poem objecting to the murder, Muhammad said, “Who will deal with this rascal for me?” Whereupon Salim b. Umayr, brother of B. Amr b. Auf, one of the “weepers”, went forth and killed him. (Ibn Hisham – Dar el jeel Beirut – 1411 –Vol. 6 - UMAYR’S EXPEDITION TO KILL ABU AFAK)

- Here, someone is killed, who objected to the murder of the Jewish merchant - by the order of Muhammed himself. Is Muhammed preaching the message of God, or his own message of sheer evil.

UMAYR B. 3adi JOURNEY TO KILL ASMA D. MARWAN

After Abu Afak was murdered, Asma wrote a poem blaming Islam and its followers of killing their opponenets.
When Muhammad heard what she had said he said, “Who will rid me of Marwan’s daughter?” Ummayr b. Adiy al-Khatmi who was with him heard him, and that very night he went to her house and killed her. In the morning he came to the apostle and told him what he had done and he [Muhammad] said, “You have helped God and His apostle, O Umayr!” When he asked if he would have to bear any evil consequences the apostle said, “Two goats won’t butt their heads about her”, so Umayr went back to his people. Now there was a great commotion among B. Khatma that day about the affair of bint [girl] Marwan. She had five sons, and when Umayr went to them from the apostle he said, “I have killed bint Marwan, O sons of Khatma. Withstand me if you can; don’t keep me waiting.” That was the first day Islam became powerful among B. Khatma.
The day after Bint Marwan was killed the men of B. Khatma became Muslims because they saw the power of Islam.”
(Ibn Katheer el bedayah wa alnehaya – vol. 5 – in the mention of the year 11 of hijrah also found in- Ibn Hisham – dar al jeel Beirut – vol. 6 UMAYR B. ADIYY’S JOURNEY TO KILL ASMA D. MARWAN)

- This particular case, clearly demonstrates, Islam spread by violence and murder and confirms the passages we have examined in the Quran.

4 Killing of a slave woman.
A blind man had a slave who he had taken a concubine, the mother of his children, who used to abuse the Prophet and disparage him. He forbade her but she did not stop.
One night she began to slander the Prophet and abuse him. So he took a dagger, placed it on her belly, pressed it, and killed her. A child who came between her legs was smeared with the blood that was there. When the morning came, the Prophet was informed about this. He assembled the people and said: “I adjure by Allah the man who has done this action and I adjure him by my right to him that he should stand up.” The man stood up. He sat before the Prophet and said: “Apostle of Allah! I am her master; she used to abuse you and disparage you. I forbade her, but she did not stop, and I rebuked her, but she did not abandon her habit. I have two sons like pearls from her, and she was my companion. Last night she began to abuse and disparage you. So I took a dagger, put it on her belly and pressed it till I killed her.” Thereupon the Prophet said: “Oh be witness, no retaliation is payable for her blood.”
(Naylu Al’wtar - Al-Shawkani – Al muneeriah pulishing – Cairo – Vol 7 – Book of Drinking – Chapter on Killing Of One who declared a warning to the prophet - also in Sunan Abi Daowd – Markaz Al’bhath wa aldersat althkafiah – Vol 2 – Chapter the judgment on one who swore to the prophet) -

- An account of the extreme intolerance and fanatacism of Islam.

5 `Amr B Umayya EXPEDITION
Once Muhammad sent one of his followers named `Amr, to murder Muhammad’s enemy Abu Sufyan. However, the assassination attempt failed. As he returned home, he met a one-eyed shepherd. The shepherd and the Muslim man both identified themselves as members of the same Arab clan. Prior to going asleep, the shepherd said that he would never become a Muslim. Umayya waited for the shepherd to fall asleep and thereafter: ”as soon as the bedouin was asleep and snoring I got up and killed him in a more horrible way than any man has been killed.”
Umayya returned and spoke with Muhammad. He relates.... ”He [Muhammad] asked my news and when I told him what had happened he blessed me.”

- I am lost for words. This is too much.

After Muhammed's death, his teaching were spread by Abu Bakr (the first caliph) by proporgating it by wars, even against muslims themselves, forcing them to pay dues that Muhammed used to collect for himself(as related in the Qur’an 9:103).

Abd Allah ibn Sa’ed (Omr ibn al-Khatab servant) said: “Arab Christians are not Christians, I am not leaving them until they become Muslims or I cut their throats.” (Kanzu ‘umal – al mutka al hindi – vol. 4, No. 11770)
Omar ibn al-Khatab (the second caliph)
Abd Allah ibn Sa’ed (Omr ibn al-Khatab servant) said: “Arab Christians are not Christians, I am not leaving them until they become Muslims or I cut their throats.” (Kanzu ‘umal – al mutka al hindi – vol. 4, No. 11770)
Khalid ibn al-Walid (the unsheathed sword of Allah)
The letter of Khalid Ibn al-Walid to the people of Madain:
“From Khaled ibn al-Walid to Marazebah the people of Faris [Persian people] peace be to those who follow the guidance. Praise God that your servants left you and you lost your possession and have been weakened. Anyone who prayed our prayer and accepted our place of prayer to the East [Qiblah] and ate our sacrifice that would be a true Muslim who has the same privileges and duties as us. When you receive my letter send me the ransom for the hostage we hold and asked for a covenant, or in the name of the God who there is no other god like him I will send you people who love to die as you love to live."

During the battle with the Persians, and it was very tough war, Khaled said: “O Allah, if you give us victory over them, I swear I won’t leave one of them alive and I will run their river with their blood.”
Then when Allah gave them victory, Khaled send people to call for capturing everyone and asking Muslims not to kill anyone except who refuses to submit. After they captured them, they (the Persians) were brought to the river and were beheaded. The Muslims did that for three days till they had killed 70000.

(Abu Bakr – By Muhammad Rashid Rida – “Muhaddith Program”[2] – And Bedaya wa nehaya –Ibn Katheer – In the mention of year 12 of Hijrah “Muhaddith”)

- I have only quoted a small part of the Quran and the Hadeeth, and there is no need to quote more. It is clear, how barbaric, primitive, and uncultured Islam is. It preaches violence, murder, deceit, war, religious conversion, extreme intolerance and hate. It has been in its past, and even today, the true followers of Islam, are continuing its legacy, or its curse, in the form of the Taliban, Sharia Law, Al - Quaida.

This does not mean Muslims of today are evil however. The belief system of Islam has been refined today for the modern folk, and the messages of peace, or the good, you could call it, has been precipitated from the venom and the hate.

Crazymikey, many of those passages you quote are taken out of context. If you read the surrounding text, you will see that violence is encouraged only as a response to violence, or the transgression of treaties. Our resident Muslim (the proud one) requires a certain form for discussion of the Quran:
1. The background to each sura was shown. One cannot take a verse revealed for a battle and insist it is if for the daily affairs of Muslims.
2. It was shown how Non-muslims who wish to attack Islam, conveniently leave out verses before and after their quoted verse. Above, I have shown only one of the many examples.

I have found only two exceptions that I cannot explain:

Quoted from here (http://www.sacred-texts.com/isl/htq/index.htm) I have included the verse before and after the quoted verse which is in bold text.
.................................................. ......................................



9. at-Taubah: Repentance

28 O ye who believe! The idolaters only are unclean. So let them not come near the Inviolable Place of Worship after this their year. If ye fear poverty (from the loss of their merchandise) Allah shall preserve you of His bounty if He will. Lo! Allah is Knower, Wise.

29 Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture as believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, and forbid not that which Allah hath forbidden by His messenger, and follow not the Religion of Truth, until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low.

30 And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah, and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah. That is their saying with their mouths. They imitate the saying of those who disbelieved of old. Allah (Himself) fighteth against them. How perverse are they!

- My suspicision is confirmed. This passage blatently suggests, violence against non-muslims, untill they convert to Islam. Thus "Islamic fundamentalists" that force conversions with viloence, are in fact, being instructed to do, from Islam itself.
It says fight them (could be verbally), until they pay a tribute (like a tax?), so you can be an unbeliever if you pay the tax, sounds unfair, but not too harsh. I would like to know a muslims take on this.

and this one-

122 And the believers should not all go out to fight. Of every troop of them, a party only should go forth, that they (who are left behind) may gain sound knowledge in religion, and that they may warn their folk when they return to them, so that they may beware.

123 O ye who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are near to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who keep their duty (unto Him).

124 And whenever a surah is revealed there are some of them who say: Which one of you hath thus increased in faith ? As for those who believe, it hath increased them in faith and they rejoice (therefor).

This is the most disturbing one, and could be justification for all kinds of violence.

Hmmmm, Hitler was a muslim.......... That figures!

oh, was he?

oh, was he?
He might as well have been - He hated jews and he was a savage bastard.

Hmmmm, Hitler was a muslim.......... That figures!
I think Hitler was Roman Catholic,
heres something on Islam,its just as bad xianity in some ways
www.geocities.com/inquisitive79/

Crazymikey, many of those passages you quote are taken out of context. If you read the surrounding text, you will see that violence is encouraged only as a response to violence, or the transgression of treaties. Our resident Muslim (the proud one) requires a certain form for discussion of the Quran:

I have found only two exceptions that I cannot explain:

Quoted from here (http://www.sacred-texts.com/isl/htq/index.htm) I have included the verse before and after the quoted verse which is in bold text.
.................................................. ......................................



9. at-Taubah: Repentance

28 O ye who believe! The idolaters only are unclean. So let them not come near the Inviolable Place of Worship after this their year. If ye fear poverty (from the loss of their merchandise) Allah shall preserve you of His bounty if He will. Lo! Allah is Knower, Wise.

29 Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture as believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, and forbid not that which Allah hath forbidden by His messenger, and follow not the Religion of Truth, until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low.

30 And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah, and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah. That is their saying with their mouths. They imitate the saying of those who disbelieved of old. Allah (Himself) fighteth against them. How perverse are they!


It says fight them (could be verbally), until they pay a tribute (like a tax?), so you can be an unbeliever if you pay the tax, sounds unfair, but not too harsh. I would like to know a muslims take on this.

and this one-

122 And the believers should not all go out to fight. Of every troop of them, a party only should go forth, that they (who are left behind) may gain sound knowledge in religion, and that they may warn their folk when they return to them, so that they may beware.

123 O ye who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are near to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who keep their duty (unto Him).

124 And whenever a surah is revealed there are some of them who say: Which one of you hath thus increased in faith ? As for those who believe, it hath increased them in faith and they rejoice (therefor).

This is the most disturbing one, and could be justification for all kinds of violence.

I do not think they have been taken out of context. I have acknowledged the first quotes as the measure against "wrong doers". I can see it is perhaps righteous to fight against wrong, but what exactly is wrong as per Islamic standards? If you examine this passage:

And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and Faith in Allah; but if they cease, let there be no hostility except to those who practise oppression”.

It has linked hostility, and oppression, to the faith in Allah. Therefore, their wrongdoers may only be people who do not practice the faith in Allah, or Islam. If you think this is jumping to conclusions. Then look at this passage:

Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the Religion of truth, from among the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued" 9:29

This removes all shadows of doubt really. Here it blatently says, fight those who do not believe in Islam, or it's written word, untill they are subdued, and pay an Islamic tax.

Now look at this:

But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the pagans wherever ye find them, and 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” 9:5

There should be no doubt now, that the wrong doers as outlined above, are non-muslims and their non-islamic beliefs. Here it suggests, even after the struggle is over, go forth and seek them, wherever they are, and only spare them, if they convert to Islam.

So, I do not agree, I have taken anything out of context. All of the passages above, are consistent with each other, and further more, consistent with the Hadeeth, and consistent with the history of violence and forced conversions in Islam, and consistent with the Islamic fundamentalism of today.

So it is only logically follows, that Islam IS actually preaching this. As you've outlined some passages, where it shows this too. It is an open and shut case really.

It is an open and shut case really.

It certainly is crazymickey. The case is closed watertight.

Islam is the worlds "Wolf in sheeps clothing" religion.

It claims to be peaceful while being the worlds biggest oppressive and violent organisation .... Case closed!

that's right boys. islam is a very oppressive religion and very unreasonable. it's also barbaric and atrocious.

too bad for you, but it's the fastest growing religion in the world. maybe today's people are oppressive, unreasonable, ruthless, and barbaric. lol

It certainly is crazymickey. The case is closed watertight.

Islam is the worlds "Wolf in sheeps clothing" religion.

It claims to be peaceful while being the worlds biggest oppressive and violent organisation .... Case closed!


not too fast my white supermicst christian fanatic friend. hahaha

He might as well have been - He hated jews and he was a savage bastard.

the jews have been attacked over and over again throughout history, many of them not muslims.

and why don't you prove me wrong with that overconfidence of yours?

the jews have been attacked over and over again throughout history, many of them not muslims.

and why don't you prove me wrong with that overconfidence of yours?

he can't prove anything, you are talking to a guy who thinks that world is flat and 6000 years old. Who thinks that isalmic armies are at his door and he build a big fence around his house and it says *muslims stay away* he looks for foreigners in england and if they look dark he automatically assumes that they are muslim terrorists..........to him every one who looks brown or with the beard is muslims terrorists......guy has no formal education, no historical knowledge and no sense of future.........he can't asnwer you. He will babble bunch of things and every thing will turn down to three topics from him, 1 stonning of women. 2) 9/11 and 3) how islam treats women ( yes again ),. lol. He can't do anything about it, he is just handicap when it comes down to talk sense.

lol

i think i noticed that too :D

that's right boys. islam is a very oppressive religion and very unreasonable. it's also barbaric and atrocious.

too bad for you, but it's the fastest growing religion in the world. maybe today's people are oppressive, unreasonable, ruthless, and barbaric. lol
Maybe it is, but it will never overpower secularism.

not too fast my white supermicst christian fanatic friend. hahaha
I'm not a christian fanatic, I might not even be white for all you know.

You Racist twat.

the jews have been attacked over and over again throughout history, many of them not muslims.

and why don't you prove me wrong with that overconfidence of yours?
Prove you wrong about what?

Hitler hated Jews?? Of course he did.

Can't you recognise a sarcastic comment when you read one, or was it too clever for you?
:D

he can't prove anything, you are talking to a guy who thinks that world is flat and 6000 years old. Who thinks that isalmic armies are at his door and he build a big fence around his house and it says *muslims stay away* he looks for foreigners in england and if they look dark he automatically assumes that they are muslim terrorists..........to him every one who looks brown or with the beard is muslims terrorists......guy has no formal education, no historical knowledge and no sense of future.........he can't asnwer you. He will babble bunch of things and every thing will turn down to three topics from him, 1 stonning of women. 2) 9/11 and 3) how islam treats women ( yes again ),. lol. He can't do anything about it, he is just handicap when it comes down to talk sense.

And you call that talking sense? :rolleyes:

And you call that talking sense? :rolleyes:

ya! I do. :D

I'm not a christian fanatic, I might not even be white for all you know.

You Racist twat.

Come on, don't be ashamed of yourself....No need to hide the white robe and the cone head peice......Wear it proudly, it's the only culture you have.

Come on, don't be ashamed of yourself....No need to hide the white robe and the cone head peice......Wear it proudly, it's the only culture you have.
I'm not ashamed of anything, and my culture and beliefs are far superior to anything you are ever likely to possess.

Thank you for your concern anyway

I would appreciate it, if we actually discuss the topic, rather than each other. Vienna, not all muslims are fanatics, don't generalize like that. Although, I would like to know a muslims's take on my analysis above, and how it affects their ideals.

ya! I do. :D
That figures.

I would appreciate it, if we actually discuss the topic, rather than each other. Vienna, not all muslims are fanatics, don't generalize like that. Although, I would like to know a muslims's take on my analysis above, and how it affects their ideals.

crazymikey

If the lying pathetic scum leave me alone then I will not retaliate, thats fair enough isn't it

PS. I would LOVE to hear a muslim answer your analysis too, but I doubt very much this will happen

I'm not ashamed of anything, and my culture and beliefs are far superior to anything you are ever likely to possess.


I agree, your culture is way more superior, perhaps if you wish to consider gymnastic skills. When my great great granddaddy Ramses, and the other Pharoahs were building state of the art agriculture systems, buildings, pyramids, ships, ect.....Yours were swinging superiorly from a tree branch.

Why don't you copy cat more numbers that my ancestors have invented for you. Do a better job at it, will you? If my anscestors knew that the west was going to use these numbers to manipulate, steal, conquer, and ruin the environment, build bombs, they would have left you up on the tree where you belonged.

crazymikey

If the lying pathetic scum leave me alone then I will not retaliate, thats fair enough isn't it


Where do you get such concept from? Islam perhaps, the religion that gives you the right to retaliate until persection cease......I demand that you stop behaving Islamic and put your head between your legs and kiss your white ass goodbye....because that's the extent of the teachings of christianity.

I agree, your culture is way more superior, perhaps if you wish to consider gymnastic skills. When my great great granddaddy Ramses, and the other Pharoahs were building state of the art agriculture systems, buildings, pyramids, ships, ect.....Yours were swinging superiorly from a tree branch.

Why don't you copy cat more numbers that my ancestors have invented for you. Do a better job at it, will you? If my anscestors knew that the west was going to use these numbers to manipulate, steal, conquer, and ruin the environment, build bombs, they would have left you up on the tree where you belonged.

Grow up and answer crazymickeys analysis

Why don't you copy cat more numbers that my ancestors have invented for you.

That is actually not correct. The decimal system, and the concept of zero, was long ago invented in India, and later this travelled to Arabia, from which it was discovered by the Europeans.

That is actually not correct. The decimal system, and the concept of zero, was long ago invented in India, and later this travelled to Arabia, from which it was discovered by the Europeans.


Thank you for clarifying that it's not British nor western, and give Algaber some credit. They don't call it Algebra out of nothing.

Thank you for clarifying that it's not British nor western, and give Algaber some credit. They don't call it Algebra out of nothing.

Yes Agaber is indeed an arabic word, but it is not an Arabic invention. Even that system originates from India, in fact a lot of mathamathical concept do, click here for more information http://www.ilovemaths.com/ind_mathe.htm

Grow up and answer crazymickeys analysis

I'm waiting for you to wear the cone head suit and burn some cross first. I want you all relaxed in your natural environment, It's hard to talk to constipated British people that think that think that the sun rise and set over their puney little irrelevant island

Yes Agaber is indeed an arabic word, but it is not an Arabic invention. Even that system originates from India, in fact a lot of mathamathical concept do, click here for more information http://www.ilovemaths.com/ind_mathe.htm

This claim is false, the zero was invented by the myans, the chinease, the indians, and the arabs all at the same time arrived at the arabic system.... Why would the numbers be called arabic numbers if they originated in India or China, They should have been called the hindu numbers, but they're not...and how come the Quran, which is a very old manuscript, utilizes the arabic numbers.

How do you think Vienna's computer would be behaving if we started using the Roman numerals...IXXXXV.

Regardless of exactly where the numbers and cultures originated, I think the east, from Egypt to India, and China lies the credit....certainly not with the western world. And if I'm willing to give any part of the western world any cultural credits, then I think the myans are most deserving.

This claim is false, the zero was invented by the myans, the chinease, the indians, and the arabs all at the same time arrived at the arabic system.... Why would the numbers be called arabic numbers if they originated in India or China, They should have been called the hindu numbers, but they're not...and how come the Quran, which is a very old manuscript, utilizes the arabic numbers.

How do you think Vienna's computer would be behaving if we started using the Roman numerals...IXXXXV.

Regardless of exactly where the numbers and cultures originated, I think the east, from Egypt to India, and China lies the credit....certainly not with the western world. And if I'm willing to give any part of the western world any cultural credits, then I think the myans are most deserving.

From what I know of, the zero and the decimal system, from 1 to 9, and 0, was invented in India, and from there it spread to China and Arabia.The earliest account of zero, is in Indian documents, that used a dot to represent 0. They were initially called Hindu-arabic numerals, but later the arabic numerals was adopted by the Europeans.

Further information here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabic_numerals

There is also a treatise written by the Arab mathmatician, Al-Uqlidisi, on the Hindu-place-value-system. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu%27l-Hasan_al-Uqlidisi

Please read the following book on the arabs inventing algebra
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0823989860/inktomi-bkasin-20/ref%3Dnosim/002-5908606-8988049


To read about the invention of trignometry and Astronomy:

http://www.clevelandmemory.com/arabs/pg051.html

The Arabs invented and developed Algebra and made revolutionary strides in trigonometry. Al-Khwarizmi, credited with the invention of Algebra, was inspired by the need to find a more accurate and comprehensive method to assure the precise divisions of land so that the Koran could be speci*fically obeyed in the laws of inheritance. The Astrolabe, combining the use of mathematics, geography and astronomy was also devised with religion in view, and was used to chart exactly the time of sunrise and sunset, to determine the time for fasting during the month of Ramadan. The writings of Leonardo da Vinci, Leonardo Fibonacci of Pisa and Master Jacob of Florence show the Arab influence on mathematical studies in European universities.26

The reformation of the calendar, with a margin of error of only one day in five thousand years was also a contribution of the Arab intellect. Indeed, in our every day commerce, whether it is in yard goods, lumber, or ingots of gold and silver, we use the weights and measures by which the Arabs of the past conducted the business of their every day life.

Astronomy

Beside the improvement of the ancient Astrolabe, the Arab astronomers of the Middle Ages compiled astronomical charts and tables, in observatories such as those at Palmyra and Maragha. Gradually, they were able to deter*mine the length of a degree, to establish longitude and latitude, and to investigate the relative speeds of sound and light. Al-Biruni, considered one of the greatest scientists of all time discussed the possibility of the earth's rotation on its own axis, a theory proven by Galileo six hundred years later. Arab astronomers such as Al Fezari, Al-Farghani, and Al-Zarqali added to the works of Ptolemy and the classic pioneers, in the development of the magnetic compass and the charting of the Zodiac.

From what I know of, the zero and the decimal system, from 1 to 9, and 0, was invented in India]

No doubt in my mind that India was a jewel to the east, but again, ask yourself, with all the ancient wisdom of the Hindus, how come they never adopted a flawed logic like christianity, and how come many of them are actually muslims or Hindus.

I am not disputing the contributions of Arabs. I am just telling you, they did not invent the place-value-system, and nor did they invent Algebra, or trigonometry for that matter, and many of the things you claim. A lot of Arabic mathmatical concepts, have originated from India, according to history, although Im sure arabs must have extended upon them, like creating fractions.

Here is some more information:

As argued by James Q. Jacobs, Aryabhata, an Indian Mathematician (c. 500AD) accurately calculated celestial constants like earth's rotation per solar orbit, days per solar orbit, days per lunar orbit. In fact, to the best of my knowledge, no source from prior to the 18th century had more accurate results on the values of these constants! Click here for details. Aryabhata's 499 AD computation of pi as 3.1416 (real value 3.1415926...) and the length of a solar year as 365.358 days were also extremely accurate by the standards of the next thousand years.

Mathematicians in India invented the base ten system in ancient times. But research did not stop there. The practice of representing large numbers also evolved in ancient India. The base ten system of calculation that uses nine numerals and the zero stood as an efficient way to represent numbers ranging from a very small decimal to an inconceivably large number. The biggest number known to Greeks was the myriad (10,000) whereas the Chinese, until recent times, had 10,000 as the largest unit of enumeration and the ancient Arabs knew only until 1,000. The notion of representing large numbers as powers of 10, one that was invented in India, turned out to be extremely handy. The Yajur Veda Samhitaa, one of the Vedic texts written at least 1,000 years before Euclid lists names for each of the units of ten upto the twelfth power [See 1]. Later other Indian texts (from Buddhist and Jaina authors) extended this list as high as the 53rd power, far exceeding their Greek contmporaries, mainly because of the latter's handicap of not being able to accept the fundamental Mathematical notion of abstract numerals. The place value system is built into the Sanskrit language and so whereas in English we only use thousand, million, billion etc, in Sanskrit there are specific nomenclature for the powers of 10, most used in modern times are dasa (10), sata (100), sahasra (1,000=1K), ayuta (10K), laksha (100K), niyuta (106=1M), koti (10M), vyarbuda (100M), paraardha (1012) etc. Results of such a practice were two-folds. Firstly, the removal of special imporatance of numbers. Instead of naming numbers in grops of three, four or eight orders of units one could use the necessary name for the power of 10. Secondly, the notion of the term "of the order of". To express the order of a particular number, one simply needs to use the nearest two powers of 10 to express its enormity.

Aryabhata (Āryabhaṭa) is the first of the great astronomers of the classical age of India. He was born in 476 AD in Ashmaka but later lived in Kusumapura, which his commentator Bhāskara I (629 AD) identifies with Pāṭaliputra (modern Patna).

His book, the Āryabhatīya, presented astronomical and mathematical theories in which the Earth was taken to be spinning on its axis and the periods of the planets were given with respect to the sun. In this book, the day was reckoned from one sunrise to the next, whereas in his Āryabhata-siddhānta he took the day from one midnight to another. There was also difference in some astronomical parameters.

Āryabhata wrote that 1,582,237,500 rotations of the Earth equal 57,753,336 lunar orbits. This is an extremely accurate ratio of a fundamental astronomical ratio (1,582,237,500/57,753,336 = 27.3964693572), and is perhaps the oldest astronomical constant calculated to such accuracy.

The earliest systematic study of trigonometric functions and tabulation of their values was performed by Hipparchus of Nicaea (180-125 B.C.), who tabulated the lengths of circle arcs (angle A times radius r) with the lengths of the subtending chords (2r sin(A/2)). Later, Ptolemy (2nd century A.D.) expanded upon this work in his Almagest, deriving addition/subtraction formulas for the equivalent of sin(A+B) and cos(A+B). Ptolemy also derived the equivalent of the half-angle formula sin(A/2)2 = (1-cos(A))/2, allowing him to create tables with any desired accuracy. Neither the tables of Hipparchus nor of Ptolemy have survived to the present day.

The next significant development of trigonometry was in India, in the works known as the Siddhantas (4th-5th century A.D.), which first defined the sine as the modern relationship between half an angle and half a chord; the modern word "sine" comes from a mistranslation of the Hindu jiva. The Siddhantas also contains the earliest surviving tables of sine values (along with 1-cos values), in 3.75-degree intervals from 0 to 90 degrees.

The Hindu works were later translated and expanded by the Arabs, who by the 10th century (in the work of Abu'l-Wefa) were using all six trigonometric functions, and had sine tables in 0.25-degree increments, to 8 decimal places of accuracy, as well as tables of tangent values

I am not disputing the contributions of Arabs. I am just telling you, they did not invent the place-value-system, and nor did they invent Algebra, or trigonometry for that matter, and many of the things you claim. A lot of Arabic mathmatical concepts, have originated from India, according to history, although Im sure arabs must have extended upon them, like creating fractions.


It honors me to attribute credit to India and thank you for educating me on the subject. I must confess, I knew little about it.

On another note, I can sense in your writings a hate for Islam....perhaps it's warranted by the State of Pakistan maddness, which by the way, I don't agree with at all. I think you are a victim of the Hindu-Muslim in India. A problem that by the way is a personal one and not a religious one. A probelm of selfishness and lack of tolerance... I'm a muslim, and I agree totally with the logic of this writer Suman Palit:
http://www.madhoo.com/archives/000574.php


Aziz is absolutely right to cry out against organized mayhem of Muslims in India. But those who we condemn carry within their hearts a blackness born of religous certainty, and reinforced by centuries of abuse, whether real or imagined. They are convinced that life is a series of zero-sum games, and that their side has lost one too many. It's payback time, and they are not leaving. What does the world have to offer them but sympathy? Pity? A call to keep taking the moral high ground in the midst of bloodshed? A slice of the pie when ten years down the road, Prez. Condi Rice redraws the map of Pakistan? I don't think so. They want their respect and they want it now. Not the genteel, sophisticated respect of their ex-colonial masters, now farting nervously in Brussels. They want the raw, real and fearful respect of their neighbors. They want to carve out a land recreated in a Vedic afterimage from their fevered dreams. They want a past that never was, to become the future of their children. And they are not going away anytime soon. As long as Islamic fundamentalism exists, so too will the Hinduvta reactionaries. Thrust, parry, counter-parry. A bloody point for every bloody counterpoint.

On another note, I can sense in your writings a hate for Islam....perhaps it's warranted by the State of Pakistan maddness, which by the way, I don't agree with at all. I think you are a victim of the Hindu-Muslim in India. A problem that by the way is a personal one and not a religious one. A probelm of selfishness and lack of tolerance... I'm a muslim, and I agree totally with the logic of this writer Suman Palit:

Woah there, you have gone of at a tangent. I am not Hindu. I am an atheist. Nor do I hate Islam, and I'm not sure how you make such a judgement. If you are referring to my analysis, then It is not me hating Islam, it is the hate that translates from Islam. I am a secularist, and anti-racism, I do not hate Islam, or muslims at all.

Crazymilk,
I think at some point I will address the points your brought from the Quran. The Hadith on the other hand is not a document that I use nor believe in. Hadith is are heresays that were carried by people who said that overhead the prophet say something. Our Quran instructs that our prophet is only a messanger and not a teacher, and it also points out to many instance where the prophet just like any human have made mistakes. Me as a muslim don't believe in the Hadith and don't care to discuss it, because I think it's irrelevant to my faith.

Woah there, you have gone of at a tangent. I am not Hindu. I am an atheist..

Atheism is not a belief. It's merely a lack of proof to warrant a believe in god. So what's really is your believe?

I for example believe in equality and freedom, that all humans, animals, and our environment were created by the same signature print of a higer power. Since we are all created by one and came from one root, I believe in equality. I wouldn't be able to justify equality if it wasn't for my believe in a single creator.

Yes, atheism is not a belief. You accused me of being Hindu, and I was merely telling you, that I do not subscribe to any religious doctorine. Atheism, basically means, no belief in God. I do not beleive in God, because theres no reason to believe he exists.

You said "you cannot justify equality" without a single creator? Well I can justify equality by saying we are all manifestations of the universe. The creator's role is nullified.

Crazymikey. The Quran is not a message to muslims, actually, you will find very few references to muslims. The main people that the Quran came to is believers....believers are not necessarily muslim. Hindus could be believer. Afterall, they believed that this is world is virtual and that the hereafter is the reality. They believe in doing good....Hindus are thus believers. The Quran is a message to humanity. You have as much right to use these verse as a muslim does. The Quran is not a book that came for a single people or race, although the muslims would love to claim authority over it. The Quran is for everyone.

“Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits, for Allah does not love transgressors”. 2:190


You must first understand the cause of Allah...Many muslims have taken their own selfish causes and called them the causes of Allah. In that case, you have all the right to condemn these people, but don't blame the Quran for it. Fight is not always a physical one. Humanity are instructed to fight those that fight them first, but once justice prevails, we are asked to stop the fighting and not transgress our limits. This verse should be used equally by Bush or Saddam. It's not exclusively for Saddam.

Try to understand the rest of the Quran from that premises. Look at it as a revelation for higher authority to all humanity. It's not a message to muslims. The Quran is not the muslims book.

You said "you cannot justify equality" without a single creator? Well I can justify equality by saying we are all manifestations of the universe. The creator's role is nullified.

Then you believe just like me. Universe is "Uni" or one. We are not the manifestation of many universes. We are all the manifestation of the "ONE", thus we are all equal.

Actually Crazymikey, don't mind my posts,

I think you are an arrogant SOB.....proof me different.

Says it all doesn't it Florrie

“Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits, for Allah does not love transgressors”. 2:190

I'm waiting for you to wear the cone head suit and burn some cross first. I want you all relaxed in your natural environment, It's hard to talk to constipated British people that think that think that the sun rise and set over their puney little irrelevant island
You aren't even worth the appalling squandering of oxygen and water required to keep you from being maggot meat, you dungaree-sporting dufus. Do yourself and everyone else a favor: jump into a snake pit and play Twister with the rattlesnakes, you under-medicated utterly clueless quarterwit.

Now keep to the topic - Or Fuck Off

In no Christian or Jewish Bible are there verses that says to kill or dislike any Muslims, in the Koran, it does: "O ye who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for friends!"


[4.89] They desire that you should disbelieve as they have disbelieved, so that you might be (all) alike; therefore take not from among them friends until they fly (their homes) in Allah's way; but if they turn back, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them, and take not from among them a friend or a helper.


[47.35] And be not slack so as to cry for peace and you have the upper hand, and Allah is with you, and He will not bring your deeds to naught.

That figures.


When would you start using ur lone brain cell? I am still waiting.....any day now. :p

In no Christian or Jewish Bible are there verses that says to kill or dislike any Muslims, in the Koran, it does: "O ye who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for friends!"



Retard! Didn't Islam Came After above two mentioned? lol. You are really a joke mate.

You aren't even worth the appalling squandering of oxygen and water required to keep you from being maggot meat, you dungaree-sporting dufus. Do yourself and everyone else a favor: jump into a snake pit and play Twister with the rattlesnakes, you under-medicated utterly clueless quarterwit.

Now keep to the topic - Or Fuck Off


Typical christian fundo behaviour, when can't reply to anything, start fucking off!!! So Vienna.

Skywalker - you and your comments are on ignore . Please keep to the topic if you can.

The Truth About Islam

O ye who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for friends. [al-Ma'idah 5:51.11]

Whoever changes his Islamic religion, kill him. Sahih Al-Bukhari (9:57)

Slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush. (Koran 9:5)

Take him and fetter him and expose him to hell fire. (Koran 69:30-37)

I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers, Smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger tips of them. (Koran 8:12)

They (the unbelievers) should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides. (Koran 5:33)

"Know that paradise is under the shades of swords." Sahih al-Bukhari Vol 4 p55

vienna vienna vienna, would you also be humble enough to quote the few verses before and after each verse you quotes above? it would also be nice to tel which surah you may be getting each from.

The Quran is not the muslims book.
Then whose book is it?

As far as I am concerned the quran is the book for believers in allah, and believers in allah are muslim. It cannot be a book for the whole world, as most the whole world doesn't believe in god let alone your allah.

THIS IS THE TRUTH ABOUT ISLAM


Fight the disbelievers

[9.3] And an announcement from Allah and His Apostle to the people on the day of the greater pilgrimage that Allah and His Apostle 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.

[9.5] 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.


[9.29] Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Apostle have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.

[9.30] And the Jews say: Uzair is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!

[9.123] O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness; and know that Allah is with those who guard (against evil).

[25.52] So do not follow the unbelievers, and strive against them a mighty striving with it.

Conquer the land of the disbelievers

[33.27] And He made you heirs to their land and their dwellings and their property, and (to) a land which you have not yet trodden, and Allah has power over all things.

[47.4] So when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners, and afterwards either set them free as a favor or let them ransom (themselves) until the war terminates. That (shall be so); and if Allah had pleased He would certainly have exacted what is due from them, but that He may try some of you by means of others; and (as for) those who are slain in the way of Allah, He will by no means allow their deeds to perish.


Kill the disbelievers

[4.89] They desire that you should disbelieve as they have disbelieved, so that you might be (all) alike; therefore take not from among them friends until they fly (their homes) in Allah's way; but if they turn back, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them, and take not from among them a friend or a helper.

Do not seek peace

[47.35] And be not slack so as to cry for peace and you have the upper hand, and Allah is with you, and He will not bring your deeds to naught.


How lovely the quran is - NOT.

THIS IS THE TRUTH ABOUT ISLAM

- NOT.


Intersting vieena, you ditched the verses before and after once again or the chapter in a whole. That is exactly how you destroyed your own bible and now you are after Quran. You took one verse of bible and made a whole religion out of it and destroyed the true religion of Esaw aka Jesus. Did you notice how messed up you have become by taking your bible out of context?

I feel sad for you vienna, you miss understood your own religion. Pitty. :(

Then you believe just like me. Universe is "Uni" or one. We are not the manifestation of many universes. We are all the manifestation of the "ONE", thus we are all equal.

Actually, no. I do not believe just like you at all. You said, your belief of equality is only possible, with a CREATOR. I said, equality is possible, because we are all manifestations of the universe. The difference is, the key word, CREATOR. It makes all the difference between our statements.

Actually Crazymikey, don't mind my posts,

I think you are an arrogant SOB.....proof me different.

Seeing as this is a completely unprovoked attack, it proves you are what you just accused me of. Psyhologicial projection, it is called.

I think at some point I will address the points your brought from the Quran. The Hadith on the other hand is not a document that I use nor believe in. Hadith is are heresays that were carried by people who said that overhead the prophet say something. Our Quran instructs that our prophet is only a messanger and not a teacher, and it also points out to many instance where the prophet just like any human have made mistakes. Me as a muslim don't believe in the Hadith and don't care to discuss it, because I think it's irrelevant to my faith.

That is interesting. As the Hadith contains within it, actions and thoughts of your Prophet, and is synonymous with Islam, it is also consistent, with Islamic history of blood-shed and conversion, and consistent with the preachings of the Quran. So, it seems not believing in it, is your own conveniance.

Crazymikey. The Quran is not a message to muslims, actually, you will find very few references to muslims. The main people that the Quran came to is believers....believers are not necessarily muslim. Hindus could be believer. Afterall, they believed that this is world is virtual and that the hereafter is the reality. They believe in doing good....Hindus are thus believers. The Quran is a message to humanity. You have as much right to use these verse as a muslim does. The Quran is not a book that came for a single people or race, although the muslims would love to claim authority over it. The Quran is for everyone.

That is your opinion, and it a good one, yet it is rubbish, if you are suggesting it is a fact. Quran makes a visible difference between "followers of Islam" and the non believers of Islam. As for Hindu being followers of Islam? If that was so, why were they forced to convert to Islam?

You must first understand the cause of Allah...Many muslims have taken their own selfish causes and called them the causes of Allah. In that case, you have all the right to condemn these people, but don't blame the Quran for it. Fight is not always a physical one. Humanity are instructed to fight those that fight them first, but once justice prevails, we are asked to stop the fighting and not transgress our limits. This verse should be used equally by Bush or Saddam. It's not exclusively for Saddam.

Fight, suggests some form of aggression, and in conjunction with fight, the words slay, and kill have been used. It is quite obvious, what its contextual meaning is, and again consistent with the Hadith, and Islamic history.

It's not a message to muslims. The Quran is not the muslims book.

Is that why, if I convert to Islam, I become muslim? You are making your own meanings of your religion. Clearly you don't like it's original meaning.

Fight, suggests some form of aggression, and in conjunction with fight, the words slay, and kill have been used. It is quite obvious, what its contextual meaning is, and again consistent with the Hadith, and Islamic history.

what the hell?

Fight suggests some form of aggression?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

I feel sad for you vienna, you miss understood your own religion. Pitty. :(
I feel sad for you too. Those that jump to conclusions are usually wrong, I understand secularism perfectly well thankyou.

Bible? bible?... why would I need a bible you idiot.

Don't get sore because I tell the truth about Islam, it only makes you sound even more stupid.

what the hell?

Fight suggests some form of aggression?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

There goes your credibility.

Flores, some of the comments you've made in this thread are disgustingly racist.
And ironically you keep accusing people of being in the ku klux clan:rolleyes:
White people aren't open punching bags. You'd scream bloody murder if we talked about your ancestors like that.

Its not even that i care i just hate the double standard, and when its so flagrant, like there was nothing light hearted about the things you said, this isn't some black comedian pointing out the differences between blacks and whites.
You're blatantly and visciously putting down an entire race.

It just goes to show even the most civil seeming muslims secretly want 'white devils' dead and the western world burned to the ground.

Don't get sore because I tell the truth about Islam, it only makes you sound even more stupid.

vienna, i'm gonna ask you one last time.

while quoting something from the quran, INCLUDE the quotes before and after that and what surah it comes from!

skywalker and some others may continue trying to explain stuff to you, even though you will just turn around as if no one said it. i, on the other hand, don't have time to argue with people like you, nor will i treat you nicely. even the greatness kindness will not bind the ungrateful.

you wanna post the "TRUTH" about islam, then look at the WHOLE PICTURE and not what you wanna see.

:m:

There goes your credibility.

i think somebody elses went first.

The pot calling the kettle black?

I am assuming you are a muslim, from your reactions. So, I would like you to explain the passages we have quoted from the Quran, Hadith.

vienna, i'm gonna ask you one last time.
You can ask me as many times as you like, the TRUTH about Islam is plain for all to see.

If there is more to the quotes I have given then please explain them.

while quoting something from the quran, INCLUDE the quotes before and after that and what surah it comes from!
Like I said - You do it - and explain the aggression shown in the quran.


you wanna post the "TRUTH" about islam, then look at the WHOLE PICTURE and not what you wanna see.
I have seen the whole picture and its fucking ugly - ask anyone in Madrid.

Now you've taken everything in the Qu'ran out of context, i hope you move on to the next religion, have you done the bible yet? Theres plenty in that to take out of context, if you wish to prove a religion is hateful by all means try but dont expect a warm reception for it or to be congratulated for stating the obvious, all religious books have parts that promote hate when taken out of context though admittadly some still promote hate when left in the context they were written in. I ask you to extend this to all religious books as you are comming across as racist and i dont think thats what your aiming for. Unfortunately the people replying are also comming across as racist, though i think they are rightly upset at their religion being singled out and condemned.

The pot calling the kettle black?

I am assuming you are a muslim, from your reactions. So, I would like you to explain the passages we have quoted from the Quran, Hadith.

do you actually want a reply explaining the verses in their context? so that you can understand them and get a proper understanding??

or are you here just to spread your blind hatred and let your ignorace run free

p.s. no, i'm not muslim

Now you've taken everything in the Qu'ran out of context
How is it taken out of context?... Please point it out.


i hope you move on to the next religion
Why??

have you done the bible yet?
No I can't get a word in for the muslims..

if you wish to prove a religion is hateful by all means try but dont expect a warm reception for it or to be congratulated for stating the obvious
I stated that Islam is Violent - You agree that it is obvious.

all religious books have parts that promote hate when taken out of context
Tell me what have I taken out of context

you are comming across as racist and i dont think thats what your aiming for. Unfortunately the people replying are also comming across as racist
Racist??.... Religion isn't a race, what on earth are you talking about? :rolleyes:

do you actually want a reply explaining the verses in their context? so that you can understand them and get a proper understanding??

YES.

p.s. no, i'm not muslim
Yeah Right

I'd day you're worse then PM Thorne, Proud Muslim and Alain all put to together (go you guys!)

I have seen the whole picture and its fucking ugly - ask anyone in Madrid.


Funny, that no one is spain is willing to believe what you believe. I suppose they have common sense and you..... well nevermind.

Anyways, you failed to answer me once again. You are disapointing me. I would like to see your true colors. ;)

Now you've taken everything in the Qu'ran out of context, i hope you move on to the next religion, have you done the bible yet? Theres plenty in that to take out of context, if you wish to prove a religion is hateful by all means try but dont expect a warm reception for it or to be congratulated for stating the obvious, all religious books have parts that promote hate when taken out of context though admittadly some still promote hate when left in the context they were written in. I ask you to extend this to all religious books as you are comming across as racist and i dont think thats what your aiming for. Unfortunately the people replying are also comming across as racist, though i think they are rightly upset at their religion being singled out and condemned.

Do you ever make sensible arguments?

Now you've taken everything in the Qu'ran out of context

How have I? Show; don't tell.

hope you move on to the next religion, have you done the bible yet?

Why should I, when that would have nothing to do with the topic, "The Truth about Islam"

if you wish to prove a religion is hateful by all means try but dont expect a warm reception for it or to be congratulated for stating the obvious, all religious books have parts that promote hate when taken out of context though admittadly some still promote hate when left in the context they were written in.

And when did I say, I am expecting a warm reception? If anything, this is very disturbing. If a religion preaches hate to the point of being poisonous, then it invalidates that religion.

I ask you to extend this to all religious books as you are comming across as racist and i dont think thats what your aiming for. Unfortunately the people replying are also comming across as racist, though i think they are rightly upset at their religion being singled out and condemned.

I am coming acrosss as racist? Perhaps to the blind. Don't shoot the messenger. If hate is translating from Islam, then how is it my fault?

The people who are replying are upset because their religion is being singled out condemned? Then, rather than making derogative comments, they should correct me on my analysis. So far, no one has done that. So I can't be held responsible for that, can I :)

do you actually want a reply explaining the verses in their context? so that you can understand them and get a proper understanding??

or are you here just to spread your blind hatred and let your ignorace run free

p.s. no, i'm not muslim

The former. Good luck.

How is it taken out of context?...
It is taken out of context by the fact you are posting single lines and missing out what is before and after it, for all we know the bit before telling them to fight might say 'if your religion is under threat' in which case its not telling them to always fight, and its not telling them to openly fight, only to fight when they are threatened, i think defending yourself is ok in most religions but mayb im wrong.
I stated that Islam is Violent - You agree that it is obvious.
No, i agree there is obvious violence in their holy book, theres also violence in the bible, and neither religion preaches it.
Do you ever make sensible arguments?
Mikey, my arguement was perfectly true, you have singled out a religion and said it preaches hate because some of its holy book contains hate, i simply asked you to do the same for all religions, your being very unfair in singling one religion out. Its perfectly sensible, you just dont like it.
Why should I, when that would have nothing to do with the topic, "The Truth about Islam
I was suggesting you post a new topic like 'The truth about Christianity', and you should do it because singling one religion out for having violent sentences in its holy book is wrong.
If anything, this is very disturbing. If a religion preaches hate to the point of being poisonous, then it invalidates that religion.
Your right it is disturbing, that makes christianity disturbing to, but what isnt disturbing is the fact if you ask a muslim or christian about the bad parts in their holy book, most will not believe them or will change their meaning(religions are good at that), violence is not preached to them, it is in their book, and im hoping a muslim will back me up that they dont believe in being violent.
Racist may have been the wrong word(i was begining to think you hate arabs or something) i apologise, religionist(if thats even a word) was what im trying to get at, im not annoyed at what you posted originally, and i dont deny those sentences are in their holy book, im annoyed that you have not done it for other religions and started threads on them aswel, and that you said it is preached, i dont consider it being in their holy book meaning it is preached to them, christian bible readings tend to miss out the bad bits, i believe islam is no different(this is where you tell me you've been to a mosque and it is preached or a muslim says it isnt). From here onwards it is not for me to argue it is up to muslims, they have a better understanding of their religion than anyone else, please dont keep your accusations of hate confined to one religion, give all religions a chance to defend themselves and dont single one out. :)

Intersting vieena, you ditched the verses before and after once again or the chapter in a whole. Did you notice how messed up you have become by taking your bible out of context?



do you actually want a reply explaining the verses in their context? so that you can understand them and get a proper understanding??


Now you've taken everything in the Qu'ran out of context.
The reasons why muslims say the verse is out of context goes something like this...

" This verse is talking about a time during which Muhammad was forced to deal with Jewish and Christian military attack and it is historical, not doctrinal ".

Although these verses were in fact written during the violent Medina phase of the establishment of Islam, the Qu'ran does not qualify the historical setting as such, but rather makes use of the war taking place as a political/religious platform for the establishment of the Islamic doctrine of Jihad against Jews, Christians, and "pagans" as a permanent position of Islam. The proof that this "out of context" defense by Muslims is complete rubbish is contained in the grammatical structure of the verses themselves:

Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. [Qu'ran 9.29]

Notice then:"Fight","until ", "pay", "feel". Were the verse only an "ancient historical account of a battle", the verse would say "Fought", "paid", and "felt". Even a school boy understands the difference between present and past tense sentance structure. Muslims then go on to attempt to continue their denial by citing the Bible's Old Testament passages of violence and war as evidence that Islam is no different than any other religion in it's accounts of violence. Nothing could be further from the truth, and this argument by them is decimated by the striking difference in sentance structure between the Bible and the Qu'ran:

"The Lord said to David", "And David slew Goliath", "and the Lord commanded them", "and they went up".

In fact, the past tense sentance structure of The Bible's historical content is clearly self evident in it's recognition of seperation of statements of doctrine from recounting of past events. That the Qu'ran's verses of war against Jews and Christians are specificly NOT written in the past tense is PROOF that the commands are statements of permanent doctrine with regard to the treatment of Jews and Christians.

Now let us examine more of the Qu'ran's commandments to followers of Islam:

Then fight in Allah' s cause - Thou art held responsible only for thyself - and rouse the believers. It may be that Allah will restrain the fury of the Unbelievers; for Allah is the strongest in might and in punishment. [Qu'ran 4:84]

I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them [Qu'ran 8:12]

Fight them, and Allah will punish them by your hands, cover them with shame, help you (to victory) over them, heal the breasts of Believers, [Qu'ran 9:14]

In the Qu'ran, the Muslim is also absolved by Allah from any personal moral culpability for the murder of unbelievers. Read the following verse:

It is not ye who slew them; it was Allah: when thou threwest (a handful of dust), it was not thy act, but Allah's: in order that He might test the Believers by a gracious trial from Himself [Qu'ran 8:17]

As compelling as the facts thus far in evidence are that Islam explicitly teaches it's followers to wage war against Jews and Christians, there is one final argument the Islamic propagandist bent upon concealing the true nature of Islam from the westerner makes when all else fails. It goes something like this:

" You can not rely on the translations of the Qu'ran into English. The glorious Qu'ran contains the very speech of Allah and it's true meaning can only be understood in Arabic where it's sacred message is unveiled by Allah himself ".

We are able to decimate this blatent lie with the "Surah". What is a Surah? A Surah is a clarification and a summation of the MEANING of specific verses of the Qu'ran for Islamic doctrine. Surah are not "the actual speech of Allah", but the Islamic tradition's OWN INTERPERTATION of the Qu'ran to the followers of Islam. Let us then look at Islam's OWN interpertation of Islam...........

It is a 'divine' commandment to persecute Jews and Christians, to defeat them in battle and then to consign them either to slavery or to death (Surah 8:39; 9:5,29: 47:4).

crazymikey,

the verses presented were [2:190-193] [2:216] [4:74] [9:5] [9:29]

Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors. [2:190]

the blind dude interpreted it as:

- This passage is advocting violence for the interest of God. However, at the same time, it says it should be in limitation? What are those limitations?

this is biased interpretation, it says to fight "those who fight you".. so tell me is there anything wrong with defending yourself? as for what the limits are.. we will see in the context.

And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have Turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith.


- This statement which follows abvocates murder against wrong doers. So what happend to the limitation as prescribed above.

so this dude first asks what the limits are, then he talks like he knows what they are and they are being broken.. do you see the ignorance here??

see in the verse it says "and turn them out from where they have Turned you out", ie if they take over your home, you take them out. the key words here is "tumult and oppression".. so once again is self defense wrong? and do you see where it says "those who suppress faith", there is a context.. this verse was revealed to a people suffering from oppression, where they were not allowed to practice their faith.

for some reason the dude didn't show the verse right after it..

But if they cease, Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. [2:192]

this is the limit, further explained in the next verse.

And fight them on until there is no more Tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah; but if they cease, Let there be no hostility except to those who practise oppression. [2:193]

- This suggests a continued campaign against oppressors, sounds like the Jihad's of today. However, the 2nd line, does not entirely suggest oppression, as it associates oppression with "Faith in Allah" In other words, let the "Faith in Allah" prevail over the oppressors. Untill they cease their hostility. Does oppressors mean non-muslims in this context, and their hostility, their alternate beliefs?

this was addressed to the same people, but this interpretator dude likes to show it as if its a bad thing to fight against oppressors and to defend yourself, he wants to make it look like different beliefs = oppression, but it says clearly in the last few words "but if they cease, Let there be no hostility except to those who practise oppression.". this oppression is the violence the muslims being addressed were facing, the theft of their homes, the oppression of not being allowed to practice islam.

2:216 was addressed to same group of people, but to those in particular who were a little hesitant, who feared men more than they should really be fearing God, because God was on their side and God would not let them down. the interpretor said..

- This suggests, we are suppose to fight, and it's God's will. There is also more deeper implications felt by this passage. That our emotional being that is marred by inflicting pain on others, is our ignorance, and we should not let that come in our way.

he tried to make it out like, the people were hesitant in fighting because our emotional being (humanity) was getting in the way, but this is not true.. this was addressed to those who were scared of fighting their oppressors.. in the context, the verse before it says..

Or do ye think that ye shall enter the Garden (of bliss) without such (trials) as came to those who passed away before you? they encountered suffering and adversity, and were so shaken in spirit that even the Messenger and those of faith who were with him cried: "When (will come) the help of Allah?" Ah! Verily, the help of Allah is (always) near! [2:214]

They ask thee what they should spend (In charity). Say: Whatever ye spend that is good, is for parents and kindred and orphans and those in want and for wayfarers. And whatever ye do that is good, -Allah knoweth it well.

Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not. [2:216]

again the next verse tells you the context..

They ask thee concerning fighting in the Prohibited Month. Say: "Fighting therein is a grave (offence); but graver is it in the sight of Allah to prevent access to the path of Allah, to deny Him, to prevent access to the Sacred Mosque, and drive out its members." Tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter. Nor will they cease fighting you until they turn you back from your faith if they can.... [2:217]

this clearly shows that the muslims were oppressed and denied access to the Mosque for worship aswell as the next verse..

Those who believed and those who suffered exile and fought (and strove and struggled) in the path of Allah,- they have the hope of the Mercy of Allah: And Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. [2:218]

then the islam expert posted verse 9:5 and said:

- This further reinforces the above passage, and here it suggests a pro-active role of Islamic conversions, by seeking non muslims, and converting them. Thus, the Islamic crusades, and how it spread, by forcing non-muslims to convert, or perish, is preached in this passage.

he doesn't show you the context, and who it was addressed to..

(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. [9:4]

here we see now that it was involving those pagans, where there was an alliance, because the pagans hated the muslims they desired to kill them all but there are those who made a treaty and didn't fight against the muslims.. so Allah commanded them to stick to the deal and do what is right.

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. [9:5]

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. [9:6]

to get a better understanding of the context you really should read the many verses that come after this.. some for example are..

How can there be a league, before Allah and His Messenger, with the Pagans, except those with whom ye made a treaty near the sacred Mosque? As long as these stand true to you, stand ye true to them: for Allah doth love the righteous. [9:7]

How (can there be such a league), seeing that if they get an advantage over you, they respect not in you the ties either of kinship or of covenant? With (fair words from) their mouths they entice you, but their hearts are averse from you; and most of them are rebellious and wicked. [9:8]

But if they violate their oaths after their covenant, and taunt you for your Faith,- fight ye the chiefs of Unfaith: for their oaths are nothing to them: that thus they may be restrained. [9:12]

so you get an idea what the pagans were like. and the next verse explains it clearly why there is this fighting..

Will ye not fight people who violated their oaths, plotted to expel the Messenger, and took the aggressive by being the first (to assault) you? Do ye fear them? Nay, it is Allah Whom ye should more justly fear, if ye believe! [9:13]

so you can now see that it was the pagans that started the aggression, so it comes down to the question.. is self defense okay?


Let those fight in the cause of Allah Who sell the life of this world for the hereafter. To him who fighteth in the cause of Allah,- whether he is slain or gets victory - Soon shall We give him a reward of great (value). [4:74]

and the sheik had to say about this:

- This is a disturbing passage. If one fights for Islam, he is right, and he will be rewarded, in life, or after life. It sounds like brainwashing.

ooh how much brainwashing.. why did he not post the verse straight after this??? here it is again in context..

Let those fight in the cause of Allah Who sell the life of this world for the hereafter. To him who fighteth in the cause of Allah,- whether he is slain or gets victory - Soon shall We give him a reward of great (value). [4:74]

And why should ye not fight in the cause of Allah and of those who, being weak, are ill-treated (and oppressed)?- Men, women, and children, whose cry is: "Our Lord! Rescue us from this town, whose people are oppressors; and raise for us from thee one who will protect; and raise for us from thee one who will help!" [4:75]

so convenient that this sheik was showing how barbaric islam is and how it brainwashes.. but why did he not give context and post the verses straight after which explains the reasons??

so you decide who is brainwashing who here?

anyway if you have any other question or need a better explanation on something just ask.

ROFLMAO, you are hilarious dude. You explained absolutely nothing, you're more content on attacking me. Which is a good sign. It shows you have nothing else, but that.

Let's see now:

the blind dude interpreted it as:

- This passage is advocting violence for the interest of God. However, at the same time, it says it should be in limitation? What are those limitations?

this is biased interpretation, it says to fight "those who fight you".. so tell me is there anything wrong with defending yourself? as for what the limits are.. we will see in the context.

It is ironic how you call me blind, when you actually have shown yourself to be blind here. I made no such conclusion, that it is wrong to to defend yourself, nor does this passage indicate anything about defending yourself, nor did I say this particular passage was wrong.

However, had you looked further, you would see this:

I have acknowledged the first quotes as the measure against "wrong doers". I can see it is perhaps righteous to fight against wrong, but what exactly is wrong as per Islamic standards? If you examine this passage:

So, pretty much, I acknowledged what you just said here, that if it means fight against wrong doers, than it would be perhaps the righteous thing to do. You owe me an apology, don't you think.

And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have Turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith.

- This statement which follows abvocates murder against wrong doers. So what happend to the limitation as prescribed above.

so this dude first asks what the limits are, then he talks like he knows what they are and they are being broken.. do you see the ignorance here??

see in the verse it says "and turn them out from where they have Turned you out", ie if they take over your home, you take them out. the key words here is "tumult and oppression".. so once again is self defense wrong? and do you see where it says "those who suppress faith", there is a context.. this verse was revealed to a people suffering from oppression, where they were not allowed to practice their faith.

And again, my friend, I have said, "this advocates murder against wrong doers" notice the keyword, "Wrong doers" and, just above it, it suggests it should be done in limits - so there is a limit beyond murder, I see ;)

for some reason the dude didn't show the verse right after it..

But if they cease, Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. [2:192]

Oh, that makes such a vast difference, doesn't it?

And fight them on until there is no more Tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah; but if they cease, Let there be no hostility except to those who practise oppression. [2:193]

- This suggests a continued campaign against oppressors, sounds like the Jihad's of today. However, the 2nd line, does not entirely suggest oppression, as it associates oppression with "Faith in Allah" In other words, let the "Faith in Allah" prevail over the oppressors. Untill they cease their hostility. Does oppressors mean non-muslims in this context, and their hostility, their alternate beliefs?

this was addressed to the same people, but this interpretator dude likes to show it as if its a bad thing to fight against oppressors and to defend yourself, he wants to make it look like different beliefs = oppression, but it says clearly in the last few words "but if they cease, Let there be no hostility except to those who practise oppression.". this oppression is the violence the muslims being addressed were facing, the theft of their homes, the oppression of not being allowed to practice islam.

It's not a bad thing to fight against oppressors, it is what is meant by oppressors in this context, and why it links the prevailing of "faith in Allah" to oppressors. Of course, I did not draw a conclusion from this - I merely asked a question "Does oppressors mean non-muslims in this context, and their hostility, their alternate beliefs?" You are the one drawing the conclusions.

2:216 was addressed to same group of people, but to those in particular who were a little hesitant, who feared men more than they should really be fearing God, because God was on their side and God would not let them down. the interpretor said.

2:216 was addressed to same group of people, but to those in particular who were a little hesitant, who feared men more than they should really be fearing God, because God was on their side and God would not let them down. the interpretor said

- This suggests, we are suppose to fight, and it's God's will. There is also more deeper implications felt by this passage. That our emotional being that is marred by inflicting pain on others, is our ignorance, and we should not let that come in our way.

he tried to make it out like, the people were hesitant in fighting because our emotional being (humanity) was getting in the way, but this is not true.. this was addressed to those who were scared of fighting their oppressors.. in the context, the verse before it says..

Umm, no:

“Fighting is prescribed for you, and you dislike it. But it is possible that you dislike a thing which is good for you, and that you love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knows, and you know not” 2:216

Nor do the passages you quoted before it, and after it, made any difference, to what this passage says. This clearly suggests, that these are trials to get to the garden of eden, that one must do.

then the islam expert posted verse 9:5 and said:

- This further reinforces the above passage, and here it suggests a pro-active role of Islamic conversions, by seeking non muslims, and converting them. Thus, the Islamic crusades, and how it spread, by forcing non-muslims to convert, or perish, is preached in this passage.

he doesn't show you the context, and who it was addressed to..

(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. [9:4]

I am humbled, that you think I am an Islam expert ;) I'm not however, I'm just reading what I can get hold of regarding Islam, and the passages themselves have spoke volumes to me.

(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. [9:4][/QUOTE]

But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the pagans wherever ye find them, and 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” 9:5

Interesting that, so make alliances with them, and when the forbidden months are past, go on a rampage. The passage 9:5 does not make a distinction between the pagans who have aliied, and those who have not.

How (can there be such a league), seeing that if they get an advantage over you, they respect not in you the ties either of kinship or of covenant? With (fair words from) their mouths they entice you, but their hearts are averse from you; and most of them are rebellious and wicked. [9:8]

But if they violate their oaths after their covenant, and taunt you for your Faith,- fight ye the chiefs of Unfaith: for their oaths are nothing to them: that thus they may be restrained. [9:12]

so you get an idea what the pagans were like. and the next verse explains it clearly why there is this fighting..

Will ye not fight people who violated their oaths, plotted to expel the Messenger, and took the aggressive by being the first (to assault) you? Do ye fear them? Nay, it is Allah Whom ye should more justly fear, if ye believe! [9:13]

so you can now see that it was the pagans that started the aggression, so it comes down to the question.. is self defense okay?

The classic kindergarten argument, "He hit me first" from the passages you quote, I can see a lot of prejudice against pagans, calling them wicked, untrustworthy, and questioning if they should be made peace with. Does not sound very encourgaing, does it.

Let those fight in the cause of Allah Who sell the life of this world for the hereafter. To him who fighteth in the cause of Allah,- whether he is slain or gets victory - Soon shall We give him a reward of great (value). [4:74]

and the sheik had to say about this:

- This is a disturbing passage. If one fights for Islam, he is right, and he will be rewarded, in life, or after life. It sounds like brainwashing.

ooh how much brainwashing.. why did he not post the verse straight after this??? here it is again in context..

Let those fight in the cause of Allah Who sell the life of this world for the hereafter. To him who fighteth in the cause of Allah,- whether he is slain or gets victory - Soon shall We give him a reward of great (value). [4:74]

And why should ye not fight in the cause of Allah and of those who, being weak, are ill-treated (and oppressed)?- Men, women, and children, whose cry is: "Our Lord! Rescue us from this town, whose people are oppressors; and raise for us from thee one who will protect; and raise for us from thee one who will help!" [4:75

That does not sound like brain washing actually - "And why should ye not fight in the cause of Allah, and of those, being weak, are ill-treated"
Something to this affect, "And why should ye not fight in the cause of Islam, and of those being ill-treated by the US"

All you've proven, that Islam regarded pagans as untrustworhy, wrong, oppressive, evil, blah blah, to justify it's wars against them, and do remember, not only did Islam fight against jews, and christians, but also Hindu's and Sikhs, and Buddhists.

Interestingly, you did not discuss the Hadith. Sorry I am not convinced.
Also, the reason, I have not quoted the surroundings passages, is because I don't have the Quran at my finger tips :)

Hey Greb,

For someone who says he isn't muslim your sure defend islam like one.

You are just a liar.

Vienna i imagine he feels much as i do that you are misinterpreting a religion and singling it out, it doesnt make him a muslim, it just means he feels you are being unjust towards muslims and he should help defend them, personally i would do the same if you was talking about any religion, so long as i felt it was being misinterpreted, he said he was not a muslim, its up to you if you believe him, likewise its up to me if i believe you are a christian or not for your attacks on the muslim religion.

It does not matter if ENG is muslim or not.

Misrepresenting the religion? I am representing it as it is. There is so much hate and prejudice contained within those passages, that in my eyes, it invalidates it as a religion of God, and itself is very primitive, compared to other religions. Anyone, seen "kill and slay the non believers" in taoism, or Buddhism, or Hinduism?

I've come to believe that Islam is no worse or better then other religions such as christianity or Jewism as to being delusional. I believe that the christian religion when it was powerful, in control and a theocracy, it was as horrifying as Islam ever was.
Organized religions are all dangerous if they are allowed to participate in goverment and become theocratic nations.

That's why all western nations have made every attempt to separate church and state. They realize that theocratic groups give rise to fanatical movements and exercise extreme behavior to anyone that they consider a threat to their belief system.

On the same note that's why Islam is considered dangerous, it's part of the state goverment and has all the potential of fanatical excesses. Every attempt must be made by Islamic nations to separate religion from goverment or risk being a victim of fanatical believers themselves. Western rulers are trying very hard to create an Iraqi goverment that is secular because they realize the pitfalls of a theocratic goveremnt.

It does not matter if ENG is muslim or not.
Thats correct mikey, im glad you see it even though vienna doesnt.
Anyone, seen "kill and slay the non believers" in taoism, or Buddhism, or Hinduism?
I cant say i have, but i have not searched for it as some people have appeared to for other religions, i believe theres a part in christianity though im not sure were, i believe that is what the crusades were based on if my historical knowledge is correct, along with the fact the christians wanted to reclaim the holyland from the 'barbarian and savage' muslims, and it turned out some of them were nicer people then the christians themselves.
If i can find the time i shall have a look for something on the subject of slaying the non believers.
Misrepresenting the religion? I am representing it as it is. There is so much hate and prejudice contained within those passages, that in my eyes, it invalidates it as a religion of God
I believe the same could be said about christianity and the bible. But thats another thread that i hope will be posted.
Greco i quite agree, though would like to maintain that not all muslims in those countrys that may be full of fanatics are indeed fanatics.

Greco, that is why religion is a man-made invention, and none of them are anything to do with the benevolent God's they portray, all religion just serves themselves. However if they are adamant, that their religion is a supernatural revelation, then they should reconsider, was it revealed by Satan, or God.

Hey Greb,

For someone who says he isn't muslim your sure defend islam like one.

You are just a liar.

no, it's just that i have a brain and intelligence. ungrateful people like you need teaching and help.

Interestingly, you did not discuss the Hadith. Sorry I am not convinced.

edit: read below

Also, the reason, I have not quoted the surroundings passages, is because I don't have the Quran at my finger tips :)

that pretty much ends the discussion, doesn't it? if you could google a site for anti-islam stuff, i'm sure you can google a site for the english quran and look at the verses before and after that. you claim that you know the truth about islam, when you yourself are unaware of what it truly contains. i don't even need to bother replying to your earlier post. you just shown me you're here to make your ignorance run wild. good day to you.

Anti Islam stuff? I'm sorry, but I've quoted actual passages from the Quran, the same you've quoted actually. The passages before or after, have not much of a difference, as you have shown for me.

As you are not capable of being sensible about this, or addressing my points, I guess you could call it a day. However, that does not mean, the discussion has ended, and I'm sure someone can represent Islam better than it has been represented thus far, by PM, Flores, and you.

no, it's just that i have a brain and intelligence. ungrateful people like you need teaching and help.
I have a brain and intelligence. and I'm not ungrateful. I have this image of you as someone afraid to admit he/she is muslim admist all this "Truth of Islam" because you cannot argueably disprove this "Truth". You are pathetic. If you are going to challenge the "Truth" don't just dance around like a fairy, challenge it.

Tell me why I am ungrateful, and for what??

Actually, no. I do not believe just like you at all. You said, your belief of equality is only possible, with a CREATOR. I said, equality is possible, because we are all manifestations of the universe. The difference is, the key word, CREATOR. It makes all the difference between our statements.


No it doesn't. The differences you see stems from your prejudices againest me. You suffer from a prejudice complex and you'll never see this world properly unless you work past your own issues.

Listen to me punk....You don't exist in this world to criticize others or compete againest others...You exist here to merely criticize and compete againest yourself. Any other efforts on your part is farts blowing in the wind.



Seeing as this is a completely unprovoked attack, it proves you are what you just accused me of. Psyhologicial projection, it is called.


No, again you have it wrong....You are an arrogant blind SOB riding on a high horse. It's easier to debate with you after life have slapped you a couple of times on your face...believe me, you'll be in a much better shape to understand your own stupidity when you're weak and down. Islam teaches me this, God is my example....If the all powerfull god doesn't interfere with you now, because you're impossible to deal with, do you think I will..... but guess what, when you die, you'll be in a much better condition to not only listen, but to accept whatever god decides for you..... Do you get my drift now, psycho.....

That is interesting. As the Hadith contains within it, actions and thoughts of your Prophet, and is synonymous with Islam, it is also consistent, with Islamic history of blood-shed and conversion, and consistent with the preachings of the Quran. So, it seems not believing in it, is your own conveniance.


Hadith is shit....And yes, I believe to my own conveniance....is there any other way to believe? Should I believe to other convineances to make you happy.

That is your opinion, and it a good one, yet it is rubbish, if you are suggesting it is a fact. Quran makes a visible difference between "followers of Islam" and the non believers of Islam. As for Hindu being followers of Islam? If that was so, why were they forced to convert to Islam?


So, good opinions are now rubbish? Quran makes no difference between anyone. You misunderstood this message to humanity, and your likes with their backward mentailities are the ones alienating the so called muslims and allowing them to manipulate the intent of the Quran by viewing it exclusively.....and you call yourselves terrorism experts??? You are idiots that are experts in misunderstanding and alienating others...that's what you are.

Here's some verses from the Quran that you missed.
[2.62] Surely those who believe, and those who are Jews, and the Christians, and the Sabians, whoever believes in Allah and the Last day and does good, they shall have their reward from their Lord, and there is no fear for them, nor shall they grieve.
[2.111] And they say: None shall enter the garden (or paradise) except he who is a Jew or a Christian. These are their vain desires. Say: Bring your proof if you are truthful.
[2.113] And the Jews say: The Christians do not follow anything (good) and the Christians say: The Jews do not follow anything (good) while they recite the (same) Book. Even thus say those who have no knowledge, like to what they say; so Allah shall judge between them on the day of resurrection in what they differ.
[2.120] And the Jews will not be pleased with you, nor the Christians until you follow their religion. Say: Surely Allah's guidance, that is the (true) guidance. And if you follow their desires after the knowledge that has come to you, you shall have no guardian from Allah, nor any helper.
[2.135] And they say: Be Jews or Christians, you will be on the right course. Say: Nay! (we follow) the religion of Ibrahim, the Hanif, and he was not one of the polytheists.
[2.140] Nay! do you say that Ibrahim and Ismail and Yaqoub and the tribes were Jews or Christians? Say: Are you better knowing or Allah? And who is more unjust than he who conceals a testimony that he has from Allah? And Allah is not at all heedless of what you do.
The Family of Imran
[3.67] Ibrahim was not a Jew nor a Christian but he was (an) upright (man), and he was not one of the polytheists.

So, do you see now that the Quran is a universal message. It's not a message for the jews, the christians, or the muslims. Mere believe in god, the last day, and doing good is enough for god, but obviously you seem to demand more than god to satisfy your prejudices and definitions.
You must think that you are "Are you better knowing or Allah? And who is more unjust than he who conceals a testimony that he has from Allah? And Allah is not at all heedless of what you do."[2.140]

Who the hell are you to label me, to tell me that I believe to my convineance, to question my faith, or to tell me that without Hadith, I don't belive...Did your hypocracy level reach a climax to the point that you and ATHEIST will start defining and stipulating to what I believe in? Don't you see the steam of arrogance and ignorance out of your ears, mouth, and ass?

Question your own.

Is that why, if I convert to Islam, I become muslim? You are making your own meanings of your religion. Clearly you don't like it's original meaning.

You don't have to convert to anything you dweep. Religion is no new underwear to change everytime you piss on yourself. Who you are is what you are, the conversion of this world will not change the fact that you are an arrogant SOB. If you pray five times a day, grow a beard, and yell Allaho Akbar, you'll still be the same dweep you are now....Proof me different.

Hey deep shit, when you try to recycle my insults, do it properly, Now, I have to go into detail in showing the utter misuse of perfectly good insults. Next time, handle insults with care, and don't try to make environmental jokes, they're my speciality. Learn to protect the integrity of insults, so we can recycle them in the future...The key is to stay witty and catchy, you on the other hand give me the mental image of a white dead corpse spitting insects and worms every time you insult..No wonder, that your likes have inspired gothic myth.


You aren't even worth the appalling squandering of oxygen and water required to keep you from being maggot meat,


My dear, learn about the water cycle? Take some waste water treatment courses? Learn about the Ozone...O3. Nothing is squandered, We are all recycling....Only me seem to be doing it more efficiently than you. Islam dictates that I be buried straight in the ground wrapped in biodegradable fiber. I'll turn into a tree in no time, and I'll be pleasured in serving other life.... You on the other hand will be slowly consumed by maggots inside of a satin decorated steel box, allowed to rott and decay in a concentrated environment with no exfiltration or infiltration...The box will buckle and your concentrated vile pollution will seep into our groundwater and poison our animals including the maggots. You see, your britich ass will not be previledged enough to become maggot meat, you're ass is only worth becoming a superfund site.

Flores, ad-hominems, are the last resort to settle an argument, and you're already exercised it. Very desperate, and it shows, that you have no points to make, and you cannot match wits with me. Which is no surprise really, you are quite sentimental, and dim, and have an obvious difficulty in grasping basic grammer, and spelling, and you also have a general paucity of comprehension of the English language. This is not an insult, I am merely telling you, how you come across to me.


No it doesn't. The differences you see stems from your prejudices againest me. You suffer from a prejudice complex and you'll never see this world properly unless you work past your own issues.

Prejudice against you? I'm afraid this IS actually your complex, and it's paranoia. You see, all you had to see, was an unfavourable analysis of mine about your religion, and instead of engaging me in discussion, you took it personal and readied yourself for combat. In fact, isn't intolerance, and aggession some of those facets of your religion, I discussed in my analysis. You only further reinforce my interpretations.

You said my belief is the same as yours? You believe were all equal, because we've been created by the one CREATOR, and I said, were all equal, because were manifestations of the same universe.

Your belief is in a supernatural and sentient entity, also known as God, and you say he created the universe. While I do not believe in a creator. I know a universe, in which we all exist, and thus are equal with every manifestation, for which a creator is not needed. You said, you can ONLY believe in equality because of a creator. While I don't need him for the same system of equality, and