Discussion in 'Religion Archives' started by path, Nov 2, 2004.
Relax, I wasn't trying to antagonize you just keep it in perspective.
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
Where did I ever say that? Search all of my posts.
No my protest to your post was simply a disagreement with your claim that "there was not division and conflict in the middle east when the ottomans ruled." That is patently untrue. The rest here is a thread in itself
So you conclude whatever is not illegal is morally acceptable and not indecent. Enacting/Revoking a law can change you moral or immoral or decent or indecent overnight.
I don't know how many muslims there know such art form exists.
You can do that, i will not kill you. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Feel free to stop playing around with my words I have already said that murder is wrong....now to answer your questions (my interpetation only):
1)Well murder is always wrong however as far as fighting Wars (Hope you dont mind if I use the Koran)...(interpetation of meaning):
Fight in the way of God against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Indeed God does not love transgressors (Koran 2:192-193)."
2) Not suppose to and is a grave sin (see #1)
3) (interpetation of meaning) :
"And if any of the idolaters seeks of you protection, grant him (her) protection till he
hears the words of God, then convey him to his place of security. That is because they are a folk who know not..(KORAN 9:6-8)."
4) Jews are considered "Followers of the Book"(along with Christians)Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!IOM):
[29.46] And do not dispute with the followers of the Book except by what is best, except those of them who act unjustly, and say: We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you, and our God and your God is One, and to Him do we submit.
[3.64] Say: O followers of the Book! come to an equitable proposition between us and you that we shall not serve any but Allah and (that) we shall not associate aught with Him, and (that) some of us shall not take others for lords besides Allah; but if they turn back, then say: Bear witness that we are Muslims.
[3.199] And most surely of the followers of the Book there are those who believe in Allah and (in) that which has been revealed to you and (in) that which has been revealed to them, being lowly before Allah; they do not take a small price for the communications of Allah; these it is that have their reward with their Lord; surely Allah is quick in reckoning
5)As those who dont know
6) Islam refuses the killing of people merely because they embrace a different faith, nor does it allow Moslems to fight against those who disagree with them on religious questions. It urges its followers to treat such people kindly:
: [60:8] GOD does not enjoin you from befriending those who do not fight you because of religion, and do not evict you from your homes. You may befriend them and be equitable towards them. GOD loves the equitable.
7) Again Muslims are suppose to fight only when driving away tyranny:
[22:39] Permission is granted to those who are being persecuted, since injustice has befallen them, and GOD is certainly able to support them.[ 22:40] They were evicted from their homes unjustly, for no reason other than saying, "Our Lord is GOD." If it were not for GOD's supporting of some people against others, monasteries, churches, synagogues, and masjids - where the name of GOD is commemorated frequently - would have been destroyed. Absolutely, GOD supports those who support Him. GOD is Powerful, Almighty.
1)Well I have kids myself and I live in the West so the anti-islam feelings around here worry me to death.....I feel outraged that this was done....but please remember that Islam is very much against this type of thing:
I]Fight in the way of God against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Indeed God does not love transgressors (Koran 2:192-193)."[/I]
2) I dont like to make judgement about "true muslims" or not "true muslims" but I will say that their behavior was unislamic I leave the judgement up to the Creator
1) On a real personal note I married into a Buddist family Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! ...shocking huh?...lol (my wife was Christian though but her family was Buddist) so I know that they are peaceful people but again I hate the killings of innocents plus the fact that it makes Islam look bad
2) See my #2 above
3) See #3 above
Peace to you :m:
My apologies.....Im a little grumpy Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Well personally I dont think that morality is for society to decide as you have said that at one time it was legal to purchase slaves in America.....so was that right? Society said it was....but people fought against it and now things are different. As far as Arabia is concerened the reason Woman arent allowed to drive cars there is because there are long stretches of roads between towns and woman (they werent always not allowed to drive) would get abducted or kidnapped while traveling between them...so outside of Arabia would be different But I dont hold Saudi up as the textbook example of Islam either
I'm saying that society decides what is moral by it's norms - I gave a bunch of examples of how morality changes over time. OK, it used to be moral to own a slave in the ME and under the Ottoman Empire, Kurds were especially renowned for selling Arabic as slaves. And Arabs were renowned for selling East Africans as slaves – and guess what, they were ALL Muslims and it was considered normal. And even God itself - in the Good Book Qur’an lays out guidelines for treating with slaves – wow how nice of it.
Do you think it’s moral to own a slave or to be one?
Thanks for that response. I'm sure you are peaceful and you read into the Qur'an as such.
But what is it in the Qur'an, that other people, take out of context? What versus are used? As you know there’s a lot of killing going on in Gods name by Muslims – and so there must be some sort of set of verses that motivate people?
I’ve read about Martyrs getting in good with god (I personally find this baffling) that verse in particular seems to motive young children to do some crazy stuff? Maybe that is what I’m talking about.
Also, did Mohammed ever fight in any wars? If so why - against whom?
If Islam is a religion of peace – as you suggest it is.
i) Why were the Persians conquered?
ii) Why were the French fought in northern Spain?
iii) Why fight and occupy the Greeks?
iv) Why were the northern Indians conquered?
v) Why were the Armenian Christians all but exterminated?
All of this was done by Islamic peoples – wasn’t it?
There’s the old adage: “actions speak louder than words”, you’ll have to explain these sorts of actions before I can agree Islam is a peaceful religion. I personally see it as the ultimate culmination of government and religion – started by the Egyptian Pharos and carried on through Islam.
In this, the actions of Islamic peoples are no different than that of ANY other countries. Over the past 1400 years they’ve fought one another as much as they fought non-Muslims. If Islam and the Qur’an were to have ANY sort of an effect in regards to peace, one would think that the areas that are manly Islamic would be peaceful, but for the past 1400 years that just isn’t the case – is it? What does that say to you? History doesn’t lie. What does that mean to you in regards to Islam? Why in 1400 years under Islam hasn't anything chnaged? Personally, I think it’s just mixing into the pot of national fervor that of religious zeal – all of which is used to motivate people, and you get the same old bullshit propaganda there always is.
Nothing has been particular special in terms of human development and peaceful succession in the ME under Islam as before Islam. The place has been volitile - yet also very creative. As a matter of fact, other than a change in religion there doesn’t seem to be much of any change in the region. What does that say to you? You would think it would be more peaceful wouldn’t you?
I often think of the Chinese and how they hold such a grudge against the Japanese for the WWII atrocities. Some of the Japanese I talk to say they were just trying to bring the Chinese up to modern times so that the East could stand against the West – basically it was for the Chinese own good. The Chinese seem to say similar bull when talking about Tibet, and funny enough many still adore Mao, even though he ultimately is responsible for 10s of millions of more Chinese deaths than the Japanese could have managed. I see the ME in a similar light – if you’re Arab and you visit Iran you’ll find a sort of prejudice that exist in all peoples - even if the world is Islamic this will never change – and the ME is a prime example, because it is Islamic and it hasn’t changed in 1400 years.
Anyway, even Proud Muslim used to mutter something about “we don’t turn the cheek, we hit back . . “ or some such none sense. He must get that from somewhere in the Qur’an?
Yes, it was morally correct at the time. It changed because society changed. It isn’t up to the individual or a book to say what is morally correct.
If that were the case I’d say no religion should be taught to children under 18 years of age – as it removes any form of choice and is just brainwashing the child to believe as the adult. But, society doesn’t say that is morally correct so it isn’t. Whereas in China children are taught religion is brainwashing starting in primary school – so they think that is morally correct. So you see it is for society to decide.
For example, many Americans want to change the world to be like America. Women in Afghanistan should be waltzing around in mini’s and SA men should come out of the closest. But that isn’t the right of America to decide what is and is not morally acceptable in another’s society. If an American goes to live in SA he/she should respect that cultures norms – not go about trying to kill people for having the same moral values. In fact – your exact type of thinking that leads people like Bush to go over and “free” the Iraqi’s – quite literally, many are now free from life.
So, yes, it still is for society to decide – not an individual and not a book.
What about in the city? Come on. PM said SA is one of the safest places on earth (next to Singapore Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
One would think that the cradle of Islam would be a little more safe huh?
Indeed...but remember The Koran doesnt tell Muslims to never fight back....as I have told you their are reasons that Muslims are ordained to fight....so when one looks at the violence perpetrated by Muslims one has to look at the circumstances around it...for example Iraq....Muslims should be fighting their because as I have told you in an earlier post that the Koran tells Muslims to fight for their land....same with Palestine ,Kashmire etc.....
Well even the Bible talks about martyrs being in God's grace(stephen for example) it's suppose to be an honor to die for your religion....but that is washed away if your violence was unjust (in my opinion)
Yes he did....I will let this link answer this question for you though because it can explain earlier battles better than me:
To be honest I dont know if I really said that....I know that sounds strange from me but I know that the Koran tells Muslims that sometimes you gotta fight even though you may not like it....Now it is peaceful if its not being oppresed but it's not a "passive" religion like Buddism or something like that would be (in my opinion)
Islam has had bad rulers in the past (and today also) but the whole religion shouldnt be judged by this...Think about this The largest Muslim country in the world today is Indonesia --- and there were never any battles fought there Additionally, Christian and Jewish minorities have survived in the Muslim lands of the Middle East for centuries. Countries such as Egypt, Morocco, Palestine, Lebanon, Syria and Jordan all have Christian and/or Jewish populations. If Islam taught that all people are supposed to be killed or forced to become Muslims, how did all of these non-Muslims survive for so long in the middle of the Islamic Empire?
Why do you concentrate on the M.E. when you talk about Muslims? less than 20% of the worlds Muslims live there...... even so dont you know of all the inventions that were created and started by Muslims?....everything from arithmatic (an arabic word by the way) to poetry to astronomy.......some of these things centuries before the West did...Did you know that the Taj Mahal was built by Muslims?...I will post more later inshallah....peace gotta go to work :m:
Would you consider Spain or Greece in with the etcetera? I only ask because Osama read a few versuses from the Qur’an and ended in saying that bascially, God commands Muslims as their duty to regain these lands.
Do you agree with that?
Yeah, that sounds about like something you’d find in the Bible.
I think Islam has been tolerant – as you point to, and intolerant, as I mentioned in the killing off of a few million Christian Armenians. So it’s not Islam per say as much as it is the culture of the region.
But that’s what I’m getting at when I say nothing has changed.
If Islam was such a highly enlightened way of life, why is it that the people who live by it have continued to fight one another? I don’t think it’s doing much enlightening.
Your example of Indonesia sums it up – it isn’t Islam nor is it the Qur’an, but instead its the culture that determines how peaceful a society will be. In essence Indonesians could worship trees or be Christian or Buddhist and they’d still be quite peaceful.
That’s why I’m focusing on the ME. If the Qur’an and Islam were truly enlightened words from the creator of the universe, and have value, well one would think they’d have had an effect on the people that live by it?
But that hasn’t been the case has it?
As you said yourself, Mohammed himself lived by the sword - we can conclude there hasn’t been a time when Islam brought any form of peace to the people who live by it. What does that say about the religion? I mean 1400 years is a long time and yet no improvement in the lot of your average middle easterner.
I think its as they say: The proof is in the pudding.
Yet, if we look at nations that separated religion from government and instead of brainwashing the people and telling them what is and is not right, they let the people decide for themselves – this form of enlightenment appears to have had dramatic changes as in improvement in a short period of time.
Wouldn’t you say this form of enlightenment has done more good for more people when compared with Islam?
Yes that is true, and I’m not trying to take anything away from that – that isn’t what I’m saying.
What I was saying is that there hasn’t been a change. There were all sorts of marvelous inventions pre-Islam and so the continuation of this is of course only natural and hence marvelous inventions post-Islam. Obviously you’ve read of the great inventions and works of the ancient Egyptians, Greeks, Phoenicians, Indians, Romans . . . .
Its only natural that these same people would continue to have inventiveness. So with that in mind we can see it certainly isn’t Islam but the creativeness of people throughout the centuries. You’d agree to that? (surely you’d agree that the ancient Chinese were a clever bunch? And I think the modern Americans have done some wondrous things)
I’m still curious as to your reasoning for these – I’m focusing on this because I’m trying to make the point that these were done by Muslims against non-Muslims. If Islam is peaceful and advocate using force only after provocation, how do you explain this?
I just wonder, the muslims who rule Kashmir state(province) also use Koran to fight against the trouble makers. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Society merely relects the degree of morality prevailing generally at any point of time. Even during slave trading times there were people who preferred not to have slaves & not to be slaves.
I nor most Muslims consider Osama the poster child for Islam(only Westerners do that)....but it seems to me that his beef isnt with Spain or Greece but it's with Palestine, Arabia and now Iraq....but it is interesting that you make it seem as if Spain was sitting there minding there own business and Muslims did a "preemptive strike against them" without talking about how Spain was BEFORE Muslims arrived In the beginning of the 8th century, the Goths had been ruling Spain for 200 years. They were Christians, but were very corrupt and oppressive and the people of Spain were suffering tremendously. Corruption and high taxes created two classes of people: the poor working class and the rich ruling class. Islam was the new religion of Arabia in the 7th century. It promoted justice, fairness and morality and the people accepted it. Islam was spreading very fast from Arabia to Northern Africa. All the Muslim lands were separated from Spain by the Strait of Gibraltar. In 710, Moortarik, with 7,000 troops, raided Andalusia and conquered Gebal-Tarik (Gibraltar). Tarik had a firce battle with King Roderick of Spain, who had 12,000 men with him. Nevertheless, the King was killed in the battle of Guadalete and Spain was defeated.
And what I'm trying to tell you is that all muslims dont fight each other.....the main hotspots i have told you about are oppressed muslims fighting which according to the Koran is acceptable
I very strongly disagree here because Islam is a culture and a way of life......praying 5 times a day....fasting for 30 days out of the year....giving zakat to the poor etc...... that is a culture and a way of life.....when one becomes a muslim there way of life totally changes. Indonesia is an example of what happens when Muslims are left alone to run their own society without foreign interference (for oil or other strategic interests)
Yes but as I have said there are more Muslims in Indonesia than the ENTIRE M.E. as a matter of fact there are more Muslims in India than the M.E. also.....the Koran has had a positive effect on over 1 billion people on the planet(and growing) why do you think that is? you are judging the whole religion on what a few "bad apples" (who for all I know may not even be real muslims)
First of all I never said that.....and i have allready given you examples of times when Islam has brought peace to a Region....It seems to me that your whole argument is based on the M.E.....what about when it was under Ottaman rule? how about before Zionism? wasnt it much more peaceful then?
Well if we use the U.S. for an example lets see.....we have had genocide of Native Americans......Slavery of minorities........2nd class citizenship of women.....etc etc.... all in a little over 200+ years......you know at least some Muslim countries have had women leaders....can the U.S. say that? have they even been close? how about a minority leader?.....Muslim countries have had that also Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
as far as the examples of the Wars you named I would have to do a little research on them....could be that they were attacked 1st or it could be because of bad leadership(I never said Muslims were perfect) Islamic Countries in it's past has seen many bad rulers but that is seperate from the religion......Unless you wanna use Hitler to be the poster child for Christianity Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! .....peace to you
In short, surrenderer, it's quite all right for muslims to overthrow bad rulers if they aren't muslim. On the other hand, it is wrong for nonmuslims to overthrow bad rulers if they are muslim. In fact, what are your- nonmuslim- sources for the claims that the goths were "very corrupt and oppressive"? the fact that the Spaniards spent several hundred years getting rid of muslims- all muslims- in Spain suggests that they were not quite as enthusiastic about the benefits of islam as the muslims themselves.
The problem may be that it is impossible for muslims to live in a couintry except on their own terms. If that is so then nonmuslim countries may have to restrict muslim immigration and treat all resident muslims as aliens with rights of residence but no rights to take part in politics or social affairs.
You guys are getting way off topic this was just meant for discussing the murder and reactions, condemnation, justification etc. Though I can't help myself I will respond to a couple of points but attempt to restrain myself some Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Osama said he consideres ALL countrys that were at one time under islamic rule as apostate lands.
Not going to get into the where's and why's here too long. Briefly if the people accepted islam there could have been reconquista.
This is debatable (the good effect bit) Details=another thread
Before the colonial period the ottomans fought the Safavids (loooong history of war between the muslim persians and the muslim turks) the egyptians and various other factions. The ottomans struggled to maintain their dominance just like any foreign power. Details=another thread.
Can we start another thread to discuss these?
In long Well that may be the most ridicoulous things i have heard...... most Muslims live in nonmuslim countries allready (there are over 100 million muslims in India yet they are still a minority) You are comparing wars that happened wars that happened 1100 years ago to today.....Who are fighting the wars of expansion now? Christians or Muslims? Oh yea check your history because unless you were in favor of the Spanish Inquistion and the Crusades then there was nothing "postive" about Spain's murders of Muslims (and other Christians and Jews) sorry to burst your bubble but Islam didnt opress religious minorites under it's rule in Spain
Well for one quick example even the History Channel acknowledges that Jews were persecuted :
Byzantine cultural influence was strong, but was probably less important than that of the Jews, who had settled in Spain in large numbers, and were persecuted after 600
So those numbers make him a poster child? sounds like the "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" to me....why do less than 5% want him to rule?....but I am so tired of defending OBL to you Muslim-Haters for now on I will use Hitler as an example instead of any Christians I know.....same thing right?
"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. To-day, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice... And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people.
-Adolf Hitler, in a speech on 12 April 1922 (Norman H. Baynes, ed. The Speeches of Adolf Hitler, April 1922-August 1939, Vol. 1 of 2, pp. 19-20, Oxford University Press, 1942)
and they have...problems, shall we say?..with the nonmuslims.
In East Timor,until very recently, in Papua now, in the south of Sudan now, do you mean?
Where did I say there was anything "positive" about the murder of muslims. I simply said that christians in Spain didn't seem to notice the virtues of muslim rule. As for the claim that muslims didn't persecute "religious minorities" [were christians a religious minority in Spain under muslim rule?], look up the almoravids and the almohads. They "didn't persecute" in a purely islamic sense. See Spanish Inquisition: A Historical Revision by Henry Kamen for a refutation of some of the myths about the inquisition. Rightly or wrongly, christians fought against muslim rule for several hundred years and were unwilling to accept muslims as co-citizens, even if muslims were willing to be citizens rather tjhan rulers.
I did not ask what the history channel, using unnamed sources said recently. I asked what nonmuslim sources said about the goths. That is, contemporaries or near contemporaries who did not have a vested interest in portraying them as "very corrupt and oppressive". They may well have had all the faults you mention, but someone who benefitted from saying they had these faults is not a reliable historical source.
Disappointing answer, I simply demonstrated that contrary to what you posted OBL does in fact enjoy wide support for his actions in the muslim world. I didn't say good or bad or go into the whys and hows or make any judgement calls. Muslim hater Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! come on I have many issues with the hostility in islamic doctrine I can seperate muslims as human beings from islamic doctrine. What should I start calling you kaffir hater because you have issues with kaffir history or doctrine? Lets keep it out of the gutter surrenderer it serves no purpose.
Separate names with a comma.