Allah is the owner of infidel lands

[R_not]

Allah is the owner of infidel lands

This fundamental right of Allah emanates straight from the Qur’an; therefore, it is non negotiable. Here are a few sample
verses:

Allah gradually reduces the land controlled by the unbelievers…21.44

This means the victory of Islam by expropriating and usurping the land of unbelievers. Ibn Kathir, the eminent exegete of the
Qur’an simply confirms this. Jalalyn, another formidable Islamic scholar accentuates ibn Kathir by saying that Allah diminishes
the land of the unbelievers by granting Muhammad (read Muslims) victory through conquest. One of the earliest Islamic
scholars, ibn Abbas (Muhammad’s cousin) also writes that Allah seizes the land of the unbelievers by conquering it for
Muhammad.

Allah gradually reduces the land under the control of the unbelievers from its outlying borders…13:41 Ibn Kathir writes that this verse refers to Muslims gaining upper hand over idolaters. If we though that Allah is merciful to the Christians and the Jews, we are wrong. The Qur’an treats the Jews and the Christians as idolaters.

The above is why muslims have divided up the world into dar al harb (the realm of war which is our infidel lands) and dar al islam (the realm of islam). They fight their jihad (stealth and/or violent) until the lands are under sharia laws and we are either dead, converted or subjugated.

I used to have this link in my signature: % of muslims and % of violence directed against non-muslims

 

[R_not]

Muslims are the legitimate owners and rulers of all infidel lands

When the Islamists migrate to an infidel land, they do not enter a foreign land. They are actually occupying a land which Allah has reserved for them. Any Islamist will tell that the entire earth belongs to Allah. Therefore, every Muslim has the inalienable right to move to an infidel land and occupy it for the sake of Allah. Let us read these few verses from the Qur’an.

Allah grabs the land of the unbelievers…28:58
Allah promises believers His sovereignty on earth. He will establish the authority of His chosen religion (Islam)…24:55

Explained by ibn Kathir, this means Allah has made Muslims the leaders and rulers of mankind through whom He would reform the world and to whom people would submit, so that they would have in exchange a safe security after their fear. Here is another verse:

Sovereignty belongs to Allah (the basis of an Islamic state). He forgives whom He wills and punishes whom He wills…48:1

Some of this is why they consider Israel ‘occupiers’, or they consider themselves ‘freedom fighters’ when they terrorize others. They consider war, ‘opening up the world to islam’ and anyone not letting them fully practice islam (put into place sharia laws which would make us a subjugated peoples) as oppressed and persecuted.

The turning of the definitions to their advantage and when they say them how so many misinterpret their words.

 

[Badaliyyah]

what religion do you practice where the land does NOT belong to god? that just seems like a self-evident claim. the earth is the lord’s and the fruits thereof, etc., etc.

salaam.

 

[R_not]

Here are more concepts of what islam means when they want ‘freedom of religion’

Religious right means freedom to force Islam on infidels

In Islam, it is compulsory for all Muslims to propagate the messages of Islam, wherever he/she might be. Thus, when an Islamist migrates to an infidel land, he is duty bound to Allah to convert the Kafirs’ to Islam, as many as possible. This is because Allah says that the only religion that should be on earth is Islam. Let us read these verses.

Islam is the religion of Allah; He is swift in calling to account…3:19 In this verse Allah states that except Islam, there is no religion acceptable to Him from any person. Ibn Kathir writes that Islam includes obeying all of the Messengers until Muhammad, who finalized their commission, thus closing all paths to Allah except through Muhammad. Therefore, after Allah sent Muhammad, whoever meets Allah following a path other than Muhammad’s, it will not be accepted of him. Allah will punish him for his rejection, reckon him for his denial, and torment him for defying His Book.

To confuse the non Muslims, the crafty Islamists will even quote the following verse to establish that Islam and Christianity are compatible.

Jesus preached the straight path (Islam)…3:51

Obviously, this is a cunning ploy to entice the Christians into Islam. Let us read a few other verses.

Allah proclaims Islam over all other religions…48:28

Explained by ibn Kathir, this verse says that Islam is the only religion accepted by Allah. It means Islam is superior to all the religions of the people of the earth, Arabs and non Arabs alike, whether having certain ideologies or being atheists or idolaters.

To establish the supremacy of Islam and the Arabs, Allah says:

Arabs are the best of righteous people…3:110
The reason why the Arabs (read Muslims) are the best of Allah’s creation is explained by ibn Kathir. He writes that they are the best because they bring the unbelievers tied in chains on their necks, that is, capture them in wars and later force them into Islam.

Therefore, non Muslims must have no delusion that the Islamists are duty bound to force Islam on them, either peacefully, or through terror. It is a command from Allah. Whether the infidels like it or not, Muslims are commanded to establish Arab supremacy around the globe. It is a compulsory duty for every Islamist. Supremacy of Islam is supremacy of the Arabs.

Verse 9:33 further confirms that Allah has destined Islam to subdue all other religions and triumph over them.

Islam is the perfect religion; it will dominate all other religions…9:33

The Qur’an even vilifies the Kafir Multiculturalism, and establishes the Islamic Multiculturalism as the supreme doctrine to follow. Allah says:

Cultural diversity is by Allah, but Muhammad is the only one in the correct/straight path (Islam). So he is to continue inviting people to Islam…22:67

Freedom to enforce Islamic Sharia, including Islamic banking, Islamic Insurance (Takaful) and Islamic family and penal (Hudud) laws

From media we learn how assiduously the Islamists are fighting around the globe to establish Islamic rules in every sphere of human activity. From Canada, to Britain, to Australia, the USA, France, the Netherlands, Denmark, and in virtually every infidel land, they are pursuing their agenda doggedly. What they might not achieve through Islamic terrorism, they will accomplish them through the political lobbying. This is far more dangerous than the Islamic terrorism. We have learned their diehard attempt to establish Sharia in Canada, their successful lobbying to implement certain Sharia provisions in the UK, and the slavish mentality of many western banks to establish a parallel Islamic banking system, just for the Islamists and the Arabs. So successful has been the Islamists game in this avenue that all most all Muslim majority countries are forced to introduce Islamic banking and finance, Islamic Insurance, Islamic investment funds, Islamic courts, Islamic marriage laws…and what not.

To force the western world to accede to their demands, the Islamists are in action, full swing, with great aplomb. Being aware of the PC mentality of the western politicians, the Islamists lobby non stop their plan for Shariazation of the western civilisation. We might wonder why the Islamists are so confident about their success. The answer is that they have unflinching trust in the Qur’an. Here is what the Qur’an says:

The article goes on with more freedoms that are so totally against our laws.

 

[R_not]

Here is a short list of other aspects Islamic ideas of ‘freedom of religion’ (source: the link in the first post):

Freedom to have Islamic free sex with infidel women (infidel women are nothing more than Islamic sex slaves).

Forcing fast food outlets to serve halal food, or to have a halal section.

Intimidating manufacturers to abandon gelatine in certain Islamic food.

Freedom to build a mosque in every suburb of Kafir land.

Petition council to close down mixed sex physical fitness centres, because the Islamists are living in the neighbourhood.

The right to open sex segregated Islamic physical fitness centres.

The right to force authority to close down mixed sex swimming pools.

Freedom to practice religion: lobby to establish Islamic marriage laws, the right to have four wives at any time.

Freedom to practice religion: the right to beat one’s wife/s.

Religious freedom: the right to preach jihadi messages to murder infidels.

Right to take legal actions against anyone who quotes the murderous verses of the Qur’an.

Lobbying parliamentarians to pass religious vilification act (for Islam only).

Islamic bigotry is Islamic tolerance.

Islamic terrorism is the creation of Kafirs; Kafirs must work hard to win the hearts and minds of Muslims.

Right to vilify other religion (it is there in the Qur’an).

Right to threaten to kill those who criticise Islam.

 

[R_not]

what religion do you practice where the land does NOT belong to god? that just seems like a self-evident claim. the earth is the lord’s and the fruits thereof, etc., etc.

salaam.

Well, since islam’s idea of the land belonging to their god means that non-muslims must be dead, converted or subjugated - I don’t call anything about that holy or self-evident.

 

[planten]

Is this thread not political? Moreover, it is to malign Islam? King David also said “The righteous will inherit the land.” That is exactly in the Quran too. The righteous will inherit the land. So what is wrong?

 

[rtconstant]

Well God owns the universe we’re just stewards of His creation.

The question is do Muslims have a right to rule the whole earth?

 

[dzheremi]

I have no problem with Allah owning all lands. It is definitely true. But the Muslims are not the instrument of God. That designation belongs to the Assyrians, as per Isaiah 7:20.

Muslims do not have the “right” to rule over any non-Muslim ever, anywhere. Or at least they don’t have any such right that a non-Muslim should ever accept. If they want to rule themselves only, so be it.

 

[Badaliyyah]

I swear it is like Catholic’s don’t even read their own documents. Leo13 anyone. Religious Freedom is bad; universal equality is admitted as formally true due to common origin of all humanity, but does not bind the state in all matters. The State ought of course to be religious (and particularly Catholic). He can talk about the freedom of the Church, but it is the freedom to make the society and thus the political sphere itself Catholic.

A quick perusal of Pius IX’s Syllabus of Errors is also fairly enlightening on this score (3, 15, 55 and 77f jump immediately to mind…and of course Pio Nono is just citing earlier texts in the Syllabus).

Vatican2 does nothing to contradict this. Its discourse on freedom of religion falls squarely within what Leo13 says about the need for freedom of the Church. It likewise still admits that state might indeed be religious and privilege one religion (the situation which we know to be the actually desireable one according to Leo and Pius9) as long as it does not violate the equality of persons (which means the formal equality of human dignity that is mentioned by Leo13).

In other words, officially, the Catholic Church wants Catholic states full of Catholic citizens, but at the same time say there is no compulsion in religion (there is this residual element of private freedom, b/c one can only embrace the faith in a free act). If Catholics have forgotten this, they are just Catholics with a case of historical amnesia (and the history isn’t all that old by Catholic standards either).

salaam.

 

[R_not]

Is this thread not political? Moreover, it is to malign Islam? King David also said “The righteous will inherit the land.” That is exactly in the Quran too. The righteous will inherit the land. So what is wrong?

Do you know the difference between inherit and steal? The history of islamic jihad is not one of ‘inheriting’ lands. And under sharia laws the non-muslim has no rights to land, or anything for that matter.

I don’t know what is political about this. It is in the koran. See the original posts about this.

And you guys are the ones who say that islam is all encompassing - political, religious, it also controls not only your bathroom behavior, but your sex lives, washing, etc.

 

[R_not]

I have no problem with Allah owning all lands. It is definitely true. But the Muslims are not the instrument of God. That designation belongs to the Assyrians, as per Isaiah 7:20.

Muslims do not have the “right” to rule over any non-Muslim ever, anywhere. Or at least they don’t have any such right that a non-Muslim should ever accept. If they want to rule themselves only, so be it.

Who are the modern day Assyrians? For example, the Persians are now Iraqis and Iranians (mostly).

I am just curious.

 

[R_not]

I swear it is like Catholic’s don’t even read their own documents. Leo13 anyone. Religious Freedom is bad; universal equality is admitted as formally true due to common origin of all humanity, but does not bind the state in all matters. The State ought of course to be religious (and particularly Catholic). He can talk about the freedom of the Church, but it is the freedom to make the society and thus the political sphere itself Catholic.

A quick perusal of Pius IX’s Syllabus of Errors is also fairly enlightening on this score (3, 15, 55 and 77f jump immediately to mind…and of course Pio Nono is just citing earlier texts in the Syllabus).

Vatican2 does nothing to contradict this. Its discourse on freedom of religion falls squarely within what Leo13 says about the need for freedom of the Church. It likewise still admits that state might indeed be religious and privilege one religion (the situation which we know to be the actually desireable one according to Leo and Pius9) as long as it does not violate the equality of persons (which means the formal equality of human dignity that is mentioned by Leo13).

In other words, officially, the Catholic Church wants Catholic states full of Catholic citizens, but at the same time say there is no compulsion in religion (there is this residual element of private freedom, b/c one can only embrace the faith in a free act). If Catholics have forgotten this, they are just Catholics with a case of historical amnesia (and the history isn’t all that old by Catholic standards either).

salaam.

While even if there is a majority of Catholics, the muslims can practice their religion and have full freedoms of the society. The reverse is not true in muslim lands.

So, what is your point?

I have no amnesia - I know what is happening with Catholics in muslim lands. In 2007/2008 there were 7 priests killed in muslim lands. No cleric was killed in our lands. Many were probably imprisoned for terrorist activities, but should that surprise us? This year in Nigeria a priest was set on fire by muslims. In Iraq Christians have been fleeing their lands and the muslims take them. In Egypt the Coptic Christians have been persecuted.

I almost forgot about the cartoons - an old nun was killed by muslims over those cartoons - she had nothing to do with those cartoons. In saudi arabia we still have to hide the fact we are Christian, Jews aren’t even allowed in that land, while muslims demand that they be allowed into Israel.

The list goes on.

 

[Epeenchin]

When Abraham impregnated his woman slave God promise him that the son born from the woman slave will have large generations (Islam) and the son born of Abraham’s very old wife will also have large generations (Catholics).

Doesn’t that mean we are worshipping the same God, why can’t we just spread our religion peacefully? The world is big and they are so many non-muslims and non-catholics to be converted.

The difference is only the laws in the religion, it is up to one to choose which one to follow …

This is just my opinion please don’t be offended.

 

[R_not]

When Abraham impregnated his woman slave God promise him that the son born from the woman slave will have large generations (Islam) and the son born of Abraham’s very old wife will also have large generations (Catholics).

Doesn’t that mean we are worshipping the same God, why can’t we just spread our religion peacefully? The world is big and they are so many non-muslims and non-catholics to be converted.

The difference is only the laws in the religion, it is up to one to choose which one to follow …

This is just my opinion please don’t be offended.

No one is offended. If they are, let them explain why they would be so.

The people born from Isaac were not Catholics, but the Jews. Catholics came after Jesus Christ died and was Resurrected, and they were not termed ‘Catholics’ until centuries later.

The two religions are totally different. The God of Israel is not allah.

Before I go into this again, have you read the koran and/or the Bible? If you did then you would know the differences between the allah of mohammed and islam, and the God of Israel. And mohammed was a pagan who did not read or write. He was not a Christian, or a Jew, and did not know the Bible. He might have heard stories which explains why they are inserted into the koran, but those stories are all different than the Biblical stories.

BAsically, mohammed changed the message of the Bible, he was not from the line of David, he often changed the message of his own koran, and he was a self-proclaimed prophet which means - he was not a prophet and islam is not an extension of Christianity or Judaism.

 

[dzheremi]

Who are the modern day Assyrians? For example, the Persians are now Iraqis and Iranians (mostly).

I am just curious.

It really depends on how you define “Assyrian”, but I think most people accept that the Assyrians are the native inhabitants of northern Iraq, as well as some connecting areas of Turkey, Iran, and Syria. It is mostly what non-Assyrians now call “Kurdistan”, but the Assyrians themselves call it “Beth Nahrain”. They are divided by a few major confessions (the Chaldeans being the community that a Catholic would most likely be familiar with…you can find a few over in the Eastern Catholicism forum, I think), but as a people they were among the first to accept Christianity.

Does that answer your question? It can be a bit of a tough one, since there are people who draw from the wellspring that is Syriac Christianity (Syriac being the language of the Assyrian Church) but claim their origin from different people, such as the Maronites who claim that they are descendents of the Phoenicians (I don’t know how many Maronites would claim this or on what basis exactly, but I have heard it more than once). It is “safer”, I suppose, to stick with the definition that Assyrians are the first Iraqis, though there is the legitimate gripe that this “Iraq” is a foreign entity made by foreigners in their land, and as such is an insult to their great history and national aspirations. To put it another way, Assyrians are Assyrians in the same way that Arabs are Arabs, whether they are in Saudi Arabia, or Kuwait, or Oman.

 

[R_not]

It really depends on how you define “Assyrian”, but I think most people accept that the Assyrians are the native inhabitants of northern Iraq, as well as some connecting areas of Turkey, Iran, and Syria. It is mostly what non-Assyrians now call “Kurdistan”, but the Assyrians themselves call it “Beth Nahrain”. They are divided by a few major confessions (the Chaldeans being the community that a Catholic would most likely be familiar with…you can find a few over in the Eastern Catholicism forum, I think), but as a people they were among the first to accept Christianity.

Does that answer your question? It can be a bit of a tough one, since there are people who draw from the wellspring that is Syriac Christianity (Syriac being the language of the Assyrian Church) but claim their origin from different people, such as the Maronites who claim that they are descendents of the Phoenicians (I don’t know how many Maronites would claim this or on what basis exactly, but I have heard it more than once). It is “safer”, I suppose, to stick with the definition that Assyrians are the first Iraqis, though there is the legitimate gripe that this “Iraq” is a foreign entity made by foreigners in their land, and as such is an insult to their great history and national aspirations. To put it another way, Assyrians are Assyrians in the same way that Arabs are Arabs, whether they are in Saudi Arabia, or Kuwait, or Oman.

Thanks.

 

[CatholicMonarch]

Arab Muslims are a threat to our existence and they must be dealt with. The Arab power has conspired to enslave us all if we don’t wake up. The Muslims are a synagogue of Satan who do not deserve to live in our country. It would be expedient for us to round them all up and deport them back to the Muslim countries. And if they mess with us like they did in 9-11, then these towel heads should be nuked out of existence.

 

[dzheremi]

Wow. NO. Muslims a threat to “our” existence? Yes, surely, some of them are. It is more beneficial to focus on ideologies than people, in my opinion, since as people Muslims are as varied and as good or bad as any other people. So where you’re going with this “towelhead” talk, I don’t know, but I don’t want to follow because it can’t possibly be anywhere good. It is not appropriate here or anywhere to engage in racist stereotyping of any people, no matter what their religion. Disagree with Muslims, fine. Despite their ideology and its effect on the world and the societies in which it predominates, sure. But this is different than degrading them as a people for cultural characteristics like what form of headdress they wear. Last time I checked, the violence of Islam does not come from the keffiyeh, which has also been worn by pan-Arabist Palestinian Christians like George Habash!

 

[chrisse]

Arab Muslims are a threat to our existence and they must be dealt with. The Arab power has conspired to enslave us all if we don’t wake up. The Muslims are a synagogue of Satan who do not deserve to live in our country. It would be expedient for us to round them all up and deport them back to the Muslim countries. And if they mess with us like they did in 9-11, then these towel heads should be nuked out of existence.

You’re not getting out of the trial membership, I think.

No, it’s the geo-political ideology of Islam that is the issue, with it’s total control of every aspect of human life. There are many Arab muslims who do not adhere to Islam, at least on the inside.

Once a “muslim” immigrates to a new land, they, like most new immigrants, tend to flock in the same area. It is in this environment that non-Islamists are at great pressure and threat from the true adherents of the ideology.