F
friendship
Guest
We must love eatchother. I think it can solve many problems!
You’ve got to be kidding right?…
JC. it did not happen in the early times of Islam. Muslims were travelling and trading peacefully all over the world.
…
Wa an Laisa Li Alinsaan illa maa sa’a. 53:39, = That man can have nothing but what he strives for 53:39.That man can have nothing but what he strives for (Quran53:39)
Without giving you any curt remarks about your false notations, I remind all friends that Muslims were great traders. Where ever they went, they carried out trade. People of other countries were very impressed by the good behavior of Muslim traders. So other faith people (initially the christians) started converting to Islam in large numbers. That upset the church people and their religious Roman Governmet.You’ve got to be kidding right?
During mohamads reign, there was no “travelling & trading peacefully” because your so called prophet would ambush the caravans, steal the goods and kill the people.
And then after he died, all hell broke loose.
Muslim on muslim killings, muslim on Christian kills, muslim on Pagan killing, muslim on Jews killing, and war/land conquest of the middle east.
Do you even read history? Where do you get your asinine historical facts from?
Dear palanten, some of these ones aren’t looking for answer. They just want attack to Islam. This one didn’t even read a first history books about Prophet Muhammad and wanted us to study history! looooooooooooool And when we answer, this one affronts to us!Without giving you any curt remarks about your false notations, I remind all friends that Muslims were great traders. Where ever they went, they carried out trade. People of other countries were very impressed by the good behavior of Muslim traders. So other faith people (initially the christians) started converting to Islam in large numbers. That upset the church people and their religious Roman Governmet.
They (christians) killed many of the unarmed muslim traders. When an explanation was called for from the Caliph, the Romans came out with their military might against the Muslim government. So the conflicts started which ended in the defeat of the Roman christian empire.
That is history. But to prove that Islam spread by the good beliefs and good works of the Muslims, it is enough to know that the Muslim traders went to far east countries without any weapons. There was no war. Many people in the far east converted to Islam quickly. There was no conflict. That was another great success of the Muslims.
Later in years 1500 A.D. the christians came out with some organised preaching under the cover of their trade and military missions. They gained some successes under the European Christian dominance. That was nothing spiritual. It was only the political power and extra effort of the church people, nuns and Padres and unmarried fathers and unmarried mothers.
It is better that outright wrong picture should not be spread on the net about early Muslims and Islam. Thanks. But say whatever you want against the present day bad christians and the Muslims. I am with you.
I personally never laughed so hard in my life. Where on earth did you get the source for this planten? Meanwhile i must continue to…Without giving you any curt remarks about your false notations, I remind all friends that Muslims were great traders. Where ever they went, they carried out trade. People of other countries were very impressed by the good behavior of Muslim traders. So other faith people (initially the christians) started converting to Islam in large numbers. That upset the church people and their religious Roman Governmet.
They (christians) killed many of the unarmed muslim traders. When an explanation was called for from the Caliph, the Romans came out with their military might against the Muslim government. So the conflicts started which ended in the defeat of the Roman christian empire.
That is history. But to prove that Islam spread by the good beliefs and good works of the Muslims, it is enough to know that the Muslim traders went to far east countries without any weapons. There was no war. Many people in the far east converted to Islam quickly. There was no conflict. That was another great success of the Muslims.
Later in years 1500 A.D. the christians came out with some organised preaching under the cover of their trade and military missions. They gained some successes under the European Christian dominance. That was nothing spiritual. It was only the political power and extra effort of the church people, nuns and Padres and unmarried fathers and unmarried mothers.
It is better that outright wrong picture should not be spread on the net about early Muslims and Islam. Thanks. But say whatever you want against the present day bad christians and the Muslims. I am with you.
Nothing wrong with saying only Khomeini. when the the Meccans and Muslims were signing the letter of the treaty, the scribe wrote down “From Mohammed Rasool Allah”. The Meccan objected and said : we don’t beleive you are Rasool Allah. So the Prophet ordered the scribe to write “from Mohammed bin Abdullah”.So say khomeini, and don’t say Ayatullah! we have many ayatullah in the world!
In the Name of God, the Most Gracious, the Most MercifulIn the Name of God, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful:
“Verily, those who have attained to faith [in his divine writ] as well as those who follow the Jewish faith, and the Christians, and the Sabians—all who believe in God and the Last Day and do righteous deeds—shall have their reward with their Sustainer; and no fear need they have, and neither shall they grieve.” 2:62 (and it occurs again in surah 5, but don’t know the exact verse numbr in that one)
"and thou wilt surely find that, of all people, they who say, “Behold, we are Christians,” come closest to feeling affection for those who believe [in this divine writ]: this is so because there are priests and monks among them, and because these are not given to arrogance. For when they come to understand what has been bestowed from on high upon this Apostle, thou can see their eyes overflow with tears, because they recognize something of its truth; they say: “O our Sustainer! We do believe, make us one, then with all who bear witness to the truth. And how could we fail to believe in God and in whatever truth has come unto us, when we so fervently desire that our Sustainer count us among the righteous?” (5:82-84)
God, the Supreme, speaketh the truth
I should probably add that both of these were revealed at a specific context (or written by Muhammad if you don’t believe it was revealed). So the second set of verses, for example, was quite evident in the friendships that formed between some of the early Muslims and the Christian king of Abbysinia (not sure about spelling). And I’m talking about verses here, not about the policies of a lot of Muslims towads other people, throughout history, which (I agree with some of the posts here) was extremely unfair and injust (and also extremely unIslamic).
Praise be to God alone, unto Whom we all will return in a lonely state
Childish post and recomandation.Nothing wrong with saying only Khomeini. when the the Meccans and Muslims were signing the letter of the treaty, the scribe wrote down “From Mohammed Rasool Allah”. The Meccan objected and said : we don’t beleive you are Rasool Allah. So the Prophet ordered the scribe to write “from Mohammed bin Abdullah”.
on a side note, you may consider putting staffsgt on the ignore list.
I knew you were a muslim all along, but why hide it.hahaha…theres a pretty simple answer for that, and one that will probably not please you,
which is that I am Muslim and not Catholic. And I do recogize that I am just a “guest” here as Jakasaki puts it, and I do not mean to violate any of the forum rules.
But the messenger does not detract from the actual message, does it? Take what I posted as you will, but as for myself, I think you might find the rest of the post more fascinating than that bit, and I’d love to hear your comments on it.