Catholicism verses Islam differences and similarities

[dolphinlove]

I’m embarrassed to ask him, actually. Whenever I ask him questions from here he just kind of looks at me… weird.

maybe because ‘questioning’ your faith and asking questions instead of just going along with the flow is just something that is not done?

 

[Sailka]

                                                                                           :nope: :hmmm: :tsktsk:

i have to leave the board for awhile and it might take me awhile to respond to the top portion, but going back to the adulterer issue. i have received an answer. if a man or woman (in solid proof) have been found guilty, then islamic law says to kill them as they are not innocent. **
**
WOW!!!

**WOW

and WOW!!!**

that is why we ignorant Christians have a hard time with your religion. i honestly doubt that many of the modern day converts to your religion know that.

thank you for making that clear to me.

you come up with your own personal interpretations of our Bible all you want, but that will not make it correct. maybe these two differences should be explored further as i see the other posts turning into political debates.

this one is easy.

today, right now, given that we have solid proof of a couple being adulterous:

**for us Christians **we are to forgive them. we are also told not to judge as that is for God to do. the Catholic Church does NOT tell us to have them stoned to death!

for muslims they shall be put to death.

can we chalk that up to one HUGE difference?

yes, the one true God is merciful, but mohammed and his laws are not.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         Again, it is not Islam or the Koran that is the problem, but the ones who Misuse  them.                                                           
                                                                                           Killing  (execution)   of others is Very very rare  and must be by  Authorities,  authorized by Court determination. 


                                                                                                                                                                                          Islamic law   and its implemention as (mis)understood  by us is the problem, in 95%  of cases.  
                                    :wave: :gopray:   :blessyou:

 

[umerazad]

this one is easy.

today, right now, given that we have solid proof of a couple being adulterous:

**for us Christians **we are to forgive them. we are also told not to judge as that is for God to do. the Catholic Church does NOT tell us to have them stoned to death!

for muslims they shall be put to death.

can we chalk that up to one HUGE difference?

yes, the one true God is merciful, but mohammed and his laws are not.

Friend you haven’t read Bible. Did ya? When I read it here is what I found:

*Exodus 20:14 “You shall not commit adultery.”

Deuteronomy 22:22 “If a man is found sleeping with another man’s wife, both the man who slept with her and the woman must die.”

Leviticus 20:10 “If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife–with the wife of his neighbor–both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death.”

Proverbs 6:32 “But a man who commits adultery lacks judgment; whoever does so destroys himself.”

Leviticus 21:9 “And the daughter of any priest, if she profane herself by playing the whore, she profaneth her father: she shall be burnt with fire.”

Deuteronomy 25:11-12 “If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity.”
Whenever I quote these verses from Old Testament I get an argument from some Christian brother ( who clearly didn’t read the Bible with understanding ) saying that * you are mis-understanding it. The Mosaic Law was given to Israel through Moses. You are committing the logical fallacy of faulty comparison by quoting from the Old Testament to support your scripture. The commandment to kill adulterers was confined to Israel and no more apply to us. *

While when I read New Testament, I read that Jesus (PBUH) very unequivocally said in Mathews 5:17-18:

1. Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil it.
2. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

In the above verse Jesus (PBUH) very unquivocally said that he DID NOT come to destroy the law but to fulfill it. Meaning, the LAW would stay as it is unless something is specially over-ridden by Jesus (PBUH). In your specific example Jesus (PBUH) let go the women only because there was no proof presented to him of her adultery. He (PBUH) was a very wise man and would never promote a social evil like adultery (which at times lead to prostitution).

The laws are meant to act as deterrence. And I read some beautiful writings of Christian authors who ‘categorized adultery as a plague of modern Christian societies’. Adultory is the major reason behind sky-rocketing divorce rates in USA which results in destruction of families and what not.

My only point is that it is the responsibiliy of the State to stop social evils from spreading. And adultery and prostitution (which is a form of adultery) are some of them.

 

[Sailka]

Friend you haven’t read Bible. Did ya? When I read it here is what I found:

*Exodus 20:14 “You shall not commit adultery.”

Deuteronomy 22:22 “If a man is found sleeping with another man’s wife, both the man who slept with her and the woman must die.”

Leviticus 20:10 “If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife–with the wife of his neighbor–both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death.”

Proverbs 6:32 “But a man who commits adultery lacks judgment; whoever does so destroys himself.”

Leviticus 21:9 “And the daughter of any priest, if she profane herself by playing the whore, she profaneth her father: she shall be burnt with fire.”

Deuteronomy 25:11-12 “If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity.”
Whenever I quote these verses from Old Testament I get an argument from some Christian brother ( who clearly didn’t read the Bible with understanding ) saying that * you are mis-understanding it. The Mosaic Law was given to Israel through Moses. You are committing the logical fallacy of faulty comparison by quoting from the Old Testament to support your scripture. The commandment to kill adulterers was confined to Israel and no more apply to us. *

While when I read New Testament, I read that Jesus (PBUH) very unequivocally said in Mathews 5:17-18:

1. Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil it.
2. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

In the above verse Jesus (PBUH) very unquivocally said that he DID NOT come to destroy the law but to fulfill it. Meaning, the LAW would stay as it is unless something is specially over-ridden by Jesus (PBUH). In your specific example Jesus (PBUH) let go the women only because there was no proof presented to him of her adultery. He (PBUH) was a very wise man and would never promote a social evil like adultery (which at times lead to prostitution).

The laws are meant to act as deterrence. And I read some beautiful writings of Christian authors who ‘categorized adultery as a plague of modern Christian societies’. Adultory is the major reason behind sky-rocketing divorce rates in USA which results in destruction of families and what not.

My only point is that it is the responsibiliy of the State to stop social evils from spreading. And adultery and prostitution (which is a form of adultery) are some of them.

                                                                                                                                                                                           Thank you for the Scriptural and reality corrections!

 

[R_not]

:juggle:

                                                                                                                                                                                          But never   ever ignore  why  a fraction of 1%  of Muslims  are violent  against us Outsiders. Not because of Religion, not  because of the Koran, but we are In their Country, In their "Life", and "In their Face", wrongfully.    Only in  worst cases of the death or torture by Us  against them do a tiny few   use their only 'weapon', Violence.

:knight1:

Well, that is not entirely true either. At least our governments figured out what muslim charities are all about - they were financing the terrorists. And then we have the other types of jihad - da’wa being one of them. And read the website that my signature has. Immigration is another jihad tactic that is being used. And then we have the MSA that is part of the muslim brotherhood that I outlined in my prior post.

Sorry, but there are many being kicked out of our country - including imams - and also many of your mosques and madrassas being caught with hate literature in them that is against us infidels.

And as we have seen what has happened in Lebanon, and other countries such as Pakistan, Kashmir, many African nations, and nations in Southeast Asia - there is a definite plan (besides the one that the muslim brotherhood cooked up called ‘The Project’) that goes into making nations into creating an islamic state.

faithfreedom.org/Articles/Perfanalyst/creating_an_islamic_state.htm

A good book to read on the subject is ‘A Never Ending War’. I just ordered another book called, ‘A Stealth Jihad, How Radical Islam is Subverting America without guns or bombs’. It will probably go into what the first book that I mention goes into.

No, the assertion that there is only 1% of a population that are violent jihadists is not correct - and gee, sharia laws don’t even care about them and unless they are under some heavy scrutiny - nothing is done to them. We see that in Pakistan with saudi Arabia financing the jihadists there.

When the country finally is under sharia law - then those jihadists are just let loose on the dhimmi population and as we have been reading in many of these countries - nothing is done to them because infidels have even less rights than muslim women.

Europe isn’t even reporting many of the crimes against non-muslims. They are just waking up to the fact there might be a problem - even after finding ‘The Projects’ documents in Europe earlier in this decade. There are whole areas that non-muslims cannot enter into because of the violence against them. And with political correctness gone mad - they don’t even say who are doing the riots, destruction and assaults - they will say ‘Asians’, or ‘disaffected youth’, etc. When in fact they are muslims.

Our news doesn’t always report the jihadists either. We have muslim students shooting from buildings at people, running them over, and then a muslim on a jihad in San Francisco trying to run Jews over, and who knows how many others that we don’t know about because of political correctness gone astray. Those are just a few examples - there is an extensive list of successful attacks against non-muslims worldwide:
Nov 15,2007 – over 10,000 muslim attacks since 9/11 and the list is still being compiled.
frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=453D47F2-EA57-43CD-8DF8-403A77F960BB
2001-2003
thereligionofpeace.com/attacks-2001-2003.htm
2004
thereligionofpeace.com/attacks-2004.htm
2005
thereligionofpeace.com/attacks-2005.htm
2006
thereligionofpeace.com/attacks-2006.htm
2007
thereligionofpeace.com/attacks-2007.htm

No other group of migrants have entered countries and laid such demands on whole populations to do things that are totally against our laws, such as bringing back segregation or practicing polygamy with outright disdain for our federal laws. An L.A. muslim was caught just recently and he was caught because he was torturing his wives and kids. I think the wives should be charged too - but I don’t know the specific laws so I don’t know what is going to happen. If white people did that to blacks, or browns, or even muslims, or anyone - the outcry would be deafening. but muslims are getting away with it time and again. People are getting tired of that though and I hope that it changes back to the way it was - no segregation.

And then there is intimidation that is used by groups such as CAIR, and imams (we saw that tactic used with the ‘flying imams’ case), etc. And you too used intimidation in one of your posts to me. People such as Mr. Spencer, Michael Savage, etc get threatened with lawsuits all the time. We see it happening in Europe where muslims from other countries demanding that Geert Wilders be dealt with more harshly. We saw what happened to Theo Van Gogh and now Aayan Hirsi Ali has to have 24 hour guards around her, as do other notables such as Salmon Rushdie.

Gee, our own Pope just recently had a fatwa issued against him by people from another country and the thing is with fatwas - any muslim can carry them out as some did with Theo Van Gogh. It is fashioned after mohammed wishing that a poetess would be dead - so his followers went out and killed her while she was breastfeeding one of her 5 children. That was the first fatwa.

 

[R_not]

Friend you haven’t read Bible. Did ya? When I read it here is what I found:

*Exodus 20:14 “You shall not commit adultery.”

Deuteronomy 22:22 “If a man is found sleeping with another man’s wife, both the man who slept with her and the woman must die.”

Leviticus 20:10 “If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife–with the wife of his neighbor–both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death.”

Proverbs 6:32 “But a man who commits adultery lacks judgment; whoever does so destroys himself.”

Leviticus 21:9 “And the daughter of any priest, if she profane herself by playing the whore, she profaneth her father: she shall be burnt with fire.”

Deuteronomy 25:11-12 “If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity.”
Whenever I quote these verses from Old Testament I get an argument from some Christian brother ( who clearly didn’t read the Bible with understanding ) saying that * you are mis-understanding it. The Mosaic Law was given to Israel through Moses. You are committing the logical fallacy of faulty comparison by quoting from the Old Testament to support your scripture. The commandment to kill adulterers was confined to Israel and no more apply to us. *

While when I read New Testament, I read that Jesus (PBUH) very unequivocally said in Mathews 5:17-18:

1. Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil it.
2. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

In the above verse Jesus (PBUH) very unquivocally said that he DID NOT come to destroy the law but to fulfill it. Meaning, the LAW would stay as it is unless something is specially over-ridden by Jesus (PBUH). In your specific example Jesus (PBUH) let go the women only because there was no proof presented to him of her adultery. He (PBUH) was a very wise man and would never promote a social evil like adultery (which at times lead to prostitution).

The laws are meant to act as deterrence. And I read some beautiful writings of Christian authors who ‘categorized adultery as a plague of modern Christian societies’. Adultory is the major reason behind sky-rocketing divorce rates in USA which results in destruction of families and what not.

My only point is that it is the responsibiliy of the State to stop social evils from spreading. And adultery and prostitution (which is a form of adultery) are some of them.

This was already done on a different thread. Here is the difference - we have not practiced such things - the violent things - in centuries, in some cases millenia. that is not true with the koran’s passages.

As for them being misconstrued, why is it us that you are trying to convince us of this? Why are you, and many other ‘moderate’ muslims, trying to tell that to your own so they change sharia laws in those countries that have that and stop practicing the heinous deeds - or at least if one does such a heinous deed - the laws goes after them? And give women and infidels equal rights under the law?! And stop this subjugation and demeaning people in those lands because they are not muslims?
We keep reading and hearing that we are the ones misinterpreting the koran. I just repeat it. And I can usually cite examples. or how about muslim charities? when they really go to the poor instead of jihadists - that will be something. Until then our governments still go after them. I just read late last year or early this year where they caught another one supporting the jihadists.

Ok, one more time - maybe you can take this one on, tell me the difference between these two muslims:

1. “I was ordered to fight all men until they say ‘There is no god but Allah.’” prophet Mohammad’s farewell address, March 632
2. “I was ordered to fight the people until they say there is no god but Allah, and his prophet Mohammed.”
   Osama bin Laden, Nov 2001

 

[Joero]

i have to leave the board for awhile and it might take me awhile to respond to the top portion, but going back to the adulterer issue. i have received an answer. if a man or woman (in solid proof) have been found guilty, then islamic law says to kill them as they are not innocent. **
**
WOW!!!

**WOW

and WOW!!!**

that is why we ignorant Christians have a hard time with your religion. i honestly doubt that many of the modern day converts to your religion know that.

thank you for making that clear to me.

you come up with your own personal interpretations of our Bible all you want, but that will not make it correct. maybe these two differences should be explored further as i see the other posts turning into political debates.

this one is easy.

today, right now, given that we have solid proof of a couple being adulterous:

**for us Christians **we are to forgive them. we are also told not to judge as that is for God to do. the Catholic Church does NOT tell us to have them stoned to death!

for muslims they shall be put to death.

can we chalk that up to one HUGE difference?

yes, the one true God is merciful, but mohammed and his laws are not.

This link may help others or anyone to know a bit about Quran:

answering-islam.org/Quran/Contra/index.html

 

[swariffin]

Perhaps, Angelos, you have forgotten that Jesus was not sent to the Gentiles, but only to the Jews:

Mathews 10:6-7

1. “These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:”
2. But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

And also Mathews 15:23-24 where he explicitly said that he is only sent to the Jews (and not to non-jews i.e. Gentiles).

1. But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us.
2. But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

Another proof of static thinking of Islamic way. Pick up one verse, forgetting the other. Even forget the verse in the same Matthew but different chapter saying “Go and make all nations my deciple…”.

 

[umerazad]

As for them being misconstrued, why is it us that you are trying to convince us of this? Why are you, and many other ‘moderate’ muslims, trying to tell that to your own so they change sharia laws in those countries that have that and stop practicing the heinous deeds - or at least if one does such a heinous deed - the laws goes after them? And give women and infidels equal rights under the law?! And stop this subjugation and demeaning people in those lands because they are not muslims?
We keep reading and hearing that we are the ones misinterpreting the koran. I just repeat it. And I can usually cite examples. or how about muslim charities? when they really go to the poor instead of jihadists - that will be something. Until then our governments still go after them. I just read late last year or early this year where they caught another one supporting the jihadists.

Ok, one more time - maybe you can take this one on, tell me the difference between these two muslims:

1. “I was ordered to fight all men until they say ‘There is no god but Allah.’” prophet Mohammad’s farewell address, March 632
2. “I was ordered to fight the people until they say there is no god but Allah, and his prophet Mohammed.”
   Osama bin Laden, Nov 2001

Below is the complete translation of the last sermon of prophet Muhammad (PBUH) that he delivered while talking to Muslims.
**
O People
Lend me an attentive ear, for I know not whether after this year, I shall ever be amongst you again. Therefor listen to what I am saying to you very carefully and take these words to those who could not be present here today.

O People
Just as you regard this month, this day, this city as sacred, so regard the life and property of every Muslim as a sacred trust. Return the goods entrusted to you to their rightful owners. Hurt no one so that no one may hurt you. Remember that you will indeed meet your Lord, and that He will indeed reckon your deeds. Allah has forbidden you to take usury (interest); therefore all interest obligation shall henceforth be waived. Your capital, however, is yours to keep. You will neither inflict nor suffer any inequity.

Allah has Judged that there shall be no interest and that all interest due to Abbas Ibn ‘Abd al Muttalib (the Prophet’s uncle) shall henceforth be waived.

Beware of Satan for the safety of your religion. He has lost all hope that he will ever be able to lead you astray in big things, so beware of following him in small things.

O People
It is true that you have certain rights in regard to your women, but they also have rights over you. Remember that you have taken them as your wives, only under Allah’s trust and with His permission. If they abide by your right then to them belongs the right to be fed and clothed in kindness. Do treat you women well and be kind to them, for they are your partners and committed helpers. And it is your right that they do not make friends with anyone of whom you do not approve, as well as never to be unchaste.

O People
Listen to me in earnest, worship Allah, say your five daily prayers (Salah), fast during the month of Ramadan, and give your wealth in Zakat.

Perform Hajj if you can afford to.

All mankind is from Adam and Eve, an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab; also a white has no superiority over a black, nor a black has any superiority over a white- except by piety and good action. Learn that every Muslim is a brother to every Muslim and that the Muslims constitute one brotherhood. Nothing shall be legitimate to a Muslim, which belongs to a fellow Muslim unless it was given freely and willingly. Do not therefor, do injustice to yourselves.

Remember one day you will appear before Allah and answer for your deeds. So beware, do not stray from the path of righteousness after I am gone. People, no prophet or apostle will come after me and no new faith will be born. Reason well therefore, O people, and understand words which I convey to you. I leave behind me two things, the Quran and the Sunnah (Hadith), and if you follow these you will never go astray. All those who listen to me shall pass on my words to others and those to others again; and may the last ones understand my words better than those who listened to me directly. Be my witness, O Allah, that I have conveyed your message to your people."
**

I don’t see an reference to the quotation that you mentioned? Also, you may read about the women part yourself.

 

[Sister_Amy]

maybe because ‘questioning’ your faith and asking questions instead of just going along with the flow is just something that is not done?

Well it’s not questioning the faith… I mean… I love my sheikh like I love my own grandfather, if not more because I am even closer to him!

I sometimes ask him questions from this forum and usually the response is just kind of awkward for me and for him. He sometimes says something like it never even occurred to him to ask such a question. And I feel bad to put him in that position because I love him so much and I don’t want him to be embarrassed.

The question that inJESUS asked isn’t one that is really beneficial. It’s certainly not a matter of creed or doctrine, and would likely depend upon the ruling of a judge in such a case. The likelihood of the situation even happening is pretty slim. So you see it’s not about going with the flow or questioning the faith… this is something that a court and a judge should decide. My sheikh has studied Islamic law so I think he would be qualified to answer, but I just don’t see the point in asking.

I asked him a question today, and I asked him how we are able to determine which of the actions of the Prophet, may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him, were inspired (by Allah), and which were simply human nature (and therefore subject to mistakes.) The answer turned out to be immensely useful for an ongoing thread on another forum where I post, and the participants are debating the position of rejecting ahadith, and the meaning of ‘Sunnah.’ I’m going to try to write on that subject tomorrow.

I do love my sheikh, and I respect him, and I wouldn’t want to waste his time with trivial questions like these. Sorry.

 

[jen_fla]

                                                                                                                                                                                      Islamic law   and its implemention as (mis)understood  by us is the problem, in 95%  of cases.

you keep saying that, sailka and i honestly WANT to believe that what you say is true.

                                                                                                                                                                                          Your  words, thoughts are virtual Opposite of reality, and  teachings of Mother Church.  **Islam Is  very demanding True  Religion**, that   has  killing and conquest  as Opposite of its teachings and Koran.

my words are opposite of Mother Church? your profile says you are Catholic so I assume that is the Church you are speaking about. please read your second sentence again and tell me who just denied that Christ was crucified and raised from the dead? now that would be opposite to the teachings of the Church.

And Islam teaches that killing Anyone not in Combat or self defense is Worst crime, sending the offender to Hell.
It appears you have been massivelly hyped.

that is your response to me when sister amy and umerazad admitted that given solid proof of adultery in islamic law condones stoning to death? why did you wag your finger at me when i finally got an answer? i am not sure how frequently that occurs, but if it is condoned by islamic law and NOT just a bunch of extremists, then your reply makes no sense.

Know why terrorists do their act? Because is Only way the weak can try to “message” the strongest military.

maybe some do to send a “message” to the strongest military, but that hardly covers the terrorists acts occurring all across the globe.

 

[Sister_Amy]

no problem. i am very impressed that you are taking the time to communicate with all of us. i am a big dummy when it comes to your religion and i do believe that there is some truth in all major religions, but the differences are causing far too much violence. understanding the differences is of the utmost importance.

I appreciate that you’re trying to ask questions about the parts that you don’t understand, and giving me the chance to answer. That is true, two-way communication.

i did read the highlighted sections. looking at 9.5 it says to me that for those that don’t repent or pay tax, then it’s lights out. are you saying that if a pagan does not pay tax or repent then killing is justified? and was this only for war in the 700s or is this the eternal word?

The important thing is to not take 9:5 alone, as tempting as that might be. A person who is refusing to make peace with Muslims is one who is making war with them. So a person who is at war with the Muslims… the Muslims are at war with him. So he can either stop being at war with the Muslims, or they will be after him. The verse is not talking about any old random pagan living on his own minding his own business–it is talking about a group of people who violated a treaty with the Muslims, and attacked them.

should all nonbelievers be ruled?

Well, aren’t we all subject, in one way or another, to God’s rule? I think the answer is that Muslims should be able to rule themselves, and since Islam allows for non-Muslims to also rule themselves inside an Islamic state, there isn’t really a problem. If they are not inside an Islamic state, then unless they are at war with the Muslims, they are at peace… in which case, there’s no need to fight.

in that previous thread you made a distinction between honour killings and islamic law. is it fair to say that islamic law is justified in killing adulterers today because of quran? is that correct?

Jesus teaches us to show mercy to the adulterers.

Yes there is a distinction between islamic law and so-called honor killings which are, in fact, against the law. They should be against the law of every country on this planet from now until forever–I absolutely HATE the idea of honor killings… whew, ok, got that out.

Killing an adulturer is not the same as an honor killing, for the reasons I explained. An honor killing does not go to court, it doesn’t have witnesses to testify to the crime, and it doesn’t penalize both parties involved (usually only the woman is punished, grrr) not to mention it is NOT always the correct punishment prescribed in islam. A public stoning however is an event which would serve as a deterrent to other people. That is a psychological thing.

But in the case of Jesus, when the adulteress was brought to him, the situation is hardly fair. In fact, I don’t think the Pharisees were asking him to uphold the law, but they were asking him to perform what was essentially an honor killing! You see, if they found that woman committing adultery, then they also found a man committing adultery with her. A woman cannot engage in adultery by herself! So why did they not also bring the man?

So if Jesus (may Allah’s peace be upon him) had allowed them to stone the woman, the law would NOT have been properly applied, because the man would go free. So it’s a really brilliant opportunity to demonstrate mercy.

In Islam, four witnesses are required for a purpose, and that is so people don’t start accusing others of adultery without proof, and slandering each other… people can gossip, you know? So in fact this law is only very seldom applied. But it is a law, applied to both the man and woman involved, and the reason it is a law is to protect the society against illicit intercourse, and to protect children so they know their lineage and are properly cared for.

It is NOT about protecting family honor.

 

[R_not]

                                                                                           :nope: :hmmm: :tsktsk:  





                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         Again, it is not Islam or the Koran that is the problem, but the ones who Misuse  them.                                                           
                                                                                           Killing  (execution)   of others is Very very rare  and must be by  Authorities,  authorized by Court determination. 


                                                                                                                                                                                          Islamic law   and its implemention as (mis)understood  by us is the problem, in 95%  of cases.  
                                    :wave: :gopray:   :blessyou:

I disagree with this. We could have lived until we died with muslims doing whatever they do. then the continual attacks, the continual demands, the continual bold untruths of the facts of not only their past history but their current history, then more attacks, more demands, more people slaughtered worldwide by muslims and the only thing we see muslims do - get worried over their image and they do nothing over those who they are telling us are ‘misunderstanding’ islam.

And then some of us dig into what islam teaches and - viola! - what is the problem… it is the koran and hadiths themselves. it is their prophet who did and said a lot of heinous things.

And then we get apologists/appeasers, which seems to me is what you are if your profile is correct, that doesn’t help matters and only try to confuse the issues. Sorry, but the koran says what it says and whatever you posted about mohammed - you just left off the nasty parts.

The facts do not bear out the continual assertions from muslims how peaceful everything is. In fact, a common thing for muslims to do is ‘turnspeak’, and also it is sanctioned in the koran to deceive the infidels. Since the facts are 180 degrees different from what muslims are trying to say - the words are just words in attempts to fix an image so broken that I don’t know how anyone can believe them if they are paying just a tiny bit of attention to what is happening worldwide.

 

[R_not]

from sister amy: *Well, aren’t we all subject, in one way or another, to God’s rule? I think the answer is that Muslims should be able to rule themselves, and since Islam allows for non-Muslims to also rule themselves inside an Islamic state, there isn’t really a problem. If they are not inside an Islamic state, then unless they are at war with the Muslims, they are at peace… in which case, there’s no need to fight. *

Tell me what country that has sharia law are infidels allowed to rule themselves?!

As for warring with muslims - in over 99% of the wars going on in this world now - the muslims started it! There is a DVD for sale about ‘What the West Needs to Know about islam’, and there is a version of it on youtube (if they didn’t get it censored yet) also that goes into the wars worldwide and who started them and keeps them going.

No one has any trouble with muslims ruling themselves in their own lands. When they migrate to lands though they need to obey those laws - which most times they do not. Just as you do not obey the laws and will be, or are already doing, by practicing polygamy which is a felony crime.

To me this tells me that what you just stated is incorrect because you are not even practicing what you are trying to preach here on these threads.

 

[Postmodern]

Sharia laws are laws based on the koran and hadiths.

I know what Shar’iah is, I asked which countries have legalized honor killings

As for saudi arabia allowing others in to exploit their oil - I don’t know what you are getting at. saudi arabia is one of the most restrictive muslim countries there is for infidels. And slavery is still conducted in saudi arabia, along with beheadings of women and others who transgress their sharia laws. An infidel, or a dhimmi, has to practice their religion in secret.

To counter my hard evidence that religiosity is not linked with “honor” killings you claimed that Muslim nations allow it. I countered this rebuttal by pointing out that simply because a Muslim country allows something doesn’t mean it is Islamic. For instance, Saudi Arabia have us a great deal on oil in the 50’s, simply because they are a Theocratic Monarchy doesn’t mean profitable oil deals for the US is an Islamic practice. And simply because a country allows/turns a blind to honor killings, and that country happens to be Islamic, that doesn’t mean that “honor” killings are Islamic.

As for dar al islam and dar al harb - dar al islam just means that sharia law is in place and muslims practice their religion as they wish - although others have restrictions placed on them.

I know what it means, I said it was a Juristic construction based on a strained interpretation of Hadith

dar al harb, well that means that muslims have restrictions placed on them and basically cannot practice their religion as they want to which means sharia law is the law of the land and dhimmi are not subjugate. Look in wikipedia for the definitions, or here is an extensive set of articles that start with this website: jihadwatch.org/archives/004628.php

Whoever told you it is misguided is not totally telling the truth.

I read it by a renowned Islamic Scholar(If you recall I referred you to him), the book was certified at Al-Azhar University, it should be solidly Orthodox

Mauana Muhammad Ali, “The Religion of Islam”

As for Israeli actions in Lebanon - well, I suppose training the Lebanonese Army over a decade ago is a bad thing?! Otherwise, Lebanon used to be the Riviera of the Middle East - not now since the muslims have become a majority. If you want to know how a Lebanese Christian survived for about a decade in a bomb shelter from muslims on a jihad - then read ‘Because They Hate’. Hezbollah and the palestinians have been rebuilding their arsenal of boms since the Lebanon/Israeli war under the noses of NATO and the UN.

During the war, the muslims would lob a bomb from a house, then run away. The Israelis would be able to pin point where the bomb came from and then retaliate. Well, what the hezbollah and pals were doing were lobbing bombs from houses that had women and children in it and then come back and use their bodies, if they died, as propaganda. And our media ‘ate it up’.

Of course, we very rarely hear about the aggression from the muslims lobbing the bombs into Israel from Lebanon - or even from the Gaza.

There was plenty of slaughter in Lebanon from all sides, Christians slaughtered Muslims as well. My point had absolutely nothing to do with any points you have raised here. You claimed that Hezbollah kills Israeli civilians because they are “infidels” I am pointing out that that is categorically false, Hezbollah’s murders of civilians is a direct result of Israeli policy in Lebanon. That is not to say that Hezbollah/Lebanon is right, or that Israel is right, I am simply saying that Israeli actions, right or wrong, in Lebanon, are the reason Hezbollah attacks Israeli civilians.

I presumed from your post you didn’t know of the deception that the koran encourages muslims to do to us infidels.

And I asked what specific sect and teaching you are referring to. You seem to view Islam as some monolithic entity.

Sorry, but maybe a few individuals here and there didn’t do things against the innocents, and religious peoples - but the aggression towards them is still happening. Even in the UK a couple of priests were killed by muslims. An old nun was killed over some cartoons a couple of years ago. buddhists monks, and Hindus are killed regularly. Sorry, but this is a fact and jihadwatch.org can be searched for the acts against innocents and the religious. I suppose there are other websites that report on them, but I usually use jihadwatch.org.

A Muslim attacks a Christian Church in Indonesia, this would be counted as Muslim Jihad by your standards I believe. What is missing from this picture is the complex sociological context in which the event took place. The fact that most Chinese in Indonesia are ethnic Chinese, and that this is primarily a ethnic conflict, is overlooked. This is the problem of your methodology, it allows no nuance. You cite problems in Britain with Muslims. Is this Muslim population representative of the global Muslim population? No, in fact most British Muslims hail from a distinct tribal sect of Pakistan.

This black/white, Huntingttionian either/or scinario does not allow a genuinely sophisticated and comprehensive analysis of the events.

I don’t know what your point of telling me Al Furqan’s quote is. It is only proving my point of what muslims do when confronted with the facts.

The “Greater” Jihad is a spiritual struggle, not physical.

As for the 19 who did mass murder - I also do not know what your point of that is either. time and again we see the rich, well off students, doctors, women - some willing to blow up their own babies, etc willing to kill themselves if they succeed in killing infidels. Saudi Arabia’s largest export besides oil are jihadists. With a country full of young people who mostly get degrees in some sort of islamic studies - there is not too much work for them to do so they go train to become jihadists. And we also see some of our own who go train to become jihadists. And they are not poor and they certainly do follow the rites of their chosen religion.

I said the studies all universally report that terrorists tend to come from a middle to upper middle class household, if I said “poor Muslim” it was in the sense that a Catholic who doesn’t keep Lent is a “poor Catholic”, it refers to spiritual, not material resources.

Your claims about religiosity of terrorists are simply false, individuals who enact honor killings tend to not be religiously observant, and “radical” Muslim show no propensity towards greater or more fervent religiosity than “moderate” Muslims.

You can rebut these with intuitive suppositions all you wish, however they are backed up by facts and scientific study after scientific study. As I said, if you want the article titles I’d be happy to give them to you. Comprehensive, peer reviewed scientific studies.

Reading the koran and hadiths can be boring, I know, but to understand it a bit would also explain the actions of jihadists - whether they fit into your paper’s thesis or not.

My paper contains no original work, it simply draws on years of intensive studies. I don’t find the Koran boring at all, it reminds me of Shakespear, the Hadiths are superficially dully, but interesting for their historical value.

By the way, I had no thesis to begin with, I found all relevant studies, and then drew a conclusion, one based on hard evidence
My positions is based on my reading major Islamic Scholars/Sources and peer reviewed sociological studies. From 12th century Persian texts to Seyyed Hossein Nasr.

 

[Postmodern]

I disagree with this. We could have lived until we died with muslims doing whatever they do. then the continual attacks, the continual demands, the continual bold untruths of the facts of not only their past history but their current history, then more attacks, more demands, more people slaughtered worldwide by muslims and the only thing we see muslims do - get worried over their image and they do nothing over those who they are telling us are ‘misunderstanding’ islam.

And then some of us dig into what islam teaches and - viola! - what is the problem… it is the koran and hadiths themselves. it is their prophet who did and said a lot of heinous things.

And then we get apologists/appeasers, which seems to me is what you are if your profile is correct, that doesn’t help matters and only try to confuse the issues. Sorry, but the koran says what it says and whatever you posted about mohammed - you just left off the nasty parts.

The facts do not bear out the continual assertions from muslims how peaceful everything is. In fact, a common thing for muslims to do is ‘turnspeak’, and also it is sanctioned in the koran to deceive the infidels. Since the facts are 180 degrees different from what muslims are trying to say - the words are just words in attempts to fix an image so broken that I don’t know how anyone can believe them if they are paying just a tiny bit of attention to what is happening worldwide.

An actual look at the source does not seem to bear out your conclusions. Shiah have a slightly more permissive notion, yet nothing to suggust a global Muslim plot

Sahih MuslimBook 032, Number 6303:

Humaid b. 'Abd al-Rahman b. 'Auf reported that his mother Umm Kulthum daughter of 'Uqba b. Abu Mu’ait, and she was one amongst the first emigrants who pledged allegiance to Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him), as saying that she heard Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: A liar is not one who tries to bring reconciliation amongst people and speaks good (in order to avert dispute), or he conveys good. Ibn Shihab said he did not hear that exemption was granted in anything what the people speak as lie but in three cases: in battle, for bringing reconciliation amongst persons and the narration of the words of the husband to his wife, and the narration of the words of a wife to her husband (in a twisted form in order to bring reconciliation between them).

 

[Verisimilitude]

Below is the complete translation of the last sermon of prophet Muhammad (PBUH) that he delivered while talking to Muslims.

The fact that he speaks to Muslims only is significant. No mention is made or inferred to the non-Muslims. The fairness and equity he does speak of does not include them for a reason. The compassion and good will he speaks of is limited to Muslims. The Quran and hadith tell the Muslim how to deal with those who are not believers and the directions include but are not limited to to fight, kill, humilate and dominate. It does not say in any substansive way to live peacefully with non-believers but to always strive for the Cause of Allah.

I have asked others to tell me what Allahs Cause is by use of the Quran and hadith to prove the Muslim intent is peacefull by nature without success. Can you?

 

[Postmodern]

The fact that he speaks to Muslims only is significant. No mention is made or inferred to the non-Muslims. The fairness and equity he does speak of does not include them for a reason. The compassion and good will he speaks of is limited to Muslims. The Quran and hadith tell the Muslim how to deal with those who are not believers and the directions include but are not limited to to fight, kill, humilate and dominate. It does not say in any substansive way to live peacefully with non-believers but to always strive for the Cause of Allah.

I have asked others to tell me what Allahs Cause is by use of the Quran and hadith to prove the Muslim intent is peacefull by nature without success. Can you?

Even Bernard Lewis will attest to the fact that Jews faired much better under Islamic rule than they did under Chrstendom, and Muslim Scriptures do not have Jews spreaming to have the guilt of shedding Christ’s blood placed upon them and their children.

Muslims have lived with minorities in the past, they do now, and will in the future.

EDIT: I would assume Muhammad’s final sermon was only adresses to Muslims because he was speaking in a Mosque, kind of like my Priest only adresses Catholics when he’s preaching in a Roman Catholic Church.

 

[Angelos]

Its amusing to see that you missed the highlighted portion of verse 5 and 6 . I guess, I am beginning to like you due to your one-dimensional way of thinking …

Cheers,

I am sure you have not read my response to that post or read it by ignoring the parts I myself highlighted to rebut your traditional claims.

 

[Angelos]

Even Bernard Lewis will attest to the fact that Jews faired much better under Islamic rule than they did under Chrstendom, and Muslim Scriptures do not have Jews spreaming to have the guilt of shedding Christ’s blood placed upon them and their children.

Who is Bernard Lewis so that we can applaud him or praise his assertions? When did Lewis become a religious authority that can declare dogmas for the Christian Church??? Who made him the pope of secular history???

Bernard Lewis only assumed that Muslims were treated better by Muslims because he either did not read the Islamic scripture or deliberately ignored the truth as a result of his hatred and prejudice towards Christianity. What’s the point of bringing up the mistaken presumptions of an atheistic writer, who knew neither Christianity nor Islam? I must remind you that being of Western origin does not make a man an expert on Christianity.

Muslims have lived with minorities in the past, they do now, and will in the future.

Of course they can!

However, they attack and try to conquer the whole world to make themselves the only religious MAJORITY. Muslims abhor the idea of being a minority in non-Muslim countries, which is the major problem threatening the future of Christians.

EDIT: I would assume Muhammad’s final sermon was only adresses to Muslims because he was speaking in a Mosque, kind of like my Priest only adresses Catholics when he’s preaching in a Roman Catholic Church.

What does this prove? He addressed Muslims and today’s every Muslim regards that sermon as guidance.