In Defense of Islam

[Maria65]

You are totally mistaken, I can speak Arabic and I can tell you that Kafir means apostate (one who forsakes his religion), not zealous militant apostates. And no Sam Has not translated it to mean unbeliever. He is quoting verses from acclaimed English translations (who try to minimize the harsh violent saying blatantly apparent in Arabic). Unless you can specifically overturn any acclaimed translator’s given use of the word unbeliever(with specific evidence from the Arabic), then it stands that ‘Unbeliever’ is not a mistranslation! It is you who are mistaken.

Also, please do not compare Jesus to Muhammad. Jesus stands in shining contrast to Muhammad, even by the Quran’s standards;

Jesus was Sinless
Muhammad was sinful
Jesus performed miracles
Muhammad could not perform miracles(Quran 29:49)
Muhammad owned slaves
Jesus did not own slaves
muhammad had many cocubines and wives
Jesus did not have ANY cocubines or wives

Jesus taught “forgive those who trespass against you.” (Matthew 6:10-15)

• Muhammad taught to avenge trespasses against your honor, family or religion.

“Narrated Anas bin Malik: ‘On the day of the Conquest, the Prophet entered Mecca, wearing a helmet on his head. When he took it off, a man came and said, “Ibn Khatal is clinging to the curtain of the Ka’ba.” The Prophet said, “Kill him.”’” (Hadith Sahih al-Bukhari Vol. 5, Book 59, No. 582)

youtube.com/user/Infideltaskforce#p/u/5/kSqEs58DBkQ
youtube.com/watch?v=Gm9UEjMiRnE

catholicapologetics.info/apologetics/islam/muhammad.htm

Here’s another:
Jesus is God.
Mohammed is not.

 

[Maria65]

Hi there! I’ve spent the last few days researching Islam, and I must say, your fears are quite unfounded. While Islam certainly does have its problems, it’s nowhere near as bad as many of you think. To show you this, I’ve made this thread. To Muslims: please correct me if I say something wrong, I will edit my post.
…

Not as bad as we thought, eh? Quite unfounded, eh? I beg to differ…

thereligionofpeace.com/

Or this:

jihadwatch.org/

Robert Spencer, the founder of the above web site, has been studying Islam since 1980.

Hey, even I have researched Islam for more than “a few days.”

 

[jakasaki]

Hi there! I’ve spent the last few days researching Islam, and I must say, your fears are quite unfounded. While Islam certainly does have its problems, it’s nowhere near as bad as many of you think. To show you this, I’ve made this thread. To Muslims: please correct me if I say something wrong, I will edit my post.

Objection 1: Islam condones terrorism!
Not true. The Qu’ran does not encourage terrorism. Most Muslims have the same reaction to terrorism that you do - one of disgust. Those who believe terrorism is right are a vast minority. To say these few are representative of all Islam is like saying the KKK or WBC is representative of all Christianity, which is obviously not the case.

Objection 2: Muhammad married a child!
True. However, at that time child marriage was common. It did not have the negative connotations that it has now. To disregarding Muhammad because of this would be like disregarding the founding fathers of the United States because they owned slaves.

Objection 3: Muslims worship Satan!
Not true. Muslims worship the same God as the Jews or Baha’i. So if Muslims are Satanists, so are Jews. I do not say that Muslims worship the same God as Christians, since arguably that is not true - they believe Jesus was a profit, not God himself.

Objection 4: Muslims worship the moon! “Allah” is not God!
Not true. This myth comes from the fact that “Allah” referred to the moon-god in pre-Islamic Middle Eastern polytheism. Certain people called hanifs worshiped this moon-god exclusively, and Muhammad was one of them. Over time, Muhammad came to believe that Allah was not only the greatest god, but the only god, as Allah’s name would imply.* He also came to believe that Allah was the same god as (imperfectly) revealed in the Bible, and wrote the Qur’an, founding Islam.

• “Allah” is Arabic. “Al” means “the” and “Lah” means “God” or “deity”. Thus, “Allah” means “The God”.

Objection 5: Islam is misogynistic and subjugates women! It allows polygamy!
The first claim is false. While modern Islam certainly does have a bad track record, that has more to do with the culture than the religion. Southern Africa and much of Asia, which are predominantly Christian or Buddhist and Hindu, respectively, are just as bad as Northern Africa and the Middle East, which are predominantly Muslim. Historically, it can clearly be seen that Islam is not misogynistic. When Islam came about, it helped the situation of women immensely. Female infants were no longer buried alive, women got inheritance (albeit not equally), and marriage meant something. See: Constitution of Medina, by Muhammad.

The second claim is true.

Objection 6: Muslims have a history of oppressing other religions!
Not true. Islam has a comparatively good history in this regard, actually! For instance, the previously mentioned Constitution of Medina ensured the rights of non-Muslims, and non-Muslims have historically been treated better under Islamic rule than the reverse, excepting early India.

---

More to come…

Bump ~ please, I ask again… cite your source for this post.

Thanks!

 

[sundog]

Hi there! I’ve spent the last few days researching Islam, and I must say, your fears are quite unfounded. While Islam certainly does have its problems, it’s nowhere near as bad as many of you think. To show you this, I’ve made this thread. To Muslims: please correct me if I say something wrong, I will edit my post.

Objection 1: Islam condones terrorism!
Not true. The Qu’ran does not encourage terrorism. Most Muslims have the same reaction to terrorism that you do - one of disgust. Those who believe terrorism is right are a vast minority. To say these few are representative of all Islam is like saying the KKK or WBC is representative of all Christianity, which is obviously not the case.

Objection 2: Muhammad married a child!
True. However, at that time child marriage was common. It did not have the negative connotations that it has now. To disregarding Muhammad because of this would be like disregarding the founding fathers of the United States because they owned slaves.

Objection 3: Muslims worship Satan!
Not true. Muslims worship the same God as the Jews or Baha’i. So if Muslims are Satanists, so are Jews. I do not say that Muslims worship the same God as Christians, since arguably that is not true - they believe Jesus was a profit, not God himself.

Objection 4: Muslims worship the moon! “Allah” is not God!
Not true. This myth comes from the fact that “Allah” referred to the moon-god in pre-Islamic Middle Eastern polytheism. Certain people called hanifs worshiped this moon-god exclusively, and Muhammad was one of them. Over time, Muhammad came to believe that Allah was not only the greatest god, but the only god, as Allah’s name would imply.* He also came to believe that Allah was the same god as (imperfectly) revealed in the Bible, and wrote the Qur’an, founding Islam.

• “Allah” is Arabic. “Al” means “the” and “Lah” means “God” or “deity”. Thus, “Allah” means “The God”.

Objection 5: Islam is misogynistic and subjugates women! It allows polygamy!
The first claim is false. While modern Islam certainly does have a bad track record, that has more to do with the culture than the religion. Southern Africa and much of Asia, which are predominantly Christian or Buddhist and Hindu, respectively, are just as bad as Northern Africa and the Middle East, which are predominantly Muslim. Historically, it can clearly be seen that Islam is not misogynistic. When Islam came about, it helped the situation of women immensely. Female infants were no longer buried alive, women got inheritance (albeit not equally), and marriage meant something. See: Constitution of Medina, by Muhammad.

The second claim is true.

Objection 6: Muslims have a history of oppressing other religions!
Not true. Islam has a comparatively good history in this regard, actually! For instance, the previously mentioned Constitution of Medina ensured the rights of non-Muslims, and non-Muslims have historically been treated better under Islamic rule than the reverse, excepting early India.

---

More to come…

May I ask howmany Christian Churches there are in Saudi Arabia. I’m not sure…but I think the answer is none. Now…may I ask howmany mosques exists in countries where Islam is an extremely small minority?

 

[jakasaki]

**May I ask howmany Christian Churches there are in Saudi Arabia. **

I’m not sure…but I think the answer is none. Now…may I ask howmany mosques exists in countries where Islam is an extremely small minority?

I can answer the above in bold…

Zero
None
Zilch

 

[elwill]

May I ask howmany Christian Churches there are in Saudi Arabia. I’m not sure…but I think the answer is none. Now…may I ask howmany mosques exists in countries where Islam is an extremely small minority?

there are non churches in saudia because it have none christian citizens,

can i ask about mosques in a place where no muslims lives there

 

[jakasaki]

**
there are non churches in saudia because it have none christian citizens, **

can i ask about mosques in a place where no muslims lives there

You’ve got to be kidding right? No Christian’s in Saudi?

According to Wiki there are 1 million Catholics in Saudi.

And we know there is **one **member on here from Saudi who is Christian… remember Sam777?

If there are no Christians in Saudi as you state, why is the Vatican pushing for Churches to be built there?

Saudi Arabia:
Population: 26.7m
Foreign workers: >7m
Christians: 1.3m

news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4499668.stm

While all Saudi citizens must be Muslims, there are estimated to be more than 1 million Roman Catholics in Saudi Arabia.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_in_Saudi_Arabia

Demographics
The percentage of Saudi citizens who are Christians is officially zero, as Saudi Arabia forbids religious conversion from Islam and punishes it by death.

 

[elwill]

so , your problem is about constitution not about islam

That however does not mean there are no Christians within Saudia Arabia as there are converts, many foreign workers and some Christians who are older than the recent constituional changes I refer to above.

yes i know that christians exist theire are not more than guests and visitors , they are obligated to respect the laws of the country .
the question is , doese the governments obligated to build anything for visitors in the land not belong to them ?

. Also if you demand respect for your faith Elwill then it is only right to grant it to others. Theocracies are ugly states generally speaking.

i don’t think that suidia force christians visitors to work in or visit suidia after all , i think that suidia is one which need for it’s laws to be respected from it’s visitors , if they don’t like it , then leave it

 

[dzheremi]

yes i know that christians exist theire are not more than guests and visitors , they are obligated to respect the laws of the country .
the question is , doese the governments obligated to build anything for visitors in the land not belong to them ?

We could ask Muslims the same thing, but it doesn’t stop them from building mosques all over the place.

i don’t think that suidia force christians visitors to work in or visit suidia after all , i think that suidia is one which need for it’s laws to be respected from it’s visitors , if they don’t like it , then leave it

Or they could, you know, give their workers basic human rights. When the issue of Turkish immigrant workers in Western Europe comes up, I hear a lot about how terrible their condition supposedly is and how the government has done a lot in recent years to secure their rights (amending citizenship and naturalization laws to make them easier, for one thing), including their right to worship openly at mosques that are used mostly by them and people descendant from them (e.g., Turkish Germans). Why can’t Christians in Saudi have the same? Because Islamic government is inherently bigoted, that’s why!

 

[elwill]

no thank you , i know that sudia constitution written to be based on islamic tradition

the next question is

is built churches for visitors or un-civilians people are involved in tradition of islam ?

is such rights for tourists exist in your country ?

is your country responsible to built for me whatever i want in your land with the fact that i’m guest in your country not more than visitor ?

come one . do you think that you have the rights to do whatever you want in the land not yours ?

 

[dzheremi]

I don’t think you are understanding Jharek’s and others’ objections, Elwill. The constitution of Saudi Arabia, firmly based on Islamic tradition (as you have agreed), actually forbids citizenship for non-Muslims, so Christian or other non-Muslim “guests” have no option to become more than “visitors”, as you call it. It would be as though Britain or the USA or France decided that Muslims could not have citizenship and then denied them their right to have mosques in those countries because, after all, any Muslim is nothing more than a “guest”. Would that be fair to you?

I rather agree with the Qatari position as expressed here:

Incidentally, Qatar’s deputy prime minister, Abdullah bin Hamad al-Attiyah, directly addressing the topic of reciprocity: “We [Muslims] are enjoying the construction of mosques and Islamic centres in the west, so we must be fair [to Christians].”

It is a matter of simple human decency, and Saudi Arabia doesn’t have it at all.

(Aside: I have asked Saudis I know what they think, and the most common objection is “Will you let Muslims pray at the Vatican?” When I point out that this has already happened, they fall strangely silent. Hmm. At least one that I know said “sure, why not?” to a church, though! I think there is hope in the younger generation, if they can stay away from extremism, which unfortunately not all do.)

 

[elwill]

We could ask Muslims the same thing, but it doesn’t stop them from building mosques all over the place.

is your country have zero muslims civilians ?

Or they could, you know, give their workers basic human rights.

and what is the basic human rights for tourists ?

. Why can’t Christians in Saudi have the same? Because Islamic government is inherently bigoted, that’s why!

you can suppose what you wnat , but i have to ask you if you think that sudia is the only islamic country in the world ?

 

[dzheremi]

It’s the only one that pulls this kind of ****, that’s for sure. Everywhere else has at least one church. Also, answer the point I made in my other post: How can you deny them their rights because they are “guests” when they don’t have the option to be anything else?!

EDIT: Guest workers are CERTAINLY NOT “tourists”! You sure have a glib interpretation of all this, Elwill. I think you would think differently were the shoe on the other foot.

 

[elwill]

I don’t think you are understanding Jharek’s and others’ objections, Elwill. The constitution of Saudi Arabia, firmly based on Islamic tradition (as you have agreed), actually forbids citizenship for non-Muslims, so Christian or other non-Muslim “guests” have no option to become more than “visitors”, as you call it. It would be as though Britain or the USA or France decided that Muslims could not have citizenship and then denied them their right to have mosques in those countries because, after all, any Muslim is nothing more than a “guest”. Would that be fair to you?

I rather agree with the Qatari position as expressed here:

actually , you are the one who don’t understand
let me tell you something : through 1400 years of islamic history and during the life of mohammed (pbuh) himself , the citizenship for other faiths were exist
so don’t say again that tradition of islam denying that

my point is that , this is the laws of suidia alone , that’s why you can’t refer to any other countries .

It is a matter of simple human decency, and Saudi Arabia doesn’t have it at all.

may he talking about christian citizins in qatar , well i agree with him
but it differ than the situation in sauidia , as for it has non citizen christians to asking citizen rights for them

(Aside: I have asked Saudis I know what they think, and the most common objection is “Will you let Muslims pray at the Vatican?” When I point out that this has already happened, they fall strangely silent. Hmm. At least one that I know said “sure, why not?” to a church, though! I think there is hope in the younger generation, if they can stay away from extremism, which unfortunately not all do.)

vatican have great muslims population and they are citizens , i know that mosques are built for them . can you see what i’m talking about ! they are citizens

anyway , while muslims have mosques in vatican , christians either have churches in many muslim’s countries , not a big dial

 

[jakasaki]

Despicable!!!

 

[qwerk]

Is this too soon to bring up the part where Saudi Arabia still openly supports slavery? Or is it hidden. I expect a Saudi won’t admit to it to us non-Muslims, but we even caught some of them here in the States thinking that they could just bring their slaves with them and carry on as if they were in Saudi Arabia.

 

[elwill]

It’s the only one that pulls this kind of ****, that’s for sure. Everywhere else has at least one church. Also, answer the point I made in my other post: How can you deny them their rights because they are “guests” when they don’t have the option to be anything else?!

EDIT: Guest workers are CERTAINLY NOT “tourists”! You sure have a glib interpretation of all this, Elwill. I think you would think differently were the shoe on the other foot.

let me say it briefly
when you come to work at my land , you should to work within my rules
may be my rules will not please you , but it will please others

even in smallest ranges , you can find that every place have it’s own rules , every hotel ,resturant , shop . factory and hospitals …etc . wherever you exist you need to follow the rules even if you don’t like it , why ? becuase you havn’t full freedom in other’s places . your freedom always limited by the rules of the owner . and it’s illegal to break them

 

[elwill]

Is this too soon to bring up the part where Saudi Arabia still openly supports slavery? Or is it hidden. I expect a Saudi won’t admit to it to us non-Muslims, but we even caught some of them here in the States thinking that they could just bring their slaves with them and carry on as if they were in Saudi Arabia.

once you get the proofs of what you says , then may be we will discuss it
as long as it’s hidden , and you are the one who knows the hidden things , then try more efforts to proof it and make it visible
good luck

 

[John7]

is it okay in Islam to beat my wife?

 

[qwerk]

once you get the proofs of what you says , then may be we will discuss it
as long as it’s hidden , and you are the one who knows the hidden things , then try more efforts to proof it and make it visible
good luck

There is a couple of Saudis in different areas of California that now sit in prisons because of their slaves they brought with them. There is a couple in Colorado that sit in prison because they brought their slave with them.

Human Trafficking in Saudi Arabia 2000-2009

Horrid conditions, horrid laws in Saudi Arabia for women and slaves and Shia and many others who are not Muslim.

At the U.N. Third Millennium Summit in New York City, Crown Prince Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz defended Saudi Arabia’s position on human rights, saying “It is absurd to impose on an individual or a society rights that are alien to its beliefs or principles.”

Indonesian sex slavery in Saudi Arabia

Filipina Slave

A quote from an article about modern day slavery in Saudi Arabia: "In 1998 when I was planning my pilgrimage to West Africa, I was warned against visiting Mauritania. It was explained to me that slavery against the “Black” African population was still practised there by the “White” Arabs and I could therefore put my self at risk. The fear was not so much my abduction and enslavement, but certainly blatant discrimination in a hostile environment where I would have no protection by (or from) the law. Needless to say, I avoided Mauritania. "

A quote from 'The Scourge of Slavery ': “Almost 200 years after the British outlawed the slave trade in 1807, slave raids and the sale of slaves in Muslim markets continues in countries like Sudan. The slave trade remained legal in Saudi Arabia until 1962, when under international pressure it was finally abolished. However, there are persistent, credible reports, that slavery persists in Saudi Arabia, and even that slaves from Sudan are ending up in Saudi Arabia.”

And if you reread the remark by King Aziz above, it is very apparent that he doesn’t care if slavery exists or not.

Do you want more?