Islam is a peaceful religion

  • Thread starter Thread starter paarsurrey
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

paarsurrey

Guest
Hi

PromisedMessiahImamMahdi 1835-1908 was endowed with a Prophetic Eye by GodAllahYHWH. He wrote a book titled “Jesus in India” in which he noted violence that would spread in the whole world; worried as he was he wrote about its sources and how to rout it out from the hearts.

I would give excerpts from the preface of his above referred book, where he had discussed it.

"I have written this book, so that, by adducing proofs from established facts, from conclusive historical evidence of proved value and from ancient documents of non-Muslims, I might remove the serious misconceptions which are current among Muslims and among most Christian sects regarding the earlier and the later life of Jesus (on whom be peace) - misconceptions, the dangerous implications of which have not only injured and destroyed the conception of Divine Unity, but the unwholesome and poisonous influence of which has for long been noticed in the morals of the Muslims of this country.

Spiritual maladies, i.e., want of good morals, evil thoughts, callousness, want of sympathy, are spreading among most Islamic sects, being the result of beliefs in unfounded stories and anecdotes of this kind. Human sympathy, pity and love of justice, humility and humble-mindedness - all good qualities - are disappearing day by day, as if they will soon bid a last farewell to this community. This callousness and this immorality make many a Muslim appear no better than the beasts of the jungle. A Jain or a Buddhist is afraid of and avoids killing even a mosquito or a flea, but, alas! there are many among us Muslims who, while they kill an innocent man or commit wanton murder, are not afraid of the powerful God, who rates human life higher than that of all the animals.

What is this callousness and cruelty and want of sympathy due to? It is due to this - that from their very childhood, stories and anecdotes and wrong views of the doctrine of Jihad are dinned into their ears and inculcated into their hearts, the result being that gradually they become morally dead and cease to feel the heinousness of their hateful actions; nay, rather, the man who murders another man unawares and thus brings ruin to the murdered man’s family thinks that he has done a meritorious deed; or rather, that he has made the most of an opportunity to win favour with his community.

As no lectures or sermons are delivered in our country to stop such evils - and if there are any such lectures they have an element of hypocrisy in them - the common people think approvingly of such misdeeds. Accordingly, taking pity upon my own people, I have compiled several books in Urdu, Persian and Arabic, in which I have stated that the popular view of Jihad prevalent among Muslims, that is, the expectation of a bloody Imam, full of spite and hostility for other people, is a texture of false beliefs inculcated by shortsighted Ulema; otherwise, Islam does not allow the use of the sword for the Faith; except in the case of defensive wars, or in the case of wars waged to punish a tyrant or to uphold freedom.

The need of a defensive war arises when the aggression of an adversary threatens one’s own life. These are the three kinds of Jihad permitted by the Shariat, and, apart from these three kinds, there is no other kind of war which is permitted by Islam for the propagation of the Faith. I have, in short, spent a large sum of money on such books, and have published them in this country and in Arabia and Syria and Khurasan, etc. But, by the grace of God, I have now discovered powerful arguments which are meant to eradicate these unfounded beliefs from the hearts of the people.

I have clear proofs, circumstantial evidence of a conclusive character, and historical evidence the light of whose truth holds out the promise that soon after their publication there will be brought about against such beliefs a wonderful change in the hearts of the Muslims. And I hope - I am sure - that after these truths have been comprehended, there will flow out of the hearts of the righteous sons of Islam the sweet and beautiful springs of lowliness, humility and mercy, and that there will come about a spiritual change which will have a wholesome and a blessed influence on the country.

I am also sure that Christian investigators and all other people who hanker after the truth and thirst for it, will benefit from my books. And the fact just now stated by me, that the real object of this book is to correct the wrong beliefs which have become part and parcel of the creeds of Muslims and Christians, requires a little explanation which I set out below."

Unquote

Thanks
 
kellie said:
Your point?
So if it is peaceful, it is still not the Truth
Click to expand...
Hi

In fact, as I understand, there should have not been any difference between Judaism or Religion of Moses, and Religion of Jesus and Religion of Muhammad as all these are from the same line. There were Prophecies in the OTBible of coming of Jesus as a last Caliph of Moses; he came but the Jews did not accept him.

Jesus came but only few among the Jews in Jerusalem accepted him, and later only his tale remained but his religion was changed by Paul but he used Jesus name for propagating his creed. If Jews of Jerusalem would have accepted Jesus, there was no need of any new religion, as Moses and Jesus had the same religion from GodAllahYHWH. Muhammad also came as per the prophecies of Moses and Jesus, so in a way it is not a different religion, it is in the same line of truth and in a complete form.

The Prophecies of Moses and Jesus about Muhammad, which appeal to me, have been discussed in “INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF THE HOLY QURAN” by MIRZA MAHMUD AHMAD, son of the PromisedMessiah 1835-1908. I mention the first here.

THE PROPHECY IN DEUTERONOMY

When Moses went to Mount Horeb under the command of
God, he addressed the Israelites saying :
The Lord thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the
midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me ; unto him ye shall
hearken (Deuteronomy 18 : 15).
God spoke to Moses saying :
I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like
unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth ; and he shall
speak unto them all that I shall command him. And it shall
come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words
which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.
But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my
name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall
speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die
(Deuteronomy 18 : 18-20).

From these passages it is evident that Moses prophesied about
a Law-giving Prophet who was to appear after him, and who
was to be from among the brethren of Israel.
'That he was to be a Law-giver, and not an ordinary Prophet
is obvious from the words “like unto Moses”. As Moses was
a Law-giver, the Prophet, who was to be like Moses, was also
to be a Law-giver.

The Promised Prophet is described as one
who “shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.”
From this also it appears that the Promised Prophet was to be
a Law-giving Prophet. The promulgation of a new Law means
the initiation of a new movement, a new nation. A Prophet
who promulgates a new Law, therefore, is no ordinary Teacher
or Reformer.

He has to present a comprehensive teaching,
incorporating fundamental principles as well as detailed rules.
Without it a new nation cannot be raised. But a Prophet who
does not bring a new Law has only to explain and to annotate
an already existing Law. It is not necessary for him to present
all that he receives from God to his people. It is possible that
some of his revelations may be meant only for his personal
edification, which he is under no obligation to pass on to his
people. The prophecy also lays down that the Promised
Prophet will “speak in my name”, and those who will not listen
to him, God will “require it” of them ; that is, those who turn
a deaf ear will incur punishment.

We are also told that any
one who pretends to fulfil the prophecy will be put to death.
If. we keep in view all the terms of the prophecy, we are
bound to conclude that until at least the time of Jesus no
Prophet had appeared in the world who could be said to have
answered to the description of the Promised Prophet.

All the Prophets who appeared between Moses and Jesus, therefore, may be ignored, when we set out in search of the Prophet who could be said to have fulfilled this prophecy. They have left no following and no people who could espouse their claims.

Only Jesus remains who has a large following, and who is
regarded by his followers as the last Teacher sent by God into
this world. But when we apply, one by one, the terms of the
prophecy to Jesus, we find that not one of them applies to him :

First, the Promised Prophet was to be a Law-giving Prophet.
Was Jesus a Law-giver ? Did he bring a new Law into the
world to replace an old one ? Jesus said clearly :
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets :
I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 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 (Matthew 5 :
17-18).

Unquote
Thanks
 
When a Muslim declares that Islam is a religion of peace, he/she is either ignorant of the Koran (Qur’an), or is deceitfully thinking of this “peace”, as it extends only to those within the Muslim Community. The deceit is that they will not tell you exactly what they mean. According to the Qur’an: “Muhammad is the Apostle of Allah. Those who follow him are merciful to one another, but ruthless to unbelievers” Sura 48:29. “Kill the Mushrikun (unbelievers) wherever you find them, and capture them and besiege them, and lie in wait for them in each and every ambush…” Sura 9:5. Also see Sura 9:29 Please note that there is not a single verse in the entire Christian Bible that contains this “open-ended”, universal command to kill/or be ruthless to unbelievers.

Sura 47:4 says:

Fa’idhā Laqītumu Al-Ladhīna Kafarū Fađarba Ar-Riqābi Ĥattaá 'Idhā 'Athkhantumūhum Fashuddū Al-Wathāqa Fa’immā Mannāan Badu Wa 'Immā Fidā'an Ĥattaá Tađaa Al-Ĥarbu 'Awzārahā Dhālika Wa Law Yashā’u Allāhu Lāntaşara Minhum Wa Lakin Liyabluwa Bađakum Bibađin Wa Al-Ladhīna Qutilū Fī Sabīli Allāhi Falan Yuđilla 'A`mālahum

which means

Therefore, WHEN YOU MEET THE UNBELIEVERS, SMITE AT THEIR NECKS; At length, when ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly (on them): thereafter (is the time for) either generosity or ransom: Until the war lays down its burdens. Thus (are ye commanded): but if it had been Allah’s Will, He could certainly have exacted retribution from them (Himself); but (He lets you fight) in order to test you, some with others. But those who are slain in the Way of Allah,- He will never let their deeds be lost.
 
Abraxsis said:
When a Muslim declares that Islam is a religion of peace, he/she is either ignorant of the Koran (Qur’an), or is deceitfully thinking of this “peace”, as it extends only to those within the Muslim Community.
Click to expand...
Hi

No, that is not correct, only a misconception.

Kindly quote from Quran, where it specifically mentions for Catholics to kill them. Muhammad relations with the Catholics/Orthodoxies were good.

Thanks
 
read above I wrote it in the Arabic form as it is used in the Koran and I gave the translation below.

SURA 47:4
 
Abraxsis said:
read above I wrote it in the Arabic form as it is used in the Koran and I gave the translation below.

SURA 47:4
Click to expand...
Hi

You are mistaken my friend. The address is to the Mecaan infidels of the time of Muhammad. Please read the context.
It is not specifically addressed to Catholics to kill them. Muhammad’s relations with the Catholics/Orthodoxies were good.

Thanks
 
I didnt accuse real Islam of being violent towards Christians, I just said it was violent in general. From what I have read of the Koran, these guys who say the Koran says it is ok to kill Christians are idiots who dont even know their own religion, but claim they have the true way. It honestly does not say that, but it does allow the killing of Pagans and polytheists, which still isnt right.
 
paarsurrey said:
Hi

In fact, as I understand, there should have not been any difference between Judaism or Religion of Moses, and Religion of Jesus and Religion of Muhammad as all these are from the same line. There were Prophecies in the OTBible of coming of Jesus as a last Caliph of Moses; he came but the Jews did not accept him.

Jesus came but only few among the Jews in Jerusalem accepted him, and later only his tale remained but his religion was changed by Paul but he used Jesus name for propagating his creed. If Jews of Jerusalem would have accepted Jesus, there was no need of any new religion, as Moses and Jesus had the same religion from GodAllahYHWH. Muhammad also came as per the prophecies of Moses and Jesus, so in a way it is not a different religion, it is in the same line of truth and in a complete form.
Click to expand...
paarsurrey, I don’t know if I will word this correctly for you to understand, but I will give it my best shot.

Judaism was based on waiting for the Messiah. ( I am talking in simple terms)

Once the Messiah did arrive, would that not mean that the religion had served it’s purpose, and a new one based on the Messiah’s teachings would be made.

How could Judaism receive it’s Messiah, AND still keep itself the same, that is, basing all of it’s teachings on waiting for the Messiah?

I hope some of my friends on this forum can help me explain this better.

You say, paarsurrey, that Moses and Jesus had the same religion, but this is where your understanding of Jesus is, becomes flawed.
Jesus not only had the same religion of Moses, but HE WAS the religion, as He WAS and IS God.
Jesus IS the religion.
 
Abraxsis said:
I didnt accuse real Islam of being violent towards Christians, I just said it was violent in general. From what I have read of the Koran, these guys who say the Koran says it is ok to kill Christians are idiots who dont even know their own religion, but claim they have the true way. It honestly does not say that, but it does allow the killing of Pagans and polytheists, which still isnt right.
Click to expand...
Hi

Kindly make a little research, then you would realize that Quran does not allow in general of killing of anybody, be he a pagan.

The only difference is that the Catholics had to author ‘Just War Doctrine’ to punish the brutal agressors and transgressors for preservation of life, which is not a part of the NTBible but is used when the need be.

Quran has included all such possibilities in the text, that should be understood.

Thanks
 
If the Koran had all such violent possibilities accounted for then you wouldnt have morons running around saying the Koran says its ok to kill Christians. Thats Islam’s problem, there is no central authority that tell these people they are wrong. I see the passages in the Koran terrorists use to justify their actions and you can interpret them to mean violence. I am sorry you can do that but its the truth, you can have them mean violence, but you have to stretch it. If there was some kind of Islamic pope we wouldnt have these problems we have today. The ‘Just War Doctrine’ is one of those things that prevents people from running around and trying Crusade whenever they feel like certain conditions have been met. It is a strength not a weakness, and it is a strength that Islam needs very badly.
 
Abraxsis said:
If the Koran had all such violent possibilities accounted for then you wouldnt have morons running around saying the Koran says its ok to kill Christians. Thats Islam’s problem, there is no central authority that tell these people they are wrong. I see the passages in the Koran terrorists use to justify their actions and you can interpret them to mean violence. I am sorry you can do that but its the truth, you can have them mean violence, but you have to stretch it. If there was some kind of Islamic pope we wouldnt have these problems we have today. The ‘Just War Doctrine’ is one of those things that prevents people from running around and trying Crusade whenever they feel like certain conditions have been met. It is a strength not a weakness, and it is a strength that Islam needs very badly.
Click to expand...
Hi

I agree with you, that it is not everybody’s discretion to announce a crusade.

The Central Authority as mentioned by you has since been established in the form of the PromisedMessiah 1835-1908, but those who have not joined him are doing such bad acts, and are being handled accordingly.

Thanks
 
Abraxsis said:
You sound like a Bahai not a muslim…no offense…
Click to expand...
Paarsurrey is part of the Ahmadi faith of Islam, its not mainstream like shiite etc.
The believe in different things to what mainstream Islam believes.
For example, he believes Jesus died in India, where as in mainstream Islam, they do not believe this.
Also, he has another prophet besides Mohammed.
That is only a couple of differences, there are many others.
 
Doesn’t a post like this reappear every few months? Islamic/Muslim boards aren’t Non Islamic friendly, thus not allowing the freedom to debate as is found here.

Kind of like Islam itself.

Irony, anybody?
 
Peaceful??? To quote the well-known hamba2han: “Actions speaker louder than words!” Right hamba?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top