Questions to Muslims not born in the U.S.

  • Thread starter Thread starter InSearchofGrace
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
may be you are right
do you need some other examples from history where christians used violence to convert people to christianity !
Just show me the current examples as what have been done by Muslims currently!
actually not i don’t believe in non-existence of christ , but i think that these stuff written theire are happened by so called christinas , if these things are fibricated history then tell me it clearly , honestly i will verify from it by myself
You think they are Christians? What kind of Christian ever make a blog for denying the existence of Jesus? The writers also told about how Muhammad must have been suffering from epilepsy to claim of having seen Gabriel. Please verify that!
and yes i believe that crimes happens in the name of christianity sometimes
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_terrorism
and i don’t say that christianity in the fact teach the violence , i show you that violence of adherence may have nothing to do with the real teaching of the relegion
i condemn the violence which acted by muslims , exactly as you
Eh…it;'s so difficult to tell you that they said these on the link from Wiki: *During the 19th century, most Christian nations have adopted the principle of separation between church and state. Religious fanaticism is since an internal problem of the Christian churches or merely a personal (psychological) problem. However, this is not so in most modern Muslim countries (except, for example, Turkey under Ataturk.) *
 
40.png
elwill:
the answer within the verse itself
or may be there is something else you trying to refere to … , please describe it

and who like the wars !!!
sometimes the wars imposed upon you , and sometimes it’s necessery to engage in it , right ?

isn’t it clear that the verse talking about wars , real wars
wait a second , i never said that we are peacefull which means that we have to give up and leave people killing us
islam gave us the right to defends ourselfs
*Qur’an (2:216) - “Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not.”
*
It is said fighting is prescribed for you…is there no other way to promote understanding but fighting? It says fighting is good for you, what’s the context here? It doesn’t seem to engage in war because there’s something bad done to muslims.

*Qur’an (4:89) - "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): **But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). *But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks."

It seems if more like if you don’t accept Islam, you’re not to be treated as friends, if you accept islam but then later on convert / change your mind , you should be slayed…!!
It’s so easy to understand…
Qur’an (8:12) - “I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them”*

Does it talk about war? Who should start the war? The muslims towards the unbeliever…

*Qur’an (8:59-60) - “And let not those who disbelieve suppose that they can outstrip (Allah’s Purpose). Lo! they cannot escape. Make ready for them all thou canst of (armed) force and of horses tethered, that thereby ye may dismay the enemy of Allah and your enemy.”
*And does it talk about war that is instigated toward muslims? Seems more that muslims have to instigate war towards the disbeliever who do not have the same opinion on the matter of religion!

Here are some more verses of violence:
*Qur’an (48:29) - “Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard (ruthless) against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves” *
This is an equal treating of muslim and nonmuslims?

Qur’an (25:52) - “Therefore listen not to the Unbelievers, but strive against them with the utmost strenuousness, with the (Qur’an).” *
Again, those who don’t believe in Islam should be fought!
*
Qur’an (21:44) - “We gave the good things of this life to these men and their fathers until the period grew long for them; See they not that We gradually reduce the land (in their control) from its outlying borders? Is it then they who will win?”

Ach…and this is about driving out the disbeliever from their land?
*
Qur’an (9:123) - “O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness.”*
Again a rude and open invitation /challenge to fight non Muslims…!!

So much for the so called religion of peace!
 
Elwill, to be fair, I do read sites where Muslims and Muslim organizations denounce terrorist attacks, e.g., WhyIslam.org, religioustolerance.org, Al-Islam.org, and muhajabah.com.
Non-Muslims would shift from their view that terrorism is a teaching of Islam, if Muslims were to dis-associate from their extremist brothers, like helping with or making a concerted effort to root out the murderous organizations and its wayward members, the adherents of this jihadist mentality who propagate terror “in the name of Allah”.
you are christian , right
tell me what the church should do , if one group of christians raised in someplace in the world and act terror in the name of jesus ?
And there’s a slew of people who have taken up exactly that, examining the Qu’ran and teaching of Islam.
In examining Qu’ran teachings, it seems that for each virtue or good practice that Muhammad espouses, there’s a contradictory teaching that advises the opposite, depending on the time that Muhammad made the pronouncement during his years of conquest, or the context by which it is proffered. There is also abrogation or replacement made by Muslim scholars, the latter trumping earlier verses or hadiths.
Hence, there is a duality or paradox in key teachings of the Qu’ran, double speak on truth and falsehood, giving followers the flexibility to pick whichever side, and find justification regardless. No wonder, one would find it hard to discern: is violence forbidden or permitted, are people of the Book to be tolerated or killed, is lying justified or not?
i think that’s exatly can happening when you study islam from anti_islamic site then study it from islamic one
the same can happening when you read about christianity from anti-christians site , then to read about it from christian site

again , if you really want to know what islam teaches from point of view of muslims so bring whatever confuse you in discussion

existing of paradox or duality should motivate you for deep study to know what the relegion teach in the fact and which side have the most convinced and truthfull openion 🙂
Not mentioned in Qu’ran or surah, and the first time you heard about the concept of taqqiya through discussions in this forum, eh? Were you trying to give a personal demo of taqqiya, complete with your use of a grinning emoticon?
Surah [2:225] GOD does not hold you responsible for the mere utterance of oaths; He holds you responsible for your innermost intentions. GOD is Forgiver, Clement.
The Arabic word, “Takeyya”, means “to prevent,” or guard against.
The principle of Al Takeyya conveys the understanding that Muslims are permitted to lie as a preventive measure against anticipated harm to one’s self or fellow Muslims. This principle gives Muslims the liberty to lie under circumstances that they perceive as life threatening. They can even deny the faith, if they do not mean it in their hearts. Al-Takeyya is based on the following Quranic verse:
“Let not the believers Take for friends or helpers Unbelievers rather than believers: if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah:except by way of precaution (prevention), that ye may Guard yourselves from them (prevent them from harming you.) But Allah cautions you (To remember) Himself; for the final goal is to Allah.” Surah 3: 28
i didn’t say that “taqiyyah” isn’t arabic language
taqiyya means to prevent or guard aganist as you said , it mentioned many times in quran in the context of how muslims should to prevent themself from punishment or from wrath of God
but this defination which i typed in bold from your quotes isn’t true , the defination you typed are talking about the concept “toqyaa” which exist in shiah teaching , it’s the defination of concept and not translation for the word , this concept wasn’t never be teached in quran or by mohammed (pbuh) not in meaning nor in concept
"Unfortunately, when dealing with Muslims, one must keep in mind that Muslims can communicate something with apparent sincerity, when in reality they may have just the opposite agenda in their hearts. Bluntly stated, Islam permits Muslims to lie anytime that they perceive that their own well-being, or that of Islam, is threatened.
It is a known Islamic practice, that when Muslims are weak they can agree with most anything. Once they become strong, then they negate what they formerly vowed.
The principle of sanctioning lying for the cause of Islam bears grave implications in matters relating to the spread of the religion of Islam in the West. Muslim activists employ deceptive tactics in their attempts to polish Islam’s image and make it more attractive to prospective converts. They carefully try to avoid, obscure, and omit mentioning any of the negative Islamic texts and teachings.
In conclusion, it is imperative to understand, that Muslim leaders can use this loop-hole in their religion, to absolve them from any permanent commitment. It is also important to know that what Muslim activists say to spread Islam may not always be the whole truth. When dealing with Muslims, what they say is not the issue. The real issue is, what they actually mean in their hearts."
is that supposed to be islamic site ! , which consequently supposed to be islamic teaching ?
 
Elwill, I would like to acknowledge and thank you for providing the Qu’ran verses on self-examination. Islamic extremists should try to read these verses more!

Good for you that you are a Muslim where Muslims are dominant.

Even as the international Christian community is in an uproar over the persecution of Copts and other Christians in Egypt, you would have us believe otherwise, that most Christians do not suffer persecution there.

As someone who lives in Egypt (is it Cairo?) and therefore knows more than me about events there, what is your reaction to these two fairly recent news articles:

Egyptian State Security Arrests Christians Assaulted By Muslim Mob
18 March 2010

freecopts.net/english/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1155&Itemid=2

November 10, 2009 Coptic Report Release
CSI Releases Report on Abuse of Christian Women in Egypt

csi-int.org/coptic_report_pr.php?sId=001273012531&sucHL=
with assumption that these things happened exactly as it is written there , then i’m against it offcourse

i don’t think that we differ about the principals itself
Sorry, but you don’t have the same laws. I did not see Egypt in the list of countries that have hate crime laws on wiki and on a diligent internet search. Please correct me if Egypt in fact has a hate crime law or laws.
Article 98(f) of the Penal Code, as amended by Law 147/2006 states the penalty for blasphemy and similar crimes:

Confinement for a period of not less than six months and not exceeding five years, or a fine of not less than five hundred pounds and not exceeding one thousand pounds shall be the penalty inflicted on whoever makes use of religion in propagating, either by words, in writing, or in any other means, extreme ideas for the purpose of inciting strife, ridiculing or insulting a heavenly religion or a sect following it, or damaging national unity
Are you talking about the history of Christian persecution of Muslims during the Crusades again?
it’s a fact that they did that in the name of christianity , if you condemn islam because some muslims commit crimes in the name of islam nowadays

then i have the right either to condemn christianity because some centuries ago christians made crimes in the name of christiaity

it’s not my logic to judge on any entire relegion by this way , it’s yours
i just show you that i can use the same weapon against you
 
Elwill, you were the one who provide the link en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_fanaticism
to prove “Christian fanaticism”, which happened to provide Islamic fanaticism as well, to have a balanced report.
i allready said that fanatism exist within every relegion
i just wanna to say , not to judge the relegion from the acts of fanatism
Did you witness this?
Anti-Christian Violence in Egypt: Nun Stabbed
Anti-Christian attitudes have not change much over the past 50 years. In October 2005 violence erupted in Alexandria after the Muslim Brotherhood distributed 20,000 copies of a DVD allegedly containing anti-Islamic statements by Copts. Three people were killed, seven churches were damaged and a nun was seriously injured in a knife attack.
did you witnessed it !

you have to understand that this is the misson of news article to write about the crimes , this is the only face you can see
when i say that i know more than you , it’s because i know the life which news articles will not talking about , i’m talking about the normal and peacefull life which christians have in my country , i have neighbour and friends are christians , and we live very normal life

what you read not represent the norm situation here even if it was true

peace
 
you are christian , right
tell me what the church should do , if one group of christians raised in someplace in the world and act terror in the name of jesus ?
You were presented with many and relatively current events, and you reply with a hypothetical. Can you point anywhere in the world where Christians are currently committing terrorist acts in the name of Jesus?
i think that’s exatly can happening when you study islam from anti_islamic site then study it from islamic one
the same can happening when you read about christianity from anti-christians site , then to read about it from christian site
again , if you really want to know what islam teaches from point of view of muslims so bring whatever confuse you in discussion
existing of paradox or duality should motivate you for deep study to know what the relegion teach in the fact and which side have the most convinced and truthfull openion 🙂
One thing I can tell you, I am not confused about my faith. The Church is not perfect, but I love that it teaches truth, unchanging doctrines, charity, and forgiveness. I treasure that it is a religion that teaches free will – it is up to me if I want to live my faith or not, to leave my faith or stay.

I am perplexed with a religion that is forced on an individual or a people, and that imprisons its own with its teachings. I am perplexed when the meaning of verses are interpreted by many of its followers to promote intolerance and hatred, and those who do not agree, who say they are mainstream or the majority, just stand by.the sidelines.

I do appreciate, however, your efforts in addressing my questions on this thread.
i didn’t say that “taqiyyah” isn’t arabic language
taqiyya means to prevent or guard aganist as you said , it mentioned many times in quran in the context of how muslims should to prevent themself from punishment or from wrath of God
but this defination which i typed in bold from your quotes isn’t true , the defination you typed are talking about the concept “toqyaa” which exist in shiah teaching , it’s the defination of concept and not translation for the word , this concept wasn’t never be teached in quran or by mohammed (pbuh) not in meaning nor in concept
Thanks for pointing that out.

From i-cias.com/e.o//taqiyya.htm, however, it is mentioned that there are Sunni theologians who defended taqiyya, like at-Tabari. He is noted to have said that the faith in the heart is what counts, not outward expressions. In fact, there is mention that some interpret Muhammad to have performed taqiyya, too, when migrating to Yathrib (later Madina) instead of risking his life staying in Mecca. What do you say to this?

From answering-islam.org/Responses/Menj/taqiyyah.htm, it is said that a) it is also taught and practiced by Sunnis, and b) Muhammad did not hesitate to use deception especially when it helped him to murder his opponents, that he used deception to kill, not to preserve life. Too long to paste here, but you can read the piece yourself.

You can say that all the sources you do not like are not reliable. But you (meaning Muslims and Islamic sites) do not have a corner on reliability! You must also know that there is a lot of information out there from internet encyclopedias and dialogs, where Muslims (Sunnis and Shias) participate, and non-Muslims.
is that supposed to be islamic site ! , which consequently supposed to be islamic teaching ?
I suggest you re-read (my) Post #101, at the top, I mentioned Islamic sites that denounce terrorist acts by Muslims, the same way you denounce terrorism, followed with my comment on paying lip service.

On the bottom part of the post, you will note that the portion is a reply to yours on another but related topic, taqiyya. I know the excerpts from the named site are negative, and I did not attribute them to an Islamic site. Importantly, how do you rebut? I am not surprised that you object to what is said, but I want to know why you object. Note the underlined last sentence of the excerpt: When dealing with Muslims, what they say is not the issue. The real issue is, what they actually mean in their hearts.
 
Article 98(f) of the Penal Code, as amended by Law 147/2006 states the penalty for blasphemy and similar crimes:

Confinement for a period of not less than six months and not exceeding five years, or a fine of not less than five hundred pounds and not exceeding one thousand pounds shall be the penalty inflicted on whoever makes use of religion in propagating, either by words, in writing, or in any other means, extreme ideas for the purpose of inciting strife, ridiculing or insulting a heavenly religion or a sect following it, or damaging national unity
Not the same, Elwill. Blasphemy law as described in your Egyptian penal code is different from hate crime law (in the U.S. and Western European countries). Your blasphemy law is, simply put, a limitation to freedom of speech, as it is an institutional muzzling of verbal and written criticism on religion, Hate crime law is an effective response to violent bigotry or bias crime motivated by enmity against a protected class, or protected person’s characteristics, i.e., religion, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, etc.

Therefore, it does not look like Egypt has a hate crime law.
it’s a fact that they did that in the name of christianity , if you condemn islam because some muslims commit crimes in the name of islam nowadays
then i have the right either to condemn christianity because some centuries ago christians made crimes in the name of christiaity
it’s not my logic to judge on any entire relegion by this way , it’s yours
i just show you that i can use the same weapon against you
Your rationale is limited, or rather, stuck to what the Christians did between 1095 and 1291, when the Christians acted to restore control of the Holy Land. As you know, Egypt itself was largely Christian until the Muslims invaded and conquered it in the 6th century, along with the other Christian lands. Can you say that Muslim brutality and savagery were less during said invasion than what the Christians did during the Crusades? I think not! The forced conversions with use of murders and forms of coercion to Islam over the centuries changed Egypt to largely Muslim by the 12th century. AND, if I may say so, forced conversions on Christians have NOT stopped to this day!

The fact is you are unable to accept that there is continued persecution of Christians in your land. You have no logic in judging Christians TODAY on a non-existent practice of persecution on Muslims or any other group of people of a different faith.
 
i allready said that fanatism exist within every relegion
i just wanna to say , not to judge the relegion from the acts of fanatism
You know I love this verse. Same verse that Sam_777 cited in one of his posts.

Matthew 7
16 By their fruits you shall know them. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? 17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit, and the evil tree bringeth forth evil fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can an evil tree bring forth good fruit. 19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit, shall be cut down, and shall be cast into the fire. 20 Wherefore by their fruits you shall know them.

Christianity is older than Islam by 600 some years. Each took about two thousand years to take hold, becoming the two biggest religions in the world. So both religions are tarnished for taking up wars. But, which one stopped the persecution altogether? And how long ago was it stopped? Which of the two continues persecution to this day? Which teaches unconditional love of neighbor? Which does not?

I rest my case!

Btw, Seraphime posed good questions to you and made compelling remarks on Post #107. It listed eight Qu’ran verses that show hatred towards non-Muslims, calling followers to act violently until submission to Islam is achieved. These verses do not support the claim of Muslims that Islam is a religion of peace. What say you?
did you witnessed it !
you have to understand that this is the misson of news article to write about the crimes , this is the only face you can see
when i say that i know more than you , it’s because i know the life which news articles will not talking about , i’m talking about the normal and peacefull life which christians have in my country , i have neighbour and friends are christians , and we live very normal life
what you read not represent the norm situation here even if it was true
Oho! May I present our exchange, before I provided the picture of the stabbed nun:

Mine

Not so fast. I do not agree that “formal Christians’ in Egypt have no problems. By “formal” Christians, you must mean the Copts, who continue to be brutalized in your country. I provided you some talking points already, for discussion when you are ready!

The problem, Elwill, is you deny the suffering of Christians in your country. If you were a Copt in your land, you would surely be one of those reporting persecution in some level, how Muslims do not let you fully practice your faith and the faith of your ancestors.

Yours

whatever , you can trust what you read
i’m talking as an eyewitness
but afterall , what i wanna to tell you that i’m always with freedom of relegions

Who can shrug off such brutality? A picture says a thousand words, does it not?

No, I was not in Alexandria, Egypt in October 2005. I was in Ontario, Canada, travelling. Were you in Egypt at that time? What were your thoughts after it happened?

I admit I had a visceral reaction upon seeing the picture of the nun after being stabbed. I would venture to say it had the some effect on you. But you were able to brush it off quickly because it did not happen in your neighborhood? And it was no more than an isolated crime?

You say you believe in freedom of religions, but when you give explanations, as you have on this thread, your words indicate your understanding if not agreement to the policy of intolerance of Christians. I understand (if) you feel that you might not have a choice, and what can one person do?

The fact is you have not witnessed nor do you believe accounts such as these ones where churches are burned, practitioners are killed, and the priests and the religious people are harmed. You continue to dismiss the reports as random crimes, which they are not. You are convinced that Muslims live side by side Christians in peace even as there’s a ton of proof to the contrary laid at your feet. That Muslims and Christians live in peace in your neighborhood or on the street where you live may be true, good for you, where there is no nearby Coptic Christian church. But that’s the extent of the claim you can make here.

For my Sunday Mass intentions, I will remember to include the Copts. And the Iraqi Christians for the next Sunday …
 
Qur’an (2:216) - “Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not.”
*
It is said fighting is prescribed for you
*…is there no other way to promote understanding but fighting?** It says fighting is good for you, what’s the context here? It doesn’t seem to engage in war because there’s something bad done to muslims.
yes , there was no other way but fighting , this verse revealed after 9 years of persecuation for muslims .

seraphime2008 / if you don’t know when and why these verses are revealed , if you don’t know the historical background for it then ask those who knows
*Qur’an (4:89) - “They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): **But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). ***But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks.”
It seems if more like if you don’t accept Islam, you’re not to be treated as friends, if you accept islam but then later on convert / change your mind , you should be slayed…!!
It’s so easy to understand…
let me just quote the previous verse for more clear view 🙂

4-88 Why should ye be divided into two parties about the Hypocrites? Allah hath upset them for their (evil) deeds. Would ye guide those whom Allah hath thrown out of the Way? For those whom Allah hath thrown out of the Way, never shalt thou find the Way.
4-89 They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks;-

so the verses is most clear now , it talking about hypocrites , who did something evil made the muslims differed about them
the question is , when this verse revealed and what those hypocites did !!!
Qur’an (8:12) - “I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them”
Does it talk about war? Who should start the war? The muslims towards the unbeliever…

these verses are revealed during the battle of Badr
*Qur’an (8:59-60) - “And let not those who disbelieve suppose that they can outstrip (Allah’s Purpose). Lo! they cannot escape. Make ready for them all thou canst of (armed) force and of horses tethered, that thereby ye may dismay the enemy of Allah and your enemy.”
*And does it talk about war that is instigated toward muslims? Seems more that muslims have to instigate war towards the disbeliever who do not have the same opinion on the matter of religion!
yes it’s still talking about war ( Badr) , actually the verses revealed in the middle of war

read the next verse , it says
8-61. But if they incline to peace, you also incline to it, and trust in Allah. Verily, He is the All-Hearer, the All-Knower.)
Here are some more verses of violence:
*Qur’an (48:29) - “Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard (ruthless) against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves” *
This is an equal treating of muslim and nonmuslims?

if you asking about how we should treat peacfull nonmuslims , i can answer you from quran and sunnah either
the comparison here about thier ruthless against enemy (physical enemy) , and thier mercifull among themselfs
*Qur’an (25:52) - “Therefore listen not to the Unbelievers, but strive against them with the utmost strenuousness, with the (Qur’an).” *
Again, those who don’t believe in Islam should be fought!

where is the fought in the verse
the word which be translatated to " listen" is " tote3 " which means in another word" obey"
and strive dosn’t mean fight or kill , it can mean resist .
Qur’an (21:44) - “We gave the good things of this life to these men and their fathers until the period grew long for them; See they not that We gradually reduce the land (in their control) from its outlying borders? Is it then they who will win?”
Ach…and this is about driving out the disbeliever from their land?
*
*
no , actually the verse here talking about scientific fact
God says that he reduse the earth from it’s border
 
You were presented with many and relatively current events, and you reply with a hypothetical. Can you point anywhere in the world where Christians are currently committing terrorist acts in the name of Jesus?
bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2005/10_october/06/bush.shtml

Nabil Shaath says: “President Bush said to all of us: ‘I’m driven with a mission from God. God would tell me, “George, go and fight those terrorists in Afghanistan.” And I did, and then God would tell me, “George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq …” And I did. And now, again, I feel God’s words coming to me, “Go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East.” And by God I’m gonna do it.’”

youtube.com/watch?v=bCiCIfzjynQ&feature=related
USA sent missionaries to Iraq to convert muslims under occupation into christianity { during the war )may be they should to breach thier army by “love your enemy” things , instead of trying to convert country under arrest or to preach against the war in the first place , right !

many christians believe that it’s relegious war from their point of view

G.Baush and general william Boykon spoken about christians war

14 christians attacks jews ( because they killed jesus )
youtube.com/watch?v=haeeIvbdWYI
One thing I can tell you, I am not confused about my faith. The Church is not perfect, but I love that it teaches truth, unchanging doctrines, charity, and forgiveness. I treasure that it is a religion that teaches free will – it is up to me if I want to live my faith or not, to leave my faith or stay.
me either
I am perplexed with a religion that is forced on an individual or a people, and that imprisons its own with its teachings. I am perplexed when the meaning of verses are interpreted by many of its followers to promote intolerance and hatred, and those who do not agree, who say they are mainstream or the majority, just stand by.the sidelines.
I do appreciate, however, your efforts in addressing my questions on this thread.
you are wellcome
Thanks for pointing that out.
From i-cias.com/e.o//taqiyya.htm, however, it is mentioned that there are Sunni theologians who defended taqiyya, like at-Tabari. He is noted to have said that the faith in the heart is what counts, not outward expressions. In fact, there is mention that some interpret Muhammad to have performed taqiyya, too, when migrating to Yathrib (later Madina) instead of risking his life staying in Mecca. What do you say to this?
From answering-islam.org/Responses/Menj/taqiyyah.htm, it is said that a) it is also taught and practiced by Sunnis, and b) Muhammad did not hesitate to use deception especially when it helped him to murder his opponents, that he used deception to kill, not to preserve life. Too long to paste here, but you can read the piece yourself.
You can say that all the sources you do not like are not reliable. But you (meaning Muslims and Islamic sites) do not have a corner on reliability! You must also know that there is a lot of information out there from internet encyclopedias and dialogs, where Muslims (Sunnis and Shias) participate, and non-Muslims.
islamic sources are much in the internet , you don’t have to study islam from " anti_islamic sites"
On the bottom part of the post, you will note that the portion is a reply to yours on another but related topic, taqiyya. I know the excerpts from the named site are negative, and I did not attribute them to an Islamic site. Importantly, how do you rebut? I am not surprised that you object to what is said, but I want to know why you object. Note the underlined last sentence of the excerpt: When dealing with Muslims, what they say is not the issue. The real issue is, what they actually mean in their hearts.
i object because they corrupt the image of muslims
 
  • Qur’an (2:216) - “Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not.”*
yes , there was no other way but fighting , this verse revealed after 9 years of persecuation for muslims .

seraphime2008 / if you don’t know when and why these verses are revealed , if you don’t know the historical background for it then ask those who knows
How do you know that this prescription can only be applied during the the early 9 years of persecution to Muslims? How do you know that the context is talking about persecution of Muslims while Muhammad himself had mocked and humiliated the Quraish in the first place? How would you be sure that all the Muslims are thinking about context when there’s no contextual frame in Quran compilation?
let me just quote the previous verse for more clear view 🙂
4-88 Why should ye be divided into two parties about the Hypocrites? Allah hath upset them for their (evil) deeds. Would ye guide those whom Allah hath thrown out of the Way? For those whom Allah hath thrown out of the Way, never shalt thou find the Way.
4-89 They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks;-
so the verses is most clear now , it talking about hypocrites , who did something evil made the muslims differed about them
the question is , when this verse revealed and what those hypocites did !!!
It seems that Allah had already made up his mind that you’re not to offer any peaceful thing than slaying the disbeliever and humiliate and segregate them from the society! You know Allah had destined them to be astray and suffered for the consequences.

Again there’s no such context in Koran! It was compiled with a rather bizzarre method…😉

Qur’an (8:12) - “I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them”
these verses are revealed during the battle of Badr
How do you know that it is not to be done or carried out by Muslim anywhere anytime?
Is there a word saying that this is only a prescription to be taken only during Muhammad time when warring the Jews, expelling them from the land that they had inhabited for hundred years?
read the next verse , it says
8-61. But if they incline to peace, you also incline to it, and trust in Allah. Verily, He is the All-Hearer, the All-Knower.)
Och I believe when in comes to peace, there would be certain condition like subdue the unbeliever, Chrsitian and Jew, humiliate them with Jiyzah…!!!
*Qur’an (48:29) - “Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard (ruthless) against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves” *
i

f you asking about how we should treat peacfull nonmuslims , i can answer you from quran and sunnah either
the comparison here about thier ruthless against enemy (physical enemy) , and thier mercifull among themselfs
How would you know that, it seems the declaration was very clear: Call for discrimination and bad action towards the disbeliever…it doesn’t say about physical enemy, but those who disbelieve! Islam has the nice verses and the violent verses as well, and who can guarantee that one will act nice and other won’t act the same if both are welcome and even suggested? Ok, the wild, brave and willing hearted muslims who fight physically with terror would all get the praying by the weak muslims who would give all the nicest smile to the world saying they got nothing to do with them…!😛 🤷
where is the fought in the verse
the word which be translatated to " listen" is " tote3 " which means in another word" obey"
and strive dosn’t mean fight or kill , it can mean resist .
Resist by your whole soul even by discriminating them and separate yourself from your fellow nation citizen since they happen to drink wine, eat pork and believe in justice for all, same law for the whole nation, no discrimination towards women, and their women wear mini skirts!!

And by the way why nothing is heard about this? :
Qur’an (9:123) - “O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness.”

Fight your neighbor 'cos they happen to be Chrsitian or Jew or Hindu or Buddhist?:eek:
 
How do you know that this prescription can only be applied during the the early 9 years of persecution to Muslims?
everytime , when muslim find the enemy wage a wars against his country , it’s obligatory upon him to fight and defend his people and his country even if he dislike the wars 🙂
How do you know that the context is talking about persecution of Muslims while Muhammad himself had mocked and humiliated the Quraish in the first place?
the entire chapter is talking about Badr battle , this battle happened after the prophet traveled to madinah . and i’m not sure how the prophet was the one who humilated Qurish in the first place
How would you be sure that all the Muslims are thinking about context when there’s no contextual frame in Quran compilation?
try to explore the islamic sites , hence you will find out that majority of muslims ( if wasn’t all of them ) have the same understanding
It seems that Allah had already made up his mind that you’re not to offer any peaceful thing than slaying the disbeliever and humiliate and segregate them from the society! You know Allah had destined them to be astray and suffered for the consequences.
🙂 it dosn’t mean that we can’t offer the peace .
mohammed (pbuh) offered the peace when he conquered mekkah , he had the ability to revenge and slay all of them , but he offered the peace and returned back without fight ( did you read anything about that ! )

beside , with very simple thinking , you will find out that the side who offer the peace during the battle are always the ones who were defeated and need to repair , re-arrange or back up thier army .
How do you know that it is not to be done or carried out by Muslim anywhere anytime?
Is there a word saying that this is only a prescription to be taken only during Muhammad time when warring the Jews, expelling them from the land that they had inhabited for hundred years?
i answered that within the fist question
*Qur’an (48:29) - “Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard (ruthless) against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves” *
i
How would you know that, it seems the declaration was very clear: Call for discrimination and bad action towards the disbeliever…it doesn’t say about physical enemy, but those who disbelieve! Islam has the nice verses and the violent verses as well, and who can guarantee that one will act nice and other won’t act the same if both are welcome and even suggested?
because we believe in entire quran which says in another verse

in chapter 60 from quran
8-Allah does not forbid you ( o’ muslims ) respecting those who have not made war against you on account of (your) religion, and have not driven you forth from your homes, that you show them kindness and deal with them justly; surely Allah loves the doers of justice.
9-Allah only forbids you respecting those who made war upon you on account of (your) religion, and drove you forth from your homes and backed up (others) in your expulsion, that you make friends with them, and whoever makes friends with them, these are the unjust.
And by the way why nothing is heard about this? :
Qur’an (9:123) - “O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness.”
resolve your problems with the nearst enemy first then gradually the farthest
Fight your neighbor 'cos they happen to be Chrsitian or Jew or Hindu or Buddhist?:eek
The life-story of the Prophet of Islam gives many instances of his kind, tolerant co-existence with non-Muslims. Some of his neighbors were non-Muslims and the Prophet would be generous towards them and exchange gifts. The Prophet of Islam would visit them when they fell sick and do business with them. There was a Jewish family he regularly gave charity to and the Muslims after his death maintained his charity towards them.

When a Christian delegation from Ethiopian churches came to Medina, the Prophet opened up his mosque for them to stay in, hosted them generously, and personally served them meals. He said:
“They were generous to our companions, so I wish to be generous to them in person…”
…referring to the event when they provided asylum to a number of his companions after they fled persecution in Arabia and took asylum in Abyssinia.

In another instance, a Jewish man named Zayd bin Sana came to the Prophet of Islam to reclaim a debt. He **grabbed the Prophet by his robe and cloak, pulled the Prophet close to his face, and said, ‘Muhammad, are you not going to give me my due? You and your clan Banu Muttalib never pay debts on time!’ ** Umar, one of the companions of the Prophet, got agitated and said, ‘**Enemy of God, am I really hearing what you just said to God’s Prophet. I swear by the One who sent him with truth, if I were not afraid that he would blame me, I would have taken my sword and cut your head off!’ **The Prophet looked calmly at Umar and censured him gently:

“Umar, that is not what we needed to hear from you. You should have counseled me to pay my debts in time and asked him to seek repayment in a respectful manner. Now take him, repay him his debt from my money and give him an extra twenty measures of date.”

Abdullah ibn ‘Amr, a famous companion of the Prophet Muhammad, would regularly give charity to his neighbors. He would send his servant to take portions of meat on religious occasions to his Jewish neighbor. The surprised servant asked about Abdullah’s concern for his Jewish neighbor. Abdullah told him the saying of Prophet Muhammad:

“The angel Gabriel was so adamant in reminding me to be charitable with my neighbor that I thought he might make him my heir.
 
Not the same, Elwill. Blasphemy law as described in your Egyptian penal code is different from hate crime law (in the U.S. and Western European countries). Your blasphemy law is, simply put, a limitation to freedom of speech, as it is an institutional muzzling of verbal and written criticism on religion, Hate crime law is an effective response to violent bigotry or bias crime motivated by enmity against a protected class, or protected person’s characteristics, i.e., religion, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, etc.

Therefore, it does not look like Egypt has a hate crime law.
what is the hate crimes , give me an examples
Your rationale is limited, or rather, stuck to what the Christians did between 1095 and 1291, when the Christians acted to restore control of the Holy Land. As you know, Egypt itself was largely Christian until the Muslims invaded and conquered it in the 6th century, along with the other Christian lands.
egypt in this time was under Byzantine Empire , and guess what egyptions were paid to them jeziah
so muslims didn’t fight the egyptions , actually they fought invadors either
Can you say that Muslim brutality and savagery were less during said invasion than what the Christians did during the Crusades? I think not!
American historian Ira Lapidus points towards “interwoven terms of political and economic benefits and of a sophisticated culture and religion” as appealing to the masses. [6] He writes that :

“The question of why people convert to Islam has always generated intense feeling. Earlier generations of European scholars believed that conversions to Islam were made at the point of the sword, and that conquered peoples were given the choice of conversion or death. It is now apparent that conversion by force, while not unknown in Muslim countries, was, in fact, rare. Muslim conquerors ordinarily wished to dominate rather than convert, and most conversions to Islam were voluntary. (…) In most cases worldly and spiritual motives for conversion blended together. Moreover, conversion to Islam did not necessarily imply a complete turning from an old to a totally new life. While it entailed the acceptance of new religious beliefs and membership in a new religious community, most converts retained a deep attachment to the cultures and communities from which they came.”
The fact is you are unable to accept that there is continued persecution of Christians in your land. You have no logic in judging Christians TODAY on a non-existent practice of persecution on Muslims or any other group of people of a different faith.
you have no logic either condemn me or any muslims today because of existence of some muslims crimers in someplace in the world
 
bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2005/10_october/06/bush.shtml

Nabil Shaath says: “President Bush said to all of us: ‘I’m driven with a mission from God. God would tell me, “George, go and fight those terrorists in Afghanistan.” And I did, and then God would tell me, “George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq …” And I did. And now, again, I feel God’s words coming to me, “Go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East.” And by God I’m gonna do it.’”
It’s fair that you bring up the Iraq invasion, elwill. Let me point out that the news clip you provided had two other parts to it, which you should have included.

Here is the full monty.

The news clip you cited, bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2005/10_october/06/bush.shtml is titled
God told me to invade Iraq, Bush tells Palestinian ministers

Part II of the same bbc news clip,
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/4320586.stm, titled Bush God comments 'not literal’

Part III,
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/4317498.stm, titled White House denies Bush God claim

Regardless if George Bush 43’s remarks were misunderstood or not, it’s a great shame that he ordered the U.S. invasion on Iraq. Even if it were a response to the despicable unprovoked 9/11 killing of an estimated 3000 American innocents, when Muslim extremists hijacked two planes to bring down the NY twin towers.

Earlier on this thread, I expressed my opinion on the 9/11 attack and the U.S. invasion of Iraq. GB received much opposition and condemnation from a lot of Americans, and other world leaders, including Pope John Paul II.

GB did not act as a leader of the Christian world, or in the name of Christianity. He acted as the U.S. commander in chief, and unfortunately placed himself on the same level as that thug in hiding, Osama bin Ladin.

I am no fan of GB 43 at all, but I do not believe he aimed to persecute Muslims, the parallel that we are discussing here. You will recall that GB called the Muslim terrorists responsible for the 9/11 attack as “hijackers of Islam”, with a mention that Islam is a religion of peace. After some more bombings in European capitals and Asia, thanks to further terrorist acts by extremist Muslims, there are of course non-Muslims who do not believe that Islam is truly a religion of peace. It has yet to be proven so the question is still being asked, around the world, in many forums, like this one in CAF. Does the regular Muslim reflect or examine the reasons why the question is still being asked?

You know, right after 9/11, there were wholesale Muslim cheers in the Middle East, pockets of Muslims in the U.S., jumping with joy after 9/11, shouting “Praise be to Allah”, including successful, well-educated Muslims who benefit from the great American freedoms. I even heard one Palestinian visiting professor in the U.S. at that time, say on TV, how impressed she was of the creativity of using planes as weapons, and with the strategic attacks which obviously took years in “admirable” planning and execution. If the tables were turned, there would be a fatwa on her head!

I’m not going to say no American ever acted out in retaliation against a Muslim after 9/11, because I don’t know that. But I found it remarkable that many community leaders and people cautioned right away against retaliation on Muslim immigrants. Even in the face of a thwarted bombing attempt at NYC Times Square by a Pakistani Sunni last Saturday, many speak and act in protection of Muslims, so they do not get unfairly targeted. For this, I feel proud and blessed to be an American, to live in civil society, in this great country, enjoying and letting other enjoy real religious liberty among other liberties. Now don’t get me wrong, his is not to say life in the U.S.A. is perfect.
youtube.com/watch?v=bCiCIfzjynQ&feature=related
USA sent missionaries to Iraq to convert muslims under occupation into christianity { during the war )may be they should to breach thier army by “love your enemy” things , instead of trying to convert country under arrest or to preach against the war in the first place , right !
many christians believe that it’s relegious war from their point of view
G.Baush and general william Boykon spoken about christians war
14 christians attacks jews ( because they killed jesus )
youtube.com/watch?v=haeeIvbdWYI
Elwill, did you review your post? The narrative you put along with the youtube clip
youtube.com/watch?v=bCiCIfzjynQ&feature=related, titled Christians believe in Muhammed (SAW) is clearly erroneous.

As for this one,
youtube.com/watch?v=haeeIvbdWYI, titled 14 CHRISTIANS ATTACKED JEWS AND A MUSLIM FOR HELPING THEM

As bad as the experience was to the victims in getting beaten up in a NYC train, it is refreshing news that a Muslim came to the rescue of 2 Jewish guys, all three ending up with black eyes. Nobody has really said the attackers were Christians, the conclusion apparently reached by the youtube poster, judging on the label used.

Elwill, do me and those who may be following this thread a favor. Test your links first before posting. And troll for youtubes that make your point!
islamic sources are much in the internet , you don’t have to study islam from " anti_islamic sites"
You say this enough times, without really reading the links. If you do, you would find out that I also cite sites that are pro-Islam or provide balanced discussion.
 
what is the hate crimes , give me an examples
How about reading the thread over and self-explanatory posts? With a little effort, you can connect the dots yourself. Getting used to “spoonfeeding”, are we not? 🙂
American historian Ira Lapidus points towards “interwoven terms of political and economic benefits and of a sophisticated culture and religion” as appealing to the masses. [6] He writes that :
“The question of why people convert to Islam has always generated intense feeling. Earlier generations of European scholars believed that conversions to Islam were made at the point of the sword, and that conquered peoples were given the choice of conversion or death. It is now apparent that conversion by force, while not unknown in Muslim countries, was, in fact, rare. Muslim conquerors ordinarily wished to dominate rather than convert, and most conversions to Islam were voluntary. (…) In most cases worldly and spiritual motives for conversion blended together. Moreover, conversion to Islam did not necessarily imply a complete turning from an old to a totally new life. While it entailed the acceptance of new religious beliefs and membership in a new religious community, most converts retained a deep attachment to the cultures and communities from which they came.”
How about putting down your source? I don’t want to say right off the bat that this is one historian’s attempt to water down or revise history.

Here is an eloquent excerpt from another historian’s take, written on Christmas Day 1999, on the Crusades vis a vis the Muslim invasion of Christian lands.

“The Crusades were a forward strike in a war in which Christianity had so far been on the defensive. After the defeat of the Crusaders, the Islamic world resumed the attacks, especially in the Balkans where one Christian nation after another came under the Turkish yoke, and as late as 1689, the Turks laid siege to Vienna.

There is no doubt that Christian soldiers have misbehaved during the conquest of Jerusalem and on other occasions, but so have Muslim armies on numerous occasions, starting with Mohammed’s own caravan raids, murders of skeptics and massacres of recalcitrant tribes.

For every Muslim gentleman-conqueror (e.g. the Kurdish general Saladin who chased the Crusaders from Jerusalem), there was a Muslim mass-murderer (e.g. the Mamluk sultan Baybars who finished off the last Crusader strongholds).”

Dr. Elst repeated what Mgr. Bernardini, bishop of the Ionian city of Smyrna said:
‘We know that a distinction must be made between the fanatics and the more peaceful majority. But even the latter will rise against us (Christians) as one man when Allah so commands.’

Historian Dr. Koenraad Elst. This is his site: koenraadelst.bharatvani.org/articles/ayodhya/nazareth.html
you have no logic either condemn me or any muslims today because of existence of some muslims crimers in someplace in the world
Go back to your post where you first used the word ‘logic’. You were / are not being accused of doing the persecution yourself. I am positing that your head is in the sand with the persecution of Copts in your own country. If you had a personal stake in the injustice, or you have loved ones who are affected profoundly, you might feel and act differently.

We are having a debate if there is actual intolerance and hatred, which feeds the persecution of Christians in Muslim countries. And because you say it’s different for each Muslim country, yada yada, it is some other country’s discriminatory policy, like Saudi Arabia’s (you did tell one poster to go ask SA about its laws), the discussion therefore led to what you know, what’s around you – in Egypt.

Here’s something for you to chew on.

Muslims seem to just let their extremist brothers off the hook, content to say they do not practice true Islam or they follow corrupted teachings. So I researched and found this hadith, which discusses the advise of Annas, Allah’s Apostle on the matter. The site is Islamic, not anti-.

The Hadith Book: 43:624 from Sahih Bukhari
searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=43&translator=1
Narrated Anas: Allah’s Apostle said, "Help your brother, whether he is an oppressor or he is an oppressed one. People asked, “O Allah’s Apostle! It is all right to help him if he is oppressed, but how should we help him if he is an oppressor?” The Prophet said, “By preventing him from oppressing others.”

Further, Muhammad accordingly said

“If you see wrongdoing, stop it by hand (force). If you cannot, then by tongue and if you cannot do even that, then at least feel bad in your heart”.

Tell me, do these admonitions only apply if the oppressed is another Muslim, and a non-Muslim is never to be helped, but just forcibly converted?

Elwill, to tell you the truth, I would rather focus on today’s situations, not rehash the Crusades and the Muslim invasion of Christian lands in centuries past.

Read this from Kuwaiti writer and commentator Ahmad Al-Sarraf, Al-Qabas (Kuwait), August 8, 2009.

Persecution of Christians in the Middle East is Tantamount to Ethnic Cleansing
memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/3653.htm

and from Asia News 01/28/2010
PHILIPPINES – SAUDI ARABIA

Christian Filipino migrants forced to convert to Islam
asianews.it/news-en/Christian-Filipino-migrants-forced-to-convert-to-Islam-17478.html

Peace 🙂
 
For this, I feel proud and blessed to be an American, to live in civil society, in this great country, enjoying and letting others enjoy real religious liberty among other liberties. Now don’t get me wrong, this is not to say life in the U.S.A. is perfect.

Sorry, I had to re-do the above sentence from my earlier post. Some keys on my laptop fail to connect when I’m typing away.
 
How about reading the thread over and self-explanatory posts? With a little effort, you can connect the dots yourself. Getting used to “spoonfeeding”, are we not? 🙂
it’s okey if you don’t want to help , i was seek in the fact to understand your view
How about putting down your source? I don’t want to say right off the bat that this is one historian’s attempt to water down or revise history.
Here is an eloquent excerpt from another historian’s take, written on Christmas Day 1999, on the Crusades vis a vis the Muslim invasion of Christian lands.
“The Crusades were a forward strike in a war in which Christianity had so far been on the defensive. After the defeat of the Crusaders, the Islamic world resumed the attacks, especially in the Balkans where one Christian nation after another came under the Turkish yoke, and as late as 1689, the Turks laid siege to Vienna.
There is no doubt that Christian soldiers have misbehaved during the conquest of Jerusalem and on other occasions, but so have Muslim armies on numerous occasions, starting with Mohammed’s own caravan raids, murders of skeptics and massacres of recalcitrant tribes.
For every Muslim gentleman-conqueror (e.g. the Kurdish general Saladin who chased the Crusaders from Jerusalem), there was a Muslim mass-murderer (e.g. the Mamluk sultan Baybars who finished off the last Crusader strongholds).”
Dr. Elst repeated what Mgr. Bernardini, bishop of the Ionian city of Smyrna said:
‘We know that a distinction must be made between the fanatics and the more peaceful majority. But even the latter will rise against us (Christians) as one man when Allah so commands.’
where is the conversion of islam by sword , i think that we were talking about spread of islam by sword , right ?
Go back to your post where you first used the word ‘logic’. You were / are not being accused of doing the persecution yourself. I am positing that your head is in the sand with the persecution of Copts in your own country. If you had a personal stake in the injustice, or you have loved ones who are affected profoundly, you might feel and act differently.
just to find common ground for understanding each others
let me tell you that whether the persecuation exist or not , i’m against it and i believe that it’s not islamic
Here’s something for you to chew on.
Muslims seem to just let their extremist brothers off the hook, content to say they do not practice true Islam or they follow corrupted teachings. So I researched and found this hadith, which discusses the advise of Annas, Allah’s Apostle on the matter. The site is Islamic, not anti-.
The Hadith Book: 43:624 from Sahih Bukhari
searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=43&translator=1
Narrated Anas: Allah’s Apostle said, "Help your brother, whether he is an oppressor or he is an oppressed one. People asked, “O Allah’s Apostle! It is all right to help him if he is oppressed, but how should we help him if he is an oppressor?” The Prophet said, “By preventing him from oppressing others.”
Further, Muhammad accordingly said
“If you see wrongdoing, stop it by hand (force). If you cannot, then by tongue and if you cannot do even that, then at least feel bad in your heart”.
these are very good hadiths , what is your problem with it ?
Tell me, do these admonitions only apply if the oppressed is another Muslim, and a non-Muslim is never to be helped, but just forcibly converted?
the hadeeth admonish the oppressor in any case ( regardless of who is the opressed one )
Elwill, to tell you the truth, I would rather focus on today’s situations, not rehash the Crusades and the Muslim invasion of Christian lands in centuries past.
Read this from Kuwaiti writer and commentator Ahmad Al-Sarraf, Al-Qabas (Kuwait), August 8, 2009.
Persecution of Christians in the Middle East is Tantamount to Ethnic Cleansing
memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/3653.htm

to tell you a truth , my feeling toward my relegion will not change because some muslims lives against it’s teaching 🙂
 
it’s okey if you don’t want to help , i was seek in the fact to understand your view
You bet, I want to help towards our understanding each other. In fact I’m serious with our dialogue, but you could move the oar on your side of the boat too. I have been rowing on my side …
where is the conversion of islam by sword , i think that we were talking about spread of islam by sword , right ?
Just as I do with your posts, please read the thought before and after what was said. We are just going around in circles.
just to find common ground for understanding each others
let me tell you that whether the persecuation exist or not , i’m against it and i believe that it’s not islamic
Your same song, over and over …
these are very good hadiths , what is your problem with it ?
Okay, maybe I am missing a connector there.

I stated: Muslims seem to just let their extremist brothers off the hook, content to say their brothers do not practice true Islam or they follow corrupted teachings. So I laid out two positive verses, where good Muslims (like you) can pick up that actively preventing bad Muslims from oppressing others is actually taught in the hadith and by Muhammad. I have no problem with the hadiths that I cited, for crying out loud. But you keep repeating that your belief and Islam have nothing to do with those Muslim “crimers” (as you call them), or what those “crimers” did have nothing to do with Islam. Do you and other Muslims just stand back and give this cop-out of an explanation?

Muhammad actually told his faithful followers (like you) to prevent the bad brother from oppressing other people. Now if more Muslims remove the scales from their eyes and act together, it would have a multiplier effect. The rift between Muslims and Christians in Egypt, for example, has a fair chance of healing. Do you not agree with this proposition? Do you not agree that the world would be a little better for everyone?

[con’t]
 
to tell you a truth , my feeling toward my relegion will not change because some muslims lives against it’s teaching 🙂
What’s the matter, you can’t stand an enlightened Muslim, one who believes that Christians in Muslim lands should have reciprocity in enjoyment of religious liberty as with the Muslims in the U.S., Canada and Western Europe? Did you read Mr. Al-Sarraf’s article? Note that he mentions Egypt two times. Are you saying Mr. Al-Sarraf violated a teaching of Islam?

Mr. Al-Sarraf’s article is not too long, and it is very good, so I am pasting it here.

**Democratization And Reform In The Arab And Muslim World **

September 21, 2009 Special Dispatch No.2551

Persecution of Christians in the Middle East is Tantamount to Ethnic Cleansing

In an article in the Kuwaiti daily Al-Qabas, liberal Kuwaiti writer and commentator Ahmad Al-Sarraf criticized the Arab countries for persecuting and discriminating against their Christian minorities. He contended that this maltreatment is tantamount to ethnic cleansing, since it often forces Christians to leave their Muslim homeland and emigrate to the West. Al-Sarraf called on the Arab countries to treat their non-Muslim residents in the same way as they expect the West to treat its Muslim minorities.

Following are excerpts from Al-Sarraf’s article: [1]

Innumerable Injustices Committed against Christians in the Middle East Are Forcing Them to Leave Their Homes

If we assess [the contribution] of Christian minorities to the culture and development of their host countries in the Arab [world], we will discover to our surprise that it invariably exceeds their percentage in the overall [population].

"In spite of this, or possibly because of it, a vast stream of Christians has for many years now been thronging out of the Middle East [towards the West]. Some left of their own accord, while others were coerced into emigrating - but all had to leave their home countries, especially Iraq, Egypt, Lebanon, the occupied territories, Sudan, and even Iran.

"The only exceptions to this enforced emigration have been the [Gulf] states and North Africa: the former because their Christian population is [relatively] small, while the latter is due to its long-standing tradition of tolerance towards non-Muslim minorities. Syria can also be considered a country that, throughout history, has been tolerant of its non-Muslim residents.

"What sustained this stream of enforced emigration [of Christians from the Middle East] is the innumerable incidents of injustice to which local Christian minorities have been constantly subjected, and which in many areas have become routine. Thus, heads of [Christian] communities have been murdered; [Christian] places of worship have been set on fire; [Christian-owned] shops have been plundered; the Christians have been marginalized in their [host] societies, and their lives have been embittered - and this is only a partial list.

"These [iniquities] have prompted many [Christians] to leave their homeland, sometimes temporarily but more often for good, and to direct their steps westward, entrusting their fate to the munificence of Western countries and their citizens - which is precisely what [the anti-Christian elements] had set out to accomplish in the first place.

"What these aggressive [elements] do not realize, however, is that even when a particular religion, movement, or ethnic community is entirely annihilated, the ethnic cleansing will not stop; other ethnic communities and religions will be targeted, one by one, and ultimately large groups will attempt to annihilate one another.

"The Claim that [the Christians Living in Our Midst] Present a Danger is Nothing But Loathsome and Irrational Extremism"

"If we put Iraq aside for the present… we will find that the situation of Christians in some parts of Lebanon, in Gaza, and in Egypt is not good, and that their number is steadily decreasing. Yet despite this, a contemptible [columnist has published] a hostile article contending that Christians are about to invade and take over the East, and that the hordes of [Christian] missionaries [are advancing] at full speed. I really don’t know what he is talking about.

"It is imperative to try to prevent the steady decrease in the Christian population of Arab and Muslim countries, [especially since] most of their Jewish residents emigrated in the late 1940s and early 1950s. The fewer Christians are left, the more extremist and the less accepting of the other we become, and the less able to understand the other’s [position] or appreciate the conditions [in which he lives].

"The claim that [the Christians living in our midst] present a danger is nothing but loathsome and irrational extremism. Their centuries-long presence among us has not rendered us less dependent on our customs and traditions - and I say this despite of my distaste for both these notions. Our comparatively tolerant [attitudes]… have not prevented our region from becoming a breeding ground for benighted fundamentalism, which spreads outside it in all directions.

“I do not know when we will acknowledge that we are part of this world, and that just as we demand that all world countries, in particular Western countries, respect the beliefs of their Muslim citizens, enable them to practice their religion, and ensure their wellbeing - so must we act [fairly] towards non-Muslims in our midst. The extremists and boors in this wretched nation, [however,] think the exact opposite - namely, that while our coreligionists are entitled to every mark of respect, we are not obligated [to honor members of other religions] - since we alone are messengers of the true [religion]; we are right, while all the others have gone astray.”

Endnote:
[1] Al-Qabas (Kuwait), August 8, 2009.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top