This is Islam

  • Thread starter Thread starter deen
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Dear Deen, Straightpath and Maryam V,

Peace to you all and thank you for your responses. I feel I have three new Muslim friends, where I had none before. May Allah continue to bless you, in this life and in the next.

Your explanation of the hijab is very helpful and beautiful. It is like our Catholic religious wearing their habits but all Muslim women are invited, by The Creator, to dress like religious. What a blessing!

Straightpath, you wrote: “A man in order to save his marriage is only allowed to hit his wife with a toothstick.” Did this permission come from Allah or somewhere else? Marital harmony is sometimes tricky, when pride begins to rule. There have been moments in my marriage when I did something stupid that angered my husband. If he is angry with me I am devastated because I love him so and want us always to be in harmony. The thought has crossed my mind that it would be better for him to beat me then to distance himself from me, which is what he does. However, I’m pretty sure my attitude would change if he ever hit me.

Regarding Mohamad’s (may he rest in peace) prophecy there are more women in hell then men. I can see that women have the challenge to respect their husbands but, believe it a greater challenge for men to respect their wives (excepting my husband’s case, of course). By God’s grace and mercy, my desire is to be pleasing to my husband, in all things and obey him as it is prescribed in Ephesians 5:21-34, because it pleases God. But, that came about, I believe, because The Almighty led me to a man who loves me as much as he loves himself. In other words, he is not selfish and does not take advantage of me first, and that makes me want to please him first. What about the husbands who do not respect their wives and take advantage of them? Are there fewer of these then there are women who disrespect their husbands? I do not think so. I think husbands and wives both suffer when they do not appreciate the goodness that dwells in the other, or when either attempts to dominate the other, for selfish desires.

Wishing you peace and wellness,
Elizabeth
 
deen said:
Maybe this will disturb you more:

“If any religion had the chance of ruling over England, nay Europe within the next hundred years, it could be Islam. I have always held the religion of Muhammad in high estimation because of its wonderful vitality. It is the only religion which appears to me to possess that assimilating capacity to the changing phase of existence which can make itself appeal to every age. I have studied him - the wonderful man and in my opinion far from being an anti-Christ, he must be called the Saviour of Humanity.” -Sir George Bernard Shaw in ‘The Genuine Islam,’ Vol. 1, No. 8, 1936
Click to expand...

Now this is what I have been looking for…this could come to fruition…I think England is well on its way…is that what Islam is trying to do? Assimilate us? Take over the world? **Maybe this will disturb you more you say…**you sounded so bold and proud of this one. If indeed Islam is trying to take over the world I am not worried or disturbed I have faith in the words of Christ…“And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.” Matthew 16:18
 
40.png
Ahimsa:
Another translation:

Again, this quote refers to non-Muslims who were beginning to wage an attack against the Muslims. (I believe the non-Muslims in this case constituted the Roman Empire, which occupied Syria, and saw the Muslims as a military threat. Word was that the Romans intended to demolish the Muslims. Muhammad marched up north to Tabuk with a force of 30,000, as a preventive defensive measure. Discovering that the Romans had withdrawn, Muhammad retreated back to Mecca.)
Click to expand...
You are mistaken. It was the Muslims that invaded Syria after the Ridda Wars (possibly the Battle of Yarmuk in 636?). The Byzantine Empire was on the defense.
 
40.png
deen:
Do you know the context of the verse? I doubt it. FYI, this is an approval for the Muslims to fight their aggressors/enemies to DEFEND themselves. Clear?

deen
Click to expand...
I read the context. It does not say “fight the agressors”. It says “fight the unbelievers” that are near. It doesn’t mention an attacking enemy, unless I missed it. Can you show the context that backs up your interpretaion?
 
40.png
mike182d:
You are mistaken. It was the Muslims that invaded Syria after the Ridda Wars (possibly the Battle of Yarmuk in 636?). The Byzantine Empire was on the defense.
Click to expand...
The Qur’an quote in question (9:123) refers either to the non-Muslims in Arabia who broke a treaty with the Muslims, or to Muhammad’s expedition to Tabuk in 630 CE/9 AH, which was a defensive measure on the part of the Muslims. Since Muhammad died in 632 CE, the Qur’an quote in question does not refer to Yarmuk.
 
40.png
deen:
Why did the Catholics and Protestants in Ireland resort to violence? Those ignorant Muslims can do whatever they think is right BUT it does not automatically mean that it is from Islam.

ISLAM IS NOT WHAT MUSLIMS DO. ISLAM IS WHAT MUSLIMS SHOULD DO.

deen
Click to expand...
That makes sense. Then, the question is:

What is Islam? Is it the Quran? Is it a particular leader? Where are his writings? How do you avoid improper understanding of what Islam is? How is one sect of Musllim wrong and another right? Which sect is right? How do we know?
 
40.png
Ahimsa:
Another translation:

Again, this quote refers to non-Muslims who were beginning to wage an attack against the Muslims. (I believe the non-Muslims in this case constituted the Roman Empire, which occupied Syria, and saw the Muslims as a military threat. Word was that the Romans intended to demolish the Muslims. Muhammad marched up north to Tabuk with a force of 30,000, as a preventive defensive measure. Discovering that the Romans had withdrawn, Muhammad retreated back to Mecca.)
Click to expand...
Where does it say that an attack is imminent or occuring or even threatening?
 
40.png
Brad:
Where does it say that an attack is imminent or occuring or even threatening?
Click to expand...
Pick up any good edition of the Qur’an, and you will find the context of the verses mentioned and discussed therein in the commentary.
 
40.png
Ahimsa:
The Qur’an quote in question (9:123) refers either to the non-Muslims in Arabia who broke a treaty with the Muslims, or to Muhammad’s expedition to Tabuk in 630 CE/9 AH, which was a defensive measure on the part of the Muslims. Since Muhammad died in 632 CE, the Qur’an quote in question does not refer to Yarmuk.
Click to expand...
What did the Romans do to provoke that attack during Ramadan?
 
40.png
Irenicist:
How do you come up with this figure?

Irenicist
Click to expand...
From an historical expert (Thomas Madden) at Saint Louis University in an article called “Crusaders and Historians” in the June/July issue of First Things:

"The First Cursade was called in 1095 by Pope Urban II in response to an urgent plea for assistance from the Byzantine Empire, the last Christian state in the East. Things had been going badly for Christians for several centuries, ever since the explosion of Muslim warriors out of Arabia in the seventh century. Egypt, Palestine, Syria, North Africa - the core of the Christian world- had been conquered by Muslim jihad warriors and subjected to Islamic rule and law. When Turkish jihad warriors invaded and conquered Asia Minor, they reduced Christendom to a tiny corner of the world…

One would think the Muslim conquest of fully two-thirds of the Christian world might engender some bad feeling…"
 
40.png
Brad:
From an historical expert (Thomas Madden) at Saint Louis University in an article called “Crusaders and Historians” in the June/July issue of First Things:

"The First Cursade was called in 1095 by Pope Urban II in response to an urgent plea for assistance from the Byzantine Empire, the last Christian state in the East. Things had been going badly for Christians for several centuries, ever since the explosion of Muslim warriors out of Arabia in the seventh century. Egypt, Palestine, Syria, North Africa - the core of the Christian world- had been conquered by Muslim jihad warriors and subjected to Islamic rule and law. When Turkish jihad warriors invaded and conquered Asia Minor, they reduced Christendom to a tiny corner of the world…

One would think the Muslim conquest of fully two-thirds of the Christian world might engender some bad feeling…"
Click to expand...
I stand corrected. 🙂 thanks for the source.
 
40.png
Brad:
From an historical expert (Thomas Madden) at Saint Louis University in an article called “Crusaders and Historians” in the June/July issue of First Things:

"The First Cursade was called in 1095 by Pope Urban II in response to an urgent plea for assistance from the Byzantine Empire, the last Christian state in the East. Things had been going badly for Christians for several centuries, ever since the explosion of Muslim warriors out of Arabia in the seventh century. Egypt, Palestine, Syria, North Africa - the core of the Christian world- had been conquered by Muslim jihad warriors and subjected to Islamic rule and law. When Turkish jihad warriors invaded and conquered Asia Minor, they reduced Christendom to a tiny corner of the world…

One would think the Muslim conquest of fully two-thirds of the Christian world might engender some bad feeling…"
Click to expand...
Hey, how is that issue, by the way? I haven’t gotten mine in the mail yet 😦
 
40.png
Ahimsa:
Pick up any good edition of the Qur’an, and you will find the context of the verses mentioned and discussed therein in the commentary.
Click to expand...
I read the verses. I’m looking for the context in the verses, not a commentary that can vary incredibly from version to version. Point me to the verses that indicate a potential or occuring attack.
 
40.png
mike182d:
Hey, how is that issue, by the way? I haven’t gotten mine in the mail yet 😦
Click to expand...
Outstanding. The first time I’ve MADE the time to read the 4 main articles start to finish prior to the next issue coming out.
 
40.png
Brad:
Ummm. That’s one non-Muslim that is wrong. History does not make any such thing clear at all.
Click to expand...
Then perhaps you will favour us by citing even one example of a people who were converted to Islam by force. You may be confusing conquest with conversion. The standard modus operandi for Islam after Muslims conquered an area was to disarm non-Muslims, impose a heavy tax on them, and then let time do its work. As late as the 13th century, more than four centuries after the Muslim conquest, half of Egypt was still Christian.

I am not trying to make out Muslim rulers as heroes and nice guys, but they are simply not guilty of forced conversion. At most they may in some places have expelled Christians unwilling to convert.

Irenicist
 
40.png
Irenicist:
Then perhaps you will favour us by citing even one example of a people who were converted to Islam by force. You may be confusing conquest with conversion. The standard modus operandi for Islam after Muslims conquered an area was to disarm non-Muslims, impose a heavy tax on them, and then let time do its work. As late as the 13th century, more than four centuries after the Muslim conquest, half of Egypt was still Christian.

I am not trying to make out Muslim rulers as heroes and nice guys, but they are simply not guilty of forced conversion. At most they may in some places have expelled Christians unwilling to convert.

Irenicist
Click to expand...
How did the lands get conquered except by conquest? The following with heavy taxes and labor for non-converts? It sounds like conversion, death, or slavery holds true.

Perhaps everyone was not forced to convert. But they certainly were not treated well if they didn’t. They were conquered. My question is how does the Quran teach against doing such?
 
40.png
mike182d:
What did the Romans do to provoke that attack during Ramadan?
Click to expand...
I have no idea. But given their previous behavior, I wouldn’t put it pass the Romans to have engaged in some nefarious activity.😃

Anyway, the question was whether the Qur’an justifies offensive, unprovoked military behavior – not whether Muslims after the time of Muhammad engage in what the Qur’an prohibited.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top