Understanding Islamic Views

[KathleenGee]

Elwill,

I believe that you are following the true spirit of God in your walk. I believe some day we will have much peace. We are all witnessing those who promote hatred, murder, selfish greed of squandering billions for themselves while so many people have little to nothing…bad science and technology that dehumanize us…this is coming to a head to be lanced…it is a great infection in the world.

I believe we will be one, and yet people will continue to hold on to their ancient traditions and customs.

As my Hebrew Catholic friend shared with me, the New Covenant of Christ did away with the Sinai Covenant that focused on the law. And the 10 commandments were summarized when Christ said to love God with all your heart, soul and mind and to love your neighbor as yourself. If you practice that…Honor God, to not take His Holy Name in vain, have one day of rest and remembrance of Him, honor and obey parents, not kill, be impure, lie, steal, bear false witness, covet wife or property of another…this is all love in action.

The Catholic Church has its laws–each Sunday is the greatest feast in the Catholic Church, not Christmas or Easter, because each Sunday we receive the fullness of Christ in all His grace, healing presence, new life of the Resurrection 2,000 years ago. Normally Resurrection Sunday Mass takes one hour. So we are required to go to Mass on Sunday one hour a week and if not that is a grave sin to the reality and gift God is giving us. And we fast during Lent on Wednesday’s, we observe our Holy Days, we do not practice artificial means of birth control or commit abortions, and we are to remain with our one spouse until death.

The 10 commandments are still followed. Elwill, you should get a universal Catholic Catechism. It further expounds on the depth of each commandment and how extensive each commandment is meant and how it is recognized and lived out in today’s conditions.

We also have our daily gatherings…at the Daily Sacrifice of the Mass. We have many lay people now throughout the world praying the Liturgy of the Hours that priests and religious are obligated to pray every day. We pray it morning and at the evening. I wish the practice of the Angelus could return where we call down God’s blessings on our work at noon. People who go to work and have a Catholic Church near by can go to noon Mass and return to work.

And finally, the New Covenant as I shared with you before, is that we are to call on Jesus every day, denying ourselves, accepting the sufferings God has given us symbolized in the Cross, and follow Jesus through His presence and power not of our own, a supernatural life. This is a supernatural life that on the outside looks no different than any other people…but if you were to follow a devout Christian every day and see the choices they make, hidden before man but seen by God alone – as Christ exhorts us not to ‘show off’, then you would understand us better.

Virtue tends to hide itself as it knows its grace comes not from the person but it is God’s work, His alone. He wants to be the sole witness of our good deeds. Pride and vanity, however, want to show off to the world, be praised…Christ said those have already gotten their reward in this life.

I have been thinking of the decree the Muslims had made for that monastery of St. Catherine’s in Egypt. I have the impression it was made solely for them and all Christians who draw on its charism and spirituality.

 

[dolphinlove]

This document is somewhat confussing to me.

I’ve read it over & over and it does **not **seem to be the words of mohamad.

**This is a message from Muhammad ibn Abdullah, as a covenant to those who adopt Christianity, near and far, we are with them.
Verily I, the servants, the helpers, and my followers defend them, because Christians are my citizens; and by Allah! I hold out against anything that displeases them.
No compulsion is to be on them.
Neither are their judges to be removed from their jobs nor their monks from their monasteries.

No one is to destroy a house of their religion, to damage it**, or to carry anything from it to the Muslims’ houses.
Should anyone take any of these, he would spoil God’s covenant and disobey His Prophet. Verily, they are my allies and have my secure charter against all that they hate.
No one is to force them to travel or to oblige them to fight.
The Muslims are to fight for them.

If a female Christian is married to a Muslim, it is not to take place without her approval. She is not to be prevented from visiting her church to pray.

Their churches are to be respected. They are neither to be prevented from repairing them nor the sacredness of their covenants.

No one of the nation (Muslims) is to disobey the covenant till the Last Day (end of the world).

Do the muslim members on here believe this are mohamads words…???

Maybe they translated it wrong

 

[famdigy]

Then explain to me Famdigy the persecution of Christians and Jews in Iran, the president of Iran blames Jews for everything, so does Islam, the Quran, it is written in that…Book that Muslims are not to take Jews and Christians as friends, so therefore, you contradict that Book of yours. It says to strike their heads off whenever they are found. How can Khomeini be a heretic when he is a Shi’a just like you. How can that sackful of fleas be a heretic? If you don’t as you said support the villainfication of Jews, why does every Muslim country villainfy Israel? Israel has a right to EXIST, just like the Islamic Republic of Iran, or the UAE, or Saudi Arabia, tell me, do you believe the State of Israel has a right to exist or are you like all the Muslims who say “Oh boo hoo Palestinian land has been stolen.”

But yet you believe in death for apostasy. In my Holy Book, Jesus or Isa in your language said that God shall judge us, not men. So therefore, you judge men, judging is for God/Allah only, how can you know what’s in a person’s heart? How can you the Muslim know what’s in a person’s heart? How come when a Muslim leaves his religiom, he has to die? What kind of religion is Islam? A religion of peace? Is it a religion of peace in a universal sense? If a Muslim wants to leave his religion, what the hell is their problem? Allah can only judge people’s hearts, not you with your religious police who mutilate and enforce laws made by El-Shaitan.

It’s not only the Christians and Jews who are persecuted in Iran, if you’ve been following the news since the last election you’ll see that everyone who dissents from the government is persecuted regardless of their faith. The president of Iran doesn’t blame Jews for everything, in fact he has no hatred to the Jews and even meets with orthodox Jews from all over the world. You need to pay closer attention and understand the difference between criticizing a political state and criticizing a religion or ethnic group . The president of Iran is criticizing the state of Israel for its policies and treatment of the Palestinians. This is a political issue with the state not the Jewish people.

For example, I can criticize Saudi Arabia, it doesn’t mean I’m criticizing Arabs or Muslims. In the same way, a person who criticizes Israeli policies is not necessarily criticizing the Jewish people or their religion.

Yes Muslims are not to take Jews and Christians as protectors. This ayah was revealed shortly before the battle of Uhud, when the news of the Unbelievers army marching towards Medina reached the Muslims, some of them said they will seek protection from so and so the Jew, others said they will seek protection from so and so the Christian. The Ayah admonishes the Muslims from taking Jews and Christians as protectors but doesn’t forbid us from maintaining good relations with them. In fact it’s written in the Qur’an “Allah forbids you not, With regard to those who Fight you not for (your) Faith Nor drive you out Of your homes, From dealing kindly and justly With them: For Allah loveth Those who are just”

With regard to Khomini, a lot of his views are contradictory to the Qur’an and the traditions of the Ahlulbayt (the prophetic household) and so we view him as a heretic figure. He is not an Infallible imam and his opinions have no authority over us.

I said before that we’re not in the business of looking into people’s hearts. If a person apostasies and keeps to himself then God is his judge. But if he publicly declares his apostasy within the Muslim society then he has laid a duty on society to respond. This is no different than a person who works within a state to undermine and destroy that state. The word for that is treason. Apostasy is treason.

 

[famdigy]

Noble Verse 4:137 “Those who believe, then reject faith, then believe (again) and (again) reject faith, and go on increasing in unbelief,- Allah will not forgive them nor guide them nor guide them on the way.”

Notice that the Quran says those who reject faith and then BELIEVE and again DISBELIEVE. if a Muslim rejects faith and is then killed for doing so how will he live to again BELIEVE and then DISBELIEVE. The atmosphere of this verse is that of free will and freedom of choice to everyone. If Allah wanted he would have said something about the punishment, if there was any, of those who reject Islam after accepting it. but Allah takes this to be clearly a private matter between them and Allah.

you’re mistaken in your understanding of the Ayah above. First of all, many of those who accepted Islam only done so on the surface with no real conviction in their hearts. When the odds were against Islam they wavered in their beleif. And so they waivered back and forth in their belief (Iman). Nowhere does it say they renounced their faith (din) outwardly. If this ayah was speaking about those who renounced their faith outwardly, then how could a person go on “increasing in unbelief” If the ayah was speaking about outward believe as you understand it then he is either in or out. There is no such thing as increasing in unbelief. Therefore it makes more sense to view this Ayah as speaking about inward convictions. Tthat is to say “increasing in unbelief” means increasing in conviction of disbelief.

Secondy, the Qur’an is not the only source of Law. For instance The Qur’an doesn’t teach the form of prayer. We have to look towards the prophetic tradition to learn how to pray.

Shaykh al-Kulayni narrates a sahíh hadíth from Ali ibn Jafar from his brother (Imam) Abu 'l-Hasan (Musa al-Kãzim) (a.s.). Ali ibn Jafar said, “I asked him about a Muslim who became Christian.” He answered, “He should be killed and not be asked to seek forgiveness.” Then I asked: “What about a Christian who becomes a Muslim and then turns away from Islam (i.e., becomes murtad)?” He replied, “He should be asked to seek forgiveness; so if he returns (to Islam, then okay), otherwise he should be killed.” This hadíth covers both types of murtad: fitri as well as milli.

Third, there was a historical event during the conquest of makkah where the prophet ordered the killing of a Murad Milli named Abdullãh bin Sa`d bin Abi Sarah but then pardoned the man after he repented and sought forgiveness.

 

[viveret]

Muslims learn their beliefs through rote memorization to a most profound way. Christians study their faith through various methods. Fundamentalists learn Scripture through study, and also work to rote memorize Scripture quotes, but not with such deep fervor as Muslims. I have heard of a few fundamentalist Christians who can repeat a large amount of passages of Scripture.

I’m sorry, this is supposed to mean what? What exactly?
Are you saying that rote memorization is more profound? That people learn more from it?
I think it turns people into automatons, particularly if nothing else is added to it year after year.
There was a time when Christians, in America in particular, read and memorized large chunks of the Bible by rote. They did so not just for religious purposes, they did so in order to learn how to read, period.
And what about the second authority in Christianity, Tradition.
Protestants and Muslims deny the authority of Tradition.
I do not.

 

[KathleenGee]

I mean literal and not in context to other people, places or things…the imposition of its faith on others, and the inability to see common ground…

 

[famdigy]

I mean literal and not in context to other people, places or things…the imposition of its faith on others, and the inability to see common ground…

you presume memorization is the only method by which we learn our religion. memorization of the Qur’an is usually done at a very early age. The link below should give you a good idea of how we learn our religion.

imam-hussain.com/progandsub.html

The study of Hawza is traditionally divided into 3 stages:

The introductory stage (Muqaddimat) which usually takes 4 years.
The intermediate stage (Sutouh) which takes about 6 years.
The higher study stage (AL-Bahth AL-Kharij) where the students are prepared to
reach Ijtihad. It takes usually 5-10 years or more.
Students can choose between full-time or part-time studies.

Subjects
During the Moukadimat and the Al Soutouh the student will be enrolled in the following subjects.

Arabic grammar and eloquence (Nahw, Sarf and Balagha)
Islamic Jurisprudence (Fiqh)
Principles of Jurisprudence (Usul al-Fiqh)
Philosophical Studies Such as Logic, Philosophy (Islamic & western) Principles of Faith (Ilm al-kalaam)
Quranic Studies (Sciences of the Holy Quran and Exegesis of the Holy Quran)
Traditions & Narrators of the Traditions (Hadith and Rijal)
Morals and Ethics (Akhlaq)
Economics (Islamic)
Contemporary Islamic Issues
Personal Laws in Islam
History (Islamic& western)
Comparative Religions
Dialogue and Preaching (Khetabah)
Manners and Sociology (Tarbeyah & Ijtema3)

 

[Advance]

I said before that we’re not in the business of looking into people’s hearts. If a person apostasies and keeps to himself then God is his judge. But if he publicly declares his apostasy within the Muslim society then he has laid a duty on society to respond. This is no different than a person who works within a state to undermine and destroy that state. The word for that is treason. Apostasy is treason.

I have looked at this issue time after time and I personally see no evidence for worldly punishment (for apostasy) . For one - this type of punishment - goes against everything we hold to be from God, the Quran. Infact , the Quran emphasizes religious freedom throughout its pages. It is my opinion that the original punishment is for treason, essentially you proclaim conversion and** FIGHT** the Islamic country.

I also disagree on your interpretation of treason - The issue of belief in God is a personal one, as such I feel that an Islamic country meddling in the internal affairs of its inhabitants is not mandated by Islamic law.

God oppresses no one, If he wished he would have made us ALL bow down to him in belief. instead, we have been given the freedom of choice.

Furthermore , ahadith or traditions (to be true) must pass the first test- the Quran. this is the problem I have with the word of Men.

 

[elwill]

Elwill, were you aware of this document prior to it being posted on this thread…???

offcourse

 

[elwill]

This document is somewhat confussing to me.

I’ve read it over & over and it does **not **seem to be the words of mohamad.

**This is a message from Muhammad ibn Abdullah, as a covenant to those who adopt Christianity, near and far, we are with them.
Verily I, the servants, the helpers, and my followers defend them, because Christians are my citizens; and by Allah! I hold out against anything that displeases them.
No compulsion is to be on them.
Neither are their judges to be removed from their jobs nor their monks from their monasteries.

No one is to destroy a house of their religion, to damage it**, or to carry anything from it to the Muslims’ houses.
Should anyone take any of these, he would spoil God’s covenant and disobey His Prophet. Verily, they are my allies and have my secure charter against all that they hate.
No one is to force them to travel or to oblige them to fight.
The Muslims are to fight for them.

If a female Christian is married to a Muslim, it is not to take place without her approval. She is not to be prevented from visiting her church to pray.

Their churches are to be respected. They are neither to be prevented from repairing them nor the sacredness of their covenants.

No one of the nation (Muslims) is to disobey the covenant till the Last Day (end of the world).

Do the muslim members on here believe this are mohamads words…???

when i cheked the arabic treaty , i found out that it’s correct
if you want to download it

pal-lp.org/library-v374.html

click on this word to download it “تحميل الملف”

 

[elwill]

you’re mistaken in your understanding of the Ayah above. First of all, many of those who accepted Islam only done so on the surface with no real conviction in their hearts. When the odds were against Islam they wavered in their beleif. And so they waivered back and forth in their belief (Iman). Nowhere does it say they renounced their faith (din) outwardly. If this ayah was speaking about those who renounced their faith outwardly, then how could a person go on “increasing in unbelief” If the ayah was speaking about outward believe as you understand it then he is either in or out. There is no such thing as increasing in unbelief. Therefore it makes more sense to view this Ayah as speaking about inward convictions. Tthat is to say “increasing in unbelief” means increasing in conviction of disbelief.

Secondy, the Qur’an is not the only source of Law. For instance The Qur’an doesn’t teach the form of prayer. We have to look towards the prophetic tradition to learn how to pray.

Shaykh al-Kulayni narrates a sahíh hadíth from Ali ibn Jafar from his brother (Imam) Abu 'l-Hasan (Musa al-Kãzim) (a.s.). Ali ibn Jafar said, “I asked him about a Muslim who became Christian.” He answered, “He should be killed and not be asked to seek forgiveness.” Then I asked: “What about a Christian who becomes a Muslim and then turns away from Islam (i.e., becomes murtad)?” He replied, “He should be asked to seek forgiveness; so if he returns (to Islam, then okay), otherwise he should be killed.” This hadíth covers both types of murtad: fitri as well as milli.

Third, there was a historical event during the conquest of makkah where the prophet ordered the killing of a Murad Milli named Abdullãh bin Sa`d bin Abi Sarah but then pardoned the man after he repented and sought forgiveness.

may be you are true and may be not , but what about the other verses and what about the verse which say
" 2-256There is no compulsion in religion; truly the right way has become clearly distinct from error; therefore, whoever disbelieves in the Shaitan and believes in Allah he indeed has laid hold on the firmest handle, which shall not break off, and Allah is Hearing, Knowing. "

2-193 And fight with them until there is no persecution, and religion should be only for Allah, but if they desist, then there should be no hostility except against the oppressors.

 

[Alcrusader]

Before thinking in any topic about Islam and Christianity&Jews we should know that “ALLAH” Is NOT OUR God “Jehovah”

once understood, you can understand everything…

 

[Alcrusader]

And another point.
Issa and Jesus are completely 2 different characters.
Issa is a corrupted Image/copy of Jesus from the point of view Nestorianism, which was told to mohammad through the monk " el raheb Bahira".

start comparing the 2 characters and you will find that one of them has a lack of informations.

 

[Alcrusader]

The problem is that the church Is NOT acting in this part. This is because we do have respect for muslims and that’s it.
You know that even when muslims say that Mohammad is the last prophet, it’s completely
wrong/. Because their is no single proof of that in the Bible nor in the Torah.
As we all know Jesus is the last messenger of God. He is God himself that took a human body and came to save us from our sines. So Why after God him self came, and said in the OT that after Jesus none will came from my part, Why Should God “Re-send” another message If he corrected everything and told us how to get to heaven in the first place?

another thing, the real name of “mohammad” was “kothm”.
el raheb Bahira changed his name to mohammad, so that he meets the a certain “fault” prophecy that “after Jesus will go to the Father, how will send “Al mou’zi”” which was though in the first couple years that’s another person, whereas Jesus meant he will send** “al mou’zi” = The Holy Spirit. **

Allah is a pagan god different from “Jehovah”
Search for the origin of the word “ALLAH” in wikipedia.

 

[Alcrusader]

I can prove to you that the god of Muslims have the same characteristics of Satan.
It’s not all, ALLAH , the god of islam, is a “LIAR” in arabic "الله ماكر "
which means, “you can’t trust ALLAH because he could cheat on you!!”

I little busy these days cz of my projects, but once I’m done with it, I’m gonna give information about Islam you never thought it could exist.

but before I go, I want any Muslim****, that could prove to me that “Mohammad IS NOW IN HEAVEN” and Is able to proof it, to not estate plzzzzzzzzzz.

 

[KathleenGee]

Famdigy,

Thanks for explaining the indoctrination of Islam. Have you checked out this site, ‘www.newageislam.com’? I see this site attempting to recover philosophical thought and discourse that eventually was banned, along with the Catholic Church doing the same, for fear that philosophical thought could lead people to not believe in God. There were various Arab scholars who were drawing on Plato, the Neo-Platonists, and others during the Arabic Golden Age, and drew them out to their own works particular to their cultures.

There was a predecessor to St. Thomas Aquinas who studied Plato and was beginning to work to apply the belief of God into a public discourse of philosphy. St. Thomas continued in the study of metaphysics – some say the study of reality --and claimed he could prove the existence of God through the erudite tradition. Plato’s works centered on cause and effect. You can insert God as the cause and we and creation His effects. St. Thomas’ works made him a saint, although he made other remarks – particularly in regards to women – that were not in the spirit of the Church but his own.

I never was able to rote memorize my catechism, only to pass. I was never even able to fully quote why we exist…to love, serve God and to be with Him in heaven. But I did learn about Christ more through His gospels and listening to the lives of the saints, or hearing about how people make decisions good or bad in every day life as a Christian. I would visit the Lord in the tabernacle some times during my lunch break at school, or visit Him on my way home from school when churches were open during that time. We can’t now because of vandals.

When I mean literal, what I am referring to is the imposition of Islam on people against their will. There are Christian fundamentalists who are literal and do not think Catholics follow the Bible and only they are saved. That is what I am referring to.

There are Muslims, because their format is essentially literal and seek a totalitarian world for all human beings, are unable because of the literal understanding of Allah throughout their studies, to recognize essences of the same Allah in our God, and unable to see the common humanity of non-Muslims. And Muslims are unable to understand the power of witness and critical thinking. I mean, Catholics are allowed to question our own faith, debate it, criticize it…because we are searching for the truth.

Christianity also sees God as love and the connector and definer that we human beings are not only His creation, but through Christ, we are restored as His children. And Christ calls us to see that He is present in all human beings, and that we will be judged - not necessarily by how much we claim we are for Christ, but how we alleviated suffering of other human beings --whether they are Christian or not.

So I see literal fundamentalism running through Islam that wants to create a totalitarian society without diversity…massive people who cannot think outside the box.
I do not see great economic works with Sharia in the history of Islam. The economy came about mainly through the discovery of oil…and our electronic/technical age of facilitating communication and travel, this facilitating the present global economy.

Plus there is this image of Allah’s enslavement of mankind – even the posture of Islamic prayer for me is a sign of enslavement…the very thing Christ is freeing us from. So when I speak literally, I am referring to these points, as well as Muslims not accepting Christ, but creating a new one who contradicts the True Christ Who is the source of our life.

We are not called to be slaves but free men. When people are free and following the dictates of Christ, and people are allowed to be fully creative and think and critique and try to do what is morally right, you have a prosperous society. Do you think I like the present financial system that is ‘owned’ by invisible entities? No. Christ said the poor would always be with us, this world will always be a place of sorrows and injustice.

A literal understanding of topics does not amend to the free and creative person God is calling us to be through Christ.

 

[viveret]

“I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the house of bondage in Egypt.”
There is no indication that God would lead anyone back there.
There is one essential Christian belief-- that man and God are made in the same image, that is not shared in Islam, and can never be.

 

[elwill]

This document is somewhat confussing to me.

I’ve read it over & over and it does **not **seem to be the words of mohamad.

**This is a message from Muhammad ibn Abdullah, as a covenant to those who adopt Christianity, near and far, we are with them.
Verily I, the servants, the helpers, and my followers defend them, because Christians are my citizens; and by Allah! I hold out against anything that displeases them.
No compulsion is to be on them.
Neither are their judges to be removed from their jobs nor their monks from their monasteries.​

etc

Do the muslim members on here believe this are mohamads words…???**

why do you think that it isn’t his words , and why do you think that muslims know nothing about these teaching ?
do you think that it’s odd teaching of mohammed (pbuh) ?

the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) was reported to have said,
“He who unfairly treats a non-Muslim who keeps a peace treaty with Muslims, or undermines his rights, or burdens him beyond his capacity, or takes something from him without his consent; then I am his opponent on the Day of Judgment” (Abu Dawud and Al-Bayhaqi).

He (peace and blessings be upon him) is also reported to have said, “He who harms a non-Muslim who keeps a peace treaty with Muslims has harmed me, and he who harms me has harmed Allah” (At-Tabarani in Al-Awsat with a good chain of transmission).

Not only was this the Sunnah of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) on the issue, but the Rightly Guided Caliphs also practiced this, with several authentic incidents to this effect reported by Umar ibn Al-Khattab and Ali ibn Abi Talib.

The Rightly Guided Caliphs and those who succeeded them continued to implement these policies towards non-Muslims living within the Muslim community. During the caliphate of Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him),

Khalid ibn Al-Waleed sent a letter to the non-Muslim population of Al-Hira in Iraq at the time, assuring them that none of their rights were to be undermined by the Muslim army’s procession in their direction.

Umar ibn Al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) was also reported to have seen a senile Jewish man asking for alms, and hence took him to the treasury and authorized a monthly pension for him and the likes of him. By this, Abu Bakr and Umar had jointly formulated a social welfare legislation for Muslims as well as non-Muslims, which was then unanimously picked up by all Islamic sects.

Islam, throughout history, has safeguarded and protected houses of worship for non-Muslims and sanctified their religious rituals. When the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) wrote the peace treaty to the people of Najran, he asserted to them that they should receive the protection of Allah and His Prophet on their property, faith, and choices. Similarly, `Umar’s letter to the people of Iliya in Palestine, upon the Muslim conquest, promised them the liberty to choose the faith they deemed appropriate; in addition there are analogous accounts attributed to Khalid ibn Al-Waleed.

Permitting non-Muslims to build their own houses of worship in towns mainly populated by Muslims also falls under this scope, where early in Muslim history several churches were built in Egypt during the first Hijri century. An example of this is the construction of the Mar Marcus Church in Alexandria (between AH 39 and 56), and the construction of the first church in Fustat in the Roman Alley during the reign of Maslamah ibn Mikhled (between the years AH 47 and 68). Ruler Abdul `Aziz ibn Marwan also authorized constructing a church in Helwan while founding the city, besides allowing a number of bishops to erect hermitage cells.

Historian Al-Maqrizi once said, “All modern day Cairo churches were undoubtedly restored in Islam.”

The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) was reported to have said prophecy on his deathbed, “By Allah, respect the Copts of Egypt, for you shall conquer them, and they shall be your supporters in the cause of Allah” (At-Tabarani).

In another hadith, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said, “Treat them well, for they are an asset to you and a warning against your enemies by the Will of Allah.” Reference here is made to Egyptian Copts (Ibn Hibban).

The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) attributed certain rights to Egyptian Copts that he did not grant to other minorities, where Ka`b ibn Malik narrates from the Prophet, “If Egypt is conquered, treat the Copts with dignity, for they have a blood relation with us.”.

Connotation is made here to the mother of the Prophet Isma`il, Hajar, who was an Egyptian (Reported by At-Tabarani and Al-Hakim

islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1158658487489&pagename=Zone-English-Living_Shariah%2FLSELayout

believe me , jakazaki
theire are more incidents where i can cite about how islam and muslims were tolerance with other relegions . o it is not something strange or odd , the tolerance was practiced widly by muslims

 

[Cinette]

I have looked at this issue time after time and I personally see no evidence for worldly punishment (for apostasy) . For one - this type of punishment - goes against everything we hold to be from God, the Quran. Infact , the Quran emphasizes religious freedom throughout its pages. It is my opinion that the original punishment is for treason, essentially you proclaim conversion and** FIGHT** the Islamic country.

I also disagree on your interpretation of treason - The issue of belief in God is a personal one, as such I feel that an Islamic country meddling in the internal affairs of its inhabitants is not mandated by Islamic law.

God oppresses no one, If he wished he would have made us ALL bow down to him in belief. instead, we have been given the freedom of choice.

Furthermore , ahadith or traditions (to be true) must pass the first test- the Quran. this is the problem I have with the word of Men.

*I am so tired I can hardly talk and I have just arrived and decided to take a peep at my emails. I just have to make a comment about you - you sound more like a Christian than a Muslim. One hears horrific stories of Muslims killing their children for choosing “wrong” partners, killing Christians. etc etc etc that I find it difficult to believe what you say. You sound like a terrific person.

In my part of the world we have many cultures and I have always had a fascination for the Arab world - art and music - and it stirs me when I hear the music.

It would be so nice if we just enjoyed each other - our culture and our personalities and learned to live in peace.

Cinette*

 

[GaryTaylor]

I’m wondering if the problem here is in understanding the difference between the War on Terror and what actually the Islamic Nation is promoting as a religion. And thus confusing the two.

Certainly, neither bin Laden nor his principal associate, Ayman al-Zawahiri, are graduates of Islamic universities. And so their proclamations ignore 14 centuries of Muslim scholarship, and instead take the form of lists of anti-American grievances and of Koranic quotations referring to early Muslim wars against Arab idolaters. These are followed by the conclusion that all Americans, civilian and military, are to be wiped off the face of the Earth. All this amounts to an odd and extreme violation of the normal methods of Islamic scholarship. Had the authors of such fatwās followed the norms of their religion, they would have had to acknowledge that no school of mainstream Islam allows the targeting of civilians. An insurrectionist who kills non-combatants is guilty of baghy, “armed aggression,” a capital offense in Islamic law.

My question is how much does one differ from the other. And how much will bin Ladens militant views effect and engulf the rest of the Islamic world.