Originally posted by louisXIVAfter all that, I do, in fairness, have to give you one compliment: You’re initial efforts on explaining the Trinity seemed pretty good to me.
Well, want me to go on about trinity? I thought you didn't like this subject.:-)
The problem is, it seems that so few people—of any religion—really want to understand the other religions. If they did, they would go to sources other than strictly critical ones. If I wanted to really understand the doctrine of the Trinity, I wouldn’t go first to a Muslim scholar or website, or a Buddhist one, etc. And if I wanted to understand Hinduism, I wouldn’t go first to a Christian scholar or website. Let alone listen to folks (with or without scholarly credentials) whose only interest is in critical polemics.
A gentile once approached Rabbi Shammai, and mockingly said that he’d convert to Judaism if Shammai could teach him the whole of the Torah in the length of time that he (the gentile) could stand on one foot. Shammai kicked him out. The gentile then went to Rabbi Hillel and made the same offer.
Hillel said: “What you find hateful to yourself, do not do to others. That is the whole of the Torah; the rest is commentary. Now, go and study the commentary." (Hillel died about the time that Jesus would've been a teenager.)
You guys all seem to be doing something like the gentile in the story; and nobody wants to go and study...
Originally posted by dj2beckerI told I will be back , I had to go yesterday because I had to go to sleep.
The best part is that they continually blabber that we are spurting false information, and when asked to point this out they either disappear or they change the subject.
For the verse you took out of context Visted already did show how you did that. But you seem don't know how to read.
Any way I will take the article you pasted and answer it part by part:
Jihad - Islamic Holy War
The relentless and often vicious persecution by Muslims against Christians is seldom recognised or understood. Many assume that the concept of Jihad, or holy war, espoused by Muslim leaders like the Aytollah Khomeini and demonstrated in terror bombings are aberrations not truly representative of Islam:
“We shall export our revolution, to the whole world. Until the cry ‘Allah Akbar’ resounds over the whole world. There will be struggle. There will be Jihad . . . Islam is the religion of militant individuals . . . Islam will be victorious in all the countries of the world, and Islam and the teachings of the Quran will prevail all over the world . . . This is the duty that all Muslims must fulfil . . .”
These were the often repeated public pronouncements of the Ayatollah Khomeini after the revolution in Iran in 1979 (“The Blood of the Moon”, by George Grant).
Nor was the Ayatollah alone in such militant threats. Abdul Aziz Ibn Saud declared: "We shall never call for or accept a negotiated peace. We shall only accept war - Jihad - the holy war. We resolve to drench the lands of Palestine and Arabia with the blood of the infidels or to accept martyrdom for the glory of Allah".
The President of Sudan, Lt. Gen. Al Bashir, has often spoken of Jihad. At the 40th anniversary of Sudan's independence, Al Bashir celebrated the spirit of Jihad which was engulfing the people of Sudan. The head of Sudan's ruling party, the National Islamic Front (NIF), Dr. Al Turabi, has often declared his goal of an Islamic empire controlling (initially) the horn of Africa (Eritrea, Ethiopia, Somalia, Kenya, Uganda and Sudan). This he calls the Grand Islamic Project.
At a two week conference of Muslim leaders from 80 countries, hosted by Muammar Gaddafi in Tripoli, Libya (October 1995), strategies to transform Africa into an Islamic continent were discussed. Participants openly admitted that their goals were to make Arabic the primary language of the continent and Islam the official religion. One SA member of parliament, Farouk Cassim declared: “It will probably be the biggest revolution to sweep Africa.” Head of the Islamic Propagation Centre International (IPCI), Yousuf Deedat, announced afterwards that South Africa was high on the agenda of the Islamic offensive: “We are going to turn South Africa into a Muslim state. We have the money to do it,” (Sunday Times 22/10/95). At present less than 2 percent of South Africans are Muslims.
In Islamic nations such as Sudan, converts from Islam risk execution as "Apostates."
What few Westerners understand, however, is that those Muslim leaders who call for the overthrow of all governments and the establishment of an Islamic superstate controlling all aspects of life for every person on earth are not extremists on the fringe of Islam.
So for there is no reference to Quran or Hadith, he talked about some muslim leaders today. The first one is Khomine, who is by any mean only represent less than 10% of Muslims (If we can call them Muslims because they are not) Sheia are not Muslims any act they made is not considered by muslims. Exactly the same as Hezbu Allah, you will find that Mulsim Scholars in Sudia Areibi were aganist Hezbu Allah in the last conflict because they don't represent Muslims and they are not considered Muslims. The majorty of Muslims (Suna) has a different belives and Khomini doesn't represent them. Actually Suna Muslims are considered infedals for him and are considered in the first of the line before Christians.
The remaining parts doesn't talk about war. It is talking about the message of each muslim is to declare the message of GOD to every one. Give me a source in Quran or Hadith said that should be only through war. What he did so far is to try to conclude from their talks without an evidence so far.
Actually, Jihad, the subjugation and forcible conversion of all people to Islam and world domination are central tenants of Islam. Jihad is ranked by many Muslims as the sixth pillar of Islam.
This definition is odd, and I don't know where did he got such a definition. He didn't give a source only claims. Jihad is defined in many places with different meanings. I pointed that out before may be in this thread or another one, that selfcontrol is considered Jihad in Islam. Saying that Jihad aims only for conversion is so far a way from the truth.
Quran say:
002.256
YUSUFALI: Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things.
PICKTHAL: There is no compulsion in religion. The right direction is henceforth distinct from error. And he who rejecteth false deities and believeth in Allah hath grasped a firm handhold which will never break. Allah is Hearer, Knower.
SHAKIR: There 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.
016.125
YUSUFALI: Invite (all) to the Way of thy Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching; and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious: for thy Lord knoweth best, who have strayed from His Path, and who receive guidance.
PICKTHAL: Call unto the way of thy Lord with wisdom and fair exhortation, and reason with them in the better way. Lo! thy Lord is Best Aware of him who strayeth from His way, and He is Best Aware of those who go aright.
SHAKIR: Call to the way of your Lord with wisdom and goodly exhortation, and have disputations with them in the best manner; surely your Lord best knows those who go astray from His path, and He knows best those who follow the right way.
So a Muslim cann't force anyone to be a Muslim. They should call for the way of GOD by wisdom.
Claiming that Jihad is ranked by many Muslims as the sixth pillar of Islam is very funny. And again there is no source or reference. I have sent you a link before about the pillars of Islam. I don't think Jihad is mentioned there.
Originally posted by louisXIVI didn't say that, I have sent you a PM saying I'm waiting for you and then I explained some points to be able to continue debating with you. But you simply ignored me and continue in your way as if you don't care. I asked you to show some respect to me and my religon so you can give me the chance to talk with you, but you did ignore that. I gave a link to read , but you didn't even bother yourself to read it. And then come back and say Muslims run a way or escape. I'm not afraid of nothing and we don't hide anything. And what I'm doing here is not to defend Islam. Anything you will say will not affect me by any mean. Only you who will lose if you continue in your way because I belive you don't know the truth.
Well, want me to go on about trinity? I thought you didn't like this subject.:-)
Jihad was so important to the founder of Islam, Muhammad, that he declared it to be the second most important deed in Islam.
“Allah's apostle was asked, ‘What is the best deed?’ He replied, ‘To believe in Allah and his Apostle.’ The questioner then asked, ‘What is the next (in goodness)?’ He replied, ‘To participate in Jihad (religious fighting) in Allah's cause.’” – The Hadith, Al Bukhari, Vol. 1 no 25.
The reference is not correct , I didn't find any hadith with this number so please ask him next time to make sure of his sources.
By the way he refere to Al Bukhari Book. Here is a link to Al Bukhari translation in the University of Southern California. Go there and tell me how much does Jihad appear to you as part of Islamic Law. There 93 Books in Bukhari. Only one book is talking about Jihad.
So if Jihad is the very important thing for the Muslim as you Claim why it is not devoted a larger portion of the Second Important Book In Islam.
Originally posted by louisXIVI get it. You want a photo of my uncircumcised dick.
First of all, I don't believe you're not a Muslim. Except if the Quran allows Muslims to lie to infidels... Wouldn't be so surprising after all... By the way, I see you're hiding your flag... one more indicator...
You only had to ask.
I'm from South Africa. I don't like flags, so I haven't put mine up.
I'm not responding to your tripe because it's already been done, in this thread. Perhaps the glory of your countenance is blinding you to this obvious fact?
Muslims, in fact, divide the world into two sectors: Dar-al-Islam (the House of Islam) and Dar-al-Harb (The House of War). The only countries considered to be at peace are those where Islamic law (the Sharia) is enforced.
So funny, again there is no source for his definition , only claims. Althout I will tell you that his claim is not correct because The Prophet made peace with Jews in Madina where he lives and with Infidals in Mecca. So can you tell me where is the Dar Al Harb here.
Islam in Arabic means submission, surrender or subjugation. A Muslim is one who submits. The Arabic word for peace is Salam. Islam is the active form of Salam. Muslims see themselves as a “peace making force” using argument, intrigue, commerce, threats, terrorism, warfare and every other means possible to secure Islam as the only religion worldwide.
I replyed to this point before. It show a complete missunderstading and direct intention to twist meanings. Where did he got this passage from Muslims see themselves as a “peace making force”. He was not able to find a solution of the name of Islam except to interpret Peace to be equal to war. And again it is only a claim without a source.
Muslims are not permitted to make peace with a non-Muslim country until its inhabitants surrender to Islam. They can agree to a cease fire for a period of time – but never to peace with non Muslims.
That is a very big lie. And again without a source. The prophet himself made peace with Jews and Infidals in Mecca. And in both cases the other party broke the Peace. So I don't know if you still don't see this as a twisting of facts.
A frontline missionary vehicle passes an abandoned tank of the National Islamic Front government of Sudan during a missionary outreach to the battlefront.
I don't know exactly what does he mean by this.
The Quran teaches that Muslims are superior to others: “Ye (Muslims) are the best of peoples evolved for mankind . . .” Surah 3:110.
He show only one part of the Verse and ignored the rest:
003.110
YUSUFALI: Ye are the best of peoples, evolved for mankind, enjoining what is right, forbidding what is wrong, and believing in Allah. If only the People of the Book had faith, it were best for them: among them are some who have faith, but most of them are perverted transgressors.
PICKTHAL: Ye are the best community that hath been raised up for mankind. Ye enjoin right conduct and forbid indecency; and ye believe in Allah. And if the People of the Scripture had believed it had been better for them. Some of them are believers; but most of them are evil-livers.
SHAKIR: You are the best of the nations raised up for (the benefit of) men; you enjoin what is right and forbid the wrong and believe in Allah; and if the followers of the Book had believed it would have been better for them; of them (some) are believers and most of them are transgressors
So as you can see Muslims are not the best because of anything other than doing the right and forbid the wrong. If they don't follow that they will not be the best. And then it talks about the people of book (Jews and Books) that they should belive in GOD and that some of them already do.
So I don't know exactly what does he want to point out of this.
Originally posted by ahosyneyIt's the "sixth pillar" in Wahhabism, isn't it?
Claiming that Jihad is ranked by many Muslims as the sixth pillar of Islam is very funny. And again there is no source or reference. I have sent you a link before about the pillars of Islam. I don't think Jihad is mentioned there.
Originally posted by Bosse de NageWhat is Whhabism....
It's the "sixth pillar" in Wahhabism, isn't it?
Whhabbism are is not a new religon. It was a movement rose up in Sudia Arebia calling for the return to the true Islam and wanted to remove the falsy tempt that some non muslims tried to insert into Islam. But today no one call himself Wahhaby. The majority of Muslims are "Ahl Al Sona Wa Jama3a"
If you ask any Muslim in the world about the pillar of Islam he will give Five. No one will give you Six.
Although that doesn't mean that Jihad is not important, but you have define what is Jihad and when it is required.
First Jihad is different types, not only Jihad in war: I posted that in another thread:
Originally posted by ahosyney
I will try to answer your question but I have a comment on your post. And it may be part of my answer too.
The word "Jihad" of course interpreted evey where as violance, war or something like that. But the word itself in Arabic doesn't mean that. And what it imply in Islam is not ony war.
"Jihad" came derived from the Arabic verb "Jahad" (In Arabic almost all words should has an origin to a verb and derived from it)
This verb means hard, difficult or made with troubles (My translation is not accurate) but to make it close andother word derived from it is "Moghad" = tired.
So the direct meaning of the word doesn't imply vilonce or war. In Islam it simply any act that you do in hardship for the sake of GOD.
So under this definition many things may be named "Jihad":
The prophet Muhammed called self control and worship the "Big Jihad" = "Al Jihad Al Akbar"
And when his wife asked him about "Jihad for women" he replayed by the Pilgrimage.
You may call what I'm doing here "Jehad" too., because I'm really facing a lot of problems 🙂
And of course it include war because in the war there is a lot of struggling and one may loose his life.
The question here why all the other meaning of word disappeared and Muslim extremist and the West ignore all the other meanings and stick with the meaning commony understaned today. I think there are many reasons for that:
1. The most important thing is ignorance. Ignorance of Islam from both muslims and others. Islamic laws and faith is not being tought in schools or university (For example in Egypt my country only my university teach Islamic scinces which are many) . So most of Muslim youth don't know really know what Islam want from them. So they can be eseally told "Jihad is to kill others" and you know the rest. That is actually what happen.
On the othre side people in the west don't know Islam, so if you tell them by media , Muslims beilve in Jihad and they want to destroy your civlisation no one can argue that.
Jihad is only a must for a Muslim when the enemy is inside the Islamic country ot there is a threaten from some enemy. Other wise it is not obligatory.
Originally posted by ahosyneyIf Jihad and death is only obligatory to someone inside a Moslem country why was a death threat instituted against Solomon Rushdie?
What is Whhabism....
Whhabbism are is not a new religon. It was a movement rose up in Sudia Arebia calling for the return to the true Islam and wanted to remove the falsy tempt that some non muslims tried to insert into Islam. But today no one call himself Wahhaby. The majority of Muslims are "Ahl Al Sona Wa Jama3a"
If you ask any Muslim in the world ...[text shortened]... ere is a threaten from some enemy. Other wise it is not obligatory.
Originally posted by ahosyneyJihad is only a must for a Muslim when the enemy is inside the Islamic country ot there is a threaten from some enemy. Other wise it is not obligatory.[/b]
What is Whhabism....
Whhabbism are is not a new religon. It was a movement rose up in Sudia Arebia calling for the return to the true Islam and wanted to remove the falsy tempt that some non muslims tried to insert into Islam. But today no one call himself Wahhaby. The majority of Muslims are "Ahl Al Sona Wa Jama3a"
If you ask any Muslim in the world ...[text shortened]... ere is a threaten from some enemy. Other wise it is not obligatory.
Quite a funny argument, though... Muslims seem to be threatened in very much countries, and very much countries seem to be muslim, if one counts all the countries where Jihad is practiced...
Your argument is very ironic...
Originally posted by jaywillI think Visited has answered this point before.
If Jihad and death is only obligatory to someone inside a Moslem country why was a death threat instituted against Solomon Rushdie?
any way that threaten came only from Iran and Khomine and as I pointed above, They are Sheia and they don't represent Muslims. Actually they are not considered Muslims. So their opinions doesn't represnt Islamic point of view.
The other thing that was not Jihad that Khomini was calling for.
Originally posted by louisXIVCount the countries where Jihad is Practiced?
Jihad is only a must for a Muslim when the enemy is inside the Islamic country ot there is a threaten from some enemy. Other wise it is not obligatory.
Quite a funny argument, though... Muslims seem to be threatened in very much countries, and very much countries seem to be muslim, if one counts all the countries where Jihad is practiced...
Your argument is very ironic...[/b]