Our religion requires that we love our God as He has loved us, with all of our heart mind and soul, and that we love each other as He has loved us. Mohammed brings death not love to the table. What say you?
I have never read the Koran so don't know what it says. But if its true that it says nonmuslims should be killed I would have to say its evil.
Read both the Quran and Salman Rushdie's book the "Satanic Verses". He is currently in hiding because Irans' Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini issued a fatwa against the author sentencing him to death. It's just plain abosolutism with no appeal to anyone. Talk about fatal visions.
The Jews, Christians and Muslims all believe in the same insecure and homicidal god. It's all a bunch a crap!
Well, God bless you.
Homicidal is a very strong word to use against God. I personally don't see it as a bunch of crap. God has in fact worked in my life; although I don't probably deserve it because I slip alot.
Hope you have a change of heart before your passing.
So God help you, but you didn't deserve it because you slipped a lot. How many people and children deserved the help and didn't get it. How many children have been starved, beaten and raped with no intervention from God and you can't see past yourself?
True, he was on The Daily Show last night promoting his new book and talking about the latest Islamic violence over that internet film, "The Innocence of Muslims"
Rushdie claims there is an "Outrage Machine" in the ME in which Muslims are looking for any reason whatsoever to churn up the hatred and violence towards non-Muslims.
Radical Islam is taking an opportuinity to incite since the overthrow of several necessary dictators who kept them at by. I think liberal pandering of Radical Islam will empower them over the long haul. Look out for a radical control of Egypt, Lybia, Tunisia and Yemen. Syria is in flux, but we might look at a possible radical islam government there too.
Thanks for your input. Didn't know Rushdie was out of hiding. It's still dangerous for him considering that two publishers have been killed by stabbing and one was stabbed and survived the attach. The fatwa against him can never be lifted because the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini has died, and by the rules, no other can recall the fatwa order.
You mention the fatwa on Rushdi, is that not the same as that which a American politician calling for Julian Assange to be shot because he has in their opinion disclosed the secrets of America?
Actually, in Quran, it is mentioned that we should choose the best reaction so even our enemy converts to be our close friend.
The problem that some people take some wrong deeds which done by some Muslims & understand Islam through it.
For Example: Here in Saudi Arabia, there is a huge number (Maybe two million people coming from all around the world) of Non Muslims & they enjoy their life. They are leaving in an Islamic country & they are safe, happy & saving to build their own future.
Is this list accurate?
http://listverse.com/2012/11/12/top-10- … di-arabia/
It's as hilarious as it is hypocritical for Christians to ignore completely their religions history when they criticize other religions.
I was speaking on the New Testament. In the Old Testament our GOD described himself as a Jealous God, yet, even that testament did not dictate that WE must kill a none believer. In backing up His chosen people He gave His chosen people the upper hand. No doubt about it. But, that has in fact changed.
I say that unless you've read the Qur'an, Sunnah (description of Prophet Mohammads' life and examples), Hadiths (His sayings) you aren't qualified to comment on him. Period.
But, if we had read them, do we qualify to comment on him?
Are you saying that you have? And if you are, you must take into account your sources. Your level of comprehension outside of your own belief system, etc...
So if one takes the time to read the Quran and still doesn't buy it, they aren't qualified to even COMMENT on it because they may be out side the belief system?
That depends, I as a Muslim don't agree with Christianity. That doesn't give me a free license to make comments that demean Christianity. Where you disagree with Islam. Ask Questions. Muslims are always happy to talk about their faith.
Alright. Why does the Quran say that the earth is shaped like an egg?
If you read Quran in arabic you'll find the answer (not just translation)
So, in the arabic version it doesn't say egg?
No, but the word in question is 'daha' which means to smooth out, leveling, flattening, or spreading. The Arabs called the place where an ostrich incubates and hatches it's egg an 'udhiyy'. It's a hollow pit in the ground about 30 to 60 centimeters deep. These two words have the same etymological root, d-h-w. The reason being that the ostrich spreads out and levels the area prior to laying it's egg. From normal vision, the earth looks like a a sphere rather than an egg. Yet the earth is ever so slightly flattened at the poles. A rounded shape with a slight bulge at the equator, which would make it a oblate spheroid. The same shape as an ostrich egg. The Qur'an in it's majesty of speech isn't referring to an actual egg, but making a similarity to shape.
The shape of the earth is opposite to the shape of an egg. Look at the picture above. The earth has the largest circumference at it equator while the egg has it smallest. It's simply wrong which means the Mohammad had no information about the earth that was unknown at the time. I'll have to go with what the experts have translated however.
Then, if 'daha' means "leveling, flattening" then it is obviously referring to the fact that most believed the Earth was flat and that's what they wrote in the Quran.
Didn't Allah create everything? Wouldn't He then have simply just told Muhammad that the shape of the earth is like an orange rather than talking in riddles about Ostrich eggs?
You should see this video again and again,hope you'll get the answer.
Those who know arabic language will understand better. Quran clearly refers to the egg of an ostrich not a normal egg. You don't know arabic language then this is your problem...
Sorry, but Arabic can be successfully translated. There is no problem other than your belief that the earth is shaped like an egg.
I understand the translation just fine. An ostrich egg in no way resembles the shape of the earth. You attempting to convince me the earth is shaped like any egg is the problem.
I think you both don't know much about languages, and just want to gossip here. And perhaps You don't want to see that Quran can be right. You can get this answer from any language institute.
I'm not forcing you in anything. I've said what I wanted to,
TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT.
I haven't said that, just egg, read the full conversation above and try to understand. If you don't want to understand then again I'll say:
TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT.
Ah, so now you have come up with even more restrictions? So, even if I had read, which I have, those documents you listed, I still am not qualified? Are you the one who will decide whether or not I'm qualified? Are you qualified to qualify others?
And I just realized my mistake. This isn't a forum designed to learn and exchanged info - only spread hate, start trouble with peaceful people and display ignorance. Do not contact me, I won't participate in ignorance debates.
1.) "Our religion" - Who is ours? So many different religions in the world
2.) It doesn't sound like you are an expert in the Koran, know people who study it.
I am not either but I am aware of people who are so-called followers of the Bible, and engage in criminal activities, cheat, kill, will take advantage of you and more in contrasts to those I've known who are buddhists or atheists. O You think all muslims are radicals. You are seeing probably the lowest of the low (1 to 2%) and thinking they represent everything. Just as foreigners who have never been in the US or UK that we are all fat, greedy and wasteful. C'mon.
hi there ... im a muslim woman and thu im not in riligist way but i must say the truth no more no less ...... the prophit mohamed was say Debt advice ....And he had a neighbor aimed stones every day and when he stopped he went to visit him and found him sick Vtahjb neighbor and told him why I worried Mufrhd rejoice because you relieved me told him not faith without mercy mercy Tfum Absme and swim angels ....But governments are politicized religion to suit their interests and the prophet is innocent of being in the name of religion aware of any case I respect all opinions, because the important thing is morality and good behavior with people is more important than religion, because I believe that religion is for God and the earth for all
Any religion can be used as a force for good or evil. Unfortunately, when the Koran and the Bible were written, society accepted a lot of things it doesn't accept today. Slaves, multiple wives, killing ones enemies, killing the enemies of one's god.
The Torah, the Old Testament and the Koran are full of violence, and just recently Jews petitioned to have certain passages removed from the Christian New Testament (like the ones where Jesus calls the Pharisees "children of the devil"), because those passages have been used repeatedly in the past 2K years to justify killing Jews.
There are wonderful Muslims. There are wonderful Jews. There are wonderful Christians - and wonderful atheists.
Look past the book into the heart of the believer or non-believer, as the case may be.
There are plenty of passages in the Bible where God is violent towards others. He even directs his followers to commit genocide at one point!
The Bible and the Quran are full of contradictions. Sometimes they advocate violence and sometimes peace.
Whose doing the droning? Think that would be Christians.
Well, there is nothing in the Bible that allows we should turn a cheek towards those who seek to kill us. In fact, the Bible allows that we protect life, ours or the innocent lives of others. Drones are an accurate way to find and destroy an acive enemy in this case.
Christian believe in hell for all non-believers. Oh that's not killing. It's worse.
Hell is not damnation and hellfire, it is spiritual death and eternal seperation from God. The righteous of God are rewarded with eternal life with Him in Heaven as a reward for loving each other, having faith and doing works. Mohammed rewards the Killer with a sort of Heaven that involves 17 Virgins (Men or Women), take your choice. Their reward is for killing.
Have you never read Dante?
In addition, you will find few that agree with you. Most Christians view Hell as demons poking you with pitchforks while you burn in eternal fire: atheists view Hell the same as heaven, and others probably have no opinion or side with the atheists.
That's the risk you run when you come up with a new "interpretation" for the bible, though. No one agrees.
Dante is not a spiritually inspired book. It's nothing but phylisophical fiction that cannot be compared to Bible scripture. I'm not caring much about athiest opinion, God bless them. Pitchforks were never spoken of in the Holy Bible. The expression "Great Gnashing of Teeth" was used by Jesus many times, but I gnash my teeth when let down or angry. I would think that I would gnash my teeth if I was not found worthy at Judgment, and thereafter seperated from God and His Kingdom.
Hope you see the light and come to the Lord also. If you are a Christian, I do appologize.
larry... seems like you know little about the basics of Islam.
first correction. - Muhammad was a prophet ... not God ... and no they are not the same thing. Only God has the right to reward a person on the day of judgement.
maybe you haven't yet heard another saying of the prophet "the ink of the scholar is holier than the blood of a martyr. "
from this statement a muslim would realize that gaining knowledge and understanding has a much higher reward than killing.
the western mindset is all about sexual intercourse, which is why they cherry picked the 72 virgins ... it may be a motivating factor for a western person, but it's not a motivational factor for a true muslim.
just an additional note for you ... "the greatest Jihaad is the conquest of oneself " ... i.e: controlling your nafs (nerves/desires/anger... etc)
an example of Hazrat Ali (known to be a warrior of God having great strength) during a holy war ... when hazrat Ali pinned down an enemy and was about to strike him with his sword ... the enemy spat on hazrat Ali's face ... Ali then let the man live.
After the war was over a person asked him why he didn't kill that person who spat on his face... Ali answered ... I would have killed him out of anger and not for Islam.
It is hard to distinguish if a person is killing for a cause or for personal satisfaction ... Only God knows what is in the hearts of people and they will be judged fairly and justly on the day of Judgement ... that is a promise from Allah.
I hope you can see that Muhammad has not brought death to the table ... he brings peace / love but did fight for the rights of people (including women) when required as well as promoted the gaining of knowledge.
Sadly, not every muslim follows his teachings.
I don't believe I've referred to the Prophet Muhammad as God in anything I've shared above. On the other hand, Jesus did proclaim himself to be God to his deciples. He is referred to as the Son of Man (this side of the cross), and the Son of God after death and spiritually on the other side of the cross. The Prophet Mohammad has never made such claims.
I'm familiar with the none violent wrtings and phylosophy within the Quran, and the basis used when Mohammed instructs the death of infidels during a time that Islam was being consolidated. This consolidation of the religion in the affected regions of the middle east were concerning peoples and countries who would fail to convert. This said: It is popularly pushed that Mohammeds directive was only intended to have effect during that era. If true, it is a shame that Islamic Extremists apply it in this era as a justification for fatwa or holy war.
I've not done a complete study of the quran. Having said that, I still have a serious problem believing it's not evil when death is the only outward method Islam currently uses in fighting something a mediocre as Rushdies book or a sorry film made by a person of Arab decent.
The treats of death and death itself need to cease before the minor millions of extremists cause a conflaguration of some kind afficting the overall billion or so of muslim peoples.
you wrote ... "Mohammed rewards the Killer with a sort of Heaven that involves 17 Virgins (Men or Women), take your choice"
you also mentioned i think in the start "verses of muhammad" ... i know what you meant to say ... but for muslims the Quran only from God ... not a human.
As far as i know the new Testament was all about Jesus proclaiming that he was God ... there was nothing in the old Testament about Jesus being a God... but that's a separate issue.
these made me think that you might think he was a God to us... only God rewards and the verses are "verses of God".
it is believed that many prophets came from God ... Moses / David / Jesus being a few of them ... they came as messengers of tribes yet Muhammad came for the whole of man-kind ... relaying the message of God for everyone. He was the seal of the Prophets ... i.e. the last prophet. his message was not for people of that era ... it is until the end of time.
as you probably know islam was new and unwanted at the time therefore it was under threat with constant attacks on muslims. the fighting against non-muslims was only for that time ... the muslims were driven out of mecca and went to medina for 10 years ... 10 years later the muslims came back to claim or as we call it Re-claim Kaaba which is our holy mosque in Mecca. The orders that we know today were that no woman or child will be harmed. if a man puts up a sword against you then fight him. no one put up a fight when re-claiming Mecca and therefore there was no bloodshed.
The problem is that we're too emotional when it comes to religion thats where people go on the wrong path, and that is exactly what the media loves to show. I would urge you not to look at the followers but to look at the religion itself (the Quran and the Hadith) ... there is a huge mix of culture and religion at the moment, where the culture is at fault and not the religion.
what we really need is to educate our own people.
I give you some of what you have said here. Your response is too complex to get into a full discussion here. I will say that Jesus did in fact represent Himself to His Diciples as God. Isiah, Daniel and other frofits predicted the God would take fleash and become the Son of Man on this side of our cross.
I did not want to get into too much Biblical argument here. The question above still stands here. Are Mahammads verses evil in fact. Can I or you prove and show something that he wrote that brings or supports evil as a matter of fact?
You mean his teaching of marrying a 6 or 7 year old and consummating the marriage when she was 9?
please go through these pages ... you'll get the answer to your question.
http://myriamfrancoiscerrah.wordpress.c … and-aisha/
I did have a look at both of those links and it seems even Muslim acknowledge that she was only 9 when he raped her. We can't call it sex because she was a child. A 9 year old child is in about grade 4 and I find it disgusting that anyone would try to justify doing that to a child.
ofcourse we acknowledge that she was 9 ... you got that information from our historical books. you didn't notice that the same used to happen in the west until the 1800's?
What? Are you know saying it was common practice in the West to marry 6 year olds? It's called pedophilia and it's pretty sick. Perhaps you don't think it's sick so lets look at it another way. What would you say about a 55 year old women who married a 6 year old boy, but waited until she was 9 to have sex with him?
Jospeh Smith (founder of Mormonism) married a young girl and Mormons today try to marry teenage girls. In fairness, though, marrying children wasn't uncommon at the time. We find it distasteful now, but back then it was the norm.
Interesting. So - Islam takes morals from what is the "norm" and does not have a moral code in it?
two responses for you mark. first one (labelled 1) is where i do not want to argue over something everyone knows ... the second one (labelled 2) is where I'm ready to argue about the situation.... the choice is yours ... reply to 1 or 2. (wow... feels like we're in a game show now
1. come on mark ... there is a moral code and you know there is.
2. So now that you know your ancestors did the same you totally accept it by ignoring that whole matter and start blaming Islam once again for following the norm.... haha ... what's next? why do muslims breathe like we do? ... you guys are good at changing directions when the waters get rough.
No - I was just pointing out the logical inconsistency here.
1. Either Islam is against sex with children as a moral guidance, or
2. Mohamed went with the "morals of the day," which included sex with children.
3. I don't consider stoning adulteresses to be "moral."
Odd - My ancestors are not claiming to be a representative of this god-thing.
Rough water? That your religion makes no sense and contradicts itself at every turn? How is that rough exactly?
I think that is where a lot of the problems with Islam (and most other religions) lie: how do you balance the needs of modern society with religious traditions? Obviously not all Muslims make war on the infidel whereever they find them, or they'd be invading Europe as we speak.
Great! now your equating Joseph Smith & Mohammed as one.. therefore, Islam should also be called a cult like Mormonism & not a religion. Besides, the issue is not about distasteful but whether it is Right or Wrong. And remember, Right or Wrong doesn't change with time.
No, I'm just pointing out that marrying young girls isn't unique to early Islam. And I think that 1 billion+ people makes Islam a religion, not a cult.
Also, right and wrong does indeed change with time. It wasn't that long ago that women wearing pants or working outside the home was considered "wrong." Or women voting. Inter-racial marriage. All once considered "wrong." Slavery, segregation, beating children, etc., were all once considered "right." Romeo & Juliet were 14 years old. Is it "right" for two 14-year-olds to run off and get married?
I'm not saying that I think it was OK that Mohammed allegedly married a 9-year-old. I'm saying that what was and is common practice in one time or culture can be abhorrent in other times and cultures.
Are you really comparing two 14 year olds running off to get married with a 56 year old marrying a 6 year old? Just because they didn't think it was wrong at the time does not make it right. At one time they thought it was okay to burn or drown a lady to see if she survives and is a witch. It's as wrong then as it is today, they just didn't know better, but someone who God speaks through would have been told to leave little girls alone.
Yes, stuff like that if you can prove it. Show me.
Sadly, not every muslim follows his teachings.
You mean his teaching of marrying a 6 or 7 year old and consummating the marriage when she was 9?
Yes, stuff like that if you can prove it. Show me.
Me: Do you wan't Muslims marrying 6 year olds and consummating the marriage when the child is 9? Does this seem RIGHT to you?
Radman ... firstly i was not very clear in my statement which led to a different discussion ... i'll rephrase.
when i said we need to educate poeple ... i meant to teach the mass of people to read and write ... there are a lot of illiterate people who cannot read the real message in the Quran and the Hadith who rely on other people to give them this information. If the wrong information is given then they follow the wrong way. and yes many people exploit this situation.
Today, muslims do not marry at an early age. that was in the past... we are in a different era now. No one i know has married below the age of 20.
arksys - you say the right things but in the wrong forum - here you will not get people who want to learn and understand but pass judgement on blind stereotypical ideas that they get from their own biased media and books.
If only they would open their minds and read they will understand that no one is out to get them more than their own politicians and phobias.
"eternal seperation from God.". Sounds like nitpicking to me. I kill a bug - eternal separation. Now if only I had known.
Well I am a pagan and it's good to know that he loves me even as he eternally separates himself from me. Not exactly a definition of love which I can quite understand. He even hates me even as he unifies himself with me.
No I love and your god does not. I would never hold a gun to head: "Love me or GRUDGEMENT!"
Do you think that the Knolyourself Verses are in fact evil?
larryprice5372 and every one,
It is said to controversial but i say it is not controversy. One who has read and understand the teachings of the Mohammad and even the teachings of Islam could never think about terrorism. Muhammad is the only messenger of Allah not he said by his own. If you love Allah then you can consider that Muhammad had never said something by own. If you say these words then it is your negligence from the true lessons of Islam.
For Example if Americans are killing Afghans and Iraqi's then what we say? Are these teaching of Jesus?
No it is not. If Indians are killing the innocent people in Kashmir then Budha never taught to kill people.
I think it is enough for the people that has sense.
I agree with IT that no religion teaches to kill or steal. The blame game starts when one wants to grab the land or resources of the other.
The killing here is not because we are grabbing any land, it is because we are not believers, coupled with the release by an Egyptian of a controvertial film made in an American moch-studio. Anyone can record a CD or DVD in a privarte srudio located in America, that would not mean that all Americans agree with it and we should be punished.
The killing over this is off the hook, if not satan inspired and insane.
As my dear friend Motown said a few days ago. "Christian were not upset about Monty Python and the Holy Grail"? Christians laughed along. Muslims need to join in on the comedy.
I agree. Muslims are not very tolerant of others.
They were OK with the Holy Grail; it was Life of Brian that got their panties in a bunch. Protests at theaters, death threats, etc. I remember going to see it and being told I was going to Hell for seeing it. I will not post my reply.
I'll get back to a reply on your position. I want to actually quote you from the Quran regarding infidels.
price-- its a good idea to discuss some verses from Quran that you think promote violence. Everyone wants to know where does Quran tells to kill all the infidels.
Forgot to get back to answering that question. It's argued that Muhammed's Surah 9:5 referred only to those failing to covert during a period of Islamic consolidation and that that chapter added by him was to have effect only in the immediate era. However, our modern era Islamic extremists apply it now in the form of fatwa and holy war, using it as a justification to wontonly kill inoccent men, women and children blowing up shopping malls, ice cream parlors, etc., Simply because they feel those shopping support the West. (Iraq/Isreal/London and on and on) It is these types of actions that seem Satanic, especially a Christian of Western decent.
I know there are slightly more than one billion Islamists in the world. It's a shame that a relative millions would interpret Surah 9:5 and put their fellow believers in their current position: that is one of controversy and distrust of intentions towards westerners.
http://www.muslimaccess.com/articles/ji … fidels.asp
http://middleeast.about.com/od/religion … 080921.htm
You are perfectly right.
Allah (God) has not given anyone permission to kill another innocent human being.
In Islam we say 'Islam is perfect, man is not'
All of Muhammad's (peace be upon him) teachings were revelations from Allah. Muhammad (pbuh) was the most perfect man on earth and no one will ever be able to surpass him.
He fought and led armies to fight in the cause of Allah only and not for his own gain, only for Islam.
What some Muslims do nowadays is wrong, but most are in the right because no one has the right to kill innocent people for the sake of wealth or land, for example Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine etc.These people are getting persecuted and opressed in every way possible by Chrisitian leaders from Christian countries. When they do it it's for democracy, but what about democracy in their own coutnries?
I believe that all religions are against Islam, and this is a sign of the end times as Muhammad (pbuh) has mentioned. The prophecies are coming true about the minor and major signs before the end of the world.
What i say to ignorant people when it becomes difficult for them to understand is wait and see. We will all find out the truth as soon as we breath our last breath.
Tell me, with all do respect do you not see the contradictions in your own words?
"Allah (God) has not given anyone permission to kill another innocent human being."
"He fought and led armies to fight in the cause of Allah only and not for his own gain, only for Islam.
I guess you need to define innocent.
These were people who were after him to kill him and his people. They drove Muhammad (peace be upon him) and his people who reverted to Islam out of Mecca and they migrated to Medina. There were many wars they had to fight against non Muslims who attacked and opressed the Muslim people, and the Muslim people were defending themselves.
See, no contradiction.
Are you saying it's just to fight and kill for the cause of Allah?
For that time and for when the next time will come, insha Allah soon.
Dajjal (the Antichrist) will come and mark the non believers with k f r (kafir) on their foreheads when his time comes, which may be soon.
Islam means to submit to the will of Allah, so every Muslim on earth is submitting to the will of Allah by worhsipping only Allah. Every Muslim does Jihad every day. Now go and find out the exact meaning of Jihad, you will learn more about Islam.
Some websites might say that Jihad just means 'holy war' referring to the killing of any non Muslim any time anywhere. If that was the case then Muslims would be going on a killing spree like Christian or Jewish Americans or otherwise around the world killing innocent children/people in schools and colleges. Muslims would be killing their neighbours and communities who are non Muslims. Makes sense doesn't it? I hope so.
No it doesn't make sense because you didn't answer my question.
Are you saying it's just to fight and kill for the cause of Allah?
Maybe you didn't open your eyes enough to read the reply i gave you earlier. People really need to read more about Islam and understand the religion before making accusations about it being violent.
I'm not accusing Islam of violence I'm only trying to get a straight answer from you.
Are you saying it's just to fight and kill for the cause of Allah?
Just answer the question, without telling me to look up the meaning of jihad.
At the time of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) yes as the Quran was being revealed. This time will come again near to the end of the world.
Fighting in the cause of Allah does not mean to kill anyone anywhere like 'Muslim terrorists' killed people, now that is wrong. As i also explained before non Muslims were killing and oppressing Muslims so they defended themselves. If war broke out in USA who were attacked by North Korea you're not going to just sit there and let them kill your people. Muslims are all around the world but are one nation.
Fighting in the cause of Allah 'jihad' also means other things, and as an example the simplest thing is saving a plant from dying, now that is also jihad, or fighting in the cause of Allah.
The people fighting in Iraq, Palestine, Afghanistan and Syria and many other countries are doing it for the sake of Allah, their religion. They are being killed left right and centre just for being Muslims and for wealth from oil.
I hope i have answered your question.
Regarding the egg. I haven't looked into the egg thing, but i know in the Quran that it says that the earth is shaped like an egg, but what kind of an egg or whether an egg or not only a Muslim scholar will be able to answer.
Last of all, i'm not here to argue or cause a fight over religion but to make people aware and understand that Islam is the true religion and people shouldn't have a go at it until they have researched it properly. No harm mentally or physically meant to anyone, including yourself.
Have a good day.
Well thanks, I've actually never met a muslim I didn't like, and I'm sure if we met I'd like you plenty.
But you still didn't answer my question. If a war broke out between the The U.S. and North Korea it wouldn't be a religious war. This is perhaps the problem, I'm not from the U.S. but I do know it's a country made up of many religions and they have the freedom to practice any religion. You are talking about world domination and taking away any freedom of practicing any religion. Remember the U.S. doesn't care what religion the people are of a country who attacks them are, they fight for freedom.
The question still remains.
Are you saying it's just to fight and kill for the cause of Allah?
Do you believe we should have the freedom to practice any religion?
That is why Islam is so dangerous, because people fight in the name of their god.
Muslims need to understand they aren't the first ones to visit an online forum with the same faulty and flawed understanding of the world around them.
I always did want a brand on my body, kinda like the branding the Nazis did to the Jews.
This is quite funny. Islam says that the antichrist will mark the foreheads of the infidel (Jews, Christians, atheists) in the end times, and Christians say the antichrist will mark the foreheads of unbelievers (Jews, Muslims, atheists) in the end times. Did Muhammed rip off the Book of Revelation and put his own spin on it or is this a case of my antichrist is bigger than your antichrist?
Yes, that so-called "defending themselves" are the Muslim Conquests, which were actually offensive campaigns. You know, like you said, Islam must take over the planet.
Unfortunately, we have Muslims who decide which are innocent and which are not.
In reality, we say Islam is false.
That's why Islam is so dangerous to societies.
No, it is Islam that is against everything else.
We already know the truth, Islam is as dangerous as it is false.
Partly from the Middle East, but mostly domestic.
Yeah, you're right. Canada is a major supplier. We are currently slant drilling and taking it. Not with the current Administrations approval.
"America's oil actually comes from a variety of places. In June of 2009, 36 percent of America's oil came from domestic sources."...
"A whopping 64 percent of the oil America used in June of 2009 was imported. However, the major source of America's oil imports may surprise you. It's Canada. Twenty-one percent of the oil imported to the United States in June of 2009 came from Canada, making Canada the largest single-country source of foreign oil for the United States." ...
"Despite Canada (which is stable and friendly to American interests) being the largest foreign source of oil and gas for the United States, Ottawa still doesn't produce the majority of oil America imports. That distinction belongs to the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, or OPEC. The 11 OPEC member nations span the globe and include oil-rich nations like Saudi Arabia and Venezuela. In June of 2009, OPEC supplied 40 percent of the oil that was imported to the United States [source: Energy Information Administration]."
I stand before you corrected. But, we do not steal their land and take their oil reserves. They do come for our open markets and profit themselves by doing so.
I think that you may listen to Ron Paul's speech in which he described the reason for a violent world that we see today. I don't think he is so wrong to ask that countries must restrict their presence to their own countries instead of having presence in 130 countries and pretending that they all begged for it. He gave the example of China having military presence in USA and asking people to think how would they feel about it.
I do believe that we have a presence in other countries that needs to be greatly reduced by future administrations. We cannot be the world police system through the United Nations either. We need to re-evaluate our presence in many middle eastern countries, to include other countries as well.
larryprice-- I really appreciate your neutrality. May God bless you and may we have a peaceful world for us and our children. Difference in faith should never be a reason to hate each other.
Thank You Majid. May your God bless you also.
I believe Allah and Jehovah are the same God, its a matter of scripture. Thats a whole new discussion.
price-- Exactly-- God is the same but people like to call him with different names. But He after all is the creator of the Universe and of all that is found in it.
Most scholars agree that Jesus spoke ancient Aramaic. The term used for God in ancient Aramaic was "Allaha". So when Jesus Poke of God, he likely called him Allaha. You are correct in what you say Larry.
How can they be one and the same? The one has a son, the other doesn't. The Son is died for our sins yet Muslims believe Jesus was just a prophet.
@evans both r set of believes ...from Muslim perceptive Jesus is in long list of prophets and continuation of Islam...for them Abraham was prophet , so was Moses , so was Jesus and so was Muhammad...continuation...
If there are conflicting beliefs here, then the Muslims have to concede that Jesus was a liar. He was not the son of God. He said the only way to the Father was through Him. Jesus came to testify to the truth. One set of beliefs is wrong if you are going to argue that Allah and God is one and the same. If you look into the history of Mohammed, you would learn that Allah was the supreme moon god of many gods and Mohammed decided to use this Allah only to create a monotheistic religion. In a nutshell, Allah is a pagan god.
@evans correction jesus didnt say that...writers of gosphel said that...they never met jesus as per majority of bible scholars...thats the point which muslims make , that bible is corrupted and verses added/manipulated by paul to establish cult...
How do you know that Jesus didn't say that? What makes you think the gospel writers were lying? Eye-witnesses to what Jesus did and what He preached were alive when the gospels were written. The gospels were preserved by oral traditions. People make cults to magnify themselves but Paul was killed for His preaching.
The Koran as I see it is a mass of contradictions like the OT. Is this correct?
As a mixture of Arabian paganism, Zoroastrianism, Jewish Mysticism, and Apocryphal Christian writings, the Koran contradicts itself several times. For instance, it says that Moses was at the time of Noah. It says that Mary, the mother of Jesus, was the sister of Aaron. Aaron did have a sister named Mary, or Miriam, but she was not the mother of Jesus. Descriptions are contradictory in how Mohammed was called to be a prophet. It says that Mohammed was called by God, that he was called by the Holy Spirit, that he was called by angels, and that Gabriel called him. In some places Muslims are called to love ‘people of the book’, Christians and Jews, and in other places called to kill them. Mohammad's teachings contrast between Medina and Mecca.
In the Koran Abraham goes against his father leaving idols and such. But in the Torah it is Terah, Abraham’s father, who leaves Ur and goes toward Canaan. According to Jewish tradition, Terah was an idol maker. After Terah died, God called Abraham, then called Abram, away from his family, home, and all that was familiar. A significant theological difference is in which son of Abraham receives the promise. The Koran claims Ishmael rather than Isaac, as the Torah reports, receives God's blessing and is nearly sacrificed by Abraham.
There are contradictory attitudes toward non-Muslims. S. 2:189 says to fight against unbelievers and Suratut-Taubah says to make war on those who disagree, but S. 2:579 says there is no compulsion in religion and S. 24:45 says to dispute only kindly with Jews and Christians.
Here are other things to be considered:
Ibn Umar al–Khattab explicitly admits,
"Let no one of you say that he has acquired the entire Qur’an for how does he know that it is all? Much of the Qur’an has been lost, thus let him say, ‘I have acquired of it what is available"’ (Suyuti: Itqan, part 3, page 72).
A’isha (also page 72) adds to the story of ibn Umar and says,
"During the time of the prophet, the chapter of the Parties used to be two hundred verses when read. When Uthman edited the copies of the Qur’an, only the current (verses) were recorded" (73 verses).
So the truth is that the Koran has not been perfectly preserved. In fact, far from it. If you are going to accuse Paul of making up the gospels, then some Muslims must have made things up regarding the Koran because so much of it was lost.
"Abu Bakr decided that it was time to gather what remained of the Qur’an in order to prevent more from being lost, and he appointed Zaid ibn Thabit to this task. After Zaid completed his codex around 634 AD, it remained in Abu Bakr’s possession until his death, when it was passed on to Caliph Umar. When Umar died, it was given to Hafsa, a widow of Muhammad.
During Caliph Uthman’s reign, approximately 19 years after the death of Muhammad, disputes arose concerning the correct recitation of the Qur’an. Uthman ordered that Hafsa’s copy of the Qur’an, along with all known textual materials, should be gathered together so that an official version might be compiled. Zaid ibn Thabit, Abdullah bin Az-Zubair, Sa’id bin Al-As, and Abdur-Rahman bin Harith worked diligently to construct a revised text of the Qur’an. When it was finished, “Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what they had copied, and ordered that all the other Qur’anic materials, whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt.”iv The Qur’an we have today is descended from this codex.
II. DISPUTES AMONG MUHAMMAD’S SCHOLARS
Not all Muslims approved of the new Qur’an. Indeed, some of Muhammad’s top teachers rejected Zaid’s version.
Muhammad once told his followers to “Learn the recitation of the Qur’an from four: from Abdullah bin Masud—he started with him—Salim, the freed slave of Abu Hudhaifa, Mu’adh bin Jabal and Ubai bin Ka’b.”v Interestingly, Ibn Masud (first on Muhammad’s list) held that the Qur’an should only have 111 chapters (today’s version has 114 chapters), and that chapters 1, 113, and 114 shouldn’t have been included in the Qur’an.
Because of this (along with hundreds of other differences), Ibn Masud went so far as to call the final edition of the Qur’an a deception! He said, “The people have been guilty of deceit in the reading of the Qur’an. I like it better to read according to the recitation of him [i.e. Muhammad] whom I love more than that of Zayd Ibn Thabit.”vi
Should Muslims submit to this “deceit”? Not surprisingly, Ibn Masud advised Muslims to reject Zaid’s Qur’an and to keep their own versions—even to hide them so that they wouldn’t be confiscated by the government! He said:
“O you Muslim people! Avoid copying the Mushaf and recitation of this man. By Allah! When I accepted Islam he was but in the loins of a disbelieving man”—meaning Zaid bin Thabit—and it was regarding this that Abdullah bin Mas’ud said: “O people of Al-Iraq! Keep the Musahif that are with you, and conceal them.”vii "
But Ibn Masud wasn’t the only one of Muhammad’s trusted teachers who disagreed with Zaid’s Qur’an. Ubayy ibn Ka’b was Muhammad’s best reciter and one of the only Muslims to collect the materials of the Qur’an during Muhammad’s lifetime. Yet Ibn Ka’b believed that Zaid’s Qur’an was missing two chapters! Later Muslims were therefore forced to reject some of Ibn Ka’b’s recitation:
http://www.4truth.net/fourtruthpbworld. … 8589953021
Chris--I think that this is turning out to be more amusing then a literary brain storming. You have copy pasted some information that you though has busted the Quran. Being a Muslim, it can make anyone only smile. The Chapter 1, 113 and 114 which seem to be the three controversial chapters in Quran according to the research you posted or copy pasted. But they are hardly 5-6 sentences each and have nothing controversial. I recommend you read them yourself as it may only take five minutes to read them all. One place to go and read is www.searchtruth.com. Go to list of chapters and one by one read all the three chapters.
Regarding versions of Quran--Mohammad never wrote or prepared a copy in his life. Quran came as small paragraphs in 23 years. It was recited five times a day in the Mosques during prayers and thousands of Muslims were memorizing it by heart. This is the reason that the first written copy of Quran came out years after Mohammad. People use to visit Macca to learn it by heart and go back to their far flung countries and teach it to others. A person who memorize it by heart is called a 'Hafiz', who use to be a respected person in the society. These Hafiz were found in far flung countries even during the times of Mohammad. But I must say that your story was quite interesting and amusing as you mentioned some Arabic names and some great controversy.
It is common sense that if there was any confusion regarding versions, the people who learned it by Mohammad would have refused and we would have sects with different versions of Quran. But this is not the case and the sects only have different interpretations but all have the same Quran from Morocco to Fiji Island.
I thought the Quran is perfectly preserved. Why did Ibn Umar say this:
“Let none of you say, ‘I have learned the whole of the Koran,’ for how does he know what the whole of it is, when much of it has disappeared? Let him rather say, ‘I have learned what is extant thereof.’”
There have been an enormous amounts of passages, chapters and verses that have been lost.
Why are there contradictions in the Koran? Why does the Koran not reconcile with the Old Testament stories?
Why would Muslim leaders burn the original Koran? There are several versions of the Koran so many Muslims did not know which the right one was. I believe that is why there are so many contradictions. Different interpretations mean contradictions.
I'm very familiar with that. However, Jesus was not as Prophet, he in fact claimed to be GOD (Allah), and it's yet to be disproved.
We will see at the end of time.
You see the problem is you guys are reading different books. His book doesn't say Jesus was God and your does. Neither of you can prove your correct or the other wrong, but one at the very least is wrong. At the most both and I think what is most likely the case both of you are wrong. Both books are deeply flawed and you have no proof that any God exists. Only wishful thinking.
What would be an interesting experiment would be (of course we can't do this) to separate two sets of identical twins at birth and switch one of the sets with people of strong Christian and strong Muslim families and see what happens in twenty years when we put them back together. Will the Christian born sing Allah praise and will the Muslim born that Jesus he was raised in the west.
Just a thought.
Look we all know why the U.S. goes into the middle east. OIL... OIL and OIL. Why did G.W. Bush go so heavily into Iraq? Ah... his Dad's in the Oil business.
Did oil prices come down. NO. That say is so unfounded and cheap.
It is NOT about oil and control of it. Maybe a free flow of it globally, but not a personal or national intent to control.
Ha. Look at countries the U.S. invades. These are all counties with oil. Do you think the Bush family doesn't make money controlling oil?
It is the intent of the US Government to intervene when the free flow of oil is in danger. That is why we engaged Irag with the UN as Desert Storm. Since the Democrats created the United Nations we and the UN have become the World Police.
It's not about our controlling anything. It is in fact, that we help to control world interests.
No arguments here. I would like every country to have the same separation of Church and state that my country has. People claim Canada's oil is dirty, but the Saudi oil is dirty and immoral.
Yes, this is not a religious thing, it's purely political in nature.
If you read the book title: "The Prize", you will see that Standard Oil and other Corporations helped develop the Middle East's oil preserves. That is what the Nazis' were after. We did stop them thank God.
It is a shame that the Middle East has failed to develop an economy based on something other than oil. Those Countries are almost socialist in nature. George W. Bush was right in his hope to create a Democracy in Irag, one that other middle eastern nations could see appreciate and seek.
Many small nations (South Korea, Japan, etc.) have developed capitalist democratic ideals and profited greatly. That was the intent with Iraq as stated by Bush. If the Middle East was to seperate theology from Government and use the natural talents of their population, the world would be better off.
If you really think that teachings of Quran are not right then what you say on this:
Quran is not a book of algebra or geometry but is a collection of rules which guides human beings to the right way, the way which the greatest philosophers are unable to decline it.(Albert Einstein)
Dr. Johan Wolfgang Von Goethe (German Poet): In 1832 said, for long years, priests prevented us understanding Quran realities and greatness of its bringer, but by improvement of sciences this book will take human attention to it and become axis of thoughts.
Really? The Quran describes the shape of the earth as like an egg. The earth is clearly not shaped like an egg and as a matter of fact it's the opposite of an egg. If this description was from God then it would be perfect and God would have found a word or words that describe the shape and size of the earth. For this reason you need to rethink your perception of reality.
what if eggs were rounder in those days? we will never know.
Good grief! what a stretch. Why can't you guys just be honest and admit your majik book was wrong?
No wonder your religion causes so many conflicts.
it's not wrong Mark.
religion does not cause conflicts ... ppl do.
Yes, I'll give you this. Religious people do cause conflict.
Of course we know, we have fossil records of eggs going back to dinosaurs and guess what? No round eggs because... wait for it... they would hurt to much coming out. Eggs are shaped like they are for a reason. Not only are you telling me it's okay to rape a 9 year old if she is mature, know your telling me eggs used to be round.
thanks for the info ... didn't know that about eggs. i just put it out there as a possibility... i never said that it was definite.
until 100 or 200 years ago people thought the earth was flat ... we knew it was round or egg shaped ... then the world figured out it was round and now they fight over the details ... the main thing is to understand that we have been given hints ... they could be 100% accurate or 50% accurate... but they give you the main idea ... and after some research you can fill in the details yourself...
about the 9 years age ... you didn't see what i hoped you would see ... that is was accepted even in the west until about 100 years ago to marry at that age ... what father would offer her daughter to a guy to rape? No one would want their child to be raped under any circumstance. early age marriages were common in those days all over the world ...
Where do you get your information.
It's been 500 years since Christopher Columbus tried to sail around the earth. Europe was pretty much the only place that thought the world was flat before that and that was because Europe was policed by the Catholic church and back then if you spoke out against the teaching of the bible they could have you killed. Sound familiar? I don't know where you got 100 or 200 years ago.
There is nothing in the Quran that show that he had any knowledge that was not known at the time. If God gave that description of the shape of the earth it would have been perfect, but it's not even close. The earth is shaped nothing like any egg. I would think a God would have known that as he would have been the one that created the earth.
Qur’an 2:261 tells us that every ear of corn has 100 grains. This has not been proven scientifically and is more than obviously false.
The Qur’an 86:6-7 says that Fluid comes from between a man's backbone and ribs. Nope.
Muhammad was given a revelation from the angel Gabriel as to why a child resembles the father sometimes, and other times the mother. The angel told him that it depends on which parent reaches their intimate climax first during conception (Bukhari 4:546). This has been disproved by genetics.
51:49, says of life in creation, "And of everything we have created pairs that ye may reflect" (see also 43:12; 50:7). So for all animals they are created in pairs. This is an obvious denial of the fact that numerous species produce asexually, not in pairs.
Rad Man-- your reference 2:261 is wrong as it says that "The parable of those who spend their substance in the way of Allah is that of a grain of corn: it groweth seven ears, and each ear Hath a hundred grains. Allah giveth manifold increase to whom He pleaseth: And Allah careth for all and He knoweth all things." It does not say that the corn ear has 100 grains. Pls read it again.
86:6-7 is answered in detail in following link-- pls read. The translation of Arabic words into other languages sometimes create room for such objections.
http://yahyasnow.wordpress.com/2009/08/ … roduction/
Regarding 51:49-- it does not say that God created everything out of a female and male. It only says that all the things are in pairs. A pair of shoe is not male and female and similarly the pairs can be day/night, good/bad, true/false, active/unactive. To assume Quran meant it to be female and male, is after all an assumption.
If you have to prove Quran wrong-- you have to go beyond minor translation errors. Its a whole ideology which you have to prove that takes a society towards problems than solutions.
I'm confused, so forgive me. but I'll cut and past a bit here.
You said I'm wrong because "It does not say that the corn ear has 100 grains." But your reference stats "and each ear Hath a hundred grains." It appears to me that I am correct.
Regarding 51:49 - Well if it's not just referring to males and females that makes my point better. Off hand I can name hundreds of things that don't come in pairs. I have a few body parts that do not come in pairs. I have A dog. I have A computer. Pair means two so even hair does not come in pairs. Clouds do not come in pairs, sometimes one, sometimes none, sometimes thousands.
Regarding 86:6-7 - Oh give me a break.
These are not minor translation errors. They show that just like the bible the writers hand no better knowledge the other of the day.
You want me to prove the whole ideology wrong. That's easy. People are being killed because some moron made a stupid movie to cause muslims to riot. And it worked. There are now $100 000 bounties on the head of those responsible for creating the movie.
Don't get me wrong I personally have never meet a Muslim I didn't like, but I've meet Christians I didn't like. But I know they are out there, it's all over the news.
Rad Man-- regarding 51:49. Well if you don't find a body part that is not in pair in your body, try searching in the opposite sex. Your dog has a pair called bitch. Your computer is not created by God, he is only telling about what he has created. Hair are infect in pair as I had black but now they are white. Clouds and no clouds make a pair (rainy days/sunny days).
People were killed in much large numbers in Iraq because a country decided to search for Weapons of Mass Destruction and invaded without even the mandate of UN. That does not mean that the democracy is wrong and should be eliminated. I think you are over simplifying things. Muslim reaction to movie may not be due to movie alone. There may be other reasons behind it. But most countries only had symbolic reaction of a thousand people out of 180 million protesting (Bangladesh and Indonesia). It was not the entire 1.6 Billion Muslims rioting all over the world. Don't be carried away by media hype.
First you say that Allah did not mean male and female (biology) and the when I bring up examples you say "try searching in the opposite sex". Well I will once again of there with you. My wife and I do NOT have matching penises. Everything is NOT in pairs, just because you want to believe so does not make it so.
There is a $100 000 reward for the person how kills the maker of the movie. Where are the people protesting the reward? In my country it's attempted murder and serious jail time.
Rad Man-- what you are asking the musilms in general may be what muslims are asking in general, that is to protest to what injustice is being carried out against their people. And if you think drones are wrong then they may be asking you to protest and show your sense of justice.
You can't ask all the fairness from others while not practicing it yourself. An honest attempt would be like Ron Paul to realize one's own faults and then ask the other to check out their's. One sided display of ethics hardly works. The first thing would be to check who is promoting hate. Any material whose main intention is to promote hated should be avoided. We don't see any interviews of terrorists over the internet as they are removed. We want the same against anything that promotes hate and unrest. Freedom of Expression does not mean promoting a wrong. I think there was no harm if that movie clip was removed. Even the actress went to court as she was deceived while making it. The producer is a proven criminal. I hope you can explain...
You are correct. I didn't see the film nor do I wish to. I do understand that it was disrespect full and intended to cause harm. In my country we do have laws against hate speech and we have kicked people out of the country for promoting hate.
However that being said to put a bounty on someones head for a disrespectful act is again something different. Many movies have been made making fun of Christianity and for the most part they get laughed at and no one pays attention. All this violence because the film depicts muslims are being violent makes the film look legit.
Rad Man-- sorry I missed out to explain you in simple way about the parable that Quran is giving regarding what you spend as charity. Its an example or parable of what you spend not a law of biology that Quran is giving. God is simply telling that if you spend a dollar, you will get 700 dollars worth of credit in heavens-- this is how the gracious God rewards people who spend their money in the way of God (charity).
Okay, no argument here. Nothing wrong with Charity as long as you are giving for the right reason. Giving so you will get back seems selfish to me, but I guess it's a good way to get truly selfish people to help others.
Rad Man-- human being is selfish by nature and who would know it better than the creator.
Not all humans are selfish. We are supposed to give to charity to help others, not to get something in return. Do you think God treats people differently in heaven? Does he have favourites? Does a suicide bomber get a bunch of virgins in heaven? What good would they do without bodies? Why is God punishing the virgins, they apparently did nothing wrong and the stuck with sharing one guy with 17 or 72 girls?
Rad Man-- Anyone who has a little bit introduction to human psychology would tell you that humans are built to perform either under fear or incentive. The creator knows it best and gives incentives to promote people to do good.
I am not sure if the 72 virgin hadith is there or not but I know that incentives are a part of military service in all cultures and you get rewards for your selfless acts in a war.
Suicide attacks in Islam were only invented around 50 years ago. We don't find anything against or for in Quran as such but modern thinkers call it the weapon of the weak. What is surprising is that we don't see any suicide bombings before 1948 in the Islamic world. More surprising is that the same phenomenon is found in the Vietnam War where the Buddhists, who don't even believe in God, did suicide attacks. Japanese did it in 2nd World War (kamakazis) and the first recorded suicide attack was performed by Samson-- reported in the Bible (Old Testament).
Rad Man-- sorry that lead is full and I could not reply to you over that regarding the reward offered by Pakistani Minister. I am sure you must angry over this reward like all the other Pakistanis. People not only dislike the US policy in Pakistan but also the present govt. which is more of a puppet govt. The minister belongs to a former communist party and present socialist party which is one of the major coalition partner in govt. there. He is not liked by masses for his long time support of foreign forces. Pakistanis are not stupid to believe what he is saying but I agree that in the international community, this will cause great damage to Pakistan's reputation. But its surprising that a Govt. minister issues such bounty and the pentagon did not comment on it or asked the Pak govt. to remove him from office. Also you may see that no party which calls itself as pro Islamic issued such statement. May be it was to ignite Islamic parties to issue more hard statements. But propaganda and psychological warfare is at best in Pakistan scenario.
It doesn't anger me at all, it confuses me. I am surprised that the Pakistani government has not stepped in and demanded he retract his statement.
But if a Govt. minister gives a statement, he is speaking on the behalf of the Pakistan govt. and if the US does not registers its protest, to the Pak govt., is it not enough for you to understand the great confusion that is being created to distract attention from other more serious matters.
Govts. give statements for propaganda reasons. they say something else but act in a different way called 'hypocrisy' or foreign policy.
Well; I am also confused that if a person like you can feel that such a bounty is against the civilized norms, how come the US govt. did not issued a statement. Also that even the Islamists parties in Pakistan did not issue such statement how come a govt. minister do such a thing in Pakistan etc. And if the Pak govt. was so serious, why did it not took serious dialog to ask to remove the video.
Now that even the actress has also approached the court and the producer was also proved to be a criminal who is not even allowed to use internet. How come he is allowed to promote hate speach?
I'm not from or in the U.S. so I can't comment on there laws or lack there of of hate speech. I don't know if it was hate speech because I didn't see the film. Freedom of speech is front and centre in the U.S. They take it very seriously. I understand the film was trying to show that Muslims are very violent. Unfortunately all the unrest seems to indicate to many that they were correct. If there were more peaceful protests against the violence and the reward it would show that muslims are not violent.
Rad Man-- I don't know about you but I feel that there is a deliberate attempt to create clash of cultures. Regarding freedom of expression, I think you don't know that all the interviews of terrorists were removed under the law called glorifying terrorism. What we fail to understand is that why cant they remove a film that was not even a film.
Its a 15 mnt video showing some un natural sex being performed by the most respected and loved personality among muslims. We don't find its making as an insult but the refusal to remove it.
Lets not forget that the producer was a convicted criminal and a threat to the society who was not even allowed to use internet. He made the small video by deceiving the cast of the movie. The actress is already trying to remove the movie for this reason.
May be you can you can shed some light as to why is it so important to not remove the video when so many videos are removed which were considered as a threat to world peace.
Funny you should say that. The concept of a spherical earth dates back to 6th century BC by the Greeks. It's all in the research and details.
Didn't know that Troubled man ... I always thought it was first described in the Quran... i'll see if i can find the info on that. we never stop learning
Actually the Earth is an oblate spheroid, so saying it is shaped like an egg isn't entirely inaccurate, though I would expect better from the culture that invented algebra.
Perhaps you missed his reply. He said maybe 1500 years ago eggs were round.
My husband suggests that perhaps they were square, and over the last 1500 years, they've evolved into ovals so they don't break as easily. I say if they evolved, it was so it wouldn't hurt the chicken as badly coming out!
Wow, how dishonest can you get. The only place that quote shows up is on Islamic propaganda sites, copied and pasted from one site to another, each and every one showing Einstein being born in 1979.
Wow! still some people are saying that Quran is not right.
I want to ask you one question: Are you more genious than Einstein or are you some great philosopher?
and why did he say this?
Quran is not a book of algebra or geometry but is a collection of rules which guides human beings to the right way, the way which the greatest philosophers are unable to decline it.(Albert Einstein)
Who told you Einstein made those remarks? And who told you philosophers are unable to decline it? I'm not genius but I've found inconsistencies.
Who told you Einstein didn't make those remarks? And if you really think Quran + Islam is not good for humanity then why this is happening:
According to Guinness Book of World Records, Islam is the world’s fastest-growing religion by number of conversions each year.
In a recent poll in the (US), 100,000 people per year in America alone, are converting to Islam.
What you say? Are these people converting to Islam without knowing?
Please show me a non-islamic site that quotes Einstein saying anything about Islam. I could not find anything.
(Buddhism is being recognized as the fastest growing religion in Western societies both in terms of new converts and more so in terms of friends of Buddhism, who seek to study and practice various aspects of Buddhism. As in the United States, Buddhism is ranked among the fastest growing religions in many Western European countries.)
(According to a 2005 paper submitted to a meeting of the American Political Science Association, most of this growth has occurred in non-Western countries, such as Latin America and Africa, and concludes the Pentecostalism movement is the fastest growing religion worldwide.)
(The American Religious Identification Survey gave non-religious groups the largest gain in terms of absolute numbers - 14,300,000 (8.4% of the population) to 29,400,000 (14.1% of the population) for the period 1990 to 2001 in the USA.)
Do you think these numbers matter? Does it make anything right?
I hope this may interest you as well. It is also from Wikipedia.
According to the Guinness Book of World Records, Islam is the world’s fastest-growing religion by number of conversions each year: "Although the religion began in Arabia, by 2002 80% of all believers in Islam lived outside the Arab world. In the period 1990-2000, approximately 12.5 million more people converted to Islam than to Christianity". Part of the books quote can be seen online from this extract from Google Books. This was again shown in the 2005, 50th anniversary edition of Guinness Book of World Records, although the number of conversions was not mentioned this time..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claims_to_ … g_religion
I don't understand your point. It's my understanding that Islam is a fear based religion making people afraid of what God will do to them if they even question Islam. I just don't understand what the significants of the numbers is?
Ultimately, there is no significance to numbers when it comes to religion. Especially if the essential outcome of larger numbers is that there are more proponents of violence. When people truly convert in order to become better human beings who can make a better world, then it might matter how many of them are converting.
Rad Man-- you started it. I did not start giving numbers from wikipedia .
no no no. mrnasir started saying Islam was the fasted growing religion so I looked it up and what the results were was it depends of what you mean by the question. He also posted misquotes from Einstein.
Rad Man-- OK... I stand corrected- apologies.
Do you mind if I ask if you mind that Muslims are misquoting Einstein to lie for Islam?
Rad Man--I think nasir was quoting or misquoting to be specific, not the Muslims in general.
Sorry I missed out one of your question regarding where do I want the video to be removed from.
The answer is what you mentioned-- youtube but the problem is that youtube is based in the US and Pakistan Govt. had to ask the US govt.
Guess what-- they did ask the US Govt. and they asked the youtube but as per the Govt. of USA, the youtube refused. Its hard to believe that when all other videos that were declared a threat to world peace can be removed, why is there a problem to remove this one, unless there is a will behind it to intimidate the muslims and create a fuss over it.
If no video was removed up til now from the youtube including the interviews of terrorists, I would have accepted the freedom of expression argument. But honestly, I don't understand why the US govt. is showing such attitude if they are serious in peace. Every one agrees that the video serves no purpose what so ever, other than to hurt the feelings of a certain group of humans.
glorifying terrorism or promoting hate and endangering world peace is not the same thing? If the video was removed, it would be so easy for the Islamic Govts. to convince their people to stay calm. What I feel is that there is a lack of will in achieving peace from both sides equally.
Furthermore you have misquoted Einstein. I don't blame you for this as you were lied to. Imagine someone of your faith lying to it's own people to convince them that they are right.
This is what Einstein actually says about religion.
“The insight into the mystery of life, coupled though it be with fear, has also given rise to religion. To know that what is impenetrable to us really exists, manifesting itself as the highest wisdom and the most radiant beauty which our dull faculties can comprehend only in their most primitive form — this knowledge, this feeling, is at the center of true religiousness, and in this sense only, I belong in the ranks of devoutly religious men. I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after his own — a God, in short, is but a reflection of human frailty. Neither can I believe that the individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear of ridiculous egotism.”
Look for yourself for a non-islamic site that quotes Einstein.
I'm not playing number game. I just asked you that why Islam is the fastest growing religion, why people are accepting this religion,if this religion is not right.
But I got the answer when you said:
"It's my understanding that Islam is a fear based religion...."
+ You think Einstein didn't make those remarks about Quran.ok
but I don't want to prove anything to you. Everything is in front of everyone.
I don't know why or how and I don't care is Islam is growing. It matters not. How does it make you feel knowing that your own people are knowingly misquoting Einstein for propaganda for Islam. A lie for God. Will you continue doing so know that you know it's a lie?
You didn't answer me that who told you Einstein didn't make those remarks...or is this your thought only?
Everyone, who is accepting Islam doesn't matter!
(This is a very big decision to one's life)
they are converting to Islam after full research by themselves, not just googling misconceptions about Islam.
Einstein did NOT say what you said he said. Look it up. You have been lied to by your own people as propaganda for Islam. First of all the quote you mentioned is not in perfect English. Do your research please.
I still don't know your point about numbers. I'm not converting to Islam after my research because my research shows you lie for Islam. Einstein did not say that about Islam! Do your research. Try to find it on Wikipedia.
Wow! what wikipedia says is right and others are wrong...I got your point.
Still you didn't answer me that who told you that those remarks are not from Einstein, have you read all his works,books,etc?
You think if wiki didn't tell us about that quote then that must be wrong!
It's your point of view. Thanks.
Three things tells me it's not Einsteins words.
1. It's in poor English.
2. We would find it somewhere on a non-muslim site.
3. Einsteins thoughts on Religion are well know and are completely unlike the quote.
4. The Quran has many inaccuracies, which makes this quote invalid.
These are all facts and not my point of view.
Einsteins writings, speeches, letters, quotes, whatever... are online for anyone to access and what you provided was not except for Islamic propaganda sites.
As a Muslim, you should be concerned about the fabrications on those websites.
Chaire Evans-- I think the logical approach would be to not believe what a web site says and rather apply common sense. There are always people who do not agree with you and even among Muslims the Shia sect are not happy with Umar.
That logically means that at least they would not buy the Umar's version of Quran. But that is not the case.
Moreover people have little knowledge of the islamic prayer-- five times a day. It is nothing but recitation of Quran by people who know Quran by heart.
What Umar did was to apply punctuation like (a') in place of (a) and divided Quran into 30 divisions so that it can easily be recited one section per day to be completed in the whole month.
Umra did collected all the versions that were without the punctuation and ordered to be burnt but that was only in his area of rule-- not uptil Libya and Iran. If there were other versions of Quran, we must have found them in Africa or Iran. Specially when Iranian Shia are the biggest critic of Umar. So, if we apply common sense and remain unbiased, we would know that the promise of God to preserve Quran in its original form is been fulfilled.
@arshad yes oldest quran has been found which is different that current one but largely essence is same and this quran which was found is not written 150 yrs till death of Muhammad...
coming to versions of quran as per shias believe original quran is 3 times of current one and mahdi would bring that quran back...
pisean-- I don't know whether you are doing it on purpose or you are truly un-aware. It is very hard for me to believe because you live in a country where 1/5 is a Muslim to be so unaware.
Quran was written during Umar's times and punctuation was added to it. Now Umar was the second Caliph after Abu Bakr which means that Abu Bakr ruled for 150 years. And if he got the Caliphate at age 50, it would mean that his age was 200 years when he died according to your claim.
Regarding Shias, there is no such claim by their clergy who now are very much institutionalized in Iran.
I would expect that instead of jumping from one topic to another-- you would seriously try to provide proof of your claims.
When Mohammad left the World, it was already 23 years passed since first verse arrived. With daily recitation of Quran in all the mosques in entire mulsim population during his times, and even till today, it was literally impossible for any misunderstanding to arrise.
Muslims today like any other religion suffer from sectarianism, but the magic is that all all the sects believe in same Quran accpet your's which believe in another one-- but I guess you are Hindu.
And I am not talking about a version that has another chapter or even sentence-- I am talking about two Muslims fighting over a single word that they feel is wrong in present day Quran. So much so that even the Ahmadi's self acclaimed prophet never claimed it.
Moreover; it is written in Quran that the previous books were altered so, God says that he will make sure that nobody would alter the Quran. That promise is now very much fulfilled as there is no sect in Islam which had a Quran that is different. They only differ in interpretation of it which is not so major issue.
The Prophet Mohammad made sure that he prepares an army of Hafiz-- the people who memorized every sentence from the day Quran started to reveal sentence by sentence. Which was as a fool proof system of safeguarding Quran. Those Hafiz spread to far corners of the world even when Mohammad was alive and made others to memorize it.
But I guess you are not here to learn.... instead try to take out your grudge against Islam otherwise you would have discussed something with proof.
@arshad u got my point wrongly.....the oldest quran found (not written)...the oldest quran found is around 150 yrs after death of muhammad...i hope u get me....i didnt say it is first quran to be written...i am saying it is oldest in the world currently to be found...it yemeni quran...thats oldest currently...
One of the three Qur'ans issued by Uthman is, according to Islamic tradition, preserved at Tashkent. The Topkapi manuscript in Istanbul is also considered to have been commissioned by Uthman.
By the way no matter what the non-muslims may claim about the authenticity of Quran and its supposed versions, It would be a miracle for Umar to collect all the versions of Quran from Morocco to Iran and burn them such that no version was left remaining with any remote tribe of Muslims-- who just refuse to accept Umar's version. Umar has to be a magician to do that.
Further more-- to erase the Quran from the minds of so many Hafiz from far corners of the World and make them to memorize his own version, such that no one resists.
Don't you think you are asking for too much....
Well; I think you got the point that if Umar wanted any different version, there were a lot of supporters of Ali who may have carried on with the original version, especially in Iran where the Shia had their majority and power.
Now I once again explain that Umar put the punctuations for the safety of meanings and nobody ever objected to what he was doing as was nothing wrong with it. Further more he asked people to burn the copies which did not had the punctuation as those copies were no long required. And that is the reason why there was no uproar. Otherwise there would be another war among the Muslims as no Muslim wold allow any alteration to Quran.
But while Umar was doing it, the Hafiz who were as far as Morocco and Tashqand, were not even aware of it. There was no reason for them to de-memorize the original version of Quran and memorize Umar's version if both were different.
I once again beg you to use common sense instead of bias towards a religion.
@arshad where does common sense come into picture in scientific finding?...yemen quran is oldest found...that is the claim made by scientist..disputed by none...now it is common sense to accept it,isnt it?...i dont know why u need to write so long sentences on closed matter...yemeni quran is oldest quran found in undisputed finding...
now coming to ur main point...quran is unaltered...ok let us consider it is unaltered...so what does it prove?...2000 years down the line someone finds say fountain head unaltered...so?...in end it means nothing then quest of our ancestors like muhammad or jesus or moses to find answers ...thats it...it proves nothing beyond that...quran or bible or torah are mere attempts...
that brings back to question of topic...do u think muhammads verses are evil and my answer to that is No ....verses are humans attempt to address questions which haunts humans since he began to think...
pisean-- my friend, I just want to bring to your knowledge that the Wikipedia disputed the claim. Following is an extract from Wikipedia.
"In 651, 19 years after the death of Muhammad, Uthman commissioned a committee to produce a standard copy of the text of Quran (see Origin and development of the Quran). Five of these original Qurans were sent to the major Muslim cities of the era, with Uthman keeping one for his own use in Medina. The only other surviving copy are held in Topkapı Palace, in Turkey.
Uthman was succeeded by Ali, who took the Uthman Quran to Kufa, now in Iraq. When Tamerlane destroyed the area, he took the Quran to his capital, Samarkand, as a treasure. It remained there for four centuries until, in 1868, when the Russians invaded, captured the Quran and brought it back to the Imperial Library in St. Petersburg (now known as the Russian National Library)."
Usman's Qurans found in Turkey and Samarkand seem to be oldest according to above extract as Usman's period is only 19 years after Mohammad.
Now can you please explain the story of 150 years that you mentioned in two of your posts. One I am copy pasting for your convenience.
@arshad u got my point wrongly.....the oldest quran found (not written)...the oldest quran found is around 150 yrs after death of muhammad...i hope u get me....i didnt say it is first quran to be written...i am saying it is oldest in the world currently to be found...it yemeni quran...thats oldest currently.
I think all his verses reek of insolence and conceit... but are not necessarily evil....
"I am the greatest, I said that even before I knew I was"
"I'm so fast that last night I turned off the light switch in my hotel room and was in bed before the room was dark."
"If you even dream of beating me you'd better wake up and apologize."
Ha Ha Ha! That was the Mohammad Ali we know.
I think there is probably not much difference between thier egos, and Ali was not a prophet. So he falls short here.
I am a great fan of the WWF and I don't remember a single wrestler who at any stage of his carrier has not said that he is the "greatest or best", but I agree that a Muslim (Muhammad Ali) should not give such a stupid statement. I think all the Muslims will be with you on this one.
I don't think anyone took Ali's statements seriously. They were obviously just entertaining hyperbole. I like the light swtich one, though!
It is my understanding that Ali converted as an adult. I don't think he was a muslim at heart.
I can't believe on this false statement. As Muhammad was only the messenger of God as it was mentioned in the Luca Bible. And Islam is the religion that is brought by the messenger Muhammad. And According to Islam Killing of innocents is a crime. Like the America did in First world war, 2nd world war Iraq, Afghanistan war.
No country resembles the religion policies. It is done by its own. In the same way teachings of Muhammad was not even about killing it was about to love God and its creatures. I hope you will consider after research
Your point is well taken: as to, "Muhammad was not about killing it was about to love God and its creatures", I say look at the link I've placed above concerning Surah 9.5, which is about killing Infidels and non-believers after a certain time.
That was ungodly, unloving, etc., and unfortunately, the radical arm of Islam administers that Surah of the Quran.
larryprice-- thanks for discussing verse 9--5, I am posting the 9--6 and 9--13 so that people may develop some idea about how carefully these verses are singled out, sometimes even from the proceeding verses to give a certain intended impression.
And if anyone of the idolaters seeketh thy protection (O Muhammad), then protect him so that he may hear the Word of Allah, and afterward convey him to his place of safety. That is because they are a folk who know not. ----------Pithal's translation 9--6
Will ye not fight a folk who broke their solemn pledges, and purposed to drive out the messenger and did attack you first? What! Fear ye them? Now Allah hath more right that ye should fear Him, if ye are believers. ------------Pithal's translation 9--13
Quran is not in the book form with an index of topics, it is infect a compilation of different instructions that came in 23 years on different situations. The study of Quran is incomplete unless the student does not read the historical reference of the verses. The 13th verse clearly explains that it is about a certain group who broke the treaty to not take part in the killing of Muslims and not for all the infidels. The 6th even says to recite Quran to them and drop them to their places of safety, if they seek protection.
Moreover the ninth chapter is the 'Chapter Forgiveness' which got its name from the discussion of three companions of the Prophet PBUH who refused to take part in jihad. They were criticized for their cowardliness for not joining the rest of the companions. If you go back to verse 13, you will find God giving justification for the war. Usually the military punishes the soldiers who run away from fighting but they were only warned and later pardoned with no punishment at all. Infect it even gives an example that in case of refusal to fight in a war, there is no specific worldly punishment in Quran like the court martial that we find in modern times. Similarly the revenge is Islam is only limited to damage suffered and not like sending a weak defenseless country to stone age etc.
As 9.6 states "if any of the adolaters seeketh thy protection (O Muhammad) then protect him...", I take your point to mean Surah 9.5 addressed persons whom have failed out of cowardliness to fight in the name of Allah. If that is correct, then you are correct to say that 9.5 does not direct Islam to destroy infidels for failing to believe in Allah. Right? And, also it seems you indicate that a person who seeks Allah's protection, even though he may have been cowardly and not fought, it protected/foregiven? This being Allah's love for all humankind!
larry-- 9--5 is about killing the infidels who broke the treaty by joining hands in the killing of Muslims. The Muslims are advised to wait for the sacred months to pass before to take revenge. But even those infidels-- if accept Islam are to be forgiven, otherwise Muslims were told to fight and revenge for deceiving Muslims with whom they had a treaty of not attacking or helping in attack on each other.
And regarding fighting in the name of Allah, I have to tell you that we even drink water in the name of Allah. If a Muslim does not even drink water without mentioning the name of Allah, how can you expect him to fight to take revenge without taking the name of Allah. And Allah wanted to preserve the people who believed in Him so, he asked them to fight for survival.
Regarding protection-- its about the infidels who ask Muhammad for protection-- Allah is advising Muhammad to not only give them protection but also drop them to their homes or other places they feel safe at.
Regarding protection: it appears as if Muhammed is being given instruction by Allah to protect them who seek protection, but you say an Infidel must accept Islam too, in order to get protection. This is what a Christian would object too.
We would also reject death as punishment for not applying ourselves to an Islamic form of worshiping our God, which is Jehovah.
larry-- matters like these need a discussion outside a hyper blog but I hope that this will provide you with some food for thought that Islam nowhere tells to kill infidels as a service to God and chapter nine only discuses about a certain group who broke the treaty and killed Muslims. So, those very Muslims were told to fight back. Now that concludes the blame that Quran asks Muslims to kill all infidels.
Regarding your second issue about your God not allowing to kill-- we the Muslims are in a state of confusion. We don't know if the God of Old Testament is the same God as Jehovah. If not-- why did Jehovah said that he and God are same? Secondly the Old Testament even goes up to the extent of advising to kill all those who do not worship your God. (Exodus 22-20). Now if Old Testament is rejected by the Christians then why it is still part of bible.
"The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called 'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter."
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran … olence.htm
Troubled Man-- Yes but we just solved 9--5 by mentioning 9--6 and 13. If you can come up with some verse, I will be glad to solve one by one-- all the proclaimed 109 verses which you found out from an internet site. that off-course you did not had time to check and confirm from Quran.
You didn't solve anything, you merely offered the same rhetoric we always here from Muslims when those verses are brought up.
I've read the Quran. Thanks.
A Troubled Man-- anti-Islam activists don't bring up the verse 9--5 anymore if they find someone quoting the 9--6 and 9--13 and posting a site to check one's self (www.searchtruth.com).
Anti-Islam activists? So, anyone who criticizes Islam is an anti-Islam activist?
And, you say Rad Man's posts are childish?
ATM-- criticize islam, who is stopping you, but even criticism is done with evidence and proof. Try to make a case and invite Muslims to answer it. Do it in a convincing manner that would make Muslims to think about their beliefs. And when you are proven wrong-- accept it and don't call evidences as rhetoric.
No one is stopping me, but you're making accusations towards others of being racist and being anti-Islamic activists, simply because we are criticizing Islam. Clearly, and quite obviously, those accusations are completely false, yet that is the tactic you have presented. Of course, the first thing you're going to do is fight now that you've created the false perception Islam is under attack and must be defended at any cost.
The evidence is in your posts.
LOL! There have been plenty of Muslims here and elsewhere on the internet who make no attempt whatsoever to think about their beliefs. They simply jump to the defensive and start making false accusations, just like you did.
And yet, the evidence speaks volumes.
I take it you don't want to discuss 8:12 and 8:17? To bad because really would like an explanation.
Well taken from http://quran.com.
8:12 [Remember] when your Lord inspired to the angels, "I am with you, so strengthen those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieved, so strike [them] upon the necks and strike from them every fingertip."
and then followed by 8:17 to relieve any guilt one might have for the above holy war. And to put it in context from what I understand it was a holy war.
And you did not kill them, but it was Allah who killed them. And you threw not, [O Muhammad], when you threw, but it was Allah who threw that He might test the believers with a good test. Indeed, Allah is Hearing and Knowing.
Oh and BTW, I did match up the quotes from the site ATM posted and they in fact match.
Rad Man-- I am sorry to say but I feel your posts quite childish.
You are here to defend an irrational belief in a Majikal, Invisible Super Being that tells you to cover up your women, because men are incapable of not raping them if they are not covered - yes?
Mark Knowles-- I don't discuss if I smell racism in a person.
I am not a racist. I understand that your religion does not teach you morals, but to lie about someone in this fashion is rather rude.
I don't even know what race you are because you hide behind a photo of a cat.
But - I can see why you would not want to discuss the reason Muslim women must cover themselves. Evil - isn't it?
Mark Knowles-- there are many hubs written by muslim women as to why they cover their heads. Go and ask them as it would be more appropriate.
Mark Knowles-- I see that you have an honest question as to why Islam teaches women to cover their heads. Can you put up as a separate question out of this blog. I am sure you will find the answer which will be from the adequate section of the Islamic society, that is from muslim women. Off-course they are in a better position to answer the question.
Arshaid - Muslim women are forbidden to speak to an unbeliever such as myself are they not?
We are already familiar with the lies propagated by religionists desperate to defend their religion - and I understand that lying to make Islam more appealing is acceptable? This I find to be evil.
And that is what we are discussing here is it not? The Evil that pervades your religion.
So - perhaps you could tell me instead of evading? I think it is because Islam teaches that a raped woman is at fault if she did not cover herself properly. Is that the case?
Did the Quran teach you anyone who criticizes Islam is a racist?
Notice that you are resorting to dishonesty in order to defend Islam. It's one of the reasons why we don't accept Islam, it teaches people to lie.
Racism? Isn't this a religious forum? Are muslim a particular race? Oh am I being Childish again?
That makes me childish and Mark a racist. I don't believe any of us have call you names?
I'm not sure what was childish about my post. I simply stated that I did check the validity of the link that ATM posted and the quotes from the Quran on that site matched up with the quotes on http://quran.com.
Rad Man-- so, should I expect that by tomorrow you and ATM will come up with some proof ?
Sure that's easy. Do you consider http://quran.com a reputable site?
Rad Man-- the site you mentioned has only one translation of English. I tell you a site that has 4/5 translations including the one called Sahih International (www.searchtruth.com). It is always handy to compare two three translations to check if all use same word. Even if would be helpful for you to prove from four different translations.
Quran (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" No reasonable person would interpret this to mean a spiritual struggle.
(1) Remember thy Lord inspired the angels (with the message): "I am with you: give firmness to the Believers: I will instil terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them."
( سورة الأنفال , Al-Anfal, Chapter #8, Verse #12)
I don't really like www.searchtruth.com because I can't just read the Quran. I have to do a search. But you can see the translations are much the same.
Can you address this please? And 8:17 as well where Allah appears to relieve the guilt of people by telling them it was his murder.
Mohummad was a deceived deceiver. Demons helped him write the Koran, and he was NOT visited by the archangel Gabriel or Jesus!
Mark Knowles-- You have to have the courage to put up a question first. Dont start to cry before you put a question as to what will happen if you put up a question. Show some courage ....and say all that in your replies. Lets see how much courage you have to hear the truth and criticism to your baseless accusations.
Ah - now I am a coward as well as a racist?
I see I have hit a nerve - haven't I? I asked you the question. You have avoided the answer and attacked me instead..
This is why your religion causes so many conflicts.
Mark Knowles-- You are one ideal case of attention seeker. You have to come up with some proof of your claims first for me to answer with proof. Otherwise-- try your luck somewhere else, I know you need attention.
Ah - now I am an attention seeker as well? That is 3 insults you have thrown at me because I asked a simple question. You are not convincing me that your religion is anything other than aggressive.
Why does Islam teach that women must cover themselves? What is the reasoning behind it?
Because they have many flies in Islamic countries, and the Sun is hot there too. Men can manage that, but women, gosh! It was actually created for skin protection.
Some still prefer that over creams.
Mark Knowles-- You are jumping from one question to another. You asked me a question as to why my religion is the reason for all the conflicts in the world. That was like a racist remark to blame some religious group to be the source of all the problems and not supporting your statement by any evidence.
I will answer this baseless blame but with evidence.
"There was actually a book written recently called the Encyclopedia of Wars. This book, authored by Charles Phillips and Alan Axelrod, documents the history of recorded warfare in the world. From their list of 1763 wars, only 123 have been classified to have involved a religious cause."
Even if we believe that all the 123 religious ones were because of Islam, one has to think about the rest of 1640 to find out-- if they were for natural resources.
Please stop lying about me. I never asked any such question. I asked the reasoning behind the ridiculous notion that Muslim women be required to cover their bodies lest Muslim men rape them.
And please stop insulting my intelligence with such drivel as you have just proposed. I know that lying is an accepted part of your religion, but - really. I am not an agricultural peasant with no education.
No wonder your religion causes so many conflicts.
Did you check out the book yourself? Here's a bit of a description of the book I found on Amazon...
"Most of the major European and U.S. conflicts are examined. Coverage for other countries is adequate. A few examples are the Sino-Korean wars, Muslim civil wars..."
http://www.amazon.com/Encyclopedia-Wars … 0816028516
How's that for good, old fashioned evidence?
TheReligionOfPeace.com: Website Review
"This site lists acts committed around the world – some in wars, some having nothing to do with Islam, but to do with nationalist or political struggles, some in civil wars. No links are given. No sources for any of this just a list of supposed attacks carried out by 'Islamic terrorists'."
http://spencerwatch.com/2012/08/07/ther … on-terror/
"Much to my surprise, the Islamic scriptures in the Quran were actually far less bloody and less violent than those in the Bible."
-Philip Jenkins, author of 'Jesus Wars'
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/stor … =124494788
Ezekiel 9:6 "Slay utterly old and young, both maids, and little children, and women . . . "
Isaiah 13:16 "Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled, and their wives ravished."
Deuteronomy 13:15 "Thou shalt surely smite the inhabitants of that city with the edge of the sword, destroying it utterly . . . "
Leviticus 20:9 "For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death . . . "
Exodus 32:27 ". . . Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side, and go in and out from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbour."
Deut 21:10-12 "When thou goest forth to war against thine enemies, and the LORD thy God hath delivered them into thine hands, and thou hast taken them captive, And seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and hast a desire unto her, that thou wouldest have her to thy wife; Then thou shalt bring her home to thine house, and she shall shave her head, and pare her nails; "
Exodus 31:15 " . . . whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death."
Deut 21:21 "And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die . . . "
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index … 145AAUreCI
Oh I'm not saying one book is worse than the other.
r Thank you for speaking objectively away from bigotry I wish you success
So many who have responded to this are going back and forth with scripture, argument and condemnation of the other person. I studied religions when I was younger, and I came to the conclusion that all of the religions mentioned here offer peace and serenity - if people will take it.
But too many people don't take the beauty offered in religions. Instead, they take the self-righteousness and become condemning of all other religions. They all insist - as is being done here - that the other guy is wrong, the other religion is warped and only the religion chosen by the person writing the opinion is the correct way to think.
Islam and Christianity are both vulnerable to the same extremist fundamentalism. Most belief systems are vulnerable to distortion by the human ego. Religion, because of its claim on who has the real God (or Allah), is even more so.
Let's not forget the Muslim conquests, as well...
Byzantine–Arab Wars: 634–750
Conquest of Persia and Iraq: 633–651
Conquest of Transoxiana: 662–751
Conquest of Sindh: 664–712
Conquest of Hispania (711–718) and Septimania (719–720)
Conquest of the Caucasus: 711–750
End of the Umayyad conquests: 718–750
Conquest of Nubia: 700–1606
Incursions into southern Italy: 831–902
Conquest of Anatolia: 1060–1360
Byzantine-Ottoman Wars: 1299–1453
Seems like there's just a whole lot of violence and wars surrounding Islam throughout it's entire history.
A Troubled Man--- And now you want some Muslim to post the list of Crusade wars and list of colonial invasions from the Wikipedia. Show some maturity and say some thing with comparative analysis and with some form of evidence. Not a post that ends with "seems like".
That is your defense? It is OK that Islam is a violent, aggressive religion because there is other violence and aggression from other religious groups?
This is how the Christians defend their irrational belief system. It doesn't matter that they spent 2,000 years murdering because Pol Pot was an atheist.
"Encyclopedia of Wars written by y Charles Phillips and Alan Axelrod, documents the history of recorded warfare in the world. From their list of 1763 wars, only 123 have been classified to have involved a religious cause."
So, religion is the cause of all wars-- turns out to be another myth.
Please stop lying about me. I know that lying is the cornerstone of your moral code, but - I never said that.
But - you do agree - Islam is a violent aggressive religion. It just doesn't matter, because there are other violent aggressive philosophies. That so?
Mark Knowles-- than may be Islam is not turning out to be so submissive to those other violent aggressive philosophies that you mention like the new world order may be.
Now it is the New World order that caused Islam to slaughter hundreds of thousands of people hundreds of years ago?
All the other guy's fault huh? You sound like a Christian. This is the true evil of your religion - it causes you to hold it above a relationship with a real person. You prefer to treat me poorly and lie about me rather than have a genuine conversation with me.
Mark Knowles-- Now that we know that wars were fought for greed, there is no reason to but blame on any religion.
I think when we make religion an escape goat, we actually support the greedy people who like to invade and kill for material gains.
You just told me 123 wars were fought for religious reasons. But - to be more fair - people who believe in Majikal Invisible Super Beings are very easily manipulated to do murder in the name of these gods. Thus - religion is at fault. I mean - if they will believe Majikal tales of Virgins in Heaven - they will believe anything.
What do you think?
Mark Knowles -- When I read about the laws of engagement in Islam that you cannot kill a child, women, elderly and those who refuse to fight with you. And that you cannot destroy the property, flora and fauna or drinking water wells, and use of fire and poison is not allowed in a war and you cannot invade a country for the sake of material gains, and war is only allowed if you suffered damage and revenge is only allowed up to the extent of damage suffered and if you make a treaty with the people of other religions/infidels you must honor the treaty .......... I feel these old teachings, really magical.
Odd - your religion is so aggressive and violent that you have rules of war in the book? Really Majikal.
As I said - this is the true evil - you prefer to lie at me rather than have a rational conversation.
Sadly - Islam permits war to spread the faith, and your Prophet was in favor of offensive wars to do so:
"I have been ordered by God to fight with people till they bear testimony to the fact that there is no God but Allah and that Mohammed is his messenger, and that they establish prayer and pay Zakat (money). If they do it, their blood and their property are safe from me"
"I was commanded to fight the people until they believe in God and his message."
"Invitation first (that is, call them first to embrace Islam). If they refuse, then war."
When Muhammad and his followers were about to attack Mecca to subjugate it to Islam, his adherents arrested Abu Sufyan, one of Mecca’s inhabitants. They brought him to Muhammad. Muhammad told him: "Woe to you, O Abu Sufyan. Is it not time for you to realize that there is no God but the only God?" Abu Sufyan answered: "I do believe that." Muhammad then said to him: "Woe to you, O Abu Sufyan. Is it not time for you to know that I am the apostle of God?" Abu Sufyan answered: "By God, O Muhammad, of this there is doubt in my soul." The ’Abbas who was present with Muhammad told Abu Sufyan: "Woe to you! Accept Islam and testify that Muhammad is the apostle of God before your neck is cut off by the sword." Thus he professed the faith of Islam and became a Muslim.
So - your religion does indeed advocate offensive warfare. Now we have shown your false statements as an attempt to show Islam in a favorable light, does it really matter that your Majik book has "rules of engagement."?
Mark-- I am glad you brought up this topic. The verse starts with the sentence " I have been ordered by God to fight ...' and not " God orders you to fight....".
So, you see that it was an order for Muhammad. Actually; when a Prophet comes, may it be Moses, David or any other, his job is to establish the religion to far flung areas during his times. Mohammad was doing the same to fight to establish the Law of God, but only Mohammad is addressed in the verse, not every Tom and Harry born to his religion after that. The wars fought by Caliphs after him, were for survival at a time when more and more land was being grabbed by each power for its survival but the laws of engagement were never broken and peace treaties were made when offered. We see no genocide or killing of civilians in those wars.
The letter send to the King of Habsha is a proof, of what Mohammad wanted out of wars.
"He writes to the Christian King of Habsha; "we don't want your land or property or power, we want you to obey to God and maintain your status, but if you refuse to accept what I have brought, then we will fight with you"
So, two things I have tried to clear here; one that only the Prophet of God can fight to establish religion, other are only left with internet to spread religion through dialog to whoever who wants to know and listen.
Secondly; Muhammad's invasions were not for land or material gains. They were only for the sake of spreading the word of God.
But even if anyone does not understand the verse that you quoted--- it can also be explained with the help of UN charter. All signatory countries agree to a treaty of non-aggression. Now Muhammad tells his followers to respect and honor treaties. I hope I made myself clear.
Regarding Abu Sofian-- If I believe that he was forced to accept Islam, then why the entire population of Makkah was not forced to accept Islam at the time of the conquest of Makkah-- why Muhammad announced a general amnesty except for around 12 men who were convicted murderers. I would still like you to post the reference of this case, from where you have picked it up for me to further study and explain. By the way, Abu Sofian became such good Muslim that we still have so many people named after him in Muslim world. Abu Sofian confessed that he thought Muhammad's religion is fake and the people of Madina who were pagans too, will never accept Muhammad as the messenger of God.
You have made yourself perfectly clear. War to spread the word of god is acceptable behavior and presumably - when another comes claiming to be a Prophet to spread the word of god - all Muslims will follow him to war.
Thank you for finally admitting that your religion and Prophet are violent and aggressive.
This is not acceptable behavior. This is evil - we are agreed at last?
Such a good Muslim? How many infidels did he murder? How many women did he stone for being raped? How do you measure a Good Muslim exactly? I never heard this before.
Can you show me some proof and evidence of this God you claim exists and gives commands? I know you are a fan of proof and evidence.
You talk about maturity, but go on to make yet another childish fabrication.
No, religion is not the cause of ALL wars, but most certainly the cause of many wars, and Islam was the cause of some of those wars.
That would only serve to show how many more wars were fought in the name of your religion along with others.
I gave you plenty of evidence of your religions history and the violence it wrought.
its the clash of loyaltes not beacuse of islam >>>> beacuse the only winner is the goverment since the bigenning >>>
Mark-- Acceptable behavior in Islam is one that is promoted by Quran. Now if Islam says that fighting to spread the word of God is ordered to Muhammad alone and he according to Islam is the last prophet, then I don't understand your fears that Muslims will follow another prophet.
Moreover Muhammad leaves behind the 'laws of engagement' which prohibits Muslims to commit any aggression. I think that its a favor to entire mankind that he did, who can read and benefit from the Quran.
I see - so - what you are saying is that Mohammed is the only Muslim that went to war?
All by himself? No one else took up the sword to spread the word of god?
I cannot benefit from your book. I find your morals reprehensible and the practice of treating women as you do to be offensive, but IO am glad there were never any Muslim wars after Mohammed died - right?
Still waiting to know why Muslim women are ordered to cover up and the proof and evidence you have for this god that you claim exists. Odd how aggressive your brothers are though. Are these real Muslims?
okay the cover come for keeping safe from wanted eyes that time as any nun dosnt they cover them selves ???? but we are free to cover or not as its for me im not coverd !!!!! and its fine but i will when i want to ...even the holy virgin was use to cover herself beacuse that time the cover make them special than cheep meat if can say ... but you are free to belive what you want to beacuse the riligion to god and the land belong to every one.... ohh god or alah is the creatur or as you say the father (same)>>> blessed be
If "fighting" is acceptable behavior in order to promote Islam, it is not a religion of peace, nor would it teach any kind of acceptable morals and ethics such that there will ever be anything other than violence promoted with those who don't accept Islam.
Mark-- I only said that the verse you mentioned only allows Muhammad to go to war to spread the word of God.
And let me correct you that it is not just Islam whose dress code for women includes a head scarf, infect all the three Abrahimic religions have the same dress code so, please don't single out Islam. Secondly even mine and your grandmother use to wear the head scarf so, you can find the answer in your own history instead of asking any other.
Again if you put this question as a separate question, you can easily get response from all three Abrahimic religions and specially women as this is a matter pertaining to women and I am sure they can explain you better. Being men, I never did much research but if you are interested in this women's issue, as some women.
I see - so all Muslims can go to war to spread the word of god? And this should reassure me in some way?
In the West - we largely reject the notion of forcing our women to cover up.
You avoided the question though. I don't blame you - I ask tough questions. But - worry not, I am a non-denominational anti-religionist. You sound like a politician. Come on - tell me why Islam forces it's women folk to cover themselves. I am not interested in what Christianity says. That has no bearing on Islam.
Mark Knowles-- I don't like to talk back in your style but I feel that you suffer from paranoia.
You think that every Muslim woman who wears a hijab is because of a man.
You think any woman defending hijab over internet, is a member of some trained group whose job is to defend Islam or a man posting as a woman.
Regarding the proof of God..... you can read another hub of mine http://arshadmajid.hubpages.com/hub/Evolutioner
If the whole Universe fails to serve as a proof of its creator--- I find helpless to provide a bigger proof.
Oddly - The Universe only offers proof that The Universe exists. Not that the FSM created it.
So now I am - according to you - a racist, coward, self promoter and paranoid.
Good job on avoiding all my questions.
How very brave of you. Hardly surprising your religion causes so much conflict. Strangely - according to you - Mohamud told you not to do this.
Mark Knowles-- I agree that I have no right to call you a racist, a coward, a self promoter and a paranoid. But you have all the right to call my religion as evil. I envy your life.
I still don't understand why you don't post your questions over hubpages-- if you are so honest about finding answers instead of running after me.
I see no proof of God there, only proof of ignorance of the world around you.
Of course the Universe isn't any proof of a creator, that's just a false conclusion based on your religious beliefs. Your religion lies to you and it teaches you to lie.
You should discard it immediately for all the harm it causes you.
I dont think they are "evil" but I do believe they encourage ignorance and hinder the advancement of society.
There's no point arguing here.
Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world, Alhamdulillah! These reverts studied the Quran and the teaching of Muhammad (peace be upon him). I'm sure they had similar thoughts like some people in this forum.
Allah is the most Merciful and the most Gracious. He guides who he wants, so there are people who are deaf and blind to the truth. Insha Allah (God willing) one day the earth will only be Muslims living on earth and not a single person will be non Muslim. The truth hurts doesn't it?
I suggest people go and do some research from authentic websites and imams and find out the truth about Islam and then criticise the true religion. There are many websites and books written by Jews and Christians about Islam and they are all misleading and wrong.
Islam's rapid expansion is simply explained by rapid population growth of the Islamic World. Col Ghadafi famously proclaimed that Europe would become Muslim by Muslims out breeding the infidels. It's simple maths that if Western people's have 2.2 children per family and Muslims 8 children, Islam will be seen as rapidly expanding.
The day that Islam rules the World is the day that democracy, freedom of conscience and speech will end. Islam is little different from the oppressive and abusive medieval Catholic Church. One can only hope Islam will one day catch up with civilisation. If you think Islam is not abusive go ad speak to the Taliban, the Iranian regime, and the Wahabis.
Yes, birth rates in the Muslim are out of control, no family planning.
Sorry, that is not a truth, that is a delusion.
We are quite able to understand Islam, that's why we reject it. The end.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic … -not-round
Above is an American Scientific website describing the roundness of the earth. read it and learn.
We know the earth is round, the first like in the link says "As countless photos from space can attest, Earth is round—the "Blue Marble," Blue marble, not blue egg.
Typical that you can't even get past the first paragraph, never mind the whole article or chapter in the case of the Quran.
Okay, I just read the entire thing.
"Isaac Newton first proposed that Earth was not perfectly round. Instead, he suggested it was an oblate spheroid—a sphere that is squashed at its poles and swollen at the equator. He was correct and, because of this bulge, the distance from Earth's center to sea level is roughly 21 kilometers (13 miles) greater at the equator than at the poles."
An oblate spheroid is not the shape of any egg. No egg was mentioned in the description of the shape of the earth in the link you provided.
Thanks for the link, it DOES NOT describe the earth as an egg.
Didn't see that one coming, did you?
To be frank I must say that all religions are similar and they came to Tndeim life and society and the Prophet Muhammad was a simple man and creating a great did not like hurt or neck and he was saying that religion is advice that is to say no compulsion!!!!!But that is the fault of the policy being made religion played interests and true Islam is innocent and suggested only read the Qur'an to illustrate similarities between the sacred scriptures
In the USA, we have freedom of religion. Anyone can worship as their conscience leads, and I do not have anything to say bout it. Neither do you.
with all respect
And if we want to judge one whatever, anywhere
Must be a complete our information first because judgment without knowledge hated thing
Your translation program is letting you down. You get what you pay for.
We must move away from intolerance and not confuse Securities and keep religion away from politics .....And if we want to judge one whatever, anywhere
Must be our information Full first because judgment without knowledge something hated I love everyone who deals with humanity whatever their religion or shape or affiliation For example I'm Around by >>>>Christians and Jews,,,,,,, and Aesidein (((Satanists))))) and love them all because they my family
Great Idea, lets keep religion away from politics. No more Muslims states.
then you dont have problims with ..Missionary campaigns ....Crusader????
weel i think wev dont need any christian states too
Think before you speak larryprice. You make absolutely no sense what you are talking about. You define the media as the truth? You are not even close to what you watch. Do not create inappropriate sentence to hurt feelings of mankind. Never blame people without thinking to the point. If you do not know the truth then leave it to God, if you are not satisfied then do a true research about it.
what is the point here from makethe blaim so if he was good or even bad why we must hate or fight god will leat us know in the end of time
i see that every one is right in sumway and it dos not make us better if the others was wrong
live and leave the others live without hate
that makes me wish if all riligions dissapear from earth
please wish the war end soon in my home
It's my understand that Muhammad was a military leader, is that who you think should assume the dictatorship over the modern world.
Forgive me if I'm wrong, but are these not his words?
Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 327: - “Allah said, ‘A prophet must slaughter before collecting captives. A slaughtered enemy is driven from the land. Muhammad, you craved the desires of this world, its goods and the ransom captives would bring. But Allah desires killing them to manifest the religion.’
Tabari 9:69 "Killing Unbelievers is a small matter to us"
Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 992: - "Fight everyone in the way of Allah and kill those who disbelieve in Allah."
What do you think? These famous intelligent people didn't have enough knowledge before making statements about Islam, or your know more than these people:
http://www.gainpeace.com/index.php?opti … Itemid=105
Do you have more knowledge than Michael H.Hart?
Hart decided to choose Muhammad over Jesus or Moses. Hart attributes this to the fact that Muhammad was "supremely successful" in both the religious and secular realms.(wikipedia)
And for your question I just want to say Quran is the most authentic book.
Here is your answer from Quran:
So I was right Muhammad was a military leader who describes killing and a lack of compassion in detail. I have to say perhaps you should read a little of the NT where Jesus only preaches love and compassion. I am no longer a Christian however his message is clear.
I think you just read about his wars.Try to read His other aspects also.
What do you think?Hart didn't know anything...
Why Michael H.Hart said all this:
"The central human figure of Islam, regarded by Muslims as a prophet of God and the last messenger. Active as a social reformer, diplomat, merchant, philosopher, orator, legislator, military leader, humanitarian, philanthropist."
http://www.onislam.net/english/shariah/ … oints.html
Jesus never advocated killing and slaughtering his enemies, why do you think Muuhammed did?
Why do you bring up what others think? And why should I look past all of his descriptions of how to kill non-believers from a military leader who was trying to empower his people to kill? And why should I look past him marrying a 7 years old?
You would think a guy to talks to God and Angels would have known better?
You didn't answer my question. I think You don't want to listen anything positive about Islam just want to argue and ........
OK just tell me one thing:
http://pwg.gsfc.nasa.gov/istp/outreach/ … scons.html
Chapter 21:v33: "It is Allah who has created the night and the day,the sun and the moon,each one travelling in orbit with its own motion."
Search yourself everything then tell me
How Quran said that sun is also moving which science discovered recently.
Sorry, don't you see the Qur'an states that he sun revolves around the earth. It doesn't say the earth has an orbit, it says the sun has an orbit and that's why we have day and night. The sun orbiting in the centre of the galaxy takes millions of years and has nothing to do with night and day. Night and day is a result of our orbit around the sun which is not mentioned in your quote.
Your quote is explaining night and day and did it improperly.
SUN REVOLVES AROUND THE EARTH???
I haven't written that,read it carefully and I'm talking about another thing.
Just answer a simple question: I'm repeating...
How Quran said that sun is also moving which science discovered recently.
"It is Allah who has created the night and the day,the sun and the moon,each one travelling in orbit with its own motion."
night and day, sun and moon. each one travelling in orbit with its own motion.
The reference is night and day. It's giving the sun and moon credit for night and day. It's the earths rotation that should be given credit for night and day.
And while the sun does move, it does not orbit--by any definition.
Just answer a simple question:
How Quran said that sun is also moving which science discovered recently.
Look back as I've answered you question. Your quote is in reference to day and night and is giving the the orbit of the sun and moon credit for day and night, which is not the case. We have day and night because of the rotation of the earth which is not mentioned in your book. Read it again and you'll see what I mean.
What you mean I'll take a look later,
Leave everything, first answer a simple question:
How Quran said that sun is also moving which science discovered recently.
I've answered you question twice. The suns orbit that is mentioned in the passage is in reference to the explanation of night and day. The Sun's orbit is of course not responsible for our night and day, the earth rotation is. Your quote says the moon and sun orbits the earth and the earth doesn't move that's how we get day and night. It's wrong wrong wrong.
"Your quote says the moon and sun orbits the EARTH and the EARTH doesn't move that's how we get day and night"
Is that I quoted, if you read carefully the EARTH was not in my quote.
Wow , you have your own translation. I think you don't know arabic language and you're not a scientist. Why should I believe you...
I don't have to know any Arabic to understand English and I don't have to be a scientist to know that when something is explaining why we have day and night by claiming it the responsibility of the Sun and moon they are wrong. The orbit of the Sun around the centre of the universe is not responsible for the day and night.
Are you a scientist or a religious teacher? Why should we listen to you?
I'm not teaching you just sharing my knowledge,Take it or Leave it.
So you think there is no God, can you give me any proof?
the burden of proof is on the person that is claiming to know with certainty that a god exist. Atheists don't assert that there are no gods. They lack a belief in a god because no sufficient evidence has been presented. Trying to shift the burden of proof onto someone and expecting them to prove a negative is a common (and laughable) debate tactic.
Can you prove to me that unicorns don't exist?
Your knowledge says that the Suns orbit is responsible for the earth day and night, the earth is shaped like an egg and sperm comes from a mans back. I difficult for me to listen and learn when your spouting your knowledge.
You think there is no God and you don't have any proof.
I got the answer.
You can't be serious posting that link here. See what she says at 3:24.
And the point of the posting of this YouTube is....?
It's probably fortunate that she wasn't pointing out all the letting of infidel blood verses from the Quran because she'd be dead by now.
Ok, this conversation is getting interesting. Now i ask you larryprice, troubled man and rad man, who is your god?? We know the bible speaks about god, Jesus himself believed and worshipped god.. you all talk about god......do you have any idea who is your god???
So much thinking so this simple question??? I believe you all must be researching about your god?
Then who possibly build the stars, galaxies and the universe?? Who created this intelligent mankind? Who possibly govern things around us? Who is the one who created angels? Who has created the Satan? Who had created the hell and the heaven???
You do not speak to the point. I asked you who is the "one"? Can you prove it? You speak about god, larryprice speaks about god, then prove who is god? You talk about hell and the heaven, who made this infinite structures which man's eyes cannot see?
What? Can't you explain this simple thing? The bible talks about Jesus, god, angels and the Satan..you believe in bible? If you say that there is no god then you yourself are proving your bible wrong...
How can you say this without thinking, without researching? How can you say that the bible and the quran is wrong? You admire bible and spoke about it in earlier conversation, yet you say that the bible is not right? You deny the whole of mankind without thinking? Then why do you speak about bible?
Aren't you getting anything to write now? You probably doing research over a simple question.. that who is god?
As for you larryprice, your question itself is wrong. It's not Muhammad (pbuh) who wrote the quran. You all have not researched about god, yet you describe god loves you, cares for you..What are you all talking about??
Okay , so this is your believe without research?, that both books are myth and superstition? Then so many people in this world , the increasing number of Christians believe in bible on first population growth and the increasing Muslim that are second largest growing population , are fools practising their religion according to you??
No, just normal, regular folks that have been indoctrinated.
Allah in the Qur'an says that Truth is made clear and distinct from falsehood however, I'm afraid some people simply refuse to believe with all the clear evidences placed before them.
Evidence? Please provide evidence. The Quran and Bible are only evidence that someone wrote them, they are not evidence of any God.
watch carefully or watch all of its parts...
There is no evidence, do you understand?
Yes I don't understand what evidence you're looking...
Everything is clear in that video.
Evidence is not something we must look for to support your beliefs, it is something that has to present itself, and not in a video.
So you are describing that you are clever to know everything? You come under the least population growth who are disbelieving the entire mankind. Smartness doesn't work if you do not know anything......period.
a religion's popularity does not make it true. You have to know better than that, right?
Yes, jumping to false conclusions regarding things that were never said here appear to be one of the favored forms of fallacious arguments.
Actually, non-belief has the highest growth rate.
Well, it looks like you've run out of arguments. Nice try.
I had not run into arguments troubled man. As you say that non-belief has highest growth rate, you are absolutely wrong. I had said you the growth of Christianity lies first and Muslims lies second to the chart. You are proving wrong. If you want to place your sentences then prove yourself right according to the recent statistics..
by Melissa Barrett8 months ago
I have said many times that what you seek in the bible you shall find. Still I see the same few verses being thrown around in support of one opinion or another. I wonder why those particular verses stick...
by mrnasir2 years ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_100What Non-Muslims said about Him?http://www.gainpeace.com/index.php?opti … Itemid=105
by thirdmillenium2 months ago
Does Islam contain some doctrines that make it mandatory for all Muslims to kill/destroy/annihilate followers of other religions/atheists/agnostics? Some say it does. Some others say it was not originally in the...
by Eric Dierker3 years ago
I have concluded it does not refer to Christ. It refers to the time before Christ's presence (physical) on earth. John the probable author is speaking of before Christ.The next verses speak of the flesh of the...
by errum fattah6 years ago
facebook, which is mentioned in the lists of famous websites of this world, had did a very shamefull thing by posting mohommad(pbuH)'s cartoon... the man who is the great man in this world, this kind of acts can't...
by James4 years ago
Is it really necessary to blame all Christians for the idiocy and violent actions of people who think God is telling them to kill people, or other evil things?Three points for this:1. The "crusades" and...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.