/* */

PDA

View Full Version : Fight only those who fight you



Eddy
08-11-2020, 05:59 PM
Firstly, in Islam, we only ever fight (and as a last resort) to ultimately obtain peace. I think that’s the obvious argument that everyone makes.
That is what a Muslim said on a thread called "Saying "Islām Is A Religion of Peace"...?"


I wasn't allowed to respond to it because I'm not a Muslim so I had to open this thread.

Anti muslim apologists are quick to bring up Quran 9:29 to defeat that line of thinking.

SAHIH INTERNATIONAL

Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture - [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.

I am not that quick to make cheap accusations, I like to make my own little research before saying anything.
I have to admit, the (anti) muslim apologists are not that wrong after all.

I missed the word in parenthesis in the original post. At that time the Forum didn't give me the option to edit the text.
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
Nitro Zeus
08-11-2020, 06:59 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy

That is what a Muslim said on a thread called "Saying "Islām Is A Religion of Peace"...?"

I wasn't allowed to respond to it because I'm not a Muslim so I had to open this thread.

Anti muslim apologists are quick to bring up Quran 9:29 to defeat that line of thinking.

SAHIH INTERNATIONAL

Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture - [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.

I am not that quick to make cheap accusations, I like to make my own little research before saying anything.
I have to admit, the muslim apologists are not that wrong after all.
If you want to know the truth, please visit Discover-The-Truth.com and there you have your answer which was already answered by a Muslim scholar.

That verse it is connected to Battle of Tabuk because the Roman Empire was about to invade Arabia peninsula and the Romans weren't really Christians, because they did not believed that God is One Person. But that happened 1400 years. I invite you to the link I provided and see for yourself.
Reply

'Abdullah
08-11-2020, 10:28 PM
Let me ask if you believe in Geneva conventions and UN’s international human rights? If you do, how do the think these international humanitarian laws are enforced and is it okay to enforce these laws?
Reply

keiv
08-11-2020, 10:41 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
I am not that quick to make cheap accusations, I like to make my own little research before saying anything.
I have to admit, the muslim apologists are not that wrong after all
Interesting
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
eesa the kiwi
08-11-2020, 10:52 PM
Greetings and peace be with you Eddy,

I don't think the questions you are asking on this forum will help you find what you are looking for. I am a Christian and believe that Islam is a religion of peace. I will leave my Muslim friends to answer your questions.

Islam inspires and encourages people to do something, ask why are you a Muslim, asks what it inspires them to do, there has to be a lot of good points or there would not be the billion plus followers.

I noticed in your first post on this forum that you regard yourself as agnostic; and I find that a strange position to hold.

The creation of the universe is history and you can't change history. Either at least 'One God' created the universe, or there is no god. There cannot be a probable or maybe god. Regardless as to what you or I believe about God, he exists fully and totally, or there is no creator god.

Ask yourself, how could the universe happen purely by natural causes? How could abiogenesis happen purely by natural causes? How could life evolve without any help from God?

In the spirit of searching for God,

Eric
From @Eric H
Reply

Eddy
08-12-2020, 03:11 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
Let me ask if you believe in Geneva conventions and UN’s international human rights? If you do, how do the think these international humanitarian laws are enforced and is it okay to enforce these laws?
Yes I do believe in international human rights.
Unfortunately there are so many different cultures that it is almost impossible to please everyone with only one set of rules.
Western culture and Islamic culture are pretty different so right there you have one little problem.
Anyway we don't want to go too far from the topic at hand.

The topic is: Does Islam promotes the idea that you attack only when you are attacked?
This is a very common and popular understanding according to most Muslims.

I have found in my readings that this idea is simply false.
Why?
Because there are many occasions in the Quran where this is totally contradicted.
Quran 9:29 never mentions that you fight only if they attack you.
As a matter of fact this verse clearly suggests that is the Muslims who are initiating the attack (fight).
The Muslims were never attacked in this occasion.
It says:
[fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.
It doesn't say fight them until they stop fighting you.
Fight until they pay the jizyah.
What if they don't want to pay the jizyah?
Do they get killed then?
That's the way it looks to me.
Where am I wrong/
Reply

'Abdullah
08-12-2020, 03:22 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
Yes I do believe in international human rights.
Unfortunately there are so many different cultures that it is almost impossible to please everyone with only one set of rules.
Western culture and Islamic culture are pretty different so right there you have one little problem.
Anyway we don't want to go too far from the topic at hand.

The topic is: Does Islam promotes the idea that you attack only when you are attacked?
This is a very common and popular understanding according to most Muslims.

I have found in my readings that this idea is simply false.
Why?
Because there are many occasions in the Quran where this is totally contradicted.
Quran 9:29 never mentions that you fight only if they attack you.
As a matter of fact this verse clearly suggests that is the Muslims who are initiating the attack (fight).
The Muslims were never attacked in this occasion.
It says:
[fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.
It doesn't say fight them until they stop fighting you.
Fight until they pay the jizyah.
What if they don't want to pay the jizyah?
Do they get killed then?
That's the way it looks to me.
Where am I wrong/
The two topics are very closely related. And that’s why I asked what do you do to enforce International human rights? Is putting sanctions not part of enforcing what you believe in right? Is raging war to liberate people and bring democracy not considered to be the right thing. See what has been done in Afghanistan, Libya, and Iraq to liberate them at the name of humanitarian rights? Why sanctions were imposed on Brunei when it declared to implement sharia law? Why are sanctions imposed on Iran for keep nuclear weapons and why these sanctions can’t be imposed on USA for example for doing the same crime? Why was USA allowed to use nuclear weapons in World War II to enforce its own so-called humanitarian laws? And how humanitarians have supported Israel to kick out and occupy Palestine?

If modern world ( first world of today) can do all evil things to impose what they believe to be right, why can’t Muslims do the same? Why are there double standards?
Reply

Eddy
08-12-2020, 04:56 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
See what has been done in Afghanistan, Libya, and Iraq to liberate them at the name of humanitarian rights?
That is a very complex question to answer in one paragraph but I would say this.
Is Afghanistan worse today than when Al Qaeda and the Taliban owned the country and executed all kinds of atrocities in the name of Islam?
Iraq was being held together by an oppressive leader who did used chemical weapons against the Kurds in the north.
Today they are free to manage their country as they please. Are they capable of doing it?
Too many conflicts among them.
Anyway I don't want to get too much into politics on a religious forum.
The UN and the International human rights are not chosen and implemented based on Christianity.
I don't think the American government represents Christianity and I don't think Al Qaeda and the Taliban represent Islam
So I don't quite know how is this relevant to what the Quran teaches.
Reply

'Abdullah
08-12-2020, 05:20 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
That is a very complex question to answer in one paragraph but I would say this.
Is Afghanistan worse today than when Al Qaeda and the Taliban owned the country and executed all kinds of atrocities in the name of Islam?
Iraq was being held together by an oppressive leader who did used chemical weapons against the Kurds in the north.
Today they are free to manage their country as they please. Are they capable of doing it?
Too many conflicts among them.
Anyway I don't want to get too much into politics on a religious forum.
The UN and the International human rights are not chosen and implemented based on Christianity.
I don't think the American government represents Christianity and I don't think Al Qaeda and the Taliban represent Islam
So I don't quite know how is this relevant to what the Quran teaches.
I did not say that UN or USA is preaching Christianity but they are preaching what they think is right thing to do such as democracy, interest based financial systems such as capitalism, promoting slavery on a new level by creating IMF and giving loans to third world countries on interest, promoting liberalism and secularism, promoting feminism etc. You believe in that religion ( let’s call it first Worldism) because you accepted international human rights and you accepted that UN and USA is right to enforce them. By the way, in the process they killed millions of innocent people and the countries I mentioned are in worse form than they were before US intervention.

How is this relevant? You believe UN, USA and IMF can’t do what ever they think is right to promote and enforce the values they believe to be true. Muslims also believe is what is revealed to them and we believe only God has the right to tell what is good for us and what is bad. It’s our duty then to make sure we believe, support and spread that message to keep justice in the society. If UN can enforce its values, what’s wrong for Muslims to enforce the values they believe are true and will provide true justice in the society?

Between are there any rules of war set to enforce humanitarian values? If there are please, list those so we can compare apple to apples and see who truly is the source of corruption in the society?
Reply

Eddy
08-12-2020, 08:44 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
You believe in that religion ( let’s call it first Worldism) because you accepted international human rights and you accepted that UN and USA is right to enforce them.
You are generalizing.
I don't agree with everything that happens in the western world.
I don't agree with every action of the government of the USA.
I don't agree with with every action supported by the UN.

So you believe the western world values are based on:
Democracy, interest based financial systems such as capitalism, promoting slavery on a new level by creating IMF and giving loans to third world countries on interest, promoting liberalism and secularism, promoting feminism etc.

What is wrong with "Democracy? (a government chosen by the majority of the people)
The people of the country are the owners of the country and not the government.
The people have the right to choose and to replace who governs the country.
The government works for the people. The government is employed by the people.

Do you prefer a dictator, (communist style like Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea)
or a dictator (Islamic style like most Muslim countries)?

Do you prefer that the people elect the government (democracy) or you prefer a self proclaimed government taken by force?

Do I believe in capitalism? Yes
Capitalism is not based on interest, two different things.
Capitalism "Economic system based on private ownership of the means of production and the creation of goods or services for profit"

Promoting slavery is not a value accepted by any western societies but it is often mention in the Quran as legitimate.

So you don't like liberalism and secularism.
Let's not confuse liberalism with immoral practices, liberalism is all about freedom and equality.
What's wrong with that?
Secularism is just to separate the government with religion.
In today's world most countries are usually composed with people from many religions.
It doesn't make any sense to have a government that favors one religion over all the others. Don't you think?

And finally feminism, what is feminism?
Feminism is the movement that aims at achieving equality of rights between men and women.
It doesn't mean the traditional roles of men and women change that much.

So you prefer misogyny instead? I think that is the opposite of feminism.

I still don't understand how all this explains Quran 9:29 or relates to fight only those who fight you.
Reply

Good brother
08-12-2020, 10:04 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
As a matter of fact this verse clearly suggests that is the Muslims who are initiating the attack (fight).
The Muslims were never attacked in this occasion.
It says:
[fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.
It doesn't say fight them until they stop fighting you.
Fight until they pay the jizyah.
What if they don't want to pay the jizyah?
Do they get killed then?
That's the way it looks to me.
Where am I wrong/
The Prophet had sent a messenger to the ruler of Busra. On his way, he was intercepted by a close ally to Caesar, the Byzantine Emperor. Al-Harith, the messenger was tied and beheaded by this ally.

Killing envoys and messengers used to be regarded as the most awful crime, from this point, many battles took place between Muslims and Byzantines that resulted in a major victories of Muslims despite their relatively low numbers and Primitive weapons..

Reply

Eddy
08-12-2020, 02:03 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Good brother
The Prophet had sent a messenger to the ruler of Busra. On his way, he was intercepted by a close ally to Caesar, the Byzantine Emperor. Al-Harith, the messenger was tied and beheaded by this ally.
Thank you very much for the response.
I read this story before but don't you think that it is too incomplete?
What was the messenger sent for?
What was the message he had for the Byzantines?
Do you think the message was appropriate?
What do you think that would have happened if a messenger came to Muhammad and say:

"I have been sent to you (prophet Muhammad) to advice you that the God (Allah) that you claim to believe is not real.
There is only one God and that God is the God worshiped by Christians and Jews.
I therefore offer you salvation by uniting with us worshiping the only God that is the real God."

Now what do you think would have been the response from prophet Muhammad and the Muslims?
Be sincere now.
What is the penalty for blasphemy?
Isn't it death?
Don't you think the messenger was committing blasphemy?
Well, yes he was.

So what happened to that messenger was very predictable and very much in line with the customs of the time.
You don't go to your enemy offering a change of God like it is a change of new cloths.

So what was the reaction from the Muslims after a very predictable outcome, they attacked first.
They didn't attempt to resolve the issue in a pacific way.

It is easy to see things from one side and never consider how does it look from the other side.
Have you thought about it?
Reply

'Abdullah
08-12-2020, 04:22 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
I still don't understand how all this explains Quran 9:29 or relates to fight only those who fight you.
I don't think you asked for the explanation of 9:29 because you yourself said:

format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
That is what a Muslim said on a thread called
"Saying "Islām Is A Religion of Peace"...?"

I wasn't allowed to respond to it because I'm not a Muslim so I had to open this thread.

Anti muslim apologists are quick to bring up Quran 9:29 to defeat that line of thinking.

SAHIH INTERNATIONAL

Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture - [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.

I am not that quick to make cheap accusations, I like to make my own little research before saying anything.

I have to admit, the muslim apologists are not that wrong after all.
In case you did not understood this verse, below is a link with complete explanation with context and reason why this verse was revealed.
https://abuaminaelias.com/verse-929-...ttle-of-tabuk/
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
I don't agree with everything that happens in the western world.
I don't agree with every action of the government of the USA.
I don't agree with with every action supported by the UN.
Good to know, you previously admitted that you endorse International Humanitarian Laws and you think UN and USA has the right to enforce them. Anyways, you will see why I asked these questions and how are these relevant to the subject of this thread.

format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
What is wrong with "Democracy? (a government chosen by the majority of the people)

The people of the country are the owners of the country and not the government.

The people have the right to choose and to replace who governs the country.

The government works for the people. The government is employed by the people.

Democracy is wrong because by definition it is a form of government in which the “supreme power” is vested in “the people” and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system. While in Islam “Supreme Power” is Allah and only the law given by Allah can provide Justice.
On paper, in democracy the elected members shall always work for the best interest of the people. On paper, democracy is supposed to have a system of check and balance (Congress, President, and Judicial System) to make sure power is not misused. But is this all really true?
Can popular opinion be manipulated? The answer is yes. Media is the best example of manipulating people’s opinion. Constantly giving them negative feedback about the Sharia law for example.
Is popular opinion always true? It is similar to as asking is the mob mentality always right? The answer is that it is mostly wrong. Some examples:
• Prostitution is allowed in Nevada because of popular vote. Is this right morally and ethically? No
• Various states in USA have legalized marijuana. Is this ethical and a right decision? The answer is NO
• Various states have allowed same sex marriage through popular vote? Is that ethical? NO
Here we see that we are missing a common ethical law which one can refer to determine what is right and what is wrong. In Islam, it is Sharia law. Where as in democracy, it is determined by people and hence we see that definition of good and bad keeps changing in a Democratic society.
Does democracy serve people? The answer is no. How many people in USA will like to have free medical insurance? Do they get it? No. Why because health insurance companies lobby against such measures. These elected members who are supposed to serve people, serve the lobbies who fund their campaigns. These lobbyists influence the elected officials with money they put in their political campaigns. It all about money and power and if that is not corruption, I am not sure what else can be corruption. This is why we see so much corruption in US history:
• Injustice when we look at genocide of native Americans
• Injustice when we look at oppression of African Americans throughout US history.
• When we look at the atrocities of bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Even recently look at the invasions of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. All of this happened with agreement of all three branches who were supposed to have a check and balance?
So over all, there is a fundamental problem with democracy. One must ask, what are the laws of democracy going to be based upon? If they are to be based on popular opinion, then who says that popular opinion is going to be moral? Who says that popular opinion can arrive to what is just? As stated above, popular opinion can easily be manipulated through mass media, social media and education system. Bottom line is that democracy can never be a substitute for morality. And this is why religion is so important to follow the right religion as a check to see if decisions being made are moral or not.

format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy

Do I believe in capitalism? Yes
Capitalism is not based on interest, two different things.
Capitalism "
Economic system based on private ownership of the means of production and the creation of goods or services for profit"

Capitalism, Feudalism or Socialism, that’s is all human made systems and all of them lack ethical and moral standards for economic system which are found in Islamic economic system. Interest was just one example which you may think is the right thing to do but you need to dig deeper to see why Interest has been banned in all Abrahamic religions.
See my article below on the topic of interest and why it is bad:

Capitalisms basically consists of just two classes: Capitalists who owns the means of production such as factories, farms and other businesses and working class who perform the work. Capitalists not only own the means of production but they also keep a major share of profit (stealing labor value). In order for working class to exist, they have to turn the profit for capitalists to own them. Otherwise they will be forced out of the business by their competitors. Nearly all the efforts of human civilization now is revolves around working hard for capitalists so that they can keep making profits and own means of production. As a result these capitalists own factories, financial institutes, mass media, social media, tech companies, medical and pharmaceutical companies, etc. They own everything.
What does that mean now? It means that they got the power to set the agenda for our society. And what kind of agenda these Capitalists have? It is very simple, making everyone to work so that profits of these capitalists grow bigger and bigger. They don’t really care about the welfare of the workers, or environment. They simply can’t because those things are no profitable. Capitalists don’t allow businesses to run by ethics and morals because these don’t give them any profit. Anything that reduces the profit, is harmful for a Capitalist. Sometimes, these capitalists do get incentives and tax breaks so they spend a portion in charity or on environmentally friendly things and make sure their charities are highlighted and discussed in social and mass media. But they don’t mention how much they have saved in taxes by doing so. It kills two birds with one stone, it helps to market that these Capitalists do care and do spend on good cause and it also allows their businesses and profits to grow.
Now how one can make profit. There are only two ways; one by reducing the cost of production and second by increase the sale price. When reducing the cost, it mostly done by reducing quality of the product and lowering the labor of working class. These Capitalists sometimes eliminate their competitors and thus create a monopoly which gives them a license to charge whatever they want to increase their profits.
In short, rich becomes richer and poor become poorer. That’s the reason today 1% of the rich people in America own as much wealth ( $36T) as the all middle class Americans combined. Only an unethical and morally corrupt person would want to support Capitalism.

Anyways, We will come back to these issues or may be we can discuss these is separate threads. The main reason I brought this up, is that when one believes that certain values are good and will get rid of oppression/corruption in the society then history tells us that human beings always have attempted to enforce those values and beliefs on others. All early Civilizations have survived this way but does this mean that all of them were on truth? Truth can only be one which comes from our creator - Allah and as Muslim we believe that Justice can only be served by implementing Sharia law.
Reply

Abz2000
08-12-2020, 06:56 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy

That is what a Muslim said on a thread called "Saying "Islām Is A Religion of Peace"...?"

I wasn't allowed to respond to it because I'm not a Muslim so I had to open this thread.

Anti muslim apologists are quick to bring up Quran 9:29 to defeat that line of thinking.

SAHIH INTERNATIONAL

Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture - [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.

I am not that quick to make cheap accusations, I like to make my own little research before saying anything.
I have to admit, the muslim apologists are not that wrong after all.
The laws of God -Who revealed the Quran and sent Muhammad :saws: as His final messenger- apply universally.
Claiming for example that Molossia
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_Molossia is an independent republic and is governed by the family democracy does not give any group of individuals license to murder, to rape, to commit incest, to set up UNLAWFUL gambling and loansharking operations centers, to UNLAWFULLY loot passers by, or to avoid JUSTLY IMPOSED financial levies ....... whether they like justice - or not.
Think about it.

At-Taubah 9:33

هُوَ ٱلَّذِىٓ أَرْسَلَ رَسُولَهُۥ بِٱلْهُدَىٰ وَدِينِ ٱلْحَقِّ لِيُظْهِرَهُۥ عَلَى ٱلدِّينِ كُلِّهِۦ وَلَوْ كَرِهَ ٱلْمُشْرِكُونَ

English - Yusuf Ali

It is He Who hath sent His Messenger with guidance and the Religion of Truth, to proclaim it over all religion, even though the Pagans may detest (it).

get Quran App:https://goo.gl/w6rESk





format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
Thank you very much for the response.
I read this story before but don't you think that it is too incomplete?
What was the messenger sent for?
What was the message he had for the Byzantines?
Do you think the message was appropriate?
What do you think that would have happened if a messenger came to Muhammad and say:

"I have been sent to you (prophet Muhammad) to advice you that the God (Allah) that you claim to believe is not real.
There is only one God and that God is the God worshiped by Christians and Jews.
I therefore offer you salvation by uniting with us worshiping the only God that is the real God."

Now what do you think would have been the response from prophet Muhammad and the Muslims?
Be sincere now.
What is the penalty for blasphemy?
Isn't it death?
Click to enlarge:

Attachment 6954

Attachment 6955

Attachment 6956


image sharing






format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy

Don't you think the messenger was committing blasphemy?
Well, yes he was.

So what happened to that messenger was very predictable and very much in line with the customs of the time.
You don't go to your enemy offering a change of God like it is a change of new cloths.

So what was the reaction from the Muslims after a very predictable outcome, they attacked first.
They didn't attempt to resolve the issue in a pacific way.

It is not blasphemy for a lawful authority to impose new, improved, and justly fitting laws.
The Romans were not "the enemy" but rather subjects of God and fellow humans of the messenger who were being delivered essential information in goodwill - which was a part of the duty of the messenger of God. They became their own enemies by attempting to prevent officers of The Law of God from carrying out their lawful duties -by murdering (martyring) those dutiful officers in cold blood.


format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
It is easy to see things from one side and never consider how does it look from the other side.
Have you thought about it?


It is the habit of satan and his servant al maseeh-ad-dajjal to create imaginary sides whilst giving his dupes the false illusion that he -or anybody else- is comparable and equal to God. Dajjal attempts to mirror the Messiah, but when the Messiah's subject status becomes undeniable, Dajjal foolishly, criminally, and impotently attempts to mirror God. The desperate infidelity becomes a mass theatrical stage show discrediting only those who stand on falsehood ultimately.
The false illusion via comparison is self evident -since God and others are not equal.
Complete Just truth and slight truth are also not equal.



This is also being made clear to you in plain text and goodwill, so please don't fall for false illusions.


Ar-Ra'd 13:16

قُلْ مَن رَّبُّ ٱلسَّمَٰوَٰتِ وَٱلْأَرْضِ قُلِ ٱللَّهُۚ قُلْ أَفَٱتَّخَذْتُم مِّن دُونِهِۦٓ أَوْلِيَآءَ لَا يَمْلِكُونَ لِأَنفُسِهِمْ نَفْعًا وَلَا ضَرًّاۚ قُلْ هَلْ يَسْتَوِى ٱلْأَعْمَىٰ وَٱلْبَصِيرُ أَمْ هَلْ تَسْتَوِى ٱلظُّلُمَٰتُ وَٱلنُّورُۗ أَمْ جَعَلُوا۟ لِلَّهِ شُرَكَآءَ خَلَقُوا۟ كَخَلْقِهِۦ فَتَشَٰبَهَ ٱلْخَلْقُ عَلَيْهِمْۚ قُلِ ٱللَّهُ خَٰلِقُ كُلِّ شَىْءٍ وَهُوَ ٱلْوَٰحِدُ ٱلْقَهَّٰرُ

Say: "Who is the Lord and Sustainer of the heavens and the earth?"
Say: "(It is) Allah."
Say: "Do ye then take (for worship) protectors other than Him, such as have no power either for good or for harm to themselves?"
Say: "Are the blind equal with those who see? Or the depths of darkness equal with light?"
Or do they assign to Allah partners who have created (anything) as He has created, so that the creation seemed to them similar?
Say: "Allah is the Creator of all things: He is the One, the Supreme and Irresistible."

get Quran App:https://goo.gl/w6rESk


As to what follows:
.

- - - - -

"Say to them: ignorant people do you bid me to worship others than Allah?" (Ibn Jarir, Ibn Abi Hatim, Tabarani). According to another tradition from Ibn Abbas, the Quraish said to the Holy Prophet: "O Muhammad, if you kiss our gods, the idols, we shall worship your God." Thereupon, this Surah was sent down. (Abd bin Humaid).

Said bin Mina (the freed slave of Abul Bakhtari) has related that Walid bin Mughirah, As bin Wail, Aswad bin al-Muttalib and Umayyah bin Khalaf met the Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace) and said to him: "O Muhammad (upon whom be Allah's peace and blessings), let us agree that we would worship your God and you would worship our gods, and we would make you a partner in all our works. If what you have brought was better than what we possess, we would be partners in it with You, and have our share in it, and if what we possess is better than what you have brought, you would be partner in it with us and have your share of it." At this Allah sent down: Qul ya-ayyuhal-kafirun (Ibn Jarir, Ibn Abi Hatim, Ibn Hisham also has related this incident in the Sirah).

Wahb bin Munabbih has related that the people of Quraish said to Allah's Messenger: "If you like we would enter your faith for a year and you would enter our faith for a year."(Abd bin Humaid, Ibn Abi Hatim).

These traditions show that the Quraish had proposed such things to the Holy Prophet not once, in one sitting, but at different times and on different occasions; and there was need that they should be given a definite, decisive reply so that their hope that he would come to terms with them on the principle of "give and take" was frustrated for ever.


If the Surah is read with this background in mind, one finds that it was not revealed to preach religious tolerance as some people of today seem to think, but it was revealed in order to exonerate the Muslims from the disbelievers religion, their rites of worship, and their gods, and to express their total disgust and unconcern with them and to tell them that Islam and kufr (unbelief) had nothing in common and there was no possibility of their being combined and mixed into one entity. Although it was addressed in the beginning to the disbelieving Quraish in response to their proposals of compromise, yet it is not confined to them only, but having made it a part of the Quran, Allah gave the Muslims the eternal teaching that they should exonerate themselves by word and deed from the creed of kufr wherever and in whatever form it be, and should declare without any reservation that they cannot make any compromise with the disbelievers in the matter of Faith. That is why this Surah continued to be recited when the people to whom it was addressed as a rejoinder, had died and been forgotten, and those Muslims also continued to recite it who were disbelievers at the time it was revealed, and the Muslims still recite it centuries after they have passed away, for expression of disgust with and dissociation from kufr and its rites is a perpetual demand of Faith.

As for the esteem in which the Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace) held this Surah, it can be judged from the following few ahadith:

Hadrat Abdullah bin Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) has related that on many an occasion he heard the Holy Prophet recite Surahs Qul Ya-ayyuhal- kafirun and Qul Huwu-Allahu ahad in the two rakahs before the Fajr obligatory Prayer and in the two rakahs after the Maghrib obligatory Prayer. Several traditions on this subject with a little variation in wording have been related by Imam Ahmad, Tirmidhi, Nasai, Ibn Majah, Ibn Hibban, Ibn Marduyah from Ibn Umar.

https://muflihun.com/quran/intro/109
Reply

Good brother
08-12-2020, 08:45 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
Thank you very much for the response.
I read this story before but don't you think that it is too incomplete?
What was the messenger sent for?

What was the message he had for the Byzantines?
with Prophet's letter to Syria to the king of Busra.
Do you think the message was appropriate?
Sure. He informed them of his noble message and mission.
What do you think that would have happened if a messenger came to Muhammad and say:

"I have been sent to you (prophet Muhammad) to advice you that the God (Allah) that you claim to believe is not real.
There is only one God and that God is the God worshiped by Christians and Jews.
I therefore offer you salvation by uniting with us worshiping the only God that is the real God."

Now what do you think would have been the response from prophet Muhammad and the Muslims?
Be sincere now.
What is the penalty for blasphemy?
Isn't it death?
Don't you think the messenger was committing blasphemy?
Well, yes he was.

So what happened to that messenger was very predictable and very much in line with the customs of the time.
You don't go to your enemy offering a change of God like it is a change of new cloths.

So what was the reaction from the Muslims after a very predictable outcome, they attacked first.
They didn't attempt to resolve the issue in a pacific way.

It is easy to see things from one side and never consider how does it look from the other side.
Have you thought about it?
Answered in the story posted by Abz2000 above.
Attachment 6957
Reply

Eddy
08-13-2020, 05:32 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
Good to know, you previously admitted that you endorse International Humanitarian Laws and you think UN and USA has the right to enforce them. Anyways, you will see why I asked these questions and how are these relevant to the subject of this thread.
No sir, be careful when you quote people inaccurately.
This was my response to your question "Yes I do believe in international human rights." I never saidthat I "think UN and USA has the right to enforce them." That was you misquoting me. You see, you are adding words into my text that I never said, and that is very dishonest on your part and an awful way to conduct a discussion.

Then you do it again:
format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
You believe UN, USA and IMF can’t do what ever they think is right to promote and enforce the values they believe to be true.
You see, again you attribute words to me that I never said. You make conclusions about what I believe based on nothing that I said. That's not the way of having an honest discussion. Please refrain from doing that in the future.

format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
If UN can enforce its values, what’s wrong for Muslims to enforce the values they believe are true and will provide true justice in the society?
.
The UN is an international entity and many Muslim countries are part of the UN, so you are saying that Muslim countries have values that the UN doesn't approve and you want them to use them anyway.
I don't think the UN cares what Muslim countries do unless they are violating human right rules agreed upon all the nations in it.
Are Muslim countries violating basic human rights?

format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
Democracy is wrong because by definition it is a form of government in which the “supreme power” is vested in “the people” and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system. While in Islam “Supreme Power” is Allah and only the law given by Allah can provide Justice.
Democracy elect a government of "real people" to manage a country in the best interest of the people.
Islam doesn't seem to have a way of electing a government to manage and enforce Allah's justice.
How is an Islamic government elected without democracy?
Anyone can jump into power by force?
Is that the Islamic way?
Shouldn't Muslims be allowed to choose who can better enforce Allah's laws?
If Al Qaeda, ISIS and a group of "Moderate Muslims" decide to take over Afghanistan and Syria.
Who should decide which one of these groups should be at the government?
Is there any other better way than democracy in this case?
Please explain.
Reply

Eddy
08-13-2020, 05:50 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Abz2000
Click to enlarge:

Attachment 6954

Attachment 6955

Attachment 6956
Thank you for your post but I couldn't open any of the links you provided.
Reply

'Abdullah
08-13-2020, 06:10 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
No sir, be careful when you quote people inaccurately.
This was my response to your question "Yes I do believe in international human rights." I never saidthat I "think UN and USA has the right to enforce them." That was you misquoting me. You see, you are adding words into my text that I never said, and that is very dishonest on your part and an awful way to conduct a discussion.

Then you do it again:

You see, again you attribute words to me that I never said. You make conclusions about what I believe based on nothing that I said. That's not the way of having an honest discussion. Please refrain from doing that in the future.
You are right, please accept my apologies. And thanks for your advice.
Reply

Eddy
08-13-2020, 06:19 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
So over all, there is a fundamental problem with democracy. One must ask, what are the laws of democracy going to be based upon? If they are to be based on popular opinion, then who says that popular opinion is going to be moral? Who says that popular opinion can arrive to what is just? As stated above, popular opinion can easily be manipulated through mass media, social media and education system. Bottom line is that democracy can never be a substitute for morality. And this is why religion is so important to follow the right religion as a check to see if decisions being made are moral or not.
Ok, time to stop criticising and offering better solutions.
Does Islam provide better solutions?
Why is it that we don't see them?
I can name 10 western countries that are very successful using "Democracy" and none of them is the USA.
Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Germany, Netherlands, Belgium, France, New Zealand, Australia and I could name more.
They all have very low rates of crime, very low levels of poverty, very good education systems, very good health care systems, etc, etc, etc.
Can you name 10 Islamic countries that don't use democracy and are successful and don't depend on oil to do it?
Name the most promising ones and explain why.
How can they do it?
Is the Islamic system like communism that sounds very nice on paper but has never worked at all anywhere?
Reply

'Abdullah
08-13-2020, 06:47 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
Democracy elect a government of "real people" to manage a country in the best interest of the people.
Islam doesn't seem to have a way of electing a government to manage and enforce Allah's justice.
How is an Islamic government elected without democracy?
Anyone can jump into power by force?
Is that the Islamic way?
Shouldn't Muslims be allowed to choose who can better enforce Allah's laws?
If Al Qaeda, ISIS and a group of "Moderate Muslims" decide to take over Afghanistan and Syria.
Who should decide which one of these groups should be at the government?
Is there any other better way than democracy in this case?
Please explain.
I mentioned in my previous posts that fundamental difference is that “ supreme power” is only Allah not “ the people or their elected representatives.”
In democracy, laws are made based on so-called popular opinion. For example a law can be made to legalize same sex marriage. Is that moral?
or law can be made to legalize prostitution, is that moral?
In Islam, supreme power is Allah and only His law is used to govern the state. A caliph is elected and have administrative power, but he need to make sure that Sharia law is implemented. We also have parliament ( shura) who can do legislation using Ijtihad and Qias on matters which are not clearly stated as halal or haram in the Sharia law. We also have judiciary system, where one can challenge any laws passed by parliament. So over all, you see that structure seems similar to democracy but it is very different because we have a Divine Law which does not change with people’s opinion.
Reply

'Abdullah
08-13-2020, 06:54 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
Ok, time to stop criticising and offering better solutions.
Does Islam provide better solutions?
Why is it that we don't see them?
I can name 10 western countries that are very successful using "Democracy" and none of them is the USA.
Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Germany, Netherlands, Belgium, France, New Zealand, Australia and I could name more.
They all have very low rates of crime, very low levels of poverty, very good education systems, very good health care systems, etc, etc, etc.
Can you name 10 Islamic countries that don't use democracy and are successful and don't depend on oil to do it?
Name the most promising ones and explain why.
How can they do it?
Is the Islamic system like communism that sounds very nice on paper but has never worked at all anywhere?
Most muslims countries are exercising democratic system which they inherited from colonization period. Sharia law is not implemented in most states and hence I can’t give you any example of an Islamic state which implements Sharia law. You can go back into the history and read about Islam’s Golden age and see what made them to prosper?
Still you will find that crime rate is actually for less in Muslim countries compared to non Muslim countries. For example, murder rate is 2.4 persons per annum in 100,000 people in Muslim countries compared to 7.5 persons per annum in same sample size. This is according to a study done by a professor in Berkeley ( link below):
https://www.vox.com/2015/1/30/7951309/islam-violence
We can also find other important data such as divorce rate, abortion, suicide, number of single mothers, homeless people, homicides, prostitution, rapes, drug addictions, robberies etc. and you would see that democracy is not a magic pill. It is not the solution of world problems.
Link below for countries ranked with highest rape crimes in 2020:
https://worldpopulationreview.com/co...ics-by-country
You must be surprised not to see any Muslim country in that list. In fact some of the countries you mentioned as best democratic countries did make that list. Why is that the case?
See video below which highlights crime rates in two most sophisticated democracies countries in the world USA and UK:

Anyways, you fail to see that people can’t have supreme power and can never have same standards of morality. That’s why we do need Divine law which can tell us what is right and what is wrong.

If you want to discuss further on democracy and capitalism, open new threads and we can continue our discussion. As far as the main topic of this thread is concerned, you have already got good answers from other group members. Also go back and visit the original thread you quoted in your first post to see that Islam does advocate offensive Jihad.
Reply

Eddy
08-13-2020, 07:27 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
A caliph is elected and have administrative power, but he need to make sure that Sharia law is implemented.
Who is responsible for electing a caliph?
I asked before and I ask again.
Al Qaeda, ISIS and a group of more moderate Muslims have their own caliph and want to take over Afghanistan and Syria.
In an Islamic ideal scenario who is responsible for selecting the caliph?
format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
I mentioned in my previous posts that fundamental difference is that “ supreme power” is only Allah not “ the people or their elected representatives.”
Understood but Allah hasn't spoken for more than 1400 years so it is actually Muslims who have to manage and enforce Sharia Law.
Aren't any rules in the Quran and Hadith on how to administer an Islamic State?
I am already very impressed with your (on paper) Islamic organization but we live in the real world here.
How can all that "Supreme Power" from Allah can be used in a real scenario?
There are totally Muslims countries in the world that are not influenced by the west and still they don't use full Sharia.
Why?
Muslims don't trust their own Sharia?
I'm sorry that is hard for me to understand.
On one hand Muslims say Sharia has a solution for everything but no one dares to use it.
It doesn't make sense.
Reply

'Abdullah
08-13-2020, 07:36 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
There are totally Muslims countries in the world that are not influenced by the west and still they don't use full Sharia.
Why?
Muslims don't trust their own Sharia?
I'm sorry that is hard for me to understand.
On one hand Muslims say Sharia has a solution for everything but no one dares to use it.
It doesn't make sense.
Brunei announced a couple of years ago to implement Shariah law. And guess what UN, USA and their western allies consisted that violation of human rights and they forced sanctions on them and forced them to soften their stance which basically means accept democracy as best form of government because rest of the world think Syria law is barbaric.
https://asiatimes.com/2019/05/wester...is-sharia-law/

So part of it is international pressure (enforcement) by so-called peace makers.
It is also because Muslims in general see West as role model; reasons can be many such as aftereffect of colonization, corrupt leaders in Muslims, media playing an important role to propagate Western values etc. Muslims in general have become apologetic and try to be peacemakers even when they are oppressed. They have been taught through media that Jihad is a bad thing to do and thus turning away from establishing the Deen of Allah. Muslims are divided and they don't act as one Ummah any more.

When Muslims act as one body and feel the pain of those Muslims who are being oppressed and when they don't shy away to do Jihad, we can definitely bring back Caliphate and implement sharia law to show the world how justice can be served through Divine law.
When will this time come? Only Allah knows & I hope it comes in my life time.
Reply

'Abdullah
08-13-2020, 07:49 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
Who is responsible for electing a caliph?
I asked before and I ask again.
Al Qaeda, ISIS and a group of more moderate Muslims have their own caliph and want to take over Afghanistan and Syria.
In an Islamic ideal scenario who is responsible for selecting the caliph?
Please see article below:
https://islamqa.info/en/answers/1118...s-is-appointed

Reply

'Abdullah
08-13-2020, 08:05 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
Understood but Allah hasn't spoken for more than 1400 years so it is actually Muslims who have to manage and enforce Sharia Law.
Aren't any rules in the Quran and Hadith on how to administer an Islamic State?
I am already very impressed with your (on paper) Islamic organization but we live in the real world here.
How can all that "Supreme Power" from Allah can be used in a real scenario?
There are totally Muslims countries in the world that are not influenced by the west and still they don't use full Sharia.
Why?
Muslims don't trust their own Sharia?
I'm sorry that is hard for me to understand.
On one hand Muslims say Sharia has a solution for everything but no one dares to use it.
It doesn't make sense.
Issues of people are still the same as they were 1400 years ago which is justice in the society. Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him established an Islamic state in his time and showed how to apply sharia law and provide justice through sharia law in the society. Sharia law is not just related to acts of worship if that’s what you think. It covers all aspects of life including how to govern, punishment system for different crimes, justice system, financial system and every other system one needs to run the state. And as I said before, prophet Muhammad peace be upon him showed how to implement it in his life time. The Four rightly guided people, showed how to implement this law on a bigger scale as Islamic state expanded. After them, for centuries Muslims have successfully used it to run the affairs of the state.
Reply

Eddy
08-13-2020, 04:51 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
Brunei announced a couple of years ago to implement Shariah law. And guess what UN, USA and their western allies consisted that violation of human rights and they forced sanctions on them and forced them to soften their stance which basically means accept democracy as best form of government because rest of the world think Syria law is barbaric.
Wrong, an Islamic State doesn't have to accept democracy in order to comply with basic human rights.
It is actually very simple, just eliminate the cutting of arms, hands and legs and we're all good to go.
As you said Sharia is not only about the justice system but also about economics, politics and everyday chores.
I don't think the UN and USA are making it difficult to Brunei to implement full Sharia aside from those few human rights issues.
So how is Brunei doing otherwise?
Are they ready to show the west they can become the next Norway or Sweden?
Reply

'Abdullah
08-13-2020, 05:40 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
Wrong, an Islamic State doesn't have to accept democracy in order to comply with basic human rights.
It is actually very simple, just eliminate the cutting of arms, hands and legs and we're all good to go.
As you said Sharia is not only about the justice system but also about economics, politics and everyday chores.
I don't think the UN and USA are making it difficult to Brunei to implement full Sharia aside from those few human rights issues.
So how is Brunei doing otherwise?
Are they ready to show the west they can become the next Norway or Sweden?
You live in your own fantasy world where criminals are put in prisons at the name of human rights and are fed from tax payers money. Same people get out and commit same crimes, go back to jail and get out again to rape another innocent person. Perhaps, you can look into Saudi Arabia and see how they have controlled crimes by implementing partial sharia law when it comes to punishing criminals by beheading them and cutting their hands. There is no human right for those who spread corruption in the society and by doing so we set an example for others to think 100 times before even thinking to rape or kill a human being. By killing one person, we can provide safety and peace to millions.
On the contrary in countries which advocate human rights, there is no fear in the hearts of criminals. They knew that they will be out in 2-3 years and they can go back to commit the same crime and even if they get life in prison, they will still get meical care, food, access to exercise facilities etc. And when there is no fear for criminals, they will automatically commit more crimes. USA has the biggest prison system in the entire world ( modern slavery) and see how they are violating human rights and helping to spread corruption in the society. Perhaps you forgot to see the video and links in my previous post. If you did, please watch it again.

Second, look into how sanctions work & how those are used to enforce so-called human rights.

Third, you now seem to be of the opinion that force can be used to enforce what you think are the basic human rights? Am I correct to assume that now?
Reply

Abz2000
08-13-2020, 05:55 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
Thank you for your post but I couldn't open any of the links you provided.
https://www.islamicboard.com/images/...1032x774-1.jpg

https://www.islamicboard.com/images/...774x1032-1.jpg

https://www.islamicboard.com/images/...1032x774-1.jpg


Regarding the election of leaders; it is pyramidical.
The laymen elect their representative, who joins with others of his rank ... and upwards ... until the election of the chief of the believers by the small group of people considered most knowledgable and wise by the leaders of leaders beneath them. The chain of command goes down the same line - with Allah :swt: at the top of that line as Supreme Legislator, Commander, Ruler .....

I draw this conclusion from the fact that the Prophet :saws: -who was subject to Allah :swt: - would choose to deal with and consult leaders of groups of people, and that those considered by the common people as being cheiftans and wise men -would more commonly petition the Prophet :saws: on behalf of their communities, and would later elect the Caliph.
The method of election can vary according to circumstances -as it has during the election of various Raashidun Caliphs, and discretion is acceptable as long as the process is the culmination of "islaah" and "ihsaan" and sincerely calculated as being the best choice in Allah's sight -seeking His good pleasure.


The system differs from the process of so called "secular democracy", the biggest difference being that eternal principles cannot be 180'd via manipulaion of whimsical popular opinion. Any temporary emergency measures must be implemented after serious consultation with the wise leaders, and the decisions must be deemed acceptable to Allah :swt: by the Caliph - who - although he derives his position of authority from the pledge of allegiance by the leaders of the people - is constantly aware that he is a manager and subject under the kingship and grace of Allah :swt: and ultimately answerable to Allah :swt: .

And Allah :swt: knows best.
Reply

'Abdullah
08-13-2020, 05:55 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
So how is Brunei doing otherwise?
Are they ready to show the west they can become the next Norway or Sweden?
You are kidding me, right?
Sweden is ranked #7 world wide when it comes to rapes & Norway in also in top 25 ( probably ranked 24).
https://worldpopulationreview.com/co...ics-by-country
You can look up the suicide rate for these countries and wonder why people are committing suicide if they are so happy?

Anyways if you have any question about Islam, we can answer. But there is no need to prove that Democracy is the ultimate solution for world problems.
I live in USA and I know how empty these slogans are. Selection of Donald Trump proves how ethical and morally corrupt these peace makers are.
You are free to believe in anything you think is right. No one here in forcing Islam on you.

Good luck!
Reply

Eddy
08-14-2020, 09:48 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
You are kidding me, right?
Sweden is ranked #7 world wide when it comes to rapes & Norway in also in top 25 ( probably ranked 24).
Sure, and you do know who is responsible for that, don't you?
I guess you're right, that is an important statistic.
I was just blinded with all the other statistics, like income per capita, education, health care, etc.
I tend to forget about the last big immigration wave.
My bad.
format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
Thank you for the link about how to elect a caliph.

I'm not going to deny it, I was a bit stunned with the option #3

By means of force and prevailing over others. When a man becomes caliph by prevailing over the people by the sword, and he establishes his authority and takes full control, then it becomes obligatory to obey him and he becomes the leader of the Muslims.

I guess some people still think this is better than democracy. There are a few groups that are really big fans of this option.
Reply

'Abdullah
08-14-2020, 03:46 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
Sure, and you do know who is responsible for that, don't you?
I guess you're right, that is an important statistic.
I was just blinded with all the other statistics, like income per capita, education, health care, etc.
I tend to forget about the last big immigration wave.
My bad.
Apparently you think that having a better worldly life is an indication of being on the right path? And you also seem to believe one should follow the mob mentality ( Democracy)? Correct me again if these are wrong assumptions, because all of your responses leads to these conclusions.

format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
Thank you for the link about how to elect a caliph.

I'm not going to deny it, I was a bit stunned with the option #3
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
By means of force and prevailing over others. When a man becomes caliph by prevailing over the people by the sword, and he establishes his authority and takes full control, then it becomes obligatory to obey him and he becomes the leader of the Muslims.

You did exactly what I thought you would ( take a passage out which fits your narrative and ignore the rest). Let me copy and past the parts of the article and explain:
First let's see what was the question in that article?
How did the Islamic state organize its affairs? How did the government rule in the earliest period?.
Its past tense and clearly asking about how affairs of government were carried out in early Islam. If you want to compare apple to apple, go back and look how Europe was being ruled at that time.
Now lets look at the answer to specific question, how was Caliph appointed?
The article says:
The imam (ruler) or caliph was appointed to lead the Islamic state by one of three methods:
Once again this is the past tense, discussing how early Muslims choose their Caliphs.
According to Islamqa first method was:
He was chosen and elected by the decision makers (ahl al-hall wa’l-‘aqd). For example, Abu Bakr al-Siddeeq became caliph when he was elected by the decision makers, then the Sahaabah unanimously agreed with that and swore allegiance to him, and accepted him as caliph.
‘Uthmaan ibn ‘Affaan (may Allaah be pleased with him) became caliph in a similar manner, when ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab (may Allaah be pleased with him) delegated the appointment of the caliph to come after him to a shoora council of six of the senior Sahaabah, who were to elect one of their number. ‘Abd al-Rahmaan ibn ‘Awf consulted the Muhaajireen and Ansaar, and when he saw that the people were all inclined towards ‘Uthmaan, he swore allegiance to him first, then the rest of the six swore allegiance to him, followed by the Muhaajireen and Ansaar, so he was elected as caliph by the decision makers.
‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib (may Allaah be pleased with him) became caliph in a similar manner, when he was elected by most of the decision makers.
Here we see that three out of four Caliphs were selected by Senior companions. Majority of the Muslim scholars today believe this is one of the right ways to select the Caliph.
Let's look what was the second method:
Appointment to the position by the previous caliph, when one caliph passes on the position to a particular person who is to succeed him after he dies. For example, ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab became caliph when the position was passed on to him by Abu Bakr al-Siddeeq (may Allaah be pleased with him).
Muslims follow the Sunnah of Prophet (peace be upon him) and four rightly guided Caliphs, so there is nothing wrong in appointing a Caliph by previous Caliph provided both follow Shariah law and strive to unite and protect the Muslims.
This brings us to the third method which shocked you, and I don't blame you for this. You have been brought up in a culture where these things are strange for you. Even many Muslims living in the West would object to this third method.
So below is what you copy and pasted from the third method:
By means of force and prevailing over others. When a man becomes caliph by prevailing over the people by the sword, and he establishes his authority and takes full control, then it becomes obligatory to obey him and he becomes the leader of the Muslims.
You on purpose did not copy and pasted the next part, which I will quote below:
Examples of that include some of the Umayyad and ‘Abbasid caliphs, and those who came after them. This method is contrary to sharee’ah, because it is seized by force.
It clearly says that the third method is contrary to Shariah, because power is seized by force. So that the first part to acknowledge.
Second, why and under what conditions it becomes obligatory to obey such leader: Let me quote from the same article:
Because great interests are served by having a ruler who rules the ummah, and because a great deal of mischief may result from chaos and loss of security in the land, the one who seizes authority by means of the sword should be obeyed if he seizes power by force but he rules in accordance with the laws of Allah.
Three very powerful reason are given:

  1. To have one ruler (Caliphate) for entire Ummah. This units the Muslims. One of the reason why Muslims we today are suffering are lack of one authority. There are roughly 50 Muslim majority countries and many of them don't support each other because power has been distributed. Everyone looks at the benefit of their own country and not the benefit of Ummah at large. The Umayyad and ‘Abbasid caliphs are good examples - even though they came to power by force but they helped to expand the Muslim empire and still enforced the Shariah law.
  2. Second reason is to eliminate chaos and to establish security in the land. The main objective of the Caliph is to implement Shariah and to unite/protect the Muslims. If the one who seizes power by force is capable to do so then obeying him is better than fights against each other. History tells us that it only resulted in chaos and killing of other Muslims. That's exactly what the non-Muslims want. And that's the reason, majority of the scholars consider protests non-Islamic way to create chaos in the country. In modern day, one can look at Libya, Egypt and Iraq. The protests against rulers have created more chaos in the society and these countries are now in the worse state than a decade ago. I understand you may not agree with this. Some Muslims influenced by Western ways also don't agree with what I said. But we are not to follow our own desires and whims. We are supposed to follow Sharia law and that puts greater emphasis on the unity and security of the Muslims.
  3. Most importantly, the ruler shall rule in accordance to shariah law. If someone takes power by force by is implementing shariah law it is better than an elected leader who does not implement shariah law.


format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
I guess some people still think this is better than democracy. There are a few groups that are really big fans of this option.
Yes you are right that this option is not the opinion of all Muslims. There is difference of opinion and this difference was from the time of companions, some of them actually fought against those who took power by force. But I personally agree with the 3rd opinion because it is based on lessons learned through history. The Umayyad and ‘Abbasid caliphs did seize power by force but they also helped Muslim to expand Islam. The golden Era of Muslims was during the 'Abbasid period. So we can see the good they brought in to the Ummah.
Is it possible to seize power by force in today's Muslim world? The answer is no, because Muslims don't have one Caliphate.
Should Muslims of today obey a ruler who may come into power by force? Yes only if the ruler is practicing Muslim and implements sharia.
Is Democracy better than the ways Muslim elect Caliph? The key difference is not how you select the ruler, it is who legislates the law and who is the Supreme power. If supreme power is "Allah" and "sharia Law" is enforced then it does not matter how one selects the ruler. On the other hand if people legislate the moral laws then we have a huge issue. I guess you will only understand this if you have some moral values and you see how those are compromised by legislation through people's power. Legalization of same sex marriage would be a good example. Do you believe it should be legalized?
Reply

keiv
08-14-2020, 04:20 PM
Look at how far the whole LGBTQ+ABCDEFG movement has come. Incest is not that far behind. Soon it’ll be beastiality and who knows what else. 2 year olds are capable of identifying as whatever gender they want (or non gender), but a 20 year old will go to jail for having relations with a 17 year old because the 17 year old is too young to know any better. God bless democracy.
Reply

Eddy
08-14-2020, 04:29 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
Apparently you think that having a better worldly life is an indication of being on the right path? And you also seem to believe one should follow the mob mentality ( Democracy)? Correct me again if these are wrong assumptions, because all of your responses leads to these conclusions.
A better worldly life?
How can we know if our worldly life is going to be better than whatever is after death.
We don't know that and we don't even think about that.
Jews for example don't even prepare for the afterlife. They enjoy themselves while on earth, they follow their religious mandates and they help each other trying to spend a life as productive and full of happymess while on earth.
Christians are not obsessed with the afterlife either. We try to be happy, productive, helpful with other human beings, etc.
So as a rule of thumb, "we do not obsessed with the afterlife. Get it?

Now you seem to equate "a mob mentality" with democracy.
Now that is just ridiculous especially coming from someone who follows "written in stones rules" that are to be follow as they are no matter the natural evolution of things, the natural evolution of cultures, etc. That is "MOB MENTALITY", my friend.
Democracy allows for changes, innovations, use of our brains and at the end it looks for agreements.
Democracy means exchanges of ideas, improvement, social harmony, discussions and an aim to make things better.
Nothing in democracy can be equated to "mob mentality", democracy is the man made antidote to the "mob mentality" you talk about.
Democracy aims at finding the best results, explain them and let the people make informed decisions.
Reply

'Abdullah
08-14-2020, 04:51 PM
@Eddy
You did not answer if you believe same sex marriage should be legalized?
Reply

Abz2000
08-14-2020, 05:18 PM
When two ravenous wolves and a tender lamb get together and vote on whats for lunch .... the final decision would most likely be a foregone conclusion. But hey, there's the question of justice, which - if raised - might have saved the lamb from being ripped to pieces.
Apply same algorithm to "two trump supporters and a black man voting to decide who should be lynched" if you like ... the conundrum may become less clouded.

Majority support is a tool which is utilised in Islam (since the Prophet was forced to convince more and more people to support him until his support base eventually overcame) -however, the requirement is justice.
Then the question as to who decides and rules on what is just and who should sit in the electric chair, or gas chamber, or face a firing squad, or put his head through the hangman's noose, or guillotine -naturally arises -and a group of dictators or east india company shills who take a land by force and then write/dictate a constitution to be observed with religious zeal through the ages -cannot match the Majesty, Justice, and Wisdom of the Creator and Sustainer of the heavens and the earth.
So then a wise person inevitably comes full circle in his/her chain of thought, and accepts that there is none worthy of the individuals' and communities' obedience above Allah :swt: . That's when "religion of peace" makes sense.
Reply

'Abdullah
08-14-2020, 06:08 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
A better worldly life?
How can we know if our worldly life is going to be better than whatever is after death.
We don't know that and we don't even think about that.
Jews for example don't even prepare for the afterlife. They enjoy themselves while on earth, they follow their religious mandates and they help each other trying to spend a life as productive and full of happymess while on earth.
Christians are not obsessed with the afterlife either. We try to be happy, productive, helpful with other human beings, etc.
So as a rule of thumb, "we do not obsessed with the afterlife. Get it?
I thought you said, you were an agnostic? Now you claim to be a Christian? Look at the life of Christian priests and nuns and tell me that they are not obsessed with afterlife?
Jews on the other hand are all about this worldly life, Torah is surprisingly silent on what happens after death. No one knows exactly why the Torah doesn't discuss the afterlife. Instead, the Torah focuses on "Olam Ha Ze," which means "this world." And we see why Jews are heavily focused only on this world. Quran also tells us that Jews claim that they are the chosen one and if they go to hell that will be just for few days. With that mentality, who will work for an aternal life in hereafter?

Islam is the only religion which teaches to be moderate and balanced in all aspects of life, whether it is religion, worship, relationships, ideas, or daily activities. Principled moderation is one of the defining characteristics of good character in Islam. Not sure from where you assumed that we are obsessed with afterlife.

format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
Now you seem to equate "a mob mentality" with democracy.
Now that is just ridiculous especially coming from someone who follows "written in stones rules" that are to be follow as they are no matter the natural evolution of things, the natural evolution of cultures, etc. That is "MOB MENTALITY", my friend.
Democracy allows for changes, innovations, use of our brains and at the end it looks for agreements.
Democracy means exchanges of ideas, improvement, social harmony, discussions and an aim to make things better.
Nothing in democracy can be equated to "mob mentality", democracy is the man made antidote to the "mob mentality" you talk about.
Democracy aims at finding the best results, explain them and let the people make informed decisions.

lol " mob mentality" sound negative, is not it. Sorry for using that word, I probably should use a more civilized (politically correct) world - A word often used by social psychologists which is " herd mentality." Many people and animals tend to do what others around them are doing. This usually is because those who join the group in the behavior figure that if several others are doing something, it must be worthwhile, or they would not be doing it. For example, people figure that a crowded restaurant must be serving good food, or it would not be as busy. In most cases, this thought process comes naturally or subconsciously, which is one reason why animals take part in herd behavior. Perhaps that is the reason you want to stay as a Christian or agnostic or even an theist but definitely not a Muslim because that is considered as negative in Western Culture. I can understand, why you are such a champion of democracy. Its the "herd mentality." This makes me wonder, why are you even asking these questions. Are you even genuinely looking into Islam as way of life or just came here to put doubts in the minds of others?
Reply

Eddy
08-14-2020, 06:22 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
@Eddy
You did not answer if you believe same sex marriage should be legalized?
That seems to be a random question which I'm not ready to answer because I haven't given it enough thought.

Quite disappointing I guess.
What is it? You had prepared a full fledge lesson on morality if I had answered yes?

By the way on the election of the caliph thing.

I didn't pick on option #3 to criticize Islam, I picked on option #3 because now I understand where the bad guys get the idea that forcing themselves into power is a legitimate and accepted way of doing things according to Islamic scriptures.
I also noticed that at the end and after they are in power they still have to rule following the rules set by Allah.
That's very nice and all but who is going to raise their voice to the new ruler when he has a sword on his hand and is not shy on using it when he is disturbed?

I'm just saying, doesn't look like a 21st century way of doing things.
Reply

Eddy
08-15-2020, 02:15 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
I thought you said, you were an agnostic? Now you claim to be a Christian?
I'm officially a Christian who seriously doubts the existence of God, so you do the math. Christian/Agnostic?
format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
Islam is the only religion which teaches to be moderate and balanced in all aspects of life,
Keep telling yourself that if it helps you feeling better.

format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
Many people and animals tend to do what others around them are doing.
The members of a herd just follow whoever is in front without asking any questions.
Seculars, democrats, liberals on the other hand are always busy making sure the next step leads to a better future.
The members of the herd only see the back of the one in front of them.
See the difference?
We lead the way so you can one day enjoy a better world.
You keep criticizing those who feed you.
format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
This makes me wonder, why are you even asking these questions. Are you even genuinely looking into Islam as way of life or just came here to put doubts in the minds of others?
No I'm not, did I ever said I want to join Islam?
I ask questions just to satisfy my curiosity.
Christianity and Islam have a lot of holes in their scriptures and I want to make sure I'm getting the facts right.
Does that bother you?
I'm not here to promote my way of seeing things, I just want to make sure I understand the way you see things.
Too complicated for you?
Reply

Al-Ansariyah
08-15-2020, 02:19 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
I'm officially a Christian who seriously doubts the existence of God
And no sign comes to them from the signs of their Lord except that they are from it turning away.(46:36)
We shall show them Our signs in the universe and within themselves,until it becomes clear to them that this is the Truth.But is it not sufficient concerning your Lord that He is ,over all things,a witness?(53:41)
Reply

Eddy
08-16-2020, 01:00 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
Is it possible to seize power by force in today's Muslim world? The answer is no, because Muslims don't have one Caliphate.
Sometimes I read this kind of stuff and think, wait a minute, is he saying what I think he is saying?
Didn't we have a group of Muslims take over parts of Syria and Iraq by force and claimed to be an Islamic State and had their own Caliph as the leader.
How is that different from option #3
They followed the rules from the text you provided, didn't they?
As a Muslim what would you say they did wrong and what did disqualified them as authentic Muslims?
Reply

'Abdullah
08-17-2020, 03:15 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
I ask questions just to satisfy my curiosity.
Christianity and Islam have a lot of holes in their scriptures and I want to make sure I'm getting the facts right.
Does that bother you?
I'm not here to promote my way of seeing things, I just want to make sure I understand the way you see things.
Too complicated for you?
It does not bother me when you ask questions and I do understand that you see things differently because you are not a Muslim. But it does bother me, when you don't answer the questions we ask ( simply ignore our questions), pick and choose what you want to discuss. This is not how an honest discussion is carried out. May be read previous posts and see if you would like to answer the questions I have asked.
Reply

'Abdullah
08-17-2020, 03:34 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
Sometimes I read this kind of stuff and think, wait a minute, is he saying what I think he is saying?
Didn't we have a group of Muslims take over parts of Syria and Iraq by force and claimed to be an Islamic State and had their own Caliph as the leader.
How is that different from option #3
They followed the rules from the text you provided, didn't they?
As a Muslim what would you say they did wrong and what did disqualified them as authentic Muslims?
First thing you should appreciate is that I don't sugarcoat things, I try my best to represent the facts as they are whether one likes it or does not.
Second, I have previously mentioned that third option ( taking power by force) is contrary to sharee’ah.
Third, if someone does take power (meaning becomes Caliph) by force then three conditions mentioned in my previous posts should be met. None of the conditions are met when ISIS took over some parts of Iraq and Syria. ISIS created chaos, instead of providing safety to Muslims - starting killing them. ISIS killed innocent citizen, children, women, old and helpless people, and pretty much violated all the laws of war mentioned in Shariah. To understand some of the rules Shariah have during war, please read my post below:
Saying "Islām Is A Religion of Peace"...?
Reply

Eddy
08-19-2020, 05:53 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
Perhaps, you can look into Saudi Arabia and see how they have controlled crimes by implementing partial sharia law when it comes to punishing criminals by beheading them and cutting their hands. There is no human right for those who spread corruption in the society and by doing so we set an example for others to think 100 times before even thinking to rape or kill a human being.
That is based solely on your lack of information and Saudi Arabia's filter of information that only allows what they want out.
Did you know about all the sexual assaults and harassment that happens every year in Saudi Arabia by the Holy Mosque during Hajj' in Mecca?
There are now hundreds of women coming forward and denouncing the problem.
Shariah over there doesn't seem to intimidate anybody, does it?

format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
unlike the military conquest of other religions like Hinduism and Christianity, the Islamic conquerors did not force the conquered people to convert to Islam.
Wow, really?
Quran 9:29
"Fight those who do not believe in Allah"
This is not about politics or economics, it is strictly about religion.If someone is fighting you because you don't believe in their religion is that not a clear attempt to force you into their religion?
You can bring any kind of context but nothing changes the intention.

Quran 9:29 (continues)
[fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.
Here there is an option to being killed and that is to pay the jizyah.
So the options are, become a Muslim, pay the jyzyah or die.
So if you cannot afford the jizyah and don't want to die you're being forced into Islam, isn't that so?

I responded to many of your questions but the forum doesn't always accepts my responses and once they don't like my replies I get the message and don't force the issue.

Tn terms of the overall response to my main topic I already have a very informed opinion thanks to all the responses.I don't find it appropriate to share it because as I said before I'm not here to promote my own views I'm here to get information from people who know Islam a lot better than me.
Reply

Good brother
08-19-2020, 10:28 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
So the options are, become a Muslim, pay the jyzyah or die.
So if you cannot afford the jizyah and don't want to die you're being forced into Islam, isn't that so?
Abu Yousuf exempted the poor, sick, crippled, the insane, monks, the blind, and the very old people from paying Jizya. His reasoning was this Hadith: “Whoever oppresses a non-Muslim subject or taxes him beyond his capacity, then I shall be the opposite party to him in the litigation.” {See Kitab al-Kharaj, pp. 69-72.)

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

Not only was this the norm of the Prophet on the issue, but the Rightly Guided Caliphs also practiced His footsteps.

Abu Bakr as-Siddiq, the First Caliph, wrote to the people of Najran:
'In the Name of God, the Beneficent, the Merciful. This is the written statement of God's slave Abu Bakr, the successor of Muhammad, the Prophet and Messenger of God. He affirms for you the rights of a protected neighbor, in yourselves, your lands, your religious community, your wealth, retainers, and servants, those of you who are present or abroad, your bishops and monks, and monasteries, and all that you own, be it great or small. You shall not be deprived of any of it, and shall have full control over it.'

Gustav Le Bon affirmed this historical fact:

"The Arabs could have easily been blinded by their first conquests, and committed the injustices that are usually committed by conquerors. They could have mistreated their defeated opponents or forced them to embrace their religion, which they wished to spread all over the world. But the Arabs avoided that. The early caliphs, who had a political genius that was rare in proponents of new religion, realized that religions and systems are not imposed by force. So they treated the people of Syria, Egypt, Spain, and every country they took over with great kindness, as we have seen. They left their laws, regulations, and beliefs intact and only imposed on them the jizya, which was paltry when compared to what they had been paying in taxes previously, in exchange for maintaining their security. The truth is that nations had never known conquerors more tolerant than the Muslims, or a religion more tolerant than Islam." (Lebon, G, The Civilization Of The Arabs, p. 605)

Reinhart Dozy, the Dutch historian, wrote:
"The Berbers did not have a sacred book. So, It clearly follows that the tolerance was going to a great extent possible, maybe, further than Muhammad had wanted.
In addition the Muslim domination was a relief and a blessing, especially for Christians. Christians in the East belonged mostly to sects that the Officials of Constantinople oppressed and persecuted while Islam, naturally, gave them full freedom to understand Christianity as they saw fit and gave equal protection to all old and new sects.
If we add that the heavy taxes they had to pay to the Roman emperor were not demanded by the new government and that the capitation tax that was posed, was moderate; it is not surprising that they gave much preference to the domination of Muslims over that of the Romans and that they vigorously support the Arabs in their conquests far from working against them."



https://islamic-life-forum.blogspot....f-muslims.html

Dhimmis were required to pay Jizya but were exempt from Zakat [charity tax] which Muslims are required to pay [2.5% of their savings, each year] as well as from military service. However, if Dhimmis agreed to serve in the armed forces, they were not required to pay Jizya, since Jizya was only taken from able-bodied men who could serve in the military.

Muslims also returned Jizya when they were unable to protect non-Muslims.

Khalid bin Walid returned all the taxes collected to Christians of Homs when he was not able to repel the attack of the Christian Byzantine Emperor Heraclous on Homs. He said to them :
“We accepted (the Jizyah) as a token of your good will and in return for defending you, but (in this), we have failed (you.)”
{See Abd al-Rahman Azzam’s “The Eternal Message of Muhammad” ; ‘Mabsut, Vol. 10, pp. 78-79; Fath al-Qadir, Vol. 4; and A. Rahman I. Doi’s “Non-Muslims Under Shariah Law.”}
Saladin also returned the Jizya when he was compelled to withdraw from Syria.
{See A. Rahman I. Doi’s “Non-Muslims Under Shariah Law.”)
https://islamic-life-forum.blogspot....perpetual.html
Reply

'Abdullah
08-19-2020, 11:16 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
That is based solely on your lack of information and Saudi Arabia's filter of information that only allows what they want out.
Did you know about all the sexual assaults and harassment that happens every year in Saudi Arabia by the Holy Mosque during Hajj' in Mecca?
There are now hundreds of women coming forward and denouncing the problem.
Shariah over there doesn't seem to intimidate anybody, does it?
Do you have any proof to believe in this non-sense? I lived in Mecca for a while and have been there during hajj as well, did not see anything like which you are claiming. If source of your information is google search and listening to Islamophobics then its obvious that you are looking for the information to attack Islam only and does not matter to you whether that information is right or wrong. In future, please quote source of your information to make a valid point.
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
Wow, really?
Quran 9:29
"Fight those who do not believe in Allah"
This is not about politics or economics, it is strictly about religion.If someone is fighting you because you don't believe in their religion is that not a clear attempt to force you into their religion?
You can bring any kind of context but nothing changes the intention.

Quran 9:29 (continues)
[fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.
Here there is an option to being killed and that is to pay the jizyah.
So the options are, become a Muslim, pay the jyzyah or die.
So if you cannot afford the jizyah and don't want to die you're being forced into Islam, isn't that so?

I responded to many of your questions but the forum doesn't always accepts my responses and once they don't like my replies I get the message and don't force the issue.

Tn terms of the overall response to my main topic I already have a very informed opinion thanks to all the responses.I don't find it appropriate to share it because as I said before I'm not here to promote my own views I'm here to get information from people who know Islam a lot better than me.
Others have already answered to your question about Jizya, so I would not repeat the same.
I don't believe any one would mind you answering following questions ( same which I asked before):
  1. In a democratic society, it is okay to have same sex marriage. It is okay to have sex with mutual consent. It is okay to legalize drugs such as marijuana. It is okay to legalize prostitution as long as majority votes for these issues. And in many countries or states; we see that these things have been legalized. I want to know what is your take on that? Do you consider these parts of your own moral values as well since majority agrees with it or would you rather differ? If you do differ, then you are no accepting the democratic process, are you?
  2. If Islamic countries violate basic International humanitarian laws by cutting hands for stealing and stoning to death for adulatory etc., would you advocate for UNO and Western countries to attack such countries and have them comply with International Human rights? Would you also agree that sanctions should be imposed on such countries to comply them by force?

Your answers does not need to be lengthy, just give us what your opinion is in simple Yes or No with may be some explanation in few sentences. These are the questions I have been asking since the beginning of this thread and you did not see any relevance of these questions with the topic in hand. I hope you can now see that these are not irrelevant questions.
Reply

Eddy
08-20-2020, 03:41 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
Do you have any proof to believe in this non-sense? I lived in Mecca for a while and have been there during hajj as well, did not see anything like which you are claiming.
These are all Muslim women coming forward and you know they can get in a lot of trouble by doing so.
Why should I believe your experience as a man when Muslim women are telling us what's happening?
Are you in total denial?
What proof do you want from me?
These are Muslim women saying it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JNpW-HYL_c8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SljmbQKJMXU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0Shnl6fIII
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8iF-cETvfCg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w068-pEs4wU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GhBa3b3Eh2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfVmk2_nZss
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfNQalkT3Uc

format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
I don't believe any one would mind you answering following questions ( same which I asked before):
Well, you're wrong, the Forum filters all my posts and some are not approved. That's just the way it is.

format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
In a democratic society, it is okay to have same sex marriage. It is okay to have sex with mutual consent. It is okay to legalize drugs such as marijuana. It is okay to legalize prostitution as long as majority votes for these issues.
The answer is yes to all those questions.
Reply

'Abdullah
08-20-2020, 04:03 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
These are all Muslim women coming forward and you know they can get in a lot of trouble by doing so.
Why should I believe your experience as a man when Muslim women are telling us what's happening?
Are you in total denial?
What proof do you want from me?
These are Muslim women saying it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JNpW-HYL_c8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SljmbQKJMXU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0Shnl6fIII
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8iF-cETvfCg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w068-pEs4wU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GhBa3b3Eh2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfVmk2_nZss
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfNQalkT3Uc
Do you know that there are cameras recording everything in the Kabba in Mecca. Millions of people watch this live and it’s absurd that you threw in some YouTube videos to support your claim. The women in these videos are not even wearing hijab, music is being played in videos in the back ground which tell me that it’s not from Muslims but in facts from those who hate Islam and will go to any extreme measure to propagate against Islam. Who knows if these women are Muslim or not, they may be Christians and being paid to lie.
I can share millions of YouTube videos where Muslim women say that their journey and experience of hajj was the best and most memorable one in their life. Few fake videos, compared to millions of women stating otherwise shows the picture you probably don’t want to see. My advice is that come to Islam with an open mind and with no bias. Read the Quran at your own, instead of picking a verse and listening to views of those who hate the truth. It’s a matter of our salvation and you should not take this lightly.

Second, women can’t go to hajj without a mahram ( a male to ensure her safety) & usually they go for hajj in groups. It’s impossible for such a thing to happen during hajj.

Third, there is security appointed almost at every 50-100 feet to ensure proper traffic flow and to avoid any incidents like these.

Okay thanks for the answers to my other questions. So you are basically saying that you don’t have an opinion of your own and your values and opinions are determined by what a majority says in your society? You are okay with same sex marriage because your democratic society has made it lawful? Would you be okay with your wife having sexual with someone else with consent - after all its legal in many western societies? What type of man you will be to tolerate this? It’s not an attack on you, I am just trying to understand how can one have such low morals?
If UN & USA can use force to implement international human rights, why then Muslims not make use of Jihad to implement Islamic values?
Reply

Eddy
08-20-2020, 06:14 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
Who knows if these women are Muslim or not, they may be Christians and being paid to lie.
They make a lot more sense than you. They suffered the assaults themselves. You are just an apologist. You deny it even when you were not there. How do you know they're lying?
Why should I believe you and not them?
They are not criticizing Islam, they are criticizing Muslim men who take advantage of certain situations because no Muslim woman in her right mind is going to go to the authorities and then end up being accused of adultery.
It is Saudi Arabia, those things happen to women, you know?


format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
So you are basically saying that you don’t have an opinion of your own and your values and opinions are determined by what a majority says in your society?
Stop being a hypocrite and building straw man fallacies.
You didn't ask for my opinion, didn't you?
Let's see again:
format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
In a democratic society, it is okay to have same sex marriage. It is okay to have sex with mutual consent. It is okay to legalize drugs such as marijuana. It is okay to legalize prostitution as long as majority votes for these issues
My answer was yes to all those questions but I never said I personally approve or not.
It is a fact that those things are currently legal in many democratic countries but not in all of them and not all people in democratic countries approve them.
You have proven over and over that your agenda is to accuse me of things I never said and then pile up the criticism over your false assumptions.
I'm too good to fall for those childish games.

format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
Do you consider these parts of your own moral values as well since majority agrees with it or would you rather differ? If you do differ, then you are no accepting the democratic process, are you?
You are clueless, absolutely clueless.
Not agreeing with the majority doesn't mean you reject the democratic way.
Today the majority might think that the Muslim immigration is beneficial for Europe but tomorrow the same democratic method and the same people might change their mind and not approve it.
You have a poor understanding of "democracy".
Reply

'Abdullah
08-20-2020, 03:06 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
They make a lot more sense than you. They suffered the assaults themselves. You are just an apologist. You deny it even when you were not there. How do you know they're lying?
Why should I believe you and not them?
They are not criticizing Islam, they are criticizing Muslim men who take advantage of certain situations because no Muslim woman in her right mind is going to go to the authorities and then end up being accused of adultery.
It is Saudi Arabia, those things happen to women, you know?
You can believe whatever you want to believe in, it is clear that your opinion is biased and based on total ignorance. I gave my reason in my previous post that why these claims have no basis but of course you want to just accuse with no proof.
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy

Stop being a hypocrite and building straw man fallacies.
You didn't ask for my opinion, didn't you?
Let's see again:

My answer was yes to all those questions but I never said I personally approve or not.
It is a fact that those things are currently legal in many democratic countries but not in all of them and not all people in democratic countries approve them.
You have proven over and over that your agenda is to accuse me of things I never said and then pile up the criticism over your false assumptions.
I'm too good to fall for those childish games.
Let's see what my question was?
format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
I don't believe any one would mind you answering following questions ( same which I asked before):
format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
  1. In a democratic society, it is okay to have same sex marriage. It is okay to have sex with mutual consent. It is okay to legalize drugs such as marijuana. It is okay to legalize prostitution as long as majority votes for these issues. And in many countries or states; we see that these things have been legalized. I want to know what is your take on that? Do you consider these parts of your own moral values as well since majority agrees with it or would you rather differ? If you do differ, then you are no accepting the democratic process, are you?
  2. If Islamic countries violate basic International humanitarian laws by cutting hands for stealing and stoning to death for adulatory etc., would you advocate for UNO and Western countries to attack such countries and have them comply with International Human rights? Would you also agree that sanctions should be imposed on such countries to comply them by force?

Your answers does not need to be lengthy, just give us what your opinion is in simple Yes or No with may be some explanation in few sentences. These are the questions I have been asking since the beginning of this thread and you did not see any relevance of these questions with the topic in hand. I hope you can now see that these are not irrelevant questions.
So you can see that you copy and pasting half of my question and left the remaining half, which was asking you if you differ from them. Your simple answer was " Yes" so that means you agree with what majority believes & have no moral values of your own. But now you want to back off and want to say that you never said that you personally approve or disapprove these values? That's called straw man fallacy and hypocrisy.

Anyways let's assume that you don't approve of these majority decisions, then that mean a majority opinion is being enforced on you and you have no other option but to accept it.

As for the second question, you said that you do agree that UN and USA can enforce humanitarian laws on countries who exercise Shariah ( cutting hands, stoning etc.). And we know that in doing so, the Western forces have killed millions of people in Iraq, Afghanistan and other Muslim countries. On the other hand, you have audacity to ask why should Muslims do Jihad and take Jizya?
Western forces have no rules for the war where as Muslims follow strict rules during war and don't hurt children, women, old people, those who don't fight against them etc. Muslims have ethics of war where as USA and its allies have no ethics. USA is the one who used nuclear bomb to kill millions in Japan during world war II and should be the one banned to have any nuclear weapons but quite the contrary, its other countries like Iran who are forced not to have nuclear weapons? That's the double standard and hypocrisy of modern world who can launch attacks on Muslim countries with no proof. Same so-called peace makers support the oppression of Palestinians by Israel and Kashmiris in India. They apparently don't see violation of human rights with oppressed one's are Muslims. And don't tell me now that you don't support all that because that is simply a diplomatic answer.

format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
You are clueless, absolutely clueless.
Not agreeing with the majority doesn't mean you reject the democratic way.
Today the majority might think that the Muslim immigration is beneficial for Europe but tomorrow the same democratic method and the same people might change their mind and not approve it.
You have a poor understanding of "democracy".
Democracy is simply two wolves and a sheep vote on what's for dinner; whether it makes sense depends on whether you are the wolf or the sheep. If it makes sense to you then guess what you are simple a wolf.
You response also shows that majority opinion may not always be right and hence can be changed with time to something even worse.
Anyways, so far you have proved that it is best for me to ignore your posts. I initially thought that may be we can have an honest discussion but it all seems to be a blame game, emotional rants, finger pointing, personal attacks and I don't want to be part of such discussion.
Good luck & please there is no need to reply back as I am not going to answer your posts/questions.
Reply

Eddy
08-20-2020, 07:13 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
I gave my reason in my previous post that why these claims have no basis but of course you want to just accuse with no proof.
Your claims that there are cameras and that somehow because you were there and never saw nothing is not good enough for me.
You claimed these people are Christians and are paid to trash Islam.
That is so ridiculous, these are Muslim women who are not blaming Islam in any way, they are just telling their story and you just want them to shut up. That is really awful, why don't you try to get the facts straight before dismissing them.
format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
Your simple answer was " Yes" so that means you agree with what majority believes & have no moral values of your own. But now you want to back off and want to say that you never said that you personally approve or disapprove these values? That's called straw man fallacy and hypocrisy.
I dare you to find a quote when I said I personally agree with all those liberals things you named.
By the way let me school a bit. The western world is majority Christian, would you agree?
Christians who follow the religion don't agree with abortion, drinking, doing drugs, prostitution and a bunch of other things that western people more on the liberal side do agree.
So you see you cannot put the whole western world in one bad and assume they are all Christians and that they all prefer democracy and that they all accept all the things you mentioned.
That is really a poor view of how things happen.
Personally I get most of my values from Christianity so I don't agree with most of those things you mentioned, but that is just me and I don't speak for the rest of the west.
format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
You response also shows that majority opinion may not always be right and hence can be changed with time to something even worse.
At least is the majority who decides and not a bunch of fanatics who believe their way is the best way.
Examples: The Taliban, ISIS, most communists regimes and most Islamic governments.
In many occasions the people in power are the minority and they oppress the majority.
That rarely happens on a democratic country.
format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
Democracy is simply two wolves and a sheep vote on what's for dinner; whether it makes sense depends on whether you are the wolf or the sheep. If it makes sense to you then guess what you are simple a wolf.
So what would be the Islamic position on this?
No democracy no need to vote, let's get the white sauce and let's shish kebab the sheeps.
Reply

'Abdullah
08-20-2020, 07:31 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
Personally I get most of my values from Christianity so I don't agree with most of those things you mentioned, but that is just me and I don't speak for the rest of the west.
So you do not like democracy either. If you remember that is one of the main issue I mentioned with democracy that majority of the people can’t define what is going to be moral values for human beings. Moral values come from our creator and we don’t compromise those based on majority opinion. Supreme power is not people’s decision, it’s Allah and His Divine Law.
Reply

Eddy
08-20-2020, 08:35 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
So you do not like democracy either. If you remember that is one of the main issue I mentioned with democracy that majority of the people can’t define what is going to be moral values for human beings. Moral values come from our creator and we don’t compromise those based on majority opinion. Supreme power is not people’s decision, it’s Allah and His Divine Law.
I love democracy, don't get it twisted. Democracy is the best system created by man.
Being against abortion or drugs or anything else doesn't make me hate democracy.
My opinion or anybody's opinion doesn't have to be the ultimate truth.
I already said I doubt the existence of god so the phrase "Morals come from the creator" is meaningless to me.
I believe morals were created by man and if you follow morals established 1400 years ago then those morals might end up being outdated.
In order for me to accept that morals come from the creator then I first have to be sure the creator is for real and I'm not.
Reply

'Abdullah
08-20-2020, 09:09 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
I love democracy, don't get it twisted. Democracy is the best system created by man.
Being against abortion or drugs or anything else doesn't make me hate democracy.
My opinion or anybody's opinion doesn't have to be the ultimate truth.
I already said I doubt the existence of god so the phrase "Morals come from the creator" is meaningless to me.
I believe morals were created by man and if you follow morals established 1400 years ago then those morals might end up being outdated.
In order for me to accept that morals come from the creator then I first have to be sure the creator is for real and I'm not.
Understood. Now we come to a real discussion point. I can understand why you have the doubts about God, perhaps mostly because of the Bible and its contradictions. You are in search of truth but finding it hard to accept Islam as a truth. It is not a religion started 1400 years ago, it’s the religion of all prophets. Please read my thread below and hope you find it helpful:
Logical Proof that Islam is the only true religion
Reply

Eddy
08-21-2020, 05:39 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
I can understand why you have the doubts about God, perhaps mostly because of the Bible and its contradictions.
Not at all, I haven't found any contradictions in the Bible so obviously that is not the reason.
Could it be the fact that God has failed to communicate to humans in a way all humans can understand?
I can ask you to prove to me you can understand and write in English and just by answering to my request you have successfully proved to me what I requested from you.
If I ask God to prove to me he exists I get no response.
Isn't God all powerful?
Isn't God all knowledgeable?
Isn't God capable of answering a simple question?

Don't look any further, that is the reason.
By the way, you can give me all sorts of logical reasons why you understand and write in English but unless you put it in paper you cannot convince me.
Same with God.
Reply

Ümit
08-21-2020, 08:47 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
Not at all, I haven't found any contradictions in the Bible so obviously that is not the reason.
Could it be the fact that God has failed to communicate to humans in a way all humans can understand?
I can ask you to prove to me you can understand and write in English and just by answering to my request you have successfully proved to me what I requested from you.
If I ask God to prove to me he exists I get no response.
Isn't God all powerful?
Isn't God all knowledgeable?
Isn't God capable of answering a simple question?

Don't look any further, that is the reason.
By the way, you can give me all sorts of logical reasons why you understand and write in English but unless you put it in paper you cannot convince me.
Same with God.
you sound just as ridiculous as a kid demanding for answers during his exams...
this is a test you are going through...the whole point of coming to Earth and living one lifetime here is to search and find your God...and you do that by believing in Him...
this whole effort would be pointless if He just popped up and showed Himself wouldn't it?
Reply

'Abdullah
08-21-2020, 10:05 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
Not at all, I haven't found any contradictions in the Bible so obviously that is not the reason.
Could it be the fact that God has failed to communicate to humans in a way all humans can understand?
I can ask you to prove to me you can understand and write in English and just by answering to my request you have successfully proved to me what I requested from you.
If I ask God to prove to me he exists I get no response.
Isn't God all powerful?
Isn't God all knowledgeable?
Isn't God capable of answering a simple question?

Don't look any further, that is the reason.
By the way, you can give me all sorts of logical reasons why you understand and write in English but unless you put it in paper you cannot convince me.
Same with God.
Its worth spending 5 minutes to watch video below, and if you are a logical person then you have no choice but to accept that existence of God is the only logical explanation of everything around us.
Reply

Eddy
08-22-2020, 05:56 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Ümit
this is a test you are going through...the whole point of coming to Earth and living one lifetime here is to search and find your God...and you do that by believing in Him...
I just can't put together the "Search and find your God" with the "believing in him" part.
To me these are two different stages of a process. Once you are committed to believing in a God then you are blinded to the possibility that you are worshiping the wrong God.
In order to search the real God you cannot commit to anything otherwise you end up with blind faith.
Faith is not based on logic, science nor truth but on strong belief, that's all, "strong belief"
I'm not ready to commit yet, I need to see signs of this God, there's got to be some signs that lead me to it.
Reply

Al-Ansariyah
08-22-2020, 05:59 PM
Language is different in this video idk. But insha Allah, subtitles will help.
https://youtu.be/Zzpw8OW_YB0

The End of Atheism - Short Film - YouTube
►The End of Atheism - Short Film ►Please Subscribe and Don't forget activeted the notification bell!...
Reply

Eddy
08-22-2020, 09:22 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
Its worth spending 5 minutes to watch video below, and if you are a logical person then you have no choice but to accept that existence of God is the only logical explanation of everything around us.
The whole video can be summarized by the following quote:
The universe must have been created by something uncreated which is the most logical rational conclusion and if there's an uncreated creator then it follows it must be powerful because it created the entire universe, it must be knowing or intelligent because it created laws in the universe ...
That is a huge leap there. Basically it says since we are incapable of a better explanation then something magical must have created the universe and that magical thing is "God".
Not very convincing.
Reply

Ümit
08-22-2020, 11:00 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
I just can't put together the "Search and find your God" with the "believing in him" part.
To me these are two different stages of a process. Once you are committed to believing in a God then you are blinded to the possibility that you are worshiping the wrong God.
In order to search the real God you cannot commit to anything otherwise you end up with blind faith.
Faith is not based on logic, science nor truth but on strong belief, that's all, "strong belief"
I'm not ready to commit yet, I need to see signs of this God, there's got to be some signs that lead me to it.
normally I would agree with you. I also usually demand everything to be logical, scientific, and hard proof etc.
but when it comes to religion...it is a subject that is beyond science. God is beyond the grasp of time, laws of nature or anything that we could understand. we will never be able to proof that with evidences you are looking for.

however...there are some clear signs to show you that there should be a highly intelligent creator:

1 existence of everything
we all know how complicated a DNA molecule is....according to some theories, the ingredients for simple enzymes existed in some premorial soup waiting for the right conditions...and these enzymes formed and found each other and they were hardly alive...etc...etc...

this may sound logical to you...but i do not agree with that.
because from chaos do not come order on its own. those atoms have to find each other to form an enzyme molecule...and multiple such molecules must find each other to develop? you know how small that chance is?
an example
glass is just molten sand right? how many sand is there lying in the deserts for centuries? conditions to form glass on its own is also there...lightning or vulcanos etc.
did someone ever found a marmalade jar made on its own? or some other glass object that we use nowadays? and the chance for that is much greater... no because from chaos do not form order.
my second objection to that theory is the development of life.
dead material cannot just come to life...even if those enzymes did form by chance...no matter how small...the step between dead material...and hardly alive enzymes is still too big. how can dead material be suddenly hardly alive? that is also not logical.

2 the Quraan is a clear sign God gave us to show us He exists...this is just given information...for free.
as a scientist or an individual who is looking for signs, you should at least examine that.
it does not have a human author. our prophet sas was illiterate...so how come he can dictate a highly poetic but so accurate book with more than 600 pages on his own? that is not possible.

there are of course many more signs that point in the direction of God...but for now I will leave it with these two.
Reply

Eddy
08-23-2020, 01:38 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Ümit
the Quran is a clear sign God gave us to show us He exists...this is just given information...for free.
as a scientist or an individual who is looking for signs, you should at least examine that.
That is exactly what I've been doing in this Forum.
The Quran is the only link Muslims have to God. If the Quran is false then Islam is false.
But the Quran is not the beginning of God communicating to Humans, there have been hundreds if not thousands of so called Gods throughout history.
Today there are only a few who have survived time.
The most popular is the god of the Christians, Jews and Muslims.
Is this god the same God?
Not all agree with this.
The scriptures have similarities but also have huge differences in describing this God.
I find that the Christian God is much closer to people than the Muslim's Allah.
What do I mean by this?
Every Christian who accepts Jesus Christ as their God receives the Holy Spirit in them.
That means that every good Christian has part of God in them.
The Holy Spirit protects you from the sinful nature of man.
And that's as far as I'm going to describe Christianity.
The point is that I don't see in Islam anything that can get you closer to God while on earth.
It is all blind faith and that makes it harder to find signs that point you in the right direction.
In a few words.
Why should I believe in Islam?
Because is the only religion that makes sense.
Says who?
The Quran and prophet Muhammad.
How do I know Allah is the real God?
How do you think the universe was created?
How do you think man was created?

You see is all a game of logic and logic traps, that seems to be the only way or at least the most popular way to prove god.
I would prefer to get some supernatural signs of the presence of God if that is somehow possible.
Reply

'Abdullah
08-23-2020, 03:45 AM
Reply

Ümit
08-23-2020, 09:44 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
That is exactly what I've been doing in this Forum.
The Quran is the only link Muslims have to God. If the Quran is false then Islam is false.
The Quraan is not our lunk to God...it is our guidance. if the Quraan was not there...we would not lose our link to God...if that was true...then how were the people linked to God long before the Quraan was revealed? doesn't make sense does it?
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
But the Quran is not the beginning of God communicating to Humans, there have been hundreds if not thousands of so called Gods throughout history.
indeed the Quraan is not the beginning og God communicating to humans. He communicated throughout the time with us all the time. He has send us prophets, books and scriptures to guide us back to the real path everytime we wandered off...and after that prophet delivered his message...we wandered off again...creating our new religion...we did that with Moses as and created Jewism...we did that with Jesus as creating Christianity...so every religion other than Islam is a human made version of the true religion....so no thousands of other God...just one God communicating to us through centuries.
that is also why the prophets and their stories in Islaam Christianity and Jewism are very similar...they are not bad copies from each other...but real events that happened and mentioned differently in these books.
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
Today there are only a few who have survived time.
The most popular is the god of the Christians, Jews and Muslims.
Is this god the same God?
yes it is the same God...however the way christians and jews see God is false...only the Islamic description of God is correct.
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
Not all agree with this.
The scriptures have similarities but also have huge differences in describing this God.
I find that the Christian God is much closer to people than the Muslim's Allah.
What do I mean by this?
Every Christian who accepts Jesus Christ as their God receives the Holy Spirit in them.
and the people who lived before Jesus were just unlucky right?
in Islaam everyone who has faith in God with the weight of an atom is considered a muslim and his final destiny will be heaven.
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
That means that every good Christian has part of God in them.
The Holy Spirit protects you from the sinful nature of man.
And that's as far as I'm going to describe Christianity.
1 define 'good christian'
2 how about bad christians? do they also have part of God in them? why are they not protected from sinful nature of men?
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
The point is that I don't see in Islam anything that can get you closer to God while on earth.

It is all blind faith and that makes it harder to find signs that point you in the right direction.
In a few words.
Why should I believe in Islam?
Because is the only religion that makes sense.
Says who?
The Quran and prophet Muhammad.
How do I know Allah is the real God?
How do you think the universe was created?
How do you think man was created?

You see is all a game of logic and logic traps, that seems to be the only way or at least the most popular way to prove god.
I would prefer to get some supernatural signs of the presence of God if that is somehow possible.
you are not getting supernatural signs from God. you have to settle with these signs.

again...you have no reliable source for this...but then a book pops up...with no known human author...the one that delivers it to us is illiterate so he cannot be the author of it. but it is written in high Arabic. at the same time it is very poetic...truely an art piece.
isn't that a clear sign of God?

can you give a reasonal explanation how that book got to us? who could have been written it?
Reply

Eddy
08-23-2020, 03:43 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Ümit
The Quraan is not our link to God...it is our guidance. if the Quraan was not there...we would not lose our link to God...if that was true...then how were the people linked to God long before the Quraan was revealed? doesn't make sense does it?
Let me clarify what I meant. The Quran is the only link Muslims have to Islam and thru Islam to Allah.
If the Quran didn't exist then there would be no Islam and the people would only believe in the God of the new and old testament (jews and Christians). There would be no Muslims.

The people who believed in God before the Quran were not Muslims. Without the Quran they would still believe in God but then we would have no Islam.
format_quote Originally Posted by Ümit
.so every religion other than Islam is a human made version of the true religion....
That is only according to Muslims and not all of them.
You kind of contradict yourself there. You believe in all the prophets before Muhammad but you believe the religions that they started are now considered man made religions according to Muslims?
How ridiculous is that?

format_quote Originally Posted by Ümit
so no thousands of other God...just one God communicating to us through centuries.
Here is a list of Gods thru history:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...idered_deities

format_quote Originally Posted by Ümit
yes it is the same God...however the way christians and jews see God is false...only the Islamic description of God is correct.
That is only according to Islam and Islam is not even the most popular religion.

format_quote Originally Posted by Ümit
1 define 'good christian'
2 how about bad christians? do they also have part of God in them? why are they not protected from sinful nature of men?
A good Christian in my personal opinion is a Christian who follows the religion according to the scriptures.
There are millions of Christians who were born into the religion but they don't practice it.
They are not protected because they don't practice the religion as they should.
format_quote Originally Posted by Ümit
can you give a reasonable explanation how that book got to us? who could have been written it?
I have an explanation but out of respect I prefer to simply say that it was conceived and written by men.
Reply

Ümit
08-23-2020, 08:35 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
Let me clarify what I meant. The Quran is the only link Muslims have to Islam and thru Islam to Allah.
If the Quran didn't exist then there would be no Islam and the people would only believe in the God of the new and old testament (jews and Christians). There would be no Muslims.

The people who believed in God before the Quran were not Muslims. Without the Quran they would still believe in God but then we would have no Islam.
that is were you are mistaken buddy...if you ask a muslim since when he is a muslim...the answer you will get is NOT "since birth"...but rather "since the Qalu Bala covenant".
the Qalu Bala covenant took place long before Adam as walked the Earth.
this means that Islaam was always there. it didn't start with the coming of Mohammed as...but it always existed...it was the one and only true religion of all time.
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
That is only according to Muslims and not all of them.
You kind of contradict yourself there. You believe in all the prophets before Muhammad but you believe the religions that they started are now considered man made religions according to Muslims?
How ridiculous is that?
yes that is quite ridiculous...however it is not true. as I said Islaam was always there...so every single prophet that was send to Earth came to teach Islaam...every prophet was muslim...the first followers of these prophets also were muslims...later on innovations were added and they started to wander off and voila...a new man made religion was born.
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy


Here is a list of Gods thru history:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...idered_deities


That is only according to Islam and Islam is not even the most popular religion.


A good Christian in my personal opinion is a Christian who follows the religion according to the scriptures.
There are millions of Christians who were born into the religion but they don't practice it.
They are not protected because they don't practice the religion as they should.
so about priests that sexually violate children...do they not practice religion as they should? why are they not protected from sinning? or is sexual violation not considered as sinning in christianity?
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
I have an explanation but out of respect I prefer to simply say that it was conceived and written by men.
that is a claim based on nothing. please provide evidences or at least clues to back up your claim...without that backing up this claim is worthless.
Reply

Eddy
08-24-2020, 06:13 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Ümit
so about priests that sexually violate children...do they not practice religion as they should? why are they not protected from sinning? or is sexual violation not considered as sinning in christianity?
I only have a little time to answer one of your questions today.

Let me explain it to you one more time.Those who follow the religion properly receive the Holy Spirit in them and are protected by god. (God knows when you are ready to receive the Holy Spirit)
You asked:
do they not practice religion as they should?
Short answer: Obviously not.
A priest who rapes children is committing a major sin (not to mention a crime) and therefore is not following the religion properly and therefore doesn't have the Holy Spirit in him and therefore is not protected by God.
Should I repeat this one more time? Is it clear enough now?

Note: As you should know by now I'm an agnostic which means I don't believe in God, Jesus as God, The Holy Spirit, Allah, the white winged horse, angel Gabriel and all the rest that is the product of human imagination.
Unless proven real is all fake to me.
Being an agnostic doesn't mean that I don't know how the Christian world works and what Christians believe since I was one of them once.
So you have to keep in mind that when I talk about Christianity I am never implying I believe what Christians believe.
Reply

Ümit
08-24-2020, 08:04 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
I only have a little time to answer one of your questions today.

Let me explain it to you one more time.Those who follow the religion properly receive the Holy Spirit in them and are protected by god. (God knows when you are ready to receive the Holy Spirit)
You asked:
Short answer: Obviously not.
A priest who rapes children is committing a major sin (not to mention a crime) and therefore is not following the religion properly and therefore doesn't have the Holy Spirit in him and therefore is not protected by God.
Should I repeat this one more time? Is it clear enough now?

Note: As you should know by now I'm an agnostic which means I don't believe in God, Jesus as God, The Holy Spirit, Allah, the white winged horse, angel Gabriel and all the rest that is the product of human imagination.
Unless proven real is all fake to me.
Being an agnostic doesn't mean that I don't know how the Christian world works and what Christians believe since I was one of them once.
So you have to keep in mind that when I talk about Christianity I am never implying I believe what Christians believe.
do not lose your patience please...no need to get angry...we are not getting angry at you for asking similar questions...

but ok...that is an answer I can accept...but how about the people that lived before Jesus...have they lived for nothing? what about all the good deeds a good person has done who lived before Jesus?
and could people sin in the time before Jesus?

ow and please do not forget to react on the other points in my last post.
Reply

Eddy
08-25-2020, 01:54 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Ümit
but ok...that is an answer I can accept...but how about the people that lived before Jesus...have they lived for nothing? what about all the good deeds a good person has done who lived before Jesus?
and could people sin in the time before Jesus?
According to Christian belief Jesus was always part of God and so was the Holy Spirit so nothing really changed in terms of the commandments, the purpose of life and the after life in either heaven or hell.
What changed according to Christian belief is that prior to Jesus coming to earth humans were born sinners because of Adam's disobeying god's instructions. Jesus came to destroy the devil's work that followed Adam's mistake.
But the basic rules have always been pretty much the same, be good and go to heaven be bad and end up in hell.

format_quote Originally Posted by Ümit
if you ask a muslim since when he is a muslim...the answer you will get is NOT "since birth"...but rather "since the Qalu Bala covenant".
the Qalu Bala covenant took place long before Adam as walked the Earth.
this means that Islaam was always there. it didn't start with the coming of Mohammed as...but it always existed...it was the one and only true religion of all time.
In order for us to understand each other we have to agree on certain basic definitions:
Islam = The religion that originated from the revelations received by prophet Muhammad.
Muslim = The people who believe in Islam

https://questionsonislam.com/article...e-been-muslims

Qalu Bala covenant means that Allah created the spirits of all people before He created the world and the human beings in it.

Following your line of thinking we could say that all human beings could trace their beginning at the same Qalu Bala covenant, couldn't we?
But at that point there were only spirits and program to either follow or not god as their lord.
Now all that is getting into virtual reality and not into the real world.
The truth is that Islam began with prophet Muhammad and there is no traceable proof of never existing before that.
There were no Muslims before Muhammad ever.There is no proof the previous prophets had nothing to do with Islam.
Yes, they spread the word of God but that's as far as the similarities go. Yes you can argue that all prophets worship the same god and therefore you can call that god Allah but before Muhammad there was no Islam.
You can say Islam always existed and Muslims always existed but that is just an empty statement with nothing to back up your claims other than scriptures with no historical value.
Prove historically that Islam was always there.I need some solid proof and not just empty claims.
Reply

Ümit
08-25-2020, 03:40 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
According to Christian belief Jesus was always part of God and so was the Holy Spirit so nothing really changed in terms of the commandments, the purpose of life and the after life in either heaven or hell.
What changed according to Christian belief is that prior to Jesus coming to earth humans were born sinners because of Adam's disobeying god's instructions. Jesus came to destroy the devil's work that followed Adam's mistake.
But the basic rules have always been pretty much the same, be good and go to heaven be bad and end up in hell.
so, basically everyone prior to Jesus were sinners...so, how can a sinner end up in heaven? I do not get that. and where did the rules come from? what was condered good and what was considered bad? who decided that back then? and how was it communicated with the humans?

Please enlighten us.
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy


In order for us to understand each other we have to agree on certain basic definitions:
Islam = The religion that originated from the revelations received by prophet Muhammad.
Muslim = The people who believe in Islam
you've got a lot of nerve dude, coming here...giving Islaam a false definition in such a way that is conveniant to you, so that you may argue with us using your wicked claims.
You may want to look up what islaam and muslim means in arabic...I am not going to argue with you based on your own made up definitions.
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy

https://questionsonislam.com/article...e-been-muslims

Qalu Bala covenant means that Allah created the spirits of all people before He created the world and the human beings in it.
Qalu Bala means "no, you are" in Arabic...it is the answer we gave to the question "Am I not your Lord?"
It means that we all believe that Allah is our God, and from that moment we are muslims. That makes practically everyone a muslim when he is born and remains a muslim until he can distinguish on his own what is good and what is bad....even the children born to christian parents.
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy

Following your line of thinking we could say that all human beings could trace their beginning at the same Qalu Bala covenant, couldn't we?
But at that point there were only spirits and program to either follow or not god as their lord.
Now all that is getting into virtual reality and not into the real world.
virtual reality according to your wicked definition perhaps...pretty much real world to us...but as it may please you...lets use spiritual world and scientific world
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy

The truth is that Islam began with prophet Muhammad and there is no traceable proof of never existing before that.
again, that is what you believe...however, not the truth. what you believe is not even logical...even christianity didn't start with Jesus...think about it...if God send down all the prophets to promote the true religion...prophets like Abraham, and Noah, and David...how come Christianity starts with Jesus? that is stupid.
The true religion always existed...every single prophet came update the prior prophet, but still the same religion. the religions we all know today are all wandered off versionss of the true arch religion which is Islaam.
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
There were no Muslims before Muhammad ever.There is no proof the previous prophets had nothing to do with Islam.
here you go acting like that child during his exams again. you have the various verses and hadeeths as your prove...
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy

Yes, they spread the word of God but that's as far as the similarities go. Yes you can argue that all prophets worship the same god and therefore you can call that god Allah but before Muhammad there was no Islam.
no, nothing to argue...the Quraan clearly sums up the most known prophets and describes them as true believers. That is enough prove to say they were all muslims.
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
You can say Islam always existed and Muslims always existed but that is just an empty statement with nothing to back up your claims other than scriptures with no historical value.
Prove historically that Islam was always there.I need some solid proof and not just empty claims.
how can it be an empty statement when there are hadeeth and verses about it?
It can only be an empty statement if you can somehow prove to me that the Quraan was human made.
prove to us that it is human written and you have a foot to stand on...untill then you are stuck with this mysterious book with unkown origin but highly valuable and at the same time poetic content.

Good luck
Reply

'Abdullah
08-25-2020, 04:59 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
In order for us to understand each other we have to agree on certain basic definitions:
Islam = The religion that originated from the revelations received by prophet Muhammad.
Muslim = The people who believe in Islam
This is what happens when one learns Islam from ex-Muslims, atheists and google search and never once read Quran in its entirety. If you read Quran you will find that the name of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is mentioned only 4 times. While Quran is full of stories of previous prophets.

  • Prophet Moses (peace be upon him) is mentioned 136 times.
  • Prophet Ibrahim (peace be upon him) is mentioned 69 times.
  • Prophet Nuh (peace be upon him) is mentioned 43 times.
  • Prophet Jesus (peace be upon him) is mentioned 25 times.



Believing in previous Books and Prophets is fundament pillar in Islam and if any Muslims disbelieves in a single Prophet then he is not a Muslim.
Allah says in the Quran:
Say, [O believers], "We have believed in Allah and what has been revealed to us and what has been revealed to Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and the Descendants and what was given to Moses and Jesus and what was given to the prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and we are Muslims [in submission] to Him."[Quran 2:136]
What does it mean? It means Islam is not a religion which started 1400 years ago. It is the religion of all previous prophets including the very first human being Adam (peace be upon him).
Reply

'Abdullah
08-25-2020, 05:02 PM
I think we need to go back the fundamental question that why should one believe in God. Once we establish that God does exist then we can take the next step to see which religion is the true religion and why?

With that, let me ask you is true justice being served in this world? If there is no life in hereafter, do you think justice has been served to those who killed millions such as Hitler?
Reply

Eddy
08-26-2020, 04:12 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Ümit
so, basically everyone prior to Jesus were sinners...so, how can a sinner end up in heaven? I do not get that.
Every Christian before Jesus was born a sinner but that only meant they need it to revert their situation by becoming closer to god by showing their faith to him. Not many did so before Jesus come to earth.
Jesus really made a huge difference since after him Christianity became the most popular religion of all times and that is still the case today.

format_quote Originally Posted by Ümit
you've got a lot of nerve dude, coming here...giving Islaam a false definition in such a way that is conveniant to you, so that you may argue with us using your wicked claims.
You may want to look up what islaam and muslim means in arabic...I am not going to argue with you based on your own made up definitions.
Sorry but you misunderstood. I tried to use the most common definitions of Islam and Muslim but I don't mind if you provide your own definitions.
I’m not interested in the Arabic meanings of the words but what they represent.
Islam = a religion
Muslim = the member of Islam
It is about being able to communicate. We can have different definitions but we have to make clear how we use these words to avoid misunderstandings.
You said “Islam was always there.”
That is why we need definitions, Islam was not always there according to what most of the world understands.
“everyone is a Muslim when he is born”
You need to understand that what you believe as a Muslim has no value outside Islam.
I can say anybody who doesn’t believe in Jesus is going to hell but as a Muslim or a Jew or a Buddhist that statement has zero value, doesn’t it?
So the phrases everyone is born a Muslim or Islam has always been there are only valid within Islam and they are absolutely meaningless to the rest of the world.

format_quote Originally Posted by Ümit
what you believe is not even logical...even christianity didn't start with Jesus...think about it...
You see that's where you are wrong. Christianity started exactly during Jesus Christ passage on earth.
Without Jesus Christ Christianity would have never taken place, the God would have still be there but now we would have only Judaism and Islam.
Same thing with Islam, without Muhammad there would be no Islam, the God would still be there so now we would have only Judaism and Christianity.
See what I mean?

I have only one more request from you:
Could you please show me that Islam existed before prophet Muhammad?
Please don't use the Quran nor the Hadith to answer.
I want you to use an independent source.
Please use only use historical data.
Show me a civilization or tribe of people who followed a religion that looked like Islam who's god is called Allah and its members call themselves Muslims or any other name.
Links please.
Reply

Ümit
08-26-2020, 07:04 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
Every Christian before Jesus was born a sinner but that only meant they need it to revert their situation by becoming closer to god by showing their faith to him. Not many did so before Jesus come to earth.
Jesus really made a huge difference since after him Christianity became the most popular religion of all times and that is still the case today.
So, in other words, according to christianity, God send prophets prior to the earth, each of them starting their own religion...and those different religions were also allowed as long as people could show their faith in him through that religion?
is that correct? And (I know the answer to this, but I want to see what your answer is from Christian perspective, so I'm gonna ask anyway) why would God want to see that? Isn't God Omnipotent? Can he not see the future or does He not just know who we are and what is in oir hearts...so why do we need to show God someting that He already knows?

and being born a sinner was somehow OK then, but something still had to be done about that so Jesus came along right?

format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy

Sorry but you misunderstood. I tried to use the most common definitions of Islam and Muslim but I don't mind if you provide your own definitions.
I’m not interested in the Arabic meanings of the words but what they represent.
Islam = a religion
Muslim = the member of Islam
So, Eddy...you found yourself a rabbit hole that goes deeper than you ever imagined right?

you want to talk about Islaam but you are not interested in the meaning of those words?
Islaam means "submission to the will of God" in Arabic
Muslim means "one who submits to the will of God" in Arabic
Allah is not a name, it is "God" in Arabic.

What word do you think Arabic Christians use to refer to God? they speak about Allah.

As you can see by the meanings of the words Islaam and Muslim, it is a general religion.
So Islaam is not based on some prophet who started his own religion...it is the Arch religion which was always there. It still is valid that if there is someone out there who has legitimately never heard of Muhammad sas, never heard about the Quraan, never had the reasonable chance to learn about Islaam...but still believes in a God...then this person is considered "Muslim". small children and mentally challenged people who cannot distinguish between right and wrong, good or evil...are considered "Muslim".
So it is hard to be not a muslim...you need to know about Muhammad sas and the Quraan and reject that.

Even Wikipedia does not venture into putting such a definition to Islaam...because that is just not true...it is not what we believe.
in fact, you might want to read the Wikipedia version about Islaam...then you might have a better impression about Islaam then you have now.

let me dictate one sentence from wiki:
Muslims believe that Islam is the complete and universal version of a primordial faith that was revealed many times before through prophets, including Adam, Abraham, Moses, and Jesus.[10]
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy

It is about being able to communicate. We can have different definitions but we have to make clear how we use these words to avoid misunderstandings.
I understand your intention but you do not achieve that by adopting definitions that are not true just for the sake of argument.

let us agree with each other that from now on we pronounce "2" as "three",
so that we may legitimately argue that 1+1=three
or three+three=4

would that be a useful thing to do?

I guess not

format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy

That is why we need definitions, Islam was not always there according to what most of the world understands.

You need to understand that what you believe as a Muslim has no value outside Islam.
I can say anybody who doesn’t believe in Jesus is going to hell but as a Muslim or a Jew or a Buddhist that statement has zero value, doesn’t it?
So the phrases everyone is born a Muslim or Islam has always been there are only valid within Islam and they are absolutely meaningless to the rest of the world.
I partially agree. I understand that those phrases have zero value to you because it requires to believe...however...there is this strong source to back it up which is still bugging you about it.
It is literally written in the Quraan...you cannot deny that.
So, unless you can prove to me that the Quraan has a human origin, and explain to me who wrote it and how it got distributed, you continuously have to deal with the Quraan as a legitimate source.

as a scientist, you cannot ignore a useful source, you have to have prove to be able to say "this source is unreliable because..."
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy

You see that's where you are wrong. Christianity started exactly during Jesus Christ passage on earth.
no. during Jesus as passage on earth it was Islaam being taught to people through Jesus as himself...after Jesus as left the Earth, the human made religion "christianity" started.
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
Without Jesus Christ Christianity would have never taken place, the God would have still be there but now we would have only Judaism and Islam.
true
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
Same thing with Islam, without Muhammad there would be no Islam, the God would still be there so now we would have only Judaism and Christianity.
See what I mean?
Without Muhammad sas, there would be no Quraan...this means that only the original Gospels revealed to Jesus as would be valid as the holy book. and the few people who still believe in the original teachings of Jesus as, who also reject trinity would be considered as Muslims.
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy

I have only one more request from you:
Could you please show me that Islam existed before prophet Muhammad?
Please don't use the Quran nor the Hadith to answer.
I want you to use an independent source.
Please use only use historical data.
Show me a civilization or tribe of people who followed a religion that looked like Islam who's god is called Allah and its members call themselves Muslims or any other name.
Links please.
again, arabic christians god is called Allah.
about proof of islaam as the premordial religion:
Proof in the way you ask is not available.

But think about it logically.

God created earth
God put humans on earth to find God for themselves
God sends down various prophets throughout history to guide us to Him...and He sends down Books and scriptures.
if you read the original versions of the last books (besides the Quraan, because you do not wish that) you read similar stories about prior prophets and what they have done.

How can you deny that christianity has deeper roots than the time of Jesus as?
How can you deny that Jewism has deeper roots than the time of Moses as?
Do you think it is coincidence that Islaam, Christianity and Jewism share the same stories and prophets?
or are they inspired from each other?

I do not have any historical source for you showing that Islaam existed prior to Muhammad sas...if I had, then there were only muslims here on earth.
Reply

Al-Ansariyah
08-26-2020, 09:21 AM
At first,you claim to be an agnostic, next you defend Christianity. Being an agnostic, Trinity and part of god in a person should not make sense to you. You should rather be speaking for agnosticism and NOT Christianity because you aren't christian anymore. All you doing is asking for proofs of islam without YOU giving any proof about atheism or christian claim of holy spirit.
The person who is truly seeking the truth reads about all religions, reads what the scriptures say rather than researching THEMSELVES on google or social media.
Have you read the whole quran? Or have you read about the life of prophet muhammad (peace be upon him)? Or have you read ahadith?
You should!! But with a proper understanding and clear mind. For quran, you may need the tafseer to understand it. Debating over internet just spreads hate towards each other especially when one's intention is just to argue and to not learn about the religion.
What Christianity,judaism and islam have in common? Prophet Abraham(a.s.).. what message did he bring? he preached about one God. And because he believed in one God, he is a muslim(one who submits to the will of God). Anyways, you need to go back to the top and your previous thread and read everything that people said because it's all very well explained!!!



https://www.kbyh.co.uk/2019/08/28/we...e-spreadsheet/
Reply

Eddy
08-26-2020, 03:16 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by medico
At first,you claim to be an agnostic, next you defend Christianity. Being an agnostic, Trinity and part of god in a person should not make sense to you. You should rather be speaking for agnosticism and NOT Christianity because you aren't christian anymore.
I didn't offer to speak about Christianity, I was asked to talk about it.
I grew up a Christian and my culture and morals come from Christianity so I have no problem with it.
I am here discussing Islam and maybe later I will go and discuss politics, economy, coronavirus, etc, and I don't see the problem.
Reply

Eddy
08-26-2020, 03:48 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Ümit
So, in other words, according to christianity, God send prophets prior to the earth, each of them starting their own religion...
That happened with Islam as well, didn't it. There is no evidence of any religion similar to Islam until Muhammad came around.
Those are the facts, your claims that Islam has always existed are just that, "claims" based on scriptures not on any historical facts.
format_quote Originally Posted by Ümit
why would God want to see that? Isn't God Omnipotent? Can he not see the future or does He not just know who we are and what is in oir hearts...so why do we need to show God someting that He already knows?
I'm not going to speak on behalf of god since I don't even believe God exists.
format_quote Originally Posted by Ümit
I understand that those phrases (Islam been always there) have zero value to you because it requires to believe...however...there is this strong source to back it up which is still bugging you about it.
It is literally written in the Quraan...you cannot deny that.
What you called a strong source is actually a very weak source in the mind of an agnostic.
The Quran is the word of Allah.
Allah is a God and therefore an unproven being.
Everything coming from an unproven being is unproven and therefore subjective.
I've been waiting for many years for someone to prove God exists and all I got so far is "have faith and believe".
format_quote Originally Posted by Ümit
no. during Jesus as passage on earth it was Islaam being taught to people through Jesus as himself...after Jesus as left the Earth, the human made religion "christianity" started.
That is just talk based on unproven scriptures, no proof, no historical facts.
The only historical fact is that Jesus is responsible for the creation of a new religion based on an old religion.
I don't know if that is what Jesus meant to do but that is what he did.
Because of him alone the religion is the most popular in the world today.
format_quote Originally Posted by Ümit
Without Muhammad sas, there would be no Quraan...this means that only the original Gospels revealed to Jesus as would be valid as the holy book. and the few people who still believe in the original teachings of Jesus as, who also reject trinity would be considered as Muslims.
There is no trace nor record nor historical facts about those Muslims you talk about.
Reply

'Abdullah
08-27-2020, 01:12 AM
Imagine the things Sheikh Hamza Yousaf is talking about in the video below were foretold by an illiterate person in 7th century and are documented till today as a sign for future generations to witness. The signs of Islam’s truth is all around you, and you can see them only if you are sincere in your search for the truth:


وَيَقُولُ ٱلَّذِينَ كَفَرُواْ لَوْلَآ أُنزِلَ عَلَيْهِ ءَايَةٌ مِّن رَّبِّهِۦ ۗ قُلْ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ يُضِلُّ مَن يَشَآءُ وَيَهْدِىٓ إِلَيْهِ مَنْ أَنَابَ

And those who disbelieved say, "Why has a sign not been sent down to him from his Lord?" Say, [O Muhammad], "Indeed, Allah leaves astray whom He wills and guides to Himself whoever turns back [to Him] -

(Ar Ra'du 13:27)
Reply

Ümit
08-27-2020, 08:07 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
That happened with Islam as well, didn't it.
you are desperately trying to avoid a point here I was trying to make:
according to your story different religions prior to Christianity was allowed...worshipping different gods was allowed, as long as people showed they had faith in some God? and that was enough to earn a place in heaven?


and being born a sinner was somehow OK then, but something still had to be done about that so Jesus came along right?

format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy

There is no evidence of any religion similar to Islam until Muhammad came around.
Those are the facts, your claims that Islam has always existed are just that, "claims" based on scriptures not on any historical facts.
There is your problem exactly Eddy, you're already settled with facts. facts are fallible. Science is per definition fallible. It is just a tool to understand the world we live in. It is an approximation of reality.
you could have the absolute truth...but because you demand facts, you just settle with an approximation of the absolute truth...(with only the understandable part that is).

Of course that is "only a claim of us"....

format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
I'm not going to speak on behalf of god since I don't even believe God exists.
this shows that you do not understand religion at all...never gave it a chance to understand...and never tried to understand it...so what are you doing here.

again...God is omnipotent...why would he want to test us if he already knows the outcome of it? think about that.
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy

What you called a strong source is actually a very weak source in the mind of an agnostic.
The Quran is the word of Allah.
Allah is a God and therefore an unproven being.
Everything coming from an unproven being is unproven and therefore subjective.
I've been waiting for many years for someone to prove God exists and all I got so far is "have faith and believe".
then take action.
you always pushed the Quraan aside...never gave it a chance...that shows how biased you are...you are not a real agnostic...you are not a true scientist...you just believe what you are told.

a true researcher explores every single source...no matter the reliability...besides, you need to research a source in order to estimate its reliability...you never did that with the quraan...you just have an empty claim that it is human written...based on absolutely nothing...there is no single page on the whole internet that points to quraan as human written.

So do that first, show us the links to those sites that prove that the quraan is human written, and you can justly cross out the Quraan from your sources list.
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy


That is just talk based on unproven scriptures, no proof, no historical facts.
The only historical fact is that Jesus is responsible for the creation of a new religion based on an old religion.
I don't know if that is what Jesus meant to do but that is what he did.
that is not what he did, that is what happened. He did just right, but the people themselves were stupid enough to wander off from the right path again.

format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
Because of him alone the religion is the most popular in the world today.

There is no trace nor record nor historical facts about those Muslims you talk about.
yeah we know...facts...bla bla...
Reply

Eddy
08-28-2020, 10:39 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Ümit
you are desperately trying to avoid a point here I was trying to make:
according to your story different religions prior to Christianity was allowed...worshipping different gods was allowed, as long as people showed they had faith in some God? and that was enough to earn a place in heaven?
Judaism and Christianity always believed in one God so I have no idea how you misinterpreted this so bad.

format_quote Originally Posted by Ümit
you always pushed the Quraan aside...never gave it a chance...
So you are not understanding, I'm here to find out if Allah is for real or not.
That simple.
The Quran is the word of Allah, isn't it?
How can I believe everything the Quran says?
That defeats the purpose of my investigation.
I read suspicious Quran passages and question them, ""this doesn't look like something a God would say or do, doesn't it?""
Then I make my own conclusion based on all the responses in the discussion and my own research.

format_quote Originally Posted by Ümit
you are not a real agnostic...you are not a true scientist...you just believe what you are told.
That could be all true except that I don't believe everything I'm told.
I'm very good at making my own conclusions.
I believe that there's a very strong possibility the Quran is 100% conceived and written by men.
That is my own conclusion because as you said there are not many links about people sharing my position.
My reasoning to arrive at this conclusion is all mine so you are wrong, I don't believe everything I'm told.

format_quote Originally Posted by Ümit
a true researcher explores every single source...no matter the reliability...besides, you need to research a source in order to estimate its reliability...you never did that with the quraan...
How do you know?
I know more about Islam that I know about Christianity.
I read the Quran, many Hadith, Tafsir (the few in english)
I read many Christian apologists that like to expose Islam but also many Islamic apologists that help me balance my opinions.
I like to see both sides and at the end make my own opinion.


One last thing that keeps bothering me.
You believe that the Quran has been preserved unchanged since the time it was created, don't you?
That because Muslims preserved every word of it thru time.
Not only that but Muslims maintained their culture thru all this time.
My problem with this:
How come Muslims did such a great job preserving the Quran and their culture after Muhammad but didn't do the same thing after all the other prophets?
You claimed Allah gave the same message to all the other prophets and at each of those times people were initially Muslims.
Mysteriously each time not only people forgot about the islamic message but also about the Islamic culture and instead turned into a more Jewish like culture.
That is hard to explain, isn't it?
The same happened when Jesus came around.
According to your version at the beginning the message to Jesus was similar to the message to Muhammad.
Am I correct?
But again mysteriously the very resilient Muslims forgot about the Islamic teachings and their Islamic culture and instead turned into what today is the very different Christian beliefs and culture.
History remembers the culture of the people after Jesus and Moses and others but history mysteriously forgot all about the existence of some Islamic culture at all those times.
You know what they say:
Too much coincidence might not be coincidence at all.
The more I research about this the more I believe these Islamic teachings before Muhammad never happened.
Reply

'Abdullah
08-28-2020, 10:11 PM
We live in a world where 2 + 2 = 5

Just as 1 + 1 +1 = 1

If you are confused

Who is god?, Jesus

Is Jesus the son of Mary?, Yes

Who created Mary?, God.

Who is God?, Jesus

Jesus is the begotten son., Yes

Who is his father?, God.

Who is God?, Jesus.

Jesus is a servant of God?, Yes

Who is God?, Jesus.

Jesus died on the cross?Yes

Who resurrected him?, God.

Who is God?, Jesus

Jesus is a messenger?, Yes

Who sent him?, God.

Who is God?, Jesus.

Did Jesus worship while on earth?, Yes

Whom did he worship?, God.

Who is God?, Jesus.

Did God have a beginning?, No

Then who was born on 25 DEC?, Jesus.

Who is God?, Jesus

Where's God?, In heaven

How many are there in heaven?, Only one God.

Where's Jesus?, He is sitted on the right hand of his father.

Who is God?, Jesus.

Then how many are they in heaven?, Only one God

Then how many seats?, One

Where's Jesus?, Seated next to God.

Then how are they seated?, On one chair

Its only understood by those with the holy spirit.

Who is God?Jesus.

Ha haha what a confusion.

So beautiful to be a Muslim. Alhamdulillah all we need to say is we believe in ONE God. Simple is that with no confusion.

قَد تَّبَيَّنَ الرُّشۡدُ مِنَ الۡغَىِّ​ۚ
The Right Way stands clearly distinguished from the wrong. ( Quran 2:256)
Reply

Al-Ansariyah
08-29-2020, 07:50 AM
How come Muslims did such a great job preserving the Quran and their culture after Muhammad but didn't do the same thing after all the other prophets?
For us muslims, it IS preserved. It wasn't the muslims but God who preserved it.
(Quran 15:9) Absolutely, we have revealed the reminder, and, absolutely, we will preserve it.
But to prove it you, there are many old manuscripts of quran dated in 1st century AH and 2nd century AH. The researchers say that the words written in it are exactly the same as we have the quran today.
Prophet(peace be upon him) was illetrate but whenever a verse was revealed to him, he immediately taught it to his companions who would memorize it and WRITE it. This is how quran was passed from generations to generations.
However, if you don't believe this, you may check the Birmingham quran manuscript, it has parts of chapters 18 to 20 dated back to 568 AD – 645 AD. AND it is exactly same as we read it today. Then you have sana'a manuscript dated back to 671 AD. Next you have topkapi manuscript dated back to early to mid 8th century. There are few more but i'll just leave here.
Ahadith were written by the people of 1st, 2nd, 3rd generations through narrations by companions of prophet. AND only these 3 generations's books are seen to be authentic,as far as i know(correct me if am wrong). If there is even a bit of confusion,it is put into the category of hasan(fair) or zaef(weak) hadiths. And the most important thing, there isn't a hadith which contadicts with the quran. If it were to be changed by non-muslims, there should be some contadictions but no,there isn't any. And muslims were also serious in keeping the ahadith safe, if anyone tries to change the hadith or make his own,he isn't considered a good person. After all, ahadiths are also in the protection of God.
Reply

Eddy
08-29-2020, 10:53 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
We live in a world where 2 + 2 = 5

Just as 1 + 1 +1 = 1

If you are confused

Who is god?, Jesus

Is Jesus the son of Mary?, Yes

Who created Mary?, God.

Who is God?, Jesus

Jesus is the begotten son., Yes

Who is his father?, God.

Who is God?, Jesus.

Jesus is a servant of God?, Yes

Who is God?, Jesus.

Jesus died on the cross?Yes

Who resurrected him?, God.

Who is God?, Jesus

Jesus is a messenger?, Yes

Who sent him?, God.

Who is God?, Jesus.

Did Jesus worship while on earth?, Yes

Whom did he worship?, God.

Who is God?, Jesus.

Did God have a beginning?, No

Then who was born on 25 DEC?, Jesus.

Who is God?, Jesus

Where's God?, In heaven

How many are there in heaven?, Only one God.

Where's Jesus?, He is sitted on the right hand of his father.

Who is God?, Jesus.

Then how many are they in heaven?, Only one God

Then how many seats?, One

Where's Jesus?, Seated next to God.

Then how are they seated?, On one chair

Its only understood by those with the holy spirit.

Who is God?Jesus.

Ha haha what a confusion.

So beautiful to be a Muslim. Alhamdulillah all we need to say is we believe in
That usually happens when you learn Christianity from Ali Dawah and Mohammed Hijab.
Reply

Eddy
08-29-2020, 05:14 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by medico
there are many old manuscripts of quran dated in 1st century AH and 2nd century AH. The researchers say that the words written in it are exactly the same as we have the quran today.
You're missing the point here.
I'm not disputing the preservation of the Quran nor the culture of Muslims after Muhammad, I'm disputing the Quran given to all the other prophets (including Jesus).
Why don't we have a single page of any of them?
Muslims claim all the prophets were given the same messages given to prophet Muhammad.
How come nothing of that was preserved by Allah the way he preserved the messages given to prophet Muhammad?
Reply

keiv
08-30-2020, 01:28 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
That usually happens when you learn Christianity from Ali Dawah and Mohammed Hijab.
Lets be real here, these are the explanations given by Christians. Even then, they cannot consistently or confidently explain who God is without, not only confusing their questioners, but confusing themselves. Often times, they make up things as they go in order to try to explain the trinity and it only goes down hill from there.

Surah Ikhlas
بِسْمِ اللهِ الرَّحْمنِ الرَّحِيمِ
قُلْ هُوَ اللَّهُ أَحَدٌ
اللَّهُ الصَّمَدُ
لَمْ يَلِدْ وَلَمْ يُولَدْ
وَلَمْ يَكُن لَّهُ كُفُوًا أَحَدٌ

1. “Say: He, Allah, is One,"
2. “Allah, the Eternal,"
3. “He begets not, nor is He begotten,"
4. “And there is none like unto Him.”
No son, spirits, fathers, god form, man form, blood sacrifices, and so on. Nice, simple, and to the point. Anyone without bias would agree that there is just no comparison
Reply

Eddy
08-30-2020, 03:40 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by keiv
Lets be real here, these are the explanations given by Christians
Not really, let me try myself.

We live in a world where 2 + 2 = 5

Just as 1 + 1 +1 = 1

If you are confused (and your IQ is below average)

Who is god?, (trinitarians, Father, son, holy spirit)j

Is Jesus the son of Mary?, Yes (the human Jesus)

Who created Mary?, God. (Her mother and father.)

Who is God?, Jesus (trinitarians, Father, son, holy spirit)

Jesus is the begotten son., Yes

Who is his father?, God.(Jesus the human was created by the father)

Who is God?, Jesus.(trinitarians, Father, son, holy spirit)

Jesus is a servant of God?, Yes (that could only apply to Jesus the human)

Who is God?, Jesus.(trinitarians, Father, son, holy spirit)

Jesus died on the cross?Yes

Who resurrected him?, God.(trinitarians, Father, son, holy spirit)

Who is God?, Jesus(trinitarians, Father, son, holy spirit)

Jesus is a messenger?, Yes (Jesus the Human being)

Who sent him?, God.(the father)

Who is God?, Jesus.(trinitarians, Father, son, holy spirit)

Did Jesus worship while on earth?, Yes

Whom did he worship?, God.(as a human he worshipped the father)

Who is God?, Jesus.(trinitarians, Father, son, holy spirit)

Did God have a beginning?, No

Then who was born on 25 DEC?, Jesus.(the human)

Who is God?, Jesus(trinitarians, Father, son, holy spirit)

Where's God?, In heaven

How many are there in heaven?, Only one God.(trinitarians, Father, son, holy spirit)

Where's Jesus?, He is sitted on the right hand of his father.

Who is God?, Jesus.(trinitarians, Father, son, holy spirit)

Then how many are they in heaven?, Only one God(trinitarians, Father, son, holy spirit)

Then how many seats?, One (low IQ question)

Where's Jesus?, Seated next to God. (Low IQ answer) (next to the father)
Then how are they seated?, On one chair (Low IQ question)

Its only understood by those with the holy spirit. (and a normal IQ)

Who is God?Jesus.(trinitarians, Father, son, holy spirit)

Ha haha what a confusion. (are you still confused?)
Reply

'Abdullah
08-30-2020, 04:12 PM
Jeus PBUH is neither God nor the son of God

Jeus PBUH is neither God nor the son of God
WHAT DOES THE WORD SON OF GOD MEANS IN BIBLICAL SENSE All four Gospels record Jesus as saying: “Blessed are the peace-makers; they will be called sons...
Reply

Abz2000
08-31-2020, 04:42 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
Your claims that ..... is not good enough for me.
You claimed ....
That is so ridiculous

......That is really awful, why don't you try to get the facts straight before dismissing them.....


.... I dare you to find a quote when I said I personally agree with all those liberals things you named.....

..... By the way let me school a bit. .....


...... So you see you cannot......


...... That is really a poor view of how things happen......


..... Personally I get most of my values from Christianity so I don't agree with most of those things you mentioned, but that is just me and I don't speak for the rest of the west.......

Another "Christian" who denies the existence of God.

Useful tool to hook a majority on side whilst simultaneously presenting them as ridiculous.

BTW, in your opinion @Eddy are both the Protocols of the learned elders, and the Hasbara handbook "forgeries" ? or is it just one?

Coz i see at least one playing out like a symphony.


BTW, the habit of emphatically pointing subjectively at the person with whom one is supposed to having a discussion/constructive debate -especially in circumstances where objectivity is more fitting and much, much easier- and thereby dragging the person into a bickering contest -
gives an impression of insincerity - makes a person think of the word "TROLL".
I know the hasbara teaches it in order to attempt to isolate the targeted individual from the majority (though the individual is chosen due to the fact that the majority is likely to agree with a significant amount of his/her assertions), and create a negative energy which aims to put the audience in a passive, uninvolved state .... it becomes a boring pattern which only serves to further enlighten those who have seen it pop up over the years - a bit like a broken record.

Think about it, when you attempt to attain majority applause by duping them onto a bandwagon of falsehood and crime, you are doing the work of iblees -since you are corrupting them and bearing your portion of their actions. Isn't that a heavy load to be bearing for a pittance? Isn't that work from home or in an internet cafe like setting packed with insincere frauds who are in actuality selling their souls for a pittance -who are usually manipulated into criminal actions through the nurturing of an idea of a common bond (i.e liberal jews who hate g-d but are also serving g-d and a greater (rothschild) cause) - a crappy deal - especially when you consider that you are leaving your own soul and the souls of those whom you help to corrupt - in a darker place than it was before you were born?
What answer will you give on the inevitable day?
Please consider my words as not an attack on yourself or ego, but an attempt to elicit a chain of positive thought in your audience and in you.
Reply

Abz2000
08-31-2020, 05:37 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
Jeus PBUH is neither God nor the son of God

Jeus PBUH is neither God nor the son of God
WHAT DOES THE WORD SON OF GOD MEANS IN BIBLICAL SENSE All four Gospels record Jesus as saying: “Blessed are the peace-makers; they will be called sons...
Reply

Eddy
08-31-2020, 07:23 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Abz2000
Another "Christian" who denies the existence of God.
Agnostic from Christian background.
format_quote Originally Posted by Abz2000
gives an impression of insincerity - makes a person think of the word "TROLL".
Yes, the word Troll is totally fitting. I'm one debating the credibility of Allah on an Islamic forum.
That's the challenge, my arguments against the arguments of knowledgeable Muslims who know their religion and can access information (Quran verses, Hadith, Tafsir, etc) very quickly and that are ready to defend their religion with passion.
That's the idea.
I cannot come here and claim there are errors in Quran without doing my homework.
Even so, I'm ready to allow myself to be shown that I'm wrong.
But I'm also ready to defend my point of view because my point of view is never lacking of extensive work behind it.
By doing a lot of research I have come to understand a lot about the Islamic world and Muslims.
I have also found a lot of flaws in the Scriptures (the Quran mainly) and I still haven't found answers to those.

Do you believe that is not ethical to discuss Islamic scriptures errors in an Islamic forum?
What if Muslims cannot find answers?
Does that exposes the religion of Islam?
Should we just follow the sheep in front of us and not ask questions?
I'm not being disrespectful but just inquisitive.
Or being inquisitive is disrespectful in the eyes of a religious fanatic?
Reply

'Abdullah
08-31-2020, 01:10 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Abz2000
Great video, perfectly explains Christianity.
Reply

Eddy
08-31-2020, 03:23 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by 'Abdullah
Great video, perfectly explains Christianity.
Really, is that what it shows?
Reply

'Abdullah
08-31-2020, 03:53 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
Not really, let me try myself.

We live in a world where 2 + 2 = 5

Just as 1 + 1 +1 = 1

If you are confused (and your IQ is below average)

Who is god?, (trinitarians, Father, son, holy spirit)j

Is Jesus the son of Mary?, Yes (the human Jesus)

Who created Mary?, God. (Her mother and father.)

Who is God?, Jesus (trinitarians, Father, son, holy spirit)

Jesus is the begotten son., Yes

Who is his father?, God.(Jesus the human was created by the father)

Who is God?, Jesus.(trinitarians, Father, son, holy spirit)

Jesus is a servant of God?, Yes (that could only apply to Jesus the human)

Who is God?, Jesus.(trinitarians, Father, son, holy spirit)

Jesus died on the cross?Yes

Who resurrected him?, God.(trinitarians, Father, son, holy spirit)

Who is God?, Jesus(trinitarians, Father, son, holy spirit)

Jesus is a messenger?, Yes (Jesus the Human being)

Who sent him?, God.(the father)

Who is God?, Jesus.(trinitarians, Father, son, holy spirit)

Did Jesus worship while on earth?, Yes

Whom did he worship?, God.(as a human he worshipped the father)

Who is God?, Jesus.(trinitarians, Father, son, holy spirit)

Did God have a beginning?, No

Then who was born on 25 DEC?, Jesus.(the human)

Who is God?, Jesus(trinitarians, Father, son, holy spirit)

Where's God?, In heaven

How many are there in heaven?, Only one God.(trinitarians, Father, son, holy spirit)

Where's Jesus?, He is sitted on the right hand of his father.

Who is God?, Jesus.(trinitarians, Father, son, holy spirit)

Then how many are they in heaven?, Only one God(trinitarians, Father, son, holy spirit)

Then how many seats?, One (low IQ question)

Where's Jesus?, Seated next to God. (Low IQ answer) (next to the father)
Then how are they seated?, On one chair (Low IQ question)

Its only understood by those with the holy spirit. (and a normal IQ)

Who is God?Jesus.(trinitarians, Father, son, holy spirit)

Ha haha what a confusion. (are you still confused?)
Knowledge is ignorance to the people of ignorance, just as ignorance is ignorance to the people of knowledge.
Reply

Abz2000
09-02-2020, 01:35 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
Agnostic from Christian background.Yes, the word Troll is totally fitting. I'm one debating the credibility of Allah on an Islamic forum.That's the challenge, my arguments against the arguments of knowledgeable Muslims who know their religion and can access information (Quran verses, Hadith, Tafsir, etc) very quickly and that are ready to defend their religion with passion.That's the idea.I cannot come here and claim there are errors in Quran without doing my homework.Even so, I'm ready to allow myself to be shown that I'm wrong.But I'm also ready to defend my point of view because my point of view is never lacking of extensive work behind it.By doing a lot of research I have come to understand a lot about the Islamic world and Muslims.I have also found a lot of flaws in the Scriptures (the Quran mainly) and I still haven't found answers to those.Do you believe that is not ethical to discuss Islamic scriptures errors in an Islamic forum?What if Muslims cannot find answers?Does that exposes the religion of Islam?Should we just follow the sheep in front of us and not ask questions?I'm not being disrespectful but just inquisitive.Or being inquisitive is disrespectful in the eyes of a religious fanatic?
i believe that the inquisitive mind should be perfectly welcome to ask useful questions, and that the one who bellieves he has a valid argument - should present that argument so that it can be looked into and understood.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpdmixP3_iYAnd

i also believe that those who dismiss or steer around clear rebuttals only to make a mess with more lame arguments - are simply insincere, and then it becomes a boring and exasperating waste of time- since those who are able to answer tend to either waste their time - or lose interest after sensing worthless trolling (not everyone likes wallowing in dung as sh*t's flying all over the room).
Then those who have less knowledge are left to debate - and that's a bit like DDOS SABOTAGE.
Reply

Eddy
09-02-2020, 08:28 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Abz2000
i also believe that those who dismiss or steer around clear rebuttals only to make a mess with more lame arguments - are simply insincere
Clear rebuttals?

Ok, let's put that to a test.

What was the clear rebuttal to this question?

You believe that the Quran has been preserved unchanged since the time it was created, don't you?
That because Muslims preserved every word of it thru time.
Not only that but Muslims maintained their culture thru all this time.
My problem with this:
How come Muslims did such a great job preserving the Quran and their culture after Muhammad but didn't do the same thing after all the other prophets?
You claimed Allah gave the same message to all the other prophets and at each of those times people were initially Muslims.
Mysteriously each time not only people forgot about the islamic message but also about the Islamic culture and instead turned into a more Jewish like culture.
That is hard to explain, isn't it?
The same happened when Jesus came around.
According to your version at the beginning the message to Jesus was similar to the message to Muhammad.
Am I correct?
But again mysteriously the very resilient Muslims forgot about the Islamic teachings and their Islamic culture and instead turned into what today is the very different Christian beliefs and culture.
History remembers the culture of the people after Jesus and Moses and others but history mysteriously forgot all about the existence of some Islamic culture at all those times.
What would be your answer to that or what do you think was the clear rebuttal to this question?
Reply

Nitro Zeus
09-02-2020, 11:48 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
Clear rebuttals?

Ok, let's put that to a test.

What was the clear rebuttal to this question?



What would be your answer to that or what do you think was the clear rebuttal to this question?
Are you ready to enter in shock? I challenge you to visit those links I provided, if you have guts.

1. Discover-The-Truth.com
2. www.abuaminaelias.com
3. Answering-Christianity.com
4. Call-To-Monotheism.com
5. wedefendislam.wordpress.com
6. discoverthetruefaceofislam.wordpress.com
7. discoverthetruefacts.wordpress.com
Reply

Abz2000
09-03-2020, 08:42 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
Clear rebuttals?Ok, let's put that to a test.What was the clear rebuttal to this question?You believe that the Quran has been preserved unchanged since the time it was created, don't you?
I belive that the divine thinking and relaying of communication is not limited to any human language, and that it is interpreted into human language as it is conveyed to humans.

The lack of the letters "p" , and "ch" in the Arabic alphabet, are logical evidences which strengthen this thinking, since any word or name containing those sounds would have to be converted to sounds which fit from the available Arabic alphabet of the time.

Eg. Quran, Ch.11 V.44

The word was either historically called Judee by humans but slowly changed to Chudee, or was or was historically Chudee but conveyed to the Prophet in terms of what he could convey, then written down as Judee when penned due to limitations of language.


If the second of the two logical possibilities is true, or if there had been such a similar case, it follows that Allah :swt: conveys guidance to humans with more emphasis on practicality than on binary accuracy. The same line of thinking would part answer following questions about how different communications came at different times but were preserved differently by humans (sometimes not too well).

I see the Quran as a communication and a beam lighting a dark road for humans, rather than as a computer with data on it where one transcription difference definitely spells disaster.

Where Perfect Allah :swt: is communicating with imperfect humans, and is helping them walk straight.

Therefore, although i have no reason to believe that there are any mistakes -i wouldn't be too flustered (rather would be ingrigued and want to know more) if anybody could prove that there were any, and considering that it is the brightest beam of light amongst others on the aforementioned dark path, i would consider it foolish to dismiss it over a trifle.


Al-Qasas 28:49

قُلْ فَأْتُوا۟ بِكِتَٰبٍ مِّنْ عِندِ ٱللَّهِ هُوَ أَهْدَىٰ مِنْهُمَآ أَتَّبِعْهُ إِن كُنتُمْ صَٰدِقِينَ

Say, "Then bring a scripture from Allah which is more guiding than either of them that I may follow it, if you should be truthful."

get Quran App:https://goo.gl/w6rESk

format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
That because Muslims preserved every word of it thru time.Not only that but Muslims maintained their culture thru all this time.My problem with this:How come Muslims did such a great job preserving the Quran and their culture after Muhammad but didn't do the same thing after all the other prophets?
Emphasis and importance placed by humans on recording and preservation through writing is an evolving phenomenon, it increased with time and from lessons learned.

It is logical to conclude that people who preserved records of events and divine communications through writing earlier, did so according to the best of their ability and hindsight at the time - which was far less efficient when conoared to today.

You may note that the companions of the prophet Muhammad :saws: had to sometimes be told NOT to write everything he said - out of an apprehension that those words might be confused with Quran - which the Prophet :saws: himself was having recorded through writing and memorization.
This indicates that the importance of preserving records through writing had come to be appreciated heavily by the people at the time the Quran was revealed - since he was no king, and not amongst the richest of his people.

Regarding the lack of confusion through different "versions" - the very first generation of companions (who lived and walked with the Prophet :saws: ) had an authorized copy enforced on all governorates in their lifetimes when interpretations in different dialects began to become a problem of moment - this could easily have been due to the lessons they had learned from observing the situation of those who were following previously revealed scriptures.


format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
You claimed Allah gave the same message to all the other prophets and at each of those times people were initially Muslims.
A person who accepts and acknowledges the overall authority of Allah :swt: and works to obey the guidance of Allah :swt; is a Muslim. A person who uses older laws of previous generations despite knowing that other updates have been added more recently by the same divine source - are not Muslims even if they inwardly believe that Allah :swt: is One.

format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
Mysteriously each time not only people forgot about the islamic message but also about the Islamic culture and instead turned into a more Jewish like culture.That is hard to explain, isn't it?

Not really difficult actually. There arrive stages where people get lax, then if those who observe that things are going downhill manage to do something about it -they usually begin to enact more rigid laws and sharper definitions of blurry lines, often depending on the state of emergency, then if those who follow afterwards understand that those laws were contextual to the situation at the time of enactment, they can continue to prosper as long as they recognise the foundations and evolve while basing themselves on the original lessons, and using precedents that were later set as references and not law.

But the issue is kingship and precedent, human kings and judges are sometimes lazy or otherwise averse to over-ruling precedent - it is often considered radical or controversial, and risks rebellion and questioning of authority. The history of the jews carries with it a history of often unbroken chains of kings and incrementally added rulings which were rarely discarded once added.

That is why i believe Muslims are now cautioned to make such distinction:

Al-Ma'idah 5:44إِنَّآ أَنزَلْنَا ٱلتَّوْرَىٰةَ فِيهَا هُدًى وَنُورٌۚ يَحْكُمُ بِهَا ٱلنَّبِيُّونَ ٱلَّذِينَ أَسْلَمُوا۟ لِلَّذِينَ هَادُوا۟ وَٱلرَّبَّٰنِيُّونَ وَٱلْأَحْبَارُ بِمَا ٱسْتُحْفِظُوا۟ مِن كِتَٰبِ ٱللَّهِ وَكَانُوا۟ عَلَيْهِ شُهَدَآءَۚ فَلَا تَخْشَوُا۟ ٱلنَّاسَ وَٱخْشَوْنِ وَلَا تَشْتَرُوا۟ بِـَٔايَٰتِى ثَمَنًا قَلِيلًاۚ وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَآ أَنزَلَ ٱللَّهُ فَأُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلْكَٰفِرُونَ

Indeed, We sent down the Torah, in which was guidance and light. The prophets who submitted [to Allah ] judged by it for the Jews, as did the rabbis and scholars by that with which they were entrusted of the Scripture of Allah, and they were witnesses thereto.

So do not fear the people but fear Me, and do not exchange My verses for a small price.

And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed - then it is those who are the disbelievers.

get Quran App:https://goo.gl/w6rESkAt-Taubah


9:31ٱتَّخَذُوٓا۟ أَحْبَارَهُمْ وَرُهْبَٰنَهُمْ أَرْبَابًا مِّن دُونِ ٱللَّهِ وَٱلْمَسِيحَ ٱبْنَ مَرْيَمَ وَمَآ أُمِرُوٓا۟ إِلَّا لِيَعْبُدُوٓا۟ إِلَٰهًا وَٰحِدًاۖ لَّآ إِلَٰهَ إِلَّا هُوَۚ سُبْحَٰنَهُۥ عَمَّا يُشْرِكُونَ

English - Sahih International

They have taken their scholars and monks as lords besides Allah, and [also] the Messiah, the son of Mary.

And they were not commanded except to worship one God; there is no deity except Him. Exalted is He above whatever they associate with Him.


get Quran App:https://goo.gl/w6rESk

It's not too difficult to imagine a scenario in which people who become overly rigid in their legislation and imagination of infallibility of their kings and scholars - accuse later prophets of being heretical or goy, and demand that such Prophets toe the line of kingly tradition and precedent if they are to be deemed acceptable.
The denial and killing of such Prophets is a testimony to their egotistic denial and the fact that they would rather teach God their religion than learn it from Him.

format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
The same happened when Jesus came around.According to your version at the beginning the message to Jesus was similar to the message to Muhammad.Am I correct?
In terms of overall essence - yes, however, the evolution of the people and understanding of tribal relevance was a lot less mature before than later, therefore the latter was more fitted to be implemented internationally.
At the time of the first coming of Jesus :saws: , untethering oneself from one's tribe was seen as treacherous by most, and almost suicidal considering that a person in a foreign land without tribal backing was prey to unknown traditions and legislation - or whim of the tribes which they interacted with.

Whereas at the time of Muhammad :saws: and after it was a lot safer and easier for people to travel far and wide, therefore it is logical to assume that divine legislation during the stage of the Quran could bear high contrast with all previously revealed divine laws, guidelines, and advice - even though each was unique to it's stage in human and community evolution in contrast to others.
The Muslims went head to head with their own tribe members based on law - despite it appearing as previously unimaginable to some elders.

format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
But again mysteriously the very resilient Muslims forgot about the Islamic teachings and their Islamic culture and instead turned into what today is the very different Christian beliefs and culture.
You'd have to research the understanding of people around Jesus :saws: and the frame of mind cultured by history of the significantly later roman councils and the primitive paganry of a long line of roman kings up until then in order to understand that evolution/defacement.

format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
History remembers the culture of the people after Jesus and Moses and others but history mysteriously forgot all about the existence of some Islamic culture at all those times.What would be your answer to that or what do you think was the clear rebuttal to this question?
History does not remember, forget, or say anything, since history is a chain of transpired events, it is rather people that keep historical records who are often prone to err. But that's just how it is innit, we have to make do by researching, being sceptical, critical, eager to find and accept what is more true and sound, then strive to do better than those before us due to the hindsights they left for us from failiures and triumphs.


......God knows what needed rebutting if there was anything there to rebut though.
Reply

Eric H
09-03-2020, 04:55 PM
Greetings and peace be with you Eddy;

Note: As you should know by now I'm an agnostic which means I don't believe in God, Jesus as God, The Holy Spirit, Allah, the white winged horse, angel Gabriel and all the rest that is the product of human imagination.
You don't have real evidence to show how the universe came to be by natural causes. You don't have real evidence to show how life started on Earth by natural causes. You don't have the courage to say you are an atheist, but you are agnostic. Yet being an agnostic has to be the most imperfect belief. God has to exist fully and totally or there is no God, there cannot be a 'maybe agnostic god'.

So you have to keep in mind that when I talk about Christianity I am never implying I believe what Christians believe.
So why do you keep talking about Christianity on a Muslim forum? It would be like me saying about pastafarians, and I don't believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

In the spirit of searching for a greatest meaning of 'One God'

Eric
Reply

Eddy
09-11-2020, 02:58 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
You believe that the Quran has been preserved unchanged since the time it was created, don't you?
That because Muslims preserved every word of it thru time.
Not only that but Muslims maintained their culture thru all this time.
My problem with this:
How come Muslims did such a great job preserving the Quran and their culture after Muhammad but didn't do the same thing after all the other prophets?
You claimed Allah gave the same message to all the other prophets and at each of those times people were initially Muslims.
Mysteriously each time not only people forgot about the islamic message but also about the Islamic culture and instead turned into a more Jewish like culture.
That is hard to explain, isn't it?
The same happened when Jesus came around.
According to your version at the beginning the message to Jesus was similar to the message to Muhammad.
Am I correct?
But again mysteriously the very resilient Muslims forgot about the Islamic teachings and their Islamic culture and instead turned into what today is the very different Christian beliefs and culture.
History remembers the culture of the people after Jesus and Moses and others but history mysteriously forgot all about the existence of some Islamic culture at all those times.
Sorry, I haven't had the time to answer to any social media lately.
The way you answered this is not what I was expecting and didn't answer my main point.
Let me explain.

Main point:
The Quran claims all prophets prior to Muhammad received similar Islamic messages.
The Quran claims at the time of the prophets (Abraham, David, Moses, Jesus) all their followers were Muslims and therefore there should be an Islamic culture developing at those times.

My position:
I believe all that is false.
Why?
Because there is no evidence of any of that being truth based on historical facts.
There are many accounts from witnesses that describe the time of Jesus and Moses.
We know about the culture at the time from many sources.
The islamic claims don't match with any of the actual historical accounts.

format_quote Originally Posted by Abz2000
Regarding the lack of confusion through different "versions" - the very first generation of companions (who lived and walked with the Prophet ) had an authorized copy enforced on all governorates in their lifetimes when interpretations in different dialects began to become a problem of moment - this could easily have been due to the lessons they had learned from observing the situation of those who were following previously revealed scriptures.
This is irrelevant since my point is not about the reliability of the Quran after Muhammad but the lack of Qurans (Islamic scriptures) prior to Muhammad.

format_quote Originally Posted by Abz2000
The evolution of the people and understanding of tribal relevance was a lot less mature before than later, therefore the latter was more fitted to be implemented internationally
I'm not sure what that means since Christianity showed that it was capable of being implemented internationally way before the time of Muhammad.
The once enemies and responsible for the death of Jesus ended up adopting Christianity later on and by doing so they expanded Christianity to most parts of the world.

I appreciate your explanations but I fail to understand how a huge community (Islamic religion and culture) changed its core beliefs thru history so many times without leaving any trace.
That is just impossible to believe.

All your explanations seem to be your own conclusions based on history common trends and your own logic but zero concrete evidence that what the Quran claims comes close to historical facts.
Reply

Eddy
09-11-2020, 03:09 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eric H
So why do you keep talking about Christianity on a Muslim forum? It would be like me saying about pastafarians, and I don't believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
Perhaps you should pay attention and realize I'm here talking about Islam.
Muslims keep asking me about Christianity and I don't have a problem answering.
You don't need to read my posts if that bothers you so much.
Reply

Eddy
09-11-2020, 03:13 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Nitro Zeus
Are you ready to enter in shock? I challenge you to visit those links I provided, if you have guts.
Maybe one of these days I'll have the guts and time to follow those links.
Meanwhile why don't you give me a preview of the shocking things I can find there?
Reply

Eric H
09-11-2020, 06:55 PM
Greetings and peace be with you Eddy,

format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
Perhaps you should pay attention and realize I'm here talking about Islam.
Understood

format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
Muslims keep asking me about Christianity and I don't have a problem answering.
And the reason they asked you about Christianity; is because you put Christian down as your religion; then you later claim you are agnostic.

format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
All your explanations seem to be your own conclusions based on history common trends and your own logic but zero concrete evidence that what the Quran claims comes close to historical facts.
If you are going to read parts of the Quran, then search for a greatest good meaning. No one would follow Islam if they saw it as you do. These scriptures have inspired a billion plus followers; there has to be something you are missing.

In the spirit of searching for God,

Eric
Reply

Eddy
09-12-2020, 01:20 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eric H
If you are going to read parts of the Quran, then search for a greatest good meaning. No one would follow Islam if they saw it as you do.
What happens when you realize the Tooth Fairy and Santa Claus are not real?
Don't you want to know the truth?
What happens when you realize the God of Christianity and Islam might not be there?
Don't you want to know the truth?
Reply

Eric H
09-12-2020, 04:12 PM
Greetings and peace be with you Eddy;

format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
Don't you want to know the truth?
Yes.

format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
What happens when you realize the God of Christianity and Islam might not be there?
The creation of the universe is history, and you can't change history. God the creator of all that is seen and unseen either exists fully and totally, or there is no god. There cannot be a maybe or probable god. I have total faith that God the Creator exists fully and totally.

I started a thread a while ago asking how could the universe and life start without God? How could life evolve without God? Any thoughts?

How could the universe and life start without God, how did life evolve without God?

In the spirit of searching for God;
Eric
Reply

Eddy
09-13-2020, 05:09 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eric H
The creation of the universe is history, and you can't change history.
True


format_quote Originally Posted by Eric H
God the creator of all that is seen and unseen either exists fully and totally, or there is no god.
That is your speculation, I wouldn't be so sure to speak of something I know nothing about.

format_quote Originally Posted by Eric H
There cannot be a maybe or probable god. I have total faith that God the Creator exists fully and totally.
You do have total faith, but faith is just faith, it doesn't matter if it is weak or strong it is still just faith at the end.

format_quote Originally Posted by Eric H
I started a thread a while ago asking how could the universe and life start without God? How could life evolve without God? Any thoughts?
Should I speculate to sound knowledgeable or just tell the truth and say "I don't know"?
One thing is for sure, life has evolved without the help of any God for thousands of years.
What we don't know is how did it all started.
Reply

Eric H
09-14-2020, 05:40 PM
Greetings and peace be with you Eddy;

format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
Should I speculate to sound knowledgeable or just tell the truth and say "I don't know"?
Science is not able to say how the universe came to be; or how life started on Earth. As you say; the best answer is we don't know.

format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
One thing is for sure, life has evolved without the help of any God for thousands of years.
I can't believe this is true, but if you have compelling evidence, then let's hear it.

In the spirit of searching for God;
Eric
Reply

Eddy
09-14-2020, 08:34 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eric H
I can't believe this is true, but if you have compelling evidence, then let's hear it.
That has a very easy answer, evolution.
We don't know how all started, we only have some good theories which could explain things but not 100%.
But once things got started we have a pretty good idea how thing evolved.
We'll never get proof of everything, that's a fact for now.
Nature can show us at any minute that has the power to create new beings and species without any help from God.
Leave a peach to rotten and all of a sudden you get newly born worms and flies.
These newly formed beings are so sophisticated that we "humans" with all our new technology cannot come close to clone.
They seem like little miracles but they were created from a totally natural process that science can easily explain.
No need for God.
At a bigger scale you can project and realize that nature is a really powerful thing.
The fact that we don't quite understand it doesn't mean a God had to be involved in the process.
That is just a cop out when something cannot be explained.
I a few words:
Things don't happen by acts of magic but by natural evolution and following natural processes that we don't always understand and that we cannot always prove scientifically.
Reply

Eric H
09-15-2020, 09:02 PM
Greetings and peace be with you Eddy;

format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
Nature can show us at any minute that has the power to create new beings and species without any help from God.
Leave a peach to rotten and all of a sudden you get newly born worms and flies.
With all due respect, this explains nothing, worms and flies lay eggs in rotten fruit, then babies are born.

format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
The fact that we don't quite understand it doesn't mean a God had to be involved in the process.
Three billion years ago, there was just single cell life. Evolution cannot explain how the eye and the skeletal system came to be purely by natural causes.

In the spirit of searching for God,

Eric
Reply

Eddy
09-15-2020, 11:43 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eric H
Three billion years ago, there was just single cell life. Evolution cannot explain how the eye and the skeletal system came to be purely by natural causes.
Evolution could explain it if "evolution" could speak for itself, unfortunately is us humans who cannot explain how the eye and the skeletal system came to be from natural processes.
Don't blame evolution's lack of communication skills for our ignorance.
You can go back step by step from the present to the past and everything can be explained very neatly but as soon as you reach a point (in this case three billion years) when your ignorance block you from the truth and then you hit the panic button and scream "there's no way" this couldn't be done by nature itself.
How illogical is that?
That's where religion comes in handy.
How can I blame you?
God has all the answers you're incapable of finding by yourself.
It's human nature.
You're not alone.
Reply

Eric H
09-16-2020, 12:47 PM
Greetings and peace be with you Eddy,

format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
unfortunately is us humans who cannot explain how the eye and the skeletal system came to be from natural processes.
Again, we don't know - you don't know.

format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
You can go back step by step from the present to the past and everything can be explained very neatly but as soon as you reach a point (in this case three billion years)
If you think you can go back step by step to three billion years ago, then you would be able to explain how the eye and the skeletal system evolved - but you can't.

format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
God has all the answers you're incapable of finding by yourself
I rely on science, and science does not have convincing evidence of how the universe and life happened by natural causes. Science has no convincing evidence for the evolution of the eye and the skeletal system.

That leaves faith and trust in God, that is all we need.

In the spirit of searching for God,
Eric
Reply

Eddy
09-16-2020, 01:23 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eric H
I rely on science, and science does not have convincing evidence of how the universe and life happened by natural causes. Science has no convincing evidence for the evolution of the eye and the skeletal system.

That leaves faith and trust in God, that is all we need.
True, there's no conclusive evidence but there are theories that are very credible and logical about both: the eye and skeletal system.
Those theories are a lot more convincing than the leap of faith needed to believe in the existence of a creator

So you said you rely on science.
And you said "science does not have convincing evidence of how the universe and life happened by natural causes."
So that turns you into believing in God.

Since you rely on science:
Does science have convincing evidence of how the universe and life happened by means of a creator?
Are you aware of the double standards in your thinking?
Reply

Eric H
09-16-2020, 03:11 PM
Greetings and peace be with you Eddy

format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
True, there's no conclusive evidence but there are theories that are very credible and logical about both: the eye and skeletal system.
When you don't have conclusive evidence, you need faith to believe something is true. So all you have is faith in a theory, nothing more.

In the spirit of searching for God,
Eric
Reply

Shayan'M'
05-22-2021, 01:30 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
That is what a Muslim said on a thread called "Saying "Islām Is A Religion of Peace"...?"I wasn't allowed to respond to it because I'm not a Muslim so I had to open this thread.Anti muslim apologists are quick to bring up Quran 9:29 to defeat that line of thinking.SAHIH INTERNATIONALFight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture - [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.I am not that quick to make cheap accusations, I like to make my own little research before saying anything.I have to admit, the (anti) muslim apologists are not that wrong after all.I missed the word in parenthesis in the original post. At that time the Forum didn't give me the option to edit the text.
Islam" is derived from the Arabic word "sal'm" which. literally means peace. The religion demonstrates peace and tolerance.

there are good and bad people even among us Muslims

but those who follow the real teaching / scripture Quran and verified hadith / words of the last and final prophet of Allah , prophet Mohammad sallallahu alayhi wa sallam they are among the good

Let's clear the miss understanding caused by Sahih international

We are to convince people to accept that their lord is Allah same as ours and prophet Mohammad sallallahu alayhi wa sallam is the last and final messenger / prophet of Allah .

many religions such Christianity also believes in judgement

We are to convince the people do good deeds as its better for them and world

for example planting a tree is good deed

prophet Mohammad sallallahu alayhi wa sallam told us Muslims to plant trees

Look at the effects on current global warming on humans and other beings

When forests die many of animals go extinct

As for unlawful at time of prophet Mohammad sallallahu alayhi wa sallam there were barely any Muslims

he never used force he convinced people to stop

such as wine / alcohol when we read about it it's bad for health

It also causes stress in family / relationships like physical abuse done on women when drunk

It is prohibited / unlawful in Islam

Adultery breaks modesty of society isn't it better to love and get married stay loyal and honest to each other

in our time we barely see any true love but in past there was

In western society most couples last only a few months and often complain about cheating

In Islam adultery is unlawful

As for we fight as last resort

Suppose someone is trying to rape the person you extremely care about ,

Would you just sit and watch or fight to stop that person

Maybe you will fight

Similarly we Muslims will fight

Suppose your country goes to war and other country the invader is killing the citizens

If you are patriot you will fight for country or at least fight to protect your household / family

similarly we Muslims will fight

most of the western society dont believe in any religion / dont care

Where as we Muslims everywhere care a lot about religion

the amount of respect you have for your parents multiple it by 100 at least that's how much we respect prophet Mohammad sallallahu alayhi wa sallam

when some non Muslim disrespects him it truly breaks our heart and since we are human being too in emotion we sometimes go berserk

isn't it better to understand the emotions and respect it of every human

sadly many non Muslims dont do that .
Reply

Shayan'M'
05-22-2021, 02:04 AM
Addition as for Quran 9:29 the fight mentioned was held during the time of prophet Mohammad sallallahu alayhi wa sallam when the non Muslims were trying to kill us all so we were commanded to fight back

Its not fight a non Muslim all the time

Surah At-Taubah =9 Verse 32:
يُرِيدُونَ أَن يُطْفِئُوا نُورَ اللَّهِ بِأَفْوَاهِهِمْ وَيَأْبَى اللَّهُ إِلَّا أَن يُتِمَّ نُورَهُ وَلَوْ كَرِهَ الْكَافِرُونَ

They (the disbelievers, the Jews and the Christians) want to extinguish Allah's Light (with which Muhammad SAW has been sent - Islamic Monotheism) with their mouths, but Allah will not allow except that His Light should be perfected even though the Kafirun (disbelievers) hate (it).
Reply

Shayan'M'
05-22-2021, 02:13 AM
Another translation of the above mentioned verse of 9:32

They want to extinguish God's [guiding] light with their utterances: but God will not allow [this to pass], for He has willed to spread His light in all its fullness, however hateful this may be to all who deny the truth.

Surah At-Taubah, Verse 31:
اتَّخَذُوا أَحْبَارَهُمْ وَرُهْبَانَهُمْ أَرْبَابًا مِّن دُونِ اللَّهِ وَالْمَسِيحَ ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ وَمَا أُمِرُوا إِلَّا لِيَعْبُدُوا إِلَٰهًا وَاحِدًا لَّا إِلَٰهَ إِلَّا هُوَ سُبْحَانَهُ عَمَّا يُشْرِكُونَ

They (Jews and Christians) took their rabbis and their monks to be their lords besides Allah (by obeying them in things which they made lawful or unlawful according to their own desires without being ordered by Allah), and (they also took as their Lord) Messiah, son of Maryam (Mary), while they (Jews and Christians) were commanded [in the Taurat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel)) to worship none but One Ilah (God - Allah) La ilaha illa Huwa (none has the right to be worshipped but Allah). Praise and glory be to Allah, (far above is Allah) from having the partners they associate (with Allah)."

Always read the entire surah instead of just one ayat to better understand the context
Reply

Eddy
01-20-2022, 06:42 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Shayan'M'
Addition as for Quran 9:29 the fight mentioned was held during the time of prophet Mohammad sallallahu alayhi wa sallam when the non Muslims were trying to kill us all so we were commanded to fight back

Its not fight a non Muslim all the time
I couldn't help to notice that Quran 9:29 it's been understood to be about a battle.
Specifically refers to the battle of Tabuk but as I understand there was no battle of Tabuk but an expedition of Tabuk.
Did Allah send a revelation advicing Muslims how to react about something that never happened?
Reply

Ümit
01-20-2022, 12:09 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Eddy
I couldn't help to notice that Quran 9:29 it's been understood to be about a battle.
Specifically refers to the battle of Tabuk but as I understand there was no battle of Tabuk but an expedition of Tabuk.
Did Allah send a revelation advicing Muslims how to react about something that never happened?
Where did you read it refers specifically to the battle of Tabuk? Are you trying to play word games with us?

It refers to the event that took place in Tabuk.
A war was anounced...the Muslims marched to Tabuk to fight with the Romans
When they arrived, they discovered that the Romans fled.
They waited 20 days and returned home.

So no battle took actually place.
Reply

Eddy
01-20-2022, 12:53 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Ümit
It refers to the event that took place in Tabuk.
A war was anounced...the Muslims marched to Tabuk to fight with the Romans
When they arrived, they discovered that the Romans fled.
They waited 20 days and returned home.

So no battle took actually place.
You would be surprised how many times I was told that applied only to the battle of Tabuk and was also told that this revelation only applied to this specific battle and is not to be used otherwise.
I was all this time under the believe that was the case until recently I read there was actually no battle of Tabuk and then all started to circle around my brain.
Wait a minute, so there was no battle of Tabuk.
But Allah (who is all knowing) knew there would be no battle of Tabuk. Am I right?
So why send a revelation advicing Muslims to "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day,......"?
It make no sense.
Unless the revelation was not meant to be used only during the expedition of Tabuk.
Anyway who are the scholars that came up with the idea this was only meant to this specific time?
The Quran doesn't give any clue it is meant only at that specific time.
Some people tell me there is no way Allah sent this revelation.
Some even say this is a human made revelation.
Some extremist scholars I'm sure are using this kind of revelation and giving Islam a bad name.
It makes no sense.
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 13
    Last Post: 11-24-2018, 03:32 AM
  2. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 02-02-2016, 07:52 AM
  3. Replies: 13
    Last Post: 02-07-2008, 09:27 AM
  4. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-29-2005, 11:25 AM
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Holiday in the Maldives

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!