Not every group that uses the name "Church" is Christian.

[Woodrow]

The Church of Satan are generaly regarded as being Satanists. However I think most of the members only belong to it for shock value and do not participate in the rituals associated with most Satanists.

 

[Goku]

I see, Jazak Allah Khair Brother Woodrow.

I came upon a Satanist website in the past, they had a list of things they believed in, one of which they said was "We worship the one true EDIT, so who dares worship the EDIT?" That shocked me a bit, and they do have odd rituals.

 

[north_malaysian]

There are about 7,000 "Satanists" in Malaysia, all ex-Muslims. The most hardcore of all are known as J.I.T (Jangan Ikut Tuhan - "Dont Follow God").

Among their rituals:

1) They start their ritual with "Bismi Ibliss Ir Rahman Ir Rahim" (In the name of Devil, the Most Gracious and Merciful)

2) They desecrate the Koran page by page, and put it in the middle, and the circling it.

3) Then they'll step on those pages of Koran and say "Dengan ini kami Murtad" (With this act we became Apostates).

4) Then some girls would lying naked on that pile of koranic pages, and each male member would have sex with those girls on it.

5) Lastly they would urinate on that pile of koranic pages and burn it.

Last year, there's a vcd circulated in northern malaysia region depicting those despicable act. It's soooo popular because people just want to see the sex scene.

 

[snakelegs]

interesting!
so these would be the muslim equivalent - instead of leaving islam, they are worshipping its antithesis - a childish rebellion.

 

[north_malaysian]

interesting!
so these would be the muslim equivalent - instead of leaving islam, they are worshipping its antithesis - a childish rebellion.

This Satanists made Muslims in Malaysia worry... first they burnt the Koran, who knows in the future they might burns th mosques, kill the imams.

Do you know how they recruit schoolchildren? They ask those innocent kids to burn a coin and make an "Antichrist" symbol tattoo on their hands... by telling those kids that they will be excelled in their exams. While the girls are advised to wear Antichrist necklace (hide under their hijab)...

 

[Grace Seeker]

Do you know how they recruit schoolchildren? They ask those innocent kids to burn a coin and make an "Antichrist" symbol tattoo on their hands... by telling those kids that they will be excelled in their exams. While the girls are advised to wear Antichrist necklace (hide under their hijab)...

Which begs the following questions:

1) What do you, a Muslim mean, when you refer to the "Antichrist". I know that you believe that Jesus (pbuh) was a prophet. Do you also believe that Jesus was also THE CHRIST, the Messiah the Jews had been waiting for?

2) And then do you mean the same thing by "Antichrist" that Christians do -- someone who is the antithesis of the glorified Christ (swt), not just the antithesis of the man Jesus -- or do you mean something different?

 

[north_malaysian]

Which begs the following questions:

1) What do you, a Muslim mean, when you refer to the "Antichrist". I know that you believe that Jesus (pbuh) was a prophet. Do you also believe that Jesus was also THE CHRIST, the Messiah the Jews had been waiting for?

2) And then do you mean the same thing by "Antichrist" that Christians do -- someone who is the antithesis of the glorified Christ (swt), not just the antithesis of the man Jesus -- or do you mean something different?

I am referring to Western Satanists concept of antichrist... because these ex Muslim Satanists took this concept from them.

For me, Jesus is the Messiah...

 

[Abdul Fattah]

Interesting thought, as most of you might have heared the catholic pope visited the orthodox patriarch and they have tried building bridges. I was wondering anybody thinks they could grow closer then this and eventually even "merge" toghether or is this (aknowledging one another) about as far as they are able to go?

 

[Woodrow]

Interesting thought, as most of you might have heared the catholic pope visited the orthodox patriarch and they have tried building bridges. I was wondering anybody thinks they could grow closer then this and eventually even "merge" toghether or is this (aknowledging one another) about as far as they are able to go?

Until there is a mutual understanding of the Nature of Isa(as) there is no possible way for any merger. However, I can see more tolerance towards each other and more understanding as to what is being said.

Even within Christianity there is much disagreement over the Nature of Isa(as) that will have to be resolved among themselves before there can be any actual dialogue between Muslim and all Christians. At the moment I would say there are some Christian denominations that are better to understand the beliefs of us. And there are some Denominations that are absolutly unable to see past their own concepts.

For true understanding and dialogue I believe the best understandings will be with the Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, and Anglican Protestants. However, I believe those 3 need to mend there own differences before they can speak on behalf of Christianity, otherwise there will never be any mutual agreement with all Christians as to what Islam actually teaches.

In Christianity I would say the Christians who are the closest to and have the better understanding of Islam are the Coptics. The Coptics hold true to many Islamic beliefs and in Egypt it is very difficult to distinguish between coptic and Muslim.

The Next closest would be The Catholics. In spite of their insistence of having Statues in the Church.

The Catholics do not believe in a one time forgiveness of sin and believe that forgiveness needs to be constantly asked for and worked for. the Catholics also tend to believe in the necessity to do good deeds to gain the mercy of God(swt) Although Catholics were the ones to introduce the concept of the trinity to Christinanity, the concept does differ from the concept followed by many other Christians. Most Catholics will direct their prayers to God(swt) directly and not through Isa(as)

 

[YusufNoor]

Most Catholics will direct their prayers to God(swt) directly and not through Isa(as)
______

erm, except when they are praying the "Hail Mary" ^o)

 

[Woodrow]

erm, except when they are praying the "Hail Mary" ^o)

True.

However I do not think the hail Mary is intended to be a prayer. It is not a prayer directed to her. It is asking her to pray on the behalf of Catholics.

I will agree that it is still an erroneous thing as no person can intercede for us.

 

[Grace Seeker]

True.

I will agree that it is still an erroneous thing as no person can intercede for us.

Yet, I just read another thread where a Muslim speaks of Muhammad (pbuh) intercedeing for us.

(I need to learn how to link to an actual post.)

 

[Grace Seeker]

Interesting thought, as most of you might have heared the catholic pope visited the orthodox patriarch and they have tried building bridges. I was wondering anybody thinks they could grow closer then this and eventually even "merge" toghether or is this (aknowledging one another) about as far as they are able to go?

Hard to say at this point in time. There are many denominations that have already merged. The division between the RCC and the Orthodox goes back a long way. Even though theologically they are very close together, the political differences and structure of the two groups is such that it might be hard to meld together at this point in time. My best guess, is that they will continue in dialogue for a couple of generations, and then once the comfort level is built up and natural anxieties are lessened, some future generation will be the one to move them into full reconciliation.

 

[YusufNoor]

Yet, I just read another thread where a Muslim speaks of Muhammad (pbuh) intercedeing for us.
(I need to learn how to link to an actual post.)

Salaam,

but we don't pray TO him, we pray FOR him!

you know, honestly, i NEVER got it when Jesus said it either, BUT Islam explains it.

on the Day of Judgement, The Eternal Creator G-d, Allah(SWT) to Muslims, the prophets will each have the abillity to intercede on behalf of their "umma".

thus, MAYBE, Insha' Allah , the Rasool Allah(SAWS) may save some of us from the "fire". Jesus/Isa(as) will have the same opportunity with his umma, as will all the other Prophets(as).

each Prophet(as) will be asked about his umma.

 

[GARY]

Salaam,

But the question is this..

If they refer to themselves as christians.....who are we to say they are not?

I mean if i were to have a debate with a chritian of different sect,as you pointed out,anglican,catholics,mormon and so on...and each say they are the rightly guided ones,,,,who are we to say they are wrong?Each believe that each is right.

But at the core i would say is if the group uses the bible then can they be termed christians.
But then again,every sect have their own bible...

So again,it is awfully easy to be misled..

It is same as in Islam,,,sunni shia and so on,we have different schools of thinking but at the core is the Quran,Allah and Propeht Muhammad saw...

We are all muslim,but you encounter some Saudi sunni who follow their brand of Islam claiming other as not Islam and so on...

This post caught my attention. It raises some important questions. On a subtle level, and sometimes not so subtle, many muslims claim that those that call themselves for example, 'shia', are not muslims at all. In a sense, the statement is very similiar to the title of this thread; Not every group that uses the name 'muslim' is muslim.

It is safe to say that many muslims do not consider some, or all of the following groups to be muslim;Sunnis(majority, but some from the other groups would say not true muslims),
Shia,
W ahhabi(who consider all others to not follow the quran strictly enough),
Kharijites(less common these days),
Ismailis,
Khojas-a.k.a Hashshashin('assassin'-smoke hash and set out to kill christians)- a sub-group of Ismailis,
Sufi,
Baha'is,
Zikri,
Ahmadiyya,
and more...
If they refer to themselves as muslims.....who are we to say they are not?
At the core i would say is if the group uses the quran they can be termed muslims.

Are there any people here that consider all of these as muslim? Some? only one?

If these other sects (not sunni) which are growing at incredible rates, were the major contributing factor to the world growth of islam, would those of you that don't consider them muslim still think islam was the fastest growing religion? I mean if it were that it were actually mostly the other sects contributing and not the majority sunni.

 

[GARY]

Major technical problems while posting my last post. Have fixed it to the best of my memory, but I believe I have lost my main point... *sigh*...

 

[Skillganon]

This post caught my attention. It raises some important questions. On a subtle level, and sometimes not so subtle, many muslims claim that those that call themselves for example, 'shia', are not muslims at all. In a sense, the statement is very similiar to the title of this thread; Not every group that uses the name 'muslim' is muslim.

It is safe to say that many muslims do not consider some, or all of the following groups to be muslim;Sunnis(majority, but some from the other groups would say not true muslims),
Shia,
W ahhabi(who consider all others to not follow the quran strictly enough),
Kharijites(less common these days),
Ismailis,
Khojas-a.k.a Hashshashin('assassin'-smoke hash and set out to kill christians)- a sub-group of Ismailis,
Sufi,
Baha'is,
Zikri,
Ahmadiyya,

--------------------------------------------------------------
We don't exactly clasify all of them as non-muslims.

I can say safely Bahai are not, they have their own book, and accept all the books e.t.c as valid.
Bahai is more of a religion itself, not exactly a sect of Islam. Accept as Bahullah as a divine messenger (something similiar to that)

We all can say safely Ahmadiyaa and Qadiani are not, for similiar reason Bahai are not.
We have been warned against Kharijites.

In a sense the majority of the muslim are W ahhabi (by correct definition) and I am gathering many here in this forum even if they don't know what that words entail. It's not a sect, but more of a movement.

The word has been miss-construed by over night so called expert in the political arena.

We have a "Sect & Division" section on this forum so check it out for info on this various sects.

 

[GARY]

This post caught my attention. It raises some important questions. On a subtle level, and sometimes not so subtle, many muslims claim that those that call themselves for example, 'shia', are not muslims at all. In a sense, the statement is very similiar to the title of this thread; Not every group that uses the name 'muslim' is muslim.

It is safe to say that many muslims do not consider some, or all of the following groups to be muslim;Sunnis(majority, but some from the other groups would say not true muslims),
Shia,
W ahhabi(who consider all others to not follow the quran strictly enough),
Kharijites(less common these days),
Ismailis,
Khojas-a.k.a Hashshashin('assassin'-smoke hash and set out to kill christians)- a sub-group of Ismailis,
Sufi,
Baha'is,
Zikri,
Ahmadiyya,

--------------------------------------------------------------

I can say Bahai are not, they have their own book, and accept all the books e.t.c as valid.

We all can say safely Ahmadiyaa and Qadiani are not.
We have been warned against Karijatte.

We have a secterian
In a sense the majority of the muslim are *******s and I am gathering many here in this forum even if they don't know what that words entail.

The word has been miss-construed by over night so called expert in the political arena.

We have a "Sect & Division" section on this forum so check it out for info on this various sects.

I understand what you say, and have a few comparisons. First, this is the mirror statement of what other sects say. You can find members of other sects that will say much the same about your particular beliefs. Some will reject certain hadith that you accept, and vice-versa.
Second comparison, many Christians say the same things. They say that certain group reads the Bible incorrectly to say this, while it actually says that, and vice-versa.
The point is, while many muslims claim that islam is not plagued with the same 'sect problem' as christianity, I beg to differ. The similarity is obvious. Muslims and Christians both have sects. Each sect of each religion claims to be correct while others are wrong, and both claim there is only one path.

There is a parallel to nearly all points made by any sect on either side, in a point made in any other sect, regardless of which side this other sect comes from.

 

[Skillganon]

I understand what you say, and have a few comparisons. First, this is the mirror statement of what other sects say. You can find members of other sects that will say much the same about your particular beliefs. Some will reject certain hadith that you accept, and vice-versa.
Second comparison, many Christians say the same things. They say that certain group reads the Bible incorrectly to say this, while it actually says that, and vice-versa.
The point is, while many muslims claim that islam is not plagued with the same 'sect problem' as christianity, I beg to differ. The similarity is obvious. Muslims and Christians both have sects. Each sect of each religion claims to be correct while others are wrong, and both claim there is only one path.

There is a parallel to nearly all points made by any sect on either side, in a point made in any other sect, regardless of which side this other sect comes from.

Christian sectarian issue is not same as Islamic Sectarian issue.

Firstly I have to problem with the list. Bahai's are not a sect of Islam neither do they claim to be muslim.

W ahabhi is not a sect of Islam it's more of a movement. They follow the Sunnah.

Secondly Ahmadiyahh/Qadiani are later innovations that came way later. Their theology was never practiced in the past, same for bahai's. we can safely say they have no bearing.

We do have sect's however it is not so a wide thing as one make it out to be. We more of have a problem with bidah & Shirk due to ignorance.

 

[GARY]

Christian sectarian issue is not same as Islamic Sectarian issue.

Firstly I have to problem with the list. Bahai's are not a sect of Islam neither do they claim to be muslim.

W ahabhi is not a sect of Islam it's more of a movement. They follow the Sunnah.

Secondly Ahmadiyahh/Qadiani are later innovations that came way later. Their theology was never practiced in the past, same for bahai's. we can safely say they have no bearing.

We do have sect's however it is not so a wide thing as one make it out to be. We more of have a problem with bidah & Shirk due to ignorance.

I somewhat agree with you on the Bahai faith. I included it because the founder used the teachings of Muhammad as a launchpad, however I was incorrect to classify it as muslim. I agree, it is 'technically' not. I would disagree about Ahmadiyahh unless the same considerations for classifying sects were given to christians sects that came later. In other words, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. Fair is fair. If we are to disregard "later innovations", then we can quickly whittle down both religions to a couple of core sects.

Christian sectarian issue is not same as Islamic Sectarian issue.

Once again, I beg to differ.




I purposely left others out. I can provide a full list if you like. (it will have to wait though, I have to go for a while)