Could forum Muslims please explain how Islam is a religion of peace

[Johnathan]

Under whose testimony is it a geographical impossibility?

Under the testimony of the God of the scriptures. The God of the Bible gave us a demographically and geographically perfectly reasonable account from the Holy Land of the prophets and patriarchs, that is confirmed by historical and archaeological evidence.
In the 7th-10th centuries AD Muhammad's followers created a demographically and geographically impossible, scripture-contrary, anti-history.

You believe Moses split the sea and Noah built a ship to house all animals and survive a flood which wiped out humanity as it was known but find it an impossibility for a chosen messenger of God to cross the desert or dig a well? ;D

According to the accounts in scripture Abraham was never within 1,000 kilometers of where Mecca was eventually settled in the 4th century AD. Add in the fact that there is not a shred of evidence that suggests Mecca existed prior to the 4th century AD, and I will take the accounts in scripture that are backed by the historical and archaeological evidence as well as fulfilled prophecy.

you're a hoot, not to mention under educated it is almost an insult to engage you!

all the best,

 

[Johnathan]

When you have been on the board long enough, ya kinda get tired of repeating it

...sure it evolves we wernt rocket scientists to begin with..
Although I'm sure the world has seen better people.

Its not a contradiction of terms.

It is unique because every revelation is a story in itself.. It has its own miraculous nature.

The Quran is not a legacy, its a book of god.

If you can grasp that then its easier to not disrespect it.. Or to appreciate it a little more.

It can't really be compared to those other examples you mentioned.. They may have the age but its the nature of revelation and transcription that I talked about.

Does god not live in translations? Or those that didn't know the language.

The leeway given to monotheism seems great in my eyes.

There isn't "leeway" in the God of the scriptures eyes.
There was a monotheistic sect of Sabian/Harannian moon god worshipers. Just because their moon god worship was monotheistic, did not make it right.

The Quran mentions sabiens and there discription is a broad one..

Depends how broadly you define god. but that's how I approach it.

Perhaps you might agree that defining Him as the god of the moon is not an option. At least it certainly isn't according to the scriptures.

From thousands of years away.

Not sure about self interest..

Have you read all the posts about an open heart?

If all converts were conscripts then maybe submission comes before belief.

But hearts and minds can be won I suppose.


You talk about Muslims saying that the Jews and Christians became corrupt.

Please reread the post. I said they claim the Gospel became corrupted. This was in answer to your post comment:

What is specific and quiet unique is the method and transcription of revelation.
...would a politician or preacher or imam ever back track if he knew there was a transcription kept?
Even harder to do so.

What I pointed out is we have transcripts of the OT that date from before the Christian era, and we have 5300 partial or complete transcripts of the Gospel that date prior to 300 AD, yet in spite of the fact that all of the translations of the Gospel in all those languages tell the same story, Muhammad's followers deny the whole subject of the Gospel. Since they must reject the whole subject of the Gospel, they are left with little choice but to proclaim the Gospel to be corrupt, even though their own messenger told the people of the Gospel to go by what is revealed therein.

And yet you started the thread.. Title says everything.

Religions can be hijacked.

The question is how and by whom? For example, when and how did the order "(by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle", become nullified?

Islam faces the same problems as any other that has passed before it.

...ain't it an obvious test? Get your head around it and self righteousness goes out the window.

Or is heaven only for the Jews? Christians? Or Muslims?

According to the scriptures, it's about what a person knows. Where there is no law there is no transgression. So if a remote tribesman has never been brought the Gospel or otherwise been quickened by the Spirit of God, or a person is too young or mentally incapacitated to understand, they would be incapable of transgressing a law they couldn't understand.
However if a person learns and understands the Gospel is about the crucifixion, death and resurrection of the Son of God, and then disbelieves the crucifixion of the Messiah, and rejects the sin atoning shed blood of the Lamb of God, and denies the Son of God, it would of course be a different matter.

But saying and doing are two different things aren't they?

Indeed. So besides going over the top in a few details, what is The Islamic State doing that is inconsistent with Surah 9:29?

 

[Johnathan]

Jonathan is there religious freedom, liberty and self determination in the bible?

Those who the Son sets free are free indeed.

Islam is probably the only religion that has "No compulsion in religion" and Surat Kaffarun - Both show freedom of religion, Liberty and self determination.

I replied to that contradiction in the post regarding abrogation:
http://www.islamicboard.com/clarifi...m-religion-peace-post2842940.html#post2842940

Islamic history and at least 9 Islamic nation states also reply to it, with the death penalty by state statute, for "apostasy". Along with 54 mainly Islamic nation states banning or restricting the Gospel, doesn't really suggest freedom of religion to me. Does it to you?

It doesn't matter if they are Meccan or median - the whole Quran is to be followed. End of.

A two-headed dog can't hunt. How doesn't one have to choose between the "no compulsion" verse of Muhammad's early pre-Hijra Mecca days, or that revealed in the second to last chapter in order of revelation, to fight and slay as a promise binding on Muhammad's followers in the Quran (9:29), in respect to the doctrine of substitution or replacement in 2:106? When as you suggest "the whole Quran is to be followed". Your argument isn't with me, but with fundamentalists, that follow the whole Quran.

I Echo جوري - How in Gods earth can you call 1200 miles an impossibility when you have no problem in believing in the splitting of the sea, the resurrection of Christ, the miracles of Christ etc etc?? Sounds stupid to me.

Because Islam's 8th-10th century penned "tradition" is an anti-history, to that of the 1600 year record of YHWH to mankind that is supported by the historical and archaeological record, as well as fulfilled prophecy and the mathematical precision thereof. Nobody could even bring historical or archaeological evidence that suggests that Mecca existed before the 4th century AD (like the archaeological evidence we have for actual ancient Arabian towns), let alone 4500 years worth of such evidence.
http://www.islamicboard.com/general/134325153-mecca-christian-era.html#post2842185
Compare that absence of evidence with the archaeological record of Jerusalem and the Holy Land of the prophets and patriarchs.

Your main question Got answered on the first page.

Then when and how did the order, "(by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle", become nullified?

 

[M.I.A.]

There isn't "leeway" in the God of the scriptures eyes.
There was a monotheistic sect of Sabian/Harannian moon god worshipers. Just because their moon god worship was monotheistic, did not make it right.



Perhaps you might agree that defining Him as the god of the moon is not an option. At least it certainly isn't according to the scriptures.



Please reread the post. I said they claim the Gospel became corrupted. This was in answer to your post comment:



What I pointed out is we have transcripts of the OT that date from before the Christian era, and we have 5300 partial or complete transcripts of the Gospel that date prior to 300 AD, yet in spite of the fact that all of the translations of the Gospel in all those languages tell the same story, Muhammad's followers deny the whole subject of the Gospel. Since they must reject the whole subject of the Gospel, they are left with little choice but to proclaim the Gospel to be corrupt, even though their own messenger told the people of the Gospel to go by what is revealed therein.



The question is how and by whom? For example, when and how did the order "(by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle", become nullified?



According to the scriptures, it's about what a person knows. Where there is no law there is no transgression. So if a remote tribesman has never been brought the Gospel or otherwise been quickened by the Spirit of God, or a person is too young or mentally incapacitated to understand, they would be incapable of transgressing a law they couldn't understand.
However if a person learns and understands the Gospel is about the crucifixion, death and resurrection of the Son of God, and then disbelieves the crucifixion of the Messiah, and rejects the sin atoning shed blood of the Lamb of God, and denies the Son of God, it would of course be a different matter.



Indeed. So besides going over the top in a few details, what is The Islamic State doing that is inconsistent with Surah 9:29?

your definition of sabien does not fit in with mine...

and therein lies the rub.


which is the better definition and why?

which one is detrimental to peace and why?



its relevant because of your thread title.

feel free to find the quranic verse and make of it what you will.

i feel your tone is beyond reasoning with now so i cant really respond to anything else you brought up.

 

[Johnathan]

your definition of sabien does not fit in with mine...

and therein lies the rub.

You can wish it was anything you like, but if you've ever read the Gospel you should easily recognize that any description of the Sabians that exists, would be preposterous to associate with Christianity.

which is the better definition and why?

which one is detrimental to peace and why?

its relevant because of your thread title.

feel free to find the quranic verse and make of it what you will.

i feel your tone is beyond reasoning with now so i cant really respond to anything else you brought up.

Is that really why you didn't want to respond to my question?
Isn't it reasonable for me to inquire as to when and how the order, "(by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle", became nullified?

 

[sister herb]

I don´t believe that we could ever find the answer which will satisfy this troll. He has decided not to accept anything except his own prejudices. I wonder is it even necessary to spend time to answer his endless "questions".

Anyone who reads the Quran, can feels the message of love and peace from Allah to people, if his mind and heart are open to this message. May Allah opens the heart of this "troll" and makes his mind ready to understand Islam better.

It would be a beautiful path.