The Islamic Thread 2

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Sultan

Banned
Feb 21, 2002
2,297
1
0
Originally posted by: realsup

More from your link

By 719 Muslims controlled most of the Iberian Peninsula. The Moors, as the Muslim conquerors came to be known, pushed northward into France, where their advance was repelled near Poitiers by Frankish leader Charles Martel in 732. The Moors then retreated south of the Pyrenees, and for the next several centuries they dominated nearly all of Spain.

At first Islamic Spain, or al-Andalus, as it was known, was ruled as part of the Province of North Africa, a division of the caliphate of Damascus. At that time Damascus, in modern Syria, was the capital of the Islamic world and the residence of the powerful Umayyad caliphs (religious and secular leaders). The power of the caliphate in Spain was weak, however, and governors (emirs) appointed by Damascus had little real authority. In 750 the Abbasids deposed the Umayyad ruling family in Damascus and claimed the caliphate.



The caliphate is exactly what Bin Laden and the wahhabi islamists are trying to bring back.
The caliphates waged Jihad to untie the world under Islamic law as the leader of the muslims.


There is no denying Jihad was waged centurys before the first crusade.

where do you see the word Jihad in the above text? and so what? Muslims dont raise hue and cry about the Crusades, as evidenced from the aforementioned link. Besides, you dont hear of tales of the city being ankle deep in blood when the Crusaders slaughtered 60,000 innocent people.

and hey, just to let you know, a majority of Muslims would like to have the Caliphate back, and it has nothing to do with Bin Laden.

Jihad cannot by definition be waged with the Muslims being the aggressor or acted upon without a direct or implied threat.
 
Aug 14, 2001
11,061
0
0
Originally posted by: Sultan
Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
Hence, it is not permissible for a Muslim to marry a polytheist/idol worshipper. Furthermore, only a Muslim male is allowed to marry a non-Muslim, and that only when the non-Muslim woman is from the People of the Book, i.e., a Jew or a Christian.

Why the difference in a Muslim man being able to marry a non-Muslim and a Muslim woman not being able to marry one?

And why is being a non-'person of the book' apparently so offensive?

I still have these questions that have not been answered:

1. Why is it OK to kill apostates? I'm not sure why killing someone for changing religions is acceptable.

2. Are there any clauses that say that women must be submissive to men in any form, similar to how some people quote from the bible?

lets give everyone a chance, yeah? im just one person answering everything (for now). i'll get to your questions in time, though i dont see a purpose answering you... but then again, it might help others

If you want to wait some time to answer my questions then that is fine. However, I think a lot of people probably don't know about the issues regarding apostasy and would be interested in reading about it, as would I in terms of more clarification in regards to it.
 

Sultan

Banned
Feb 21, 2002
2,297
1
0
Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
Originally posted by: Sultan
Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
Hence, it is not permissible for a Muslim to marry a polytheist/idol worshipper. Furthermore, only a Muslim male is allowed to marry a non-Muslim, and that only when the non-Muslim woman is from the People of the Book, i.e., a Jew or a Christian.

Why the difference in a Muslim man being able to marry a non-Muslim and a Muslim woman not being able to marry one?

And why is being a non-'person of the book' apparently so offensive?

I still have these questions that have not been answered:

1. Why is it OK to kill apostates? I'm not sure why killing someone for changing religions is acceptable.

2. Are there any clauses that say that women must be submissive to men in any form, similar to how some people quote from the bible?

lets give everyone a chance, yeah? im just one person answering everything (for now). i'll get to your questions in time, though i dont see a purpose answering you... but then again, it might help others

If you want to wait some time to answer my questions then that is fine. However, I think a lot of people probably don't know about the issues regarding apostasy and would be interested in reading about it, as would I in terms of more clarification in regards to it.

Sure, I'll answer it, I got through 3 of your questions, yeah? Patience is a good virtue. You obviously got the answer to the question regarding apostasy, so I suspect you just wish to ask a loaded question again. Nonetheless, I'll elaborate on it further in time.
 

Corbett

Diamond Member
Jun 8, 2005
3,074
0
76
from which propaganda site did you pull the above quotes? Do you not know that lines taken out of context can easily be misconstrued? if Muslims are truly told to kill non-Muslims, why are so many non-Muslims alive?

Sorry but you need to provehow they are out of context rather then just screaming that they are. You are just another muslim that does not know what your Koran says and practice it because it is a "good way of life."
 

0roo0roo

No Lifer
Sep 21, 2002
64,795
84
91
meh more grasping at straws. best you can do is be an apologist for a ideology that is extremely flawed. no all knowing all powerful all loving god would have created such nonsense. best to just toss it all out the window. religion is ignorance sanctified, wake up.

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/index.html
http://www.answeringislam.org/NonMuslims/rights.htm
http://www.flex.com/~jai/satyamevajayate/index.html
http://jihadwatch.org
http://www.prophetofdoom.net/
http://www.faithfreedom.org
http://www.apostatesofislam.com/index.htm
http://answering-islam.org.uk/Index/A/apostasy.html
http://www.infidels.org
 

maluckey

Platinum Member
Jan 31, 2003
2,933
0
71
So the Muslim invasion of Spain was O.K. by Spain and Western Europe? The Muslims were surprised when they retaliated?

The Moors were not welcome guests on the peninsula, and were driven out as soon as was possible. The Knights Templar just returned the favor from the rest of the worlds POV.
 

Sultan

Banned
Feb 21, 2002
2,297
1
0
Originally posted by: Corbett
from which propaganda site did you pull the above quotes? Do you not know that lines taken out of context can easily be misconstrued? if Muslims are truly told to kill non-Muslims, why are so many non-Muslims alive?

Sorry but you need to provehow they are out of context rather then just screaming that they are. You are just another muslim that does not know what your Koran says and practice it because it is a "good way of life."

I'll try to prove one of your quotes out of context. I hope that suffices.
 

Sultan

Banned
Feb 21, 2002
2,297
1
0
Originally posted by: maluckey
So the Muslim invasion of Spain was O.K. by Spain and Western Europe? The Muslims were surprised when they retaliated?

The Moors were not welcome guests on the peninsula, and were driven out as soon as was possible. The Knights Templar just returned the favor from the rest of the worlds POV.

I think none of you are aware of the historical background of the Muslims coming to Spain. Actually, the Muslims came to the AID of Christians who believed in monotheism, rather than the trinitarian philosophy.

Furthermore, the Moor invasion was assisted by the natives of Hispania.

I cant believe there are so many illiterates on this forum, who dont even want to learn a little bit more about what they are claiming and just keep on going with ridiculous claims.

Please read more here: Wikipedia Link.

Regardless, what does the Crusades or Conquest of Spain have to do with Islam? They were events carried out by people. Do you believe that God ordained upon Muslims to invade Spain, just like God ordained Bush to invade Iraq? Please contribute maturely.
 

Sultan

Banned
Feb 21, 2002
2,297
1
0
Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
Hence, it is not permissible for a Muslim to marry a polytheist/idol worshipper. Furthermore, only a Muslim male is allowed to marry a non-Muslim, and that only when the non-Muslim woman is from the People of the Book, i.e., a Jew or a Christian.

Why the difference in a Muslim man being able to marry a non-Muslim and a Muslim woman not being able to marry one?

And why is being a non-'person of the book' apparently so offensive?

I still have these questions that have not been answered:

1. Why is it OK to kill apostates? I'm not sure why killing someone for changing religions is acceptable.

Answered
2. Are there any clauses that say that women must be submissive to men in any form, similar to how some people quote from the bible?

 

imported_Tango

Golden Member
Mar 8, 2005
1,623
0
0
Originally posted by: maluckey
So the Muslim invasion of Spain was O.K. by Spain and Western Europe? The Muslims were surprised when they retaliated?

The Moors were not welcome guests on the peninsula, and were driven out as soon as was possible. The Knights Templar just returned the favor from the rest of the worlds POV.


You are using Jihad and War as synonymes. They are not.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,589
5
0
Please clarify what you are defining as a Jihad?
 

imported_Tango

Golden Member
Mar 8, 2005
1,623
0
0
Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Please clarify what you are defining as a Jihad?


Jihad (jihad ????) is an Islamic term, from the Arabic root jhd ("to exert utmost effort, to strive, struggle"), which connotes a wide range of meanings: anything from an inward spiritual struggle to attain perfect faith to a political or military struggle to further the Islamic cause. The term is frequently mistranslated to mean "holy war" in English, although jihad can apply to warfare. Mainstream Muslims consider jihad to be the most misunderstood aspect of their religion by non-Muslims. The meaning of "Islamic cause" is of course open to interpretation. The Islamic religious legitimacy of the goals or methods of various Islamist movements who adopt the terminology of jihad is often brought into question, usually by moderate and liberal Muslims.

A person who engages in any form of jihad is called a "mujahid", meaning "striver" or "struggler", though this Islamic term is most often used to mean a person who engages in fighting. It is not limited to fighting or warfare however, a Muslim struggling to memorize the Qur'an is a mujahid, for example. The neologism jihadist is sometimes used to describe militant Islamic groups, including but not restricted to Islamist terrorism (c. f. Jihadist organizations and Rules of war in Islam).

or:

...to other analysts, however, the context of these verses is that of a specific "war in progress" and not a universally binding set of instructions upon the faithful. Regardless of the later implications of these portions of the Qur'an, the passages in question, at the time, clearly emphasized the importance of self-defense in the Muslim community.

It's something happening very often: one word having an original meaning start getting used in a different semantic frame until the reiterate use of the word in this misleading way self-reinforces the mistake, thus actually provoking a shift in the general accepted meaning.

Happened the same with the word "terrorism" and many other political theory words.
 

1prophet

Diamond Member
Aug 17, 2005
5,313
534
126
Is it better to be right among your brethren or do right and be cast out?
 

Sultan

Banned
Feb 21, 2002
2,297
1
0
Originally posted by: 1prophet
Is it better to be right among your brethren or do right and be cast out?

I dont follow your question. Can you please elaborate?
 

jpeyton

Moderator in SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones
Moderator
Aug 23, 2003
25,375
142
116
Also remember that there are many levels of faith, as there are with all religions.

It depends on societal influences, personal influences, etc.

Islamic law may be followed to the letter in some Islamic governments, but not in others.

Some Muslims take a very literal interpretation of the religion, while others adapt to modern times. Some hold on to all aspects of the religion, while others only hold on to some.

It's the same as comparing a very devout Catholic to a "holidays only" churchgoer. One might integrate their entire life with the teachings of the church and bible while the other might believe in God, but go about their lives nonchalantly while visiting church a few times a year.

So while Sultan's post may speak for one group of Muslims, another group may practice their faith differently.

Faith is a subjective thing. Nobody here knows what exists beyond our life here on Earth. Spiritual bliss for different people comes in different forms, and I think it would be very narrow minded for anybody here to condemn an entire group of people on what you supposedly believe is their way of thinking.

You don't truly know a person until you talk to them.

So many people think its a war with Christians against Muslims, but the fact is that I'm sure millions of rural villagers in Afghanistan could care less about fighting a war with the US as much as they care about working, eating, and raising their families. Just because they believe in Allah and were born into a Islamic nation does not mean they were our born enemies.

For example, on the subject of honor killings, I remember once reading a post by Sultan supporting them in certain cases. Well I strongly disagree with him, as do my Muslim friends (and their families overseas). So if you don't support honor killings (and my guess is that most of you wouldn't), you can show your disapproval to Sultan (or any other person, government, etc. that supports them), but please don't blanket the entire Muslim population of the world with your damnation for supporting honor killings because many of them don't. Many of them don't support suicide bombings, many don't support beheadings, many don't support al-Qaeda.

Even if we exaggerated the numbers of the worldwide network of Muslim terrorists and their support groups, we would get a number in the high six to low seven figures. Those terrorists would represent a few tenths of a percent of the worldwide Muslim population, which as of 2003 represented almost 1.5 billion people (or almost a quarter of the world's total population).
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,589
5
0
Originally posted by: Sultan
Originally posted by: 1prophet
Is it better to be right among your brethren or do right and be cast out?
I dont follow your question. Can you please elaborate?

Elaborated below


be right among your brethren
To follow what every one else is doing and be accepted by your local gang/family/society
do right and be cast out
To do what is morally right and be expelled by your local gang/family/society

 

PG

Diamond Member
Oct 25, 1999
3,426
44
91
I've seen this in The Table of the Quran in many english translations. Please explain:

52. O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust.

http://www.wam.umd.edu/~stwright/rel/islam/Quran/5.html



 

ahurtt

Diamond Member
Feb 1, 2001
4,283
0
0
Originally posted by: Sultan
Originally posted by: realsup
Originally posted by: Sultan
Originally posted by: realsup
Why do muslims blame Christians for the Crusades. Jihad was waged against Jews and Christians for hundreds of years before the 1st Crusade was waged against Muslims.

I'm sorry, where did you get this info? Which Jihads were waged against Jews and Christians for 'hundreds' of years?


http://www.mideastweb.org/islamhistory.htm

Just use google the info is easy to find. Unless you think muslims peacefully waged war against Spain in the 700's.

I'm sorry, but I find it hard to trust a website registered under Israel as a non-biased source of information. Why dont you read more about what Muslims think about the Crusades here: Link

Why would that link you provided be any less biased in the other direction than a link from an Israell based website? "Islamicity.com?" Before I give any credence into the answers you provide to the peoples questions in this forum, can you please tell us something about your credentials as an authority on the Islamic faith? If we are to believe what you are saying here (and I think you are trying to answer in good faith and appreciate what you are trying to do) I for one would like to know why your personal interpretations should be considered the truth.
 

Sultan

Banned
Feb 21, 2002
2,297
1
0
Originally posted by: jpeyton
....
So while Sultan's post may speak for one group of Muslims, another group may practice their faith differently.

...

For example, on the subject of honor killings, I remember once reading a post by Sultan supporting them in certain cases. Well I strongly disagree with him, as do my Muslim friends (and their families overseas). So if you don't support honor killings (and my guess is that most of you wouldn't), you can show your disapproval to Sultan (or any other person, government, etc. that supports them), but please don't blanket the entire Muslim population of the world with your damnation for supporting honor killings because many of them don't. Many of them don't support suicide bombings, many don't support beheadings, many don't support al-Qaeda...

I will disagree with you on both counts. Some laws in Islam may be interpreted differently, but if by levels of faith, you mean to imply practicing and non-practicing Muslims, you may be correct. But amongst practicing Muslims, there is no personal input on which Islamic law should be or shouldnt be followed. If the Muslim is unable to follow a certain Islamic Law, he/she asks for forgiveness from God, but accepts he/she is making a mistake.

Therefore, my comments are not about one group of Muslims or the others. The division amongst Muslims is an incorrect assumption. Those who deviate from the Islamic Law and form independant groups, such as Ahmadias, Ismailis are not regarded as Muslims.

Additionally, I am not in support of honor killings. Regardless of my support or not, honor killings are NOT part of Islamic Law. Please make a distinction between practices and the laws of the religion.
 

Sultan

Banned
Feb 21, 2002
2,297
1
0
Originally posted by: PG
I've seen this in The Table of the Quran in many english translations. Please explain:

52. O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust.

http://www.wam.umd.edu/~stwright/rel/islam/Quran/5.html

Please read the verses below and after the above verse. If that does not alleviate your concern, I'll attempt to explain. You can find the link here: Surah Al-Maeda
 

Sultan

Banned
Feb 21, 2002
2,297
1
0
Originally posted by: ahurtt
Originally posted by: Sultan
Originally posted by: realsup
Originally posted by: Sultan
Originally posted by: realsup
Why do muslims blame Christians for the Crusades. Jihad was waged against Jews and Christians for hundreds of years before the 1st Crusade was waged against Muslims.

I'm sorry, where did you get this info? Which Jihads were waged against Jews and Christians for 'hundreds' of years?


http://www.mideastweb.org/islamhistory.htm

Just use google the info is easy to find. Unless you think muslims peacefully waged war against Spain in the 700's.

I'm sorry, but I find it hard to trust a website registered under Israel as a non-biased source of information. Why dont you read more about what Muslims think about the Crusades here: Link

Why would that link you provided be any less biased in the other direction than a link from an Ireal based website? "Islamicity.com?" Before I give any credence into the answers you provide to the peoples questions in this forum, can you please tell us something about your credentials as an authority on the Islamic faith? If we are to believe what you are saying here (and I think you are trying to answer in good faith and appreciate what you are trying to do) I for one would like to know why your personal interpretations should be considered the truth.

Your originial comment:

Why do muslims blame Christians for the Crusades. Jihad was waged against Jews and Christians for hundreds of years before the 1st Crusade was waged against Muslims

Since you asked the Muslim viewpoint, I gave you the viewpoint from Muslims. I hope you agree that Islamiccity.com gives the perspective of Muslims. I as a Muslim do not think much of the Crusades. The Crusaders were defeated, so whoopie doo. The Crusaders killed a lot of Muslims, so I'll moan and cry.

As for the second part of the question, my personal interpretation is almost completely absent. I provide references from the Quran, Hadiths, and analysis/explanations of scholars and provide links to the sources as best as I can. Hope that helps.

Additionally, if you would please attempt to actually read the Original Post, I clearly mentioned that Analogy or personal interpretation is the FOURTH source of Islamic Law, and can only be used when the answers are not clear/provided in the Quran, Sunnah and through Ijma.
 

azazyel

Diamond Member
Oct 6, 2000
5,872
1
81
Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
meh more grasping at straws. best you can do is be an apologist for a ideology that is extremely flawed. no all knowing all powerful all loving god would have created such nonsense. best to just toss it all out the window. religion is ignorance sanctified, wake up.

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/index.html
http://www.answeringislam.org/NonMuslims/rights.htm
http://www.flex.com/~jai/satyamevajayate/index.html
http://jihadwatch.org
http://www.prophetofdoom.net/
http://www.faithfreedom.org
http://www.apostatesofislam.com/index.htm
http://answering-islam.org.uk/Index/A/apostasy.html
http://www.infidels.org

Since you are such an expert on anti Islamic sites I was hoping you could post any pre 9/11 articles written by Robert Spencer? It seems that people (many on this board) think he is a credible source on Islam but I can't for the life of me understand why.

Also, this thread would be pointless if more people here actually got off their arses and spoke with a Muslim. I have lived a block away from a Mosque for the past 8 years and I can say Muslims are great neighbors.