Ozoned
Diamond Member
- Mar 22, 2004
- 5,578
- 0
- 0
Originally posted by: Sultan
The veracity of the Quran cannot be disputed.
Again, a leap of faith.
Originally posted by: Sultan
The veracity of the Quran cannot be disputed.
Again, it requires faith.Originally posted by: hscorpio
So how can you be so sure that the version this guy ordered printed was the accurate version.
Originally posted by: Sultan
What? Which cleric advocated the "religious cleansing" of the country? Some non-Muslims in this forum have more information about Muslims than Muslims themselves.
Many statements have been issued by leaders of Muslim nations, scholars, and Muslims in general with respect to terrorist acts. I gave the example of denouncing 9/11 attack above as one such case. If you choose to be deaf to such statements, there's nothing I can do to convince you otherwise.
Egyptian preacher Muhammad Al-
Ghazzali who, in 1992, issued a fatwa for the murder of Farag
Foda, an anti-clerical writer in Cairo. Within weeks of the
fatwa, zealots murdered Foda in his home.
Other "sheikhs of death" mentioned include the Yemeni
Abdul-Majid Al- Zendani, and the Saudis Ali bin Khudhair
Al-Khudhair and Safar Al- Hawali. The two Saudis have described
the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks against the United States as
"retaliations", and thus justified under Islamic law.
Nov 16, 2004
Abu Bakar Bashir, the Muslim cleric whom American intelligence officials have blamed for the attack in Bali, refused to condemn the bombing and said that the United States intelligence agency is behind the Bali bombings in an attempt to justify their accusation that Indonesia is a terrorist base. He also warned not to cooperate with America because it will bring tragedy for your country. (Harper's Magazine)
Sheikh Omar Abdul Rahman, during his federal grand jury trial in New York City. Rahman was convicted of helping engineer the 1993 World Trade Center bombing as well as a failed Islamic Group plan (known as ?The Day of Terror?) to destroy other Manhattan landmarks including the Holland and Lincoln tunnels, United Nations building, and George Washington Bridge. Rahman was also found guilty of trying to arrange Mubarak?s assassination, an act that wasn?t surprising considering his fatwah (religous decree) against then-Egyptian President Anwar Sadat in 1981.
Originally posted by: hscorpio
So how can you be so sure that the version this guy ordered printed was the accurate version.
Again, it requires faith.
How the fvck do you figure that this was offtopic, I mean, you know the definition of faith, now ponder the thread title. We must take a political viewpoint about Islam on this forum to justify the existance of the thread . As such, the nuts and bolts of Islam must be tested in this thread....Originally posted by: hscorpio
[offtopic]
Originally posted by: hscorpio
So how can you be so sure that the version this guy ordered printed was the accurate version.
Again, it requires faith.
I know that. I was hoping Sultan would find his way to the "it requires faith" answer eventually. He disbeleives Christianity because he thinks the bible has been corrupted/changed but believes the Qu'ran is somehow perfect because he thinks it's written form has never been changed.
I linked to a site that said the official version of the Qu'ran was ordered to be printed because some leader was worried about the differing accounts of the Qu'ran throughout the region. I was suggesting the possibility that the version of the Qu'ran ordered written could be one of the different accounts. I was trying to point out that there is no way to know that it is Muhammads true teaching for sure and believing in the Qu'ran is EXACTLY the same thing as believing in the Bible.
Even if there was some way of knowing 100% that the current Qu'ran is Muhammads original message, there is no way to prove that Muhammad actually received a message from God. He could have just made the whole thing up. We don't know and never will.
Believing in any religion requires faith. There is no way to prove the Qu'ran or the Bible is the true word of god using reason and logic.
In the end it all comes down to faith, believing in something that cannot be proved.
We should get back on topic though because this thread is supposed to be about details of the faith of Islam. I'm sure Sultan doesn't want it to turn into a debate over why/why not to believe in Islam.
[/offtopic]
What kind of holidays are there in Islam? Is there anything similar to Christmas?
The point of this thread was to explain the nuts and bolts of Islam to non-muslims who the OP feels are misinformed. I do not believe it was to debate the merits of believing in Islam, but I'll let the OP address the issue.Originally posted by: Ozoned
How the fvck do you figure that this was offtopic, I mean, you know the definition of faith, now ponder the thread title. We must take a political viewpoint about Islam on this forum to justify the existance of the thread . As such, the nuts and bolts of Islam must be tested in this thread....
Originally posted by: hscorpio
I know that. I was hoping Sultan would find his way to the "it requires faith" answer eventually. He disbeleives Christianity because he thinks the bible has been corrupted/changed but believes the Qu'ran is somehow perfect because he thinks it's written form has never been changed.
I linked to a site that said the official version of the Qu'ran was ordered to be printed because some leader was worried about the differing accounts of the Qu'ran throughout the region. I was suggesting the possibility that the version of the Qu'ran ordered written could be one of the different accounts. I was trying to point out that there is no way to know that it is Muhammads true teaching for sure and believing in the Qu'ran is EXACTLY the same thing as believing in the Bible.
Even if there was some way of knowing 100% that the current Qu'ran is Muhammads original message, there is no way to prove that Muhammad actually received a message from God. He could have just made the whole thing up. We don't know and never will.
Believing in any religion requires faith. There is no way to prove the Qu'ran or the Bible is the true word of god using reason and logic.
In the end it all comes down to faith, believing in something that cannot be proved.
We should get back on topic though because this thread is supposed to be about details of the faith of Islam. I'm sure Sultan doesn't want it to turn into a debate over why/why not to believe in Islam.
[/offtopic]
What kind of holidays are there in Islam? Is there anything similar to Christmas?
Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
....
Originally posted by: Sultan
Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
....
Thank you for your post. It was an informative one. I am sorry and ashamed that such characters exist amongst us Muslims.
These characters are no different that many non-Islamic characters who expouse hatred amongst people. This said, I am not trying to justify these bad elements amongst Muslims.
I do not agree with their views, and I hope you understand that most Muslims dont either.
Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Thank-you for the response.
The problem that most have with the Muslim/Arab nation is that their general population generates the impression that such "spokemens" are acceptable and/or supported.
When actions that such people encourage are then impliments and supported, it is difficult to accept that it is an abnormality.
Then when actual historical events are twisted to justify these actions, it destroys the credability of the presenter.
The thread of coincidence (connect the dots) becomes to great to ignore and thereby contaminates any that try to justify such actions.
Originally posted by: Sultan
Originally posted by: Citrix
Terrorist acts have nothing to do with any religion
you just lost all credibility. Terrorst attacks/acts have EVERYTHING to do with the muslim religion. when was the last time you saw a Shinto monk, or Bhuddist Monk, Mormon Clergyman, Pentacostal Priest, Baptist Preacher, American Indian Shaman... telling their followers to go kill all the non belivers of their religion??????
Thank you for your hate-mongering post. If you have any question about Islamic beliefs, please ask. I can answer your ridiculous question with pages and pages of information.
Originally posted by: Sultan
Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Thank-you for the response.
The problem that most have with the Muslim/Arab nation is that their general population generates the impression that such "spokemens" are acceptable and/or supported.
When actions that such people encourage are then impliments and supported, it is difficult to accept that it is an abnormality.
Then when actual historical events are twisted to justify these actions, it destroys the credability of the presenter.
The thread of coincidence (connect the dots) becomes to great to ignore and thereby contaminates any that try to justify such actions.
That is an incorrect impression. Do you support Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell? I suspect no, but I havent heard you say that. But that does not imply that I get the impression you support their views.
Life is too short and busy to go around criticizing nut cases for the words they speak.
You must also understand that it is not the religion which incites certain people to acts of violence, but rather actions of others which does. Dont you think this Iraq war will create many, many more "terrorists" who watched their children bleed to death when our forces rained bombs on their city and did not allow medical aid to enter?
Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
...
Sourceter·ror·ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (tr-rzm)
n.
The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.
Originally posted by: Sultan
This topic of denounciation and action against terrorist elements in countries of Muslim majority has been raised again and again. I have answered it in the past. This is a false charge. All leaders of Muslim nations and scholars of the religion have denounced terrorist acts. Heck, Yasser Arafat who half of (witless) America call a terrorist donated blood for the victims of 9/11. Actions against terrorists have been taken by Pakistan, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, etc, etc and are continuing.
Yes, Islam is a religion of peace. Whoever commits these acts of violence are madmen, and there is no justification whatsoever for their attacks. There was no justification for 9/11, there is no justification to our actions in Iraq.
Terrorist acts have nothing to do with any religion
Originally posted by: dszd0g
Please bear with me on this post; I am going to broach some of the more controversial subject matter. It will be easy to simply flame me in response, but I hope that I have been rational and I have faith that the response will be equally sensible.
Originally posted by: hscorpio
The Israeli miitary has killed many muslims and I think its safe to assume that muslims want Israel gone from the Middle East.
Do the Muslims here dispute this? How can there be peace in the Middle East when the only solution that will make the Muslims happy is eliminating the Jews? Israel was established because Europe was happy to get rid of Hitler, but they really did not want the Jews back. Europe did not want to give back all the property that was confiscated from the Jews, a lot of which has not been returned to this day. Making the Jews someone else's problem was the solution Europe came up with. Most of Europe would have been fine with Arab countries destroying Israel and removing their problem. In all probability, this would have happened with out the US support of Israel.
The Oslo accords demonstrated that Israel would be willing to pull out of the disputed territories tomorrow if they had any sort of guarantee that they would be left alone after that. If the Palestinians actually could show they could get the suicide bombers under control Israel would be happy to leave. When Israel has tried pulling out of areas, they are forced to go back in because the area becomes suicide bomber training camps. In the past leaving an occupied area has resulted in more deaths for Israelis, how is that encouragement?
Originally posted by: Sultan
The previous wars were a result of Israel's occupation and its Zionist agenda.
Correct me if I am wrong, but Israel did not occupy the West Bank, Gaza, or the Golan Heights until their neighboring countries attacked them. Just like we set up a Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) at Germany's border after World War I, Israel has been trying to use the zones as a DMZ. I am not sure you can call either one successful.
Yasar Arafat was a terrorist, I only hope the Palestinians do not chose another terrorist as a leader. Then all we need is Sharon to be replaced by someone a little less violent.
Another question, what is the religious significance of Jerusalem to the Muslim religion? Arafat wanted to be buried in Jerusalem. Palestinians make as big of a deal about Jerusalem as the Jews do, but I am not aware of any reason for this other than not being willing to make any compromises and not wanting to let the Jews have what they want. For Jews, Jerusalem is a bigger deal than Mecca is to Muslims, but is it of any religious import to Muslims?
Originally posted by: Sultan
The fact is over 150000 US soldiers are in Iraq who have killed 10000+ CIVILIANS, wounded many thousands more. Therefore they are the terrorists.
When listing terrorist organizations:
Originally posted by: Sultan
Hey, in my books, the list is:
US Army
IDF
Russian Army
Bush, Rumsfield, Cheney
While the US has definitely committed war crimes, there is a difference between civilian casualties and terrorism. The US is not trying to kill civilians. Terrorists are trying to kill civilians. The difference is intent. Many Muslims seem to take this stance of not differentiating between the behavior of the US and Israel and the suicide bombers. There is a world of difference. Statements like this that hurt American's opinion of Muslims. From this thread, even the Quran says that war is sometimes necessary, but terrorism is evil. If Muslims took the stance that their religion seems to teach, it would definitely help public opinion.
How common are Muslims like Faizenne who are full of hate, and 95% of the reasons he gives for hating Jews are not even true?
Originally posted by: Sultan
Iraq invasion = terrorist attack
I am strongly against the Iraq war. It is a war of aggression done for the financial benefit of large US corporations including the US oil industry and military contractors. Again, there is a difference between war of aggression and terrorism. Both are wrong, but there is a difference between the two. It is like the difference between walking up to a man and punching him, and walking up to and kicking a toddler. Both are wrong, but I would be much more upset over the latter.
Suicide "Homicide" bombers have been brought up in this thread, but this is such a major topic I would like to inquire further on it.
Originally posted by: Sultan
The United States ITSELF is committing an act of terror in Iraq. So the difference is we use million dollar weapons, while the opposite side uses human bombs. I'd say the opposite side has move conviction and valor than our forces because they are fighting to free the land of an occupier.
On the news we see interviews with Palestinian parents whose child was a suicide bomber, they are proud of what their child has done. The whole community is supportive of them. If the religion of Islam says this behavior is evil, why is it so prevalent?
"All I can answer is that whatever God wants to happen will. Yes, my son Saeed died as a martyr. But every Palestinian who dies as a martyr is our son. All the people's children are our children and we are all responsible for one another. Everyone is important to us and every martyr who dies is as important to us as our son. If you ask my youngest son what he wants to be when he grows up, he will tell you that he wants to be a suicide bomber."
http://www.redress.btinternet.co.uk/yaghi24.htm
"The women swarmed around the Um Shadi, mother of Mahmoud Hamdan Kwasma, who carried out the suicide bombing on Wednesday in Haifa. They had come in order to praise her for the death of her son in the service of Allah." "The Um Shadi went on to say 'I am proud of my son's deed, we must fight for our faith and not for our nation.'"
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/861590/posts
In multiple threads, you have been apologetic if not supportive of the terrorists. Comments like the quote above more than anything are what harm the opinion of Islam in my opinion. In this thread, you seem to state how you are a true follower of Islam, and yet you make comments like the above. How can we interpret this as anything other than Muslims supporting terrorism?
Originally posted by: Aimster
I will be the first Muslim on this thread to say it. Muslim = dangerous religion. It can be very peaceful and such a lovely religion to follow. It is a book of poetry. It is dangerous because different Mosque/Countries will preach to you different opinions of Islam. Egypt is a Muslim country. Christian, Jews go there every year. There are no problems because the government and the people believe in a peaceful Islamic state and are more than generous with Christians, etc. Turkey believes in their own version of the Quran and it has implemented it all around the country (You make fun of France for banning the headscarf. Did you know Turkey was the first country to do so?). Iran has a permanent Jewish member in their cabinet (You defend Iran?s government. The people are against it and you still support them). UAE, Dubai, Kuwait are countries where a Jew can visit and not feel threatened. Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan are danger zones. They have created an evil religion.
Originally posted by: f95toli
Western democracy (including freedom of religion) has been around for less than 200 years, for 1800 years there was no freedom of religion in the west, during that same period jews and other minorietes could live in peace in muslim countries.
Originally posted by: dszd0g
This post has not been responded to yet. I am not sure if it was intentionally ignored, if it got lost in the long thread, or if it has not been gotten to yet. If this post is not responded to, I will assume it is being intentionally ignored.
On the news we see interviews with Palestinian parents whose child was a suicide bomber, they are proud of what their child has done. The whole community is supportive of them. If the religion of Islam says this behavior is evil, why is it so prevalent?
"All I can answer is that whatever God wants to happen will. Yes, my son Saeed died as a martyr. But every Palestinian who dies as a martyr is our son. All the people's children are our children and we are all responsible for one another. Everyone is important to us and every martyr who dies is as important to us as our son. If you ask my youngest son what he wants to be when he grows up, he will tell you that he wants to be a suicide bomber."
http://www.redress.btinternet.co.uk/yaghi24.htm
"The women swarmed around the Um Shadi, mother of Mahmoud Hamdan Kwasma, who carried out the suicide bombing on Wednesday in Haifa. They had come in order to praise her for the death of her son in the service of Allah." "The Um Shadi went on to say 'I am proud of my son's deed, we must fight for our faith and not for our nation.'"
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/861590/posts
In multiple threads, you have been apologetic if not supportive of the terrorists. Comments like the quote above more than anything are what harm the opinion of Islam in my opinion. In this thread, you seem to state how you are a true follower of Islam, and yet you make comments like the above. How can we interpret this as anything other than Muslims supporting terrorism?
Originally posted by: b0mbrman
New question.
As I'm a big fan of travelling, where in the Muslim street are there places that...
· I can see things of historical importance?
· I can see things that are interesting in a modern sense?
· I should avoid for safety reasons?
· I'm explicitly barred from visiting?
Originally posted by: Sultan
Religiously speaking, martyrdom is a great achievement. Thats the first point.
That said, suicide bombings and homicide bombings are IMO different things. Bombing cafes with innocent civilians or flying planes into building are examples of terrorist actions. Suicide bombing against military targets is a valid form of offensive. I am POSITIVE that you would be willing to give your life for your cause and country. The only difference between us, and the suicide bombers is that we get big guns, big planes, big tanks, etc, whereas they have homemade explosives and nuts and bolts.
I am also POSITIVE that your parents and family will be proud of your achievements if you give your life serving your cause and country.
Therefore, the quotes you provide above are no different than what your parents and family would say regarding your giving your life away.
The above quote was mainly in reference to the Iraqi resistance. However, since you have also associated it with the Palestinian cause, I have no qualms. In both cases, I speak only of those who strike military targets, not civilian.
Another question, what is the religious significance of Jerusalem to the Muslim religion? Arafat wanted to be buried in Jerusalem. Palestinians make as big of a deal about Jerusalem as the Jews do, but I am not aware of any reason for this other than not being willing to make any compromises and not wanting to let the Jews have what they want. For Jews, Jerusalem is a bigger deal than Mecca is to Muslims, but is it of any religious import to Muslims?
Many in this forum agree that the conflict in Iraq was completely wrong. So some stop far short of referring it to it as I do. Since you've been reading my other posts, I have defined terrorism using a direct reference to a dictionary and clearly pointed out how the Iraq conflict is by that very definition a terroirst action.
Islam has VERY strict rules of engagements in military conflicts. No unarmed civilian, aged men, women, children and EVEN trees is to be hurt.
Originally posted by: Sultan
Originally posted by: cwjerome
Sultan, I have a question for you. Do you believe in "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion", and what do you think its impact has been on Islamic religious teachings and culture?
I have not read this protocol, nor aware of its contents. I am sorry to not be able to answer your question. Hopefully I will get a chance to read this, sooner than later.
Originally posted by: cwjerome
If you are not aware of the contents of "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" then I think you're not qualified to speak with any authority on this OP.![]()
More recently, the Egyptian state-owned publisher al-Ahram editorialized in 1995 in a foreword to a translation of Shimon Peres' book The New Middle East:
"When The Protocols of the Elders of Zion were discovered, some 200 years ago, and translated in various languages, including Arabic, the World Zionist Organization attempted to deny the existence of the plot, and claimed forgery. The Zionists even endeavored to purchase all the existing copies, in order to prevent their circulation. But today, Shimon Peres proves unequivocally that the Protocols are authentic, and that they tell the truth."
An article in the Egyptian state-owned newspaper al-Akhbar on February 3, 2002 stated:
"All the evils that currently affect the world are the doings of Zionism. This is not surprising, because the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which were established by their wise men more than a century ago, are proceeding according to a meticulous and precise plan and time schedule, and they are proof that even though they are a minority, their goal is to rule the world and the entire human race."
In 2002, Egyptian state-owned television, as well as numerous Arabic satellite television stations, aired an Egyptian-produced 41-part historical drama entitled Horseman Without a Horse, featuring the Protocols as a major plot element.
Many Arab governments fund the publication of new printings of the Protocols, and teach them in their schools as historical fact. See Arabs and anti-Semitism for more information.
The American retail chain, Wal-Mart, was criticized for selling a The Protocols of the Elders of Zion on its website -- with a description that suggested it might be genuine. It was withdrawn from sale in September 2004, as 'a business decision'.
Originally posted by: Aimster
Facts on Jesus:
* that the Jews planned to kill Jesus but Allah had promised to save him from death (Surah 3:55-56)
Originally posted by: dszd0g
Originally posted by: Sultan
Religiously speaking, martyrdom is a great achievement. Thats the first point.
Could you elaborate?
I dont know. I am not supportive of their actions. I was also not aware of the target of their suicide attack. I believe after 50 years of living under occupation, watching their family and friends die against an overwhelming power, these people have had their nuts come lose. I see it as an act of crime and/or venegence. It does not have anything to do with Islam.Therefore, the quotes you provide above are no different than what your parents and family would say regarding your giving your life away.
Maybe I left out the context of the above stories. Those were people killing civilians.
The first case involved bombing a discotheque and killing 20 teenagers.
http://www.israelinsider.com/c.../articles/sec_0049.htm
The second case involved blowing up a bus with women and children on board, the link I provided showed pictures of some of the victims (scroll down):
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/861590/posts
My parents told me once if I ever commited a serious crime they would be the first in line to turn me in to the police. I believe they would be ashamed and horrified if I did a crime like the above.
Why are whole neighborhoods proud of these murderers?
The above quote was mainly in reference to the Iraqi resistance. However, since you have also associated it with the Palestinian cause, I have no qualms. In both cases, I speak only of those who strike military targets, not civilian.
From my understanding, Israel is crawling with Israeli troops. If someone wants to strike a military target one is not hard to come by. I can understand Palestinians who throw rocks at Israeli soldiers and tanks in the occupied territories.
If the Palestinians only attacked military targets in the occupied territories, the Israelis would pull out of the occupied territories maybe with the exception of right around Jerusalem. The problem is that the Israelis are being forced to do something to defend themselves. They should be more careful about cutting down the civilian casualties.
Which reminds me,
Another question, what is the religious significance of Jerusalem to the Muslim religion? Arafat wanted to be buried in Jerusalem. Palestinians make as big of a deal about Jerusalem as the Jews do, but I am not aware of any reason for this other than not being willing to make any compromises and not wanting to let the Jews have what they want. For Jews, Jerusalem is a bigger deal than Mecca is to Muslims, but is it of any religious import to Muslims?
Many in this forum agree that the conflict in Iraq was completely wrong. So some stop far short of referring it to it as I do. Since you've been reading my other posts, I have defined terrorism using a direct reference to a dictionary and clearly pointed out how the Iraq conflict is by that very definition a terroirst action.
I am against what we are doing in Iraq. I am willing to call the Iraqis going after our troops freedom fighters. The ones who are targetting Iraqi civilians are terrorists (I can't figure that one out?).
Islam has VERY strict rules of engagements in military conflicts. No unarmed civilian, aged men, women, children and EVEN trees is to be hurt.
Unfortunately this does not seem to be the Islam that is being taught to a number of Muslims, is it? What do you think the US should have done? (I have had my ideas, but I am curious to hear yours first).
Thank you for clarifying.
