Islam In Europe

[LiveInFaith]

john99,
are you expecting the whole time of everybody is supposed to be fighting?
When inevitable, anyone will fight.
But fighting is not the only solution for every disagreement. Only when there is interest, and lust, greed if you will add.

 

[clusteringflux]

Christianity and Islam are as two peas in a pod and when even a liberal monotheists can not admit that even the possibility may exist that someone else's ideas about the World and the Gods may be correct - well it seems pretty clear to me where the problem lays,

Michael

There are some notable differences, Michael. I don't know where you are from but people in most Christian based countries are free to think as they wish without being killed or jailed....Can the same be said for most Muslim countries?

 

[John99]

There are some notable differences, Michael. I don't know where you are from but people in most Christian based countries are free to think as they wish without being killed

Well there is that family in the Ozarks or wherever that they always bring up.

 

[WildBlueYonder]

I've spoken with many Americans from various parts of the countries and most of them-even though they seem like nice friendly intelligent people-will cheerfully agree that that they think the war on Afghanistan was justified and Afghans being killed since last 5 years are in accordance with spreading democracy

SAM, you're a clever girl, must be nice to be able to speak your mind on a Western-based internet site, answer me this, if islam is such a dear religion of peacenics, how far would you go speaking your mind, before you were put in your place by your menfolk?

or if islam is the religion of peace, why have no muslims won the "Noble Peace Prize? where are the muslim Gandhi's & MLK's? where are the muslim ex-president Carter-types? no, none? I wonder why?

if islam is the religion of peace, why was its 1st hundred years all about conquest, rape & plunder? must I remind you that Mohammad's 1st letters to other kings, was surrender or face the consequences?

“In the Name of Allâh, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful.
From Muhammad, the slave of Allâh and His Messenger to Hercules, king of the Byzantines. Blessed are those who follow true guidance. I invite you to embrace Islam so that you may live in security. If you come within the fold of Islam, Allâh will give you double reward, but in case you turn your back upon it, then the burden of the sins of all your people shall fall on your shoulders.

from: http://muhammad.net/j/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=123&Itemid=38

“In the Name of Allâh, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful.
From Muhammad, the Messenger of Allâh to Chosroes, king of Persia.
Peace be upon him who follows true guidance, believes in Allâh and His Messenger and testifies that there is no god but Allâh Alone with no associate, and that Muhammad is His slave and Messenger. I invite you to accept the religion of Allâh. I am the Messenger of Allâh sent to all people in order that I may infuse fear of Allâh in every living person, and that the charge may be proved against those who reject the Truth. Accept Islam as your religion so that you may live in security, otherwise, you will be responsible for all the sins of the Magians.”

from: http://muhammad.net/j/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=122&Itemid=38

“In the Name of Allâh, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful.
From Muhammad servant of Allâh and His Messenger to Muqawqas, vicegerent of Egypt.
Peace be upon him who follows true guidance. Thereafter, I invite you to accept Islam. Therefore, if you want security, accept Islam. If you accept Islam, Allâh, the Sublime, shall reward you doubly. But if you refuse to do so, you will bear the burden of the transgression of all the Copts.

from: http://muhammad.net/j/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=121&Itemid=38

seems like islam is still up to its old tricks
a saying in the U.S. is, "same old, same old"

SAM, refute Mohammed's words, see how long you last

 

[WildBlueYonder]

You don't recall the Crusades then?
:-shrug-:

crusades?could you tell us why the crusades started? what was the root cause?

so, just why did the crusades start? was it not because a byzantine emperor asking a catholic pope, for help against the invading muslim Seljuk Turks? that were at the gates of his capital?

the pope then send indulgences, giving any catholic knight who fought for the Holy Land, a free pass to heaven, silly catholics, thinking that fighting in a holy war would get them into heaven, I wonder where they got that idea from?

its funny, but the crusades ended 700 years ago, & we're still called crusaders? that long-term memory tape, is on rewind & play every day, get with it islam, if we return to the crusades, it'll be because you gave us no choice, probably have to defend Europe this time?

 

[Michael]

There are some notable differences, Michael. I don't know where you are from but people in most Christian based countries are free to think as they wish without being killed or jailed....Can the same be said for most Muslim countries?

I agree there are many notable differences. But lets not forget what life was like living under the rule of the church. At that time people were not free to think as they wish without being killed or jailed.

Which is the difference between the secular governments in the West and East and the religous governments of the ME. Also, people in the West and far East are not very religous. Oh, they have some beliefs (I know Japanese the beleive in Gods and ghosts and other stuff) but it doesn't rule their lives.

 

[Michael]

I agree that many different beliefs are much better than just one beleif. BUT I also think some beliefs are detrimental towards the type of society I wish to live in. I do not want to live in a society where polygamy exists. I don't want to live in a society where people who have a different faiths are taxed - simply for having a different beleif?!?!

I don't know much about Buddhist, only that they search for self cleanliness, independence of external materials, to get along with nature. They won't blow, and the same time they also tend to not become rich. They are not into material richness. We need Buddhist to be our sample of sincerity and cleanliness, but if all us were Buddhist, who would develop our material world, to fulfill our needs of materials (for any reasons)?

Well, the Japanese are Buddhist and in general Japanese are pretty good at material production.

PS3 comes to mind
MII

 

[LiveInFaith]

Well, the Japanese are Buddhist and in general Japanese are pretty good at material production.

PS3 comes to mind
MII

Yes, high rank on the list of rich countries. Either my impression about Buddhism is wrong, or Buddhism doesn't affect much to Japanese.

 

[Michael]

The truth is Buddhism, like modern day Christianity, doens't interfere too much in people's lives and therefor isn't a drag on the country. I am positive if Japanese were very religous, say they prayed 3 times everyday, they'd be more religous and more "Buddhist" and less prosperous.

Buddhist Japanese live their lives day to day just like anyone else. They get up eat, go to work and then for drinks, then dinner, sex and bed. BUT one day someone gets married or time to take a big test, etc.... and they go to the temple and do a little prayer and then get on with life. So, like twice-a-year-Christians, they get the mental stress relief of knowing they will never "die" and also get a boost when they need a lift and also a nice ceremony when they get married but they don't get dragged down into spending much of their time and energy on this fantasy world of Buddhism (or in the case of Christians - fantasy world of Christianity)

 

[Arsalan]

Gotta love the ignorant ranting towards Islam. People confuse the actions of some Muslim governments and leaders as being automatically Islamic while they are most often not. And deriving your knowledge of Islam from them is futile because they themselves have none.

 

[Michael]

Gotta love the ignorant ranting towards Islam. People confuse the actions of some Muslim governments and leaders as being automatically Islamic while they are most often not. And deriving your knowledge of Islam from them is futile because they themselves have none.

Hello Arsalan, welcome to Sciforums


Yes, in much the same manner as China was never Communistic there has never existed an Islamic government. Historically both have proven to be failures at attempting to govern and neither have ever existed.

That aside: Would you agree that it is not going to better Western or Eastern society to put an added tax onto Muslims simply for practicing their Islamic faith? Surely you'd agree that such a tax would be immoral and unjust?

 

[GeoffP]

Gotta love the ignorant ranting towards Islam. People confuse the actions of some Muslim governments and leaders as being automatically Islamic while they are most often not. And deriving your knowledge of Islam from them is futile because they themselves have none.

I've heard at least one Syrian fellow term them "islamist" rather than "islamic". This might be more accurate - although it's not really true to imply they draw no rulings from religious readings.

 

[WildBlueYonder]

Muslim Medical Students get Picky
Daniel Foggo and Abul Taher
timesonline.co.UK

Some Muslim medical students are refusing to attend lectures or answer exam questions on alcohol-related or sexually transmitted diseases because they claim it offends their religious beliefs.

Some trainee doctors say learning to treat the diseases conflicts with their faith , which states that Muslims should not drink alcohol and rejects sexual promiscuity.

ok, so I'm just minding my own business, checking my emails, when I notice that this thread had some responses, so I look,
& after reading these comments, I have to ask; why is there a logical disconnect between what muslims claim they can do on earth as opposed to what is allowed in muslim heaven?

case in point, does not the quran say that those muslims that go to paradise will have rivers of wine to drink (without getting drunk of course) & 70 (or 72) (always) virgins for their sexual pleasure? is mulsim heaven not a picture of drunken (1-man, 70 female) sex orgies? or are they merely sipping wine while reading Dostoevsky?

if allah of the crescent moon allows that in his heaven, why does he deny it to his followers on earth? is not muslim heaven a place of alcohol and sexual promiscuity? then is not allah of the crescent moon a hypocrite, for stating that for some drinking & sexual promiscuity is not allowed, but not for others, its ok under certain circumstances? like martyrs' paradise or wartime of course (where rape & pillage is expected) or if you become the calif of the ummah?

 

[GeoffP]

No preaching please.

And all four contemporary schools of islamic jurisprudence disagree with your synthesis. Perhaps you should email it to al-Ahzar?

 

[Arsalan]

Im not preaching. I wouldnt even know how. What i did do was reply to some posts, including yours, that were misguided on Islam. And i sincerely doubt that all schools disagree with my synthesis. Some divines might, but what I said is overall accepted by the Muslims.

 

[GeoffP]

Yes and no. All four major schools of jurisprudence dictate death for the apostate. Individual opinions of individual muslims vary, of course; but human groupthink always invites intolerance.

 

[Arsalan]

Those Muslims who say it is death follow Maududi who, from his own writings, demonstrates his lacking knowledge and limited thinking of Islam. My reply was derived from the opinions of the Holy Prophet, Khalifa e Rashideen, great Scholars and great Mujaddids and Imams. I do think they knew a bit more about Islam than Maududi or his contemporaries.

 

[GeoffP]

You might well say so, and I might agree. To which mujaddids and imams are you referring?

 

[Sock puppet path]

Those Muslims who say it is death follow Maududi who, from his own writings, demonstrates his lacking knowledge and limited thinking of Islam. My reply was derived from the opinions of the Holy Prophet, Khalifa e Rashideen, great Scholars and great Mujaddids and Imams. I do think they knew a bit more about Islam than Maududi or his contemporaries.

Muslim

Chapter 6: WHEN IT IS PERMISSIBLE TO TAKE THE LIFE OF A MUSLIM


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Book 016, Number 4152:
'Abdullah (b. Mas'ud) reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: It is not permissible to take the life of a Muslim who bears testimony (to the fact that there is no god but Allah, and I am the Messenger of Allah, but in one of the three cases: the married adulterer, a life for life, and the deserter of his Din (Islam), abandoning the community.

Bukhari

Volume 9, Book 84, Number 57:
Narrated 'Ikrima:

Some Zanadiqa (atheists) were brought to 'Ali and he burnt them. The news of this event, reached Ibn 'Abbas who said, "If I had been in his place, I would not have burnt them, as Allah's Apostle forbade it, saying, 'Do not punish anybody with Allah's punishment (fire).' I would have killed them according to the statement of Allah's Apostle, 'Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'"

are these hadith false?

 

[GeoffP]

Well, I know that Buhkari is considered "canonical". I also note that the chain of isnad for each hadith concerns only one person - ibn Abdullah in the first case, al'Ikrima in the second; the first also carries additional verification. So, this would suggest that it's right in the vein of the initial intention - which is unsettling.