So I just discovered this about Islam

[anaconda]

The Koran teaches that the world is flat.

The Christian Bible talks about dead people coming alive, talking burning bushes, and turning water into instant fermented grape juice.

 

[Muwahid]

Thank you everyone for your kind words to me here

There were times in history where all faiths genuinely collaborated with one another to learn and expand, and even debate respectfully. The early tafseers (exegesis) of the Qur'an, reference Jewish and Christian tribes because our scholars went to them to learn more about some of the prophets and messengers, and there was mutual respect.

The point is not to get one over on each other or make another look ignorant, but rather to open minds up, clear misconceptions, and treat each other with respect, and Allah yahdeenaa, may God guide us all and forgive our shortcomings.

As for Kevin, you've done what I asked you not to (copy and paste...), from a site named "Islam Lies" above all.

 

[Kevin007]

Thank you everyone for your kind words to me here

There were times in history where all faiths genuinely collaborated with one another to learn and expand, and even debate respectfully. The early tafseers (exegesis) of the Qur'an, reference Jewish and Christian tribes because our scholars went to them to learn more about some of the prophets and messengers, and there was mutual respect.

The point is not to get one over on each other or make another look ignorant, but rather to open minds up, clear misconceptions, and treat each other with respect, and Allah yahdeenaa, may God guide us all and forgive our shortcomings.

As for Kevin, you've done what I asked you not to (copy and paste...), from a site named "Islam Lies" above all.

Truth cannot be friends with a lie. Light cannot be friends with darkness. You believe Jesus was not crucified, yet there is overwhelming evidence He was. Islam was made up to combat all the other religions at the time that were worshipping many gods.

There are many contradictions in the Koran. The Koran teaches to lie to non- Muslims, etc etc etc... Many Muslim scholars believe Jesus will be beheading Christians during the tribulation... You just cannot make this stuff up (or can you?).

[FONT=&quot]Muslims quote Luke 22:43 as proof that when Jesus cried out to God not to be crucified, that an angel came and saved him from crucifixion. However the next verses says that Jesus was arrested by the mob for crucifixion. On what basis do you accept the first passage as uncorrupted scripture, but reject the next verse as corrupted scripture? [/FONT]

 

[Muwahid]

Truth cannot be friends with a lie. Light cannot be friends with darkness. You believe Jesus was not crucified, yet there is overwhelming evidence He was. Islam was made up to combat all the other religions at the time that were worshipping many gods.

There are many contradictions in the Koran. The Koran teaches to lie to non- Muslims, etc etc etc... Many Muslim scholars believe Jesus will be beheading Christians during the tribulation... You just cannot make this stuff up (or can you?).

Find me the Qur'anic verse which tells Muslims to lie to non-Muslims?

 

[Kevin007]

Find me the Qur'anic verse which tells Muslims to lie to non-Muslims?

Qur'an (16:106), Bukhari (84:64-65)....

 

[Kevin007]

[FONT=&quot] Muwahid- There is no passage in the Koran that says the Bible is altered or corrupted. [/FONT]

 

[Muwahid]

Qur'an (16:106), Bukhari (84:64-65)....

Quran 16:106

من كفر بالله من بعد ايمانه الا من اكره وقلبه مطمئن بالايمان ولكن من شرح بالكفر صدرا فعليهم غضب من الله ولهم عذاب عظيم
Whoever disbelieves in Allah, after believing except those who have been coerced (but still believing in his heart), but rather disbelieves in his heart, earns the punishment and anger of Allah​

Quick question... where does that say lie to disbelievers?

 

[Kevin007]

Quran 16:106

من كفر بالله من بعد ايمانه الا من اكره وقلبه مطمئن بالايمان ولكن من شرح بالكفر صدرا فعليهم غضب من الله ولهم عذاب عظيم
Whoever disbelieves in Allah, after believing except those who have been coerced (but still believing in his heart), but rather disbelieves in his heart, earns the punishment and anger of Allah​

Quick question... where does that say lie to disbelievers?

it establishes that there are circumstances that can compel a Muslim to tell a lie to a non-Muslim.

 

[Muwahid]

it establishes that there are circumstances that can compel a Muslim to tell a lie to a non-Muslim.

Yes an exception was made because the Muslims were being brutally tortured, like the mother of the companion Ammar ibn Yaasir, who was tortured and murdered for her faith. She was the first martyr of Islam.

Islam gave permission for these people to lie, so their lives would be spared.

If you find something morally wrong about that, you have issues man.

 

[Christian Liberty]

Oh oh.... look out, dogs are on the list.

Alright, who told the cops?

LOL! Too bad pigs aren't

(Disclaimer: that was a joke)

I guess that's why ISIS's tweets are all full of those cute little kitties. But, oh wait, I forgot - ISIS isn't Islamic.

Yeah, the name must be to fool people into becoming Islamophobic.

Al Qeida didn't evne like ISIS.

The general principle is that vermin which pester you, may spread disease or harm you, may be killed without sin.

The flipside, is the general principle in regard to animals in general according to the prophet: دخلَت امرأة النار في هرة حبستها ، لا هي أطعمتها إذ هي حبستها ، ولا هي تركتها تأكل من خَشَاشِ الأرض (A woman entered hell-fire for caging a cat, and starving it, and she did not let it free to eat the vermin)

Questions? Comments? Concerns?

Can you go to Hell for stealing money at gunpoint? Does this apply even if you are a cop, and you call your theft "a fine"?

Should Christian cops consider themselves lucky that Biblical salvation is not of works?

We must look at Islamic doctrine through general principles first, before applying special cases and scenarios, in any case this verse sums up the concerns you may have:

5:32 من قتل نفسا بغير نفس او فسادفي الارض فكانما قتل الناس جميعا ومن احياها فكانما احيا الناس جميعا (Whoever kills someone not out of retaliation for murder, or against a transgressor* then it's as if he killed all of humanity, and anyone who saves a person, it's as if he saved all of humanity)

This is the general picture Islam gives regarding life and death of not only believers but 'an-naas jamee3an' all of humanity. I gave an asterisk to transgressor, because this means someone who is waging war in the land, an enemy to the people.

Another powerful hadith in my opinion is when a funeral procession was passing by the prophet Muhammad ص and he stood out of respect. His companions informed him that it was a jewish funeral, not a Muslim, and he rebuked them saying 'a-laysaa nafsan?', meaning, Is he not a human being?

The reward in jihaad comes from defending your family, land, religion, etc. There's great honor in standing against people who intend harm upon your people. And I believe the highest honor should go to those who died in the front lines defending their people. It needs to be put into perspective, there's nothing admirable about invading lands and oppressing people, but the true interpretation of Islamic jihaad is not about invading and oppressing.

So, how would you deal with the whole utilitarian v absolute morality dilemma where you have cases where you can save (say) five innocent people but it will require you to kill (say) one innocent person? My interpretation of Christianity says that would be wrong even if most "Christians" disagree with me. Taken literally it seems that the person who kills the one innocent person would be simultaneously saving and killing all humanity if you strictly apply the Muslim doctrine. How does Islam deal with ethical dilemmas like that? Mind you, I know you could ask the same question to Christians, and this isn't an attack in any way, just out of curiosity.

 

[Kevin007]

http://www.666soon.com/is_the_mahdi_connected_to_the_an.htm

look at the chart Muwahid- tell me your opinion on it....

 

[Christian Liberty]

Yes an exception was made because the Muslims were being brutally tortured, like the mother of the companion Ammar ibn Yaasir, who was tortured and murdered for her faith. She was the first martyr of Islam.

Islam gave permission for these people to lie, so their lives would be spared.

If you find something morally wrong about that, you have issues man.

There are some Christians who take "thou shall not lie" so literally that they would have a problem with that. I'm at least sympathetic to that view, and I don't think it makes one "have issues." At the least I think it would be a shame to tell someone they "have issues" for taking God's Word overly seriously (admittedly, I get that you wouldn't consider the Bible God's Word, but we do.)

Mind you, taking that position would require one to be just as harsh in condemning Christians who say it is OK to sometimes lie (as many do, and I might to in extreme instances, I'm not sure yet) as it would in condemning Muslims, so it doesn't really work if ones goal is just to demonize Islam. But I think its a valid doctrinal stance to take.

For what its worth, I have serious doctrinal issues with Islam, as with any religion who does not accept Jesus Christ as God incarnate and the perfect sacrifice for sins, and I do not think it is possible for anyone to attain heaven without faith in the same. But I am not going to be dragged into the whole "Islam supports violence and oppression" direction. Not at the same time where I have to defend my own faith from "Christian" demons* like Ellis Washington and Ann Coulter. Heck, maybe libertarian Christians could get some rhetorical points by calling the hardcore "Christian" warmongers the Christian version of Al Qeida

*Just so we're clear, I don't LITERALLY think these people are demons (as a doctrinal proposition) but their theology is demonic.

 

[Christian Liberty]

http://www.666soon.com/is_the_mahdi_connected_to_the_an.htm

look at the chart Muwahid- tell me your opinion on it....

Dispensationalists make it hard to take other Christians seriously. Sorry.

Seriously though, the end of the world fearmongering needs to stop. I'm not even postmillennial but seriously, the defeatist attitude that we are just totally screwed because the end of the world is coming is dangerous. Paul thought the world would end soon in his day. Most American Christians think it will end in our day, although for half of them, its because Barack Obama isn't killing enough foreigners to "keep us safe." Here you have a Muslim who supports more political liberty than your average Christian. I'm all for hitting them on theological grounds but pretending like they just want to kill all of us is insane. Even the radicals mostly want to kill us because of our foreign policy, not our freedoms. Its sad that I have to point this out on RPF of all places.

 

[Muwahid]

Can you go to Hell for stealing money at gunpoint? Does this apply even if you are a cop, and you call your theft "a fine"?

Should Christian cops consider themselves lucky that Biblical salvation is not of works?

Heavy and unnecessary taxes are forbidden in Islam, the Quraysh used to levy a heavy tax on caravans which passed through Mecca, there was no need for the tax besides greed, so Islam abolished it.

On the flipside as citizens, there's something like an implicit contract we've all signed to abide by the law, and can only turn against it forcefully when it starts to becomes impossible to change rationally and it affects our livelihoods greatly. Not sure about your second point maybe!

So, how would you deal with the whole utilitarian v absolute morality dilemma where you have cases where you can save (say) five innocent people but it will require you to kill (say) one innocent person? My interpretation of Christianity says that would be wrong even if most "Christians" disagree with me. Taken literally it seems that the person who kills the one innocent person would be simultaneously saving and killing all humanity if you strictly apply the Muslim doctrine. How does Islam deal with ethical dilemmas like that? Mind you, I know you could ask the same question to Christians, and this isn't an attack in any way, just out of curiosity.

You've got me racking my brain on this one. Islam, even in the example I gave Kevin allows for the lesser of two evils, meaning something that's typically sinful is permissible given the right intentions. I wouldn't call it utilitarian, because that ideology infers good comes from utility alone, this is more lesser-of-two-evils.

It's a tough question because it's hard to imagine a realistic scenario. Perhaps a driver fell asleep at the wheel, and is barrelling towards a group of school children, do you think quickly and create a barrier to protect the school children knowing it will mean a head on collision for the sleeping driver? My interpretation would be it's the lesser of two evils to create that barrier. Disagree?

 

[Muwahid]

There are some Christians who take "thou shall not lie" so literally that they would have a problem with that. I'm at least sympathetic to that view, and I don't think it makes one "have issues." At the least I think it would be a shame to tell someone they "have issues" for taking God's Word overly seriously (admittedly, I get that you wouldn't consider the Bible God's Word, but we do.)

Mind you, taking that position would require one to be just as harsh in condemning Christians who say it is OK to sometimes lie (as many do, and I might to in extreme instances, I'm not sure yet) as it would in condemning Muslims, so it doesn't really work if ones goal is just to demonize Islam. But I think its a valid doctrinal stance to take.

The main problem is how this question is framed however. The insinuation Islam allows Muslims to lie non-Muslims is false, the religion of the oppressing party does not matter, its a matter of coercion. Many have come to the conclusion Muslims are allowed to lie while proselytizing in order to attain new converts which is false.

If we're going to look at this on a philosophical level then it's a valid doctrinal question, I agree.

We have to remember that God is omnibenevolent, God allowing one lie under coercion is an aspect of this, if you remain firm, as many of the martyrs had-- there is extra reward for you.

 

[jmdrake]

Haha, jmdrake is literally so ignorant of Islam that it is hilarious that he's even trying to have an intelligent discussion

And you thought of that quip all by your lonesome? So tell me this. Do you believe God wrote the Koran or Satan? Because according to Muwhahid those are your only choices. Didn't take you for a Muslim but I guess you're going for your 21 virgins? Or are you just being a dumbass for the sake of it?

 

[jmdrake]

The word Qur'an means "recitation", the Qur'an was not intended as a book. I'll go over the basics here.

A verse would be revealed to Muhammad ص
He would recite it, and teach it to his companions
He had several scribes, he would have them write it, to teach other people

When Muhammad ص died, the Qur'an was written, probably a few times over on these fragments. During the first caliph, Abu Bakr's reign, he tasked after the battle of Yamamah in which many Haafiz (people who fully memorized the Qur'an) died, Zayd ibn Thaabit with collecting all those fragments from the scribes, and each fragment needed two credible witnesses to authenticate it was indeed written on the command of the prophet.

This is how the first codex of the Qur'an was compiled.

Uthman, later standardized the harf into the original Qurayshi harf (there were six others, in six other dialects revealed to Muhammad ص). He did this because in foreign lands they would argue over who has the correct version, even though both were correct, to clear up confusion, the original harf was distributed to the conquered provinces.

And that's really the end of the story as simplified as I could make it.

Muhammad's ص literacy makes the Qur'an miraculous because he could not read the Abrahamic scriptures yet the Qur'an is filled with the stories of Adam, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, Lot, Job, Noah etc. So in order to naturally explain the existence of the Qur'an we need to find a historical link between highly educated scriptural scholars, and Muhammad ص and even then it does not explain how Muhammad came up with these stories in the form of poetry he did, which was reveered by the Arabs who were very into poetry... and furthermore how did he, Muhammad ص a Qurayshi then give the Qur'an in six different dialects for different Arabs, who were from different tribes? Was Muhammad an Arabic expert and a poet? Where's the historical link?

My point is simple, it would take a committee (even in modern times), to produce something like the Qur'an. You would need at the bare minimum, scholarly knowledge of the biblical scriptures, an expert in Arab poetry, and know many regional dialects of Arabic to disseminate the Qur'an to different Arab tribes.

How did Muhammad ص do it then?

You just told me. His companions wrote the book. You've taken it on faith that he "recited it" to them. I don't.

Edit: And as for Mohammed having the Abrahamic stories, you don't think they could have been told to him from his educated Catholic wife of 25 years? Seriously, what's "miraculous" about reciting something that's already been told to you by someone else? So even if we go with your belief of how the Koran was written, which I neither accept nor reject, that's no proof of a miracle. Khadija and her cousin tell some stories, Mohammed recites them to his friends, he also recites some stories about heaven and virgins, throws in some Arab mythology about jinns, adds some stuff about his own views of morality and war, his friends write them down, they compile it all together after he dies, there are some discrepancies, someone else cleans it all up, and "presto", we have the Koran.

 

[westkyle]

I may not agree with Muhawid, but I respect him greatly. He is a good witness for his faith, because he has integrity, good virtues and is meek. He acts more like Christ than do many who call themselves Christians.

I may have said this before, but I do not agree that Christianity is the only way. That said, I have never come across a post of yours that has been negative and have enjoyed many concerning different saints from Christianity. Peace, brother.

 

[TER]

I may have said this before, but I do not agree that Christianity is the only way. That said, I have never come across a post of yours that has been negative and have enjoyed many concerning different saints from Christianity. Peace, brother.

you must have skipped over many of my posts then! I can be negative and unkind. It is problem of mine I have to keep working on.

 

[Muwahid]

You just told me. His companions wrote the book. You've taken it on faith that he "recited it" to them. I don't.

Edit: And as for Mohammed having the Abrahamic stories, you don't think they could have been told to him from his educated Catholic wife of 25 years? Seriously, what's "miraculous" about reciting something that's already been told to you by someone else? So even if we go with your belief of how the Koran was written, which I neither accept nor reject, that's no proof of a miracle. Khadija and her cousin tell some stories, Mohammed recites them to his friends, he also recites some stories about heaven and virgins, throws in some Arab mythology about jinns, adds some stuff about his own views of morality and war, his friends write them down, they compile it all together after he dies, there are some discrepancies, someone else cleans it all up, and "presto", we have the Koran.

Did you just say Khadijah was a Catholic?

jmdrake, why do you keep digging this hole you're in?