It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Muhammad - Prophet or Profiteer of God?

page: 23
4
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 06:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by kangjia57
Reply to george_gaz

[Wont become an Islamic state till majority are Muslims,and when majority are Muslims,it will indeed become a Islamic state.

Well if you don’t pay tax than you can keep the cash in your pocket matey!




Wrong budd!!!! You need to take your terrorist dreams somewhere else. This is the problem with Islam. It breads guys like this. I dare you to walk into a pub that has true Brits in it and start saying that.

[edit on 10-12-2007 by Sky watcher]

[edit on 10-12-2007 by Sky watcher]




posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 06:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Odium
 


Its late and ive only just seen your post, so a wiki page will have to quench your thirst for now. It appears that you must have only read one, not both, otherwise you would've noticed the similarities already. Therefore, when I get the chance, I will dust off my bible and qu'ran and find some nice verses for you, please be patient though, because whilst I know general stories, I believe in neither religion, so I do not know verses and in which parts they are contained off the top of my head.

en.wikipedia.org...'an



[edit on 10-12-2007 by mrmanuva]



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 06:43 PM
link   
what's the point in showing interpretations, noble meaning in words that are in reality practiced for slavery and genocide.

No need to research a book for meaning, when it is out there - in practice. If its ok to stone a woman because she was raped or kill one if she let her students name a toy or cut off the hands of a thief - AND have people justify such "laws", I dont need to look at the book, the proof is right there.

[edit on 12/10/2007 by 2believeor0]



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 07:27 PM
link   
reply to post by mrmanuva
 


I meant the parts like: at the expense of women, etcetera.

The Bible is part of the Qur'an.
It is why Muslims in the U.K. happily send their children to christian schools.



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 07:28 PM
link   
reply to post by 2believeor0
 


You mean, the parts that aren't in the Qur'an and are thus laws socially created by the people of the region? That are rather similar to the way the Catholic Church treated women for over 1000 years and so on and so fourth.



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 07:35 PM
link   
reply to post by yahn goodey
 


You just shot yourself in the foot there boy.

Palestine was created on the 25 of April 1920 and was effective from the 29 of September 1923. This included the land that Israel was now on. It was part of the League of Nation's Mandate A.

The British then changed their mind after agreeing to hand the land over to the Arabs of the region. It was never intended to be given to the Jewish people and was given to them because of WW2.

Your arguement would also be better explained as:
You are promised a house.
Someone kills a person.
That persons brother is given your house.

Oh that seems fair?



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 07:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by AshleyD
reply to post by mrmanuva
 


I couldn't agree more. All he really did was take the Jewish testimony and turned it into an Arab testimony. Instead of the descendants of Isaac (the Jews) being the chosen people, Islam claims the descendants of Ishmael (the Arabs) are the chosen people.

He also took Jewish and Christian eschatology and gave it an Arab spin. Basically none of the prophecies in the Koran differ from Biblical prophecies. They are merely switched to an Arab perspective.

Personally, I think Mohammad was a deceiver who wanted to create a religion to push the agenda of his own Arab people, to spread his own people's power and territory, to subjugate women, and to allow the things he personally wanted such as multiple wives.

Hmmm...but 're-interpreting' the bible for one's own agenda is also an accusation that can be levelled at the Christians too. In fact, the Jews (legitimately) made exactly the same kind of statements about the early Christian church that Christians now make again Islam. What goes around, comes around, huh?


J.


[edit on 12/10/2007 by AshleyD]



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 07:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Sky watcher
 


True Brits?

You mean, people who'd hit a man for having a different opinion and in turn be directly the same as him? I think they are just as bad to be honest. :-)



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 01:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Grenade
If i was referring to Muslims, i personally would have used the word Allah, not God.
(As i personally see them as two different things... Allah being a Muslims interpretation of the creator, God being my opinion.)


Just to clarify, the words mean the same. Allah is Arabic for 'The God', from the the words 'al' meaning 'the' and 'illah' meaning 'god'


Originally posted by Grenade
You seem like a nice chap so lets not nit pick each others words in the future
Im sure being the intelligent person that you are, we share lots of common beliefs and ideas.


Not nit-picking, just clarifying because we have ignorants in this thread who don't bother to read the whole thing and continue to state their opinions as fact. The sad part is it's happening on both sides. Sigh...

In this post I'm making a clarification because I predict that if I don't, some idiot will come along and say that 'Allah' is the name of some kinda 'moon god', when that's not even true from an etymological perspective. But I also predict that this post won't matter for those who choose to remain ignorant. It's really sad. Ignorance of others' customs and beliefs is the number one reason the world can't be more harmonious, I belief -- both sides will not relent and neither side wants to make an effort to understand each other. Bellicose attitudes will culminate in conflict, obviously. At any rate, I post anyway on the off-chance that someone with a more open mind comes along and reads it.

Anyway, Muslims believe that one could not define God or imagine Him, because He is beyond comprehension... seems like it's not so dissimilar to your own personal interpretation after all



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 03:51 AM
link   
reply to post by blueorder
 

Blueorder, are you really saying that according to the Quran women are not equal to men? There are so many verses that agree to the equality of men and women, I am amazed. According to the Quran, they are equal in the eyes of God, they are equal in that they should both get rewarded with respect only to the effort they put in (not their gender), they are equal in that they are both entitled to their earnings, they are equal in their chances, they are equal in the protection they gain from God, they are equal in that they will not be judged on gender, there are so many examples, that I'm going to stop now. Surah 3:195, Surah 4:32, Surah 4:124, Surah 6:139, Surah 9:67-72, Surah 16:97, Surah 33:35,Surah 33:58, Surah 33:73, Surah 40:40, Surah 42:49-50, Surah 47:19, Surah 48:5-6, Surah 57:13, Surah 57:18, Surah 60:10.
BTW, the only references I can find about Ahmad Al Qataani is from the article you quoted. He can't be a very important person if that is all he ever said. He doesn't even have a wiki page on him. Could you provide some detail? Because most sources agree that (whatever the reasons- overpopulation, breeding, etc), Islam IS the fastest growing religion.


reply to post by mrmanuva
 


Originally posted by mrmanuva
Personally, I see Muhammad as a man who rehashed the bible in order to gain power, influence, money and the "justification" (his words were from god afterall) to act in any way which he saw fit. To me, he simply rewrote the bible to give men the power to do almost whatever they want, at the expense of women (clothing, multiple wives allowed for men but not husbands for women etc) and people of other religions (holy war).

I know you said this was just your opinion, but you also said that it was based off evidence that you had seen so far. I'd just like to clarify some things:

* For the 1st twelve years after he received the Revelation, Muhammad had to preach in hiding. When he publicly started preaching he was insulted, mocked and ridiculed. His entire clan was boycotted by the Meccans so that they could not buy food, buy goods, socialise or live within the city. It was during this time that his wife and his uncle (who was his protector since he had been orphaned) died. It was only after migrating to Madinah that Muhammad escaped the Meccans. I get the feeling that there would have been better ways to get power and money than this.

* If Muhammad did rehash the Bible (which I find unlikely for so many reasons), he certainly didn't make it any worse (I have no wish to malign the Bible, I hope no one takes it this way):
- Muslims (both men and women) were now allowed to divorce as a last resort if the marriage was not working (Not allowed in the Bible).
- Equality of the sexes extolled in many places in the Quran (Equality of MEN is mentioned in the Bible, and perhaps women are included in this, but nothing specifically saying that men and women are equal).
- Polygamy: The only specific command against polygamy I can find in the Bible is not to have MANY wives. I can't tell what 'many' means, but if the Biblical figures are anything to go by, it could be a lot. The Quran limits this to only 4, and in fact, only 1 if you cannot support and treat them equally. To say that Muhammad started Islam because he wanted multiple wives is silly, because polygamy was rampant much before Muhammad came along. He certainly didn't start it, and in fact, limited it.
- Many Biblical punishments greatly reduced (Punishment for adultery changed to punishment for public adultery, and reduced to lashes instead of stoning).
- Treatment of slaves greatly stressed, and a mechanism started by which slavery could be ended (Freeing of slaves given great importance, if slave runs away they should not be sought again, etc.)
- I don't know what you meant by 'clothing', the Bible says that women should cover their heads. The Quran only recommends this while travelling, otherwise it only mentions that both men and women should be modest.
- Conditions for fighting, restrictions while fighting, prevention of brutality while fighting was all greatly increased in the Quran.


reply to post by AshleyD
 

AshleyD, as I mentioned before, Muslims don't lay claim to Palestine because of some 'Chosen One' thing relating to the lineage of Abraham through Ishmael. There is no 'Chosen Race' concept in Islam. All are equal. Muslims do not believe they are the 'Chosen Race' (in opposition to Judaism or something).

[edit on 11-12-2007 by babloyi]



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 03:57 AM
link   
reply to post by jimbo999
 


all well and good jimbo, but why should we in the west timewarp a thousand years to accomodate people who have not progressed beyond such archaic behaviour



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 04:09 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


great post



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 08:57 AM
link   
We have also touched on whether Islam espouses peace or war, with the consensus that both are preached.

The problem I have, even from reading the "moderates'" comments on here, it is never "peace" WITHOUT any caveats, ie, preaches peace but allows for "defence" in war- the problem is "holy war" can be interpreted in many ways, for example, some followers of Islam, while on the one hand preaching peace, can excuse the violence, because they are in a state of "war" because of the very existence of unbelievers.

Say what you like about Jesus but he wasn't a warmonger.

I believe the Koran to be Muhammad's own interpretation of previous Abrahamic books and teachings, adapated to suit himself

(others may say this about Jesus, but he certainly didn't justify war, love your enemy, turn the other cheek etc)



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 09:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by blueorder
The problem I have, even from reading the "moderates'" comments on here, it is never "peace" WITHOUT any caveats, ie, preaches peace but allows for "defence" in war- the problem is "holy war" can be interpreted in many ways, for example, some followers of Islam, while on the one hand preaching peace, can excuse the violence, because they are in a state of "war" because of the very existence of unbelievers.

The problem is, the term 'holy war' doesn't appear anywhere in the Quran. And nowhere in the Quran does it say that one must be in a constant state of war because of the very existence of unbelievers. As I mentioned, there are some very strict conditions present in the Quran to be allowed to fight, and 'existence of unbelievers is not there'.
Then again, that is pretty irrelevant to my main point. If everyone was peaceful, then there would never be any need to defend oneself. Problem is, humans are not. If someone attacked you, or your family, you might be noble enough to 'turn the other cheek' or 'love your enemy', but you cannot expect everyone else to follow you. People have a right to defend themselves.



Originally posted by blueorder
Say what you like about Jesus but he wasn't a warmonger.

I believe the Koran to be Muhammad's own interpretation of previous Abrahamic books and teachings, adapated to suit himself

(others may say this about Jesus, but he certainly didn't justify war, love your enemy, turn the other cheek etc)

These two people disagree with you:
Grabbing the Tiger by the tail
Preparing Christians for the slaughter



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 09:53 AM
link   
babloyi whats your views on sufism?

Do you agree with them being total spiritual?



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 10:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by babloyi

The problem is, the term 'holy war' doesn't appear anywhere in the Quran. And nowhere in the Quran does it say that one must be in a constant state of war because of the very existence of unbelievers. As I mentioned, there are some very strict conditions present in the Quran to be allowed to fight, and 'existence of unbelievers is not there'.
Then again, that is pretty irrelevant to my main point. If everyone was peaceful, then there would never be any need to defend oneself. Problem is, humans are not. If someone attacked you, or your family, you might be noble enough to 'turn the other cheek' or 'love your enemy', but you cannot expect everyone else to follow you. People have a right to defend themselves.


On my own (non religiously inspired level) I believe in defending oneself.

What I am talking about is the religious book, and subsequent widely agreed teachings in relation to Muhammad, which gives approval to violent actions.

Right, tell me the crack with these references (I will admit I am no koranic scholar, so please assist)

"Qur'an:9:5 "Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war."

Ishaq:324 "He said, ‘Fight them so that there is no more rebellion, and religion, all of it, is for Allah only. Allah must have no rivals.'"

Qur'an:8:65 "O Prophet, urge the faithful to fight. If there are twenty among you with determination they will vanquish two hundred; if there are a hundred then they will slaughter a thousand unbelievers, for the infidels are a people devoid of understanding."

Qur'an:9:19 "Do you make the giving of drink to pilgrims, or the maintenance of the Mosque, equal to those who fight in the Cause of Allah? They are not comparable in the sight of Allah. Those who believe, and left their homes, striving with might, fighting in Allah's Cause with their goods and their lives, have the highest rank in the sight of Allah."

Qur'an:2:193 "Fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief) and religion is only for Allah. But if they cease/desist, let there be no hostility except against infidel disbelievers."

Qur'an:4:94 "Believers, when you go abroad to fight wars in Allah's Cause, investigate carefully, and say not to anyone who greets you: ‘You are not a believer!' Coveting the chance profits of this life (so that you may despoil him). With Allah are plenteous spoils and booty."





These two people disagree with you:


I do not see the words of Jesus there?

[edit on 11-12-2007 by blueorder]



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 10:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by blueorder
On my own (non religiously inspired level) I believe in defending oneself.

What I am talking about is the religious book, and subsequent widely agreed teachings in relation to Muhammad, which gives approval to violent actions.

Right, tell me the crack with these references (I will admit I am no koranic scholar, so please assist)

My pleasure to! Still, just to tell you, these same quotes have continuously popped up all over ATS, and I've addressed them many times already. Still, no harm in doing them again (Apologies for the large quotes, I'd direct you to a link of the passages, but you might misunderstand me):


Okay, first off, you said:

Originally posted by blueorder
"Qur'an:9:5 "Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war."



Surah Al-Tauba [9:3-7]:
And an announcement from Allah and His Messenger, to the people (assembled) on the day of the Great Pilgrimage,- that Allah and His Messenger dissolve (treaty) obligations with the Pagans. If then, ye repent, it were best for you; but if ye turn away, know ye that ye cannot frustrate Allah. And proclaim a grievous penalty to those who reject Faith. (But the treaties are) not dissolved with those Pagans with whom ye have entered into alliance and who have not subsequently failed you in aught, nor aided any one against you. So fulfil your engagements with them to the end of their term: for Allah loveth the righteous. But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. If one amongst the Pagans ask thee for asylum, grant it to him, so that he may hear the word of Allah; and then escort him to where he can be secure. That is because they are men without knowledge.

In case you don't want to read through the whole thing, it is talking about a treaty between the Meccans and the Muslims. The Meccans broke the treaty, so Allah gave permission to the Muslims to fight them after the appointed time of the treaty was over.


Then, from the same surah, you quoted:

Originally posted by blueorder
Qur'an:9:19 "Do you make the giving of drink to pilgrims, or the maintenance of the Mosque, equal to those who fight in the Cause of Allah? They are not comparable in the sight of Allah. Those who believe, and left their homes, striving with might, fighting in Allah's Cause with their goods and their lives, have the highest rank in the sight of Allah."



Surah Al-Tauba [9:19-20]:
Do ye make the giving of drink to pilgrims, or the maintenance of the Sacred Mosque, equal to (the pious service of) those who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and strive with might and main in the cause of Allah? They are not comparable in the sight of Allah: and Allah guides not those who do wrong. Those who believe, and suffer exile and strive with might and main, in Allah's cause, with their goods and their persons, have the highest rank in the sight of Allah: they are the people who will achieve (salvation).

See, this is why I stressed the importance of the meaning of the word Jihad. It means 'striving', not 'fighting'!


And then:

Originally posted by blueorder
Qur'an:8:65 "O Prophet, urge the faithful to fight. If there are twenty among you with determination they will vanquish two hundred; if there are a hundred then they will slaughter a thousand unbelievers, for the infidels are a people devoid of understanding."


This is talking about a specific time of war, when the Meccans broke a treaty against Muhammad. I'd quote the entire thing to show you, but that'd be too much. Let me just direct your attention to a verse a few lines above:

Surah Al-Anfal [8:61]:
But if the enemy incline towards peace, do thou (also) incline towards peace, and trust in Allah: for He is One that heareth and knoweth (all things).



Also:

Originally posted by blueorder
Qur'an:2:193 "Fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief) and religion is only for Allah. But if they cease/desist, let there be no hostility except against infidel disbelievers."



Surah Bakarah [2:190-193]:
Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors. And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have Turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith. But if they cease, Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. And fight them on until there is no more Tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah; but if they cease, Let there be no hostility except to those who practise oppression.

I'd say there is a VERY big difference between 'infidel disbelievers' and 'those who practice oppression'. Which translation are you using?


Lastly:

Originally posted by blueorder
Qur'an:4:94 "Believers, when you go abroad to fight wars in Allah's Cause, investigate carefully, and say not to anyone who greets you: ‘You are not a believer!' Coveting the chance profits of this life (so that you may despoil him). With Allah are plenteous spoils and booty."



Surah An-Nisa [4:94]:
O ye who believe! When ye go abroad in the cause of Allah, investigate carefully, and say not to any one who offers you a salutation: "Thou art none of a believer!" Coveting the perishable goods of this life: with Allah are profits and spoils abundant. Even thus were ye yourselves before, till Allah conferred on you His favours: Therefore carefully investigate. For Allah is well aware of all that ye do.

I don't quite see what the problem is with this quote. It warns against doing exactly what you accuse muslims of doing: wanting to kill all the 'infidels'.



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Beachcoma

Originally posted by Grenade
If i was referring to Muslims, i personally would have used the word Allah, not God.
(As i personally see them as two different things... Allah being a Muslims interpretation of the creator, God being my opinion.)


Just to clarify, the words mean the same. Allah is Arabic for 'The God', from the the words 'al' meaning 'the' and 'illah' meaning 'god'

 

Not to me, when i refer to God i refer to a collective spirit of each and everyone of us, not a creator.



Anyway, Muslims believe that one could not define God or imagine Him, because He is beyond comprehension... seems like it's not so dissimilar to your own personal interpretation after all


By referring to God as "he" then you are implying he is male? As i said i do not believe in God as a being of any sort, just the fabric of the universe which ties us and everything around us together. I think i will create a new word, in future i will use a different word, say for example the underlying collective spirit. So, my god is now called Tucs. And i am a prophet of Tucs as this is how i percieve the universe.

All followers may join my religion for a one off fee of £9.99 + the devotion of you and your future generations with maybe a random crusade or two.

Any diciples in the wings? I will reveal all in my up and coming book the Tu'ran.



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 11:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by babloyi
My pleasure to! Still, just to tell you, these same quotes have continuously popped up all over ATS, and I've addressed them many times already. Still, no harm in doing them again (Apologies for the large quotes, I'd direct you to a link of the passages, but you might misunderstand me):


ok cheers for taking the time



Surah Al-Tauba [9:3-7]:
And an announcement from Allah and His Messenger, to the people (assembled) on the day of the Great Pilgrimage,- that Allah and His Messenger dissolve (treaty) obligations with the Pagans. If then, ye repent, it were best for you; but if ye turn away, know ye that ye cannot frustrate Allah. And proclaim a grievous penalty to those who reject Faith. (But the treaties are) not dissolved with those Pagans with whom ye have entered into alliance and who have not subsequently failed you in aught, nor aided any one against you. So fulfil your engagements with them to the end of their term: for Allah loveth the righteous. But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. If one amongst the Pagans ask thee for asylum, grant it to him, so that he may hear the word of Allah; and then escort him to where he can be secure. That is because they are men without knowledge.

In case you don't want to read through the whole thing, it is talking about a treaty between the Meccans and the Muslims. The Meccans broke the treaty, so Allah gave permission to the Muslims to fight them after the appointed time of the treaty was over.


so basically saying double cross them back, but only offer charity for those that repent? Seems quite extreme to me?





Qur'an:9:19 "Do you make the giving of drink to pilgrims, or the maintenance of the Mosque, equal to those who fight in the Cause of Allah? They are not comparable in the sight of Allah. Those who believe, and left their homes, striving with might, fighting in Allah's Cause with their goods and their lives, have the highest rank in the sight of Allah."

Surah Al-Tauba [9:19-20]:
Do ye make the giving of drink to pilgrims, or the maintenance of the Sacred Mosque, equal to (the pious service of) those who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and strive with might and main in the cause of Allah? They are not comparable in the sight of Allah: and Allah guides not those who do wrong. Those who believe, and suffer exile and strive with might and main, in Allah's cause, with their goods and their persons, have the highest rank in the sight of Allah: they are the people who will achieve (salvation).

See, this is why I stressed the importance of the meaning of the word Jihad. It means 'striving', not 'fighting'!


fighting could easily fall under "Those who believe, and suffer exile and strive with might and main, in Allah's cause, with their goods and their persons, have the highest rank in the sight of Allah:"?



Qur'an:8:65 "O Prophet, urge the faithful to fight. If there are twenty among you with determination they will vanquish two hundred; if there are a hundred then they will slaughter a thousand unbelievers, for the infidels are a people devoid of understanding."
This is talking about a specific time of war, when the Meccans broke a treaty against Muhammad. I'd quote the entire thing to show you, but that'd be too much. Let me just direct your attention to a verse a few lines above:
"But if the enemy incline towards peace, do thou (also) incline towards peace, and trust in Allah: for He is One that heareth and knoweth (all things)."


contradicted above, only give peace to those who repent or are not infidels?


Qur'an:2:193 "Fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief) and religion is only for Allah. But if they cease/desist, let there be no hostility except against infidel disbelievers."



Surah Bakarah [2:190-193]:
Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors. And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have Turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith. But if they cease, Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. And fight them on until there is no more Tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah; but if they cease, Let there be no hostility except to those who practise oppression.


I'd say there is a VERY big difference between 'infidel disbelievers' and 'those who practice oppression'. Which translation are you using?"


Not sure in fairness, but this sentence is rather "hazy"

"And fight them on until there is no more Tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah; but if they cease, Let there be no hostility except to those who practise oppression."

The first line says fight on until there is faith in Allah- ie convert them, yet in the last sentence it opposes "oppression", fighting until conversion would be oppressive



Qur'an:4:94 "Believers, when you go abroad to fight wars in Allah's Cause, investigate carefully, and say not to anyone who greets you: ‘You are not a believer!' Coveting the chance profits of this life (so that you may despoil him). With Allah are plenteous spoils and booty."



Surah An-Nisa [4:94]:
O ye who believe! When ye go abroad in the cause of Allah, investigate carefully, and say not to any one who offers you a salutation: "Thou art none of a believer!" Coveting the perishable goods of this life: with Allah are profits and spoils abundant. Even thus were ye yourselves before, till Allah conferred on you His favours: Therefore carefully investigate. For Allah is well aware of all that ye do.


I don't quite see what the problem is with this quote. It warns against doing exactly what you accuse muslims of doing: wanting to kill all the 'infidels'.

why would they be going abroad to fight in wars, if it is a book of peace?

[edit on 11-12-2007 by blueorder]



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 11:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Grenade
By referring to God as "he" then you are implying he is male?


Nah. I'm using the word 'he' because that's how it's usually done. God is neither male nor female. God just is.

Anyway, here is a little thought on extremists and those who use religion to justify cruelty:

It occurred to me that the very same mistranslations and out of context references to the Qur'an used by people who claim Islam is a violent religion are probably used by Muslim extremists to justify murder. That would make sense, wouldn't it?



new topics




 
4
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join