Muhammad - Prophet or Profiteer of God?

page: 8
4
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 6 2007 @ 04:51 PM
link   
You better hope that the Vice and Vitrue police arent monitoring this site. The Sharia says that you should be flogged for defaming the prophet.


I think that both descriptions are correct, it just depends on how you look at things from a religious perspective.




posted on Dec, 6 2007 @ 07:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by kangjia57
Reply to blueorder

the point is he was involved and actively led several battles

All the battles were defensive!If someone attacked you, what would you do? I am sure you are not gona stand and watch and say matey please have mercy on me while hes about to stab you? Or are you?


Apparently a man named Jesus was attacked and he just let them attack him. He kinda proved a point by letting people kill him too. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.

Shall I start naming countries that are not Muslim countries and are stunted nations?

Why don't you name the Muslim countries that are modern and pleasant?

[edit on 6-12-2007 by Merle8]



posted on Dec, 6 2007 @ 07:25 PM
link   
Muhammad was not devine in anyway. He is a fake, The Arabs were just jealous and wanted their own religion to suite their needs. Sorry but thats the truth. Having said that, I don't care who you believe in as long as your a good person who does not rape, Beat women or kill in the name of your god by blowing your own ignorant rear up and taking innocent people with you. If you want to be a martar for god then blow yourself up in a empty desert where know one will be hurt. Thats how you help your cause and help out the civilized world. Peace be with you.



posted on Dec, 6 2007 @ 07:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Grenade
 


Well I've done research on Islam, and my honest opinion is that the majority of Muslims do have the capacity of becoming full-fledged terrorists. Why, you may ask? Because it is in the Quran, their Jihad against the infidels is the war that the political left does not want anyone to realize. They want the entire world to be ruled by Islam, and they are trying their best at killing all infidels who oppose that...you can see this by inseparable tie between religion and government in nations in the middle-east. That really is what is going on in the back of their minds. So, I'm not trying to insult anyone, if they do not think this is how it is, this is simply how I see it, and so far I have never had a Muslim deny any of what I've said so far.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 02:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Kacen
 

Hey Kacen! Sorry for the late reply. I had gone to sleep for the night. As far as I can tell, the women being the twin-halves of men can refer to any number of things: The fact that the Quran says that God created everything in pairs, to emphasise the importance of marriage in Islam, etc.

As for the other Hadith, like I said, I don't have it, so I can't really tell. There are of course, many things that Muhammad did that were not meant to be taken as an example. For instance, there is a Hadith where Muhammad said (while eating), that he liked Vinegar. Or there is another Hadith where Muhammad said that he disliked eating reptiles (snakes, lizards, turtles, etc.), and another Hadith that mentioned that Muhammad had a black shawl that he was attached to. This certainly doesn't mean that we should be quaffing vinegar in huge quantities, or that we should never try eating reptiles, or that we should only have black shawls. Certain schools of thought (wahabiism for example) do say that we should live our lives EXACTLY as Muhammad did 1500 years ago (no technology, no progress, etc). This is completely out of sync with the Quran.


reply to post by blueyedevil666
 

Hey BED!
Can you tell me where you got that from? Because it has been posted before, and unfortunately, I have to say, it is a lot of nonsense. Let me clarify a few things:

The Gospel of Jesus does not exist today in an uncorrupted form. There is no Gospel today about which we can say "Jesus wrote/dictated that". While there may originally have been such a thing (Q?), it certainly does not exist today. The Quran when talking about the 'Injeel' (Gospel of Christ) is referring to what he originally taught, which muslims believe is not the same as what Christians today practice.
On a side note: You mention that God is eternally the father of the Son, but the Bible disagrees with you. The very word 'begotten' means to create, or to father, or to sire. You can't have something 'eternally begotten' (and I have not seen this term in the Bible).

The 'Muhammad says' stuff is pretty out there (and untrue), and you (or the place you copied that from) does not seem to be aware of the fact that 'Jihad' most definitely does not mean 'killing and fighting'. As for the verses you quoted, it is quite easy to check up and find out (by reading a few lines before and after) that it is talking about during a time of war.

There is no such alternative as 'Non-believers have to pay tax or die'. There are many situations where Jizya is waived (when it is not a time of war, when the rulers cannot actually provide protection, when the person decides to join the fight instead of paying Jizya, etc).

About your 'list' with the countries, I apoligise, but I can't do anything but laugh. Some of that stuff is so silly. Besides, what a country/individual may or may not have done has little bearing with what the Quran and Hadith say.

About your comparison of Muhammad and Jesus, first off, I don't think it is a valid comparison. Jesus lived in relatively peaceful times, under a civilised authority (The Romans) and had free reign to preach as he wished. Muhammad lived in a society of only recently settled nomads, with no controlling/overseeing civilisation, and constant tribal wars.

* All Muslims agree that Muhammad was never prophesied: I don't know where you got this idea, but it is untrue. Muslims all agree that Muhammad was prophesied in almost all the scriptures before him.

* Muhammad never performed any miracles: Yes, Muhammad said his biggest miracle was the Quran (and if you read it considering it was written 1500 years ago, yes it is pretty unbelievable), but it is wrong to say he never performed any miracle. He was asked by the Pagans of Mecca to do something as proof that he was a Prophet. He then split the moon in two, and then combined it together again. Of course, the Meccans said the same thing you'd probably say if you had known about it: Muhammad was a sorceror (and you'd go on to quote how Jesus warned against false prophets and their miracles: see, whichever way you go, you can't win with some people).

* Muhammad certainly didn't go on 80 war campaigns, even the wiki article (which seems to have added occasions that were not even battles) has many fewer than that, and a link a few pages up limited it to 9, and if his aim was to spread Islam across borders and as far as possible, he would have had battles against countries outside Arabia, which he never did. And as I mentioned before, Jesus did not have to go into any battle, because he lived in pretty peaceful times. A better comparison would be Abraham or Moses who were their community's religious as well as political leaders. And both of them lived in pretty uncivilised times, where they had to fight for their survival.

Comparison over, and on to your other points: No country in the world today imposes Jizya tax. However, there is no country in the world today that can be called an 'Islamic country'. Also, I don't know where you got the Hadith about muslims killing each other from, it is obviously nonsense, because both Ali and Uthman died much after the death of Muhammad, so he couldn't have commented on their deaths.


reply to post by yahn goodey
 

Hey Yahn Goodey. This is also a misconception. Friday is not the sabbath day of the muslims, it is just the day of the week when they have congregational prayers. The idea of making it a holiday (when you don't have to work) came later. According to the Quran, the forcing of the Sabbath day was removed by Allah, and was only for the communities before that time (You can remember how outraged the Pharisees got when they perceived Jesus breaking the Sabbath).

reply to post by laiguana
 

Laiguana, see my point about the meaning of Jihad in my reply to blueeyeddevil



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 02:46 AM
link   


By Rick Mathes



Last month I attended my annual training session that’s required for maintaining my state prison security clearance. During the training session, there was a presentation by three speakers representing the Roman Catholic, Protestant and Muslim faiths, who explained each of their belief systems.
I was particularly interested in what the Islamic Imam had to say. The Imam gave a great presentation of the basics of Islam, complete with a video.
After the presentations, time was provided for questions and answers. When it was my turn, I directed my question to the Imam and asked: “Please, correct me if I’m wrong, but I understand that most Imams and clerics of Islam have declared a holy jihad (holy war) against the infidels of the world. And, that by killing an infidel, which is a command to all Muslims, they are assured of a place in heaven. If that’s the case, can you give me the definition of an infidel?”
There was no disagreement with my statements, and without hesitation, he replied, “Non-believers!”
I responded, “So, let me make sure I have this straight. All followers of Allah have been commanded to kill everyone who is not of your faith so they can go to Heaven. Is that correct?”
The expression on his face changed from one of authority and command to that of a little boy who had just gotten caught with his hand in the cookie jar. He sheepishly replied, “Yes.”
I then stated, “Well, sir, I have a real problem trying to imagine Pope John Paul commanding all Catholics to kill those of your faith, or of Dr. Stanley ordering Protestants to do the same in order to go to Heaven!”
I continued, “I also have a problem with being your friend when you and your brother clerics are telling your followers to kill me. Let me ask you a question. Would you rather have your Allah who tells you to kill me in order to go to Heaven or my Jesus who tells me to love you because I am going to Heaven and He wants you to be with me?” You could have heard a pin drop as the Imam hung his head in shame.
Needless to say, the organizers and/or promoters of the “diversification” train seminar were not happy with my way of dealing with the Islamic Imam and exposing the truth about the Muslim’s belief.



When the Muslim claims that he believes in peace, it only refers to fellow Muslims. If your an "infidel" there is no peace. How to be a good Muslim and go to heaven, well...kill an infidel. If your a Muslim and deny this is in the Qu'ran then you are being untruthful and guilty of braking the laws of Abraham (ten commandments).

It is written in the Qu'ran that the soul that sins will be put to death. It also states that the soul that sins though it possess the whole world would in vain give it as a ransom. Thus you have no hope of seeing heaven as anything you offer is in vain. Should you say that you can ransom your soul by good deeds/works then your saying Allah can be bought/bribed by your good deeds/works. If you say that he can not be bought or bribed by good works or deeds then you will pay the price for your sins which is death. Either way you turn your toast.

Now do you believe that Jesus was a prophet and that a prophet can not lie? If you say "yes" to this, then why don't Muslims do what he said? If you try and say the bible is corrupted by translation, I have one that isn't (KJV) and will be glad to read it to you.



"A man who was merely a man and said the things Jesus said wouldn’t be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic on the level of a man who say’s he’s a poached egg, or else he would be the devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this was and is the Son of God or else a mad man or something worse. You can shut Him up for a demon or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God but don’t let us come up with any patronizing nonsense about Him being a great moral teacher He hasn’t left that alternative open"
C. S. Lewis



Was Muhammad a prophet of god, well yes his god (Allah a moon god idle) but not the Living God, the God of all creation.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 02:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by babloyi
Or there is another Hadith where Muhammad said that he disliked eating reptiles (snakes, lizards, turtles, etc.), and another Hadith that mentioned that Muhammad had a black shawl that he was attached to.


Oh... so that's where that came from. What about frogs? I'm not sure about frogs. I've accidentally eaten frogs-leg porridge once. Taste like chicken, really. I actually thought it was chicken porridge until a whole leg came out. Lost my appetite immediately.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 03:25 AM
link   
reply to post by pstrron
 


Hey pstrron! I got that email forwarded to me a long time ago. Gave me quite a laugh! The situation posed is so absurd, and the response by the imam is so unlikely, that it is impossible that the story is true. I checked it up, and at the very most, it is a lie, and at the very least it is a man's attempt to badger a prison inmate.

Also, you seem to be a bit mixed up about the concept of sin and forgiveness in Islam: According to the Quran, it is quite easy to fix yourself up from sin. Just ask God for forgiveness, and repent. Even if you do not do this, God knows what is in the heart, and is infinite in mercy, and may forgive you anyhow.

About the KJV. I doubt any muslim would trust the authenticity of the KJV any more or less than any other version of the Bible currently in circulation.

reply to post by Beachcoma
 


There is nothing wrong with eating frogs if that is what you fancy
. The laws about what is allowed and not allowed to be eaten are clearly outlined in the Quran, and I believe the Hadith add to this only that you should not eat (makrouh instead of being haram) flesh of animals that hunt with their paws/claws.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 03:27 AM
link   
reply to post by babloyi
 


Your interpretation of the term Jihad, whether it be correct or not, doesn't apply to all, including Muslims. They may interpret differently from you and would argue that it can be applied in times of war, a struggle against the infidel oppressors, as I'm sure they would say. Muslims themselves rally in the streets with this word printed on their signs, using it in terms that I and many others can only interpret as a violent conquest against infidels. What the terrorist sympathizers fail to understand is that their interpretations are not the same as the terrorists that they defend. They have a different perception of how Islam is to be lived by and spread...be it through words or actions. It is likely that most if not all muslims view all non-muslims as infidels and as forfeit in the future when they believe Islam will rule the world, they could care less about their fates.

[edit on 7-12-2007 by laiguana]



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 03:39 AM
link   
Reply to babloyi

Hey kangjia! While the practice of homosexuality is condemned in the Quran, I cannot find any instance of a punishment of 'dropping from a mountain', either in the Quran, or in the Hadith. Can you tell me where you got this from?

No still cant find a hadeeth stating it, but what ever I found, the punishment for homosexuality is still death. And after looking at the punishment for adultery, I don’t think it should be very surprising about how harsh the punishment for homosexuality will be.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 03:46 AM
link   
reply to post by laiguana
 


Excuse me? Are you implying that I am a terrorist sympathiser?

What people interpret or don't interpret is not the fault of Islam. There is no interpretation involved here at all, except perhaps in translating the arabic word 'Jihad' into English. I can do that for you. The meaning of the word Jihad has absolutely nothing to do with war or fighting. The term 'Holy War' was not coined by muslims. Jihad literally means 'Struggle'. That is all it means. When taken in context of Islam, it means Striving/struggling towards Allah. When a muslim is defending themself, defending their family, their property, their right to believe, then yes, it is a type of Jihad. This is certainly not the only type of Jihad, nor is it even the main type of Jihad.

Your second point is also very misleading: "Most if not all muslims view all muslims as infidels". What do you mean by infidel? According to the dictionary, it is someone who does not accept a particular faith. In this case, there would be no need for the 'most' in your statement. However, if you are using the term infidel as a translation of 'Kafr', then you would be wrong. A kafr is a person who does not believe in 1 God. Another translation could be a person who actively works against the belief in 1 God. Either way, to say that according to Islam all kafr must die is FALSE, FALSE, FALSE! I cannot stress this enough. So many people think it is a muslims duty to kill all unbelievers. This is FALSE. FALSE. FALSE. It is untrue. I'd be so happy if people got this.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 03:49 AM
link   
So homosexuality is wrong, but it's not wrong for muhammed to be a terrorist pedophile? Sounds a bit awkward.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 03:50 AM
link   
reply to post by kangjia57
 


The punishment for public adultery is lashes. Why should this mean that the punishment for homosexual acts be death?

I'm telling you again, while homosexuality is condemned, there is no prescribed punishment for homosexual acts in the Quran or Authentic Hadith. I know this for a fact. Homosexual Groups within Islam make a great deal about this as a reason for allowance to practice what they like in private (reasoning that I disagree with).



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 03:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by laiguana
So homosexuality is wrong, but it's not wrong for muhammed to be a terrorist pedophile? Sounds a bit awkward.


Whatever you wish to believe, my friend. I have presented all the facts here, and it is your choice to give them a blanket rejection because of your beliefs, or to provide countering information.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 03:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by babloyi
reply to post by laiguana
 


Jihad literally means 'Struggle'. That is all it means. When taken in context of Islam, it means Striving/struggling towards Allah. When a muslim is defending themself, defending their family, their property, their right to believe, then yes, it is a type of Jihad. This is certainly not the only type of Jihad, nor is it even the main type of Jihad.


Well, you only proved my point, they can tie any agenda to that word and interpret it as they wish. Moving on....




YEither way, to say that according to Islam all kafr must die is FALSE, FALSE, FALSE! I cannot stress this enough. So many people think it is a muslims duty to kill all unbelievers. This is FALSE. FALSE. FALSE. It is untrue. I'd be so happy if people got this.


How is this false? As far as I'm aware the greatest atrocities in the world being committed this day is in Islamic based nations. The most recent acts of terrorism, on a global scale, are tied to Islam. Did we already forget the reaction Muslims around the world had after 9/11? I see no falsity in their actions, only denial by their sympathizers.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 03:55 AM
link   
Reply to Kacen

I have gay friends, my two closest friends are lesbians, you really believe in killing them?

If they were somewhere where sharia law is than Of course they should face death. Islam doesn’t allow dirt to spread in society, it teaches HOW TO ILIMINATE IT.

Don’t you think the fact that in such countries where it’s punishable by death, the fact that homosexuals still exists shows it may not be a choice?

They may exist but undercover. Majority won’t accept it and won’t let it become the norm of the society.When they are discovered they are ILIMINATED!

In Palestine homosexuals sometimes are forced to escape to Israel out of fear of death! That shows something…

I am surprised they are allowed to escape.The Palestinians should ELIMINATE them and show them as examples to the rest what happens when you become homosexual.

My mind has genocidal feelings, but seeing Beachcoma calms me down...

I am straightforward and I will state clearly how Islam deals with wrong actions and how it ELIMINATES them.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 04:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by babloyi

What people interpret or don't interpret is not the fault of Islam.



What is it the fault of, the Book of Mormons?


This is really a case of the emperor having no clothes and some people pretending otherwise.

Islam was founded in violence, and continues to this day, most muslims may not kill infidels but I believe this is either because of their inherent humanity, or because they choose to follow certain parts of the Quran, Muslim tradition etc.

As for these islamic terrorists not being muslims, I daresay Bin Laden has read his Koran on several occassions, he may interpret it slightly differently from others, but he is still a Muslim



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 04:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by kangjia57

If they were somewhere where sharia law is than Of course they should face death. Islam doesn’t allow dirt to spread in society, it teaches HOW TO ILIMINATE IT.

They may exist but undercover. Majority won’t accept it and won’t let it become the norm of the society.When they are discovered they are ILIMINATED!

I am surprised they are allowed to escape.The Palestinians should ELIMINATE them and show them as examples to the rest what happens when you become homosexual.

I am straightforward and I will state clearly how Islam deals with wrong actions and how it ELIMINATES them.



Let me repeat, this chap was born and educated in England- this is a Muslim born in England, the sort of person the elite waffle about the joys of "multi culturalism"

Clearly the UK is no place for such people- you have to laugh though, they bang on about being devout, but clearly the wealth offered in the UK is more important that having a life under Sharia Law in Sudan.

Hypocritical and foreign to the UK, never forget it



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 04:29 AM
link   
reply to post by blueorder
 


Book of Mormons? What are you talking about?

So you are saying that Islam is responsible even if what the people who claim to be muslims are doing is in clear contradiction to Islam?

So Jesus/Christianity is responsible for all the slaughter and violence by 'Christians' during the Crusade? So the Christianity is responsible for for burning all those 'witches'? So Christianity is responsible for the spread of STDs and teen pregnancies and high mortality because it condemns the use of the condom? So Hinduism is responsible for the actions of the Tamil Tigers? So Buddhism is responsible for the persecution of non-buddhists in Bhutan?



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 04:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by babloyi
Yes, the followers of Christ were doing so as an expression of their Christianity- thankfully Christianity managed to largely shed its fanatacism and violence several hundred years ago



People will undoutedly use anything in a violent way, be it communism or religion, but pointing out that world and other faiths are not perfect does not lead to equivalence with the actions done in the name of Islam- it stands out head and shoulders above the rest, by some considerable margin

--------------------------------------------
Trimmed big quote

Please read ABOUT ATS: Warnings for excessive quoting, and how to quote

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 7/12/07 by masqua]





top topics
 
4
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join