Syrian Muslim Brotherhood to launch political party - The Caliphate Builds Momentum

reply to post by OpinionatedB


who will you be praying to?

the Caliphate, if it is the Caliphate, will build its house upon the foundation which God provides.

what's your house built on?

Originally posted by OpinionatedB
reply to post by michaelbrux

 

the caliphate of the brotherhood is being built upon the house which the Shaytan provided.....

MY house is the house of the Holy Prophet of Islam (saw)

if what you say is true, then your house is in no danger. and my government's actions are of no consequence.

see how that works?

i sure hope for your sake that you do see how it works.

Originally posted by michaelbrux
reply to post by OpinionatedB

 

i'm sure there is something you and your family can say to convince them to not do such things to you.

instead of wasting time on ATS, perhaps you should be preparing your speech.

if the Caliphate is coming, no one outside of the fertile crescent can stop it.

the shia need to dig deep and find their own solution.

You won't like that solution much. A better solution is to have the US stop backing the Brotherhood like they were brothers or something. No one INSIDE the fertile crescent can do anything about that.

Let me ask you something - do you seriously believe a flowery speech and a few "pretty pleases" really stop bullets?

I Would have laughed at anyone who told me 30 years ago that I'd ever be backing Shiites in anything at all, but I gotta tell you, I've got their backs on this one. A unified Caliphate from Spain to Indonesia is going to be a lot tougher pill to swallow that a scattered bunch of infighting opponents across the same area. It's not going to be only the Shiites the brotherhood decides to X out.

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by michaelbrux
reply to post by OpinionatedB

 

i'm sure there is something you and your family can say to convince them to not do such things to you.

instead of wasting time on ATS, perhaps you should be preparing your speech.

if the Caliphate is coming, no one outside of the fertile crescent can stop it.

the shia need to dig deep and find their own solution.

You won't like that solution much. A better solution is to have the US stop backing the Brotherhood like they were brothers or something. No one INSIDE the fertile crescent can do anything about that.

Let me ask you something - do you seriously believe a flowery speech and a few "pretty pleases" really stop bullets?

I Would have laughed at anyone who told me 30 years ago that I'd ever be backing Shiites in anything at all, but I gotta tell you, I've got their backs on this one. A unified Caliphate from Spain to Indonesia is going to be a lot tougher pill to swallow that a scattered bunch of infighting opponents across the same area. It's not going to be only the Shiites the brotherhood decides to X out.

i have developed this habit of not taking sides. i personally don't see that anything close to a Caliphate is possible, but for the sake of this thread, i've decided to pretend as if it is.

the Ottoman Caliphate lived side by side with a Shiite state in Iran for a long time...so long, I assume they were collaborators.

being that legitimate claimants to both the Ottoman and the Iranian theocratic states still exist, i assume they are currently working together to achieve such an outcome.

and the only conclusion i can draw from this thread is that they don't like how things are unfolding.

is it possible that the Muslim Brotherhood actually represents an obstacle to the Caliphate?

I think so.

for that reason...I need to be absolutely convinced that the US is moving in the direction of re-implementing a condition that it destroyed less than 100 years ago.

none of you guys absolutely convince anyone of anything.

that's why i don't take what you say seriously.

Originally posted by nenothtu
You won't like that solution much. A better solution is to have the US stop backing the Brotherhood like they were brothers or something. No one INSIDE the fertile crescent can do anything about that.

Let me ask you something - do you seriously believe a flowery speech and a few "pretty pleases" really stop bullets?

I Would have laughed at anyone who told me 30 years ago that I'd ever be backing Shiites in anything at all, but I gotta tell you, I've got their backs on this one. A unified Caliphate from Spain to Indonesia is going to be a lot tougher pill to swallow that a scattered bunch of infighting opponents across the same area. It's not going to be only the Shiites the brotherhood decides to X out.

I agree Neno. The US doesn't need to be supporting any group that advocates the killing of people.

It just seems like some kind of move toward the One World Government that we've been warned about for years and could result in the death of many innocent people. This is NOT something our government should be supporting in any way, shape or form!!!

There's at least one Shiite that is very important to me and her feelings on this matter a LOT to me. They are out to KILL her family, friends, everyone who she holds dear and that will NOT be taken lightly!

Genocide is NEVER acceptable !

I take sides all the time, bit in the matter of Syria it's a perplexing thing, because there isn't any even sort-of good side to take. BOTH of the warring factions are entirely useless. That only leaves me with the side of the people caught in the crossfire, and there's not much i can do for them as long as they elect to stay in the crossfire, because it's not my country to run, and what they keep inside Syrian borders stays inside Syrian borders - none of my business.

Now in the matter of the Brotherhood and their pursuit of a Caliphate, well, They AREN'T entirely contained within Syria. They already have 4 power centers they are consolidating, and it's only going to get worse from there. The vision of the Brotherhood for the new Caliphate doesn't stop at the Iranian border, nor the Balkans. It runs from Spain all the way to Indonesia, with designs on the rest of the world when they get that swath consolidated. that's why they call it a "Global Caliphate". Links have been posted earlier in the thread to MB designs, right from their own mouths, you probably should read up on them before simply assuming that the Caliphate they intend to establish is commensurate with the old ottoman Empire.

By assuming that the Ottomans and the Persians are working together to restore the old caliphate, you assume wrongly. The Muslim Brotherhood are Egyptian Wahabbis, and they have grander plans for a caliphate than the mere restoration of the old caliphate. Oddly enough, they mean to make Baghdad the capitol of it, and reclaim all the lands that were ever Islamic from Spain to Indonesia as a jumping off point to establishing a global caliphate. They intend to claim all the "Islamic" lands for THEIR variety of Islam, to the exclusion and extermination of all the other brands, since they, in common with most religious folks, believe their brand is the only "right" brand.

that's not going to bode well for Christians or Buddhists or Atheists or any other religion.

Originally posted by michaelbrux

is it possible that the Muslim Brotherhood actually represents an obstacle to the Caliphate?

No. No possibility of that at all.

for that reason...I need to be absolutely convinced that the US is moving in the direction of re-implementing a condition that it destroyed less than 100 years ago.

What condition is that? If you are referring to the old caliphate, the US most certainly did not destroy it. You should re-check your history books if that's what you are thinking.

none of you guys absolutely convince anyone of anything.

that's why i don't take what you say seriously.

I don't expect to convince you of anything at all. It appears that your mind is already made up, and locked tight. Even if I am wrong, and it isn't, I don't expect to convince you of anything. I expect you to convince yourself, by getting curious enough given the points brought up to ferret out the information on your own, rather than working from your own assumptions or just taking my word for it being any different from what you assume. I expect to provide questions that you must find the answers to yourself, if for no other reason than to prove me wrong.

Do it.

Prove me wrong.

For anyone who does not know this Brotherhood: It is the name of an underlying terrorist organization that launched in the eighties of the twenty century a series of attacks against the Syrian state and other sects: Kindergartens, schools, buses, villages, lawyers, doctors, professors, universities, and military officers. They also managed to plant bombs in some vital parts of Damascus such as Al-Azbakiya quarter, in which more than two hundreds of innocent women and children were killed. They also managed to take over one of the most important military schools in Aleppo, the Artillery School, and kill all the students and officers who were “infidels” in their point of view.

The Muslim brotherhood is officially a forbidden party in Syria, and there was actually a very good law – at least in my opinion – that sentences everyone who belongs to this terrorist organization to death.


This is their statement about their desire to rise to power in Syria:



Translation:


A Statement of Support to the People of Syria

With the name of Allah

Allah had said in Quran: “The permission is granted to the fighters for his well, to defeat the injustice and Allah is capable of making them win”, and all prayers and salutations to his messenger Muhammad who has been sent for the mercy of all people, and all prayers and salutations also to Muhammad’s companions and followers until the end of the days.

We are – the Muslim Brotherhood – declare that we have got enough from the politics of the Baath-Regime and his infidel supporters in the past years.

We declare, it is enough after all what we have faced from killing, arresting and displacement against our leaders and followers.

It is time for us to come back home and rule Syria under our principles that come from Islam (Sharia), these principles that have been brought back to life by the greatest renewer of the 20th century Imam Hassan Al-Banna – Allah’s mercy on him.


It is time for our forbidden party to come back home, and there is no way to achieve that goal without igniting and supporting the revolution inside Syria.

The people in Syria have demands: a better life, a more freedom, … and we have to exploit and push them to take actions that guarantee the overthrow of the current government.

The people are now protesting after the allegations of the bloodshed by the government forces.

These demonstrations should be our aid to make our coup and replace the government. We have to ignite rage, incite and exploit that bloodshed and make it our way to come back home and spread our Islamic principles to rule over the political scene in Syria.

It is time to come back home and rule the Syrian Muslim people who live under the umbrella of the secular regime that supports and protects the principles of tolerance, and guarantees the freedom of thinking and embracing whatever belief the people choose. Such a freedom was the main reason that made the other non-Muslim sects of the Syrian people able to step forward and have a rank and a good contribution in the Syrian life, and also share the wealth with the Muslims on their own land.

It is time for us to come back and force all the other non-Muslim sects to shrink and step back. These sects are the infidel Christians, the criminal Alawites and the infidel Druzes.


It is time for us to come back and rule Syria under the name of Allah – the lord of all lords – and his holy Quran, and to impose the Islamic principles on all who oppose us without discrimination.

It is time for our principles to spread among the Syrian Muslims, to bring back the well and the glory of Allah after they have been lost because of these infidel regimes.

So we support the revolution in Syria with all what we have (money, speech, writings and media conferences), because it is the last hope for our principles to gain success, and the only way to overthrow the Baath-Regime, even if that has to cost thousands of lives of innocent people. We have to push the young Muslims to go down the streets in order to ignite this revolution, even if that would lead to their death, because that death means the freedom to those who will come after, and a victory for us. We also assure the right of those people to protest and defense themselves, even if that would cause the death of many policemen and army officers who are basically infidels, they caused a lot of corruption and destruction in our land, so death will be their fair punishment for what they committed.

It is also too important to remind the Syrian Muslims of the intentions of the other sects and their plans against Islam, and against our freedom, so we do not recommend any sort of collaboration even under the most difficult circumstances, because they – in their instincts – have bad feelings and bad intentions for Islam and for his people. We have to make sure that the revolution will be pure Islamic, and with that no other sect would have a share of the credit after its success.


My Notes:

and this is not only in Syria, it is now in almost every single middle eastern country, the arab spring is designed to place the Brotherhood into postiions of governmental power!

It's very difficult for me to imagine the establishment of a global caliphate because there are real issues that divide the Islamic world. The barriers of ethnicity, language, and established cultures are not trivial, and painting that part of the world with such a broad brush to believe that all the people of those regions desire to be part of one government or would idly slip into it seems unlikely.

If anything, the past twenty years of history have shown how difficult it is to keep together political units where there isn't already a strong accepted authority. From the Soviet Union, to Czechoslovakia, to the Balkans, to Ethiopia and Eritrea, or Sudan's recent division, political divisions are getting smaller more often than larger. And if you want a Muslim example of the problems of union, look what a mess Yemen has been.

But, I do think there is some movement toward a union of the Arabic speaking nations and I could imagine a regional entity forming that might include Egypt and Syria since that was tried before. I could imagine neighboring states would go for it as well. While I can't say conclusively that it might not include North Africa, though I imagine Tunisia as a western boundary, I'd be shocked if Iran or any country east of there would ever want to be part of such an entity. I imagine Turkey would pass also.

So, while there might be a pan-Arab movement that has some legs, I sincerely doubt it goes much further than that.

As far as it goes my brothers and friends

you must understand Islam to understand the Caliphate

and when you understand Islam, mainly the Sunnites and Shiites you will come to understand that a caliphate is impossible for the whole Islamic world, eventually there will be a power struggle (which has already started) and this will lead to a third world war, no doubt about it.

The question is, where will zionist israel be during that storm?

as it seems, zionist israel is on the side of the sunnites, evil will support evil, just like how the wahabis are killing Shi'a and Christians and even Sunnites, what happens when this rebel wahabi movement begins to take ACTUAL power, I'm 100% sure that not all muslims will support them, and for those muslims who do not support the wahabis they will get the sword.

whilst the people in the west will look at the Islamic countries and blame it all on Islam, when in reality the true muslims are taking the hits for everyone else.

May god protect the all the good muslims from the tribulations of the salafi wahabis and zionists

reply to post by RizeorDie

May god protect the all the good muslims from the tribulations of the salafi wahabis and zionists

InshaAllah inshaAllah...

Alhamdolillahi Rabbi al Alameen

Originally posted by cassandranova

So, while there might be a pan-Arab movement that has some legs, I sincerely doubt it goes much further than that.

Lookit all the green on that map

Green is the Prophet's color, and is often used to denote pan-Islamic movements, as well as strong identification with Islam as the identifier sees it. That's also why the headbands of Palestinian Shaheed are green.

Green. It's next year's red.

Just a couple of notes on my post above - I said "pan islamic" on purpose, instead of "pan arab", because the two are not the same thing at all - there's lots of Muslims who aren't Arabs... Iran is an entire country full of non-Arab Muslims. They're all Persians.

Also, the Muslim Brotherhood is neither pan Islamic nor pan-Arab. They are Wahabbis, which doesn't even cover all of the Sunnis, much less all Muslims.

There is no need for the rulers to be "all of the Muslims" or even the majority in order to rule - Syria is ruled by Alawites, a minority.

If people are thinking "unified" must by necessity mean "all inclusive" as pertains to the ruling class, they probably ought to re-think that.

reply to post by nenothtu


Thank you for the clarification.

reply to post by nenothtu


Precisely. In the Muslim Brotherhood statement, kindly translated by the member further up the page, we can see that they intend to incite bloodshed, and force other groups - whoever is not desiring Sharia law - to shrink back and decrease in numbers.

Not only that, but it is clear that they intend to kill, steal and destroy, and they believe that they are backed by a God who will reward their activities in Heaven. When they realise that the age of the conquest of kingdoms was actually over a long time ago, to be replaced with an age of reason and forgiveness, it will be too late. They certainly won't find 70 virgins at their perverted mercy when they reach the other side of the curtain.

My honest opinion is that Islam in its entire form is a clever counterfeit of the Jewish/ Christian tradition, inspired by the archangel who fell from grace, otherwise known as Satan. Christianity emphasises that a fulfillment of the ancient Mosaic Law had been achieved in Christ, and therefore we were to now live as sons & daughters under the grace of God, seeking peace alone and not retaliating in violence. (Jews believe that Jesus was not the fulfillment of the Mosaic Law, and therefore they are still living under the burden of total obedience to the strict Mosaic Law, which in our human capacity we can never hope to fulfill).

Then Islam came along - shortly after the earthly ministry of Christ and the establishment of His church - and in its most basic principles it sought to undermine the ministry of Christ, by contradicting the core tenets of the Christian faith.

Namely, the 'angel' who dictated to Mohammed basically states that Jesus never died on the cross, and therefore was not resurrected to provide evidence of his Godhood, and therefore could not provide that which Christianity preaches - the forgiveness of sins, and cleansing from all unrighteousness, through the name and power of Jesus, and through His atoning death (as 'the ransom for many') upon the cross.

The 'angel' states unequivocally that Jesus was not the Son of God, and the ultimate conclusion of the (somewhat considered and comprehensive) attack on the Christian faith is that Mohammed is to be considered a 'greater prophet than Jesus'. In order to be 'saved', according to Mohammed, we must turn from the Christian-taught doctrine that we can accept God's grace towards us - a free gift to us, as we are a stumbling and imperfect humanity. Instead of relying on grace and forgiveness, Islam teaches that you should rely solely on the cold and legalistic demands of Mohammed's new faith-group. The basic idea which then develops is that if we try hard enough to obey Mohammed's commands, as inspired by an 'angel', then God might have mercy and let you into heaven when you die. If you kill infidels (unbelievers) you are more likely to earn God's favour. Completely antithetical to the original teachings of the church of Jesus Christ.

In my humble opinion, Islam is a clever counterfeit designed to create massive amounts of hateful, vengeful people, who are passionately committed to killing as many people as possible, and who are especially determined to destroy the 'heretical' Christians.

As I said, when the God you serve calls himself 'The Greatest Deceiver' (one of Allah's 99 names), well that should be a clue as to his real identity - the fallen archangel, the great pretender - the chief denizen of Hell.


Note - that's not to say that many Muslims cannot ignore the more hateful aspects of their faith's doctrine, and live respectable and essentially holy lifestyles. It's the strict adherence to the deceptive parts of the teaching which leads to the fanaticism.

Someone once said that Satan will provide you with a lake of truth for you to drink, in order that he can disguise the taste of his addition of a cup of deadly poison. This is how he works. Lots of good commands for righteous living, seeded with deadly poisonous doctrine, which will enable the growth of one potential application of the religion as a force through which demons can move at will. This is exactly what has been borne out in the historical and contemporary evidence.

One more thing - Christianity has suffered from an incursion of the demonic, in the example of the Roman Catholic Church of the Middle Ages. Whether there is still an element of demonism involved in the rigid doctrine of certain Christian faith groups is a matter which quite clearly needs some attention, in order that the general public don't see 'religion as a whole' as being hateful.

Sadly, that is the major trend of opinion, and this is especially evident on ATS. People think that 'religion is to blame' for all war and strife. It is not true. The misapplication of true religion, and the deceptions of false religion, are to blame for the war and strife we see.

reply to post by FlyInTheOintment


1. I agree with you that there are many deceivers, in the mould of the great deceiver himself, lived during the past and living in the present.

Your half truth and falsehood portrayal of Islam's version of our Messiah end days is sadly proof of deciet and wilful hatred of Islam. You are decietfully implying Islam view that our Messiah did not die on the cross or resurrected. Let's look at the text from the Koran:-

That they said (in boast), "We killed the Christ Jesus son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah";- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them [or it appeared so unto them], and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not: Nay, Allah raised him up unto Himself; and Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise., [Qur'an 4:157]

The Koran says otherwise. What was critical was that our Messiah was raised up to Heaven. There were many islamic interpretations. Some scholars wrote that a body double was placed on the cross. Some said the jews were only mortals and fully incapable of killing a divine personage.

To understand the Koran, is to understand who the good prophet Muhammad was. He was only a trader and later a shepard. He was no arab scholar, and wrote according what was given to him, without often the flowery prose or articulateness of a scribe. Thus resulting many interpretations.

But no matter the interpretations, the central themes remained the same as Judaism and Christianity - belief in ONE true God, responsibilities of man in relation to God and mankind, sanctity of innocent lives, religious duties, helping those in need, charity, against cheating, against excesses of human life, seeking for forgiveness directly to God, rewards and punishments, etc.

The prophet never asked anyone to pray to him, but only to God and no one else. Similar with our Messiah. Their teachings were the path to God, as revealed to them by Him, and not themselves as path. Seek for their words, and not the words of interpretated or misinterpretated words by latter men.

Both of them were revered by all muslims. No muslim dares deny their existance, nor their past and future roles. As to who is the lesser or the higher divine being, let it be known such constructs are only man-made. In the presence of our common Creator, we are all only his creations, equal in His eyes, and what we do in our given lifetime is that which sets us on different steps to Him. Only He can judge that worth, NOT you or me - mankind.


2. Muslim Brotherhood.

Anyone can write a letter and fill it with their hatred, ignorances or deluded dreams. It is quite another to realise such foolishness in reality.

Futhermore, had anyone checked that letter's authenticity, that it was written by the top official in the Brotherhood?

Will the Muslim Brotherhood's supposed goals be acceptable by the masses? That's another story, and highly unlikely, being that no human enjoys enslavement. The MB may succeed and rule the Arab world one day, with even greater might and repression, but it will never be for long, as the current crop of despots found out.

The MB will only survive if they can fulfill the common hopes and goals of all human life that shares this planet. If they fail, they will join the ranks of deposed despots.

Humankind are capable of change. Right now, MB is presumed to be some kind of pariah and treated as terrorists. Those who make discussions impossible only makes violence inevitable. For decades, they had been treated as such and shunned. Even a cornered dog will fight back.

Let them be part of the political process. At least its much better than them being the deadly suicide attack processes. Let them prove themselves to the their own citizens If they fail, they know that they have no support for their pipe dreams, and lose even more supporters and die a natural death one day.

If they succceed in governing mankind -socially, politically and economics, I am sure they will become role models for other nations, even developed ones.

None knows the future. Let it play out by itself, mistakes or successes, so that we may progress and evolve. No need for fear mongering or live in fear, or worse, RULED by fear.

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by cassandranova

So, while there might be a pan-Arab movement that has some legs, I sincerely doubt it goes much further than that.

Lookit all the green on that map

Green is the Prophet's color, and is often used to denote pan-Islamic movements, as well as strong identification with Islam as the identifier sees it. That's also why the headbands of Palestinian Shaheed are green.

Green. It's next year's red.

While I agree with you that there is a shared symbolism and ideology, I continue to believe the differences between areas that might form a global caliphate are more than trivial.

I see your metaphor like saying that every country with a cross in their flag wanting to be part of some greater entity. While there are certainly links between England, Scotland, Iceland, Sweden, Denmark, Iceland, and Finland, does that mean they desire a political unity? I don't think so.

While I accept there are certain loud and active political types who probably dream of such an enlarged state, I just don't see it happening. The status quo forces against consolidation seem too strong to me.

reply to post by SeekerofTruth101


Your quote from the Koran confirms my point: that in the Islamic scripture there is an outright refutation of the central tenet of the Christian faith; that of the death and resurrection of Christ. The text craftily moulds the perception that it is in accordance with what might have happened, and seems to agree with the ascension of Christ into Heaven. However, the words of Christ himself were shown repeatedly to indicate that he would die at the hands of wicked men, and then be raised again to life by the Father, before then ascending to take His throne at the right hand of the Father. After the ascension, as He Himself promised before He went to the cross, the Holy Spirit of God came upon His disciples, and upon those who had placed their faith in Him.. With this promise being fulfilled, the disciples went forth as apostles to proclaim the gospel of peace - that there is reconciliation to God by a simple act of free will, that of placing your faith in the name and sacrifice of Jesus Christ, the Messiah promised to be born of the line of David, in the heritage and tradition of Judaism.

He was the fulfillment of the Mosaic Law, as He never sinned, and yet was incarnated as fully human; the Son of Man. Therefore He was the only one who was worthy to be counted as a willing sacrifice, taking the burden of our sin and accepting the full punishment due to all of us for our rebellion against God. Jesus stated that He would lay down His life of His own free will; and that He would take it up again - ie be resurrected - at the authority of God the Father.

In the death and resurrection of Christ is the atoning sacrifice, which we can accept as a free gift of the Father for the salvation of our souls. None can earn the merit and favour of God, because that wouldn't be fair - everyone is born into different circumstances, and has different capabilities which might unfairly cause one person to be more able to earn God's favour than another.

Only by faith can we become acceptable before God - faith is the only justifiable method for salvation which can be equally applicable to ANY person alive - whether you are rich or poor, educated or uneducated, intelligent or simple-minded, born into a family of faith or born into a family of Satanists.

Don't for a minute claim that Islam believes Jesus to be the Messiah. The text claims He is a prophet.

When you consider that the central commission of Jesus as given to His disciples, was to go into all the world and preach the good news of reconciliation to God - to heal the sick, cast out demons, and raise the dead in His name - you have to wonder why the successful implementation of His church would then be followed by the birth of a new religion, seemingly very similar to the heritage from which Jesus came, and yet subtly different, denying the power of Jesus' central ministry, that of His sacrifice to reconcile fallen and sinful mankind to a Holy God.

Why would God, after raising Jesus from the dead/ giving His disciples the power to perform mighty miracles in the name of the Messiah, then suddenly decide that He had gotten it quite wrong, and that a new prophet was required, who would preach against the gospel of peace and reconciliation to God as demonstrated by Christ, instead calling people everywhere to deny the divinity of Christ, and to forget about the commission to go out and heal people, cast out demons, raise the dead and do other mighty works in His name. Why would God do that?

He wouldn't. However, if you were an incredibly powerful archangel, albeit fallen and in a state of absolute corruptness, who was intent on disrupting and if possible destroying the gospel of peace, you might adopt the task of creating a counterfeit religion, which was in many ways similar to the truth, but denied the fundamental power of the sacrifice of Jesus to reconcile man to God. The same counterfeit religion could produce either devout and righteous-living people, who could be held up as the reason why the new religion is a religion of peace - or it could equally well produce hateful, vengeful and brutal militants whose sole function and purpose is to kill, steal from and destroy anyone who is outside the bounds of their faith - or even those members of their own faith who try very hard to avoid the morally wrong message contained within the Koran - that to kill an unbeliever somehow qualifies you as a person deserving of God's favour.

Islam is a clever counterfeit, created by the Father of Lies, which is dressed up as a religion of peace. It is a religion divided. The moderates take all the good instruction in the Koran and apply it to their lives, and I'm sure God has great mercy and love for them. The other half is a fanatical, militant, demonically inspired coup-d'etat against Christ, which denies the power, love and mercy of God.

reply to post by FlyInTheOintment


I seriously do admire your faith and belief system. But I am unable to accept the dogmatism that you continually cling to such egoistical beliefs and try here to condemn and force others to your way of perception.

Your greatest error is the presumption that you know the very ways and everyway of our Creator. Yours is only an opinion, devoid of even logic or facts, sorry to say.

What you consider a conterfeit of another faith can equally be said of your own beliefs. Who taught you those dogmas to support your belief? None other than interpretations by mere mortals, basing largely on events as they interpretate it, and may not necessarily be what our Messiah had intended, or even our Creator, for humans are flawed.

I will show you how some can misinterpretate the New Testament, and turned it into almost of 2 centuries mistake. Many presume Peter the disciple was the favourite of our Messiah. But fact was that our Messiah was merely more concerned about that young, immature, headstrong but loyal disciple.

Our Messiah took extra care of him, to guide him properly, for he knew what Peter's character profile was, an attention he did not need to give to the others for he had the fullest confidence in their maturity. Rather, it was John that our Messiah had the most confidence in.

Yet, an entire heirachical institution was built upon Peter, worse when he himself never call himself that, for our Messiah did not appoint anyone specifically as a leader, but only to work as a team, to share, discuss and find consensual solutions to spread the good news of faith,love and forgiveness to mankind. The title was thrusted upon him by latter mortal men from the 3rd century

My point is simply this - stick to the words of our Messiah, and not the interpretated words of mere infants that mortal men truly are, even right now.

When we celebrate Christmas, we are only honoring and respecting the birth of our divine teacher in mortal form, whose teachings had changed countless millions of lives over the centuries of civilisation, while still acknowledging the One True Creator who created us, above all.

Similarly too for muslim when they celebrate the good prophet Muhammad's birthday, but more critically the observance of religious duties rather than that birthday for muslims, such as now, the period of Ramadan - the fasting month of proving their faith, communion and love for our common Creator by abstaining from food and water from sunrise to sunset daily for a month.

Regardless if 'Messiah' or 'Prophet', what is more important? The answer is simply to acknowledge our Creator, and his guides for life through his divine teachers' teachings sent and taught., and to follow those teachings. That you claim muslims, of a geological and cultural distance away in the time of our ancient ancestor, and termed our Messiah as 'prophet' to you seems as a demotion. You still have alot to learn to grow up spiritually.

Muslim brotherhood or Christian brotherhood or hebrew brotherhood, we have much in common in our aspirations despite our differences such as form of worship, culture, etc. We all aknowledge the same one True Creator who created us, and gave us the gift of life, love and free will.

I wish I had the time to discuss and share more, but unfortunately, I don't, nor do I think you will appreciate it.

Anyway, thanks for your response. I know that I may have offended, but it was never my intention to hurt. Cheers.

Originally posted by cassandranova

While I agree with you that there is a shared symbolism and ideology, I continue to believe the differences between areas that might form a global caliphate are more than trivial.

I think you may have missed my point - I apologize for not being clear.

Shared symbolism and ideology mean nothing at all in the game of power. Of course there are differences among Muslims - just as there are vast differences among people right here in the US, and that seems not to prevent us from having a single ruling government over the whole thing here. It is neither an absolute barrier over there.

A symbol or an ideology mean nothing at all to a man holding the gun with which to make you do as he wants. If he can make use of your symbolism or ideology, he will, but he won't lose any sleep over it if he has to point the gun at you instead because your symbols and ideologies are just too different from his. Either way, he will see to it that you are governed to HIS satisfaction.

The men who run governments don't care about whether your differences are trivial or severe - as long as you do as you're told, they don't have to put an absolute end to your differences.

I see your metaphor like saying that every country with a cross in their flag wanting to be part of some greater entity. While there are certainly links between England, Scotland, Iceland, Sweden, Denmark, Iceland, and Finland, does that mean they desire a political unity? I don't think so.

I'm unclear as to what you are referring to as a "metaphor". I expressed no metaphors. I gave you a concrete example of something you seem to think an impossibility - a pan-Islamic organization.

While I accept there are certain loud and active political types who probably dream of such an enlarged state, I just don't see it happening. The status quo forces against consolidation seem too strong to me.

It is precisely those "loud and active political types" who MAKE the states, big, medium, or small. To dismiss the idea simply because no one else but that political faction cares is a serious miscalculation. The very fact that the rest don't care means that they will not do very much to prevent it, and politicians will do as politicians do without their opposition. They will, in fact do what they ARE DOING right now in the Middle East, while you are WATCHING THEM DO IT and swearing they are not going to.

You may say " The status quo forces against consolidation seem too strong to me", but it is unwise to say that very loudly while you are standing there watching them DO THAT VERY THING. You are watching the exact same group of people take control of power center after power center, yet claiming that they are somehow "different". They are not. How many countries has the Muslim Brotherhood taken control of now in which they were an illegal political party? Consider the notion of an outlawed political party taking over of the reins of power in country after country before you start deciding what is not very likely to happen. Those countries that they own now WERE disparate. Now, not so much so as far as government goes - they have the same party in control of each one. Syria is just the latest road bump on the road to conquest.