Islam: What the West Needs to Know (full documentary)

reply to post by maddog3n8

that the Christian dogma was the Jesus is God...the Son of God...part of the Holy Trinity...do I believe that...no...but he was asserting the Bible said otherwise.

Christian dogma does not exactly reflect what the Bible actually says. Jesus never said he was God and he never said he was a part of any Holy Trinity either. But this is a completely different subject anyway.

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by undo

 

That is an awesome documentary. Watched it a year or so ago.

Makes a person wonder, eh??

and not a single anti muslim moment in it, just the facts man, just the facts (with some conjecture).
how ironic would it be if, right in the midst of them (egypt) is the very evidence of allah and god in general, they've been searching for. as caretakers some of them are taking the extreme angle of covering the whole thing up in wax or blowing up the evidence, not knowing that's what it is (at least at the lower levels).

reply to post by maddog3n8

Glad to see you're back on track. I did not 'alert' on you, for whatever that's worth.

I just want us all to remain calm and open to discussion.
NOT ONE OF US really knows ANYTHING about the 'great beyond', or 'God', or why the heck we are here, or what we are supposed to be doing, or how the universe works.

It seems to me, however, that we should be taking care of our planet and each other - sharing the available resources but NOT puncturing, mining, frakking, or drilling into the Earth. Pollution of water and air, destruction of ecosystems, and rampant greed are shameful products of 'humanity'.

There is ENOUGH already above ground and available for us ALL to eat, have clean water, food, adequate shelter, and a reasonable expectation of surviving with each other's help and altruism.

Seriously, HOW HARD is that to comprehend?

reply to post by charles1952


I'm glad you're still here, charles.
Thank you. Again. Some more. Also.

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
reply to post by maddog3n8

 

Christian dogma does not exactly reflect what the Bible actually says. Jesus never said he was God and he never said he was a part of any Holy Trinity either. But this is a completely different subject anyway.

yeah he did but he didn't say he was the father, this is an important distinction. they all knew his prior activity as the activity of jehovah but only in some spots of the old testament. when it says heavenly father, it doesn't mean the father of humans. the father of humans is the creator of humans. the creator is god, but not the only god.

let me give you an example, the word for god in the book of genesis is Elohim. ELOHIM is a plural word, and it is applied also to angels, the dearly departed, even other spiritual entities in the old testament. the problem isn't that the trinity is false in the sense of 3 gods in one person, but that the 3 gods were not in one person, they were just all called by the same name in the old testament. they were all known as jehovah. for example, anu and his sons (enki and enlil) did different things that were all attributed in the old testament, to jehovah. enki saved the noah figure from the flood. enlil demanded the flood. etc. this happens repeatedly. ever wonder why jehovah sounds like he's a mean old codger in some parts and a great and loving supporter of humans, in another? well there you have it! one of these things is not like the other!

reply to post by wildtimes

Dear wildtimes,

I'm on your side on this. I really am. I tried to explain what some non-Muslims were feeling and thinking back here, www.abovetopsecret.com... but it looks like it was spit upon.

I really hesitate to suggest this, but has the hate become so deep that no Muslim here will reach out?

I know, I'm being too harsh and I'm over-generalizing, but I'm just a human and this is getting frustrating.

Well, I guess I'l just head off to bed and dream of you triumphing over the forces of ignorance and hate. Then, when I check in tomorrow, I'll see everybody trying to make peace.

With respect,
Charles1952

Click here for more information.

Originally posted by maddog3n8
POST REMOVED BY STAFF

or that oldie but goodie: in the beginning was the word, and the word was with god and the word was god. and the word was made flesh and dwelt among men.

and who is the text referring to in that section? the word, who was jesus. people debate what that title, "the word" means. it's the power of creation (dna), at least, that's my theory. he was basically describing himself as a creator of the adam (named after the atum, which is the god of creation in ancient egypt). hebrew and hieratic is very similar, in that both use very few if any vowels, and share cultures and ancestors on many occasions.

might explain why the ancient egyptians believed they could do this with language (Written or oral)

reply to post by wildtimes


So Glad that you approve!! (Sarcasm intended)

Making a statement that ignores that you put your foot in your mouth...doesn't mean I am going to be civil to you!!

If you don't know what you are talking about, then you should keep your teeth together!!!

Is that plain enough for you...Miss...I have studied all these religions?

Clearly, you have no idea what you are talking about!!!

reply to post by maddog3n8

his premise is the foundation of the catholic and protestant faiths!!! Read Mark 14:61, Christ pronounces himself the "Son of God". Again, you show how stupid you are!!

Jesus being the "son of God" really means nothing when you consider that Adam is also called the son of God.It isn't exclusive to Jesus. Now why don't you find me the verse where Jesus calls himself God or a part of the holy trinity?

You won't debate the video, because you won't watch it!!!

I will not watch the video until you first establish what makes these anti-Islamic people on the video "experts"?
And secondly what makes them better "experts" on Islam than actual practicing Muslims, who would have a far superior understand of the subject?

This is the fourth time I'm asking you, you don't seem to have an answer. But never mind... your silence speaks volumes.

reply to post by sk0rpi0n


This isn't about Christian dogma...therefore...I'm not going to get sucked down that rabbit hole! However, you know nothing about Christian Theology if you won't admit that Christ is part of the Holy Trinity!! I gave you the Biblical verse...you ignore it!!! Again, you are a troll!!!

I don't have to defend the video...you do!! Troll!!

Whether they are experts or not is immaterial!! Troll!!!

They are quoting the Koran!!! If they are using it out of context, only if you have watched the video, can you know that they are using out of context!! Troll!!!

Again, you think I'm a retard!!!! Your stupid conjectures are silly beyond the point of irony. Troll!!!

skorpion

here ya go:

in the beginning was the word.
the word was WITH god and the word WAS god. the word was made flesh and dwelt among men

so it's saying, jesus was a god, of the gods known as jehovah. he was both with god and a god. what's the word made flesh, skorp?

i can tell you! glad you asked. hehe
this is the word that makes flesh!

reply to post by babloyi

As a muslim, my sources for Islam are the Quran and the Sahih Hadith. I do not know, nor do I care about Ibn Kathir, or Pooya/Ali. They may be interesting as a target of academic study, and I might pick up a few things from them (and elsewhere), but for me, the scriptures are self-evident.

REGARDING: Islamic Scholars


You say that you do not pay very much credence to Islamic scholars, and rely on primarily the Qur'an and Sahih Ahadith.

Sahih al-Bukhari ahadith come from a scholar called Muhammad al-Bukhari (born 193 years after Muhammad's death).

Sahih Muslim ahadith come from a scholar named Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj (born about 200 years after the death of Muhammad).

• (Point #1

All ahadith were were collected by scholars.

Imam Muhammad ibn Shihab Az-Zuhri is widely believed to be the first physical compiler of ahadith. He was not even born until 50 years after the death of Muhammad.

• (Point # 2) Additionally, whose criteria are you using to determine a hadith's authenticity or sahih grading? You rely on scholars and the general consensus of the collective ummah (Muslim Community). Muhammad never wrote down his own sunnah or seerah, scholars did. And even further, to determine a hadith's grading,.... upon whose isnad (chain of narration) will you rely upon? Because even isnad is written and recorded by scholars

Furthermore, correlating each specific Qur'an verse with its specifically related hadith is a main criteria of the academic science of Tafsir.

• (Point #3) When you, personally, create your own personal tafsir (interpretation) of Qur'an verses, you are doing so without considering the historic context of the specific verses, and if you use hadith or seerah, you are automatically by default relying on a scholar's compilation, a scholar's grading system, a scholar's isnad, and a scholar's written account. Do you think your personal tafsir is better than the tafsir of the people who had a personal hand in compiling, creating, recording, writing, researching, and studying the very ahadith and seerah that you now read?








*** Definitions for those unfamiliar with arabic or Islamic domains of study ***


• Ahadith (plural) / Hadith (singular) / Sunnah: The actions, sayings, and traditions of Islam's prophet; Muhammad.

• Sahih: Each hadith has a grading, according to its believed authenticity. "Sahih" is the highest grade attainable and indicates that a hadith is authentic and trustworthy.

• Isnad: Chain of narration of ahadith. Muhammad never wrote down his own hadith. The scholars that were born 50-300 years after his death collected and recorded each individual hadith. The main compilers of ahadith travelled to all of the lands that Muhammad had been to. They then asked locals about accounts of Muhammad. Isnad it the "chain of narration" linking the witness account to the actual event related to Muhammad. 70 years and upward after Muhammad's death the isnad was recorded. A 70 to 300 year time span of local testimony going something like this: "My father told me, that his uncle told him, that he heard from a guy that he bought a goat from, that was the brother of a guy who saw Muhammad say so-and-so and did such-and-such." Each person in the chain of narration is researched to determine if the chain of narration is plausible/possible, and then to determine the level of trustworthiness of each person in the chain. If a link in the chain is unknown, or untrustworthy, or unreliable, then the grade of the isnad lowers, which directly effects the grade of the hadith.

• Seerah: Biographical accounts of Islam's prophet; Muhammad.

• Tafsir: The science of explaining and interpreting each individual verse of the Qur'an, according to many criteria, including correlating the Qur'an verse with its appropriate hadith, taking into consideration it's time within the 23 year span of revelation, taking into consideration the historic environment occurring at the time of each verses revelation, and taking into consideration which verses abrogate earlier verses based upon chronology, history, and acknowledgement of Muhammad in the ahadith.

reply to post by babloyi

As I mentioned, the "There is no compulsion in religion" verse is a Medinite, quite late into the Medinite era, so that kinda blows that point out of the water.

REGARDING: "There is no compulsion in religion"

You are incorrect in your reasoning, because you do not represent the verse in its full context, and you completely fail to take into consideration the historic environment in which the verse was revealed, and you did not acknowledge abrogation.




Firstly, let us quote the verse according to its relative revelation, in its full and entire context:

"Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects "Taghut" (disbelief and going against Islam and Allah) and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things.

Allah is the Protector of those who have faith: from the depths of darkness He will lead them forth into light. Of those who reject faith their patrons are the "Taghut" (disbelief and going against Islam and Allah): from light they will lead them forth into the depths of darkness. They will be companions of the fire, to dwell therein (Forever)."

- Qur'an, Suratul Baqarah, ayat 256 & 257 (2:256-257)

• (Point # 1) As we can plainly see, the verse in its entire context of revelation is biased towards belief and obedience to Allah. The word "Taghut" has been often white-washed to the incorrect translation of "evil" or "Satan" or "Idols", but infact, "Taghut" means: The action of disbelief and disobedience to Allah and Islam. In addition, the verse in its entire revealed context ends with a threat of Hell Fire to non-Muslims.



CONTINUED

Historic Environment Regarding "No compulsion in religion"


Next, let us examine when, why, and under what circumstances the above revelation was revealed.

Muhammad launched an unprovoked assault against the Jewish Tribe known as Banu Nadir who were living in the vicinity of Medina.
(Invasion of Banu Nadir)

Muhammad ordered the assassination of Ka'b ibn al-Ashraf, who was one of the leaders of the Banu Nadir tribe. His crime was speaking badly against Islam. The assassination was done in the middle of the night, under the guise of lying to Ka'b to get him to drop his guard. Some Muslims lied to Ka'b about their abandoning Muhammad, and then proceeded to assassinate Ka'b.

Because of the assassination of Ka'b, and the attacks and expulsion of other Jewish tribes from Medina, and also due to the constant demands of jizya and alms tax,... the tribe of Banu Nadir refused to pay yet another alms to Muhammad as "blood money" for the the deaths of two men that died in a skirmish that Muslims had instigated. For refusing to pay the alms, Muhammad accused the Banu Nadir of plotting to assassinate him, which he concluded based on "revelation."

Because of the refusal to pay alms, Muhammad banished the Banu Nadir tribe from Medina. After the banishment, the wealth of Banu Nadir was discovered through Muslim spies and intelligence officers. Muhammad then claimed that Angel Gabriel revealed that the banished Jews were plotting to assassinate him. Because of "Angel Gabriel," Muhammad attacked Banu Nadir, killed their men, enslaved the women and children, and then confiscated all of their wealth.

It was in direct relationship to the unprovoked destruction and annihilation of Banu Nadir that "no compulsion in religion" was revealed:

"When the children of a woman (in pre-Islamic days) did not survive, she took a vow on herself that if her child survives, she would convert it a Jew. When Banu an-Nadir were expelled (from Arabia), there were some children of the Ansar (Helpers) among them. They said: We shall not leave our children. So Allah the Exalted revealed; "Let there be no compulsion in religion. Truth stands out clear from error."

- Sunan Abu Dawood

It was reported that; the Ansar were the reason behind revealing this Ayah, although its indication is general in meaning. Ibn Jarir recorded that Ibn Abbas said (that before Islam), "When (an Ansar) woman would not bear children who would live, she would vow that if she gives birth to a child who remains alive, she would raise him as a Jew. When Banu An-Nadir (the Jewish tribe) were evacuated (from Al-Madinah), some of the children of the Ansar were being raised among them, and the Ansar said, `We will not abandon our children.' Allah revealed, "There is no compulsion in religion. Verily, the right path has become distinct from the wrong path."

- Tafsir ibn Kathir

Ibn 'Abbas who said: “The women of the Ansar whose boys always died in infancy used to vow to bring up their boys as Jews if they were to live. When the Banu'l-Nadir were driven out, they had among them children of the Ansar. The Ansar said: 'We will not leave our children!' Upon which Allah, exalted is He, revealed (There is no compulsion in religion. The right direction is henceforth distinct from error …)”.

 

Ibn 'Abbas who said regarding the saying of Allah, exalted is He, (There is no compulsion in religion…): “The woman of the Ansar whose boys never survived used to vow that if a boy of hers survived, she would raise him as a Jew. When the Banu'l-Nadir were driven out of Medina they had among them children of the Ansar. The Ansar said: 'O Messenger of Allah! Our Children!' Allah, exalted is He, therefore revealed (There is no compulsion in religion…)”.

- Tafsir Al-Wahidi

• (Point #2) Muhammad annihilated and destroyed the Jewish tribe Banu Nadir, unprovoked. Afterwards, an Ansari woman acquainted with the tribe vowed to convert her child to the religion of Judaism. "No compulsion in religion" was revealed in order to stop a baby from being raised as a Jew.



CONTINUED

Abrogation Regarding "No compulsion in religion"


And finally, let us take into consideration the concept of abrogation.

Abrogation, in the Qur'an, is when Allah later changes his mind, contradicts himself, or supersedes an earlier verse for a newer verse. Allah admits to abrogation in the Qur'an in verses 2:106 and 16:101.

"No compulsion in religion" was abrogated two years later in favor of jihad against non-believers:

But then Allah's saying (There is no compulsion in religion…) was abrogated and the Prophet was commanded to fight the "People of the Book" in Suratul Tawbah”

- Tafsir Al-Wahidi

Ibn Abbas said: it was revealed with regard to a man from the tribe of Bani Salim Ibn Awf called al-Husayni whose two sons converted to Christianity but he was himself a Muslim. He told the Prophet: "Shall I force them to embrace Islam, they insist on Christianity", hence Allah revealed this verse. But, this verse was abrogated by the verse of fighting.

- Tafsir ibn Kathir

Two years after the "No compulsion in religion" verse was revealed, this is the set of verses that were reveled to abrogate/supersede it.

"1. [This is a declaration of] disassociation, from Allah and His Messenger, to those with whom you had made a treaty among the polytheists.

2. So travel freely, [O disbelievers], throughout the land [during] four months but know that you cannot cause failure to Allah and that Allah will disgrace the disbelievers.

3. And [it is] an announcement from Allah and His Messenger to the people on the day of the greater pilgrimage that Allah is disassociated from the disbelievers, and [so is] His Messenger. So if you repent, that is best for you; but if you turn away - then know that you will not cause failure to Allah . And give tidings to those who disbelieve of a painful punishment.

4. Excepted are those with whom you made a treaty among the polytheists and then they have not been deficient toward you in anything or supported anyone against you; so complete for them their treaty until their term [has ended]. Indeed, Allah loves the righteous [who fear Him].

5. And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful."

- Qur'an, Suratul Tawbah, ayah 1-5 (9:1-5)

Verse 1-3 state that Allah and Muhammad are now disassociated from all non-believers.

Verse 4 says to honor the remaining treaties with non-believers only until their predetermined length has expired.

Verse 5 says to kill, enslave, and besiege all non-believers anywhere unless they become Muslim, indicated by "repent, prayer, and zakah".

Chapter 9 of the Qur'an contain many of the last verses to be revealed in Islam including:

"O you who have believed, fight those near to you of the disbelievers and let them find in you harshness. And know that Allah is with the righteous."

- Quran, Suratul Tawbah, ayat 123 (9:123)

"O Prophet, fight against the disbelievers and the hypocrites and be harsh upon them. And their refuge is Hell, and wretched is the destination."

- Quran, Suratul Tawbah, ayah 73 (9:73)

And two years after this declaration, Muhammad gave his "Farewell Sermon" shortly before his death. In this final sermon, Muhammad states that the only superiority among mankind is religious superiority:

"All mankind is from Adam and Eve, an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab; also a white has no superiority over black nor a black has any superiority over white except by taqwa (piety and obedience to Allah) and good action. Learn that every Muslim is a brother to every Muslim and that the Muslims constitute one brotherhood."

• (Point #3) In the Qur'an, the jihad in Surah 9 abrogates/supersedes the "no compulsion in religion" verse. Additionally, Muhammad's "Final Sermon" commands religious superiority and the separation of Muslims into "one brotherhood" separate from non-Muslims.

reply to post by babloyi

You mean the only religion in the world that explicitly calls for the freeing of slaves as a good deed, something to be done and achieved? You mean the religion whose founder was personally involved in the freeing of almost 40,000 slaves? I'd be hard-pressed to find a comparable example in any other religion.

And again, with a mind to show the falsehood of Islam being the uniquely violent and war-hungry one out, never mind Judaism, Christian eschatology is basically the wonderful peace-loving Jesus we all know coming back and destroying every nation to the point of slaughtering everyone who opposes him, so that no group would not be grieving, and then imposing his will with an iron rod.

I am going to refer you to these 2 posts where I admonished ATS member sk0rpi0n for doing exactly what you are doing:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by Kgnow

 

Over and over, day after day, your logic and arguments are consistently, "Well the Christians did so-and-so..... well the Jews believe such-and-such.... well the Hindus have done such and such...."

You constantly defend your religion by deflecting attention of the topic onto other religions.

Can you even defend or justify Islamic slavery, rape of slaves, or the finalized Medina-style attitude of hate, aggression, and murder of non-Muslims WITHOUT comparing it to other religions or other groups? Because I will rebut now; those other religions and other people that spread oppression, injustice, and suffering are wrong too.

Can you?

reply to post by Kgnow

 

Any person that spreads suffering, tyranny, or oppression is wrong. Any religion, any culture, any nationality is wrong if they cause suffering.

Islam might have said that it is "better" to free slaves if you want, and that a master should treat their slaves with kindness,.... but it took SECULARISM to abolish slavery!!!

• (Point #1) If Allah is the Most Compassionate and Most Merciful,.... then how compassionate and how merciful does it make the secularism that fully destroyed the lawfulness of slavery? Because surely Allah did not abolish slavery in his "perfect" religion.

reply to post by undo


Undo,
The New Testament was written in isolation from the Old Testament. If you really want to know what the Torah/Old Testament means, I would suggest reading the translations from the:

Chonicles Project

You might find that your understanding of the Bible is rather skewed.

Originally posted by maddog3n8
reply to post by undo

 

Undo,
The New Testament was written in isolation from the Old Testament. If you really want to know what the Torah/Old Testament means, I would suggest reading the translations from the:

Chonicles Project

You might find that your understanding of the Bible is rather skewed.

actually i go back to the ancient hebrew, chaldean, aramaic and greek.

for example, i discovered these little gems:

there are 2 floods in the bible, one that punctuates the opening verses of genesis 1, and one in chapter 6. the genesis 1 flood is what you see transpiring in the supposed creation of the world verse. it's not the creation of the world, it's the re-terraforming of the world, following a cataclysm which resulted in a flood of water that appears to have frozen solid. (ice age). the water drew down to reveal land that was already there.

it's the global flood. the later flood, in genesis 6, is the black sea flood. note that the text says noah took 7 of each male and female clean animals, 7 of each male and female birds, and 2 of each unclean animals. (that's 14+14+4) that's certainly not all the animals on the planet. yet other places suggest all.

i believe the all animals reference is a vague reference to the actual global flood that was part of the ice age event, and that those prior creations had a global dna bank of plant and animal dna, and saved it, and used it to re-terraform the planet, as it indicated in the rest of genesis. you don't pick up on this stuff if you don't read it very carefully and take contradicting statements into a logic puzzle grid for comparative analysis. line those puppies up to see why they don't appear to agree.

the bible only hints to what happened prior to the dispensation of homo sapiens. in other words, whatever was happening on the planet before the ice age, is not discussed but in very vague terms, just little snippets and hints. the prior age was called, by some scholars, the dispensation of the angels, in that the angels were a race created before humans. this makes sense if you consider the war of heaven and all that type of ancient history. they grew to be technologically advanced, went out among the stars and planets, had an intergalactic war, end result was the ice age on this planet. i think our predecessors lost the fight.

theoretically, of course.

reply to post by undo


Interesting....I have not heard that take on the Old Testament...do you have a source I could look into?