What is the True Islam…???

a reply to: EasternShadow

originally posted by: EasternShadow
It's a matter of subjective reality.

Actually, it is a matter of objective fact. You made the very specific claim, and I very specifically addressed THAT claim, that there is a separate Sunni and a separate Shia Quran. That is an objectively false statement in any sense of the word, and has nothing to do with subjective realities (that sounds like "alternative facts" ).
Do you now acknowledge that there is no separate shia and sunni Quran? Because that was my point.

Now if you don't, and judging by your following statements, you don't, then I will address that.

originally posted by: EasternShadow
Some Shia scholars believe Quran has been corrupted during compilation.

Yes, thank you for quoting from the link I provided, the one that in the very first line, states:

The Shī‘ah view of the Qur'an (known in English as "The Koran") has some differences from the Sunni view, but the text of the Qur'an is exactly identical.

That definitely supports your view, especially considering you (or wiki, in this case), provide a list of 10 scholars who are in the incredible incredible minority, who go against the huge consensus of both Sunni and Shia scholarship, that state that some distortions may have occurred.

originally posted by: EasternShadow
Transmitted properly by what mean? What is the proof? How do we know such verse is accurate and not hoaxes or errors done by some of the Sahaba or by some middle age scholars?

Proof? What has proof got to do with anything? So something can only be true if it has proof? That's pretty backwards thinking.

originally posted by: EasternShadow
Does it matters? No, I dont believe in such things.

It certainly does matter, considering your posts seem to be from some person that learnt from or referenced such a person. But then following that, where DID you get your text from?
PS: Something that would be useful in educating you on Qirat and ahruf:
www.islamic-awareness.org...

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: bloodymarvelous

My point was that there is that there is no way to possibly know accurately what % of prodestants agree with X or Y..
It is a billion people.. a billion people don't agree on anything..

All we could do is take anecdotal evidence (aka no evidence) and guess at what the rest think...

And the same goes for Catholics, and wait for it... Muslims too...

Since there is no real way to know what that many people actually believe, there is no way for "enough " to speak out against whatever..

At that point you are using anecdotal evidence to establish that "not enough people are speaking out."

But then realizing that anyone who does speak out, " is only anecdotal evidence."

It's loss , loss for real people and win win for any propaganda mongers..

Especially when your dealing with people with a vested interest in creating a religious boogeyman meant to validate their own religion..

All anyone has to say is "why aren't Protestants speak out??"

And there is functionally no way to show Either way.. it's just too many people.

You're just showing that you don't understand anything about statistics or taking a stochastic measurement of non-uniform group.

An auto insurance agent can tell you that people with tickets on their record get in more accidents. He can't tell you which people who have tickets will and which ones won't. There may be a few people who have tickets, but are in fact very safe drivers. Or some people who have no tickets and are unsafe drivers.

But when I see HIzbolla win an election in Palestine, we're past the point where you can expect me to believe that terrorism sympathizers are few and far between in Palestine. Or when ISIS takes over Iraq. Am I to believe that millions of people got conquered by a few hundred fundamentalist militants? (Rather than the more likely alternative: that many Iraqis willingly embraced them.)

originally posted by: firefromabove

because the average Joe in the street, just wants to know what the True Islam is…

Islam is a religion centered around the truth that God is One and created everything, and that all humans will be judged by God for their conduct on earth

Since God made earth and put humans in charge of it, God requires us to live in a way that's acceptable to Him. That's why God chose certain men to relay His Word throughout all generations.

Islam is the culmination of it all. Muslims are required to be the custodians of the Qur'an and live a life that's in accordance with God's Law. We have duties to fulfill to God, to our fellow Muslims and to our fellow humans.

I guess this sums up both what I love and what I hate about Islam.

Islam is about making everyone serve Allah. It's not about free choice to serve him or not to serve him.

Christianity is about free choice to serve or not to serve god, but if you don't serve god he'll punish you in the next life. Only god has the right to punish you, however.

In Islam, other Muslims have the right to punish you. And if you reject Islam, Muslims have the right to force you to "submit". At a minimum they can force you to pay a Jizya tax.

This is a glaring, and totally ireconcillable difference. Even if it were the only difference, it would be enough reason to be at war. All by itself.

We can't "agree to disagree" about something like that. I'm not going to "agree to disagree" that it's ok for you to force me to do those things which you believe to be the will of an invisible man in the sky who may or may not exist.

a reply to: bloodymarvelous

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous
But when I see HIzbolla win an election in Palestine, we're past the point where you can expect me to believe that terrorism sympathizers are few and far between in Palestine. Or when ISIS takes over Iraq. Am I to believe that millions of people got conquered by a few hundred fundamentalist militants? (Rather than the more likely alternative: that many Iraqis willingly embraced them.)

I gotta say, you offer a lot of flaky reasons for someone who holds to "statistics or taking a stochastic measurement of non-uniform group".
You mean a country that has been oppressed for decades votes in a...wait..did you say Hizbolla?
You think Hizbolla won an election in Palestine?
Yeah, I'm sure your take on the situation is very nuanced, and that all brown people and their political parties are interchangeable.

originally posted by: babloyi
a reply to: EasternShadow

originally posted by: EasternShadow
It's a matter of subjective reality.

Actually, it is a matter of objective fact. You made the very specific claim, and I very specifically addressed THAT claim, that there is a separate Sunni and a separate Shia Quran. That is an objectively false statement in any sense of the word, and has nothing to do with subjective realities (that sounds like "alternative facts"

).

Did I mentioned anything about objective reality?
I think you are quoting me out of context.
Let's try again.

originally posted by: babloyi
You've got me into a situation where you're saying "The sky is green", and I'm saying "The sky not green",

Is this subjective reality? or Objective reality like you said?

originally posted by: babloyi
Do you now acknowledge that there is no separate shia and sunni Quran? Because that was my point.

And you have yet answer my question. Here let me copy and paste it.

THE QUR'AN ACCORDING TO IMAM HAFS:
He (Muhammad) said (qaala), "My lord knows ..." (21:4)

THE QUR'AN ACCORDING TO IMAM WARSHL:
Say (qul): My lord knows ...

The difference here changes the subject of the verb. In the Hafs Qur’an the subject is Muhammad but in the Warsh Qur’an the subject is God. Is this valid?

You claim ALL are valid. So I ask you again. Are the two Qi'rats above have the same meaning? Is Qaala = Qul? Is Muhammad = God? Because that what it is, according to your validity. I know you know it's not true. Therefore the two Quran above cannot be the same.

originally posted by: babloyi
Yes, thank you for quoting from the link I provided, the one that in the very first line, states:

The Shī‘ah view of the Qur'an (known in English as "The Koran") has some differences from the Sunni view, but the text of the Qur'an is exactly identical.

That definitely supports your view, especially considering you (or wiki, in this case), provide a list of 10 scholars who are in the incredible incredible minority, who go against the huge consensus of both Sunni and Shia scholarship, that state that some distortions may have occurred.

C'mon babloyi. Are you kidding me? You are quoting me out of context. AGAIN?
That's not what I meant. OK let's me try to clarify again with bold statement this time.

originally posted by: babloyi
Yes, as I mentioned earlier, there is debate among Shias and Sunnis as to the method of the compilation of the Quran. Neither disagree with each other as to the content.

Neither disagree with each other?
Neither = None = 0 disagreement
I have proven to you "10 scholars who are in the incredible incredible minority" disagree. Therefore you claim that neither disagree is false.

originally posted by: babloyi
Proof? What has proof got to do with anything?

Proof is required when you make a claim. When you study other people's claim. When you based your question. When you make conclusion. When you presentd your data to be reviewed by others. When you correct your assesment. When you separate between true and false. Proof is Everything about Truth.

originally posted by: babloyi
So something can only be true if it has proof? That's pretty backwards thinking.

So something can be true if it claimed by medieval imam because it is based on Quran and Hadith? That's pretty much naive thinking. Just look at what ISIS has cause to the world. Is slavery a norm acceptable by Quran and Hadith? Is sex with unwilling slaves ( rape ) is acceptable by Quran and Hadith because Allah view ( more likely pagan ancient Arab Bedoiun view to me ), slaves as "right hand" property. Is threating people's life with sword so you could enter heaven at the cost of other people life, acceptable by Quran and Hadith? Is this you claim as TRUE Islam? What the hell did Muhammad teach muslim in the past to have cause all this chaos?

originally posted by: babloyi
It certainly does matter, considering your posts seem to be from some person that learnt from or referenced such a person.

But then following that, where DID you get your text from?

Books, historical manuscripts, learn from أُسْتَاذ (ʾustāḏ), discussion with various Islamic groups. Other than that Sahih Al Bukari is easily available online. You should read early Quran manuscripts such as Sana'a manuscript. Just google it.

originally posted by: babloyi
PS: Something that would be useful in educating you on Qirat and ahruf:
www.islamic-awareness.org...

Haha very funny.

a reply to: EasternShadow

originally posted by: EasternShadow
Did I mentioned anything about objective reality?

No, you didn't, I did. Your response to me showing you as being false was basically "Yeah, well we all live in a subjective reality". I strongly disagreed. Somethings are not subjective.

originally posted by: EasternShadow
You claim ALL are valid. So I ask you again. Are the two Qi'rats above have the same meaning? Is Qaala = Qul? Is Muhammad = God? Because that what it is, according to your validity. I know you know it's not true. Therefore the two Quran above cannot be the same.

Both are "قل" in arabic. The text is exactly the same, the meaning is exactly the same. Neither of the readings suggest anything about Muhammad being God. And again, most importantly to my point, NONE OF THIS IS PROOF/EXAMPLE/POINT related to how Shias and Sunnis supposedly have a different Quran, which to be honest, is the most important reason I'm having this discussion with you. Aside from that, it's gotten to the point of uninteresting "I'm right, no, I'm right, no, I'm right". Have you backed away from this false statement now?

originally posted by: EasternShadow
Neither disagree with each other?
Neither = None = 0 disagreement
I have proven to you "10 scholars who are in the incredible incredible minority" disagree. Therefore you claim that neither disagree is false.

Right, so if I say that 2+2=4, and state that that is universally accepted, and you show me one or two scholars that disagree, then suddenly it is not universally accepted? Right.
So which alternate Shia Quran do these extreme minorities subscribe to? Did they each make up their own that all Shias, most Shias, some Shias, few shias, 2 shias, 1 shia person follows? Yes? No?

originally posted by: EasternShadow
Proof is required when you make a claim. When you study other people's claim. When you based your question. When you make conclusion. When you presentd your data to be reviewed by others. When you correct your assesment. When you separate between true and false. Proof is Everything about Truth.

I'm sorry, proof has nothing to do with the truth. All proof has to do with is your comfort in believing the truth.
If a man 2000 years ago said "The Earth revolves around the Sun", to his child, and the child said so to their child, and so on until today, and then that person said "My great ancestor said that the Earth revolves around the Sun 2000 years ago", it won't be less true because it cannot be "proved" according to you.

originally posted by: EasternShadow
Books, historical manuscripts, learn from أُسْتَاذ (ʾustāḏ), discussion with various Islamic groups...

Ah, so I was right.

Very funny indeed!

originally posted by: babloyi
a reply to: bloodymarvelous

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous
But when I see HIzbolla win an election in Palestine, we're past the point where you can expect me to believe that terrorism sympathizers are few and far between in Palestine. Or when ISIS takes over Iraq. Am I to believe that millions of people got conquered by a few hundred fundamentalist militants? (Rather than the more likely alternative: that many Iraqis willingly embraced them.)

I gotta say, you offer a lot of flaky reasons for someone who holds to "statistics or taking a stochastic measurement of non-uniform group".
You mean a country that has been oppressed for decades votes in a...wait..did you say Hizbolla?

You think Hizbolla won an election in Palestine?

Yeah, I'm sure your take on the situation is very nuanced, and that all brown people and their political parties are interchangeable.

Not going to say they're not oppressed. (Or more accurately have been oppressed in the past, but not so much in the last couple of decades.) But at present I might suggest that they owe the majority of their economic woes to unrestrained population growth.

[quote=wiki]
According to the U.S. Census, population growth mid-1990-2008 in Gaza and West Bank was 106% from 1.9 million (1990) to 3.9 million persons.[9]



They doubled their population in 18 years.

en.wikipedia.org...

When you double the strain on your nation's resources well, yeah.......... that tends to ruin any efforts that anyone else might be putting toward helping that economy. There is NO amount of economic aid that can outpace the harm done by such irresponsible behavior. Not even a hope of it.

originally posted by: solve
a reply to: Joecroft

It gets really entertaining, when you realize that Islam and Judaism is the same thing, just one key difference, Jewish people have mass hallucinations, and Muhammad liked to trip alone.

-True story-

Do you really want to know what is entertaining about this post? Who are the people suffering
from mass hallucinations? Hint...not the Jews or the Christians!

a reply to: solve

I like reading your posts because they are so much fun to read...
goes great with your morning coffee.

originally posted by: babloyi
a reply to: EasternShadow

originally posted by: EasternShadow
Did I mentioned anything about objective reality?

No, you didn't, I did. Your response to me showing you as being false was basically "Yeah, well we all live in a subjective reality". I strongly disagreed. Somethings are not subjective.

With regard to Quran and Hadith? Objective reality is absurd. If there is any objectivity, Islam will be one united school of thought and law that all muslim universally accept. Instead, we have today various Islamic branches and sects all over the world. And muslim kill each other due to their differences even today. Example Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Turkey and ISIS.

originally posted by: babloyi
Both are "قل" in arabic. The text is exactly the same, the meaning is exactly the same. Neither of the readings suggest anything about Muhammad being God.

If neither readings suggest anything about Muhammad being God, then the two readings cannot exactly be the same meaning. Qul cannot be the same meaning as Qaal because the subject is different. Qul is refering to God as saying while Qaal is refering to Muhamad as saying. How is this suppose to be the same meaning? One must be valid, yet you claim all are valid. How is it possible?

originally posted by: babloyi
And again, most importantly to my point, NONE OF THIS IS PROOF/EXAMPLE/POINT related to how Shias and Sunnis supposedly have a different Quran, which to be honest, is the most important reason I'm having this discussion with you.

I have. You claim there is only one Quran. I refute your claim using different Qirats of Quran as example, since Quran is suppose to be transmitted verbally. The Qi'rat itself is the Quran in it's verbal form. You are unable to deny the existing of the two Qi'rats I mentioned. You claim both are the same. Anyone familiar with the two Qi'rats can quickly recognize the differences, which you have fail. Google the differences between the Qi'rats and you will see a lot of links pointed to it.

Not only that, I also provide you with the differences textual Qurans, with evidences from several hadith from Sahih Al Bukari and the book of "AL kafi" written by a well known Shia theologist and historian. Even more, I also pointed to you historical evidence of other different Qurans, such as, Hijazi manuscripts, Sana'a manuscript, Codex Parisino-petropolitanus, BnF Arabe 328(c) and Birmingham fragment, Tübingen fragment and Kufic manuscripts. This Qurans still exist today. Empirical evidences without doubt falsify your claim that there is only ONE Quran.

Now since you insist,

Shia use Ali's Quran which is why they claim Quran was first compiled by Ali. Sunni use modern today Quran known as the Uthmanic Codex which was compiled during Uthman Caliphate. Both Qurans are different.

Shia scholars are unanimous that Ali ibn Abu Talib possessed a personal transcript of the Quran, which he collected six months after Muhammad's death, and that this was the first compilation of the Quran. The unique aspect about this version is that it was collected in the order it was sent,[15] which mainstream Shi’ism hold is the only difference between the Quran we have today and Ali’s.[4]:89–90

A few Shia scholars argue that Ali presented his Quran to the community, but they refused to acknowledge his copy. One report states, "he had brought the complete Book [of God], comprising the interpretation and the revelation, the precise and ambiguous verses, the abrogating and the abrogated verses; nothing was missing from it, [not even] a letter alif, nor lam. But they did not accept it from him"[16] They also believe that Ali’s version of the Quran contained verses that are not seen in the Uthmanic codex we have today. They believe changes in the order of verses and suras did take place and that there were variant readings, tabdil, exchange of words such as umma to imma, rearrangement of words and deletion of words pertaining to the right of Ali being the first caliph.[17]
en.wikipedia.org...

edit on 17-5-2017 by EasternShadow because: (no reason given)

originally posted by: babloyi
Aside from that, it's gotten to the point of uninteresting "I'm right, no, I'm right, no, I'm right".

You're the one who is keen on asking for Objective true in the first place. All I did was mention your view as your own experience. Not mine to see. We have our own subjective reality, which is my suggestion to keep your view to yourself. But you demand more of this Sunni-Shia different Quran things. And yes, I agree. It's getting uninteresting.

originally posted by: babloyi
Have you backed away from this false statement now?

As far as I can see, I have given you a lot of evidence to support my view, which you ignore.. While you on the other hand, have been proven making false statements and out of context argument.

It's fine to disagree with me. I understand that. But resorting to personal attack on my background is just....very sad.

We've got a religion here

1) - teaching its people that they should reproduce at an alarming rate.
2) - Teaching them that when that plan doesn't work out, it is the fault of the "great satan" in the West.

3) - Teaching them that if only the "great satan" in the West would convert to Islam and share its bounteous wealth, the unlimited population growth in Islamic nations would cause no economic collapses ever.

4) - Teaching that it is their responsibility to forcibly convert.

So we start with an impossibly false economic pretense. Propose a solution that would, in the long term, do no good at all.

Then simply blame anyone who doesn't follow the solution for what happens. Claiming the solution would work, but nobody will follow it.

And of course, until everyone follows it, there is no way to be absolutely sure it would fail,.... unless you have a brain, in which case it should be obvious it would inevitably fail. But remember that it is an act of arrogance to use your brain when looking at Allah's plans, because you're supposing that your merely human intellect could see errors in a plan proposed by a being of infinity intelligence.

And the worst part is, due to unrestrained reproduction, millions of new children will be indoctrinated into this philosophy every day. Making it less and less likely this obvious lie will ever be dispelled.

a reply to: Joecroft


What is the real Christianity, Judaism, etc?

Real Islam follows Quran and Sunnah, the five pillars.

Fake Islam is of the Muslim Brotherhood. ie every attack done in the name of Islam of a terrorist nature that has no scriptural support, suicide being the worst of sins, is not a real Muslim.

I don't care what organization it calls itself, if it is involved with terrorism it is Muslim Brotherhood related and orchestrated.

Muslim Brotherhood is a Masonic order and not real Islam.

So any Sunni, Shia, I would even extend the epithet real Muslims to well meaning Wahhabis.

But for reals, to associate Islam with terrorism is to miss the scam entirely. America needs to feel justified as it massacres civilians with drone strikes and helps turn Syria into rubble and dropping bombs with obviously Biblical meaning (see:MOAB), keeping going its industry of war, death and Opium from Afghanistan, oil plundering and its own acts of terror.

Look at who has caused more death since ISIS came out of nowhere, civilians too, the West and allies or the terrorist group that claims to be Islam but are created by the intel communities for this purpose of destroying Islam and in time all religion.

Dajjall has one eye, Allah does not.

Said the Prophet saws.

Who reps the one eye?

a reply to: bloodymarvelous

You are so indoctrinated by US propaganda I feel sorry for you.

Reproduction is a right, don't know why you are complaining about people having children.

But Islam doesn't teach what you claim it does which means you are regurgitating propaganda and have not done due diligence in confirming what you hear.

Leads me to believe that you don't want to believe Islam is anything but evil despite the fact it isn't.

But seriously, teaching its people to reproduce is done in Judaism and Christianity and in fact everywhere in the world.

You trying to make it to be sinister is evil, people have a right to reproduce.

Except in China. You want Islam to be Communist or what?

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous
We've got a religion here

1) - teaching its people that they should reproduce at an alarming rate.
2) - Teaching them that when that plan doesn't work out, it is the fault of the "great satan" in the West.

3) - Teaching them that if only the "great satan" in the West would convert to Islam and share its bounteous wealth, the unlimited population growth in Islamic nations would cause no economic collapses ever.

4) - Teaching that it is their responsibility to forcibly convert.

So we start with an impossibly false economic pretense. Propose a solution that would, in the long term, do no good at all.

Then simply blame anyone who doesn't follow the solution for what happens. Claiming the solution would work, but nobody will follow it.

And of course, until everyone follows it, there is no way to be absolutely sure it would fail,.... unless you have a brain, in which case it should be obvious it would inevitably fail. But remember that it is an act of arrogance to use your brain when looking at Allah's plans, because you're supposing that your merely human intellect could see errors in a plan proposed by a being of infinity intelligence.

And the worst part is, due to unrestrained reproduction, millions of new children will be indoctrinated into this philosophy every day. Making it less and less likely this obvious lie will ever be dispelled.

You don't talk to many Muslims do you?

Because you are just talking common trash talk about things you know nothing about and are spoon fed by hypocites and sociopaths.

Great Satan is a term used by Hamas, not Islam.

Satan is the epitome of a fool in Islam so you think you are being called evil but you are really being called fools.

And Americans hate America worse than some foreigners, which let's be honest isn't exclusive to Islam.

A third of the world including much of Europe hates America.

It's not even a crime.

And most Muslims don't hate America, Iran is secretly an ally and they are just playing a role.

Do your homework.

a reply to: Joecroft

Divide and Conquer.

The strategy employed by British colonizers to conquer and one in use today.

Syria was provoked to civil war and soon will be conquered and secularized even though it already has freedom of religion and many Christians, who have been there longer and have always generally gotten along as the Sunnah's even state Abu Bakr (pbuh) ordered the Christians of Syria, pious servants of God, never be disturbed.

But going back to WW1, Britain wanted to take down the Ottoman Empire and enlisted the Arabians with promises of Independence only to end up subjects.

Turkey was made, "The Secular Republic of Turkey", Islambul dubbed Istanbul and the Young Turks were installed, Donmeh-Sabbateans like Ataturk who are/were fake converts to Islam. Really they are Sabbateans Jews.

Does anyone of intelligence still believe 9 11 was actually done by Muslims? Tower 7 should not have fell, neither should have the other 2 and no planes hit the Pentagon or Pennsylvania, look at the few pictures that exist, NO PLANES.

And you don't find a passport in tact after all that. That would have definitely been destroyed in the initial crash if not the explosion that detonated the towers.

It reeks, everyone knows it.

So why should anyone believe anything based on that, the reason people still fear Islam today is because of something they know wasn't their fault but they can't reconcile in their minds how enourmously deceptive our governments are and need to believe that the hate they feel is justified.

1.5 billion Muslims in the world, most have absolutely no connection to violence or evil more than any society and less than many depending on where you go.

Islam is everywhere for a reason. It's a great religion blessed by God that will be great until this sphere dissapears.

a reply to: Joecroft

I give you a quote from 8th century AD/2AH or earlier Syrian Christian Monk John bar Penkaye, Book Summary of World History, chapter 15 "Rise of Islam."

"when the kingdom of the Persians came to an end in the days of King Khosro the Kingdom of the children of Hagar at once gained control over more or less the whole world, but took the whole Kingdom of the Persians overthrowing all their Warriors who prided themselves in the Art of War.

We should not think of the Advent of the children of Hagar as something ordinary but as due to divine working. Before calling them God had prepared them beforehand to hold Christians in honor, they also had a special commandment from God concerning our monastic station, that they should hold it and honor. Now when these people came at God's command and took over as it were both kingdoms not with any war or battle but in the menial fashion such as when a brand is rescued out of the fire not using weapons of war or human means God put victory in their hands and such a way that the words written concerning them might be fulfilled One man chase a thousand and two men routed 10000, how otherwise could naked men riding without armor or shields, have been able to win, apart from divine aide, God having called them from the ends of the Earth to destroy a sinful kingdom, and to bring low, through them, the proud Spirit of the Persians."

www.tertullian.org...

This is the real Islam.

From the archives of the Syrian Christian Church and in the time right around it's genesis.

I can produce another 8th century work attributed to Simeon ben Yohai, pseudepigraphally but that is an honor in Judaism, in support of Islam over "Edom" aka the Byzantine Empire, calling Mohammed (pbuh) the "Rider on the camel" of Isaiah.

That's the real Islam, it lives in the hearts of Muslims, and others who know history including many Rabbis on YouTube, some anti Zionist even.

Regarding the "Secrets of Simeon ben Yohai" it has an article on Wikipedia with a link to a website with it in full at the end of the Wikipedia article.

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous
We've got a religion here

1) - teaching its people that they should reproduce at an alarming rate.
2) - Teaching them that when that plan doesn't work out, it is the fault of the "great satan" in the West.

3) - Teaching them that if only the "great satan" in the West would convert to Islam and share its bounteous wealth, the unlimited population growth in Islamic nations would cause no economic collapses ever.

4) - Teaching that it is their responsibility to forcibly convert.

So we start with an impossibly false economic pretense. Propose a solution that would, in the long term, do no good at all.

Then simply blame anyone who doesn't follow the solution for what happens. Claiming the solution would work, but nobody will follow it.

And of course, until everyone follows it, there is no way to be absolutely sure it would fail,.... unless you have a brain, in which case it should be obvious it would inevitably fail. But remember that it is an act of arrogance to use your brain when looking at Allah's plans, because you're supposing that your merely human intellect could see errors in a plan proposed by a being of infinity intelligence.

And the worst part is, due to unrestrained reproduction, millions of new children will be indoctrinated into this philosophy every day. Making it less and less likely this obvious lie will ever be dispelled.

I totally missed your allegation that Islam teaches forced conversion.

It's actually forbidden in the Qur'an.

2:256

"There is no compulsion of any sort in religion as the right way stands clearly distinguished from the way of error."

So you want to explain how a religion whose most sacred text contains a prohibition against forced conversion is supposed to teach it?

Erase the verse completely?

You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about and should be ashamed of your allegations which happen to be forbidden and therefore can never be a part of Muslim teachings, because you obviously think it is a reality when nothing could be further from the truth.

At the end of the day and End of Days that is your responsibility to learn if you want to speak truth, and will be your responsibility to account for at Judgement Day.

I pray you wake up before then. You don't even have to be a Muslim to ho to Heaven according to the Qur'an.

It makes forced conversion unnecessary as well as illegal according to Sharia.

That's right the dreaded Sharia protects people from forced conversion because the Qur'an forbids it as it is "the way of error."

People like you are quick to speak and slow to listen and I doubt this is your first time telling fairy tales about Islam.

Shame shame shame...

Meanwhile let me tell you what IS compulsion in religion, forced conversion is an EXAMPLE.

Another is saying "Accept Jesus as Lord and Saviour or go to hell, those are your options."

The forced conversions in Spain of Jews and Muslims in 1492 by European Catholics who ethically and/or religously cleansed the Iberian peninsula the same year Colombus set sail to commit the inaugural American genocide not long after resulting in a bicoastal genocide the likes of which has no equal in known history complete with forced conversions of South American, Central and North American tribes.

Then we got the Canaanesque Crusade against Jerusalem that LITERALLY massacred an entire city of Muslims, Jews and Christians who lived there in peace.

Saladin took it back and actually made peace which opened up communications and the spread of knowledge to Europe which led to the Cathedral building spree.

Muslims have been far kinder to Europeans throughout history and to everybody when compared with the Europeans, Roman Catholics especially, followed by the American colonists and their descendants whe envisioned the theft of America as "Manifest destiny" and only considered white people as men by law, as nobody would argue African men or women, women even back then in general, were free or totally free in the case if women.

Qur'an has sections dedicated to womens rights and Islam has never been racist, even in the case of slavery which compared to America was more of a well treated albeit unpaid servant, still a slave but even slaves had rights in Islam. Not so in America.

Sorry bud but forced conversion is not a Muslim teaching, is literally prohibited.

And Europeans are the violent culture. Cause all the wars.

Ever here of WW1, 2, Korea, Vietnam, the Cold War when we helped Afghanistan defeat Russia?

It wasn't out of goodwill for the people of Afghanistan, but all about Russia gaining control of a country now the source of the worlds heroin supply.

Before that... Vietnam.

Coincidence?

originally posted by: Disturbinatti
a reply to: bloodymarvelous

You are so indoctrinated by US propaganda I feel sorry for you.

Reproduction is a right, don't know why you are complaining about people having children.

But Islam doesn't teach what you claim it does which means you are regurgitating propaganda and have not done due diligence in confirming what you hear.

Leads me to believe that you don't want to believe Islam is anything but evil despite the fact it isn't.

But seriously, teaching its people to reproduce is done in Judaism and Christianity and in fact everywhere in the world.

You trying to make it to be sinister is evil, people have a right to reproduce.

Except in China. You want Islam to be Communist or what?

You could only possibly believe that "reproduction is right" if you've been brainwashed to the point of being totally unable to use logic and reason to look at the question.

Palestine's population doubled from 1.9 million to 3.9 million in 18 years. If that pace keeps up, then by 180 years, doubling every 18 years, there would be 3.9 billion. By 360 years there would be 3.9 trillion. By 540 years, 3.9 Quintillion.

Now I am sure technology will improve in 360 years..... but enough to support 3.9 trillion people? Yeah,.....um probably not.

You either have to be stupid or brainwashed not to be able to see plainly how impossible it would be for that to work out.

originally posted by: Disturbinatti

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous
We've got a religion here

1) - teaching its people that they should reproduce at an alarming rate.
2) - Teaching them that when that plan doesn't work out, it is the fault of the "great satan" in the West.

3) - Teaching them that if only the "great satan" in the West would convert to Islam and share its bounteous wealth, the unlimited population growth in Islamic nations would cause no economic collapses ever.

4) - Teaching that it is their responsibility to forcibly convert.

So we start with an impossibly false economic pretense. Propose a solution that would, in the long term, do no good at all.

Then simply blame anyone who doesn't follow the solution for what happens. Claiming the solution would work, but nobody will follow it.

And of course, until everyone follows it, there is no way to be absolutely sure it would fail,.... unless you have a brain, in which case it should be obvious it would inevitably fail. But remember that it is an act of arrogance to use your brain when looking at Allah's plans, because you're supposing that your merely human intellect could see errors in a plan proposed by a being of infinity intelligence.

And the worst part is, due to unrestrained reproduction, millions of new children will be indoctrinated into this philosophy every day. Making it less and less likely this obvious lie will ever be dispelled.

I totally missed your allegation that Islam teaches forced conversion.

It's actually forbidden in the Qur'an.

2:256

"There is no compulsion of any sort in religion as the right way stands clearly distinguished from the way of error."

So you want to explain how a religion whose most sacred text contains a prohibition against forced conversion is supposed to teach it?

Erase the verse completely?

That verse describes the question of forcing someone to convert to Islam. But obeying Allah is a different question.

Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold forbidden that which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
Qur'an 9:29

Although non-Muslims cannot be forced to become Muslim, it is a required duty of Muslims to force non Muslims to obey Allah's will. Paying a submission tax is sufficient, but some form of submission is required.

At the end of the day and End of Days that is your responsibility to learn if you want to speak truth, and will be your responsibility to account for at Judgement Day.

Yes. And it is your duty too.

I pray you wake up before then. You don't even have to be a Muslim to ho to Heaven according to the Qur'an.

It makes forced conversion unnecessary as well as illegal according to Sharia.

Yes, but not forced obedience.

That's right the dreaded Sharia protects people from forced conversion because the Qur'an forbids it as it is "the way of error."

People like you are quick to speak and slow to listen and I doubt this is your first time telling fairy tales about Islam.

Shame shame shame...

Meanwhile let me tell you what IS compulsion in religion, forced conversion is an EXAMPLE.

Another is saying "Accept Jesus as Lord and Saviour or go to hell, those are your options."

Yes. Xians believe god will punish you if you don't convert. It is God's right to do so, but not man's right to do so.

If the Xian god doesn't exist and you don't convert, then nothing will happen. If the Muslim god doesn't exist and you don't at least pay your submission tax, the Muslims will continue fighting you until you do.

The forced conversions in Spain of Jews and Muslims in 1492 by European Catholics who ethically and/or religously cleansed the Iberian peninsula the same year Colombus set sail to commit the inaugural American genocide not long after resulting in a bicoastal genocide the likes of which has no equal in known history complete with forced conversions of South American, Central and North American tribes.

I can't disagree with you that Christians have in the past attempted to force conversions. There is nothing in the bible to support their behavior, unlike the Koran which does give support for extorting Jizya tax.

But it did happen.


Muslims, on the other hand, have always been content merely to extort money from the non-believers in their territories. Rather than massacre them.

I guess extortion is better than Murder, but it would be nice if the Muslims could grow up like the Christians have done, and stop mistreating non-believers altogether.

And Europeans are the violent culture. Cause all the wars.

You need to read up on your history.

The first war between the Muslims and Christians was when the Berber army invaded Spain, and then proceeded toward France, and was stopped by Charles Martel.

Until then, Christians had never done anything to harm Muslims.

www.history.com...

a reply to: bloodymarvelous


Brainwashed because I believe all people have the right to have as many kids as they want?

Only a brainwashed person would say that.

You a communista, mane?

Because I could understand your lack of knowledge AND vitriolic hate, if you lived in a communist land or were sympathetic.

Other than that you are pissed off because I can demonstrate your lack of knowledge so easily.

Go...learn. Spread your wings and broaden your horizons.

Let some love in that heart of yours for your fellow human.

Advocating eugenesist type of birth reduction makes you kind of a Nazi too.

Meaning you don't want more Muslims on earth and don't want them having children, you find it alarming that they like large families because you are a typical American who thinks every country should be like you.

Unless you are not, you should look at your own country's history before talking trash about other cultures.

It's far worse than the history of many modern nations complete with a bi coastal near total genocide.

Maybe you should be "snipped."

I have proven the Christians of Syria and Jews of the Mid East both supported Islam from day 1.

What have you done, spread hate?

That's not good.

a reply to: bloodymarvelous

Good sized rant though.

And size matters when you are ranting!!

Seriously get a life and get over yourself and your hate.