Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
PS - As much as I abhor Al Qaeda/ISIS and all their variants, along with what I considered to be barbarically primitive practices from genital mutilation by East African tribes like the Masai (who are not Muslim by the way) to beheadings by Central Amerian drug Cartels...Considering that this advanced democratic republic is only about 150 years out of from considering slavery a particularly fine Christian institution, I'm just not feeling the self-righteousness.
Reuven Firestone claims that the Genesis 22 account has inserted the name of Isaac and that when examining the syntax, grammatically it is superflous. He says that though the Quran itself was written later---the original Jewish/Bible stories were better preserved in Arabia through the oral tradition. The Quran may contain the original preserved version of the Bible stories even though it was written down later. (That is his thesis anyway.....)
So, if, as the video suggests, ancient Judasim/Jews were in the Arabian penninsula---it might add credence to Ruevens theories.....
(while I like to know about revisionist theories...I have not found one that is convincing so I am sticking with the traditional Muslim narrative)
Made no sense, I am referring to the only written information about muhammed.
Without it, the religion dissolves. There is no islam.
No, it wouldn't. Islam would still be here, albeit with much less knowledge surrounding it. The very essence of it remains- it being the in Qur'an of course.
No, it wouldn't. Islam would still be here, albeit with much less knowledge surrounding it. The very essence of it remains- it being the in Qur'an of course.
Not true, it was the teachings of muhammed that inspired the thousand years of Jihad into Europe.
Without these teachings, using the Qur'an only, there is little to even understand about the religion.
Not true, it was the teachings of muhammed that inspired the thousand years of Jihad into Europe.
And which teachings would those be? According to Westerners, the Arabs conquered the world because their religion orders them to do so. On the contrary, conquering was quite the thing back then. The Arabs, having been finally united, started to expand and conquer for the same reasons are nations did so. But of course, when it's comes to any actions done by a Muslim, Westerners insist it must be part of the religion.
Quote:
Without these teachings, using the Qur'an only, there is little to even understand about the religion.
That would depend; the fundamental basics are still there: that there is one God; that one must be good and just in all his affairs; that one must help the needy, etc... This is mainly what the religion is about.
That would depend; the fundamental basics are still there: that there is one God; that one must be good and just in all his affairs; that one must help the needy, etc... This is mainly what the religion is about.
?
fundamental basics apply in all religions, but are all different.
A small percentage of the world religions believe in one God.
As of today, there are over 3000 Gods.
Being Good, is a society thing, what is good for one, might not be for another.
Islam's first documentation of the 5 pillars points to the money, not going to the poor, but the rulers.
Helping the poor is fairly new, and a dead giveaway is the rulers living in scandalas wealth, while the masses suffer in extreme poverty.
And which teachings would those be? According to Westerners, the Arabs conquered the world because their religion orders them to do so. On the contrary, conquering was quite the thing back then. The Arabs, having been finally united, started to expand and conquer for the same reasons are nations did so. But of course, when it's comes to any actions done by a Muslim, Westerners insist it must be part of the religion.
Yes, it's all a "Western conspiracy"!
I recently came across this quran commentary, which funnily enough, got the "mistaken" idea that Islam is violent...
Quote:
[9:29] Those who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day26 - even though they were given the scriptures, and who do not hold as unlawful27 that which Allah and His Messenger have declared to be unlawful, and who do not follow the true religion - fight against them until they pay tribute out of their hand and are utterly subdued.28
26. Though the people of the Book professed to believe in Allah and the Hereafter, in fact they believed in neither. For only that person really believes in Allah who acknowledges Him as the only one God and the only one Lord, and does not associate with Him any other, whatsoever, in His Being, in His characteristics, in His rights and in His powers and authority. But according to this definition of shirk both the Christians and the Jews were guilty of shirk as has been made plain in the verses that follow: therefore their profession of belief in Allah was meaningless. Likewise they did not really believe in the Hereafter, in spite of the fact that they believed in resurrection. For it is not enough: one must also believe that on that Day absolute justice will be done on the basis of one’s belief and actions. One should also believe that no ransom and no expiation and no spiritual relationships with any saint shall be of any avail on that Day. It is absolutely meaningless to believe in the Hereafter without this. And the Jews and the Christians had polluted their faiths because they believed that such things would protect them against justice on that day.
27. The second reason why Jihad should be waged against them is that they did not adopt the law sent down by Allah through His Messenger.
28. This is the aim of Jihad with the Jews and the Christians and it is not to force them to become Muslims and adopt the Islamic way of life. They should be forced to pay jizyah in order to put an end to their independence and supremacy so that they should not remain rulers and sovereigns in the land. These powers should be wrested from them by the followers of the true faith, who should assume the sovereignty and lead others towards the right way, while they should become their subjects and pay jizyah. Jizyah is paid by those non-Muslims who live as zimmis (proteges) in an Islamic state, in exchange for the security and protection granted to them by it. This is also symbolical of the fact that they themselves agree to live in it as its subjects. This is the significance of “they pay the tribute out of (their) hand,” that is, “with full consent so that they willingly become the subjects of the believers, who perform the duty of the vicegerents of Allah on the earth.”
At first this command applied only to the Jews and the Christians. Then the Prophet (peace be upon him) himself extended it to the Zoroastrians also. After his death, his companions unanimously applied this rule to all the non Muslim nations outside Arabia.
This is jizyah of which the Muslims have been feeling apologetic during the last two centuries of their degeneration and there are still some people who continue to apologize for it. But the way of Allah is straight and clear and does not stand in need of any apology to the rebels against Allah. Instead of offering apologies on behalf of Islam for the measure that guarantees security of life, property and faith to those who choose to live under its protection, the Muslims should feel proud of such a humane law as that of jizyah. For it is obvious that the maximum freedom that can be allowed to those who do not adopt the Way of Allah but choose to tread the ways of error is that they should be tolerated to lead the life they like. That is why the Islamic state offers them protection, if they agree to live as its zimmis by paying jizyah, but it cannot allow that they should remain supreme rulers in any place and establish wrong ways and impose them on others. As this state of things inevitably produces chaos and disorder, it is the duty of the true Muslims to exert their utmost to bring to an end their wicked rule and bring them under a righteous order.
As regards the question, “What do the non-Muslims get in return for jizyah”, it may suffice to say that it is the price of the freedom which the Islamic state allows them in following their erroneous ways, while living in the jurisdiction of Islam and enjoying its protection. The money thus collected is spent in maintaining the righteous administration that gives them the freedom and protects their rights. This also serves as a yearly reminder to them that they have been deprived of the honor of paying Zakat in the Way of Allah, and forced to pay jizyah instead as a price of following the ways of error.
My point being, is that it isn't just "Westerners" at all. It's Muslims themselves that say that the Islamic religion is violent.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
