U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Islam
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-12-2015, 08:17 AM
 
352 posts, read 308,690 times
Reputation: 54

Advertisements

Bismillaah ir Rahmaan ir Rahiim In The Name Of Allaah, The Most Gracious, The Most Merciful. As salaamu alaykum The Peace Be Upon You.


I have way too many books to read, but I started this volume and determined from a few pages, that the prophet sent a group of Muslims out on a reconnaissance mission. Long story short, they attacked a caravan killing two of the five persons, one escaped. They took two persons as prisoners, and returned to The Prophet (SAW) to divide the booty. The Prophet Muhammad (SAW) stated "I have not commanded you to fight in the prohibited month." However The following verse was sent down by Allaah, All Glory Praise and Honour Be To HIM:

Quote:
Al- Baqarah 217
"They ask you about the sacred month - about fighting therein. Say, "Fighting therein is great [sin], but averting [people] from the way of Allah and disbelief in Him and [preventing access to] al-Masjid al-Haram and the expulsion of its people therefrom are greater [evil] in the sight of Allah . And fitnah is greater than killing." And they will continue to fight you until they turn you back from your religion if they are able. And whoever of you reverts from his religion [to disbelief] and dies while he is a disbeliever - for those, their deeds have become worthless in this world and the Hereafter, and those are the companions of the Fire, they will abide therein eternally."
If you wish to debate this incident or another in this book, please feel free to do so. As I would like to know what type logic you use in such circumstances.


The Battles of the Prophet (Ghazwat ul Rasul) ~ scroll down the page



Al Sira Al Nabawiyya The Life Of The Prophet Muhammad (SAW) ~ Single Volume




Wassalaam. devotee
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-12-2015, 09:49 AM
 
1,601 posts, read 753,037 times
Reputation: 435
Quote:
Originally Posted by devotee View Post
Bismillaah ir Rahmaan ir Rahiim In The Name Of Allaah, The Most Gracious, The Most Merciful. As salaamu alaykum The Peace Be Upon You.


I have way too many books to read, but I started this volume and determined from a few pages, that the prophet sent a group of Muslims out on a reconnaissance mission. Long story short, they attacked a caravan killing two of the five persons, one escaped. They took two persons as prisoners, and returned to The Prophet (SAW) to divide the booty. The Prophet Muhammad (SAW) stated "I have not commanded you to fight in the prohibited month." However The following verse was sent down by Allaah, All Glory Praise and Honour Be To HIM:

If you wish to debate this incident or another in this book, please feel free to do so. As I would like to know what type logic you use in such circumstances.


The Battles of the Prophet (Ghazwat ul Rasul) ~ scroll down the page

Al Sira Al Nabawiyya The Life Of The Prophet Muhammad (SAW) ~ Single Volume

Wassalaam. devotee
1. It is bad to steal. It is a violation of property rights. Without property rights, no other rights are possible. Since man has to sustain his life by his own effort, the man who has no right to the product of his effort has no means to sustain his life. Muhammed sent these men out to steal. To INITIATE force, which is the root of all evil. Muhammad sent his men on seven unsuccessful raids against Meccan caravans before finally finding one, whereupon they murdered the driver and plundered the contents.

2. It is evil to attack and slaughter people. Yet this is what Muhammed's men did.

Muhammed's evil men wanted to kill as many as they could of them and steal. Waqid shot Amr bin al-Hadrami with an arrow and killed him... (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 425)

According to Ibn Kathir, the Muslims didn't care that Muslims were attacking and stealing and slaughtering. They only cared that this had occurred during the sacred months:

The Quraysh said that Muhammad and his Companions violated the sanctity of the Sacred Month and shed blood, confiscated property and took prisoners during it. Those who refuted them among the Muslims who remained in Makkah replied that the Muslims had done that during the month of Sha`ban (which is not a sacred month). (Ibn Kathir)

This embarrassed Muhammed because people were mad about him doing this in the sacred month. So, Muhammed got his imaginary buddy Allah to produce this verse (I'll use the verse you provided):

Al- Baqarah 217
"They ask you about the sacred month - about fighting therein. Say, "Fighting therein is great [sin], but averting [people] from the way of Allah and disbelief in Him and [preventing access to] al-Masjid al-Haram and the expulsion of its people therefrom are greater [evil] in the sight of Allah . And fitnah is greater than killing." And they will continue to fight you until they turn you back from your religion if they are able. And whoever of you reverts from his religion [to disbelief] and dies while he is a disbeliever - for those, their deeds have become worthless in this world and the Hereafter, and those are the companions of the Fire, they will abide therein eternally."

WOW! So evil Allah says here that "averting [people] from the way of Allah and disbelief in Him and [preventing access to] al-Masjid al-Haram and the expulsion of its people therefrom: is WORSE than SLAUGHTERING them! OK, this is important. Allah is OKing the SLAUGHTER of people who are speaking against Islam and expelling people. What if mosques today are caught teaching terrorism and are shut down. This verse encourages Muslims to slaughter people. This is really bad and thank you for pointing it out!

And, to keep the context clear, no one was attacking Muslims. Muslims were attacking caravans and slaughtering people and stealing.

3. Muslims today lie about this. They try to claim that the Muhammed and his Muslims attacked the caravan to get back what belonged to them. This is false. Nowhere is this said in Islam. But this is documented:

A caravan of Quraish carrying dry raisins and leather and other merchandise of Quraish passed by...” (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 424)

And, raisins are perishable. A fifth of the loot was also given to Muhammad as war booty, which would not have been the case if it rightfully belonged to another Muslim (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 425).

Muhammed's men attacked caravans. No one was attacking Muslims/Muhammed. Muhammed had been evicted by the Meccans a year earlier for being a trouble maker and doing exactly what Allah said was a crime worse than slaughtering people: Muhammed was pushing Islam on people:

The leading men of Mecca] went to Abu Tablib [and said] “Your nephew has cursed our gods, insulted our religion, mocked our way of life and accused our forefathers of error. Either you must stop him or you must let us get at him.”
The apostle continued on his way… In consequence, his relations with the Quraish [Meccans] deteriorated and men withdrew from him in enmity. (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 168).

So how long did these people put up with Muhammed's garbage before tossing him out? Thirteen years.

In fact, if we follow the principle of Allah, Muhammed should have been slaughtered on the spot.

Can any Muslim here say that Muhammed and his men were evil to attack caravans, steal and slaughter?

Can any Muslim here say that Allah is evil or promoting the slaughter of people who speak against Islam?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-12-2015, 08:34 PM
 
Location: Logan Township, Minnesota
15,511 posts, read 13,294,416 times
Reputation: 7407
Quote:
Originally Posted by devotee View Post
Bismillaah ir Rahmaan ir Rahiim In The Name Of Allaah, The Most Gracious, The Most Merciful. As salaamu alaykum The Peace Be Upon You.


I have way too many books to read, but I started this volume and determined from a few pages, that the prophet sent a group of Muslims out on a reconnaissance mission. Long story short, they attacked a caravan killing two of the five persons, one escaped. They took two persons as prisoners, and returned to The Prophet (SAW) to divide the booty. The Prophet Muhammad (SAW) stated "I have not commanded you to fight in the prohibited month." However The following verse was sent down by Allaah, All Glory Praise and Honour Be To HIM:



If you wish to debate this incident or another in this book, please feel free to do so. As I would like to know what type logic you use in such circumstances.


The Battles of the Prophet (Ghazwat ul Rasul) ~ scroll down the page



Al Sira Al Nabawiyya The Life Of The Prophet Muhammad (SAW) ~ Single Volume




Wassalaam. devotee
Very short reply.

Basically Muhammad had repremanded them for fighting, without his order to do so. They had gone against Muhammad(saws)
__________________
When posting as a MOD my posts will be in red

No advertising, no copyrighted material, no personal attacks


MODERATOR OF: Buddhism: Judaism: Paganism:

When in doubt read the TOS MOD LIST FAQ's
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-12-2015, 10:05 PM
 
1,601 posts, read 753,037 times
Reputation: 435
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodrow LI View Post
Very short reply.

Basically Muhammad had repremanded them for fighting, without his order to do so. They had gone against Muhammad(saws)
Rubbish.

There were several raids. Muhammed ordered them.

FIRST RAID:

"According to Ar-Raheeq Al-Makhtum (The Sealed Nectar), a modern Islamic hagiography of Muhammad written by the Indian Muslim author Safi ur-Rahman Mubarakpuri, Muhammad ordered the first caravan raid led by Hamza ibn ‘Abd al-Muttalib (Muhammad's uncle) seven to nine months after the Hijra."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Is_Caravan_Raid

It is mentioned in Ibn Hisham and Ibn Ishaq's biography of Muhammad (the earliest surviving biography of Muhammad from the 7th century), that for these caravan raids Muhammad gave permission to "plunder" the caravans of theirs enemies and seize their goods and property(s) and said:

“ Go forth against this caravan; it may be that Allah will grant you plunder
[Ibn Ishaq and Ibn Hisham Sirat Rasul Allah, p. 95, translation by Folio Society][18]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carava...Haykal_1976-15

Second raid

"About a month after Hamzah's unsuccessful bid to plunder, Muhammad entrusted a party of sixty Muhajirun led by Ubaydah to conduct another operation at a Quraysh caravan that was returning from Syria and protected by two hundred armed men. The leader of this caravan was Abu Sufyan ibn Harb."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carava...Haykal_1976-15

Fourth Raid
"The fourth raid, known as the invasion of Waddan, was the first offensive in which Muhammad took part personally with 70, mostly Muhajir,troops.[13] It is said that twelve months after moving to Medina, Muhammad himself led a caravan raid to Waddan (Al-Abwa). The aim was to intercept the caravans of the Quraysh. The raid party did not meet any Quraysh during the raid.[15][16]"

Fifth Raid

The fifth raid, known as the invasion of Buwat, was also commanded by Muhammad.[15] A month after the raid at al-Abwa, he personally led 200 men including Muhajirs and Ansars to Bawat, a place on the caravan route of the Quraysh merchants. A herd of 1,500 camels, accompanied by 100 riders under the leadership of Umayyah ibn Khalaf, a Quraysh.[24]

Sixth Raid:

The Invasion of Dul Ashir[2] occurred directly after the Invasion of Buwat in December of 623 AD (2 A.H of the Islamic calendar). The expedition was ordered by Muhammad after he received intelligence that a caravan was heading to Syria. Therefore, Muhammad directed about 150-200 Muslims, who attempted to raid the caravan.But caravan left before the Muslims arrived.[2]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Dul_Ashir

Seventh Raid

The Nakhla Raid was the seventh Caravan Raid and the first successful raid against the Meccans. Abdullah ibn Jahsh was the Commander .[2] [4]

It took place in January 624 AD (Rajab 2 A.H.) Muhammad despatched ‘Abdullah bin Jahsh Asadi to Nakhlah at the head of 12 Emigrants with six camels.[3][5][6][7]

Here's where it gets fun!!

Muhammed was not with these Muslims and they attacked and slaughtered without Muhammeds direct approval. But Muhammed had been going on unsuccessful raids before this. One has to consider: Why is it OK to attack and steal and slaughter any time except for this "sacred month"?? Isn't Muhammed supposed to be peaceful? And consider, he only got upset when this happened:

"The Quraysh also spread everywhere the news of the raid and the killing by the Muslims in the sacred month. Because of the timing, and because the attack was carried out without his sanction, Muhammad was furious about what had happened. He rebuked them (the Muslims) for fighting in the sacred month, saying: "I did not instruct you to fight in the sacred month"[5]

So, Muhammed is busted. He was responsible for his men. He never gave an order not to kill....why did he even send out the raiding party during the sacred time? His men got mad at him:

Muhammad initially disapproved of that act and suspended any action as regards the camels and the two captives on account of the prohibited months . The Arab Pagans, exploited this opportunity to accuse the Muslims of violating what is Divinely inviolable (fighting in the months considered sacred to the Arab pagans[10]). This idle talk brought about a painful headache to Muhammad’s Companions, until at last they were relieved when Muhammad revealed a verse regarding fighting in the sacred months[10][11]

ROFL!! Of course, cook up a verse! And what an evil verse it was:

"They ask you about the sacred month - about fighting therein. Say, "Fighting therein is great [sin], but averting [people] from the way of Allah and disbelief in Him and [preventing access to] al-Masjid al-Haram and the expulsion of its people therefrom are greater [evil] in the sight of Allah . And fitnah is greater than killing." And they will continue to fight you until they turn you back from your religion if they are able. And whoever of you reverts from his religion [to disbelief] and dies while he is a disbeliever - for those, their deeds have become worthless in this world and the Hereafter, and those are the companions of the Fire, they will abide therein eternally."

Sadistic Allah gives his full permission for the slaughter, and all future slaughter!! Brilliant move, Muhammed! Gets you off the hook. Gives ISIS the explicit insrtuction: "Fighting therein is great [sin], but averting [people] from the way of Allah and disbelief in Him and [preventing access to] al-Masjid al-Haram and the expulsion of its people therefrom are greater [evil] in the sight of Allah . And fitnah is greater than killing."

The thing is, no one was attacking Muhammed. He was attacking them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-12-2015, 10:28 PM
 
Location: Not-a-Theist
3,440 posts, read 1,586,785 times
Reputation: 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by devotee View Post
Bismillaah ir Rahmaan ir Rahiim In The Name Of Allaah, The Most Gracious, The Most Merciful. As salaamu alaykum The Peace Be Upon You.


I have way too many books to read, but I started this volume and determined from a few pages, that the prophet sent a group of Muslims out on a reconnaissance mission. Long story short, they attacked a caravan killing two of the five persons, one escaped. They took two persons as prisoners, and returned to The Prophet (SAW) to divide the booty. The Prophet Muhammad (SAW) stated "I have not commanded you to fight in the prohibited month." However The following verse was sent down by Allaah, All Glory Praise and Honour Be To HIM:

If you wish to debate this incident or another in this book, please feel free to do so. As I would like to know what type logic you use in such circumstances.

The Battles of the Prophet (Ghazwat ul Rasul) ~ scroll down the page

Al Sira Al Nabawiyya The Life Of The Prophet Muhammad (SAW) ~ Single Volume


Wassalaam. devotee
In the first place, whilst wars were inevitable in the olden day due the more barbaric nature of human beings, the concept and elements of war should never have been incorporated in any holy religious texts and more so if the core religious texts is claimed to be immutable from an all supreme God. If the holy texts is to be claimed as a way of life [as the Quran] then it is more imperative to exclude any war elements in its core texts.


Since 1,000 years ago, the number of wars had been reducing between humans, except those initiated by SOME evil prone Muslims.


By including war and martial elements in the Quran and the whole ethos of Islam, Muhammad or whoever established Islam had made a BIG mistake that posed a threat to humanity eternally. This claim is the truth as proven by the glaring evidences of the terrible evils and violence committed by SOME evil prone Muslims who were inspired by the very significant amount of evil laden, warring and martial elements in the Quran.


It is so common sense that any humans will counter attack as a matter of self-defense when they are attacked. There is no need at all to include such 'war' elements in a religion texts or a way-of-life that is supposedly to be immutable as the words of a God. What is worse in the case of the Quran is the verses related to 'justified war' are so loose and vague that acts by non-Muslims [and even Muslims] are easily perceived as a threat to Islam and thus give the opportunity for those evil prone Muslims to vent their anger, evil and violence on non-Muslims. This is a reality as represented by the real terrible evils and violence committed by SOME Muslims [true Muslims].

The point is, leave it to the people and they will know how to defend themselves. There is no need for a God to inspire its believer to war and violence because the verses can be easily misinterpreted.


Quote:
However The following verse was sent down by Allaah, All Glory Praise and Honour Be To HIM:
Which verse? and what is the page number of the book you are referring to.


Btw, I don't give much Islamic credibility to such stories, but if you want to discuss it in its context, then;
If I am not mistaken, Muhammad did not scold them seriously and he excused them.
I think this is a case of Muhammad wanting to be in control and ensure he get the greater share of the booty of war [note the verse that gave him preferential share, including Allah which does not exist in the first place].
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-13-2015, 08:35 AM
 
352 posts, read 308,690 times
Reputation: 54
Bismillaah ir Rahmaan ir Rahiim In The Name Of Allaah, The Most Gracious, The Most Merciful. As salaamu alaykum The Peace Be Upon You.

Trying to make sense of the situation, beginning from page four of the book. Either the Muslims wanted to get even with the Meccans (Quraysh), for forcing them to leave Mecca, or, they were trying to instigate a conflict in order to overthrow the Meccans.
The only other scenario that I can subscribe to is the fact that the Muslims were following the Holy Qur'an by fighting and killing the Meccans (Quraysh), due to their "preventing access to the path of Allaah, to deny HIM." And, that "tumult and oppression is worse than slaughter." It is also obvious that, the Meccans were trying to turn the Muslims back from their faith. Obvious still is the fact that the Meccans, intended to fight the Muslims, without ceasing, until they gave up their faith. The division of the 'booty' is secondary and needn't be made to look like crookery as some on these forums state.





Wassalaam. devotee
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-13-2015, 10:29 AM
 
1,601 posts, read 753,037 times
Reputation: 435
Quote:
Originally Posted by devotee View Post
Bismillaah ir Rahmaan ir Rahiim In The Name Of Allaah, The Most Gracious, The Most Merciful. As salaamu alaykum The Peace Be Upon You.

Trying to make sense of the situation, beginning from page four of the book. Either the Muslims wanted to get even with the Meccans (Quraysh), for forcing them to leave Mecca, or, they were trying to instigate a conflict in order to overthrow the Meccans.
The only other scenario that I can subscribe to is the fact that the Muslims were following the Holy Qur'an by fighting and killing the Meccans (Quraysh), due to their "preventing access to the path of Allaah, to deny HIM." And, that "tumult and oppression is worse than slaughter." It is also obvious that, the Meccans were trying to turn the Muslims back from their faith. Obvious still is the fact that the Meccans, intended to fight the Muslims, without ceasing, until they gave up their faith. The division of the 'booty' is secondary and needn't be made to look like crookery as some on these forums state.

Wassalaam. devotee
You have it wrong. Muhammed went to Mecca to start trouble and push HIS religion on others.

When the apostle openly displayed Islam as Allah ordered him, his people did not withdraw or turn against him, so far as I have heard, until he spoke disparagingly of their gods. When he did that, they took great offence and resolved unanimously to treat him as an enemy. (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 167)

"[Muhammad] declared Islam publicly to his fellow tribesmen. When he did so, they did not withdraw from him or reject him in any way, as far as I have heard, until he spoke of their gods and denounced them." (al-Tabari Vol.VI, p.93)

The Meccans put up with Muhammed for some time, although he was acting like a jerk.

[The Meccans] said they had never known anything like the trouble they had endured from this fellow. He had declared their mode of life foolish, insulted their forefathers, reviled their religion, divided the community and cursed their gods (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 183).

"We [the Meccans] have never seen the like of what we have endured from this man [Muhammad]. He has derided our traditional values, abused our forefathers, reviled our religion, caused division among us, and insulted our gods. We have endured a great deal from him." (al-Tabari, Vol.VI p.101)

According to the principle that Allah set forth later, the Meccans should have slaughtered Muhammed.
"tumult and oppression is worse than slaughter."

Are you getting this? This is the second time I've had to go through this with you.

Muhammed went to Mecca and started the trouble. The Meccans finally offered him money to shut up:

They decided to send for Muhammad and to negotiate and argue with him... When he came and sat down with them, they explained that that they had sent for him in order that they could talk together. No Arab had ever treated his tribe as Muhammad had treated them, and they repeated the charges... If it was money he wanted, they would make him the richest of them all; if it was honor, he should be their prince; if it was sovereignty, they would make him king. (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 188)

THIS is how badly the Meccans wanted to be peaceful. They turned the other cheek!

Muhammad said OK and took offer.

When [the Meccans] heard that, they rejoiced. What he had said about their gods pleased and delighted them, and they gave ear to him… When he came to the prostration and finished the chapter, he prostrated and the Muslims followed their prophet in it, having faith in what he brought them and obeying his command. Those mushrikūn of Quraysh and others who were in the mosque also prostrated on account of what they had heard him say about their gods. In the whole mosque there was no believer or kāfir who did not prostrate. (al-Tabari, the Tarikh Vol. 1)

Wonderful! Peace! But not for long. As soon as his Muslim followers started asking why Muhammed he turned coat for spoils, Muhammed started acting up again. He broke his word. Of course, this made things even worse with the Meccans.

This is typical of Muslims today. A country offers them hospitality and the Muslims start acting like total jerks. Back to the story....

Did the Meccans do anything to Muhammed because he acted like a total a$$hole? They did. Not much, but they did get fed up with his bad behavior. His uncle was powerful and tried to protect him (and also received many pleas from Meccans to make Muhammed behave):
Abu Sufyan, with other sundry notables, went to Abu Talib and said: "You know the trouble that exists between us and your nephew, so call him and let us make an agreement that he will leave us alone and we will leave him alone; let him have his religion and we will have ours." (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 278)

Muhammed gave them the finger and went on being an a$$hole.

After 13 years of Muhammed's nonsense, they finally evicted him.

That's the history. So, why did Muhammed and his gang start raiding Meccan caravans (killing the drivers and stealing the goods) about a year later?

Several reasons. Money, revenge....Muhammed gained wealth by stealing. Also, and very important, after Muhammed's protector and uncle died, the Meccans did not attack Muhammed and toss him out on his butt, as he deserved. Muhammed went to neighboring Medina because those people agreed to go to war with Muhammed against the Meccans.

Muhammed pulled a lot more evil nonsense ... do you want me to go on with the story?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-13-2015, 07:06 PM
 
Location: Not-a-Theist
3,440 posts, read 1,586,785 times
Reputation: 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by devotee View Post
Bismillaah ir Rahmaan ir Rahiim In The Name Of Allaah, The Most Gracious, The Most Merciful. As salaamu alaykum The Peace Be Upon You.

Trying to make sense of the situation, beginning from page four of the book. Either the Muslims wanted to get even with the Meccans (Quraysh), for forcing them to leave Mecca, or, they were trying to instigate a conflict in order to overthrow the Meccans.
The only other scenario that I can subscribe to is the fact that the Muslims were following the Holy Qur'an by fighting and killing the Meccans (Quraysh), due to their "preventing access to the path of Allaah, to deny HIM." And, that "tumult and oppression is worse than slaughter." It is also obvious that, the Meccans were trying to turn the Muslims back from their faith. Obvious still is the fact that the Meccans, intended to fight the Muslims, without ceasing, until they gave up their faith. The division of the 'booty' is secondary and needn't be made to look like crookery as some on these forums state.

Wassalaam. devotee
As usual you are not viewing the Quran and Muhammad in the whole perspective of history and reality.


1. In the perspective of history and reality, it was Muhammad who started it all from the first place.
It was Muhammad who started the 'tat' and the Qureshi and non-Muslims countered with 'tit' and it spiral into the above tit-for-tat.


2. Muhammad had some extreme psychological experiences* [can be explained by psychology and psychiatry] and he was convinced by his wife and then others that he was the prophesized prophet. From research and in reality, there are tens of thousands who have had such experiences and wanted to kick start a religion but were not successful as Muhammad's Islam.


3. Muhammad kick-started his religion by preaching and insulting the religions of his existing locals who were then living harmoniously with their different religions [Abrahamic, pagans, idolatry, etc.].
Religion is a very sensitive issue to the normal believers [Muslims should know and understand that in view of the very sensitiveness even to cartoons which is very immature spirituality].
Therefore when Muhammad first started condemning and insulting their [Qureshi, Jews, Christians] religions, Muslims should understand the Qureshi, Jews, Christians as normal human beings and normal believers will definitely get angry.
When they get angry, they will definitely retaliate with their counter insults and mocking. This is recorded in the Quran.
This is the starting point of the tit-for-tat that culminating in Muhammad turning up the winner because he very aggressive, violent and has the luck of the circumstances then.


Muhammad was very vengeful when he attacked and took over Mecca and the Kaaba. If he was really a genuine spiritual person he would have started his religion [if it was that good] elsewhere and built it up based on his spiritual qualities and not based on aggression, might, wars and imperialism [as extended by others].


Your story of Muhammad and his sidekicks who went on their own merely prove that Muhammad and his men were violent and aggressive [in contrast that is not expected of pious spiritual believers] as culminating from the tit-for-tat that Muhammad started merely based on some psychological [doubtful] experiences.


Your story also prove ISIS and other jidhadist are doing exactly what Muhammad's men did on their own, i.e. your words above,
Muslims were following the Holy Qur'an by fighting and killing the Meccans (Quraysh), due to their "preventing access to the path of Allaah, to deny HIM." And, that "tumult and oppression is worse than slaughter."


The above 'preventing access .....' is categorized as 'corruption,' 'mischiefs' or 'wronged' in the Quran. So objectively ISIS and other jihadists are doing exactly what the Quran and Allah dictated in the Quran, i.e. strive and fight in the way of Allah with one's wealth and life to defend Islam and Muslims [true and not hypocrites].


If ISIS and other jihadists are right in accordance to the Quran and Allah, while the whole world condemned them as wrong [per humanity moral standard], then there is some thing wrong with the Quran.


As I had said the Quran and Islam is two-face with two truths, it true it is both good [partly] and at the same time partly evil. How it turn out like this is due to point 2 above.


The evidence and proof of my hypothesis above are the actual terrible evils and violence committed by SOME evil prone Muslims who are inspired by the partly evil element in the Quran [Islam].


As a comparison, the Buddha and his likes could have some unusual psychological or psychiatric experience [like Muhammad] that compelled them towards spirituality and religiosity where their teachings end up as a religion, e.g. Buddhism, Jainism, Taoism, etc.
BUT the difference between them and Islam is they NEVER include leading and motivating evil elements in the holy texts with God as the ultimate controller.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-14-2015, 05:30 AM
 
352 posts, read 308,690 times
Reputation: 54
Bismillaah ir Rahmaan ir Rahiim In The Name Of Allaah, The Most Gracious, The Most Merciful. As salaamu alaykum The Peace Be Upon You.




Quote:
Your story also prove ISIS and other jidhadist are doing exactly what Muhammad's men did on their own, i.e. your words above,
Muslims were following the Holy Qur'an by fighting and killing the Meccans (Quraysh), due to their "preventing access to the path of Allaah, to deny HIM." And, that "tumult and oppression is worse than slaughter."


The above 'preventing access .....' is categorized as 'corruption,' 'mischiefs' or 'wronged' in the Quran. So objectively ISIS and other jihadists are doing exactly what the Quran and Allah dictated in the Quran, i.e. strive and fight in the way of Allah with one's wealth and life to defend Islam and Muslims [true and not hypocrites].


If ISIS and other jihadists are right in accordance to the Quran and Allah, while the whole world condemned them as wrong [per humanity moral standard], then there is some thing wrong with the Quran.

There is a problem with the Ahadith used by some posters, which is appearing as forged stories about Prophet Muhammad (SAW). I left a link to Prophet Muhammad's (SAW), Life Story in a post above. I would expect it to be much more accurate.

"Preventing access to the path of Allaah, to deny HIM," And, that "tumult and oppression is worse than slaughter," is the primary cause of 'corruption,' 'mischief's' or 'wronged' in the world today. Basically, Communism in the form of a New World Order being led by the Zionist, must prevent religion from leading the populous of the world away from sensual perversion, which is now on a rampage, throughout the world. Islam, is a formidable obstacle, to the fast stepping NWO; and according to the Zionist, NWO proponents, must be destroyed. So, what it amounts to is, whose side are you on.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XUub1no1qw ~ Muslim reform movement

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1D-2oQONdAU ~ Hijacked religion!!



Wassalaam. devotee
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-14-2015, 07:38 PM
 
Location: Not-a-Theist
3,440 posts, read 1,586,785 times
Reputation: 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by devotee View Post
Bismillaah ir Rahmaan ir Rahiim In The Name Of Allaah, The Most Gracious, The Most Merciful. As salaamu alaykum The Peace Be Upon You.

There is a problem with the Ahadith used by some posters, which is appearing as forged stories about Prophet Muhammad (SAW). I left a link to Prophet Muhammad's (SAW), Life Story in a post above. I would expect it to be much more accurate.

"Preventing access to the path of Allaah, to deny HIM," And, that "tumult and oppression is worse than slaughter," is the primary cause of 'corruption,' 'mischief's' or 'wronged' in the world today. Basically, Communism in the form of a New World Order being led by the Zionist, must prevent religion from leading the populous of the world away from sensual perversion, which is now on a rampage, throughout the world. Islam, is a formidable obstacle, to the fast stepping NWO; and according to the Zionist, NWO proponents, must be destroyed. So, what it amounts to is, whose side are you on.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XUub1no1qw ~ Muslim reform movement


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1D-2oQONdAU ~ Hijacked religion!!

Wassalaam. devotee
If there are any forged stories, they can be discussed and debated.


In any case, because it is history in the 7th century, the most accurate story cannot have a high credibility in our modern era and for the purpose of divine authority.
The most credible authority for Islam is from the Quran and no where else.


Who side I am on?
My view is all evils must be dealt with regardless of whatever the source, i.e. NWO, Communism, Democracy, Secularism, Religion, etc.


However we are in this Islamic Forum, so the evils from other sources are off topic. We should addressed other types of evils and violence in their respective forum, but here we can only talk about Islam.
Therefore you should not try to deflect by introducing other non-topical issues, e.g. NWO, Communism, Politics, Democracy, etc.


My point;
What ISIS is doing is complying to what is in the Quran and as demanded by Allah, i.e. fight the non-Muslims for the following reasons.
"Preventing access to the path of Allaah, to deny HIM," And, that "tumult and oppression is worse than slaughter," is the primary cause of 'corruption,' 'mischief's' or 'wronged' in the world today.


If the Muslims of ISIS are doing exactly what Allah expect them to do as per the Quran, then how can you say they are wrong?
Besides Who Are You [me or anyone] as a fallible human slave to Allah to judge for Allah?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Islam
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top