World Islamifacation

[Rayaan]

[Minimalist]

I'll agree to disagree on this, Min, because the existence of Muhammad is a historical fact according to my knowledge

That's okay, Rayaan. I don't expect you to come to your senses all at once.

[Faith No More]

I think any day that we restrict the constructing of a religious building that is clearly within the rules, we need to take a long hard look in the mirror and ask ourselves if this is who we really want to be. I am all for ridding the world of religion, but I am not for restricting it.

Edit: I am not for restricting it as long as it stays within the rules and laws that everyone else has to abide by.

[fr0d0]

I posted a reply to this verse in a different thread. I'll quote it again:

Poop. I missed that... sorry.

If you read from the beginning of the same chapter (Surah At-Tauba), from the first verse to the fifth verse, you will know that there is a historical background to the verse that you quoted. It is speaking about an event that happened at a specific time and a specific place. Therefore, it is not a command which is to be applied for all times and all places.

But the command applies at some specific times and places. That's bad enough.

In the first verse (Chapter 9), it says that there is a treaty between the Muslims and the Mushriks (or polytheists) of Mecca who used to persecute the Muslims. However, the precondition for the Muslims to engage in a war against them is only if they break the treaty. This is the reason why the verse was revealed to Muhammad - i.e. because it enabled the Muslims to defend themselves against the constant persecution from the hostile, pagan tribes of Mecca - which is, IF they attack first. So, the important thing is to look at the verses which comes before the specific verse that you quoted.

If you still think that the interpretation is wrong, then feel free to say so, and explain to me why you think it is not right, and then give your own interpretation.

It's justification for violent war against your aggressors, sure. I find that to be primitive.

A classical interpretation by Ismail Ibn Kathir (A.D. 1301–1373 - a Muslim muhaddith, Faqih, historian, and commentator): Do not wait until you find them. Rather, seek and besiege them in their areas and forts, gather intelligence about them in the various roads and fairways so that what is made wide looks ever smaller to them. This way, they will have no choice, but to die or embrace Islam.

That is in relation to the political and historical context of the verse, and secondly, they have do have a choice as long as they (the pagans) do not rebel against Muhammad and his followers.

Some choice - become a Muslim or die. This is what people are sayinig here... Islam is not tolerant.

Mohammed says: all will submit to Allah. Jesus says: you have a choice.

1. Muhammad said submit to Allah but not that you *must* submit, and ultimately, the Quran says: "Let there be no compulsion in religion" (Surah 2:256).

The above contradicts that wouldn't you agree? In certain circumstances it's a choice of death or obedience. Sounds pretty ****ing compulsory to me.

There were many Christians and Jews who lived peacefully in an Islamic state. They were not forced to convert to Islam. Muhammad granted them autonomy as long as they sign a pact of non-aggression and pay taxes - and in return - they get their autonomy and a guarantee for safety and security for their lives, money, and honor.

Mohammed respected those faiths as the root of his own. Same way he didn't destroy the Xtian relics but did the 300 other religious statues in Mecca. Same as people in the name of Islam destroy historic monuments because they're not Islamic.

2. Maybe Jesus did say that, and that could be true, but if you don't mind, I would like to know what is your interpretation of this: "But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay [them] before me" (Luke 19:27). So two things: (a) What does it mean and (b) was Jesus giving them a choice or not and why? I want to know this because it's possible that I'm not understanding it correctly.

This is the King in Jesus's story talking. The choice of rejection of God is spiritual death. Physical death is indescriminatory, and certainly not something that can be judged by humans. Also, the spiritual death isn't final. In the end... all come to God... but that isn't in this life. God always forgives, and people choose the depth of their resistance. Ultimately, the conclusion is undeniable. It's just a matter of time before that is realised.

The difference with Allah's dictate is that he condones political homicide and war. That's uncivilised and barbaric. (modern society does the same BTW)

[Anymouse]

Doesn't really make any difference to this Wiccan. They're all convinced they're right, and everyone else is a heretic. It's terrorism whether you use a suicide vest in a market, walk into a church and gun down a Kansas doctor, or bulldoze Palestinian homes and build a ghetto wall around them like Warsaw under the Nazis.

If they won't live with us and each other in peace, I guess the best hope is they take each other out. Unfortunately in this day of nuclear weapons, they might get every other living thing too. They all look toward some sort of Apocalypse.

Christians, Muslims, Jews, they all want to burn us (atheists and Wiccans) at the stake anyway, and call us satanic when we're not the ones with a god of evil, or a god calling himself good when he promotes evil.

The Wiccan Rede even derives from a Christian source, but they forget that when they crank up the witchduck or fan the flames for a marshmallow roast with us as the main course, or try to prohibit practice of our faith in the military (thank you for that Pres. Bush.)

At least Muslims haven't called on the government to outlaw atheist or Wiccan practices here. But that may be because they are a minority, not because they are more open than Christians.

I see today on Navy Times's Website the entire high command of the Turkish Armed Forces retired in protest over the ruling AK Party's continuing purge of their military over an alleged coup plot that didn't happen. Turkey is a founding member of NATO with a religious party running the government: that can't be good for the Atlantic Alliance's business. But no worse than the Re-pube-licans Tea Party nutters here I guess.

I am far more scared of people like Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann than I am of religious nuts half a world away. They're right here and have a following.

Dilige, et quod vis fac (Love, and do what you will)--St. Augustine of Hippo, "Seventh Treatise of the Epistles of St. John," VII Century, the source for Allister Crowley's Wiccan Rede.

James.

[The Grand Nudger]

Shell, you want some kids? I got kids for sale. I can even get you an order in on the factory floor, be about nine months turnaround from order to production. We're currently capable of both male and female models, with the options of brown, blond, or red hair. We have however been restricted to green eyed models due to limitations on the floor.

[Shell B]

Shell, you want some kids? I got kids for sale. I can even get you an order in on the factory floor, be about nine months turnaround from order to production. We're currently capable of both male and female models, with the options of brown, blond, or red hair. We have however been restricted to green eyed models due to limitations on the floor.

I'll pass on the kids, thanks.

[The Grand Nudger]

Well, if you ever want to reconsider, just send me a pm here at the dealership. We run out a new model every year and I don't think I have to tell you how depreciation works. Could get an early model with reasonable wear and tear very fairly priced at one of our summer tent sales.