30 Dec 06
2 edits
Originally posted by ahosyneyI fully conceede that "Christians" have killed in the name of God. However, why were they calling themselves "Christians" if they were ignoring the mandate of Christ to love your enemies? That is the question. I think what you had back in the time of the Crusades was a Christian population who were largely illiterate and uneducated and who relied on the church and clery to tell them what the Bible says and how they should believe. However, today the general populace is literate and educated thus they do not rely as heavily on what other men say that God has said in this holy word. Do you percieve that this is part of the problem in some sects withing the world of Islam? Perhaps they too have a populace that is largely illiterate and uneducated, unlike yourself, and who rely on Imams to tell them what the Quran is saying or how it should be interpreted and are thus decieved into believing that if they send their child to blow themselves up in the streets of Israel they will wind up in candy land with 70 some virgins.
[b]But don't we see those in the Muslim world today who do interpret killing the "infidel" as justifiable when a perceived "persecution" arises? Do some of them not connect such verses together like a puzzle?
If I told you that at a period of time, Christians formed what is called crusades, and they invaded Muslim countries, killed them in millions ...[text shortened]... eir flag was the cross.
Will you say they didn't connect the puzzle from the Bible as will?
I say that we can either live in the past or learn from the mistakes from the past such as the travesty of the Crusaders. Today, however, do we have Crusades? You may lump the "West" or the united States and all of Christiandom into one great big group and argue that the world of Chrsitiandom is now on a Crusade in Iraq. I know because I have heard many attempt to make such accusations, but is this accurate? The United States and the Western powers are all secular nations. It is only in the world of Islam today that we seem to have men condoning killing in the name of God. This is what troubles me. Theocracies, therefore, are problematic in that they attempt to mingle the unholy affairs of men with the holy affairs of God. It is an unholy union to say the least. Unfortunatly, the Muslim world seems to insist that the two must be joined, however, by insisting upon theocracies existing in the Muslim world to a large degree.
30 Dec 06
3 edits
ahosyney,This is quite a statement. It is the fault of "Christians" that the Islamic world has become corrupted?
What you don't realize that the Majority of Muslims don't, what you don't realize that the minority that do are the result of Christian corruption in Islamic world. Isn't Ben Laden for example USA made.
First of all, you are lumping the United States and the world of Christiandom into one great big group. The United States, however, is a secular nation and not a theocracy. As a result, the United States acts merely upon its own self interest, rather than on the percieved interest of particular God. Therefore, blaming all of the faults of the United States on the Christians is disingenuous to say the least. I would argue that, in fact, there are very few if any true Christians in three branches of government in the United States.
Second of all, you are blaming the faults of a group of people for the faults of another group of people. Were is the accountablity of those within the Musltim world? It seems the Christians could do the same by blaming thier shortcomings on a group they find distastful such as the Islamo-facists, no?
30 Dec 06
1 edit
Originally posted by ahosyneyYou are assuming that God sends unbelievers to hell because he hates them. However, the Bible says that God wishes that NONE should perish and that God so loved the entire world that he sent his only begotten Son to save us all. Now it is up to human will as to whom we choose to serve. If we choose to invite Christ into our lives he can save us. If we choose not to invite him into our lives then I guess we can try and save ourselves. He will not force himself upon us because God is a God of love and of which free will must be apart of the equation. Hell is merely a serperation from God and is what men choose. It has nothing whatsoever to do with him hating us.
According to the bible, where will the unbelivers will at the end. In heaven or on hell?
If you say in heavem then why do you belive in anything.
And if you say in hell , why will GOD put them in hell if he loves them.
Please answer my question...!!!![/b]
31 Dec 06
3 edits
Originally posted by ahosyneyOK, you got me here. I have heard people say that the Quran gives reference to justifying conversion to Islam via the sword. However, after some study it appears the Quran does not make such reference. In fact it says in Sura 256 that there must be no coercion in matters of faith". This, in fact, gives me hope!!!!!
Also, did not Mohammad convert with the sword or am I mistaken?
Yes, you are Mistaken. Show me an Islamic reference that show that?
Show me where in Quran where you find the word sword.....
However, it is true that Mohammad called for the use of the sword in his war against oppossing tribes in Arabia whether they be Christian, Jewish, or other in his war to build his Islamic state. Therefore, it was a fight for territory and not for spreading the faith.
Having said that, we can then view Mohammad as a man who's fight was both spiritual and political in nature. I think, however, that this is a distinction between the fight of Christ and that of Mohammad. Christ's fight was purely spiritual and he in no way adovcated the establishment of a Christian state. Christ said that his kingdom is not of this world and he did not take part in the affairs of the state in any way. In fact, when they came for him to take him to his death, his disciple Peter drew a sword and cut off a man's ear to defend Christ. Christ then rebuked him and told him that he who lives by the sword, dies by the sword.
31 Dec 06
4 edits
Originally posted by whodeyThis, in fact, gives me hope!!!!!
OK, you got me here. I have heard people say that the Quran gives reference to justifying conversion to Islam via the sword. However, after some study it appears the Quran does not make such reference. In fact it says in Sura 256 that there must be no coercion in matters of faith". This, in fact, gives me hope!!!!!
However, it is true that Mohammad c st. Christ then rebuked him and told him that he who lives by the sword, dies by the sword.
This give me hope too!!!!!
--------------------------------------------------------
You have many posts here and in the other thread, in each one you talk about several points , that disperse the discussion and make it difficult to consentrate.
I can continue answer you the same way we do now, but I feel we will not meet in a point.
To solve the problem I have to ask you a question:
Is Islam really as it appears in the world today?
You said it yourself:
have heard people say that the Quran gives reference to justifying conversion to Islam via the sword. However, after some study it appears the Quran does not make such reference.
And when you talk about the prophet Mohammed you also say something like:
However, it is true that Mohammad called for the use of the sword in his war against oppossing tribes in Arabia whether they be Christian, Jewish, or other in his war to build his Islamic state.
Without giving a reference or specific information, which give me the feeling that you also heard that, but you don't have specific information about it.
Given that, how can you make any comparison, or prove any point.
When I wanted to know Christianity I didn't go only to Muslims who talks about Christianity , but read the Bible, visit Christian sites, study and talk with Christians like you. This give me more understanding, and strength my faith !!
I think you have a purpose from this discussion. I don't know what is it?. But if you still want to continue the discussion, I want to ask you to give yourself a chance to know more about Islam, and if you need help I can help. Then we can talk again.
And at that time, may be you can strength your faith too!!!
--------------------------------------
For now, I don't know really what is your real problem with Islam:
1- There is Islamic faith. When I say faith I mean what Muslims belive about GOD and prophets. It might not agree with yours but that is not enough to ignore it.
2- There is Islamic worship: I don't know what you know about that.
3- And there is Islamic Law: I don't know also what you know about this.
If you know the problem in Islam this will sure will help you to easily write Whodey Quran if you still need to do so.
-------------
Happy new year for you. GOD bless you
-----------------------------
31 Dec 06
A big problem I face when I talk with you is when I give a reference from the bible for example that is agnist your faith, you ignore the literal meaning and try to find another meaning that matchs your faith. That happned several times.
So it appears to me that you faith then adjust your text to match it, although the book should prove the faith.
Besides most of your ideas about your faith you seldom give a reference from the Bible for your explaination.
For example, when you talked about the Hell , you said I see it is spritual hell, or something like that, but you didn't show me a reference from the Bible. On the other hand the Bible say it is not spritual.
What surprizes me more, is when we talk about islam , you start doing the same, you through you faith about Islam, without a proove, or reference. And the main source of information, Quran , you didn't read.
31 Dec 06
Originally posted by ahosyneyMy referemce for such a claim is Wiki. As far as being unbiased, it seems to be the closest to being unbiased in my opinion. Wiki states that Muhammad had an 8 year war against Meccan forces which ended in a Muslim victory and conquest of Mecca. Do you deny this?
And when you talk about the prophet Mohammed you also say something like:
However, it is true that Mohammad called for the use of the sword in his war against oppossing tribes in Arabia whether they be Christian, Jewish, or other in his war to build his Islamic state.
Without giving a reference or specific information, which give me the feeling th ...[text shortened]... specific information about it.
Given that, how can you make any comparison, or prove any point.
31 Dec 06
Originally posted by ahosyneyPerspective is a wonderous thing. The funny thing is, is that I often percieve you as doing the same. I think our beliefs influence us both more than we may realize.
[b]A big problem I face when I talk with you is when I give a reference from the bible for example that is agnist your faith, you ignore the literal meaning and try to find another meaning that matchs your faith. That happned several times.
31 Dec 06
1 edit
Originally posted by whodeyIn my statement I didn't denay your statement, I said you presented it without a reference or information. You just said that the prophet Mohammed use the sword agnist Arab tribes.
My referemce for such a claim is Wiki. As far as being unbiased, it seems to be the closest to being unbiased in my opinion. Wiki states that Muhammad had an 8 year war against Meccan forces which ended in a Muslim victory and conquest of Mecca. Do you deny this?
But you didn't say that those tribes drove him away and his followers from Mecca and they forced early muslims to leave their homes without talking anything. And those tibes took their homes and money.
You didn't say that after the prophet sittled in another city he has been attacked three times from those tribes during those 8 years. One of the attacks they siege the city for a month. Not allowing food in or out. You didn't say they were defending themselves.
You didn't say that the Prophet has enterd into a treaty with those tribs to allow him to visit his home in Mecca. And after that those tribs brock the treaty and killed Muslims with no reason.
You didn't say that the prophet returned home to Mecca without any fight and he forgive all those Tribs and then they all Joined him.
--------------------------------------
When you say all of that, then we can talk?
Please read what I said again and you will know what I mean.
31 Dec 06
Originally posted by ahosyneyOK, I will show you a reference in Revelations 20:14. It talks about how death, hell, and the grave are cast into the lake of fire and is referred to as the second death. Thus the first death is physical and the second death is spiritual in nature. Those who had their name written in the "Book of Life" were spared the second death, but not the first.
Besides most of your ideas about your faith you seldom give a reference from the Bible for your explaination.
For example, when you talked about the Hell , you said I see it is spritual hell, or something like that, but you didn't show me a reference from the Bible. On the other hand the Bible say it is not spritual.
What surprizes me more, is when we ...[text shortened]... , without a proove, or reference. And the main source of information, Quran , you didn't read.[/b]
Christ put it this way in John 3:3. He said that except a man be "born again" he cannot see the kingdom of God. Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. That whcih is born of the flesh is of the flesh, but that which is born of the spirit is born of the spirit. Your physical body is corrupted via sin and therefore will die. However, if your spirit man be "born again" it will live after your physical body dies thus avoiding the second death.
31 Dec 06
6 edits
Originally posted by ahosyneyThat may or may not be correct, however, did Christ and his disciples defend themselves? If I recall they all died the death of a martyre and when I say martyre I am not referring to someone who is commiting suicide to kill his enemies. I think this is the distinction between Christ and his followers and Muhammad and his followers. After Muhammad was victorious, he then established an Islamic state, thus he was both a spiritual leader and a politician as where Christ was only a spiritual leader. I guess what I am getting at is that I could not see Christ taking up a sword to then set up a wordly kingdom in this world as Muhammad did even if it was to defend himself. In fact, Jesus never defended himself. Christ stated that his kingdom is not of this world, rather, his kingdom exists in this world via the ambassoders of that kingdom in this world known as Christians.
In my statement I didn't denay your statement, I said you presented it without a reference or information. You just said that the prophet Mohammed use the sword agnist Arab tribes.
But you didn't say that those tribes drove him away and his followers from Mecca and they forced early muslims to leave their homes without talking anything. And those tibes of that, then we can talk?
Please read what I said again and you will know what I mean.
31 Dec 06
1 edit
Originally posted by whodeyLet me ask you a question?
That may or may not be correct, however, did Christ and his disciples defend themselves? If I recall they all died the death of a martyre and when I say martyre I am not referring to someone who is commiting suicide to kill his enemies. I think this is the distinction between Christ and his followers and Muhammad and his followers. After Muhammad was victo ...[text shortened]... gdom exists in this world via the ambassoders of that kingdom in this world known as Christians.
What will you do if someone, or a group attacked you, or your house?
Will you defend yourself, or let them kill you.
Will you be following Jesus or not.
---------------------------------
I am not referring to someone who is commiting suicide to kill his enemies.
For your information, and to end the debate about suicide bombing:
Islam forbidde commite suicide. In both Quran and Hadith, commite suicide is forbidden. And there was no exception about that. And all the great Muslims scholars today didn't accept that.
004.029
O ye who believe! Eat not up your property among yourselves in vanities: But let there be amongst you Traffic and trade by mutual good-will: [b]Nor kill (or destroy) yourselves: for verily Allah hath been to you Most Merciful! [/b]
So if Quran say don't kill yourself, then there is no exception. And any one Justify that for himself, is responsible for it. But it has nothing to do with Islamic teaching. This is anohter claim, like many you gave me here, and didn't prove.
-------------------------------------
Here is a link for the most trusted Hadith Book, Bukhari
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/
Search there for Sucide Bombing if you can. There 93 chapters talking about different aspects of human life. How many of them talks about war.
This the second trusted one:
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/
Hadith is what the prophet did, or said. It include the details of Islamic Law. This is a translation of course of the two books. In the same site you will find different resources. This site is for Muslim students in southern california university.
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/
01 Jan 07
3 edits
Originally posted by ahosyneyThis is a fair enough question and one with which many a Chrsitian has struggled with including myself. It reminds me of a story of some missionaries in the former Soviet Union who had an outreach back in the days of the KGB and the iron curtain. They had to meet secretly or be discovered and killed for illegal religious practices. It turned out that they had been infiltrated by a KGB spy and the missionaries somehow found out about it. They then had to make the decision to flee for their lives along with their families, even though they had no where to run, or watch themselves along with their families all be discovered and killed. Well to make a long story short, they ended up killing the KGB spy and they survived the ordeal.
[b]Let me ask you a question?
What will you do if someone, or a group attacked you, or your house?
Will you defend yourself, or let them kill you.
Will you be following Jesus or not.
---------------------------------
As much as it pains me, however, I do not think it to be sanctioned by the teachings of Christ or of the apostles. It reminds me of the story of Paul being thrown into prison and awaiting execution. As he was waiting in his cell, God miraculously loosed his chains and opened the cell doors as all of the gaurds went into a deep sleep. All of the Christians then fled with Paul being the last to leave. However, just as Paul was leaving the gaurd awoke and saw that the prisoners had all left. He then drew his sword in order to kill himself knowing that he would be killed for allowing them to escape. However, Paul then shouted at him to stop and told him that they were all still there as he yelled at the fleeing prisoners to return so that the man would not kill himself. The gaurd then decided not to kill himself and later gave his life to Chrsit as well as the rest of his household.
I believe the teaching of loving your enemies to be the hardest teaching in the Bible. I also believe it to be one of the teachings that sets Christianity apart from all other religions as well as those who are devoid of faith. After all, anyone can love those who love them back. Loving your enemy is the completion or the perfection of the love message. I also believe that it is nothing short of a supernatural act. It is a selfless act in which one does not consider self preservation above the will of their God. Jesus forsook his own life and even rebuked Peter who attempted to defend those that came for him to take him to the cross. Each of the disciples then preceeded to evangelise the world and all died the deaths of a martyre save one. None of them took up arms in any way to defend themselves. You then had the Chrisitan movement in the Roman Empire in which Christians were rounded up and fed to lions. Where were the revolts? Where was the militant uprising? It sounds crazy but the fact remains that with each martyre the Christian movement seemed to gain momentum. How can you continue to hate a people who choose not to fight back? How do you control a people who are not afraid to die? It was problematic for Rome to say the least and we see today the success it had.
01 Jan 07
3 edits
Originally posted by ahosyneySo you are saying that Islam forbids suicide because their holy books forbid it under any circumstances even though Muslims scholars do not accept the teaching? That is sad to say the least, but I am glad you are not one of them.🙂
Islam forbidde commite suicide. In both Quran and Hadith, commite suicide is forbidden. And there was no exception about that. And all the great Muslims scholars today didn't accept that.
I guess that is why it is important to know your holy book. Otherwise you become followers of the people who interpret the holy book for you rather than the follower of the God who gave the words for your holy book. Christianity has the same problem only in terms of following perceived men of God rather than the words of God himself.