NY Times
November 9, 2002

Behind the Veil: A Muslim Woman Speaks Out
By MARLISE SIMONS


AMSTERDAM — Ayaan Hirsi Ali had done well in the 10 years since she arrived in
the Netherlands as a young refugee from Somalia and, until a few months ago,
she lived a quiet life in her adopted land. Never did she intend to create a
national commotion.

She studied Dutch, took on cleaning jobs, went to university and worked as a
political scientist. She made a name for herself pressing for the emancipation
of Muslim women and documenting how thousands, living even here, were subjected
to beatings, incest and emotional and sexual abuse.

To the surprise of many, she became a leading voice condemning the government's
support for multiculturalism, programs costing millions of dollars a year that
she considers misplaced because they help keep Muslim women isolated from Dutch
society.

Then Ms. Hirsi Ali, 32, began receiving hate mail, anonymous messages calling
her a traitor to Islam and a slut. On several Web sites, other Muslims said she
deserved to be knifed and shot. Explicit death threats by telephone soon
followed. The police told her to change homes and the mayor of Amsterdam sent
bodyguards. She tried living in hiding. Finally, last month, she became a
refugee again, fleeing the Netherlands.

"I had to speak up," she said, in a telephone interview from her hiding place,
"because most spokesmen for Muslims are men and they deny or belittle the
enormous problems of Muslim women locked up in their Dutch homes."

Her ordeal has caused an outcry in the Netherlands, a country already uneasy
with its recent waves of immigrants and asylum seekers, now representing almost
10 percent of the population. Many Dutch see the threats as an intolerable
assault on the country's democratic principles. The threats have also
intensified a fierce debate — one that can be heard these days across Europe —
about what moral values and rules of behavior immigrants should be expected to
share.

Though absent, Ms. Hirsi Ali seems very present here. Her portrait has appeared
on magazine covers and television and there have been indignant newspaper
editorials and questions in Parliament. Some have called her the Dutch Salman
Rushdie. In paid advertisements, more than 100 Dutch writers have offered her
support.

"I've made people so angry because I'm talking from the inside, from direct
knowledge," she said. "It's seen as treason. I'm considered an apostate and
that's worse than an atheist."

The theme of injustice toward women in Islamic countries has become common in
the West, but it has gained fresh currency through Ms. Hirsi Ali's European
perspective, her study of Dutch immigrants and her own life. Born in Mogadishu,
she grew up a typical Muslim girl in Somalia. When she was 5, she underwent the
"cruel ritual," as she called it, of genital cutting. When her father, a Somali
opposition politician, had to flee the country's political troubles, the family
went to Saudi Arabia, where, she said, she was kept veiled and, much of the
time, indoors.

At 22, her father forced her to marry a distant cousin, a man she had never
seen. But a friend helped her to escape and she finally obtained political
asylum in the Netherlands.

She was shocked when, as a university student, she held a job as an interpreter
for Dutch immigration and social workers and discovered hidden "suffering on a
terrible scale" among Muslim women even in the Netherlands. She entered safe
houses for women and girls, most of them Turkish and Moroccan immigrants, who
had run away from domestic violence or forced marriages. Many had secret
abortions.

"Sexual abuse in the family causes the most pain because the trust is violated
on all levels," she said. "The father or the uncle say nothing, nor do the
mother and the sisters. It happens regularly — the incest, the beatings, the
abortions. Girls commit suicide. But no one says anything. And social workers
are sworn to professional secrecy."

More than 100 women a year have surgery to "restore" their virginity, she
estimates in her published work. While only 10 percent of the population is
non-Dutch, this group accounts for more than 60 percent of abortions, "because
the Muslim girls are kept ignorant," she said. Three out of five Moroccan-Dutch
girls — Moroccans are among the largest immigrant groups — are forced to marry
young men from villages back home, to keep them under control, she said.

A year or so ago, Ms. Hirsi Ali's case might not have attracted so much
attention. But the mood in the Netherlands, as in much of Europe, changed after
Sept. 11, 2001. In the month that followed, there was an unheard of backlash
against the nearly one million Muslims living in the Netherlands, with more
than 70 attacks against mosques. Sept. 11 also gave politicians licence to vent
brewing animosities.

Among them was Pim Fortuyn, a maverick gay politician who was killed in May,
apparently by an animal rights activist. He said out loud what had long been
considered racist and politically incorrect — for example, that conservative
Muslim clerics were undermining certain Dutch values like acceptance of
homosexuality and the equality of men and women.

What Mr. Fortuyn did on the right, Ms. Hirsi Ali has done on the left. Many in
the Labor Party, where she worked on immigration issues, were shocked when she
told reporters that Mr. Fortuyn was right in calling Islam "backward."

"At the very least Islam is facing backward and it has failed to provide a
moral framework for our time," she said in one conversation. "If the West wants
to help modernize Islam, it should invest in women because they educate the
children."

To do this, she argues for drastic changes in Dutch immigration policy. The
government, she says, should impose Dutch law on men who beat their wives and
daughters, even if the Muslim clergy say it is permissible. It should also end
teaching the immigrants in their own language and stop paying for the more than
700 Islamic clubs, most of which, she said, "are run by deeply conservative men
and they perpetuate the segregation of women."

Her views, and the death threats, have divided Muslims, who account for most
immigrants here. Almost 20 Muslim associations have condemned the threats, but
at the same time faulted her for criticizing Islam. Hafid Bouazza, a
Dutch-Moroccan author who in the past has received letters saying he will burn
in hell for his writing, said the threats were shocking. "No criticism of Islam
is accepted from women," he said. "Muslim women are particularly vulnerable."

Others were bitter. Ali Eddaudi, a Moroccan writer and cleric living here,
dismissed "all the fuss" over a Muslim woman who "panders to the Dutch."

Ms. Hirsi Ali agrees that the criticism is so intense in part because she is a
woman. "I am a Muslim woman saying these things, and it has provoked a lot of
hatred," she said.

One thing is certain: the death threats against Ms. Hirsi Ali have given more
prominence to her ideas, which have now become the subject of intense debate
among Dutch policy makers. The Dutch Liberal Party has invited her to become a
candidate in the parliamentary elections next January.

She says she has accepted and hopes to return to the Netherlands, though she
fears for her safety. "Either I stop my work, or I learn to live with the
feeling that I'm not safe," she said. "I'm not stopping."

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/11/09/international/middleeast/09FPRO.html?ex=1037509200&en=7af510aaffba939a&ei=5040&partner=MOREOVER

to blow her off instead of giving a critique on her points.

How much "opportunity" is she getting when she's receiving death threats and has to move from place to place?
____________________
Expertise
1/2 of the New OkayActivist Moderating Team (Guerrilla_Love's the other)

Make sure you know the .

If you have any questions or comments, do NOT post a thread. Do one of these:

1. Leave a note in my inbox
2. Email me at therealexpert@hotmail.com
3. AIM me - KMBExpert
4. Yahoo me - real_expert

OKPlayin since 2000.

didnt you know that all muslims are perfect and never do any of the things they are criticized for doing?

they had nothing to do with 9/11, dont harbor extremists and arent oppressive to women. its all a set up by the western media.

don't you have a klan rally to go to?

her interests show themselves for what they truly simply b/c she runs to West as her saviour. if she has something against Islam, don't be a Muslim. if she has something against *certain* Muslims, don't attack Islam. she's the equivalent of a Muslim uncle tom - sellin out her people to get in good with massa.

That's garbage. Because she decided to voice her problems about how women are treated within Islam now she's a sellout? This labelling does nothing to improve the problems addressed as a whole. And considering she's lived in several different countries in Europe, Africa and the Middle East I'm sure she knows how widespread the problems are.

She did not "run" to the West, at least in accordance to this article. She left because of the rampant abuses she was suffering in the countries she left. There's a difference.
____________________
Expertise
1/2 of the New OkayActivist Moderating Team (Guerrilla_Love's the other)

Make sure you know the .

If you have any questions or comments, do NOT post a thread. Do one of these:

1. Leave a note in my inbox
2. Email me at therealexpert@hotmail.com
3. AIM me - KMBExpert
4. Yahoo me - real_expert

OKPlayin since 2000.

>That's garbage. Because she decided to voice her problems
>about how women are treated within Islam now she's a
>sellout? This labelling does nothing to improve the
>problems addressed as a whole.

considering her actions, improving the problems addressed as a whole is not something she's really interested in. that's why she looks to the West rather than her fellow Muslims.


>She did not "run" to the West, at least in accordance to
>this article. She left because of the rampant abuses she
>was suffering in the countries she left. There's a
>difference.

do i have to spell everything out? I didn't mean "run" in the literal sense.

>>That's garbage. Because she decided to voice her problems
>>about how women are treated within Islam now she's a
>>sellout? This labelling does nothing to improve the
>>problems addressed as a whole.
>
>considering her actions, improving the problems addressed as
>a whole is not something she's really interested in. that's
>why she looks to the West rather than her fellow Muslims

Do you think there's a reason she looks to the West instead of her own medieval culture for help? Perhaps she's wary of being stoned to death, or having her legs chopped off or whatever other insane and backward shit they like to do.

what i want to know is how are women treated in islam?


and if so (after your biased stupid answer)...how do you know?


the problem isnt the fact that muslim men treat women like garbage....MEN DO!!!...


lets contrast what islam says about women...how muslim men are SUPPOSED to treat women and how MOST do...then lets look into what the problem is......


in islam women (anisa)...have a whole chapter of the quran (a mighty long one might i add)...whereas men have 1 dedicated to them...women in islam were given the right to own property, CHOOSE who they marry, have an outside male protector in their marriage (a wali) to ensure their rights are being followed, women taught the deen (islam), ayesha (ra) was given the distinctive status after the death of the rasool (saw) or a mediator of the deen....when the men couldnt get it right..they went to her...even ibn umar (ra..called the faqi of the sahaba (companions) used t o visit her for advice...so much so, she mediated the first (and biggest) conflict the muslims had among themselves)

women can become sheykhs (sheykhas..like rabia (ra), nana asmau, and hafsa (who memorized the quran, and is the one who gave us the order in which we recite today)....women fought alongside men as water bearers, nurses, etc...and are allowed to fight given the lazy men are not able. women (mothers...umm) are the foundation of the community (ummat)...women can vote in a shurah (council)...sit in on a council (shurah)..women do NOT have to be circumcised (its an old african tradition actually..islam doesnt remove specifics in ones culture unless its in direct violation of the sunnah (tradition..which includes fiqh, usul, and all its branches)....women should not be locked up...women are given time to themselves when they are on their menses...the men are told not to harass them, dont look at them, and leave them alone....in other words no macking, no pimping...

hijab means protection, it was instrumented when the women were being raped and killed...its a marker so that people know who they are, and those who arent muslims were warned no to mess with them OR ELSE..and many times this was carried out...many scholors have cited that the downfall of any society begins with undermining its women....



now...thats not even nearly half or even a quarter of their rights (did i mention that a man cannot take the money they earn, but they can take ours?? oops ok)....on that note, i am not going to go into the fact that from from conception men and women are NOT the same...(XX VS XY)...that xx thing gives off estrogen, the xy thing gives off testosterone.....(this is informal, not scientific...because both have some of each hormone, and some are xxy etc..not the course of this discussion)....men for ages have misused women...muslims are NO EXCEPTION......if we would have been the exception, they allah would never have to warn us about it...estrogen does something to the female in the course of emotion (doubt me, go through menopause, or get hormone therapy)...testosterone does something on the almost other end of the spectrum (using estrogen as a point of reference) if you doubt me, hang out with a roider (steroid abuser)....because we are this way. doesnt make one better than the other...its a compliment...but being the stupid shaved monkeys we are, and not the ennobled human beings (those with iman) we exploit our various "advantages" (for lack of a better term)...so in HUMAN society men take their G.E.N.E.R.A.L. (REPEAT 3X)...physical "strengthabiliy" (made it up...webster's dictionary 2008...watch for it) over women and take advantage of them..........doesnt make it right...and men have been WARNED AGAINST THIS IN THE QURAN!!!...allah says that he has power over men, and he is watching us.....yet we still act up...men rape kill, murder, etc women, and only proper social order can curb it...because nothing can stop it..(unless you have a utopia in your back yard, or you live in platos world of forms)


i have seen non muslim men beat women (my mother)...i have men numerous women who were raped, and abused...NEVER FAIR...but (and here is the kicker)

TO LABEL IT AS A "MUSLIM" DISEASE IS THE MOST HALF TWISTED MONKEY-LICUOUS HALF WITTED PILE OF RHINO TURD I HAVE EVER HEARD....

its like saying white men are inherently racist...or black people are inherently stupid...hispanics are inherently lazy, and muslims are inherently violent....chinese are inherently smart, etc......its a throwback to the foolishness that got us here in the first place....hormones, surroundings, parents, social systems, etc all play a role in ones behavior...and women get locked up in germany....dont believe me, look it up...women get beaten here in america...america has more homicides than any other country (so americans are inherently barbaric?)...

in the end, i said a bunch of junk, and you dont have to listen...or even read it for all i care...and in the spirit of the new nazi-like moderation on the boards (we all dont have to agree, and isnt that whats good about us?...think about it) you can delete this, or ban me if you want......whatevea gets your goat.....just remember that if muslims are inherently abusive, then whites are inherently racist...and you can continue packing the snowball....

Jazakallah Khair!

---------------------------(*)---------------------------
Ramadan Mubarak!

i'm still reading your reply, but having read a good portion of the koran, i've noticed it is more receptive to women's equality than the bible.

there are many muslim men twisting the faith for their own purposes, just as there are christian men who use the bible to suit themselves & justify their cruelty to their women.

imo, any faith that doesn't *specifically* recognize and appreciate the feminine aspects of the DIVINE (not just earthly women) will have these problems--but that's just my 2 cents.

_____________________________
i wanna channel words like
whoopi channeled ghosts
break nouns, verbs and concepts
like mongolian equestrians
break horses
and ride across mental deserts
with deceptively easy beauty
(c) lesley anne m. 2002

dope lex, dope...its a human problem...not just a muslim problem...and check suratul anisa for the answer to what men get for abusing their wives (..and allah has power over all things/..wa allahu qulishayin qadir)...check the shifa of qadi iyad as to weather its suggested we hit them in the first place....(the answer is no..the rasoolullah (saw) never hit his...and the problem would com in when you have 1 billiob prople over the course of 1400 years..and the provision to not have your wifes rear spanked by a stranger for her crimes was never placed in a book thats supposed to outline live for the last stage of mankind on earth......not fair to us if that was the case...


spousal abuse is forbidden in islam.........the hadd (punishment) for a woman who commits a crime is to let her family handle it (xcept for capital punishment).....we dont do like the taliban and have strangers spank women in public (though the men get spanked in public)....like i said...yu dont have to agree with islams method of punishing for its crimes...you arent muslim, and i can understand if you dont like beatings for criminal acts.....or castration for serial rape...or repeat capital robery or violent robery punishable by hand cutting (stealing doesnt mean they loose a hand, and food is excluded...and the poor have a right if they have no property)....in order to make any comments on islamic law IN PRACTICE...you must understand volumes have been written on the subject and entire groups of people have dedicated their lives to uphold the law...if you want to make comments on islamic law...first understand usul, then fiqh, and all its branches before you can go off and say "brodha the coran say..."...i am aware of what it says...but what does it mean..'

and for a man who lashes his wife out of malace...she is enntitled to divorce..and/or monitary compensation for beating her...if he lashes her in the face....he might be punished for it...but bah....its like talking to trees..they might hear you..but they will never tell.

it seems that muslims are far more able to point out their arguments--for better or worse--without a whole lot of finger pointing and condemnation.

christians usually do not exhibit this quality.

muslims (on an individual level anyway) seem more willing to point things out and then sit back and see if you accept it vs. christian brow beating, shaming, etc.


_____________________________
hey...who's gonna buy me for christmas??

i wanna channel words like
whoopi channeled ghosts
break nouns, verbs and concepts
like mongolian equestrians
break horses
and ride across mental deserts
with deceptively easy beauty
(c) lesley anne m. 2002

when i agree with you.

what fellow muslims would she have run to???

she wouldn't have been heard by her "fellow muslims"...they're the same ones willing to kill her now.

_____________________________
i wanna channel words like
whoopi channeled ghosts
break nouns, verbs and concepts
like mongolian equestrians
break horses
and ride across mental deserts
with deceptively easy beauty
(c) lesley anne m. 2002

>she wouldn't have been heard by her "fellow
>muslims"...they're the same ones willing to kill her now.

all Muslims are killers. woo hoo!

i'm not saying that

but if she had gone to someone in her country (which she probably wouldn't have even had an opportunity to do had she gotten into that marriage), she might have gotten killed anyway, or it would have to be all underground in which case she may not have reached as many people.

i understand your point, but i don't think she was "selling out". she did went where she thought she could survive, and by speaking out she may help to SAVE some of her muslim sisters.

i'm wondering where u think she should have gone or who she should have told...

_____________________________
hey...who's gonna buy me for christmas??

i wanna channel words like
whoopi channeled ghosts
break nouns, verbs and concepts
like mongolian equestrians
break horses
and ride across mental deserts
with deceptively easy beauty
(c) lesley anne m. 2002

3 things:

1. she was specifically talking about Dutch Muslim women

2. she was getting death threats, b/c she denounced Islam as a backward religion, etc., not b/c she was trying to help these women.

3. do you think there are no , or only no Muslim women organizations in the Netherlands?

on another note. just think about this situation analogically, using race and the US as setting.

>her interests show themselves for what they truly simply b/c
>she runs to West as her saviour

So every Muslim that migrates to the west is a sellout? OK there bud!

>So every Muslim that migrates to the west is a sellout? OK
>there bud!

yes, that's exactly what I was saying!

>>So every Muslim that migrates to the west is a sellout? OK
>>there bud!
>
>yes, that's exactly what I was saying!

I think I need some more clarification. Every Muslim currently living in the west is a sellout?!

She moved to the West because she didn't want to grow up in a culture where women are treated like shit, where their genitalia are being mutilated and are forced to marry men they don't know. That's not the essence of Islam, but that is reality in many Muslim countries. Including Somalia, where she's from.
She doesn't like that and doesn't want to live in a place where that happens, nor does she want any daughters she might have to have to go through that as well, so she left. How the fuck does that make here an "uncle Tom"?

She doesn't critisize Islam as a whole, but the extremely radical aspects that people added, which are in no relation to Islam itself but are committed in the name of Allah. And the fact that this critisism resulted in numerous death threats only proves her point.

who are you to call anyone an idiot? idiot. did i say anything about moving anywhere? learn to read before you reply to me again.

Man do you know her?Do you know anything about Somali people....I'm getting tired of defending my culture, because someone decided to play open cards in the Netherlands....genital mutilation is a horrible act,for generations it has been practised in Somalia...its easy to look at it with a western state of mind without researching the economical/social aspects it has for women...For many mothers/grandmothers its an act of love,they dont want their (grand)daughters to be the outcast of society so they circumcise them

Ayaan Ali ( I know her personally) is JUST A FUCKING OPPORTUNIST...I dont mind that she is expressing her ideas..but she is just another well assimilated immigrant who's jumping on the 9/11 bandwagon...its sad


>She moved to the West because she didn't want to grow up in
>a culture where women are treated like shit,
FUCKING LIE, SHE WAS AN OPPORTUNIST REFUGEE WHO FLED FROM THE ARAB COUNTRIES TO THE NETHERLANDS...please don't repeat what the media has fed you.....


> where their
>genitalia are being mutilated and are forced to marry men
>they don't know.
This isnt a commen practise in Somali culture and she wasnt forced to marry a man she didnt know....Her father is a well known ( socalled modern western-educated)man in the Somali community....check the Somali BBC site, they interviewed him few weeks ago...

Its funny,but her story is based on lies...a lot of Somali's living in the netherlands know that...but they all choose to stay quiet..


That's not the essence of Islam, but that
>is reality in many Muslim countries. Including Somalia,
>where she's from.
>She doesn't like that and doesn't want to live in a place
>where that happens, nor does she want any daughters she
>might have to have to go through that as well, so she left.

>How the fuck does that make here an "uncle Tom"?
>She doesn't critisize Islam as a whole, but the extremely
>radical aspects that people added,

So what is she actually critisizing...Extremists???The headlines in the Dutch newspapers are saying something different...I dont know if you have seen her television appearance, she seemed very biased..not able to point out what her greatest concern is...she also lacks solutions..I do agree with her that there are issues in muslim families...but what is her solution...?How is she going to help those women she's referring to?


(spellchecker needed..lol)

genital mutilation is a horrible act,for
>generations it has been practised in Somalia...its easy to
>look at it with a western state of mind without researching
>the economical/social aspects it has for women...For many
>mothers/grandmothers its an act of love,they dont want their
> (grand)daughters to be the outcast of society so they
>circumcise them


and it's equally easy to make excuses for it when it's not going to happen to you.

what difference does it make if a horrible act is lovingly practiced or not?

> genital mutilation is a horrible act,for
>>generations it has been practised in Somalia...its easy to
>>look at it with a western state of mind without researching
>>the economical/social aspects it has for women...For many
>>mothers/grandmothers its an act of love,they dont want their
>> (grand)daughters to be the outcast of society so they
>>circumcise them
>
>
>and it's equally easy to make excuses for it when it's not
>going to happen to you.
>
>what difference does it make if a horrible act is lovingly
>practiced or not?

I'm not not justifying the act....its horrible point blank...I was explaining where these women where coming from...

>Man do you know her?Do you know anything about Somali people
No i don't know her, and i can't say i read any books she wrote or anything. Just a couple of articles and interviews. As for Somali culture, all i know is what my friend told me, and some things i read. But no, i don't know that much about her or her background.
But actually, my reply wasn't so much to defend her, but more against the accusations of her being the equivalent of an "uncle Tom" for what seems to be just giving her opinion. Cause all those uncle Tom accusations are ignorant and annoying. And as for her being an opportunist... she's getting death threats for saying what's on her mind. I don't see how that would benefit her, unless she wants to live on the edge or some shit like that. So why are people so much against her?

>For many mothers/grandmothers its an act of love,they dont want their
>(grand)daughters to be the outcast of society so they
>circumcise them
Yes i am aware of that. But isn't it fucked up that a society doesn't consider women with their genitalia in tact to be clean and wholesome? That alone ought to be critisized, and the fact that those acts are associated with Islam is even worse. Because in my opinion it's actually a great insult to the creator that women have to be "modified" before they're acceptable, especially since it causes so much suffering. God/Allah is supposed to be perfect, so to consider his most beautiful creation to be incomplete is rediculous. With male circumcision it's different, because that provides better hygiene and it doesn't have any sexual consequences. But female circumcision serves no other purpose than to prevent women from having an orgasm. Women are being robbed from their sexuality, one of the greatest gifts god gave them.
I really don't think anybody in the world has a good excuse for female circumcision.

For generations it has been practiced in da pimpin' game... its easy to look at it with a religious state of mind without researching the economical/social aspects that it has for a ho... For many pimps it's an act of love, they don't want their ho's to be gettin' out of line, running wild and becoming outcasts of da game, so they pimp-slap them to keep them in line. Because after all, it's all about the love...

>....genital mutilation is a horrible act,for
>generations it has been practised in Somalia...its easy to
>look at it with a western state of mind without researching
>the economical/social aspects it has for women...For many
>mothers/grandmothers its an act of love,they dont want their
> (grand)daughters to be the outcast of society so they
>circumcise them

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Behind the turntables is where he stands
Then there is the movement of his hands
So when asked who's the best, y'all should say:
'Run-D.M.C. and JAM MASTER JAY!'"

R.I.P. Jam Master Jay:
"God damn, that DJ made my day!"

if you want to put it in such simplistic terms. selling her people out? who are her people exactly? in her terms, it's other muslim women. now, you can disagree with her strategies, but you haven't even *addressed* the question of muslim women's rights.

and let me ask you tho, if there is so much muslim social reluctance to address feminist ideas that the woman has to run to the west, what does that even say about the extent of the crisis? i mean, i don't agree with inviting one devil to fix your problems with another, but such "opportunism" is the strategy of the desperate. being in such dire straits deserves some respect.

if you want to make a case for a better, more sophisticated feminist response, make one. but your contempt comes far too easily *mister* aziz.

And this one of a cultural issue labeled as an Islamic way of life. I'm going to put myself out here on a limb for minute. I can definitely relate to this story in many ways because I was engaged to a Somalian woman two years ago who later moved from the states back home to Birmingham England. And If I'm not mistaken, she used to call me from this same community in the Netherlands because she used to visit one of her favorite cousins there. Saying all of this, she took a job as an interpreter in Birmingham and she used to tell me horrible stories about how some of the women in her mothers community were harshly treated and how newly immigrants would sit at the police station pretending to be crazy or they pleaded their case that they had no family back home because of the fear that they might be deported back the Somalia or they were being beaten by their husbands there in England.
But anyway, if this is the same community she used to call me from, yeah its a pretty tight communial unit that is ran on a tight system. I mean I heard about women being beaten by their husbands but I never heard of Somalian women being confined to their homes. I think that is crap...


But the main point is that Islam doesn't condone in the beating of or the mistreatment of women in Islam period. It just like saying wearing a Burhka in Afghanistan is mandatory...no its not..there's no ruling that women are obligated to wear face veils or not to speak in public. Its simply a matter of it being a cultural issue. I do however feel that there needs to be something done about theses misconceptions though.....


"The camel never sees its own hump but that of its brothers is always before its eyes"- N.African proverb

That's waht I was gonna say. Or something like it. People have this sickness in their minds that when a Muslim does anything wrong the whole of Muslims or Islam itself is suddenly the cause of this individuals or this certain communities actions. People are still very very ignorant and can't for some reason or another separate Islam from the actions of some Muslims. A lot of these things are due to cultural bias's. I remember I met this lady at a bus station about 5-6 years ago and we got on the conversation of Islam and she asked me if it was true that Muslim men locked they're wives up in towers. I kind of laughed, but at the same time was hurt because this woman was dead serious. She actually thought that we taught this in our deen. The way I look at it though, we waste our times arguing with kafirs about what Islam is and what it isn't. I'm sick of arguing. From now on, dawah is the only weapon of choice for me. If as non-Muslim has a sincere question about Islam I will answer it with the best of my ability, or I will try to show it in my own life. But I won't argue with them anymore.

To those of you who aren't Muslim, I say this with no intentions of angering you, but to let you know, when you read stories like these, don't fall for the obvious. Don't just go on believing that Islam is some sort of back wards religion, because it isn't. You don't have to take my word for it, but come on. Use some common sense. Or better yet, ask yourself, is this allowed in my own religion, then judge or better yet, make an educated judgement about Islam. Or if you want to know if Islam is bad for women, ask a Muslim woman. Plain and simple.

--------------------------(*)---------------------------
Ramadan Mubarak!

myself i know better than to think that genital mutilation and such are taught in the quran, as well as murder and suicide bombings, etc. true muslims dont partake in activities like these. but it is ironic how many people will equate christianity with the actions of American government and the history of oppression of people of color. lets face the fact that 90 percent of people that supposedly follow an organized religion are really perverting it for their own end, and not blame the religion itself, whether its islam or christianity

about being black....

_____________________________
hey...who's gonna buy me for christmas??

i wanna channel words like
whoopi channeled ghosts
break nouns, verbs and concepts
like mongolian equestrians
break horses
and ride across mental deserts
with deceptively easy beauty
(c) lesley anne m. 2002

well said ahki....culture and Islam are two different things. I think that if people can distinguish the two they'd have a better understanding of what Islam is as a whole-instead of what the media portrays about Islam.

That's on point. I think the complete ignorance of the two things and misconceptions about the religion and middle eastern countries drive this way of thinking. That's like me saying all Mormons are have 12 wives and force them all to bear 7 children or all Baptists beat their wives and shit. Christianity doesn't condone those things, but people hide behind the Bible as a basis for comitting heinous acts. People in "developed" nations do the exact same shit.

the muslim will claim that islam is a way of life, but on the other the hand, the muslim will say not to judge islam by the "culture" of its followers...

pitiful.

but true. I don't think anyone practices "true" Islam thus leaving Islam the "perfect" un-practiced religion.

***Shakes head***

I am tryin ova here!!!

Sheeeeesh!!!! :P


three ways to get something: (1) by trading, (2) by receiving a gift (from love or friendship), or (3) by force ("do what I want or I'll shoot you"). Honest, peaceful people operate in the first two ways. Criminals and the state operate by force, aggression, coercion.

okay i will say this once

its not ISLAM that is doing anything it is not the QURAN

these are sins of the father literally

if the faith is sooooo bad nobodys forcin her to be Muslim in the netherlands!!


People put to much faith in MAN & follow laws & rules made by another so called "brother" or sister. What happened to worship no other but him...they forgot who him is or what??

u gotta find your own relationship with GOD

above all else EVEN ya parents.

& SHE IS A OPPORTUNIST!!!
CUZ THOSE FEMALES IN AFGHANISTAN HAVE BEEN BEING MISTREATED FOR YEARS & NO ONE CARED ABOUT THIER PLITH UNTIL AFTER 911
BEFORE THAT IT WAS "THEIR CULTURE, THEIR BUSINESS"


back bitins a sin

& as for myself my brothers treat me with much respect & my father treats me & expects me to be treated like a jewel.It takes all kinds though judge on individual bases i guess is all i can tell u.
Woman in the Quran are spoken of in high regards we got a whole chapter & everything.

GOOGLE THAT :D

three ways to get something: (1) by trading, (2) by receiving a gift (from love or friendship), or (3) by force ("do what I want or I'll shoot you"). Honest, peaceful people operate in the first two ways. Criminals and the state operate by force, aggression, coercion.

>okay i will say this once
>
>its not ISLAM that is doing anything it is not the QURAN
>
>these are sins of the father literally
>
>if the faith is sooooo bad nobodys forcin her to be Muslim
>in the netherlands!!
>
it's obviously not THAT easy. try to tell that to my neighbour.
i don't think her father would be cool if she'd say to him that she no longer wants to wear her scarf and convert to christianity.


>People put to much faith in MAN & follow laws & rules made
>by another so called "brother" or sister. What happened to
>worship no other but him...they forgot who him is or what??
>
>u gotta find your own relationship with GOD
>
>above all else EVEN ya parents.
>

true. cosign.

>& SHE IS A OPPORTUNIST!!!

i'd be careful with that. you don't know her.

>CUZ THOSE FEMALES IN AFGHANISTAN HAVE BEEN BEING MISTREATED
>FOR YEARS & NO ONE CARED ABOUT THIER PLITH UNTIL AFTER 911
>BEFORE THAT IT WAS "THEIR CULTURE, THEIR BUSINESS"

true. they(americans, europeans) only care when it happens in their neighbourhood. they want foreigners to assimilate to a certain extent. but i remember we discussed this in high school and that was before 911.okay i did not study the quran enough to be an expert and i'm not muslim but i do have some first hand info.
i do know that it is does happen pretty often that women from islamic families are forced to marry men they don't know.
i had classmates in school that went through this and one of my neighbours is experiencing the same thing.
i've had many friends and basketball teammates from turkey, iran and afghanistan that told me the same thing, ''my sister will not marry somebody without my fathers or my approval''.
a lot of girls can't finish school and pursue a career because (mostly) the father got other plans for her.
no big deal. they are pretty open about it. it's not a secret. the public is pretty much aware of that. but nobody really speaks up against it.
it's pretty common among SOME families. in europe they get labeled conservative.

i am not the one to judge and say if such acts are wrong. but those things happen in turkish and other muslim families.
can you blame the quran for that? i don't have an answer for that. but it is reality to some people with roots in arabic countries, whether you call that a problem or not.

at the same time i do have turkish friends that some would call liberal or modern. they pretty much have the same lifestyle as everyone else. the girls even at a young age are allowed to do the same things like the boys.
of course the anti-islam peeps might argue that they are not representative because they only carry ''muslim'' as a label but do not practice their religion like it's supposed to.

news like this do no muslim a favour especially in this anti-islam climate that we have nowadays.
but it does happen and denying it is not a solution to the problem if you see it as one.

when shes 18 she can do what she wants...

& pops can get over it or not thats up to him.


three ways to get something: (1) by trading, (2) by receiving a gift (from love or friendship), or (3) by force ("do what I want or I'll shoot you"). Honest, peaceful people operate in the first two ways. Criminals and the state operate by force, aggression, coercion.

>when shes 18 she can do what she wants...
>
>& pops can get over it or not thats up to him.

in theory.
some probably do say no but if your pops has the habit of beating you up, he doesn't care if you're 12 or 22 as long as he feels that you're inferior to him.
sure you can call the cops and sue your father. but that doesn't happen too often in the real world.

to be lettin anybody put hands on her

just like in any bad relationship she gotta be woman enough to walk away.

God only helps those who help themselves

three ways to get something: (1) by trading, (2) by receiving a gift (from love or friendship), or (3) by force ("do what I want or I'll shoot you"). Honest, peaceful people operate in the first two ways. Criminals and the state operate by force, aggression, coercion.

in all meaningful respects.

why is this news?

It does seems to get worse and worse for Islam. More and more of these stories keep coming up over and over. Makes you wonder.

i might have gotten you wrong but if you want to say that finally islam is getting exposed just because the media is all over it i would think twice...
anti-islam propaganda has been going on for years way before 911.

does anyone have passages from the quran supporting your argument whateva it might be?
cause that could clear up a lot of misunderstandings and show who really knows and who's out there thinking.

>does anyone have passages from the quran supporting your
>argument whateva it might be?
>cause that could clear up a lot of misunderstandings and
>show who really knows and who's out there thinking.

Response: As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, Admonish them(first), (Next)refuse to share their beds then beat them; but if they return to obediance, seek not against them means (of annoyance)Sura 4:34

oh oh i do!!!!


yes teacher that means that if your wife does something that requires flogging (LIKE IT DOES FOR MEN...GO TO YEMEN YOULL SEE)..instead of having big brovah umar spank your wifes rear in public!!!! you can handle the hadd yourself.......if you dont like the hadd (punishment) then dont be muslim.......you wont hurt allahs feelings...wallahi!!!!!

you people dont like the hadd, hate allah, and want to know what goes on in this country? this is the refuge for those who hate allah......and regardless you would rather lock my wife away from her child for 2 years for stealing instead of me saying to her you did wrong...so i am not going to stay around you for a while.....(and please dont bring up the fornicating lady in nigeria....you are muslim, you are responsible for ISLAMIC law...just as if they would smack me on the butt for stealing (minor offence)...they would lock me up of 2 years and let some dude named bubba smack my butt...i say break out the pelu..and smack me with the mishwak (toothbrush)...rather than give me a criminal record for the rest of my days....

and dont be foolish and say "duuuuuhhh, bat shee's an adalt baaass"....and ill tell you so am i.....so she can officially do what she wants...and so can i.

>oh oh i do!!!!
>
>
>yes teacher that means that if your wife does something that
>requires flogging (LIKE IT DOES FOR MEN...GO TO YEMEN YOULL
>SEE)..instead of having big brovah umar spank your wifes
>rear in public!!!! you can handle the hadd yourself.......if
>you dont like the hadd (punishment) then dont be
>muslim.......you wont hurt allahs feelings...wallahi!!!!!

Response: It does not say spank, it says beat. And futher more I was not planning on becoming a muslim any time soon.
>
>you people dont like the hadd, hate allah, and want to know
>what goes on in this country? this is the refuge for those
>who hate allah......

Response: nothing against Allah, I just have my doubts. Thats all.

translated from arabic its hit......not spank or beat.


in the sunnah (tradition which explains its context)...the prophet (saw) never hit anyone......hs companions carried out the hadd (punishment)...actually he was big on telling people who commited crimes that the best thing to do is to never repeat it...or pay the blood money in the case of murder...

gotta remember the quran covers a lot of ground..and it covers societies where the people marry at older ages..and covers a case whee in some cultures you are a woman after puberty....a 12 year old wife who steals is not the same as a 54 year old wife who lies....."hitting" is not the absolute...check its context and you will see that first other solutions are offered..and if hadd (state punishment0 is the prefered method to absolve the crime....i'd rather not have anyone see my wife's rear end....alhamdulillah (thank "god") for that, cause it would only open the can of worms where the perverted brother goes around whipping women (sorta like the video of those lunatics whipping women in public in afghanistan....muslims arent perfect...and no system of government that introduces the human eliment is ever utopian....islam is not a utopia...and muslims steal, rape, murder, and worse....if we wouldnt have allah would have no need of warning us about ourselves...and then there would be no hadd for it...

Response: Hit women, not beat them up?? Darn how could I ever critise Islam?? By the way whats the difference?

>translated from arabic its hit......not spank or beat.

Response: Exactely how many times do I get to hit her?? By the way if that is the proper translation, then why do both my Qu'rans translate it as beat?

Moreover, all the arabic speaking people that I know always tell me that it is actually worse than beat.

the difference you ignorant twitt...if the fact that its called hadd...punishment for WHAT ANYONE MALE OR FEMALE DOES WRONG...SO INSTEAD OF HAVING ME WHUP YOU WIFE LIKE I WOULD YOUR BROTHER....WHY DO YOU DO IT...

next on the list is the fact that (and trust me on this one)...i promise...wallahi...i will not cry if you dont become muslim....you speak like you would be doing me a favor.....half wit...maybe you learn to read and understand what you read...then you would have something constructive (good or bad) to say rather that scathing the fact that hitting, whipping, and beathing (whatever you want to call it) is a method of punishment in islam.......dont like it? support your country who puts people in prison for life for stealing food.......

oh better yet!!! why dont you just place them all in prisons that cost over 60k a year to keep a prisoner....well...i hopr you enjoyed ignorance corner..and remember people in disney world that osoclasi lives in hitting is wrong children....so never hit anyone.........fool.


and you arent doing allah a favor by becoming muslim....in fact when you grow up out of your utopian shell and come into the real world..you will come to realize that hitting as far better than slavery...i mean imprisonment....sorry, that was just my friend freud...

>the difference you ignorant twitt...

Response: Ignorant twitt?? ouch. Hey is that part of hadd??

if the fact that its
>called hadd...punishment for WHAT ANYONE MALE OR FEMALE DOES
>WRONG...SO INSTEAD OF HAVING ME WHUP YOU WIFE LIKE I WOULD
>YOUR BROTHER....WHY DO YOU DO IT...

Response: I don't have any brothers.

>next on the list is the fact that (and trust me on this
>one)...i promise...wallahi...i will not cry if you dont
>become muslim....

Response: Really, I thought I let you down.

you speak like you would be doing me a
>favor.....half wit...maybe you learn to read and understand
>what you read...then you would have something constructive
>(good or bad) to say rather that scathing the fact that
>hitting, whipping, and beathing (whatever you want to call
>it) is a method of punishment in islam.......dont like it?

Response: is calling me half wit part of Islamic punishment as well? By the way its not hitting, whipping or beathing its beating.



>support your country who puts people in prison for life for
>stealing food.......

Response: Or just smack them up a bit huh.
>
>oh better yet!!! why dont you just place them all in prisons
>that cost over 60k a year to keep a prisoner....well...i
>hopr you enjoyed ignorance corner..and remember people in
>disney world that osoclasi lives in hitting is wrong
>children....so never hit anyone.........fool.

Response: No, just hitting your wife is.
>
>
>and you arent doing allah a favor by becoming muslim....in
>fact when you grow up out of your utopian shell and come
>into the real world..you will come to realize that hitting
>as far better than slavery...i mean imprisonment....sorry,
>that was just my friend freud...

Response: you mean to tell me I am not on Allah's top favorite list?? Darn I try so hard.

>>the difference you ignorant twitt...
>
>Response: Ignorant twitt?? ouch. Hey is that part of hadd??

no...just me calling a spade a spade.

>if the fact that its
>>called hadd...punishment for WHAT ANYONE MALE OR FEMALE DOES
>>WRONG...SO INSTEAD OF HAVING ME WHUP YOU WIFE LIKE I WOULD
>>YOUR BROTHER....WHY DO YOU DO IT...
>
>Response: I don't have any brothers.

see..a twitt in action.....context over content....but i would guess you knew that?

>>next on the list is the fact that (and trust me on this
>>one)...i promise...wallahi...i will not cry if you dont
>>become muslim....
>
>Response: Really, I thought I let you down.

yes...i am cryong right now:(

>you speak like you would be doing me a
>>favor.....half wit...maybe you learn to read and understand
>>what you read...then you would have something constructive
>>(good or bad) to say rather that scathing the fact that
>>hitting, whipping, and beathing (whatever you want to call
>>it) is a method of punishment in islam.......dont like it?
>
>Response: is calling me half wit part of Islamic punishment
>as well? By the way its not hitting, whipping or beathing
>its beating.

thankyou english teacher..i didnt know that a message board was now a term paper...ill be sure to note and waste my life spell checking message board posts to impress you...:) btw its thank you and not thankyou isnt it?
>
>
>>support your country who puts people in prison for life for
>>stealing food.......
>
>Response: Or just smack them up a bit huh.

hey...i never said live in civilization...it comes with a contract..and if the contract is broken......the punishment is carried out...i didnt write the rules..i just follow them....oh and yes smack em up..

>>oh better yet!!! why dont you just place them all in prisons
>>that cost over 60k a year to keep a prisoner....well...i
>>hopr you enjoyed ignorance corner..and remember people in
>>disney world that osoclasi lives in hitting is wrong
>>children....so never hit anyone.........fool.
>
>Response: No, just hitting your wife is.

if the required punishment for my wifes behavior (ie stealing)....and the qadi (you know what that is right? bah you know islamic law so you should) says her punishment is that she would be lashed then go home to her children (instead of taking her away)...ill beat her......rather tha have her go to prison for 10 years.....when its my turn...(hopefully not of either of us)...ill let the muslim in charge of the hadud carry out the whipping on me....its islamic law...love it or leave it....you seem fine with daily anal rapes in rahway st in jersey....if you even been to prison, sr seen a man get deflowered, youll change you mind and agree that 10 lashes is nothing...
>>

>>and you arent doing allah a favor by becoming muslim....in
>>fact when you grow up out of your utopian shell and come
>>into the real world..you will come to realize that hitting
>>as far better than slavery...i mean imprisonment....sorry,
>>that was just my friend freud...
>
>Response: you mean to tell me I am not on Allah's top
>favorite list?? Darn I try so hard.

i am sure you do...but the funny thing is you seem to follow me..so ill have you know i dont take well to stalkers....but since you done seem like you will stop........at least by me flowers....white roses are my favoorite..

and on that note.......i said what i had to say...and you read it...i am sure those who have some sort of grey matter understand the premise...even if they dont agree...:)

>no...just me calling a spade a spade.

Response: Or you can't defend islam very well.
>
>see..a twitt in action.....context over content....but i
>would guess you knew that?

Response: yep
>thankyou english teacher..i didnt know that a message board
>was now a term paper...ill be sure to note and waste my life
>spell checking message board posts to impress you...:) btw
>its thank you and not thankyou isnt it?

Response: Actually I did not realize that word was suppose to mean beating. I thought you were trying to get around the word.
>>if the required punishment for my wifes behavior (ie
>stealing)....and the qadi (you know what that is right? bah
>you know islamic law so you should)

Response: Yep. A judge of Muslim law; appointed by a ruler whose duties include supervision or endowments; inheritances etc.

says her punishment is
>that she would be lashed then go home to her children
>(instead of taking her away)...ill beat her......rather tha
>have her go to prison for 10 years.....when its my
>turn...(hopefully not of either of us)...ill let the muslim
>in charge of the hadud carry out the whipping on me....its
>islamic law...love it or leave it....you seem fine with
>daily anal rapes in rahway st in jersey....if you even been
>to prison, sr seen a man get deflowered, youll change you
>mind and agree that 10 lashes is nothing...

Response: Yeah, I think that you need to think about this a little more, before you try to continue this debate.
>i am sure you do...but the funny thing is you seem to follow
>me..so ill have you know i dont take well to stalkers....but
>since you done seem like you will stop........at least by me
>flowers....white roses are my favoorite..

Response: hmm, I thought you responded to one of my post first?

the bible's equally clear about letting men beat their wives

...and testament, shmeshtament. i've known plenty of christians who flip flop back & forth between the two, no matter what jesus supposedly absolved y'all of.

it's all ancient patriarchy. and it all reads about the same.

...oh and DeRaye makes an excellent point about translation. at least there's only one quran. go try & find the "right" bible.

y'all kill me goin back & forth over this like it's not 2 versions of the same thing...

_____________________________
hey...who's gonna buy me for christmas??

i wanna channel words like
whoopi channeled ghosts
break nouns, verbs and concepts
like mongolian equestrians
break horses
and ride across mental deserts
with deceptively easy beauty
(c) lesley anne m. 2002

>the bible's equally clear about letting men beat their wives

Response: I notice you lack proof of your arguement.
>
>...and testament, shmeshtament. i've known plenty of
>christians who flip flop back & forth between the two, no
>matter what jesus supposedly absolved y'all of.

Response: Real scholarly statment here.
>
>...oh and DeRaye makes an excellent point about translation.
>at least there's only one quran. go try & find the "right"
>bible.

Response:that is because the 4th Uthman burned all other textual varianst of the Quran.
However actually there are textual variants amongst qurans today. I saw an article in discovery magazine about it 2 years ago. And I have run across some variants in arabic myself.
So not all Qurans are the same.

all of them are the same...and uthman was the 3rd khalif not the 4th (not the brightest bulb on the shelf are we?)


the differences in the quranic methods were:

hafsa had the final order the rasool (saw) recited it every day...

ibn masood had it in the order revealed....

and others had various manuscripts...the quran on the other hand was comitted to memory by some of his (saw) scribes...including muawiyyah (ra)...in fact if you looking for juice the fact that uthman (ra) burned the quran after the confirmation by thousands that that was the final order (like he didnt know it, uthman was also a qari but thw way we do things in islam is not based on conjecture....uthman knew in order secure his place in history PROPERLY he couldnt burn any copy that may have been the good mushaf........if he did? we would not have the quran in its order...and no none exist....unless you know of the way they scribed it? they did it on bone...and on paper later....there werent any "books' of the quranic recitation untill umar (ra) comissioned to have the all collected..and uthman (ra) decided to go with the way the rasool taught it to him...and his wife hafsa...and others...ibn masood was the only one with another complete viable version, and that was the order it was revealed in.....BUT the problem is that then you would have to know what ayat goes where....for example the begining of surah 5 was the last ayat to be revealed

Forbidden to you (for food) are: dead meat, blood, the flesh of swine, and that on which hath been invoked the name of other than Allah; that which hath been killed by strangling, or by a violent blow, or by a headlong fall, or by being gored to death; that which hath been (partly) eaten by a wild animal; unless ye are able to slaughter it (in due form); that which is sacrificed on stone (altars); (forbidden) also is the division (of meat) by raffling with arrows: that is impiety. This day have those who reject faith given up all hope of your religion: Yet fear them not but fear Me. This day have I perfected your religion for you, completed My favor upon you, and have chosen for you Islám as your religion. But if any is forced by hunger, with no inclination to transgression, Allah is indeed Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful (5:3)

that would make no sense to those who weent trained in the quran if this was last...because eits actually part of suratul maída (number 5)........ so uthman did all us lay muslims o favor anf got rid of all that ould cause us confusion.....as far as the text is concerned..its all the same...and the order is the true order oof the quran.......because the order it was revealed is not cronological......


you should ask qustions like why did muawiyyah drink the blood of the rasool (saw).....or why did ayesha (ra) go to basra....what happened to hassan (ra) and heusein (ra)...why are there 4 schools of fiqh...you know things that are a bit harder........not childish "there be 2 qurans"....and none of those are hard to answer.....because the masters of this islam business say "to every difficult question there is an easy answer"........if i was smart i would say and vice versa.....but i am not going to take that liberty till i know for sure.......bye bye :)

>Response: I notice you lack proof of your arguement.

that i don't know the bible well enough to point out a scripture, but i will work on it. however, men have been using some justification to do it all these years. perhaps the term "chastise" has been taken too far, i don't know.

but the intention of my post--given the fact that i may or may not be wrong about a specific scripture being present--was that BOTH faiths have been used to perpetuate outdated, outmoded, and disrespectful attitudes and behavior towards women. all of the "big 3", imo, were the beginning of the end of the acknowledgement of women's equal role in the universe, and we've been suffering ever since.

hence, i don't know why you insist on arguing details about the DEGREE of disrespect women face in either system.

you yourself have said you hold some views that some christians might not agree with, just like some of the more progressive muslim men on this site might not be welcomed in a more conservative setting.

it all boils down to interpretation, with you AND with them.

and the bottom line, like sooooo many people have tried to tell you before, is that if you argue something from a basis of faith, there's ALWAYS going to be a right or wrong. you can argue until the cows come home, but eventually you're going to have to agree to disagree.

you think your god is right. they think theirs is. it's a losing battle. *shrug*


_____________________________
hey...who's gonna buy me for christmas??

i wanna channel words like
whoopi channeled ghosts
break nouns, verbs and concepts
like mongolian equestrians
break horses
and ride across mental deserts
with deceptively easy beauty
(c) lesley anne m. 2002

>
>that i don't know the bible well enough to point out a
>scripture, but i will work on it. however, men have been
>using some justification to do it all these years. perhaps
>the term "chastise" has been taken too far, i don't know.

Response: Thats just it, men have done this. Not the scripures themselves.
>
>but the intention of my post--given the fact that i may or
>may not be wrong about a specific scripture being
>present--was that BOTH faiths have been used to perpetuate
>outdated, outmoded, and disrespectful attitudes and behavior
>towards women. all of the "big 3", imo, were the beginning
>of the end of the acknowledgement of women's equal role in
>the universe, and we've been suffering ever since.

Response: No,the people in the big 3 are resposible not the scripures. Well at least the scriptures don't condone this action. We don't have verse that admit that man has a degree of advantage over women. (2:228)
>
>hence, i don't know why you insist on arguing details about
>the DEGREE of disrespect women face in either system.

Response: Oh i don't kmow, maybe its because we don't require women to wear veil in order to make sure we don't lust. Or walk behind us nor are we allowed to beat(hit) them or banish them from our beds.
>
>you yourself have said you hold some views that some
>christians might not agree with, just like some of the more
>progressive muslim men on this site might not be welcomed in
>a more conservative setting.

Response: Yeah but my view is dealing with women preaching. Neither view is disrespecting women in any way, I just think that God has set roles for each gender to do. I don't think men are smarter, or can hit their wives. I just think it has to do with function instead of superiority.
>
>it all boils down to interpretation, with you AND with them.

Response: I disagree. Those who think that women should preach feel the exact same way I do about women equality with men. We don't disagree on that part. I never said banish a women from your bed etc. I am talking about one specific role within the church. Thats all. And I have an arugement from scripture, my heart is actually with the women, I just can't get around certain verses that seem to speak against it.
>
>you think your god is right. they think theirs is. it's a
>losing battle. *shrug*

Response: Not always. I know some stories of people who were saved after listening to debates. After examining both sides of the issue. so I think it has some good.
>

>>that i don't know the bible well enough to point out a
>>scripture, but i will work on it. however, men have been
>>using some justification to do it all these years. perhaps
>>the term "chastise" has been taken too far, i don't know.
>
>Response: Thats just it, men have done this. Not the
>scripures themselves.

but it's all about how those scriptures are interpreted. that's why we have a million & one denominations now. that's all you have. so to say that "it's the men & not the scriptures", how about you follow a system that doesn't even give you an excuse to go that route because women aren't specifically targeted as "less than"?


>Response: No,the people in the big 3 are resposible not the
>scripures. Well at least the scriptures don't condone this
>action. We don't have verse that admit that man has a degree
>of advantage over women. (2:228)

ok maybe not specifically, but there's plenty about the husband being the head, "wives submit to your husbands," etc. and yes, i know that whole "the man's supposed to submit to god" thing, but the majority don't take it that far.

you know most christian men don't have a deep enough understanding to take those passages as meaning much more than "i run the show". and a lot of christian women play into that mentality themselves.



>>hence, i don't know why you insist on arguing details about
>>the DEGREE of disrespect women face in either system.
>
>Response: Oh i don't kmow, maybe its because we don't
>require women to wear veil in order to make sure we don't
>lust. Or walk behind us nor are we allowed to beat(hit) them
>or banish them from our beds.

some christian women are forced to wear skirts and/or cover most of their bodies/hair 24/7, as i'm sure you know. again, it all boils down to interpretation. scripture may not DETAIL a practice, but apparently IMPLICATION is enough in most cases.



>Response: Yeah but my view is dealing with women preaching.
>Neither view is disrespecting women in any way, I just think
>that God has set roles for each gender to do. I don't think
>men are smarter, or can hit their wives. I just think it has
>to do with function instead of superiority.

well how do u know most muslim men feel that way? and i think you have quite a few views most christian men might not vibe w/ too well, considering the conversations i've had with a few.


>Response: Not always. I know some stories of people who were
>saved after listening to debates. After examining both sides
>of the issue. so I think it has some good.

hmph. well if christianity is supposed to "save" me, i'd rather be a heathen, thanks.

_____________________________
hey...who's gonna buy me for christmas??

i wanna channel words like
whoopi channeled ghosts
break nouns, verbs and concepts
like mongolian equestrians
break horses
and ride across mental deserts
with deceptively easy beauty
(c) lesley anne m. 2002

>
>but it's all about how those scriptures are interpreted.
>that's why we have a million & one denominations now. that's
>all you have. so to say that "it's the men & not the
>scriptures", how about you follow a system that doesn't even
>give you an excuse to go that route because women aren't
>specifically targeted as "less than"?

Response: please the denomination arguement is not very convincing. All denominition agree about the esscentials to the faith. The things inwhich the church has held dear to itself throughout its history. i.e. the trinity.
And no its not about how they are interpreted, there is a right way and a wrong way. A lot of things that you see in denominations are grounded in tradition rather than biblical interpretain. In other words this is what the church has always done, and then someone comes along and says that not biblical.



>
>ok maybe not specifically, but there's plenty about the
>husband being the head, "wives submit to your husbands,"
>etc. and yes, i know that whole "the man's supposed to
>submit to god" thing, but the majority don't take it that
>far.

Response: But you can't blame the bible for those husbands abuse of the text. That's not the scriptures fault, they need to look at the context of the passage.

>you know most christian men don't have a deep enough
>understanding to take those passages as meaning much more
>than "i run the show". and a lot of christian women play
>into that mentality themselves.

Response: Yep, thats true, but thats nothing to do with Christianity.
>
>>some christian women are forced to wear skirts and/or cover
>most of their bodies/hair 24/7, as i'm sure you know. again,
>it all boils down to interpretation. scripture may not
>DETAIL a practice, but apparently IMPLICATION is enough in
>most cases.

Response: thats more tradition than interpretion though. Although some passages are somewhat difficult to apply to today.

>well how do u know most muslim men feel that way? and i
>think you have quite a few views most christian men might
>not vibe w/ too well, considering the conversations i've had
>with a few.

Response: Oh yeah you are right there. I offend alot of people with some of my deeper theological views. (wait until you see me argue about God's predestination issues). But, like I said I am dealing with the Quran textually. does not matter how they feel. They have to prove me wrong contextually, before I change my mind.

>hmph. well if christianity is supposed to "save" me, i'd
>rather be a heathen, thanks.

Response: Well, thats up to you. My point was that there is some value to debating.
>

so as an example, are all Catholic priests molesters? Are all Baptist preachers womanizers, opportunists and people who take advantage of the congregation? No. So the same with Islam. 1 bad apple or a few bad apples can appear to spoil the bunch, but it don't. Ya'll are really sad if you would blame a whole religion or group of people for the actions, beliefs and words of others. Ya'll just as bad as white people that say that all black people are either on drugs, selling drugs, on welfare or in jail. Shame!
---------------------------(*)---------------------------
Ramadan Mubarak!

Fight those who believe not in God nor the Last Day nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by God and his apostle not acknowledge the Religion of Truth (even if they are) people of the book, until they pay Jizya (religous tax) with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. Sura 9:29

Response: Man, I can feel the love.

....when was that Surah revealed? What was the situation between Prophet Muhammad and the Meccans at that point in history? If you don't know, then really you are in no position to interepret the Qur'an. If you didn't know, the Qur'an is not one big collection of thoughts and sayings compiled as a do's and don't manual for Muslims. Some parts of the Qur'an were revealed because of a certain issue that was of concern at the time. I really don't expect non-muslims to understand the Qur'an when they can't even understand their own holy books, but I just want to say that every english translation you see of the Qur'an isn't going to explain the essence of Islam for you or to you. It goes so much deeper than that.

Really, the English tranliteration is just that. It isn't even the Qur'an in the literal sense. The only Qur'an that is the Qur'an is that of the Arabic tongue. The Qur'an has some words that there aren't any english equivilant, so when you try to interpret the Qur'an and the religion of Islam based on you already fallible translation or tranliteration, you fail, therefore its not even worth trying to fight or discredit Islam or the Qur'an because your info is faulty. Ask a Muslim. Ask an Imam. Beware of your own judgement and intelligence or that of the media, because in the end you will be wrong.
---------------------------(*)---------------------------
Ramadan Mubarak!

>....when was that Surah revealed?

Response: I believe 7 years after the previous sura. It is dealing with life under the new ummat.

What was the situation
>between Prophet Muhammad and the Meccans at that point in
>history?

Response: Same as it always was, not very good. They were having a hard time keeping treaties.

If you don't know, then really you are in no
>position to interepret the Qur'an. If you didn't know, the
>Qur'an is not one big collection of thoughts and sayings
>compiled as a do's and don't manual for Muslims. Some parts
>of the Qur'an were revealed because of a certain issue that
>was of concern at the time. I really don't expect
>non-muslims to understand the Qur'an when they can't even
>understand their own holy books,

Response: That's odd I don't see any verse that limits muslims from not doing this today. I don't see any verse that restricts this to a specific time period or anything. And according to orthodox islam the Qur'anic commands are universal and thus applicable for all times and places.


but I just want to say that
>every english translation you see of the Qur'an isn't going
>to explain the essence of Islam for you or to you. It goes
>so much deeper than that.

Response: Yep, same muslim arguement. I know I know, the real Qu'ran is in arabic. Yeah sure.
>
>Really, the English tranliteration is just that. It isn't
>even the Qur'an in the literal sense. The only Qur'an that
>is the Qur'an is that of the Arabic tongue. The Qur'an has
>some words that there aren't any english equivilant, so when
>you try to interpret the Qur'an and the religion of Islam
>based on you already fallible translation or
>tranliteration, you fail, therefore its not even worth
>trying to fight or discredit Islam or the Qur'an because
>your info is faulty. Ask a Muslim. Ask an Imam. Beware of
>your own judgement and intelligence or that of the media,
>because in the end you will be wrong.

Response: Yep,same ole muslim arugement. By the way feel free to translate it correctly for me.

Well how bout this

" Allah's apostle said, " I have been ordered to fight with the people till they say.'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah,' and whoever says,'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah,'his life and property will be saved by me." Al-Bukhari, vol 4.

ouch

And believe me, this is only partial. I will come back with your correction. I'm still missing your intention of posting. Is it to prove that Islam as a religion and as a way of life holds women in a lower manner or is it the relationship between Musims and non Muslims. Either way God willing I will try my best to provide you proof to the error in you judgement or thought. But until then, answer me this. What is the Christian or Judeo-Christian stance in these manners. I'd love to hear your answers. From my own "look" into the Bible I found things that were far more literal and either spitefull or hatefull when it came to relations with non believers. I recall Joshua destroying whole tribes men, women and children, and on the subject of treatment of women, I found your "apostle" Paul to say this:

I Corinthians 14:34,35 "As in all the congregations of the saints, women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak but must be silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must remain in submission, as the law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in a church."

I await you "response". And please come with something other than the "Christian response" of how that was then, the church has changed. If that is your answer, who gave anyone permission to change anything? Anyways, know that I come not to defame the name of Christianity as it appears you come. I am not trying to create a further divide between Christian and Muslim, but I am curious as to why you seek to discredit Islam so, when yet your own house is out of order.

But as to Surah 9:29 I will get back to you on that. I believe that you are speaking or quoting the Qur'an out of context, but since I do not know all, I have to go to the lab and get my read on!
---------------------------(*)---------------------------
Ramadan Mubarak!

>And believe me, this is only partial. I will come back with
>your correction. I'm still missing your intention of
>posting. Is it to prove that Islam as a religion and as a
>way of life holds women in a lower manner or is it the
>relationship between Musims and non Muslims. Either way God
>willing I will try my best to provide you proof to the error
>in you judgement or thought.

Response: Well, I am not trying to prove anything. My first post was saying that the more you look at Islam the worse it gets. Then someone told me to put up a sura proving my point. So I did, then that lead to the topic of women in islam. And I was asked to put up another sura, so I did. So its up to you, you can debate either topic I don't mind.

But until then, answer me
>this. What is the Christian or Judeo-Christian stance in
>these manners. I'd love to hear your answers.

Response: On which one? Women or unbelivers? On women its up in the air. My perspective is that there are roles that women must hold, and there are roles that men must hold. i.e. pastoral roles I think belong to the male, not because the male is superior to the women, but there are certain functions that God has assigned to each sex. Now, realize I hold the minority view on this one, there are plenty of Christians who would say the opposite, but that is where we would have to debate.

On unbelievers, we are called to witness to them. And show acts of mercy to them, but not attack them.

From my own
>"look" into the Bible I found things that were far more
>literal and either spitefull or hatefull when it came to
>relations with non believers. I recall Joshua destroying
>whole tribes men, women and children,

Response: Yep thats correct, but that was my arguement from yesterday. That was a specific event, limited by God for Joshua and Israel to conquer and recieve the land that was promised to them. That is not for us today, God told him specifically to do that as 1) an act of judgement against the canaanites for their sins.2) In order to fufill the promises that were given to Abraham in ordet to fufill the covenant blessings. In Islam I don't see those verses being only applicable to a certain group of people or a specific time period. From my understanding everyting in the Quran is universal and still applies today. And it is evident that some groups read it that way.

and on the subject of
>treatment of women, I found your "apostle" Paul to say this:
>
>I Corinthians 14:34,35 "As in all the congregations of the
>saints, women should remain silent in the churches. They
>are not allowed to speak but must be silent in the churches.
> They are not allowed to speak, but must remain in
>submission, as the law says. If they want to inquire about
>something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for
>it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in a church."
I await you "response". And please come with something
>other than the "Christian response" of how that was then,
>the church has changed. If that is your answer, who gave
>anyone permission to change anything?


Response: Sure no prob, Paul is not prohibiting all public speech by women in the church, for he clearly allows them to pray and prophesy in the church in 1 Cor 11:5. Therefore, it is best to understand this passage is referring to speech that is in the catagory being discussed in the immediate context, namely, the spoken evaluation and judging of prophecies in the congregation (see v 29: Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others weigh what is said) While Paul allows women to speak and give prophecies in the church meetings. he does not all them to speak up and give evaluations or critiques of the prophecies that have been given, for this would be a ruling or governing function with respect to the whole church.


Anyways, know that I
>come not to defame the name of Christianity as it appears
>you come.

Response: Actually, if I'd really came to defame Islam I would come with some harder arguements than the ones I am doing here.

I am not trying to create a further divide
>between Christian and Muslim, but I am curious as to why you
>seek to discredit Islam so, when yet your own house is out
>of order.

Response: Nice one. Actually some one ask me to put up those suras. I've got more than these, I am just putting up verses because I was challenge too.
>
>But as to Surah 9:29 I will get back to you on that. I
>believe that you are speaking or quoting the Qur'an out of
>context, but since I do not know all, I have to go to the
>lab and get my read on!

Response: Sure no problem.

....that your understanding of Islam is a bit skewed. What is your understanding of that Iyat? What do you think it means? That Muslims are free to go and attack non Muslims now? No. You must first understand that during the time of the revelation of this Surah the Muslims were at war with the Meccans. The Meccans waged the war and the Muslims were forced to defend themeselves, so when it says fight the unbelievers it is from a defensive stance, not that of the aggressor. Any Muslim would tell you that we fight not as the aggressor, but in defense, to defend Islam. Though some Muslims have been known to be aggressors this is not Islam. Then again, I rarely see any Christians turning the other cheek. We can go back and forth about what religion has done what throughout history until we turn blue in the face (which would be a little hard for me to do) but the truth is, we get no where. Just as your argument is going. Your not going to be able to prove Islam to be a violent religion. When, what was it 10,000 Muslims entered Mecca not one drop of blood was shed. Not one. This is your violent religion? In my years of being a Muslim, I've never been taught to slay non-believers. Ever. So tell me something I don't know. Enlighten me as to why you, who read the Qur'an out of context as if it is some ordinary book, understand my own religion better than myself. Forgive me if the tone of this sounds harsh, for I'm not coming at you like that at all, only trying to make a point clear. Fight those who believe not in Allah does not mean attack those who believe not in Allah and the Last Day. Two different meanings. Fighting goes deeper than violence anyways. Also, the Jizyah was not a religious tax, it was a tax, protection, compensation for living within Islamic boarders. America has taxes too. Pick up your Abdullah Yusuf Ali Transliteration and read the Intro to this Surah and read C.93. Matter of fact, read about Islamic history and how Islam came to be during the time of Muhammad (peace be upon him)

I'm done.
---------------------------(*)---------------------------
Ramadan Mubarak!

>....that your understanding of Islam is a bit skewed. What
>is your understanding of that Iyat?

Response: Isn't it Ayat?

What do you think it
>means?

Response: well it says fight those who do not believe in God. Does not matter if they were people of the book, if they don't acknowledge the prophet get them. the verse speaks for itself.

That Muslims are free to go and attack non Muslims
>now? No. You must first understand that during the time of
>the revelation of this Surah the Muslims were at war with
>the Meccans.

Response: Does'nt matter because no where does that verse limit muslims to that time period.

The Meccans waged the war and the Muslims were
>forced to defend themeselves, so when it says fight the
>unbelievers it is from a defensive stance, not that of the
>aggressor. Any Muslim would tell you that we fight not as
>the aggressor, but in defense, to defend Islam.

Response: nonsense, Jamal Badawi tries this same reasoning about self defense. But the problem is that muslims never define what self defense is. And in islam it is always much broader than what it appears to be. Many muslims argue that america is a culture aggressor by exporting its Hollywood values all over the world, and thus fight against America is done in self defense. Therefore there is no end to how a muslim group can define self defense and oppression and thus find an Islamic justification for violence. nice try.


Though some
>Muslims have been known to be aggressors this is not Islam.
>Then again, I rarely see any Christians turning the other
>cheek. We can go back and forth about what religion has
>done what throughout history until we turn blue in the face
>(which would be a little hard for me to do) but the truth
>is, we get no where. Just as your argument is going. Your
>not going to be able to prove Islam to be a violent
>religion.

Response: Oh yeah how about:

" fighting is prescribed for you and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you, But God knoweth and ye know not." sura 2:216

or how bout:

"Let those fight is the cause of God who sell the life of this world for the hearafter. To him who fighteth in the cause of God whether he is slain or gets victory, soon shall we give him a reward of great (value). Those who believe fight in the cause of God and those who reject faith fight in the cause of evil, so fight ye against the friends of Satan, feeble indeed in the cunning of Satan."

When, what was it 10,000 Muslims entered Mecca
>not one drop of blood was shed. Not one. This is your
>violent religion?

Response: Thats ok because Mohommed made it up in medina when he attacked the last jewish tribe in medina on the suspicion that they plotted with the Meccan enemies agianst Muslims.

In my years of being a Muslim, I've never
>been taught to slay non-believers. Ever. So tell me
>something I don't know. Enlighten me as to why you, who
>read the Qur'an out of context as if it is some ordinary
>book, understand my own religion better than myself.

Response: Because you guys just keep saying that I am out of context but never show me real context in the debate. That self defense arguement does not work, one wonders how you can use self defese when muslims stomped across north africa. There is not that much self defense in the world.

>Forgive me if the tone of this sounds harsh, for I'm not
>coming at you like that at all, only trying to make a point
>clear. Fight those who believe not in Allah does not mean
>attack those who believe not in Allah and the Last Day. Two
>different meanings Fighting goes deeper than violence
>anyways.

Response: I notice you left out the part that says " and feel themselves subdued." what are you going to do, debate them into submission.

Also, the Jizyah was not a religious tax, it was a
>tax, protection, compensation for living within Islamic
>boarders. America has taxes too. Pick up your Abdullah
>Yusuf Ali Transliteration and read the Intro to this Surah
>and read C.93. Matter of fact, read about Islamic history
>and how Islam came to be during the time of Muhammad (peace
>be upon him)

Response: nice try Jizyah was a tax paid by Christains and jews to muslim rulers, as opposed to pagans who were forced to either accept islam or die.

>Response: Isn't it Ayat?

My Response: Actually there is no correct English way to spell the word Iya, Ayat, Ayah, Iyah, so if your point is to make me look as if I don't know what I'm talking about, one should look at ones self


>
>Response: well it says fight those who do not believe in
>God. Does not matter if they were people of the book, if
>they don't acknowledge the prophet get them. the verse
>speaks for itself.

No where in that verse does it say that if they didn't acknowledge Muhammad (Peace be upon him) as a Prophet to "get them". (And I know you didn't mean the words "get them" literally, but what you're implying does not apply)

But since your so up on your knowledge of Islam, then explain to me why this wasn't the case with the Abysinians who took in the Muslims, and please come better than debating how Muslims needed asylumn<--spelling isn't perfect, I know!


>Response: Does'nt matter because no where does that verse
>limit muslims to that time period.

My Response: Common sense, knowledge of Islamic history and the Qur'an and knowledge of the history of the Qur'an would tell you and explain that when the verse was revealed that it spoke specifically about that moment, but just like in every part of the Qur'an it teaches us, it sets the foundation of how we are to be in this world. It's not an open invite or an open declaration for Muslims to fight or attack non Muslims. I wouldn't expect you to understand this though, so there really isn't much sense in me continuing further.

>
>Response: nonsense, Jamal Badawi tries this same reasoning
>about self defense. But the problem is that muslims never
>define what self defense is. And in islam it is always much
>broader than what it appears to be. Many muslims argue that
>america is a culture aggressor by exporting its Hollywood
>values all over the world, and thus fight against America is
>done in self defense. Therefore there is no end to how a
>muslim group can define self defense and oppression and thus
>find an Islamic justification for violence. nice try.

My Response: Nonsense? How so? Teach me oh wise one. Explain to me about my own religion. I must have missed something, because even when I first read the Qur'an I understood that Muslims are never to be the aggressor. We aren't supposed to get smacked down and take it either, but it is not Islamic for one to be the aggressor. As far as the Muslim world seeing America as the aggressor, it goes further than Hollywood and pop culture. Are you aware of our years of involvement in the Middle east? Of the U.S. not only influencing through its exports (which to me is only a small part of the equation) but being directly envolved with keeping corrupt leaders in Muslim countries, financially supporting countries who openly oppose Muslims and Arabs alike? Nice try yourself.
>
>
>
>Response: Oh yeah how about:
>
>" fighting is prescribed for you and ye dislike it. But it
>is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you,
>and that ye love a thing which is bad for you, But God
>knoweth and ye know not." sura 2:216

My Response: And what here don't you get? God commands one to fight and stand up for oneself and defend the religion, even though one may dislike it. That mankind, men, human beings may dislike a thing that is good for them and love something that is bad. God knows when man knows nothing. What about this don't you get? Americans in the military who go to fight the wars for this country I'm sure aren't just a bunch of trigger happy kids, but actually are going to defend their country, defend their freedom (or that's the pitch anyways) so what's the difference here. C'mon now man, pick you fights a little better than that.


>or how bout:
>
>"Let those fight is the cause of God who sell the life of
>this world for the hearafter. To him who fighteth in the
>cause of God whether he is slain or gets victory, soon shall
>we give him a reward of great (value). Those who believe
>fight in the cause of God and those who reject faith fight
>in the cause of evil, so fight ye against the friends of
>Satan, feeble indeed in the cunning of Satan."

My Response Again: And? It's not saying, "Muslims, do nothing but fight! War is the only way!" These verses are speaking specifically about fighting for Islam. That doesn't mean that this is what the whole religion is all about. Islam is a complete way of life, so obviously this would be one of the other topics covered. You make it sound as if this is all the Qur'an talks about. The Qur'an covers much, much more than this my friend. Your argument is loosing its steam. I'm not understanding your point.

>
>Response: Thats ok because Mohommed made it up in medina
>when he attacked the last jewish tribe in medina on the
>suspicion that they plotted with the Meccan enemies agianst
>Muslims.

Source please.

>
>Response: Because you guys just keep saying that I am out of
>context but never show me real context in the debate. That
>self defense arguement does not work, one wonders how you
>can use self defese when muslims stomped across north
>africa. There is not that much self defense in the world.

Again, provide a source. I wasn't aware that Muslims stomped through Africa forcing people to believe. Speak to some Somali Muslims and ask them how Islam came into East Africa.


>Response: nice try Jizyah was a tax paid by Christains and
>jews to muslim rulers, as opposed to pagans who were forced
>to either accept islam or die.

Tell me how Muslims were treated in non Muslim lands. Tell me how Jews were treated and how Christians were treated in other lands then compare it to how they were treated in Muslims lands. There were many, many years of coexistence in Muslim lands. Remember Spain? How were Christians and Jews treated there by Muslims before the Muslims were murdered and expelled.

Come better or don't come at all because your arguement goes nowhere.

Salaam.

---------------------------(*)---------------------------
Ramadan Mubarak!

lol.......

>
>My Response: Actually there is no correct English way to
>spell the word Iya, Ayat, Ayah, Iyah, so if your point is to
>make me look as if I don't know what I'm talking about, one
>should look at ones self

Response: Hmm, I thought that is all you had to say. Oh well.
>
>>No where in that verse does it say that if they didn't
>acknowledge Muhammad (Peace be upon him) as a Prophet to
>"get them". (And I know you didn't mean the words "get them"
>literally, but what you're implying does not apply)

Response: Fight those who do not believe in Allah is pretty clear. There is no way around it, the evidence is overwhelming.
>
>But since your so up on your knowledge of Islam, then
>explain to me why this wasn't the case with the Abysinians
>who took in the Muslims, and please come better than
>debating how Muslims needed asylumn<--spelling isn't
>perfect, I know!

Response: Because after Muhammed gained an army is when his thinking changed. All of the earlier suras he pleaded with jews trying to get them to convert, afterwards it was kill, attack etc. I guess gaining an army changes ones thinking.

>
>My Response: Common sense, knowledge of Islamic history and
>the Qur'an and knowledge of the history of the Qur'an would
>tell you and explain that when the verse was revealed that
>it spoke specifically about that moment, but just like in
>every part of the Qur'an it teaches us, it sets the
>foundation of how we are to be in this world. It's not an
>open invite or an open declaration for Muslims to fight or
>attack non Muslims. I wouldn't expect you to understand
>this though, so there really isn't much sense in me
>continuing further.

Response: You said that last time. And your common sense is not so common amongst groups in Islam, because they use these verses to justify killings that they do.

>
>My Response: Nonsense? How so? Teach me oh wise one.
>Explain to me about my own religion. I must have missed
>something, because even when I first read the Qur'an I
>understood that Muslims are never to be the aggressor. We
>aren't supposed to get smacked down and take it either, but
>it is not Islamic for one to be the aggressor.

Response: Because, Islam is an aggressor. Islam grew out of war, it is remains in war. It's evident in the Qu'ran (and I have not used half of my verses) and in the Hadith's and in Mohammeds personal life. It is a very violent religion, the self defense arguement if no good anymore.

As far as
>the Muslim world seeing America as the aggressor, it goes
>further than Hollywood and pop culture. Are you aware of
>our years of involvement in the Middle east? Of the U.S.
>not only influencing through its exports (which to me is
>only a small part of the equation) but being directly
>envolved with keeping corrupt leaders in Muslim countries,
>financially supporting countries who openly oppose Muslims
>and Arabs alike? Nice try yourself.

Response: Yeah but you are attacking america and I am not defending all what americal does. That's no arguement to me, like I said Islam use of the words self defense are infinite. That is a bad arguement.
>My Response: And what here don't you get? God commands one
>to fight and stand up for oneself and defend the religion,
>even though one may dislike it.

Response: The words "stand up for yourself" are not in the verse. You are reading into the text.

That mankind, men, human
>beings may dislike a thing that is good for them and love
>something that is bad. God knows when man knows nothing.
>What about this don't you get? Americans in the military
>who go to fight the wars for this country I'm sure aren't
>just a bunch of trigger happy kids, but actually are going
>to defend their country, defend their freedom (or that's the
>pitch anyways) so what's the difference here. C'mon now
>man, pick you fights a little better than that.

Response; The problem is that you are attacking america, and not defending the Qu'ran. Two wrongs don't make a right.
>>My Response Again: And? It's not saying, "Muslims, do
>nothing but fight! War is the only way!" These verses are
>speaking specifically about fighting for Islam. That
>doesn't mean that this is what the whole religion is all
>about. Islam is a complete way of life, so obviously this
>would be one of the other topics covered. You make it sound
>as if this is all the Qur'an talks about. The Qur'an covers
>much, much more than this my friend. Your argument is
>loosing its steam. I'm not understanding your point.

Response: Well, you have not defending islam( I don't think anybody can) all you have done is said we are "defending ourselves" and "america is not so good." Thats not an arguement that is ducking the premise, you offer no context of the passage itself.
>

>
>Source please.

Response: I believe "Life of Mohammed" by Guilluame published by Oxford University around 1955.
>
>Again, provide a source. I wasn't aware that Muslims
>stomped through Africa forcing people to believe. Speak to
>some Somali Muslims and ask them how Islam came into East
>Africa.

Response: You never heard of how islam spread? whoa I thought that was common knowledge, I'd have to find you a source on that one.
>
>
>Tell me how Muslims were treated in non Muslim lands. Tell
>me how Jews were treated and how Christians were treated in
>other lands then compare it to how they were treated in
>Muslims lands. There were many, many years of coexistence
>in Muslim lands. Remember Spain? How were Christians and
>Jews treated there by Muslims before the Muslims were
>murdered and expelled.

Response: You are drifting.
>
>Come better or don't come at all because your arguement goes
>nowhere.
>
Response: No, they are good. You guys have no answer. The typical "we are better than america/we are defending ourselves one is not very convincing." Come with some exegesis(interpretation) next time lets deal with the text itself.

>Response: Well, I am not trying to prove anything. My first post was saying that the more you look at Islam the worse it gets. Then someone told me to put up a sura proving my point. So I >did, then that lead to the topic of women in islam. And I was asked to put up another sura, so I did. So its up to you, you can debate either topic I don't mind.

well, i think that someone was me. and this is what i said:

>does anyone have passages from the quran supporting your
>argument whateva it might be?
>cause that could clear up a lot of misunderstandings and
>show who really knows and who's out there thinking.

by saying anybody i meant everybody that has a certain opinion/belief on what the quran says, no matter if you're a muslim or not.

again, i believe that there are too many people out there thinking what islam is and not really knowing.

the last couple of years folks tried to tell me all sorts of stuff about islam, from violent religion to anti-christs.
i've always been telling them that we all believe in the same god and we all want to go to the same place and our religions don't really differ that much if you look at the ''core message'', i.e. love/respect each other etc.

BUT i don't know, i'm thinking!
i haven't read enough in the quran to really join a debate on this. all i know is from my muslim friends and a few quotes from the quran.

for example i would like to more about this point that osoclasi brought up:

>But wait why don't we look in one of the hadiths.

>Volume 7, Book 62, Number 124:
>Narrated Usama:

>The Prophet said, "I stood at the gate of Paradise and saw that the majority of the people who entered it were the poor, while the wealthy were stopped at the gate (for the accounts). But the >companions of the Fire were ordered to be taken to the Fire. Then I stood at the gate of the Fire and saw that the majority of those who entered it were women."

i still would like a muslim to comment on this.


i know osoclasi knows his bible. some might argue that he is wrong on some interpretations but you can't really say that he has no knowledge of what he's talking about.
just look at some archived discussions we had on christianity.
i knew (or at least hoped) you'd give us your ''proof'' for your point from the quran. i mean your first post was almost begging for further elaboration ;-)

sadly no one really followed your example and REALLY started to build.
i always hear muslims say islam is about peace and love but nobody backed it off with Allah's or Mohammed's words.
bashing any religion should be a no no here but at the same time what's the point in saying ''what do you want to tell me about my religion?'' or ''who are you to school me on islam?''.
if you know better, then please get the facts out there.

it's probably unfair. maybe we are all just music lovers stuck in the wrong forum.

>
>well, i think that someone was me. and this is what i said:

Response: yeah that was you. hey how it going?
>
>the last couple of years folks tried to tell me all sorts of
>stuff about islam, from violent religion to anti-christs.
>i've always been telling them that we all believe in the
>same god and we all want to go to the same place and our
>religions don't really differ that much if you look at the
>''core message'', i.e. love/respect each other etc.

Response: thats just it, the God of Christianity and the God of the Quran are not the same. Hey try this, find at three verses in the Quran that says that Allah loves mankind. You are going to be hard pressed, their are not many at all.
>
>BUT i don't know, i'm thinking!
>i haven't read enough in the quran to really join a debate
>on this. all i know is from my muslim friends and a few
>quotes from the quran.

Response: Well, don't take your friends words or my words look for yourself. Don't be afraid to ask the tough questions.
>
>>i still would like a muslim to comment on this.

Response: Me too. Its been two days now.
>
>sadly no one really followed your example and REALLY started
>to build.
>i always hear muslims say islam is about peace and love but
>nobody backed it off with Allah's or Mohammed's words.
>bashing any religion should be a no no here but at the same
>time what's the point in saying ''what do you want to tell
>me about my religion?'' or ''who are you to school me on
>islam?''.
>if you know better, then please get the facts out there.

Response: Here is something else that I have been sitting on.

Hadith AL-Bukhari vol 4,124:

Allah's apostle said " I have been ordered to fight with the people till they say, " None has the right to be worshipped but Allah,' and whoever says,'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah,' his life and property will be saved by me..."

Kind of hard to draw self defense from that.

or in the same hadith vol 9,45 says:

Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.
Now, thats something to think about.

>>....when was that Surah revealed?
>
>Response: I believe 7 years after the previous sura. It is
>dealing with life under the new ummat.

wrong...........

> What was the situation
>>between Prophet Muhammad and the Meccans at that point in
>>history?
>
>Response: Same as it always was, not very good. They were
>having a hard time keeping treaties.

prove it...they never broke a treaty.....which one? at tabari would disagree and he has the longes volumes on islamic history.....but then again you were there....

> If you don't know, then really you are in no
>>position to interepret the Qur'an. If you didn't know, the
>>Qur'an is not one big collection of thoughts and sayings
>>compiled as a do's and don't manual for Muslims. Some parts
>>of the Qur'an were revealed because of a certain issue that
>>was of concern at the time. I really don't expect
>>non-muslims to understand the Qur'an when they can't even
>>understand their own holy books,
>
>Response: That's odd I don't see any verse that limits
>muslims from not doing this today. I don't see any verse
>that restricts this to a specific time period or anything.
>And according to orthodox islam the Qur'anic commands are
>universal and thus applicable for all times and places.

and so it is...but like vanilla ice cream with alot of topping choices...you dont have to choose them all...and actually, you would be strange if you ordered vanilla ice cream with rootbeer, and chocolate sprinkles, with hot sauce, and hog gravy.

>
> but I just want to say that
>>every english translation you see of the Qur'an isn't going
>>to explain the essence of Islam for you or to you. It goes
>>so much deeper than that.
>
>Response: Yep, same muslim arguement. I know I know, the
>real Qu'ran is in arabic. Yeah sure.

quran means to recite or recitation....tell me oh monkey boy, how could it be recited in english if the languages arent related? in fact since you have an islam bias..ask someone who speaks hebrew how well it translates into english and you will hear that about 40 percent of the meaning is lost. (i used to live in crown heights....)

>>Really, the English tranliteration is just that. It isn't
>>even the Qur'an in the literal sense. The only Qur'an that
>>is the Qur'an is that of the Arabic tongue. The Qur'an has
>>some words that there aren't any english equivilant, so when
>>you try to interpret the Qur'an and the religion of Islam
>>based on you already fallible translation or
>>tranliteration, you fail, therefore its not even worth
>>trying to fight or discredit Islam or the Qur'an because
>>your info is faulty. Ask a Muslim. Ask an Imam. Beware of
>>your own judgement and intelligence or that of the media,
>>because in the end you will be wrong.
>
>Response: Yep,same ole muslim arugement. By the way feel
>free to translate it correctly for me.

same old kafr arguement.....instead of reaching past his own nafs...he revels in them like swine in mud....

> Well how bout this
>
>" Allah's apostle said, " I have been ordered to fight with
>the people till they say.'None has the right to be
>worshipped but Allah,' and whoever says,'None has the right
>to be worshipped but Allah,'his life and property will be
>saved by me." Al-Bukhari, vol 4.
>
>ouch

after badr....that was the call, take it out of context but bush said n. corea is part of the axis of evil....guess that means coreans are related to satan....

meanwhile that hadith deals with the fact that the emuslims were under attack...and because of that the property and blood of your enemy is halal for you....you know..like eibn ladens blood is halal for your tax dollars:)...and innocent children in iraq are being helped everyday with bombs from your tax dollars:)...meanwhile your bigggest issue is the fact that during war people arent allowed to say "the enemy will pay"...the example is the sunnah which shows how he did it....ill give you an example...how many people died when the muslims conquered mecca?.......................ill give you a hint........its less than 1.

how many muslims killed any jews after they were betrayed by their neighbors in the battle of uhud (they broke the treaty)....ill help you....you seem a little slow..none

you take things out of context if you wish.......but the whole internet is watching you become a larger fool post by post...even the worst of the islam haters on this board have some understanding of islam...you are completely defunct of any knowledge...in fact anything you find seems to be from some rabid-xtian-white-racist-group-anti-islam-site. for you i wish you the best in your hope to use your cold dame prmote corner of the internet to debunk 1400 (and then some)years of history......you fail to recognize the power of amana:)

and thats what makes you a fool...a body w/o need of a ruh...no nur......twisted aql....may allah have mercy on you:)

>wrong...........

Response: I notice you did not correct me. does that mean you don't know yourself?? But wait I have a source. What does Yusif say?

" Logically this sura follows up the arguement of the last sura (VIII) and indeed may be considered a part of it, although chronologically the two are seperated by an interval of seven years."
>
>
>prove it...they never broke a treaty.....which one? at
>tabari would disagree and he has the longes volumes on
>islamic history.....but then again you were there....

Response: That is what the sura is about. Look at this:

" (But the treaties are) not disolved with those pagans with whom Ye have alliance and who have not subsequently failed you in aught, Nor aided any one against you. So fufil your engagements with them to the end of the term: for God loveth the righteous."

Then it really gets good.

But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleager them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem of war. But if they repent..." Sura 9:4-5

I never said the muslims broke the treaty, the enemies did.

>and so it is...but like vanilla ice cream with alot of
>topping choices...you dont have to choose them all...and
>actually, you would be strange if you ordered vanilla ice
>cream with rootbeer, and chocolate sprinkles, with hot
>sauce, and hog gravy.

Response: What are you talking about?

>quran means to recite or recitation....tell me oh monkey
>boy, how could it be recited in english if the languages
>arent related? in fact since you have an islam bias..ask
>someone who speaks hebrew how well it translates into
>english and you will hear that about 40 percent of the
>meaning is lost. (i used to live in crown heights....)

Response: Well for your info this monkey boy is studing bibical Hebrew right now. And it translates pretty well. I use a BHS (biblia hebraica stuttgartensia) bible.

>same old kafr arguement.....instead of reaching past his own
>nafs...he revels in them like swine in mud....

Response: Oh you shut me up with that one.
>
>
>after badr....that was the call, take it out of context but
>bush said n. corea is part of the axis of evil....guess that
>means coreans are related to satan....

Response: Oh boy.
>
>meanwhile that hadith deals with the fact that the emuslims
>were under attack...and because of that the property and
>blood of your enemy is halal for you....you know..like eibn
>ladens blood is halal for your tax dollars:)...and innocent
>children in iraq are being helped everyday with bombs from
>your tax dollars:)...meanwhile your bigggest issue is the
>fact that during war people arent allowed to say "the enemy
>will pay"...the example is the sunnah which shows how he did
>it....ill give you an example...how many people died when
>the muslims conquered mecca?.......................ill give
>you a hint........its less than 1.

Response: yeah but how many jews died during the islamic conquest? I give you a hint more than 1.
>
>how many muslims killed any jews after they were betrayed by
>their neighbors in the battle of uhud (they broke the
>treaty)....ill help you....you seem a little slow..none

Response: So how do you explain what happen to Ibnu'l-Ashraf. Oh wait he was the one jew.
>
>you take things out of context if you wish.......but the
>whole internet is watching you become a larger fool post by
>post...even the worst of the islam haters on this board have
>some understanding of islam...you are completely defunct of
>any knowledge...in fact anything you find seems to be from
>some rabid-xtian-white-racist-group-anti-islam-site. for you
>i wish you the best in your hope to use your cold dame
>prmote corner of the internet to debunk 1400 (and then
>some)years of history......you fail to recognize the power
>of amana:)

Response: Translation. Maybe if I say the whole internet disagrees with him, then maybe that will distract him long enough for me to find a better arguement than he is taking those clear verses out of context.
>
>and thats what makes you a fool...a body w/o need of a
>ruh...no nur......twisted aql....may allah have mercy on
>you:)

Response: Translation: And if I keep calling him names maybe he will get frustrated and stop picking on me.

seperated by an interval of seven years doesnt mean revealed 7 years later......very few surahs were revealed in totality.....and most of them are in juz 30.......so there i did answer your question....but now i am entertaining you....


and yusef ali's commentary is not the best.....look at ibn ata'allah or ibn kathir......yusef ali was a translator and his commentary is akin to saying that the king james version of the bible is the best one.........not by a longshot.

its funny, you say that you are taking it easy on "us" ignorant muslims....so my question to you is this............why is you weakest effort so weak? i say pump up your kufur to level 10..(i would rather you dont, but the sunnah of being a kafir is the more you loose, the more straws you clutch..its in the quran, you should know this)....if you are proud of being a kafir (and not just someone who doesnt want to be muslim, thats just a nonmuslim, a kafiir is who fights it).....trust me you havent scared us yet.....so dont be scurrd...um ummmmm, dont be scurrd....

>seperated by an interval of seven years doesnt mean revealed
>7 years later......very few surahs were revealed in
>totality.....and most of them are in juz 30.......so there i
>did answer your question....but now i am entertaining
>you....

Response: does not matter. I don't have to be right about that one. He just asked so I gave an answer. does not make me any difference what so ever.
>
>
>and yusef ali's commentary is not the best.....look at ibn
>ata'allah or ibn kathir......yusef ali was a translator and
>his commentary is akin to saying that the king james version
>of the bible is the best one.........not by a longshot.

Response: Thats fine.
>
>its funny, you say that you are taking it easy on "us"
>ignorant muslims....so my question to you is
>this............why is you weakest effort so weak?

Response: Well, I am trying to be nice here. I have not even begun. I don't think you are justified in calling my arguement weak with answers like beat really means hit. LOL


i say
>pump up your kufur to level 10..(i would rather you dont,
>but the sunnah of being a kafir is the more you loose, the
>more straws you clutch..its in the quran, you should know
>this)....if you are proud of being a kafir (and not just
>someone who doesnt want to be muslim, thats just a
>nonmuslim, a kafiir is who fights it).....trust me you
>havent scared us yet.....so dont be scurrd...um ummmmm, dont
>be scurrd....

Response: Would you like for me to post something against islam??

I can attack 1)islamic monotheism (a God's absolute unity b) voluntarism c) agnosticism d fatalism d) philosophically.

2)mohammed a) divine call b) supposed miracles c)his morals imperfections

.3) the quran a) statis of women b) erros c)unique literary style d)prophesies e)unity f)scientific accuracy g)contridictions h) and finally violence.

So if you want me too start a post and we can debate let me know.

I for one would be VERY interested in such a debate. And in turn would could also debate/discuss not argue on Christian subjects on Christian theology such as the status of women, the authenticity of the Bible, the geneology of Jesus/Isa (RA), the "sonship" of god throughout the Bible, the alteration of the teachings of Nabi Isa (RA), the "results" of Christianity (since "terrorism" and other ills seen in some Muslim populated countries done by Muslims are attached so to the religion of Islam) or whatever it is that you'd want to debate. This would be both very informative and fun, I accept your challenge! The ball is in your court playa'!
---------------------------(*)---------------------------
Ramadan Mubarak!

Do you want it to be just me and you.(if they let us do that here) Or do you want me to write a post and let every body join in?

Do you want a word limit. Say 1500 for opening statements, 1000 for rebuttals, 500 for closing arguements? Or do you not care about all this?

Do you want me to go first with the opening argument, then you rebuttal, I go third and you go last? Or would you rather have the opening arguement?

I probably would lean more towards debating the deity of Christ and the realibility of scriptures. (which include Jesus's teachings.)

And really quick. What do you mean by "sonship" of God throughout the bible? Are you saying that Jesus was not the Son of God, or are you saying that there are other sons of God.

Also after this debate are you interested in defending islam??

>Do you want it to be just me and you.(if they let us do that
>here) Or do you want me to write a post and let every body
>join in?
We could have it be between us primarily but since this is okayplayer, I don't think that's going to happen completely.

>Do you want a word limit. Say 1500 for opening statements,
>1000 for rebuttals, 500 for closing arguements? Or do you
>not care about all this

This part I don't care about

>Do you want me to go first with the opening argument, then
>you rebuttal, I go third and you go last? Or would you
>rather have the opening arguement?

I'd have to say go ahead. We could begin another post.

>I probably would lean more towards debating the deity of
>Christ and the realibility of scriptures. (which include
>Jesus's teachings.)
>
>And really quick. What do you mean by "sonship" of God
>throughout the bible? Are you saying that Jesus was not the
>Son of God, or are you saying that there are other sons of
>God.

Both actually. I'm denying the sonship of Jesus and I'm also implying that others were called son's of god before Jesus (RA)
>Also after this debate are you interested in defending
>islam??

And always! I'll defend Islam till there's no breathe left in me to defend with.
---------------------------(*)---------------------------
Ramadan Mubarak!

>We could have it be between us primarily but since this is
>okayplayer, I don't think that's going to happen completely.

Response: Sounds good. I have class tonight and it does not end until 9:50 PM. So I will either write up an arguement tonight when I get back. Or tomorrow after work. I will title it Christian/Muslim debate pt 1, the only question that I have (in order to be accurate) is that when you say 'son of God' you mean that Jesus himself is not God?

So this debate would be me defending the deity of Christ correct? IF it is then I will post something pretty soon then. Also are we just using the bible?
>
>This part I don't care about

Response: Thats fine.
>
>I'd have to say go ahead. We could begin another post.

Response: Ok, I should have something up no later than Wed evening, or maybe as early as tonight. (depending on how tired I am after class.)
>
>Both actually. I'm denying the sonship of Jesus and I'm
>also implying that others were called son's of god before
>Jesus (RA)

Response: And by sonship you mean 'deity' correct?

>And always! I'll defend Islam till there's no breathe left
>in me to defend with.

Response: Ok, I will attack islam next debate. And if the above questions are accurate then I will get started on the debate.

>Response: Sounds good. I have class tonight and it does not
>end until 9:50 PM. So I will either write up an arguement
>tonight when I get back. Or tomorrow after work. I will
>title it Christian/Muslim debate pt 1, the only question
>that I have (in order to be accurate) is that when you say
>'son of God' you mean that Jesus himself is not God?

Cool! When I say "Son of God" I mean it in the traditional sense of a son in which the words are used. And yes, I am saying that not only is Jesus not the "son" of God, but he is definately not god. But insha allah we shall speak about that tommorow! :)

>So this debate would be me defending the deity of Christ
>correct? IF it is then I will post something pretty soon
>then. Also are we just using the bible?

I wouldn't say that this would be about you defending the "deity of Christ (RA), but your belief in him being a deity. We don't have to use the Bible, we could use any source that is an authentic source.

>Response: Ok, I should have something up no later than Wed
>evening, or maybe as early as tonight. (depending on how
>tired I am after class.)

Cool! This should be very interesting and informative. I look forward to it.

>>Both actually. I'm denying the sonship of Jesus and I'm
>>also implying that others were called son's of god before
>>Jesus (RA)
>
>Response: And by sonship you mean 'deity' correct?

By sonship I mean an actual son, next of kin of God.

>
>Response: Ok, I will attack islam next debate. And if the
>above questions are accurate then I will get started on the
>debate.

Well come on with it!

---------------------------(*)---------------------------
Ramadan Mubarak!

then u should know that christians and jews are also "people of the book"

so where's that leave you?

sheesh...

_____________________________
hey...who's gonna buy me for christmas??

i wanna channel words like
whoopi channeled ghosts
break nouns, verbs and concepts
like mongolian equestrians
break horses
and ride across mental deserts
with deceptively easy beauty
(c) lesley anne m. 2002

>then u should know that christians and jews are also "people
>of the book"
>
>so where's that leave you?

Response: Oh I already know that me and islam don't get along

Not to sound like an a$$hole, but did a Muslim beat you up when you were a kid or what? What's your beef with Islam because obviously you have some sort of hostility towards Islam.
---------------------------(*)---------------------------
Ramadan Mubarak!

>Not to sound like an a$$hole, but did a Muslim beat you up
>when you were a kid or what? What's your beef with Islam
>because obviously you have some sort of hostility towards
>Islam.

Response: no, i never got beat up or anything. And no I am not on some sort of vigilante trip against islam. I just have a lot of arguements against it that I have been sitting on for about 2 years. And they have been accumilating, so I decided to use some of them.

I mean think about it, I have been on this site for about 2 years and I have never put up a single post against islam. That should tell you something. Most of the time I just defend Christianity.

you seem to have pretty extensive knowledge on these things.

so all i'm saying is (okayummah feel free to correct me if i'm wrong on this), you ought to know better than to say muslims are sworn against YOU vs. other "unbelievers"

the bible and torah are considered different degrees of the same revelation. hell, the bible stories and the stories of the koran are the same--in some cases virtually verbatim. i've read enough of both at this point to see that much.

so you ARE a "person of the book" as far as a REAL muslim is concerned. i can't speak for the extremists. "true" unbelievers appear to fall under pagans, polytheists, atheists, etc.


_____________________________
hey...who's gonna buy me for christmas??

i wanna channel words like
whoopi channeled ghosts
break nouns, verbs and concepts
like mongolian equestrians
break horses
and ride across mental deserts
with deceptively easy beauty
(c) lesley anne m. 2002

>you seem to have pretty extensive knowledge on these things.

Response: I try.
>
>so all i'm saying is (okayummah feel free to correct me if
>i'm wrong on this), you ought to know better than to say
>muslims are sworn against YOU vs. other "unbelievers"

Response: did you read the verse?
>
>the bible and torah are considered different degrees of the
>same revelation. hell, the bible stories and the stories of
>the koran are the same--in some cases virtually verbatim.
>i've read enough of both at this point to see that much.

Response: Actually I did a paper on the different stories in the Qur'an and Bible. They are quite different, me personally think that Mohammed plagerized them and got some of his facts twisted,but hey thats an opionion.
>
>so you ARE a "person of the book" as far as a REAL muslim is
>concerned. i can't speak for the extremists. "true"
>unbelievers appear to fall under pagans, polytheists,
>atheists, etc.

Response: Read the verse again.
>
>

and you can see in Surah 2:62, "surely those who believe, and those who are Jews and the Christians, and the Sabians, whoever believes in Allah and the Last day and does good, they shall have their reward from their Lord, and there is no fear for them, nor shall they grieve."

also, Surah 2:87 "And most certainly We gave Musa the Book and We sent apostles after him one after another..."


and what part of the stories of adam (surah 2), noah (surah 10 and others), or joseph and his brothers (surah 11) is sooooo different from the bible that they are completely erroneous?? i'm not claiming that ALL the stories are the same. just that some of the key ones are, and that it illustrates the companionship of the two books & how the 2 religions can be seen as parts of a whole.


_____________________________
hey...who's gonna buy me for christmas??

i wanna channel words like
whoopi channeled ghosts
break nouns, verbs and concepts
like mongolian equestrians
break horses
and ride across mental deserts
with deceptively easy beauty
(c) lesley anne m. 2002

>and you can see in Surah 2:62, "surely those who believe,
>and those who are Jews and the Christians, and the Sabians,
>whoever believes in Allah and the Last day and does good,
>they shall have their reward from their Lord, and there is
>no fear for them, nor shall they grieve."
>
>also, Surah 2:87 "And most certainly We gave Musa the Book
>and We sent apostles after him one after another..."

Response: Yeah, I got a theory to that. I think from my research that Mohammed changed after he got an army, his later surahs reflect a different attitude towards jews and Christians.

for instance: "They do blaspheme who say God is Christ the son of Mary." (thats me) But said Christ: O children of Israel! Worship God, my lord and your Lord." Whoever joins other gods with God- God will forbid him the Garden, and the FIRE WILL BE HIS ABODE. There will for the wrong-doers be no one to help. sura 5:72.

yep its curtains for me. :)
>
>
>and what part of the stories of adam (surah 2)

Response: Well in the story of Adam, they were not even on earth they were someplace else. Allah forgave them of their sins. Hence no need for a messiah, and Adam was created higher than angels.

, noah (surah
>10 and others),

Response: Well in Noah's case one of his sons turns rebellious and dies. Hence who are the table of nations.

i'm not claiming that ALL the stories are the
>same. just that some of the key ones are, and that it
>illustrates the companionship of the two books & how the 2
>religions can be seen as parts of a whole.

Response: No not at all, because like I said. No original sin, no messiah. Therefore the two can never be harmonized, seeing that I believe in the trinity will send me to hell. I am not looking to go to an isalmic study section any time soon.
>

>

true jews whorship god....and true (old) christians were jews who believed jesus was the messiah (anointed king of israel...not some demi-god-man/lizard/super-hero/tax attorney)

so when it says true believing it doesnt mean whose who worship jesus more than others...and look at the order of the surahs and the circumstances youll know that your theory is slso wrong......he married a jew, the emperor of ethiopia was an ally 9so much so that he told his companions to "respect the blood of the abasynians because thier blood courses through our veins").....look up the ad and the thamud...and youll see that they believe that their decendents are african (in our complexes we still dont concider egypt & ethiopia part of africa) and semitic......even after that, lets name some countries where under muslim rule others were given freedom to practice their religion (including the case umar made when he entered jerusalem (who was under roman rule, and they went to jerusalem to weaken the romans (byzintines actually..the the arabic word for "europeans" was "rum" or rome) and avoid attack, egypt was the same case because the classical dynasties were all but gone..with the exception of some of sopdets peoples in the south....cairo was gone....

india (who's name comes from hindus, or "people from the indus river valey, not a religion...its like saying african is a religion) the moguls allowed them to worship snakes, rats, saddata, whatever...

xian china.....kubli khan made no mass conversions...bhuddists also flurished under the khans (a popular pakistani and afghani name to this day)...so much so they made no efforts (nonwithhstanding the actions of some guy named bob, i cant account for every individual...i am not their keeper)

andalousia (spain)...700 years of islam, 400 of xtianity (xtian from "x"mas...true christians were devout jews who believed in the messiah...others who can be up for concideration were the coptics...though now there is almost no difference with them and rome......almost...remember this is the islamic world view...some people believe they age god and stuff like that...and in theiir world if this is functional...then this life for them is successfull (depending on their yardstick)..the muslims were invited in by alfonso x (not x like in malcom x but the tenth)..he was having some fueds and needed the mercenary skills of the ummayads (from the banu ummayah, a clan of the quaresh, who were the keepers of the black stone of abraham....before islam, remember the arabs didnt like muhammad (saw) either...they told him they would let hum rule arabia if he would shutup about the whole allah 1 god thing (although the quaresh worshipped allah (not alat..that was the moon-god of the tamimi...who was destroyed when muhammad (saw)entered mecca)...they didnt want allah to to be the sole god because the other tribes payed good money to have their hajj (which was a curruption of how the meccans believed their city was formed..the whole ishmael thing, and the muslims tell the other side of the story about when haagar (abrahams mate..the egyptian, not the arab egyptian either..and no she wasnt greek like cleo)...was left and had to find water for her son, then she was helped by a tribe who lived there..and found water...the well of zam zam...and the black stone was passed from ishmael to the native tribe via his children...eventually (because last names in the arab tradition was done via the fathers first name..osama's father's name is laden.....or it may be a famous member of his family when they europeanized the method..they also use towns, and trade now...like abu hamid al ghazzali is "father of the praised/praiser, the weaver)...just letting you know this so you dont feel that muslims were some rabid group of dummiez who sprang up out the dessert to undermine xtianity....(remember when it says in your bible that ishmael would be given a covenant also, and his progeny would be more that the foam of the sea....i dont need that to believe, but it is you "holy" book)

i am tired, so i am not going to mention how the turks choose islam because they were a weaker tribe..and they convered on their own....or the hausa who faced a similar sitation..or how umar chose not to pray in the church in jerusalem because he was afraid the muslims in later generations would turn it into a mosque (masjid...ma (place) sajid (prostration))..funny enough today this masjid shares a wall with the same church cause umar and his men prayed outside...or how andalousia was one of the only places in europe to not have the plague, because of cleaner practices (strategic gardens, running water, sewers etc)....or how the direct like of scholors who uised the sankore institute (setup from the riches of a FEMALE west african merchant) in the ciity of timbuktu mali....or how the murabitun (moors) stopped the ummayads in spain when they became corrupt.....but i think this post is way off topic...the point was that women are abused..and WE DO OURSELVES TO BELIEVE THAT ISLAM IS THE PROJECTOOR OF ABUSE DIRECTED TOWARDS WOMEN...

YOU ASKED IF AN AYAT ABOUT HITTING WOMEN MEANT TO BEAT THHEM IIF YOU FELT LIKE IT, AND YOU WERE TOLD NO...from muslims...who live their religion....you dont.

you asked if islam is a proponent of beating women, you were told no..its a provision made to insure that if and when a woman commits a crime that the punishment is to be whipped, strangers dont carry out the punishment...weather you agree that males or females should be hit for crimes in any society is your problem.....i have a problem with locking up people for stealing food...but they do it here..and that that....

beatiing in islam is not restricted to women...if women were all spared for crimes that required beating....imagine what i would do...i would send my wife out on crime sprees...and because 1400 years the technology wasnt available to make medium security prisons the wnd result would be women rampaginig around commiting crimes.....the other end of it is if a stranger was allowed to whip your wife, that would lead to perversions in the law, and society.....every tiime soomeone felt they wanted to look at some womans butt...they would do theiir dardest to get them in trouble.....

there is law, and then there is execution of the law......women arent beaten every day enmasse...ask them, say does you husband hit you? the answer ranged from 'dat nuggah wouldnt dare"..to "no, that is the extreme limit"..you tend to forget that men that are muslim that beat women, would be men that arent muslim that beat women...spousal abuse like child abuse, or substance abuse has less to do with "you know hindus smoke ganja religously so they have a higher incidence of coke snorting"...ga-bige....women in islam are forgiven moreover than men are...check the statistics for the hadud in arab countries annd you would find that more men are executed that women, even for crimes such infidelity......or rather OPEN SLUTTY (MEN AND WOMEN) INFILELITY..

when you find a gem, you just roll with it......it confirms you prejudice....so therefore you like it...when you hear the good...you blank it out.......so using the same method proposed above, if you were white, you would have been one of those who say "niggers get most of the handouts and they are the worst people ever" and the like statements.........if you are happy being christian, or like yet setshengo (whateva, no disrespect...i just cant spell your name) or kola boof...i feel kola boofs struggle..and i understand her vision (sorta)..but being a "revolutionary" with shock appeal iisnt going to make you but a supernova....you can enjoy your limited fame till the scene gets tired of you and changes to the new generation of what they feel like hearing......you voice needs to be heard...true..cause i would be lying if i said muslim men never abuse their wives, drink fernandez vat 19 rum, smoke oppium, blow up buildings..and everything else under the sun that is part of the HUMAN CONDITION.....remember japanese kamakazes were bhuddists and shinto(ists?)...religion has nothing to doo with terror.....america dropped a bomb on the japanese in the claim that by killing civilians they would save the lives of their soilders.....like soilders arent in it to kill and die (or get a gi build and buy a car..you choose)....too address abuse it needs to be addressed in the scale that it is...a human problem..cause if we scapgoat accoording to our biases..we are just riding the wave..and the REAL PROBLEM OF SPOUSAL ABUSE NEVER GETS SOLVED.........

>so as an example, are all Catholic priests molesters? Are
>all Baptist preachers womanizers, opportunists and people
>who take advantage of the congregation? No. So the same
>with Islam. 1 bad apple or a few bad apples can appear to
>spoil the bunch, but it don't. Ya'll are really sad if you
>would blame a whole religion or group of people for the
>actions, beliefs and words of others. Ya'll just as bad as
>white people that say that all black people are either on
>drugs, selling drugs, on welfare or in jail. Shame!
>---------------------------(*)---------------------------
>Ramadan Mubarak!


Yes, well said!

So many ppl say shit about some religion but they don't even know shit about it... if u dont know the truth then u don't have the right to be hating on anyone who's from that religion... thats just stupid.

.

look let me tell u all some things again!!!


1. female circumcision is not a Islamic thing
thats a cultural thing

since in the Quran its says not to alter Allahs creations in anyway not to even fix gaps in teeth let alone cut shtttuff off!!


2. whoever it was that put the Surah about disobedient woman & to beat them

read more & if u did pos the rest of it not only what is convenient to your point
it says to beat them with what a tooth brush i believe & to be as heavy handed as a feather
really its sayin if nothing else works u need to go head & leave that broad alone & give her none & u cant be tryin to knock her out cuz shes a female & u got to be gentle with her!


Islam is a lifestyle for some a religion for others

but to both it is a quest for PEACE

Jesus loved all the children & Muhammad taught them to fear no one but ALLAH

if they dont want to listen & want to fear there husbands & fathers
& that brother that say he Imam or a shikh thats their problem


Allah will put no burden upon u that u cannot bear


& dre is right this is not only a "muslim" thing its just so happened she is a muslim ITS more cultural.

This is what happens when state & religion mix

u dont know what is culture & what is religion if u are just a blind follower

u mix them

& those governments use this to there advantage

when they need it they put in affect Islamic law


three ways to get something: (1) by trading, (2) by receiving a gift (from love or friendship), or (3) by force ("do what I want or I'll shoot you"). Honest, peaceful people operate in the first two ways. Criminals and the state operate by force, aggression, coercion.

>2. whoever it was that put the Surah about disobedient woman
>& to beat them

Response: Um, that would be me.
>
>read more & if u did pos the rest of it not only what is
>convenient to your point
>it says to beat them with what a tooth brush i believe & to
>be as heavy handed as a feather

Response: Tooth brush?? are you sure bout that??

>really its sayin if nothing else works u need to go head &
>leave that broad alone & give her none & u cant be tryin to
>knock her out cuz shes a female & u got to be gentle with
>her!

Response: Well, lucky for us I have a Qu'ran right here. (flip/flip)Ah here it is... well let me add more than last time.

"Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because God has given the one more than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obediant, and guard in absence what God would have them to guard.As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first),(next), refuse to share their beds,(and last) beat them; but if they return to obediance, seek not against them means of annoyance..."

I don't see anything about a tooth brush. Hmm well lucky for me I have another translation sitting right here. Well lets look at that one. (flip/flip)

"Men have authority over women because God has made the one superior to the other, and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obediant. They guard their unseen parts because God has guarded them. As for those whom you fear disobediance, admonish them, forsake them in beds apart, AND BEAT THEM. Then if they obey you, take no futher action against them...

But wait why don't we look in one of the hadiths.

Volume 7, Book 62, Number 124:
Narrated Usama:

The Prophet said, "I stood at the gate of Paradise and saw that the majority of the people who entered it were the poor, while the wealthy were stopped at the gate (for the accounts). But the companions of the Fire were ordered to be taken to the Fire. Then I stood at the gate of the Fire and saw that the majority of those who entered it were women."

I don't see any tooth brushes here either. Oh well maybe its in the arabic.

"I don't see any tooth brushes here either. Oh well maybe its in the arabic."

**ouch**

You are suppose to teach love not bash anyone's beliefs!

My jesus save you.

>
>**ouch**
>
>You are suppose to teach love not bash anyone's beliefs!

Response: Yeah, I know, but my beleifs are always getting bashed.

But you're right two wrongs don't make a right. So I will lighten it up a little.

Like so many ppl said before, the genital thing is an ancient African thing (I believe it was practiced in Ancient Egypt too), and now a days, barely no one does it anymore (I'm Somali I know), it only went on because ppl were holding on the their pre-Islamic practices, and many learnt Somali Muslim leaders are speaking out against it.
And to, that Christian dude on the board trying his best to taint Islam, and to all others, know this man, what you and anyone else have against Islam will not change the fact that is Islam will continue to grow, thanks to ppl like your Christian brethern BUSH, is only getting stronger, now that the true Muslims (some of the defenders on this board including) are taking their faith more seriously (how can you not, with all this anti-Islamic ish out there), and all the fake ppl who never really had faith, like that Dutch Somali women are being exposed to the Ummah for what she is. We are some peaceful peeps, but this magnifying glass on the Islamic world needs to stop, how you gonna group ISLAMIC practices and CULTURAL or SINFUL practices (because Muslim do sin, when did we claim we were perfect). ISLAM IS PERFECT, MUSLIMS ARE NOT. THERE I SAID IT.

Peace.

>
> And to, that Christian dude on the board trying his best to
>taint Islam,

Response: That would be me. And for the record I am not trying my hardest by any means. I am actually being polite. And holding back the majority of my arguements.

> We are some peaceful peeps, but this magnifying glass on
>the Islamic world needs to stop, how you gonna group ISLAMIC
>practices and CULTURAL or SINFUL practices (because Muslim
>do sin, when did we claim we were perfect). ISLAM IS
>PERFECT, MUSLIMS ARE NOT. THERE I SAID IT.

Response: Oh one does not need a magnifying glass to see through islam.

just a blind eye.........

of your faith!?

dont ever question mine u ill equipped


its in the Maulana Muhammad Ali
translation

toothbrush=miswak

u think cuz u read a chapter or 2 u know my nature better than i do...

keep it movin






three ways to get something: (1) by trading, (2) by receiving a gift (from love or friendship), or (3) by force ("do what I want or I'll shoot you"). Honest, peaceful people operate in the first two ways. Criminals and the state operate by force, aggression, coercion.

>of your faith!?

Response: I don't care whether or not you do or don't. Feel free I might be a little tougher than you give me credit for.

>dont ever question mine u ill equipped

Response: Hmm, more name calling. That must be hadd or something.
>
>
>its in the Maulana Muhammad Ali
>translation
>
>toothbrush=miswak

Response: Like I figured its in the arabic. Right wink, wink. Funny neither Yusif Ali's nor Penquin classic show tooth brush hmm, maybe they don't know arabic. Oh well.
>
>u think cuz u read a chapter or 2 u know my nature better
>than i do...

Response: A chapter or 2?? Actually I read three chapters. So nah take that.

>>of your faith!?
>
>Response: I don't care whether or not you do or don't. Feel
>free I might be a little tougher than you give me credit
>for.

why would i?? to each there own...RIGHT??


>>dont ever question mine u ill equipped
>
>Response: Hmm, more name calling. That must be hadd or
>something.


thats name callin & here i though i was bein nice *shrugs*


>>its in the Maulana Muhammad Ali
>>translation
>>
>>toothbrush=miswak
>
>Response: Like I figured its in the arabic. Right wink,
>wink.

dont get ya other eye poked out or do u blink when u think u winkin??? :P

Funny neither Yusif Ali's nor Penquin classic show
>tooth brush hmm, maybe they don't know arabic. Oh well.
>>

Well maybe they got violent tendencys,but the Prophet said a good man dont need to chastise his wife anyways




>>u think cuz u read a chapter or 2 u know my nature better
>>than i do...
>
>Response: A chapter or 2?? Actually I read three chapters.
>So nah take that.

ohhh well i feel stupid now...i guess !??



Hey if u really dont know something about Islam u dont have to make it up!Ask me & i promise not to sugar coat it & answer u to the best of my knowledge...& i might answer u in ya inbox if its to brutal :P


three ways to get something: (1) by trading, (2) by receiving a gift (from love or friendship), or (3) by force ("do what I want or I'll shoot you"). Honest, peaceful people operate in the first two ways. Criminals and the state operate by force, aggression, coercion.

make a brother get spiteful, do some reading up on the bible and pick it apart, quoting for it what I WOULD LIKE, and saying "bible says this, and that". DUDE, you're Christian right, WORK ON THAT, 'cause i KNOW FROM YOUR ATTACKS (yes attacks, anytime any ish about Islam comes up, you have negative ish to say) you AIN'T much of a good one. Why waste time reading the Quran to try to dis Islam, when honestly dude you ain't open to what the Quran says, that defeats the purpose, you like Christianty, work on THAT.

peace,

maybe you right brother, but what does that say about your faith though?

How in the world did you guys come to that conclusion?? Calling me insecure is a bit of a stretch. I have been on the site for about 2 years and never put up a post dedicated to attacking islam. I could if I chose,but you guys would probably come up with all types of weird conclusions about me then. Sounds to me like someone is out of arugements.

.

and this is no offence to the xitans here...take it with a grain of salt........bismillah

you bible says...

Humans were created after the other animals. (1:25-27)

and

The first man and woman were created simultaneously. (1:27)

Humans were created before the other animals. (2:18-19)

The man was created first, then the animals, then the woman from the man's rib. (2:18-22)

did they read this stuff b4 they made it up?

Gen.4:4
"And the Lord had respect unto Abel."

and

Rom.2:11
"For there is no respect of persons with God."

me and abel are hurt.....that wasnt cool..


next..................

1 Jn.4:9
"God sent his only begotten son into the world."

Job 1:6
"The sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them

whoa....your god must be a playa....and a liar.

next.................

Acts 26:23
"That Christ should suffer, and that he should be the first that should rise from the dead.

Kg.13:21
"And it came to pass, as they were burying a man, that, behold, they spied a band of men; and they cast the man into the sepulchre of Elisha: and when the man was let down, and touched the bones of Elisha, he revived, and stood up on his feet."

man......but i thought jesus was first? but kings says he wasnt...while after acts says he was....

next.......

Acts 10:36
"The word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ."

Lk.12:51
"Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division: For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law."

he is the word of peace....nah dog, i aint bout that peace at all...matter of fact if you aint got a sword...sell your shirt to get one :)


next..................

Jn.20:19-24
Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you.... But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came.

10

Mt.28:16
"Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them. And when they saw him, they worshipped him."

11

1 Cor.15:5
"And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve."

nah 12 baby, 12.......yeah...


next.............

Acts 2:22
"Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know."

oh yeah!!!!??

Mk.8:12
"And he sighed deeply in his spirit, and saith, Why doth this generation seek after a sign? verily I say unto you, There shall no sign be given unto this generation."

lol, make up your mind.....i had a friend named jesus...and he had the same problem as this jesus dude........whoever he is.

Pr.20:1
"Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging: and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise."

aye aye captain!!

1 Tim.5:23
"Drink no longer water, but use a little wine for thy stomach's sake."

Ps.104:15
"Wine that maketh glad the heart of man."

but, but, but you just said.......maaaan

i got alot more where that came from.....lets play, shall we? :)

the bible?? Before I answer the below contridictions I think it is important to see what the Qur'an says:

Sura Baqara 2:136 points out that their is no difference between the scriptures which preceded and those of the Qur'an saying. ".. the revelation given to us... and Jesus... we make no difference between one and another of them. Sura Nissa 4:136 says "... Believe... and the scripture which He sent before him. Sura Ma-ida 5:68 says " People of the book! stand fast by the law, the gospel, and all revelation that hath come to you from Your Lord. It is the revelation that has come to thee from Thy Lord.

Now on to the contridictions.

>
>Humans were created after the other animals. (1:25-27)
>
>and
>
>The first man and woman were created simultaneously. (1:27)
>
>Humans were created before the other animals. (2:18-19)
>
>The man was created first, then the animals, then the woman
>from the man's rib. (2:18-22)
>
>did they read this stuff b4 they made it up?

Response: The problem with this arguement is that you are assuming that Gen 2 is intended to be a creation account. Gen 1 mentions the creation of man as the last of a series, and without many details, whereas Gen 2 man is the center of interest and more specific details are given about him and his setting.Gen 2 is built upon the foundation of Chpt 1 and represents itself no different tradition than the first chapter or discepant account of the order of creation. Many near eastern nations did this in their stories, they would tell a story one way then tell it agian in more detail.

My turn:

Does Allah lead astray?

Sura 35:8 " Allah leaves stray whom He wills and guides whom He wills.

Or man:
" It was not Allah who wronged them, but they wronged their own souls.

>
>Gen.4:4
>"And the Lord had respect unto Abel."
>
>and
>
>Rom.2:11
>"For there is no respect of persons with God."

Response: Before using these arguements it might be helpful to look at another translation. NASB(one of my favorites)

Rom 2:11 "For there is no PARTIALITY with God." In otherwords from the context of that passage, there is no difference between jews and gentiles. Look at verse 10 " to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For there is no..." Gen and Romans are argueing two entirely different points. Genesis is saying that God is pleased with Abels sacrifice.

MY TURN:

Evil and Good where do they come from?

4:78 " If some good befalls them, they say " This is from Allah". But if evil, they say " This is from thee (O Prophet). Say: " All things are from Allah..."

4:79 " Whatever good, (O Man!) happens to thee, is from Allah. But whatever evil happens to thee, is from thyself.

>>1 Jn.4:9
>"God sent his only begotten son into the world."
>
>Job 1:6
>"The sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord,
>and Satan came also among them

Response: Plural verses singular. Bene elolohim is pluaral Ben Elohim is singular. Angels, humans etc are never called son (singular) of God they are always sons (plural) of God.

My Turn

What was man created from, blood, clay, dust, or nothing?

"Created man, out of a (mere) clot of congealed blood," (96:2).
"We created man from sounding clay, from mud moulded into shape, (15:26).
"The similitude of Jesus before Allah is as that of Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him: "Be". And he was," (3:59).
"But does not man call to mind that We created him before out of nothing?" (19:67, Yusuf Ali). Also, 52:35).
"He has created man from a sperm-drop; and behold this same (man) becomes an open disputer! (16:4).

>
>next.................
>
>Acts 26:23
>"That Christ should suffer, and that he should be the first
>that should rise from the dead.
>
>Kg.13:21
>"And it came to pass, as they were burying a man, that,
>behold, they spied a band of men; and they cast the man into
>the sepulchre of Elisha: and when the man was let down, and
>touched the bones of Elisha, he revived, and stood up on his
>feet."

Response: But you need to check the context inwhich Paul was speaking. When Paul says that Christ is the first be raised from the dead he is speaking in the sense that Christ is the first to be raised to never die again. This is clearly pointed out in other Pauline letters like for instance in Rom 8:29 Paul calls Christ the firstborn among many brothers, what is he saying? Christ is the first person to die and to be raised and to never die again just like we will. Also check 1 Cor 15:23.


My turn:

The first Muslim was Muhammad? Abraham? Jacob? Moses?

"And I am commanded to be the first of those who bow to Allah in Islam," (39:12).

"When Moses came to the place appointed by Us, and his Lord addressed him, He said: "O my Lord! show (Thyself) to me, that I may look upon thee." Allah said: "By no means canst thou see Me (direct); But look upon the mount; if it abide in its place, then shalt thou see Me." When his Lord manifested His glory on the Mount, He made it as dust. And Moses fell down in a swoon. When he recovered his senses he said: "Glory be to Thee! to Thee I turn in repentance, and I am the first to believe." (7:143).

"And this was the legacy that Abraham left to his sons, and so did Jacob; "Oh my sons! Allah hath chosen the Faith for you; then die not except in the Faith of Islam," (2:132).

>
>next.......
>
>Acts 10:36
>"The word which God sent unto the children of Israel,
>preaching peace by Jesus Christ."
>
>Lk.12:51
>"Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell
>you, Nay; but rather division: For from henceforth there
>shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and
>two against three. The father shall be divided against the
>son, and the son against the father; the mother against the
>daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in
>law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law
>against her mother in law."

Response: Actually Acts and Luke are using the word peace in different context. In Acts Peter is addressing gentiles, the type of peace that he is talking about is peace between God and man. Man needs to be reconciled with God, the jews thought only they were reconiled, here peter is telling Gentiles that they too are reconciled with God. In Luke I think it is helpful to compare the same verse to that of Matthew in order to get the full context of what Jesus is saying. He says in verse 37 "He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he who loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy..." So whats he saying? That there is a choice that one has to make between God and everything else that you love. If a person loves his mother more than God something is wrong especially if that mother is an unbeliever then that family will divide. Because you are no longer loyal to your family you are loyal to God.

I will answer the rest on another post before this gets too long.

why play the same games they play

to them theirs
& 2 us ours


three ways to get something: (1) by trading, (2) by receiving a gift (from love or friendship), or (3) by force ("do what I want or I'll shoot you"). Honest, peaceful people operate in the first two ways. Criminals and the state operate by force, aggression, coercion.

>Jn.20:19-24
>Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the
>week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were
>assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the
>midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you.... But
>Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them
>when Jesus came.
>
>10
>
>Mt.28:16
>"Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a
>mountain where Jesus had appointed them. And when they saw
>him, they worshipped him."
>
>11
>
>1 Cor.15:5
>"And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve."

Response: One of the 12 is just another name to refer to the original apostles. Even though Judas had died. The 11 apostles are also used in Luke 24:9,33 Acts 1:26. This is used when it gets more specific, one of the 12 is just a generic way of saying apostles thats all.

My Turn: Here is a general question.

Why Allah telling Satan to bow down before Adam (7:12-18) when in Islam such a worshipful gesture is due only to God?


>next.............
>
>Acts 2:22
>"Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a
>man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and
>signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye
>yourselves also know."
>
>oh yeah!!!!??
>
>Mk.8:12
>"And he sighed deeply in his spirit, and saith, Why doth
>this generation seek after a sign? verily I say unto you,
>There shall no sign be given unto this generation."

Response: Again, this is different context inwhich Peter was speaking. Peter is tellng the jews in Acts 2 that all of those signs and wonders Jesus did were to prove his ministry. In other words they proved that he was the messiah and by his miracles the jews should have been able to see that. In Mk, what does Jesus mean when he says 'this generation'. He meant the generation of unbelievers who wanted him to perform signs and wonders knowing full well who he was. So Jesus knowing their hearts refused to do a sign for them (unbelievers) and walked away.

My Turn

Does Allah forgive or not forgive those who worship false gods?

Allah forgiveth not that partners should be set up with Him; but He forgiveth anything else, to whom He pleaseth; to set up partners with Allah is to devise a sin Most heinous indeed," (4:48). Also 4:116

The people of the Book ask thee to cause a book to descend to them from heaven: Indeed they asked Moses for an even greater (miracle), for they said: "Show us Allah in public," but they were dazed for their presumption, with thunder and lightning. Yet they worshipped the calf even after clear signs had come to them; even so we forgave them; and gave Moses manifest proofs of authority," (4:153).


>Pr.20:1
>"Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging: and whosoever is
>deceived thereby is not wise."
>
>aye aye captain!!
>
>1 Tim.5:23
>"Drink no longer water, but use a little wine for thy
>stomach's sake."
>
>Ps.104:15
>"Wine that maketh glad the heart of man."

Response: First of all you are not interpreting proverbs in light of its genre. Proverbs 'meshallim' are figures of speech, parables, or special contrived sayings. Proverbs give good advice for wise approaches to certain aspects of life, but are not exhaustive in their coverage. In other words proverbs are good advice to live a Godly life style. Is it true that when a person drinks to much they look like idiots? Yes. And isn't it also true that when people celebrate something they use wine for the occasion? Yes. And can't wine also be used to treat aligments? Yes. All of these points to truths.

MY TURN:

Speaking of wine

Is wine consumption good or bad?
O ye who believe! Intoxicants and gambling, (dedication of) stones, and (divination by) arrows, are an abomination,- of Satan's handwork: eschew such (abomination), that ye may prosper," (5:90).

(Here is) a Parable of the Garden which the righteous are promised: in it are rivers of water incorruptible; rivers of milk of which the taste never changes; rivers of wine, a joy to those who drink; and rivers of honey pure and clear. In it there are for them all kinds of fruits; and Grace from their Lord. (Can those in such Bliss) be compared to such as shall dwell for ever in the Fire, and be given, to drink, boiling water, so that it cuts up their bowels (to pieces)?" (47:15).

Truly the Righteous will be in Bliss: On Thrones (of Dignity) will they command a sight (of all things): Thou wilt recognize in their faces the beaming brightness of Bliss. Their thirst will be slaked with Pure Wine sealed," (83:22-25).

i got alot more where that came from.....lets play, shall
>we? :)

Response: Whenever you are ready. You might want to start another post however.

get my jesus piece ready I want diamonds encrusted in his crown& hold a pew for me on sunday...

I mean is that what u tryin to do here!!???

u tryin save somebody or something

u silly listen to LEXM

that preacher man got u scattered all that holier than thou talk is so u put another dollar in the collection plate so he can chrome out is new caddy

sad really

three ways to get something: (1) by trading, (2) by receiving a gift (from love or friendship), or (3) by force ("do what I want or I'll shoot you"). Honest, peaceful people operate in the first two ways. Criminals and the state operate by force, aggression, coercion.

>Response: One of the 12 is just another name to refer to the
>original apostles. Even though Judas had died. The 11
>apostles are also used in Luke 24:9,33 Acts 1:26. This is
>used when it gets more specific, one of the 12 is just a
>generic way of saying apostles thats all.


so 11 means 12 now like 1 means 3? i didnt do so well in math..only lvl 2 regents...so help a brovah out....

>My Turn: Here is a general question.

>Why Allah telling Satan to bow down before Adam (7:12-18)
>when in Islam such a worshipful gesture is due only to God?

you assume so...but all that is in the heavens prostrate to man....all is here under our care...all postrated to adam because adam is the crown of allah's creation...and we are his "children"...according to classical commentary (not yusef ali..nothing against him..but the further you are away from the source the more chance for error) all worship allah, and follow his commands...allah tells all to subject itself (not worship..worship is more than prostrating...if that was the case..we muslims worship the black stone..intention is the elixr as the sufis say. murder vs self defence) man, as a command from who they worship.....and man worships allah (in theory) because allah also says in the quran:

2.34 And behold, We said to the angels: "Bow down to Adam" and they bowed down. Not so Iblis: he refused and was haughty: he was of those who reject Faith.

the bowing down happens with trees (we cut them, make paper), the animals (they for the most part stay away from us like they were commanded, xcept those we domesticated), cars (put in gas and go)...etc..we have a responsibility to allah beyond just sajda (prostration0..we shouldnt practice scorched earth tatics..we should do things like plant trees, not practice usary...etc...but some worship money, women, men, etc....even those who prostrate:)

iblis (the cheif of the shaytans)...didnt want to because he figured he was better....sorta like jealousy because allah chose walking dirt over his "smokeless fire" (light perhaps?)

>Response: Again, this is different context inwhich Peter was
>speaking. Peter is tellng the jews in Acts 2 that all of
>those signs and wonders Jesus did were to prove his
>ministry. In other words they proved that he was the messiah
>and by his miracles the jews should have been able to see
>that. In Mk, what does Jesus mean when he says 'this
>generation'. He meant the generation of unbelievers who
>wanted him to perform signs and wonders knowing full well
>who he was. So Jesus knowing their hearts refused to do a
>sign for them (unbelievers) and walked away.

so did he or didnt he leave a sign (i know isa did, your hispanic jesus god dude to you maybe)....in acts which came after mark claim he did? who was right saul of tarsus, or mark?
dont slide over the question....one says yes and the other no....this is the holy (pure) bible..and if i put a cup of urine in a galon of koolaide...doesnt make it pure does it? and do these people let you know their intent....cause the muslims have hundreds of thousands of books with the intent and context of every statement made.....weather its on ma'arifat or usul...or weather it was mutawatir and applies to all of us in law...or weather it was a single narration and is just an example within a given context.....
>My Turn

cool

>Does Allah forgive or not forgive those who worship false
>gods?
>
>Allah forgiveth not that partners should be set up with Him;
>but He forgiveth anything else, to whom He pleaseth; to set
>up partners with Allah is to devise a sin Most heinous
>indeed," (4:48). Also 4:116
>
>The people of the Book ask thee to cause a book to descend
>to them from heaven: Indeed they asked Moses for an even
>greater (miracle), for they said: "Show us Allah in public,"
>but they were dazed for their presumption, with thunder and
>lightning. Yet they worshipped the calf even after clear
>signs had come to them; even so we forgave them; and gave
>Moses manifest proofs of authority," (4:153).


according to the scholors b4 us (ghazzali included)..tawaba (returning...turning around/repentence..like tawaf..the thing we do around the kaabaa) absolves any sin..if one was to die in a state of kufur (covering up/rejection...like kufs=socks..kufi="hat like thing") then shirk (polytheism) is unforgivable...allah gives us every second to change our ways and grants us alot of slack......see the context of the word forgiveth..meaning will not...allah is beyone time..so when the time comes for us to be forgiven on the day of deen (transaction/debt)...that wouldnt be absolved....in the moses case you can tell that was past tense...cause even from your bible stories you remember that allah did forgive them because they repented (made tawaba):)..its only too late when you die...catually on your death bed you still have a chance.....if you are sincere..allah's name isnt cruel (out of the 99 attributes he has)...but only allah can see ikhlas (khalas=enough, ikhlas sincerity..sincerity is enough)...even the "angels" (i hate that word...no such thing..but i wont confuse you with terms insha allah)

>Response: First of all you are not interpreting proverbs in
>light of its genre. Proverbs 'meshallim' are figures of
>speech, parables, or special contrived sayings. Proverbs
>give good advice for wise approaches to certain aspects of
>life, but are not exhaustive in their coverage. In other
>words proverbs are good advice to live a Godly life style.
>Is it true that when a person drinks to much they look like
>idiots? Yes. And isn't it also true that when people
>celebrate something they use wine for the occasion? Yes. And
>can't wine also be used to treat aligments? Yes. All of
>these points to truths.

soloman is touted to be the wisest king (of course to you behind you puerto rican/jewish friend jesus)...in your bible (and in the islamic tradition also..and the jewish tradition of course, because his sunnah was that of moses..although his religion (deen) was submission to 1 god...which is islam..all the messengers differ in sunnah only...they all worshiped iloh, illah, ya hwa, etc..or any other ancient peoples had for the main god/only god (main is via addition sorta like how muslims ignore the command from allah to HONOR THE WOMBS THAT BORE YOU!!..and smack up their moms..and abuse the honarable title of mother of their children..sad, but muslims arent immune to bad behavior..th quran isnt a shield...its a recitiation)..or those who had other traditions based on the fact of their circumstances that allah left them with (fitra...natural order..indians plant a tree when they kill one..bhuddists try to achieve a higher state of conciousness to avoid the tricks of this world...and they by allah's grace in what he told them to do will recieve this "eternal bliss" thing he promised for those who "do good"...but that doesnt absolve those who know better from doing better.....same goes for the "muslims"....
>MY TURN:
>
>Speaking of wine
>
>Is wine consumption good or bad?
>O ye who believe! Intoxicants and gambling, (dedication of)
>stones, and (divination by) arrows, are an abomination,- of
>Satan's handwork: eschew such (abomination), that ye may
>prosper," (5:90).
>
>(Here is) a Parable of the Garden which the righteous are
>promised: in it are rivers of water incorruptible; rivers of
>milk of which the taste never changes; rivers of wine, a joy
>to those who drink; and rivers of honey pure and clear. In
>it there are for them all kinds of fruits; and Grace from
>their Lord. (Can those in such Bliss) be compared to such as
>shall dwell for ever in the Fire, and be given, to drink,
>boiling water, so that it cuts up their bowels (to pieces)?"
>(47:15).
>
>Truly the Righteous will be in Bliss: On Thrones (of
>Dignity) will they command a sight (of all things): Thou
>wilt recognize in their faces the beaming brightness of
>Bliss. Their thirst will be slaked with Pure Wine sealed,"
>(83:22-25).

the parable of the muslim was given by one of the prophets companions to a fellow jewish citiizen after one jummah.....

this brother was returning from jummah on his beautiful horse...with his finest linens and great smells...he approached a jew who asked him if he was such and such (ibn hajr i believe, but i dont want to lie on him..any muslim who remembers please remind me...and may allah have mercy on you for that)..he looked at the man with his tar stained clothes, dingy appearance, and torn shoes and answered yes...the jew procieded to ask him if it wasnt his prophet who said (and i paraphrase..to not bore you).."this world is the prison of the believer, and the jennah (heaven...god i hate that word..no such place) of the disbeliever"...he said the muslim answered yes...so the jew asked him look at you in your fine clothes and me in my wrags, what prison are you in, and what heaven am i in?......the muslim pondered the question for a moment..then answered...when i think of the 5 prayers i must make a day, and the month i must fast from food and drink..and the laws i follow....i am in a prison...for me the goal is the next world....you, on the other hand have the freedom to do what you want...when you want in this world...only to have your prison in the next........

yes wine has good ualities (which allah says in the quran)..but here is not the place for that..its like drinking 40's at your neuro surgery internship......you can drink all the 40's you want when you retire...the sufis akin it to the kings property which he lets you have free reign over..but he says stay away from that sacred piece of land (haram litteraly means sacred).....you can have the whole forest..but stay from that acre...and of course man in is monkeylike nature goes for the acre and forgets the forest.....wine is fine in jannah...insha allah i would have earned it..
>
you left out a few of them....but thats ok...i dont like talking about this stuff much...and i do believe that this topic is being stretched...i hope you are sincere in your questions and i am not just wasting my time.....you dont have to become muslim...because (yasin 7-11)..basically says not everyone will...and thats the point...sometimes you have to live in a world with other people......people who arent like you..and in most cases respect if not agree with their view...hindus only reciently stopped having women jump on funeral fires...and bhuddists in thailand diverge from the teachings of saddata alot....(look it up, they almost arent)...but i think the point is this....matter of fact allah says it best in surah 109 ayat 6(ayat also means sign, and was the old word for stars...those stars seem scattered dont they...what if their was some order to their scattered appearance? that would be interesting).....good night...this post is too long..sorry

First of all you never responded to my other post. But hey I am a nice guy I still will respond to this one, even though you skipped my other aruguments.

>so 11 means 12 now like 1 means 3? i didnt do so well in
>math..only lvl 2 regents...so help a brovah out....

Response: No, that means that the apostles were refered to as the 12. That is another name for them.

>>itself (not worship..worship is more than prostrating...if
>that was the case..we muslims worship the black
>stone..intention is the elixr as the sufis say. murder vs
>self defence) man, as a command from who they
>worship.....and man worships allah (in theory) because allah
>also says in the quran:

Response: Well personally I think the whole black stone thing is kind of wierd, but hey thats just me. So I take it from this verse that man is higher on God's list than angels? That brings up another arguement then, (if you agree with this). Look at what Satan says:

" Then began Satan to whisper suggestions to them, bringing openly before there minds all their shame... He said ' Your Lord Only forbid you this tree, Lest you should become angels or such beings as live for ever. (sura 7:20-25)

Here's the problem. Why is Satan tempting man by promising him that he would be like angels or become immortal, when we already saw that man was created higher than angels, and why would man fear death when he was already pure and sinless?
>so did he or didnt he leave a sign (i know isa did, your
>hispanic jesus god dude to you maybe)....in acts which came
>after mark claim he did? who was right saul of tarsus, or
>mark?

Response: Actually its Peter talking not Paul. First of all Mark does not say that Jesus did not do miracles. Jesus did not do miracles for the unbeilevers from that time on. What Peter is referring to is the fact that Jesus did miracles period. (does not matter when). Those miracles that he did during his ministry pointed to him being the messiah.

>dont slide over the question....one says yes and the other
>no....this is the holy (pure) bible..

Response: You never read Mark within its context. Pharisees wanted him to do a miracle, Jesus declined. Thats all.

>>according to the scholors b4 us (ghazzali included)..tawaba
>(returning...turning around/repentence..like tawaf..the
>thing we do around the kaabaa) absolves any sin..if one was
>to die in a state of kufur (covering up/rejection...like
>kufs=socks..kufi="hat like thing") then shirk (polytheism)
>is unforgivable...allah gives us every second to change our
>ways and grants us alot of slack......see the context of the
>word forgiveth..meaning will not...allah is beyone time.


Response: Hold up. That is not what the passages says. It does not mention death nor does it mention a second chance. Where do the scholars get this from. Look at sura 4:116:

" God forgiveth not (the sin of) joining gods with Him; But he forgiveth whom he pleaseth other sins than this; one who joins other gods with God hath strayed far away."

Sorry Troll you are reading into the text here, you offer no intrepretation of the text itself.



....you, on the
>other hand have the freedom to do what you want...when you
>want in this world...only to have your prison in the
>next........

Response: Again, you are not dealing with the text.
>>>
>you left out a few of them....but thats ok...i dont like
>talking about this stuff much...and i do believe that this
>topic is being stretched...

Response: No, I responded to them all. They are up above look at " But the Quran says"

>First of all you never responded to my other post. But hey I
>am a nice guy I still will respond to this one, even though
>you skipped my other aruguments.

i cant follow all these posts...soon enough i am going to leave you with the trophy...i cant find them all...my bad

>>so 11 means 12 now like 1 means 3? i didnt do so well in
>>math..only lvl 2 regents...so help a brovah out....
>
>Response: No, that means that the apostles were refered to
>as the 12. That is another name for them.

never heard that....maybe you are reading into it...what about 10 or 11 or 12..not just 12 my friend...3 totaly different accounts......

i am not going to go into saul saying 1 to live and once to die..the resurection would be in the spirit..then jesus rising from the dead and had to disguise himself as a gardener...with mary magdlane (sp) "she supposed him to be the gardner...who seekest thou?.....i came to carry off (big heavy tall) jesus....woman, seekest the LIVING among the DEAD" what was jesus thinking? they will kill him again...and what spirit wants fish and bread with holes in his hands?

>>>itself (not worship..worship is more than prostrating...if
>>that was the case..we muslims worship the black
>>stone..intention is the elixr as the sufis say. murder vs
>>self defence) man, as a command from who they
>>worship.....and man worships allah (in theory) because allah
>>also says in the quran:
>
>Response: Well personally I think the whole black stone
>thing is kind of wierd, but hey thats just me. (abraham did it...the mispha? and the jews bowed before the stone alter during passover sacrifice...but then again you wouldnt do that...only jesus would....wwjd? he would be a jew) So I take it (cool....i take alot too)
>from this verse that man is higher on God's list than
>angels? That brings up another arguement then, (if you agree
>with this). Look at what Satan says:
>
>" Then began Satan to whisper suggestions to them, bringing
>openly before there minds all their shame... He said ' Your
>Lord Only forbid you this tree, Lest you should become
>angels or such beings as live for ever. (sura 7:20-25)

satan is lying.....astonishing huh? who woulda thunk it?

>Here's the problem. Why is Satan tempting man by promising
>him that he would be like angels or become immortal, when we
>already saw that man was created higher than angels, and why
>would man fear death when he was already pure and sinless?
>>so did he or didnt he leave a sign (i know isa did, your
>>hispanic jesus god dude to you maybe)....in acts which came
>>after mark claim he did? who was right saul of tarsus, or
>>mark?

satan is lying......i know its hard to believe...but he is.

>Response: Actually its Peter talking not Paul. First of all
>Mark does not say that Jesus did not do miracles. Jesus did
>not do miracles for the unbeilevers from that time on. What
>Peter is referring to is the fact that Jesus did miracles
>period. (does not matter when). Those miracles that he did
>during his ministry pointed to him being the messiah.

my bad...thats what i get for not going to church.

>>dont slide over the question....one says yes and the other
>>no....this is the holy (pure) bible..
>
>Response: You never read Mark within its context. Pharisees
>wanted him to do a miracle, Jesus declined. Thats all.

would you dare to read the quran in its context (and i did read mark in its context)? and iif so would you dear to get fiqh (understanding/law) in it? i think not....soooooowhy should i post all of mark? he said "this sinning generation gets no sign" its in context...now you shouldnt take it out....

>>>according to the scholors b4 us (ghazzali included)..tawaba
>>(returning...turning around/repentence..like tawaf..the
>>thing we do around the kaabaa) absolves any sin..if one was
>>to die in a state of kufur (covering up/rejection...like
>>kufs=socks..kufi="hat like thing") then shirk (polytheism)
>>is unforgivable...allah gives us every second to change our
>>ways and grants us alot of slack......see the context of the
>>word forgiveth..meaning will not...allah is beyone time.
>
>
>Response: Hold up. That is not what the passages says. It
>does not mention death nor does it mention a second chance.
>Where do the scholars get this from. Look at sura 4:116:

noooooooope...nowhere does it mention a second chance...fiqh my friend...fiqh...understanding what you read..reading comprehension.....shakespare would be studied in his context...so would twain..even sallenger....but you know...the quran doesnt deserve that does it? i am giving you the context as i have studied it...even before we get any understanding of arabic for the quran (not just how to order chicken wings in egypt)...we must understand fiqh...even if its in our language (check iyha ulum id deen by abu hamiid al ghazzali...good read...i think its in volume 1 or 3, i read them long ago...and still want ijazah in them..classical scholorship...looooooooooooooog from now..insha allah)...the point is to those who know, told others and wrote it down when they asked what each ayat meant...check ibn kathir or an easier tafsir (explaination) of the quran.....allah warns us on folloowing our conjecture..and that wasnt mine...that was the quuran the way the scholors and the companions of the messenger (saw) knew it....ill give you an example...

we commit shirk alllllllllllllllll day....muslims take tv as their god...sex...whateva...thats internal shirk...the shirk (polytheism...actually sharing/associating/adding)....the point is that allah says in the quran at the end of ayats of warning "wa allahu al-gafur ar-rahim" or "and allah is the oft-forgiging most compassionate" (the word rahim is from the word rham, or womb...the mothers womb is a mercy to civilazation or the ummah...from umm, mother)..but allah tells us that his mercy covers his rath..and promises to have mercy on all of us (even those who get burned alive, they will never see the "fire" in "hell" (whateva...no such place as "hell" but i dont want to confuse you..thats why translations are poor because they cater to converts with lay-terms for actual different concepts)....regardless allah also says in the tense and mentions in other places in the quran that he forgives all...but warns us about dying in a state of shirk...the sufis warn about hidden shirk...because whats in, must come out...so the muslim is worried about open shirk...the mumin is worried about hidden shirk, and the muhsin doesnt even know we are still here......ihsan is something ill try not to discuss...but ill wet you pallet...they say "die b4 you die".......

>" God forgiveth not (the sin of) joining gods with Him; But
>he forgiveth whom he pleaseth other sins than this; one who
>joins other gods with God hath strayed far away."
>
>Sorry Troll you are reading into the text here, you offer no
>intrepretation of the text itself.

once again not me...thats the way the tafsir explaiins it...without fiqh...the ayats (signs/stars) are just a bunch of scattered nonsense...but not so to an astronomer (or an astrologer as a mattter of fact).....check the charts...they explaiin whats said......plus, this stuff s basic...you are discussing usul here usul is the most basic islaic science all new muslims must learn....it covers who allah is (not ta man in the sky on a chair)...then it asks who were the messengers..and what allah expects of us....why he did this...etc...a good book on it is the begining of the risala if ibn abi zayid....its easy and deals with things on "our" level///if you think you advanced in it...check the hikam of ibn ata'allah....or meaning of man by sayiidi ali al jamal....uthman ibn fodio covers some of it iin a great book called tariq al jannah....thats if you want to really fiind real advanced ways to diss islam....cause this stuff is simple....so simple the ppeople who i know that reads it (and are muslim)...finds it halarious....cause its what i should be teaching a kid at age 8..before he/she is responsible to pray (puberty...the onset of adulthood)
>
>
>....you, on the
>>other hand have the freedom to do what you want...when you
>>want in this world...only to have your prison in the
>>next........
>
>Response: Again, you are not dealing with the text.

yes it is.......readiing comprehension.....but then again i admit i am a troll, and i can be confusing at times...sorry if i am.....astagafurallah.......

>>you left out a few of them....but thats ok...i dont like
>>talking about this stuff much...and i do believe that this
>>topic is being stretched...
>
>Response: No, I responded to them all. They are up above
>look at " But the Quran says"

oh, i once again said i am leaving this long thing soon (should have a long time ago...just fiigured your questions were becoming genuine...not so you would become muslim....but so you can understand soomethhing more than your shell (and same goes for me or any others who treck on thiis pile of internet fodder)

look, you win........say what you want...you have anything important to say...pm me...wanna trash islam...join the club, nothing you say is new......the problem is that those who dont live it....sometimes never "get it". but once again sorry for my crazy woords in the begining....i find it funny to flame.....not personal..but this is the internet...and my name is reflective the fact that on message boards....we are all trolls...all we do is pimp point of views..with no consessions for the fact that someone else feels different.....ill say that i dont like republicans (or democrats)..but reading expertise gloating on their win is something for me to stay away from....read that thing...nothing by opinion pimping.....and funny enough...i am guilty of that here....i hate these things (which is why i never joined the boards in 2000)...untill i came up with the idea to become a pimp for the underdawg.....like me..or better yet, anyone who says something..i just try to give another spin.(under the bridge is lurking, my wife was more frequent ton these boards back in the day...like 3 months ago..lol)..so my flaming is not personal to you.......smile, you still alive....ii think ill join in on the tech boards...cause this side is getting llama (lamer) by the minute...and i do nothing to help that............smile, you still alive......

later............may come backk when i see the old stuff people used to post...interesting stuff...nuff wit hthe adjenda pimping.

ps...you win.

>
>ps...you win.

Response: Ok, I will talk to you again later. Peace. (extending hand shake). No hard feelings, I enjoyed our debate.

:)

shakes hand and says heheheheheh sukahhhhhhhhhhh!!!

nah i am bugging, its been fun........see you around. (insha allah)

this is another reason why i love okplayer.

we're spreading the word about another voice of the voiceless and the vampires that bleed them for what they're worth.

women get shit on by men of all faiths and if it were always up to many of these sick men, that foot would stay on their necks.




"I'm never hesistant to say-
fuck the president!!"
-Akil, J5


www.summerproleague.com/highlights.html

"Friend, you have a .45 automatic on your lap. I've got a 35-millimeter camera on mine-- and I feel my weapon is more powerful than yours."
-Gordon Parks to Black Panther David Hilliard, 1969

>>women get shit on by men of all faiths and if it were always
>up to many of these sick men, that foot would stay on their
>necks.