-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
A
Some more of that Muslim tolerance the Democrats keeps insisting is good for us and "makes us all stronger": Masked gunmen attack 'during morning prayers' at Kenya's Garissa University | Daily Mail Online
"Up to 150 killed in Kenyan university massacre following al-Shabaab Easter Week raid: Terrorists ‘behead’ Christian students in worst attack in country in 17 years."
If you were a Christian, you were executed on the spot.
"Up to 150 killed in Kenyan university massacre following al-Shabaab Easter Week raid: Terrorists ‘behead’ Christian students in worst attack in country in 17 years."
If you were a Christian, you were executed on the spot.
L
Abu Bakr, father of aisha, the first rightly guided caliph (according to sunni belief), who start the apostasy war (Harb al-ridda) (i.e. killing the apostates, since on the time muhammad died, many who had been converted to islam by fear and threat, tried to leave islam as soon as they know that muhammad died).
Umar ibn Al-Khattab, the second caliph. It was actually Umar who said that no two religions can exist in the peninsula of arab. But then he invented the term 'dhimma' (protected person), as an available option for Christians and Jews who are willing to pay huge fine called jizya (as stipulated in Quran Sura at Tauba aya 29). So your reference to Syrian Christians, do not cover all what Umar has thought on them. Since you may not read (or intentionally hide) the Pact of Omar, i'll post it here:
1 We shall not build, in our cities or in their neighborhood, new monasteries, Churches, convents, or monks' cells, nor shall we repair, by day or by night, such of them as fall in ruins or are situated in the quarters of the Muslims.
2 We shall keep our gates wide open for passersby and travelers. We shall give board and lodging to all Muslims who pass our way for three days.
3 We shall not give shelter in our churches or in our dwellings to any spy, nor bide him from the Muslims.
4 We shall not teach the Qur'an to our children. It is forbidden to touch the Qur'an.
5 We shall not manifest our religion publicly nor convert anyone to it. We shall not prevent any of our kin from entering Islam if they wish it.
6 We shall show respect toward the Muslims, and we shall rise from our seats when they wish to sit.
7 We shall not seek to resemble the Muslims by imitating any of their garments, the qalansuwa, the turban, footwear, or the parting of the hair. We shall not speak as they do, nor shall we adopt their kunyas.
8 We shall not mount on saddles, nor shall we gird swords nor bear any kind of arms nor carry them on our- persons.
9 We shall not engrave Arabic inscriptions on our seals.
10 We shall not sell fermented drinks.
11 We shall clip the fronts of our heads.
12 We shall always dress in the same way wherever we may be, and we shall bind the zunar round our waists.
13 We shall not display our crosses or our books in the roads or markets of the Muslims. We shall use only clappers in our churches very softly. We shall not raise our voices when following our dead. We shall not show lights on any of the roads of the Muslims or in their markets. We shall not bury our dead near the Muslims.
14 We shall not take slaves who have beenallotted to Muslims.
15 We shall not build houses overtopping the houses of the Muslims.
16 (When I brought the letter to Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, he added, "We shall not strike a Muslim.")
17 We accept these conditions for ourselves and for the people of our community, and in return we receive safe-conduct.
18 If we in any way violate these undertakings for which we ourselves stand surety, we forfeit our covenant [dhimma], and we become liable to the penalties for contumacy and sedition.
19 They shall not buy anyone made prisoner by the Muslims, and
20 Whoever strikes a Muslim with deliberate intent shall forfeit the protection of this pact.
Do you still think middle east need people like Abu Bakr and Umar Ibn Al-Khattab?
Umar ibn Al-Khattab, the second caliph. It was actually Umar who said that no two religions can exist in the peninsula of arab. But then he invented the term 'dhimma' (protected person), as an available option for Christians and Jews who are willing to pay huge fine called jizya (as stipulated in Quran Sura at Tauba aya 29). So your reference to Syrian Christians, do not cover all what Umar has thought on them. Since you may not read (or intentionally hide) the Pact of Omar, i'll post it here:
1 We shall not build, in our cities or in their neighborhood, new monasteries, Churches, convents, or monks' cells, nor shall we repair, by day or by night, such of them as fall in ruins or are situated in the quarters of the Muslims.
2 We shall keep our gates wide open for passersby and travelers. We shall give board and lodging to all Muslims who pass our way for three days.
3 We shall not give shelter in our churches or in our dwellings to any spy, nor bide him from the Muslims.
4 We shall not teach the Qur'an to our children. It is forbidden to touch the Qur'an.
5 We shall not manifest our religion publicly nor convert anyone to it. We shall not prevent any of our kin from entering Islam if they wish it.
6 We shall show respect toward the Muslims, and we shall rise from our seats when they wish to sit.
7 We shall not seek to resemble the Muslims by imitating any of their garments, the qalansuwa, the turban, footwear, or the parting of the hair. We shall not speak as they do, nor shall we adopt their kunyas.
8 We shall not mount on saddles, nor shall we gird swords nor bear any kind of arms nor carry them on our- persons.
9 We shall not engrave Arabic inscriptions on our seals.
10 We shall not sell fermented drinks.
11 We shall clip the fronts of our heads.
12 We shall always dress in the same way wherever we may be, and we shall bind the zunar round our waists.
13 We shall not display our crosses or our books in the roads or markets of the Muslims. We shall use only clappers in our churches very softly. We shall not raise our voices when following our dead. We shall not show lights on any of the roads of the Muslims or in their markets. We shall not bury our dead near the Muslims.
14 We shall not take slaves who have beenallotted to Muslims.
15 We shall not build houses overtopping the houses of the Muslims.
16 (When I brought the letter to Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, he added, "We shall not strike a Muslim.")
17 We accept these conditions for ourselves and for the people of our community, and in return we receive safe-conduct.
18 If we in any way violate these undertakings for which we ourselves stand surety, we forfeit our covenant [dhimma], and we become liable to the penalties for contumacy and sedition.
19 They shall not buy anyone made prisoner by the Muslims, and
20 Whoever strikes a Muslim with deliberate intent shall forfeit the protection of this pact.
Do you still think middle east need people like Abu Bakr and Umar Ibn Al-Khattab?
A
Ageofknowledge's pact with Islam:
I shall boldly proclaim the Christian worldview unapologetically.
I shall boldly speak against the false religious system of Islam.
I shall boldly defend my life and the lives of all genuine Christians.
I shall seek, within jurisprudence and scriptural principles, to legitimately influence my government to accomplish all of the above.
If anyone has a complaint with respect to this, please complete this form and PM it to me.
I shall boldly proclaim the Christian worldview unapologetically.
I shall boldly speak against the false religious system of Islam.
I shall boldly defend my life and the lives of all genuine Christians.
I shall seek, within jurisprudence and scriptural principles, to legitimately influence my government to accomplish all of the above.
If anyone has a complaint with respect to this, please complete this form and PM it to me.
A
To say that Islam is, is to resort to using essentialism. What you are now doing is essentialising Islam to be this or to be that. Ascribing a set of attributes which are necessary to Islam's identity and function. Sir, Islam is everything and then some more, no less than Christianity is and no less than Judaism is and every ism is! Now you can use the "why" question if you wish, and I'd be happy to inform you that Islam is people, and people have been created by God with all different attributes intrinsically built. So yes, you have the evil (as your title have suggested), and you have the generous and kind, the good and the bad. This goes for all religions and non religions.
To say why such and such a thing is evil or not, you must have done some extensive studies on the subject yes? I can't think of anything worse than evil. After what I've written above, are you now ascribing evilness to all Muslims or only some? What is your criteria for good and evil Sir? Judge not, that ye be not judged...
Have a great day.
To say why such and such a thing is evil or not, you must have done some extensive studies on the subject yes? I can't think of anything worse than evil. After what I've written above, are you now ascribing evilness to all Muslims or only some? What is your criteria for good and evil Sir? Judge not, that ye be not judged...
Have a great day.
L
I suppose that you are a muslim, sir? Why do muslims can't differentiate 'islam' and 'muslims'?
The OP himself never a word wrote 'muslim' in any of his posts in this thread.
And that was well put, Islam is based on Allah's word (the quran) and sunna of muhammad (hadith and sira' rasullullah).
As a muslim, you should have known all of the above, do you?
The OP himself never a word wrote 'muslim' in any of his posts in this thread.
And that was well put, Islam is based on Allah's word (the quran) and sunna of muhammad (hadith and sira' rasullullah).
As a muslim, you should have known all of the above, do you?
A
Exactly. We're not dealing with an unknown here nor something that cannot be known. Simply put, Islam is a monotheistic false religion articulated in an epistemological body of documentation that originated from what is today Saudi Arabia in the seventh century as a result of a disaffected young man named Muhammad, who had been rejected for leadership by his tribe's elders, fabricating fanciful inventions in a cave he retreated to (much like the cult leader Joseph Smith did later in 19th century America) upon which he posed as an apostle of God to garner power subsequently filling his life with sexual immorality (twelve marriages, sex with a child, sex with slaves, sex with concubines, and rapes), human slavery, and wanton violence. Both in word and deed, Muhammad was a false apostle and false prophet.
Later, his followers engaged in like behaviors on a much grander scale including the enslavement of 150 million Africans with tens of millions of the males castrated, the genocide of India in which 80 million Hindus were murdered, the invasion and plundering of Europe, etc...
Of the world's "great religions," Islam is the most sexually immoral and violent that's teachings, which are articulated in a clearly defined body of Islamic epistemology, contradict the very character of Holy Creator God, His eternal spiritual kingdom, and the mission of Jesus Christ.
Later, his followers engaged in like behaviors on a much grander scale including the enslavement of 150 million Africans with tens of millions of the males castrated, the genocide of India in which 80 million Hindus were murdered, the invasion and plundering of Europe, etc...
Of the world's "great religions," Islam is the most sexually immoral and violent that's teachings, which are articulated in a clearly defined body of Islamic epistemology, contradict the very character of Holy Creator God, His eternal spiritual kingdom, and the mission of Jesus Christ.
Oh my gosh, are you serious? It's not Muslims that are 'bad' or evil, it is the Islamic religion, which just happens to incorporate Muslims, the Race. Saying the Muslims love fully, just like CHRISTIANS has nothing to do with the actions of mohamed and his history of torture and evil to his own race. I can't figure out why anyone would want to glorify mohamed, knowing this. How shallow can muslims be if they allow islam to dictate their lives.
A
Hahaha...., thanks for that mate, precisely the point I was making 
! In other words, to say Islam is, would be to make no distinction between Islam and its followers, who as I've already stated, are made up of good and bad Muslims.
I was against the proposition that detracts from the main issue here, which is the essentialising of Islam, (or Christianity for that matter), you would be implicitly implicating by saying that you (Islam/Christianity etc.), you are dangerous by definition. I say no, you would need to take a step back and realise that we in Christianity, Islam, and Judaism etc. are dangerous by our actions and not by our definitions, or the essentialising of our faith.
Can’t you see how dangerous this dogmatic view is? It’s basically a form of reductionism, where we simply brand the totality of a particular thing (faith) to its mere essences. We go from rightly saying that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts, to essentially saying that the sum of its parts is greater than the whole. No different than someone standing so close his nose is touching the canvas, complaining what is the fuss all about, until a person suggests he takes a few steps back, to which the complainant would more than likely remark with: “oh, now I see what the fuss is all about, now that’s a remarkable (or terrible) painting…!” as the case may be.
I'm very much aware of that fact sir, hence I copy pasted the title and only the tile of the OP, since that's where the thrust of my disagreement was. Incase you're wondering where I got "Muslim" from if the OP didn't write it. I got it by making explicit what was implicitly suggested by the OP..., a message hidden behind the veil if you like which I thought would be better revealed and brought to the surface for all to reflect upon.
! In other words, to say Islam is, would be to make no distinction between Islam and its followers, who as I've already stated, are made up of good and bad Muslims.I was against the proposition that detracts from the main issue here, which is the essentialising of Islam, (or Christianity for that matter), you would be implicitly implicating by saying that you (Islam/Christianity etc.), you are dangerous by definition. I say no, you would need to take a step back and realise that we in Christianity, Islam, and Judaism etc. are dangerous by our actions and not by our definitions, or the essentialising of our faith.
Can’t you see how dangerous this dogmatic view is? It’s basically a form of reductionism, where we simply brand the totality of a particular thing (faith) to its mere essences. We go from rightly saying that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts, to essentially saying that the sum of its parts is greater than the whole. No different than someone standing so close his nose is touching the canvas, complaining what is the fuss all about, until a person suggests he takes a few steps back, to which the complainant would more than likely remark with: “oh, now I see what the fuss is all about, now that’s a remarkable (or terrible) painting…!” as the case may be.
I'm very much aware of that fact sir, hence I copy pasted the title and only the tile of the OP, since that's where the thrust of my disagreement was. Incase you're wondering where I got "Muslim" from if the OP didn't write it. I got it by making explicit what was implicitly suggested by the OP..., a message hidden behind the veil if you like which I thought would be better revealed and brought to the surface for all to reflect upon.
Last edited by a moderator:
L
Hahaha...., thanks for that mate, precisely the point I was making ! In other words, to say Islam is, would be to make no distinction between Islam and its followers, who as I've already stated, are made up of good and bad Muslims.
I was against the proposition that detracts from the main issue here, which is the essentialising of Islam, (or Christianity for that matter), you would be implicitly implicating by saying that you (Islam/Christianity etc.), you are dangerous by definition. I say no, you would need to take a step back and realise that we in Christianity, Islam, and Judaism etc. are dangerous by our actions and not by our definitions, or the essentialising of our faith.
Can’t you see how dangerous this dogmatic view is? It’s basically a form of reductionism, where we simply brand the totality of a particular thing (faith) to its mere essences. We go from rightly saying that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts, to essentially saying that the sum of its parts is greater than the whole. No different than someone standing so close his nose is touching the canvas, complaining what is the fuss all about, until a person suggests he takes a few steps back, to which the complainant would more than likely remark with: “oh, now I see what the fuss is all about, now that’s a remarkable (or terrible) painting…!” as the case may be.
I'm very much aware of that fact sir, hence I copy pasted the title and only the tile of the OP, since that's where the thrust of my disagreement was. Incase you're wondering where I got "Muslim" from if the OP didn't write it. I got it by making explicit what was implicitly suggested by the OP..., a message hidden behind the veil if you like which I thought would be better revealed and brought to the surface for all to reflect upon.
! In other words, to say Islam is, would be to make no distinction between Islam and its followers, who as I've already stated, are made up of good and bad Muslims.I was against the proposition that detracts from the main issue here, which is the essentialising of Islam, (or Christianity for that matter), you would be implicitly implicating by saying that you (Islam/Christianity etc.), you are dangerous by definition. I say no, you would need to take a step back and realise that we in Christianity, Islam, and Judaism etc. are dangerous by our actions and not by our definitions, or the essentialising of our faith.
Can’t you see how dangerous this dogmatic view is? It’s basically a form of reductionism, where we simply brand the totality of a particular thing (faith) to its mere essences. We go from rightly saying that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts, to essentially saying that the sum of its parts is greater than the whole. No different than someone standing so close his nose is touching the canvas, complaining what is the fuss all about, until a person suggests he takes a few steps back, to which the complainant would more than likely remark with: “oh, now I see what the fuss is all about, now that’s a remarkable (or terrible) painting…!” as the case may be.
I'm very much aware of that fact sir, hence I copy pasted the title and only the tile of the OP, since that's where the thrust of my disagreement was. Incase you're wondering where I got "Muslim" from if the OP didn't write it. I got it by making explicit what was implicitly suggested by the OP..., a message hidden behind the veil if you like which I thought would be better revealed and brought to the surface for all to reflect upon.
Sura Al Imran aya 49 (yusuf ali): "And (appoint him) an Apostle to the Children of Israel (with this message): I have come to you with a sign from your Lord in that I make for you out of clay as it were the figure of a bird and breathe into it and it becomes a bird by Allah's leave; and I heal those born blind and the lepers and I quicken the dead by Allah's leave; and I declare to you what ye eat and what ye store in your houses. Surely therein is a Sign for you if ye did believe.
The OP was clearly referring to Muhammad, so I guess you should refute that? Just saying lol.
A
Very poor, very poor and misleading indeed! So you are an Arab Christian yeh? That's great, please explain to the non-Arabs on this forum what the term Bi'iznillah means..., translated in the above English as by Allah's leave.
You better know your Arabic and know it well if you wish to quote yet another verse from the Qur'an ok...just saying lol!
Have a good day.
You better know your Arabic and know it well if you wish to quote yet another verse from the Qur'an ok...just saying lol
!Have a good day.
L
Very poor, very poor and misleading indeed! So you are an Arab Christian yeh? That's great, please explain to the non-Arabs on this forum what the term Bi'iznillah means..., translated in the above English as by Allah's leave.
You better know your Arabic and know it well if you wish to quote yet another verse from the Qur'an ok...just saying lol!
Have a good day.
You better know your Arabic and know it well if you wish to quote yet another verse from the Qur'an ok...just saying lol
!Have a good day.
The word Bi'iznillah, only mentioned in 2 times in that verse. So Yusuf Ali correctly states there, that by Allah's leave is only with regard to the first two situations (bird creation and healing lepers, quicken the dead). But not to the one that I put n bold (declare to you what you eat and what you store in your houses). Are you now adding the words into the quran? Astagfirullah.
Beside that, I don't think allah's leave made anything different to the verse, since leave/permission has nothing to do with ability. But we will talk about that in other times or if you want to.