|
|
|
|
|
| Muslim
Posted: 9/10/2006 12:41:43 PM |
Being a Muslim scholar doesn't mean that you are 100% perfect.
then why do you keep using the term to back up your own points? | |
|
| Muslim
Posted: 9/10/2006 12:56:21 PM |
then why do you keep using the term to back up your own points?
i have to agree...from this thread and the thread about women & Islam I'm starting to get the impression that he thinks HIS interpretation of the Koran is the ONLY right interpretation...
kinda scary actually... | |
|
| Muslim
Posted: 9/10/2006 1:18:17 PM | | Explain to them Jihad At Talab then if Islam is only for defensive purposes or oppression. | |
|
| Muslim
Posted: 9/10/2006 1:26:42 PM | “Before drawing conclusion regarding the teachings of a said religion and it’s doctrines – it is important to understand the pre-existing situations, cultural setbacks, traditional practices, mindset of the people that religion initially dealt with. You obviously have failed to take under consideration - the pre-existing way of life of the people that religion was ‘introduced to’ by their prophet.”
___________________________________________________________________
Regarding this forum, it can not be said that I have drawn conclusions regarding the teachings of a said religion as I am merely debating one verse of the Quran, and specifically the word “beat”.
Unfortunately some Muslims (not all) view verse 004.034 as a god given right to beat their wives, and as a compassionate man in 2006 I think this is disgraceful, even if the beating is done “lightly”.
Please watch the videos that discuss this topic.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWGA8i6scYY&mode=related&search=
Friday Sermon on Qatar T.V., 27 August 2004
“We must know that wife beating is punishment in Islamic religious law. No one should deny this because this was permitted by the creator of man.”
“(The Koran says:) “and beat them” This verse is a wondrous nature……”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nUI3TUdFCk
Discussion of wife beating, Qatar T.V. 26 September 2004
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJkmRBEOC3o&mode=related&search=
Sheik explains wife beating in Islam, Syrian T.V. 26 July 2004
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fb6D9G4gpW8&mode=related&search=
Mufti of Egypt Ali Gum’a
Al Risala T.V. (Saudi Arabia), 26 May 2006 | |
|
| Muslim
Posted: 9/10/2006 2:08:04 PM | Passionteman, I've never in my years of visiting forums had somebody proven so wrong and still bobbing and weaving saying they're right. It's amazing.
The translations put up by the other poster are from experts, and their interpretations are correct, and are considered to be authoritative. Are we to believe you over and above every other translation from Islamic scholars? Ah, no.
I've used these translations in my study of Islam and Islamic extremism, including countless books on the subject. I've even seen on Islamic websites these sources used as an English translation written right next to the Arabic text. They're correct. You're wrong.
I'd add, all this talk about taking into context the time of these writings, though it might look good written in a post and used as an argument, it's pure crap. Islamic extremists use violent verses in the Koran to further their "Jihad" agendas as we speak.
I could post verse after verse of anti-semitic and christian bashing passages from the Koran, including other violent verses, which Islamic extremists interpret literally in TODAY'S world. It's foolish for anybody to say "You need to understand why and when these verses were written." The Islamic extremists use them now to shout out how they're doing "Allah's will." I could give a rat's ass about the past. I'm concerned with the present.
Now, not all Muslims buy into these verses, like beating women, how Jews (people of the book) and Christians are "unjust," etc., and believe them. No different than most Jews and Christians don't read Leviticus in the Old Testament, where it talks about if you dishonor your father and mother you shall surely be put to death, or words to that effect, and act upon those ideologies. Including countless other things, like being stoned to death for certain sins. It's a pretty violent section of the Bible.
Problem is, in all honesty, the Koran takes a different approach than the Bible. It singles out a specific religion and group of people, Jews and Christians, and speaks badly of them over and over again in its text. It also takes a hardline approach as to nonbelievers.
It's why we find ourselves where we are today. The Bible doesn't take the same approach as the Koran, or the amount of Christian extremists might be much greater and they'd be the thorn in the world's ass now instead of Muslims.
Personally, I don't believe in either book. I just study them because I find it interesting. So, I'm not here to bash Islam, Christianity, or any other religion. But what I am bashing is Islamic extremism, and for anyone who's studied this subject, read the Koran, it's not a great leap in logic to understand how the extremists can justify their actions and say they're doing Allah's will. | |
|
chinua
|
Joined: 9/30/2005
Msg: 31 | |
| Muslim
Posted: 9/10/2006 2:43:44 PM | | any extremism is bad.......ever heard the saying about 'too much of a good thing'?......extremists can take anything and twist it. | |
|
| Muslim
Posted: 9/10/2006 3:03:07 PM | Dude, passionateman, you are very creatvie with excuses. You should get a Nobel Peace Prize for your bull.
 | |
|
| Muslim
Posted: 9/10/2006 3:15:35 PM | [QUOTE] passionateman, you are very creatvie with excuses. You should get a Nobel Peace Prize for your bull. [/QUOTE]
LOL. No doubt.
EDIT: Can somebody tell me what I'm doing wrong on these quote deals? It's pissing me off. | |
|
| Muslim
Posted: 9/10/2006 4:14:28 PM | then why do you keep using the term to back up your own points?
Because you don't know Arabic to read the Arabic text. DUH.
have to agree...from this thread and the thread about women & Islam I'm starting to get the impression that he thinks HIS interpretation of the Koran is the ONLY right interpretation...
kinda scary actually...
Nope. I don't think so. Alot of the translations tell you at the beginning of the actual book that they have incorporated the Arabic text side bey side with the English translation because Arabic words have different meanings and their translated work doesn't replace the Arabic text. Go get a copy of the Koran first.
Explain to them Jihad At Talab then if Islam is only for defensive purposes or oppression
What does Jihad exactly mean? You don't even know Arabic, so I am pretty sure for you it means "holly war". LMfAO. Just like you have heard it on Fox News and CNN.
Regarding this forum, it can not be said that I have drawn conclusions regarding the teachings of a said religion as I am merely debating one verse of the Quran, and specifically the word “beat”.
You are discussing the word beat in English not "Darab" in Arabic. Here are all the different meanings of the word "Darab" used in that verse. It has so many different meanings, we can find numerous different meanings ascribed to it in the Quran.
To travel, to get out: 3:156; 4:101; 38:44; 73:20; 2:273
To strike: 2:60,73; 7:160; 8:12; 20:77; 24:31; 26:63; 37:93; 47:4
To beat: 8:50; 47:27
To set up: 43:58; 57:13
To give (examples): 14:24,45; 16:75,76,112; 18:32,45; 24:35; 30:28,58; 36:78; 39:27,29; 43:17; 59:21; 66:10,11
To take away, to ignore: 43:5
To condemn: 2:61
To seal, to draw over: 18:11
To cover: 24:31
To explain: 13:17
Passionteman, I've never in my years of visiting forums had somebody proven so wrong and still bobbing and weaving saying they're right. It's amazing.
Where is your evidence that I am wrong? Do you know Arabic? No you don't. Have you studied religion, no you haven't. Like the other thread, all you do is copy and paste verses out of context from google searches. Is that what you call your ability to debate? hahaha.
The translations put up by the other poster are from experts, and their interpretations are correct, and are considered to be authoritative. Are we to believe you over and above every other translation from Islamic scholars? Ah, no.
No. They are only translations and they don't replace the actual Arabic Text. Quran is recited and read in Arabic, not English. Get a copy of the Koran and read the commentary before the translation, where these scholars have mentioned about their translation work to get an idea of what I am talking about.
I've used these translations in my study of Islam and Islamic extremism, including countless books on the subject. I've even seen on Islamic websites these sources used as an English translation written right next to the Arabic text. They're correct. You're wrong.
Do you have a copy of the Koran? Where did you study Islam exactly? By yourself?
I'd add, all this talk about taking into context the time of these writings, though it might look good written in a post and used as an argument, it's pure crap. Islamic extremists use violent verses in the Koran to further their "Jihad" agendas as we speak.
What doed Jihad mean? Give me meaning of this word and its roots.
Here is some Bible information in case you didn't know.
The Bible itself says women should remain silent in churches and are not to instruct men. So any church with female ministers is in violation of the Bible. I think this is why pagan religions are so favored by today's women.
1.THIS IS A VIEW OF WOMEN BASED ON BIBLE
The birth of a daughter is a loss" (Ecclesiasticus 22:3).
"A man who educates his son will be the envy of his enemy." (Ecclesiasticus 30:3)
2. JEWISH RABBIS MADE IT AN OBLIGATION TO JEWISH MEN TO PRODUCE OFFSPRING IN ORDER TO PROPOGATE THE RACE
"Your daughter is headstrong? Keep a sharp look-out that she does not make you the laughing stock of your enemies, the talk of the town, the object of common gossip, and put you to public shame" (Ecclesiasticus 42:11).
"Keep a headstrong daughter under firm control, or she will abuse any indulgence she receives. Keep a strict watch on her shameless eye, do not be surprised if she disgraces you" (Ecclesiasticus 26:10-11).
"As in all the congregations of the saints, women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be 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 the church." (I Corinthians 14:34-35)
"When a woman has her regular flow of blood, the impurity of her monthly period will last seven days, and anyone who touches her will be unclean till evening. Anything she lies on during her period will be unclean, and anything she sits on will be unclean. Whoever touches her bed must wash his clothes and bathe with water, and he will be unclean till evening. Whoever touches anything she sits on must wash his clothes and bathe with water, and he will be unclean till evening. Whether it is the bed or anything she was sitting on, when anyone touches it, he will be unclean till evening" (Lev. 15:19-23).
WOW. THAT IS AN EXCELLENT TREATMENT OF WOMEN AT A TIME WHEN SHE FEELS GRUMPY.
"If a man takes a wife and, after lying with her, dislikes her and slanders her and gives her a bad name, saying, 'I married this woman, but when I approached her, I did not find proof of her virginity,' then the girl's father and mother shall bring proof that she was a virgin to the town elders at the gate. The girl's father will say to the elders, 'I gave my daughter in marriage to this man, but he dislikes her. Now he has slandered her and said I did not find your daughter to be a virgin. But here is the proof of my daughter's virginity.' Then her parents shall display the cloth before the elders of the town, and the elders shall take the man and punish him. They shall fine him a hundred shekels of silver and give them to the girl's father, because this man has given an Israelite virgin a bad name. She shall continue to be his wife; he must not divorce her as long as he lives. If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the girl's virginity can be found, she shall be brought to the door of her father's house and there the men of the town shall stone her to death. She has done a disgraceful thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in her father's house. You must purge the evil from among you." (Deuteronomy 22:13-21)
THERE IS SOME STONING TO DEATH. WHILE THERE IS NO SUCH VERSE IN THE KORAN.
3. HINDUISM
"Tasmat striyam jatam parasyanti ut pumamsam haranti"(Hence they reject a female child when born, and take up a male.) [Taitt. Samh. VI.5.10.3] [Muir I 26]
Female infanticide arose from the general Vedic attitude towards women. The large dowries prescribed by the Vedas meant that a girl was seen as a burden. The woman who gave birth to a daughter was ashamed, and much stigma attached to a lady who only gave birth to daughters. Hence infanticide arose as a convenient way of getting rid of the "burden."Aryan texts sanction this custom:
"A man, aged thirty years, shall marry a maiden of twelve who pleases him, or a man of twenty-four a girl of eight years of age; if (the performance of) his duties would otherwise be impeded, he must marry sooner."[Manu IX.94]
Child marriage of daughters 5-6 years old was common due to the custom of dowry and to avoid scandals [Nand 17] [Basham 167-8] [Yadav 70] [Altekar 16] [Banerjee 70]. Hindu Law books prescribe that the best partner for a man in one-third his age. Thus a man 18 year old should marry a girl 6 years old! –
"When a woman, proud of her relations [or abilities] deceives her husband ( with another man), then the king should [ensure that] she be torn apart by dogs in place much frequented by people"[Manu Smrti 8:371] "And the evil man should be burnt in a bed of red-hot iron"[Manu Smrti 8:371-2]
THERE IS SOME EXCELLENT TREATMENT OF WOMEN ABOVE.
VIII. 356. He who addresses the wife of another man at a Tirtha, outside the village, in a forest, or at the confluence of rivers, suffer (the punishment for) adulterous acts (samgrahana).
VIII. 357. Offering presents (to a woman), romping (with her), touching her ornaments and dress, sitting with her on a bed, all (these acts) are considered adulterous acts (samgrahana).
VIII. 358. If one touches a woman in a place (which ought) not (to be touched) or allows (oneself to be touched in such a spot), all (such acts done) with mutual consent are declared (to be) adulterous (samgrahana). [Manu VIII.356-358]
| |
|
| Muslim
Posted: 9/10/2006 7:52:35 PM | What exactly are you wanting to know about this topic OP?
Are Christians better than Muslims?
Is Islam the fastest growing religion? Gee, I hope not!
I think you would have to be exposed to people from
different religions to get a good answer. See how people live their
lives, how they interact with you.
I have met many muslims, and know some now. All I can say is that
for the most part, they try to ram their religion down my throat, it
is all some of them talk about! | |
|
lira
|
Joined: 6/8/2006
Msg: 36 | |
| Muslim
Posted: 9/11/2006 2:15:20 PM | | Some christian denominations do the same, ram reliegion down my throat. I discoverered a way to make them want to leave my door. I think all religions try to spread their own beliefs. I have always heard"Spread the word of God". I am christian (episcapal) but I am not a good christian so I will 'shut up' now. | |
|
| Muslim
Posted: 9/16/2006 4:01:24 PM | Some Christians may shove their religion down your throat, but if you walk away from them, they will leave you alone. They don't proslytize with the sword so you are very lucky that they just talk till they are blue in the face.
I have had Jehovaah Witness' try to shove their religion down my throat, as you know they even come knocking at your door. However, they always have a smile on their face and if you ask them to leave, they do.
Wait until Islam gets more power in the US. You will see the polar opposite. Either you convert, die or pay a jizyah tax. | |
|
| Muslim
Posted: 9/16/2006 8:02:21 PM | Dutch
They don't proslytize with the sword so you are very lucky that they just talk till they are blue in the face.
Provide us a verse from their primary source, Koran where it is dictated to proslytize with the sword. If you can't provide us evidence, it is simply your own personal blief and theory and not linked to religion at all, while indicating your narrow-mindedness and lack of knowledge. | |
|
| Muslim
Posted: 9/16/2006 8:07:49 PM | http://www.aina.org/news/20060916154058.htm
(AINA) -- According to the website Islam Memo, one Christian was killed in Baghdad after the Pope's speech two days ago. The speech created a wave of anger throughout the Islamic world, including Iraq. A poster has been placed in many Baghdad mosques for the previously unknown group, "Kataab Ashbal Al Islam Al Salafi," (Islamic Salafist Boy Scout Battalions). This group threatens to kill all Christians in Iraq if the Pope does not apologize in three days in front of the whole world to Mohammed.
© 2006, Assyrian International News Agency. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use. | |
|
| Muslim
Posted: 9/16/2006 8:10:57 PM | Somali cleric calls for pope's death
Email Print Normal font Large font September 17, 2006
Advertisement
AdvertisementA HARDLINE cleric linked to Somalia's powerful Islamist movement has called for Muslims to "hunt down" and kill Pope Benedict XVI for his controversial comments about Islam.
Sheikh Abubukar Hassan Malin urged Muslims to find the pontiff and punish him for insulting the Prophet Mohammed and Allah in a speech that he said was as offensive as author Salman Rushdie's novel The Satanic Verses.
"We urge you Muslims wherever you are to hunt down the Pope for his barbaric statements as you have pursued Salman Rushdie, the enemy of Allah who offended our religion," he said in Friday evening prayers.
"Whoever offends our Prophet Mohammed should be killed on the spot by the nearest Muslim," Malin, a prominent cleric in the Somali capital, told worshippers at a mosque in southern Mogadishu.
"We call on all Islamic Communities across the world to take revenge on the baseless critic called the pope," he said.
Reached by telephone on Saturday, Malin confirmed making the remarks that were echoed in less strident form by other senior clerics in the Supreme Islamic Council of Somalia (SICS).
Another SICS executive member, Sheikh Ahmed Abdullahi, vented similar anger at the pope's "barbarous criticism" but stopped short of calling for his murder.
"He must apologise because he has offended the most honorable person who ever lived in the world," Abdullahi said.
The German-born leader of the Roman Catholic Church has been condemned in the Muslim world for comments he made at a Tuesday lecture, in which he implicitly denounced links between Islam and violence, particularly with reference to jihad, or "holy war."
The pope also quoted a 14th-century Byzantine emperor who said innovations introduced by the Prophet Mohammed were "evil and inhuman."
Somalia, a Horn of Africa nation of some 10 million mainly moderate Muslims, has been wracked by instability for the past 16 years but has recently seen the rise of fundamentalist Islamists who seized the capital in June.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/somali-cleric-calls-for-popes-death/2006/09/16/1158334739295.html | |
|
| Muslim
Posted: 9/16/2006 10:29:21 PM | It's ironic that a poorly chosen quote by the Pope ends up justifying itself out of context! It seems clear [to me] that the pope intended to speak against violence in the name of religion, not to speak against moslems. What's the result? Many moslems condemn him or call for his death, and a smaller number firebomb churches. Are these people completely stupid? Talk about making it tough for moslems worldwide who DO believe in peace!
On the subject of translation:
Most words have a range of meaning, regardless of the language. Often, many languages will have words with nearly identical meanings. Even when they don't, it's not too difficult to see how the different meanings can come about. There are many VASTLY different words in English which have the same origin, and by the same token, some words with vastly differing meaning. To truly understand, it is necessary to at least have some understanding of the original language. Each word will have shades of meaning which influence which meanings apply in the other words. Translations are often very weak in this; common definitions are chosen for many words, leaving little choice about the remainder. When the text is hundreds of years old [like the Quran], the language may IN THEORY be the same, it is likely that spellings, meanings, and usages have changed, especially since cultures certainly will have. The Quran has the advantage of continuing to be written and taught in its original language, which limits the opportunities for translational error. The Bible lacks that - "God knows" how many levels of translation are there! The fact that cultures change is also a BIG influence. Even with exactly the same wording, 500 years makes for radically different beliefs, standards and interpretations. Whatever Mohammed [PBUH] MEANT is a matter of at least a little conjecture, and doesn't matter much when modern moslems will interpret based on their current culture.
I don't doubt the accuracy of the scholars' translations, nor the value of being able to study in the original language. None of these, however, has been put in a proper context. Was a particular translation based on reading extensive related text or just a small amount possibly not in context? Is it translated based on the original culture or a particular modern one? It's quite likely, in my eyes, that the English "beat [lightly]" is a fair and accurate translation, even if it doesn't cover all the possible or intended meanings. It seems it probably WAS intended to be an improvement on women's rights at the time. Unfortunately, in the modern world, it has probably actually become a means to impair women's rights. If originally Mohammed [PBUH] meant for beating to be a last resort, many men in the modern world would choose to believe it was the first and best choice. Same for Jihad and other concepts: people will choose to interpret things to best suit their personal and cultural attitudes, regardless of how they're meant. Hardly a problem unique to islam - it's a daily issue just between genders! In the end it doesn't matter what the Torah, Bible or Quran say. Tyrants and terrorists will pick and choose to suit their purposes. | |
|
| Muslim
Posted: 9/17/2006 9:24:39 AM | All this talk of providing "out of text" verses from the Koran is an effort in futility and irrelevant to Islamic extremism. Violent verses are in both the Bible and the Koran. The time they were written, taking them into context, blah-blah-blah, is fine if you want to debate the historic content of their meaning.
Your normal Muslim wouldn't read the verses I've posted bashing Jews and Christians, including other ones talking about infidels, war, etc., and believe them literally. No different than in Leviticus in the Bible where it talks about being put to death if you dishonor your mother or father, among other things. This isn't practiced or taken literally by Christians today. But it is talked about in the text of their holy book.
Also, as I've stated it can't be denied Jews and Christians (no matter what the context of the verse or history behind it) are painted by the Koran in a bad light, and there are some pretty graphic verses related to war, etc.
So, now we get to extremists and their interpretation of the Koran. What's funny is I post violent and anti-semitic verses, Christian bashing from the Koran, and I get some idiots in here say that I'm misinterpreting the verses like I have some agenda. For the select few who've said that you need to pull your head out of the sand to see the light.
All I've ever harped on is Islamic extremists. Some have a problem with that word because they believe it gives Islam a bad name and in no way should be related. Well, you morons, if somebody follows a religion, quotes verses from it day in and day out, talks about it in videotapes that are propaganda pieces, praises Allah when they succeed in killing thousands, etc., they commit acts of murder and terror, they can be considered Islamic extremists and ARE Islamic extremists.
I used the example of a Christian who blows up an abortion clinic. This person might follow everything in the Bible, but he steps outside of its teachings. He interprets an "eye for an eye" and kills the doctor due to his interpretation of the text. I got news for you-all. He's a Christian extremist. A crazy-ass one (no different than the Islamic nutjobs) but Christian extremist fits.
As I stated, this concept is no different than an Islamic extremist. They follow Islam, but they go "outside the box," take verses "out of context" as some of you braindead people in here say I'm doing, and are extreme in their viewpoints of Islamic teachings.
I wonder if the select few in here who said I was just taking words out of context from the Koran and not historically putting them into perspective know they went right along with my argument and did nothing to further their cause and were just participating in an effort in futility as it relates to this subject all the while bolstering my position.
Never in any thread have I berated Muslims. I've just spoken of Islamic extremists. And this "out of context" statement is surely what they do in their reading of the Koran. They buy into the verses speaking of war, anti-semitism, bashing Christianity, and the like as relating to the present day. They don't care about the context, the time the verse was written, or any of these other BS issues that have been brought up.
You can make that lame argument if somebody is trying to say Islam is violent as it relates to a present day ideology of your common Muslim, and it would wash. But not when talking about Islamic extremists. Their interpretation, as we have found, is different than the majority of other Muslims in the world.
They just believe what they read gives them the right in their mind to hate Jews, Christians, and even their own brothers who don't buy into their radical vision of what Islam should be. I'm not saying their interpretation is correct, btw.
Anyway, I've seen three posters now over the past few months who use the same methods of saying something to the effect of "the verse is out of context" and want to refuse to accept that the term "Islamic extremist" is correct.
So, a few easy questions.
1.) Do these fringe groups follow Islam in any way, shape, form or fashion?
2.) Do they claim to worship Allah and claim to follow the teachings of Mohammed as given to him from the angel Gabriel?
3.) Do they quote from the Koran and use Islam and their interpretation of its teachings as a means to justify their actions?
If you answer yes to any one of those questions, "Islamic extremist" fits them to a tee. If the word offends you, then what should these people be called? If they're not Islamic extremists, what in the hell would be a proper term that would be acceptable to you people? | |
|
| Muslim
Posted: 9/17/2006 10:24:09 AM |
1. This verse talks about past and doesn't have any present implication as it relates the fight against the pagans of Makkah.
This is an example of the dishonesty employed by religious or political zealots. Where in the Sura that you quoted does it refer to “the past”? It speaks of meeting “in battle.” Without qualifications that would mean any time anywhere. | |
|
lira
|
Joined: 6/8/2006
Msg: 44 | |
| Muslim
Posted: 9/17/2006 2:59:18 PM | | That man that killed the christion because of what the pope said. I think he did it because he is an azz hole, and he just hid behind the muslim religion | |
|
| Muslim
Posted: 9/17/2006 6:32:29 PM | Author sees Islam's 20-year plan for U.S.
Arab-American author outlines secret
20-year strategy to undermine country
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: August 4, 2003
1:00 a.m. Eastern
Editor's note: Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin is an online, subscription intelligence news service from the creator of WorldNetDaily.com – a journalist who has been developing sources around the world for the last 25 years.
© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com
A refugee from the Muslim Middle East thinks he has discovered Islam's 20-point plan for conquering the United States by 2020 – a plan revealed in the latest issue of Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin.
Anis Shorrosh, author of ''Islam Revealed'' and ''The True Furqan,'' is a Christian Arab-American who emigrated from Arab-controlled Jerusalem in January 1967.
''The following is my analysis of Islamic invasion of America, the agenda of Islamists and visible methods to take over America by the year 2020,'' Shorrosh says. ''Will Americans continue to sleep through this invasion as they did when we were attacked on 9/11?''
1. Terminate America's freedom of speech by replacing it with statewide and nationwide hate-crime bills.
2. Wage a war of words using black leaders like Louis Farrakhan, Rev. Jesse Jackson and other visible religious personalities who promote Islam as the religion of African-Americans while insisting Christianity is for whites only. What they fail to tell African-Americans is that it was Arab Muslims who captured them and sold them as slaves. In fact, the Arabic word for black and slave is the same, ''Abed.''
3. Engage the American public in dialogues, discussions, debates in colleges, universities, public libraries, radio, TV, churches and mosques on the virtues of Islam. Proclaim how it is historically another religion like Judaism and Christianity with the same monotheistic faith.
4. Nominate Muslim sympathizers to political office to bring about favorable legislation toward Islam and support potential sympathizers by block voting.
5. Take control of as much of Hollywood, the press, TV, radio and the Internet as possible by buying the related corporations or a controlling stock.
6. Yield to the fear of the imminent shut-off of the lifeblood of America – black gold. America’s economy depends on oil and 41 percent of it comes from the Middle East.
7. Yell ''foul, out-of-context, personal interpretation, hate crime, Zionist, un- American, inaccurate interpretation of the Quran'' anytime Islam is criticized or the Quran is analyzed in the public arena.
8. Encourage Muslims to penetrate the White House, specifically with Islamists who can articulate a marvelous and peaceful picture of Islam. Acquire government positions and get membership in local school boards. Train Muslims as medical doctors to dominate the medical field, research and pharmaceutical companies. (Ever notice how numerous Muslim doctors in America are, when their countries need them more desperately than America?) Take over the computer industry. Establish Middle Eastern restaurants throughout the U.S. to connect planners of Islamization in a discreet way.
9. Accelerate Islamic demographic growth via:
Massive immigration (100,000 annually since 1961).
Use no birth control whatsoever – every baby of Muslim parents is automatically a Muslim and cannot choose another religion later.
Muslim men must marry American women and Islamize them (10,000 annually). Then divorce them and remarry every five years – since one can't legally marry four at one time. This is a legal solution in America.
Convert angry, alienated black inmates and turn them into militants (so far 2,000 released inmates have joined al-Qaida worldwide). Only a few ''sleeper cells'' have been captured in Afghanistan and on American soil.
10. Reading, writing, arithmetic and research through the American educational system, mosques and student centers (now 1,500) should be sprinkled with dislike of Jews, evangelical Christians and democracy. There are currently 300 exclusively Muslim schools in the U.S. which teach loyalty to the Quran, not the U.S. Constitution. In January of 2002, Saudi Arabia’s Embassy in Washington mailed 4,500 packets of the Quran and videos promoting Islam to America's high schools – free of charge. Saudi Arabia would not allow the U.S. to reciprocate.
11. Provide very sizeable monetary Muslim grants to colleges and universities in America to establish ''Centers for Islamic studies'' with Muslim directors to promote Islam in higher-education institutions.
12. Let the entire world know through propaganda, speeches, seminars, local and national media that terrorists have hijacked Islam, when in truth, Islam hijacked the terrorists.
13. Appeal to the historically compassionate and sensitive Americans for sympathy and tolerance towards Muslims in America who are portrayed as mainly immigrants from oppressed countries.
14. Nullify America's sense of security by manipulating the intelligence community with misinformation. Periodically terrorize Americans with reports of impending attacks on bridges, tunnels, water supplies, airports, apartment buildings and malls.
15. Form riots and demonstrations in the prison system demanding Islamic Sharia as the way of life, not America's justice system.
16. Open numerous charities throughout the U.S., but use the funds to support Islamic terrorism with American dollars.
17. Raise interest in Islam on America's campuses by insisting freshman take at least one course on Islam.
18. Unify the numerous Muslim lobbies in Washington, mosques, Islamic student centers, educational organizations, magazines and papers by Internet and an annual convention to coordinate plans, propagate the faith and engender news in the media.
19. Send intimidating messages and messengers to the outspoken individuals who are critical of Islam and seek to eliminate them by hook or crook.
20. Applaud Muslims as loyal citizens of the U.S. by spotlighting their voting record as the highest percentage of all minority and ethic groups in America.
Shorrosh is a member of the Oxford Society of Scholars, has traveled in 76 countries, and is a lecturer and producer of TV documentaries. ''Islam Revealed'' is a bestseller now in its eighth printing. His forthcoming 10th book, from which the 20-point plan is abridged, is titled ''Islam: A Threat or a Challenge.''
''The True Furqan'' is also available for viewing on Islam-Exposed.org. Shorrosh's new website is Focusing-on-Islam.com. | |
|
| Muslim
Posted: 9/21/2006 8:49:35 AM | Alyosha
This is an example of the dishonesty employed by religious or political zealots. Where in the Sura that you quoted does it refer to “the past”? It speaks of meeting “in battle.” Without qualifications that would mean any time anywhere.
Read what is written right above the verse in that post. I have explained it there. | |
|
| Muslim
Posted: 9/21/2006 5:43:52 PM | "....Kill those who join other gods with Allah wherever you find them; besiege them, seize them, lay in wait for them with every kind of ambush...."(Sura 9:5).
"When you encounter the unbelievers, strike off their heads, until ye have made a great slaughter among them...."(Sura 47:4).
"....Make war upon such of those to whom the Scriptures have been given as believe not in Allah, or in the Last Day, and who forbid not what Allah and His Apostle have forbidden....until they pay tribute..." (Sura 9:29).
"Say to the infidels: If they desist, what is now past shall be forgiven them; but if they return, they have already before them the doom of the ancients! Fight then against them till strife be at an end, and the religion be all of it Allah's." (Sura 8:39).
"Proclaim a grievious penalty to those who reject faith." (Sura 9:3)." | |
|
| Muslim
Posted: 9/22/2006 7:55:49 AM |
"....Kill those who join other gods with Allah wherever you find them; besiege them, seize them, lay in wait for them with every kind of ambush...."(Sura 9:5).
"When you encounter the unbelievers, strike off their heads, until ye have made a great slaughter among them...."(Sura 47:4).
"....Make war upon such of those to whom the Scriptures have been given as believe not in Allah, or in the Last Day, and who forbid not what Allah and His Apostle have forbidden....until they pay tribute..." (Sura 9:29).
"Say to the infidels: If they desist, what is now past shall be forgiven them; but if they return, they have already before them the doom of the ancients! Fight then against them till strife be at an end, and the religion be all of it Allah's." (Sura 8:39).
"Proclaim a grievious penalty to those who reject faith." (Sura 9:3)."
All your verses are out of context. Come back when you have more information and have studied religions, so that I could debate with you. I only debate with someone who has knowledge of other religions and you don't seem to be the one. 
Good luck | |
|
longte
|
Joined: 10/18/2004
Msg: 49 | |
| Muslim
Posted: 9/22/2006 8:14:13 AM | Passionateman
Just curious
Why is every example that others give 'out of context'???
Seems strange that you are the only available Islamic Scholar who sees things this way??
Just as Christians Bhuddists Wiccans and every other religion, must accept problems within their religious texts, so to should the Muslims
..
. | |
|
| Muslim
Posted: 9/22/2006 8:24:37 AM |
Passionateman
Just curious
Why is every example that others give 'out of context'???
Because you lack information about their religion. I don't. I have studied comparative religions and gone in depth into it and fully know that what he has done is copied and pasted parts of these verses from some internet site. He doesn't want an explanation as he doesn't know about their religion nor he cares to know. But he thinks that he could fool people by quoting verses.
Seems strange that you are the only available Islamic Scholar who sees things this way??
You could become one too only if you open your eyes and learn about of history, comparative religion, purchase their Koran and read it by yourself and put the verses in context as to whether it was talking about a specific time in past during battle or has present implications.
And I will give you an example of one of the verses posted above. If you have an open mind, you will try to understand it, but you if you don't and aren't interested, you could turn into the person who posted it and move on with your life.
This is what the other person put in.
INCOMPLETE AND INCORRECT
"....Kill those who join other gods with Allah wherever you find them; besiege them, seize them, lay in wait for them with every kind of ambush...."(Sura 9:5)
COMPLETE AND CORRECT
This is the correct one in th Koran itself.
But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for God is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.
Quran -9-5
The context of the verse is battlefield. There was an agreement with the pagans of Mecca and there was breach of the agreement by the pagans. So the verse says that you could fight the pagans as they were oppressing Muslims during that time. And suggests that you could seize them, wait in ambush for them etc. It is exactly the same type of situation that a General Army would suggest to its fellow soldiers. Let's say General Abizaid of the US army will tell all the soldiers in Iraq to fight the insurgents, kill them, capture them, seize them etc. I don't see any present implication of this verse at all. It is referring to past time when pagans persecuted Muslims, took their property and hurt them in every way they could, so as usual, you gotta defend yourself and the verse shows exactly what needs to be done. Show me what part of that applies for today?
So it is people like you and the poster above who don't even know the history behind the verse, when it was revelead and what the purpose was. Now if you read the verse that she quoted, that translation doesn't even exist there. He/she must have found it from somewhere on the internet. | |
|
|
| Page 2 of 13
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 |
|
Home
login 
