This topic is locked from further discussion.
Was your last prophet, conrtolled by a demon at some of his life?
a simple yes or no answer is fine. And i would like to know why he was possessed if he was.
123625
What do you mean by was he controlled by a demon? We say was he mistaken or not... Yes he did and there's a whole verse which is named "sourat abas" which tells that.He was ahuman being like you and me and it's why he's our idol. If he wasn't a human then what's the point of following his steps?
[QUOTE="gamingqueen"][QUOTE="RationalAtheist"][QUOTE="gamingqueen"]Morning...
Do you argue to prove yourself right or because you are interested to know?
RationalAtheist
Everyone like to think they are correct, as I do.
I am interested in the truth of all religions.
I am interested to know how people can evade giving answers, after they have offered to do so in a thread entitled "Any questions on Islam?"
My questions are relevent and my assertions are all backed up by evidence.
We simply disagree. I love to disagree with you and all I want is to disagree with you. Infact I could never agree with you... even if you say I love cake I'll say I hate cake just because I can! Does that remind you of someone here?
We disagree about what? And why do we disagree? Does that not interest you?
Are you inferring that I don't really actually think the things I write about?
Would this personal attack better be sent to me as a PM, rather than taking this thread off-topic?
You don't get it. Where are you from btw?
[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"][QUOTE="gamingqueen"][QUOTE="RationalAtheist"][QUOTE="gamingqueen"]Morning...
Do you argue to prove yourself right or because you are interested to know?
gamingqueen
Everyone like to think they are correct, as I do.
I am interested in the truth of all religions.
I am interested to know how people can evade giving answers, after they have offered to do so in a thread entitled "Any questions on Islam?"
My questions are relevent and my assertions are all backed up by evidence.
We simply disagree. I love to disagree with you and all I want is to disagree with you. Infact I could never agree with you... even if you say I love cake I'll say I hate cake just because I can! Does that remind you of someone here?
We disagree about what? And why do we disagree? Does that not interest you?
Are you inferring that I don't really actually think the things I write about?
Would this personal attack better be sent to me as a PM, rather than taking this thread off-topic?
You don't get it. Where are you from btw?
Perhaps you could explain....
If you read my posts in this thread, you will know where I come from. I mentioned my origins several times.
Why go off topic (again)?
I think it much more interesting to talk about Islam.
[QUOTE="123625"]Was your last prophet, conrtolled by a demon at some of his life?
a simple yes or no answer is fine. And i would like to know why he was possessed if he was.
gamingqueen
What do you mean by was he controlled by a demon? We say was he mistaken or not... Yes he did and there's a whole verse which is named "sourat abas" which tells that.He was ahuman being like you and me and it's why he's our idol. If he wasn't a human then what's the point of following his steps?
i meant posscessed sorry. A simple yes or no answer is fine.
Everyone who teaches English at my college is a native speaker so three years ago when I took english a teacher from America gave me that course anyways, that teacher had to make a speech everyday about how they're badly portrayed in the media and how american women are notlike carrie bradshow and other sex and the city women as they don't sleep around and do all sort of stuff women do on tv. We never told her but and that and we never searched on google and we never used wikipedia nor asked her for an evidence to show that not all american women are like that! Why? Because she was one and she knows better and she's actually nice.
Can you do the same thing please?
[QUOTE="gamingqueen"][QUOTE="123625"]Was your last prophet, conrtolled by a demon at some of his life?
a simple yes or no answer is fine. And i would like to know why he was possessed if he was.
123625
What do you mean by was he controlled by a demon? We say was he mistaken or not... Yes he did and there's a whole verse which is named "sourat abas" which tells that.He was ahuman being like you and me and it's why he's our idol. If he wasn't a human then what's the point of following his steps?
i meant posscessed sorry. A simple yes or no answer is fine.
No. You can't be possessd by al jin so easily for reasons explained in sourat al najm.
Everyone who teaches English at my college is a native speaker so three years ago when I took english a teacher from America gave me that course anyways, that teacher had to make a speech everyday about how they're badly portrayed in the media and how american women are notlike carrie bradshow and other sex and the city women as they don't sleep around and do all sort of stuff women do on tv. We never told her but and that and we never searched on google and we never used wikipedia nor asked her for an evidence to show that not all american women are like that! Why? Because she was one and she knows better and she's actually nice.
Can you do the same thing please?
gamingqueen
No.
Its not enough for me for someone to say something and I will believe it. The reason for this is that people can say all sorts of things and many of them are not true. With religion, people say different things that can not all be true. The only way to seek the truth is to find evidence. (This is the way science works - sceptical - relies on evidence, proof and peer review.)
Did your teacher ask you not to do research on American women? Do you actually really know that they are not really like they are on that programme? Would you not think others may have different views on American women?
How do you know who knows better? Is it possible to seem "nice" to someone when discussing opposing core beliefs?
[QUOTE="gamingqueen"]Everyone who teaches English at my college is a native speaker so three years ago when I took english a teacher from America gave me that course anyways, that teacher had to make a speech everyday about how they're badly portrayed in the media and how american women are notlike carrie bradshow and other sex and the city women as they don't sleep around and do all sort of stuff women do on tv. We never told her but and that and we never searched on google and we never used wikipedia nor asked her for an evidence to show that not all american women are like that! Why? Because she was one and she knows better and she's actually nice.
Can you do the same thing please?
RationalAtheist
No.
Its not enough for me for someone to say something and I will believe it. The reason for this is that people can say all sorts of things and many of them are not true. With religion, people say different things that can not all be true. The only way to seek the truth is to find evidence. (This is the way science works - sceptical - relies on evidence, proof and peer review.)
Did your teacher ask you not to do research on American women? Do you actually really know that they are not really like they are on that programme? Would you not think others may have different views on American women?
How do you know who knows better? Is it possible to seem "nice" to someone when discussing opposing core beliefs?
Do you have trust issues?
Everyone who teaches English at my college is a native speaker so three years ago when I took english a teacher from America gave me that course anyways, that teacher had to make a speech everyday about how they're badly portrayed in the media and how american women are notlike carrie bradshow and other sex and the city women as they don't sleep around and do all sort of stuff women do on tv. We never told her but and that and we never searched on google and we never used wikipedia nor asked her for an evidence to show that not all american women are like that! Why? Because she was one and she knows better and she's actually nice.
Can you do the same thing please?
gamingqueen
What gives this one woman's views on american society the credibility to speak for an entire culture? Now, I'm not saying that all american women are like those of "sex and the city", but plenty do exist. While I don't mean to condone excessive promiscuity,I will say that there is nothing wrong with a woman being sexually expressive. And what does her being nice have to do with anything?
[QUOTE="gamingqueen"]Everyone who teaches English at my college is a native speaker so three years ago when I took english a teacher from America gave me that course anyways, that teacher had to make a speech everyday about how they're badly portrayed in the media and how american women are notlike carrie bradshow and other sex and the city women as they don't sleep around and do all sort of stuff women do on tv. We never told her but and that and we never searched on google and we never used wikipedia nor asked her for an evidence to show that not all american women are like that! Why? Because she was one and she knows better and she's actually nice.
Can you do the same thing please?
PREGmatic
What gives this one woman's views on american society the credibility to speak for an entire culture? Now, I'm not saying that all american women are like those of "sex and the city", but plenty do exist. While I don't mean to condone excessive promiscuity,I will say that there is nothing wrong with a woman being sexually expressive. And what does her being nice have to do with anything?
There's nothing wrong with that to you for obvious reasons :P It annoys ALOT of american women here trust me.
Do you have trust issues?
gamingqueen
Not at all. I can justify all my beliefs....
Why the 3rd attempt at taking this thread off topic?
[QUOTE="gamingqueen"]Do you have trust issues?
RationalAtheist
Not at all. I can justify all my beliefs....
Why the 3rd attempt at taking this thread off topic?
What do you want me to prove? That we're bad?
[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"][QUOTE="gamingqueen"]Do you have trust issues?
gamingqueen
Not at all. I can justify all my beliefs....
Why the 3rd attempt at taking this thread off topic?
What do you want me to prove? That we're bad?
Well, you could answer the questions I posed for a start...
Have I ever said that Muslims are bad? No, Muslims are people - Muslims have different views about Islam and about plenty of other things in their lives.
My points and questions were raised to highlight my assertion that the Islamic faith is bad. I'll re-state them if you like. I have stated that Islam is bad (for society and individuals) because:
1 - The rules of the religion are irrational. For example, pork being "unclean" is simply not true.
2 - The religion stifles the right to question. (The Aisha discussion in this thread is a case in piont.) A goal of Islam is global Islamic dominance and religious rule. There has already been talk by Islamics here of "Islamic Empire Building".
3 - The Islamic faith is dismissive about those who do not agree with Islam. I included over 500 quotes about infidels from the Koran. This believe or be damned policy does not inspire me to faith. Surely people have a common bond, aside from religion. This bond existed a long time before man conceived of religion.
4 - Islam can not be proven to be true, just as the other more dominant religion of Christianity can not, so to base lifestyles and laws on it seems entirely irrational to me.
[QUOTE="Darthric"]What about the historical conquest of Islam? After Mohammad's death his successors just carried on with the conquest he started?
Its a fact that Islam was mainly spread by force, unlike Christianity which spread generally voluntarily. Now im not saying people were killed if they did not accept Islam, but they had less rights, and itwas inevitable if a country/kingdom fall to a different faith the populace will be converted.
Take for example the Crusades, im not saying they were right, but was it not a fair act of retaliation? Its long been considered that the Crusades were an event where "loads of evil westerners went to the middle east and started forcing Christianity on Muslims". But wasn't Jerusalem taken by force in 635(i think) in the first place from the Byzantine Empire? I mean most of the eastern world was Orthodox Christianity. But is it not true at exactly the same time you were conquering all over the world? Its a fact that the Pope did not call a Crusade because Jerusalem was partially import, but to draw in Islamic armies to take pressure off all of the other Christian kingdoms...
TakeSpain, what about the Islam conquest of Spain? Justification, for the conquest of all those Kingdoms? Even parts of southern France? It was said by Islamic conquerors at the time they wanted to sack Rome., tacking areas of southern France on the way. Egypt? Persia? India? Armenia (later genocide)? All of these places were taken by force And the Buddha's of east Asia?
Muslims make out that Christians are real b****** but what about these things, like Turkey would not exist without conquest.
Now im not saying that you were evil conquerors, but gaining an empire from Southern France to India does not come without war, and you can't say it was a big coincidence that you had a reason to attack everyone, and you were just defending yourselves or had justification for every conquest? Come on...
So do you admit Muslims were just ad bad? If not worst.
NasRex
yes Muslims were bad, But you guys still win the cake by a long shot. Christianization of europe was fairly blood,Crusades,New world,Slavery,Empiralism,World wars and everything in the cold war...we are actaully far behind.
See i would disagree, why?
Most wars fought in the west have and had nothing to do with Christianity.While Muslims have bad habit of bringing it into everything, escalation all situation and making them worse.
New World? Yes people very converted, generally willingly, sometimes forcefully but was that the reason for the colonialism? No. Wealth and power were the reasons.
Slavery, yes, but Muslims practiced it themselves, and in fact, its still legal and practiced in a number of Arab countries, that's a fact, check it.
Imperialism, ottoman Empire? The Ottomans were in Europe far longer than any Crusader state existed, Eastern Europe was fighting for survival just as the Spanish Kingdoms had done years before. And there was no justification for those wars other than Imperialism, countless Ottoman invasion of Hungary, Poland, Greece all those other eastern European countries. And one other factor, if the Muslims had been as powerful during the age of discovery as in there past can you honestly tell me they would have never have done the same?They would have, in the end Muslims have a far longer history in conquest in te name of religion than Christians do.
World War, nothing at all to do with religion, cant consider it, in fact the Nazis disliked all kinds of Religion and were not keen on people practicing it (though they made no attempt to stop it, that wanted it phased out).
Once again the Cold ware, Ideology.
And Christianity in Europe bloody, not really other than North eastern Europe. In fact, when the Huns (could be wrong, might be vandals or the other guys, cant remember if i got the right one) sacked Rome, they did very little damage, why? because they themselves had converted to Christianity. I think you'll find if you read a history blood there was far more war and conquest fought for Islam, including by the Prophet himself, than Christianity.
[QUOTE="gamingqueen"][QUOTE="RationalAtheist"][QUOTE="gamingqueen"]Do you have trust issues?
RationalAtheist
Not at all. I can justify all my beliefs....
Why the 3rd attempt at taking this thread off topic?
What do you want me to prove? That we're bad?
Well, you could answer the questions I posed for a start...
Have I ever said that Muslims are bad? No, Muslims are people - Muslims have different views about Islam and about plenty of other things in their lives.
My points and questions were raised to highlight my assertion that the Islamic faith is bad. I'll re-state them if you like. I have stated that Islam is bad (for society and individuals) because:
1 - The rules of the religion are irrational. For example, pork being "unclean" is simply not true.
I found this article on the internet concerning pork. Is this untrue?
DISEASES CAUSED BY PORK
The following lists show germs or parasites that are found
in pork and some diseases caused by them. Many of these
diseases are contagious while some are proven fatal.This proves
that the more science advances the more Islam is shown correct
as a religion of God.
PARASITIC DISEASES
a) TRICHINELLA SPIRATIS ( Trichina worms )
It is the most dangerous parasite to man ( Rheumatism and
muscular pain). The infected persons shown no symptoms, recover
very slowly some die, some reduced to permanent invalids. No one
is immune from this disease and there is no cure.
b) TAENIA SOLIUM ( Pork tape worm )
The worm causes malnourishment of the person leading
to anemia, diarrhea, extreme depression melancholia and
digestive disturbances. Cysticercosis means that larva enter
the blood stream then settle down in one or more of the vital
organs of the body, for example: brain, liver, lungs or spinal
cord. They grow and encapsulate, inducing pressure to the
system around, resulting in dangerous diseases (diarrhea,
digestive disorder, anemia, chronic invalidation).
c) ROUND WORMS
Examples: Ascaris, which may lead to digestive
disturbances, appendicitis, obstructive jaundice.
d) HOOK WORMS
Examples:Ancylostomiasis, which may lead to
anemia, oedema, heart failure or retarded
growth ( mental and physical), tuberculosis,
diarrhea and typhoid.
e) SCHITOSOMA JAPONICUM
Bleeding, anemia and other syndromes. If ova
are settled in the brain or spinal cord, paralysis
and death may occur.
f) PARAGOMINES WESTERMAINI
Infestation leading to bleeding of the lungs
( endenve haemoptysis)
g) PACIOLEPSIS BUSKI
Digestive disturbances leading to persistent
diarrhea; generalized oedema.
h) CLONORCHIS SINENSIS
chlonorchiasis-obstructive jaundice, liver enlargement.
i) METASTRONGYLUS APRI
Causes bronchitis, abscess of the lungs.
j) GIGANTHORINCHUS GIGAS
Cause anemia and digestive disorders.
k) BALATITIDIUM COLI
Causes acute dysentery and general weakness.
BACTERIAL DISEASES
1. Tuberculosis
2. Fusiformis necrofurus: causing foot-rot which is very
difficult to heal.
3. Salmonella Cholera suis: causing cholera
4. Paratyphoid
5. Bruceellosis: Acute, sub acute and chronic. It may lead
to permanent disabilities.
6. Swine Erysipelas: causing Erypelas in man.
Viral Diseases
1. Small pox: is was a source of infection to man.
2. Japanese B-encepphalitis: It is the source of infection
3. Influenza, foot mouth disease, gas tro-enteritis of the
new born babies.
Protozoal Diseases : Toxo plasma goundii- It is a very
dangerous diseases.A new born baby of an infected woman may die
within few days or weeks after delivery. But if he survives
he may develop blindness or deafness.In adult chronic exhaustive
fever with enlarged liver and spleen may occur. Pneumonia, or
celebro- spinal meninggitis which may lead to death or madness.
The patient may become blind and deaf too.
Fats In Pigs:
Pork contains more fats than other meats.
Therefore, people who are fond of pork are more obese than
others. Cholesterol is higher in their blood thus making them
more prone to asthereosclerosis cardiovascular accidents and
sudden death.
Other Diseases :
Flesh of the pork is hard to digest and may
lead to chronic digestive disturbances. Pimples, boils, cysts are
common in pork eaters. These are some of the parasites and
diseases found in pork and/ or the skin of pigs and certainly
there are many more. There is still no means of killing these
parasites, in the tissues, neither has anyone found a method of
expelling them, even produced any specific treatment for the
diseases.
Its not enough for me for someone to say something and I will believe it. The reason for this is that people can say all sorts of things and many of them are not true. With religion, people say different things that can not all be true. The only way to seek the truth is to find evidence. (This is the way science works - sceptical - relies on evidence, proof and peer review.)
RationalAtheist
The scientific method is not the know-all be-all end-all of reason. We cannot apply the scientific method to most history, we cannot apply it to philosophy or theology, and we cannot use it to determine exactly what logic and reason is.
I think I read something about slavery. Well, slavery though is allowed in Islam, yet a person has many responsbilities to the slave. Few important ones are:
Masters could not abuse their slaves and had to give them the same that they ate and wore.
Narated by Al-Ma'rur: At Ar-Rabadha I met Abu Dhar who was wearing a cloak, and his slave, too, was wearing a similar one. I asked about the reason for it. He replied, "I abused a person by calling his mother with bad names." The Prophet said to me, 'O Abu Dhar! Did you abuse him by calling his mother with bad names you still have some characteristics of ignorance. Your slaves are your brothers and Allah has put them under your command. So whoever has a brother under his command should feed him of what he eats and dress him of what he wears. Do not ask them (slaves) to do things beyond their capacity (power) and if you do so, then help them.'" – [Bukhari, Vol.1, Book 2, #29]
In another narration the importance of giving slaves education and teaching them good manners is stressed by Prophet Muhammad(saw):
Narrated Abu Burda's father: Allah's Apostle said "Three persons will have a double reward:
1. A Person from the people of the scriptures who believed in his prophet (Jesus or Moses) and then believed in the Prophet Muhammad (i .e. has embraced Islam).
2. A slave who discharges his duties to Allah and his master.
3. A master of a woman-slave who teaches her good manners and educates her in the best possible way (the religion) and manumits her and then marries her." – [Bukhari Vol.1, Book 3, #97A]
Further in the Quran it is seen that people are encouraged to marry the slaves. If a person cannot marry a free woman for whatever reason, to prevent him from committing sin, the Quran asks them to marry from among the slave women.
If any of you have not the means wherewith to wed free believing women, they may wed believing girls from among those whom your right hands possess: And Allah hath full knowledge about your faith. Ye are one from another: Wed them with the leave of their owners, and give them their dowers, according to what is reasonable. – [Quran 4:25]
Islam never started slavery and it is well known that slavery was practiced much before the introduction of Islam. Islam actually laid down all the rules so that eventually slavery would be eliminated completely. There are many great rewards for freeing a slave. Allah(swt) has given man all the incentive to free slaves which would in return eventually eradicate slavery completely. Another narration goes as follows:
Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, "Whoever frees a Muslim slave, Allah will save all the parts of his body from the (Hell) Fire as he has freed the body-parts of the slave." Said bin Marjana said that he narrated that Hadith to 'Ali bin Al-Husain and he freed his slave for whom 'Abdullah bin Ja'far had offered him ten thousand Dirhams or one-thousand Dinars. – [Bukhari, Vol.3, Book 46, #693]
Most wars fought in the west have and had nothing to do with Christianity.While Muslims have bad habit of bringing it into everything, escalation all situation and making them worse.
New World? Yes people very converted, generally willingly, sometimes forcefully but was that the reason for the colonialism? No. Wealth and power were the reasons.
Slavery, yes, but Muslims practiced it themselves, and in fact, its still legal and practiced in a number of Arab countries, that's a fact, check it.
Imperialism, ottoman Empire? The Ottomans were in Europe far longer than any Crusader state existed, Eastern Europe was fighting for survival just as the Spanish Kingdoms had done years before. And there was no justification for those wars other than Imperialism, countless Ottoman invasion of Hungary, Poland, Greece all those other eastern European countries. And one other factor, if the Muslims had been as powerful during the age of discovery as in there past can you honestly tell me they would have never have done the same?They would have, in the end Muslims have a far longer history in conquest in te name of religion than Christians do.
World War, nothing at all to do with religion, cant consider it, in fact the Nazis disliked all kinds of Religion and were not keen on people practicing it (though they made no attempt to stop it, that wanted it phased out).
Once again the Cold ware, Ideology.
And Christianity in Europe bloody, not really other than North eastern Europe. In fact, when the Huns (could be wrong, might be vandals or the other guys, cant remember if i got the right one) sacked Rome, they did very little damage, why? because they themselves had converted to Christianity. I think you'll find if you read a history blood there was far more war and conquest fought for Islam, including by the Prophet himself, than Christianity.
Darthric
Don't you think your 2nd sentence is quite inaccurate and inflamatory?
In fact, Christianity has caused terrible bloodshed and wholesale hardship and death in Europe during the middle ages. People were executed or imprisoned for believing anything else (i.e. Bruno and Galileo). Most people lived their lives in poverty and were totally controlled by the church.
The crusades were fought in the name of Christian religion. Why else call them "crusades"?
Hitler used Christian religion in many of his public addresses to inspire his people to action under God's will (so he thought), right up to the end of WW2.
Both religions are as bad as eath other, offering all rival religions total disrespect. The two religions both state "if you don't believe in this religion only, you are going to die horribly in God's vengence." It is no wonder that religion has been the cause of oppression and warfare throughout history, if that's what religious types think of each other.
MFaraz_Hayat
Any meat improperly cooked can cause disease. If that is your standard for not eating pork...you need to be a vegetarian. But be careful......you can get sick from vegetables as well since the pick up things from the soil. Oops...guess you can't eat veggies either.
[QUOTE="gamingqueen"][QUOTE="RationalAtheist"][QUOTE="gamingqueen"]Do you have trust issues?
RationalAtheist
Not at all. I can justify all my beliefs....
Why the 3rd attempt at taking this thread off topic?
What do you want me to prove? That we're bad?
3 - The Islamic faith is dismissive about those who do not agree with Islam. I included over 500 quotes about infidels from the Koran. This believe or be damned policy does not inspire me to faith. Surely people have a common bond, aside from religion. This bond existed a long time before man conceived of religion.
Can someone plz direct me to these verses.
I found this article on the internet concerning pork. Is this untrue?
DISEASES CAUSED BY PORK
Other Diseases :
Flesh of the pork is hard to digest and may
lead to chronic digestive disturbances. Pimples, boils, cysts are
common in pork eaters. These are some of the parasites and
diseases found in pork and/ or the skin of pigs and certainly
there are many more. There is still no means of killing these
parasites, in the tissues, neither has anyone found a method of
expelling them, even produced any specific treatment for the
diseases.MFaraz_Hayat
It may well be true, but pigs are not the only farmyard animals to get disease. I have already posted this link to a UK government web site showing all animal diseases in this very thread. Does that make all animal flesh "unclean" then?
The last paragraph of your source (please provide the link to show the scientific origins of the text) provides no accurate information, so I suspect the source is biased.
[QUOTE="MFaraz_Hayat"]LJS9502_basic
Any meat improperly cooked can cause disease. If that is your standard for not eating pork...you need to be a vegetarian. But be careful......you can get sick from vegetables as well since the pick up things from the soil. Oops...guess you can't eat veggies either.
First of all, I took this article from Internet. I didnot write it. Secindly, are all of these diseases caused only by improper cooking? And are these diseases caused by other red meats?
First of all, I took this article from Internet. I didnot write it. Secindly, are all of these diseases caused only by improper cooking? And are these diseases caused by other red meats?
MFaraz_Hayat
You can find diseases for other meats..yes. And pork in and of itself is not a risk. The text is archaic and more cultural than health conscious.
I'd find some links for you...but I'm running out the door to work. Suffice it to say, you can find info on the internet.
[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"]Its not enough for me for someone to say something and I will believe it. The reason for this is that people can say all sorts of things and many of them are not true. With religion, people say different things that can not all be true. The only way to seek the truth is to find evidence. (This is the way science works - sceptical - relies on evidence, proof and peer review.)
Dracargen
The scientific method is not the know-all be-all end-all of reason. We cannot apply the scientific method to most history, we cannot apply it to philosophy or theology, and we cannot use it to determine exactly what logic and reason is.
It can not be the be-all-and-end-all of reason - agreed. This is because reasoning can be both rational and irrational. But we use science (and have done reliably for soime time now) to reveal the truth and to discover through rational, deductive reasoning.
History can come under scientific scrutiny. We have developed an increasingly refined picture of our origins and exploits in history.
We can apply the scientific method to philosophy and theology. This is especially true in a historical context.
We use rational logic as a fundamental tool to support the scientific framework of discovery.
[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"][QUOTE="gamingqueen"][QUOTE="RationalAtheist"][QUOTE="gamingqueen"]Do you have trust issues?
MFaraz_Hayat
Not at all. I can justify all my beliefs....
Why the 3rd attempt at taking this thread off topic?
What do you want me to prove? That we're bad?
3 - The Islamic faith is dismissive about those who do not agree with Islam. I included over 500 quotes about infidels from the Koran. This believe or be damned policy does not inspire me to faith. Surely people have a common bond, aside from religion. This bond existed a long time before man conceived of religion.
Can someone plz direct me to these verses.
Sure - here they are.
The reason we do not eat pork, is the same reason Jews consider pork not to be kosher. Simiarly, the dietary requirement includes carnivorous animals, and the proper slaughtering of animals. We believe in God, and his word, and he forbids it. Simple as that. Just as Muslims are required to pray 5 times a day. Just as Jews are expected to respect the Sabboth.
This is the main reason. Every other reason is secondary, and is only useful if one wants insight as to why God commanded such a thing. Obediance aside. Pork is well documented to have been disease-full hundreds of years back, and prior. Whether or not it's healthier or not in modern times, is debateable, yet once again, a secondary reason.
The reason we do not eat pork, is the same reason Jews consider pork not to be kosher. Simiarly, the dietary requirement includes carnivorous animals, and the proper slaughtering of animals. We believe in God, and his word, and he forbids it. Simple as that. Just as Muslims are required to pray 5 times a day. Just as Jews are expected to respect the Sabboth.
This is the main reason. Every other reason is secondary, and is only useful if one wants insight as to why God commanded such a thing. Obediance aside. Pork is well documented to have been disease-full hundreds of years back, and prior. Whether or not it's healthier or not in modern times, is debateable, yet once again, a secondary reason.
rimnet00
It depends which God you believe as to whether God allows it or not. Why not question the "word"? If something has been proven to be false, why continue to believe it?
Where is this documentation that shows pork to be more disease-ridden than other farmyard animals? Why is it debateable if pork is healthier in modern times than other meats? Empirical scientific evidence on the effects of meats on the human diet suggests otherwise...
[QUOTE="rimnet00"]The reason we do not eat pork, is the same reason Jews consider pork not to be kosher. Simiarly, the dietary requirement includes carnivorous animals, and the proper slaughtering of animals. We believe in God, and his word, and he forbids it. Simple as that. Just as Muslims are required to pray 5 times a day. Just as Jews are expected to respect the Sabboth.
This is the main reason. Every other reason is secondary, and is only useful if one wants insight as to why God commanded such a thing. Obediance aside. Pork is well documented to have been disease-full hundreds of years back, and prior. Whether or not it's healthier or not in modern times, is debateable, yet once again, a secondary reason.
RationalAtheist
It depends which God you believe as to whether God allows it or not. Why not question the "word"? If something has been proven to be false, why continue to believe it?
Where is this documentation that shows pork to be more disease-ridden than other farmyard animals? Why is it debateable if pork is healthier in modern times than other meats? Empirical scientific evidence on the effects of meats on the human diet suggests otherwise...
I odn't understand your post. What has been proven wrong?
[QUOTE="rimnet00"]The reason we do not eat pork, is the same reason Jews consider pork not to be kosher. Simiarly, the dietary requirement includes carnivorous animals, and the proper slaughtering of animals. We believe in God, and his word, and he forbids it. Simple as that. Just as Muslims are required to pray 5 times a day. Just as Jews are expected to respect the Sabboth.
This is the main reason. Every other reason is secondary, and is only useful if one wants insight as to why God commanded such a thing. Obediance aside. Pork is well documented to have been disease-full hundreds of years back, and prior. Whether or not it's healthier or not in modern times, is debateable, yet once again, a secondary reason.
RationalAtheist
It depends which God you believe as to whether God allows it or not. Why not question the "word"? If something has been proven to be false, why continue to believe it?
Where is this documentation that shows pork to be more disease-ridden than other farmyard animals? Why is it debateable if pork is healthier in modern times than other meats? Empirical scientific evidence on the effects of meats in the himan diet suggests otherwise...
The thread is about Islam. However, to clarify, I am speaking about God as described in Islam. By his Word, I am refering to the Qur'an. There is no reason given in the Qur'an as to why swine is permissable, or impermissiable - it simply is impermissiable (haram). If you believe that the Qur'an as the word of God, then it would only make sense to follow what is asked of you in it.
Once again, whether or not pork is healthy in modern times is debateable, and secondary. I'm no meat expert, so for all I know pork could be a great source of protein. I don't know, nor does it concern me as a Muslim.
[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"][QUOTE="rimnet00"]The reason we do not eat pork, is the same reason Jews consider pork not to be kosher. Simiarly, the dietary requirement includes carnivorous animals, and the proper slaughtering of animals. We believe in God, and his word, and he forbids it. Simple as that. Just as Muslims are required to pray 5 times a day. Just as Jews are expected to respect the Sabboth.
This is the main reason. Every other reason is secondary, and is only useful if one wants insight as to why God commanded such a thing. Obediance aside. Pork is well documented to have been disease-full hundreds of years back, and prior. Whether or not it's healthier or not in modern times, is debateable, yet once again, a secondary reason.
MFaraz_Hayat
It depends which God you believe as to whether God allows it or not. Why not question the "word"? If something has been proven to be false, why continue to believe it?
Where is this documentation that shows pork to be more disease-ridden than other farmyard animals? Why is it debateable if pork is healthier in modern times than other meats? Empirical scientific evidence on the effects of meats on the human diet suggests otherwise...
I odn't understand your post. What has been proven wrong?
That pork is less healthy to eat than beef, mutton or poultry.
Pigs are also suscepible to the same numbers and variety of diseases as other farmyard animals.
[QUOTE="MFaraz_Hayat"][QUOTE="RationalAtheist"][QUOTE="rimnet00"]The reason we do not eat pork, is the same reason Jews consider pork not to be kosher. Simiarly, the dietary requirement includes carnivorous animals, and the proper slaughtering of animals. We believe in God, and his word, and he forbids it. Simple as that. Just as Muslims are required to pray 5 times a day. Just as Jews are expected to respect the Sabboth.
This is the main reason. Every other reason is secondary, and is only useful if one wants insight as to why God commanded such a thing. Obediance aside. Pork is well documented to have been disease-full hundreds of years back, and prior. Whether or not it's healthier or not in modern times, is debateable, yet once again, a secondary reason.
RationalAtheist
It depends which God you believe as to whether God allows it or not. Why not question the "word"? If something has been proven to be false, why continue to believe it?
Where is this documentation that shows pork to be more disease-ridden than other farmyard animals? Why is it debateable if pork is healthier in modern times than other meats? Empirical scientific evidence on the effects of meats on the human diet suggests otherwise...
I odn't understand your post. What has been proven wrong?
That pork is less healthy to eat than beef, mutton or poultry.
Pigs are also suscepible to the same numbers and variety of diseases as other farmyard animals.
As Rimnet stated, the fact that pigs are less healthy is not mentioned in the Quran. It just says that donot eat the meat of swine. Quran is not proven false.
[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"][QUOTE="rimnet00"]The reason we do not eat pork, is the same reason Jews consider pork not to be kosher. Simiarly, the dietary requirement includes carnivorous animals, and the proper slaughtering of animals. We believe in God, and his word, and he forbids it. Simple as that. Just as Muslims are required to pray 5 times a day. Just as Jews are expected to respect the Sabboth.
This is the main reason. Every other reason is secondary, and is only useful if one wants insight as to why God commanded such a thing. Obediance aside. Pork is well documented to have been disease-full hundreds of years back, and prior. Whether or not it's healthier or not in modern times, is debateable, yet once again, a secondary reason.
rimnet00
It depends which God you believe as to whether God allows it or not. Why not question the "word"? If something has been proven to be false, why continue to believe it?
Where is this documentation that shows pork to be more disease-ridden than other farmyard animals? Why is it debateable if pork is healthier in modern times than other meats? Empirical scientific evidence on the effects of meats in the himan diet suggests otherwise...
The thread is about Islam. However, to clarify, I am speaking about God as described in Islam. By his Word, I am refering to the Qur'an. There is no reason given in the Qur'an as to why swine is permissable, or impermissiable - it simply is impermissiable (haram). If you believe that the Qur'an as the word of God, then it would only make sense to follow what is asked of you in it.
Once again, whether or not pork is healthy in modern times is debateable, and secondary. I'm no meat expert, so for all I know pork could be a great source of protein. I don't know, nor does it concern me as a Muslim.
To me, your stance is baffling - in accepting something you believe that you think might not be true. Even more baffling is your statement that you are not concerned by the truth or facts - only blind faith - even when it has been proved wrong.
[QUOTE="rimnet00"][QUOTE="RationalAtheist"][QUOTE="rimnet00"]The reason we do not eat pork, is the same reason Jews consider pork not to be kosher. Simiarly, the dietary requirement includes carnivorous animals, and the proper slaughtering of animals. We believe in God, and his word, and he forbids it. Simple as that. Just as Muslims are required to pray 5 times a day. Just as Jews are expected to respect the Sabboth.
This is the main reason. Every other reason is secondary, and is only useful if one wants insight as to why God commanded such a thing. Obediance aside. Pork is well documented to have been disease-full hundreds of years back, and prior. Whether or not it's healthier or not in modern times, is debateable, yet once again, a secondary reason.
RationalAtheist
It depends which God you believe as to whether God allows it or not. Why not question the "word"? If something has been proven to be false, why continue to believe it?
Where is this documentation that shows pork to be more disease-ridden than other farmyard animals? Why is it debateable if pork is healthier in modern times than other meats? Empirical scientific evidence on the effects of meats in the himan diet suggests otherwise...
The thread is about Islam. However, to clarify, I am speaking about God as described in Islam. By his Word, I am refering to the Qur'an. There is no reason given in the Qur'an as to why swine is permissable, or impermissiable - it simply is impermissiable (haram). If you believe that the Qur'an as the word of God, then it would only make sense to follow what is asked of you in it.
Once again, whether or not pork is healthy in modern times is debateable, and secondary. I'm no meat expert, so for all I know pork could be a great source of protein. I don't know, nor does it concern me as a Muslim.
To me, your stance is baffling - in accepting something you believe that you think might not be true. Even more baffling is your statement that you are not concerned by the truth or facts - only blind faith - even when it has been proved wrong.
First of all, plz calrify what has been proven wrong? Quran just says donot eat flesh of swine. No reason is given, so?
[QUOTE="Gipsyeyes"]Okay so you've a Muslim trying to defend 50 year old Mohammad marrying a 9 year old. I've got another question. Why did your Mohammad destroy the Jewish tribe of Banu Quraiza? Eigtht hundred Jewish men were murdered under Mohammad's orders, their women taken as sex slaves, and their children as slaves too.
Actually, I have the answer: It was because they rfeused to convert to Islam!
hagiiiiiiiiii
They're not lies. You know nothing of your horrible Islamic history. Here's proof: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banu_Quraiza
"The Banu Qurayza (Arabic ب6;ي 2;ريظة; ب6;8; 2;ريظة alternate spellings include Quraiza, Qurayzah, Quraytha, and the archaic Koreiza) were a Jewish tribe who lived in northern Arabia until the seventh century, at the oasis of Yathrib (now known as Medina). In 627 CE, the tribe was charged with treachery and collaboration with the invading armies during the Battle of the Trench and besieged by the Muslims commanded by Muhammad.[1][2] The Banu Qurayza surrendered and all the men, apart from a few who converted to Islam, were beheaded, while all the women and children were enslaved."
"As their morale waned, Ka'b ibn Asad suggested three alternative ways out of their predicament: embrace Islam, kill their own children and women, then rush out for a charge to either win or die; or make a surprise attack on the Sabbath."
Read it, you may learn something of your horrible religion of Islam.
I have already read the biography of the Prophet. Banu Quraiza had signed a treaty with the Prophet and broke it( And even tried to kill Prophet). They were placed under siege and when surrendered were asked: that wether they wanted judgement at hands of Prophet Muhammed or their ally Kab Ibn Sad. They chose judgement of their ally, who in turn punished them according to Jewish scriptures. (I am not sure about the name of the ally).
I see that you chose to overlook the fact, that the other two jewish tribes ( Banu qainuqa and Banu Nadir) were forgiven and allowed to reside in Khyber by the muslims. Despite the fact that they too had broken treaties with muslims.
[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"]To me, your stance is baffling - in accepting something you believe that you think might not be true. Even more baffling is your statement that you are not concerned by the truth or facts - only blind faith - even when it has been proved wrong.
MFaraz_Hayat
First of all, plz calrify what has been proven wrong? Quran just says donot eat flesh of swine. No reason is given, so?
The reason given for not eating pork in this thread has been that pigs are dirty. Islamic sites also attest to this view. I have to say that millions of people eat pork with no ill effects. There are far greater health risks from eating cattle.
Why not have reasons for doing things! It makes more sense than doing things for no reason, or just because some ancient book told you.
I have already read the biography of the Prophet. Banu Quraiza had signed a treaty with the Prophet and broke it( And even tried to kill Prophet). They were placed under siege and when surrendered were asked: that wether they wanted judgement at hands of Prophet Muhammed or their ally Kab Ibn Sad. They chose judgement of their ally, who in turn punished them according to Jewish scriptures. (I am not sure about the name of the ally).
I see that you chose to overlook the fact, that the other two jewish tribes ( Banu qainuqa and Banu Nadir) were forgiven and allowed to reside in Khyber by the muslims. Despite the fact that they too had broken treaties with muslims.
MFaraz_Hayat
And you overlooked the fact that a few Banu Quraiza were spared because they decided to convert to Islam.:roll: Still it goes to show what a horrible violent man your so called "prophet" was. The biggest holy man mobster that ever lived was "prophet" Mohammad. A man who created the religion of Islam only for his sole benefit and pleasure. A man who was the most egotistical self aggrandising megalomaniac ever.:evil: A man who made rules to suit him only. The biggest lie that Muslims constantly repeat is: "Islam is a religion of peace".
I think I read something about slavery. Well, slavery though is allowed in Islam, yet a person has many responsbilities to the slave. Few important ones are:
Masters could not abuse their slaves and had to give them the same that they ate and wore.
Narated by Al-Ma'rur: At Ar-Rabadha I met Abu Dhar who was wearing a cloak, and his slave, too, was wearing a similar one. I asked about the reason for it. He replied, "I abused a person by calling his mother with bad names." The Prophet said to me, 'O Abu Dhar! Did you abuse him by calling his mother with bad names you still have some characteristics of ignorance. Your slaves are your brothers and Allah has put them under your command. So whoever has a brother under his command should feed him of what he eats and dress him of what he wears. Do not ask them (slaves) to do things beyond their capacity (power) and if you do so, then help them.'" - [Bukhari, Vol.1, Book 2, #29]
In another narration the importance of giving slaves education and teaching them good manners is stressed by Prophet Muhammad(saw):
Narrated Abu Burda's father: Allah's Apostle said "Three persons will have a double reward:
1. A Person from the people of the scriptures who believed in his prophet (Jesus or Moses) and then believed in the Prophet Muhammad (i .e. has embraced Islam).
2. A slave who discharges his duties to Allah and his master.
3. A master of a woman-slave who teaches her good manners and educates her in the best possible way (the religion) and manumits her and then marries her." - [Bukhari Vol.1, Book 3, #97A]Further in the Quran it is seen that people are encouraged to marry the slaves. If a person cannot marry a free woman for whatever reason, to prevent him from committing sin, the Quran asks them to marry from among the slave women.
If any of you have not the means wherewith to wed free believing women, they may wed believing girls from among those whom your right hands possess: And Allah hath full knowledge about your faith. Ye are one from another: Wed them with the leave of their owners, and give them their dowers, according to what is reasonable. - [Quran 4:25]
Islam never started slavery and it is well known that slavery was practiced much before the introduction of Islam. Islam actually laid down all the rules so that eventually slavery would be eliminated completely. There are many great rewards for freeing a slave. Allah(swt) has given man all the incentive to free slaves which would in return eventually eradicate slavery completely. Another narration goes as follows:
Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, "Whoever frees a Muslim slave, Allah will save all the parts of his body from the (Hell) Fire as he has freed the body-parts of the slave." Said bin Marjana said that he narrated that Hadith to 'Ali bin Al-Husain and he freed his slave for whom 'Abdullah bin Ja'far had offered him ten thousand Dirhams or one-thousand Dinars. - [Bukhari, Vol.3, Book 46, #693]
MFaraz_Hayat
Surely your not justifying slavery?
"Islam never started slavery and it is well known that slavery was practiced much before the introduction of Islam. Islam actually laid down all the rules so that eventually slavery would be eliminated completely. There are many great rewards for freeing a slave. Allah(swt) has given man all the incentive to free slaves which would in return eventually eradicate slavery completely. Another narration goes as follows:"
So why is it only the Islamic countries in the world who still practice slavery?
"The Prophet said, "Whoever frees a Muslim slave, Allah will save all the parts of his body..."
If your not Muslim? Its ok?
Don't you think your 2nd sentence is quite inaccurate and inflamatory?
In fact, Christianity has caused terrible bloodshed and wholesale hardship and death in Europe during the middle ages. People were executed or imprisoned for believing anything else (i.e. Bruno and Galileo). Most people lived their lives in poverty and were totally controlled by the church.
The crusades were fought in the name of Christian religion. Why else call them "crusades"?
Hitler used Christian religion in many of his public addresses to inspire his people to action under God's will (so he thought), right up to the end of WW2.
Both religions are as bad as eath other, offering all rival religions total disrespect. The two religions both state "if you don't believe in this religion only, you are going to die horribly in God's vengence." It is no wonder that religion has been the cause of oppression and warfare throughout history, if that's what religious types think of each other.
RationalAtheist
"Don't you think your 2nd sentence is quite inaccurate and inflamatory?"
Not at all, im pretty sure in Islam when a person attacks a Muslim he is attacking all of Islam, this theory does not exist in other faiths, as it does more harm than good.
"In fact, Christianity has caused terrible bloodshed and wholesale hardship and death in Europe during the middle ages. People were executed or imprisoned for believing anything else (i.e. Bruno and Galileo). Most people lived their lives in poverty and were totally controlled by the church."
I completely agree with you, in fact Islam was far more civilized than Christianity and did far more for a great amount of time, My argument is it was much more violent in its creation and expansion.
"The crusades were fought in the name of Christian religion. Why else call them "crusades"?"
Thats a stupidly simple way of looking at them, like arguing everything is black or white, not even worth a response really...
"Hitler used Christian religion in many of his public addresses to inspire his people to action under God's will (so he thought), right up to the end of WW2."
What Hitler said or thought? Nazis were not keen on religion at all, no matter what Hitler said or thought. Simple fact i was making, WW2 was not fought over faith.
"Both religions are as bad as eath other, offering all rival religions total disrespect. The two religions both state "if you don't believe in this religion only, you are going to die horribly in God's vengence." It is no wonder that religion has been the cause of oppression and warfare throughout history, if that's what religious types think of each other."
I agree to extent with you, but why are atheists so quick to forget all of the good things faith have done, the west is built on the principles of Christianity, without those principles would we be in a better position? Compare the West's principles with the Islamic worlds principles, its why the two are so different.
Question...why chose to follow the word of only one prophet of your religion?LJS9502_basic
Muhammed (pbuh) is the Seal of the Prophets. It's also not his word we are following, but the Word of God; the Qur'an. Those who came before him had a particular purpose, for a particular group of people. As the final prophet, aka the Seal of the Prophets, he delivered the final message to mankind (hense the nickname "The Mouthpiece of God"). The Qur'an is the last revelation from God to mankind before judgement day. With that said, there are many references to other prophets in the Qur'an, and the morals of those particular references are binding on Muslims.
I assume however, you are asking why Muslims do not also follow the Bible and/or the Torah? We as Muslims, and as per the Qur'an do not acknoledge the validity of the texts, based on assertion that the texts are not in their original form, as they were sent from God.
Did muhammad write the Quran?123625
No, Muhammed was illiterate. His multiple scribes wrote it down, as well as had hundreds of followers memorize the words. The Arabian culture in that time period treasured the art of poetry. In fact, to be a noble, you had to be well posed in poetry. They would take pride in memorizing poetry. As all Prophets before him, Muhammed's miracle from God was one that would relate to the culture/time period -- hense the poetic nature of the Qur'an.
Religiously motivated Anti-Semitismin in german society was quiet common in middle ages ,if nazis were not chirstain why did the red cross and the catholic church help them in getting out of europe after WW2...strange dont you think? NasRex
Anti-Semitismin was mainly caused due to the amount of money the Jews held in Germany.
"If nazis were not chirstain why did the red cross and the catholic church help them in getting out of europe after WW2"
I never said Nazis are not Christian, i said the Nazi ideology was not keen on Christianity. Nazis tried to mix the church with the ideology. This did not happen immediately (duh) thus the Red Cross and the Catholic Church helped Christian Nazis.
"Many Nazi leaders subscribed either to a mixture of then modern scientific theories, as Hitler himself did, or to mysticism and occultism, which was especially strong in the SS."
"Despite Germany's long history as the seat of the Holy Roman Empire and the birthplace of the Reformation, Christianity was in a decline during the rise of the Nazi Party."
Wiki^
"...strange don't you think? "
no not really....
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment