The Unofficial "Ask a Muslim" Thread.

[BuffedGuy]

I have noticed alot of the debating is over whos "laws" each group want to fallow..

no matter what group you poll you will always get a high number of people saying they want to live by their religions laws.christians would say bible needs to be law. muslims would say the quran shoulw be law.

But how many people would truely be able to live by those standards.. probably a low percentage, but i do believe it would be on both sides.. Humans as a general statement are weak minded. and if you as a person don't take responsiblity to learn and educate yourself then you will fall inline with whatever extreme we are with. either christian or muslim.

As christians, you can not forget the dark dark days the christian faith has had in its past. the wars, murders, lying, steal and cheating it has had. It is easy to point the finger at muslims because to the rest of the world it might seem "weird". but burning a woman alive because a woman could swim and the church says that makes her a witch? come on though it wasn't recent, Christians have had their dark days.during the middle ages Martin Luther lead a charge to kill jews. killing 150,000 of them, which percentage wise is about equal to hitler.. and he made everybody believe it was "for god" ..

and i do realize there are holes in my logic that you can rip apart.. but look at the big picture. though muslim extremist are making muslims look horrible.. that doesn't mean all muslims are suicide bombers. that is dumb and far from the truth.

i defend buffedguy on this thread because i feel he is trying to educate people on believes and concepts.. you can't rightfully ask him to defend groups of people his is not. he can only spread knowledge from what he knows, and try to tell you the mind set other people might or might not be in.. Buffedguy is only one man, he is very out spoken about alot of things.

I only ask that we keep an open mind and heart on this forum, because tho i am not muslim i think that he has taught everybody alot on here.. so to rip back and forth on small things is a waste of time.

Thank you for your kind words. Much appreciated.

[D7M]

Hey Buff,

Ok, I see your point. That's fine. I agree, it shouldn't be used to justify racism against Arabs (or any race).

Yes, the contemporary church rejects this, you're right.

As far as that website, I'm a bit hesitant. The internet is a great tool for sharing information, but the problem is that there is so much crap out there too (which, incidentally, is why I never let my students use websites as sources).

But that website was more about Christianity and slavery in general. It's a really interesting subject. I won't hijack this thread, but if you're interested the best treatment I've seen is John Noonan's book, "A Church that can and cannot change"

And Buff, you know it's highly unlikely I'm going to be offended

[NightWolf]

Who is demanding anything? They were asked in a poll if they would want Shari'ah law in the West, and they said yes. It is only with regards to themselves--mostly family law and such--not imposed on others. In other words, they simply want the freedom to follow family law in accordance to their own beliefs. You see, the Islamic Law allows Non-Muslim minorities to rule according to their own laws, so that is what the Muslims were talking about when they said they want Shari'ah law

Well unlike you i dont think they just want the islamic
law because of the family issues, the reason i dont think
so is because IMO the majority of the 40% who voted for this
are infact the extremists and radicals,

the point that
"over 32% of the muslim voters said that western society
is decadent and immoral and that muslims should
seek to bring it to an end" further shows that they are
most likley extremists and demand it.

You have a misunderstanding, but I guess you do not wish to understand. When Muslims call towards the freedom to live by Shari'ah in the West, they are not saying that Non-Muslims should live under Islamic Law or the Islamic punishments. Rather, they are simply asking for some freedom and lenience with regard to themselves. For example, in India Muslims are allowed to practice polygamy, whereas Christians are not. This is because India allows Muslims to use family law in accordance to Islam, and Christians according to Christianity.

See above

Almost all radicals are born Americans and very young in age. The older generation, i.e. the immigrants, are much more moderate, and are happy to be in the country. The radicals blame their parents for migrating here, and believe that hijrah (emigration) is mandatory on them, and many of them do eventually leave.
This argument of yours--that they first move here and then hate on the country--is simply not correct. I spend a lot of time debating with radicals, and I know how they think. Very few of them migrated here. Rather, their parents moved here for education purposes, and then they (the children) themselves lived spoiled lives, did not appreciate what they had, and then became radicalized when they saw the humiliation of the Muslim world at the hands of the colonial West.

Well i will not debatt against you how it is for the muslims
and extremists in the US, because that i do not know.

HOWEVER the extremists and radicals in Europe
(atleast sweden) are NOT born in the country,
infact they have not been to many years in
the country and most of them cant even speak
the langue because of the hate, they dont even
try to bother.

So to answer your question: I think that yes the Christians should be able to have their own way of life preserved in Muslim lands, and this is something that we Muslims must work towards as we have lagged far behind in this aspect.

Thank you, i have many in real life storys about this
kind of things but as we both agre and have the same
opinon on the matter i wont bother to bring them up.

Most of us were born in America. So where are you telling us to go back to?

You know very well i was talking about the muslim radicals
that come to a country and then whine about the way
of life and the people in it, so why do you use the term "us"?
i thought you did not belong to these groups?

And I assure you that most Muslims do not want to kill you and your family. It is as imaginary a thought as the Nazi's idea that Jews wanted to take over the world.

Well thats not a fair exampel now is it? last i checked
the jews did not blow up people and behead "infidels"
in hitlers country.

What I will say, however, is that I agree there are extremists amongst our ranks, and I oppose them. This is not just a token statement I am making; rather, I spend a lot of my time and energies refuting them. They are scum. It is true that many of them do many nefarious things like taking benefits from the government (i.e. welfare) and then meanwhile plan their "jihad" against the government. This is completely forbidden under Islamic Law, and rejected by the vast majority of Muslims.

Another point where i agre with you.

My *only* problem with you is that you are trying to demonize the Muslim community in generality. You say "sure, not *all* Muslims are like that"...I am telling you that MOST Muslims are not, and you need to recognize that

.

This is a false statement, and i have already
explained why.

Furthermore, to get a balanced picture, you need to dole out blame appropriately. You cannot place the blame all on the Muslims. You are complaining that Muslims are CALLING towards destroying the UK. Well, the UK not only called to destroying Iraq, but it DID destroy it. You complain about the Muslims who move to the UK LEGALLY and then complain when they are there. What about the British troops who enter Muslim lands ILLEGALLY without any VISA or permission of the people, and who greet the Muslims with their guns? How many years did it take the UK to come back to Iraq? Didn't we just dump the British? Was it not just yesteryear when we freed ourselves from the shackles of British colonialism? Why in the world are they back?

You are absolutely right, and this might come as a
shock to you, but i totally opposed that the US and UK
was in Iraq. They had absolutely no business there.
And every iraqi that hates them for it has every right
to do so. i have many relatives friends there and
they all say its much worse now, the shiates
are on killing spree on christians now.
Thats why i like sunnis, and hate shiates.

Muslims come legally and complain with their mouths, whereas Non-Muslims come illegally and kill with their guns. So why the double-standard? Some Westerners are so angry at the Muslims whose only crime was to complain with their tongues and chant radical slogans of death and destruction...well, can you then imagine the anger in Muslim eyes when the Westerners actually come into Muslim lands and ACTUALLY spread death and destruction, instead of just saying it? You're so angry at Muslim immigration to Europe...can you imagine how angry the Muslims are when the British don't just immigrate but conquer?

The reason they complain with their mouths and chant radical
slogans about death is because they CANT do anything else
atleast not for the moment. They dont have the weapons and
technology as theBritish or the US. Look what they are doing in iraq
to christians atm, why? because they got the power and they CAN,
when saddam was in power these same people could not.

We need to realize that there is extremism, bigotry, and war-mongering prevalent in the Western nations as well, which fuels the extremists within the Muslim ranks. Each side is feeding off the other's fury. If the West would just stop conquering Muslim lands, there would be almost no Muslim radicals at all.

I agre to this, because for every muslim country they
invade, the more radicals are refuged to Europe,
along with non violent muslims, if there are such left
in these countrys.

[BuffedGuy]

Peace be unto you, NightWolf.

In the Name of God, The Most Gracious, The Most Merciful.

[B]Well unlike you i dont think they just want the islamic
law because of the family issues, the reason i dont think
so is because IMO the majority of the 40% who voted for this
are infact the extremists and radicals,

I disagree with you. So does Gallup poll.

the point that
"over 32% of the muslim voters said that western society
is decadent and immoral and that muslims should
seek to bring it to an end" further shows that they are
most likley extremists and demand it.

No, it doesn't. In Gallup Poll's book, they showed how a similar percentage of Christians felt that the top problems in Western society were moral decadence and sexual immorality.

HOWEVER the extremists and radicals in Europe
(atleast sweden) are NOT born in the country,
infact they have not been to many years in
the country and most of them cant even speak
the langue because of the hate, they dont even
try to bother.

I warn a lot of people about the dangers of xenophobia. It's the same pattern that repeats throughout history. If you study history, almost every wave of immigrants to America had their share of problems. For example, when the Irish first came in the 19th century, they were hated by the other white Americans. The Chicago Post wrote:

"The Irish fill our prisons, our poor houses...Scratch a convict or a pauper, and the chances are that you tickle the skin of an Irish Catholic. Putting them on a boat and sending them home would end crime in this country."

http://www.kinsella.org/history/histira.htm

See how similar it is to what you are saying about Muslims in Europe? It takes every diaspora population time to acclimate and integrate into their community. It took many generations for the Irish to "settle in", to the point that eventually a newspaper declared:

"The Irish have become more Americanized than the Americans."

It took many generations for that to happen. And you will see a similar story for different groups of immigrants, such as the Greeks, the Italians, etc.

Indeed, many xenophobes say similar things to Mexicans who immigrate to the USA, i.e. "They don't even bother to learn English; they are criminals, etc." But again, it takes time. Generations.

In the Care of the Lord,
-Saladin.

[BuffedGuy]

Australian bloke converts to Islam, part 1

Australian bloke converts to Islam, part 2

[gst528i]

Okay we all know the holy books of hindu, christian, muslim were written by "PROPHETS", " PEOPLE OF GOD", "GURUS" what ever term you use.
My point is, these books were written by humans and has been with us for ages. We all have come to the conclution that there are some parts in christian bible, hindu holy book, that has been added or removed because it wasn't the word of god.
How can muslims say with irrefutable proof that the quran was all the word of god.
Also i have always wondered, how did the prophet mohammed claim he had word from god?
Any magical powers? any gifts?
This is why i don't believe in any religions

[BuffedGuy]

Peace be unto you, GST.

In the Name of God, The Most Gracious, The Most Merciful.

And i just have to ask. What does islam say to adapting to time? By this i mean, islamic laws adapting as time changes and we go forward, in a sense as humans evolve do these laws become "for the lack of better word less barbaric".
I am not saying islam has the only barbaric laws, since the bible has them too, but don't you think christianity which is dominant in the west has evolved to not take exact punishments in the bible, but adapt them as we evolve.
Where as the muslim world is stuck rigid and unwilling to change or adapt to punishments and other things proposed in the holy book.

I believe that there is a difference between a religion adapting for the times and outright revisionism. Yes, I believe that Islam and Islamic Law intrinsically have the capability of being applied to numerous different times, places, cultures, etc. There is a level of dynamic versatility that is inherently present in Islam. For example, Islamic Law tries to accommodate different cultures, instead of imposing one culture upon all. As such, I think this is something that is inbuilt with Islam.

However, what we Muslims are wary of is blatant revisionism. We believe that Christians have indeed been guilty of this; conversely, they may think we are stuck in the past. Nonetheless, we Muslims do not think it makes sense to neutralize the Word of God by creating complicated "explanations". In fact, one of the Quran's main criticisms against the Christians (i.e. the People of the Book) is that they change the book of God to conform to their whims and desires. God says in the Quran:

"And those who call themselves Christians, We did take a covenant from them, but they forgot a good part of the message that was sent them: so we estranged them...And soon will God inform them of their handiwork. O People of the Book! Now has come to your Our messenger, revealing to you much of what you used to hide in the Book and passing over much. There has come to you from God a Light and Clear Book from God, wherewith God guides all who seek His Good Pleasure to ways of peace and safety, and leads them out of darknesses, by His Will, unto the Light--guides them to a path that is straight." (Quran, 5:14-16)

God warns:

"Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say: 'This is from God,' to traffic with it for a miserable price! Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby." (Quran, 2:79)

The Quran even says that the Jews and Christians worshiped their rabbis and priests:

"They have taken as lords beside God their rabbis and their monks." (Quran, 9:31)

When a Christian said "but we don't worship our rabbis and priests", then Prophet Muhammad [s] answered by saying that the rabbis and priests would turn what God had forbidden in the Book and make it permissible, and also make what was permissible into what is forbidden.

Not only do orthodox Muslims criticize Jews and Christians for this, but we also criticize certain heretical sects of Islam for doing this. We call them the People of Evil Innovation (Ahl al-Bidah). The methodology of the People of Evil Innovation is to first come up with their beliefs from their own desires, and then they will after that read the Quran in order to "generate proofs" to back up their preconceived notions. On the other hand, the methodology of the People of the Prophetic Way is to FIRST read the Quran, and THEN make up their beliefs based on that reading. Instead of superimposing our beliefs on God's Word, we impose God's Words on us.

In fact, there was more than once that God revealed a verse in the Quran that differed from what Prophet Muhammad [s] wanted. When God revealed one such verse, Prophet Muhammad [s] said:

"I wanted one thing but God wanted another, and what God wanted is (always) best." (At-Tafsir al-Kabir)

Actually one of the distinguishing features of the Muslim is the fact that a Muslim submits himself in full to God. In fact, the Arabic word "Muslim" translates to "submitter." We are merely slaves to God, and we obey His Will, without question or argumentation. The Quran describes the Muslim as one who says:

"We hear, and we obey." (Quran, 2:285)

And the Quran says:

"The believers' reply, when they are summoned to God and His Messenger so that he can judge between them, is to say, 'We hear and we obey!' They are ones who are successful. (Quran, 24:51)

And God says further:

"When God and His Messenger have decided something, no believing man or woman has a choice about following it or not. Anyone who disobeys God and His Messenger is clearly misguided." (Quran, 33:36)

We believe that judging by God's Laws is mandatory:

"If any do fail to judge by what God has revealed, they are transgressors." (Quran, 5:47)

The Quran describes itself in numerous places as Al-Furqan, which means "The Criterion (between right and wrong)", or "that which distinguishes between right and wrong." So as a Muslim, our Criterion is the Quran, not our own whims and desires. God says:

"Then do you see such a person as takes as his god his own vain desires?(Quran, 45:23)

God says of the Quran:

"Thus We have revealed it to be a Judgment of authority...Were you to follow their desires after the Knowledge which has reached you, you would find neither protector nor defender against God." (Quran, 13:37)

"Have you seen him who takes his desires for his god?" (Quran, 25:43)

"If the Truth had been in accordance to their desires, truly the heavens and the earth, and all beings therein would have been in confusion and corruption! No, We have sent them their scriptures, but they turn away from their admonition." (Quran, 23:71)

We Muslims believe it is Major Disbelief in God to call the punishments prescribed by God to be barbaric. Whoever seeks to replace them with his own punishments has put himself over God, and thus committed polytheism. How can a person believe that God's Punishment is barbaric? Such a person cannot truly believe in God. He might say it from his tongue that he does, but his heart is full of doubt, and that's why he has to "clean up" God's Words.

You are correct in saying that Jews and Christians have "modernized" their religion, but I think that "modernizing" is just a euphemism for "revisionism." I believe that they have invented their own religion. Having said that, there are Orthodox Jews and maybe a few branches of Christianity who refuse to use revisionism, and this must be mentioned. I respect them a lot, in the sense that at least they stick to their guns. They believe in their beliefs; their beliefs are more than hobbies or past-times.

However, one thing that is unique about Islam is that although Judaism and Christianity have entire sects/branches that have adopted revisionism as a modus operandi, i.e. Reform Judaism (and even Conservative Judaism) and many strains of Christianity, you will not find a similar branch of Islam. This may be in fact what vexes many of you, i.e. our refusal to create a revisionist sect that "modernizes" the religion. In fact, some people have tried their best to create such sects, but all Praise is due to God, they have never met with success. The orthodox Muslims have always been able to intellectually "contain" them, and "own their...butts" in debates. The Muslim masses never accepted them, and they are doomed to utter obscurity.

I think that if you are going to follow a religion, follow it wholesale. It doesn't make sense to follow half of it and reject half of it. In fact, God says:

"Do you, then, believe in one part of the Book and reject the other!?" (Quran, 2:85)

God warns against those who take certain "open to interpretation" verses to supersede and nullify the clear and decisive verses:

"He it is Who sent down to you the Book: In it are verses that are decisive and fundamental; they are the foundation of the Book. Other verses are open to interpretation. But those in whose hearts is deviation follow the part thereof that is open to interpretation, seeking to mislead and seeking to give it their own interpretation. But no one knows its interpretation except God. And those who are firmly grounded in Knowledge, say 'We believe in the Book; the whole of it is from our Lord', and none will grasp the Message except men of understanding." (Quran, 3:7)

As for the punishments legislated in the Quran, I do not think they are barbaric. I believe that they are a mercy on the people. By having such harsh punishments, they serve as strong deterrents, which keep people away from sinning, which benefits none other than their own souls. It is like a parent who threatens his kid with a severe punishment if he does drugs. The punishment is actually a mercy for the child, but the child cannot grasp that yet.

Furthermore, there are a lot of misconceptions about Islamic Punishments (Hadood) to begin with. For example, I clarified about the fornication/adultery punishment, and there are similar clarifications that must be made about other Islamic punishments.

Also, I find the Western punishment of prison to be troubling. A man goes to jail, and if he's not criminal already, he'll *turn* criminal in jail, just to survive. Throwing a criminal with a bunch of other criminals is not the best way to rehabilitate a person. Whilst in jail, he will probably commit even more sins, again just to survive. He might get raped, or he might sodomize someone else. He will be persuaded to do drugs and other things. So in the end, throwing him in jail is just hurting his soul and position in the hereafter. You throw him in jail for one sin, and he commits one hundred more whilst in jail! And he comes out with a PhD in crime.

Instead, a swift punishment will maximize the person's chance of rehabilitation. He will want to change himself immediately; meanwhile, if he was thrown in jail, that motivation to change will wane or even die out over time.

Furthermore, we believe that punishment in this worldly life benefits a person's state in the next life. As such, it is a mercy, since it alleviates the person from eternal punishment, which is worse.

Lastly, even if I did believe that such-and-such punishment was barbaric, I would say:

"I wanted one thing but God wanted another, and what God wanted is (always) best." (At-Tafsir al-Kabir)

In other words, even if Satan whispered to me that such-and-such is barbaric about Islam, I would tell myself that I am wrong and that it is just the whispering of Satan. Then I would submit myself to God and His Will, without question. I hear and I obey. If you watched the two videos I linked to (the one with the Australian "bloke"), you will see that the Islamic attitude is: how can I have an opinion on a matter when the Lord of the Universe has spoken?

In the Care of the Lord,
-Saladin.

[BuffedGuy]

GST, you always ask juicy questions; I will have to answer your last post tomorrow, God-Willing. It took me ages writing the above post, haha.

[BuffedGuy]

Ron Paul responded to my email. Looks generic though, lol. Here it is:

Dear [snipped]:

Thank you for taking the time to contact my office with your kind and supportive words. It is reassuring and encouraging to hear from those, such as yourself, who understand the issues and the positive impact of a pro-freedom philosophy.

Such active citizen participation, as the founders well understood, is absolutely vital to our form of government and to the preservation of the liberty they entrusted to us.

As I serve in the 111th Congress, rest assured that I shall continue to take very seriously my oath to uphold the Constitution of limited federal powers and work to make ours the freest, and hence most prosperous and tranquil society in the history of mankind.

Thank you again for taking the time to communicate your thoughts. I always appreciate hearing from those to whom power is vested by our Constitution, "the People of the United States."

Sincerely,

Ron Paul

[gst528i]

GST, you always ask juicy questions; I will have to answer your last post tomorrow, God-Willing. It took me ages writing the above post, haha.

Haha , yea sorry about making you type. I am not trying to insult your religion or anything. Just trying to understand...
Thanks last answer. I understand your point about deterrence by using these punishments. I find them barbaric, but they seem to be doing a hell of a job in abu dhabi (sp), baharain (sp), and dubai. I have seen how safe it is for tourist to walk with cash in hands at midnight....

[amcon]

buffedguy - i am impressed with your attitude in the other threads(i mean that and no sarcasim) ...

[BuffedGuy]

buffedguy - i am impressed with your attitude in the other threads(i mean that and no sarcasim) ...

Thanks. That means a lot. I was too harsh on you and Prone2Rage in certain threads. I apologize for that. May God unite our hearts on the truth.

[Hoggage_54]

I have a crush on a Muslim girl. How do I approach her?

[amcon]

Thanks. That means a lot. I was too harsh on you and Prone2Rage in certain threads. I apologize for that. May God unite our hearts on the truth.

no no no - it is your passion you are instructed by God to educate, and your beliefs dictate you actions. educate every one you can (ditto for me as well).



and as i said before i dont know you however we are brothers/cousins in God almighty - i love your passion and you energy - we will meet one day in our holy bodies.

amen!

[gst528i]

I have a crush on a Muslim girl. How do I approach her?

Easy approach as any other girl.... i did ... worked for me .... course beware if she really like you and u get into a relation there is a chance this will cause problems in the future ( you not being muslim).

other wise .. its all good.

[BuffedGuy]

I had this conversation with an extremist, as follows:

Hamas has turned soft. They have the defeatist attitude that they will live side by side with Israel in peace, if Israel agrees to the 1967 borders. How can they do that when ALL of the land in palestine is usurped from the muslims? We should drive them all out, without leaving any land left to them, and whoever says otherwise is a defeatist.

My response:

Yes, Israel started out as a colonial entity and all of the land it exists upon is usurped from the native Palestinian population. This is why the Palestinians do not wish to ever formally recognize Israel, because they do not want to say that the take-over of Palestinian land was legitimate to begin with.

Nonetheless, living in peace side-by-side Israel is not defeatist. Yes, the Quran says to fight off those who drive us out of our homes, but if they incline towards peace, then we must also incline towards peace. God says in the Quran: "If the enemy inclines towards peace, then you also incline towards peace! And trust in God!" (Quran, 8:61)

We are a people who love peace over war. If that requires giving concessions, then that is OK. Did not Prophet Muhammad [s] make great concessions to the pagans at the Treaty of Hudaiybiyyah? Some of the concessions he [s] made hurt the Muslims greatly, yet he [s] made them. Muslims gave up some of their rights to reach that peace agreement. Why!? Because peace is better than war, a fact that the Prophet Muhammad [s] understood.

You mention Salahuddeen Ayyoubi (Saladin). Perfect example: yes, Saladin liberated Jerusalem from the Crusader occupation, yet he allowed the Crusaders to hold onto some land in Palestine! Even though he was at that time so powerful that he could have simply driven them out--each and every last one of them--but he didn't. Instead, he made peace with them and promised their safety. Go check a history book and see who let the Crusaders stay in Tyre? Who transported Crusaders to safety in Tyre? Was it not our beloved Saladin who did that!? Keep in mind that this strip of land that he allowed Crusaders to remain on was most definitely usurped Muslim land, yet Saladin made the concession anyways! Why? Because peace is better than war.

Will you now dare to call Saladin to be a defeatist? You guys talk about Saladin as if you revere him, but if he were alive today, your kind would be the first to call him a defeatist. Your kind delights in the killing of the "filthy kufaar", yet Saladin was found many times crying whenever Non-Muslim women came to him complaining that their husbands or sons had died in the battle.

As for Hamas, I am glad that there is now a wedge between them and Al-Qaeda. "Al-Zawahri [Al-Qaeda's number two] rebuked Hamas." (MSNBC) And: "Hamas has distanced itself from al-Qaida, saying its struggle is against Israel, not the West at large." (MSNBC)

Hamas is heading in the right direction by distancing itself from Al-Qaeda, and hopefully we can see them becoming more moderate and mainstreamed as time progresses. Regardless of what any group wants, the Palestinian people themselves want peace, so if Hamas does not tow that line, it will lose the support of the people. Palestinians in general are less interested in some epic struggle to reclaim ancestral land: they just want to live in peace and safety, as human beings.

May God save us from extremism.

[amcon]

Easy approach as any other girl.... i did ... worked for me .... course beware if she really like you and u get into a relation there is a chance this will cause problems in the future ( you not being muslim).

other wise .. its all good.

and try not to do it with 7-11 hotdog in your hand... good luck

[animalpk]

@BG

you are doing a great work brother, JAZAKALLAH.

I thank you for this good work,, keep it up.

[BuffedGuy]

Peace be unto you, StoneGRMI.

Why did the largest base of Muslims and Arabs choose to live in Michigan? I've never asked any of my friends here that as I was never asked to ask a Muslim anything.

Interestingly enough, Detroit is said to have perhaps the second largest Arab population outside of the Arab world. I don't know how accurate that is, but that's what I have heard.

In my own city, most Muslims are either immigrants or first generation Americans. (Having said that, I'm a bit confused about if I would be considered first or second generation American.) But anyways in Detroit there are even third generation Muslims. Again, I don't know how they decide which is the first generation: is it the immigrant population or their children who were born in America?

Long story short though, they came for jobs in the auto industry, and then Arabs who came later would settle in Detroit so that they could mingle with other fellow Arab immigrants. It was a positive feedback loop.

EDIT: Actually, most Muslims in America are not from immigrant families at all, since the largest subgroup of Muslims is made up of African Americans. I was just talking about the groups other than them.

In the Care of the Lord,
-Saladin.

[BuffedGuy]

@BG

you are doing a great work brother, JAZAKALLAH.

I thank you for this good work,, keep it up.

Barakh-Allah feek. May Allah [swt] reward you.

[*RAGE*]

deleted........

[BuffedGuy]

Question for my practicing Christian cousins on this forum: does it not bother you when you see people mocking Prophet Jesus [as] and God? For example, recently someone posted an animation of Prophet Jesus [as] doing a silly dance, and another person posted a picture of Prophet Jesus [as] coupled with a reference to masturbation--followed by a comment. Or what about in cartoons like Family Guy, American Dad, Simpsons, etc. where they depict God in a mocking way...or even the countless references in so many tv shows where they mock God? Just recently, Jon Stewart mocked God for "resting on Sunday"...don't get me wrong, I like Jon Stewart and his show, but that comment really gutted me. The callous way in which they talk about the Lord of the Universe really gets to me. The way they make a mockery of The Messiah, it twists my stomach's insides.

So my question is: does this bother you? Or is it not considered a big deal? Do you laugh at such jokes when they are made? I find the tv shows like Family Guy to be extremely funny, but when they crack a joke about Prophet Jesus [as] or God--even if it is extremely "funny"--I would not laugh; rather, I feel sick to my stomach and viscerally pained. Obviously you can't speak on behalf of all Christians, but perhaps just speak for yourself as a Christian, or for the Christians you know. We Muslims love and respect Prophet Jesus [as] and it guts us to see the way that he [as] is made into a mockery by popular culture.

I'm not asking this in a polemical way. I'm not implying that Christians *don't* feel a certain way. I am just asking, since I've never asked practicing Christians what they feel when they are confronted with this.

Thanks,
-Saladin.

[gst528i]

Question for my practicing Christian cousins on this forum: does it not bother you when you see people mocking Prophet Jesus [as] and God? For example, recently someone posted an animation of Prophet Jesus [as] doing a silly dance, and another person posted a picture of Prophet Jesus [as] coupled with a reference to masturbation--followed by a comment. Or what about in cartoons like Family Guy, American Dad, Simpsons, etc. where they depict God in a mocking way...or even the countless references in so many tv shows where they mock God? Just recently, Jon Stewart mocked God for "resting on Sunday"...don't get me wrong, I like Jon Stewart and his show, but that comment really gutted me. The callous way in which they talk about the Lord of the Universe really gets to me. The way they make a mockery of The Messiah, it twists my stomach's insides.

So my question is: does this bother you? Or is it not considered a big deal? Do you laugh at such jokes when they are made? I find the tv shows like Family Guy to be extremely funny, but when they crack a joke about Prophet Jesus [as] or God--even if it is extremely "funny"--I would not laugh; rather, I feel sick to my stomach and viscerally pained. Obviously you can't speak on behalf of all Christians, but perhaps just speak for yourself as a Christian, or for the Christians you know. We Muslims love and respect Prophet Jesus [as] and it guts us to see the way that he [as] is made into a mockery by popular culture.

I'm not asking this in a polemical way. I'm not implying that Christians *don't* feel a certain way. I am just asking, since I've never asked practicing Christians what they feel when they are confronted with this.

Thanks,
-Saladin.

I am nor christian/ nor muslim or jewish. I Do believe in god. But my question is to than, don;t you think god himself has a sense of humor? You have to agree he has a sense of humor, i mean look at his creations, some you can't help but laugh.
Second, and i think i can qoute you on this lol... " any publicity is good publicity" ....

[BuffedGuy]

I am nor christian/ nor muslim or jewish. I Do believe in god. But my question is to than, don;t you think god himself has a sense of humor? You have to agree he has a sense of humor, i mean look at his creations, some you can't help but laugh.
Second, and i think i can qoute you on this lol... " any publicity is good publicity" ....

Peace be unto you, GST528i.

I understand that in America, people have the First Amendment right to say whatever they want to say. I also understand that it is a strong part of what makes America America. I am not trying to change that necessarily, as I realize it is a cherished ideal of the country.

However, people practice self-censorship all the time. Most of us don't go off spouting racist diatribes. If we did, there would be severe consequences: we'd be ostracized from the community, to the point where it would even affect our day-to-day lives, careers, livelihood, etc. Almost nobody could hold down a job if it was known that he was spouting off racist jokes. So although there is no de jure penalty, there is certainly a de facto penalty.

So I think it would *not* be against the American ideals for a society to practice restraint when it comes to religious icons, beliefs, etc. As for "God having a sense of humor", I believe that God Almighty is too Exalted above us to even ask the question, because it implies that God Almighty is like a human being. Yes I believe He permits us to have a laugh; however, in Islam it is not permissible to make jokes about religion. So you can make jokes about other things, but not about religion.

God Almighty says in the Quran:

"Say: Go on mocking, surely God will bring forth what you fear. If you ask them, they declare: 'We were only talking idly and joking.' Say: 'Was it at God, His Signs, and His Messenger that you were mocking?' Make no excuse: you have rejected faith after you had believed." (Quran, 9:64-66)

Shaykh Muhammad ibn Uthaymeen declared:

“The matters of Divine Lordship, Prophethood, Revelation and religion are sacred matters which are to be venerated. It is not permissible for anyone to show disrespect towards them, whether by mocking them to make others laugh or to poke fun at them. If anyone does that, he is a disbeliever, because this is indicative of his disrespect towards God and His Messengers, Books and Laws. Whoever does that has to repent to God for what he has done, because that is a kind of hypocrisy. So he has to repent to God, seek His forgiveness, mend his ways and develop fear of God, veneration towards Him and love for Him in his heart. And God is the Source of strength." (al-Majmoo’ al-Thameen, 1/63)

We believe that by making such jokes, it takes away from the veneration and awe one feels about God Almighty, and it creates disbelief in the hearts. It is belittling God and His All-Encompassing Power.

Now obviously these are *our* Muslim beliefs which I cannot possibly impose on other American citizens, but I am wondering what the practicing Christians believe. The reason I say this is that America is a majority Christian country...and if the majority is not comfortable with such jokes, then one would think that the rest would show a level of restraint and stay away from trampling on their sensitivities. Just the same way people don't make fun of mentally disabled children, dwarfs, Holocaust victims, 9/11 victims, etc.

In the Care of the Lord,
-Saladin.

[BuffedGuy]

My first post:

Peace be unto you, Derek.

...

My first question is: where is God? I have heard the Christian prayer that says that the "Father Who art in heaven"...so is this to be taken literally? We Muslims believe that God is transcendent above the Heavens, distinct and separate from His Creation below Him. Literally if someone asks us where God is, we point upward. However, I have heard that Christians do not actually believe that God is in/above the heavens as we Muslims do; rather, they say that He does not exist in any "location". Or is there a difference of opinion on the matter? Thank you.

EDIT: To be clear, we Muslims believe that God is ABOVE the heavens and not IN the heavens, although sometimes we say "in the heavens" simply to indicate He is upwards.

In the Care of the Lord,
-Saladin.

Derek's response:

Good question, buff. I was looking forward to your questions. I think this kind of comparison/contrast with Christianity/Islam will be profitable.

Short answer is, no, Christians do not believe God is literally in a place (and if they do, they are seriously misguided and confused), since God is a completely transcendent Being (where His essence and existence are one and the same), he is beyond both time and space.

As such we can only use anological language when speaking about God. Even though Christians do not believe He exists in a single place, we say, "who art in heaven" because our human language cannot adequately express the reality of God.

My response:

Peace be unto you, Derek.

Thanks for the response. To be clear, we Muslims say that: if by "place" one means an entity composed of atoms or matter, then it is disbelief to claim this, because God cannot be contained inside His creation. But if by place one simply means a direction, then yes, God is above us, transcendent above and distinct from His creation. We believe that this belief of ours opposes that of the pagan polytheists, who claim that God is everywhere and thus it is acceptable to worship their idols since God 'indwells' inside His creation. We Muslims reject this and say that God is above and unique from His creation, and cannot be contained in or by His creation, because God is too Exalted and Glorified above mixing in or being surrounded by His creation..this is one of the reasons we Muslims reject the idea that God came down to earth as a human being. So we say that God is above the heavens, separated from His creation and distinct.

Anyways, there was a huge debate in Islamic theology with regards to this issue (i.e. where is God), with a group of the Muslims believing like you do, saying that God is not literally above the heavens. However, the orthodox group of Muslims fervently opposed this group. It is still a heated debate amongst Muslims today.

In the course of Islamic theology, the earliest generation of Muslims ascribed to the view that God is literally above the heavens. Then, as the Islamic empire expanded, the Muslims had interaction with Greek philosophy. The Muslims and the Non-Muslim philosophers (who followed Greek philosophy) had heated debates, each trying to refute the other. Then from the ranks of the Muslims arose a group that sought to embrace parts of Greek philosophy to refute the Non-Muslim philosophers...sort of like use their own guns against them.

But we orthodox Muslims fought this group of philosopher Muslims, because we saw how they corrupted their faith by mixing in Greek philosophy with Islam. Eventually, the orthodox Muslims issued statement after statement condemning philosophy in general. That group of philosopher Muslims adopted the belief that God does not exist in this space-time continuum and it would be anthropomorphism to believe such a thing; this is what the Christians like you say. However, the orthodox Muslims rejected this claim of the philosopher Muslims and called them "like atheists", because we say that there are only three options: either God is (1) everywhere, (2) nowhere, or (3) somewhere. There is nothing else left. The belief that God is everywhere is the belief of pagan religions throughout history, and the belief that God is nowhere is what the atheists believe (and what we orthodox Muslims accused the philosopher Muslims of believing). So all that is left is that God is somewhere, and that somewhere is above the Heavens, distinct from His creation. Of course, the philosopher Muslims slam us back with arguments, and I'm sure the Christians would too, since both groups hold the same belief on the issue, accusing us of anthropomorphism.

Anyways, the orthodox Muslims believe that religion and philosophy are at polar opposites. In religion, man knows nothing, until God reveals His Word and Message to him through His Messengers. On the other hand, philosophers believe that they themselves can reach the truth through their own willpower and intellect. Furthermore, the questions that philosophers ask are not for lowly servants like ourselves to ask, and such thinking inevitably leads down the path of disbelief. We also believe that philosophy is a bunch of baloney (which I'm sure many nonbelievers think of religion). Here is my preacher's own words on philosophy (who is ironically doing his masters in philosophy at Yale):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MH7eSXz0L4

Anyways, I'm blabbing now, but it might interest you since you majored in theology.

So my follow-up question is: was there a debate in Christian theology over this issue? Also, how did Greek philosophy influence Christianity? Did Christiandom ever go to loggerheads with the philosophers? I did read something on this long time ago, but it has become fuzzy now...

In the Care of the Lord,
-Saladin.

[D7M]

Yah, those Jesus mockeries are annoying.

what I find interesting is that those kind of jokes are primarily aimed at Christians. I mean, do you think you'd ever see someone posting a pic of Mohamed coupled with a masturbation reference here (or anywhere)? Never. I just think it's an interesting sociological observation.

why do you think that is, buffedguy?

oh, and I'll answer your question about Greek philosophy and Christianity on my thread...

[BuffedGuy]

Yah, those Jesus mockeries are annoying.

what I find interesting is that those kind of jokes are primarily aimed at Christians. I mean, do you think you'd ever see someone posting a pic of Mohamed coupled with a masturbation reference here (or anywhere)? Never. I just think it's an interesting sociological observation.

why do you think that is, buffedguy?

oh, and I'll answer your question about Greek philosophy and Christianity on my thread...

Peace be unto you, Derek.

To be blunt, I think it's because Christians respond by saying "oh come on guys...", whereas the Muslims "go buck-wild."

I've discussed the cartoon issue in this thread, and I disagree with burning down stuff and harming people, etc., but I *do* agree with being very upset and conveying to others the extent of one's hurt. It's a lot like how you can't say the N word to black people, but you can get away with saying "cracker" to white people. Blacks will "eat you alive" if you use the N word, which is the way Muslims react to insults directed at Prophet Muhammad [s]. On the other hand, whites give a much less emotional response to the word "cracker"; they may express disapproval but the intensity of this disapproval is much less, to the point where it is not a very strong deterrent to using it.

So although I disagree with violence and infringing on others' rights if they insult Prophet Muhammad [s], I *do* agree with showing just as much disapproval towards it as a black guy would show towards a white guy using the N word.

Also, I think there is another issue here, of which I am critical of Jews and Christians over. They make jokes about their own religion; granted, they don't malign their own religions, but they *do* open the door to joking about religion. Like I said in an earlier post, Islam blocks that door altogether. For example, Jon Stewart--who is a Jew himself--made a joke about Prophet Moses [as] being lost in the desert, how he didn't have a map, etc...or in Seinfeld, they made a joke about how Prophet Moses [as] must have been a nose-picker since he was in the desert. (Astagfur-Allah! We seek God's Refuge!) Keep in mind that Jerry Seinfeld is a Jew himself. I think that once you start cracking jokes like that, you open up Pandora's box.

Of course, neither Jon Stewart or Jerry Seinfeld are orthodox Jews, and I doubt orthodox Jews would make such jokes (although I'm not sure). But I *do* think that the lighthearted way that Reform Jews and the more liberal-minded Christians take their religion gives others the impression that they would tolerate such jokes. Christians must make up a very large group of Jon Stewart's audience...if they all wrote in letters saying "hey, I'm offended by that joke", I'm sure Jon Stewart would refrain from them. On the other hand, if he made a joke about Prophet Muhammad [s], the Muslims would flood him with letters.

I can totally see how many Non-Muslims are turned off by the violent reaction of the Muslims. And like I said before, I too was opposed to the extremism in regards to this issue. But as Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan said (paraphrased): any time you warn against extremism, remember that there are two extremes: any time you warn against zealotry, do not forget to be cautious of the other extreme: negligence.

I believe that although many Muslims have indeed been guilty of zealotry, I think that many Christians are guilty of the other extreme: i.e. taking their religion in too lighthearted of a way. Sometimes I see Christians themselves laughing at jokes poking fun at Prophet Jesus [as], or even making jokes themselves. I think they have lost any sense of gheerah (protective "jealousy") over God and Prophet Jesus [as]. Why is it that they get angry at a person who insults their mother (although this gheerah is fast disappearing too!), but not Jesus [as]? We Muslims believe that we are to love the prophets more than our mothers, and gheerah is a part of love.

Anyways, like I said: I'm not trying to point all the fingers at Christians. I do agree that we Muslims have a problem in our own ranks with regards to zealotry. I just think the Christians can work on their negligence. I believe the best path is the Middle Path, as God commands in the Quran:

"We have appointed you to be a nation of the Middle Path." (Quran, 2:143)

Prophet Muhammad [s] warned against zealotry and negligence, concluding with:

"Follow the Middle Path." (Sahih Bukhari)

In the Care of the Lord,
-Saladn.

[BuffedGuy]

You guys must hate me for my long posts. I am really sorry about that. I have this habit of doing that. I was working for this one Islamic group, and they hired me to write responses...they used to always kill me for going wayyyy over the word limit. They'd demand 5 pages maximum, and I'd come back with 10.

If you want to ask a question but don't want my typical long answers, please inform me of that, so I can be extra cautious and just give a brief answer. I like being comprehensive, so if you don't mind reading a long answer, then I think that is better. But if you cannot bear long posts, then let me know and I'll limit myself. Thank you.

[D7M]

heh, I'm starting to get used to your long posts.

You make a good point about overall Christian-Jewish levity towards their religion (though I don't agree that the race analogy really works).

You probably answered this somewhere else before, but why do you always put "[as]" after Jesus, as in ....Jesus [as]?

[*RAGE*]

deleted

[BuffedGuy]

Peace be unto you, Derek.

You probably answered this somewhere else before, but why do you always put "[as]" after Jesus, as in ....Jesus [as]?

Actually I'm surprised nobody has asked this question yet. It's an abbreviation for the word "alayhis-salam", which means "peace be upon him." It is literally a prayer. We almost never mention the name of the prophets without saying this right after...

Also, we don't just say Allah but "Allah [swt]", and the "swt" is an abbreviation for "Subhana wa Ta'ala", which translates to "be He Glorified and Exalted."

So after prophets, we give a prayer (which is actually directed to God), and after God's Name, we praise Him.

I've been a bit lax on this board about it, since I use the term "God" here instead of "Allah". When I talk to Non-Muslims, I use the word "God" since they tend to think "Allah" is someone different. And with the term "God", I'm not used to using the abbreviation "swt" after it, even though I really should.

In the Care of the Lord,
-Saladin.

[D7M]

Peace be unto you, Derek.



Actually I'm surprised nobody has asked this question yet. It's an abbreviation for the word "alayhis-salam", which means "peace be upon him." It is literally a prayer. We almost never mention the name of the prophets without saying this right after...

Also, we don't just say Allah but "Allah [swt]", and the "swt" is an abbreviation for "Subhana wa Ta'ala", which translates to "be He Glorified and Exalted."

So after prophets, we give a prayer (which is actually directed to God), and after God's Name, we praise Him.

I've been a bit lax on this board about it, since I use the term "God" here instead of "Allah". When I talk to Non-Muslims, I use the word "God" since they tend to think "Allah" is someone different. And with the term "God", I'm not used to using the abbreviation "swt" after it, even though I really should.

In the Care of the Lord,
-Saladin.

Ah, ok. So then when you say Mohamed [s] that is also a prayer? But a different one than [as]?

You'd be interested to know at my university there is a new course coming out: "Christian God/Muslim God". It's being jointly taught. Sounds promising. I'll keep you posted when I hear more details.

[BuffedGuy]

Ah, ok. So then when you say Mohamed [s] that is also a prayer? But a different one than [as]?

Yes, it is a similar prayer. The "[s]" is an abbreviation for "Sallallaahu Alaehe Wa Sallam", which means "blessings and peace of God be upon Him."

You'd be interested to know at my university there is a new course coming out: "Christian God/Muslim God". It's being jointly taught. Sounds promising. I'll keep you posted when I hear more details.

OK, cool. I just hope they get an orthodox Muslim to teach it, instead of a Muslim liberal wacko. Do you know who the Muslim professor will be?

[D7M]

Yes, it is a similar prayer. The "[s]" is an abbreviation for "Sallallaahu Alaehe Wa Sallam", which means "blessings and peace of God be upon Him."



OK, cool. I just hope they get an orthodox Muslim to teach it, instead of a Muslim liberal wacko. Do you know who the Muslim professor will be?

I'll pm you with the profs name.

[BuffedGuy]

Here is a saying of Prophet Muhammad [s] which refutes the idea that Muslims should be bloodthirsty or seek out wars...Prophet Muhammad [s] said:

"O people! Do not wish to face the enemy (in war) and ask God to save you (from war). But if you should face the enemy, then be patient..." (Tafseer Ibn Katheer)

God commands in the Quran that we should even make peace with a people who are known for treachery--that is how much peace is valued. God says to make peace and just trust in God. God says:

"If the enemy inclines towards peace, then you also incline towards peace! And trust in God." (Quran, 8:61)

In the commentary of this verse, the Islamic jurist Ibn Katheer explained:

"God says: strike a peace treaty with those who incline towards peace, and trust in God. Verily, God will suffice for you and aid you even if they resort to peace as a trick, so that they gather and reorganize their forces." (Tafseer Ibn Katheer)

So even if you fear they will trick you, sign a peace treaty anyways and trust in God!

Prophet Muhammad [s] said:

"There will be disputes (with other nations) after I die, so if you have a way to end them in peace, then do so!" (Ibn Katheer)

[BuffedGuy]

You have quoted the verse 'if they incline towards peace, then you incline towards peace.' Read the REASONS why this verse was revealed. I can tell you already now that it was NOT sent down for negotiating for a piece of Land TAKEN from muslims.

Oh really? The verse was revealed after the Battle of Uhud between the Muslims of Madeenah and the pagans of Mecca (the Quraish). The latter had driven the Muslims of Mecca out of their homes, who fled as refugees to Madeenah. The Muslims fought to recover the wealth from their property and won the first battle with the Quraish (the Battle of Badr). The Quraish retaliated and the Muslims lost this second battle, i.e. the Battle of Uhud. It was then that Prophet Muhammad [s] agreed to a "humiliating" peace with the pagans of Quraish, called the Treaty of Hudaybiyah.

Ibn Katheer says in the commentary of this verse (the one you dispute!):

The pagans inclined to peace in the year of Hudaybiyah and sought cessation of hostilities for nine years, between them and the Messenger of Allah he accepted this from them, as well as, accepting other terms of peace they brought forth. `Abdullah bin Al-Imam Ahmad recorded that `Ali bin Abi Talib said that the Messenger of Allah said,

«إِنَّهُ سَيَكُونُ بَعْدِي اخْتِلَافٌ أَوْ أَمْرٌ فَإِنِ اسْتَطَعْتَ أَنْ يَكُونَ السِّلْمَ فَافْعَل»

(There will be disputes after me, so if you have a way to end them in peace, then do so.)


(Tafseer Ibn Katheer)

Palestinians are fighting defensive Jihad, taking back what belongs to them and this Ummah.

Were not the Muslims run out of their homes in Mecca (just as the Muslims in Palestine were run out of Israel)? Is not the Kaba'ah more precious to the Muslims than Al-Aqsa (the mosque in Jerusalem)? Yet, the Prophet [s] still made peace with the Quraish. The treaty curtailed the rights of the Muslims greatly. It formally ended the claim of Right of Return of the Muslims to their homes in Mecca, and was admission by the Muslims that they would not seek to recover their homes in Mecca.

Look at the double-standard of the peace treaty that the Prophet [s] accepted: If any one from the Quraish came to the Muslims and was converted to Islam he was to be returned to the Quraish. On the other hand, if a Muslim defected to the Quraish, he was not to be delivered to the Muslims. This is like the modern day equivalent of Hamas agreeing to return Israeli prisoners, but agreeing that Israel gets to keep Palestinian prisoners. Of course, if Hamas agreed to this, you and your Al-Qaeda buddies would be making a huge fuss of this act of "apostasy".

Not only this, but the treaty signed by the Prophet [s] stipulated that the Muslims would even abandon Hajj (pilgrimage) for that year!!! That would be the modern day equivalent of Hamas agreeing that the Palestinians would not be able to pray in Al-Aqsa mosque for a year.

Of course I am not saying that Hamas or the Palestinians should agree to any such terms. I *am* saying however that our religion gives leeway in this regard, due to the overwhelming desire in Islam to seek peace over war. Therefore the Palestinians are NOT wrong in wanting to agree to the two state solution, and thereby ceding Muslim land to the Israelis.

Having said that, it is unlikely that Israel will *ever* grant Palestinian sovereignty, and so Jihad and Intifada *is* the only way to go if that is the case. BUT if they incline towards peace and agree to a two state solution, then the Palestinians should rush towards peace as the Quran commands, and concede half of Palestine. The Israelis already HAVE the land, and you can continue living in your imaginary world that defies the reality.

When the Prophet [s] signed the Treaty of Hudaiybiyah with the Quraish, the Muslims were disheartened because they thought how humiliating the terms were for the Muslims. But Allah [swt] revealed in the Quran that in reality it was a victory for the Muslims. The Islamic scholars say that the reason that it was a victory was that the Quraish had tried to destroy Islam from the face of this earth, and by agreeing to the treaty, the Quraish had admitted that they could not do that, and the signing of the treaty prevented them from that. And because of PEACE, Islam was able to flourish and become a world power.

Since the very beginning, the Zionists have said that they want to drive all the Arabs out--every single last one of them like "drugged roaches." They have wanted to create Eretz Israel, which includes all of Palestine and more. Yet, if they agree to the two state solution--even if some of the terms are slanted in favor of the Israelis--it will still be a victory for the Muslims, because it is the Zionists admitting that they failed in taking over all of the Palestinian land.

Lastly, you have failed to counter my point about Saladin [r], who signed a peace treaty with the Crusader states in the holy land. In fact, the Crusader states were on the same territory as Israel today. So the matter is the exact same. So why would it be OK for Saladin [r] to do that with usurped Muslim land, but suddenly "selling out" when Hamas or the Palestinians agree to that? Or would you also say that Saladin [r] is a sell-out? (Of course you can't say that because then you will be exposed for the khariji dog you really are!)

Hamas have already sold themselves to UN...coward rats...may Allah swt give them what they deserve.

May Allah swt preserve the real Mujahideen--shaikh usaama ibn ladin and those who sold themselves to Allah and not to this worldy life.

May Allah [swt] crush the khawaarij, the dogs of hell-fire!

[BuffedGuy]

The race is on for the greatest number of adherents! At present, it looks like this:

Christianity 30-35% of the world's population
Islam 20%
Hinduism 10%
Buddhism 5%
Judaism 0.25%

Here is a nifty pie chart:



We're in number two place, woo hoo!

And it's a dead heat race between Catholicism and Sunni Islam:

Catholicism................1,100,000,000
Sunni Islam................1,000,000,000
Protestantism...............593,000,000
Eastern Orthodox..........240,000,000
Shi'ism........................130,000,000

That's according to adherents.com .... last year TimesOnline published this:

Islam overtakes Catholicism as world's largest religion

Islam has overtaken Roman Catholicism to become the world's largest single religious denomination, according to L'Osservatore Romano, the Vatican newspaper.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle3653800.ece

Yayy!!

Actually, I think that's not right, hehe, since they are including Shi'ism with Sunni Islam...that's comparing apples to oranges. So I think we're still second place. Our incredibly high birth rates should do the trick though.

On a serious note, I think most Americans don't realize that every fifth person in the world is a Muslim, which is a major reason people should know about Islam and Muslims.

In the Care of the Lord,
-Saladin.

[BuffedGuy]

Deleted....................

[BuffedGuy]

Deleted......................

[adamw1]

As someone who does not really have a religious view but does have a respect for religion i would like to say this thread is fascinating. Iv always believed religion is something you are born into depending on what side of the fence you were born so to speak and it is used as an excuse for far to many atrocities and always will be. My question is,how does your faith or any faith for that matter explain theorys on scientific evolution etc?

'About God, I cannot accept any concept based on the authority of the Church. As long as I can remember, I have resented mass indocrination. I do not believe in the fear of life, in the fear of death, in blind faith. I cannot prove to you that there is no personal God, but if I were to speak of him, I would be a liar. I do not believe in the God of theology who rewards good and punishes evil. My God created laws that take care of that. His universe is not ruled by wishful thinking, but by immutable laws'.

—W. Hermanns, Einstein and the Poet—In Search of the Cosmic Man (Branden Press, Brookline Village, Mass., 1983), p.132, quoted in Jammer, p.123.

I do understand this is just one persons belief but that makes more sense to me.