| Bookmark this post: |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Add a Comment
from Jordan
said:Hamzeh, the reason why the Jewish lobby was so successful in promoting the Israeli causes is the fact that in never stood back one day and said: takhannaha shwai.
For me, I would support any civilized effort to counter the Pope's statements but I refuse any use of violence that will only confirm what the Pope and his friend from the 14 century claim.
from Jordan
said:Read, then judge:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/15_09_06_pope.pdf
from United States
said:Dear Batir,
You neglected to address the second and most important part about the Pope's announcement, namely; that in Islam there is a direct clash between the mind and whatever the Muslims think that what came from God is divine and can't under any circumstances altered , modified, or deleted. In other words : No matter what the mind thinks about-- if it contravene with whatever God said then Muslims go with the latter, and the mind can go and take a vacation. That is the crux of what the Pope was saying, and by the way I'm a Muslim myself. As far as the first part, Islam did indeed spread by the power of the sword, and those who refused to become Muslims they can either pay Jizyah, or go live somewhere else. The only part that I personally objected to in his announcement is that Muhammad didn't come with any thing useful which is absolutely false, Muhammad not only united all of the Arabs around what we now call the Middle East, he managed to spread Islam around the wide world, and the result is one point something billion Muslims in existence today, so to suggest that Muhammad didn't bring anything new is an egregious utterance by a highly spiritual Christian leader like the pope.
from United States
said:Arespected religious leader like the pope should not say such things especially as nations across the globe are struggling to find ways to bridge differences between faiths.
We have heard about his extremism and hate for arabs and muslims now that he have dropped his mask from his face we see its ugliness and extremist nature.
from United States
said:How do you expect Islam to defend it self against such false statements when there is such a thing as a "secular Muslim??"
from United States
said:hatem, read your Islamic history again, and you will see that Islam did not spread by the sword. It is the nature of the Persian and Byzantium Empire during the 7th century that motivated people to adopt Islam. Indonesia, largest Muslim country in the world was converted by trade, not a single soldier set foot in Indonesia.
When Omar entered Jerusalem on a camel.
Egypt was taken the same way, no fighting, these are large populated areas back then and today.
One reason why Islam spread so fast is the very fact that it brought them peace, the inhabitants of the Middle East were begging to be invaded by the Muslims to be freed from their tyrant leaders.
The Ottoman incursion into Europe can be reasonably assessed as a revenge for the Crusades. It was the Turk Khalil Ibn Al Qalawun who finally kicked out the last crusaders from Acre.
Read your history and find that we Muslims have also been mislead by their massive propaganda campaigns to dishearten us and drive us away from Islam.
They corrupted the Torah, they corrupted the Bible, but they couldn’t corrupt the Quran because God promised he would protect it. So they corrupt our history and our image, and create fitnas amongst us.
Many Muslims today are turning to "Secularism" due to their fabrications, because they don't want to associate them selves with Islam (Bad Image in the West), yet remain acceptable by their families and neighbors as Muslims by name.
from United States
said:"The only responsible act from the Pope and the vatican would be to issue an official apology to Muslims. Otherwise we will be engulfed in a new circ;e of extermism."
In other words, "dare insinuate we are violent and we might kill you." It would be funny if it weren't so seriously demented.
Muslims go out of their way to forget how violent their own history is. I've been pointing people to this article lately, which demonstrates how, in spite of all the talk that America is hated for its "imperialism" and support for Israel, the truth is that the United States was hated by Muslims even when the United States was a new and insignificant country hundreds of years ago:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=22314
Christianity was around for hundreds of years before there were any Crusades launched for the sake of Christendom. By contrast, jihad has been around since Muhammad walked the earth. People also fail to realize that the Crusades were, in part, a defensive reaction against Muslim encroachment on Byzantium. There is no doubt that Muslims would have pressed their expansionist jihad into Europe if given a chance. Furthermore, people also forget that Europeans of that era had already seen the Muslim invasion and occupation of Spain. The truth is that the Crusades probably saved Europe from being overrun. Thank goodness for European civilization.
"The official Islamic religious institution (Al Azhar) has never insulted Christianity in such a way and neither did the most credible Islamic references."
Are you sure about that? Al-Azhar has issued a lot of rulings that I consider pretty nutty - such as justifying female circumcision. I wouldn't be surprised if some of them were quite derogatory towards Christianity, especially since M
from United States
said:"The official Islamic religious institution (Al Azhar) has never insulted Christianity in such a way and neither did the most credible Islamic references."
Are you sure about that? Al-Azhar has issued a lot of rulings that I consider pretty nutty - such as justifying female circumcision. I wouldn't be surprised if some of them were quite derogatory towards Christianity, especially since Muslims don't seem to understand exactly how they often insult Christians. (Though if you watch a little bit of MEMRI-TV, you'll find plenty of blantant Jew- and Christian-hatred in the Arab media.)
I read about this story today on a British blog and a Muslim replied in the comments section that he couldn't understand why Christians cannot show the same respect for Muhammad that they show for Jesus. I've heard this one many times. Many Muslims seem to be completely unaware that Christians view Jesus in an entirely different light than Muslims do. They don't understand that to Christians, no person is even remotely comparable to Jesus. Jesus wasn't mearly one in a long line of prophets to Christians, he was a unique and divine being. Muslims also don't seem to fully understand that because Muhammad lived several hundred years after the last books of the Bible, Muhammad is an entirely irrelevant personage to Christians, just as Jesus is irrelevant to the practice of Judaism.
from United States
said:Tommy,
What are you doing here?
I thought that you gave up on us months ago and never to return to our "ignorant" blogs.??
See, Tommy here gets all his info from this website: http://www.jihadwatch.org/
and http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/
He almost copies and pastes, You can find all the topics related to what are talking about here, and his answers are almost copies of whats on that site.
It will shed some light on who is thinking on behalf of Tommy.
"Many Muslims seem to be completely unaware that Christians view Jesus in an entirely different light than Muslims do. They don't understand that to Christians, no person is even remotely comparable to Jesus."
So its ok if we they don't understand us, but we MUST understand them. Your bias is nauseating.
Tommy keeps quoting books from Robert Spencer as the scholar and leading intellect on Islamic topics. Do a little research and you will find that Robert Spencer is the editor of JihadWatch, that was part of the "Christian Islamic forum" that their task was to convert Muslims to Christianity.
Tommy, Don't teach us of history.
When you stop giving us the history of the world related by fundamentalists and fanatics like Robert Spencer, then you can return to reality.
from United States
said:Tommy said : "People also fail to realize that the Crusades were, in part, a defensive reaction against Muslim encroachment on Byzantium."
WHAT PLANET DO YOU LIVE ON!
The Byzantians were at war with the Franks during the 1st crusade, and remained so for most of the Crusades, the Franks even sacked Constantinople 1204,one of histories worst massacres commited by the Franks against Byzantiams.
According to both Arab and Frankish historians, the Franks raped Greek nuns, killed all the priests and monks who were hiding in a church called Sofia.
Those who escaped from Constantinople went to Nicaea which became the captial of the Greek empire until Byzantium was captured 75 years later.
On many occasions, the Byzantiums allied with Muslims against the Franks, because the Frankish Kings like Baldwin the 1st, 2nd and 3rd, and the infamous Rynald of Chattillon were in the Orient for expanding their kingdoms and massing riches.
Some even declared new Crusades against other European Christian kingdoms.
You still think the Crusades was a defensive reaction??? You are very sad to believe so, how easy it is to play with your mind, mold it in anyform desirable.
Amazing how distorted your world is. You probably have your own name distorted without even knowing.
from United States
said:Tommy the ignorant said : "There is no doubt that Muslims would have pressed their expansionist jihad into Europe if given a chance."
You ignorant fool, the Ottoman Turks were camped by the walls of Vienna in 1529. This clearly shows your complete lack of the slightest historical background.
As many western historians agree, the Ottomans incursion into Europe was to revenge Europe's Crusades that wrecked havoc on the Muslim and Jewish populations.
You can claim all you want, but when you have Southeast Asia with its Largest Muslims population in Indonesia, that hasn't seen a single Muslims soldier set foot on their land, it contradicts your notion that Islam spread with the sword from Day 1.
How do you explain the Indonesians and Southeast Asians conversions to Islam??
Please, turn off your computer, and go to the Library. The web has opened the possibilities for all sorts of idiots with good web design skills to make their writings seem credible, so that poor fools like you swallow it up like it was weight loss magical potion.
from United States
said:"You still think the Crusades was a defensive reaction???"
The Council of Claremont was convened to address the request of Byzantine Emperor Alexius the First's request for assistance in dealing with the encroaching Turks. So yes, it began as a defensive conflict after a long period of Muslim conquest of Christendom.
Your claims that the Muslims did not engage in violent conquest of peoples prior to the Crusades, but were instead everywhere invited to subjugate people, are pure fantasy. Places like Egypt remained predominantly Christian long after the Muslim conquest. The slow and painful effects of dhimmitude gradually wore the Egyptians and others down.
That the Muslim conquest of Egypt was relatively easy, there can be no doubt. The governor of Byzantine Egypt, Cyrus, who some suspect was a convert to Islam, had persecuted the native Christians and was all too happy to betray Byzantine to the Muslims.
That wasn't the choice of the people, that was the result of a Benedict Arnold who despised the local population and who had betrayed Egypt to Arab invaders. The humiliation and suffering of dhimmitude eventually compelled most Egyptians to become Muslims over a period of centuries. For all the talk about there being "no compulsion in religion" in Islam, the history suggests otherwise.
"So its ok if we they don't understand us, but we MUST understand them. Your bias is nauseating."
Most westerners will freely admit to not knowing very much about Islam. They don't care. While I obviously have something of an interest in Islam, most westerners do not. Many Muslims, however, seem to think they know more than they actually do about Christian beliefs than they really do. They seem to believe that Christians look at Christianity through the same lens that Muslims do. It is an obnoxious tendency.
from United States
said:"How do you explain the Indonesians and Southeast Asians conversions to Islam?"
Did you read the article in the link I originally posted?
"From Mohammedanism (which for centuries she [i.e., Aceh] is reputed to have accepted) she really only learnt a large number of dogmas relating to hatred of the infidel without any of their mitigating concomitants; so the Acehnese made a regular business of piracy and man-hunting at the expense of the neighboring non-Mohammedan countries and islands, and considered that they were justified in any act of treachery or violence to European (and latterly to American) traders who came in search of pepper, the staple product of the country. Complaints of robbery and murder on board ships trading in Acehnese parts thus grew to be chronic."
With that comment in mind. I can posit some not-so-peaceful ways Islam might have been spread.
(Sorry for the typos in my last post. I'm having some troubles with some of my browser plug-ins that are causing me to have difficulties submitting forms after correcting them.)
from United States
said:"You ignorant fool, the Ottoman Turks were camped by the walls of Vienna in 1529. This clearly shows your complete lack of the slightest historical background."
If not for the Crusades, it would have been the Seljuk Turks centuries earlier, rather than the Ottoman Turks, whom the Europeans would have had to expel from Europe's heartland.
from United States
said:Hasam,
From where ever Tommy gets his information, I have read similar things from less volitile sources, including Islamic sources.
Hatem above agrees that Islam had at times been spread by the sword, perhaps you need to read his sources rather than condemn him to the charge of mis-led ignorance. Or ask some of the Christian tribes in Jordan, who still have an oral history of fleeing Saudi for their lives.
Batir, I hesitated to even post on this one, but just wanted to echo some things that Tommy said. For me, and Christianity through the past, Jesus Christ was more than a prophet with good words.
He is the one who redeemed me from my sinful ways, who took my place in death that I might live my grace.
When people like Hasan go on the offense saying our Bible is corrupt, I say when? Was God unable to protect His word previously? Istagfirallah! If Mohammed (pbuh) said to respect the book of the people of the Book, then let it be so. What parts were changed? Where is the evidence?
It is insulting for me to hear the comments coming from the mosques in Jordan to hear that Mary was a part of the Trinity, many things like this. To too many Muslims, I am just a deceived believer in an outdated religion, who will come to the 'light' later. But, I am walking in the Light, Jesus is my light.
Batir, I am sorry for your insult as well, I am very sad that the Pope chose these bitter words out of a bitter time when there were millions which would have conveyed his thoughts.
from United States
said:Batir, can you please delete my posts after Kinzis reply starting with the one posted September, 16, 2006 4:27 PM? They all got messed up and cut up. I will repost them again.
Thanks in advance.
from United States
said:Attempting to close bold tag</b>
"Christians believe the Torah was corrupted, thus the need for Christianity and Jesus’ new uncorrupted fresh message!"
Once again, you demonstrate how little you actually know about Christianity. Christians do not believe the Torah was in any way corrupt. In fact, they incorporate the Torah into their Bible in the Old Testament. Christians believe the Torah was relevant for its time and its people, the Jews. Christians believe that the New Testament was relevant for a later time.
Funny how Muslims seem to believe that Allah is all-knowing and that free will doesn't really exist, yet Allah could not successfully predict and take action to prevent the corruption of his earlier revelations. Or is it that Allah favored corrupted revelations?
"I'm a Jordanian living in the US, I pay more taxes and I cannot vote, I have fewer rights than American citizens. So is this supposed to wear me down until I decide to settle here and become American?"
Dhimmitude was more than merely taxation. It was also humiliation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhimmi
from Jordan
said:Wow, this is a very lively debate and I will try to respond to some points.
Hasan, I have deleted your comments and I think you must post them again since they are so rich.
Regarding the "secular muslim" issue I find no contradiction. Secularism in its simplist forms is related to separation of state from religion. Any muslim practicing the five pillars of Islam shall remain a muslim without having a conviction that politics should be run by Islamic text. Actually, the whole history of Islamic empire, after the killing of Ali Bin Abi talib was a pure political system of manipulation, struggle for power and tribal favouratism especially with Umayyeds.
from Jordan
said:Hatem, the clash between mind and religion isfound in all religions and not Islam alone. History proves that Islam was the religion most tolerant to mind power and philosophy until Al Ghazali closed the door for "Ijtihad". Muslim thinkers and philosophers were always enlightened in comparison with Christian and Jewish. You can see what happned to Galelio and Spinoza to find out. However, the enlightment era in Europe proved separate religion and mind through secularism. In Islam we are facing a phase of "mind regression" due to the inability of religious leaders to adapt to new science and facts. The problem is in people and not the holy texts.
from United States
said:Reposting.
Kinzi, of course we Muslims believe the Bible was corrupted, thus the need for God to send another revelation, The Quran. If the Bible wasn't corrupted by humans, then there would be no need for the Quran.
Christians believe the Torah was corrupted, thus the need for Christianity and Jesus’ new uncorrupted fresh message!
It would be concealing the truth when a Christian or a Muslim claims that he believes in the authenticity of the others book and religions.
If Christians held high respects for the Quran, as you suggest I should for the Bible, then why aren't they Muslim. Why don’t Muslims and Christians convert to Judaism?
The only people who believe in the notion of "no one perfect religion" are atheists thus excusing themselves from any commitment.
There are thousands of different Christian churches who each claim to hold the true words and teachings of Christ while the others are false. Shia and Sunnis also each claim to be more true.
Every religion in the world claims the other one is corrupted.
Be realistic. You choosing one faith and not the other is evidence enough that you consider the others to be untrue.
At least give Muslims some credit, that we believe in the authenticity of Jesus’ message, but not in the scribers who changed most of what he said, while Judaism and many other religions don't even believe in Jesus.
Islam is the only faith outside Christianity that believes in Jesus.
from Jordan
said:Tommy, I could not help but laught while reading your comment that "Crusafes were defensive". This has reminded me with Bush's statements about the "pre-emptive war" in sending his troops thousands of miles to Iraq.
Yes Al Azhar did publsih some "regressive" fatwas but they are all within the circle if Islam and mot attacking other religions.
from United States
said:As for me questioning the Authenticity of the Bible, that’s a whole different topic which needs a dedicated forum. But I'll simply recommend you to just consider the Council of Nicaea. The council was created under the authority of the Emperor Constantine who was a Pagan (not even a Christian) who used it for political reasons. There were hundreds of gospels and religious writings, some of them written by Jesus himself, that Constantine considered "Apocrypha" which means to be hidden from people. St Paul who is believed to have written most of the content in the New Testament. Today if you ask an educated Christian about the author of the Bible, he will tell you that no one knows yet, no ones knows the sources as they don't have the original documents.
But the Discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls sheds some light, and I recommend you look it up as you will be interested to find the huge differences in simple teachings recorded in them, compared to the current bible, which ever one you read, the King James Version or the New International Version.
No one insulted any religion here. I was simply stating the obvious belief held by every person on earth who believes in a faith. And that his faith is more correct than the other. If I declared otherwise, I would be lying to you.
I'm personally happy the pope said what he said, as it shows his true intentions. I don't need an apology from him, because Time and History will tell, and it will apologize to us.
Do you believe the Quran is an authentic book written by God? I'd like to hear your answer.
from United States
said:This is a Repost and is placed before Tommy's On September, 16, 2006 7:40 PM post :
Tommy said :"The slow and painful effects of dhimmitude gradually wore the Egyptians and others down. "
Man I love it when you use the word dhimmitude as if it's the only Arabic word you know and keep ringing about it. If anyone here wants to know where he learned this word, just go to Jihadwatch.org
I'm a Jordanian living in the US, I pay more taxes and I cannot vote, I have fewer rights than American citizens. So is this supposed to wear me down until I decide to settle here and become American?
"So yes, it began as a defensive conflict after a long period of Muslim conquest of Christendom. " You speak of Christendom during that time as if they were all united. The Muslim empire was divided, and that was mainly why the Franks were able to conquer so much in the beginning because the other Muslims emirs and Sultans did not see any reason to stop the Frankish invasion, as it did not affect them. Same was the case in Europe. There was no unity. What got people to go to war is the promise of booty and lust for glory as many will tell you of the nature of the European man who was no more than a savage beast during those dark ages of Europe. How easy would it have been to use Jerusalem as Jesus death place as a means to make them feel better about them selves.
from United States
said:"That the Muslim conquest of Egypt was relatively easy, there can be no doubt. The governor of Byzantine Egypt, Cyrus, who some suspect was a convert to Islam, had persecuted the native Christians and was all too happy to betray Byzantine to the Muslims. "
Jerusalem was betrayed by AlKamil (whose uncle was Saladin) and handed it over to Emperor Fredrick the 2nd.
Betrayal wasn't the only reason why Egypt was taken easily. Betrayal was a common thing amongst kings and emirs.
You stating that the mainly Christian population converted due to taxation is another proof (along with Spain) that Islam did not spread by the sword. It surely would have been easier to convert these Egyptians by the sword instead of wait "over a period of centuries.."
from Jordan
said:Kinzi and Hasan; I am not going to get involved in the never-ending debate about whose religion is best. Muslims, christians and Bushmen in Africa all consider their religion to be the best. What I always say is that such a difference will be decided by God who might consider putting us all in paradise or in hell as I most likely expect, but as we live on one Earth we should respect each other's opinion and religion. I just wished the Pope did that.
from United States
said:'Tommy, I could not help but laught while reading your comment that "Crusafes were defensive".'
Come on, Batir. You are not as gullible as Hasan. You know as well as I do that the Muslim conquest of north Africa, Spain, and the Near East wasn't simply going to stop there. If not for the Crusades, Europe would be Muslim today. Thank goodness the Crusades happened. Without a Christian/secular European culture to advance civilization forward, we wouldn't be commenting on your blog today. There would be no computers, no internet, and no blogs.
from United States
said:I should mention, for the record, that I am an agnostic. I am not a Christian.
from United States
said:Batir : ”However, the enlightment era in Europe proved separate religion and mind through secularism. In Islam we are facing a phase of "mind regression" due to the inability of religious leaders to adapt to new science and facts. The problem is in people and not the holy texts.”
I don’t know how you classify the separation of State and Religion for me to understand what exactly you mean. The Quran contains many laws including moral and material laws. God tells us in the Quran to not kill. He also tells us how to get married, divorced , and dividing inheritance to name a few. Now which laws would you consider fall under the “state” category and which fall under “religion?”
The “State and religion” concept differs from one society to another. In the US, they claim to separate them, but every coin has “In God We Trust.” To get married in the US you need a witness to validate it, same as in Islam. Economic policies in the US are similar to those of Islam like trade, witnesses. You can argue all day trying to define which laws we can consider common sense in an attempt to not give credit to a religious book, figure or God for coming up with them.
The Quran has laws, if you want to consider your self Muslim, then you have to follow each one of them, and since many of those laws need to have an organized group to govern them, then you must also allow the government to make sure those laws are followed for the sake of avoiding chaos. Otherwise each person will take law in his own hands. Imagine every person deciding on their own to kill his brother’s murderer. Or lock up or punish a thief that he caught?
The court system in the Quran is also similar to the US judicial system.
You are arguing over a problem that should not be even there.
The west keeps telling you about the benefits of separating religion from state so that you become busy with that issue instead of
from United States
said:"Thank goodness the Crusades happened. Without a Christian/secular European culture to advance civilization forward, we wouldn't be commenting on your blog today. There would be no computers, no internet, and no blogs."
Without the Muslims invention of the Zero digit, Algebra, and Algorithms to a name a few, you would still be a hunter to survive. Imagine a computer running on Roman numerals.
from United States
said:Tommy, and Batir, you both seem to realize the difference between Islam and Europe’s Christianity. The European corrupt church said the world was flat and killed Galileo. It regressed people. Thanks to Francis Bacon, who argued that Science and the study of nature would improve people’s life, contributed to the launch of the enlightenment era in Europe.
It was only when the Churches authority was stripped from it that Europe developed and advanced.
A simple minded person might see this as a constant, a pattern that if followed everywhere and anytime it would create the same results.
Islam on the other hand never had the problem the Europeans had with their church. Islam is the sole reason that advanced the Arabs from their tents and contributed to the worlds most important discoveries in all fields.
The Quran is full of scientific data, and uses it to prove its authenticity. Islam and Science go hand in hand. Islam cannot survive without Science.
Any person wishing to discredit Islam would only need to prove one scientific statement in the Quran as false. But so far, it has stood the test of time. You'd think with all the enemies and haters of Islam, someone would have found something. The irony is, the West spends Billions of $$ each year on science and astronomy to only prove the Qurans scientific statements as authentic, making the Quran a supernatural phenomena when you consider an illiterate 1400 years ago "wrote" it.
Atheism helped Europe emerge from the Dark ages, but it would do the same for Muslims, because the problem is not Islam, it is the leaders of these nations that keep all the resources to themselves.
from United States
said:Batir, you as a Muslim should not even think that our backward problem is due to Islam, as this is what they want you to think. They cannot stand the fact that Islam is the world’s fastest growing religion today, in both absolute and proportional terms. They will do anything to undermine our faith, they will place dictators to rule us, they will create strife between us Sunni’s, Shia and Arab Christians and Jews, and they will create propaganda against us. And today we are seeing it more than ever, as the topic here being discussed.
These reactions by the West against Islam is only an indication of their frustration and panic with Islam’s growth. They are resorted to violence, slander and plain lies in order to discredit Islam. The West does not follow Jesus’ teachings and will only feel good when they see that the rest of the world is also not living up these standards with them. It's like a child who doesn't want to be in trouble alone.
When you have people like Tommy thinks you are less gullible than me, it's a sign that your thoughts are not in the right place. It makes him happy to hear you say Islam is pushing us back.
I've been reading Tommy's posts for months, he moves from one Jordanian Blog to the next looking for "Secular" Muslims, or even Atheists to reinforce all his ideas about Islam. When he realizes he cannot find agreement, he moves to another Blog.
Simply, compare the Arabs state of affairs before and after Islam. And compare Europe’s Christianity during the dark ages and after the rise of Atheism. These are two completely different situations, but the comparisions will tell you the problem in Europe was the Churh, but in today's Muslim world, it is not Islam.
from United States
said:The Arabs neither invented zero nor algebra. That was the Hindus and the Greeks. The Hindus invented zero. Both the Greeks and Hindus made contributions to algebra. Also, the Greeks made the most important contribution to math: the axiomatic method upon which all modern math is founded.
The Arabs made a few minor contributions in algebra such as a solution to cubic equations. (Actually, they found a graphical solution to cubic equations, algebraic solutions would have to wait until the European Renaissance.) Muslims also deserve credit for invented elementary cryptanalysis. Certainly algebra and zero were transmitted by the Arabs to Europeans. They also preserved much of Greek mathematics at a time when it was lost in Europe.
As for algorithms: algorithms, as they are understood today by mathematicians and computer scientists, are not the product of ancient Arabs but of modern western scientists. Only the word has its origins in Arabic.
None of what you are saying negates the importance of the Crusades in preserving Western civilization from falling under the darkness of an Islamic culture that became increasingly moribund after its brief Golden Age.
from United States
said:"I've been reading Tommy's posts for months, he moves from one Jordanian Blog to the next looking for "Secular" Muslims, or even Atheists to reinforce all his ideas about Islam. When he realizes he cannot find agreement, he moves to another Blog."
Nonsense. In fact, I have encountered very few if any athiests in the Muslim blogosphere. I spend much more time at Egyptian blogs (like Sandmonkey's) than Jordanian blogs (and even more time on conservative American blogs). I certainly do not go to blogs that openly state they are "against the US administration and zionism" expecting to find full agreement with my beliefs. I fully expect to encounter opinions I don't agree with and I do like a little bit of good-natured debate. I learn quite a bit from everyone.
Certainly, I learn much about why some Muslims are so irrational from watching Hasan's performances. They are often quite comical.
from Jordan
said:Tommy, it would be very interesting to try to hypothise what would've changed in the history of mankind if the Muslims managed to occupy more parts of Europe. You say Europe could have fallen in drak ages. Well, it was already in dark ages before the enlightment process. I do not think Muslims would have been able to hold on to all areas by force. No financial or human resources can allow them to do that, and maybe they could have occupied parts of western and Northern Europ for 100 years and then forced to withdraw. In that period maybe Muslims and Christians could have both benefited from some cultural encounters. Although the crusades were violent but they provided a good chance for cultural dialogue that was not presented before. Maybe Islam could have been a source of enlightmnet as well. It was not until Muslims became isolated that the cultural products of Islam stopped innovation.
from Jordan
said:Hasan I appreciate your concern about my "muslim identity" and the facts taht I should not listen to what the west says. Well, actually mt friend all my "critical" points about our interpretation of Islam and not Islam itself are derived from our actual state of mind and civilization nowaday and has nothing to do with the west influence. I usually get my analysis from scientific ways of thinking: observe, compare and conclude. I can easily observe our lack of innovation compared to the west and conclude that this is due to the fact that we have closed, or minimized our "platform" of thinking to please the clerics who cliam they understand everything in life. This is why I think the best muslim leader in the 20th century was mahateer Mohammad who has transformed malaysia into a big economy based on science, logic and innovation linked to Islamic values. Why Arabs do not have someone like Mahateer and they are all following the speeches of Bin laden is really annoying. The only two things that I feel impressed by the west are the freedom of thinking and the discipline in work. We lack such qualities now and the reason is not Islam itself but the ignorant and insecure people who have hijacked Islam.
from United States
said:Batir, it's good to read your responses to Hasan.
I was not trying to make a point about which religion is superior, but that poorly spoken words on both sides are insulting. Very few Muslims I know understand how painful it is to hear misconceptions about my beliefs communicated as fact.
I had never heard comments like Hasan's before, and I suppose it puts me in greater fear of having Islam as he interprets it play a greater role in the world stage.
From Hasan's point of view, now I understand why the photos I see directed toward the Pope say "know your limits": it is the idea that a usurped religion has no right to speak it's mind when in conflict with Islamic teaching. I don't agree with what the Pope said, but the response is chilling.
from Jordan
said:I agree with Batir, the Pope is in no position to critisize other religions. Christianity has done enough harm in the past as well.
All what he did in his speach is fueling more hatred in the world where it is already messed up.
Can we change the Pope? We need someone who can bring peace to this world, not cause more war.
from Jordan
said:batir wardam,you seem to ignore the fact that Jesus never asked his followers to kill what ever was the cause furthermore he asked us to love our enemies and to turn the other cheek and we true believers as such we believe that the force of goodness and forgivness is much stronger than the force of evil.Mr.Ghandi said i quot(there is no cause in the world worth to kill for it)unquot and i add, did you realy read the quran ,please, moslems read your quran and you will realize that it orders the killing of non moslems ,despite your effort to hide this fact
And you mr.oserver,i disagree with and i say to that despite some mistakes from some mistakes christianity was and still the light of the world through Jesus christ who according to your Quran is the Soul and the word of god and i tell there is no perfection in this world ,and the harm that cristianity cauesed according to your statement caccot ve compared to the harm that islam caused and still causing to the world
from Italy
said:Why have we Westerns and Christians always to be carefull to avoid to offend Muslims? Isn't enough that Pope didn't want to offend anyone? He just condemned violence in the name of God...Is that wring? Shouldn't every Muslim thank him and tell that he's right?
Didn't islam have its historical diffusion with violence, expecially after the Prophet? Why they don't understand that the Pope's words are just ANOTHER pretext to fight against Christians? They should think about the general meaning of the lectio magistralis of Pope, not about that sentence (maybe not very "diplomatic").
It's to easy to say "Pope helps extremists in this way"...Exstremists help themselves and many Arabs and islamic Governaments too!
Pope told that he is very sad for what his words have "provocated"...It's enought...We can't go on to ask sorry! None Muslim will ask us sorry to have kill an Italian nun yesterday in Somalia and a priest in Turkey after the stupid satyric cartoons "about Muhammad".
Al-Jazeera wouldn't ask Pope sorry 4 the satyric cartoon where he shots on the doves that Pope Wojtyla made fly!
from Jordan
said:Alessandra; I would have thanked the pope if he condemned violence in the name of ALL religions and not singling out Islam in this way. Fanatics are from each and every religion, including Christianity and history documents that. Mr George Bush thinks there is a voice from God that asks him to fight terrorism which means killing thousands of people in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Israeli leaders also have a strong religious influence on their mindsets that provides them with justification for killing innocents in Palestine and Lebanon.
The issue is, for a Pope it is always wise not to criticise any other religion. It can be accepted from a secular or athiest but not from a religious leader.
And by the way, why are westerns and Christian always united in condemnation to any criticism for the policy of the state of Israel when the Jweish influential power accuse them of anti-semites? Why do you think it is OK to apologise to Jews and not Muslims? I reckon this is a guilt feeling from the past but this is not logical.
I do not want to fall into the stupidity of comparing religions but the main message is that you should respect other religions. If you want to condem violence in the name of GOD condemn all who do that and not only Muslims.
from United States
said:Batir, just so it is on record, I and many other Christians continually criticise and condemn the state of Israel for it's violent tactics not just in acts of war such as Lebanon but the inhuman wearing away of human dignity.
I don't like the words the Pope has chosen, but I don't like criticism that Muslims leaders have leveled at my faith either (and I do have just enough Arabic to understand what comes out of Amman mosques on Fridays). Now that the US has an Evangelical President, the whole Muslim world equates all of us Evangelicals as Bush clones.
So I am wondering if it is really possible for religious leaders to cease criticising the wrong actions of the other?
from Italy
said:Batir, you are right about Bush (he's a fanatic man too...A man that says: "God is with us" to try to justify a war, is just a fanatic).
You are right also about the politics of a part of Israeli Governament and religion surely has its influence 4 someone...but Pope isn't a political man and he didn't talk about politics!
I can't tell that fanatism doesn't exist in all religions...in fact John Paul II asked sorry for crusades!
By the way just fanatics Muslims ACTUALLY GO ON to talk about a true "holy war" (against West, but most of all against secular, "moderate" and liberal MUSLIMS that don't think like them"!)...Well, the fact that, as you rightly tell, fanatism is in all the religions, doesn't mean that Muslims shouldn't look at their responsabilities "in the name of islam". How come that Turkey is Muslim now? How come that, ask someone remembered, the majority of people is Muslim and Coptics are discriminated?
Pope respects every religion and every beliver, but it's right that every people, in EVERY RELIGION, refuse violence in the name of God and it's right that they pass over the time when they used violence in the name of God: this HAPPENED AND HAPPENS also in islam! It doesn't mean that Pope doesn't respect islam or Muslims: he TOLD that he ESTEEMS them! At the same time he asked honesty with ourselves for a true dialogue. Pope maybe used the wrong words, but you must think about the general sense of his message.
At the end, it isn't true that Christians are always united in condemnation to any criticism about the State of Israel !!!!! For example the Left is quite critic (or very critic) with Israel in Italy, many "pacifists" too! France is politically close to Arabs and Palestinians, Russia too, in in Germany and I think not only there, some neo-nazists exist! I'm also quite critic with Israel, but I realise that there are some Islamic States that, more or less clearly,
from Italy
said:(continue) wanna destroy it! Why doesn't Israel have the right to defend itself? That's why many people think that behind the criticism of Israel there is anti-semitism: some people don't want that JEW PEOPLE defend themselves and hate them BECAUSE THEY ARE JEWS!
You are a journalist and to tell the truth is your work...So you must know the truth: this situation of the Pope is just a pretext to fight against Christians, as the STUPID Danish cartoons were a pretext with the same goal.
Try to understand Batir, we can't always be frightened for the "reactions" of Muslims!!!! I personally start to be tired with that!
from Italy
said:*I was talking about when I mentioned Coptics...I forgot to tell.
from United Kingdom
said:Peace be unto you all,
I'm not gonna get into anykind of debate with you guys, I just want to state an important facts about Islam and that all this is good to develop your thinking but wkeup so called secular Muslims:
Islam (submission to Allah's will), is the only religion of Mankind!, it is what Adam (pbuh) was given, so was Abraham, moses and Jesus and then in it's final form given to Muhammad (pbuh), not to mention 125,000 prophets and messengers of Allah that some are mentioned in the Qur'an and Hadeeth, and others not mentioned, but the number is mentioned in the hadeeth.
there is no word (Judaism or Chrtianinty) mentioned any where in the Torah nor in the Bible!, those are but words invented to suit the needs and dark desires of those who have straied from Allah's path, when they found the commandments not to their liking!, and who have covered up the truth! the word Kafir if you lookup it's etymalogical history litteraly means covering-up in Hebrew!.
there can be no true Islam, if the Shariah which is Allah's Law for his creation to be followed isn't established on this earth, and whoever deviates from this will find only humiliation and indignity, which is evident in the current situation of the Ummah.
Jihad does have military uses, and many muslim's today are in denial because their interests with the west are under threat, it is that when the Ummah's way of living according to Allah's Law is threatned! not only our material posessions and the land these are secondary, then it is an obligation to defend the faith against those who cover-up the truth that do not really desire for us anything other than to extinguish the light of Allah but Allah will complete his light even though the Unbelievers do not like it.
you may slander me and brand me an extremist or a radical or a fundamentalist!, but I'm just saying the truth as it is, do you know what the word fundamentalist means or
from United Kingdom
said:Peace be unto you all,
I'm not gonna get into anykind of debate with you guys, I just want to state important facts about Islam and that all this is good to develop your thinking but wakeup so called secular Muslims:
Islam (submission to Allah's will), is the only religion of Mankind!, it is what Adam (pbuh) was given, so was Abraham, moses and Jesus and then in it's final form given to Muhammad (pbuh) who was the seal of the prophets and messengers peace be upon them all, prophets and messengers of Allah that some are mentioned in the Qur'an and Hadeeth, and others not mentioned, but the number is mentioned in the hadeeth 125,000 prophets and messengers.
there is no word (Judaism or Chrtianinty) mentioned any where in the Torah nor in the Bible!, those are but words invented to suit the needs and dark desires of those who have strayed from Allah's path, when they found the commandments not to their liking!, and who have covered up the truth! the word Kaffar, kafir if you lookup it's etymalogical history litteraly means covering-up in Hebrew!.
there can be no true Islam, if the Shariah which is Allah's Law for his creation to be followed isn't established on this earth, and whoever deviates from this will find only humiliation and indignity, which is evident in the current situation of the Ummah because they have left the teachings of Allah and his prophet.
Jihad does have military uses, and many muslim's today are in denial because their interests with the west are under threat, it is that when the Ummah's way of living according to Allah's Law is threatned! not only our material posessions and the land these are secondary, then it is an obligation to defend the faith against those who cover-up the truth that do not really desire for us anything other than to extinguish the light of Allah but Allah will complete his light even though the Unbelievers do not like it.
you may slander me and
from United Kingdom
said:call me whatever you want I'm just saying the truth, do you know where the word fundamentlist comes from and what it means? a protestant group in the U.S. who adhered to the fundamentals of their faith were labled as such, so in that sence yes! i am a fundamentalist! to become a decent Mathmatician you have to study and practice the fundamentals of maths! to be a good physician you have to study and practice the fundamentals of medicine! the same principle goes for any discipline!, religion! faith! or creed! or policy!.
note: I am just portraying the truth, if the pope wants dialouge and for faiths to understand each other than he has to understand what I have just written but I bet you anything if I started to tell him such things! which he probably knows 100% are true and he's helping cover it up from humanity and so have all his predecesers and many of the Ruhban of bani Israel then wheres it gonna go?, but this is for your information I hope in the future if the pope and others are searious this is the type of subject matter theyll have to face.
I hope we could reach some kind of dialouge I really do but other generations of other centuries have tried and failed! do you think our century has gotten any wiser? lemme know thanks guys.
from United Kingdom
said:I would further like to add that even in Islam I respect the other faith thats my duty I wouldn't be a muslim otherwise, but we have our ideals and our morals just like anyother peoples, I know theres alot to be done, but it's not all from our end, also the west must face the problems it has and it must stop it's unjust policies towards us muslims this my advice to all human beings, there are other ways to stop the terror but the west isn't interested in them, they are only interested in their vison on the matter nothing else, they won't even consider any other way, thats what happens when you try to talk truth to power! thats how it's mentioned in the Qur'an, the propehts and the messengers all came to their peoples respectivly and muhammed (pbuh) to all mankind! and always the people denied their prophets and accused them of being insane and delusioned! and now in this day and age of secular-atheim and everything-ism! the followers of the prophets and mssengers and being persecuted for what they believe and what is a sacred duty to protect and preserve! this is not new! my friends it's all there in the Qur'an but we don't see it! we do not even care anymore! we have sold our souls! for this brief spann of 50, 60 or 80 years of life on this world at a heavy price of losing our eternal life, la hawla wala guwata illa billah!
Add a Comment
<<Home
Don't you think muslims are over-reacting a little bit to what the pope said? I mean you yourself considered it a singling out of Islam as the only religion linked to violence.
Yalla 3ad, don't you think enno takhannaha shwai?