Paul Younan   |
"Open Question to Muslims"
Aug-23-2003 at 06:40 AM (GMT3)
|
This question is open to anyone, but I would be most interested in hearing from our Muslim brethren.Much attention is given in the media these days about how the Palestinians deserve their own homeland. Do you Muslims (in particular, Ramazan and Sieg) support the Palestinian people's right to an independent country? If so, then why don't we hear anything from you about the rights of Assyrians to have their own independent country in modern-day Iraq - the original homeland of the Assyrians? Why don't we hear anything from you about the rights of the Copts (the original Egyptians) to an independent homeland in Egypt? How about the Berbers in Libya? The Kurds in Turkey? The Arameans in Syria? The Phoenicians in Lebanon? The Native Americans in the United States? Just curious? Would you be willing to give the Christian Assyrians their original homeland back - right smack in the middle of the mostly Muslim middle east? Don't you think it's a little hypocritical for you to demand a Palestinian state.....while at the same time, you deny the rights of Assyrians to their own homeland? Don't you think it's a little hypocritical for you to decry the "stealing" of Muslim lands - when that's all that Muslims have done to countless other groups for the past 1,400 years? Don't you think it's a little hypocritical for you to decry the "stealing" of Muslim lands - when you are, at this very moment, sitting on "stolen land". And if you doubt it, ask the original natives who are rotting away on Indian reservations. Well? 
Fk^rwbw 0ml4
Peshitta.org
|
|
|
TOP |
Sieg  |
1. "RE: Open Question to Muslims"
Aug-23-2003 at 05:04 PM (GMT3)
|
>This question is open to anyone,
>but I would be most
>interested in hearing from our
>Muslim brethren.
>
>Much attention is given in the
>media these days about how
>the Palestinians deserve their own
>homeland.
>
>Do you Muslims (in particular, Ramazan
>and Sieg) support the Palestinian
>people's right to an independent
>country? To Him belongs the earth and to the earth shall our bodies return inevitably. I do not support "our land," "my land," "your land." Indeed, we are created and placed into separate tribes, but only so that we could learn from each other and rejoice in the uniqueness given to us by Allah. To answer your question, I do not support the Palestinian people's right to an independant country as I do not support the State of Israel as a country exclusive to Jews. I believe that we should coexist in full harmony. We can only do that if we follow the example of our ancestor Ibrahim Thus says the Lord, Stand by the ways and see and ask for the ancient paths, where the good way is, and walk in it; and you shall find rest for your souls. But they said, `We will not walk in it. (Jeremiah 6:16)" >
>If so, then why don't we
>hear anything from you about
>the rights of Assyrians to
>have their own independent country
>in modern-day Iraq - the
>original homeland of the Assyrians?
>
The human beings originally from the land called Assyria were given the same rights as all human beings in the Qu'ran. However, you do not hear much about the Assyrians from Muslims because--let's face it--most do not think the Ashuri exists any longer. Your people are the great who stood silently while never being praised or known. It is unjust to "patch up" what has befalled them. On the Day of Resurrection, those who harmed you and your family will receive full recompense for their deeds. Rest assure.
>
>Why don't we hear anything from
>you about the rights of
>the Copts (the original Egyptians)
>to an independent homeland in
>Egypt? I am very ignorant to the fact that there are Copts who object to Egypt's present government.
>
>How about the Berbers in Libya?
> The Kurds in Turkey?
> The Arameans in Syria?
> The Phoenicians in Lebanon?
> The Native Americans in
>the United States? Same, except for the Native Americans in the United States. I didn't even know the Phoenicians still existed! Look at the Samaritans in Israel. There are only 500 left and most of them are men. But I don't see "Save the Samaritians" campaigns on television. The fact is that most people, including Muslims, are obvilious to the fact that these people still are amongst the living.
>
>Just curious?
>
>Would you be willing to give
>the Christian Assyrians their original
>homeland back - right smack
>in the middle of the
>mostly Muslim middle east? The power to "give" what is rightfully God's is illusionary as is a king's divine right to rule you as he pleases. But, hypothetically, I'd give the Assyrians all the land they desired (if that were in my power). >Don't you think it's a little
>hypocritical for you to demand
>a Palestinian state.....while at the
>same time, you deny the
>rights of Assyrians to their
>own homeland? Indeed, it is hypocritical for the land-hungry to cry about bread, but deny the loaf to their brothers >Don't you think it's a little
>hypocritical for you to decry
>the "stealing" of Muslim lands
>- when that's all that
>Muslims have done to countless
>other groups for the past
>1,400 years? Those who want their wine with their bread and cheese should bring enough for the whole party. However, it is a tad insulting when you label those who purposely twist and disregard certain ayahs in order to justify their self-interest "Muslims." It is tad insulting when you call men who slaughtered millions of Christians and Jews for not converting to Islam when it is strictly forbidden in the Qu'ran to deny and violate human rights to others to be "Muslims." It is like the Islamic world considering the Ku Klux Klan as representatives of the Christian world or the West. The ones whom you refer to are a different group called Muhammadans, not Muslims. To a Muslim, nothing exists except for God. The world to him is mere delusion. Man and Jinn were created to worship Allah. To fuss and play tug-o-war for land and water causes me to laugh. On the Day of Resurrection, only my deeds will be with me, not rather or not I am from here or there; apart of this or that. Brother, serve Him as your father Ibrahim did and save yourself from gnashing of teeth.
Don't you think it's a little
>hypocritical for you to decry
>the "stealing" of Muslim lands
>- when you are, at
>this very moment, sitting on
>"stolen land". And if
>you doubt it, ask the
>original natives who are rotting
>away on Indian reservations.
>
The United States has flexed its muscles too long at the expense of the Native Americans. It is unjust. Well? "The end of the matter, all having been heard: fear G-d, and keep His commandments; for this is the whole man. For G-d shall bring every work into the judgment concerning every hidden thing, whether it be good or whether it be evil. (Ecclesiates 12:13-14)"
>
>
>Fk^rwbw 0ml4
>
> Peshitta.org
|
|
|
TOP |
 |
|
Keith |
2. "RE: Open Question to Muslims"
Aug-23-2003 at 08:17 PM (GMT3)
|
The Palestinians already have a "homeland". It's name is Jordan. Seig, you are a Muslim of a different sort and I respect that, however those who know your religion the best disagree with you about your principle of those of differing religions "coexist(ing) in harmony" within their (the Muslim's) own countries. This is why we have the tyranny in Iran, Iraq, Afganistan, and ony other ...stan around. You appear to be one of the very few Muslims I have known who believe the way you do. I appreciate that.You are correct that the we don't hear from the Assyrians much anymore. The reason? The Muslims slaughtered and tortured most of them. You said "It is tad insulting when you call men who slaughtered millions of Christians and Jews for not converting to Islam when it is strictly forbidden in the Qu'ran to deny and violate human rights to others to be "Muslims." It is like the Islamic world considering the Ku Klux Klan as representatives of the Christian world or the West. The ones whom you refer to are a different group called Muhammadans, not Muslims." Again, Seig, those who know your religion best disagree with you. Here is what the Koran says.
47:4-6: When ye encounter the infidels, strike off their heads till ye have made a great slaughter among them, . . . And whoso fight for the cause of God, their works he will not suffer to miscarry; He will vouchsafe them guidance, and dispose their hearts aright; And he will bring them into the Paradise, of which he hath told them." Our God and Savior, The Messiah, predicted this in John 16:2, He said "the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service." Striking prophecy anyway. Seig, you ought to take a long look at historical Christianity. My hope is you will take the blinders from your eyes and see our religion for what it is and not what you have been taught that it is. I, for one, would love see someone with your intelligence and zeal convert to a life of satisfaction and a life which guarantees an eternal home with God. Keith
|
|
|
TOP |
|
|
Andrew Gabriel Roth |
3. "RE: Open Question to Muslims"
Aug-24-2003 at 00:12 AM (GMT3)
|
Akhi Sieg,I have to say your reply disappoints me. I do not believe the claims of the Palestinians are equivalent to those of my people. First of all, you know the Torah, and you know that it gives the land to my people forever, from Dan to Beer Sheba, and the proof of that should hardly be necessary. Second, "Palestine" was a Roman invention to humilate the Jews. After they leveleed Jerusalem, they renamed the city and called the country "Palestine" after the Jew's most hated enemies in the ancient world--Philistines. One thing is certain also, the Philistines were not Semites, but probably came from the Greek world. By rendering the issue neutral, what is done in effect is to strip the rights of my people to dwell in security and soveriegnty in the land God has granted them in perpetuity. It is not a neutral issue. If the Palestinians want to live in peace with us, they can. Many elect, for example, not to participate in Parliament because they don't want to legitimize the Israeli government. They have then taken the path of terror and suicide bombers. If they REALLY wanted peace, why didn't they take the best deal they would ever get, from Ehud Barak, in 1999? There are 22 Arab countries that could give the Palestinians their homeland--we have one Jewish nation and we will NEVER give it up, lest another holocaust comes and the world shuts its doors to us again. Not while I or any of my brethren draw a free breath. Ishmael's children were to be a great nation, but a seaprate one from Isaac. That is fact. Nevertheless, if they want to live with us, let them do so in peace. The Arabs are billionaires from their oil many times over. They could imporove the Palestinians' lot if they wanted to. Instead, they write checks to suicde bomber's families and after washing the blood from their hands, smile at the camera. Let's tell the truth about this okay? Ask a Palestinian what he means when he says "end the occupation"? Does he mean the 7 cities ceded to them by treaty--Behtlehem, Hebron, Nablus and the rest? NO. He means end the occupation of the Jewish state in all its borders. Their militant groups were emblems not of those 7 cities but of the whole map of Israel with a bloody knife stuck through it. Do they think we are stupid and don't notice these things? Who was it that cheered in the streets on 9/11? Israelis? No Sieg--Palestinians--cheering on their terrorist friends who are just like them but much richer. They want every Jew in Israel dead or on the run, and totally displaced from the land. Then they wonder why we don't negotiate--as if we could barter away our right to exist? Torah is crystal clear, as is Romans 11 and the entire NT. God will bless those who bless israel and curse those who curse Israel. There is no neutrality. There is no open city. It is either all Jewish with Palestinians participating in the government or it is all Palestinians because every last Jew that could hold a rifle was massacred, myself included. I will not give one inch Sieg. They take a thimbulfull of Jerusalem's dirt from my hands at their peril. Zionism is not racism---ANTI-ZIONISM--the denial of the Jewish people to their own homeland--THAT IS RACISM, AND EVEN MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. SAID AS MUCH. And Paul's people also have been denied these things as well. The history does not bode well for examples of mercy in the Middle East. Sorry to be harsh, but I cannot keep silent on this. I do my best to be tolerant but I am also BAR RAGSHEE when I have to be. Never again. Shlama w'burkate
Andrew Gabriel Roth PS--The Palestinians should realize the blame lies in the British Balfour Decalration of 1914.
|
|
|
TOP |
|
|
Sieg |
4. "RE: Open Question to Muslims"
Aug-24-2003 at 01:22 AM (GMT3)
|
>Akhi Sieg,
>
>I have to say your reply
>disappoints me. I do
>not believe the claims of
>the Palestinians are equivalent to
>those of my people.
>
>First of all, you know the
>Torah, and you know that
>it gives the land to
>my people forever, from Dan
>to Beer Sheba, and the
>proof of that should hardly
>be necessary.
>
>Second, "Palestine" was a Roman invention
>to humilate the Jews.
>After they leveleed Jerusalem, they
>renamed the city and
>called the country "Palestine" after
>the Jew's most hated enemies
>in the ancient world--Philistines.
>One thing is certain also,
>the Philistines were not Semites,
>but probably came from the
>Greek world.
>
>By rendering the issue neutral, what
>is done in effect is
>to strip the rights of
>my people to dwell in
>security and soveriegnty in the
>land God has granted them
>in perpetuity. It is
>not a neutral issue.
>If the Palestinians want to
>live in peace with us,
>they can. Many elect,
>for example, not to participate
>in Parliament because they don't
>want to legitimize the Israeli
>government. They have then
>taken the path of terror
>and suicide bombers. If
>they REALLY wanted peace, why
>didn't they take the best
>deal they would ever get,
>from Ehud Barak, in 1999?
>
>
>There are 22 Arab countries that
>could give the Palestinians their
>homeland--we have one Jewish nation
>and we will NEVER give
>it up, lest another holocaust
>comes and the world shuts
>its doors to us again.
> Not while I or
>any of my brethren draw
>a free breath.
>
>Ishmael's children were to be a
>great nation, but a seaprate
>one from Isaac. That
>is fact. Nevertheless, if
>they want to live with
>us, let them do so
>in peace. The Arabs
>are billionaires from their oil
>many times over. They
>could imporove the Palestinians' lot
>if they wanted to.
>Instead, they write checks to
>suicde bomber's families and after
>washing the blood from their
>hands, smile at the camera.
>
>
>Let's tell the truth about this
>okay? Ask a Palestinian
>what he means when he
>says "end the occupation"?
>Does he mean the 7
>cities ceded to them by
>treaty--Behtlehem, Hebron, Nablus and the
>rest? NO. He
>means end the occupation of
>the Jewish state in all
>its borders. Their militant
>groups were emblems not of
>those 7 cities but of
>the whole map of Israel
>with a bloody knife stuck
>through it. Do they
>think we are stupid and
>don't notice these things? Who
>was it that cheered in
>the streets on 9/11?
>Israelis? No Sieg--Palestinians--cheering on
>their terrorist friends who are
>just like them but much
>richer.
>
>They want every Jew in Israel
>dead or on the run,
>and totally displaced from the
>land. Then they wonder
>why we don't negotiate--as if
>we could barter away our
>right to exist?
>
>Torah is crystal clear, as is
>Romans 11 and the entire
>NT. God will bless
>those who bless israel and
>curse those who curse Israel.
> There is no neutrality.
> There is no open
>city. It is either
>all Jewish with Palestinians participating
>in the government or it
>is all Palestinians because every
>last Jew that could hold
>a rifle was massacred, myself
>included.
>
>I will not give one inch
>Sieg. They take a
>thimbulfull of Jerusalem's dirt from
>my hands at their peril.
>
>
>Zionism is not racism---ANTI-ZIONISM--the denial of
>the Jewish people to their
>own homeland--THAT IS RACISM, AND
>EVEN MARTIN LUTHER KING JR.
>SAID AS MUCH. And
>Paul's people also have been
>denied these things as well.
> The history does not
>bode well for examples of
>mercy in the Middle East.
>
>
>Sorry to be harsh, but I
>cannot keep silent on this.
> I do my best
>to be tolerant but I
>am also BAR RAGSHEE when
>I have to be.
>Never again.
>
>Shlama w'burkate
>Andrew Gabriel Roth
>
>PS--The Palestinians should realize the blame
>lies in the British Balfour
>Decalration of 1914. Akhi Andrew, I have offended you with my ignorance or what many would perceive as naivete. I only spoke for myself as an individual. I have no desire for land, race, or culture, so I would give it freely (if it were up to me). My only objective is to follow the example of our father Ibrahim and fulfill my duty as being well-pleasing to God. As for the Palestinians, I will not comment. I do not have enough information on them to refute or to commend your statements. Again, son of thunder, I apologize if I have offended you. But please, tell me more about Israel.
|
|
|
TOP |
|
|
Andrew Gabriel Roth |
8. "RE: Open Question to Muslims"
Aug-24-2003 at 05:03 AM (GMT3)
|
You did not offend me Akhi Sieg. I merely said your answer disappointed me and showed my heart to you. I did this because you and I have a refreshing and candid dialogue and that you need to know where my passion lies, as well as the reasons behind it.Now, so far I have not seen any real problems with the was YOU have expressed your faith. At the same time though, myself and I believe also Paul as well, are intrigued at how that tolerance and kindness of yours is reconciled with these other facts that we have been relating here. I have long wanted many of the same answers from Muslims that Paul just posed. I keep hearing about the tolerant Islam, the peace-loving Islam, and the fact that it has been perverted by a vicious few, even as Constantine perverted Christianity. But then I read, "Kill Jews where you find them", and I start scratching my head again. I also don't get how these verses that Keith mentioned are reconciled with a merciful Islam. I really want to know how this is done. How does a Muslim read these and stay loving? Now, as to your point about what I have heard some call the "Jewish jihad", but in Hebrew is called "herem" or "corban", there are some things you need to be aware of. As hard as it is for modern minds to understand, God consigned various pagans for destruction because Israel was a fledgling nation surrounded by these practicies that threatened to dilute them and remove their distinctiveness from the earth. If the Israelites keep straying, then the plan of God cannot go forward, and every time the Israelites settled with these others, inevitiably they are drawn to wicked ways of orgies and paganism. Furthermore, what happened when the Israelites themselves went after the same evil? Were not 3000 Jews killed by Moses for worshipping the GOlden Calf, with the rest forced to wander for 40 years? Was not the Northern Kingdom destroyed in 722 BCE for this reason? What about Ahab and his pagainsim? His house was taken away. God even goes so far in the Torah to say that He will vomit the Israelites out of the land if they do the same things that the Canaanites did to get them kicked out. In this, there is total consistency. In addition, the only reason Judah was spared was because of an over-arching eternal promise to David's line and that from there Messiah would come. In this also, we see instances where the house of Judah is kept, but generations of idolaters are not counted. Even there however, paganism caused Judah to also lose Jerusalem and her Temple--TWICE AND ON THE SAME DAY OF THE CALENDAR--and they were in Captivity in Babylon for 2 generations. When you do this kind of sin, you get wiped out or at least severely chastised. Period, end of story. Islam however cannot claim equivalence here though because the faith in the one God is well established by the time of Mohammed. Jews and Christians believe in one God as "people of the book" and therefore, it cannot be claimed that the ways of Jews and Christians undermined the faith of Muslims, as these pagans did for ancient Israel. So no, it is not the same thing. At least from my standpoint, that is why I have a hard time with understanding this faith. Again though, the way you have expressed it I have not found problematic, but it forces me to think one of two things must be true: Either these verses Keith metnioned are just ignored and there are good people everywhere becuase of or inspite of them, or there is another way to understand these verses, and they don't mean what we seem to think they do. Right now, it confuses me, to be honest. Shlama w'burkate
Andrew Gabriel Roth
|
|
|
TOP |
|
|
Sieg |
10. "RE: Open Question to Muslims"
Aug-24-2003 at 04:29 PM (GMT3)
|
Akhi Andrew,I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers; I will put my words in his mouth, and he will tell them everything I command him. If anyone does not listen to my words that the prophet speaks in my name, I myself will call him to account. (Deuteronomy 18:18-19). If you know the structure of the Qu'ran, you will quickly recognize the words "I will put my words in his mouth and he will tell them everything I command him." But let us discuss the following: Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight), smite at their necks; At length, when ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly (on them): thereafter (is the time for) either generosity or ransom: Until the war lays down its burdens. Thus (are ye commanded): but if it had been God's Will, He could certainly have exacted retribution from them (Himself); but (He lets you fight) in order to test you, some with others. But those who are slain in the Way of God,- He will never let their deeds be lost. (44:4) For a while, Muhammad and his followers were being killed and had their property destroyed by pagans who found it commercially repulsive for this monotheistic faith to spread. You see, the Ka'ba was full of false gods that travellers would pay homage to for a fee. Therefore, the preaching about One God would destroy profit. Though Muslims were being slaughtered by pagans, they were not given permission to wage war until the following verses were revealed: 2:39 To those against whom war is made, permission is given (to fight), because they are wronged;- and verily, God is most powerful for their aid;- 22:40 (They are) those who have been expelled from their homes in defiance of right,- (for no cause) except that they say, "our Lord is God". Did not God check one set of people by means of another, there would surely have been pulled down monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques, in which the name of God is commemorated in abundant measure. God will certainly aid those who aid his (cause);- for verily God is full of Strength, Exalted in Might, (able to enforce His Will). Consider the following in the Tanakh: He will not falter or be discouraged till he establishes justice on earth. In his law the islands will put their hope. (Isaiah 42:4). "I have long time holden my peace; I have been still, and refrained myself, now will I cry like a travailing woman; I will destroy and devour at once." Isaiah 42:14. Just as your people faced injustices by surrounding countries, so were the Muslims faced with injustices by the surrounding tribes. Most forget that the Muslims at this point were a small group like the Christians were in Rome for a time. Just as your people were commanded to defend themselves against their enemies in a certain fashion, so were my own. Most also forget that the Qu'ran was revealed a bit here, a bit there for over twenty years. Therefore, since the verses were revealing progressively, the untrained eye says there are contradiction therein. For it is: Do and do, do and do, rule on rule, rule on rule; a little here, a little there. (Isaiah 28:10). "Behold, the former things are come to pass, and the new things do I declare: before they spring forth I tell you of them. `Sing unto the Lord a new song, and his praise from the end of the earth'. Let the wilderness and the cities thereof lift up their voices, the villages that Kedar doth inhabit: let the inhabitants of the rock sing, let them shout from the top of the mountains. Let them give glory unto the Lord, and declare His praise in the inlands." Isaiah 42, Verses 9-12.
|
|
|
TOP |
|
|
Andrew Gabriel Roth |
13. "RE: Open Question to Muslims"
Aug-24-2003 at 07:19 PM (GMT3)
|
Akhi Sieg,I think you know how I respond to the first statement. "The Prophet" after Moses is Messiah. That is how even the Pharisees took that verse to mean. It is also no coincidence that the man who came right after Moses and Messiah share the root of the same name, which translates in both cases as "YHWH is salvation". The clear linkage with respect to this very name is also found in Zechariah, chapters 3 and 6, and is reinforced in Jeremiah 23:5-6, Isaiah 11:1-2 and many, many other places. We have also seen in convincing fashion how "parcelete" is the Holy Spirit, and how the Aramaic breaks out to "he who ends the curse". And so, whatever the Qu'ran may represent to you, it is not without a complete counter-explanation of what the Hebrew Torah and the Aramaic NT have to say on behalf of Jews and Christians around the world. Noting also that the words (in fight) are in parentheses, which tells me that they are not part of the Arabic text but the translator felt they were implied somehow? Don't you think that is disturbing? Finally, did Mohammed kill the Jews at Khybar and other places or not? If he did, then how were these Jews threatening to him in any way except that of disagreement? Surely that is not the same thing as pagans fighting to keep their commericial interests intact. Shlama w'burkate
Andrew Gabriel Roth
|
|
|
TOP |
|
|
Andrew Gabriel Roth |
18. "RE: Open Question to Muslims"
Aug-25-2003 at 04:43 AM (GMT3)
|
Yes and no Akhi Sieg,Yes he is the prophet decribed by Moshe. No, he is not just a prophet. You have to piece together the Scriptures I mentioned (and about a dozen more) for the full picture-- and it is a long and extensive study that I don't think would necesarily serve the intended purpose of this forum. However, I would suggest that a good place to start is the entire chapter of Exodus 23. Shlama w'burkate
Andrew Gabriel Roth
|
|
|
TOP |
|
|
Sieg |
5. "RE: Open Question to Muslims"
Aug-24-2003 at 03:35 AM (GMT3)
|
>The Palestinians already have a "homeland".
>It's name is Jordan. Seig,
>you are a Muslim of
>a different sort and I
>respect that, however those who
>know your religion the best
>disagree with you about your
>principle of those of differing
>religions "coexist(ing) in harmony" within
>their (the Muslim's) own countries.
>This is why we have
>the tyranny in Iran, Iraq,
>Afganistan, and ony other ...stan
>around. You appear to be
>one of the very few
>Muslims I have known who
>believe the way you do.
>I appreciate that. The biggest disaster in the Islamic world has been the fact that the majority of these Muslims, resort to other books beside the Quran to run their religious life. These books are called Hadiths and Sunna. These are man-made books written about 200 years after the prophet Muhammed's death claiming to be his teachings. They are innovations and lies that harbor all the ignorance and hatred to the human race. Prophet Muhammed himself told them not to write any other books but to adhere only to the Quran. They did not listen except for the first 200 years. In these books the scholars find all the reasons to kill anyone and oppress anyone. They use these books to cancel the clear verses in the Quran that order them to be Just and peaceful. For example , Quran declares, "There shall be no compulsion in religion" 2:256, but the Hadiths books cancel this major Quranic law. Praise be to God, the same Muslims who are ignorant with the Quran are also ignorant of many bad teachings in these "Hadith and Sunna" books and act on behalf of the good teachings they hear. The disaster hits when a corrupted leader or a scholar or two start teachings young group of Muslims the inhumane and bad teachings in these books and convince them (e.g. Palestinian children taught how and why to kill Jews). Of course these Hadiths and Sunna books have some good teachings but the corruptions in them is vast, and the order in the Quran is NOT to follow any other religious books other than the Quran. 6:114. In these hadith books they can find anything they want, killing burning, abusing, injustice...etc. Those who "know" Islam "correctly" will object to my words based on tradition. Let the wise think for themselves >
>You are correct that the we
>don't hear from the Assyrians
>much anymore. The reason? The
>Muslims slaughtered and tortured most
>of them. What did the Christians do to 100 million Africans? Did Christ command his followers to enslave Native Americans and Africans? My point is that CERTAIN Muhammadans committed those crimes. I repeat CERTAIN.
>
Again, Seig, those who know your
>religion best disagree with you.
>Here is what the Koran
>says.
>47:4-6: When ye encounter the infidels,
>strike off their heads till
>ye have made a great
>slaughter among them, . .
>. And whoso fight for
>the cause of God, their
>works he will not suffer
>to miscarry; He will vouchsafe
>them guidance, and dispose their
>hearts aright; And he will
>bring them into the Paradise,
>of which he hath told
>them." let's see what the Bible says about the procedures to take during war:
>
"And the Lord said, Go ye after him through the city, and smite: let not your eye spare, neither have ye pity: 9:6 Slay utterly old young, both maids, and little children, and women: but come not near any man upon whom the mark; and begin at my sanctuary. Then they began at the elderly men who before the house. 9:7 And he said to them, Defile the house, and fill the courts with the slain: go ye forth. And they went forth, and slew in the city. Ezek. 9:5-7 Let's see what the Qu'ran says. <60:8> "GOD does not enjoin you from befriending those who do not fight you because of religion, and do not evict you from your homes. You may befriend them and be equitable towards them. GOD loves the equitable. " "If they withdraw from you and fight you not, but (instead) send you (guarantees of) peace, then God alloweth no way for you (to war against them)" (4:90). "If the enemy incline towards peace, do thou (also) incline towards peace, and trust in God" (8:61). In war, beheading is an act of mercy. War was a reality for the Muslims like it was for the Jews. Like the rise and fall of nations, it's going to happen. Our God and Savior, The Messiah,
>predicted this in John 16:2,
>He said "the time cometh,
>that whosoever killeth you will
>think that he doeth God
>service." Striking prophecy anyway. Yeah, just like when the Catholics burned men alive for translating the Bible for the common man, right? Or was it when the Puritans hunted "redskins" for sport while "saving them through the grace of God?" I didn't find it very Christian of the United States when I realized that the army had to be sent in order to guarantee the safety of a handful of black kids who wanted an education. It wasn't very Christian of Krystalnacht in Germany. I,too, can point the finger.
>
>Seig, you ought to take a
>long look at historical Christianity.
>My hope is you will
>take the blinders from your
>eyes and see our religion
>for what it is and
>not what you have been
>taught that it is. I,
>for one, would love see
>someone with your intelligence and
>zeal convert to a life
>of satisfaction and a life
>which guarantees an eternal home
>with God.
>
>Keith I wish the same for you, Akhi.
|
|
|
TOP |
|
|
Keith |
6. "RE: Open Question to Muslims"
Aug-24-2003 at 04:25 AM (GMT3)
|
Seig,I have taken an objective look at your religion. Now, as far your attempt to equate what Ezekial said to do during a time of war to what Mohammed said to do when you evangelize is difficult to believe. The FACT is Islam is responsible for the wholesale slaughter of the Assyrian people. I'm guessing the Assyrian waged no war against any Muslim nation. If you have information to which I am ignorant I, like Paul, will await proof. You have brought up other books that Muslims believe to be authoritative, however, I quoted the Koran itself. Nothing in this (best) translation is said of war or battle. Nothing. You are equating apples with oranges. I am familiar with this type of tactic. Mormons use this sense of hide & seek too. I can't answer for the Catholics, you'll have to ask them to defend themselves for their abuse of power. You'll notice that there is no prohibition in the Bible for translating it. You said "I didn't find it very Christian of the United States when I realized that the army had to be sent in order to guarantee the safety of a handful of black kids who wanted an education. It wasn't very Christian of Krystalnacht in Germany." To bring up the United States government in it's abuse of blacks during last century is laughable when you try to equate that to what the Muslims have done to Christians and Jews as well as what you guys have done to our country. I'm sure you know that this country is NOT a Christian nation, it was a nice try on your part though. You also said "I, too, can point the finger." It's true you can point the finger but you can't do it with any logic. I don't think there is a single distinctly Christian in the world so you'll have to come with another argument in defense of your fellow Muslim brothers. How many Muslim countries are there now? 15? 20? 30? How many support terrorism? Come on over to the logical and correct side of this issue. There is peace beyond description. Keith
|
|
|
TOP |
|
|
Paul Younan |
7. "Jesus vs. Mohammed"
Aug-24-2003 at 04:45 AM (GMT3)
|
» Last edited by Paul Younan on Aug-24-2003 at 04:55 AM (GMT3)Akhi Seig, Something is inside my head that I just have to get out - so please don't take this short message as an insult to your religion. Let's do a little comparison between Jesus and Mohammed:
Jesus
|
Mohammed
|
Virgin Birth
|
Not quite
|
Celibate
|
How many wives?
|
A star signalled His birth
|
Nobody heard of him until he showed up at their door with a sword
|
The Chaldeans worshipped Him, offering Incense
|
Nope
|
Changed water to wine
|
Not really....but he forbade people to drink it (water still ok, thankfully)
|
Rebuked the wind and calmed the sea
|
Uh-uh
|
Multiplied the bread and satisfied thousands
|
Was hungry until he married the wealthy widow who was old enough to be his Mom
|
Put devils to flight by the word of His mouth
|
No deal
|
Forgave debts and pardoned sins
|
No, but collected debts and killed people for their sins
|
Raised the dead
|
Created a whole bunch of new dead
|
Gave sight to the blind
|
No way Jose
|
Healed the paralytics
|
No, but probably created some disabled people through his vicious warfare
|
Healed the ear that Shimon cut off
|
Cut off the heads completely - don't bother with the ears
|
Akhi, I am astounded that you find this man, Mohammed, to be a prophet. I mean, what sort of prophet is this?
Fk^rwbw 0ml4
Peshitta.org
|
|
|
TOP |
|
|
Sieg |
9. "RE: Jesus vs. Mohammed"
Aug-24-2003 at 04:29 PM (GMT3)
|
>» Last edited
>by Paul Younan on Aug-24-2003
>at 04:55 AM (GMT3)
>
>Akhi Seig,
>
>Something is inside my head that
>I just have to get
>out - so please don't
>take this short message as
>an insult to your religion.
>
>
>Let's do a little comparison between
>Jesus and Mohammed:
>
>
>
>
>Jesus
> |
>
>Mohammed
> |
>
>
>
>Virgin Birth
> |
>
>Nah, born like you and I
> |
>
>
>
>Celibate
> |
>
>Many wives
> |
>
>
>
>A star signalled His birth
> |
>
>When his message was first heard, the men offered him all of their riches and power if he would abandon this belief and paid tribute to the false gods in the Ka'ba. He was becoming bad for business.
> |
>
>
>
>The Chaldeans worshipped Him, offering Incense
>
> |
>
>"His basic message was one of belief in one God, respect for morality above and beyond tribal links, and prayer. As the ranks of his followers swelled, he became a threat to the local tribes, especially the Quraysh his own tribe whose responsibility it was to look after the Kaba, which at this time was home to the several thousand 'idols' that people worshipped as gods. As Muhammad preached against this pantheon he became deeply unpopular with the rulers and his followers suffered from repeated attacks to person and property. Eventually there was an assassination attempt. He was forced to flee Mecca in 622; this is known as the Hijrah, and it is the date that marks the beginning of the Islamic calendar. (Wikipedia)"
> |
>
>
>
>Changed water to wine
> |
>
>God forbad the drinking of wine gradually in the Qu'ran because it clouds reason
> |
>
>
>
>Rebuked the wind and calmed the
>sea
> |
>
>Uh-uh
> |
>
>
>
>Multiplied the bread and satisfied thousands
>
> |
>
>Was hungry until he married the
>wealthy widow who was old
>enough to be his older sister (fifteen year difference)
>
> |
>
>
>
>Put devils to flight by the
>word of His mouth
> |
>
>No deal
> |
>
>
>
>Forgave debts and pardoned sins
> |
>
>"Muhammad went to Medina (at that time known as "Yathrib") where he was invited to become ruler of the town by a large group of residents. He declared a welfare state, collected taxes for the needy, organised town defences against numerous raiding parties from Mecca and beyond, and entered numerous trade agreements. He built mosques, and established a religous culture based on respect for other religions and their freedom to practice (the town also was home to a number of Christians and Jews). (Wikipedia)"
> |
>
>
>
>Raised the dead
> |
>
>"By 627, Muhammad had united Medina under Islam with protected privileges for the Jews and Christians who lived there. Word of the new religion, with the peace and prosperity it brought spread by trade. The Bedouin became keenly interested in this new religion; they saw its potential to bring peace and plenty to their wandering tribes, and after much negotiation they became allies with Muhammad and after much contact with the town and muslims they gradually converted. At this stage the revelations that had been coming to Muhammad were almost complete, and he was told that he was to return to Mecca and reclaim the Kaba. With negotiation and assent of the elders of the Quraysh he made an unarmed pilgrimage to the Kaba. This continued for a while but then the agreement broke down, and war was declared. But there was no bloodshed. In 630, 20 years after being forced to flee, Muhammad marched with an army of 10,000 followers back to Mecca, and the Meccans surrendered without a fight. He became a religious and political leader of the city. He destroyed all the idols in the Kaba, and gave a general amnesty to all his enemies in the town. (Wikipedia)"
> |
>
>
>
>Gave sight to the blind
> |
>
>no, he didn't
> |
>
>
>
>Healed the paralytics
> |
>
>nope
>
> |
>
>
>
>Healed the ear that Shimon cut
>off
> |
>
>In Mecca Muhammad destroyed the idols in the Kabah and various small shrines.
>
> |
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Akhi, I am astounded that you
>find this man, Mohammed, to
>be a prophet. I
>mean, what sort of prophet
>is this? Brother, you have based your knowledge on hearsay. None of what you said can be traced directly back to the prophet. Unknowingly, you are referring to the reign of the Khalifas.
>
>Fk^rwbw 0ml4
>
> Peshitta.org
|
|
|
TOP |
|
|
Sieg |
12. "RE: Jesus vs. Mohammed"
Aug-24-2003 at 04:29 PM (GMT3)
|
>» Last edited
>by Paul Younan on Aug-24-2003
>at 04:55 AM (GMT3)
>
>Akhi Seig,
>
>Something is inside my head that
>I just have to get
>out - so please don't
>take this short message as
>an insult to your religion. I, too, desire the same from you, Akhi.
> >
>
>
>
>Bible
> |
>
>Qu'ran
> |
>
>
>
>"And God said, let us make a man in our image, after our likeness." Genesis 1:26 > |
>
>112:1 Say: He is God, the One and Only;
112:2 God, the Eternal, Absolute;
112:3 He begetteth not, nor is He begotten;
112:4 And there is none like unto Him. > |
>
>
>
> "For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day He RESTED, and was REFRESHED" Exo. 31:17 > |
>
We created the heavens and the earth and all between them in Six Days, nor did any sense of weariness touch Us.50:38 > |
>
>
>
6:5 And GOD saw that the wickedness of man great in the earth, and every imagination of the thoughts of his heart only evil continually. 6:6 And the LORD repented that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. Genesis 6:5-6 > |
>
6:59 With Him are the keys of the unseen, the treasures that none knoweth but He. He knoweth whatever there is on the earth and in the sea. Not a leaf doth fall but with His knowledge: there is not a grain in the darkness (or depths) of the earth, n or anything fresh or dry (green or withered), but is (inscribed) in a record clear (to those who can read).
> |
>
>
>
> "We conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law." Roman 3:28>
> |
>
>29:2 Do men think that they will be left alone on saying, "We believe", and that they will not be tested?
29:3 We did test those before them, and God will certainly know those who are true from those who are false.
29:4 Do those who practise evil think that they will get the better of Us? Evil is their judgment! > |
>
>
>
>God said to Jesus, "You are my son today I have begotten you" Heb.5:5 God said to David, "You are my son today I have begotten you" Psalm 2:7 > |
>
19:88 They say: "(God) Most Gracious has begotten a son!"
19:89 Indeed ye have put forth a thing most monstrous!
19:90 At it the skies are ready to burst, the earth to split asunder, and the mountains to fall down in utter ruin,
19:91 That they should invoke a son for (God) Most Gracious.
19:92 For it is not consonant with the majesty of (God) Most Gracious that He should beget a son.
19:93 Not one of the beings in the heavens and the earth but must come to (God) Most Gracious as a servant.
19:94 He does take an account of them (all), and hath numbered them (all) exactly.
19:95 And everyone of them will come to Him singly on the Day of Judgment.
19:96 On those who believe and work deeds of righteousness, will (God) Most Gracious bestow love. > |
>
>
>
>The Lord said, "I will break my covenant with them" Levi. 26:44 You said O Lord: My covenant will I not break.. 38 But you cast off and abhorred, you have been wroth with your annointed. You have made void the covenant of your servant. 43 You have made all his enemies to rejoice, you have also turned the edge of his sword, and have made him to stand in the battle 46 HOW LONG WILL YOU HIDE YOURSELF FOR EVER? Psalm 89:19 > |
>
> 30:6 (It is) the promise of God. Never does God depart from His promise: but most men understand not.
> |
>
>
>
>
|
|
TOP |
|
|
Sieg |
11. "RE: Open Question to Muslims"
Aug-24-2003 at 04:29 PM (GMT3)
|
>Seig,
>
>I have taken an objective look
>at your religion. Now, as
>far your attempt to equate
>what Ezekial said to do
>during a time of war
>to what Mohammed said to
>do when you evangelize is
>difficult to believe. The FACT
>is Islam is responsible for
>the wholesale slaughter of the
>Assyrian people. Muslims, like Jews, DO NOT evangelize. Submission to God is not responsible for the wholesale slaughter of the Assyrian people, my friend. Tyrants were.
>
>I'm guessing the Assyrian waged no
>war against any Muslim nation.
>If you have information to
>which I am ignorant I,
>like Paul, will await proof. The Assyrian people did nothing but greatness even onto China. Paul has a right to be angry. Tamurlane virtually wiped out the entire Church because he was an Ottoman who claimed to be a descendant of Genghis Khan. He had much to prove to himself. He had a chip on his shoulder. So he orders his men to actually build a pyramid in Persia with severed heads. But that is no different from Vlad the Impaler dipping his bread in his enemies' blood as he watches them slide down poles from the anus. I mean, he was just a Christian defending the Church from the Turks who swept Europe, right? Speaking of Europe, a primarily Christian continent, it was fabulous how they transformed Africa into a profitable puzzle set at the expense of its inhabitants. South America wants to give an amen too. The Assyrian people, like Paul said, NEVER did this nor would they. Instead, they travelled to China by foot and developed a script for the Mongols.
>
>You have brought up other books
>that Muslims believe to be
>authoritative, however, I quoted the
>Koran itself. Nothing in this
>(best) translation is said of
>war or battle. Nothing. You
>are equating apples with oranges.
>I am familiar with this
>type of tactic. Mormons use
>this sense of hide &
>seek too. Actually, the translation was horrid. Start quoting from Yusuf Ali. Consider the following: 47:4 Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight), smite at their necks; At length, when ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly (on them): thereafter (is the time for) either generosity or ransom: Until the war lays down its burd ens. Thus (are ye commanded): but if it had been God's Will, He could certainly have exacted retribution from them (Himself); but (He lets you fight) in order to test you, some with others. But those who are slain in the Way of God,- He will never let their deeds be lost. I can't answer for the Catholics,
>you'll have to ask them
>to defend themselves for their
>abuse of power. You'll notice
>that there is no prohibition
>in the Bible for translating
>it. You said "I didn't
>find it very Christian of
>the United States when I
>realized that the army had
>to be sent in order
>to guarantee the safety of
>a handful of black kids
>who wanted an education. It
>wasn't very Christian of Krystalnacht
>in Germany."
>
>To bring up the United States
>government in it's abuse of
>blacks during last century is
>laughable when you try to
>equate that to what the
>Muslims have done to Christians
>and Jews as well as
>what you guys have done
>to our country. I'm sure
>you know that this country
>is NOT a Christian nation,
>it was a nice try
>on your part though.
>
Wait. Before I start to blush, please tell me you knew that the founders of this country were Protestant Christians and that the writers of the Constitution played lip-service to Christian dogma and human rights while sending slave ships to collect a group of "subhumans" after the Native Americans started to die off. You did know that right? >You also said "I, too, can
>point the finger." It's true
>you can point the finger
>but you can't do it
>with any logic. I don't
>think there is a single
>distinctly Christian in the world
>so you'll have to come
>with another argument in defense
>of your fellow Muslim brothers.
>How many Muslim countries are
>there now? 15? 20? 30?
>How many support terrorism? Facts: 1) I am an American 2) Muslims who worked at the WTC died too 3) I, like you, am "The Great Satan" 4) If I were in Iraq, I'd probably be killed because I am "an infidel." I would send the terrorists to hell just like you would. In fact, I'd supply the rifles. >
>Come on over to the logical
>and correct side of this
>issue. There is peace beyond
>description. Jihaad denotes an internal struggle. It is a struggle for a married man, at times, not to look at a woman walk by. It is a struggle for a man to "turn the other cheek" when being humiliated. It is a struggle for a man to avoid lying when it is the only means by which he can veil a particular fault. It is a struggle to quit smoking or stop drinking wine. This is what Jihaad is, not this "holy war" bull. I see, Keith, that you have bought into the media's magic. The media does not have Communists to boost their ratings anymore, so they needed a new enemy for Americans like yourself to "stay-tuned." I bet you even believe I worship a "moon god," don't you? 
>
|
|
|
TOP |
|
|
Keith |
14. "RE: Open Question to Muslims"
Aug-24-2003 at 08:37 PM (GMT3)
|
» Last edited by Keith on Aug-24-2003 at 08:39 PM (GMT3)Seig, That was a pretty insulting post. Unfortunately it was one which is typical and expected. I may have been wrong to assume that you were different from the other Muslims. My apologies for assuming this. The European continent is even less Christian than this country. You may want to reread American history before making a statement that the founders of this country were Protestants. Some were, some weren't. How do you know that the translation from which I quoted is "horrid". Isn't it true that real Muslims believe that all translations could be described this way since only the original script is sacred. I'll have to say, with the same authority as you, that the translation which you prefer is "horrid" as well. My friend you are wrong about the media needing a new whipping boy and thuis they created the Muslims as the enemy of this country. I don't know if i believe that or not. Maybe, maybe not. One thing I do know is that the religion of Islam is the enemy of the Christian. You'll have to pay carefull attention to what I say and what I haven't said. I did not say you were my enemy, your religion is the of the Christian and therefore is at enmity with God. I don't believe you worship the "moon god". You don't do you? I do believe you revere a murderous, egomaniacal, adulterer.
Keith
|
|
|
TOP |
|
|
Sieg |
15. "RE: Open Question to Muslims"
Aug-24-2003 at 11:50 PM (GMT3)
|
>» Last edited
>by Keith on Aug-24-2003 at
>08:39 PM (GMT3)
>
>Seig,
>
>That was a pretty insulting post.
>Unfortunately it was one which
>is typical and expected. I
>may have been wrong to
>assume that you were different
>from the other Muslims. My
>apologies for assuming this. What was so insulting about my previous posts? How did I offend you? Why do you hate me so?
>
>The European continent is even less
>Christian than this country. You
>may want to reread American
>history before making a statement
>that the founders of this
>country were Protestants. Some were,
>some weren't. Excuse me, good sir, but Catholics were hated in the United States until they took a stand against Communism in the sixties. It was even a big deal when Kennedy was elected because of his faith (and he wouldn't have been elected if his father didn't pull some strings for him). Until you prove to me that the founding fathers were something other than Protestant Christians, then your words have no gravity.
>
>How do you know that the
>translation from which I quoted
>is "horrid". Isn't it true
>that real Muslims believe that
>all translations could be described
>this way since only the
>original script is sacred. I'll
>have to say, with the
>same authority as you, that
>the translation which you prefer
>is "horrid" as well. Learn a little Arabic first before you judge translations. To me, Arabic is no more "sacred" than Hebrew and Aramaic.
>
>My friend you are wrong about
>the media needing a new
>whipping boy and thuis they
>created the Muslims as the
>enemy of this country. I
>don't know if i believe
>that or not. Maybe, maybe
>not. Tell that to a historian of United States History.
>
>One thing I do know is
>that the religion of Islam
>is the enemy of the
>Christian. You'll have to pay
>carefull attention to what I
>say and what I haven't
>said. I did not say
>you were my enemy, your
>religion is the of the
>Christian and therefore is at
>enmity with God. "...nearest among them in love to the believers wilt thou find those who say, "We are Christians": because amongst these are men devoted to learning and men who have renounced the world, and they are not arrogant." Do you want to find a true Muslim in history, Keith? Go to Yahoo. Now type "Saladin"
>
>I don't believe you worship the
>"moon god". You don't do
>you? I do believe you
>revere a murderous, egomaniacal, adulterer. Prove that Muhammad was a "murderous, egomaniacal adulterer" using an objective source of information. Please, don't copy and paste from a Christian site or Hadeeths. Until then, silence the insults.
|
|
|
TOP |
|
|
Keith |
17. "RE: Open Question to Muslims"
Aug-25-2003 at 03:52 AM (GMT3)
|
Seig,You said " Until you prove to me that the founding fathers were something other than Protestant Christians, then your words have no gravity." Now I'm not saying I can and I'm not saying I can't prove you wrong but what if I could? Would you change your belief system based on this or this arguing for the sake of arguing? Remember, I'm not saying I can prove that the founding fathers weren't uniformly Protestant but I'm also not saying I can'tr prove it. Your choice, let me know. You have asked "Prove that Muhammad was a "murderous, egomaniacal adulterer" using an objective source of information. Please, don't copy and paste from a Christian site or Hadeeths. Until then, silence the insults." You've got to be kidding. Do you expect us to believe that every single non-pro-Muslim is wrong about Mo? Every single one? We're not that gullible. Keith
|
|
|
TOP |
|
|
Sieg |
19. "RE: Open Question to Muslims"
Aug-25-2003 at 04:59 AM (GMT3)
|
>Seig,
>
>You said " Until you prove
>to me that the founding
>fathers were something other than
>Protestant Christians, then your words
>have no gravity."
>
>Now I'm not saying I can
>and I'm not saying I
>can't prove you wrong but
>what if I could? Would
>you change your belief system
>based on this or this
>arguing for the sake of
>arguing? Remember, I'm not saying
>I can prove that the
>founding fathers weren't uniformly Protestant
>but I'm also not saying
>I can'tr prove it. Your
>choice, let me know. Keith, if you cannot prove me wrong, then do not tell me that the founding fathers were not all Protestants to impress the forum. I have no reason to lie.
>
>You have asked "Prove that Muhammad
>was a "murderous, egomaniacal adulterer"
>using an objective source of
>information. Please, don't copy and
>paste from a Christian site
>or Hadeeths. Until then, silence
>the insults."
>
>You've got to be kidding. Do
>you expect us to believe
>that every single non-pro-Muslim is
>wrong about Mo? Every single
>one? We're not that gullible.
>
For years, all non Jews were considered to be "Christ killers." Were they wrong?
>
>Keith
|
|
|
TOP |
|
|
Sieg |
20. "Correction.."
Aug-25-2003 at 05:06 AM (GMT3)
|
I meant to say "all Jews were known as those who crucified their own Messiah" by the non-Jews.
|
|
|
TOP |
|
|
Email this topic to a friend
Printer-friendly version of this topic
