Aslong Interference exist, so too Terrorism. Do you agree, yes or no & why?

[leibowde84]

We talk most of the time about isis, alqeada etc but never the root cause of these groups. That is the interference of muslim affairs by the West.
In my humble opinion if this continues, i think more moderate muslims will be forced to join such groups. These groups believes you cant simply invade Iraq, Afghanistan and throw away the regimes without opening more dangerous doors.
Also people see this as conspiracy. They wonder, why is there no such regime change in North Korea, Cambodia, Cuba, only in muslim world there is clear mendling. So this is real issue and it proofs the prophecies from Hadiths. The hadiths says there will be major and minor battles between muslims and the west(hadith mentions romans, in our time America is the Roman Empire), these battles are called Malhama and it takes place in Khurassan(Afghanistan), Shaam(Syria, Lebanon, Palestine) and Iraq.


Anyways what is your view? Do you think interference made things worse or better?

I think that we caused these groups to come up, but it had nothing to do with Islam. That is just a lie perpetrated by Islamic communities in the Middle East to try to put blame on the West for simply demanding a global economy. In reality, the end of the Cold War and the killing of Saddam seem to have created the ability of these horrible people to take control of the grossly misinformed. People like Bin Laden only survived the Cold War because we held them defeat the Russians, leaving tons weaponry behind. Then, they forgot quickly and came after us.

All in all, this doesn't seem to be about Islam. It seems to be a psychological issue ... a collection of sociopaths under the guise of Islam.

In what way do we "interfere with Islam?" Can you site some specific examples? And, if you say the creation of Israel, you are asking for it ... just a friendly warning. The West doesn't care about Islam, as long as it is peaceful. But, just like every other group, Islam has to have a thick skin. People will insult it, insult its leaders, insult its prophet. If they can show maturity by turing the other cheek, they won't be ridiculed. If they don't, they deserve to be.

 

[leibowde84]

We talk most of the time about isis, alqeada etc but never the root cause of these groups. That is the interference of muslim affairs by the West.
In my humble opinion if this continues, i think more moderate muslims will be forced to join such groups. These groups believes you cant simply invade Iraq, Afghanistan and throw away the regimes without opening more dangerous doors.
Also people see this as conspiracy. They wonder, why is there no such regime change in North Korea, Cambodia, Cuba, only in muslim world there is clear mendling. So this is real issue and it proofs the prophecies from Hadiths. The hadiths says there will be major and minor battles between muslims and the west(hadith mentions romans, in our time America is the Roman Empire), these battles are called Malhama and it takes place in Khurassan(Afghanistan), Shaam(Syria, Lebanon, Palestine) and Iraq.


Anyways what is your view? Do you think interference made things worse or better?

One thing is for certain, the world will not give up our freedoms and commnities for the benefit of anything a terrorist wants. The evilest of the evil should be treated as such.

 

[LuisDantas]

We talk most of the time about isis, alqeada etc but never the root cause of these groups. That is the interference of muslim affairs by the West.

You will need to be more specific. Technically, it is the Muslims who have began "interfering" with others since the events described in the Quran.

There is a lot to disapprove of in the way Muslim communities have been interacted with, no doubt. But dreams of unchallenged expansion and domain over non-Muslims are just unrealistic.

There are no "Muslim affairs" as such, not in this world. There are people and there are affairs. They should be handled in a respectful way, but Muslims have not and do not deserve special privileges just for being Muslims.

In my humble opinion if this continues, i think more moderate muslims will be forced to join such groups. These groups believes you cant simply invade Iraq, Afghanistan and throw away the regimes without opening more dangerous doors.

I somewhat agree. But radicalism and isolationism are only going to further escalate things.

Also people see this as conspiracy. They wonder, why is there no such regime change in North Korea, Cambodia, Cuba, only in muslim world there is clear mendling.

It seems to be mainly a matter of how much weaponry each country has.

So this is real issue and it proofs the prophecies from Hadiths. The hadiths says there will be major and minor battles between muslims and the west(hadith mentions romans, in our time America is the Roman Empire), these battles are called Malhama and it takes place in Khurassan(Afghanistan), Shaam(Syria, Lebanon, Palestine) and Iraq.

Such prophecies are not at all reliable or worth of attention, IMO. Hadiths can't very well become reliable at this precise moment after being mistrusted so widely, either. Nor does it help that you are equating romans with America just to further your view.

Anyways what is your view? Do you think interference made things worse or better?

Military interference has consistently made things worse, as seen since the meddling with Iran decades ago at the very least, of course.

But it is hardly like Muslims have no role in that quagmire either. It is hard and at least arguably all-out wrong to just let so many groups of insistent theocrats go on their business unchallenged.

A good case can be made that, whoever the actual blame may be, we have reached a point at which it is simply not acceptable to stop taking measures to inhibit the most dangerous groups - and it is unfortunately all too obvious that such measure will simply not be undertaken by Muslim groups, at least not with anywhere near enough reliability.

I would love to trust Muslims to deal with their side of those problems. But all this insistence that Muslims/Islam must not be challenged basically makes it necessary to present interference.

 

[Simplelogic]

We talk most of the time about isis, alqeada etc but never the root cause of these groups. That is the interference of muslim affairs by the West.
In my humble opinion if this continues, i think more moderate muslims will be forced to join such groups. These groups believes you cant simply invade Iraq, Afghanistan and throw away the regimes without opening more dangerous doors.
Also people see this as conspiracy. They wonder, why is there no such regime change in North Korea, Cambodia, Cuba, only in muslim world there is clear mendling. So this is real issue and it proofs the prophecies from Hadiths. The hadiths says there will be major and minor battles between muslims and the west(hadith mentions romans, in our time America is the Roman Empire), these battles are called Malhama and it takes place in Khurassan(Afghanistan), Shaam(Syria, Lebanon, Palestine) and Iraq.


Anyways what is your view? Do you think interference made things worse or better?

I wish America hadn't been "interfered" with on 9-11.

 

[leibowde84]

We talk most of the time about isis, alqeada etc but never the root cause of these groups. That is the interference of muslim affairs by the West.
In my humble opinion if this continues, i think more moderate muslims will be forced to join such groups. These groups believes you cant simply invade Iraq, Afghanistan and throw away the regimes without opening more dangerous doors.
Also people see this as conspiracy. They wonder, why is there no such regime change in North Korea, Cambodia, Cuba, only in muslim world there is clear mendling. So this is real issue and it proofs the prophecies from Hadiths. The hadiths says there will be major and minor battles between muslims and the west(hadith mentions romans, in our time America is the Roman Empire), these battles are called Malhama and it takes place in Khurassan(Afghanistan), Shaam(Syria, Lebanon, Palestine) and Iraq.


Anyways what is your view? Do you think interference made things worse or better?

What "interference" started these groups to rise up specifically? It seems abuntantly clear that these extremists are merely cowardly psychopaths after nothing but power and destruction. What does that have to do with Islam? I feel like Islam would want to seperate itself from murderous psychos, right?

 

[Simplelogic]

What "interference" started these groups to rise up specifically? It seems abuntantly clear that these extremists are merely cowardly psychopaths after nothing but power and destruction. What does that have to do with Islam? I feel like Islam would want to seperate itself from murderous psychos, right?

Bukhari (52:177) - Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour (last day) will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him."

Short answer….no.

 

[leibowde84]

Bukhari (52:177) - Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour (last day) will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him."

Short answer….no.

That is from the Hadith, which seems to be the "Book of Morman" of Islam ... ignored as fraudulent by many. Are there any quotes to this effect in the Quraan?

 

[Simplelogic]

That is from the Hadith, which seems to be the "Book of Morman" of Islam ... ignored as fraudulent by many. Are there any quotes to this effect in the Quraan?

This Hadith is excepted worldwide amongst Muslims. It too is consider a "sacred" text and holy.

Quran (2:191-193) - "And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief or unrest] is worse than killing...but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone. But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun (the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)" (Translation is from the Noble Quran) The historical context of this passage is not defensive warfare, since Muhammad and his Muslims had just relocated to Medina and were not under attack by their Meccan adversaries. In fact, the verses urge offensive warfare, in that Muslims are to drive Meccans out of their own city (which they later did). The use of the word "persecution" by some Muslim translators is thus disingenuous (the actual Muslim words for persecution - "idtihad" - and oppression - a variation of "z-l-m" - do not appear in the verse). The actual Arabic comes from "fitna" which can mean disbelief, or the disorder that results from unbelief or temptation. Taken as a whole, the context makes clear that violence is being authorized until "religion is for Allah" - ie. unbelievers desist in their unbelief.

Quran (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." Not only does this verse establish that violence can be virtuous, but it also contradicts the myth that fighting is intended only in self-defense, since the audience was obviously not under attack at the time. From the Hadith, we know that this verse was narrated at a time that Muhammad was actually trying to motivate his people intoraiding merchant caravans for loot.

Quran (3:151) - "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority". This speaks directly of polytheists, yet it also includes Christians, since they believe in the Trinity (ie. what Muhammad incorrectly believed to be 'joining companions to Allah').

Quran (4:74) - "Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward." The martyrs of Islam are unlike the early Christians, who were led meekly to the slaughter. These Muslims are killed in battle as they attempt to inflict death and destruction for the cause of Allah. This is the theological basis for today's suicide bombers.

Quran (5:33) - "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement"

Quran (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them" No reasonable person would interpret this to mean a spiritual struggle.

Quran (8:67) - "It is not for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war until he had made a great slaughter in the land…"

Quran (9:29) - "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued." "People of the Book" refers to Christians and Jews. According to this verse, they are to be violently subjugated, with the sole justification being their religious status. This was one of the final "revelations" from Allah and it set in motion the tenacious military expansion, in which Muhammad's companions managed to conquer two-thirds of the Christian world in the next 100 years. Islam is intended to dominate all other people and faiths.

Quran (9:30) - "And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!"

Quran (9:38-39) - "O ye who believe! what is the matter with you, that, when ye are asked to go forth in the cause of Allah, ye cling heavily to the earth? Do ye prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the Hereafter. Unless ye go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place." This is a warning to those who refuse to fight, that they will be punished with Hell.

Quran (9:73) - "O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them; and their abode is hell, and evil is the destination." Dehumanizing those who reject Islam, by reminding Muslims that unbelievers are merely firewood for Hell, makes it easier to justify slaughter. It also explains why today's devout Muslims have little regard for those outside the faith.

Quran (9:111) - "Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Quran: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme." How does the Quran define a true believer?

The Quran's Verses of Violence

This is a small sample btw.

 

[leibowde84]

Bukhari (52:177) - Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour (last day) will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him."

Short answer….no.

Whether Muslims blieve that the Hadith is divinely inspired or not, the Hadith was written after Muhammad's death and goes against a lot of what he taught. Just the treatment of women alone when Muhammad had a great deal of respect for his wife, who funded his prophecy.

 

[Servant_of_the_One1]

@leibowde84 the prophecy mentioned in the hadith illustrates the final struggle between muslims and zionists.

 

[leibowde84]

@leibowde84 the prophecy mentioned in the hadith illustrates the final struggle between muslims and zionists.

OK, but why should one believe its account? If Muhammad (peace be upon him ) was dead by the time it was written and he was Allah's last prophet, who had authority to speak for God? I get the Quraan, but I have a hard time taking the Hadith as anything more than a power grab by the earliest Sunni Muslims. But, maybe you could help me out with understanding.

 

[Servant_of_the_One1]

@leibowde84 I understand your problem with hadiths. Trust me, i have same struggle. I cant accept some hadith because they contradict Quran and Other (authentic) hadiths.
But this hadith is not anti-semite, and it doesnt contradict quranic verse to defend yourself against agressors. It reveals secrets about the end of days.
If you look at modernday, u see a evil state that kills palestinians, robbs their lands and put them in prisons. Then ofcourse, a time will come when muslims unify and attack the heart of that regime.


We should never take hadiths above Quran when the hadith contradict the Quran.
However to throw away hadiths and lable it all as lies is somehow extreme decision. Then the person becomes member of an sect called Quranite.


p.s why are u writing peace be upon after mentioning prophet Muhammad's name(PBUH), arent u christian?

 

[Simplelogic]

@leibowde84 the prophecy mentioned in the hadith illustrates the final struggle between muslims and zionists.

Except the text does NOT say "zionist"…it says JEWS. Your prophet is talking about the final war where he believed that Muslims will exterminate the Jewish people altogether. This text clearly proves that Islamic texts regarding warfare were not meant to be read as "historical" but read as something that must be carried out until the "day of judgement". I would caution a word or warning to this line of thought. Historically, it usually never ends well for those who seek to destroy the Jewish race. Choose wisely!

Many Muslims believe that prophecies in the Quran are currently being fulfilled by current events in the Mid East. What Muslims fail to realize is that "prophecies" in the Quran were actually lifted from the Hebrew scriptures! The Hebrew text provides MANY more current day prophecies that are being fulfilled and the ones in the Quran are only being "fulfilled" because they have plagiarized the Hebrew Tanakh without knowing it!

Let me know if you ever want to do a debate on Islamic eschatology vs Hebrew eschatology. I think it would be a interesting thread.

 

[Simplelogic]

Whether Muslims blieve that the Hadith is divinely inspired or not, the Hadith was written after Muhammad's death and goes against a lot of what he taught. Just the treatment of women alone when Muhammad had a great deal of respect for his wife, who funded his prophecy.

Hmmmmm….

Qur'an (4:34) - "Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great."

Qur'an (38:44) - "And take in your hand a green branch and beat her with it, and do not break your oath..." Allah telling Job to beat his wife (Tafsir).

Bukhari (72:715) - A woman came to Muhammad and begged her to stop her husband from beating her. Her skin was bruised so badly that she it is described as being "greener" than the green veil she was wearing. Muhammad did not admonish her husband, but instead ordered her to return to him and submit to his sexual desires.

Bukhari (72:715) - "Aisha said, 'I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women'" This is Muhammad's own wife complaining of the abuse that the women of her religions suffer relative to other women.

Muslim (4:2127) - Muhammad struck his favorite wife, Aisha, in the chest one evening when she left the house without his permission. Aisha narrates, "He struck me on the chest which caused me pain."

Muslim (9:3506) - Muhammad's father-in-laws (Abu Bakr and Umar) amused him byslapping his wives (Aisha and Hafsa) for annoying him. According to the Hadith, the prophet of Islam laughed upon hearing this.

Abu Dawud (2142) - "The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: A man will not be asked as to why he beat his wife."

Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 969 - Requires that a married woman be "put in a separate room and beaten lightly" if she "act in a sexual manner toward others." According to the Hadith, this can be for an offense as petty as merely being alone with a man to whom she is not related.