Response: And once again, you can not provide any proof or sound logic that shows that islam ruled by force, when your own historical facts prove that the muslims ruled India for centuries, without expanding. So please tell me that you have more proof and sound logic, then the absurd logic in your alleged evidence.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Islam will dominate!
- Thread starter 301ouncer
- Start date
Response: And once again, you can not provide any proof or sound logic that shows that islam ruled by force, when your own historical facts prove that the muslims ruled India for centuries, without expanding. So please tell me that you have more proof and sound logic, then the absurd logic in your alleged evidence.
Response: Likewise, since you clearly have nothing logical to begin with.
.lava
Veteran Member
can't believe you said "shut up". never heard you said it before. btw i trully admire your timing, Sunstone. i want to shut myself up.
if there is fire then there is smoke, right? many from India came with same claims so there must be some truth in it. Muslim people are not "angels". even Qur'an mentions those Muslims who want to gain power and money and in fact they don't care for Islam. of course there've been and there are wrong doers in Islam. turning blind eye is not going to make them disappear. every religion has its own wrong doers. does not take huge courage to face it. they are human, they commit crime and they try to justify themselves by using titles we also have. ignoring their existence and keeping silent about what they did is neither humane nor Islamic, if you ask me
.
DeitySlayer
President of Chindia
Control over a foreign nation is hard, especially if you're facing constant insurgency from the population. How are you going to expand when you're fighting secession movements from the Rajputs and Sikhs and Marathas? The force was expended maintaining the current status.
And as lava so well put it; ignoring the problem isn't going to make it go away. Not all Muslims are pyschotic terrorists, but not all Muslims are nice little angels either. Stop painting in black and white.
DeitySlayer
President of Chindia
What, you mean like exactly how you say 'the Qur'an is from Allah' or 'Islam will dominate the world' or 'everything is lies against Islam' without showing it is so?
I see that you chose not to help me. So be it then. I tried.
What, you mean like exactly how you say 'the Qur'an is from Allah' or 'Islam will dominate the world' or 'everything is lies against Islam' without showing it is so?
Response: Another statement with no proof. At least you are consistant.
We all have the proof already.
Response: I can alone help as much as you allow.
DeitySlayer
President of Chindia
OK, let's try then, Fatihah. Where is your proof of the Qur'an's innerancy? Oh, and I see you conveniently dodged the point that all the force was expended maintaining the Empire against Hindu and Sikh insurgency.
Response: The topic of the thread is not about the innerancy of the qur'an and I don't wish to go off topic. But if you insist, you can always create a thread.
DeitySlayer
President of Chindia
You dodged the second point. Again.
Response: You're exactly right. When a person provides a statement with no proof, I do just that. I dodge it. And to help you keep count, this is now the third time.
DeitySlayer
President of Chindia
Thanks, but I believe my intellectual capabilities are more than sufficient to count up to three. Regarding the point I made, saying that force must be expended to maintain order is a statement with proof. The British needed force to keep order in India. So did the Mughals. Why did they declare war on the Sikh nation, otherwise? The battlefields are there. The records are there, in both Muslim and Sikh historical texts. You cannot deny these battles took place, and you cannot deny the Mughals marched towards the Punjab, not the Sikhs towards Aurangzeb's throne.
Response: Force is to use one's power to cause a change or influence on something. No the indians did not ask for their nation to be taken over, but neither did the muslims ask for their sailors to be held captive, which resulted in the muslims fighting and conquering India.
DeitySlayer
President of Chindia
So thusly, because Iran captured some American sailors in their waters, does this justify the United States in launching an invasion and occupying the entirety of Iran? Note also that India was not a continuous, unified country at the time of the Mughal invasions; so not only did the Mughals invade the kingdom which captured their sailors; they conquered all the neighbouring kingdoms also. Analagous to the USA, in the above situtation, conquering Iran, and then going onto Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq as well.
Do you have links to information about the sailor captives? All the information I find only tells that the Muslims were attracted by teh wealth in India and wanted to spread Islam. In fact, some Muslims on this site have explained that the Muslims went in wanting to get rid of idol worshipping practices. But I would appreciate looking at the information you are refering to.
Response: If in fact Iran captured some U.S. citizens unjustly, and the Iranian government refuses to let them go, then the U.S. does have a right to go to war with Iran to free it's citizens, even if that means that the U.S. takes control of the Iranian government themselves.
Response: I don't know if any links. Perhaps you can type in your search engine Muhammad bin Qasim, who was the general of a muslim army and was the one who originally conquered India in 712 A.D. Let me know how that works.
Last edited: