-
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!
Muhammad's Sword !!!
- Thread starter TashaN
- Start date
MdmSzdWhtGuy
Well-Known Member
shema said:
Not me, I am an equal opportunity offender.
As for others being more apologetic toward Muslims than Christians when stating their differing religious opinions, when is the last time you heard of a Christian doing acts such as what happened to Theo Van Gogh? Might be some real life practical reasons why people are less guarded with Christians, less likelihood of retaliation. (how's that for equal opportunity offending?)
B.
Here we have got another misconception about Islam.
The same as Muslims were paying Zakat, non-muslims were paying Jizyah and both of them is sort of tax. The different is that Muslims also have to fight in defending the city/country but the non-muslims don't have to do so. Therefore, in this case they have more right than the muslims themselves.
As everybody knows, Muslims were entering to other countries and once those people surrender or lose, so muslims will start to role the city.
In order to maintain the city and protect the people inside, the non-muslims were paying a tax as a sign of loyality and also because they don't have to participate in any war to defend the city but they can if they want and they won't pay the Jizyah if they did because like that, there would be no difference between a muslim and a non-muslim in that case.
Also, you have to know that, Jizyah will be only be paid by those who can work, but those who don't have good work, old people, women and children as well, don't have to pay the Jizyah. This prove that, the reason for Jizyah wasn't because they were simply non-muslims, because if this was the case, so all non-muslims whether they have work or not, women, children and old people would pay, but it's not.
Note that, only those who fought the muslims will pay the Jizyah, that's why prophet Mohammed didn't take Jizyah from the Jews in Madina because they were citizens there (before they fight him), and had a deal with them to live in peace, they had equal rights the same as muslims, and they had the same citizen rights as what a citizen in any country nowadays has. It happened also that the christaisn in the past served in the muslims army in defending the city (by their own well) because they were normal citizens the same as muslims.
Protect from whom?
The government at that time were protecting them whether from the enemy who come to fight the city/country or even to protect their churches and also for the purpose of maintainance as well. No body was forcing them to convert and they had the right to live and practice their religion as they please. Nevertheless, so sadly, this was contrary to what the christaisn and others were doing to the muslims civilians when they take over the city. You know well what was happening to them.
There is no doubt that those who live in the country itself as citizens won't pay the Jizyah and i explained already who is the one who supposed to pay.
This is the greatness of Islam. Islam didn't have to process in term of theology, doctrine, or the moral aspects of war during all it's entire history. It still the same because the truth always stand against time and place and no force on earth can change it. This is the greatness of islam. This is why i love Islam.
The same as Muslims were paying Zakat, non-muslims were paying Jizyah and both of them is sort of tax. The different is that Muslims also have to fight in defending the city/country but the non-muslims don't have to do so. Therefore, in this case they have more right than the muslims themselves.
As everybody knows, Muslims were entering to other countries and once those people surrender or lose, so muslims will start to role the city.
In order to maintain the city and protect the people inside, the non-muslims were paying a tax as a sign of loyality and also because they don't have to participate in any war to defend the city but they can if they want and they won't pay the Jizyah if they did because like that, there would be no difference between a muslim and a non-muslim in that case.
Also, you have to know that, Jizyah will be only be paid by those who can work, but those who don't have good work, old people, women and children as well, don't have to pay the Jizyah. This prove that, the reason for Jizyah wasn't because they were simply non-muslims, because if this was the case, so all non-muslims whether they have work or not, women, children and old people would pay, but it's not.
Note that, only those who fought the muslims will pay the Jizyah, that's why prophet Mohammed didn't take Jizyah from the Jews in Madina because they were citizens there (before they fight him), and had a deal with them to live in peace, they had equal rights the same as muslims, and they had the same citizen rights as what a citizen in any country nowadays has. It happened also that the christaisn in the past served in the muslims army in defending the city (by their own well) because they were normal citizens the same as muslims.
Protect from whom?
The government at that time were protecting them whether from the enemy who come to fight the city/country or even to protect their churches and also for the purpose of maintainance as well. No body was forcing them to convert and they had the right to live and practice their religion as they please. Nevertheless, so sadly, this was contrary to what the christaisn and others were doing to the muslims civilians when they take over the city. You know well what was happening to them.
There is no doubt that those who live in the country itself as citizens won't pay the Jizyah and i explained already who is the one who supposed to pay.
This is the greatness of Islam. Islam didn't have to process in term of theology, doctrine, or the moral aspects of war during all it's entire history. It still the same because the truth always stand against time and place and no force on earth can change it. This is the greatness of islam. This is why i love Islam.
The Truth said:Here we have got another misconception about Islam.
The same as Muslims were paying Zakat, non-muslims were paying Jizyah and both of them is sort of tax. The different is that Muslims also have to fight in defending the city/country but the non-muslims don't have to do so. Therefore, in this case they have more right than the muslims themselves.
As everybody knows, Muslims were entering to other countries and once those people surrender or lose, so muslims will start to role the city.
In order to maintain the city and protect the people inside, the non-muslims were paying a tax as a sign of loyality and also because they don't have to participate in any war to defend the city but they can if they want and they won't pay the Jizyah if they did because like that, there would be no difference between a muslim and a non-muslim in that case.
Also, you have to know that, Jizyah will be only be paid by those who can work, but those who don't have good work, old people, women and children as well, don't have to pay the Jizyah. This prove that, the reason for Jizyah wasn't because they were simply non-muslims, because if this was the case, so all non-muslims whether they have work or not, women, children and old people would pay, but it's not.
Note that, only those who fought the muslims will pay the Jizyah, that's why prophet Mohammed didn't take Jizyah from the Jews in Madina because they were citizens there (before they fight him), and had a deal with them to live in peace, they had equal rights the same as muslims, and they had the same citizen rights as what a citizen in any country nowadays has. It happened also that the christaisn in the past served in the muslims army in defending the city (by their own well) because they were normal citizens the same as muslims.
Protect from whom?
The government at that time were protecting them whether from the enemy who come to fight the city/country or even to protect their churches and also for the purpose of maintainance as well. No body was forcing them to convert and they had the right to live and practice their religion as they please. Nevertheless, so sadly, this was contrary to what the christaisn and others were doing to the muslims civilians when they take over the city. You know well what was happening to them.
There is no doubt that those who live in the country itself as citizens won't pay the Jizyah and i explained already who is the one who supposed to pay.
This is the greatness of Islam. Islam didn't have to process in term of theology, doctrine, or the moral aspects of war during all it's entire history. It still the same because the truth always stand against time and place and no force on earth can change it. This is the greatness of islam. This is why i love Islam.
But, is it not fair to say that in most predominantly Muslim countries, Christians are forbidden to follow the faith of their choice, and can be imprisonned for doing so ?
(Whilst, of course, in a predominantly Christian country - such as the United States - no Christian has the right to deny the Muslim following his faith).
That is why I like Christianity.
kai
ragamuffin
.............................:thud:The Truth said:Here we have got another misconception about Islam.
The same as Muslims were paying Zakat, non-muslims were paying Jizyah and both of them is sort of tax. The different is that Muslims also have to fight in defending the city/country but the non-muslims don't have to do so. Therefore, in this case they have more right than the muslims themselves.
As everybody knows, Muslims were entering to other countries and once those people surrender or lose, so muslims will start to role the city.
In order to maintain the city and protect the people inside, the non-muslims were paying a tax as a sign of loyality and also because they don't have to participate in any war to defend the city but they can if they want and they won't pay the Jizyah if they did because like that, there would be no difference between a muslim and a non-muslim in that case.
Also, you have to know that, Jizyah will be only be paid by those who can work, but those who don't have good work, old people, women and children as well, don't have to pay the Jizyah. This prove that, the reason for Jizyah wasn't because they were simply non-muslims, because if this was the case, so all non-muslims whether they have work or not, women, children and old people would pay, but it's not.
Note that, only those who fought the muslims will pay the Jizyah, that's why prophet Mohammed didn't take Jizyah from the Jews in Madina because they were citizens there (before they fight him), and had a deal with them to live in peace, they had equal rights the same as muslims, and they had the same citizen rights as what a citizen in any country nowadays has. It happened also that the christaisn in the past served in the muslims army in defending the city (by their own well) because they were normal citizens the same as muslims.
Protect from whom?
The government at that time were protecting them whether from the enemy who come to fight the city/country or even to protect their churches and also for the purpose of maintainance as well. No body was forcing them to convert and they had the right to live and practice their religion as they please. Nevertheless, so sadly, this was contrary to what the christaisn and others were doing to the muslims civilians when they take over the city. You know well what was happening to them.
There is no doubt that those who live in the country itself as citizens won't pay the Jizyah and i explained already who is the one who supposed to pay.
This is the greatness of Islam. Islam didn't have to process in term of theology, doctrine, or the moral aspects of war during all it's entire history. It still the same because the truth always stand against time and place and no force on earth can change it. This is the greatness of islam. This is why i love Islam.
Dear Michel, show me which country (except Saudi Arabia) forbad any Christian from being Christian and practicing his faith?Even if there is one or more country (which i don't know yet) beside Saudi arabia so is that mean islam teach this? The answer definitely is, No. Also, you said most of muslim countries which is absolutely, inaccurate.Remember that there is more than 1 billion muslim around the world so think of that when you say most. Saudi arabia don't represent Islam more than the US representing Christianity, don't you agree with me?
Saudi arabia don't represent Islam more than the US representing Christianity, don't you agree with me?
I would like to add somthing about the Jizyah issue. Islam grant full right for those who pay Jizyah (whom i talked about in post # 44) and they can even have the chance to deal with pigs and alcohol (which is forbidden in islam) and no one will condemn them from doing what they used to do before according to their own religion and their culture. Any muslim who harm these properties will be punished. Also, some scholars said that if a muslim killed a non-muslim so he must be killed as well.
These thoughts and rules have been practiced since centires ago before the world and humanity in general know somthing called "human rights" in 1948 if i'm not mistaken.
Can you imagine that?
In the time when Islam was giving all these rights, there was no religion or any system exist which allow people from other religions to practice their faith freely in their land. While christaisn and jews were eliminating each other when they got the chance for that, Islam allowed both to practice their religions and cultures, and gave them rights even many non-muslims reached to be in charge of islamic cities in the time of bani Amyyiah, Abbases, and in Othamnic empire as well.
Peace and blessing,
The Truth
These thoughts and rules have been practiced since centires ago before the world and humanity in general know somthing called "human rights" in 1948 if i'm not mistaken.
Can you imagine that?
In the time when Islam was giving all these rights, there was no religion or any system exist which allow people from other religions to practice their faith freely in their land. While christaisn and jews were eliminating each other when they got the chance for that, Islam allowed both to practice their religions and cultures, and gave them rights even many non-muslims reached to be in charge of islamic cities in the time of bani Amyyiah, Abbases, and in Othamnic empire as well.
Peace and blessing,
The Truth
jewscout
Religious Zionist
when were jews trying to eliminate Christians? and with what army?:sarcastic
while i do not agree with your perception of this multi-religious Utopian Islamic history....i will agree if I had my choices between Christian Europe and the Islamic Middle east in the Middle ages i would set up shop in Cairo before i would in Paris.:yes:
kai said:
Yeah well we don't have to talk about it, the majority of non muslims on this thread are more than happy to point it out. Anyone who spends three days on this forum will most definately see a fair share of anti-islamic comment plus a large amount of questionable history regarding Islam and the only pro-islamic comments they will find will come from muslims themselves. I rarely see people talking positively about Isam on this forum. Even with the article Truth just posted I haven't seen much positive feedback... it's almost as if people don't want to hear about the good things Islam has done. I'm not pro war or anything, but wars happen. Muslims faught back, and we have every right to do so. I thank Muhammed for listening to God when He said to fight back... if it wasn't for him doing so.. I wouldn't be sitting here today. My faith is strong.... I believe Muhammed did fight in battles, but none were unjust. We were attacked first. Has anyone seen Kingdom of Heaven? The way Muslims and Islam is portrayed in that movie during battle seems to go hand in hand with that article... although the article above is talking about a different battle, the way we treated those we faught seems to agree. I'd hate to use a movie as an example, but it is historically correct. Muslims were raped and murdered by Christians, and when we ended up taking over again... we didn't react anywhere close to the same way the Christians did. Like my brother Sala'hadeen said "We are not like you".
Just so people know... I understand that the actions which took place during the Crusades aren't a true representation of the Teachings of Jesus (pbuh). A true follower of Christ would never act in such a way, and those who did were blinded. I do not believe in causing mischief or transgressing bounds, but I do believe in fighting for what's right, fighting in defense, and fighting oppression.
Sura 4:89-90
They but wish that ye should reject Faith as they do, and thus be on the same footing as them: so take not protectors from their ranks until they flee in the way of God from what is forbidden. But if they fight you, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks.
Except those who join a group between whom and you there is a treaty (of peace), or those who approach you with hearts restraining them from fighting you or fighting their own people. If God had pleased, He could have given them power over you and they would have faught you: therfore if they withdraw from you but fight you not, and instead send you (guaruntees of)peace, then God hath opened no way for you (to fight them).
Peace and Blessings
fullyveiled muslimah
Evil incarnate!
Ezzedean said:
That was very well said. I think there has been a misunderstanding here. The muslims are defending Islam on the basis of what Islam teaches. The non-muslims (with exceptions of course) are arguing that Islam itself is responsible for whatever atrocities took place in the past or are taking place now. It seems we are talking about two different subjects. I don't beleive any muslim on this forum is saying that every war ever done in the name of this religion was justified. What we are saying is that at those times when those wars were completely unjust, the muslims resposible were acting out of line. What I think people want us to "admit" is that Islam does give quarter to unjust acts on the basis of spreading Islam.
Am I saying that all the wars that muslims ever took part in throughout history was justified and righteous? No I am not. Am I saying that an unjust muslim ruler of a land never oppressed the non-muslims living under them? No, again I am not. I don't think my muslim borthers and sisters will disagree with me either.
The messege that the muslims in this forum are trying to convey has been lost in this tit-for-tat nitpicky debate game that we play with each other. The messege is simple and it is this: Do not judge Islam from the poor example that we muslims have made of it. We as a whole are in stark contrast to the true teachings and pure elements of Islam. Instead judge it with and objective eye, if you can, from the Quran itself and the hadith. Allow us to give you the real meaning of the verses that upset you so much, not so that you can accept it, but so that you will at least understand it. From that standpoint you can make of Islam what you will.
However we cannot convey that messege if we are stuck defending the actions of people that we really know nothing about, like hezbollah and hamas. We are constantly asked why we cannto change their actions, but th answer is not ours to give. The answer is that the conditions of people must change for them to change.
Smoke
Done here.
Frubals to you! I don't read every thread, but that's the first honest response I've seen. What we hear all too often is that Muslims have never conquered other countries unjustly, and have always treated the conquered fairly. It's just not true, and we know it's not true, and that makes us -- well, me, anyway -- distrust those who argue that way.fullyveiled muslimah said:
kai
ragamuffin
Ezzedean said:
i have not given any positive feedback to the article because its not factual its bias and negating history, if mohammed pbuh fought in self defence then good, but i am not on about Islam i am on about the spread of Islam, lets simplify it so there is no confusion , i state that the spread of islam went hand in hand with military expansion, the empires of the Islamic caliphs and sultans were vast and thats what spread Islam across the world! thats my entire point in a nutshell , this version of events where nation upon nation took up Islam by its own accord is fundamentally wrong . Islam came with the empire and stayed, right that is not Islam bashing thats not even a comment on Islam its a comment on the spread of Islam
