• 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!

Was Islam spread by the sword?

Status
Not open for further replies.
If that was Islam I would be the first to be a non muslim.

Not true. The notion of all Moslems being under one uniting leader is simply a matter of established fact in Islam both philosophically and historically. So whilst it is nice that you reject the goal of ISIS your opinion is at complete odds with that of current Islamic jurists where all four schools of Jurisprudence seem to subscribe to the idea of a caliphate.

Indeed, you seem to be completely ignoring Muhammad himself who established an Islamic state in Medina where all Moslems were under one banner and who is quoted as saying in Sahih Bukhari 3455:

"The children of Israel used to have their political affairs ruled by prophets. Whenever a prophet died another would succeed him. But there will be no prophet after me, instead there will be caliphs and they will number many." The companions asked, "What then do you order us?" Muhammad said, "Fulfil allegiance to them one after the other. Give them their dues. Verily, Allah will ask them about what he entrusted them with."

It is very clear that your prophet is laying down a post-prophet statehood where caliphs will follow one after the over and to which Moslems should swear allegiance to – thus, to follow the Caliph is an obligation of the Moslem as mandated by your prophet and God. This is exactly what we saw after Muhammad died. So to suggest that the idea of a caliphate has no theological basis within Islam is simply incorrect. ISIS are merely trying to re-establish the tradition not deviate from Islam’s ideology.

As a Moslem how can you not know this or deny this?
 
If that was Islam I would be the first to be a non muslim.

Not true. Beheading is an intimate part of Islam – how can you deny this? We know this from the historical record where it has been the popular mode of execution and the reason is undeniably because Islam’s prophet, the perfect man and example to be followed for all time, ordered and himself seems to have partaken in beheadings . Most notably during his exploits in the war with the Banu Qurayzu tribe where hundreds of Jews had their most vital extremity lobbed off. We also know it is mentioned numerous times within the Koran and Hadith – for example we see in the Koran 8:12 mandating this action against the Kuffar by saying

‘I shall cast into the unbelievers’ hearts terror; so smite above the necks, and smite every finger of them.’

To say beheadings has not been advocated by Moslems throughout the centuries as a result of Muhammad’s example and Allah’s commands is just patently ridiculous - so we can see that ISIS are cleary continuing a long tradition of this type of execution and are not deviating at all from what Islam espouses.
 
Please take your own time.

Regards

I have read the links and I still disagree. You provided the following quote to prove that Islam does subscribe to the paradigm of separating church and state …

“"The very essence of secularism is that absolute justice must be practised regardless of the differences of faith and religion and colour and creed and group...this, in essence, is the true definition of secularism. And this is exactly what the Holy Qur'an admonishes us to do in matters of state, how things should be done and how the state should be run

We can see that within that quote they are clearly saying that Allah’s law should be followed in order for true secularism to be realised – that is a proposition which is completely contradictory! Secularism is free of religious interference.

I repeat my earlier post here to clarify my views on Islam and secularism.

Secularism is defined as: "A doctrine that rejects any form of religious faith and worship" or "The belief that religion and ecclesiastical affairs should not enter into the function of the state."

In consideration of the fact that in Islam, religion gave rise to the ‘Islamic state’, this would mean that the very foundation of ‘the state’ is anchored on religion – so straight away I think that separating religion from the state 100% will be near impossible

Now, I hope I am correct in saying the most fundamental belief in Islam is that the Koran is the word of God whilst most seem to agree the Sunnah is the God of Islam’s guidance to Muhammad. Thus, what is espoused in these holy texts have come together to create what is known as Sharia.

Shariah itself is defined as "the code of law derived from the Koran and from the teachings and example of Muhammed; "sharia is only applicable to Moslems; under Islamic law there is no separation of church and state". Indeed, Shariah is “the speech of God in relation to the acts of his servants via requests, choices and circumstantial laws” this is confirmed in the Koran: 5:48

“So judge between them by what Allah has revealed and do not follow their inclinations away from what has come to you of the truth. To each of you we prescribed a law (sharia) and a method…”

So, if secularism is based on separating religion from all the affairs of this life so that a land and our lives are ruled by man made laws and regulations rather than the law of God then surely there can be no doubt that secularism contradicts Islam in every aspect. Secularism and Islamic law are two different paths that never meet; choosing one must mean rejecting the other. The great extent of Islam’s legislation means that your faith guides Moslems through every detail from running the state and their lives – it provides guidance relating to prayer, fasting, war, peace, trade, taxes, governance, family matters, diet and so on. This means that Islam cannot be separated from the state and so a true Moslem, if we go by the texts (which came from the mouth of God) means to follow Islam gives you no choice but to reject secularism for it excludes the law of Allah.

Put simply – secularism rejects Allah’s law and it makes lawful what Allah has forbidden.
 

Looncall

Well-Known Member
Not true. The notion of all Moslems being under one uniting leader is simply a matter of established fact in Islam both philosophically and historically. So whilst it is nice that you reject the goal of ISIS your opinion is at complete odds with that of current Islamic jurists where all four schools of Jurisprudence seem to subscribe to the idea of a caliphate.

Indeed, you seem to be completely ignoring Muhammad himself who established an Islamic state in Medina where all Moslems were under one banner and who is quoted as saying in Sahih Bukhari 3455:

"The children of Israel used to have their political affairs ruled by prophets. Whenever a prophet died another would succeed him. But there will be no prophet after me, instead there will be caliphs and they will number many." The companions asked, "What then do you order us?" Muhammad said, "Fulfil allegiance to them one after the other. Give them their dues. Verily, Allah will ask them about what he entrusted them with."

It is very clear that your prophet is laying down a post-prophet statehood where caliphs will follow one after the over and to which Moslems should swear allegiance to – thus, to follow the Caliph is an obligation of the Moslem as mandated by your prophet and God. This is exactly what we saw after Muhammad died. So to suggest that the idea of a caliphate has no theological basis within Islam is simply incorrect. ISIS are merely trying to re-establish the tradition not deviate from Islam’s ideology.

As a Moslem how can you not know this or deny this?

Is this why muslim states are such pathetic failures when they attempt democracy?

Should this result in suspicion of muslims living among non-muslims?
 
Is this why muslim states are such pathetic failures when they attempt democracy?

Should this result in suspicion of muslims living among non-muslims?

To broadly sum up my answer rather crudely - yes.

The whole premise of Islam is built upon the Moslem submitting to the rule of Allah so that Allah's law can govern thereby ensuring that all runs in accordance with Islam. Hence, if we - remove Islam and subject that Moslem to seclarist rules and regulations then Allah's authority will have been negated and we have just directly contradicted the whole point of Islam. Therefore I fail to see how the idea of a separation of Mosque and State can be reconciled with Islamic theology.

Attempts at democracy have thus far failed because they are never truly secular - Indonesia is trumped up as a success story and is commonly used as definitive proof that Islam, secularism and democracy can co-exist. This is not true - I have travelled there and Islam is clearly at the forefront of society, not quite as visceral as many Moslem majority lands but nonetheless Islam is deeply ingrained at the social and governmental levels. The non Moslems living there will likely attest to its undemocratic nature - Indonesia scores very poorly in affording human rights such as religious freedom.

I am witnessing Islam’s inability to accept rule other than that deemed by Allah in my own country here in Britain. See, we now have Islamic monocultures which have turned their back on the wider society and with it the forming of quite extensive social structures with value systems that are increasingly at odds with the values expressed by this nation. Indeed, we are starting to reap the fruits of the dichotomous existence Moslems face when born into a land which advocates laws and values which diametrically oppose those they are told they should abide by in the Mosques and Madrassas.

For example, we are now seeing an insidious introduction of Sharia laws into our legal framework so that now, a country which gave the world democracy and claims to treat all its citizens equally is now actually discriminating its own people along religious lines. We have seen terrorism on our streets and hundreds of would be atrocities averted; we have the imminent threat of Islamic terrorism hanging over us daily. We have just seen over 1400 white non Moslem girls be systematically raped by 100% Pakistani Moslems in just one town. More Moslems have joined ISIS than our own British army – a quite harrowing piece of evidence which supports the allegiance Moslems born into this country have with Islam and Moslems above the Nation and its people. We are getting many restaurants and supermarkets catering to Moslems above the majority so that now many non Moslems are now unknowingly eating Islamically sluaghtered Halal meat. We have Moslem workers being afforded different rules of employment so that they are given more time off as well as the option of opting out of duties which are deemed haram. These are just a few examples of the inability of Islam to co-exist with others or to accept rule other than Allah’s - this is because Islam has no reverse gear, it doesn't ever accomodate and it never bends because the word of God is perfect and cannot be changed. Understanding this helps us to understand why Moslems cannot accept anything other than what runs in accordance with the explicit wishes of God........... ....anyway I would detail these points more vividly but I am in a rush.
 
Last edited:

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Was Islam spread by the sword?

No.

For example:

Spread of Islam in Somalia: [8]

Nearly all people in Somalia are Sunni Muslims. For more than 1400 years, Islam made a great part of Somali society.[1]Practicing Islam reinforces distinctions that further set Somalis apart from their immediate neighbors, many of whom are either Christians or adherents of indigenous faiths. The early Muslims sought refuge from persecution in cities on the northern Somali coast.

History

Sunni-Sufi orders and Islamic scholars [3]

The Idrisiyah order was founded by Ahmad ibn Idris (1760–1837) of Mecca. It was brought to Somalia by ShaykhAli Maye Durogba of Merca in Somalia, a distinguished poet who joined the order during a pilgrimage to Mecca. His supposed "visions" and "miracles" attributed to him gained him a reputation for sanctity, and his tomb became a popular destination for pilgrims. The Idrisiyah, the smallest of the three Sufi orders, has few ritual requirements beyond some simple prayers and hymns. During its ceremonies, however, participants often go into trances.

A conflict over the leadership of the Idrisiyah among its Arab founders led to the establishment of the Salihiyah in 1887 by Muhammad ibn Salih. The order spread first among the Somalis of the Ogaden area of Ethiopia, who entered Somalia about 1880. The Salihiyah's most active proselytizer was Shaykh Mahammad Guled ar Rashidi, who became a regional leader. He settled among the Shidle people (Bantus occupying the middle reaches of theShebelle River), where he obtained land and established a jama'ah. Later he founded another jama'ah among the Ajuran (a section of the Hawiye clanfamily ) and then returned to establish still another community among the Shidle before his death in 1918. Perhaps the best known Somali Salihiyah figure was Mohammed Abdullah Hassan, leader of a lengthy resistance to the British until 1920.

Generally, the Salihiyah and the Idrisiyah leaders were more interested in the establishment of a jama'ah along the Shabeelle and Jubba rivers and the fertile land between them than in teaching because few were learned in Islam. Their early efforts to establish farming communities resulted in cooperative cultivation and harvesting and some effective agricultural methods. In Somalia's riverine region, for example, only jama'ah members thought of stripping the brush from areas around their fields to reduce the breeding places of tsetse flies.

Local leaders of brotherhoods customarily asked lineage heads in the areas where they wished to settle for permission to build their mosques and communities. A piece of land was usually freely given; often it was an area between two clans or one in which nomads had access to a river. The presence of a jama'ah not only provided a buffer zone between two hostile groups, but also caused the giver to acquire a blessing since the land was considered given to God. Tenure was a matter of charity only, however, and sometimes became precarious in case of disagreements.

No statistics were available in 1990 on the number of such settlements, but in the 1950s there were more than ninety in the south, with a total of about 35,000 members. Most were in the Bakool, Gedo, and Bay regions or along the middle and lower Shabele River. There were few jamaat in other regions because the climate and soil did not encourage agricultural settlements.

Islam in Somalia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I don't see any sword in spread of Islam in Somalia.

Regard
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
I have read the links and I still disagree. You provided the following quote to prove that Islam does subscribe to the paradigm of separating church and state …

“"The very essence of secularism is that absolute justice must be practised regardless of the differences of faith and religion and colour and creed and group...this, in essence, is the true definition of secularism. And this is exactly what the Holy Qur'an admonishes us to do in matters of state, how things should be done and how the state should be run.”

We can see that within that quote they are clearly saying that Allah’s law should be followed in order for true secularism to be realised – that is a proposition which is completely contradictory! Secularism is free of religious interference.

I repeat my earlier post here to clarify my views on Islam and secularism.

Secularism is defined as: "A doctrine that rejects any form of religious faith and worship" or "The belief that religion and ecclesiastical affairs should not enter into the function of the state."

In consideration of the fact that in Islam, religion gave rise to the ‘Islamic state’, this would mean that the very foundation of ‘the state’ is anchored on religion – so straight away I think that separating religion from the state 100% will be near impossible

Now, I hope I am correct in saying the most fundamental belief in Islam is that the Koran is the word of God whilst most seem to agree the Sunnah is the God of Islam’s guidance to Muhammad. Thus, what is espoused in these holy texts have come together to create what is known as Sharia.

Shariah itself is defined as "the code of law derived from the Koran and from the teachings and example of Muhammed; "sharia is only applicable to Moslems; under Islamic law there is no separation of church and state". Indeed, Shariah is “the speech of God in relation to the acts of his servants via requests, choices and circumstantial laws” this is confirmed in the Koran: 5:48

“So judge between them by what Allah has revealed and do not follow their inclinations away from what has come to you of the truth. To each of you we prescribed a law (sharia) and a method…”

So, if secularism is based on separating religion from all the affairs of this life so that a land and our lives are ruled by man made laws and regulations rather than the law of God then surely there can be no doubt that secularism contradicts Islam in every aspect. Secularism and Islamic law are two different paths that never meet; choosing one must mean rejecting the other. The great extent of Islam’s legislation means that your faith guides Moslems through every detail from running the state and their lives – it provides guidance relating to prayer, fasting, war, peace, trade, taxes, governance, family matters, diet and so on. This means that Islam cannot be separated from the state and so a true Moslem, if we go by the texts (which came from the mouth of God) means to follow Islam gives you no choice but to reject secularism for it excludes the law of Allah.

Put simply – secularism rejects Allah’s law and it makes lawful what Allah has forbidden.



I don't agree with you.

You have quoted Koran: 5:48; and I give the verse with the verses in the context for a correct understanding:

The Holy Quran : Chapter 5: Al-Ma'idah

[5:44] And how will they make thee their judge when they have with them the Torah, wherein is Allah’s judgment? Yet, in spite of that they turn their backs; and certainly they will not believe.
[5:45] Surely, We sent down the Torah wherein was guidance and light. By it did the Prophets, who were obedient to Us, judge for the Jews, as did the godly people and those learned in the Law; for they were required to preserve the Book of Allah, and because they were guardians over it. Therefore fear not men but fear Me; and barter not My Signs for a paltry price. And whoso judges not by that which Allah has sent down, these it is who are the disbelievers.
[5:46] And therein We prescribed for them: A life for a life, and an eye for an eye, and a nose for a nose, and an ear for an ear, and a tooth for a tooth, and for other injuries equitable retaliation. And whoso waives the right thereto, it shall be an expiation for hissins; and whoso judges not by what Allah has sent down, these it is who are wrongdoers.
[5:47] And We caused Jesus, son of Mary, to follow in their footsteps, fulfilling that which was revealed before him in the Torah; and We gave him the Gospel which contained guidance and light, fulfilling that which was revealed before it in the Torah, and a guidance and an admonition for the God-fearing.
[5:48] And let the People of the Gospel judge according to what Allah has revealed therein, and whoso judges not by what Allah has revealed, these it is who are the rebellious.
[5:49] And We have revealed unto thee the Book comprising the truth and fulfilling that which was revealed before it in the Book, and as a guardian over it. Judge, therefore, between them by what Allah has revealed, and follow not their evil inclinations, turning away from the truth which has come to thee. For each of you We prescribed a clear spiritual Law and a manifest way in secular matters. And if Allah had enforced His will, He would have made you all one people, but He wishes to try you by that which He has given you. Vie, then, with one another in good works. To Allah shall you all return; then will He inform you of that wherein you differed.
[5:50] And We have revealed the Book to thee bidding thee to judge between them by that which Allah has revealed and not to follow their evil inclinations, and to be on thy guard against them, lest they cause thee to fall into affliction on account of part of what Allah has revealed to thee. But if they turn away, then know that Allah intends to smite them for some of their sins. And indeed a large number of men are disobedient.
[5:51] Do they then seek the judgment of the days of Ignorance? And who is better than Allah as a Judge for a people who have firm faith?
[5:52] O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for friends. They are friends one to another. And whoso among you takes them for friends is indeed one of them. Verily, Allah guides not the unjust people.
[5:53] And thou wilt see those in whose hearts is a disease, hastening towards them, saying, ‘We fear lest a misfortune befall us.’ Maybe, Allah will bring about victory or someother event from Himself. Then will they become regretful of what they concealed in their minds.

The Holy Quran Arabic text with Translation in English text and Search Engine - Al Islam Online

Regards
 

FearGod

Freedom Of Mind
Not true. The notion of all Moslems being under one uniting leader is simply a matter of established fact in Islam both philosophically and historically. So whilst it is nice that you reject the goal of ISIS your opinion is at complete odds with that of current Islamic jurists where all four schools of Jurisprudence seem to subscribe to the idea of a caliphate.

Indeed, you seem to be completely ignoring Muhammad himself who established an Islamic state in Medina where all Moslems were under one banner and who is quoted as saying in Sahih Bukhari 3455:

"The children of Israel used to have their political affairs ruled by prophets. Whenever a prophet died another would succeed him. But there will be no prophet after me, instead there will be caliphs and they will number many." The companions asked, "What then do you order us?" Muhammad said, "Fulfil allegiance to them one after the other. Give them their dues. Verily, Allah will ask them about what he entrusted them with."

It is very clear that your prophet is laying down a post-prophet statehood where caliphs will follow one after the over and to which Moslems should swear allegiance to – thus, to follow the Caliph is an obligation of the Moslem as mandated by your prophet and God. This is exactly what we saw after Muhammad died. So to suggest that the idea of a caliphate has no theological basis within Islam is simply incorrect. ISIS are merely trying to re-establish the tradition not deviate from Islam’s ideology.

As a Moslem how can you not know this or deny this?

I don't think any Muslim hates the establishment of a strong Islamic state from the east "Indonesia" to the west "Morocco" where there is no borders and just one land under the Islamic rule, one currency,one army and a unity which is the brotherhood.

The ISIS isn't representing the true caliphate, they aren't different from Al qaeda and as i said in many occasions that Al Andalusia under the Islamic state in the 10th century was much better than Afghanistan of today.

No Muslim will hate a united Islamic state to be ruled by a ruler similar to Umar ibn Al khattab or Saladin.

The ISIS is killing Muslims and innocent people, so they are dangerous and many of them are foreigners,from Canada,Britain,Germany,USA..etc

The Islamic countries are fighting these groups and i don't think that they'll success since the Islamic world refused them along with their stupid deeds.
 
I don't think any Muslim hates the establishment of a strong Islamic state from the east "Indonesia" to the west "Morocco" where there is no borders and just one land under the Islamic rule, one currency,one army and a unity which is the brotherhood.

The ISIS isn't representing the true caliphate, they aren't different from Al qaeda and as i said in many occasions that Al Andalusia under the Islamic state in the 10th century was much better than Afghanistan of today.

No Muslim will hate a united Islamic state to be ruled by a ruler similar to Umar ibn Al khattab or Saladin.

The ISIS is killing Muslims and innocent people, so they are dangerous and many of them are foreigners,from Canada,Britain,Germany,USA..etc

The Islamic countries are fighting these groups and i don't think that they'll success since the Islamic world refused them along with their stupid deeds.

I am glad you at least agree with me that what ISIS are trying to do is in complete accordance with Islamic theology. That you disqualify their legitimacy because they are killing Moslems and innocent people is not accurate. See, ISIS are crudely targeting Shia and Moslems who they do not see as being Moslem but rather they are heretics - which means that they should be punished in the same way as non Moslems. I repeat - in the eyes of ISIS (and Sunni Islam) they are killing non Moslems - heretics do not count. This ancient sectarian divide makes this establishment of a caliphate with a unification of all Moslems an impossibility anyway because Shia will reject a Sunni caliphate and vice versa.

You say innocent people are being killed - well, the Koran clearly deems the followers of the book (and polytheists) who reject Islam as rebellious and deserving of punishment. For example, chapter 5 of the Koran which was quoted in an earlier comment shows your God say the following

5:47 "Let the people of the Gospel judge by what Allah hath revealed therein. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) those who rebel".......
5:49 "And this (He commands): Judge thou between them by what Allah hath revealed, and follow not their vain desires, but beware of them lest they beguile thee from any of that (teaching) which Allah hath sent down to thee. And if they turn away, be assured that for some of their crime it is Allah´s purpose to punish them. And truly most men are rebellious"......
5:51 "O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust".

There is much more damnation within the Koran of the Jews, Christians and polytheists. So actually, these do not appear to be innocent people in Allah's eyes - he seems to be quite keen to punish them for not following the 'true religion'.
 
Last edited:
I don't agree with you.

You have quoted Koran: 5:48; and I give the verse with the verses in the context for a correct understanding:

The Holy Quran : Chapter 5: Al-Ma'idah

[5:44] And how will they make thee their judge when they have with them the Torah, wherein is Allah’s judgment? Yet, in spite of that they turn their backs; and certainly they will not believe.
[5:45] Surely, We sent down the Torah wherein was guidance and light. By it did the Prophets, who were obedient to Us, judge for the Jews, as did the godly people and those learned in the Law; for they were required to preserve the Book of Allah, and because they were guardians over it. Therefore fear not men but fear Me; and barter not My Signs for a paltry price. And whoso judges not by that which Allah has sent down, these it is who are the disbelievers.
[5:46] And therein We prescribed for them: A life for a life, and an eye for an eye, and a nose for a nose, and an ear for an ear, and a tooth for a tooth, and for other injuries equitable retaliation. And whoso waives the right thereto, it shall be an expiation for hissins; and whoso judges not by what Allah has sent down, these it is who are wrongdoers.
[5:47] And We caused Jesus, son of Mary, to follow in their footsteps, fulfilling that which was revealed before him in the Torah; and We gave him the Gospel which contained guidance and light, fulfilling that which was revealed before it in the Torah, and a guidance and an admonition for the God-fearing.
[5:48] And let the People of the Gospel judge according to what Allah has revealed therein, and whoso judges not by what Allah has revealed, these it is who are the rebellious.
[5:49] And We have revealed unto thee the Book comprising the truth and fulfilling that which was revealed before it in the Book, and as a guardian over it. Judge, therefore, between them by what Allah has revealed, and follow not their evil inclinations, turning away from the truth which has come to thee. For each of you We prescribed a clear spiritual Law and a manifest way in secular matters. And if Allah had enforced His will, He would have made you all one people, but He wishes to try you by that which He has given you. Vie, then, with one another in good works. To Allah shall you all return; then will He inform you of that wherein you differed.
[5:50] And We have revealed the Book to thee bidding thee to judge between them by that which Allah has revealed and not to follow their evil inclinations, and to be on thy guard against them, lest they cause thee to fall into affliction on account of part of what Allah has revealed to thee. But if they turn away, then know that Allah intends to smite them for some of their sins. And indeed a large number of men are disobedient.
[5:51] Do they then seek the judgment of the days of Ignorance? And who is better than Allah as a Judge for a people who have firm faith?
[5:52] O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for friends. They are friends one to another. And whoso among you takes them for friends is indeed one of them. Verily, Allah guides not the unjust people.
[5:53] And thou wilt see those in whose hearts is a disease, hastening towards them, saying, ‘We fear lest a misfortune befall us.’ Maybe, Allah will bring about victory or someother event from Himself. Then will they become regretful of what they concealed in their minds.

The Holy Quran Arabic text with Translation in English text and Search Engine - Al Islam Online

Regards

With all respect – I fail to see how by quoting the entire chapter you have changed the point I was making with the verse I quoted – which was to show that your God clearly mandates laws for Moslems which they are to follow. You actually supported this point whilst simultaneously showing that Islam mandates separate laws for non Moslems – an impossibility in egalitarian, secularist societies.

I am making the case that theologically speaking, Islam does not subscribe to the paradigm of separating the church and state and mandates the Moslem to follow only the law of Allah..

This is further supported by a Hadith I quoted earlier:

Sahih Bukhari 3455: "The children of Israel used to have their political affairs ruled by prophets. Whenever a prophet died another would succeed him. But there will be no prophet after me, instead there will be caliphs and they will number many." The companions asked, "What then do you order us?" Muhammad said, "Fulfil allegiance to them one after the other. Give them their dues. Verily, Allah will ask them about what he entrusted them with

You have said that Islam is the most secular faith yet despite you quoting many verses of the Koran I cannot see where any of it offers evidence of Islam’s subscription to secularism.

To be secular, Islamic societies must reject Islamic law and follow man made injunctions. This goes against the very essence of Islam which is why in 1400 years we are yet to see a society do this. If it made the distinction between the temporal and the spiritual, like Christianity, Islam will have done it by now. It hasn’t because it is different to Christianity so that it will never end up where Christianity has unless we see a reformation and a concessation of much of what Islam teaches…

You say you disagree with me – so with all the scripture you have quoted please explain how it clearly demonstrates Islam advocates secularism because I am beginning to not quite follow what it is that you are saying
 

FearGod

Freedom Of Mind
Not true. Beheading is an intimate part of Islam – how can you deny this? We know this from the historical record where it has been the popular mode of execution and the reason is undeniably because Islam’s prophet, the perfect man and example to be followed for all time, ordered and himself seems to have partaken in beheadings . Most notably during his exploits in the war with the Banu Qurayzu tribe where hundreds of Jews had their most vital extremity lobbed off. We also know it is mentioned numerous times within the Koran and Hadith – for example we see in the Koran 8:12 mandating this action against the Kuffar by saying

‘I shall cast into the unbelievers’ hearts terror; so smite above the necks, and smite every finger of them.’

To say beheadings has not been advocated by Moslems throughout the centuries as a result of Muhammad’s example and Allah’s commands is just patently ridiculous - so we can see that ISIS are cleary continuing a long tradition of this type of execution and are not deviating at all from what Islam espouses.

You misunderstood the verse due to your ignorance in the tafseer.

Here is the complete verse (8:12)

((When thy Lord inspired the angels, (saying): I am with you. So make those who believe stand firm. I will throw fear into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Then smite the necks and smite of them each finger)).

God ordered his angels (human form) to kill the disbelievers with no mercy.

Angels may appear in human shape

Read here

The ISIS men are similar in shape, having long hairs and beards, could they be God's wrath on our world, we have to watch and see, if they were God's plan then no force on earth could stop them
.

They mostly have similar look, wearing black dress and black flags, they got no mercy at all and they don't understand peace at all (no white flags)

oou-uo10.jpg
 
Last edited:

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
I don't think any Muslim hates the establishment of a strong Islamic state from the east "Indonesia" to the west "Morocco" where there is no borders and just one land under the Islamic rule, one currency,one army and a unity which is the brotherhood.

The ISIS isn't representing the true caliphate, they aren't different from Al qaeda and as i said in many occasions that Al Andalusia under the Islamic state in the 10th century was much better than Afghanistan of today.

No Muslim will hate a united Islamic state to be ruled by a ruler similar to Umar ibn Al khattab or Saladin.

1.The ISIS is killing Muslims and innocent people, so they are dangerous and many of them are foreigners,from Canada,Britain,Germany,USA..etc

2.The Islamic countries are fighting these groups and i don't think that they'll success since the Islamic world refused them along with their stupid deeds.

I agree with you on above two points numbered by me and colored in magenta.

Regards
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Was Islam spread by the sword?

No.

For example:

Spread of Islam in Somalia: [9]

Nearly all people in Somalia are Sunni Muslims. For more than 1400 years, Islam made a great part of Somali society.[1]Practicing Islam reinforces distinctions that further set Somalis apart from their immediate neighbors, many of whom are either Christians or adherents of indigenous faiths. The early Muslims sought refuge from persecution in cities on the northern Somali coast.

History

Sunni-Sufi orders and Islamic scholars [4]

Membership in a brotherhood is theoretically a voluntary matter unrelated to kinship. However, lineages are often affiliated with a specific brotherhood and a man usually joins his father's order. Initiation is followed by a ceremony during which the order's dhikr is celebrated. Novices swear to accept the branch head as their spiritual guide.

Each order has its own hierarchy that is supposedly a substitute for the kin group from which the members have separated themselves. Veneration is given to previous heads of the order, known as the Chain of Blessing, rather than to ancestors. This practice is especially followed in the south, where place of residence tends to have more significance than lineage.

Leaders of Sufi orders and their branches and of specific congregations are said to have baraka, a state of blessedness implying an inner spiritual power that is inherent in the religious office, and may cling to the tomb of a revered leader, who, upon death, is considered a saint. However, some saints are venerated by Sufis because of their religious reputations, whether or not they were associated with an order or one of its communities.

Sainthood also has been ascribed to other Sufis because of their status as founders of clans or large lineages. Northern pastoral nomads are likely to honor lineage founders as saints; sedentary Somalis revere saints for their piety and baraka.
Because of the saint's spiritual presence at his tomb, Sufi pilgrims journey there to seek aid (such as a cure for illness or infertility). Members of the saint's order also visit the tomb, particularly on the anniversaries of his birth and death.

The traditional learning of a wadaad includes a form of folk astronomy based on stellar movements and related to seasonal changes. Its primary objective is to signal the times for migration, but it may also be used to set the dates of rituals that are specifically Somali. This folk knowledge is also used in ritual methods of healing and averting misfortune, as well as for divination.

Islam in Somalia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I don't see any sword in spread of Islam in Somalia.

Regard
 

FearGod

Freedom Of Mind
I am glad you at least agree with me that what ISIS are trying to do is in complete accordance with Islamic theology. That you disqualify their legitimacy because they are killing Moslems and innocent people is not accurate. See, ISIS are crudely targeting Shia and Moslems who they do not see as being Moslem but rather they are heretics - which means that they should be punished in the same way as non Moslems. I repeat - in the eyes of ISIS (and Sunni Islam) they are killing non Moslems - heretics do not count. This ancient sectarian divide makes this establishment of a caliphate with a unification of all Moslems an impossibility anyway because Shia will reject a Sunni caliphate and vice versa.

You say innocent people are being killed - well, the Koran clearly deems the followers of the book (and polytheists) who reject Islam as rebellious and deserving of punishment. For example, chapter 5 of the Koran which was quoted in an earlier comment shows your God say the following

5:47 "Let the people of the Gospel judge by what Allah hath revealed therein. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) those who rebel".......
5:49 "And this (He commands): Judge thou between them by what Allah hath revealed, and follow not their vain desires, but beware of them lest they beguile thee from any of that (teaching) which Allah hath sent down to thee. And if they turn away, be assured that for some of their crime it is Allah´s purpose to punish them. And truly most men are rebellious"......
5:51 "O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust".

There is much more damnation within the Koran of the Jews, Christians and polytheists. So actually, these do not appear to be innocent people in Allah's eyes - he seems to be quite keen to punish them for not following the 'true religion'.

These incidents happening recently in the ME is a sign of the end of times.

If the ISIS won and started their war towards Israel then that means that we are very close to the end where some will be with the believers side and the others will be with the disbelievers side.

If they are the dajjal group then they'll lose,but still we are living the end of times.

We just have to watch and see.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
I don't think any Muslim hates the establishment of a strong Islamic state from the east "Indonesia" to the west "Morocco" where there is no borders and just one land under the Islamic rule, one currency,one army and a unity which is the brotherhood.

The ISIS isn't representing the true caliphate, they aren't different from Al qaeda and as i said in many occasions that Al Andalusia under the Islamic state in the 10th century was much better than Afghanistan of today.

No Muslim will hate a united Islamic state to be ruled by a ruler similar to Umar ibn Al khattab or Saladin.

The ISIS is killing Muslims and innocent people, so they are dangerous and many of them are foreigners,from Canada,Britain,Germany,USA..etc

The Islamic countries are fighting these groups and i don't think that they'll success since the Islamic world refused them along with their stupid deeds.

I don't agree with what I have colored in magenta above. It is not a question of hatred or love.

There is no such requirement mentioned in Quran that one who adheres to Islam and professes it has to live in such a Utopian Territory. Islam convinces one heart and soul with reasonable, meaningful and rational arguments. It wins one's heart. It has got nothing to do with with ruling or not-ruling a territory.

Regards
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
With all respect – I fail to see how by quoting the entire chapter you have changed the point I was making with the verse I quoted – which was to show that your God clearly mandates laws for Moslems which they are to follow. You actually supported this point whilst simultaneously showing that Islam mandates separate laws for non Moslems – an impossibility in egalitarian, secularist societies.

I am making the case that theologically speaking, Islam does not subscribe to the paradigm of separating the church and state and mandates the Moslem to follow only the law of Allah..

This is further supported by a Hadith I quoted earlier:

Sahih Bukhari 3455: "The children of Israel used to have their political affairs ruled by prophets. Whenever a prophet died another would succeed him. But there will be no prophet after me, instead there will be caliphs and they will number many." The companions asked, "What then do you order us?" Muhammad said, "Fulfil allegiance to them one after the other. Give them their dues. Verily, Allah will ask them about what he entrusted them with

You have said that Islam is the most secular faith yet despite you quoting many verses of the Koran I cannot see where any of it offers evidence of Islam’s subscription to secularism.

To be secular, Islamic societies must reject Islamic law and follow man made injunctions. This goes against the very essence of Islam which is why in 1400 years we are yet to see a society do this. If it made the distinction between the temporal and the spiritual, like Christianity, Islam will have done it by now. It hasn’t because it is different to Christianity so that it will never end up where Christianity has unless we see a reformation and a concessation of much of what Islam teaches…

You say you disagree with me – so with all the scripture you have quoted please explain how it clearly demonstrates Islam advocates secularism because I am beginning to not quite follow what it is that you are saying

God clearly mandates laws for Moslems which they are to follow

The verses in the context clearly mention of the right of the Christians to follow their Gospels [5:47] [5:48] and the right of Jews to follow Torah [5:44] in the personal religious life; the state subject are different and are common to all Jews, Christians, Muslim etc.

Regards
 

outhouse

Atheistically
Do you even have a clue what the word WAS means?


Yes it WAS spread by the sword, and no credible person denounces this.


Even a PBS documentary claims this in the first minute of shining a positive light on the religion.
 

FearGod

Freedom Of Mind
Do you even have a clue what the word WAS means?


Yes it WAS spread by the sword, and no credible person denounces this.


Even a PBS documentary claims this in the first minute of shining a positive light on the religion.

But there were always Christians, Jews, Hindus, disbelievers ..etc

How you explain that, regardless of how many they are ?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top