Eileen Farhat, left, prepares to give Gov. Kathleen Sebelius a tour of the new Wichita mosque on Wednesday.
Posted on 07/16/2005 9:02:48 PM PDT by BigFinn
Wichita-area Muslims on Wednesday celebrated the grand opening of Kansas' largest mosque.
The event drew hundreds of visitors -- including Gov. Kathleen Sebelius -- to join the celebration and tour the facility.
The 10,050-square-foot mosque -- which has yet to be officially named -- is at 6655 E. 34th St. North and adjoins the Muslim Community Center, where Muslims had previously prayed.
The mosque includes a carpeted prayer area on the main floor, a 10-foot-high speaker's platform or pulpit, an area to wash the bodies of people who have died and an office for the imam, a prayer leader.
For Muslims, the opening of the mosque marked the end of nearly 10 years of concept planning and four years of fiscal planning. It was built at a cost of more than $800,000, debt-free.
"It's just like home," said Nabil Seyam, spokesman for the Islamic Society of Wichita. "The mosque, it is a place of worship, but it also is a place where it feels like home. There is no evil in it. It's a place of peace."
Eileen Farhat, left, prepares to give Gov. Kathleen Sebelius a tour of the new Wichita mosque on Wednesday.
As part of the grand opening ceremony, there were readings from the Quran. Muslim leaders and Sebelius gave speeches to a standing-room only audience of several hundred inside the community center.
Sebelius told the group she was impressed with the facility not just as a faith center, but as a community center and education center. There is a school inside the building.
After the speeches and readings, visitors were allowed to tour the mosque. Visitors removed their shoes as they entered the carpeted prayer area. Women were given scarves to cover their hair.
After the tour, Sebelius said she hoped the visibility of the mosque would prompt non-Muslims to visit and learn more about the faith.
"I'm a big believer that the more we learn about one another, the more we learn how much we have in common," she said. "People tend to view each other with a little suspicion until they figure out these are parents and professionals and community leaders. I think this is great."
Assem Farhat, president of the board of trustees for the Islamic Society of Wichita, saw another positive in having such a large mosque in the city.
"It improves the attractability of the city to Muslims" from outside the city, he said. "They would be more likely to consider Wichita."
Following the tours, people gathered in the community center for refreshments.
At one table sat Sharfuddin Shah, the former president of the board of trustees for the Islamic Society. He moved to Dallas last year before the mosque was complete, so seeing the finished building was important and special.
"It's very nice," he said. "I was glad to hear it was finished and glad to see it finished."
Denial?
Where did I post a denial?
Rather, I pointed out your ignorance on the subject matter.
You reinforced the statement.
Milford, it's easy to claim reading on the internet. Much harder to show it. If you have a real objection to my statement in post 30, lay it on me. Just don't drive by and insult me.
Fair enough.
Have you done any internet reading on the subject?
You might want to start with the Quran. I would especially recommend the translations of Yusef Ali. In addition to Quranic quotes from post 48, try:
Qur’an 5:51 “Believers, take not Jews and Christians for your friends.”
Qur’an 60:1 “Believers, take not my enemies and yours as allies, offering them love, even though they have rejected the truth that has come to you, and have driven out the Prophet and you because you believe in Allah! If you have come out to struggle [fight jihad] in My Cause, and to seek My Pleasure, (take them not as friends), holding secret converse of love with them: for I am aware of all you conceal. And any of you that does this has strayed from the Straight Path. If they were to get the better of you, they would be your foes, and stretch forth their hands and their tongues against you with evil (designs).”
Qur’an 60:5 “We reject you. Hostility and hate have come between us forever, unless you believe in Allah only.’”
Qur’an 48:13 “If any believe not in Allah and His Messenger, We have prepared a Blazing Fire for them!”
Qur’an 48:28 “It is He Who has sent His Messenger with guidance and the Religion of Truth (Islam), that he may make it superior to every other religion, exalting it over them. Allah is a sufficient Witness. Muhammad is the Prophet of Allah. Those who are with him are severe with Infidel unbelievers.”
Tabari VIII:130 “The Messenger said, ‘Two religions cannot coexist in the Arabian Peninsula.’ Umar investigated the matter, then sent to the Jews, saying: ‘Allah has given permission for you to be expelled.”
There's more, but pretty specific on the concept of co-existence.
Then there's the jizya, sharia, current major bloody world conflicts involving muslims (14 at last count I believe)...
There are a number of sites you can visit for information, if you truly desire to be knowledgeable.
Your attempts to portray muslims as left out victims in the world seems pretty much akin to blaming the rape victim for provoking the rapist by dressing provocatively.
My intent was not to insult you, although it was to force you to gain some concrete information of the subject matter.
You really ruined that song for me! I used to love it, now I will think of your version when I hear it! Glen with a towell around his head! Hmmm.
Right. And let's turn out those Christian verses about hating your father and mother, carrying two swords, the blood of Christ being on the Jews' heads and their progeny, and so on to the end. Useful propaganda for radical-minded Muslims, I'm sure, during the 16th and 17th centuries, when all those idiotic religious wars spawned by Christianity were ripping apart Europe, as radical Islam now threatens to do.
There's junk like this in every religious book --- and probably worst of all in the Hebrew Bible. That's hardly an indictment against all its adherents, and indeed, we have millions of Muslims in America and in Europe who live peacefully with others and only desire to live a good life. There are many in Iraq and Afghanistan too, who are dying assisting the governments in those countries, resisting terror and violence as either soldiers or civilians, and also strong and brave enough to head out into the street and vote for their future like we saw earlier this year. Each of them who did that risked their lives for democracy. They would be model citizens anywhere.
If we're going to selectively quote verses from the Koran let's also quote stuff like this (Shakir translation, 2:62): "Surely those who believe, and those who are Jews, and the Christians, and the Sabians, whoever believes in Allah and the Last day and does good, they shall have their reward from their Lord, and there is no fear for them, nor shall they grieve." That's rather more accomodating than Jesus's injunction that "the only way to the Father is through me," but who cares. We could pick & choose verses from thousand-year-old religious texts all day long in order to condemn or laud people currently living. I think, though, that all that verse-hurling sheds more heat than light --- and that heat a particularly pernicious kind.
Most Muslims are good, many that aren't probably have the potential to be good if not raised in an atmosphere of separation from, and hostility towards, the world around them. I don't know who arranged the reception described in this article, but it does show the Muslim community here in America trying to engage with those who aren't a part of themselves, and that strikes me as a positive. I don't think Islam is specifically the problem here, but rather Islam as spawned in a particular kind of environment --- one isolated, poor, and poorly conformed to the modern world.
There is not one verse in the New Testament, not one, that advocates violence.
"There's junk like this in every religious book --- and probably worst of all in the Hebrew Bible."
Ahhh, what a telling statement. Interesting...the Hebrew Bible.
There are more Quranic verses that preach hate, intolerance and violence. You have no desire to acknowledge this fact, as I originally suspected. It is clear who we are dealing with.
Christians, Jews, Hindus and Buddhists are not responsible for the bloody and murderous conflicts in the world today. Muslims are. Reconcile that fact with yourself.
If Muhammad had said, "I did not come to send peace on the earth, but the sword," you'd be gleefully quoting that verse as evidence of the depravity of the Muslim religion. Or the condemnations of the unbelieving cities of Chorazin and Bethsaida, which seem to me no different in kind than some of the Koranic verses you chose to cite. Revelation is filled with blood. The number of people here who profess to be Christians applauding Tancredo's remarks about nuking Mecca certainly show that some of it still rubs off.
Like I said, there's stuff like that in all religious books (including the Koran), which will always be used by the thugs of the day to justify killing whomever they want to kill. But in the Koran, as in the Bible, there are also stuff which appeals for a more peaceful, less judgmental order. That's the kind of Islam which needs to assert itself. The actions of the Muslims I mentioned in my last post give hope that it could.
Christians, Jews, Hindus and Buddhists are not responsible for the bloody and murderous conflicts in the world today. Muslims are. Reconcile that fact with yourself.
Christians were killing Muslims in Bosnia not too long ago. In what way did their acts condemn Christians elsewhere? Or even Bosnian Christians uninvolved in the actual killings?
Not too long ago in the scheme of things Christians --- a LOT of them --- were killing each other as well as killing Jews and Muslims and various other infidels in the name of their religion. Did that condemn Christianity? Or just a particular kind, and a particular sort of adherent?
It's much the same situation today. A violent brand of Islam has asserted itself, and has gained an unhealthy amount of support and sympathy because of current conditions in the world. It doesn't represent all Islam, anymore than the nuttiness of the 16th century represented all Christianity. Times will change, and I applaud all those people who are trying to steer Islam towards a more peaceful order.
I didn't (regarding Tancredo). Nor have the majority of posters on Free Republic whose religious affiliation has not been shared with you.
I never said you did, though if you claim the "majority of posters" haven't then I don't think you've bothered to read the threads. They're not shy about which religion they think is the right one.
Why hasn't this "peaceful" islam been shown for thousands of years? Any explanation to that?
I really don't get this. Islam and its history seems to me overall about as clean and dirty as any other religion. There are millions of peaceful Muslims living here in America right now. And elsewhere. If you're denying this, I don't see on what grounds. There are also violent Christians now (Eric Rudolph was just in your newspaper), and many, many violent Christians only a few generations ago. Islam does happen to be going through a phase where it's churning out more than its fair share of nuts. But Christianity got through its own phases, Judaism got through theirs, and I don't doubt that Islam will too. No religion can survive for 1,400 years like Islam has without a big internal current towards stability and peace.
Really, when did Christians kill muslims in Bosnia in the name of Christianity?
It happened just ten years ago.
When have the Jewish people done violence in the name of the Jewish faith, or Hindu's, or Buddhists, or Scientologists? None have.
I don't know that the latter three have, though if you'd like to argue that Scientology is a more peaceful religion than Christianity, and ergo superior, I'm sure Tom Cruise would love you. In regards to Judaism, you need to read the Old Testament and all those religious purges, or look at the religious terrorism of the Sicarii and the violent Messianism which took place during the 1st and 2nd centuries, or even at some fanatics in Israel in the last few years.
However, the fact of the matter is that muslims ARE killing in the name of islam. They cite hundreds of Quranic texts that tell them to do so. So who are, in fact, the "good" muslims? The ones who act according to their "holy book" or the ones who ignore it? In the name of religion? Citing Bible verse? No, never happened.
What do you think the religious wars of the 16th and 17th centuries were about? Or the Spanish Inquisition? Or the execution of heretics? Or the religious justifications for slavery? Or the Russian purges of Jews? Or the Crusades? All that's happened since then is that the times have changed, and the religion has been reinterpreted, and it's been decided (by most) that that's not really the way to go.
Well, the first part I agree with, but current conditions in the world did not cause the violent brand of islam. Again, even a minimum amount of a knowledge of basic history would have prevented you from making such an absurd statement
Right. People's behavior are not linked to the times they live in. Stuff that happens has nothing whatever to do with the period it happens in. History is divorced from the reality it occurs in.
Oh, how about the murdering angels in 9, or the killing power of the witnesses in 11, or the bloody Jesus making war in 19, or all the tidy punishments meted out to unbelievers. Fire and brimstone, I believe, in 21.
Post the passage in the "Hebrew" Bible, (non-muslims call it the Old Testament FYI),
I don't know what Muslims call it. Most people aren't very anal about it.
that advocates decapitation for unbelievers.
I don't know about decapitation, but I believe in the five books of Moses there are plenty of deadly punishments meted out to various transgressors. Is this false? And aren't the "good" kings of Israel and Judah praised for killing worshippers of Baal and so on.
Post the passage in the New Testament that advocates or condones violence...
I've already mentioned several verses which the radicals then and now see vindication in. Chorazin, Jesus bringing the sword to the earth, the two swords, etc. I trust you're familiar.
"Christian/Jewish women were given scarves to cover their hair."
From now all muslim women upon entering(like that'll ever happen) any church of Christ are to REMOVE their head scarfs in a show of "balanced" respect for OUR AMERICAN religion!
Of course, you haven't answered any of my questions, nor have you cited the verses that promote slaughter, condone violence, etc.
"I've already mentioned several verses which the radicals then and now see vindication in. Chorazin, Jesus bringing the sword to the earth, the two swords, etc. I trust you're familiar"
"No, you haven't. Not one. There aren't any.
Post the passage in the "Hebrew" Bible, (non-muslims call it the Old Testament FYI),
"I don't know what Muslims call it. Most people aren't very anal about it."
Of course you do...you've done so.
"Oh, how about the murdering angels in 9, or the killing power of the witnesses in 11, or the bloody Jesus making war in 19, or all the tidy punishments meted out to unbelievers. Fire and brimstone, I believe, in 21."
Nope, not even close.
You've only succeeded in proving your ignorance.
Again, don't bother. You have no knowledge of the subject matter.
Milford, I'm happy to debate with you, but not if you're going to be disingenuous. I haven't mentioned Jesus's assault with a whip on those money changers. I've mentioned much else. It's there for you to deal with.
If you'd like to interpret all those violence-tinged verses in such a way that they do not mandate or excuse violent behavior, then I'm glad, since I think that's absolutely necessary for a person in the modern world to do. Jews must, Muslims must, Christians must. But it's a great lie if you pretend that Christianity (or Judaism) has always been seen by its practitioners as a faith outlawing violence. Just a lie. When the radicals control a faith, we naturally see radical anti-social action.
I'm more interested in what we were discussing on post 110, which you completed avoided responding to.
"I haven't mentioned Jesus's assault with a whip on those money changers. I've mentioned much else. It's there for you to deal with."
Because you can't. The passage DOES NOT EXIST, a fact obviously realized by you since you are unable to quote the supposed verse verbatim.
In which passage of the New Testament does Jesus exhort His followers to do violence, hurt their brother?
Judaic/Christian values both cite the Ten Commandments as the basis of their moral foundation. "Thou shalt not kill" is one of the ten.
"If you'd like to interpret all those violence-tinged verses in such a way that they do not mandate or excuse violent behavior, then I'm glad, since I think that's absolutely necessary for a person in the modern world to do."
No interpretation required. There are NO violence-tinged verses in the New Testament. Again, if there were, you would have absolutely delighted in posting them. Your failure to do so, along with your baseless lies shows your foolishness. Disingenuous? Yes, you absolutely are.
Your posts more than suggest an intolerance, ignorance and thinly veiled hate. I would suggest a good reading of the Old and New Testament would do you good.
"But it's a great lie if you pretend that Christianity (or Judaism) has always been seen by its practitioners as a faith outlawing violence. Just a lie."
You keep making the same accusations, but when you are pressed to cite the violent verses in the New Testament, you realize it is impossible, yet you continue. Curious.
"When the radicals control a faith, we naturally see radical anti-social action."
Yes, which brings me back to the original questions you were asked and deflected. For your short attention span:
"Why hasn't this "peaceful" islam been shown for thousands of years? Any explanation to that?"
"However, the fact of the matter is that muslims ARE killing in the name of islam. They cite hundreds of Quranic texts that tell them to do so.
And this is the important one:
"So who are, in fact, the "good" muslims? The ones who act according to their "holy book" or the ones who ignore it?
Really, when did Christians kill muslims in Bosnia in the name of Christianity?
When have the Jewish people done violence in the name of the Jewish faith, or Hindu's, or Buddhists, or
Scientologists?
When have the Jewish people done violence in the name of the Jewish faith, or Hindu's, or Buddhists, or Scientologists?
Post the passage in Revelation that promotes slaughter.
Post the passage in the "Hebrew" Bible, (non-muslims call it the Old Testament FYI), that advocates decapitation for unbelievers.
Post the passage in the New Testament that advocates or condones violence...
Again, it is impossible for you to do so because they don't exist. So then you rant.
Really, you are most ineffective.
While men do evil, you have not cited ONCE where "believers" claimed to do so according to their religious texts. Except, of course, in the name of islam. The violence in the text is indeed cited by those who do evil, or doesn't islam see it that way?
"I'm more interested in what we were discussing on post 110, which you completed avoided responding to."
Actually, "we" weren't discussing anything. You refuse to answer or debate any of the above questions and statements posted previous 110. Of course, since you are unprepared to intelligently debate these questions, you choose to "change the subject".
Perhaps English is not your first language. In that order, you should have someone READ the questions to you so you can attempt to answer what was being asked of you.
Christianity IS a faith that outlaws violence. This fact would have been abundantly clear to you had you ever bothered to glance at the New Testament.
You've been had. You have no desire to intelligently debate. You want to spew, baselessly and irresponsibly and stupidly. As a muslim, wasn't your intention to portray islam in a good light?
Reminds me of the movie, "Body snatchers".
As with the stupidity, they seem to be springing up everywhere.
____________________________________________________________
Officials lay bricks in symbolic start for Muslim center
Dallas Morning News
June 14, 2005
PLANO TEXAS – The Ismaili Muslim community announced Tuesday that it is building a $6.5 million worship and community center in Plano, where it has found a warm welcome.
Gov. Rick Perry flew in to lay the first ceremonial brick for the center's foundation.
___________________________________________________________
And I believe Gov Perry is a Republican, that flew in on tax payed money to boot.
Wow, John 2:15 doesn't exist?
There are NO violence-tinged verses in the New Testament. Again, if there were, you would have absolutely delighted in posting them. Your failure to do so, along with your baseless lies shows your foolishness.
I have posted them, and you don't do yourself credit to deny it. Look at Matthew 12:21-23 on Chorazin etc. How does that differ from Koran 48:13, which you quoted as showing something wrong with somebody who believes in Islam? Where's the peace in Jesus's "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword" (Matt 10:34)?
Judaism. Why are unbelievers etc condemned to die in Leviticus 20:2-5, 20:9, 20:10, 20:11, 20:13, 20:15-16, 20:27, 21:9, etc. etc. etc.? If the presence of these vile attitudes in the Jewish religion does not keep Jews (most of them, anyway) from living peaceful lives, why do you then argue that Muslims can't?
Yes, which brings me back to the original questions you were asked and deflected. For your short attention span: "Why hasn't this "peaceful" islam been shown for thousands of years? Any explanation to that?"
Yes, and your question makes little sense to me, since your premise (that it has never been shown) is absurd. This peaceful Islam is shown by every Muslim who does live peacefully. Do you deny that there are so many who do?
"So who are, in fact, the "good" muslims? The ones who act according to their "holy book" or the ones who ignore it?
I already answered this. Who do you think the good Jews are? The ones who interpret Leviticus as a sanction for savagery, or those who don't?
Really, when did Christians kill muslims in Bosnia in the name of Christianity?
Answered. #110
When have the Jewish people done violence in the name of the Jewish faith, or Hindu's, or Buddhists, or Scientologists?
Answered. #110
You go on, and just as with these, I've already addressed all that you asked. It's there for everyone to see.
A danger when discussing religion is that one person will hit on another's sensitivities, which I think I've done with you, since I don't think you've been responding very rationally or honestly to the things I've said. (I pass over juvenile antics such as your claiming that I'm a Muslim because I spoke of the "Hebrew Bible" --- probably the most charitable thing I can do.)
So far as knowledge goes, the facts are that I've referenced specific historical events numerous times, you have not. Historically, Christianity, Judaism, and Islam have all had pernicious streaks of violence within them. The Crusades, the intra-Christian religious wars, the slaughter in Bosnia, the sicarii, the killing of the priests of Baal, etc., all happened. It's silly to deny them. When evil men (and I agree with you there) take over, horrible things happen. Islam is struggling internally right now with evil men, but as history shows, it's not a malady really specific to Islam. Anybody who said that Christianity in the 16th century or Judaism in the 1st century couldn't someday settle down and co-exist with others because of the activities of the nuts would have been foolish. Islam just needs to work it out and have people (like those in Iraq and Afghanistan) step up, take control of their future, and make it a democratic, open one. I feel encouraged that people are stepping up whenever I see things like the Iraq vote and the help Muslims gave in rescuing Jessica Lynch and the Navy SEAL. Those who did that are good people, and that's all I have to say.
I can't see any purpose to continuing this debate with you. It's dead, anyway, since there's not much I can do when I answer your questions and you then insist I haven't done so. With an avalanche of insults and slanders to boot, which I hope you think does your savior proud, since I'm just shaking my head.
The last word is yours if you want it. I won't touch this thing any longer.
"The last word is yours if you want it."
I do...to correct your inaccuracies.
You claimed, "I haven't mentioned Jesus's assault with a whip on those money changers
John 2:15 "So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple area, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables."
Where does it say Jesus "whipped" anyone as you claim?
Look at Matthew 12:21-23 on Chorazin etc. How does that differ from Koran 48:13,
Matthew 12:21 - 23:
"And in his name the Gentiles will hope." 22 Then they brought to him a demoniac who was blind and mute. He cured the mute person so that he could speak and see".
The above is the New Testament verse. Again, you show your ignorance.
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword" (Matt 10:34)
Again, if you knew what you were talking about you would have known that this verse speaks to the followers of Jesus of the treatment they will receive at the hands of those who do not follow Jesus. The treatment of Christians in Africa at the hands of muslims would be one example of the fulfillment of this prophesy.
Judaism. Why are unbelievers etc condemned to die in Leviticus 20:2-5, 20:9, 20:10, 20:11, 20:13, 20:15-16, 20:27, 21:9, etc. etc. etc.? If the presence of these vile attitudes in the Jewish religion does not keep Jews (most of them, anyway) from living peaceful lives, why do you then argue that Muslims can't?
I don't know. You tell me about the "unbelievers" again. Jewish law does not state that "unbelievers" should be stoned for their sins. Islamic law, (sharia), does. Terrorists cite these verses from your quran to justify this ONGOING violence:
Bukhari:V1B11N626 “The Prophet said, ‘No prayer is harder for the hypocrites than the Fajr. If they knew the reward they would come to (the mosque) even if they had to crawl. I decided to order a man to lead the prayer and then take a flame to burn all those who had not left their houses for the prayer, burning them alive inside their homes.’”
And this, which is ongoing and condoned in the quran:
Qur’an 5:33 “The punishment for those who wage war against Allah and His Prophet and make mischief in the land, is to murder them, crucify them, or cut off a hand and foot on opposite sides...their doom is dreadful. They will not escape the fire, suffering constantly.”
Qur’an 9:5 “When the sacred forbidden months for fighting are past, fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, torture them, and lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war.”
Ishaq:550 “The Muslims met them with their swords. They cut through many arms and skulls. Only confused cries and groans could be heard over our battle roars and snarling.”
Qur’an 5:37 “The [Christian] disbelievers will long to get out of the Fire, but never will they get out there from; and theirs will be an enduring torture.”
Ishaq:595 “The Apostle said, ‘Get him away from me and cut off his tongue.””
Ishaq:312 “Umar said to the Apostle, ‘Let me pull out Suhayl’s two front teeth. That way his tongue will stick out and he will never be able to speak against you again.’”
Ishaq:316 “Following Badr, Muhammad sent a number of raiders with orders to capture some of the Meccans and burn them alive.”
Qur’an 8:12 “Your Lord inspired the angels with the message: ‘I will terrorize the unbelievers. Therefore smite them on their necks and every joint and incapacitate them. Strike off their heads and cut off each of their fingers and toes.”
Lovely peaceful "religion". The muslims who perpetrated this savagry against the "unbeliever" cited these and many other versus of the quran. Just ask the families of Nick Berg, Daniel Pearl, Paul Johnson, Armstrong, many, many Napalese, Pakistani, Italian and Korean hostages....
In other words, "THEY ACTED IN THE NAME OF ISLAM.
"So who are, in fact, the "good" muslims? The ones who act according to their "holy book" or the ones who ignore it?
Peace? Again, you didn't answer the question. Peace only for muslims and conditional peace UNTIL for all others....
"This peaceful Islam is shown by every Muslim who does live peacefully. Do you deny that there are so many who do? " So is this the answer to my question?
The peaceful muslims are those who ignore the Quran? What is muslim about them then?
Tabari VIII:142 “The Messenger made peace with them on condition that the Zoroastrians should be required to pay the jizyah tax [so onerous, it’s akin to economic suicide] that one should not marry their women.”
Tabari VIII:104 “Peace to whoever follows the right guidance! To proceed; Submit yourself, and you shall be safe.’”
Qur’an 49:9 “If two parties among the Believers fall into fighting, make peace: but if one becomes aggressive, then fight against the one that transgresses until it complies.”
Qur’an 8:61 “But if the enemy inclines toward peace, do you (also) incline to peace, and trust in Allah. Should they intend to deceive or cheat you, verily Allah suffices: He strengthened you with His aid and with Believers.” [The small print is real important. “Should they intend to deceive or cheat” is an open invitation to invoke 8:57 to 60. The first to interpret this surah said:]
Ishaq:326 “If they ask you for peace on the basis of Islam (submission), make peace on that basis. Be of one mind by His religion.”Ishaq:454 “Now that Allah has conferred Islam on us, and made us famous, shall we give them our property? By Allah, we will offer them only the sword until Allah judges between us.’ ‘As you wish,’ said Allah’s Messenger.”
Ishaq:454 “Now that Allah has conferred Islam on us, and made us famous, shall we give them our property? By Allah, we will offer them only the sword until Allah judges between us.’ ‘As you wish,’ said Allah’s Messenger.”
Yes, the sword...until Allah judges.
Of course, I can continue...there are literally HUNDREDS of verses such as these.
I already answered this.
You didn't, but the quranic verses do. Who do you think the good Jews are? The ones who interpret Leviticus as a sanction for savagery, or those who don't?
"When have the Jewish people done violence in the name of the Jewish faith, or Hindu's, or Buddhists, or Scientologists?
Answered. #110
Again, you haven't.
Tell me, where are the Jews today who are perpetrating savagry in the name of Judaism? They are non-existent.
"Really, when did Christians kill muslims in Bosnia in the name of Christianity?"
"Answered. #110"
No, you didn't. Christians are not killing anyone in "the name of their religion", nor have they cited Bible verses to show they are good Christians for doing so.
Muslims have. As a matter of fact, Jews, Christians, Scientologists, Hindu's, Buddhists do not wage war and cite their religious texts as justification for doing so.
Muslims can and do.
What sets Islam apart is that the Qur’an and its God at times encourage the killing of those who do not adhere to Muslim theology.
Let's get this straight.
The Crusades actually began because the Seljuk Turks, fanatical Muslims who took Jerusalem from their fellow Muslims, had butchered Jews and Christians (and their fellow Muslims) and made it impossible for Jews and Christians to continue to live in, or Christian Europeans to make pilgrimages to, the Holy Land (see Bruce L. Shelley’s Church History in Plain Language.
Literally, Sicarii meant "dagger-men".
The victims of the Sicarii included Jonathan the High Priest
The sicarii even resorted to murder to obtain their objective. Under their cloaks they concealed sicae, or small daggers, from which they received their name. At popular assemblies, particularly during the pilgrimage to the Temple Mount, they stabbed their enemies (Romans or Roman sympathizers), lamenting ostentatiously after the deed to escape detection.
The Bosnian SERBS were responsible for the war with the muslims. Serbs mainly share a communist ideology. They did not EVER claim their actions were justified according to Christianity, nor did they cite text from any "Holy" books that prompted them to act.
You neglected to mention that the muslims in Bosnia, AS WE SPEAK, are in the process of retailiating against the Christian community, burning Churches, murdering civilians, etc.
The priests of Baal, who, you neglected to mention, were sacrificing the Israelites. Their deaths were the only course of self-defence for the Israelites. No mention of the contest by you?
You may deny the Crusades where provoked by the attack against Christians by muslims, you may deny the attrocities perpetrated by muslims when they conquered Jerusalem way back in 638,
"A danger when discussing religion is that one person will hit on another's sensitivities"
Your refusal to answer the statements, and ignorance of history shows that I indeed have angered you...
"So far as knowledge goes, the facts are that I've referenced specific historical events numerous times, you have not."
Of course I did.
The Bible does not encourage militant action in the name of spreading the Christian faith.
The Qur’an, as I've CLEARLY SHOWN, does encourage militant action against “infidels.”
This is why, on the whole, the history of Islam has been much more violent than that of Christianity.
Here are some verses from the New Testament you might want to ponder:
Luke 6:37-40, Luke:6:20-26
This especially, Luke:6 27- 28,
"but to you who hear I say, love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you.
Luke:6:29 - "To the person who strikes you on one cheek, offer the other one as well, and from the person who takes your cloak, do not withhold even your tunic.
And30 "Do unto others as you would have them do to you"
You kind of missed those verses. Point out which verses here invoke violence SpringheelJack.
"I won't touch this thing any longer."
No doubt...
Your illogical arguments, attacks and ignorance of history can't stand the light of the facts.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.