striktlymi:

Sure, Muhammad and his followers were involved in some violent acts in his days just like the children of Israel were in the old testament; but this does not imply that violence was what was preached.

Violence in so many cases is unavoidable. What matters is one's approach to it. It is either one is fighting a just war or not. The war Obama is prosecuting against ISIS is considered, in many quarters, just but that done by George in Iraq is highly criticized.

I consider Muhammad to be an advocate of peace as far as history is concerned. Most of the war (if not all) he embarked on were mainly defensive. He did not start them and was ready to stop fighting when the other party was willing to sheath their swords.

You are obviously not telling the truth, a lot of wars Muhammed embarked on were offensive and was also used as a veritable tool to spread and impose his ideology (Islam) on people. Muhammed preached peace amongst muslims but hatred towards un believers. Examples abound in their holy books and it is this example islamic terrorist follow.

The head of ISIS who is also an Arab man has a PhD in Islamic studies, surely you can't claim to have 5% of the knowledge he has of Islam and he defends all his actions using the quoran and the hadiths. You really need to stop trying to be politically correct and say the truth which I am quite certain you know.

PastorKun:

You are obviously not telling the truth, a lot of wars Muhammed embarked on were offensive and was also used as I veritable to spread and impose his ideology (Islam) on people. Muhammed preached peace amongst muslims but hatred towards un believers. Examples abound in their holy books and it is this example islamic terrorist follow.

The head of ISIS who is also an Arab man has a PhD in Islamic studies, surely you can't claim to have 5% of the knowledge he has of Islam and he defends all his actions using the quoran and the hadiths. You really need to stop trying to be politically correct and say the truth which I am quite certain you know.

Since the wars are that many, I will make it fair and ask you to mention only two of the "lot of wars".

striktlymi:

Since the wars are that many, I will make it fair and ask you to mention only two of the "lot of wars".

I don't need you to make it fair for me,you can visit this link :http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_expeditions_of_Muhammad a hundred of his military expeditions are well documented there and they were mostly offensive.

PastorKun: It's a fact that most muslims hate boko haram because apart from the fact that boko haram are giving Islam a bad image because of the atrocities they commit in the name of Islam a lot of muslims are also victims of their atrocities. However boko haram, ISIS and other extremists groups claim that they are the true muslims and that moderate muslims like you are hypocrites. They justify their actions quoting instructions from the quoran such as quoran 8:39 and 9:28-30.

They also sight the example of Mohammed who led several battles to forcefully convert people to Islam(Jihad). They claim to be following in the foot steps of Mohammed who is the perfect example for all muslims. How do you explain or reconcile this?

Oga at the bottom, you will agree with me that recent harms exposure prove CAN to be boko haram sponsored and all those boko haram are not muslim but christian in disguise

1- CAN president jet found with almost 10 million dollars to purchase harms
2- CAN chairman in a local government of Osun state prophecies emergence of boko haram in Osun and ask his church member to disguise like muslim and throw bangers in to his own church in other to cause chaos in Osun

SmellMyFart: ISLAM IS BOKO. Period

Oga at the bottom, you will agree with me that recent harms exposure prove CAN to be boko haram sponsored and all those boko haram are not muslim but christian in disguise

1- CAN president jet found with almost 10 million dollars to purchase harms
2- CAN chairman in a local government of Osun state prophecies emergence of boko haram in Osun and ask his church member to disguise like muslim and throw bangers in to his own church in other to cause chaos in Osun

PastorKun:

I don't need you to make it fair for me,you can visit this link :http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_expeditions_of_Muhammad a hundred of his military expeditions are well documented there and they were mostly offensive.

Whether or not Muhammad was involved or ordered military expeditions is not in dispute here. What is in dispute is if he started the wars. The link you gave does not prove that he started one or more of those wars.

Here is a caption from The guardian: "Barack Obama authorises air strikes against Isis militants in Syria". Does that remotely suggests that Obama started the war with ISIL? That's exactly how the link you gave is.

yazach:

Oga at the bottom, you will agree with me that recent harms exposure prove CAN to be boko haram sponsored and all those boko haram are not muslim but christian in disguise

1- CAN president jet found with almost 10 million dollars to purchase harms
2- CAN chairman in a local government of Osun state prophecies emergence of boko haram in Osun and ask his church member to disguise like muslim and throw bangers in to his own church in other to cause chaos in Osun

Are you this daft or you are just intentionally being stoopid

striktlymi:

Whether or not Muhammad was involved or ordered military expeditions is not in dispute here. What is in dispute is if he started the wars. The link you gave does not prove that he started one or more of those wars.

Here is a caption from The guardian: "Barack Obama authorises air strikes against Isis militants in Syria". Does that remotely suggests that Obama started the war with ISIL? That's exactly how the link you gave is.

Well if you bothered to read through the link I provided, the reason for each of his military campaigns were clearly stated and they were mostly to spread Islam. In short they were offensive and they were the provocators.

striktlymi:

I am always Catholic.

I believe ISIL to be a terror group which is giving Islam a very bad name.

Ok, so even though Islam is the motivation behind all these terrorism, you think Islam is not to blame but these victims of religion?

PastorKun:

Well if you bothered to read through the link I provided, the reason for each of his military campaigns were clearly stated and they were mostly to spread Islam. In short they were offensive and they were the provocators.

I actually did go through the list but rather quickly. I did that because I have done some bit of research into some of the major wars on that list. As far as my research goes, Muhammad's role was not that of an aggressor.

ooman:

Ok, so even though Islam is the motivation behind all these terrorism, you think Islam is not to blame but these victims of religion?

The problem with Religion is not religion in itself but people. Like so many other endeavour, people can use religion as a tool to further their selfish interest. Islam in itself is not to blame from my viewpoint but the people who use it to further their selfish interest, knowingly or unknowingly.

striktlymi:

I actually did go through the list but rather quickly. I did that because I have done some bit of research into some of the major wars on that list. As far as my research goes, Muhammad's role was not that of an aggressor.

Ok he wasn't an aggressor, he was actually doing them a favour by forcing them to convert to his religion

striktlymi:

I actually did go through the list but rather quickly. I did that because I have done some bit of research into some of the major wars on that list. As far as my research goes, Muhammad's role was not that of an aggressor.

Maybe the 'research documents' you read were written by modern day apologists who are now trying to repackage Islam's history to water down it's violent roots and make it more presentable. The most authentic Islamic sources which remains the quoran and the hadiths described most of this campaigns as offensive.

PastorKun:

Maybe the 'research documents' you read were written by modern day apologists who are now trying to repackage Islam's history to water down it's violent roots and make it more presentable. The most authentic Islamic sources which remains the quoran and the hadiths described most of this campaigns as offensive.

When I do a research devoid of laziness I prefer to look at:

1) The document itself that relates the object of my research.
2) The opinions and evidence of those in favour.
3) The opinions and evidence of those against.
4) I look at the works of scholars from both sides.
5) I match 2) - 4) against 1) before I form my own opinion.

I do not just pick one side to a story and relate same as my opinion.

Lucario007:

so what of the following:

No. 1:St Paul’s advice about whether women are
allowed to teach men in church:
“I do not permit a woman to teach or to have
authority over a man; she must be silent.” (1
Timothy 2:12)

No. 2: In this verse, Samuel, one of the early
leaders of Israel, orders genocide against a
neighbouring people:
“This is what the Lord Almighty says... ‘Now go
and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all
that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both
man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep,
camel and donkey.’” (1 Samuel 15:3)

or this:
“Wives, submit to your husbands as to the
Lord.” (Ephesians 5:22)

No. 4: “Slaves, submit yourselves to your
masters with all respect, not only to the good and
gentle but also to the cruel.” (1 Peter 2:18)

or even these:

“So the man took his concubine and sent her
outside to them, and they raped her and abused
her throughout the night, and at dawn they let her
go. At daybreak the woman went back to the
house where her master was staying, fell down at
the door and lay there until daylight. When her
master got up in the morning and opened the
door of the house and stepped out to continue on
his way, there lay his concubine, fallen in the
doorway of the house, with her hands on the
threshold. He said to her, ‘Get up; let’s go.’ But
there was no answer. Then the man put her on
his donkey and set out for home.” (Judges
19:25-28)

“ And Jephthah made a vow to the Lord, and said,
‘If you will give the Ammonites into my hand,
then whoever comes out of the doors of my
house to meet me, when I return victorious from
the Ammonites, shall be the Lord’s, to be offered
up by me as a burnt-offering.’ Then Jephthah
came to his home at Mizpah; and there was his
daughter coming out to meet him with timbrels
and with dancing. She was his only child; he had
no son or daughter except her. When he saw her,
he tore his clothes, and said, ‘Alas, my daughter!
You have brought me very low; you have become
the cause of great trouble to me. For I have
opened my mouth to the Lord, and I cannot take
back my vow.’” (Judges 11:30-1, 34-5)

These are all from the bible. So does it mean all Christian s follow and obey such barbaric acts?

so please who are you to judge?

Hitler was a Catholic, and the amount of people he killed not to mention the Christian Crusades should be equal if not doubling the number of people killed by Muslim terrorist activities.

All in all, nearly all religions are the same.

Mr fool hitler was not fighting a religious war

PastorKun:

Are you this daft or you are just intentionally being stoopid

Between you and I who do you think best suited with those qualification? Am very sure your One of the reasons is that you are a sheep that is being brain washed by some smart entities (e.g CAN)

malvisguy212: you sound intelingent but you are somehow ignorance.


Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do
not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made
unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who
were given the SCRIPTUR - [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.

The people that are giving the scripture, did they pay the jizyay?

Do you know that which ever village boko haram capture, they preach islam to the villagers untill they accept islam? Am telling you the truth brother believe me.

Mr Lost sheep!!! what do you have to say about this?

Deuteronomy 20 New International Version (NIV)

10 When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. 11 If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. 12 If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. 13 When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. 14 As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the Lord your God gives you from your enemies. 15 This is how you are to treat all the cities that are at a distance from you and do not belong to the nations nearby.

16 However, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. 17 Completely destroy[a] them—the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites—as the Lord your God has commanded you. 18 Otherwise, they will teach you to follow all the detestable things they do in worshiping their gods, and you will sin against the Lord your God.

Let us see what these hypocrites have to say about this

The bible even go to the extent of treating those who surrendered mercilessly

Deuteronomy 20 New International Version (NIV)

10 When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. 11 If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you.
12 If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. 13 When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. 14 As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the Lord your God gives you from your enemies. 15 This is how you are to treat all the cities that are at a distance from you and do not belong to the nations nearby.

16 However, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. 17 Completely destroy[a] them—the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites—as the Lord your God has commanded you. 18 Otherwise, they will teach you to follow all the detestable things they do in worshiping their gods, and you will sin against the Lord your God.

striktlymi:

The problem with Religion is not religion in itself but people. Like so many other endeavour, people can use religion as a tool to further their selfish interest. Islam in itself is not to blame from my viewpoint but the people who use it to further their selfish interest, knowingly or unknowingly.

More like alcohol causes accidents, but alcohol is not to blame but the drunkard argument right?

I agree...

A slowpoke WILL COME NOW AND SAY THIS IS OLD TESTAMENT AFTER WHICH JESUS HAD CLEARLY STATED HIS INTENTION OF NOT OPPOSING THE LAW BUT TO MAKE IT PASS AS IF GOD OF OLD TESTAMENT IS DIFFERENT FROM NEW TESTAMENT

1 Samuel 15 King James Version (KJV)

15 Samuel also said unto Saul, The Lord sent me to anoint thee to be king over his people, over Israel: now therefore hearken thou unto the voice of the words of the Lord.

2 Thus saith the Lord of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt.

3 Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.

EVEN WOMEN, INFANT, SUCKLING(IMAGINE), ANIMALS WERE NOT SPARED

THE QUESTIONS ARE:
1- WILL CHRISTIANS SAY GOD WAS NOT JUST AND KIND FOR GIVING THAT ORDER?(I SEEK REFUGE)
2- WE HEAR MEN, WOMEN, WHAT CONCERN INFANT, SUCKLING AND ANIMALS?

4 And Saul gathered the people together, and numbered them in Telaim, two hundred thousand footmen, and ten thousand men of Judah.

PastorKun:

You are obviously not telling the truth, a lot of wars Muhammed embarked on were offensive and was also used as I veritable to spread and impose his ideology (Islam) on people. Muhammed preached peace amongst muslims but hatred towards un believers. Examples abound in their holy books and it is this example islamic terrorist follow.

The head of ISIS who is also an Arab man has a PhD in Islamic studies, surely you can't claim to have 5% of the knowledge he has of Islam and he defends all his actions using the quoran and the hadiths. You really need to stop trying to be politically correct and say the truth which I am quite certain you know.

Everybody knows that this is quite true. The start point was in defense from attacks of the warring tribes of Mecca and Medina, but when he became more victorious and prosperous, he decided to wage wars of conversion.

ooman:

More like alcohol causes accidents, but alcohol is not to blame but the drunkard argument right?

I agree...

Hmmmmm...

#Have u gone back? Don't see u around here much.

yazach:

Mr Lost sheep!!! what do you have to say about this?

Deuteronomy 20 New International Version (NIV)

10 When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. 11 If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. 12 If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. 13 When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. 14 As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the Lord your God gives you from your enemies. 15 This is how you are to treat all the cities that are at a distance from you and do not belong to the nations nearby.

16 However, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. 17 Completely destroy[a] them—the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites—as the Lord your God has commanded you. 18 Otherwise, they will teach you to follow all the detestable things they do in worshiping their gods, and you will sin against the Lord your God.

dos are the old testement law, God has giving us his grace through his son,in the old testement when you live by God law and you break it you will pay the penalty,it will be hard for man to keep it or to fullfiled what it require by the law, but jesus has already fullfiled it,how? He teach us how to obey the law,instead of ten commandment he make it two for us, how?
1.worship God with all your heart: if you love God you will not worship any other object just like muslims bow down to a stone
2. Love your neigbour as your self:if you love your neigbour you will not kill,molest or steal from him. So the ten comandment and the two comandment are still the same law BUT IN THE NEW TESTEMENT COMMANDMENT JESUS BRING, HE GIVE US HIS GRACE AND MERCY, IF I BREAK THE LAW, AND I GENUELY REPENT FROM MY HEART, GOD WILL FORGIVE ME. This is the difference of the old and new testement law.
You guys in the arab live by the law [sharia law] rejecting the grace and mercy of God .



Quran (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." Not only does this verse establish that violence can be virtuous, but it also contradicts the myth that fighting is intended only in self- defense, since the audience was obviously not under attack at the time. From the Hadith, we know that this verse was narrated at a time that Muhammad was actually trying to motivate his people into raiding merchant caravans for loot. Quran (3:56) - "As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help." Quran (3:151) - "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority". This speaks directly of polytheists, yet it also includes Christians, since they believe in the Trinity (ie. what Muhammad incorrectly believed to be 'joining companions to Allah'). Quran (4:74) - "Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward." The martyrs of Islam are unlike the early Christians, who were led meekly to the slaughter. These Muslims are killed in battle as they attempt to inflict death and destruction for the cause of Allah. This is the theological basis for today's suicide bombers. Quran (4:76) - "Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah…" Quran (4:89) - "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden) . But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks." Quran (4:95) - "Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). Unto all (in Faith) Hath Allah promised good: But those who strive and fight Hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward,-" This passage criticizes "peaceful" Muslims who do not join in the violence, letting them know that they are less worthy in Allah's eyes. It also demolishes the modern myth that "Jihad" doesn't mean holy war in the Quran, but rather a spiritual struggle. Not only is the Arabic word used in this passage, but it is clearly not referring to anything spiritual, since the physically disabled are given exemption. (The Hadith reveals the context of the passage to be in response to a blind man's protest that he is unable to engage in Jihad and this is reflected in other translations of the verse). Quran (4:104) - "And be not weak hearted in pursuit of the enemy; if you suffer pain, then surely they (too) suffer pain as you suffer pain..." Is pursuing an injured and retreating enemy really an act of self- defense? Quran (5:33) - "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement"

Let's put some reasoning into this. Agreed, you have rightly quoted and I really don't care to join words on the veracity, morality or otherwise of those biblical quotes. But, let's come to terms with the 21st Century reasoning. If Jehovah said the Jews should eliminate 'His' enemies because of their opposition to His chosen people and grievous idolatry and now, they are no longer on that course, why are Muslims who claim that Allah has sent them to destroy 'their' enemies because they refuse to convert to their religion still bent on the path of bloodshed? Mind you, it is apparent in the quran that Mohammed commenced his wars only because he was attacked and his first premises for war was based on that until victory brought out the human ambition of territorial conquests for land and booty.

This is the 21st Century, my man. God ordered the destruction of the idolaters in Caanan and the people of Israel refused to complete the act by sparing those they chose to spare. Because of the failure of the Jews, Jesus came to offer peaceful restitution to all for sin and has declared salvation to those who will willingly accept and declared God's final judgement to those who refuse. That is what I will call a 'religion of peace', not one that still fans the embers of violence and destruction in this present time and situation

My take is that Islam too should allow people to willingly and peacefully chose and not throw the world into unnecessary conflagration. If truly you believe that your god is almighty and will bring judgement of destruction on the kafir as claimed in the quran, why not wait for that god to do it rather than try to do it on his behalf? It comes to reason then, that the One who is indeed God, has the capacity to deal with His enemies and does not require His faithful worshippers to do it for Him.

I remember that in Islamic history, when Mohammed was said to have destroyed the idols of his neighbors, his father challenged those who wanted to kill him by asking that they should leave judgement to their gods and they accepted. Why then are the extremist Islamists not taking a cue from this? Just simply reasoning shows that they do not believe that the god they serve is almighty enough to do it by himself.

yazach: A slowpoke WILL COME NOW AND SAY THIS IS OLD TESTAMENT AFTER WHICH JESUS HAD CLEARLY STATED HIS INTENTION OF NOT OPPOSING THE LAW BUT TO MAKE IT PASS AS IF GOD OF OLD TESTAMENT IS DIFFERENT FROM NEW TESTAMENT

1 Samuel 15 King James Version (KJV)

15 Samuel also said unto Saul, The Lord sent me to anoint thee to be king over his people, over Israel: now therefore hearken thou unto the voice of the words of the Lord.

2 Thus saith the Lord of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt.

3 Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.

EVEN WOMEN, INFANT, SUCKLING(IMAGINE), ANIMALS WERE NOT SPARED

THE QUESTIONS ARE:
1- WILL CHRISTIANS SAY GOD WAS NOT JUST AND KIND FOR GIVING THAT ORDER?(I SEEK REFUGE)
2- WE HEAR MEN, WOMEN, WHAT CONCERN INFANT, SUCKLING AND ANIMALS?

4 And Saul gathered the people together, and numbered them in Telaim, two hundred thousand footmen, and ten thousand men of Judah.

I am often amazed at how Muslims react to issues of faith. The quran itself predicts how their version of Jesus, the prophet, will return to this world to correct the opinion of his followers who believe that he is son of God and savior. Later writtings generally accepted by Muslims also expect a Madhi who is a savior from God and who will wage war on both the unbelievers and a Dijjal, who is like the Christian antichrist.

If indeed Muslims believe any of these, why can't they wait for the fulfillment of their predictions? Why do the average Muslim take up arms to defend the desecration of Islam, of the prophet and of the quran? Many lives - innocent lives - have been lost in pogroms disguised as religious riots against voices raised in opposition of Islam.

Enough is enough. The Muslim world needs to upgrade to avoid a complete destruction of the world by Jihads against the whole world, which can never succeed in this age and time, but will only lead to mass decimation of their rank and file. It's is no ruse. While it is true that a large number of people of other faith have been killed by Islamist jihads, many more Muslims have suffered and millions of Muslim lives have perished in the recent wars against terror.

Salman Rushdie is still in hiding to avoid sudden death through a 'fatwa' placed on him by Islamic leaders because of his critical and disparaging writtings about Mohammed. Saudi authorities and other Islamic administrations have destroyed large numbers of the Bible. Muslim clerics raise their voices to malign other religions, particularly Christianity. They use all manner of hateful words on Christ and His followers.

If other religious faithful decide to follow the footsteps of Muslims and take up arms in defense of their religion, no Muslim would be left in nations and regions where Muslims are in minority, because Muslims are more fond of hate speech against other religions.

striktlymi:

Hmmmmm...

#Have u gone back? Don't see u around here much.

Found that religious debates aren't worth it...

malvisguy212: dos are the old testement law, [s]God has giving us his grace through his son,in the old testement when you live by God law and you break it you will pay the penalty,it will be hard for man to keep it or to fullfiled what it require by the law, but jesus has already fullfiled it,how? He teach us how to obey the law,instead of ten commandment he make it two for us, how?
1.worship God with all your heart: if you love God you will not worship any other object just like muslims bow down to a stone
2. Love your neigbour as your self:if you love your neigbour you will not kill,molest or steal from him. So the ten comandment and the two comandment are still the same law BUT IN THE NEW TESTEMENT COMMANDMENT JESUS BRING, HE GIVE US HIS GRACE AND MERCY, IF I BREAK THE LAW, AND I GENUELY REPENT FROM MY HEART, GOD WILL FORGIVE ME. This is the difference of the old and new testement law.
You guys in the arab live by the law [sharia law] rejecting the grace and mercy of God .



Quran (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." Not only does this verse establish that violence can be virtuous, but it also contradicts the myth that fighting is intended only in self- defense, since the audience was obviously not under attack at the time. From the Hadith, we know that this verse was narrated at a time that Muhammad was actually trying to motivate his people into raiding merchant caravans for loot. Quran (3:56) - "As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help." Quran (3:151) - "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority". This speaks directly of polytheists, yet it also includes Christians, since they believe in the Trinity (ie. what Muhammad incorrectly believed to be 'joining companions to Allah'). Quran (4:74) - "Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward." The martyrs of Islam are unlike the early Christians, who were led meekly to the slaughter. These Muslims are killed in battle as they attempt to inflict death and destruction for the cause of Allah. This is the theological basis for today's suicide bombers. Quran (4:76) - "Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah…" Quran (4:89) - "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden) . But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks." Quran (4:95) - "Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). Unto all (in Faith) Hath Allah promised good: But those who strive and fight Hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward,-" This passage criticizes "peaceful" Muslims who do not join in the violence, letting them know that they are less worthy in Allah's eyes. It also demolishes the modern myth that "Jihad" doesn't mean holy war in the Quran, but rather a spiritual struggle. Not only is the Arabic word used in this passage, but it is clearly not referring to anything spiritual, since the physically disabled are given exemption. (The Hadith reveals the context of the passage to be in response to a blind man's protest that he is unable to engage in Jihad and this is reflected in other translations of the verse). Quran (4:104) - "And be not weak hearted in pursuit of the enemy; if you suffer pain, then surely they (too) suffer pain as you suffer pain..." Is pursuing an injured and retreating enemy really an act of self- defense? Quran (5:33) - "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement"

[/s]

@bold, you need to answer these questions
1- In the old time why was it that God did not give them the so call grace you claim to have been given now?

2- In your judgment will you say God was so cruel by asking those people to fight?

Don't forget the following word of Jesus

◄ Luke 12:49 ►

New International Version
"I have come to bring fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled!
50 But I have a baptism to undergo, and what constraint I am under until it is completed! 51 Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division.

New Living Translation
Do you think I have come to bring peace to the earth? No, I have come to divide people against each other!

HolyHolla: Let's put some reasoning into this. Agreed, you have rightly quoted and I really don't care to join words on the veracity, morality or otherwise of those biblical quotes. But, let's come to terms with the 21st Century reasoning. If Jehovah said the Jews should eliminate 'His' enemies because of their opposition to His chosen people and grievous idolatry and now, they are no longer on that course, why are Muslims who claim that Allah has sent them to destroy 'their' enemies because they refuse to convert to their religion still bent on the path of bloodshed? Mind you, it is apparent in the quran that Mohammed commenced his wars only because he was attacked and his first premises for war was based on that until victory brought out the human ambition of territorial conquests for land and booty.

This is the 21st Century, my man. God ordered the destruction of the idolaters in Caanan and the people of Israel refused to complete the act by sparing those they chose to spare. Because of the failure of the Jews, Jesus came to offer peaceful restitution to all for sin and has declared salvation to those who will willingly accept and declared God's final judgement to those who refuse. That is what I will call a 'religion of peace', not one that still fans the embers of violence and destruction in this present time and situation

My take is that Islam too should allow people to willingly and peacefully chose and not throw the world into unnecessary conflagration. If truly you believe that your god is almighty and will bring judgement of destruction on the kafir as claimed in the quran, why not wait for that god to do it rather than try to do it on his behalf? It comes to reason then, that the One who is indeed God, has the capacity to deal with His enemies and does not require His faithful worshippers to do it for Him.

I remember that in Islamic history, when Mohammed was said to have destroyed the idols of his neighbors, his father challenged those who wanted to kill him by asking that they should leave judgement to their gods and they accepted. Why then are the extremist Islamists not taking a cue from this? Just simply reasoning shows that they do not believe that the god they serve is almighty enough to do it by himself.

HolyHolla: Let's put some reasoning into this. Agreed, you have rightly quoted and I really don't care to join words on the veracity, morality or otherwise of those biblical quotes. But, let's come to terms with the 21st Century reasoning. If Jehovah said the Jews should eliminate 'His' enemies because of their opposition to His chosen people and grievous idolatry and now, they are no longer on that course, why are Muslims who claim that Allah has sent them to destroy 'their' enemies because they refuse to convert to their religion still bent on the path of bloodshed? Mind you, it is apparent in the quran that Mohammed commenced his wars only because he was attacked and his first premises for war was based on that until victory brought out the human ambition of territorial conquests for land and booty.

Firstly, are you a Christian? If yes, I think my points will make sense to you because I see a good reasoning in you post, but if you are an atheist, just ignore my comments because I don’t think it worth it to have online discussion with someone who denied existence of the creator.
Now my response
1- I think you know who Adolf Hitler was; was he killing Jews in response to God’s commandment
2- Crusader war, in response to who’s command? God? Even after some centuries have passed over the war commandment by God.
3- Am sure you heard of the recent seized 9.3 million arms issue which involve CAN president? If the Jet happen to belong to a Muslim, what do you think some useless Christians will be saying but now that it belong to Christians leader will it not Justify to say CAN are behind Boko Haram?
The bone of contention is that if somebody claims to be fighting for Allah, does that mean truly he is fighting for Allah sake or Allah truly command him to do so?

HolyHolla: This is the 21st Century, my man. God ordered the destruction of the idolaters in Caanan and the people of Israel refused to complete the act by sparing those they chose to spare. Because of the failure of the Jews, Jesus came to offer peaceful restitution to all for sin and has declared salvation to those who will willingly accept and declared God's final judgement to those who refuse. That is what I will call a 'religion of peace', not one that still fans the embers of violence and destruction in this present time and situation

My Man, what will you say about this:
• 15th century: Crusades against Hussites, thousands slain. [DO30]
• 1538 pope Paul III declared Crusade against apostate England and all English as slaves of Church (fortunately had not power to go into action). [DO31]
• 1568 Spanish Inquisition Tribunal ordered extermination of 3 million rebels in (then Spanish) Netherlands. Thousands were actually slain. [DO31]
• 1572 In France about 20,000 Huguenots were killed on command of pope Pius V. Until 17th century 200,000 flee. [DO31]
• 17th century: Catholics slay Gaspard de Coligny, a Protestant leader. After murdering him, the Catholic mob mutilated his body, "cutting off his head, his hands, and his genitals... and then dumped him into the river [...but] then, deciding that it was not worthy of being food for the fish, they hauled it out again [... and] dragged what was left ... to the gallows of Montfaulcon, 'to be meat and carrion for maggots and crows'." [SH191]
• 17th century: Catholics sack the city of Magdeburg/Germany: roughly 30,000 Protestants were slain. "In a single church fifty women were found beheaded," reported poet Friedrich Schiller, "and infants still sucking the breasts of their lifeless mothers." [SH191]
• 17th century 30 years' war (Catholic vs. Protestant): at least 40% of population decimated, mostly in Germany. [DO31-32]
You still call this religion of peace?

HolyHolla: My take is that Islam too should allow people to willingly and peacefully chose and not throw the world into unnecessary conflagration. If truly you believe that your god is almighty and will bring judgement of destruction on the kafir as claimed in the quran, why not wait for that god to do it rather than try to do it on his behalf? It comes to reason then, that the One who is indeed God, has the capacity to deal with His enemies and does not require His faithful worshippers to do it for Him.

I must tell you and I am not care either you believe me or not. Islam mean peace, if anybody claims to be fighting in the name of Islam then you should know the person is either a liar or trying to blackmail Islam. The media is to be blame for your misconception on Islam
CAN chairman(a pastor of baptist) in ask his member to disguise like muslim and throw banger in to his church after prophecy he claimed to receive from God that book haram will attack.
Assuming he succeeded, what will you think of muslims?
Now I will shed light on conditions for Islamic war
1- It must be declared under Islamic State by Muslim leader(Single Leader) not Sect leader.
2- It should be fought if you are attacked and should be commanded by Islamic leader. The Prophet lived with pagan in Macca peacefully after he conquered them; he lived with Christians in Medina even when muslims were majority.

ooman:

Found that religious debates aren't worth it...

Sometimes I have the same sentiments.

Yes, I am a proud to say that I am a Christian and not an atheist.

I similarly believe that Hitler was a terrorist as well as the Catholic Crusaders and God never mandated their destructive missions. I also believe that whoever decides to pick an illegal mandate in the name of God should be condemned and tagged "unChristian". I thought you too should also be against terrorists, no matter their professed religions. That is why I am surprised that you are rather fighting those who condemn Islamist terrorists instead of the terrorists themselves.

I am definitely not on the same page with those defending the issue of $10 million smuggled into SA for clandestine activities. I am more miffed by the fact that they chose to use the CAN president's jet for this illegal activity. I am also ashamed to read CAN's defense of the issue and their attack on the opposition, which I believe is just passing the buck. I, for one, will not shield those who claim the same religion with me when they step out of line. To me, the CAN official who fixed a blast in church to prove his prediction true was definitely out of line too.

I am happy to read this statement from you; "The bone of contention is that if somebody claims to be fighting for Allah, does that mean truly he is fighting for Allah sake or Allah truly command him to do so?" But I'm still at a loss as to why you will chose to trade brickbats with Pastor Kun and the others over their condemnation of BH or their claims that the quran contains elements that seem to justify such violence. Is it not true? Have you not read such passages before? If there are such in the quran, the next step, as I mentioned earlier, should be to upgrade your mind to the 21st Century, just like I believe the Catholics and Nazis have done by now eschewing violence. Even the Catholics of Northern Ireland have stopped the violent wars for independence from GB. For this, I have more respect for Muslims in the southern parts of Nigeria who have abstained from violence to prove their religion. Even though they too read the quran, they have mostly upgraded to modernity, except for a few who still voice out violent teachings.

The main question that should be on everybody's mind now is, "why are Islamists now waking up into unfruitful destruction?" Right now, the terror wars are far from where we dwell and we may feel comfortable with that until they move to our very dwellings too. We should therefore, all rise up to voice condemnation of these extremists before they get to us too.

But I'm still bothered by your submissions, " Now I will shed light on conditions for Islamic war
1- It must be declared under Islamic Stateby Muslim leader(Single Leader) not Sect leader.
2- It should be fought if you are attacked and should be commanded by Islamic leader. The Prophet lived with pagan in Macca peacefully after he conquered them; he lived with Christians in Medina even when muslims were majority". Are you still claiming that in this 21st Century, there is yet validity for any type of violent jihad based on these stated terms? Then, where is the 'Religion of peace" in violence? It is the same defense that Takfiris in the Islamic State use to justify their horror. The Muslim slaughter man who appears on video keeps saying they are decapitating Westerners in their captivity because US and Britain attacked them. They "peacefully" tax the Christians in their captured territories on the orders of quranic injunctions. So, how is your mindset different from that of the Takfiris?

We who are educated have the compulsory mandate to speak out now before the almajiris and their provocators take over and send us into early graves.

yazach:


Firstly, are you a Christian? If yes, I think my points will make sense to you because I see a good reasoning in you post, but if you are an atheist, just ignore my comments because I don’t think it worth it to have online discussion with someone who denied existence of the creator.
Now my response
1- I think you know who Adolf Hitler was; was he killing Jews in response to God’s commandment
2- Crusader war, in response to who’s command? God? Even after some centuries have passed over the war commandment by God.
3- Am sure you heard of the recent seized 9.3 million arms issue which involve CAN president? If the Jet happen to belong to a Muslim, what do you think some useless Christians will be saying but now that it belong to Christians leader will it not Justify to say CAN are behind Boko Haram?
The bone of contention is that if somebody claims to be fighting for Allah, does that mean truly he is fighting for Allah sake or Allah truly command him to do so?

My Man, what will you say about this:
• 15th century: Crusades against Hussites, thousands slain. [DO30]
• 1538 pope Paul III declared Crusade against apostate England and all English as slaves of Church (fortunately had not power to go into action). [DO31]
• 1568 Spanish Inquisition Tribunal ordered extermination of 3 million rebels in (then Spanish) Netherlands. Thousands were actually slain. [DO31]
• 1572 In France about 20,000 Huguenots were killed on command of pope Pius V. Until 17th century 200,000 flee. [DO31]
• 17th century: Catholics slay Gaspard de Coligny, a Protestant leader. After murdering him, the Catholic mob mutilated his body, "cutting off his head, his hands, and his genitals... and then dumped him into the river [...but] then, deciding that it was not worthy of being food for the fish, they hauled it out again [... and] dragged what was left ... to the gallows of Montfaulcon, 'to be meat and carrion for maggots and crows'." [SH191]
• 17th century: Catholics sack the city of Magdeburg/Germany: roughly 30,000 Protestants were slain. "In a single church fifty women were found beheaded," reported poet Friedrich Schiller, "and infants still sucking the breasts of their lifeless mothers." [SH191]
• 17th century 30 years' war (Catholic vs. Protestant): at least 40% of population decimated, mostly in Germany. [DO31-32]
You still call this religion of peace?

I must tell you and I am not care either you believe me or not. Islam mean peace, if anybody claims to be fighting in the name of Islam then you should know the person is either a liar or trying to blackmail Islam. The media is to be blame for your misconception on Islam
CAN chairman(a pastor of baptist) in ask his member to disguise like muslim and throw banger in to his church after prophecy he claimed to receive from God that book haram will attack.
Assuming he succeeded, what will you think of muslims
Now I will shed light on conditions for Islamic war
1- It must be declared under Islamic State by Muslim leader(Single Leader) not Sect leader.
2- It should be fought if you are attacked and should be commanded by Islamic leader. The Prophet lived with pagan in Macca peacefully after he conquered them; he lived with Christians in Medina even when muslims were majority.

striktlymi:

Sometimes I have the same sentiments.

And now, you think otherwise?

ooman:

Found that religious debates aren't worth it...

Exactly