Christian-Muslim Relations In the Middle-East

  • Advertisement
  • Indie

    Indie

    Legendary Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    It doesnt mean anything. It is normal to feel hurt because your brand image for proselytization has been shaken.
    You're projecting your thoughts and feelings unto others.
     
    Rafidi

    Rafidi

    Legendary Member
    You're projecting your thoughts and feelings unto others.
    Habibti... "projecting my thoughts and feelings into others"...ya3neh ana secret electromagnetic scanner. I am projecting my thoughts and "feelings" into you. Is this how much I am able to get into you?

    Ou3a te7baleh minneh electromagnetically 😂
     
    Dark Angel

    Dark Angel

    Legendary Member
    Habibti... "projecting my thoughts and feelings into others"...ya3neh ana secret electromagnetic scanner. I am projecting my thoughts and "feelings" into you. Is this how much I am able to get into you?

    Ou3a te7baleh minneh electromagnetically 😂
    your situation seems to be deteriorating a little bit further every day. impressive path you have embarked on.

    it is an interesting sight nevertheless when the mask is dropped.
     
    Last edited:
    Rafidi

    Rafidi

    Legendary Member
    your situation seems to be deteriorating a little bit further every day. impressive path you have embarked on.

    it is an interesting sight nevertheless when the mask is dropped.
    Remember, I do not speak in tongues. Please interpreter whatever spirit is whispering into you.
     
    Dark Angel

    Dark Angel

    Legendary Member
    Remember, I do not speak in tongues. Please interpreter whatever spirit is whispering into you.
    before it being a matter of interpreting, it is a matter of politeness. you have a been on a rampage lately that is very telling about you. you are being eaten up by hatred. that is not healthy neither for nor for the people around you. if these discussions are not doing you anything positive then do not participate in them.

    when you take the time to interact with people via a written message, in particular when you seem to be spending most of your day doing it, you should be mindful of both the messages you are receiving and the ones you are writing, with the objective of communicating ideas and shaping perspectives. this is not the case with you. you seem to be under the impression that this is a war zone, and that you are among mortal enemies. had you been an occasional poster then it wouldn't have been an issue. but since you post almost on daily basis, maybe you should do it in a way that will help you evolve, rather than keep presenting what these thins you do are. at the end of the day the choice is yours.
     
    Rafidi

    Rafidi

    Legendary Member
    before it being a matter of interpreting, it is a matter of politeness. you have a been on a rampage lately that is very telling about you. you are being eaten up by hatred. that is not healthy neither for nor for the people around you. if these discussions are not doing you anything positive then do not participate in them.

    when you take the time to interact with people via a written message, in particular when you seem to be spending most of your day doing it, you should be mindful of both the messages you are receiving and the ones you are writing, with the objective of communicating ideas and shaping perspectives. this is not the case with you. had you been an occasional poster then it wouldn't have been an issue. but since you post almost on daily basis, maybe you should do it in a way that will help you evolve, rather than keep presenting what these thins you do are. at the end of the day the choice is yours.
    I know the ideas and beliefs that represent me.

    Many of my posts are reactions. So you should start by lecturing to your type who always spew venom. You are only hurting because I lash you painfully. And I will continue to do so, and put my beliefs and values aside to make sure you and your impolite likes are dealt with in a lashing manner. Respect begets respect. Enjoy! 😉
     
    Dark Angel

    Dark Angel

    Legendary Member
    I know the ideas and beliefs that represent me.

    Many of my posts are reactions. So you should start by lecturing to your type who always spew venom. You are only hurting because I lash you painfully. And I will continue to do so, and put my beliefs and values aside to make sure you and your impolite likes are dealt with in a lashing manner. Respect begets respect. Enjoy! 😉
    people can only be who they really are, nothing more and nothing less.
     
    T

    Thoma

    New Member
    I have responded to your points. Dont take fighting into the sacred months. Cease fire. But if you are attacked in the sacred months, then defend yourself in the sacred months. Very simple to understand. What you need is not a reply. It is psychotherapy. I cant keep to also be repeating myself because you have high fever in the brain.

    And you conveniently overlooked Jesus violating the Sabbath on several occasions.
    No one contested that Allah in the Quran and Muhammad had initially explicitly commanded 'defensive-only fighting in sacred months'. What is being brought to light however is the point of Muhammad and his companions having violated that command with Allah's blessing (with Allah's admission, justification and condonation of the violation) provided the violation benefited Allah, Muhammad and Muslims (benefited some greater/ultimate goal of theirs such as in that instance the 'laying claim to the kaaba'), and having set with that the precedent of 'all proclaimed principles (whether them being adopted/commanded by the quran or not, universal or otherwise) could be set aside if those principles were to stand in the way of achieving some perceived fundamental goal that would fundamentally benefit Allah, Islam and Muslims'.

    The point also particularly uncovers a certain truth that the typical modern Muslim munafiq always vainly try to sweep under the carpet. In contradiction to their claim, and by the admission of none other than Allah himself in the Quran, Muhammad and his companions weren't essentially fighting defensively after having left Mecca. Rather, the fighting of Muhammad and co was so obviously, excessively and proudly non-defensive (transgressive) that when it spilled over to a sacred month, it prompted Allah and Muhammad to justify the resulting violation that this fighting of theirs, by it occurring in a sacred month, had caused. Had their fighting that spilled over into a sacred month been defensive in nature it wouldn't have constituted an issue for them in the first place, an issue that needed Allah's resolution and justification before they carry on with achieving their goal.

    In trying to deny that, the typical modern Muslim munafiq would proceed into 'yaamiha while trying to yikahelha', namely by a) assuming the Muslim/Qureichi pact and the initial Quranic command, that of 'not to fight in sacred months', absurdly excluded defensive fighting (i.e. absurdly discarded the possible case where the pact gets breached), so as to paint Muhammad and companions being at loss about having possibly committed a violation for having defensively fought during a sacred month, and b) having Allah responding and admitting afterwards 'while their self-defensive fighting during a sacred month is a violation, it is still less severe than the Qureishi violation of Allah of kicking Muhammad and co outside the kaaba, less severe than the violation against which this less severe violation is to be permitted', and with that locking Allah and themselves into positively commanding violations (against Allah) whenever Allah and themselves would command self-defensive fighting in a sacred month.

    ---

    How does my overlooking your claim 'Jesus violating the Sabbath' have any bearing on here? That thus constitutes no fallacy on my part. Rather, your diversion to that claim as an irrelevant response to my post does. You could just honestly admit and concede the truth in my post, and I may then rightly indulge you on Christianity. Meanwhile, anyone can google up the falsehoods you throw left and right in distraction from the truth, and can easily uncover the truths if they so will (few clicks away). For example anyone can simply google up 'did Jesus break the sabbath' and see the truth and expose for themselves the falsehood of your assertion. There's no truth maiming in Christianity, nor deceit, everything is laid oud bare in the open, especially in this day and age, for all to see and engage in. In case you haven't fully realized it yet, In Christianity Truth is worshipped.
     
    Last edited:
    Indie

    Indie

    Legendary Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    your situation seems to be deteriorating a little bit further every day. impressive path you have embarked on.

    it is an interesting sight nevertheless when the mask is dropped.
    before it being a matter of interpreting, it is a matter of politeness. you have a been on a rampage lately that is very telling about you. you are being eaten up by hatred. that is not healthy neither for nor for the people around you. if these discussions are not doing you anything positive then do not participate in them.

    when you take the time to interact with people via a written message, in particular when you seem to be spending most of your day doing it, you should be mindful of both the messages you are receiving and the ones you are writing, with the objective of communicating ideas and shaping perspectives. this is not the case with you. you seem to be under the impression that this is a war zone, and that you are among mortal enemies. had you been an occasional poster then it wouldn't have been an issue. but since you post almost on daily basis, maybe you should do it in a way that will help you evolve, rather than keep presenting what these thins you do are. at the end of the day the choice is yours.
    The way people address you says more about them than it does about you.
     
    Rafidi

    Rafidi

    Legendary Member
    No one contested that Allah in the Quran and Muhammad had initially explicitly commanded 'defensive-only fighting in sacred months'. What is being brought to light however is the point of Muhammad and his companions having violated that command with Allah's blessing (with Allah's admission, justification and condonation of the violation) provided the violation benefited Allah, Muhammad and Muslims (benefited some greater/ultimate goal of theirs such as in that instance the 'laying claim to the kaaba'), and having set with that the precedent of 'all proclaimed principles (whether them being adopted/commanded by the quran or not, universal or otherwise) could be set aside if those principles were to stand in the way of achieving some perceived fundamental goal that would fundamentally benefit Allah, Islam and Muslims'.

    The point also particularly uncovers a certain truth that the typical modern Muslim munafiq always vainly try to sweep under the carpet. In contradiction to their claim, and by the admission of none other than Allah himself in the Quran, Muhammad and his companions weren't essentially fighting defensively after having left Mecca. Rather, the fighting of Muhammad and co was so obviously, excessively and proudly non-defensive (transgressive) that when it spilled over to a sacred month, it prompted Allah and Muhammad to justify the resulting violation that this fighting of theirs, by it occurring in a sacred month, had caused. Had their fighting that spilled over into a sacred month been defensive in nature it wouldn't have constituted an issue for them in the first place, an issue that needed Allah's resolution and justification before they carry on with achieving their goal.

    In trying to deny that, the typical modern Muslim munafiq would proceed into 'yaamiha while trying to yikahelha', namely by a) assuming the Muslim/Qureichi pact and the initial Quranic command, that of 'not to fight in sacred months', absurdly excluded defensive fighting (in cases where the pact is breached), so as to paint Muhammad and companions being at loss about having possibly committed a violation for having defensively fought during a sacred month, and b) having Allah responding and admitting afterwards 'while their self-defensive fighting during a sacred month is a violation, it is still less severe than the Qureishi violation of Allah of kicking Muhammad and co outside the kaaba, less severe than the violation against which this less severe violation is to be permitted', and with that locking Allah and themselves into positively commanding violations (against Allah) whenever Allah and themselves would command self-defensive fighting in a sacred month.

    ---

    How does my overlooking your claim 'Jesus violating the Sabbath' have any bearing on here? That thus constitutes no fallacy on my part. Rather, your diversion to that claim as an irrelevant response to my post is. You could just honestly admit and concede the truth in my post, and I may then rightly indulge you on Christianity. Meanwhile, anyone can google up the falsehoods you throw left and right in distraction from the truth, and can easily uncover the truths if they so will (few clicks away). For example anyone can easily google up 'did Jesus break the sabbath' and see the truth and expose for themselves the falsehood of your assertion. There's no truth maiming in Christianity, nor deceit, everything is laid oud bare in the open, especially in this day and age, for all to see and engage in. In case you haven't fully realized it yet, In Christianity Truth is worshipped.
    Habibi, reading your posts makes my brain feel twisted. Your english is very bad, aside your twisted logic or illogic. You dont want to learn how to use the comma.

    Besides, you replied your arguments with your first sentence:

    "No one contested that Allah in the Quran and Muhammad had initially explicitly commanded 'defensive-only fighting in sacred months'. "

    Ya3neh you know the truth, bas inta newey tet7amran w tfasser mithel ma baddak 😂

    It is funny you are trying to insult God and paradoxically keep repeating that God who creates and disposes is "violating" a law of His making, but your so called lord and saviour evidently was accused of violating the Sabbath and you say I am trying to divert the topic. And you call others munafiq.

    You need to cure the fever in your brain. I dont know how old you are, but you are really very unintelligent. If you dont have anything to contribute, and you are pissed with the fact that this thread has exposed Christianity as a violent religion that persecuted the pagans and used the sword to forcefully convert pagan Europe into Christianity, you can smash your phone against the wall.
     
    T

    Thoma

    New Member
    Habibi, reading your posts makes my brain feel twisted. Your english is very bad, aside your twisted logic or illogic. You dont want to learn how to use the comma.

    Besides, you replied your arguments with your first sentence:

    "No one contested that Allah in the Quran and Muhammad had initially explicitly commanded 'defensive-only fighting in sacred months'. "

    Ya3neh you know the truth, bas inta newey tet7amran w tfasser mithel ma baddak 😂

    It is funny you are trying to insult God and paradoxically keep repeating that God who creates and disposes is "violating" a law of His making, but your so called lord and saviour evidently was accused of violating the Sabbath and you say I am trying to divert the topic. And you call others munafiq.

    You need to cure the fever in your brain. I dont know how old you are, but you are really very unintelligent. If you dont have anything to contribute, and you are pissed with the fact that this thread has exposed Christianity as a violent religion that persecuted the pagans and used the sword to forcefully convert pagan Europe into Christianity, you can smash your phone against the wall.
    Just to clear up your response here, are you asserting that Allah has no basic and absolute principles and is thus not bound even by his own word and can act in ways contrary to reason, including self-contradiction? Provided that the greatest sin in Islam is shurk or 'associating a creature with Allah', would it stop being a sin if Allah commanded you to practice it?
     
    Rafidi

    Rafidi

    Legendary Member
    Just to clear up your response here, are you asserting that Allah has no basic and absolute principles and is thus not bound even by his own word and can act in ways contrary to reason, including self-contradiction? Provided that the greatest sin in Islam is shurk or 'associating a creature with Allah', would it stop being a sin if Allah commanded you to practice it?
    Allah ordered the angels to bow to Adam in prostration. That is not regarded as shirk. Do you know why or would you want me to explain why? The "absolute principle" and that is eternal and unchangeable is La Ilaha Ilallah. Any other action falls as part of created and disposal rules. Nonetheless there are fixed rules that do not change. My response was your choice of words saying "God violated His law". For you to "violate" something, you must be bound by it or under it. And you must be liable to face consequences.

    Why don't you want to tell us about why Jesus violated the Sabbath? It would make more sense to use the term "violation" for Jesus because even in your own trinitarian beliefs he was not an absolute god. But in the Islamic belief of Tawheed, Allah is the absolute and eternal God that is indivisible into parts and pieces.
     
    T

    Thoma

    New Member
    Allah ordered the angels to bow to Adam in prostration. That is not regarded as shirk. Do you know why or would you want me to explain why? The "absolute principle" and that is eternal and unchangeable is La Ilaha Ilallah. Any other action falls as part of created and disposal rules. Nonetheless there are fixed rules that do not change. My response was your choice of words saying "God violated His law". For you to "violate" something, you must be bound by it or under it. And you must be liable to face consequences.

    Why don't you want to tell us about why Jesus violated the Sabbath? It would make more sense to use the term "violation" for Jesus because even in your own trinitarian beliefs he was not an absolute god. But in the Islamic belief of Tawheed, Allah is the absolute and eternal God that is indivisible into parts and pieces.
    Doesn't bowing down in prostration to anything other than Allah constitute shirk and violate your la ilaha ilallaa 'the one absolute principle that is eternal and unchangeable' as you posited? Since Allah commanded it, can we not validly assert that Allah has no basic or absolute principles and is thus not bound even by his own word and can act in ways contrary to reason, including self-contradiction? 'To violate something one must be bound by it or under it, and one must be liable to face the consequences', but if the violation is commanded by Allah, then it stops being a violation in the first place, and that's the point.

    Your claim about Jesus is irrelevant here. But since you mentioned it, Jesus didn't violate the Sabbath. That can be easily found online by a simple google search.
     
    R

    Ralph N

    Well-Known Member
    Doesn't bowing down in prostration to anything other than Allah constitute shirk and violate your la ilaha ilallaa 'the one absolute principle that is eternal and unchangeable' as you posited? Since Allah commanded it, can we not validly assert that Allah has no basic or absolute principles and is thus not bound even by his own word and can act in ways contrary to reason, including self-contradiction? 'To violate something one must be bound by it or under it, and one must be liable to face the consequences', but if the violation is commanded by Allah, then it stops being a violation in the first place, and that's the point.

    Your claim about Jesus is irrelevant here. But since you mentioned it, Jesus didn't violate the Sabbath. That can be easily found online by a simple google search.
    They kill you because you bow to Jesus, but they blame Satan why he refused to bow to adam...

    Tele3 Satan Ma3o Hak, you see? Thats why they truly deeply follow Satan... His teachings and his legacy... Killing, butchering, sabaya....and they claim God is mercy love and Mercy... rahman el rahim... wein el rahman el rahim bel butcherring , klilling sabbaya... wars and forcing ones belief on others...
     
    Rafidi

    Rafidi

    Legendary Member
    Doesn't bowing down in prostration to anything other than Allah constitute shirk and violate your la ilaha ilallaa 'the one absolute principle that is eternal and unchangeable' as you posited? Since Allah commanded it, can we not validly assert that Allah has no basic or absolute principles and is thus not bound even by his own word and can act in ways contrary to reason, including self-contradiction? 'To violate something one must be bound by it or under it, and one must be liable to face the consequences', but if the violation is commanded by Allah, then it stops being a violation in the first place, and that's the point.

    Your claim about Jesus is irrelevant here. But since you mentioned it, Jesus didn't violate the Sabbath. That can be easily found online by a simple google search.
    I can similarly tell you that why the angels bowing for Adam is not shirk can easily be found through a simple Google search. Am I discussing with you or discussing with Google?

    The absolute principle here is Tawheed, not the prostration. Therefore, the command of Allah to the angels and obedience to that command were the greatest expressions of Tawheed and not the prostration to Adam. The command or the word of Allah supersedes the prostration. The command of Allah is what gives anything value or worth. The bowing itself is a created action. There was a "time" there was no prostration done by creatures because God is eternal and created are time bound. But there was a truth or absolute truth/reality which was God's Essence and Being. God is above time and space or anything created, including the act of prostration. The bowing and praying are tools to an end. The end is remembrance of Allah. The reason in the Holy Quran we find this verse:

    Holy Quran 29:45
    "Recite what has been revealed to you (i.e., the Prophet) of the Book, and keep up the prayer. Surely prayer forbids obscenity and malfeasance; and indeed the Remembrance of Allah is greater, and Allah knows whatever you (The pronoun is plural) work."
     
    T

    Thoma

    New Member
    I can similarly tell you that why the angels bowing for Adam is not shirk can easily be found through a simple Google search. Am I discussing with you or discussing with Google?

    The absolute principle here is Tawheed, not the prostration. Therefore, the command of Allah to the angels and obedience to that command were the greatest expressions of Tawheed and not the prostration to Adam. The command or the word of Allah supersedes the prostration. The command of Allah is what gives anything value or worth. The bowing itself is a created action. There was a "time" there was no prostration done by creatures because God is eternal and created are time bound. But there was a truth or absolute truth/reality which was God's Essence and Being. God is above time and space or anything created, including the act of prostration. The bowing and praying are tools to an end. The end is remembrance of Allah. The reason in the Holy Quran we find this verse:

    Holy Quran 29:45
    "Recite what has been revealed to you (i.e., the Prophet) of the Book, and keep up the prayer. Surely prayer forbids obscenity and malfeasance; and indeed the Remembrance of Allah is greater, and Allah knows whatever you (The pronoun is plural) work."

    No you cannot. To indulge your request of addressing your claim about Christianity is to give way to your distraction attempts against the actual point at hand which you ought address irrespectively. I however referred honest readers to google since your falsehood is easily exposed with basic internet searches, and unlike in your case this does not constitute an evasion/distraction/fallacy on my part. Now off to the actual point at hand:

    So, according to you, tawheed, the absolute principle as you call it, is defined and most greatly expressed simply by what Allah commands and the respective obedience/application to/of those commands, irrespective of the content of those commands.

    Yaane if Allah commands worshiping (Allah) by commanding 'prostrating to Allah and none other than Allah', then this is tawheed, the truth, the absolute principle, the application/obedience of/to which is its greatest expression, and the violation of which (i.e. prostrating to other than Allah) would be the contrary expression, the expression of shirk, and the gravest of sins. If Allah then commands worshipping (Allah) by commanding 'prostrating to Allah and to someone else other than or with Allah', then this in turn to you becomes the tawheed, the absolute principle, the application/obedience of/to which is its greatest expression, and the violation of which (i.e. prostrating to Allah and none other than Allah) would be the contrary expression, the expression of shirk, the gravest of sins.

    Doesn't that indeed mean Allah has no basic and absolute principles and is not bound even by his own word and can act in ways contrary to reason, including self-contradiction?
     
    Last edited:
    Rafidi

    Rafidi

    Legendary Member
    No you cannot. To indulge your request of addressing your claim about Christianity is to give way to your distraction attempts against the actual point at hand which you ought address irrespectively. I however referred honest readers to google since your falsehood is easily exposed with basic internet searches, and unlike in your case this does not constitute an evasion/distraction/fallacy on my part. Now off to the actual point at hand:
    Sorry but you cant tell me what topic I can raise and which I cant. You can only refuse to address the points I raise and evade. Especially that the two are related. And you dont tell me I "ought" to address anything. I'm not under any duress or obligation. If I dont accept to indulge your childish posts or I dont want to entertain your points or posts, your entire forum worth is the ignore button and I block you. Ha22ak kabset zer. Dont flatter yourself.

    Your lord violated the Sabbath and was expressly accused of that. It's either the Jews got it wrong or he did.

    So, according to you, tawheed, the absolute principle as you call it, is defined and most greatly expressed simply by what Allah commands and the respective obedience/application to/of those commands, irrespective of the content of those commands.
    Yes, your honor. The above is correct.

    Yaane if Allah commands worshiping (Allah) by commanding 'prostrating to Allah and none other than Allah', then this is tawheed, the truth, the absolute principle, the application/obedience of/to which is its greatest expression, and the violation of which (i.e. prostrating to other than Allah) would be the contrary expression, the expression of shirk, and the gravest of sins. If Allah then commands worshipping (Allah) by commanding 'prostrating to Allah and to someone else other than or with Allah', then this in turn to you becomes the tawheed, the absolute principle, the application/obedience of/to which is its greatest expression, and the violation of which (i.e. prostrating to Allah and none other than Allah) would be the contrary expression, the expression of shirk, the gravest of sins.
    The above is partly correct, your honor.

    But when or in the case Allah commands you to bow to a person, as was the case with the angels and Adam, that bowing is not called worship. God honoured Adam and demonstrated man's superiority to all creatures including the angels. Following the command of Allah and obeying Him becomes the "worship".

    Doesn't that indeed mean Allah has no basic and absolute principles and is not bound even by his own word and can act in ways contrary to reason, including self-contradiction?
    No. It does more mean that. For example, God does not break His promises. The most absolute principle in this case is "I am Allah and beside me there is no other". But you cant draw comparisons and say Allah does not honour His word. I brought the example of the obedience to Allah as the greatest form of worship because you kept using the word "violate" in reference to God and command to defend oneself even in the sacred months. That is fundamentally wrong because Allah cannot violate His own laws or words, since He is above every law and creation. The laws are for you and me to be under. It is impossible for Him to violate His laws since He makes, creates and disposes. I am actually proving the opposite of what you claim. He is the lawmaker and lawgiver. He can cancel a rule or suspend it based on our necessity. Cant He? Even when God says only fight in the sacred months for defense "when attacked in the holy months" and not for previous aggressions and similarly, when Allah asked the angels to bow to Adam, there is no violation of any law and no violation of Tawheed. We dont dictate to God. He dictates to us. Except if you want to become arrogant and rebellious like Iblis and retort and tell God you will not bow to Adam because you feel you are better than Adam and instead you think Adam should bow to you. Understood?
     
    Top