Kay 17: We need not go to far searching for examples of intolerance, and include the prophet's treatment of prisoners of war, of pagans and forced conversion.

Mecca fought bitterly against the Prophet for over 10 yrs and in just one day embraced Islam. The prophet declared idols as false Gods and destroyed them. The Prophet threatened Abu Sufyan with beheading. He murdered black idolaters.

That's intolernace to me at least

Forced conversions??

Please, i do not like reading this kind of ignorance.... After years of persecution and Murder, the prophet captured Mecca with little or no confrontation, forgave the actions of those who killed his uncle and other believers.... Who killed him out of his home.... Yet he did nothing to them but destroy the idols in the Kaaba....

Where did black idolators come from Please stop lying and spreading false information...

None of the Quraish was forced to become Muslim, but Muhammad’s victory convinced some of his most principled opponents, such as Abu Sufyan, that the old religion had failed.

The statement about 'beheading' was made by Abbas (RA) not the prophet (SAW).... There was opposition to abu sufyan due to his past. Abu Sufyan purpose of visiting the prophet was to convert in the first place, He had already spoken to Ali (RA) before meeting the Prophet.... Abu sufyan lived his life as a dedicated muslim throughout.

So please get off islamophobic websites... gosh!!

jackbauersballs:

You see this?

Was this necessary?

And if someone else said this to you, you would ban them for eternity...

Mscheww..

its ok jack Bauer.

Mac and I have some "chemistry" going on! lol! whether na acid or base I no know.

Tiaraburu, i tell you, you do not want to go into crusade debate... It is a no win for you.... It is not defensible

The same christians, you talk about lived in muslim lands... Eastern christians fought alongside their muslim counterparts against the crusaders... The europeans spared no one in their quest for Jerusalem.... The crusaders spared no one...

I can not vouch for the actions of every muslim leader or army in history, not every followed the exact guidelines but i am telling you what Islam says about combat or war ... We both know how brutal the bible is about war.....

What does the Prophet say?

Muslim Book 019, Number 4294:

It has been reported from Sulaiman b. Buraid through his father that when the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) appointed anyone as leader of an army or detachment he would especially exhort him to fear Allah and to be good to the Muslims who were with him. He would say: Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah. Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war, do not embezzle the spoils; do not break your pledge; and do not mutilate (the dead) bodies; do not kill the children. When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. If they respond to any one of these, you also accept it and withold yourself from doing them any harm. Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them. Then invite them to migrate from their lands to the land of Muhairs and inform them that, if they do so, they shall have all the privileges and obligations of the Muhajirs. If they refuse to migrate, tell them that they will have the status of Bedouin Muilims and will be subjected to the Commands of Allah like other Muslims, but they will not get any share from the spoils of war or Fai' except when they actually fight with the Muslims (against the disbelievers). If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah's help and fight them. When you lay siege to a fort and the besieged appeal to you for protection in the name of Allah and His Prophet, do not accord to them the guarantee of Allah and His Prophet, but accord to them your own guarantee and the guarantee of your companions for it is a lesser sin that the security given by you or your companions be disregarded than that the security granted in the name of Allah and His Prophet be violated When you besiege a fort and the besieged want you to let them out in accordance with Allah's Command, do not let them come out in accordance with His Command, but do so at your (own) command, for you do not know whether or not you will be able to carry out Allah's behest with regard to them.

Here is one hadith of that shows us that before any expedition that was carried out by a Muslim, that the prophet would speak with the leader of the group commanding the leader to be just, and that the leader should NOT kill children. Why would the prophet give such a command if he was an evil man like were supposed to believe? The fact that the prophet gave such an order shows what a good man he was, and that he was not a barbarian, nor a savage, and that he made several righteous rules of war.

Here are more hadiths from Bukhari's book that deal with this matter:

ukhari Volume 004, Book 052, Hadith Number 257.

Narrated By 'Abdullah : During some of the Ghazawat of the Prophet a woman was found killed. Allah's Apostle disapproved the killing of women and children.

Bukhari Volume 004, Book 052, Hadith Number 258.

Narrated By Ibn 'Umar : During some of the Ghazawat of Allah's Apostle a woman was found killed, so Allah's Apostle forbade the killing of women and children.

Yahya related to me from Malik from Ibn Shihab that a son of Kab ibn Malik (Malik believed that ibn Shihab said it was Abd ar-Rahman ibn Kab) said, "The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, forbade those who fought ibn Abi Huqayq (a treacherous jew from Madina) to kill women and children. He said that one of the men fighting had said, 'The wife of ibn Abi Huqayq began screaming and I repeatedly raised my sword against her. Then I would remember the prohibition of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, so I would stop. Had it not been for that, we would have been rid of her.'"

Here we once again have the prophet ordering his men to not kill women and children, and notice how one of the Muslim fighters repeatedly put his sword down towards a lady because the prophet had ordered him to not kill women, had the prophet not made the order he would have killed her.

Then Abu Bakr advised Yazid, "You will find a people who claim to have totally given themselves to Allah. Leave them to what they claim to have given themselves. You will find a people who have shaved the middle of their heads, strike what they have shaved with the sword.

"I advise you ten things| Do not kill women or children or an aged, infirm person. Do not cut down fruit-bearing trees. Do not destroy an inhabited place. Do not slaughter sheep or camels except for food. Do not burn bees and do not scatter them. Do not steal from the booty, and do not be cowardly."


Here is a hadith were we see the first caliph of Islam commanding a Muslim to not kill women or children, nor the elderly. The caliph was simply following the instructions that he had been given by non other than the prophet Muhammad.

The thing the morality of that time prevented all these atrocities, rules of engagement and "civilized" warfare came just into the 20th century. Atrocities by the muslim armies simply tell us how they interpreted the Quran and it wasn't non-violently and monarchs freely harnessed the religion as a medium of control.

I will focus on Muhammed:

the massacre of the Jewish tribe in Medina

Murder of black idolater http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expedition_of_Khalid_ibn_al-Walid_(Nakhla)

Apart from being convinced that there Gods failed them, but isn't it obvious that duress played a role? the Thalif tribe were requesting to keep their idol despite claiming to convert to Islam

All Muhammed's enemies converted, and immediately after his death, the tribes all reverted to their "failed Gods"! Until another war was fought to drag them back to Islam.

Kay 17: The thing the morality of that time prevented all these atrocities, rules of engagement and "civilized" warfare came just into the 20th century. Atrocities by the muslim armies simply tell us how they interpreted the Quran and it wasn't non-violently and monarchs freely harnessed the religion as a medium of control.

I will focus on Muhammed:

the massacre of the Jewish tribe in Medina

Murder of black idolater http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expedition_of_Khalid_ibn_al-Walid_(Nakhla)

Apart from being convinced that there Gods failed them, but isn't it obvious that duress played a role? the Thalif tribe were requesting to keep their idol despite claiming to convert to Islam

All Muhammed's enemies converted, and immediately after his death, the tribes all reverted to their "failed Gods"! Until another war was fought to drag them back to Islam.

Guy, stop reducing the quality of this discussion. Your posts are too lame to start addressing them.

TroGunn:

It's a known fact that the Vatican is politically independent and is recognized as such. Bringing the Vatican into this is clutching at straws at best, as the Vatican is a privately owned and run enclave. It's also a known fact that non-muslims in muslim lands enjoy much less religious freedom TODAY, compared to muslims in secular or "christian" lands.

- http://cnsnews.com/news/article/countries-worst-religious-freedom-grades-are-mostly-islamic

Your ignorance is of hyperbolic proportions making you always dodge the issues being discussed, it is clear u were not addressing my post. And funny thing is, this christians lands are always bankrolling dictators who end up supressing everybody just like Mubarack did in Egypt with deliberately stoking inter - religious feuds etc the same christian lands again bankroll the morally bankrupt regime of Isreal which has continued to oppress both muslims and christians and is about making life especially difficult for residents of Bethleham . . . I enjoy seeing you christians always pay lip service to religious freedom.

maclatunji:

Guy, stop reducing the quality of this discussion. Your posts are too lame to start addressing them.

Ohh! Boy! You too hash oh!

tbaba1234: Tiaraburu, i tell you, you do not want to go into crusade debate... It is a no win for you.... It is not defensible

The same christians, you talk about lived in muslim lands... Eastern christians fought alongside their muslim counterparts against the crusaders... The europeans spared no one in their quest for Jerusalem.... The crusaders spared no one...

I can not vouch for the actions of every muslim leader or army in history, not every followed the exact guidelines but i am telling you what Islam says about combat or war ... We both know how brutal the bible is about war.....

What does the Prophet say?

See hypocrisy in action. Despite your posturing, I have opened your eyes to the atrocities of Muslim armies and you are flip flopping! Ok...... so I can vouch for the actions of the crusaders, abi?

Even if the wars were in retaliation, Jesus instructions were clear. His pacifist stance was the very essence of Christianity and that was what was used to successfully spread Christianity in large parts of the middle east within just 250 years! Till some Romans lost their heads about Christ's teachings and stafted fighting in God's name.

Christianity's major figures reinforce this pacific view throughout history!






A soldier of the civil authority must be taught not to kill men and to refuse to do so if he is commanded, and to refuse to take an oath. If he is unwilling to comply, he must be rejected for baptism. A military commander or civic magistrate must resign or be rejected. If a believer seeks to become a soldier, he must be rejected, for he has despised God.
—Hippolytus of Rome

For since we, a numerous band of men as we are, have learned from His teaching and His laws that evil ought not to be requited with evil, that it is better to suffer wrong than to inflict it, that we should rather shed our own blood than stain our hands and our conscience with that of another, an ungrateful world is now for a long period enjoying a benefit from Christ, inasmuch as by His means the rage of savage ferocity has been softened, and has begun to withhold hostile hands from the blood of a fellow-creature.
—Arnobius, Adversus Gentes I:VI


The Scriptures teach that there are two opposing princes and two opposing kingdoms : the one is the Prince of peace ; the other the prince of strife. Each of these princes has his particular kingdom and as the prince is so is also the kingdom. The Prince of peace is Christ Jesus ; His kingdom is the kingdom of peace, which is His church; His messengers are the messengers of peace; His Word is the word of peace; His body is the body of peace; His children are the seed of peace.
—Menno Simons (1494-1561),


To our most bitter opponents we say: ‘We shall match your capacity to inflict suffering by our capacity to endure suffering. We shall meet your physical force with soul force. Do to us what you will, and we shall continue to love you.’
—Martin Luther King, Jr. (1929-1968), “Loving your Enemies” in Strength to Love[20]


Love without courage and wisdom is sentimentality, as with the ordinary church member. Courage without love and wisdom is foolhardiness, as with the ordinary soldier. Wisdom without love and courage is cowardice, as with the ordinary intellectual. Therefore one who has love, courage, and wisdom is the one in a million who moves the world, as with Jesus, Buddha, and Gandhi.
—Ammon Hennacy (1893 - 1970) [


I do not wish to be a king; I am not anxious to be rich; I decline military command... Die to the world, repudiating the madness that is in it.
—Tatian



and what did Jesus himself say? To mention just a couple

You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.' But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. (Matt. 5:38-39)

Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. (Matt. 5:43-48, Luke 6:27-28)

Put your sword back in its place...for all who draw the sword will die by the sword. (Matt. 26:52)

Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God. (Matt. 5:9)


While Prophet Muhammad was agreeable to war and even gave instructions about it. His followers commenced conquests soon after his demise, winning land and subjects to God. Christ was pacifist and for 250 years Christianity flourished despite ALL odds and persecution. Its a fundamental difference .


The crusades were triggered by the violent and bloody actions of Fatimid caliph Al-Hakim in 1071 in killing pilgrims and converting Churches to stables. The Byzantine emperor, Alexis I feared that all Asia Minor would be overrun called on western Christian leaders and the papacy to come to the aid of Constantinople by undertaking a pilgrimage or a crusade that would free Jerusalem from Muslim rule. Ironically, Muslims are the ones expressing outrage about what their forefathers caused!

Well I will cut you some slack; you and I cannot vouch for the barbarity of the "faithful" ions back. Enjoy you day.

^

What huge logical fallacy you embrace indeed! The crusaders were money hungry men who went to plunder foreign lands just like . . . The same christians would spread Christianity using Slavery in the most savage way possible and to add to insult ridicule the people they are subjugating, read Lord Lugard letter to the Queen, and see what he thinks about your ancestors, the Christians have continually issued anti-semetic rants against the jews right from the time of the Christians fathers till date, I think the fact that you living in denial is evidence enough of the truthful nature of our claims, like thaba indicated, Muslims did atimes went offcourse going against Islamic principles on rules of engagement unlike you we condemn such and unlike Christians generally muslims always condemn terror done by muslims against others, but what do we get? Christian hypocrisy, this same hypocrisy that goes as far as window dressing terror attacks done by christians as either criminal or done by insane individuals, we wonder when people would be honest in their dealing we can only move forward if people acknowledge their wrongs and try to make amends. I mean have ever wondered what your christian brothers did to the indians of America? Yeah tolerance indeed. The earlier u people begin to understand that because someone is a muslims does not always mean his actions are Islamicn rather the Muslim is judge by Islamic criteria that is common sense, if you want to fault a system u fault the system by what it says not by those who practicing it.

omartins: Tolerance? When I first heard about a religion call muslim it was tagged ''IMOLE''(dangerous religion). All terrorist are Muslims but not all muslims are terrorist. MUSLIMS BELIEVE ONLY IN VIOLENCE, please leave history alone and lets live in present.

So what are Nigerian christians doing in UAE, Malaysia etc
Who tagged Islam dangerous? People who misunderstand it?

Ask yourself, are christians peaceful? Did Muslims start WW1 and WW2? Did they cause Bakassi problem? Who championed apartheid?
Am I to believe that christians hate oppression and violence only if not done by them?

@tiarabubu, Jesus (AS) mission as a Prophet was not meant to be that of a political leader, he was purely a spiritual guide. Please tell us: what are the teachings of Jesus (AS) on politics and the military? Or are you saying all of us will become monks and travelers? Christians follow their whims and caprices in this regard, we Muslims have standards set by the Prophet(SAW), the conquest of Mecca is a key example here. The Prophet(SAW), lost some of his children and close family members at the hands of the Quraish, he never took revenge for it.

This is in no way to say Jesus (AS)is less important in the eyes of Muslims, but it is a fact that he himself would acknowledge.

Hence, you cannot compare him to Prophet Muhammad (SAW) in that regard. As tbaba has rightly pointed out Christianity spread with the conquests of the Roman empire. Without Islam, Arabia today would in all likelihood be under the control of either the Eastern Orthodox Church or the Roman Catholic Church not with roses and petals but with military might.

I wonder why you have not acknowledged the military duels between the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church. Were they fighting for Jesus(AS) or territory?

maclatunji: @tiarabubu, Jesus (AS) mission as a Prophet was not meant to be that of a political leader, he was purely a spiritual guide. Please tell us: what are the teachings of Jesus (AS) on politics and the military? Or are you saying all of us will become monks and travelers? Christians follow their whims and caprices in this regard, we Muslims have standards set by the Prophet(SAW), the conquest of Mecca is a key example here. The Prophet(SAW), lost some of his children and close family members at the hands of the Quraish, he never took revenge for it.

This is in no way to say Jesus (AS)is less important in the eyes of Muslims, but it is a fact that he himself would acknowledge.

Hence, you cannot compare him to Prophet Muhammad (SAW) in that regard. As tbaba has rightly pointed out Christianity spread with the conquests of the Roman empire. Without Islam, Arabia today would in all likelihood be under the control of either the Eastern Orthodox Church or the Roman Catholic Church not with roses and petals but with military might.

I wonder why you have not acknowledged the military duels between the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church. Were they fighting for Jesus(AS) or territory?

Great point that Christians fail to understand
Human beings will always have conflicts. Identical twins fight each other even while young
Islam recognises that and tells us what to do in the face of attack and warns us not to exceed limits
Christians claim that they are pacifists. When confronted by conflict, they charge into war without restraint since there is no limit prescribed.

Again you are giving me examples.... Why are you been so shallow? We could also look at examples of christian brutality...

Jesus (Peace be upon him) was not a political leader, He never led a nation

These are from the bible regarding war

Numbers 31:17,18

17 Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man,18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

1 Samuel 15:2,3

2 This is what the LORD Almighty says: 'I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt.3 Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy [a] everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.' "

What did the donkeys do?

vedaxcool: ^

What huge logical fallacy you embrace indeed! The crusaders were money hungry men who went to plunder foreign lands just like . . .

I will be the first to agree that the crusaders where just misled and misguided men whose actions were not supported by the religion the claim to profess. If you say that the crusaders went to plunder foreign lands, what say ye of the Muslim invaders who stormed Turkey, Syria, Egypt, Jerusalem, India, China? Did you know that the invasion of India by Muslims, started by Al Muhallab ibn Abi Suffrah in 664 CE during the Umayyad Caliphate, is regarded by some as the worst genocide in human history? Estimates reach up to 20 million people murdered by band of Islamic armies that swept in from the west.

An estimate of the number of people killed, based on the Muslim chronicles and demographic calculations, was done by K.S. Lal in his book Growth of Muslim Population in Medieval India, who claimed that between 1000 CE and 1500 CE, the population of Hindus decreased by 80 million. His work has come under criticism by historians such as Simon Digby (School of Oriental and African Studies) and Irfan Habib for its agenda and lack of accurate data in pre-census times. Western Historians such as Will Durant contend that Islam spread through violence.[4][7] Sir Jadunath Sarkar contends that that several Muslim invaders were waging a systematic jihad against Hindus in India to the effect that "Every device short of massacre in cold blood was resorted to in order to convert heathen subjects." In particular the records kept by al-Utbi, Mahmud al-Ghazni's secretary, in the Tarikh-i-Yamini document several episodes of bloody military campaigns. Hindus who converted to Islam however were not completely immune to persecution due to the Caste system among South Asian Muslims in India established by Ziauddin al-Barani in the Fatawa-i Jahandari where they were regarded as an "Ajlaf" caste and subjected to discrimination by the "Ashraf" castes

Another blood cuddling invader was called Tīmūr bin Taraghay Barlas, known in the West as Tamerlane or "Timur the lame", or "SWORD Of ALLAH" as he was called. The man kept detailed memoirs of his exploits and the massacre of Hindus, looting plundering and raping of their women and children, and the plunder of the wealth of Greater India. He recorded details of how villages, towns and entire cities were rid of their Hindu male population through systematic mass slaughters and genocide and their women and children forcefully converted en masse to Islam from Hinduism.

In a short space of time all the people in the [New Delhi] fort were put to the sword, and in the course of one hour the heads of 10,000 infidels were cut off. The sword of Islam was washed in the blood of the infidels, and all the goods and effects, the treasure and the grain which for many a long year had been stored in the fort became the spoil of my soldiers. They set fire to the houses and reduced them to ashes, and they razed the buildings and the fort to the ground....All these infidel Hindus were slain, their women and children, and their property and goods became the spoil of the victors. I proclaimed throughout the camp that every man who had infidel prisoners should put them to death, and whoever neglected to do so should himself be executed and his property given to the informer. When this order became known to the ghazis of Islam, they drew their swords and put their prisoners to death Taimur Lane. Turk-i-Taimuri


Timur left Delhi in approximately January 1399. In April he had returned to his own capital beyond the Oxus (Amu Darya). Immense quantities of spoils were taken from India. 90 captured elephants were employed merely to carry precious stones looted from his conquest, so as to to erect a mosque at Samarkand —(what historians today believe is the enormous Bibi-Khanym Mosque) Part Excerps from Ruy González de Clavijo 1859 Narrative of the Embassy of Ruy Gonzalez de Clavijo to the Court of Timour at Samarcand AD 1403-6.

The same christians would spread Christianity using Slavery in the most savage way possible and to add to insult ridicule the people they are subjugating, read Lord Lugard letter to the Queen, and see what he thinks about your ancestors, the Christians have continually issued anti-semetic rants against the jews right from the time of the Christians fathers till date, I think the fact that you living in denial is evidence enough of the truthful nature of our claims,

What Lord Lugard thinks is immaterial. Come to think of it, do you know what Lord Luggard thinks of the Muslims? Have you read his memoirs? Its really strong stuff. But I will not digress.

@ bolded. Yes the Jews have suffered serious unjust persecution. But can you show proof of anti semetic rants "from Christian fathers" and also in the present day? I will like to see which "Christian Father" made Jewish anti semitic rants and where anti semitic rants are coming today.

Are the Jews more comfortable with Christians today or Muslims. Are they not the best of "friends" with Iran and co? And of course Christians shout "death to the Jews" everyday. You are interesting.

I think the fact that you living in denial is evidence enough of the truthful nature of our claims, like thaba indicated, Muslims did atimes went offcourse going against Islamic principles on rules of engagement unlike you we condemn such and unlike Christians generally muslims always condemn terror done by muslims against others, but what do we get? Christian hypocrisy, this same hypocrisy that goes as far as window dressing terror attacks done by christians as either criminal or done by insane individuals, we wonder when people would be honest in their dealing we can only move forward if people acknowledge their wrongs and try to make amends.

Let us start by the examples of the Islamic invasion of India where millions died. Care to condemn? SHOW ME ONE APOLOGY BY A MUSLIM LEADER FOR THAT!

Lets look at the invasion of Eygpt, Syria, Turkey and Jerusalem. Care to condemn that? Go through my post. I have consistently condemned the Crusades (which Muslims triggered) as not being inline with Christ's teaching. Have you done same? going by the frequency of attacks on non Muslims by Muslims, the condemnation from Muslim leaders should come in torrents! look at the recent Koran burning and that recent dreadful film (Innocence of Muslims) incidents. Presidents, prime Ministers, the Vatican has condemned the action totally. In 2011, Iran burnt 300 Bibles. Where was the condemnation?

Even Pope john Paul said sorry for "the sins of the Church" for 2,000 years of violence and blunders, Show me WHO ( a senior Cleric from the Muslim world) HAS SAID THE SAME? Never again," he said. "We forgive and we ask forgiveness. We are asking pardon for the divisions among Christians, for the use of violence that some have committed in the service of truth, and for attitudes of mistrust and hostility assumed towards followers of other religions." (March 2000, at the Vatican)

The earlier u people begin to understand that because someone is a muslims does not always mean his actions are Islamicn rather the Muslim is judge by Islamic criteria that is common sense, if you want to fault a system u fault the system by what it says not by those who practicing it

Next time read your own post carefully so that you don't shoot yourself in the foot. In YOUR OWN post you were whining about the crusades and slavery and Lord Lugards letter. If you had applied your own words you wouldn't have whined about the crusades and slavery in the first place!

maclatunji: @tiarabubu, Jesus (AS) mission as a Prophet was not meant to be that of a political leader, he was purely a spiritual guide. Please tell us: what are the teachings of Jesus (AS) on politics and the military? Or are you saying all of us will become monks and travelers? Christians follow their whims and caprices in this regard, we Muslims have standards set by the Prophet(SAW), the conquest of Mecca is a key example here. The Prophet(SAW), lost some of his children and close family members at the hands of the Quraish, he never took revenge for it.

This is in no way to say Jesus (AS)is less important in the eyes of Muslims, but it is a fact that he himself would acknowledge.

Hence, you cannot compare him to Prophet Muhammad (SAW) in that regard. As tbaba has rightly pointed out Christianity spread with the conquests of the Roman empire. Without Islam, Arabia today would in all likelihood be under the control of either the Eastern Orthodox Church or the Roman Catholic Church not with roses and petals but with military might.

I wonder why you have not acknowledged the military duels between the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church. Were they fighting for Jesus(AS) or territory?

You see Mac, unlike Islam, in strict Christianity, politics and spiritual matters dont mix. If there was a political agenda Jesus's admonishment would have contradicted it. How would a political leader tackle admonishment like;

You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.' But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. (Matt. 5:38-39)

Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. (Matt. 5:43-48, Luke 6:27-28)

Put your sword back in its place...for all who draw the sword will die by the sword. (Matt. 26:52)
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God. (Matt. 5:9)


You see Jesus' teachings were proved right when for 250 years (before Roman wars in the name of Christianity) Christianity flourished despite heavy prosecution by the Romans. They were initially pagans, saw Christianity as a threat and sought to subdue it. The mightiest army in the world COULD NOT suppress pacifist Christianity for 250 years and it spread to Egypt, Syria, Turkey, Iraq etc without a fight. That in itself proved that non-violence works! So saying that violence was the only way Islam could have survived has been empirically proved wrong by Christianity.

Later wars by the Romans was a classical tragedy of mixing religion with politics. the Roman rulers became converted and couldn't reconcile Christian pacifism with the need to maintain a large empire and began slowly seeking justification for violence. Of course they made wars in God's name. And the result? Massive failure. The gains Christianity made through non violence (Syria, Jerusalem, Turkey, Egypt etc) were lost when it pick up arms. Infact the Roman empire collapsed further proving Jesus' statement "those who live by the sword will perish by the sword" (Matt. 26:52) Even the later Crusades, though initially successful, flopped big time. Again, God has chosen to spread his word through non violence as he laid down the new rules through Christ. Anything in the contrary will come to naught.

So, all those "Christians" who pick up arms to "fight" for God or cause pain, hurt or anger are ON THEIR OWN.



To our most bitter opponents we say: ‘We shall match your capacity to inflict suffering by our capacity to endure suffering. We shall meet your physical force with soul force. Do to us what you will, and we shall continue to love you.’

—Martin Luther King, Jr. (1929-1968), “Loving your Enemies” in Strength to Love

^How cute, so the teachings of Jesus cannot help man organise society for if we men in particular were to follow Jesus exactly as he lived, we will not marry (forget what that new discovery says abi?) and wander a great deal like Medieval monks did.

By the way, the early "followers" of Jesus understood the importance of politics and played it well.

Google the Holy Roman Empire for more details because you see whilst you guys claim that Muslims shouldn't talk about 1400 years ago, you seek to take us over 2000 years back. By the way, who tells you that Jesus' true teachings survived.

If he arrived on earth today he wouldn't recognise you guys as his true followers, Christmas your biggest celebration is based on a lie, he was never born on that day. The Gospel which he taught has been replaced by third party questionable accounts. He never even called his followers "Christians".

You see those your 250 years were really years in which Jesus' true teachings got lost. Like Betathings said, your outlook to human relations and conflict is practically useless as the historical events even between Churches is evidence of that.

I agree that the west hasn't been fair in their painting of muslims, but I just can't reconcile how in the name of provocation or blasphemy innocent citizens would be murdered, I mean innocent citizen in far away nation would be cut short of access to life, all the time! L Muslims have a lot of PR work to do, cos life is so precious, and am restrained to agree that islam means peace.

The question on this thread is if Islam is not violent, it has nothing to do with Christianity.

I still think Muhammad was intolerant towards pagans, that he found violence not as a taboo but a tool. And violence plays a key role in the history of islam. And it is a religion of a community not an individual.

maclatunji: ^How cute, so the teachings of Jesus cannot help man organise society for if we men in particular were to follow Jesus exactly as he lived, we will not marry (forget what that new discovery says abi?) and wander a great deal like Medieval monks did.

We also follow Jesus' teachings, in case you haven't noticed.

Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, 8 and the two shall become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two but one flesh. 9 What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.” Mark 10:7-9

Christianity is about your relationship with God, chikenan. Your relationship with the State is different. That is why Churches and religion have less influence in running Governments in predominantly Christian countries. This helps foster faith freedom.

"Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's" Matthew 22:22

In Christendom, secular authority and religious authority are two different things that ideally seldom mix. That is why Christians can be minorities in Islamic countries for years and live without objections (eg Iran, Syria and Iraq) but Muslims seldom can without asking for a radical change in how secular rules govern them (eg flag debate in Switzerland, Shariah Zones in Britain etc). This, unfortunately, contributes in no small measure to the perception of Muslims as intolerant.

By the way, the early "followers" of Jesus understood the importance of politics and played it well.

Google the Holy Roman Empire for more details because you see whilst you guys claim that Muslims shouldn't talk about 1400 years ago, you seek to take us over 2000 years back. By the way, who tells you that Jesus' true teachings survived.

Really? How do you know? Proof please. Remember talk is cheap. I can as well make sweeping, baseless statements and turn the tables around. But I am above that

Your guys brought up issues of ions past and tried to make it sound nice. I just showed it wasn't really as nice as it was made to sound. That's all. The point is whether its issues of 2000, 1400 or 1 year(s) ago lets not sweeten the tale.

If he arrived on earth today he wouldn't recognise you guys as his true followers, Christmas your biggest celebration is based on a lie, he was never born on that day. The Gospel which he taught has been replaced by third party questionable accounts. He never even called his followers "Christians".

Many Christians have fallen by the way side, no doubt. false doctrine has creep into the faith as foretold in the Bible viz:

But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God-- having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with them. ...In fact, everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted, while evil men and impostors will go from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived (2 Timothy 3:1-13).

]Yes,its a prophesy that is coming true. Its sad what some people do in the name of Christianity. We are asked to "watch and pray" and observe and test every doctrine comparing it with the Bible whether they are of God; because "many false prophets have gone out into the world" 1 John 4:1 These are prophecies that are happening before our very eyes.



Nobody says Christ was actually born on December 25. Its a commemorative day that some Christians don't even agree with. What is important is the commemoration which is now globally associated with love, sharing, caring and holidays even among non Christians. To us, every day is Christmas.

Yea, and that "He never even called his followers "Christians"" again. Well, Christ said ""If you love me, you will keep my commandments. " John 14:15, " “Come unto me, all ye that are weary and heavy laden, and I will give you rest.” Matthew 11:28 etc and Christians is Greek for followers of Christ as recorded in the Bible

New Testament Acts 11:26,"...in Antioch the disciples were first called Christians." Acts 26:28 "Do you think that in such a short time you can persuade me to be a Christian?" 1 Peter 4:16, "...if you suffer as a Christian, do not be ashamed, but praise God that you bear that name."

Essentially, the term is used to identify a religious group " followers of Christ". In the true sense, every christian knows the fundamentals of his belief. It is beyond physical. its not just in practices, books or buildings (churches). That why Christians don't blow their tops when these are destroyed. Its your personal relationship with God.

the hour is coming when neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father.... But the hour is coming, and is now here, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father is seeking such people to worship him. God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.” John 4:23-24

Christianity is more than a name Mac.

You see those your 250 years were really years in which Jesus' true teachings got lost. Like Betathings said, your outlook to human relations and conflict is practically useless as the historical events even between Churches is evidence of that.

Again, talk is cheap. You gotta try harder.

Kay 17: The question on this thread is if Islam is not violent, it has nothing to do with Christianity.

I still think Muhammad was intolerant towards pagans, that he found violence not as a taboo but a tool. And violence plays a key role in the history of islam. And it is a religion of a community not an individual.

The Question on this thread has nothing to do with violence, it highlights on muslim tolerance, a fact of history.

Violence played a role in the civilization of the world, It is undeniable.... It is part of human nature....

The prophet was the leader of a civilisation,

Do you think any nation surviving today has not gone through violence in its history, Do you think Islam would have survived if it did not fight its enemies... We would have been utterly destroyed...

^^
Good point there.

So like every other civilization, Islam uses violence to protect itself and maintain dominance. That could involve a conflict with a rival religion, eg Christianity

tiarabubu:

We also follow Jesus' teachings, in case you haven't noticed.

Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, 8 and the two shall become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two but one flesh. 9 What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.” Mark 10:7-9

Christianity is about your relation with God, chikenan. Your relationship with the State is different. That is why Churches and religion have less influence in running Governments in predominantly Christian countries than in Muslim Countries. This helps foster faith freedom.

"Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's" Matthew 22:22

In Christiandom secular authority and religious authority are two different things that ideally seldom mix. That is why Christians can be minorities in Islamic countries for years and live without objections (eg Iran, syria and iraq) but Muslims seldom can without asking for a radical change in how secular rules govern them (eg flag debate in Switzerland, Shariah Zones in Britain etc). This, unfortunately, contributes in no small measure to the perception of Muslims as intolerant.






Really? How do you know? Proof please. Remember talk is cheap. I can as well make sweeping, baseless statements and turn the tables around. But I am above that

Your guys brought up issues of ions past and tried to make it sound nice. I just showed it wasn't really as nice as it was made to sound. That's all. The point is whether its issues of 2000, 1400 or 1 year(s) ago, lets not sweeten the tale.




Nobody says Christ was actually born on December 25. Its a commemorative day that some Christians don't even agree with. What is important is the commemoration which is now globally associated with love, sharing, caring and holidays even among non Christians. To us, every day is Christmas.

Yea, and that "He never even called his followers "Christians"" again. Well, Christ said ""If you love me, you will keep my commandments. " John 14:15, " “Come unto me, all ye that are weary and heavy laden, and I will give you rest.” Matthew 11:28 etc and Christians is Greek for followers of Christ as recorded in the Bible

New Testament Acts 11:26,"...in Antioch the disciples were first called Christians." Acts 26:28 "Do you think that in such a short time you can persuade me to be a Christian?" 1 Peter 4:16, "...if you suffer as a Christian, do not be ashamed, but praise God that you bear that name."

Essentially, the term is used to identify a religious group " followers of Christ". In the true sense, every christian knows the fundamentals of his belief. It is beyond physical. its not just in practices, books or buildings (churches). That why Christians don't blow their tops when these are destroyed. Its your personal relationship with God.

the hour is coming when neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father.... But the hour is coming, and is now here, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father is seeking such people to worship him. God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.” John 4:23-24

Christianity is more than a name Mac.





Again, talk is cheap. You gotta try harder.

Christianity is more than a name yet Jesus never used it.

Jesus (AS) wasn't born on Christmas day, yet you sing: "Mary's born child Jesus Christ was born on Christmas day"!

Church is Separate from State yet Vatican City exists with Pope as Head of State.

Everything has no basis but we should follow abi?

vedaxcool:


Your ignorance is of hyperbolic proportions making you always dodge the issues being discussed, it is clear u were not addressing my post. And funny thing is, this christians lands are always bankrolling dictators who end up supressing everybody just like Mubarack did in Egypt with deliberately stoking inter - religious feuds etc the same christian lands again bankroll the morally bankrupt regime of Isreal which has continued to oppress both muslims and christians and is about making life especially difficult for residents of Bethleham . . . I enjoy seeing you christians always pay lip service to religious freedom.



Ohh! Boy! You too hash oh!

I dodge nothing. Am not the one bringing up the unrelated (like the Vatican, Israel) to the issue of below par religious freedom granted to non-muslims in muslim lands TODAY.

Mubarak ignored cases of intolerance and assaults on non-muslims. Post-Mubarak, religious freedom continue to deteriorate in Egypt-
http://www.humanevents.com/2012/07/30/report-despite-overthrow-of-dictator-egyptian-christians-still-persecuted-and-killed/. Hopefully, it get's better.

The West (especially the US you love to hate) grant far more freedom to muslims than non-muslims get in muslim lands. That is a fact. But I don't expect you to accept it. It's not in your nature to look at things the way they really are. You'd rather go around in circles, and you do so alone, count me out.

maclatunji:

Christianity is more than a name yet Jesus never used it.

Yes Christianity is MORE than just a name. The name is less than what it represents. Its about a relationship with God. And that's what Jesus emphasized in his teachings.

Persecutors of Christians in those early days have coined many other names to call the faithful (including the name Christians). Jesus never used those too. Even Islam calls Christians "People of the Book". Did Jesus use that name? you are free to coin one for your use. Jesus would most likely not have used it. The name you would coin will mean nada, zlitch, putch, nothing!

Jesus (AS) wasn't born on Christmas day, yet you sing: "Mary's born child Jesus Christ was born on Christmas day"!

Children sing "London Bridge is falling down..." is it really falling? Seriously, you didn't read my post about it. Just go through one more time. It wouldn't hurt.


Nobody says Christ was actually born on December 25. Its a commemorative day that some Christians don't even agree with. What is important is the commemoration which is now globally associated with love, sharing, caring and holidays even among non Christians. To us, every day is Christmas.

Church is Separate from State yet Vatican City exists with Pope as Head of State.

Ah hah, now I believe you didnt read my post. This is what I said;

In Christiandom secular authority and religious authority are two different things that ideally seldom mix.

Everything has no basis but we should follow abi?

What are you saying? sweeping statements that carry little content.


See, Oga Maclatunji, you are just rumbling; trying to come up for air. Better brush up your act and return to your old coherent self else I will demote you to division 2 in my league table - meaning you will get ignored!

tiarabubu:


Yes Christianity is MORE than just a name. The name is less than what it represents. Its about a relationship with God. And that's what Jesus emphasized in his teachings.

Persecutors of Christians in those early days have coined many other names to call the faithful (including the name Christians). Jesus never used those too. Even Islam calls Christians "People of the Book". Did Jesus use that name? you are free to coin one for your use. Jesus would most likely not have used it. The name you would coin will mean nada, zlitch, putch, nothing!





Children sing "London Bridge is falling down..." is it really falling? Seriously, you didn't read my post about it. Just go through one more time. It wouldn't hurt.


Nobody says Christ was actually born on December 25. Its a commemorative day that some Christians don't even agree with. What is important is the commemoration which is now globally associated with love, sharing, caring and holidays even among non Christians. To us, every day is Christmas.





Ah hah, now I believe you didnt read my post. This is what I said;

In Christiandom secular authority and religious authority are two different things that ideally seldom mix.





What are you saying? sweeping statements that carry little content.


See, Oga Maclatunji, you are just rumbling; trying to come up for air. Better brush up your act and return to your old coherent self else I will demote you to division 2 in my league table - meaning you will get ignored!

I will let you escape this time because frankly I can't be responding to you on mobile and you obviously can't see the painfully obvious contradictions in your posts.

Without the Catholic Church you wouldn't be here claiming Christianity and the Pope doesn't separate Church from State. I guess you're more Christian than the Pope.

As for Christmas, who are you kidding: Millions of Christians die every year believing in their hearts of hearts he was born on Dec. 25. You don't ever tell the world the date is fake what you conveniently call "commemorative". You've been programmed to accept lies about Christianity and even justify them.

If you guys can't correctly tell the world the correct birthday of Jesus (AS), how can you expect anybody to accept anything else you say about him?

See the recent Jesus (AS) had a wife drama, who do you want us to believe? Or you want to talk about that fake painting that 99% of Christians believe is that of Jesus (AS) which it isn't.

Tiarabubu, when you pray, you actually visualise God as a White man with a white beard when he isn't, I guess that's commemorative too.

How many lies are you going to continually justify? I should be the one ignoring you.

maclatunji:

I will let you escape this time because frankly I can't be responding to you on mobile and you obviously can't see the painfully obvious contradictions in your posts.

Show them

Without the Catholic Church you wouldn't be here claiming Christianity and the Pope doesn't separate Church from State. I guess you're more Christian than the Pope.

Answered in my posts

As for Christmas, who are you kidding: Millions of Christians die every year believing in their hearts of hearts he was born on Dec. 25. You don't ever tell the world the date is fake what you conveniently call "commemorative". You've been programmed to accept lies about Christianity and even justify them.

Google Christmas and millions of websites filled with information comes up. On Christmas day Clerics and ordinary folks say on TV "Its a day we commemorate the birth of Christ". This fact is preached so often. Ask a Christian around you.

If you guys can't correctly tell the world the correct birthday of Jesus (AS), how can you expect anybody to accept anything else you say about him?

What has birthday got to do with your salvation?

See the recent Jesus (AS) had a wife drama, who do you want us to believe? Or you want to talk about that fake painting that 99% of Christians believe is that of Jesus (AS) which it isn't.

Tiarabubu, when you pray, you actually visualise God as a White man with a white beard when he isn't, I guess that's commemorative too.

Believe in our reaction - nothing. If other religious figures were subjected to the same slander Jesus went through, we'd be through World War 10 and counting.

Pictures depicting Christ mean little. His looks in those pictures are dependent on the artists imagination. He lives in our hearts

How many lies are you going to continually justify? I should be the one ignoring you.

Point out the lies.

So far, I have been the only one between us who have used empirical evidence from historians to buttress my points. You are the one making conjectures and broad unsupported statements. Telling isn't it.


Having a beautiful Sunday/week my dear Maclatunji. I am off.

tiarabubu:


I will be the first to agree that the crusaders where just misled and misguided men whose actions were not supported by the religion the claim to profess. If you say that the crusaders went to plunder foreign lands, what say ye of the Muslim invaders who stormed Turkey, Syria, Egypt, Jerusalem, India, China? Did you know that the invasion of India by Muslims, started by Al Muhallab ibn Abi Suffrah in 664 CE during the Umayyad Caliphate, is regarded by some as the worst genocide in human history? Estimates reach up to 20 million people murdered by band of Islamic armies that swept in from the west.

An estimate of the number of people killed, based on the Muslim chronicles and demographic calculations, was done by K.S. Lal in his book Growth of Muslim Population in Medieval India, who claimed that between 1000 CE and 1500 CE, the population of Hindus decreased by 80 million.[b] His work has come under criticism by historians such as Simon Digby (School of Oriental and African Studies) and Irfan Habib for its agenda and lack of accurate data [\b] in pre-census times. Western Historians such as Will Durant contend that Islam spread through violence.[4][7] Sir Jadunath Sarkar contends that that several Muslim invaders were waging a systematic jihad against Hindus in India to the effect that "Every device short of massacre in cold blood was resorted to in order to convert heathen subjects." In particular the records kept by al-Utbi, Mahmud al-Ghazni's secretary, in the Tarikh-i-Yamini document several episodes of bloody military campaigns. Hindus who converted to Islam however were not completely immune to persecution due to the Caste system among South Asian Muslims in India established by Ziauddin al-Barani in the Fatawa-i Jahandari where they were regarded as an "Ajlaf" caste and subjected to discrimination by the "Ashraf" castes

Another blood cuddling invader was called Tīmūr bin Taraghay Barlas, known in the West as Tamerlane or "Timur the lame", or "SWORD Of ALLAH" as he was called. The man kept detailed memoirs of his exploits and the massacre of Hindus, looting plundering and raping of their women and children, and the plunder of the wealth of Greater India. He recorded details of how villages, towns and entire cities were rid of their Hindu male population through systematic mass slaughters and genocide and their women and children forcefully converted en masse to Islam from Hinduism.

In a short space of time all the people in the [New Delhi] fort were put to the sword, and in the course of one hour the heads of 10,000 infidels were cut off. The sword of Islam was washed in the blood of the infidels, and all the goods and effects, the treasure and the grain which for many a long year had been stored in the fort became the spoil of my soldiers. They set fire to the houses and reduced them to ashes, and they razed the buildings and the fort to the ground....All these infidel Hindus were slain, their women and children, and their property and goods became the spoil of the victors. I proclaimed throughout the camp that every man who had infidel prisoners should put them to death, and whoever neglected to do so should himself be executed and his property given to the informer. When this order became known to the ghazis of Islam, they drew their swords and put their prisoners to death Taimur Lane. Turk-i-Taimuri


Timur left Delhi in approximately January 1399. In April he had returned to his own capital beyond the Oxus (Amu Darya). Immense quantities of spoils were taken from India. 90 captured elephants were employed merely to carry precious stones looted from his conquest, so as to to erect a mosque at Samarkand —(what historians today believe is the enormous Bibi-Khanym Mosque) Part Excerps from Ruy González de Clavijo 1859 Narrative of the Embassy of Ruy Gonzalez de Clavijo to the Court of Timour at Samarcand AD 1403-6.

The bold shows that all you posted is nothing more of than emotional polemics aimed at scoring emotional points rather than making factual points that are not based on inaccurate data. We again read thaba post on rules of engagement, and we see that even if the inaccurate nature of your post was to waved we are compelled by common sense to ask why would muslims ignore the prophet pbuh on the rules of war? The most funny aspect of your entire inaccurate data spree is that after 20 million dead, 80 million dead hindus still remained the majority till date, making us wonder whether there is that will to apply wisdom in posting? Or are hindus capable of resusrecting after being dead? Such huge populations that died would have made hindus become a minority in their lands yet that isn't so. We wonder whether you tried analysing what you post? I mean when Christians invaded north america we know for sure the Red Indian population plunged so low that the invaders were able to confine them to Reservations etc or like Slavery severely de-populated the Middle belt of Nigeria (North Central). Your post is symptomatic of what Muslims understand to be unrelenting false propaganda against Islam, which knows the truth but prefers spreading inaccurate data to score points that are low brow indeed!

tiarabubu:

What Lord Lugard thinks is immaterial. Come to think of it, do you know what Lord Luggard thinks of the Muslims? Have you read his memoirs? Its really strong stuff. But I will not digress.

@ bolded. Yes the Jews have suffered serious unjust persecution. But can you show proof of anti semetic rants "from Christian fathers" and also in the present day? I will like to see which "Christian Father" made Jewish anti semitic rants and where anti semitic rants are coming today.

Are the Jews more comfortable with Christians today or Muslims. Are they not the best of "friends" with Iran and co? And of course Christians shout "death to the Jews" everyday. You are interesting.

Indeed Lord Lugard could have called muslims all sort of names, he was a Christian fanatic, that is of limited value coz while one can change his muslim label, you poor black woman would always remain black even if you bleach a millions times when u read where your christian fanatic L Lugard reduces you and your ancestry into nothing more than a glorified animal , who is incapable of reasoning for itself . . . That's deep indeed!

Dodging the issue of Christian Slavery are we? Well point noted . . . On jews in due time I would post the anti - semetic rants of the Christian father, the funny thing is the relegation of christianity to te back doors in the west brought about reduced persecution of Jews, fundamentally Jews suffered great persecution simply because the Christians could not understand why they murdered god . . . Hence though not required to persecute the jews, the thought of a blood soak jews every ester led to the massacre of 100 of 100, 000's and the eventually genocidal elimination of Jews . . . Jews are more confortable with Christians because Christianity has been removed from places of influence within the govt and materialism has gained foothold in the life of most Western society.
Why don't u go and read why Christians got fed up with church playing a role in the governing of the society . . . The answer isn't far from violence and serial manipulation . . .

tiarabubu:

Let us start by the examples of the Islamic invasion of India where millions died. Care to condemn? SHOW ME ONE APOLOGY BY A MUSLIM LEADER FOR THAT!

Lets look at the invasion of Eygpt, Syria, Turkey and Jerusalem. Care to condemn that? Go through my post. I have consistently condemned the Crusades (which Muslims triggered) as not being inline with Christ's teaching. Have you done same? going by the frequency of attacks on non Muslims by Muslims, the condemnation from Muslim leaders should come in torrents! look at the recent Koran burning and that recent dreadful film (Innocence of Muslims) incidents. Presidents, prime Ministers, the Vatican has condemned the action totally. In 2011, Iran burnt 300 Bibles. Where was the condemnation?

Even Pope john Paul said sorry for "the sins of the Church" for 2,000 years of violence and blunders, Show me WHO ( a senior Cleric from the Muslim world) HAS SAID THE SAME? Never again," he said. "We forgive and we ask forgiveness. We are asking pardon for the divisions among Christians, for the use of violence that some have committed in the service of truth, and for attitudes of mistrust and hostility assumed towards followers of other religions." (March 2000, at the Vatican)

Yawns, millions died in india according to inaccurate data No? terror attacks has been condemned by muslims, christians window dress them and call them right wing extremist or he is insane, lol just like you are window dressing the matter being discussed, which is muslim condemn terror attacks done by muslims . . . It would be a fat pity if you cannot address the simple fact that when Christians engage in terrorist attacks against themselves or others it is reduced to something else . . . Evidently you view burning Qur'an as a terror attack which any child would tell you otherwise, I could help but blurt out fits of laughter when I read your post, u really fit te description of Right Wing America . . . Cloud the issues and make counter allegations . . . I am talking of contemporary happenings yet to delude none save yourself you hastily arranged false witness like the in the jews in the time of Jesus . . .

tiarabubu:

Next time read your own post carefully so that you don't shoot yourself in the foot. In YOUR OWN post you were whining about the crusades and slavery and Lord Lugards letter. If you had applied your own words you wouldn't have whined about the crusades and slavery in the first place!

Off course blame me for your deliberate miss-use of common sense, you came whining about Muslims doing this and Muslims doing that. Then we decided to use the same trick on you and see how u would react, and well we saw the best u could say, we are talking Islam not christianity, muslims don't go around peddling allegations against christianity yet whenever we engage you guys we are forced to use your own (in)capability to address matters so that u can all see the futility of engaging in false propaganda, which apparently most of you guys seem to hold masters degree in, hence I only hope u would learn and see reasons why addressing matters must be done in LOGICAL manner but I doubt it whether you would learn as you have shown in this thread, despite being shown the truth of Islam it seems u still prefer following your theories.

@tbaba

Islam will by necessity not tolerate religions and thoughts that undermine its authority, which explains the hostility Muslims had for the Persians and the Hindus/Buddhists. And that explains why the Prophet never tolerated paganism

BetaThings:
So what are Nigerian christians doing in UAE, Malaysia etc
Who tagged Islam dangerous? People who misunderstand it?

Ask yourself, are christians peaceful? Did Muslims start WW1 and WW2? Did they cause Bakassi problem? Who championed apartheid?
Am I to believe that christians hate oppression and violence only if not done by them?

This issue of "what are christians doing in ....." Or the US attacked ....is so lame & gets tiring really.
So if the US meets life in the moon & conquers them....they're propagating christianity there?
These so called people discovered America & more than half of Africa....they dint come there because they were Muslims. They came because they were new lands to conquer.
The US can't owe anyone any apology if they're predominantly christian and all their acts gets termed as a religious conquest.
Islam came as a late comer into the game & can't expect to catch up witha religion that's has been on ground for centuries in one day.
South Africa gained independence when? I'm sure it would be a case of xtian oppresing someone if they were majorly muslims.
This world would be a better place if most people(esp Muslims) realise that countries in the west take decisions secularly & not as a christian nation....and they should be happy that way cos wiping the whole of the Arab world from the face of this planet isn't something that would take a whole year to do if the so called "christian" western states decide to do that.

^Hahahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaa

An example of deciet and lies to further a possition.

This is what talk2xp wrote

talk2xp: Why are [size=14pt]we Christians[/size] such blasphemers? We talk as if our religion is all that we say it is. Let me start from the Pastors and this a facts they are nothing but entrepreneurs, Congregations I just cant say what we are here. A divisional pastor of a popular church were the head pastor "fries" his hair and has a phd messed up the life of a friend of mine that the guy became just a shit. We are not what we say we are so lets stop fooling around. I read a book by G.J.O Moshay and God have mercy all what he wrote. Another is "Islam is of the devil". And I was like WHAT! Seriously the Pastors like I said will not react because if they do, it will become an avenue to loose their mugus "congregation" to the next entrepreneur "Pastor". Some1 was asking why he cant practice Christianity in Saudi Arabia or UAE? My question to him and his kind is; Why cant a Moslem rule the US, Uk or most European countries? Abeg, Abeg, Abeg just stop this blasphemy and get real. Da Vinci or what ever its called is not in the league of some "Christian" assault to Islam. It is a known fact that BH and other terrorist group associated to Islam are nothing but "false flag" some would understand what this term means. And I must add as a student of life and history, the reason why Islam became the fastest spreading religion in the time of Muhammad was not the war but his tolerance and thats a FACT! After they conquered the enemies they moved into the city of Mecca though the Meccans expected a revenge based on the way they treated him and his followers but instead he peacefully entered the city and destroyed only the idols in Kaaba. After that they moved to Syria were they met Jews and Christians and the prophet told his followers not to impose Islam on them but to respect their religion,costitution and way of live. He never saw them as idol worshipers or unbelivers. His extraordinary lifestyle made the religion of Islam the fastest spreading religion even till date and thats a fact even against all the hates.

And of course tbaba1234 was mislead

tbabal234: ^ It is always great to see a christian not blinded by anti-islam sentiments..

Thanks..

However, tbaba see what your "Christian hero" posted in another thread

talk2xp: Have read a whole lot of comments as regards to this post and I realise how BH is turning people from these religion into enemies. But I must say I understand the sentiment and aggression but Islam is not what you call it and a lot of us knows that and we also know that this is all politics. My anger is that Muslim leaders should also be more vocal in condemning this outcast called BH. I know am still going to be lashed out at and I still will understand but I still maintain my stand that Islam is not a religion that kills for people to accept it. I attended a Catholic school and most of my friends are Christian married to a Christian and [size=15pt]am a practicing Muslim[/size]. I understand JIHAD and this not anything synonymous to it. The Prophet (Mohammed) lived with Christians and also had a truce with Idol worshipers. BH and other terrorist groups have painted Islam bad but I say this BH are not Muslims and a man that takes his life or life of innocent people is not considered a Muslim. I halted a documentary on amajiri due to security reason and I understand the extent of the brainwashing. God is love and love is God. https://www.nairaland.com/986505/christians-should-accept-islam-no/8#11406114

You see why what you are being told may not necessarily be the truth? See how someone clearly being deceitfully dishonest has got you clapping. So sad! SMH

Justin Martyr - Dialogue with Trypho (Between 138A.D. and 161 A.D.)

We too, would observe your circumcision of the flesh, your Sabbath days, and in a word, all you festivals, if we were not aware of the reason why they were imposed upon you, namely, because of your sins and the hardness of heart.

The custom of circumcising the flesh, handed down from Abraham, was given to you as a distinguishing mark, to set you off from other nations and from us Christians. The purpose of this was that you and only you might suffer the afflictions that are now justly yours; that only your land be desolated, and you cities ruined by fire, that the fruits of you land be eaten by strangers before your very eyes; that not one of you be permitted to enter your city of Jerusalem. Your circumcision of the flesh is the only mark by which you can certainly be distinguished from other men…as I stated before it was by reason of your sins and the sins of your fathers that, among other precepts, God imposed upon you the observence of the sabbath as a mark.



Origen of Alexandria (185-254 A.D.) – A ecclesiastical writer and teacher who contributed to the early formation of Christian doctrines.

We may thus assert in utter confidence that the Jews will not return to their earlier situation, for they have committed the most abominable of crimes, in forming this conspiracy against the Savior of the human race…hence the city where Jesus suffered was necessarily destroyed, the Jewish nation was driven from its country, and another people was called by God to the blessed election.


http://www.yashanet.com/library/fathers.htm

infolekan:

This issue of "what are christians doing in ....." Or the US attacked ....is so lame & gets tiring really.
So if the US meets life in the moon & conquers them....they're propagating christianity there?
These so called people discovered America & more than half of Africa....they dint come there because they were Muslims. They came because they were new lands to conquer.
The US can't owe anyone any apology if they're predominantly christian and all their acts gets termed as a religious conquest.
Islam came as a late comer into the game & can't expect to catch up witha religion that's has been on ground for centuries in one day.
South Africa gained independence when? I'm sure it would be a case of xtian oppresing someone if they were majorly muslims.
This world would be a better place if most people(esp Muslims) realise that countries in the west take decisions secularly & not as a christian nation....and they should be happy that way cos wiping the whole of the Arab world from the face of this planet isn't something that would take a whole year to do if the so called "christian" western states decide to do that.

It would be useful to read posts with an open mind. It is difficult to understand how your post relate to what I said below. Read it again
1. The question is are all terrorists muslims? And who are terrorists?
Timothy McVeigh (Oklahoma Bombing) was a terrorist - white American - not a muslim
Nelson Mandela was a terrorist in the books of the US until 2008 - not a muslim
The Tamil girl who decapitated Rajiv Gandhi in a suicidal act was part of a terror plot Tamil Tigers - Not a muslim
ETA of Spain is a terror group - not muslims
IRA was partly a religious terror group - not muslims
You can search for more terror groups not associated with Islam

Do christians need a bodyguard of lies against Islam to serenade their religion? Don't these put your favours and grace to question?

2. If Islam is dangerous, should Christians feel comfortable flocking to Muslim countries. Personally as a matter of prudence, I shun savages, not flock to their lands. Are we not missing something?

What is tiring is actually your inability to see the contradiction in your post
3. So Mungo Park discovered River Niger at Segu = So he gave the place an African name after "discovering" it
They discovered Australia, introduced their foreign disease to the aborigines who were left at the mercy of criminals in penal servitude
So these people conquering these new lands are doing so peacefully for the benefit of mankind?
I have no problem with spreading christianity in Mars, but stop the tomfoolery of saying that western countries are not partial towards Christianity.
And why did Hitler, a Christian, murder so many jews? And if e had had his way, not being an Aryan, you would have not been born. H wwould have wiped out your ancestors or you would be a slave. But I reckon that is okay with you

When South Africa was under Christian white dominance, treating blacks like pigs, other western christian countries supported the apartheid regime. Justifying it is an endorsement of slavery

Wiping out Arab and Islam would be interesting. I welcome you and your white masters to the conquest

omartins: Tolerance? When I first heard about a religion call muslim it was tagged ''IMOLE''(dangerous religion). All terrorist are Muslims but not all muslims are terrorist. MUSLIMS BELIEVE ONLY IN VIOLENCE, please leave history alone and lets live in present.

So what are Nigerian christians doing in UAE, Malaysia etc
Who tagged Islam dangerous? People who misunderstand it?

Ask yourself, are christians peaceful? Did Muslims start WW1 and WW2? Did they cause Bakassi problem? Who championed apartheid?
Am I to believe that christians hate oppression and violence only if not done by them?