bari_kade:

It is quite interesting that your quest about "Holy Wars In The Bible" was aimed at bringing. . .

Perhaps something is awry in the stated motive which does not reflect the quest for answers in the stated query. I sue for peace as a believer in Jesus Christ; and if my defence of the Old Testement does not help anyone, it still does not portray Jesus Christ as violent.

My quest is not about "Holy Wars In The Bible" as you've stated. My quest, rather, is to find out why Christians usually base their attacks against Muslims and "their Allah" on the wars they faught against unbelievers, when clearly, the very God we serve also backed up his people in times of war, against the unbelievers of those times. Hence, my desire for a compromise between the two religions since the argument holds no water.

To bring an end to unnecessary disputes between Christians and Muslims.  But honestly, I need someone to clarify these things to me.  I'm really willing to learn and probably have my views changed.

Guys, I just need some clarification on this.

We've read of wars supported by God in the Bible and how God helped his people conquer the unbelievers.  Even God is described as a Man of war in the Bible (Exodus 15:3).  Why then are we Christians so quick to castigate the Muslims based on some Quranic verses that narrate how Holy wars were fought in the times of Muhammad?

Is there something I'm missing?   Heck! I know Jesus came and abolished such acts of war.  He came to preach and establish peace among mankind, and even admonished us to turn the other cheek when wronged.

But this still doesn't change the fact that God supported wars against unbelievers (sure, they classify as unbelievers) - and not forgetting that He's a God that changeth not, the same Yesterday, Today and Forever.  So why then do we constantly use this to attack Muslims when we want to "prove" how "wrong" their religion is?  Or is it because there's no kind of "New Testament" in their Quran that admonishes Muslims not to be revengeful?

Please people, explain things to me , because I'm really sick and tired of seeing us attack each other's religion, trying to prove that one is better than the other.  The fact that we believe in the same God is enough for me to believe that both religions are right, but only see certain things about God differently.  At least, both religions agree and accept that God created Heaven and Earth.

This same issue is what makes Christians call Allah all sorts of names, simply because of His support for war as recorded in the Quran, forgetting that this Allah is the same God we serve, but is being seen differently in some areas by the Muslims.

So, does anyone here care to explain what the matter is, to me?

Hmmm. .  a nice attempt there to make the Muslims appear guilty of war crimes.  But isn't God Himself, a man of war?

Welcome back mlks_baby. Nice to know you're doing fine!

Now, here's my guess:

m4malik is the eldest.

mlks_baby is the 2nd.

shahan is the 3rd.

I do not doubt the fact that people's views and beliefs are being changed over the Internet. Personally, I've had my views changed about certain things from what I read here on Nairaland everyday. But that part you quoted was just a complement to the first paragraph of the whole post.

That is, it's more difficult to convince someone who's belief in Islam, is just as strong as your belief in Christianity; - over the Internet - especially when it's done aggressively.

And as for the "aggressive approach", the Bible verse I provided has stated conspicuously how I meant it.

Last year was very pathetic. In my home, we usually spent about N100,000 per month on diesel alone!

I thank God they improved this year. We've been having light for a minimum of 12 hrs per day, and about 18 - 22 hrs maximum since this year began. But since the beginning of this week (Sunday), it's been a different story entirely. We only have light for like 6 - 10 hrs everyday. Even right now as I type, we're on generator.

I just hope they come back to their senses fast.

Bobbyaf:

I see the point you're making Goodguy. It is so easy to get caught up with religious contention. Do you think there is a way to overcome that problem?

What would it require to be more successful in delivering what one thinks is truth, without offending un-necessarily?

One thing we Christians fail to realise is that, the same way we feel about our religion is exactly the same way the Muslims feel about their religion.  Nothing you say will convince the other party that your own religion is superior, because both parties strongly believe their religion is the best.  The same way a Christian cannot accept claims made by a Muslim against Christianity, a Muslim will never accept claims made by Christians against Islam.

When we're arguing with Muslims, or any others, we should try putting ourselves in their position and try viewing things from their perspective.  Try seeing what makes him/her believe what he/she believes in, and then counter it from that angle.  Everyone has a very strong opinion about what they truly believe in.  We believe in what we believe in, because we believe it is worth believing in, and if anyone now comes from no where to refute that which we strongly believe in, it will be difficult to accept it.  It'll even be more difficult, if that someone refutes our belief aggressively.

And I'll like to say this - You can never win an argument with an aggressive approach.  (Because grievous words stir up anger - Proverbs 15:1)

However, you can only totally convince an unbeliever by your good actions, your good deeds, your good lifestyle, and not just words alone.  Those that were referred to in the Bible quotes provided by Shahan not only convinced whoever was convinced, with their debates/words alone, but with the manner of lives they lived.  It's even more difficult to convince someone over the Internet, because nobody knows anybody, and whatever somebody says cannot just be generally accepted by everybody.

Someone once said, you'll not be remembered for what you said only, but also what you did. -- I guess we can apply this here also.

And yeah, you're right.  We should convey our messages without offending unnecessarily.

Christian:  Jesus is God.

Muslim:  That's a lie!  Prove it!

Christian:  In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God and the word was God (John 1:1).

Muslim:  That's very wrong.  That's blasphemy!  How dare you equate a mere mortal with God?  Infact, your Bible is so full of frauds and lies!

Christian:  Are you so blind that you cannot comprehend simple truths?

Muslim:  What truths?  Those are nothing but lies.  How possible is it for 2 persons to be the same and still refer to one another as Son and Father?

Christian:  You are either simply ignorant or you have a chronic inability to comprehend objective arguments.

Muslim:  Me, ignorant?  I don't blame you.  You lack common sense, retard!

Christian:  Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him (Proverbs 26:4).

Muslim:  Idiot, you just answered me.  That makes you a fool as well!

Christian:  Father forgive them, for they know not what they say.

Muslim:  After calling me a fool?  Good Christian indeed.  Hypocrite!



. . . and the fight debate continues.

We're saying the same thing here.  I know that these verses do not support self-harm.  Easy with the exclamation marks, okay?   Notwithstanding, they still depict that people did something abnormal to themselves to express their remorse for whatever reasons best known to them.

Just like in the Quran also, you will never find verses like, "Thou shalt smite thyselves with rods, and cut thysleves with swords".  Rather, what you'll see are verses like:

"Hadhrath Adam was so distressed that he smashed his hands onto his knees and the skin from his hands caused gashes from which bone could be seen." 

"When Ayesha was defeated and Ali saw the corpses on the ground he began to beat his thighs"

"When Hadhrath Omar heard of Nu'man ibn Muqrin's death he beat his head and screamed, "O what a pity that Nu'man died".

. . . and so on.

So you see, these verses are not enjoining Muslims to engage in self-harm, but are only parts of narrations of some stories.  Some Muslim fanatics now see these and decide to do the same to express their sorrow or remorse, and say, afterall, we've read about some people doing it in the Quran.

Hope you get my point.

davidylan:

Where are these verses in the bible that support self harm in the bible? Maybe i'm reading mine upside down!

That's why I was careful with my use of words there.  This is what I said: "there are verses that seem to support similar self-harming acts also", and I later went on to say:  "they can actually take these verses out of context just to justify their acts".  Note the emboldened words.  As for the Bible verses, they're in the same post you quoted.

mrpataki:

@ goodguy,
Sorry but my point still stands. Hope you aint annoyed any longer

I was never angry in the first place.  I just saw no reason for the stylish insult.


And. .  your point should still not stand.  Read my post again with an open mind, and you'll see where I'm coming from.  Perhaps, if you have any problems with the Islam talk (I know you detest Islam), you could substitute all areas where Islam is mentioned with Hinduism or Buddhism.  My own be say make una try understand wetin I dey tell you.

mrpataki:

(Qur’an, Al-Imran 4:104)
Let there arise out of you a group of people inviting to all that is good (Islam), enjoining Al-Ma’ruf (i.e. Islamic Monotheism and all that Islam calls for) and forbidding Al-Munkar (polytheism and disbelief and all that Islam has forbidden). And it is they who are the successful.

Perhaps, if you could provide a link to the full chapter, we may reason it out from there.  What I've read here does not seem to connect to the issue at hand in any way.

mrpataki:

Now lets try to reason this thing out logically. Those peeps you see in the pictures above flagellating themselves are doing it for their love for Saddam, believed to be a grandson of Muhammad, who is a muslim, and to them it is good!

Imam Hussain is not Saddam Hussein.  Read the first post of the thread starter again, and you'll see that Imam Hussain was the grandson of Prophet Muhammad, who was killed some 1300 years ago.  You can do a google search on him for more info.

mrpataki:

The above verse clearly states that a group of people are invited into doing good, just as they believe Suicide bombings is also doing good, killing the infidels is also doing good, slight beating of their wives is also doing good, and quite a whole lot more of such attrocities.

They are made to believe that in such "doing good" they are seen and regarded as the successful ones. Hope you get my angle of reasoning here.

I don't think this is a correct interpretation of that verse.  Maybe if I read the whole chapter, I'll understand better, but for now, it seems to me that you've taken that verse completely out of context.

However, I will like to say this - perhaps, I was wrong.  Perhaps, it really has something to do with their religion.  But I still believe and maintain that I was not wrong by saying that it should not be conclusively attached to Islam.  It really does not appear Islamic to me.  These group of people flagellating themselves are the Shiites.  They are obviously so fanatical about their religion, that they would do virtually everything recorded in the Quran.  They say it's "Sunnah".

A thorough research has revealed to me that these Shiites actually have Quranic verses that support these self-harming acts.  But the same article reveals that there is another sect of Muslims that do not support this at all -- which brings us back to my first point, and that is, this act should not be outrightly attached to Islam, just because of the fanaticism of a particular sect.  (The article: http://www.answering-ansar.org/answers/azadari/en/chap9.php)

It is also important to note that in the Bible, there are verses that seem to support similar self-harming acts also.  And supposing there are Christians that also flagellate themselves for any reasons best known to them, they can actually take these verses out of context just to justify their acts.  The verses include Isaiah 22:12, Isaiah 32:11, Jeremiah 49:3 and Luke 23:48.

But one very important thing to note here is that Muhammad never commanded it.  The Shiites are only doing this due to their love for Imam Hussain, and are simply using verses in the Quran to justify those acts.  Do not forget that we also find so many similar instances among the Christians too.  They do certain things and use Bible verses to justify their acts.

Nonetheless, my point is, and still remains that: "The fanaticism of a particular sect of a group should not be a basis for the castigation of the whole body to which that sect belongs.  That is entirely the problem of that sect, and theirs alone.  However, if the whole body agrees on, and engages in the same acts, then it is clearly a common pratice of that body, and any approbation or reproval of such acts shall not be faulted in any way."

That is goodguy's theory of . . . (I'll fill it in later ).

mrpataki:

On a lighter note, your name propels a better side of you Segun right?

Better side?  What do you mean?  And yeah, it's Segun .

mrpataki:

@ goodguy,
I have noticed some of your inputs at times, and well we are all entitled to our opinions.

Glad you acknowledge that.

mrpataki:

I guess in your locality, you are seen as a pundit, but on the "www", its not like that!

Keep guessing brother.

mrpataki:

Sorry if you are going to talk, at least add some sound reasoning to your points!

You know, I have also been noticing some of your inputs; and it does appear to me that you really do have a penchant for brawls, especially when it's got something to do with Islam.  I'm pretty sure if I had come here with some inflammatory comments about Islam, I'd have made perfect sense to you and of course, had your brotherly pat on my back.  Thanks for the insult by the way, my "good Christian" brother.

mrpataki:

To what do we attribute this self-inhumane act here that we see here

Good question. 

First and foremost, read the opening line carefully.  You'll see that it only talks about a certain group of Muslims, from God-knows-where, flagellating themselves.  And as I pointed out earlier, we have not heard of anything similar from other Muslims from other parts of the world.  Therefore, I believe common sense should be able to tell us that these certain group of Muslims are the ones taking things too far.  If it was something Muslims all over whole world engaged in, your assertions could have been right.  It's just like saying, because a certain group of Christians in a particular part of the world also flagellate themselves because of the crucifixion of Christ (as in the case of Simon in the Da Vinci Code), then it definitely should be attributed to Christianity.  Or that because trini_girl, as an ardent Christian, believes Premarital sex is not fornication, then it is a generally accepted notion in the Christendom;  - which should not be so.  Get my drift?

mrpataki:

Do you know that, doing such act they are truly showing their love for their religion?

It apparently has nothing to do with their religion, because:

1.  They are not flagellating themselves for God, or any other religious reasons (going by the input of the thread starter).
2.  They are only expressing their sorrow for the death of the grandson of their prophet, which I am 99.9% sure Muhammad would never have asked them to do this way.  You could have been right if you had said they were showing their love for Muhammad's grandson.  That's another thing on its own.
3. This self-harming act is being carried out by a particular group of Muslims, and not the whole Islamic believers all over the world, so it is irrational to conclude that it is a religious or Islamic act.

However, if you honestly believe it has anything to do with their religion, and not just spitting out words prejudicially, can you kindly show me a quote from the Quran, Hadith, or whatever books Muslims read that enjoins that Muslims should mourn deaths this way?  If you can and will show me, then I'll admit openly how wrong I am and accept the corrections subsequently.  Otherwise, I will just take this as another futile attempt to ridicule another's religion for a totally baseless reason.

mrpataki:

Guess you actually may not know any better.

You could enlighten me, you know?  Jesus Christ would never hesitate. 

Once again, thanks for insulting me for my refusal to join the bandwagon.  God bless.

Reminds me of Simon in the Da Vinci Code. And I want to believe there are Christians like him in real life too. You see, there are peeps that are just so fanatical about this religion thingy, so this has got nothing to do with Islam. Afterall, we've not seen or heard of a single muslim here in Nigeria, or even other parts of the world, apart from these group of people mourning this way.

Personally, I wouldn't attribute this 'self-inhumane' acts to their religion at all.

Examples of such informative/educative debates:

* "Should Women Preach?"
* "Christians: Does God's Word Allow Divorce or Not?"
* "Is Elijah John The Baptist?"

These are just a few among many others.  You'll see that on topics like these, people argue and argue, but at the end of the day, we all gain something.

Hope you get my point.

What da. . ?


mrpataki, I'm pretty sure Muhammad never asked them to mourn the death of anyone this way, so I believe this has got little or nothing to do with their religion.  Some peeps are just fanatically barbaric.

Well, it all depends on the kind of religious debate you're referring to here.

Religious debates that tend to educative and informative should not be discouraged at all. Personally, I have gained a lot from such religious debates, and I am pretty sure Jesus Christ won't get angry with me for participating in them.

But when the debate (more like fight) is tending to a Christianity vs Islam thingy, my hand no dey o. Those are the kinds of debates me thinks should be stopped.

oh okay.

Actually, another thing I find annoying about PE5 is the officiating. The refree blows the whistle at the slightest tackle. It's even more annoying when you're losing.

ThiefOfHearts:

and i wonder why goodguy now believes he was generalizing.

I still don't believe I was generalising.  I only 'accepted' for the sake of argument.

mamaput, you see? Thanks for being honest anyway.

ThiefOfHearts:

I will still attack this post

Madam, you've been attacking the poster, not the post.

ThiefOfHearts:

because you are still saying the same thing I'm against but I'm not in the mood anymore to make you see my point so im going to let it slide

You know I am saying the truth.  Don't worry, you have have to admit it openly, okay?

ThiefOfHearts:

as for your last comment, I will respond to whomever I feel like responding to.

Respond to whomever you feel like responding to -- I have no problems with that at all.  But when your rejoinders begin to have elements of insults in them, then something needs to be done about that.

ThiefOfHearts:

If they are quick to be offended by my responses then they should stay away from me and my posts and quit complaining constantly like it's going to chnage anything because it's not

Don't be stiff-necked.  Change! Change Toyin!  Change!!  This attitude of yours will get you no where, I dey tell you.  When your responses are so full of insults, or contain a bit of it, how do expect people not to take offence in it?  How will you feel if I constantly use all the synonyms of "mad" to refer to you simply because I do not agree with you?  Think again girl, because THAT is what YOU do 98% of the time.

mamaput:

But Good guy you too are generalizing.
We have a lot of house men today.
And there are also many cases were the woman has more money than the man.

Okay mamaput, I accept I was generalising. And thanks for enlightening me. But I believe those women are not totally comfortable with that idea themselves. Somehow, somewhere, they feel odd -- even if they don't let it out, deep down inside them, only them know what's going on.

Now, this is what I call a civil response. Even though she disagrees, she didn't insult me. ToH, learn from mamaput!

ThiefOfHearts:

BTW there's a difference between being up to standard and depending on a person entirely for their money. There's a HUGE difference between a girl deciding to date guys who have a JOB like she does and someone who just picks men based on how much they can shower her.

You're only confirming what I said earlier.  If you were not so quick to attack goodguy's post, you'd have seen where he was coming from.

I did not imply in anyway that women depend totally on men for money.  What I mean is, every woman believes and expects that the man should always do more of the spending, and that they will only support where/when necessary.

ThiefOfHearts:

So please comot yourself with your dumb generalization. Rationalize it all you want but your comment is no better than michelin's so don't bother me

Na real 'wah' for you! O really ga lara e gan. I don't blame you at all. It's in your blood.

ThiefOfHearts:

and if my comments are too "mean" and bother you so much, you could always ignore me 

Actually, it should be this:  If you know you cannot but insult people for posting their opinions, why don't you just refrain from responding to them?

Errmm, mamaput, that does not sound like 'judging' to me.

ThiefOfHearts:

Are you not the same gnat that complained about stereotyping?

Layifioren is totally right about you.  Can't you just pass a comment without even an iota of insult in it?  On every single thread you post, you must insult at least one person.  Na wa for you o!  Besides, you can't tell me that statement is not right about all women.  All women want their men to be "man enough", and the only major way that is determined is how loaded he is.  I am pretty sure you can not go out with, talkess of marry a man who is not "up to your standard" or higher.

I am not stereotyping.  That is a FACT!

Welcome back.

All these ladies sef!

When it comes to submission, they're all quick to shout "Hell no!", and that's when they remember that they are "strong independent women".  But when it comes to money spending, they're so quick to shout that it is a man's responsibility, and that they are only there to "support" (funny how they lower themselves this time around ), and any man who won't stand up to his responsibilities is an asshole that isn't worth being with at all; and they totally forget in this case that they are "strong independent women".


@babyosisi, me I like you o jare!  Please keep up the good spirit.

segoye22, thanks for that post.

georgecso:

Nobody is attacking islam. But if you feel attacked well they created the room for that. There is no compulsion in faith but there should be FREEDOM to voice out what you think and feel.
Brother, Islam should not feel attacked because Christainity too has been under consistent attack for long by the so called architechs of the world.
Thanks

And while you're enjoying the FREEDOM to voice out what you feel and think, you should not use that as an avenue to disparage other people's religion. By implying that the way someone prays to God is "insane", it is very conspicuous that you're attacking them.

georgecso:

we should be free to talk about the "dark areas" of any religion even if their is any.

From the underlined part of your statement, it's obvious even you are not sure if there are "dark areas". Why then are you raising dust over nothing?

Alright. I'll see if I can also lay my hands on the PE6.

ope_emi:

Lol.  Copy copy.

mazaje:

is God on the mountain top as we see some chirstains going to mountain tops to pary to God r is he by the riverside where as we see some christain going to the river side to worship.

As I said earlier, where ever anyone chooses to pray to God should not be of concern to anybody.  God is everywhere.  If I feel it necessary to go to the top of a skyscraper to pray to God, I should not be condemned for that.

mazaje:

serve your God and allow others to serve theirs, how do u know that christainity is way and islam is not? all i know is that there is truth in every religion and u don't know anything so u have no right to tell which is right or wrong do urs and allow other to do theirs

Those are my sentiments exactly.  Everyone should serve God which ever way they want to.  The most important thing is that you serve Him and Him alone.  We may find other people's modes of worship preposterous, but God does not.  So what's the fuss all about?

I like WE108 'cozz the players move and run faster. PE5 is kinda slow and I hate it when I have to exert so much force on the pad, forgetting that won't change anything.

As for the female soccer, I heard from a friend.