Total Posts:64|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Islam Promotes Peace?

Yassine
Posts: 2,617
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2015 8:47:09 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
- Currently debating the Topic with @64bithuman:

* http://www.debate.org...

- This is a question directed at those who either studied the religion as a major/minor in Islamic Studies or learned it from muslim sources:

=> Does Islam Promote Peace?
Current Debates:

Islam is not a religion of peace vs. @ Lutonator:
* http://www.debate.org...
celestialtorahteacher
Posts: 1,369
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2015 2:08:08 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/27/2015 8:47:09 PM, Yassine wrote:
- Currently debating the Topic with @64bithuman:

* http://www.debate.org...

- This is a question directed at those who either studied the religion as a major/minor in Islamic Studies or learned it from muslim sources:

=> Does Islam Promote Peace?

This a joke, right? "Islam Promotes Peace"..
celestialtorahteacher
Posts: 1,369
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2015 8:12:02 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Ahmadiyyah Islam promotes peace. Yassine's joke of a religion is a manual for suicide bombers and head-choppers, people with no respect for human life, only respect for idols, dead men, paper and ink books.
Yassine
Posts: 2,617
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2015 9:52:51 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/29/2015 8:12:02 AM, celestialtorahteacher wrote:
Ahmadiyyah Islam promotes peace. Yassine's joke of a religion is a manual for suicide bombers and head-choppers, people with no respect for human life, only respect for idols, dead men, paper and ink books.

- Please stop spamming all my posts. :)
Current Debates:

Islam is not a religion of peace vs. @ Lutonator:
* http://www.debate.org...
celestialtorahteacher
Posts: 1,369
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2015 11:11:17 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I'm not spamming but Criticizing your proselytizing of a totalitarian fascist ideology that has no place for moral people who care about human life. Stop proselytizing fascism and you won't get any complaints from me. And you're jealous of Ahmadiyyahs because they actually do have a real religion of peace. They are Muslims. You are a Muhammadan idol worshiper. Muslims know and honor surrendering to God as Peace. Your types don't know what the root of "Islam" is as you think it means "surrender to God" only. Nope. The "salaam, shalom, peace" is right there in the name of God as Peace. Without surrendering to God as Peace you surrender your mind to a war-monger and mere human being making all sorts of claims as if he never understood his opinions are just one man's opinions. None of you Muhammadan idol worshipers understand this--that no man can tell another what to do, how to think, how to act, if they both respect God and humanity. To give absolute authority to a dead man is not only insane logically it is immoral and insults God who doesn't need any single human being to be raised up to God worship level to reach and teach humanity.
sadolite
Posts: 8,842
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2015 11:15:55 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/27/2015 8:47:09 PM, Yassine wrote:
- Currently debating the Topic with @64bithuman:

* http://www.debate.org...

- This is a question directed at those who either studied the religion as a major/minor in Islamic Studies or learned it from muslim sources:

=> Does Islam Promote Peace?

Why does one have to study Islam in an academic setting to see if Islam promotes peace? You can just as easily "look out side your front door" so to speak, and get a pretty good idea if it does or not. I trust what I actually see and hear more than what an academic in a classroom says.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
Dazz
Posts: 1,163
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/30/2015 5:02:08 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/29/2015 11:15:55 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 5/27/2015 8:47:09 PM, Yassine wrote:
- Currently debating the Topic with @64bithuman:

* http://www.debate.org...

- This is a question directed at those who either studied the religion as a major/minor in Islamic Studies or learned it from muslim sources:

=> Does Islam Promote Peace?

Why does one have to study Islam in an academic setting to see if Islam promotes peace? You can just as easily "look out side your front door" so to speak, and get a pretty good idea if it does or not. I trust what I actually see and hear more than what an academic in a classroom says.

Academic setting doesn't mean to be literary in a classroom. But essential is to have at least know how & access to the actual content of the subject, over which you base your opinion or view. if you reside more over the hearing than the academic sources then very little you've about the topic to discuss over.
Remove the "I want", remainder is the "peace". ~Al-Ghazali~
"This time will also pass", a dose to cure both; the excitement & the grievance. ~Ayaz~
celestialtorahteacher
Posts: 1,369
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/30/2015 6:43:24 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
We really don't need to go into the details of fascist totalitarian ideology in religious form to know it's bad for any society based on democracy and protection of human rights. Why would we want to study Nazism or Communism now as if these were legitimate ideologies for consideration. Muhammadism is just like these other fascist ideologies, except where they posited their Supreme Leaders, Muhammadans put up Muhammad's ghost to do that job, and all the clones and toadies who agree with Muhammad's ghost ideas which are over a thousand years out of date with social reality.

Like I say, Muhammadans claiming their Islam promotes peace, well, that's just a sick joke as anyone who turns on their TV News any day of the week can see for themselves.
celestialtorahteacher
Posts: 1,369
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/30/2015 6:55:38 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Muhammadism is the religion of suicide bombers and hackers of heads of people who don't want to become Muhammad clones or who just belong to the Other Muslim team as if God wanted people to wear religious uniforms for choosing sides in religious warfare. Muhammadans will and do kill each other when there's no non-Muslim targets available. Muhammadism spawns blood-thirst and promotes rage where reasoned emotional response is required so that it easily becomes a tool for mob violence as there are no democratic back ups in Muhammadan society for protecting dissident views, it's run like gangsters run their gangs, through violence and intimidation and elimination of rivals through violent acts. That's what all the suicide bombings are about: intimidation of rivals for political power and all of stemming from Muhammadan believers refusing to learn about the democracy and human rights movements and why they have occurred and why they are so important for modern social organization and government.

Only the Ahmadiyyah Muslims deserve the title of being Muslims. Shiites and Sunni are Muhammadan idol worshipers and dangerous to democratic societies as were other fascist totalitarian ideologies desiring to rob citizens of their freedoms.
sadolite
Posts: 8,842
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/30/2015 8:56:54 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/30/2015 6:43:24 AM, celestialtorahteacher wrote:
We really don't need to go into the details of fascist totalitarian ideology in religious form to know it's bad for any society based on democracy and protection of human rights. Why would we want to study Nazism or Communism now as if these were legitimate ideologies for consideration. Muhammadism is just like these other fascist ideologies, except where they posited their Supreme Leaders, Muhammadans put up Muhammad's ghost to do that job, and all the clones and toadies who agree with Muhammad's ghost ideas which are over a thousand years out of date with social reality.

Like I say, Muhammadans claiming their Islam promotes peace, well, that's just a sick joke as anyone who turns on their TV News any day of the week can see for themselves.

Interesting, that's what I see when I look outside my front door.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
WAM
Posts: 139
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/30/2015 2:06:53 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
This goes mainly for celestialtorahteacher:
First of all, it is called Muhammadanism, or you could just call it Islam.
Second, as you stated "Muhammadism is the religion of suicide bombers". As you are correct in saying that a majority of suicide bombings have some connection to Islam, namely the bombers defining themselves as Muslims, this statement might be somewhat correct, the reasons for you stating it however are extremely wrong. Furthermore I want to elaborate that I am not debating if Islam is a religion of peace, it is not, just like any other religion. I simply want to debunk your biased and bigoted views as to Muslim religion and suicide bombers.
1.) In stating that 'Islam is the religion of suicide bombers' you indirectly imply that all or a grand amount of Muslims are suicide bombers.
I will debunk this using simple maths.
' https://www.iraqbodycount.org... ' states that, Islam being the 95% majority of Iraq, there were around 1000 suicide bombings in Iraq from 2003-2010, that caused civilian casualties, stating around 12000 casualties. http://www.statista.com... ' concludes a number of around 29000 deaths by suicide bombers and car bombs from 2003-2010, rendering a number of around 12000 likely.
On average this means each suicide bomber has around 12 victims that die and many more injured.
Would Islam, as stated, be 'the religion of suicide bombers' we could assume that all or a majority of followers commit to suicide bombing. Islam having 1.6 billion followers and assuming they would all commit to suicide bombings and taking the number of average casualties into conclusion (12 per suicide bombing), the entire world population would have been wiped out by Islamic suicide bombers by now. Even if only 1% of Muslims (16 million) would commit suicide bombings and even if they 'only' had 5 victim casualties each, this would conclude to a casualty count of 80 Million. The current amount of Humans dying each year is assumed to be around 56 million, a number far less than the number caused by 1% of Muslims in this scenario. Injury caused 9% of death, about 5 million. If all injury related death was caused by Muslims through suicide bombings and we calculate that they take 2 victims with them and we don't count them towards the injury death (the suicide bombers) we need 2.5 million followers killing them self, a mere 0.15% of Muslims. Even if this was the case, a number of 0.15% does not statistically prove the statement that "Muhammadism is the religion of suicide bombers". Not even if these numbers are put up against the 7 years of statistics that gained this evidence will the number be more than 1%. So your statement is factually incorrect, as under 1% is not a % calculation that can be taken serious into account.

2.)"Muhammadans will and do kill each other when there's no non-Muslim targets available", this statement might be correct, in this context as well as Catholic and Protestant in the 30 years War, although that in the setting of Iraq Western Targets were available and being targeted but still resulting in a whopping 12,284 vs. 200 Casualty rate between Civilians and Soldiers, proving this statement to be somewhat inaccurate as well. Also looking at Indonesia, the country with the majority of Muslims, has had around 6 suicide bombings in the 9 years from 2002-2011, all directed against westerners. Also it seems like there is no evidence of them killing each other in extraordinary cases, other than usual homicide and so, proving the statement incorrect even further.

Seeing this it seems like Muslim population should be decreasing drastically due to suicide bombers in the act of suicide bombing being killed by suicide bombers by suicide bombers, thus decreasing the Islamic population rapidly. This projection seems to be incorrect, as Islam is increasing by 2.2% annually.

Oh and also, calling anyone a "Muhammadan" as an insult seems quite stupid, as Muhammad is considered the final prophet and founder of Islam, meaning Ahmadiyya are Mohammedan, especially because Ahmadiyya belief is that Islam is the final dispensation for humanity as revealed to Muhammad.

Just to make this clear, I am not defending Islam nor any other religion, the sole reason for this rant is to the shocking Latency of ridiculous claims and statements being made about any subject, without proof nor actual justification, whether it be on TV, stated in Newspaper or on the Internet. I have the feeling that stupidity is literally jumping at me when I am reading or watching certain Statements, and I am not talking about DDO in general Terms.
celestialtorahteacher
Posts: 1,369
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/30/2015 10:47:40 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Any chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Muhammadism has extreme violence to human life and human rights as its weakest link. How do we know? The world news tells us so, and like I said, it tells this each and every day with news of Muhammadans blowing up each other at religious service, no respect whatsoever for anything but political loyalty as human life is routinely sacrificed to paper and ink idol worship. Yes, Christians certainly did behave every bit as religious and violently insane as modern radical Muhammadans but they got corralled in from religious totalitarianism by the secular democracy movement and that same fate awaits Muhammadans as Sharia Law is only popular with Muhammadans, no one else willing to lose their freedoms so easily.

There will be an Islamic Reformation but it will be led by Muslim women who are the primary victims of Muhammadism's all male domination of society plan. Muslim men can find the Ahmadiyyah alternative but only if willing to play a mental game with Muhammad's doctrines--the game of forgiving Muhammad for being violent and ignoring his violent teachings while focusing on the good things he had to say. Honesty in religious beliefs compels distancing from all forms of Muhammadism but I do respect Ahmadiyyah Muslims who do practice a religion of peace and are most excellent neighbors in any society.
WAM
Posts: 139
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2015 9:34:41 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I will not argue what the 'world news' tell us, as we all know how non biased and truthful they always are.

I will explain the definition of 'Muhammadism' , correctly spelled Muhammadanism to you again as you seemingly have not understood it. It defines a follower of Muhammad, him being the supposed founder of Islam, which would indirectly make all Muslims Muhammadans. If you want to make a non-self contradicting claim simply state that, for example that Sunni's are less peaceful than your seemingly oh so perfect Ahmadiyyah Muslims. But do not state that Muslims are not peaceful but (Ahmadiyyah) Muslims are.

"There will be an Islamic Reformation but it will be led by Muslim women who are the primary victims of Muhammadism's all male domination of society plan."
Again an extremely incorrect claim, to your information Muslim countries have had more female leaders than the USA. Just to state this too, Indonesia, the country with the highest Muslim population, had, from 2001 to 2004 a female president. Even Afghanistan, being under Taliban rule previously, had females running for president, a female vice president and other females in important political places.
Dazz
Posts: 1,163
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2015 1:02:33 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/31/2015 9:34:41 AM, WAM wrote:
I will not argue what the 'world news' tell us, as we all know how non biased and truthful they always are.

I will explain the definition of 'Muhammadism' , correctly spelled Muhammadanism to you again as you seemingly have not understood it. It defines a follower of Muhammad, him being the supposed founder of Islam, which would indirectly make all Muslims Muhammadans. If you want to make a non-self contradicting claim simply state that, for example that Sunni's are less peaceful than your seemingly oh so perfect Ahmadiyyah Muslims. But do not state that Muslims are not peaceful but (Ahmadiyyah) Muslims are.
Ahmadiyyas aren't muslims, no matter how long they claimed to be so. Because to become a Muslim, Islam requires to accept the 2 basic pillars of faith; first is to accept the ALLAH Almighty as the only one worthy to be worshiped and second part is to accept Prophet Muhammad [peace & blessings be upon him] as the [final] messenger. The leader of Ahmadiyya community, Mirza Gulam Ahmad Qadiani [ in a town of Qadian- India in the last century], claimed to be a the promised Imam/leader first & then claimed to be prophet [some deny his blunt claim & call him revivalist instead but his prophecy-claim is saved in the records which he hadn't repented]. Thus by definition, he & his followers are out of Islam [as depicted by their little population also, they'd say they're 2 Million but only on the website actually, by the commercial done by people like calestailtorahteacher etc]. But now, why they claim to be Muslim if they by-themselves deny the very basic pillar of Islamic belief? Answer is this community is not the only one in the realm of this propaganda, there are other distracted ones too working on their false agenda to somehow uproot the love of Prophet from the hearts of Muslims [which is totally impossible to do as long as you stick on the definition of a Muslim being]. The supporting reasoning to my view is, check out who supports such communities like of Ahmaddiya? Muslims don't even consider them to be muslim because they clearly reject the final seal of Prophecy [though implicitly, as if they reject explicitly, how would they deceive others about their label of being a "muslim"?].

Anyhow according to a Hadees [saying of Prophet peace & blessing be upon him] it has to happen before the resurrection day, that is known as fitna-e-dajjal, there would be a list of people claiming to be a prophet. Some of them have claimed so [the very first one appeared in the period of first Caliph far ago], some are coming [like in the current days, new Ahmadiyyas have prepared to publish another prophethood claim, nothing astonishing].

Finally Ahmadiyya isn't a sect as it don't encompass the basic belief of Islam. Thus celetialtorahteacher's persistent & irrelevant support to ahmadiyyas shows it's either trolling or a propaganda. Secondly even if he likes them very much why he's much keen to call them Muslim or a Muslim sect, why not to name it as a different religion like say just ahmadiyyas? To be a sect, sect has to at least accept the basic tenets of Islam, which neither ahmadiyyas accept as explicit by their founders' teachings& writings, nor the celestailtorahteacher is able prove it a sect. Because if he'd go to prove Ahmadiyyas a sect of Islam, he & Ahmadiyyas both would have to accept the Founder Prophet of Islam, which they both don't accept. So yes, you questioned him rightly, where he is unable to answer, no doubt. Thanks for your detailed & valid contribution.

"There will be an Islamic Reformation but it will be led by Muslim women who are the primary victims of Muhammadism's all male domination of society plan."
Again an extremely incorrect claim, to your information Muslim countries have had more female leaders than the USA. Just to state this too, Indonesia, the country with the highest Muslim population, had, from 2001 to 2004 a female president. Even Afghanistan, being under Taliban rule previously, had females running for president, a female vice president and other females in important political places.
Remove the "I want", remainder is the "peace". ~Al-Ghazali~
"This time will also pass", a dose to cure both; the excitement & the grievance. ~Ayaz~
WAM
Posts: 139
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2015 1:49:13 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Dazz, thanks for your great insight. I'm not very versed in religious studies, but for your information I think I remember reading about Ahmadiyyas statistically having the highest increase of followers per annum in the 'Muslim' Religion. But just to be clear, I was not trying to state that Ahmadiyyas are Muslim, as I already had the feeling that something was a little off about them while briefly breezing over their history, but was merely trying to show the ridicule in the statement made by celestialtorahteacher.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,641
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2015 1:54:39 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/31/2015 1:02:33 PM, Dazz wrote:
At 5/31/2015 9:34:41 AM, WAM wrote:
I will not argue what the 'world news' tell us, as we all know how non biased and truthful they always are.

I will explain the definition of 'Muhammadism' , correctly spelled Muhammadanism to you again as you seemingly have not understood it. It defines a follower of Muhammad, him being the supposed founder of Islam, which would indirectly make all Muslims Muhammadans. If you want to make a non-self contradicting claim simply state that, for example that Sunni's are less peaceful than your seemingly oh so perfect Ahmadiyyah Muslims. But do not state that Muslims are not peaceful but (Ahmadiyyah) Muslims are.
Ahmadiyyas aren't muslims, no matter how long they claimed to be so. Because to become a Muslim, Islam requires to accept the 2 basic pillars of faith; first is to accept the ALLAH Almighty as the only one worthy to be worshiped and second part is to accept Prophet Muhammad [peace & blessings be upon him] as the [final] messenger. The leader of Ahmadiyya community, Mirza Gulam Ahmad Qadiani [ in a town of Qadian- India in the last century], claimed to be a the promised Imam/leader first & then claimed to be prophet [some deny his blunt claim & call him revivalist instead but his prophecy-claim is saved in the records which he hadn't repented]. Thus by definition, he & his followers are out of Islam [as depicted by their little population also, they'd say they're 2 Million but only on the website actually, by the commercial done by people like calestailtorahteacher etc]. But now, why they claim to be Muslim if they by-themselves deny the very basic pillar of Islamic belief? Answer is this community is not the only one in the realm of this propaganda, there are other distracted ones too working on their false agenda to somehow uproot the love of Prophet from the hearts of Muslims [which is totally impossible to do as long as you stick on the definition of a Muslim being]. The supporting reasoning to my view is, check out who supports such communities like of Ahmaddiya? Muslims don't even consider them to be muslim because they clearly reject the final seal of Prophecy [though implicitly, as if they reject explicitly, how would they deceive others about their label of being a "muslim"?].

Anyhow according to a Hadees [saying of Prophet peace & blessing be upon him] it has to happen before the resurrection day, that is known as fitna-e-dajjal, there would be a list of people claiming to be a prophet. Some of them have claimed so [the very first one appeared in the period of first Caliph far ago], some are coming [like in the current days, new Ahmadiyyas have prepared to publish another prophethood claim, nothing astonishing].

Finally Ahmadiyya isn't a sect as it don't encompass the basic belief of Islam. Thus celetialtorahteacher's persistent & irrelevant support to ahmadiyyas shows it's either trolling or a propaganda. Secondly even if he likes them very much why he's much keen to call them Muslim or a Muslim sect, why not to name it as a different religion like say just ahmadiyyas? To be a sect, sect has to at least accept the basic tenets of Islam, which neither ahmadiyyas accept as explicit by their founders' teachings& writings, nor the celestailtorahteacher is able prove it a sect. Because if he'd go to prove Ahmadiyyas a sect of Islam, he & Ahmadiyyas both would have to accept the Founder Prophet of Islam, which they both don't accept. So yes, you questioned him rightly, where he is unable to answer, no doubt. Thanks for your detailed & valid contribution.

"There will be an Islamic Reformation but it will be led by Muslim women who are the primary victims of Muhammadism's all male domination of society plan."
Again an extremely incorrect claim, to your information Muslim countries have had more female leaders than the USA. Just to state this too, Indonesia, the country with the highest Muslim population, had, from 2001 to 2004 a female president. Even Afghanistan, being under Taliban rule previously, had females running for president, a female vice president and other females in important political places.

That is an excellent example of the No True Scotsman fallacy. Well done.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
Dazz
Posts: 1,163
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 1:32:38 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/31/2015 1:54:39 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 5/31/2015 1:02:33 PM, Dazz wrote:
At 5/31/2015 9:34:41 AM, WAM wrote:
I will not argue what the 'world news' tell us, as we all know how non biased and truthful they always are.

I will explain the definition of 'Muhammadism' , correctly spelled Muhammadanism to you again as you seemingly have not understood it. It defines a follower of Muhammad, him being the supposed founder of Islam, which would indirectly make all Muslims Muhammadans. If you want to make a non-self contradicting claim simply state that, for example that Sunni's are less peaceful than your seemingly oh so perfect Ahmadiyyah Muslims. But do not state that Muslims are not peaceful but (Ahmadiyyah) Muslims are.
Ahmadiyyas aren't muslims, no matter how long they claimed to be so. Because to become a Muslim, Islam requires to accept the 2 basic pillars of faith; first is to accept the ALLAH Almighty as the only one worthy to be worshiped and second part is to accept Prophet Muhammad [peace & blessings be upon him] as the [final] messenger. The leader of Ahmadiyya community, Mirza Gulam Ahmad Qadiani [ in a town of Qadian- India in the last century], claimed to be a the promised Imam/leader first & then claimed to be prophet [some deny his blunt claim & call him revivalist instead but his prophecy-claim is saved in the records which he hadn't repented]. Thus by definition, he & his followers are out of Islam [as depicted by their little population also, they'd say they're 2 Million but only on the website actually, by the commercial done by people like calestailtorahteacher etc]. But now, why they claim to be Muslim if they by-themselves deny the very basic pillar of Islamic belief? Answer is this community is not the only one in the realm of this propaganda, there are other distracted ones too working on their false agenda to somehow uproot the love of Prophet from the hearts of Muslims [which is totally impossible to do as long as you stick on the definition of a Muslim being]. The supporting reasoning to my view is, check out who supports such communities like of Ahmaddiya? Muslims don't even consider them to be muslim because they clearly reject the final seal of Prophecy [though implicitly, as if they reject explicitly, how would they deceive others about their label of being a "muslim"?].

Anyhow according to a Hadees [saying of Prophet peace & blessing be upon him] it has to happen before the resurrection day, that is known as fitna-e-dajjal, there would be a list of people claiming to be a prophet. Some of them have claimed so [the very first one appeared in the period of first Caliph far ago], some are coming [like in the current days, new Ahmadiyyas have prepared to publish another prophethood claim, nothing astonishing].

Finally Ahmadiyya isn't a sect as it don't encompass the basic belief of Islam. Thus celetialtorahteacher's persistent & irrelevant support to ahmadiyyas shows it's either trolling or a propaganda. Secondly even if he likes them very much why he's much keen to call them Muslim or a Muslim sect, why not to name it as a different religion like say just ahmadiyyas? To be a sect, sect has to at least accept the basic tenets of Islam, which neither ahmadiyyas accept as explicit by their founders' teachings& writings, nor the celestailtorahteacher is able prove it a sect. Because if he'd go to prove Ahmadiyyas a sect of Islam, he & Ahmadiyyas both would have to accept the Founder Prophet of Islam, which they both don't accept. So yes, you questioned him rightly, where he is unable to answer, no doubt. Thanks for your detailed & valid contribution.

"There will be an Islamic Reformation but it will be led by Muslim women who are the primary victims of Muhammadism's all male domination of society plan."
Again an extremely incorrect claim, to your information Muslim countries have had more female leaders than the USA. Just to state this too, Indonesia, the country with the highest Muslim population, had, from 2001 to 2004 a female president. Even Afghanistan, being under Taliban rule previously, had females running for president, a female vice president and other females in important political places.

That is an excellent example of the No True Scotsman fallacy. Well done.
I've observed, this is your usual attitude to assert your opinions. Show some mature responsibility to validate your claim before you put them here as your conclusion. Otherwise, without the reasoning, no one is gonna entertain you by one's time & replies. Thanks.
Remove the "I want", remainder is the "peace". ~Al-Ghazali~
"This time will also pass", a dose to cure both; the excitement & the grievance. ~Ayaz~
WAM
Posts: 139
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 5:26:07 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
" No True Scotsman fallacy". Really? This is not the same at all. Dazz provide more or less evidence that will be taken as the closest thing to fact, as long as you cannot disprove or contradict it. Religious fellowship might be nothing less than a self identification, but should I state that I am a Christian even though I do not believe what Christianity preaches? No, because that statement makes no sense. Religious followers have to believe in the general faith or have their own interpretation according to the fundamentals of the Religion they follow, otherwise they just create their own Religion and as such should not be able to call themselves Followers of XY Religion if they are not. Then they could say that 'my religion is based on XY' but not 'I follow XY'.

On the other hand I wont prove or disprove that Dazz is correct with his claims as I have no desire to look into it and will just believe him in the Statement that Ahmadiyya are not Muslim, based on the fact that traditional Islam generally does not consider Ahmadiyya to be Muslim, not on what he provided. One thing that I can tell him though is that the number of 2 million Ahmadiyya is certainly incorrect. They state that they have 'tens of million' as their members, although estimates are in the region of 10-20 million.
Legendary_Houp
Posts: 56
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 6:28:32 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Quran 9:5 "And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful."

Quran 2:191 "And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter... and fight them until fitnah is no more, and religion is for Allah."

You just have to read it!
celestialtorahteacher
Posts: 1,369
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 7:00:24 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/31/2015 9:34:41 AM, WAM wrote:
I will not argue what the 'world news' tell us, as we all know how non biased and truthful they always are.

I will explain the definition of 'Muhammadism' , correctly spelled Muhammadanism to you again as you seemingly have not understood it. It defines a follower of Muhammad, him being the supposed founder of Islam, which would indirectly make all Muslims Muhammadans. If you want to make a non-self contradicting claim simply state that, for example that Sunni's are less peaceful than your seemingly oh so perfect Ahmadiyyah Muslims. But do not state that Muslims are not peaceful but (Ahmadiyyah) Muslims are.

"There will be an Islamic Reformation but it will be led by Muslim women who are the primary victims of Muhammadism's all male domination of society plan."
Again an extremely incorrect claim, to your information Muslim countries have had more female leaders than the USA. Just to state this too, Indonesia, the country with the highest Muslim population, had, from 2001 to 2004 a female president. Even Afghanistan, being under Taliban rule previously, had females running for president, a female vice president and other females in important political places.

That's good, for Indonesia and one notes so far Indonesian Muslims aren't going to other countries or at home blowing other Muslims and non-Muslims up. I told you it will be Muslim women who bring in the coming Islamic Reformation.
celestialtorahteacher
Posts: 1,369
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 7:06:43 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/31/2015 1:02:33 PM, Dazz wrote:
At 5/31/2015 9:34:41 AM, WAM wrote:
I will not argue what the 'world news' tell us, as we all know how non biased and truthful they always are.

I will explain the definition of 'Muhammadism' , correctly spelled Muhammadanism to you again as you seemingly have not understood it. It defines a follower of Muhammad, him being the supposed founder of Islam, which would indirectly make all Muslims Muhammadans. If you want to make a non-self contradicting claim simply state that, for example that Sunni's are less peaceful than your seemingly oh so perfect Ahmadiyyah Muslims. But do not state that Muslims are not peaceful but (Ahmadiyyah) Muslims are.
Ahmadiyyas aren't muslims, no matter how long they claimed to be so. Because to become a Muslim, Islam requires to accept the 2 basic pillars of faith; first is to accept the ALLAH Almighty as the only one worthy to be worshiped and second part is to accept Prophet Muhammad [peace & blessings be upon him] as the [final] messenger. The leader of Ahmadiyya community, Mirza Gulam Ahmad Qadiani [ in a town of Qadian- India in the last century], claimed to be a the promised Imam/leader first & then claimed to be prophet [some deny his blunt claim & call him revivalist instead but his prophecy-claim is saved in the records which he hadn't repented]. Thus by definition, he & his followers are out of Islam [as depicted by their little population also, they'd say they're 2 Million but only on the website actually, by the commercial done by people like calestailtorahteacher etc]. But now, why they claim to be Muslim if they by-themselves deny the very basic pillar of Islamic belief? Answer is this community is not the only one in the realm of this propaganda, there are other distracted ones too working on their false agenda to somehow uproot the love of Prophet from the hearts of Muslims [which is totally impossible to do as long as you stick on the definition of a Muslim being]. The supporting reasoning to my view is, check out who supports such communities like of Ahmaddiya? Muslims don't even consider them to be muslim because they clearly reject the final seal of Prophecy [though implicitly, as if they reject explicitly, how would they deceive others about their label of being a "muslim"?].

Anyhow according to a Hadees [saying of Prophet peace & blessing be upon him] it has to happen before the resurrection day, that is known as fitna-e-dajjal, there would be a list of people claiming to be a prophet. Some of them have claimed so [the very first one appeared in the period of first Caliph far ago], some are coming [like in the current days, new Ahmadiyyas have prepared to publish another prophethood claim, nothing astonishing].

Finally Ahmadiyya isn't a sect as it don't encompass the basic belief of Islam. Thus celetialtorahteacher's persistent & irrelevant support to ahmadiyyas shows it's either trolling or a propaganda. Secondly even if he likes them very much why he's much keen to call them Muslim or a Muslim sect, why not to name it as a different religion like say just ahmadiyyas? To be a sect, sect has to at least accept the basic tenets of Islam, which neither ahmadiyyas accept as explicit by their founders' teachings& writings, nor the celestailtorahteacher is able prove it a sect. Because if he'd go to prove Ahmadiyyas a sect of Islam, he & Ahmadiyyas both would have to accept the Founder Prophet of Islam, which they both don't accept. So yes, you questioned him rightly, where he is unable to answer, no doubt. Thanks for your detailed & valid contribution.

"There will be an Islamic Reformation but it will be led by Muslim women who are the primary victims of Muhammadism's all male domination of society plan."
Again an extremely incorrect claim, to your information Muslim countries have had more female leaders than the USA. Just to state this too, Indonesia, the country with the highest Muslim population, had, from 2001 to 2004 a female president. Even Afghanistan, being under Taliban rule previously, had females running for president, a female vice president and other females in important political places."

See, here it is, posted proof that Muhammadans are in complete denial of reality when they cannot see because of obedience to their idol that it is only Ahmadiyyah Muslims who do have a true religion of peace while Sunnis and Shia have vicious hypocrisy and lies, a phony religion claiming to be of peace but is of war. Even makes war against peaceful Muslims for not obeying the idol's taboos correctly.
'
Muhammadism values obedience to paper and ink words over peace, over human life and that's why it is disqualified as is as a religion of God while Ahmadiyyah Islam is truly of God. If rules and regulations define your worship of God you've completely missed the point of religion.
WAM
Posts: 139
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 7:50:48 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
What a stupid and incorrect statement once again.
I will not even reply to the other stuff you said right now, but lets get this clear
"If rules and regulations define your worship of God you've completely missed the point of religion.". No, this is not my definition of Religion. This is however my definition of worship to defined religions, such as Islam and Christianity. If I say that I am a Muslim, yet claim that I believe Jesus Christ is my Lord and Savior there is a big problem as to me calling myself a Muslim.
Harikrish
Posts: 11,011
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 8:52:57 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Islam is a religion of peace. When you compare the lives lost in the spread of religion. Islam still comes out with the lowest conversion rate. The current wars in the Middle East are civil wars and driven by political mismanagement. Even here when the total death count is taken it is still lower than similar civil wars and other wars that took placed in recent modern history. American civil war, China Mao revolution, WWI and WW2, Vietnam, Korean War etc. etc.
The Islamists are poorly equipped and lack the weapons of mass destruction that the western world possess and have used in their wars against innocent populations. Japan comes to mind.
Islam has produced more martyrs than any other religion. But that is a sign of their faithfulness and love for their prophet which other religions cannot replicate.
Islam is a complete religion with a full judiciary system called Sharia.
Peace be upon all.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 9:06:18 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/27/2015 8:47:09 PM, Yassine wrote:
- Currently debating the Topic with @64bithuman:

* http://www.debate.org...

- This is a question directed at those who either studied the religion as a major/minor in Islamic Studies or learned it from muslim sources:

=> Does Islam Promote Peace?

You cannot promote peace through terror as Islam does. All you do is nurture rebellion, as the fragmented nature of Islam, and indeed false Christianity proves.

Only through following the true teachings of Christ, taught to him by his father Jehovah, will there ever be world peace.
Dazz
Posts: 1,163
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 1:51:02 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/1/2015 6:28:32 AM, Legendary_Houp wrote:
This is for readers to know that what actually Quran says. [Hope you'd able to presume the relevant flow of my text that is tailored according to possible counter arguments.]

Quran (Muhammad-Surat# 47) 24. Do they not think over the Qur"an, or are their hearts locked?Quran (Al-Hajj-22) Verse46. Have they not travelled in the land that (perhaps by seeing these ruins) their hearts should become (such) as to understand, or the ears (such) as to hear (the truth)? So the fact is that it is not the eyes (of such people) that are blind, but the hearts, which are in the breasts, turn blind. Quran (Hajj) 8. And there are some of the people who dispute about Allah (His Essence, Attributes and Powers) without knowledge and understanding, and without any guidance and logic, and without any enlightening Book (sent down from heaven Quran(41:26). And the disbelievers say: "Do not listen to this Qur"an, but make noises in (its recitation sessions), so that you may overwhelm (their recitation from the Qur"an)."Quran 2 (Surat Al-Baqarah):19. Or their example is like a rain pouring from the sky wherein there are layers of darkness and thunder and lightning (as well). They thrust their fingers into their ears, fearing death due to the thunder. And Allah has encompassed the disbelievers.

=>So, is there any fear of transformation to the truth if you listen to the Quran, hence have you closed your ears? Why not to read the "full" Quran and offer others to read it too, & let them decide freely & vividly, instead of showing them what you want to see.

So if one opens Quran (or any book) and want "a" verse (or text) as a support to his personal view, there is nothing astonishing if one really gets the success in finding a one, because this is how one sees. But will his personal assertion make any difference to the logical inference?

Quran (Baqarah-2) Verse2. (This is) the Glorious Book in which there is no chance of doubt. (It is) a guide for those who guard against evil and fear Allah.

If the next counter-argument comes (as was made in an international debate forum) that even other verses are peaceful & even if we understand that the context of those 1 or 2 verses (you provided), is also peaceful [as I'll prove below]. But still some people (or Muslims) can be guilty of terrorism because of plainly reading or misunderstanding them. Then I'd say; how that excuse [of people' fault] validate your resolution?

=>Now what a glorious verse comes next, with the glorious charter of peace.

Quran (At-Tawbah 9) 6. And if any of the idolaters seeks asylum with you, provide him with protection until he listens to the Words of Allah. Then escort him to his haven. This is because these people do not possess the knowledge (of the truth).

=> Any man of mind can see that when an idolater will seek asylum & why? And we're ordered to give protection to the one who's asking, then who is supposed to initiate the war at first place? Not only that, we're ordered to escort them to their haven (as our responsibility). Now if we'd have invaded their land by a terrorist attack of war, then how can we escort them to "their" haven. Hope it making sense to someone sensible.

Now continue reading (at-Tawbah)!
7. (How) can there be a promise for the polytheists with Allah and His Messenger (blessings and peace be upon him) except for those with whom you have made a treaty near the Sacred Mosque (at al-Hudaybiya)? So as long as they remain true to (the treaty with) you, remain true to them. Surely, Allah loves those who fear Him.

8. How (can one expect from them an honouring of the agreement)? They are in such a state that if they overpower you, they will have regard neither for any tie of kinship with you nor for any covenant. They please you with lip service only, but their hearts deny (all what they say). And most of them are those who break agreements.

9. They gained a paltry price (in terms of worldly interests) for the Revelations of Allah and then started hindering (people) from His path (of the Din [Religion]). Indeed, it is extremely evil what they keep doing.

10. They have no regard for either a tie of kinship or a covenant in respect of a Muslim, and they are the people who have exceeded limits (in disobedience).

11. (Even) then if they repent and establish Prayer and pay Zakat (the Alms-due), they are your brothers in Din (Religion). And We elucidate (Our) Revelations in detail for those who possess knowledge and understanding.

12. And if after making a promise (for peaceful bilateral relations), they break their oaths, (and restore the state of war,) and taunt you with sarcasm in your Din (Religion), then wage (deterring defensive) war against (those) chieftains of disbelief (to pre-empt and eliminate any militancy and aggression they may inflict on you). Surely, their oaths are not worth any regard, so that they may desist (from their mischief-mongering).
........

30. And the Jews said: ""Uzayr (Ezra) is the son of Allah," and the Christians said: "The Messiah is the son of Allah." These are their (absurd) utterances that they voice with their mouths. They (acquire) resemblance with the saying of those who have disbelieved before (them). May Allah ruin them! Where are they wandering distracted?

31. They took their priests and monks for lords besides Allah and (also) the Messiah, the son of Maryam (Mary), whilst in truth they had not been given (any) command except to worship (only) the One God besides Whom there is no God. Holy is He, far above those that they associate with Him as partners.

32. They desire to extinguish the Light of Allah by blowing through their mouths. And Allah rejects (it) but (wills) to manifest His Light to its fullness, even though the disbelievers dislike (it).

33. Allah is He Who sent His Messenger (blessings and peace be upon him) with guidance and the Din (Religion) of truth to make him (the Messenger) dominant over every (other exponent of) Din (Religion), though much to the dislike of the polytheists.

..........................
Here I'd provide the conclusion (precisely due to character limit).

Quran (Qaf) 45. We know best what they say, and you are not the one to coerce them. So advise by means of the Qur"an anyone who fears My threat of punishment.

Quran (Zukhruf #43) verse:88. And by his (Esteemed Messenger"s) saying: "O Lord, surely, they are a people who (somehow) do not tend to believe." 89. So, (O My Beloved,) turn your face away from them and say (like this: "Alright, our greeting is:) Peace!" Then soon they will come to know (their end).

(Nahl)125. (O Glorious Messenger!) Invite towards the path of your Lord with wisdom and refined exhortation and (also) argue with them in a most decent manner. Surely, your Lord knows well the one who strayed away from His path, and He also knows well the rightly guided. 126. And if you want to punish, then punish only (as severely) as you were afflicted, but if you remain patient, then certainly that is better for those who keep patience.
Remove the "I want", remainder is the "peace". ~Al-Ghazali~
"This time will also pass", a dose to cure both; the excitement & the grievance. ~Ayaz~
Dazz
Posts: 1,163
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 2:15:47 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/1/2015 7:06:43 AM, celestialtorahteacher wrote:

See, here it is, posted proof that Muhammadans are in complete denial of reality when they cannot see because of obedience to their idol that it is only Ahmadiyyah Muslims who do have a true religion of peace while Sunnis and Shia have vicious hypocrisy and lies, a phony religion claiming to be of peace but is of war. Even makes war against peaceful Muslims for not obeying the idol's taboos correctly.
'
Muhammadism values obedience to paper and ink words over peace, over human life and that's why it is disqualified as is as a religion of God while Ahmadiyyah Islam is truly of God. If rules and regulations define your worship of God you've completely missed the point of religion.

See here it is, posted proof that calestialtorahteacher is either a hypocrite or at least self-contradicting. His profile says that he's a Christian whereas he believes that "Ahmadiyyah Islam is truly of God". Now as far as I'm informed, Christians or Christianity don't include the Ahmadiyyas as a Christian sect, nor it'd allow to have 2 religions at one time. So is he ahmadiyya follower? Why to fabricate the reality then? Why to deceive others? Anyhow his attitude validates my claim more firmly, that ahmadiyyas are not Muslims [though this is off-topic subject, but just to elucidate that how calestialtorahteacher view is flawed].

Secondly calestialtorahteacher always comment about ahmadiyyas to be peaceful, irrespective of the topic requirement. I mean no one here is asking about ahmadiyyas, nor they're the only peaceful community on earth. How irrelevant is their talk here!
Remove the "I want", remainder is the "peace". ~Al-Ghazali~
"This time will also pass", a dose to cure both; the excitement & the grievance. ~Ayaz~
Dazz
Posts: 1,163
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 2:25:46 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/1/2015 9:06:18 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/27/2015 8:47:09 PM, Yassine wrote:
- Currently debating the Topic with @64bithuman:

* http://www.debate.org...

- This is a question directed at those who either studied the religion as a major/minor in Islamic Studies or learned it from muslim sources:

=> Does Islam Promote Peace?

You cannot promote peace through terror as Islam does. All you do is nurture rebellion, as the fragmented nature of Islam, and indeed false Christianity proves.

Only through following the true teachings of Christ, taught to him by his father Jehovah, will there ever be world peace.

Your view don't provide any supporting reasoning to believe over. Should I believe what you said? You said what you said, nothing else is there to accord for. I possess the opposite view, that is about not wasting my time in just sharing that with others.
Remove the "I want", remainder is the "peace". ~Al-Ghazali~
"This time will also pass", a dose to cure both; the excitement & the grievance. ~Ayaz~
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 2:47:29 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/1/2015 2:25:46 PM, Dazz wrote:
At 6/1/2015 9:06:18 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/27/2015 8:47:09 PM, Yassine wrote:
- Currently debating the Topic with @64bithuman:

* http://www.debate.org...

- This is a question directed at those who either studied the religion as a major/minor in Islamic Studies or learned it from muslim sources:

=> Does Islam Promote Peace?

You cannot promote peace through terror as Islam does. All you do is nurture rebellion, as the fragmented nature of Islam, and indeed false Christianity proves.

Only through following the true teachings of Christ, taught to him by his father Jehovah, will there ever be world peace.

Your view don't provide any supporting reasoning to believe over. Should I believe what you said? You said what you said, nothing else is there to accord for. I possess the opposite view, that is about not wasting my time in just sharing that with others.

That's because it is a fairly broad area of study, anything in particular that you feel would help you?

I'll start with:

Matthew 5:44
ASV(i) 44 but I say unto you, love your enemies, and pray for them that persecute you;

If you love even your enemies, how can you be at anything but peace with them?
smelisox
Posts: 850
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 2:48:17 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Because you are taking their lives. And no one has the right to take a life but the person who owns that life.