@aliramzi41 Christianity is in fact a religion, just like Islam and Catholocism. It has derrivative views, certainly, but still remains a mainstream RELIGION.
3 Muslims converts where held for hours, stabbed with knives and were told to convert or die ... they didn't and were killed. Im happy to provide the articles and videos about this. (The families of those 3 Muslim converts pastors forgave those who killed them)
How about the 10 Christian eye doctors who went to a Muslim country to help the poor villages. they were shot by Muslims because they though they were trying to convert people.
islamic hordes from present day saudi arabia invaded egypt, iraq, syria, jordan, persia all without any provocation at all and forced the population to convert to barbaric islam under torture and death. The saudi invaders also forced the population to only speak arabic, that is why many national languages, such as egypt's own historic national language, have basically died out. islam ruined the middle east. It is a disease started by a paedophile criminal warlord. fuck islam
@premorall Taht has happened ALL over the world..The Spanish to the mayans, etc, The Europeans to the First Nations, please consider other events before you make anti-muslim propoganda. I am not a Muslim, but I feel they have faced FAR too much hate from the Western world, It is not a "Muslim issue" it is a humanity issue. The people in the middle east, not just Muslims are widely precieved by Westerners as terrorists, only because our media is only covering the bad parts, it gets more views.
18th 'til 20th centuries - Do the pagans of Afghanistan's Kafirstan (kafir means unbeliever) province deserve repeated invasion in order to force them to convert to Islam, a process that's continuing right now and during which Muslims renamed the province Nuristan (nur means light)? No.
20th century – Had the Timorese been attacking and oppressing Muslims before being invaded by Indonesia in 1975? No
19th century – Did the Luba Kingdom deserve to be destabilized and destroyed by East African slave traders? No.
19th century – Did the Bambara Empire of Africa deserve to be weakened by the jihad of Chekou Amadu and then decisively defeated and its population forced to convert to Islam by El Hadj Umar Tall? No.
17th century – Had the Austrians attacked or tried to oppress Muslims before Vienna being besieged twice? No.
18th century – Did the Americans attack the Barbary States before the Barbary States pirated American merchant vessels and force American sailors to convert to Islam? No.
19th century – Did the African Kingdom of Kaabu deserve to be destroyed by Alfa Yaya of Labé of the Muslim Fula people? No.
15th century – Had the Greeks of the Trebizond Empire been attacking and oppressing Muslims before being extinguished by Mehmed in 1461 A.D.? No.
16th century – Who attacked whom first, Indonesian converts to Islam or the pre-Islamic Hindu and Buddhist Indonesians? My guess is, the Muslims attacked first. Why did the Sultanates of Malacca & Demak feel such a need to attack and destroy the Majapahit Empire
14th century – Did the Russians and Lithuanians deserve to continue to be attacked and hegemonized by the Muslim Golden Horde throughout this century and into the 15th century? No. At one point, in 1378 Tokhtamysh the ruler of the Golden Horde promised to leave the inhabitants of Moscow unharmed if they opened the city gates. They did open the gates, and Tokhtamysh murdered around 24,000 Russians
11th century – What were Muslim Turkic tribes doing moving into the Middle East and attacking the Byzantine Empire (among many other non-Muslim societies), culminating in the Battle of Manzikert in 1071 at which Muslim Turks took control over the eastern half Anatolia and provoked the Crusades? Did the Byzantines deserve such a sustained offensive onslaught from the Turks? No.
11th century – Cilicia (around modern day Iskenderun on the coast in south central Turkey) had been part of Armenia since the days of Tigranes the Great who was conquered by the Romans in the 1st century BC. Had the Armenians there gone around attacking and trying to oppress Muslims before being conquered by the Mamelukes? No.
10th century – Did the Buddhist Karakhoja Uighurs and the mixed Uighurs/Yugurs, Tocharians and Scythians of the Tarim Basin (centered around Hetian, or Khotan/Hotan) deserve to be conquered by the Muslim Kara-Khanid Uighurs in the name of Islam? No.
10th century – Did the pagan Ghana Empire deserve to be attacked and destroyed by Abu-Bakr Ibn-Umar? No.
11th century – Had the Sardinians attacked Muslims and attempted to oppress them before being attacked in 1015 A.D.? No.
8th to 9th centuries – Did the French attempt to attack and oppress Muslims before being attacked at the Battle of Tours and then suffer Muslim bases in southern France? No.
9th century – Did the Sicilians attack any Muslims before the Muslims invaded and asserted hegemony over Sicily? No.
9th century – Did the Corsicans attack any Muslims before being conquered in 890 A.D.? No.
7th century – Did the Armenians attack or try to oppress Muslims before being conquered by the Arabs, their nobility murdered and subjected to intense pressure to convert to Islam? No.
7th century – Did the Georgians attack or try to oppress Muslims before being conquered by the Arabs? A definitive No.
7th century - Had the Copts been attacking and oppressing Muslims before being hegemonized, with permanent long term consequences, by the Muslim Arabs? No.
7th century - Did the Khazars attack Muslims before Muslim crossed the Caucus Mountains to attack, but were beaten back at the capital of the Khazars: Balanjar? No.
7th century – Did the Byzantines attack Muslims before Muslims invaded and conquered Palestine and North Africa? No.
7th century – Did the Zoroastrian Persians attack Muslims before Muslims invaded and hegemonized Persia? No.
PLEASE PLEASE PEOPLE DO NOT BE A MUSLIM UNTIL YOU MAKE SURE THAT YOU WANT TO BE .ISLAM NEVER FORCED ANYBODY TO BE MUSLIM.IF U DO NOT WANT TO IT'S YOU BUSINESS .BUT WE HAVE TO SAY THE MESSAGR IS OUR DUTY AS MUSLIM THAT'T IT :)
MAY ALLAH GUIDE ALL THE MANKIND TO THE STRAIGHT PATH AMINE
Spain just by accident became Muslim with the Visigoth kings voluntarily embracing Islam and dispatching en masse the most beautiful Gothic ladies to the harems of their Islamic advisors and elder brothers. The raids on the south coasts of Italy and France are never mentioned in any original annals of the 9th or 10th century...Any opinions different from these have long been proved by Islamic scholars and some of the more tolerant and open-minded Western historians as "totally baseless".
@pertuk u r trying to appear as a smart person but what u r saying is called "half the truth"
1- Crusaders massacred the people in jerusalem , Saladin entered the City peacefully
2- what about Lithuania , how they became christians
3- jews were living peacefully in spain and when the Crusader heroes came , Muslims and jews were forced to convert TORQUEMADA , and for the jews they found no place in Europe to escape except ottoman turkey .
@SoProudMuslim True, Crusaders did massacare people in Jeruslame, Jihadis also massacared people both before and after. Christian groups have also done reconciliatory gestures about the crusades, Muslim groups have done no such thing for the atrocities jihadis committed, nor will they ever
@pertuk why don't u go and find out , among the massacred the leader was the minister who was a JEW in the time when jews could't take offices in the mountains in europe
1. it was Granada and there was like 22 kingdoms in spain at this time with no probs with jews.
2 . The mob done it not the officials , in europe the pope was himself doing the job
3. This jewish minister , his father was the minister b4 he died , his father ruled wisely (continued)
4. unlike his father this minister gave shared the wealth of the City among the jews leaving the muslims and christians ( the majority) in poverty .
5. u gonna ask how the officials didn't interfere : u have to know that the king knew that this stupid minister was involved in killing his son (the heir) so he found it a chance to take revenge by the mob
6.u r the only one who deny that the jews lived peacefully in muslim spain (even jews admit it) (continued)
@pertuk now i have replied objectively and clearly about an incident that happened in one city ... but u didn't defend ur pope who oppressed in the name of God , who forced muslims and jews in spain to convert to catholicism , who launched dirty crusades who were cannibals (by word) they have eaten human flesh in a small city in levant , and o course killed 70 thousand in jerusalem ..
EXPLAIN , DON'T THROW COMMENT AND RUN , NEXT TIME KNOW THE WHOLE STORY
4- Muslims ruled over India for 1000 years , yet muslims were always minority ,
they never converted any body by the sword's edge (compare it to the next)
5 - South America , can we find any single one who worship whatever they were worshipping (don't even know their religion) in other meaning can we found indegious people in south america.
6- remember there is christians in egypt (ruled 1400 yrs by muslims) there is a reasonable percentage of christians in the arab world
u r talking about Byzantium like it was the state of peace and just , the prophet has ended the message with emperor by "upon you the guilt of the Arians "
search in books who r the Arians ... and the emperor has killed the messengers sent by the prophets (imagine a country killed an ambassador ) Muslims have war with them.
yet u have to know muslims fought the persians and the Byzantines , i think it was better to fight Ethiopia (continued)
@pertuk Ethipia was nearer too . but the king was a just king and no sect of religion was oppressed .. and the prophet cared about the Arians whom the byzantines slaughtered across their empire .
Spain, visigoths were Arians but Roderic was Catholic and he oppressed arians he even raped the daughter of the ruler of Ceuta and he helped Tareq to cross the path to the peninsula .
Constantinople was never besieged by the Arabs and particularly the year 717 A.D. was one of the happiest in Byzantine history because the Byzantines saved a lot of money not having to waste their expensive Greek fire on Allah's peaceful missionaries and preachers. Charles Martel was a minor figure in the history of the world and he had never seen a single Arab beduin in his life although some of his libels on them have been preserved now banned throughout Chirac's France.
The Jews of Yathrib were never exterminated by Muhammed, their wives and children never enslaved .The battle of the Yarmuk never took place. The same is valid about Qadisya and Nehavend as Persia remained free and never converted at the point of the sword to Islam. Islam was so fashionable in Persia from 610 that everyone wanted to enjoy it to the full .
@pertuk my question to u now rather u know the whole truth and u hide the half of it so u r called deceiver .
OR u didn't know the other half of the story so u have a home work to do and i advice u to start with the jews of Beny quraida and read the whole story.
@bhigr They were all governed by Muslims for century's, but aren't Muslims. If Islam is spread by the sword, why are they not totaly Muslim? And do not forget the crusades, and inqisition. Christianity was spread by sword.
@Ahmedmega10000 Because spreading Islam means spreading muslim government,i.e. shariah rule. Not all non-muslims must become muslim. But all non-muslims must submit to muslim rule. Non-muslims under shariah law are dimmhis. They are disgrace, belittled and humiliated by the muslim overlords. In addition they must pay a poll tax (jizyah) as a sign of kufr.
@bhigr Yes, they had to pay a tax, but didn't have to go to the army. And Muslims have to submit to Christian rule. Can you tell me a Christian kingdom that allowed sharia law? And cruseds were sooooooo peacefull, they were a genocide. And inqisition was torturing. Christianity was spread by sword.
@Ahmedmega10000 Dhimmis were not allowed to go to the army. They were not allowed to hold any public office. They were not allowed to build churches. They could not testify before court, they were not allowed to publicly preach or convert musllims,.... Muslims must not submit to christian rule. We have a secular government in western nations. Allowing shariah law equates to submitting to muslim rule, so no self-respecting non-muslim can do that.
@Ahmedmega10000 The problem is that shariah law systematically discriminates against non-muslims. Islam is like a mafia organisation. You must pay for not being killed by muslims the so called protection tax, jizyah.
@bhigr WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? CAN YOU TELL ME WHERE DOES THE SHARIA LAW SAYS DO DISCRIMINATE NON-MUSLIMS? YOU ARE TELLING LIES, AND I DON'T SEE THE SENSE BEHINDE YOUR ARGUMENTS.
@Ahmedmega10000 These taxes were invented by mohamed. let me quote the quran
9:29Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
@Ahmedmega10000 Crusades. Please tell me: How many centuries had muslims been waging jihad against christian nations prior to the crusades? Please enumerate the men women and children slaughtered and enslaved by muslims within this time period!
@bhigr WHAT! You are a total liar! First there was never a massacre made by Muslims exept perhaps those killed Armenians. Christians had made dozens of genocides and that can't be denied. Seccond, that was not the reason for the crusades, but lies that have been told by the church. They said that Muslims have forbidden piligmirs to visit Jerusalem, but that was a lie. Christians have used inqisition to not only kill, but also torture Muslims, and that is far worse than just killing.
@Ahmedmega10000 Total liar? And then: never a massacre, except perhaps.... You contradict yourself. There were innumerable massacres committed by muslims in the name of faith. There were innumerable wars of conquest - jihad - waged on christian nations for more than 400 years prior to the crusades. Now lets count the corpses and raped and enslaved women and children.... You fear the outcome don't you?
@bhigr WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? Can you tell me when have Muslims killed and raped women? And you have not answered my very first question: WHY ARE THE BALKANS, SPAIN AND INDIA NOT MUSLIM? WHY WAS THEIR NON-MUSLIM POPULATION NOT MASSACRED? And, the medieval religius in-tolerance was started by the Church, so don't waste your breath.
@Ahmedmega10000 You dont know the history of your prophet? The prophet muhammed personally massacred between 600 and 900 male jews, anyone who had grown pubic hair. The women and children were enslaved. They were called banu Quraiza. Muslims ever since have followed the sunnah of their prophet mohammmed.
@bhigr And you got that from? The Bible? You are so desperate, you cant even bring truth to the table. And how should he had seen if they have grown pubic hair?
@Ahmedmega10000 They were stripped from their clothes in order to see whether they had grown pubic hair. Trenches were dug in medina. Then the prophet muhammmed beheaded each and every male jew with pubic hair. This is according to muslim sources. Read the sirat Rassoul Allah by ibn ishaq or read the wikipedia article about the banu quraizah
@bhigr HAHAHA! And the Qur'an itself says that it is forbidden to kill someone yjust if he doesn't believe. And, it would be tottaly idiotic to kill someone for growing pubic hair. Remember the BALKANS, SPAIN AND INDIA I talked about? Can you explain me that? And the inqisition? Torturing used by Catholics?
9:5 So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
"And, it would be tottaly idiotic to kill someone for growing pubic hair." I agree, mohammed was an imbecile.
@Ahmedmega10000 Sure, the Spanish drove out the muslims from Spain. This is called the reconquista. The history of islam in india is infamous indeed. This is called the hindu holocaust. The systematic slaughter and subjugation of hindus. The British stopped this islamic practice.
@bhigr Hahaha! The truth is that Spain was Muslim for about 20% wich converted willingly to Islam, but the Spanish slaughtered them all. That is the turth about your own religion. And that is shit wat you said about India. It is known that Hindu have slaughtered milions of Muslims, but because the Indians were too vast in numbers they couldn't kill them all. And the Balkans perhaps? Why did Serbs slaughtered thousands of Muslims in the past 18 years?
@Ahmedmega10000 Yes, you are right, the muslims could not slaughter all the hindus. They managed to slaughter about 100 million hindus in the 800 years of muslim conquests. The hindu kush between india and persia means slaughter of indians because of the number who died on the rout through the mountains to persia and the middle east. Muslims cannot pride themselves with conversion because this only takes place under extreme suppression and discrimination under muslim rule.
@Ahmedmega10000 Now, why don't we touch the history of islamic slavery starting with mohammed until today? You do know that you can rape any slave woman under shariah law, even if she is married? Slavery is still being practiced in Sudan and parts of the middle east in the name of shariah!
@bhigr I'm talking the truth. You are talking lies. You are answering Only half of my comments. I'm answering all of your comments. Therefore I don't see the sense behinde arguing with you. (ALLOWED TO RAPE A MARRIED WOMEN! HAHAHHAHAHA THANKS FOR MAKING ME LAUGH! HAHAHAHHAHHA YOU ARE SOOOOOOO FUNY MAN! HAHHAHAH)
@Ahmedmega10000 It's not funny. The islamic term is "Ma malakat aymanukum" what your right hand posseses, those are slaves Surah 4, Veres 24 Muslims are allowed to rape female slaves. Muhammed frequently raped women after he had killed their father and brothers.
@bhigr hahaa no where does it say to rape woman and kill their fathers and brothers. Do you think the 1.5 billion people on this planet will accept islam if this were true? you only make yourself look like a fool when you say things that aren't true. and your other point, muslims had never been waging war against peace, only against terrany & oppression, a defensive stance Islam has always had. So long as satan roams the earth the truth will always be under attack, and truth will attack back
@maxwelle103 "The apostle of Allah sent a military expedition..They defeated them and took them captives. Some of the Companions of the apostle of Allah were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers. So Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Quranic verse, "And all married women (are forbidden) unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess". .." 4:24
@maxwelle103 ..."And all married women (are forbidden) unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess". That is to say, they are lawful for them when they complete their waiting period."
Narrated Ibn Muhairiz: .. "We went out with Allah's Apostle for the raid of Banu Al-Mustaliq and we received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus. ....
So when we intended to do coitus interrupt us, we said, 'How can we do coitus interruptus before asking Allah's Apostle who is present among us?" We asked (him) about it and he said, 'It is better for you not to do so, for if any soul (till the Day of Resurrection) is predestined to exist, it will exist."
@bhigr Never talk about the Medieval time again. Inqsitions were used by who? THE CATHOLICS! And the Crusades were started by who? THE CATHOLICS! And why is Israel not Islamic? (I forgot that)
@Ahmedmega10000 The crusades were a reaction to over 400 years of muslim conquest of christian lands. The wars started, when your prophet proclaimed. "I have been order to fight the people until all say none has the right to be worshipped but Allah..." So get your facts straight!
@bhigr Another lie. I figured something out. You are either six years old or you have missed school. The cruseds were used for the pope (as many popes had even sex with women in the medieval times) to claim lands as his own. These attempts howerwer, have all failed.
@Ahmedmega10000 Ad hominem attacks are non sequiturs. This is a typical muslim response. You cannot deny that muslims had been waging wars relentlessly against christian nations prior to the crusades. Muslims continue to wage jihad against kufr all over the world, because their goal is world conquest.
@Ahmedmega10000 "Please can you tell me why should world conquest be our goal?" In order to enforce Allah's law, all over the world. I shall quote you once more:
"Jihad means claiming the unbelievers lands if nesesery and destroying their armies." Claiming the unbelievers lands, yup! Thank you for your honesty!
@bhigr Yes, they drove us out and killed every single Muslim wich was left in spain and only few converted to Islam approx. 20%. All of them killed by christians.
@bhigr I will tell you how much years we were killing you. Not one. Jihad means claiming the unbelievers lands if nesesery and destroying their armies. Crusades mean killing AND TORTURING all unbelievers. That is affirmated by the pope himself you are prob the only person who thinks that the crusades were peaceful acts.
I think the sword not used nowdays and islam spread so fastly why? be cause islam something different compare other religion islam the true religion 1 god only
Jihad is commanded of all believers in Islam. The goal is to convert the world, bringing all under the dictates of Sharia Law. Muhammad and his followers instigated and fought no less than 27 wars to conquer and subdue other nations by the sword. There are 2 swords depicted on Saudi Arabia's national flag. Muhammad ordered the KILLING of all who would not bow down to him a Allah's messenger. O Messenger, rouse the Believers to the fight" Q 8:65
@gooldie888 Let's speak frankly u speak without proof so let me proof that to u American the Christian regime bombings Hiroshima and Nagasaki & germany also killed all jews at holocaust & Christian killed muslims of Bosna i Hercegovina & more & more so nowdays there is no swords in use and no masked faces understood
If you preach that Islam was not spread by the sword, then I would ask you to stop reading the Koran, and read actual history. Read about what happened to the Sassanid Persians, the Christians of Egypt and North Africa, and more as armies of Arabs stormed these lands and supplanted themselves as rulers and the natives as servants
I think the major problem with som Muslims is that they cannot consider the state of other people than themselves, and wont accept anything that stains their identity.
jsut 1 question for u brainwashed muslim the whole world knows islam ws spread by the sword-y r thr no zoroastrians in iran?y r thr no buddhists along the silk route?y didi muslims destroyt the place whr buddha gained enlightenment,muslims destroyed buddhist nalanda university and killed all 100000 monks in 1 day 4 nt converting to islam,100000 hindus wer kille din 1 day by timur in delhi,khalid ibn walid killed more than 40000 zoroastrians in 1 day andthe river flowed with thr blood
the prophet Muhammed PBUH have fought in 11 war in his life NINE were defence from Quraish and one was because quraish brock it's covenant with the prophet Muhammed PBUH & the last one was against Khaiber which wasa city in arabia inhabeted by jews and they were always a threat to the muslim country. who want to see a religion spreed by force let him look at cristianity and how they pay money to poor people to convert to cristianity & also what they've done to Al-andalus & in the crusaides.
After 13 years in Mecca he had about 50 followers and after 8 eight years of war with Mecca THEY CONFIRMED !! Are you joking? They had been rejecting "MO" for almost 20 years - and they belived him when he got 10.000 soldiers in their town!!!
islam ruled india for 10 centuries and today 80% of the indians are non muslims,also till today there are thousands of jews in yeman which is an arabic muslim country till today and also there are millions of cristians arabs specially in egypt ,so if islam was spreed by sword there woudn't be one cristian arabic in the world nor one jewish and all india would be muslim after a 1000 year being ruled by islam!!!
@FulYasameen islam ruled india form 1192-1707 ok and india once consisted of bangaldesh,afghanistanpakistan ok what is today india is all thth ws left 4 the hindus who inhabited it,and as far islamic attrocities in india go lemme tell u-
1)vikramshila,taxila,nalanda,,odantapuri,somapura,jadadalla all wer destroyed by muslims
2)in 1398 timur massacred the entire hindu popultion of delhi as in 1 day more than 200-300 thousand people wer killed
@thescorpionking2020 if this is true this is not Islam this is a Human action which is against Islam. if Islam spread by force then why till now in countries ruled only by Muslims for centuries you can find other Religions (Jews and Christians and others) why did Muslims left them alive all this time. did Muslims Invade Indonesia or west Africa. read the history and you will find the truth.
@nabilalihibah dude the fcat is thth these human actions wer perpetuated coz islam totally legalizes them,if islam ws so peaceful y r the no pre islamic pagans,jews,chrsitians who orginally inhabited arabia thr today,whr r the zoroastrians of iran.just 100000 of them today in ths world,y did ur caliph umar who supposedly ws a sahaba and lived with mohammad destroy major persian universities,they wer supposed to b closest 2 mohammad
@nabilalihibah u muslims shud apologise to the entire world 4 ur inhuman actions thruout the last 1400 years,y didi muslims attack persia,india,spain what had these countries done to muslims i dun think so,u attacked coz u wanted evryone to be muslim and spread ur evil fascist ideology by the sword,muslims hav destroyed more than 30 universities and educational institutions in general,gundishapur,taxila,nalanda,vikramshila evrythin ur's is a destructive religion and ideology
muslims destroyed the temple whr buddha ganied enlightement,destroyed millions of hindu temples,guru gobind singh's 7 n 8 yr old sons wer bricked alive 4 nt convertin to islam,guru arjun dev ws boiled alive 4 nt convertin to islam,guru tegh bahadur beheaded 4 nt convertin,haqiqat rai a 12 yr old hindu boy hanged 4 nt converting to islam,its a shame thh u muslims cn actually say tht ur evil religion ws nt spread by the sword,ur religion destroyed buddhism totally nd killed so many innocent people
when mahmud of ghazni destroyed the somnath temple he killed all 50000 of its inhabitants who wer all non combatants nuthin gt to do wth islam,go n search aurnagzeb he ruled india from 1659-1707 and he forced people to convert to islam giving them option of either death or islam,ur religion is the most evil ideology tht ever came up,u destroyed zoroastrianism so much t so tht only 150000 of tht benign faith are left today in this world shame on u muslims
@pigment777 where did the 10000 came from? they were Muslim followers. and why did he took them to Mecca? because people of Mecca brook the peace treaty made earlier and attacked a Muslim tribe under his protection. so it was Justified according to any man made law.
Zoroastrianism was the state religion of three pre-Islamic Persian empires, the last being the Sassanian empire that passed a decree in AD 224.[3][5] Unlike the Greeks, who had conquered Iran centuries earlier, the Arabs set out to destroy Zoroastrianism n replace it with Islam.When asked by Yazdezard, about the reasons for the unwarranted Arab aggression against Persians, an Arab soldier replied, "Allah commanded us, by the mouth of His Prophet, to extend the dominon of Islam over all nations."
According to an account in Tarikh al-Tabari by Al-Tabari, the Arab Commander Sa'ad ibn Abi Waqqas wrote to Umar about what should be done with the books at Ctesiphon. Umar wrote back: "If the books contradict the Qur'an, they are blasphemous. On the other hand, if they are in agreement, they are not needed, as for us Koran is sufficient." Thus, the huge library was destroyed and the books, the product of the generations of Persian scientists and scholars were thrown into fire or the Euphrates.
@nabilalihibah ya this is wat ur sahabas learnt from mohamamd destroying universities and libraries huh what do u hav to say abt tht mohammad preached among evil people who had no respect 4 life and education,what mohammad taught is reflected in the deeds of those who follow it and tht cn be seen in the deeds of umar,khalid and modern terrorists of today,y did umar order tht university to be destroyed y did khalid kill 40000 non combatant zoroastrians in 1 day 4 no reason???
That same Quran says that it is God (!!) sho make me totoaly reject your way of life.
[4:88]
Then what is the matter with you that you are divided into two parties about the hypocrites? Allah has cast them back (to disbelief) because of what they have earned. Do you want to guide him whom Allah has made to go astray? And he whom Allah has made to go astray, you will never find for him any way (of guidance)
... so why are you try to change ME change your God.
"Allah said,'A prophet must slaughter before collecting captives. A slaughtered enemy is driven from the land. Muhammad, you craved the desires of this world, its goods and the ransom captives would bring. But Allah desires killing them to manifest the religion." - Ishaq:327
hahahaha. i like the way that she even smiles and says ok,, well they did raid what she means that they robbed some caravans. for loot.. but they had a good reason for that.. hahahahah. but i am sure there is hadiths about why you can rob or kill other non believers..hahaha.the whole thing is like who is better, ? jesus or mohamd?? and they say that they dont have any idols..
@bigbrother1994 The Mecca also attack muslim caravans to.Plus by the arabian legal code of the time since Mecca illegality stole muslim wealth the muslim have the right to raid they caravans to recover it.
Interesting, you cannot come up with a reasonable argument of why Islam is theologicaly wrong, therefore you have to come up with insults for a man who is no longer here.
Islam absolutely encourages questioning. It encourages reasoning. It encourages its followers to seek knowledge. Many Muslim leaders have forgotten this. some have not.
Judaism encourages... do all jews encourage it?
Christianity encourages... do all christians encourage?
take any religion ... or any society for that matter...question the norms and you are likely to offend people.
its the unfortunate argument : do not confuse religion with its followers.
advocate....it is you who has the misconcetion of what non belivers think that 'islam spread by the sword' means. no non muslims belives that swords were held to the throats of people...however, with a little research, you will find that this notion is not far off
What makes Bukari and Muslim's accounts better is that they actually tell you if the story of hadith is reliable , and their own commentary on it , which isn't something Ibn Ishaq did .
Well, at the time of bukhari and muslim, many many more hadith had been made up. So they had to sort through many more narrations than Ishaq did. If you critically compare these hadith, you will also find discrepancies between them... There is no absolute proof about these sources. We have to live with a certain degree of uncertainty!
"critically compare these hadith" , thats what the science of "jarh w tadeel" is , there is a degree of uncertainty , but what makes bukhari and muslim better is that they actually tell you this , if the hadith or story has more narratives , which is stronger , and reasons to believe it or not .
I haven't even quoted him once, I have quoted bukhari and mainstream scholars of sunni Islam;-) I just mentioned Ibn Ishaq and am quite surprised about your reaction!
I know , and thank you for that , but you still claim he is the most authentic .
I dont think so , if you are so convinced in this book dispite all I brought , then please bring me some authenticity to the satanic verses myth for example , all i want is one strong narration chain.
so if we use your own logic , then why can't I use hitler's own biography and documents to prove he not an anti-Semite despite the evidence for the Jewish holocaust ?? that is what David Irving does .
The narration chains offered by mukhari and muslim aren't very reliable either. They were concocted ca. 200 years after mohammeds death. Please, don't believe that this is an irrefutable proof. The overwhelming part of Ishaqs biography is actually supported by the hadith of bukhari and muslim. This supports Ishaq biography. Deviations between them must be expected...
What ??? which of his myths are actually supported by hadith ?? for example you said that the battle of badr was a caravan raid , bring forth a hadith or verse to confirm it .
Dude , I'm actually giving you challenges here , try to respond to one at least .
and the authentic narration chains in bukhari and Muslim are reliable because there is an actual science called "jarh w tadeel" which is dedicated to this .
let me get this right....he asked for a verse or a hadith to prove the motivation of the battle of badr with a written confrontation of challenge for you to respond, which you did....and then? i hope Tchado is learning and accepting
another example , the satanic verses myth has over 27 narratives contradicting each other , and each one has either VERY weak or rejected narratives .... so is there any good reasons to believe this story ?? historically speaking
most of the chainless narrations/stories found in Ibn Ishaq's book 120 years after the Prophet's death are false. As Muslims we accept the Quran and AUTHENTIC Hadith only to be 100% true.
(e) Ibn Ishaq was (for lack of better term) a "suck up" to the Jews of Arabia
f) Most important of all, his report about Laylat al Qadr (the first 'revelation'), contradicts all the hadith versions
(g) There are several stories in Ibn Ishaq which are never found in the hadith. The reason why is because several hadith collectors such as Bukhari-- did not trust Ibn Ishaq.
(a) That's just an ad hominem attack. Being a shii doesn't mean he forged his sources.
(b) the relationship to free will was disputed in early Islam and there was no consensus until much later after ishaq's death among sunny scholars. That doesn't make his account of muhammeds life unreliable. Again, an ad hominem attack.
(c) I agree, but his account is much closer in time than bukhari or muslim, which is in favour of his biography.
What makes him unreliable is the lack of authentic chain narratives and original material , and no support from hadith , thats all I need to prove that something is wrong with that book , even bukhari and muslim make that clear in their introductions .
for example , do you have any strong narratives to the Asma story ?? or one version of the satanic verses myth that has an unbroken chain of narration.
plus the original book doesn't exist , It is unclear that Ibn Ishaq must have devoted himself to study and research the apostolic tradition by attending lectures in Egypt and then returning to Madina to collate and arrange all the materials that he had accumulated.
and his Islamic views are questionable , and there are many false stories in there . No Islamic Scholar accepts Ibn Ishaq to be 100% true. There are many problems with his stories (no chain of transmissions, no source for his material, etc). Therefore we can conclude that most of the chainless narrations/stories found in Ibn Ishaq's book 120 years after the Prophet's death are false.
if you are going to have dialog with Muslims in the future , I wouldn't recommend that book .
and just so you know , Ibn Ishaq is an early source , but among the Muslims its historically weak as hell , and the Isnad for most of the book is weak , you can quote it as much as you like , there are dozens of books that refute many of the claims within it , like Ibn Hisham's book.
answering - christian - claims . com / The - Problems - With - Ibn - Ishaq . html
delete the spaces , but I do recommend you read this .
Tabari has recorded: Abs and Zeeban were the tribes Who were the first to attack Medina and Hazrat Abu Bakr fought them before the return of Usamah (Tabari, V 01. IV, p.1873).
Ibn Khalladun has recorded: Abs and Zeeban were the first to attack Hazrat Abu Bakr and the others collected together at Zil Qassah (Ibn Khalladun, Vol. II, p.65).
Tabari has said: As soon as intimation was received of the death of the Holy Prophet, peace be on him, Banu Zeeban and Abs attacked those who still adhered to Islam and slaughtered them in diverse manners and so did the other tribes around them (Tabari, Vol. IV, p.1817).
The apostates had not only made preparations to advance upon Medina, they had, immediately after the death of the Holy Prophet, slaughtered the sincere Muslims among them who persisted in their adherence to Islam. Ibn Khalladun has said that on receiving the intimation of the death of the Holy Prophet, peace be on him, Banu Zeeban and Abs attacked those among themselves who were Muslims and the same was done by the other tribes who had become apostates (Ibn Khalladun, Vol. II, p.66).
No , they were fought for leaving Islam AND instigating violence against Muslims by declaring war on them , and planning multiple attacks on Madina , and when you declare war on Muslims , the laws of war kick in , which I think by now you know.
since you love scholars so much , I'll quote some
and I would really like you to answer the Question , how am I , a Muslim supposed to do "offensive jihad" , when I'm ordered in the QURAN not to attack first , not to transgress , not kill innocent people , fight those who fight me , and I'm supposed to apply the rules of war in Islam ??? How????
Because you are also ordered to kill unbelievers, wherever you find them and these injunctions make the earlier injunctions of the quran null and void. It is called the doctrine of abrogation. Furthermore, the sunnah of the prophet himself mandates raiding, enslaving an conquering unbelievers... As a sunni you must follow his sunnah!
I'm ordered to fight back , kill unbelievers who fight me , and the doctrine of abrogation is differed opon , one scholar abrogated 400 verses , others abrogate 22 , others abrogate NON , The Sunnah of the prophet mandates self defense and concurring enemies , and I follow the Sunnah.
Oh the sunnah of the prophet also mandates warfare against non-believers. I already quoted the hadith saying. "I have been ordered to fight the people, until they say la illaha ill'Allah..." That's offensive jihad, plain and simple!
The history of Catholocism and Christianity is just as "tainted", perfect example is the Crusades.
looke888 2 months ago
christianity is not religion christianity is buhdisim popisim crosisim
aliramzi41 1 month ago
@aliramzi41 Christianity is in fact a religion, just like Islam and Catholocism. It has derrivative views, certainly, but still remains a mainstream RELIGION.
looke888 1 week ago
3 Muslims converts where held for hours, stabbed with knives and were told to convert or die ... they didn't and were killed. Im happy to provide the articles and videos about this. (The families of those 3 Muslim converts pastors forgave those who killed them)
FollowingJesus247 3 months ago
How about the 10 Christian eye doctors who went to a Muslim country to help the poor villages. they were shot by Muslims because they though they were trying to convert people.
FollowingJesus247 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
How do you explain Iranian pastor being held for over 2 years and on trial to be executed for converting to Christianity????? yes this year of 2011
He was told to convert back or die ....
STOP LYING! This is still done today!
FollowingJesus247 3 months ago
Comment removed
FollowingJesus247 3 months ago
jazaki allah kol kheir :)
amalmansy 5 months ago
You'll be lucky to last 1/2 in a Muslim state without being raped by the people you are supporting.
MrPoxman 1 year ago
fuk islam and fuk paedophile muhammad
premorall 1 year ago
fuk christinity and fuk your nazi gay pop christianity mens GAY HAHAHAHAHA
aliramzi41 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
islamic hordes from present day saudi arabia invaded egypt, iraq, syria, jordan, persia all without any provocation at all and forced the population to convert to barbaric islam under torture and death. The saudi invaders also forced the population to only speak arabic, that is why many national languages, such as egypt's own historic national language, have basically died out. islam ruined the middle east. It is a disease started by a paedophile criminal warlord. fuck islam
premorall 1 year ago 2
@premorall Taht has happened ALL over the world..The Spanish to the mayans, etc, The Europeans to the First Nations, please consider other events before you make anti-muslim propoganda. I am not a Muslim, but I feel they have faced FAR too much hate from the Western world, It is not a "Muslim issue" it is a humanity issue. The people in the middle east, not just Muslims are widely precieved by Westerners as terrorists, only because our media is only covering the bad parts, it gets more views.
looke888 1 week ago
18th 'til 20th centuries - Do the pagans of Afghanistan's Kafirstan (kafir means unbeliever) province deserve repeated invasion in order to force them to convert to Islam, a process that's continuing right now and during which Muslims renamed the province Nuristan (nur means light)? No.
20th century – Had the Timorese been attacking and oppressing Muslims before being invaded by Indonesia in 1975? No
pertuk 1 year ago 3
19th century – Did the Luba Kingdom deserve to be destabilized and destroyed by East African slave traders? No.
19th century – Did the Bambara Empire of Africa deserve to be weakened by the jihad of Chekou Amadu and then decisively defeated and its population forced to convert to Islam by El Hadj Umar Tall? No.
pertuk 1 year ago 3
Comment removed
pertuk 1 year ago
17th century – Had the Austrians attacked or tried to oppress Muslims before Vienna being besieged twice? No.
18th century – Did the Americans attack the Barbary States before the Barbary States pirated American merchant vessels and force American sailors to convert to Islam? No.
19th century – Did the African Kingdom of Kaabu deserve to be destroyed by Alfa Yaya of Labé of the Muslim Fula people? No.
pertuk 1 year ago 3
16th century – Did the Ethiopians deserve to be attacked by Muslim armies under Imam Ahmad ibn Ibrihim al-Ghazi? No.
17th century – Had the Icelanders attacked or tried to oppress Muslims before Islamic warriors raided them and enslaved over 400 Icelanders? No
pertuk 1 year ago 4
15th century – Had the Greeks of the Trebizond Empire been attacking and oppressing Muslims before being extinguished by Mehmed in 1461 A.D.? No.
16th century – Who attacked whom first, Indonesian converts to Islam or the pre-Islamic Hindu and Buddhist Indonesians? My guess is, the Muslims attacked first. Why did the Sultanates of Malacca & Demak feel such a need to attack and destroy the Majapahit Empire
pertuk 1 year ago 4
14th to 15th centuries – Did the Slavs or Romanians attack any Muslims or try to oppress them before being attacked by the Ottomans? No.
15th century – Did the Principality of Theodoro in the Crimean Peninsula deserve to be destroyed by the Ottoman commander Gedik Ahmet Pasha? No
pertuk 1 year ago 3
14th century – Did the Russians and Lithuanians deserve to continue to be attacked and hegemonized by the Muslim Golden Horde throughout this century and into the 15th century? No. At one point, in 1378 Tokhtamysh the ruler of the Golden Horde promised to leave the inhabitants of Moscow unharmed if they opened the city gates. They did open the gates, and Tokhtamysh murdered around 24,000 Russians
pertuk 1 year ago 3
11th century – What were Muslim Turkic tribes doing moving into the Middle East and attacking the Byzantine Empire (among many other non-Muslim societies), culminating in the Battle of Manzikert in 1071 at which Muslim Turks took control over the eastern half Anatolia and provoked the Crusades? Did the Byzantines deserve such a sustained offensive onslaught from the Turks? No.
pertuk 1 year ago
11th century – Cilicia (around modern day Iskenderun on the coast in south central Turkey) had been part of Armenia since the days of Tigranes the Great who was conquered by the Romans in the 1st century BC. Had the Armenians there gone around attacking and trying to oppress Muslims before being conquered by the Mamelukes? No.
pertuk 1 year ago
10th century – Did the Buddhist Karakhoja Uighurs and the mixed Uighurs/Yugurs, Tocharians and Scythians of the Tarim Basin (centered around Hetian, or Khotan/Hotan) deserve to be conquered by the Muslim Kara-Khanid Uighurs in the name of Islam? No.
10th century – Did the pagan Ghana Empire deserve to be attacked and destroyed by Abu-Bakr Ibn-Umar? No.
11th century – Had the Sardinians attacked Muslims and attempted to oppress them before being attacked in 1015 A.D.? No.
pertuk 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
8th to 9th centuries – Did the French attempt to attack and oppress Muslims before being attacked at the Battle of Tours and then suffer Muslim bases in southern France? No.
9th century – Did the Sicilians attack any Muslims before the Muslims invaded and asserted hegemony over Sicily? No.
9th century – Did the Corsicans attack any Muslims before being conquered in 890 A.D.? No.
pertuk 1 year ago
Comment removed
pertuk 1 year ago
Comment removed
pertuk 1 year ago
Comment removed
pertuk 1 year ago
Comment removed
pertuk 1 year ago
8th century – Did the Spaniards attack any Muslims before the Umayyads initially conquered Spain? No.
8th century – Sindh province was conquered by the Arabs. Had the Hindu Indians attacked or tried to oppress Muslims? No.
8th century – Had the Sardinians attacked any Muslims before being raided by the Saracens from 705 to 706 A.D.? No.
pertuk 1 year ago
7th century – Did the Armenians attack or try to oppress Muslims before being conquered by the Arabs, their nobility murdered and subjected to intense pressure to convert to Islam? No.
7th century – Did the Georgians attack or try to oppress Muslims before being conquered by the Arabs? A definitive No.
7th century - Had the Copts been attacking and oppressing Muslims before being hegemonized, with permanent long term consequences, by the Muslim Arabs? No.
.
pertuk 1 year ago
7th century - Did the Khazars attack Muslims before Muslim crossed the Caucus Mountains to attack, but were beaten back at the capital of the Khazars: Balanjar? No.
7th century – Did the Byzantines attack Muslims before Muslims invaded and conquered Palestine and North Africa? No.
7th century – Did the Zoroastrian Persians attack Muslims before Muslims invaded and hegemonized Persia? No.
pertuk 1 year ago
Does that mean I got history all wrong?
It was really the Meccans that came running to Medina and begged to be converted?
The Persians and Indians were not killed but actually committed suicide when they heard they could not be Muslims?
Yeah I know, the Koran contains no violence and every second verse contains the word "love".
StopSpamming1 1 year ago
If islam ever tries to foist its religion on America there will be another civil war in the states.
pmoyer50 1 year ago
Both the Spanish Inquisition and the Crusades were provoked by Islamic aggression against the Christendom
pertuk 1 year ago
Comment removed
pertuk 1 year ago
PLEASE PLEASE PEOPLE DO NOT BE A MUSLIM UNTIL YOU MAKE SURE THAT YOU WANT TO BE .ISLAM NEVER FORCED ANYBODY TO BE MUSLIM.IF U DO NOT WANT TO IT'S YOU BUSINESS .BUT WE HAVE TO SAY THE MESSAGR IS OUR DUTY AS MUSLIM THAT'T IT :)
MAY ALLAH GUIDE ALL THE MANKIND TO THE STRAIGHT PATH AMINE
samib21 1 year ago
Spain just by accident became Muslim with the Visigoth kings voluntarily embracing Islam and dispatching en masse the most beautiful Gothic ladies to the harems of their Islamic advisors and elder brothers. The raids on the south coasts of Italy and France are never mentioned in any original annals of the 9th or 10th century...Any opinions different from these have long been proved by Islamic scholars and some of the more tolerant and open-minded Western historians as "totally baseless".
pertuk 1 year ago
@pertuk u r trying to appear as a smart person but what u r saying is called "half the truth"
1- Crusaders massacred the people in jerusalem , Saladin entered the City peacefully
2- what about Lithuania , how they became christians
3- jews were living peacefully in spain and when the Crusader heroes came , Muslims and jews were forced to convert TORQUEMADA , and for the jews they found no place in Europe to escape except ottoman turkey .
(continued)
SoProudMuslim 1 year ago
@SoProudMuslim True, Crusaders did massacare people in Jeruslame, Jihadis also massacared people both before and after. Christian groups have also done reconciliatory gestures about the crusades, Muslim groups have done no such thing for the atrocities jihadis committed, nor will they ever
pertuk 1 year ago
@SoProudMuslim If Jews were living peacefully in Muslim Spain then why were Jews massacared in Granada in 1066
pertuk 1 year ago
@pertuk why don't u go and find out , among the massacred the leader was the minister who was a JEW in the time when jews could't take offices in the mountains in europe
1. it was Granada and there was like 22 kingdoms in spain at this time with no probs with jews.
2 . The mob done it not the officials , in europe the pope was himself doing the job
3. This jewish minister , his father was the minister b4 he died , his father ruled wisely (continued)
SoProudMuslim 1 year ago
@pertuk
4. unlike his father this minister gave shared the wealth of the City among the jews leaving the muslims and christians ( the majority) in poverty .
5. u gonna ask how the officials didn't interfere : u have to know that the king knew that this stupid minister was involved in killing his son (the heir) so he found it a chance to take revenge by the mob
6.u r the only one who deny that the jews lived peacefully in muslim spain (even jews admit it) (continued)
SoProudMuslim 1 year ago
@pertuk now i have replied objectively and clearly about an incident that happened in one city ... but u didn't defend ur pope who oppressed in the name of God , who forced muslims and jews in spain to convert to catholicism , who launched dirty crusades who were cannibals (by word) they have eaten human flesh in a small city in levant , and o course killed 70 thousand in jerusalem ..
EXPLAIN , DON'T THROW COMMENT AND RUN , NEXT TIME KNOW THE WHOLE STORY
SoProudMuslim 1 year ago
4- Muslims ruled over India for 1000 years , yet muslims were always minority ,
they never converted any body by the sword's edge (compare it to the next)
5 - South America , can we find any single one who worship whatever they were worshipping (don't even know their religion) in other meaning can we found indegious people in south america.
6- remember there is christians in egypt (ruled 1400 yrs by muslims) there is a reasonable percentage of christians in the arab world
SoProudMuslim 1 year ago
u r talking about Byzantium like it was the state of peace and just , the prophet has ended the message with emperor by "upon you the guilt of the Arians "
search in books who r the Arians ... and the emperor has killed the messengers sent by the prophets (imagine a country killed an ambassador ) Muslims have war with them.
yet u have to know muslims fought the persians and the Byzantines , i think it was better to fight Ethiopia (continued)
SoProudMuslim 1 year ago
@pertuk Ethipia was nearer too . but the king was a just king and no sect of religion was oppressed .. and the prophet cared about the Arians whom the byzantines slaughtered across their empire .
Spain, visigoths were Arians but Roderic was Catholic and he oppressed arians he even raped the daughter of the ruler of Ceuta and he helped Tareq to cross the path to the peninsula .
(continued)
SoProudMuslim 1 year ago
Constantinople was never besieged by the Arabs and particularly the year 717 A.D. was one of the happiest in Byzantine history because the Byzantines saved a lot of money not having to waste their expensive Greek fire on Allah's peaceful missionaries and preachers. Charles Martel was a minor figure in the history of the world and he had never seen a single Arab beduin in his life although some of his libels on them have been preserved now banned throughout Chirac's France.
pertuk 1 year ago
Comment removed
SoProudMuslim 1 year ago
The Jews of Yathrib were never exterminated by Muhammed, their wives and children never enslaved .The battle of the Yarmuk never took place. The same is valid about Qadisya and Nehavend as Persia remained free and never converted at the point of the sword to Islam. Islam was so fashionable in Persia from 610 that everyone wanted to enjoy it to the full .
pertuk 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@pertuk my question to u now rather u know the whole truth and u hide the half of it so u r called deceiver .
OR u didn't know the other half of the story so u have a home work to do and i advice u to start with the jews of Beny quraida and read the whole story.
SoProudMuslim 1 year ago
Was Islam spread by the sword? Yes, predominantly!
Read your history for example muslim history in wikipedia.
bhigr 1 year ago
@bhigr Then tell me, why is Spain not Muslim? And the Balkans and India too?
Ahmedmega10000 1 year ago
@Ahmedmega10000 These countries are not governed by shariah law. Therefore, they do not belong to the dar al islam, they are not muslim.
bhigr 1 year ago
@bhigr They were all governed by Muslims for century's, but aren't Muslims. If Islam is spread by the sword, why are they not totaly Muslim? And do not forget the crusades, and inqisition. Christianity was spread by sword.
Ahmedmega10000 1 year ago
@Ahmedmega10000 Because spreading Islam means spreading muslim government,i.e. shariah rule. Not all non-muslims must become muslim. But all non-muslims must submit to muslim rule. Non-muslims under shariah law are dimmhis. They are disgrace, belittled and humiliated by the muslim overlords. In addition they must pay a poll tax (jizyah) as a sign of kufr.
bhigr 1 year ago
@bhigr Yes, they had to pay a tax, but didn't have to go to the army. And Muslims have to submit to Christian rule. Can you tell me a Christian kingdom that allowed sharia law? And cruseds were sooooooo peacefull, they were a genocide. And inqisition was torturing. Christianity was spread by sword.
Ahmedmega10000 1 year ago
@Ahmedmega10000 Dhimmis were not allowed to go to the army. They were not allowed to hold any public office. They were not allowed to build churches. They could not testify before court, they were not allowed to publicly preach or convert musllims,.... Muslims must not submit to christian rule. We have a secular government in western nations. Allowing shariah law equates to submitting to muslim rule, so no self-respecting non-muslim can do that.
bhigr 1 year ago
@bhigr Yes, Muslim halifates had sharia law and Christian kingdoms had their law. Where's the problem there?
Ahmedmega10000 1 year ago
@Ahmedmega10000 The problem is that shariah law systematically discriminates against non-muslims. Islam is like a mafia organisation. You must pay for not being killed by muslims the so called protection tax, jizyah.
bhigr 1 year ago
@bhigr WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? CAN YOU TELL ME WHERE DOES THE SHARIA LAW SAYS DO DISCRIMINATE NON-MUSLIMS? YOU ARE TELLING LIES, AND I DON'T SEE THE SENSE BEHINDE YOUR ARGUMENTS.
Ahmedmega10000 1 year ago
@bhigr And these taxses were invented by the Ottomans, not by sharia law.
Ahmedmega10000 1 year ago
@Ahmedmega10000 These taxes were invented by mohamed. let me quote the quran
9:29Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
bhigr 1 year ago
@bhigr The Jizya means the tax (burning in hell)! hahaha!
Ahmedmega10000 1 year ago
@bhigr and Catholic kingdoms have killed all Muslims they got in their hands, so they had not to pay any taxes.
Ahmedmega10000 1 year ago
@Ahmedmega10000 Crusades. Please tell me: How many centuries had muslims been waging jihad against christian nations prior to the crusades? Please enumerate the men women and children slaughtered and enslaved by muslims within this time period!
bhigr 1 year ago
@bhigr WHAT! You are a total liar! First there was never a massacre made by Muslims exept perhaps those killed Armenians. Christians had made dozens of genocides and that can't be denied. Seccond, that was not the reason for the crusades, but lies that have been told by the church. They said that Muslims have forbidden piligmirs to visit Jerusalem, but that was a lie. Christians have used inqisition to not only kill, but also torture Muslims, and that is far worse than just killing.
Ahmedmega10000 1 year ago
@Ahmedmega10000 Total liar? And then: never a massacre, except perhaps.... You contradict yourself. There were innumerable massacres committed by muslims in the name of faith. There were innumerable wars of conquest - jihad - waged on christian nations for more than 400 years prior to the crusades. Now lets count the corpses and raped and enslaved women and children.... You fear the outcome don't you?
bhigr 1 year ago
@bhigr WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? Can you tell me when have Muslims killed and raped women? And you have not answered my very first question: WHY ARE THE BALKANS, SPAIN AND INDIA NOT MUSLIM? WHY WAS THEIR NON-MUSLIM POPULATION NOT MASSACRED? And, the medieval religius in-tolerance was started by the Church, so don't waste your breath.
Ahmedmega10000 1 year ago
@Ahmedmega10000 You dont know the history of your prophet? The prophet muhammed personally massacred between 600 and 900 male jews, anyone who had grown pubic hair. The women and children were enslaved. They were called banu Quraiza. Muslims ever since have followed the sunnah of their prophet mohammmed.
bhigr 1 year ago
@bhigr And you got that from? The Bible? You are so desperate, you cant even bring truth to the table. And how should he had seen if they have grown pubic hair?
Ahmedmega10000 1 year ago
@Ahmedmega10000 They were stripped from their clothes in order to see whether they had grown pubic hair. Trenches were dug in medina. Then the prophet muhammmed beheaded each and every male jew with pubic hair. This is according to muslim sources. Read the sirat Rassoul Allah by ibn ishaq or read the wikipedia article about the banu quraizah
bhigr 1 year ago
@bhigr HAHAHA! And the Qur'an itself says that it is forbidden to kill someone yjust if he doesn't believe. And, it would be tottaly idiotic to kill someone for growing pubic hair. Remember the BALKANS, SPAIN AND INDIA I talked about? Can you explain me that? And the inqisition? Torturing used by Catholics?
Ahmedmega10000 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Ahmedmega10000 Well you obviously didnt read the quran.
9:5 So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
"And, it would be tottaly idiotic to kill someone for growing pubic hair." I agree, mohammed was an imbecile.
bhigr 1 year ago
@Ahmedmega10000 Sure, the Spanish drove out the muslims from Spain. This is called the reconquista. The history of islam in india is infamous indeed. This is called the hindu holocaust. The systematic slaughter and subjugation of hindus. The British stopped this islamic practice.
bhigr 1 year ago
@bhigr Hahaha! The truth is that Spain was Muslim for about 20% wich converted willingly to Islam, but the Spanish slaughtered them all. That is the turth about your own religion. And that is shit wat you said about India. It is known that Hindu have slaughtered milions of Muslims, but because the Indians were too vast in numbers they couldn't kill them all. And the Balkans perhaps? Why did Serbs slaughtered thousands of Muslims in the past 18 years?
Ahmedmega10000 1 year ago
@Ahmedmega10000 Yes, you are right, the muslims could not slaughter all the hindus. They managed to slaughter about 100 million hindus in the 800 years of muslim conquests. The hindu kush between india and persia means slaughter of indians because of the number who died on the rout through the mountains to persia and the middle east. Muslims cannot pride themselves with conversion because this only takes place under extreme suppression and discrimination under muslim rule.
bhigr 1 year ago
@bhigr I see you can't read. You just humiliated yourself. lmao
Ahmedmega10000 1 year ago
@Ahmedmega10000 Now, why don't we touch the history of islamic slavery starting with mohammed until today? You do know that you can rape any slave woman under shariah law, even if she is married? Slavery is still being practiced in Sudan and parts of the middle east in the name of shariah!
bhigr 1 year ago
@bhigr I'm talking the truth. You are talking lies. You are answering Only half of my comments. I'm answering all of your comments. Therefore I don't see the sense behinde arguing with you. (ALLOWED TO RAPE A MARRIED WOMEN! HAHAHHAHAHA THANKS FOR MAKING ME LAUGH! HAHAHAHHAHHA YOU ARE SOOOOOOO FUNY MAN! HAHHAHAH)
Ahmedmega10000 1 year ago
@Ahmedmega10000 It's not funny. The islamic term is "Ma malakat aymanukum" what your right hand posseses, those are slaves Surah 4, Veres 24 Muslims are allowed to rape female slaves. Muhammed frequently raped women after he had killed their father and brothers.
bhigr 1 year ago
@bhigr hahaa no where does it say to rape woman and kill their fathers and brothers. Do you think the 1.5 billion people on this planet will accept islam if this were true? you only make yourself look like a fool when you say things that aren't true. and your other point, muslims had never been waging war against peace, only against terrany & oppression, a defensive stance Islam has always had. So long as satan roams the earth the truth will always be under attack, and truth will attack back
maxwelle103 1 year ago
@maxwelle103 "The apostle of Allah sent a military expedition..They defeated them and took them captives. Some of the Companions of the apostle of Allah were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers. So Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Quranic verse, "And all married women (are forbidden) unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess". .." 4:24
Abu Dawud 2:2150
bhigr 1 year ago
@maxwelle103 ..."And all married women (are forbidden) unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess". That is to say, they are lawful for them when they complete their waiting period."
bhigr 1 year ago
Narrated Ibn Muhairiz: .. "We went out with Allah's Apostle for the raid of Banu Al-Mustaliq and we received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus. ....
bhigr 1 year ago
So when we intended to do coitus interrupt us, we said, 'How can we do coitus interruptus before asking Allah's Apostle who is present among us?" We asked (him) about it and he said, 'It is better for you not to do so, for if any soul (till the Day of Resurrection) is predestined to exist, it will exist."
Sahih Bukhari 5:59:459
bhigr 1 year ago
@bhigr
jihad mean struggle
in islam we allowed to defence our self against agression
sultanmuhammadII 1 year ago
@bhigr Never talk about the Medieval time again. Inqsitions were used by who? THE CATHOLICS! And the Crusades were started by who? THE CATHOLICS! And why is Israel not Islamic? (I forgot that)
Ahmedmega10000 1 year ago
@Ahmedmega10000 The crusades were a reaction to over 400 years of muslim conquest of christian lands. The wars started, when your prophet proclaimed. "I have been order to fight the people until all say none has the right to be worshipped but Allah..." So get your facts straight!
bhigr 1 year ago
@bhigr Another lie. I figured something out. You are either six years old or you have missed school. The cruseds were used for the pope (as many popes had even sex with women in the medieval times) to claim lands as his own. These attempts howerwer, have all failed.
Ahmedmega10000 1 year ago
@Ahmedmega10000 Ad hominem attacks are non sequiturs. This is a typical muslim response. You cannot deny that muslims had been waging wars relentlessly against christian nations prior to the crusades. Muslims continue to wage jihad against kufr all over the world, because their goal is world conquest.
bhigr 1 year ago
@bhigr
Please can you tell me why should world conquest be our goal?
Actually, I once read a book about the sings of the day of judgement and one
sing is that Islam will end as a small religion and a breeze will take the souls of
the believers into the heavens and the Ka'bah will be destroyed by unbelievers.
Ahmedmega10000 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Ahmedmega10000 "Please can you tell me why should world conquest be our goal?" In order to enforce Allah's law, all over the world. I shall quote you once more:
"Jihad means claiming the unbelievers lands if nesesery and destroying their armies." Claiming the unbelievers lands, yup! Thank you for your honesty!
bhigr 1 year ago
How did Islam come to Israel? Jihad. lligitemate war of aggression.
bhigr 1 year ago
@bhigr Partly. Jihad forbidds to kill civilians. Islam came by coversion to Israel. Now I gotta go it's currently 1h 40 min a.m.
Ahmedmega10000 1 year ago
@bhigr Yes, they drove us out and killed every single Muslim wich was left in spain and only few converted to Islam approx. 20%. All of them killed by christians.
Ahmedmega10000 1 year ago
@bhigr I will tell you how much years we were killing you. Not one. Jihad means claiming the unbelievers lands if nesesery and destroying their armies. Crusades mean killing AND TORTURING all unbelievers. That is affirmated by the pope himself you are prob the only person who thinks that the crusades were peaceful acts.
Ahmedmega10000 1 year ago
islam is a satan's religion. all muslims jihadists are going to burn in hell.
TheSardar22 1 year ago
I think the sword not used nowdays and islam spread so fastly why? be cause islam something different compare other religion islam the true religion 1 god only
TheArabianLegend 1 year ago
Comment removed
TheArabianLegend 1 year ago
Jihad is commanded of all believers in Islam. The goal is to convert the world, bringing all under the dictates of Sharia Law. Muhammad and his followers instigated and fought no less than 27 wars to conquer and subdue other nations by the sword. There are 2 swords depicted on Saudi Arabia's national flag. Muhammad ordered the KILLING of all who would not bow down to him a Allah's messenger. O Messenger, rouse the Believers to the fight" Q 8:65
gooldie888 1 year ago
@gooldie888 Let's speak frankly u speak without proof so let me proof that to u American the Christian regime bombings Hiroshima and Nagasaki & germany also killed all jews at holocaust & Christian killed muslims of Bosna i Hercegovina & more & more so nowdays there is no swords in use and no masked faces understood
TheArabianLegend 1 year ago
If you preach that Islam was not spread by the sword, then I would ask you to stop reading the Koran, and read actual history. Read about what happened to the Sassanid Persians, the Christians of Egypt and North Africa, and more as armies of Arabs stormed these lands and supplanted themselves as rulers and the natives as servants
I think the major problem with som Muslims is that they cannot consider the state of other people than themselves, and wont accept anything that stains their identity.
deserk 1 year ago
jsut 1 question for u brainwashed muslim the whole world knows islam ws spread by the sword-y r thr no zoroastrians in iran?y r thr no buddhists along the silk route?y didi muslims destroyt the place whr buddha gained enlightenment,muslims destroyed buddhist nalanda university and killed all 100000 monks in 1 day 4 nt converting to islam,100000 hindus wer kille din 1 day by timur in delhi,khalid ibn walid killed more than 40000 zoroastrians in 1 day andthe river flowed with thr blood
thescorpionking2020 1 year ago
Check this video: The Trouble with Christianity
Mowali 1 year ago
the prophet Muhammed PBUH have fought in 11 war in his life NINE were defence from Quraish and one was because quraish brock it's covenant with the prophet Muhammed PBUH & the last one was against Khaiber which wasa city in arabia inhabeted by jews and they were always a threat to the muslim country. who want to see a religion spreed by force let him look at cristianity and how they pay money to poor people to convert to cristianity & also what they've done to Al-andalus & in the crusaides.
FulYasameen 2 years ago
mayAllah bless you sister ..nice video:)
FulYasameen 2 years ago 2
WOW...
After 13 years in Mecca he had about 50 followers and after 8 eight years of war with Mecca THEY CONFIRMED !! Are you joking? They had been rejecting "MO" for almost 20 years - and they belived him when he got 10.000 soldiers in their town!!!
Guess why.
/bullshit
pigment777 2 years ago
@pigment777
islam ruled india for 10 centuries and today 80% of the indians are non muslims,also till today there are thousands of jews in yeman which is an arabic muslim country till today and also there are millions of cristians arabs specially in egypt ,so if islam was spreed by sword there woudn't be one cristian arabic in the world nor one jewish and all india would be muslim after a 1000 year being ruled by islam!!!
FulYasameen 2 years ago
@FulYasameen islam ruled india form 1192-1707 ok and india once consisted of bangaldesh,afghanistanpakistan ok what is today india is all thth ws left 4 the hindus who inhabited it,and as far islamic attrocities in india go lemme tell u-
1)vikramshila,taxila,nalanda,,odantapuri,somapura,jadadalla all wer destroyed by muslims
2)in 1398 timur massacred the entire hindu popultion of delhi as in 1 day more than 200-300 thousand people wer killed
thescorpionking2020 1 year ago
@thescorpionking2020 if this is true this is not Islam this is a Human action which is against Islam. if Islam spread by force then why till now in countries ruled only by Muslims for centuries you can find other Religions (Jews and Christians and others) why did Muslims left them alive all this time. did Muslims Invade Indonesia or west Africa. read the history and you will find the truth.
nabilalihibah 1 year ago
@nabilalihibah dude the fcat is thth these human actions wer perpetuated coz islam totally legalizes them,if islam ws so peaceful y r the no pre islamic pagans,jews,chrsitians who orginally inhabited arabia thr today,whr r the zoroastrians of iran.just 100000 of them today in ths world,y did ur caliph umar who supposedly ws a sahaba and lived with mohammad destroy major persian universities,they wer supposed to b closest 2 mohammad
thescorpionking2020 1 year ago
@nabilalihibah u muslims shud apologise to the entire world 4 ur inhuman actions thruout the last 1400 years,y didi muslims attack persia,india,spain what had these countries done to muslims i dun think so,u attacked coz u wanted evryone to be muslim and spread ur evil fascist ideology by the sword,muslims hav destroyed more than 30 universities and educational institutions in general,gundishapur,taxila,nalanda,vikramshila evrythin ur's is a destructive religion and ideology
thescorpionking2020 1 year ago
muslims destroyed the temple whr buddha ganied enlightement,destroyed millions of hindu temples,guru gobind singh's 7 n 8 yr old sons wer bricked alive 4 nt convertin to islam,guru arjun dev ws boiled alive 4 nt convertin to islam,guru tegh bahadur beheaded 4 nt convertin,haqiqat rai a 12 yr old hindu boy hanged 4 nt converting to islam,its a shame thh u muslims cn actually say tht ur evil religion ws nt spread by the sword,ur religion destroyed buddhism totally nd killed so many innocent people
thescorpionking2020 1 year ago
when mahmud of ghazni destroyed the somnath temple he killed all 50000 of its inhabitants who wer all non combatants nuthin gt to do wth islam,go n search aurnagzeb he ruled india from 1659-1707 and he forced people to convert to islam giving them option of either death or islam,ur religion is the most evil ideology tht ever came up,u destroyed zoroastrianism so much t so tht only 150000 of tht benign faith are left today in this world shame on u muslims
thescorpionking2020 1 year ago
@pigment777 where did the 10000 came from? they were Muslim followers. and why did he took them to Mecca? because people of Mecca brook the peace treaty made earlier and attacked a Muslim tribe under his protection. so it was Justified according to any man made law.
nabilalihibah 1 year ago
Zoroastrianism was the state religion of three pre-Islamic Persian empires, the last being the Sassanian empire that passed a decree in AD 224.[3][5] Unlike the Greeks, who had conquered Iran centuries earlier, the Arabs set out to destroy Zoroastrianism n replace it with Islam.When asked by Yazdezard, about the reasons for the unwarranted Arab aggression against Persians, an Arab soldier replied, "Allah commanded us, by the mouth of His Prophet, to extend the dominon of Islam over all nations."
thescorpionking2020 1 year ago
According to an account in Tarikh al-Tabari by Al-Tabari, the Arab Commander Sa'ad ibn Abi Waqqas wrote to Umar about what should be done with the books at Ctesiphon. Umar wrote back: "If the books contradict the Qur'an, they are blasphemous. On the other hand, if they are in agreement, they are not needed, as for us Koran is sufficient." Thus, the huge library was destroyed and the books, the product of the generations of Persian scientists and scholars were thrown into fire or the Euphrates.
thescorpionking2020 1 year ago
@nabilalihibah ya this is wat ur sahabas learnt from mohamamd destroying universities and libraries huh what do u hav to say abt tht mohammad preached among evil people who had no respect 4 life and education,what mohammad taught is reflected in the deeds of those who follow it and tht cn be seen in the deeds of umar,khalid and modern terrorists of today,y did umar order tht university to be destroyed y did khalid kill 40000 non combatant zoroastrians in 1 day 4 no reason???
thescorpionking2020 1 year ago
Dear sister...
That same Quran says that it is God (!!) sho make me totoaly reject your way of life.
[4:88]
Then what is the matter with you that you are divided into two parties about the hypocrites? Allah has cast them back (to disbelief) because of what they have earned. Do you want to guide him whom Allah has made to go astray? And he whom Allah has made to go astray, you will never find for him any way (of guidance)
... so why are you try to change ME change your God.
pigment777 2 years ago
"Allah said,'A prophet must slaughter before collecting captives. A slaughtered enemy is driven from the land. Muhammad, you craved the desires of this world, its goods and the ransom captives would bring. But Allah desires killing them to manifest the religion." - Ishaq:327
44warjunkie 2 years ago
hahahaha. i like the way that she even smiles and says ok,, well they did raid what she means that they robbed some caravans. for loot.. but they had a good reason for that.. hahahahah. but i am sure there is hadiths about why you can rob or kill other non believers..hahaha.the whole thing is like who is better, ? jesus or mohamd?? and they say that they dont have any idols..
bigbrother1994 2 years ago
@bigbrother1994 The Mecca also attack muslim caravans to.Plus by the arabian legal code of the time since Mecca illegality stole muslim wealth the muslim have the right to raid they caravans to recover it.
Barenziahlover 2 years ago
mashaAllah very good and informative video !
jouhainey 2 years ago 2
You don't know shit.
Axcendar 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Mohammad is a famous pedophile. His wife was 9 years old. Disgusting.
DeepHauz 2 years ago
Interesting, you cannot come up with a reasonable argument of why Islam is theologicaly wrong, therefore you have to come up with insults for a man who is no longer here.
AngelofAllah2007 2 years ago
i can come up with many, but here is one:
the word Islam means "to sumbit". you're basically submitting.
ok it's fine to submit to G-d...but you have to be able to question and challenge him as well as clerics.
Islam discourages this, where as Judaism encourages it.
questioning, debating, arguing...this is what Islam forbids.
if you should so much as question a cleric , you are branded as a heretic and/or traitor.
if you so much as question Islam, you are threatened with violence.
DeepHauz 2 years ago
Islam absolutely encourages questioning. It encourages reasoning. It encourages its followers to seek knowledge. Many Muslim leaders have forgotten this. some have not.
Judaism encourages... do all jews encourage it?
Christianity encourages... do all christians encourage?
take any religion ... or any society for that matter...question the norms and you are likely to offend people.
its the unfortunate argument : do not confuse religion with its followers.
zhasnain1 2 years ago
read up on what pedophillia is. read up on the characteristics of a pedophile.. and on the victims of pedophillia.
then read up on the life of Muhammad (pbuh).
Then re-assess what you believe.
I could give you links to credible material... if you'd like.
zhasnain1 2 years ago
Thanks Mr. ZIONIST 4 your stupid comment ! why don't your Talmudic facts
and find out how the boys are treated !
massimo38 2 years ago
why dont you ask christians & Jews in the middle east and they tell you if islam was preached to them or was put as a sword on their necks
AssyrianArmy 2 years ago
exactly.
DeepHauz 2 years ago
Islam was spread by the sword, its a well known fact and the sources are in the Quran and Hadith books.
all what shes saying is rubish, when Tariq bn Zyad invaded Spain he burned his ships & told his army
"the sea is behind you and the ENEMY is infront of you"
this means he didnt preach Islam in Spain peacfuly as this donkey is claiming but BY SOWRD. cant get more obvious than this.
she needs to read Quran & hadith Books stories before opening her mouth.
AssyrianArmy 2 years ago
advocate....it is you who has the misconcetion of what non belivers think that 'islam spread by the sword' means. no non muslims belives that swords were held to the throats of people...however, with a little research, you will find that this notion is not far off
forzaitalia2 2 years ago
What makes Bukari and Muslim's accounts better is that they actually tell you if the story of hadith is reliable , and their own commentary on it , which isn't something Ibn Ishaq did .
Tchado1000 2 years ago
Well, at the time of bukhari and muslim, many many more hadith had been made up. So they had to sort through many more narrations than Ishaq did. If you critically compare these hadith, you will also find discrepancies between them... There is no absolute proof about these sources. We have to live with a certain degree of uncertainty!
bhigr 2 years ago
"critically compare these hadith" , thats what the science of "jarh w tadeel" is , there is a degree of uncertainty , but what makes bukhari and muslim better is that they actually tell you this , if the hadith or story has more narratives , which is stronger , and reasons to believe it or not .
Tchado1000 2 years ago
No , it doesn't belong under the "most authentic" category
Tchado1000 2 years ago
or even "most reliable"
Tchado1000 2 years ago
thats why even if you keep quoting a scholar , if I quote an authentic hadith or the Quran , to muslims it has higher authority .
Tchado1000 2 years ago
I haven't even quoted him once, I have quoted bukhari and mainstream scholars of sunni Islam;-) I just mentioned Ibn Ishaq and am quite surprised about your reaction!
bhigr 2 years ago
I know , and thank you for that , but you still claim he is the most authentic .
I dont think so , if you are so convinced in this book dispite all I brought , then please bring me some authenticity to the satanic verses myth for example , all i want is one strong narration chain.
so if we use your own logic , then why can't I use hitler's own biography and documents to prove he not an anti-Semite despite the evidence for the Jewish holocaust ?? that is what David Irving does .
Tchado1000 2 years ago
The narration chains offered by mukhari and muslim aren't very reliable either. They were concocted ca. 200 years after mohammeds death. Please, don't believe that this is an irrefutable proof. The overwhelming part of Ishaqs biography is actually supported by the hadith of bukhari and muslim. This supports Ishaq biography. Deviations between them must be expected...
bhigr 2 years ago
What ??? which of his myths are actually supported by hadith ?? for example you said that the battle of badr was a caravan raid , bring forth a hadith or verse to confirm it .
Dude , I'm actually giving you challenges here , try to respond to one at least .
and the authentic narration chains in bukhari and Muslim are reliable because there is an actual science called "jarh w tadeel" which is dedicated to this .
Tchado1000 2 years ago
Sure, it was a caravan raid. bukhari volume 5, book 59, Nr. 286
bhigr 2 years ago
let me get this right....he asked for a verse or a hadith to prove the motivation of the battle of badr with a written confrontation of challenge for you to respond, which you did....and then? i hope Tchado is learning and accepting
forzaitalia2 2 years ago
another example , the satanic verses myth has over 27 narratives contradicting each other , and each one has either VERY weak or rejected narratives .... so is there any good reasons to believe this story ?? historically speaking
most of the chainless narrations/stories found in Ibn Ishaq's book 120 years after the Prophet's death are false. As Muslims we accept the Quran and AUTHENTIC Hadith only to be 100% true.
Tchado1000 2 years ago
(e) Ibn Ishaq was (for lack of better term) a "suck up" to the Jews of Arabia
f) Most important of all, his report about Laylat al Qadr (the first 'revelation'), contradicts all the hadith versions
(g) There are several stories in Ibn Ishaq which are never found in the hadith. The reason why is because several hadith collectors such as Bukhari-- did not trust Ibn Ishaq.
Tchado1000 2 years ago
several respected Muslim theologians rightly reject his authority for several reasons:
(a) That he was a Shi'i favouring Ali over all the other contenders to the Khilfa
(b) That he held the view that Man has free will, which is kind of contrary to the Quranic perception.
(c) That his Isnads (chains of transmissions) were defective
(d) He used reports of traditions gathered from Jewish sources
Tchado1000 2 years ago
(a) That's just an ad hominem attack. Being a shii doesn't mean he forged his sources.
(b) the relationship to free will was disputed in early Islam and there was no consensus until much later after ishaq's death among sunny scholars. That doesn't make his account of muhammeds life unreliable. Again, an ad hominem attack.
(c) I agree, but his account is much closer in time than bukhari or muslim, which is in favour of his biography.
(d) Again ad hominem...
bhigr 2 years ago
What makes him unreliable is the lack of authentic chain narratives and original material , and no support from hadith , thats all I need to prove that something is wrong with that book , even bukhari and muslim make that clear in their introductions .
Tchado1000 2 years ago
for example , do you have any strong narratives to the Asma story ?? or one version of the satanic verses myth that has an unbroken chain of narration.
plus the original book doesn't exist , It is unclear that Ibn Ishaq must have devoted himself to study and research the apostolic tradition by attending lectures in Egypt and then returning to Madina to collate and arrange all the materials that he had accumulated.
Tchado1000 2 years ago
and his Islamic views are questionable , and there are many false stories in there . No Islamic Scholar accepts Ibn Ishaq to be 100% true. There are many problems with his stories (no chain of transmissions, no source for his material, etc). Therefore we can conclude that most of the chainless narrations/stories found in Ibn Ishaq's book 120 years after the Prophet's death are false.
if you are going to have dialog with Muslims in the future , I wouldn't recommend that book .
Tchado1000 2 years ago
and just so you know , Ibn Ishaq is an early source , but among the Muslims its historically weak as hell , and the Isnad for most of the book is weak , you can quote it as much as you like , there are dozens of books that refute many of the claims within it , like Ibn Hisham's book.
answering - christian - claims . com / The - Problems - With - Ibn - Ishaq . html
delete the spaces , but I do recommend you read this .
Tchado1000 2 years ago
Tabari has recorded: Abs and Zeeban were the tribes Who were the first to attack Medina and Hazrat Abu Bakr fought them before the return of Usamah (Tabari, V 01. IV, p.1873).
Ibn Khalladun has recorded: Abs and Zeeban were the first to attack Hazrat Abu Bakr and the others collected together at Zil Qassah (Ibn Khalladun, Vol. II, p.65).
Tchado1000 2 years ago
Tabari has said: As soon as intimation was received of the death of the Holy Prophet, peace be on him, Banu Zeeban and Abs attacked those who still adhered to Islam and slaughtered them in diverse manners and so did the other tribes around them (Tabari, Vol. IV, p.1817).
Tchado1000 2 years ago
The apostates had not only made preparations to advance upon Medina, they had, immediately after the death of the Holy Prophet, slaughtered the sincere Muslims among them who persisted in their adherence to Islam. Ibn Khalladun has said that on receiving the intimation of the death of the Holy Prophet, peace be on him, Banu Zeeban and Abs attacked those among themselves who were Muslims and the same was done by the other tribes who had become apostates (Ibn Khalladun, Vol. II, p.66).
Tchado1000 2 years ago
No , they were fought for leaving Islam AND instigating violence against Muslims by declaring war on them , and planning multiple attacks on Madina , and when you declare war on Muslims , the laws of war kick in , which I think by now you know.
since you love scholars so much , I'll quote some
Tchado1000 2 years ago
and I would really like you to answer the Question , how am I , a Muslim supposed to do "offensive jihad" , when I'm ordered in the QURAN not to attack first , not to transgress , not kill innocent people , fight those who fight me , and I'm supposed to apply the rules of war in Islam ??? How????
Tchado1000 2 years ago
Because you are also ordered to kill unbelievers, wherever you find them and these injunctions make the earlier injunctions of the quran null and void. It is called the doctrine of abrogation. Furthermore, the sunnah of the prophet himself mandates raiding, enslaving an conquering unbelievers... As a sunni you must follow his sunnah!
bhigr 2 years ago
I'm ordered to fight back , kill unbelievers who fight me , and the doctrine of abrogation is differed opon , one scholar abrogated 400 verses , others abrogate 22 , others abrogate NON , The Sunnah of the prophet mandates self defense and concurring enemies , and I follow the Sunnah.
Tchado1000 2 years ago
Oh the sunnah of the prophet also mandates warfare against non-believers. I already quoted the hadith saying. "I have been ordered to fight the people, until they say la illaha ill'Allah..." That's offensive jihad, plain and simple!
bhigr 2 years ago