If you think an ideology or religion is immoral and evil, should you actively oppose it?

Joined
Oct 30, 2017
Messages
1,865
If you think an ideology or religion is immoral and evil, should you actively oppose it?

Christians and Muslims seem to think so as evidenced by Inquisitions and Jihads.

I am a Gnostic Christian and we have always seen it as part of our belief system to oppose immoral and evil belief systems. We are not pacifists but historically have done our ideological fighting with good arguments instead of violence.

We have also called on all good people to actively oppose religions and ideologies that they feel are immoral and not deserving of their respect. That is a take-off on the adage that for evil to grow, all good people need do is nothing. Gnostic Christians believe in spreading good ideologies.

Both Christianity and Islam, slave holding ideologies, have basically developed into intolerant, homophobic and misogynous religions. Both religions have grown themselves by the sword instead of good deeds and good moral arguments and continue with their immoral ways in spite of secular law showing them a better and more moral ways. Some of Christianity has adopted these better ways of late but Islam is lagging and fighting against ideological reform.

Jesus said we would know his people by their works and deeds. That means Jesus would not recognize Christians and Muslims as his people, and neither do I. Jesus would call Christianity and Islam abominations.

Gnostic Christians did call them out for their evils in the past, and I am proudly continuing that tradition and honest irrefutable evaluation based on morality.

In whatever belief system you follow, be it humanist, secular, atheistic or religious, does your ideology require you to fight other ideologies or religions you find immoral or harmful to society?

Please specify what ideology you follow in your reply.

Regards
DL
 

Helioform

Star
Joined
Oct 2, 2017
Messages
3,195
I have tried to oppose some people who were clearly bigoted and ignorant using their religion as a way to dominate others.

What I found out is that it was a total waste of time. A mind is a terrible thing to waste, and some religious or even atheistic ideologies cannot be fought with reason, because the individuals are in a form of intense mind control, a kind of MKUltra.

But thanks to the democratization of information with the internet, people can make up their own minds with the data that they are willing to research.
 

SpektaCoolAir

Established
Joined
Oct 19, 2017
Messages
247
Both Christianity and Islam, slave holding ideologies, have basically developed into intolerant, homophobic and misogynous religions. Both religions have grown themselves by the sword instead of good deeds and good moral arguments and continue with their immoral ways in spite of secular law showing them a better and more moral ways. Some of Christianity has adopted these better ways of late but Islam is lagging and fighting against ideological reform.

Jesus said we would know his people by their works and deeds. That means Jesus would not recognize Christians and Muslims as his people, and neither do I. Jesus would call Christianity and Islam abominations.
please consider some education before making such ignorant & total false claims!

here is the first step towards it:


Was Islam Spread by the Sword?



It is a common misconception with some non-Muslims that Islam would not have millions of adherents all over the world, if it had not been spread by the use of force.

The following points will make it clear, that far from being spread by the sword, it was the inherent force of truth, reason and logic that was responsible for the rapid spread of Islam.

Islam has always given respect and freedom of religion to all faiths. Freedom of religion is ordained in the Quran itself:

“There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong.” (Quran 2:256)

The noted historian De Lacy O’Leary wrote:[1] “History makes it clear however, that the legend of fanatical Muslims sweeping through the world and forcing Islam at the point of the sword upon conquered races is one of the most fantastically absurd myths that historians have ever repeated.”

The famous historian, Thomas Carlyle, in his book Heroes and Hero worship, refers to this misconception about the spread of Islam: “The sword indeed, but where will you get your sword? Every new opinion, at its starting is precisely in a minority of one; in one man’s head alone. There it dwells as yet. One man alone of the whole world believes it, there is one man against all men. That he takes a sword and tries to propagate with that will do little for him. You must get your sword! On the whole, a thing will propagate itself as it can.”

If Islam was spread by the sword, it was the sword of intellect and convincing arguments. It is this sword that conquers the hearts and minds of people. The Quran says in this connection:

“Invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good instruction, and argue with them in a way that is best.” (Quran 16:125)

The facts speak for themselves
· Indonesia is the country that has the largest number of Muslims in the world, and the majority of people in Malaysia are Muslims. But, no Muslim army ever went to Indonesia or Malaysia. It is an established historical fact that Indonesia entered Islam not due to war, but because of its moral message. Despite the disappearance of Islamic government from many regions once ruled by it, their original inhabitants have remained Muslims. Moreover, they carried the message of truth, inviting others to it as well, and in so doing endured harm, affliction and oppression. The same can be said for those in the regions of Syria and Jordan, Egypt, Iraq, North Africa, Asia, the Balkans and in Spain. This shows that the effect of Islam on the population was one of moral conviction, in contrast to occupation by western colonialists, finally compelled to leave lands whose peoples held only memories of affliction, sorrow, subjugation and oppression.

· Muslims ruled Spain (Andalusia) for about 800 years. During this period the Christians and Jews enjoyed freedom to practice their respective religions, and this is a documented historical fact.

· Christian and Jewish minorities have survived in the Muslim lands of the Middle East for centuries. Countries such as Egypt, Morocco, Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan all have significant Christian and Jewish populations.

· Muslims ruled India for about a thousand years, and therefore had the power to force each and every non-Muslim of India to convert to Islam, but they did not, and thus more than 80% of the Indian population remains non-Muslim.

· Similarly, Islam spread rapidly on the East Coast of Africa. And likewise no Muslim army was ever dispatched to the East Coast of Africa.

· An article in Reader’s Digest ‘Almanac’, yearbook 1986, gives the statistics of the increase of the percentage of the major religions of the world in half a century from 1934 to 1984. This article also appeared in The Plain Truth magazine. At the top was Islam, which increased by 235%, while Christianity had increased by 47%. During this fifty-year period, there was no “Islamic conquest” yet Islam spread at an extraordinary rate.

· Today the fastest growing religion in America and Europe is Islam. The Muslims in these lands are a minority. The only sword they have in their possession is the sword of truth. It is this sword that is converting thousands to Islam.

· Islamic law protects the privileged status of minorities, and that is why non-Muslim places of worship have flourished all over the Islamic world. Islamic law also allows non-Muslim minorities to set up their own courts, which implement family laws drawn up by the minorities themselves. The life and property of all citizens in an Islamic state are considered sacred whether they are Muslims or not.

Conclusion
It is clear, therefore, that Islam did not spread by the sword. The “sword of Islam” did not convert all the non-Muslim minorities in Muslim countries. In India, where Muslims ruled for 800 years, they are still a minority. In the U.S.A., Islam is the fastest growing religion and has over six million followers.

In his book The World’s Religions, Huston Smith discusses how the prophet Muhammad granted freedom of religion to the Jews and Christians under Muslim rule:

The Prophet had a document drawn up in which he stipulated that Jews and Christians “shall be protected from all insults and harm; they shall have an equal right with our own people to our assistance and good offices,” and further, “they shall practice their religion as freely as the Muslims.”[2]

Smith points out that Muslims regard that document as the first charter of freedom of conscience in human history and the authoritative model for those of every subsequent Muslim state.


[1] In his book Islam at the Crossroads, p.8.
[2] Quoted in The World’s Religions by Huston Smith, Harper Collins, 1991, p. 256


https://www.islamreligion.com/articles/677/was-islam-spread-by-sword/
 
Joined
Oct 30, 2017
Messages
1,865
I have tried to oppose some people who were clearly bigoted and ignorant using their religion as a way to dominate others.

What I found out is that it was a total waste of time. A mind is a terrible thing to waste, and some religious or even atheistic ideologies cannot be fought with reason, because the individuals are in a form of intense mind control, a kind of MKUltra.

But thanks to the democratization of information with the internet, people can make up their own minds with the data that they are willing to research.
There are many who as you say are bigoted and ignorant.

I think it is to us to keep trying to change their ways because of the adage that if good people do nothing, evil grows.

Remember that when talking to or discussing those issue in places like here, the lurkers and your own moral dutry should be your concern. I think we all owe mankind to try to civilize the uncivilized.

Regards
DL
 

JoChris

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
6,168
If you think an ideology or religion is immoral and evil, should you actively oppose it?

Christians and Muslims seem to think so as evidenced by Inquisitions and Jihads.

I am a Gnostic Christian and we have always seen it as part of our belief system to oppose immoral and evil belief systems. We are not pacifists but historically have done our ideological fighting with good arguments instead of violence.

We have also called on all good people to actively oppose religions and ideologies that they feel are immoral and not deserving of their respect. That is a take-off on the adage that for evil to grow, all good people need do is nothing. Gnostic Christians believe in spreading good ideologies.

Both Christianity and Islam, slave holding ideologies, have basically developed into intolerant, homophobic and misogynous religions. Both religions have grown themselves by the sword instead of good deeds and good moral arguments and continue with their immoral ways in spite of secular law showing them a better and more moral ways. Some of Christianity has adopted these better ways of late but Islam is lagging and fighting against ideological reform.

Jesus said we would know his people by their works and deeds. That means Jesus would not recognize Christians and Muslims as his people, and neither do I. Jesus would call Christianity and Islam abominations.

Gnostic Christians did call them out for their evils in the past, and I am proudly continuing that tradition and honest irrefutable evaluation based on morality.

In whatever belief system you follow, be it humanist, secular, atheistic or religious, does your ideology require you to fight other ideologies or religions you find immoral or harmful to society?

Please specify what ideology you follow in your reply.

Regards
DL
As been said multiple times already, there is a massive difference between the Roman Catholic church and the Christian church. That is both in doctrine and church history.

Criminal acts, invasions of countries etc are nowhere commanded in the New Testament for the church. Going out into the world to preach the Gospel is totally different to invading other countries and beheading those who would not convert to the invaders' faith.

By actively oppose: teaching the Gospel. exposing falsehoods, campaigning against evil acts and ideologies - YES, if done peacefully only.

P.S. I am a Christian, Baptist denomination.
 

Helioform

Star
Joined
Oct 2, 2017
Messages
3,195
There are many who as you say are bigoted and ignorant.

I think it is to us to keep trying to change their ways because of the adage that if good people do nothing, evil grows.

Remember that when talking to or discussing those issue in places like here, the lurkers and your own moral dutry should be your concern. I think we all owe mankind to try to civilize the uncivilized.

Regards
DL
You are right about the lurkers. I think we should be concerned mostly about those who are ambivalent or on the fence so to speak.
 
Joined
Oct 30, 2017
Messages
1,865
please consider some education before making such ignorant & total false claims!

here is the first step towards it:


Was Islam Spread by the Sword?



It is a common misconception with some non-Muslims that Islam would not have millions of adherents all over the world, if it had not been spread by the use of force.

The following points will make it clear, that far from being spread by the sword, it was the inherent force of truth, reason and logic that was responsible for the rapid spread of Islam.

Islam has always given respect and freedom of religion to all faiths. Freedom of religion is ordained in the Quran itself:

“There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong.” (Quran 2:256)

The noted historian De Lacy O’Leary wrote:[1] “History makes it clear however, that the legend of fanatical Muslims sweeping through the world and forcing Islam at the point of the sword upon conquered races is one of the most fantastically absurd myths that historians have ever repeated.”

The famous historian, Thomas Carlyle, in his book Heroes and Hero worship, refers to this misconception about the spread of Islam: “The sword indeed, but where will you get your sword? Every new opinion, at its starting is precisely in a minority of one; in one man’s head alone. There it dwells as yet. One man alone of the whole world believes it, there is one man against all men. That he takes a sword and tries to propagate with that will do little for him. You must get your sword! On the whole, a thing will propagate itself as it can.”

If Islam was spread by the sword, it was the sword of intellect and convincing arguments. It is this sword that conquers the hearts and minds of people. The Quran says in this connection:

“Invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good instruction, and argue with them in a way that is best.” (Quran 16:125)

The facts speak for themselves
· Indonesia is the country that has the largest number of Muslims in the world, and the majority of people in Malaysia are Muslims. But, no Muslim army ever went to Indonesia or Malaysia. It is an established historical fact that Indonesia entered Islam not due to war, but because of its moral message. Despite the disappearance of Islamic government from many regions once ruled by it, their original inhabitants have remained Muslims. Moreover, they carried the message of truth, inviting others to it as well, and in so doing endured harm, affliction and oppression. The same can be said for those in the regions of Syria and Jordan, Egypt, Iraq, North Africa, Asia, the Balkans and in Spain. This shows that the effect of Islam on the population was one of moral conviction, in contrast to occupation by western colonialists, finally compelled to leave lands whose peoples held only memories of affliction, sorrow, subjugation and oppression.

· Muslims ruled Spain (Andalusia) for about 800 years. During this period the Christians and Jews enjoyed freedom to practice their respective religions, and this is a documented historical fact.

· Christian and Jewish minorities have survived in the Muslim lands of the Middle East for centuries. Countries such as Egypt, Morocco, Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan all have significant Christian and Jewish populations.

· Muslims ruled India for about a thousand years, and therefore had the power to force each and every non-Muslim of India to convert to Islam, but they did not, and thus more than 80% of the Indian population remains non-Muslim.

· Similarly, Islam spread rapidly on the East Coast of Africa. And likewise no Muslim army was ever dispatched to the East Coast of Africa.

· An article in Reader’s Digest ‘Almanac’, yearbook 1986, gives the statistics of the increase of the percentage of the major religions of the world in half a century from 1934 to 1984. This article also appeared in The Plain Truth magazine. At the top was Islam, which increased by 235%, while Christianity had increased by 47%. During this fifty-year period, there was no “Islamic conquest” yet Islam spread at an extraordinary rate.

· Today the fastest growing religion in America and Europe is Islam. The Muslims in these lands are a minority. The only sword they have in their possession is the sword of truth. It is this sword that is converting thousands to Islam.

· Islamic law protects the privileged status of minorities, and that is why non-Muslim places of worship have flourished all over the Islamic world. Islamic law also allows non-Muslim minorities to set up their own courts, which implement family laws drawn up by the minorities themselves. The life and property of all citizens in an Islamic state are considered sacred whether they are Muslims or not.

Conclusion
It is clear, therefore, that Islam did not spread by the sword. The “sword of Islam” did not convert all the non-Muslim minorities in Muslim countries. In India, where Muslims ruled for 800 years, they are still a minority. In the U.S.A., Islam is the fastest growing religion and has over six million followers.

In his book The World’s Religions, Huston Smith discusses how the prophet Muhammad granted freedom of religion to the Jews and Christians under Muslim rule:

The Prophet had a document drawn up in which he stipulated that Jews and Christians “shall be protected from all insults and harm; they shall have an equal right with our own people to our assistance and good offices,” and further, “they shall practice their religion as freely as the Muslims.”[2]

Smith points out that Muslims regard that document as the first charter of freedom of conscience in human history and the authoritative model for those of every subsequent Muslim state.


[1] In his book Islam at the Crossroads, p.8.
[2] Quoted in The World’s Religions by Huston Smith, Harper Collins, 1991, p. 256


https://www.islamreligion.com/articles/677/was-islam-spread-by-sword/
Thanks for the nice greeting. You show the usual Muslim ignorance.

Let's chat about your slave holding ideology, if you can keep a civil tongue in your mouth.

One issue at a time might be worth my time if you do not just copy paste garbage.

If Islam did not spread by the sword the way Christianity did, how much of this is false?

Here is a short version but if you have the time, it leads to a longer one.


Regards
DL
 

DesertRose

Superstar
Joined
May 20, 2017
Messages
7,596
Hello I am a Muslim and you know nothing about Islam and Bill Warner is no authority on Islam he is just another hypocritical religious bigot.
immoral ways in spite of secular law showing them a better and more moral ways.
What voodoo spell are you under? Have you looked at the century and this one Are you familiar with the term democide? Secular governments have high death tolls!

IMPORTANT NOTE: Among all the democide estimates appearing on this website, and in the table on the lower right, some have been revised upward. I have changed that for Mao's famine, 1958-1962, from zero to 38,000,000. And thus I have had to change the overall democide for the PRC (1928-1987) from 38,702,000 to 76,702,000. Details here.

I have changed my estimate for colonial democide from 870,000 to an additional 50,000,000. Details here.
Thus, the new world total: old total 1900-1999 = 174,000,000. New World total = 174,000,000 + 38,000,000 (new for China) + 50,000,000 (new for Colonies) = 262,000,000.
Just to give perspective on this incredible murder by government, if all these bodies were laid head to toe, with the average height being 5', then they would circle the earth ten times. Also, this democide murdered 6 times more people than died in combat in all the foreign and internal wars of the century. Finally, given popular estimates of the dead in a major nuclear war, this total democide is as though such a war did occur, but with its dead spread over a century.
For charts:
http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/20TH.HTM
 

JoChris

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
6,168
Hello I am a Muslim and you know nothing about Islam and Bill Warner is no authority on Islam he is just another hypocritical religious bigot.

What voodoo spell are you under? Have you looked at the century and this one Are you familiar with the term democide? Secular governments have high death tolls!

IMPORTANT NOTE: Among all the democide estimates appearing on this website, and in the table on the lower right, some have been revised upward. I have changed that for Mao's famine, 1958-1962, from zero to 38,000,000. And thus I have had to change the overall democide for the PRC (1928-1987) from 38,702,000 to 76,702,000. Details here.

I have changed my estimate for colonial democide from 870,000 to an additional 50,000,000. Details here.
Thus, the new world total: old total 1900-1999 = 174,000,000. New World total = 174,000,000 + 38,000,000 (new for China) + 50,000,000 (new for Colonies) = 262,000,000.
Just to give perspective on this incredible murder by government, if all these bodies were laid head to toe, with the average height being 5', then they would circle the earth ten times. Also, this democide murdered 6 times more people than died in combat in all the foreign and internal wars of the century. Finally, given popular estimates of the dead in a major nuclear war, this total democide is as though such a war did occur, but with its dead spread over a century.
For charts:
http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/20TH.HTM
I certainly agree with you about atheists being to blame for millions of murders in 20th century.
Can't blame (misuse of) religion for every war in the world.
E.g, Soviet Communism blamed for 12-20 million murders of Christians. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians_in_the_Soviet_Union
 
Joined
Oct 30, 2017
Messages
1,865
As been said multiple times already, there is a massive difference between the Roman Catholic church and the Christian church. That is both in doctrine and church history.

Criminal acts, invasions of countries etc are nowhere commanded in the New Testament for the church. Going out into the world to preach the Gospel is totally different to invading other countries and beheading those who would not convert to the invaders' faith.

By actively oppose: teaching the Gospel. exposing falsehoods, campaigning against evil acts and ideologies - YES, if done peacefully only.

P.S. I am a Christian, Baptist denomination.
To me, all who fly the cross are the same as they almost think using Jesus as a scapegoat is moral, when it is not.

You are forgetting that Jesus said he came to bring war, not peace.

Inquisitions have been going on ever since, although today, all Christians can satisfy their intolerance on is women and gays whom Christians on the right deny equality to.

The left has been mostly brought to civility but the right refuses to be civilized and moral.

Do you, a Baptist, grant equality to all people?

Regards
DL
 

Helioform

Star
Joined
Oct 2, 2017
Messages
3,195
As been said multiple times already, there is a massive difference between the Roman Catholic Church and the Christian church. That is both in doctrine and church history.

Criminal acts, invasions of countries etc are nowhere commanded in the New Testament for the church. Going out into the world to preach the Gospel is totally different to invading other countries and beheading those who would not convert to the invaders' faith.

By actively oppose: teaching the Gospel. exposing falsehoods, campaigning against evil acts and ideologies - YES, if done peacefully only.

P.S. I am a Christian, Baptist denomination.
Christianity would not have spread the way it did if it weren't for the killing of all opposers with the rise of the Catholic church. Gnostics have been killed off while your brand of christianity has flourished due to the invasions of countries as you say. History is written by the victors (of wars).
 
Joined
Oct 30, 2017
Messages
1,865
Hello I am a Muslim and you know nothing about Islam and Bill Warner is no authority on Islam he is just another hypocritical religious bigot.

What voodoo spell are you under? Have you looked at the century and this one Are you familiar with the term democide? Secular governments have high death tolls!

IMPORTANT NOTE: Among all the democide estimates appearing on this website, and in the table on the lower right, some have been revised upward. I have changed that for Mao's famine, 1958-1962, from zero to 38,000,000. And thus I have had to change the overall democide for the PRC (1928-1987) from 38,702,000 to 76,702,000. Details here.

I have changed my estimate for colonial democide from 870,000 to an additional 50,000,000. Details here.
Thus, the new world total: old total 1900-1999 = 174,000,000. New World total = 174,000,000 + 38,000,000 (new for China) + 50,000,000 (new for Colonies) = 262,000,000.
Just to give perspective on this incredible murder by government, if all these bodies were laid head to toe, with the average height being 5', then they would circle the earth ten times. Also, this democide murdered 6 times more people than died in combat in all the foreign and internal wars of the century. Finally, given popular estimates of the dead in a major nuclear war, this total democide is as though such a war did occur, but with its dead spread over a century.
For charts:
http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/20TH.HTM
Thanks for trying to deflect with your name calling without an argument against the information give.

Typical brain dead Muslim tactics.

Regards
DL
 
Joined
Oct 30, 2017
Messages
1,865
I certainly agree with you about atheists being to blame for millions of murders in 20th century.
Can't blame (misuse of) religion for every war in the world.
E.g, Soviet Communism blamed for 12-20 million murders of Christians. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians_in_the_Soviet_Union
True, but the so called religious have been the majority for what. 5,000 years and we have been at war for much of that time, and to blame the small minority of non-believers for what the vast majority of believers have been responsible for is quite a hypocritical position.


Regards
DL
 

DesertRose

Superstar
Joined
May 20, 2017
Messages
7,596
Slavery preceded Islam....capiche? It was there before the advent of Islam
https://islamqa.info/en/94840
"Slavery did not spread in this appalling manner throughout all continents except by means of kidnapping; rather the main source of slaves in Europe and America in later centuries was this method.

The texts of Islam took a strong stance against this. It says in a hadeeth qudsi: “Allaah, may He be exalted, said: ‘There are three whose opponent I will be on the Day of Resurrection, and whomever I oppose, I will defeat … A man who sold a free man and consumed his price.’” Narrated by al-Bukhaari (2227).

It is worth pointing out that you do not find any text in the Qur’aan or Sunnah which enjoins taking others as slaves, whereas there are dozens of texts in the Qur’aan and the ahaadeeth of the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) which call for manumitting slaves and freeing them."


Typical brain dead Muslim tactics.
I did not call you names so cut it out.
I guess the truth hurts.....
Here is another truth.
Islamic empires used to run tight ships on usury/interest bearing loans.
This is modern day slavery.
Christianity let seculars take over in governance and the seculars let the Satanists take over.....
You want tyranny and no accountability......
It is coming......
 
Joined
Oct 30, 2017
Messages
1,865
Christianity would not have spread the way it did if it weren't for the killing of all opposers with the rise of the Catholic church. Gnostics have been killed off while your brand of christianity has flourished due to the invasions of countries as you say. History is written by the victors (of wars).
The worst infraction and example in my view was the Cathar Inquisition. 10,000 innocent people just butchered in the one city so as to bring the rest to heel because Christianity would not allow the freedom of religion that they now claim a right to.


Regards
DL
 

JoChris

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
6,168
To me, all who fly the cross are the same as they almost think using Jesus as a scapegoat is moral, when it is not.

You are forgetting that Jesus said he came to bring war, not peace.

Inquisitions have been going on ever since, although today, all Christians can satisfy their intolerance on is women and gays whom Christians on the right deny equality to.

The left has been mostly brought to civility but the right refuses to be civilized and moral.

Do you, a Baptist, grant equality to all people?

Regards
DL
Spiritual war, yes. Physical war, no.
In dialogue with Pontius Pilate, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+18:28-40&version=KJV Jesus said that his Kingdom was not of this world (see verse 36-37 especially).

Just preaching the Gospel and living a life that the unsaved world hates is enough to cause Christians to get some form of persecution. Some countries will be just social ostracism and verbal abuse (like Australia). Some countries will be job losses, businesses sued (bakery not making gay couple wedding cake), other countries Christians rightly fear for their lives.
2017 article: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/04/14/christian-persecution-how-many-are-being-killed-where-are-being-killed.html

If merely condemning homosexuality as sin (because that is what the bible says) is labelled as bigoted, backward, ignorant etc, then true Christians will just have to "tough that out". We are to please God first.

I want all people to have equal legal rights, I want gays and women to have equal opportunities in secular jobs, I want them to be free from violence, I want gays to have civil unions equal to heterosexual marriage.
In return I want Christians to be free to choose whom they marry, whom they admit to church membership, whom they permit to be church leaders etc.

The bible teaches against unrepentant sinners being permitted to remain in church and women being church leaders. FACT. If a person will not believe a church's teachings, then they should leave that church, not demand that church to give into their demands.
 

DesertRose

Superstar
Joined
May 20, 2017
Messages
7,596
Secondly there were long epochs of peace so why are you so ahistorical.........
People coexisted in peace with others under my religion.
I could provide it Priests and Rabbis and others saying they lived peacefully with Muslims.
When rulers followed our principles and felt accountable to God there was peace and when they did not there was none!
The data is available but I am not interested in answering DISRESPECT.
Do not ask people questions if you are going to call them names such as 'brain dead'. This tells me you want to confirm your biases and do not want a credible exchange of info....
So go on with your ill thoughts and hostility.
Keep posting your one sided stuff that is what you are here for. Adios.
 
Joined
Oct 30, 2017
Messages
1,865
Slavery preceded Islam....capiche? It was there before the advent of Islam
https://islamqa.info/en/94840
"Slavery did not spread in this appalling manner throughout all continents except by means of kidnapping; rather the main source of slaves in Europe and America in later centuries was this method.

The texts of Islam took a strong stance against this. It says in a hadeeth qudsi: “Allaah, may He be exalted, said: ‘There are three whose opponent I will be on the Day of Resurrection, and whomever I oppose, I will defeat … A man who sold a free man and consumed his price.’” Narrated by al-Bukhaari (2227).

It is worth pointing out that you do not find any text in the Qur’aan or Sunnah which enjoins taking others as slaves, whereas there are dozens of texts in the Qur’aan and the ahaadeeth of the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) which call for manumitting slaves and freeing them."



I did not call you names so cut it out.
I guess the truth hurts.....
Here is another truth.
Islamic empires used to run tight ships on usury/interest bearing loans.
This is modern day slavery.
Christianity let seculars take over in governance and the seculars let the Satanists take over.....
You want tyranny and no accountability......
It is coming......
You ignore the fact that many black African slaves were brought into the middle east by Muslims.

Why are their offspring's not there now?
Because the Muslim tradition was to castrate the males.

Muslim men today proudly slave themselves to Allah and his mouthpiece Mohammad and make second class slaves of their girl children and wives.

Islam did not begin as slave holders of their own women but sure developed to be just that.

https://www.google.ca/search?q=ancient+muslim+slavery&source=lnms&tbm=vid&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiehKL1iabXAhUX3WMKHa_UBsQQ_AUIDCgD&biw=1120&bih=559

If you are just going to lie, best to ignore me.

Regards
DL
 

SpektaCoolAir

Established
Joined
Oct 19, 2017
Messages
247
Islam, slave holding ideology

some more education:

Islam and slavery

I often hear Christian missionaries criticizing Islam and accusing it because Islam permitted slavery, and saying that this is a transgression against man’s freedom and rights. How can we respond to these people?.



Praise be to Allaah.
Discussing slavery and asking questions about it on the part of those who promote Christianity and try to divert people from following the religion of Islam is something that annoys the wise person and makes him point the finger of accusation towards the ulterior motives that lie behind these questions.


That is because slavery is well established in Judaism and Christianity, where it has taken unjust forms. They have many books which discuss that in detail and condone it. Therefore it makes you wonder: how can these churchmen call people to Christianity when Christianity condones and legitimizes slavery?


In other words: how can they stir up an issue when they themselves are up to their necks in it?!


The issue of slavery is completely different when discussed from the angles of Christianity and Islam, and when compared with the situation that prevailed at the advent of Islam.


Hence we must discuss this topic in some detail with reference to what is said in Judaism, Christianity and contemporary culture on this matter, then we will speak of slavery in Islam.


Many lies have been fabricated about Islam on this topic, at a time when criminals with lengthy track records are safe and nobody points a finger at them.


Islam and slavery:


Islam affirms that Allaah, may He be glorified and exalted, created man fully accountable, and enjoined duties upon him, to which reward and punishment are connected on the basis of man’s free will and choice.


No human being has the right to restrict this freedom or take away that choice unlawfully; whoever dares to do that is a wrongdoer and oppressor.


This is one of the basic principles of Islam. When the question is asked: why does Islam permit slavery? We reply emphatically and without shame that slavery is permitted in Islam, but we should examine the matter with fairness and with the aim of seeking the truth, and we should examine the details of the rulings on slavery in Islam, with regard to the sources and reasons for it, and how to deal with the slave and how his rights and duties are equal to those of the free man, and the ways in which he may earn his freedom, of which there are many in sharee’ah, whilst also taking into consideration the new types of slavery in this world which is pretending to be civilized, modern and progressive.


When Islam came, there were many causes of slavery, such as warfare, debt (where if the debtor could not pay off his debt, he became a slave), kidnapping and raids, and poverty and need.


Slavery did not spread in this appalling manner throughout all continents except by means of kidnapping; rather the main source of slaves in Europe and America in later centuries was this method.


The texts of Islam took a strong stance against this. It says in a hadeeth qudsi: “Allaah, may He be exalted, said: ‘There are three whose opponent I will be on the Day of Resurrection, and whomever I oppose, I will defeat … A man who sold a free man and consumed his price.’” Narrated by al-Bukhaari (2227).


It is worth pointing out that you do not find any text in the Qur’aan or Sunnah which enjoins taking others as slaves, whereas there are dozens of texts in the Qur’aan and the ahaadeeth of the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) which call for manumitting slaves and freeing them.


There were many sources of slaves at the time of the advent of Islam, whereas the means of manumitting them were virtually nil. Islam changed the way in which slavery was dealt with; it created many new ways of liberating slaves, blocked many ways of enslaving people, and established guidelines which blocked these means.


Islam limited the sources of slaves that existed before the beginning of the Prophet’s mission to one way only: enslavement through war which was imposed on kaafir prisoners-of-war and on their womenfolk and children.


Shaykh al-Shanqeeti (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: The reason for slavery is kufr and fighting against Allaah and His Messenger. When Allaah enables the Muslim mujaahideen who are offering their souls and their wealth, and fighting with all their strength and with what Allaah has given them to make the word of Allaah supreme over the kuffaar, then He makes them their property by means of slavery unless the ruler chooses to free them for nothing or for a ransom, if that serves the interests of the Muslims.

End quote from Adwa’ al-Bayaan (3/387).


He also said:


If it is said: If the slave becomes Muslim then why keep him as a slave, when the reason for slavery is kufr and fighting against Allaah and His Messenger, so this reason no longer applies?


The answer is that the well known principle among the scholars and all wise people, which is that the previously established right cannot be erased by a right that is established later, and that what came first takes precedence, is obvious.


When the Muslims captured kuffaar, their right to possession was affirmed by the law of the Creator of all, Who is All Wise and All Knowing. So this right is confirmed and established. Then if the slave became Muslim after that, his right to escape slavery by embracing Islam was superseded by the mujaahid’s prior right to take possession of him before he became Muslim, and it would be unjust and unfair to annul the prior right because of a subsequent right, as is well known to all wise people.


Yes, it is good for the master to free the slave if he becomes Muslim. The Lawgiver enjoined and encouraged that, and opened many doors to it. Glory be to the Most Wise, the All Knowing.

“And the Word of your Lord has been fulfilled in truth and in justice. None can change His Words. And He is the All‑Hearer, the All‑Knower.” [al-An’aam 6:115]


“in truth” means in what He tells us, and “in justice” means in His rulings.


Undoubtedly this justice refers to owning slaves and other rulings of the Qur’aan.


How many people criticize something sound when their problem is their own misunderstanding. End quote from Adwa’ al-Bayaan (3/389).


Capture of prisoners during war was the most common way of acquiring slaves. Prisoners would inevitably be captured during any war, and the prevalent custom at that time was that prisoners had no protection or rights; they would either be killed or enslaved. But Islam brought two more options: unconditional release or ransom. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Thereafter (is the time) either for generosity (i.e. free them without ransom), or ransom (according to what benefits Islam).”
[Muhammad 47:4]

During the battle of Badr the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) accepted ransoms from the mushrik prisoners of war and let them go, and the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) let many of the prisoners go for free, releasing them with no ransom. During the conquest of Makkah it was said to the people of Makkah: “Go, for you are free.”


During the campaign of Banu’l-Mustaliq, the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) married a female prisoner from the defeated tribe so as to raise her status, as she was the daughter of one of their leaders, namely the Mother of the Believers Juwayriyah bint al-Haarith (may Allaah be pleased with her). Then the Muslims let all of these prisoners go.


Islam is not thirsty for the blood of prisoners, nor is it eager to enslave them.


Thus we may understand the limited ways that can lead to slavery. Islam did not abolish it altogether, because the kaafir prisoner who was opposed to truth and justice was a wrongdoer, or was a supporter of wrongdoing or was a tool in the execution or approval of wrongdoing. Letting him go free would give him the opportunity to spread wrongdoing and aggression against others and to oppose the truth and prevent it reaching people.


Freedom is a basic human right which cannot be taken away from a person except for a reason. When Islam accepted slavery within the limits that we have described, it put restrictions on the man who exploits his freedom in the worst possible way. If he was taken prisoner in a war of aggression in which he was defeated, then the proper conduct is to keep him in reasonable conditions throughout his detention.


Despite all that, Islam offers many opportunities to restore freedom to him and people like him.


The principle of dealing with slaves in Islam is a combination of justice, kindness and compassion.

One of the means of liberating slaves is allocating a portion of zakaah funds to freeing slaves; the expiation for accidental killing, zihaar (a jaahili form of divorce that is forbidden), breaking vows and having intercourse during the day in Ramadaan, is to free a slave. In addition to that, Muslims are also encouraged in general terms to free slaves for the sake of Allaah.



This is a brief summary of some of the principles of dealing with slaves in a just and kind manner:


1 – Guaranteeing them food and clothing like that of their masters.


It was narrated that Abu Dharr (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “They are your brothers whom Allaah has put under your authority, so if Allaah has put a person’s brother under his authority, let him feed him from what he eats and clothe him from what he wears, and let him not overburden him with work, and if he does overburden him with work, then let him help him.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari (6050)



2 – Preserving their dignity


It was narrated that Abu Hurayrah (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: I heard Abu’l-Qaasim (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) say: “Whoever accuses his slave when he is innocent of what he says will be flogged on the Day of Resurrection, unless he is as he said.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari (6858)


Ibn ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) manumitted a slave of his, then he picked up a stick or something from the ground and said: There is no more reward in it than the equivalent of this, but I heard the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) say: “Whoever slaps his slave or beats him, his expiation is to manumit him.” Narrated by Muslim (1657)




3 – Being fair towards slaves and treating them kindly



It was narrated that ‘Uthmaan ibn ‘Affaan tweaked the ear of a slave of his when he did something wrong, then he said to him after that: Come and tweak my ear in retaliation. The slave refused but he insisted, so he started to tweak it slightly, and he said to him: Do it strongly, for I cannot bear the punishment on the Day of Resurrection. The slave said: Like that, O my master? The Day that you fear I fear also.


When ‘Abd al-Rahmaan ibn ‘Awf (may Allaah be pleased with him) walked among his slaves, no one could tell him apart from them, because he did not walk ahead of them, and he did not wear anything different from what they wore.


One day ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab passed by and saw some slaves standing and not eating with their master. He got angry and said to their master: What is wrong with people who are selfish towards their servants? Then he called the servants and they ate with them.


A man entered upon Salmaan (may Allaah be pleased with him) and found him making dough – and he was a governor. He said to him:
O Abu ‘Abd-Allaah, what is this? He said: We have sent our servant on an errand and we do not want to give him two jobs at once.




4 – There is nothing wrong with slaves having precedence over free men in some matters


- with regard to any religious or worldly matters in which he excels over him. For example, it is valid for a slave to lead the prayer. ‘Aa’ishah the Mother of the Believers had a slave who would lead her in prayer. Indeed the Muslims have been commanded to hear and obey even if a slave is appointed in charge of their affairs.



5 – A slave may buy himself from his master and be free


If a person is enslaved for some reason but then it becomes apparent that he has given up his wrongdoing and forgotten his past, and he has become a man who shuns evil and seeks to do good, is it permissible to respond to his request to let him go free? Islam says yes, and there are some fuqaha’ who say that this is obligatory and some who say that it is mustahabb.


This is what is called a mukaatabah or contract of manumission between the slave and his master. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):


“And such of your slaves as seek a writing (of emancipation), give them such writing, if you find that there is good and honesty in them. And give them something (yourselves) out of the wealth of Allaah which He has bestowed upon you”


[al-Noor 24:33]


This is how Islam treats slaves justly and kindly.


One of the results of these guidelines is that in many cases, the slave would become a friend of his master; in some cases the master would regard him as a son. Sa’d ibn Haashim al-Khaalidi said, describing a slave of his:



He is not a slave, rather he is a son whom [Allaah] has put under my care.


He has supported me with his good service; he is my hands and my arms.



Another result of the Muslims treating slaves in this manner is that the slaves became part of Muslim families as if they were also family members.


Gustave le Bon says in Hadaarat al-‘Arab (Arab Civilization) (p. 459-460): What I sincerely believe is that slavery among the Muslims is better than slavery among any other people, and that the situation of slaves in the east is better than that of servants in Europe, and that slaves in the east are part of the family. Slaves who wanted to be free could attain freedom by expressing their wish. But despite that, they did not resort to exercising this right. End quote.



How did non-Muslims treat slaves?


Attitude of the Jews towards slaves:


According to the Jews, mankind is divided into two groups: the Israelites form one group and all of mankind is another group.


As for the Israelites, it is permissible to enslave some of them, according to specific teachings contained in the Old Testament.


As for people other than the Israelites, they are a low-class race according to the Jews, who may be enslaved via domination and subjugation, because they are people who are doomed to humiliation by the heavenly decree from eternity. It says in Exodus 21:2-6:


“If you buy a Hebrew servant, he is to serve you for six years. But in the seventh year, he shall go free, without paying anything.



3 If he comes alone, he is to go free alone; but if he has a wife when he comes, she is to go with him.


4 If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the woman and her children shall belong to her master, and only the man shall go free.


5 But if the servant declares, 'I love my master and my wife and children and do not want to go free,'


6 then his master must take him before the judges. He shall take him to the door or the doorpost and pierce his ear with an awl. Then he will be his servant for life”



As for enslaving non-Hebrews, this is done by taking them captive or overpowering them, because they believe that their race is superior to others, and they try to find a justification for that slavery in their distorted Torah. So they say that Ham the son of Noah – who was the father of Canaan – angered his father, because Noah was drunk one day and became naked as he was sleeping in his tent, and Ham saw him like that. When Noah found out about that after he woke up, he got angry and he cursed his progeny who were descendents of Canaan, and he said – according to the Book of Genesis 9:25-26): “Cursed be Canaan! The lowest of slaves will he be to his brothers.’ He also said, ‘Blessed be the LORD, the God of Shem! May Canaan be the slave of Shem.’”


In the same chapter (v. 27) it says: “May God extend the territory of Japheth; may Japheth live in the tents of Shem, and may Canaan be his [or their] slave”.


In the Book of Deuteronomy 20:10-14, it says:


“When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace.



11 If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you.


12 If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city.


13 When the LORD your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it.


14 As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves”




Attitude of the Christians towards slaves:


Christianity confirmed slavery as it had been affirmed beforehand by Judaism. There is no text in the Gospels that prohibits or denounces slavery. It is remarkable that the historian William Muir criticized our Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) for not immediately abolishing slavery, whilst overlooking the attitude of the Gospels concerning slavery, as there is no report from the Messiah, or from the Disciples, or from the churches concerning this issue.


Rather, in his Epistles, Paul advised that slaves should be loyal to their masters, as he says in his Epistle to the Ephesians, where he enjoins slaves to obey their masters as they would obey the Messiah:


“5 Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ.



6 Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but like slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart.


7 Serve wholeheartedly, as if you were serving the Lord, not men,


8 because you know that the Lord will reward everyone for whatever good he does, whether he is slave or free”


(Ephesians 6:5-9)




In Grand Larousse encyclopédique, it says: It comes as no surprise that slavery has continued among Christians until today; the official representatives of the faith have affirmed its validity and accepted its legitimacy.


… to sum up: the Christian religion approved fully of slavery and still does so today. It is very difficult for anyone to prove that Christianity strove to abolish slavery.




The saints affirmed that nature makes some people slaves.


Churchmen did not prevent slavery or oppose it; rather they supported it, to such an extent that the philosopher saint Thomas Aquinas supported the philosophical view that agreed with the view of religious leaders, and he did not object to slavery, rather he praised it because – according to the view of Aristotle – it is one of the conditions in which some people are created naturally, and it does not contradict faith for a man to be content with the lowest position in life.


Haqaa’iq al-Islam by al-‘Aqqaad (p. 215).


In the Dictionary of the Bible by Dr. George Yousuf it says: Christianity did not object to slavery for political or economic reasons, and it did not urge believers to oppose their generation’s views with regard to slavery, or even debate it, and it did not say anything against the rights of slave owners or motivate the slaves to seek independence; it did not discuss the harm or harshness of slavery and it did not enjoin the immediate release of slaves.


It did not change anything in the nature of the relationship between master and slave; on the contrary, it affirmed the rights and duties of both parties.



Contemporary Europe and slavery


It is the reader’s right, in this era of advancement and progress, to ask questions about the pioneers of this progress and the numbers of people who died because of the way in which they were hunted, and who died on their way to the coast where the ships of the English Company and others would wait, then the rest died due to changes in climate. Approximately 4% died as they were being loaded onto the ships, and 12 % during the journey, let alone those who died in the colonies.



The slave trade continued at the hands of English companies that obtained the right of monopoly with the permission of the British government, then gave free rein to British subjects to enslave people. Some experts estimate that the total number of people seized by the British during slavery and exiled to the colonies between 1680 and 1786 CE was around 2,130,000.



When Europe made contact with Black Africa, this contact led to human misery during which the black people of that continent were faced with a major calamity that lasted for five centuries. The states of Europe came up with evil ways of kidnapping these people and bringing them to their lands to serve as fuel for their revival, where they burdened them with more work than they could bear. When America was discovered, the calamity increased and they became slaves in two continents instead of just one.


The Encyclopaedia Britannica says (2/779) on the topic of slavery: Hunting slaves in the villages that were surrounded by the jungle was done by lighting fires in the straw of which the corrals surrounding the villages were made, then when the villagers fled to open land, the British hunted them down with whatever means they had at their disposal.


During the period from 1661 to 1774, for every million Black Africans who reached the Americas, a further nine million died during the hunting, loading and transportation. In other words, only one tenth of those who were hunted survived and actually reached the Americas, where they found no rest or relief, rather they were subjected to hard labour and torture.


At that time, they had laws which any wise person would be ashamed of.


Among these evil laws were those which said that any slave who transgressed against his master was to be killed, and any slave who ran away was to have his hands and feet cut off, and he was to be branded with hot iron; if he ran away again, he was to be killed. How could he run away if his hands and feet had been cut off?!



- It was forbidden for a black man to become educated, and the jobs of whites were forbidden to colourds.


- In America, if seven black people gathered together, that was regarded as a crime, and if a white man passed by them it was permissible for him to spit at them and give them twenty lashes.


- Another law stated that the blacks had no soul and that they possessed no smartness, intelligence or willpower, and that life existed only in their arms.


To sum up, with regard to his duties and service to his master, the slave was regarded as sane, responsible and punishable if he fell short, but with regard to his rights, he had no soul and no being, and he was not more than a strong pair of arms!


Finally, after many centuries of enslavement and oppression, there came the protocol to abolish slavery and strive to put an end to it, in a resolution issued by the United Nations in 1953 CE.



Hence their consciences did not awaken until the last century, after they had built their civilization on the corpses of free men whom they had enslaved unlawfully. What fair-minded person can compare this with the teachings of Islam, which came fourteen hundred years ago? It seems that accusing Islam with regard to this topic is like the saying, “She accused me of her problem then walked away.”


And Allaah knows best.


See: Shubahaat Hawl al-Islam by Muhammad Qutub; Talbees Mardood fi Qadaaya Khateerah by Shaykh Dr. Saalih ibn Humayd, the Imam of the Haram in Makkah.


https://islamqa.info/en/94840
 
Top