Is Islam true?

Fredie said : now you may view this as a pack of lies, that is your right, but you have no right at all to call me a liar just because you disagree with a great scholar. there are plenty of muslims who would call you the same thing for disagreeing with him. it would appear that the religious authorities in afghanistan, for instance, are totally at odds with you, given the precarious situation of abdul rahman. now far from being adamant not to listen, i am listening very carefully to everything being said. now you may view this as a pack of lies, that is your right, but you have no right at all to call me a liar just because you disagree with a great scholar. there are plenty of muslims who would call you the same thing for disagreeing with him. it would appear that the religious authorities in afghanistan, for instance, are totally at odds with you, given the precarious situation of abdul rahman. now far from being adamant not to listen, i am listening very carefully to everything being said. my purpose here is interfaith dialogue

Pauline says : Not only Fredi is the liar, the Evangelists are the biggest liar in the world. They will find anything or even fabricate anything to condemn not just Islam but other religion too that is not Christian. Even other churches like Catholic for that matter, the Evangelist will fabricate lots of lies to baptise those Catholics to become Evangelist. This is why they always ended up only hanging with Evangelists. The most racist people on earth. They are skillful at badmouthing because they only chew aged cheese in their mouth. The most uncivilized and lunatics. Once, you reject them, they will be frowning at you and stalking you every where you go. This is what had happened to me.

Fredie said : my purpose here is interfaith dialogue
Nope, Fredie's purpose here is to baptise the audiences with his fanaticism by his wrath against Islam.

So, sister Angela, IF YOU READ THIS, did you now realize how much I have gone through?    They are simply not just a liar but also a bully.


Edited by pauline35

well ahmad, if youre not happy with the translation, what can i do about it? - i have shown the document, and the translation that is available.  we both seem to be in the same situation with regard to translation from arabic to english.  if you do not believe the translation, then you will have to provide your own

now the issue of apostasy is again to the fore on some islamic websites, given the present situation in afghanistan - see here:

http://www.islamonline.net/English/News/2006-03/21/article09 .shtml

note the views given by the scholars.  yusuf al-qaradawi says that if the apostate does not proclaim his disbelief, he is not to be executed(!!!)  no.  of course not.  because if he doesnt declare it, noone will know, deeuuuh....     qaradawi also quotes 2: 217, which does not exclude execution

jamal al-banna says that apostasy is not a crime at all, and thus flies in the face of all the eye-witness reports in the books of hadith, the judgements of the "rightly-guided" caliphs, and what is explicitly written in the books of jurisprudence

mohammed salim al-awaa confines the issue to the quran, clearly disbelieving, like yourself, all sunnah.  but he does say its a punishable crime, the punishment being left to the discretion of the relevant authority

abdul-majeed subh says its ok as long as apostates do not harm the muslim society, but does not define what harm is in this instance.  thus he admits the possible need for execution

this all sounds like a mishmash of confusion to me, astonishing, because the issue does not concern how many lumps of sugar people are allowed to put in their tea, but life and death itself

btw the latest on abdul (or abdur) rahman is that he will be released, as they have decided hes completely off his trolley.  of course.  why else would he convert

Edited by fredifreeloader

Thanks bro Fredi for your response. Concerning the translation issue, I have already highlighted the ambiguity in the translation which can certainly be verified by any literate Muslim, irrespective he knows Arabic or not; its just so obvious.

On the issue of apostasy, I don't think anyone from your cited weblink differed from what I have presented here, though most of them are just putting forward their opinion and not their evidence on which they base their opinions. It is this kind of vagueness in their opionions, not to disrespect anyone, that is objectionable to any sound minded person. It is always necessary, whether they believe in one side or the other, to present their evidence on which their opinons are based and not based on their fame alone.  

�servetus - you will be aware then, to which texts i was referring ...�

Yes, Fredi, I am quite aware of them.  Again, though, and with respect to your rather generalized statement that �the texts all come from the old testament and hence do not apply,� I suggest otherwise: that to Orthodox Judaism, and to Judaism in general, they absolutely do apply.

��christians are not under the law of moses��

I understand the theory.  However, as the article in The Nation explains, or at least suggests, if Jewish Fundamentalists were to abandon the secular laws of Israel and reinstitute the Torah of Moses as the law of the land (or elsewhere, for that mater), one can imagine the penalty that might befall a Jew who converted to what is considered, by those Fundamentalists, an �idolatrous� and deviant sect, Christianity.  In case that is difficult to imagine, one could always revisit, say, the eleventh chapter of Acts as a reminder.    

�Christians are not under the law of moses, and certainly have no warranty to carry out the killings prescribed in it, the reasons being given in the new testament.�

Except for the caveat that I just expressed (above), on this point I do largely concur.  That said, it is worthwhile to note what has historically been done in the name of Christianity with what one Protestant historian rather conveniently (to my mind) called a �too literal exegesis� of, e.g., Matthew 18:6 and Luke 14:23.

�� the subject is too vast to go into on this thread, entitled as it is, "is islam true?�

The subject is vast indeed, but the vastness of subjects hasn�t stopped anyone from talking in this thread thus far.  I maintain that there is value in setting the three religions, Judaism, Christianity and Islam side by side and relating them by analogy if not by mixture.  I am continuing to do exactly that.

�the writer you quote states - "one wonders what the jerry falwells and pat robertsons think of all this...." - well what i wonder is - why didnt he just ask them and find out?  im sure they must have websites, they sound pretty important - but perhaps it was not on his agenda to find out, just to "wonder"�

The author, David Hirst, simply employed a common literary device -a rhetorical question.  His point is excellently made, to my mind, and I wish his article would be broadcast either on tonight�s network news or today�s so-called �news� by Pat Robertson�s 700 Club.  But I won�t wait up for it.

Serv

Edited by Servetus