Was the Middle East in Muhammad's time really so barbaric?

Prove Islam is from God, why it is the 'One True Religion'.
sum
Posts: 6519
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:11 pm

Re: Was the Middle East in Muhammad's time really so barbari

Post by sum »

Hello uncung

I must stress that you and your co-religionists are zombies. You are all programmed and are unable to think for yourselves. Your brains have been seriously damaged.

sum

User avatar
uncung
Posts: 2783
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2011 4:21 pm

Re: Was the Middle East in Muhammad's time really so barbari

Post by uncung »

sum wrote:Hello uncung

I must stress that you and your co-religionists are zombies. You are all programmed and are unable to think for yourselves. Your brains have been seriously damaged.

sum
damaged?

User avatar
manfred
Posts: 11531
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:29 pm

Re: Was the Middle East in Muhammad's time really so barbari

Post by manfred »

damaged. (="rusak" or "beschädigt" as they say in your neck of the woods.)
Jesus: "Ask and you will receive." Mohammed: "Take and give me 20%"

User avatar
Hombre
Posts: 3673
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2009 3:18 am

Re: Was the Middle East in Muhammad's time really so barbari

Post by Hombre »

uncung wrote:what punishment do you mean?
- who the one will punish us/muslims?
- Koran doesnt order muslims to punish non muslims.
Of course not. Islam orders Muslim to sing the Havah Nagila, and dance Kumbaya. With little Humus and Sheesh Kabab, we are in heavan

Nosuperstition
Posts: 3789
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 6:45 am

Re: Was the Middle East in Muhammad's time really so barbari

Post by Nosuperstition »

uncung wrote:doubting of religion/truth is a part of disbelieving. it is one of the reason why people are tortured in hell.
i guess (my opinion) it is because they are either arrogant or lazy
.
uncung wrote:
manfred wrote: well, that depend how you look at it...

Ordinarily people would not simply attack their neighbours to get loot. That is was ROBBERS do.

"Propagating Islam" is the excuse to make robbery, extortion and slave runs acceptable to those with remnants of a conscience.

Islam brought no benefit to any country it was "propagated" to.

It only brought benefits to the conquerors.
it is disbelievers fault. if they submited to muslims then they dont need to be attacked. and their belongings/goods would be saved.
The tragedy is that you forget that the disbelievers too would have been brainwashed with their own set of beliefs however absurd they may appear to those of a different faith and to those who got used to critical thinking.Otherwise it is Allah's fault,he being omnipotent had the power to show miracles to the disbelievers so that they convert volutarily without ever shedding a drop of blood.
Last edited by Nosuperstition on Sun Feb 16, 2014 7:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
palli or halli in Dravidian languages means a village just like gaav in Aryan languages means a village.palli or halli in Aryan Mauryan Imperial era around 200 B.C designates a tribal hamlet.So many of those in South India are indeed descendants of tribals and are still keeping up that heritage.

Nosuperstition
Posts: 3789
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 6:45 am

Re: Was the Middle East in Muhammad's time really so barbari

Post by Nosuperstition »

Hello uncung,it is said that Allah loves people with love that is a 100 times more than the love a mother has for her child.So does Allah love only muslims or does he also love disbelievers?"
palli or halli in Dravidian languages means a village just like gaav in Aryan languages means a village.palli or halli in Aryan Mauryan Imperial era around 200 B.C designates a tribal hamlet.So many of those in South India are indeed descendants of tribals and are still keeping up that heritage.

User avatar
pr126
Posts: 5288
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 9:24 am
Location: Blighty

Re: Was the Middle East in Muhammad's time really so barbari

Post by pr126 »

uncung wrote:
it is disbelievers fault. if they submited to muslims then they dont need to be attacked. and their belongings/goods would be saved.
Really?
I thought one has to submit to Allah, not to the Muslims.

A non Muslim's life and property is up for grabs? No wonder you like your cult so much.
A religion cult of murder and plunder. What kind of malevolent god commands that?!

And know that anything you obtain of war booty - then indeed, for Allah is one fifth of it and for the Messenger and for [his] near relatives and the orphans, the needy, and the [stranded] traveler, if you have believed in Allah and in that which We sent down to Our Servant on the day of criterion - the day when the two armies met. And Allah , over all things, is competent. Quran 8:41

Muslims say this is done in a war situation.
What they omitted to say is that the wars [ghazwa] were started with a specific purpose in mind, - to murder and to plunder.
Islam: an idea to kill and die for.

User avatar
uncung
Posts: 2783
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2011 4:21 pm

Re: Was the Middle East in Muhammad's time really so barbari

Post by uncung »

Nosuperstition wrote:Hello uncung,it is said that Allah loves people with love that is a 100 times more than the love a mother has for her child.So does Allah love only muslims or does he also love disbelievers?"
dude, teacher's love different with, mom', dad', friend', aunt', brother' love.
as well as God's love.
God belongs to many attitudes. among them is love. He loves obediance not mean He neglect His other creatures: disbelievers.

User avatar
uncung
Posts: 2783
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2011 4:21 pm

Re: Was the Middle East in Muhammad's time really so barbari

Post by uncung »

pr126 wrote:uncung wrote:
it is disbelievers fault. if they submited to muslims then they dont need to be attacked. and their belongings/goods would be saved.
Really?
I thought one has to submit to Allah, not to the Muslims.

A non Muslim's life and property is up for grabs? No wonder you like your cult so much.
A religion cult of murder and plunder. What kind of malevolent god commands that?!

And know that anything you obtain of war booty - then indeed, for Allah is one fifth of it and for the Messenger and for [his] near relatives and the orphans, the needy, and the [stranded] traveler, if you have believed in Allah and in that which We sent down to Our Servant on the day of criterion - the day when the two armies met. And Allah , over all things, is competent. Quran 8:41

Muslims say this is done in a war situation.
What they omitted to say is that the wars [ghazwa] were started with a specific purpose in mind, - to murder and to plunder.
it is the regulation of booty.

User avatar
pr126
Posts: 5288
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 9:24 am
Location: Blighty

Re: Was the Middle East in Muhammad's time really so barbari

Post by pr126 »

uncung wrote:
pr126 wrote:uncung wrote:
it is disbelievers fault. if they submited to muslims then they dont need to be attacked. and their belongings/goods would be saved.
Really?
I thought one has to submit to Allah, not to the Muslims.

A non Muslim's life and property is up for grabs? No wonder you like your cult so much.
A religion cult of murder and plunder. What kind of malevolent god commands that?!

And know that anything you obtain of war booty - then indeed, for Allah is one fifth of it and for the Messenger and for [his] near relatives and the orphans, the needy, and the [stranded] traveler, if you have believed in Allah and in that which We sent down to Our Servant on the day of criterion - the day when the two armies met. And Allah , over all things, is competent. Quran 8:41

Muslims say this is done in a war situation.
What they omitted to say is that the wars [ghazwa] were started with a specific purpose in mind, - to murder and to plunder.
it is the regulation of booty.
Your reply doesn't make sense.
Reply to this sentence:
the wars [ghazwa] were started with a specific purpose in mind, - to murder and to plunder.
Like raiding and robbing caravans.
Last edited by pr126 on Sun Feb 16, 2014 2:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Islam: an idea to kill and die for.

User avatar
uncung
Posts: 2783
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2011 4:21 pm

Re: Was the Middle East in Muhammad's time really so barbari

Post by uncung »

pr126 wrote: Your reply doesn't make sense.
Reply to this sentence:
the wars [ghazwa] were started with a specific purpose in mind, - to murder and to plunder.
gaining booty is the other benefit of jihaad.

User avatar
Hombre
Posts: 3673
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2009 3:18 am

Re: Was the Middle East in Muhammad's time really so barbari

Post by Hombre »

uncung wrote:
pr126 wrote: Your reply doesn't make sense.
Reply to this sentence:
the wars [ghazwa] were started with a specific purpose in mind, - to murder and to plunder.
gaining booty is the other benefit of jihaad.
So, you and other Muslims should not complain when Israel or Spain who took land, once occupied by Muslims. Lets call them, "Jewhaad" or "Christihaad" (A form of Jewish & Christian Jihad)

User avatar
uncung
Posts: 2783
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2011 4:21 pm

Re: Was the Middle East in Muhammad's time really so barbari

Post by uncung »

Hombre wrote: So, you and other Muslims should not complain when Israel or Spain who took land, once occupied by Muslims. Lets call them, "Jewhaad" or "Christihaad" (A form of Jewish & Christian Jihad)
I do not complain.
Jihaad always up to date.
I reckon also the riot in Central Africa for instance as the 'booty' of syaheed.

sum
Posts: 6519
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:11 pm

Re: Was the Middle East in Muhammad's time really so barbari

Post by sum »

Hello uncung

If the muslims invite a nation to embrace Islam and they refuse, should they be fought if they refuse even to pay jizyya?

sum

User avatar
uncung
Posts: 2783
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2011 4:21 pm

Re: Was the Middle East in Muhammad's time really so barbari

Post by uncung »

sum wrote:Hello uncung

If the muslims invite a nation to embrace Islam and they refuse, should they be fought if they refuse even to pay jizyya?

sum
jizya payment implies they dont fight, aka submit already to muslims.

sum
Posts: 6519
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:11 pm

Re: Was the Middle East in Muhammad's time really so barbari

Post by sum »

Hello uncung

Once more, you are avoiding the question.

I will ask again. If muslims ask a nation to embrace Islam, pay the jizyya and keep their religion or be fought, but they refuse to embrace Islam or pay the jizyya, should they be attacked and fought?

sum

User avatar
uncung
Posts: 2783
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2011 4:21 pm

Re: Was the Middle East in Muhammad's time really so barbari

Post by uncung »

sum wrote:Hello uncung

Once more, you are avoiding the question.

I will ask again. If muslims ask a nation to embrace Islam, pay the jizyya and keep their religion or be fought, but they refuse to embrace Islam or pay the jizyya, should they be attacked and fought?

sum
attacked?
detained or punished is the correct term.

sum
Posts: 6519
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:11 pm

Re: Was the Middle East in Muhammad's time really so barbari

Post by sum »

Hello uncung

Just clarify your position on this.

If muslims invite a non-Islamic nation to embrace Islam, convert or continue with their own religion but pay the jizyya with due humiliation and feel themselves subdued, or be fought if they reject the terms offered, do you think that this is an acceptable offer with the threat of being fought?

sum

Nosuperstition
Posts: 3789
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 6:45 am

Re: Was the Middle East in Muhammad's time really so barbari

Post by Nosuperstition »

uncung wrote:
Nosuperstition wrote:Hello uncung,it is said that Allah loves people with love that is a 100 times more than the love a mother has for her child.So does Allah love only muslims or does he also love disbelievers?"
dude, teacher's love different with, mom', dad', friend', aunt', brother' love.
as well as God's love.

God belongs to many attitudes. among them is love. He loves obediance not mean He neglect His other creatures: disbelievers.
Hadith for Allah's love 70 times better than mother's love
http://islam.stackexchange.com/question ... thers-love

Then are the authors of this hadith stupid to compare mother's love and God's love?

If God does not neglect his other creatures and loves them more than 70 times a mother loves her child,then he surely will not send them to hell just for disbelieving in one of his prophets,Muhammed.Are able to see through this reason and an obvious contradiction?
palli or halli in Dravidian languages means a village just like gaav in Aryan languages means a village.palli or halli in Aryan Mauryan Imperial era around 200 B.C designates a tribal hamlet.So many of those in South India are indeed descendants of tribals and are still keeping up that heritage.

User avatar
uncung
Posts: 2783
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2011 4:21 pm

Re: Was the Middle East in Muhammad's time really so barbari

Post by uncung »

Nosuperstition wrote:
Hadith for Allah's love 70 times better than mother's love
http://islam.stackexchange.com/question ... thers-love

Then are the authors of this hadith stupid to compare mother's love and God's love?

If God does not neglect his other creatures and loves them more than 70 times a mother loves her child,then he surely will not send them to hell just for disbelieving in one of his prophets,Muhammed.Are able to see through this reason and an obvious contradiction?
it is the embodiment of 70 x mom's love.
mom 1 love (very small)
God 70 loves (too much)

of course they both very different.

Post Reply