Islam is a religion of peace, not violence

Sean of the Living wrote: It’s funny how when they say all Muslims are terrorists (based on stereotypes of famous Muslims) they always leave out people like Cat Stevens and Muhhamed Ali (he protested against the Vietnam War) and leave in people like Osama Bin Laden.

ramunass wrote:
Dont forget Saladin he fought the Crusades he was very good man

It pisses me off people looking and terrorists and thinking

“Hey stupid Islam making the world bomb eachother”

In Medieval Times Islam made Europe a much better place

Sean of the Living wrote:

Yes that’s another odd thing, people say it’s “sad” that the Christian Crusaders who tried to invade the holy land failed, when really they were downright invaders and nothing more. Of course, you must take into account, all wars start for more than one reason and I don’t think there’s been many wars that have started purely on religion in the world. Even the 12th century crusades were largely because of money and resources such as spices the Arabs possessed which the Europeans desired.

# Don’t bother to warn the disbelievers. Allah has blinded them. Theirs will be an awful doom. 2:6

Allah has sickened their hearts. A painful doom is theirs because they lie. 2:10

A fire has been prepared for the disbelievers, whose fuel is men and stones. 2:24

Disbelievers will be burned with fire. 2:39

“Whosoever hath done evil and his sin surroundeth him; such are rightful owners of the Fire." 2:81

If you believe in only part of the Scripture, you will suffer in this life and go to hell in the next. 2:85

jomas the grunt wrote:
turks harrased europes borders for many years
but pope innocent decided to attempt a attack on jerusilam(sp) to fight back
even though in wasnt turk property >.>

ramunematt wrote: cruelty and violence in the Quran

Intolerance in the Quran

Oh yah, those few verses definitely cancel out these hundreds (literally) of verses from the Quran that would say otherwise than being the “religion of peace”.

RageOverdose wrote: Gonna look over these verses in rmatt’s site. I’ll quote the site, which uses only ONE particular translation, which I find a bit misleading, and I’ll compare it to others.



Well, that’s not actually what it says. In fact, it mentions nothing of doom.

“2:6 BEHOLD, as for those who are bent on denying the truth - it is all one to them whether thou warnest them or dost not warn them: they will not believe."

It merely states, those that reject Allah will always reject Allah, so don’t waste time trying to discuss it.



Better explained as, hypocrisy leads to destruction. And, based on the preceding a seceding verses, it is referring to those who claim to believe in Allah but, in fact, do not. Actually, these string of verses can be interpreted as showing Allah’s distaste in people like Osama bin Laden, who claim they do work for Allah when they destroy and harm people.

“2:8 And there are people who say, “We do believe in God and the Last Day," the while they do not [really] believe. 2:9 They would deceive God and those who have attained to faith-the while they deceive none but themselves, and perceive it not. 2:10 In their hearts is disease, and so God lets their disease increase; and grievous suffering awaits them because of their persistent lying. 2:11 And when they are told, “Do not spread corruption on earth," they answer, “We are but improving things!" 2:12 Oh, verily, it is they, they who are spreading corruption but they perceive it not?"



Ha! Wrong. Still part of the hypocrisy stream. They think they’re in Allah’s good graces, but they will lose all comforts, and be cast into Hell.

“2:24 And if you cannot do it-and most certainly you cannot do it-then be conscious of the fire whose fuel is human beings and stones which awaits all who deny the truth!"



Yeah, of Hell. Essentially, you don’t believe and you aren’t forgiven of the original sin. This is NO different from Judaism or Christianity. So, if you think Muslims are violent based on this, then all Abrahamic followers are. By the way, this is STILL referring to hypocrites, and is more evidence to support that terrorists who use Allah as an excuse are misrepresenting Islam.

“2:39 but those who are bent on denying the truth and giving the lie to Our messages - they are destined for the fire, and therein shall they abide."



Speaking again of hypocrites. I’m getting the feeling the Al-Baqara is about hypocrites and those that take Allah’s name for the wrong reasons. I found this particular part a tad confusing, though, because of the large amount of quotes. In the end, it seems there are those that claim Allah has said something which He did not, and they use it as a tool to acquire something. But, while they can hide from humans, they cannot hide from Allah, and in the end, Hell awaits, even if no human realized their folly.

“2:79Woe, then, unto those who write down, with their own hands, [something which they claim to be] divine writ, and then say. “This is from God," in order to acquire a trifling gain thereby; woe, then, unto them for what their hands have written, and woe unto them for all that they may have gained! 2:80And they say, “The fire will most certainly not touch us for more than a limited number of days." Say [unto them]: “Have you received a promise from God - for God never breaks His promise - or do you attribute to God something which you cannot know?" 2:81Yea! Those who earn evil and by their sinfulness are engulfed - they are destined for the fire. therein to abide;"



Taken out of context. If Allah tells you to not shed blood and pray, but you pray and shed blood, then you are defying him. One right doesn’t make you completely right. By the way, the word ransom in the verse is most likely referencing to redeeming one from sin. So, you did what Allah told you not to and cast away people declaring their sin, but then you pardon them of sin, when you in fact are impure. More hypocrisy and false sense of divinity.

“2:84And lo! We accepted your solemn pledge that you would not shed one another’s blood, and would not drive one another from your homelands - whereupon you acknowledged it; and thereto you bear witness [even now]. 2:85And yet, it is you who slay one another and drive some of your own people from their homelands, aiding one another against them in sin and hatred; but if they come to you as captives, you ransom them - although the very [act of] driving them away has been made unlawful to you! Do you, then, believe in some parts of the divine writ and deny the truth of other parts? What, then, could be the reward of those among you who do such things but ignominy in the life of this world and, on the Day of Resurrection, commitment to most grievous suffering? For God is not unmindful of what you do."

I could go on, but this is getting long. I’ll do more later.

Sean of the Living wrote: Retard, these verses don’t say to kill non Muslims they say that the disbelievers will go to Hell. And even so, Hell in Islam is somtimes temporary anyway.Besides, if these verses are absolutely in context, howcome they only have a few words of the original verses? Seems like these people are leaving a bit out. And you, one who has not even read the Quran in it’s original form, judge it purely based on your faith in these skeptics.Hell, I even rebuked some of these. “Slay the adulterers wherever you find them” (9:5), for example, is not the whole verse. If they’d shown it in context they would have shown the whole thing, which says:[9:4-5] If the idol worshipers sign a peace treaty with you, and do not violate it, nor band together with others against you, you shall fulfill your treaty with them until the expiration date. GOD loves the righteous. Once the Sacred Months are past, and they refuse to make peace, you may kill the idol worshipers when you encounter them, punish them, and resist every move they make.

ramunematt wrote:

Don’t you get it? EVERY verse is taken out of context, EVERY verse can be made to sound like it means something completely different from what it says. That’s the number one reason I think scripture is invalid. No one can know what it really says. Some people will take it literally, some metaphorically. It’s all picking and choosing based on what YOU want, not what it actually says. You can’t just say, “okay, I’ll choose to follow this verse where it tells me to be kind and ignore the verse where it tells me to stone homosexuals”. No, it doesn’t work that way. If you are a true believer of any book of religion you have to follow EVERYTHING it says, regardless of how horrible some of it’s verses may sound.

Itachi Uchiha wrote: Don’t you get it? EVERY verse is taken out of context, EVERY verse can be made to sound like it means something completely different from what it says. That’s the number one reason I think scripture is invalid. No one can know what it really says. Some people will take it literally, some metaphorically. It’s all picking and choosing based on what YOU want, not what it actually says. You can’t just say, “okay, I’ll choose to follow this verse where it tells me to be kind and ignore the verse where it tells me to stone homosexuals”. No, it doesn’t work that way. If you are a true believer of any book of religion you have to follow EVERYTHING it says, regardless of how horrible some of it’s verses may sound.
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

gay is allowed in animals world... thats the fact...