Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Sign in to follow this  
Tryingtolearn

Christianity vs Islam

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, andres said:

A woman is not a mans property. She is just as capable to take care of herself as a man is. Your views are very old fashioned. And opressive. 

I did not say the Quran or the Bible was sexistic. I said I was not certain the Bible was more sexistic than the Quran. I am not even certain one xan speak about sexism when it comes to the Bible or the Quran.

Christian women are not silent. Just have a look at European parliaments versus middle East ones. Many women are ministers and occupy leading positions in our countries. Our Swedish archbishop is a woman. Would that be possible in the Muslim world?

I dont know what you mean by old fashioned. These are the Islamic laws. Men and Women have their roles. Feminism does not go well with Islam. Brother go and take a look at as soon as Early Twentieth Century Western World and see how Women were treated and the nations Canada and the United States were Christian based countries and Women actually had to fight for their rights so that they could be considered a person. Also what about assimilation of the Native Americans, being forced to accept the Christianity doctrine. Saint Paul narrated a verse in the Bible whereby Women have to stay silent. Also go look at Iran and see how many Women go to University and how many are involved in politics. 

Edited by AfricanShia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Son of Placid said:

I have already mentioned this stuff in another post you did not read.

Please tell me how I could forget this. I toured more than 50 churches over two years. Some were even the same denomination, but were still better than the rest. I attended one church...You'd think a "Fellowship Baptist" would be up for fellowship, but there was only one other church in the entirety of Montreal they could have fellowship with, and even then it was with a wink. The politics in organized religion is hidden in doctrines, and traditions, but blatant to an outsider. 

You mean to tell me that the Quran, which is not put together in any chronological order and scattered stories must be read in context, but with the Bible you can pull out any old verse and make a claim?

"The same Qur'an" Some recite Haffs, some recite Warsh. Besides the dots and pronunciations, the sequence of ayats, are you going to tell me they are word for word? I bet you don't know which has more, which has less, save yourself the trouble and don't go there.

This you decide while telling me all Muslims read the same Qur'an, they just have different opinions on what it means. That is the real corruption of all Abrahamic religions. The meanings are given to you from a chain of narrations. Narrations meant to turn an opinion into a doctrine, or at least a tradition. Depends who they tell you to believe.

Tafsir al mizan, portrays Christians as lowest of the low. When did Muhammad ever do that?

He entrusted his followers to take asylum in a Christian kingdom until it was safe.  

Research hard enough? I have more years of study than you have life. Give me a break.

I know my Quran quite well. Also chains of narrations are closely analyzed, if one narrator is deemed unreliable, then the whole chain is considered unreliable. All Muslims read the same Quran that contains no differences because no one can change the Quran because it is being protected by Allah. If someone trys to change it then their life will be over. Christians are low because of their extreme love of Prophet Isa and calling him the Son of God. I have already proven you wrong yet your arrogance has made you think you won. You cant beat someone who has more knowledge than you. Also this taking refuge in an asylum in a Christian Kingdom? From what sources did this come from? I can do this all day. You cant even counter or read my proofs I have provided. If anything your making yourself look bad on your behalf by asking me if I research hard enough and yet I was the one who actually brought references to back my argument as well as my colleagues and yet you havent brought any references. You are being quite a hypocrite. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, AfricanShia said:

You said pretty much have the same core beliefs but overall dont have the same beliefs. If im wrong then why does the Catholic version of the Bible have more books than the common Bible such the one Jehovahs witness' use ? Problem is with Christianity is that the beliefs are quite scrambled and all over the place and the picture is never quite clear. As I also recall, The Bible is quite sexist towards Women. May I provide proofs for you

The Jehovah's Witnesses, not being Trinitarian and having some rather odd beliefs such as only so many folks getting into heaven ( less than their own numbers...lol) are not considered " orthodox" Christianity by any of the other Christian denominations from Catholic to Lutheran to Baptist. I'm sure you have  small  heterodox sects in Islam that are considered beyond the pale, too. 

However,since you asked, here's the quick and over-simplified answer to your question:  Catholics and Orthodox accept books of the Greek Jewish Scriptures ( the Septuagint)  that were part of the Jewish canon at the time the church was formed.  Both Jews at the time and early Christians read them. This was not without controversy because the  Jews  ended up, when their canon was set after the advent of Christianity, not accepting  all of them into the Tanakh. But they stayed in the Christian canon,although their authority was often pondered. The Protestants ( I assume the JWs just took that version) felt free to exclude them, even though you can find them in Anglican versions and in a separate section of many Protestant versions. The Scriptures all Christians agree upon most of them. As well, these are all Old Testament books. The New Testament books are the same in the Christian world. 

Again, there is no " common Bible" from which the " Catholic one" could vary. If there were, it would have to be the  versions the Catholics prefer  since there are more of them. Lol. 

The picture is actually very clear and beliefs are not " mixed up". There are several beliefs that mark a mainstream Christian and we have them listed in Canon Law. If you were to sit me and my Presbyterian friend down and ask us about Christianity, our answers would be about the same. She would differ from me most on church structure and the number of sacraments, but that is not much different than various parts of Islam.

I think you are getting hung up on things that don't bother most Christians nor interfere with our fellowship with each other.

Not sure you want to go into Abrahamic religion and women. Lol.

Edited by LeftCoastMom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, LeftCoastMom said:

The Jehovah's Witnesses, not being Trinitarian and having some rather odd beliefs such as only so many folks getting into heaven ( less than their own numbers...lol) are not considered " orthodox" Christianity by any of the other Christian denominations from Catholic to Lutheran to Baptist. I'm sure you have  small  heterodox sects in Islam that are considered beyond the pale, too. 

However,since you asked, here's the quick and over-simplified answer to your question:  Catholics and Orthodox accept books of the Greek Jewish Scriptures ( the Septuagint)  that were part of the Jewish canon at the time the church was formed.  Both Jews at the time and early Christians read them. This was not without controversy because the  Jews  ended up, when their canon was set after the advent of Christianity, not accepting  all of them into the Tanakh. But they stayed in the Christian canon,although their authority was often pondered. The Protestants ( I assume the JWs just took that version) felt free to exclude them, even though you can find them in Anglican versions and in a separate section of many Protestant versions. The Scriptures all Christians agree upon most of them. As well, these are all Old Testament books. The New Testament books are the same in the Christian world. 

Again, there is no " common Bible" from which the " Catholic one" could vary. If there were, it would have to be the  versions the Catholics prefer  since there are more of them. Lol. 

The picture is actually very clear and beliefs are not " mixed up". There are several beliefs that mark a mainstream Christian and we have them listed in Canon Law. If you were to sit me and my Presbyterian friend down and ask us about Christianity, our answers would be about the same. She would differ from me most on church structure and the number of sacraments, but that is not much different than various parts of Islam.

I think you are getting hung up on things that don't bother most Christians nor interfere with our fellowship with each other.

Not sure you want to go into Abrahamic religion and women. Lol.

At least I can have a better discussion with you Sister. :)

What im exactly trying to prove is that if the Bible was a pure revelation from the Almighty God then it would have been differed among different denominations because you cant change God's word. Also people tend to get the misconception that Islam mistreats Women but that is not allowed according to the Quran and instead Women must be treated with the upmost respect and a Husband must provide for his wife and take care of his wife needs when she demands them and the Wife must take care of the Husbands needs. That is equality in the simplest form. Also there are extreme Muslims like Wahabis and Salafis but still have the same Quran. 

Edited by AfricanShia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ well, I'd say equality is where both genders have the right to get along in their lives without having to be " taken care of" by the other except by mutual consent. ( That often did not happen in a lot of Christian or Muslim societies historically). Other societies often did a better job, 

For instance, here traditionally, the woman owned the house, had custody of all her kids, gave her clan rights to the offspring ( why maternal  uncles, who shared her clan, were as important if not more important than the father), and could gain her livelihood on her own. She could also be head of a village, take part in the councils, lead ceremony, etc. Women also walked around  these parts wearing little more than a comfortable skirt a lot of the time. They weren't harassed because the males were not taught to think that way about parts of a female body. Babies needed the breasts. Why cover them? Sort of like how most white American males these days can handle seeing a woman's ankle. 15O years ago they thought that was too risqué. (I keep wondering what will happen if some day someone gets it into their head that women's noses are too sexy to handle.)

So you can see where any  middle-eastern Abrahamic faith was considered a step backwards to these women and many do not accept that form of spirituality or abandoned it, especially  when the Religious Freedom Act went through.

Both Christianity and Islam claim to have elevated the status of women  in their respective original cultures and they both might be right. But anywhere is up from the cellar. Women living on the top floors are not too impressed.

But...your example of Paul telling women to be silent is considered by most scholars to be simply a matter of order in the early church ( women were supposedly calling out questions during service) and not a general rule for the life of women. Women speak all the time in the liturgical service. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, LeftCoastMom said:

^ well, I'd say equality is where both genders have the right to get along in their lives without having to be " taken care of" by the other except by mutual consent. ( That often did not happen in a lot of Christian or Muslim societies historically). Other societies often did a better job, 

For instance, here traditionally, the woman owned the house, had custody of all her kids, gave her clan rights to the offspring ( why maternal  uncles, who shared her clan, were as important if not more important than the father), and could gain her livelihood on her own. She could also be head of a village, take part in the councils, lead ceremony, etc. Women also walked around  these parts wearing little more than a comfortable skirt a lot of the time. They weren't harassed because the males were not taught to think that way about parts of a female body. Babies needed the breasts. Why cover them? Sort of like how most white American males these days can handle seeing a woman's ankle. 15O years ago they thought that was too risqué. (I keep wondering what will happen if some day someone gets it into their head that women's noses are too sexy to handle.)

So you can see where any  middle-eastern Abrahamic faith was considered a step backwards to these women and many do not accept that form of spirituality or abandoned it, especially  when the Religious Freedom Act went through.

Both Christianity and Islam claim to have elevated the status of women  in their respective original cultures and they both might be right. But anywhere is up from the cellar. Women living on the top floors are not too impressed.

But...your example of Paul telling women to be silent is considered by most scholars to be simply a matter of order in the early church ( women were supposedly calling out questions during service) and not a general rule for the life of women. Women speak all the time in the liturgical service. 

Modesty is a very important moral aspect of a person. A Woman being modest prevents people from looking at that woman in a sexual manner which is very degrading. A Woman covering her body has more self-respect and dignity than a Woman who exposes her private parts and hair. Woman dont have to wear hijab in the household unless if people other than their Husband or family members are within the house. The main cause of Women getting raped is the fact they dont have any Modesty allowing sexual predators to get aroused off them and attack them. A Woman can breastfeed while properly covering and also this is a moral value that has been degraded by many societies, a moral value that is crucial to teach the youth. Men and Women need Modesty in order to be a righteous believer of God. Men and Women who are Modest are worthy of respect than the ones that dont. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:sign_offtopic:^ Rape was almost unknown here in this particular region pre-contact. Dress did not matter. (The dress here was considered proper for the culture, especially since you spent most of your time in the water. The men did not sexualize that and went mostly naked themselves.) Concepts mattered. 

Rape has more to do with domination and power. Women get raped when men have  no self-control. Self-control is the business of the person and must be taught to them, like everything else.

Women have been raped in long skirts and bonnets. We know because that is what kept happening to us after they forced us into long skirts and bonnets.

Edited by LeftCoastMom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 Also this taking refuge in an asylum in a Christian Kingdom? 

Nobody said taking refuge in an asylum. Refuge and asylum are basically the same thing...a safe place. 

Yes, Muhammad sent his people to "take refuge" in a Christian kingdom. You should know this. Of course it makes Christians look good so, no they didn't teach you that. The source is called History.

Quote

Christians are low because of their extreme love of Prophet Isa and calling him the Son of God.

Another Muslim telling me what I am and what I believe. It's a never ending prejudice.

3 hours ago, AfricanShia said:

I have already proven you wrong yet your arrogance has made you think you won.

Thus far your proof is cuz you said so. Actually, your teacher said so. So far you have only been taught, you haven't studied more than you've been shown.

What references do you want?

Edited by Son of Placid
For the sake of an edit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, AfricanShia said:

I dont know what you mean by old fashioned. These are the Islamic laws. Men and Women have their roles. Feminism does not go well with Islam. Brother go and take a look at as soon as Early Twentieth Century Western World and see how Women were treated and the nations Canada and the United States were Christian based countries and Women actually had to fight for their rights so that they could be considered a person. Also what about assimilation of the Native Americans, being forced to accept the Christianity doctrine. Saint Paul narrated a verse in the Bible whereby Women have to stay silent. Also go look at Iran and see how many Women go to University and how many are involved in politics. 

Islamic laws are oldfashioned and its view on gender roles are from 7th century Medina. Women in Iran do not have the same rights as men. Having said this, conditions in Iran are much more promising in Iran rhan in other muslim nations. Iran has a well educated population, young women fight for equal rights (google "my stealthy freedom") and sooner or later Iran will become a democrasy. Sharia law does not go well together with personal freedom, especially for women. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, andres said:

Islamic laws are oldfashioned and its view on gender roles are from 7th century Medina. Women in Iran do not have the same rights as men. Having said this, conditions in Iran are much more promising in Iran rhan in other muslim nations. Iran has a well educated population, young women fight for equal rights (google "my stealthy freedom") and sooner or later Iran will become a democrasy. Sharia law does not go well together with personal freedom, especially for women. 

You say the same for Men but the Islamic laws are laws that will last until Judgement Day. They are the complete set of laws revealed by God to suit the needs of the people. People today can folloe Islamic Laws but yet they are able to blend easily in society. Women during the time of the Holy Prophet actually had more respect for themselves and were more deserving of respect than the average Woman today. They were chaste, ascetic, pious and modest, something which God would prefer over the average "Woman" these days who lacks modesty and other important moral characterisitics. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Son of Placid said:

Nobody said taking refuge in an asylum. Refuge and asylum are basically the same thing...a safe place. 

Yes, Muhammad sent his people to "take refuge" in a Christian kingdom. You should know this. Of course it makes Christians look good so, no they didn't teach you that. The source is called History.

Another Muslim telling me what I am and what I believe. It's a never ending prejudice.

Thus far your proof is cuz you said so. Actually, your teacher said so. So far you have only been taught, you haven't studied more than you've been shown.

What references do you want?

Can I have the reference of Muhammad doing such. This ignorance is going too far. This is why I dont debate with Christians. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, LeftCoastMom said:

:sign_offtopic:^ Rape was almost unknown here in this particular region pre-contact. Dress did not matter. (The dress here was considered proper for the culture, especially since you spent most of your time in the water. The men did not sexualize that and went mostly naked themselves.) Concepts mattered. 

Rape has more to do with domination and power. Women get raped when men have  no self-control. Self-control is the business of the person and must be taught to them, like everything else.

Women have been raped in long skirts and bonnets. We know because that is what kept happening to us after they forced us into long skirts and bonnets.

Okay then if that was the case then might as well have naked Women walking in crime neighbourhoods vs a modest Woman walking through one and it seems quite obvious to which is most likely to get raped. Hint: The one that Men are able to look at her exposed parts and get sexually aroused off them. This is the most obsurd thing I have read in my life. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, LeftCoastMom said:

:sign_offtopic:^ Rape was almost unknown here in this particular region pre-contact. Dress did not matter. (The dress here was considered proper for the culture, especially since you spent most of your time in the water. The men did not sexualize that and went mostly naked themselves.) Concepts mattered. 

Rape has more to do with domination and power. Women get raped when men have  no self-control. Self-control is the business of the person and must be taught to them, like everything else.

Women have been raped in long skirts and bonnets. We know because that is what kept happening to us after they forced us into long skirts and bonnets.

Might as well also have more self-respect for yourself by covering your body parts. Give me one good reasong why a Man or a Woman shouldnt be modest? People would rather respect a Woman or Man who covers their body from others and give them space rather than one whom exposes themselves for others to get sexually aroused. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Son of Placid @andres @LeftCoastMom . In all honesty all three of you are wasting my time. Unless if you actually references whereby you can prove what your supporting against me then dont reply at all because your arguements are weak and you make ignorant and false accusations and try to make it look like im ignorant when really I just proved you all wrong by providing references that support my claims. This a discussion that requires references and for one to break down those references to support your side. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@LeftCoastMom . I specifically liked that claim whereby you agreed the Holy Spirit is unlettered and is named Muhammad. @Son of Placid . I also liked how you claimed that the Unlettered man is just a Man that the Bible mentioned yet please ask me this: Why would God put useless verses into his Holy Book?. Most absurd comment ever. By claiming such you literally degraded the power of the Almighty God. :)

Edited by AfricanShia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@LeftCoastMom . I liked that claim whereby you agreed that the Holy Spirit is unlettered and is named Muhammad. @Son of Placid . I also liked that specific claim whereby you yourself claimed that the Unlettered Man in the Bible was a simply a random man mentioned. But here is the problem with that. Why would the Almighty God allow such a verse into his Holy Book if it has no meaning whatsoever behind it? . You degraded your own faith by agreeing with such. Most absurd thing. :)

Edited by AfricanShia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, AfricanShia said:

You say the same for Men but the Islamic laws are laws that will last until Judgement Day. They are the complete set of laws revealed by God to suit the needs of the people. People today can folloe Islamic Laws but yet they are able to blend easily in society. Women during the time of the Holy Prophet actually had more respect for themselves and were more deserving of respect than the average Woman today. They were chaste, ascetic, pious and modest, something which God would prefer over the average "Woman" these days who lacks modesty and other important moral characterisitics. 

The needs of people differ from place to place and are not the same today as they were 1.400 years ago. Education, science and globalisation have changed the world. Not many educated women accept their husband shal decide how she shall dress or him having 4 wives. Women are also sexual beings. 

Evolution moves on, societies develop. Sharia law nations will continue to be dependent on leading nations with freedom of speach and democrasy. Educated people in Sharia nations do not wish to be underdogs. And they want to get rid of the old priests that decide who they can vote for. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, AfricanShia said:

People would rather respect a Woman or Man who covers their body from others and give them space rather than one whom exposes themselves for others to get sexually aroused. 

What about tribal people in the hot djungle that do not cover their bodies at all? Do they not respect each other? Why do their women not carry burka? Muhammeds laws were adspted to Arabs in 7th century. It is not universal, and today it is not very succesful anywhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, andres said:

The needs of people differ from place to place and are not the same today as they were 1.400 years ago. Education, science and globalisation have changed the world. Not many educated women accept their husband shal decide how she shall dress or him having 4 wives. Women are also sexual beings. 

Evolution moves on, societies develop. Sharia law nations will continue to be dependent on leading nations with freedom of speach and democrasy. Educated people in Sharia nations do not wish to be underdogs. And they want to get rid of the old priests that decide who they can vote for. 

Yes Women are Human beings. In Islam Men and Women shouldnt mistreated so whats your point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, andres said:

What about tribal people in the hot djungle that do not cover their bodies at all? Do they not respect each other? Why do their women not carry burka? Muhammeds laws were adspted to Arabs in 7th century. It is not universal, and today it is not very succesful anywhere.

The only reason why Allahs laws are not universal is because Allah guides whom he wills and misguides whom he wills. Also you forget that Prophet Muhammad traveled long distances. And Women in tribal jungles being naked is sickening, would you yourself want to see that as a normal thing because its perverted. They are kafirs and its clear that their beliefs are twisted so why should I bother myself with such?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, andres said:

The needs of people differ from place to place and are not the same today as they were 1.400 years ago. Education, science and globalisation have changed the world. Not many educated women accept their husband shal decide how she shall dress or him having 4 wives. Women are also sexual beings. 

Evolution moves on, societies develop. Sharia law nations will continue to be dependent on leading nations with freedom of speach and democrasy. Educated people in Sharia nations do not wish to be underdogs. And they want to get rid of the old priests that decide who they can vote for. 

Sharia Law is dependent on Sharia Law. All these Liberals who to want to change Sharia Law or abolish wont succedd in doing so. Look at how oragnized and successful Iran is, the Shia nation. Women and Men have a good set of rights Islamically, many of them go to university, about 90% of the Women in Iran go to University. There is crime of course and Sharia Law takes care of that crime. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, AfricanShia said:

The only reason why Allahs laws are not universal is because Allah guides whom he wills and misguides whom he wills. Also you forget that Prophet Muhammad traveled long distances. And Women in tribal jungles being naked is sickening, would you yourself want to see that as a normal thing because its perverted. They are kafirs and its clear that their beliefs are twisted so why should I bother myself with such?

Not only women are naked in the djungle. Men also are. There is a natural reason they do not wear Burkas, but you do not seem willing to reflect over such disturbing facts. 

I know Muhammed travelled "long" distances. Maybe all the way from Mekka to Jerusalem. 

Had he wished to, Muhammed had had no possibility to spread his message very far during his lifetime. 

Why would Allah wish to misguide somebody? You think he misguided everybody except for Shias? On purpose?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, AfricanShia said:

@Son of Placid @andres @LeftCoastMom . In all honesty all three of you are wasting my time. Unless if you actually references whereby you can prove what your supporting against me then dont reply at all because your arguements are weak and you make ignorant and false accusations and try to make it look like im ignorant when really I just proved you all wrong by providing references that support my claims. This a discussion that requires references and for one to break down those references to support your side. 

We are all so sorry for having wasted your time. Not sure why you haven't turned your high horse around and ridden victoriously off into the sunset yet, while we watch in awe.

Maybe this will help. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migration_to_Abyssinia 

All the sources are there...more than you can refute. I repeat, you should already know this.

So Deuteronomy was written after Isa?   Source please.

You still have to explain how you can take two words, "unlettered man" and make Muhammad one of the cursed of God.  

You still have to explain how Muhammad was to become the leader of the Levites.

You can also explain what comfort you get from a comforter that is late 600+ years. 

Maybe you can also tell me why the Muslims on this site that I respect are not backing you up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, AfricanShia said:

Might as well also have more self-respect for yourself by covering your body parts. Give me one good reasong why a Man or a Woman shouldnt be modest? People would rather respect a Woman or Man who covers their body from others and give them space rather than one whom exposes themselves for others to get sexually aroused. 

" Modesty" is subjective and culturally based.  The clothes here were considered perfectly " modest". People were respected just fine. Perhaps you should ask  yourself why some men in some cultures have no self-respect or self-control?

One good reason for wearing less clothing : ever tried diving for clams in a burka?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, AfricanShia said:

Okay then if that was the case then might as well have naked Women walking in crime neighbourhoods vs a modest Woman walking through one and it seems quite obvious to which is most likely to get raped. Hint: The one that Men are able to look at her exposed parts and get sexually aroused off them. This is the most obsurd thing I have read in my life. 

Then why were the settler  men still raping us when we were forced into long skirts and bonnets?

Edited by LeftCoastMom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, AfricanShia said:

@LeftCoastMom . I specifically liked that claim whereby you agreed the Holy Spirit is unlettered and is named Muhammad.

Lol. I didn't ...but you are free to believe that.

9 hours ago, AfricanShia said:

 This is why I dont debate with Christians. 

But if you post here, you are inviting debate with Christians. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, AfricanShia said:

The only reason why Allahs laws are not universal is because Allah guides whom he wills and misguides whom he wills. Also you forget that Prophet Muhammad traveled long distances. And Women in tribal jungles being naked is sickening, would you yourself want to see that as a normal thing because its perverted. They are kafirs and its clear that their beliefs are twisted so why should I bother myself with such?

well, I think God is loving and merciful ....and that it had more to do with climate and the fact that getting away from that jaguar in a burka would be problematic. ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, andres said:

Not only women are naked in the djungle. Men also are. There is a natural reason they do not wear Burkas, but you do not seem willing to reflect over such disturbing facts. 

I know Muhammed travelled "long" distances. Maybe all the way from Mekka to Jerusalem. 

Had he wished to, Muhammed had had no possibility to spread his message very far during his lifetime. 

Why would Allah wish to misguide somebody? You think he misguided everybody except for Shias? On purpose?

Allah misguides no one. The person is the one whom misguides himself. Someone who denys the revelations of Allah, Allah seals that persons heart so that he will not listen even if you show him all the proof.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, LeftCoastMom said:

well, I think God is loving and merciful ....and that it had more to do with climate and the fact that getting away from that jaguar in a burka would be problematic. ...

Yes indeed he is but he has laws and he is not going to forgive those who do wrong unless if they themselves are willing to seek forgiveness from Allah. Allah is free of all needs. Allah doesnt need us but we need him so he is not going to waste his time with wrongdoers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, LeftCoastMom said:

Lol. I didn't ...but you are free to believe that.

But if you post here, you are inviting debate with Christians. :)

Well it seems no one else is coming and if more do then I will debate with them as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, LeftCoastMom said:

" Modesty" is subjective and culturally based.  The clothes here were considered perfectly " modest". People were respected just fine. Perhaps you should ask  yourself why some men in some cultures have no self-respect or self-control?

One good reason for wearing less clothing : ever tried diving for clams in a burka?

Modesty is a law from Allah. It is a form of self-respect and faith. Anybody who is sane and is intellectual would know that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, AfricanShia said:

Yes indeed he is but he has laws and he is not going to forgive those who do wrong unless if they themselves are willing to seek forgiveness from Allah. Allah is free of all needs. Allah doesnt need us but we need him so he is not going to waste his time with wrongdoers. 

Ummm...pretty sure those people don't think they are " doing wrong".

 

4 minutes ago, AfricanShia said:

What? This is just pure ignorance. 

That is not an answer.

 

3 minutes ago, AfricanShia said:

Modesty is a law from Allah. It is a form of self-respect and faith. Anybody who is sane and is intellectual would know that. 

These sane ,self-respecting,and intellectual people were fine with the clothes they had. Their faith had no problem with it,either. Lol. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, AfricanShia said:

What? This is just pure ignorance. 

On your part.

Honestly, do you have any idea who you are talking to, their experience, their history?

Say no.

LCM could teach you how to be a better Muslim. She's changes Muslim diapers quite often.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, LeftCoastMom said:

Ummm...pretty sure those people don't think they are " doing wrong".

 

That is not an answer.

 

These sane ,self-respecting,and intellectual people were fine with the clothes they had. Their faith had no problem with it,either. Lol. 

People who sin are aware of what they do and dont care about God. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...