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

Is Islam an immoral religion? Debate between SHIA Muslim and Christian PREACHER.

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Veteran Member

:salam:
I personally did not like this discussion and I would have walked away when the preacher started to insult the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم), but I would appreciate your thoughts on the discussion as well as some well substantiated defences to the preachers arguments.

In summary: preacher basically brings forth 4:24 (the verse about slavery or married women as slaves) and says Islam is an immoral religion. The polite and respectful Shia brother responds by saying that since we are in the ghaybat al Kubra, there is no war or expansionism, and so this verse would no longer relevant. The Christian just dismisses him and says you didn’t bring any ahadith from your Imams that the verse is no longer applicable.


I wish that there were different interpretations and accounts of the verse given instead of accepting that it allows enslaving “married non-muslim women” and “raping” them. Anyway, I personally believe these issues are very contextual and nuanced, and throwing out buzzwords like “rape” and “slavery” is something these anti-Islam preachers love to do. I have added a quote of one of the Study Qur’an’s interpretations of the verse. Please feel free to add more.

Quote

Alternately, some consider the present verse to be a continuation of v. 3: Marry such women as seem good to you, two, three, or four: but if you fear that you will not deal justly, then only one, or those whom your right hands possess.

According to this interpretation, muḥṣanāt refers to women whom one might marry beyond the limit of four, which would be completely forbidden, unless they were slave women (IK, Ṭ). - The Study Quran

If a non-Muslim comes across this post then I recommend you begin by reading this article to understand the nuance:

https://www.al-islam.org/slavery-allamah-sayyid-saeed-akhtar-rizvi/islam-attacks-slavery

Edited by 313_Waiter
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 99
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

There's racism involved. It's people of the desert vs the morally ethical Europeans.

What I don't understand is that both religions are Abrahamic faiths, it's not as though Islam came with a new "god", it's the same Deity, new revelation. Christianity is the religion that deviate

This "argument" is mute. 1] Slavery exists in the Bible. Examples: Genesis 17:12 & 27 and Leviticus 19:20 (Douay translation for the phrase "bought slaves). Then for bought "servants" and "bo

  • Veteran Member

From brother Nad_M’s blog truthanvil.blogspot.com:

Quote

4:23-24 expands on the categories of women that are illegal for intimate relations however it makes an exception for already married Ma Malakat aymanikum. In case a married woman embraces Islam and then decides to desert her non-Muslim husband (only for the sake of her new faith) seeking shelter in a Muslim area. If after examination she is believed to be sincere in her faith then she cannot be turned back to her previous home, not only for safety reasons but also because -in the case her husband is an idolator- her new faith has made unlawful intermarriages with idolaters 2:221. A Muslim man may take her under his wing in his household, thus making her his mulk yamin. They become legal for eachother and if they wish to marry, they may only do so after payment of the dower to her initial husband thus definately annuling the previous marriage ties 60:10.

Notice here the justice in the Quran where it first encourages Muslims to pay what is due to the opposite party with whom one is at war, regardless of potentially these enemies not reciprocating with the Muslims in the same situation. 60:11 then discusses that eventuality and says that should it occur, then for the next cases, a disbelieving husband will only be compensated proportionally to what his predecessor unfairly compensated the Muslim camp. By first encouraging indiscriminate justice, and then justice by deterrence, the Quran skillfuly equalizes the balance of justice even in times of war.

The other case of a married woman becoming lawful to a Muslim is that of a former married war prisonner. Once the threat of war was over, the defeated enemy and their belongings brought at the battlefield were confiscated, including their women which per their customs they used to unjustly drag with them as a means by which they were emboldened to fight. They now fell under Muslim custody, as a punishment and lesson to those who do not value their own, including a lesson to these very women. When they were integrated into the fabric of society, taken in a Muslim household and made to benefit from the strict regulations as regards right hand possessions, which includes being kind and caring with them as one would be with the remaining members of the family, these women learned that Islam gave them, even in such conditions, a value they could never have hoped for in their own communities. Their surviving husbands that in fact do not deserve to be married to them in the first place, are only hurt in their male "pride". They didnt love these women, who would treat a wife in such way? Even then, they learn that wives, and women in general, do have a value seeing how Muslims treat the wives of their enemies. When a Muslim guardian takes into his home such women, formerly married war prisonners now upgraded to right hand possessions, they become sexually lawful to him but this in no way means that if she refuses he is allowed to force her and rape her.

There are no such recorded cases in history and if anything, whenever a case of mistreated and abused person was brought to the prophet, he condemned such a behavior. The guardian may in that case either keep her in his household and stop insisting or send her away from his household by ransoming her against benefits of any kinds to her former camp, if anyone among her own people desires taking her back. The social contract between a guardian and his right hand possession is exclusive to them both, legalizing and regulating sexual activity as would be in a marriage contract and its accompanying responsibilities of maintenance and good treatment.

Just to add, I believe the women who were dragged onto the battlefield by the pagans could still be ransomed by them as was done for the captured women of Awtas (there must be an ‘iddah as well so any insinuation of rape is pure speculation).

Shiite commentators may have different interpretations though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

This "argument" is mute.

1] Slavery exists in the Bible. Examples: Genesis 17:12 & 27 and Leviticus 19:20 (Douay translation for the phrase "bought slaves). Then for bought "servants" and "bondman" see Proverbs 29:19, Exodus 21:20 & 32(?), Sirach 33:28.

2] In accordance with Ayat 4: 90, slavery was abrogated by treaty.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Development Team
11 hours ago, 313_Waiter said:

:salam:
I personally did not like this discussion and I would have walked away when the preacher started to insult the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم), but I would appreciate your thoughts on the discussion as well as some well substantiated defences to the preachers arguments.

In summary: preacher basically brings forth 4:24 (the verse about slavery or married women as slaves) and says Islam is an immoral religion. The polite and respectful Shia brother responds by saying that since we are in the ghaybat al Kubra, there is no war or expansionism, and so this verse would no longer relevant. The Christian just dismisses him and says you didn’t bring any ahadith from your Imams that the verse is no longer applicable.


I wish that there were different interpretations and accounts of the verse given instead of accepting that it allows enslaving “married non-muslim women” and “raping” them. Anyway, I personally believe these issues are very contextual and nuanced, and throwing out buzzwords like “rape” and “slavery” is something these anti-Islam preachers love to do. I have added a quote of one of the Study Qur’an’s interpretations of the verse. Please feel free to add more.

If a non-Muslim comes across this post then I recommend you begin by reading this article to understand the nuance:

https://www.al-islam.org/slavery-allamah-sayyid-saeed-akhtar-rizvi/islam-attacks-slavery

What I don't understand is that both religions are Abrahamic faiths, it's not as though Islam came with a new "god", it's the same Deity, new revelation.

Christianity is the religion that deviated from the shema of Musa (عليه السلام) and abrogated much of the Torah, having Isa (عليه السلام) "die" for sins of Mankind. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
34 minutes ago, Gaius I. Caesar said:

What I don't understand is that both religions are Abrahamic faiths, it's not as though Islam came with a new "god", it's the same Deity, new revelation.

Christianity is the religion that deviated from the shema of Musa (عليه السلام) and abrogated much of the Torah, having Isa (عليه السلام) "die" for sins of Mankind. 

There's racism involved. It's people of the desert vs the morally ethical Europeans.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Development Team
1 hour ago, El Cid said:

There's racism involved. It's people of the desert vs the morally ethical Europeans.

But they have no qualms with the ancient Hebrews, who were peoples of the desert and apparently morally superior to the ancient Indo-Europeans. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member (With Brothers Forum Membership)
6 hours ago, El Cid said:

There's racism involved. It's people of the desert vs the morally ethical Europeans.

Christianity isn't a "european" religion, that's a "woke" talking point to try and undermine it in the West because among the "woke" white=bad and everything associated with whites is also bad by default. Christianity started in the Middle East and there are more brown Christians on earth now than there are white ones.

Don't be fooled by that line of thinking; The goal is to undermine Christianity first and then come for Islam once Christianity has been thoroughly destroyed. Christians are the People of the Book and thus deserve our solidarity against the "woke" contingent that is trying to persecute them because if we sit by and say nothing, then no one is going to defend us when they inevitably learn that Islam doesn't line up with their immoral values and they come to denigrate and destroy us (which will happen as soon as Christianity is gone). We all worship the same One God (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) so we all have to put our doctrinal differences aside and stand against the tide of pagan irreligion that the "woke" movement is pushing in an attempt to set the wealthy liberal elite up as "gods" who dictate right and wrong based on their whims.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, Gaius I. Caesar said:

But they have no qualms with the ancient Hebrews, who were peoples of the desert and apparently morally superior to the ancient Indo-Europeans. 

Hebrews and Judaism are both things which are above criticism from anyone of any race. Doing so will result in social suicide. Ethnic people perceived to be Muslims and the  religion of Islam are ripe targets for anyone to throw under the bus. No one will bat an eye.

18 minutes ago, Abdul-Hadi said:

Christianity isn't a "european" religion, that's a "woke" talking point to try and undermine it in the West because among the "woke" white=bad and everything associated with whites is also bad by default. Christianity started in the Middle East and there are more brown Christians on earth now than there are white ones.

Don't be fooled by that line of thinking; The goal is to undermine Christianity first and then come for Islam once Christianity has been thoroughly destroyed. Christians are the People of the Book and thus deserve our solidarity against the "woke" contingent that is trying to persecute them because if we sit by and say nothing, then no one is going to defend us when they inevitably learn that Islam doesn't line up with their immoral values and they come to denigrate and destroy us (which will happen as soon as Christianity is gone). We all worship the same One God (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) so we all have to put our doctrinal differences aside and stand against the tide of pagan irreligion that the "woke" movement is pushing in an attempt to set the wealthy liberal elite up as "gods" who dictate right and wrong based on their whims.

 

Stop with this "woke movement" nonsense that you spout out into any topic on Shiachat. It doesn't excuse the long historical/social factors of Europe with christianity. No one is saying that chri. started in Europe rather than Middle East. Christianity is the largest religion in Europe. Europeans have been christians since the 1st century. Christianity has had a profound/significant/enormous effect on European History/Art and culture/Law/Society since the 1st century itself. That's why Christianity and European are synonymous with each other. Just like Middle Easterns and Islam are. Not everything is "Woke" in this world.

There's no racist tones in these statements. It's how things are perceived and will continue to be so. So stop bringing inappropriate things like "White=bad, woke" into matters which have no place for them nor do a lot of people believe such things including me. Islam has a racial background to it and that's why non members of other races are reluctant to explore it because they believe the cultural norms of ME/Sub to be Islamic values.

Edited by El Cid
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Just now, hasanhh said:

How is teaching the Words of the Devil "morally ethical?"

To them, those words come from the Quran. Just like for you they come from their books. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
3 hours ago, El Cid said:

There's racism involved. It's people of the desert vs the morally ethical Europeans.

Yes, fully. Eurocentric imperialist racism is very strong and hostile. Half of these people are oblivious to what they're even saying in their assumptions which they start their premises from.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
2 hours ago, Gaius I. Caesar said:

But they have no qualms with the ancient Hebrews, who were peoples of the desert and apparently morally superior to the ancient Indo-Europeans. 

Coughcoughzioncoughcough :helpsos:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member (With Brothers Forum Membership)
3 hours ago, hasanhh said:

What is "woke" anyway?

The cultural revolution that's currently taking place in America and Europe to destroy the family, undermine religion, force celebration of things that are sinful (zina, homosexuality, polytheism, etc) and teach that races should be kept separate and segregated from one another, that children should disrespect parents if the parents don't adhere to American liberal values, shall I keep going?

It's a very real thing and it's going to come to try and undermine Islam as soon as it has fully stamped out Christianity.

Edited by Abdul-Hadi
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
37 minutes ago, Abdul-Hadi said:

Christianity isn't a "european" religion, that's a "woke" talking point to try and undermine it in the West because among the "woke" white=bad and everything associated with whites is also bad by default. Christianity started in the Middle East and there are more brown Christians on earth now than there are white ones.

Don't be fooled by that line of thinking; The goal is to undermine Christianity first and then come for Islam once Christianity has been thoroughly destroyed. Christians are the People of the Book and thus deserve our solidarity against the "woke" contingent that is trying to persecute them because if we sit by and say nothing, then no one is going to defend us when they inevitably learn that Islam doesn't line up with their immoral values and they come to denigrate and destroy us (which will happen as soon as Christianity is gone). We all worship the same One God (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) so we all have to put our doctrinal differences aside and stand against the tide of pagan irreligion that the "woke" movement is pushing in an attempt to set the wealthy liberal elite up as "gods" who dictate right and wrong based on their whims.

 

The Nazarenes (the original Jewish-protoChrisitans) were from the middle east, all of the "four gospels according to" take place in the middle east. 

From the book of Acts onwards we have Paul prostlyzing to the Europeans (Greeks and Romans in particular) with his growningly anti-Jewish stance (which inspires Christian antisemitism). From Paul and Peter we have the later basis of the blueprints that evolved into Catholicism (the true beginning of a "Christianity") which is a European thing. Catholicism though universally destroyed any sense of European identity (which is ironic for so-called European nationalists, who are merely larpers). 

Christianity isn't european is a true thing, if we're talking about their central figures and the most important events in the new testament. The later thing that called itself "Christianity' is more or less a proto-Globalism machine. Christianity (and it's shadow of "antichristianity" though is very much a driving force with imperialist racist bigotry and the subversion of governments. The whole concept of "separation of church and state" comes out of what Christians were doing.

Nonetheless secular Europeans with their Eurocentrality still take on Christian assumptions which they are now accustomed to as their cultural identity.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

The statements/beliefs of Islam being incompatible with Christian Europe have been there since the Medieval times.

The belief/statements that Prophet Muhammad(صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) is the Anti-Christ or False Prophet have been there since those aforementioned times. Christian-European art has also depicted Muhammad(صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) in hell such as the one in San Petronio church. All of these things come from Racially motivated beliefs, Culture Superiority, Imperialism, Stubborn behavior of all kinds mostly because of their rivalries with empires such as the Ottomans.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
2 minutes ago, Abdul-Hadi said:

The cultural revolution that's currently taking place in America and Europe to destroy

You forgot democracy. Currently, PBS is running this "Dismantling Democracy" series.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
5 minutes ago, Abdul-Hadi said:

The cultural revolution that's currently taking place in America and Europe to destroy the family, undermine religion, force celebration of things that are sinful (zina, homosexuality, polytheism, etc) and teach that races should be kept separate and segregated from one another, that children should disrespect parents if the parents don't adhere to American liberal values, shall I keep going?

It's a very real thing and it's going to come to try and undermine Islam as soon as it has fully stamped out Christianity.

My argument (not specifically in context with this thread, but it's relevant to mention) is that what you are describing is just the natural conclusion of the Protestant Reformation. All the assumptions of the Protestant ideology lead to Atheistic anti-religion and the rest of what you describe. 

Edited by al-Muttaqin
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Just now, El Cid said:

The statements/beliefs of Islam being incompatible with Christian Europe have been there since the Medieval times.

The belief/statements that Prophet Muhammad(صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) is the Anti-Christ or False Prophet have been there since those aforementioned times. Christian-European art has also depicted Muhammad(صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) in hell such as the one in San Petronio church. All of these things come from Racially motivated beliefs, Culture Superiority, Imperialism, Stubborn behavior of all kinds mostly because of their rivalries with empires such as the Ottomans.

Yes you're correct.

Secular atheist western Islamophobia could be seen as an extension of the "antichrist" rhetoric, seeing that Christians are still ignorant of what even their books say on the matter and use it as a rhetorical tool for violence and propaganda. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
1 minute ago, al-Muttaqin said:

The Nazarenes (the original Jewish-protoChrisitans) were from the middle east

This now called "proto-christians" is the same misrepresentation l ran into in college. Back then, gZeus was allegedly a Essene -not true as he was not of a sect; and Nazarenes  were those who did not drink wine and such.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member (With Brothers Forum Membership)
3 hours ago, al-Muttaqin said:

My argument is that what you are describing is just the natural conclusion of the Protestant Reformation. All the assumptions of the Protestant ideology lead to Atheistic anti-religion and the rest of what you describe. 

Could you elaborate on this for me? I'm afraid I don't understand what you mean by this & I'm not the brightest guy out there.

Edited by Abdul-Hadi
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
1 minute ago, al-Muttaqin said:

Yes you're correct.

Secular atheist western Islamophobia could be seen as an extension of the "antichrist" rhetoric, seeing that Christians are still ignorant of what even their books say on the matter and use it as a rhetorical tool for violence and propaganda. 

Though one thing I'll add is that this is not a black and white issue. It's a very gray one as Europeans have plenty of reasons to hate Islam and everything that it stands for. One of the reasons is that in almost every century. There's been some empire/group which became synonymous with Islam itself for European countries such as I mentioned the Ottoman empire. In the 21st century, ISIS/Salafis are more synonymous with Islam than Muslims ever will be. This unfortunate reason is why Islam will have a bad reputation in almost any century as another villan will just pop up out of no where to appropriate Islam for itself.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Just now, hasanhh said:

This now called "proto-christians" is the same misrepresentation l ran into in college. Back then, gZeus was allegedly a Essene -not true as he was not of a sect; and Nazarenes  were those who did not drink wine and such.

No, Jesus and his followers are called Nazarenes in the New Testament, and the Qur'an calls them that too (Nasara). There is a reason why the Qur'an doesn't address Christians as "Ahl al-Masih". 

It is well known by secular scholarship too that Christianity grew out of Jesus' Nazarene group, this isn't disputed at all. The word "Christian" only appears three times in the NT and not in reference to a group of followers of Jesus but as a derogatory remark aimed towards his alleged crucifixion (basically "Christian" meaning someone who follows a crucified messiah, it's an insult term - following that, the term "Christian" runs contrary to Surah 4:157).

Anyway, Christianity as we know it is something that evolved over several centuries and the self-designation of the term crystallized in the 3rd century and was officially typified by the Catholic church. Protestants carried over the name.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
3 minutes ago, al-Muttaqin said:

No, Jesus and his followers are called Nazarenes in the New Testament, and the Qur'an calls them that too (Nasara).

"He shall be called a Nazarene", at Mathew 2:23, is a contrived refrain. This Nazareth prophecy nowhere exists in the Old Testament.

Where does Quran reveal this?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
11 minutes ago, al-Muttaqin said:

Yes you're correct.

Secular atheist western Islamophobia could be seen as an extension of the "antichrist" rhetoric, seeing that Christians are still ignorant of what even their books say on the matter and use it as a rhetorical tool for violence and propaganda. 

@El CidI should also give you a quote of what their books actually say on the antichrist: 

"Concerning the coming of our King Jesus the Messiah and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers and sisters, not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by the teaching allegedly from us—whether by a prophecy or by word of mouth or by letter—asserting that the day of the Lord has already come. Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God. Don’t you remember that when I was with you I used to tell you these things? And now you know what is holding him back, so that he may be revealed at the proper time. For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way. And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the King Jesus will overthrow with the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendor of his coming. The coming of the lawless one will be in accordance with how Satan works. He will use all sorts of displays of power through signs and wonders that serve the lie, and all the ways that wickedness deceives those who are perishing. They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie and so that all will be condemned who have not believed the truth but have delighted in wickedness." (2 Thessalonians 2:1-12)

In other contexts in the New Testament it is used to also refer to anyone who denies that Jesus is the Messiah (which seems to be a polemic against Jews).

In both instances nonetheless, it is impossible to refer to Muhammad, Islam and Muslims as being anything to do with the "antichrist". When Muhammad by far didn't claim to be God (as the Qur'an also severely criticizes Christians for doing this to Jesus) and Muslims don't disbelieve that Jesus is the Messiah.

So as I mentioned, it's a "rhetorical tool for violence and propaganda", aka remember the crusades? Christians might not have armies anymore (unless you count the US military :hahaha:) but they sure do cause a lot of trouble and cause violence with such ignorant rhetoric. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
4 minutes ago, hasanhh said:

"He shall be called a Nazarene", at Mathew 2:23, is a contrived refrain. This Nazareth prophecy nowhere exists in the Old Testament.

Where does Quran reveal this?

Yes I agree that it's not mentioned anywhere in the Tanakh (Old Testament). My point is not that. 

Search in your Qur'an (whether arabic or transliteration), the term that in english translations is translated to "Christian" is al-Nasara. This occurs throughout the entire Qur'an.

A quick lexicographical reference perhaps: http://corpus.quran.com/search.jsp?q=lem%3AnaSoraAniy~+bad person%3Apn

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
18 minutes ago, hasanhh said:

English to Arabic and l found musihiuwn only.

Again, the arabic term used in the Qur'an is al-Nasara which means Nazarene. 

In common arab lingo, we have the following (copied from here):

 

al-Masīḥ (أَلْمَسِيح) Christ or Messiah
al-Masīḥiyyah (أَلْمَسِيحِيَّة) Christianity
Masīḥī (مَسِيحِيّ) Christian (literally "Messianic")
Mubaššir (مُبَشِّر) Christian missionary (positive sense, literally means "carrier of good news")
Munaṣṣir (مُنَصِّر ) Christian missionary (neutral sense, literally "Christianizer")
Edited by al-Muttaqin
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
7 hours ago, hasanhh said:

This "argument" is mute.

1] Slavery exists in the Bible. Examples: Genesis 17:12 & 27 and Leviticus 19:20 (Douay translation for the phrase "bought slaves). Then for bought "servants" and "bondman" see Proverbs 29:19, Exodus 21:20 & 32(?), Sirach 33:28.

2] In accordance with Ayat 4: 90, slavery was abrogated by treaty.

Thanks, is this for married women as well?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
6 hours ago, Gaius I. Caesar said:

What I don't understand is that both religions are Abrahamic faiths, it's not as though Islam came with a new "god", it's the same Deity, new revelation.

These types of Christians would say “no! Islam is a Muhammadism faith not an Abrahamic faith! Islam came with a new god Allah!”. They may even claim Satan is the source of Islam and refer to stories like the Prophet getting scared of Gabriel and the satanic verses in the books of Ahlus Sunnah as evidence.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Development Team
1 hour ago, El Cid said:

Hebrews and Judaism are both things which are above criticism from anyone of any race. Doing so will result in social suicide

 Yet somehow in medieval Europe, they were perceived as "dirty", "cheaters" and fit only for jobs deemed un-Christian (e.g. Usury)

At times, they were deemed unworthy of life. Why else would the Spanish Inquisition go after them?

Hebrews and Judaism are not above reproach in Western culture and history. That is undeniably false.

Most Eastern people will never understand the dark history of  this complex relationship. I think they should take great care in not buying the lies of anti-Semites/Islamophobes as often, those groups tend to go hand in hand with each other.

However, if Islam is immoral, then Christianity and Judaism are also immoral. Do you not see the hypocrisy of that ignorant preacher?

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.


×
×
  • Create New...