Did Muhammad Bring His Own Religion Called Islaam?
-
Peace arnoldyasin. You have correctly identified a few very relevant issues,which are;
a) when peoples beliefs/books/assumptions are threatened or called into question bluntly/directly then they may respond back with barriers and defensive attitiudes....(happens on this forum a lot.)
b) its easy to make assumptions about a poster based on his/her posts alone.....no way is the FULL personality and deeds of the poster known to the other posters just by virtue of posts...
I have seen posters call other posters liars,kafir,insulting names etc,etc,without much regard for the actual CONTENT of a persons post,or where that person is coming from,or the fact that you cant know the FULL personality from the internet alone......
Thanks arnoldyasin for bringing this issue to the forums attention.....
Peace all. -
As Salaamu Alaykum
You have said this
?Calling me passive is showing the ignorance, you don't know half what i do......?
Equally by you being disturbed because I call the bible ?so-called?, which it is and more, exposes the ignorance from the other side of the fence. Arnold it appears that you are loosing composure here because I have not questioned what you do in terms of promoting Islaam and writing books etc. etc. Actually I sincerely commend you and all brothers and sisters for that. I only addressed you having problems with me using a light weight expression such as ?so-called? in reference to a false tampered book called the bible. And when you evolve out of your emotions, thus you will come to the realization or understanding that you personally have no idea of what I have been doing in terms of promoting Islaam, the truth, etc. etc. I am not here to provide you a list of what I do nor am I here requesting a list from you in what you have doing for the Deen. If we stoop on that immature level all we will be doing is playing the game of ?tip for tap tip for tap?, that right there is wasted time & energy. Thus I do not need such validation, Alhamdulillah. I am in the process of doing some research on Salaat and when I am finish, I will present it in the forum and that can open up the doors for you and I and others to engage in some real intellectual stimulation, rather then argue because some one uses words and expression that one does not like such as the light weight expression ?so-called bible?. I noticed that you have made this statement
?You think people will listen to you if you don't respect their feelings for their precious book??
Coming from one who possibly displays character of passivity may view life like that. I have highlighted the following in my previous post to you
?Arnold what do you think about strong men such as Malcolm X, Ahmed Deedat who stands on truth and speaks their mind freely? I admire and respect men like that??
Now I want to follow up with this point because for some reason you think that taking the softer/passive approach to things (is much more of an affective way that) will reach the people. I am not denying that approach will reach a segment of the population. However we cannot blind ourselves to strong controversial personalities like Malcolm X and Ahmed Deedat, just to name a few. They speak strong, they are militant in their approach and they also have the masses following them, rallying to them, supporting them. There is a large segment of the population that wants THE NAKED TRUTH UNCOMROMISED. I just want to highlight this so that you can see the inconsistency in your statement ?You think people will listen to you if you don't respect their feelings for their precious book?? No one cannot deny the fact that these to examples that I have used (Malcolm X & Ahmed Deedat) have the masses rallying to them and supporting them. So taking this approach is not something negative and will always turn people away. Sometimes you have to shake that slave mentality before the mind awakens. In terms of Psychology it is a very effective process. We have different populations with different characteristics and mentalities in the world and yes we have to figure out ways to reach these different populations. Some populations will respond to the nice guy approach and that is where you will come in Arnold. However, there are other populations that will not respond to the passive approach because of their god born militant nature and that is where people like myself will be effective. Arnold we need them both and that is why I told you, if that is your character not to use words like ?so-called bible? because you fear that will offend some people, that?s fine because that is you and that?s your approach. I must make this clear Arnold that is where your ?opinion? will be concluded in terms or in regards to my self. Again On the other side of the fence I will speak an uncompromising truth and there are people who will appreciate that and will respond. I do not beat around the bush Arnold. When one read the Qur?aan Allah uses stronger militant words then a Peacemaker like myself who said ?the so-called bible?.
Salaam
Calling me passive is showing the ignorance, you don't know half what i do......Read my post again. You think calling the Bible 'so-called' makes you non-passive? I only said this out of respect for people's feelings as i know people create an instant barriere when the thing they grew up with is not respected. You think people will listen to you if you don't respect their feelings for their precious book? That is the only reason why i said this. Their are more ways to show people the truth. And about me passive...Are you busy with creating lectures to teach Christians the Quran and comparing it to the Bible? Did you quit a real good study that would have given you a job with a big paycheck for a study that will not pay all the effort back you put in to it? I did. I quit my Biochemistry study for Theology, for the mission, i even left my wife for the mission. Have you done this? Are you busy with writing articles about the Quran for your country? I do. You keep thinking 'so-called' is non-passive, i will continue my passive mission....
Peace
-
Peace,
Al Kidhr, i see that you again have misunderstood me, which is probably because i chose the wrong words. For one, you could have just said in your first response, Arnold i choose different wordings, then i wouldn't have said anything. But you chose to call me passive, which was arrogant. I know your site and i know you do a lot of things, that is good. But you don't know what i meant and again you began assuming and assuming, long stories over on which i'm on the fence and assumptions about me fearing things. For one, Malcolm X inspired a lot of people because they were attracted to his fight over equality, it wasn't just him talking about the Bible, it was a whole package why people listened to him. As for Ahmed Deedat, people say that he was a Quran aloner, but his works show different angles, i don't judge. But his works let people to the exact thing we are fighting, the hadith. So people went from one mental-slavery to the other. You think i use the soft approach, no brother i use the SMART approach. When i talk with Christians about the Bible, i tell when it was compiled, how and by whom. I don't need to say 'so-called', as the NAKED TRUTH doesn't need mine or your comments. The truth proves itself, and doesn't need my personal words to 'strengthing it'. When i just tell the truth, people listen as they see i'm un-biased and just being honest and objective. If i would say the 'so-called' Bible is compiled then and then, people will think i'm biased and not objective. That is the difference. That is real psychology. I respect you, so i don't mind you responded wrong the first time, but brother, next time, watch out with assumptions, as now you typed a whole post for nothing.
Peace
-
brother, next time, watch out with assumptions, as now you typed a whole post for nothing.
Peacepeace all
khidr u typed a whole post for nothing, and i read it for nothing >( ;D
brothers all of this talking about using "so-called" expression for the bibleWhen one read the Qur?aan Allah uses stronger militant words then a Peacemaker like myself who said ?the so-called bible?
brother ALLAH IS ALLAH THE MIGHTY, and u r the human, there's no way to compare here.
And i agree with arnold on the approach issue, brother when the soft approach doesn't work use whatever
u want, but u have to give people their chances, the militant approach can have
passive effects and then u do exactly the opposite of what ur supposed to do.salam
-
peace
so are we to point guns to everyone's heads and HOPE they believe?
-
Peace Brother Arnold
I have seen ur dialogue with Brother Khidr and I think its u who misunderstood the whole situation. I think Al Khidr is fine with ur approach but its just not his type of approach. In this matter I think both approaches are good and needed.
But brother Arnold, I cant see why ur taking it this far just because he used the expression ?so-called bible? because its true as we muslims know that the Bible was not pure and Malcolm X also Ahmed Deedat used the same expression and even harder.
And also just like what Brother Khidr mentioned Al Qur?an uses a stronger expression than what he used.For example
Allah in the Qur?an calls Christians Pagans
Al Qur?an 572-73
72. Pagans indeed are those who say that Allah is the Messiah, son of Mary.
73. Pagans indeed are those who say that Allah is a member of a trinity.Allah says in the Qur?an that the majority of Christians & Jews are perverted transgressors
Al Qur?an 3110
You are the best community ever raised among the people you advocate righteousness and forbid evil, and you believe in Allah. If the followers of the scriptures (the Christians & Jews) believe, it will be better for them. Some of them do believe, but the majority are perverted transgressors.The Al Qur?an tells us not to love our enemies and not to take Christians and Jews as friends or allies.
I always supported the strong leaders like Malcolm X, Ahmed Deedat, Rashad Khalifa. And even Rashad Khalifa called another muslim a Muhammadan and that?s much harsher than the ?so-called bible?. Ahmed Deedat is someone who spoke his mind and he had a militant nature and also had the masses behind him. I think this is a good strategy of reaching the people and leaders like this have proven that it works. And of course nothing is wrong with switching up a little bit at times. I just know one thing people rally to the cause with leaders like that then the softer spoken ones. -
Peace.
How militant was Mahatma? Even Malcolm X changed a lot later in life.
I'm not saying anyone here is necessarily being "militant." I'm just saying it is good to invite to the truth in a way that is as objective as possible, that is neither silent nor loud, and that is with justice and respect.
A great story in this regard is what God commanded Moses to do in his dealings with Pharaoh.
Also, this verse is particularly relevant
6108 "And do not insult those who call on other than God, lest they insult God without knowledge. And We have similarly adorned for every nation their works; then to their Lord is their return and He will inform them of what they had done."
-
Peace
Cavemandoctor what did you mean by when you said that Malcolm X changed later on in life
-
Peace,
no_shirk, i'm also fine in his approach, please read my post again, i say clearly that if he just had to say, Arnold this is my way, then i wouldn't have said anything, but he called me passive, which is a big mistake and i take that personal. Then he wrote long long posts full with assumptions on how i think and do, which he doesn't have any clue on. And he thinks it is the hard approach, but the truth doesn't need his comments, plus again, yes that is God who says it in the Quran, again truth doesn't need extra personal comments. He also refered to 'holy'. For him and me it is not a holy book, but for a lot of people it is. Only people can make things 'holy', because it refers to the reverance they feel for that object or place. Is the same that the Quran is not 'holy' for a christian. So i don't make any problems at all, he is the one writing long long posts full with assumptions.........
-
Salaam every one
I can't believe people in here is making a big deal about a Muslim saying the Bible is a so-called book. I myself think Arnold is arrogant trying to say a Muslim should not use those words. I agree with Al Khidr in here. Keep up the good work Al Khidr these Muslims are just weak.
-
Peace
Cavemandoctor what did you mean by when you said that Malcolm X changed later on in life
Peace no_shirk
Malcolm X changed a lot of his thoughts and methods throughout his life. Whereas earlier on, he was more (what some consider) "militant" and had certain beliefs (with regard to African unity and separation, e.g.), he later on changed not only in some beliefs but methods as well.
-
Peace Arnold
I read his post again Arnold and it sounded like he raise the question of you believing in the bible as a holy book. raising questions is not the same as a conclusion. Some one else made a commment about the Qur'an is from God and he is human. I think thats another misunderstanding. God (Allah) revealed the Qur'an for us to follow so the examples in the Qur'an should be our examples that we should apply in life. I do not believe the Qur'an was for the old days and not for today. I believe the Qur'an is for all generations. Sometimes when people fight its easy for misunderstanding to come from both sides. Brother Arnold you should not get upset about Al Khidr using the word passive. I just don't think it should be something that you should keep inside. Sometimes we can't let things like that get to us.
-
Salaam every one
I can't believe people in here is making a big deal about a Muslim saying the Bible is a so-called book. I myself think Arnold is arrogant trying to say a Muslim should not use those words. I agree with Al Khidr in here. Keep up the good work Al Khidr these Muslims are just weak.
If you would have seen carefully, i don't judge it. I approach it differently. Please read more carefully next time, and don't make personal comments.
Peace
-
Salaam Caveman
A lot of people think Malcolm changed. That is not true. He was militant all the way up to his death. He did not come back to America from Hajj with a changed view. When Malcolm X came back he came back to an america that would not allow Blacks to vote, use the same toilet as whites. Blacks had no freedom, so he did not come to the usa change. I have read a lot of good information on this. Malcolm X was a warrior up to his death. After he was kicked out of the Nation of Islam his stance on the enemy became international. One thing he was trying to do is get involved with the civil rights movement and bring them to the human rights movement so they can be more powerful in fighting for their rights and controling their own destiny.
Peace
Cavemandoctor what did you mean by when you said that Malcolm X changed later on in life
Peace no_shirk
Malcolm X changed a lot of his thoughts and methods throughout his life. Whereas earlier on, he was more (what some consider) "militant" and had certain beliefs (with regard to African unity and separation, e.g.), he later on changed not only in some beliefs but methods as well.
-
Salaam Caveman
A lot of people think Malcolm changed. That is not true. He was militant all the way up to his death. He did not come back to America from Hajj with a changed view. When Malcolm X came back he came back to an america that would not allow Blacks to vote, use the same toilet as whites. Blacks had no freedom, so he did not come to the usa change. I have read a lot of good information on this. Malcolm X was a warrior up to his death. After he was kicked out of the Nation of Islam his stance on the enemy became international. One thing he was trying to do is get involved with the civil rights movement and bring them to the human rights movement so they can be more powerful in fighting for their rights and controling their own destiny.
Peace
Cavemandoctor what did you mean by when you said that Malcolm X changed later on in life
Peace no_shirk
Malcolm X changed a lot of his thoughts and methods throughout his life. Whereas earlier on, he was more (what some consider) "militant" and had certain beliefs (with regard to African unity and separation, e.g.), he later on changed not only in some beliefs but methods as well.
Peace no_shirk
I think you may have misunderstood me. I never said Malcolm ceased to be a "warrior." He continued to struggle for truth and justice his whole life. But, his views on truth changed. His methods changed too. Whereas earlier on in his life, his message was only for African-Americans (explicit exclusion of whites, e.g.), later on, he transmitted his message to all races, in a broader attempt to push forth a human rights/civil rights movement, just as you said.
A few quotes from Malcolm himself
"You may be shocked by these words coming from me. But on this pilgrimage, what I have seen, and experienced, has forced me to rearrange much of my thought-patterns previously held, and to toss aside some of my previous conclusions. This was not too difficult for me. Despite my firm convictions, I have always been a man who tries to face facts, and to accept the reality of life as new experience and new knowledge unfolds it. I have always kept an open mind, which is necessary to the flexibility that must go hand in hand with every form of intelligent search for truth."
" In the past, yes, I have made sweeping indictments of all white people. I will never be guilty of that again -- as I know now that some white people are truly sincere, that some truly are capable of being brotherly toward a black man. The true Islam has shown me that a blanket indictment of all white people is as wrong as when whites make blanket indictments against blacks."
