Active TopicsActive Topics  Display List of Forum MembersMemberlist  CalendarCalendar  Search The ForumSearch  HelpHelp
  RegisterRegister  LoginLogin  Old ForumOld Forum  Twitter  Facebook
Advertisement:
         

Interfaith Dialogue
 IslamiCity Forum - Islamic Discussion Forum : Religion - Islam : Interfaith Dialogue
Message Icon Topic: Apostacy and few other issues Post Reply Post New Topic
<< Prev Page  of 12 Next >>
Author Message
Caringheart
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 March 2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2030
Quote Caringheart Replybullet Posted: 23 July 2012 at 8:53pm
Originally posted by honeto

Caringheart,
nice try but my point is all I wanted to make. That Jesus did not come to free anyone from the law mentioned in the OT, according to those verses I posted.
Also the love thingy y'all preach dos not make sense as nothing has changed as far as what peopel do. They still disobey God, will God not punish them for their willfull trespasses out of love? If we look at the scripture this love thngy that y'all preach does not seem to be real. Don't take me wrong, we Muslims believe God loves us and will show His Mercy love and forgiveness on those who do not deny Him and do not engage in willfull disobdiences.

Matthew 18:8 “If your hand or foot causes you to sin, cut it off and cast it from you. It is better for you to enter into life lame or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet, to be cast into the everlasting fire. "

Hasan



Hello Hasan,
I sometimes wonder if you've read what I've written.
This for instance;
"One is in the judgement of man to punish, and the other puts judgement in the hands of God alone."
We are in agreement, just as you state, Jesus did not come to abolish the law.  He did however make it more clear that it is in God's hands to judge.

As far as the 'love thingy', as you put it Smile
You are partially correct about that as well.  Those who do not love God have not changed.  However, those who do love God are changed greatly.  I have seen it.
You say people have not changed... this comes as no surprise.  The great majority are not.  We are clearly told that in this world we will have temptations.  We are clearly told that we can not overcome these on our own but only with the Holy Spirit living in us... only with God leading us.  And Jesus was quite clear that the 'path and the gate are narrow, and there are few who find it'.  The 'love thingy' does work for those who have truly found it.  I have seen it. 
Others may pretend they have found the way, and they may think they are hiding their sins, but God sees all.  God knows the heart and He knows those that belong to Him.
Peace be on your day.
Blessings and Salaam,
Caringheart Heart

I think you can look within the Muslim community as well and see who belongs to God and who only appears to belong to God.  It is true of all peoples... there are those who act from a love of God and those who do not. Smile
IP IP Logged
Nausheen
 
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar
Senior Member

Joined: 10 January 2001
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4198
Quote Nausheen Replybullet Posted: 26 July 2012 at 11:52pm

HOW DOES ISLAM DEFINE APOSTASY? IS IT PERMISSIBLE FOR A MUSLIM TO CONVERT TO ANOTHER FAITH? HOW CAN LAWS AGAINST APOSTASY AND BLASPHEMY BE RECONCILED WITH THE KORANIC INJUNCTION OF “NO COMPULSION IN RELIGION”?

 

Traditional human communities believe that truth leads to salvation, and error to damnation. It is probable that very many religious people in a variety of denominations still believe this. Historically, religiously-faithful princes have therefore seen it as necessary to use the coercive power of the state to forbid apostasy. One of the most powerful and persistent manifestations of this understanding in history was the Inquisition, which was definitively abolished in 1834. Protestant countries also respected this drastic principle; in fact, the first converts to Islam in Britain were impaled on stakes. In a Hindu context, ‘apostasy’ was often classified as violation of caste rules and boundaries, and similarly drastic consequences could follow. After the Mongol sack of Baghdad in 1253, Buddhists who converted to Islam were routinely put to death.

The four canonical schools of Sunni Islamic law, and also most pre-modern Shi’a jurists, recommend similarly drastic penalties, although the judge is enjoined to ‘look for ambiguities’ in order to avert the death penalty wherever possible.

The Ottoman Caliphate, the supreme representative of Sunni Islam, formally abolished this penalty in the aftermath of the so-called Tanzimat reforms launched in 1839. The Shaykh al-Islam, the supreme head of the religious courts and colleges, ratified this major shift in traditional legal doctrine. It was pointed out that there is no verse in the Qur’an that lays down a punishment for apostasy (although chapter 5 verse 54 and chapter 2 verse 217 predict a punishment in the next world). It was also pointed out that the ambiguities in the hadith (the sayings of the Prophet) suggest that apostasy is only an offense when combined with the crime of treason. These ambiguities led some medieval Muslims, long before the advent of modernisation, to reject the majority view. Prominent among them one may name al-Nakha’i (d.713), al-Thawri (d.772), al-Sarakhsi (d. 1090), al-Baji (d. 1081), and al-Sha’rani (d.1565). The debate triggered by the Ottoman reform was continued when al-Azhar University in Cairo, the supreme religious authority in the Arab world, delivered a formal fatwa (religious edict) in 1958, which confirmed the abolition of the classical law in this area.

Among radical Salafis and Wahhabis who do not accept the verdicts of the Ottoman or the Azhar scholars, it is generally believed that the majority medieval view should still be enforced.

The best discussion of the controversy is the book by Mohammed Hashim Kamali, “Freedom of Expression in Islam” (Cambridge, 1997).

Caringheart, I owe this knowledge to you. Thank you for asking questions on apostacy - since I did not know a detailed answer to your concerns on apostacy, had submited a request to Q&A section on www.Seekersguidance.com and received the above link from them.
 
Hope it clarified for you some issues, as it did for me.
 
 
Wanu nazzilu minal Qurani ma huwa
Shafaa un wa rahmatun lil mo'mineena
wa la yaziduzzalimeena illa khasara.
IP IP Logged
Nausheen
 
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar
Senior Member

Joined: 10 January 2001
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4198
Quote Nausheen Replybullet Posted: 27 July 2012 at 12:54am
"In the times of muhammad sallallahu alaihe wasallam, he used to judge between the jews (who brought their disputes for him for resolution), according to the torah. He did not use the Quran to resolve their disputes."

I appreciate the beauty of this statement but how could Muhammad, who could not read, use the Torah to judge conflicts between Jews?


The answer to this question is very similar to how he transmitted the verses of the Quran to his followers.
 
Muhammad (peace be upon him) had scribes to whom he dictated the verses, after receiving a revelation. They would write it, then recite them to him to check for mistakes. And he would do this every year with a collection of entire verses/chapters that were revealed till that year.
 
Similarly, for any academic purpose, he would summon scribes. Eg., when he wrote letters to various kings of neighbouring countries, inviting them to Islam, he dictated them to scribes who did the writing - then reading it to check for errors.
 
I guess this system would have worked equally well when he had to judge disputed between jews using the torah.
 
hope this helps.
 
Wanu nazzilu minal Qurani ma huwa
Shafaa un wa rahmatun lil mo'mineena
wa la yaziduzzalimeena illa khasara.
IP IP Logged
Caringheart
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 March 2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2030
Quote Caringheart Replybullet Posted: 27 July 2012 at 5:53pm
Originally posted by Nausheen

HOW DOES ISLAM DEFINE APOSTASY? IS IT PERMISSIBLE FOR A MUSLIM TO CONVERT TO ANOTHER FAITH? HOW CAN LAWS AGAINST APOSTASY AND BLASPHEMY BE RECONCILED WITH THE KORANIC INJUNCTION OF “NO COMPULSION IN RELIGION”?

 

Traditional human communities believe that truth leads to salvation, and error to damnation. It is probable that very many religious people in a variety of denominations still believe this. Historically, religiously-faithful princes have therefore seen it as necessary to use the coercive power of the state to forbid apostasy. One of the most powerful and persistent manifestations of this understanding in history was the Inquisition, which was definitively abolished in 1834. Protestant countries also respected this drastic principle; in fact, the first converts to Islam in Britain were impaled on stakes. In a Hindu context, ‘apostasy’ was often classified as violation of caste rules and boundaries, and similarly drastic consequences could follow. After the Mongol sack of Baghdad in 1253, Buddhists who converted to Islam were routinely put to death.

The four canonical schools of Sunni Islamic law, and also most pre-modern Shi’a jurists, recommend similarly drastic penalties, although the judge is enjoined to ‘look for ambiguities’ in order to avert the death penalty wherever possible.

The Ottoman Caliphate, the supreme representative of Sunni Islam, formally abolished this penalty in the aftermath of the so-called Tanzimat reforms launched in 1839. The Shaykh al-Islam, the supreme head of the religious courts and colleges, ratified this major shift in traditional legal doctrine. It was pointed out that there is no verse in the Qur’an that lays down a punishment for apostasy (although chapter 5 verse 54 and chapter 2 verse 217 predict a punishment in the next world). It was also pointed out that the ambiguities in the hadith (the sayings of the Prophet) suggest that apostasy is only an offense when combined with the crime of treason. These ambiguities led some medieval Muslims, long before the advent of modernisation, to reject the majority view. Prominent among them one may name al-Nakha’i (d.713), al-Thawri (d.772), al-Sarakhsi (d. 1090), al-Baji (d. 1081), and al-Sha’rani (d.1565). The debate triggered by the Ottoman reform was continued when al-Azhar University in Cairo, the supreme religious authority in the Arab world, delivered a formal fatwa (religious edict) in 1958, which confirmed the abolition of the classical law in this area.

Among radical Salafis and Wahhabis who do not accept the verdicts of the Ottoman or the Azhar scholars, it is generally believed that the majority medieval view should still be enforced.

The best discussion of the controversy is the book by Mohammed Hashim Kamali, “Freedom of Expression in Islam” (Cambridge, 1997).

Caringheart, I owe this knowledge to you. Thank you for asking questions on apostacy - since I did not know a detailed answer to your concerns on apostacy, had submited a request to Q&A section on www.Seekersguidance.com and received the above link from them.
 
Hope it clarified for you some issues, as it did for me.


Thumbs%20Up
Yes Nausheen, this is just what I want... to encourage people to do research for themselves into understanding and not fear questions and looking into their own faith.
A very good article.  Thanks.  It definitely clarifies and enlightens.
Alot of misunderstanding comes simply from not knowing what the top rulers in the religion (i.e., like the Pope in Catholicism...  I did not know that there was a similar thing in Islam.) but not knowing what the actual accepted doctrine is and only knowing what one sees in some places.  
I think we would have less problem accepting Islam knowing that this is not an approved practice and was condemned as long ago as the Ottoman Empire.  That would explain the 'peace of Islam' that others identify with.  The world would have an easier time if we did not still see in Islam the practice of putting to death for apostasy in some places.  But then there was also a foolish minister in the Christian faith that wanted to burn Qur'ans and I am sure this was not approved of by the Pope.  The thing is, one foolish minister and burning books, is a far cry from the ruler of a country and killing people.  I think the thing is, the Pope has a louder voice in the world.  He makes sure he is heard, and since the things he speaks are mainly seen to be observed, we have trust in his word.
Thanks again from my
Heart
Now I know why you have been away for so long? Approve

Just an after thought;
I think there are far too many Muslims who do not know this and they speak far too often with hate rather than love.  We should all endeavor to bring others to God through love.  If they refuse our way then it is between them and God, not they and myself. Smile
It is not for me to punish.  Disobedience has its own consequences.  God only seeks to protect and save us from consequences. Smile


Edited by Caringheart - 27 July 2012 at 6:08pm
IP IP Logged
Caringheart
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 March 2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2030
Quote Caringheart Replybullet Posted: 27 July 2012 at 5:58pm
Originally posted by Nausheen

"In the times of muhammad sallallahu alaihe wasallam, he used to judge between the jews (who brought their disputes for him for resolution), according to the torah. He did not use the Quran to resolve their disputes."

I appreciate the beauty of this statement but how could Muhammad, who could not read, use the Torah to judge conflicts between Jews?

The answer to this question is very similar to how he transmitted the verses of the Quran to his followers.
 
Muhammad (peace be upon him) had scribes to whom he dictated the verses, after receiving a revelation. They would write it, then recite them to him to check for mistakes. And he would do this every year with a collection of entire verses/chapters that were revealed till that year.
 
Similarly, for any academic purpose, he would summon scribes. Eg., when he wrote letters to various kings of neighbouring countries, inviting them to Islam, he dictated them to scribes who did the writing - then reading it to check for errors.
 
I guess this system would have worked equally well when he had to judge disputed between jews using the torah.
 
hope this helps.
 


You mean basically like having translators... or a team of researchers who would search the scripture of the Torah?

Wouldn't the resolution of the dispute then be more attributable to the interpreters or researchers than to Muhammad?
IP IP Logged
honeto
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 20 March 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2397
Quote honeto Replybullet Posted: 27 July 2012 at 6:27pm
Originally posted by Caringheart


Originally posted by honeto

Caringheart,
nice try but my point is all I wanted to make. That Jesus did not come to free anyone from the law mentioned in the OT, according to those verses I posted.

Also the love thingy y'all preach dos not make sense as nothing has changed as far as what peopel do. They still disobey God, will God not punish them for their willfull trespasses out of love? If we look at the scripture this love thngy that y'all preach does not seem to be real. Don't take me wrong, we Muslims believe God loves us and will show His Mercy love and forgiveness on those who do not deny Him and do not engage in willfull disobdiences.



<h3>Matthew 18:8<span id="en-NKJV-23736"> <span>“If your hand or foot causes you to sin, cut it off and cast it from you. It is better for you to enter into life lame or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet, to be cast into the everlasting fire.</span> "</span></h3>
<h3><span>Hasan</span></h3>
Hello Hasan,I sometimes wonder if you've read what I've written.This for instance;"One is in the judgement of man to punish, and the other puts judgement in the hands of God alone."We are in agreement, just as you state, Jesus did not come to abolish the law.  He did however make it more clear that it is in God's hands to judge.As far as the 'love thingy', as you put it [IMG]smileys/smiley1.gif" align="absmiddle" alt="Smile" />You are partially correct about that as well.  Those who do not love God have not changed.  However, those who do love God are changed greatly.  I have seen it.You say people have not changed... this comes as no surprise.  The great majority are not.  We are clearly told that in this world we will have temptations.  We are clearly told that we can not overcome these on our own but only with the Holy Spirit living in us... only with God leading us.  And Jesus was quite clear that the 'path and the gate are narrow, and there are few who find it'.  The 'love thingy' does work for those who have truly found it.  I have seen it.  Others may pretend they have found the way, and they may think they are hiding their sins, but God sees all.  God knows the heart and He knows those that belong to Him.Peace be on your day.Blessings and Salaam,Caringheart [IMG]smileys/smiley27.gif" align="absmiddle" alt="Heart" />I think you can look within the Muslim community as well and see who belongs to God and who only appears to belong to God.  It is true of all peoples... there are those who act from a love of God and those who do not. [IMG]smileys/smiley1.gif" align="absmiddle" alt="Smile" />


Caringheart,
what you have just said above mean, that there was nothing new about love then. How you described that those who love God will be successful was always the way, and that is how in Islam God has told us. Those who love God and show that love in practice to Him and to His creation are the one achieving salvation.
So, that love was nothing new as you all try to portray when you say: " Love" was a new thing, it was not.
Thanks,
Hasan
39:64 Proclaim: Is it some one other than God that you order me to worship, O you ignorant ones?"
IP IP Logged
Caringheart
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 March 2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2030
Quote Caringheart Replybullet Posted: 27 July 2012 at 7:21pm
Originally posted by honeto


Caringheart,
what you have just said above mean, that there was nothing new about love then. How you described that those who love God will be successful was always the way, and that is how in Islam God has told us. Those who love God and show that love in practice to Him and to His creation are the one achieving salvation.
So, that love was nothing new as you all try to portray when you say: " Love" was a new thing, it was not.
Thanks,
Hasan


Hello Hasan,
If I understood you correctly here(and I am not sure that I have), you have side tracked.

God of the old testament was about punishment.  'Do as I say or there will be punishment.'
Jesus taught 'love God as He loves you'.  Jesus showed us how much God loves us.

Is Islam about punishment for disobedience(reward for good), or is it about being changed for love of God?  Does Islam teach old testament or new testament, or both?
Isn't Islam's teaching more about serving self than about serving God?
Do this and you will get that...
as opposed to love God because He so loves you and this is what He deserves.
IP IP Logged
Bigmo
 
Starter.
Starter.


Joined: 02 April 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8
Quote Bigmo Replybullet Posted: 28 July 2012 at 4:08am
16:82 But if they turn away from you, your only duty is a clear delivery of the Message

4:79-80 Say: ‘Whatever good betides you is from God and whatever evil betides you is from your own self and that We have sent you to mankind only as a messenger and all sufficing is God as witness. Whoso obeys the Messenger, he indeed obeys God. And for those who turn away, We have not sent you as a keeper."

17:53-54 And tell my servants that they should speak in a most kindly manner. Verily, Satan is always ready to stir up discord between men; for verily; Satan is mans foe.... Hence, we have not sent you with power to determine their Faith

24.54. Say: "Obey God, and obey the Messenger, but if ye turn away, he is only responsible for the duty placed on him and ye for that placed on you. If ye obey him, ye shall be on right guidance. The Messenger's duty is only to preach the clear (Message).

88:21 22; And so, exhort them your task is only to exhort; you cannot compel them to believe.

42:6 48 And whoso takes for patrons others besides God, over them does God keep a watch. Mark, you are not a keeper over them. But if they turn aside from you (do not get disheartened), for We have not sent you to be a keeper over them; your task is but to preach

64:12 Obey God then and obey the Messenger, but if you turn away (no blame shall attach to our Messenger), for the duty of Our Messenger is just to deliver the message.

28.55-56 And when they hear vain talk, they turn away there from and say: "To us our deeds, and to you yours; peace be to you: we seek not the ignorant," It is true thou wilt not be able to guide whom thou lovest; but God guides those whom He will and He knows best those who receive guidance

39:41 Assuredly, We have sent down the Book to you in right form for the good of man. Whoso guided himself by it does so to his own advantage, and whoso turns away from it does so at his own loss. You certainly are not their keeper.
67:25 26 And they ask, "When shall the promise be fulfilled if you speak the Truth?" Say, "The knowledge of it is verily with God alone, and verily I am but a plain warner."


As we can clearly see, many of the verses that talks about obeying the prophet also emphasizes the prophet's limited authority, something that the Islamic sects do not recognize. The ruler to them has the authority to punish people for what they consider sins like drinking alcohol, eating pork, not fasting Ramadan, watching pornos etc.

The Koran meanwhile focuses on crimes against another like stealing, killing, slandering of women falsely and oppression. It gave the believers the right to fight against those who fight them but not to transgress. It also gave people the right to defend themselves against evictions from their lands. There is no talk about punishing people for something that does not concern somebody else's right.

Adultery is the only place where the Koran diverted from this due to the fact that a adultery affects another party. Here the Koran sees adultery as affecting the other partner in a marriage. It’s a betrayal and a breaking of oath. But even then it placed strict standards on that but was lenient when it came to punishing slanders of women. Adultery needs four witnesses but the slander can get punished just from opening his mouth without four witnesses. It’s clear that the verse made it very difficult to implement on adultery but very easy to implement on the slanderer. Further reading of the verse about the Zani and Zania shows us that the issue came up concerning slandering of one of the prophet’s wife presumably. But adultery still affects another party as its a breaking of an oath between a man and a woman and is an act of betrayal.

The Koran cannot order the prophet to punish people for sins, that God's job. The Koran gave people the right and freedom to disbelieve let alone sin. Plus how the Koran understands sins is very different than how the sects understand sins.

In the end the sects had no choice but to abrogate many of these verses, usually invoking the "sword verse". They claim that many of these verses that gave the prophet limited authority(over those who chose to disobey him) has been abrogated by verse 9-5 or verse 9-29.

However these verses were about the wars with the pagans, and verse 9-13 and many other verses makes it clear who instigated these battles and why. The Jizya verse (9-29) also was claimed by the sects to be a tax to be paid by non Muslims in an Islamic state for protection. However Jizya never came concerning the Medina community where the prophet and his followers had a community. And only came upon the believers entering of Mecca. Jizya could have easily been compensation for the loss of property and homes that the believers suffered after being forced into exile. The Koran forbade prophets from seeking any form of reward. They can however accept charity on behalf of the believers.

But the Sunnah claimed otherwise. In it the prophet was ordered to fight the people till they acknowledge monotheism and also in it the prophet ordered the execution of those who apostate. That’s why they abrogated many of the verses that limited his authority. Then they simply transferred that authority to the Muslim ruler by default. The Ridda war story about Abu Bakr is a case study of this. In that story Abu Bakr apparently fought people for not paying Zakat. Now the authority was transferred from God to the prophet to one of his companions. This made it very easy to then transfer that authority to the ruler. This is why you see places where Shariah law is implemented filled with such concepts like searching cars for alcohol or flogging people for watching pornos or not wearing proper attire. None of this should concern anyone but it has become a punishable sin. God only punishes those who did not get caught and punished in this world. The sects claimed that once punished the sin falls away and disappears. You will not find such a concept in the Koran. There God punishes in a million ways and does not need humans to punish for him. I think the sects introduced this conc3ept to make people more accepting of this by making them think its better for them since God's punishment is more severe. They also introduced stoning the adulterer by claiming the Zina verse in the Koran is concerning fornification and not adultery. They claimed that the verse about stoning was lost and is not included in the Koran but the ruling remains.

This of course violated not only the freedom aspect of the Koran but also an eye for an eye and a life for a life. In the Koran, any punishment must be reciprocal and proportionate to the crime and it also must be targeted towards the actual perpetrators of the crime and not someone else associated to the criminal as the case with tribal laws that simply targets anyone from that tribe. They broke this by lower the bar for executions. Some Sunni scholars also gave the authority to execute homosexuals and enslave female prisoners and execute male prisoners. Something the Koran forbade. The Koran gave two options for prisoners, either freedom or ransom of some sort. They gave this authority to the ruler. This is all very sad as the taking of someone’s life is no easy matter in the Koran. God should take life and not humans, but if a person takes a life then he lost his right to live, but even then the Koran gave exile from the community as another option for murder especially if the person shows repentance. So an eye for an eye and a tooth for tooth somehow ended up being an eye for an eye lash and a tooth for a jaw.

To be fair the Sunni orthodoxy rarely practiced some of these laws. We know of no time in history where adulterers were stoned to death. Apostasy was rarely practiced, unlike the Christians in Europe that practiced these laws left and right. So the Sunni jurist knew that some of these laws could be controversial and therefore they tended to avoid them.

Its very unfortunate the current Islamist in Iran and Sudan and the Salafis in generally never understood why these laws were controversial. But in doing so they exposed much aspect of the sects that people were not aware of. The Sufis provided a convenient cover as they shunned legalism. But even the clerics understood that these laws were controversial. Its not easy in Islam to execute outside of murder. But this wise tradition was broken. That’s very unfortunant as now we see the culture of death has spread among Muslims till Islam became synonymous with violence and killing. Once you lower the bar it spirals out of control.

One thing is crystal clear from all this. The Koran's take on human authority and freedom is RADICALLY different than how the Sunni/Shia sects understand it. Therefore the biggest difference between a Koranic state and a Sunni or Shia state will come in the form of the state's authority over the masses. It is this, more than anything else, that separates the Koran from the Sunnah. That’s why the Abbasids championed the Sunnah over the Mutazilites. The Mutaziltes couldn't find the ink inthe Koran to give them such draconian authority. The sects did that by first bringing the divine authority from God to prophet, then propet to Caliph (companions) and now that authority is in Omar Al Bashir, Khamenei, Mullah Omar and Al Saud. And that’s very sad.
IP IP Logged
<< Prev Page  of 12 Next >>
Post Reply Post New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Disclaimer:
The opinions expressed herein contain positions and viewpoints that are not necessarily those of IslamiCity. This forum is offered to stimulate dialogue and discussion in our continuing mission of being an educational organization.
If there is any issue with any of the postings please email to icforum at islamicity.com or if you are a forum's member you can use the report button.

Note: The 99 names of Allah avatars are courtesy of www.arthafez.com

Advertisement:



Sponsored by:
Islamicity Membership Program:
IslamiCity Donation Program  http://www.islamicity.com/Donate
IslamiCity Arabic eLearning http://www.islamiCity.com/ArabAcademy
Complete Domain & Hosting Solutions www.icDomain.com
Home for Muslim Tunes www.icTunes.com
Islamic Video Collections www.islamiTV.com
IslamiCity Marriage Site www.icMarriage.com