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: Are These Acts of Idolatry? Post Reply Post New Topic
<< Prev Page  of 10 Next >>
Author Message
Ron Webb
Male Humanism
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 30 January 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1859
Quote Ron Webb Replybullet Posted: 12 August 2014 at 1:18pm
Originally posted by islamispeace

re you having bouts of memory loss?  Go back to the previous posts. I showed a video clip which showed how some Catholics prayed to a statue of Mary.  Your best argument in response was "well, its from Fox News", as if somehow that serves as a viable argument!

My response was that Fox News captioned the story incorrectly.  Nobody in the video clip (did you actually watch it, or just read the caption?) said they were praying to a statue.  Even the reporter said that they were "gathering and praying in front of the statue".  So, evidence of polytheism perhaps, but not idolatry.

I have also pointed out repeatedly that Hindus literally pray to their idols and make offerings to them.  What is that if not idolatry?

Okay, I think I see the problem.  Do you seriously think that repeatedly "pointing out" something is the same as providing evidence?

You can "point out" your opinions as often as you want, but that doesn't make them true.  In response, I pointed out the official Web site of the Sanskrit Religions Institute, which says very clearly that Hindu worshippers "are not bowing down to stone, they are not worshipping a statue; they are approaching these sacred images as the means to get to the God behind the image."  (emphasis added)

No offense intended, but I think the Sanskrit Religions Institute is a far more reliable source for the true principles of Hinduism than the opinion of some anonymous Muslim on the Internet.  No matter how many times he repeats those opinions.

If you know beforehand about their beliefs, then yes.

So, your views are based on prejudice rather than the pictures themselves?

How do you know it is "symbolic"?  The idols are literally given offerings!  If these were "symbolic", then you could offer a pencil and it would be fine.

No, a pencil would have no symbolic significance.

So, in other words, you have no actual explanation.  What a shock!

I have lots of possible explanations.  I just don't know which one applies to each situation.

Originally posted by Ron Webb

Whereas your alleged "moon splitting" miracle, for instance, couldn't possibly be explained the same way, right?

You could make the argument, but that would bring us back to the hypothetical argument that Satan started Islam.  The pieces just don't fit.  If anything, when the pagans asked for a miracle, Satan would have split the moon (assuming he has that power) and put an image of one of the pagans gods or something.

If splitting the moon was sufficient for Allah, why would it not be sufficient for Satan?  One could argue that if Allah really wanted to convince non-believers, He would have inscribed the Quran on the surface of the moon.  (Shucks, that would probably convince me too.)  But He didn't.  Why not? I don't know, you tell me -- but whatever the reason, it's the same reason that Satan would not have put an image of a pagan god on the moon in my hypothetical.

Why would Satan want to make idol worshipers believe that their idols are nothing but lifeless pieces of wood and stone and that they should only worship the One, Supreme God?

I've answered that several times already: because by definition a polytheist religion is tolerant of many gods, whereas monotheism is by definition intolerant of them.  You may not agree that the distinction bears out in practice, but a theoretical answer should suffice for your theoretical question.
Addeenul ‘Aql – Religion is intellect.
IP IP Logged
islamispeace
 Islam
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 01 November 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2256
Quote islamispeace Replybullet Posted: 12 August 2014 at 8:29pm
Originally posted by Ron Webb

My response was that Fox News captioned the story incorrectly.  Nobody in the video clip (did you actually watch it, or just read the caption?) said they were praying to a statue.  Even the reporter said that they were "gathering and praying in front of the statue".  So, evidence of polytheism perhaps, but not idolatry.


LOL You are so full of crap, it's not even funny (oh wait, yes it is).  The people in the video were gathered around the statue, and were engaged in prayer.  The statue was the center piece.  It had to be there. 

Here is some more proof of how Catholics pray to statues of Mary:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-p1EAWF7jE

Notice how in this video, Pope Francis looks up at the statue and utters a silent prayer.  Is that not idolatry?  Hint: It's a rhetorical question. Wink

And by the way, Catholics would contend that even though they pray to Mary, it is not polytheism.  Polytheism implies the belief in multiple gods, but Catholics believe in one God.  They don't regard Mary as a "goddess".  So, praying to Mary would not be "polytheism" in the strict sense of the word.  From an Islamic point of view, it is definitely shirk, but not necessarily polytheism.  Shirk is not necessarily synonymous with polytheism.  Any act which should be directed to God alone is shirk, even if the person does not believe in another "god".

Originally posted by Ron Webb

Okay, I think I see the problem.  Do you seriously think that repeatedly "pointing out" something is the same as providing evidence?

You can "point out" your opinions as often as you want, but that doesn't make them true.  In response, I pointed out the official Web site of the Sanskrit Religions Institute, which says very clearly that Hindu worshippers "are not bowing down to stone, they are not worshipping a statue; they are approaching these sacred images as the means to get to the God behind the image."  (emphasis added)

No offense intended, but I think the Sanskrit Religions Institute is a far more reliable source for the true principles of Hinduism than the opinion of some anonymous Muslim on the Internet.  No matter how many times he repeats those opinions.
 

LOL No offense, but I think you are full of crap (oh wait, I do mean offense!).  The "Sanskrit Religions Institute" can try to whitewash what millions of people literally do, but just because it is an "institute" (ooh, that's impressive!), does not give its argument more weight.  You are simply appealing to authority.  I have shown you evidence of how Hindus literally pray to their idols and make offerings to them.  What is that if not idolatry?  LOL

Originally posted by Ron Webb

So, your views are based on prejudice rather than the pictures themselves?


No, no, no.  It's based on observation, whereas your views are based on ignorance and an appeal to uncertainty and theory.  That seems to be your mantra in life. Big%20smile

Originally posted by Ron Webb

No, a pencil would have no symbolic significance.


And fruits and coconut water, which are obviously not consumed (either by the idol or the worshiper) are?  If they "symbolic", then why can't a person just "symbolically" offer a piece of fruit without actually literally providing a piece of fruit?

Originally posted by Ron Webb

I have lots of possible explanations.  I just don't know which one applies to each situation.


No, all you have are more crackpot theories.  You just literally make up arguments, irregardless of whether they make any sense or are supported by the evidence.  I responded to each of your "explanations" and showed why they were weak.  You didn't offer a rebuttal, besides more theories.  Again, that does seem to be your mantra.

Originally posted by Ron Webb

If splitting the moon was sufficient for Allah, why would it not be sufficient for Satan?  One could argue that if Allah really wanted to convince non-believers, He would have inscribed the Quran on the surface of the moon.  (Shucks, that would probably convince me too.)  But He didn't.  Why not? I don't know, you tell me -- but whatever the reason, it's the same reason that Satan would not have put an image of a pagan god on the moon in my hypothetical.


LOL Again, Satan would have had no reason to help Muhammad (peace be upon him) to convince idol worshipers that there is only One God.  Also, it was the pagans who had requested that Muhammad (peace be upon him) split the moon.  They asked for that, and that's what they got.  Yet, like all unbelievers, they still refused to believe.  If anything, Satan would have made Muhammad (peace be upon him) think that a miracle would occur, and yet after several tries, not allow the miracle to occur, thereby vindicating the pagans and damaging Muhammad's reputation.

Shucks, I doubt a blind atheist like you would believe even if an angel came down and slapped you upside the head!  LOL

Originally posted by Ron Webb

I've answered that several times already: because by definition a polytheist religion is tolerant of many gods, whereas monotheism is by definition intolerant of them.  You may not agree that the distinction bears out in practice, but a theoretical answer should suffice for your theoretical question.
 

And I have already refuted this nonsense several times by pointing out that polytheistic religions don't follow the "definition".  You are still stuck on theory and going in circles.  The reality is different.  Moreover, Satan could care less about "tolerance" or "intolerance".  His goal is to lead people astray, in any way possible.  Therefore, to suggest that he would actually discourage idol worship and other pre-Islamic practices (such as female infanticide, hedonism and greed, tribal warfare etc.) is the epitome of nonsense.   


Edited by islamispeace - 12 August 2014 at 8:54pm
Say: "Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds. (Surat al-Anaam: 162)

IP IP Logged
Andrew Eby
Male Other
Newbie
Newbie
Avatar

Joined: 03 August 2014
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 10
Quote Andrew Eby Replybullet Posted: 13 August 2014 at 2:10am
To settle this argument you guys have here is the third eye point of view. Both of you are correct. If the Quran says like the Bible says that you shall not Bow before any Other God or Idol before me. Here lays the problem, I could say to you that your false as a follower Christ myself, but I won't because I do not believe that. The mere fact of bowing before ANYTHING is a symbol of worshiping, dedicating, repenting, talking is a form of idolizom no matter how put it, you can't play with words there. We all have the same beliefs just told diferently. Why do we have to fight or argue??!! Why can't we join together and share the secrets of the past as I have come to know myself through many years of reading and searching for the TRUTH. The TRUTH is our governments wants us to be like this, sheep without herder, cattle without it's wrangler, so easy to manipulate and distort the TRUTH, but just as BUDHA said " there are three things that cannot be long hidden; the sun, the moon and the TRUTH. We are finding the TRUTH, City of DWARKA found mythical place now proven not mythical. Huge city under Japan's water no name yet. Mayan or Incan city found under lake TITICACA. We are much much older then what main stream HISTORIANS have said for over thousands of years. Imformation is at your fingered tips my brothers and sisters. The day we come together as one PEOPLE, one GOD, one DESTINY is the day the world will know peace. So I ask YOU, Islam, Muslim, Buddhist, Jew, Catholic and very other religion, when do you really want to act like what believe in?? It's not with guns and war, it's with our mouths, pen and paper, the mass majority who are spiritual. We should all be at our governments front door. They are all not for the people of this PLANET. When can we start acting like a planet and stop with the race and religion and start growing with each others beliefs. We haven't figured out really who the heck we are yet let alone what happened in the past. So how can we sit here today and fight over this after thousands of years of doing so. We are like children in GODS eyes. Seriously think about it. We all believe that there is a GOD right?? So ask yourself how pissed off he is??!! I pray for the day we come together as a planet of humans and rejoice in our GOD and HIS MAJESTY. There is one thing in life that I do not get though is atheism. My point of view is that first there was noting, out of nothing came time, out of time came our GOD. Why do you think he knows the past present and future? Plus every word and every thought. That concept should open some eyes. I grew up in a Presbyterian house where my dad is the pastor. In my young years I thought to myself the world, universe had to much more grand then what the BIBLE told. I was right, one day I asked myself what reality meant to me. After a few months my eyes where open and it was like taking the red pill, TRUTH is our REALITY. REALITY is what a collective society and individual deem to be TRUE. That should be the defintion. Every theory you look up dances around the TRUTH. I have lots more knowledge for taking.   
IP IP Logged
Ron Webb
Male Humanism
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 30 January 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1859
Quote Ron Webb Replybullet Posted: 14 August 2014 at 7:55pm
Originally posted by islamispeace

You are so full of crap, it's not even funny (oh wait, yes it is).  The people in the video were gathered around the statue, and were engaged in prayer.  The statue was the center piece.  It had to be there.

"It had to be there"?  So Catholics can't pray to the Virgin Mary without a statue?  You know better than that.  Why waste time with such foolishness?

Notice how in this video, Pope Francis looks up at the statue and utters a silent prayer.  Is that not idolatry?

No.  You can't tell by looking at a picture who or what the prayer is addressed to, but I'm quite sure that it would have been addressed to the Virgin Mary herself, not to her statue.

No offense, but I think you are full of crap (oh wait, I do mean offense!).  The "Sanskrit Religions Institute" can try to whitewash what millions of people literally do, but just because it is an "institute" (ooh, that's impressive!), does not give its argument more weight.  You are simply appealing to authority.

I am indeed.  Appeals to authority are valid if the authority is valid, which is the case here.  At any rate, they are far more authoritative then you.

I have shown you evidence of how Hindus literally pray to their idols and make offerings to them.  What is that if not idolatry?

You have shown me pictures, but pictures cannot show the intent of the person praying.

Originally posted by Ron Webb

If you know beforehand about their beliefs, then yes.
So, your views are based on prejudice rather than the pictures themselves?

No, no, no.  It's based on observation, whereas your views are based on ignorance and an appeal to uncertainty and theory.  That seems to be your mantra in life.

It's not based on observation if you have to know the answer beforehand.  That's called prejudice.  By observation alone, you cannot know the intent of the person praying.

Originally posted by Ron Webb

No, a pencil would have no symbolic significance.

And fruits and coconut water, which are obviously not consumed (either by the idol or the worshiper) are?  If they "symbolic", then why can't a person just "symbolically" offer a piece of fruit without actually literally providing a piece of fruit?

I don't know, you should be asking a Hindu that question.  My suspicion is that if you don't have an actual piece of fruit to spare, a symbolic offering of a picture of a piece of fruit might suffice.

Again, Satan would have had no reason to help Muhammad (peace be upon him) to convince idol worshipers that there is only One God.

How many wars were caused, and how many people died, because Muhammad convinced idol worshippers that there is only one God?  How much terrorism and hatred continues to this day because of it?

Also, it was the pagans who had requested that Muhammad (peace be upon him) split the moon.  They asked for that, and that's what they got.  Yet, like all unbelievers, they still refused to believe.  If anything, Satan would have made Muhammad (peace be upon him) think that a miracle would occur, and yet after several tries, not allow the miracle to occur, thereby vindicating the pagans and damaging Muhammad's reputation.

Which would have accomplished exactly nothing.  Why would Satan dictate the Quran to Muhammad, and then sabotage Muhammad's attempts to promulgate it?

And I have already refuted this nonsense several times by pointing out that polytheistic religions don't follow the "definition".

Some do, some don't.  The question is, are monotheist religions more likely than polytheist ones to be intolerant of other beliefs?  I can't give you any statistics, but you only have to watch the nightly news to know the answer to that.  You've given me a few examples of polytheists.  I could give you dozens, maybe hundreds, of Muslim/Islamist examples alone.
Addeenul ‘Aql – Religion is intellect.
IP IP Logged
islamispeace
 Islam
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 01 November 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2256
Quote islamispeace Replybullet Posted: 14 August 2014 at 9:08pm
Originally posted by Ron Webb

"It had to be there"?  So Catholics can't pray to the Virgin Mary without a statue?  You know better than that.  Why waste time with such foolishness?


I already pointed that out, dummy.  I already stated that both Catholics and Hindus should be able to pray without the use of idols, but that's the point!  They deliberately use idols!  You are the one "wasting time with...foolishness" because you refuse to acknowledge what can be be plainly observed.  The Agnostic Code has really blinded you to clear facts.

Originally posted by Ron Webb

No.  You can't tell by looking at a picture who or what the prayer is addressed to, but I'm quite sure that it would have been addressed to the Virgin Mary herself, not to her statue.
 

LOL Sure, sure.  Apparently, looking up at the statue and praying (I am pretty sure he was not praying to God Shocked), is not proof to your befuddled mind that the Pope was praying to Mary.  Of course, he was praying to Mary!  But, why does he need the statue?  Why does he look up to it while he is praying?  What is that if not idolatry?

Originally posted by Ron Webb

I am indeed.  Appeals to authority are valid if the authority is valid, which is the case here.  At any rate, they are far more authoritative then you.
 

Your appeal to authority ignores the counter-evidence.  That is why it is a fallacy.  You are essentially claiming that in spite of the fact that millions of people worship idols, the "Institute" knows that they are not actually worshiping the idols.  Tell that to the people!

Originally posted by Ron Webb

You have shown me pictures, but pictures cannot show the intent of the person praying.


I also showed you videos and even instructions from websites showing faithful Hindus how to properly make offerings to idols of their gods.  I think the intent is pretty clear.  You can continue to live in your uncertain fantasy world, but the reality is very clear.

Originally posted by Ron Webb

It's not based on observation if you have to know the answer beforehand.  That's called prejudice.  By observation alone, you cannot know the intent of the person praying.
 

Observation is based on research, dummy! 

Originally posted by Ron Webb

I don't know, you should be asking a Hindu that question.  My suspicion is that if you don't have an actual piece of fruit to spare, a symbolic offering of a picture of a piece of fruit might suffice.


So, now I should ask a Hindu?  If you don't know the answers, then why the hell are you making silly arguments that you cannot even support?  Did you ask a Hindu that the offerings are "symbolic", or was that just your own "suspicion"? 

Originally posted by Ron Webb

How many wars were caused, and how many people died, because Muhammad convinced idol worshippers that there is only one God?  How much terrorism and hatred continues to this day because of it?


LOL We're back to that again, huh?  I guess there is just no convincing a prejudiced atheist that this *****ic views have no basis in facts and logic. 

Idol worshipers are just as capable of violence as anyone else.  Even your so-called "humanists" have been the cause of great violence in the world.  People fight over many things.  They always have, and they always will.  Did you read Charles Kurzman's book?  Wink

And the idolaters in Arabia were not peace-loving people.  They were known for their violence, too.  Satan had no reason to destroy the Arab pagan religion, in favor of monotheism, if his goal was to incite violence.  He had many options at his disposal, including further exploiting the tribal conflicts (which Muhammad (peace be upon him)) preached against! 

Originally posted by Ron Webb

Which would have accomplished exactly nothing.  Why would Satan dictate the Quran to Muhammad, and then sabotage Muhammad's attempts to promulgate it?


Why don't you ask him when you are both in Hell? LOL

As I said, Satan had no reason to start a monotheistic religion in the first place.  That is why the argument is absurd from the get-go.  If anything, Satan would have used the opportunity to further entrench idolatry.  He could have made Muhammad (peace be upon him) believe that he was a true Prophet and then when the time was right, betray him (such as at the time when the pagans asked for the moon to be split). 

Originally posted by Ron Webb

Some do, some don't.  The question is, are monotheist religions more likely than polytheist ones to be intolerant of other beliefs?  I can't give you any statistics, but you only have to watch the nightly news to know the answer to that.  You've given me a few examples of polytheists.  I could give you dozens, maybe hundreds, of Muslim/Islamist examples alone.
  

Even if this was true, it does nothing to change the fact that polytheists can and do persecute others.  Therefore, your argument is moot.  Satan would have known that polytheists can also be driven to "intolerance". 


Edited by islamispeace - 14 August 2014 at 9:09pm
Say: "Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds. (Surat al-Anaam: 162)

IP IP Logged
islamispeace
 Islam
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 01 November 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2256
Quote islamispeace Replybullet Posted: 14 August 2014 at 9:10pm
Originally posted by islamispeace

No, all you have are more crackpot theories.  You just literally make up arguments, irregardless of whether they make any sense or are supported by the evidence.  I responded to each of your "explanations" and showed why they were weak.  You didn't offer a rebuttal, besides more theories.  Again, that does seem to be your mantra.


It does not go unnoticed that Ron Webb still has no reasonable explanation, only crackpot theories...
Say: "Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds. (Surat al-Anaam: 162)

IP IP Logged
Ron Webb
Male Humanism
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 30 January 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1859
Quote Ron Webb Replybullet Posted: 15 August 2014 at 9:21am
Originally posted by islamispeace

I already pointed that out, dummy.  I already stated that both Catholics and Hindus should be able to pray without the use of idols, but that's the point!  They deliberately use idols!  You are the one "wasting time with...foolishness" because you refuse to acknowledge what can be be plainly observed.  The Agnostic Code has really blinded you to clear facts.

Yes, they should be able to, and they can and they do.  But they like having images of their gods, just as I like having a picture of my wife on my desk.  So what?  That doesn't mean I am in love with a picture.

Originally posted by Ron Webb

It's not based on observation if you have to know the answer beforehand.  That's called prejudice.  By observation alone, you cannot know the intent of the person praying.

Observation is based on research, dummy!

Then show me the research.  Don't just show me pictures that prove nothing unless you assume your conclusion beforehand, as you already admitted.

So, now I should ask a Hindu?  If you don't know the answers, then why the hell are you making silly arguments that you cannot even support?  Did you ask a Hindu that the offerings are "symbolic", or was that just your own "suspicion"?

If the idols are symbolic (which they are), then obviously offerings to it are also symbolic.  But no, I don't have all the answers.  (Unlike you, apparently.)  If I needed to understand their symbolism in detail, I would ask a Hindu.

Idol worshipers are just as capable of violence as anyone else.  Even your so-called "humanists" have been the cause of great violence in the world.

Such as?

Originally posted by Ron Webb

Some do, some don't.  The question is, are monotheist religions more likely than polytheist ones to be intolerant of other beliefs?  I can't give you any statistics, but you only have to watch the nightly news to know the answer to that.  You've given me a few examples of polytheists.  I could give you dozens, maybe hundreds, of Muslim/Islamist examples alone.
   
Even if this was true, it does nothing to change the fact that polytheists can and do persecute others.  Therefore, your argument is moot.  Satan would have known that polytheists can also be driven to "intolerance".

Yup, polytheists can and do persecute others.  The question is, is there less intolerance and persecution in the world now, with Islam, than there would have been without it?  I'd love to see you make the case for that. Wink
Addeenul ‘Aql – Religion is intellect.
IP IP Logged
islamispeace
 Islam
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 01 November 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2256
Quote islamispeace Replybullet Posted: 15 August 2014 at 8:16pm
Originally posted by Ron Webb

Yes, they should be able to, and they can and they do.  But they like having images of their gods, just as I like having a picture of my wife on my desk.  So what?  That doesn't mean I am in love with a picture.


Again, you are going in circles.  Comparing Catholic veneration of statues to a picture of your wife is absurd.  Do you make prayers to the picture?  Do you make offerings to it (as at least most Hindus do)? 

Suppose that Mary or the saints were physically present on the earth.  Obviously, in that situation, a statue would definitely not be necessary?  Correct?  So, Catholics would pray to the literal Mary or to a literal saint.  Would that not be idolatry?  Now, replace the literal Mary or the literal saint with a statue.  What changes?  Prayers are still being made to a physical object, even if it is a "symbol" which represents the actual being.  Is that not idolatry?

Originally posted by Ron Webb

Then show me the research.  Don't just show me pictures that prove nothing unless you assume your conclusion beforehand, as you already admitted.
 

I have shown you the research already.  You have simply rejected it.  I have provided material from websites.  I have provided pictures and videos. 

Here is some more research.  In most Hindu temples, the idol is "woken up" every morning and given a bath.  Here is how a Hindu source describes it:

"Early in the morning, generally before sunrise, they wake him up to the accompaniment of music and devotional hymns, give him a bath, dress him up fully and gloriously and then worship him with all ardor and fervor making various offerings and chanting hymns of encomiums." (http://www.hinduwebsite.com/hinduism/pantheonfaq.asp

Is this all "symbolic"?  Is this something you would do to a mere "symbol"? Shocked

Originally posted by Ron Webb

If the idols are symbolic (which they are), then obviously offerings to it are also symbolic.  But no, I don't have all the answers.  (Unlike you, apparently.)  If I needed to understand their symbolism in detail, I would ask a Hindu.


LOL The same source explained in detail the various rituals that Hindus perform on these alleged "symbols", as shown above.  Moreover, the same source states clearly:

"A devout Hindu is not much ashamed of going to a temple and bowing before an idol.  He has no hesitation to stand in front of it and speak to it as if he is talking to an individual with the faith and devotion that is exemplary."

The source also states that sometimes the idol actually responds!  Would a mere symbol respond to acts of worship?

"But sometimes as recorded by human experience, the idols do respond and converse with man."


Originally posted by Ron Webb

Such as?


Memory loss again?  Stalin? Mao?  Pol Pot?  Remember? Wink

Originally posted by Ron Webb

Yup, polytheists can and do persecute others.  The question is, is there less intolerance and persecution in the world now, with Islam, than there would have been without it?  I'd love to see you make the case for that. Wink


LOL Oh, your clownish responses make me laugh! 

Since we know that people from all walks of life, whether religious or not, are capable of violence and persecution of others, it is not hard to imagine that the world would not be very different if Islam did not exist.  Of course, I cannot prove what the world would have been like in this alternate reality, but neither can you prove that there would been "less intolerance and persecution".  It's hilarious how you ask for proof of an hypothetical scenario when in all your time suggesting your crackpot theories, you have not provide one iota of evidence to support them.  Bozo being Bozo... Clown

By the way, you might want to read Graham Fuller's book "A World Without Islam".  He provides some key insights, if you are really interested in this hypothetical scenario. 

Your reading list is getting bigger by the day!  LOL  I sure hope you do some reading, if you are really interested in seeking answers.  Of course, if you don't, I won't mind.  It will just confirm that you are just a troll who has a very prejudiced view of Islam and Muslims.  Surprise, surprise!




Edited by islamispeace - 15 August 2014 at 8:18pm
Say: "Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds. (Surat al-Anaam: 162)

IP IP Logged
<< Prev Page  of 10 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