Peace in the Middle East

[Naseem]

What Would Muhammad Do?
(a checklist)

What would Muhammad do...?


Have sex with a 9-year-old girl?
YES

Advocate beheading?
YES

Require women to cover their faces?
YES

Befriend Christians and Jews?
NO!

Own slaves?
YES

Marry his daughter-in-law?
YES

Approve of prostitution?
YES

Gluttonize?
YES

Recommend wife-beating?
YES

Hit his own wife?
YES

Kill prisoners of war?
YES

Advocate suicide attacks?
YES

Kill apostates?
YES

Tell sick persons to heal them-selves by drinking camel urine?
YES

Beat children who don’t pray?
YES

Have eleven wives at one time?
YES

Lie?
YES

Enslave women and children?
YES

Stone adulterers to death?
YES

Torture a man out of greed?
YES

Consider men and women equal partners?
NO!

Steal?
YES

Kill someone for insulting him?
YES

Preach love for people of all religions?
NO!

Extort money from other religions?
YES

Keep women as sex slaves?
YES

Force conversions to Islam?
YES

Commit acts of terror?
YES

Kill a woman?
YES

Capture a woman and rape her?
YES

Encourage the rape of women in front of their husbands?
YES


Check it out! ---> Invalid Link Removed

FUNNY give the proofs its turnin on non sense discussion with very low level
its liek i say wat dr d would do !
put crap in 3 ad yes ...ect thats none sense

D IN THAT CASE TO NUKE AN DEXTERMINATE ALL THE MUSLIMS AND THATS IT .

just on last thing to say ! all teh stuff i said i came with proofs u dont i even came with the bible! u didnt

RENDEZ VOUS AT THE JUDGMENT DAY !

 

[poison]

Naseem, keep something in mind: I'm pretty sure no one here hates Muslims. Myself, I do hate what is done in the name of Islam. Even worse is that the rest of islam doesn't decry acts of terror. They say 'oh, but you have to understand...israel...the US....it's not their fault...'.


Bull****ing****. I believe actual terrorists are a minority. I also believe sizable amount support terror through monetary donations, and a majority are secretly proud of what their 'brothers' are doing. I rarely hear a Muslim say 'That is wrong'.


And that, my friend, is wrong.

 

[poison]

RENDEZ VOUS AT THE JUDGMENT DAY !

Ahh, there it is.

**** off. I wish you no harm, as long as you're not harming others. You, apparently, long for the grand showdown.

Nighty-night, bud. Give Ahmedinejad a kiss for me, he'll be right there with you.

 

[Naseem]

Ahh, there it is.

**** off. I wish you no harm, as long as you're not harming others. You, apparently, long for the grand showdown.

Nighty-night, bud. Give Ahmedinejad a kiss for me, he'll be right there with you.

hey poison c what i say u get me all wrong
1st the muslims sect who claim crap ..ect i hate them maybe even more Then U


2nd u talkin about ahmadicrap najad teh shia shwoman who is makin the show ! u put me same box as him its really more as an ENEMY for me taht proov u dont get it at all !

when i said é rendey vousat judjment day " what did u understand bout that and what did u think i meant ! " i am goin heaven...ect" no men i cnat now if i ll go or not i am not the judge god ll !
ok i siad that to D i menat that in the j day ll c the truthe about islam as its not wha he belive it is !
so pls stop judjin with crap logic !

 

[DR.D]

... RENDEZ VOUS AT THE JUDGMENT DAY !

May Christ Himself judge between us then. AMEN

 

[Naseem]

May Christ Himself judge between us then. AMEN

AMEEN D the christ ll return the truth ll shine as i said !

 

[Thrall]

Morality is NOT universal. Every religion believes it is, and that THEIRS is the universal morality. Morality changes with time period, location, societal standards and mores, and technological status. MORALITY is a word.

Consider. Lions in the wild will kill another lion who rapes a child lion. They all team up and kill it. Why? Because they have morals? Hell no! Lions don't have morals, because they don't have a word for morality! They see the rape, and they are designed to kill that which has just proven itself harmful and dysfunctional. It is simple for them, because THEY don't have to talk about it. It is all chemical instinct.

Human beings, on the other hand, have invented the worst god damn thing ever, language. If we had never learned to talk, we would never have learned the curse of abstract thought. Abstraction sets in, and then reality is lost. Now, what is natural "morality" is lost as well.

You are all arguing about nothing. Your religions tell you to believe something, and you aren't even thinking right, because you are thinking with someone else's beliefs, someone elses's words, and from a completely different time period I might add! You are lost, and when I am done posting this, you are going to come back on me and say the same thing. Its like you are talking with the mouths of people you don't even know, having their arguments for them.

 

[poison]

Everybody's right, OK? Geez.

Frankly, I wish everyone would mind their own business, stop minding others business, and everyone would meet in heaven.

 

[poison]

Morality is NOT universal. Every religion believes it is, and that THEIRS is the universal morality. Morality changes with time period, location, societal standards and mores, and technological status. MORALITY is a word.

Consider. Lions in the wild will kill another lion who rapes a child lion. They all team up and kill it. Why? Because they have morals? Hell no! Lions don't have morals, because they don't have a word for morality! They see the rape, and they are designed to kill that which has just proven itself harmful and dysfunctional. It is simple for them, because THEY don't have to talk about it. It is all chemical instinct.

Human beings, on the other hand, have invented the worst god damn thing ever, language. If we had never learned to talk, we would never have learned the curse of abstract thought. Abstraction sets in, and then reality is lost. Now, what is natural "morality" is lost as well.

You are all arguing about nothing. Your religions tell you to believe something, and you aren't even thinking right, because you are thinking with someone else's beliefs, someone elses's words, and from a completely different time period I might add! You are lost, and when I am done posting this, you are going to come back on me and say the same thing. Its like you are talking with the mouths of people you don't even know, having their arguments for them.

Oh, no. some things are just wrong. Blowing up a mosque in Iraq because they're Sunnis is wrong. Cutting off peoples heads with dull knives like stuck pigs is wrong.

You're wrong. If you wouldn't want it done to you, it's likely wrong.

 

[kwyckemynd00]

u right on that thats how god test ppl cuz most of so called muslim s who leads sects " not real shcolars" interpert by following their desiiers sum for power sum for the fame....ect but always theirs proof that they wrong thats y when u follo koran u have to folow that with the understood with the prophet compaginons as they had a pure islam not corrupted !
but guess what teh prophet muhamed peace be upon him did predidct that there gonna be sects...ect !

The bolded part is going to be next to impossible; there will never be resolution as to what is true and what isn't in any interpretation. That's the beauty of being human, each person sees life through a different set of eyes. In some cases, this difference in interpretation is a bad thing, e.g. the too-high occurrence of modern radical Muslims.

I have a question for you, if you don't mind. In your opinion, what is it about Islam that seems to facilitate radicalism this day and age.

IMHO, I think it has something to do with the fact that Islam isn't just any other holy book, it basically gives a guideline on how to live as a person and how to govern a society. The guidelines seem to facilitate an Islamic monarchic society. Any religious monarchic society is in for danger, IMO, but the problem with Islam is, IMO, that it facilitates it and which allows the spread of religious radicalism because it can easily be made into a tool of manipulation by religious leaders of the state.

 

[kwyckemynd00]

Morality is NOT universal. Every religion believes it is, and that THEIRS is the universal morality. Morality changes with time period, location, societal standards and mores, and technological status. MORALITY is a word.

Very true. HOWEVER, there is one thing that is universal. Reproductively successful organisms must have behavioral and physiological factors and traits that facilitate that success.

Our physiological ability to succeed is limited by behavior as humans. Certain behaviors facilitate success, others destruction; and it just so happens that some of these things we consider "right" and "wrong" have an impact on the success of humanity. So, "right" and "wrong" and "moral" are all words, and they are all defined locally by populations with a huge degree of variation, but there are more an less successful way of life and some down right dangerous behaviors.

These things our fellow AM.com members are arguing as "wrong" are some of those things that are downright dangerous and you can't argue that. So, when it comes down to it, whether something is "right" or "wrong" is irrelevant; but what is beneficial is not. And I can damn sure prove to you that many of those behaviors people are calling wrong facilitate disaster; behaviors you're defending because right, wrong, and moral are all subject to beliefs held by local populations

 

[Naseem]

The bolded part is going to be next to impossible; there will never be resolution as to what is true and what isn't in any interpretation. That's the beauty of being human, each person sees life through a different set of eyes. In some cases, this difference in interpretation is a bad thing, e.g. the too-high occurrence of modern radical Muslims.

I have a question for you, if you don't mind. In your opinion, what is it about Islam that seems to facilitate radicalism this day and age.

IMHO, I think it has something to do with the fact that Islam isn't just any other holy book, it basically gives a guideline on how to live as a person and how to govern a society. The guidelines seem to facilitate an Islamic monarchic society. Any religious monarchic society is in for danger, IMO, but the problem with Islam is, IMO, that it facilitates it and which allows the spread of religious radicalism because it can easily be made into a tool of manipulation.

u right in part but not that simple since tehre priority and monarchy is not allowed in islam ! to f u say an islamic state it should be as consequence to ppls heart like u have to built it in u r heart b 4 and those sects started as soon as teh prophet died ! and i give a clue those so calle dislam radicals leaders most of them never studied islam i mean as real scholars ! check dhawahri as exemple he was doctor medecine he was influanced by seid qutb the well known freemason ! i say that s lost ppl who sums of them are ignorant misguided ! like how come those leaders never blast themselves always sen otehr ppl especially ignorent youth who disguis their sucide as act of fight " in fact msot of them r just fed up from life"

 

[kwyckemynd00]

You may be 100% right about your interpretation of Islam. But, the problem lies in that it is very open to dangerous interpretation and there is a support in the Qur'an for legitimate monarchies, which will facilitate the dangerous radicalism.

What the Qur'an is supposed to say versus how people get the message are two different things, and unfortunately (as you said) religious leaders are rarely scholars.

 

[Thrall]

Oh, no. some things are just wrong. Blowing up a mosque in Iraq because they're Sunnis is wrong. Cutting off peoples heads with dull knives like stuck pigs is wrong.

You're wrong. If you wouldn't want it done to you, it's likely wrong.

You see, you're missing the point. I know that I don't want someone to blow me up, so I won't do it to them. That is functional. When someone ****s up that balance for whatever reason, that's when I retaliate. I can JUSTIFY it however I want (i.e. right, wrong, god etc.), but in the end I will do whatever I can to retaliate.

I was not denying anyone's right to an opinion, but you will find that if you actually think about how you think a little more, you could argue with a little more than just flat out denial of mine.

 

[Naseem]

You may be 100% right about your interpretation of Islam. But, the problem lies in that it is very open to dangerous interpretation and there is a support in the Qur'an for legitimate monarchies, which will facilitate the dangerous radicalism.

What the Qur'an is supposed to say versus how people get the message are two different things, and unfortunately (as you said) religious leaders are rarely scholars.

i garantee u nuthin support monarchies if u mean as saudi kingdom ...ect in islam u cnat ineritate like by blood ! to rule

1st the koran is only one and unique book no many versions and we belive it s teh word of god and god commend to follow his messanger as he was the "in vivi interpretation of quran" if u want thats y muhammed peace be upon him did warn us about the innovation in religion like enw inetrpretation or new way of worshippin ! those ppl l denie that and ll interpret in away to pleas their desire if u got me !
so islam c those ppl as they calle them lost so if they still interpret with their way after the proov given to them from quran and athentic hadeeth " what muhamed peace be upon him said" keep taht way and no repent they r guilty tehy ll have to answer god for that
for ppl who r ignorant and juss follow those who lead them they ll be judged depending on their intention
as exemple thos ppl like bal quada crap r called takfeers it mean they excomuinate anybody who dont follow or agree tehm i menat the muslims like me sdo for them i ll be a s a dsbeliver crazy! its like with bush u r with them or against lol!
teh prophet did predict that said peace be upon him that ll be group who ll pray alot and wroship alot but their fiath ll be corrupted also called them DOGS FROM HELL! and those same ppl did kille uthman ibu afan wich was the 3rd khalif!

 

[DR.D]

Very true. HOWEVER, there is one thing that is universal. Reproductively successful organisms must have behavioral and physiological factors and traits that facilitate that success. ...

Yes, that is the bottom line. Reproductive advantage is what governs advancement of a species, but don't you see that it's still a system in and of itself? Why does the Bible condemn homosexuality? Because it is "wrong"? Well, maybe because if everyone was homosexual, there would be no freakin' species! Sounds like more of a common sense call to me. The Bible does give guidelines, but whether you call them moral or not is irrelevant if it just adds up anyway. The guides are just common protocols for success and advancement of genetic info to the next generation. Don't think moral or immoral anymore... think TRUE or FALSE, because that IS universal and totally absolute. Homosexuals can not reproduce, TRUE. OK, then lions kill a male that rapes a pup because it is detrimental to the species to allow such unproductive anomalies to flourish. That endangers the integrity of the group, just as it is foolish and suicidal to make excuses for Islam. We do so at our own peril! The fact that lions do this instinctual with out verbal communication is only more proof that right and wrong are indeed universal and ingrained into the whole system by virtue of the conditions of the system itself.

My point is there is universal law, period. It's inherit to the system itself, or what we call our environment. Don't get hung up on the words, true/false, right/wrong, moral/immoral, whatever you call it it still means the same thing!

 

[Naseem]

Ahh, there it is.

**** off. I wish you no harm, as long as you're not harming others. You, apparently, long for the grand showdown.

Nighty-night, bud. Give Ahmedinejad a kiss for me, he'll be right there with you.

so if u meant to insult mean by sayin ............ u should apologize since itw as wrong ad unjust !

well thats an exemple of jihad the major one he talked bad and my human way pushed me to insult him like really but i faught it ! and i didnt

 

[poison]

You see, you're missing the point. I know that I don't want someone to blow me up, so I won't do it to them. That is functional. When someone ****s up that balance for whatever reason, that's when I retaliate. I can JUSTIFY it however I want (i.e. right, wrong, god etc.), but in the end I will do whatever I can to retaliate.

I was not denying anyone's right to an opinion, but you will find that if you actually think about how you think a little more, you could argue with a little more than just flat out denial of mine.

I didn't mean tgo jump on you. I'm just tired of the PC moral equivalency that is such the rage now.

I don't care if you call it functional, moral, whatever. The concept behind it is the same. Certain things should not be allowed or done. Those things are wrong, be it from a 'functional' sense (hmm, is it functional to cut this guys head off, or not?) or a moral sense, or simply from the knowledge that 99.9% of the populations is born and raised with.

So, Islamic terror is wrong. Period. I CAN make that judgement based on widespread knowledge and belief, as well as common human empathy.

 

[poison]

Naseem, I'm sure the Koran is interpreted wrong, and not followed correctly. Let me tell you why I don't care to take that into account:

What was originally meant doesn't matter if the current followers choose do do something else, or twist it. You can tell the Iraqi vegetable farmer 'they're doing it wrong, mohammed doesn't condone that behavior!!' as his head is slowly being removed from his shoulders while people stand around and laugh, and that may be true, but IT DOES NOT CHANGE ANYTHING. He's still being tortured for nothing, and going to die, because some idiot translated it wrong.

The Christians 'did it wrong' too, in the Inquisition, in the Americas, and plenty other places. They got over it, and do not condone torture and mUrder any more. But that doesn't make it OK: thousands died from torture. That's the end result.

So, today we have many Muslims 'doing it wrong'. Why do you think that you telling me 'they're doing it wrong' will make me sigh in relief: 'Oh, man, I was worried for a second, I'm cool now!'?

Why don't Muslims stand up and 'do it right' as a group? Decry the terror, the killing? If it's so 'wrong', why don't we see that or hear it? Why the excuses: it's the occupation. Wait, you're in Afganistan, and you're blaming Israel? Please. Whatever legitimate complaints Muslims may have will never be heard if they continue to stand passively by and hate anyone not Muslim.

 

[poison]

so if u meant to insult mean by sayin ............ u should apologize since itw as wrong ad unjust !

well thats an exemple of jihad the major one he talked bad and my human way pushed me to insult him like really but i faught it ! and i didnt

I will apologise. I get pretty heated for personal reasons. I don't know you, and as much as I dislike your religion lately, I empathize with you here: you're trying to show us the other side of Islam, and that's a serious uphill battle for you.

I don't care who is right, who's god can give who's a wedgie, or whether you touch yourself while reading science journals. Just be good to others, and you're A-OK.

 

[Naseem]

Naseem, I'm sure the Koran is interpreted wrong, and not followed correctly. Let me tell you why I don't care to take that into account:

What was originally meant doesn't matter if the current followers choose do do something else, or twist it. You can tell the Iraqi vegetable farmer 'they're doing it wrong, mohammed doesn't condone that behavior!!' as his head is slowly being removed from his shoulders while people stand around and laugh, and that may be true, but IT DOES NOT CHANGE ANYTHING. He's still being tortured for nothing, and going to die, because some idiot translated it wrong.

The Christians 'did it wrong' too, in the Inquisition, in the Americas, and plenty other places. They got over it, and do not condone torture and mUrder any more. But that doesn't make it OK: thousands died from torture. That's the end result.

So, today we have many Muslims 'doing it wrong'. Why do you think that you telling me 'they're doing it wrong' will make me sigh in relief: 'Oh, man, I was worried for a second, I'm cool now!'?

Why don't Muslims stand up and 'do it right' as a group? Decry the terror, the killing? If it's so 'wrong', why don't we see that or hear it? Why the excuses: it's the occupation. Wait, you're in Afganistan, and you're blaming Israel? Please. Whatever legitimate complaints Muslims may have will never be heard if they continue to stand passively by and hate anyone not Muslim.

muslim r dvided alot since alot of them followed the temptations and dont care about the herafter anymor or 4get bout it what i am sayin is u cant genelize its wrong u have to care about wjat koran mean in real so with that u can fight teh sects with that!
the ppl u talkin about i guss " radical muslims" or takfeers they even hate muslims! chek how shia sect hate the otehrs! it s really deep ! as i am talkin bout shia if u take khomani he was in france they did help him t make the unislamic revolution! there is ppl who pushin that tehy teh more wars and klashes the more they get benifit from that!

 

[Thrall]

I didn't mean tgo jump on you. I'm just tired of the PC moral equivalency that is such the rage now.

I don't care if you call it functional, moral, whatever. The concept behind it is the same. Certain things should not be allowed or done. Those things are wrong, be it from a 'functional' sense (hmm, is it functional to cut this guys head off, or not?) or a moral sense, or simply from the knowledge that 99.9% of the populations is born and raised with.

So, Islamic terror is wrong. Period. I CAN make that judgement based on widespread knowledge and belief, as well as common human empathy.

Well, see, but that is precisely my point. You believe that what you feel is morally inbred, and that that is what everyone thinks is morally inbred. From the looks of things, you cannot be swayed from this opinion at all. That is FINE, "right" or "wrong" as you may be. But have you ever stopped to consider that the very people you ridicule have a sense of right and wrong that is justified in their minds just as yours is justified?

Violence is a way of life for these people, and there is nothing wrong with it in their eyes. NO, I am not saying they are all like that. But obviously SOMEONE thinks that it is perfectly feasible to blow other people to hell. They probably even think they are justified. That fact fact alone disproves morality.

I'm just a kid in your eyes, I don't really know much, but I can tell you that religion has ruined the minds of millions by teaching them how to think THEIR way. People kill for their version of morality. What a waste. That is why it sickens me.

I should just mind my own business, I am sorry for the rant. :frustrate

 

[poison]

Well, see, but that is precisely my point. You believe that what you feel is morally inbred, and that that is what everyone thinks is morally inbred. From the looks of things, you cannot be swayed from this opinion at all. That is FINE, "right" or "wrong" as you may be. But have you ever stopped to consider that the very people you ridicule have a sense of right and wrong that is justified in their minds just as yours is justified?

I understand what you're saying. But the remaining 98% or the world disagrees with them, spanning thousands of different cultures, religions, races, and so on.

Murderers have 'justification' for what they do, as do the rest of the nutjobs of the world. But when put up against the standards of decency the majority of the world believes is acceptable, their justification collapses.

Violence is a way of life for these people, and there is nothing wrong with it in their eyes. NO, I am not saying they are all like that. But obviously SOMEONE thinks that it is perfectly feasible to blow other people to hell. They probably even think they are justified. That fact fact alone disproves morality.

I don't care what label you attach to it. I like 'karmic balance' myself. You can't disrupt the karmic balances of the world like that.

I'm just a kid in your eyes, I don't really know much, but I can tell you that religion has ruined the minds of millions by teaching them how to think THEIR way. People kill for their version of morality. What a waste. That is why it sickens me.

I should just mind my own business, I am sorry for the rant. :frustrate

Uh, 1) I hadn't looked at your age; 2) you're more well spoken than I; and 3) you have nothing to be sorry for. Keep posting!

 

[DR.D]

... I should just mind my own business, I am sorry for the rant. :frustrate

Dude, don't get frustrated! You have a solid point. Tell me, do you believe in the death penalty?

 

[spitboy2000]

thrall's point is absurd. just because other people may think some action is "justified" does not mean that we can't judge its morality.

nazis thought killing six million jews was justified, even glorious. does that mean that we can't judge the morality of Nazis? Absurd.

We can and must judge the morality of those Muslim Fascists that believe killing infidels and innocent Muslims alike for the glory of Islam is just. They are evil.

 

[Thrall]

thrall's point is absurd. just because other people may think some action is "justified" does not mean that we can't judge its morality.

nazis thought killing six million jews was justified, even glorious. does that mean that we can't judge the morality of Nazis? Absurd.

We can and must judge the morality of those Muslim Fascists that believe killing infidels and innocent Muslims alike for the glory of Islam is just. They are evil.

Tell me then, who decides what is good and evil? Their book or yours? And under what translation?

You see, the only reason I dissect the concept of morality is because when we throw our rigid belief systems into the mix, and then put them up against one another, true morality becomes a very gray area. If you think it is as black and white as you seem to believe, then you have not thought about it very hard. You think you are right. There is nothing else. That in itself is ABSURD, my friend.

No, the Nazis were not correct in their actions, and please keep in mind that their views were twisted by the propaganda of one disruptive man. He wanted all of the power for himself. This is not "right" or "wrong", it just simply cannot last. If things are meant to be any way other than what they are, a change WILL occur. With accelerated growth will eventually come accelerated decay.

You are a person who has assumed you have the full story, when you haven't even opened your mind to most of it. Please reconsider your dismissal of my so called absurd opinion.

 

[Thrall]

Dude, don't get frustrated! You have a solid point. Tell me, do you believe in the death penalty?

Do I believe in the death penalty? Well, I have no choice really; it exists after all. Here's what I mean.

I think there is no question that if someone killed someone important to you, you would be tempted to do likewise. There are crimes that obviously pronounce someone as dysfunctional. Is it their right to live as a murderer? Possibly. Should we let them? Obviously not. It doesn't work. Supporting them, is, well, fruitless.

Consider this absolute rule. Men create standards to define norms. No standard set by man is 100% correct. Why? Because the universe has no apparant standards for governance, so we are really just guessing, aren't we? That being said, you have to draw a line that says when to kill and when to not. Does that mean it definitely is "the" line that has to be right where we set it? Absolutely not.

There is no right or wrong when it comes to the death penalty. It is, in my eyes, an eventuality. If we banned it, the murderers would likely keep harming people, even in prison. Recidivism is no myth, either. The hard part is saying when to kill, and there just is no right answer. We have no basis to make that decision, just like we have no basis to make the decision of who it is okay to kill in war. Is it okay to murder a child who could possibly be harboring weapons against you? A child who may, in the future, murder your comrades? How do you make that call? These questions again lend credence to my point, which is that the idea of a set morality is simply fiction.

 

[DR.D]

Do I believe in the death penalty? Well, I have no choice really; it exists after all. Here's what I mean.

I think there is no question that if someone killed someone important to you, you would be tempted to do likewise. There are crimes that obviously pronounce someone as dysfunctional. Is it their right to live as a murderer? Possibly. Should we let them? Obviously not. It doesn't work. Supporting them, is, well, fruitless.

Consider this absolute rule. Men create standards to define norms. No standard set by man is 100% correct. Why? Because the universe has no apparant standards for governance, so we are really just guessing, aren't we? That being said, you have to draw a line that says when to kill and when to not. Does that mean it definitely is "the" line that has to be right where we set it? Absolutely not.

There is no right or wrong when it comes to the death penalty. It is, in my eyes, an eventuality. If we banned it, the murderers would likely keep harming people, even in prison. Recidivism is no myth, either. The hard part is saying when to kill, and there just is no right answer. We have no basis to make that decision, just like we have no basis to make the decision of who it is okay to kill in war. Is it okay to murder a child who could possibly be harboring weapons against you? A child who may, in the future, murder your comrades? How do you make that call? These questions again lend credence to my point, which is that the idea of a set morality is simply fiction.

I see your point, but you can't say "absolutely not" about where to draw that line if your whole argument is that there are no absolutes! Yes, there is an absolute standard, or else the universe would not operate with any predictability. Does man know what all the rules are? No, but those rules are intrinsic and nonetheless operational whether we misapply them, can even understand them, or even recognize they are there. There is underling order in the universe. My point is that there is no 100% perfection for man. Man is imperfect, but that's no excuse not to draw the best line you can with the info you have. There are certainly ways that work better than others whether they are perfect or not. The universal rule should be 'do to others as you would have them do to you'. Would you kill a man? If so, that's fine, but Newton's 3'rd Law states that that will result in a balancing effect. Or as the Bible states it, you live by the sword you die by the sword, so no man can ever talk trash about sitting on death row or hanging from a tree if he shed first blood. You get what you give, THAT is the standard. Unless we all agreed as a global society that we will not kill each other, then society will fail, right? You can't have a society without living people. Therefore, peace should be universal for the sake of the stability required for the species to advance and if somebody whats to break that rule, then they get what they give. It may not be perfect, but it's fair.

 

[poison]

Nicely said, Dr. D.

 

[Naseem]

thrall i got u r point unlike animals who r designed the way they act so that they wont be judged humans have the ability to feel whats right and not at the base like killin sumone inocent or take others property ...ect those basic stuff and then it comes the society where we live in who has alot infulance i agree ! , but still deep inside us we can fell whats bad and not " i menat teh basics" then society infuluence come to lower that like lower the signal that comes from deep and it keeps juss lowerin but never stop at all it juss get like low radio signal teh more u get infulence the deeper u have to get to ge this signal!

 

[Thrall]

I see your point, but you can't say "absolutely not" about where to draw that line if your whole argument is that there are no absolutes! Yes, there is an absolute standard, or else the universe would not operate with any predictability. Does man know what all the rules are? No, but those rules are intrinsic and nonetheless operational whether we misapply them, can even understand them, or even recognize they are there. There is underling order in the universe. My point is that there is no 100% perfection for man. Man is imperfect, but that's no excuse not to draw the best line you can with the info you have. There are certainly ways that work better than others whether they are perfect or not. The universal rule should be 'do to others as you would have them do to you'. Would you kill a man? If so, that's fine, but Newton's 3'rd Law states that that will result in a balancing effect. Or as the Bible states it, you live by the sword you die by the sword, so no man can ever talk trash about sitting on death row or hanging from a tree if he shed first blood. You get what you give, THAT is the standard. Unless we all agreed as a global society that we will not kill each other, then society will fail, right? You can't have a society without living people. Therefore, peace should be universal for the sake of the stability required for the species to advance and if somebody whats to break that rule, then they get what they give. It may not be perfect, but it's fair.

Yes, you caught me! I was looking for absolutes, the same malady you all seem to suffer from.

Now you are delving deeper into the thing than is necessary. You are talking about universal laws, when I am talking about people believing that their individual versions of morality are absolute. MY POINT IS THIS: When man created language, he had the ability to obscure and "bake" his own thoughts. He could form ideas. This was good for survival, really BAD for instinct. Any sense of "morality" is again, instinct. It is not defined by a code. And certainly not just your code.

An "eye for an eye" is a good standard, for sure. I agree. Is it the the standard? Do we hold that as the standard universally? NO. Why? If morality is based on some obscure universal truth, then why is not really universal amongst our numbers?

Let me get dirty for a second, Dr. D. I am not religious, though I do not see how someone can take objection to the peaceful message Jesus brought. But "thou shalt not kill"! If we live in an "eye for an eye" world, and that is the rule, then your strict code has just negated my ability to exact that universal justice.

Should we draw a line? We have no choice. But you can't say your line is better than mine. The fact that there is even a question of where to draw the line means that there is no exact place to draw it. We just have to compromise the best we can.

Peace? To the best of my ability. Always. One must know controlled violence for his own protection, and can even practice it as recreation (i.e. games and combat sports). But always peace if there is a choice at all, my friend.

P.S. I find it ironic that you believe so strongly in the imperfection of man, yet would cite the very laws that Newton "created" as rote. Yes, they appear correct, but have you ever considered the fact that physics can change? In fact, the discovery of orbitally rearranged monatomic elements has already disproved alot of what we considered absolute physical law.

 

[DR.D]

... Let me get dirty for a second, Dr. D. I am not religious, though I do not see how someone can take objection to the peaceful message Jesus brought. But "thou shalt not kill"! If we live in an "eye for an eye" world, and that is the rule, then your strict code has just negated my ability to exact that universal justice. ... P.S. I find it ironic that you believe so strongly in the imperfection of man, yet would cite the very laws that Newton "created" as rote. Yes, they appear correct, but have you ever considered the fact that physics can change? In fact, the discovery of orbitally rearranged monatomic elements has already disproved alot of what we considered absolute physical law.

It's important to keep things in their proper context. It is not necessary to take an eye for an eye so to speak because Jesus does offer to be our vindicator, but the Bible also states that a soldier does not bare the sword in vane, so there is no conflict with the two view. Murder is one thing, preservation is another. There is still a well defined line in my opinion because the difference is clearly one of offense VS defense. Christ told us to turn the other cheek, but not to be a doormat. Keep it in context, but yes it is a fine line. A clear line nonetheless.

As for ORMEs, they are mostly just present in certain volcanic soils dating back to a specific geological event so it is only another phenomena that has yet to be explained. Rapidly spinning nuclei are still subject to the same laws of physics though and there behavior is predictable even if their origin is not well characterized. Same with Einstein's law and Quantum Electodynamics. They don't agree with each other strictly so they can't both be "absolutely" correct, both they both match prediction and observation well enough that they can be applied in daily life quite successfully for their own purposes. You just have to go with the best system you have because the picture is alway incomplete. The Uncertainty Principle is God's right to enforce. You make great points and we are in pretty much full agreement Thrall, you even seem really turned off to religion same as me, I am just not communicating well I don't think.

 

[Thrall]

ORMEs are very interesting to me. A substance that has a constantly fluctuating weight, that when exposed to certain conditions disappears without a trace, and can actually detract from the weight of other physical objects. You know people used to ingest this stuff back in the days of yore? The natural occuring ORME is not near as miraculous as those created and charged in a laboratory setting. This stuff actually aligns and corrects your very DNA when ingested for a period of time!

Most of my information about this comes from Lawrence Gardner, who wrote a book "Secrets of the Lost Ark". I saw the video, which you can view on YouTube. It is interesting to me.

Getting back on topic, I think we can conclude that this conversation has been worthwhile. I hope I have put enough content in this thread to at least help you understand that I simply believe in questioning our very thought patterns themselves. I think there are few of us who bother. I really do. Reps for you!

 

[DR.D]

ORMEs are very interesting to me. A substance that has a constantly fluctuating weight, that when exposed to certain conditions disappears without a trace, and can actually detract from the weight of other physical objects. You know people used to ingest this stuff back in the days of yore? The natural occuring ORME is not near as miraculous as those created and charged in a laboratory setting. This stuff actually aligns and corrects your very DNA when ingested for a period of time!

Most of my information about this comes from Lawrence Gardner, who wrote a book "Secrets of the Lost Ark". I saw the video, which you can view on YouTube. It is interesting to me.

Getting back on topic, I think we can conclude that this conversation has been worthwhile. I hope I have put enough content in this thread to at least help you understand that I simply believe in questioning our very thought patterns themselves. I think there are few of us who bother. I really do. Reps for you!

Amen! People don't seek truth anymore, I commend your outlook and know you shall find it. I'll check out the U-tube, ORMEs are pretty cool man. I have heard all the reports about pituitary restoration and enhanced photon emission in the body. It follows the same principle as hormesis (AKA: The Incredible Hulk Syndrome). Ingestion or exposure to small amounts of high energy ionizing radiation in the form of photons results in invigoration. That's because radiation kills cancer cells favorably, or any rapidly dividing cell, which improves the effeciency of the whole system in a non-stochastic response curve. I was a nuclear biophysics major and we had to irradiate some lima beans one time with like 1000 and 8000 roetgens of a gamma source. Man, those babies grow three times bigger that the control plants! My room mate was pissed because I didn't slip some pot seeds in there too, lol. He had another experiment in mind. Anyway, thanks for the stimulating discussion my man.

 

[Naseem]

Albert Pike"33rd mason and kkk creator" and Three World Wars!



Albert Pike received a vision, which he described in a letter that he wrote to Mazzini, dated August 15, 1871. This letter graphically outlined plans for three world wars that were seen as necessary to bring about the One World Order, and we can marvel at how accurately it has predicted events that have already taken place.
Pike's Letter to Mazzini

It is a commonly believed fallacy that for a short time, the Pike letter to Mazzini was on display in the British Museum Library in London, and it was copied by William Guy Carr, former Intelligence Officer in the Royal Canadian Navy. The British Library has confirmed in writing to me that such a document has never been in their possession. Furthermore, in Carr's book, Satan, Prince of this World, Carr includes the following footnote:

"The Keeper of Manuscripts recently informed the author that this letter is NOT catalogued in the British Museum Library. It seems strange that a man of Cardinal Rodriguez's knowledge should have said that it WAS in 1925".

It appears that Carr learned about this letter from Cardinal Caro y Rodriguez of Santiago, Chile, who wrote The Mystery of Freemasonry Unveiled.

To date, no conclusive proof exists to show that this letter was ever written. Nevertheless, the letter is widely quoted and the topic of much discussion.

Following are apparently extracts of the letter, showing how Three World Wars have been planned for many generations.

"The First World War must be brought about in order to permit the Illuminati to overthrow the power of the Czars in Russia and of making that country a fortress of atheistic Communism. The divergences caused by the "agentur" (agents) of the Illuminati between the British and Germanic Empires will be used to foment this war. At the end of the war, Communism will be built and used in order to destroy the other governments and in order to weaken the religions." 2

Students of history will recognize that the political alliances of England on one side and Germany on the other, forged between 1871 and 1898 by Otto von Bismarck, co-conspirator of Albert Pike, were instrumental in bringing about the First World War.

"The Second World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences between the Fascists and the political Zionists. This war must be brought about so that Nazism is destroyed and that the political Zionism be strong enough to institute a sovereign state of Israel in Palestine. During the Second World War, International Communism must become strong enough in order to balance Christendom, which would be then restrained and held in check until the time when we would need it for the final social cataclysm." 3

After this Second World War, Communism was made strong enough to begin taking over weaker governments. In 1945, at the Potsdam Conference between Truman, Churchill, and Stalin, a large portion of Europe was simply handed over to Russia, and on the other side of the world, the aftermath of the war with Japan helped to sweep the tide of Communism into China.

(Readers who argue that the terms Nazism and Zionism were not known in 1871 should remember that the Illuminati invented both these movements. In addition, Communism as an ideology, and as a coined phrase, originates in France during the Revolution. In 1785, Restif coined the phrase four years before revolution broke out. Restif and Babeuf, in turn, were influenced by Rousseau - as was the most famous conspirator of them all, Adam Weishaupt.)

"The Third World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences caused by the "agentur" of the "Illuminati" between the political Zionists and the leaders of Islamic World. The war must be conducted in such a way that Islam (the Moslem Arabic World) and political Zionism (the State of Israel) mutually destroy each other. Meanwhile the other nations, once more divided on this issue will be constrained to fight to the point of complete physical, moral, spiritual and economical exhaustion

 

[poison]

bwaahaaahaaaahaalolsnorffleehheeheheheughachachecheach...heh

OMFG, funniest post all day!

So it was all manipulated and planned from the start. OK. I like Fruit Punch, got any koolaid I can buy?

 

[Naseem]

relly funny how the letter is dated 1871! and the luciferian pike got it right really funny!!!!!! yes it s funny the masses can be manipulated as the nazi master said" the bigger the lie is the more ppl gonna believe" or another nazi gubles quote " the more ppl think they gonna be attacked the more u can make them do whatever...."! thats funny no! wait a minut isnt that way thinkin how teh germans got manipulated by some hitler who even look non ariyan that made them massacre million innocent ppl !

 

[EESCHMan]

Ah...the beauty of religion...two sides arguing over their holy books.

 

[EESCHMan]

What Would Muhammad Do?
(a checklist)


Have sex with a 9-year-old girl?
YES

Advocate beheading?
YES

Require women to cover their faces?
YES

Befriend Christians and Jews?
NO!

Own slaves?
YES

Marry his daughter-in-law?
YES

Approve of prostitution?
YES

Gluttonize?
YES

Recommend wife-beating?
YES

Hit his own wife?
YES

Kill prisoners of war?
YES

Advocate suicide attacks?
YES

Kill apostates?
YES

Tell sick persons to heal them-selves by drinking camel urine?
YES

Beat children who don’t pray?
YES

Have eleven wives at one time?
YES

Lie?
YES

Enslave women and children?
YES

Stone adulterers to death?
YES

Torture a man out of greed?
YES

Consider men and women equal partners?
NO!

Steal?
YES

Kill someone for insulting him?
YES

Preach love for people of all religions?
NO!

Extort money from other religions?
YES

Keep women as sex slaves?
YES

Force conversions to Islam?
YES

Commit acts of terror?
YES

Kill a woman?
YES

Capture a woman and rape her?
YES

Encourage the rape of women in front of their husbands?
YES


Check it out! ---> Invalid Link Removed

You can find some of these same offenses in the Bible:

Slavery:"However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)"

"When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)"

"Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Timothy 6:1-2 NLT)"

Rape:
" If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.(Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT)"

This one is nice...kinda like Islamic honor killing!

"If within the city a man comes upon a maiden who is betrothed, and has relations with her, you shall bring them both out of the gate of the city and there stone them to death: the girl because she did not cry out for help though she was in the city, and the man because he violated his neighbors wife.(Deuteronomy 22:23-24 NAB)"

Murder:

"Whoever strikes his father or mother shall be put to death. (Exodus 21:15 NAB)"

Don't talk back to your parents!

"1) If one curses his father or mother, his lamp will go out at the coming of darkness. (Proverbs 20:20 NAB)

2) All who curse their father or mother must be put to death. They are guilty of a capital offense. (Leviticus 20:9 NLT)"

Kill virgins (if they aren't)...

"But if this charge is true (that she wasn't a virgin on her wedding night), and evidence of the girls virginity is not found, they shall bring the girl to the entrance of her fathers house and there her townsman shall stone her to death, because she committed a crime against Israel by her unchasteness in her father's house. Thus shall you purge the evil from your midst. (Deuteronomy 22:20-21 NAB)"

God killing, just cuz:

"The ark of God was placed on a new cart and taken away from the house of Abinadab on the hill. Uzzah and Ahio, sons of Abinadab guided the cart, with Ahio walking before it, while David and all the Israelites made merry before the Lord with all their strength, with singing and with citharas, harps, tambourines, sistrums, and cymbals.
When they came to the threshing floor of Nodan, Uzzah reached out his hand to the ark of God to steady it, for the oxen were making it tip. But the Lord was angry with Uzzah; God struck him on that spot, and he died there before God. (2 Samuel 6:3-7 NAB)"

How nice this passage is:

"Anyone who is captured will be run through with a sword. Their little children will be dashed to death right before their eyes. Their homes will be sacked and their wives raped by the attacking hordes. For I will stir up the Medes against Babylon, and no amount of silver or gold will buy them off. The attacking armies will shoot down the young people with arrows. They will have no mercy on helpless babies and will show no compassion for the children. (Isaiah 13:15-18 NLT)"

and on and on...

but I guess these are taken out of context...

 

[anabolicrhino]

It's important to keep things in their proper context. It is not necessary to take an eye for an eye so to speak because Jesus does offer to be our vindicator, but the Bible also states that a soldier does not bare the sword in vane, so there is no conflict with the two view. Murder is one thing, preservation is another. There is still a well defined line in my opinion because the difference is clearly one of offense VS defense. Christ told us to turn the other cheek, but not to be a doormat. Keep it in context, but yes it is a fine line. A clear line nonetheless.

As for ORMEs, they are mostly just present in certain volcanic soils dating back to a specific geological event so it is only another phenomena that has yet to be explained. Rapidly spinning nuclei are still subject to the same laws of physics though and there behavior is predictable even if their origin is not well characterized. Same with Einstein's law and Quantum Electodynamics. They don't agree with each other strictly so they can't both be "absolutely" correct, both they both match prediction and observation well enough that they can be applied in daily life quite successfully for their own purposes. You just have to go with the best system you have because the picture is alway incomplete. The Uncertainty Principle is God's right to enforce. You make great points and we are in pretty much full agreement Thrall, you even seem really turned off to religion same as me, I am just not communicating well I don't think.

I always thought Jesus said "lets not take an eye for an eye"!..meaning peace is peace and violence is violence. You cannot achieve peace by using violence.

Einstein's relative theory and quantum theory do share two common points which are; all phenomenon are relative to the point of observation. Particles and waves behave the same when observed. Observation is the limiting factor in quantifying any behavior or miracle or scientific experiment.

There is also Plancks Constant which predicts at what point observable particles become energy fields. It is the point where particles connect with space to become unified as the whole of existence.

Great thread !

 

[DR.D]

... and on and on...

but I guess these are taken out of context...

Yeah, as a matter of fact they are out of context and thus nullified AD, they are all OT quotes. If that was current Christianity, I would not be able to swallow it either so you won't get that argument from me. The fact that you already knew you prostitutionalized the context means it becomes progressively more difficult to take you seriously. You only want to fence with me but lack a sincere desire for truth. I guess you already have it all figured out though, at the tender age of 20 something I suppose, lol. Here's the antithesis my man: "I'm only trying to help you."

 

[DR.D]

I always thought Jesus said "lets not take an eye for an eye"!..meaning peace is peace and violence is violence. You cannot achieve peace by using violence.

Einstein's relative theory and quantum theory do share two common points which are; all phenomenon are relative to the point of observation. Particles and waves behave the same when observed. Observation is the limiting factor in quantifying any behavior or miracle or scientific experiment.

There is also Plancks Constant which predicts at what point observable particles become energy fields. It is the point where particles connect with space to become unified as the whole of existence.

Great thread !

Yes, Jesus established a new system. After Christ, we no long have to keep a running balance (strict eye for eye) because He offers to be our defender and vindicator. Like I already stated though, that's in relation to offense and retaliation, it's no excuse not to defend yourself on a practical level. Even Jesus advised his disciples to sell an article of clothing if necessary to purchase a sword after He was to me executed. He knew they would be under attack.

You are quite right. There is a duality between mass and energy that is shared among the two great theories, and indeed nothing is real until it is observed! I find the two slit experiment particularly mind blowing and the connection and spin alteration you see in one photon moving away from a sister photon generated in the same event. Although the 2 photons are moving apart at twice the speed of light, they still know what the status of the other is! That does not jibe with Einstein's equation. I have been working on a GUT for the last, ohhhh... 15 years! I'm all ears if you have any insights so I can finish my equation and finally solve the ultimate mystery of the universe!
:cheers:

 

[anabolicrhino]

You are quite right. There is a duality between mass and energy that is shared among the two great theories, and indeed nothing is real until it is observed! I find the two slit experiment particularly mind blowing and the connection and spin alteration you see in one photon moving away from a sister photon generated in the same event. Although the 2 photons are moving apart at twice the speed of light, they still know what the status of the other is! That does not jibe with Einstein's equation. I have been working on a GUT for the last, ohhhh... 15 years! I'm all ears if you have any insights so I can finish my equation and finally solve the ultimate mystery of the universe!
:cheers:

I could, but then what would you have to do for the rest of eternity! Enjoy the journey!

 

[EESCHMan]

Yeah, as a matter of fact they are out of context and thus nullified AD, they are all OT quotes. If that was current Christianity, I would not be able to swallow it either so you won't get that argument from me. The fact that you already knew you prostitutionalized the context means it becomes progressively more difficult to take you seriously. You only want to fence with me but lack a sincere desire for truth. I guess you already have it all figured out though, at the tender age of 20 something I suppose, lol. Here's the antithesis my man: "I'm only trying to help you."

The point being is that they ARE in the Bible...you can't just say, "Oh, that's The Old Testament...we don't follow that one"

I'm sure I can find some good NT Quotes...

"I guess you already have it all figured out though, at the tender age of 20 something I suppose, lol"

I'm actually almost 40...
I know I don't have it all figured out, but apparently most religious people think they do.


Ok, here is ONE question:

What evidence/proof/whatever would convince you that there wasn't a god?

 

[DR.D]

... Ok, here is ONE question:

What evidence/proof/whatever would convince you that there wasn't a god?

Well I don't know, what have you got? I'm always open to new outlooks because I certainly don't have it all figured out yet.

 

[poison]

Jun. 7, 2007 21:28
Poll shows frustration of young Muslims in the US
By ASSOCIATED PRESS
Print Subscribe
E-mail Toolbar

A show of sympathy for suicide bombers among some young, American Muslims has raised new concerns about homegrown extremism in the US, but also is highlighting calls to engage the country's growing Muslim population.

A Pew Research Center poll released late last month found that, while US Muslims are largely the picture of assimilation, about a quarter of Muslims ages 18 to 29 said the use of suicide bombing against civilian targets to defend Islam could be justified, at least on rare occasions.

The finding was described by some as a trouble spot, and even a hair-raising statistic, but many Muslim scholars had another reaction to the Pew report: What did you expect?

"Given what's happened in Iraq and Palestine, I would be shocked if there wasn't discontent," said Omid Safi, professor of Islamic studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

I have a serious problem with this. It illustrates precisely what I've said, that many Muslims support or are proud of Islamic terror.

Discontent is fine, even admirable. BUt to make the jump from 'X disturbs me', to 'X disturbs me, so I'm going to go bomb and murder Y, Z, and A too, for good measure, and if B is hurt in the process, so be it'....????

There is a lot of discontent in the world. Many peoples are oppressed; many peoples are oppressed far more than Muslims have ever been oppressed (Sudan, ARmenia, Cambodia, Burma, etc). Yet Muslims are the only people who turn, and turn quickly, to suicide bombing of innocent civilians to voice their discontent.

 

[DR.D]

I have a serious problem with this. It illustrates precisely what I've said, that many Muslims support or are proud of Islamic terror.

Discontent is fine, even admirable. BUt to make the jump from 'X disturbs me', to 'X disturbs me, so I'm going to go bomb and murder Y, Z, and A too, for good measure, and if B is hurt in the process, so be it'....????

There is a lot of discontent in the world. Many peoples are oppressed; many peoples are oppressed far more than Muslims have ever been oppressed (Sudan, ARmenia, Cambodia, Burma, etc). Yet Muslims are the only people who turn, and turn quickly, to suicide bombing of innocent civilians to voice their discontent.

I already pointed out that the qu'ran endorses it. It is a one way ticket to heaven in an critical religion that leaves you guessing otherwise if you might qualify or not.

The Bible guaranteed heaven too, only the criteria is a bit different: You must admit your sin status audibly (confess) and accept that Christ's shed blood is the only thing that can fix it with God (believe & receive).

 

[spitboy2000]

It's good cop bad cop -- the Jihadists bomb infidels and the slicker Islamists say, "See, you need to change your behavior, their anger is justified, etc" -- it's abominable, but it is part of the Jihad against the West.

 

[Naseem]

I already pointed out that the qu'ran endorses it. It is a one way ticket to heaven in an critical religion that leaves you guessing otherwise if you might qualify or not.

The Bible guaranteed heaven too, only the criteria is a bit different: You must admit your sin status audibly (confess) and accept that Christ's shed blood is the only thing that can fix it with God (believe & receive).

D r u a MASON? " juss crossed my mind"
when say kroan say that it means all muslims who accpet kroran as word r terrorist or ll be or wannabe!
really the way u talk as sciantist and u know b4 talkin about any thing u should get the prove !
so i am sayin only 2 options u have strategy and u use lie as tool
or u just ignorent and u dont wanna search or learn bout that be for u state such a things !

 

[Naseem]

Question:

What is the ruling regarding acts of Jihaad by means of suicide, such as attaching explosives to a car and storming the enemy, whereby he knows without a doubt that he shall die as a result of this action?

Response

Indeed, my opinion is that he is regarded as one who has killed himself (committed suicide), and as a result he shall be punished in Hell, for that which is authenticated on the authority of the Prophet (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam).

[((Indeed, whoever (intentionally) kills himself, then certainly he will be punished in the Fire of Hell, wherein he shall dwell forever)), [Bukhaaree (5778) and Muslim (109 and 110)]].

However, one who is ignorant and does not know, and assumes his action was good and pleasing to Allaah (Subhaanahu wa Ta'aala), then we hope Allaah (Subhaanahu wa Ta'aala) forgives him for that which he did out of (ignorant) ijtihaad, even though I do not find any excuse for him in the present day. This is because this type of suicide is well known and widespread amongst the people, so it is upon the person to ask the people of knowledge (scholars) regarding it, until the right guidance for him is differentiated from the error.

And from that which is surprising, is that these people kill themselves despite Allaah having forbidden this, as He (Subhaanahu wa Ta'aala) says:

{And do not kill yourselves. Surely, Allaah is Most Merciful to you}, [Soorah an-Nisaa., Aayah 29].

And many amongst them do not desire anything except revenge of the enemy, by whatever means, be it halaal or haraam. So they only want to satisfy their thirst for revenge.

We ask Allaah to bless us with foresight in His Deen and action(s) which please Him, indeed He is all Powerful over all things.

Shaykh Ibn 'Uthaymeen*
Kayfa Nu'aalij Waaqi'unaa al-Aleem - Page 119

*One of the greatest scholars of this century, from Saudi Arabia

"...So what we hold is that those people who perform these suicide (bombings) have wrongfully committed suicide, and that this necessitates entry into the Hellfire, and Allah's refuge is sought; and that this person is not a shahid (martyr)..."

- Shaykh Muhammad Bin Saalih al-'Uthaymeen, Saudi Arabia