Turn on thread page Beta

Islamists celebrate murder of Ahmadi Muslim Brit who wished Christians Happy Easter watch

    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    Moslems often post here claiming that everyone is born a Moslem. Surely, if a Sikh fulfils the basic beliefs and practices (a low hurdle, really) of being a Moslem he is a Moslem?

    Mohammed apparently had words to say on the matter, and I'm surprised to hear so many people contradicting what he said. Presumably you understand you will be interrogated very fully on the matter in the afterlife.
    Pretty sure Sikhs call themselves Sikhs, and not because Muslims call them non Muslim.

    Sikhism is pretty ambiguous in what they are (pantheism/monotheism) and if a Sikh embraces monotheism and calls themselves a Muslim they could probably still partake in a lot of sikh practices and still be Muslim.

    Whats with "moslem", it's not particularly offensive and isn't pronounced like that in English maybe "mooslim" if you wanted to use that argument? Is it just being stupid for the sake of being stupid?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Oilfreak1)
    Whats with "moslem", it's not particularly offensive and isn't pronounced like that in English maybe "mooslim" if you wanted to use that argument? Is it just being stupid for the sake of being stupid?
    This has been asked so many times that I would have expected all TSR members would know that my spelling is perfectly valid in English and an older one than the one you use. It is pronounced the same with either spelling.

    http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dic...english/moslem
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    This has been asked so many times that I would have expected all TSR members would know that my spelling is perfectly valid in English and an older one than the one you use. It is pronounced the same with either spelling.

    http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dic...english/moslem
    TIL
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Oilfreak1)
    Sikhism is pretty ambiguous in what they are (pantheism/monotheism) and if a Sikh embraces monotheism and calls themselves a Muslim they could probably still partake in a lot of sikh practices and still be Muslim.

    Where do you get this nonsense from, especially the last line. Sikhs do not believe that Muhammed pbuh was the last prophet and the Quaraan the last and final revelation.

    Also this thread is full of the usual jibberish in who is considered a Muslim. Anyone who is a practicing Muslim cannot commit shirk which is seen as the greatest and most unforgivable sin. That's the main criteria when distinguishing halaal acts to ones that are shirk.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    People on here claiming they know Ahmadiyyat and what it teaches make me laugh.

    Before they were supporting ISIS, saying ISIS are Muslims. Yet somehow, the most peaceful Muslims: Ahamdis, aren't?
    Some people are a joke.
    Its like they have forgotten that Islam was about peace.

    Instead of flaunting your ignorance and arguing about who you think is a Muslim and who is not, concentrate on your own life and be a good person (and if you are Muslim then be a good Muslim).
    You are just making your fellow Sunni brothers and sisters look bad by trying to defame Ahmadis when all Sunnis aren't even bad. Please research before spreading lies.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    You know a religion is flawed when members of said religion kill eachother and decide who is faithful and who is not.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Oilfreak1)
    you're a shia, the shia sect was a political division, ahmadis are a theological one.
    That, to me, sounds like a very "half-truth" type of analysis. Unless you're rejecting all the political aspects in Islamic theology, then that isn't true at all. I'm sure choosing the right caliph is one of the most part of Islamic theology. Besides, their schools of jurisprudence have significant differences from sunni ones.
    (Original post by Oilfreak1)
    While most sane shia accept the Qu'rans completeness, the finality of the prophet and have the same shahada as Sunnis - Ahmadis don't.
    "completeness" is a vague term. I would argue no one except Quranists "accept" the Quran's "completeness"...

    (Original post by Oilfreak1)
    Alot of people say we're simply stirring hate towards ahmadis but by their own admission (a poster earlier provided an ahmadi source which highlights these beliefs) they believe MGA to be at best the second coming of Isa (as) at worst a reincarnation of Mohammed (SAWS).
    Yet, that is to be defined. You have ignored all their explanations. By your definition of "prophethood", then even Ahmadis admit MGA wasn't a prophet, but again they have a different interpretation of the word "seal" and "prophethood".


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophethood_(Ahmadiyya)

    If their biggest crime was to have an alternative non-literal interpretation (different from orthodox ones), then again I say you read the Quran.

    (Original post by Oilfreak1)
    Guru Nanak also incorporated tonnes of islamic teachings in his religion, should we then also consider Sikhs to be Muslim?
    Islam incorporated tonnes of early Christian/Jewish and even Greek teachings... let's all consider Zeus as the only true god?

    Anyway, Ahmadis still believe in monotheism, the teachings of prophet and they consider the quran to be the final divine scripture that was revealed, and the teachings to be timeless (Ahmadis believe MGA's teaching do not abrogate Muhammed's, so he cannot be another complete "prophet").
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by digistar_100)
    Where do you get this nonsense from, especially the last line. Sikhs do not believe that Muhammed pbuh was the last prophet and the Quaraan the last and final revelation.

    Also this thread is full of the usual jibberish in who is considered a Muslim. Anyone who is a practicing Muslim cannot commit shirk which is seen as the greatest and most unforgivable sin. That's the main criteria when distinguishing halaal acts to ones that are shirk.
    If a Sikh wanted to call themselves a Muslim they would reject Pantheism (shirk) as well as accept the finality of the Qu'ran and the prophet (Saws) (they already consider him a prophet).

    They would still be a revert.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Oilfreak1)
    If a Sikh wanted to call themselves a Muslim they would reject Pantheism (shirk) as well as accept the finality of the Qu'ran and the prophet (Saws) (they already consider him a prophet).

    They would still be a revert.
    You're suggesting from what I can see that a person can be/call himself Sikh and Muslim at the same.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chemting)
    That, to me, sounds like a very "half-truth" type of analysis. Unless you're rejecting all the political aspects in Islamic theology, then that isn't true at all. I'm sure choosing the right caliph is one of the most part of Islamic theology. Besides, their schools of jurisprudence have significant differences from sunni ones.
    Not agreeing on who should succeed the prophet doesn't make you a non-muslim, centuries later some sects of shia have turned to shirk and would be considered non-muslim, this does not apply to the vast majority of shia.

    "completeness" is a vague term. I would argue no one except Quranists "accept" the Quran's "completeness"...
    That would be everyone who claims to be muslims

    Yet, that is to be defined. You have ignored all their explanations. By your definition of "prophethood", then even Ahmadis admit MGA wasn't a prophet, but again they have a different interpretation of the word "seal" and "prophethood".

    They're pretty clear on their definition of prophet here, this goes directly against the Qu'ran.


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophethood_(Ahmadiyya)

    If their biggest crime was to have an alternative non-literal interpretation (different from orthodox ones), then again I say you read the Quran.



    Islam incorporated tonnes of early Christian/Jewish and even Greek teachings... let's all consider Zeus as the only true god?

    You're agreeing with me here, just because a faith uses elements of another faith, does not mean they are the same belief. Just because Guru Nanak borrowed heavily from Islam doesn't make Sikhs and Muslims equivalent. The whole world under one faith with differing opinions would be great though, I'A Islam will accomplish this.

    Anyway, Ahmadis still believe in monotheism, the teachings of prophet and they consider the quran to be the final divine scripture that was revealed, and the teachings to be timeless (Ahmadis believe MGA's teaching do not abrogate Muhammed's, so he cannot be another complete "prophet".

    They don't have different interpretations of many things (Jesus' (as) crucifixion and death), they flat out disagree with the Qu'ran, this is ignoring the "completeness" of a prophet.
    characters
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by digistar_100)
    You're suggesting from what I can see that a person can be/call himself Sikh and Muslim at the same.
    No i'm saying that if a Sikhs are very similar to Muslims but cannot be called Muslim, just as quadinites cant be called Muslim.

    If a Sikh rejects Pantheism, Accepts the Qu'ran and the final Messenger of Allah, he is a muslim.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Oilfreak1)
    No i'm saying that if a Sikhs are very similar to Muslims but cannot be called Muslim, just as quadinites cant be called Muslim.

    If a Sikh rejects Pantheism, Accepts the Qu'ran and the final Messenger of Allah, he is a muslim.
    What you have not done, which I'd be interested to hear, is why you disagree with what Mohammed is reported to have said on the matter in the hadith, and how you intend to deal with his assessment of you in the afterlife?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    What you have not done, which I'd be interested to hear, is why you disagree with what Mohammed is reported to have said on the matter in the hadith, and how you intend to deal with his assessment of you in the afterlife?
    He wont be the one assessing me, he's not God.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Oilfreak1)
    He wont be the one assessing me, he's not God.
    So what he said is both wrong and unimportant?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    So what he said is both wrong and unimportant?
    What he says is both correct and important but he won't be judging me (he'd be interceding for me).

    Calling a sect non-muslim was not mentioned by the prophet, calling out an individual as a non-muslim when they outwardly claim to be one is however.

    Go back in the thread, I retracted a blanket statement that All ahmadis are non-muslim, but I would not consider the Ahmadis that reject certain aspects of ahmadiyya to be ahmadis.

    Lets just assume I said bilal the ahmadi is non-muslim and argued this for my entire life, 1 of 2 things will happen.

    1 - I was right.
    2 - I was wrong and will myself be the non-muslim.

    What will I do at that point? The creator himself will have condemned me, there's no authority above the creator all i'd be able to do is hope for forgiveness.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Epicurean)
    Islam or Islamism? I assume the latter is what we are talking about.

    The left is far from a homogeneous group, and there are many on the left who do criticise Islamism and who do not pander to extremists. Christopher Hitchens is an example of a person on the left who was critical of the Saddam regime and Islamism. Also, not all left-wing people support large governments, left-wing anarchists would be a classic example.
    People like Hicth are few and far between, I don't have the quote on hand, but I even remember him saying as much. Free speech is advocated by most and defended by few.

    Those that rally behind the "Je suis Charlie" banner are by enlarge just going through the motions, they wouldn't actively appose Islam or actively defend free speech by drawing Mohammed themselves and joining in solidarity with those that are in danger.

    We just know that the ranks of actual liberals, that share similar beliefs as Harris or Hicth or Douglas Murray or even Mark Steyn, are not legion. They are the fringe minority of the left wing political group.

    The rest can and will take the path of least resistance, I hope I don't sound overly pretentious when I say this, but the majority of our group are sheep. Their reasoning skills are lesser than the theists, often having far worse reasons for their atheist position than the theists (mainly Christianity), they are so often critical of. They are just as indoctrinated as many theists.

    Their atheist position is a political ploy, a metaphorical stick with which they can beat on their political opponents. They want anti-hate speech laws to grow, they will want anti-islamophobia (blasphemy) laws to come into effect. They are already on the side of Islam and Islamism.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HanSoloLuck)
    People like Hicth are few and far between, I don't have the quote on hand, but I even remember him saying as much. Free speech is advocated by most and defended by few.

    Those that rally behind the "Je suis Charlie" banner are by enlarge just going through the motions, they wouldn't actively appose Islam or actively defend free speech by drawing Mohammed themselves and joining in solidarity with those that are in danger.

    We just know that the ranks of actual liberals, that share similar beliefs as Harris or Hicth or Douglas Murray or even Mark Steyn, are not legion. They are the fringe minority of the left wing political group.

    The rest can and will take the path of least resistance, I hope I don't sound overly pretentious when I say this, but the majority of our group are sheep. Their reasoning skills are lesser than the theists, often having far worse reasons for their atheist position than the theists (mainly Christianity), they are so often critical of. They are just as indoctrinated as many theists.

    Their atheist position is a political ploy, a metaphorical stick with which they can beat on their political opponents. They want anti-hate speech laws to grow, they will want anti-islamophobia (blasphemy) laws to come into effect. They are already on the side of Islam and Islamism.
    Of course, there is only one True Leftist...
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Oilfreak1)
    Not agreeing on who should succeed the prophet doesn't make you a non-muslim, centuries later some sects of shia have turned to shirk and would be considered non-muslim, this does not apply to the vast majority of shia.

    But the difference isn't entirely "political", shias still have theological differences.


    (Original post by Oilfreak1)
    That would be everyone who claims to be muslims

    Quranists aren't "everyone who claims to be Muslims".

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quranism



    (Original post by Oilfreak1)
    They're pretty clear on their definition of prophet here, this goes directly against the Qu'ran.

    They're not though, messiah and reviver isn't "prophet".




    (Original post by Oilfreak1)
    You're agreeing with me here,

    I know haha :p:$

    (Original post by Oilfreak1)
    just because a faith uses elements of another faith, does not mean they are the same belief. Just because Guru Nanak borrowed heavily from Islam doesn't make Sikhs and Muslims equivalent. The whole world under one faith with differing opinions would be great though, I'A Islam will accomplish this.

    Actually, Ahmadiyya believes that all faiths are "divine" but they all "converge" to one faith - Islam... just a note.

    (Original post by Oilfreak1)
    They don't have different interpretations of many things (Jesus' (as) crucifixion and death), they flat out disagree with the Qu'ran, this is ignoring the "completeness" of a prophet.

    Ahmadis don't believe Jesus died at the cross... instead he was pulled down (or something) and then died in Kashmir whilst looking for Israeli artifacts... I admit its crazy, but not quite "unquranic"...

    Tbh, I don't know why I'm defending Ahmadiyyas theologically...
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Oilfreak1)

    Guru Nanak also incorporated tonnes of islamic teachings in his religion, should we then also consider Sikhs to be Muslim?
    i have had this explained to me by a sikh and it seems most muslims, including yourself are ignorant to what sikhism says about islam - their guru stated that muslims should act spiritually, morally and humanly as per the techings in quran and not obsess over dictats and uncessarry tribalism that causes war and imperialism ( sikhism came about during islamic invasion of north india)
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Genghis Khan)
    they are muslim though...
    Just because you say you are something, does not mean you actually are:
    KKK claim they are Christians - reality is they are not
    Same thing here.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: April 3, 2016
The home of Results and Clearing

1,029

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
How are you feeling about GCSE results day?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.