Why do people hate islam?

[strayanbit]

You're right I wouldn't call the Quakers violent (unless you're talking about the violence those oats do to my digestive system)!  I was reading their wikipedia page, and they apparently welcome atheists and humanists would you believe?  Apparently only 86% of quakers believe in god... pretty good for a church!

[Spendulus]

You're right I wouldn't call the Quakers violent (unless you're talking about the violence those oats do to my digestive system)!  I was reading their wikipedia page, and they apparently welcome atheists and humanists would you believe?  Apparently only 86% of quakers believe in god... pretty good for a church!

I can't recall having had the pleasure of knowing any personally.  But there are many other groups that share similar beliefs.  Including not really caring if you "believe in god" and such.

[PrikiNo.1]

I'm not sure you're right there, no-one can even prove Jesus ever existed, there is no physical evidence or records or documents mentioning him before 100CE.
Is that because he got magically hoovered up to valhalla and a team of men in black rappeled down out of nowhere and erased everyones memories?

Also the idea that the bible is older than previously thought is entirely possible.  The bible as we know it is a collection of different books and texts, which have had the shit edited out of them.  Some of the myths are copied from earlier mystical traditions.  As to the idea that any parts of the bible are older than about 10,000 years are silly.  It was only about 10,000 years ago that humans domesticated wheat and were able to farm more food than they could eat.  I doubt anyone would have time to learn to read and write, then write stories about their imaginary friend. lol.

Dude, do you having a problem with reading or what?

The history about Christ is dating back for 2 millennia! There are evidence and facts about the Apostles who wrote the New Testament and you are telling me that Jesus was mentioned before 100 BC? Please, re-educate yourself before you start to posting here!

[strayanbit]

You're the one who needs to learn to read... I  mentioned 100 CE - which is 100 AD in the old money.

[BADecker]

Islam wants to take over the world FACT and i don.t want my daughter brought up in Islamic law

So what happened to the Jews when Christians come along for the first time i bet they thought no way there will be more Christians than the JEWS

same going on here i hate ISLAM AND ALL RELIGIONS ITS A JOKE
plus when people  say i hate muslims you seem to think they are racist but its a religion that many people want to be law all over the world
I would rather be dead than live like a muslim
NOW FOR SOMEONE WITH THE SAME THOUGHTS AS ME

LISTEN TO THIS WOMEN THIS IS WHY I HATE ISLAM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXGE2eBUdlQ

Close to 100% of the first Christians were Jews. And many Jews today are Christians. Usually when modern Jews are Christians, they are better Christians than any of the other Christians.

SO ALMOST 100% CAN TURN MUSLIM THEN IF THEY KEEP SPREADING LOOK AT 20 YEARS AGO HOW MANY MUSLIMS THEN THEY ARE GROWING LIKE A CANCER
So BADECKER you better start preaching to some muslims and have a preaching fight you might convert some into MUPPETS 

The only reason why Muslims are spreading to Christian lands is, God is directing circumstances to get them to do so. Why is God getting them to come here? So that we can convert them to Christianity, since we wouldn't go over there and do it.

Note that not all Muslims will convert. The ones that don't will be in the same boat as you... on the way to Hell.

[BADecker]

...

Science is the key not religion

Science is a religion, not the key.   

NOPE ITS NOT A RELIGION ITS PROOF AND FACT RELIGION IS MAKE BELIEVE 

Science theory is part of science. Theory is fiction until it is proven to be fact. In addition, there are many scientists and others who believe much of science fiction theory to be fact. Science is religion.

[BCEmporium]

You are reading this using;

The theory of computing,
The digital theory,
The RF theory,
The electronics theory,
The electrical theory,
The theory of general relativity,
The theory of special relativity (satellites)

Amongst many others... But hey they are "just theories ". Happens that if a single one in the stack is wrong you will not read this...

[BADecker]

You are reading this using;

The theory of computing,
The digital theory,
The RF theory,
The electronics theory,
The electrical theory,
The theory of general relativity,
The theory of special relativity (satellites)

Amongst many others... But hey they are "just theories ". Happens that if a single one in the stack is wrong you will not read this...

If there are any theories that are in line with the science used to make these things work, then they are not theories any longer. They are facts.

If engineers happened to develop some of these things because they looked at the theories, if the theories were not proven to be fact, then the engineers applied other than the theories to make the fact of the working things.

Theory and engineering are two completely different things. Both may be called science by many. But pure science that has theories within its realms, also has science fiction by way of those theories.

[BCEmporium]

No sir, they are still theories.
The only thing above theory is a law.

The correct term is "that's just an hypothesis ".

[BADecker]

No sir, they are still theories.
The only thing above theory is a law.

The correct term is "that's just an hypothesis ".

The point is, the development of engineered equipment does not change a theory into a fact. It might, at times, help to do so, but not necessarily.

[Spendulus]

You are reading this using;

The theory of computing,
The digital theory,
The RF theory,
The electronics theory,
The electrical theory,
The theory of general relativity,
The theory of special relativity (satellites)

Amongst many others... But hey they are "just theories ". Happens that if a single one in the stack is wrong you will not read this...

I do like these theories.

[Biomech]

You're the one who needs to learn to read... I  mentioned 100 CE - which is 100 AD in the old money.

That made me laugh. For those unaware of modern historical conventions:

Old Money (I love that!)
 B.C. Before Christ. Misnomer even biblically... but relates to the alleged birth of christ.
 A.D. Anno Domini. Latin for "In the year of our Lord".

Modern Convention

CE Common Era. Corresponds with A.D.
BCE Before common Era. Corresponds with B.C.

[Biomech]

...

Science is the key not religion

Science is a religion, not the key.   

NOPE ITS NOT A RELIGION ITS PROOF AND FACT RELIGION IS MAKE BELIEVE 

Science theory is part of science. Theory is fiction until it is proven to be fact. In addition, there are many scientists and others who believe much of science fiction theory to be fact. Science is religion.

This is one of those things that religious people do either out of willful or actual ignorance. I'll admit it, it straight up pisses me off. If you do NOT understand a term, LEARN.

Theory does NOT mean in science what it means in common usage. Science operates basically under two axioms. One, that all things CAN BE known. (not ARE known). Two, that one needs a framework to test postulates to best describe known facts.

Until such time as a thing has been proven far in excess of what is necessary to convict for murder, it is NOT theory. It's a postulate. Even if it APPEARS to be correct, such as the Causal Order Postulate, which has remained a postulate for decades because it cannot be properly reconciled with existing theory.

A THEORY, by contrast, is that which best describes the known facts, has been reviewed, tested, reviewed again, and tested again ad nauseam until so little of it remains speculative that it is deemed to be the best description of the facts at hand AND has been rigorously tested. In the scientific method, we do not test to PROVE a postulate, we test to DISPROVE. Every test is designed to make the postulate fail. When all tests that can be conceived have failed to disprove a postulate, it becomes part of the general theory of that particular discipline. If additional tests can be thought up, and they are frequently, they are undertaken. Once it's accepted as theory, additional questions do not make it leave the theory UNLESS they disprove all or part of the existing theory, again, with extreme rigor.

By contrast, Religion accepts as truth so called "holy writ" and if they test at all, test with extreme bias towards what is already believed, do not do so under peer review, and frequently hide or distort the known facts in order to perpetuate the dogma.

[BADecker]

...

Science is the key not religion

Science is a religion, not the key.   

NOPE ITS NOT A RELIGION ITS PROOF AND FACT RELIGION IS MAKE BELIEVE 

Science theory is part of science. Theory is fiction until it is proven to be fact. In addition, there are many scientists and others who believe much of science fiction theory to be fact. Science is religion.

This is one of those things that religious people do either out of willful or actual ignorance. I'll admit it, it straight up pisses me off. If you do NOT understand a term, LEARN.

Theory does NOT mean in science what it means in common usage. Science operates basically under two axioms. One, that all things CAN BE known. (not ARE known). Two, that one needs a framework to test postulates to best describe known facts.

Until such time as a thing has been proven far in excess of what is necessary to convict for murder, it is NOT theory. It's a postulate. Even if it APPEARS to be correct, such as the Causal Order Postulate, which has remained a postulate for decades because it cannot be properly reconciled with existing theory.

A THEORY, by contrast, is that which best describes the known facts, has been reviewed, tested, reviewed again, and tested again ad nauseam until so little of it remains speculative that it is deemed to be the best description of the facts at hand AND has been rigorously tested. In the scientific method, we do not test to PROVE a postulate, we test to DISPROVE. Every test is designed to make the postulate fail. When all tests that can be conceived have failed to disprove a postulate, it becomes part of the general theory of that particular discipline. If additional tests can be thought up, and they are frequently, they are undertaken. Once it's accepted as theory, additional questions do not make it leave the theory UNLESS they disprove all or part of the existing theory, again, with extreme rigor.

By contrast, Religion accepts as truth so called "holy writ" and if they test at all, test with extreme bias towards what is already believed, do not do so under peer review, and frequently hide or distort the known facts in order to perpetuate the dogma.

This is one of those things makes me pity ignorant science types. They tell us science is religion by how they handle it. Then we tell them the same thing in a straight-forward manner. Then they go about proving it to be religion by the ways that they say it is not religion.

At the same time, they tell us that the Bible is not being tested for truth scientifically. Yet, when they are shown the testing that not only proves that the Bible is truth, but also that it is religion by showing us our inability to perceive everything, they want to throw religion under the bus, even though they express theory in science, which shows any understanding person that science is religion.

Amazing! All that scientific study, and yet so much ignorance.

[Johny2016]

Soon all we say Allaho Akbar

[Spendulus]

Soon all we say Allaho Akbar

The need to generate and use sock puppets is so telling.

[mohsin qureshi]

The preception of Islam now is worst, because of some groups, the rebal groups who affliate theirselves with Islam, and killed the inncocent people. This is a big issue thats why people do not likes Islam. However Islam strongly conndems these types of attacks, even Islam said that assasination of one person is equals to killing of mankind.

The concept of JIHAD (Fight) in Islam is that: -

Through the actions of some elements, the western world visualizes a wrong concept of Jihad (Holy War). The word Jihad conjures up the vision of a marching band of religious fanatics with savage beards and fiery eyes, brandishing swords and attacking the infidels.

Jihad in Islamic terminology means to make an effort, to endeavour and to strive in a noble way. Over the centuries this meaning of Jihad has been obliterated or at least diluted. The critical juncture in the Islamic world requires reviving and recapturing the true and pristine meaning of Jihad.

Jihad can be divided into two broad categories. First is Jihad-e-akbar. This is Jihad against one's own person to curb sinful inclinations, i.e., purification of self. This is the most difficult Jihad and hence in terms of rewards and blessings is the highest category of Jihad.

The second is Jihad-e-asghar. This is Jihad of the sword. This is communal Jihad and presupposes certain specific conditions. The Quran speaks of fighting only against those who first attack Muslims and this is the very condition laid down in other verses of the Holy Quran as well. The so-called verse of the sword in the Islamic scripture is often taken out of context as if it inculcates an indiscriminate massacre of all unbelievers. The Quranic words such as kill whatever you find them apply only in cases where the enemy has first attacked Muslims and apply to those unbelievers and enemies who break their oaths and firm agreements. They do not apply to unprovoked wars and battles. To interpret these verses in any other manner would be a travesty of the lofty ideals of Islam. There is not a single instance in the life of the Holy Prophet where he offered the alternative of the sword or Islam to anyone.

The Western media and even some scholars sometimes ignore the distinction between these two aspects of Jihad. It must be remembered that the Holy Quran does not make Jihad, the holy war, in context of an article of faith. The sayings and traditions of the Holy Prophet render it into a formula for active struggle that invariably and incorrectly tended towards a militant expression. Modern day terrorism is contrary to the purview of the real spirit of the Islamic Jihad.

The presentation of Islam as a crude and barbaric religion which gives itself the right to cause unwarranted human and material suffering and destruction under the guise of Divine authority, is not the kind of Islam we find in the Holy Quran and in the precepts of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him!)

[Spendulus]

The preception of Islam now is worst, because of some groups, the rebal groups who affliate theirselves with Islam, and killed the inncocent people. This is a big issue thats why people do not likes Islam. However Islam strongly conndems these types of attacks, even Islam said that assasination of one person is equals to killing of mankind.

The concept of JIHAD (Fight) in Islam is that: -

Through the actions of some elements, the western world visualizes a wrong concept of Jihad (Holy War). The word Jihad conjures up the vision of a marching band of religious fanatics with savage beards and fiery eyes, brandishing swords and attacking the infidels.

Jihad in Islamic terminology means to make an effort, to endeavour and to strive in a noble way. Over the centuries this meaning of Jihad has been obliterated or at least diluted. The critical juncture in the Islamic world requires reviving and recapturing the true and pristine meaning of Jihad.

Jihad can be divided into two broad categories. First is Jihad-e-akbar. This is Jihad against one's own person to curb sinful inclinations, i.e., purification of self. This is the most difficult Jihad and hence in terms of rewards and blessings is the highest category of Jihad.

The second is Jihad-e-asghar. This is Jihad of the sword. This is communal Jihad and presupposes certain specific conditions. The Quran speaks of fighting only against those who first attack Muslims and this is the very condition laid down in other verses of the Holy Quran as well. The so-called verse of the sword in the Islamic scripture is often taken out of context as if it inculcates an indiscriminate massacre of all unbelievers. The Quranic words such as kill whatever you find them apply only in cases where the enemy has first attacked Muslims and apply to those unbelievers and enemies who break their oaths and firm agreements. They do not apply to unprovoked wars and battles. To interpret these verses in any other manner would be a travesty of the lofty ideals of Islam. There is not a single instance in the life of the Holy Prophet where he offered the alternative of the sword or Islam to anyone.

The Western media and even some scholars sometimes ignore the distinction between these two aspects of Jihad. It must be remembered that the Holy Quran does not make Jihad, the holy war, in context of an article of faith. The sayings and traditions of the Holy Prophet render it into a formula for active struggle that invariably and incorrectly tended towards a militant expression. Modern day terrorism is contrary to the purview of the real spirit of the Islamic Jihad.

The presentation of Islam as a crude and barbaric religion which gives itself the right to cause unwarranted human and material suffering and destruction under the guise of Divine authority, is not the kind of Islam we find in the Holy Quran and in the precepts of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him!)

Now, do you actually believe all that bullshit?  I ask because there is a strong scent of Takiyya in the air.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYJiFOZkev0

[popcorn1]

The preception of Islam now is worst, because of some groups, the rebal groups who affliate theirselves with Islam, and killed the inncocent people. This is a big issue thats why people do not likes Islam. However Islam strongly conndems these types of attacks, even Islam said that assasination of one person is equals to killing of mankind.

The concept of JIHAD (Fight) in Islam is that: -

Through the actions of some elements, the western world visualizes a wrong concept of Jihad (Holy War). The word Jihad conjures up the vision of a marching band of religious fanatics with savage beards and fiery eyes, brandishing swords and attacking the infidels.

Jihad in Islamic terminology means to make an effort, to endeavour and to strive in a noble way. Over the centuries this meaning of Jihad has been obliterated or at least diluted. The critical juncture in the Islamic world requires reviving and recapturing the true and pristine meaning of Jihad.

Jihad can be divided into two broad categories. First is Jihad-e-akbar. This is Jihad against one's own person to curb sinful inclinations, i.e., purification of self. This is the most difficult Jihad and hence in terms of rewards and blessings is the highest category of Jihad.

The second is Jihad-e-asghar. This is Jihad of the sword. This is communal Jihad and presupposes certain specific conditions. The Quran speaks of fighting only against those who first attack Muslims and this is the very condition laid down in other verses of the Holy Quran as well. The so-called verse of the sword in the Islamic scripture is often taken out of context as if it inculcates an indiscriminate massacre of all unbelievers. The Quranic words such as kill whatever you find them apply only in cases where the enemy has first attacked Muslims and apply to those unbelievers and enemies who break their oaths and firm agreements. They do not apply to unprovoked wars and battles. To interpret these verses in any other manner would be a travesty of the lofty ideals of Islam. There is not a single instance in the life of the Holy Prophet where he offered the alternative of the sword or Islam to anyone.

The Western media and even some scholars sometimes ignore the distinction between these two aspects of Jihad. It must be remembered that the Holy Quran does not make Jihad, the holy war, in context of an article of faith. The sayings and traditions of the Holy Prophet render it into a formula for active struggle that invariably and incorrectly tended towards a militant expression. Modern day terrorism is contrary to the purview of the real spirit of the Islamic Jihad.

The presentation of Islam as a crude and barbaric religion which gives itself the right to cause unwarranted human and material suffering and destruction under the guise of Divine authority, is not the kind of Islam we find in the Holy Quran and in the precepts of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him!)

Argue with this bright young female everything she says I am with her 8 min long video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXGE2eBUdlQ

[mohsin qureshi]

Argue with this bright young female everything she says I am with her 8 min long video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXGE2eBUdlQ
[/quote]

I am noe surprised to see that video, every true man faced the eligations like her. There are so many differences we see today in Christanity and any other religion, if someone intrested then i will posted all the differences. The Holy Prophet Jesus, what are his saying and how many christans actually follow them. First i wanna share, the existance of Muhammad (PBUH) in bible: -

The Holy Prophet in the Bible

DEUTRONOMY:
I will raise them a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. 18/18

JOHN:
If ye love me, keep my commandments. And I will pray the Father and he shall give you a Comforter, that he man abide with you forever;

These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you. But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom tile Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

Nevertheless I tell you the truth: It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you: but if I depart, I will send him unto you.

I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Sprit of truth is come, he will guide you into all the truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you. 14.15/16: & 25 /26: 16.7 & 12/14

DEUTERONOMY:
And this is the blessing, wherewith Moses the man of God blessed the children of Israel before his death. And he said, The lord came from Sinai, and rose up from Sier unto them; he shined forth from mount Paran, and he came forth with ten thousand of saints; from his right hand went a feiry law for them. Yea he loved the people; all his saints are in thy head: and they sat down at thy feet; every one shall receive of thy words. 33.1/3

HABAKKUK:
God came from Teman, and the Holy One from mount Paran. Seleh! His glory covered the heavens, and the earth was full of his praise. And his brightness was as the light: he had horns coming out of his hands and there was the hiding of his power. Before him went the pestilence, and burning coals went forth at his feet. He stood and measured the earth: he beheld and drove asunder the nations; and the everlasting mountains were scattered, the perpetual hills did bow: his ways were everlasting. I saw the tents of Cushan in affliction and the curtains of the land of Midian did tremble. 3.3/7