Islam

Quote:
no,it wasn't,but don't you know that God already knows wether people will go to hell or heaven,actually even before their birth?that's well known Soze.

bwahahahahaha , didnt see this.
so, for a god, he is very rude !!
believers are so funny and pathetic

http://www.400monkeys.com/God/index.html

Written by Mosquiller on 28.07.2008 at 15:12

http://www.400monkeys.com/God/index.html

lol
once i saw something similar but can't remember the add. , anyway it was like this:
if you wanna see God, click here.
.
.
.
when you clicked the link, you faced a web page with error 404 which means NOT FOUND.

haha Yeah there are too much of those shits there.

I believe that everyone should have the right to express his opinion,but not like this,this is chaos,a mad house.It's unfortunate that I have to say this to someone older than me but : grow up,this is a serious discussion not your personal blog,are you really that miserable? everything makes you " " .

i change my words, you are NOT "talented in escaping what you don't wanna see or accept", you are "the master".

Written by Mosquiller on 15.07.2008 at 00:01

Written by [user id=30512] on 10.07.2008 at 17:37

You believe all scandinavian bands? Here in Europe there is laughed about them. They can tell you the weather of the coming winter very well, but any sense of history, no, not really.

Honestly, I dont. but i agree with buruzm's music, bathory, mayhem (dead & euro era!)
also, I know about the arab muslim invaders that one of their leaders was homo.
he was trying to capture a scandinavian beautiful guy but they were kicked and couldnt reach their end there.

Quote:

Witches have been killed, indeed. Both other things are bullshit.

Thats it.
Im sure that many none-witches HAVE BEEN KILLED as well.

You right with the witches thing, I don't think that there where more witches in these days as there are today, but many innocent people have been killed indeed.

Written by [user id=30512] on 29.07.2008 at 14:11

Written by Mosquiller on 15.07.2008 at 00:01

Written by [user id=30512] on 10.07.2008 at 17:37

You believe all scandinavian bands? Here in Europe there is laughed about them. They can tell you the weather of the coming winter very well, but any sense of history, no, not really.

Honestly, I dont. but i agree with buruzm's music, bathory, mayhem (dead & euro era!)
also, I know about the arab muslim invaders that one of their leaders was homo.
he was trying to capture a scandinavian beautiful guy but they were kicked and couldnt reach their end there.

Quote:

Witches have been killed, indeed. Both other things are bullshit.

Thats it.
Im sure that many none-witches HAVE BEEN KILLED as well.

You right with the witches thing, I don't think that there where more witches in these days as there are today, but many innocent people have been killed indeed.

I hope Black Winter has read this.

Written by AiwiAstwihad on 29.07.2008 at 00:27

i change my words, you are NOT "talented in escaping what you don't wanna see or accept", you are "the master".

I have never ignored a point in a post in this thread,thogh I feel no kind of responsibility towards it, unless the writer disrespects me or my religion,some people may ignore it but I don't.

Written by Mosquiller on 30.07.2008 at 00:47

I hope Black Winter has read this.

He has,you dare comparing the creation of the islamic empire to the medieval persecution in europe? You should fully understand and seperate religions,because,while they have many things in common,they differ in many ways,I have seen how some of you discuss in Christianity thread fully based on mixing Islam with Christianity.where I want to get,is that in the history of Islam there have not been any important crimes or persecution,actuall every place muslims entered knew a golden age,so if you,for some reason want to discuss persecution,it will make more sens to talk about what is happening right now in some parts of the world in the name of Islam.not about the islamic openings.

Written by Black Winter on 30.07.2008 at 23:40

He has,you dare comparing the creation of the islamic empire to the medieval persecution in europe? You should fully understand and seperate religions,because,while they have many things in common,they differ in many ways,I have seen how some of you discuss in Christianity thread fully based on mixing Islam with Christianity.where I want to get,is that in the history of Islam there have not been any important crimes or persecution,actuall every place muslims entered knew a golden age,so if you,for some reason want to discuss persecution,it will make more sens to talk about what is happening right now in some parts of the world in the name of Islam.not about the islamic openings.

1. I wasnt comparing.
2. what I said was not about medieval persecutions. it was about creation of the christian empire or whatever it was.
3. i have not and wont participate in christianity thread, ever.
4.

Quote:
where I want to get,is that in the history of Islam there have not been any important crimes or persecution

Yet another example : The Caliph Umar dispatched 30,000 men under the command of Sa'd ibn Abī Waqqās against the Persian army. The Battle of al-Qādisiyyah followed, with the Persians prevailing at first, but on the third day of fighting, the Muslims gained the upper hand. The Persian general Rostam Farrokhzād was badly wounded, caught and beheaded. According to some sources, the Persian losses were 20,000, and the Arabs lost 8,500 men and one of the people who did good in the battle is Abo Mihjin al-Thaqafi.
- Wikipedia

AND THIS IS SO IMPORTANT FOR US.

i don't know what you mean by "respect" exatly. yes, i don't respect islam but i don't think i've been rude towards you yourself. have some sense of humor...
and no need to be so condescending, you HAVE neglected some points and fudged some questions. but no problem, who cares...

Written by Mosquiller on 31.07.2008 at 00:07

Written by Black Winter on 30.07.2008 at 23:40

He has,you dare comparing the creation of the islamic empire to the medieval persecution in europe? You should fully understand and seperate religions,because,while they have many things in common,they differ in many ways,I have seen how some of you discuss in Christianity thread fully based on mixing Islam with Christianity.where I want to get,is that in the history of Islam there have not been any important crimes or persecution,actuall every place muslims entered knew a golden age,so if you,for some reason want to discuss persecution,it will make more sens to talk about what is happening right now in some parts of the world in the name of Islam.not about the islamic openings.

1. I wasnt comparing.
2. what I said was not about medieval persecutions. it was about creation of the christian empire or whatever it was.
3. i have not and wont participate in christianity thread, ever.

No I did not mean you I meant other iranian dudes.

Written by Mosquiller on 31.07.2008 at 00:07


4.

Quote:
where I want to get,is that in the history of Islam there have not been any important crimes or persecution

Yet another example : The Caliph Umar dispatched 30,000 men under the command of Sa'd ibn Abi Waqqas against the Persian army. The Battle of al-Qadisiyyah followed, with the Persians prevailing at first, but on the third day of fighting, the Muslims gained the upper hand. The Persian general Rostam Farrokhzad was badly wounded, caught and beheaded. According to some sources, the Persian losses were 20,000, and the Arabs lost 8,500 men and one of the people who did good in the battle is Abo Mihjin al-Thaqafi.
- Wikipedia

AND THIS IS SO IMPORTANT FOR US.

The Islamic conquest was aided by the material and social bankruptcy of the Sassanids; the native populations had little to lose by cooperating with the conquering power. Moreover, the Muslims offered relative religious tolerance and fair treatment to populations that accepted Islamic rule without resistance. It was not until around 650, however, that resistance in Iran was quelled. Conversion to Islam, which offered certain advantages, was fairly rapid among the urban population but slower among the peasantry and the dihqans [farmers]. The majority of Iranians did not become Muslim until the ninth century.
[source : iranchamber.com]

So you can see,that muslims did not commit any persecution,it's widely known that the islamic era is characterized as one of the best eras of tolerance and development,you have already said that the situation in persia at that time was like shit,I dare you to say that the islamic conquer did not bring enormous benefits to persia,unless you call a war where two countries confront in middle ages a persecution,that was the rule at that time,every nation was looking for expanding their borders,the islamic state was no exeption,that's all,I have said this many and many times here.

Written by AiwiAstwihad on 31.07.2008 at 00:12

i don't know what you mean by "respect" exatly. yes, i don't respect islam but i don't think i've been rude towards you yourself. have some sense of humor...
and no need to be so condescending, you HAVE neglected some points and fudged some questions. but no problem, who cares...

Look I don't care if you respect Islam or not what I care about is that discuss in a decent manner and keep sayings like the following out of the discussion because it can not bring any good to it,and generally displaying disrespect towards the subject or the discussion is not an argument or anything valuable,so why not,reasonnably keep it out of the thread?

Quote:

"shut your mouth and keep your advices for yourself. and don't worry, someday your moronic islam will be vanished from our valued land...
but anyway, it's a good idea to start with burning your Fuckin mosques!! lol"

And believe me if you post any good joke about islam or God I will appreciate it but,for example,in The Joke Thread.

Quote:
and no need to be so condescending, you HAVE neglected some points and fudged some questions. but no problem, who cares...

You can compile those posts in one clear serious post and I will glad to respond,because I am only giving my opinion I don't see why should I fudge some points.

Bullshit.
That really says nothing at all, and I tell you, those web sites are Islamic Republic's cock suckers to fool ppl like you.
I've already told you of the cities which have been destroyed and the important persons who have been killed and the ppl who commited suicide.

uhmm...about these:
"shut your mouth and keep your advices for yourself."
look at your saying which made me say so:

Quote:

you know nearly every nation on earth had glorious times,and nearly every nation on earth got defeated by another one, but this did not prevent its people from working for their nation,I advise iranians to do that,instead of crying their lost glory and childishly throwing the blame at arabs of muslims or islam.

you know what's the meaning behind those words so sorry but you deserved it.

"and don't worry, someday your moronic islam will be vanished from our valued land..."
i think it's a fact that islam is moronic not an insult...

"but anyway, it's a good idea to start with burning your Fuckin mosques!! lol"
that's why i say have some sense of humor, don't you see that little beatiful "lol"? lol
i'm not an arsonist anyway...

Quote:

You can compile those posts in one clear serious post and I will glad to respond,because I am only giving my opinion I don't see why should I fudge some points.

i'm not interested nor have time to collect them from previous pages!!
still in this page, there are some examples but first let me say that "fudge" does not mean "not giving" the answer BUT giving an "unclear" one.
well, i don't have time now but will bring those examples.
it's 3:20 AM...

ok, i finaly overcame the lazyness and gathered some examples from the current page and grouped 'em by subject. after all those Fuckin copy-pastes i hope you would give ANSWERs not repeating old-fashioned, repetitious, last-ditch statements...
and if you find no proper answer, be honest and brave at least, to admitt your islam is crap...
here you go...


*I*
-so NO, animals won't be awarded for worshiping god, don't tell me you don't know this... how can you claim this while you certainly know having free-will, power to choose,doer's aim being following God's instructions, ... is the first step to be awarded for something done even a GOOD act, in islam.
-how do you interpret gathered as awarded? gathered here means reviving the dead not awarding animals.
-if you wanna continue this way, you can say how camels are important as Mohammad used them in his wars!! or how cows/camel are important as he ate from their meat/milk!! or how animals are important as they're being sacrificed to Allah!!
well...apparently animals rights has a very different meaning for you than the official meaning.
-come on, those things mean nothing. take 'Bagharah' for example, what does it prove? NOTHING.
it's called "Bagharah" cos the story that Sura speaks about contains a "cow", that's all and no more.
or spider for example, it's called "Spider" cos the life of who chose other protectors rather than Allah is compared to spirederweb for both being fragile, again: that's all and no more.
or elephant for example, it's called "Elephant" cos it tells the story of "Companions of the Elephant" and again: that's all and no more. it goes the same with Ant & Bee.



---- i don't give a f**k what islam says about animals BUT what surprizes me is that you
insist on implicit/unimportant things such as the number of surahs/the story of animals helping Mohammad the story of a woman in hell and etc WHILE islam is full of explicit sentences against your claims. you ignore the FACT of sacrifise for example and speak of meaningless STATISTICS/STORIES...

and you bring a sarcastic verse which speaks of "gathering" as your proof for "awarding".
it's like claiming those asshole angels will be rewarded in heaven for serving God...

islam DID forget animals (or maybe was unable to see them something more than moving food or carriage...) BUT still speaks of unseen creatures such as jinn relatively extensive...




*II*
-they disjointed precious lamé, Baharestan carpet to devide them among themselves!!!!
-they melted precious impressed silver/gold plates to devid them among themselves!!!
-they captured women/men/children and took them to slavery!!!
-they destroyed valuable BOOKS of Madayen believing : 'everything we need is in Quran, if they say the same things we have in Quran then we won't need them and if they contain anything against Quran, then they must be destroyed' !!!
-his main point was muslims using war to conquer Persian Emipre and to convert persians to islam and you simply neglected that!!!!
-then hear the third time from Ibn Khaldun. you certainly know him, don't you?
-

Written by Mosquiller on 31.07.2008 at 00:07

Yet another example : The Caliph Umar dispatched 30,000 men under the command of Sa'd ibn Abī Waqqās against the Persian army. The Battle of al-Qādisiyyah followed, with the Persians prevailing at first, but on the third day of fighting, the Muslims gained the upper hand. The Persian general Rostam Farrokhzād was badly wounded, caught and beheaded. According to some sources, the Persian losses were 20,000, and the Arabs lost 8,500 men and one of the people who did good in the battle is Abo Mihjin al-Thaqafi.
- Wikipedia

AND THIS IS SO IMPORTANT FOR US.

-

Written by Mosquiller on 31.07.2008 at 01:22

That really says nothing at all, and I tell you, those web sites are Islamic Republic's cock suckers to fool ppl like you.
I've already told you of the cities which have been destroyed and the important persons who have been killed and the ppl who commited suicide.

----- and in just one city they killed around 100000 inhabitants and DID captured thousends of women/girls.
and about quelling those risings...they give much more historical evidances of muslims savageries:
* in one of those suppressions they killed more that 40000 ppl of the city.
* in another city they hanged dead bodies of inhabitants in 2 lines each 24 kilometers .
* in another city they captured 4000 pll then killed them all aftewards.

you continue saying that it's politics, it's a young country looking for more power, ...
whatever reason you wanna give, there is a historical fact you can't deny:
Persians were FORCED to convert to Islam by SWORD. so your islam DID spread by sword.
who cares what you think islam says, what actually happend according to HISTORY is mentioned above, not even completely, they represent only a TINY part of the event... but are enough to give you the possibility to imagine...the disaster... and muslims' boody hands...and the nature of islam...

and you pointed out: "the Muslims offered relative religious tolerance and fair treatment to populations that accepted Islamic rule without resistance. "
shit...shit...shit...what kind of response is this? even primitive cave-men can be calm when things go the way they desire...so what?
relatively fair to those who accepted islam without tolerance???????
what the hell did you expect? giving up their longtime land/relligion/language/culture/etc and accept the newborn shitty islam?
wow...how can you blisfully speak of benefits islam brough to Persia? is "destruction & massacre" a kind of "advantage" in your dictionary?

and this behaviour is backed-up by Quran and is not limited to first muslims but STILL continues.
this part is copy-pasted from my post on the "relligion, double standards" :

The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Apostle and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution or crucifixion of the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides or exile from the land : that is their disgrace in this world and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter.
5:33

Therefore when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight) smite at their necks; at length when ye have thoroughly subdued them bind a bond firmly (on them): thereafter (is the time for) either generosity or ransom: Until the war lays down its burdens. Thus (are ye commanded): but if it had been Allah's Will He could certainly have exacted retribution from them (Himself); but (He lets you fight) in order to test you some with others. But those who are slain in the way of Allah He will never let their deeds
be lost.
47:4

* even if it's just in the case of war, the act of fighting those who disagree you is ridiculous and primitive. and there is no evidance in this vessel that this is a defensive war!!!!


...But if they turn renegades seize them and slay them wherever ye find them? and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks.
4:89

...therefore if they do not withdraw from you, and (do not) offer you peace and restrain their hands, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them ; and against these We have given.you a clear authority.
4:91

But when the forbidden months are past then fight and slay the pagans wherever ye find them and seize them beleaguer them and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent and establish regular prayers and practice regular charity then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-Forgiving Most Merciful.
9:5

O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the Hypocrites and be firm against them. Their abode is hell an evil refuge indeed.
9:73

Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah and those who reject faith fight in the cause of evil: so fight ye against the friends of Satan: feeble indeed is the cunning of Satan.
4:76

Remember thy Lord inspired the angels (with the message): "I am with you: give firmness to the believers: I will instil terror into the hearts of the unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them."
8:12


in addition to Rushdi's case,
you certainly remember Theo van Gogh's murder in 2004.
Mohammed Bouyeri, a Dutch citizen murdered him while he was bicycling to work.
He shot him 8 times with an HS 2000 handgun, then cut Van Gogh's throat, nearly decapitating him, and stabbed him in the chest. Two knives were left implanted in his torso, one attaching a five-page note to his body. The note threatened Western governments, Jews and Ayaan Hirsi Ali (who went into hiding).
he did this Although he was born in Amsterdam and was well-educated!!!!

and you certainly remember Ayaan Hirsi Ali's case !!!
and you certainly remember how muslims reacted to those cartoons published in denmark.
an etc...






*III*
-nice, you just mentioned an old philosophical problem with God's Omniscience.
-

Written by Mosquiller on 14.07.2008 at 23:27

i say this again that Christianity, Judaism and Islam :"fakes" because they were all in a way plagiarisms of Zoroaster's religion

-

Written by Mosquiller on 28.07.2008 at 00:35

God is evil, hates humanity and wants to inflict general suffering and malaise upon his playthings (that's you) to wile away his time. You see, just like the rest of us, God suffers from existential angst and ennui. However God's existential problems are amplified by his infinite existence. In order to achieve relief God created the universe and uses it to inflict his anguish upon countless conscious beings.
just look at this incomplete list of vile things said to be 'acts of God': tsunamis, volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, tornadoes, HIV, cancer, the Bubonic plague, Ayn Rand, syphilis, floods, old age and the cancellation of Firefly. That last one might have been the fault of Fox. although they are probably working for God Arrgg

"This world could not have been the work of an all-loving being, but that of a devil, who had brought creatures into existence in order to delight in the sight of their sufferings."
Arthur Schopenhauer

Written by AiwiAstwihad on 05.08.2008 at 14:40
-so NO, animals won't be awarded for worshiping god, don't tell me you don't know this... how can you claim this while you certainly know having free-will, power to choose,doer's aim being following God's instructions, ... is the first step to be awarded for something done even a GOOD act, in islam.
-how do you interpret gathered as awarded? gathered here means reviving the dead not awarding animals.
-if you wanna continue this way, you can say how camels are important as Mohammad used them in his wars!! or how cows/camel are important as he ate from their meat/milk!! or how animals are important as they're being sacrificed to Allah!!
well...apparently animals rights has a very different meaning for you than the official meaning.
-come on, those things mean nothing. take 'Bagharah' for example, what does it prove? NOTHING.
it's called "Bagharah" cos the story that Sura speaks about contains a "cow", that's all and no more.
or spider for example, it's called "Spider" cos the life of who chose other protectors rather than Allah is compared to spirederweb for both being fragile, again: that's all and no more.
or elephant for example, it's called "Elephant" cos it tells the story of "Companions of the Elephant" and again: that's all and no more. it goes the same with Ant & Bee.

-the first step to be judged for an act,wether awarded,or punished,is to have full conciousness and free will,it's of course correct
-maybe I have not been so clear,the act of gathering must be for a purpose right?why would God gather humans AND animals?what could be the following act?I think,it's judgement for humans(since they have free will) and going to heaven(which is by the way something you yourself suggested as a rational explanation) for animals,now for animals,heaven is different,I don't know how,but it's certainly different from the notion of heaven for humans,maybe it's just a place,I don't know.I have not read aanything about it until now.
-of course everything is important,every single thing in this universe is important,not only animals,but moving back to the point that made you say that:the pigeon and the spider,in a very serious situation,the messenger and Abubakr in the cave,their lives are threatened,and God choses two animals,to use them to fool the blasphemers,why not a rock or sand in front of the entering?why a web,which is by the way discribed in another location in the Quran as 'the weakest shelter"?I refuse to stop on the apparent reason of this act,but maybe it's not symbolic,maybe it's just like that,just a tool.
-the names of the chapters,have you first noticed,that they are all important names,if we do not count the names of animals?plus,if you take a look at any of those chapters named after animals,you will notice that the chapter barely talks about the animal,aren't there hundreds of other possibilities for titles than the names of animals?can't we consider then that there are some significance behind it?

Quote:

---- i don't give a f**k what islam says about animals BUT what surprizes me is that you
insist on implicit/unimportant things such as the number of surahs/the story of animals helping Mohammad the story of a woman in hell and etc WHILE islam is full of explicit sentences against your claims. you ignore the FACT of sacrifise for example and speak of meaningless STATISTICS/STORIES...
and you bring a sarcastic verse which speaks of "gathering" as your proof for "awarding".
it's like claiming those asshole angels will be rewarded in heaven for serving God...

islam DID forget animals (or maybe was unable to see them something more than moving food or carriage...) BUT still speaks of unseen creatures such as jinn relatively extensive...

okay if we keep aside the statistics thing,and the animals helping Muhammed,the Hadith about the woman going to hell for torturing a cat is meaningless?anyway that's not it,there is more,let me remind you and add some evidence of the evident value of animal in Islam,so I expect you to take them one by one,and tell me that they mean nothing,or that islam does not care about animals

let's take a more in depth look at the hadith of Muhammed(S):
*"All creatures are like a family (Ayal) of God: and he loves the most those who are the most beneficent to His family."
*"Whoever is kind to the creatures of God is kind to himself."
*"There is no man who kills [even] a sparrow or anything smaller, without its deserving it, but Allah will question him about it [on the judgment day],"

The following Hadith leaves no ambiguity in the scene in which the Quran uses the word "community" (the aya : "There is not a moving (living) creature on earth, nor a bird that flies with its two wings, but are communities like you. We have neglected nothing in the Book, then unto their Lord they (all) shall be gathered."
):
Abu Huraira reported the Prophet as telling of an incident that happened to another prophet in the past. This prophet was stung by an ant and, in anger, he ordered the whole of the ants' nest to be burned. At this, God reprimanded this prophet in these words: "Because one ant stung you, you have burned a whole community which glorified Me." (bukhari and muslm)

The Prophet(s) passed by some children who were shooting arrows at a ram. He told them off, saying: 'do not maim the poor beast'." (Narrated by Abdallah bin Ja'far. An-Nasai, 7:238).

The Prophet(s) forbade an animal being made a target." (Narrated by Anas. Recorded by Riyad. (Ref. No. 28); Hadith No. 1606; p. 272.

Even in war, animals cannot be killed except if needed for food. Hazrat Abu Bakr, the first Caliph after the death of the Holy Prophet Muhammad(s) (632-634 A.C.) addressed the Muslim army at a place outside Medina, called Jorf, before sending them off for the battle of Muta. Among the instructions he gave to the soldiers was not to slaughter animals except for food. (The Qur'an, 22:40; Tabari III, p. 123).

The Prophet(s) has placed the killing of animals without a justifiable reason as one of the major sins:
Avoid ye the seven obnoxious things {deadly sins}: polytheism; magic; the killing breathing beings! Which God has forbidden except for rightful reason. (Narrated by Abu Huraira. Sahih Mulim - Kitab-ul-Imam (Ref. No. 46); Chapt. XXXIX, Vol.I; p. 52. Bukhari, 4:23. Also Awn, (Ref. No. 32); Hadith No. 2857.

The Prophet(s) said to a man who was sharpening his knife in the presence of the animal: 'Do you intend inflicting death on the animal twice - once by sharpening the knife within its sight, and once by cutting its throat?'

The Prophet(s) once passed by a lean camel whose belly had shrunk to its back. 'Fear God' he said to the owner of the camel, 'in these dumb animals and ride them only when they are fit to be ridden, and let them go free when it is meet that they should rest. (Narrated by Abdullah bin Ja'far. Awn (Ref. No. 32); 7:221; Hadith No. 2532).

travelers used to delay even saying their prayers until they had first given their riding and pack animals fodder and had attended to their needs: "When we stopped at a halt, we did not say our prayers until we had taken the burdens off our camels' backs and attended to their needs."

Prevention of physical cruelty is not enough; mental cruelty is equally important. In the following incident, a bird's emotional distress has been treated as seriously as a physical injury:
We were on a journey with the Apostle of God(s), and he left us for a while. During his absence, we saw a bird called hummara with its two young and took the young ones. The mother bird was circling above us in the air, beating its wings in grief, when the Prophet came back and said: 'who has hurt the FEELINGS of this bird by taking its young? Return them to her'.

The Prophet(s) was asked if acts of charity even to the animals were rewarded by God. He replied: 'yes, there is a reward for acts of charity to every beast alive. (Narrated by Abu Huraira, Bukhari, 3:322. Also Muslim, Vol. 4; Hadith No. 2244. Also Awn (Ref. No. 32), 7:222, Hadith No. 2533. Also Mishkat al-masabih, Book 6; Chapter 6.

When the Holy Prophet(s) migrated to Medina from Mecca in 622 A.C., people there used to cut off camels' humps and the fat tails of sheep. The Prophet(s) ordered this barbaric practice to be stopped. The temptation for the people to perform this sort of vivisection on the animals was that the juicy humps and fatty tails could be eaten while the animal remained alive for future use. To remove this avidity, he declared: "whatever is cut off an animal, while it is still alive, is carrion and is unlawful (Haram) to eat."

The Prophet prohibited the use of skins of wild animals. (Narrated by Abu Malik on the authority of his father. Abu Dawud and Tirmidhi as recorded in Garden of the Righteous - Riyad as-Salihin of Imam Nawawi; Hadith No. 815, p. 160.)
The Prophet forbade the skins of wild animals being used as floor-coverings.
The Prophet said: "Do not ride on saddles made of silk or leopard skins." (Narrated by Mu'awiah. Abu Dawud [see Riyad, Ref. No. 28]; Hadith No. 814, p. 160.)


About slaughtering animals,I suppose you are talking about Eid Al Idha,so you should know that sacrificing animals during it is not an obligation,or even a sunna,it's a tradition,that muslims have after the story of Ibrahim,but still I don't see anything wrong about it,Islam does not have a position for or against consuming meat,there is no suggestion in the Qur'an or in any other of the Islamic sources that eating meat is good for physical or spiritual health. Islam's approach in this matter is neutral; it has left the choice to the individual, but those who opt to eat meat are urged in the Qur'an Majeed to eat in moderation. (The Qur'an 7:31; 5:87 and other verses). Furthermore, there are elaborate and stringent laws governing the ove rall treatment of animals used for food - their rearing and breeding; the pre-slaughter; and handling during and after slaughter.But let's take a look at slaughtering in Islam and it's rules,and decide wether it could possibly be a violation of animal rights:

God's Messenger was reported as saying: 'Allah Who is Blessed and Exalted, has prescribed benevolence toward everything {and has ordained that everything be done in a good way}; so, when you must kill a living being, do it in the best manner and, when you slaughter an animal, you should {use the best method and} sharpen your knife so as to cause the animal as little pain as possible. (Narrated by Shaddad bin Aus. Muslim; Vol. 2, Chapter 11; Section on 'Slaying'; 10:739, verse 151. Also 'Robson' (Ref. No. 15); p. 872. Also recorded in Riyad. (Ref. No. 28); Hadith No. 643; p. 131).
The Messenger of God was heard forbidding to keep waiting a quadruped or any other animal for slaughter. (Bukhari. Also Muslim; Vol. 2, Chapter 11; Section on 'Slaying'; 10:739; verse 152. Also 'Robson' (Ref. NO. 15), p. 872).
The Prophet(s) forbade all living creatures to be slaughtered while tied up and bound. (id (Ref. No. 46); Hadith No. 4817; p. 1079).

It is not their flesh, nor their blood, that reaches Allah; it is your righteousness {piety and spiritual volition} that reaches Him?.Their flesh will never reach Allah, nor yet their blood, but your devotion will reach Him (Qur'an 22:37).
The main purpose of allowing Muslims to continue with animal sacrifices was to turn this tradition into an institution of charity. All the verses of the Qur'an Majeed which deal with the subject wind up with the proviso that the meat be fed to the poor, the needy, those who are too modest to beg as well as the mendicants - those who beg openly (The Qur'an, 2:196; 22:28; 35-37).

So now what do you think of your sentence "islam DID forget animals (or maybe was unable to see them something more than moving food or carriage...)?

about part II and III of your post,I have discussed them before,but I will reform another answer like the previous later today but now I have to go,you may wait until I complete it then answer.

and now to part two and three of your post:

Quote:

-they disjointed precious lamé, Baharestan carpet to devide them among themselves!!!!
-they melted precious impressed silver/gold plates to devid them among themselves!!!
-they captured women/men/children and took them to slavery!!!
-they destroyed valuable BOOKS of Madayen believing : 'everything we need is in Quran, if they say the same things we have in Quran then we won't need them and if they contain anything against Quran, then they must be destroyed' !!!
-his main point was muslims using war to conquer Persian Emipre and to convert persians to islam and you simply neglected that!!!!

Can I know where you took these information from,a source?because I have seen wikipedia and not few history books and none seems talking about it
meanwhile I think my answer was clear,it's widely known that the islamic era is characterized as one of the best eras of tolerance and development,you have already said that the situation in persia at that time was like shit,I dare you to say that the islamic conquer did not bring enormous benefits to persia,unless you call a war where two countries confront in middle ages a persecution,that was the rule at that time,every nation was looking for expanding their borders,the islamic state was no exeption,that's all,I have said this many and many times here why do you keep ignoring it?let's quote wikipedia only in its introduction about the islamic conquest of Persia:
"The Islamic conquest of Persia (633-656) led to the end of the Sassanid Empire and the eventual decline of the Zoroastrian religion in Persia. However, the achievements of the previous Persian civilizations were not lost, but were to a great extent absorbed by the new Islamic polity."

Quote:

-then hear the third time from Ibn Khaldun. you certainly know him, don't you?

ibn khaldoun?where? AlMukadima(the introduction)?,plus he lived a very long time after the Islamic conquest of Persia,and also far away from there in Tunisia,he must've took his information from someone else,who is he?(please provide me with valuable references,books,if possible chapters,pages because I think I have all of those history books)
besides,Ibn Khaldoun is known for his hate towards arabs,I quote him saying "once becoming arab(a place) it's destroyed",so it does not surprize me to find out that he really reported such an incident,remember that the book of Ibn khaldoun is not really a history book,it talks more about civics and philosophy

Quote:

-they destroyed valuable BOOKS of Madayen believing : 'everything we need is in Quran, if they say the same things we have in Quran then we won't need them and if they contain anything against Quran, then they must be destroyed' !!!

how do you expect from some one who follows a religion that incites religious freedom,freedom of thinking,that encourages every kind of knowledge, scientific research and litterature to do something like that?Muslims are known for taking benefits from the previous nations books and studies,do I even need to go further in this point?should I even bring evidence for this evident point?the hadiths "Seek knowledge even in China", "Seek knowledge from the cradle to the grave", and "Verily the men of knowledge are the inheritors of the prophets", have echoed throughout the history of Islam and incited Muslims to seek knowledge wherever it might be found. During most of its history, Islamic civilization has been witness to a veritable celebration of knowledge. That is why every traditional Islamic city possessed public and private libraries and some cities like Cordoba and Baghdad boasted of libraries with over 400,000 books. Such cities also had bookstores, some of which sold a large number of titles. That is also why the scholar has always been held in the highest esteem in Islamic society.How do you then expect someone like the Caliph Omar to say something like that?

Quote:

That really says nothing at all, and I tell you, those web sites are Islamic Republic's cock suckers to fool ppl like you.
I've already told you of the cities which have been destroyed and the important persons who have been killed and the ppl who commited suicide.

Really?what about wikipedia?I have read some of the pages about this conquest and surprizingly,there is no record of cities being destroyed,actually persian cities knew a lot of growth and developpment after the conquest.

and now moving to that emotional sentence,I am not going to take part by part,but let's give you some important points:
you should try to take a less narrow look on the islamic history,now if we just suppose that horrible things happened in persia,what about other places muslims entered,syria,lbanon,jordan,egypt,north africa,spain,far east...why did a large part of the locals there keep their religion?hmm?what happened to the 'forcing against their will'?and what about the pparts of the world that islam reached without war?Indonesia is the biggest muslim nation(number of citizens) and no muslim fighter ever entered it.you cannot still concentrate on one case of Iran and ignore the rest,you should look at it all,as one set.
and in the abscence of trusted sources about what you are claiming about all this destruction bla bla bla I have only to dismiss the issue.and move forward to another point that we can discuss based on trusted resources,this "backed up by the Quran" thing:

Quote:
The punishment of those who wage war against God and His Apostle and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution or crucifixion of the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides or exile from the land : that is their disgrace in this world and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter.

this is the kind of discussion that messes with my nerves,how come that the answer is in front of your wide open eyes,and you just,fully aware,put in bold the wrong part,this is crap mr Soze,please,try to avoid such things,okay?can't you see in the beginning of the sentence "those who wage war against God and his apostle" what do you expect from us?to embrace them?to hide?to run away?to demonstrate?unbelieveable!

Quote:
Therefore when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight) smite at their necks; at length when ye have thoroughly subdued them bind a bond firmly (on them): thereafter (is the time for) either generosity or ransom: Until the war lays down its burdens. Thus (are ye commanded): but if it had been God's Will He could certainly have exacted retribution from them (Himself); but (He lets you fight) in order to test you some with others. But those who are slain in the way of God He will never let their deeds
be lost.
47:4
[even if it's just in the case of war, the act of fighting those who disagree you is ridiculous and primitive. and there is no evidance in this vessel that this is a defensive war!!!!

is there an evidence that it's an offensive war?no.but let's have another look at some other parts in the Quran,because,as you know,in order to fully understand its meanings we should consider the whole book,plus the hadith,you will understand once we finish with the ayas you provided:

Quote:
...But if they turn renegades seize them and slay them wherever ye find them? and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks.
4:89

...therefore if they do not withdraw from you, and (do not) offer you peace and restrain their hands, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them ; and against these We have given.you a clear authority.
4:91

impressive,you quote verse 89,then 91,didn't it come to you to,even by curiosity take a look at the verse 90?no?doesn't seem in the heart of your supoosed quote why do you neglected it?don't you know that you should never take a verse out of his context?okay here is the clarification,surprizingly in the aya 90:
"..Therefore if they withdraw from you but fight you not, and (instead) send you (Guarantees of) peace, then God Hath opened no way for you (to war against them)."
so you see there is nothing more clear,those ayas are talking to muslims when in a state of war,it's obvious,clear, undoubtable and it stands as an evidence that clears any ambiguity about the offensive or defensive way of war.

Quote:
But when the forbidden months are past then fight and slay the pagans wherever ye find them and seize them beleaguer them and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent and establish regular prayers and practice regular charity then open the way for them: for God is Oft-Forgiving Most Merciful.
9:5

If you take a look again at the sura you quoted,you will know what the story is all about,the talk was not in general,and it is not adressed to all the muslims,it's God's order to the prophet and his followers at that time,against those who started the fight first,and got the prophet out of his home,the evidence,besides the talking about the agreement near Mecca,the verse 13 in the same chapter:
"Will ye not fight people who violated their oaths, plotted to expel the Messenger, and took the aggressive by being the first (to assault) you? Do ye fear them? Nay, it is God Whom ye should more justly fear, if ye believe!"

and this goes also for the aya 73 from the same sura,which is,in addition to what I said previously,adressed to the prophet,which is another evidence that those are not general recommandations.

Quote:
Those who believe fight in the cause of God and those who reject faith fight in the cause of evil: so fight ye against the friends of Satan: feeble indeed is the cunning of Satan.
4:76

let's take a look at the previous verse:
"And why should ye not fight in the cause of God and of those who, being weak, are ill-treated (and oppressed)?- Men, women, and children, whose cry is: "Our Lord! Rescue us from this town, whose people are oppressors; and raise for us from thee one who will protect; and raise for us from thee one who will help!"
so,fighting in the cause of God against satan,is fighting in the name of the weak,for justice against oppression and persecution,that I think makes no problem,in addition to the verse 4:90 previously mentionned makess it clear that there cannot be any persecutive war in the name of God.

Quote:
Remember thy Lord inspired the angels (with the message): "I am with you: give firmness to the believers: I will instil terror into the hearts of the unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them."
8:12

let's examine the following verse:
"This because they contended against God and His Messenger. If any contend against God and His Messenger, God is strict in punishment." 8:13
I believe this makes it clear,along with the after following verse:
"O ye who believe! when ye meet the Unbelievers in hostile array, never turn your backs to them. "8:15

So these are the true meanings I think behind the apperantly terrorizing verses that you posted here and in the Religion:double standards thread,and now I can claim that your sentence "this is backed up by the Quran" is foundless

Quote:
in addition to Rushdi's case,
you certainly remember Theo van Gogh's murder in 2004.
Mohammed Bouyeri, a Dutch citizen murdered him while he was bicycling to work.
He shot him 8 times with an HS 2000 handgun, then cut Van Gogh's throat, nearly decapitating him, and stabbed him in the chest. Two knives were left implanted in his torso, one attaching a five-page note to his body. The note threatened Western governments, Jews and Ayaan Hirsi Ali (who went into hiding).
he did this Although he was born in Amsterdam and was well-educated!!!!
and you certainly remember Ayaan Hirsi Ali's case !!!
and you certainly remember how muslims reacted to those cartoons published in denmark.
an etc...

and 9/11 ,and attacks of Madrid,and attacks of London....
and so what?dthose are unfortunate events but does this prove anything at all?and this Dutch being was "well educated" what does it mean?so was most of the criminals in history.And I thank you for the touching but mostly unnecessary details.

Quote:
i say this again that Christianity, Judaism and Islam :"fakes" because they were all in a way plagiarisms of Zoroaster's religion

so if Zoroaster taught something about the goodness of God or any other philosophical matter that we can track a similarity with islam,judaism and christianity,that means that those religions are plagiarisms of the Zoroaster's religion?but moving further about this religion,you should know that many muslim scholars consider Zoroaster a prophet,the shiites and sunnies who follow Malik ibn Anas(one of the four imams of the sunnis),some people dismiss Zoroastrianism as paganism or fire worship, but it is said that originally the fire was a symbol of the covenant with God or the commitment to follow the divine light and to abide by the religious laws; the aberration happened when some people or followers later on started to worship the fire itself, so it developed from being a symbol to being an object of worship.
There are several clear prophecies about the advent of Prophet Muhammad in the Zoroastrian scriptures. The first one is mentioned in the Zend Avesta (first category of the Zoroastrian scriptures) which says that the burning fire that they used to have constantly burning in their temple will actually be extinguished, and historically speaking, it is reported that when Prophet Muhammad was born, for the first time that fire was extinguished in Persia.
Also the extinguishing of the fire could imply the disappearance of that form of religion as developed after Zoroaster, because when Islam came to Persia, very few Zoroastrians were left because the rest embraced Islam.
The other aspect of that prophecy is that when this fire is extinguished, it would be associated with the so-called powerful restoration of the world, and that may imply the correction of the adulteration or deviation that have taken place after Zoroaster.
The other prophecy is from the Dasatir (the second category of Zoroastrian scriptures) which says that while people are so much engaged in deviation from the path of truth, there shall arise a man among the Arabs, as interpreted from the original words, who is going to overthrow the oppressive government, and that was the kind of government that existed in Byzantine and Persia in the early days of Islam.
It also said that those who used to direct their prayers towards the temple of fire will direct their prayer now towards another house which will be stripped of its images. It is known that the Ka'bah, toward which the Persians now turn in prayer as they have become Muslims, was actually filled with idols by the Arabs; it was only through the advent of Prophet Muhammad that it was purified and stripped from all of these idols and that the purity and simplicity of the worship of One God was restored again.
The scriptures indicate that the person who will bring about that change is one who will be a law-giver, someone who received revelation in the form of law, and that applies to Prophet Muhammad.
It also describes him as eloquent, and that description really fits Prophet Muhammad as he was very eloquent in his sayings and speeches. Also the Qur'an that God revealed to him is unsurpassed in eloquence.
But still,I cannot give any confirmation aboutthis issue because I don't know enough about it,but muslims believe that God's mercy and guidance are not only restricted to the Middle East area, but include all humanity, and they were not restricted to the known Abrahamic faiths. Muslims cannot say that because no prophet of Zoroastrianism, Buddhism, or Hinduism is mentioned in the Qur'an then these religions are free or void of any credibility or that they have nothing to do with the message of various prophets.

Quote:
God is evil, hates humanity and wants to inflict general suffering and malaise upon his playthings (that's you) to wile away his time. You see, just like the rest of us, God suffers from existential angst and ennui. However God's existential problems are amplified by his infinite existence. In order to achieve relief God created the universe and uses it to inflict his anguish upon countless conscious beings.
just look at this incomplete list of vile things said to be 'acts of God': tsunamis, volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, tornadoes, HIV, cancer, the Bubonic plague, Ayn Rand, syphilis, floods, old age and the cancellation of Firefly. That last one might have been the fault of Fox. although they are probably working for God Arrgg

"This world could not have been the work of an all-loving being, but that of a devil, who had brought creatures into existence in order to delight in the sight of their sufferings."
Arthur Schopenhauer

very old but interesting poin:
the question comes why do pain and sufferings exist in the world. We find sickness, old age and death. We see things that are ugly, people who are insane and foolish. There are storms, earthquakes, floods, draught and famine. We also see people commit sins, show disloyalty, unfaithfulness, greed and insincerity. We see people commit rapes, murders; they fight and make wars. We know all these and many more problems. There are evils caused by human beings and there are natural disasters. There are suffering for individuals and there are those that involve a large number of people.
But we also know that this is not the whole story. Besides all these negative things, we also see beauty, health, prosperity, life, birth, wisdom, intelligence, growth and progress. We also see goodness among people, faith, sincerity, charity, love and the spirit of sacrifice. We also see a lot of virtue and piety. It is wrong to see one side of the coin and not to see the other side. Any philosophy that concentrates on one aspect of the creation and denies or ignores the other side is partially true and partial truths are no truth at all.
But then the question is why does God allow these exceptions to the rules?
The Quran tells us that good, evil and whatever happens in this world happens by God's Will. Only God knows fully His Will. We finite beings cannot grasp fully His infinite Will and Wisdom. He runs His universe the way He deems fit. The Qur'an tells us that God is Wise and everything that God does is right, just, good and fair. We must submit and surrender to His Will. The Qur'an has not given us all the details about God's Will, but it has enlightened us with the guidance that is useful and sufficient for us. There are several points that we should keep in our mind to understand this issue:

1. First of all, God did not make this world a permanent world. This is a temporary world and everything here has a time limit. When its times comes it will die, come to an end and finish. Neither the good things of this world are forever, nor the bad things eternal. We are here for a short time and we are being tested. Those who will pass this test will find an eternal world that is perfect and permanent. Those who will fail this test shall see the evil consequences of their sins and corruption.

2. God has placed a physical law and a moral law in this universe. God allows suffering to occur when one or more of these laws are broken. The physical law is based on cause and effect. Sickness comes if one does not take care of one's health or is exposed to infections. A car accident occurs when one is not alert, or drives in a careless manner, or if the cars are not checked, roads and freeways are not made and kept in right shape, or the traffic laws are not right or not properly enforced. Study of causes and effects is very important to facilitate safeguards. Even here we should keep in mind that God often saves us and He does not let us suffer from every negligence. How many times it happens that we are not careful and still we reach safely to our destinations?how many times did you not really deserve to be saved but then did get saved? God says:

"(God) Most Gracious! It is He Who has taught the Qur'an. He has created man: He has taught him speech (and Intelligence). The sun and the moon follow courses (exactly) computed; and the herbs and the trees both (alike) bow in adoration. And the Firmament has He raised high, and He has set up the Balance (of Justice), in order that you may not transgress (due) balance. So establish weight with justice and fall not short in the balance. It is He Who has spread out the earth for (His) creatures." (Ar-Rahman:1-10)

The way we exceed the measures set by God and violate His laws of cause and effect is incredible. It is really the mercy of God that we are saved. Strictly speaking, the question should not be why does God allow suffering, but how much God protects us and saves us all the time in spite of our violations and negligence. The Quran says in one of my favourite passages:

"If God were to punish people according to what they deserve, He would not leave on the back of the (earth) a single living creature: but He gives them respite for a stated Term: when their Term expires, verily God has in His sight all His servants." (Fatir:45)

i don't wanna keep arguin over animals in islam cos there are lots of other fundamenal problems with islam and i don't even expect islam to have modern views over 'em. it's useless to argue over the characteristics of the hevean for animals while the concept of afterlife and judgement day are controversial themselves...
BUT i have to respond you:

Quote:

-the first step to be judged for an act,wether awarded,or punished,is to have full conciousness and free will,it's of course correct
-maybe I have not been so clear,the act of gathering must be for a purpose right?why would God gather humans AND animals?what could be the following act?I think,it's judgement for humans(since they have free will) and going to heaven(which is by the way something you yourself suggested as a rational explanation) for animals,now for animals,heaven is different,I don't know how,but it's certainly different from the notion of heaven for humans, maybe it's just a place,I don't know.I have not read aanything about it until now.

that's the problem, speaking of gathering without givin any furthur explaination (in Quran) .
and there's not even a single ambiguous indication in Quran about a different hevean for animals and God's plans for 'em.

Quote:

-of course everything is important,every single thing in this universe is important,not only animals,but moving back to the point that made you say that:the pigeon and the spider,in a very serious situation,the messenger and Abubakr in the cave,their lives are threatened,and God choses two animals,to use them to fool the blasphemers,why not a
rock or sand in front of the entering?why a web,which is by the way discribed in another location in the Quran as 'the weakest shelter"?I refuse to stop on the apparent reason of this act,but maybe it's not symbolic,maybe it's just like that,just a tool.
-the names of the chapters,have you first noticed,that they are all important names,if we do not count the names of animals?plus,if you take a look at any of those chapters named after animals,you will notice that the chapter barely talks about the animal,aren't there hundreds of other possibilities for titles than the names of animals?can't we consider then that there are some significance behind it?

first, i don't think that story ever really happend...but ok lets suppose it happend that way:
why God selected 2 animals? cos they suited his porpuse and no more.
why not a rock? maybe cos he couldn't move it!!! but seriously, maybe cos it could make 'em more suspesious about the cave.
if God uses animals as tools for his porpuse, it never ever means they are important.
it's like a master using his slaves in doing IMPORTANT things for him but it doesn't signify the IMPORTANCE of the slaves...
again no, i don't see anything important in names.

Quote:

*"All creatures are like a family (Ayal) of God: and he loves the most those who are the most beneficent to His family."
*"Whoever is kind to the creatures of God is kind to himself."
*"There is no man who kills [even] a sparrow or anything smaller, without its deserving it, but Allah will question him about it [on the judgment day],"
The Prophet(s) was asked if acts of charity even to the animals were rewarded by God. He replied: 'yes, there is a reward for acts of charity to every beast alive. (Narrated by Abu Huraira, Bukhari, 3:322. Also Muslim, Vol. 4;
Hadith No. 2244. Also Awn (Ref. No. 32), 7:222, Hadith No. 2533. Also Mishkat al-masabih, Book 6; Chapter 6.
The Prophet(s) has placed the killing of animals without a justifiable reason as one of the major sins:
Avoid ye the seven obnoxious things {deadly sins}: polytheism; magic; the killing breathing beings! Which God has
forbidden except for rightful reason. (Narrated by Abu Huraira. Sahih Mulim - Kitab-ul-Imam (Ref. No. 46);
Chapt. XXXIX, Vol.I; p. 52. Bukhari, 4:23. Also Awn, (Ref. No. 32); Hadith No. 2857.

the massage is be kind/helpfull/don't kill... don't you even see the explicit sarcasm in the third one?
and the main point of my post was not kindness or muslims ideal behaviour towards beings...

Quote:

The following Hadith leaves no ambiguity in the scene in which the Quran uses the word "community" (the aya : "There is not a moving (living) creature on earth, nor a bird that flies with its two wings, but are communities like you. We have neglected nothing in the Book, then unto their Lord they (all) shall be gathered."
):
Abu Huraira reported the Prophet as telling of an incident that happened to another prophet in the past. This prophet was stung by an ant and, in anger, he ordered the whole of the ants' nest to be burned. At this, God reprimanded this prophet in these words: "Because one ant stung you, you have burned a whole community which glorified Me." (bukhari and muslm)

that prophet was solaymaan, i think.
the main massage is: don't decide in anger & don't punish a whole for the mistake of an indivisual...
and the ant is a SYMBOL, come on...you don't really believe the story of Solaymaan kingdom with all thosse animals /deamons/angels serving him is a historical fact, do you?

Quote:

The Prophet(s) passed by some children who were shooting arrows at a ram. He told them off, saying: 'do not maim the poor beast'." (Narrated by Abdallah bin Ja'far. An-Nasai, 7:238).
The Prophet(s) forbade an animal being made a target." (Narrated by Anas. Recorded by Riyad. (Ref. No. 28); Hadith No. 1606; p. 272.
Even in war, animals cannot be killed except if needed for food. Hazrat Abu Bakr, the first Caliph after the death of the Holy Prophet Muhammad(s) (632-634 A.C.) addressed the Muslim army at a place outside Medina, called Jorf, before sending them off for the battle of Muta. Among the instructions he gave to the soldiers was not to slaughter animals except for food. (The Qur'an, 22:40; Tabari III, p. 123).
Prevention of physical cruelty is not enough; mental cruelty is equally important. In the following incident, a bird's emotional distress has been treated as seriously as a physical injury:We were on a journey with the Apostle of God(s), and he left us for a while. During his absence, we saw a bird called hummara with its two young and took the young ones. The mother bird was circling above us in the air, beating its wings in grief, when the Prophet came back and said: 'who has hurt the FEELINGS of this bird by taking its young? Return them to her'.

ok, the most relevant part of your response... BUT
distinguish between the ideal behaviour and the imperative behaviour.
all your examples are mostahab/makrooh (Suggested/better-be avoided) NOT
Vajib/Haram (enjoined/forbidden) .
not all odrinary ppl are expected to do the Mostahhab(suggested) and avoid the makrooh (better-be avoided).
there's no punishment for Makrooh. but yes, rewards for Mostahhab.
and they all remain a suggestion. and actually don't play an important role in muslims lives.

Quote:

The Prophet(s) said to a man who was sharpening his knife in the presence of the animal: 'Do you intend inflicting death on the animal twice - once by sharpening the knife within its sight, and once by cutting its throat?'
The Prophet(s) once passed by a lean camel whose belly had shrunk to its back. 'Fear God' he said to the owner of the camel, 'in these dumb animals and ride them only when they are fit to be ridden, and let them go free when it is meet that they should rest. (Narrated by Abdullah bin Ja'far. Awn (Ref. No. 32); 7:221; Hadith No. 2532).
God's Messenger was reported as saying: 'Allah Who is Blessed and Exalted, has prescribed benevolence toward everything {and has ordained that everything be done in a good way}; so, when you must kill a living being, do it in the best manner and, when you slaughter an animal, you should {use the best method and} sharpen your knife so
as to cause the animal as little pain as possible. (Narrated by Shaddad bin Aus. Muslim; Vol. 2, Chapter 11;
Section on 'Slaying'; 10:739, verse 151. Also 'Robson' (Ref. No. 15); p. 872. Also recorded in Riyad. (Ref. No. 28); Hadith No. 643; p. 131).
The Messenger of God was heard forbidding to keep waiting a quadruped or any other animal for slaughter. (Bukhari. Also Muslim; Vol. 2, Chapter 11; Section on 'Slaying'; 10:739; verse 152. Also 'Robson' (Ref. NO. 15), p. 872).

remains a suggestion...
it's Mostahhab(suggested) not to sharpen the knife before cutting the throat.
and it's Makrooh(better-be-avoided) to for example sharpen the knife in front of the animal.

Quote:

travelers used to delay even saying their prayers until they had first given their riding and pack animals fodder and had attended to their needs: "When we stopped at a halt, we did not say our prayers until we had taken the burdens off our camels' backs and attended to their needs."

don't forget that the ridings were one of thier most important properties and their death or faint was a huge disadvantage for themselves so taking care of one's crucial property is not some sort of kindness.

Quote:

The Prophet prohibited the use of skins of wild animals. (Narrated by Abu Malik on the authority of his father.
Abu Dawud and Tirmidhi as recorded in Garden of the Righteous - Riyad as-Salihin of Imam Nawawi; Hadith No. 815, p. 160.)
The Prophet forbade the skins of wild animals being used as floor-coverings.
The Prophet said: "Do not ride on saddles made of silk or leopard skins." (Narrated by Mu'awiah.
Abu Dawud [see Riyad, Ref. No. 28]; Hadith No. 814, p. 160.)
When the Holy Prophet(s) migrated to Medina from Mecca in 622 A.C., people there used to cut off camels' humps and the fat tails of sheep. The Prophet(s) ordered this barbaric practice to be stopped. The temptation for the people to perform this sort of vivisection on the animals was that the juicy humps and fatty tails could be eaten while the animal remained alive for future use. To remove this avidity, he declared: "whatever is cut
off an animal, while it is still alive, is carrion and is unlawful (Haram) to eat.

the same with pig's meat, it's Haram. if pig's meat is Haram, it has nothing to do with cruelty or such...

Quote:

About slaughtering animals,I suppose you are talking about Eid Al Idha,so you should know that sacrificing animals during it is not an obligation,or even a sunna,it's a tradition,that muslims have after the story of Ibrahim,
but still I don't see anything wrong about it,Islam does not have a position for or against consuming meat,there is no suggestion in the Qur'an or in any other of the Islamic sources that eating meat is good for physical or spiritual health. Islam's approach in this matter is neutral; it has left the choice to the individual, but those who opt to eat meat are urged in the Qur'an Majeed to eat in moderation. (The Qur'an 7:31; 5:87 and other verses).

yes, it's rooted in the story of abraham. sacrifice is different from meat-consuming and it's not limited to Eid Al Idha. muslims do it extensively in different occasions, from specific relligious occasions to oblation.
it's a tradition to sacrifice for faith cure or to avoid evil eye...
well its a rule in Hajj or ZUmra and still not limited to it.

To every people did We appoint rites (of sacrifice) that they might celebrate the name of Allah over the sustenance He gave them from animals (fit for food) but your Allah is one Allah: submit then your wills to Him (in Islam) and give thou the Good News to those who humble themselves
22:34
Therefore to thy Lord turn in Prayer and Sacrifice.
108:2

Quote:

The Prophet(s) forbade all living creatures to be slaughtered while tied up and bound. (id (Ref. No. 46); Hadith No. 4817; p. 1079).

really? i heard just the opposite:
it's Mostahhab(suggested) to tie 3 hands/legs of sheeps and 4 hands/legs of cow and let the hens flutter after cutting their throat.

Quote:

It is not their flesh, nor their blood, that reaches Allah; it is your righteousness {piety and spiritual volition} that reaches Him?.Their flesh will never reach Allah, nor yet their blood, but your devotion will reach Him (Qur'an 22:37).

so?

Quote:

The main purpose of allowing Muslims to continue with animal sacrifices was to turn this tradition into an institution of charity. All the verses of the Qur'an Majeed which deal with the subject wind up with the proviso that the meat be fed to the poor, the needy, those who are too modest to beg as well as the mendicants - those who beg openly (The Qur'an, 2:196; 22:28; 35-37).

so what?
the first subject of sacrifice is God and the poor use the remainder. look at the story of Adam's sons, there was no poor on earth!!! or the story of Abraham/Ismail, it was just for testing the Abraham's faith...(another philosophical problem here)
is meat the most important thing that the poor need?
it's just explaining out... they have to do something with the meat of their sacrifice and as God can't consume it but the poor can, it's contributed to 'em.
this idea of sacrifice is toooooo old as ancient ppl used to sacrifice (even child-sacrifice was common) to their gods to satisfy 'em or to avoid their rage... this IS the historical root...

Quote:

So now what do you think of your sentence "islam DID forget animals (or maybe was unable to see them something more than moving food or carriage...)?

what am i suppose to think?
i still believe that , lets look at your examples which explicitely spoke about animals_ but as i don't wanna copy-paste 'em here, i go with numbers:

food: 7
carriage:2
other:3 (ram, target, bird)

3/4 of 'em is about "food/carriage", let me help you with more examples from Muhammad's quotes:

- Jinns won't attack someone with blooded horse in his house.
- 3 things make a muslim fortunate: one of 'em is good riding.
- spending money on horse is as necessary as maintenance(Nafaghah).
- spending on horse is like spending on charity.
- the angels won't participate in your entertainments except the wrestling and the horse-riding.

sorry but all i can do when i hear such things is LoLing and feelig deep sorrow for the ppl who believe 'em ...
BUT
as i suggest you to be honest/brave, i have to be so myself, so as next to MY examples there are YOUR examples too, then there are FEW not-so-primitive teachings in islam...

when you said you'll "reform another answer" , i thought this time you'll bring someting new and reasonable BUT unfortuately you just repeated the repeated...at first i didn't want to respond but ok, here's my response to those vapid repeated statements:

Quote:

I think my answer was clear,it's widely known that the islamic era is characterized as one of the best eras of tolerance and development,you have already said that the situation in persia at that time was like shit,I dare you to say that the islamic conquer did not bring enormous benefits to persia,unless you call a war where two countries confront in middle ages a persecution,that was the rule at that time,every nation was looking for
expanding their borders,the islamic state was no exeption,that's all,I have said this many and many times here why do you keep ignoring it?let's quote wikipedia only in its introduction about the islamic conquest of Persia:
"The Islamic conquest of Persia (633-656) led to the end of the Sassanid Empire and the eventual decline of the Zoroastrian religion in Persia. However, the achievements of the previous Persian civilizations were not lost, but were to a great extent absorbed by the new Islamic polity."

the same old shit...pathetic...

Quote:

ibn khaldoun?where? AlMukadima(the introduction)?

yep, pages 285,286.

Quote:

he must've took his information from someone else,who is he?(please provide me with valuable references,books,if possible chapters,pages because I think I have all of those history books)
besides,Ibn Khaldoun is known for his hate towards arabs,I quote him saying "once becoming arab(a place) it's destroyed",so it does not surprize me to find out that he really reported such an incident,remember that the book of Ibn khaldoun is not really a history book,it talks more about civics and philosophy ...
Can I know where you took these information from,a source?because I have seen wikipedia and not few history books and none seems talking about it...

honestly, i don't know him at all and i don't know what his books are about and i don't care, all my sources are persian and they introduced the book AlMukhadima as ONE of their sources for the book-burnin in Madayen_ plus other sources.
i can give you a vast list (the sources of my sources plus my persian sources) but I'M DEAD SURE YOU DON'T GIVE A FUCK and will deny them all BUT who cares, your denial dosen't change historical facts.
(i'm not sure about some translations of books' names and there are different versions/translations so page numbers won't help you, but for being accurate, i'll even put page numbers too)

- Tabari
- 2 centuries of scielnce
- Iran's social History
- Yaghubi, V:2, P:123
- Akhbar-Ul-Taval, p:120-121,123
- Yaghut, Mojam-Ul-Baldan, V:2, P:107
- Ibn Balkhi, p:116
- Tajareb-Ul-Self, P:30,75,81,82
- Oyun-Ul-Akhbar, V:1, P:76,77
- Moravej-Ul-Zahab, V:2, P:160
- Almaref, P:115
- Ibn-Khalkan, V:2, P:277
- Altanbih, P:275
- Alfehrest, P:338
- Adab-Ul-Ketab, P:192
- Balazari, P:300-1
- Aghani, V: 4, P: 423
- Asar-Ul-Baghiah, P: 211
- Tabarestan History, V:1, P: 164,174
- Barthold Turkestan, P: 185
- Van Vloten, P:3
- Tazkerat_Ul-Shoara
- Tarjom_Ul_Hokama
- Sasannian's civilization
- Alkharaj, P:55
- A review of Iran's History
- Ibn Asir, Total History, p:340
- Al-Fotuh, p:223,215,282
- Systan's History, P:80
- Rozat-Ul-Safa, V:3, P:311
-...


just ONE of my sources had more than 150 sources (Arabic/English/Persian/French/...) and you don't expect me to type them all here.

is this enough????????????????????????????????????????????????????
of course not... your eyes are bilinded by faith. open your eyes to see the reality...

Quote:

how do you expect from some one who follows a religion that incites religious freedom,freedom of thinking,that encourages every kind of knowledge, scientific research and litterature to do something like that?Muslims are known for taking benefits from the previous nations books and studies,do I even need to go further in this point?
should I even bring evidence for this evident point?the hadiths "Seek knowledge even in China", "Seek knowledge from the cradle to the grave", and "Verily the men of knowledge are the inheritors of the prophets", have echoed throughout the history of Islam and incited Muslims to seek knowledge wherever it might be found. During most of
its history, Islamic civilization has been witness to a veritable celebration of knowledge. That is why every traditional Islamic city possessed public and private libraries and some cities like Cordoba and Baghdad boasted of libraries with over 400,000 books. Such cities also had bookstores, some of which sold a large number of titles.
That is also why the scholar has always been held in the highest esteem in Islamic society.How do you then expect someone like the Caliph Omar to say something like that?

what a gentelman...i'm realy impressed!!
your gentelman is responsible for all those atrocities we mentioned before.
if it wasn't for Ferdowsi and other Persians' resistance, we would be speakin Arabic now!!
they were afraid of Persians national language and fought against our script/language/books/libraries/...
when Ghatib-Ibn-Muslim_ Hajjaj's warlord_ entered Kharazm for the seconf time, killed everyone who wrote by Kharazmic(english word?) script, burnt books_ SOURSE: Asar-Ul_Baghiah
Caliphs tortured and opressed those who wrote or rhyme about Persia's glories and in admiration to their ancesstors. SOURSE: Aghani, V:4


still you blindly continiue denying...

Quote:

Really?what about wikipedia?I have read some of the pages about this conquest and surprizingly,there is no record of cities being destroyed,actually persian cities knew a lot of growth and developpment after the conquest.
and now moving to that emotional sentence,I am not going to take part by part,but let's give you some important points:
you should try to take a less narrow look on the islamic history,now if we just suppose that horrible things happened in persia,what about other places muslims entered,syria,lbanon,jordan,egypt,north africa,spain,far east...
why did a large part of the locals there keep their religion?hmm?what happened to the 'forcing against their will'?
and what about the pparts of the world that islam reached without war?Indonesia is the biggest muslim nation (number of citizens) and no muslim fighter ever entered it.you cannot still concentrate on one case of Iran and
ignore the rest,you should look at it all,as one set.

wikipedia is not the ultimate reference... if you can't find something on it, you can't deny that fact...
i don't care how other nations were converted to islam, and our topic here was over Persia.
you're makin me mad but don't worry i don't want a warning but i have to say:
Fuck the islamic conquest.
emotional??? they are historical facts of muslims savageries and you call them emotional? what is emotional is your shallow admiration for islam and ignoring facts.
you even dare to deny history in favor of your islam...that's really abject.

Quote:

this is the kind of discussion that messes with my nerves,how come that the answer is in front of your wide open eyes,and you just,fully aware,put in bold the wrong part,this is crap mr Soze,please,try to avoid such things,okay?
can't you see in the beginning of the sentence "those who wage war against God and his apostle" what do you expect from us?to embrace them?to hide?to run away?to demonstrate?unbelieveable!

no Mr. black winter. war has its rules...it's not a civilized approach to explain every deed in the name of war, the opposite of hiding is NOT cutting off hands and feet from opposite sides!!

Quote:

"..Therefore if they withdraw from you but fight you not, and (instead) send you (Guarantees of) peace, then God Hath opened no way for you (to war against them)."

what a decent God!! don't attack those who gave up war...

Quote:

So these are the true meanings I think behind the apperantly terrorizing verses that you posted here and in the Religion:double standards thread,and now I can claim that your sentence "this is backed up by the Quran" is foundless

you call those "explaining-outs" responses?
whatever the reason of the war is, whoever the enemies are, whoever the victims are, war has its rules...
i reiterate that they do not justify unlimited atrocity suggested in Quran.

Quote:

and 9/11 ,and attacks of Madrid,and attacks of London....
and so what?dthose are unfortunate events but does this prove anything at all?and this Dutch being was "well educated" what does it mean?so was most of the criminals in history.And I thank you for the touching but mostly unnecessary details.

if you can't see "what they prove"/"what they mean", i can't help...
you CAN see but DON'T wanna accept.
they all had their INTERPRETATIONS OF QURAN which was different from yours.
they were muslims maybe different from you, but you can't deny their mental-base being islamic teachings. why do you think your interpretation of Quran/islam is the only one?

Quote:

you should know that many muslim scholars consider Zoroaster a prophet,the shiites and sunnies who follow Malik ibn Anas(one of the four imams of the sunnis),some people dismiss Zoroastrianism as paganism or fire worship, but it is said that originally the fire was a symbol of the covenant with God or the commitment to follow the divine light and to abide by the religious laws; the aberration happened when some people or followers later
on started to worship the fire itself, so it developed from being a symbol to being an object of worship.

huh...i don't care what muslims say about Zoroastrianism!!!
BTW,
i won't call it "plagiarism". of corse all relligions/cultures/ISMs/nations/... have had affected others and been affected by others.
BUT
As "the oldest of the revealed credal religions", Zoroastrianism "probably had more influence on mankind directly or indirectly than any other faith"_ Boyce 1979, p. 1.

It has been asserted that key concepts of Zoroastrian eschatology and demonology had influence on the Abrahamic religions. _Black & Rowley 1987, p. 607b. & Duchesne-Guillemin 1988, p. 815.


plz...plz...plz...don't comment on something you don't have enough knowledge over. the comparision of relligions needs vast historical/social/mythical/theological/linguistic/derivation/chronological/etc knowledge that you & I don't have.
so only QUOTE from VALID sources.

after all, are you really teaching us what Zoroaster says?

Quote:

There are several clear prophecies about the advent of Prophet Muhammad in the Zoroastrian scriptures. The first one is mentioned in the Zend Avesta (first category of the Zoroastrian scriptures) which says that the burning fire that they used to have constantly burning in their temple will actually be extinguished, and historically speaking, it is
reported that when Prophet Muhammad was born, for the first time that fire was extinguished in Persia.
Also the extinguishing of the fire could imply the disappearance of that form of religion as developed after Zoroaster, because when Islam came to Persia, very few Zoroastrians were left because the rest embraced Islam.
The other aspect of that prophecy is that when this fire is extinguished, it would be associated with the so-called powerful restoration of the world, and that may imply the correction of the adulteration or deviation that have taken place after Zoroaster.
The other prophecy is from the Dasatir (the second category of Zoroastrian scriptures) which says that while people are so much engaged in deviation from the path of truth, there shall arise a man among the Arabs, as interpreted from the original words, who is going to overthrow the oppressive government, and that was the kind of government that existed in Byzantine and Persia in the early days of Islam.
It also said that those who used to direct their prayers towards the temple of fire will direct their prayer now towards another house which will be stripped of its images. It is known that the Ka'bah, toward which the Persians now turn in prayer as they have become Muslims, was actually filled with idols by the Arabs; it was only through the advent of Prophet Muhammad that it was purified and stripped from all of these idols and that the purity and
simplicity of the worship of One God was restored again.
The scriptures indicate that the person who will bring about that change is one who will be a law-giver, someone who received revelation in the form of law, and that applies to Prophet Muhammad.
It also describes him as eloquent, and that description really fits Prophet Muhammad as he was very eloquent in his sayings and speeches. Also the Qur'an that God revealed to him is unsurpassed in eloquence.
But still,I cannot give any confirmation aboutthis issue because I don't know enough about it,but muslims believe that God's mercy and guidance are not only restricted to the Middle East area, but include all humanity, and they were not restricted to the known Abrahamic faiths. Muslims cannot say that because no prophet of Zoroastrianism, Buddhism, or Hinduism is mentioned in the Qur'an then these religions are free or void of any credibility or that they have nothing to do with the message of various prophets.

bullshit....even not worth respondin.




about this part, the only reasonable sentence is this:

Quote:

It is wrong to see one side of the coin and not to see the other side.Any philosophy that concentrates on one
aspect of the creation and denies or ignores the other side is partially true and partial truths are no truth at all.

in case of God, it can't be considered one-sided-view, why? cos when you speak of absolute things only ONE contradictory example can be a refutation to that absolute/unmitigated/plenary idea.
i remember you said you're good in maths then i bring a VERY SIMPLE example from maths:
claim: ALL prime numbers are odd.
contradictory example: 2 is an even-prime-number.
then: the claim is incorrect.

and the relation to God:
claim: God is ALL-good.
contradictory example: there's a SINGLE/TEMPORARY/INDIRECT evil "done" by Him.
then: God is not ALL-good.

ok, and by takin God's other attributes into consideration, there's even no need to "DO" the evil to be evil:
lets enter God's omnipotence & omniscience into the previous example:
claim: God is ALL-good.
contradictory example: there's a SINGLE/TEMPORARY/INDIRECT evil "not-prevented" by Him.
then: God is not ALL-good.

and the first evil which was "not-prevented" by Him was Shaytan (satan), though he COULD due to his omnipotence and KNEW (the concequences) due to his omniscience... despite this, God "allowed" him to "survive" and to "mislead" humans... then God is not ALL-good.
as simple as that...

Quote:

But then the question is why does God allow these exceptions to the rules?
The Quran tells us that good, evil and whatever happens in this world happens by God's Will. Only God knows fully His Will. We finite beings cannot grasp fully His infinite Will and Wisdom. He runs His universe the way He deems fit. The Qur'an tells us that God is Wise and everything that God does is right, just, good and fair. We must
submit and surrender to His Will. The Qur'an has not given us all the details about God's Will, but it has enlightened us with the guidance that is useful and sufficient for us.

enough said, another version of these Hadithes from Muhhammad:
- think about Allah's gifts but not His essence.
- think about the creation but not about Allah, that you'll be perished.

Quote:

1. First of all, God did not make this world a permanent world. This is a temporary world and everything here has a time limit. When its times comes it will die, come to an end and finish. Neither the good things of this world are forever, nor the bad things eternal. We are here for a short time and we are being tested. Those who will pass this test will find an eternal world that is perfect and permanent. Those who will fail this test shall see the evil
consequences of their sins and corruption.

no need for further explaination according my previous respnses, the simple question is:
why should an ALL-good God "allow" the happening of evil even in short terms?

Quote:

2. God has placed a physical law and a moral law in this universe. God allows suffering to occur when one or more of these laws are broken. The physical law is based on cause and effect. Sickness comes if one does not take care of one's health or is exposed to infections. A car accident occurs when one is not alert, or drives in a careless manner, or if the cars are not checked, roads and freeways are not made and kept in right shape, or the
traffic laws are not right or not properly enforced. Study of causes and effects is very important to facilitate safeguards. Even here we should keep in mind that God often saves us and He does not let us suffer from every negligence. How many times it happens that we are not careful and still we reach safely to our destinations?how many times did you not really deserve to be saved but then did get saved?

again the problem is not "He does not let us suffer from every negligence", first your claim is not provable, it's just a matter of faith and second as i said befor the problem with God is not "the evils he could have done but didn't" or "the evils could have happend and he prevented" BUT "the evils he could have not done but did" or "the evils happend and could have been prevented" .
plus, Allah is omnipotent then is not restricted to cause/effect.
and sometimes it's not the direct side effect of our own carelessness, for example ppl are born with heredetical disabilities, mental disorders, ...




BTW,
and you're still completely missin one point in my post:
-you just mentioned an old philosophical problem with God's omniscience.


lets assume you did not respond cos i didn't make my point clear, ok, i'll try to explain my point clear enough but plz read carefully...

God is said to be omniscient, right? then as you mentioned he knows who goes to hell/heaven even BEFOR they are born. lets take the example of that woman who was sent to hell for her misbehaviour towards that cat and call her Ms A. God knows everything including every change, every thought for change, every chance for change, every possibility for change, every decision for change and finally every attempt for change, therefore his knowledge doesn't change itself, cos if it changes it means there was something, a change, that he was unable to forsee. so if we take a snapshot of what God forsees befor Ms A's birth, this snapshot won't change during Ms A's life, suppose in that snapshot Ms A mistreated that cat at the age of 30...
ok, Ms A is born, grown up is now in her 30 at the moment just befor that behaviour, here we go:
Q- if at this moment we take another snapshot of what God forsees, is this the same as the first one?
- if yes, then she has no chance for change, then she is not free.
- if no, then these two snapshots taken in different times of Ms A's life differ and therefore God is not omniscient due to the reasons mentioned above.
lets see the same question in another way:
Q- is there any chance for her to not to do that?
- if there is, then God is not omnisient.
- if there is not, then she is not free.






though you couldn't find any proper answer, you were not brave and honest enough to admit your islam is crap,i'll do instead of you:
*it is crap*



Fuck!! i'm an idiot!!! for spending my time arguing over islam...and posting those long shits.

Unfortunately your post contained some very important points but I have already told you that I will not answer any of your posts as long as I find unserious comments like"your Islam is crap" "you are blinded by..",and this one "Fuck!! i'm an idiot!!! for spending my time arguing over islam...and posting those long shits."who on earth would have envy to answer after such a comment?and do you think you spent more time than me writing your post?although I kind of knew that you will come typicly and refuse to admit even basic clear things,plus ignoring lots of parts of my post,at least have descency to answer them all,quote them all one by one,like I did with your post,answer them all,and give importance to every part,in some parts of your answer you quote a whole set of arguments,then comment vagely upon one,in other parts,you cut my sentence in a way that makes it seem meaningles,I mean you are kidding no one here but yourself.I don't see any good from spending a lot of more time again explaining the very few interesting new points of your post,and by the way I think you are the one who needs to admit that 'islam is great' atleast for the overwhelming evidence about animals in Islam,I thought that was irrefutable and you know it means nothing to admit it,it does not proove tat God exist or that Islam is true or anything,you said Islam neglected animals,and I am sure I prove you wrong,you said that Islam back up unjustified violence,and I am also sure that I prove you wrong,but I was very surprised that you,stubborn,still insist on denying it.

WOW. what long posts! i shall spend more time to read them.

At Black Winter, have you heard of a movie called "Beauty and the Beast" ?
there we have two main characters, I myself see both sides. the beauty side and the ugly side.

+
when I'm starving, I eat food.
when I'm thirsty, then I drink water. etc

when a god is lonely, he creates some shits.

when A does B, C will take place.

you get my point or i should explain more ?!

Written by Mosquiller on 07.08.2008 at 01:58

WOW. what long posts! i shall spend more time reading them.

At Black Winter, have you heard of a movie called "Beauty and the Beast" ?
there we have two main characters, I myself see both sides. the beauty side and the ugly side.

+
when I'm starving, I eat food.
when I'm thirsty, then I drink water. etc

when a god is lonely, he creates some shits.

when A does B, C will take place.

you get my point or i should explain more ?!

AESHMA,at least people like you make more sense to me,you think we are all prisonners of a lonely god that,in some ways makes us go under severe things,but who is also sometimes loving towards us,which are the acts of a lonely person?that making food or water available is no generosity from god because he makes us feel hungry and thirsty?otherwise I have failed to understand your point,I will ask you to explain more about this circumstances and consequences thing.

Written by Black Winter on 06.08.2008 at 23:01

you cut my sentence in a way that makes it seem meaningles...

i guess you mean the part about Ibn Khaldun not being present at that time.
sorry about that, i deleted it from the post. i should've paid more attention to your following sentence "he must've took his information from someone else,who is he?" to know your intention...

oh, i was about to forget, about not wishing to respond: no problem, i know possible answers (not necessarily yours) and the answers to those answers and can even post 'em here instead of you...

Written by AiwiAstwihad on 09.08.2008 at 11:37

i know possible answers (not necessarily yours) and the answers to those answers and can even post 'em here instead of you...

same here, ,I always thought about it this way but some how never verbalized it

Written by Black Winter on 09.08.2008 at 11:44

same here, ,I always thought about it this way but some how never verbalized it

so you can "lol" too!!!

note: to avoid further misunderstandings, it was "necessarily" not "necessary" ...

Written by AiwiAstwihad on 09.08.2008 at 11:57

so you can "lol" too!!!

I am "surprizing myself" here,because you know,I am not omniscient
and BTW I didn't even notice this 'necessary'.

Written by Black Winter on 09.08.2008 at 12:17

Written by AiwiAstwihad on 09.08.2008 at 11:57

so you can "lol" too!!!

I am "surprizing myself" here,because you know,I am not omniscient

one more off-topic post:
leastwise it's a good progress towards more lolS from you
but i AM omniscient due to the extraordinary power SATAN gave me!!!
well seriously, i didn't mean so, that's why i wrote "possible answers"...

italy terrorism

Quote:
The first one is mentioned in the Zend Avesta (first category of the Zoroastrian scriptures) which says that the burning fire that they used to have constantly burning in their temple will actually be extinguished, and historically speaking, it is reported that when Prophet Muhammad was born, for the first time that fire was extinguished in Persia.
Also the extinguishing of the fire could imply the disappearance of that form of religion as developed after Zoroaster, because when Islam came to Persia, very few Zoroastrians were left because the rest embraced Islam.
The other aspect of that prophecy is that when this fire is extinguished, it would be associated with the so-called powerful restoration of the world, and that may imply the correction of the adulteration or deviation that have taken place after Zoroaster.
The other prophecy is from the Dasatir (the second category of Zoroastrian scriptures) which says that while people are so much engaged in deviation from the path of truth, there shall arise a man among the Arabs, as interpreted from the original words, who is going to overthrow the oppressive government, and that was the kind of government that existed in Byzantine and Persia in the early days of Islam.
It also said that those who used to direct their prayers towards the temple of fire will direct their prayer now towards another house which will be stripped of its images. It is known that the Ka'bah, toward which the Persians now turn in prayer as they have become Muslims

From where are you drawing these craps ??
all of these have been written during post-islamic era of iran.
'Avesta' had over 300,000 words during 'Achaemenids', around 250,000 words during 'Sassanids' and today around 80,000 words.
'Zoroaster' has wrote the 'Gathas' part himself and the other parts are written by the others.
all the things from avasta that can be trusted shall be found in the true avesta and zarathustrian scriptures which are very rare ones.

Quote:
don't you know that God already knows wether people will go to hell or heaven,actually even before their birth?

Quote:
We are here for a short time and we are being tested.

So all of the happenings are scheduled!!
if he knows..., why does he test ppl ?? to test is to find out who deservs to go to heaven or hell and while he already knows about it, the test would be worthless.
you earlier said that any muslim should avoid commiting suicide, but as i found out it is already planned from before and god will send him to hell for what he himself has planned.
did god know that in the year of 1979 the islamic repulic will rule over iran and will fuck iraninas and even the whole world ?!! did god know what will hitler do after his birth ?? stalin ??

Quote:
and what about the parts of the world that islam reached without war?Indonesia is the biggest muslim nation(number of citizens) and no muslim fighter ever entered it.

Only an example shits on the other ones.
I don't give a shit about the other parts of the world.

Written by Black Winter on 07.08.2008 at 13:02

AESHMA,at least people like you make more sense to me,you think we are all prisonners of a lonely god that,in some ways makes us go under severe things,but who is also sometimes loving towards us,which are the acts of a lonely person?that making food or water available is no generosity from god because he makes us feel hungry and thirsty?otherwise I have failed to understand your point,I will ask you to explain more about this circumstances and consequences thing.

You obviously have failed,
what is the end of creation? to worship?
that just meant god is not needless coz if he was he wouldnt have created us.

To foresee something is in no way making it happen,try to understand that first
Then,you cannot make a conclusion that Islam spread by violence and forcing only based on what you claim happened in persia,simply because there is a lot of other examples that prove you wrong.
God is needy?I don't think so,the same Idea has been implicitly mentionned thousands of years ago,in the Quran,God really was not in need for humans because there was already angels to worship him and everything,I don't understand why people are still on road to 'decoding' God with pre-aquired wrong references?what you seem to know about rules of this universe may not apply well on God.

What about dinosaurs ?!!
god needed more puppets.
angles, to worship,
humans, to worship, but leting them do some bad things to entertain him more.
humans kill eachother and he just laughs at them.