Dear friends,
I finally found the time to sit down and record a podcast about my views of Islam and Muslims. I hope that this podcast will set the record straight and clearly explain my views. For those interested in this topic, here are the links to a series of articles I wrote on the related topic of “Russia and Islam”:
Russia and Islam series:
http://10.16.86.131/russia-and-islam-part-one-introduction-and-definitions/
http://10.16.86.131/russia-and-islam-part-two-russian-orthodoxy/
http://10.16.86.131/russia-and-islam-part-three-internal-russian-politics/
http://10.16.86.131/russia-and-islam-part-four-islam-as-a-threat/
http://10.16.86.131/russia-and-islam-part-five-islam-as-an-ally/
http://10.16.86.131/russia-and-islam-part-six-the-kremlin/
http://10.16.86.131/russia-and-islam-part-seven-the-weathermans-cop-out/
http://10.16.86.131/russia-and-islam-part-eight-working-together-a-basic-how-to/
and a few related articles:
http://10.16.86.131/russias-civilizational-choice/
http://10.16.86.131/the-fighting-imam-of-donbass-must-see/
http://10.16.86.131/ramzan-kadyrov-offers-putin-his-own-personal-volunteer-chechen-special-force/
http://10.16.86.131/a-muslim-police-officer-dies-a-heros-death-and-receives-russias-highest-honorary-title-hero-of-russia/
You can listen directly to the podcast here:
or you can download it from here: https://archive.org/details/SakerPodcast1304042017
Finally, here is the YouTube version:
Thanks for a great podcast! I have 3 comments/ questions:
1. If the “jews” are not the jews of the old testament but Talmudic jews, and the Catholics are not real Christians but Frankish schismatics, then Orthodoxy is the oldest monotheistic religion (of the big four) because the Talmud, Islam, and the Vatican all appeared afterward the old & new testament. Correct?
2. When the bible refers to “God ‘s chosen people” who will “return to Israel’ this is referring to the Orthodox returning to Israel??The whole prophecy about “God’ s chosen people” becomes very strange if one considers them to be Orthodox and not Talmudic jews…
3. Where does freemasonry fit in? Apparently it has origins in ancient Egypt so it is older than Orthodoxy? Is there a relationship between freemasonry and Talmudic judaism?
Reply to question 1:“then Orthodoxy is the oldest monotheistic religion” yes, absolutely. I claim that Orthodoxy (i.e. real, traditional, historical Christianity) is the faith of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, i.e. Old Testament Judaism. You could make the case that Hinduism, correctly interpreted, is also monotheistic. And since the Vedas, at least in their oral form, might be fantastically old (some suggest 12’000 years!) it is hard to say that Orthodoxy is the oldest religion out there. As for the Talmud, Islam and the Vatican appearing later that is simply undeniable.
Reply to question2: “When the bible refers to “God ‘s chosen people” who will “return to Israel’ this is referring to the Orthodox returning to Israel?” No, at least not in the material sense. Remember that Christ said that His kingdom was not of this world. We are talking about a “new Jerusalem” a “heavenly Israel” if you want. The Israel of the Old Testament is, of course, a proto-image of this future spiritual Israel, but the Orthodox church is not in the business of creating settlements or displacing locals. This is a purely spiritual category illustrated symbolically.
Reply to question 3: Where does freemasonry fit in? Apparently it has origins in ancient Egypt so it is older than Orthodoxy? Is there a relationship between freemasonry and Talmudic judaism? Freemasonery is much more recent, it was created in 17th-18th centuries. They do *claim* that they take their roots in the times of the King Solomon, but that is also an allegory. There is a pretty good case which can be made that the kind of “black spirituality” you see in Freemasonery was imported into Europe by returning Crusaders who learned that stuff in the Middle-East. Maybe. I am more inclined to think that there always was a gnostic semi-covert undercurrent in the West and that it eventually gave birth to the kind of speculation we see in Freemasonery. As for the link between Freemasonery and Rabbinical Judaism, I think that it is well established and undeniable. By the way, the Latins have regularly explored the Kabbalah and I believe that so-called “Christian kabbalists” and Freemasons have a lot in common. As did the Rosicrucians, the Illuminati (the real ones, not the modern ones), possibly the Templars and the Cathars. Then there are also the Bogomils, the Judaizers, etc. etc. etc. etc. All these neo-gnostic movements have esoterism and all sorts of hidden teachings in common. These are all symptoms of the kind of spiritual delusion (πλάνη) which the separation from the Church results in.
Kind regards,
The Saker
Hi Saker
Peace.
I don’t quite understand what is meant by Islam Christianity and Talmud appearing later that Orthodoxy.
Jesus is a prophet of Islam and so is Adam. So how can Islam appear later.
Could you explain.
The way we Muslims understand it is very simple
The followers of prophet Moses who accepted prophet Jesus continued on Islam and those who denied him were no longer on Islam
The followers of Jesus who accepted prophet Muhammad continued on Islam and those who denied him were no longer on Islam
Anyone who accepted all the prophets including the prophet of his time is a follower of Islam
Thus Christians denied prophet Muhammad and Jews denied both prophet Muhammad and prophet Jesus.
Only Muslims accepted all the prophets.
And peace and blessings upon all the prophets from Adam to Muhammad.
Only Muslims say this last sentence.
Dear anonymous Muslim
From Adam to Noah, from Noah to Abraham, from Abraham to Moses, from Moses to Jesus. Isaac’s line ends there. Ishmael’s continues with Mohammad. And for Muslims, Jesus to Mohammad. And from Mohammad?
Every prophet had a successor according to Mohammad.
https://www.al-islam.org/discovering-islam-moustafa-al-qazwini/succession-prophet-muhammad-imama
http://www.sibtayn.com/en/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2133%3Aforty-seven-sayings-about-imam-ali-a-s-from-prophet-p-b-u-h&Itemid=335
Some nice ones from the second link:
35) The Prophet (P.B.U.H) said, “Ali (A.S) and his shi^a are the successful ones.” Ibn Al-Maghazeli, 47; Mizan Al-^Itidal, 2/313.
41) The Prophet (P.B.U.H) said, “Whoever splits with Ali (A.S) has split with me, and whoever splits with me has split with God.” Ibn Al-Maghazeli, 45; Yanabi^ Al-Mawda, 181.
Regards
Dear
The sunni sufis are the Shia or Shian e Ali
Not the kufans who martyred the family of the holy prophet pbuh and who called themselves shia and continue to do so to this day.
A real twister, isn’t it.
Peace
Peace and guidance to you
“Not the kufans who martyred the family of the holy prophet pbuh and who called themselves shia and continue to do so to this day.”
Calvin to Hobbes: Isn’t it sad how some people’s grip on their lives is so precarious that they’ll embrace any preposterous delusion rather than face an occasional bleak truth?
I feel so sad when such a crass augment is made, a completely ignorant one. Which, nonetheless, because of its vile nature, forces a reply.
You call yourself or imply that you are a Sufi, yet you allege the same venom that the takfiri (and the Sunnis for generations) have for the Shia, that they killed imam Hussein. Such vile propaganda. Does it even merrit a response? Will humour you this once.
Shia means partisan. The moment a man is enemy or fights another, there is no way he is a Shia of that imam anymore. The kufans who betrayed hussein, along with the medians, the meccans, the bedouin, the Muslims in general of that time failed their duty to the progeny of Muhammad. The ones who killed the progeny were the ummayads. The reason the ummayads came to be in the position of power was because of your three caliphs and their misguided (even satanic) policies. These are the same three, who you do not disassociate from, but shower with respect. Reason and you will see the harm that they did and how different things would have been if Ali had led. But more than that try to see beyond a label or a statement like the one you made.
There are so many books that the Shia have written, because it is such a vile slur, keep it up.
http://www.shiapen.com/comprehensive/who-killed-imam-hussain.html
About your sufiism
The imams that the Shia follow have repeatedly rejected sufi practices that border on the extreme. These are the imams that are guided. For most part it is these wayward practices that led to the rise of wahabism.
Will tell you a simple difference between the Shia and the sufi and the wahabi.
Say Allah is the head of a state, and Muhammad is his vizier, and the ahlulbayt other ministers of state.
When the wahabi wants something he says I’ll go to the head of the state and ask directly (forgetting that the devil said the same, I will bow to you, not Adam, even though Allah has appointed them (ulul amr) guides)
The Shia go to the ahlulbayt and ask them to ask God. And your sufis go to any and every auliyah and pir. It’s like going to a bank and talking to the clerk instead of the manager. Although holy, in their (pirs) words, they are but dogs in the street of Ali. Their status is derived from the ahlulbayt. They become close to God because of their closeness to them (the guides).
There is this hadees, I heard in the mosque, where imam Ali entered a town and the people came out to greet him, and said you must visit our holy men in the mosque. He asked what do they do? They replied they pray all the time. He asked who provides for them. The villagers replied we feed them. He said your dogs are better, they protect you and warn you.
http://www.sibtayn.com/en/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5835:imam-al-sadiq-and-discussion-with-sufis&catid=565&Itemid=649
https://www.al-islam.org/verses-ghadir-al-mustafa-center-islamic-researches/2-prophet-s-foretells-about-twelve-imams
Regards anonymous
Is it not true that some Shia’s make takfir on some Companions of the Last Prophet (PBUH)? If so then this issue of “takfirism” is not just limited to the Wahabis of Nejd?
Thanks. Very interesting and educational presentation.
Saker, I still have a ways to go with this podcast… but aren’t you hitting a strange note right at the beginning when you say Eastern Orthodoxy had nothing to do with the crusades? I heard that it was one of the Byzantine emperors who pleaded with Rome to send a force to defend them from islamic onslaught. While I understand you want to say… “not us, and we suffered from them”, but maybe not quite, “not us”. On the other hand, I do quite object to the ready blame Muslims heap on the West, and that probably goes the other way too. The blame game never seems to have any winners.
Vera
What is the connection between the Papal Crusades and Byzantium cry for help from the Papacy to defend themselves? May I suggest: None.
And as far as the blame game is concerned, can you give me an example of Muslims invading or pillaging the Western world in the last 150 years? Can you come with one? Let me give you what has happened in the Muslim world in the last 15 years only, being on the receiving end of Western democratic love: invasion of Afghanistan on the pretext of the 9/11 lie; The Iraq debacle; Libya, Syria , Yemen, Somalia to name a few, with a total destruction of these societies, countless killed and maimed. And you come and ask why the “blame game”? You can’t be serious!!??
While that is true. You are being disingenuous with that statement.In the “heyday” of the Islamic countries powers there were countless attacks on Christian states. And also the same is true for Christian states attacking Islamic ones.But since the late 17th Century the Islamic states military power was on the decline.And we saw most of the Balkan,Caucasus,and Eastern European territories they had conquered freed from those Islamic Empires (Ottoman Turkey and Persia) that had seized them during “their” centuries of military greatness.Earlier we saw the Islamic Caliphate’s armies seize Christian populated territories throughout the MENA. And even three-fourths of Spain and all of Portugal. As well as shorter lived takeovers of Sicily (several centuries) and tiny other Italian and even French Christian lands. So yes,for the last 150 years there may not of been attacks by Islamic states on Christian ones.But that had much more to do with the military powers of the two sides than it did with anything to do with religious co-existence.
In an age when ,unlike today,it was much easier to reform economies and military structures, the Islamic Empires wouldn’t do so.There were a couple of attempts,but they weren’t pushed hard enough to succeed.That left those states, centuries behind Europe in economic and military strength.Some would use the excuse that it “couldn’t” be done. But the example of Japan proves it “could” be done, if a nations leaders were willing to do it. No matter what the high cost involved.We hear very little about the Japanese modernization that over 70 years brought Japan to be the equal of most European countries in the World.But from what I’ve read in the past it was a very “harsh” process.That age gave few concerns for the “common people” in that time. And many were reduced to almost slavery in the quest to modernize and industrialize. To become “honorary Europeans” as it was thought back then.But they did accomplish that modernization.Proving that,yes it could be done by a non-European nation. Even in an age of European Imperialism. But it wasn’t done in the Islamic World.And that left the door “wide-open” for European Imperial states to impose forms of Colonialism and now Neo-Colonialism onto Islamic states.
Even today,no Islamic state has been able to turn that around.Certainly there are a “handful” of rich states in the Islamic World.But those are all ,small in area,or population. And all of them gained that wealth through their natural resources exploitation.Not through industrial development.Many would ask why that is so.My thinking is that it isn’t “only” because of the West’s control of them. Though that does hamper greatly their progress.But instead,I believe it is because they haven’t “internally” made peace between religion and material progress.We see Wahhabi and other jihadi thinking (with immense strength in those states) more than happy for their societies to live in a version of the long dead past.While for a while you saw secularism on the rise (not carried far enough,but still there),today there are very few states that are secular in the Islamic World.And the debate,as we can see,still is ongoing in those states.In Iraq until a decade ago,there were women and minorities of non-Muslims accepted as equals (or at least almost so).Today,most minorities have fled or been killed. And women or almost required to wear the Hijab.Those not doing so risk attack or murder.In Egypt,without Sissi the Muslim Brotherhood would still be in power.And even now terrorism and attacks on Christians is common.Libya,destroyed by NATO,true. Didn’t rise up a secular system to replace the NATO destroyed one (which was actually pretty secular,all in all).But instead has warring groups,all of whom seem to want to compete on which is the most backward thinking.
It is in the ex-Soviet states that today we see the most secular states of the Islamic World.Not the most “honest” or most “free” perhaps.But the most modern and secular.Modernism and freedom,are not synonymous no matter what we are told by some Western thinkers.And I would say that is because those states under the Soviets broke the power of “political” Islam.Now today some of that power is being recreated (sadly). In attempts by some in those countries to “return to there roots”. But that ,if successful,will doom them.Undermining the legal and social equally of their citizens is a giant step backward to a Medieval past.The Russian acquisition and then Soviet rule left those countries more modern and better educated than any of their Islamic neighbors. And enforced equality of peoples and the sexes in those states gave them a foothold in modernity.But just as with Ukraine,in a different way perhaps,but also in ways similar.It will be a total tragedy if some current elements undo the progress of more than a century. And create “Afghanistan’s” of those countries.
You haven’t been to Egypt(where women voted before they did in the U.S. or Britain), Morrocco(popular tourist destination), Lebanon(known for it beautiful woen , mostly because they don’t were the burqa, nor hijab), Syria(before the impose conspiracy against her by the U.S. and Israel),
You haven’t been to Algeria, nor Indonesia. Malaysia is a wonderful, blessed country to visit.
The worst thing that happened to the Arabs, and mostly Islamic world, was the Ottoman Empire. True, they set us back. But if the Islamic world had joined in the slaughter of WW1, and WW2, maybe we would have been forced to quickly build up infrastructures that would later go on to do civil applications.
The Turks were morons. But then again, Islam and by far the overwhelming majority of Muslims just want to go about their business living. They don’t really want a piece of hegemony, belligerence and grandiosity.
Things go around in cycles, soon the Islamic world will rise again, just wait for the One-Road, One-Belt initiative to go into full swing.
The empire, the west had better play their cards right, is all I got to say.
Heard it all now. Many thanks! Always good to hear another point of view, especially from the Orthodox side. I have been studying Islam intensely for two years now. For all it’s worth, my experience so far (based on reading the sources and interacting with Muslims online) has not helped quell the alarm I felt when I finally read the Koran and studied the history. I have met two kinds of Muslims — those who are actively hostile to me and my beliefs (I am a theist) and stoop to personal insults, and those who are polite but when pressed will come out with the affirmations of how they understand Islam to be that is completely incompatible with my, cough, non-dhimmified existence, shall we say. Both kinds are dedicated to Islam as an ideology of conquest and supremacy over everybody else. (One correction: one lady I met is dedicated to reforming Islam. She is new to it.)
I find it mindboggling that you think that Christians were better off under Muslims than under Latins. There is a great deal of obfuscatory western historical “scholarship” that appeases Islam and sings praises of supposed lovely coexistence. Critics of this approach are few so far, and have to write under pseudonyms, which speaks reams. I would find it very useful if you would describe that in greater detail.
I do extend Muslims basic civility, but not often do I find it extended back. The Koran tells them to not take us for friends, and it shows. We (Christians and Jews and others) are vilified in their scriptures, and it shows. And the West is vilified by imams the world over, and it shows.
You say they have been tolerant people to you — but what would happen if they had power over you and yours? That is the crux of it, isn’t it, and that is where dhimmitude comes in. Like the mafia, Islam says: join up, pay up, or die. How prevalent is this point of view? It seems very prevalent based on many surveys, as well so far my own experience.
There is one thing that I flat out object to in your presentation. You said that Western Christians started the confrontation with Islam, with the Crusades. Not true. Islam overran vast Christian lands from Spain all the way to Persia, and applied subjection or the sword. The Crusades were a feeble and limited effort to counter that. There were many different Christianities in those lands; they were almost all islamized or fled. So I guess I also disagree that the abuse of non-Muslims was contained to the Ottomans and that it wasn’t the norm in history, though I am sure it could be debated regarding very specific periods.
Where I do agree with you is that Muslims should not be lumped together as if they all thought alike. They are people like any others and should be approached as individuals, not as Islam. And if they did take seriously the injunction about no compulsion in religion, things would turn around. But so far, I find, that the later violent verses make more sense to very many of them.
I find it mindboggling that you think that Christians were better off under Muslims than under Latins.
Yes, the Western propaganda and social consensus is very good at inducing that kind of mindblock. It’s always the “other” who is a beast. Never the western Kulturträger.
I do extend Muslims basic civility, but not often do I find it extended back
Did you ever wonder why? Or is it simply because Islam is bad and makes Muslims bad too. Since my experience is the exact opposite, it makes me wonder how it is that we, apparently, met such radically different people.
Where I do agree with you is that Muslims should not be lumped together as if they all thought alike.
You missed my point. It is the dramatically different versions of Islam which ought not to be lumped together. When you say X Y or Z about Islam you are already lumping together totally different phenomena.
I am absolutely amazed at how hard it is to bring this simple point across: you (collective you) say “Islam this, Islam that”. I ask WHICH Islam. And, again, its “Islam this, Islam that”.
Is it really so hard to understand that there is no such thing as one Islam? And neither is there one interpretation of the Quran.
I often wonder if people are even interested in fact – seems to me that you already have you opinion and that this opinion will not be affected by ANY facts.
Frankly, this is rather discouraging…
It makes me lose hope in my fellow human being to see such ironclad, determined obtuseness
Dear Saker: that axe about blame game falls the other way too. I have even seen a Muslim saying — I my impression is that this is not a lone opinion — that to admit the huge role of Muslims in the slave trade would be unfair to the Muslim young who would have to bear that “guilt.” Historical dishonesty as policy. So all the politically correct go on about the transatlantic slave trade and tiptoe around the rest of it.
I think, regarding the different Muslims you and I met can be explained easily: I meet them over the internet. Don’t know any Muslims personally. Over the internet, people are largely anonymous, and will admit to things they never would in person. They are also willing to be ruder! :-) I am sure you have noticed!
Are there dramatically different versions of Islam? A good question. I think that when it comes to ideologies, each person carries a unique take on it, be it Christianity, or Islam, or marxism. There is a middle ground, where groups of various sizes propagate their own understandings, and that I see like you… many groups, many understandings — the main difference being that within some ideologies, you are allowed to voice them, and within others you get persecuted for it. Then there is the overall picture… for me, that picture comes together from three parts: strong historical trends, current prevalent views, and the writs. On that level, islamic reformers don’t even make a blip on the screen, so far. The totalitarians have almost all the umps, and it’s their game.
Greetings of peace Vera
Reading your post, I get the sense that before commencing your study of Islamic sources, you had pre-conceived notions of Islamic ideology, in particular its views on the relationship with non-Muslims, and selectively assimilated those “evidences” that helped entrench your confirmation bias.
For a more nuanced and holistic view on approaching the study of the Qur’an, I suggest the following book by Sheikh Imran Hoosein:
http://www.imranhosein.org/inhmedia/books/MethodologyforStudyoftheQuran.pdf
Greetings to you too, Ismaeel, I did not have any preconceived notions at all, except stuff I got from history classes which was the usual “look at the wonderful coexistence in Andalusia.” I was a total babe in the woods. Then I read the Koran and did a double take — I keep on learning though, and thank you for the link. I hope you keep on learning as well. Cheers.
Vera, I feel sorry for you. As the Saker said, be wary of ignorance.
All your ‘sound-bites’ are right after western propaganda and bias against Islam.
The Quran states that ‘do not take Christians and Jews for friends, when they have befriended one another’….true. But its a historical anomaly for Christians and Jews to be friends. They never have except in very modern times under the odd marriage of Zionism. Christian and Jewish Zionism is an ideology, and one that is very hostile to Islam, thus you have the portion of the Quran I just mentioned.
Muslims were in Spain for 800+ years, name me one massacre of Christian or Jewish civilians. Just one please. No, there weren’t any. In fact, Christians ad Jews were allowed to practice their own religions freely. In fact, Jews thrived in Muslim Spain, with one Caliph having a Jewish Foreign Minister.
In 1492, when Islamic Spain fell, Muslims and Jews suffered greatly through the western Christian inquisition. Death, or conversion. All Islam asked for was a ‘tax’. Seems very different policy to me. In 1099, when the Crusaders sacked Jerusalem, every living thing was killed. Men, women, children and even animals, by the illiterate, felons that swooped in and were whipped into a killing frenzy by the Pope and his regents.
Indonesia, the most populace Islamic country, became Muslim and not one sword was unsheathed. Same with Malaysia. Even the barbaric Mongol hordes that swept through the Islamic world, having had the upper hand, settled down and converted to Islam en masse.
So please, look for an in-biased interpretation(s) of the Quran, before you try to think you can understand it literally or symbolically. Both apply. And even Islamic scholars caution against interpretations not knowing literal or symbolic meanings.
Islam is the fastest growing religion on earth, by conversion rate alone. Ever ask why that is? Because, as we Muslims believe, the Quran is the last revelation from God to mankind.
If you had a favorite author, and you read some of his books, and you heard he has another book out, wouldn’t you want to read it with an open mind?
Stay away from clichés and simple mindedness. Entrenched bias will do you no good. I don’t know where you live, but if you can, look up your local Mosque, don’t be afraid, you wont be traded as a slave or get forcibly converted. You will even walk away with your head. Also you will walk away a more enlightened and tolerant person. Do yourself that favor some day.
Again, Jews and Christians have 0 in common, in fact, the Levite Rabbis betrayed Jesus and you should see what Jews say or believe about Jesus and his blessed mother in their Talmud, which the vast majority of Jews will tell you supersedes the Old Testament. At least in Islam and the Quran, we revere and hold high both blessed people. In fact, Mary, will be one of 4 women in creation who will be admitted into paradise first, no questions asked. The Talmud speaks of Mary as a ‘harlot’ and a ‘fornicator’ who had sexual relations with a Roman soldier.
There are aprox. 1.7 billion Muslims on earth, if the Quran told us to victimize, kill, convert forcefully everyone else, the world would have gone up in smoke centuries ago. Think about that. One in five people is a Muslim.
I firmly believe that whomever respects, and co-exists with the Islamic Umma(world), stands to benefit by leaps and bounds into the new century and beyond. I see Russia and China doing so, to the determent of the Christain-Jewish-Zionist-Evangelical west.
In 2015 alone, the West dropped 23,144 bombs on majority Muslim countries. In 2016, it was increased to 27, 451 bombs. And yet, despite Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, etc fiascos of just recently, the Islamic world is still passive and tolerant.
Out of the 1.7 billion Muslims, perhaps there are 1 million hardcore fanatics of the Wahabii or Salafi sub-branches that are propagandized as an ‘Islamic Terror’ wave. That’s probably 0.009% of the Islamic world. Again, if the Quran was such a hostile book as you believe, Islam would have overcome the globe with hostility and death. But it seems to me that Zionism, Evangelicalism of the Jewish and Western Christian alliance is the one that’s increasingly belligerent, hostile and hegemonic.
Thus, Islam and Ruum(Orthodox Christianity have and continue to suffer from said alliance. Naturally, Islam and Orthodox Christianity will get ever closer and help one another, as we currently see in Syria and the Donbass. Even in WW2, Muslims and Orthodox fought and died together en masse against the Nazi armies.
The Quran tells us that the honorable Orthodox are the true Christians, as well as Nestorian and Chaldrian Christians are the one to make and keep as friends. And what do you know, a book wriiten 1400 years ago is right on the mark.
Cheers. And Salam to you.
This is very enlightening but those who already had their conclusion before they started their “research” still wouldn’t see anything sensible in what you took your time to explain.
Salam.
“Muslims were in Spain for 800+ years, name me one massacre of Christian or Jewish civilians.”
Dear Bored,
You might benefit reading “A Saint Under Muslim Rule” — by Dom Justo Perez de Urbel, which describes Muslim rule over Cordova Christians in the early 800s.
Incidentally, the book reveals the so called “Iberian proto-Renaissance of the 9th century” was largely the product of persecuted Christian scholars attempting to save classical learning in murderous conditions. By-the-by, these Christian scholars found an appreciative market for their transcriptions in Gaul.
All blessings on you and your family,
RC
Vera,
I wonder…why you atheists think, that you must sey your oppinion everywhere, even to go into a relligious dialogues?! I have allways wondered?! Its a very strange behaviour… I am content with my feith, and never go to your websites to argue with you, because I simply do not care what you think…. I had enought of this poison at school….
Dear Hajar, why do you assume I am an atheist? I am not.
There is a supernatural war going on which is not commonly recognized, as such. To make sense of the place of Islam and Christianity in the world today, one needs to examine their respective scriptures that define the belief systems, and the personal characters of the founders1, Mohammad and Jesus. Nowhere in the New testament does Jesus exhort his followers to invade, murder, rape, enslave, tax non believers. On the other hand, the Quran is replete with commands to subdue, enslave, execute those that are not believers. Jesus tells his people to turn the other cheek when insulted, but what does the Quran teach? Mohammad is presented as the perfect person, and the only true role model for his followers. I question the spiritual qualifications of anyone who looks for guidance from a rapist, murderer, pillager, bigot, assassin, and general all round bad guy.
Looking at the current manifestations of the Islam and Christianity is not the correct way to analyse the situation. The vast majority of those that claim to be Christian are of a nominal type, who rarely read their book, and same goes for those claiming to be Muslim. And a good thing that most Muslims have a very poor understanding of their scriptures, because if they followed them, then the world would be a far wickeder place. One must not forget the basic conflict between Satan and God, and why we are in a world of Sin. God will prevail over Satan in His time. I see Islam as a concoction of Satan, as the Quran panders to the base human fallen nature caused by Sin entering the world. That is why is is so appealing, because it does not encourage spiritual elevation, but applauds the inherent sinful nature of Man. Muslims will dispute this, but you judge a tree by it fruit. The New Testament invites followers of Jesus to be born again and receive the Holy Spirit and become new people.
The two belief systems have nothing in common whatsoever. Like so many workshop manuals say, tongue in cheek, ‘when all else fails, read the instructions’.
I am curious – did you even listen to the podcast?
(just wondering)
Perhaps you should have also delved into the differences regarding evangelical Christians (ie American protestant religion) and Orthodoxy. The disconnect above is blatant.
Davi’ not sure about the direction of your question, but somehow I suspect that Christ ( in human mode) would be scratching his head when looking at what passes for current North American Evangelicalism. I know that I certainly do. Like I said in my post, the founding document of Christianity, the New Testament is the only basis for believers lives. Culture and Tradition over the years have resulted in substantial ‘mission creep’, to the degree that the original intent is unrecognizable.
Saker, yes i did listen. I am a Russian Orthodox by baptism, Melbourne, Australia. Parents from the CCCP post WW2, so I have a deep desire to understand what makes this world tick. Studying the scriptures of both Christianity and Islam is more than just a hobby, as is the unfortunate history of Islam and Christianity. Both fall short of God’s ideal. The essence of all conflict is the fact that Satan exists, and opposes God. I would like to think that at least that is agreed upon? I have been following your blog for several years since stumbling on it, and will continue to do so, as it is politically sound and informative. Thank you for your work, and though being an unwealthy pensioner, I have supported your work.
But like any legal contract, the respective scriptures that dictate believers lives cannot be reinterpreted for the sake of convenience.
Sounds like you ‘conveniently’ ‘interpreted’ Islam as the work of Satan. To that I say look out ! Australians are converting to Islam in decent numbers. There are 1.6 billion of us. What will you do !
You are correct that many people, including Australians, are converting to Islam.
But I don’t have to do anything, other than make people aware of the teachings in the Quran and the New Testament. Jesus will sort it out on the Last Day.
“The essence of all conflict is the fact that Satan exists, and opposes God.”
In Islam, it is God that has merely granted satan respite till the day of judgment.
He is trying to prove Man is a less worthy creature than him by enslaving and leading him astray.
Vented a bit?
How many gods do you believe in?
“And a good thing that most Muslims have a very poor understanding of their scriptures…” It certainly looks like you, my friend, have an extremely poor understanding of YOUR scriptures…
“the basic conflict between Satan and God” – do you mean that the Creator of the Universe has some conflict with His creation, or are you talking about some “skirmish” in the Pantheon? You see God and Satan as equals?
And yes, we judge a tree by the fruit – wherever islam ruled, domicile nations and religions are still intact, and wherever christianity ruled (specially western) – kiss the cross or die!
Do christians obey Jesus and “turn the other cheek”? Please name some examples (if you can find them)……….and, please, stop this charade: you follow the teachings of the arch-pharisee Saul from Tarsus, and you do not follow the teachings of Jesus the Christ, son of blessed virgin Mary, peace and blessings of God Allmighty be upon them both!
The elephant in the room (for all discussions of religion, not just this post) is ideology which is religion for the less than pure of heart.
Peter, did you read your scripture? I read this Luke 19:27 ”But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them–bring them here and kill them in front of me.”
Peter, do pleasre quote where in the quran it says to go rape..am waiting
Anon: Not Jesus speaking. A parable. Jesus is, however recorded saying: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.
The Koran tells how Mohammed killed the men of a conquered tribe, and divided the women as slaves for himself and others. Many islamic scholars (some even in American universities) say that consent is not needed in women slaves. And that slavery is just fine. There is the rape. Do you personally define such rape out of existence also?
Quote from Quran where it says rape please
Ask Imam Google, he his more than happy to help you out. Please do your own research if you have any questions. It is much more satisfying than taking someone else’s word.
Peter, I am a muslim I have read Quran from cover to cover many many times, dont lecture me about what faith, take your islamophobia somewhere else. Your kind is only heaer to misinforme ppl.
FYI our Muslims in former Yugoslavia are 99% converted Serbs, who hate their roots and their origin. They were granted a nationality in 1974 Constitution, so to make a confusion (actually a spin) as they are different ethnicity. Recently they were granted an updated name: Bosniaks, along with their “genuine“ (sic) language. Google is now claiming all pages in Serbian latinica as Bosnian language, asking for translation. Obviously this is an ongoing agenda. Since, historically, Bosniaks and Serbs are actually relatives, they lived in peace till the war was triggered to dismantle Yugoslavia.
OToh Kosovo Albanians are not converted Serbs but illegal immigrants who inhabitted Kosovo after Ww2. Hence the difference in behaviour and volume of hatridge towards Serbs… backed and mobilised by anglo zionists.
As for Islam as a faith, if we are strict as we should be about the Truth, we already know that if not influenced by Holy Spirit then it must be influenced by other force. If not praying to Holy Trinity then who you pray to? Holy fathers are very clear about this.
New age religion is about uniting and not confronting, so there must be voices to call for a peace among all religions, based on some human tolerance. Curious to see those voices in Islamic world.
Quite the opposite! So many of todays Serbs are forced-to-convert Albanians, Montenegrins, Macedonians, Bosniaks, Wallachs, Cincar, Torbesh etc, etc.
Care to show the proof that you are influenced by the Holy Spirit? Or do we have to check with the holy fathers on your behalf?
” If not praying to Holy Trinity then who you pray to?” God, the Allmighty, All Knowing, Creator of the heavens and the earth? ……….and of the holy fathers………..
“..Bosniaks and Serbs are actually relatives” – No, we are not relatives! One does not rape, kill, maime, expell and genocide his relatives! No matter what’s their religion or affiliation. Name one nation among your neighbours that actually likes the Serbs! Just one! Nah, they are all bad, only Serbs are good – that’s why they all hate serbs! It must be that “they hate your way of life” – the same as the “whole world hates USA”
How did the Anonymous comment on April 06, 2017 at 12:23 pm UTC come through?
Serbs are so evil that everybody hates them and rightfully so? Really? Or I don’t understand something?
Hello both anonymous’s … we have been down the ‘Balkan Flame wars’ many times on this blog. Please find another topic or another blog as this never gets resolved … mod-hs
I have to say I am very glad I am free from all these religious chain.
“Name one nation among your neighbours that likes the Serbs”. Our neighbors are NATO and EU. What’s your point?
Excellent podcast! Good sound but short. It left me wanting for more.
So Islam has its heresies just as Christianity and Judaism. Judge them by their fruit. But be warned that either you or your children will eventually have to eat them. So if you are truly loving then judge truthfully or as you say, witness.
My understanding is that Christians,Muslims and Judaics (not Jews because being a Jew is an ethnicity and conflating ethnicity and religion, as we have seen, leads easily to confrontation thru obfuscation) alike were warned that will happen by Muhammad and Christ. We were warned because of our fallen nature. To ascend from that state to our intended place we need to better ourselves.
How to achieve that? Love,forgiveness,compassion,knowledge,… virtues transmitted to us from God. We are given a choice to follow words of God-clearest expression of free will. We are also told what will happen to us if we do not-we will be cast away. So, instructions are included just as consequences.
That being said i see no reason against peaceful coexistence. We are even instructed to do so. If there is no compulsion in religion and scriptures specifically say so then we are not obeying our Creator if we do not try to find means to coexist. Yes, because of our doctrinal differences it does put that task at a higher difficulty. But how can we expect to be in a presence of God if we cannot raise above such trivial(in comparison to rewards) hardships put before us?
Nice explanation of Russian view toward Islam. It does explain a lot. It certainly does explain well the view Serbs have toward Islam. We were exposed to Ottoman version of Islam. Here i am glad that people like Sheikh Imran exist, that decry Ottoman use of Islam as a tool. I see how Muslims can see Christianity if they were exposed just to its heresies-just the same. Changing of that perception thru dialog is extremely important because it touch upon one important issue. Grievances are real,crimes are real,suffering also,on all sides. But the responsibility for them is misdirected.
I would like to ask what you or Sheikh Imran can tell me about Sheikh Hassan Farhan al Maliki?
My personal experience with Muslims in Serbia and in Bosnia (before the war) is entirely good. Is it because i had little contact with them or because i met only good examples, but the truth remains that my personal experience with Muslims is entirely good. My fathers best man was a Muslim and they are friends to this day. As a kid we were guests in their house, they were always welcoming to us and went to much trouble to make our stay pleasant so i understand how you felt as a guest to Sheikh Imran.
During my time in the army i had several Muslims serving with me. Two of them were such that at that time i would gladly give my life for them (although their ways were strange to me, religion for me at that time was something superficial) for they stood for what they believed and did not hide anything. That is a rare thing. Fasting during Ramadan thru basic infantry training is no small feat. I could not do it at that time. And we were the same age then. Rising earlier than the rest of us to drink water before sun gets up and not drinking a drop (i watched them hawkishly i confess and i am glad to have done so for i would easily discard their feat otherwise) till the sun goes down. Whoever went thru basic infantry training would understand the strength of will displayed there. And that will was not misguided for they were decent human being all around.
Here i would like to mention one thing that led me to like Sheikh Imran and connect to what he is saying. With us was one Muslim who could not read and write. He was eating just like the rest of us (minus aforementioned plus few others of which none was Orthodox Christian to my knowledge) pate that included pork. That by itself is not big thing here in the Balkans. Faith here is as i mentioned before, more of a cultural than religious thing which might be a good thing seeing all those heresies around. Serbian Orthodox Church is plagued also by myriad problems just as the Serbs as a whole. So, if something or someone is coming from Serbia and you happen to like Serbs beware that we have our own 5th column and “useful” idiots. Now, those two friends of mine told him that what he is doing is wrong and pointed him to a label that clearly said that pork is included. His answer horrified me. My imam told me that it is ok to do it. Whether he did told him so or not is not the point. The point is that the power that preachers have over those who could not read is tremendous. That sobered me to the responsibilities of the clergy and their power also. Whenever i hear emphasis on knowledge and understanding i listen carefully and hope that others will also.
That leads to another point. If we have a problematic person within our family what are we to do? To distance ourselves from them? We told them they are wrong and they did not listen what can i do more? First, do not be like them. Second, be there for them when they need help and they will be needing help. Simple, yet so difficult. Now, apply the same principle to Church and Uma. When i encounter such attitude i cannot but support it.
On a lighter note, after this wall of text,let me tell you a joke from Serbia. Petar and Marko were walking thru a desert dying from thirst and hunger when they come across a mosque. Petar says let us go in and say we are Muslims and ask for food and drink. Marko answers to him, i will go in but i will not hide that i am Orthodox Christian. They entered the mosque and presented themselves as Alija and Marko and asked Imam for food and drink. Soon, both arrived and were put in front of Marko. When Petar/Alija asked Imam what about food and drink for him, Imam answered to him, brother Alija you know it is Ramadan and we fast.
The Eastern Emperor Alexis I requested help from the papacy after the the defeat at Manziket (1071A.D.) where Romanus IV was captured by the Turks. The pope responded by asking the western monarchs to go to war against the Turks. As for the bad feelings between the crusaders and the the Byzantines, part of it stems from the belief on the part of the crusaders that the Byzantines were not during there share of the fighting and were treacherous.
As for the 4th Crusade, they were invited into Constantinople by Alexius IV to help him depose his uncle Alexius III. After deposing Alexius III, when they did not get paid the crusaders sacked the city. The pope responded by excommunicating the crusaders.
Second there was a papacy long before the 10th century. During the Ecumenical era there were five patriarchal sees:Rome, Alexandria, Antioch, Constantinople, and Jerusalem. Rome was considered Primus inter Pares. Among the Eastern Orthodox at least two of the Roman Popes are considered saints: Georgy I and Leo I. Also not all the Roman popes were Latin at least 10 were Greeks. So you see Orthodox, Catholic relations are not as simple as the author makes it seem.
Crusaders not getting paid? As in Foreign Legion or any other mercenary/terrorist group? I read that as mercenaries/terrorist not getting paid it is within their right (what that right would be i wonder) to kill,burn,pillage,rape and desecrate, so their acts were justified. That is the similarity of Crusades to Ottoman Jihads. Heresies are all the same and normal sane people that value life are same also.
About that excommunication, was it not revoked later for everyone involved but Venetians? Meaning that others were absolved from guilt but Venetians were not. Hypocrisy and base politicking. That is why in the East, Pope and what he represent means nothing but to predict when and from who the next attack would come. Weather vane for trouble.
It still look simple to me. Up to a point there was one Church and one Uma and the next moment heresies sprang all over. Sometimes i wonder was it not somehow related to Khazars conversion to Pharisaic law?
Hi Dragan, thanks for your input… I am a sunni muslim from Morocco and my close friend here in Sweden is Dragan an orthodox christian we seem to get along with each other well. When one is brainwashed to look at things in certain ways they will remain in that condition until they decide to change the way they think the way they see things…this applies all ppl in the world and to all faiths.
I am glad that you appreciated my input. Here is some more input from a decent human being. He is an American living and working in Serbia, his name is Charles Cather he has a you tube channel and he speaks there about his life in Serbia. So, if you or anyone else is interested how it really looks like here in Serbia and you are not put off by him being American,… although we here consider him an honorary Serb. He earned it big time by speaking honestly.
Here he is interviewing Moroccan National Basketball Team member during their stay in Serbia in 2015.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYhUd31ntPY
Is Serbia safe?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRQ0L7JjD5c
Is Serbia Safe for a Muslim Tourist?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErogSHdeMvM
Serbian Police vs. Arab Refugee Children
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jI-xtlbaODQ
Tolerant Serbs in Republika Srpska
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKAVCKqdx9M
Serbian/Palestinian Culture Night in Belgrade, Serbia
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-w4-YkQKG38
Its been a long time since I delved into this and I’ve forgotten most all of it, but yes, early on there were much debate about the nature od Jesus and the trinity. It can be said that there Christians who thought Jesus was not divine, and were various interpretation of the trinity, or even if there was such a thing.
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/trinity/trinity-history.html
As such, from my viewpoint (ignostic), it is much ado about nothing, and is political, like wondering if an egg should be broken form the big and of little end, and misses the practical and spiritual aspects of both Christianity and Islam, which is roughly the Golden Rule sort of teachings, as found in many other religions. The ‘fundamental differences’ are only as significant as what sort of abstract ideation, ideology, or stories, the brain can get involved with, or get carried away with, and hardly good reason to go to war or to kill or oppress people.
My Barney the Dinosaur doll, which sits near my computer to keep malware away, agrees.
Blue, I am surprised you think that Islam has the Golden Rule. I am told by more knowledgeable people that it doesn’t. Might you have a reference?
When Islam rule Spain
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PM8HnvuKbAo&t=715s
Well, yes. Unfortunately, that is turning out to be… not quite so. I just read The Myth of the Andalusian Paradise. I would recommend it. Thank you for the link.
‘Golden rule sort of teachings’
http://islamicbulletin.org/newsletters/issue_24/beliefs.aspx
“Oneness of Mankind
◊ People are created equal in the sight of Allah. There is no superiority of one over another for any reason except piety and righteousness. Muslims are required to respect the dignity of mankind, regardless of religion, race, nationality, or place of birth, all of mankind are honored.
◊ People are not to be judged on factors that they had no choice over, such as gender, color, size, race, health, etc. Islam teaches that human diversity is a sign of the richness of Allah’s mercy and the beauty of His creation. Prophet Muhammad said: “Surely Allah does not look at your faces or your bodies, but looks at your hearts and your deeds”.
◊ In Islam there are no priests, priesthood or holy men, and no one has special access to sacraments, there are however, scholars who are knowledgeable of Islam, and their duty is to truthfully explain Islam to others. THEY ARE JUST ADVISORS.
◊ Islam teaches people to be moderate in their life. Muslims should not give up totally this life for the hereafter, nor give up the work for the hereafter totally for this life only. ”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Pillars_of_Islam#Zak.C4.81t:_Charity
“Zakāt: Charity
Zakāt or alms-giving is the practice of charitable giving based on accumulated wealth. The word zakāt can be defined as purification and growth because it allows an individual to achieve balance and encourages new growth. The principle of knowing that all things belong to God is essential to purification and growth. Zakāt is …”
Also this
http://islam.ru/en/content/story/golden-rule-islam
This principle was stated several times by our Prophet Muhammad, so it is a principle Muslims should discuss when sharing Islam with people of other religions.
Anas ibn Malik (may Allah be pleased with him) reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said:
لَايُؤْمِنُأَحَدُكُمْحَتَّىيُحِبَّلِأَخِيهِأَوْقَالَلِجَارِهِمَايُحِبُّلِنَفْسِهِ
“None of you has faith until he loves for his brother or his neighbor what he loves for himself.” [Sahih Muslim, Book 1, Number 72]
An-Nawawi comments on this tradition, saying:
الأولىأنيحملذلكعلىعمومالأخوةحتىيشملالكافروالمسلمفيحبلأخيهالكافرمايحبلنفسهمندخولهفيالإسلامكمايحبلأخيهالمسلمدوامهعلىالإسلامولهذاكانالدعاءبالهدايةللكافرمستحباوالمرادبالمحبةإرادةالخيروالمنفعةثمالمرادالمحبةالدينيةلاالمحبةالبشرية
“It is better to interpret this as brotherhood in general, such that it includes the disbeliever and the Muslim. So he should love for his brother, the disbeliever, what he loves for himself which is his entering Islam, just as he should love for his brother Muslim that he remains in Islam. For this reason, it is recommended to supplicate for the disbeliever to be guided. The meaning of love here is an intention for good and benefit, and this meaning is religious love, not human love.” [Sharh Arba’een An-Nawawi, Hadith Number 13]
In another narration, he (peace and blessings be upon him) said:
وَالَّذِينَفْسِيبِيَدِهِلَايُؤْمِنُعَبْدٌحَتَّىيُحِبَّلِأَخِيهِمَايُحِبُّلِنَفْسِهِمِنْالْخَيْرِ
“By Him in whose Hand is my soul, a servant does not believe until he loves for his brother what he loves for himself of goodness.”[Musnad Ahmad, Number 12734, Sahih]
In another narration […]
——
and again at http://quraan-today.blogspot.com/2014/01/golden-rule-in-islam-treat-others-as.html
do a web search on golden rule in islam and you find others.
https://mtakbar.wordpress.com/2008/01/12/islam-has-no-golden-rule/
One of the myths repeated continously by Islamophobes and their supporters is the idea that Islam does not have an equivalent to the golden rule any where in its sacred texts. This myth is transformed into talking points and repeated over and over again until it takes on the status of truth.
…
Saker, man, you could easily impersonate Netanyahu. Same accent and voice. Sorry if I insulted you. Haha.
Yes, excellent work. I am Sunni, however I don’t have the least bit of a problem with the Shia. In fact, the ‘fitna’, or discord going on is a part of a Wahhabi-Western plot at division. Muslim is Muslim, and we can put aside the age old political argument about succession. It no use crying over spilt milk.
I firmly believe that Rumm(Orthodox Christianity) and Islam have one enemy, and should band together. Mr. Khadyrov of Chechnya is a force in this direction.
Sheik Imran Hussien is too. Also, the seizing of Constantine by Muslim armies is perhaps the biggest mistake and black mark in Islamic history. I for one believe the Ottomans set back the Islamic world in the Middle-East in terrible ways. We as Arabs and Muslims have no love for the ‘abomination’ that was the Ottoman Empire.
Keep up the good work. Btw, call up Trump on the phone and pretend your Netanyahu and sabotage the Israeli-U.S. alliance.
Cheers Saker. Salam my friend.
bored muslim: +100 to this. I am also a Sunni Muslim, and also have no problem with the Shia.
Just to add to your solid comment above, many people haven’t heard about the political work happening now in the Sunni Muslim community. Mr. Khadyrov invited over 200 Sunni scholars to Grozny last September to define what is “Sunni Islam” and they decided that Wahhabi Islam is not part of the Sunni community. For a long time, Sunni Muslim leadership (both state and religious), although in religious disagreement with the Wahhabis, were politically silent because they didn’t want to cut off the oil money. Now this is changing, probably due to the Saudi war in Yemen, and the Gulf countries interfering in Syria.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/the-sunni-conference-at-grozny-muslim-intra-sectarian_us_57d2fa63e4b0f831f7071c1a
Muslims are nice people, no doubt about that. But one also has to be realistic about the situation. Once Muslims are in power, then non-Muslims won’t be able to eat pork, won’t be able to drink alcohol, will not have equal rights, and so on.
What happened in Spain, with the seemingly benevolent Muslim occupation there, is just what you call the exception which proves the rule; and the rule, as mentioned by Vera above, is “join up, pay up, or die”. That is the reality of the situation when Muslims are in power.
Luckily, in most Christian countries at present, Muslims are not in power yet. However, in most Christian countries, the locals don’t actively remind the Muslims as to who has the power in that country, and so the Muslims take advantage of the situation and start going on about headgear, behaviour, music, Sharia law, etc. The exception to this is Russia, in Russia the locals definitely do actively remind the Muslims as to who has the power in that country, hence Russia gets on very well with Muslims.
The expression good fences make good neighbours comes to mind here, but that’s just for neighbours. From a societal sense it doesn’t mean a physical fence as such, but more like a behavioural fence, a tolerance fence, a red line that if crossed brings about consequences. It all boils down to the good old fashioned smothered in testosterone proper golden rule of “my roof my rules” or “my cave my rules”, either accept it or be on your way. No way “my roof your rules” is going to happen.
So Muslims definitely are nice people, but only when they don’t have power in your country. In much the same way, Jews are also nice people, provided they don’t control the media, the banks and hence the government in your country. Its all just about acknowledging people for what they are, acknowledging their inherent tendencies, acknowledging their birth rates, and then taking active pre-emptive measures to control those tendencies for the sake of peace in your country in the long run. Retroactive measures are also ok, since one is not always sober enough or awake enough to be on guard all the time.
Jews became agents/middlemen of the occupying Arab Caliphate.
They were cruel and vicious and abused their power.
That is why Jews were kicked out of Spain.
Do some research on the production of pigs in „muslim“ countries…..and check through history (unbiased) about what non-muslims used to eat and drink….
Anyway, Jesus Christ (a person circumcised eight days after his birth – and never complaining about that) says (according to your Bible):
„17Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them, but to fulfill them. 18For I tell you truly, until heaven and earth pass away, not a single jot, not a stroke of a pen, will disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19So then, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do likewise will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.…“(Matthew 5:18)
…said law forbids eating of pork and consuming alcohol (Old Testament)
Paul enters the stage and says (as a sole sorce of the „truth) in the famous Corinthians 2:
„11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: 12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. 13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; 14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;“
So, we have a dilemma: to follow the Christ (Messiah, Massih, the Anointed, the Decreed, the Appointed, Chosen) OR to follow Saul/Paul, self-appointed ex-cop who made a living by destroying the followers of Christ and his disciples…..
Well, much easier to follow Paul, sure….and heaven and earth have not passed away yet…..or did they?
Slm,
Brother I agree with you, but exactly the same goes for Islam today, lets fix our faith first, and then to correct the others…. because… “A soul will not bare the sins of another soul…” – this is what God teaches us….
To the Saker:
Why, for you, the Symbol of Nicee, which first promulgation was 325 and later confirmed in 381 in Constantinople, is the most sacred document of the Christians ? It is a document produced 300 years after the events by men. It is a political document, like a constitution, it cannot be sacred.
The oldest Christian documents are St-Paul’s letters. Saint Paul never met Jesus alive and he was not in agreement with the Disciples living in Jerusalem. It is Saint Paul who invented the Christianism, the 4 Gospels were written at least 50 years later and nobody knows who wrote them and there are full of contradictions.
This religion is man made and as such should be a matter of analysis and discussions. A book cannot be sacred, it is written by men and men are liars. I do not believe that one Christian in ten ( bishops and Pope included) are really believing in the Credo word for word.
I do not believe that one Christian in ten ( bishops and Pope included) are really believing in the Credo word for word.
I do. With all my heart and soul.
Actually, Saint Paul DID meet the risen Jesus, therefore alive.
You can’t understand anything about Christianity if you read only the ‘merde’ excreted by the Dawkins, Dennets, Hitchens, Onfreys and their ilk. You are a sad puffed up ignorant, which explains your arrogant insolence (or is it ‘chutzpah’ hiding under a French ‘noble’ sounding pseudonym – all the verbiage about Paul ‘inventor of Christianity’, ‘disagreement with the disciples living in Jerusalem’, ‘gospels contradictions’ is pure Jewspeak).
Salam Saker,
Excellent Podcast. An excellent book on this subject is called, “Children of the Alley” is a novel by the Egyptian writer and Nobel laureate Naguib Mahfouz. The earlier translation is called, “Children of Gebelawi” is not good at all. The title of the book in Arabic is “”Children of the Alley” which is the best translation.
It is a story of Gebelawi (God), Adam, Satan, Moses, Jesus, Mohammad and Savior (Mahdi)…. woven in beautiful tales in the opium dens where the children were always busy smoking sisha and telling tales….
Anyhow, Gebelawi builds the Alley for his children, so that eat out of the rent from the Alley. However, the thugs hijack the Alley for their own greed and keep the children busy in the opium dens. Comes, Moses, Jesus, Mohammad and try in their own ways to get the children out of the dens, and revert the ownership of the Alley to the children. As soon as Moses, Jesus, Mohammad are gone the thugs again hijack the Alley and children are back to dens. Throughout all this Gebelawi remains aloof.
The conclusion of the Mahdi tale is beautiful. Unfortunately, Naguib Mahfouz was finally murder by a fellow Egyptian for committing blasphemy.
Best regards,
Mohamed
Salam Mohamed,
The book you mentioned ” Children of the Alley” seems like a very interesting book to read.
I did a quick research on the author. Reviews say he was as gifted as Charles Dickens in being able to bring forth to the reader, vivid images of the towns, the housescand those that dwelled in it.
Terrible that this author Naguib Mahfouz, was murdered! Blasphemy is something I have a strong revulsion to. IMHO, it’s one of the highest non- physical insult a person can give a fellow human being. However, it can be dealt with, of course in my opinion, for example, through shunning, not reading his books, not allowing him into places of worship, fines for ” hurting the religious sensibilities of others” ( money of fine to go directly to a Mosque). Something along those lines.
To me, blasphemy at the core, is between God and the blasphemer. It is up to God, to punish blasphemy. It is not the job of another fellow human being, to murder a human being as this 80 something year old author was viciously murdered. Stabbed on his neck a couple of times becomes much, much vile a crime in my eyes and I believe in God’s eyes too, than any blasphemy he was alledgely or certainly guilty of.
Regards,
Carmel by the Sea
Peace Saker,
I have allways wondered to the followers of Ibn Taymyah… did you mentione, that most of them live in european christian countryes? This is one of the paradoxes of our time, theese are people, who dont like christians, but at the same time live in their countryes, and with their money…they are more a sectarians, and if youre a muslim and you try to question their views, they are ready to fight with you… many of them go exactly to daeesh and the other satanic groups in Syria…. they live in the western countryes, but hate them, and the western countryes hate them, but are taking care of them! So big is the lie in our time, that people cant realize what they are doing…. I allways ask them one question:”If you hate the west so much, why do you live there?” This is a lack of dignity, and self respect, and lack of any values! They do not care much of Islam, theyr believe is mostly outhward, and deep insight they are actualy a materialists, and not a beliveing people… I never feeled like Im talking to a beliver, when talking to them….so youre right about them, and thank you for the wonderfull podcast.
I have a question to ask. Sheikh Imran Hossein has given many talks like this one in Malaysia and it doesn’t tie in very well with what you have reported back to us.
Could you please go to 1:02:35 and more specifically 1:03:30 minutes in this sermon and listen for 5 minutes or so about what the Sheikh has to say about Alawites and the Government of Syria. It’s startling sectarian language and also of course very inaccurate . After the brief introduction, the sermon is in English.
https://youtu.be/-cNlHSiRnEg
Please, your words and leadership mean a lot to me. Can you explain why in Malaysia the Sheikh says things like this?
Salam Alam,
Sheikh Imran Hossein is very sectarian and I have mentioned this on this blog several times, due to the fact that he speaks in tongue and discreetly. This time he has come out openly against Shia, especially both Syria and Iran in the above referenced video and the time-period you refereed.
Right before the time period mentioned by you, he speaks highly of Sahih Bukhari, but on this blog he has mentioned that Sahih Bukhari should be in trash bin because it says that Prophet married a child of six years old. Double Talk! :)
A man of religion who uses Double Talk does not carry respect and he twists the Truth!
Best regards,
Mohamed
@ Amal Hayek
Sheikh Imran is criticizing Iran’s policy regarding Syria and Syrias past mistakes. He is warning Syria and Iran that Zionism is the enemy and that any injustice real or perceived will be used to instigate violence among Muslims. It was discussed here before. Bashars Syria did held prisoners for USA and did help in destruction of Iraq. Before that, Syria under Hafez Assad did cozy itself up with the West. What were their reasons to do so is debatable but it is a fact. Iran helped Muslims in Bosnia, together with NATO against Serbs. Syria today is fighting NATO and Iran did not recognize Kosovo. So, in mentioning past mistakes and injustices he tries to point out what are the weak and exploitable links for Zionism to use against Muslims. Criticizing Russia and China is ok but as soon someone point out mistakes made by Iran it suddenly becomes haram?
@ Mohamed
What i saw was that he mentioned Bukhari and Muslim also. He even quoted them. But my understanding is that they falsely transmitted hadiths and that is the reason for trashing. Some of them were transmitted truthfully while others were not. Some were given precedence not according to the Quran but to the current ruling dynasty and others were omitted entirely while others were changed. What they did truthfully belongs to Uma not to them personally. What they did not do truthfully belongs to the Devil. Following that methodology i see no reason to say that he uses double talk only that he expose those that do so. And what was the chair Sheikh Imran was referring to when he said that they do not want to use the specific hadith? Was he perhaps referring to modern day censorship using those same exact methods?
Bukhari or Muslim (not sure which) transcribed hadiths from other sources that still exist today and comparing them shows this to be true. Correct me if i am wrong.
Bukhari or Muslim (not sure which) transcribed hadiths from other sources that still exist today and comparing them shows this to be true. Correct me if i am wrong.
Salam Dragon,
Since you asked me to correct, so I am going to correct you. In Islam there are two tracts of theology, where as other religions have one tract of theology.
Muslims have Holy Quran which is the Word of God and Sunnah of Prophet Mohammad (saws), which is what the Prophet did, say, approved, disapproved, showed, agreed, not agreed and so forth.
The Sunnah of Prophet for both Sunni and Shia come from different tracts. Sunnah for Shia comes from Imam Ali (as) and his children, meaning the children of the Prophet as Ali was married to the Prophet’s daughters Bibi Fatima (as). Thus, Prophet’s descends come from Ali and Fatima, as Prophet didn’t have any male children who survived him.
As far as Sunni are concerned, in the beginning the first three Caliphs burned the Sunnah. The fifth Caliph onward cooked the Sunnah, which you alluded to. Two hundred and fifty years later this Sunnah was collected by Bukhari and his student Muslim. Thus, Bukhari Book is considered the Most Authenticated Book of Sunnah and NO Hadith in his Book is considered not the Sunnah of the Prophet. The second most Authenticated Book of Sunnah is the Book of Muslim. And, four more Books by different authors. Thus, from these Six Authenticated Books of Hadith, the Sunnah of Sunni comes from.
Now in theory all Muslims believe that the Quran is higher than the Sunnah of Prophet as Quran is direct Word of God and that the Sunnah should agree with the Quran. If it doesn’t then it should be discarded. However, in practice in Sunni Islam the Sunnah takes precedent over the Quran. The toxicity in the Sunni religion comes from this Sunnah.
From the Sunnah, minimally the following is derived:
1. Commentary (meaning) of Quran, the commentary of Quran in Sunni is very toxic as the Sunnah itself is very toxic.
2. Islamic Laws and Jurisprudence. Islam has at least Five different Laws and Jurisprudence. Four different groups of Sunni have four different Laws and Jurisprudence. The fifth being the Shia Law and Jurisprudence.
3. Islamic Practices. Again five different ways of Practices. Five different ways of Praying. Four groups of Sunni have four different way of Praying. The fifth being the Shia way of Praying.
And, so on and so on. If any Caliph wanted to marry a child, cook a Hadith and as the Prophet did it, why can’t we?
Also, 90% of Hadith in Authenticated Bukhari are not the sayings of the Prophets but other people. For example there is no Hadith in the Six Authenticated Books of Hadith, where the Prophet says, “I married Aisha when she was a six year old child”. It is Aisha who claims in all the Six Books, that when she was six years old the Prophet married her.
The Sunni spend all their energy that All Haidths in the Six Authenticated Books are All Correct. To cast a doubt on One Hadith is casting doubt on the whole Sunnism.
I challenge Sheikh Imran to give a hour or more lecture, casting doubts on some of the Hadiths in Bukhari by giving specific examples from Islam and Quran. It should not be his personal opinion, but a scholastic response. Post the video here and on Facebook!
Best regards,
Mohamed
So we have a question are Sunni even Muslims? Correct me if i am wrong here. I have difficulty determining from your words where you stand in this discussion.
Shia uber alles but especially Sunni? Shia can do no wrong? Nonsense i say. Humans are not perfect and they make mistakes. Those mistakes should not be hidden or overlooked because that path leads to more of them. Doctrine,tracts,schools,… can and should be studied and understood but people following them because they are deceived should be shown a better way. People that are deceived should not be discarded.
Imagine me saying that Serbs are the best people in history and that no Serb has done nothing wrong or even if he did, others have done more so it is acceptable . That would be exceptionalism. Trying to explain the other side and engaging in a dialogue is not.
Imagine me saying that all members of western Christianity are evil. It is not true, i have some in my family so i know it firsthand. But if you look what Ustashe did to us and what Muslims in Bosnia did to us both during WWII and during the 90′ i could easily equate their religion, which was on their lips when they were committing those crimes, with every Catholic and Muslim. However i do not. I did before,i confess. Did that helped me to live with them easier and with less friction? It did not. They were not responsible for the actions of the Pope or parts of Uma at that time. And we still will be living as neighbours, no matter where the state border is drawn.
I do not advocate more divisions. I do not advocate unity of something that cannot be united due to objective reasons but i do advocate at least peaceful coexistence. Your challenge to Sheikh Imran i view as arrogant. Excuse me for being blunt. How would you feel if i challenged you to prove something? If you accept, i led you there and who knows what awaits you there, if you do not than i imply my moral superiority over you. That is not a way to treat people. I would also like to see that kind of scholarly treatise as you do but i would try to humbly ask. The more i respect the person the more humbly. Forgive me for speaking like this about arrogance but it is my burden for a long time and i see it everywhere.
At the end i would like to ask again on what you base your accusation of Sheikh Imrans sectarianism? Why is it hypocritical of him to quote Bukhari and Muslim? How did he attack the Shia if he did criticize them for their mistakes? And lastly to what chair was he referring to in the video because he did emphasize it for some reason and i honestly do not know why and you were the one pointing that moment in the video?
Correct me again if i am wrong but please answer my questions.
Forgive me, but what is the difference in a personal opinion of a scholar and a scholastic response of a scholar?
Proof. Not just I the Sheikh believe that this Hadith is correct and that Hadith is not correct. Supposedly, all Hadiths in the Six Authenticated Books are Correct. Thus, if the Sheikh makes an assertion that the Hadith in the Six Books that according to Aisha she was six years old she married the Prophet is not correct, he has to bring proof to prove it.
There is lot of proof that Aisha was not six when she married the Prophet. But I would like the Sheikh to do that. By doing this, the Sheikh being a Scholar will destroy the Sunni Sunnah and much held belief all Hadiths in Sahih Authenticated Books are correct.
Bingo! He will then become a Shia by destroying the Sunni Sunnah.
Best regards,
Mohamed
I think the Sheikh has mentioned multiple times in multiple lectures about this . It boils down to Methodology.
Basically if a Hadith no matter how authentic (as even the strongest and most authentic Ahadith are onlyrelative to the Quran), goes against the Quran, we know that Hadith is false and is in reality unauthentic. If my memory serves me correct, the Sheikh does not accept this Hadith as being authentic about Lady Aisha being six when her marriage took place.
The Sheikh has mentioned this is his latest work on Methodology, page 93.
http://imranhosein.org/inhmedia/books/MethodologyforStudyoftheQuran.pdf
http://imranhosein.org/books/555-an-introduction-to-methodology-for-study-of-the-quran.html
Have you emailed him? I know he is rather busy with his Dajjal book.
Of course, Aisha was nine!
Bukhari or Muslim (not sure which) transcribed hadiths from other sources that still exist today and comparing them shows this to be true. Correct me if i am wrong.
Salam Dragon,
Since you asked me to correct, so I am going to correct you. Here are couple of examples of toxicity in Sunni Islam from the Six Authenticated Books, especially from the Books of Bukhari and Muslim:
Look at the above Hadith and see how toxic the above Hadith is and it is against the teaching of the Quran.
1. Prophet advises to drink camel urine to cure themselves.
2. He cuts off the hands and legs. The Hadd (Limit) Laws are well defined in the Quran and this is against the Holy Quran.
3. The Prophet tortures them.
4. The Prophet brand their eyes with heated iron.
5. The Prophet denies them water.
6. And, the Prophet leaves them to die in the heat without food and water.
The Holy Quran tells us that, “The Prophet is created a Mercy of all Mankind”. Correct?
Another example:
Show me in the Holy Quran:
1. A married person is to be put to death for committing fornication?
2. A person is to be put to death for leaving Islam?
However the Quran tells us, Qur’an 2:256 “There is no compulsion in religion. The right direction is henceforth distinct from error. And he who rejects false deities and believes in Allah has grasped a firm handhold which will never break. Allah is Hearer, Knower”.
Prophet sexual habits:
I challenge Sheikh Imran to give a hour or more lecture, casting doubts on some of the Hadiths in Bukhari by giving specific examples from Islam and Quran. It should not be his personal opinion, but a scholastic response. Post the video here and on Facebook!
Best regards,
Mohamed
Mohamed: you said, Show me in the Holy Quran:
A person is to be put to death for leaving Islam?
How about this?
Quran (4:89) — “They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing: But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah. 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.”
Criticizing Russia and China is ok but as soon someone point out mistakes made by Iran it suddenly becomes haram?
Salam Dragon,
There is nothing wrong pointing out the mistakes of Iran, but the Sheikh is very sectarian. He is soooo sectarian that he claims that Imam Hussain (as) fought against Yazid (la), because Imam Hussain was against the Dynasty Rule and the Shia believe in the Dynasty Rule of the Prophet Mohammad (saws).
The above is very insulting to Islam, All Muslims whether Sunni or Shia, to the Prophet and to Imam Hussain (as). All Muslims including a child knows that it was Yazid who fought with Imam Hussain and Imam Hussain saved the Islam from the jaws of corrupt Yazid who wanted to destroy the Islam.
The Sheikh knows very well the first three Caliphs burned the Sunnah of the Prophet and changed Islam, thus creating confusion within the followers. The first three Caliphs were the masters of Divide and Rule and not the British as claimed.
From fifth Caliph onward it becomes dynasties of Caliphate. All Caliphs were corrupt including all the Dynasties of Caliphate, not just the recent Ottoman Dynasty. It makes Saker happy when the Sheikh claims that only the Ottoman Caliphate was corrupt. Poor Saker, if he knew Islam history, he will know all Caliphs were corrupt.
Only the fourth Caliph Imam Ali (as) was not corrupt and who in his short four years of Caliphate tried very hard to bring the Muslims back to the Islam of the Prophet. He was not allowed as in these short four years four Civil Wars were fought against him, and eventually he was murdered. The thugs took over after the death of the Prophet.
This is what the Holy Quran says about the Dynasties from Adam to the Mahdi. Ask the Sheikh whose son Mahdi will be, if not Imam Ali (as) and Bibi Fatima (as):
The Sheik follows the corrupt Caliphs and the corrupt Dynasties of Omayyad, Abbasid, Ottoman and so forth. And, follow their cooked Sunnah.
Rather than,
Follow the Dynasty of the Prophet and the correct Sunnah. As recorded in Sahih Muslim, the Sunnah of Sunni, that the Prophet said, “I am leaving you two ropes,
1. Holy Quran.
2. And, my Family.
These two always be together till the Judgement Day, and whoever holds on to these two ropes will never go astray.
vera on April 08, 2017 · at 3:52 pm UTC
Mohamed: you said, Show me in the Holy Quran:
A person is to be put to death for leaving Islam?
How about this?
Quran (4:89) — “They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing: But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah. 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.”
Salam Vera,
The above verse has nothing to do with leaving Islam. It is a very bad translation and very abused verse on the internet. The verses preceding the above verse and the verse following the verse, and including the above verse, thus a bunch of verses discuss a particular incident. I will come back to this incident later, but would like to make couple of posts about translation, taking verses out of context and how was the Quran complied.
First about translations and how Sunni Muslims play with the translation of Quran. Not only that the translation differs from language to language. Basically, translations are frowned upon and most of the translations are done by Wahhabi. The lasted most used translation on the internet is called, Authenticated (Sahih) Internal Translation. The Wahhabi and Sunni like the word, “Sahih”, like the Sahih Six Books of Sunnah.
Such as Sahih Bukhari. Who Authenticated the Book of Bukhari? None other than Bukhari himself. Who Authenticated the Book of Muslim? None other than Muslim. And, with the other four Authenticated Books of Sunnah, the authors themselves Authenticated their own book.
So, who has Authenticated the translation of the Sahih International Translation? Of course, none other than the translator(s) himself/themselves.
Arabic is a very subtle language and English is a very direct language, therefore it becomes very, very difficult to translate it from Arabic to English. Also, sometimes some extra words are put in brackets to make the translation easier to understand. The reason them being in brackets because they are not in the Arabic. Other times, the translations are intentionally played with. Here is an example. The Holy Quran usually never mentions names, if someone is reprimanded.
Chapter 80, verses 1 to 3 : https://quran.com/80
عَبَسَ وَتَوَلَّىٰ
أَن جَاءَهُ الْأَعْمَىٰ
وَمَا يُدْرِيكَ لَعَلَّهُ يَزَّكَّىٰ
Very small verses and any reader of Arabic will know that no names are mentioned. Basically, two people are discussing and a blind man interrupts, so one of the person doesn’t likes this interruptions makes a bad face (frown) and turns away. Bad manners.
Now, the two person are: The Prophet and the third Caliph Usman. The Sunni believe that the bad mannered person was the Prophet and the Shia believe the bad mannered person was Usman.
Now lets us look at the translation:
The Prophet frowned and turned away
Because there came to him the blind man, [interrupting].
But what would make you perceive, [O Muhammad], that perhaps he might be purified
One can see how few words are there in Arabic and how many words are there in English. And, how the translation is demeaning the Prophet. It is the Sunni and the Sunni Books who demean the Prophet and then they the Sunni kill people who make cartoons of the Prophet.
Vera, I will let this post to go through. And, then I will write couple of more posts, one at a time. I will request you and other readers to wait before responding until all my post are gone through. In my last post I will mention that it is the last one and anyone can then respond.
Best regards,
Mohamed
Salam Vera,
Thanks for being patient with me. Before, we go any further here is the verse in the Holy Quran about leaving Islam:
BTW, the translation is from the Wahhabi site.
The above verse is very simple. It says, they become Muslims and then left Islam. Become Muslims again, and left Islam again. The verse further says, that their matter is with Allah. No where, you will find in the above verse to put them to death or cut their throat for leaving Islam.
Now Sheik Imran and his likes will try to justify that those who leave Islam should be put to death. Why? Because it is in their Most Authenticated Book of Hadiths by Bukhari. It is in their Sunnah. Of course, with hook and crook this deviant behavior has to be justified.
You are quite mistaken if you believe that Sheikh Imran is the only one to hold this view. Here is another example, from a Shia Hojatoleslam:
https://youtu.be/p79pVX-gHF4
Just saying :-)
The Saker
1. There can be no doubt about their Most Authenticated Book of Hadiths by Bukhari.
2. As soon as the Prophet was deceased, the first three Caliph practiced putting people to death for leaving Islam and for various reasons in contradiction to the Holy Quran and the True Sunnah of the Prophet.
3. Basically, they cooked the True Sunnah and eventually 250 years later, this cooked Sunnah became the Six Most Authenticated Books of Hadiths.
4. So, Sheikh Imran justifies by calling those who left Islam as the enemies of State, and that they should be dealt with like traitors.
I like small posts so, there will be some more. I still ask for your and other posters patient until I am through.
Best regards,
Mohamed
You are quite mistaken if you believe that Sheikh Imran is the only one to hold this view. Here is another example, from a Shia Hojatoleslam:
https://youtu.be/p79pVX-gHF4
Just saying :-)
The Saker
Salam Saker,
The problem lies not knowing the history of Islam. The first Caliph took over the Caliphate while the body of the Prophet was still warm and not buried. Yemen collected the Zakat (Charity Tax) but they refused to pay him this tax. They said to abu Bakr we don’t mind paying the Zakat but not to you, as you are not the rightful heir of the Prophet. abu Bakr called them apostate en-masses and the rest is history. The Prophet got rid of the term called, “Ex-Communication” as this was very strong tool in the hands of religious zealots. abu Bakr coined a better term called, “apostate” from which he ex-communicated en-masses.
Within six months of death of the Prophet, the very first civil war in Islam.
Due to Persecution and Takiya, the Shia history and religion books are full of Sunni stuff. For this reason the Shia don’t consider their Books of Hadiths as authenticated. Each scholar based on his knowledge draws his own conclusion.
Another problem lies that “my God”, “my Religion” “my Way of Life” is the correct way. God being the Most Loving God and being the Merciful God, will only allow me and my group to heaven. The rest who are majority are destined for hell for infinity.
What happened to God being the Most Loving God and being the Merciful God?
Best regards,
Mohamed
P.S. As long as there are religions like the above, there won’t be any marriages within the religion. It would be “my way or highway”. How unfortunate! :)
You are quite mistaken if you believe that Sheikh Imran is the only one to hold this view. Here is another example, from a Shia Hojatoleslam:
https://youtu.be/p79pVX-gHF4
Just saying :-)
The Saker
Salam Saker,
The Prophets (as) of old times in the Old Testament and Prophet Mohammad (saws) had States, and they ruled States as Rulers. Where as Jesus (as) was an ordinary citizen under Rome. He couldn’t enforce any laws. And, when he became a threat to Rome he was eliminated.
Always, a claim is made that yes, OT is the Word of God but you will never find in NT where such punishment were doled out. However, like OT one will find such things in Quran.
We selectively know about Jesus, only his history of less than four years. As discussed before in NT which I don’t believe but it is shown that Jesus ran a Kangaroo Court regarding the women who was accused of adultery. Unfortunately, at that time Mindfedo didn’t allow me to discuss fully and kept interfering. So, we couldn’t get to any conclusions.
Best regards,
Mohamed
Thank you Mohamed, for all the information. Nevertheless, between Koran 4:89, some unpleasant hadiths, and the fact that as you say below, Muslims have been hacking each other to pieces over apostasy…. well, there you have it. One nonviolent verse is not going to fix the problem.
But all you Muslims have the power to fix it. Simply just say no. Never threaten a friend or relative who has doubts. Never try to harm someone who’s walked away from Islam. And let others know that you do not support such behavior. That is how y’all can come to peace, one person at a time. :-) Best to you.
This podcast by Saker was very educational. Thank you Saker.
I would like to share with Muslims and Christians a very short video of an Orthodox Christian priest talking about Muslims. Beautiful !
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KNtni6NPrpI
Carmel by the Sea ( a Christian)
Dear Saker,
Thank you for the podpast. I enjoy your work.
I have one major comment and it is the difference between a religion and followers of that religion. Islam and Muslims are not synonymous. Same with Christianity and Christians.
For me, Islam is a religion and you can figure out what it says by reading the Koran, the Hadith, and the Sira. If Muslims today follow or not follow Islam has no impact what history is. There are different interpretations of what Islam is and means according to different Muslim sects.
Just so you would know, I have read the Koran (the ultimate authority) more than once in Arabic with explanations giving context by different Muslim scholars in Arabic. I have read much of the Hadith and the Sira. If you take the order by which the Koran was “revealed” to Mohammed, you can certainly see a transformation in his character in the revelations from Mecca to Medina. Anyone who is honest can see which direction the religion took.
I am fluent in Arabic and most of my friends are Muslim, but I don’t confuse them with Islam which is a compilation of historical texts that are accepted. When people quote specific Koranic texts as they are committing their heinous crimes, no one says these texts don’t exist. They just say, they are taken out of context or it does not apply today. So, what applies today and what does not and what formula do you use to decide?
As for your comment about ibn Taymiyah, he did not start anything. Read al-bukhari and those like him. Read Islam as “revealed” to Mohammed. Ask the Shiites what they think of what Omar and Othman did back then – at the origin of Islam. For me, Islam is the tradition that Mohammed left us, as Christianity is the tradition that Jesus left us. Who wrote what and when is a different matter. We have what we have today.
If you say Judaism and Western Christianity are not what they were originally – I agree, then you are Orthodox 😊 and you in Arabic can be called a salafi. In Islam, the salafis are those who adhere to a strict interpretation of original text, by the letter. You call them extremists. Then, Orthodox are extremists too because they are not modern enough. 😉
Again, my main point is to separate the religion from its followers. Having a religion that is quite violent with 99% of its followers not violent does not change the violent text. Have a religion that is quite peaceful with 99% of its followers not peaceful does not change the peaceful text.
Your podcast would have been more appropriate to be called: Saker’s views on Muslim (rather than Islam).
A lovely day to all of you, regardless of what you believe or if you believe in anything at all.
With much respect to all.
The only people that have ever tried to persuade me into becoming one of them are certain Jews of Brooklyn. I don’t know which sect they represented—this was quite a while ago so my memory is faulty—but, as we already know, certain Jews are “tribal” to a fault, aggressively supremacist and there are a number of other “bad behaviors” which I’ll leave alone for the sake of this great video. Yes, a great podcast. It’s too bad this information even needs to be explained in the West. But like most things global…