These are the faces of Islamic Oppression

Yes, he is the last messenger in the line of Prophets. After him, there will be no more messengers.

 

Same message that joseph smilth had isn't it? (except for all the killing)

 

I see Mormons are the time and they don't appear violent. The Mormons don't allow coffee or wine so it's a rough sell.

Islam prohibits wine but clearly Jesus made wine and the disciples of Jesus drink wine at the Last Supper. Did God change his mind about wine?

 

And David Koresh.

 

Did you say David Koresh

 

The accepted explaination is that when the Bible is talking about "wine" it really means grape juice. And just go ahead and ignore the part of the Bible that makes the issue moot by saying not to judge people on what they eat or drink.

It's the same message that the Bible has about Jesus.

Everyone wants to be the last prophet. Except JS. He wanted to be the first in a new line of modern "prophets."

 

Either way it was 'another' prophet to somehow correct or change what Jesus said and completed. At least the things foretold about false prophets along with the things these so called prophets say actual align so we know who the false prophets are.

 

When I was dating my wife who used to be LDS (she stopped going long before I met her) we'd get into "discussions" about the LDS church. Despite me getting yelled at and called a liar she still kept dating me. Two years later she's now taking a New Testament class at the state University.

Now she's explaining to me where the LDS church went wrong on various things. For awhile she was convinced that all they need to do is read the New Testament cover to cover and just accept it for what it says and they'd see the truth.

I remember when I believed that.

The problem boils down to the indoctrination that trusting a prophet is the same as trusting God and questioning a prophet is the same as questioning God. And since the telephone game "proves" the Bible is corrupt, well what is there to judge anyone by?

 

"A homicide bomber struck Shiite pilgrims as they were resting Sunday during a days-long walk to a Shiite shrine, killing at least 40 people and wounding 60."

There is apparently video of the victims, but I don't have the heart today to go look for it.

Do you think that the attackers were Mormons? Christians? Amish? Mennonites? Anyone want to take a guess on the religion of the murderers?

Ray Charles could see a pattern here.

Brothers, if you want peace in our time you much denounce fundamentalist Islam.

 

Muslims and muslim governments need to start denouncing the violence and the fundamentalism which is causing the violence.

There's more outrage over cartoons than the daily killing of innocent civilians by the terrorists.

 

In Islam, a person can not kill anyone for any reason (even for blasphemy).

The above is a reflection of the backwarded Arabic society, and has nothing to do with Islam.

As a matter of fact, Honour killing occurs in all parts of the world, including the USA.

Peace,

 

That seems to be a pretty minority opinion, as Muhammad murdered a lot of people and many of his followers appear to be following his example.

 

He is using the "for no reason" excuse.

But we know that it is a one of two reasons:
1. mischief in the land
2. non-innocent (non-muslim)

so that pretty much can cover anything you can think of can't it.

 

In the days of Muhammad most muslims were converted by the sword. The Arabic word "Islam" means to submit.

 

When I speak, I speak of facts, not what should/shouldn't happen.

The only person in an Islamic state that has the right to give the death penalty, is the Khalifa, ruler. So true, Mohamed did give the death penalty to those who caused imminent danger to this state.

Mohammed and his companions never gave the death penalty except under minor circumstances. The crime rate at that time was by far the lowest of any other nation.

Peace,

 

Well, the facts are that a huge number of Muslims disagree violently with your understanding of Islam.

In fact, they would kill you as a blasphemer, just like Muhammad had Abu Afak killed.

So you support the right of the Iranian regime to execute homosexuals? Please confirm or deny.

Osama bin Laden is working hard to set up his own Islamic Caliphate. In the geographic areas where has has succeeded, do you support his right to "give the death penalty" to anyone who refuses to follow his orders?

 

Nope. You do. I haven't met a Muslim who doesn't, and trust me I know lots of Muslims (all types of sects).

Nope. Mohammed killed him because he was against him, and to be against a prophet of God is not a forgivable sin in Islam. Mohamed dealt with Jews, even took loans from them and treated them nicely. As a matter of fact, it wasn't until the 1940s that the situation between Muslims and Jews took a different direction.

In Islam, under and Islamic rules, anyone who says something negative against God or any of his prophets is sentenced to death if the person didn't repent.

I don't support the killing of anyone because of what they belief in or because of their sexual preferences are.

However, if Iranians agree to such laws and voted them into power, I am in no position to say they shouldn't do it. True, there might be some who don't agree, but like any other country, you can always leave.

In Islam, Muslims aren't allowed to disobey the Khalifa, unless his orders are against the Koran and Sunnah.

Islam is the closet ideology/religion to Democracy than any other. In Islam, when a khalifa dies, a group of highly respect and knowledge men get together and select one (if I remember correctly it is called Shura). This is similar to what we have in the USA.

Peace,

 

Well, it's good to know where you stand.

 

This is not true. Other than the politically and financially motivated hindu extremists no one gives a damn who you're dating or what goes on between 2 people consensually. You seem to be lost far back in time.


Also, it's pathetic to see some of the regulars here cry "islamophobia" rather than respond to the topic. This incident highlights the very real danger of religious "faith".