• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Isis

SnowyMacie

Well-Known Member
Apr 12, 2011
17,008
6,087
North Texas
✟133,159.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
In Relationship
HTML:
Well, glad to know you don't disagree with it, anyway.

Well, because the Crusades really did start as a defense. The Byzantine Emperor called on Pope Urban II to request aid in his defense against the Seljuk Turks.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

SnowyMacie

Well-Known Member
Apr 12, 2011
17,008
6,087
North Texas
✟133,159.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
In Relationship
Upvote 0

Gnarwhal

☩ Broman Catholic ☩
Oct 31, 2008
20,973
12,715
39
Northern California
✟533,737.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I guess that's Latin for "I don't have any sources."

You know what it means, no need to be presumptuous. :doh:

After 12 years of the persecution of Muslims by the Meccans and the Meccan boycott of the Hashemites, Muhammad's relatives, Muhammad and the Muslims performed the Hijra ("emigration") to the city of Medina (formerly known as Yathrib) in 622. There, with the Medinan converts (Ansar) and the Meccan migrants (Muhajirun), Muhammad in Medina established his political and religious authority. A state was established in accordance with Islamic economic jurisprudence. The Constitution of Medina was formulated, instituting a number of rights and responsibilities for the Muslim, Jewish, Christian and pagan communities of Medina, bringing them within the fold of one community -- the Ummah.[139][140]

Footnote:

[140] Watt. Muhammad at Medina. pp. 227-228 Watt argues that the initial agreement was shortly after the hijra and the document was amended at a later date specifically after the battle of Badr (AH [anno hijra] 2, = AD 624). Serjeant argues that the constitution is in fact 8 different treaties which can be dated according to events as they transpired in Medina with the first treaty being written shortly after Muhammad's arrival. R. B. Serjeant. "The Sunnah Jâmi'ah, Pacts with the Yathrib Jews, and the Tahrîm of Yathrib: Analysis and Translation of the Documents Comprised in the so called 'Constitution of Medina'." in The Life of Muhammad: The Formation of the Classical Islamic World: Volume iv. Ed. Uri Rubin. Brookfield: Ashgate, 1998, p. 151 and see same article in BSOAS 41 (1978): 18 ff. See also Caetani. Annali dell'Islam, Volume I. Milano: Hoepli, 1905, p. 393. Julius Wellhausen. Skizzen und Vorabeiten, IV, Berlin: Reimer, 1889, p 82f who argue that the document is a single treaty agreed upon shortly after the hijra. Wellhausen argues that it belongs to the first year of Muhammad's residence in Medina, before the battle of Badr in 2/624. Even Moshe Gil a skeptic of Islamic history argues that it was written within 5 months of Muhammad's arrival in Medina. Moshe Gil. "The Constitution of Medina: A Reconsideration." Israel Oriental Studies 4 (1974): p. 45.​

Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner
 
Upvote 0

Strider1002

For when I am weak, then I am strong.
May 10, 2011
6,731
2,003
Pennsylvania
✟77,542.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Even if Muslims are violent because they were met with violence, let us not blame the victims. That strategy wouldn't fly in any other topic, nor should it here. If Muslims choose to embrace violence today, that is their responsibility, not that of someone who persecuted their ancestors a thousand years ago.
 
Upvote 0

SnowyMacie

Well-Known Member
Apr 12, 2011
17,008
6,087
North Texas
✟133,159.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
In Relationship
Even if Muslims are violent because they were met with violence, let us not blame the victims. That strategy wouldn't fly in any other topic, nor should it here. If Muslims choose to embrace violence today, that is their responsibility, not that of someone who persecuted their ancestors a thousand years ago.

We're not trying to victimize modern Muslims or say their innocent because they can't help it. Were saying that is Islam is not violent in it's truest origin.
 
Upvote 0

Rhamiel

Member of the Round Table
Nov 11, 2006
41,182
9,432
ohio
✟263,621.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
We're not trying to victimize modern Muslims or say their innocent because they can't help it. Were saying that is Islam is not violent in it's truest origin.

I am not sure if that is the case "truest origin" of Islam has violence as part of it. things like the second class status for Jews and Christians, persecution of other religions, and violent conquest can be traced back to the very beginning of Islam.
If the actions of Muhammad and the Four Rightly Guided Caliphs can not be seen as the "truest form of Islam" then I do not know what can be?
 
Upvote 0

AztecSDSU

Well-Known Member
Apr 14, 2014
1,435
75
33
✟1,989.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Single
The ideal was that evangelism be the means by which Christianity was spread, but it doesn't change the fact that there were periods when attempts to proliferate it through conquest were made.

Islam did coexist alongside Judaism and Christianity. It's recorded that in the earliest days of Islam that Muslims in Medina would pray alongside Jews facing Jerusalem and that Christians were permitted to pray in mosques. However once Muslims began to be violently driven out is when violence and warfare began to commingle with their theology.

Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner

Christianity was spread by evangelism. Sorry, but even if early Christians would have wanted to spread Christianity by the sword a bunch of slaves and women (through most of the early church period men were involved with the cult of Mithras) were hardly match for the armies of pagan Rome. St. Paul, St. Patrick, St, Cyrill, St. Methodius, and all the notable Christian evangelists were evangelists. They were not like Mohammed; they had no army, and they waged no wars.

As one sees in modern day India, Muslims tend to stop being willing to peacefully co-exist when the power dynamic favors them...
 
Upvote 0

Gnarwhal

☩ Broman Catholic ☩
Oct 31, 2008
20,973
12,715
39
Northern California
✟533,737.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
First of all, I'm not referring to the early church fathers nor am I necessarily referring to anyone from the Byzantine era. The violence came much later.

In Muhammed's case, his initial resort to violence was in order to uphold the constitution they forged in Medina between all of the faiths and groups represented there. It wasn't to spread Islam.

Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner
 
Upvote 0

SnowyMacie

Well-Known Member
Apr 12, 2011
17,008
6,087
North Texas
✟133,159.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
In Relationship
The first two-thirds is entirely irrelevant to the specific time, but whatever.

Still, Muhammad becomes the victim to the same things that his religion falls under; his life is full of mystery and misunderstandings. The question that should be asked is who Muhammad was, and what do Muslims say he did, but most importantly, how true are these claims that Muslims say about their founder and prophet. Before a critical analysis, the life of Muhammad needs explanation.
Even Muslims know not much about Muhammad’s childhood, as it ultimately does not matter with their beliefs, much like Christian accounts of Jesus. According to the traditional accounts, Muhammad was born in 570 CE in Mecca. Later in childhood, he became an orphan as his father died before his birth and his mother dying at age six. This ultimately has a much larger impact on Islam than it seems at the surface because his uncle raised him, and since he was a merchant, took him on a fateful caravan trip to Syria when he was twelve. On this journey, the caravan’s route took them cave of a Christian monk, Bahira. While this caravan’s route supposedly always took them by this cave, this time the monk took notice because Muhammad had a cloud hover over his head and his head alone. The monk stopped the Meccans and insisted that they join him for a meal, and summoned Muhammad personally accompany them. During this visit, Bahira found a mark on Muhammad’s back and explained that that was the seal of prophethood and this boy was the prophet predicted by Christ.
This is not the only event that signals some sort of divine calling for Muhammad. In infancy, while under the care of his Bedouin (it was common that during that time that city-dwelling Arabs place their care of Bedouins so they to expose them to the healthy are of the desert). Halima, his Bedouin, had been struggling to nurse, suddenly became so full of milk that she was able to nurse Muhammad and her own child, even the camel’s udders became overflown with milk. However, something even more preposterous happened: “While I was with a [foster] brother of mine behind our tents shepherding the lambs, to men in white raiment came to me with a golden basin full of snow. Then they seized me and opened up my belly, extracted my heart and split it; then they extracted a black drop from it and threw it away; they washed my heart and belly with that snow” (Ibn Ishaq 72). This account appears to symbolize Muhammad’s purification for prophesy years before, not only the actual call, but before the event with the monk happened.
Other than those stories, Muhammad’s life prior to his call to prophesy remains in darkness. When he did receive it, the belief is that he was still in Mecca, where he married his first wife (according to tradition she saw him as being a holy man), and working as a merchant. During this time, the tradition is that for one month each year he would go to a cave on a mountain called Hira and pray. Not only that, but at age forty, during one of these prayer sessions, he received his first visit from the archangel Gabriel.
These visions from Gabriel would form the Qur’an, which was apparently “burned into his mind” so that he could remember them when he preached. In addition to the visions that gave Muhammad the Qur’an, Gabriel took him on a night trip to Jerusalem, where he ascended into Heaven. These visions and messages from God caused conflict between his followers and the ruling tribe in Mecca, which eventually forced his followers to out of Mecca to Medina, where he had his first encounters with Jews and Christians.
In Medina (primarily Jewish at that time), it is reported that Muhammad “established some sort of treaty with the Jews—known today as the “Constitution of Medina”—a treaty that required the two groups to help each other”(Reynolds 42), even some scholars suggesting that Muhammad molded his teachings to support the Jews. It also believed that Muslim practice of praying towards the Ka’ba came from the Jewish tradition of praying towards Jerusalem, which happened while Muhammad was praying towards Jerusalem turned around because God told him to so. (Reynolds 42). This moment began the conflict as Muhammad became frustrated with the Jews who refused to follow his ways of praying. This conflict over praying eventually turned into a bloody conflict that ended Jewish presence in Medina. On the other hand, Muhammad’s relationship with Christians differed from his with Jews as according to tradition; a caravan of Christians came to Medina and visited Muhammad, even prayed in his mosque. However, this group, divided on the issue of whether Christ was God or the Son of God, received teaching and advice from Muhammad. This story seems to explain why a large section of the third Surah is about how Christians have not submitted due to how the division in the story reflects that part of the Qur’an as opposed to how history shows the divisions in Middle Eastern church at that time.
After this incident with the Christians, Muhammad continued living in Medina while Islam spread over the region. Eventually the Muslims conquered Mecca, and during about 630 CE, Muhammad knew that his death was near and took a pilgrimage to Mecca, a pilgrimage that it taken by Muslims to this day. During this time, Muhammad continued sending out raids until he became too ill. Eventually his illness became so bad he could not lead prayer, and chose Abu Bakr has his successor, who according to Sunni Muslims took the physical place of the prophet (Reynolds 56). According to tradition, Muhammad died in the third month of the eleventh Islamic year.
This is summary of the life of Muhammad; however, there are major problems with just how accurate the accounts are on the life of Muhammad. The primary problem with Muhammad’s life is that the earliest biographies of his life, composed well after a century following his death is that one cannot view them as critically authoritative. F.E. Peters says that it unlikely that anyone would doubt that the first biography written by Ibn Ishaq in the eight century reflected the needs of the Muslim community at that time (298). Therefore, how can people ever truly know what Muhammad actually said or meant if motives not related to actually telling his life shaped the telling of the biographies? To Muslims (unlike Christians), the actions and words of Muhammad are not those of God’s and thus, the meaning of them is not what is important (Peters 299); Muslims are more concerned with Muhammad’s message, the Qur’an, than they are his life because when it all comes down to it, he was basically just the messenger. Because of this, it is probably not possible to form a truly critical, historical Muhammad.
Allahu Akbar…Ash-adu anna Muħammadan-Rasulullah, God is greatest, I bear witness that Muhammad is the messenger of God. In reality, Muslims, unlike Christians, do not see their figure as divinity, but a prophet. A prophet, whose life other people have told stories about and shared these stories; even if these stories are not critically or historically accurate.

Works Cited
Ibn Ishaq, Muhammad. The Life of Muhammad. Translated by Alfred Guillaume. London: Oxford University Press, 1955. Print
Peters, F.E. "The Quest for the Historical Muhammad." Cambridge University Press. 23.3 (1991): 291-315. Print.
Reynolds, Gabriel. The Emergence of Islam: Classical Traditions in Contemporary Perspective. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2012. Print.
 
Upvote 0

AztecSDSU

Well-Known Member
Apr 14, 2014
1,435
75
33
✟1,989.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Single
First of all, I'm not referring to the early church fathers nor am I necessarily referring to anyone from the Byzantine era. The violence came much later.

In Muhammed's case, his initial resort to violence was in order to uphold the constitution they forged in Medina between all of the faiths and groups represented there. It wasn't to spread Islam.

Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner


The problem there is when you go beyond the Byzantine era you're talking about a period of European history when religion and the state are not separate entities. Frankly it's an arrangement that is contrary to the foundations of Christianity, and at that point no one was spreading Christianity anymore.
Mohammed got brassed off that the Jews wouldn't do this his way and reacted violently. So yeah, I'd say that's an attempt to use violence to spread Islam.
How many Buddhist groups beheaded journalists last week?
 
Upvote 0

dmpeace

Junior Member
May 26, 2007
2,117
358
✟32,874.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Follow the part of Qu'ran ISIS is reading and it is part of what Muslims believe. Peace was never part of the Muslim system. They don't separate their politics from there faith, they go together. If you read through the Qu'ran, Isis is doing nothing wrong with keeping it.
 
Upvote 0

Rhamiel

Member of the Round Table
Nov 11, 2006
41,182
9,432
ohio
✟263,621.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Follow the part of Qu'ran ISIS is reading and it is part of what Muslims believe. Peace was never part of the Muslim system. They don't separate their politics from there faith, they go together. If you read through the Qu'ran, Isis is doing nothing wrong with keeping it.

well you could argue that since Christians are counted as "people of the Book" if they are willing to live as second class citizens and pay extra taxes, they SHOULD be protected by the Caliphate
Islamic State, as far as I know, is not doing thing.

I am not saying that such a system is just or preferable, I am just trying to be honest about what Islam says and what Islamic State is doing in Iraq
 
Upvote 0

AztecSDSU

Well-Known Member
Apr 14, 2014
1,435
75
33
✟1,989.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Single
well you could argue that since Christians are counted as "people of the Book" if they are willing to live as second class citizens and pay extra taxes, they SHOULD be protected by the Caliphate
Islamic State, as far as I know, is not doing thing.

I am not saying that such a system is just or preferable, I am just trying to be honest about what Islam says and what Islamic State is doing in Iraq

You could also argue that since the caliphate doesn't actually exist at this point Iraq is part of the abode of war. Therefore Islamic theology would permit Islamic State to basically kill anyone they want to in pursuit of establishing the caliphate.
 
Upvote 0