Islam/Muslim Discussion Thread ٢

[Caliphate of the Netherlands]

Shaytan. He still is.

Interestingly. At least if we are to go after Bukhari's train of thought, Shaytan is instrumental in ensuring that Allah would not get bored with a sinless creation and wipe us all away. I guess in that way he'd both serve humans and Allah alike.

Well, he is an enemy of Islam as he wants people not to submit to God. Islam is submission to Allah (swt), Shaytan tries everything to prevent this. Therefore, he's Islam's greatest enemy.

All fitnahs, all violence, all ego's of people are manifestations of Shaytan.

[Herskerstad]

Interestingly. At least if we are to go after Bukhari's train of thought, Shaytan is instrumental in ensuring that Allah would not get bored with a sinless creation and wipe us all away. I guess in that way he'd both serve humans and Allah alike.

Well, he is an enemy of Islam as he wants people not to submit to God. Islam is submission to Allah (swt), Shaytan tries everything to prevent this. Therefore, he's Islam's greatest enemy.

All fitnahs, all violence, all ego's of people are manifestations of Shaytan.

What would, according to Bukhari, Allah eventually do to mankind if mankind had no inclination to sin at creation?

[Caliphate of the Netherlands]

Well, he is an enemy of Islam as he wants people not to submit to God. Islam is submission to Allah (swt), Shaytan tries everything to prevent this. Therefore, he's Islam's greatest enemy.

All fitnahs, all violence, all ego's of people are manifestations of Shaytan.

What would, according to Bukhari, Allah eventually do to mankind if mankind had no inclination to sin at creation?

According to Bukhari? No idea.

[Herskerstad]

What would, according to Bukhari, Allah eventually do to mankind if mankind had no inclination to sin at creation?

According to Bukhari? No idea.

Pardon, I meant Muslim.

http://www.searchtruth.com/book_display ... umber=6621

The natural conclusion is of course, given that Shaytan did indeed cause man to sin, that he saved them from annihilation. So mankind nor Allah cannot be completely disserviced by Shaytan as mankind's benefits are obvious, and Allah does not have to be bored, or lonely, or without people to forgive which is incidentally as a result also raised up rather high in it's soteriology.

Point is, even if one a whole one disagrees with Shaytan, it would be impossible not to have him incorporated an intentional element to Allah's plan. Given that he also is Allah's creation, one might be inclined to further ask where the origin point of evil comes from.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

The punishments Allah (SWT) sent to the sinning peoples.
Now g'nite.

Not a sociology major I take it?

I'm a highschooler.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

The punishments Allah (SWT) sent to the sinning peoples.

"Rome fell because Allah hated their sins!"

Good stuff. I guess this means Allah hated Christianity more than He hated Romans fucking everything that moved and was of lower social status than them, since their long period of sexual deviancy was also one of their most successful economically, militarily, and politically.

Sexual deviancy mixed with the empire's greatness? Sounds like a sign to me.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Who was the greatest enemy of Islam?

Shaytan. He still is.

That's what I was thinking.

[Behran]

Salafism is not Islam.

[Arachno-Satinism]

Salafism is not Islam.

According to many nor is Shi'ism.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Salafism is not Islam.

Why do you think that?
And Assalamu 'Alaikum wa RaHmatullahi wa Barakatihuh

[Conserative Morality]

Sexual deviancy mixed with the empire's greatness? Sounds like a sign to me.

Sounds like a sign of... what? Of 400+ years of success? Followed by 270 years of increasing social puritanism and failure?

[Behran]

Salafism is not Islam.

Why do you think that?
And Assalamu 'Alaikum wa RaHmatullahi wa Barakatihuh

Because no where in the Quran does it say to kill innocent people.

[Napkiraly]

Interestingly. At least if we are to go after Bukhari's train of thought, Shaytan is instrumental in ensuring that Allah would not get bored with a sinless creation and wipe us all away. I guess in that way he'd both serve humans and Allah alike.

Well, he is an enemy of Islam as he wants people not to submit to God. Islam is submission to Allah (swt), Shaytan tries everything to prevent this. Therefore, he's Islam's greatest enemy.

All fitnahs, all violence, all ego's of people are manifestations of Shaytan.

Including Muhammad's?

[Kubumba Tribe]

Sexual deviancy mixed with the empire's greatness? Sounds like a sign to me.

Sounds like a sign of... what? Of 400+ years of success? Followed by 270 years of increasing social puritanism and failure?

The 'Aad also may have had success. So may have the Thamud. We know fair and well the people of Fira'un had successes. So may have the people of Prophet LuT. But what happened to them and why?

[Kubumba Tribe]

Well, he is an enemy of Islam as he wants people not to submit to God. Islam is submission to Allah (swt), Shaytan tries everything to prevent this. Therefore, he's Islam's greatest enemy.

All fitnahs, all violence, all ego's of people are manifestations of Shaytan.

Including Muhammad's?

You know what he meant by saying "all violence".

[Kubumba Tribe]

Why do you think that?
And Assalamu 'Alaikum wa RaHmatullahi wa Barakatihuh

Because no where in the Quran does it say to kill innocent people.

Isn't Salafism just the bringing back of Al-Islam's golden ages? Do Salafis kill anyone who disagrees with them?

[Kubumba Tribe]

Well, he is an enemy of Islam as he wants people not to submit to God. Islam is submission to Allah (swt), Shaytan tries everything to prevent this. Therefore, he's Islam's greatest enemy.

All fitnahs, all violence, all ego's of people are manifestations of Shaytan.

What would, according to Bukhari, Allah eventually do to mankind if mankind had no inclination to sin at creation?

Why didn't you ask "According to Allah (SWT)" 1st before asking about what Al-Bukhari said?

[Conserative Morality]

Sounds like a sign of... what? Of 400+ years of success? Followed by 270 years of increasing social puritanism and failure?

The 'Aad also may have had success. So may have the Thamud. We know fair and well the people of Fira'un had successes. So may have the people of Prophet LuT. But what happened to them and why?

A bunch of Arab tribes mentioned in the Quran are hardly my area of expertise, my area of expertise being 'groups that actually mattered in the greater scheme of things'.

I couldn't tell you any more than the bare minimum about the Sabines or the Helvetii either.

[Behran]

Because no where in the Quran does it say to kill innocent people.

Isn't Salafism just the bringing back of Al-Islam's golden ages? Do Salafis kill anyone who disagrees with them?

Salafism is a tool of the west and Israel, it is what ayatollah Khomeini called American Islam.

And yes, Salafis have killed Shias, Christians, Jews and even other Sunni Muslims.

Al Qaeda, ISIS, the Taliban are Salafi.

[Kubumba Tribe]

Isn't Salafism just the bringing back of Al-Islam's golden ages? Do Salafis kill anyone who disagrees with them?

Salafism is a tool of the west and Israel, it is what ayatollah Khomeini called American Islam.

And yes, Salafis have killed Shias, Christians, Jews and even other Sunni Muslims.

Al Qaeda, ISIS, the Taliban are Salafi.

Mhm...I see

[Napkiraly]

Including Muhammad's?

You know what he meant by saying "all violence".

Yes, all violence. There were no exceptions he pointed out, thus all in this instance would encompass the entirety of all violent actions, including Muhammad's.

[Kubumba Tribe]

You know what he meant by saying "all violence".

Yes, all violence. There were no exceptions, thus all in this instance would encompass the entirety of all violent actions, including Muhammad's.

So, you're taking his words out of context to fit your stance?

[Napkiraly]

Yes, all violence. There were no exceptions, thus all in this instance would encompass the entirety of all violent actions, including Muhammad's.

So, you're taking his words out of context to fit your stance?

It's not. He says all violence is a manifestation of Satan and his influence. This would include Muhammad's violent actions given the parameters set by the post, which does not offer any exceptions.

[Arachno-Satinism]

You know what he meant by saying "all violence".

Yes, all violence. There were no exceptions he pointed out, thus all in this instance would encompass the entirety of all violent actions, including Muhammad's.

Kubumba obviously wishes the exception to he unto whom peace is always wished upon by his followers, God, and the Host of Angels until the Day of Judgment. Though asserting that all violence is bad is pretty stupid, so it's not like I can blame him.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Yes, all violence. There were no exceptions he pointed out, thus all in this instance would encompass the entirety of all violent actions, including Muhammad's.

Kubumba obviously wishes the exception to he unto whom peace is always wished upon by his followers, God, and the Host of Angels until the Day of Judgment. Though asserting that all violence is bad is pretty stupid, so it's not like I can blame him.

I'm not asking for any exceptions, I'm pointing out that Napkiraly's taking Netherlands' words out of proportion.