why muhammad was tutored by kuffar in mecca

Author: Lunar108
Religion

Posts

Total: 14
Topic's author
#1
Lunar108
Lunar108's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 188
0
2
3
Lunar108's avatar
Lunar108
0
2
3
the people living in mecca the quraysh tribe were very open to religious freedom and around mecca before islam came lay many Idols uniting all the arabs as each tribe worshiped multiple idols depending on time , the existence of both christians like waraqa bin naufal and jews like :
the freedom of religion in pre-islamic times in the Arabian Peninsula along with the diversity of the gods worshipped shows a great example of freedom of religion , as long as no one insult the gods of the other that's until muhammad came with his new religion and insulted his tribes god and tried to destroy their idols,

muhammad was caught before he could do anything , being of high born in his tribe he managed to leave with slab on the rest however his followers suffering have just began since the holy book of islam which they need to recite contains insults towards the idols of the tribe claimed that those idols couldn't defend themselves therefore they are not gods  .
----------------------
now let us analyze this, imagine a person walk into a church 1500 years ago in the middle of the sermon breaks the cross and claim that jesus isn't god otherwise the cross would have defended itself , what would happen to that person ?
--------------------
let me give you another example , imagine that I rode a bulldozer and used it to demolish a mosque, burned all the qurans in there and then I claimed that allah doesn't exist otherwise the mosque would have defended itself  , how would muslims feel especially in a muslim majority country .
-------------------------
after Conquest of Mecca by islam muhammad prohibited all the arabic tribes from worshiping their idols 
muhammad also destroyed all the idols , 
--------------------
before islam the Arabian Peninsula had many cultures , many religions 
after islam it had only one religion and one culture islam , 
---------------
this tradition of destroying the land marks of other cultures like what isis did in iraq came from muhammad destroying the idols back in mecca and then in the entire  Arabian Peninsula , you might not now this but one of islamic caliphate's son tried to destroy egypt pyramids sadly or luckly he failed after only managing to leave a massive gash at one of them  
==================================
In AD 1196, Al-Aziz Uthman, Saladin's son and the Sultan of Egypt, attempted to demolish the pyramids, starting with that of Menkaure. Workmen recruited to demolish the pyramid stayed at their job for eight months, but found it almost as expensive to destroy as to build. They could only remove one or two stones each day. Some used wedges and levers to move the stones, while others used ropes to pull them down. When a stone fell, it would bury itself in the sand, requiring extraordinary efforts to free it. Wedges were used to split the stones into several pieces, and a cart was used to carry it to the foot of the escarpment, where it was left. Despite their efforts, workmen were only able to damage the pyramid to the extent of leaving a large vertical gash at its northern face.
======================================



#2
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Lunar108
The one boundary the British (and most European) colonists had when colonising was to not blackmail the inhabitants to Christianity and also to not directly destroy statues or sculptures that the natives found sacred.

I'm not saying they didn't sin in other ways but this was just a fact, fact-check me if you want.

The Ottoman Empire and all Islamic invaders completely blackmailed the populace into Islam and destroyed anything sacred to them if they felt like it.
#3
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,078
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Lunar108
Schism is clever people setting up their own club for personal gain.

Of course, if the new club is going to pay dividends, you need a considerable membership of gullible people

And you  also need to invest in the next generation of clever leaders.....Condition/tutor them appropriately and reward them accordingly.

Especially given the short turn around time of both leaders and members.


And fast forward 1700 years or so and nothing's really changed, other than the membership has grown and the stakes are considerably higher.

And the clever people can still  get the gullible numpties to do all sorts of stupid stuff in the name of the club.
#4
Yassine
Yassine's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 1,085
3
2
6
Yassine's avatar
Yassine
3
2
6
@RationalMadman

The one boundary the British (and most European) colonists had when colonising was to not blackmail the inhabitants to Christianity and also to not directly destroy statues or sculptures that the natives found sacred.
- LMAO! That's exactly what they did literally everywhere they went. Have you ever opened a History book? LOL! 


I'm not saying they didn't sin in other ways but this was just a fact, fact-check me if you want.
- Dude, you do that to your own people, let alone others. Vast amounts of Native children systematically kidnapped to be "civilized" & christianized, countless of them died in the process. The essential cause of most Colonial powers was to spread Christianity & "civilize" the world *cough* enslave *cough* pillage... Virtually the entire native population of the Americas was compelled to Christianity through coercion or missions aimed at systematically erasing native religions & languages. Much of the population of Subsaharan Africa went from indigenous religions to Christianity in half a century, an unprecedented event in human history, under extensive oppression & bloody persecution, with systematic desecration of their temples & sanctities. In Chad, hundreds of Islamic scholars were invited to "discuss" religion, they were summerly massacred after they gathered in one place. They destroyed all their madrasas & burned their libraries, thereafter Africans were only allowed in European schools if they adopt Christianity. The Spanish massacred 7 million & expelled another million in their effort to Christianize Muslim Spain. More than 5 million Muslims were massacred or expelled from Greece if they did not convert to Christianity, their mosques turned into barns & houses burned. In Algeria, a third of the population was genocided in a mission to "civilize" the country, after which the French archbishop celebrated in Paris the 'victory of Christianity over Islam' in a great ceremony. In China, the rise of Christianity was followed by a wide scale persecution of native Chinese & one of the greatest rebellions in Chinese History, against the Qin dynasty, which led to 100 million deaths. I could go on & on & on. ... "fact check-me" LMAO! Not because you stick your head in the sand does that mean everyone else can not see... You people are completely oblivious to the immense destruction & suffering your countries cause the rest of the World. Your denial is not gunna change History.
 

The Ottoman Empire and all Islamic invaders completely blackmailed the populace into Islam and destroyed anything sacred to them if they felt like it.
- This gotta be one of the funniest things I read! The Ottomans gave complete autonomy to the Christians (& others) under their rule. They had their own territories, their own laws, their own courts,  & even managed their own budgets. They appointed Byzantine heirs to high-offices, admirals, grand viziers & governors. They reinstated the Orthodox Christian patriarch after being banished by the Byzantines, then into newly designated positions in empire's cabinet, along with the patriarchs of other churches & the jews. They brought in Catholics, Maronites, Armenians & Jews to Istanbul & assigned neighborhoods & churches (formerly Orthodox) for them...  That said, the Ottomans were even less tolerant than the Abbasids or the Umayyads... The Abbasids even saw Christian grand viziers, that's the highest position in the empire under the Caliph. After 13 centuries of Islamic rule of the Middle East, native Christianity went down only 60%, because their faith was protected & their culture preserved. In contrast, indigenous religions in Africa shrunk more that under a measly few decades of Christian rule of Africa, even worse in the America. Stop projecting your disgusting History into ours. 
#5
Yassine
Yassine's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 1,085
3
2
6
Yassine's avatar
Yassine
3
2
6
@Lunar108

the people living in mecca the quraysh tribe were very open to religious freedom and around mecca before islam came lay many Idols uniting all the arabs as each tribe worshiped multiple idols depending on time , the existence of both christians like waraqa bin naufal and jews like :
the freedom of religion in pre-islamic times in the Arabian Peninsula along with the diversity of the gods worshipped shows a great example of freedom of religion , as long as no one insult the gods of the other that's until muhammad came with his new religion and insulted his tribes god and tried to destroy their idols,
- Why do you lie so much?!! Now you're making up new history?! The beloved Prophet (pbuh) did not insult their idols nor attempted to destroy them, according to Allah's command: "Do not revile those whom they invoke other than Allah, because they will revile Allah in ignorance out of spite. 1 For We have indeed made the deeds of every people seem fair to them. Then, their return is to their Lord and He will inform them of what they have done." (6:108)


muhammad was caught before he could do anything
- So which is it? Did he insult & destroy or did he not?


, being of high born in his tribe he managed to leave with slab on the rest however his followers suffering have just began since the holy book of islam which they need to recite contains insults towards the idols of the tribe claimed that those idols couldn't defend themselves therefore they are not gods  .
- As expected from a psychopath... Defending the torturers & abusers against the victims... So, your theory is that because the Quran contains the story of Abraham where he tells his people their idols can't defend themselves (which is even worse in the Bible), Quraysh were so mad they tortured him & his followers, starved them & killed them... 


now let us analyze this, imagine a person walk into a church 1500 years ago in the middle of the sermon breaks the cross and claim that jesus isn't god otherwise the cross would have defended itself , what would happen to that person ?
- Imagine 1500 years ago that person walking into a Church telling them to believe in One God, WITHOUT destroying desecrating their sanctities, in response they they proceed to burn, torture & kill him...


let me give you another example , imagine that I rode a bulldozer and used it to demolish a mosque, burned all the qurans in there and then I claimed that allah doesn't exist otherwise the mosque would have defended itself  , how would muslims feel especially in a muslim majority country .
- We don't need to imagine this, the West has been doing this for 1000 years to Muslims.


after Conquest of Mecca by islam muhammad prohibited all the arabic tribes from worshiping their idols
- Are you obsessed with lying or something? The beloved Prophet (pbuh) gave them amnesty after two decades of doing every heinous & horrible things to Muslims. Many converted the, but many did not. For example, Safwan was one of the nobles of Quraysh who used to torture Muslims & attempted to assassinate the Prophet (pbuh). He did only converted months after the conquest.


 muhammad also destroyed all the idols
- Muslims don't worship idols, Mecca became Muslim.


before islam the Arabian Peninsula had many cultures , many religions 
after islam it had only one religion and one culture islam , 
- Reminds me of Europe, the Americas & Africa... so many indigenous cultures & religions razed & replaced by Christianity. –  The difference is, in Arabia the people came into Islam willingly, more than 90 tribes of the peninsula came to pledge allegiance with the beloved Prophet (pbuh) without conflict. Quraysh & their allies eventually did that too.


this tradition of destroying the land marks of other cultures like what isis did in iraq came from muhammad destroying the idols back in mecca and then in the entire  Arabian Peninsula , 
- You just destroyed your own fantasy. If ISIS is blasting those temples & idols in the 2010s, what have the Muslims not done so the past 1400 years??? Speaking of Iraq, much of Baghdad's Abbasid legacy was destroyed by the British in their invasion of Iraq early 20th century. 


you might not now this but one of islamic caliphate's son tried to destroy egypt pyramids sadly or luckly he failed after only managing to leave a massive gash at one of them  
In AD 1196, Al-Aziz Uthman, Saladin's son and the Sultan of Egypt, attempted to demolish the pyramids, starting with that of Menkaure. Workmen recruited to demolish the pyramid stayed at their job for eight months, but found it almost as expensive to destroy as to build. They could only remove one or two stones each day. Some used wedges and levers to move the stones, while others used ropes to pull them down. When a stone fell, it would bury itself in the sand, requiring extraordinary efforts to free it. Wedges were used to split the stones into several pieces, and a cart was used to carry it to the foot of the escarpment, where it was left. Despite their efforts, workmen were only able to damage the pyramid to the extent of leaving a large vertical gash at its northern face.
- Back to your lies I see! They weren't trying to destroy the pyramid, rather to get in, like many before them. You know why? Some crusader told al-Aziz there is treasure inside. Speaking of which, it was the Romans who did the most damage to the pyramids, completely destroying one of them, followed by Europeans who pillaged Egypt from its historical wealth, including entire temples.

- Why so much hate & insanity?! 


#6
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
This gotta be one of the funniest things I read! The Ottomans gave complete autonomy to the Christians (& others) under their rule. They had their own territories, their own laws, their own courts,  & even managed their own budgets. They appointed Byzantine heirs to high-offices, admirals, grand viziers & governors. They reinstated the Orthodox Christian patriarch after being banished by the Byzantines, then into newly designated positions in empire's cabinet, along with the patriarchs of other churches & the jews. They brought in Catholics, Maronites, Armenians & Jews to Istanbul & assigned neighborhoods & churches (formerly Orthodox) for them...  That said, the Ottomans were even less tolerant than the Abbasids or the Umayyads... The Abbasids even saw Christian grand viziers, that's the highest position in the empire under the Caliph. After 13 centuries of Islamic rule of the Middle East, native Christianity went down only 60%, because their faith was protected & their culture preserved. In contrast, indigenous religions in Africa shrunk more that under a measly few decades of Christian rule of Africa, even worse in the America. Stop projecting your disgusting History into ours. 
Let's focus on this primarily as this is the most wrong.


I encourage you to understand the methods used.

#7
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
- Dude, you do that to your own people, let alone others. Vast amounts of Native children systematically kidnapped to be "civilized" & christianized, countless of them died in the process. The essential cause of most Colonial powers was to spread Christianity & "civilize" the world *cough* enslave *cough* pillage... Virtually the entire native population of the Americas was compelled to Christianity through coercion or missions aimed at systematically erasing native religions & languages. Much of the population of Subsaharan Africa went from indigenous religions to Christianity in half a century, an unprecedented event in human history, under extensive oppression & bloody persecution, with systematic desecration of their temples & sanctities. In Chad, hundreds of Islamic scholars were invited to "discuss" religion, they were summerly massacred after they gathered in one place. They destroyed all their madrasas & burned their libraries, thereafter Africans were only allowed in European schools if they adopt Christianity. The Spanish massacred 7 million & expelled another million in their effort to Christianize Muslim Spain. More than 5 million Muslims were massacred or expelled from Greece if they did not convert to Christianity, their mosques turned into barns & houses burned. In Algeria, a third of the population was genocided in a mission to "civilize" the country, after which the French archbishop celebrated in Paris the 'victory of Christianity over Islam' in a great ceremony. In China, the rise of Christianity was followed by a wide scale persecution of native Chinese & one of the greatest rebellions in Chinese History, against the Qin dynasty, which led to 100 million deaths. I could go on & on & on. ... "fact check-me" LMAO! Not because you stick your head in the sand does that mean everyone else can not see... You people are completely oblivious to the immense destruction & suffering your countries cause the rest of the World. Your denial is not gunna change History.

 LMAO! That's exactly what they did literally everywhere they went. Have you ever opened a History book? LOL! 
I can tell you what I am fully aware of.

Unlike the Masai in Kenya which were never force into Christianity, the native tribes in Tanzania and Nigeria (in the Islamic part of Nigeria) had to bow down and conform to Islam. More importantly, there are basically 0 places the Brits colonised where native tribes have been totally destroyed of their native sacred sculptures and such. Hinduism in India was in fact made by the Brits, uniting Shaivism with Vaishnavism to reduce internal conflict and even fusing Pagan religions in with it too.

Can you give me examples of the British destroying native scultptures and blackmailing the population into Christianity as opposed to merley introducing it?
#8
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11


#9
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
This gotta be one of the funniest things I read! The Ottomans gave complete autonomy to the Christians (& others) under their rule. They had their own territories, their own laws, their own courts,  & even managed their own budgets. They appointed Byzantine heirs to high-offices, admirals, grand viziers & governors. They reinstated the Orthodox Christian patriarch after being banished by the Byzantines, then into newly designated positions in empire's cabinet, along with the patriarchs of other churches & the jews. They brought in Catholics, Maronites, Armenians & Jews to Istanbul & assigned neighborhoods & churches (formerly Orthodox) for them...  That said, the Ottomans were even less tolerant than the Abbasids or the Umayyads... The Abbasids even saw Christian grand viziers, that's the highest position in the empire under the Caliph. After 13 centuries of Islamic rule of the Middle East, native Christianity went down only 60%, because their faith was protected & their culture preserved. In contrast, indigenous religions in Africa shrunk more that under a measly few decades of Christian rule of Africa, even worse in the America. Stop projecting your disgusting History into ours. 
I am open to be educated on this, please can you contrast Christian African nations vs Islamic ones and explain how the Islamic led with a lighter or friendlier methodology? I am willing to be proven wrong.
Topic's author
#10
Lunar108
Lunar108's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 188
0
2
3
Lunar108's avatar
Lunar108
0
2
3
-->
@RationalMadman
slavery by muslims in Africa 
Topic's author
#11
Lunar108
Lunar108's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 188
0
2
3
Lunar108's avatar
Lunar108
0
2
3
quran 25:44
Or do you think that most of them listen or understand?1 They are only like cattle—no, more than that, they are astray from the ˹Right˺ Way!2 
how did that crusader reach egypt , no crusader ever set foot on africa 
and if islam is as perfect as you claim it to be why is everyone running away from it to the west ?
even the syrian refugees in turkey are getting kicked out , let me point here that they didn't get kicked out from any other European country.
why didn't saudi arabia took the syrian refugees if islam is as perfect as you claim it to be ? isn't sharia law the law of saudi arabia as saudi arabia claim ?

#12
Yassine
Yassine's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 1,085
3
2
6
Yassine's avatar
Yassine
3
2
6
Let's focus on this primarily as this is the most wrong.
- None of it is. I haven't even scratched the surface. I am open to have a formal debate on the subject if you wish. 


- And? "second-class citizens" LOL! This is just a misnomer fallacy, for lack of any actual objection. The Ottomans literally sent ships to save Jews from European persecution... The Jews had more rights under Muslims than they ever had under Western rule, or elsewhere. They were accorded territory under Islam, none in the West. They were accorded freedom to practice their Torah & Talmud, the right to have their own courts of law, their own laws to run their territories or neighborhoods, the right to elect their own leaders, the right to enact their own policies & issue their own budgets, the right to have their own education system & their own schools. In their own communities, their language was preserved, & their culture persisted. None of this is granted to Jews in the West, & yet "second class citizens". LMAO! What should we call Jews in the US or Europe? Fifth class citizens? Imagine the US or the UK accord Jews all these rights... just kidding, in their dreams...


- What's the objection here? No conquest in History was as just & compassionate as the Early Islamic Conquests.


- The article has a strong Christian narrative & very few academic sources. I stopped reading Wikipedia months ago after the evangelicals & SJWs highjacked the site, sadly! First of all, the Armenian War is a case against Secularism, not Islam. It was led by the Young Turks. a secularist materialist nationalist , movement, deeply European in thought & spirit (Ataturk's people), which deposed the Caliph (Sultan Abdelhamid II) & replaced Islamic Law & system with western ones. No such event occurred in 6 centuries of Ottoman rule, but the moment the country is secularized, deaths start rolling out. Second of all, there is no such thing as the Armenian "genocide". Genocide is what the Nazis did to the Jews, or the French did to the Algerians. This was war, a civil war for the most part, Armenians sided with enemies (Russians) against the Ottomans (their own country) in a WWI, if 1 million Armenian died, 700 thousands Turks died fighting them. Finally, the prior century leading to the WWI, Christian nations under Ottoman control (Greeks, Bulgarians, Armenians...etc), incited by Western European powers, all rose against the Ottomans in the Balkans, leading to the death (& sometimes expulsion) of 90% of the Turkish population in the region (over 10 million Turks); after 5 centuries of peaceful coexistence. This begot a lot of hate between the Christians & the Muslims of the region, which ended in Balkanization. Yet, no one in the West is talking about the Turkish genocide...


- LOL! Yes, Ottomans were pioneer of Knowledge & the Sciences, an ideal which Europe looked up to & was inspired by. The Enlightenment itself is a product of Ottoman influence in Europe. All Renaissance & Enlightenment thinkers studied, either directly or by proxy, under Ottomans. Much of European industrialization came from the Ottomans & the Mughals, such as in the making of steam engines, clocks, sewing mills, mechanical devices, military equipment (rockets, torpedoes, tanks..etc)... Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, Newton... all were swimming in vast amounts of Ottoman & Arab knowledge, falsely credited to the former. The Asha'ari ideas dominant in the Ottoman Empire at the time, were also adopted by intellectuals like Berkeley, Hume, Hamilton, Locke...etc. In fact, the very ideal of religious pluralism sought in Europe came from the Ottoman Millet system. Jews, Armenians, Greeks.... each with their own millet (community), & their own laws & territories. 


I can tell you what I am fully aware of.
Unlike the Masai in Kenya which were never force into Christianity,
- I don't know how to answer this. So, the Masai people were not forced to convert, therefore there was no force conversion. That's a logical fallacy. Forced conversion is not always "convert or die", that's mostly a Catholic thing. The very nature of Colonialism, based on faith & race, where a White Christian is a human, while a Black non-Christian is not, is coercion enough. 


the native tribes in Tanzania and Nigeria (in the Islamic part of Nigeria) had to bow down and conform to Islam.
- Sensationalism nonsense. 8 centuries of Islamic rule of Tanzania & Nigeria, & yet the majority of the population was still indigenous. No, Islam spread in Tanzania largely through trade, then under the Omani empire, then the Zanzibar Sultanate. In Nigeria, Islam came with trade & also with the Almoravid conquest in the 11th century, which gave rise to two of the most powerful empires in Subsaharan History. The Mali empire, spanning 400 cities & millions of square km, with a 4000 ships fleet. The Timbuktu university then reported to host 25k students, & its library 1 million books (in contrast to 1700 books in the largest library in Europe then, the Sorbonne). Then the Songhai Empire, even greater in area & wealth, the wealthiest African state of its time, until their fall at the hands of the Moroccan Saadi dynasty. Then came the Sokoto Sultanate in the 19th century to Nigeria, trade flourished & it became a wealthy nation. Education was granted & mandated to all men & women, courts established in every corner of the state, & land was evenly distributed among the conquered people; generating the most prolific era of Nigerian history, in scholarship, arts & technology. In fact, the Sokoto Nigerian woman Mariam Fodio is known to be the most prolific Muslim author in Islamic History. She wrote over 70 books, in literature, poetry, law, theology, history, medicine, & even sufism. I have one of her books. Despite all this, most of the population of Nigeria remained indigenous. Until, of course, Brits came in the early 1900s, 50 years later the whole indigenous population became Christian...


More importantly, there are basically 0 places the Brits colonised where native tribes have been totally destroyed of their native sacred sculptures and such.
- I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "totally". That's a hard task to achieve, even for Brits... But "almost totally" would probably apply to a fifth of the world. 


Hinduism in India was in fact made by the Brits, uniting Shaivism with Vaishnavism to reduce internal conflict and even fusing Pagan religions in with it too.
- I don't disagree here, add to that Wahabism in Arabia, & Bahaism in Iran, & Kamalism in Turkey...etc. All horrible brutal ideologies aimed at removing traditional religions, which manifested the strongest resistance to Colonialism. The bay of Bengal (along with the Marmara region) was the most industrialized region of the 18th century world, a much desired prize for the Brits. Early 19th century resistance against the East India Company followed by the Sepoy Rebellion made the British realize the importance of faith in the Indian people, hence the wide scale propaganda campaign to rewrite Indian history depicting the Muslims as brutal invaders, & reform Indian religions, to conform to that narrative, hence the rise of Hindutva. In contrast, traditional Hindu religions adopted & merged with Islamic ideas, to the point where even Hindu kings would usually pay homage to Muslim saints.  


Can you give me examples of the British destroying native scultptures and blackmailing the population into Christianity as opposed to merley introducing it?
- I'm not sure if you're joking here...?! Have your heard of North America? Nuff said... I don't know if you're aware of this, the Whites of the 19th century & much of the 20th century saw others as sub-human slaves, & treated them accordingly.

- In truth, Colonialism is just an extension of the Crusades, though expressed in various forms. As such, the main idea was the Earth belongs to us Christians, & we just need to claim it. The entire Colonial narrative is built on the assumption that lands are without natives. Lands are lush & brimming with resources, ripe for the picking. In practice, this came into effect in two main ways. Settlement by annihilation, as in exterminating or displacing the native population. Or, settlement by assimilation, as in assimilating the native's culture into the colonial's. The Protestants were generally more fond of the former (Britain, Netherlands...), while the Catholics more fond of the latter (Spain, Portugal, France...).


- What's the issue?! Shows how Islam brought the Golden Age of the Maghreb.
#13
Yassine
Yassine's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 1,085
3
2
6
Yassine's avatar
Yassine
3
2
6
@RationalMadman
I am open to be educated on this, please can you contrast Christian African nations vs Islamic ones and explain how the Islamic led with a lighter or friendlier methodology? I am willing to be proven wrong.
- I appreciate your question & honesty, I kinda answered this earlier. The subject here is two folds, one is labels vs. facts, & the other is majority practice.

- The global narrative today is written by the West, other narratives rarely make it to the spotlight, unless through the West (such as the case for Native Americans, or African Americans). As such, much of the focus is on the great Western achievements & the supposed barbarism of others, while none on their own atrocities. The narrative is thus controlled with sheer labels. Particularly, equality, freedom, civilization...etc for us... backwardness, barbarism, oppression... for others; albeit, in facts the opposite is the case. Allow me to give you few examples:
1. Native Americans were portrayed as violent disgusting brutes whose goal is to devour the elegant civilized peaceful White Europeans, when in reality the opposite is the case.
2. Black African women were portrayed as lustful degenerate whores who just want to seduce the pure chaste White man... in fact, this was just rape.
3. The British campaigned for the abolishment of Slavery, as saviors of the world. In reality, the racism & inhumane treatment against Blacks & even against the lower class actually got worse with the Abolishment. Why did they do it then? One, because of the industrial revolution, the UK did not need slaves anymore, they needed workers. Slaves cost more than coal, & they were prone to many rebellions. Two, all the enemy major powers of the world relied on slaves. Particularly, the Ottoman Empire, which was pressured by Europeans to abolish slavery under the moral pretext of "equality". In effect, slaves in Europe were property under extremely harsh conditions, whereas slaves in the Ottoman Empire run the country, as they constituted 3 of the 4 ruling factions of the state. Virtually, the entire Ottoman government & military were slaves. The abolishment of Slavery for the UK meant lowering cost of construction, whereas it mean the collapse of the state for the Ottomans, which indeed happened shortly after.

- It is not about Christian vs Islamic methodology, rather about majority practice. It just so happens that, for the better part of Islamic History, tolerant trends of Islam dominated. That does not mean callous trends did not exist, only they were uncommon; though, that kinda changed with Colonialism. In Christianity, the opposite was the case. The callous trends of the faith (like Catholicism) dominated Christian History, while the more tolerant trends, such as the Copts, went unnoticed. The Copts of Abyssinia were the first people to accept Muslim refugees from the persecution in Mecca. The Copts have an amazingly peaceful & tolerant history, known for their hospitality & acceptance. Even more so, the Nestorians of Iraq (the Eastern Church), the most rich & tolerant of all Christians. They preserved Greek medicine & knowledge, they constituted the Diwan class of the Abbasid Empire (officials). The churches of Middle East are generally tolerant & humility-oriented, contrary to the European churches (with exceptions of course, such as the. Cathars). Unfortunately, the European churches came on top & dominated the Christian story. Imagine the Abbasids or the Ottomans adopted the Wahhabi trend of Islam... they'd probably do worse than Catholics.


#14
Yassine
Yassine's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 1,085
3
2
6
Yassine's avatar
Yassine
3
2
6

how did that crusader reach egypt , no crusader ever set foot on africa
- LOL! Fantasies =/= History. 

 
and if islam is as perfect as you claim it to be why is everyone running away from it to the west ?
- Who's telling you all these stupid things?


even the syrian refugees in turkey are getting kicked out , let me point here that they didn't get kicked out from any other European country.
- You're living in a bizzaro world. 


why didn't saudi arabia took the syrian refugees if islam is as perfect as you claim it to be ? isn't sharia law the law of saudi arabia as saudi arabia claim ?
- No. Saudis are closest to the West than Islam.


- I wonder why he attempted to "demolish" that small pyramid... for kicks I guess... Why don't you post about the dozens of *actual* temples & hundreds of thousands of artifacts literally pillaged from Egypt by the Europeans. Lest you be the biggest hypocrite on this planet.