for muslim, at sa mga taong gusto mag tanong about ISLAM

[kenneth009]

balik pagano nalang tayo. mas nauna yun kesa sa islam

Before sa mga pagano, may relihiyon ba? patayo tayo ng relihiyong "Bago Pagano"?

 

[Dreamer]

Ang tanong ko po sa mga kapatid na Muslim:

Bakit tanging sa Islam lang nagbabawal lumipat sa ibang relihiyon ang isang Muslim, at bagkus ay pinapatay ang mga lumilisan sa Islam?

TIA

 

[rafh27]

do you have hard proof for your claim that al quaeda is gawa gawa lang?

mate sorry for inconvenient, i forgot to post a link on my previous post,

you have notice dalawa ang sagot ko, the other one from Col. ghaddafi right,

perhaps, about gawa2x lang ng U.S.A, i saw on Documentary of Farenheit 9/11 & Zeitgeist adendum that the USA govnmnt invented that name, to Blame a osama bin Laden.
Meron link sa baba, pakicheck.

my 2nd answer about col. ghaddafi, that the Al-Qaeda does really exist,
Facts: the Al-qaeda militant who thrown away ghaddifi in dictatorship was a non Libyan citizen, & had identify as Shias Followers of various arab countries hired by a known as "The Man Behind the Curtain"

each from the two is correct.

heres some links about al-qaeda

www.pakalertpress.com/2011/01/23/how-the-u-s-invented-al-qaeda/

existentialistcowboy.blogspot.com/2010/12/how-us-invented-al-qaeda.html?m=1
www.infowars.com/al-qaeda-100-pentagon-run

prisonplanet.com/articles/february2008/022208_congressman_involved.htm

eto naman video sa youtube that hillary clinton speaks of al-qaeda
m.digg.com/news/politics/hillary_clinton_we_created_al_qaeda

 

[leftoutkid]

ano nangyari doon sa sudan? napanood ko kasi yung attack on darfur. pinapatay ng mga arab muslim ang mga african muslim. isang genocide yun. akala ko pantay pantay. bakit pag sabihin muslim parang supreme ang mga arab.

 

[rafh27]

Ang tanong ko po sa mga kapatid na Muslim:

Bakit tanging sa Islam lang nagbabawal lumipat sa ibang relihiyon ang isang Muslim, at bagkus ay pinapatay ang mga lumilisan sa Islam?

TIA

God says: “Let there be no compulsion in religion.
Truth has been made clear from error. Whoever
rejects false worship and believes in God has
grasped the most trustworthy handhold that never
breaks. And God hears and knows all things.” [Sûrah
al-Baqarah: 256] One of the fundamental truths established by the
sacred texts is that no one can be compelled to
accept Islam. It is the duty of Muslims to establish
the proof of Islam to the people so that truth can be
made clear from falsehood. After that, whoever
wishes to accept Islam may do so and whoever wishes to continue upon unbelief may do so. No one
should be threatened or harmed in any way if he
does not wish to accept Islam.

i hope it answers your question mate


jazakallahu khairan

 

[rafh27]

ano nangyari doon sa sudan? napanood ko kasi yung attack on darfur. pinapatay ng mga arab muslim ang mga african muslim. isang genocide yun. akala ko pantay pantay. bakit pag sabihin muslim parang supreme ang mga arab.

mate,
kindly study the differents of Shias & Sunnih,

in addition; there are people na Muslim sa pangalan, pero Asal hayop, they do not follow the teachings of Qur-an & Hadith; at tawag dito ay mga MUNAFIQ (hipokrito)

i hope it answers your question mate.

Jazakallahu khairan

 

[9Ten8ti]

Pasingit lang. gusto ko lang maliwanagan kung alin ba ang totoong nangyari sa 9/11 Attck? base sa international news at U.S. claims, grupo ni osama bin laden ang may gawa.. pero ayun naman sa muslim side U.S. government conspiracy ang nangyari dahil yung wtc may napakaraming gold iniimbak sa ilalim and if im not mistaken gold daw ng iran yun. ang source ko dito ay yung video na may pamagat na 9/11 ATTACK REVELATION. i think inilabas ang video na yun ng mga muslims. at talagang makikita mo doon in slow motion na may bomba sa loob ng wtc dahil sa anggulo ng pagsabog. if you watch the said video at di ka lang mag-isip, siguradong maniwala ka na conspiracy ang nangyari. nais kong malinawan kung sino sa inyo lahat dito na may concrete evidence kung sino ba talaga may sala?

 

[jengskie18]

rafh@ tama ka jan. . yung mga ganyang klaseng tao hindi totoong muslim. Noong 1st week nga rin ng April nilagyan ng bomb yung likoran ng bus namatay yung kawawang bata 10 years old palang. Dahil sa walang tigil na pangingikil nadadamay yung mga civilian.

-About sa mosque naawa talaga ako sa simbahan nyo. Ang bahox2 kasi. parang nasa gitna yung concrete na simbahan tapos pinapaligiran ng mala squatter tingnan. Minsan nga na isip ko kung talaga bang hindi sila concern sa cleanliness sa kanilang paligid. I don't know the real reason why, pero yan yung parang impression ko sa paligid nila.

-But nung nag punta ako sa cotabato ng visit kami sa inyong "Grand Mosque" sabi nila worth 2 billion pesos daw yun.
Eto ohhhh christian within the grand mosque:

Tanong lang ulet:
Totoo ba yung mga type of muslims like:

Lords
Warriors
Traders

hehe gawax2 ko lang yan. di ko kasi yun alam.

taga-cotabato ako...ang Grand Mosque na yan dito sa amin ay sponsored by sultan bulkia of brunei...

 

[jengskie18]

bakit kinatatakutan ang mga muslim sa bansa natin? at no offend, bakit ang yayabang nila? lalo na pag marami sila, kahit dadaan ka lang sa harap nila susundan ka ng tingin, e wala ka namang ginagawa sa kanila.

paano mo naman nasabi ang ang yayabang na eh tinitingnan ka lang naman? wala man silang ginagawang masama sayo? ibig sabihin pala kung may titingin sayo mayabang na ang dating???

 

[pcruztemp]

heres some links about al-qaeda

www.pakalertpress.com/2011/01/23/how-the-u-s-invented-al-qaeda/

existentialistcowboy.blogspot.com/2010/12/how-us-invented-al-qaeda.html?m=1
www.infowars.com/al-qaeda-100-pentagon-run

prisonplanet.com/articles/february2008/022208_congressman_involved.htm

eto naman video sa youtube that hillary clinton speaks of al-qaeda
m.digg.com/news/politics/hillary_clinton_we_created_al_qaeda

you always harp on about islamic scholars and wikipedia claiming that the source of information is in doubt unless the "experts" give their say. but why do you lower your standards if it suits you? the first two links provide no hard proof and are just written by someone who made a website. If they were credible then why is the idea that al quaeda is a US invention not shared by the equivalent of islamic scholars in this case: the journalists and historians of the world



re the last video of hillary clinton. that is a twisted interpretation. she was referring to the mujahedeen. this contradicts your point in several ways
1. you claim that the al quaeda was invented post 9-11. if that's so then this is clear evidence that it existed even before that but at the time it was allied with the USA against the soviets.
2. yes, the USA funded the mujahedeen decades ago and then the same mujuahedeen turned around formed what became al quaeda. this in no way proves that the USA is using the al quaeda as a scapegoat. That's what is called in slang tagalog "trinaydor". This perfectly explains it

 

[pcruztemp]

God says: “Let there be no compulsion in religion.
Truth has been made clear from error. Whoever
rejects false worship and believes in God has
grasped the most trustworthy handhold that never
breaks. And God hears and knows all things.” [Sûrah
al-Baqarah: 256] One of the fundamental truths established by the
sacred texts is that no one can be compelled to
accept Islam. It is the duty of Muslims to establish
the proof of Islam to the people so that truth can be
made clear from falsehood. After that, whoever
wishes to accept Islam may do so and whoever wishes to continue upon unbelief may do so. No one
should be threatened or harmed in any way if he
does not wish to accept Islam.

i hope it answers your question mate


jazakallahu khairan

Qur'an (4:89) - "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them"

Qur'an (9:11-12) - "But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then are they your brethren in religion. We detail Our revelations for a people who have knowledge. And if they break their pledges after their treaty (hath been made with you) and assail your religion, then fight the heads of disbelief - Lo! they have no binding oaths - in order that they may desist."

Bukhari (52:260) - "...The Prophet said, 'If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.' " Note that there is no distinction as to how that Muslim came to be a Muslim.



Bukhari (83:37) - "Allah's Apostle never killed anyone except in one of the following three situations: (1) A person who killed somebody unjustly, was killed (in Qisas,) (2) a married person who committed illegal sexual intercourse and (3) a man who fought against Allah and His Apostle and deserted Islam and became an apostate."



Bukhari (84:57) - [In the words of] "Allah's Apostle, 'Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'"



Bukhari (89:271) - A man who embraces Islam, then reverts to Judaism is to be killed according to "the verdict of Allah and his apostle."



Bukhari (84:58) - "There was a fettered man beside Abu Muisa. Mu'adh asked, 'Who is this (man)?' Abu Muisa said, 'He was a Jew and became a Muslim and then reverted back to Judaism.' Then Abu Muisa requested Mu'adh to sit down but Mu'adh said, 'I will not sit down till he has been killed. This is the judgment of Allah and His Apostle (for such cases) and repeated it thrice.' Then Abu Musa ordered that the man be killed, and he was killed. Abu Musa added, 'Then we discussed the night prayers'"



Bukhari (84:64-65) - "Allah's Apostle: 'During the last days there will appear some young foolish people who will say the best words but their faith will not go beyond their throats (i.e. they will have no faith) and will go out from (leave) their religion as an arrow goes out of the game. So, wherever you find them, kill them, for whoever kills them shall have reward on the Day of Resurrection.'"



Abu Dawud (4346) - "Was not there a wise man among you who would stand up to him when he saw that I had withheld my hand from accepting his allegiance, and kill him?" Muhammad is chastising his companions for allowing an apostate to "repent" under duress. (The person in question was Muhammad's former scribe who left him after doubting the authenticity of divine "revelations" upon finding out that he could suggest grammatical changes. He was brought back to Muhammad after having been captured in Medina).



Reliance of the Traveller (Islamic Law) o8.1 - "When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed." (o8.4 affirms that there is no penalty for killing an apostate).

Such defenders usually quote verse 2:256 to Western audiences. The verse states "Let there be no compulsion in religion, for truth stands out from error." They may also include a fragment of verse 10:99-100, "Wouldst thou (Muhammad) compel men until they are believers?" What they don't say is that nearly all Muslim scholars agree that both verses were spoken by Muhammad during an earlier time in his teachings, when he did not have the power to compel others. They are abrogated by later verses, such as verse 9:29, which clearly commands Muslims to fight unbelievers until they relent and either accept Islam or a state of humiliation under Islamic rule (an obvious illustration of compulsion).

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/012-apostasy.htm

 

[pcruztemp]

The Qur'an tells us that Joseph interpreted the dream of his prison-mate:

"O my two companions of the prison! As to one of you, he will pour out the wine for his lord to drink: and as for the other, he will be crucified, and the birds will eat from his head. Thus is the case judged concerning which you both did enquire." [Surah 12:41]

Centuries later, according to the Qur'an, Pharaoh threatened his magicians, who believed in Moses, saying:

Be sure I will cut off your hands and your feet on opposite sides, and I will cause you all to die on the cross [Surah 7:124, see also Surahs 26:49 and 20:71]

The major problem with these statements from the Qur'an is that there is no archeological or historical evidence that the Egyptians used crucifixion as a form of punishment in the time of Joseph, or in the time of Moses. Crucifixion only becomes a punishment much later in history in another culture before it has been taken over by the Egyptians. Such threats made by a Pharaoh of these time periods would be historically inaccurate. The Egyptians executed people by impaling a pointed stake [or tp-ht in hieroglyphs] through the victim. Centuries later, the Romans executed people by fastening the victim to a cross with rope or nails, and they called this crucifixion. Simply put, crucifixion defines a method of execution used by the Romans and the techniques of impalement used by the ancient Egyptians cannot properly be referred to as crucifixion.

The "Islamic Awareness" team must, somehow, find something/anything that looks like crucifixion in ancient Egypt in order to save their Qur'an from another obvious error. Since there is absolutely no historical evidence for the practice of crucifixion in ancient Egypt, the "Islamic Awareness" team will apply their standard polemics when faced with another Qur'anic "chronic chronology" problem: enlarge and broaden the definition of crucifixion to include something, anything, that did exist in ancient Egypt. Before employing their usual sophistry, the "Islamic Awareness" team attempts to redefine impalement. Impalement is usually defined as "an act of torture and/or execution whereby the victim is pierced by a long stake". The "Islamic Awareness" team would like us to think that instead of putting a stake or pole through someone, impalement should be defined as fastening someone to a stake. Driving nails through the hands and feet of a victim, while fastening him to a cross, could be considered a form of "multiple micro-impalements" associated with crucifixion, however in cases where the victim is fastened to the cross with ropes – there is no impalement at all. Crucifixion and impalement are not the same and these terms are not synonymous – they have obvious and distinct meanings.

However, nailing victims to a stake was simply not the practice in ancient Egypt.

http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Saifullah/crucifixion2.htm

 

[rafh27]

but why do you lower your standards if it suits you? the first two links provide no hard proof and are just written by someone who made a website. If they were credible then why is the idea that al quaeda is a US invention not shared by the equivalent of islamic scholars in this case: the journalists and historians of the world

Actually sinadya ko un 2 or 3 links na not accurate para maramdaman mo din ang sinasabi kong lack of proof tulad ng wikipedia.

As ive said in previous post, try to watch zeitgeist part 1 & farenheit 9/11,
kasi mas klaro ang evidence at explanation dun

try mo sa youtube kung meron,
meron ako copy dito pero binili ko to,

 

[pcruztemp]

Actually sinadya ko un 2 or 3 links na not accurate para maramdaman mo din ang sinasabi kong lack of proof tulad ng wikipedia.

so wala ka pa din maipalabas na proof accepted by the great historians and journalists that 9/11 was invented by the USA?

 

[rafh27]

see?
You have posted Qur-anic verses & hadith which is true,

now lets clear this things out, when & where this be applied.

For example during battle.
Any new convrted or muslim who step back & turn away from Islam is to be killed..!
Why? It is a traitor!
Mamaya they stabbed you behind.

Second, lets applied in the time of the companions, the prophet muhammad (s.a.w) is in a great danger, so anyone who left islam it is like he is the assassin, para maiwasan ang pagsi sisi, a traitor must be killed..!


Sa panahon ngayon, hindi na pwede e apply para patayin ang mga tao who left Islam, we are not in a war, and the verses simply applied during battle & in the time of prophet muhammad (s.a.w)


i hope it answers the issue.

Jazakallahu Khairan

 

[rafh27]

so wala ka pa din maipalabas na proof accepted by the great historians and journalists that 9/11 was invented by the USA?

im recommending you to watch zeitgeist adendum and farenheit 9/11

 

[pcruztemp]

im recommending you to watch zeitgeist adendum and farenheit 9/11

which are both not accepted by the great sholars of history and journalism

 

[pcruztemp]

Sa panahon ngayon, hindi na pwede e apply para patayin ang mga tao who left Islam, we are not in a war, and the verses simply applied during battle & in the time of prophet muhammad (s.a.w)


i hope it answers the issue.

Jazakallahu Khairan

what about the death penalties for apostasy and fatwas calling for death handed down in non-war conditions?

A Kuwaiti man accused of using Twitter to defame the Muslim Prophet Mohammad has ignited a debate in the tiny but wealthy Gulf country about imposing the death penalty for the crime of blasphemy.

Muslim preachers, lawmakers and international human rights groups have all jumped into the debate, which erupted after Hamad Al-Naqi, a member of the country’s Shiite minority, was arrested March 28 on charges of “defaming the Prophet” in tweets posted on the social-networking website. He has denied making the posts, claiming that somebody hacked into his twitter account.

Under Article 111 of Kuwait’s penal code, which prohibits defamation of religion, Naqi faces up to one year’s imprisonment and a fine. But soon after he was arrested calls emerged for Kuwait to follow its bigger neighbor, Saudi Arabia, and impose the death penalty for such crimes.
...
Kuwait, whose population is about 70% Sunni and 30% Shiite, practices a more mild form of Islam than Saudi Arabia

http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=266960

Christians said he was detained in April 2010 when security forces raided Irani’s house in Karaj during a worship service. Iranian Christians said at the time that security forces beat Irani and confiscated Bibles and other Christian literature and DVDs.

His colleague, Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani, is facing the death penalty on charges of "apostasy" or abandoning Islam.

http://www.bosnewslife.com/21524-news-alert-family-fears-iranian-pastor-dying-behind-bars

 

[rafh27]

what about the death penalties for apostasy and fatwas calling for death handed down in non-war conditions?

first of all,
kuwait ay nagpatupad ng batas "under article 111"
which is not base in sharia,
so dapat aware ang mga citizens diba?
So problema na ng mga lawbreaker,

2nd,
he was a Shia'
shia doesnt recognize Muhammad (s.a.w) as the last prophet, so alam niya may batas ang kuwait na pinagbabawal yun.

3rd ano pakiramdam mo pag pinagsabihan ko ang lolo mo na namatay na Magnanakaw, mandurugas, rapist, impostor, sinungaling, sugarul, at putang ina at isagaw itong lahat sa buong Pilipinas.
hindi mo ba ako sasampahan ng kaso mate?
Tandaan mo si miriam santiago may kinasuhan siyang taong ganito ang kasalanan.

Finally, if you left islam due to marriage to non-muslim, ignorance, scientific belief, darwinism, or discarding from the law. You can leave in peace, without having a threat,
pero, you should aware that some other countries na pinagbbawal ang pani2ra sa prophet muhammad (s.a.w)
sa indonesia, marami umalis sa Islam, pero hindi sila pinagpatay because "there is no compulsion in religion"
my elder brother is an atheist, he left islam, pero hindi namin inaway, kahit mga friend nya muslim at friend namin na Qur-an scholar ay hindi nag utos para ipapatay bro ko.


jazakallahu khairan,

 

[Dreamer]

God says: “Let there be no compulsion in religion.
Truth has been made clear from error. Whoever
rejects false worship and believes in God has
grasped the most trustworthy handhold that never
breaks. And God hears and knows all things.” [Sûrah
al-Baqarah: 256] One of the fundamental truths established by the
sacred texts is that no one can be compelled to
accept Islam. It is the duty of Muslims to establish
the proof of Islam to the people so that truth can be
made clear from falsehood. After that, whoever
wishes to accept Islam may do so and whoever wishes to continue upon unbelief may do so. No one
should be threatened or harmed in any way if he
does not wish to accept Islam.

i hope it answers your question mate


jazakallahu khairan

Thanks for your answer brother, but in real life and many recent events your answer is not what is happening!

Many Christian convert were killed or tried to be killed even by their own families.

It happen even inside a shopping mall in Canada, when a convert was pushed deceptively from a top floor by his relatives. Fortunately he survived the the fall but was paralyzed.

The recent one is in Iran, which was mention by pcruz.