Print Page | Close Window

Creation of Islam

Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: Scholarly Pursuits
Forum Name: The Minefield
Forum Discription: Controversial topics. Only mods can start new topics
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=26421
Printed Date: 04-Jul-2022 at 17:39
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: Creation of Islam
Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Subject: Creation of Islam
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 06:45
There is a thread in "Philosophy and Theology" forum with the title: "Who was jesus, Prophet?", it is good that I also ask here "Who was Muhammad, prophet?"
 
I want really to know the self created religion of this illiterate man which was just a heterogeneous mixture of Christianity, Judaism and pagan religions such as Mazdakism, Manichaeism and Zoroastrianism, could be a divine religion?!! The fact is that he was just a merchant who travelled to some neighbour countires of Arabia and learnt somethings from the followers of those religion (of course not very good, anyway he was illiterate and could just rely on his memory) and came back home and narrated them to the people of an isolated desert region, who had never heard these things, The book, which was collected later from his stories, is full of errors. There are numrous non-Arbaic (Greek, Persian, Latin, ...) relgious words in this book, that about most of them, we see the narrator had not understood the meaning of them correctly, like the word al-Fardos (Paradise)!


-------------



Replies:
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 07:40
And the fun continues...


I was going to say more, but I will let this brilliant comment by Omar do it for me:
Originally posted by Omar


(And seriously, the Sassanids lost 1300 years ago. Get over it already!)



-------------


Posted By: Suren
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 07:43
Are you serious Cyrus? I hope not!Confused

-------------
Anfører


Posted By: Suren
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 07:44
Originally posted by es_bih

And the fun continues...


I was going to say more, but I will let this brilliant comment by Omar do it for me:
Originally posted by Omar


(And seriously, the Sassanids lost 1300 years ago. Get over it already!)

Sassanids are back better watch yourselfWink

-------------
Anfører


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 07:50
Originally posted by Suren

Originally posted by es_bih

And the fun continues...


I was going to say more, but I will let this brilliant comment by Omar do it for me:
Originally posted by Omar


(And seriously, the Sassanids lost 1300 years ago. Get over it already!)

Sassanids are back better watch yourselfWink



Star


-------------


Posted By: azimuth
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 07:56
you must tell ali sina this fact and destroy the foundation of islam, the wold must know the truth cyrus, zoroaster zindabad, israel zindabad and shahmiri zindabad

-------------


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 07:57
LOL


-------------


Posted By: Suren
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 08:07
  Viva Abu muslim.

-------------
Anfører


Posted By: edgewaters
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 08:44

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

I want really to know the self created religion of this illiterate man which was just a heterogeneous mixture of Christianity, Judaism and pagan religions such as Mazdakism, Manichaeism and Zoroastrianism, could be a divine religion?!!

IMHO, there is no such thing. Just cult leaders, petty ones and larger-than-life ones.

The really good ones are able to do just what you describe: they take bits and pieces and build a brand new model. Like a car manufacturer. They use succesful things from earlier designs, add a few new twists, and come out with a shiny new religion. The petty ones just mimic the great ones in a watered-down sort of way, and are quickly forgotten.

The really great ones are very rare, because it requires a very unique combination of talents. They have to be brilliant, true geniuses, in order to create a very appealing religious system which can mesmerize people, and they have to be extremely charismatic to get it off the ground. Genius and charisma tend to be a rare combination, all the more so when both qualities are taken to such extreme heights. Figures like this were probably like a cross between Einstein and Kennedy (or, perhaps to be more current, Obama and Stephen Hawking).

You get a combination like that and they're going to do something incredible ... really transform the world, shake it to its roots ... even though I don't consider them to have been talking directly to God, I can definately understand how such a person could give that impression. It would very much seem that way if you were to meet someone like that in person. Some of them probably posed as gods, themselves.



Posted By: Suren
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 08:50
  Edited to make sure no body misunderstand.


-------------
Anfører


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 13:13
Originally posted by Suren

Are you serious Cyrus? I hope not!Confused
Astaghfirallah! LOL


-------------


Posted By: Mortaza
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 13:52
The fact is that he was just a merchant who travelled to some neighbour countires of Arabia and learnt somethings from the followers of those religion (of course not very good, anyway he was illiterate and could just rely on his memory) and came back home and narrated them to the people of an isolated desert region, who had never heard these things,
 
Yeah, Yeah Prophet was only one who interested with trade..Ermm
 
Now It make sense..
 


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 14:08
Originally posted by edgewaters

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

I want really to know the self created religion of this illiterate man which was just a heterogeneous mixture of Christianity, Judaism and pagan religions such as Mazdakism, Manichaeism and Zoroastrianism, could be a divine religion?!!

IMHO, there is no such thing. Just cult leaders, petty ones and larger-than-life ones.

The really good ones are able to do just what you describe: they take bits and pieces and build a brand new model. Like a car manufacturer. They use succesful things from earlier designs, add a few new twists, and come out with a shiny new religion. The petty ones just mimic the great ones in a watered-down sort of way, and are quickly forgotten.

The really great ones are very rare, because it requires a very unique combination of talents. They have to be brilliant, true geniuses, in order to create a very appealing religious system which can mesmerize people, and they have to be extremely charismatic to get it off the ground. Genius and charisma tend to be a rare combination, all the more so when both qualities are taken to such extreme heights. Figures like this were probably like a cross between Einstein and Kennedy (or, perhaps to be more current, Obama and Stephen Hawking).

You get a combination like that and they're going to do something incredible ... really transform the world, shake it to its roots ... even though I don't consider them to have been talking directly to God, I can definately understand how such a person could give that impression. It would very much seem that way if you were to meet someone like that in person. Some of them probably posed as gods, themselves.

Islam had absolutely nothing new to say and there was no way to spread this relgion without sword, of course there were some people around Muhammad like some Persian Mazdakists who were really genuine, they had to satisfy this man who was accepted as a prophet among Arabs!
 
[Quran, 33:50] O prophet! We have made lawful to you any believing woman (married or not) who dedicates her soul to the prophet; this only for you, and not for the believers. We know what we have appointed for them as to their wives and the captives whom their right hands possess; in order that there should be no difficulty for you. And Allah is oft-forgiving most merciful.
 
 


-------------


Posted By: Al Jassas
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 14:29
Hello Cyrus
 
Saying Islam gave nothing new is unjust, remember, this was the first religion without a religious heirarchy or as is now known, an ecclesiastic religion, a thing all other religions including the Persian ones you mentioned had at the core of their belief systems. It was a simple religion with simple teachings that were focused on the human being himself. It empowered women more than any mainstream culture or religion for centuries (even mellenium) to come. And it had equality at its Heart, equality between all muslims that is no built in racism or discrimination, unless you count slavery that is another issue altogether.
 
Finally, thee is no proof whatsoever that Islam is related near or far to any of the Persians religions, this is a fact and if you have proofs give it and I will discuss with you.
 
 
Al-Jassas
 
PS: the passage from the Quran above, it has a story behind it, read it carefully and you will understand it.
 


Posted By: Seko
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 14:29
Marvelous! He's back with more subterfuge and blood to spill. Cyrus are you ever satisfied and do you actually think we care about your misinformation?  We do get tired of correcting your rubbish you know.

-------------


Posted By: Reginmund
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 14:34
If your point, Cyrus, is that Islam was a construct based on already existing doctrines and not something handed down from a god, then any rational person would agree with you. This is true for all religions though, Zoroastrianism too. Religion however will endure regardless of how scientific advances may undermine its credibility, as science cannot counteract man's fear of non-existence or his need to believe there is universal and absolute justice.

Originally posted by Suren

Sassanids are back better watch yourselfWink


Where? Iran's present government is an insult to Persian history and culture.


-------------


Posted By: Bulldog
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 14:57
How does Science undermine religions credibility?
Islam enourages the Sciences and Learning, something unfortunately alot of the muslim world has forgotten.


-------------
      What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine



Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 16:55
Originally posted by Al Jassas

Hello Cyrus
 
Saying Islam gave nothing new is unjust
just or unjust, that is a fact.
 
remember, this was the first religion without a religious heirarchy or as is now known, an ecclesiastic religion, a thing all other religions including the Persian ones you mentioned had at the core of their belief systems.
I think you are talking about clericalism: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/clericalism - http://www.thefreedictionary.com/clericalism an undue influence of the hierarchy and clergy in public affairs and government, yes? Shia Muslims don't believe what Sunnis say about it but they say according to Quran (like 4:59) you should obey not only Allah and the prophet but also the clergy.
Anyway I myself think Sunnis are right on this issue but it just shows the influence of Mazdakism on Islam, you can read here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazdakism - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazdakism  One of the principles of Mazdakism was "anti-clericalism".
 
It was a simple religion with simple teachings that were focused on the human being himself.It empowered women more than any mainstream culture or religion for centuries (even mellenium) to come. And it had equality at its Heart, equality between all muslims that is no built in racism or discrimination, unless you count slavery that is another issue altogether.
The same as Mazdakism.
 
Finally, thee is no proof whatsoever that Islam is related near or far to any of the Persians religions, this is a fact and if you have proofs give it and I will discuss with you.
If you know please mention one thing in Islam which was unrelated to the Persian religions or other pre-Islam religions, we can discuss about it.


-------------


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 17:12
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

Originally posted by edgewaters

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

I want really to know the self created religion of this illiterate man which was just a heterogeneous mixture of Christianity, Judaism and pagan religions such as Mazdakism, Manichaeism and Zoroastrianism, could be a divine religion?!!

IMHO, there is no such thing. Just cult leaders, petty ones and larger-than-life ones.

The really good ones are able to do just what you describe: they take bits and pieces and build a brand new model. Like a car manufacturer. They use succesful things from earlier designs, add a few new twists, and come out with a shiny new religion. The petty ones just mimic the great ones in a watered-down sort of way, and are quickly forgotten.

The really great ones are very rare, because it requires a very unique combination of talents. They have to be brilliant, true geniuses, in order to create a very appealing religious system which can mesmerize people, and they have to be extremely charismatic to get it off the ground. Genius and charisma tend to be a rare combination, all the more so when both qualities are taken to such extreme heights. Figures like this were probably like a cross between Einstein and Kennedy (or, perhaps to be more current, Obama and Stephen Hawking).

You get a combination like that and they're going to do something incredible ... really transform the world, shake it to its roots ... even though I don't consider them to have been talking directly to God, I can definately understand how such a person could give that impression. It would very much seem that way if you were to meet someone like that in person. Some of them probably posed as gods, themselves.

Islam had absolutely nothing new to say and there was no way to spread this religion without sword, of course there were some people around Muhammad like some Persian Mazdakists who were really genuine, they had to satisfy this man who was accepted as a prophet among Arabs!
 
[Quran, 33:50] O prophet! We have made lawful to you any believing woman (married or not) who dedicates her soul to the prophet; this only for you, and not for the believers. We know what we have appointed for them as to their wives and the captives whom their right hands possess; in order that there should be no difficulty for you. And Allah is oft-forgiving most merciful.
 
 


Saying that Islam was spread by the sword when it took up to 4-5 centuries for a lot of regions to even have a Muslim majority is no other thing than retarded. I guess when you don't understand the whole scope of history, and focus on today rather than a careful study of a 1400 year period you get this idea if the vast majority are Muslim today that means they were so 1400 years ago as well. Again if there were "by the sword," not saying that there were not small and insignificant sporadic ones, but no large scale or centralized movements of any significance occurred. Egypt was majority Christian up until the Crusades, and so was almost most of the rest of the Middle East. Why? Because conversions were not stressed for one, nor sought out in the early period.

I know you have your gripes with Iran's current form of government, and also some disillusion about your own place in there, but that doesn't warrant speaking nonsense for no reason either.

There is always an option of emigration.


-------------


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 17:14
Originally posted by Al Jassas

Hello Cyrus
 
Saying Islam gave nothing new is unjust, remember, this was the first religion without a religious heirarchy or as is now known, an ecclesiastic religion, a thing all other religions including the Persian ones you mentioned had at the core of their belief systems. It was a simple religion with simple teachings that were focused on the human being himself. It empowered women more than any mainstream culture or religion for centuries (even mellenium) to come. And it had equality at its Heart, equality between all muslims that is no built in racism or discrimination, unless you count slavery that is another issue altogether.
 
Finally, thee is no proof whatsoever that Islam is related near or far to any of the Persians religions, this is a fact and if you have proofs give it and I will discuss with you.
 
 
Al-Jassas
 
PS: the passage from the Quran above, it has a story behind it, read it carefully and you will understand it.
 


Well I guess if the Prophet had been Iranian he'd be jumping hoops about him ShockedLOLWinkEmbarrassed


-------------


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 17:17
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

Originally posted by Al Jassas

Hello Cyrus
 
Saying Islam gave nothing new is unjust
just or unjust, that is a fact.
 
remember, this was the first religion without a religious heirarchy or as is now known, an ecclesiastic religion, a thing all other religions including the Persian ones you mentioned had at the core of their belief systems.
I think you are talking about clericalism: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/clericalism - http://www.thefreedictionary.com/clericalism an undue influence of the hierarchy and clergy in public affairs and government, yes? Shia Muslims don't believe what Sunnis say about it but they say according to Quran (like 4:59) you should obey not only Allah and the prophet but also the clergy.
Anyway I myself think Sunnis are right on this issue but it just shows the influence of Mazdakism on Islam, you can read here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazdakism - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazdakism  One of the principles of Mazdakism was "anti-clericalism".
 
It was a simple religion with simple teachings that were focused on the human being himself.It empowered women more than any mainstream culture or religion for centuries (even mellenium) to come. And it had equality at its Heart, equality between all muslims that is no built in racism or discrimination, unless you count slavery that is another issue altogether.
The same as Mazdakism.
 
Finally, thee is no proof whatsoever that Islam is related near or far to any of the Persians religions, this is a fact and if you have proofs give it and I will discuss with you.
If you know please mention one thing in Islam which was unrelated to the Persian religions or other pre-Islam religions, we can discuss about it.


Yes Cyrus. The Iranians have not only created the World and the Stars, but also everything that ever had any historical ramifications. Not only did the Iranians invent Islam, they invented religion of all kinds, and of course secretly the Germans are Iranians, and of course yes Obama is Iranian as are half of the World's leaders. The rest are just put there to undermine Iran's achievements to the Galaxy.

Star


-------------


Posted By: Beylerbeyi
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 17:58
Not only did the Iranians invent Islam, they invented religion of all kinds, and of course secretly the Germans are Iranians, and of course yes Obama is Iranian as are half of the World's leaders.

How dare you not name the dinosaurs? They were the proto-Persians. Name 'Darius' was originally 'Dariosaur'. 


-------------


Posted By: Akolouthos
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 18:08
Originally posted by es_bih

Saying that Islam was spread by the sword when it took up to 4-5 centuries for a lot of regions to even have a Muslim majority is no other thing than retarded. I guess when you don't understand the whole scope of history, and focus on today rather than a careful study of a 1400 year period you get this idea if the vast majority are Muslim today that means they were so 1400 years ago as well. Again if there were "by the sword," not saying that there were not small and insignificant sporadic ones, but no large scale or centralized movements of any significance occurred. Egypt was majority Christian up until the Crusades, and so was almost most of the rest of the Middle East. Why? Because conversions were not stressed for one, nor sought out in the early period.
 
I think we are all often careless with words when we discuss this topic. There is some debate over whether or not Islam was spread by the sword more than any other absolutist religion. What cannot be denied, however, is that the influence of Islam was spread by the sword. The prophet and his followers, whether they forced people to convert or not, did spend a good deal of time bringing Arabia and (in the case of his followers) much of the known world into the Dar al-Islam, where there was financial and social pressure to convert. I think we often take a view of the situation that is too black and white.
 
-Akolouthos


Posted By: Suren
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 18:30
Originally posted by Beylerbeyi

Not only did the Iranians invent Islam, they invented religion of all kinds, and of course secretly the Germans are Iranians, and of course yes Obama is Iranian as are half of the World's leaders.

How dare you not name the dinosaurs? They were the proto-Persians. Name 'Darius' was originally 'Dariosaur'. 

I have been told they were created by Turks, God is Turk do not forget that fact. These are just Persian propaganda to reclaim Turkish historyBig smile (it is a joke for those who dont get it)


-------------
Anfører


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 18:36

The Prophet? I think you're mistaken. During the Prophet's time there were defensive wars fought yes. But, the conquest itself is the prodigy of the Caliphate.
Here is the thing Ako, if there was that much pressure to convert, a lot of people in particular the uneducated peasantry would have converted en masse. That is what happens when there are pressures. The Levant and Egypt would have been nearly 80% Muslim within a generation if it were so. Fact still remains that up until the Crusades the Christians were a majority within the remnants of the Caliphate.







-------------


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 18:39
Originally posted by Beylerbeyi

Not only did the Iranians invent Islam, they invented religion of all kinds, and of course secretly the Germans are Iranians, and of course yes Obama is Iranian as are half of the World's leaders.

How dare you not name the dinosaurs? They were the proto-Persians. Name 'Darius' was originally 'Dariosaur'. 


I am mistaken forgive me. Yes. The Dinasours were also Proto-Iranic. Also Turks are long lost Proto-Iranic people so people here on AE with Turkic ancestry or heritage (quite a few of us here including myself and you Bey) we all should bow down to Dariosaurius the First. Infact Cyrus the First may have been not only a dinasour but the first cell crica. 3 billions years ago. True. All of life on Earth is Iranic due to Cyrus the one celled king of creation.

LOL


-------------


Posted By: Suren
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 18:46
You finaly got the point

-------------
Anfører


Posted By: Evrenosgazi
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 19:30
A ridiculous topic by a confused and complexed man about history of his country, but I must accept that the posts are funny


Posted By: Akolouthos
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 19:58
Originally posted by es_bih


The Prophet? I think you're mistaken. During the Prophet's time there were defensive wars fought yes. But, the conquest itself is the prodigy of the Caliphate. 
 
We could debate this ad nauseam -- actually, we have before, haven't we? Wink Suffice it to say that I maintain that the wars may only be considered defensive in the loosest sense of the word, and that if we take a very selective reading. Still, this is a legitimate point of debate. My original point, however, that the spread of Islam was expedited by the sword, defensive or not. Remember, I'm trying to clarify something I think we all to often speak carelessly about.
 
Here is the thing Ako, if there was that much pressure to convert, a lot of people in particular the uneducated peasantry would have converted en masse. That is what happens when there are pressures. The Levant and Egypt would have been nearly 80% Muslim within a generation if it were so. Fact still remains that up until the Crusades the Christians were a majority within the remnants of the Caliphate.
 
Well, first, I don't think anyone would assert that there wasn't any pressure to convert. If you would like to argue along those lines, I'd love to hear an explanation.
 
Second, pressured conversion need not be swift; indeed, it often is not. Keep in mind how persistent paganism was in the Roman empire. The various cults survived the Constantinian dispensation, the Theodosian edicts, etc., and didn't really become supressed outwardly until the middle of the sixth century. In the East, they continued in a severely marginalized, occasionally syncretic form well into the Medieval period. In the West, many persisted even later. Point being, history demonstrates that the conversion of an entire subject population through social and economic pressure is a gradual process.
 
-Akolouthos


Posted By: eaglecap
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 20:13
Who was Muhammad, prophet?"
Since religion is so subjective it probably depends on your upbringing and theological training.
To Christians and Jews- No!!
To Hindus and Budist - No!!
To the animist- NO!!
To Muslims yes!!
to Universalist- maybe

It is there right to believe but at the same time questioning anyone's beliefs should not threaten them and is free speech. If someone is strong in a particular faith then they should be able to stand up to the criticism and not get bent out of shape. Criticism should only make them stronger in their faith. I have found some Christians do not like criticism and the same is true with any belief, religion or political views.

Now that you have included both Jesus and Muhammad why not Joseph Smith- was Joseph Smith a Prophet??

I am sure the Mormons here would love that!!

-------------
Λοιπόν, αδελφοί και οι συμπολίτες και οι στρατιώτες, να θυμάστε αυτό ώστε μνημόσυνο σας, φήμη και ελευθερία σας θα ε


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 20:37
Originally posted by Evrenosgazi

A ridiculous topic by a confused and complexed man about history of his country, but I must accept that the posts are funny


Funny it is indeed. Big smile


-------------


Posted By: gcle2003
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 20:39
Off the top of my head but I don't think Mormons believe Smith was a prophet, do they? He discovered the writings of the prophet Mormon.

-------------


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 20:43
Originally posted by Akolouthos

Originally posted by es_bih


The Prophet? I think you're mistaken. During the Prophet's time there were defensive wars fought yes. But, the conquest itself is the prodigy of the Caliphate. 
 
We could debate this ad nauseam -- actually, we have before, haven't we? Wink Suffice it to say that I maintain that the wars may only be considered defensive in the loosest sense of the word, and that if we take a very selective reading. Still, this is a legitimate point of debate. My original point, however, that the spread of Islam was expedited by the sword, defensive or not. Remember, I'm trying to clarify something I think we all to often speak carelessly about.
 
Here is the thing Ako, if there was that much pressure to convert, a lot of people in particular the uneducated peasantry would have converted en masse. That is what happens when there are pressures. The Levant and Egypt would have been nearly 80% Muslim within a generation if it were so. Fact still remains that up until the Crusades the Christians were a majority within the remnants of the Caliphate.
 
Well, first, I don't think anyone would assert that there wasn't any pressure to convert. If you would like to argue along those lines, I'd love to hear an explanation.
 
Second, pressured conversion need not be swift; indeed, it often is not. Keep in mind how persistent paganism was in the Roman empire. The various cults survived the Constantinian dispensation, the Theodosian edicts, etc., and didn't really become supressed outwardly until the middle of the sixth century. In the East, they continued in a severely marginalized, occasionally syncretic form well into the Medieval period. In the West, many persisted even later. Point being, history demonstrates that the conversion of an entire subject population through social and economic pressure is a gradual process.
 
-Akolouthos


Again I said there were sporadic events throughout history of forced conversions or stressed ones. But, none of these can be applied to the early Caliphate as a state or Islam as a religion. Why? Well the religion does not preach it, and the state did not practice and in the early times did not favor conversion. Remember, more taxes from non-army recruits than form eligible recruits. Incidentally Arab Christians from the peninsula served in the conquests. So again - they were neither pressured to convert nor did, but actually participated on the same level. In less numbers because there were less of course, but that is a matter of statistics rather than them not being allowed to do so.




-------------


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 20:49
Stop despising Iranians! Angry I mean we didn't create Islam! Wink

-------------


Posted By: Suren
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 20:52
Originally posted by Reginmund

If your point, Cyrus, is that Islam was a construct based on already existing doctrines and not something handed down from a god, then any rational person would agree with you. This is true for all religions though, Zoroastrianism too. Religion however will endure regardless of how scientific advances may undermine its credibility, as science cannot counteract man's fear of non-existence or his need to believe there is universal and absolute justice.

Originally posted by Suren

Sassanids are back better watch yourselfWink


Where? Iran's present government is an insult to Persian history and culture.
don't you understand the atmosphere? IT IS A JOKE. begripe?!

-------------
Anfører


Posted By: Seko
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 20:53
Did you guys know that I am also a Prophet? I foresee the value of this thread for only the creator, Dariosaur! I also know why he created this thread. Maybe he can tell you all why also! What do you say Cyrus?

-------------


Posted By: Suren
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 20:55
Originally posted by Seko

Did you guys know that I am also a Prophet? I foresee the value of this thread for only the creator, Dariosaur! I also know why he created this thread. Maybe he can tell you all why also! What do you say Cyrus?
Thank god. I know that god is a Turk!

Nasilsen Tenrri?Smile


-------------
Anfører


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 20:56
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

Stop despising Iranians! Angry I mean we didn't create Islam! Wink



No one is despising Iranians Smile

Wait a minute, up until last week half the Iranian Nationalist defense council proclaimed that Salman the Iranian influenced and created Islam on behalf of the Prophet.


-------------


Posted By: Evrenosgazi
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 21:15

Guys let us stop the discussion, stupid topic leads us to a turk-persian argument



Posted By: Al Jassas
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 22:44

Mazdakism was an off shoot of zoroastrianism and there is simply no connection whatsoever between a proto-communist religion and a one that punishes adultry with death.

 
Al-Jassas


Posted By: edgewaters
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 22:58
Originally posted by Evrenosgazi

Guys let us stop the discussion, stupid topic leads us to a turk-persian argument

This is the Minefield, a space for such topics. It is watched closely to prevent such things.



Posted By: Akolouthos
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 23:45
Originally posted by es_bih

Originally posted by Akolouthos

Originally posted by es_bih


The Prophet? I think you're mistaken. During the Prophet's time there were defensive wars fought yes. But, the conquest itself is the prodigy of the Caliphate. 
 
We could debate this ad nauseam -- actually, we have before, haven't we? Wink Suffice it to say that I maintain that the wars may only be considered defensive in the loosest sense of the word, and that if we take a very selective reading. Still, this is a legitimate point of debate. My original point, however, that the spread of Islam was expedited by the sword, defensive or not. Remember, I'm trying to clarify something I think we all to often speak carelessly about.
 
Here is the thing Ako, if there was that much pressure to convert, a lot of people in particular the uneducated peasantry would have converted en masse. That is what happens when there are pressures. The Levant and Egypt would have been nearly 80% Muslim within a generation if it were so. Fact still remains that up until the Crusades the Christians were a majority within the remnants of the Caliphate.
 
Well, first, I don't think anyone would assert that there wasn't any pressure to convert. If you would like to argue along those lines, I'd love to hear an explanation.
 
Second, pressured conversion need not be swift; indeed, it often is not. Keep in mind how persistent paganism was in the Roman empire. The various cults survived the Constantinian dispensation, the Theodosian edicts, etc., and didn't really become supressed outwardly until the middle of the sixth century. In the East, they continued in a severely marginalized, occasionally syncretic form well into the Medieval period. In the West, many persisted even later. Point being, history demonstrates that the conversion of an entire subject population through social and economic pressure is a gradual process.
 
-Akolouthos


Again I said there were sporadic events throughout history of forced conversions or stressed ones. But, none of these can be applied to the early Caliphate as a state or Islam as a religion. Why? Well the religion does not preach it, and the state did not practice and in the early times did not favor conversion. Remember, more taxes from non-army recruits than form eligible recruits. Incidentally Arab Christians from the peninsula served in the conquests. So again - they were neither pressured to convert nor did, but actually participated on the same level. In less numbers because there were less of course, but that is a matter of statistics rather than them not being allowed to do so.


 
I think you mistook my meaning, so I'll try to clarify it once more. I am trying not to oversimplify the question. My suggestion was not what you generally run into, and what you are arguing against here -- at least not primarily. My point was a bit more subtle. I simply mean to say that Islam benefited from the fruits of conquest --it expanded the area which was under the Muslim yoke. Furthermore, it is absolutely absurd to say that there was no pressure to convert; what on earth would you call the jizya? The pressures I was mentioning were social and economic; the fact that the regions in question were taken by the sword is not a direct cause for the conversion, but an indirect one -- it allowed a situation in which pressure could be applied. I doubt you and I would ever agree on whether or not Islam is "spread by the sword" in any absolute sense, and there is a legitimate debate; the terms here are not exactly the same as those in the many other threads discussing the role of violence in Islam. I was simply asserting what is evident from history itself.
 
As for the conquests, pressure, etc. I would point out that this was all a part of Islam from the point of its inception. This distinguishes it from other religions, and specifically Christianity. By comparison, it isn't until late in the third century that you first see Christian militants burning pagan temples and such, and not until Heraclius do you see a proto-Crusader mentality.
 
-Akolouthos


Posted By: Seko
Date Posted: 23-Jan-2009 at 00:12
Evrenosgazi, I totally agree. It is a stupid topic and the intentions of the man who created this topic was for his own personal, and dare I say, dubious reasons. He can expalin his rationale and intent if he really wanted to be honest with us.
 
I do not appreciate his insults nor do I think for a brief moment that his thread is of any value other than fodder for CoC violations. Do not for a brief moment think this is a critical evaluation of Islam or of Islam's prophet for the sake of our education. It is purely an act of trollish behavior intended to piss off a few members. All one had to do is look up our Philosophy and Religion section to find numerous threads on Islam that currently exist. Instead, this new topic was created and placed in the Minefield for very specific and spiteful reasons.
 
I will keep this thread open for the sake of playing dumb! I can do that as well as the next guy!


-------------


Posted By: Suren
Date Posted: 23-Jan-2009 at 00:36
It seems some members take this thread seriously, and over reacted.


-------------
Anfører


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 23-Jan-2009 at 01:02
Originally posted by Suren

It seems some members take this thread seriously, and over reacted.


Looks like it



Viking


-------------


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 23-Jan-2009 at 07:35
Originally posted by Seko

Did you guys know that I am also a Prophet? I foresee the value of this thread for only the creator, Dariosaur! I also know why he created this thread. Maybe he can tell you all why also! What do you say Cyrus?
That is simple, Israel has the same value for me that Islam has for you. Please at least be impartial! Wink


-------------


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 23-Jan-2009 at 07:50
Originally posted by Al Jassas

Mazdakism was an off shoot of zoroastrianism and there is simply no connection whatsoever between a proto-communist religion and a one that punishes adultry with death.

Al-Jassas
I didn't say Islam was the same Mazdakism!! The obvious fact is that Mazdakism, like other pre-Islam relgions, had a strong influence on this relgion.


-------------


Posted By: Reginmund
Date Posted: 23-Jan-2009 at 10:16
Originally posted by Bulldog

How does Science undermine religions credibility? Islam enourages the Sciences and Learning, something unfortunately alot of the muslim world has forgotten.


It does, but only as long as the results do not contradict the doctrine.

Originally posted by suren

don't you understand the atmosphere? IT IS A JOKE. begripe?!


Well I was laughing as I wrote it.


Posted By: Seko
Date Posted: 23-Jan-2009 at 13:54
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

Originally posted by Seko

Did you guys know that I am also a Prophet? I foresee the value of this thread for only the creator, Dariosaur! I also know why he created this thread. Maybe he can tell you all why also! What do you say Cyrus?
That is simple, Israel has the same value for me that Islam has for you. Please at least be impartial! Wink


And that is what it boils down to folks! Cyrus evidently gets all bent out of shape when  topics on Israel were opened. So what does he do? He acts like a little kid and attacks Islam!

Keep you animosity to yourself then Cyrus.

Gee, Cyrus how many times do you see me attacking Judaism or Christianity for that matter? I could if I wanted but since I do not care to lower myself with flagrant disrespect to others I leave well enough alone. You, on the other hand, have acted foolishly and have encouraged a thread containing childish posts. You should be proud of yourself!

If you don't like a particular thread on AE then provide your arguements instead of creating diversions and attacking another religion for the sake of you personal foibles.

And damn right I take it seriously when AE is used as your or anyone elses punching bag for certain relgions or countries.


-------------


Posted By: pikeshot1600
Date Posted: 23-Jan-2009 at 14:40
I don't know enough about the subject to be in this discussion, but before someone loses both legs in the Minefield, I suggest we seriously consider closing this thread.
 
 


Posted By: Reginmund
Date Posted: 23-Jan-2009 at 14:42
Well, this thread isn't going anywhere good, but I'm pretty sure it's going somewhere entertaining.


Posted By: Suren
Date Posted: 23-Jan-2009 at 17:34
Due to misunderstanding and some other odd reasons this thread turn to a disaster. I saw wrong claims and unprofessional approaches.

-------------
Anfører


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 23-Jan-2009 at 18:45

Seko, people believe in their country and their nationality, as much as you believe in you religion, do you know how many people have been killed so for in the defense of their countries? Why do you think religious beliefs are more important than nationalist beliefs? You don't attack relgions but you can insult the whole Iranian people by calling our National Hero "Dariosaur"!!! Angry



-------------


Posted By: Beylerbeyi
Date Posted: 23-Jan-2009 at 19:11
people believe in their country and their nationality, as much as you believe in you religion
So Israel is your country and Israeli is your nationality? Then why are you worried about Dariosaur?


-------------


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 23-Jan-2009 at 19:42
Israel is my country for the same reason as Palestine is yours!!

-------------


Posted By: Bulldog
Date Posted: 23-Jan-2009 at 20:38
Cyrus
You don't attack relgions but you can insult the whole Iranian people by calling our National Hero "Dariosaur"!!! Angry


You've insulted the Iranian people a whole lot more by attacking the religion of 98% of Iran so its ironic to feel offended by a joke about a an old King.


-------------
      What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine



Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 23-Jan-2009 at 21:17
Darius the Great was one of our greatest kings, you could say he was not a great king, we have discussed about it in several threads in AE, you could even say he was not actually a king but you are directly insulting to this Iranian national hero by calling him a "Dinosaur"!!!
 
Did I say something similar to it about the prophet of Islam, wasn't he illiterate? or a merchant? those are just my interpretation of some historical events in that period, I never insult to anyone.


-------------


Posted By: Bulldog
Date Posted: 23-Jan-2009 at 21:54
One example of what people in Iran may find offensive.

Cyrus
The book, which was collected later from his stories, is full of errors.


I think people take more offense to slurs against their faith than against a historic king.


-------------
      What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine



Posted By: Some
Date Posted: 23-Jan-2009 at 22:01
Originally posted by Bulldog

Cyrus
You don't attack relgions but you can insult the whole Iranian people by calling our National Hero "Dariosaur"!!! Angry


You've insulted the Iranian people a whole lot more by attacking the religion of 98% of Iran so its ironic to feel offended by a joke about a an old King.
 

Bulldog with all respect remember that Iran is a theocracy with no freedom of religion and it get's worse all the time. Prosecution still happens of religious minorities and also to people who dare to get the taught of leaving Islam and freedom of religion is very regulated. Many immigrants from Iran that I know of could not even dare to leave Islam while in Iran because they will get extreme punishment for it of the government finds out it seems to get even worse now when talk about pure death penalty to anyone who leaves Islam.

In regimes like that I do not think one can purely say how many % someone is Muslim because many of them might be or not might not be believing Muslims but they do not dare to say that.

So yeah Iran is majority Muslim nation but to lay exact numbers cannot be done in totalitarian theocracies.

All love from some girl


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 23-Jan-2009 at 23:09
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

Seko, people believe in their country and their nationality, as much as you believe in you religion, do you know how many people have been killed so for in the defense of their countries? Why do you think religious beliefs are more important than nationalist beliefs? You don't attack relgions but you can insult the whole Iranian people by calling our National Hero "Dariosaur"!!! Angry



If you are insulted by Dariosaur...then we should be insulted by Germans being alleged 'Iranian' speakers, etc....

not only that, but to be insulted by something that was created out of comedic relief is rather childish. As your actions to create a insultive thread just to get attention. Not my fault that a multitude of people think Israel should be criticized. Perhaps you should have attacked the conglomerate, or each individual group found here that critiqued, but not singled one group out.



-------------


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 23-Jan-2009 at 23:18
Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

Israel is my country for the same reason as Palestine is yours!!



Ok...

....so I deduce because he likes justice and you don't?

Not a fair deduction I know... but see that is what happenns when you don't take the time to formulate an answer or don't have hindsight.

Bey is non religious and an atheist I believe...so neight Muslim or Christian...

...and Turkey had some decent relations with Israel...

...again see my point?

You are assuming something without thinking about what the assumption is.

-------------


Posted By: Some
Date Posted: 24-Jan-2009 at 10:16
Originally posted by es_bih

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri

Seko, people believe in their country and their nationality, as much as you believe in you religion, do you know how many people have been killed so for in the defense of their countries? Why do you think religious beliefs are more important than nationalist beliefs? You don't attack relgions but you can insult the whole Iranian people by calling our National Hero "Dariosaur"!!! Angry



If you are insulted by Dariosaur...then we should be insulted by Germans being alleged 'Iranian' speakers, etc....

not only that, but to be insulted by something that was created out of comedic relief is rather childish. As your actions to create a insultive thread just to get attention. Not my fault that a multitude of people think Israel should be criticized. Perhaps you should have attacked the conglomerate, or each individual group found here that critiqued, but not singled one group out.

 
I agree it is very childish but hey it is super nationalist Cyrus who I have debated now for so extremly long proving time and time again that Germanic languages is not a branch of Iranian languages or that Scythian and Saxon are not the same but he refuses to accept that despite what argument you give.
 
How ever I like when people debate about religions and religions origins and what influnced and what and so on we need more of that in a respectfull manner not less.
Debating theology is no problem if you ask me Smile
 
All love


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 24-Jan-2009 at 12:34
Originally posted by Bulldog

One example of what people in Iran may find offensive.

Cyrus
The book, which was collected later from his stories, is full of errors.


I think people take more offense to slurs against their faith than against a historic king.
Do you mean there is no story in that book or no error?!! You could say the insription of Darius the Great at Behistun includes some stories and is full of errors. We Iranians are not so close-minded as you think.


-------------


Posted By: gcle2003
Date Posted: 24-Jan-2009 at 14:37
Originally posted by Bulldog

One example of what people in Iran may find offensive.

Cyrus
The book, which was collected later from his stories, is full of errors.


I think people take more offense to slurs against their faith than against a historic king.
 
That some people may take offence is not necessarily a reason for not saying or doing something.


-------------


Posted By: Beylerbeyi
Date Posted: 26-Jan-2009 at 10:04
Actually, this is the second time he accuses me of insulting all Iranian peoples. The first time was when I wrote that 'Germans are not Aryan'...

As to dinosaurs being Iranian, I was making fun of the extreme nationalists. If a Turk wrote ridiculous things like that I would have written the same for Turks. Get over it...

As to Israel and Palestine, Cyrus, my reasons for supporting Palestine are not the same as your reasons for supporting Israel, at all. I won't elaborate on your actions and personality since that is likely to get me a warning.  


-------------


Posted By: Seko
Date Posted: 26-Jan-2009 at 14:29
I totally agree with Beylerbeyi! Speak as freely as you want, being that others want to as well!

-------------


Posted By: Reginmund
Date Posted: 26-Jan-2009 at 14:58
Originally posted by gcle2003

That some people may take offence is not necessarily a reason for not saying or doing something.


Being offensive is often the way to go. If you called Hitler a bad leader in 1940 you'd insult the majority of the German nation, but most would now agree it would have been a meritorious act. It's far more admirable to stand up for what you believe is right than to bow your head before the consensus of the brainwashed masses.

Concerning the books of the major world religions; they are all full of errors. What can one expect, they were written in a comparably ignorant age.

Concerning Cyrus and Israel. I believe Cyrus sees in Hamas the religious oppressors of his own country, hence its only natural for him to support their enemies.


Posted By: Beylerbeyi
Date Posted: 26-Jan-2009 at 16:01
I believe Cyrus sees in Hamas the religious oppressors of his own country, hence its only natural for him to support their enemies.
Natural? It is more like delusional. Israel supported Hamas against secular el Fetih, fat lot of good it did to them. US supported el Qaeda against USSR, tell how 'natural' it was to those who died in the twin towers.

He doesn't like the Iranian regime, so what? I don't like them either. But one must lack in many faculties to write what he writes. If Israel or America will bomb Iran tomorrow, his kind will learn the lesson of solidarity the hard way. 


-------------


Posted By: Bulldog
Date Posted: 26-Jan-2009 at 16:29
Reginmund
Concerning the books of the major world religions; they are all full of errors. What can one expect, they were written in a comparably ignorant age.


Depends what you call an error.

Personally I haven't come across errors but I'm no theologian and I've mainly just read from the Holy Qur'an. Most of what is written is concerned with living a moral life, helping your community and and the importance of justice so I didn't find it "wrong" in my oppinon.

We can all believe what we like, as long as we respect each other.


-------------
      What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine



Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 26-Jan-2009 at 16:48
I should admire our Arab members' reaction toward this thread! Smile 

-------------


Posted By: Reginmund
Date Posted: 27-Jan-2009 at 11:41
Originally posted by Beylerbeyi

Natural? It is more like delusional. Israel supported Hamas against secular el Fetih, fat lot of good it did to them. US supported el Qaeda against USSR, tell how 'natural' it was to those who died in the twin towers.

He doesn't like the Iranian regime, so what? I don't like them either. But one must lack in many faculties to write what he writes. If Israel or America will bomb Iran tomorrow, his kind will learn the lesson of solidarity the hard way.


I can sympathise with his desire for a secular Iran based on Iranian rather than Islamic traditions. The more pressure is exerted on Iran however the greater the popular support for the present regime will be, as there is no better tool for enforcing uniformity than an external enemy. From this POV Cyrus' support for the US and Israel is irrational, as it is counterproductive. The initiative for change must come from a majority reaction in the Iranian people if it is to produce lasting results.

Originally posted by Bulldog

Depends what you call an error.

Personally I haven't come across errors but I'm no theologian and I've mainly just read from the Holy Qur'an. Most of what is written is concerned with living a moral life, helping your community and and the importance of justice so I didn't find it "wrong" in my oppinon.

We can all believe what we like, as long as we respect each other.


I call it an error if it contradicts modern science. The parts you mention contain subjective truths so they can never be "wrong", but there is also plenty of material in the both the Bible and the Quran that contradicts a lot of what is considered established fact by scientists today. Then again this does not matter if you are religious, which I assume you are since you operate with terms like "holy", as belief then comes before reasoning. And of course I respect everyone as humans regardless of what they believe, but it must also be possible to criticise a person's viewpoints on any topic in a mature and intelligent manner without being seen as disrespectful.


Posted By: opuslola
Date Posted: 19-Aug-2010 at 15:16
Originally posted by Beylerbeyi

<span ="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 1px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 1px; ">I believe Cyrus sees in Hamas the religious oppressors of his own country, hence its only natural for him to support their enemies.
</span>
<span ="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 1px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 1px;">Natural? It is more like delusional. Israel supported Hamas against secular el Fetih, fat lot of good it did to them. US supported el Qaeda against USSR, tell how 'natural' it was to those who died in the twin towers.</span>
<span ="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 1px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 1px;"></span>
<span ="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 1px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 1px;">He doesn't like the Iranian regime, so what? I don't like them either. But one must lack in many faculties to write what he writes. If Israel or America will bomb Iran tomorrow, his kind will learn the lesson of solidarity the hard way. </span>


And such may well happen at any time!

-------------
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/



Print Page | Close Window

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz - http://www.webwizguide.com