The Good ...... The Bad ......... The Ugly.

THAT ONE God of Islam that Muslims worship and pray to, indicated as ALLAH^swt, is not an idealist God.   "HE" picks and chose who are to be born or invited to embrace the Islam of the Al-Quran/Sunna of the Prophet for the purpose of raising up their soul/mind-spirit duo back to "HIM".  And those picked and chosen could be any one .   The Good, the Bad and the Ugly.   Each of them would have to overcome their struggle individually and with the help of his/her community.   There is no point to beat all these drums about when a Muslim is bad, Islam is also bad.   ALLAH^swt Himself had given His Acknowledgement of what He had chosen and thatis one of the thing that a Muslim is challenged for his/her faith in ALLAH^swt .   "HE" revealed this in the following firman:

Fatir  35 : 32   Then We gave the Book as inheritance to such of Our slaves whom We chose.   Then of them are some who wrong themselves, and of them are some who follow a middle course, and of them are some who are , by ALLAH's Leave, foremost in good deeds.   That  (the inheritance of the Al-Quran) - that is indeed the great grace.

Comment:  Even if they don't make it in this lifetime, when their soul enters the Barzakh (the after death state) the whole Al-Quran would be revealed to them in an unmaginable clear lights.   So a humble Muslim would always pray that, if they are to be returning, ALLAH^swt would grace them and return to this earthly existence, as a Muslim of the Al-Quran.  The little good deeds we invest to-day goes a long way to make an easier return, in the long run.   For those who believe in the hereafter and Day of Judgement, that is the due process.   For those who don't subscribe to that, what is the point to teach Muslims who is a good Muslim, who is a bad Muslim, who is an ugly Muslim.   To-day, I am a proud (ancestrally) Batak Muslim of Toba.  My clan is called Purva (ancient).  Perhaps a 60,000 year old tribe. Thanks to ALLAH^swt.  I used to be bad and ugly as confirmed by the following verse of the Al-Quran:

Ad-Dahr (of Time)  76 : 1   Has there not been over man a period of time, when he was not a thing worth mentioning?

I guess I have the longest list of bad laundry list.

Jun 24, 2012 -- 11:06PM, chevy956 wrote:

Jun 24, 2012 -- 5:03PM, Miraj wrote:

Jun 24, 2012 -- 4:58PM, rocketjsquirell wrote:

Miraj

You already know the answer to your question. Historically the answer has been yes, Muslims and Christians have have held any and every Jew responsible for the real and imagined sins of any particular Jew or imagined Jew. Oh, that is right I forgot, you do not actually recognize history.

If you want to say as a matter of faith that "Islam does not condone forced conversions". O.K., I will accept that as your belief.

However, if you or anyone else says that there has been and is no forced conversion to Islam, I will disagree.

Disagree all you want.  Conversion is a matter of faith.  Faith cannot be coerced.

Most serial killers are religious, by the way, which is a nice little red herring which wins you no points in a debate

The Hindus didn't finsh off the Buddhists- the Muslims cheerfully killed members of both religions.

Try backing up your responses with actual facts next time instead of 2 word answers.

Here is a link to Muslim atrocities in India during the conquest:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Hin...

Here is a link to Muslim persecution of Buddhists in India during the conquest:

PERSECUTION OF BUDDHISTS  

buddhistfaith.tripod.com/pureland_sangha/id22.html

>>>>>>>> Chevy, if you are  serious about this topic, you gotta do more than a google search.

First of all, Buddhists were largely wiped out by the Hindus BEFORE Muslims set foot on Indian sub-continent. So a "PERSONAL website" with some giber-gaber is not exactly evidence of any kind.

If you do another searches, I am sure you will find many south Carolina men who want to merry his goat as well.

I have spent some time researching this era, so I know a bit about this.

Now come to the Hindu one. There are times Muslims and Hindus fought and that is call war. Not persecution. During war either you kill or be killed.

As I said couple of times in THIS thread. Muslims ruled India for around 1000 years and had they used "Forced conversion" regularly (Like Christians used in couple of southern states for around 200 years), the whole Indian nations would have became "Muslim". Today around 86% of total Indian population are Hindus. Then you also have a good number of Christians in India as well.

Now as I have explained before, over thoudsand years, there were NO state sponsored "Forced conversion" on Hindus.

If you care to learn more about it, I can give you a huge list of events where Muslims were persecuted by Hindu kings as well. Today it is better in India but you don't have to look very hard to see systematic descrimination against Muslims in India. Just google Kashmir (Indians occupied it for few decades now) and see what is up.

Lastly, I'll come back to what is going right now in part of the world. For last few centuries Myanmar Bhuddhists are systematically persecuting Muslims. These Muslims are living in that land for many hundred years but they are persecuted for their skin tone and religion TODAY!!

Unlike you, I'll offer reports from internationally recognized news reports (Not from pookie's website).

 ======================================================

Ethnic violence mars transition to democracy for Rohingya in Burma

Clashes in west of country between Muslim Rohingya and Rakhine Buddhists have left 80 dead

They are one of the world's most persecuted and unwanted minorities, says the UN – the Roma of east Asia. Now the Rohingya face a wave of hatred from Burmese bloggers who brand them "dogs, thieves, terrorists" and "black mon

sters".

Recent clashes between the Muslim Rohingya and Rakhine Buddhists in western Burma officially left 80 dead and 54 injured, but NGOs fear the true toll is far higher.

....for rest of the article, please click here.

================================================================= 

<> Massacre of Muslims in Arakan, Burma

   Sunday, 10 June 2012

========================================================================================

If you have any questions on "FORCED CONVERSION", feel free to ask.

>>>>>Again, the fact that you disagree with the website doesn't mean the info is invalid or incorrect.

>>>>>> Theoratically you are right. As far as this web site is concern, you are wrong. If you know any Indians in your area, just ask who were ruling India when Muslims arrived and you will see.

Just look up any "Credible" source of information. I have spent good amount of time in my university days, so as far as this topic is concern I am sure of this information.

Bhuddhist were largely gone by the time Muslims arriaved in India.

Also DO note that, Muslim rulers were (Lets say 95% of them) not much interested to preach Islam in India. The strongest "Mughal emperor" Akbar the great was so anti-Muslim that he intriduced a new religion (Mixing up a little bit of everything which died right after he passed away).

Islam in India came with Sufi. saints and traders (Much like in Indonesia and Malaysia) and people embraced it without much violence.

Take another example when "Akbar" attacked the eastern part of India he sent his Hindu general and a Muslim land lord defended eastern India against him (That part of India is now known as Bangladesh). So if you look at Indian history strictly religious point of view, you will be getting the wrong idea.

When the British went to India and colonized it both Hindus and Muslims gave their last shot against the Brits under a Muslim Emperor (Bahadur Shah zafar). Remember it was around 100 years of colonization and Muslims did not have any special power over population.

Had Muslim rulers had the habit of forcing people about religion and other affairs, I do not think people from all faiths (Hindu, Muslims and other faith) wanted to fight unitedly under the last Mughal ruler who lost power many years before this happened.

King Ashoka is considered the bhuddhist king who ruled greater India. Hindus largely controled most parts when Muslims arrived in India.

But Islam was spreading via common people not by kings.

As an expert said, " By the time of the Muslim conquests in India, there were only glimpses of Buddhism nor any evidence of a provincial government in control of the Buddhists"

[ Source: André Wink, "Al-Hind, the Making of the Indo-Islamic World", 2004, BRILL, ISBN 90041023 ]

Jun 27, 2012 -- 9:24AM, BDboy wrote:

 >>>>>>>Forced conversion is going on right now in India and Pakistanwww.dnaindia.com/world/report_pak-minist...

 

>>>>>>>> I think I made it VERY clear to everyone that, I can speak of what Islam says about forced conversion. It is AGAINIST it.

Also do remember, Pakistan is a Muslim majority country. Had forced conversion was accepted in Islam, there was no need to ban it!!

There are laws against rape in the USA but that does NOT mean there is no rape in the USA!!

Except that it is sanctioned by the religious community and the government, where in the US, rape is a crime.

I think we can wrap this discussion up on the only thing we all seem to agree on:

1.  Forced conversions are wrong and should not occur.

I think that those whose understanding is that Islam does not allow forced conversion, would agree with this. I also think that those whose understanding is different, would also agree with this. 

Everything else is going to be a shouting match upon which there is unlikely to be any agreement.

Now that everyone has said their piece and convinced no one on the other side, maybe we should discuss other things.