What does Islam mean for you?

[Zemouli Chahra]

Hi for all, or should I say Salam Alaikom, السلام عليكم,the greeting of muslism.

Christianity, Judaism and Islam comes from the same source. They all tend to make people believe in one single great God, Allah. By doing so, God sent prophets to guide people. All prophets have the same aim. Mousa came with Judaism, Jesus with christianity and Mohammed with Islam, Peace be upon all prophets.
However, the true religions were corrupted and the holy texts too changed to make the single God a father or a son. This single God was given sons and daughters which goes against the first aim of prophets. Thus, it came the last religion,Islam, to unify people under one single religion and one single God. And the holy Quran, the holy text of Islam, to correct the destructive other texts that were changed. Christianity is a true religion if wasn't corrupted, and Judaism too. But God said I'll protect Islam and that is why we still believe in one single God and having one holy text, Quran. Thus, all religions complement each other and all prophets are aqual having the same message.

I did my best to give a clear relationship between the three religions. I hope it is cleare now!

For you, what do you know about Islam and what is the realtionship between it and Christianity? And does Islam comes from the same source of Christianity?

With all respect to your beliefs

[Zemouli Chahra]

Hi for all, or should I say Salam Alaikom, السلام عليكم,the greeting of muslism.

Christianity, Judaism and Islam comes from the same source. They all tend to make people believe in one single great God, Allah. By doing so, God sent prophets to guide people. All prophets have the same aim. Mousa came with Judaism, Jesus with christianity and Mohammed with Islam, Peace be upon all prophets.
However, the true religions were corrupted and the holy texts too changed to make the single God a father or a son. This single God was given sons and daughters which goes against the first aim of prophets. Thus, it came the last religion,Islam, to unify people under one single religion and one single God. And the holy Quran, the holy text of Islam, to correct the destructive other texts that were changed. Christianity is a true religion if wasn't corrupted, and Judaism too. But God said I'll protect Islam and that is why we still believe in one single God and having one holy text, Quran. Thus, all religions complement each other and all prophets are aqual having the same message.

I did my best to give a clear relationship between the three religions. I hope it is cleare now!

For you, what do you know about Islam and what is the realtionship between it and Christianity? And does Islam comes from the same source of Christianity?

With all respect to your beliefs

Just to add
Aslaam alikum is not only for muslims. it means merci upon you.. so its applicable to everyone i think whenever u start talking to anyone and wish n pray for him.......

[cafolini]

Around the 7th century the Arabs decided they were tired of not being their own bankers and created Islam to do so against the West. Muhamed fought for hegemony in La Mecca and Yahtrib (now Medina), and armed with the Quran, by around 632 he managed to create one of the greatest empires that expanded through Malacca and into Africa and most of the Iberian peninsula. When the first Portuguese got to Malacca, at that time the center and pivot of the empire, they were impressed and one said that the owner of Malacca had his hands around the neck of VENICE. That's what Islam means to me.

[togre]

To react to specific points in your questions/comments...

Christianity, Judaism and Islam comes from the same source. They all tend to make people believe in one single great God, Allah.

There is a superficial similarity between the three. Specifically all three acknowledge only one God. However, the identity of God (who he is, what he requires, etc.) is markedly different between the three.

By doing so, God sent prophets to guide people. All prophets have the same aim. Mousa came with Judaism, Jesus with christianity and Mohammed with Islam, Peace be upon all prophets.

I could not disagree with this statement more strongly. To identify Jesus as merely a prophet, as one among many, is impossible. He identifies himself as God's Son in a unique way, he accepts praise, worship and titles that God alone deserves. Either he is who he says he is, or he a pretender and usurper of God's glory. No fence-sitting is allowed.

However, the true religions were corrupted and the holy texts too changed to make the single God a father or a son. This single God was given sons and daughters which goes against the first aim of prophets. Thus, it came the last religion,Islam, to unify people under one single religion and one single God. And the holy Quran, the holy text of Islam, to correct the destructive other texts that were changed. Christianity is a true religion if wasn't corrupted, and Judaism too.

This ignores the massive textual evidence that exists for both the Old and New Testaments of the Bible. We have manuscripts and translations that vastly predate Islam and guess what? They contain no material differences from each other or from later manuscripts. Can and does and did error creep into the worship of Christians and Jews? Yes, but the thing needed for reform was not new revelation, but a return to the old.

Indeed, although much was muddled within the house of Israel when Jesus was born, he came not for reform, but for redemption.

And that is what distinguishes Christianity from Islam and the remnants of Judaism. Christianity reveals that the relationship between God and man can only exist on the basis of grace (undeserved love), mercy and forgiveness from God. Islam and what's left of Judaism approach God the basis of 'works-righteousness' --the idea that man must and can behave well enough to be acceptable to God. Christianity (in line with the teaching of Old Testament Judaism) recognizes that a holy God cannot accept "good enough" or lower his standards. But in an unparalleled act of love he provided his Son as a Substitute--one who provided a holy life, in our place, and one who suffered death for sin, in our place.


I mention all this to reiterate what I stated at the very beginning. Yes, the three great monotheistic religions have some outward points of similarity. But at their heart and core, at their essence, they are and ever will remain antithetical.

[mortalterror]

Islam means never having to say you're sorry... about the holocaust.

[mal4mac]

How do you know that Islam is the true religion?

Islam is not the last religion - Mormonism is more recent, for one.

How do you know that God said, "I'll protect Islam"? Unless you have had a revelation you have only heard men say this, or have seen it in books written by men.

[tonywalt]

I would say Islam and the other members of the "big three" monotheistic religons are right up there with "how many angels can dance on a pin or pen" in terms of my interest.

I am interested in God offering protection for Islam. When did he "say" this, I suppose he was chatting with Mohammad. Seems to me he has been rather selective lately as Western forces have a freehand, and use it in Iraq and Afghanistan. This is not to mention aiming drone missiles at free will in many Islamic countries. While I do not condone this, he could step up that protection if given his undertaking.

I think dogma of any kind strangles free thinking and keeps certain people in power, which is just what it was designed to do.

[Paulclem]

My experience of Islam is through the Muslims I have met whilst travelling and through my job.

There were the friendly market people in the Bazaar in Istanbul, and the bread seller with the cat outside the Haji Sofia. There was the Manager of a Supermarket in Izmir who invited me into his office for a chat whilst my wife went with some of his staff for a haircut. (I forget how it was that they took her - I think it came out in conversation and they offered to take her to a local one). There was the friendly shopkeeper who always had a smile and a wave for us when we lived in Bombay, and the Bangladeshi taxi driver who often responds to calls we make when we are taking out the old Auntie here in Coventry.

Then there are the many Learners who were Muslim in my English, and now maths classes. In my current class there are Muslim ladies and a gent from the Sudan, Iraq, Somalia and Egypt.

All of them have been pleasant people who are good to know and teach. I think of this when I hear about the problems that are evident in the world between Islam and Christianity and Judaism. I can't equate the people I know with what are political power problems. The excuse and context of religion is often used in order to polarise opinion and cause unrest and problems. With the media a very willing advocate of this, it's very difficult to see through.

Nor can I really equate them with the "my religion is better than your religion brigade" which unfortunately the OP postulates.

the true religions were corrupted and the holy texts too changed to make the single God a father or a son. This single God was given sons and daughters which goes against the first aim of prophets. Thus, it came the last religion,Islam, to unify people under one single religion and one single God.

This is clearly a reference to the Christian trinity, and I find it most unhelpful from someone who really wants to find out what people think of Islam. It also, by inference, criticises wider religions such as Hinduism. It's as unhelpful as Cafolini's potted historial interpretation which has nothing to do with how Muslims are now and how we should get on.

My experience of Islam is positive because of the people I have met - friendly, accommodating, generous and tolerant.

[tonywalt]

My experience of Islam is positive because of the people I have met - friendly, accommodating, generous and tolerant.[/QUOTE]

I am always way behind the curve on mass media "campaigns", but I would say that the new mantra for the Western mass media is that Moslems are "a tolerant and peaceful people" and this should be coupled with anecdotal evidence. The majority are relatively tolerant and peaceful, no need to keep reciting it.

I noticed after the London tube bombings the BBC bent over backwards, sideways, and updside down to interview people of Pakistani decent (and other moslem majority countries) and have them express that how they did not condone the grevious action. Really! I would hope not. They must have zeroed in on every "Asian" in the bombing area standing around.

[cafolini]

My experience of Islam is through the Muslims I have met whilst travelling and through my job.

There were the friendly market people in the Bazaar in Istanbul, and the bread seller with the cat outside the Haji Sofia. There was the Manager of a Supermarket in Izmir who invited me into his office for a chat whilst my wife went with some of his staff for a haircut. (I forget how it was that they took her - I think it came out in conversation and they offered to take her to a local one). There was the friendly shopkeeper who always had a smile and a wave for us when we lived in Bombay, and the Bangladeshi taxi driver who often responds to calls we make when we are taking out the old Auntie here in Coventry.

Then there are the many Learners who were Muslim in my English, and now maths classes. In my current class there are Muslim ladies and a gent from the Sudan, Iraq, Somalia and Egypt.

All of them have been pleasant people who are good to know and teach. I think of this when I hear about the problems that are evident in the world between Islam and Christianity and Judaism. I can't equate the people I know with what are political power problems. The excuse and context of religion is often used in order to polarise opinion and cause unrest and problems. With the media a very willing advocate of this, it's very difficult to see through.

Nor can I really equate them with the "my religion is better than your religion brigade" which unfortunately the OP postulates.

the true religions were corrupted and the holy texts too changed to make the single God a father or a son. This single God was given sons and daughters which goes against the first aim of prophets. Thus, it came the last religion,Islam, to unify people under one single religion and one single God.

This is clearly a reference to the Christian trinity, and I find it most unhelpful from someone who really wants to find out what people think of Islam. It also, by inference, criticises wider religions such as Hinduism. It's as unhelpful as Cafolini's potted historial interpretation which has nothing to do with how Muslims are now and how we should get on.

My experience of Islam is positive because of the people I have met - friendly, accommodating, generous and tolerant.

But that's not what Islam is. You are talking about adherents of Islam, who are the Muslims. They live in Islam or in many other parts of the world, but they are not Islam. Islam is what I said it is. Each adherent is an individual who has been imposed Islam by force in the historical context I talked about.
I don't have to be helpful toward your presupositions to be helpful about anything. You are a demagogue when you do that. Of course you are too kind to be a despot.

[Paulclem]

But that's not what Islam is. You are talking about adherents of Islam, who are the Muslims. They live in Islam or in many other parts of the world, but they are not Islam. Islam is what I said it is. Each adherent is an individual who has been imposed Islam by force in the historical context I talked about.
I don't have to be helpful toward your presupositions to be helpful about anything. You are a demagogue when you do that. Of course you are too kind to be a despot.

But that's not what Islam is.

The OP said "What does Islam mean to you?" I have met Islam through the Muslims I've met.


Islam is what I said it is.

Around the 7th century the Arabs decided they were tired of not being their own bankers and created Islam to do so against the West. Muhamed fought for hegemony in La Mecca and Yahtrib (now Medina), and armed with the Quran, by around 632 he managed to create one of the greatest empires that expanded through Malacca and into Africa and most of the Iberian peninsula. When the first Portuguese got to Malacca, at that time the center and pivot of the empire, they were impressed and one said that the owner of Malacca had his hands around the neck of VENICE. That's what Islam means to me.

Is it this? Still lke the 7th century?

Each adherent is an individual who has been imposed Islam by force in the historical context I talked about.

I don't think so. Whatever the history, Islam is now culturally established under different conditions. It's like saying the Church of England as established by Henry VIII is still the vehicle of Royal oppression in the UK.

My point is that it is important how we relate to religions on an individual basis. Relating to Governments, power and politics only is an avenue that leads to polarisation and movement away from the actual human representatives. We all know that natural media hates a vacuum and stereotypes rush in to fill the gaps where no human individuals are referenced. I don't trust the media, government or politicians to to do this for me.

In response to Tonywalt though, good on the BBC if that's what they were doing. I saw the bombings on TV, and it would be all too easy to take the rabidity of the paper press and project it onto all Muslims. No-one wants poor judgement to be capitalised on by those elements in the political sphere who want religious/ racial strife.

[cafolini]

But that's not what Islam is.

The OP said "What does Islam mean to you?" I have met Islam through the Muslims I've met.


Islam is what I said it is.

Around the 7th century the Arabs decided they were tired of not being their own bankers and created Islam to do so against the West. Muhamed fought for hegemony in La Mecca and Yahtrib (now Medina), and armed with the Quran, by around 632 he managed to create one of the greatest empires that expanded through Malacca and into Africa and most of the Iberian peninsula. When the first Portuguese got to Malacca, at that time the center and pivot of the empire, they were impressed and one said that the owner of Malacca had his hands around the neck of VENICE. That's what Islam means to me.

Is it this? Still lke the 7th century?

Each adherent is an individual who has been imposed Islam by force in the historical context I talked about.

I don't think so. Whatever the history, Islam is now culturally established under different conditions. It's like saying the Church of England as established by Henry VIII is still the vehicle of Royal oppression in the UK.

My point is that it is important how we relate to religions on an individual basis. Relating to Governments, power and politics only is an avenue that leads to polarisation and movement away from the actual human representatives. We all know that natural media hates a vacuum and stereotypes rush in to fill the gaps where no human individuals are referenced. I don't trust the media, government or politicians to to do this for me.

In response to Tonywalt though, good on the BBC if that's what they were doing. I saw the bombings on TV, and it would be all too easy to take the rabidity of the paper press and project it onto all Muslims. No-one wants poor judgement to be capitalised on by those elements in the political sphere who want religious/ racial strife.

They actually continue to impose Islam by force today. The Muslims do not want Islam. They want Western democracies and hence all the trouble Islam is having today.
The people want Western demacracies. Look at Egypt, Lybia, Syria, etc. Islam is still what it always was, as I said. And they better stop financing terrorism and killing their citizens or I can guarantee you they are going to be finished faster than through slow evolution.
Why do most Muslims want to migrate out of Islam if they can? You think it is because Muslims like Islam. But of course, while inside, they could lose their tongues if they told anyone what they want. Islam is obsolete as a system of government and this is the end of this discussion. I'll not go in circles about this.
And by the way, your knowledge of English history is deficient. You cannot attribute the protestant church to a madman like Henry VIII who had nothing to do with his daughter Elizabeth I, the actual one who established it and send the Catholics back home. Sorry, my man. You are in error there too.

[tonywalt]

.........

[Paulclem]

They actually continue to impose Islam by force today. The Muslims do not want Islam. They want Western democracies and hence all the trouble Islam is having today.
The people want Western demacracies. Look at Egypt, Lybia, Syria, etc. Islam is still what it always was, as I said. And they better stop financing terrorism and killing their citizens or I can guarantee you they are going to be finished faster than through slow evolution.
Why do most Muslims want to migrate out of Islam if they can? You think it is because Muslims like Islam. But of course, while inside, they could lose their tongues if they told anyone what they want. Islam is obsolete as a system of government and this is the end of this discussion. I'll not go in circles about this.
And by the way, your knowledge of English history is deficient. You cannot attribute the protestant church to a madman like Henry VIII who had nothing to do with his daughter Elizabeth I, the actual one who established it and send the Catholics back home. Sorry, my man. You are in error there too.

You see I agree with some of what you say concerning some countries like Saudi - but that's not what the OP asked. I do think you generalise too much as well particularly considering that Muslims live not only in Muslim states but Western Democracies as well.

It might also be a little premature to assume that the Arab Spring will bring western style democracy to Libya etc. But that's not Islam - that's the politics like I said.

And they better stop financing terrorism and killing their citizens or I can guarantee you they are going to be finished faster than through slow evolution.

Don't you think you'd better leave those decisions to those who make them?

And by the way, your knowledge of English history is deficient. You cannot attribute the protestant church to a madman like Henry VIII

You're right - he was nuts. But it was in fact Henry VIII who made himself head of the Church of England when his divorce to Katherine of Aragorn was not ratified by the Pope. You're not C of E protestant are you?

this is the end of this discussion

Why do you assume that yours is the last and most important word? Surely we're just beginning. I have to say that I do enjoy your posts.

Just added this:

Reformation

While Anglicans acknowledge that Henry VIII's repudiation of papal authority caused the Church of England to become a separate entity, they believe that it is in continuity with the pre-Reformation Church of England. Apart from its distinct customs and liturgies (such as the Sarum rite), the organizational machinery of the Church of England was in place by the time of the Synod of Hertford in 672–673, when the English bishops were first able to act as one body under the leadership of the Archbishop of Canterbury. Henry's Act in Restraint of Appeals (1533) and the Acts of Supremacy (1534) declared that the English crown was "the only Supreme Head in earth of the Church of England, called Ecclesia Anglicana," in order "to repress and extirpate all errors, heresies, and other enormities and abuses heretofore used in the same." The development of the Thirty-Nine Articles of religion and the passage of the Acts of Uniformity culminated in the Elizabethan Religious Settlement. By the end of the 17th century, the English church described itself as both Catholic and Reformed, with the English monarch as its Supreme Governor.[3] MacCulloch commenting on this situation says that it "has nevgituer subsequently dared to define its identity decisively as Protestant or Catholic, and has decided in the end that this is a virtue rather than a handicap."[4]
[edit] King Henry VIII of England

The English Reformation was initially driven by the dynastic goals of Henry VIII, who, in his quest for a consort who would bear him a male heir, found it expedient to replace papal authority with the supremacy of the English crown. The early legislation focused primarily on questions of temporal and spiritual supremacy. The introduction of the Great Bible in 1538 brought a vernacular translation of the Scriptures into churches. The Dissolution of the Monasteries and the seizure of their assets by 1540 brought huge amounts of church land and property under the jurisdiction of the Crown, and ultimately into the hands of the English nobility. This simultaneously removed the greatest centers of loyalty to the pope and created vested interests which made a powerful material incentive to support a separate Christian church in England under the rule of the Crown.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History...rch_of_England

[Zemouli Chahra]

Hello,
First, I'd like to say that my weakness in the language mastery did prevent me from transmitting clearly what I want.But I'll try my best to give you what I mean.
Here a small passage that explains very important points:" sorry if it is long"


Islam is not Just for Arabs:
Islam is not Just for Arabs The Truth of Islam is meant for all people regardless of race, nationality or linguistic background. Taking a look at the Muslim World, from Nigeria to Bosnia and from Malaysia to Afghanistan is enough to prove that Islam is a Universal message for all of mankind --- not to mention the fact that significant numbers of Europeans and Americans of all races and ethnic backgrounds are coming into Islam. Every Religion Claims That It Is The Truth (The Criteria Of The Truth) There are so many sects, cults, religions, philosophies, and movements in the world, all of which claim to be the right way or the only true path to Allah (God). How can one determine which one is correct or if, in fact, all are correct? The method by which the answer can be found is to clear away the superficial differences in the teachings of the various claimants to the ultimate truth, and identify the central object of worship to which they call, directly or indirectly. False religions all have in common one basic concept with regards to Allah. They either claim that all men are gods or that specific men were Allah or that nature is Allah or that Allah is a figment of man's imagination. Thus, it may be stated that the basic message of false religion is that Allah may be worshipped in the form of His creation. False religion invites man to the worship of creation by calling the creation or some aspect of it God. For example, prophet Jesus invited his followers to worship Allah but those who claim to be his followers today call people to worship Jesus, claiming that he was Allah! Buddha was a reformer who introduced a number of humanistic principles to the religion of India . He did not claim to be God nor did he suggest to his followers that he be an object of worship. Yet, today most Buddhists who are to be found outside of India have taken him to be God and prostrate to idols made in their perception of his likeness. By using the principle of identifying the object of worship, false religion becomes very obvious and the contrived nature of their origin clear. As God said in the Our'aan: That which you worship besides Him are only names you and your forefathers have invented for which Allah has sent down no authority: The command belongs only to Allah: He has commanded that you only worship Him; that is the right religion, but most men do not understand ". (Soorah Yoosuf 12:40) It may be argued that all religions teach good things so why should it matter which one we follow. The reply is that all false religions teach the greatest evil, the worship of creation. Creation-worship is the greatest sin that man can commit because it contradicts the very purpose of his creation. Man was created to worship Allah alone as Allah has explicitly stated in the Our'aan: "I have only created Jinns and men, that they may worship me"(Soorah Zaareeyaat 51:56) Consequently, the worship of creation, which is the essence of idolatry, is the only unforgivable sin. One who dies in this state of idolatry has sealed his fate in the next life. This is not an opinion, but a revealed fact stated by Allah in his final revelation to man: The following criteria can best serve as a gauge to find out the authenticity of the last revelation (the Qur'an) as words of God: 1. Rational Teachings: Since our Creator bestowed reason and intellect upon us, it is our duty to use it to distinguish the TRUTH from falsehood. True, undistorted revelation from God must be rational and can be reasoned out by all unbiased minds. 2. Perfection: Since our Creator is all perfect, His revelation must be perfect and accurate, free from mistakes, omissions, interpolations and multiplicity of versions. It should be free from contradictions in its narration. 3. No Myths or Superstitions: True revelation is free from myths or superstitions that degrade the dignity of our Creator or man himself. 4. Scientific: Since our Creator is the Creator of all knowledge, true revelation is scientific and can withstand the challenge of science at all times. 5. Factual Prophecy: Our Creator is the Knower of the past, present and future. Thus His prophecies in His revelation will be fulfilled as prophesied. 6. Inimitable By Man: True revelation is infallible and cannot be imitated by man. God's true revelation is a Living miracle, an open book challenging all mankind to see and prove for themselves its authenticity or veracity.