History Community ~ All Empires Homepage


This is the Archive on WORLD Historia, the old original forum.

 You cannot post here - you can only read.

 

Here is the link to the new forum:

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Forum LockedWhats the difference?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>
Author
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
retired AE Moderator

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: London
Status: Offline
Points: 8795
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Dec-2007 at 15:50
Islam is all about free will, that the Hadiths were altered to suit the will of the powers that were is another issue. 

In Ayat Al-Korsi it is stipulated la ikraha fed-din, meaning there is no compulsion in religion.  This leaves the fate of those who do not abide by the book in their own hands.


Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 7011
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Dec-2007 at 18:22
If Islam does not believe that everything that happens is the will of God, then why is commercial insurance irreligious (haram)?
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork
Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.
Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
retired AE Moderator

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: London
Status: Offline
Points: 8795
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Dec-2007 at 18:41
You're using a double negative.
Back to Top
Al Jassas View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07-Aug-2007
Status: Offline
Points: 1809
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Al Jassas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Dec-2007 at 20:43
Commercial insurance is forbidden for reason that have nothing to do with fate.
 
Three reasons exist for forbidding insurance. The first is you buy a cheap policy on an expensive commodity and the insurance company pays huge sums if injury happens that is disproportionate for the original policy price. Likewise is the opposite, you pay alot for a policy you don't use and you may never use.
 
the second reason is Jahalah, and any sale that contains Jahalah is forbidden. Jahalah means uncertainty and only certain sales are allowed so people's money does not go for nothing.
 
Other reasons also exist but these are the thing I remeber.
 
Al-Jassas 
Back to Top
Paul View Drop Down
Editorial Staff
Editorial Staff
Avatar
AE Immoderator

Joined: 21-Aug-2004
Location: Hyperborea
Status: Offline
Points: 965
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Paul Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Dec-2007 at 22:09
So Muslims are forbidden to drive with car insurance?
Light blue touch paper and stand well back

http://www.maquahuitl.co.uk

http://www.toltecitztli.co.uk
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 7011
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Dec-2007 at 10:24
 
Originally posted by Zagros Zagros wrote:

You're using a double negative.
 
I'm having trouble figuring that out. Or not figuring it out. Smile
 
However I asked the question because of having been told that it was haram to take out insurance against what are called in insurance circles 'Acts of God' like floods and fires and so on. I don't know whether that was authoritative or not, but it arose some 20 odd years ago when my then company (which specialised in developing insurance software) was working for an Islamic client.
 
The point seemed to be that one should not be compensated for things that happen, because it was God's will that they happen.
 
But again, I'm not arguing, just explaining how I heard that view.
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork
Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.
Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
retired AE Moderator

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: London
Status: Offline
Points: 8795
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Dec-2007 at 10:52
  You confused me.  The pre question condition you set answered your question:

If Islam does not believe that everything that happens is the will of God

then why is commercial insurance irreligious (haram)?

but now that I have had some sleep it seems that you may have been enquiring about specifics.

It seemed at first like you were asking a rhetorical question like, "If allah wills everything, then why is insurance irreligious?" except you used 'not' which got me.
Back to Top
Al Jassas View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07-Aug-2007
Status: Offline
Points: 1809
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Al Jassas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Dec-2007 at 14:16

Hello gcle

If insuring against acts of God was forbidden, then why the hell seeking cure for illness wajib (compulsory, you are sinned if you don't seek cure for your illness). The problem with insurance is pure legal as I have said earlier. You pay lots of money and in many instances, you get nothing in return. That is what is know as a rip off. If the company from its own good heart wanted to insure me, than one payment is enough for one accident but for me to pay for premiums every single year and in the end, on pure technicalities I get paltry, sorry man. I did not renew my licence to this day because I have to pay for insurace and I will not because based on the form that it is in today, it is forbidden. there are several insurance schemes that are allowed but no insurance company will implement them.
 
also, money lending in Islam is considered an act of benevolence, that is why any form of interest is forbidden. If a big company wants money, they could always find a partner, increase their capital by issuing stocks, which is used to this day.
 
Al-Jassas
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 7011
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Dec-2007 at 15:54
Insurance against Acts of God may not be forbidden, but my clients back in the eighties refused to issue such policies, including straight life assurance.
 
I'm aware as a result of that experience that Islamic insurers are not allowed to invest in interest-bearing stocks, but only in shares or mutual funds where the return is not guaranteed - with the odd effect that they cannot invest in exactly the kinds of assets that other insurers are forced to invest in (i.e. safe ones). 
 
(They were also required to charge the same premiums to everyone for the same benefits, which seems admirable, though it is drifting off topic.)
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork
Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.
Back to Top
Cryptic View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 05-Jul-2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 901
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Cryptic Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-Dec-2007 at 20:35
Originally posted by azimuth azimuth wrote:

 
 The prophet  Mohammed's hair and eyes were black color.
Jesus ( Prophet too in Islam) as per Islamic sources had brown reddish hair that looked wet and brown eyes ( not sure about the eyes)
Moses ( Prophet too) was darker in color probably brownish color and black hair and eyes.


Is the physical description of Jesus from the Koran or the Hadith?   Most early Christian art shows Christ with clearly dark brown hair or black hair.  I think that there is also an Islamic tradition that Mohammed had a gap between his front teeth.  Thus this feature is considered lucky in some Arab countries.
Originally posted by azimuth azimuth wrote:

 
as per the look
 
both were white,


I do not mean to split hairs, but "white" is too vague a term.    Rather both were semitic caucasoids.    This is also interesting.  Semites are a pretty small ethnic group.   Yet they have supplied the founders of all three of the large Abrahamic faiths.

 


Edited by Cryptic - 31-Dec-2007 at 20:42
Back to Top
Al Jassas View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07-Aug-2007
Status: Offline
Points: 1809
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Al Jassas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-Dec-2007 at 22:19
Prophet Muhammad lost all his front teath in battle, and there is some part of Islamic traditions that say the Jesus christ may have brown or even red hair. It is not unusual to find brown hair among the Arab population of the levant.
 
As for Islam and insurance, the philosophy of Islam is simple, it is primarily libertarian, no taxes, no guarantees on profit, no price controls, just free market where any one can make profit or lose money. It is because of that that Islam introduced some social measurements to curb this wild free market like Zakah and charity.
 
Al-Jassas


Edited by Al Jassas - 31-Dec-2007 at 22:23
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 7011
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Jan-2008 at 10:42
Originally posted by Cryptic Cryptic wrote:

  This is also interesting.  Semites are a pretty small ethnic group.   Yet they have supplied the founders of all three of the large Abrahamic faiths.
 
Presumably because Abraham was a Semite. Smile
 
Indians provided the founders of all of the large Indian faiths.
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork
Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.
Back to Top
Cryptic View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 05-Jul-2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 901
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Cryptic Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Jan-2008 at 16:17
Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

 
Indians provided the founders of all of the large Indian faiths.


Just out of curiosity, does Hinduism have an established founder(s) or is it a collection of religious tradition without a founder?   I guess the ethnic count on global religions would be....

-3 Semites (Christianity, Judaism, Islam)
-1 Persian (Zorasterianism)
-1 individual North Indian / Nepalese and 1 group of North Indians  (Buddhism and Sikism)
-2 East Asians (Confucianism and Taoism) Though Lao Tzu may not have been an individual person.



Edited by Cryptic - 01-Jan-2008 at 16:20
Back to Top
Omar al Hashim View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Location: Snowy-Highlands
Status: Offline
Points: 5725
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Omar al Hashim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Jan-2008 at 02:34
As insurance goes, I think this is a legal technicality that different people from different areas with different levels of knowledge and interpretation will have a different opinion on. I would never have called insurance haram, but I am not surprised that others might.

Originally posted by al Jassas al Jassas wrote:

As for Islam and insurance, the philosophy of Islam is simple, it is primarily libertarian, no taxes, no guarantees on profit, no price controls, just free market where any one can make profit or lose money. It is because of that that Islam introduced some social measurements to curb this wild free market like Zakah and charity.

I wouldn't say that this is an extensive description either. Certainly it is perfectly legal to rule as you say, but I wouldn't call it the philiosophy of islam at all. I don't see any reason why you couldn't run a welfare state within islamic law either.
Taxation is an established precedent, so are price controls.


Edited by Omar al Hashim - 02-Jan-2008 at 03:08
"O Byzantines! If success is your desire and if you seek right guidance and want your empire to remain then give the pledge to this Prophet"
~ Heraclius, Roman Emperor
Back to Top
Omar al Hashim View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Location: Snowy-Highlands
Status: Offline
Points: 5725
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Omar al Hashim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Jan-2008 at 03:10
Originally posted by Paul Paul wrote:

Originally posted by es_bih es_bih wrote:



Islam has nothing against free will and pre determination in Protestant terms is not a part of Islam
 
What make you think I was thinking of Islam in the free will statement. A son born to die of the cross seems like pre-determination to me.
 
However you immediately thought I was thinking of Islam not Christianity. Which is very revealing. It indicates you think there is no free will in Islam..... Interesting, a defender of the faith subcontiously thinks it's less free than Christanity. I'll note that. 

Actually, Islam is niether, and both, free will and determinism. Islam obeys neither extreme, and takes a middle route.
"O Byzantines! If success is your desire and if you seek right guidance and want your empire to remain then give the pledge to this Prophet"
~ Heraclius, Roman Emperor
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 7011
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Jan-2008 at 10:22
 
Originally posted by Cryptic Cryptic wrote:

Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

 
Indians provided the founders of all of the large Indian faiths.


Just out of curiosity, does Hinduism have an established founder(s) or is it a collection of religious tradition without a founder? 
Some Hindus would I think cite Krishna (as an incarnation of Vishnu) as the first preacher of Hinduism, playing a similar role to Jesus with regard to Christianity.
 
Looked at from outside, myself I would view Hinduism as the result of a merger between a polytheistic faith system related to other Indo-European religions and a set of beliefs centred around reincarnation and karma that was probably indigenous to the sub-continent.
 
That goes back to the murky past but I don't see any reason not to think of the earliest Hindus - those responsible for merging the two sets of belief - as being 'Indian'.
Quote
 
  I guess the ethnic count on global religions would be....

-3 Semites (Christianity, Judaism, Islam)
-1 Persian (Zorasterianism)
-1 individual North Indian / Nepalese and 1 group of North Indians  (Buddhism and Sikism)
-2 East Asians (Confucianism and Taoism) Though Lao Tzu may not have been an individual person.

 
Bahai is Persian.
 
Buddhism and Sikhism make two totally different religions, both Indian in origin. Throw in Jainism and of course Hinduism and the Indian count is four.
 
Not sure whether Shinto should be included as a 'global' religion.
 
Since Nephi came from Jerusalem Mormonisn was also founded by a Semite. In their view anyway. 


Edited by gcle2003 - 02-Jan-2008 at 10:23
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork
Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.
Back to Top
Killabee View Drop Down
Earl
Earl


Joined: 01-Feb-2006
Status: Offline
Points: 274
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Killabee Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Jan-2008 at 19:39
Originally posted by Cryptic Cryptic wrote:



Is the physical description of Jesus from the Koran or the Hadith?   Most early Christian art shows Christ with clearly dark brown hair or black hair.  I think that there is also an Islamic tradition that Mohammed had a gap between his front teeth.  Thus this feature is considered lucky in some Arab countries. 

 
 
This Computer-generated sketch probably resembles how Jesus looked like based on archaeological evidence of the skeletons of Jews unearthed from Israel  around 2000 years ago.

 
 
Note this look is still very common in Palestine. Compare the alleged picture of Jesus to the Palestinian Hamas figures:
 
Ismail Haniyeh

SHEHADEH, SALAH
Khaled Mashal
Abdel Aziz Duwaik
 
 
As far as the appearance of Mohammed, we don't know yet since he forbade any drawing of portrait in his lifetime and his remain is still buried in Medina and no one dares to excavate to analyze it.
 
Based on the Hadith, he seemed to be light-skinned by nature but sometime got tanned(as it said his armpit was white in contrast with his face) due to long year in outdoor.
 
Sahih al-Bukhari
Volume 4, Book 56, Number 744:
Narrated Isma'il bin Abi Khalid:
I heard Abii Juhaifa saying,saying, "I saw the Prophet, and Al-Hasan bin 'Ali resembled him." I said to Abu- Juhaifa, "Describe him for me." He said, "He was white and his beard was black with some white hair. He promised to give us 13 young she-camels, but he expired before we could get them."

Volume 1, Book 3, Number 63:
Narrated Anas bin Malik:
While we were sitting with the Prophet in the mosque, a man came riding on a camel. He made his camel kneel down in the mosque, tied its foreleg and then said: "Who amongst you is Muhammad?" At that time the Prophet was sitting amongst us (his companions) leaning on his arm. We replied, "This white man reclining on his arm." The an then addressed him, "O Son of 'Abdul Muttalib."...

Volume 1, Book 3, Number 63:
Narrated Anas bin Malik:
While we were sitting with the Prophet in the mosque, a man came riding on a camel. He made his camel kneel down in the mosque, tied its foreleg and then said: "Who amongst you is Muhammad?" At that time the Prophet was sitting amongst us (his companions) leaning on his arm. We replied, "This white man reclining on his arm." The an then addressed him, "O Son of 'Abdul Muttalib."


Volume 1, Book 12, Number 771:
Narrated 'Abdullah bin Malik bin Buhaina:
Whenever the Prophet used to offer prayer he used to keep arms away (from the body) so that the whiteness of his armpits was visible.

Volume 4, Book 56, Number 744:
Narrated Isma'il bin Abi Khalid:
I heard Abii Juhaifa saying, "I saw the Prophet, and Al-Hasan bin 'Ali resembled him." I said to Abu- Juhaifa, "Describe him for me." He said, "He was white and his beard was black with some white hair. He promised to give us 13 young she-camels, but he expired before we could get them."

Volume 4, Book 56, Number 747:
Narrated Rabia bin Abi Abdur-Rahman:
I heard Anas bin Malik describing the Prophet saying, "He was of medium height amongst the people, neither tall nor short; he had a rosy color, neither absolutely white nor deep brown; his hair was neither completely curly nor quite lank. Divine Inspiration was revealed to him when he was forty years old. He stayed ten years in Mecca receiving the Divine Inspiration, and stayed in Medina for ten more years. When he expired, he had scarcely twenty white hairs in his head and beard." Rabi'a said, "I saw some of his hairs and it was red. When I asked about that, I was told that it turned red because of scent.

Volume 1, Book 8, Number 385u:
Narrated 'Abdullah bin Malik:
Ibn Buhaina, "When the Prophet prayed, he used to separate his arms from his body so widely that the whiteness of his armpits was visible."

Back to Top
eaglecap View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 15-Feb-2005
Location: DesertSouthwest
Status: Offline
Points: 3264
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote eaglecap Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Jan-2008 at 00:06
Originally posted by hugoestr hugoestr wrote:

Originally posted by eaglecap eaglecap wrote:

Jesus said about the women caught in adultry, to the Jews who wanted to stone her, he who is without sin caste the first stone- of course they all walked away.

Muhammad when dealing with an adultress woman- stone her to death!!

Mercy vs. no mercy!!!


Sorry to tell you that this story was injected into the text during the middle ages. It was not part of it before that. Too bad; it is one of the better ones


I am open to what you say but a friend sent me this hugoestr

There is abundant evidence in support of the authenticity of the pericope de adultera. John 7:53-8:11 is found (1) in many Greek uncials and minuscules mainly of the Majority or Byzantine text-type, (2) in the ancient versions or translations: Old Latin, Vulgate, Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, and Ethiopic, and (3) in the writings of the Church Fathers: Didascalia, Ambrosiaster, Apostolic Constitutions, Ambrose, Jerome, and Augustine.

Jerome (AD 340-420), the translator of the Latin Bible called the Vulgate, said this about the pericope de adultera: “. . . in the Gospel according to John in many manuscripts, both Greek and Latin, is found the story of the adulterous woman who was accused before the Lord.” Jerome considered the pericope genuine, and included it in his Vulgate.

Self-styled textual critics who arrogantly say: “This text has no place in Scripture; I will never preach from it!,” should rather heed these wise words of Calvin: “it has always been received by the Latin Churches, and is found in many old Greek manuscripts, and contains nothing unworthy of an Apostolic Spirit, there is no reason why we should refuse to apply it to our advantage.”

It must be noted that if John 7:53-8:11 is removed from the Gospel, it leaves a vacuum between the words “out of Galilee ariseth no prophet (7:52), and “Then spake Jesus again unto them” (8:12). In 7:40-52, we find the private dialogue and debate among the Jewish populace, and between the temple servants and Pharisees over Jesus’ identity; whether He was the Moses-like Prophet (Deut 18:15) or not. Jesus was out of the picture at that time. It is thus quite awkward to introduce Jesus so abruptly in 8:12 where it is recorded that He spoke to them “again.” Jesus in verses 12-16 was teaching what is righteous judgment. The pericope de adultera provides the link between the two episodes. Jesus taught them “again” because He had already begun teaching the people before he was interrupted by the scribes and Pharisees (8:2-3). Jesus’ “light of the world” discourse clearly fits the context of the pericope de adultera. The Jewish religious leaders had failed to exercise righteous judgment because in condemning the adulteress, they failed to judge themselves for they were equally sinful (8:7-9). Jesus’ judicial and yet merciful treatment of the adulteress clearly demonstrates that He alone as the light of the world is the true and perfect Judge (8:12).

Well then, brothers and fellow citizens and soldiers, remember this in order that your memorial, your fame and freedom will be eternal.
Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
retired AE Moderator

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: London
Status: Offline
Points: 8795
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Jan-2008 at 00:15
Killabee, are you implying Jesus was a terrorist, sir?  Actually, come to think of it... he was (by the standard at that time and by today's).
Back to Top
Killabee View Drop Down
Earl
Earl


Joined: 01-Feb-2006
Status: Offline
Points: 274
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Killabee Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Jan-2008 at 08:06
How can he be terroist? He didn't call for killing any innocent civilian that terrorism is all about.

He was more like a cult leader from the eye of Pharisee Jews and Roman.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.125 seconds.