News pics

**CoDer** · February 6th, 2006 08:02 PM

Sad world we have

**BlueBimmer** · February 6th, 2006 08:06 PM

Originally Posted by Steeljack

is that Yao Ming? hehe

**GasJunkie** · February 6th, 2006 08:08 PM

Remember the song, war what is it good for?........nothing.

**Steeljack** · February 6th, 2006 08:13 PM

A young boy sits on the barrel of a tank displayed at the military museum in Beijing Sunday, Feb. 5, 2006. According to Japanese Kyodo news agency, U.S. Defense Department said Friday that China has the "greatest potential" among major and emerging powers to become its military competitor, and called for "greater" Pacific presence, higher long-range strike capacities and stronger cooperation with allies like Japan. (AP Photo)

**GasJunkie** · February 6th, 2006 08:18 PM

another favorite past time of the american war mongering.

**team_PONGLAI_11** · February 6th, 2006 08:29 PM

and it seems nothing is gained from war.

marami ng namamatay...

**CoDer** · February 6th, 2006 08:34 PM

Tolerance in Islam

"There is no compulsion in religion", the scholar Nahas said:

"the scholars differed concerning Q. 2:256. Some said: 'It has been abrogated [cancelled] for the Prophet compelled the Arabs to embrace Islam and fought them and did not accept any alternative but their surrender to Islam. The abrogating verse is Q. 9:73 'O Prophet, struggle with the unbelievers and hypocrites, and be thou harsh with them.' Mohammad asked Allah the permission to fight them and it was granted. Other scholars said Q. 2:256 has not been abrogated, but it had a special application. It was revealed concerning the people of the Book [the Jews and the Christians]; they can not be compelled to embrace Islam if they pay the Jizia (that is head tax on free non-Muslims under Muslim rule). It is only the idol worshippers who are compelled to embrace Islam and upon them Q. 9:73 applies. This is the opinion of Ibn 'Abbas which is the best opinion due to the authenticity of its chain of authority."[1]
In exempting the Jews and the Christians from Q. 2:256, the Muslim scholars agree that the idol worshippers can be compelled by force to embrace Islam.

It is clear that, whether Q. 2:256 was abrogated or not, the scholars quite naturally admit to the historical fact that "the Prophet compelled the Arabs to embrace Islam and fought them and did not accept any alternative but their surrender to Islam."

THE JUSTIFICATION FOR COMPULSION

The Muslim theologians had to justify this compulsion. Here is the reason given by a famous scholar:

"No compulsion" is a condemnation of compelling people to do evil generally, but compelling people in the truth is a religious duty. Does the infidel get killed for any thing except on the basis of his religion? The Prophet said: I have been ordered to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah. This Hadith is taken from the words of Allah 'Fight them on until there is no more tumult and religion becomes that of Allah (Q. 2:193).
If some one asks how can people be compelled in the truth when the mere fact of compelling indicates a the violation of the will of the one compelled? The first answer is that Allah sent Mohammad calling people to Him, showing the way to the truth, enduring much harm ... until the evidence of Allah's truth became manifest ... and His apostle became strong, He ordered him to call people by the sword ... hence there is no more an excuse after being warned. The second answer is that people first are taken and compelled, but when Islam becomes prevalent ... and they mix and make friends ... their faith strengthens and finally becomes sincere."[2]

According to the above :

1. Muslims believe that they have the right to compel people to accept Islam because it is the truth.

2. Muslims believe that Mohammad was given a divine command to fight against people, not in self defence or for economical or political reasons, but because people do not worship the one Mohammad worshipped.

3. The above scholar had no value for the human free will. To him, forcing Islam on people is justified if later on they will become Muslims. It is not an exaggeration then to say that the sword is Allah's final word.

**Steeljack** · February 6th, 2006 08:36 PM

Graphic Pic

A Haitian man points out the location of a still-healing exit-wound from a bullet that hit his friend a few months earlier during a firefight between gangs and U.N. soldiers, in Cite Soleil slum, Port-au-Prince, Haiti, Saturday, Feb. 4, 2006. Haitians will vote Feb. 7 in the first presidential and parliamentary elections since the ouster of former president Jean-Bertrand Aristide in February 2004. (AP Photo/Brennan Linsley)

**GasJunkie** · February 6th, 2006 08:52 PM

Originally Posted by CoDer

Tolerance in Islam

"There is no compulsion in religion", the scholar Nahas said:

"the scholars differed concerning Q. 2:256. Some said: 'It has been abrogated [cancelled] for the Prophet compelled the Arabs to embrace Islam and fought them and did not accept any alternative but their surrender to Islam. The abrogating verse is Q. 9:73 'O Prophet, struggle with the unbelievers and hypocrites, and be thou harsh with them.' Mohammad asked Allah the permission to fight them and it was granted. Other scholars said Q. 2:256 has not been abrogated, but it had a special application. It was revealed concerning the people of the Book [the Jews and the Christians]; they can not be compelled to embrace Islam if they pay the Jizia (that is head tax on free non-Muslims under Muslim rule). It is only the idol worshippers who are compelled to embrace Islam and upon them Q. 9:73 applies. This is the opinion of Ibn 'Abbas which is the best opinion due to the authenticity of its chain of authority."[1]
In exempting the Jews and the Christians from Q. 2:256, the Muslim scholars agree that the idol worshippers can be compelled by force to embrace Islam.

It is clear that, whether Q. 2:256 was abrogated or not, the scholars quite naturally admit to the historical fact that "the Prophet compelled the Arabs to embrace Islam and fought them and did not accept any alternative but their surrender to Islam."

THE JUSTIFICATION FOR COMPULSION

The Muslim theologians had to justify this compulsion. Here is the reason given by a famous scholar:

"No compulsion" is a condemnation of compelling people to do evil generally, but compelling people in the truth is a religious duty. Does the infidel get killed for any thing except on the basis of his religion? The Prophet said: I have been ordered to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah. This Hadith is taken from the words of Allah 'Fight them on until there is no more tumult and religion becomes that of Allah (Q. 2:193).
If some one asks how can people be compelled in the truth when the mere fact of compelling indicates a the violation of the will of the one compelled? The first answer is that Allah sent Mohammad calling people to Him, showing the way to the truth, enduring much harm ... until the evidence of Allah's truth became manifest ... and His apostle became strong, He ordered him to call people by the sword ... hence there is no more an excuse after being warned. The second answer is that people first are taken and compelled, but when Islam becomes prevalent ... and they mix and make friends ... their faith strengthens and finally becomes sincere."[2]

According to the above :

1. Muslims believe that they have the right to compel people to accept Islam because it is the truth.

2. Muslims believe that Mohammad was given a divine command to fight against people, not in self defence or for economical or political reasons, but because people do not worship the one Mohammad worshipped.

3. The above scholar had no value for the human free will. To him, forcing Islam on people is justified if later on they will become Muslims. It is not an exaggeration then to say that the sword is Allah's final word.

To show no bias you should also tell us about the inquisition.

**CoDer** · February 6th, 2006 08:58 PM

Hahahaha... I'm a Christian not a Catholic.

Here it is.

To assist people in repenting, the Inquisitors used any torture method they could think of, with the theoretical restriction that they couldn't break the skin. The Inquisitors came up with numerous gadgets to work within this restriction. They included:

The Judas Chair: This was a large pyramid-shaped "seat." Accused heretics were placed on top of it, with the point inserted into their anuses or genitalia, then very, very slowly lowered onto the point with ropes. The effect was to gradually stretch out the opening of choice in an extremely painful manner.

The Head Vice: Pretty straightforward concept. They put your head into a specially fitted vice, and tighten it until your teeth are crushed, your bones crack and eventually your eyes pop out of their sockets.

The Pear: A large bulbous gadget is inserted in the orifice of choice, whether mouth, anus or vagina. A lever on the device then causes it to slowly expand whilst inserted. Eventually points emerge from the tips. (Apparently, internal bleeding doesn't count as "breaking the skin.")

The Wheel: Heretics are strapped to a big ol' wheel, and their bones are clubbed into shards. Not very creative, but quite effective.

Methods of execution weren't much better. Since death was the eventual outcome, the skin-breaking point was rendered largely moot. While burning at the stake was the most widely used method, being cost-effective and providing a fun spectacle for the whole family, there were other approaches used in special cases:

Sawing: Heretics were hung upside-down and sawed apart down the middle, starting at the crotch.

Disembowelment: Not the nice kind of disembowelment, where a samurai slits you wide open like a fish and you die in moments. No, that's not good enough for the Inquisition. A small hole is cut in the gut, then the intestines are drawn out slowly and carefully, keeping the victim alive for as much of the process as possible.

The Stake: Depending on how unrepentant a heretic might be, the process of burning at the stake could vary wildly. For instance, a fairly repentant heretic might be strangled, then burned. An entirely unrepentant heretic could be burned over the course of hours, using green wood or simply by placing them on top of hot coals and leaving them there until well done.
The last burning organized by the Inquisition was in 1834, when the Spanish Inquisition was officially abolished. But though Torquemada's legacy has been laid to rest, the Inquisition lives on.

The Catholic Church even attempted to destroy true Christian Scriptures but they failed.