Islam

[Χahar]

I'm going to use this thread with a ridiculously generic title to discuss the People of the Book right now.

I think that the Torah is a corrupted version of the word of Allah, so the only parts that can be taken as fact are those that are expressly corroborated in the Qur’ān, which is about a quarter based on my completely random guess.

So, what is your faith's view on the people of the book?

Do we end up in hell (I can't remember what its called in Islam, something J-- but too close spelling wise to heaven for me to try and spell)? Temporary punishment? Permanent?  You can answer in another thread if you'd like

</hijack>

It depends on your righteousness.

3:113-115: Not all of them are alike; a party of the people of the Scripture stand for the right, they recite the Verses of God during the hours of the night, prostrating themselves in prayer. They believe in God and the Last Day; they enjoin Al-Ma'rûf and forbid Al-Munkar; and they hasten in (all) good works; and they are among the righteous. And whatever good they do, nothing will be rejected of them; for God knows well those who are Al-Muttaqûn.

[Josh/Devilman88]

Could you tell them the history of Islam?

[Χahar]

As revealed in the Qur'an or what is historically corroborated?

[afleitch]

As revealed in the Qur'an or what is historically corroborated?

A bit of both. They are both relevant and of worth I find. I fell the same way with Christianity; no religion is excempt from it's place in history

[Josh/Devilman88]

As revealed in the Qur'an or what is historically corroborated?

A bit of both. They are both relevant and of worth I find. I fell the same way with Christianity; no religion is excempt from it's place in history

[Χahar]

Well, the Qur'an says that Islam was created with Adam. However, his religion was corrupted and lost. The same happened for many more prophets, through Moses and Jesus. However, this will not be the case for Muhammad. After this, we go into recorded history. The caliphate, which succeeded Muhammad, was elected. This marks the great split in Islam: the Sunnis wanted an elective caliphate, while the Shiites wanted a hereditary one.

More to come later.

[Colin]

Xahar, just out of curiosity where is your family from? Are you Sunni or Shia?

[Verily]

Xahar, just out of curiosity where is your family from? Are you Sunni or Shia?

He's from Bangladesh, I believe. Which would imply Sunni.

[Colin]

Xahar, just out of curiosity where is your family from? Are you Sunni or Shia?

He's from Bangladesh, I believe. Which would imply Sunni.

I thought I remembered that he was from the Indian Sub-continent I just couldn't decide between Pakistan and Bangladesh.

[Hashemite]

If you're Sunni, what's your opinion on Shias?

[Senator Ben]

From a Doctrine standpoint, what kind of difference is there between the various branches of Islam?

[Hashemite]

From a Doctrine standpoint, what kind of difference is there between the various branches of Islam?

I studied it last year, but since the teacher was a Valium, I forgot the details. Mainly the split occurred over some Caliphal succession issue, and one side killed Ali and the split occurred IIRC.

From experience in Saudi Arabia, most Sunnis think Shias are dogs and assholes, and vice versa

[The Mikado]

From a Doctrine standpoint, what kind of difference is there between the various branches of Islam?

From what I remember, after the death of Muhammad (632 AD/CE), the caliph (successor, a position with both spiritual and temporal power) was Abu Bakr, Muhammad's father-in-law, and then was succeeded by Omar and Uthman.  Many Muslims believed Muhammad's son-in-law Ali ibn Abu Talib should have succeeded.  The supporters of Ali were the Shia.  Ali took power after the death of Uthman, but a rebellion led by Muhammad's youngest widow Aisha (Abu Bakr's daughter) and by a Muslim general named Muawiyah.  Muawiyah murdered Ali at a peace treaty and became caliph, founding the Umayyad dynasty.

From then on, Muslims divided between the side that favored the caliphs (Sunnis) and the side that favored putting Muhammad's descendants via Ali on the throne (Shia).

[Χahar]

Xahar, just out of curiosity where is your family from? Are you Sunni or Shia?

He's from Bangladesh, I believe. Which would imply Sunni.

I thought I remembered that he was from the Indian Sub-continent I just couldn't decide between Pakistan and Bangladesh.

Yes. I am a Sunni from Bangladesh.

If you're Sunni, what's your opinion on Shias?

I don't have any problem with them. Since the caliphate lost meaning long ago and was finally abolished, the dispute is rather pointless now.

From a Doctrine standpoint, what kind of difference is there between the various branches of Islam?

From what I remember, after the death of Muhammad (632 AD/CE), the caliph (successor, a position with both spiritual and temporal power) was Abu Bakr, Muhammad's father-in-law, and then was succeeded by Omar and Uthman.  Many Muslims believed Muhammad's son-in-law Ali ibn Abu Talib should have succeeded.  The supporters of Ali were the Shia.  Ali took power after the death of Uthman, but a rebellion led by Muhammad's youngest widow Aisha (Abu Bakr's daughter) and by a Muslim general named Muawiyah.  Muawiyah murdered Ali at a peace treaty and became caliph, founding the Umayyad dynasty.

From then on, Muslims divided between the side that favored the caliphs (Sunnis) and the side that favored putting Muhammad's descendants via Ali on the throne (Shia).

That's about right.

[phk]

Xahar, just out of curiosity where is your family from? Are you Sunni or Shia?

He's from Bangladesh, I believe. Which would imply Sunni.

I thought I remembered that he was from the Indian Sub-continent I just couldn't decide between Pakistan and Bangladesh.

Yes. I am a Sunni from Bangladesh.

If you're Sunni, what's your opinion on Shias?

I don't have any problem with them. Since the caliphate lost meaning long ago and was finally abolished, the dispute is rather pointless now.

From a Doctrine standpoint, what kind of difference is there between the various branches of Islam?

From what I remember, after the death of Muhammad (632 AD/CE), the caliph (successor, a position with both spiritual and temporal power) was Abu Bakr, Muhammad's father-in-law, and then was succeeded by Omar and Uthman.  Many Muslims believed Muhammad's son-in-law Ali ibn Abu Talib should have succeeded.  The supporters of Ali were the Shia.  Ali took power after the death of Uthman, but a rebellion led by Muhammad's youngest widow Aisha (Abu Bakr's daughter) and by a Muslim general named Muawiyah.  Muawiyah murdered Ali at a peace treaty and became caliph, founding the Umayyad dynasty.

From then on, Muslims divided between the side that favored the caliphs (Sunnis) and the side that favored putting Muhammad's descendants via Ali on the throne (Shia).

That's about right.

IIRC: Bangladeshi Muslims are 95% Sunni and 5% Shia.

Also on the subject of the caliphate, do many Sunnis want to resurrect the office of caliphate in some form?

[Vasall des Midas]

I think that the Torah is a corrupted version of the word of Allah, so the only parts that can be taken as fact are those that are expressly corroborated in the Qur’ān, which is about a quarter based on my completely random guess.

So, what is your faith's view on the people of the book?

Do we end up in hell (I can't remember what its called in Islam, something J-- but too close spelling wise to heaven for me to try and spell)? Temporary punishment? Permanent?  You can answer in another thread if you'd like

</hijack>

There are no eternal hell sentences according to Islamic teaching. For no one. It's not a sadist cult.

[Χahar]

Xahar, just out of curiosity where is your family from? Are you Sunni or Shia?

He's from Bangladesh, I believe. Which would imply Sunni.

I thought I remembered that he was from the Indian Sub-continent I just couldn't decide between Pakistan and Bangladesh.

Yes. I am a Sunni from Bangladesh.

If you're Sunni, what's your opinion on Shias?

I don't have any problem with them. Since the caliphate lost meaning long ago and was finally abolished, the dispute is rather pointless now.

From a Doctrine standpoint, what kind of difference is there between the various branches of Islam?

From what I remember, after the death of Muhammad (632 AD/CE), the caliph (successor, a position with both spiritual and temporal power) was Abu Bakr, Muhammad's father-in-law, and then was succeeded by Omar and Uthman.  Many Muslims believed Muhammad's son-in-law Ali ibn Abu Talib should have succeeded.  The supporters of Ali were the Shia.  Ali took power after the death of Uthman, but a rebellion led by Muhammad's youngest widow Aisha (Abu Bakr's daughter) and by a Muslim general named Muawiyah.  Muawiyah murdered Ali at a peace treaty and became caliph, founding the Umayyad dynasty.

From then on, Muslims divided between the side that favored the caliphs (Sunnis) and the side that favored putting Muhammad's descendants via Ali on the throne (Shia).

That's about right.

IIRC: Bangladeshi Muslims are 95% Sunni and 5% Shia.

Also on the subject of the caliphate, do many Sunnis want to resurrect the office of caliphate in some form?

I'm sure there are some, but most people I know regard the caliphate as fully legitimate only as long as it was elected. Besides, political issues have doomed this idea to the same fate as the Pan-Arab movement.

I think that the Torah is a corrupted version of the word of Allah, so the only parts that can be taken as fact are those that are expressly corroborated in the Qur’ān, which is about a quarter based on my completely random guess.

So, what is your faith's view on the people of the book?

Do we end up in hell (I can't remember what its called in Islam, something J-- but too close spelling wise to heaven for me to try and spell)? Temporary punishment? Permanent?  You can answer in another thread if you'd like

</hijack>

There are no eternal hell sentences according to Islamic teaching. For no one. It's not a sadist cult.

Yes. For most people, an instant in the hellfire will be enough to purify you. For really evil people, it might take somewhat longer.

[Gabu]

Yes. For most people, an instant in the hellfire will be enough to purify you. For really evil people, it might take somewhat longer.

What then, you get admitted to heaven (or what do you call it?)?

[Vasall des Midas]

Yes. For most people, an instant in the hellfire will be enough to purify you. For really evil people, it might take somewhat longer.

What then, you get admitted to heaven (or what do you call it?)?

Of course.

[Gabu]

Yes. For most people, an instant in the hellfire will be enough to purify you. For really evil people, it might take somewhat longer.

What then, you get admitted to heaven (or what do you call it?)?

Of course.

Well that's a point in favor of Islam for me, then.