Palestine and Jerusalem belong to Muslims

[Osomir]

Have no right to personal information. You should not be asking and it is not permitted to discuss such things beyond what a poster chooses to reveal. You are not permitted to use any person information to attack, defame or harm the poster in any way.

It is none of your d$%* business!

I did not claim a right to personal information. Take a couple of deep breaths and try again.

You criticized Roudy for not telling you where he grew up. Why is that important to you? Are you an internet stalker ?

I criticized him for it simply because he keeps attempting to utilize it as an appeal to authority. Notice how I have never asked any of you for such information. If he told me he drew his experience from books I would likewise ask him what the titles of the books were. It's the same thing. If he wants to use it as an appeal to authority then it shouldn't be surprising for someone to inquire about more details concerning said authority; there is after all a huge difference between growing up in Indonesia or Albania, or Senegal, or Saudi Arabia. Saying he "grew up in a Muslim country" doesn't really tell me anything useful as far as his experience goes, especially in the face of his historically demonstrated weakness in the area of religious and historical basics within Islam.

I also find you guys trying to rush to his defense somewhat amusing given his proclivity for and widespread use of personal attacks on other posters.

 

[Roudy]

Sorry I only lived and grew up in a Muslim country.

I've heard you say this many times, and yet you can't 1.) name the country and 2.) you continuously get very basic things incorrect, such as in the thread where we discussed Yemen and you thought that the Sahih Bukhari was part of the Quran. No one with even a passing knowledge of the basics of Islam would make that mistake. No one. So even if you did spend some time in a Muslim country you obviously never studied the religion at all.

ISIS and Al Queda are practicing true Sunni Islam.

That's interesting since they consider each other rather heretical. It doesn't make sense to say that they are BOTH practicing true Sunni Islam when the way that they practice it is so different from each other and indeed opposed to each other.

Iran's Mullah's are practicing true Shia Islam. In fact that's exactly what they are both saying. I don't understsnd what all the confusion is all about.

Iran's council is by far one of the weakest Shia theological institutions in the world. Shia centers of theology tend to surround Qom and Najaf. Historically speaking and theologically speaking, Iran's political shia model goes against classical Shia Islam and is a relatively new expression on the faith.

When Ayatollah Khomeini rose to power in 1979, he specifically said that he's there to establish and export pure Islam. ISIS's leader, who is a devout cleric makes the same claims, they are establishing AN ISLAMIC STATE. What's misunderstanding here?

And Joseph Kony insists that he is establishing a Christian state based on the ten commandments as he has his children soldiers rape their families. These people saying such things doesn't mean that they are legit. You seem to rather be succumbing to the propaganda of these radical groups.

ISIS actually evolved out of Al Queda, and they aren't really doing anything different from each other. ISIS is a younger group that has learned to use modern technology to its advantage. Most crucially, ISIS is in total control of large swaths of territory and has a huge source of funding from the territory it holds. Of course Al Queda and ISIS are competitors, but it's possible that one day Al Queda may merge with ISIS.

ISIS is led by a devout Muslim cleric and thousands of Muslims are flocking to its message because they believe ISIS represents true Islam, and the desire to live a purely ISLAMIC life.

Ayatollah Khomeini has the status of prophet (imam) among Shia Muslims. He was a man who studied and preached Shia Islam for decades of his life and was the Shia "pope" before he came to power. Practicing Shia Muslims revered him as their "Saint". He was not an abomination or some off the wall cult leader. His words were considered final and Devine,y inspired and as important as when the Pope renders an opinion. As with the current supreme leader of Iran.

You are a nobody and know nothing compared to these devout Muslims. There is a reason why they label themselves ISLAMIC STATE or ISLAMIC REPUBLIC. They are practicing true Islam and many Musłims agree with them. Even those that disagree, still agree that that they are indeed practicing true islam, they just don't agree with them taking the koran so literally. To seperate Islam out of these groups is insane, delusional, and ignorant.

 

[Roudy]

Have no right to personal information. You should not be asking and it is not permitted to discuss such things beyond what a poster chooses to reveal. You are not permitted to use any person information to attack, defame or harm the poster in any way.

It is none of your d$%* business!

I did not claim a right to personal information. Take a couple of deep breaths and try again.

You criticized Roudy for not telling you where he grew up. Why is that important to you? Are you an internet stalker ?

I criticized him for it simply because he keeps attempting to utilize it as an appeal to authority. Notice how I have never asked any of you for such information. If he told me he drew his experience from books I would likewise ask him what the titles of the books were. It's the same thing. If he wants to use it as an appeal to authority then it shouldn't be surprising for someone to inquire about more details concerning said authority; there is after all a huge difference between growing up in Indonesia or Albania, or Senegal, or Saudi Arabia. Saying he "grew up in a Muslim country" doesn't really tell me anything useful as far as his experience goes, especially in the face of his historically demonstrated weakness in the area of religious and historical basics within Islam.

I also find you guys trying to rush to his defense somewhat amusing given his proclivity for and widespread use of personal attacks on other posters.

Hah? Those that know me know that I rarely bring up or use my background in discussions. But rest assured I am a decendant of people who lived for generations in the Middle East and from various countries. Many in my family and community including my father, knew the Koran by heart (mandatory part of education even for non Muslim).

It's entertaining to see the level of ignorance on sites such as this.

 

[Osomir]

ISIS actually evolved out of Al Queda, and they aren't really doing anything different from each other. ISIS is a younger group that has learned to use modern technology to its advantage. Most crucially, ISIS is in total control of large swaths of territory and has a huge source of funding from the territory it holds. Of course Al Queda and ISIS are competitors, but it's possible that one day Al Queda may merge with ISIS.

This doesn't in any way suggest that they are theologically sophisticated. We also know that AQI (the founding entity of ISI and later ISIS) was threatened by bin Laden with excommunication due specifically due to its tactics and the US Army's intelligence center's subsequent analysis of the two groups showed large theological and methodological divisions between the two. I also find it interesting that you would hinge your basis on these two groups since Osama bin Laden had no formal scholarly religious education and specifically eschewed formal religious training in favor of his personalized style of Islamic branding.

ISIS is led by a devout Muslim cleric and thousands of Muslims are flocking to its message because they believe ISIS represents true Islam, and the desire to live a purely ISLAMIC life.

Since you have said this over and over again and seem so confident in yourself, I challenge you to a formal discussion in the new formal discussion forum on the issue where you can finally support your stance in more detail instead of simply defending yourself with the use of personal attacks and thread abandonment.

Ayatollah Khomeini has the status of prophet (imam) among Shia Muslims.

No he doesn't. There are only 12 imams within Jafari Islam and the Imam is only believed to return as the Mahdi in the last days. Khomeini didn't claim to be the Mahdi, nor iwas he believed to be. In terms of physical religious leaders, shias follow what are called Majaji or grand ayatollahs, of which there are over 60 in the world currently living and of which Khamenei is hardly the most popular in terms of religious followers. As far as Khomeini is concerned, Shias are not allowed theologically speaking to adopt the ideas of a Marja who is dead.

He was a man who studied and preached Shia Islam for decades of his life and was the Shai "pope" before he came to power.

Likening anyone to the Shia "pope" is to not understand how Shiism works. Marja are theologically required to have differing views from one another in order to maintain diversity within the faith and in order to ensure theological discourse. The most popular modern Marja to exist was Khoei, and his successor today (Al Sistani) is much more popular theologically speaking than the Iranian government.

Once again, these are pretty basic concepts, and the fact that you don't seem to be aware of them is rather telling when it comes to the robustness of your own acclaimed religious knowledge.

 

[Roudy]

you

Sorry I only lived and grew up in a Muslim country.

I've heard you say this many times, and yet you can't 1.) name the country and 2.) you continuously get very basic things incorrect, such as in the thread where we discussed Yemen and you thought that the Sahih Bukhari was part of the Quran. No one with even a passing knowledge of the basics of Islam would make that mistake. No one. So even if you did spend some time in a Muslim country you obviously never studied the religion at all.

ISIS and Al Queda are practicing true Sunni Islam.

That's interesting since they consider each other rather heretical. It doesn't make sense to say that they are BOTH practicing true Sunni Islam when the way that they practice it is so different from each other and indeed opposed to each other.

Iran's Mullah's are practicing true Shia Islam. In fact that's exactly what they are both saying. I don't understsnd what all the confusion is all about.

Iran's council is by far one of the weakest Shia theological institutions in the world. Shia centers of theology tend to surround Qom and Najaf. Historically speaking and theologically speaking, Iran's political shia model goes against classical Shia Islam and is a relatively new expression on the faith.

When Ayatollah Khomeini rose to power in 1979, he specifically said that he's there to establish and export pure Islam. ISIS's leader, who is a devout cleric makes the same claims, they are establishing AN ISLAMIC STATE. What's misunderstanding here?

And Joseph Kony insists that he is establishing a Christian state based on the ten commandments as he has his children soldiers rape their families. These people saying such things doesn't mean that they are legit. You seem to rather be succumbing to the propaganda of these radical groups.

Have no right to personal information. You should not be asking and it is not permitted to discuss such things beyond what a poster chooses to reveal. You are not permitted to use any person information to attack, defame or harm the poster in any way.

It is none of your d$%* business!

Ha ha ha thanks Aris. You're a sweetheart and one of the fairest people I have known.

 

[Phoenall]

you

Sorry I only lived and grew up in a Muslim country.

I've heard you say this many times, and yet you can't 1.) name the country and 2.) you continuously get very basic things incorrect, such as in the thread where we discussed Yemen and you thought that the Sahih Bukhari was part of the Quran. No one with even a passing knowledge of the basics of Islam would make that mistake. No one. So even if you did spend some time in a Muslim country you obviously never studied the religion at all.

ISIS and Al Queda are practicing true Sunni Islam.

That's interesting since they consider each other rather heretical. It doesn't make sense to say that they are BOTH practicing true Sunni Islam when the way that they practice it is so different from each other and indeed opposed to each other.

Iran's Mullah's are practicing true Shia Islam. In fact that's exactly what they are both saying. I don't understsnd what all the confusion is all about.

Iran's council is by far one of the weakest Shia theological institutions in the world. Shia centers of theology tend to surround Qom and Najaf. Historically speaking and theologically speaking, Iran's political shia model goes against classical Shia Islam and is a relatively new expression on the faith.

When Ayatollah Khomeini rose to power in 1979, he specifically said that he's there to establish and export pure Islam. ISIS's leader, who is a devout cleric makes the same claims, they are establishing AN ISLAMIC STATE. What's misunderstanding here?

And Joseph Kony insists that he is establishing a Christian state based on the ten commandments as he has his children soldiers rape their families. These people saying such things doesn't mean that they are legit. You seem to rather be succumbing to the propaganda of these radical groups.

Have no right to personal information. You should not be asking and it is not permitted to discuss such things beyond what a poster chooses to reveal. You are not permitted to use any person information to attack, defame or harm the poster in any way.

It is none of your d$%* business!

Ha ha ha thanks Aris. You're a sweetheart and one of the fairest people I have known.

Would make a very good mod if she wanted to wear that mantle again. But after dealing with immature scots and self centred Greeks I very much doubt she would.

 

[Osomir]

Have no right to personal information. You should not be asking and it is not permitted to discuss such things beyond what a poster chooses to reveal. You are not permitted to use any person information to attack, defame or harm the poster in any way.

It is none of your d$%* business!

I did not claim a right to personal information. Take a couple of deep breaths and try again.

You criticized Roudy for not telling you where he grew up. Why is that important to you? Are you an internet stalker ?

I criticized him for it simply because he keeps attempting to utilize it as an appeal to authority. Notice how I have never asked any of you for such information. If he told me he drew his experience from books I would likewise ask him what the titles of the books were. It's the same thing. If he wants to use it as an appeal to authority then it shouldn't be surprising for someone to inquire about more details concerning said authority; there is after all a huge difference between growing up in Indonesia or Albania, or Senegal, or Saudi Arabia. Saying he "grew up in a Muslim country" doesn't really tell me anything useful as far as his experience goes, especially in the face of his historically demonstrated weakness in the area of religious and historical basics within Islam.

I also find you guys trying to rush to his defense somewhat amusing given his proclivity for and widespread use of personal attacks on other posters.

Hah? Those that know me know that I rarely bring up or use my background in discussions. But rest assured I am a decendant of people who lived for generations in the Middle East and from various countries. Many in my family and community including my father, knew the Koran by heart (mandatory part of education even for non Muslim).

It's entertaining to see the level of ignorance on sites such as this.

Once again we are in a scenario where you are patting yourself on the back for your "expertise" while at the same time you don't seem to be aware of what an Imam is within Shiism which is pretty much one of the most basic religious concepts within said community. How you can blatantly get something like that wrong and still feel highly confident in the accuracy of your knowledge is rather nonplussing.

 

[Roudy]

ISIS actually evolved out of Al Queda, and they aren't really doing anything different from each other. ISIS is a younger group that has learned to use modern technology to its advantage. Most crucially, ISIS is in total control of large swaths of territory and has a huge source of funding from the territory it holds. Of course Al Queda and ISIS are competitors, but it's possible that one day Al Queda may merge with ISIS.

This doesn't in any way suggest that they are theologically sophisticated. We also know that AQI (the founding entity of ISI and later ISIS) was threatened by bin Laden with excommunication due specifically due to its tactics and the US Army's intelligence center's subsequent analysis of the two groups showed large theological and methodological divisions between the two. I also find it interesting that you would hinge your basis on these two groups since Osama bin Laden had no formal scholarly religious education and specifically eschewed formal religious training in favor of his personalized style of Islamic branding.

ISIS is led by a devout Muslim cleric and thousands of Muslims are flocking to its message because they believe ISIS represents true Islam, and the desire to live a purely ISLAMIC life.

Since you have said this over and over again and seem so confident in yourself, I challenge you to a formal discussion in the new formal discussion forum on the issue where you can finally support your stance in more detail instead of simply defending yourself with the use of personal attacks and thread abandonment.

Ayatollah Khomeini has the status of prophet (imam) among Shia Muslims.

No he doesn't. There are only 12 imams within Jafari Islam and the Imam is only believed to return as the Mahdi in the last days. Khomeini doesn't claim to be the Mahdi, nor is he believed to be by his followers. In terms of physical religious leaders, shias follow what are called Majaji or grand ayatollahs, of which there are over 60 in the world currently living and of which Khamenei is hardly the most popular in terms of religious followers. As far as Khomeini is concerned, Shias are not allowed theologically speaking to adopt the ideas of a Marja who is dead.

He was a man who studied and preached Shia Islam for decades of his life and was the Shai "pope" before he came to power.

Likening anyone to the Shia "pope" is to not understand how Shiism works. Marja are theologically required to have differing views from one another in order to maintain diversity within the faith and in order to ensure theological discourse. The most popular modern Marja to exist was Khoei, and his successor today (Al Sistani) is much more popular theologically speaking than the Iranian government.

Once again, these are pretty basic concepts, and the fact that you don't seem to be aware of them is rather telling when it comes to the robustness of your own acclaimed religious knowledge.

You discount and distort reality. Khomeini was the head cleric in Iran and was deposed by the Shah, which was the biggest mistake the Shah made. There were other head clerics but he was the main one. After he came to power and died he was given the label "imam" or saint. Shia Islam is very similar to Catholicism in this way, they create "saints" out of people. In Iran, if they catch you bashing Khomeini or "the imam" the punishment is very severe, and equivalent to bashing the prophet.

As far as Bin Laden's knowledge of Islam you seemed to have skipped the formative years of his life where he and Zawahiri STUDIED ISLAM AT THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD, and then branched off on their own Jihad in Afghanistan and elsewhere.

So again, claiming that these groups and their actions "have nothing to do with Islam". is delusional and insane.

 

[Roudy]

you

Sorry I only lived and grew up in a Muslim country.

I've heard you say this many times, and yet you can't 1.) name the country and 2.) you continuously get very basic things incorrect, such as in the thread where we discussed Yemen and you thought that the Sahih Bukhari was part of the Quran. No one with even a passing knowledge of the basics of Islam would make that mistake. No one. So even if you did spend some time in a Muslim country you obviously never studied the religion at all.

ISIS and Al Queda are practicing true Sunni Islam.

That's interesting since they consider each other rather heretical. It doesn't make sense to say that they are BOTH practicing true Sunni Islam when the way that they practice it is so different from each other and indeed opposed to each other.

Iran's Mullah's are practicing true Shia Islam. In fact that's exactly what they are both saying. I don't understsnd what all the confusion is all about.

Iran's council is by far one of the weakest Shia theological institutions in the world. Shia centers of theology tend to surround Qom and Najaf. Historically speaking and theologically speaking, Iran's political shia model goes against classical Shia Islam and is a relatively new expression on the faith.

When Ayatollah Khomeini rose to power in 1979, he specifically said that he's there to establish and export pure Islam. ISIS's leader, who is a devout cleric makes the same claims, they are establishing AN ISLAMIC STATE. What's misunderstanding here?

And Joseph Kony insists that he is establishing a Christian state based on the ten commandments as he has his children soldiers rape their families. These people saying such things doesn't mean that they are legit. You seem to rather be succumbing to the propaganda of these radical groups.

Have no right to personal information. You should not be asking and it is not permitted to discuss such things beyond what a poster chooses to reveal. You are not permitted to use any person information to attack, defame or harm the poster in any way.

It is none of your d$%* business!

Ha ha ha thanks Aris. You're a sweetheart and one of the fairest people I have known.

Would make a very good mod if she wanted to wear that mantle again. But after dealing with immature scots and self centred Greeks I very much doubt she would.

People change when they become mods. And their interactions and relationships change too. You're giving up a lot for nothing.

 

[Roudy]

Have no right to personal information. You should not be asking and it is not permitted to discuss such things beyond what a poster chooses to reveal. You are not permitted to use any person information to attack, defame or harm the poster in any way.

It is none of your d$%* business!

I did not claim a right to personal information. Take a couple of deep breaths and try again.

You criticized Roudy for not telling you where he grew up. Why is that important to you? Are you an internet stalker ?

I criticized him for it simply because he keeps attempting to utilize it as an appeal to authority. Notice how I have never asked any of you for such information. If he told me he drew his experience from books I would likewise ask him what the titles of the books were. It's the same thing. If he wants to use it as an appeal to authority then it shouldn't be surprising for someone to inquire about more details concerning said authority; there is after all a huge difference between growing up in Indonesia or Albania, or Senegal, or Saudi Arabia. Saying he "grew up in a Muslim country" doesn't really tell me anything useful as far as his experience goes, especially in the face of his historically demonstrated weakness in the area of religious and historical basics within Islam.

I also find you guys trying to rush to his defense somewhat amusing given his proclivity for and widespread use of personal attacks on other posters.

Hah? Those that know me know that I rarely bring up or use my background in discussions. But rest assured I am a decendant of people who lived for generations in the Middle East and from various countries. Many in my family and community including my father, knew the Koran by heart (mandatory part of education even for non Muslim).

It's entertaining to see the level of ignorance on sites such as this.

Once again we are in a scenario where you are patting yourself on the back for your "expertise" while at the same time you don't seem to be aware of what an Imam is within Shiism which is pretty much one of the most basic religious concepts within said community. How you can blatantly get something like that wrong and still feel highly confident in the accuracy of your knowledge is rather nonplussing.

Yes I know what an Imam is, but you're the ignorant one who doesn't know in Iran he's called IMAM KHOMEINI. Look it up.

 

[Osomir]

ISIS actually evolved out of Al Queda, and they aren't really doing anything different from each other. ISIS is a younger group that has learned to use modern technology to its advantage. Most crucially, ISIS is in total control of large swaths of territory and has a huge source of funding from the territory it holds. Of course Al Queda and ISIS are competitors, but it's possible that one day Al Queda may merge with ISIS.

This doesn't in any way suggest that they are theologically sophisticated. We also know that AQI (the founding entity of ISI and later ISIS) was threatened by bin Laden with excommunication due specifically due to its tactics and the US Army's intelligence center's subsequent analysis of the two groups showed large theological and methodological divisions between the two. I also find it interesting that you would hinge your basis on these two groups since Osama bin Laden had no formal scholarly religious education and specifically eschewed formal religious training in favor of his personalized style of Islamic branding.

ISIS is led by a devout Muslim cleric and thousands of Muslims are flocking to its message because they believe ISIS represents true Islam, and the desire to live a purely ISLAMIC life.

Since you have said this over and over again and seem so confident in yourself, I challenge you to a formal discussion in the new formal discussion forum on the issue where you can finally support your stance in more detail instead of simply defending yourself with the use of personal attacks and thread abandonment.

Ayatollah Khomeini has the status of prophet (imam) among Shia Muslims.

No he doesn't. There are only 12 imams within Jafari Islam and the Imam is only believed to return as the Mahdi in the last days. Khomeini doesn't claim to be the Mahdi, nor is he believed to be by his followers. In terms of physical religious leaders, shias follow what are called Majaji or grand ayatollahs, of which there are over 60 in the world currently living and of which Khamenei is hardly the most popular in terms of religious followers. As far as Khomeini is concerned, Shias are not allowed theologically speaking to adopt the ideas of a Marja who is dead.

He was a man who studied and preached Shia Islam for decades of his life and was the Shai "pope" before he came to power.

Likening anyone to the Shia "pope" is to not understand how Shiism works. Marja are theologically required to have differing views from one another in order to maintain diversity within the faith and in order to ensure theological discourse. The most popular modern Marja to exist was Khoei, and his successor today (Al Sistani) is much more popular theologically speaking than the Iranian government.

Once again, these are pretty basic concepts, and the fact that you don't seem to be aware of them is rather telling when it comes to the robustness of your own acclaimed religious knowledge.

You discount and distort reality. Khomeini was the head cleric in Iran and was deposed by the Shah, which was the biggest mistake the Shah made. There were other head clerics but he was the main one. After he came to power and died he was given the label "imam" or saint.

Only by his own followers, and this in no way theologically puts him on par with the 12 imams of Jafari Shiism, nor does it change the reality that most of the theological power within 12er shiism is held in Qom and Najaf, not Tehran.Your attempt to brand him as some sort of Shia pope is intellectually dishonest and ignores the traditional theological power structures within the faith.

As far as Bin Laden's knowledge of Islam you seemed to have skipped the formative years of his life where he and Zawahiri STUDIED ISLAM AT THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD, and then branched off on their own Jihad in Afghanistan and elsewhere.

Studying Islam isn't the same as having a formal Islamic scholarly credentials. His thesis was that Muslims didn't need such formal education and he himself eschewed it, as did one of his main influences: Sayyid Qutb who likewise never completed formal religious training. Bin Laden was never considered to be a formal Islamic scholar.

 

[High_Gravity]

Hello,

I am Muslim. Everyone knows that Muhammad (peace be upon him and his family) is a true prophet of God Almighty, holy and heavenly. If you don't know this, then learn about the Night Journey.
Isra and Mi raj - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Therefore the missions of all 123 999 prophets ended, while Muhammad took over as the 124 000th prophet, the last of all prophets, who closes the cycle of prophethood. Servanhood of God Almighty, today, and since the 7th century is only through Muhammad's Islam, through true Islam. Jerusalem now belongs to Muhammad, no more to Jesus, no more to Moses, no more to Abraham. This is what pleases God Almighty.

As such, what Americans, Israelis, Europeans, Christianity and Judaism are doing is pure wickedness, pure evil.

Nevertheless, ever since the Muslims conquered Jerusalem in the 7th century under Umar (may God be well pleased with him), Islam has never been denied Jerusalem or Palestine, and it never will, to the end end of times.

No they don't.

 

[Osomir]

I did not claim a right to personal information. Take a couple of deep breaths and try again.

You criticized Roudy for not telling you where he grew up. Why is that important to you? Are you an internet stalker ?

I criticized him for it simply because he keeps attempting to utilize it as an appeal to authority. Notice how I have never asked any of you for such information. If he told me he drew his experience from books I would likewise ask him what the titles of the books were. It's the same thing. If he wants to use it as an appeal to authority then it shouldn't be surprising for someone to inquire about more details concerning said authority; there is after all a huge difference between growing up in Indonesia or Albania, or Senegal, or Saudi Arabia. Saying he "grew up in a Muslim country" doesn't really tell me anything useful as far as his experience goes, especially in the face of his historically demonstrated weakness in the area of religious and historical basics within Islam.

I also find you guys trying to rush to his defense somewhat amusing given his proclivity for and widespread use of personal attacks on other posters.

Hah? Those that know me know that I rarely bring up or use my background in discussions. But rest assured I am a decendant of people who lived for generations in the Middle East and from various countries. Many in my family and community including my father, knew the Koran by heart (mandatory part of education even for non Muslim).

It's entertaining to see the level of ignorance on sites such as this.

Once again we are in a scenario where you are patting yourself on the back for your "expertise" while at the same time you don't seem to be aware of what an Imam is within Shiism which is pretty much one of the most basic religious concepts within said community. How you can blatantly get something like that wrong and still feel highly confident in the accuracy of your knowledge is rather nonplussing.

Yes I know what an Imam is, but you're the ignorant one who doesn't know in Iran he's called IMAM KHOMEINI. Look it up.

The fact that some of his followers within Iran call him that does not mean that he is considered by shias to be an actual Imam or the Mahdi. Your appeal to his authority and likening him to one of the 12 is still highly theologically inaccurate and not how Shiism works.

 

[Roudy]

ISIS actually evolved out of Al Queda, and they aren't really doing anything different from each other. ISIS is a younger group that has learned to use modern technology to its advantage. Most crucially, ISIS is in total control of large swaths of territory and has a huge source of funding from the territory it holds. Of course Al Queda and ISIS are competitors, but it's possible that one day Al Queda may merge with ISIS.

This doesn't in any way suggest that they are theologically sophisticated. We also know that AQI (the founding entity of ISI and later ISIS) was threatened by bin Laden with excommunication due specifically due to its tactics and the US Army's intelligence center's subsequent analysis of the two groups showed large theological and methodological divisions between the two. I also find it interesting that you would hinge your basis on these two groups since Osama bin Laden had no formal scholarly religious education and specifically eschewed formal religious training in favor of his personalized style of Islamic branding.

ISIS is led by a devout Muslim cleric and thousands of Muslims are flocking to its message because they believe ISIS represents true Islam, and the desire to live a purely ISLAMIC life.

Since you have said this over and over again and seem so confident in yourself, I challenge you to a formal discussion in the new formal discussion forum on the issue where you can finally support your stance in more detail instead of simply defending yourself with the use of personal attacks and thread abandonment.

Ayatollah Khomeini has the status of prophet (imam) among Shia Muslims.

No he doesn't. There are only 12 imams within Jafari Islam and the Imam is only believed to return as the Mahdi in the last days. Khomeini doesn't claim to be the Mahdi, nor is he believed to be by his followers. In terms of physical religious leaders, shias follow what are called Majaji or grand ayatollahs, of which there are over 60 in the world currently living and of which Khamenei is hardly the most popular in terms of religious followers. As far as Khomeini is concerned, Shias are not allowed theologically speaking to adopt the ideas of a Marja who is dead.

He was a man who studied and preached Shia Islam for decades of his life and was the Shai "pope" before he came to power.

Likening anyone to the Shia "pope" is to not understand how Shiism works. Marja are theologically required to have differing views from one another in order to maintain diversity within the faith and in order to ensure theological discourse. The most popular modern Marja to exist was Khoei, and his successor today (Al Sistani) is much more popular theologically speaking than the Iranian government.

Once again, these are pretty basic concepts, and the fact that you don't seem to be aware of them is rather telling when it comes to the robustness of your own acclaimed religious knowledge.

You discount and distort reality. Khomeini was the head cleric in Iran and was deposed by the Shah, which was the biggest mistake the Shah made. There were other head clerics but he was the main one. After he came to power and died he was given the label "imam" or saint.

Only by his own followers, and this in no way theologically puts him on par with the 12 imams of Jafari Shiism, nor does it change the reality that most of the theological power within 12er shiism is held in Qom and Najaf, not Tehran.Your attempt to brand him as some sort of Shia pope is intellectually dishonest and ignores the traditional theological power structures within the faith.

As far as Bin Laden's knowledge of Islam you seemed to have skipped the formative years of his life where he and Zawahiri STUDIED ISLAM AT THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD, and then branched off on their own Jihad in Afghanistan and elsewhere.

Studying Islam isn't the same as having a formal Islamic scholarly credentials. His thesis was that Muslims didn't need such formal education and he himself eschewed it, as did one of his main influences: Sayyid Qutb who likewise never completed formal religious training. Bin Laden was never considered to be a formal Islamic scholar.

So you see, you're the ignorant arrogant one here. You didn't know that Bin Laden attended an Islamic school known to produce many radicals and terrorist groups and their leaders, and you still still claim that Khomeini isn't considered an Imam in Iran. Now run along before you embarass yourself more:

Ruhollah Khomeini - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Khomeini was noted by many for his mystique. Before the revolution he benefited from the widespread circulation of a Hadithattributed to the Imam Musa al-Kazim who is said to have prophesied shortly before his death in 799 that

'A man will come out from Qom and he will summon people to the right path. There will rally to him people resembling pieces of iron, not to be shaken by violent winds, unsparing and relying on God.'[214]

Khomeini was the first and only Iranian cleric to be addressed as "Imam", a title hitherto reserved in Iran for the twelve infallible leaders of the early Shi'a.[215] He was also associated with the Mahdi or 12th Imam of Shia belief in a number of ways. One of his titles was Na'eb-e Imam (Deputy to the Twelfth Imam). His enemies were often attacked as taghut and Mofsed-e-filarz (corrupters of the earth), religious terms used for enemies of the Twelfth Imam. Many of the officials of the overthrown Shah's government executed by Revolutionary Courts were convicted of "fighting against the Twelfth Imam". When a deputy in the majlis asked Khomeini directly if he was the 'promised Mahdi', Khomeini did not answer, "astutely" neither confirming nor denying the title.[216]


Khomeini and child
As the revolution gained momentum, even some non-supporters exhibited awe, called him "magnificently clear-minded, single-minded and unswerving."[217] His image was as "absolute, wise, and indispensable leader of the nation"[218]

The Imam, it was generally believed, had shown by his uncanny sweep to power, that he knew how to act in ways which others could not begin to understand. His timing was extraordinary, and his insight into the motivation of others, those around him as well as his enemies, could not be explained as ordinary knowledge. This emergent belief in Khomeini as a divinely guided figure was carefully fostered by the clerics who supported him and spoke up for him in front of the people.[219]

 

[Osomir]

ISIS actually evolved out of Al Queda, and they aren't really doing anything different from each other. ISIS is a younger group that has learned to use modern technology to its advantage. Most crucially, ISIS is in total control of large swaths of territory and has a huge source of funding from the territory it holds. Of course Al Queda and ISIS are competitors, but it's possible that one day Al Queda may merge with ISIS.

This doesn't in any way suggest that they are theologically sophisticated. We also know that AQI (the founding entity of ISI and later ISIS) was threatened by bin Laden with excommunication due specifically due to its tactics and the US Army's intelligence center's subsequent analysis of the two groups showed large theological and methodological divisions between the two. I also find it interesting that you would hinge your basis on these two groups since Osama bin Laden had no formal scholarly religious education and specifically eschewed formal religious training in favor of his personalized style of Islamic branding.

ISIS is led by a devout Muslim cleric and thousands of Muslims are flocking to its message because they believe ISIS represents true Islam, and the desire to live a purely ISLAMIC life.

Since you have said this over and over again and seem so confident in yourself, I challenge you to a formal discussion in the new formal discussion forum on the issue where you can finally support your stance in more detail instead of simply defending yourself with the use of personal attacks and thread abandonment.

Ayatollah Khomeini has the status of prophet (imam) among Shia Muslims.

No he doesn't. There are only 12 imams within Jafari Islam and the Imam is only believed to return as the Mahdi in the last days. Khomeini doesn't claim to be the Mahdi, nor is he believed to be by his followers. In terms of physical religious leaders, shias follow what are called Majaji or grand ayatollahs, of which there are over 60 in the world currently living and of which Khamenei is hardly the most popular in terms of religious followers. As far as Khomeini is concerned, Shias are not allowed theologically speaking to adopt the ideas of a Marja who is dead.

He was a man who studied and preached Shia Islam for decades of his life and was the Shai "pope" before he came to power.

Likening anyone to the Shia "pope" is to not understand how Shiism works. Marja are theologically required to have differing views from one another in order to maintain diversity within the faith and in order to ensure theological discourse. The most popular modern Marja to exist was Khoei, and his successor today (Al Sistani) is much more popular theologically speaking than the Iranian government.

Once again, these are pretty basic concepts, and the fact that you don't seem to be aware of them is rather telling when it comes to the robustness of your own acclaimed religious knowledge.

You discount and distort reality. Khomeini was the head cleric in Iran and was deposed by the Shah, which was the biggest mistake the Shah made. There were other head clerics but he was the main one. After he came to power and died he was given the label "imam" or saint.

Only by his own followers, and this in no way theologically puts him on par with the 12 imams of Jafari Shiism, nor does it change the reality that most of the theological power within 12er shiism is held in Qom and Najaf, not Tehran.Your attempt to brand him as some sort of Shia pope is intellectually dishonest and ignores the traditional theological power structures within the faith.

As far as Bin Laden's knowledge of Islam you seemed to have skipped the formative years of his life where he and Zawahiri STUDIED ISLAM AT THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD, and then branched off on their own Jihad in Afghanistan and elsewhere.

Studying Islam isn't the same as having a formal Islamic scholarly credentials. His thesis was that Muslims didn't need such formal education and he himself eschewed it, as did one of his main influences: Sayyid Qutb who likewise never completed formal religious training. Bin Laden was never considered to be a formal Islamic scholar.

So you see, you're the ignorant arrogant one here. You didn't know that Bin Laden attended an Islamic school known to produce many radicals and terrorist groups and their leaders, and you still still claim that Khomeini isn't considered an Imam in Iran. Now run along before you embarass yourself more:

Going to a school doesn't make one an Islamic scholar. That's not how Sunni scholasticism works. Once again, this is pretty basic stuff that you as a self professed expert should know.

 

[Roudy]

ISIS actually evolved out of Al Queda, and they aren't really doing anything different from each other. ISIS is a younger group that has learned to use modern technology to its advantage. Most crucially, ISIS is in total control of large swaths of territory and has a huge source of funding from the territory it holds. Of course Al Queda and ISIS are competitors, but it's possible that one day Al Queda may merge with ISIS.

This doesn't in any way suggest that they are theologically sophisticated. We also know that AQI (the founding entity of ISI and later ISIS) was threatened by bin Laden with excommunication due specifically due to its tactics and the US Army's intelligence center's subsequent analysis of the two groups showed large theological and methodological divisions between the two. I also find it interesting that you would hinge your basis on these two groups since Osama bin Laden had no formal scholarly religious education and specifically eschewed formal religious training in favor of his personalized style of Islamic branding.

ISIS is led by a devout Muslim cleric and thousands of Muslims are flocking to its message because they believe ISIS represents true Islam, and the desire to live a purely ISLAMIC life.

Since you have said this over and over again and seem so confident in yourself, I challenge you to a formal discussion in the new formal discussion forum on the issue where you can finally support your stance in more detail instead of simply defending yourself with the use of personal attacks and thread abandonment.

Ayatollah Khomeini has the status of prophet (imam) among Shia Muslims.

No he doesn't. There are only 12 imams within Jafari Islam and the Imam is only believed to return as the Mahdi in the last days. Khomeini doesn't claim to be the Mahdi, nor is he believed to be by his followers. In terms of physical religious leaders, shias follow what are called Majaji or grand ayatollahs, of which there are over 60 in the world currently living and of which Khamenei is hardly the most popular in terms of religious followers. As far as Khomeini is concerned, Shias are not allowed theologically speaking to adopt the ideas of a Marja who is dead.

He was a man who studied and preached Shia Islam for decades of his life and was the Shai "pope" before he came to power.

Likening anyone to the Shia "pope" is to not understand how Shiism works. Marja are theologically required to have differing views from one another in order to maintain diversity within the faith and in order to ensure theological discourse. The most popular modern Marja to exist was Khoei, and his successor today (Al Sistani) is much more popular theologically speaking than the Iranian government.

Once again, these are pretty basic concepts, and the fact that you don't seem to be aware of them is rather telling when it comes to the robustness of your own acclaimed religious knowledge.

You discount and distort reality. Khomeini was the head cleric in Iran and was deposed by the Shah, which was the biggest mistake the Shah made. There were other head clerics but he was the main one. After he came to power and died he was given the label "imam" or saint.

Only by his own followers, and this in no way theologically puts him on par with the 12 imams of Jafari Shiism, nor does it change the reality that most of the theological power within 12er shiism is held in Qom and Najaf, not Tehran.Your attempt to brand him as some sort of Shia pope is intellectually dishonest and ignores the traditional theological power structures within the faith.

As far as Bin Laden's knowledge of Islam you seemed to have skipped the formative years of his life where he and Zawahiri STUDIED ISLAM AT THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD, and then branched off on their own Jihad in Afghanistan and elsewhere.

Studying Islam isn't the same as having a formal Islamic scholarly credentials. His thesis was that Muslims didn't need such formal education and he himself eschewed it, as did one of his main influences: Sayyid Qutb who likewise never completed formal religious training. Bin Laden was never considered to be a formal Islamic scholar.

So you see, you're the ignorant arrogant one here. You didn't know that Bin Laden attended an Islamic school known to produce many radicals and terrorist groups and their leaders, and you still still claim that Khomeini isn't considered an Imam in Iran. Now run along before you embarass yourself more:

Going to a school doesn't make one an Islamic scholar. That's not how Sunni scholasticism works. Once again, this is pretty basic stuff that you as a self professed expert should know.

Burn hats quite different from what you represented. Bin Laden was a devout Muslim who became even more devout and radical as a result of his higher ISLAMIC education with the Muslim Brotherhood. Oh but it has nothing to do with Islam does it?

 

[High_Gravity]

Khomeini isn't an Imam? what was he than a fry cook? He had to be a religious scholar to do what he did.

 

[Osomir]

This doesn't in any way suggest that they are theologically sophisticated. We also know that AQI (the founding entity of ISI and later ISIS) was threatened by bin Laden with excommunication due specifically due to its tactics and the US Army's intelligence center's subsequent analysis of the two groups showed large theological and methodological divisions between the two. I also find it interesting that you would hinge your basis on these two groups since Osama bin Laden had no formal scholarly religious education and specifically eschewed formal religious training in favor of his personalized style of Islamic branding.

Since you have said this over and over again and seem so confident in yourself, I challenge you to a formal discussion in the new formal discussion forum on the issue where you can finally support your stance in more detail instead of simply defending yourself with the use of personal attacks and thread abandonment.

No he doesn't. There are only 12 imams within Jafari Islam and the Imam is only believed to return as the Mahdi in the last days. Khomeini doesn't claim to be the Mahdi, nor is he believed to be by his followers. In terms of physical religious leaders, shias follow what are called Majaji or grand ayatollahs, of which there are over 60 in the world currently living and of which Khamenei is hardly the most popular in terms of religious followers. As far as Khomeini is concerned, Shias are not allowed theologically speaking to adopt the ideas of a Marja who is dead.

Likening anyone to the Shia "pope" is to not understand how Shiism works. Marja are theologically required to have differing views from one another in order to maintain diversity within the faith and in order to ensure theological discourse. The most popular modern Marja to exist was Khoei, and his successor today (Al Sistani) is much more popular theologically speaking than the Iranian government.

Once again, these are pretty basic concepts, and the fact that you don't seem to be aware of them is rather telling when it comes to the robustness of your own acclaimed religious knowledge.

You discount and distort reality. Khomeini was the head cleric in Iran and was deposed by the Shah, which was the biggest mistake the Shah made. There were other head clerics but he was the main one. After he came to power and died he was given the label "imam" or saint.

Only by his own followers, and this in no way theologically puts him on par with the 12 imams of Jafari Shiism, nor does it change the reality that most of the theological power within 12er shiism is held in Qom and Najaf, not Tehran.Your attempt to brand him as some sort of Shia pope is intellectually dishonest and ignores the traditional theological power structures within the faith.

As far as Bin Laden's knowledge of Islam you seemed to have skipped the formative years of his life where he and Zawahiri STUDIED ISLAM AT THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD, and then branched off on their own Jihad in Afghanistan and elsewhere.

Studying Islam isn't the same as having a formal Islamic scholarly credentials. His thesis was that Muslims didn't need such formal education and he himself eschewed it, as did one of his main influences: Sayyid Qutb who likewise never completed formal religious training. Bin Laden was never considered to be a formal Islamic scholar.

So you see, you're the ignorant arrogant one here. You didn't know that Bin Laden attended an Islamic school known to produce many radicals and terrorist groups and their leaders, and you still still claim that Khomeini isn't considered an Imam in Iran. Now run along before you embarass yourself more:

Going to a school doesn't make one an Islamic scholar. That's not how Sunni scholasticism works. Once again, this is pretty basic stuff that you as a self professed expert should know.

Burn hats quite different from what you represented. Bin Laden was a devout Muslim who became even more devout and radical as a result of his higher ISLAMIC education with the Muslim Brotherhood. Oh but it has nothing to do with Islam does it?

But he was not a formal Sunni scholar. He lacked the religious credentials for example to issue a formal fatwa (this didn't stop him from issuing his own brand of them, but still). Once again, this is basic stuff.

 

[Osomir]

Khomeini isn't an Imam? what was he than a fry cook? He had to be a religious scholar to do what he did.

Such religious scholars in Shiism are called Marjas / Grand Ayatollahs. Imams are historical figures whose line ended with the greater occultation when the last of them went into hiding as a child who is not expected to return until near the end times. We call Jafari Shias 12ers specifically because they venerate only 12 Imams.

 

[Roudy]

Khomeini isn't an Imam? what was he than a fry cook? He had to be a religious scholar to do what he did.

Like I said. He is like the pope or saint in Shia Islam. He brought pure and true Islam to Iran, but there are those that keep yapping that these people and their actions have nothing to do with Islam. And the ignorant masses accept this lie.