The oldest religion in the world - that is islam

[cabdirazzaq]

Many of you are probably thinking I must be very deluded or crazy claiming that the oldest religion is 1400 years old but I'm sure many christians and jews would agree with me on this one. This is my way of logic:
Christianity comes from the name Christ, Buddhism for Buddha, Hinduism for the land of india and Judaism rom Juda or Judea but what does islam mean?

Its not a person nor is it a place but rather an action, islam means "submitting to God" this in sincerity and peace. This is why I claim Jesus(peace be upon him) was a muslim(yea thats right, he submitted right) and the same for all the prophets and this is why the quran says (interpretation of the meaning):

O people of the Scripture! Why do you dispute about Ibrahim(Abraham), while the Tawrah and the Injil were not revealed till after him Have you then no sense

Verily, you are those who have disputed about that of which you have knowledge. Why do you then dispute concerning that of which you have no knowledge It is Allah Who knows, and you know not.

Ibrahim was neither a Jew nor a Christian, but he was a true Muslim Hanifa and he was not of the polytheists [Quran, Imraan]

So what basicly happend was that the religion that first came down was one, the belief in one God who should be worshipped without partners but people kept changing it(adding a few gods here and there), and prophets kept being sent to get the message back on track.

So il end with saying that I testify like Noah, Abraham, Jesus and Moses did(peace be upon them) that my Lord is one lord and that my religion is submission.

So if they dispute with thee, say: "I have submitted My whole self to Allah and so have those who follow me." And say to the People of the Book and to those who are unlearned: "Do ye (also) submit yourselves?" If they do, they are in right guidance, but if they turn back, Thy duty is to convey the Message; and in Allah's sight are (all) His servants[Quran 3.20]

[StonerBill]

so the bible is real it just occured after 600 C.E?

[cabdirazzaq]

Hve you failed to see the point?

[Burbot]

i get you adam...

when i was reading about islam [which was acctually the first faith i started reading up on when i started my mini-quest just over a year ago] i read that too...

its kind of like, a muslim does not mean you have to follow Mohammads teachings, you have to submit yourself to the will of the Lord, so then animals would then be muslim, as well as everyone and everything that submits

i have a question though, is it islam that means submission, or muslim, or is it the same using circile logic...eh, im confusing myself with this post, ill stop while im ahead :p

[cabdirazzaq]

i get you adam...

when i was reading about islam [which was acctually the first faith i started reading up on when i started my mini-quest just over a year ago] i read that too...

its kind of like, a muslim does not mean you have to follow Mohammads teachings, you have to submit yourself to the will of the Lord, so then animals would then be muslim, as well as everyone and everything that submits

i have a question though, is it islam that means submission, or muslim, or is it the same using circile logic...eh, im confusing myself with this post, ill stop while im ahead :p
Yep, the animals, the sun and the gravity force, all of them are muslim. By submitting we follow our prophet though since the Quran says;

Say: "If ye do love Allah, Follow me: Allah will love you and forgive you your sins: For Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful."[3.31]

But you are correct in a way though since muslims existed prior to his coming, Paul when he persecuted "christians" called them "the people of the way" in the NT, many of which i see as muslims.

Islam is submitting to God, muslim is one who does it. Arabs use a suffix instead of a prefix, we dont say tavelerer but mutraveler(musafir, the word safari comes from this acually)

[Burbot]

ok, interesting

[kiss_the_sky]

But does this also mean that people who submit themselves to God, but are not muslim because of some reason, can go to heaven as well? I believe that Islam is positive about Jews and Christians, as them being 'People of the Book', right? But I don't know if this means they can also be 'saved' (that's not the right word but I think you know what I mean).

[cabdirazzaq]

But does this also mean that people who submit themselves to God, but are not muslim because of some reason, can go to heaven as well? I believe that Islam is positive about Jews and Christians, as them being 'People of the Book', right? But I don't know if this means they can also be 'saved' (that's not the right word but I think you know what I mean)

In a way yes and in a way no.

Surely those who believe, and those who are Jews, and the Christians, and the Sabians, whoever believes in Allah and the Last day and does good, they shall have their reward from their Lord, and there is no fear for them, nor shall they grieve.[2.62]

The meaning of this and other verses like it is very simple and clear. We believe in a message of consensus in which people are united under one way and not made into sects and divisions. The way has always been submission though its faces and laws have been different. So yes a jew who followed their prophet during his time are those who fall under this verse but as soon as they denied the Messiah they became disbelievers, denying on prophet is like denying them all.

Albeit, we have nothing called a "guarante" in islam as many sectst these day promise. The words of the prophet(peace and blessing of Allah be upon him) was that the first in which the fire of hell will be started are those who preached the message(scholars) but with a bad intention. So yes there will be alot of muslims in hell and alot of jews/christians in paradise at the same time, its not the name of the religion, it is how it was practised during its time.

[Mr MiGu]

what about those that submit themselves to a different god than yourself?

[cabdirazzaq]

Well that would be contrary to the most fundamental part of islam, that is the worship of one God. The Creator and Substainer of all, so how could we ever dedicate our worship to someone else?
Just wondering...

[kiss_the_sky]

what about those that submit themselves to a different god than yourself?
There is but one God.

[BraveSirRubin]

Using your logic, I could just as easily make up a religion... let us call it "Bullshit". In ancient torgahonomipodian "Bullshit" means "believing in God". Therefore, everyone believed in God, all the prophets and such... so hell.... I now proclaim Bullshit to be the oldest and most powerful religion on earth!

[cabdirazzaq]

There is but one God.Thats the spirit, your thinking like a muslim already : )

But seriously, just by pure logic we can exclude the polytheistic views. If we embrace the concept of god, then its impossible for a universe to be stable and still have many gods running around without contradicting themselves.

What happend and still happens is that people have a strong fashion of worshipping what they view as righteous people. It first starts out as just some pictures/idols to honor this person then all of a sudden (a few generations later) people are praying to saint this and saint that and even to people who didn't want to be worshipped (such as Christ and Siddharta). There are no other gods, most of the teists believe in a Supreme God, the question is if they worship Him alone or not

[cabdirazzaq]

Using your logic, I could just as easily make up a religion... let us call it "Bullshit". In ancient torgahonomipodian "Bullshit" means "believing in God". Therefore, everyone believed in God, all the prophets and such... so hell.... I now proclaim Bullshit to be the oldest and most powerful religion on earth!
Hey.. I had a reason for writing that christians and jews wouldnt in reality have much against this, I mentioned these groups since they believe in a message of monotheism and those who do not cannot accept a divinely inspired message anyway.

[MollyBloom]

This philosophy is part of what I love about Islam: the idea that people before Muhammad like Abraham and Moses were Muslims, simply meaning that they followed the one Lord God. I find that Christian doctrine sometimes has problems addressing all those who came before Jesus: what "religion" they are and whether or not they are saved (since they came before Christ).

Very intriguing...

[ryupower]

Are you saying that Jews and Christians are Islamic? :p


That's an interesting random thought that you had though! ;)

[cabdirazzaq]

Some were yes...

"...and nearest among them in love to the believers wilt thou find those who say, "We are Christians": because amongst these are men devoted to learning and men who have renounced the world, and they are not arrogant [Quran 5.82]

And the diciples of Christ were muslims.

"And behold! I inspired the disciples to have faith in Me and Mine Messenger: they said, 'We have faith, and do thou bear witness that we bow to Allah as Muslims'[ 5. 111]

Remember the famous prayer christ teached his diciples in two places of the NT. Well the phrase : May your will be done on earth as it is in heaven can basicly be used to decribe islam : )

[sodabandito]

Islam is not the oldest religion, dude

[sodabandito]

Using your logic, I could just as easily make up a religion... let us call it "Bullshit". In ancient torgahonomipodian "Bullshit" means "believing in God". Therefore, everyone believed in God, all the prophets and such... so hell.... I now proclaim Bullshit to be the oldest and most powerful religion on earth!
ALL RELIGION IS BULLSHIT!!!..you must be a George Carlin fan;)

[Burbot]

Islam is not the oldest religion, dude


i just think you might not get what he's trying to say...well did say

[Libertine]

Sun Worship

[Bikshu]

hmm, the realization that all religions are the same comes with being mystical. Hindus consider everybody who lives right to be a hindu.

[Jedi]

hmm, the realization that all religions are the same comes with being mystical. Hindus consider everybody who lives right to be a hindu.Absolutely and that includes Islam.

Allah ho Akhbar!

[cabdirazzaq]

hmm, the realization that all religions are the same comes with being mystical. Hindus consider everybody who lives right to be a hindu.
Well, there must be some other criteria for whos a hindu or not?

[WayfaringStranger]

Judaism is the oldest religion, passd on by oral tradition. Zoroastrianism is the oldest written religion.

[Burbot]

adam, i think most peopel in here fail to see the point

[cabdirazzaq]

lol.. yea : )
Human laziness, they answer the name of the thread without reading what ive written

[Bikshu]

Well, there must be some other criteria for whos a hindu or not? in its simplest forum, to be hindu, you must believe in God. - this is what has been explained to me.

[ryupower]

Sun Worship
Moon.

[ryupower]

Some were yes...

"...and nearest among them in love to the believers wilt thou find those who say, "We are Christians": because amongst these are men devoted to learning and men who have renounced the world, and they are not arrogant [Quran 5.82]

And the diciples of Christ were muslims.

"And behold! I inspired the disciples to have faith in Me and Mine Messenger: they said, 'We have faith, and do thou bear witness that we bow to Allah as Muslims'[ 5. 111]

Remember the famous prayer christ teached his diciples in two places of the NT. Well the phrase : May your will be done on earth as it is in heaven can basicly be used to decribe islam : )
I say that when I pray, especially if I'm praying for someone's salvation, including the body of Ishmael. :)

God's will is always right, because He knows Everything. And is the only one who does. :)

[cabdirazzaq]

I say that when I pray, especially if I'm praying for someone's salvation, including the body of Ishmael. :)

God's will is always right, because He knows Everything. And is the only one who does. :)
Yup, Im glad we can agree on that one, and Claudia..
Il be praying for the guidance of you as well ^^

[kiss_the_sky]

Adam, have you seen the movie Submission? I wonder what your opinion is about it.

[cabdirazzaq]

Nope, cant say Ive had

[EwokUtopia]

I like this thread. I believe all human beliefs stem from a single unifying quest for knowledge, driven by the same force (God, Allah, Brahma, the Creator, Ahura Mazda, the Dagda, its the same force seperated by language and culture). Im just wondering then, what about Buddha, Krishna, Kung Fu Tze, and other eastern (and not to mention the now forgotten pre-christian western) spiritual leaders, would you consider them to be Muslim? For my personal beliefs, I believe that all religions are one, but I dare not put a name on that one belief.

[cabdirazzaq]

I like this thread. I believe all human beliefs stem from a single unifying quest for knowledge, driven by the same force (God, Allah, Brahma, the Creator, Ahura Mazda, the Dagda, its the same force seperated by language and culture). Im just wondering then, what about Buddha, Krishna, Kung Fu Tze, and other eastern (and not to mention the now forgotten pre-christian western) spiritual leaders, would you consider them to be Muslim? For my personal beliefs, I believe that all religions are one, but I dare not put a name on that one belief.
"would you consider them to be Muslim?"

Who am I to consider someone to be or not to be under the category of "muslims" while I only know an insignificant knowledge of some of the previous mentioned. Concerning Siddharta, is it possible for someone to be in a state of "submission to God" while at the same time "rejecting" Him?

[EwokUtopia]

Concerning the words Islam and Muslim, I believe that there should be more words than this, being as these are Arabic words and it is a religion not bound to one certain people or language. I consider muslims to be believers, and that is my panglobal term for it, but thats just me.

[Erasmus70]

I can make the same argument that Christianity is not from 2,000 years ago.
Its the oldest religion on the planet.
Since it simply means 'Following (submitting) to Christ (God)'.
So there ya go Cab.

I can make an even better case the Judaism is the oldest since it never 'started' in the sense you just had God and you just had people who submitted to him.
Abraham for example.
Its not that Abraham 'started' Judaism (submission to God) but that he simply did what was already there to be done.

Do you see where I can just as easily say this?

In fact, Judaism goes back that far.
Islam does not.
Its the most recent one and its the one with Muhammed.
Anyone saying 'Muslim' or 'Islam' understands we mean as revealed by Muhammed.
We dont say the Moon God worshippers before him were 'also Muslims' or Hubal was 'also Allah'.


(well some people say that yes Allah was a Moon God before Muhammed remade MoonGod in Yahwehs image but this is another story)

[EwokUtopia]

To say that there was no Islam before Muhammed is like saying that there was no Judaism before Ezekiel, which you have already stated that you believe otherwise. do not be so quick to refute the beliefs of others, for you will find that yours may be just as easily quashed.

[Erasmus70]

I think my very point was that the popular Islam argument that they supercede all known religions could really be used - just as easily - by any other religion.

For another example: A Mormon can just say "Well Mormonism is not actually a religion that was started a few centuries ago and its not even a 'religion' because in fact 'Mormonism' simply means submitting to God.
(use exact same phrases and concept just insert word "mormonism")
So
'Therefore'
Mormonism has always been there and thus the oldest religion on earth.

See how anyone can just as easily do what Cab did?

[spook13]

The "oldest religion" is sanatana-dharma, which is clearly revealed in the Vedic scriptures of India, notably in the Bhagavad-gita. Sanatana-dharma is a Sanskrit term that means eternal religion, eternal truth, or eternal duty. The Bhagavad-gita describes very succinctly what is universal and eternal truth, without birth or death, and what is temporary and undergoes apparent birth, dissolution, and death.

Even saying that sanatana-dharma is the "oldest religion" in relation to "other religions" is a misrepresentation, because using the word "old" implies that it came into being at some point in time...it never came into being, and will never cease to be; and using the word "religion" in this way implies a sectarian faith.

The scriptures that describe sanatana-dharma are arguably the oldest scriptures in known history, certainly precede the New Testament and Koran, and are at least as old as the Old Testament. They also originated in a geographical area thousands of miles distant from the areas in which the books of the Bible and the much later Koran originated.

All names for religions: Hinduism, Islam, Christianity, Buddhism, Mormonism, and on and on, are sectarian designations for faiths that actually have sanatana-dharma as their foundational basis.

[EwokUtopia]

Cab has the right to believe what he believes though, and you rather rudly tried to trample his beliefs. You are also ignorant of Mormonism, Mormon is the name of a prophet of the Church of Jesus Christ and the Latter day saints. If Mormons believe themselves to be the oldest faith, I would support that as well, because, from a certain point of view, it can be true.

[Erasmus70]

Even saying that sanatana-dharma is the "oldest religion" in relation to "other religions" is a misrepresentation, because using the word "old" implies that it came into being at some point in time...it never came into being, and will never cease to be; and using the word "religion" in this way implies a sectarian faith.

And again this makes the point clear that anyone can do what Cab and the Muslim Apologists are doing with this idea.
You can apply this to anything including Mormons if you want.

Mormons and Muslims have a lot in common actualy.. the Mormons claim they have Prophet who delivered inerrant new Scriptures which correct and supercede all previous ones.
Again, they could just as easily argue that they are not something that 'came into existance' recently but that God had it that everyone including Abraham was really a 'Mormon' back to Noah and Adam even.
Meaning: They worshipped God.
Its just now the Mormons (not a sect but simply worshipping God) have a final revelation.
This may sound silly but Im just saying that a Mormon can 'just as easily' make this argument too.
So can anyone.
Muslims keep presenting this as if its clever ands it really isnt.

[Jedi]

Mr. Erasmus70, Vedas are "Old" , don't trust me, but atleast trust the scientific analysis that tries to carbon date the oldest upanishads and vedas that were before that- as stated in them were passed down orally. But all this discussion about what is old is pointless, for the past is in the past, what one must do is 'submit' (as said by mr. Cabri-Das) here ;) to God now and for that, you really do not need a past.

[spook13]

Even saying that sanatana-dharma is the "oldest religion" in relation to "other religions" is a misrepresentation, because using the word "old" implies that it came into being at some point in time...it never came into being, and will never cease to be; and using the word "religion" in this way implies a sectarian faith.

And again this makes the point clear that anyone can do what Cab and the Muslim Apologists are doing with this idea.....

This may sound silly but Im just saying that a Mormon can 'just as easily' make this argument too.
So can anyone.
Muslims keep presenting this as if its clever ands it really isnt.
Erasmus...I don't think you have the faintest idea of what the post was about...clue number one: I wasn't trying to make an argument. Now, with that in mind, you can do some scholarly research and figure it out for yourself.

[Erasmus70]

I do understand what and how you were trying to explain your position to me.
(all three above).
I already have 'figured it out' and that is why Im posting this in the last place.
Just used your post as an example or 'case in point'.
Sorry you didnt like that.

[cabdirazzaq]

Ewokutopia, acually that would be incorrect.
The word christian is bound to the man Christ (peace be upon him), judaism is bound to this certain tribe, the same with hinduism and buddhism. The word (islam) it self describes a way of life rather than being bound to something like "mohammedism" which is an incorrect word. Muslims describe everone who submitted /submitts to Gods will under the term muslim, christians wont do that (with the word christian).

[spook13]

I do understand what and how you were trying to explain your position to me.
(all three above).
I already have 'figured it out' and that is why Im posting this in the last place.
Just used your post as an example or 'case in point'.
Sorry you didnt like that.Your reply is largely unintelligible, but I can glean that you've just told me you still don't know what I was talking about. You just tossed my post, which clearly broke new ground in this particular thread, into your list of "examples" of what suggests disagreement with your positions.

Like it or not?...neutral. I'm as used to being disagreed with as you are.

[EwokUtopia]

Ewokutopia, acually that would be incorrect.
The word christian is bound to the man Christ (peace be upon him), judaism is bound to this certain tribe, the same with hinduism and buddhism. The word (islam) it self describes a way of life rather than being bound to something like "mohammedism" which is an incorrect word. Muslims describe everone who submitted /submitts to Gods will under the term muslim, christians wont do that (with the word christian).

I know, and I completely understand what you are saying, thats one of the reasons I am actively interested in Islam, it doesnt glorify any person, but rather it puts the faith in one underlying reality (god, allah, what have you) above anything else. In my own personal spirituality (which I dont have a name for) I draw upon many of Islam's teachings, and I think that if people in this part of the world would stop putting media-induced stigmas on Muslim's and Islam, we would realize how much there is in Islam for lay people.

[Erasmus70]

Ewokutopia, acually that would be incorrect.
The word christian is bound to the man Christ (peace be upon him), judaism is bound to this certain tribe, the same with hinduism and buddhism. The word (islam) it self describes a way of life rather than being bound to something like "mohammedism" which is an incorrect word. Muslims describe everone who submitted /submitts to Gods will under the term muslim, christians wont do that (with the word christian).
Come on Cab.
I know your a Muslim and you must act as if you are intellectually superior (as well as cleaner) but at his point you are only playing 'Word Games' which not even a child should be fooled by.

Again, I can just as easily announce to you that 'Christ' simply means God Incarnate (and therefore God Himself) so as you can see - whenever we say 'Christian' we are simply meaning 'One who follows (submits) to God).
So as you can see.. Abraham was a 'Christian' and so was Noah.. and in fact, Adam was the First Christian - meaning he simply submitted to God (who is also containing Christ in Himself).

Now of course, when I put it to you that way - you will just say that is not good enough and I am just playing with a 'word game' and that an adult knows when I say Christian Im refering to the Jewish Sect of 30AD.
However
This is just as easily for me to say as for you to say.

The well-understood world-wide understanding when we say 'Muslim' and 'Islam' is refering to THE MUHAMMED VERSION OF SUBMITTING TO THE GOD MUHAMMED CLAIMS.

Please stop with this game.
You have better ways to justify your Muhammedian claim to what is 'submitting' and if the Koran is true revelation or not than this poor angle.

Maybe you can even tell me what Muhammed (as inspired by Allah) is the required number of Witnesses I must have before I take a Claim seriously?
Is it ONE witness who claims something?
or
Is it FOUR Witnesses word of mouth?

Please tell me what is Allahs decree on this (through the mouth of Muhammed)?

[Erasmus70]

Your reply is largely unintelligible, but I can glean that you've just told me you still don't know what I was talking about. You just tossed my post, which clearly broke new ground in this particular thread, into your list of "examples" of what suggests disagreement with your positions.
Like it or not?...neutral. I'm as used to being disagreed with as you are.
Pardon my poor late-night sentence structure in my reply.

Starting again:
I totally understand now and before what you intended to communicate in your statements in the first place.
I ALSO thought it was a good example of what we were talking about at the time.
A topic that was somewhat 'beside your point'.
I used it as an example to that.

Did not mean to be rude or give you the impression I did not also understand your specific point.
Just applied it to the second point already in play.

In a sense I agree with everyone (in a way) in that, if you go back far enough there is no 'name' for a 'religion' anyways.
Meaning: Noah is just burning incense to God.
This is not a deal where 'Well what Religion is that then?"
No.
Theres just God and thats the deal. No 'Religions'.
Later (actualy rather quickly thereafter) you have everyone dividing into this and that.
Some begin to worship the Patriarchs 'as if they were gods' and others forget, others change and add and on and on and on .....

In a 'Sense' everyone of these individual branches is 'in a way' claiming they are the proper and 'therefore' oldest true lineage.
Mormons think they have it right and 'therefore' are the 'true descendants' of the oldest religion.
That being simply 'proper submission to the one true God'.

Dig?

So thats why Im saying - if one can make that arguments (Cab and Muhammed) then Im showing how its 'Just as easily' made by everyone else, according to what they claim is right.

SOMEONE might be right - but just 'saying so' is not enough in itself.

[spook13]

Pardon my poor late-night sentence structure in my reply.
....SOMEONE might be right - but just 'saying so' is not enough in itself.Cool, fair enough.

Yes, I had intended my contribution to simply be food for thought and not to stir anything up.

Peace and apologies....

[EwokUtopia]

Come on Cab.
I know your a Muslim and you must act as if you are intellectually superior (as well as cleaner) but at his point you are only playing 'Word Games' which not even a child should be fooled by.

Again, I can just as easily announce to you that 'Christ' simply means God Incarnate (and therefore God Himself) so as you can see - whenever we say 'Christian' we are simply meaning 'One who follows (submits) to God).
So as you can see.. Abraham was a 'Christian' and so was Noah.. and in fact, Adam was the First Christian - meaning he simply submitted to God (who is also containing Christ in Himself).

Now of course, when I put it to you that way - you will just say that is not good enough and I am just playing with a 'word game' and that an adult knows when I say Christian Im refering to the Jewish Sect of 30AD.
However
This is just as easily for me to say as for you to say.

The well-understood world-wide understanding when we say 'Muslim' and 'Islam' is refering to THE MUHAMMED VERSION OF SUBMITTING TO THE GOD MUHAMMED CLAIMS.

Please stop with this game.
You have better ways to justify your Muhammedian claim to what is 'submitting' and if the Koran is true revelation or not than this poor angle.

Maybe you can even tell me what Muhammed (as inspired by Allah) is the required number of Witnesses I must have before I take a Claim seriously?
Is it ONE witness who claims something?
or
Is it FOUR Witnesses word of mouth?

Please tell me what is Allahs decree on this (through the mouth of Muhammed)?
Thats just straight up racist and Islamophobic. Using the word "Muhammedan" is religiously derogitory, and is akin to calling Catholic's "papists" calling protestants "heretics" and calling Sikh's "towel-heads". you are a very offensive person, so please do not spread your hate for Islam and Muslims any further, youve allready made it clear. we get it, your intolerant.

[Erasmus70]

Thats just straight up racist and Islamophobic. Using the word "Muhammedan" is religiously derogitory, and is akin to calling Catholic's "papists" calling protestants "heretics" and calling Sikh's "towel-heads". you are a very offensive person, so please do not spread your hate for Islam and Muslims any further, youve allready made it clear. we get it, your intolerant.
Again, more 'word games' in which you take common terms and then pour your own meaning into them.

Total Nonsense and having nothing to do with Racism, Skin colour, dress or any such thing.

In this case, Cab is suggesting that 'Islam' or 'Muslim' are simply all-purpose, all-encompassing general terms.
Ok.
So how then would we define or describe the certain 'Muslims' who are submitting by Muhammeds orders?

Koranians?
No.

Muhammedian is a very common terms and its used in no derogatory sense to simply describe those who are practicing submission to God AS laid out by Muhammed.
Simple.

Thats no more offensive or different than describing Jews or Christians as "People of the Book".

Not at all Derogatory.
Mind you - you are a Uni Student taking Native Studies so Im sure the 'Political Correctness' propaganda machine has you trained to make such 'finds' in anything.

[EwokUtopia]

you really found the wrong forum, didnt you. I could respond to your ignorance with a million counterpoints (like telling you that every Muslim I have talked to has said that Mohammedan is an offensive term that basically throws thir beliefs in the trash and it offends them as much as if I called them a Camel-Jockey, which i would never even think of mind you, just an example) but that will just lead us in circles which bore me. you dont understand shit, so please either open your closed mind, or close your open mouth.

[Erasmus70]

Thats too bad.
I guess if someone is arrogant enough to declare 'Islam' to mean 'the true religion' so far that even describing it otherwise is an 'Insult'.
Then you can blame Cab because he wants to eliminate any distinction for the word 'Muslim'.

So what is it gonna be?
Can I keep using 'Muslim' to refer to the 1,400 year old religion that started in Arabia under Muhammeds Koran
or
Would you rather be called 'Muhammedians'?

BTW.. Id sure like to know why you are pretending that is such an offensive term?
Isnt Muhammed the One and only True Messenger (according to his Book)?

Explain why this should be offensive and even better.. shouldnt you be proud to call yourself a Muhammedan?

Keep on getting angry Ewok and dont hold back.
I would be happier if you want to bring a Million 'Counterpoints'.
Maybe you can do the popular trick of Listing all of them in one post - we see that tactic all the time by poor Muslim apologists.

[EwokUtopia]

I believe that is truly offensive, however whatever responce i can give wont be enough, for this isnt my place to respond, you have offended islam, and it is up to a muslim to respond to your hatred and ignorance, not i.

[Erasmus70]

Your wrong.
By the standards of Muhammed, Allah and the Koran you are wrong.
There is no insult where none is intended.
There is no offense when none was intended.

Even at worst - calling someone a Muhammedan is hardly 'hateful' and not even close to 'ignorance'.
Hey.. maybe you can provide a list of acceptable or 'politically correct' terms from your University teachers.
Find out if 'Jew' is acceptable now or not?
What about 'Crusader'?
Jihadist?
All Muslims are 'Jihadists' now?

Hey.. what do you think about the Jews in Toronto trying to shut down all the 'Pro Palestinian' Orgs on the Campuses there?

[cabdirazzaq]

Your wrong.
By the standards of Muhammed, Allah and the Koran you are wrong.
There is no insult where none is intended.
There is no offense when none was intended.

Even at worst - calling someone a Muhammedan is hardly 'hateful' and not even close to 'ignorance'.
Hey.. maybe you can provide a list of acceptable or 'politically correct' terms from your University teachers.
Find out if 'Jew' is acceptable now or not?
What about 'Crusader'?
Jihadist?
All Muslims are 'Jihadists' now?

Hey.. what do you think about the Jews in Toronto trying to shut down all the 'Pro Palestinian' Orgs on the Campuses there?He´s not wrong, what he says is correct. I would take it as a deep insult by being called "muhammedian" or something of the like, since that might be understod as worshipping him or as more likely that islam is an arabic religion bound to arabs even though the prophet preached an universal message. (18% of the muslims come from arab countries, the rest does not).

By the standards of Muhammed, Allah and the Koran you are wrong."...It is He Who has named you Muslims, both before and in this (Revelation); that the Messenger may be a witness for you, and ye be witnesses for mankind! So establish regular Prayer, give regular Charity, and hold fast to Allah! He is your Protector - the Best to protect and the Best to help!(Qur´an 22.78)

"This day have I perfected your religion for you, completed My favour upon you, and have chosen for you Islam (not mohammedism) as your religion." (Q 5.3)

Don't you see the difference? Where in the bible does it use the word christian or christianity? Those words were acually used by their enemies to scorn them (like those who persist using the word muhammedin) and they used to be called "the people of the way". What way?

"But when Jesus became conscious of their disbelief, he cried: Who will be my helpers in the cause of Allah? The disciples said: We will be Allah's helpers. We believe in Allah, and bear thou witness that we have surrendered (unto Him) [the word muslimoon being used] (Koran 3.52)

The bible claims that Jesus(peace be upon him) said: "Thy Will Be Done On Earth As It Is In Heaven", the only religion of God is the religion of following His will.

What you object to is the fact that the rules were told by Muhammed(peace and blessing of Allah be upon him) and you are correct, they were taught by him but even though rules might have been altered by the following prophet the religion never were (with the coming of Christ, some rules were changed but the same religion applied, atleast until Paul came along) and the like but never the religion it self. This is why we muslims hate innovations in our religion, were not interested in changing the religion (except for some heretic now and then), if we innovate a matter in our religion, that would mean that we think that God needs help in forming His religion and He is free from such.

Finnaly I conclude, the prophets(peace and blessing of Allah be upon him) adopted a son who was an african slave whom he released too freedome, his wife Zainab was from jewish orgin and his close companion Salman was persian. His message was universal and not fixed or bound to any desert, compare that to the jewish and christian faith, yes christian, according to the Bible Jesus(peace be upon him) said that he "was only sent to the blind sheep of Israel" and so was the case with all the other prophets who were all sent to their restricted areas except for the last and final of them, Muhammed (may Allahs peace and blessing be upon him).

"Say: "O men! I am sent unto you all, as the Messenger of Allah, to Whom belongeth the dominion of the heavens and the earth: there is no god but He: it is He That giveth both life and death. So believe in Allah and His Messenger, the Unlettered Prophet, who believeth in Allah and His words: follow him that (so) ye may be guided."

[Cerberus]

Despite thinking erasmus is a bit of a prick, I have to agree with him on this one.

Word games, nothing more.

[stoney69]

"And certainly We have explained in this Quran every kind of example, and man is most of all given to contention" 18:54

[EwokUtopia]

Hey.. what do you think about the Jews in Toronto trying to shut down all the 'Pro Palestinian' Orgs on the Campuses there? Not Jews....zionists....there are quite a few pro-palestinian jews who i would proudly march beside at any protest. I take it as a token of the fact that this movement is gaining weight and the zionists are begining to fear us. they know that it is we in the west who pay their bills.
www.nkusa.org
www.jewsagainstzionism.com
www.jewsnotzionists.com
www.jfjfp.org
www.jewishvoiceforpeace.org



And stop calling me a university student like it is a bad thing, just because you were to stupid to advance far past the seventh grade doesnt mean you have to assault those who did.

[Erasmus70]

and Cab doesnt realise it but he is making the point even clearer when he recalls that 'Christians' is not even a word or term from the Bible anyways.
This is a word Romans used to describe them.

I dont think its a problem (any more than saying Muhammedans) because everyone understands what the speaker means to say.

They (The 'Christians') simply said 'This is the Way' or were 'People of The Way'
They followed 'The Way'
So what does that mean?
Its not a 'name' or 'title' of a 'religion' that has started but instead it just means submitting to Gods Will.

And this is the very point Im making Cab.
Of course a Muslim is going to describe Islam as nothing more than the proper way to submit.
(Thats the point of being a Muslim!)

Of course a Christian is going to describe The Way as nothing more than the proper way to Submit... (that the point of them following it in the first place!)

Like I was saying - I could take everything you said, replace 'Islam' with the word 'Mormonism' and its just as valid.... at least from the Mormons point of View and in his mind!

Again, its easy for you to just show up and say Paul has changed something.
Well I can just as easily say Muhammed came along even later and changed even more!

But according to Muhammeds own set standards - who should I believe first:
One Witness about himself?
or
Four Witnesses about another?

[EwokUtopia]

Pat Robertson has spoken! Hallelujah!

[Erasmus70]

Not Jews....zionists....there are quite a few pro-palestinian jews who i would proudly march beside at any protest. I take it as a token of the fact that this movement is gaining weight and the zionists are begining to fear us. they know that it is we in the west who pay their bills.
www.nkusa.org (http://www.nkusa.org/)
www.jewsagainstzionism.com (http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/)
www.jewsnotzionists.com (http://www.jewsnotzionists.com/)
www.jfjfp.org (http://www.jfjfp.org/)
www.jewishvoiceforpeace.org (http://www.jewishvoiceforpeace.org/)

While I dont think Zionists 'fear' anyone, its no surprise that there are a few groups of 'pro palestinian' Jews over here and there really is a rather large portion of the Israeli population that is sympathetic.
They dont win many elections but they are a segment of the population.

As far as 'who is paying the bills'.
You need to understand that Palestinian orgs are also being paid for by foreign supporters themselves.
Even by people here in the West.

Both are getting 'backed up' by a lot of other nations out there.
One of the reasons a country like Canada supports Israel is because they are indeed our Friends and Allies.
You dont always love or even like your Ally but they are still the ones who will support you, work with you and at the end of the day they are Democratic enough to be on our team.

One of the major problems the Pro-Palestinian campus movement will have is dealing with a lot of Jews who are NOT anti-zionists.
These people are extremely influencial in Canada and hold major, major positions in business, banking, politics and maybe the most powerful - The Media.
So in that sense, lets just say its not looking very good for your side.

Personally, I am sympathetic to the HONEST and sincere arab immigrants who are now in Israel and largely because these people were required, requested and happily settled when Israel needed their labour and their skills.
So I dont see any problem in getting them what they deserve.
(Not the PLO)
However,
Its clear to me that there will be no 'Palestinian problem' in about 20 years after they are systematically (or dramatically) moved out of the land of Israel. At this point its beginning as a step-by-step slow process.
Should they decided to declare the West Bank a 'Nation' and then do anything to give the Israelis an excuse to go to war (which will inevitably happen) then it will just speed up the process.

As a Christian, the biggest concern I have is over some Christian Churches who are mistakenly 'taking a side' with the Zionists only because they believe this is somehow 'fullfilling Gods Plan'.
This is backwards thinking and uncalled for by any doctrines or intentions.
This would be like supporting Al Quaida (or other antizionist) organisations because you know that Israels coming destruction (or near destruction) will work for Gods Plan too.

Fortunately, most Christians do NOT fall for this sort of nonsense but I always keep my eye on the various groups who start to cause everyone a problem with that thinking.
(of course, there are idiots in all walks of life too).

Even Still.. The PLO is the only one deliberately murdering civilians so I hope they get defeated first and foremost.
I have no more sympathy for them than I did for the antichristians child murderers going around calling themselves 'The IRA'.
Hope they all get eliminated from the planet. Permanently.

[EwokUtopia]

I have countered every one of your arguements in that post before, and quite frankly i do not feel like repeating myself to some ignorant zionist. you dont know the situation in Palestine at all, and you mistake palestinian organizations, not to mention you seem to support the zionist domination of the media (once again, change your avatar picture, you hypocrate). The Palestinians are not migrant workers, that is an Israeli propaganda ploy to take away the legitimacy of the Palestinian people in relation to the land, most people arent stupid enough to buy it, but i suppose there are a few takers here and there. what truly scares me is that you support a "final solution" to the palestinian problem by "relocating" them from their own land.........perhaps for more Lebensraum for Israel? surely you can appreciate such irony. And I am fully aware of Christian zionism, and it doesnt matter that most christians are not christian zionists, what matters is that many christians with power are zionists, but of course these are only pawns. israel is an aparthied state, and if you support it with the current state that it is in, im sorry, but you are something of a fascist.

[Erasmus70]

Yes but considering that you even believe I am a 'Zionist' lol.. so your wacky theories that everyone else can be dont surprised me.

Again, you are not 'countering' by just denying well understood facts of life.
Almost every single 'Palestinian' is either FROM another Arab Nation (i.e. Arafat is from Egypt) or they are second and third generation Jordanians (and others).

This is a fact of life.
Just reposting denials or pointing at a tiny tiny fraction that are from indigenous people (as are a some Jews) is not going to change the common explanation for almost all others.

As I said - I DO think there should be something for the Israeli Citizens who are from Arab heritage.
This doesnt change the fact that Israel will eventually impliment that slow, systematic relocation.
I didnt say I liked it - I just say that is what is due to happen.
Most will go back to Jordan or various parts of the Arab world.

Im not saying that is good either. Im just saying it will end that problem.
The next problem of Arab Nations trying to annihilate Israel will be a whole another story to itself.

[EwokUtopia]

Youve never met a Palestinian, have you? theyre just some mysterious people on tv that you seem to detest, arent they? Arafat may have been born in Egypt (this is not a fact, but rather it is disputed) but that does not make him Egyptian. Both his parents were Palestinians, his mother coming from a rather prominent family in Palestine, and his father was a working Palestinian. Eamon Devalera was born in the US, does that make him an American? by birth yes, but does that really matter? He was Irish through-and-through, and he led his people up against tyranny and oppression, much like Arafat. you are the one who is denying facts of the world. But as passionately as I feel about this, and as much I have to say about it, I am not a Palestinian, and I hope that one day you will meet one and she or he can tell you the so-called "facts of life" for what they really are.

[Erasmus70]

You definately do not need to go to Israel to know very well understood, verifiable, attestable, well documented basics about populations and at the very least we can certainly know, without a doubt who they are NOT.

Philistines were not a 'Nation' and as a matter of a fact, there were MANY different 'peoples' who happened to be living in the REGION sometimes called the 'Palestine Region'.
Jews, Christians, Arabs (Beduin) and actually all kinds of various ethnic mix and matches from over the centuries.

Again, almost EVERYONE who is now dubbed a 'Palestinian' is from a family history (and I mean as in - Grandparents or PARENTS) if not they themselves FROM SOMEWHERE ELSE.
Seriously.
Everyone knows this except people who get their story from Western News on the TV or from Internet Missionaries like you.

Look.. there is NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT and as far as Im concerned they should all be proud of it ok!
Good!
But stop going around making up ridiculous stories about some mythical 'nation' called 'Palestine' and how 'Their Land' is being 'Occupied'.
Total Nonsense.

"well they have a different dialect because they pronounce a 'Q' sound like a "G'"
Oh gimme a break.. people in my next town over have these things.
Neighbourhoods a block apart from each other in London have these things.

"Some are there from history and are not all immigrants or refugees from other Arabs states"
Yes.. like what... .03%?
Is it more?
Guess what.. then you can find just as many JEWS who were still living in the Palestine Region for centuries too.
Like 5 of them.
Would you even dare to suggest Israelis have every right to be there because, technically speaking, there are a few Israelis Jew Families that have been there for centuries?

By the way.. I hate to disappoint the heavily relied on 'Victim Status Claim' made by Al Jazeera types but Palestinians (as we call them now) are NOT portrayed as nefarious and hostile types.
Actually the US and Western Media LOVES portraying them as equal (but less powerful) than the Israelis.
You NEVER hear anythign about them being an immigrant group just like the Jews are.

Sorry but Palestinians get a pretty good presentation on US networks.
I have only seen 'Fox News' a few times sorry to tell you.
Im stuck watching most of the 'Palestinian Cause Friendly' Canadian Stations just like you are.

[EwokUtopia]

So let me get this straight, according to you both the Palestinians and Jews are recent migrants to the region? wow, i never knew that an area like that, brimming with both agricultural and spiritual wealth, could have been completely uninhabited until 1948! do you see how this doesnt make sense? No, I do not get my information from internet missionaries and western news, for the most part, I get my information from my Palestinian friends (who strongly disagree with your all too common claim that there is no such thing as a Palestinian, and I think they'd know better than you). But there is one thing you do have to understand, the whole concept of nationality is relatively new to that region, they used to simply be Palestinian Arabs, its much the same in all oppressed places, Africa and Latin America for instance. Many Palestinians do not want Palestine to be its own country, but rather one part of a greater Pan-Arabic state, which would be nice, for binded together they could resist Zionist-American Imperialism. The simple fact is that the Arabs lived in Palestine first, and they were invaded by an Imperialist power, zionism is imperialism by its very definition. Its actually racial imperialism, finding lebensraum for the chosen people. Why do you justify the fact that these people are being forced off their homes? I do wonder if you also supported the Aparthied regime of South Africa? Did you know that most south african Blacks are Bantu's who came from central Africa, thus not making them true south africans? would this justify the horridly oppressive regime of the National Party? Their land is being occupied, and to deny that fact is like saying the sky is down. I have heard many first hand stories of the occupation and its horrors, and believe me, it is far worse than anything Palestine has ever hurled at Israel. These people, my friends, have lived in Palestine for many more generations than I have lived in Canada, and I have voyageur ancestors, so that says alot. dont give me this whole "their only 3rd generation" crap, because it really doesnt hold up. who do you say was in Palestine before the 19th century?


One thing that you have to stop is confusing Palestinian organizations. It is a common misconception that the PLO is a terrorist organization, indeed I thought it was too, when i was 12 years old and didnt know right from left about the region. The PLO does not, nor has it ever, employed suicide bombers. When you claim that, it makes most people who are activists about this issue just decide to not take you seriously.

[Erasmus70]

Hey listen.. I think its a shame that far too many 'regular' Palestinians, just trying to live day to day have to pay the price for PLO (and yes, there is 4-5 groups) for what they have started.
I totally believe you have a whole neighbourhood of honest, working (or worse unemployed) Palestinian families doing no harm.
THEN
A group of armed thugs decides their neighbourhood is just perfect for firing Mortars into the Israeli neighbourhood across the street.
After usually murdering an Israeli or two (also just minding their own business too) and guess what?
The Authority, obviously has no choice but to remove that neighbourhood to somewhere else.
The Terrorists dont care because they are getting funded and glory and just go onto the next town.
Meanwhile the Palestinian family gets fucked over and has to move AND their suffereing gets packaged and sold by the Terrorists as more 'fodder' anyways.

Hey.. here is something from the net;

WHAT DOES "PALESTINE" MEAN?

It has never been the name of a nation or state. It is a geographical term, used to designate the region at those times in history when there is no nation or state there.

The word itself derives from "Peleshet", a name that appears frequently in the Bible and has come into English as "Philistine". The Philistines were mediterranean people originating from Asia Minor and Greek localities. They reached the southern coast of Israel in several waves. One group arrived in the pre-patriarchal period and settled south of Beersheba in Gerar where they came into conflict with Abraham, Isaac and Ishmael. Another group, coming from Crete after being repulsed from an attempted invasion of Egypt by Rameses III in 1194 BCE, seized the southern coastal area, where they founded five settlements (Gaza, Ascalon, Ashdod, Ekron and Gat). In the Persian and Greek periods, foreign settlers - chiefly from the Mediterranean islands - overran the Philistine districts. From the time of Herodotus, Greeks called the eastern coast of the Mediterranean "Syria Palaestina".

The Philistines were not Arabs nor even Semites, they were most closely related to the Greeks. They did not speak Arabic. They had no connection, ethnic, linguistic or historical with Arabia or Arabs. The name "Falastin" that Arabs today use for "Palestine" is not an Arabic name. It is the Arab pronunciation of the Greco-Roman "Palastina"; which is derived from the Plesheth, (root palash) was a general term meaning rolling or migratory. This referred to the Philistine's invasion and conquest of the coast from the sea.

The use of the term "Palestinian" for an Arab ethnic group is a modern political creation which has no basis in fact - and had never had any international or academic credibility before 1967.

----

That was MODERATE compared to the rant this guy goes on:
http://www.masada2000.org/

He does make one monsterous point here which everyone seems to be ignoring.
ISRAEL WAS A NATION FOR CENTURIES.

You want to find all kinds of evidence that Caananites were 'related to Arabs' or that Beduins were 'The Real Palestininians' and all this and nobody seems to mention this is ANCIENT ISRAEL.
You might have noticed this from things like sayyyy.. the old testament, history books or the fact that ANCIENT ISRAEL IS BURIED UNDERNEATH IT.

Now does that mean they have some right to be taking it over again?
Thats one reason.
The other being they were handed the land over by British Imperialists who happened to own the place back then.

Anyways..The South Africans simply do not and did not have the numbers to maintain control.
Unlike Palestinians - the British/Dutch immigrants arent running around trying to tell people they are the 'real natives' and that Blacks are 'Occupying' their homeland and so on.

Personally I am FOR Palestinians taking over the Gaza Strip area but the way I see it this is all part of a plan to move them OUT of everywhere else.
Then,
They can count on the fact a new 'Palestinian State' will declare war on Israel (or something will start) and then they will annihilate it off the planet.
End of Palestinian problem.

Again, because Im describing what I think will probably happen does not mean I think its good or support Zionism.
Believe me I can tell you some opinions about the Zionists that would undoubtedly have me banned from Hipforums as an 'AntiSemite' (and of course, a 'Nazi') in about 10 minutes.
That doesnt mean I have to sit around and gobble up all the lies, manipulations and propaganda the Al Jazeera crowd want to make up about Palestinians either.

I WISH it would resolve itself peacefully but since that is out of the question then it would be just as well that Israel wins, Palestinians leave, we all shed a tear but at least its over, we go on with life and ultimately less pain and violence once its over.

We can hope.

[EwokUtopia]

You can disect any nationality like that untill you find that they havnt allways been there. The British for instance are a race of invaders, be they Germanic, Danish, or Norman. even the celts migrated there at some time, so going over the history of the word palestinian doesnt really proove much. Yes your right that Israel will probably kick alot more Palestinians out before the day is done, but the Arabs have a saying, and it goes something like this "the darkest time of night occurs just before the dawn". Israel can not survive long term. their imperialistic attitudes have earned them no friends in the middle east. They are 5 million surrounded by 100 million people who hate them for what they have done to the Arab Palestinians (acknowledging the fact that the Palestinians are arabs does not take away their Palestinianishness, just like acknowledging the fact that the Irish are Celts does not take away their Irishness). The west is failing right now, that is a fact, we can not survive if we maintain this corporate consumer culture (or lack of culture I should say), so it comes down to this simple fact: we shall either change or western civilization as we know it shall perish. Without western aide, Israel will not last long, and if the west reforms and saves itself from its impending doom, it is unlikely to still support the Aparthied regime of Israel.

I personally do not see the withdrawl from Gaza as a large victory, seeing as the majority of those (tax-evading) settlers simply moved into similar settlements in West Bank. Do me a favour. Look at 2 maps, the Jewish homeland as the UN origionaly laid out, and Israel today. huge difference. the largest being Jerusalem, as it seems the Israeli's ignore the historical fact that expansionism in this city has never been a good idea (a little thing called the crusades ring a bell?).

You seem to be ignorant of 2 main things, Number one being that Israel (namely the IDF) have indulged in extremely violent practises that are undoubtedly signs of occupation, especially in Gaza (which continues unhindered after the 'withdrawl')
and 2, you have never explained to me who lived in the region before the 19th century, so I am interested as to what the lie about the Palestinians that you so keenly follow believe the inhabbitants of the region to be at that time.

[Erasmus70]

People did live in the 'Palestine Region' before the 19th century.
Beduin are an Arab people.
There were also remnants of Jews left over from the centuries before.
Almost NONE of these people are the forefathers to any of the people there today whether they are Palesinians or 'Israelis'.
Almost ALL of the immigrants now calling themselves 'Palestinians' are from Syria, Lebanon, Jordan.
When I say 'From' I dont mean from centuries ago - I mean as in minutes ago.
Same for almost ALL the Jews there.
Two groups of IMMIGRANTS.


Yes, Im aware that 100 Million Arabs would like to (and probably will) try and exterminate Israel off the map.
The ONLY reason why they havent done it already is because Israel is backed by western democracies.
Namely one with 300 Million people who are not exactly crazy about the Arab Nations themselves.

So what is the final solution - AntiZionists MUST try and break that support by all means.
Either by starting grass-roots movements in the Universities and in western opinions.. try and get the people themselves to vote out pro-israeli governments.
and/or
Blow up WTC's and remind everyone its only against the 'Jewnited States' and will stop once Israel is left to fend for itself.

Sure, everyone would like that.
Meanwhile there is no good reason to get rid of Israel and nobody even wanted that land until they showed up anyways lol.

I have to say.. I do wonder if some of these Israeli terrorist kooks will ever succeed in blowing up the Dome on the Rock.
I think they have tried 3 times now - they always get caught though.
Maybe only a matter of time like the WTC.
Eventualy they get in there.
?

[stoney69]

mannnnnnnn they've really managed to twist you good havent they!

leave you to re-write history and the occupiers would become natives

..so who are the natives of the 'jewnited states' ? the english-irish-german-italians ? occupied by the so-called indigenous ?!

[EwokUtopia]

Yeah, I was talking to my Palestinian friend today and he said that they did a blood test on Palestinians and found a huge amount of Canaanite blood in them. Of course the Israeli's tried to silence this, but the test survived, Im sure if you scoured the internet (or went to Palestine itself, but Im assuming you wont want to do that for the sake of a forum debate) you would find this test. the Caananites mixed with two northern Arab tribes and left over jews (there was a shitload of Arab jews, and still are some, but most have became Muslims of their own free will since) and his people resulted.

[Erasmus70]

Response to Cabs (Muhammed and The Koran) Claim that Adam was a Muslim or anyone else before Muhammed:
According to several passages in the Koran - Muhammad was the first Muslim:

Say: Shall I choose for a protecting friend other than Allah, the Originator of the heavens and the earth, Who feedeth and is never fed? Say: I am ordered to be the first to surrender [aslama] (unto Him). And be not thou (O Muhammad) of the idolaters. S. 6:14 Pickthall

Say, verily my Lord hath directed me into a right way, a true religion, the sect of Abraham the orthodox; and he was no idolater. Say, verily my prayers, and my worship, and my life, and my death are dedicated unto God, the Lord of all creatures: He hath no companion. This have I been commanded: I am the first Moslem (Wa 'Ana 'Awwalu Al-Muslimin). S. 6:161-163 Sale

He hath no associate. This am I commanded, and I am the first of the Muslims. S. 6:163 Rodwell

Say (O Muhammad): Lo! I am commanded to worship Allah, making religion pure for Him (only). And I am commanded to be the first of those who are muslims (surrender unto Him). S. 39:11-12 Pickthall

So that settles it, there were no Muslims before Muhammed.
He is the First.

[EwokUtopia]

Muslim means "those who submit" and under Islamic theology, birds and bees and wind and trees are all Muslim because they all submit to the will of God, that is they are at peace with themselves and they behave naturally, as they should. Indeed, under Islamic theology all babies are born Muslims as well, so then it is the oldest religion if one accepts Islamic theology (which I know not all do) and that was Cab's origional point.



Im getting pretty sick of all these Islamophobic posters (even though there are like 3) spreading their hatred and ignorance. Im sure Mr. Bush smiles to think that so many people blindly follow this irrational fear of Islam that fuels his imperialistic conquests.

[Erasmus70]

Muslim means "those who submit" and under Islamic theology, birds and bees and wind and trees are all Muslim because they all submit to the will of God, that is they are at peace with themselves and they behave naturally, as they should. Indeed, under Islamic theology all babies are born Muslims as well, so then it is the oldest religion if one accepts Islamic theology (which I know not all do) and that was Cab's origional point.


No.
Under Islamic Theology, Muhammed is the first Muslim.
Is Cab denying the Word of Muhammed or confused?
Am I wrong?
Here again are the scriptures:

Say: Shall I choose for a protecting friend other than Allah, the Originator of the heavens and the earth, Who feedeth and is never fed? Say: I am ordered to be the first to surrender [aslama] (unto Him). And be not thou (O Muhammad) of the idolaters.

Say, verily my Lord hath directed me into a right way, a true religion, the sect of Abraham the orthodox; and he was no idolater. Say, verily my prayers, and my worship, and my life, and my death are dedicated unto God, the Lord of all creatures: He hath no companion. This have I been commanded: I am the first Moslem (Wa 'Ana 'Awwalu Al-Muslimin).

He hath no associate. This am I commanded, and I am the first of the Muslims.

Say (O Muhammad): Lo! I am commanded to worship Allah, making religion pure for Him (only). And I am commanded to be the first of those who are muslims (surrender unto Him).