Democracy & Usury

K

Kalalah007

Guest
Democracy system - christians...
Usury economic system - jews..

"O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust. "(Al Maaida 51)

Christians and Jews will not satisfied until we follow their religion (system / dien)

"Never will the Jews or the Christians be satisfied with thee unless thou follow their form of religion. Say: "The Guidance of Allah,-that is the (only) Guidance." Wert thou to follow their desires after the knowledge which hath reached thee, then wouldst thou find neither Protector nor helper against Allah. "(Al Baqara 120)

ALLAH will not help US if we take Christians and Jews (and its system) as protectors / helpers (awliya)

"Let not the believers Take for friends or helpers Unbelievers rather than believers: if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah: except by way of precaution, that ye may Guard yourselves from them. But Allah cautions you (To remember) Himself; for the final goal is to Allah. "(Ali Imraan 28)
 
Cup of Tea, that is a good question. Within the individual religion sections on this forum, I can't really tell whether discussions are about that particular religion, or about how that aspect of that religion is seen in the context of interfaith. I'm befuddled at times, and am unclear as to the goals of this whole forum. I don't see this as interfaith in the strictest definition, but rather as a sharing of belief so the rest of us can learn something. Of course that learning has outcomes like agreeing, disagreeing, or not caring at all.

In this particular case, I have no interest ... yet.
 
Last edited:
The Christian's decided that interest was usury any interest. Well that stopped all lending. Why would I give you my money that I could use to build my business to you? So since the Christians wouldn't lend any money to each other... The Jews took on that role...

Back when I was a kid 6% was usury....that has ended eh? As has the Christian objection to interest.
 
wil said:
The Christian's decided that interest was usury any interest. Well that stopped all lending. Why would I give you my money that I could use to build my business to you? So since the Christians wouldn't lend any money to each other... The Jews took on that role...
Click to expand...

That's definitely what happened, which brings to issue...

Kalalah007 said:
Democracy system - christians...
Click to expand...

When Christians were so worried about usury, it wasn't a democratic society by any means. In fact, it was the height of the Middle Ages and monarchy was the government system. This same government system eventually expelled most of these money lenders from their nations, in particular Spain and England, because of their religious beliefs. But then, in a strange twist, an alliance between interfaith governments developed, in particular I'm thinking about the French and Ottomans, that caused outrage among the rest of the Christian monarchies which brought them back in touch with Jewish financiers to help pay for the newly raised armies/navies capable of fighting both French and Ottoman forces in and around the Mediterranean.
 
Senthil said:
Cup of Tea, that is a good question. Within the individual religion sections on this forum, I can't really tell whether discussions are about that particular religion, or about how that aspect of that religion is seen in the context of interfaith. I'm befuddled at times, and am unclear as to the goals of this whole forum. I don't see this as interfaith in the strictest definition, but rather as a sharing of belief so the rest of us can learn something. Of course that learning has outcomes like agreeing, disagreeing, or not caring at all.

In this particular case, I have no interest ... yet.
Click to expand...
we had a walled garden concept at one time.... enter someone else's garden, you tend their plants, ask repectful questions about their methods of horticulture....in our own gardens we can weed and turn under whatever we want discussing amongst ourselves the need to replant...

Outside of all gardens we enter the world of theoretical and interfaith discussion...

we've devolved somewhat in this regard since the moderators were done away with...we used to each police our own sections and admonish those who abused the concept... today we are the wild west and for the most part half respectful... we do however have those that like to go into other gardens and trample the fruit...
 
Thanks for that. Most people do tread carefully naturally, although sometimes a neutral statement gets blown out of context into being a hateful statement.
 
Modding is a tough job. I've done my share on sites in the past. On those sites though there were one or two mods per section. I do not see one mod for an entire forum as we have here on a regular basis. I really don't think one person can justify the time needed to be the mod for an entire site. I certainly wouldn't take it on!

That being said, I don't know what other sites the rest of our group have been on. This one is fairly tame compared to many sites. Even when we have major arguments here, they are not as strident as some sites I have been on where the attitude is take no prisoners! Those can get brutal, and if the mods do not care to step in; again something I have seen too often, there can be blood in the water!
 
A Cup Of Tea said:
Who thinks this is interfaith?
Click to expand...

Actually, after having thumbed through a number of various dictionary definitions, the meaning of interfaith seems to be very vague indeed.

"involving people who belong to different religions"

is typical of the kind of definition I found. There was little to no definition on how the 'involving' should take place. So interfaith as an attempt to understand everyone's different religious points of view is not necessarily the correct concept. It is one concept; just of many possibilities though. The term does not seem to reject strife as another possibility for interfaith discussion.
 
Devils' Advocate said:
Actually, after having thumbed through a number of various dictionary definitions, the meaning of interfaith seems to be very vague indeed.

"involving people who belong to different religions"

is typical of the kind of definition I found. There was little to no definition on how the 'involving' should take place. So interfaith as an attempt to understand everyone's different religious points of view is not necessarily the correct concept. It is one concept; just of many possibilities though. The term does not seem to reject strife as another possibility for interfaith discussion.
Click to expand...
Only asked for an opinion. He can do as he cares, I'm no administrator.
But to answer my own question. When individual encourage people do distance themselves from other religions, I think that is the opposite of interfaith. That is not strife, it's reclusion.
 
Correct ACOT.... saying my way is the only way ....is not interfaith...imo
Senthil said:
Thanks for that. Most people do tread carefully naturally, although sometimes a neutral statement gets blown out of context into being a hateful statement.
Click to expand...
we had multiple mods here...the elevation of some to mod pissed off many others... I was elevated to mod at one time...this pissed off the born agains and fundies...Thomas was made mod to satisfy some of them... it was an ebb and flow for years...however we as mods slowly moderated less and less and instead discussed openly the issues and the gardens....trolls, my way or the highway and prophets didn't find this place conducive to their agendas...they came and went and still come and go....others try coming back.... nature of the beast...
Devils' Advocate said:
Modding is a tough job. I've done my share on sites in the past. On those sites though there were one or two mods per section. I do not see one mod for an entire forum as we have here on a regular basis. I really don't think one person can justify the time needed to be the mod for an entire site. I certainly wouldn't take it on!

That being said, I don't know what other sites the rest of our group have been on. This one is fairly tame compared to many sites. Even when we have major arguments here, they are not as strident as some sites I have been on where the attitude is take no prisoners! Those can get brutal, and if the mods do not care to step in; again something I have seen too often, there can be blood in the water!
Click to expand...
yes we fair far better here than other venues.... we are blessed by a great group of folks who believe in interfaith discussion.... the site has been largely self moderating and while we have a few weeds, the garden is growing nicely.
 
A Cup Of Tea said:
When individual encourage people do distance themselves from other religions, I think that is the opposite of interfaith. That is not strife, it's reclusion.
Click to expand...

I agree. I want this to be a space for actual discussion which we can't have if people aren't willing to engage with one another and have simply walled themselves off.

As for modding, this is an evolving position for me too. I've been a mod (one of many) on a few sites over the years, but they were never on a subject like religion where people have such strong convictions related to their beliefs and stances. Part of my process is learning more about the users on this site and how everyone interacts so that I can get a base line to judge would-be transgressors and trolls.

Devils' Advocate said:
I really don't think one person can justify the time needed to be the mod for an entire site. I certainly wouldn't take it on!
Click to expand...

It is time consuming, but this is a subject I'm passionate about. Still, I am bound to miss stuff. If you see something that seems out of place, please report it.
 
Kalalah, As I stated before, (I'm sure you don't read this),

Please abstain from this throwing verses randomly hoping one will resonate. It has no place here. The Glorious Quran is a magnificent thing. It has more lessons than we can hope to understand. However your attempt at Dawah is very poor tactically. First off, you come to a website that is filled with students of various religions. Some may even be scholars and more surely claim to be. The people here have no interest in single verses thrown at them. It wouldn't mean anything to them. If you took your time not copy and pasting from whatever Dawah website you are coming from and spent the time to write an essay on one of these aspects and opened it for explanation, you would be well received I believe. Remember there is no compulsion in religion. And those who follow in the footsteps of the prophets before Mouhammed (PBUH) are safe from the hellfire. You cannot save someone. They must do it. All you can hope to do is show them the path and hope they take it, but what you are doing is putting up a large abnoxious sign that makes people want to veer onto other paths just to avoid the sign. (this may not be the best example... but it is all I got at the moment)
 
In some ways, I would rather someone come right out and say it directly, rather than beat around the bush, with the same agenda, but more hidden and sneaky. It reminds me of the quotes around a certain past president of the US ... "Which would you rather have to deal with, a smart crook, or a dumb crook?"

In the unethical practice of conversion tactics, I prefer "I'm here to try to convert you," as the opening line. It's honest. The "Here's some food, let's talk." isn't honest.

Just some thought.
 
wil said:
Joe.... to quote an old virginia slims ad and women's lib motto.... you've come a long way baby!
Click to expand...
Not sure he was much different at the start. As mentioned before, we have differences of opinion concerning interfaith, but I don't think he was ever looking to convert. It just seems that way at times...
 
Senthil said:
In some ways, I would rather someone come right out and say it directly, rather than beat around the bush, with the same agenda, but more hidden and sneaky. It reminds me of the quotes around a certain past president of the US ... "Which would you rather have to deal with, a smart crook, or a dumb crook?"

In the unethical practice of conversion tactics, I prefer "I'm here to try to convert you," as the opening line. It's honest. The "Here's some food, let's talk." isn't honest.

Just some thought.
Click to expand...
:D I like that, I don't adhere to either scenario you state, but it is quite a reasonable one. If I were looking to Convert someone, I would probably start with some generic, How much do you know about Islam? Then start the explanation after hearing what and how they say. It is not something one could easily do online. I believe in finding common ground, whether that be for IF or conversion. The difference is if I wanted to convert someone, that conversation would lead to me stating somewhere that I would like you to join in Islam. (Don't get me wrong I wish everyone would for sake of their souls, but I just don't find that many people so far off the right path to warrant an actual saving attempt especially with the complications stated before).

A Cup Of Tea said:
Not sure he was much different at the start. As mentioned before, we have differences of opinion concerning interfaith, but I don't think he was ever looking to convert. It just seems that way at times...
Click to expand...
I have to say I'm glad you believe it, as it wasn't my focus. The reason it seems that way at times is that my approach to both is similar, common ground. But as I stated before, If I wanted to convert someone, I would have stated it as I believe stating the intention is quintessential in gaining the favor from it and as Senthil stated, noone likes to be tricked.
 
them verses are only saying not to take non-muslims as friends in such a way where your own faith is damaged; if a muslim can practice his religion without bad influence from a non-muslim friend then that's fine!
 
Kalalah007 said:
Christians and Jews will not satisfied until we follow their religion (system / dien)
Click to expand...
Ahmad, I agree, to a point. I think there is more to this than just that (as is common with Quranic Aya). The above quote is what I have issues with. Also with his approach which is quite evident by posting a few Aya, or a copy/pasted argument from a Dawahist website, and leaving it without discussion. He isn't here to discuss Islam's perspective, nor learn from/of others' perspectives. He is attempting to convert by throwing verses, I simply don't agree that this is the place nor is this a good tactic for achieving his goal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top