Islam will dominate!

[Fatihah]

Definition of proof: "Any factual evidence that helps to establish the truth of something"

My evidence: Jahangir's diary, which documents plans to execute Arjan Dev or try and force him to convert to Islam.

No-one has ever challenged it academically, Muslim or non-Muslim. The Bible has been challenged. The Qur'an has been challenged. This has not been challenged. Ever. By anyone of learning. It is watertight, flawless. There is absolutely zero evidence of forgery. Therefore it is factual.

Therefore I have factual evidence, and by definition, proof.

The point I repeatedly make is that if it is not factual, you should be able to find an academic challenge against it. You cannot.

Response: Says the person who doesn't know the english definition of the word "proof". (Post 592).

Your own words demonstrate you have no proof.

 

[Breathe]

Response: All the while advocating acts of violence as true with no proof. Clearly not deminstrating a call for truth, but a call of support to your degrading propaganda.

What? :areyoucra

 

[Haris19]

Why would you take this stance? Nameless is not attacking Islam and is not justifying violence. Your response it completely emotional and your grammer is terrible. Please re-read Nameless' post objectively and recognise that he is not attacking. This business of India began with 301Ouncer making a statement that some of us disagreed with. It has been a debate about history ever since. Nobody is saying that anybody should pay or be reconverted or anything else. I cannot believe you have chosen to take offense. I am astonished at your response. It is entirely uncalled for and invalid.

Madhuri, you probably need to go back on some of the earlier posts and read properly.Nameless was in a way justifying the horrendous attacks on Christians in Orissa by saying that the Christians started it(without any solid proofs) first and that they violated a law in Orissa.Nameless's stance on the Gujarat issue is no different.I do not deny that crimes were committed by the Mughals when they invaded India.i do not deny the forced conversions and neither do i plan to justify any of it.In fact,i condemn them.

However,nameless so far has not shown any signs of condemning the horrendous crimes committed by the Hindu fanatics in India but expects Indian muslims to condemn every crime committed by fanatic Muslims all the way from the 18th century(Mughal era).

Peace!

 

[Fatihah]

Apart from the fact that no scholar, Muslim or otherwise, has ever contested them.

Response: Says the person who can't prove his own evidence.

 

[Fatihah]

Please provide any proof for your view, Fatihah. Please give a reference to an academic book or a website.

"Refer to post 455" does not constitute as proof, neither does claiming others have no proof whilst having none yourself constitute you being correct. Logical fallacies are logical fallacies. Burden of proof, negative evidence, circular reasoning etc are not logical.

Proof has been given to you, Fatihah, in the form of books, but you have refused to even acknowledge them. You have even denied the emperor's diary as evidence.

You can lead a horse to water, but not make him drink it.



I agree with you here, too.

Response: I don't engage in one-sided dialogues. You've never presented proofs yourself that muslims have conquered land by force. So to ask for what you yourself won't produce would be a waste of time for me to acknowledge.

 

[Fatihah]

Proof has been given to you, Fatihah, in the form of books, but you have refused to even acknowledge them. You have even denied the emperor's diary as evidence.

You can lead a horse to water, but not make him drink it.



I agree with you here, too.

Response: Yet at no time did you provide proof that the "alleged" proofs are true. Thus your own actions are proofs that your statement is a lie to begin with.

 

[DeitySlayer]

Response: I don't engage in one-sided dialogues. You've never presented proofs yourself that muslims have conquered land by force. So to ask for what you yourself won't produce would be a waste of time for me to acknowledge.

Stop parroting the same sentence 'you don't know the definition of proof'.

My factual evidence: Tuzk-e-Jahangir

It is valid, it has been confirmed, no-one has disputed it, Muslim or otherwise, it is consistent with his philosophical and artistic tendencies, and he never expressed displeasure against it. There are no contrary sources.

That is factual evidence. That is proof.

 

[Wotan]

Yes, I think it is important that this point is emphasised. People do not necessarily represent their religion correctly and the difference should be noted.

And who defines "correctly?"

Apparently when faith in action results in activity we approve of it it is "correct."
But when others professing the SAME faith and claiming a deep understanding of it bomb some other faith's structure we conclude THEY are not correct.

WHY?​

They claim the faith, they ARE knowledgeable about it. How is it that others with NO such knowledge get to define what the "Faith" requires?

Not only is that position illogical it is nothing but an apology for violence. I see NO reason whatever to excuse religious faith for ANY act done in its name. If you want say charity comes from "faith" very well.

So does intolerance and barbarity and ignorance.

 

[DeitySlayer]

Response: Yet at no time did you provide proof that the "alleged" proofs are true. Thus your own actions are proofs that your statement is a lie to begin with.

Did you provide any proof about the first Muslims coming to India because the Indians had captured some of their sailors?

 

[Breathe]

Response: I don't engage in one-sided dialogues. You've never presented proofs yourself that muslims have conquered land by force. So to ask for what you yourself won't produce would be a waste of time for me to acknowledge.

You never asked me to, but others have done quite well.

You don't seem to engage in dialogues in general, I'm afraid. You can't seem to debate, just ridicule, demand proof, then ignore it and ask for it again.

I'm wasting my time discussing with you, so goodbye Fatihah. This time I don't plan on un-ignoring you. I would appreciate if you too would put me on your ignore list, so you don't reply to any of my messages with logical fallacies, ad hominems or non sequiturs.

Thanks.

 

[Badran]

Response: I agree. One should deliver the message in a nice manner.

I'm glad we have agreed on this.

As for slander, you once again failed to provide a post in which is insulting someone, yet you are accusing muslims of slander. That means that you are the one guilty of slandering. Why the hypocrisy? How can you claim to be a pious muslim yet slander muslims unjustly at the same time. You even suggested that I look for the posts, rather than you yourself backing up your own allegations. This is shameful behavior.

I'm not talking about you Fatihah in particular. I'm talking in general here, not you specifically. Also, The OP itself is provoking, he made the part where it says (over all religions) in red to emphasize, this is obviously provoking behavior. We see our religion as the best and we believe in it, but that doesn't mean we should tell people that we are better than them or that our religion is superior to theirs.

As for whether I know it to be fact that muslims are softening thecmessage and befriending non-muslims over spreading the message directly, it's because their posts shows so. And I sincerely hope you won't make an attempt to ask me to produce such posts, while dodging the task of producing posts of muslims insulting others as you suggested. Surely, one can not be that hypocritical.

I would not ask you to quote anyone, because it is not my point to prove you wrong, my point is that i'm trying to convince that our actions here, was because we believed that some Muslims here are being unjust to others. We might be wrong, but it won't be because we want to befriend others and sacrifice our religion for such reason.

 

[Badran]

Yes, I think it is important that this point is emphasised. People do not necessarily represent their religion correctly and the difference should be noted.

Yes, that's what i meant.

 

[Fatihah]

No. Neither are you to apologize. All that I am looking for here, all that Odion, xkatz, and GURSIKH are looking for here, is acknowledgement that these horrors did happen. Fatihah's repeated denial is equatable to Holocaust denial and is a slap in the face to my and their cultural and spiritual ancestors.



It's not hate. It's a search for the truth. Fatihah denying the Mughal cruelties is like a German today denying the Holocaust. We don't want an apology. We don't want to slander Islam. We don't want to punish Muslims. We just want you to stop denying it happened, and show some respect to the memories of all those killed.

Response: To the contrary, you advocating that such events took place without proof, knowing that it did not happen, is like watching a child jump up and down and swear that they did see an old, fat bearded man in a red suit come down their chimney with gifts.

 

[Badran]

True, but Fatihah can't even accept this, even when there are mountains of literature and texts from the era, on both Mughal and Sikh sides, which extensively document the violence and executions.

I was only talking about that particular post i quoted, because it said (Islam) instead of Muslims.

 

[DeitySlayer]

Response: To the contrary, you advocating that such events took place without proof is like watching a child jump up and down and swear that they did see a fat bearded man in a red suit come down their chimney with gifts.

On the contrary. It's like someone claiming that Hitler sanctioned the Holocaust while holding texts and testimonies from Jews who were in concentration camps, as well as Hitler's diary, which contains explicit orders to kill the Jews. And when the style of writing is consistent with Hitler's other writings, and when no-one, Nazi or otherwise, has been able to flaw the accuracy of the diary.

 

[DeitySlayer]

I do not engage in argument with people who show a moronic failure to accept reasonable standards of evidence and clear textual proofs which they repeatedly deny, despite their inability to find any sort of scholarly article or counter-source which demonstrates that the proof is propaganda or false. I leave this discussion in the hopes of finding greater intellectual and moral standards elsewhere, and to return to sane and human Islam, which I see so well demonstrated in .lava and Badran and maro. When I read their posts, I see love and humility, compassion and humanity. When I read yours, I see nothing but hate.

 

[Fatihah]

I'm glad we have agreed on this.



I'm not talking about you Fatihah in particular. I'm talking in general here, not you specifically. Also, The OP itself is provoking, he made the part where it says (over all religions) in red to emphasize, this is obviously provoking behavior. We see our religion as the best and we believe in it, but that doesn't mean we should tell people that we are better than them or that our religion is superior to theirs.



I would not ask you to quote anyone, because it is not my point to prove you wrong, my point is that i'm trying to convince that our actions here, was because we believed that some Muslims here are being unjust to others. We might be wrong, but it won't be because we want to befriend others and sacrifice our religion for such reason.

Response: Then according to you, a muslim who highlights what the qur'an actually states in red is insulting other people and their religion. That is completely irrational and I'm sure you know this. Clearly, you disagree with the person's approach, but to go as far as calling such a small thing a provoking behavior is irrational. And by doing so, you are again insulting the qur'an and Allah, for the words highlighted are the words of the qur'an.

 

[Fatihah]

I do not engage in argument with people who show a moronic failure to accept reasonable standards of evidence and clear textual proofs which they repeatedly deny, despite their inability to find any sort of scholarly article or counter-source which demonstrates that the proof is propaganda or false. I leave this discussion in the hopes of finding greater intellectual and moral standards elsewhere, and to return to sane and human Islam, which I see so well demonstrated in .lava and Badran and maro. When I read their posts, I see love and humility, compassion and humanity. When I read yours, I see nothing but hate.

Response: All the while, attacking those muslims religion. Naturally, we expect such non-muslims to give such praise to certain muslims. Not a problem. They should be admired. But your reasons for doing so clearly isn't out of complete admiration, but rather a safety blanket, because with them, they won't take the approach of leaving you utterly debunked like myself, 301ouncer, and a few other muslims leave you. Yes, you are free to leave, and take your propaganda with you.

Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem.

 

[Badran]

Response: Then according to you, a muslim who highlights what the qur'an actually states in red is insulting other people and their religion. That is completely irrational and I'm sure you know this. Clearly, you disagree with the person's approach, but to go as far as calling such a small thing a provoking behavior is irrational. And by doing so, you are again insulting the qur'an and Allah, for the words highlighted are the words of the qur'an.

I'm not insulting the Quran. Of course their is nothing wrong with highlighting anything the Quran says, i agree.

However, put this into consideration, he posted an entire verse, why highlight the part where it says (over all religions) especially? Why? Is this the part he wants to tell others, is this the aim, is this what we should be doing, telling others that our religion is superior to theirs?

It's provoking, and pointless. There is no need for such tactics.

 

[Fatihah]

I'm not insulting the Quran. Of course their is nothing wrong with highlighting anything the Quran says, i agree.

However, put this into consideration, he posted an entire verse, why highlight the part where it says (over all religions) especially? Why? Is this the part he wants to tell others, is this the aim, is this what we should be doing, telling others that our religion is superior to theirs?

It's provoking, and pointless. There is no need for such tactics.

Response: Then according to you, the message of the qur'an is pointless. Meaning you're provoking Allah(swt). I would rather be in his shoes than yours, for your behavior is much more offensive.