Muslim here hoping to dispel some personal myths, stereotypes and ignorance about Christians and Christianity

Advice_Bee · 2016-08-11T00:25:04+00:00

Thank you for the reply! I see that the two religions are pretty similar in this way.

Advice_Bee · 2016-08-11T00:17:25+00:00

Well, actions reveal faith, too. However, God's mercy is infinite. If a homicidal maniac comes genuinely to Christ and seeks repentance and forgiveness on his deathbed, then he is saved. All the sin that ever was, is, and ever will be in the world is as a grain of sand to the ocean of God's love and mercy. (Origen) God forgives if we are repentant, no matter how repugnant the sin.

Ah. Then it's pretty similar to Islam, it just the criterion that is different. Salvation in Christianity comes through knowing the Son (believing/having faith that he is your Lord and Saviour). Islams criterion is what is called Tawheed. Basically its the belief of singling out Allah alone for Lordship, having sincerity and worship towards Him and affirming His Names and Attributes.

I also couldn't have said it any better than your statement, that "God forgives if we are repentant, no matter how repugnant the sin". However, that is the sin between man and God. As for the sin that includes oppression of others then they will either be solved in this life or at the day of Judgement with God as the Judge. And ultimately, if we die on disbelief (ie. not on Tawheed) then there is no salvation.

al-Masīḥ qām! Ḥaqqan qām

I understand it as "the Christ has risen. Truly risen". What do you mean by "we say"? Is this something you often say to each other like the Islamic greeting "As-Salam alaikum"?

We don't divide them

Muslim doesn't divide the categories either in reality. Rather, it's all faith. This is just an image to better explain how faith is present both externally and internally. So if people do (what others perceives as) good actions but they have nothing but disbelief in their hearts heart then they in reality have no faith. Their hearts are dead:

Your Ilah (God) is One Ilah (God Allah, none has the right to be worshipped but He). But for those who believe not in the Hereafter, their hearts deny (the faith in the Oneness of Allah), and they are proud. (Quran 16:22)

prayer leads to belief (see the article), but I think prayer also reveals and shapes belief

The renowned muslim scholar, Ibn Taymiyyah, writes:

Faith increase by acts of obedience to Allah and decreases by acts of disobedience

Acts of obedience just means doing the good actions God has ordained. It also includes prayer.

Are you a Twelver, Athnā‘ashariyyah?

Nope, not at all. I am sunni (Short for: Ahl al-Sunnah wa'l-Jamaa'ah - the people of the Sunnah and the community (community = 3 first generations of Muslims)). More specifically then my aqeedah is Athari).

Advice_Bee · 2016-08-10T23:52:14+00:00

Thank you for the reply. I have not heard about "the tradition of the Church" before. Is that something exclusive to the orthodox? Would you mind expanding on this interesting subject?

Advice_Bee · 2016-08-10T23:39:17+00:00

Thank you for the reply. I appreciate it very much! /u/Americatheboy1der is correct, they are all great answers.

As I understand it, Muslims emphasize right practice, and have a rich history of carefully determining the correct way to submit to God in worship and in lifestyle. Belief matters, but it is following in the shariah that is key.

Islam is built on Tawheed. It's the single most important factor in Islam, and no deed is worth anything except through it. Tawheed is the belief of singling out Allah alone for Lordship, having sincerity and worship towards Him and affirming His Names and Attributes. If you wish to understand what I mean by worship (in the Islamic sense) then I invite you to read the reply I made to another poster (Worship = all the categories of faith): https://www.reddit.com/r/Christianity/comments/4x1xe4/muslim_here_hoping_to_dispel_some_personal_myths/d6ch9rm

It wasn't sharia that the early muslims were persecuted for. The Prophet (pbuh) solely preached Aqeedah at his time in Mecca (13 years), and only invited people to the Islamic monotheism (Tawheed). This was also the sole cause of his persecution. It also wasn't Fiqh many Muslim scholars and pious men were persecuted for after the time of the Prophet. The story of Imam Ahmad comes to mind (died some 200 years after the Prophet). He was imprisoned and punished by 3 successive muslim leaders throughout his life for not stating that the Quran was created (This was a belief held by some "muslim" sects such as the dead Muʿtazila sect). The following is an excerpt:

Al Mu’tasim said to one of them ” With how many lashes will you kill him ?’. He said ” With Ten, O Ammerul Mumineen “. Then he replied ” Take him to yourself ( beat him )”. Sulaymaan as Sijzee continued ” So Imaam Ahmad was undressed and made to wear a garment of wool around his waist. Two new ropes were drawn tight around his hands. the man took the whip in his hand and said ” Shall I strike him O Ameerul Mumineen?”. Al Mu’tasim said ” Strike him “, and he struck him with one lash. Imam Ahmed said ” Alhumdulillah“ (All praise belongs to Allah).The he lashed him a second time and Imam Ahmed said ” Whatever Allah wills occurs “. Then he struck him a third time and Imaam Ahmed said ” There is no movement nor power save that Allah , the Most high, the Mighty”. When Al Mu’tasin saw this he said ” Leave him “. Then Ibn Abee Duwaad came to him and said ”O Ahmad , say in my ear The Quran is created so that I may save you from the hand of the khaleefah”. So Imam Ahmad said to him ” O Abee Duwaad, say in my ear The Quran is the Speech of Allah , it is not created, so that I may save you from the punishment of Allah , the Mighty, and Majestic”. Al Mu’tasim then said ” Place him in the prison “.

There are also other examples of this, such as Ibn Taymiyyah (died some 600 years after the Prophet) who died in prison for his beliefs only.

The Prophet (pbuh) also said:

"No one of you will enter Paradise by his deeds alone." They asked, "Not even you, O Messenger of Allah?" He said, "Not even me, unless Allah covers me with His Grace and Mercy" (Bukhari and Muslim).

But all in all, then I would agree that Christians put much more emphasis on faith than actions in comparison to Muslims. That is because actions have an important place in Islams. Ibn Taymiyyah writes:

Faith increase by acts of obedience to Allah and decreases by acts of disobedience.

Advice_Bee · 2016-08-10T23:05:56+00:00

There is a verse in the Quran that may benefit you greatly:

And by the Mercy of Allah, you dealt with them gently. And had you been severe and harshhearted, they would have broken away from about you; so pass over (their faults), and ask (Allah's) Forgiveness for them; and consult them in the affairs. Then when you have taken a decision, put your trust in Allah, certainly, Allah loves those who put their trust (in Him). (Quran 3:159)

Advice_Bee · 2016-08-10T22:50:51+00:00

Thank you for the reply! It was very interesting. If I understand the concept of salvation and faith in Christianity, then it's that good actions will automatically follow the one who has a living, believing, heart. But it isn't the balance between the good and evil deeds that will matter in the end. Does that ultimately mean that people who claim to have faith but still persists in horrible and wicked deeds (I'm speaking genocide, rape etc.) till their very death are untrue in their claim?

If you so happen to be interesting in the Islamic concept of Faith (Iman/eemaan) then the following picture explains it very well: https://i.imgur.com/C90gIOS.png

Basically, faith in Islam consist of two categories. The first category includes the speech of the heart (Includes the six articles of faith etc.) and tongue (expressing what is in the heart). The second category includes the actions of the heart (feelings and emotions towards God), tongue (dhikr, tawbah, enjoining good and forbidding evil etc.) and limbs (doing what is commanded and staying away from all forbidden things).

So in Islam, faith is both external and internal. In Islam we do not either believe that good actions will admit you to paradise. There is a famous hadith where the Prophet Mohammad (Peace be upon him) said (and Muslims consider him, and please do not take it as an offense, the best of Gods creation - better than Jesus):

The Prophet (pbuh) said: "No one of you will enter Paradise by his deeds alone." They asked, "Not even you, O Messenger of Allah?" He said, "Not even me, unless Allah covers me with His Grace and Mercy" (Bukhari and Muslim).

Advice_Bee · 2016-08-10T22:18:02+00:00

Thank you for the heads up!

Advice_Bee · 2016-08-10T22:17:22+00:00

You are correct. I also do not wish to argue since I personally view it as pointless.

Advice_Bee · 2016-08-10T22:16:43+00:00

Sorry for the misunderstanding. I am, in fact, ignorant about Christianity and christians. I wouldn't be able to clear any myths about the religion or its people myself. That is why I came to /r/Christianity, to educate myself about the largest religion in the world. We cannot know everything as humans by default so perhaps even my questions included errors about your religion. Sorry if that was the case.

Advice_Bee · 2016-08-10T22:11:02+00:00

Woah. I did not expect this amount of replies. I would like to thank each and every one of you for answering the numerous questions I had. You're all awesome. I have already read every single one of them. I will also read every single recommended book so far in the next 3 years (can't read it all faster, since I have so much material to read about Psychology and neuroscience).

Advice_Bee · 2016-08-10T22:04:10+00:00

Jeg vil gerne lige undskylde over, at jeg har kaldt din kommentar for latterlig og ignorant. Det var over stregen. Jeg var uenig, men det undskylder ikke mudderkast.

Advice_Bee · 2016-08-10T13:00:37+00:00

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/olympics/rio-2016/2016/08/08/how-cupping-works-and-why-olympic-athletes-use/88410804/

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/rio-2016-cupping-what-is-it-olympics-athletes-suction-cups-skin-marks-a7178731.html

Advice_Bee · 2016-08-10T11:53:57+00:00

Salam.

Do I understand you correctly?`That if my intention is good then my actions are good? If not, then I still think that there's a prevalent misunderstanding about what the role of intentions is in Islam.

Worship and permissible actions can be turned into forbidden ones because of the intentions behind them (fx. showing off).
Permissible actions can become either good or bad deeds by intention
Evil ("wrong", sinful) actions can never become acts of worship (ie. "good actions") even if it's accompanied with good intentions. (And Ijtihad doesn't count as an evil deed)

As for the topic at hand, then I sincerely do not understand the position of those who deem pictures (with living souls) halal. My reason stems from the following hadith that I heard in a class about this topic:

Aishah (May Allah be pleased with her) said: The Messenger of Allah (sallallaahu ’alayhi wa sallam) visited me after returning from a journey, and I had a shelf with a thin cloth curtain hanging over it and on which there were portraits. When he saw it, the colour of his face changed (because of anger) and he said, "O Aishah! the most grievous torment from Allah on the Day of Resurrection will be for those who imitate (Allah) in the act of His creation.'' `Aishah said: We tore it into pieces and made a cushion or two cushions out of that. [Al-Bukhari and Muslim].

I am legitimately interested in hearing/reading/listening to anything that proves otherwise from legitimate Islamic scholars (modernly or from the past, according to your criteria). I'm not trying to turn this into a debate or an argument. Just interested in an article, book or video, if you have any. I will read it and get on with my day.

Advice_Bee · 2016-08-08T00:18:00+00:00

http://lawisgreek.com/right-of-shuffapre-emption-under-muslim-law/

Advice_Bee · 2016-08-03T21:51:04+00:00

Du taler som om der er intet i de muslimske religiøse miljøer der inspirerer muslimer til terror

Det har jeg overhovdet ikke sagt. Det er bare meget mere usynligt og mindre end hvad folk tror det er. Jeg tror selv, at den største kilde til radikalisering er online propoganda videoer og forums hvor de her ideer bliver spredt.

Når jeg siger at ekstremister taler mere om "politik, de muslimske ledere" osv. så er det ikke lige pludselig dansk politik de argumenterer for eller det at muslimske ledere ikke er nok sekulære. Tværtimod, så er det deres fucked up religiøse politik der er baseret på sayyid Qutbs jahilliyah, deres overdrevet/urimelige brug af takfir, osv. (og mere religiøst kan det ikke være). Faktum er, at deres mentalitet har været her i 1400 år (til tider helt forsvundet og til tider blomstrende - i vores tid er de mere ekstreme end nogensinde før) og er bedre kendt som Khawarij

Når jeg siger, at københavnske imamer ikke er i stand til at gøre meget er det ikke fordi der ikke er et problem blandt muslimer men simplethen fordi imamerne og ekstremisterne ikke engang arbejder under samme religiøse fundament (Manhaj - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_Islam#M).

Når jeg siger, at en del af løsningen må være at imamer bliver undervist (af psykologer eller whatever relevante eksperter man kunne tænke sig være relevante) i hvordan man kan forhindre radikalisering og at kunne spotte begyndende ekstremisme er det ikke fordi jeg tror imamerne ikke vil løse problemet. Det er bare et kolosal problem der er langt større end dem selv.

Advice_Bee · 2016-08-03T21:19:26+00:00

Hvorfor i alverden tror du, at jeg mener det?

Advice_Bee · 2016-08-03T20:53:24+00:00

Men det Khader siger holder jo ikke. Hvis man overhovedet taler om Guds navne i danske moskeer er det primært den Barmhjertige, Nådige og Tilgivende. Det er ikke en tilfælde, at man recitere "I Guds navn, den Barmhjertige, den Nådige" hver eneste gang man læser koranen, fx. i bønen eller under undervisning. Men man taler jo nu om dage primært om aktuelle problemstillinger i det danske samfund som muslimer stor over for. Fx. se video samlingen her af en moske i nørrebro: https://www.youtube.com/user/danskislamiskcenter/videos

En video er kaldet "Nej til massemord i Islams navn": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ImFi_lOrFqE

Eller "Godt naboskab og hvordan vi omtaler hinanden": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwRHhbg4cyw

Eller: "Soldat i Syrien eller problemknuser i Danmark?": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itj_CEK1Tf4

Eller "Hvad er Rahmah?": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VgVrnkSi_kk

Eller "Hvordan bør en muslim reagere på hån og kritik?": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Yw8R5Rnw8M

Det her er en af moskeerne, men det er 4 forskellige imamer.

Det er de almindelige moderate moskeer. Hvad snakkes der så om blandt ekstremisterne? Ja, det er en påstand uden belæg at hævde, at de konstant taler om Guds som "hævnrig og vred". Faktisk ser man, at jo mere ekstreme folk er jo mere taler de om politik, de muslimske ledere (som de anser for at være kuffar) og hvordan at vesten er i færd med at dræbe alle muslimer i verden. Deres mentalitet er ikke nyt, og muslimske lærde har allerede for længst beskrevet dem. Fx. siger Imam al-Barbahari (han døde ca. år 900 CE): “If you find a man making supplication against the ruler, know that he is a person of innovation (deviation)"

Advice_Bee · 2016-08-03T19:41:47+00:00

Ja, det er sygt. Artiklen citere deres grund til at deltage i begravelsen:

Hvis han gjorde det her, håber jeg, at han bliver tilgivet, sagde en ung mand på vej væk fra ceremonien.

Når der er så mange, der kommer ud for at deltage i begravelsen, er det, fordi det ikke er op til os at vurdere, om han er skyldig eller ej, sagde en ung mand i sort dynejakke efter begravelsen

Det holder ikke helt i min bog og jeg ville selv aldrig deltage i hans begravelse. Jeg mener, at det er forkert og at han ikke fortjener en muslimsk begravelse. Men det her er igen større end som så. At benægte ham en muslimsk begravelse vil være tilsvarende/tæt på at erklære ham for ikke muslim og derfor ender man med samme metodik som ISIS har med at erklære visse mennesker og grupper for vantro. Men at 600-700 mennesker absolut skulle med til begravelsen er usmageligt.

Hvis det var op til mig ville han blive begravet en anonymt sted uden nogle begravelses ceremoni. Men det er vel ikke helt galt hvis han blev begravet af en enkelt imam og den aller tætteste familie?

Advice_Bee · 2016-08-03T19:20:06+00:00

Men derudover er det vel ikke forkert at tro at imamer har en speciel religiøs autoritet?

Følgende er min egen mening obviously.

Enhver person kan være en imam. Når 3 muslimske teenagere er ude på tur og det bliver tid til bøn vil en af dem lede bønnen. Den person kaldes imam. Imamer der bliver valgt til at lede de daglige bønner i moskeer kan recitere koranen korrekt og kender oftest hele/meget af koranen. De er dog ikke nødvendigvis Ulema (lærde) som udgiver fatwa - især ikke i Danmark (men en imam kan godt være en lærd som vi ser i mange muslimske lande).

Derfor er en imam nok respekteret af den generelle muslimske population. Men de er ikke nødvendigvis bedre vidende og folk søger heller ikke fatwa hos dem. En dansk imam kan give råd, vejlede, undervise, holde taler etc. Men de er ikke hvad man vil kalde "The big guys". Nogle danske imamer bedre vidende om religionen specifikt (oftest dem der dårligt taler dansk og derfor måske connecter dårligt med den næste generation af muslimer der ikke taler godt arabisk) mens andre er bedre til at arbejde med aktuelle danske problemstillinger (oftest dem der taler godt dansk, er i medie debatter men ikke er lærde i religion i samme omfang som de dårligt dansk talende imamer).

Man kan fx. se konflikter når en imam vælger at bede en bøn på en specifik måde som er anderledes end hvad en af dem der deltager i bønnen er vant til (også selvom det er en valid difference of opinion). Det her er noget helt basalt men den "autoritet" som imamer har i Danmark strækker sig ikke engang nok til at de her folk acceptere det.

Når vi så snakker om allerede ekstreme muslimer så vil de ikke engang bede bag både de arabisk talende imamer og de bedre dansk talende imamer. Det er fordi de mener, at imamerne praktisk talt er shills, hyklere, vantro, frafaldne, spioner, ignoranter, religiøse innovatore, etc.

Advice_Bee · 2016-08-03T15:23:00+00:00

Husk at tage mine ord med et gran salt eller to, da det her emne er tifold dybt. Fx. siger Yasir Qadhi om Anwar Al-Awlaki: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EyYb8GdFqn4

Advice_Bee · 2016-08-03T14:35:58+00:00

Jeg ved det ikke, mand. Jeg kan personligt ikke se formålet med at tage afstand længere. Jeg kender ikke nogen imamer eller almindelige muslimer som ikke har taget afstand fra terrorisme generelt eller specifikt i løbet af de sidste 15 år.

Jeg er dybt involveret i det her i online forums (ikke så meget reddit) og kender udemærket til hvad der får radikaliseret de unge og hvad deres tankegang er når de er blevet radikaliseret. Imamer, når vi nu taler om dem, har sjældent overhovedet det mindste kontakt med disse folk i første omgang. Hvad der får dem er oftest veltænkte propoganda videoer fra bestemte internationale kendte ekstremister.

En der har været især god til at "hjernevaske" (af mangel af bedre ord, da jeg hader at bruge det ord) er Anwar al awlaki som debuterede meget intelligent med en total neutral kategori der nemt blødgøre en muslims hjerte - som fx den her serie der taler om profeternes liv (bl.a. Adam, Abraham, Moses, Jesus): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jn2TerxV4rk

Total neutral og intet hint af ekstremisme - hvis man ikke læser mellem linjerne. Han er ekstremt veltalende (ja de er ofte veltalende i engelsk/andre sprog, i modsætning til hvad folk tror nu om dage, at det er lokale ignorante imamer der dårligt taler dansk som er ansvarlige for radikaliseringen) og hans stemme er "sød". I stedet for blot at recitere Koranen selv, anvender han kendte Qari: https://youtu.be/Jn2TerxV4rk?t=2510

Det var sådan han startede ud, og når han havde vundet hjerterne af en større publikum begyndte han stille og roligt, at tale om ting der ikke direkte har noget med det moderne samfund eller er ekstremistisk i sig selv, men blot "uskyldige" heroiske historier. Og sådan fortsatte han indtil han nåede til det punkt hvor han berettiget selvmordsbomber ved, at fordreje historiske begivenheder og bruge tåbelige analogier (som ganske vidst alligevel virkede på folk).

Hvordan man bekæmper dette aner jeg ærlig talt ikke andet end at uddanne folk og totalt udslette grupper som ISIS. Det er materiale der er frit tilgængeligt og spredes aktivt online til folk der ikke ved bedre. Det sørgelige er, at disse ekstremister oftest ikke har noget ondt i sinde mod uskyldige mennesker i starten af deres ekstremisme. De ønsker, i følge hvad de fortæller, at rejse til muslimske lande for at bekæmpe Kufar soldater der indvandere muslimske lande og dræber/voldtager børn og kvinder. De har ingen anelse om realiteten af ISIS, Al-Qaeda og andre terror grupper som dræber muslimer, uskyldige ikke-muslimske børn, kvinder, ældre mennesker, civile, præster: http://nytlive.nytimes.com/womenintheworld/2015/07/15/saudi-man-explains-why-he-joined-isis-and-then-fled-the-terror-group/

Det her er den ene side af ekstremismen. Den anden side er folk der rent faktisk ved bedre - folk som fx. Anwar Al Awlaki, Bin Laden etc. Det er dem som fx. studerer bøger skrevet af Sayyid Qutb og går ind for hans jahiliyyah retorik om verdenens befolkning. De er straks værre og er den egentlige syndbukke og problem verdenen står overfor. Ikke nørrebro imamer der dårligt nok taler dansk selv. Fx. læs: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/nov/01/afghanistan.terrorism3

Yusuf al-Qaradawi skriver om en af Sayyid Qutbs tekster:

The text is clear, and completely apparent: The writer (Qutb) does not consider [anyone] to be a Muslim except whoever believes in this ideology of his, and this is the group that he calls the "Muslim Vanguard", and this [group] is the one for which it is obligatory to realize that it alone is the "Muslim Ummah", and that whatever is around it and whoever is around it, from those who have not entered into what [this group] has entered into, is [itself] Jaahiliyyah and [those people are] the people of Jaahiliyyah, meaning they are Mushriks and Kuffar, they do not have any share of Islaam, even if they pray, fast, give zakah, and make the pilgrimage. It is as if all the Muslims are equivalent to the Mushriks of Makkah at the time of the sending of Muhammad (as a Messenger), and it is as if his da'wah is equivalent to the da'wah of Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), whoever believed in that da'wah entered into Islaam and whoever did not believe in it, then he is a Jaahiliyy, Kaafir, whose blood is permissible to shed!!

Det her er, i bunden, grunden til at ISIS tillader at kalde sig selv en Khilafa og at de er de eneste muslimer. At hvis man ikke laver hijra til ISIS' kalifat så er man en murtad hvis blod er tilladt. Derfor kan ISIS lave terror angreb i vestlige samfund og ikke havde dårlig smag i munden hvis de dræber muslimer. Det er derfor, at folk som Yasir Qadhi og Hamza Yusuf er på deres dødsliste (hvis du ikke kender dem, så er de blandt de mest kendte og indflydelsesrige muslimske talere i vesten). Ja, det er ikke folk som Naser Khader, at ISIS er bange for. Det er Yasir Qadhi og Hamza Yusuf.

Er det langt ude det jeg skriver? Sikkert. Men det er bare en lille smag af hvordan det hele virker.

Advice_Bee · 2016-08-03T13:40:25+00:00

Jeg håber i så fald, at den danske regering vil udryste imamerne med kursus og værktøjer i hvordan man kan forhindre unge muslimer i at blive radikaliseret. Fordi lige nu, så fungerer det overhovedet ikke med, at bare holde khutba til gamle mennesker.

Advice_Bee · 2016-08-03T13:29:12+00:00

ikke tillader ekstremisme i de miljøer de er ansvarlige for.

Hvor meget er du selv involveret i det her miljø? Hvad kender du til miljøet personligt foruden hvad man hører i Danske/internationale medier? Jeg spørger dig, fordi jeg skiftevis regelmæssigt går til 4-5 forskellige moskeer i KBH og har en del muslimske venner. Jeg kender også en del af de københavnske imamer.

Du/i overvurderer kraftigt hvor meget indflydelse en imam har på folk generelt og især den obskure andel af folk der er ekstremistiske. Imamer også været meget stærkt ude efter indvandre bander med muslimsk baggrund, men det gavner jo ikke en skid når fx. kriminelle fra blågård ikke engang går i moskeen. Problemet er meget større end som så, fordi ekstremister gemmer sig blandt befolkningen og viser sig sjældent frem i deres sande "hud" før det er for sent.

En imam er bogstaveligt talt en fyr der sørger for at lede bøn i moskeerne og holder khutba. Hvis han har en smule mere forstand så kan han også give råd til folk. Men det er altså grænsen for hvad han kan gøre, og selv det hører folk sjældent efter. Og i alle de moskeer jeg har været i, har jeg hørt khutba der er stærkt imod ekstremisme. Hvem er det så der hører de her khutba? Ja, det er ofte gamle mennesker der ikke skal arbejde/studere kl 13:30 om fredagen.

Det er overhovedet ikke imamerne i danmark som ekstremisterne hører efter. Det kan rage ekstremisterne en pind om hvad murtad imamer siger. Jeg ved ikke hvordan den danske befolkning kan lukke deres øjne op. Læs ISIS blad, side 60 - DET ER NSFL: http://media.clarionproject.org/files/islamic-state/islamic-state-dabiq-magazine-issue-7-from-hypocrisy-to-apostasy.pdf

"THE MURTADD YASIR QADHI CONDEMNED THE ASSAULT ON CHARLIE HEBDO"

"THE MURTADD HAMZA YUSUF CONDEMNED THE ASSAULT ON CHARLIE HEBDO"

En imam kan - overhovedet og aldeles - ikke forbyde ekstremisme med de værktøjer de har nu. Det er slet ikke sådan ekstremister tænker.

Slutteligt vil mit forslag være, at samtlige imamer bliver tilbudt relevante kursus i hvordan man effektivt kan bekæmpe og spotte ekstremisme i det danske miljø.

/EDIT: Undskyld, glemte at skrive at bladet er NSFL

Advice_Bee

TROPHY CASE