Jump to content

Need help answering a Christian's Questions on the nature of Waheguru in Sikhi


TheeTurbanator
 Share

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, GurjantGnostic said:

Islam is a beautiful religion, and the teachings of the Prophet Mohammed are quite good. 

I would seriously reconsider this viewpoint.

11 minutes ago, GurjantGnostic said:

If there was not truth in Islam Guru Nanak Ji would not have had anything to do with muslims.

Expand on this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, GurjantGnostic said:

 

Islam is a beautiful religion, and the teachings of the Prophet Mohammed are quite good.  Let it be a lesson to us all that if we are not careful any religion can be corrupted. 

Oh, wow, you are quite naive, brother. Blows my mind.

Are you trying to say the Koran is wonderful, and it's only the stuff that's written outside of the Koran that's bad? If so, have you checked out the Koran?

15 minutes ago, GurjantGnostic said:

If there was not truth in Islam Guru Nanak Ji would not have had anything to do with muslims.

"to do" as in merely talking with them? So the mere fact of talking with someone means you think there's truth in their religion/philosophy/whatever? Among other things, this proposition of yours means that people could never talk to other people for fear of validating their thinking.

Do you believe that a news reporter that does an interview with a vile person, say a Nazi, means that the National Socialism has truth?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BhForce said:

Oh, wow, you are quite naive, brother. Blows my mind.

Are you trying to say the Koran is wonderful, and it's only the stuff that's written outside of the Koran that's bad? If so, have you checked out the Koran?

"to do" as in merely talking with them? So the mere fact of talking with someone means you think there's truth in their religion/philosophy/whatever? Among other things, this proposition of yours means that people could never talk to other people for fear of validating their thinking.

Do you believe that a news reporter that does an interview with a vile person, say a Nazi, means that the National Socialism has truth?

EDIT: I cannot stand by what I said in this post.  I was totally wrong, except the following part

I know what the Moghuls and Pakistani did to Sikhs it's the definition of Evil.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, GurjantGnostic said:

My understanding of the Quaran is not good enough to go into great detail.  But consider this.  The prophet Mohammed preached equality of race, and sex, and also did not believe in caste.  When he took Mecca, and destroyed the idols, he ldid not destroy the rock I think it was placed there by Abraham?, as it was not an idol, but represented monotheism.  He commanded that no innocents and no property be harmed, and that if the enemy were to surrender they would not be hurt.  Fast forward to mass terror, conversion by the sword, and bombings that Islam is linked with today and how can we say these people are Muslims?

Was not Guru Nanak Ji's closest companion a Muslim, at the birth of SIkhi? 

Bro this is what they want you to believe. By their own law they are allowed to lie about the nature of their faith to keep it prospering. Mass terror and conversion by the sword have been policies of islam since day one. If you spend enough time around muslims you'll see what I mean. They have been doing everything you said from the beginning. You just need to look at their own history. We are fed all these lies and have been bombarded with them so much, they have now become the norm and if you speak out the truth you are labeled an "Islamaphobe". Islam is a disgusting and vile cult and God ain't got nothing to do with it. Hell even Satan (pun intended) wouldn't go next to them.

It's a huge misconception that Guru Nanak Dev Ji's companion was a muslim. Many of the friendly stories and interactions between Sikhs and islamists are a load of bollocks barring a few. Any even those were with muslims who are considered heretics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, MrDoaba said:

Bro this is what they want you to believe. By their own law they are allowed to lie about the nature of their faith to keep it prospering. Mass terror and conversion by the sword have been policies of islam since day one. If you spend enough time around muslims you'll see what I mean. They have been doing everything you said from the beginning. You just need to look at their own history. We are fed all these lies and have been bombarded with them so much, they have now become the norm and if you speak out the truth you are labeled an "Islamaphobe". Islam is a disgusting and vile cult and God ain't got nothing to do with it. Hell even Satan (pun intended) wouldn't go next to them.

It's a huge misconception that Guru Nanak Dev Ji's companion was a muslim. Many of the friendly stories and interactions between Sikhs and islamists are a load of bollocks barring a few. Any even those were with muslims who are considered heretics.

They should live up to their lies rather than their truths then.  Lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, GurjantGnostic said:

The prophet Mohammed preached equality of race, and sex, and also did not believe in caste.

Well, if that's how you want to define "Muslim" maybe I'll call myself a Muslim. But that's not how 99.99% of Muslims define Muslim. They define it as believing in the Koran, and the Hadith, too.

4 minutes ago, GurjantGnostic said:

When he took Mecca, and destroyed the idols, he ldid not destroy the rock I think it was placed there by Abraham?, as it was not an idol, but represented monotheism

Right, which is why the Muslims destroy churches, temples, and idols of Hindu gods, Buddha, and Jesus and Christian iconography when they conquer a territory. How's this a good thing?

6 minutes ago, GurjantGnostic said:

He commanded that no innocents and no property be harmed,

"Innocents" are defined as Muslims. Property is not to be harmed because they are going to take it over.

7 minutes ago, GurjantGnostic said:

if the enemy were to surrender they would not be hurt.

Right, so they are demanding that Europe surrender to their demands, otherwise they will be hurt. The head of Turkey (Erdogan) actually warned that Europeans "will not walk safely on the streets" if they don't give in to his demands. That's not some ISIS nutso, that's the President of Turkey, a NATO ally!

How you can say "they won't be hurt if they surrender" is a good thing is beyond my comprehension.

11 minutes ago, GurjantGnostic said:

Fast forward to mass terror, conversion by the sword, and bombings that Islam is linked with today and how can we say these people are Muslims?

Because, bro, the basis for this is contained right within the Koran:

Quran (9:29) - "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued." 

12 minutes ago, GurjantGnostic said:

Was not Guru Nanak Ji's closest companion a Muslim, at the birth of SIkhi? 

You are referring to Bhai Mardana, who was a Muslim by birth. By keeping the company of Guru Nanak ji, Bhai Mardana effectively became a kafir (apostate). Simply singing is forbidden in Islam, singing what is purported to be divine revelation by a prophet coming after the Prophet Mohammed is definitely apostasy. 

Put it this way: If you want to say that Bhai Mardana was still a Muslim after worshipping according to the way taught by Guru Nanak, I want to ask if you think Guru Nanak ji was still a Hindu?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • yeh it's true, we shouldn't be lazy and need to learn jhatka shikaar. It doesn't help some of grew up in surrounding areas like Slough and Southall where everyone thought it was super bad for amrit dharis to eat meat, and they were following Sant babas and jathas, and instead the Singhs should have been normalising jhatka just like the recent world war soldiers did. We are trying to rectifiy this and khalsa should learn jhatka.  But I am just writing about bhog for those that are still learning rehit. As I explained, there are all these negative influences in the panth that talk against rehit, but this shouldn't deter us from taking khanda pahul, no matter what level of rehit we are!
    • How is it going to help? The link is of a Sikh hunter. Fine, but what good does that do the lazy Sikh who ate khulla maas in a restaurant? By the way, for the OP, yes, it's against rehit to eat khulla maas.
    • Yeah, Sikhs should do bhog of food they eat. But the point of bhog is to only do bhog of food which is fit to be presented to Maharaj. It's not maryada to do bhog of khulla maas and pretend it's OK to eat. It's not. Come on, bro, you should know better than to bring this Sakhi into it. Is this Sikh in the restaurant accompanied by Guru Gobind Singh ji? Is he fighting a dharam yudh? Or is he merely filling his belly with the nearest restaurant?  Please don't make a mockery of our puratan Singhs' sacrifices by comparing them to lazy Sikhs who eat khulla maas.
    • Seriously?? The Dhadi is trying to be cute. For those who didn't get it, he said: "Some say Maharaj killed bakras (goats). Some say he cut the heads of the Panj Piyaras. The truth is that they weren't goats. It was she-goats (ਬਕਰੀਆਂ). He jhatka'd she-goats. Not he-goats." Wow. This is possibly the stupidest thing I've ever heard in relation to Sikhi.
    • Instead of a 9 inch or larger kirpan, take a smaller kirpan and put it (without gatra) inside your smaller turban and tie the turban tightly. This keeps a kirpan on your person without interfering with the massage or alarming the masseuse. I'm not talking about a trinket but rather an actual small kirpan that fits in a sheath (you'll have to search to find one). As for ahem, "problems", you could get a male masseuse. I don't know where you are, but in most places there are professional masseuses who actually know what they are doing and can really relieve your muscle pains.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use