Another doctrinal difference is the shiite belief in the institution of Imamate - the belief that the Imams were the rightly chosen successors and infalliables. Sunnis have similar reverence for the companions of the Prophet, but they don’t consider them Infalliable.So unlike what one ignorant poster has said above - shias believe in following the teachings of Quran as well as the actions of the Prophet (and the Imams), unlike Sunnis - The second Caliph is said to have proclaimed that Quran was sufficient and he needed no other guidance.

Also - a very recent phenomenon is Wahabism. Wahabis consider themselves an offshoot of Sunni Islam, started merely 200 years back and all terrorist activities can be traced back to this virulent sect. So you would never find a shia or sunni engaging in terrorism, but wahabis (also known by some other names such as Ahle-Hadiths and Salafis)

To what I have observed till now, when they are more Muslims in one country, they tend to be turmoil or troubles in that country…. as if there are no blessings in those countries. May be Satan is more influencial than Angels….in these countries.

When there are less Muslim in one country, they are really nice, good and caring people because their minds are more opened not like in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Telling you all these because of my long experience with Muslims.

Q2-Br. Zeeshan Asla,muttah was halal during the reign of Abu Bakr and half the reign of Umar, what authority did Umar have to declare muttah haram?

As for the comments about the nature of imperialism: WTF? Since when is annexation a requirement? The Romans used puppets, like our good friend Herod the Great, to put a local face on their administration. If the system did not keep the populace in line, direct occupation would follow. The Romans win either way. Either the puppet is successful, or, in an attempt to be sucessful, he is overly brutal and the Romans were “liberators”. (The system failed with Cleopatra and Herod Agrippa, who led revolts against the Romans). Hitler placed puppets in Slovakia and part of France, and even countries occupied, like the Netherlands and my beloved Norway, local constables collaborated in arrests and deportation. The SS and Gestapo were not always needed.

The Elites use religion (or ethnicity/culture) to divide the “little people” and keep them fighting each other instead of their REAL enemy & main obstacle
to freedom–The Elites.

And of course, most folks fall for it.

Saddam was a master of that game, but so is
Bu$hCo and the MSM.

As long as this Game continues, the future of the human race is very much in doubt.

Till yesterday nobody in West know the real difference between Shia and Sunni and now the bustard’s American play a dirty game and divided the society for their own advantage.

I believe they should forget what ever little difference between them and kick the westerner out of the country then build new iraq.

My two cents is that although terrorists may be in the minority, there are lots of Muslims in the world who tacitly agree with some of the things that terrorist organizations say.

The Christian equivalent would be the moderate Christian who agrees with some fundamentalist viewpoints.

Sometimes you “agree” with some points. Sometimes you just “not disagree” with others.

1. The US doesnt have to specifically invade and annex another country to be called imperialistic. In the 21st century, imperialism in the strict definition in the word would be fairly infeasible. The US operates like an economic imperialist. We already enjoy such massive power here that the vast majority of us can stay home, while a very small percentage of businessmen and government officials travel overseas to further consolidate our power. We enter into developing countries, and using money that is often supplied by the US Treasury, and approved by the World Bank, offer them massive loans to build up their infrastructure, with the stipulation that those infrastructure contracts go to private contractors that the US supports. When these countries are eventually unable to pay back these massive debts, they often cut national programs or raid their own treasury to avoid defaulting. Once they do default, we agree to absorb their debt in exchange for a ‘pound of flesh’. This may be paid in supporting specific policy measures, agreeing to fight against a specific country, privatizing their resources to US-led multinational corporations, etc etc. While our army doesnt specifically go over and enslave those of other countries, a class of businessmen representing “our” interests travels to other countries, and inevitably creates a situation in which those countries are beholden to us, by material or ideological support. So yes, we are imperialistic, we are just way, way better than previous empires at concealing this fact.

2. A country that has been in a state of national emergency for 70+ years, that has spent the majority of its history in some kind of war, that spends more on military budget than the next 50 highest military spenders combined, that jump into a war that the majority of the world are against with little to no factual support, and who are run mostly by neoconservatives who have an obsession with defense contracts and Israeli conflict….I would say the ‘warmonger’ status is pretty friggin accurate.

A. Fantasy death cults.

1. Please explain how the US can be considered imperialist, we’ve never taken a country and called it our own.
2. Please explain how the US are war mongerrers, we liberated your islamic asses and have been protecting you ever since.

Shias also hold the majority in Baltistan. This is a country that borders Tibet, which you never hear of because Pakistan has control over, so it’s part of Pakistan.

The nature of the evangelical church today is to hold Christ as the head of the church (not the Pope) and recognize our responsibility as the Body of Christ on earth (the church). In this it is VERY different than the “Catholic” church at any period.
Glenn

There are always 2 sides to any argument just like there is always 2 sides to a story. The reason for this duality is for humans to realise that balance can only be achieved when we comprehend what having 2 sides mean. It is meant for complementing. Like a mother & father, when they complement, only then will there be peace or else division will rule, one way or another.

Love is another word for unity whereas power is another word for division. Power cannot exist without division for power is division. Power cannot be shared for male and female are different. Power can only be neutralised when we realised that when truth is attained, and not read about, preached, taught, practiced artificially, etc, power becomes love. God has no notion of power for to Him, power is Love. Which is why we are all alive and sustained by aspects of Truth called The Sun, Nature, etc. If God exists and He was to have the notion of power like humans do, everything will be destroyed.

Power means to judge, to have contrast, to divide. Love, because it is not power but Truth, do not judge. The love that gives and gives without contrast, judgement, division, etc, is Permanent Power and any entity who is so empowered, do not need to judge. That entity can afford to give and give. If we comprehend this far, we will have some foundation of what Truth, Love, Power, etc is all about. It is about not judging others but judging our self and once we’ve judged our self and found out who we really, really are, we then do not need to judge others and allow others to judge us by way of religions, faiths, right & wrongs, good & bad and all the nonsense that humans take as real and immanent.

Ask yourself this and that is, how can a chimp understand what a human understands? It can’t because there is a difference in evolution [but not a difference in importance for evolution is just a message for those who are honest enough to open their eyes fully]. To evolve higher and back towards Truth/God/Love/etc, we need to evolve away from the hypocrisy that we take as real, like blind faiths. God is not about believing but about knowing and accepting who we really, realy, are and where we stand in relation to Truth, and we can only do that when we judge our self first and not others or allow hypocrisy to judge us [like when we accept a blind belief]. There is nothing that we can express on the outside [without] that we are not already inside [within]. We cannot despise hypocrisy unless we are a hypocrite our self first. Self-judgement is the truth within and only the truth will free the individual. Otherwise, we will be shackled to “technology”, religion, hypocrisy, commerce, politics, and all the junk within humanity that most take as the reason for existing.

The ONLY reason for existing is to evolve back to Truth and Nature uses the mechanism of death to reinforce that point. The blind will always be blind if they refuse to judge themselves first and when we don’t self-judge, we then judge others and covet what belongs to others, especially others’ freedom of beliefs, be that correct or incorrect. Once the majority start judging themselves first and act truthfully, peace will finally start manifesting. And not before, inspite of going to Mars, blindly and greedily/fearfully believing in super-high tech, religions, “New World Order”, kelptomania economics, politics as a means of plundering, or not. If you are “heartless”, your heart will tell you so and all the pills, surgery, maverick of Big Pharma, religion, etc, will not make a bit of difference for removing malice is not the same as perfuming it. Another word for hypocrisy. Humans were evolved to return-back-to/reflect, Truth, and not to become some mad insanity masquerading as “truth”. And WE ALL know it. Hypocrite or not and humans are addicted to hypocrisy and will do anything to hide that fact. Can any animal be so dumb as to cheat itself like humans do?

For those willing to learn more about shi’ite: http://www.al-islam.org

However, if we’re talking about splits that have survived to this day, the oldest one would be that which took place in 431 at the Council of Ephesus, between the churches that adhered to the designation “Theotokos” for the Virgin Mary (modern descendants are the Orthodox, Catholic and most Protestant denominations) and those that rejected it (the Nestorian Christians).

This was followed by the dispute between the “Diophysite” or Chalcedonian Christians (modern descendants are, again the Orthodox, Catholic and most Protestant denominations) and the “Monophysites” who rejected the Council of Chalcedon in 451. The latter group included the majority churches in Armenia, Egypt and Ethiopia. Recently, however, they seem to have kissed and made up with the Orthodox churches and, to an extent, even the Catholic church.

Only then came 1054 when Orthodox and Catholics began to go their separate ways (emphasis on began; the fourth crusade was the real clincher, and they did get back together again briefly in 1439)

And then came the Reformation….