1.
Everyone who doesnt believe in Allah and Muhammad as his prophet are nonbelievers, including jews and christians ("religion of the book")

heres one example from the quran:

"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."  Quran (9:29)

2.

Whats muslim clerics tell /=/ study

give me a link, and btw not every study can be believed

many muslims clerics said that muhammad took some orders from allah and decided not to put them in the quran

Cao Cao get named a lot as the best of the three.  I think you are referring to gamers their opinion?

The thing is that many people are fans of the Three brothers  Guan Yu, Liu Bei, Zhang Fei and Zhou Yun and Zhuge Liang/Mao Chao... and probably that is why they choose Liu Bei?

I meant real life... but yeah, often gamers opinions.

ROTK games being based on the ROTK by Luo Guanzhong which iteslf is a fictionalized account of the Three Kingdoms time period, but also the most well known account of the fall of the Han.

The actual historical records such tell a much different tale.

People choose Liu Bei based on the real story?  Well that is the thing I wanted to say I never met someone who choose Liu Bei except gamers :s or are big fans of the other characters I mentioned.

The Catholic Church put Galielo on trial for, in the Church's own words, "holding as true the false doctrine taught by some that the sun is the center of the world."

Then you come out and say something else that is sadly wrong, that Islam doesn't treat women as second class citizens.  I actually studied Islam, and every school of thought gives the same bullshit that woman aren't unequal, they just have a different role.  The husbands makes all decisions, the husband can have up to four other wives to dilute whatever minimal domestic role his wife already has, women cannot have any religious leadership role, women cannot have a political role in an Islamic government, and so forth.

Yeah, and before the Civil War slaves weren't second class citizens, they just have different roles...

1. Not true... using this searchable quran with yusaf ali traslation.... http://www.islamicity.com/quransearch/

2:62 (Y. Ali) Those who believe (in the Qur'an), and those who follow the jewish (scriptures), and the christians and the Sabians,- any who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.

RE: (9:29) Let's look at the full context beginning on 9:25...

9:25 (Y. Ali) Assuredly Allah did help you in many battle-fields and on the day of Hunain: Behold! your great numbers elated you, but they availed you naught: the land, for all that it is wide, did constrain you, and ye turned back in retreat.

If you know history, this is in relation to after the recent battle for Meccah where Muslim's were finally in control. God is speaking to those who retreated in fear even though the outcome was a win for the Muslims. He's telling them to not be afraid and to always trust God. 9:29 continues that trust and the use of 'fight' is not intended as a command to go out and kill. Its a command to not give up on your religion and to continue to strive forward. Notice there is no mention of physical attack, just taxation (Jizya). If you study the history of Islams rise to power in the world, it was actually full of little warfare. Constantinople(Egypt's) itself fell without bloodshed because the Muslim army offered a very low Jizya tax (actually lower than what the Christian Romans required) in exchange for being under Muslim command. This was also provided freedom to worship Christianity the way they chose, which was also at odds with the Roman Catholic Church.

So, this does not mean to seek out war on others, its a cry to not be scared when you have God's backing and to continue the fight. As I said before, this must be taken with the whole book as well. There are numerous areas that describe the rules of war a Muslim must follow. It always reiterates that war is for defense only and they cannot attack others without provocation or in the defense of the weak. So the idea that this is telling Muslims to go out and attack others is contradictory to the full revelation of the Qur'an.

As an example, this verse exemplifies my position with two translations.

2:190 (Y. Ali) Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors.

2:190 (Picktall) Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Lo! Allah loveth not, aggressors.

As you can see it says to fight those who are fighting you and to not start the fight as God does not like those who attack first. This is also a repeated idea at the end of almost any set of verses on the rules of war and to always strive for peace.

As for #2 on your quote, I have never heard anyone say Muhammad chose to not keep some things that came from God. In fact, the only history I've read was that Muhammad refused to allow anything to be written down unless he said it was from God. Which is another reason I think the Hadiths should be removed from Islamic study. Any cleric I heard stating what you said would send a massive red flag up as someone seeking control. Same reasoning Christians in the Middle Ages were not allowed to read the Bible; could only listen to priest.

Yeah, nice job trying to dodge the fact that you've been proven completely and utterly wrong by trying to start the whole Islam debate.

You've already proven yourself completely unlearned on the Galieo subject, even to the point of where you didn't know what the book in question was about.

He eventually was charged with hersay because he had not proof.   You could only be charged with hersay if you had none.   If you had actual scientific proof there was nothing the church could do to you.  (Legally.)

Once again, I say read the book, or the accounts... or heck, a historian's accounts.   Or hell, the Wikipedia page. (as bad as wikipedia can be.)

It's amusing how you apparently scanned through it, oblivious to all info and context until you got to a sentence you liked.  Even though pretty much every sentence and paragraph above it proved you wrong.  You'd make a great politician/lobbiest/creationist.

Which is why you so often make mistakes like this.  You only look for things that support your world view.

It's so much easier to not have a world view, and take things as they are.

And for the record, I'm of the opinion that Pope John Paul 1 was assassanated due to attempts to reform it's financial wing.  So it's not like that I'm someone who is all pro Catholic Church.

It's just a matter of looking at the established facts and histories rather then fictionalized accounts.

Well, based on the ROTK novel, which isn't really the "real story."

Dude thats not even funny