what do you know about Islam?

[LittleLambofJesus]

Hm, well now that I think about it, I know someone who's Asatru and was formerly Muslim.

You would think if Muslims were at war with Asatruar he might've said something about it?

Oh well, we mustn't let anyone be confused with actual facts.

I say everyone just forget "Religion" and just:

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/458563/lemonz_everybody_dance_now/

 

[Booko]

I don't know. Arthra used the term. If you wish to demonstrate that you're reading the thread you might want to go back and see where he said it.

Thanks, as one of Art's coreligionists I'm well aware of what he meant by it.

What I did not understand was what you meant by it, or the reason for your repetition of the phrase. Which is why I asked you.

I read what Arthra said!

Good, for your next exciting act maybe you can try responding to my posts instead of a tendentious reading of them.

That Islam's so benevolent that the Baha'i had to go to Israel to escape persecutioN!

We didn't "go to Israel." Baha'u'llah and His family was sent there as the end in a succession of exiles. The main Baha'i community was still in Persia.

Hey, if you want to criticize Islam, knock yourself out, but it would be helpful if you criticized it for something that's actually factual.

 

[Booko]

I say everyone just forget "Religion" and just: \

I'm all for that!

 

[katautumn]

a) How is a tu quoque a defence if in fact you're offering that?
b) Are you accepting the allegation that Muhammed did those things charged by Jefell?
c) Which of the "Bible heroes" are you saying that we Christians follow AS Moslems follow Muhammed? You claim you were a Christian, think back to your teachings and tell me when you were raised to follow the examples of someone in the Bible and go and kill people.

I can give you one example right off the top of my head:

King David. David was touted in the Word as a "man after God's own heart". He slain Goliath when he was just a young man. He was God's chosen and yet he raped Bathsheba, impregnated her and then had her husband, Uriah, murdered so that he could have her all to himself. David is lauded by many Christians to be one of the most honorable men in the Bible and yet simply dismiss his issues with, "well, we all make mistakes. David still had a sinful nature."

Muslims do not worship Muhammed. They revere him for being a prophet. It's no different than King David, although David did not prophesy. He did, however, pen many of the Psalms.

I just get tickled when someone tries to use Muhammed's life to try and smear Islam. "Oh, he was a pedophile! He married a nine year old girl! He murdered people!" It's funny because some of the male heroes in the Bible whom Christians revere are guilty of the same things.

In fact, when God commanded Moses to go to war with the Midianites, do you know what Moses told his soldiers to do with the captured? You're going to love this:

"Have you allowed all the women to live?" he asked them. 16 "They were the ones who followed Balaam's advice and were the means of turning the Israelites away from the LORD in what happened at Peor, so that a plague struck the LORD's people. 17 Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, 18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

Or, if you prefer the King James Version of the same passage:

And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive? 16Behold, these caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to commit trespass against the LORD in the matter of Peor, and there was a plague among the congregation of the LORD.
17Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.
18But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.

Is it safe to say that Moses was giving his soldiers permission to commit acts of pedophilia with their captives? If it wasn't considered pedophilia because, "well, that was during the Bible times and girls got married younger in those days" then why would people slam Islam for Muhammed marrying a nine year old girl? Most girls in those times were betrothed from the time of birth and were wed just prior to or as soon as they began menstruating.

 

[katautumn]

It differs because we know that nonsense about Muhammad being a pedophile is historically untrue and is nothing more than gossip spread about da internetz. Well, that would be putting it charably. Actually I think it runs a little closer to bearing false witness, but that's me.

Then it would probably explain why every time you see a rail against Muslims on an internet forum the age of Aisha changes every time. I've seen people say Aisha was as young as six years old in some discussions. Although I've also heard rumors online that when Mary was betrothed to Joseph she was twelve and he was in his sixties or seventies.

It's pretty sad when people cannot debate religious fundamentals without attacking significant religious figures. As I said, the heroes in the Bible (with the exception of the story of Jesus) were no prize. Most of them did some pretty unspeakable things.

 

[Montalban]

Thanks, as one of Art's coreligionists I'm well aware of what he meant by it.

What I did not understand was what you meant by it, or the reason for your repetition of the phrase. Which is why I asked you.

He like you, offered an apology for Islam. He said that Baha'i had a special realationship. So special that your faith can't have it's HQ in an Islamic nation!

Good, for your next exciting act maybe you can try responding to my posts instead of a tendentious reading of them.

Such big words

We didn't "go to Israel." Baha'u'llah and His family was sent there as the end in a succession of exiles. The main Baha'i community was still in Persia.

Baha'i are HQ'd in Israel. Therefore it's HQ went there.

Hey, if you want to criticize Islam, knock yourself out, but it would be helpful if you criticized it for something that's actually factual.

I've cited facts. You've cited emotional personal experiences. You seem to have confused the two - hence asking me to provide facts, when I've done so!

 

[Montalban]

I can give you one example right off the top of my head:

try answering all the questions

a) how's tu quoque a defence?
b) as a Christian - which you claim you were - were you ever encouraged to marry a child (as part of your religious duty?) (did you hear of anyone else)- this would go to whether you're on a point about quoting from the OT in the first place.

You missed these, but there's several questions I'd asked...
a) How is a tu quoque a defence if in fact you're offering that?
b) Are you accepting the allegation that Muhammed did those things charged by Jefell?
c) Which of the "Bible heroes" are you saying that we Christians follow AS Moslems follow Muhammed? You claim you were a Christian, think back to your teachings and tell me when you were raised to follow the examples of someone in the Bible and go and kill people.

And note, not only did you avoid a) and b) but you picked and chose what to address from c) so I ask you again which OT people are we meant to follow in this regards? (just assuming for a moment they consummated relations with children)

 

[Montalban]

Then it would probably explain why every time you see a rail against Muslims on an internet forum the age of Aisha changes every time. I've seen people say Aisha was as young as six years old in some discussions. Although I've also heard rumors online that when Mary was betrothed to Joseph she was twelve and he was in his sixties or seventies.

Is there a point there somewhere?

It's pretty sad when people cannot debate religious fundamentals without attacking significant religious figures. As I said, the heroes in the Bible (with the exception of the story of Jesus) were no prize. Most of them did some pretty unspeakable things.

That's exactly what you do. I cite Islamic evidence about Muhammed and instead of addressing that you attack figures in the OT. You do exactly what you preach against.

I find it a pitty that rather than any one of you condemning what Muhammed did you feel obliged to offer a relativist defence to a sexual assault upon a child (Aisha). Can you imagine that in court. Some man's on trial for such a horrendous crime and you step forward and say "We can't condmen him because other people do it"

No wonder you were moved to leave Christianity.

I'll take the time to state this though most reading it won't bother - as you've demonstrated already by missing several questions I asked.

1) Muhammed consummated a marriage with a six year old. This fact is stated not just once, but several times in Hadith. One might like to call into question 'hadith' in general - which doesn't address these particular hadith verses.
2a) the 'tu quoque' defence is a logical fallacy. Even if people in the OT consummated marriages with children it would in no way excuse Muhammed. None at all. Yet none of you acknowledge what Muahmmed did!
2b) The relationship between myself as a Christian and any OT figure is not in the slightest the same as that between a Moslem and Muhammed anyway
We're Christians - followers of Christ. Not Davidians or Moseans. There's no "NT" for Isalm. Muhammed's example is still to be followed.

Perhaps you come here with good intents but you're defending a gross attack on a child.

What's that say!

 

[Montalban]

I'm all for that!

And yet you say you're of a religious faith!

 

[Montalban]

There are several people here screaming out for Christ's guiding light.

I am amazed how many people jump to the defence of henious crimes against children

 

[elwill]

what if the apostate converts to Christianity? is this a capital offense?

no , there must be another reasons beside .
anyway if you really wanna to know about this issue from prospective of muslims , i can help you with islamic sites

this issue is raised much in the forums , but actually i didn't see facts about this issue
most of muslims countries not punish apostates

 

[katautumn]

try answering all the questions

a) how's tu quoque a defence?

Sheesh. You're like the person who, when presented with a sound argument, cries "STRAWMAN!" every time.

b) as a Christian - which you claim you were - were you ever encouraged to marry a child - this would go to whether you're on a point about quoting from the OT in the first place.

No, but, then again, it's a different time. My late grandmother got married at thirteen to a twenty-two year old man and not only did no one argue against it, it was an arranged marriage. It was a completely different time. In today's society, we know that it's unacceptable for an adult to marry a child. Hundreds of years ago it was the preferred method, mainly due to the fact that it was important for the man to be an established land owner and the wife was young so that she could bear many children for him.

How can you condemn Islam because it's rumored Muhammed had a child bride and dismiss a passage of Scripture I presented in which Moses himself instructed his soldiers to have sex with child virgins?

1) Muhammed consummated a marriage with a six year old. This fact is stated not just once, but several times in Hadith. One might like to call into question 'hadith' in general - which doesn't address these particular hadith verses.

Actually, if the stories you read on the intarwebz are true, he did not "consummate" a marriage to a six year old girl. From written stories she was seven when she was betrothed to Muhammed. Betrothed, not having relations with. Big difference.

2a) the 'tu quoque' defence is a logical fallacy. Even if people in the OT consummated marriages with children it would in no way excuse Muhammed. None at all. Yet none of you acknowledge what Muahmmed did!

It's not a tu quoque defense! *headdesk* Why would it be acceptable for people in the Old Testament to consummate marriages with children, but in no way acceptable for Muhammed? We're talking about around 600AD here, not the 1950's. I would assume child brides were still acceptable in those times.

2b) The relationship between myself as a Christian and any OT figure is not in the slightest the same as that between a Moslem and Muhammed anyway

Care to explain why? Because you're following the "right" religion and that means whatever atrocities committed by heroes of the Bible are excused?

We're Christians - followers of Christ. Not Davidians or Moseans. There's no "NT" for Isalm. Muhammed's example is still to be followed.

If this were true, Muslims would be called "Muhammedites" or some other name. Do you even know what "Islam" translates into? "Total submission to God". Muslim (an adherent of the Islamic religion) means, "one who submits to God." Muslims believe the same way about Muhammed as Christians do about the authors of the Bible - that the sacred texts were revealed to him by God, Himself. There is no difference.

Perhaps you come here with good intents but you're defending a gross attack on a child.

That's rich, Montalban, but sadly not shocking coming from you.

 

[katautumn]

There are several people here screaming out for Christ's guiding light.

I am amazed how many people jump to the defence of henious crimes against children

Like when God ordered for the firstborn sons of Egypt to be thrown into the Nile?

 

[elwill]

So Muhammed was at war with this person?

From Ibn Hisham's Sirat Rasul Allah ("The Life of the Prophet of God" - the oldest extant biography of Muhammad), page 365. The background to his murder is that after the battle of Badr, Ka'b b. al-Ashraf was horrified by Muhammad's victory, and the death of certain Arab leaders. I'll start with Kab's quote expressing his surprise at the Muslim victory.

QUOTE FROM THE SIRAT RASULALLAH
""Is this true? Did Muhammad actually kill these whom these two men mention? These are the nobles of the Arabs and kingly men; by God, if Muhammad has slain these people it were better to be dead than alive." When the enemy of god became certain that the news was true he left the town and went to Mecca to stay with al-Muttalib who was married to Atika. She took him in and entertained him hospitably. He began to inveigh against the apostle and to recite verses in which he bewailed the Quraysh who were thrown into the pit after having been slain at Badr."
the fact that Kab went to the prophet Muhammad’s enemy and incited against Muhammad with them

Kab incited people to kill Muhammad and Muslims, so therefore he became an enemy

What about the idea that Islam is permanently at war with that part of the world not submitted to Islam?

this is the idea of most westerners , it isn't muslims's idea , it's your problem
if you read the history , you will find how muslims lived with christians and jews in peace under muslims rule through most of the time

Allāh does not forbid you(muslims) from those who do not fight you because of religion and do not expel you from your homes – from being righteous toward them and acting justly toward them. Indeed, Allāh loves those who act justly.


Allāh only forbids you from those who fight you because of religion and expel you from your homes and aid in your expulsion – [forbids] that you make allies of them. And whoever makes allies of them, then it is those who are the wrongdoers.

 

[elwill]

The evidence that he 'consummated' a marriage with a child comes from Islam itself.

Marriage for young girls was widely practiced among Arabs back then, and even today in many third-world non-Muslim and Muslim countries.

Since GOD Almighty enabled females in Aisha's age to get pregnant, as it happened even in our world today , then why can't her age be the minimum age for marriage, especially during the Biblical and Islamic days where people used to die between the ages of 40s and 50s due to diseases and malnutrition?

can you proof for me that marrying of girls in these age are opposed to any relegion in the world ?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

no , there must be another reasons beside .
anyway if you really wanna to know about this issue from prospective of muslims , i can help you with islamic sites

this issue is raised much in the forums , but actually i didn't see facts about this issue
most of muslims countries not punish apostates

But just because they leave Islam does not mean they have left the belief and faith that is of YHWH and His Christ Jesus. Is that not a correct assesement? If a Christian converts to Islam he is not leaving them either are they? Thoughts? Salam

http://www.scripture4all.org/

Galation 1:6 I am marveling that thus swiftly ye are being translated from the calling of ye into a different Good-Message.
7 which is not another if no any are the ones disturbing ye and willing to pervert the Good-Message of the Christ.
8 But even if-ever we, or a messenger out of heaven, should be messaging to ye beside which we well-messagizing to ye, anathema/anaqema <331> let him be.

Reve 22:3 and every anathema/kat-anaqema <2652> not shall be still. And the throne of the God/YHWH and of the Lamb-kin in Her shall be, and His bond-servants shall be offering divine-service to Him.

 

[Montalban]

Sheesh. You're like the person who, when presented with a sound argument, cries "STRAWMAN!" every time.

But I don't cry STRAWMAN - I cry "tu quoque". And evidentally as you're still insisting on ignoring my questions, and continuing with this logical fallacy you've obviously nothing to add.

No, but, then again, it's a different time. My late grandmother got married at thirteen to a twenty-two year old man and not only did no one argue against it, it was an arranged marriage. It was a completely different time. In today's society, we know that it's unacceptable for an adult to marry a child. Hundreds of years ago it was the preferred method, mainly due to the fact that it was important for the man to be an established land owner and the wife was young so that she could bear many children for him.

Sigh! You seem to want to turn my questions into something else, and answer that. Where did your grandmother do this based on Christian teaching? Cite the Christian teaching.

How can you condemn Islam because it's rumored Muhammed had a child bride and dismiss a passage of Scripture I presented in which Moses himself instructed his soldiers to have sex with child virgins?

How can you condone what Muhammed did by continuing with a tu quoque argument?

Actually, if the stories you read on the intarwebz are true, he did not "consummate" a marriage to a six year old girl.

I'm not basing my argument on 'stories' but facts. Again you wish to take from my post what you want and deal with that. I cited Hadith.

It's not a tu quoque

It is.

I raised the issue of Muhammed and a child. You say "But your Bible does the same thing". That's you too argument!

We're talking about around 600AD here, not the 1950's. I would assume child brides were still acceptable in those times.

Another example of where you've seletively ignored what I've written.

Where does the Hadith (which you're ignoring) say "This is an example only for our time and culture"?

It's sad when people are so wrapped up in hatred of Christianity that they defend evil, even child abuse.

 

[Montalban]

Like when God ordered for the firstborn sons of Egypt to be thrown into the Nile?

Which is another tu quoque.

Was what Muhammed did wrong? Well, you've already excused it as being culturally relative to his time/place

 

[Montalban]

Marriage for young girls was widely practiced among Arabs back then, and even today in many third-world non-Muslim and Muslim countries.

Show me where it's condemned in modern Arab countries because it's no longer 'relevant'.

Since GOD Almighty enabled females in Aisha's age to get pregnant, as it happened even in our world today , then why can't her age be the minimum age for marriage, especially during the Biblical and Islamic days where people used to die between the ages of 40s and 50s due to diseases and malnutrition?

Show me Aisha 'got pregnant' at that age.

can you proof for me that marrying of girls in these age are opposed to any relegion in the world ?

That's not the argument. For instance never have I accused Muhammed of pedophilia and yet others keep using that word in their replies to me. Let's stick to the argument being made.

 

[Montalban]

From Ibn Hisham's Sirat Rasul Allah ("The Life of the Prophet of God" - the oldest extant biography of Muhammad), page 365. The background to his murder is that after the battle of Badr, Ka'b b. al-Ashraf was horrified by Muhammad's victory, and the death of certain Arab leaders. I'll start with Kab's quote expressing his surprise at the Muslim victory.

QUOTE FROM THE SIRAT RASULALLAH
""Is this true? Did Muhammad actually kill these whom these two men mention? These are the nobles of the Arabs and kingly men; by God, if Muhammad has slain these people it were better to be dead than alive." When the enemy of god became certain that the news was true he left the town and went to Mecca to stay with al-Muttalib who was married to Atika. She took him in and entertained him hospitably. He began to inveigh against the apostle and to recite verses in which he bewailed the Quraysh who were thrown into the pit after having been slain at Badr."
the fact that Kab went to the prophet Muhammad&#8217;s enemy and incited against Muhammad with them

Kab incited people to kill Muhammad and Muslims, so therefore he became an enemy

You mean he made up verses against Muhammed and this 'encited' emnity towards Islam and thus made him an enemy. In other words "Don't criticise Islam"

It's like the poetess Muhammed had murdered for her witty ditties.

this is the idea of most westerners , it isn't muslims's idea , it's your problem
if you read the history , you will find how muslims lived with christians and jews in peace under muslims rule through most of the time

All&#257;h does not forbid you(muslims) from those who do not fight you because of religion and do not expel you from your homes &#8211; from being righteous toward them and acting justly toward them. Indeed, All&#257;h loves those who act justly.


All&#257;h only forbids you from those who fight you because of religion and expel you from your homes and aid in your expulsion &#8211; [forbids] that you make allies of them. And whoever makes allies of them, then it is those who are the wrongdoers.

I said "Islam is at war with all that is not under its rule"

So you're counter argument is "Islam isn't at war with the rest of the world because it gets on well with people under it's rule?"

That misses the mark completley. All you've done is confirmed the part of my address that Islam is NOT at war with that which is under it's rule. Not what it's reaction is to that which is NOT under it's rule.