Islam: A Religion of Lies...

[Walks_in_islam]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

You have the pedophile prophet and I'm the one with an obsession?

Yes. You do have one. You focus on sex and sex with children like a fixed laser.

Walks, your posted scriptures give a progression of history of Israel, starting from their henotheist patriarch who is beckoned by God to leaves his pagan roots of Ur of the Chaldees to follow God. You then post (a later history) of the Law of Moses, where God takes the people who were Abraham's descendants and gives them the LAW. You do she a progression there in the Hebrew Bible?

Yet, still cannot see how he progression of the pagan Abraham justifies your Mohammed consummating his marriage with Aisha at the age of nine?

The child brides in your religion are brought about because the leader of your religion had a child bride.

That's what I said. Thanks.

Are you claiming now that Abraham could not have known it was a sin and it actually was not a written and defined sin until the LAW was given by God? Are you claiming that nobody at the time was in a position to even define it as a sin? It just happened that Abraham married his half-sister because it was culturally acceptable at the time? Is this the reason that even though Abraham twice sort of "pimped" his wife (half-sister) off because he was afraid he would be killed for her God intervened on both occasions and blessed this marriage and made sure she was returned to Him, even though under God's law the marriage itself is a sin? That God overlooked this in favor of Abraham's commitment to Him?

Good. We are in agreement. With that said you were tasked (8 times now speaking of counting the number of times it takes to get someone to answer a question) to go and fetch the LAW on marriage that defines the sin of marriage to a young girl, in or preceding the 8th century because the law concerning who can and cannot marry is spelled out both in the bible and Quran and neither define an "age". Because there WAS a law and there WAS a church at that time, unlike in the time of Abraham, so there were hundreds of years available for this "discovery" of the meaning of Ezekiel to be made.

So: If you cannot go and get it and you cannot find it and share it you're nothing better than a travelling four-flushing snake oil salesman. A showman. A fake. A court jester. A joke who believes you are exalted to define what is "sin" all on your own.

Otherwise, I fetched the law that is available, all of it. Despite your rabbinical claim I guess (since you dropped it like a hot iron) you must concur on that jewish law thing. (you won't admit you were wrong but I will cheerfully point that out for you. Least I can do. No problem. Really.)

You never answered Canon law nor did you provide anything remotely parallel to it from the church, any church. There is not a single verse outside of a parable in Ezekiel that only you but not the rest of the jewish or christian community has ever made a rule, or determination that this is REALLY what that verse means through all of history all the way up through colonial America.

Innocently wondering - suddenly you are quiet? no comments on taxes? location? mosques? age? No more evangelies about jewish laws or practices? Que pasa senor? I know right? Ouch. You find that pharmacy? This is the wrong place for you senor. You aren't getting anywhere here.

[Walks_in_islam]

Originally Posted by Esaias

I just read the first five or six or so pages of this thread.

It never ceases to amaze me how so many Christians seem ashamed of and offended at the One they claim as Lord and Saviour. The falling over oneself to recast God's holy Word into something acceptable to "(post)modern sensibilities."

The original post concerned Koranic allowance for telling untruths under certain circumstances.

Hebrew midwives and Rahab the harlot ought to put that to rest. (If only more Christians would study the Bible... or at least read Rushdoony lol.)

There are a few examples of untruths in the bible.

Though there is a firm commandment not to bear false witness, however based on circumstances described in several stories there do appear to be cases that imply that telling a lie is acceptable.

It is what it is. There is no shame in it.

[Walks_in_islam]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Hmm... so if I understand correctly, it kind of depends on who you ask? That is, there are different schools of thought which give different weights to Koran, Hadith, and consensus? How then is shariah determined? Is it pretty much a local thing (like slightly different halacha for different locations)?

I am now using adultery merely as a medium with which to probe the larger question: how does one know what course to follow? Koran says lashing, hadith indicates stoning. If you follow Koran are you not ignoring hadith? And if you follow hadith are you not going beyond Koran?

How is this reconciled? (Again, adultery is only being used as an example).

This would be one example of a teacher outlining this specific issue the same way it was taught to me.

http://www.islamicvoice.com/april.99/dialogue.htm

Much more thorough discussion than above, as it examples more Hadith and expands into examples where it was found in the Hadith that an unmarried person was stoned and two examples where married persons found guilty of adultery were not stoned but were lashed. Also examples where confession was made, but not repeated, and not followed up on, and one where the Prophet said:

‘The Prophet of Allah said; “Stay away from those loathsome evils, which Allah has forbidden you from. If someone through a slip indulges in any such act then he should remain concealed behind the veil of Allah and ask forgiveness of Him. But if someone will produce his neck before us (i.e. stick to the sinful activities unashamedly and boldly) then we shall enforce the code over him.”
(Bulughul Maraam; Kitabul Hudood; Ibne Haj’r Asqalani)

Basically in this particular summary the conclusion reached by this particular scholar is this:

There are two options before us

* The obvious and unambiguous order of Qur’an is available to us in this case but we must interpret it to accommodate mutually contradictory traditions.

* We should interpret the contradictions in the light of clear order of the Qur’an and leave out those traditions which do not conform to it.

Given only these two options, I think there is no option at all. We have to accept the latter.

This matches up with what I was taught. It is for sure NOT what is applied when a gang of villagers grab some poor woman, drag her out, and stone her on an accusation. See previous reference to "street Muslims".

[Walks_in_islam]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

No, the Hadith were compiled after the Mohammed's death.

It is supposed to be the sayings of Mohammed, and eyewitness accounts of of those who were close to him.

It has some strange content.

Volume 1, Book 6, Number 1296:

Narrated 'Aisha:

The Prophet used to lean on my lap and recite Qur'an while I was in menses.

Menses? WUT? "prepubescent girls" don't have "menses".

Providing an answer, to the question, as to whether women are "unclean" during their menses. The answer is no, in Islam they are not. The Quran states "do not approach your wives during their times" (menses) and the Hadith are exampled to define what is "approach".

The areas of the Hadith that most fascinate and interest you say a lot about you. THAT, senor, is not a "guess".

[Walks_in_islam]

Originally Posted by mfblume

You need to read the bible more carefully, oh great mocker. The FEMALE babies were distinctly not to be killed. Any other way to misrepresent the bible, ye who could not have been wrong about your lack of healing, omniscience personified?

How did I miss this oh great mocker?

You need to read the bible more carefully. It's bad press to "misrepresent" the bible in a thread about a "religion of lies" LOL

I fixed your post. When someone accurately describes what a passage says it is foolish to try to say "no it says something else". So I added "FEMALE" to your "textual twist".

Here is what it actually says.

7 They fought against Midian, as the Lord commanded Moses, and killed every man. 8 Among their victims were Evi, Rekem, Zur, Hur and Reba—the five kings of Midian. They also killed Balaam son of Beor with the sword. 9 The Israelites captured the Midianite women and children and took all the Midianite herds, flocks and goods as plunder. 10 They burned all the towns where the Midianites had settled, as well as all their camps. 11 They took all the plunder and spoils, including the people and animals, 12 and brought the captives, spoils and plunder to Moses and Eleazar the priest and the Israelite assembly at their camp on the plains of Moab, by the Jordan across from Jericho.

13 Moses, Eleazar the priest and all the leaders of the community went to meet them outside the camp. 14 Moses was angry with the officers of the army—the commanders of thousands and commanders of hundreds—who returned from the battle.

15 “Have you allowed all the women to live?” he asked them. 16 “They were the ones who followed Balaam’s advice and enticed the Israelites to be unfaithful to the Lord in the Peor incident, 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.

Any other way to misrepresent the bible, ye who could not have been wrong about your lack of healing, omniscience personified?

That was free. You don't have to send me $10 by paypal or MasterCard.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Walks_in_islam

Gx

Your "accuracy" problems continue. Saudi Arabia does not even approach your "largest Muslim country" statement. There are claims and then other claims, but they can be easily checked. If i did not live where I claimed then it would be hard to provide little details like for instance if you consult google maps (is this another link you wont open because of the e-spank you get when you do) then you could confirm there is one highway south from Jubail. If you drive south, you pass a town called qatif, its right past the airport exit. If you follow that highway it ends in dhahran. Just before it ends you can exit and continue south. Three exits after that is the Dhahran Mall, same exit as KFUPM university. Left is the mall, right is the Uni. On that corner, after you exit and turn right, is the US consulate on the left.
If you keep going you eventually hit thr Bahrain Causeway. Cost of the toll is 2 BD
Or 20 SAR. Summary: i live here. Let me know if you need any other cool little details
You and your silly evangelie friend are two peas in a pod. LOL. Your little snide comments dont even make a scratch. Anything else? Lol

97.1% of the total population (25,493,000) of Saudi Arabia is Muslim. That's, like, a really large percentage. Who is having the accuracy problem?

[good samaritan]

Originally Posted by Ferd

Thank you for bringing up these points. They are very good points of references to juxtapose Christianity and islam.

1. Christians who kill abortion doctors.
We agree that
A. it has happened.
now do we also agree that
A. Christian Ministers roundly reject this, speak open and often that it is NOT representative of Christianity to kill people we do not agree with
B. Understand that the actual number of murdering terrorists who actually kill abortion drs can be listed on a single hand over the last 10 years? that the number for all of the modern era is less than what? 100?

2. Catholic/Protestant Wars in Ireland.
That my friend is a mis-representation of the history of Ireland.

It is in fact lazy to boil that down to a religious war.


The strife that STILL exists in Ireland... and that has at times blown up into actual war and terrorism is NOT religiously motivated.

Here is the very brief history. back in the 1200s Henry II invaded Ireland. This led to his taking land from the Irish and giving it to his Norman/French followers. over the centuries, English Kings dominated the Irish and they hated them for it. in the 1500s the English Monarch split with the catholic church, but the Irish maintained close ties to the Catholic church. In the wars that followed with Ireland, the Irish sought to gain their independence from the English Crown. The Crown won the wars and took land from the Irish and gave it to their followers. These followers were protestant. then came more wars.

The Irish fought the English invaders year by year, decade by decade, century by century. They fought not because one side was Protestant and they were catholic. They fought because they had been invaded by the English who were taking their land, raping their women and starving their kids.

It just so happened that the Irish were catholic and the invaders became Protestant. the war was and is over English invasions for 800 years.

3. There were the crusades. This is a well-used argument. Crusades.... So let’s review what the crusades were.
first, the lands around Jerusalem were Christian lands. controlled by the Byzantine Emperor. Then Muhammad rose to power and over a number of years, the Arabs gained control of a lot of land... including Jerusalem. BUT that wasn’t the end of their invasions. from the 600s to the 1000s Muslims expanded into Christian held lands. They took large portions of the Byzantine lands, they took portions of Italy. They took portions of southern france. They took complete control of North Africa, extinguishing entire Christian nations…it was these Islamic invasions over a 400 year period that ended Aryanism. They took almost all of what we now call Spain.

So over that period, the Christian nations fought for their survival against an enemy with a very different culture which was vastly different from the mideval wars within the Christian nations that raged at the same time. This was seen as a cultural war by both sides. Beyond that the Muslims saw themselves as the “sword of allah” and the Christians saw themselves as “defenders of the faith”. BOTH SIDES saw the invading muslims as the agressors and the Christians as the defenders….

THEN at the same time the Vikings began their invasions from the north. Christian Europe became an armed camp every man capable of fighting was in an army marching around the countryside figting off invader after invader. The Vikings could not simply be defeated, because more came and none were controled by any one king. They were just marauders. So in the end, the church just went there and CONVERTED THEM thus ending the Viking invasions. BUT that left Christian Europe with a serious problem. They had HUGE armies full of men who had no trade other than fighting…. And most of those they had been fighting were no longer invading.

THIS was the political and social pressure that led the church to point toward turning from being defensive to being the agressors where the muslims were concerned. Enter the Crusades. 400 years of pent up frustration, cultural pressure, and massive armies that were going to undo their own societies combined to form a perfect storm that brought about the Crusades. MOST of it was just socio-economic-political realities clothed in the religious language of the age.


BUT beyond that, it can be argued that John Hunyadi who died in 1456 of the plague was The Last Crusader…Certainly by the year 1500, there was no one left alive who could legitamatly wear the Crusaders Cross. We have lived for 514 years, without a single Christian Crusader walking to and fro upon the earth…YESTERDAY AT THE VERY LEAST 10,000 FUTURE JIHADIES WERE BORN…



Finally, you suggest that the point of your points are that there are Christians that don’t act like me. That is true. The vast majority of people who call themselves Christians don’t act like me. I believe baptism in Jesus Name is required for salvation. I do not own a single piece of jewlery. In fact, I have never owned a wedding ring. ive been married 19 years. I do not ever go out in public wearing shorts. Period. I never drink. I think it is a sin. Those things alone, separate me from the vast majority of people who call themselves Christians. I don’t any issue with what others do.

BUT the numbers of people who call themselves Christian, have NEVER ONCE tried to kill someone for the cause of Christianity. The statistical reality is the number of such is so close to zero as to be statistically inseperable from zero.
TODAY more than one Muslim will attempt to and likely succeed in killing someone (liklely a fellow muslim) because they believe their victim doesn’t believe in islam in the right way. These people number in the millions. Hundreds of millions more muslims while not activly killing people, believe such is utterly reasonable.

I think this may be the post that someone was thinking about.

[Walks_in_islam]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

97.1% of the total population (25,493,000) of Saudi Arabia is Muslim. That's, like, a really large percentage. Who is having the accuracy problem?

heeheehee yourself.

Proverbs 9

13 The woman Folly is loud; she is undisciplined and without knowledge.
14 She sits at the door of her house, on a seat at the highest point of the city,
15 calling out to those who pass by, who go straight on their way.
16 "Let all who are simple come in here!" she says to those who lack judgment.

With this somehow just relevant scripture in mind that is not what you said. I quote: "Saudi Arabia, the largest Muslim country"

Saudi Arabia is not the "largest Muslim country". Indonesia is.

Followed by:

Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Egypt, Nigeria, Iran, Turkey, Algeria, Morocco, Iraq, Sudan, Afghanistan, Ethiopia, and Uzbekistan.

After that, there is Saudi Arabia with 25.5 million Muslims. Just a few more than China actually, who has 23.3 million Muslims.

In case you MEANT percent population Saudi Arabia is not the country with the highest percentage Muslim population either. Morocco is.

Followed by Afghanistan, Tunisia, Iran, Western Sahara, Mauritania, Yemen, Tajikistan, Iraq, Jordan, Mayotte, Turkey, Somalia, Azerbaijan, Maldives, Niger, Comoros, Algeria, Palestinian Territories

Then, at 97.1%, Saudi Arabia falls in line.

We were in a serious discussion. You are evidently not qualified to join that discussion. I doubt that you are qualified to tell from the above who is having the accuracy problem either.

Innocently wondering if you need further details about "life in Saudi Arabia"? LOL

[Walks_in_islam]

Originally Posted by good samaritan

I think this may be the post that someone was thinking about.

I think that was back before "the natives are all dead of smallpox giving us title to what God has provided for us" came up lol

[Walks_in_islam]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

97.1% of the total population (25,493,000) of Saudi Arabia is Muslim. That's, like, a really large percentage. Who is having the accuracy problem?

Oh yeah. That number includes 8 million foreign expats. The majority of those expats are non-Muslim. Simple math does not add up to that 3% but i really didnt need to go beyond the official number

Heeheehee right? Still funny? Shouldnt let that evangeliar make you think you are playing with a kid. You are not. Bet on that.