Abusing muhammad?

[Sister_Amy]

No Muslim had ever and can answer the question what previous Christians answered. How come History tells us Jesus died and got ressurected? But the Koran contradicts history. Why? Its because its a lie. God didn`t write the Koran, the followers of Mohammed did, and claimed its Gods word. You Muslims really need to start submitting yourselves to Allah instead to the words of Mohammed.

Almost clever, but not quite.

The truth of the history is known only by God, by Allah. So I will be taking His word on the matter. Namely, the Qur’an.

 

[Reuben_J]

The proof is the Qur’an itself. That’s a nice little circular argument, isn’t it? The Qur’an proves that it is from God in its miraculous nature, the miraculous language of it, and the miraculous signs contained within it. For me, the guidance to the Qur’an came from reading it. The more I read and prayed about it, the more powerful it became to me. And since reading it I haven’t once been able to believe anything other than that it was revealed by God.

The Bible, on the other hand, doesn’t even claim to really be all from God. There is no proof in it, nothing that in reading it convinces me that it is entirely of divine origin. (Although there are certain parts, of course, which stand out.)

My, Sister Amy, about the only truth here is the part on circular argument.

Your words against our words. I am only wondering why you asking for proof in seeing that as far as the Quran is concerned, it’s a circular argument as you said.

 

[jakasaki]

Don’t you wish you knew?

**A “hadith” is something that the Prophet Muhammad said, did, or was done in is presence that he approved of, which was reported by someone who witnessed it, who then narrated it to others. **

.

A **Gospel **is something that **Jesus Christ **said, did or was done in His presence that He approved of, which was reported by someone who witnessed it, His Apostles, when then narrated it to others.

God Bless

 

[Sister_Amy]

Intellectual pride will not serve your cause here, Sister Amy, no matter how high you think of yourself. If an idea cannot be understood in the simplest and the most direct language then I would suspect whether that idea is worth considering at all. It’s surprising why it is so difficult for you to tell us what you want to, Islam having prided itself of making things simple and easy. Otherwise it would look merely as a way of simply brushing aside issues brought up by other posters.

If other posters actually brought up issues, I might be able to brush them aside. I haven’t seen any real issues, yet. A few posters are attempting to investigate or attack my claim that the Qur’an is from God–that’s where I’m pushing them, really. Because otherwise discussion is pretty much pointless. Arguing over the branches when the trunk is the issue. They’re starting to catch on. Sorry to bore you meanwhile with all my… “intellectual pride” is how you put it, right?

You state your opinion and that’s the end of the story. Then it makes no sense for you to be in this Forum.

Really? Wouldn’t you like me to help you move to a better position in understanding Islam?

The invitation to understand is so that you will not misunderstand what being said by the Christians. Unfortunately you as being ex-Christians are very unimpressing in its knowledge it’s little wonder you left it.

I’ve never tried to impress anyone with my knowledge of Christianity. Islam doesn’t need to prove anything about Christianity to be valid–that’s what’s so beautiful about it. But your co-posters here can’t seem to validate Christianity without attacking Islam.

I would be happy to ignore that factor and assume that you are only a full fledge Muslim who has no understanding of Christianity. The tragedy here is that the posters thought you have some background on Christianity considering that you had been there. But you are more like planten, paarsurrey and Muslim Woman.

Is that supposed to be an insult? Like I said, I’m not here to impress anyone with my knowledge of Christianity.

Who called him that? I would be more convinced if that was substantiated by his actions.

It was his tribe–his uncles and cousins and the people in the city of Mecca. It was all before Islam, mind you. They called him that because it was substantiated by his actions. As one person has put it, it doesn’t make sense for a man to tell the truth about worldly matters and then lie about God.

Sure. But I think that is the contention here regardless of what you think. Was it really the testimony of the Creator? You need to start from there in order to impress the kindergarteners here.

You’re catching on. Good job.

 

[Sister_Amy]

This is truly nonsensical. Please give reference to this statement.

A reference? It’s my own statement. I can’t think of any instance where women’s rights were improved because of Christianity–rather as societies became more secular, more atheist even, women began to have more “rights.” I mean, can you think of any instance where Christianity was used to campaign for women to have the right to own property? Or where Christianity was used to explain a woman’s rights in marriage? I can’t. Maybe you can. But Islam did these things, over a millennium ago.

How so? It’s from your own hadith.

Ehh?

This has been discussed a while back in previous thread in which you were a participant. This contention had been rebuffed and proven wrong.

I’ve proven myself correct on at least two occasions in recent memory. A woman’s testimony of rape is sufficient–there is NO PROOF IN ISLAM which says she requires witnesses, but there are a variety of examples in which a woman’s testimony has been enough. It seems you are mistaken about who was proven wrong.

You may be right here. However one thing it rpoves is that Shariah is not practical if it’s so difficult to implement.

Who says Shari’ah is difficult to implement? How did you come to that conclusion? It’s not so much that it’s difficult but that people aren’t committed to it. They rather prefer the corrupt western model where they can enjoy the fruits of this world instead of establishing justice.

I think you had used the word impress earlier on, Sister Amy. If it’s being used here it only means that Islam has nothning to show that it’s truly a God given religion that bears good fruit. If you don’t agree with this statement, by all means repudiate it and convince us that it’s not so.

I’m not in the business of convincing, really–your opinion is totally subjective. I could present examples of “good fruit” all I want, and you could still show me some bad apples, who act in spite of Islam rather than because of it. I wish I could get you to understand that difference. And that is just one good reason for me to be here.

 

[Sister_Amy]

My, Sister Amy, about the only truth here is the part on circular argument.

Your words against our words. I am only wondering why you asking for proof in seeing that as far as the Quran is concerned, it’s a circular argument as you said.

The proof should be obvious. I rest my entire case on the Qur’an. I don’t need anything else, really. And I believe in it so totally. I think you should be asking what it is about the Qur’an that can inspire such rock-solid faith.

 

[Reuben_J]

Don’t you wish you knew?

A “hadith” is something that the Prophet Muhammad said, did, or was done in is presence that he approved of, which was reported by someone who witnessed it, who then narrated it to others.

The science of hadith is the study of authenticating those ahadith (plural), by checking their content and their chain of narration, to ensure that reports by liars or forgetful people are not transmitted the same as those reports by honest people.

Bro Sendonaman, at best hadith is problematic and its science is no science at all. There are Muslims who simply do not believe in it at all even among main stream Islam. Secterian Muslims like planten and Paasurrey are on record to outright reject it.

Some hadiths being used officially by Islamic countries as official teachings in their schools can be considered unauthentic by other Muslims if they do not fit into some argument in defending Islam and Mohammad.

Some hadiths are wriiten hundred of years after Mohammad’s death, it’s really difficult to say that they are real or not. As non-Muslims we do refer to the hadith simply because Muslims themselves are using them.

 

[Benjamin8o8]

Almost clever, but not quite.

The truth of the history is known only by God, by Allah. So I will be taking His word on the matter. Namely, the Qur’an.

See, that is what I am talking about. You don`t believe in history, you only belive the words that were spoken by Mohammed. Sorry sister, but he was no prophet.

 

[Reuben_J]

A reference? It’s my own statement. I can’t think of any instance where women’s rights were improved because of Christianity–rather as societies became more secular, more atheist even, women began to have more “rights.” I mean, can you think of any instance where Christianity was used to campaign for women to have the right to own property? Or where Christianity was used to explain a woman’s rights in marriage? I can’t. Maybe you can. But Islam did these things, over a millennium ago.

That’s why I said I don’t want to discuss about your personal statement or what people do because it got nothing to do with the religions. If it’s your statement it’s only your subjective opinion unless you back that opinion perhaps with the Quran or hadith.

I see you’re talking about human right with the other poster. I’m sorry to come in mid way through your discussion. What strikes me was when you said Christianity does not treat women better than Islam or something to that effect. That I disagree.

Your question is irrelevant as majorirty of politicians do not base their policy strictly on Christianity. Well, politicians are just polticians.

Of course I can defend Christian marriage if that’s what you want and can explain to you why it’s a perfect marriage.

Ehh?

Unless you miss the hadith I posted a few posts back.

I’ve proven myself correct on at least two occasions in recent memory. A woman’s testimony of rape is sufficient–there is NO PROOF IN ISLAM which says she requires witnesses, but there are a variety of examples in which a woman’s testimony has been enough. It seems you are mistaken about who was proven wrong.

Nevertheless there was this Muslim who disagreed and emphatically said you was wrong.

Who says Shari’ah is difficult to implement? How did you come to that conclusion? It’s not so much that it’s difficult but that people aren’t committed to it. They rather prefer the corrupt western model where they can enjoy the fruits of this world instead of establishing justice.

You said so in Afghanistan. What about Pakistan, Iran and Saudi Arabia? Are they fully perfect Shariah countries? I know, I think I’ve asked you this one time. Well, it could be forgotten by now, but are they Shariah countries? I don’t know, all that I was saying I was only taking them from what you said.

I’m not in the business of convincing, really–your opinion is totally subjective. I could present examples of “good fruit” all I want, and you could still show me some bad apples, who act in spite of Islam rather than because of it. I wish I could get you to understand that difference. And that is just one good reason for me to be here.

Sister Amy, this forum is full of disclosure of bad fruits of Mohammad and Islam, and that’s the reason for this thread was started, because Muslim posters (not you I think) are so insane with the ‘bad fruits’ that we brought up. I don’t think that’s subjective because lots of examples have been quoted.

 

[Reuben_J]

The proof should be obvious. I rest my entire case on the Qur’an. I don’t need anything else, really. And I believe in it so totally. I think you should be asking what it is about the Qur’an that can inspire such rock-solid faith.

Like I said, put up a statement, and that’s it.

May God bless you still.

 

[Reuben_J]

Is that supposed to be an insult? Like I said, I’m not here to impress anyone with my knowledge of Christianity.

OK then I take that back.

 

[Jay53]

The death penalty for treason is not murder. Murder is forbidden, but the death penalty is a matter of the law, and it is not murder, not according to anyone’s definition. Murder is killing outside of the law, which of course is not condoned in Islam. Or do you really not know the difference?

Where does this say anything about treason?

(1) This is the ruling of Allaah and His Messenger, as the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever changes his religion, kill him.” (reported by al-Bukhaari, al-Fath, no. 3017).

And I asked in the other thread - how would Muslims feel if the Catechism of the Catholic Church stated that non-Christians should be killed and anyone who leaves Christianity should be killed if they don’t repent within 3 days? And then acted on this?

I also wanted to know why God’s mercy is only available for 3 days?

(4) The apostate is not to be killed without warning. Even though his crime is so great, he is given a last chance, a respite of three days in which to repent. If he repents, he will be left alone; if he does not repent, then he will be killed.

Sister Amy: Made it up, or were duped, or that people made things up about them. Why should I believe all these people in the first place?

Oh, I see, it’s a giant conspiracy - it’s easier to believe that Satan duped thousands of people in numerous locations and all these people made all this stuff up vs. Satan deceived one man who then led many people astray. Oh OK. That makes soooo much more sense. You’ve convinced me!

It’s much easier to believe one man’s experiences, especially if there is proof, than to believe many people’s experiences, without proof.

The proof is the Qur’an itself. That’s a nice little circular argument, isn’t it? The Qur’an proves that it is from God in its miraculous nature, the miraculous language of it, and the miraculous signs contained within it. For me, the guidance to the Qur’an came from reading it. The more I read and prayed about it, the more powerful it became to me. And since reading it I haven’t once been able to believe anything other than that it was revealed by God.

The Bible, on the other hand, doesn’t even claim to really be all from God. There is no proof in it, nothing that in reading it convinces me that it is entirely of divine origin. (Although there are certain parts, of course, which stand out.)

You are right - that is a nice little circular argument.

In every way.

Such as?

 

[Jay53]

Sister Amy;4796316] Can’t be sure exactly what you’re talking about. Does God void someone’s prayer because it’s not at the “right” time? What does that even mean? Are you sure you understood properly? Because I’m afraid I don’t follow.

Sorry, I forgot to post this earlier for you. My reference to the “right” time was with regard to #5

Fard Parts in the Prayer

There are fourteen things called the Fard (imperative) parts which have to be fulfilled for the Prayer to be valid and proper. Seven of these are prerequisites which must be fulfilled before the commencement of the Prayer. The other seven, called the pillars of the Prayer, have to be observed during the Prayer.

PREREQUISITES

If any of the following seven prerequisites is ignored, the Prayer will not be deemed to have been performed at all :

1. Cleanliness of Body
   The body has to be cleaned of all sorts of impurities, whether these are impurities in effect or impurities in fact, and one must have obtained purity either through Wudu or, if need be, through Ghusl.

1. Cleanliness of Garments
   All the garments including even the cap, socks, gloves, etc., that one is wearing or having on one’s body must be clean and pure beyond any shadow of a doubt.

1. Cleanliness of Place
   The minimum requirement is that the place where one intends to stand and where one’s knees, hands and forehead would rest in Sajdah, must be clean, whether it is a piece of plain ground or floor, or a mat, etc., bat one should also avoid standing for the Prayer at a place which is stinking with filth and dirt around it.

1. Covering of Satar
   For males it is the part of the body between the navel and the knee, and for females it is the whole body excluding the face, hands and feet. Women should see that the ankles do not remain uncovered.

1. Ascertaining the right time for a Prayer
   Each Prayer has to be performed within the time limit prescribed for it. If a Prayer is performed before its time, it will be no Prayer at all, and if it is offered after the time for it has elapsed, it will have to be offered as a missed (Qada) Prayer.

1. Facing the Qibla
   If a person performs his Prayer with his face turned towards a direction other than that of the Qibla, unless there is a genuine reason for that, his Prayer will not be deemed to have been performed.

1. Intention
   Having the intention in the mind, which may also be expressed with the tongue, to offer a particular Fard Prayer at a prescribed time, or a particular missed Prayer afterwards. For the Sunnat or Nafl Prayers, however, the mention of the time is not necessary. If one is going to offer a Prayer under the leadership of an Imam, one has to express intention to that effect, too. muslim-canada.org/fiqhch13.htm

 

[Jay53]

ROFL!!!

Good one… a couple of wackos on blogs are very authoritative in islam, you think?

Heh. You have a different idea of “taking over the world” and “world domination” than I have, and than Islam means. That’s all.

It’s always good to check back over some key verses in the Qur’an, like 2:256.

A couple wackos on blogs? I think not. I’ll be happy to find more for you if you really need me to.
The second source I quoted is from Muslims. Unless you consider them wackos too? Here is their statement of purpose:

duaat.wordpress.com has been set up by Muslim individuals in the UK.

As Muslims we believe we have been created for one purpose only, which is to obey, follow and worship none but Allah swt exclusively. As Allah swt says:

“I have not created the Jinn and man except that they should worship Me”
[dhaariyat, 51:56]

Our aim is to awaken the masses within the Muslim Ummah who have taken the sleeping pill of democracy. Our call of awakening is Al-Islaam.

By the will of Allah we will carry his word to those around us, collectively as duaat (callers to Islam).

Then here is what I quoted before:

Therefore there are three main ways in which a state or country can become Daar ul-Islam (the domain of Islam):

1. The majority of its citizens embrace Islam and implement the Sharee’ah on their own accord

1. A group of Muslims rise, overthrow the government and implement the Sharee’ah by force (coup)

1. The Islamic state carries out Jihaad as its foreign policy and removes the government

If the Muslims are unable to convince their people (e.g. through peaceful da’wah) to embrace Islam and implement the Sharee’ah, it then becomes an obligation upon them to make hijrah and unite (build their own community and execute the Sharee’ah over themselves) and then rise against the government by force at a later date, regardless of whether they are the majority or the minority. duaat.wordpress.com/2008/03/1…ate-the-world/

Are you going to contend that these people have misinterpreted the Quran too?

And you quoting the verse from the Quran means nothing with regard to this because that verse says there is no compulsion in religion. I have no doubt that Muslims don’t expect to convert everyone to Islam. They do, however, intend to TRY to “take over the world” and make everyone subject to Islam and Islamic/Sharia law. How is your definition of “take over the world” different?

 

[rtconstant]

It doesn’t really prove anything, except that whoever Josephus talked to, in order to learn the history, accepted that opinion. It doesn’t make it true (assuming still that the relevant sections are not actually forgeries in the first place.)

Right, because believing the Holy Books that gave Muhammed his inspiration and the people of the time is just rediculous. They’re obviously liars. Whereas its completely absurd that a sinful man who came centuries later would lie…

And again I’ll remind you that many Catholics on this forum claim Muhammad to have been following a “gnostic heresy”, suggesting that such claims you find in Islam regarding the crucifixion are not new–that they were known early in church history, simply rejected. Hm!!

I’ve already explained this. Read previous post.

Muhammad should be taken seriously because God sent him as a messenger, and reinforced him with miracles. I’m going to come back to the statement in bold.

Just because he says so? Sorry not good enough. It would help if he had actually at least led a good, or inspiring life.

If the author were a human, the Qur’an would not be the miracle that it is.

What’s miraculous about it? Awkward prose, contradictory statements? deplorable behavior? What exactly is miraculous about it? It is plainly the work of a human, and twisted one at that.

Of course it is, it’s the only reason I stand here to argue with you.

Oh, so its true because you believe it. Not exactly inspiring. Though back to the original statement, Muhammed would certainly look a lot better if he hadn’t have written the Quran.

Actually, there are no Muslims who believe that Muhammad wrote the Qur’an. A person cannot claim to actually be a Muslim if he believes Muhammad wrote the Qur’an.

And yet many do believe he wrote it and made it up. Don’t come to hard on these guys. They’re the ones you need when the rest of the world is getting angry at the “real” Muslims.

Now things are getting tricky for you.

Not at all.

Because it’s miraculous, of course.

In 1400 years no one has been able to demonstrate how Muhammed’s book is miraculous.

It must be tough facing the fact that your entire religion is based on something that never even happened.

Were you reflecting?

Now you have a little problem. Who wrote the Gospels? Eyewitnesses, or God? You must make up your mind, mustn’t you? Did eyewitnesses really see it and record it? Or did God inspire those men to describe such events? I wonder how you’ll answer. I of course, think that neither happened, but I’m curious what you’ll say.

The answer and advantage for Christians is that we can say both. Yes it was penned by eye witnesses, and inspired and protected by God. Great combination. Whereas with the Quran Muhammed didn’t see any of this, and God wasn’t involved in inspiring it. So really it just ends up being the meanderings of a desert raider who didn’t understand the basics of what he wrote about.

Indeed not. The truth has exposed for over 1400 years. Perhaps you can ask God to guide you to it.

The Truth was revealed 2000 years ago, and there has been nothing approaching it since.

 

[Booklover]

The proof should be obvious. I rest my entire case on the Qur’an. I don’t need anything else, really. And I believe in it so totally. I think you should be asking what it is about the Qur’an that can inspire such rock-solid faith.

**Brainwashing! **

Vickie

 

[dkdempsey]

Want to know the real difference between Chrsitianity and Islam? Just look at their founders. The difference is like night and day. Jesus abused no one. He instructed his followers to turn the other cheek. Muhammed abused/killed many. Muhammed deserves no respect.

 

[R_not]

Almost clever, but not quite.

The truth of the history is known only by God, by Allah. So I will be taking His word on the matter. Namely, the Qur’an.

But mohammed said that your allah deceives. Are you sure it didn’t deceive you, or more correctly that it deceived mohammed?

How can you trust a liar?
Qur’an 9:3 “Allah and His Messenger dissolve obligations.”

And in this case mohammed said that Satan told him things and then he found out - how do you know that Satan didn’t tell him to replace the older surahs instead of the reverse:

Tabari VI:110 “When Muhammad brought a revelation from Allah canceling what Satan had cast on the tongue of His Prophet, the Quraysh said, ‘Muhammad has repented of [reneged on] what he said concerning the position of our gods with Allah. He has altered [the bargain] and brought something else.’ Those two phrases which Satan had cast on Muhammad’s tongue of were in the mouth of every polytheist. The Messenger said, ‘I have fabricated things against Allah and have imputed to Him words which He has not spoken.’”

Here is a stark contrast between Jesus and mohammed. When Jesus died - he asked His Father to forgive (Luke 23:34) while mohammed cursed at his death.

MUHAMMAD: “May Allah curse the Jews and Christians for they built the places of worship at the graves of the prophets.” Bukhari, Vol. 1, #427 [Muhammad had been poisoned years earlier by a Jewish woman whose husband was killed by the Muslims and the poison had slowly worked its effect. He said this while dying in the arms of his wife Aisha].

The words of two who are dying shows the caliber of these two men. Just because many didn’t swallow his ‘religion’ he wanted his god to curse them.

JESUS: In Luke 9:54, 55 Jesus rebuked His disciples when they wanted to destroy a town that rejected Him. Also, in Luke 22:52, Jesus’ disciples started to fight against those that came to arrest Jesus, He stopped them, and healed a man injured in the fight.

Here we see Jesus wasn’t such a paranoid like mohammed who had to destroy people’s lives if they didn’t believe in Him. He knew that they didn’t have to fight to spread the Word.

MUHAMMAD: told his followers to aggressively make war on non-Muslims: 9:5, 29. Sura 9 was one of the last Suras given by Muhammad. Initially, when Muhammad’s group was weak, he ordered his followers to try to get along with other people. After the Muslims became powerful, he ordered them to spread Islam by force. Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman continued his wars of aggression.

This is very telling since we see this behavior in so many lands - first enter peacefully and trick many, then… well, read history.

 

[sedonaman]

But the Koran contradicts history. Why? Its because its a lie. God didn`t write the Koran, the followers of Mohammed did, and claimed its Gods word. You Muslims really need to start submitting yourselves to Allah instead to the words of Mohammed.

You’ve got your gods mixed up. Your last should read, "Allah didn’t write the Koran, the followers of Mohammed did, and claimed it’s Allah’s word. You Muslims really need to start submitting yourselves to God instead to the words of Mohammed [and/or Allah].

 

[sedonaman]

It must be tough facing the fact that your entire religion is based on something that never even happened.

We noticed you are having that trouble. The problem you are having is that if Christ actually was crucified, Islam falls apart [as though it’s not already a hodge-podge of nonsensical parts as it is]. If Christianity is true, it easily accounts for the rise of Islam. Whereas, Islam cannot explain Christianity.