good points of islam

[planten]

I’m sorry, How about something a little more present in our time. Here’s one the recent “Election” in “Iran”. If they don’t stop protesting the “Supreme Leader” is going to stop the “Protesting” for them with the use of force. Nope, still can’t seem to find anything good, sorry.

real2all, Thank you for asking. If you agree with the old time story then let me know please. After that we will take up your point about the recent times. You seem to be right there. Do you agree to the beginning of the conflicts 1400 years ago??

 

[sedonaman]

**
BZ W, your post is extra ordinarily long. Why is that?. It is so that I cannot add even one line in reply to your post. The system will reject my reply post.
**

It’s no wonder. It’s a complete fabrication.

**
So I tell you that your post is based on wrong beliefs, wrong knowledge. Do not quote weak hadith to malign Islam.
**

We don’t need to quote any Islamic texts; we have yours, such as:

**Your post is all false. It was the nearby christian states under the major influence of the christian king Kaisar of Rome who assembled armies on the borders of the Islamic state of Madinah. Muslims had no power to face the armies of the Kaisar.
**

and …

** charlotte, you are adamant. I believe in Da Vinci Code 100 % because it is the work of a very great genious Leonardo Da Vinci. You may not believe him but I do. So the marriage of Jesus with Mary Magd is a truth and there is no harm in telling the truth. (as you said it)

i will not leave you there. I will ask you about the previous marriage of Jesus at the age of 16 and when you have considered that truth then I will inform you of more marriage and children at a later age two. There are people in the world who claim to hail from Jesus.

So could you please drop such subjects. It will only hurt your Catholic friends all the more. Reply please, what is your response to my request
**.

and now the latest saga …

**Jakasaki, I can give you a very early time report. Some Muslim traders and preachers had gone to a nearby christian country (State) which was under the protection of Caeser, the Roman Christain King. When they preached Islam, they were in the foriegn country and quite unarmed. They were killed by the Roman Catholics.

So the Caliph demanded an explanation from the ruler of that state. They The RC’s were haughty and arrogant feeling their own super power. So the Caliph gave them an ultimatum to get ready for war. He sent his forces to take account of the killing of poor Muslims. The result was bad for the Roman Catholics. They (The RC) were defeated. So the trouble developed which went on to the complete defeat of the christians.

They had no right to kill any preacher. Afterwards, of course, it was open for all who wanted to fight. Muslims did not press any one to fight if they desisted from fighting. jakasaki, try to read the correct early history.
**

This must be why Muslim countries are so backward; they are teaching their children anti-everyone else propaganda nonsense.

 

[Byzantine_Wolf]

Jakasaki, I can give you a very early time report. Some Muslim traders and preachers had gone to a nearby christian country (State) which was under the protection of Caeser, the Roman Christain King. When they preached Islam, they were in the foriegn country and quite unarmed. They were killed by the Roman Catholics.

So the Caliph demanded an explanation from the ruler of that state. They The RC’s were haughty and arrogant feeling their own super power. So the Caliph gave them an ultimatum to get ready for war. He sent his forces to take account of the killing of poor Muslims. The result was bad for the Roman Catholics. They (The RC) were defeated. So the trouble developed which went on to the complete defeat of the christians.

They had no right to kill any preacher. Afterwards, of course, it was open for all who wanted to fight. Muslims did not press any one to fight if they desisted from fighting. jakasaki, try to read the correct early history.

Could you please give sources, dates, names, etc, just so we are on the same page. I’ve already quoted Sahih Bukhari hadith and al-Tabari historical accounts relating to how Mohammad sent a threatening letter to the Byzantine Empire (who, I would argue, were not Roman Catholic, if that is who you are referring to).

Actually, if it is true, it’s quite ironic, because that’s what a Muslim ruler in Persia did to Ghengis Khan: kill both parties of diplomats that he sent to discuss peace, and so Ghengis invaded. Yet I’ve heard Muslims criticize Ghengis for doing that, or speak of him in a poor light.

 

[Agabriel]

Is anyone getting the feeling like the discussion has taken a turn for the ‘unreal’?



This is what I like about Islam - the threads always go off into never never land. :takeoff:

 

[sedonaman]

My post is long to explain myself and make my point clear, so that it doesn’t become a short statement of “your post is based on wrong beliefs, wrong knowledge.” You were welcome to either leave my post out and directly respond to me, or quote brief segments just to make sure I knew what you were addressing. Please do not create conspiracies and accuse me of making it long on purpose so that you “cannot add even one line in reply” to my post. It’s an insult to me, and I think everyone here on this forum knows I wrote my post without any evil intent planned for the length.

…

We have been over this ground with planten ad nausium many times before. There was a fellow poster, “samaan” by username, who was very knowledgeable and provided some excellent contributions to this forum, but planten succeeded in driving him away. Here is a sample of what transpired before [as you read it, ask yourself if it sounds familiar]:

Originally Posted by planten.

samaan, you are making extra ordinarily long posts so that I cannot reply to each of your points.
You know that there is a limit on length of the posts.

samaan.

Planten, my posts are long because I explain my arguments using proof and logical reasoning- both are things which you have failed to do yet for me.

samaan.

Planten,
First, you need to cite your sources when you post something. The reason is so that other people can check its veracity.
Second, you have not provided a single hadith throughout this whole discussion that is as you say against the Koran. Why don’t you show a hadith that is against the Koran so that we can analyse it here on the discussion board for other people to see?
…
Planten, I am willing to continue our conversation, but I need you to co-operate with me. You can criticise me all you want, but you must:
-Cite sources
-Provide feasable examples to support claims
-Use logical reasoning
-Provide textual proof

samaan.

Planten, I have done the following:

-Given an example from the Hadith of Bukhari, which is the story of Mohammed first claims prophecy (selected relevant and orthodox textual example)
-Analyzed the differences between this story and other stories from the Bible about revelation (proofs for comparison between the texts)
-Described in detail the assumptions I have used for the differences between the Biblical versus Islamic accounts, and what the implications of these assumptions are (logical reasoning)
-Cited all my textual sources which I have used, whether Christian or Islamic
Planten, you have done none of these.

samaan.

Planten,
Why are you trying to change the topic of this discussion to something other than about the “angel Gabriel” being from Satan?
One of the techniques of dishonest debating, Planten, is to try to change subjects when in the middle of a discussion in order to draw attention away from the main topic.
If you wish to discuss Jesus divinity, take it up in another forum or posting. However, don’t try to avoid answering my questions or citing referenced, well-reasoned proofs for your arguments because you are unable or unwilling to do.

samaan.

Planten is using a typical debating tactic than many Moslems employ when they can’t actually answer a question- they just switch to another one and try to avoid the subject.
It’s the reason why Planten won’t answer me- he knows that he cannot respond.

samaan.

Planten, …

The only failure here in this debate, Planten, are your arguments:
-You provide no textual proof
-You provide no consistent reasoning
-You provide no relevant examples
-You provide no referenced sources

Your arguments are a joke, Planten, because you have referenced only yourself. When you are found to be wrong, you change topics and try to force people to answer your questions.

I don’t play your games, Planten. That’s dishonest and not worthy of discussion.

I say to anybody who reads this post, as I said on another message board, don’t answer any of Planten’s questions until he answers mine, which he has repeatedly refused and tried to avoid doing so. When he started to lose the argument, he tried to change topic. When I told him I wasn’t playing his games, he went to a different thread.

samaan.

See Planten, you have expressed the exact reason why nobody listen to you with any degree of seriousness.

You don’t read what people write.

Because I’m slow, it is only now that I suspect “planten” is a “plant” put here to sabotage this forum.

 

[sedonaman]

…
Part 2
…

This excerpt from Part 2:

But what was the real nature of that Muslim colonial rule and what was the nature of Dhimmitude the Hindus had suffered for centuries after centuries? It is best described through a dialogue between Sultan Alauddin Khilji and a qazi called Mughisuddin. The incident has been narrated by Alauddin’s court chronicler Ziauddin Barni in Tarikh-i-Firozshahi. Barni wrote,

“One day Qazi Mughisuddin visited the court of Sultan Alauddin Khilji [1296 – 1316] and the Sultan asked the qazi, ‘How are Hindus designated in the (Islamic) law, as payers of tribute (Kharaj-gauzar) or giver of tribute (Kharaj-dih)?’ The kazi replied, ‘They are called payers of tribute, and when the revenue officer demands silver from them, they should, without question and with all humility and respect, tender gold. If the officer throws dirt into their mouths, they must without reluctance open their mouths wide to receive it. By doing so they show their respect for the officer. The due subordination of the Zimmi (tribute payer, AKA, dhimmi) is exhibited in this humble payment and by this throwing of dirt in their mouths. The glorification of Islam is a duty. … Allah holds them in contempt, for He says, ‘Keep them in subjection’. To keep the Hindus in abasement is especially a religious duty because they are the most inveterate enemies of the Prophet and because the Prophet has commanded us to slay them, plunder them, and make them captive, saying, ‘Convert them to Islam or kill them, enslave them and spoil their wealth and property. No doctor but the great doctor (Hanifa), to whose school we belong, has asserted to the imposition of the jizya (poll tax) on Hindus. Doctors of other schools allow no other alternative but ‘death or Islam’.”

agrees with what Thomas Jefferson John Adams heard almost 500 years later when they went to see Tripoli’s ambassador to London in March 1785 to inquired by what right the Barbary states preyed upon American shipping, enslaving both crews and passengers. They were kindly informed that,

“It was written in the Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their [Muslims’] authority were sinners, that it was their [Muslims’] right and duty to make war upon whoever they could find and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Mussulman [as Muslims were called then] who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.”

It is worth noting that the United States played no part in the Crusades, nor in the Catholic reconquista of Andalusia; nor did the state of Israel exist at the time. The US was merely minding its own business.

 

[jakasaki]

We have been over this ground with planten ad nausium many times before. There was a fellow poster, “samaan” by username, who was very knowledgeable and provided some excellent contributions to this forum, but planten succeeded in driving him away. Here is a sample of what transpired before [as you read it, ask yourself if it sounds familiar]:

Originally Posted by planten.

samaan.

samaan.

samaan.

samaan.

samaan.

samaan.

samaan.

Because I’m slow, it is only now that I suspect “planten” is a “plant” put here to sabotage this forum.

Ah yes indeed - I remember samaan very well. Excellent posts!

 

[Byzantine_Wolf]

[All of what you quoted]

Hmm…that all does sound vaguely familiar… Reminds me of Muslim debater Nadir Ahmed, where he has a set strategy of how to debate and carries it out each time. Course, Humphrey in Yes, Minister did that too, and Hacker used it against him.

By the by, if any one hasn’t had a chance to hear Nadir Ahmed debate, especially his debates against Sam Shamoun or James White, you should. Even Muslims hate the guy, and for good reason. He uses more logical fallacies in just one rebuttal than most people do in a lifetime.

 

[jakasaki]

Hmm…that all does sound vaguely familiar… Reminds me of Muslim debater Nadir Ahmed, where he has a set strategy of how to debate and carries it out each time. Course, Humphrey in Yes, Minister did that too, and Hacker used it against him.

By the by, if any one hasn’t had a chance to hear Nadir Ahmed debate, especially his debates against Sam Shamoun or James White, you should. Even Muslims hate the guy, and for good reason. He uses more logical fallacies in just one rebuttal than most people do in a lifetime.

I’ve seen the debates (not all of them) from Nadir and Shamoun and Sam sets him straight. And yes, at times even muslims don’t like Nadir because they claim he does not represent islam properly.

Well, then, tell the man to stop debating… simple!!!

 

[Byzantine_Wolf]

I’ve seen the debates (not all of them) from Nadir and Shamoun and Sam sets him straight. And yes, at times even muslims don’t like Nadir because they claim he does not represent islam properly.

Well, then, tell the man to stop debating… simple!!!

Unfortunately you can’t stop a man from debating short of killing him. However, there are Muslim websites out there actually exposing Nadir and all he does, and most Christian debaters are telling others not to even mess with Nadir Ahmed. David Wood, who debated Nadir at one time and hosted the debate with James White, started a series of posts on his blog about Nadir exposing his tactics and self-destructive personality, and got even contributions from Muslims.

Now that I think about it, Nadir does a lot of the topic-switching as well. For the Shamoun debate, which was “Is Islam a Religion of Peace?”, he tries to change the topic to violence in the Bible (Shamoun destroys even this fallacy when he points out Mohammad called the violence done from the Old Testament the order of God). In the James White debate he tried to change the topic of “Is the New Testament Reliable?” to “Was Paul a Real Prophet?” Course that topic in and of itself was stupid, since Paul was an apostle and not a prophet :hypno:

 

[Aydan]

By the by, if any one hasn’t had a chance to hear Nadir Ahmed debate, especially his debates against Sam Shamoun or James White, you should. Even Muslims hate the guy, and for good reason. He uses more logical fallacies in just one rebuttal than most people do in a lifetime.

I’ve never heard of Nadir Ahmed. Do you have any links to information about him or his debates?

 

[planten]

Ah yes indeed - I remember samaan very well. Excellent posts!

But I do not remember any samaan. It must be some made up person to malign me now.

 

[jakasaki]

But I do not remember any samaan. It must be some made up person to malign me now.

You’re kidding right.

SedonaMan posted some of the conversations posts between you and samaan…

OY - VEY!

 

[sedonaman]

But I do not remember any samaan. It must be some made up person to malign me now.

**Hey, world! **Here is a guy who knows how to open a forum account, who has made over 3,100 posts on this forum, knows how to use the various font features, etc., but cannot copy and paste any part of another’s post so as to comment on it … and uses as an excuse that “it is too long” to leave room for a reply. Now he claims he never heard of “samaan” [with whom he had debated at length] and denies he ever heard of him in spite of the links I provided to one of their exchanges.

He is not sincere, and now I am more sure than ever that he is here to sabotage this forum.

I rest my case.

 

[sedonaman]

…
Nadir does a lot of the topic-switching as well. For the Shamoun debate, which was “Is Islam a Religion of Peace?”, he tries to change the topic to violence in the Bible (Shamoun destroys even this fallacy when he points out Mohammad called the violence done from the Old Testament the order of God).
…

Here’s a thought. It would seem that what one can say about the other, the other can say something similar about the one. On a high enough level, though, we reach a point where this isn’t possible. Take for example, the Qur’an vs. the Bible. In response to the charge that the Qur’an is violent, we are told by Muslims [with the possible exception of planten] that it is divided into “early, peaceful” verses and “later violent” ones. For example:

Qur’an of Mecca 73:10: Listen to what they [unbelievers] say with patience, and leave them with dignity.

From tolerance we move to the ultimate intolerance, not even the Lord of the Universe can stand the unbelievers[1]:

*Qur’an of Medina 8:12: Then your Lord spoke to His angels and said, “I will be with you. Give strength to the believers. I will send terror into the unbelievers’ hearts, cut off their heads and even the tips of their fingers!” *

The Bible, too, can be divided similarly, Old Testament [early verses] and New Testament [newer verses]. The alleged violence in the Bible is almost exclusively in the OT [the only NT violence I can recall off-hand is Peter’s cutting off the servant’s ear, for which Christ rebuked him]; and, for the sake of discussion, let us grant to Muslim apologists that there is violence in the Bible. But look at the sequence in time of the Bible vs. the Qur’an:
[/INDENT]

Violent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Peaceful​

OT [violent, i.e., an eye for an eye, etc.] – – – > NT [Love your enemies, etc.]

Qur’an of Medina [slay the unbelievers, etc.] <– – – Qur’an of Mecca [leave unbelievers with dignity]

– – – time – – – >​

The sequence of the Qur’an was purposefully shown in reverse chronological order to make the point that Islam is a retrograde teaching [in the broad sense of the word “teaching”] that justifies and rewards a man for reverting to his feral nature, as opposed to the Bible which encourages man to aspire to a higher level.

Note [1] Warner, “The Study of Political Islam”

 

[Aydan]

Here’s a thought. It would seem that what one can say about the other, the other can say something similar about the one. On a high enough level, though, we reach a point where this isn’t possible. Take for example, the Qur’an vs. the Bible. In response to the charge that the Qur’an is violent, we are told by Muslims [with the possible exception of planten] that it is divided into “early, peaceful” verses and “later violent” ones. For example:

Qur’an of Mecca 73:10: Listen to what they [unbelievers] say with patience, and leave them with dignity.

From tolerance we move to the ultimate intolerance, not even the Lord of the Universe can stand the unbelievers[1]:

*Qur’an of Medina 8:12: Then your Lord spoke to His angels and said, “I will be with you. Give strength to the believers. I will send terror into the unbelievers’ hearts, cut off their heads and even the tips of their fingers!” *

The Bible, too, can be divided similarly, Old Testament [early verses] and New Testament [newer verses]. The alleged violence in the Bible is almost exclusively in the OT [the only NT violence I can recall off-hand is Peter’s cutting off the servant’s ear, for which Christ rebuked him]; and, for the sake of discussion, let us grant to Muslim apologists that there is violence in the Bible. But look at the sequence in time of the Bible vs. the Qur’an:
[/INDENT]

Violent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Peaceful​

OT [violent, i.e., an eye for an eye, etc.] – – – > NT [Love your enemies, etc.]

Qur’an of Medina [slay the unbelievers, etc.] <– – – Qur’an of Mecca [leave unbelievers with dignity]

– – – time – – – >​

The sequence of the Qur’an was purposefully shown in reverse chronological order to make the point that Islam is a retrograde teaching [in the broad sense of the word “teaching”] that justifies and rewards a man for reverting to his feral nature, as opposed to the Bible which encourages man to aspire to a higher level.

Note [1] Warner, “The Study of Political Islam”

I would like to add one more example as well. In the Bible we know that Jesus replaces the old covenant so the New Testament and its nonviolence is what we follow as Christians but in the Koran is the opposite in the beginning it says there is no compulsion in religion but then later on it has all the violent verses as you point out. What a contrast there is between the Bible and the Koran. This is quite a post for someone who doesn’t exist.

 

[real2all]

Hello all and good day to you all.
I am surprised to see this thread still going on. Just caught up on what has been posted. and i must say I’m impressed. Thank you, for keeping this interesting.

 

[real2all]

Also “NO”
still can’t see anything good yet, but when i find something i’ll let you all know…

 

[Byzantine_Wolf]

I’ve never heard of Nadir Ahmed. Do you have any links to information about him or his debates?

Here are some posts by David Wood at his blog:

Nadir Ahmed declares Shabir Ali and Ahmed Deedat kafirs

Nadir Ahmed says Shabir Ali’s son is cursed because Ali believes in the swoon theory - In my opinion, this is really low; I don’t care what religion you belong to or what you believe, you don’t go after a person’s family. People on this forum - be they Muslims, Jews, Roman Catholics or fellow Orthodox - can rest assured no matter how passionate debates with me may get, I will never, ever attack their mothers, fathers, sons or daughters in any way that may be construed as trolling or flame-baiting.

Random facts about Nadir Ahmed’s temperament

A commentary on Nadir Ahmed’s debate tactics

Some other sources:

Nadir Ahmed’s entire debate with James White (~1.5 hours long) - Now you can see Nadir Ahmed in action!

A Muslim site attacking Nadir Ahmed - As I said, even Muslims hate this guy

By the way, I would link to his website, but I get a “Reported Attack Site!” warning, and I don’t want to endanger any one. No doubt his rhetoric will seep into your computer and clog the mainframe

 

[Agabriel]

**Hey, world! **Here is a guy who knows how to open a forum account, who has made over 3,100 posts on this forum, knows how to use the various font features, etc., but cannot copy and paste any part of another’s post so as to comment on it … and uses as an excuse that “it is too long” to leave room for a reply. Now he claims he never heard of “samaan” [with whom he had debated at length] and denies he ever heard of him in spite of the links I provided to one of their exchanges.

He is not sincere, and now I am more sure than ever that he is here to sabotage this forum.

I rest my case.

do you now know why I use this guy… :takeoff: when talking about planten’s posts??? I mean, he can’t even click on your links to review them!

Planten’s take on history is really out there… oh oh, I gotta do this… :takeoff: