Human sacrifice in islam?

[jack_hawkins]

At least this outrage happened in a country far away in the middle of a warzone. When you get people living next door who seem to think the world would be a better place with you dead it hits closer to home (literally).

I wouldn’t talk about your fellow Muslims that way
the biggest threat to a Muslim is another Muslim - strange that isn’t it?

 

[jack_hawkins]

An act of pure evil but I don’t think you’e being fair in assuming that all Muslims are like this. I think it is possible to be a Muslim and a decent person.

Yes, I agree - but looking at the words of the Koran it is despite being a Muslim. Righteous Muslims have to selectively ignore certain clear instructions - in fact certain parts of the Koran/Hadiths are avoided so many Muslims are not aware of them.

 

[Mr.Bee]

I don’t recall Abraham laughing.

Sorry, my mistake, Sarah laughed.

 

[Jason_Hurd]

Not that this will help the arguement at all, but…

Abraham sacrificing his son, in this context, is misunderstood.

In Genesis, God makes a promise to Abraham that he will have a multitude of decendents, by Issac.

When he and Sarah heard this they laughed, but we all know what happened.

Knowing this, later, when Abraham was tested by God, he knew he was not going to kill Issac, because God keeps his promises and how could he kill Issac and still have decendants?

Gen: 22: … “The boy and I will go over there to worship and then we will come back to you”.

“We” is the key word there, he knew they were both coming back.

The days of child sacrifices were essentially over.

I must respectfully disagree with this reading of Scripture. If Abraham knew beforehand that he would not really have to sacrifice Isaac, then God’s test of his faith was a worthless waste of time. It’s as much as to say that Abraham winked slyly at God, intimating ‘I know you won’t make me go through with it and that this is all really just a masquerade; just wanted to let you know I knew’. Do you see how impossible this reading is?

Abraham was faithfully obeying God’s command, so faithfully that it was necessary for God to send an angel to stop him from actually killing his own son, which he was perfectly prepared to do.

 

[Mr.Bee]

I must respectfully disagree with this reading of Scripture. If Abraham knew beforehand that he would not really have to sacrifice Isaac, then God’s test of his faith was a worthless waste of time. It’s as much as to say that Abraham winked slyly at God, intimating ‘I know you won’t make me go through with it and that this is all really just a masquerade; just wanted to let you know I knew’. Do you see how impossible this reading is?

Abraham was faithfully obeying God’s command, so faithfully that it was necessary for God to send an angel to stop him from actually killing his own son, which he was perfectly prepared to do.

God would not ask anybody to kill his own son, just to prove you love him.

The test was did Abraham believe Gods promise, which if he did then sacraficing Issac was out of the question. Abraham was prepared to go through with it, but he new it wasn’t going to happen.

 

[pro_universal]

However if we look at the acknowledged historical sources (sources accepted by Muslim sources) we see a completely different picture. We see a violent man, who raided caravans, had people assassinated, had a low opinion of women or “right hand possessions” etc etc.
So what’s the problem, objective historians’ or Muslims’ view of Mohammed?

Which historians characterize Muhammad this way?

Robert Spencer isn’t a historian, if that’s who you’re thinking of.

 

[jack_hawkins]

Which historians characterize Muhammad this way?
Robert Spencer isn’t a historian, if that’s who you’re thinking of.

Check your historical sources. That is the historical position. Most Muslims I know acknowledge Mohammed was a caravan raider who had people assassinated. Do you disagree?
Do you deny he had limbs chopped off (of other people naturally)? Is that “harsh but fair” in your book?
Actually Robert Spencer uses sources accepted by Muslim scholars, so your criticism of him is invalid.

 

[pro_universal]

Check your historical sources. That is the historical position. Most Muslims I know acknowledge Mohammed was a caravan raider who had people assassinated. Do you disagree?

Uh, yes. In fact I don’t know of a single Muslim who would characterize the man that way.

What “historical sources” are you referring to? Which ones should I be checking for this revelation?

Do you deny he had limbs chopped off (of other people naturally)? Is that “harsh but fair” in your book?
Actually Robert Spencer uses sources accepted by Muslim scholars, so your criticism of him is invalid.

Using sources “accepted by Muslims” does not prove anything; I could write an entire book written “entirely by American sources” to prove any number of crazy and misleading points about America.

Robert Spencer is a person who does that with Islam; he is not a historian, and there’s a reason why none of the Islamic scholars in the US take him seriously.

As for the punishments-yes, that was certainly fair for the time. Here in America, we were strapping people into electrical circuits and frying them for crimes up until a couple of years ago…harsh punishment for harsh crimes is a standard feature of any civilized country

 

[jack_hawkins]

so you deny, against all the accepted writings of Islam, that Mohammed raided caravans and had people assassinated?
you must hang with some strange people, as no Muslim I have ever spoken to has denied this
quick execution versus multiple amputations slowly killing?

 

[pro_universal]

so you deny, against all the accepted writings of Islam, that Mohammed raided caravans and had people assassinated?
you must hang with some strange people, as no Muslim I have ever spoken to has denied this

Yes. Both of those descriptions are not accurate. He did fight wars-killing the leaders of your opponents in a war is not a “caravan raid” or an assassination.

But regardless, please tell me which “historical sources” you were referring to. Which works of history paint this picture you have of Muhammad?

 

[jack_hawkins]

Yes. Both of those descriptions are not accurate. He did fight wars-killing the leaders of your opponents in a war is not a “caravan raid” or an assassination.

But regardless, please tell me which “historical sources” you were referring to. Which works of history paint this picture you have of Muhammad?

you are either a bare-faced liar, or you don’t know much about Mohammed
why would all the Muslims I’ve spoken to agree these things happened, and you don’t? what explanation is there for that?

 

[pro_universal]

you are either a bare-faced liar, or you don’t know much about Mohammed
why would all the Muslims I’ve spoken to agree these things happened, and you don’t? what explanation is there for that?

Maybe you haven’t been speaking to Muslims, or you just don’t remember. Or maybe you think that reading Robert Spencer constitutes reading Muslim writing-it does not.

But anyway, your lack of follow up after claiming “historical sources” speaks for itself.

 

[jack_hawkins]

Maybe you haven’t been speaking to Muslims, or you just don’t remember. Or maybe you think that reading Robert Spencer constitutes reading Muslim writing-it does not.
But anyway, your lack of follow up after claiming “historical sources” speaks for itself.

I have spoken to many Muslims, so I think you must been simpy trying to deceive us
since you can lie so blatantly, I’m not sure I can believe anything you say
I can quote historical sources actually, I just can’t be bothered to find them - I was preferring to focus on one part of the argument.
I would have thought someone claiming to be so authoritative on Mohammed’s life would know all the sources anyway?
I shall post some citations, but I think any further discussion when you are using taqqiya is a waste of time.

Bukhari Vol 4 book 56, no 3012
Ibn Ishaq, 287-288

 

[hosemonkey]

One of our local boys has just returned from Iraq. He lost a good friend there as a result of a terrorist booby trap. His squad heard a child frantically screaming in an alley and ran to render aid. The moslem terrorists had rigged the child with explosives and had then broken his legs, knowing that when our soldiers heard a child screaming, they would rush to help. When our soldiers tried to help the kid, these moslem dogs detonated the explosives, killing and wounding our troops. Do you condemn this, Pro_universal? Or are you no better than these animals? Is it any wonder that decent people are disgusted by moslems?

You have not answered my question, Pro_universal. Do you support the animal acts by your fellow moslems that I have described or not? If so, you are no better than the dogs that commited these acts. If you do not, then say so.

 

[hamba2han]

God would not ask anybody to kill his own son, just to prove you love him.

The Command given to Abraham (pbuh) to sacrifice his son was not a test of love for the Creator, it was a test of obedience to Him.

The fact that Abraham had no hesitation to carry out the Command given to him meant that he did indeed pass this test.

It appears that most of the Christians on these boards would fail the test of obedience to their Creator.

If you were in Abraham’s place, would you kill your child if you were commanded by your Creator to do so?

 

[Valke2]

The Command given to Abraham (pbuh) to sacrifice his son was not a test of love for the Creator, it was a test of obedience to Him.

The fact that Abraham had no hesitation to carry out the Command given to him meant that he did indeed pass this test.

It appears that most of the Christians on these boards would fail the test of obedience to their Creator.

If you were in Abraham’s place, would you kill your child if you were commanded by your Creator to do so?

no.

 

[pro_universal]

Bukhari Vol 4 book 56, no 3012
Ibn Ishaq, 287-288

Your citation to Bukhari does not exist. “No 3012” isn’t in any of the collections I can find.

Ibn Ishaq…which writing of his was that from? Where did you get the direct citation to his books?

 

[Mr.Bee]

If you were in Abraham’s place, would you kill your child if you were commanded by your Creator to do so?

You see, that is a loaded question.

My point is, Abraham knew the reason for God’s command, therefore he obeyed.

If God asked me to kill my child without explanation, then I would disobey. I guess I’m going to hell then.

But I believe God would not ask an unreasonable demand.

 

[hamba2han]

My point is, Abraham knew the reason for God’s command, therefore he obeyed.

How on earth do you know that he knew the reason for God’s command??

If God asked me to kill my child without explanation, then I would disobey. I guess I’m going to hell then.

This very real possibility does not trouble you?

But I believe God would not ask an unreasonable demand.

The creations should leave all the reasoning to their Creator.

 

[mgupta]

In India the Hindu’s are now attacking Christians. The Buddhists have as well. Take your blinders off.

And why are they doing that. Could it be because Christians are over there trying to convert them to the “true way”