Which Christian mind? That who said his God is an offspring of and incest? That who said his God uses virgin girls? That who says his God shaved bear and hair of his people? That who says his God ordered to kill boys, married women and men becasue of their faith? That who says his own God DEAD on the cross? That who says his God killed new born babies? No chance at all.The fact that Muhammed never directly heard the voice of God, that he killed people and violently stole from them, that he had slaves and condoned all kinds of physical abuse and punishment are just the tip of the iceberg. I realize you don’t see these as problems, but to a Christian mind, these are huge character issues.
May be this for the timebeing.So, you have nothing to offer from the New Testament? From what I have seen of the websites answering-christianity, etc., neither do they.
No. I want you to read both. You never go for an explanation from a Muslim, for whichever questions or allegations you find in an anti-Islamic site.So what’s wrong with that? You only expect people to read pro-Islam sites, do you? That would be so one-sided, isn’t it?
You should really be looking at the veracity of the evidence, not the source - because that would be the logical fallacy of ad hominem.
In my experience, Muslims only want their ‘critics’ to read pro-Islam sites? How is that fair and reasonable?
Isn’t it the same God that allowed polygamy, slavery, robbary, killing of non-believers, their children, their women except virgin girls, compelled rape victims to marry the rapists, riding cherobs like a cowboy, and then stoped all that?I don’t believe rape, murder, torture, genocide, ethnic-cleansing, enslavement of innocent women and children, and pedophilia to be relative morals. I think these are absolute morals. They were wrong in year 0. They were wrong in the first century AD. They were wrong in the 7th century. They are wrong today. And they will be wrong tomorrow.
The problem of a purported prophet of God showing ‘relative morality’ is that his morality becomes absolute.
Even today, there are many if not most Muslim (if not all Muslims) believe pedophilia is okay because Muhammad did it.
Because such purported prophets are used to moral guides - they can never ever claim the ‘relative moral’ excuse.
There is a logical problem with the relative morality argument if one thinks carefully. It says that God condones certain acts that he subsequently makes heinous. He makes certain acts moral in the 7th century but heinous acts today. Thus, God is not consistent in his morality. This is a problem because God has not ‘spoken’ to us since ancient times - so how are we to know of his change of heart regarding moral matters?
Give me one reason to think, he can’t be taken as a moral guide.Khalfan,
Moral values may have changed but we do look for prophets to transcend time and culture. Otherwise, why bother? Your prophet seems rather limited in “usefulness” to the 7th century Arabian desert. Not at all useful today.
Is Muhammad a moral guide or not? If so then his moral standards must be superior to ours even today and into the future. If his moral standards are below ours then why not toss his ‘model’ into the garbage can of history?
You can’t have it both ways - either Muhammad was a prophet for all time and all places or he was a prophet for the 7th century Arabian desert only.
Which is it?
Wow… and where can I find that history?I’m sorry but I have rather higher moral standards than your prophet. I believe that a true prophet of a true almighty god would not condone rape in any shape or form. Think of the millions of women who were raped by Muslims through the centuries because Muhammad condoned it.
Didn’t he do that?The fact that the 7th century Arabs were savages does not mean that what they did should be condoned. In fact, a true prophet should tell them that what they were doing was immoral and wrong.
Also general emancipation of slaves pre-existed Islam. Don’t tell us that Muhammad initiated anything new here. He did not institute general emancipation. He made specific emancipation okay but there are sahih hadiths that also say that a slave-owner can renege on his emancipation of his slave.
The Persian Cyrus the Great instituted general emancipation more than 1,000 years before Muhammad.
At the time of last speach of Prophet (pbuh) where he announced completion of Islam as the religion, there weren’t even a single slave existed among Muslims. That is the influence Prophet (pbuh) could make in his people. Emancipation existed in Roman empire could never ever stop slavery in Christian community until when, today? The Black people still suffer the seperation in U.S and South Africa. Thank God that Ebraham Lincon could do something.The Romans had a system of specific manumission. pbs.org/empires/romans/empire/slaves_freemen.html.
But the only one who could throw it out from an entire community is Mohamed (pbuh). And that makes him different.The Greek stoics were philosophically against slavery in any form about 900 years before Muhammad.
Then why do you quibble when someone quotes from an anti-Islam site? You seem to only want people to quote from pro-Islam sites.No. I want you to read both. You never go for an explanation from a Muslim, for whichever questions or allegations you find in an anti-Islamic site.
Isn’t it the same God that allowed polygamy, slavery, robbary, killing of non-believers, their children, their women except virgin girls, compelled rape victims to marry the rapists, riding cherobs like a cowboy, and then stoped all that?
I am sorry… what is stoped in that? let me think.
So you think polygamy, slavery, robbery, killing of non-believers to be moral acts?Polygamy is stoped. Then… I can’t find anything else is stoped in NT. May be you can help me.
Because he was evil? Is killing, rape, plunder, robbery, genocide, ethnic-cleansing, torture, enslavement and pedophilia NOT evil?Give me one reason to think, he can’t be taken as a moral guide.
Read up on what the Muslims did to their conquered peoples in the Holy Land and India.Wow… and where can I find that history?
Rodrigo Bivar [/QUOTE said:I’m sorry but I have rather higher moral standards than your prophet. I believe that a true prophet of a true almighty god would not condone rape in any shape or form. Think of the millions of women who were raped by Muslims through the centuries because Muhammad condoned it.
Wow… and where can I find that history?
Rodrigo Bivar [/QUOTE said:The fact that the 7th century Arabs were savages does not mean that what they did should be condoned. In fact, a true prophet should tell them that what they were doing was immoral and wrong.
Didn’t he do that?
Rodrigo Bivar [/QUOTE said:Also general emancipation of slaves pre-existed Islam. Don’t tell us that Muhammad initiated anything new here. He did not institute general emancipation. He made specific emancipation okay but there are sahih hadiths that also say that a slave-owner can renege on his emancipation of his slave.
The Persian Cyrus the Great instituted general emancipation more than 1,000 years before Muhammad.
The Romans had a system of specific manumission. pbs.org/empires/romans/em…s_freemen.html
.
At the time of last speach of Prophet (pbuh) where he announced completion of Islam as the religion, there weren’t even a single slave existed among Muslims. That is the influence Prophet (pbuh) could make in his people. Emancipation existed in Roman empire could never ever stop slavery in Christian community until when, today? The Black people still suffer the seperation in U.S and South Africa. Thank God that Ebraham Lincon could do something.
Rodrigo Bivar [/QUOTE said:The Greek stoics were philosophically against slavery in any form about 900 years before Muhammad.
But the only one who could throw it out from an entire community is Mohamed (pbuh). And that makes him different.
Slavery existed and was the backbone of Muslim society until 1960. While outlawed in your country, slavery thrives there today. The authorities just look the other way and let it go on.At the time of last speach of Prophet (pbuh) where he announced completion of Islam as the religion, there weren’t even a single slave existed among Muslims. That is the influence Prophet (pbuh) could make in his people. Emancipation existed in Roman empire could never ever stop slavery in Christian community until when, today? The Black people still suffer the seperation in U.S and South Africa. Thank God that Ebraham Lincon could do something…
It gets even worst. it is illegal to execute a virgin SO the state hires a man who’s job it to top rape any woman(or girl past the age of puberty) condemend to death to asssure she is not a virgin.Ironically, it’s “reading” that completely put me off to Islam. Fo instance, this recent news story from the BBC, it’s about a fatwa issued to resolve the conflict of Muslim women working alone with men. The suggested resolution, breastfeeding:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breastfeeding_fatwa
And from the BBC:
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6681511.stm
Oh, my Lord! That is the ugliest thing I have ever heard. And I thought I had heard the worst. That makes me physically ill.It gets even worst. it is illegal to execute a virgin SO the state hires a man who’s job it to top rape any woman(or girl past the age of puberty) condemend to death to asssure she is not a virgin.
You forgot an important part of this. So that the man did not commit the crime of rape, they were married. Then he was not sinning when he raped her.It gets even worst. it is illegal to execute a virgin SO the state hires a man who’s job it to top rape any woman(or girl past the age of puberty) condemend to death to asssure she is not a virgin.
No arrests? Nobody in the crowd or bystanders jumping in and taking those guys down?When I was in London, an ex-Muslim was at Speakers’ Corner in Hyde Park talking about slavery that still is going on in some African Muslim nations (a presentation complete with charts, graphs, statistics and pictures on posters, I might add). I saw two Muslim men at the back of the crowd talking angrily with eachother in between listening to the presentation. Then they abruptly left. They came back minutes later with faces frozen in expressions of anger, pushed through the crowd, grabbed the man speaking about slavery in Islam and, before anyone knew what to do, one man restrained him and the other kicked him as hard as he could in the stomach. The crowd watching had been about 10 people. We all frantically tried to get help for him, calling out to people listening to other speakers to call an ambulance. The last I heard or saw from him, was this poor man trying to expose the horrors of slavery in Islam, being put into the back of an ambulance.
Normal ‘group think’. The larger the group, the less likely it is that anyone will take responsibility to help.No arrests? Nobody in the crowd or bystanders jumping in and taking those guys down?
we had the wame thing happen in the US as at least 10 peopkle stepped over or walked around a women dying on the floor of a convenience storeNormal ‘group think’. The larger the group, the less likely it is that anyone will take responsibility to help.
I saw some news about it. Some of them even took short video of her with their cell phones. But did not help. I’ll never understand people like that.we had the wame thing happen in the US as at least 10 peopkle stepped over or walked around a women dying on the floor of a convenience store
No. The men ran away immediately. The first instinct of everyone was to help the injured man, so in the precious minutes lost with the rush to help the victim, the men hightailed it out of there. There was a lot of confusion amongst the crowd about what was going on as the crime was happening. I can’t emphasize enough how quickly this all took place. The men had obviously walked away the first time to work out and execute the plan. I was so shaken by it all, that I left after the ambulance came. But I saw people pointing in the direction of the men’s escape as they were talking to police. I don’t know if anyone was ever arrested or if the victim recovered. It was all just extremely traumatic to witness. This happened in the spring of 1997.No arrests? Nobody in the crowd or bystanders jumping in and taking those guys down?
I know the case that you are talking about, but this wasn’t like that. Everyone remained and were very concerned for this man. The reason the criminals got away, was that the first instinct was to help the victim. Some were helping the man up from the ground and helping him sit and asking if he was alright. Still others were calling out to call for an ambulance. I was one of the people shouting out to others in the park for help. It was just a scene of confusion and panic. The calm ones were the ones talking to the victim and asking him about pain and if he knew the men who did it. I remember he was very dazed, his eyes didn’t look focused, and was in great pain but he indicated that he didn’t know them. Most of the other people were still standing around listening to other speakers and weren’t aware of what was happening right away.Normal ‘group think’. The larger the group, the less likely it is that anyone will take responsibility to help.