sublime morality of genocide and enslavement

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

pro_universal:

In contrast, El Cid made war on behalf of a political machine that killed virtually every last Jew in Spain. That is genocide, when you decide that because of who their parents were, a certain people must be eradicated no matter if they convert, were part of a peaceful tribe, or anything else. The muslims made war on one specific group of Jews over a treaty violation; within a decade they had other Jews under their control and those Jews kept their religion, lives, and property. That’s more than we can say for any European state of the time.

Nice of you to think Cid was a prophet of God.

There really is no moral equivalence, is there?

pro_universal:

Rodrigo:

You should be telling us, yes he did commit genocide and enslavement, and that is the proof of his ‘sublime morality’.

I’m not a Muslim nor am I a hypocrite.

With ‘respect’ I beg to differ.

pro_universal:

This is why I don’t do what you want me to.

So are you denying he committed genocide and enslavement?

pro_universal:

Rodrigo:

No.

Well, if that’s your answer on rereading the points you clearly missed there’s nowhere we can get on the debate. Your information is incorrect, and presented in a way that is designed specifically to incite people to hate muslims.

You asked me to re-read your posts. I have already answered your posts. So why go over old ground. If you have any arguments to progress the discussion please provide.

Why would I entertain your request to waste my time by re-reading posts I have already answered?

pro_universal:

I’ll keep praying for you as long as you’re typing. That’s clearly what you need, and I hope that Jesus will show you the error of your discriminatory and angry ways.

You really should be praying for Muhammad’s victims instead. That only shows where your priorities lie.

Chau
MataMoro.

 

[pro_universal]

Let’s start by noting what isn’t in your litany of posts Rodrigo:

Mainly: A historical source showing that there were no Jews in Arabia after the Arabs took it. Instead, you quote a bunch of hadiths (as always, out of context.) If your hadiths meant what you are trying to construe them to mean, it would’ve been an easy matter for the Arabs to kick every last Jew out of their lands over that period between the 640’s and 1948. They didn’t, so your theory has some serious credibility problems there.

Also of note:

New Hampshire still IS part of America. Palestine has ceased to be part of any Arab empire for 1,000 years.

India is still a member of the commonwealth. That’s the functional equivalent of the Arabs’ role in the Turkish state, which was based on Muslim identity (which is why they all speak Arabic except for the turks.) Your abstractions of hadiths are similar to this point.

Yes, cultural and religious identities do define the character of different provinces. Quebec is a French province of Canada. British Columbia is English.

You might also want to note that legally there still is a Palestine. No country on the planet, nor the UN body itself, recognizes Israel’s claims to land outside the 1967 borders.

You really should be praying for Muhammad’s victims instead. That only shows where your priorities lie, Muslim, I mean Catholic.

I pray for the victims of Europe’s 20th century racist fascism, which has produced the greatest horror known to man in World War II. This is where your “tradition” of hating muslims and arabs comes from, and it’s for the elimination of this evil influence on the world that I pray.

You are a product of an intolerant, angry, and violent Europe. I do pray for you, because I can only imagine what a torment it must be to live while hating so many people.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

pro_universal:

Let’s start by noting what isn’t in your litany of posts Rodrigo:

Mainly: A historical source showing that there were no Jews in Arabia after the Arabs took it.

My historical sources are the hadiths. They explicitly tells us Umar, on Muhammad’s wishes, expelled the Jews from the Hijaz, some say the Arabian Peninsula.

And what about Tabari’s History? Doesn’t that count?

What have you got? Some Jews from Arab countries (not even the Hijaz) some 1,400 years later. Lots of things happened in that time, bud.

So where’s your historical source?

pro_universal:

Instead, you quote a bunch of hadith (as always, out of context.)

Oh… the Muslim ‘out of context’ excuse again.

How is, ‘Umar expelled the Jews from the Hijaz’, out of context?

And what do you think are Muslim historical sources anyway?

pro_universal:

If you hadiths meant what you are trying to construe them to mean, it would’ve been an easy matter for the Arabs to kick every last Jews out of their lands over that period between the 640’s and 1948. They didn’t, so your theory has some serious credibility problems there.

But they did.

“Two centuries later, the great chroniclers of Islam believed that the whole of Central Arabia was emptied of Christians and Jews in the wake of Umar’s action. But there are pieces of evidence to suggest that this was not quite the case. For example, it was a Christian of Medina, admittedly a slave, who assassinated Umar. During the reign of Mu’awiya, the founder of the Umayyad dynasty, a force of 200 Christians formed the police of Medina and in Mecca a’cemetery for the infidels’ existed for a long time.

Yet if non-Muslims did remain in the peninsula their numbers in the central region were small. It is almost certain that, three centuries after the revelation, only a tiny group of Christians remained in Najran. The Jews were confined to the periphery.” Courbage, and Fargues, Christians and Jews under Islam, p. 7.

pro_universal:

Also of note:

Rodrigo:

New Hampshire still IS part of America. Palestine has ceased to be part of any Arab empire for 1,000 years.

India is still a member of the commonwealth. That’s the functional equivalent of the Arabs’ role in the Turkish state, which was based on Muslim identity (which is why they all speak Arabic except for the turks.) Your abstractions of hadiths are similar to this point.

Yes, cultural and religious identities do define the character of different provinces. Quebec is a French province of Canada. British Columbia is English.

I beg to differ. You’re misunderstanding what the Commonwealth is.

And Quebec is Canadian – French-speaking, but Canadian.

Your New Hampshire analogy got busted. Get over it.

pro_universal:

Rodrigo:

You really should be praying for Muhammad’s victims instead. That only shows where your priorities lie, Muslim, I mean Catholic.

I pray for the victims of Europe’s 20th century racist fascism, which has produced the greatest horror known to man in World War II. This is where your “tradition” of hating muslims and arabs comes from, and it’s for the elimination of this evil influence on the world that I pray.

And the perpetrators of WWII, Hitler and Mussolini, got done. We, the US, actually fought the fascists and racists known as the Nazis and Fascists and the Muslims under Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin el Husseini.

So it is highly objectionable to call us racist fascists when your side fought with the Nazis against the Allies.

I bet you didn’t tell the readers that the Muslims were on the side of Hitler, did you?

pro_universal:

You are a product of an intolerant, angry, and violent Europe. I do pray for you, because I can only imagine what a torment it must be to live while hating so many people.

I actually don’t hate Muslims. I hate Muhammad and Islam and what it does to Muslims.

You, on the other hand, cannot see the difference between criticism of Islam versus hatred of Muslims.

You, on the other hand, cannot see the difference between hatred of Muhammad versus hatred of Muslims.

You see, I view Muslims as victims of Islam. Only a Muslim would make the mistake you have. I’ve debated hundred’s of Muslims and you’re all the same and make the same mistakes.

What I do see is the truth: that you never denied Muhammad committed genocide and enslavement of the B. Qurayza.

Chau,
El Cid

 

[pro_universal]

So where’s your historical source?

Here’s a good summary article that refutes all of your claims and actually has citations at the bottom: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_Muslim_Lands

Oh… the Muslim ‘out of context’ excuse again.

It’s the truth. The argument that it seems like too much reflects your overuse of out of context statements, not the credibility of my illuminatory comments. Think of how many quotes from “Jewish sources” the Nazis put out…was the argument “oh, come on, they can’t all be fake!” a good one?

As for hadiths, they are not regarded as law by muslims, and they are frequently wrong. They are literally a mix-and-match of third or fourth person (in the good ones) narratives, and are not by any stretch guaranteed to be historically accurate.

But they did.

No, they did not. See link above. As for your source, I recommend you buy a copy of the book before you make a silly claim about its thesis: amazon.com/gp/product/1860642853/002-8093497-5019246?v=glance&n=283155

I encourage you to read it. Then you’ll see how wrong you can be if you rely on snippets of other people’s writing from websites in forming your conclusions.

Your New Hampshire analogy got busted. Get over it.

Now you’re just playing semantics in hope of a “victory”, which is what I suspect your involvement in this is becoming about more than even your hatred of muslims. Please read about the commonwealth system and then the Ottoman Millet system before you go any further with this.

We, the US, actually fought the fascists and racists known as the Nazis and Fascists and the Muslims under Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin el Husseini.

So it is highly objectionable to call us racist fascists when your side fought with the Nazis against the Allies.

Indeed, we fought them so well that Birmingham Alabama had its police unleashing dogs on peaceful protestors and the KKK shot people on television without being convicted only 20 years later. The US is to be commended to for beating Hitler, but let’s not pretend that we were in it just for the principle. Our own history long after WWII (which includes alongside racism forced sterilization, open anti-semitism, and violence against women) shows otherwise.

As for this mufti of yours, he’s an internet superstar on muslim hating sites. What most neglect to mention is that he was appointed by the British, and that the arabs’ participation with the nazis by and large did not involve cooperation in the anti-Jewish project. The Jews of Morocco who were unmolested even though the Germans went there are a good example of that. The flaw in your reasoning here can be exposed this way: The US sided with the USSR in that war. Does that mean the US supported international communism?

What I do see is the truth: that you never denied Muhammad committed genocide and enslavement of the B. Qurayza.

I deny that attacking one particular political unit in response to a treaty violation is in fact genocide. It’s like saying that the US committed “Genocide against Europe” because it wiped out the Nazis. If genocide can be applied to situations that local, then almost any military action at all could be called “genocide.” That cheapens the term, and dishonors the victims of the 20th century. There is no comparison between what the muslims did in Arabia in the 7th century to one tribe and what Hitler did to the Jews in the 20th.

Only a Muslim would make the mistake you have. I’ve debated hundred’s of Muslims and you’re all the same and make the same mistakes.

The fact that you find this issue relevant shows how strong the rest of your case is here. My religion has nothing to do with the strength of my points, but of course levelling the accusation to you seems to be a way of discrediting me. If you honestly believe that the fact that someone says “I’m Catholic” or “I’m muslim” makes a difference in how you should analyze the truth of their claims, then you are in need of some serious remedial reasoning courses.

But then again, I wouldn’t expect anything else from a person who calls himself “Muslim killer”. It’s exactly what I’d expect from someone with the name “Jew killer”, namely, bias and unhappy little paradigms of belief.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

pro_universal:

Rodrigo:

So where’s your historical source?

Here’s a good summary article that refutes all of your claims and actually has citations at the bottom: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histor…in_Muslim_Lands

Why don’t we examine your silly claim.

Are these countries listed by pro_universal in Arabia?
Spain – No
Lebanon – No
Iraq – No
Persia – No
Iran – No
Tunisia – No
Morocco – No
Egypt – No
Algeria – No
Libya – No
Bahrain –No.

So what have you proved? That you don’t know the difference between ‘Muslim Lands’ and Arabia. Nice.

And oh, if you want to talk about the migration of the Jews in 1948, just let me know. First look up the countries they came from. I’ll give you a hint: Arab countries are not all in Arabia.

pro_universal:

Rodrigo:

Oh… the Muslim ‘out of context’ excuse again.

It’s the truth. The argument that it seems like too much reflects your overuse of out of context statements, not the credibility of my illuminatory comments. Think of how many quotes from “Jewish sources” the Nazis put out…was the argument “oh, come on, they can’t all be fake!” a good one?

Lots of words but nothing to show how the hadiths were quoted ‘out of context’.

Is ‘Umar expelled the Jews from the Hijaz’ out of context?

pro_universal:

As for hadiths, they are not regarded as law by muslims, and they are frequently wrong. They are literally a mix-and-match of third or fourth person (in the good ones) narratives, and are not by any stretch guaranteed to be historically accurate.

Only Muslims make the claim above – when they’re cornered with the truth.

Well, this same argument can be made against Herodotus, Livy, Plutarch, Suetonius, The Venerable Bede, Thucycides, Strabo, Xenophon, and Tacitus.

Why the double-standards. You claim you’re a Catholic right, so who wrote the Gospels? Do you know the authorship or were they literally a a mix-and-match of third or fourth person (in the good ones) narratives, and are not by any stretch guaranteed to be historically accurate?

pro_universal:

Rodrigo:

But they did.

No, they did not. See link above. As for your source, I recommend you buy a copy of the book before you make a silly claim about its thesis: amazon.com/gp/product/18…glance&n=283155

I encourage you to read it. Then you’ll see how wrong you can be if you rely on snippets of other people’s writing from websites in forming your conclusions.

See above. You’ve been debunked.

pro_universal:

Rodrigo:

Your New Hampshire analogy got busted. Get over it.

Now you’re just playing semantics in hope of a “victory”, which is what I suspect your involvement in this is becoming about more than even your hatred of muslims. Please read about the commonwealth system and then the Ottoman Millet system before you go any further with this.

The commonwealth is comprised of independent countries. The Ottoman empire was not comprised of independent countries. There is a difference between independence (i.e. sovereign) and the Ottoman Millet system only covered religious minorities. It didn’t affect Arabs, being Muslims.

The four nonMuslim millets were Armenian, Catholic, Jewish, and Orthodox. Do you see Arab mentioned anywhere? I challenge you to show us evidence that the Ottomans had a millet for Arabs.

You certainly are entertaining, bud.

pro_universal:

Rodrigo:

We, the US, actually fought the fascists and racists known as the Nazis and Fascists and the Muslims under Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin el Husseini.

So it is highly objectionable to call us racist fascists when your side fought with the Nazis against the Allies.

Indeed, we fought them so well that Birmingham Alabama had its police unleashing dogs on peaceful protestors and the KKK shot people on television without being convicted only 20 years later. The US is to be commended to for beating Hitler, but let’s not pretend that we were in it just for the principle. Our own history long after WWII (which includes alongside racism forced sterilization, open anti-semitism, and violence against women) shows otherwise.

Hey, I thought we were talking about WWII – so now it’s the KKK? How originally tu quoque you are. You remind me of another Muslim, Justice2006, who keep on jumping from pillar to post when unable to answer.

Stick to the topic. What have you to say about accusing us of being racist fascists when YOUR SIDE FOUGHT ON HITLER’S SIDE?

cont

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

pro_universal:

Rodrigo:

What I do see is the truth: that you never denied Muhammad committed genocide and enslavement of the B. Qurayza.

I deny that attacking one particular political unit in response to a treaty violation is in fact genocide. It’s like saying that the US committed “Genocide against Europe” because it wiped out the Nazis. If genocide can be applied to situations that local, then almost any military action at all could be called “genocide.” That cheapens the term, and dishonors the victims of the 20th century. There is no comparison between what the muslims did in Arabia in the 7th century to one tribe and what Hitler did to the Jews in the 20th.

Look up the definition of Genocide, bud. Don’t make it up. Nazis are not a race – they aren’t covered by the genocide definition.

And don’t forget the enslavement bit. You seemed to have left that out.

pro_universal:

Rodrigo:

Only a Muslim would make the mistake you have. I’ve debated hundred’s of Muslims and you’re all the same and make the same mistakes.

The fact that you find this issue relevant shows how strong the rest of your case is here. My religion has nothing to do with the strength of my points, but of course levelling the accusation to you seems to be a way of discrediting me.

I don’t have to discredit you, bud. Your arguments discredit yourself.

pro_universal:

If you honestly believe that the fact that someone says “I’m Catholic” or “I’m muslim” makes a difference in how you should analyze the truth of their claims, then you are in need of some serious remedial reasoning courses.

No I don’t. I’m more well-versed on formal logic than you.

I just find it hilarious that you can imagine we’d be fooled that you’re a Catholic. Do you think being a Catholic would make your argument stronger?

pro_universal:

But then again, I wouldn’t expect anything else from a person who calls himself “Muslim killer”. It’s exactly what I’d expect from someone with the name “Jew killer”, namely, bias and unhappy little paradigms of belief.

Get it right, bud, it’s Moor slayer. Not Muslim killer. Got it?

It’s a moniker Spanish people have nothing to be ashamed of. Look up Matamoro – there’re literally hundreds, if not thousands, of examples of its use. It’s even a surname. Ever heard of the poet-artist Din Matamoro?

Adios amigo,
Mata Moro

 

[pro_universal]

So what have you proved? That you don’t know the difference between ‘Muslim Lands’ and Arabia. Nice.

And oh, if you want to talk about the migration of the Jews in 1948, just let me know. First look up the countries they came from. I’ll give you a hint: Arab countries are not all in Arabia.

I made no list. You’re assuming that because I also made comments regarding all the places under Muslim rule, which, if there is some muslim law requiring expulsion of Jews, would also have expelled their Jews. I have to ask again: reread the source.

Is ‘Umar expelled the Jews from the Hijaz’ out of context?

Yes, it is. This is quite funny, since you clearly did not bother to look up the source material:

Umar expelled the Jews and the Christians from Hijaz. When Allah’s Apostle had conquered Khaibar, he wanted to expel the Jews from it as its land became the property of Allah, His Apostle, and the Muslims. Allah’s Apostle intended to expel the Jews but they requested him to let them stay there on the condition that they would do the labor and get half of the fruits. Allah’s Apostle told them, “We will let you stay on thus condition, as long as we wish.” So, they (i.e. Jews) kept on living there until ‘Umar forced them to go towards Taima’ and Ariha’.

sacred-texts.com/isl/bukhari/bh3/bh3_530.htm

You’re taking an action against a specific group of people and extrapolating, a common fault of the “blame-this-or-that-religion” movement on any side.

Well, this same argument can be made against Herodotus, Livy, Plutarch, Suetonius, The Venerable Bede, Thucycides, Strabo, Xenophon, and Tacitus.

This is an excellent comparison. These sources are decent, but nowhere near 100 percent and all contain inaccuracies. They are to be checked and cross referenced mercilessly.

Do you know the authorship or were they literally a a mix-and-match of third or fourth person (in the good ones) narratives, and are not by any stretch guaranteed to be historically accurate?

The Gospels were inspired by God. Muslims do not claim the same thing about hadiths. If you can find any muslim anywhere who says that all hadith is inspired by God, I’d like to see it.

The Ottoman empire was not comprised of independent countries. There is a difference between independence (i.e. sovereign) and the Ottoman Millet system only covered religious minorities. It didn’t affect Arabs, being Muslims.

Read about it. To call that “Turkish Empire” is flat out wrong. You are making this claim because the sum total of your learning is google from the past few minutes. Plain and simple.

Look up the definition of Genocide, bud. Don’t make it up. Nazis are not a race – they aren’t covered by the genocide definition.

If Jews are a race, then this is outside the definition of genocide by a mile. Picking one group of people who happen to be jews and making war for reasons beside religion (this was a treaty violation, at least according to the only sources we have) does not constitute an attack on a whole race.

No I don’t. I’m more well-versed on formal logic than you.

See what I mean? This is rapidly becoming “Rodrigo is really cool in addition to Rodrigo hates muslims” instead of a real debate.

I’m in an education bracket that puts me in the top percentile of the United States, most of it having to do with logic and other methods of reasoning. Does the fact that I mentioned that make my argument more credible? If not, why are you bringing this into the debate regarding your own education?

I’m glad we’ve gotten to this point. This is really what I perceive the anti-muslim movement in America to be about: “We’re cool, and muslims are not.”

That’s a motto I refuse to degrade my Church with.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

pro_universal:

Rodrigo:

So what have you proved? That you don’t know the difference between ‘Muslim Lands’ and Arabia. Nice.

And oh, if you want to talk about the migration of the Jews in 1948, just let me know. First look up the countries they came from. I’ll give you a hint: Arab countries are not all in Arabia.

I made no list. You’re assuming that because I also made comments regarding all the places under Muslim rule, which, if there is some muslim law requiring expulsion of Jews, would also have expelled their Jews. I have to ask again: reread the source.

I have read your source. That’s where I got the list. You mean you DIDN’T read your own reference you told me to read? How original? People NOT reading their own evidencing references?

pro_universal:

Rodrigo:

Is ‘Umar expelled the Jews from the Hijaz’ out of context?

Yes, it is. This is quite funny, since you clearly did not bother to look up the source material:
Quote:
Umar expelled the Jews and the Christians from Hijaz. When Allah’s Apostle had conquered Khaibar, he wanted to expel the Jews from it as its land became the property of Allah, His Apostle, and the Muslims. Allah’s Apostle intended to expel the Jews but they requested him to let them stay there on the condition that they would do the labor and get half of the fruits. Allah’s Apostle told them, “We will let you stay on thus condition, as long as we wish.” So, they (i.e. Jews) kept on living there until ‘Umar forced them to go towards Taima’ and Ariha’.

sacred-texts.com/isl/bukhari/bh3/bh3_530.htm

You’re taking an action against a specific group of people and extrapolating, a common fault of the “blame-this-or-that-religion” movement on any side.

How exactly did I extrapolate? Oh… I see… You’re homing on ONE hadith when I quoted several. How honest of you?

Did you read these hadiths?
Saheeh Muslim - 1767
Narrated Omar bin Al-Khattab:
He [Omar] heard the Messenger of Allah (SAW) saying, “O I indeed will exile the Jews and the Christians from the Arabian Peninsula until I leave no one but a Muslim.”

Muslim Book 019, Number 4366:
It has been narrated by 'Umar b. al-Khattib that he heard the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) say: I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula and will not leave any but Muslim.

Tabari VIII:130 “The Messenger said during his final illness, ‘Two religions cannot coexist in the Arabian Peninsula.’ Umar investigated the matter, then sent to the Jews, saying: ‘Allah has given permission for you to be expelled; for I have received word that the Prophet said that two religions cannot coexist in Arabia.”

I bet you’re saying it only applies to the B. Nadir, aren’t you? The Bukhari hadiths used the phrase, ‘Umar expelled the Jews from Hijaz’, as a preamble. Then it really talked about the specific Jews of Khaibar.

But then there are many hadiths that do say he expelled the Jews from the Arabian Peninsula until he left no one but a Muslim. Care to explain these?

I know, I know, out of context.

pro_universal:

Rodrigo:

Well, this same argument can be made against Herodotus, Livy, Plutarch, Suetonius, The Venerable Bede, Thucycides, Strabo, Xenophon, and Tacitus.

This is an excellent comparison. These sources are decent, but nowhere near 100 percent and all contain inaccuracies. They are to be checked and cross referenced mercilessly.

And you think the Muslim scholars didn’t crosscheck the SAHIH hadiths? So, have you any evidence, aside from your obviously authoritative opinion, that my hadiths are wrong or inaccurate?

Oh I see… it is sufficient that you claim… and thus it is true. How refreshingly original? Why bother with evidence at all?

pro_universal:

Rodrigo:

Do you know the authorship or were they literally a a mix-and-match of third or fourth person (in the good ones) narratives, and are not by any stretch guaranteed to be historically accurate?

The Gospels were inspired by God. Muslims do not claim the same thing about hadiths. If you can find any muslim anywhere who says that all hadith is inspired by God, I’d like to see it.

Oh…. I see… Methinks you just pulled out a deus-ex-machina from your …

The hadiths are the principal sources of Islamic early history, bud. They’re no less reliable than other sources of history of that period. In fact, the Muslims were particularly scrupulous with their sources. They even listed the narration lists and cross-checked each narrator for reliability. And they also ranked each hadith for reliability and authenticity. Which is better than what the Western historians did in that time.

cont

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

pro_universal:

Rodrigo:

The Ottoman empire was not comprised of independent countries. There is a difference between independence (i.e. sovereign) and the Ottoman Millet system only covered religious minorities. It didn’t affect Arabs, being Muslims.

Read about it. To call that “Turkish Empire” is flat out wrong. You are making this claim because the sum total of your learning is google from the past few minutes. Plain and simple.

So, you don’t have any evidence that the Ottoman Millet system had anything to do with the Arabs. Nice.

Making things up has got you busted big time, buddy. Ottoman Millet system indeed. I think you’ve just googled it up without understanding what you’ve read.

Take your time: if you can find any evidence that the Ottoman Millet system has anything to do with Arabs I’m sure you’ll be quick to let us all know.

pro_universal:

Rodrigo:

Look up the definition of Genocide, bud. Don’t make it up. Nazis are not a race – they aren’t covered by the genocide definition.

If Jews are a race, then this is outside the definition of genocide by a mile. Picking one group of people who happen to be jews and making war for reasons beside religion (this was a treaty violation, at least according to the only sources we have) does not constitute an attack on a whole race.

I see you have absolutely no idea of the definition of genocide, do you? The Holocaust is covered by the genocide definition, buddy, but the Nazis are not.

pro_universal:

Rodrigo:

No I don’t. I’m more well-versed on formal logic than you.

See what I mean? This is rapidly becoming “Rodrigo is really cool in addition to Rodrigo hates muslims” instead of a real debate.

So what’s wrong with ‘Rodrigo is really really cool?’

I already told you I don’t hate Muslims, but will you listen? No.

pro_universal:

I’m in an education bracket that puts me in the top percentile of the United States, most of it having to do with logic and other methods of reasoning. Does the fact that I mentioned that make my argument more credible? If not, why are you bringing this into the debate regarding your own education?

I’ll let my words do my talking, oh Mr Genius pro_universal. If you have to brag about your SAT scores or Mensa IQ test scores… okay, I’ll be charitable.

pro_universal:

I’m glad we’ve gotten to this point. This is really what I perceive the anti-muslim movement in America to be about: “We’re cool, and muslims are not.”

That’s a motto I refuse to degrade my Church with.

Do you think a man who committed genocide and enslavement is cool too?

Chau,
Rodrigo

 

[pro_universal]

I’ll let my words do my talking, oh Mr Genius pro_universal. If you have to brag about your SAT scores or Mensa IQ test scores… okay, I’ll be charitable.

My point is made. Definition of pot calling the kettle black:

Man who says “I am more well versed in logic than you are” responding to a point about the fruitlesness of mentioning these things with the above. Do you see the irony there?

Your above claims about the Millet system having nothing to do with arabic are flat out wrong. (Turkic language supremacy did not become an issue until the time of the Young Turks.) So are your claims about the hadith

I’m not going to do all your research for you since this is clearly becoming a pointless back-and-forth about your ego and not the truth. Your above comments are turning this into an infantile “i be smarter than yous” session more than anything else, so your comments will get as much time as such antics are worth.

Still, I invite any other board members who are curious about any evidence posted (by any parties) to query me if they’d like the “hating-muslims-is-wrong” or “let’s study history without bias” point of view.

I hope that I’ll be able to find a conversation about the relationship between Catholics and Muslims that is really about the facts.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

pro_universal:

Rodrigo:

I’ll let my words do my talking, oh Mr Genius pro_universal. If you have to brag about your SAT scores or Mensa IQ test scores… okay, I’ll be charitable.

My point is made. Definition of pot calling the kettle black:

Man who says “I am more well versed in logic than you are” responding to a point about the fruitlesness of mentioning these things with the above. Do you see the irony there?

That was in relation to you maligning my logic. I can’t defend myself from your scurrilous charges?

Didn’t you make this ad hominem fallacy?

“If you honestly believe that the fact that someone says “I’m Catholic” or “I’m muslim” makes a difference in how you should analyze the truth of their claims, then you are in need of some serious remedial reasoning courses.”

You, on the other hand, volunteered your ‘top percentile’ intelligence. There is a difference.

pro_universal:

Your above claims about the Millet system having nothing to do with arabic are flat out wrong. (Turkic language supremacy did not become an issue until the time of the Young Turks.)

I still see no evidence to support your assertion about the Millet system, bud.

pro_universal:

So are your claims about the hadith

Still no evidence from you about the hadiths? I didn’t think you would provide any.

pro_universal:

I’m not going to do all your research for you since this is clearly becoming a pointless back-and-forth about your ego and not the truth.

Oh… the readers can see this is code for ‘I’ve been busted making things up and I can’t find the evidence to get myself out of a hole’. Nice.

pro_universal:

Your above comments are turning this into an infantile “i be smarter than yous” session more than anything else, so your comments will get as much time as such antics are worth.

Well, you started it, bud. It’s somehow okay for you to malign my reasoning but not okay for me to retaliate. How charitable of a Catholic to start slinging ad hominems about?

pro_universal:

Still, I invite any other board members who are curious about any evidence posted (by any parties) to query me if they’d like the “hating-muslims-is-wrong” or “let’s study history without bias” point of view.

I’ll respectfully ask these board members to ask you to evidence your claims against the hadiths and also to provide the evidence to support your claims about the Ottoman Millet system.

pro_universal:

I hope that I’ll be able to find a conversation about the relationship between Catholics and Muslims that is really about the facts.

Which facts would these be?

1. The facts about how the hadiths that proved you wrong are ‘out of context’?
2. The facts about how these hadiths you couldn’t prove are ‘out of context’ suddenly become unreliable?
3. The facts that support the Ottoman Millet system and the Arabs?
4. The facts about the Jews in Arabia?
5. The facts about the collaboration between the Muslims and the Nazis during WWII?
6. The fact that the defeat of the Nazis was a genocide?
7. The fact that you didn’t even read your own evidencing reference?
8. The fact that you scored top-percentile in the US wrt your education?
9. Or the fact that you object to the moniker given to the Patron Saint of Spain? And Guatemala, Nicaragua and Chile.

Adios,
Mata Moro

 

[Booklover]

pro_universal:

Rodrigo,

Please leave us Catholics to help ourselves, Rodrigo. We don’t need your kind to ruin our reputation for tolerance and learning.

If anyone is trashing the Church it’s you, Pro-Universal! You’re showing yourself an enemy of the church! Rodrigo is very welcome here and even if he is not a “Christian” .

Here are some words by Bishop Fulton J. Sheen that you need to ponder:

Christian love bears evil, but it does not tolerate it. I does penance for the sins of others, but it is not broadminded about sin. **THE CRY FOR TOLERANCE NEVER INDUCES IT TO QUENCH ITS HATRED OF THE EVIL PHILOSOPHIES THAT HAVE ENTERED INTO CONTEST WITH THE TRUTH! **It forgives the sinner, and it hates the sin, it is unmerciful to the error in his mind. The sinner it will always take back into the bosm of the Mystial Body; but his lie will never be taken into the treasury of His Wisdom. REAL LOVE INVOLVES REAL HATRED: WHOEVER HAS LOST THE POWER OF MORAL INDIGNATION AND THE URGE TO DRIVE THE BUYERS AND SELLERS FROM THE TEMPLES HAS ALSO LOST A LIVING FERVENT LOVE OF TRUTH!

CHARITY, THEN IS NOT A MILD PHILOSOPY OF “LIVE AND LET LIVE”; IT IS NOT A SPECIES OF SLOPPY SENTIMENT. CHARITY IS THE INFUSION OF THE SPIRIT OF GOD, WHICH MAKES US LOVE THE BEAUTIFUL AND HATE THE MORALLY UGLY.

 

[pro_universal]

REAL LOVE INVOLVES REAL HATRED: WHOEVER HAS LOST THE POWER OF MORAL INDIGNATION AND THE URGE TO DRIVE THE BUYERS AND SELLERS FROM THE TEMPLES HAS ALSO LOST A LIVING FERVENT LOVE OF TRUTH!

Show me where in the bible it says: “In order to love, you must know how to hate”???

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Hola Mr Genius,
Keep on showing us your LOVE for a man with such sublime morality as genocide and enslavement. I will show more examples of sublime morality so you can LOVE him some more.

Adios amigo,
Rodrigo del matamoro

 

[Cyber_Knight]

Rodrigo Bivar:

Hola Mr Genius,
Keep on showing us your LOVE for a man with such sublime morality as genocide and enslavement. I will show more examples of sublime morality so you can LOVE him some more.

Adios amigo,
Rodrigo del matamoro

Would you care to show more about Muhammad sublime morality? Continuing what you have started, so people may learn something from here? thanks!