Can I honestly ask a serious question?

sbsquarepants

Defender OF Faith wrote: »

Everything you have said is false, Muhammed(pbuh) Marriage to Aisha(RA) was discussed in the "Ask About Islam thread" post number 176,182 and 187; which I invite you to read if you wish to discuss the issue further so I dont have to repeat myself.

I've read your posts and I have to say I'm actually shocked at your naivety / indoctrination / brainwashing call it what you will.
For example, from your own post you actually appear to believe that the following is some kind of virtue or shining example of islams progressive caring ethos

So it allowed Muslims to have intercourse with slave women taken as captives of
just and legitimate wars. In so doing, the woman would automatically become free
if she got pregnant. What's more, her child would also become free

You actually believe that saying it's ok to rape prisoners so long as you let them go if you get them pregnant is somehow morally acceptable? A glowing tribute to the loving nature of the perfect muslim? Really?
Throwing a woman you've abducted and raped plus her newborn child - your own son or daughter by the way, out into the dessert to fend for themselves is an act of kindness bordering on moral perfection is it?
Think about that for a while and ask yourself are you maybe a tiny bit confused.

And as for the Aisha being a willing participant in the marriage - she was a child ffs. Your apologist nonsense is actually quite disgusting
Would you be happy to marry off your 6 year old daughter to some 40 odd year old. If she said she was all for it - would you care, or would you say hold on a minute here - you're a child, now go to your room - and you're a paedo - outside now scumbag, because that's what any right thinking individual should think!
Maybe you should read up a little on Stockholm syndrome or at the very least cognitive dissonance.

zl1whqvjs75cdy

Defender OF Faith wrote: »

I didn't say or even implied that my friend what I meant to say that these sources will use the Qur'an,Seerah and Hadith as they are their only source of information regarding Muhammed(pbuh) if you believe there to be other sources about Muhammed(pbuh) then these then please present them as I am currently not aware of them, however such sources will omit important information and often manipulate the translations in order to suit their purpose and what the questioner presented in post number 10 is a good example.


Proving whether this statement is false or correct does not affect what I presented nor does it affect what will be presented, as any argument presented will be using the Qur'an & Hadith we have present today & hence I don't feel or see that need to go into the details of how the Qur'an was preserved.

So we are back to the only source is the Qur'an, the Qur'an is perfect and even if I come up with another source you are not going to believe it. I think there is not much point in us continuing our conversation as we are both set in our views.

I do thank you for explaining your view point though, it has given me a small insight into how the Islamic faith works. Also, I appreciate it can't be easy defending yourself on a mostly Christian or atheist/agnostic message board so thank you for keeping it civil. On that note I will bow out of the thread.

Tom Dunne

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Correct me if I'm wrong, but a 50 year old man having sex with a 9 year old girl doesn't really seem all that interested in childrens rights to me. Today he'd be jailed and called a scumbag - and rightly so.
Perfect behaviour my arse!
The word for people like that is paedophile, not perfect.

Can we at least make an effort to keep it civil? I am not engaging in debate on this matter, I am merely asking you to refrain from using provocative terms such as scumbag and paedophile.

Reoil

Defender OF Faith wrote: »

A Muslim doesn't kill innocent people

Really?

Defender OF Faith

donkeyoaty0099 wrote: »

So we are back to the only source is the Qur'an, the Qur'an is perfect and even if I come up with another source you are not going to believe it. I think there is not much point in us continuing our conversation as we are both set in our views.

Yes i will 100% accept it just come up with it, the Qur'an welcomes argument and Criticize that is build on evidence and proof it even challenges for such evidence to be presented.
"Bring forth your proof if you are truthful." [Surah al-Baqarah: 111]

Islam does not want its follow to be blinded by faith but in multiple times through the Qur'an invites it to ponder,reflect and think using our intellect.

donkeyoaty0099 wrote: »

I do thank you for explaining your view point though, it has given me a small insight into how the Islamic faith works. Also, I appreciate it can't be easy defending yourself on a mostly Christian or atheist/agnostic message board so thank you for keeping it civil. On that note I will bow out of the thread.

Thank you for your understanding my friend.

Defender OF Faith

Reoil wrote: »

Really?

In accordance with the Islamic teaching of Qur'an and Hadith yes really.

Dont bring up the issue of ISIS or Al Qaeda or any equivalent group as the basis of your argument, I spoke about such groups in post #5 instead use the main sources of Islam accordingly.

Tom Dunne

Defender OF Faith wrote: »

If your a Christian it's your duty to make sure that Muhammad(pbuh) was 100% a false prophet and that the Qur'an is not the book of God to guarantee that the truth is on your side

I think that is a tremendously provocative statement and completely untrue.

Defender OF Faith

sbsquarepants wrote: »

You actually believe that saying it's ok to rape prisoners so long as you let them go if you get them pregnant is somehow morally acceptable? A glowing tribute to the loving nature of the perfect muslim? Really?
Throwing a woman you've abducted and raped plus her newborn child - your own son or daughter by the way, out into the dessert to fend for themselves is an act of kindness bordering on moral perfection is it?
Think about that for a while and ask yourself are you maybe a tiny bit confused.

Classically taking my words out of context to try and push your point, please dont put words in my mouth.
In the excat same post I said:

"He Prophet (S) also ordered for slaves to not be forced into having sexual intercourse:

"Musaykah, a slave-girl of some Ansari, came and said: My master forces me to commit fornication. Thereupon the following verse was revealed: "But force not your maids to prostitution (when they desire chastity). (24:33)"

Islam laid down rules which would eventually lead to eradicating the practice. So it allowed Muslims to have intercourse with slave women taken as captives of just and legitimate wars. In so doing, the woman would automatically become free if she got pregnant. What's more, her child would also become free.

Not only that, Islam also ordered a Muslim to treat the slave woman in every respect as if she were his wife. She should be well fed, clothed and given due protection. In the family environment, she had the opportunity to learn about Islam and was free to accept it or reject it. She also had the opportunity to earn her freedom for she could be ransomed.

Slaves felt humiliated at being called slaves. He advised his companions not to say "my slave" or "my slave-girl" but to say, "my son" or "my daughter." He also told the slaves not to call their masters "lord" for Allah alone was the Lord. He was so kind to slaves that his last admonition before he died was, "Fear Allah in regard to your slaves." Abu Dharr (ra) was one of the converts and Muhammad (saw) praised him for his honesty. Once he abused a non-Arab slave, who complained to the Noble Prophet (saw) about this.

Review the full post & the sources provided if you wish.

sbsquarepants wrote: »

And as for the Aisha being a willing participant in the marriage - she was a child ffs. Your apologist nonsense is actually quite disgusting
Would you be happy to marry off your 6 year old daughter to some 40 odd year old. If she said she was all for it - would you care, or would you say hold on a minute here - you're a child, now go to your room - and you're a paedo - outside now scumbag, because that's what any right thinking individual should think!
Maybe you should read up a little on Stockholm syndrome or at the very least cognitive dissonance.

What's this rubbish? you have not even attempted to refute or answer what I presented and quite frankly I don't think you have even read my post as your bringing the same arguments which I answered all over again, review if you wish post 182 and 187 for the follow up as the questioner brought the same points you mentioned phrased differently.

Defender OF Faith

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Real information about Muhammed would be an interesting telling of the story of Muhammed. I understand he was an influential character in history but I'm not interested in how you have mythologised an interesting character and made him into a, frankly boring, characture.

You have so far wrote 7 posts and not in one of them did you present what you considered to be a real source of information on Muhammed(pbuh) or how the Characteristics I mentioned Muhammad(pbuh) possess are false.

There's a Biography written about Muhammad(pbuh) by an Agnostic Jew who neither like or dislike Islam for her to offer Bias solidified by the fact that she is an agnostic. Such biography might interest you to read, I referenced it in one of my early posts in this thread.

Defender OF Faith

Tom Dunne wrote: »

I think that is a tremendously provocative statement and completely untrue.

You are probably correct I apologies I don't think this thread or any other in fact is suitable for a debate between religions.

~Edited my Original post accordingly.

El_Duderino 09

Defender OF Faith wrote: »

You have so far wrote 7 posts and not in one of them did you present what you considered to be a real source of information on Muhammed(pbuh) or how the Characteristics I mentioned Muhammad(pbuh) possess are false.

There's a Biography written about Muhammad(pbuh) by an Agnostic Jew who neither like or dislike Islam for her to offer Bias solidified by the fact that she is an agnostic. Such biography might interest you to read, I referenced it in one of my early posts in this thread.

Great. Thanks maybe I'll look it up some time.

I'm more interested in your last post where you detailed some rules for owning slaves, and how you think such an awesome dude like Muhammed could possibly condone owning slaves.

Only a brutal man with a very outdated understanding of empathy could condone owning slaves. Doesn't sound like your Prince Charming from earlier posts.

Do you condone owning slaves?

Wurzelbert

Defender OF Faith wrote: »

I have numbered your questions to answer them accordingly:

1) Yes they were innocent
2)Yes they were innocent
3) All his wars/Campaigns were for retaliation purposes to harm committed against the Muslims and to maintain the sovereignty and security of the state he established in Medina. He never transgressed,oppressed or started a war against innocent tribes or nations that did him or the Muslims no harm, during all of his campaign without an exception.

"Indeed, Islam is a religion that seeks to maximize peace and reconciliation. Yet, Islam is not a pacifist religion; it does accept the premise that, from time to time and as a last resort, arms must be taken up in a just war."

4) Every single Caravan Muhammed(pbuh) have ordered to be captured without an exception have belonged to Quriash or to a tribe which was planning to attack/start and instigate war with the Muslims living in Medina.

"I would let to remind you that Muslims when migrating to Medina to escape prosecution and torture at the hand of Quriash left all the belonging,money,possessions and wealth behind, and this is why initially the prophet formed a bond of "Brotherhood" between the inhabitants of Madina and those coming from Makkah. Therefore as Quraysh had confiscated the property of Muslim Muhajirs[Those who left to Medina from Makkah] residing in Madina, it was only appropriate that the Muslims should also confiscate their merchandise and if they persisted in withholding the property of the Muhajir Muslims on account of their enmity and obstinacy, the Muslims should, as a retaliatory measure, divide their merchandise amongst themselves as war booty." P11

[...]

thanks, just wanted to hear your opinion on those issues...needless to say a vast number of muslims and countless imams would disagree with you on the cartoonists’ innocence, as would most serious (and non muslim) historians on the rest...but never mind, i understand you and are doing what you feel you have to do as a good muslim...

the halal part is not important, just came to mind since you mentioned animals...and we have a description and can make up our own minds...

sbsquarepants

Defender OF Faith wrote: »

Classically taking my words out of context to try and push your point, please dont put words in my mouth.
In the excat same post I said:

Review the full post & the sources provided if you wish..

I didn't put any words in your mouth - I cut and pasted it from your answer - it is exactly what you said verbatim.

Defender OF Faith wrote: »

What's this rubbish? you have not even attempted to refute or answer what I presented and quite frankly I don't think you have even read my post as your bringing the same arguments which I answered all over again, review if you wish post 182 and 187 for the follow up as the questioner brought the same points you mentioned phrased differently.

Rubbish?
We're talking about a 6 year old girl. That's a girl who would be in what, 1st class or so in this day and age. At the A is for apple, B is for ball stage of their education.
I'm calling her a child.
You're claiming she is a grown woman fit to be married off to a 50 year old, and that not only is that 50 year old not some perverted deviant - he is in fact the perfect human being.

Now, which one of us is talking rubbish?

Disgusting facts don't cease to exist just because they don't fit your tunnel vision I'm afraid.

sbsquarepants

Tom Dunne wrote: »

Can we at least make an effort to keep it civil? I am not engaging in debate on this matter, I am merely asking you to refrain from using provocative terms such as scumbag and paedophile.

I am making a big effort to keep it civil.
It's extremely difficult to describe such behaviour without using terms like those. The old chestnut that the morals of the day were different just doesn't cut it - when talking about a regular person maybe they hold more weight - but this guy is held up as the very model of moral perfection. Gods messenger no less.
Seriously - how?
Come on now, what is not stomach churningly disgusting about a 50 year old man having sex with a 9 year old girl?
You may as well hold up Jimmy Saville as your bench mark of perfection.

Defender OF Faith

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I'm more interested in your last post where you detailed some rules for owning slaves, and how you think such an awesome dude like Muhammed could possibly condone owning slaves.

Before you comment on the post and make conclusions, I invite you to read the full post written in the Ask about Islam thread post number 183 and the accompanying sources.

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Do you condone owning slaves?

The whole purpose of Islam was to eradicate slavery if you review my original post you will understand so of course I do not condone slavery

Umar Ibn Al-Khattab one of the prophet closest companions and the 2nd caliph of Islam said a beautiful word that summerise the spirit of Islam regarding Slavery and justice in the following incident which occured during his time as a Caliph:

"Ibn Abd Al-Hakim reported: Anas(RA), said that a man from the people of Egypt came to Umar ibn Al-Khattab and said, “O leader of the believers, I seek refuge in you from injustice!” Umar replied, “You have sought someone willing.” The man said, “I competed with the son of Amr ibn Al-‘As[Son of the governor of Egypt] and I won, but he started striking me with a whip and saying: I am the son of the dignified!” Upon this, Umar wrote to Amr[Ummar appointed Governor of Egypt] ordering him to travel to him with his son. He came with his son and Umar said, “Where is the Egyptian?” He gave him the whip and told him to strike the son of Amr. The man started striking him while Umar was saying, “Strike the son of the illiterates!” Anas said, “By Allah, the man struck him and we loved his striking, and he did not stop until we wished he stopped.” Then Umar said to the Egyptian, “Direct it to Amr.” The Egyptian said, “O leader of the believers, it was only his son who struck me and I have settled the score.” Umar said to Amr, “Since when did you enslave the people though they were born from their mothers in freedom?” Amr said, “O leader of the believers, I did not know about this and he did not tell me.”*

Since you appear to doubt the authenticity of what I say the full reference to the story is given below:

* The incident is narrated in:
Futuh Masr[Conquest of Egypt] pp:290 & Muhammed ibn Yusuf "The life of the companion" 2/82, mentioned in Ali ibn Hisham Alhanafi "The elected treasure in the best works and deeds" 4/420

See also Shubahaat Hawl al-Islam by Muhammad Qutub; Talbees Mardood fi Qadaaya Khateerah by Shaykh Dr. Saalih ibn Humayd, the Imam of the Haram in Makkah.

Source: http://www.faithinallah.org/what-does-islam-teach-about-slavery/
Quoted from: http://www.dailyhadithonline.com/2012/07/18/umar-ibn-al-khattab-when-you-did-you-enslave-people-although-they-are-born-free/

Defender OF Faith

Wurzelbert wrote: »

thanks, just wanted to hear your opinion on those issues...needless to say a vast number of muslims and countless imams would disagree with you on the cartoonists’ innocence, as would most serious (and non muslim) historians on the rest...but never mind, i understand you and are doing what you feel you have to do as a good muslim...

That's fine my friend however since your questions required a simple yes or no answer I didn't go into the details of why they are innocent as plenty of Islamic organization and Imams around the world have condemned this attack already, regardless of what I present it will always boil down to the following:

"You cannot enforce the laws of one land in another land"

Defender OF Faith

sbsquarepants wrote: »

I didn't put any words in your mouth - I cut and pasted it from your answer - it is exactly what you said verbatim.

Rubbish?
We're talking about a 6 year old girl. That's a girl who would be in what, 1st class or so in this day and age. At the A is for apple, B is for ball stage of their education.
I'm calling her a child.
You're claiming she is a grown woman fit to be married off to a 50 year old, and that not only is that 50 year old not some perverted deviant - he is in fact the perfect human being.

Now, which one of us is talking rubbish?

Disgusting facts don't cease to exist just because they don't fit your tunnel vision I'm afraid.

More and more rubbish with complete disregard to what I presented, review the post along with the follow up with an open mind willing to engage with what's presented rather then simply use your own sentiment and standards to enforce them into 7th century Arabian desert.

Wurzelbert

Defender OF Faith wrote: »

[...]
The whole purpose of Islam was to eradicate slavery[...]

so what went wrong?

sbsquarepants

Defender OF Faith wrote: »

More and more rubbish with complete disregard to what I presented, review the post along with the follow up with an open mind willing to engage with what's presented rather then simply use your own sentiment and standards to enforce them into 7th century Arabian desert.

I think you may have opened your mind too far, it appears to have fallen out! Defending your faith requires something more than "I don't like the question therefore it's rubbish" I'm afraid.

Explain to me, in simple terms how it is that a 6 year old girl is a grown woman, old enough to marry?
I'll make it easier for you - the marriage was consummated when she was 9. Which is fine apparently because girls mature faster in the heat so you say. What exactly is it about the heat of the dessert that makes a 9 year old girl into a grown woman?
Do 9 year olds in Miami or Havana mature at this rate, what about Spain or Italy? Or is it something unique to the middle east?
If I put my toddler in a sauna for a few hours can I skip the terrible twos altogether, or does it have to be a dry heat?
I'm puzzled. I've seen 9 year old girls from all over the world and as far as I can tell they all have 1 thing in common - they are children.

Defender OF Faith

sbsquarepants wrote: »

I think you may have opened your mind too far, it appears to have fallen out! Defending your faith requires something more than "I don't like the question therefore it's rubbish" I'm afraid.

Explain to me, in simple terms how it is that a 6 year old girl is a grown woman, old enough to marry?
I'll make it easier for you - the marriage was consummated when she was 9. Which is fine apparently because girls mature faster in the heat so you say. What exactly is it about the heat of the dessert that makes a 9 year old girl into a grown woman?
Do 9 year olds in Miami or Havana mature at this rate, what about Spain or Italy? Or is it something unique to the middle east?
If I put my toddler in a sauna for a few hours can I skip the terrible twos altogether, or does it have to be a dry heat?
I'm puzzled. I've seen 9 year old girls from all over the world and as far as I can tell they all have 1 thing in common - they are children.

All have been explained review the post and the follow ups....

Wurzelbert

whydoc wrote: »

I think you have to get closer to Prophet Muhammad's life from authentic resources.
I hope this would help;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89tu7PehnvE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKyS-KZb9ZU&list=PL8017A75CD19C0443
https://islamicnafahat.wordpress.com/category/know-him/
Trending hashtag:
https://twitter.com/hashtag/whoismuhammad

that’s like reading up on the benefits of communism in karl marx’ own publications...

Defender OF Faith

Wurzelbert wrote: »

so what went wrong?

If you review my original post #183 in the "Ask about Islam" thread I discussed the issue there.

Wurzelbert wrote: »

that’s like reading up on the benefits of communism in karl marx’ own publications...

And what do you suppose to be a good reading link? wiki-Islam? faithfreedom?answeringIslam?Islamreview?.... the list goes on.

The people presented are Scholars who understand the prophet more then you will ever wish for, unfortunately his image have been tainted in your brain by looking at his story from one side and when presented with the other side you fiercely reject it since it strongly opposes the one sided idea you build up about him.

I am not stupid enough nor is the 1.8B Muslims in the world are to follow the man you believe Muhammad(pbuh) to be we follow the man described in posts 1&2

If you dont want to read what Muslims have to say about Muhammed(pbuh) or what such sites say I always recommend the book "Muhammed the first prophet" referenced in my early posts by an agnostic Jew who neither hate or love Islam who's also an agnostic giving what in my opinion a very objective outlook on Muhammad(pbuh)

Edit link to book: http://thefirstmuslim.com/

Tom Dunne

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Come on now, what is not stomach churningly disgusting about a 50 year old man having sex with a 9 year old girl?
You may as well hold up Jimmy Saville as your bench mark of perfection.

One of the issues I have is that you are stating the above as fact. It allegedly happened over 1400 years ago. How can you state with such conviction that an event at that time actually happened?

If, and it's a big if, it happened, it is utterly repugnant. However, I can convey my disgust without using emotive language such as "pedophile" and "scumbag".

maggiepip

Is it a fair (albeit simplistic!) summary to make, that what you are basically saying DoF is that although Muhammad did say to take slaves, he was going with the practice of the times, and by asking for respect and kindness to be shown to slaves, and release (if the slave is impregnated) that his overall aim was to eventually eradicate slavery?

Defender OF Faith

maggiepip wrote: »

Is it a fair (albeit simplistic!) summary to make, that what you are basically saying DoF is that although Muhammad did say to take slaves, he was going with the practice of the times, and by asking for respect and kindness to be shown to slaves, and release (if the slave is impregnated) that his overall aim was to eventually eradicate slavery?

Before you comment on the post and make conclusions, I invite you to read the full post written in the Ask about Islam thread post number 183 and the accompanying sources.

sbsquarepants

Defender OF Faith wrote: »

All have been explained review the post and the follow ups....

To your liking perhaps, but not to mine.

Tom Dunne wrote: »

One of the issues I have is that you are stating the above as fact. It allegedly happened over 1400 years ago. How can you state with such conviction that an event at that time actually happened?

If, and it's a big if, it happened, it is utterly repugnant. However, I can convey my disgust without using emotive language such as "pedophile" and "scumbag".

I am honestly not trying to be offensive or controversial or even just being an asshole.
I don't know if it happened or it didn't but that is not the point - the followers of this guy, they believe it happened, they accept it as a stone cold fact and they have no problem with that. That is what I have a problem with - not that he may or may not have had sex with a child - but that they themselves truly believe he did, but that they are fine with that cos he's perfect (and apparently it's hot over there so 9 year olds are fair game - you couldn't make this shít up!)
Now as you say yourself, that is utterly repugnant. I do not see the problem with calling a spade, a spade. I'm not throwing some scurrilous accusation that I can't back up with evidence - the followers of this guy INSIST that this can not be questioned, so it is a bit rich to complain when it is not questioned.
He is held up as a shining beacon of morality and human perfection - to be blunt he is anything but.
Whether the story is true or false doesn't really matter, the fact that it is purported to be true and accepted to be true and he is still admired instead of being despised, or even mildly criticised, speaks volumes for the mentality and the critical thinking faculties of his followers.
He was perfect, he shagged kids, therefore shagging kids must be fine - are you really going to defend that? Or say it should be respected? I just couldn't bring myself to say the words to be honest!
No, i'm sorry - it doesn't deserve any respect whatsoever, so it doesn't get mine. I save my respect for those who deserve it, there are millions, billions even who are vastly morally superior to Muhammad. A spade, is a spade, is a spade - end of.

keyboardmouse

Ok, So Muhammad is the most perfect human ever?

How about this as question the first:

Source, Sirat Rasulallah — "Life of the Prophet of Allah" The oldest extant biography of Muhammad, written by Ibn Ishaq.


"Kinana al-Rabi, who had the custody of the treasure of Banu Nadir, was brought to the apostle who asked him about it. He denied that he knew where it was. A Jew came (Tabari says "was brought"), to the apostle and said that he had seen Kinana going round a certain ruin every morning early. When the apostle said to Kinana, "Do you know that if we find you have it I shall kill you?" He said "Yes". The apostle gave orders that the ruin was to be excavated and some of the treasure was found. When he asked him about the rest he refused to produce it, so the apostle gave orders to al-Zubayr Al-Awwam, "Torture him until you extract what he has." So he kindled a fire with flint and steel on his chest until he was nearly dead. Then the apostle delivered him to Muhammad b. Maslama and he struck off his head, in revenge for his brother Mahmud."


The "most perfect human" orders torture for the extraction of "booty"?

defender of the faith....I'm all ears

Defender OF Faith

sbsquarepants wrote: »

To your liking perhaps, but not to mine

You have been asking the same questions which were answered in a comprehensive issue regarding the matter I invite you to read the post then question what I have presented and explain to me how the answer given is not to your liking.

maggiepip

Defender OF Faith wrote: »

Before you comment on the post and make conclusions, I invite you to read the full post written in the Ask about Islam thread post number 183 and the accompanying sources.

Gosh thats a bit of a gruff response, Ive just read what you suggested and you are saying that because slavery was already ingrained in society before Islam, Mohammad basically tried to phase it out rather than blanket ban it, which I assume might cause an uprising. And while he was trying to phase it out he preached kindness to slaves and tried to teach respect. He also gave them "rights" , with his ultimate goal being to eradicate slavery. To be fair, if you think about that explanation it makes sense, and, having read a bit more there is plenty to back that up. So, personally I would accept that Mohammads goal was to eradicate slavery.

Defender OF Faith

maggiepip wrote: »

Gosh thats a bit of a gruff response, Ive just read what you suggested and you are saying that because slavery was already ingrained in society before Islam, Mohammad basically tried to phase it out rather than blanket ban it.....

The fact that you said this clearly indicate that you have not read my post as I have explicitly discussed this issue, review the post #183 in the "Ask about Islam" thread along with the accompanying sources carefully as you are likely to find all your answers there, if you wish to discuss anything I wrote please quote it and present it with your question.

maggiepip

Defender OF Faith wrote: »

The fact that you said this clearly indicate that you have not read my post as I have explicitly discussed this issue, review the post #183 in the "Ask about Islam" thread along with the accompanying sources carefully as you are likely to find all your answers there, if you wish to discuss anything I wrote please quote it and present it with your question.

"Blanket Ban" was my language. I have read what you are referring to, could you possibly just confirm with a yes or a no answer, did Mohammad try to eradicate slavery or not??? Sometimes things can be that simple

Defender OF Faith

maggiepip wrote: »

"Blanket Ban" was my language. I have read what you are referring to, could you possibly just confirm with a yes or a no answer, did Mohammad try to eradicate slavery or not??? Sometimes things can be that simple

Yes of course it was part of the spirit of Islam to recognise and remove this social disease which crept society at the time in a similar fashion as it did when it came to Alcohol.

As the Second Caliph of Islam and one of the prophet closes companions Umar have said:

“Since when did you enslave the people though they were born from their mothers in freedom?”

Wurzelbert

the main finding from this and similar threads would be the age-old realisation that discussions on religion are pointless by nature...

maggiepip

Wurzelbert wrote: »

the main finding from this and similar threads would be the age-old realisation that discussions on religion are pointless by nature...

lol!!

Defender OF Faith

keyboardmouse wrote: »

Ok, So Muhammad is the most perfect human ever?

How about this as question the first:

Source, Sirat Rasulallah — "Life of the Prophet of Allah" The oldest extant biography of Muhammad, written by Ibn Ishaq.


"Kinana al-Rabi, who had the custody of the treasure of Banu Nadir, was brought to the apostle who asked him about it. He denied that he knew where it was. A Jew came (Tabari says "was brought"), to the apostle and said that he had seen Kinana going round a certain ruin every morning early. When the apostle said to Kinana, "Do you know that if we find you have it I shall kill you?" He said "Yes". The apostle gave orders that the ruin was to be excavated and some of the treasure was found. When he asked him about the rest he refused to produce it, so the apostle gave orders to al-Zubayr Al-Awwam, "Torture him until you extract what he has." So he kindled a fire with flint and steel on his chest until he was nearly dead. Then the apostle delivered him to Muhammad b. Maslama and he struck off his head, in revenge for his brother Mahmud."


The "most perfect human" orders torture for the extraction of "booty"?

defender of the faith....I'm all ears

Great! this is really only the second time some sort of evidence against Muhammad(pbuh) was presented to support the "Barbaric" side some assumes him to be and hence I honestly appreciate this much better then a simple sentiment or a response supported by your emotions as what you believe Muhammad(pbuh) to be.

Yes we still do believe that Muhammad(pbuh) is the most perfect Man to have walked this Earth, however the incident you presented clearly contradict this as how can a Man we claim to be of excellent Character kills someone for a few coins?

As Muslims we are instructed not to follow Islam blindly, and to simply reject the evidence you presented because it does not fit what we believe Muhammad(pbuh) to be is plain and utter blind belief, once the evidence is presented we will discuss and investigate this evidence.

Don't be surprised as to my challenge to bring forth evidence in fact I will continue to challenge you to bring forth more evidence to prove that Muhammad(pbuh) is whom you believe him to be:

Bring forth your proof if you are truthful." [Surah al-Baqarah: 111]

Islam is a religion that invites serious debates,discussions & Criticism based on evidence and proof not emotions and sentiments.

I will write my response later but note that it's likely to bit slightly shorter then post number 11 ~

I also invite you to keep the discussion in such a manner whereby you present your evidence one at a time and allow me or other Brothers to answer your questions before moving on if you wish.

Wurzelbert wrote: »

the main finding from this and similar threads would be the age-old realisation that discussions on religion are pointless by nature...

I am here to merely answer questions,correct misconceptions and refute allegations regarding my religion and its prophet(pbuh) if you wish to learn about the religion of Islam purely from an Academic perspective or to simply study the religion feel free to ask your questions, if I cant answer other brothers in this forum can otherwise I will direct you to place/source were you can find your answers.

What is pointless is when you come here and say Muhammed(pbuh) was X,Y and Z without using a shred of evidence to support your claim then when presented with sources about Muhammed(pbuh) you reject them simply because they do not fit the character you believed Muhammed(pbuh) to be.

Interistingly enough I remember that before in AH we had a discussion about the Quranic verse which you claimed to be inciting Muslims to kill non-Muslims and once proven wrong your respone was:

".....i just think i’ll leave it at that, no point arguing about religion…"*

It seems to be a habbit of yours especially when it comes to Islam that once we prove that Islam is not the religion you believe it to be you reject the claim by saying "It's pointless to argue about religion...."

For someone like yourself[No disrespect intended] with little to no qualification when it comes to the subject of Islamic scholarship, Arabic,Qur'an and sciences of Hadith; there is little you can argue about but a lot you can question & doubt, but once we clarify we kindly invite you to re-evaluate your conclusion on the matter in question.

*Reference Anti-islam rally thread post number 480 : http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057349018

Wurzelbert

Defender OF Faith wrote: »

[...]

I am here to merely answer questions,correct misconceptions and refute allegations regarding my religion and its prophet(pbuh) if you wish to learn about the religion of Islam purely from an Academic perspective or to simply study the religion feel free to ask your questions, if I cant answer other brothers in this forum can otherwise I will direct you to place/source were you can find your answers.

What is pointless is when you come here and say Muhammed(pbuh) was X,Y and Z without using a shred of evidence to support your claim then when presented with sources about Muhammed(pbuh) you reject them simply because they do not fit the character you believed Muhammed(pbuh) to be.

Interistingly enough I remember that before in AH we had a discussion about the Quranic verse which you claimed to be inciting Muslims to kill non-Muslims and once proven wrong your respone was:

".....i just think i’ll leave it at that, no point arguing about religion…"*

It seems to be a habbit of yours especially when it comes to Islam that once we prove that Islam is not the religion you believe it to be you reject the claim by saying "It's pointless to argue about religion...."

For someone like yourself[No disrespect intended] with little to no qualification when it comes to the subject of Islamic scholarship, Arabic,Qur'an and sciences of Hadith; there is little you can argue about but a lot you can question & doubt, but once we clarify we kindly invite you to re-evaluate your conclusion on the matter in question.

*Reference Anti-islam rally thread post number 480 : http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057349018

yeah..."misconceptions" and "allegations", what else...that is basically what i meant...what you firmly and religiously believe to be facts and absolute truths could be nothing more than ancient myths or just plain lies handed down through the centuries...the world is full of those, with all its religions...has that ever crossed your mind? it is probably beyond a truly devout muslim to comprehend anyway, and that similarly applies to all true believers of all religions...
it is interesting to see how followers of different religions tick, and i understand that any true believer will defend his religion to the end, no matter what, with all the emotion and tunnel vision that comes with it...have heard it all before and not just from muslims...
also your idea of “proof” and “evidence” is clearly and unsurprisingly different from mine.
and regarding the instance where you claim to have “proven me wrong” when i wrote the quran gives the options to kill or convert unbelievers, i did indeed - initially - forget to mention the third option which is to subdue and extort money from them in exchange for their lives and religion...and i can read that in the quran, no twisting of words or metaphorical interpretation necessary...easy to see where isis and the taliban get their inspiration anyway...

diddley

Defender OF Faith wrote: »

To begin with can you really believe that 1.8 Billion people on this earth will follow and convert to a religion and put their love,faith and trust in a man with the descriptions you highlighted?

Had to just briefly reply to this: Yes, I think that most educated people would know and believe this to be the case. People will believe anything. Namaste

Defender OF Faith

Wurzelbert wrote: »

yeah..."misconceptions" and "allegations", what else...that is basically what i meant...what you firmly and religiously believe to be facts and absolute truths could be nothing more than ancient myths or just plain lies handed down through the centuries...the world is full of those, with all its religions...has that ever crossed your mind? it is probably beyond a truly devout muslim to comprehend anyway, and that similarly applies to all true believers of all religions

I think Homeopathy is a load of lies and bollox that does not stop me from asking and learning about it.

I understand your personal sentiment, if you wish to ask questions you are welcome otherwise a discussion of this sort is not beneficial to either me or you.

Wurzelbert wrote: »

it is interesting to see how followers of different religions tick, and i understand that any true believer will defend his religion to the end, no matter what, with all the emotion and tunnel vision that comes with it...have heard it all before and not just from muslims...
also your idea of “proof” and “evidence” is clearly and unsurprisingly different from mine.

Same proof and evidence just misunderstood by you...

Wurzelbert wrote: »

and regarding the instance where you claim to have “proven me wrong” when i wrote the quran gives the options to kill or convert unbelievers, i did indeed - initially - forget to mention the third option which is to subdue and extort money from them in exchange for their lives and religion...

Non of the Options you mention exist or found anywhere in Islamic teaching.
Review my post in that thread.

Wurzelbert wrote: »

and i can read that in the quran, no twisting of words or metaphorical interpretation necessary...easy to see where isis and the taliban get their inspiration anyway...

Clearly your not reading it properly if these are the conclusions you are coming up with..

Defender OF Faith

diddley wrote: »

Had to just briefly reply to this: Yes, I think that most educated people would know and believe this to be the case. People will believe anything. Namaste

Thanks for your replay & welcome to the discussion my friend, let me point out that according to you the majority of the 1.8B people are uneducated to recognise this to be the truth, and that those who converts are following a lie which they are to uneducated to recognise; clearly you made the assumption that you understand the prophet of Islam more then Muslims and the Scholars of Islam themselves care to share were did you get your knowledge form?

BuilderPlumber

Defender OF Faith wrote: »

He is the one who changed our lives and manners to be better:
A Muslim doesn't steal
A Muslim doesn't lie
A Muslim doesn't drink alcohol (to excess) or take drugs. And do harm afterwards.
A Muslim doesn't commit adultery
A Muslim doesn't cheat
A Muslim doesn't kill innocent people
A Muslim doesn't harm his neighbors
A Muslim obeys his parents and helps them
A Muslim is kind to young and elderly people, to women and to weak people.
A Muslim doesn't torture humans or even animals, and does not harm trees
A Muslim loves his wife and takes care of his children and show mercy towards them until the last day of his life.
A Muslim's relationship towards his parents never stops even when they die

Yes, this is very very true. Unfortunately, each of the above with one amended to reflect what I consider the true meaning for today, has become a way of life for many. Killing, stealing, dealing and taking drugs, drinking alcohol to excess and doing harm afterwards, disrespect for parents and neighbours, abuse of women and children, and animal torture are all a way of life among many today. A decent Muslim will not engage in any of this and either would a decent Christian, Jew, or any faith. Those who kill, cause hurt or otherwise do wrong are not worthy of the religion they claim to be.

We need to differentiate between ISIS/al Qaeda/Taliban/al Shabaab/Boko Haram style Islam and the many moderate forms of it that are tolerant, not set in stone and above all kind and compassionate. Anyone who equates Islam with the ISIS et al brand should read the Koran and spot the differences.

diddley

Defender OF Faith wrote: »

Thanks for your replay & welcome to the discussion my friend, let me point out that according to you the majority of the 1.8B people are uneducated to recognise this to be the truth, and that those who converts are following a lie which they are to uneducated to recognise; clearly you made the assumption that you understand the prophet of Islam more then Muslims and the Scholars of Islam themselves care to share were did you get your knowledge form?

I never said I understand the prophet of Islam, and I don't want to understand him/them/it. What I said was that most educated people would not be surprised that people blindly put their faith/love/trust in person or object X, and often this is misguided.

Take a look at history to find out more. X

Defender OF Faith

diddley wrote: »

I never said I understand the prophet of Islam, and I don't want to understand him/them/it. What I said was that most educated people would not be surprised that people blindly put their faith/love/trust in person or object X, and often this is misguided.

Take a look at history to find out more. X

Ah I am deeply sorry for misunderstanding your words then! I ask for your forgiveness if you felt that my words were belittling you in anyway as it was not intended to be.

But now I understand what you meant I totally agree, if it was not for the blind devotion of Jim Jones followers those hundreds of people that committed suicide would not have done so if they used their brain and intellect to analyse his reasons for suicide.

We have been blessed with an intellect and brain to discern who among the men are worthy of being followed and who is not, those who place their trust on a person based solely on his love and faith are Sheep & every man who assumes a position of leadership is bound to be followed by a sheep.

Then is He who guides to the Truth (worthier) to be closely followed or he who finds no guidance (for himself or others) unless he is guided?And most of them follow not except assumption and conjecture . Indeed, assumption avails not against the truth at all."[10:35-36]

Again I apologise for my false assumption as after answering a number of questions on this thread I blindly assumed it referenced to your understanding of Muhammad(pbuh) and here is me taking about blind belief

sbsquarepants

Defender OF Faith wrote: »

You have been asking the same questions which were answered in a comprehensive issue regarding the matter I invite you to read the post then question what I have presented and explain to me how the answer given is not to your liking.

No, sorry you haven't answered anything. I would like you to explain in simple terms (or complicated ones or any terms whatsoever for that matter) how it is that 6 year old girls are old enough to marry and 9 year olds old enough for sex.
I find the idea repulsive, you seem happy enough with it because it's warm in the middle east. I suspect you're talking nonsense, but I'm trying to give you the opportunity to clarify your position. Can you do that?

Defender OF Faith wrote: »

Islam is a religion that invites serious debates,discussions & Criticism based on evidence and proof not emotions and sentiments.

Provide some of this proof that it's acceptable for 50 year old men to have sex with 9 year old girls so.

Defender OF Faith

sbsquarepants wrote: »

No, sorry you haven't answered anything. I would like you to explain in simple terms (or complicated ones or any terms whatsoever for that matter) how it is that 6 year old girls are old enough to marry and 9 year olds old enough for sex.
I find the idea repulsive, you seem happy enough with it because it's warm in the middle east. I suspect you're talking nonsense, but I'm trying to give you the opportunity to clarify your position. Can you do that?



Provide some of this proof that it's acceptable for 50 year old men to have sex with 9 year old girls so.

Post # 176,182,187 in the "Ask about Islam" thread your answers are there ~

sbsquarepants

And round and round we go.
I'll just cut my loses and accept that you have no answer worth a damn. Hardly a surprise to me, reconciling such a disgusting act with so called perfect morals would be quite a tough thing to do. Best not to think about it - "He did it, he's perfect, therefore there's no problem" must sit much easier on your conscience.
Personally I hold myself to a much higher standard than that and yet I can guarantee you that I am far from perfect.
But I can also guarantee I am a damn sight closer to perfection than your disgusting hero.

alwald

sbsquarepants wrote: »

And round and round we go.
I'll just cut my loses and accept that you have no answer worth a damn. Hardly a surprise to me, reconciling such a disgusting act with so called perfect morals would be quite a tough thing to do. Best not to think about it - "He did it, he's perfect, therefore there's no problem" must sit much easier on your conscience.
Personally I hold myself to a much higher standard than that and yet I can guarantee you that I am far from perfect.
But I can also guarantee I am a damn sight closer to perfection than your disgusting hero.

I asked the same question and I never got an answer from defender of faith, I gave up since I realised that I will not get anywhere with him, he seems to answer what he wants and put aside the difficult questions.

If you are looking to know more about the religion from a well known professor and researcher who IMO speaks openly then you have to search for Tariq Ramadan, he has several books (over 20) and he covers a lot of topics, I only watched him on youtube in different debates (mainly in French channels) but there are few in English.

keyboardmouse

As I wait on a reply from defender I think I'd like to mention some common sense:

Is it not silly to label anyone utterly perfect at all? especially someone who lived long ago in what could be very savage times?
The evidence points to the fact that Muhammad lived according to his social norms in his country, which to most of us today are repellent.
Slavery, rape, conquest, stoning (though this isn't mentioned in the Q'uran (although I believe it was meant to be, you can correct me on this)
and killing a boy because he would grow up to be an unbeliever etc...savage times. Horrific and turbulent.

Truth is extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and the evidence to me is that Muhammad was far from perfect and seemed
to me an opportunist leader, forwarding his own agenda in the name of God. That's what the evidence suggests to me. I've no doubt someone brought up steeped in Islamic tradition will overlook that, almost the same as when we overlook the flaws perhaps in our partner or wife/husband and say, "no no I still love them."

So was he perfect, lets be honest : it hardly seems likely, to me anyway.

My main trouble with Islam is it's apparent claim to be the final revelation, its claiming even of Jewish and Christian prophets and stories as its own, its claim to be perfect and worst of all is the message to spread it around far and wide to people such as me who don't believe a jot of it, and if many Muslims had their way, I would die for this "sin."

At the end of the day, God is God, if he's there in anyway, he can stand up for himself. Masked idiots brandishing machine guns need not apply. Sorry if I've strayed off point a bit.

Defender OF Faith

sbsquarepants wrote: »

And round and round we go.
I'll just cut my loses and accept that you have no answer worth a damn...

Your questions were answered your simply refusing to read the answer provided, and keep bringing up the same question over and over again.

So far you have not pointed out a single flaw in the answer I presented as clearly you have not even read or looked at it, if you wish to discuss this issue, discuss it in the "Ask about Islam" thread where I have given my answer.

Your making this circular by continually asking questions which I keep telling you have been answered and instead of responding to my answer you ask the same question!

alwald wrote: »

I asked the same question and I never got an answer from defender of faith, I gave up since I realised that I will not get anywhere with him, he seems to answer what he wants and put aside the difficult questions....

Review Post # 176,182,187 in the "Ask about Islam" thread the answers are there ~

Note that your question was asked in "Women right about Islam" thread which was not an appropriate thread to such a question, I invited you to open a thread to discuss the answer but you have not done so.

All the questions you asked in the "Women right in Islam thread" were answered collectively in post # 394 I have not put aside any "Difficult question".

To add that Tariq Ramadan is a brilliant Muslim mind who I recommend any one wishing to study Islam further to have a look at his work.

keyboardmouse wrote: »

As I wait on a reply from defender I think I'd like to mention some common sense:

Is it not silly to label anyone utterly perfect at all? especially someone who lived long ago in what could be very savage times?
The evidence points to the fact that Muhammad lived according to his social norms in his country, which to most of us today are repellent.
Slavery, rape, conquest, stoning (though this isn't mentioned in the Q'uran (although I believe it was meant to be, you can correct me on this)
and killing a boy because he would grow up to be an unbeliever etc...savage times. Horrific and turbulent.
Truth is extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and the evidence to me is that Muhammad was far from perfect and seemed
to me an opportunist leader, forwarding his own agenda in the name of God. That's what the evidence suggests to me. I've no doubt someone brought up steeped in Islamic tradition will overlook that, almost the same as when we overlook the flaws perhaps in our partner or wife/husband and say, "no no I still love them."

False accusation with no evidence or proof to support them ,Muhammed(pbuh) is exhaled above everything you just mentioned and until you can prove to me otherwise or how what I posted in post # 1 & 2 is false you cant expect me to blindly accept what you tell me without any evidence or proof.

I will post my response to your previous "evidence" against Muhammed(pbuh) later today ~

alwald

Defender OF Faith wrote: »

Review Post # 176,182,187 in the "Ask about Islam" thread the answers are there ~

Note that your question was asked in "Women right about Islam" thread which was not an appropriate thread to such a question, I invited you to open a thread to discuss the answer but you have not done so.

All the questions you asked in the "Women right in Islam thread" were answered collectively in post # 394 I have not put aside any "Difficult question".

Well I am not the only one who is saying that you don't answer all questions or that you write long posts without giving a clear answer, this is a fact and many posters will agree with me.

I am not expecting you to answer everything but I would appreciate if you just say that you don't have an answer as oppose to writing a long post without answering the question, and sometimes I would appreciate that you use common sense (just like Tariq Ramadan) as oppose to answering blindly.

Defender OF Faith

alwald wrote: »

Well I am not the only one who is saying that you don't answer all questions or that you write long posts without giving a clear answer, this is a fact and many posters will agree with me.

I am not expecting you to answer everything but I would appreciate if you just say that you don't have an answer as oppose to writing a long post without answering the question, and sometimes I would appreciate that you use common sense (just like Tariq Ramadan) as oppose to answering blindly.

It takes a sentence to ask a question but sometimes an essay to answer, especially when it comes to areas of Islam and the prophet life people might find to be controversial. There are volumes and essays written dealing with such issues and I do my best to simplify it and further provide sources at the bottom of my answer for further details and study. I wrote a summary of the story of Badr in less then 60 lines while there are 20 pages written on the issue on the Biography book provided, really only 4 of my posts in this forum so far can be considered "Long"

You cannot come here claiming I have not answered a question when you have not even read the answer nor made the effort to point out how did I not answer the question.

I never claimed to have all the answers however many of the questions people are asking regards knowledge dealing with the fundamentals of Islam and incidents in the biography of the prophet or general misconceptions regarding Islam or certain verses of the Qur'an all to frequently repeated, which is simple knowledge that every Muslim makes the effort to learn.

I reference an ample of sources at the bottoms of my answer for those wishing to explore the issue further & I never answer something blindly I make sure to do plenty of research beforehand.