Bryan Fischer: "No More Mosques, Period"

[Kalam]

Actually there have been legion examples of you lying. Take abrogation for example. Mr. Fitnah ate your lunch on that topic and your only recourse was to lie your ass off repeatedly.

Mr. Fitnah claims that certain verses are nasikh and mansukh and always fails to support his opinion with evidence from any scholar on the subject. In your mind, I'm sure that constitutes a victory.

You lie in the name of Islam. Islam is a religion of violence -- founded upon violence -- and demanding of violence. Yet you, being a liar, deny it.

I have no need to do research to prove you have claimed such shit on behalf of Islam. You and I and many others recall it quite well enough.

Thanks for proving my point about not offering any examples.

 

[Liability]

Actually there have been legion examples of you lying. Take abrogation for example. Mr. Fitnah ate your lunch on that topic and your only recourse was to lie your ass off repeatedly.

Mr. Fitnah claims that certain verses are nasikh and mansukh and always fails to support his opinion with evidence from any scholar on the subject. In your mind, I'm sure that constitutes a victory.

You lie in the name of Islam. Islam is a religion of violence -- founded upon violence -- and demanding of violence. Yet you, being a liar, deny it.

I have no need to do research to prove you have claimed such shit on behalf of Islam. You and I and many others recall it quite well enough.

Thanks for proving my point about not offering any examples.

No. Mr. Fitnah established that abrogation does exist. Logically, it shouldn't. You attempted to deny it. But since he (and numerous others) clearly quoted contradictory verses in the Qur'an, either the Qur'an (as the word allegedly of Allah) is an admittedly self-contradictory work OR the latter verses which contradict the earlier ones must abrogate those earlier verses.

Your tap dancing around that point always fails for obvious reasons. We enjoy laughing at your expense, however, as a result each time.

Oh, and clearly, I did not "prove" your pseudo "point." Pussies like you ALWAYS (ploddingly and predictably) demand that others "prove" that you said X, Y and Z based on some nearly forgotten thread from months and months earlier. As though we are obligated to do research to disprove your endless litany of lies.

Make it simple. Tell us now that Islam is NOT a religion of Peace. I will promptly agree with you. Admit that it seeks conversion by violence and subjugation (since it is incapable of conversion by persuasion or logic). I will promptly agree again with you!

Yours is a psychotic and violence-prone "religion" that will obtain no victory or conversions by violence over anybody who understands what that screed of a "holy" book actually says. Islam's days are numbered, thank God. A very limited and dwindling number.

God may be Great. Islam isn't.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Actually there have been legion examples of you lying. Take abrogation for example. Mr. Fitnah ate your lunch on that topic and your only recourse was to lie your ass off repeatedly.

Mr. Fitnah claims that certain verses are nasikh and mansukh and always fails to support his opinion with evidence from any scholar on the subject. In your mind, I'm sure that constitutes a victory.

You lie in the name of Islam. Islam is a religion of violence -- founded upon violence -- and demanding of violence. Yet you, being a liar, deny it.

I have no need to do research to prove you have claimed such shit on behalf of Islam. You and I and many others recall it quite well enough.

Thanks for proving my point about not offering any examples.

Really now,stop lying to yourself. The subject has been exhausted every "scholar" you presented upon examination in the end disagreed with your contention on abrogation.
Your argument, based entirety self delusion.

 

[Kalam]

No. Mr. Fitnah established that abrogation does exist. Logically, it shouldn't. You attempted to deny it.

And this was a "lie"? Until about a year ago, I subscribed to the beliefs of a sect that rejected ahadith entirely. I've spoken consistently from a Sunni (mostly Hanafi) viewpoint since then -- meaning that I've acknowledged nasikh and mansukh for quite a while -- and don't anticipate any further changes in belief for a number of personal reasons that have nothing to do with this discussion.

The difference between Mr. Fitnah and I is that he has always been incorrect about nasikh and mansukh. Claiming that ayat have been abrogated simply because they aren't consistent with narrow-minded views of Islam will not suffice; the ulema have clearly identified which ayat are nasikh and mansukh and there is little room left for discussion.

Here is the authoritative work on the subject by As-Suyuti (d. 1505 CE):
http://www.muneerfareed.com/storage/al-itqan-fi-ulum-al-quran/nasikhmansukh.pdf

But since he (and numerous others) clearly quoted contradictory verses in the Qur'an, either the Qur'an (as the word allegedly of Allah) is an admittedly self-contradictory work OR the latter verses which contradict the earlier ones must abrogate those earlier verses.

Few of the "contradictory" verses that anyone has cited were on As-Suyuti's list, meaning that they aren't nasikh or mansukh. Sorry, non-Muslims working with an English translation of the Qur'an don't have the scriptural knowledge to determine matters of such importance.

Your tap dancing around that point always fails for obvious reasons. We enjoy laughing at your expense, however, as a result each time.

I'm glad that you and Mr. Fitnah enjoy each other's company. I shudder thinking of where he'd be if he'd never found somebody foolish enough to believe that his dense interpretations of the Qur'an reflect any sort of truth about the Islamic religion.

Oh, and clearly, I did not "prove" your pseudo "point." Pussies like you ALWAYS (ploddingly and predictably) demand that others "prove" that you said X, Y and Z based on some nearly forgotten thread from months and months earlier. As though we are obligated to do research to disprove your endless litany of lies.

Make it simple. Tell us now that Islam is NOT a religion of Peace. I will promptly agree with you. Admit that it seeks conversion by violence and subjugation (since it is incapable of conversion by persuasion or logic). I will promptly agree again with you!

Yours is a psychotic and violence-prone "religion" that will obtain no victory or conversions by violence over anybody who understands what that screed of a "holy" book actually says. Islam's days are numbered, thank God. A very limited and dwindling number.

God may be Great. Islam isn't.

And here, as always, is the inane and whiny portion of your post. I'll tell you what -- go ahead and condemn Islam and do whatever makes you happy while you watch our population's rate of growth continue to shoot through the roof.

 

[Kalam]

Actually there have been legion examples of you lying. Take abrogation for example. Mr. Fitnah ate your lunch on that topic and your only recourse was to lie your ass off repeatedly.

Mr. Fitnah claims that certain verses are nasikh and mansukh and always fails to support his opinion with evidence from any scholar on the subject. In your mind, I'm sure that constitutes a victory.

You lie in the name of Islam. Islam is a religion of violence -- founded upon violence -- and demanding of violence. Yet you, being a liar, deny it.

I have no need to do research to prove you have claimed such shit on behalf of Islam. You and I and many others recall it quite well enough.

Thanks for proving my point about not offering any examples.

Really now,stop lying to yourself. The subject has been exhausted every "scholar" you presented upon examination in the end disagreed with your contention on abrogation.
Your argument, based entirety self delusion.

I've posted the relevant chapter from As-Suyuti's Itqan. Now, dazzle me by supporting your specific claims of nasikh and mansukh with works of the same magnitude.

 

[bodecea]

An opinion can't be a lie.

You lie to yourself , thats what you do to be a muslim, you know its not true ,then catch yourself and double down.

Thanks for clarifying you are not posting facts.

Clearly.

I'm surprised that your practice of avoiding substantive discussion at all costs has worked this long for you.

It really hasn't "worked"...people just learn to roll their eyes and lower expectations.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Mr. Fitnah claims that certain verses are nasikh and mansukh and always fails to support his opinion with evidence from any scholar on the subject. In your mind, I'm sure that constitutes a victory.


Thanks for proving my point about not offering any examples.

Really now,stop lying to yourself. The subject has been exhausted every "scholar" you presented upon examination in the end disagreed with your contention on abrogation.
Your argument, based entirety self delusion.

I've posted the relevant chapter from As-Suyuti's Itqan. Now, dazzle me by supporting your specific claims of nasikh and mansukh with works of the same magnitude.

Been there, done that.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/1737774-post1314.html

 

[Kalam]

Really now,stop lying to yourself. The subject has been exhausted every "scholar" you presented upon examination in the end disagreed with your contention on abrogation.
Your argument, based entirety self delusion.

I've posted the relevant chapter from As-Suyuti's Itqan. Now, dazzle me by supporting your specific claims of nasikh and mansukh with works of the same magnitude.

Been there, done that.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/1737774-post1314.html

None of the ayat you mentioned were discussed in that article. I'm afraid your work is still cut out for you.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

I've posted the relevant chapter from As-Suyuti's Itqan. Now, dazzle me by supporting your specific claims of nasikh and mansukh with works of the same magnitude.

Been there, done that.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/1737774-post1314.html

None of the ayat you mentioned were discussed in that article. I'm afraid your work is still cut out for you.

The Ayat aside, your Suyuti doesn't support your abrogation argument .

My observation of the abrogation of not fighting the hypocrtites 4:90 to fighting the hypocrites in Sura 9 is manifest.Unless you are willfully blind which we have established you are.

The Noble Quran : Surat 9
Tafsir.com Tafsir Ibn Kathir

 

[Kalam]

The Ayat aside, your Suyuti doesn't support your abrogation argument .

As-Suyuti's views on abrogation are mine.

My observation of the abrogation of not fighting the hypocrtites 4:90 to fighting the hypocrites in Sura 9 is manifest.Unless you are willfully blind which we have established you are.

This is why non-Muslims don't establish what is nasikh and mansukh. You have made it clear that you care nothing for historical context or relevant ahadith, which are of central importance in both cases (and in nearly every case.) There is a reason that no Muslim has ever identified those ayat as nasikh and mansukh: they're not. You fail again.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

The Ayat aside, your Suyuti doesn't support your abrogation argument .

As-Suyuti's views on abrogation are mine.

So now you believe in internal abrogation?

 

[Father Time]

I believe his idea is extreme. But no more extreme than the ACLU and other loony lefties who believe that terrorists have the right to enter our country illegally, blow shit up, and then be provided with taxpayer funded attorneys and special meals.

Holy straw man. Where do they say that Muslims have the right to blow up other people's property?

And I'm not sure if you understand our justice system but yes people who are accused of murder get taxpayer funded attorneys. If this is news to you, then you must be living in a cave somewhere.

There is no doubt in my mind that people on here would argue that the 1st amendment allows for anyone to fund, recruit, train, and assemble an army to kill innocent Americans. Price we pay for freedom and all.

Then you are a fucking moron or more likely lying. Seriously I can't imagine how anyone can equate building a mosque (a perfectly legal building) with forming an army outside of brain damage.

 

[Father Time]

well, chalk him up for willing to shred the 1st amendment

According to the First Amendment, RABID folks have a "right to life."

Since you obviously never read the first amendment:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

 

[Father Time]

I'm guessing that chanel won't have anything intelligent to say about either. If she says anything at all.

I predict a sudden case of thread flight.

No thread flight. I am not debating the IRA or the crusades or even whackos that kill abortion doctors. I asked how many MASS MURDERS have been committed in the name of radical Christianity in modern America. Perhaps I should be more specific. How about in the last 20 years in the city of NY? Tens of thousands of Irish there.

Being a "Christian" is a label Americans give themselves which is passed down usually from their parents. Just because someone believes in Christ does not mean they are religious. I doubt the same can be said for people who call themselves Muslim.

Spin doctors. Yawn.

It just doesn't get dumber than this, folks.

You're right, that truly is the dumbest thing I've ever seen on these boards.

'You can't judge Christianity because not everyone who calls themselves Christian is sincere, however you can totally judge Muslims from anyone who calls themselves one because they're all sincere. It's impossible for them to just take the Muslim label from their parents which a lot of Christians do.'

 

[Hister]

'You can't judge Christianity because not everyone who calls themselves Christian is sincere, however you can totally judge Muslims from anyone who calls themselves one because they're all sincere. It's impossible for them to just take the Muslim label from their parents which a lot of Christians do.

Christians aren't sincere, what's next? The sky is blue?

Like the saying goes: Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition!

 

[Liability]

* * * *

But since he (and numerous others) clearly quoted contradictory verses in the Qur'an, either the Qur'an (as the word allegedly of Allah) is an admittedly self-contradictory work OR the latter verses which contradict the earlier ones must abrogate those earlier verses.

Few of the "contradictory" verses that anyone has cited were on As-Suyuti's list, meaning that they aren't nasikh or mansukh. Sorry, non-Muslims working with an English translation of the Qur'an don't have the scriptural knowledge to determine matters of such importance.

The "LOL" was the only honest part of that reply. I had almost forgotten that conversion of others to your vile "faith" is required by your hideous holy book, and you Muslims insist on converting non-believers (when you aren't trying to just kill them). And as part of this grand plan, one is required to do all the prayers and read the Qur'an, but you folks provide the interesting twist: folks gotta read that cheese-dick work of fiction IN the original language even if that means one has to learn that language. Translations are always inferior, of course, to the alleged word of that violent madman god you worship. So, even though it is ABSOLUTELY CRYSTAL CLEAR (and if there was such a thing as an HONEST Muslim "scholar" he would be compelled to admit and acknowledge) that some verses within the Qur'an are undeniably contradictory.

But you, being a fraud as always, simply deny that major premise: "No no. There are no contradictions in any verses of the Qur'an."

You are, now, as always, exactly what I said you are. You are a liar.

Here is a very brief excerpt of a work (link provided at end) that demonstrates internal contradictions within Qur'anic verses:

* * * *
(Quran-3:7)— “He it is Who has revealed the Book to you; some of its verses are clear and decisive, they are the basis of the Book, and others are allegorical; then as for those in whose hearts there is perversity they follow the part of it which is allegorical, seeking to mislead and seeking to give it (their own) interpretation. but none knows its interpretation except Allah, and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge say: We believe in it, it is all from our Lord; and none do mind except those having understanding.”

Allah says in Quran that, “I made Qur’an very clear, simple and easy and written in Arabic (44:58, 54:22, 54:32, 54:40) so that Muslims (Arabs of course) can understand very easily?” Please listen what Merciful Allah says in Qur’an: “ But We have indeed made the Qur'an easy to understand and remember: then is there any that will receive admonition? (54:22); and “We have made it a Qur'an in Arabic, that ye may be able to understand and learn wisdom (43:3)”. Allah emphatically declared that He made Quran very easy so that Muslims can understand very easily.

No where in the Quran Allah says that my words must be read with the help of Quranic interpretations and commentaries! * * * *

-- Islam Watch - "Samples of Quranic (koran) Contradictions and Flaws" by Syed Kamran Mirza by Syed Kamran Mirza.

Syed got it right. The contradiction is quite clear. It is not a problem of "translation." No honest person could deny that contradiction.

Why would Allah contradict himself? If it's not a contradiction, but Allah merely changed his mind about whether his little tome was clear to Muslims for easy understanding -- or not -- then the Qur'an must be subject to abrogation.

And then there are these contradictions (which you can try to deny constitute contradictions, but that's just dishonest of you if you try, for obvious reasons). And, again, it is not a matter of mis-translation, either:

* * * *
E. Self-contradictory Quranic verses

Which one is correct?

• Quran-2:256: There is no Compulsion in religion…. OR

• Quran-9:29: Fight those who do not profess the true faith (Islam) till they pay the poll-tax (jiziya) with the hand of humility.

• Quran-9:5: Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them and take them captive, and besiege them and prepare for them each ambush….

• Quran-47:4: When you meet the unbelievers in the Jihad strike off their heads….

• Quran-2:191: And slay (kill) them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out such is the reward of those who suppress faith.

• Quran-8: 65: O Apostle! Rouse the believers to the fight…(against) unbelievers. * * * *

-- Id.

Sounds like a shit-load of compulsion going on, but there is no compulsion. So, again, either Allah's little book for easily misguided Muslims contains examples of the allegedly Almighty contradicting himself OR Allah changed his mind and the latter verses abrogate the former.

How does an Allah-fearing and devout Muslim wishing to be a good adherent of Islam resolve that? Does he refrain from compelling or attempting to compel others into "belief" in Islam OR does he act like a massively psychotic violent son of a bitch and strike off their heads and fingertips, and does he make them pay taxes to feel subjugated?

Spin it all you wish, Kalam, but you never answer such a direct question. We all know why. You can't.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

so the only way to protect freedom of religion is to deny freedom of religion to non-christian religions?

some conservatives do not understand that the same principles of religious freedom that THEY enjoy would disappear if fundamentalist christans get what THEY want

Did you know that there are some Muslims that do not want the proposed mosque in New York to be built. So it's not just Christians.

OMIGOD! That makes ALLLLLLL the difference in the world!!!!!!

We already know you're a stupid fuck, no sense in proving it time after time.

 

[Yukon.]

Why are Americans so frightened of Muslims...is it their skin colour, their dress code, what is it ? Could it be that your system of government is so fragile and your religious beliefs so week that you fear Islam will end both? Pray tell my children, but do tell me.

 

[Hister]

Why are Americans so frightened of Muslims...is it their skin colour, their dress code, what is it ? Could it be that your system of government is so fragile and your religious beliefs so week that you fear Islam will end both? Pray tell my children, but do tell me.

It's the bomb in their turban and the fact that they kiss carpets more than their wives.

 

[Liability]

Why are Americans so frightened of Muslims...is it their skin colour, their dress code, what is it ? Could it be that your system of government is so fragile and your religious beliefs so week that you fear Islam will end both? Pray tell my children, but do tell me.

In your usual ignorance and relying upon your standard dishonesty you ask a stupid question premised upon a false assumption, scumbag.

Americans as a rule do not fear Muslims.

Instead, most of us are beginning to appreciate what Islam is and what it represents. We oppose it. Since those scumbags favor violence to achieve their insidious objective, you imbecile, it is perfectly rational to oppose them at every turn and to be prepared to fight them.

In life, if one is a believer in the teachings of Jesus (which you aren't, of course), one may reasonably agree to "turn the other cheek." But in matters of State, it would be much worse than mere folly to rest our defense policies on that notion. It would be malfeasance.

Oh, and on the topic of religion, the line in your current avie is dishonest.