Obama’s Illegitimate War on Israel

[JenT]

But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them;
Koran 4:89

Way to post passages out of context...

[The hypocrites] long that you should disbelieve as they have disbelieved so that you might be on the same level; so take not from among them friends until they flee in Allah’s way. Then if they turn back (to hostility), seize them and kill them wherever you find them, and take no friend nor helper from among them, except those who join a people between whom and you there is an alliance, or who come to you, their hearts shrinking from fighting you or fighting their own people. And if Allah had pleased, He would have given them power over you, so that they would have fought you. So if they withdraw from you and fight you not and offer you peace, then Allah allows you no way against them. - 4:89-90​

Sorry, fighting in self defense doesn't exactly compare to the divinely-sanctioned slaughter and rape of children that takes place in the Bible.

You don't get to just add words in parenthesis to make verses look the way you want them to look. OH WAIT! Yes you do, as long as it furthers the cause of Allah, right?

You post this as though it makes everything okay:

So if they withdraw from you and fight you not and offer you peace, then Allah allows you no way against them

Yeah, if we become dhimmis and become Islam's whipping posts, beaten and clubbed on the head or neck even as we pay extra taxes just to be humiliated and ostricized because we don't accept Allah, are made to wear humiliating clothes so that everyone can see we are dhimmis and therefore abuse us, unable to testify against any Muslim in court because of the dhimmi-scum status to be walked under.... sure Kalam, wonderful peace.

Except that every Muslim jurist agrees that death is proscribed for those who are apostate. All the commentaries and legal writings about being killed for leaving Islam does not question the death sentence, but how many chances they have to recant or how long to wait before they are killed or if they should be offered a second chance to glorify Islam, but none of the legal writings on the subject deny apostate Muslims should be killed or not, just when, and how painfully.

The Koran also says to follow the way of Mohammed. I realize why you have to deny the Hadiths from the Sira, because it reveals true Islam,

The ahadith are only legitimate sources of guidance if they're consistent with what is said in the Qur'an, the final and most important standard of accuracy. Even sahih collections are not immune to error. Ibn Ishaq's biography is known to be inaccurate in its description of several notable events. Again, though, I invite you to share with us any instance in which Muhammad (SAW) caused the death of innocent unbelievers simply for being unbelievers.

The caravans, Kalam, nobody disputes them. It boggles my mind how you're just making up your own religion and beliefs. And it saddens me that you can get away with it just because most Westerners have such little knowledge about Islam.

Nice blanket statement. Please post a poll confirming that 100% of "clerics, Imams and sheikhs" share your beliefs. Thanks.

Why can't I just follow your example and say it's so? Even your own websites that you post admit the significance of the Sira, Kalam. This is like my going to a Muslim nation and claiming that priests and pastors don't study the Bible. Where is someone going to find proof that all priests and pastors read the Bible?

and all nations predominantly Islam.

Today just isn't your day.

ICL - Turkey Constitution
http://www.assetrecovery.org/kc/resources/org.apache.wicket.Application/repo?nid=1d1292dd-80c2-11dd-aec8-83823fa6e881
CONSTITUTION OF THE FIFTH REPUBLIC OF NIGER, Adopted on 18 July 1999 - Wikisource
Constitution of Azerbaijan
Tajikistan Constitution
Constitution of Turkmenistan
http://www.kushtetutakosoves.info/repository/docs/Constitution.of.the.Republic.of.Kosovo.pdf
CONSTITUTION OF DJIBOUTI
CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE GAMBIA, 1997 REPRINED 2002
CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF CHAD
FUNDAMENTAL LAW OF THE SECOND REPUBLIC OF GUINEA
CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF SENEGAL
http://confinder.richmond.edu/admin/docs/Mali.pdf
THE CONSTITUTION OF BURKINA FASO

What are you trying to prove with this?

It is fact. And all the propaganda written by the west trying to convince its own followers they are peaceful won't change the root of Islam. Mohammed. Beheader of nations.

You've made a fool of yourself once again. As I said, your "knowledge" of Islam may be great enough to impress your friends at church, but you're not going to be able to keep pace with anyone who actually knows what they're talking about. If I were you, I'd stick to studying my own religion.

[/QUOTE]

Nobody talks about Islam in church. I can't remember the last conversation about it.

 

[Sunni Man]

JenT, the "Law" that Jesus spoke about was the Torah

The Torah contained all of the OT laws.

Jesus was a Rabbi, ie, a Torah teacher.

He taught OT law to the people.

Matthew 5:17 “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. 19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.

Here Jesus is saying not to break any part of the law.

And is equating the keeping of the law with being righteous.

 

[JenT]

JenT, the "Law" that Jesus spoke about was the Torah

The Torah contained all of the OT laws.

Jesus was a Rabbi, ie, a Torah teacher.

He taught OT law to the people.

Matthew 5:17 “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. 19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.

Here Jesus is saying not to break any part of the law.

And is equating the keeping of the law with being righteous.

Sure, Sunni, and He also said He FULFILLED the law

Christians are no longer under the law, just as The Light has been trying to tell you.

We obey out of gratitude and love, not because of the law.

 

[JenT]

Kalam, I've been reading your posts more carefully and I realize why we can't agree.

Apparently you don't believe in traditional Muslim beliefs but the pseudo-new face of Islam.

Do you actually believe the rewritten beliefs or are you just going along with the deception in order to gain political credibility?

Fadi Hakuri promotes the new Islam. He said:

Hakuri: "Islam is probably one of the major reasons why the majority of Europeans today in continental Europe have a negative and hostile view towards Turkish acceptance into the European Union, that’s at least what the opinion polls indicate. And in fact intensity of this opposition can also in large part be explained by Islam and the fear that Turkish Muslims may not be able to integrate effectively in European society. Of course Netherlands is one of those countries which has a large Turkish minority population. Nevertheless, with the reforms in Islam that is taking place in Turkey today, this could perhaps help give a better image amongst European public and facilitate the process of Turkey’s acceptance into the European Union"

A false face of Islam to fit in and be accepted. Do you really buy it or do you just have political goals like some of the leaders?

Chowk: Religion: Reinterpretation of Islam in Turkey

 

[Sunni Man]

JenT, the "Law" that Jesus spoke about was the Torah

The Torah contained all of the OT laws.

Jesus was a Rabbi, ie, a Torah teacher.

He taught OT law to the people.

Matthew 5:17 “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. 19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.

Here Jesus is saying not to break any part of the law.

And is equating the keeping of the law with being righteous.

Sure, Sunni, and He also said He FULFILLED the law

Christians are no longer under the law, just as The Light has been trying to tell you.

We obey out of gratitude and love, not because of the law.

Fulfillment doesn't mean completion.

I "fulfill" my duties to my wife, kids, and job, every day.

But that does not mean I have "completed" or "finished them".

 

[Sunni Man]

Plus, Jesus said: "till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law"

Again, heaven and earth have NOT passed away.

So the Law has NOT changed and is still valid.

 

[JenT]

Plus, Jesus said: "till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law"

Again, heaven and earth have NOT passed away.

So the Law has NOT changed and is still valid.

You do not understand because you do not know the Scriptures.

1.“Behold, the days are coming, says the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah— 32 not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, though I was a husband to them, says the LORD. 33 But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the LORD: I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. 34 No more shall every man teach his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, ‘Know the LORD,’ for they all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, says the LORD. For I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more.” (Jeremiah 31:31)

2.Matthew 26:28
For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

3.Mark 14:24
And He said to them, “This is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many.

4.Luke 22:20
Likewise He also took the cup after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood, which is shed for you.

5.1 Corinthians 11:25
In the same manner He also took the cup after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood. This do, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.”

6.2 Corinthians 3:6
who also made us sufficient as ministers of the new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

7.2 Corinthians 3:7
But if the ministry of death, written and engraved on stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of the glory of his countenance, which glory was passing away,

8.Hebrews 8:7
For if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second.

9.Hebrews 8:8
Because finding fault with them, He says: “Behold, the days are coming, says the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah—

10.Hebrews 8:13
In that He says, “A new covenant, ” He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.

11.Hebrews 9:15
And for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, that those who are called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.

12.Hebrews 12:24
to Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than that of Abel.

As Jesus said,

17 “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. 19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.

They will not pass away until all is fulfilled. Christ was looking toward the cross. He knew the consequences if He did not go there.

Christ fulfilled the law. The law and its consequences.

And the unsaved keep repeating that God should simply look away from sin. Christ told you, the law and its consequences will not pass away until all is fulfilled. Somebody needed to step forward and fulfill the law and its consequences. SomeOne who was without sin. There was and is only one man that could do such a thing, He was 100% man, 100% God, begotten of the Father, prophesied of and revealed in both the old and new testaments. Do you think it was easy for One who is fully human to face the cross? He sweat blood. He did all that and yet many still reject Him.

It is incomprehensible to me why anyone would.

 

[THE LIGHT]

Matthew 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

In this verse Jesus is conferming that the Law is still in effect.

I have ask many christians, "has heaven and earth passed away"?

The obvious answer is "No"

Which means the the entire OT laws are still in effect and valid.

This verse is what Jesus said.

Paul hijacked the religion and twisted what Jesus said.

So christians; who are you going to follow and believe?

Jesus or Paul?

How many times do I have to say it. The law has NOT passed away. Jesus never claimed it did and Paul never claimed it did. Those who do not follow Christ are still under the law.

 

[Kalam]

How many times do I have to tell you that the law was fulfilled for us by Jesus. Those in Christ are no longer under the law but under GRACE!

Jesus, did you tell your followers that they were exempt from Mosaic law, or did you make it clear that it would be in effect until heaven and earth pass away?

For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled.

Thanks JC.

The most Jesus did was offer alternative interpretations of some aspects of the law.

Jen has accepted Jesus as her savior which means that Christ has already paid for her sins and violations of the law past present and future. The only people going to hell are those who do not accept Jesus.

Your beliefs seem Biblically unsound. Jesus was a strong advocate of Mosaic law and disdained the Pharisees and scribes only because they were hypocrites and didn't truly follow it (see Matt. 23:23.) You'll notice that Jesus' disciples adhered to Mosaic law; are we to believe that they all misunderstood his teachings? Even you hypocritical right-wing Christians have to flip back to Leviticus to justify your condemnations of homosexuality.

YES the law still exists. It hasn't passed away. That's why all those who don't accept Christ are going to HELL. Because they are still under the law.

So, apparently, were his disciples.

Try reading the Bible one of these days. You'll find it is a lot different than you think.

I've read it in its entirety twice in the past several years, the New Testament alone an even greater number of times. I own the NIV and the KJV.

 

[Sunni Man]

Man, I am so glad Islam found me!!!

Reading these last few posts just reminds me of the dark days.

When I was caught up in the mixed up nonsense called Christianity.

Islam was truely a breath of fresh air.

 

[theHawk]

Man, I am so glad Islam found me!!!

Reading these last few posts just reminds me of the dark days.

When I was caught up in the mixed up nonsense called Christianity.

Islam was truely a breath of fresh air.

Yea, because the nonesense of the Pedophile Prophet make so much more sense!

 

[Kalam]

You don't get to just add words in parenthesis to make verses look the way you want them to look. OH WAIT! Yes you do, as long as it furthers the cause of Allah, right?

The additions were the translator's... don't get your Huggies in a wad.

If you prefer a particular translation, let me know and we'll try to work with that one.

You post this as though it makes everything okay:

So if they withdraw from you and fight you not and offer you peace, then Allah allows you no way against them

Yeah, if we become dhimmis

I'm afraid that's not what the passage says. It's rather unambiguous.

and become Islam's whipping posts, beaten and clubbed on the head or neck even as we pay extra taxes just to be humiliated and ostricized because we don't accept Allah, are made to wear humiliating clothes so that everyone can see we are dhimmis and therefore abuse us, unable to testify against any Muslim in court because of the dhimmi-scum status to be walked under.... sure Kalam, wonderful peace.

Please show us where in the Qur'an all of these practices are described or accept that they're not part of scriptural Islam.

Except that every Muslim jurist agrees that death is proscribed for those who are apostate.

Lying won't get you anywhere.

I'd recommend starting with this book by Dr. Sheikh Abdur-Rahman, who was the Chief Justice of Pakistan.

Punishment of Apostasy in Islam - Google Books

See also:
Freedom of religion, apostasy and Islam - Google Books

By Dr. Abdullah Saeed, professor of Arabic and Islamic Studies at the University of Melbourne; and Dr. Hassan Saeed, former Attorney-General of the Maldives (a country in which Islam is the only official religion.)

All the commentaries and legal writings about being killed for leaving Islam does not question the death sentence,

Why would you even say this when it's clear that you've read none? Learn to cite evidence for your claims or avoid making them in the first place.

But if they dispute with thee say: I submit myself entirely to Allah and (so does) he who follows me. And say to those who have been given the Book and the Unlearned (people): Do you submit yourselves? If they submit, then indeed they following the right way; and if they turn back, thy duty is only to deliver the message. And Allah is Seer of the servants. - 3:20​

The caravans, Kalam, nobody disputes them.

The caravans of the Makkans whose oppression had driven the Muslims out of the city in the first place? I'm afraid you'll have to do better than that.

It boggles my mind how you're just making up your own religion and beliefs. And it saddens me that you can get away with it just because most Westerners have such little knowledge about Islam.

You can't address my arguments, so you accuse me of making up "my own beliefs." Frankly, accusations of disbelief in Islam don't mean much to me when they come from deluded neo-Christians who are unable to grasp even the most basic tenets of my religion (which is, of course, Islam.)

All of my religious positions are based on the words of the Qur'an and legitimate traditions. Don't be stupid.

Why can't I just follow your example and say it's so?

Because that wouldn't be following my example.

Even your own websites that you post admit the significance of the Sira, Kalam.

You said that about an article I posted detailing the inaccuracy of Ibn Ishaq's accounts. I'm going to assume that reading comprehension isn't your forte.

Ibn Ishaq's work is a biography. It isn't a holy book and no Muslim treats it as one. If you're correct, I'm sure you'll have no trouble quoting an Islamic organization calling it a "holy book." You were unable to do this before; maybe you'll have better luck this time.

This is like my going to a Muslim nation and claiming that priests and pastors don't study the Bible.

No, it isn't. The Bible supposedly the holy text of Christianity (although you and other Christians adhere to it selectively.)

Where is someone going to find proof that all priests and pastors read the Bible?

The Bible is the central text of Christianity and adherence to it is what makes one a practicing Christian. Ibn Ishaq's biography is not a holy text by any stretch of the definition; adherence to it is not an article of the Islamic faith. Your insistence otherwise - in spite of the fact that I've explained this to you at least five times - makes you stupid.

What are you trying to prove with this?

[Ibn Ishaq's biography of Muhammad (SAW)] is revered and respected by... all nations predominantly Islam.

You implied that all predominantly Islamic nations "revered" this biography. Each of the constitutions I posted established a secular government in a Muslim-majority nation.

Nobody talks about Islam in church. I can't remember the last conversation about it.

I don't blame you for not wanting to embarrass yourself.

 

[Kalam]

Man, I am so glad Islam found me!!!

Reading these last few posts just reminds me of the dark days.

When I was caught up in the mixed up nonsense called Christianity.

Islam was truely a breath of fresh air.

Yea, because the nonesense of the Pedophile Prophet make so much more sense!

Apparently, tens of thousands of converts (my estimate) realize this every year.

Regarding "pedophile":

[Aishah's] age was lowered in that report so that no questions would be raised about her virginity, and by extension, the legitimacy of Muhammad's offspring through her.

Source: "All of these specific references to the bride's age reinforce Aisha's pre-menarcheal status and, implicitly, her virginity. They also suggest the variability of Aisha's age in the historical record." - D. A. Spellberg, Politics, Gender, and the Islamic Past.

In reality, she had been betrothed to Jubair Ibn al Mut'am, a pagan, before her engagement to Muhammad. Jubair eventually annulled their engagement. In at least two separate sources it is pointed out that Asma bint Abi Bakr, Aisha's half-sister, was 100 years old when she died in 73 AH. That would make Aisha 90 in 73 AH.

Source: "Asma died in 73 A.H. at the age of one hundred years. She was ten years older than her sister Aisha." - Ibn Kathir, Al-bidayya wal-nihaya

"She was the sister of Aisha Siddiqa, wife of the Holy Prophet, and was ten years older than her. … In 73 A.H. … Asma died at the age of one hundred years." - Mishkat al-Masabih

 

[theHawk]

[Apparently, tens of thousands of converts (my estimate) realize this every year.

Regarding "pedophile":

Every reliable source I have ever seen states that she was clearly six years old at the time of their marriage. He waited until she was nine to "consummate" it. I've never run into any Muslims that denied this.

Besides, why would there be a passage in the Qu'ran that sites reasons for divorce which include wives that have not yet menstruated?

Sura:
65:4 And (as for) those of your women who have despaired of menstruation, if you have a doubt, their prescribed time shall be three months, and of those too who have not had their courses; and (as for) the pregnant women, their prescribed time is that they lay down their burden; and whoever is careful of (his duty to) Allah He will make easy for him his affair.


Aisha herself testified:
'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house when I was nine years old.

The Sahih Bukhari Vol 7 cites many times that she was 6.

Many other passages where she testifies she was playing with dolls at the time they were married.


You calling Aisha a liar?

 

[Kalam]

Every reliable source I have ever seen states that she was clearly six years old at the time of their marriage.

You consider Sahih Bukhari a reliable source? Can I assume, then, that you believe in the divine revelation of the Qur'an as described therein?

He waited until she was nine to "consummate" it. I've never run into any Muslims that denied this.

Few know, fewer care. Bukhari's collection is regarded as a generally reliable source of information by orthodox Sunnis. However, it seems un-Islamic to assume that Bukhari, a human, was immune to error. After all, he compiled oral traditions that were supposedly passed down over two entire centuries. A comparison of Bukhari's claim regarding Aishah's age with the claims of other scholars suggests that Bukhari was most likely incorrect. As I said:

[Aishah's] age was lowered in that report so that no questions would be raised about her virginity, and by extension, the legitimacy of Muhammad's offspring through her.

Besides, why would there be a passage in the Qu'ran that sites reasons for divorce which include wives that have not yet menstruated?

Because many Muslims were recent converts, having taken their spouses before Islamic marital jurisprudence was established. The Qur'an considers marriage appropriate when potential husbands an wives have attained intellectual maturity. Clearly, this would not include "child brides."

And test the orphans until they reach the age of marriage. Then if you find in them maturity of intellect, make over to them their property, and consume it not extravagantly and hastily against their growing up. And whoever is rich, let him abstain, and whoever is poor let him consume reasonably. And when you make over to them their property, call witnesses in their presence. And Allah is enough as a Reckoner. - 4:6​

Aisha herself testified:

...

The Sahih Bukhari Vol 7 cites many times that she was 6.

Note that Aishah died 135 years before Bukhari was born. These words hadn't been preserved in writing; they were, like most ahadith, centuries-old oral traditions surrounding the life of Muhammad (SAW.) The reliability of this particular hadith is doubtful given that reports from two other sources contradict it and that non-Muslims frequently accused Muhammad's lineage of being impure and Aishah of being a non-virgin (she had been engaged - not married - to Jubair previously).

Many other passages where she testifies she was playing with dolls at the time they were married.

These reports actually tend to support the argument that Aishah was older than the age Bukhari reported. See:

Aishah’s dolls | The ancient historical references | Madam Ayeshah married Prophet Muhammad when she was 19 years old and not 9. (ilovezakirnaik.com)
Madam Ayeshah married Prophet Muhammad when she was 19 years old and not 9. (ilovezakirnaik.com)

Also:
Age of Aisha (ra) at time of marriage
Real Age Of Aisha (R.A) At The Time Of Marriage With Muhammad PBUH | World Latest News
Muhammad's Marriage to Aisha / Age of Marriage For Men & Women

You calling Aisha a liar?

I'm calling that particular hadith unauthentic.

 

[THE LIGHT]

How many times do I have to tell you that the law was fulfilled for us by Jesus. Those in Christ are no longer under the law but under GRACE!

Jesus, did you tell your followers that they were exempt from Mosaic law, or did you make it clear that it would be in effect until heaven and earth pass away?

The law still exists. Followers of Christ are not under the law. How else can I say it?

 

[THE LIGHT]

Plus, Jesus said: "till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law"

Again, heaven and earth have NOT passed away.

So the Law has NOT changed and is still valid.

 

[theHawk]

You consider Sahih Bukhari a reliable source? Can I assume, then, that you believe in the divine revelation of the Qur'an as described therein?

Muslims consider it a reliable source.
No I don't believe in the "devine revaltion" of Mister Pedophile.

Few know, fewer care. Bukhari's collection is regarded as a generally reliable source of information by orthodox Sunnis. However, it seems un-Islamic to assume that Bukhari, a human, was immune to error. After all, he compiled oral traditions that were supposedly passed down over two entire centuries. A comparison of Bukhari's claim regarding Aishah's age with the claims of other scholars suggests that Bukhari was most likely incorrect. As I said:

Oh I see, its "generally" reliable. In other words you'll ignore whatever you don't like or whatever makes followers of your faith look bad. Gotcha.

Because many Muslims were recent converts, having taken their spouses before Islamic marital jurisprudence was established. The Qur'an considers marriage appropriate when potential husbands an wives have attained intellectual maturity. Clearly, this would not include "child brides."

That seems to contradict the passage I quoted about divorce concerning wives that haven't yet reached menstruation. Nice try to tapdance around that one. Maybe the ass-backwards Islamists think a girl can reach the "age of intellectual maturity" before they reach the menstruation age.

Note that Aishah died 135 years before Bukhari was born. These words hadn't been preserved in writing; they were, like most ahadith, centuries-old oral traditions surrounding the life of Muhammad (SAW.) The reliability of this particular hadith is doubtful given that reports from two other sources contradict it and that non-Muslims frequently accused Muhammad's lineage of being impure and Aishah of being a non-virgin (she had been engaged - not married - to Jubair previously).

These reports actually tend to support the argument that Aishah was older than the age Bukhari reported. See:

Madam Ayeshah married Prophet Muhammad when she was 19 years old and not 9. (ilovezakirnaik.com)

Also:
Age of Aisha (ra) at time of marriage
Real Age Of Aisha (R.A) At The Time Of Marriage With Muhammad PBUH | World Latest News
Muhammad's Marriage to Aisha / Age of Marriage For Men & Women


I'm calling that particular hadith unauthentic.

Ah of course, for centuries it was accepted as fact. But now, only in the 21st century are Muslims begining to realize how bad it looks that their little false prophet was a child molester. So lets rewrite history! Bingo! She was magically 19!
Don't forget why they needed Muhammed to marry such a young girl. They needed to be sure he married a virgin since his other wasn't one.


I feel sorry for you Muslims. Brainwashed since childhood in believing in the lies of a child molesting false prophet.

You should heed the words of Jesus, whom you Muslims claim to believe was a prophet-

Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. (Matthew 7:15)

 

[JenT]

You don't get to just add words in parenthesis to make verses look the way you want them to look. OH WAIT! Yes you do, as long as it furthers the cause of Allah, right?

The additions were the translator's... don't get your Huggies in a wad.

Personal insults so soon? Are you upset?

If you prefer a particular translation, let me know and we'll try to work with that one.

Which translation are you using because I haven't seen any that made the additions and changed the meaning as you did.

You post this as though it makes everything okay:

So if they withdraw from you and fight you not and offer you peace, then Allah allows you no way against them

Yeah, if we become dhimmis

I'm afraid that's not what the passage says. It's rather unambiguous.

Why are you avoiding the part that says to slay those who left Allah? It was unambiguous too.

Please show us where in the Qur'an all of these practices are described or accept that they're not part of scriptural Islam.

So are you denouncing the life and sayings of Mohammed then?

Lying won't get you anywhere.

I'd recommend starting with this book by Dr. Sheikh Abdur-Rahman, who was the Chief Justice of Pakistan.

Punishment of Apostasy in Islam - Google Books

See also:
Freedom of religion, apostasy and Islam - Google Books

By Dr. Abdullah Saeed, professor of Arabic and Islamic Studies at the University of Melbourne; and Dr. Hassan Saeed, former Attorney-General of the Maldives (a country in which Islam is the only official religion.)


Why would you even say this when it's clear that you've read none? Learn to cite evidence for your claims or avoid making them in the first place.

But if they dispute with thee say: I submit myself entirely to Allah and (so does) he who follows me. And say to those who have been given the Book and the Unlearned (people): Do you submit yourselves? If they submit, then indeed they following the right way; and if they turn back, thy duty is only to deliver the message. And Allah is Seer of the servants. - 3:20​

Are you a Muslim that denies Mohammed's life and sayings? Or do you agree Muslims are to follow the life of Mohammed? And if so, what is the oldest, most respected book describing his life?

The caravans of the Makkans whose oppression had driven the Muslims out of the city in the first place? I'm afraid you'll have to do better than that.

The caravans he attacked and the Qurayza who were neutural and according to Muslim sources, 600 to 900 were beheaded because they would not convert.

You can't address my arguments, so you accuse me of making up "my own beliefs." Frankly, accusations of disbelief in Islam don't mean much to me when they come from deluded neo-Christians who are unable to grasp even the most basic tenets of my religion (which is, of course, Islam.)

Traditional Islam or the new and improved Islam? The one being pushed to gain acceptance into the European Union?

All of my religious positions are based on the words of the Qur'an and legitimate traditions. Don't be stupid.

"Legitimate" traditions. So you pick and choose what you want to believe and throw out the rest. Do you denounce all the Islamic judgments then, of apostates?

Because that wouldn't be following my example.

You said that about an article I posted detailing the inaccuracy of Ibn Ishaq's accounts. I'm going to assume that reading comprehension isn't your forte.

Oh I understood it, especially the part where it talked about how accepted his accounts were. Something you seem to want to contradict.

Ibn Ishaq's work is a biography. It isn't a holy book and no Muslim treats it as one. If you're correct, I'm sure you'll have no trouble quoting an Islamic organization calling it a "holy book." You were unable to do this before; maybe you'll have better luck this time.

Or you could just google "Sacred Hadiths" and see what you get (over 3,250,000)

No, it isn't. The Bible supposedly the holy text of Christianity (although you and other Christians adhere to it selectively.)

The Bible is the central text of Christianity and adherence to it is what makes one a practicing Christian. Ibn Ishaq's biography is not a holy text by any stretch of the definition; adherence to it is not an article of the Islamic faith. Your insistence otherwise - in spite of the fact that I've explained this to you at least five times - makes you stupid.

Now isn't that odd...because many sites even seem to suggest that the word Sharia and Sira are related. Do you denounce Sharia law, Kalam? I wonder how many real Muslims do.

[Ibn Ishaq's biography of Muhammad (SAW)] is revered and respected by... all nations predominantly Islam.

You implied that all predominantly Islamic nations "revered" this biography. Each of the constitutions I posted established a secular government in a Muslim-majority nation.

"Islam is probably one of the major reasons why the majority of Europeans today in continental Europe have a negative and hostile view towards Turkish acceptance into the European Union, that’s at least what the opinion polls indicate. And in fact intensity of this opposition can also in large part be explained by Islam and the fear that Turkish Muslims may not be able to integrate effectively in European society. Of course Netherlands is one of those countries which has a large Turkish minority population. Nevertheless, with the reforms in Islam that is taking place in Turkey today, this could perhaps help give a better image amongst European public and facilitate the process of Turkey’s exception into the European Union" - Fadi Hakura

And I wonder why those Muslim nations are trying to change the image of Islam...

Nobody talks about Islam in church. I can't remember the last conversation about it.

I don't blame you for not wanting to embarrass yourself.

[/QUOTE]

A Christian trying to change the focus from Christ to Mohammed...yes, that would be embarrassing.

 

[Kalam]

How many times do I have to tell you that the law was fulfilled for us by Jesus. Those in Christ are no longer under the law but under GRACE!

Jesus, did you tell your followers that they were exempt from Mosaic law, or did you make it clear that it would be in effect until heaven and earth pass away?

The law still exists. Followers of Christ are not under the law. How else can I say it?

Why did the disciples adhere to Mosaic law?