Right. Women, homosexuals, religious minorities and apostates are brutally oppressed by some insignificant minority. Sure.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Right. Women, homosexuals, religious minorities and apostates are brutally oppressed by some insignificant minority. Sure.[/quote]
At least by a minority, because women alone would constitute a majority.
And a minority that oppresses a majority cannot be insignificant.
So yes, you got it.
[quote]orion wrote:
And your argument is that it is better or worse if you do not kill in the name of your god but kill anyway?
[/quote]
No, not at all. He was putting down Christians. Those are not the actions Christians condone.
Oh, I understand what he was trying to say, that someone in Waziristan might mistake these things as something condoned by Christianity.
Yet, I merely have to check the internet to see a man getting his head sawed off and the people doing it yelling “Allah Akbar.”
I can also see Muslims rioting over pictures of Muhammad, and a Teddy Bear, yet show me pictures of Muslims rioting about a terrorist beheading video. You can’t do it.
And don’t give me that bull about how no one cares if the US kills Muslims in Iraq. On one hand you can say that, on the other pop out statistics showing more Americans are against the War in Iraq, so evidently, according to the alleged statistics, people are outraged over our involvement there.
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
lixy wrote:
Go tell that to the average guy in Waziristan for whom Christians are a bunch of kiddie-raping, bomb-dropping (that one is for Chushin), money-worshiping, porn-loving perverts.
Wouldn’t surprise me if this were your opinion as well.
edit, the things you mentioned Christians doing are clearly sins and never, ever condoned my the Church.
do we rape children and praise God?
do we drop bombs in the name of our God?
do we worship money in the name of our God?
do we love porn in the name of our God?
no.
You can not even point to Scripture which could be taken out of context to approve of such things.
Yet Muslims commit atrocity after atrocity praising Allah, praising Islam.
Your argument doesn’t mean shit.
[/quote]
Obviously, you’ve never read Leviticus. 
Our resident mongoloid edits his posts and does not append a edit tag to them.
Shameful.
[quote]lixy wrote:
Our resident mongoloid edits his posts and does not append a edit tag to them.
Shameful.[/quote]
Is there only one Asian on this part of the forum? Oh, you must have meant “Mongol.” Who knows, lixy? Given the swath of land the Mongols conquered, you might be part mongol (and mongoloid) yourself. Perhaps not, though. The ubiquity of first-cousin marriages amongst Arabs doesn’t exactly lead to a robust pedigree.
[quote]lixy wrote:
Our resident mongoloid edits his posts and does not append a edit tag to them.
Shameful.[/quote]
Wow, a liar and a coward, never would have quessed.
EDIT - for a person who chose to ignore me, If in fact you were talking about me, please show me a post I have edited without marking it.
You can not debate me, so you have chosen to insult me?
You are a class act.
And what would it matter if posts are edited without a tag? Why would a thing like that bother you?
[quote]Beowolf wrote:
Obviously, you’ve never read Leviticus. :D[/quote]
Quote me some text justifying the things I have mentioned.
Yes, where does Leviticus mandate open-ended warfare against all non-Jews?
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Wouldn’t surprise me if this were your opinion as well.
edit, the things you mentioned Christians doing are clearly sins and never, ever condoned my the Church.
do we rape children and praise God?
do we drop bombs in the name of our God?
do we worship money in the name of our God?
do we love porn in the name of our God?
no.
You can not even point to Scripture which could be taken out of context to approve of such things.
Yet Muslims commit atrocity after atrocity praising Allah, praising Islam.
Your argument doesn’t mean shit.
[/quote]
You wrote:
“Yet Muslims commit atrocity after atrocity praising Allah, praising Islam.”
Those people do not live/behave/act like Muslims. Its sad that they do this.
Yes, I know our religion has this extremly bad and wrong perception due to these terrorists, who do claim to be fulfilling Islamic law - but it is this small group of people (and yes overall, they are a very small percentage) that seems to be giving all of Muslims a bad name. I encourage you to go to a Muslim centric area somewhere near you, visit the Mosque, and just observe Muslims there.
[quote]mafzal4 wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
Wouldn’t surprise me if this were your opinion as well.
edit, the things you mentioned Christians doing are clearly sins and never, ever condoned my the Church.
do we rape children and praise God?
do we drop bombs in the name of our God?
do we worship money in the name of our God?
do we love porn in the name of our God?
no.
You can not even point to Scripture which could be taken out of context to approve of such things.
Yet Muslims commit atrocity after atrocity praising Allah, praising Islam.
Your argument doesn’t mean shit.
You wrote:
“Yet Muslims commit atrocity after atrocity praising Allah, praising Islam.”
Those people do not live/behave/act like Muslims. Its sad that they do this.
Yes, I know our religion has this extremly bad and wrong perception due to these terrorists, who do claim to be fulfilling Islamic law - but it is this small group of people (and yes overall, they are a very small percentage) that seems to be giving all of Muslims a bad name. I encourage you to go to a Muslim centric area somewhere near you, visit the Mosque, and just observe Muslims there.
[/quote]
Given that Mohammed beheaded those people after the Battle of Badr or after attacking the Khaibar oasis, how can you say that such things are not Islam? Mohammed was a man of much carnage.
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
I think this “there are no clerics in Islam” argument needs full disclosure of the facts. Perhaps lixy could be troubled to tell us about the Four Schools and their influence on imams preaching in Sunni mosques around the world, and what trickle-down effect it has on the understanding of the Qur’an by the general Muslim population.
Otherwise, we’ve been told yet another half-truth. [/quote]
No offense, but your education on Islam is lacking big holes. I applaud you for attempting to do research on Islam, but there are no clerics in Islam. At least not clerics as it is understood by other faiths.
We have Imams, general leaders who have studied Islam for years. I would say the vast majority of them are great resources, but just like we (Muslims) have a problem with terrorists giving us a bad name, there are a lot of Imams who really are preaching wrong information under the name of Islam.
The four schools of thought (and there are more - these are the main ones) I believe have one overall Imam who they turn to - one for each school. These are knowleadgable people. THe trickle-down effect I would imagine is that the people who follow these Imam’s would tend to follow their understanding of the Quran as well.
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
mafzal4 wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
Wouldn’t surprise me if this were your opinion as well.
edit, the things you mentioned Christians doing are clearly sins and never, ever condoned my the Church.
do we rape children and praise God?
do we drop bombs in the name of our God?
do we worship money in the name of our God?
do we love porn in the name of our God?
no.
You can not even point to Scripture which could be taken out of context to approve of such things.
Yet Muslims commit atrocity after atrocity praising Allah, praising Islam.
Your argument doesn’t mean shit.
You wrote:
“Yet Muslims commit atrocity after atrocity praising Allah, praising Islam.”
Those people do not live/behave/act like Muslims. Its sad that they do this.
Yes, I know our religion has this extremly bad and wrong perception due to these terrorists, who do claim to be fulfilling Islamic law - but it is this small group of people (and yes overall, they are a very small percentage) that seems to be giving all of Muslims a bad name. I encourage you to go to a Muslim centric area somewhere near you, visit the Mosque, and just observe Muslims there.
Given that Mohammed beheaded those people after the Battle of Badr or after attacking the Khaibar oasis, how can you say that such things are not Islam? Mohammed was a man of much carnage. [/quote]
According to Muslim law, a prisoner qua prisoner cannot be killed. Ibn Rushd even records a consensus of the Companions of the Prophet to the same effect. This does not preclude the trial and punishment of prisoners for crimes beyond the rights of belligerency. For this, we possess the high authority of the practice of the Prophet when two prisoners of the Battle of Badr were beheaded by his order. Muslim jurists clearly recognise that a prisoner cannot be held responsible for mere acts of belligerency:
Treatment during captivity has been the subject of liberal provisions. As regards the prisoners of Badr, the Prophet ordered: “Take heed of the recommendations to treat the prisoners fairly.” The consequence was that many Muslim soldiers contented themselves with dates and fed the prisoners in their charge with bread.
Abu Yusuf remarks that prisoners must be fed and well treated until a decision is reached regarding them. They are not to be charged for their food, the cost of which is to borne by the capturing Muslim State. The Qu’ran lays down: “Lo, the righteous shall … [go to Paradise] … (because) they perform the vow and fear a day whereof the evil is wide spreading, and feed with food the needy wretch, the orphan and the prisoner, for love of Him, (saying): we feed you, for the sake of God only, we wish for no reward not thanks from you.” Prisoners are to be protected from heat and cold, and the like. If they have no clothes, these might be provided, as was the practice of the Prophet.
If they are in any trouble or discomfiture, this is to be done away with as far as possible, for which there is authority of the practice of the Prophet. He has the right to draw up [a] will for the property at home. Obviously these would be communicated to the enemy authorities through a proper channel. Among prisoners, a mother is not to be separated from her child, nor other near relatives from each other. The position and dignity of prisoners are to be respected according to individual cases.
A tradition is also attributed to the Prophet: “Pay respect to the dignitary of a nation who is brought low.” There is no evidence in early Muslim history of exacting labour from prisoners. It they tried to escape or otherwise violate discipline, they might be punished. If they succeeded in their attempt to escape. and reach safety, and are again captured, their previous offense of escaping might not be ground for punishment, except perhaps the breach of parole.
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
orion wrote:
And your argument is that it is better or worse if you do not kill in the name of your god but kill anyway?
No, not at all. He was putting down Christians. Those are not the actions Christians condone.
Oh, I understand what he was trying to say, that someone in Waziristan might mistake these things as something condoned by Christianity.
Yet, I merely have to check the internet to see a man getting his head sawed off and the people doing it yelling “Allah Akbar.”
I can also see Muslims rioting over pictures of Muhammad, and a Teddy Bear, yet show me pictures of Muslims rioting about a terrorist beheading video. You can’t do it.
And don’t give me that bull about how no one cares if the US kills Muslims in Iraq. On one hand you can say that, on the other pop out statistics showing more Americans are against the War in Iraq, so evidently, according to the alleged statistics, people are outraged over our involvement there.
[/quote]
"Oh, I understand what he was trying to say, that someone in Waziristan might mistake these things as something condoned by Christianity.
Yet, I merely have to check the internet to see a man getting his head sawed off and the people doing it yelling “Allah Akbar.”
You fail to see the irony here. You are someone in America, mistaking these things as something condoned by Islam.
You are in America, going on the Internet, watching a bunch of idiots say something stupid, claim to be Muslim, and you automaticallly assume its something condoned by Islam.
These people are doing these things, no doubt about that. But once again, as has been said many many times - do not make hte mistake of thinking these are condoned by Islam (their actions, that is)
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
lixy wrote:
Our resident mongoloid edits his posts and does not append a edit tag to them.
Shameful.
Wow, a liar and a coward, never would have quessed.
EDIT - for a person who chose to ignore me, If in fact you were talking about me, please show me a post I have edited without marking it.
You can not debate me, so you have chosen to insult me?
You are a class act.
And what would it matter if posts are edited without a tag? Why would a thing like that bother you? [/quote]
No, he actually is right. Editing posts after the fact in a thread such as this, deserves a little acknowledgment. It would seem that you are the one who is editing his posts secretly - making you the liar and the coward.
He did not insult you - it merely is a fact.
Editing posts without a tag is not a good idea for your credibility in a thread such as this my friend.
[quote]mafzal4 wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
mafzal4 wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
Wouldn’t surprise me if this were your opinion as well.
edit, the things you mentioned Christians doing are clearly sins and never, ever condoned my the Church.
do we rape children and praise God?
do we drop bombs in the name of our God?
do we worship money in the name of our God?
do we love porn in the name of our God?
no.
You can not even point to Scripture which could be taken out of context to approve of such things.
Yet Muslims commit atrocity after atrocity praising Allah, praising Islam.
Your argument doesn’t mean shit.
You wrote:
“Yet Muslims commit atrocity after atrocity praising Allah, praising Islam.”
Those people do not live/behave/act like Muslims. Its sad that they do this.
Yes, I know our religion has this extremly bad and wrong perception due to these terrorists, who do claim to be fulfilling Islamic law - but it is this small group of people (and yes overall, they are a very small percentage) that seems to be giving all of Muslims a bad name. I encourage you to go to a Muslim centric area somewhere near you, visit the Mosque, and just observe Muslims there.
Given that Mohammed beheaded those people after the Battle of Badr or after attacking the Khaibar oasis, how can you say that such things are not Islam? Mohammed was a man of much carnage.
According to Muslim law, a prisoner qua prisoner cannot be killed. Ibn Rushd even records a consensus of the Companions of the Prophet to the same effect. This does not preclude the trial and punishment of prisoners for crimes beyond the rights of belligerency. For this, we possess the high authority of the practice of the Prophet when two prisoners of the Battle of Badr were beheaded by his order. Muslim jurists clearly recognise that a prisoner cannot be held responsible for mere acts of belligerency:
Treatment during captivity has been the subject of liberal provisions. As regards the prisoners of Badr, the Prophet ordered: “Take heed of the recommendations to treat the prisoners fairly.” The consequence was that many Muslim soldiers contented themselves with dates and fed the prisoners in their charge with bread.
Abu Yusuf remarks that prisoners must be fed and well treated until a decision is reached regarding them. They are not to be charged for their food, the cost of which is to borne by the capturing Muslim State. The Qu’ran lays down: “Lo, the righteous shall … [go to Paradise] … (because) they perform the vow and fear a day whereof the evil is wide spreading, and feed with food the needy wretch, the orphan and the prisoner, for love of Him, (saying): we feed you, for the sake of God only, we wish for no reward not thanks from you.” Prisoners are to be protected from heat and cold, and the like. If they have no clothes, these might be provided, as was the practice of the Prophet.
If they are in any trouble or discomfiture, this is to be done away with as far as possible, for which there is authority of the practice of the Prophet. He has the right to draw up [a] will for the property at home. Obviously these would be communicated to the enemy authorities through a proper channel. Among prisoners, a mother is not to be separated from her child, nor other near relatives from each other. The position and dignity of prisoners are to be respected according to individual cases.
A tradition is also attributed to the Prophet: “Pay respect to the dignitary of a nation who is brought low.” There is no evidence in early Muslim history of exacting labour from prisoners. It they tried to escape or otherwise violate discipline, they might be punished. If they succeeded in their attempt to escape. and reach safety, and are again captured, their previous offense of escaping might not be ground for punishment, except perhaps the breach of parole.
[/quote]
It sounds to me like you’re arguing from the Hadith, but Islamic law does not see things the same way. From the 'Umdat al-Salik:
[quote] When a child or woman is taken captive [by jihad warriors], they become slaves by the fact of capture, and the woman’s previous marriage is immediately annulled. [Justice 9.12]
[/quote]
and
The 'Umdat al-Salik bases its above exegesis on Surah 47:4
Finally, you have al-Mawardi agreeing with the 'Umdat al-Salik:
And we still haven’t discussed Mohammed’s treatment of the Banu Qurayzah.
You may have your own interpretation of things, but the ulema certainly see things differently than you.
Yes, they were considered as slaves. But the Prophet (pbuh) strongly encouraged his followers to treat the prisoners very well. Muslims were renowned in this era for their treatment of most of their prisoners.
There are several options to be considerd as you listed - but in the meantime they are meant to be treated at the very least humanly.
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
So you’ve got proof from some tome written in Saudi Arabia in 1978 that Aisha was at least 14, huh? All those other ahadith about the age of Aisha are lies, then, even though they are considered sahih by Muslims?
[/quote]
I wasn’t claiming proof of anything. Only providing counter arguments from an article on the web site you provided to cast doubt upon what you stated as fact. I’m a skeptic when it comes to claims about Truth regarding events ~1500 years ago. Having said that…
The link you posted contained a very convincing series of arguments and supporting evidence. I thank you for providing it and I will concede the debate on this. Having said that…
That’s one serious fucking charge to make. You don’t know me asshole. So fuck you and the horse you rode in on.
Look, the issue at hand is what this guy living 1400 years ago did and whether or not Muslims are following his example today.
I shouldn’t have thrown that charge at you, but a lot of people out there (maybe not you) are willing to take sides against there own people with no warrant for doing so.
It may be that the accounts in the Hadith are lies and that they never happened. Mohammed may have never even existed. But what we believe doesn’t matter. It matters what Muslims believe, and they clearly believe in the inspiration of the Qur’an and Sunnah. Now, the issue remains as to whether not the actions and statements of Mohammed in the Qur’an and Sunnah are normative. I have claimed and provided evidence for the idea that they are. I think Mohammed is held up as an example of behavior in Islam, and I’ve found no evidence to the contrary.
But I see no reason for you to side against me in this debate. I’m not sitting here conjuring up things to vilify Muslims. I’m studying their texts and seeing if the truth claims made in their texts and exegesis explain their actions. I believe they do.