[quote]Aleksandr wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
FightingScott wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
The Muslim world will really hate us.
One of the main tenants of Islam that separates it from other Abrahamic Religions is that Muhammad was the LAST prophet.
Actually, that’s the claim of Christianity as well - that Jesus was the last prophet. Actually, it goes quite a bit beyond that - he is prophet, priest, and king - he is God in the flesh.
Heresy.[/quote]
OK, what do we believe?
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
He WOULD have done heroin too if he ‘had liked the dealer’? And this shitbag is going to be our next POTUS? OMG.[/quote]
Although I’m not from America… didn’t good ol’ Bush do blow in his time?
And the fact is that he didn’t do heroin, did he? I quite like the fact that he’s made mistakes and learned from them.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
He WOULD have done heroin too if he ‘had liked the dealer’? And this shitbag is going to be our next POTUS? OMG.
Although I’m not from America… didn’t good ol’ Bush do blow in his time?
And the fact is that he didn’t do heroin, did he? I quite like the fact that he’s made mistakes and learned from them.[/quote]
What’d he learn? Only buy drugs from dealers you like?
He doesn’t have the strength of will to say no to drugs, but he’s expected to completely change America, negotiate with Hamas and Iran, and make everything rosy?
I’m still fascinated how anyone can vote for any of these 3.
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
Aleksandr wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
FightingScott wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
The Muslim world will really hate us.
One of the main tenants of Islam that separates it from other Abrahamic Religions is that Muhammad was the LAST prophet.
Actually, that’s the claim of Christianity as well - that Jesus was the last prophet. Actually, it goes quite a bit beyond that - he is prophet, priest, and king - he is God in the flesh.
Heresy.
OK, what do we believe? [/quote]
prophet.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
What’d he learn? Only buy drugs from dealers you like?
He doesn’t have the strength of will to say no to drugs, but he’s expected to completely change America, negotiate with Hamas and Iran, and make everything rosy?
I’m still fascinated how anyone can vote for any of these 3.[/quote]
It’s more the fact that he isn’t still doing blow (to my knowledge anyway).
True, he didn’t say no but he did learn to stop, didn’t he?
When it comes down to it, you don’t know what you’re going to get with any politician. They say the same thing, get into power and magically the situation changes and you get something else entirely.
[quote]Aleksandr wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Aleksandr wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
FightingScott wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
The Muslim world will really hate us.
One of the main tenants of Islam that separates it from other Abrahamic Religions is that Muhammad was the LAST prophet.
Actually, that’s the claim of Christianity as well - that Jesus was the last prophet. Actually, it goes quite a bit beyond that - he is prophet, priest, and king - he is God in the flesh.
Heresy.
OK, what do we believe?
prophet.[/quote]
Wait, are we still playing “tell the other one what his real beliefs are”?
[quote]Aleksandr wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Aleksandr wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
FightingScott wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
The Muslim world will really hate us.
One of the main tenants of Islam that separates it from other Abrahamic Religions is that Muhammad was the LAST prophet.
Actually, that’s the claim of Christianity as well - that Jesus was the last prophet. Actually, it goes quite a bit beyond that - he is prophet, priest, and king - he is God in the flesh.
Heresy.
OK, what do we believe?
prophet.[/quote]
wrong.
[quote]Aleksandr wrote:
Aleksandr wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Aleksandr wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
FightingScott wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
The Muslim world will really hate us.
One of the main tenants of Islam that separates it from other Abrahamic Religions is that Muhammad was the LAST prophet.
Actually, that’s the claim of Christianity as well - that Jesus was the last prophet. Actually, it goes quite a bit beyond that - he is prophet, priest, and king - he is God in the flesh.
Heresy.
OK, what do we believe?
prophet.
Wait, are we still playing “tell the other one what his real beliefs are”?[/quote]
Depends. Are we willing to be honest about the mainstream understanding of our respective religions, or are we still in taqiyya mode? Of course, by your own admission, you don’t let the rest of the Sunnah inform your view of the Qur’an, so why should I even begin to consider your views in line with any mainstream Islamic understanding.
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
Aleksandr wrote:
Aleksandr wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Aleksandr wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
FightingScott wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
The Muslim world will really hate us.
One of the main tenants of Islam that separates it from other Abrahamic Religions is that Muhammad was the LAST prophet.
Actually, that’s the claim of Christianity as well - that Jesus was the last prophet. Actually, it goes quite a bit beyond that - he is prophet, priest, and king - he is God in the flesh.
Heresy.
OK, what do we believe?
prophet.
Wait, are we still playing “tell the other one what his real beliefs are”?
Depends. Are we willing to be honest about the mainstream understanding of our respective religions, or are we still in taqiyya mode? Of course, by your own admission, you don’t let the rest of the Sunnah inform your view of the Qur’an, so why should I even begin to consider your views in line with any mainstream Islamic understanding.
[/quote]
lol
“By my own admission”. I see you’re still playing detective.
Maybe more muslims than you think are disinterested in non-Qur’anic sources.
[quote]Aleksandr wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Aleksandr wrote:
Aleksandr wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Aleksandr wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
FightingScott wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
The Muslim world will really hate us.
One of the main tenants of Islam that separates it from other Abrahamic Religions is that Muhammad was the LAST prophet.
Actually, that’s the claim of Christianity as well - that Jesus was the last prophet. Actually, it goes quite a bit beyond that - he is prophet, priest, and king - he is God in the flesh.
Heresy.
OK, what do we believe?
prophet.
Wait, are we still playing “tell the other one what his real beliefs are”?
Depends. Are we willing to be honest about the mainstream understanding of our respective religions, or are we still in taqiyya mode? Of course, by your own admission, you don’t let the rest of the Sunnah inform your view of the Qur’an, so why should I even begin to consider your views in line with any mainstream Islamic understanding.
lol
“By my own admission”. I see you’re still playing detective.
Maybe more muslims than you think are disinterested in non-Qur’anic sources.[/quote]
If I trotted out Surah 9:29
you’d be quick to bring up historical context to explain it away, now wouldn’t you? Since there’s no historical context given in the Qur’an, I’d guess that the extra-Qur’anic texts (Hadith and Sira) would suddenly become interesting and relevant to the discussion.
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
If I trotted out Surah 9:29
Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
you’d be quick to bring up historical context to explain it away, now wouldn’t you? Since there’s no historical context given in the Qur’an, I’d guess that the extra-Qur’anic texts (Hadith and Sira) would suddenly become interesting and relevant to the discussion.
[/quote]
They certainly would, and that’s consistent with my position. Their value is in providing context, nothing more, nothing less. I have said this throughout.
Obama’s platform on foreign affairs is basically to pull American troops out of the middle east and substitute diplomacy. I don’t see how he is going to be successful with diplomacy when he is going to be a liability to be associated with and he is timid militarily.
Obama says he would go and talk to the Iranians if he was president. I don’t think that having a friendly meeting with an apostate is going to be a photo op that Ahmadinejad is interested in. With a defeated American military bugging out of Iraq, what would his motivation be? Obama never says is what he would do if Ahmadinejad refused his advances.
[quote]Aleksandr wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
If I trotted out Surah 9:29
Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
you’d be quick to bring up historical context to explain it away, now wouldn’t you? Since there’s no historical context given in the Qur’an, I’d guess that the extra-Qur’anic texts (Hadith and Sira) would suddenly become interesting and relevant to the discussion.
They certainly would, and that’s consistent with my position. Their value is in providing context, nothing more, nothing less. I have said this throughout.[/quote]
Really? Now I’m confused. On the other thread, you said this:
[quote]But it’s interesting that you continue to reference the hadith, knowing that I have absolutely no interest in what Johnny said that Bill said that Ted heard the prophet did.
[/quote]
You have no interest in the Hadith, but you do for historical context? Huh. Then I guess it’s ok if I reference it to provide the historical context of your prophet’s various sayings.
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
Aleksandr wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
If I trotted out Surah 9:29
Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
you’d be quick to bring up historical context to explain it away, now wouldn’t you? Since there’s no historical context given in the Qur’an, I’d guess that the extra-Qur’anic texts (Hadith and Sira) would suddenly become interesting and relevant to the discussion.
They certainly would, and that’s consistent with my position. Their value is in providing context, nothing more, nothing less. I have said this throughout.
Really? Now I’m confused. On the other thread, you said this:
But it’s interesting that you continue to reference the hadith, knowing that I have absolutely no interest in what Johnny said that Bill said that Ted heard the prophet did.
You have no interest in the Hadith, but you do for historical context? Huh. Then I guess it’s ok if I reference it to provide the historical context of your prophet’s various sayings. [/quote]
It’s not complicated. I’m not interested in what it is said that the prophet did or did not do. I don’t think that I ought to imitate the prophet. But the historical context is useful for interpreting. If you check the other thread, you’ll see that I said the same thing there.
Doesn’t the Qur’an say he’s an excellent example of conduct?
http://quranicteachings.co.uk/uswa-e-hasana.htm
Good, so when it discusses under what circumstances it’s permissible to wage jihad, we’re allowed to discuss it. This is where we had our feud over Surah 2. I argued that the historical context and later revelation from Mohammed informed the interpretation of Surah 2, just as Jalalayn and Kathir did. You had a huge problem with that.
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
I don’t think that I ought to imitate the prophet.
Doesn’t the Qur’an say he’s an excellent example of conduct?
http://quranicteachings.co.uk/uswa-e-hasana.htm
But the historical context is useful for interpreting.
Good, so when it discusses under what circumstances it’s permissible to wage jihad, we’re allowed to discuss it. This is where we had our feud over Surah 2. I argued that the historical context and later revelation from Mohammed informed the interpretation of Surah 2, just as Jalalayn and Kathir did. You had a huge problem with that. [/quote]
The issue was how you ignored several verses from the second surah, which forbid acting as an aggressor, and mandate ending hostilities when your enemy stops attacking you.
[quote]Aleksandr wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
FightingScott wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
The Muslim world will really hate us.
One of the main tenants of Islam that separates it from other Abrahamic Religions is that Muhammad was the LAST prophet.
Actually, that’s the claim of Christianity as well - that Jesus was the last prophet. Actually, it goes quite a bit beyond that - he is prophet, priest, and king - he is God in the flesh.
Heresy.[/quote]
Nice how we are all bigots who hate Muslims yet you call the Christian beliefs and religion a heresy. What does that make you?
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Aleksandr wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
FightingScott wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
The Muslim world will really hate us.
One of the main tenants of Islam that separates it from other Abrahamic Religions is that Muhammad was the LAST prophet.
Actually, that’s the claim of Christianity as well - that Jesus was the last prophet. Actually, it goes quite a bit beyond that - he is prophet, priest, and king - he is God in the flesh.
Heresy.
Nice how we are all bigots who hate Muslims yet you call the Christian beliefs and religion a heresy. What does that make you?[/quote]
A person that read the next post I made. Which, it seems, is more than you can say!
[quote]Aleksandr wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
I don’t think that I ought to imitate the prophet.
Doesn’t the Qur’an say he’s an excellent example of conduct?
http://quranicteachings.co.uk/uswa-e-hasana.htm
But the historical context is useful for interpreting.
Good, so when it discusses under what circumstances it’s permissible to wage jihad, we’re allowed to discuss it. This is where we had our feud over Surah 2. I argued that the historical context and later revelation from Mohammed informed the interpretation of Surah 2, just as Jalalayn and Kathir did. You had a huge problem with that.
The issue was how you ignored several verses from the second surah, which forbid acting as an aggressor, and mandate ending hostilities when your enemy stops attacking you.[/quote]
On the surface, it would appear so. But Muslims have a different definition of what constitutes aggression, do they not? Shirk is considered aggression. According to Bukhari ( http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/059.sbt.html#005.059.650 ), Surah 9 was revealed after Surah 2. Since Allah is free to replace older commands with newer and better ones, 9:5 and 9:29 appear to inform the understanding of Surah 2, at least according to respected Quran’ic commentators like Jalalayn and Ibn Kathir. Mohammed was not engaged in a defensive conflict in Surah 9 - he picked a fight with the Byzantines.
[quote]Aleksandr wrote:
A person that read the next post I made. Which, it seems, is more than you can say![/quote]
Hey, I respond as I read.
-ok, read it. But oh well. I suppose if you were to change your opinion, you would have to convert to Christianity.