Malaysian Islamic scholar says the use of "Allah" for "God" in Malay-language Bibles "must be abandoned because it erroneously represents the two religions as equal"

The Malay "Islamic expert" is a fool. I have in my possession an old Jewish text, printed originally in Israel several centuries ago, wherein the Arabic translation of the "Dayenu" Passover song has "G-d" as "Allah."

It's been proven so many times already, and ad nauseum at that, that "Allah" is simply the Arabic word for "G-d."

I am so glad I live in a free and democratic land like the USA where we are constitutionaly guaranteed our freedom FROM such tired and corrupt influences represented by the likes of these smelly and ignorant bearded jackals called "the ulema."

Allah is looney Mohammed's moon-demon. The two religions aren't equal because Islam is totally devoid of rationality and is in fact virulently anti-rational http://crombouke.blogspot.com/2010/01/tawhid-or-tawheed-versus-christian.html

Yes, we wouldn't want anyone to get the mistaken impression that Muslims or Islam is in anyway oppressive, right? This goes to show that Malaysian Muslims always have Islamic supremacy at the heart of their dark agenda. Whether those Muslims belong to 'UMNO' or 'PAS' or whatever, it does not matter.

Calling 'UMNO' as moderate is a sick joke. A 'moderate' Muslim is nothing more than a Muslim who ignores certain parts of the Quran, for the moment. That ignorance does not mean repudiation. And there is always the danger that a moderate Muslim may become more devout at any time. The Home Ministry, the part of the Malaysian government that's directly authored this piece of intolerance and tyranny, has come off appearing distinctly less than moderate for the many years that Marisol and tracked and written about this kerfuffle. Perhaps the Home Ministry isn't too happy pretending to be ignorant Muslims as per Najib's standing taqiyya?

Hey Najib, with your friends in Gaza and Tehran, and with your own ongoing oppression right here at home, how's your 'global movement of moderates' coming along?

http://satdthinks.blogspot.com/2011/01/allah-ciplak-time-travel-into-17th.html

Read up boys and girls. And Spencer, why didn't you watch those Jihadi Christians, eh? I wonder were they the same people in Russia that kill Muslims because they are Muslims. Anyway congratulation Spencer. Your wisdom has prevailed. And also that the Incredibles' villain too, Mr. Geert the Wildman, the one that inspired the shooter. Well done!

What do Arab Christians call God?

I also believe the names of both dietes should not be confused.

Yahweh/god came from Zoroastrianism, a faith that introduced the concepts of the soul, good and evil and judgment based upon the treatment of others to mankind.

Allah, though sounding similar was in fact a demon worshiped by Muhammad's tribe out of fear and for the sake of worldly gain.

They are completely different spiritual entities and have completely different relationships with their worshipers.

One is a representation of an unreachable ideal of goodness.

The other is a fearsome, hatefull being to be submitted to in fear and be constantly mollified with the lives of tribal enemies and defenceless animals.

If I was a christian I would absolutely not want the source of my morality confused with a creature like that.

=== Malaysian Islamic scholar says the use of "Allah" for "God" in Malay-language Bibles "must be abandoned because it erroneously represents the two religions as equal" ===

For the first time in my life, I fully agree and back-up every letter of the "Islamic Scholar" stating that " Allah is Allah and G-d is G-d " !
Who ever compares Allah = G-d , Must be beheaded on the spot !
AMEN ! INSHA-ALLAH !
Because, comparing ANY religion to Islam, is blasphemy !
( I, personally, think of something much worse !!! )

There is a clear difference between God and Allah , Allah is the devil himself. So in this case , for once , they are right. Do not let them put Allah in the Bible other than identify the evil one, is you have to name him.

Oh NO! I did not mean you SEAN! I completely clicked on the wrong comment to reply to! I was really replying to someone else! Not Sean! Please delete that comment or make it a reply to srizals

I clicked on sean by accident but then looked at the "replying to" thingy above instead of the comment that inspired my responce when writing the first sentence.

I am very very very sorry for the mistake Sean.

I was really replying to srizals.

Just delete the comment starting "I'm not a bloodthirsty..." above.

Deeply sorry for the error.

All along Christians and Jews have maintained that Jehovah is NOT Allah and now we are proven correct!

Unfortunately, dropping the name of the moon god demon from the Malay translation of the Holy Bible, will look like a victory to the Muslims.

I keep reading day after day after day praying I wake up one morning and there's peace in the middle east. Cause only when there is, Jesus will come back and take the chosen back in the rapture and all these evil, misunderstanders, and lost souls will have to deal with what comes after the rapture, and it ain't pretty.

I keep reading day after day after day praying I wake up one morning and there's peace in the middle east. Cause only when there is, Jesus will come back and take the chosen back in the rapture and all these evil, misunderstanders, and lost souls will have to deal with what comes after the rapture, and it ain't pretty.

It would be a good thing if the one God really was the one God...At least there would be consistency...But the one God is not the one God...It has been fragmented into pieces, with each piece having a different name and purpose...All religions are built around these pieces...There may be some merit to the idea of God, the creator of everything...but as soon as some aspiring priests gives it a name and purpose it becomes a piece...an incomplete, and faulty, model of the real thing, but not the real thing...Because of this, all religions are wrong while being right...
If a religion was 'right' in all aspects, it would not be possible to rip it apart as we do the Quran and sometimes Bible...
All religions have 'quirks', the ultimate God of the universe has no quirks...but the fragmented pieces do...The Quran, authored by a 'piece' is full of quirks, proving Allah is not the real God...

The word 'God' is not a name, it is a title 'God' has no name...Allah is a name...Only things have names...If God is not a thing, then Allah is not God...
When Moses was having a conversation with the burning bush, he asked God his name...God evaded the name issue, and said 'I AM THAT I AM', tell them 'I AM' sent you...I AM THAT I AM means 'existence is existence', or pure existence, and it is not a name...It's expressed as YHVH. Those are pretty heavy concepts to lay on a sheep herder...Allah has nothing to do with this at all...Allah, a thing, resides in pure existence, but is not pure existence...At best Al-lah is the Lord of Duality, or matter...Since all evil happens in matter, The Lord of Evil, is a title that fits him well...The Quran itself backs up that reality...

Why would islam be the equal of Christianity? It is partly a derivation from same.

"The use of "Allah" for God by Christians must stop because it may cause Islamic anger: "

Translation;
The use of Allah for God by Christians must stop because we might upset the psychotic animals of islam who might blow something up if the rest of mankind doesnt bow down and pretend its less worthy than muslim dogs.

"All religions have 'quirks', the ultimate God of the universe has no quirks"

"quirks" as defined by whom....you and your finite mind?
There are no 'quirks' in my religion. God has decided to do things as He has decided.
Possibly the 'quirks' you see in the Bible are simply because your limited mind cannot comprehend them.

"The local Catholic newspaper, the '"Herald Malaysia" has won a lawsuit at the Supreme Court two years ago for the right to publish the word "Allah" referring to the Christian God....."

Marisol, this is what is quite incredible to me. How can Catholics worship Allah, thinking this abomination is the same God Jesus worshipped?

Vatican II (NOSTRA AETATE PROCLAIMED BY HIS HOLINESS
POPE PAUL VI) reads in part: "The Church regards with esteem also the Moslems. They adore the one God, living and subsisting in Himself; merciful and all- powerful, the Creator of heaven and earth,(5) who has spoken to men; they take pains to submit wholeheartedly to even His inscrutable decrees, just as Abraham, with whom the faith of Islam takes pleasure in linking itself, submitted to God....."

A professing Christian who believes Allah is the God of Abraham, I've got to question his or her Christianity. Sorry.

Allah is not YHWH. Allah is not the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

Allah is the demon idol moon god worshiped by Mohammed's father. The fact that there are Arabic bibles a few centuries old which contain the word Allah just means Mohammed's demon religion had already creeped it's way into that language. If you use the name Allah, you are referring to a particular god other than Yahweh of the Old Testament. The use of the word "god" is a more general designation of deity.

"I also believe the names of both dietes should not be confused.
Yahweh/god came from Zoroastrianism, a faith that introduced the concepts of the soul, good and evil and judgment based upon the treatment of others to mankind.
Allah, though sounding similar was in fact a demon worshiped by Muhammad's tribe out of fear and for the sake of worldly gain.
They are completely different spiritual entities and have completely different relationships with their worshipers.
--------------

Very good point.
Christians might stop using allah, not because of whiny muslims, but more because it might cause confusion with those who are coming to the True Living God of the scriptures who might think Christians are worshiping the same demon of the Koooran that muslims are blindly bowing down to.

I should have capitalized the word god in my last sentence. "The use of the word "God" is a more general designation of deity.

"The use of "Allah" for God by Christians must stop because it may cause Islamic anger:"

And we all know what will happen if Muslims (Islamic nationalists) become angry. The moral of the story: Don't make Islam mad at you. They just might kill you.

Now where have I heard this before? OH! All over the world where Islam is in contact with other nations or cultures in any significant way.

It REALLY IRRITATES me when I keep hearing people who know nothing say that "the Christian God and alla are the same". The koran repeatedly states alla has no son and those who believe he does deserve punishment Koran 18:4-6 is one. The entire premise of God having a Son come down to give his son as a sacrifice to save wrongdoers is the cornerstone of Chrisianity. Couldn't be a bigger difference.

Also, to the poster who said God's name Yaweh (Jehova) originated in Zoroastrianism is not true. God revealed to Moses when he was to speak to the Pharoah of Egypt at Exodus 6:3 that his name Jehovah means (He said to tell the sons of Israel that I shall prove to be whom I shall prove to be (the translation I am that I am is not accurate) - meaning that although from Adam's creation to that time his name Jehovah itself was known, he was about to show Egypt and the Israelites the true might of what he could accomplish in their behalf. (The ten plagues and then Moses people passing through the Red Sea, then having their pursuers drown in it - and all the acts of deliverance and sustenance as they journied to the promised land.

From what I found the Zoroastrian god is Ahura Mazda, the savior figure is Sayoshyant and this belief system appeared in recorded history in the 5th century. Those Bible accounts as stated above ooccured at 2450 BCE.

The Islamic attempt to use secular power to censure Christian liturgy is arrogant, abusive, and provides further justification for the claim that Islam is a threat to freedom.
Th real abuse here is being done by the savages who turn religion into something fearful, trivial and ugly.

Well, he is correct. Al-ilah or Allah, are not the same as God. Muslims worship the Moon god of the Arab Peninsula, not God.

For a long time now I have proceeded on the assumption that "Allah" is either not the God of the Jews and Christians (regardless of what Muslims claim) but largely taken from some other pre-Mohammedan, polytheistic deity with aspects of the Judeo-Christian God added on to it OR "Allah" is the God of the Jews and Christians but an altered version of such, altered with characteristics that in effect warp or bastardize the Judeo-Christian God.

Either way, "Allah" is not admirable and comes across as a slave master who occasionally dishes out morsels of mercy to his slaves. He is in effect an Orwellian tyrant, irrespective of his origin, and cannot function as an inspiration for the Golden Rule applied to all and as a deity that highly prizes the worth and dignity of every human being as the Judeo-Christian conception of God does. The Judeo-Christian God is an inspiration for self-initiative and places substance over form, thus far more easily allowing for man to explore his creative abilities and to live in truly free societies.

So much for the notion that the three Abrahamic faiths all "worship the same God".

No, Ronald. The fruits of death and destruction were reaped from the bosom of corrupted Christianity/Christians that do not heed to their own religious commandments.

When the Crusaders captured Jerusalem, what did they do? What did Saladin do in return? Who invented the medieval torture machines? The Iron Maiden for example? Who inspired Narnia? What cross did the Nazi wear on their uniforms and planes? What country nuked hundreds of thousands helpless civilians instead of well fortified warriors? What country fire-bombed cities after cities during the world wars instead of warship harbours? Was it not a nation under God?

Your Mohammed is the worst example of the human race, Jesus is the best.

10:12 AM, hmm...my time, in the lands of the Malay, where turtles seek refuge from turtle-eaters, where sharks run for shelter from fancy soup cravers, and where the tigers are being eaten by a people that eats almost everthing they can have their hands on without any rules and exemptions, it is already 1:21 AM. I have to leave you guys for a while. Don't stop. I'll read up. As always...

Ronald,

Let see, Jesus were said to be humiliated by his enemies to die in the most humiliating way to die, on the cross, mocked by and tormented by his enemies, says you and the likes of you.

Muhammad, the prophet, was victorious; his more powerful and greater enemies were defeated, forever, all over Arabia.

Jesus was rejected to the end of his time on earth by his own people. Muhammad was accepted in the end.

Muhammad, the prophet, married, built families, societies, laws, upholding the good, destroying the evil. Jesus, in your faith, was succumbed by evil. Killed and destroyed by the evil ones. And so?

Jesus' mission was not accomplished. He was betrayed by his own people. He was greatly outnumbered then. He won't be in his second coming. Insya Allah.

correcttion: should read...
OTOH - Mo's model is struggling to keep alive, brutality is the major factor in every Islamic country..

srizlas began a comment by adressing me and others, presumably in reply. Then came a long, rambling and somewhat incoherent speech that failed to communicate anything but deep contempt, and ending by glorifying the Muslim prophet Muhamad because this Muhamad was big and powerful and good at killing.

It is almost a relief: I am not obliged to come back here again to see if any sense shall surface later on.

God>allah

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allah

Therefore,

Allah (Arabic) = God (English) = Dieu (French) = Dios (Spanish = and so on...

Islam has no monopoly on the word "Allah", despite the fact that the Islamic conception of "Allah" is mostly, not totally, a truly demonic god.

That fanatical Muslims believe that "Allah" commands them to commit murder is no different than some crazy American or non-American people who commit murder in God's name. God is not responsible for their crimes. Similarly, the true Allah, the true God, is not responsible for the crimes of fanatical Muslims.

Thank God the name Allah is not equal to that of Jesus - and I think most of the western world can be grateful for that!

"Yahweh/god came from Zoroastrianism, a faith that introduced the concepts of the soul, good and evil and judgment based upon the treatment of others to mankind."

Close, Yahweh was originally anthropomorphic, being ascribed many human characteristics in the Old Testament, whereas Ahura Mazda is non-anthropomorphic and is regarded as being All-Good, with no evil originating from this source.

As for Allah - yep, a loony Arab moon deity.

PMK, if someone points at a stone and tells you that this is your god, would you not be offended? What more when they claimed such a thing out of ignorance, without any solid proof from any religious writings except his own unreligious assumptions.

Like the moon-god theory. How could a man come out with such a theory when in the Koran stated clearly, reminding mankind not to take the moon and the stars as gods? How could he reach to such deceitful conclusion when the sacred text of Islam itself do not condone such a blasphemous act?

PMK, you said God doesn't have a wife, but He has a son out of wedlock. Does that mean He has a bastard? Pure is He from the needs and the weaknesses of man. Please refrain from saying things that you don't understand. Be fearful of the One that possesses all that is seen and unseen by the naked eyes. Be fearful of the One that can only be seen by the purified hearts. Don't say things that made you stray further away from the Creator. You'll destroy your soul eventually. Taking many people with you.

Duhh, swami,
Why are you afraid of exposing yourself? Come out from the dark and step into the light. Interestingly, do you know about a ritual only unique to a religion where the Saints purify themselves by eating some flesh of the dead? Do you know a ritual of the Saints that performed ‘sacred’ nude pilgrimages in order to purify their sinful desire?

Juliet,

The evil on this earth cannot coexist with the good. Evil must not be triumphant on this earth. The good must have the courage to face it. If not, Satan would be victorious. Would you want that?

In my own personal opinion, there should be an open dialogue, live on television regarding this dispute. People must be brave enough to defend their arguments in the public. It would settle a lot of things in doubt.

No comment on Romans 1:23. No one reads the Bible these days, I guess.

"Like the moon-god theory. How could a man come out with such a theory when in the Koran stated clearly, reminding mankind not to take the moon and the stars as gods? How could he reach to such deceitful conclusion when the sacred text of Islam itself do not condone such a blasphemous act?"

It's not a theory, it's fact. http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/moongod.htm
http://wikiislam.net/wiki/The_Pagan_Origins_of_Islam
(Note: I don't know these site, but looking over the article it at least seems to have the basic facts)

Also, you are making the assumption for us that the Koran is true. The "theory" isn't about Islamic theology (you would have a point), but about historical fact. There was a moon-goddess named allat that Mohammad adopted for this chief God.

"In my own personal opinion, there should be an open dialogue, live on television regarding this dispute."

That's good, but it's not our side that's against this, but your co-religionists.

PMK,

Of all the three said Abrahamic faith, only one commemorated Abraham great deeds on yearly basis. It is even made as one of the five pillars of Islam, performing the Hajj. Muslims recalled the ultimate sacrifice done by Abraham, Hagar and Abraham's first son, Ismail. How firm their hearts were in carrying God’s will as a test of faith. He left them be in the God's grace and mercy, in the middle of the desert without anyone around. Without water. A test of faith not many can pass. The Hajj reminds Muslims to not to have too much love of anything in this temporal life, there should be a limit. The ultimate longing and love is only reserved to the Creator that had created what we see in front of us now. Should we have more love and affection towards the creations than the Creator?

The stone throwing mentioned by London was repeated by Muslims in a special event until dooms day in remembering what Abraham had done when Satan tried to whisper evil thoughts in him, trying to influence him to disobey the God's order to sacrifice his beloved son. Abraham threw him with stones and continued his mission without hesitation and fear, firmly believing in the Most Merciful that has forbidden tyranny from Him and from us too. Some may say that this is crazy and this is why they reject religion. What they had failed to see is that in the true religion, no human sacrifice is needed. We only need to sacrifice our greed, arrogance and the craving to do evil, steal, kill and destroy. That's all. And if atheist claimed that there is no human sacrifice in atheistic civilisation. Think again.

With this benchmarking by Abraham, no living person should or could perform human sacrifice in the name of religion or in the name of God or anything. It is done. The sample to follow had been laid firm.

Jan, Narnia was inspired from Narni. Google it up. Another remnant of the great West once was.

In passing his ultimate test, Abraham is remembered to this very day and three great religions claimed linkage with him. Which one is the nearest to his faith? Abraham did not accept Jesus as his lord and saviour. He never even met him. So how?

Be back after this. 7:28 PM. Have to perform Maghrib.

Foolster41, Muhammad was sent to purify the great tribes of the Arabs, descendents of Ishmael, the son of Abraham from their deepest ignorance, idol worships. The God has fulfilled His promise to Abraham. There are no idol worshippers anywhere in Arabia to this very day. Muhammad, the prophet, was sent to all mankind to purify them from never ending greed to fulfil their thirst for the temporal pleasures around us with rules and guidance to save them from errors, great, mild and little ones. So your idol argument has no basis at all. People were worshipping idols at the time before Prophet Muhammad. People ceased to worship any idols, officially or secretly after Prophet Muhammad stopped them, remember?

All the idols were destroyed in the opening of Makkah. If you still don’t believe me, ask any idol worshippers you know to destroy their idols with their own hands. Why don’t you ask any of them here? So you have debunked yourself, yet again, Foolster41, and really, I'm not trying to fool you.

Nowadays, most people are back to idol worship. Either they are worshipping real stone idols or human idols that mesmerised them. The same human idols that have all the advantages and weaknesses as he is, at certain degree, maybe much more or lesser. So many people would sacrifice their life, money, dignity and time chasing the shadows of short lived pleasures of the world, the Fata Morgana that looked so beautiful in their eyes.

CGW, Abraham was a great man, we are nothing compared to him. So how could he have a bastard? Why Christians like to defile the Holy prophets of the God, His emissaries to mankind, baffles me.

London Jim, at that time he was saved only to die horribly later in the hands of his enemies? Thank you for clearing that up for us. Your loving god was so angry with us that he made his creations, evil ones to torture and kill his only begotten son, which is also a part of him that ask why he had abandoned him to die on the cross alone? And this is logic for you?

Ronmorgen, who is under the mercy of whom? The Creator under the mercy of His creations or the creations under the mercy of their Creator. If you can answer this riddle, I will believe you.

Repent and obey your own scripture.

Romans 1:18 – 1:23
The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse. For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.

Stop disobeying your own book of faith, the rock of your religion. It is so unbecoming.

12:05 PM, the Gallus gallus is silent. So is the Gekko gecko. Time for me to join them. I'll be back. As always.

Romans 1:24-25

Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator--who is forever praised. Amen.

Sexual diseases, abortions, prostitutions and moral degeneration that even Saints marry gays in 'house of god' and some even became sexual predators themselves. All so abundantly and proudly challenge the stigma in the realm of highly civilised West that thought they have reached their apex. What fruits are you looking for?

12:22 AM. Logging off.

The use of "Allah" for God by Christians must stop because it may cause Islamic anger
................................

The building of churches by Christians must stop because it may cause Islamic anger...the use of church bells by Christians must stop because it may cause Islamic anger...eating during Ramadan by Christians must stop because it may cause Islamic anger...preaching to Muslims by Christians must stop because it may cause Islamic anger...marriages to Muslim women by Christians must stop because it may cause Islamic anger...

More:

The allegation of a "mis-translation" is not new, but a 400-year-old Malay-Latin dictionary shows that Christians' use of the word "Allah" is far older than the latest round of supremacist posturing against it.
................................

Muslims regularly try to rewrite history. Even if this fact is well documented—and I'm sure there is much more evidence for the long use of "Allah" by Christians—it is still considered no more than "Jahilyya" by Muslims, since it is an inconvenient bit of history that serves as "an obstacle"—no matter how slight—to the supremacy of Islam.

Len, we do not have snake oil salesman in our culture, ever. Only in yours. Muslims aren't allowed to consume snake by products, remember? We could only use anti venom to save lives. We can't even sell animals forbidden to be consumed by us to non-Muslims. Imagine the benefits for the wildlife if there are more practising Muslims around you.

Len, you keep on insisting pagan influence in Islam. Don't you know that paganism required a God father, a God mother and a God son? They could only understand Godliness by relating their own existence/norm to God. Only in this way pagans can comprehend the concept of God. Which religion gave this personification element to The God? Answer honestly, Len.

I read them Len. The problem is there's not a single proof in Islamic religious sources that could have supported the moon-god theory. Even the Muslims that have gone astray did not believe their God is an idol. Find a group of Muslims that worship the so called moon-god idol. You can’t, can you?

Since you gave a webpage argument. This is my counter webpage argument. It is a false assumption. As is some quotation of the Koran by someone in here. I will address him later on.

http://www.theholybook.org/content/view/9276/16/

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/Allah/moongod.html

Since man was put on this earth, The God has sent His messengers to mankind whenever the divine message was corrupted by greedy and sinful men of interest. As you can see, humans are attracted to sin. We love to do whatever we please, with no rules governing us, no string attached, without having to carry any responsibility whatsoever. The message keeps on getting corrupted. And it will keep on being purified by the truth seekers.

You say that you have a Judeo Christian heritage. Do you dare ask the Jews why don't they believe in a human god form that has only a son, without a wife? Some of them have more than a son and a wife. Is God lesser than man?

Pure is the One that has no need and all the weaknesses of a man. Pure is the divine Creator. Allahuakbar. The God is great. Look at the largest star known to man. How puny an earthly god would have been compared to it, what more a human god. Desist in this blasphemy. Be fearful of the One that owns everything that exist and existed, known or unknown to man.

Or the picture if you still don't believe it. She gave birth normally. Little girls do not. They don't even have the ability to conceive or breast feed babies.

http://www.answering-christianity.com/thai_girl.htm

Romania is not a Muslim country. Google youngest mother. You'll be surprised.

srizals, may I grab your ear for a minute?
Right. .back to your contention that Abraham did not see Jesus as lord and saviour, wrap your rusty wits around this passage, where we join, mid-conversation, at John 8:53. .''Are you greater than our father Abraham? He died, and so did the prophets. Who do you think you are?''
Jesus replied,'' If i glorify myself, my glory means nothing. My Father, whom you claim as your God, is the one who glorifies me. Though you do not know him, I know him. If I said I did not, I would be a liar like you, but I do know him and keep his word. Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad.'' ''You are not yet fifty years old'' they said to him ''and you have seen Abraham!'' '' I tell you the truth,'' Jesus answered, ''before Abraham was born, I am!''.
@@@@This may well fall on deaf ears srizals, as you seem to have a stubborn heart and a number of log-jams in the stream of your thinking. Still, where there's life there's hope, as the saying goes. And don't think you can command Wellington to ''Desist'', as hiß mind is eminently better tuned and balanced than many.

My name's not "Len" it's Foolster41. I'm not sure where you even get "Len" from since it doesn't in any way resemble my name.

"I read them Len. The problem is there's not a single proof in Islamic religious sources that could have supported the moon-god theory."
I see, what you're saying is, no matter what evidence I bring, if it conterdicts the Koran, you'll beleive the Koran. In other words you are impervious to reason.

Then again, maybe you don't really beleive that since you actually post outside evidence, which I will examine, but later since it's late.

Evidently a triad of sun-moon-stars did exist at the time, it's mentioned in the Koran.
http://www.quranbrowser.com/cgi/bin/get.cgi?%20version=yusufali&%20layout=auto&%20searchstring=006:075-79

Of course, there is also the "satanic verses" that mention the names of the three gods(godesses?) early in Islamic sources.

I found this interesting rebuttal to that article you posted. I only browsed over it, but it does seem to at least make a few valid refutations of the claims in that article (the false alegation that morey was "caught redhanded" inventing evidence)

http://www.yoel.info/moonotheism.htm

"You say that you have a Judeo Christian heritage. Do you dare ask the Jews why don't they believe in a human god form that has only a son, without a wife? Some of them have more than a son and a wife. Is God lesser than man?"

Pure is the One that has no need and all the weaknesses of a man. Pure is the divine Creator. Allahuakbar. The God is great. Look at the largest star known to man. How puny an earthly god would have been compared to it, what more a human god. Desist in this blasphemy. Be fearful of the One that owns everything that exist and existed, known or unknown to man."

I'm not sure what you mean by this, but Christians believe that God took the FORM of a man, and wasn't actually originally a man.
It seems to me "blasphemy" is believing in a god who advocates murder, Jew-hatred, banditry and special moral exception for the whims of his prophet.

As for the Satanic verse, it's too long to discuss here.
Read up first from this site. Then we'll continue.

http://sunnah.org/wordpress/?p=333

http://www.call-to-monotheism.com/prophet_muhammad__peace_be_upon_him__and_the_satanic_verses

The verse concerned for the rest to judge.

The Star
With the name of Allah, the All-Merciful, the Very-Merciful.
[53:1]
By the star when it goes down to set,

[53:2]
your fellow (the Holy Prophet) has neither missed the way, nor did he deviate.

[53:3]
He does not speak out of (his own) desire.

[53:4]
It is but revelation revealed (to him).

[53:5]
It is taught to him by one (angel) of strong faculties,

[53:6]
the one of vigour. So he stood poised,

[53:7]
while he was on the upper horizon.

[53:8]
Then he drew near, and came down,

[53:9]
so as he was at a distance like that of two bows (joined together), rather even nearer.

[53:10]
Thus He (Allah) revealed to His slave what He revealed.

[53:11]
The heart did not err in what he saw.

[53:12]
Do you quarrel with him in what he sees?

[53:13]
Indeed he saw him another time

[53:14]
by Sidrat-ul-Muntahā (the lote-tree in the upper realm),

[53:15]
near which there is Jannat-ul-Ma’wā (the Paradise of Abode),

[53:16]
when the lote-tree was covered by that which covered it.

[53:17]
The eye neither went wrong, nor did exceed the limit.

[53:18]
He has indeed seen a part of the biggest signs of your Lord.

[53:19]
Have you ever considered about the (idols of) Lāt and ‘Uzzā,

[53:20]
and about the other, the third (idol), namely, Manāt,?

[53:21]
Is it that you have males and He (Allah) has females?

[53:22]
If so, it is a bizarre division.

[53:23]
These are nothing but names you and your fathers have invented; Allah has sent down no authority attached to them. They are following nothing but conjecture and what their own souls desire, while guidance from their Lord has surely reached them.

[53:24]
Is it that man can get whatever he wishes?

[53:25]
(No,) because to Allah alone belongs the (good of) the Hereafter and the former life (of this world).

[53:26]
How many angels there are in the heavens whose intercession cannot benefit (any one) at all, but after Allah allows (it) for whomsoever He wills and pleases.

[53:27]
Those who do not believe in the Hereafter call the angels by names of females.

[53:28]
They do not have knowledge about it. They follow nothing but conjecture, and conjecture is of no avail in (the matter of) Truth.

[53:29]
So, turn away from him who turns away from Our advice, and seeks nothing but (pleasure of) the worldly life.

[53:30]
That is the limit of their access to knowledge. Indeed only your Lord knows well about the one who has gone astray from his way, and He knows well about the one who has adopted the right path.

[53:31]
To Allah belongs whatever there is in the heavens and whatever there is in the earth, so that He gives punishment to evildoers for what they did, and gives good reward to those who did good

[53:32]
-those who abstain from the major sins and from shameful acts, except minor involvements. Indeed your Lord is extensive in forgiveness. He knows you more than anyone else (from a time) when He created you from the earth and when you were embryos in the wombs of your mothers. So, do not claim purity (from faults) for your selves. He knows best who is God-fearing.

For those who are newcomers to Jihadwatch, and may be puzzled by ''srizal'''s intransience, Robert Reiley's ' The closing of the Muslim Mind' is a good place to understand the origins of the mindset. http://www.mercatornet.com/articles/view/the_closing_of_the_muslim_mind/

Jan, the ones that want to take over the world, are the likes of you! Individual group can never do this. Only governments with huge military arsenal can. Grow up.

That is why they dominated the world affairs with false monetary system without gold to base their money on, traded mere electronic money without goods. Toppling foreign governments all over the world that dared going the other direction than what is prescribed by them, bombing other foreign countries around the world, trying to dominate Muslims in their countries by telling them what they can do and cannot do in their religion not of their own without taking it to the court. And having snobbish armies on lands not of their own while terrorising the lives of so many.

Jan, Narni was a manifestation of what deviated Christianity once was. How it preserved itself throughout centuries. By domination and oppression. Grow up. Google further. You're getting close. I will guide you if you are unable to seek the information meant by me.

London Jim. Sex between a husband and a wife, blessed by their parents and communities, most importantly by their religious body, according to normality, governed by moral and responsibility is a sacred bond the likes of you can never understand. Who are you to mock a holy matrimony? Have you ever engaged yourself in sex outside of marriage, Jan and London?

Consenting sex even by people in their mid 40s or 50s that has not bind themselves in the holy matrimony of a marriage between a man and a woman is just a hideous sin that invites sexual transmitted diseases to say the very least. How dare you compare a thing governed by civility with such barbaric abnormality?

Since you used London for your name, maybe you should google the marriage that ended the 100 year war between two competing Christian nations in the past. Maybe you should be googling the marriage of the royal Christian Byzantium princess hundred of years after the marriage of Prophet Muhammad.

Maybe you should be realising that secular law of marriage regarding the age of a husband and wife keep on changing from time to time. Now some laws even approved same sex marriage, an awkward and foreign to normality of a decent man, even though the parties involved are over 30s or even 60s. Do their age made it right?

And some churches are not showing reluctances to this abomination that made Sodom and Gomorrah history. Any comment on this, Jan and London?

Jan, London Jim. Define a girl and a woman for me if you can. What is the difference between them? What made a girl a woman and what made a girl not a woman. A riddle for you to solve.

That Thai girl is an honourable wife. Respected by her husband and the society. She has a loving husband to protect, to care for her and love her for the rest of her life in a lawfully manner. Supported by their community and each other in what is known as a family unit. Who are you to judge them?

Foolster41,

I've never moved any goal post. It is you that ignore which goal post to score. I have presented that Allah is the God that the Jews and the Christians adored to before some of them associate Him with mere creatures. You're still stuck to a man made theory.

Wellington, maybe you should be assisting Jan and London. They are trying to outsmart me using petty insults. How childish of them. What a shame.

Got to go. Have to prepare for my Subuh prayer. Do Christians pray after they wake up from their sleep?

Jesus was a created man. He was created in Mary's womb. O deviated one. Now do you understand? Can The God be created inside a womb of a mere mortal?

An idol is more less. It is created by hands from a stone. Thus it is created twice. How could a creation be an equal or a link to The God? Tell me O deviated one.

"I've never moved any goal post. It is you that ignore which goal post to score. "

Thank you. I never said you were going to move goal posts, or that you had. I said you would claim I have, which
you just did.

"You're still stuck to a man made theory."

In my mind, nothing is proven yet either way. I still need to look further at the evidence.

It is clear that they have a superior complex over other religions as they refuse to join the Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism (MCCBCHST initiated by the Malaysian Catholic Church who have a desire to dialogue with fellow citizens of other faiths.

Bishop Paul Tan said Muslims don't want to be part of the MCCBCHST “for reasons better known to them and which I don't want to comment.”

It is pretty clear than that the reason why they would refuse an invitation to be part of this group to promote inter-faith understanding and unity is that they have no interest in promoting inter-faith understanding or unity!

To help others grasp what is the Council of Nicaea that was also formed for unity of faiths,

http://petragrail.tripod.com/nicea.html

http://www.realchrist.info/4-1.html

http://www.answering-christianity.com/abdullah_smith/false_jesus_of_christianity.htm

http://www.simpletoremember.com/vitals/Christmas_TheRealStory.htm

http://www.answering-christianity.com/abdullah_smith/false_jesus_of_christianity.htm

http://islamtomorrow.com/bible/NicaeaCouncil325.htm

Just in case you're saying I'm biased and only presented Muslim links.

This one I hardly recommend, enter with a strong heart if you are a true truth seeker. Like I did here.

http://one-evil.org/entities_organizations/evil_org_christianity.htm

And why having a council would not be such a good idea. Who knows what would happen next. Let's learn from history.

"One year after Council (382) Emperor Theodosius passed laws making heresy (against christianity) punishable by death.

In support of christian objectives in 391, Emperor Theodosius I ordered the destruction of all pagan temples. Patriarch Theophilus of Alexandria appeals to Theodosius that the most dangerous of all temples of the temple of dangerous knowledge of the great library of Alexandria (one of the ancient 7 wonders of the world and the greatest university/treasure of human history).
Theodosius I agrees with the argument and calls his troops to assist in the complete demolition and burning of every single book, manuscript and artefact of ancient human history."

http://one-evil.org/councils_imperial/councils_imperial_constantinople_381.htm

After you have done your research on paganism that influenced Islam, maybe you should finish it up with this.

"It was a mixture of paganism and Christianity which made the changeover from paganism to nominal Christianity less controversial and more painless. I’ve given some specific examples of this in a European context below. Many scholars have pointed out that the idea of a Divine figure coming to earth to redeem the faithful was a very common pagan myth in the Middle East of the first century (1). It's easy to see how early Christians would've been tempted to claim that Christ was some form of pre-existent God in order to make their beliefs accommodate the surrounding paganism- and it's understandable that some would've been eager to misinterpret Bible passages to this end.

The idea of a 'trinity' of gods was widespread in paganism. The Egyptians had three main gods, Osiris, Isis and Horus. Horus was in turn divided into 3 parts or persons:

Horus - the King
Horus - Ra
Horus - the Scarabaeus.

Likewise the Hindu Vedas of around 1000 BC claimed that one God existed in three forms:

Agni - Fire, presiding over the earth
Indra - the Firmament, presiding over the mid-air
Surya - The Sun. presiding over the Heavens.

In later Hinduism, the 'trimurti' or trinity of gods became:

Brahma - the creative power
Vishnu - the preserving power
Siva - the transforming power.

So when Theophilus, bishop of Antioch introdcued the word 'trias' to Christian literature for the first time in AD170, and the word 'trinitas' was first used by Tertullian in AD200, they were importing pagan concepts which were familiar and had been for millenia."

"Barry Cunliffe (2) notes “the prevalence of tripilism in Celtic religion… The ‘power of three’ was frequently expressed in iconography, as, for example, in the three-faced stone head from Corleck, Cavan, in Ireland or the tricephalic deity depicted on the pot from Bavay in northern France, but it is also found as a recurring motif- the triskele- in Celtic art.

The concept is made even more specific in the Romano-British and Gallo-Roman religion in the form of the Deae Matres or the Matronae- the three mother goddesses- who together form a unity representing strength, power and fertility. Another but less widespread female trinity are the Saluviae, who preside over springs… inscriptions to the Lugoves in Switzerland and Spain may well refer to a triple form of Lugh.

In the Insular literature of Ireland, tripilism is a recurring theme. The great goddess, the Morrigan in her plural form, the Morrigna, resolves into three: Morrigan, Badb, and Nemain. Brigit and Macha also occur as triads. It is tempting to wonder if the threefold division proposed by Lucan, of Esus, Teutates, and Taranis, is a further expression of Celtic tripilism”.

So it’s not surprising that the idea of God as a trinity was easily accepted in Europe- the one true God had been adapted to the pagan background culture, rather than Bible truth being allowed to define our beliefs. The more one searches, the more one finds evidence of what Cunliffe calls “tripilisms”, pagan godheads that occurred in three forms or persons.

Examples include: the “three legs of Mann” on the Isle of Mann, which symbol is also found on coins found in Italy and Asia Minor from before the time of Christ; the triple knot inscriptions [called the Triquetra] and the “Triskel” symbol, again a reference to some primitive form of ‘trinity’, found in inscriptions and art forms throughout Brittany, Ireland and Western Britain.

There's a small plaque of schist from Bath, England with three female figures representing the ‘three mothers’, a triad of deities. These triads of mother goddesses were common in the West of Britain in the early Roman period, probably reflecting an earlier Iron Age tradition. The original is in the Roman Baths Museum in Bath UK."

http://www.realchrist.info/4-1.html

"The reason is obvious. Our religion is definitely different. We worship the Creator. You worship the created."

I know, right? how can you possibly talk to those people of those yucky inferior religions?

But Seriously? It's not as if every other religion in that group believes the others are wrong (I'd hope so in fact, one who doesn't believe in their own religion is a hypocrite). So why is Islam so different? And don't repeat that "it's different because it's better" again. Give a real reason.

Please no distractions. What does the council of Nicea have anything to do with whether "Allah" is a generic loan word for a deity or not in Malay? What does it have to even do with the side topic of the origins of Islam?

Your "alamanic of evil" is so blatantly pro-Islam and anti-Christian it's laughable. I see absolutely no mention of the evils in Islam along side their examples of evils in Christians, which PALE in comparison in terms of numbers. Mistreatment of women, the slave trade, and mistreatment of non-beleivers are all, and have been very prominent in Islamic lands for the last 1400 years, but not a peep for the site under those issues pages.

I see no mention of people like Adimijob, Hussein OBL or Quadafi in the dangerous people list.

Your trying to distract by bringing up Tu Quo Que attacks. Islam is the religion of choice of terrorism because mohammad taught to terrorize including pillage, rape and torture. It's in the Koran, so telling us otherwise won't fool us. You haven't disproven the content of the koran, or presented facts that Islam is not the most dangerous organization. Why else are there so many terrorist attacks (definition of terrorism: attacks against civilians in order to cause terror) around the world? Can you show anywhere near as many instances of terrorism (so defined above) by ANY single religion, as clearly motivated by their religion (quoting texts of the religion)?

(Yes, this is the same challenge before, but this time I'm CLEARLY defining what I'm looking for. It must be terrorism (so I won't be counting soldiers killed by muslims in muslim lands), and it needs to be a unlimited sample (meaning both of us may take samples from ANYWHERE in the world and cannot limit where the other takes sample data.) )

Comparing samples? Agreed. I'll start with this one.

Body Count. It's downloadable.
http://www.rissc.jo/index.php/english-publications.html

This one is more direct.

http://rissc.jo/docs/bodycount_final.pdf

In Islam, there is no gay marriages.

In Islam, no one dared to inflict injuries to others because the same injuries would be inflicted to the culprits.

In Islam, no one dared to steal and slash and cut their victims. Their hand would be the ultimate price.

In Islam, no one dared to kill a life. His life would be the ultimate price for this sin. Only if he can pay a blood money and asked the forgiveness of the family's victim, his life is spared.

In Islam, a mother is a martyr if she dies in delivery.

In Islam, no one sins except when they reached puberty.

In Islam, no one can steal other's lands and claimed it is something to do with religion.

In Islam, no one needs to seduce others to make him or her special or able to make tons of money. We don't have pornography industries or 'adult' entertainment businesses.

In Islam, we do not have gay priests.

In Islam, no one can out-ruled the Koran and the genuine Hadith.

In Islam, no man is idolised as Saints.

In Islam, we have the only religious book uncorrupted, unchanged and still in a living language.

Enough for now. Have to go somewhere with the Misses. Catch you later, Foolster41.

Or are these?

[2:246]
Did you not see a group from the children of Isrā’īl (Israel), after (the time of) Mūsā when they said to their prophet: “Appoint for us a king, so that we may fight in the way of Allah.”
He said: “Is it (not) likely, if fighting is enjoined upon you, that you would not fight.” They said: “What is wrong with us that we would not fight while we have been driven away from our homes and our sons?” But, when fighting was enjoined upon them, they turned away, except a few of them, and Allah is Aware of the unjust.

[2:247]
Their prophet said to them: “Allah has appointed Tālūt as a king for you.” They said: “How could he have kingship over us when we are more entitled to the kingship than him? He has not been given affluence in wealth.” He said: “Allah has chosen him over you and has increased his stature in knowledge and physique, and Allah gives His kingship to whom He wills. Allah is All-Embracing, All-Knowing.’

[2:248]
Their prophet said to them: “The sign of his kingship is that the Ark shall come to you, carried by the angels, having therein tranquillity from your Lord, and the remains of what the House of Mūsā and the House of Hārūn (Aaron) had left. Surely, in it there is a sign for you, if you are believers.”

[2:249]
So, when Tālūt set out along with the troops, he said: “Allah is going to test you by a river, so, whoever drinks from it is not my man, and whoever does not taste it is surely a man of mine, except the one who scoops a little with his hand.” Then they drank from it, except a few of them. So, when it (the river) was crossed by him and by those who believed with him, they said: “There is no strength with us today against Jālūt and his troops.” Said those who believed in their having to meet Allah: “How many small groups have overcome large groups by the will of Allah. Allah is with those who remain patient.”

[2:250]
And when they faced Jālūt and his troops, they said: “Our Lord, pour out endurance on us, make firm our feet and help us against the disbelieving people.”

[2:251]
So, they defeated them by the will of Allah, and Dāwūd (David) killed Jālūt, and Allah gave him the kingdom and the wisdom and taught him what He willed. Had Allah not been pushing back some people by means of others, the earth would have been spoiled. But Allah is All-Gracious to all the worlds.

[2:252]
These are the verses of Allah that We recite to you (O Prophet), with all veracity, and certainly you are among the Messengers.

[2:253]
Those are the messengers some of whom We have given excellence over some others. Among them there are ones to whom Allah spoke (directly) and He raised some of them steps higher (in other respects), and We gave clear signs to ‘Īsā (Jesus), the son of Maryam (Mary) and supported him with the Holy Spirit. If Allah so willed, those succeeding him would have not fought against each other after clear signs had come to them.
But they disagreed among themselves. So, there were some who believed and there were some who disbelieved, and if Allah so willed, they would have not fought against each other. But Allah does what He intends

[2:254]
O you who believe! Spend from what We have given to you before a day comes when there will be no trading, no friendship and no intercession, and it is the disbelievers who are unjust.

[2:255]
Allah: There is no god but He, the Living, the All-Sustaining. Neither dozing overtakes Him nor sleep. To Him belongs all that is in the heavens and all that is on the earth. Who can intercede with Him without His permission? He knows what is before them and what is behind them; while they encompass nothing of His knowledge, except what He wills. His Kursiyy (Chair) extends to the Heavens and to the Earth, and it does not weary Him to look after them. He is the All-High, the Supreme.

[2:256]
There is no compulsion in Faith. The correct way has become distinct from the erroneous. Now, whoever rejects the Tāghūt (the Rebel, the Satan) and believes in Allah has a firm grasp on the strongest ring that never breaks. Allah is All-Hearing, All-Knowing.

By the way, who killed Goliath according to the Bible, Foolster41? David or Elhanan?

Foolster41,

I like to share some verses with you. The Jews, some, think we are copying them. The Christians, hopefully just some of them, think we are a Satanic cult. People smeared the Koran without daring to read it.

We have to look beyond people's friendly faces and sweet talks. Good night, Foolster41. 12:33 am.

[2:204]
Among men there is one whose speech, in this life, attracts you; he even makes Allah his witness on what is in his heart, while he is extremely quarrelsome.

[2:205]
Once he turns back, he moves about in the land trying to spread disorder in it, and to destroy the tillage and the stock; and Allah does not like disorder.

[2:206]
When it is said to him, “Fear Allah”, he is tempted by arrogance to (commit) sin. Hell is then enough for him, and it is indeed an evil bed to rest.

[2:207]
And among men there is one who sells his very soul to seek the pleasure of Allah, and Allah is Very-Kind to His servants.

[2:208]
O you who believe, enter Islam completely, and do not follow the footsteps of Satan. Surely, he is an open enemy for you;

[2:209]
and if you slip, even after clear signs have come to you, then you must know that Allah is Mighty, Wise.

[2:210]
They are looking for nothing (to accept the truth) but that Allah (Himself) comes upon them in canopies of cloud with angels, and the matter is closed. To Allah shall all matters be returned.

[2:211]
Ask the Children of Isrā’īl (Israel) how many a clear sign We have given to them; and whoever changes the blessing of Allah after it has come to him, then Allah is severe in punishment.

[2:212]
Adorned is the present life for those who disbelieve, and they laugh at those who believe, while those who fear Allah shall be above them on the Day of Resurrection. Allah gives provision to whom He wills without measure.

[2:213]
All men used to be a single ’Ummah (i.e. on a single faith). Then (after they differed in matters of faith), Allah sent prophets carrying good news and warning, and sent down with them the Book with Truth to judge between people in matters of their dispute. But it was no other than those to whom it (the Book) was given who, led by envy against each other, disputed it after the clear signs had come to them. Then Allah, by His will, guided those who believed to the truth over which they disputed; and Allah guides whom He wills to the straight path.

[2:214]
Do you think that you will enter Paradise while you have not yet been visited by (difficult) circumstances like those that were faced by the people who passed away before you? They were afflicted by hardship and suffering, and were so shaken down that the prophet, and those who believed with him, started saying: “When (will come) the help of Allah?” (Then, they were comforted by the Prophet who said to them) ‘Behold, the help of Allah is near.’

London Jim,

Some verses regarding the One and Only,

The Unity

With the name of Allah, the All-Merciful, the Very-Merciful.

[112:1]
Say, “The truth is that Allah is One.

[112:2]
Allah is Besought of all, needing none.

[112:3]
He neither begot anyone, nor was he begotten.

[112:4]
And equal to Him has never been any one.”

Where's in the Bible that says Allah is three?

"People smeared the Koran without daring to read it."
I've read it. You're quoting the nice verses as if that somehow erases the violent verses that came later. Nice try.

Your body count listing, while interesting, is not at all what I asked for, and no, don't try to say I'm "moving the goal posts" since I already defined it clearly this time, and this doesn't match at all. This lists casualties of different conflicts and wars, all together, without dividing motivations from either side. I asked for cases of TERRORISM against CIVILIANS, that were MOTIVATED BY A RELIGION. This doesn't meet ANY of this criteria.

Secondarily, this comes from a Muslim source and is laughably biased. For example, it lists the all of the deaths of WW II (55-72 million) as brewing "Christian, Bhuddist" without ever explaining how those wars were motivated by either religion, or actknowledges the political and non-religious aspects (socialism, Hitler's thirst for power and Germany's feelings of victemhood after the 1st world war, etc.)

Try again. Frankly, I'm getting tired of this, but I'll give you one last chance.

Your quoting from the Koran and discussion of triniatarian roots of other religions has nothing to do with the current topic (I don't even see how it relates to my possibly incorrect claim about the origins of Islam), please stick on the current topic of Mallay's use of the word "allah", and violence in the name of Islam vs. other religions.

And to listen to it in its original form as it was 1,400 years ago, how the meaning and the sound of the language related to one another and you'll understand how it stayed in the hearts of Muslims.

http://www.alim.org/library/quran/surah/arabic/112/ARB#1

And the sound of the verses regarding David and Goliath
starting with 2:246.

http://www.alim.org/library/quran/surah/arabic/2/ARB#246

Regarding the Jews,

http://www.alim.org/library/quran/ayah/compare/2/122/accountability-on-the-day-of-judgement

And regarding force conversion,

http://www.alim.org/library/quran/ayah/compare/2/256/there-is-no-compulsion-in-religion-and-wali-of-allah-vs-wali-of-shaitan

London Jim, you have to excuse me for a while. I have to perform my Jumaah prayer. Will be back after this. ASAP.

Foolster41, give me the verses that you said asking the Muslims to terrorize Non Muslims? Which one?

Don't get weary, Foolster41. Be firm. Defend your faith without hesitation and boredom. Be resilient. My, you are one tough costumer. Be back after this. You asked to come back here once. Now you are giving the same excuse, 'I'm tired of all this and you still not giving what I want.' without even trying to explain yourself. Is it fair?

I have to answer all your accusations and allegations while you have the higher ground without the need to explain yourself and your faith? Are you a higher being? Anyway got to go, now. My time is up. Be back after this.

http://www.theinsider.org/news/article.asp?id=0472

Read this one for a while.

And this one,

http://www.theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/claim_that_all_terrorists_are_muslims_ignores_history/

I remember Sabra and Shatilla,

http://www.countercurrents.org/pa-fisk180903.htm

Well, where's yours, Foolster41?

http://www.theinsider.org/news/article.asp?id=0472
OK, so terrorism is rare. So what? Again, this is off-topic since it has nothing to do with the orgins of those few terrorist attacks.

http://www.theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/claim_that_all_terrorists_are_muslims_ignores_history/

Again, but again misses the criteria I had already set. I already knew that not all attacks were by muslims (This is obvious). The article talks about number of terrorist attacks in the west such as the US compared to muslim and non-muslim, but without a wider picture this is dishonest to say it somehow proves islam is peaceful.

The issue isn't whether Islam commits the most terrorism, the issue is whether Islam itself justifies terrorism, and whether any other religion has instances of religions. Again, many non-muslim violence acts this article cites aren't from any religous motivation (some by communists, KKK, Black Liberation, etc.), and so has nothing to do with what I'm talking about.

"You asked to come back here once. Now you are giving the same excuse, 'I'm tired of all this and you still not giving what I want.' without even trying to explain yourself. Is it fair? I have to answer all your accusations and allegations while you have the higher ground without the need to explain yourself and your faith? Are you a higher being? "

Are you being serious? I'm being very fair, and I did give explinations. Ignoring something doesn't make it not exist. The reason I said I'm getting tired is because of your dishonesty. You presented an article that did not fit my clear criteria, and now you presented two more. I'm not going to allow you to waste my time with red herrings.

"I remember Sabra and Shatilla, Well, where's yours, Foolster41?"

Well to start:
The Massacre of Banu Quraiza: 600-900 dead (they had already surrendered. Mohammad striped boys to look at their genetils to see if they were men, who weree slaughtered.)
The raid of Banu Mustaliq: 200 famalies taken captive as slaves.
Oruzgan, Afganastan: 19 dead, including 10 women and 2 women
Kunduz, Afghanistan: 3 children killed
Kirkuk, Iraq: A young boy and his father were killed

A few more here: http://islam-watch.org/MA_Khan/IncessantTerrorism.htm

There's also the mistreatment of the Kopts (including slaughter, but also severe mistreatment) in Egypt, and non-Muslims believers in any Muslim nation.

It has been narrated by 'Umar b. al-Khattib that he heard the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) say: “I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula and will not leave any but Muslim.”

Foolster41, you are starting a wild accusation here. Are you sure you want to do that? Here? In the WWW? I'll give you a moment to think and retract your baseless accusations. People might think you're trying to fool them, Foolster41. Could you please think and read before you accuse?

You are going against your own religious teaching, don't you know that? Don't you know that Christians cannot and should not judge?

Luke 6:37 BBE
Bible in Basic English
Be not judges of others, and you will not be judged: do not give punishment to others, and you will not get punishment yourselves: make others free, and you will be made free:

Are you willing to go against your own Holy book? Would you dare to bare the consequences?

You still can't accept that people that betrayed their country by assisting, collaborating and even joined the battle with the enemy committed the highest treason which is punishable by death.

Find me an ancient Jewish writings that described this incident, if you can. You know the Jews. They don't forget and forgive easily. Why don't they have any ancient record or this horrific event? Is it because they knew that those treacherous warriors deserved to pay the ultimate price? Why did those powerful warriors submitted to Muslims' judgment at that time? Were they stupid? Who judge them? Why did they asked others than the Prophet to judge their treachery? What happened to the previous two Jewish tribes that broke their treaty with the Muslims?

Answer these questions and you'll understand a soldier has to pay the ultimate price if he betrayed his nation and collaborating with the enemy that nearly destroyed every one in his nation. He was about to kill people that had trusted in him. This betrayal is unforgiven. It was their own law, Foolster41. They had been judged by their own law.

If the writing is true about some Muslims checked whether the boys had pubic hair or not, isn't it a demonstration of carefulness? They don't want to kill little boys. That is obvious. And how can you tell a boy from a man, Foolster41? They could have killed everyone without checking. Instead, only the warriors were put to death, not because they are simple hostile warriors, but they were on the same side before their betrayal. Find me a law that prohibit such execution for treacherous soldier.

You lied. The Prophet never did what you have accused him of. In fact he had not been recorded to use his sword against anyone even though he was in the heat of batttle. You are lying. What should you do after you have been proved lying? Shouldn't you apologise for such a lie?

I've explained that Malay Christians can use Allah as a reference to their god if they can prove it in the Bible or anyone here that Allah Himself had said He was one of three. Do it and this thread is over.

Anyway, you yourself said that this is about Allah and Malay Christians and the Malaysian scholar, why did you dare to bring up terrorism in the first place? And now you said I'm wasting your time?

If you have lost your will to fight and endure, let me share this verse with you,

2:250
And when they went into the field against Goliath and his hosts they said: Our Lord! Bestow on us endurance, make our foothold sure, and give us help against the disbelieving folk.

http://www.alim.org/library/quran/ayah/compare/2/250/victory-is-not-by-numbers-and-prayer-of-the-believers-for-victory

It's a prayer, Foolster41, a prayer by the Israelis that believed in Allah. How anti Jews, eh?

Could you share some prayer like this from the Bible. Many said that the Koran was copied from the Bible. I'm sure you can find one similar with this.

Or you can finish your job in the real world and then come back to the Matrix, in that way, I won't stressed you out.

6:47 AM

What time is it now in America, Foolster41? Is the time shown in this webpage true to America? Could you please include the time where you are in, in your comment so that I know what mood are you having when you are commenting?

Foolster41,

For deeper explanation of the slain warriors,

http://islamic-replies.ucoz.com/2/Did_Muhammad_Kill_800_900_Innocent_Jews.html

http://nogodbutallah.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=702:mohammad-a-jews&catid=4:content&Itemid=6

http://www.letmeturnthetables.com/2011/01/why-kill-qurayza-jews.html

I'm still waiting for the ancient Jewish resources, Foolster41. Don't let me down. 7:05 AM, have to go jogging with my kids. Catch you later, Foolster41. Relax, have a break, have a kit kat.

Could you please give some explanation of the slain civilians, women, children and the helpless during the fall of Jerusalem during the crusades? They were Jews and Muslims. Interestingly, the Christians never died together with the Jews in such number at such a Holy land. I'll wait for this explanation from you too.

"Foolster41, you are starting a wild accusation here. Are you sure you want to do that?"
What wild accusation? That the articles you presented the criteria I set? That Kopts and non-muslims are slaughtered and mistreated in muslim lands? You don't say what you mean by this.

"The FBI gave the standard profile of a serial killer..."
Again, profiles on serial killers has nothing to do with what I'm talking about, as is most of the rest of this post. For the fourth time now you've delved into non-sequitor red herrings. One almost gets the impression your doing this on purpose.

"Foolster41, if you can agree that these Christians didn't commit terror because of Christianity or their understanding of their religion, could you disagree that some Muslims commit terror because of their religion?"

Yes, I could, because CHRISTIANITY DOESN'T TEACH VIOLENCE, and so saying that violence by so-called Christians has something to do with Christianity is nonsensical. I already gave some examples of Koranic verses and hadiths above, but you didn't even bother to answer.Here are some more: http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/023-violence.htm

"You lied. The Prophet never did what you have accused him of. In fact he had not been recorded to use his sword against anyone even though he was in the heat of batttle. You are lying. What should you do after you have been proved lying? Shouldn't you apologise for such a lie?"

Then your own Koran, hadiths and muslim tradtions are lies, since that's where he's recorded doing such things. Also, accusing me of lying seems rather hypocritical.

Sourcing Ibn Ishak, Tabari writes:

'Kinanah b. al-Rabi b. al-Huqyaq who had the treasure of B. Nadir was brought to the Messenger of God, who questioned him; but he denied knowing where it was. Then the messenger of God was brought a Jew who said to him, "I have seen Kinanah walk around this ruin every morning." The Messenger of God said to Kinanah: "What do you say? If we find it in your possession, I will kill you." "All right," he answered. The Messenger of God commanded that the ruin should be dug up, and some of the treasure was extracted from it. Then he asked him for the rest of it. Kinanah refused to surrender it; so the Messenger of God gave orders concerning him to al-Zubayr b. al-'Awwam, saying, "torture him until you root out what he has." Al-Zubayr kept twirling his firestick in his breast until Kinanah almost expired; then the Messenger of God gave him to Muhammad b. Maslamah, who beheaded him to avenge his brother Mahmud b. Maslamah."'

Book 019, Number 4366:
It has been narrated by 'Umar b. al-Khattib that he heard the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) say: “I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula and will not leave any but Muslim.”

Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 176 Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar:
Allah's Apostle said, "You (i.e. Muslims) will fight with the Jews till some of them will hide behind stones. The stones will (betray them) saying, 'O 'Abdullah (i.e. slave of Allah)! There is a Jew hiding behind me; so kill him.' "

“the Apostle of Allah said, 'Kill any Jew that falls into your power.” [Ibn Ishaq, Siratul Rasul, v. 553]

If the justification of attacking the Khaybar was because of trechery by them, then why would mohammad give another reson?

Allah's Messenger called Ali [and said]: “Proceed on and do not look about until Allah grants you victory,” and Ali went a bit and then halted and did not look about and then said in a loud voice: “Allah's Messenger, on what issue should I fight with the people?” Thereupon he (the Prophet) said: ”Fight with them until they bear testimony to the fact that there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is his Messenger…” (Sahih Muslim 5917)

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Muhammad/myths-mu-self-defense.htm

He also waited to see if they would give the morning prayer, and attacked if he did not hear it (i.e he attacked them for not being muslim), and he met villagers outside the town with buckets and shovels, not expecting the attack.

Perhaps you are right on the technicality that perhaps he didn't with his own hand raise his hand, or torture people, or kill poet women for insulting him, but he directly ordered such things, so how can such a person be considered a great example of all time? Did Jesus do any of those things?

What should you do after being caught lying (about me lying)? Shouldn't you apologize for lying?

"That the articles you presented DON't MEET the criteria I set?"
Correction in all caps.

there is other stuff I haven't answered yet, and I may answer latter, but first I want to hear your explanation of my "lie" and "wild accusation" that must be cleared first.

"You must apologise first for saying that the Prophet Muhammad himself inspect whether the warrior boys whether they look like Edgar Jimenez Lugo, Robert Thompson and Jon Venables. You said that he inspected them to see whether they had pubic hairs before beheading them."

You are right that it doesn't say he did that directly, he commanded others to do it. I didn't lie (Lie: to say something you know to be untrue), it's something called hyperbole, like you know how a mafia don orders a hit, even though it's his hench men who did it, it's just about the same as him doing it since he ordered it, someone might say the don killed the person. Being inpersice? Yes. Lying? No.

That you are defending this action is pretty vile. Is having pubes automatic responsibility and adulthood? Tell me, how old do you think boys grew pubic hair at that time? Was it somehow later than now? Were they just "more mature then", as the excuse also for mohammad have sex with a 9 year old? Sorry, I don't buy it.

You claim that they had it coming because they worked for mohammad's enemies, but you don't refute any of my claims that seem to conterdict this motivation, including that mohammad's given reason was to ”Fight with them until they bear testimony to the fact that there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is his Messenger…”, and the other seemingly contradictions to a self-defense claim on the religion of peace site I linked to.

"Does this fit your criteria? Or you are cutting and pasting others' attack on Islam, without even trying understanding them?"

I'm not sure what you mean by this, since you don't actually refute anything I said as false, except that Mohammad didn't personaly rip little boys pants down (which as I said, was hyperbole).

"why did you dare to bring up terrorism in the first place?"
Uh, you brought up the norway shooter first, also I had mistaken you for someone else I had been talking to (here and e-mail) who refused to answer this challange. (Sorry about the mix-up)

Also, your accusations are pretty hypocritical considering how many times you lied (including using dishonest arguments) without apollogy. For review:

"If being unmarried is so holy and get U closer to god, what the heck is all the white slaves of sex n porn that booms like mushroom n all the millions of babies being aborted on yearly basis in your country man?Stop all the hideous unmarried sex activities and be a loveable person of god like Jesus, like you have claimed."

You made the bezaire claim that I "claimed" that I said marriage was bad, and responsible for things like porn and abortion. I never said such things. You never apollogized for this.

(On HAMAS's 'drive the jews to the sea' statement): "U see, what Hamas meant was the immigrants as they did came by the sea on ships, returned to where they came from in the means of transport that brought them to Palestine in the first place." 
Another lie, disproven by the fact that HAMAS specificly promotes killing of Jews (to children!). No Apollogy.

On "my way of thinking": "They are all liars n killers. All of them deserved to be exterminated. Along with helpless women n children and unarmed men."" No apollogy for this false statement.

"I have to use ref. n resources from the Zionists or Israel's side from now on. Hope not that exclusively."
Here you falsely pretend to be a victem, saying I'm being unfair and insisting you use "pro-zionist" sources. The truth is, I complained about ONE source, Al-Jazeera who puts out pro-terrorist (HAMAS) propaganda. No Appollogy.

You dishonestly claimed that Sharia isn't being enforced on non-muslims. Then again, maybe you didn't lie and your completely clueless what's happening in muslim countries. You didn't apollogize or explain how your clueless.

Also, a vast number of uses of tu-quo-que fallacies that, when I called you on them, again you never apollogized for.

So, how about you apollogy for your ACTUAL dishonesty, since your in such a huff about my hyperbole?

Source: http://www.jihadwatch.org/2009/10/boston-muslim-a-misunderstander-of-islam-was-plotting-violent-jihad.html

You lied!

Two Jewish tribes, Banu Qainuqa and Banu Nadir weren't slaughtered when they broke their treaty with the Prophet. Only Banu Quraizah. Even the Jews of Khaybar weren't executed since they were open hostile enemies that seek to destroy the Muslims honestly without deceit.

Like I've said earlier, no warriors that betrayed and fought with the enemy against his country in a war would be forgiven. Name me one in whatever year. If Muslims were so blood thirsty, the Jews wouldn't be so hastily surrendered to them and heeded to Muslims' judgement whenever they were overpowered by them.

The Jewish tribes at that time had shown great anonymity towards the Prophet and Islam. That is why Ali was asked to fight them until they proclaimed him as the messenger of God. Those who desist fighting and threatening Muslims with annihilation, didn't have to proclaim it. Show me a record of forced conversion of the Jews at Khaybar. You can't, can you?

Even after their hostility towards the Muslims, the Prophet let them be. Do you know about this, Foolster41?

Interestingly, how many Muslims and Jews faced each other on that day in Khaybar, Foolster41? What were the death toll? You're trying to portray them as bullies, I wonder why?

You lied again about Sharia. Sharia is law. Non-Muslims who live under Muslim nations may choose to follow it or his own law according to their faith. You make it sound like the tiny minority of Muslims in the West are going to enforce Sharia upon you. How would this be possible?

Name me Non-Muslim adulterers that were stoned to death or whipped under Sharia? You can't even find a hundred Muslims who suffered these punishments, can you?

Name me Non-Muslims who were whipped for being a drunkard, caught gambling and lost their hand for thievery?

Again, you are lying.

You have never met a 9 year old girl that have reached puberty, haven't you?

9 year old aborted her baby.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OZH-mdbCXI

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/7824699/Girls-now-reaching-puberty-before-10-a-year-sooner-than-20-years-ago.html

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/08/09/girls.starting.puberty.early/index.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_youngest_birth_mothers

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1883598,00.html

Your argument is that a 9 year old is a baby-like-kid, which is a lie. They are woman! Who are you to say otherwise?

A girl can start her period anytime between the ages of 8 and 15.
http://www.womenshealth.gov/publications/our-publications/fact-sheet/menstruation.cfm

http://www.avert.org/puberty-girls.htm

The fact that these 'babies' are sexually active, even now, and the fact that in history, Byzantium royals and even the British royals practised, hundred of years after the Prophet marriage, shows that there is nothing wrong with this marriage.

Stop acting like they are babies! Babies don't grow babies in their wombs, give birth and breast feed other babies!

I am all with you if you want Western Christian girls to get much older when they marry. Let say 45 to 50 years old, sound good to you, spread the word. Let's have bride over 50s. It sounds so much amoral to me.

Foolster41, I have proven the puberty age about 1,400 years ago and now is about the same.

You are not hyperboling. Trust me, I know literature. You're lying. Apologise for all your lies.

You haven't been able to back your claim "Islam itself justifies terrorism"

I've asked the verses or the Hadith repeatedly. Stop beating around the bushes and give it to me.

If Islam justify terrorism, I won't be busy talking with you Foolster41. So would all the able men. You are lying, once more.

Start apologising.

Book 019, Number 4360:
It has been narrated on the authority of 'Umar b. al-Khattab who said: When it was the day on which the Battle of Badr was fought, the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) cast a glance at the infidels, and they were one thousand while his own Companions were three hundred and nineteen.

The Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him) turned (his face) towards the Qibla Then he stretched his hands and began his supplication to his Lord:" O Allah, accomplish for me what Thou hast promised to me. O Allah, bring about what Thou hast promised to me. O Allah, if this small band of Muslims is destroyed. Thou will not be worshipped on this earth."

He continued his supplication to his Lord, stretching his hands, facing the Qibla, until his mantle slipped down from his shoulders. So Abu Bakr came to him, picked up his mantle and put it on his shoulders. Then he embraced him from behind and said:. Prophet of Allah, this prayer of yours to your Lord will suffice you, and He will fulfil for you what He has promised you.

So Allah, the Glorious and Exalted, revealed (the Qur'anic verse):" When ye appealed to your Lord for help, He responded to your call (saying): I will help you with one thousand angels coming in succession." So Allah helped him with angels.

Abu Zumail said that the hadith was narrated to him by Ibn 'Abbas who said: While on that day a Muslim was chasing a disbeliever who was going ahead of him, he heard over him' the swishing of the whip and the voice of the rider saying: Go ahead, Haizi'm! He glanced at the polytheist who had (now) fallen down on his back. When he looked at him (carefully he found that) there was a scar on his nose and his face was torn as if it had been lashed with a whip, and had turned green with its poison.

An Ansari came to the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) and related this (event) to him. He said: You have told the truth. This was the help from the third heaven. The Muslims that day (i. e. the day of the Battle of Badr) killed seventy persons and captured seventy. The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said to Abu Bakr and 'Umar (Allah be pleased with them): What is your opinion about these captives? Abu Bakr said: They are our kith and kin. I think you should release them after getting from them a ransom. This will be a source of strength to us against the infidels.

It is quite possible that Allah may guide them to Islam. Then the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: What is your opinion. Ibn Khattab? He said: Messenger of Allah. I do not hold the same opinion as Abu Bakr. I am of the opinion that you should hand them over to us so that we may cut off their heads.

Hand over 'Aqil to 'Ali that he may cut off his head, and hand over such and such relative to me that I may but off his head. They are leaders of the disbelievers and veterans among them. The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) approved the opinion of Abu Bakr and did not approve what I said.

The next day when I came to the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him), I found that both he and Abu Bakr were sitting shedding tears. I said: Messenger of Allah, why are you and your Companion shedding tears? Tell me the reason. For I will weep ate, if not, I will at least pretend to weep in sympathy with you. The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: I weep for what has happened to your companions for taking ransom (from the prisoners). I was shown the torture to which they were subjected. It was brought to me as close as this tree. (He pointed to a tree close to him.) Then God revealed the verse:" It is not befitting for a prophet that he should take prisoners until the force of the disbelievers has been crushed..." to the end of the verse:" so eat ye the spoils of war, (it is) lawful and pure. So Allah made booty lawful for them."

http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/muslim/019.smt.html

Muhammad, the prophet was betrayed three times by the Jews. He and the first Muslims were almost routed, each one of them. He had to face the same forces that he had showed mercy before in Madinah when they have surrendered to him in Khaybar.

What would you have him do? Die?

Book 019, Number 4380:

It has been narrated on the authority of Ibn Abbas who learnt the tradition personally from Abu Safyan. The latter said: I went out (on a mercantile venture) during the period (of truce) between me and the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him).

While I was in Syria, the letter of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) was handed over to Hiraql (Ceasar), the Emperor of Rome (who was on a visit to Jerusalem at that time).

The letter was brought by Dihya Kalbi who delivered it to the governor of Busra The governor passed it on to Hiraql, (On receiving the letter), he said: Is there anyone from the people of this man who thinks that he is a prophet. People said: Yes. So, I was called along with a few others from the Quraish. We were admitted to Hiraql and he seated us before him.

He asked: Which of you has closer kinship with the man who thinks that he is a prophet? Abu Sufyan said: I. So they seated me in front of him and seated my companions behind me. Then, he called his interpreter and said to him: Tell them that I am going to ask this fellow (i. e. Abu Sufyan) about the man who thinks that he is a prophet. If he tells me a lie, then refute him.

Abu Sufyan told (the narrator): By God, if there was not the fear that falsehood would be imputed to me I would have lied. (Then) Hiraql said to his interpreter: Inquire from him about his ancestry, I said: He is of good ancestry among us. He asked: Has there been a king among his ancestors? I said: No. He asked: Did you accuse him of falsehood before he proclaimed his prophethood? I said: No.

He asked: Who are his follower people of high status or low status? I said: (They are) of low status.

He asked: Are they increasing in number or decreasing? I said. No. they are rather increasing.

He asked: Does anyone give up his religion, being dissatisfied with it, after having embraced it? I said: No.

He asked: Have you been at war with him? I said: Yes. He asked: How did you fare in that war? I said: The war between us and him has been wavering like a bucket, up at one turn and down at the other (i. e. the victory has been shared between us and him by turns). Sometimes he suffered loss at our hands and sometimes we suffered loss at his (hand).

He asked: Has he (ever) violated his covenant? I said: No. but we have recently concluded a peace treaty with him for a period and we do not know what he is going to do about it. (Abu Sufyan said on oath that he could not interpolate in this dialogue anything from himself more than these words )

He asked: Did anyone make the proclamation (Of prophethood) before him? I said: No.

He (now) said to his interpreter: Tell him, I asked him about his ancestry and he had replied that he had the best ancestry. This is the case with Prophets; they are the descendants of the noblest among their people (Addressing Abu Sufyan), he continued: I asked you if there had been a king among his ancestors. You said that there had been none. If there had been a king among his ancestors, I would have said that he was a man demanding his ancestral kingdom.

I asked you about his followers whether they were people of high or low status, and you said that they were of rather low status. Such are the followers of the Prophets.

I asked you whether you used to accuse him of falsehood before he proclaimed his prophethood, and you said that you did not.

So I have understood that when he did not allow himself to tell a lie about the poeple, he would never go to the length of forging a falsehood about Allah.

I asked you whether anyone renounced his religion being dissatisfied with it after he had embraced it, and you replied in the negative. Faith is like this when it enters the depth of the heart (it perpetuates them).

I asked you whether his followers were increasing or decreasing. You said they were increasing. Faith is like this until it reaches its consummation.

I asked you whether you had been at war with him, and you replied that you had been and that the victory between you and him had been shared by turns, sometimes he suffering loss at your hand and sometimes you suffering lost at his. This is how the Prophets are tried before the final victory is theirs.

I asked you whether he (ever) violated his covenant, and you said that he did not. This is how the Prophets behave. They never violate (their covenants).

I asked you whether anyone before him had proclaimed the same thing, and you replied in the negative. I said: If anyone had made the same proclamation before, I would have thought that he was a man following what had been proclaimed before.

(Then) he asked: What does he enjoin upon you? I said: He exhorts us to offer Salat, to pay Zakat, to show due regard to kinship and to practise chastity.

He said: If what you have told about him is true, he is certainly a Prophet. I knew that he was to appear but I did not think that he would be from among you.

If I knew that I would be able to reach him. I would love to meet him; and if I had been with him, I would have washed his feet (out of reverence). His dominion would certainly extend to this place which is under my feet.

Then he called for the letter of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) and read it. The letter ran as follows:

"In the name of Allah, Most Gracious and Most Merciful. From Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah, to Hiraql, the Emperor of the Romans. Peace be upon him who follows the guidance. After this, I extend to you the invitation to accept Islam. Embrace Islam and you will be safe. Accept Islam, God will give you double the reward. And if you turn away, upon you will be the sin of your subjects.

"O People of the Book, come to the word that is common between us that we should worship none other than Allah, should not ascribe any partner to Him and some of us should not take their fellows as Lords other than Allah. If they turn away, you should say that we testify to our being Muslims [iii. 64]."

When he had finished the reading of the letter, noise and confused clamour was raised around him, and he ordered us to leave. Accordingly, we left. (Addressing my companions) while we were coming out (of the place). I said: Ibn Abu Kabsha (referring sarcastically to the Holy Prophet) has come to wield a great power. Lo! (even) the king of the Romans is afraid of him. I continued to believe that the authority of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) would triumph until God imbued me with (the spirit of) Islam.

Only in the Qur'an, no creations are revered as god, gods or divine worthy of worship.

Only the laws/guidances in the Qur'an remained to be observe by the believers following it. The Bible's laws/guidances aren't being observed by the believers proclaiming of believing it. Romans 1:23 would be one of them.

1:00 AM in the blessed lands of the Malay. Have to sleep. I'll be back.

Your last two posts are interesting in their way, Mr. Srizals, but what I would like to know is your opinion about why the Qur'an is true.

You've mentioned that in the Qur'an no creations are revered as gods. That's all very well, but that refers to some of the content of the Qur'an. It is not an opinion or speculation on the truth of the Qur'an. What I'm asking for something more along the lines of epistemology. If the Qur'an is a book of knowledge, how are its propositions true? In other words, what are premises on which one can argue that the book is sound?

It seems our posts crossed at some point. I'll look for your reply another time.

Excellently worded classicus. .you expressed what I was trying to formulate as a retort to srizels' calling me ''O Deviated one''. Having never studied Philosophy, it took me a while to get my head around the primary principles of deductive reasoning, deviation from the norm, and so forth. That the premises are faulty explains why the conclusions are so questionable. The assumption that the Qu'ran is what Muslims say it is holds no weight as far as I'm concerned.

Jolly Olly. .just started reading up on inductive reasoning too and a plethora of logical fallacies. I feels like Christmas and I just got given a brand new tool kit for all them tricky jobs.

"You lied again about Sharia. Sharia is law. Non-Muslims who live under Muslim nations may choose to follow it or his own law according to their faith. You make it sound like the tiny minority of Muslims in the West are going to enforce Sharia upon you. How would this be possible?"

I already proved this the last time we spoke.

See:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2009/10/sharia-advancing-in-iraq----for-non-muslims-too.html
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Sharia+law+non-muslims+site%3Awww.jihadwatch.org&aq=f&aql=&aqi=&oq=

It's pretty funny how you LIE (you already had access to these links, and the jihadwatch archives) when you accuse me of lying. I expect you to apollogize, but of course, I'm not holding my breath since you've never apollogized for your lies before.

"I am all with you if you want Western Christian girls to get much older when they marry. Let say 45 to 50 years old, sound good to you, spread the word. Let's have bride over 50s. It sounds so much amoral to me."

Once again, you take what I say, and greatly exagerate what I'm saying, as if that's my posistion. I never said such a thing.

"Stop acting like they are babies! Babies don't grow babies in their wombs, give birth and breast feed other babies!"

Just because someone can give birth does not make them automaticly emptionaly mature enough to do so. Niether did I say that they are "babies" (but of course, you won't actknowledge this was a lie either!) Do you really beleive 9 year olds are mature enough to have sex, or have children? You are infact saying it's alright to have sex with 9 year olds. This is pedophilia.

"You are not hyperboling. Trust me, I know literature. You're lying. Apologise for all your lies."

I already exlained my reasoning (ordering a hit can be said as doing it), you don't show how that is not hyperbole.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbole). Instead you keep noisily insisting I apollogize in order to try to distract from what mohammad did (or to be more percise ordered done) including murdering peoets who were critical, leading raiding war bands, torturing men for their possestions qand persecuting non-beleivers.

"I've asked the verses or the Hadith repeatedly. Stop beating around the bushes and give it to me."
Once again, I gave a number of verses above. You either can't read or wish to pretend they don't exist.

I gave you pleanty of warnings, and you contenue to LIE (about me lying), and in general being a hypocrite (especially considering all the dishonest arguments that I've called you on including red-herrings to distract, ad honim and Tu Quo Que). I think I'm done, unless you have something worthwhile to answer to.

Ha ha. loved your Paradise Lost and Car Talk anecdotal subscripts to that 'an idol is more less'. Classic classicus. Chartered accountancy, you're right, that's the English term. .my old man trained as one, so of course swung me my first job when I left school in his old firm Peat Marwick. Bored the crap out of me checking other people's sums and I couldn't get out of it quick enough. Although you probably know all the ins-and-outs of Logic etc, for anybody else who, like me, could use some extra tools to structure their arguments, here's the site that helped me instantly. . http://atheism.about.com/od/criticalthinking/a/deductivearg.htm

Torturing people for their possessions, a lie again,,

"As a matter of fact, Kinana Ibn Rabi Ibn al-Huquaiq had been granted his life on the condition that he would never break faith or make false statements. He had also given his word, according to one of the reports, that if he did anything to the contrary, he could be put to death. Kinana played false, and the immunity granted to him was withdrawn. He killed Mahmud Ibn Maslama (Muslima) and had, therefore to suffer for it, as we have already stated on the authority of Tabari." (Allama Shibli Nu'Mani, Sirat-Un-Nabi, volume II, p 173-174)"

http://www.call-to-monotheism.com/rebuttal_to_silas_s_article__muhammad_and_the_death_of_kinana_

At that time, almost every tribe is hostile towards Muslims, they are not hesitant to attack and kill all Muslims that they can. That is why Muslims waited for the azan before raiding them. They are at a time of war in the age of the gladiators. They can't afford to walk here and there like you and me now.

Some incidents in Khaybar that you should know.

"During the Khaybar expedition, an attempt was made to poison the Messenger(sallallahu alaiyhi wassallam) of Allah. A Jewess, Zaynab bint al-Harith, the wife of Sallam ibn Mishkam, presented him with roasted mutton, having enquired what joint he liked best. When she was told, 'shoulder,' she put a quantity of poison in it and took it to him. When he tasted it, he realised immediately that it was poisoned and spat it out.

He summoned the Jews who gathered round and asked them, 'Will you be truthful about something I will ask of you?'
They said, 'Yes.
'Did you put poison in this mutton?'
'Yes.
'What made you do it?'
'If you were false,' they said, 'we would get rid of you. But if you are really a Prophet, the poison would not harm you.
Zaynab was then brought to the Messenger(sallallahu alaiyhi wassallam) of Allah. She confessed, 'I wanted to kill you.
He answered, 'Allah would not give you power over me.
His Companions asked, 'Shall we kill her?'
'No,' he said, and she was set free.

However, when Bishr ibn al-Bara' ibn Ma'rur, who had also eaten some of the mutton, died a painful death, Zaynab was killed."

http://alislaah3.tripod.com/alislaah/id13.html

Some of the tribes even deliberately lured Muslims out in deceit that they want to learn Islam from them when they just wanted to lure them out from safety to kill them. Is this ok with you?

Google The battle of Hunain. Thanks.

In haste, read this for a while.

http://www.heritage-history.com/www/heritage.php?Dir=pseudowar&FileName=moslemconquest

*sigh*

"Torturing people for their possessions, a lie again" ... "as we have already stated on the authority of Tabari."

You apparently have reading comprehension problems. I quoted Tabari, you can't both rely on the authority of, and say they are wrong/lying on the same issue at the same time. You never even mention my quote. It quite explicitly said he (ordered) torture to get possessions.

But of course, I'm the one who's being dishonest here.

Also, you are advocating torture as punishment as being alright?

As for the rest, I'm not responding to you unless you start admiring your dishonesty.

"If you can't accept the marriage of the Prophet, can you accept the marriage of Byzantium princess and British royal? Yes or no? A simple, one word answer with reasons would suffice."

You don't say which, but if it is with an underage girl of 9 (quick google search suggest, "yes"), then yes.

Oh, sorry were you expecting hypocracy?

Darn it, I meant "no." I can't accept it. I read that wrong ("can you NOT accept"). This is obviously what I meant when I said "Oh, sorry were you expecting hypocracy?"

Even Ibn Ishaq himself wasn't sure of what he was writing sometimes by saying 'it is alleged' or 'God only knows the truth'. He was emphasising the truth of his recordings.

Should you take him as error free when he himself had not claimed such?

http://hartsem.academia.edu/Ibrahimlong/Papers/161140/Ibn_Ishaqs_Sirat_Rasul

Foolster41, you lied again about saying that Christianity doesn't preach terrorism. Apologise.

Luke 19:27
New International Version (©1984)
But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them--bring them here and kill them in front of me.

http://bible.cc/luke/19-27.htm

Who said that, Foolster41?

Let me show you who,

Luke 19:28
New International Version (©1984)
After Jesus had said this, he went on ahead, going up to Jerusalem.

http://bible.cc/luke/19-28.htm

"If you can't find the resources, then, you must admit, you are judging based on hearsay, a gossip without any foundation of the truth."

But if Tabari made it up, as you claim, or taking things from bad sources, then by what basis do you quote him as an authority? He's the one you quoted to prove he didn't torture him for information (note, it only gives an alt. motive, which could still co-incide with my verse. it still says he tortured. more on that later. ). Why did you quote someone, only to admit he wasn't a reliable witness, and evidence is "heresay"?

Also, even if the verse you quoted is the only correct one, it still says he tortured someone. You comment "That a man should be tortured with burns on his chest by the sparks of a flint is too heinous a deed for a Prophet (Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) who had earned for himself the title of Rahma'lil Alamin (Mercy for all the worlds)." may be true in that I don't remember reading the specific of HOW he tortured, so maybe he didn't do it THAT WAY, but the verse does say he tortured (that is, ordered torture by his henchmen.). So on the face of it, your quote (in that it implies mohammad did not torture) is false by your own words.

"Foolster41, you lied again about saying that Christianity doesn't preach terrorism. Apologise."
What is really irritating is that you PRETEND to be honest and call me a liar, but REFUSE to even actknowledge your dishonest arguments (such as your use of ad honim and tu quo que in our past conversation), or your false accusations against me. I listed quite a few above, but you just pretend to not have seen it and try again with another lie, and demand I apollogize.

That's it! I refuse to give you any more attention. You have shown that you refuse to discuss like a civilized person, and instead keep trying to LIE hoping something will stick.

Also, your taking the verse completely out of context. (IRONY!). It's a parable. You might want to read the entire chapter: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+19&version=NIV

Also, you might want to consider why this verse isn't actually being used to justify violence, as opposed to the thousands of attacks since 9/11 by muslims in the name of Islam.

Keep digging, you're not at the center of the earth quite yet.

"But if Tabari made it up, as you claim, or taking things from bad sources,"
To be clear, your claim is he took it from bad sources (Ibn Ishaq) who may have made it up from other sources.

Parables? What funny parables it must have been. But it isn't. Throughout millennia, that is what Christians do and did, mostly to each other.

The ancient mediaeval torture machines were invented for heretics. Even heretics that chose another form of Christianity.

Many Christians were wiped out by Christians themselves. Many suffered on the stake, burnt slowly in front of pious Christians, and exemplary model would be the Archbishop Cranmer, see, even an Archbishop is not save in the reign of Christianity.

http://www.cathar.info/1206_crusade.htm

Tabari quotes all the sources and resources as a knowledge for future references. You cherry picked them. It's your fault. Not mine.

http://sunnah.org/history/Scholars/Al-Tabari.htm

Foolster41, when Jerusalem fell into the hands of the Crusaders, what happened to the Jews and Muslims there? Are your mind that detached from reality and the past?

You keep referring to countries overran by deadly troops and its allies. Well, guess what, people don't behave normally during war. People do crazy things. Especially when they are being invaded by holy beings that think they have the divine right to invade, kill and torture and keep human's body parts as trophies of war.

Guess who these Barbarians are. Look into the mirror and you'll see what they look like, O higher beings!

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-kill-team-20110327

Answer yes or no, Foolster41:

Crusaders spread Christianity in most Europe. (Yes, NO)

People were killed, tortured in sadistic and painful way so that they won’t just die easily if they refused Christianity. (Yes, NO) (And you were so grossed at a death of a man).

What about the millions of Pagans, Jews, Christians and Muslims that perished sadistically under Christianity?

The god in the Old Testament is the same with the New Testament. (Yes, NO)

Time and time again, you have been proven to be a shameless liar. Do what you must. Just don’t interrupt me in here, ever again if your argument is just 'Israel has the right to kill babies, says god', and 'Christianity doesn't teach terrorism'.

You lied about Hamas, saying that they wanted to drown every single Israelis into the sea. You supported thievery. You support baby killers. You are not a good person, Foolster41. Sorry for saying that. But it’s a fact. As I’ve, no, as you’ve proven it, yourself. What a shame.

Bible quotes inscribed on killing machines or terror. What a weird combination.

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/us-military-weapons-inscribed-secret-jesus-bible-codes/story?id=9575794

The Breast ripper were used on women's breast, only Christians have been recorded to have used such torture against dissidents. You can't twist your way out of this one, Foolster41. But you can just lie your way out of this. You have been had. Not by me. By the saviours of Western civilisation nowadays and of the ancients that cried wolf.

The monsters actualy are the likes of you!

http://listverse.com/2009/07/20/top-10-gruesome-medieval-torture-devices/

http://www.medievality.com/torture.html

http://www.oddee.com/item_96596.aspx

http://torture.justsickshit.com/torture-in-the-medieval-timessickly/

Here is what happened to those who thought the marriage of the Prophet as vile.

http://crooksandliars.com/nicole-belle/vatican-rocked-another-sex-scandal

http://blogs.voanews.com/breaking-news/2011/05/18/us-church-backed-study-homosexuality-celibacy-did-not-cause-sex-abuse/
"In 2007, a settlement was reached between the Catholic

Archdiocese of Los Angeles and hundreds of plaintiffs in a church sex-abuse scandal. The church promised to pay $660 million, the largest payout in the abuse scandal by far. CBSNews.com"
http://www.presstv.ir/usdetail/165224.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3872499.stm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/23/AR2010032304040.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/19/us-catholic-church-sexual-abuse-report

Again, only Christians emerged as the absolute dominion in this field, too. Not those evil Muslims who accept Muhammad as the Prophet.

Someone says that "we will know them by their fruits". Will that someone please reply to me now?

You know what, among all the hideous torture method practised by Christians, one chilled me the most, the saw. Where the victims were sawn alive, slowly in halves. I can't imagine the sight and the smell of fresh blood and flesh, what a gruesome scene it was. How do these Christians, I mean, the culprits that did these torture do what they do? Were they humans!??

The likes of you have made people hate religion for acting so holy and pious and god-fearing, when you absolutely not.

“Fear is the basis of the whole - fear of the mysterious, fear of defeat, fear of death. Fear is the
parent of cruelty, and therefore it is no wonder if cruelty and religion have gone hand-in-hand.” - Bertrand Russell

Things about the Popes that you might not know.
http://www.oddee.com/item_96537.aspx

Enjoy, for those who love humour.

There's no historical proof whatsoever regarding the death of Kinana by ancient Jews and Christians. Check mate.

You, Foolster41 have won the title, Foolster the liar. And you did it all by yourself. Congratulation! You deserved it. No need to reply. I'm not going to read your lies again. Except of course, if you apologise for all your intentional lies. BYe Foolster, the liar. Nice knowing you.

For the benefit of anyone who may lob into this thread in future, which was taken over by an incredibly arrogant, utterly brainwashed, and very aggressive Mohammedan dementor, pouring out spin, lies, tu quoque and rote utterances, at a mile a minute:

you may find that these items from the jihadwatch archive, on the subject of 'arguing with Muslims', throw some light on the thread (which, of course, the Mohammedan managed to deflect entirely from the posted topic, namely, Muslim bullying and harassment of Christians in Malaysia, presuming to tell them what words they may use - or not use - in their Bible translations; so the first thing to do, given all the Mohammedan dementor activity, is to scroll right back up to the top of the thread and re-read the posted article a couple of times, thus defeating the Mohammedan's attempt to distract and confuse.)

First, on Tu Quoque, which is a logical fallacy that all Mohammedans who have ever visited this site seem to employ instinctively and reflexively, and sometimes as their argument of first resort:

TaylorNealGrayson | November 30, 2009 4:41 AM | Reply

"The argument, "But other people do it," has absolutely no logic.
Other people doing it does not negate the fact that THESE people do it.
Other people doing it for *different* reasons does not cancel out the fact that THESE people do it for religious reasons.
Other people doing it does not make THESE people doing it less wrong or less abhorrent.
The old "other people do it" argument is simply a deflection of responsibility."

Second, a more detailed discussion of some of the tricks employed by Mohammedan debaters, written by an apostate from Islam:

http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/10467/sec_id/10467

"Out Of Context," Or, How To Argue With A Muslim
by Ibn Warraq (Sept. 2007)

And Hugh Fitzgerald, on how to provoke a Muslim Meltdown, in the comments to this thread from 2005

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2005/12/fitzgerald-gift-giving-and-gift-taking.html

First, Jihadwatch regular Cornelius recounted his experience with an outwardly nice and friendly Muslim neighbour he had had:

'We finally broached the issue of apostasy. I asked him if he would view Christians as barbaric if we murdered those among us who converted to Islam. He replied "of course."

'I shot back "then how is it any different when Muslims kill those who convert to Christianity?"

His answer so starkly exemplified the mindset of a supremicist that - though I manitained my poker face, I was left absolutely shaken.

"Because OURS is the TRUE faith."

The words were seared into my memory. Here-in lies the rationale for every double standard, every display of intolerance, every act of violence that a Muslim chooses to employ against an infidel..."because OURS is the TRUE faith."'

To which Hugh Fitzgerald, long an erudite poster at this site (he would have much appreciated 'classicus) but who has since moved on to other fields replied:

Hugh | December 26, 2005 8:26 PM

"The story just above makes a useful point that should be remembered.

" When dealing with an outwardly friendly, plausible adherent of Islam, at a certain point, and no matter how outwardly pleasant the fellow (or fellowette) may be, try to bring the conversation around to certain matters.

"Ask, for example, about the "Hadith" and the "Sira." Start out with a tone of sweet ignorance, as ingenuous as you can possibly be. See what your informant tells you.

"Ask as well about the treatment of non-Muslims under Islam.

"Then start asking a few questions -- test questions.

"What's the jizyah?" "What other things did non-Muslims have to do"? "Are they treeated with complete equality today"?

"Did Muslims ever own slaves"? "Did Muhammad ever own slaves"? "Do any Muslims today own slaves"? "What's this about black eunuchs -- any truth to the stories?" "Did Muslims really raid up and down the coasts of Europe"?

"What do Muslims think of Muhammad"? "Is he like Jesus?" "Do they want to be like him?" "Is he some kind of model, or what"?

"Who was Aisha"? "How old was she when Muhammad had sexual intercourse with her"? "Muslims don't really believe that they should imitate Muhammad in that, do they?"

"Who was Asma bint Marwan"? "What were the Banu Qurayza"? "What happened at the Khaybar Oasis"?

"Is it okay to lie about Islam to protect the faith from non-Muslims"?

"What do Muslims see as their goal"?

"Long before you get through those questions, as you show a disturbing knowledge, the conversation will have been reduced to hysterical fury and lie after shouted lie.

Now imagine this final statement being delivered in the gravelly cajun voice I would like to summon up for the occasion:

"I gorontee."

I submit that Hugh's predictions have been fully borne out in the course of this thread.

And some more wisdom from the jihadwatch archives, on the subject of typical Mohammedan methods of 'argumentation' and discourse:

In this thread -

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2005/06/spain-arrests-more-terror-suspects.html

in the comments:

Giaour | June 21, 2005 2:57 PM

"When conversing with Muslims remember these simple rules.

[the Muslim believes that] l. Islam is perfect (The perfect ideology for the world).

[the Muslim believes that] 2. By extension an Islamic is perfect and can do wrong.

3. Islam is never the aggressor or wrong, because it is perfect and only the imperfect who resist Islam are wrong. The imperfect unbeliever is the aggressor for resisting perfect Islam.

4. The Muslim is ALWAYS correct, it is the fault of the imperfect unbeliever that he doesn't understand Islam - as he has not been schooled in the right way.

Has anyone ever seen an Arab/Muslim accept personal responsibility about anything, or ever cop to error or mistakes? I haven't.

At the very least it is Insha'allah (The will of Allah), thus eliminating the need to accept responsibility.

BTW, Muslims play the guilt card with Kaffirs, but the guilt card does not play on a Muslim table.

If you have one word by which to describe those raised in the Judeo Christian World.. it is guilt.

Aggressiion and aggressiveness defines the Arab/Muslim

Bear that in mind when cross talking with a Muslim.

What Muslims respond to, and viciously, is shame
and ridicule.

** Especially ridicule, because that is their chief dialect tool, invoked against Kaffirs.** {note - aggression and ridicule have been employed by the Mohammedan in this thread, over and over and over - dda)

Muhammad was thin skinned, his response to ridicule was slaughter (fitnah is worse than slaughter).

The Qur'an toilet riots, were a response to perceived ridicule of the basis of their ego and identity.. thus themselves."

Oh, and some more on the subject of the Muslim mind, contributed by a poster named Zathras in 2006, also very interesting and apposite.

In this thread from 2006

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2006/05/israeli-retaliates-to-attacks-bombs-bases-in-lebanon.html

"In my youth I ran foul of the local Communist Party recruiters at our local jazz club.

"Their evangelism was interesting and better organised and less susceptible to personal opinion than was that of many Christian evangelists but on the whole, not more effective.

"However there was one side of them that always amused me,

" I had seen it before and it was the tendency to become aggressive if and when you refuted their arguments.

"However in my dealings with Muslims, reacting aggressively and even violently seems to be the norm once you point out the fallacies.

"They also never answer questions at all but veer off into a sura stream of oft irrelevance which I gather is supposed to counter the question as opposed to answering it.

"The point here (sorry!!) is that when I talk with them I keep getting deja vu and I have just discovered what causes this:

"f you play a game or a tactical scenario on a computer, you run into that relentlessly stupid binary character called an AI, where there appears to be an automated response to changes in the local situation whatever it may be and sometimes these responses really do border on the bizarre and the irrelevant and seem to have nothing at all to do with the supposed cause. Obviously this is a function of the program and the capacity of the computer and not just a gremlin or glitch.

"But Muslims argue like a bland AI with the Koran as their core memory and their madrassa/mosque teachings as the program.

"They are quite incapable of seeing a problem with their viewpoint, nor of even believing that someone else could be correct other than them; and they absolutely refuse to use the evidence of their own senses to challenge their own views.

"They appear to be consciously "out of phase" with the rest of the world and to luxuriate in this and to see it as the result of divine supremacy as opposed to the results of a very poor program and an even worse memory core.

Posted by: Zathras at May 29, 2006 12:08 AM'.

Oh, and I just took my own advice.

I went right back up and read the posted article.

The fact of the matter is that in Malaysia Muslims are arrogantly and cruelly bullying and threatening and bossing around the Christians - and *also*, on other occasions, the Buddhists, the Hindus, and anybody else in Malaysia who is not a Muslim. And anyone who dares to apostasise from Islam - such as Lina Joy - gets treated very badly, too, because sharia says that those who leave Islam must be killed.

Life in Malaysia for non-Muslims is not very good...and it's steadily getting worse, as Muslims grow more and more aggressive, more and more selfish and cruel and unjust (as well as mean and petty and spiteful).

The sensible non-Muslims are leaving and going to other places.

When they are all gone, then the Muslims will have no-one to leech off, and will only have each other to bully, rob and kill.

I'm sure the higher being that saved Foolster, the liar came from either these churches.

http://www.oddee.com/item_90977.aspx

Now I'm beginning to see what is meant by these verses. I'm done. Bye everyone. Have a happy 90 years of life. Enjoy the grace of God while you can.

For those misunderstanders of Islam,

A gift for you,

Romans 1

17For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.

18For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

19Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

20For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

21Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

22Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

23And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

24Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:

25Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

"There's no historical proof whatsoever regarding the death of Kinana by ancient Jews and Christians. Check mate."
Yes, just like how me and my brothers would when we were kids jokingly say (after loosing at chess) "Queen with the uzzi" and start knocking down peices. Winning through completely ignoring the rules, or the actual arguments I'm making. People here are not as stupid as you think, so I don't know what you think you're doing, except maybe making youself feel so smart, while looking so stupid.

We wern't talking about the death of Kinana, so that's another slight-of-hand attempt (I'm afraid I lost track, I think that's about six outright lies, six dishonest arguments (Tu Quo Que, Ad honim, etc.) and four non-sequitor deflections) . We were talking about whether Mohammad tortured (or ordered) him tortured. Both the source I quoted and the one you yourself quoted from Tabari said he in fact did.

"your argument is just 'Israel has the right to kill babies'"
How many times now have you put dispicable words in my mouth false, and refused to take responsibility? I DARE you to quote where I said that. You can't, because I didn't. How is this not dishonest? I know you'll just ignore it, because admiting being wrong is weakness for a muslim UBERMANCH. Can't let those Kufr think they might be equal to the Master religion.

Yet, you are trying to convince someone (yourself?) that I'm a dispicable liar while ignoring most of my arguments and lying yourself? Why would someone trust you?

"You lied about Hamas, saying that they wanted to drown every single Israelis into the sea." It's in their charter and propaganda towards their children. It's not hard to find. I beleive I've even quoted it before in our last discussion on the "Boston" thread. But don't let truth get in your way.

"You supported thievery. You support baby killers."
And you don't in supporting HAMAS? Really? Of course I don't, because Isreal doesn't target babies (or civilians), and you failed to prove it.

"No need to reply. I'm not going to read your lies again."
Good riddence.

"WAR IS PEACE. SLAVERY IS FREEDOM. IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH. " - Inner Party in George Orwell's "1984" (written 1948)
Sounds like Islam to me.

(And looking it up, I think we got the "Queen with a uzi" thing from a dilbert comic. http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/1991-12-21/)

dumbledoresarmy,

Lina Joy is still alive, you lied too. I'm done talking with liars that cannot reason.

The Disbelievers
With the name of Allah, the All-Merciful, the Very-Merciful.
[109:1]
Say, “O disbelievers,

[109:2]
I do not worship that which you worship,

[109:3]
nor do you worship the One whom I worship.

[109:4]
And neither I am going to worship that which you have worshipped,

[109:5]
nor will you worship the One whom I worship.

[109:6]
For you is your faith, and for me, my faith.”

http://www.alim.org/library/quran/ayah/compare/109/1/command-not-to-compromise-in-the-matters-of-religion

Woe to those who cannot adhere to their own religious texts. Woe to those who had made their religion a thing of a play.

Go here,

http://theuglytruth.wordpress.com/

Look at the picture on your left.

"No; we ‘targeted’ the ‘terrorists’ who were using them as ‘human shields’. And we were right to do so. We, the Israeli Army, were right to kill these children in a shower of hellfire, because we did it inadvertently, while targeting someone else.

And the Gazans were wrong, on the other hand, to ‘target civilians’ with their almost useless rockets, which killed only 13 of us. And we in vengeance killed 1,300 of them, with bigger bombs and rockets, including 300 children. So that’s all right then. Our cause was just because we were ‘targeting terrorists’."

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/55486.html

To those who think that they are 'debating'. You don't ask and ask without answering any of the arguments against you.

If you do that, you are a coward that hide behind 'I got to ask but I don't have to answer' or whatever childish play you can think of.

Grow up.

"I'm sure the higher being that saved Foolster, the liar came from either these churches."
You just keep proving my point that you can't answer me, and instead defame me as belonging to one of these cults.

"25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever."

You keep quoting that, but it's pretty hypocritical since you Muslims believe the bible is corrupted (except the verses that convinetly can be used to promote Islam). This is also false, since there are many many original copies BEFORE the birth of Mohammad.

Also, the Bible came first, so it is the Muslims who are "exchanging" with the claim of a gospel that does not fit with the one Jesus taught (and Jesus warned against this). Just another day in the world of the hypocrite liar Srizals.

And by the way, I don't hate you. I dislike the hateful and dishonest things you say, and it does breaks my heart. I am praying that you see that dishonesty leads to death. I pray you see the LOVE of Christ is greater than the hatred and high of power that comes with Islam (Romans 8:35), and one must SERVE not seek power OVER others (Mark 9:33-37). The only thing that can break hate is not more hate, it is LOVE, and God is Love.

I was talking to Mr. Dumb... Stop being paranoid! You've won. Hooray, I'm 'debunked' by a questioner that is too afraid to answer any of my questions. Everyone rejoiced! You have been saved. Now go back to porn and pun, fat and booze. Enjoy life! You deserved it. Cheerio.

"Lina Joy is still alive, you lied too. I'm done talking with liars that cannot reason."

He says she was 'treated badly'. He never said she is dead (look above if you don't believe me). This is far too many times to have this bad of reading comprehension. You are DEFINITELY doing it on purpose.

Hypocrite.

You've lost the right to call someone a liar and be taken seriously, so please just stop.

Mr. Dumb says...."because sharia says that those who leave Islam must be killed."

She's still alive. YOu lied!

Just because Islam says those who must leave be killed, doesn't mean that automatically every person will be put to death.

It may be mistreatment is used in hopes of "persuading" the person to rejoin Islam.

I never said she was dead. Dumbledore was talking about cause and effect. Cause: Pronouncement of death penalty and inferiority of non-believers leads to death and/OR mistreatment. I think that's pretty clearly what he meant, but you HAVE to misconstrue it to be the worst way possible.

Also, the only reason I'm refusing to really answer you is because of your blatent dishonesty, if you were willing to show any effort to acknowledge your mistakes, I might be willing to listen. You don't even speak of them, but instead focus on making up things about me and what I said.

Foolster41, this is the last time I'm addressing you as a friend. You have been given the chance to prove all your allegations and defend your faith. You have not taken this golden opportunity of my second coming in here. I have no desire of returning here unless Christians here are brave enough to reason with questions and answers.

May you find peace. You are still living and breathing. You are blessed by The God that you have abandoned. Worry not. The Glory of The God cannot be added by us nor decrease by us. If you know the largest star known up to now by man, you'll see what I mean. God is Great. Hell is enough for liars among us. Let the curse of God be on us who have lied. Amin. I have to prepare to break my fast.

My Lord, I have done my duty. Bear witness that I have not abandoned the way of the Prophet, my leader, my love.

Forgive me for my transgression. Forgive these people O Lord if they are not knowing what they are saying against You and against themselves. Lead those who are sincere towards You. Only You, to You alone, I surrender myself.

"Foolster41, this is the last time I'm addressing you as a friend."
Does this mean I'm your enemy now?

"I have no desire of returning here unless Christians here are brave enough to reason with questions and answers."

HIPPO CRIT! +20 damage!

No one is fooled. I've tried to be reasonable with you. You defamed me repeatedly here (putting words into my mouth MULTIPLE times), and when I called you on it you refused to apologize or even acknowledge it. You also kept making off-topic arguments and non-sequitors and acted as if they were proved your arguments (see your VERY FIRST reply to me "there are no more Muslim idolaters, therefore Islam did not originate from idolatry" (at least, that Islam originated from idolatry, whether true or not is the point I was making, and so whether there are idol worshiping Muslims now has nothing to do with my argument.). I still tried to discuss things with you, but the frequency of your dishonesty got worse and worse.

"Hell is enough for liars among us. Let the curse of God be on us who have lied. Amin. I have to prepare to break my fast."

Wait a minute. You really believe you are The Buzz Light year? Oh all this time I thought it was an act! Look everyone! It's the real Buzz Lightyear!

Foolster, the liar said, "Of course I don't, because Isreal doesn't target babies (or civilians), and you failed to prove it."

I guess you want me to proof it by citing and quoting the secretive Israelis commanders when they were giving the orders or gloated about it, eh?

The dead babies and children, Foolster, the liar, they are the dead proof. ARe yOu blind??

"In an article I wrote last year, I cite at length an interview with an IDF sharpshooter conducted by Israeli journalist Amira Hass of Ha'aretz. In the course of this chilling interview, the sharpshooter admits that IDF policy allows troops to fire at children over the age of 12. I also cite a report by B'Tselem concerning an incident in which Israeli troops fired on a group of children who had finished playing soccer at a refugee camp in Rafah, killing an eleven-year-old boy. B'Tselem concludes:

"An eleven-year-old child was killed and two children were injured for no reason. However, the army failed to open any investigation against the soldiers responsible, even though all the army officials involved in the review of the incident clearly knew that the soldiers had used lethal weapons when their lives were not in jeopardy and had violated army regulations."

http://dissidentvoice.org/Articles/Sharma_CNN-Israel-Civilians.htm

http://www.google.com.my/#hl=en&q=pictures+of+dead+children+of++gaza&oq=pictures+of+dead+children+of++gaza&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=50115l54004l0l55973l24l13l1l0l0l5l4

Those charred burnt baby dolls weren't dolls, Foolster, the liar!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/15/gaza-bombing-israel-war

http://www.flickr.com/photos/maisometimes2/3108142855/

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article21673.htm

http://desertpeace.wordpress.com/2009/01/06/phopto-gallery-of-gazas-martyred-children/

Again, you will say where's the proof that the Israelis deliberately targeting them. That is how you would argue in a 'debate' of the truth.

Again, you're a liar, Foolster, the liar.

Some Christians still practised and preferred 'man-cooking' medium rare.

'Four soldiers in the Philippines have been arrested for setting a man on fire they wrongly suspected of being an Islamic militant, the military said Monday, branding it an "inhumane act of torture".'
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-08-01/philippine-soldiers-arrested-for-burning-man/2820104

Holy men that condemn 'child' marriages.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/andrewbrown/2010/mar/11/catholic-abuse-priests?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487

"One of 437 children killed in Gaza. Did she suck that pacifier while she was dying? How long did it take for her to die?"

http://mondoweiss.net/2009/02/kerrys-gaza-visit-shows-that-the-avalanche-is-beginning-to-move.html

Your lovely lords,

"The Israeli army is at the centre of a second scandal over the moral conduct of its soldiers in as many days (the previous one was two days ago: IDF in Gaza: Killing civilians, vandalism, and lax rules of engagement) .

The revelations centre on T-shirt designs made for soldiers that make light of shooting pregnant Palestinian mothers and children and include images of dead babies and destroyed mosques."

http://sabbah.biz/mt/archives/2009/03/21/israeli-army-t-shirts-mock-gaza-killings-terrorist-fashion-2009/

Maybe all these pictures and writings were parables as well, Foolster, the liar!

And of course, to not be biased of just focusing on the Israelis poor little children, ops, sorry, errr..Humans' little children or whatever,

Here are the poor children of Israel, terrified of the bombings by evil Palestinians..

http://www.thehollywoodliberal.com/2006/07/18/war-news-53-more-dead-in-bushs-civil-war-israeli-children-sign-bombs-with-love/

Watch those eyes and lips, compared them with previous links. Are they equal?

Back to this original post, where's the proof that Allah was the same god of the Old and New Testament?

Where's the proof that Allah said He took a flesh of human as clothing to dwell with His creations?

Desist if you can't argue based on yOur Bible.

And lastly, if this isn't a baby to you, I don't know what is, Foolster, the liar.

"This little baby was killed during Israel’s assault on the Christian and Muslim civilians of Lebanon during her genocidal war in the summer of 2006. The mother was hit in the stomach with a piece of shrapnel from an Israeli bomb which then penetrated through her womb and killed the child within her. You will hear NOTHING of any condemnation of this terrible crime coming out of the “Christian” community claiming to be “pro-life” that supports Israel and for that may they be damned."

http://theuglytruth.wordpress.com/2011/03/19/murdering-babies-is-permissible-when-theyre-palestinian/

London Jim, stop acting like a dork and start behaving like a man. Give reasons and arguments. People will respect you more, here and in the real world.

http://notmytribe.com/2009/israeli-soldiers-admit-targeting-civilians-87004.html

"The soldiers’ testimonies include accounts of an unarmed old woman being shot at a distance of 100 yards, a woman and her two children being killed after Israeli soldiers ordered them from their house into the line of fire of a sniper and soldiers clearing houses by shooting anyone they encountered on sight.

“That’s the beauty of Gaza. You see a man walking, he doesn’t have to have a weapon, and you can shoot him,” one soldier told Danny Zamir, the head of the Rabin pre-military academy, who asked him why a company commander ordered an elderly woman to be shot."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article5939611.ece

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=338_1211194755

The body would follow suit. His heart, mind and soul will manifest themselves in the actions of the physical body.

When a Muslim prays or does his/her religious duties, no mockery nor praises of men/women concerns him/her.

These humans are unable to offer him/her Paradise nor Hell nor influenced The God upon His Judgement.

John 5:22 Moreover, the Father judges no one, but has estrusted all judgement to the Son.

Srizals the lair said: "Foolster, the liar said"

"Back to this original post, where's the proof that Allah was the same god of the Old and New Testament?"
Huh? Why should I prove something I don't beleive is true?

"Where's the proof that Allah said He took a flesh of human as clothing to dwell with His creations?"
"Allah" doesn't say it, but Jesus pretty clearly claimed to be equal with God. Again, this is off-topic.

As for the article about the sharpshooter, again you're being dishonest. It's pretty clear from the article that the IDF isn't just shooting people. He says in the article the restrictions on when to shoot are strict, and that he is glad for it.

He also specifically talks about shooting out legs of violent people, and only people with weapons (such as guns or molotovs) he may take head shots (a necessity to stop them from murdering people).

In other words, the ONLY reason a 12 year old would be in danger of being shot is if they pulled a weapon. What do you beleive should be done if a 12 year old pulls out a gun or molotov? (And there are pleanty of images of children with weapons, being propagandized into beleiving in violence against Jews, like on HAMAS sponsored TV). Do you beleieve a child, because they are a child should be allowed a chance to kill before they are arrested?

The incident about the 11-year old being killed for no reason is hardly targeting. While I agree it is tragic, and that perhaps the IDF were negligent in their investigaton, and it does look a little fishy, at very worst it was an accident since the children were not being targeted, were a good distance away and apear to have been accidently struck by warning shots. I don't see anything in the report that suggests intentionality. At very worst this is a cover up of manslaughter (don't get me wrong, that's bad, but it's not intentional murder, which is what you are claiming)

You cite other examples of children and a pregnent woman dying from shrapnel, but children dying, as tragic as it is does not prove they were targeted. As I've said a number of times, HAMAS hides and fires at Isreali civilians in populated areas, so Isreali has no choice but to fire back and injure or kill gazan civilians or not fire and endanger their own civilians and tell the terrorists they can get away with murder. Neither choice is good.

The thing about elderly people being killed is the closest to proving your case, but there is no indication that this is national policy, but some rogue soldiers. If the IDF is covering it up, that is a tragesty of justice, I agree. However, it does not show a national policy of targeting civlians.

Again, are you going to apollogize your past lies, or are you going to contenue to ignore them and call me a liar? Doesn't seem very honest to me.

"I have to use ref. n resources from the Zionists or Israel's side from now on. Hope not that exclusively."
Here you falsely pretend to be a victem, saying I'm being unfair and insisting you use "pro-zionist" sources. The truth is, I complained about ONE source, Al-Jazeera who puts out pro-terrorist (HAMAS) propaganda. No Appollogy.

Here they are again:

Putting words into my mouth:
* "If being unmarried is so holy and get U closer to god, what the heck is all the white slaves of sex n porn that booms like mushroom n all the millions of babies being aborted on yearly basis in your country man?Stop all the hideous unmarried sex activities and be a loveable person of god like Jesus, like you have claimed."

* You made the bezaire claim that I "claimed" that I said marriage was bad, and responsible for things like porn and abortion. I never said such things. You never apollogized for this.

* On "my way of thinking": "They are all liars n killers. All of them deserved to be exterminated. Along with helpless women n children and unarmed men."" No apollogy for this false statement.

* "Stop acting like they are babies! Babies don't grow babies in their wombs, give birth and breast feed other babies!" I never said they were 'like babies'. I said they were not mature enough for childbirth. Whether this is incorrect or not, you are misrepresenting what I'm actually saying.

* "your argument is just 'Israel has the right to kill babies'"
Again, I never said that.

False statement about HAMAS' intentions:
* (On HAMAS's 'drive the jews to the sea' statement): "U see, what Hamas meant was the immigrants as they did came by the sea on ships, returned to where they came from in the means of transport that brought them to Palestine in the first place." 
Another lie, disproven by the fact that HAMAS specificly promotes killing of Jews (to children!). No Apollogy.

General false statements
* "Torturing people for their possessions, a lie again" ... "as we have already stated on the authority of Tabari."
But your own quote mentions Mohammad (ordering) the man tortured. When I pointed this out you went mum.

* "There's no historical proof whatsoever regarding the death of Kinana by ancient Jews and Christians. Check mate."
We weren't even argueing about whether Kinana died, but whether he was tortured.

* You also made a comment about the unreliablity of the man Tabari quotes (which one might take as Tabari being unrealiable), but you don't actknowledge your inconsistancy in quoting him to refute me (but, as I said, the quote actually validates what I was saying).

* "Foolster41, you lied again about saying that Christianity doesn't preach terrorism. Apologise."
then you quoted Luke 19:27, a verse where Jesus is narrating a parable, and the words are of a king in the parable. You mocked me when I pointed this out. Well then, did you know Jesus also ordered a fatted calf to be slaughtered, and have a party? (Luke 15:22) "Bring the fattened calf and kill it. Let’s have a feast and celebrate.". This is the nonsense that happens when you read verses out of context. To do it to the bible is scholarship, to do it to the Koran is dishonest.

* Dishonesty about sharia in non-muslim countries (as if you've never read jihadwatch before). You didn't apollogize or explain how your clueless.

* Also, a vast number of uses of tu-quo-que fallacies that, when I called you on them, again you never apollogized for.

* And a number of Ad honim (for example, saying I belong to a cult)

(That's 13+ false statements!)

(Er, correction: 12+, since I accidently bulleted a single point into 2 bullets)

"As for my manners, forgive me if you will. "

Does this mean you are also apollogizing to me for your gastly manners against me, including lying about me and intentionaly mistrepresenting my arguments?

If so, I accept, but I wonder why the sudden change of heart from posts #218 and #231

"It offends me much when people lie and unwilling to apologise for lying"
Indeed, it offends me too.

PS, when I'm referring to Muslims, I mean those practising Muslims that love their religion and brothers and sisters of the same faith, much more than they love themselves, their wealth and personal causes and gains.

These Muslims of self interest concerned me not.

"A decent hyperbole or a light parable, maybe?"

Ah, back to mocking me now? It seems to be your strategy, that when you don't like the truth (such as whether a quote is in a parable, or the meaning of hyperbole), you simply mock it as false without providing any facts.

Are you saying Srizals, that a mob boss who orders the hit isn't just as guilty as the man who does it under his orders? If so, why, and how much should he be punished?

You never did show how that specific parable verse is being used by Christians to justify terrorism, as I asked, yet you still mock me when I say your claim that the verse "promotes terrorism". You quoted a verse completely out of context to give it meaning not interpreted that way by Christians themselves, and when I call you on this, I get mockery.

So then, you won't complain if I pick verses out of the Koran and interpret them in a way no muslims read that verse to mean, right? After all, your not completely dishonest and a hypcrite, right?

Are you going to ignore me yet again?

Where, who and what verses Foolster41? I'll give you one last chance to prove it here, right here, right now!

Please, don't use just links, nor cherry picked quotations separated from one another. YOu have to include:
a. the verses and their background.

b. the group of people that were said to have used them in an act of terror and their names if possible.

c. the year and centuries it began and the frequency of such occurrences.

d. the reason behind such said terror.

e. Statistics of the culprits and the said victims.

Please present your proof in this inter-related sequential manner. You will have a chance of winning this back, Foolster41.

There, I have helped you out. Destroy my reputation on the Net, right here, right now!

You would be known as the Great Slayer of Srizals!

Don't paste an entire webpage for me to ponder, Foolster41, have mercy!

If you failed to respond within 9,000 hours from now, please desist from your accusations. Your honour depends on it.

"Where, who and what verses Foolster41? I'll give you one last chance to prove it here, right here, right now!"
As if I havn't already, since you don't respond to ONE of the 12 accusations I bring against you above.

"Please, don't use just links, nor cherry picked quotations separated from one another."...

Your going to have to clarify what you're talking about, because this doesn't seem to have anything to do with what I said in my last post.
You mean quote verses from the Quoran, and cases where it is used to justify violence?

What I was talking about was how you took a verse in the bible COMPLETELY out of context, and mocked me when I called you on it (basically you indicated you didn't believe it, without bothering to show proof that I was wrong). I implied that you wouldn't stand for the Koran being treated the same way.

Then you issued this challenge.

"please desist from your accusations."
You mean ALL unrelated accusations, since NONE of my accusations have anything to do with this challenge?

"Destroy my reputation on the Net, right here, right now!"
You do that yourself when you lie and use dishonest non-sequitor, tu quo que and ad honim arguemnts (see my list above), and then refuse to acknowledge your dishonesty, and bluster with these silly challenges that has nothing to do with what I actually said.

When you wrote
"Where, who and what verses Foolster41? I'll give you one last chance to prove it here, right here, right now!"

Were you responding by any chance to "So then, you won't complain if I pick verses out of the Koran and interpret them in a way no muslims read that verse to mean, right? After all, your not completely dishonest and a hypcrite, right?"?

If so, this makes still no sense. I was speaking of intentionally taking koranic verses out of context, and so to challange me about which verses I would take out of context, but insist I don't take them out of context is completely bonkers.

I was being facetious, taking what you did to the bible and applying the same standards to the Koran.

Also to be clear when I say "since NONE of my accusations have anything to do with this challenge" I mean no CURRENT arguments, since I've been sidelining my argument that the Koran promotes violence to focus more on your accusation that the bible promotes violence, and your slew of dishonest statements since your insisting I'm being dishonest and that you are not.

Wait, I debunked you by simply asking you to clearify what you meant and how it related to what I said? Wow, I'm better than I thought. =)

Foolster41, a sample for you to follow,

Link:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/dec/21/stephen-griffiths-crossbow-cannibal-profile

Quotation and argument.

a. 'Griffiths developed an outlandish persona, portraying himself as "Ven Pariah" and a "misanthrope who brought hate into heaven". He appeared in a photograph naked from the chest upward and quoted the Bible, Ezekiel 25:17: "The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides." The quote acquired notoriety when it was used in a gory execution scene in Quentin Tarantino's film Pulp Fiction.'

My emphasis, Ezekiel 25:17 is a favourite quote of this cannibal.

During a brief hearing at the crown court later the same day, there was no opportunity for further upset as the clerk asked if he was Stephen Shaun Griffiths. "I am," he replied.

My emphasis, "I am". It is a famous phrase used only in the..I let you guess it, Foolster41.

b. Stephen Shaun Griffiths, 40s, White European/British and a keen student of Criminology.

c. Before and around 2010.

d. "He said, Griffiths declared on MySpace: "Humanity is not merely a biological condition, it is also a state of mind. On that basis I am a pseudo human being at best. A demon at worst."

A true narcissist, hunger for fame and glory, has no intention whatsoever to save people around him from self destruction mode and hideous sins. No one had ever tried to kill him, no one had ever killed his relatives, children and countrymen, no one had ever oppressed him. No one had ever invaded his home and chased him out of his house under the pain of death.

e. Culprit - White European/British Christian Bible reader and his victims were older than 9 year old women, mostly White women (Religion not clearly stated).

...And yet again brave Sir Srizals bravely runs away, zipping away on another tangent (or rather back on topic, but not explaining his off-topic exploits).

I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

You said, mockingly:
"Foolster41 has yet done it again. He's had managed to debunk me yet again and again in what the hell I don't know."

You (hypocriticaly) insinuate I'm cheating by going off-topic (or your very bad reading skills), when I simply asked what you meant by your challange which sounds like it's supposed to be in direct answer to my recent post, but doesn't make sense (I outline this in the post about that post) and thus off topic.

In other words, when I accuse you of going off-topic, your answer is to accuse me... of going off topic!

I never claimed to have "debunked" you, I asked to clearify. Aparently to you that's unfair. That's another lie.

You never did answer any of the questions in the post you are mocking.

You also failed to explain or apollogize for ONE of the 12 points I show about of dishonesty by you. Instead you simply ignore it like it never happened.

"My emphasis, "I am". It is a famous phrase used only in the..I let you guess it, Foolster41. "
Yes, but what is its meaning in the bible? The phrase indicates that one is God. Can on believe one is God and also be a Chrisitan? Also, once again this verse is being taken out of context (It's God speaking and not a command to humans). But once again, this doesn't bother you when it's done to the bible, only to the Koran.

At any rate, fine you brought one case for a Christian terrorist using a verse. Congradulations. Only around 16,999 to go! (One case doesn't proove anything, and there have been 17,000 attacks by muslims in the name of Islam.)

Foolster41 said, Only around 16,999 to go!

Well, here's go nothing,

http://www.conversantlife.com/theology/fundamentalism-the-serial-killer-of-biblical-interpretation

"Mass Murder
The men of Israel withdrew through the territory of the Benjaminites, putting to the sword the inhabitants of the city, the livestock, and all they chanced upon. Moreover they destroyed by fire all the cities they came upon." (Judges 20:48 NAB)

"Micah Kills a Whole Town
Then, with Micah's idols and his priest, the men of Dan came to the town of Laish, whose people were peaceful and secure. They attacked and killed all the people and burned the town to the ground. There was no one to rescue the residents of the town, for they lived a great distance from Sidon and had no allies nearby. This happened in the valley near Beth-rehob.Then the people of the tribe of Dan rebuilt the town and lived there. They renamed the town Dan after their ancestor, Israel's son, but it had originally been called Laish."
(Judges 18:27-29 NLT)
http://www.evilbible.com/Murder.htm

"Amos, 36, read out a lengthy, rambling speech to the court, quoting lines from the Bible, insisting he didn't do the killing.

"I trust in the Lord Jesus Christ that the right thing will be done," said Amos, looking pious as he stood in the prisoner's box facing the victim's family and the 12 jurors who showed up for the sentencing."
http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2009/11/26/11929766-sun.html

"A man who lost an early morning Bible-quoting contest killed the man who beat him, police said.

Gabel Taylor, 38, was shot once in the face outside his apartment Thursday."
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-83953923.html

South Montgomery County police continued to investigate a report Wednesday that while quoting scripture, two teens shot at least two other children with an air soft gun at Fellowship of The Woodlands church's vacation Bible school last week.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=105x1435966

http://home.wlu.edu/~lubint/Touchstone/KKK-Fisher.htm

"Authorities now allege that Thomas raped and killed older women during two cycles: in the 1970s in Los Angeles and in the 1980s in the Claremont area. Police continue to receive calls from family members of slain woman who believe he might be responsible.

At the office where he worked, red-eyed co-workers were stunned by the allegations. Many spent Thursday clustered in small groups, discussing the news and comforting each other, colleagues said."

Ofari-Hutchinson said Thomas kept to himself and was fond of citing Scripture. They talked about current events and politics -- but rarely about Thomas' personal life.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/05/accused-los-angeles-serial-killer-was-religious-pleasant-fellow.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_terrorism

"Senseless, horrific attacks like the one yesterday in Oslo or in previous years in Oklahoma City and Columbine, leave us stunned, saddened and looking for answers. It also is natural to want revenge against those responsible for such heartless acts. I am taking this opportunity to remind us that in the midst of our passion fueled by anger we must be guided by reason built on a foundation of justice. Let’s hold accountable those responsible for terrible acts, but let’s not generalize the threat to a group of people. If we are happy to persecute Muslims today I fear we will find fundamentalist Christians or Jews in the crosshairs down the road. That is a road we must not travel."
http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2011/07/23/christian-terrorism/

"Numbers 31:17 "Now kill all the boys [innocent kids]. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man."
http://www.answering-christianity.com/killer.htm

Now, answer me this Foolster41, can the same All Merciful and the Most Compassionate Allah that is worshipped by a people that were told that if they kill a life without a just cause is the same as the sin as he was killing all of humanity, can be the same with god in the Bible?

All pure is He from the lies made by shameless men.

classicus, have you found the proof I have asked of you? How could I answer your questions without having the opportunity of reading what was said the ancient descriptions of embryology?

Should I be relying on my resources only? I don't want to be accused of being deliberately bias now.

Hahahah! BB guns shooting PLASTIC bullets? Your using that as one of your examples? Did you read the article?

"The gun that shoots plastic BBs did not seriously injure the children"

I think it's highly likely they knew it would not seriously injure. Heck, my brother has a BB gun (with plastic bullets) and I've shot him brother before. (just smarts a little). You truly are grasping at straws.

Neither Timmothy McVeigh or Anders Brevik were Christians.

Mcveigh said he was an agnostic and said "Science is my religion". He didn't quote any scripture to justify the attack (his main stated motivation was the WACO siege). There are claims he belonged to Christian Identity, a unbiblical and racist cult, so either way, no.

Brevik identified himself as a "Cultural Christian", but he doesn't believe in God (which is kind of a requirement of a religion to believe in that religion).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=lKEqM5bi8K4

Nice try though.

''All pure is He from the lies made by shameless men.''
Sounds like you're talking about the Lord Jesus, sriz. If only. . then you might be breaking out of your trance. .if only you would dare to think outside of the box.

Also, I love how many of the commenters on that blog about McVeigh/Brevik you posted are simply not buying it, and give reasonable counters and offer descenting resources. Reading down it appears in fact most of the comments disagree with the article. Hmm.

''All pure is He from the lies made by shameless men.''
Who is that shameless man? You've lied 15 times now! You pretend to be the honest one, and that I'm a liar, but my God demands honesty ("Thou shalt not bear false witness"), while yours allows for deciet.

Tell me who said this?

"Allah has already ordained for you, (O men), the dissolution of your oaths (in some cases): and Allah is your Protector, and He is Full of Knowledge and Wisdom." (66:2)

"Remember how the Unbelievers plotted against thee, to keep thee in bonds, or slay thee, or get thee out (of thy home). They plot and plan, and Allah too plans; but the best of planners is Allah." (8:30) (NOTE: the word "plot" here is "makara", which can be translated as "to deceive")

I'll begin tonight discussion with this verses,

(2 Chronicles 15:12-13 NAB)
"They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman."

and the ignored 'parable' quoted by the Cannibal,

Ezekiel 25:17

"I will carry out great vengeance on them and punish them in my wrath. Then they will know that I am the LORD, when I take vengeance on them.'"

I hope you'll explain to me about these verses later, Foolster41. I'm not relying on any interpretation, but the verses speak for themselves.

As the verses that you have quoted to claim that Allah is a deceiver, (May the curse of Allah be on the liars that dared
to claim something that doesn't exist.

Where's in the verses that say He claimed to be a deceiver? Read the verses again, Foolster41, word by word. Where is it? How could I even respond to something that isn't even there??

What is clear though, that He is the best planner that cannot be defeated by the best evil human planner of all that tried to outsmart Him.

The God cannot be defeated, trialled, humiliated, tortured and killed by His puny mortal men that rely on Him.

Can you give an instance in history that a god can be outmatched and outsmarted, killed and humiliated by his own creations?? Paraded to be beaten in the most despicable ways by His worthless, un-thankful creatures??

Well? Can you?

But you will twist even this one I presume, so I have to return the favour to you;

No interpretation Foolster41, the verses, they speak for themselves.

1 Kings 22:23
Now, therefore, behold, the Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of these thy prophets, and the Lord hath spoken evil concerning thee.

2 Chronicles 18:22
Now therefore, behold, the Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of these thy prophets.

Jeremiah 4:10
Ah, Lord GOD! surely thou hast greatly deceived this people.

Jeremiah 20:7
O Lord, thou hast deceived me, and I was deceived.

Ezekiel 14:9
And if a prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing, I the Lord have deceived that prophet.

2 Thessalonians 2:11
For this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie.

Your only defence would be,

a. god in the NT is not the same god in the OT.

b. these verses were corrupted by shameless men.

By the way, have you seen classicus?

Tell classicus that I want to ask him about these verses regarding the Jews in the New Testament,

“The children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” (Matthew 8.12)

“O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets and stonest them that are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! Behold your house is left unto you desolate.” (Matthew 23.37,38) Then answered all the people (Jews) and said, “His blood be on us and on our children” (Matthew 27:25). 1 “But take heed to yourselves: for they shall deliver you to councils, and in the synagogues ye shall be beaten” (Mark 13.9)

“He that believeth not shall be damned” (Mark 16.16)

“Ye are of your father the devil and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar and the father of it. And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not. Which of you convinceth me of sin? And I say the truth, why do you not believe me? He that is of God heareth God’s words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God” (John 8.43-47)

“Stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so you do. Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which showed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers” (Acts 7.51-53)

“It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing you put it from you and judge yourself unworthy of everlasting life, we turn to the Gentiles” (Acts 13.45-51)

“For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision: whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre’s sake ... wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith; not giving heed to Jewish fables and commandments of men, that turn from the truth.” (Titus 1.10-14).

“The Jews, who both killed the Lord Jesus and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God and are contrary to all men: forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins always: for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost.” (l Thessalonians 2.14-16)

“Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is an antichrist, that denieth the father and the son. Whoever denieth the son, the same hath not the father” (l John 2.22,23)

“I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan ...” (Revelation 2.9,10)

“Behold I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews and are not but do lie; behold I will make them to come and worship before thy feet...” (Revelation 3.9)

Moses Bazes, author of “Jesus the Jew, the Historical Jesus,” after examining the anti-Semitic statements in the New Testament writes:

“I believe that because of the anti-Jewish narratives of the New Testament, the Jews were hounded from one country to another, denied to live as human beings, denied to work as other people worked, denied to play as others played, were in no country at peace, in no era at peace and finally persecuted and massacred.

This was all because of the Christian bigotry and hatred in the name of Jesus.

Obviously it cannot be possible to regard Jesus as none other than the scourge of God for the Jews. The tragic existence of the Jews during 1900 years in the Diaspora, the hatred they experienced, the pogroms, persecutions, murders and the destructions they suffered, must be mainly attributed to anti- Jewish statements in the New Testament.

Christianity introduced contempt for the Jew and is thus responsible for what happened in the Second World War at the Dachau Concentration camp in Germany and at the Auschwitz concentration camp in Poland.

What was started at the Church Council at Nicea in 325 CE was duly completed in the concentration camps and crematories of Christian Germany where six million Jews perished.”

http://jdstone.org/cr/files/antisemitisminthenewtestament_1.html

http://www.messiahtruth.com/anti.html

Where's the verses of the Koran that you claimed copy your New Testament in its anti Jewishness?

Forgive me if you're still preparing your arguments for me. Time can pass us by slowly at times..

Paul's Letters & Epistles

Within the seven letters written by Paul and the six Pseudo-Pauline and Deutero-Pauline epistles are found four verses which constitute some of the most virulent anti-Jewish polemic present in the New Testament. These are shown in Table II.F-1.

Table II.F-1 – Anti-Jewish polemic from Paul's 1st Thessalonians

Source
Description of Context
Lectionary
Code
2:13-16
Condemning the Jews for killing Jesus and the prophets, and celebrating the suffering of the Jews now that the "wrath of God" has come upon them
---
* Key to Lectionary Codes:
--- - Not included in a major lectionary series.

http://www.messiahtruth.com/anti.html

classicus, could we limit the time we are going to take in order to prepare our arguments and compile our sources? Let's say, 3 days and 3 nights intervals?

1 Thess. 2:14. For ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of God which in Judaea are in Christ Jesus: for ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as they have of the Jews:

1 Thess. 2:15. Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men:

1 Thess. 2:16. Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins alway: for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost.

The verses quoted by Foolster41,

http://www.alim.org/library/quran/ayah/compare/66/2/do-not-make-something-unlawful-which-allah-has-made-lawful-and-wives-of-the-holy-prophet-are-admonished-on-their-behavior-with-him

And so that the context is not hidden.

Surah 66. At-Tahrim, Ayah 1 -4
O Prophet! Why bannest thou that which Allah hath made lawful for thee, seeking to please thy wives? And Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

Allah hath made lawful for you (Muslims) absolution from your oaths (of such a kind), and Allah is your Protector. He is the Knower, the Wise.

When the Prophet confided a fact unto one of his wives and when she afterward divulged it and Allah apprised him thereof, he made known (to her) part thereof and passed over part. And when he told it her she said: Who hath told thee? He said: The Knower, the Aware hath told me.

If ye twain turn unto Allah repentant, (ye have cause to do so) for your hearts desired (the ban); and if ye aid one another against him (Muhammad) then lo! Allah, even He, is his protecting Friend, and Gabriel and the righteous among the believers; and furthermore the angels are his helpers.

Surah 8. Al-Anfal, Ayah 29 - 34

O ye who believe! If ye keep your duty to Allah, He will give you discrimination (between right and wrong) and will rid you of your evil thoughts and deeds, and will forgive you. Allah is of infinite bounty.

http://www.alim.org/library/quran/ayah/compare/8/30/if-you-become-godfearing,-allah-will-grant-you-wisdom-to-judge-between-right-and-wrong-and-lawful-guardians-of-ka'bah-are-those-who-have-fear-of-allah

And when those who disbelieve plot against thee (O Muhammad) to wound thee fatally, or to kill thee or to drive thee forth; they plot, but Allah (also) plotteth; and Allah is the best of plotters.

And when Our revelations are recited unto them they say: We have heard. If we wish we can speak the like of this. Lo! this is naught but fables of the men of old.

And when they said: O Allah! If this be indeed the truth from Thee, then rain down stones on us or bring on us some painful doom!

But Allah would not punish them while thou wast with them, nor will He punish them while they seek forgiveness.

What (plea) have they that Allah should not punish them, when they debar (His servants) from the Inviolable Place of Worship, though they are not its fitting guardians. Its fitting guardians are those only who keep their duty to Allah. But most of them know not.

Translation by Pickthall

Please desist, Foolster41. You have been proven wrong.

Do not fear man's mockery and abuse. Fear the One that you are rebelling against without any right and truth. He has given you even until now to see the truth. You are your own enemy.

Back to the question of Allah in Malay as a translation of god. Unfortunately, I am a Malay. You can't out-Malay me. That would be totally absurd.

Which do you think is the correct testimony of faith by Muslims?

A riddle for you to solve; which one is actually the testimony of faith of a Muslim?

1.
Tiada tuhan melainkan Allah dan Muhammad adalah pesuruh-Nya.
There is no god but Allah and Muhammad is His messenger.

2.
Tiada tuhan melainkan tuhan dan Muhammad adalah pesuruh-Nya.
There is no god but god and Muhammad is His messenger.

3.
Tiada Allah melainkan Allah dan Muhammad adalah pesuruh-Nya.
There is no Allah but Allah and Muhammad is His messenger.

12:26 AM in the blessed lands of the Malay.

Good night, Foolster41.

“I hope you'll explain to me about these verses later, Foolster41. I'm not relying on any interpretation, but the verses speak for themselves.”
I already did explain that this was GOD'S words and not a command to followers. (Dishonesty #16, for those keeping track) It's dishonest to call it “interpretation” when it says it RIGHT IN THE VERSE.
I've already shown how this verse cannot be interpreted the way that the killer you mentioned, or Jules Winnfield (in pulp fiction) interprets is the correct interpratation. In other words, this man MISUSED the verse to justify violence.
Are you saying that a Koranic verse that is misquoted to justify violence (the verse does not command to commit violence) can be cited to show how the Koran promotes terrorism? More dishonest double standards!
“As the verses that you have quoted to claim that Allah is a deceiver, (May the curse of Allah be on the liars that dared to claim something that doesn't exist. “
You proclaimed a curse on yourself! You still REFUSE to acknowledge your own dishonesty!
Of course, you don't explain how I'm wrong. He said Allah allows for the desolation of oaths. This is pretty clear. He also said that Allah plots (Makara, decieves).
I don't see how 66:1 & 3-4 contradicts my reading of 66:2.
Neither does showing the context of 8:29-34 contradict the translation of the word “makara” which means deciet.
But once again you don't present proof and proceed to pretend you made a slam dunk.
At any rate, what if I was taking these verses out of context? You seem to thing it's fine when you do it (ez 25:17, Luke 19:27) since you never showed how those verses are being quoted in context by you , why can't I?
“Can you give an instance in history that a god can be outmatched and outsmarted, killed and humiliated by his own creations?? Paraded to be beaten in the most despicable ways by His worthless, un-thankful creatures??”
I never made such a claim. Yet another non-sequitor. I think you're now perhaps attacking the basis of my belief in Christianity itself, as if it has do with anything. And yet your being perfectly honest with me!
“This was all because of the Christian bigotry and hatred in the name of Jesus.”
Jesus made bigoted statements against all Jews? Where? That's the only way this statement makes sense, since if Christians were bigoted against Jews when Jesus did not command it, it would be IN SPITE of Jesus. So, then where did Jesus make bigoted statements against his own race? He did condemn “this generation” of Jews who he knew would reject and kill him, but to conflate this to some sort of self-hatred anti-semetism is beyond ridiculous.
Again, of course I'm the liar. Don't get confused by facts.
And it's pretty clear from those verses quoted that those being refrenced are not all Jews, but those jews who have rejected Christ and focused on works and regulations, like the Pharasees. Feel free to prove it by proving the original greek that shows the words refer to all Jews. I'm going to look into this further.
“Please desist, Foolster41. You have been proven wrong.”
About what? You still haven't actknowledged or explained cases of your own dishonesty that I've listed and refrences a few times now. Instead you keep harping on my dishonesty as if your the completely honest one and I'm the liar.

Also, you might be interested to know that Jules reconized he was misusing the verse. Also, the verse he quotes in the movie is a mix of that verse and PS 23.

http://www.webspawner.com/users/ezekielpulp/

Generally, in Western culture we don't say (or write) anything after saying goodbye. In this case, the salutation was not in the word, "goodbye" but it was implicit. ("The discussion is at an end.")

I have to congratulate you on your persistence, but your perception is not keen - and I think that's deliberate on your part.

There are plenty of explanations by the writers in this thread about your errors in reasoning, you don't need anything else. If you re-read what has been written to you, you will see why your arguments fail. We have read your side of the story, but you continue things by bringing up irrelevancies.

The discussion is at an end sir, good day.

"Jules misquoted/misused the parable? Thank God! Okay, now, what about the real Cannibal? Did he misquoted/misused the parable too??"

Uh, yes. Yes he did. Perhaps you have fuzz in your eyes. I believe said it AT LEAST TWICE. It is the direct words of GOD (saying what God will do), and not a command to kill people. Again, I find it hard believe you missed this, since you are replying to that post, and I suspect you are once again intentionaly and dishonestly ignoring what I say that you simply dislike. ONCE AGAIN, THIS IS DISHONEST, AND YET YOU ARE INSISTING THAT I'M BEING DISHONEST!

"you have been asking about Islam not based on any authentic reliable sources of Islam itself. You have been using Christians' opinions to base your questions that you think as Islamic or related to Islam."

Yeah, quoting the Quoran directly is such a Christian source. *rolls eyes*. Are you being serious?! Just because I use Christian sources doesn't automaticly invalidate the arguments, especially since I'm then quoting out of the Koran.

You still haven't answered those two quoranic verses I quoted. You gave the context, but fail to explain how the context counters my interpretation. You just pretended it somehow proved your case without explaining how.

You're using Ad honim attacks (And rather hypocriical ones at that, considering you yourself USED PLEANTY OF MUSLIM SOURCES ON THE BIBLE, such as islamtoday and answering-Christianity) instead of actually answering my arguments. (Dishonesty #18: ad honim & #19 for yet another case of hypocracy)

"Don't you find it odd that the Jews that cannot accept a man as a god, while Christians, some like you, that accept a man as a god, can share a heritage? Find me a Jew that share your belief, Foolster41. Find one, fast."

Of course there are messianic Jews who are Jewish in background who accepted Christ. Aparently they find no contradiction. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messianic_Judaism
I find it hard to believe you've never heard of Messianic Jews. (The 12 apostles were messianic Jews). I won't list this as a dishonesty, maybe you're just really sheltered in Malaysia.

What you're not grasping is that Christians beleive that Jesus was not truely originaly a man, but God wrapped in the FORM of a man (fully God and fully man). We are not deifying a created being, but the creator. It has no contradiction with Jewish scriptures.

Also, again as I said before attacking Christianity as false has nothing to do with the main topics of Islam and terrorism and Christianity and Terrorim.

You also don't answer my challange to find anti-Jewish bigoted statements from Jesus himself to back up your rediculous claim of Christian anti-jewish bigotry (because if it's not justified by the belief the beleif shouldn't be held liable, right? Also this was dishonesty #17). Or show how the verses you quote from Paul etc. are about all Jews (as opposed to Jews who rejected Christ). Of course it's fine when you make "wild claims", but your sure to call me on each and every of my claims, even the blazingly obvious (such as HAMAS promoting anti-semetism, or the existance of Messianic Jews).

I'm tired of your dishonest arguments and hypocracy. You refuse to actknowledge your dishonesty and just move on to the next lie. It's exasperatingly frustrating.

I agree completely with what Classicus wrote in his last post.

As he said "this conversation is at an end"

Foolster41,

I mean like this Jew.

http://jihadiyehudi.blogspot.com/

He's a pure Jew of Judaism. Messianic Jews are not Jews of Judaism. You lied again, this time, glaringly.

The eleven apostle were Muslims. They do not worship Jesus as a god. They worship 'The Father' that sent Jesus to the lost sheep of Israel. YOu had lied, again, glaringly this time.

classicus,

you have mentioned about the embryology facts in the Koran that you think were copied from the ancients. The ancients do not know that when we were created in the womb, along the way, we begin our journey of life in a leech like creature and the time frame you said were not true.

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Science/Embryo/BiblecopyGreek.html

http://www.quranicstudies.com/articles/medical-miracles/does-the-quran-plagiarise-ancient-greek-embryology.html

http://islam4today.blog.ca/2011/06/12/does-quran-plagiarize-embryology-from-greek-though-11302110/

An e-book that you can read when you have a free time,
http://issuu.com/quraanandsunnah/docs/qs_lib_embryology

The leech like embryo,
http://www.muslimvideo.com/tv/view_video.php?viewkey=725298db12ef6eece648

http://www.quransearch.com/nadeem_embryology.htm

http://islamic-replies.ucoz.com/Rebuttal_AnsweringIslam_Embryology_Literature.html

Compare them with the allegations, classicus, listen and read from both sides of the story. And then decide. This is the way of the true truth seekers. They won't just buy it from one side of the argument. That would be biased.

I'll try to summarise them as apt as possible here, bear with me in just a few seconds:

Only a Creator would have known these minute details of the stages of the tiny human embryo. Only in the Koran, these detailed descriptions are available. No man would have dared to try to guess about something in such minute detail only to be proven wrong 1,400 years later.

And it was accepted by expert in embryology.

http://www.cis-ca.org/voices/b/bucaille-mn.htm

http://www.sultan.org/articles/QScience.html

http://islamicbulletin.org/newsletters/issue_6/embraced.aspx

http://www.quranandscience.com/new-muslim-stories/209-maurice-bucaille-.html

A SCIENTIST'S INTERPRETATION OF REFERENCES TO EMBRYOLOGY IN THE QURAN

http://www.icbh.org/topics/embryology.htm

classicus,

My faith in The God protect me from myself. This is the most important thing why I believe in the Koran. I am above my lust, my anger and my desire. Whenever I've made a mistake, I am able to return to Allah's sanctuary and mercy, just by repenting and cleaning myself from my sins and wrongdoings with my tears and renewed resolution.

I don't rely on the blood of anyone's son. No one needs to sacrifice their son for my own shortcomings.

I don't have to confess to any man or ask him to forgive me on God's behalf. I pray and ask Him personally.

Nor do I have to ask god to sacrifice his only son to save me. That would be the ultimate selfishness on my part. I deal with my own shortcomings myself. No one need to pay the price for my errors.

Foolster41, was that your god's plan to have his only son killed to save humanity from his wrath because of Adam and Eve? Sorry, but that was a very miserable plan indeed, the evil triumphed while the good suffered.

How merciful is your god and that is why Muslims in Malaysia cannot accept another religion to portray their god as the same as Muslims, even though in reality, there is no god but Allah and He answers all the call of His creations, even those who are defying Him. He is the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful.

How could we, Muslims say that a god that let his son died on the cross is the same God that we worshipped??

I suggest all Christians to nail their only son to the cross and redeem more sinful Christians, following the footstep of their beloved god. Sorry, but I have to give this difficult statement to you.

May the ones that seek the truth will seek it after reading us, Foolster41 and classicus.

All the fanciful latin terms are fallacies of arguments used to escape reasoning, only those who are running away from explaining after daring to question would used them.

Hope you guys can grow up from using those shields when you are arguing against a Muslim. We never used them. We question and then answer. We give and we take. That's how we interact in the real world.

Foolster41, the verse you want about Jesus cursing the Jews,

John 8:23-24
New International Version (NIV)
23 But he continued, “You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world. 24 I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am he, you will indeed die in your sins.”

Then shall he (Jesus) say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye CURSED, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: (Matthew 25:41)

Christians and the Jews,
http://www.romancatholicism.org/popes-jews.htm

You have been judging a religion that had protected the Jews from Christians for centuries. But the Jews, many of them have return the favours of Muslim's hospitality by stealing Palestine from us and that is what you've been repeating about Muslim and Jews hostility for the past 60 years. The culprit is the Christian that wanted the son of god to return to the earth that he had abandoned. This Christian sect is trying to fulfil this prophecy.

Interestingly, this Christianity doesn't exist during Jesus' time and hence is an innovation of a religion. And what did Jesus said about innovation in his name?

Mark 13:5 And Jesus began to say to them, "See to it that no one misleads you. 6 "Many will come in My name, saying, 'I am He!' and will mislead many (NASB-77)

He warned about Christians since only Christians claimed to be Christians in his name.

Muslims do not, we are not 'Christians'.