Islam: What the West Needs to Know (full documentary)

reply to post by sk0rpi0n


So..I am supposed to spoon feed you every verse from the Koran and Haidiths, by transcribing in context how it was presented, so that you can answer my question, which simply put is....WHERE ARE THEY WRONG IN THEIR ASSERTIONS!!!!!

Right....I"ll get right on transcribing a hour and half long dialogue...cause you are too lazy to watch.....on second thought...I don't need your opinion if that is what it would take to get it!!!

reply to post by mekhanics


No...actually....that wasn't the original topic...and I did read through the 3 and 4 pages of that blog...again....you don't know me or what I have read and not read...keep assuming...that shows how ignorant you are!! The original point was to debunk ...in your own words...Islam: What the West needs to Know!!! The point of the thread was most definitely not some very, oh so polite gentleman...who professes to be a doctor...who cherry picks his arguments...which his quotes have nothing to do with the documentary....who by subtle innuendo...uses ad hominem to malign the character of the people in the video...and further, doesn't debunk any of the quotes from the Koran that were used!!!!

But you wouldn't know that would you...because you didn't watch the VIDEO!!! So who is now taking things at face-value from a source?

Stay on point this time or STFU!!!

Originally posted by maddog3n8
reply to post by mekhanics

 

Stay on point this time or STFU!!!

Butt-hurt much?

reply to post by mekhanics


No actually...projecting much?

on a side note: does anyone think the book of revelation in the bible is being used as a playbook for all of this? i mean it even suggests that christians would be persecuted and executed and so forth, by some deadly duo of anti-christ + false prophet. if the rcc is following that text and deliberately trying to fulfill the negative position, just imagine the implications. if they created muhummad and islam, for the sole purpose of taking over whole cultures and extracting their wealth, without ever looking like the culprits. all they had to do was promise some poverty stricken and lonely arabic people, that they would have huge harems in the afterlife --- et. al, appealed to their hormones.

gadzooks.

Originally posted by maddog3n8
reply to post by mekhanics

 

No actually...projecting much?

No actually, You're missing the point.

'It really makes me think about becoming a Muslim': Liam Neeson considers converting to Islam

reply to post by mekhanics


FACE PALM!!!

I am done with you!!!

Why would I give a fly F### at a rolling doughnut at what Liam Nielson thinks about religion? What Liam Nielson thinks about converting to Islam? What Liam Nielson thinks about ANYTHING!?!

You Sir, are a troll of epic proportion!!! Keep up with your stupid circular logic!!! That is all Islam is good for!!!!

reply to post by maddog3n8


I think:

Butt-hurt much.

Originally posted by mekhanics
reply to post by maddog3n8

 

I think:

Butt-hurt much.

okay, i'll debate you on it. get yer books. let's have a discourse.

reply to post by sk0rpi0n


He freed them so he could "marry them", or "marry them off", or "adopt them"?
Sketchy.

And, correct me if I'm mistaken, but wasn't Aisha SIX YEARS OLD when he married her? And all of NINE YEARS OLD when he "consummated" that 'marriage'?

What the heck do you expect she would do with 'slaves' (being as she WAS ONE, by definition). A grown man has NO BUSINESS 'marrying" a 6-yr old little girl and 'consummating' said 'marriage' when she is a 9-yr old little girl!!!
She had some EMPATHY!!!

How can you defend that?
For crying out loud, at least Romeo and Juliet were TEENAGERS!
A NINE-YEAR-OLD is in NO WAY, SHAPE, or FORM, an "eligible consenting partner" in marriage or sex.

One of the young women who was nearly hacked to death by her brother was a teenager. She had been MARRIED OFF by her parents to a 60-year-old geezer who abused her. She complained about the abuse, wept for her stripped dignity and innocence to her family, who said, "Suck it up. This is your life."

She ran away with her boyfriend/lover. Who WAS hacked to death by her brother.
Sick.

How do you explain that, Skorp?

reply to post by undo


While I don't profess to being a theologian....I have read a number of articles that would suggest that the Book of Revelations was written in code to send messages back to the other Christians. If you search "666" and "Nero", you will find some compelling evidence that the "Number of the Beast" was actually talking about Nero. Whether that is true or not, well I will leave that for you to decide.

I would say though, that you hypothesis has merit, Islam didn't come into being until over 600 years after Christ. I would submit that your posit has just as much bearing on the issues at hand then anything else I have read so far on this thread!!!

reply to post by maddog3n8

So..I am supposed to spoon feed you every verse from the Koran and Haidiths, by transcribing in context how it was presented, so that you can answer my question, which simply put is....WHERE ARE THEY WRONG IN THEIR ASSERTIONS!!!!!

No, my question was really simple.

There are plenty of people with negative views on Islam, which they are entitled to. But in this case we have a video which is being promoted in the OP as containing "expert" views on Islam. All I want to know is what makes these anti-Islamic people "experts"? And what makes them better "experts" on Islam than actual practicing Muslims, who would have a far superior understand of the subject? Like, do they have superior comprehension skills? Are they endowed with some magical ability to read minds? What is it that makes them better "experts" on the subject? Tell me.

The entire video can be summarized as "group of anti-Islamists voice their opinion". Also, thanks to mekhanics link to the rebuttal. It does the job perfectly.

reply to post by wildtimes


I think you need to read the whole context:

Mark the word “OR” in the above verse. ‘Wives or possessed-women’, (not ‘the wives and possessed women’) were the initial restrictions. Then a few years later, in Madinah, the final verdict came; “If any of you have not the means wherewith to wed free believing women, they may marry (instead of resorting to free sex with) believing girls from among those whom your right hands possess. Moreover, Allah has full knowledge about your faith. You are one from another. believing girls from among those whom your right hands possess This (permission of marriage with captive-women) is for those among you who fear sin but it is better for you that you practice self-restraint. And Allah is Oft-forgiving. Most Merciful” (4:25)

There is no question that he is talking about slavery! I will not posit in conjecture why he said these things...but to me...he is clearly condoning the practice! Regardless of what the trolls say, he was for slavery!!!

reply to post by wildtimes

He freed them so he could "marry them", or "marry them off", or "adopt them"? Sketchy.

Of course, it would seem sketchy for someone who has already arrived at a conclusion.
No amount of dialogue or discussion would change your views or at least get you to consider. You only pretend to want to "learn" and "educate" yourself, but inside you actually just believe what you want to believe, so I am not going to bother.

Originally posted by maddog3n8
reply to post by undo

 

While I don't profess to being a theologian....I have read a number of articles that would suggest that the Book of Revelations was written in code to send messages back to the other Christians. If you search "666" and "Nero", you will find some compelling evidence that the "Number of the Beast" was actually talking about Nero. Whether that is true or not, well I will leave that for you to decide.

I would say though, that you hypothesis has merit, Islam didn't come into being until over 600 years after Christ. I would submit that your posit has just as much bearing on the issues at hand then anything else I have read so far on this thread!!!

the sad part of that is, that it means the muslims are just as much the victims in all of this as any of the people they have subjugated or tried to subjugate! personally, i think jesus was the last pharaoh of egypt (cleopatra's son). at the time she and julius caesar were a couple before julius was assassinated. that would've made her son, the rightful heir to:

1. the throne of egypt
2. the throne of the roman empire
3. the throne of israel via his ptolemy ancestral connection to king david.

he would've had the biggest target in history, ever, painted on a single heir to any seat of authority. the romans would've wanted him dead because he could challenge the replacement of julius and because they wanted to claim egypt as their own, and he was the heir to that throne as well. oh this stuff gets mighty deep.

anyway, would be interesting to find out if they did create islam. sadly, most muslims wouldn't believe it now, cause it's too embedded in their culture and way of life and thinking.

reply to post by sk0rpi0n


Which you have summarily dismissed without watching!! If you haven't watched, you should keep your teeth together, because you do not know what was said!!! End point. Do not pass go, do not collect two hundred dollars!!!

The hilarity of this is that you don't know how stupid you are being!!!!

reply to post by maddog3n8


Well, according to Robert F. Shedinger he said:

'Jesus was a Muslim

The head of the religion department at Luther College in Iowa recently argued that Jesus Christ, the central figure of Christianity, was in fact, a Muslim.

According to Shedinger, Islam is a “social justice movement,” not a religion, and since Christ supposedly supported “social justice,” that makes him a Muslim. To quote him, “I came to the conclusion that [Islam] was a social justice movement and I think that’s who Jesus was in the first century so I conclude Jesus is more like a Muslim.”

Where do we begin with what’s wrong with this picture? The first and most obvious point would have to be that Christ, being born roughly 600 years before Islam even existed, is not capable of being a Muslim. To be sure, if you believe there are commonalities in values between Islam and Christianity (which scholars in both faiths do, in fact, believe), you could argue that Christ held some Islamic ideas. But to claim that he was a Muslim is to take it entirely too far.

Moreover, if we are talking about which religious founder actually got his ideas from the other, would it not be more accurate to say “Muhammad was a Christian.” After all, if Christ’s teachings are virtually indistinguishable from Muhammad’s (which seems to be the main thesis of Shedinger’s argument), and Christ came first (which he unquestionably did), then clearly it’s Muhammad who ripped off Christ, not the other way around. Of course, a book titled “Was Muhammad a Christian” might get a sizably larger amount of backlash from some of Muhammad’s less…shall we say, “socially just” followers, but it also would have been more intellectually honest.

Finally, about that “social justice movement” description, we’d like to hear more of an explanation about how a religion that encourages female circumcision and conquest of any and all unbelievers is somehow tied to “social justice,” or, if it doesn’t support these things, why people who believe it does are wrong. We also wonder why a social justice movement would be based around a belief that there is no God but theirs and their founder is the only legitimate prophet. We expect to be waiting a long time regarding these points.

www.theblaze.com...



Astonishing, isn't it? Makes me wonder how Islam came to being!!!!

Islam didn't come into being until over 600 years after Christ?

I'd suggest you learn some basic stuff like 'what is Islam' and 'what is Muslim'.

reply to post by sk0rpi0n


There is no "sketchy"-ness about it!!! He (Mohammad) was clearly for slavery!!! Or are you now arguing that the quote from mekanics is inaccurate?

reply to post by mekhanics


I suggest you learn some basic timelines!!!!! Mohammad was born when?

Lets take your stupid search of Youtube...because that's a great source of irrefutable knowledge...and expand it to how many Imams or Islamic Scholars buy into that dogma?

reply to post by maddog3n8

Which you have summarily dismissed without watching!! If you haven't watched, you should keep your teeth together,

I am going to dismiss it without watching... until you first tell me what makes these anti-Islamic people "experts"? And what makes them better "experts" on Islam than actual practicing Muslims, who would have a far superior understand of the subject? (And I'll keep bringing this up until someone answers)

This is like the third time I'm asking you... but you just don't seem to have an answer... instead of answering my valid question regarding the documentary... you keep dancing around the question.

The hilarity of this is that you don't know how stupid you are being!!!!

The only thing thats stupid is the fact that people believe that the speakers on that video are actually "experts" on Islam.