A claim:


moses wrote on May 14^th, 2019 at 3:28pm:

Without the rape torture and slaughter bits, the qur'an would have less to read than a 10 cent mickey mouse comic.

One thing that strikes anyone who actually bothers to read the Quran is how rarely violence (as in physically fighting people) is mentioned - in comparison to everything else in the Quran.

This is self evident without needing to know exactly how many.

Nonetheless, I did a quick google on the raw numbers, and the results are conclusive:

Total number of verses (ayah) in the Quran: 6236
Number of verses that mention fighting and war: 109 (according to Islamophobic site 'the religion of peace')

By my calculation thats about 1.7% of the Quran.

So it turns out there is quite a deal more than a 10c mickey mouse comic worth left in the Quran after the 'rape torture and slaughter bits' are taken out.  :)

Chapter 9 is 129 verses. It is pretty much entirely devoted to promotion and motivation for violence, warfare, pain etc though obviously not all of them directly mention war.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1469837313

But anyway, congratulations on trying to disprove the mickey mouse comment. You are nearly there.

If you did the same analysis on a book that was entirely about war, what percentage of the sentences do you think would mention war?

polite_gandalf wrote on May 15^th, 2019 at 3:05pm:

A claim: moses wrote on May 14th, 2019 at 3:28pm: Without the rape torture and slaughter bits, the qur'an would have less to read than a 10 cent mickey mouse comic. One thing that strikes anyone who actually bothers to read the Quran is how rarely violence (as in physically fighting people) is mentioned - in comparison to everything else in the Quran. This is self evident without needing to know exactly how many. Nonetheless, I did a quick google on the raw numbers, and the results are conclusive: Total number of verses (ayah) in the Quran: 6236 Number of verses that mention fighting and war: 109 (according to Islamophobic site 'the religion of peace') By my calculation thats about 1.7% of the Quran. So it turns out there is quite a deal more than a 10c mickey mouse comic worth left in the Quran after the 'rape torture and slaughter bits' are taken out.  :)

Gissa quick Google on the verses about subjugation, oppression, the supremacy of Islam, the treatment of apostates, women, dhimmis, polytheists,  the demand that Islam not be criticised by the 'infidel', etc.

Islam is a entirely negative influence in Western societies, with no positive aspect whatsoever. Islam's aim from the start has been the eradication of polytheists (hindus and the like), atheists and the total subjugation of Christians and Jews everywhere.  That aim has never changed and without it there is no Islam, so it will never change.

Ever.  You can't contradict Alladin's last prophet, can you??

freediver wrote on May 15^th, 2019 at 7:13pm:

If you did the same analysis on a book that was entirely about war, what percentage of the sentences do you think would mention war?

I would imagine it would talk quite a lot about war without necessarily using the word war.

Its a silly point you are making FD, if you are trying to insinuate that the only topic of the Quran is killing infidels, you are obviously way off. Take the 5 pillars for example - prayer, belief in oneness of God, alms giving, fasting and pilgrimage. These are central themes in the Quran, obviously. They also have nothing to do with killing infidels, by any stretch of the imagination. The 5 pillars in fact coalesce around the core theme of a personal, spiritual journey of enlightenment - a struggle to discard earthly material wants and desires. And this is emphasised again and again in the Quran, using metaphors and poetry that couldn't be more removed from such crass temporal trivialities as war, pillage and booty. Somehow I doubt your war book would be 98+% a spiritual guide to personal enlightenment, and if it was, I'd frankly feel ripped off that it was sold to me as a war book. Similarly, if you and moses actuallly read the whole Quran you will be in for a major let down if you expected a saucy book of rape torture and slaughter.

My point was your 1.7% calculation is bogus. You might as well have divided the number of mentions by the total number of words.

gandalf,

Do some moslems NOT believe,      that the Koran contains supremacist utterings [also praising Mohammed's murderous path], and urging all moslems to fight in the cause of Allah ?

Or do moslems just want non-moslems to believe,       that the Koran does NOT contain supremacist utterings [also praising Mohammed's murderous path], and urging all moslems to fight in the cause of Allah ?

What the Koran urges the believer to do, it is plainly stated, there, in the Koran   gandalf.

You and yours, playing your semantic denial games, with everyone on this forum, only opens people like yourself to earning the disrespect of those who come across your replies/posts.



.



ADDRESSED TO NON-MOSLEMS....
If you think that moslems are honest and peaceful people, and that ISLAM is a peaceful and tolerant religion,
checkout some of the articles/news reports listed on this page.    -------- >


THE RELIGION OF PEACE
http://thereligionofpeace.com/




PROPOSITION;
Every follower of ISLAM knows that ISLAM is a murderous, death cult.

The desire, of every follower of ISLAM is to get into Allah's Paradise [i like to call it Allah's bordello in the sky],      in order, to among other things, to drink wine freely, and to deflower new virgins every day for the rest of eternity.

But every moslem knows, that he'll never get into Allah's Paradise if he betrays the 'secret', and tells you [the naive infidel] the truth [of never-ending war and carnage, here on earth].



gandalf,

I've got some bad news for you.

Loving and hating for the sake of Allah, will get you, what it got Farhad Khalil Mohammad Jabar [Parramatta].


AL WALAA WAL BARAA

Yadda wrote on May 15^th, 2019 at 10:08pm:

The desire, of every follower of ISLAM is to get into Allah's Paradise [i like to call it Allah's bordello in the sky],      in order, to among other things, to drink wine freely, and to deflower new virgins every day for the rest of eternity.

"Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain:...."
Koran 9.111



.




Two of my favourite Koran verses.....         ;D         ;D         ;D


"Satan makes them promises, and creates in them false desires; but satan's promises are nothing but deception.
They (his dupes) will have their dwelling in Hell, and from it they will find no way of escape."
Koran 4.120


"Then, on the Day of Judgment,.....Then would they offer submission (with the pretence), "We did no evil (knowingly)." (The angels will reply), "Nay, but verily [God] knoweth all that ye did;"
Koran 16.27


;)

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D6grQnLXoAAQVTs.jpg

@ Reply #8,

Captain Nemo,

LETS all live in peace and harmony together.

Just like....




IMAGE....
http://sheikyermami.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/sheik.jpg

'.....Just like in muslim countries.'


image source....
http://sheikyermami.com/




.




Captain Nemo,

Suggestion;
If you want to be more effective, you should respond to posts like my own, with humourous satire,
which plainly shows how everything i am saying about ISLAM, Allah, and Mohammed, is untrue.

And show, how what i am posting is a gross misrepresentation of what true ISLAM is.


QUESTION [to Captain Nemo];
Why don't people like yourself, respond to my posts, with posts just like i have described, above ?



.



WHAT ALLAH SAID.....


"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. "
Koran 9.29


"Fighting [against disbelievers] is prescribed for you, and [if] ye dislike it.....Allah knoweth, and ye know not."
Koran 2.216


"O ye who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are near to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who keep their duty (unto Him)."
Koran 9.123



.



WHAT MOHAMMED SAID.....

THE HADITH....

"...the Prophet said, 'If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him." - DEAD.
hadithsunnah/bukhari/ #004.052.260



.



MORE, OF WHAT MOHAMMED SAID.....

ISLAMIC LAW TEXT....

"Ibn 'Umar related that the Messenger of Allah, upon whom be peace, said, "I have been ordered to kill the people until they testify that there is no god except Allah, and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and they establish prayer and pay the zakah. If they do that, their blood and wealth are protected from me save by the rights of Islam. Their reckoning will be with Allah." (Related by al-Bukhari and Muslim.) "
fiqhussunnah/fus1_06


ISLAMIC LAW TEXT....

"Ibn 'Abbas reported that the Prophet said: "The bare essence of Islam and the basics of the religion are three [acts], upon which Islam has been established. Whoever leaves one of them becomes an unbeliever and his blood may legally be spilled. [The acts are:] Testifying that there is no God except Allah, the obligatory prayers, and the fast of Ramadan."...."
fiqhussunnah/#3.110

n.b.
"Whoever......becomes an unbeliever.....his blood may legally be spilled."




.




MAINSTREAM ISLAMIC DOCTRINE - WHICH IS TAUGHT IN ALL ISLAMIC SCHOOLS

Al Wala' Wal Bara'



Quote:

Al Wala' Wal Bara' Al-wala' wa-l-bara' is an Arabic term in Islam, meaning "loyalty and disavowal". It signifies loving and hating for the sake of Allah. Al-wala' wa-l-bara' is referred to as holding fast to all that is pleasing to Allah, and withdrawing from and opposing all that is displeasing to Allah; namely the Kuffar who are to be hated, for the sake of Allah.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Wala'_Wal_Bara'



.




Quote:

‘Al Walaa wal Baraa’ is an 'essential doctrine' (usul ud-deen). ‘Essential’ means that all Muslims must believe and practice al Walaa wal Baraa as a condition of being admitted to paradise. ‘Al Walaa wal Baraa’ is a highly developed, well-supported and canonical part of Islam approved by the consensus of Islamic jurists. 'Al Walaa wal Baraa' is legally binding and obligatory upon all Muslims. 'Al Walaa wal Baraa' is precisely defined by Islamic jurists and is not a nebulous idea. ‘Al Walaa wal Baraa’ is an official Islamic doctrine and considered the second most important doctrine in Islam.

http://www.elsasblog.com/170219-al-walaa-wal-baraa-and-islamo-catatonia.html

I think gandi is being very disingenuous with his saying that the many verses which lead up to a verse actually saying to kill someone etc. do not count.

Now gandi makes much of a single verse in the qur'an 2:256 which says there is no compulsion in religion.

O.K. gandi if it comes down to only the verses which actually use the words matter, do tell us: how many verses actually say there is no compulsion in religion?

Is there only one?

Does this mean that the concept of rape torture and mass slaughter plural verses which outnumber the singular verse of no compulsion in religion by a factor of over 100 to 1, are setting the agenda for the design of islam?

I think Moses is being very disingenuous with his saying that the many verses which lead up to a verse actually saying to kill someone etc. do not count.

Now Moses refuses to acknowledge half of the Bible - the Old Testament.  It is included in every copy of the Bible.   Many Christians read it, often daily.  Yet, according to Moses, it forms no part at all of Christianity.  Really?

O.K. Moses if it comes down to only the verses which actually actually in the New Testament that matter, why is the Old Testament included in every copy of the Bible?  The Old Testament is used routinely by Terrorists and Oppressors, by Homophobes and Misogynists.  Yet, you keep claiming they are incorrect.   Despite what you claim, they consider themselves to be good god fearing, Christian folk.   

Does this mean that the concept of rape, torture and mass slaughter plural verses which outnumber the singular verse of no compulsion in religion by a factor of over 100 to 1, are setting the agenda for the design of Christianity?    ::) ::)

Islam is resolutely and uncompromisingly supremacists and jihadist for global domination of Islamic law, sharia. Nothing less.

It is relentlessly separatist, relentlessly asserting its special privileges, as seen in the Koran: Muslims special, unbelievers despicable. Muslims are perpetually pressing for special rules for themselves, exemptions, accommodations. Things they have NEVER ever done for other and never will. 
Never ever = Allah's final word. The never ever is absolutely correct about Islam. There is no room for Muslims to compromise. It's sharia now or sharia soon or shraia in a few years. But there is NO compromise about sharia across the world one way or another.

Perpetual jihad until the final Islamic solution - world domination. 




.

Brian Ross wrote on May 17^th, 2019 at 4:41pm:

I think Moses is being very disingenuous with his saying that the many verses which lead up to a verse actually saying to kill someone etc. do not count. Now Moses refuses to acknowledge half of the Bible - the Old Testament.  It is included in every copy of the Bible.   Many Christians read it, often daily.  Yet, according to Moses, it forms no part at all of Christianity.  Really? O.K. Moses if it comes down to only the verses which actually actually in the New Testament that matter, why is the Old Testament included in every copy of the Bible?  The Old Testament is used routinely by Terrorists and Oppressors, by Homophobes and Misogynists.  Yet, you keep claiming they are incorrect.   Despite what you claim, they consider themselves to be good god fearing, Christian folk.    Does this mean that the concept of rape, torture and mass slaughter plural verses which outnumber the singular verse of no compulsion in religion by a factor of over 100 to 1, are setting the agenda for the design of Christianity?    ::) ::)

"The Old Testament is used routinely by Terrorists and Oppressors, by Homophobes and Misogynists.  Yet, you keep claiming they are incorrect."

You are a deceitful person, misrepresenting what and who, those Old Testament laws affected.



Brian Ross,

You make the God of the Old Testament sound like a murderous ogre.

Who encouraged his people to kill anyone who was not an ancient Hebrew.


The Old Testament does NOT order God's people to kill other people, because they were not Jews [or Hebrews, or Christians].

Nor does the Old Testament order God's people to fight other people because they were not Jews [or Hebrews, or Christians].

[Unlike ISLAM.]



The Old Testament commanded God's people to keep to the covenant that they had freely entered into, with their God.

And, there were punishments, for those who broke their covenant, with their God.

That, isn't terrible, nor was it unjust.


"And all the people answered together, and said, All that the LORD hath spoken we will do."

The Old Testament commanded God's people to keep to the covenant that they had freely entered into, with their God.

And, there were punishments, for those who broke their covenant, with their God.

That, isn't terrible, nor was it unjust.


"And all the people answered together, and said, All that the LORD hath spoken we will do."



Yadda said....

Quote:

The Old Testament commanded God's people to kill any Hebrew who had intentionally broken their holy covenant with their God. Too bad! The Hebrews were commanded to kill any Hebrew person, who tried to corrupt the Hebrew nation. Deuteronomy 13:6 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers; 7  Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth; 8  Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him: 9  But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. Leviticus 18:24 Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things: for in all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you: 25  And the land is defiled: therefore I do visit the iniquity thereof upon it, and the land itself vomiteth out her inhabitants. 26  Ye shall therefore keep my statutes and my judgments, and shall not commit any of these abominations; neither any of your own nation, nor any stranger that sojourneth among you: 27  (For all these abominations have the men of the land done, which were before you, and the land is defiled;) 28  That the land spue not you out also, when ye defile it, as it spued out the nations that were before you. 29  For whosoever shall commit any of these abominations, even the souls that commit them shall be cut off from among their people. 30  Therefore shall ye keep mine ordinance, that ye commit not any one of these abominable customs, which were committed before you, and that ye defile not yourselves therein: I am the LORD your God. Why so ? Why must the Hebrews keep God's ordinances and laws ? Because the Hebrews had freely, willingly, and without coercion, entered into an agreement [a holy covenant] with their God to live by/according to his laws. Exodus 19:5 Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine: 6  And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel. 7  And Moses came and called for the elders of the people, and laid before their faces all these words which the LORD commanded him. 8  And all the people answered together, and said, All that the LORD hath spoken we will do. And Moses returned the words of the people unto the LORD. The ancient Hebrews were A COVENANT PEOPLE. They had entered into a solemn covenant with their God. [n.b. There was nothing to stop any Hebrew from leaving his people, if he/she did not want to live according to the covenant that his people had entered into, with God. Any Hebrew could leave his people, and go and live 'in the world', among the Gentiles. Thereby, becoming a Gentile! But if the Hebrew person remained living among God's people, and blatantly and intentionally, broke the covenant with God [that he was constrained by], that Hebrew person understood, that he was risking LAWFUL execution, according to the terms of the covenant, with God.]

re my posts....

Reply #13

and, Reply #14


Brian Ross,

You should ask for your money back.
.....that 'Doctorate' thing you got.

Who was the issuing authority ?

Was it a Sunday School teacher's assistant ?

You don't know much, about what is contained in the Old Testament bible.
....that's for sure.

yoohoo gandi.

bump

I think gandi is being very disingenuous with his saying that the many verses which lead up to a verse actually saying to kill someone etc. do not count.

Now gandi makes much of a single verse in the qur'an 2:256 which says there is no compulsion in religion.

O.K. gandi if it comes down to only the verses which actually use the words matter, do tell us: how many verses actually say there is no compulsion in religion?

Is there only one?

Does this mean that the concept of rape torture and mass slaughter plural verses which outnumber the singular verse of no compulsion in religion by a factor of over 100 to 1, are setting the agenda for the design of islam?

moses wrote on May 18^th, 2019 at 2:40pm:

Now gandi makes much of a single verse in the qur'an 2:256 which says there is no compulsion in religion. O.K. gandi if it comes down to only the verses which actually use the words matter, do tell us: how many verses actually say there is no compulsion in religion? Is there only one?

No there is not only one. I reference 18:29 all the time.

But thats not the point. You are disingenuously verbling me as saying that instead of being full of rape and torture, the Quran is really full of saying no compulsion in religion.

I am not.

The Quran is chock full of imagery and metaphors related to finding spiritual peace and harmony in belief (which itself is really just a metaphor for freeing oneself from base and earthly desires). If nothing else just read chapter 2 - the longest surah in the Quran and tell me roughly how much is 'rape and torture' and how much is a personal conversation with the individual to have and maintain faith. Read Al Fatiha at the very least - the first and by far the most important verse - as muslims say it before every prostration (ruka'a) in their prayer - 17 times a day, and countless other times as the 'go to' verse to recite for just about any occassion - weddings, funerals, or just when you're feeling anxious. What does Al Fatiha say? It is in two parts - the first part is to acknowledge/remind ourselves that God is a) the most merciful b) the sustainer of all life and c) the master of judgement. The second half is to ask God to guide us and keep us on the righteous path (the "right path" defined elsewhere in the Quran as the path of peace). Thats it. No murder rape or pillage - just remembering God as the master over all things and seeking his guidance to stay on the right path.

In fact Al Fatiha is just a microcosm of what the overall theme in the Quran is about. And this is the theme muslims recite the most - the most important verse. And the theme is further encapsulated by the 5 pillars - belief/faith in God, prayer, alms giving, pilgrimage and fasting - every one of them is a form of spiritual cleansing for the individual, to grow their spiritual side (Iman)

gandi gandi, you tried to disprove the assumption that the qur'an  has a theme of hatred for the unbeliever, the muslim is supreme, rape of slaves is condoned, torture and murder of people is allowable etc.

You tried to say that only the verses which actually use the words hate kill etc. count as showing the amount of depravity in the qur'an.

I showed you that your theory that islam is a religion of peace and tolerance is only backed by one single verse which actually uses the key words.

You now have come up with one more verse.

18:29. And say: "The truth is from your Lord." Then whosoever wills, let him believe, and whosoever wills, let him disbelieve. Verily, We have prepared for the Zalimun (polytheists and wrong-doers, etc.), a Fire whose walls will be surrounding them (disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah). And if they ask for help (relief, water, etc.) they will be granted water like boiling oil, that will scald their faces. Terrible the drink, and an evil Murtafaqa (dwelling, resting place, etc.)!

This verse is just as much about hatred and torture as the innumerable verses which actually say to rape kill torture etc. gandi.

Your example says that the non believers will be given boiling water as a relief drink if they are thirsty it will scald their faces.

Of course all verses have corresponding and supportive teachings gandi we all know that.

The fact also is that your book supports thieving lying rape torture and mass murder.

In fact this site tells us in part:

Amount of Text Devoted to the Kafir

The Koran says that the Kafir may be deceived, plotted against, hated, enslaved, mocked, tortured and worse. The word is usually translated as “unbeliever” but this translation is wrong. The word “unbeliever” is logically and emotionally neutral, whereas, Kafir is the most abusive, prejudiced and hateful word in any language.

Islam devotes a great amount of energy to the Kafir. The majority (64%) of the Koran is devoted to the Kafir, and nearly all of the Sira (81%) deals with Mohammed’s struggle with them. The Hadith (Traditions) devotes 32% of the text to Kafirs1. Overall, the Trilogy devotes 60% of its content to the Kafir.

Hadith 37%
Sira 81%
Koran 64%
Total 60%

Hatred for the sake of Allah and love for the sake of Allah is called Al Walaa wa al Baraa, a fundamental principle of Islamic ethics and Sharia. A Muslim is to hate what Allah hates and love what Allah loves. Allah hates the Kafir, therefore, a Muslim is to act accordingly.

The fact that muslim lands are piles of rubble right now, muslims are the worlds refugee problem, muslims are the global terrorists, muslims are slaughtering their kids in the tens of thousands is proof that you have a monumental problem gandi.

Stop all the crap about how divine islam is, look at the situation muslims are in and tell the truth for once in your life.

islam is your problem, the answer is to purge the evil from your doctrine and start a fresh, not burrow deeper into the degeneracy islam is.

moses wrote on May 21^st, 2019 at 3:18pm:

I showed you that your theory that islam is a religion of peace and tolerance is only backed by one single verse which actually uses the key words.

That is indeed my 'theory', but its not my argument in this thread.

You are 'strawmaning' me.

My 'theory' in this discussion is that the Quran is overwhelmingly *NOT* a book rape, torture and slaughter as you insisted. The corollary of this theory is *NOT* necessarily that it is therefore all or mostly specifically about 'peace and tolerance'. In fact the description I articulated in my last post was all about personal spiritual development, emphasising the importance of personal faith, and how that grows one's spirit (iman). Obviously I would say that 'peace and tolerance' is a natural bi-product of such spiritual development, but it doesn't mean it is specifically stated as so.

Also I naturally reject your contention that Quranic depictions of hell, and its theoretical future inhabitants (for no one is there now), is necessarily preaching hate towards others. But I know this is a favourite theme of yours.

Would a verse which states disbelief is hateful to allah and the believers, be preaching hatred of unbelievers gandi?

moses wrote on May 21^st, 2019 at 3:48pm:

Would a verse which states disbelief is hateful to allah and the believers, be preaching hatred of unbelievers gandi?

reference please?

Gandi, do you think some of the suicide bombers think they are going to paradise

Captain Nemo wrote on May 16^th, 2019 at 12:40am:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D6grQnLXoAAQVTs.jpg

Who's Leunig talking about here, Captain Nemo from the deep?

Frank wrote on May 17^th, 2019 at 6:22pm:

Islam is resolutely and uncompromisingly supremacists and jihadist for global domination of Islamic law, sharia. Nothing less. It is relentlessly separatist, relentlessly asserting its special privileges, as seen in the Koran: Muslims special, unbelievers despicable. Muslims are perpetually pressing for special rules for themselves, exemptions, accommodations. Things they have NEVER ever done for other and never will.  Never ever = Allah's final word. The never ever is absolutely correct about Islam. There is no room for Muslims to compromise. It's sharia now or sharia soon or shraia in a few years. But there is NO compromise about sharia across the world one way or another. Perpetual jihad until the final Islamic solution - world domination.  .

Always absolutely never ever.

polite_gandalf wrote on May 21^st, 2019 at 3:44pm:

moses wrote on May 21st, 2019 at 3:18pm: I showed you that your theory that islam is a religion of peace and tolerance is only backed by one single verse which actually uses the key words. That is indeed my 'theory', but its not my argument in this thread. You are 'strawmaning' me. My 'theory' in this discussion is that the Quran is overwhelmingly *NOT* a book rape, torture and slaughter as you insisted. The corollary of this theory is *NOT* necessarily that it is therefore all or mostly specifically about 'peace and tolerance'. In fact the description I articulated in my last post was all about personal spiritual development, emphasising the importance of personal faith, and how that grows one's spirit (iman). Obviously I would say that 'peace and tolerance' is a natural bi-product of such spiritual development, but it doesn't mean it is specifically stated as so. Also I naturally reject your contention that Quranic depictions of hell, and its theoretical future inhabitants (for no one is there now), is necessarily preaching hate towards others. But I know this is a favourite theme of yours.

MY *theory* is that Islam, based on the Koran and the hadiths, is an oppressive, violent and supremacists ideology.

It's aim, at every turn, is sharia -  a most oppressive, violent and supremacist code.

Mattyfisk wrote on May 21^st, 2019 at 7:21pm:

Frank wrote on May 17th, 2019 at 6:22pm: Islam is resolutely and uncompromisingly supremacists and jihadist for global domination of Islamic law, sharia. Nothing less. It is relentlessly separatist, relentlessly asserting its special privileges, as seen in the Koran: Muslims special, unbelievers despicable. Muslims are perpetually pressing for special rules for themselves, exemptions, accommodations. Things they have NEVER ever done for other and never will.  Never ever = Allah's final word. The never ever is absolutely correct about Islam. There is no room for Muslims to compromise. It's sharia now or sharia soon or shraia in a few years. But there is NO compromise about sharia across the world one way or another. Perpetual jihad until the final Islamic solution - world domination.  . Always absolutely never ever.

That's pissweak, Paki.

You look at Islam today - and across the last 1400 years - and you DO see that it has never ever been a force for peace.

Sorry - the peace of subjugation and oppression, perhaps.  All the Christians overrun by Islam in the Middle East, all the Indians who have not converted but bore brunt of Islam's invasion regard it as Evil and Satan incarnate.
The historical record backs their assessment of Islam.

polite_gandalf wrote on May 21^st, 2019 at 2:14pm:

moses wrote on May 18th, 2019 at 2:40pm: Now gandi makes much of a single verse in the qur'an 2:256 which says there is no compulsion in religion. O.K. gandi if it comes down to only the verses which actually use the words matter, do tell us: how many verses actually say there is no compulsion in religion? Is there only one? No there is not only one. I reference 18:29 all the time. But thats not the point. You are disingenuously verbling me as saying that instead of being full of rape and torture, the Quran is really full of saying no compulsion in religion. I am not. The Quran is chock full of imagery and metaphors related to finding spiritual peace and harmony in belief (which itself is really just a metaphor for freeing oneself from base and earthly desires). If nothing else just read chapter 2 - the longest surah in the Quran and tell me roughly how much is 'rape and torture' and how much is a personal conversation with the individual to have and maintain faith. Read Al Fatiha at the very least - the first and by far the most important verse - as muslims say it before every prostration (ruka'a) in their prayer - 17 times a day, and countless other times as the 'go to' verse to recite for just about any occassion - weddings, funerals, or just when you're feeling anxious. What does Al Fatiha say? It is in two parts - the first part is to acknowledge/remind ourselves that God is a) the most merciful b) the sustainer of all life and c) the master of judgement. The second half is to ask God to guide us and keep us on the righteous path (the "right path" defined elsewhere in the Quran as the path of peace). Thats it. No murder rape or pillage - just remembering God as the master over all things and seeking his guidance to stay on the right path. In fact Al Fatiha is just a microcosm of what the overall theme in the Quran is about. And this is the theme muslims recite the most - the most important verse. And the theme is further encapsulated by the 5 pillars - belief/faith in God, prayer, alms giving, pilgrimage and fasting - every one of them is a form of spiritual cleansing for the individual, to grow their spiritual side (Iman)

Should he read chapter 9? Or should he only read the bits you tell him to if he wants a true indication of the amount of slaughter bits in the Quran?

Are you conceding your 1.7% calculation was bogus?

Frank wrote on May 21^st, 2019 at 8:04pm:

Mattyfisk wrote on May 21st, 2019 at 7:21pm: Frank wrote on May 17th, 2019 at 6:22pm: Islam is resolutely and uncompromisingly supremacists and jihadist for global domination of Islamic law, sharia. Nothing less. It is relentlessly separatist, relentlessly asserting its special privileges, as seen in the Koran: Muslims special, unbelievers despicable. Muslims are perpetually pressing for special rules for themselves, exemptions, accommodations. Things they have NEVER ever done for other and never will.  Never ever = Allah's final word. The never ever is absolutely correct about Islam. There is no room for Muslims to compromise. It's sharia now or sharia soon or shraia in a few years. But there is NO compromise about sharia across the world one way or another. Perpetual jihad until the final Islamic solution - world domination.  . Always absolutely never ever. That's pissweak, Paki. You look at Islam today - and across the last 1400 years - and you DO see that it has never ever been a force for peace. Sorry - the peace of subjugation and oppression, perhaps.  All the Christians overrun by Islam in the Middle East, all the Indians who have not converted but bore brunt of Islam's invasion regard it as Evil and Satan incarnate. The historical record backs their assessment of Islam.

Good point.

Always absolutely never ever Paki - on stilts.

gandi wrote Reply #21 - Yesterday at 6:23pm

Quote:

reference please?

40:35. Those who dispute about the Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) of Allah, without any authority that has come to them, it is greatly hateful and disgusting to Allah and to those who believe. Thus does Allah seal up the heart of every arrogant, tyrant. (So they cannot guide themselves to the Right Path).

allah and believers hate those who reject allah gandi, it even tells us that allah then makes it impossible for these unbelievers to actually guide themselves back onto the right path.

So most definitely there is no love and tolerance of the unbeliever in islam.

I notice that the Judaeo / Christian doctrine has a theme of: man should repent for his sins and return to the spirit of righteousness.

islam is the total antithesis of this spiritual concept gandi, it does not promote peace and tolerance.

freediver wrote on May 21^st, 2019 at 9:59pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on May 21st, 2019 at 2:14pm: moses wrote on May 18th, 2019 at 2:40pm: Now gandi makes much of a single verse in the qur'an 2:256 which says there is no compulsion in religion. O.K. gandi if it comes down to only the verses which actually use the words matter, do tell us: how many verses actually say there is no compulsion in religion? Is there only one? No there is not only one. I reference 18:29 all the time. But thats not the point. You are disingenuously verbling me as saying that instead of being full of rape and torture, the Quran is really full of saying no compulsion in religion. I am not. The Quran is chock full of imagery and metaphors related to finding spiritual peace and harmony in belief (which itself is really just a metaphor for freeing oneself from base and earthly desires). If nothing else just read chapter 2 - the longest surah in the Quran and tell me roughly how much is 'rape and torture' and how much is a personal conversation with the individual to have and maintain faith. Read Al Fatiha at the very least - the first and by far the most important verse - as muslims say it before every prostration (ruka'a) in their prayer - 17 times a day, and countless other times as the 'go to' verse to recite for just about any occassion - weddings, funerals, or just when you're feeling anxious. What does Al Fatiha say? It is in two parts - the first part is to acknowledge/remind ourselves that God is a) the most merciful b) the sustainer of all life and c) the master of judgement. The second half is to ask God to guide us and keep us on the righteous path (the "right path" defined elsewhere in the Quran as the path of peace). Thats it. No murder rape or pillage - just remembering God as the master over all things and seeking his guidance to stay on the right path. In fact Al Fatiha is just a microcosm of what the overall theme in the Quran is about. And this is the theme muslims recite the most - the most important verse. And the theme is further encapsulated by the 5 pillars - belief/faith in God, prayer, alms giving, pilgrimage and fasting - every one of them is a form of spiritual cleansing for the individual, to grow their spiritual side (Iman) Should he read chapter 9? Or should he only read the bits you tell him to if he wants a true indication of the amount of slaughter bits in the Quran?

Ideally all of it FD, and he'll find that chapter 9 is quite the anomaly in an otherwise meditative and deeply spiritual book.

If there's one verse that encapsulates the entire Quran, and Islam for that matter, its the very first, and by the far the most well known and common verse. We recite it more than any other verse. Literally a bare minimum of 17 times a day. It has nothing to do with fighting others. Nor do the 5 pillars - universally understood as the core essences of Islam.

Guess what FD? Chapter 9 is not recited by muslims 17 times a day. Chapter 9 has no bearing whatsoever on the 5 pillars.

You misinterpret as usual moses.

muslims are 'hateful' towards what they are doing/saying - not to them personally.

"I hate what you are doing" =/= "I hate you"

hate the sin = / = hate the sinner.

I very much believe that is the message of the qur'an (as do the millions of muslims who persecute and oppress the non muslims globally).

Why does allah make it impossible for them to get back on the straight and narrow If he only hates their deeds and not the sinners themselves?

aquascoot wrote on May 21^st, 2019 at 7:05pm:

Gandi, do you think some of the suicide bombers think they are going to paradise

gandi, ive asked this one to gweg and mothra and bwian and they ignore it.

Et too Brutee ??

polite_gandalf wrote on May 22^nd, 2019 at 2:42pm:

You misinterpret as usual moses. muslims are 'hateful' towards what they are doing/saying - not to them personally. "I hate what you are doing" =/= "I hate you"

But of course you will never credit the same about people who oppose Islam ('what you are doing') and not particular Muslims ('you').

For your idiotic and dishonest agit-prop its ALL 'Islamophobia'.



You are an intelligent and, when you don't guard yourself, a well-meaning man. But you are as dishonest and untrustworthy as any Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, Hizbi or Hezbollah operative. Or Bwian and the Paki Karnal.  Dishonesty and blatant agit-prop is just what you all DO.   It's your jihad.

Your creed allows you and positively encourages you to be dishonest and to lie and so you are dishonest and do lie.

Frank wrote on May 22^nd, 2019 at 6:46pm:

Or Bwian and the Paki Karnal.

Me too!

600 years ago, christianity was pretty brutal.
plenty of  people being boiled in oil thanks to the book.
but 600 years of science and secularism beating it down has made it very benign and pretty harmless.

in another 600 years, after the secular west get the guts to publish lots of cartoons of mo and just keeping laughing at the pretty dumb ideas (like getting 64 virgins for blowing yourself up), islam will be beaten into shape. its just come to the game a bit late and the west seems unwilling to teach the lessons.
but they'll come to their senses eventually and it will all be sweet

Auggie wrote on May 22^nd, 2019 at 6:51pm:

Frank wrote on May 22nd, 2019 at 6:46pm: Or Bwian and the Paki Karnal.  Me too!

Nah.  Bwian is mad in a Lady in the Van kind of way, bought his doctorate online, lives in fantasy land with major unresolved psychic blockages and underwear scattered all over the place. The Paki is an 80s Fouckalldian idiot whose mind was destroyed by buggery, sociology and political 'science', in that order. He likes to cross-dress as a Vietnam veteran to reminisce.

You are neither an unmoored mad woman nor an unmoored educated moron like them. You are just 20 thousand leagues under the sea, Nemo, bubbling away inconsequentially whenever there is an opportunity.

polite_gandalf wrote on May 22^nd, 2019 at 2:33pm:

freediver wrote on May 21st, 2019 at 9:59pm: polite_gandalf wrote on May 21st, 2019 at 2:14pm: moses wrote on May 18th, 2019 at 2:40pm: Now gandi makes much of a single verse in the qur'an 2:256 which says there is no compulsion in religion. O.K. gandi if it comes down to only the verses which actually use the words matter, do tell us: how many verses actually say there is no compulsion in religion? Is there only one? No there is not only one. I reference 18:29 all the time. But thats not the point. You are disingenuously verbling me as saying that instead of being full of rape and torture, the Quran is really full of saying no compulsion in religion. I am not. The Quran is chock full of imagery and metaphors related to finding spiritual peace and harmony in belief (which itself is really just a metaphor for freeing oneself from base and earthly desires). If nothing else just read chapter 2 - the longest surah in the Quran and tell me roughly how much is 'rape and torture' and how much is a personal conversation with the individual to have and maintain faith. Read Al Fatiha at the very least - the first and by far the most important verse - as muslims say it before every prostration (ruka'a) in their prayer - 17 times a day, and countless other times as the 'go to' verse to recite for just about any occassion - weddings, funerals, or just when you're feeling anxious. What does Al Fatiha say? It is in two parts - the first part is to acknowledge/remind ourselves that God is a) the most merciful b) the sustainer of all life and c) the master of judgement. The second half is to ask God to guide us and keep us on the righteous path (the "right path" defined elsewhere in the Quran as the path of peace). Thats it. No murder rape or pillage - just remembering God as the master over all things and seeking his guidance to stay on the right path. In fact Al Fatiha is just a microcosm of what the overall theme in the Quran is about. And this is the theme muslims recite the most - the most important verse. And the theme is further encapsulated by the 5 pillars - belief/faith in God, prayer, alms giving, pilgrimage and fasting - every one of them is a form of spiritual cleansing for the individual, to grow their spiritual side (Iman) Should he read chapter 9? Or should he only read the bits you tell him to if he wants a true indication of the amount of slaughter bits in the Quran? Ideally all of it FD, and he'll find that chapter 9 is quite the anomaly in an otherwise meditative and deeply spiritual book. If there's one verse that encapsulates the entire Quran, and Islam for that matter, its the very first, and by the far the most well known and common verse. We recite it more than any other verse. Literally a bare minimum of 17 times a day. It has nothing to do with fighting others. Nor do the 5 pillars - universally understood as the core essences of Islam. Guess what FD? Chapter 9 is not recited by muslims 17 times a day. Chapter 9 has no bearing whatsoever on the 5 pillars.

And chapter 8?

Are you conceding your 1.7% calculation was bogus?

Auggie wrote on May 22^nd, 2019 at 6:51pm:

Frank wrote on May 22nd, 2019 at 6:46pm: Or Bwian and the Paki Karnal.  Me too!

As for silly old Karnal, he's not even a Paki. He's British, as every schoolboy knows. Aussie Aussie Aussie.


Quote:

Your creed allows you and positively encourages you to be dishonest and to lie and so you are dishonest and do lie.

University of Balogney, innit, but I'm curious. Let's hear some jolly old truth.

Old boy, which passport do you use?

freediver wrote on May 22^nd, 2019 at 7:42pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on May 22nd, 2019 at 2:33pm: freediver wrote on May 21st, 2019 at 9:59pm: polite_gandalf wrote on May 21st, 2019 at 2:14pm: moses wrote on May 18th, 2019 at 2:40pm: Now gandi makes much of a single verse in the qur'an 2:256 which says there is no compulsion in religion. O.K. gandi if it comes down to only the verses which actually use the words matter, do tell us: how many verses actually say there is no compulsion in religion? Is there only one? No there is not only one. I reference 18:29 all the time. But thats not the point. You are disingenuously verbling me as saying that instead of being full of rape and torture, the Quran is really full of saying no compulsion in religion. I am not. The Quran is chock full of imagery and metaphors related to finding spiritual peace and harmony in belief (which itself is really just a metaphor for freeing oneself from base and earthly desires). If nothing else just read chapter 2 - the longest surah in the Quran and tell me roughly how much is 'rape and torture' and how much is a personal conversation with the individual to have and maintain faith. Read Al Fatiha at the very least - the first and by far the most important verse - as muslims say it before every prostration (ruka'a) in their prayer - 17 times a day, and countless other times as the 'go to' verse to recite for just about any occassion - weddings, funerals, or just when you're feeling anxious. What does Al Fatiha say? It is in two parts - the first part is to acknowledge/remind ourselves that God is a) the most merciful b) the sustainer of all life and c) the master of judgement. The second half is to ask God to guide us and keep us on the righteous path (the "right path" defined elsewhere in the Quran as the path of peace). Thats it. No murder rape or pillage - just remembering God as the master over all things and seeking his guidance to stay on the right path. In fact Al Fatiha is just a microcosm of what the overall theme in the Quran is about. And this is the theme muslims recite the most - the most important verse. And the theme is further encapsulated by the 5 pillars - belief/faith in God, prayer, alms giving, pilgrimage and fasting - every one of them is a form of spiritual cleansing for the individual, to grow their spiritual side (Iman) Should he read chapter 9? Or should he only read the bits you tell him to if he wants a true indication of the amount of slaughter bits in the Quran? Ideally all of it FD, and he'll find that chapter 9 is quite the anomaly in an otherwise meditative and deeply spiritual book. If there's one verse that encapsulates the entire Quran, and Islam for that matter, its the very first, and by the far the most well known and common verse. We recite it more than any other verse. Literally a bare minimum of 17 times a day. It has nothing to do with fighting others. Nor do the 5 pillars - universally understood as the core essences of Islam. Guess what FD? Chapter 9 is not recited by muslims 17 times a day. Chapter 9 has no bearing whatsoever on the 5 pillars. And chapter 8? Are you conceding your 1.7% calculation was bogus?

Let's ask FD.


Quote:

Your creed allows you and positively encourages you to be dishonest and to lie and so you are dishonest and do lie.

FD, do you uphold the use of porkies in your campaign against the Muselman?

A simple yes or no will suffice.

freediver wrote on May 22^nd, 2019 at 7:42pm:

Are you conceding your 1.7% calculation was bogus?

No. What I said exactly in the OP is a simple statement of fact. Actually I got it from Islamophobic website the religion of peace.

Your attempts to misconstrue what I said into something else doesn't change this.

The only relevant point is that the vast majority of the Quran is not about fighting. And lets not forget your attempts to clearly imply that it is.

Mattyfisk wrote on May 22^nd, 2019 at 9:03pm:

Auggie wrote on May 22nd, 2019 at 6:51pm: Frank wrote on May 22nd, 2019 at 6:46pm: Or Bwian and the Paki Karnal.  Me too! As for silly old Karnal, he's not even a Paki. He's British, as every schoolboy knows. Aussie Aussie Aussie.

Of course you are a Paki. They even have a statue of you in the Karnal District of India, near the paki border.

Frank wrote on May 23^rd, 2019 at 6:47pm:

Mattyfisk wrote on May 22nd, 2019 at 9:03pm: Auggie wrote on May 22nd, 2019 at 6:51pm: Frank wrote on May 22nd, 2019 at 6:46pm: Or Bwian and the Paki Karnal.  Me too! As for silly old Karnal, he's not even a Paki. He's British, as every schoolboy knows. Aussie Aussie Aussie. Of course you are a Paki. They even have a statue of you in the Karnal District of India, near the paki border.

Karnal is near Delhi, dear.

Flew there, did you?

Perhaps one should try the bus.

polite_gandalf wrote on May 23^rd, 2019 at 11:51am:

freediver wrote on May 22nd, 2019 at 7:42pm: Are you conceding your 1.7% calculation was bogus? No. What I said exactly in the OP is a simple statement of fact. Actually I got it from Islamophobic website the religion of peace. Your attempts to misconstrue what I said into something else doesn't change this. The only relevant point is that the vast majority of the Quran is not about fighting. And lets not forget your attempts to clearly imply that it is.

The vast majority of the Quran is not about the things you claim are the core message of Islam.

But there is plenty of promotion of slaughter in the name of Islam.


Quote:

One thing that strikes anyone who actually bothers to read the Quran is how rarely violence (as in physically fighting people) is mentioned - in comparison to everything else in the Quran.

Is this a statement of fact from an Islamophobic website? Why does it take so much effort to get a Muslim to own what they say about Islam?

Mattyfisk wrote on May 22^nd, 2019 at 9:11pm:

freediver wrote on May 22nd, 2019 at 7:42pm: polite_gandalf wrote on May 22nd, 2019 at 2:33pm: freediver wrote on May 21st, 2019 at 9:59pm: polite_gandalf wrote on May 21st, 2019 at 2:14pm: moses wrote on May 18th, 2019 at 2:40pm: Now gandi makes much of a single verse in the qur'an 2:256 which says there is no compulsion in religion. O.K. gandi if it comes down to only the verses which actually use the words matter, do tell us: how many verses actually say there is no compulsion in religion? Is there only one? No there is not only one. I reference 18:29 all the time. But thats not the point. You are disingenuously verbling me as saying that instead of being full of rape and torture, the Quran is really full of saying no compulsion in religion. I am not. The Quran is chock full of imagery and metaphors related to finding spiritual peace and harmony in belief (which itself is really just a metaphor for freeing oneself from base and earthly desires). If nothing else just read chapter 2 - the longest surah in the Quran and tell me roughly how much is 'rape and torture' and how much is a personal conversation with the individual to have and maintain faith. Read Al Fatiha at the very least - the first and by far the most important verse - as muslims say it before every prostration (ruka'a) in their prayer - 17 times a day, and countless other times as the 'go to' verse to recite for just about any occassion - weddings, funerals, or just when you're feeling anxious. What does Al Fatiha say? It is in two parts - the first part is to acknowledge/remind ourselves that God is a) the most merciful b) the sustainer of all life and c) the master of judgement. The second half is to ask God to guide us and keep us on the righteous path (the "right path" defined elsewhere in the Quran as the path of peace). Thats it. No murder rape or pillage - just remembering God as the master over all things and seeking his guidance to stay on the right path. In fact Al Fatiha is just a microcosm of what the overall theme in the Quran is about. And this is the theme muslims recite the most - the most important verse. And the theme is further encapsulated by the 5 pillars - belief/faith in God, prayer, alms giving, pilgrimage and fasting - every one of them is a form of spiritual cleansing for the individual, to grow their spiritual side (Iman) Should he read chapter 9? Or should he only read the bits you tell him to if he wants a true indication of the amount of slaughter bits in the Quran? Ideally all of it FD, and he'll find that chapter 9 is quite the anomaly in an otherwise meditative and deeply spiritual book. If there's one verse that encapsulates the entire Quran, and Islam for that matter, its the very first, and by the far the most well known and common verse. We recite it more than any other verse. Literally a bare minimum of 17 times a day. It has nothing to do with fighting others. Nor do the 5 pillars - universally understood as the core essences of Islam. Guess what FD? Chapter 9 is not recited by muslims 17 times a day. Chapter 9 has no bearing whatsoever on the 5 pillars. And chapter 8? Are you conceding your 1.7% calculation was bogus? Let's ask FD. Quote: Your creed allows you and positively encourages you to be dishonest and to lie and so you are dishonest and do lie. FD, do you uphold the use of porkies in your campaign against the Muselman? A simple yes or no will suffice.

FD?

freediver wrote on May 24^th, 2019 at 5:54am:

The vast majority of the Quran is not about the things you claim are the core message of Islam.

I promise you it is. And as someone who's actually read it, I think I have the authority to say that. You can call that a muslim "owning what they say about Islam" if you like.

You don't get to dictate what the "vast majority" of the Quran is or isn't because you've never read it.

Well, you could, but you'd come across as a fool  :)

polite_gandalf wrote on May 24^th, 2019 at 9:32am:

freediver wrote on May 24th, 2019 at 5:54am: The vast majority of the Quran is not about the things you claim are the core message of Islam. I promise you it is. And as someone who's actually read it, I think I have the authority to say that. You can call that a muslim "owning what they say about Islam" if you like. You don't get to dictate what the "vast majority" of the Quran is or isn't because you've never read it.

This just goes to show why Islam is such an inferior culture and why Whitey's is so superior, G.

Whitey, you see, has Freeeeedom. You Muslims have your Quran. FD's in a far better position to define the Quran.

FD, you see, hasn't read it. That's the difference between you people and us, G: we uphold FD's right to say what he wants. If you don't believe him, you don't support Freeeedom.

Scientific, innit.

hey K,

attempt 6.

"do you think there has ever been a suicide bomber who thought he was going to paradise ?"

aquascoot wrote on May 24^th, 2019 at 1:10pm:

hey K, attempt 6. "do you think there has ever been a suicide bomber who thought he was going to paradise ?"

I do, dear. And quite a few who didn't too.

Kamakazes, Tamil Tigers, various cult members.

You?

Mattyfisk wrote on May 24^th, 2019 at 2:32pm:

aquascoot wrote on May 24th, 2019 at 1:10pm: hey K, attempt 6. "do you think there has ever been a suicide bomber who thought he was going to paradise ?" I do, dear. And quite a few who didn't too. Kamakazes, Tamil Tigers, various cult members. You?

kamikazes...thats not a very widespread religion nowadays.
i doubt we have much to fear from pilots with JAL.

does the bible or the tora or the pali cannon promise paradise to suicidal martyrs ?

if such promises are made in the koran but not the other religious texts, should this just be ignored ?.

but thanks for answering.
less cowardly then gweg, mothra, bwian and gandolph

polite_gandalf wrote on May 24^th, 2019 at 9:32am:

freediver wrote on May 24th, 2019 at 5:54am: The vast majority of the Quran is not about the things you claim are the core message of Islam. I promise you it is. And as someone who's actually read it, I think I have the authority to say that. You can call that a muslim "owning what they say about Islam" if you like. You don't get to dictate what the "vast majority" of the Quran is or isn't because you've never read it. Well, you could, but you'd come across as a fool  :)

Are you going to try to back that up?

you first FD:


Quote:

The vast majority of the Quran is not about the things you claim are the core message of Islam.

Which will be interesting to see you try.

How exactly does one back up their claim of what a book they have never read is about?

As for my method of backing my claim up. It would go along the lines of "read it yourself and say it aint so".

Hatred for the sake of Allah and love for the sake of Allah is called Al Walaa wa al Baraa, a fundamental principle of Islamic ethics and Sharia. A Muslim is to hate what Allah hates and love what Allah loves. Allah hates the Kafir, therefore, a Muslim is to act accordingly.


Amount of Text Devoted to the Kafir

The Koran says that the Kafir may be deceived, plotted against, hated, enslaved, mocked, tortured and worse. The word is usually translated as “unbeliever” but this translation is wrong. The word “unbeliever” is logically and emotionally neutral, whereas, Kafir is the most abusive, prejudiced and hateful word in any language.

Islam devotes a great amount of energy to the Kafir. The majority (64%) of the Koran is devoted to the Kafir, and nearly all of the Sira (81%) deals with Mohammed’s struggle with them. The Hadith (Traditions) devotes 32% of the text to Kafirs1. Overall, the Trilogy devotes 60% of its content to the Kafir.

Hadith 37%
Sira 81%
Koran 64%
Total 60%

polite_gandalf wrote on May 28^th, 2019 at 1:14pm:

you first FD: Quote: The vast majority of the Quran is not about the things you claim are the core message of Islam. Which will be interesting to see you try. How exactly does one back up their claim of what a book they have never read is about? As for my method of backing my claim up. It would go along the lines of "read it yourself and say it aint so".

Because if it were true, you would have used the same analysis you used in the OP to prove what the Quran is really about. But it does not work both ways, does it Gandalf? It's the ever-shifting goal posts of the meaning of Islam.

No it doesn't work both ways FD.

Its pretty easy to count the number of times the Quran gives permission for fighting - thats a clear cut thing.

On the other hand it is not easy to count the number of times the Quran councils for introspection and spiritual development - its a rather more opaque thing. If you attempted such an endeavor, you would end up having to quote almost the entire book. 

Your predictable counter that calling for violence is also similarly opaque frankly doesn't pass the pub test.

Quote:

Your predictable counter that calling for violence is also similarly opaque frankly doesn't pass the pub test.

Your attempt in the OP to measure it is obviously bogus.

It is not bogus at all.

Verses that mention violence and war are verses that mention violence and war. And it is very easy to quantify them.

What is bogus, is the contention that while only a tiny number of verses mention violence and war specifically, most of the rest is related - in just not so many words.

What is bogus is to infer that the Quran is no different to a war book - because war books won't specifically mention the word "war" very often either.

What is most bogus, is for someone who has never bothered to read a book, to claim what that book is and isn't predominantly about.

Suppose you picked up a book about war. One that is entirely about war. What percentage of the sentences would you expect to mention war?

Almost none.

Congratulations for making no point at all.

And yet you claim that the same metric tells us how much of the Quran is about war.

Why haven't you read the Quran yet, FD? I'm curious.

It's on Wikipedia.

freediver wrote on May 29^th, 2019 at 8:58pm:

And yet you claim that the same metric tells us how much of the Quran is about war.

If the Quran was actually a book of war you might have a point.

polite_gandalf wrote on May 30^th, 2019 at 10:52am:

freediver wrote on May 29th, 2019 at 8:58pm: And yet you claim that the same metric tells us how much of the Quran is about war. If the Quran was actually a book of war you might have a point.

So counting the words in a book about war cannot tell us whether the book is about war, but it can tell us whether the Quran is about war?

Can you explain this special Muslim logic for us?

Isn't it pathetic?

islamists take the 64% of the qur'an which promotes al walaa wa al baraa or hatred for the sake of allah and love for the sake of allah and  dar al-Islam literally the house or region of submission – those lands under  Muslim  government  –  and  dar  al-Harb  the house or region of war – those lands where muslims are  in  the  minority, as being the one true message of islam.

They thieve rape torture and murder their way towards an islamic caliphate, they can quote the qur'an chapter and verse to show the doctrinal purity in their evil deeds.

Then we have *moderates* like gandi who can not bring themselves to admit that this is what the qur'an actually does preach.

So what is the result of the two differing opinions?

Well right now 2019

muslims are the worlds largest terrorist threat, muslims have destroyed their homelands into pile of worthless rubble, muslims are the worlds refugee problem, muslims slaughter their kids in the 100s' of 1000s' with hunger and refugee trauma, this should be enough but they also have serious inbreeding poverty and illiteracy problems as well.

islam is a proven failure and it can never be anything else until the *moderates* have the balls to be honest about their qur'an, the terror threat will continue, muslims will be stateless as they flee around the globe while their kids die in droves because they simply can't be honest about how evil islam, muhammad, his reinvented moon god allah and the qur'an actually are.

Boko Haram is an Islamist movement founded in 2002 by Yusuf Muhammad in Borno State of northeastNigeria. Yusuf Muhammad's teaching propagated hatred toward Western civilization. It vehemently affirmed theinfallibility of the Qur'an as the uncreated and eternal word of Allah. Yusuf also demanded the full implementation of theSharia in Nigeria to usher in the perfect Islamic State.



Boko Haram, whose name roughly translates to "Western education is forbidden", has waged an armed campaign in northeastern Nigeria since 2009.

The group wants to establish an Islamic state, following a strict interpretation of Islamic law. 

More than 27,000 people have been killed by the group and over two million others displaced from their homes.

Over the years, the group has kidnapped thousands of adults and children. Most of those abducted are women who are used as sex slaves, while the men are often forcefully recruited as fighters.

aquascoot wrote on May 30^th, 2019 at 2:11pm:

Boko Haram, whose name roughly translates to "Western education is forbidden", has waged an armed campaign in northeastern Nigeria since 2009. The group wants to establish an Islamic state, following a strict interpretation of Islamic law.

Really?

I thought they just wanted to rock.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mb3iPP-tHdA

freediver wrote on May 30^th, 2019 at 1:05pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on May 30th, 2019 at 10:52am: freediver wrote on May 29th, 2019 at 8:58pm: And yet you claim that the same metric tells us how much of the Quran is about war. If the Quran was actually a book of war you might have a point. So counting the words in a book about war cannot tell us whether the book is about war, but it can tell us whether the Quran is about war? Can you explain this special Muslim logic for us?

Perhaps you should ease up on the strawmen FD.

greggerypeccary wrote on May 30^th, 2019 at 2:18pm:

aquascoot wrote on May 30th, 2019 at 2:11pm: Boko Haram, whose name roughly translates to "Western education is forbidden", has waged an armed campaign in northeastern Nigeria since 2009. The group wants to establish an Islamic state, following a strict interpretation of Islamic law.  Really? I thought they just wanted to rock. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mb3iPP-tHdA

I'm sure the grieving parents of Nigeria think you are very funny  ::) ::) ::)

polite_gandalf wrote on May 30^th, 2019 at 2:59pm:

freediver wrote on May 30th, 2019 at 1:05pm: polite_gandalf wrote on May 30th, 2019 at 10:52am: freediver wrote on May 29th, 2019 at 8:58pm: And yet you claim that the same metric tells us how much of the Quran is about war. If the Quran was actually a book of war you might have a point. So counting the words in a book about war cannot tell us whether the book is about war, but it can tell us whether the Quran is about war? Can you explain this special Muslim logic for us? Perhaps you should ease up on the strawmen FD.

I could always try asking you to explain what you meant. Do you think you would evade if I did?

evading eh FD? Something you would never do of course.

You could always start by actually reading and comprehending what I say for once rather than making up crap and pretending I said it. I realise thats a completely new concept for you and one you probably never considered before.

polite_gandalf wrote on May 30^th, 2019 at 10:52am:

freediver wrote on May 29th, 2019 at 8:58pm: And yet you claim that the same metric tells us how much of the Quran is about war. If the Quran was actually a book of war you might have a point.

So counting the words in a book about war cannot tell us whether the book is about war, but it can tell us whether the Quran is about war?

Can you explain this special Muslim logic for us?

freediver wrote on May 30^th, 2019 at 4:48pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on May 30th, 2019 at 2:59pm: freediver wrote on May 30th, 2019 at 1:05pm: polite_gandalf wrote on May 30th, 2019 at 10:52am: freediver wrote on May 29th, 2019 at 8:58pm: And yet you claim that the same metric tells us how much of the Quran is about war. If the Quran was actually a book of war you might have a point. So counting the words in a book about war cannot tell us whether the book is about war, but it can tell us whether the Quran is about war? Can you explain this special Muslim logic for us? Perhaps you should ease up on the strawmen FD. I could always try asking you to explain what you meant. Do you think you would evade if I did?

Will you answer a question, FD? Or would you prefer to evade?

I'm curious.

Funny, I'm hearing echos...

polite_gandalf wrote on May 31^st, 2019 at 8:50am:

Funny, I'm hearing echos...

From 2007?

As far as the rape bits go

would this qualify?

sura 65 (the divorce) is a chapter dealing with required times for divorced muslim wives to wait before remarrying etc.

65.4:And those who no longer expect menstruation among your women - if you doubt, then their period is three months, and [also for] those who have not menstruated. And for those who are pregnant, their term is until they give birth. And whoever fears Allah - He will make for him of his matter ease. 

This verse seems very clear to me:

no longer expect menstruation, would mean change of life.

who have not menstruated, would mean little prepubescent children


And for those who are pregnant, means exactly that pregnant females

Child marriage/rape of little girls is covered and legal in islamic doctrine.

moses wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2019 at 2:01pm:

As far as the rape bits go would this qualify? sura 65 (the divorce) is a chapter dealing with required times for divorced muslim wives to wait before remarrying etc. 65.4:And those who no longer expect menstruation among your women - if you doubt, then their period is three months, and [also for] those who have not menstruated. And for those who are pregnant, their term is until they give birth. And whoever fears Allah - He will make for him of his matter ease.  This verse seems very clear to me: no longer expect menstruation, would mean change of life. who have not menstruated, would mean little prepubescent children And for those who are pregnant, means exactly that pregnant females Child marriage/rape of little girls is covered and legal in islamic doctrine.

Child marriage was legal in every Western jurisdiction until the early 20th century, Moses. Looks like Moh was the first to define a minimum age.

Quote:

Looks like Moh was the first to define a minimum age.

How did he define it?

freediver wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2019 at 5:56pm:

Quote: Looks like Moh was the first to define a minimum age. How did he define it?

Curious, are you?

Mattyfisk wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2019 at 7:13pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 2nd, 2019 at 5:56pm: Quote: Looks like Moh was the first to define a minimum age. How did he define it? Curious, are you?

Sure. I've never seen a Paki tapdance.

freediver wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2019 at 8:43pm:

Mattyfisk wrote on Jun 2nd, 2019 at 7:13pm: freediver wrote on Jun 2nd, 2019 at 5:56pm: Quote: Looks like Moh was the first to define a minimum age. How did he define it? Curious, are you? Sure. I've never seen a Paki tapdance.

No worries. Feel like answering a question?

Mattyfisk wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2019 at 9:30pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 2nd, 2019 at 8:43pm: Mattyfisk wrote on Jun 2nd, 2019 at 7:13pm: freediver wrote on Jun 2nd, 2019 at 5:56pm: Quote: Looks like Moh was the first to define a minimum age. How did he define it? Curious, are you? Sure. I've never seen a Paki tapdance. No worries. Feel like answering a question?

Would you like to retract you claim about Moh defining a minimum age?

Moslems won't engage in any meangingful and reasoned dialoge about their religion, with any individual who can find any legitimate fault with ISLAM.

Except to insist that it is moslems who are the informed and correct and virtuous people.

And that it is those who are not [moslems], who are the misinformed and ignorant, about the virtue of their religion.

And moslems are wholly entitled to defend ISLAM by any legitimate means whenever it is attacked or besmirched by ignorant disbelievers.



And the same for Mohammed, and for ISLAMIC law.

Both being virtuous and faultless entities, who are simply denigrated by those who are ignorant disbelievers.

Its blasphemy i tell you!

And you know what we are allowed to do with blasphemers, don't you!



If the infidels would only convert, and submit to ISLAM, we could all live in peace and harmony!!

But the filthy infidels only wish to cause strife in the world.

And it is we moslems, who are those who are always seeking to bring peace to all of mankind.


Just like....






IMAGE....
http://sheikyermami.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/sheik.jpg

'.....Just like in muslim countries.'


image source....
http://sheikyermami.com/

freediver wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2019 at 9:38pm:

Mattyfisk wrote on Jun 2nd, 2019 at 9:30pm: freediver wrote on Jun 2nd, 2019 at 8:43pm: Mattyfisk wrote on Jun 2nd, 2019 at 7:13pm: freediver wrote on Jun 2nd, 2019 at 5:56pm: Quote: Looks like Moh was the first to define a minimum age. How did he define it? Curious, are you? Sure. I've never seen a Paki tapdance. No worries. Feel like answering a question? Would you like to retract you claim about Moh defining a minimum age?

Don't want to answer the question, eh? That's a shock.

Tell me, what's my name?

No idea.

How many millions of children would you guess have been raped because Muhammad institutionalised pedophilia in his 'religion'?

freediver wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2019 at 6:08am:

No idea. How many millions of children would you guess have been raped because Muhammad institutionalised pedophilia in his 'religion'?

That's another question. Who am I?

Say it.

Did he 'define' a minimum age by having sex with children?

freediver wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2019 at 8:29am:

Did he 'define' a minimum age by having sex with children?

Say my name.

abu wrote:Reply #76 - Yesterday at 5:55pm

Quote:

Child marriage was legal in every Western jurisdiction until the early 20th century, Moses. Looks like Moh was the first to define a minimum age.

I take it that the west now in the 21st century is streets ahead of islamic culture / religion when it come to the subject of child rape in legal marriages.

It's part and parcel of the religion, it's being practiced right now as I type somewhere in the muslim world.

Rape is part of the religion as per the rape torture and slaughter bits in the qur'an.

moses wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2019 at 3:31pm:

abu wrote:Reply #76 - Yesterday at 5:55pm Quote: Child marriage was legal in every Western jurisdiction until the early 20th century, Moses. Looks like Moh was the first to define a minimum age. I take it that the west now in the 21st century is streets ahead of islamic culture / religion when it come to the subject of child rape in legal marriages. It's part and parcel of the religion, it's being practiced right now as I type somewhere in the muslim world. Rape is part of the religion as per the rape torture and slaughter bits in the qur'an.

It's happening right now somewhere in the Curry world too, dear.

You?

Me?

It makes me furious that some cultures (Indian, islamic, sub Saharan African to name a few) are still steeped in the sexual mistreatment of little girls.

I think that anyone who doesn't protest loudly against this type of thing is sick in the head.

Mattyfisk wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2019 at 10:36am:

freediver wrote on Jun 3rd, 2019 at 8:29am: Did he 'define' a minimum age by having sex with children? Say my name.

Sounds like you may have a mental fixation, about other people obeying your wishes.

That doesn't sound mentally healthy to me.

It does sound very like the ISLAMIC influence, upon many.     ....as i said, it doesn't sound mentally healthy.



Keep away from sharp and dangerous objects.

moses wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2019 at 4:56pm:

Me? It makes me furious that some cultures (Indian, islamic, sub Saharan African to name a few) are still steeped in the sexual mistreatment of little girls. I think that anyone who doesn't protest loudly against this type of thing is sick in the head.

You love being furious about this sort of thing, dear. My own great-grandmother married at the ripe old age of 12.

Alright alright, don't shoot the messenger.

I'll have you know she was perfectly non-tinted.

moses wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2019 at 4:56pm:

Me? It makes me furious that some cultures (Indian, islamic, sub Saharan African to name a few) are still steeped in the sexual mistreatment of little girls. I think that anyone who doesn't protest loudly against this type of thing is sick in the head.

moses,

These types, imo, seem to want to treat us all [all who are not in their 'camp'], like they treat little girls.

And they tend to become, they tend to act violently, when the fulfilling of their wishes are resisted by others.

Mental illness.

It isn't difficult to spot them.




Quote:

A simple definition of SANITY/INSANITY. Typically, an unrestrained sane person will act in ways which are harmless to others, and in ways which are creative, and productive [for himself, others, and society]. And typically, and conversely, an unrestrained INSANE person will act in ways which are harmful and destructive to himself, and, or, others around him.

Mattyfisk wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2019 at 5:40pm:

moses wrote on Jun 3rd, 2019 at 4:56pm: Me? It makes me furious that some cultures (Indian, islamic, sub Saharan African to name a few) are still steeped in the sexual mistreatment of little girls. I think that anyone who doesn't protest loudly against this type of thing is sick in the head. You love being furious about this sort of thing, dear. My own great-grandmother married at the ripe old age of 12. Alright alright, don't shoot the messenger. I'll have you know she was perfectly non-tinted.

Double Aisha's age.

freediver wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2019 at 5:54pm:

Mattyfisk wrote on Jun 3rd, 2019 at 5:40pm: moses wrote on Jun 3rd, 2019 at 4:56pm: Me? It makes me furious that some cultures (Indian, islamic, sub Saharan African to name a few) are still steeped in the sexual mistreatment of little girls. I think that anyone who doesn't protest loudly against this type of thing is sick in the head. You love being furious about this sort of thing, dear. My own great-grandmother married at the ripe old age of 12. Alright alright, don't shoot the messenger. I'll have you know she was perfectly non-tinted. Double Aisha's age.

What are you, a jellyfish?

Say it.

a sick apologist wrote:

Quote:

You love being furious about this sort of thing, dear. My own great-grandmother married at the ripe old age of 12. Alright alright, don't shoot the messenger. I'll have you know she was perfectly non-tinted.

What sort of a sicko would try and turn a declaration of abhorrence of child abuse still being carried out right now today the 21st century, by some twisted backward cultures who accept this sexual abuse of children as the norm, into some queer rantings about tinted or what happened ages ago?

There's certainly some queer people around and they all seem to be of the loony leftard bent.

moses wrote on Jun 4^th, 2019 at 3:25pm:

a sick apologist wrote: Quote: You love being furious about this sort of thing, dear. My own great-grandmother married at the ripe old age of 12. Alright alright, don't shoot the messenger. I'll have you know she was perfectly non-tinted. What sort of a sicko would try and turn a declaration of abhorrence of child abuse still being carried out right now today the 21st century, by some twisted backward cultures who accept this sexual abuse of children as the norm, into some queer rantings about tinted or what happened ages ago?

Because without that marriage, dear, one wouldn't be here today.

You?

Me I'm here today as well.

The difference between us is that I would like to call a spade a spade and denounce the twisted cultures who still are sexually abusing little girls as the norm.

while you grovel at their feet and support all their backward cultural ways.

moses wrote on Jun 4^th, 2019 at 3:55pm:

Me I'm here today as well. The difference between us is that I would like to call a spade a spade and denounce the twisted cultures who still are sexually abusing little girls as the norm.

No, dear, you like to denounce the twisted cultures of those who are tinted.

The least you could do is call a spade a spade.

Oh the lies of the muzzie and lying loony leftards.

You have lied by implying that I target coloured people.

I target religions /  cults and cultures which are backward evil entities today the 21st century.

You probably are on the defensive as it seems that the depravities against little girls do seem to thrive in your so called tinted (your words not mine) cultures.

You really are one sicko loony with your continual efforts to muddy the waters of sexual abuse against children in some cultures.

Oh the lies of the Christians and lying loony Rightards.

You are correct, Abu by implying that Moses targets coloured people.

He targets a particular religion and cultures which he declares are backward evil entities today in the 21st century.

He is probably on the defensive as it seems that the depravities against little girls do seem to thrive in your so called tinted (your words not mine) cultures and of course, under Christianity itself.  All those Christian clergy and leaders who like to kiddy-fiddle.

Moses is really one sicko loony with his continual efforts to muddy the waters of sexual abuse against children in Christianity!   ::)

moses wrote on Jun 5^th, 2019 at 1:14pm:

Oh the lies of the muzzie and lying loony leftards. You have lied by implying that I target coloured people. I target religions /  cults and cultures which are backward evil entities today the 21st century. You probably are on the defensive as it seems that the depravities against little girls do seem to thrive in your so called tinted (your words not mine) cultures.

Cultures, is it?

Ah yes, good old correlation not causation.

Should the tinted Curries denounce the evil parts of their book, Moses?

And upon that day, Curry will cease to exist, no?

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 5^th, 2019 at 3:25pm:

Oh the lies of the Christians and lying loony Rightards. You are correct, Abu by implying that Moses targets coloured people. He targets a particular religion and cultures which he declares are backward evil entities today in the 21st century. He is probably on the defensive as it seems that the depravities against little girls do seem to thrive in your so called tinted (your words not mine) cultures and of course, under Christianity itself.  All those Christian clergy and leaders who like to kiddy-fiddle. Moses is really are one sicko loony with his continual efforts to muddy the waters of sexual abuse against children in Christianity!   ::)

Yes, Moses is quite comfortable trying to stop your Jigaboo getting in.

He's just calling a spade a spade, no?

Quote:

Should the tinted Curries denounce the evil parts of their book, Moses?

I most certainly believe that India has a lot to answer for when it comes to entrenched abuse of the females.

moses wrote on Jun 6^th, 2019 at 2:02pm:

Quote: Should the tinted Curries denounce the evil parts of their book, Moses? I most certainly believe that India has a lot to answer for when it comes to entrenched abuse of the females.

Well, there you go. Should we ban their books too?

A thorough questioning and purging of any material they have which promotes their lust for child sex and female abuse in general, would probably help.

moses wrote on Jun 6^th, 2019 at 4:19pm:

A thorough questioning and purging of any material they have which promotes their lust for child sex and female abuse in general, would probably help.

Probably? Shouldn't we be demanding that they renounce their evil verses?

What's your strategy for the Curry?

Mattyfisk wrote on Jun 6^th, 2019 at 3:13pm:

moses wrote on Jun 6th, 2019 at 2:02pm: Quote: Should the tinted Curries denounce the evil parts of their book, Moses? I most certainly believe that India has a lot to answer for when it comes to entrenched abuse of the females. Well, there you go. Should we ban their books too?

You are very keen to make room for every kind of evil, Paki.

polite_gandalf wrote on May 15^th, 2019 at 3:05pm:

A claim: moses wrote on May 14th, 2019 at 3:28pm: Without the rape torture and slaughter bits, the qur'an would have less to read than a 10 cent mickey mouse comic. One thing that strikes anyone who actually bothers to read the Quran is how rarely violence (as in physically fighting people) is mentioned - in comparison to everything else in the Quran. This is self evident without needing to know exactly how many. Nonetheless, I did a quick google on the raw numbers, and the results are conclusive: Total number of verses (ayah) in the Quran: 6236 Number of verses that mention fighting and war: 109 (according to Islamophobic site 'the religion of peace') By my calculation thats about 1.7% of the Quran. So it turns out there is quite a deal more than a 10c mickey mouse comic worth left in the Quran after the 'rape torture and slaughter bits' are taken out.  :)

An investigation into Finland’s police data by the country’s police academy, shows that 131 Finnish citizens became victims of sex crimes committed by asylum seekers in the year 2016.

A total of 1052 asylum seekers were suspected of crimes in 2016 and virtually all were men, who together represented 29 nations. Two thirds were Iraqis and the age of the suspects was evenly distributed.

Finnish women were victims in 8 out of 10 cases committed by mostly Muslim asylum seekers: 108 out of 116 suspects of sexual offenses came from Islamic countries like Iraq (83), Afghanistan (14) or Morocco (6).
...
Among the sexual offenses that asylum seekers were suspected of rape is the most common, with 32% of the reports. Almost one in 7 cases, or 16%, were about was gang rape and another 16% of the reports were for sexual harassment.






Because Islam has nuffin' to do wiv nuffin'.

Frank wrote on Jun 6^th, 2019 at 6:27pm:

Mattyfisk wrote on Jun 6th, 2019 at 3:13pm: moses wrote on Jun 6th, 2019 at 2:02pm: Quote: Should the tinted Curries denounce the evil parts of their book, Moses? I most certainly believe that India has a lot to answer for when it comes to entrenched abuse of the females. Well, there you go. Should we ban their books too? You are very keen to make room for every kind of evil, Paki.

Good show, dear boy. Which evil Curry verses do you suggest they renounce?

Anything from the Upanishads? The Yoga Sutras? The Karma Sutra?

Namaste.

The idiot is trying to hide the facts

India sexual abuse: 'Four child victims every hour'

In India, a child is sexually abused every 15 minutes, according to the latest government figures.

moses wrote on Jun 7^th, 2019 at 5:05pm:

The idiot is trying to hide the facts India sexual abuse: 'Four child victims every hour' In India, a child is sexually abused every 15 minutes, according to the latest government figures.

Exactly. So I'd like to know which verses you'd like to strike from their holy books please, Moses.

That's your strategy, remember? You'd like them to denounce the rape and slaughter bits, right?

And upon that day, Curries will cease to exist, no?

I believe that it goes much deeper than their books, it's entrenched in their culture and the beliefs of inequality which apparently abound in the peoples' thinking.

It seems to be a very worrying and terrible occurrence in the fair land of India.

moses wrote on Jun 8^th, 2019 at 1:38pm:

I believe that it goes much deeper than their books, it's entrenched in their culture and the beliefs of inequality which apparently abound in the peoples' thinking. It seems to be a very worrying and terrible occurrence in the fair land of India.

Fair? India's tinted, Moses.

So if the book thing won't work, how should we deal with the Muselman?

You really should ask yourself would you try Australian taipan antivenene if you were bitten by an African black mamba?

Of course you wouldn't, you would use the specific treatment required.

Now the same thing applies to child sexual abuse which is rampant in India, islamic countries and sub Saharan Africa.

The question and purge the evil in their doctrine applies greatly to islamic countries. Why?

Because it is urged as the higher path for muslims, religiously and culturally.

What has their book got to do with this you say?

Well the book is the middle and both ends of everything that the islamic people do.

It guides every single thing they do while awake.

Now it just so happens that the book was authored by a practicing thief liar pedophile rapist torturer and mass murderer, who preached that every depraved activity he wallowed in, is the one true word of his reinvented pagan moon god allah.

So the evil in the cornerstone of their very being (qur'an), has to be denounced and purged, to help these people attain some form of societal peace and well being.

Ah yes, the black mamba is the Muselman. They worship a different book when they're awake to your Curry.

He's more of a cobra.

But what of God's Chosen People? His law is the cornerstone of his religion, his culture, his blood.

Which Chosen People have purged and denounced the evil in the Torah?

Mattyfisk wrote on Jun 8^th, 2019 at 7:36pm:

Ah yes, the black mamba is the Muselman. They worship a different book when they're awake to your Curry. He's more of a cobra. But what of God's Chosen People? His law is the cornerstone of his religion, his culture, his blood. Which Chosen People have purged and denounced the evil in the Torah?

Wasn't Moses a mass murderer?

Auggie wrote on Jun 8^th, 2019 at 7:41pm:

Mattyfisk wrote on Jun 8th, 2019 at 7:36pm: Ah yes, the black mamba is the Muselman. They worship a different book when they're awake to your Curry. He's more of a cobra. But what of God's Chosen People? His law is the cornerstone of his religion, his culture, his blood. Which Chosen People have purged and denounced the evil in the Torah? Wasn't Moses a mass murderer?

He was certainly a murderer, Auggie. He started the exodus after he killed someone in the Pharoh's family - the crime of regicide.

Basically, Moses was on the run. He got together some Jewish slaves as protection, then turned them into a desert death cult - a group of bandits who'd raid cities, kill every man, woman and child, and take over.

It was pretty bad for a while there. When they fought other armies, they'd cut off their foreskins and give them to their God - great big piles of skin next to the mass graves.

After a while, God got over them. He was sick of their nonsense. He sent Yeheshua and Moh in to put them in their place.

Auggie wrote on Jun 8^th, 2019 at 7:41pm:

Mattyfisk wrote on Jun 8th, 2019 at 7:36pm: Ah yes, the black mamba is the Muselman. They worship a different book when they're awake to your Curry. He's more of a cobra. But what of God's Chosen People? His law is the cornerstone of his religion, his culture, his blood. Which Chosen People have purged and denounced the evil in the Torah? Wasn't Moses a mass murderer?

I know he was a Red Sea pedestrian.

What interests me is that our Moses, who posts here, proclaims that Christians no longer pay attention to the Old Testament.  If that was true, why does he use the nom de net of "Moses"?  Afterall, Moses was a star player in the Old Testament, he rescued the Jews from Egypt where they had been enslaved.   Seems a little, well contradictory, doesn't it?    ::) ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 8^th, 2019 at 11:08pm:

Auggie wrote on Jun 8th, 2019 at 7:41pm: Mattyfisk wrote on Jun 8th, 2019 at 7:36pm: Ah yes, the black mamba is the Muselman. They worship a different book when they're awake to your Curry. He's more of a cobra. But what of God's Chosen People? His law is the cornerstone of his religion, his culture, his blood. Which Chosen People have purged and denounced the evil in the Torah? Wasn't Moses a mass murderer? I know he was a Red Sea pedestrian. What interests me is that our Moses, who posts here, proclaims that Christians no longer pay attention to the Old Testament.  If that was true, why does he use the nom de net of "Moses"?  Afterall, Moses was a star player in the Old Testament, he rescued the Jews from Egypt where they had been enslaved.   Seems a little, well contradictory, doesn't it?    ::) ::)

Ah.

Quote:

proclaims that Christians no longer pay attention to the Old Testament.

Poor old forked tongue. The winter cold is killing his memory (I mean it gets very cold on the chook roost in June, it has to affect something).

Any way forky tongue we all know that the Christians are no longer paying attention to the Mosaic law, that's how the whole thing started, the Messiah came and fulfilled the law, all men who wanted it received atonement for their spiritual sins through faith.

Never mind maybe you should get one of your muzzie friends to lend you a burqa to keep your fallacious head and tongue a bit warmer on these long cold winter nights.

moses wrote on Jun 9^th, 2019 at 1:57pm:

Quote: proclaims that Christians no longer pay attention to the Old Testament. Poor old forked tongue. The winter cold is killing his memory (I mean it gets very cold on the chook roost in June, it has to affect something). Any way forky tongue we all know that the Christians are no longer paying attention to the Mosaic law, that's how the whole thing started, the Messiah came and fulfilled the law, all men who wanted it received atonement for their spiritual sins through faith. Never mind maybe you should get one of your muzzie friends to lend you a burqa to keep your fallacious head and tongue a bit warmer on these long cold winter nights.

Who has ever suggested that Christians obey "Mosiac law", except you, Moses?   ::)

Now, how about you explain to us again how Christians ignore what is written in the Old Testament?  I'd be interested in hearing why you believe Christian Terrorists don't exist as well?    ::) ::)

Oh dear the cold has really got to you hasn't it?

The Christians have long ago (about 2019 years) given up the Mosaic law, they now have a belief that they are justified by faith.

There are other parts of the O.T. that Christians still follow.

According to Christ people like terrorists are not recognized by Him as true followers of His teachings, therefore they are not Christians.

moses wrote on Jun 9^th, 2019 at 2:23pm:

Oh dear the cold has really got to you hasn't it? The Christians have long ago (about 2019 years) given up the Mosaic law, they now have a belief that they are justified by faith. There are other parts of the O.T. that Christians still follow.

Which is the point I have made, over and over, Moses but which you consistently denied... ::)


Quote:

According to Christ people like terrorists are not recognized by Him as true followers of His teachings, therefore they are not Christians.

Funny, I don't see Christ around to tell people they can no longer be Christians if they commit atrocities.  Indeed, the Pope, Christs Vicar on Earth, used to be quite happy playing along with the Nazis before and during WWII.   He didn't have any real problems with the Holocaust.   Christ's "words" were written well after his death and re-edited several times, Moses.  You have no idea what Christ said or did or believed.  All you have is a record of mealy-mouthed bullshit created by self-serving Church leaders.    ::)

All foretold by Christ, you know the false prophets, the proclaimers of their own command as doctrine, those that claimed to be followers but were workers of iniquity.

They are not Christians according to the teachings of the sole authority in Christianity (The Words of Christ)

moses wrote on Jun 9^th, 2019 at 3:10pm:

All foretold by Christ, you know the false prophets, the proclaimers of their own command as doctrine, those that claimed to be followers but were workers of iniquity. They are not Christians according to the teachings of the sole authority in Christianity (The Words of Christ)

As I suggested, you have no real idea what Christ said, did or believed, Moses.  His "words" were written well after his supposed death and have been re-edited many times since.   So, how do you know what Christ meant?   In reality you don't.  You take it all on faith, like the sky-daddy believers before you.  Tsk, tsk.   ::)

How do we know what Christ meant?

Well it seems He never once suggested that pedophilia rape torture and mass murder was all perfectly acceptable, as did your idol muhammad.

moses wrote on Jun 9^th, 2019 at 2:23pm:

Oh dear the cold has really got to you hasn't it? The Christians have long ago (about 2019 years) given up the Mosaic law, they now have a belief that they are justified by faith. There are other parts of the O.T. that Christians still follow. According to Christ people like terrorists are not recognized by Him as true followers of His teachings, therefore they are not Christians.

Christians aren't perfect, Moses, just forgiven. All who believe are saved.

But not Jews, as you well know. They don't follow Yeheshua. Should they decry and denounce the evil in the Torah?

moses wrote on Jun 9^th, 2019 at 3:19pm:

How do we know what Christ meant? Well it seems He never once suggested that pedophilia rape torture and mass murder was all perfectly acceptable, as did your idol muhammad.

Yet the Old Testament does, Moses.  You know, the first half of the bible which you now claim Christians follow...    ::) ::)

Brian is there anything in the old testament that comes close to chapter 9 of the Quran in the open ended promotion of violence to spread religion?

freediver wrote on Jun 9^th, 2019 at 5:15pm:

Brian is there anything in the old testament that comes close to chapter 9 of the Quran in the open ended promotion of violence to spread religion?

When you answer my questions, FD, I might answer yours.   ::)

Both books have parts which are open to violent interpretation. It's just that in this time in history nutjob muslims are acting on these parts. ISIS even jumped on the slavery part of the Koran. To them that  justified raping the crap out of and (keeping captive for further rapeings) Yazidi women.

Mr Hammer wrote on Jun 9^th, 2019 at 6:23pm:

Both books have parts which are open to violent interpretation. It's just that in this time in history nutjob muslims are acting on these parts. ISIS even jumped on the slavery part of the Koran. To them that  justified raping the crap out of and (keeping captive for further rapeings) Yazidi women.

And how was that received generally amongst most Muslims, Hammer?  Mmmm?  Lets see, did most Muslims accept the ISIS interpretation of the Q'ran or did they fight Daesh so hard that they eliminated it as a major threat?   I'm curious to see how you interpret that reaction...   ::)

forky tongue wrote:
Quote:

Yet the Old Testament does, Moses.  You know, the first half of the bible which you now claim Christians follow...

Aw gee forked tongue the long cold nights on the chook roost are really starting to get to you, aren't they?

The Mosaic law in the first few books of the O.T. was made obsolete by the coming of the Messiah who was foretold in the O.T.

Also the parts Of the O.T. which describes the Hebrews taking of the promised land etc., are  simply historical accounts of the Hebrews and their God in those long ago days, they are irrelevant to the Christians of todays' world.

The Christians are interested in how to attain spiritual salvation of their soul.

Now the muzzie book is about muslim supremacy, how to rape torture and kill the enemies of allah, it is written in the present tense, that is exactly why islam is where it is right now the 21st century.

Mr Hammer wrote on Jun 9^th, 2019 at 6:23pm:

Both books have parts which are open to violent interpretation.

Yes, but Moses won't purge and denounce the sick and twisted parts of his own religious books, dear.

He wants to keep them up his sleeve.

moses wrote on Jun 10^th, 2019 at 2:29pm:

forky tongue wrote: Quote: Yet the Old Testament does, Moses.  You know, the first half of the bible which you now claim Christians follow... Aw gee forked tongue the long cold nights on the chook roost are really starting to get to you, aren't they? The Mosaic law in the first few books of the O.T. was made obsolete by the coming of the Messiah who was foretold in the O.T. Also the parts Of the O.T. which describes the Hebrews taking of the promised land etc., are  simply historical accounts of the Hebrews and their God in those long ago days, they are irrelevant to the Christians of todays' world. The Christians are interested in how to attain spiritual salvation of their soul. Now the muzzie book is about muslim supremacy, how to rape torture and kill the enemies of allah, it is written in the present tense, that is exactly why islam is where it is right now the 21st century.

In reality, the Old Testament is a propaganda book which paints the Jews as being perpetually the victims of everybody they encounter, Moses and it appears you have swallowed it lock, stock and barrel.  Modern archaeology has shown just how big a pack of lies most of it is.

You appear also to be not overly familiar with the Old Testaments suggestions that killing women, children, enslaving them - if spared and pillaging their homes and cities was perfectly OK.  Misogyny was perfectly OK as well, while massacre and murder were perfectly acceptable as well.   Rather typical of a  Christophile though, to ignore the foundations of his religion.   ::) ::)

Victims? They sound victorious fairly often. You haven't read it have you Brian? Did you skip that bit in your doctor of divinity class, just in case it lead the students to conclude there are differences between religions?

freediver wrote on Jun 10^th, 2019 at 5:31pm:

Victims? They sound victorious fairly often. You haven't read it have you Brian? Did you skip that bit in your doctor of divinity class, just in case it lead the students to conclude there are differences between religions?

Say my name.

Not scared of invoking a spell, shurely?

freediver wrote on Jun 10^th, 2019 at 5:31pm:

Victims? They sound victorious fairly often. You haven't read it have you Brian? Did you skip that bit in your doctor of divinity class, just in case it lead the students to conclude there are differences between religions?

When you answer my questions, I might answer yours, FD.   ::)

Mattyfisk wrote on Jun 6^th, 2019 at 10:03pm:

Frank wrote on Jun 6th, 2019 at 6:27pm: Mattyfisk wrote on Jun 6th, 2019 at 3:13pm: moses wrote on Jun 6th, 2019 at 2:02pm: Quote: Should the tinted Curries denounce the evil parts of their book, Moses? I most certainly believe that India has a lot to answer for when it comes to entrenched abuse of the females. Well, there you go. Should we ban their books too? You are very keen to make room for every kind of evil, Paki. Good show, dear boy. Which evil Curry verses do you suggest they renounce? Anything from the Upanishads? The Yoga Sutras? The Karma Sutra? Namaste.

Evil doesn't need a Koran.

Frank wrote on Jun 10^th, 2019 at 9:11pm:

Mattyfisk wrote on Jun 6th, 2019 at 10:03pm: Frank wrote on Jun 6th, 2019 at 6:27pm: Mattyfisk wrote on Jun 6th, 2019 at 3:13pm: moses wrote on Jun 6th, 2019 at 2:02pm: Quote: Should the tinted Curries denounce the evil parts of their book, Moses? I most certainly believe that India has a lot to answer for when it comes to entrenched abuse of the females. Well, there you go. Should we ban their books too? You are very keen to make room for every kind of evil, Paki. Good show, dear boy. Which evil Curry verses do you suggest they renounce? Anything from the Upanishads? The Yoga Sutras? The Karma Sutra? Namaste. Evil doesn't need a Koran.

And do you know, dear chap?

I concur. Do you also think Moses' plan to get Muslims to purge the so-called vile, evil and utterly despicable parts of the Quran is ridiculous?

I'm curious. I'm keen to know what you think.

forked tongue wrote:

Quote:

You appear also to be not overly familiar with the Old Testaments suggestions that killing women, children, enslaving them - if spared and pillaging their homes and cities was perfectly OK.  Misogyny was perfectly OK as well, while massacre and murder were perfectly acceptable as well.   Rather typical of a  Christophile though, to ignore the foundations of his religion.

We all know that O.T. has some very barbaric accounts of the Hebrews journey to gain the promised land.

The O.T. is people and time specific.

The instructions to slaughter the Amalekites refer solely to the Amalekites about four thousand years ago.

The O.T. does not say that the Hebrews are to rape torture and murder everybody who does not practice Judaism, or the hypocrites, blasphemers, apostates etc. forever and a day, it is mainly written in the past tense because it is a historical account of the Hebrews and their covenant with their God.

That is why today the Jews are only interested in staying in their homeland and being left alone.

Conversely:

The quran is written in the present and future tense, the theme of muslim supremacy, muslims committing rape torture and mass murder to spread islam, is as significant today as it was 1400 years ago.

That is why today right now 21st century muzzies are recognized as the global terrorist threat.

moses wrote on Jun 11^th, 2019 at 3:02pm:

forked tongue wrote: Quote: You appear also to be not overly familiar with the Old Testaments suggestions that killing women, children, enslaving them - if spared and pillaging their homes and cities was perfectly OK.  Misogyny was perfectly OK as well, while massacre and murder were perfectly acceptable as well.   Rather typical of a  Christophile though, to ignore the foundations of his religion. We all know that O.T. has some very barbaric accounts of the Hebrews journey to gain the promised land. The O.T. is people and time specific. The instructions to slaughter the Amalekites refer solely to the Amalekites about four thousand years ago. The O.T. does not say that the Hebrews are to rape torture and murder everybody who does not practice Judaism, or the hypocrites, blasphemers, apostates etc. forever and a day, it is mainly written in the past tense because it is a historical account of the Hebrews and their covenant with their God. That is why today the Jews are only interested in staying in their homeland and being left alone. Conversely: The quran is written in the present and future tense, the theme of muslim supremacy, muslims committing rape torture and mass murder, is as significant today as it was 1400 years ago. That is why today right now 21st century muzzies are recognized as the global terrorist threat.

That is not what many Christians believe, Moses and your attempts to duck that point is rather telling.   Christian fundamentalists believe everything in the Bible - Old and New Testaments are important to their beliefs in Yahweh.

Until you address those beliefs, adequately, you will remain a fool.   ::)

If any body goes outside of the teachings preached by Christ they are not recognized as Christians.

moses wrote on Jun 11^th, 2019 at 3:11pm:

If any body goes outside of the teachings preached by Christ they are not recognized as Christians.

They disagree with you, Moses.  Time you realised that you're a minority of one.  Silly little boy.   ::)

I think you would find that the overwhelming majority of Christians believe it exactly as I say it is.

You can never get away from the facts that:

Men who commit evil are denounced by Christ.

muslims can perpetrate the foulest of atrocities in the name of allah and they are obeying muhammad to the very letter.

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 11^th, 2019 at 3:24pm:

moses wrote on Jun 11th, 2019 at 3:11pm: If any body goes outside of the teachings preached by Christ they are not recognized as Christians. They disagree with you, Moses.

They most certainly do. No Christian would say sinners are rejected from the flock. This goes against every teaching in the Bible.

Christians aren't perfect, dear, just forgiven.

moses wrote on Jun 11^th, 2019 at 3:35pm:

I think you would find that the overwhelming majority of Christians believe it exactly as I say it is. You can never get away from the facts that: Men who commit evil are denounced by Christ.

All true, Moses, you just got one word wrong:

Men who commit evil are forgiven by Christ.

An easy mishtake to make, dear.

Don't they have to sincerely repent and seek true forgiveness of the soul?

If a murderer is caught and pays the penalty, he is not going to be set free, the only forgiveness he may seek is spiritual, genuine regret and repentance I'd say.

moses wrote on Jun 11^th, 2019 at 3:35pm:

I think you would find that the overwhelming majority of Christians believe it exactly as I say it is. You can never get away from the facts that: Men who commit evil are denounced by Christ. muslims can perpetrate the foulest of atrocities in the name of allah and they are obeying muhammad to the very letter.

You claim that men who commit evil are denounced by Christ, Moses but do their fellow Christians and more importantly, their Church(es) and leaders denounce them or honour them?   Tsk, tsk.   ::)

You must like reading this answer forky.

It's all been foretold how there would be false prophets, men who proclaim their commands as doctrine, men who would claim to be followers but would be workers of iniquity.

The upshot is that workers of evil are denounced by Christ, they are not Christians.

moses wrote on Jun 11^th, 2019 at 4:52pm:

You must like reading this answer forky. It's all been foretold how there would be false prophets, men who proclaim their commands as doctrine, men who would claim to be followers but would be workers of iniquity. The upshot is that workers of evil are denounced by Christ, they are not Christians.

I still haven't seen Christ doing anything for the last ~2019 years, Moses, if he existed at all...  ::)

I'm pretty sure no one has seen muhammad rape torture and murder anyone in that last millennium and a half yet muzzies still go to extraordinary lengths to show their total devotion and obedience in all things islamic.

Same with Confucius how long since anyone has seen him? Yet they follow him to the very letter.

So your point is not exactly relevant is it?

moses wrote on Jun 11^th, 2019 at 3:55pm:

Don't they have to sincerely repent and seek true forgiveness of the soul?.

Is this a question, Moses, or a statement of Christian dogma?

Your previous thoughts were a little more emphatic.

Perhaps Brian think all religions are equal because they are all equally impenetrable for him.

freediver wrote on Jun 12^th, 2019 at 9:57pm:

Perhaps Brian think all religions are equal because they are all equally impenetrable for him.

FD?

Quote:

Is this a question, Moses, or a statement of Christian dogma? Your previous thoughts were a little more emphatic.

A bit of both I'd say.

A person who has committed some evil deed and has been caught, has to face the physical sentence passed out according to our laws.

Such a person may want to put off his/her evil persona and seek to absolve his inner most being, that's the only thing asking Christ for forgiveness can achieve in such a situation, I'm thinking.

moses wrote on Jun 12^th, 2019 at 10:12pm:

Quote: Is this a question, Moses, or a statement of Christian dogma? Your previous thoughts were a little more emphatic. A bit of both I'd say. A person who has committed some evil deed and has been caught, has to face the physical sentence passed out according to our laws. Such a person may want to put off his/her evil persona and seek to absolve his inner most being, that's the only thing asking Christ for forgiveness can achieve in such a situation, I'm thinking.

Sorry, Moses, the apostle John is most emphatic. All you need to be saved is to believe.

The entire point of the New Testament, as you're no doubt aware, is to let the blood of Christ take away our sin.

And conversely, to seek forgiveness for those who sin against us.

You're free to stick with the OT though. An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, dear. That's your choice.

It just happens to go against everything the Enlightenment, Western civilisation, the rule of law and the universal declaration of the rights of (hu)man is built upon.

Forgiveness.

Saved spiritually, it's 100% impossible to seek forgiveness then simply walk out of jail free.

moses wrote on Jun 12^th, 2019 at 10:27pm:

Saved spiritually, it's 100% impossible to seek forgiveness then simply walk out of jail free.

And yet, that's exactly what the Gospels preach. That's why they're called "gospels" - good news.

Look, why do I, a devious Muslim apologist, have to tell you what your own religion teaches?

moses wrote on Jun 12^th, 2019 at 9:44pm:

I'm pretty sure no one has seen muhammad rape torture and murder anyone in that last millennium and a half yet muzzies still go to extraordinary lengths to show their total devotion and obedience in all things islamic. Same with Confucius how long since anyone has seen him? Yet they follow him to the very letter. So your point is not exactly relevant is it?

It is very relevant, Moses because it goes to the heart of what you and all other religionists think.  You believe, all without evidence, therefore it is true, completely without any direct evidence to support your beliefs.   ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 12^th, 2019 at 10:49pm:

moses wrote on Jun 12th, 2019 at 9:44pm: I'm pretty sure no one has seen muhammad rape torture and murder anyone in that last millennium and a half yet muzzies still go to extraordinary lengths to show their total devotion and obedience in all things islamic. Same with Confucius how long since anyone has seen him? Yet they follow him to the very letter. So your point is not exactly relevant is it? It is very relevant, Moses because it goes to the heart of what you and all other religionists think.  You believe, all without evidence, therefore it is true, completely without any direct evidence to support your beliefs.   ::)

Oh, I don't know about that, Brian. I happen to think faith, prayer, charity, fasting and pilgrimage are pretty good things to do. I've done it.

I must admit, I've even squatted down to pee and played with my dick afterwards, but that's just me.

Confucius had similar good ideas on how to live, just different. As did Moses, Siva, Yeheshua, Patanjali, the Buddha Gautama, all.

As the Dali Lama says, a doctor doesn't prescribe the same medicine for every illness. Different people need different faiths according to their different temperaments.

We now live in a time where this is possible. I think we should celebrate this choice. FD even has a name for it.

You?

Mattyfisk wrote on Jun 12^th, 2019 at 11:03pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 12th, 2019 at 10:49pm: moses wrote on Jun 12th, 2019 at 9:44pm: I'm pretty sure no one has seen muhammad rape torture and murder anyone in that last millennium and a half yet muzzies still go to extraordinary lengths to show their total devotion and obedience in all things islamic. Same with Confucius how long since anyone has seen him? Yet they follow him to the very letter. So your point is not exactly relevant is it? It is very relevant, Moses because it goes to the heart of what you and all other religionists think.  You believe, all without evidence, therefore it is true, completely without any direct evidence to support your beliefs.   ::) Oh, I don't know about that, Brian. I happen to think faith, prayer, charity, fasting and pilgrimage are pretty good things to do. I've done it. I must admit, I've even squatted down to pee and played with my dick afterwards, but that's just me. Confucius had similar good ideas on how to live, just different. As did Moses, Siva, Yeheshua, Patanjali, the Buddha Gautama, all. As the Dali Lama says, a doctor doesn't prescribe the same medicine for every illness. Different people need different faiths according to their different temperaments. We now live in a time where this is possible. I think we should celebrate this choice. FD even has a name for it. You?

What is the best religion for someone whose temperament is blowing up buses?

What's my name?

forky tongue wrote
Quote:

It is very relevant, Moses because it goes to the heart of what you and all other religionists think.  You believe, all without evidence, therefore it is true, completely without any direct evidence to support your beliefs.

The direct evidence is in the doctrine taught by their founders, all authored and written when the events first occured  (or there abouts') so to speak.

But tell me, islamists today the 21st century are still following the teachings of muhammad to rape torture and murder their way into paradise, why do you never criticize these terrorists?

moses wrote on Jun 13^th, 2019 at 3:40pm:

forky tongue wrote Quote: It is very relevant, Moses because it goes to the heart of what you and all other religionists think.  You believe, all without evidence, therefore it is true, completely without any direct evidence to support your beliefs. The direct evidence is in the doctrine taught by their founders, all authored and written when the events first occured  (or there abouts') so to speak. But tell me, islamists today the 21st century are still following the teachings of muhammad to rape torture and murder their way into paradise, why do you never criticize these terrorists?

Speaking of terrorists:

"Three right-wing militiamen from rural Kansas were found guilty on Wednesday in a 2016 plot to slaughter Muslim refugees living in an apartment complex in Garden City."

It's good to see that our law can catch and punish these criminals who are not following anything in the Christian doctrine.

Common criminals and their despicable offences have nothing to do with Christianity, is 100% true statement.

moses wrote on Jun 13^th, 2019 at 3:50pm:

It's good to see that our law can catch and punish these criminals who are not following anything in the Christian doctrine. Common criminals and their despicable offences have nothing to do with Christianity, is 100% true statement.

That's true, Moses. Christians aren't perfect, just forgiven. All Christians are sinners, dear. You have to admit that when you're saved.

But I'm curious. Can we apply your exclusion to the Muselman? Rape - haram, drugs - haram, murder, suicide - haram haram haram.

What is it that makes them Muslims? Do you think it's the beards?

moses wrote on Jun 13^th, 2019 at 3:50pm:

It's good to see that our law can catch and punish these criminals who are not following anything in the Christian doctrine. Common criminals and their despicable offences have nothing to do with Christianity, is 100% true statement.

They're terrorists, moses.

You don't need religion to be a terrorist.

The majority of terrorist attacks in Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Europe, etc. are carried out by right-wing extremists.

I think you're telling us a load of crap, the global terrorist threat right now is islamic terror.

moses wrote on Jun 13^th, 2019 at 4:05pm:

I think you're telling us a load of crap, the global terrorist threat right now is islamic terror.

Fake news, moses.

"Of course, right-wing terrorism is now a very real and deadly threat in many Western countries, the United States included. Last October, Robert Bowers, a forty-six-year-old Pittsburgh man who ranted online about the threats presented by “illegals” and “the overwhelming Jew problem,” allegedly gunned down and killed eleven worshippers at the Tree of Life synagogue. Just last month, federal agents arrested Christopher Paul Hasson, a lieutenant in the U.S. Coast Guard who had called for “focussed violence” to “establish a white homeland.” Like Tarrant, Hasson had been inspired by the Norwegian terrorist Breivik, and, according to the prosecutors, he was intending “to murder innocent civilians on a scale rarely seen in this country.”

"These are just the most visible recent examples of the ongoing violence perpetrated by white supremacists and other right-wing nuts. “Right-wing extremists were linked to at least 50 extremist-related murders in the United States in 2018, making them responsible for more deaths than in any year since 1995,” the Anti-Defamation League noted in January. Even the Trump Administration’s own report, “National Strategy for Counterterrorism,” which was published last year, acknowledged that “domestic terrorism in the United States is on the rise,” and it cited “racially motivated extremism” as one of the causes."

It’s Time to Confront the Threat of Right-Wing Terrorism

moses wrote on Jun 13^th, 2019 at 4:05pm:

I think you're telling us a load of crap, the global terrorist threat right now is islamic terror.

"According to recent FBI data, white supremacists in the US have committed far more killings than members of groups like Al Qaeda and Daesh."

Far-right violence now a bigger threat to the US than Daesh and Al Qaeda

"According to the Anti-Defamation League’s Center on Extremism, 71 percent of killings related to extremism have been committed by white supremacists between 2008 and 2017, while extremists related to groups like Al Qaeda, are responsible for 26 percent of fatal violence.

“White supremacists and other far-right extremists have killed far more people since September 11, 2001, than any other category of domestic extremist,” wrote Janet Reitman.

Abu wrote
Quote:

That's true, Moses. Christians aren't perfect, just forgiven. All Christians are sinners, dear. You have to admit that when you're saved. But I'm curious. Can we apply your exclusion to the Muselman? Rape - haram, drugs - haram, murder, suicide - haram haram haram. What is it that makes them Muslims? Do you think it's the beards?

Sorry to inform you but you have it all wrong, rape is condoned (you know the bit about allah is forgiving when you and other muzzies all rape those your right hand possesses)

Murder, suicide why the highest grade of muzzies are the ones who slay and are slain and those who sell this life for the other.

Now what makes them muzzie? Well the criteria is: believe there is no god but allah and the old thief liar pedophile rapist torturer and mass murderer muhammad is his messenger. 

FYI, moses:

"In 2017, there were 65 extremism-related incidents, which killed 95 people, and only seven attacks had been committed by Muslim-origin extremists, equaling slightly more than 10 percent of the attacks in the US, while other right-wing and left-wing violence made up more than 80 percent of the attacks."

Far-right violence now a bigger threat to the US than Daesh and Al Qaeda

gp. You need to make a couple of phone calls and tell the relevant authorities of your information.

My stats are:

In the last thirty days there were 117 Islamic attacks in 25 countries, in which 709 people were killed and 544 injured. The jihad report for June 01, 2019 - June 07, 2019 is  Attacks 30  Killed 154  Injured 192  Suicide Blasts 4  Countries 14. There has been 35165 islamic terror attacks sine September 11 2001

From Australian National Security

Australia's current National Terrorism Threat Level is PROBABLE

The primary terrorist threat in Australia is from a small number of Islamist extremists, principally lone actors or small groups. While we must be prepared for more complex attack plots, simple attack methodologies that enable individuals to act independently and with a high degree of agility remain the more likely form of terrorism in Australia.[/b]

[url=https://www.nationalsecurity.gov.au/Listedterroristorganisations/Pages/default.aspx]
Currently, 27 organisations are listed as terrorist organisations under the Criminal Code. They are:

•Abu Sayyaf Group (ASG) •Al-Murabitun •Al-Qa'ida (AQ) •Al-Qa'ida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) •Al-Qa’ida in the Indian Subcontinent (AQIS) •Al-Qa’ida in the Lands of the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) •Al-Shabaab •Boko Haram •Hamas' Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades •Hizballah's External Security Organisation (ESO) •Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan •Islamic State •Islamic State East Asia •Islamic State in Libya (IS-Libya) •Islamic State Khorasan Province •Islamic State Sinai Province (IS-Sinai) •Jabhat al Nusra •Jaish-e-Mohammad •Jama’at Mujahideen Bangladesh •Jamiat ul-Ansar (JuA) •Jemaah Anshorut Daulah •Jemaah Islamiyah (JI) •Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) •Lashkar-e Jhangvi •Lashkar-e-Tayyiba •Palestinian Islamic Jihad

NATIONAL SECURITY HOTLINE 1800 123 400

Not a right wing group in there as far as I can see.

moses wrote on Jun 13^th, 2019 at 3:40pm:

forky tongue wrote Quote: It is very relevant, Moses because it goes to the heart of what you and all other religionists think.  You believe, all without evidence, therefore it is true, completely without any direct evidence to support your beliefs. The direct evidence is in the doctrine taught by their founders, all authored and written when the events first occured  (or there abouts') so to speak.

75 to 150 years for the Gospels is not "thereabouts", particularly when one considers that they were edited several times up to several hundred years after they were written, Moses.   You believe propaganda and are a fool because of that.


Quote:

But tell me, islamists today the 21st century are still following the teachings of muhammad to rape torture and murder their way into paradise, why do you never criticize these terrorists?

Perhaps because I do criticise the Islamists - the perpetrators of Terrorism all the time, Mose.  You, OTOH, criticise all Muslims for crimes they have never committed.  You are an Islamophobe, Moses.   ::)

Gee forky tongue you do nothing but lie when it comes to the islamists, in fact you go out of your way to try and demonstrate that islam and Christianity are very similar.

You can never do this, as the one truth in all of it is:

People who commit atrocities are disobeying the teachings of Christ.

muslims who perpetrate human rights atrocities are directly following the teachings of muhammad.

moses wrote on Jun 13^th, 2019 at 4:19pm:

Abu wrote Quote: That's true, Moses. Christians aren't perfect, just forgiven. All Christians are sinners, dear. You have to admit that when you're saved. But I'm curious. Can we apply your exclusion to the Muselman? Rape - haram, drugs - haram, murder, suicide - haram haram haram. What is it that makes them Muslims? Do you think it's the beards? Sorry to inform you but you have it all wrong, rape is condoned (you know the bit about allah is forgiving when you and other muzzies all rape those your right hand possesses) Murder, suicide why the highest grade of muzzies are the ones who slay and are slain and those who sell this life for the other. Now what makes them muzzie? Well the criteria is: believe there is no god but allah and the old thief liar pedophile rapist torturer and mass murderer muhammad is his messenger.

Except that all that's krap, as you well know. It doesn't mean what it says, remember?

We need Islam "critics" like yourself and FD to rephrase the Quran and make stuff up.

Lucky we have you, eh? What would we apologists talk about otherwise?

Sustainable fishing and carbon taxes?

moses wrote on Jun 13^th, 2019 at 4:51pm:

Gee forky tongue you do nothing but lie when it comes to the islamists, in fact you go out of your way to try and demonstrate that islam and Christianity are very similar. You can never do this, as the one truth in all of it is: People who commit atrocities are disobeying the teachings of Christ. muslims who perpetrate human rights atrocities are directly following the teachings of muhammad.

Care to quote to us where I have "lied" about how terrible the Islamist Terrorists are, Moses?

Here, there is even a space for you to provide your proof:

Quote:

You, OTOH, simply reiterate your lies about Islam and Muslims in virtually every post, Moses.  Your nose must be six feet long now and you'll be barred from Heaven...   ::)

moses wrote on Jun 13^th, 2019 at 4:51pm:

muslims who perpetrate human rights atrocities are directly following the teachings of muhammad.

The black superman?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KW5qF9fheXw

greggerypeccary wrote on Jun 13^th, 2019 at 10:26pm:

moses wrote on Jun 13th, 2019 at 4:51pm: muslims who perpetrate human rights atrocities are directly following the teachings of muhammad. The black superman? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KW5qF9fheXw

Indeed. The best example of slaying and being slain I can think of: "no Viet Cong ever called me ngger".

It is a jolly world, no?

forked tongue:
Quote:

Care to quote to us where I have "lied"

Gee forky tongue you do nothing but lie when it comes to the islamists, in fact you go out of your way to try and demonstrate that islam and Christianity are very similar.

You can never do this, as the one truth in all of it is:

People who commit atrocities are disobeying the teachings of Christ.

muslims who perpetrate human rights atrocities are directly following the teachings of muhammad.

You don't understand?

moses wrote on Jun 14^th, 2019 at 6:11pm:

forked tongue: Quote: Care to quote to us where I have "lied" Gee forky tongue you do nothing but lie when it comes to the islamists, in fact you go out of your way to try and demonstrate that islam and Christianity are very similar. You can never do this, as the one truth in all of it is: People who commit atrocities are disobeying the teachings of Christ. muslims who perpetrate human rights atrocities are directly following the teachings of muhammad. You don't understand?

People who commit atrocities are disobeying the teachings of Mohammed as well, Moses.  Those who disobey Christ suffer the same fate.    ::)

Oh gee now we're going to hear about it all means something else.

Good old moh the practicing thief liar pedophile rapist torturer and mass murderer, certainly knew how to speak in code didn't he?

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 14^th, 2019 at 6:37pm:

moses wrote on Jun 14th, 2019 at 6:11pm: forked tongue: Quote: Care to quote to us where I have "lied" Gee forky tongue you do nothing but lie when it comes to the islamists, in fact you go out of your way to try and demonstrate that islam and Christianity are very similar. You can never do this, as the one truth in all of it is: People who commit atrocities are disobeying the teachings of Christ. muslims who perpetrate human rights atrocities are directly following the teachings of muhammad. You don't understand? People who commit atrocities are disobeying the teachings of Mohammed as well, Moses.  Those who disobey Christ suffer the same fate.    ::)

Did Muhammad ever disobey the teachings of Muhammad?

freediver wrote on Jun 14^th, 2019 at 10:06pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 14th, 2019 at 6:37pm: moses wrote on Jun 14th, 2019 at 6:11pm: forked tongue: Quote: Care to quote to us where I have "lied" Gee forky tongue you do nothing but lie when it comes to the islamists, in fact you go out of your way to try and demonstrate that islam and Christianity are very similar. You can never do this, as the one truth in all of it is: People who commit atrocities are disobeying the teachings of Christ. muslims who perpetrate human rights atrocities are directly following the teachings of muhammad. You don't understand? People who commit atrocities are disobeying the teachings of Mohammed as well, Moses.  Those who disobey Christ suffer the same fate.    ::) Did Muhammad ever disobey the teachings of Muhammad?

You answer my questions, I might answer yours, FD.   ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 14^th, 2019 at 11:08pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 14th, 2019 at 10:06pm: Brian Ross wrote on Jun 14th, 2019 at 6:37pm: moses wrote on Jun 14th, 2019 at 6:11pm: forked tongue: Quote: Care to quote to us where I have "lied" Gee forky tongue you do nothing but lie when it comes to the islamists, in fact you go out of your way to try and demonstrate that islam and Christianity are very similar. You can never do this, as the one truth in all of it is: People who commit atrocities are disobeying the teachings of Christ. muslims who perpetrate human rights atrocities are directly following the teachings of muhammad. You don't understand? People who commit atrocities are disobeying the teachings of Mohammed as well, Moses.  Those who disobey Christ suffer the same fate.    ::) Did Muhammad ever disobey the teachings of Muhammad? You answer my questions, I might answer yours, FD.   ::)

Do you think Muhammad committed an atrocity and disobeyed the teachings of Muhammad when he slaughtered 800 Jews in one day? Or don't you think that was an atrocity?

freediver wrote on Jun 15^th, 2019 at 9:09am:

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 14th, 2019 at 11:08pm: freediver wrote on Jun 14th, 2019 at 10:06pm: Brian Ross wrote on Jun 14th, 2019 at 6:37pm: moses wrote on Jun 14th, 2019 at 6:11pm: forked tongue: Quote: Care to quote to us where I have "lied" Gee forky tongue you do nothing but lie when it comes to the islamists, in fact you go out of your way to try and demonstrate that islam and Christianity are very similar. You can never do this, as the one truth in all of it is: People who commit atrocities are disobeying the teachings of Christ. muslims who perpetrate human rights atrocities are directly following the teachings of muhammad. You don't understand? People who commit atrocities are disobeying the teachings of Mohammed as well, Moses.  Those who disobey Christ suffer the same fate.    ::) Did Muhammad ever disobey the teachings of Muhammad? You answer my questions, I might answer yours, FD.   ::) Do you think Muhammad committed an atrocity and disobeyed the teachings of Muhammad when he slaughtered 800 Jews in one day? Or don't you think that was an atrocity?

What made you settle on 800? Cat got your tongue?

qur'an 8.67: It is not for any prophet to have captives until he hath made a great slaughter in the land. Ye desire the lure of this world and Allah desireth (for you) the Hereafter, and Allah is Mighty, Wise.

allah conveniently came up with his words which absolved muhamads' blood lust. (so moh wasn't doing anything wrong, just getting his kill count up for allah.)

I mean allah could have killed them himself but he prefers muzzies to do it as a test.(qur'an 47.4)

moses wrote on Jun 15^th, 2019 at 1:55pm:

qur'an 8.67: It is not for any prophet to have captives until he hath made a great slaughter in the land. Ye desire the lure of this world and Allah desireth (for you) the Hereafter, and Allah is Mighty, Wise. allah conveniently came up with his words which absolved muhamads' blood lust. (so moh wasn't doing anything wrong, just getting his kill count up for allah.) I mean allah could have killed them himself but he prefers muzzies to do it as a test.(qur'an 47.4)

Indeed. That means don't kidnap any enemies unless you're at war with them.

You?

Surah 8 the spoils of war:

8:67. It is not for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war (and free them with ransom) until he had made a great slaughter (among his enemies) in the land. You desire the good of this world (i.e. the money of ransom for freeing the captives), but Allah desires (for you) the Hereafter. And Allah is All-Mighty, All-Wise.

O.K exactly as it says, a prophet should  not have captives and then sell them unless he has made a great slaughter in the land.

Those muzzies who want to take them captive instead and sell them to take the money, are after the lures of the earth, while allah desires them for them the hereafter.

So taking captives and selling them as slaves bad, no heaven for them.

Slaughtering huge numbers of them first gets you into paradise with the houri's with big tits and the little boys.

Death cult ring any bells?

moses wrote on Jun 15^th, 2019 at 2:47pm:

Surah 8 the spoils of war: 8:67. It is not for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war (and free them with ransom) until he had made a great slaughter (among his enemies) in the land. You desire the good of this world (i.e. the money of ransom for freeing the captives), but Allah desires (for you) the Hereafter. And Allah is All-Mighty, All-Wise. O.K exactly as it says, a prophet should  not have captives and then sell them unless he has made a great slaughter in the land. Those muzzies who want to take them captive instead and sell them to take the money, are after the lures of the earth, while allah desires them for them the hereafter. So taking captives and selling them as slaves bad, no heaven for them.

Exactly. You can't take prisoners of war without a war. Not unlike the Geneva Convention, yes?

Uncle gets around this one by having a little offshore prison outside US legal jurisdiction. Cunning, no?

Uncle gets to sneak around Pakistan and Afghanistan, rendition anyone sold to him for the bounty, and send him off to Guantanamo Bay in the dark of night.

You can't say Moh didn't warn them, dear. No paradise for Uncle.

It says not to take captives until you've made excessive slaughter.

Why not defeat and sell them as the men wanted to do? (you know desire the lures of the world bit)

Quote:

Exactly. You can't take prisoners of war without a war. Not unlike the Geneva Convention, yes?

They were mostly sex slaves.

moses wrote on Jun 15^th, 2019 at 3:55pm:

It says not to take captives until you've made excessive slaughter.

I think that's what a war is, Moses.

So negative, I know. FD likes you to be more jolly about it.

The invasion of Iraq was a classic slaughter in the land.

freediver wrote on Jun 15^th, 2019 at 4:17pm:

Quote: Exactly. You can't take prisoners of war without a war. Not unlike the Geneva Convention, yes? They were mostly sex slaves.

Really? Those prisoners of war must have had very sore bottoms, dear.

You?

freediver wrote on Jun 15^th, 2019 at 9:09am:

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 14th, 2019 at 11:08pm: freediver wrote on Jun 14th, 2019 at 10:06pm: Brian Ross wrote on Jun 14th, 2019 at 6:37pm: moses wrote on Jun 14th, 2019 at 6:11pm: forked tongue: Quote: Care to quote to us where I have "lied" Gee forky tongue you do nothing but lie when it comes to the islamists, in fact you go out of your way to try and demonstrate that islam and Christianity are very similar. You can never do this, as the one truth in all of it is: People who commit atrocities are disobeying the teachings of Christ. muslims who perpetrate human rights atrocities are directly following the teachings of muhammad. You don't understand? People who commit atrocities are disobeying the teachings of Mohammed as well, Moses.  Those who disobey Christ suffer the same fate.    ::) Did Muhammad ever disobey the teachings of Muhammad? You answer my questions, I might answer yours, FD.   ::) Do you think Muhammad committed an atrocity and disobeyed the teachings of Muhammad when he slaughtered 800 Jews in one day? Or don't you think that was an atrocity?

You answer my questions, I might answer yours, FD.   ::)

Mattyfisk wrote on Jun 15^th, 2019 at 5:03pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 15th, 2019 at 4:17pm: Quote: Exactly. You can't take prisoners of war without a war. Not unlike the Geneva Convention, yes? They were mostly sex slaves. Really? Those prisoners of war must have had very sore bottoms, dear. You?

Most of them were women. That was the primary reason for Muslims going to war - to capture women to rape. That's how Islam spread.

freediver wrote on Jun 15^th, 2019 at 5:29pm:

Mattyfisk wrote on Jun 15th, 2019 at 5:03pm: freediver wrote on Jun 15th, 2019 at 4:17pm: Quote: Exactly. You can't take prisoners of war without a war. Not unlike the Geneva Convention, yes? They were mostly sex slaves. Really? Those prisoners of war must have had very sore bottoms, dear. You? Most of them were women. That was the primary reason for Muslims going to war - to capture women to rape. That's how Islam spread.

I see. Which part of the Quran tells them to do that, FD?

And why did they go for the Negroid sub-species?

If they wanted to have slaves, why didn't they go for superior Whitey?

Racist, were they?

Mattyfisk wrote on Jun 15^th, 2019 at 6:06pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 15th, 2019 at 5:29pm: Mattyfisk wrote on Jun 15th, 2019 at 5:03pm: freediver wrote on Jun 15th, 2019 at 4:17pm: Quote: Exactly. You can't take prisoners of war without a war. Not unlike the Geneva Convention, yes? They were mostly sex slaves. Really? Those prisoners of war must have had very sore bottoms, dear. You? Most of them were women. That was the primary reason for Muslims going to war - to capture women to rape. That's how Islam spread. I see. Which part of the Quran tells them to do that, FD?

Chapter 9. And the verse from chapter 8 we were just discussing.