It was not standard at all. Not then. Not today. It was a low point, even by the brutal standards of 7th century arab tribal warfare. Nor were they a threat. All 700 of them were captives. They were POWs. They posed no threat at all. The only thing they posed was an opportunity for Muhammed to make his name.

freediver wrote on Jul 30^th, 2013 at 8:29pm:

According to modern definitions to qualify as a POW you must have conducted military operations according to the laws and customs of war.

Attacking the state you live in providing aid to the enemy does not fall within the normal accepted rules and customs of war.

The Qurayzas were criminal traitors, and did not deserve the protection one might normally give to a prisoner of war.

Anyone who aids the enemy in times of war is liable to the death penalty, and is not a POW.

The Qurazas aided the enemy in time of war and attacked Muslims.

Can you provide proof that any of their women were raped?

Of course facts are not important to liars like you are they Freediver?

Lord Herbert wrote on Jul 31^st, 2013 at 7:58am:


What are the signs of a true prophet?

Prophets preach monotheism. Muhammed only ever taught monotheism.


Prophets are sent with miracles. Muhammed was accompanied by a number of miracles - one of these is the Quran.

Quote:



Quote:



The Quran is a multi-faceted miracle. What convince me that it was the word of God is its authoritative nature - no man can talk the way God does. Try and write a book like it - nobody has ever written anything like it in human history.

Another amazing thing is the millions of people who have memorised the whole Quran even today 1400 years after it was first revealed.


Quote:

True Colours wrote on Jul 30^th, 2013 at 10:17pm:


Can you provide one single example, in the entire history of Islam, of a Muslim man being punished under islamic law for raping his wife or his sex slave?

Quote:


You just finished typing out an extract from a book so you could post it here. It appears to be the first time anyone has ever posted that extract online, even though you claim it is very famous. Not knowing what you are talking about has obviously never stopped you before.

So tell us TC, what are we supposed to make of Islam considering sex to be a man's right and a woman's responsibility?

What are we supposed to make of Islam permitting polygamy and the capturing of concubines on the battlefield?

What are we supposed to make of Muslims who are otherwise an endless source of transparent spin when it comes to Islam suddenly pulling out the "I am not an expert" line when it comes to rape?

Quote:


Having a slave is illegal. The yanks fought a war over it. If you really find it hard to believe that someone might have been punished for having slaves (let alone raping them), I'm sure I could google it for you. In fact some rich Saudis were recently busted with slaves in London. I just find it hard to believe that you would need an example to demonstrate that slavery and rape is illegal. Or is this merely yet another pointless deflection?

Quote:


What would the point be? Would it shed any light on whether Islam permits rape? Or is this merely yet another transparent moral equivalence deflection?

BTW, how did that women's rights movement of the 1970's go in Muslim countries? Did it hit some kind of barrier that is incomprehensible to you? Or do they already have equal rights?