Australian Politics Forum - Muhammad as the anti-christ

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: Muhammad as the anti-christ
Reply #255 - Apr 9^th, 2018 at 12:13pm

FD, I already answered the distinction thing.

You speculated that it was merely political allegiance, based on no evidence whatsoever. The fact is, all the sources (including wikipedia, your "go to" source) clearly and unambiguously identify them as "muslims". What that actually means in terms of the personal beliefs of the 7th century individuals in question is completely speculative, and therefore neither here nor there.

Also, you are wrong to say your "question stands" on what I consider what is and what isn't a "legitimate" muslim. It is *YOU* who set a bar of what is, in your words "bugger all success" in converting people, it is *YOUR* measure, not mine. Therefore it must necessarily be based on what *YOU* consider to be a "legitimate" muslim and what is not. And the fact is, you have rabbited on for ages about how 'being muslim' is essentially nothing more than a political allegiance. So no FD, it has nothing to do with what I think about the distinction, its all about your definition of a) what it means to convert to Islam and b) what does and doesn't constitute "bugger all success" in gaining converts.

So I'll ask again - 1. are you now backpeddling on your long-held belief that 'being muslim' is not much more than a political allegience?, or if not, 2. if we accept that all those aws and kazrajh tribe members (numbering well into the 100s) "converted" to Islam, as in pledging political allegience to Muhammad - how exactly is converting all those people - even before you have even met most of them, equate to having "bugger all success" in converting people to your religion?

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49837
At my desk.

Re: Muhammad as the anti-christ
Reply #256 - Apr 9^th, 2018 at 1:15pm

Quote:

FD, I already answered the distinction thing.

I must have missed that bit.

Quote:

You speculated that it was merely political allegiance, based on no evidence whatsoever. The fact is, all the sources (including wikipedia, your "go to" source) clearly and unambiguously identify them as "muslims". What that actually means in terms of the personal beliefs of the 7th century individuals in question is completely speculative, and therefore neither here nor there.

When you described them as a mindless collective, were you also speculating? Or do you have proof?

Quote:

Also, you are wrong to say your "question stands" on what I consider what is and what isn't a "legitimate" muslim.

I am not saying anything at all about legitimacy.

Quote:

It is *YOU* who set a bar of what is, in your words "bugger all success" in converting people, it is *YOUR* measure, not mine.

Converting people to his religion Gandalf. I even rephrased it for clarity.

Quote:

Therefore it must necessarily be based on what *YOU* consider to be a "legitimate" muslim and what is not.

Why is it necessary to pass that sort of judgement in order to discuss the nature of their allegiance?

Quote:

And the fact is, you have rabbited on for ages about how 'being muslim' is essentially nothing more than a political allegiance

Can you quote me?

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: Muhammad as the anti-christ
Reply #257 - Apr 9^th, 2018 at 2:48pm

freediver wrote on Apr 9^th, 2018 at 1:15pm:

Converting people to his religion Gandalf. I even rephrased it for clarity.

He converted people to his religion - hundreds of them, before the hijra, and especially before proposing any violence. Do you agree with that? If not, then you need to explain what you mean by "converting", and why it doesn't apply here. If you do agree, then you need to explain how that can be described as having "bugger all success" in converting people to your religion.

freediver wrote on Apr 9^th, 2018 at 1:15pm:

Why is it necessary to pass that sort of judgement in order to discuss the nature of their allegiance?

To spell it out again - because its *YOUR* claim that he had "bugger all success" in converting people - despite the fact that, according to wikipedia, the majority of 2 entire tribes converted. So its on you FD, to explain what you actually mean by that. Because at face value, I'm sure you would agree, it sounds strange to describe the mass conversion of all or most of 2 entire tribes as having "bugger all success".

freediver wrote on Apr 9^th, 2018 at 1:15pm:

Can you quote me?

I'm sure I could. But before I go to the trouble, are you denying it?

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49837
At my desk.

Re: Muhammad as the anti-christ
Reply #258 - Apr 9^th, 2018 at 8:36pm

Quote:

He converted people to his religion - hundreds of them, before the hijra, and especially before proposing any violence. Do you agree with that?

I am skeptical of your claim that an entire tribe converted to his religion before they even met him.

Quote:

If not, then you need to explain what you mean by "converting", and why it doesn't apply here.

Are you pulling an Aussie?

Quote:

I'm sure I could. But before I go to the trouble, are you denying it?

Yes Gandalf, I am denying it.

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 49698
Gender: male

Re: Muhammad as the anti-christ
Reply #259 - Apr 9^th, 2018 at 9:10pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 9^th, 2018 at 12:13pm:

So I'll ask again - 1. are you now backpeddling on your long-held belief that 'being muslim' is not much more than a political allegience?, or if not, 2. if we accept that all those aws and kazrajh tribe members (numbering well into the 100s) "converted" to Islam, as in pledging political allegience to Muhammad - how exactly is converting all those people - even before you have even met most of them, equate to having "bugger all success" in converting people to your religion?

'Converting to Islam' has been for a very long time a simple political expediency. Do you want to be killed or do you want to pay extra tax or perform a ritual? Not exactly a spiritual choice. What is in your heart means nothing to a Muslim, it is all about how you perform in public.

Utter the shahada
be seen to be prostating yourself five times a day
be seen to give alms
Don't be seen to be eating in daytime during Ramadan
Go to Mecca

Contrast it to the two most important commandments in Christianity: Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

You can fake what you say and what you perform but you can't fake what's in your heart.

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: Muhammad as the anti-christ
Reply #260 - Apr 10^th, 2018 at 10:49am

freediver wrote on Apr 9^th, 2018 at 8:36pm:

I am skeptical of your claim that an entire tribe converted to his religion before they even met him.

Sorry FD, but your skepticism in the absense of any actual evidence means diddly squat. It also betrays an ignorance of arab history. Pre-Islamic arabs were basically following the religion of Abraham, but with a few extra gods thrown in. It is also a matter of historical fact that the arrival of the next prophet of God was widely anticipated at the time. That people were so willing to accept Muhammad's prophethood, and 'covert' to his religion - even without meeting him, is not a stretch at all. The fact is they were identified as muslims by all the sources, and they certainly pledged their loyalty to Muhammad, or else he wouldn't have been able to migrate. 75 of them alone travelled to Mecca to meet him and perform the hajj. Sa'd ibn Mu'adh, the leader definitely did wholeheartedly convert after meeting with Muhammad, and he obviously had a lot of influence over his people.

Long story short, extremely unlikely to be zero converts, wouldn't you agree?

freediver wrote on Apr 9^th, 2018 at 8:36pm:

Yes Gandalf, I am denying it.

Don't be cute FD. We all know you have stated that Islam blurs the line between religion and politics. Its therefore reasonable to question you about what you actually consider a 'legitimate' conversion to Islam, as opposed to a mere pledging of political loyalty - and why you are now making this distinction at all. But not only that, you are now running with the line that people really only 'converted' in order to let them go raping and pillaging. How is 'converting' as an excuse to go raping and pillaging somehow more legitimately 'converting' to Islam than the 'mere' pledging of political loyalty to Muhammad (for pragmatic purposes)?

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 49837 At my desk.	Re: Muhammad as the anti-christ Reply #261 - Apr 10^th, 2018 at 12:25pm Ask away gandalf, but if I didn't say it then I didn't say it. It's just yet another of your absurd strawmem.
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: Muhammad as the anti-christ
Reply #262 - Apr 10^th, 2018 at 1:30pm

freediver wrote on Apr 10^th, 2018 at 12:25pm:

Ask away gandalf, but if I didn't say it then I didn't say it. It's just yet another of your absurd strawmem.

translation: I'll duck and weave from the actual point here.... in classic FD style.

Feel free to have another go FD: How is 'converting' as an excuse to go raping and pillaging somehow more legitimately 'converting' to Islam than the 'mere' pledging of political loyalty to Muhammad (for pragmatic purposes)?

were there still exactly 45 muslims at the time of the first caravan raid?

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49837
At my desk.

Re: Muhammad as the anti-christ
Reply #263 - Apr 10^th, 2018 at 6:41pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 10^th, 2018 at 1:30pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 10^th, 2018 at 12:25pm:

Ask away gandalf, but if I didn't say it then I didn't say it. It's just yet another of your absurd strawmem.

translation: I'll duck and weave from the actual point here.... in classic FD style.

You accused me of saying it. I asked you to quote me. You responded by asking if I was denying it. I said yes. Seems pretty straightforward to me Gandalf. You lead us down this tangent. You are welcome to get off it at any time.

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: Muhammad as the anti-christ
Reply #264 - Apr 10^th, 2018 at 7:57pm

freediver wrote on Apr 10^th, 2018 at 6:41pm:

You are welcome to get off it at any time.

Good point FD - can I do that by asking you to address the actual point - say like this question that I just asked you, and you ignored?...

How is 'converting' as an excuse to go raping and pillaging somehow more legitimately 'converting' to Islam than the 'mere' pledging of political loyalty to Muhammad (for pragmatic purposes)?

Would you like to answer now, or would you prefer to revert back to tangents again while whinging about me going down tangents?

I've pretty much given up on trying to extract an answer from you about the Abu claim, and how it is a "completely different narrative" to mine - when it clearly isn't.

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 49837 At my desk.	Re: Muhammad as the anti-christ Reply #265 - Apr 10^th, 2018 at 8:22pm Quote: Good point FD - can I do that by asking you to address the actual point - say like this question that I just asked you, and you ignored? You can do anything you set your mind to Gandalf.
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

polite_gandalf Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 20027 Canberra Gender:	Re: Muhammad as the anti-christ Reply #266 - Apr 10^th, 2018 at 8:34pm You know that saying FD - if you don't have anything useful to say...
Back to top	A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said: Quote: Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms. IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 49837 At my desk.	Re: Muhammad as the anti-christ Reply #267 - Apr 10^th, 2018 at 8:44pm polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 10^th, 2018 at 8:34pm: You know that saying FD - if you don't have anything useful to say... ...don't accuse people of saying things they didn't say? Just saying, Gandalf.
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

polite_gandalf Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 20027 Canberra Gender:	Re: Muhammad as the anti-christ Reply #268 - Apr 10^th, 2018 at 8:46pm Oh look, you're reverting back to the tangent - after whinging about reverting to tangents. In order to duck and weave from my question. Ready to answer the question yet? No, never mind then.
Back to top	A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said: Quote: Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms. IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 49837 At my desk.	Re: Muhammad as the anti-christ Reply #269 - Apr 10^th, 2018 at 9:28pm polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 10^th, 2018 at 8:46pm: Oh look, you're reverting back to the tangent - after whinging about reverting to tangents. In order to duck and weave from my question. Ready to answer the question yet? No, never mind then. Tell me more about this tangent Gandalf.
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged