Quote:What is this FD - you can't argue against the moral legitimacy of their plight, so you're resorting to a technicality around the modern day definition of war?
Sure I can. You are the one who flip-flopped from "always in self defence" to "they dclared war against Muhammad and his non-existent community a few years earlier when he ran away from Mecca". If you'd like to have another go at arguing he spent years murdering Meccan traders and stealing their goods in self defence, be my guest. But don't run away from it then say I was unable to argue against its moral legitimacy.
Furthermore, your absurd argument is in fact a brilliant demonstration of the evil of Islam and why the middle east is went from the cradle of civilisation to the most backwards place on earth - one man get's wronged, and according to Islam that justifies a lifetime of theft, murder and meting out whatever retribution is convenient to anyone who can be linked to that wrong in any way. How is this any different to the modern excuses Muslims offer for terrorism?
Quote:Exactly what was a "state" in 7th century tribal Arabia FD? Care to have a crack at that one?
I use the same meaning that I do today. Muhammad running away from Mecca is not a state.
Quote:There obviously was a leader
So obviously that you refuse to say how many followers he had at the time.
Quote:And there was a small community
How small Gandalf? Was that community in fact much larger by the time the Muslims were done Murdering Meccan traders?
Quote:Good question FD. I believe I asked you that exact same question when you made your BS claim about Islam recruitment only starting when potential followers saw the attraction of slaughtering innocent and defenceless caravaners.
No Gandalf. I asked you the question. I have asked it every time you use this excuse, to highlight the absurdity of your excuses. How does Muhammad's mistreatment by some people in Meccca justify an entirely different group of Muslims using it as an excuse to murder and steal from an entirely different group of Meccans? This is the evil of Islam.
Quote:"murdered all those Meccan traders"? Really FD, before we get carried away with yet more hyperbole, exactly how many are we talking about? Was 'murder' and bloodlust really the primary objective here do you think? In the interests of ramping up the hysteria levels even more, perhaps you could adopt a new phrase - how about 'the appalling genocide of the Meccan traders'?
The primary objective of Muhammad's career murdering Meccan traders was to steal their goods. The booty was then used to grow the religion, by funding it and by attracting people to it with the promise of even mroe spoils of war.
Quote:You forgot to mention the whole community of followers that Muhammad was responsible for. If it was really the case that Muhammad raised an army and attacked Mecca purely on account of a slight against his own person - then you would have a point.
So Muhammad murdered and stole for the common good? Or for the good of Islam?
Quote:It is a point of historical fact that Muhammad's people felt aggrieved and put enormous pressure on him to act.
Crap. The ones who fled Mecca with him did, but you refuse to say how many there were. The ones who joined him from Medina outnumbered them but had not grievance, only lust for power and spoils of war.
Quote:But even apart from that, he had a whole community to look after, who were completely destitute
More BS. And another flip-flop from Gandalf. Can you ever stick to just one excuse?
Quote:trying to start a life in an agrarian community with zero knowledge or experience with the agrarian livelihood. Their options for making ends meet were clearly limited. The Quraysh obviously wouldn't allow them to trade in Mecca
Who says they had to farm? They could have traded also. What you really mean is that Muhammad was cut off from the pagan kaaba and the easy money it brought to his family, but instead of making an honest living he felt justified in murdering and stealing to get back what he considered his by God's decree.
Quote:Muslims are often criticised here for believing their religion is a "religion of peace"
They are criticised for lying about what the Quran says.
Quote:while I am often criticised for pointing out large numbers of Christians appear not to believe that Christianity has messages of peace in it's belief system
You are criticised for saying incredibly stupid things, such as that we have no right or ability to criticise Islam. And running away from every opportunity to comment on a comparison between Jesus and Muhammad, or the Quran vs the NT, or pretending you misunderstood the question and people were actually asking you about Joseph Kony.
Quote:Please answer the point that if belief is valid as a means of assessing what people claim about their religion then both views are equally valid, right? Roll Eyes
If the belief involves lying about what a holy book says while claiming to adhere to it, then it is less valid.
Quote:what "inherent beliefs" Auggie?
I don't have to change any of my "inherent beliefs" to know my religion is a religion of peace.
He was probably referring to the Quran, whose contents you lie about.