Australian Politics Forum - Muhammad as the anti-christ

Auggie

Gold Member

Offline

The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571

Re: Muhammad as the anti-christ
Reply #135 - Mar 8^th, 2018 at 2:29pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 2:23pm:

Auggie wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 12:52pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 12:43pm:

one man =/= entire community

Muhammad sought revenge and order the deaths of those who ‘turned him out’.

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.

Ah hah! So, it was the pressure of tb community around him which compelled him to seek revenge? So, how does this theory fit into the idea that Muhammad acted in accordance with God’s word/revelation if he was influenced by the community???

Surely, that Muhammad was the prophet of God would’ve been enough to have people follow him?

Back to top

The Progressive President

IP Logged

Brian Ross

Gold Member

Offline

Representative of me

Posts: 39603

Re: Muhammad as the anti-christ
Reply #136 - Mar 8^th, 2018 at 2:31pm

Auggie wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 2:23pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 2:13pm:

Auggie wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 12:52pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 12:43pm:

one man =/= entire community

Your point?

Jesus was threatened and almost killed during his ministry but he never sought revenge or retribution, and in the end he chose to die.

Muhammad sought revenge and order the deaths of those who ‘turned him out’.

Which is more spiritual? Forgiving enemies or seeking revenge?

Again, your source for Jesus's actions/thoughts is, what Augie? Oh, The Bible, of course. Well, we know who wrote and edited The Bible, now don't we? Tsk, tsk. Roll Eyes

Brian, were talking about what those religions profess, their tenets and theological claims. It doesn’t matter if you and I don’t believe it’s real, it matters that other people believe it’s real.

Interesting. So those Muslims who believe that Islam is a "religion of peace" have a valid argument in their favour then, Augie? Hmmm? What about the Christians who have turned their back on their leader's professions about his religion being "peaceful"? How does their argument stack up? Roll Eyes

Back to top

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour. Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

IP Logged

Auggie

Gold Member

Offline

The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571

Re: Muhammad as the anti-christ
Reply #137 - Mar 8^th, 2018 at 2:38pm

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 2:31pm:

Auggie wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 2:23pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 2:13pm:

Auggie wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 12:52pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 12:43pm:

one man =/= entire community

Your point?

Jesus was threatened and almost killed during his ministry but he never sought revenge or retribution, and in the end he chose to die.

Muhammad sought revenge and order the deaths of those who ‘turned him out’.

Which is more spiritual? Forgiving enemies or seeking revenge?

Again, your source for Jesus's actions/thoughts is, what Augie? Oh, The Bible, of course. Well, we know who wrote and edited The Bible, now don't we? Tsk, tsk. Roll Eyes

Brian, were talking about what those religions profess, their tenets and theological claims. It doesn’t matter if you and I don’t believe it’s real, it matters that other people believe it’s real.

Interesting. So those Muslims who believe that Islam is a "religion of peace" have a valid argument in their favour then, Augie? Hmmm? What about the Christians who have turned their back on their leader's professions about his religion being "peaceful"? How does their argument stack up? Roll Eyes

What were talking about here specifically is the comparison between the two key religious figures of both religious traditions. I agree that there are other authoritative voices in both religious traditions that have preached a mixture of both hate and love, the Catholic Church being one example.

It’s akso true that Christianity was able to purge itself of its negative aspects and pave the way for the enlightenment and scientific revolution BECAUSE the religious tradition was moral enough to create that change. Ultimately people can look directly to Jesus and see what his teachings were.

Islam can be a peaceful religion but it requires a significant revision of certain inherent beliefs.

Back to top

The Progressive President

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: Muhammad as the anti-christ
Reply #138 - Mar 8^th, 2018 at 2:54pm

Auggie wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 2:26pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 2:23pm:

Auggie wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 12:52pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 12:43pm:

one man =/= entire community

Muhammad sought revenge and order the deaths of those who ‘turned him out’.

You forgot to mention the whole community of followers that Muhammad was responsible for.

So, without attempting to propose a straw man argument, are you saying that Muhammad was under ‘pressure’ from his peers to seek vengeance? ie he might not have wanted to seek revenge personally but because his community did, he had to relent if he wanted their loyalty?

It is a point of historical fact that Muhammad's people felt aggrieved and put enormous pressure on him to act. Suggest you read Montgommery Watt or Karen Armstrong's books on Muhammad.

But even apart from that, he had a whole community to look after, who were completely destitute, 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

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

Auggie

Gold Member

Offline

The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571

Re: Muhammad as the anti-christ
Reply #139 - Mar 8^th, 2018 at 3:09pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 2:54pm:

Auggie wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 2:26pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 2:23pm:

Auggie wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 12:52pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 12:43pm:

one man =/= entire community

Muhammad sought revenge and order the deaths of those who ‘turned him out’.

You forgot to mention the whole community of followers that Muhammad was responsible for.

So, without attempting to propose a straw man argument, are you saying that Muhammad was under ‘pressure’ from his peers to seek vengeance? ie he might not have wanted to seek revenge personally but because his community did, he had to relent if he wanted their loyalty?

It is a point of historical fact that Muhammad's people felt aggrieved and put enormous pressure on him to act. Suggest you read Montgommery Watt or Karen Armstrong's books on Muhammad.

But even apart from that, he had a whole community to look after, who were completely destitute, 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

Ok, so how does that ‘pressure’ fit in to the fact that Muhammad’s commandments for society were dictated by God?? Unless you’re saying that there were some things he did that weren’t commanded by God?

Second, even if I’m willing to concede that his community was destitute, the revelations of the Quran don’t reflect that destitution. For eg, if God supposedly dictated the Quran, then why not say “Permission is you granted to you (O Muhammad) to raid caravans in order to feed people but know that such an act is evil in of itself; but so as to prevent starvation, this is allowed to you, only when I specifically command you...”

Back to top

The Progressive President

IP Logged

Brian Ross

Gold Member

Offline

Representative of me

Posts: 39603

Re: Muhammad as the anti-christ
Reply #140 - Mar 8^th, 2018 at 3:24pm

Auggie wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 2:38pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 2:31pm:

Auggie wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 2:23pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 2:13pm:

Auggie wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 12:52pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 12:43pm:

one man =/= entire community

Your point?

Jesus was threatened and almost killed during his ministry but he never sought revenge or retribution, and in the end he chose to die.

Muhammad sought revenge and order the deaths of those who ‘turned him out’.

Which is more spiritual? Forgiving enemies or seeking revenge?

Again, your source for Jesus's actions/thoughts is, what Augie? Oh, The Bible, of course. Well, we know who wrote and edited The Bible, now don't we? Tsk, tsk. Roll Eyes

Brian, were talking about what those religions profess, their tenets and theological claims. It doesn’t matter if you and I don’t believe it’s real, it matters that other people believe it’s real.

Interesting. So those Muslims who believe that Islam is a "religion of peace" have a valid argument in their favour then, Augie? Hmmm? What about the Christians who have turned their back on their leader's professions about his religion being "peaceful"? How does their argument stack up? Roll Eyes

What were talking about here specifically is the comparison between the two key religious figures of both religious traditions. I agree that there are other authoritative voices in both religious traditions that have preached a mixture of both hate and love, the Catholic Church being one example.

It’s akso true that Christianity was able to purge itself of its negative aspects and pave the way for the enlightenment and scientific revolution BECAUSE the religious tradition was moral enough to create that change. Ultimately people can look directly to Jesus and see what his teachings were.

Islam can be a peaceful religion but it requires a significant revision of certain inherent beliefs.

"What we're talking about" or "what we were talking about"?

We were talking about what you claimed, Augie. Now, how it pertains to each group of believers is interesting. Muslims are often criticised here for believing their religion is a "religion of peace" 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. That is where the conversation has gone. 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

Back to top

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour. Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

IP Logged

polite_gandalf Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 20023 Canberra Gender:	Re: Muhammad as the anti-christ Reply #141 - Mar 8^th, 2018 at 3:36pm Auggie wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 3:09pm: Unless you’re saying that there were some things he did that weren’t commanded by God? LOL of course there were. Do you think he waited for God's permission every time he needed to pee?
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

polite_gandalf Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 20023 Canberra Gender:	Re: Muhammad as the anti-christ Reply #142 - Mar 8^th, 2018 at 3:38pm what "inherent beliefs" Auggie? I don't have to change any of my "inherent beliefs" to know my religion is a religion of peace.
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

Auggie

Gold Member

Offline

The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571

Re: Muhammad as the anti-christ
Reply #143 - Mar 8^th, 2018 at 5:39pm

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 3:24pm:

Auggie wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 2:38pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 2:31pm:

Auggie wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 2:23pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 2:13pm:

Auggie wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 12:52pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 12:43pm:

one man =/= entire community

Your point?

Jesus was threatened and almost killed during his ministry but he never sought revenge or retribution, and in the end he chose to die.

Muhammad sought revenge and order the deaths of those who ‘turned him out’.

Which is more spiritual? Forgiving enemies or seeking revenge?

Again, your source for Jesus's actions/thoughts is, what Augie? Oh, The Bible, of course. Well, we know who wrote and edited The Bible, now don't we? Tsk, tsk. Roll Eyes

Brian, were talking about what those religions profess, their tenets and theological claims. It doesn’t matter if you and I don’t believe it’s real, it matters that other people believe it’s real.

Interesting. So those Muslims who believe that Islam is a "religion of peace" have a valid argument in their favour then, Augie? Hmmm? What about the Christians who have turned their back on their leader's professions about his religion being "peaceful"? How does their argument stack up? Roll Eyes

What were talking about here specifically is the comparison between the two key religious figures of both religious traditions. I agree that there are other authoritative voices in both religious traditions that have preached a mixture of both hate and love, the Catholic Church being one example.

It’s akso true that Christianity was able to purge itself of its negative aspects and pave the way for the enlightenment and scientific revolution BECAUSE the religious tradition was moral enough to create that change. Ultimately people can look directly to Jesus and see what his teachings were.

Islam can be a peaceful religion but it requires a significant revision of certain inherent beliefs.

"What we're talking about" or "what we were talking about"?

We were talking about what you claimed, Augie. Now, how it pertains to each group of believers is interesting. Muslims are often criticised here for believing their religion is a "religion of peace" 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. That is where the conversation has gone. 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

Now that was below the belt, that first point, Brian.

The answer is no: as Gandalf admitted before, you can’t have an ‘anything goes’ approach with religion. We have to identify certain objective beliefs about religion and about what those people believe.

Anything else is just a lie.

Back to top

The Progressive President

IP Logged

Auggie

Gold Member

Offline

The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571

Re: Muhammad as the anti-christ
Reply #144 - Mar 8^th, 2018 at 6:03pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 3:36pm:

Auggie wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 3:09pm:

Unless you’re saying that there were some things he did that weren’t commanded by God?

LOL of course there were. Do you think he waited for God's permission every time he needed to pee?

I’m talking about the laws and principles of behaviour. Are you saying that there some wars or battles he fought which were not commanded by God

Back to top

The Progressive President

IP Logged

Brian Ross

Gold Member

Offline

Representative of me

Posts: 39603

Re: Muhammad as the anti-christ
Reply #145 - Mar 8^th, 2018 at 6:18pm

Auggie wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 5:39pm:

Now that was below the belt, that first point, Brian.

How is asking for clarification about what you have written "below the belt"?

Quote:

The answer is no: as Gandalf admitted before, you can’t have an ‘anything goes’ approach with religion. We have to identify certain objective beliefs about religion and about what those people believe.

Anything else is just a lie.

So, belief has nothing to do with religion? My, how interesting... Roll Eyes

Back to top

« Last Edit: Mar 8^th, 2018 at 9:46pm by Brian Ross »

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour. Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

IP Logged

Auggie Gold Member Offline The Bull Moose Posts: 8571	Re: Muhammad as the anti-christ Reply #146 - Mar 8^th, 2018 at 6:20pm polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 3:38pm: what "inherent beliefs" Auggie? I don't have to change any of my "inherent beliefs" to know my religion is a religion of peace. The belief that the Quran is unalterable word of God.
Back to top	The Progressive President IP Logged

Mattyfisk

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 92450
Gender: male

Re: Muhammad as the anti-christ
Reply #147 - Mar 8^th, 2018 at 7:02pm

Auggie wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 6:20pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 8^th, 2018 at 3:38pm:

what "inherent beliefs" Auggie?

I don't have to change any of my "inherent beliefs" to know my religion is a religion of peace.

The belief that the Quran is unalterable word of God.

Oh, come on. The Bible isn't?

You must have missed the opening verse, dear.

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47530
At my desk.

Re: Muhammad as the anti-christ
Reply #148 - Mar 8^th, 2018 at 7:22pm

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.

Back to top

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!

IP Logged

Mattyfisk Gold Member Online Australian Politics Posts: 92450 Gender:	Re: Muhammad as the anti-christ Reply #149 - Mar 8^th, 2018 at 7:32pm FD, I thought you said you weren't allowed to quote bomb. I want those Old Testament quotes on my desk by Monday morning, thanks.
Back to top	IP Logged