FD, you posted that. Can you explain your logic there, please?

Is there any reason why parts of the Quran can't be - etc, etc, etc, Mindless Collective, traitorous Jews, so unfair, etc, etc?

Cheers.

The Government should step in and ban Sharia law and re-write the Koran

Mattyfisk wrote on Feb 1^st, 2019 at 9:11am:



Never even thought about it Karnal, have Jews killed anyone on the street lately? Islam seems to be the main problem except for the crazy politicians who let muzzos in, we'll be paying the price for that indiscretion for a long long time

freediver wrote on Jan 31^st, 2019 at 12:49pm:


This is the problem with highlighting and focusing only on half a sentence.

The Jihadis are trying to kill people, not convert them Gandalf.

Can you explain your logic? Are you saying that ignoring the bits of the Quran you don't like is a reasonable expectation of Muslims because you believe the jihadis must be doing it?

Bias_2012 wrote on Feb 1^st, 2019 at 12:25pm:


Sorry, Bias, you. The Torah is the Old Testament.

Mattyfisk wrote on Feb 1^st, 2019 at 12:32pm:


That's a good point, it's one that Brian as an apologist uses as a crutch.  If a Muslim does something contrary to the Koran, or Islam, (which, is never too clear) they are not weeeely a Muslim, therefore, ipso facto, cos Brian like to throw in a bit of Latin, (even if he doesn't understand it) it's not weeeely Islamic, therefore, ...kiddies can see where the logic is going, ...its nuffin to do wiv  Islam.

And Brian is a doctor so he knows.   

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 1^st, 2019 at 1:01pm:


Moses is a religious numpty, he is as idiotic as anyone else who needs a sky daddy to feel complete or for comfort and guidance.

I can totally accept Christian motivations for such things as bombing abortion clinics.

Where I disagree with you is relativism and relevance. Crusades, your go to apologism, ain't relevent, and Islamic inspired v Christian inspired violence ain't relative.

You defend the excess of Islam, in fact you have declared loudly and proudly that you will not criticise it.

You have dealt yourself out of any debate as biased, as well as being ridiculous in your mental contortions,  I have followed your contortions of logic impeccably.  Contrary to Islam, therefore not Islamic therefore nuffin to do wiv Islam.

You defend Islam the same way that Moses defends Christianity. 

Secret Wars wrote on Feb 1^st, 2019 at 12:45pm:


Strange. That's exactly what Moses, Yadda and the old boy say about Christians who disobey the Bible.

Mind you, they all have clauses. Moses brings up Jesus being tempted by the devil in the desert to encourage Christians to hate, ban and kill the Muselman, which is haram in Christianity. Y says he's not perfect and he'll face his Maker on Judgement Day. The old boy just pretends he's not a Christian.

Mind you, none of them are very fond of Christians who practice Christianity. They call them apologists.

You?

Quote:


I am not a doctor of divinity, I am happy to accept at face value a Muslim holding a dripping head declaring that he has gone choppy choppy and done it for Jihad and Allan. Especially because that person usually has an internally coherent justification in the scriptures they believe.

I might have missed a few subtle nuances and idioms I admit but then I am looking not for excuses why the head hacking jihadist is not weeeely a Muslim, therefore nuffin to do wiv Islam.  And no need for me to do so, you have more than covered the apologism and justifications.

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 1^st, 2019 at 11:46am:



What about these verses?

Quote:



This one sounds like convert or die, does this contradict your peaceful verses?

Quote:




Does Allah say you cannot pick and choose which verses you believe in, is it a package deal if you want all those houris and an everlasting erection to service them?


Quote:

Secret Wars wrote on Feb 1^st, 2019 at 1:46pm:


Not at all, Secret. Killing innocent people and holding up their heads on Facebook is the height of bad manners in Islam. It's more haram than eating pork.

Raping? Haram. Kidnapping? Haram. Torturing? You know.

This is in the Quran verses G has quoted. G has even quoted the not-all-who-go-in-my-name passage, the same thing Jesus said.

Muslims who ban, hate and kill are disagreeing the words of their Cunning Prophet. Christians who ban, hate and kill are disagreeing with their Holy Saviour. Not all who go in their names shall enter the Kingdom.

Personally, I believe them both. Rather than ban, hate and kill, welcome, love and bring life to others. That's the message of both. That's why I'm an apologist, you see.

I am a Moslem and a Christian. I spit, make the sign of the cross and squat down to pee and play with my dick afterwards.

You?

Baronvonrort wrote on Feb 1^st, 2019 at 3:30pm:


In isolation, of course it does. Until you realise the context. Which polytheists is it referring to?...

Quote:


and...

Quote:


'Kill the polytheists wherever you find them' - provided they are a) those with whom you made a treaty with and b) have been unfaithful to (violated) the treaty they made with you

Baronvonrort wrote on Feb 1^st, 2019 at 3:30pm:


Good point Baron. Perhaps in light of this you should be asking yourself why you (and most others here) believe that the jihadis and the terrorists are the most faithful to Islamic doctrine - despite their *BLATANT* disobeying of verses like 2:256 and 18:29.

At least I actually try to tackle head on the alleged "kill the infidel" verses and mount a case for why I don't think it is incompatible with my version of Islam.

Whereas the jihadis and FD and moses alike just pretend that 2:256 and 18:29 etc don't exist, and run away from them whenever they are raised.

moses wrote on Feb 1^st, 2019 at 6:14pm:


So are you saying if you disobey the words of Christ and shriek ban them kill them cesterete them, Christ has rejected you?

That's a bit harsh, Moses. After all, if thou knocketh, the door will be answered unto Ye.

Quote:


If you disobey the teachings of Christ, by making up your own rules and regulations, Christianty will not rejected you.  Churches will accept you, even make you into a saint, Moses.

Christians who rape torture and kill non-believers and apostate corrupt Christians are obeying the teachings of Christianity.   

Aw gee tell us again how Christian teachings that women must not teach in a Church, should be modest, that husbands and wives must love each other, are just as evil as the teachings in islam which condone rape, bashing women and detaining them in a house until they die.

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2019 at 3:41pm:

Christianity didn't start ~ 2019+ years ago, Doktor Thickness.

Is there nothing in this world that you are not hideously wrong and stupid about?  Nothing?


Nothing.   

Frank wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2019 at 4:22pm:


Thank you for confirming how long Christianity has been suppressing women, Soren.  You do understand what the "tilde" means in mathematics, don't you?  It means "approximately".  Run along, I can hear someone calling you from the little kiddies' playground where you belong, OK? 

Frank wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2019 at 6:00pm:


So, why are they calling you, Soren?  Oh, dearie, dearie, me.  Tsk, tsk.   

Brian Ross wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2019 at 4:32pm:


Alt jungend, alt jungend! Vo bist du, alt jungend?

Mattyfisk wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2019 at 8:52pm:


Her! her, doktor. Jeg har roen klar! I denne sprøjte!   

It comes down to this: If parts of the Koran can be ignored, then it is not the word of God . . . or unidentified scoundrels inserted sections of their own into the word of God. The same might be said of the Bible.

Pretty dull stuff, but what might be interesting is how anyone would convince themselves that any of it is the word of God.

I can see how some people might consider elements of doctrine desirable, but the adamant belief in the supernatural is the domain of religious fanatics, and while they may not be dangerous today, their psychology is unpredictable.

The bible is the words of men driven by the spirit of their inner self.

Exactly the same as the qur'an.

The  O.T is the product of 48 prophets and 7 prophetesses. The N.T. is the product of a varied group of men and women also.

The qur'an is the product of one single man who was a thief, liar, paedophile, rapist, torturer and mass  murderer. The qur'an reflects the inner self of this sick, depraved pervert, it's as simple as that.

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 4^th, 2019 at 1:32pm:


And yet here you are, arguing that bits of the Quran could simply be ignored if you don't like them. That's what I am asking you to explain, and what you keep running away from. How does that work?

If a Jihadi suggested to you that you should ignore 2:256, would you describe him as a hypocrite?

Gandalf wrote:
Quote:


Are these in the Old Testament and specifically refer to one certain group of people e.g.:

(Deut. 7.1-2; 20.16-18).   The destruction was to be complete: every man, woman, and child was to be killed.  The book of Joshua tells the story of slaughtering all the Canaanite clans throughout Canaan.

It is a time, geography and people specific, past tense story. (about 3,400 years old)

It does not tell the Hebrews to kill every single non Hebrew in the world for ever and a day in the future .

Now get to the qur'an it is written in the present and future tense, the satanic commands of depravity in the qur'an are meant for the then and now, the present and the future.

-----aaannnnnd  you really don't know why the muzzies are still doing all the raping torturing and killing?


Late addendum

A few samples (there are zillions more) from the qur'an which are written in the present and future tense.

qur'an 2.216: Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not.

*Is* prescribed for you it doesn't say *was* prescribed, it's present and future tense.

qur'an 3.151: We shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve because they ascribe unto Allah partners, for which no warrant hath been revealed. Their habitation is the Fire, and hapless the abode of the wrong-doers.

*Shall* cast terror, it doesn't say *did*, it's present and future tense.

qur'an 61.4: Truly Allah loves those who fight in His Cause in battle array, as if they were a solid cemented structure.

allah loves those who *Fight* it doesn't say who *fought*, once again present and future tense.


qur'an 5.33: Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet *be cut off* from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment,

*Be killed* it doesn't say were *killed*, once again present and future tense

qur'an 4.74: Let those that fight in the cause of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the cause of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward.

*Fight and sell your life*, present and future tense commands to the suicide terrorists, it didn't say *fought and sold* their lives.

freediver wrote on Feb 5^th, 2019 at 7:19pm:


If they refuse to consider arguments in favour of a non-slaughtering Islamic doctrine - yes.

gandi quoted The book of Deuteronomy as his proof that ancient texts are applicable today, well here we go again just for you gandi.

first off what is Deuteronomy?

Deuteronomy Summary

Moses wrote this book

The genre of the book of Deuteronomy is not much different from that of Exodus. It is Narrative History and Law

The very first verse in Deuteronomy is, 1:1 These be the words which Moses spake unto all Israel on this side Jordan in the wilderness, in the plain over against the Red sea, between Paran, and Tophel, and Laban, and Hazeroth, and Dizahab.

Narrative History and Law gandi.

History is about the past.

3500 years ago these laws preached by Moses would have not raised an eyebrow, civilization was barbaric to say the least back then.

Now this law was officially made defunct 2019 years ago by Christ: once again for the umpteenth time,

Luke 16:16  The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached , and every man presseth into it.

The law had a distinct time frame on it.

2019 years ago man was justified by faith not the law:

Once again for the zillionth time

Romans 10:4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.

Romans 3:20  Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

Romans 3:28  Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.

Galatians  2:16  Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

Galatians 3:11  But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith.

The law you refer to had a clear-cut time frame, was made inoperative 2019 years ago, it is no longer applicable.

That's the reason you don't have Christians running around killing people willy-nilly today 2019, like the muzzies do.

The qur'an is in the present / future tense, so we have muslims committing the most heinous of crimes against their fellow man right now. because the qur'an tells them to do it.

moses wrote on Feb 6^th, 2019 at 2:58pm:


History is about the past, yes, Moses but "law" is about the present and the future, now isn't it?  Oh, dearie, dearie, me, tripped up by language, yet again, hey?   

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 6^th, 2019 at 9:25am:


So you were making an argument that you personally believe to be crap, but that you thought the infidel might be convinced by, because the infidel would not accept something else you said?

Do you do this often?

Mattyfisk wrote on Feb 6^th, 2019 at 9:23pm:

Let the boy dig, Paki.  The Holy Koran has answers. let the boy speak.

Always challenging, always knowing better - very Paki of you but let thee boy speak, for a change. He's not gandalf that you always have to jump in and speak for him because you know better - you may be gandalf's wife but you aren't this boy's.

moses wrote on Feb 6^th, 2019 at 2:58pm:


So moses, by your logic the 10 commandants are irrelevant and not applicable today right?

Or is there a formula that enables us to pick and choose what laws of the OT we can keep and which ones we must abandon?

That said I do support and commend Christians for attempting to cherry pick out the trully awful bits of the OT (and even the NT - vis your thoughts about St Paul's misogyny). But the double standards on display between how the bible is treated compared to how the quran is treated - is trully breathtaking.

Gandi wrote:

Quote:


You genuinely don't know the difference between commandments and laws?

1/. One is called the Commandments of God === the other the law of Moses.

2/. Mosaic law is written on a book === the Commandments written on stone.

3/. Commandments are placed inside the ark of the covenant === the law outside the ark of the covenant.

4. Mosaic law ended on the cross with the death of Christ === the Commandments will last forever.

You get the drift gandi?

Two separate entities.

One of them the law of Moses is long gone dead in the water.

The other the commandments are eternal.

freediver wrote on Feb 7^th, 2019 at 12:41pm:


FD, you may not have noticed, but the principle of abrogation in the Quran is one of the key weapons used by Islam critics. Chapter 9 'abrogates' all the peace and tolerance verses - remember? Of course there is a parallel.

As for 'turn the other cheek' - I present to you 41:34

And not equal are the good deed and the bad. Repel [evil] by that [deed] which is better; and thereupon the one whom between you and him is enmity [will become] as though he was a devoted friend.

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 7^th, 2019 at 2:32pm:


Muhammad contradicting himself and becoming more violent as he gained power is not the same thing as Jesus preaching new concepts, that were presented as new concepts, which force the rejection of some of the OT concepts.

Are you going to explain your logic for advocating ignoring bits of the Quran, or just try to change the subject? Would you accuse a Muslim of being a hypocrite if he did what you suggest non-Muslims do?

Am I correct that you openly promoted an argument to a non-Muslim that you personally believe to be crap?

moses wrote on Feb 7^th, 2019 at 2:51pm:


Actually Moses, it turns out that its all Mosaic Law. Thus it comes down to which parts of Mosaic Law Christians think should still apply, and which don't:

Quote:


Thus we get whats known as supersessionism, that the new covenant of the NT replaces the covenant of Mosaic Law - which is the mainstream view of Christians today. I believe its this concept that gives rise to the myth about abrogation in the Quran, where like the misunderstanding about the role of Muhammad in Islam led to the concept of 'Muhammadism' - western critics are once again projecting an erroneous "biblical" interpretation of Islam.

The point is, we get this idea that the 'kill the infidel' and other awful parts of the OT can conveniently be ignored as superseded by nicer parts of the bible. And thats quite acceptable apparently, despite it being based on, at best, ambiguous evidence. But the point remains, that the vast majority of Christians don't believe that their faith commands them to kill non-believers and march into infidel towns and raise them. This is true despite me pointing to Deuteronomy and the very clear commands to do just that. Similarly, the vast majority of muslims don't accept that their faith commands them to slaughter all non-muslims, and this remains true regardless of how many times you point to chapter 9 etc and insist that its true.

freediver wrote on Feb 8^th, 2019 at 12:53pm:


Heres a revelation for you FD, the old testament is still part of the Christian Bible.

gandalf  wrote:Reply #69 - Today at 10:05am

Quote:


Are you making your own rules now gandi?

The  Hebrews apparently thought different to you gandi

1/. One is called the Commandments of God=== the other the law of Moses.

2/. Mosaic law is written on a book === the Commandments written on stone.

3/. Commandments are placed inside the ark of the covenant === the law outside the ark of the covenant.

4. Mosaic law ended on the cross with the death of Christ === the Commandments will last forever.

Quote:
 

The Messiah of the N.T. was foretold in the O.T., He distinctly said that the law was until the time of John it was obsolete.

You say ambiguous evidence, well the N.T is the only evidence we have and it absolutely stated that the law was finished and man was saved by faith in Christ. (there is no other authority on this earth which supersedes the teachings of the N.T. for Christians)

Gandi you're looking for any excuse no matter how false to hide from the fact that muslims kill people today 2019 because the qur'an tells them to do so.

The writings of the qur'an have no time frame on them, it's the perfect word of allah for you, it was written by people who had no idea how the world was going to pan out, they couldn't see beyond the 7th century and the total domination of muslims / islam over all other people.

The end result is that muslims are brainwashed from birth with this muslim supremacist crap written in the present tense, the highest grade ones, fully believe their destiny is to rape torture and murder their way across the land, in the pursuit of establishing islam as the only religion allowed.

Then we have others like you, who can see that this is  not acceptable in the 21dst century so there is conflict between the number one muslims (the rapists torturers and killers), and the *moderates*  who know that the commands to slaughter etc. are not acceptable today.

So what do you the *moderates* do?

Well you kill allahs' loved ones, they retaliate and kill you.

You are a weak dishonest person, who denys that the verses of evil in the qur'an mean what they say, you keep making excuses gandi.

To question and expose all the evil in the qur'an will destroy islam, so you instead prefer the survival of islam and the never ending bloodshed.

That's it in a nutshell gandi, it's got sweet fanny adams to do with Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, paganism you name it.

The problem is totally a muslim one and the unequivocal present tense evil in the qur'an gandi.

Hi Yadda,
your posts are still too long to read.

Please make them short and punchy.

Mattyfisk wrote on Feb 8^th, 2019 at 7:11pm:



Please make them short and punchy


Follower of Islam the Koran and Mohammed = gash, pudenda, vagina, vulva, pussy, beaver, box, muff, puss, snatch,  twat.

Geddit?

You can't be taken seriously if you believe in the koran and mohammed. It's like Scientology. A joke.

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 8^th, 2019 at 2:52pm:

Explain the place of the OT is Christianity, Italian muslima. You were a christian well before you were a Musulman, so you shoul d know the weight and significance  of the OT in in Christianity.


Speak, Mohammedan convert.

Mattyfisk wrote on Feb 8^th, 2019 at 8:46pm:

Thanks.

Exactly. believe in Islam= twats on stilts. You must be mad to buy into such idiocy.   But they do. Twats.

What's your explanation for grown ups signing up to such twattery?


A puzzle for the ages.   Must be all that hair, I am guessing.

Mattyfisk wrote on Feb 8^th, 2019 at 9:28pm:

Auggie wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 6:41pm:



Global Jihad is consistent with Islamic ideology

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

Auggie wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 7:26pm:



You could try reading the Quran, FD has provided a link for chapter 9.

Many other verses as well.

Quote:



Quote:



I know you're thick but try to comprehend what these verses say

Don't reject it just ignore it?

Australia: Muslims say call to disavow violent Qur’an verses is “inappropriate,” will “never, ever, ever” do it
Feb 2, 2019 10:51 am

Australian Muslim leaders have rejected comments from a NSW Supreme Court justice, who said Muslim leaders should publicly denounce “belligerent” verses of the Koran, as “inappropriate”.

Grand Mufti of Australia Dr Ibrahim Abu Mohamed said religious leaders would “never, ever, ever” disavow verses of the holy text while president of the Australian Muslim Women’s Association Silma Ihram said that it was not appropriate for a judge to delve into religious scripture interpretations.

“All Muslim associations that are registered and well-known in Australia have condemned acts of violence and have condemned the use of terrorism,” she said.

“So to hold us to account for the misinterpretation and misuse of our holy book is inappropriate.”

Dr Rateb Jneid, Australian Federation of Islamic Councils president, said a judge shouldn’t be drawing conclusions on a holy text.

Justice Fagan pointed to sermons on the pair’s phones quoting Koran verses which “unmistakably instruct the believers to undertake jihad in pursuit of universal Islamic dominance” as an example of verses that should be denounced.

“As seen in this and numerous other prosecutions, the hostile verses [in the Koran] are inspiring serious crimes,” he said.

It’s not the first time that Muslim community leaders have been called on to do more to stop radicalism in their communities.

Well well well, the worm is turning.

As usual the muzzies all turn a blind eye and lie, saying there is nothing to disavow.

Proof that muslims prefer the violence bloodshed and death spawned by the *holy* text of the qur'an.

How long will we have to endure the putridity of islamic holy jihad against the nonbelievers?

Are muslims really so stupid that they can't see that islam is nothing more than the urgings of muhammad as he sought to instill islam across the land.

The majority of the qur'an deals with hating and oppressing the kufirs.

The highest grade of muslims are the killers, muslims can take sex slaves, muslim paradise is a brothel filled with hour'is with big tits and little boys.

Why are muslims the top listed terrorist organizations in the world?

Why are we even having this argument, if [whine voice]it's got *nuffin to do wiv islam* cos it's been misinterpreted.?[/whine voice]

It will happen as sure as the sun will come up in the east, it's just a matter of time.

The perverse thing is that muzzies and apologists choose islam does not have to answer for its' evil, over stopping the degeneracy caused by islamic texts from the qur'an.

Auggie wrote on Feb 13^th, 2019 at 6:15pm:


LOL!

Good luck with that one Auggie 

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 13^th, 2019 at 12:26pm:


Any muslim who says alcohol is haram insists on Abrogation.


Why do muslims say alcohol is haram when the Quran allows it?

Quote:



Quote:



As we see with alcohol earlier verses are abrogated by later verses. For some reason muslims are deceptive in denying abrogation exists with Quran verses.