Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →
↑ ↓
CEMB → Forum → Life, The Universe & Everything → Religions and Gods → A Question to Ex-Muslims Only

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts

Do humans have needed kno...
Today at 03:50 AM
اضواء على الطريق ....... ...
by akay
February 23, 2025, 09:40 AM
What music are you listen...
by zeca
February 22, 2025, 09:50 PM
Lights on the way
by akay
February 22, 2025, 02:56 PM
German nationalist party ...
February 21, 2025, 10:31 AM
New Britain
February 17, 2025, 11:51 PM
Random Islamic History Po...
by zeca
February 14, 2025, 08:00 AM
Qur'anic studies today
by zeca
February 13, 2025, 10:07 PM
Muslim grooming gangs sti...
February 13, 2025, 08:20 PM
Russia invades Ukraine
February 13, 2025, 11:01 AM
Islam and Science Fiction
February 11, 2025, 11:57 PM
Gaza assault
February 05, 2025, 10:04 AM

Theme Changer

 Topic: A Question to Ex-Muslims Only

 (Read 75971 times)
  • Previous page 1 ... 10 11 1213 14 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Re: A Question to Ex-Muslims Only
     Reply #330 - April 13, 2009, 12:02 PM
    Quote from: BMZ"
    I feel bad too. Okay! No more on my ignore list.

    Err... I don't really care if you "ignore" me or not, BMZ. The satanic smiley was supposed to clarify that issue. I am really looking forward to our Holocaust debate, though. I wouldn't want to miss that.

    Islam: where idiots meet terrorists.
  • Re: A Question to Ex-Muslims Only
     Reply #331 - April 13, 2009, 02:03 PM
    Quote from: BMZ on April 13, 2009, 02:29 AM
    @ charleslemartel

    If I were to debate with a Christian friend about contradictions in the Bible, I would bring up
    a clear-cut contradiction. For example, I will present the following as a clear-cut and solid contradiction:

    Quote
    Mark 8:29"But what about you?" he asked, "Who do you say I am?"
    Peter answered, "You are the Christ."

    Luke 9:20"But what about you?" he asked. "Who do you say I am?"
          Peter answered, "The Christ of God."

    Matthew 16:20Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."


    This is a fine example to show a clear-cut contradiction in a scripture. This is just a note for your reading pleasure.

    BMZ 


    LOL. What happens to your contradiction-seeing faculties when it comes to Quran?

    A friendly advice: first resolve the contradictions SNB is bringing from Quran Cheesy
    Islam is a funny religion which is misunderstood by its scholars and correctly understood by ordinary Muslims.
    Faith is keeping your eyes shut when looking at the world, and/or keeping your eyes open only for the beauty of the world.
  • Re: A Question to Ex-Muslims Only
     Reply #332 - April 13, 2009, 04:44 PM
    Quote from: Rashna on April 13, 2009, 11:07 AM
    Quote from: BMZ on April 13, 2009, 11:02 AM
    Quote from: Zaephon on April 13, 2009, 09:37 AM
    Quote from: osmanthus on April 13, 2009, 09:22 AM
    Good. Do it. You backed out of the last thread on the topic without presenting anything of substance.

    BMZ put me on his ignore list, which makes me really, really very sad.

     signmuahaha


     

    I feel bad too. Okay! No more on my ignore list.

    BMZ


    How about me?

    Pleeeze

    You can't be unfair to me but fair to Zaephon...


    I did that at the same time, Sweety. You are welcome.

    Good night
    BMZ
  • Re: A Question to Ex-Muslims Only
     Reply #333 - April 13, 2009, 04:50 PM
    Quote from: charlesmartel on April 13, 2009, 02:03 PM
    Quote from: BMZ on April 13, 2009, 02:29 AM
    @ charleslemartel

    If I were to debate with a Christian friend about contradictions in the Bible, I would bring up
    a clear-cut contradiction. For example, I will present the following as a clear-cut and solid contradiction:

    Quote
    Mark 8:29"But what about you?" he asked, "Who do you say I am?"
    Peter answered, "You are the Christ."

    Luke 9:20"But what about you?" he asked. "Who do you say I am?"
          Peter answered, "The Christ of God."

    Matthew 16:20Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."


    This is a fine example to show a clear-cut contradiction in a scripture. This is just a note for your reading pleasure.

    BMZ 


    LOL. What happens to your contradiction-seeing faculties when it comes to Quran?

    A friendly advice: first resolve the contradictions SNB is bringing from Quran Cheesy


    Just posted. Can't you send a better guy from FFI? Looks like he has not even read one translation in English.
    If he had, he would have tried to find a clear-cut 'contradiction'.

    Even I, being the defender, have to teach the accuser.  Cheesy SNB did not even know that 2:193 is not a separate verse on it's own. It is part of a section comprising 2:190-2:194 and I can see that none at FFI knew about that.

    Good night
    BMZ
  • Re: A Question to Ex-Muslims Only
     Reply #334 - April 13, 2009, 04:57 PM
    Quote from: Zaephon on April 13, 2009, 12:02 PM
    Quote from: BMZ"
    I feel bad too. Okay! No more on my ignore list.

    Err... I don't really care if you "ignore" me or not, BMZ. The satanic smiley was supposed to clarify that issue. I am really looking forward to our Holocaust debate, though. I wouldn't want to miss that.




    Zaephon,

    Debate on the alleged Holocaust can be finished very fast. My gripe is with the word Holocaust, reserved exclusively for the Jews and the numbers.

    In the mean time, please study and get facts on the Jewish population for as many centuries as you can and also the latest.

    Even the bloody Pope is now forcing his own sensible well-read Bishops to take back their statements.

    I will put you back on ignore.  Cheesy

    Good night
    BMZ

  • Re: A Question to Ex-Muslims Only
     Reply #335 - April 13, 2009, 04:58 PM
    Quote from: BMZ on April 13, 2009, 04:50 PM
    Quote from: charlesmartel on April 13, 2009, 02:03 PM
    Quote from: BMZ on April 13, 2009, 02:29 AM
    @ charleslemartel

    If I were to debate with a Christian friend about contradictions in the Bible, I would bring up
    a clear-cut contradiction. For example, I will present the following as a clear-cut and solid contradiction:

    Quote
    Mark 8:29"But what about you?" he asked, "Who do you say I am?"
    Peter answered, "You are the Christ."

    Luke 9:20"But what about you?" he asked. "Who do you say I am?"
          Peter answered, "The Christ of God."

    Matthew 16:20Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."


    This is a fine example to show a clear-cut contradiction in a scripture. This is just a note for your reading pleasure.

    BMZ 


    LOL. What happens to your contradiction-seeing faculties when it comes to Quran?

    A friendly advice: first resolve the contradictions SNB is bringing from Quran Cheesy


    Just posted. Can't you send a better guy from FFI? Looks like he has not even read one translation in English.
    If he had, he would have tried to find a clear-cut 'contradiction'.

    Even I, being the defender, have to teach the accuser.  Cheesy SNB did not even know that 2:193 is not a separate verse on it's own. It is part of a section comprising 2:190-2:194 and I can see that none at FFI knew about that.

    Good night
    BMZ


    Here is a typical muslim claiming victory after being beaten. !! There is it folks!!
  • Re: A Question to Ex-Muslims Only
     Reply #336 - April 13, 2009, 05:28 PM
    @BMZ

    WE kafirs should be saying Inshallah and thanking muhhamad . Want to know the reason? ITs on account of his exceptional dumbness that he showed in quran we kafir always win the debates with muslims.Had it been anyone who had a bit of wisdom we would not have won!!!  SO muhhamad is our man and not yours!!!! inshallah prophet muhhamad is with the kafirs!!  Cheesy
  • Re: A Question to Ex-Muslims Only
     Reply #337 - April 13, 2009, 05:45 PM
    BMZ,

    You referred to the Holocaust as "alleged" at least twice. This means that you believe the Holocaust is, at least partially, fabricated. Please clarify your position. What are the real figures, and why do you oppose the word Holocaust?

    You seem unable to decide whom you hate more, Christians or Jews. You are such a stereotypically xenophobic Muslim.
    Islam: where idiots meet terrorists.
  • Re: A Question to Ex-Muslims Only
     Reply #338 - April 13, 2009, 06:36 PM
    Quote from: BMZ on April 13, 2009, 04:50 PM
    Quote from: charlesmartel on April 13, 2009, 02:03 PM
    Quote from: BMZ on April 13, 2009, 02:29 AM
    @ charleslemartel

    If I were to debate with a Christian friend about contradictions in the Bible, I would bring up
    a clear-cut contradiction. For example, I will present the following as a clear-cut and solid contradiction:

    Quote
    Mark 8:29"But what about you?" he asked, "Who do you say I am?"
    Peter answered, "You are the Christ."

    Luke 9:20"But what about you?" he asked. "Who do you say I am?"
          Peter answered, "The Christ of God."

    Matthew 16:20Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."


    This is a fine example to show a clear-cut contradiction in a scripture. This is just a note for your reading pleasure.

    BMZ 


    LOL. What happens to your contradiction-seeing faculties when it comes to Quran?

    A friendly advice: first resolve the contradictions SNB is bringing from Quran Cheesy


    Just posted. Can't you send a better guy from FFI? Looks like he has not even read one translation in English.
    If he had, he would have tried to find a clear-cut 'contradiction'.

    Even I, being the defender, have to teach the accuser.  Cheesy SNB did not even know that 2:193 is not a separate verse on it's own. It is part of a section comprising 2:190-2:194 and I can see that none at FFI knew about that.

    Good night
    BMZ


    What would you do with a better guy? Cheesy

    You can't even refute SNB!!

    But I would not blame you for this. You are trying to defend the indefensible; it is Quran (or Allah or Muhammad) which should take the blame and not you.

    You have my full sympathies with you.
    Islam is a funny religion which is misunderstood by its scholars and correctly understood by ordinary Muslims.
    Faith is keeping your eyes shut when looking at the world, and/or keeping your eyes open only for the beauty of the world.
  • Re: A Question to Ex-Muslims Only
     Reply #339 - April 13, 2009, 11:39 PM
    Quote from: charlesmartel on April 13, 2009, 06:36 PM
    Quote from: BMZ on April 13, 2009, 04:50 PM
    Quote from: charlesmartel on April 13, 2009, 02:03 PM
    Quote from: BMZ on April 13, 2009, 02:29 AM
    @ charleslemartel

    If I were to debate with a Christian friend about contradictions in the Bible, I would bring up
    a clear-cut contradiction. For example, I will present the following as a clear-cut and solid contradiction:

    Quote
    Mark 8:29"But what about you?" he asked, "Who do you say I am?"
    Peter answered, "You are the Christ."

    Luke 9:20"But what about you?" he asked. "Who do you say I am?"
          Peter answered, "The Christ of God."

    Matthew 16:20Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."


    This is a fine example to show a clear-cut contradiction in a scripture. This is just a note for your reading pleasure.

    BMZ 


    LOL. What happens to your contradiction-seeing faculties when it comes to Quran?

    A friendly advice: first resolve the contradictions SNB is bringing from Quran Cheesy


    Just posted. Can't you send a better guy from FFI? Looks like he has not even read one translation in English.
    If he had, he would have tried to find a clear-cut 'contradiction'.

    Even I, being the defender, have to teach the accuser.  Cheesy SNB did not even know that 2:193 is not a separate verse on it's own. It is part of a section comprising 2:190-2:194 and I can see that none at FFI knew about that.

    Good night
    BMZ


    What would you do with a better guy? Cheesy

    You can't even refute SNB!!

    But I would not blame you for this. You are trying to defend the indefensible; it is Quran (or Allah or Muhammad) which should take the blame and not you.

    You have my full sympathies with you.


    There is nothing to refute.  Cheesy SNB could not prove any contradiction. Beating around the bush means nothing. The guy does not understand a thing. You can see that he has no substance.

    Cheers
    BMZ
  • Re: A Question to Ex-Muslims Only
     Reply #340 - April 14, 2009, 12:03 AM
    @KhaliLF

    Quote from: KhaliLF
    SNB rightly asks some questions on the source BMZ uses to argue there was a specific context for certain verses. And see what BMZ has to say in answer:


    BMZ


    But I have yet to come across such an approved source in Islam. Or was it approved in the debate that BMZ can use 'BMZ' as source?

    For all that happened in Muhammad's life (As BMZ brought in his earlier post) BMZ has no source other than 'BMZ'. He says his thoughts are his source..! Amazing indeed. Are witnessing to the dawn of a new prophet called 'BMZ' in Islam?


    How silly of you, KhaliL

    Looks like both you and SNB lack comprehension. SNB had asked me a very silly question and wanted to know what was the source of the material that I wrote which he had emboldened.

    I had written that myself and those were my thoughts expressed. Hence, the reply "BMZ".

    I can't help if both of you cannot comprehend such a simple thing. Go back and read the post again and try to understand before you تقيا. Cheesy Hope you understand what I wrote! It is the one you do most 24 X 365.

    BMZ
  • Re: A Question to Ex-Muslims Only
     Reply #341 - April 14, 2009, 12:12 AM
    Quote from: Zaephon on April 13, 2009, 05:45 PM
    BMZ,

    You referred to the Holocaust as "alleged" at least twice. This means that you believe the Holocaust is, at least partially, fabricated. Please clarify your position. What are the real figures, and why do you oppose the word Holocaust?

    You seem unable to decide whom you hate more, Christians or Jews. You are such a stereotypically xenophobic Muslim.


    If I do not agree with you, it does not mean I hate you. Why do you think like that? Do you hate Muslims?

    There is no need to have a topic in the debate section. You can do right here:

    My first question:

    Give me the Jewish population figures in Europe before and during the German occupation in various countries.

    BMZ

    Edited to add: I dislike and despise the word, which was only used in the late fifties or early sixties because it has been exclusively reserved for the Jews killed by the German bastards, under Hitler's spell. If you can accept the same word for the two million killed by Pol Pot in Cambodian killing fields, millions killed in Africa and the killing of about two million Armenians by the Turks, I will accept the word.

    I can't accept this double standard of calling Genocide in other cases and reserving this alleged Holocaust only for the Jews.

    Would you agree with that? 

    BMZ
  • Re: A Question to Ex-Muslims Only
     Reply #342 - April 14, 2009, 12:20 AM
    Quote from: skynightblaze on April 13, 2009, 05:28 PM
    @BMZ

    WE kafirs should be saying Inshallah and thanking muhhamad . Want to know the reason? ITs on account of his exceptional dumbness that he showed in quran we kafir always win the debates with muslims.Had it been anyone who had a bit of wisdom we would not have won!!!  SO muhhamad is our man and not yours!!!! inshallah prophet muhhamad is with the kafirs!!  Cheesy


    What was that? Can you try to be coherent?  Cheesy

    BMZ
  • Re: A Question to Ex-Muslims Only
     Reply #343 - April 14, 2009, 06:16 AM
    Quote from: BMZ
    If I do not agree with you, it does not mean I hate you. Why do you think like that?

    I'm neither Christian nor Jewish, I was referring to your paranoid comments about the Pope. You seem to regurgitate a good deal of hateful rhetoric against Christians and Jews, I've noticed.

    Quote from: BMZ
    Give me the Jewish population figures in Europe before and during the German occupation in various countries.

    Back to square 1. You are the one challenging the Holocaust, it is up to you to provide the figures. You agreed to this before.

    Quote from: BMZ
    If you can accept the same word for the two million killed by Pol Pot in Cambodian killing fields, millions killed in Africa and the killing of about two million Armenians by the Turks, I will accept the word.

    The word "genocide" explains the mass-killings you refer to. There is nothing wrong or inaccurate about the word Holocaust. While it is true that the Jews were not the sole victims of the Holocaust, the entire genocidal campaign revolved around militant anti-Semitism. Thus, Shoah/Holocaust refers to one historical example of genocide, where the extermination of Jews was considered the ultimate goal of the campaign.

    The Armenian Genocide and the Rwandan Genocide are other two examples of historical genocides. There are many other examples, like the mass-killings of Hindus by Muslim conquerors, the genocide in Darfur, or the Indonesian occupation of Eastern Timor for example. Now, just as the mass-killings of Armenians are referred to as the Armenian Genocide, or the Great Catastrophe, the mass-killings of Jews are referred to as the Holocaust.   

    Quote from: BMZ
    I can't accept this double standard of calling Genocide in other cases and reserving this alleged Holocaust only for the Jews.

    Nobody is saying that the only genocide in human history happened to Jews.  Roll Eyes
    Islam: where idiots meet terrorists.
  • Re: A Question to Ex-Muslims Only
     Reply #344 - April 14, 2009, 07:15 AM
    Quote from: BMZ on April 14, 2009, 12:03 AM
    @KhaliLF

    Quote from: KhaliLF
    SNB rightly asks some questions on the source BMZ uses to argue there was a specific context for certain verses. And see what BMZ has to say in answer:


    BMZ


    But I have yet to come across such an approved source in Islam. Or was it approved in the debate that BMZ can use 'BMZ' as source?

    For all that happened in Muhammad's life (As BMZ brought in his earlier post) BMZ has no source other than 'BMZ'. He says his thoughts are his source..! Amazing indeed. Are witnessing to the dawn of a new prophet called 'BMZ' in Islam?


    How silly of you, KhaliL

    Looks like both you and SNB lack comprehension. SNB had asked me a very silly question and wanted to know what was the source of the material that I wrote which he had emboldened.

    I had written that myself and those were my thoughts expressed. Hence, the reply "BMZ".

    I can't help if both of you cannot comprehend such a simple thing. Go back and read the post again and try to understand before you تقيا. Cheesy Hope you understand what I wrote! It is the one you do most 24 X 365.

    BMZ



    Hello BMZ,

    Am I making any silly allegation? See from your post in the debate:

    Quote from: BMZ
    Muslims were under oppression and were being persecuted. They could do nothing as they were small in numbers. The persecution went on and when they had
    grown in size, only then they were told to fight and all conditions were made clear, which you have learned for the first time.

    So, 2:190-194 are instructions to fight those who had started persecution, torture, killing and fighting earlier during the infancy of Islam. The pagan Meccans had not given freedom of speech or freedom of worship to the prophet. Prophet declared that there was only One God, laying the foundation stone of Islam. Pagans start persecution and slaughter. Muslims are kicked out from their homes and they go into exile.

    They wanted to fight but the instruction came only when they had increased in numbers. Had only a few fought with the pagans in Mecca, Islam would have been finished during it's infancy. Thus 2:190-194, including your favourite 2:193 were clearly orders to fight a people who were truly oppressors. Thus those verses clearly instructed the Muslims to stand up and fight against those who were the real oppressors.


    = SNB emboldened the above part and asked you:

    Quote from: skynightblaze
    What is your source for the argument in bold? This is not found in quran so where do you get it from?


    = Your answer:

    Quote from: BMZ
    BMZ


    How does this work?

    You brought up some historical  accounts  without even bothering to check whether Quran supports them or not. SNB rightly asked for source since what you mentioned in your post are not found in Quran. When Quran is the only source you both parties agreed on; is it appropriate for you to project yourself as a source? When you bring from history, you need to authenticate it. Your thoughts serve as a source only if you are such a high authority in Islam.

    What is wrong with IsLame suggesting you should be addressed with an additional (pbuh)? After all it is your pomposity that earned you the tag.., (laughs...)

    I suggest you may please go through the posts again. This time be a little more attentive so that you can do without accusing me of lacking comprehension.
     
    PS: Apologies Zaephon if this disturbs the flow of your debate with BMZ. This is all from me if it is the case. 


    Regards
    KF
  • Re: A Question to Ex-Muslims Only
     Reply #345 - April 14, 2009, 07:59 AM
    Quote from: BMZ on April 14, 2009, 12:20 AM
    Quote from: skynightblaze on April 13, 2009, 05:28 PM
    @BMZ

    WE kafirs should be saying Inshallah and thanking muhhamad . Want to know the reason? ITs on account of his exceptional dumbness that he showed in quran we kafir always win the debates with muslims.Had it been anyone who had a bit of wisdom we would not have won!!!  SO muhhamad is our man and not yours!!!! inshallah prophet muhhamad is with the kafirs!!  Cheesy


    What was that? Can you try to be coherent?  Cheesy

    BMZ


    Why was Muhhamad so dumb?


  • Re: A Question to Ex-Muslims Only
     Reply #346 - April 14, 2009, 08:00 AM
    Quote from: KhaliLF on April 14, 2009, 07:15 AM
    Quote from: BMZ on April 14, 2009, 12:03 AM
    @KhaliLF

    Quote from: KhaliLF
    SNB rightly asks some questions on the source BMZ uses to argue there was a specific context for certain verses. And see what BMZ has to say in answer:


    BMZ


    But I have yet to come across such an approved source in Islam. Or was it approved in the debate that BMZ can use 'BMZ' as source?

    For all that happened in Muhammad's life (As BMZ brought in his earlier post) BMZ has no source other than 'BMZ'. He says his thoughts are his source..! Amazing indeed. Are witnessing to the dawn of a new prophet called 'BMZ' in Islam?


    How silly of you, KhaliL

    Looks like both you and SNB lack comprehension. SNB had asked me a very silly question and wanted to know what was the source of the material that I wrote which he had emboldened.

    I had written that myself and those were my thoughts expressed. Hence, the reply "BMZ".

    I can't help if both of you cannot comprehend such a simple thing. Go back and read the post again and try to understand before you تقيا. Cheesy Hope you understand what I wrote! It is the one you do most 24 X 365.

    BMZ



    Hello BMZ,

    Am I making any silly allegation? See from your post in the debate:

    Quote from: BMZ
    Muslims were under oppression and were being persecuted. They could do nothing as they were small in numbers. The persecution went on and when they had
    grown in size, only then they were told to fight and all conditions were made clear, which you have learned for the first time.

    So, 2:190-194 are instructions to fight those who had started persecution, torture, killing and fighting earlier during the infancy of Islam. The pagan Meccans had not given freedom of speech or freedom of worship to the prophet. Prophet declared that there was only One God, laying the foundation stone of Islam. Pagans start persecution and slaughter. Muslims are kicked out from their homes and they go into exile.

    They wanted to fight but the instruction came only when they had increased in numbers. Had only a few fought with the pagans in Mecca, Islam would have been finished during it's infancy. Thus 2:190-194, including your favourite 2:193 were clearly orders to fight a people who were truly oppressors. Thus those verses clearly instructed the Muslims to stand up and fight against those who were the real oppressors.


    = SNB emboldened the above part and asked you:

    Quote from: skynightblaze
    What is your source for the argument in bold? This is not found in quran so where do you get it from?


    = Your answer:

    Quote from: BMZ
    BMZ


    How does this work?

    You brought up some historical  accounts  without even bothering to check whether Quran supports them or not. SNB rightly asked for source since what you mentioned in your post are not found in Quran. When Quran is the only source you both parties agreed on; is it appropriate for you to project yourself as a source? When you bring from history, you need to authenticate it. Your thoughts serve as a source only if you are such a high authority in Islam.

    What is wrong with IsLame suggesting you should be addressed with an additional (pbuh)? After all it is your pomposity that earned you the tag.., (laughs...)

    I suggest you may please go through the posts again. This time be a little more attentive so that you can do without accusing me of lacking comprehension.
     
    PS: Apologies Zaephon if this disturbs the flow of your debate with BMZ. This is all from me if it is the case. 


    Regards
    KF



    It is still silly, KhaliL.  You continue to fail to understand and I must say both you and skynight failed to understand. It is a statement made by me during the debate. If I write a note or a comment to make a point, you cannot ask me to produce a source, because I am the source of that note.

    If I quote someone, then you have the right to ask me for a link or a reference. It is still a lack of comprehension on your part, skynightblaze included.

    For example, you wrote the above post and made some comments. Never mind if they do not make any sense but I am not entitled to ask you, "Who is your source or whose help did you get in writing that?" I know it is you who wrote.

    Since you are here, why not discuss Qur'aan in English and Arabic. Folks will enjoy it. You can bring your stuff here. What say you? I am sure you will feel at home.

    Cheers
    BMZ

     
  • Re: A Question to Ex-Muslims Only
     Reply #347 - April 14, 2009, 08:06 AM
    Quote from: skynightblaze on April 14, 2009, 07:59 AM
    Why was Muhhamad so dumb?


    Because he had dumber followers & could afford being dumb!

    In Quran 033.053, Allah tells guests to be circumspect in barging into Muhammad's house, only come when invited & leave immediately after eating, without lingering for gossip, because such stuff annoy Muhammad, but while Mo is shy about asking guests to leave, Allah isn't shy in telling them these stuff!  Tongue

    Any smart follower would realise that its extremely suspicious, to say the least,that the Creator of the Universe cares about the length of time guests spend in Mo's house, & is asking guests to leave as Muhammad is shy to tell them so himself, but Muhammad's followers still believed him! grin12

    Quran 033.053
    YUSUFALI: O ye who believe! Enter not the Prophet's houses,- until leave is given you,- for a meal, (and then) not (so early as) to wait for its preparation: but when ye are invited, enter; and when ye have taken your meal, disperse, without seeking familiar talk. Such (behaviour) annoys the Prophet: he is ashamed to dismiss you, but Allah is not ashamed (to tell you) the truth. And when ye ask (his ladies) for anything ye want, ask them from before a screen: that makes for greater purity for your hearts and for theirs. Nor is it right for you that ye should annoy Allah's Messenger, or that ye should marry his widows after him at any time. Truly such a thing is in Allah's sight an enormity.
    PICKTHAL: O Ye who believe! Enter not the dwellings of the Prophet for a meal without waiting for the proper time, unless permission be granted you. But if ye are invited, enter, and, when your meal is ended, then disperse. Linger not for conversation. Lo! that would cause annoyance to the Prophet, and he would be shy of (asking) you (to go); but Allah is not shy of the truth. And when ye ask of them (the wives of the Prophet) anything, ask it of them from behind a curtain. That is purer for your hearts and for their hearts. And it is not for you to cause annoyance to the messenger of Allah, nor that ye should ever marry his wives after him. Lo! that in Allah's sight would be an enormity.
    SHAKIR: O you who believe! do not enter the houses of the Prophet unless permission is given to you for a meal, not waiting for its cooking being finished-- but when you are invited, enter, and when you have taken the food, then disperse-- not seeking to listen to talk; surely this gives the Prophet trouble, but he forbears from you, and Allah does not forbear from the truth And when you ask of them any goods, ask of them from behind a curtain; this is purer for your hearts and (for) their hearts; and it does not behove you that you should give trouble to the Messenger of Allah, nor that you should marry his wives after him ever; surely this is grievous in the sight of Allah.
    World renowned historian Will Durant"...the Islamic conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precious good, whose delicate complex order and freedom can at any moment be overthrown..."
  • Re: A Question to Ex-Muslims Only
     Reply #348 - April 14, 2009, 08:07 AM
    Quote from: skynightblaze on April 14, 2009, 07:59 AM
    Quote from: BMZ on April 14, 2009, 12:20 AM
    Quote from: skynightblaze on April 13, 2009, 05:28 PM
    @BMZ

    WE kafirs should be saying Inshallah and thanking muhhamad . Want to know the reason? ITs on account of his exceptional dumbness that he showed in quran we kafir always win the debates with muslims.Had it been anyone who had a bit of wisdom we would not have won!!!  SO muhhamad is our man and not yours!!!! inshallah prophet muhhamad is with the kafirs!!  Cheesy


    What was that? Can you try to be coherent?  Cheesy

    BMZ


    Why was Muhhamad so dumb?





    What was that? Why can't you Indians  Cheesy write some sense and try to hold a proper conversation, instead of writing gibberish?  Cheesy

    Please note that I have not written "You Hindus".  Cheesy

    Cheers
    BMZ
  • Re: A Question to Ex-Muslims Only
     Reply #349 - April 14, 2009, 09:20 AM
    Quote from: BMZ
    It is still silly, KhaliL.  You continue to fail to understand and I must say both you and skynight failed to understand. It is a statement made by me during the debate. If I write a note or a comment to make a point, you cannot ask me to produce a source, because I am the source of that note.


    You are entertaining indeed; and that is what earned you prophet-hood much deservingly in this case. [laughs]

    Listen BMZ, if you make a statement like 'I was fond of orange juice but not anymore' that does not ask for any source and nobody will care. But see what you wrote here:

    Quote from: BMZ
    Muslims were under oppression and were being persecuted. They could do nothing as they were small in numbers. The persecution went  on and when they had  grown in size, only then they were told   to fight and all conditions were made clear, which you have learned for the first time.

    So, 2:190-194 are instructions to fight those who had started persecution, torture, killing and fighting earlier during the infancy of Islam. The pagan Meccans had not given  freedom of speech or freedom of worship to the prophet. Prophet declared that there was only One God, laying the foundation stone of Islam. Pagans start persecution and slaughter. Muslims are kicked out from their homes and they go into exile.


    Focus on the bolded brown   in your quote. You are narrating something that happened sometimes in the past.

    Source for this?

    I would ask because these are historical accounts. If you quote from history, you NEED to source it. Or what if I am going to make a statement perhaps contrary to what you made above? I will do it as:

    Quote
    The pagan Meccans were under oppression and were being persecuted. They could do nothing as they were small in numbers. Muslims persecuted them and only when Kuffar grown in size they were forced to fight.

     

    Would it be okay with you if I project myself as source for the above?

    Quote from: BMZ
    If I quote someone, then you have the right to ask me for a link or a reference. It is still a lack of comprehension on your part, skynightblaze included.

    For example, you wrote the above post and made some comments. Never mind if they do not make any sense but I am not entitled to ask you, "Who is your source or whose help did you get in writing that?" I know it is you who wrote.


    See above. I can not repeat everything ad nauseum.

    Quote from: BMZ
    Since you are here, why not discuss Qur'aan in English and Arabic. Folks will enjoy it. You can bring your stuff here. What say you? I am sure you will feel at home.



    Did you finish with SNB and Zaephon? SNB has one more to bring as he mentioned. Zaephon too is engaged with you at the moment. You mean you want to bypass both to engage with me in Arabic and English? [laughs]

    I would suggest you take a crash course in Logic before coming up to debate. 

    Quote from: BMZ
    Cheers
    BMZ


    Ditto..
    KF
  • Re: A Question to Ex-Muslims Only
     Reply #350 - April 14, 2009, 09:27 AM
    The notion of TRINITY has always intrigued me. Isn't it real hard for people to explain, reason out? Multiple makes sense. Plural makes sense. Singular makes sense. But where did this 3 come from? Am sure this subject has been debated all the time, but I haven't found a clear explanation yet.

    AG
  • Re: A Question to Ex-Muslims Only
     Reply #351 - April 14, 2009, 09:39 AM
    Quote from: KhaliLF on April 14, 2009, 09:20 AM

    I would ask because these are historical accounts. If you quote from history, you NEED to source it. Or what if I am going to make a statement perhaps contrary to what you made above? I will do it as:

    Quote
    The pagan Meccans were under oppression and were being persecuted. They could do nothing as they were small in numbers. Muslims persecuted them and only when Kuffar grown in size they were forced to fight.

     

    Would it be okay with you if I project myself as source for the above?



    BMZ doesn't accept any source he dislikes, so he even refuses Bukhari & Muslim hadiths as they narrate unpleasant facts.

    But he says stuff about persecution which isn't written in the Quran, which is a no win situation.

    If only the Quran is true, it is  contradictory & violent, as it says, "There is no compulsion..." & right after that says that others must be subjugated &\or killed.

    If both the Quran & hadiths are true, then BMZ can't just pick & choose what he likes-he gets all the unpleasant, violent & misogynist stuff-& all the grotesque stuff Muhammad is supposed to have said & done.

    Without hadiths, the Quran remains contradictory, misogynist & violent-with violence getting the upper hand via the doctrine of abrogation in the Quran itself, while with hadiths-the Quran may lose some of its contradictory nature, but it becomes far more mosigynistic, vicious & violent.  Tongue
    World renowned historian Will Durant"...the Islamic conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precious good, whose delicate complex order and freedom can at any moment be overthrown..."
  • Re: A Question to Ex-Muslims Only
     Reply #352 - April 14, 2009, 09:45 AM
    Quote from: AG on April 14, 2009, 09:27 AM
    The notion of TRINITY has always intrigued me. Isn't it real hard for people to explain, reason out? Multiple makes sense. Plural makes sense. Singular makes sense. But where did this 3 come from? Am sure this subject has been debated all the time, but I haven't found a clear explanation yet.

    AG



    Hi AG!

    If I've offended you, I'm genuinely sorry, so I won't go into Islam & Muhammad in this post again.  Smiley

    But I'm curious, why should three be hard to explain? Why is one any more plausible?Where did three come from? From the same place the ideas of multiple & one came from-human heads! Wink

    Google was founded by two people-Larry Page & Sergey Brin, Microsoft was founded by two-Bill Gates & Paul Allen, why is it impossible that the Universe was created by three folks working together?

    Maybe multiple makes most sense, because when we look around at any human creation, there are always multiple Creators-& great stuff are created by highly organized teams of thousands, three also makes sense, because such a monumental work does need more than one Creator, but it might be really too much for a Single God!  Wink

    So whats' the harm with a trio?  Huh?
    World renowned historian Will Durant"...the Islamic conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precious good, whose delicate complex order and freedom can at any moment be overthrown..."
  • Re: A Question to Ex-Muslims Only
     Reply #353 - April 14, 2009, 09:59 AM
    Quote from: AG on April 14, 2009, 09:27 AM
    The notion of TRINITY has always intrigued me. Isn't it real hard for people to explain, reason out? Multiple makes sense. Plural makes sense. Singular makes sense. But where did this 3 come from? Am sure this subject has been debated all the time, but I haven't found a clear explanation yet.

    AG



    Hello and Greetings, AG

    There are many ludicrous and ridiculous trinities. There is the Hindu trinity, Christian trinity, etc. Most trinitarians do not even know what the heck it is but they do try their best to defend it and that too, to no avail.

    If you are talking about the Christian trinity, which is the most incoherent and the most absurd trinity of 'em all, I would be glad to elaborate.

    Cheers
    BMZ
  • Re: A Question to Ex-Muslims Only
     Reply #354 - April 14, 2009, 10:04 AM
    Quote from: Rashna on April 14, 2009, 09:39 AM
    Quote from: KhaliLF on April 14, 2009, 09:20 AM

    I would ask because these are historical accounts. If you quote from history, you NEED to source it. Or what if I am going to make a statement perhaps contrary to what you made above? I will do it as:

    Quote
    The pagan Meccans were under oppression and were being persecuted. They could do nothing as they were small in numbers. Muslims persecuted them and only when Kuffar grown in size they were forced to fight.

     

    Would it be okay with you if I project myself as source for the above?



    BMZ doesn't accept any source he dislikes, so he even refuses Bukhari & Muslim hadiths as they narrate unpleasant facts.

    But he says stuff about persecution which isn't written in the Quran, which is a no win situation.

    If only the Quran is true, it is  contradictory & violent, as it says, "There is no compulsion..." & right after that says that others must be subjugated &\or killed.

    If both the Quran & hadiths are true, then BMZ can't just pick & choose what he likes-he gets all the unpleasant, violent & misogynist stuff-& all the grotesque stuff Muhammad is supposed to have said & done.

    Without hadiths, the Quran remains contradictory, misogynist & violent-with violence getting the upper hand via the doctrine of abrogation in the Quran itself, while with hadiths-the Quran may lose some of its contradictory nature, but it becomes far more mosigynistic, vicious & violent.  Tongue


    Hadith is junk and stuff like the Christian Bible, full of gossips, narrations from unreliable sources. All stories from men whom no one knows. Do you know Ibne Katadah?

    BMZ
  • Re: A Question to Ex-Muslims Only
     Reply #355 - April 14, 2009, 10:09 AM
    Quote from: KhaliLF on April 14, 2009, 09:20 AM
    Quote from: BMZ
    It is still silly, KhaliL.  You continue to fail to understand and I must say both you and skynight failed to understand. It is a statement made by me during the debate. If I write a note or a comment to make a point, you cannot ask me to produce a source, because I am the source of that note.


    You are entertaining indeed; and that is what earned you prophet-hood much deservingly in this case. [laughs]

    Listen BMZ, if you make a statement like 'I was fond of orange juice but not anymore' that does not ask for any source and nobody will care. But see what you wrote here:

    Quote from: BMZ
    Muslims were under oppression and were being persecuted. They could do nothing as they were small in numbers. The persecution went  on and when they had  grown in size, only then they were told   to fight and all conditions were made clear, which you have learned for the first time.

    So, 2:190-194 are instructions to fight those who had started persecution, torture, killing and fighting earlier during the infancy of Islam. The pagan Meccans had not given  freedom of speech or freedom of worship to the prophet. Prophet declared that there was only One God, laying the foundation stone of Islam. Pagans start persecution and slaughter. Muslims are kicked out from their homes and they go into exile.


    Focus on the bolded brown   in your quote. You are narrating something that happened sometimes in the past.

    Source for this?

    I would ask because these are historical accounts. If you quote from history, you NEED to source it. Or what if I am going to make a statement perhaps contrary to what you made above? I will do it as:

    Quote
    The pagan Meccans were under oppression and were being persecuted. They could do nothing as they were small in numbers. Muslims persecuted them and only when Kuffar grown in size they were forced to fight.

     

    Would it be okay with you if I project myself as source for the above?

    Quote from: BMZ
    If I quote someone, then you have the right to ask me for a link or a reference. It is still a lack of comprehension on your part, skynightblaze included.

    For example, you wrote the above post and made some comments. Never mind if they do not make any sense but I am not entitled to ask you, "Who is your source or whose help did you get in writing that?" I know it is you who wrote.


    See above. I can not repeat everything ad nauseum.

    Quote from: BMZ
    Since you are here, why not discuss Qur'aan in English and Arabic. Folks will enjoy it. You can bring your stuff here. What say you? I am sure you will feel at home.



    Did you finish with SNB and Zaephon? SNB has one more to bring as he mentioned. Zaephon too is engaged with you at the moment. You mean you want to bypass both to engage with me in Arabic and English? [laughs]

    I would suggest you take a crash course in Logic before coming up to debate. 

    Quote from: BMZ
    Cheers
    BMZ


    Ditto..
    KF


    Leave it at this, KhaliL. I have alread explained my concern. You guys are void of logic.

    Are you receptive to my idea of discussing Qur'aan here? You with your favorite topics, verses and me doing the grilling?

    It would be fun and very interesting.

    Cheers
    BMZ
  • Re: A Question to Ex-Muslims Only
     Reply #356 - April 14, 2009, 10:09 AM
    Quote from: AG on April 14, 2009, 09:27 AM
    The notion of TRINITY has always intrigued me. Isn't it real hard for people to explain, reason out?
    AG


    Not really, relgious people will attempt to justify anything for the sake of keeping their faith.  Its all nonsense in the end.
    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: A Question to Ex-Muslims Only
     Reply #357 - April 14, 2009, 10:11 AM
    Quote from: BMZ on April 14, 2009, 10:04 AM
    Hadith is junk and stuff like the Christian Bible, full of gossips, narrations from unreliable sources. All stories from men whom no one knows. Do you know Ibne Katadah?
    BMZ


    Well, then you can't write about any situation that happened during the Prophet's time without giving the sources, if you write about incidents without sourcing them-you become an Almighty God or a Prophet-who's able to look into the past!

    However, if you give sources, then those sources come from the hadiths! Then you have to accept all the sordid stuff in the authentic hadiths as well!

    Without the hadiths, the violence in the Quran becomes difficult to explain, & with hadiths-you get not only violence, but loads of absurd & unpleasant stuff as well!

    As I said, ita a no win situation!  Wink
    World renowned historian Will Durant"...the Islamic conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precious good, whose delicate complex order and freedom can at any moment be overthrown..."
  • Re: A Question to Ex-Muslims Only
     Reply #358 - April 14, 2009, 10:13 AM
    Good point - I doubt he has a logical answer..
    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: A Question to Ex-Muslims Only
     Reply #359 - April 14, 2009, 10:24 AM
    Quote from: BMZ on April 14, 2009, 10:04 AM
    Hadith is junk and stuff like the Christian Bible, full of gossips, narrations from unreliable sources. All stories from men whom no one knows. Do you know Ibne Katadah?
    BMZ

     
    Quote from: Surah an-Nahl, 16: 44
    We have revealed to you (Muhammad) the Reminder (the Qur'an), so that you (Muhammad) may explain clearly to men what is sent down to them.


    Tongue
    I chose to get circumcised at 17, don't tell me I never believed.
  • Previous page 1 ... 10 11 1213 14 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »