Now that we've completed discussion of any preposterous notion that the Gospel somehow became the exact opposite of what it had been in Muhammad's day, through your abject inability to explain why you vainly wish that the impossibility of scripture corruption after Muhammad were even a possibility, let's move on to exploring the terrorist that you follow and why. Fortunately Muhammadan books make it abundantly clear that Muhammad was one of the most consummate, as well as conveniently self-admitted, terrorists in the history of mankind.
Surah 8:12 I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them
And Muhammad on his alter-ego "Allah":
Surah 33:26 Allah took down the People of the Scripture Book. He cast terror into their hearts.
Of course it wasn't Muhammad's alter-ego "Allah" that cast terror into their hearts, but Muhammad himself.
Please tell us why you reject the 1600 year record of Yahweh to mankind and the love of the Prince of Peace/Passover Lamb of God as revealed in that record, to follow a stand-alone, counter-gospel, 7th-century self-admitted terrorist?
(indeed through your blasphemy against Him even repeatedly attempted to falsely accuse Him as being a "warlord" (http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=4714.msg18108#msg18108) in efforts to bring Him down to Muhammad's murderous reprobate level)
After you reply I will split this post off as a separate subject, since you listed terrorism as one of the things you would address, in your email to me.
Quote from: PeteWaldo on August 19, 2015, 06:58:11 AM
Now that we've completed discussion of any preposterous notion that the Gospel somehow became the exact opposite of what it had been in Muhammad's day, through your abject inability to explain why you vainly wish that the impossibility of scripture corruption after Muhammad were even a possibility, let's move on to exploring the terrorist that you follow and why. Fortunately Muhammadan books make it abundantly clear that Muhammad was one of the most consummate, as well as conveniently self-admitted, terrorists in the history of mankind.
Surah 8:12 I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them
And Muhammad on his alter-ego "Allah":
Surah 33:26 Allah took down the People of the Scripture Book. He cast terror into their hearts.
Of course it wasn't Muhammad's alter-ego "Allah" that cast terror into their hearts, but Muhammad himself.
Please tell us why you reject the 1600 year record of Yahweh to mankind and the love of the Prince of Peace/Passover Lamb of God as revealed in that record, to follow a stand-alone, counter-gospel, 7th-century self-admitted terrorist?
(indeed through your blasphemy against Him even repeatedly attempted to falsely accuse Him as being a "warlord" (http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=4714.msg18108#msg18108) in efforts to bring Him down to Muhammad's murderous reprobate level)
After you reply I will split this post off as a separate subject, since you listed terrorism as one of the things you would address, in your email to me.
Response: You have no evidence that the Bible was uniformly the same, and we know it was not because there are over 24, 000 manuscripts of the Bible and no two are identical. Your own Christian scholars said Mark 16:9-20 and 1 John 5:7 are false. In fact, these verses and others were thrown out in the REVISED standard version in 1952, which claims to go back to the oldest manuscripts. Then 32 scholars of the highest eminence backed by 50 cooperating denominations claimed the Bible had serious defects and they revised it AGAIN, except this time they put the verses that were thrown out back in it again because they were pressured to do so.
So the evidence is clear your Bible is false and was NOT uniformly the same, and your Christian scholars admit to it.
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 07:40:59 AM
Quote from: PeteWaldo on August 19, 2015, 06:58:11 AM
Now that we've completed discussion of any preposterous notion that the Gospel somehow became the exact opposite of what it had been in Muhammad's day, through your abject inability to explain why you vainly wish that the impossibility of scripture corruption after Muhammad were even a possibility, let's move on to exploring the terrorist that you follow and why. Fortunately Muhammadan books make it abundantly clear that Muhammad was one of the most consummate, as well as conveniently self-admitted, terrorists in the history of mankind.
Surah 8:12 I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them
And Muhammad on his alter-ego "Allah":
Surah 33:26 Allah took down the People of the Scripture Book. He cast terror into their hearts.
Of course it wasn't Muhammad's alter-ego "Allah" that cast terror into their hearts, but Muhammad himself.
Please tell us why you reject the 1600 year record of Yahweh to mankind and the love of the Prince of Peace/Passover Lamb of God as revealed in that record, to follow a stand-alone, counter-gospel, 7th-century self-admitted terrorist?
(indeed through your blasphemy against Him even repeatedly attempted to falsely accuse Him as being a "warlord" (http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=4714.msg18108#msg18108) in efforts to bring Him down to Muhammad's murderous reprobate level)
After you reply I will split this post off as a separate subject, since you listed terrorism as one of the things you would address, in your email to me.
Response: You have no evidence that the Bible was uniformly the same, and we know it was not because there are over 24, 000 manuscripts of the Bible and no two are identical. Your own Christian scholars said Mark 16:9-20 and 1 John 5:7 are false. In fact, these verses and others were thrown out in the REVISED standard version in 1952, which claims to go back to the oldest manuscripts. Then 32 scholars of the highest eminence backed by 50 cooperating denominations claimed the Bible had serious defects and they revised it AGAIN, except this time they put the verses that were thrown out back in it again because they were pressured to do so.
So the evidence is clear your Bible is false and was NOT uniformly the same, and your Christian scholars admit to it.
How does that reply even in small part, to the subject of terrorism that you quoted?
Do you see why we had to institute forum rules?
I will split this topic off, and then this time why don't you actually try to offer a substantive reply, to what you quote?
Quote from: PeteWaldo on August 19, 2015, 08:01:23 AM
How does that reply even in small part, to the subject of terrorism that you quoted?
Do you see why we had to institute forum rules?
I will split this topic off, and then this time why don't you actually try to offer a substantive reply, to what you quote?
Response: It wasn't in response to that. If you stop changing subjects in threads and chopping them up then perhaps you will not have difficulty.
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 07:40:59 AM
You have no evidence that the Bible was uniformly the same, and we know it was not because there are over 24, 000 manuscripts of the Bible and no two are identical.
That argument TRIES to imply that, because there are so many variants (over 150,000 to be precise), it is impossible to know what was originally being taught.
What you FAIL to share though is that nearly ALL variants are minor... a different letter, different word order, etc. For example:
Manuscript #1: In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.
Manuscript #2: In the beginning, God created the earth and the heavens.
Manuscript #3: At the beginning, God made the heaven_ and the earth.
Manuscript #4: In the beginning, Jesus created the heavens and the earth.
Manuscript #5: In the beginning, God created the sky and the earth.
Now, repeat this process on this passage for tens/hundreds/thousands of manuscripts, realizing that they all say essentially the same thing, and 85% or more of them are
nearly identical: In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.
You soon realize that the argument about "different manuscripts" is a tempest in a teapot. In fact, there is no tempest, nor is there a teapot. It is fluff, mist, a cloud without rain.
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 07:40:59 AM
Your own Christian scholars said Mark 16:9-20 and 1 John 5:7 are false. In fact, these verses and others were thrown out in the REVISED standard version in 1952, which claims to go back to the oldest manuscripts.
And?
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 07:40:59 AM
Then 32 scholars of the highest eminence backed by 50 cooperating denominations claimed the Bible had serious defects and they revised it AGAIN, except this time they put the verses that were thrown out back in it again because they were pressured to do so.
And Islam has not suffered the folly of "scholars"? Just look at Shiite and Sunni divisions that date all the way back to the time (nearly) of Muhammad. Why would you thrust "scholars" upon what I believe when you would NEVER dare do the same to yourself regarding the obvious scholarly divisions within Islam?
The issue isn't about what "scholars" say, rather the issue
is the Gospel.
Now, what about Muhammad's terrorism?
Quote from: ExMilitary on August 19, 2015, 11:34:00 AM
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 07:40:59 AM
You have no evidence that the Bible was uniformly the same, and we know it was not because there are over 24, 000 manuscripts of the Bible and no two are identical.
That argument TRIES to imply that, because there are so many variants (over 150,000 to be precise), it is impossible to know what was originally being taught.
What you FAIL to share though is that nearly ALL variants are minor... a different letter, different word order, etc. For example:
Manuscript #1: In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.
Manuscript #2: In the beginning, God created the earth and the heavens.
Manuscript #3: At the beginning, God made the heaven_ and the earth.
Manuscript #4: In the beginning, Jesus created the heavens and the earth.
Manuscript #5: In the beginning, God created the sky and the earth.
Now, repeat this process on this passage for tens/hundreds/thousands of manuscripts, realizing that they all say essentially the same thing, and 85% or more of them are nearly identical: In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.
You soon realize that the argument about "different manuscripts" is a tempest in a teapot. In fact, there is no tempest, nor is there a teapot. It is fluff, mist, a cloud without rain.
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 07:40:59 AM
Your own Christian scholars said Mark 16:9-20 and 1 John 5:7 are false. In fact, these verses and others were thrown out in the REVISED standard version in 1952, which claims to go back to the oldest manuscripts.
And?
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 07:40:59 AM
Then 32 scholars of the highest eminence backed by 50 cooperating denominations claimed the Bible had serious defects and they revised it AGAIN, except this time they put the verses that were thrown out back in it again because they were pressured to do so.
And Islam has not suffered the folly of "scholars"? Just look at Shiite and Sunni divisions that date all the way back to the time (nearly) of Muhammad. Why would you thrust "scholars" upon what I believe when you would NEVER dare do the same to yourself regarding the obvious scholarly divisions within Islam?
The issue isn't about what "scholars" say, rather the issue is the Gospel.
Now, what about Muhammad's terrorism?
Response: To the contrary, what you just confirmed is that no two are identical. So regardless as to whether the variant is major or minor, they still are not consistent. Furthermore, which variant was in the original? You do not know because you do not know what the original looks like. So yes it is impossible to know what was originally stated because you have no clue which variant was the original one.
The Qur'an on the other hand has no corruption, and was preserved by the companions of the Prophet which can be verified from a reliable chain of transmission.
As for terrorism, Muhammad (saw) never committed terrorism.
So you have no clue
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 09:17:27 AM
Quote from: PeteWaldo on August 19, 2015, 08:01:23 AM
How does that reply even in small part, to the subject of terrorism that you quoted?
Do you see why we had to institute forum rules?
I will split this topic off, and then this time why don't you actually try to offer a substantive reply, to what you quote?
Response: It wasn't in response to that. If you stop changing subjects in threads and chopping them up then perhaps you will not have difficulty.
I started the next subject because we had exhausted the first. The fact is it would have been a physical impossibile to change tens of thousands of copies of the gospel in all of those languages, that had been read and followed all over the known world, to become the exact opposite of what they had been so many centuries later.
Just as you tacitly admitted through your dumbfounded absence of an explanation for that preposterous impossibility you suggested.
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=4714.msg18120#msg18120
Since you do not, cannot, and never will have an explanation as to how that would have been accomplished, that subject is complete. Either explain, or let it go.
The actual answer is that Muhammad dithered on in his earlier Mecca drivel, that he obviously later on regretted blundering so.
So please respond to the rest of that post regarding this new subject of terrorism.
Quote from: PeteWaldo on August 19, 2015, 12:40:44 PM
I started the next subject because we had exhausted the first. The fact is it would have been a physical impossibile to change tens of thousands of copies of the gospel in all of those languages, that had been read and followed all over the known world, to become the exact opposite of what they had been so many centuries later.
Just as you tacitly admitted through your dumbfounded absence of an explanation for that preposterous impossibility you suggested.
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=4714.msg18120#msg18120
Since you do not, cannot, and never will have an explanation as to how that would have been accomplished, that subject is complete. Either explain, or let it go.
The actual answer is that Muhammad dithered on in his earlier Mecca drivel, that he obviously later on regretted blundering so.
So please respond to the rest of that post regarding this new subject of terrorism.
Response: The text was never preserved from the start, which is proven by the fact that there are 24,000 manuscripts and no two are identical. So it is not a case of changing thousands of copies because it was corrupted early on before there were thousands. Your point remains invalid.
As for terrorism, the Qur'an is clear that it is prohibited to fight those who incline to peace (8:61). So the claim of terrorism is invalid.
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 12:18:12 PM
Response: To the contrary, what you just confirmed is that no two are identical. So regardless as to whether the variant is major or minor, they still are not consistent. Furthermore, which variant was in the original? You do not know because you do not know what the original looks like. So yes it is impossible to know what was originally stated because you have no clue which variant was the original one.
The Qur'an on the other hand has no corruption, and was preserved by the companions of the Prophet which can be verified from a reliable chain of transmission.
Finally, if we understand correctly the following verse of Suratul-Hijr (xv. 90-91): 'As we sent down upon (punished) the dividers (of the Scripture?) who broke up the Koran into parts,' we are tempted to state that
even when the Prophet was alive, some changes were noticed in the recital of certain verses of his sacred book. There is nothing very surprising in this
fact, since Muhammad could not read or write, and
was at the mercy of friends for the writing of his revelations, or, more frequently, of some mercenary amanuenses.†(Mingana, "Three Ancient Korans", The Origins of the Koran â€" Classic Essays on Islam's Holy Book, edited by Ibn Warraq [Prometheus Books, Amherst NY, 1998], p. 84; bold emphasis ours)
Doesn't sound reliable to me. In fact if you find 2 different versions of a revelation, which one is correct?
You have 2 choices, 1. The "chain of transmission" (as you call it) was corrupt or, 2. Muhammad couldn't remember his own revelations.
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 12:55:14 PM
Quote from: PeteWaldo on August 19, 2015, 12:40:44 PM
I started the next subject because we had exhausted the first. The fact is it would have been a physical impossibile to change tens of thousands of copies of the gospel in all of those languages, that had been read and followed all over the known world, to become the exact opposite of what they had been so many centuries later.
Just as you tacitly admitted through your dumbfounded absence of an explanation for that preposterous impossibility you suggested.
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=4714.msg18120#msg18120
Since you do not, cannot, and never will have an explanation as to how that would have been accomplished, that subject is complete. Either explain, or let it go.
The actual answer is that Muhammad dithered on in his earlier Mecca drivel, that he obviously later on regretted blundering so.
So please respond to the rest of that post regarding this new subject of terrorism.
Response: The text was never preserved from the start, which is proven by the fact that there are 24,000 manuscripts and no two are identical. So it is not a case of changing thousands of copies because it was corrupted early on before there were thousands. Your point remains invalid.
As for terrorism, the Qur'an is clear that it is prohibited to fight those who incline to peace (8:61). So the claim of terrorism is invalid.
That's pretty entertaining. I suppose next you'll be pulling the ole "no compulsion" rabbit out of the hat. Unfortunately the verse you cite was among Muhammad's earlier Mecca drivel that he later regretted dithering on with.
Here is one of the later substituting verses:
Surah 9.111 Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they
fight in His cause, and slay and are slain:
a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and
the Qur'an: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah. then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme.
Of course that's a filthy lie regarding the Gospel binding Christians to fight and slay, but it is indeed binding on Muhammad's non-hypocrite, true, orthodox followers.
As further confirmed by the Hadith:
Bukhari, V1 B2 #24 Narrated Ibn 'Umar: Allah's Apostle said: "
I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle, and offer the prayers perfectly and give the obligatory charity, so if they perform a that, then they save their lives an property from me except for Islamic laws and then their reckoning (accounts) will be done by Allah."
Of course it would be sheer blasphemy against our great God for a Christian or Jew to testify to that.
You see my friend, your argument isn't with us, but with true fundamental orthodox followers of Muhammad, like the Islamic scholar Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, as further confirmed by 1400 years of imperialistic slaughter, female prisoner rape, thievery and subjugation of non-Muslims to Muhammad's followers.
Quote from: ExMilitary on August 19, 2015, 01:05:09 PM
Finally, if we understand correctly the following verse of Suratul-Hijr (xv. 90-91): 'As we sent down upon (punished) the dividers (of the Scripture?) who broke up the Koran into parts,' we are tempted to state that even when the Prophet was alive, some changes were noticed in the recital of certain verses of his sacred book. There is nothing very surprising in this fact, since Muhammad could not read or write, and was at the mercy of friends for the writing of his revelations, or, more frequently, of some mercenary amanuenses.†(Mingana, "Three Ancient Korans", The Origins of the Koran â€" Classic Essays on Islam's Holy Book, edited by Ibn Warraq [Prometheus Books, Amherst NY, 1998], p. 84; bold emphasis ours)
Doesn't sound reliable to me. In fact if you find 2 different versions of a revelation, which one is correct?
You have 2 choices, 1. The "chain of transmission" (as you call it) was corrupt or, 2. Muhammad couldn't remember his own revelations.
Response: The Qur'an also says it is protected from corruption (15:9). So it is very reliable. Nor can you find any error or indecency in the Qur'an or produce a chapter like it as prove that it is human-made.
So you have two choices. 1. Accept the Qur'an is the true word of Allah or 2. deny the Truth and be punished in the Hereafter.
Quote from: PeteWaldo on August 19, 2015, 01:21:31 PM
That's pretty entertaining. I suppose next you'll be pulling the ole "no compulsion" rabbit out of the hat. Unfortunately the verse you cite was among Muhammad's earlier Mecca drivel that he later regretted dithering on with.
Here is one of the later substituting verses:
Surah 9.111 Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Qur'an: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah. then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme.
Of course that's a filthy lie regarding the Gospel binding Christians to fight and slay, but it is indeed binding on Muhammad's non-hypocrite, true, orthodox followers.
As further confirmed by the Hadith:
Bukhari, V1 B2 #24 Narrated Ibn 'Umar: Allah's Apostle said: "I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle, and offer the prayers perfectly and give the obligatory charity, so if they perform a that, then they save their lives an property from me except for Islamic laws and then their reckoning (accounts) will be done by Allah."
Of course it would be sheer blasphemy against our great God for a Christian or Jew to testify to that.
You see my friend, your argument isn't with us, but with true fundamental orthodox followers of Muhammad, like the Islamic scholar Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, as further confirmed by 1400 years of imperialistic slaughter, female prisoner rape, thievery and subjugation of non-Muslims to Muhammad's followers.
Response: The classic "abrogation" argument. the same ole argument that Christians like to use. The sad part is that you are about to be exposed with your own argument. For in order to claim the verse is abrogated, that means Muhammad told the
truth. Thus the Qur'an is
TRUE.
Yet you deny the Qur'an is true, thus your argument of abrogation is false. Debunked by your own logic.
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 01:35:10 PM
Quote from: PeteWaldo on August 19, 2015, 01:21:31 PM
That's pretty entertaining. I suppose next you'll be pulling the ole "no compulsion" rabbit out of the hat. Unfortunately the verse you cite was among Muhammad's earlier Mecca drivel that he later regretted dithering on with.
Here is one of the later substituting verses:
Surah 9.111 Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Qur'an: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah. then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme.
Of course that's a filthy lie regarding the Gospel binding Christians to fight and slay, but it is indeed binding on Muhammad's non-hypocrite, true, orthodox followers.
As further confirmed by the Hadith:
Bukhari, V1 B2 #24 Narrated Ibn 'Umar: Allah's Apostle said: "I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle, and offer the prayers perfectly and give the obligatory charity, so if they perform a that, then they save their lives an property from me except for Islamic laws and then their reckoning (accounts) will be done by Allah."
Of course it would be sheer blasphemy against our great God for a Christian or Jew to testify to that.
You see my friend, your argument isn't with us, but with true fundamental orthodox followers of Muhammad, like the Islamic scholar Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, as further confirmed by 1400 years of imperialistic slaughter, female prisoner rape, thievery and subjugation of non-Muslims to Muhammad's followers.
Response: The classic "abrogation" argument. the same ole argument that Christians like to use. The sad part is that you are about to be exposed with your own argument. For in order to claim the verse is abrogated, that means Muhammad told the truth. Thus the Qur'an is TRUE.
Muslims indeed believe the quran is true. That is hundreds of millions of them believe it is Islam's job to rule the world. Why so many understand that to fight and slay as binding on them in the Quran. Of course the apostate hypocrites were afraid to, both in Muhammad's day, as well as throughout the next 1400 years.
Surah 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.
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 01:35:10 PMYet you deny the Qur'an is true, thus your argument of abrogation is false. Debunked by your own logic.
Well that's right. Muhammad's doctrine of substitution does not relate to me, because Christians and Jews know the Quran is filled with satanic lies, from the father of lies himself.
However Muslims do indeed believe the Quran is truth, so the doctrine of substitution is how sort out inoperative verses like the more peaceful drivel you posted. The rest of mankind are Islam's victims, but not as much as the poor souls that are filled with the spirit of antichrist by following Muhammad alone.
Quote from: PeteWaldo on August 19, 2015, 01:58:00 PM
Muslims indeed believe the quran is true. That is hundreds of millions of them believe it is Islam's job to rule the world. Why so many understand that to fight and slay as binding on them in the Quran. Of course the apostate hypocrites were afraid to, both in Muhammad's day, as well as throughout the next 1400 years.
Surah 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.
Well that's right. Muhammad's doctrine of substitution does not relate to me, because I know the Quran is filled with satanic lies, from the father of lies himself.
However Muslims do indeed believe the Quran is truth, so the doctrine of substitution is how sort out inoperative verses like the more peaceful drivel you posted. The rest of mankind are their victims.
Response: Yet is YOU who says the verse of abrogation says the verse in the Qur'an is cancelled. That means according to your logic, Muhammad is truthful since you claim he truly said those words, which means he is also truthful when he says he is a Prophet. Yet you deny he is a Prophet, therefore, your logic of abrogation fails.
Debunked by your own logic.
Thus it is clear that Islam is peaceful as proven by the fact that there is no compulsion in religion (2:256), and it is prohibited to fight those who incline to peace (8:61).
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 02:02:52 PM
Quote from: PeteWaldo on August 19, 2015, 01:58:00 PM
Muslims indeed believe the quran is true. That is hundreds of millions of them believe it is Islam's job to rule the world. Why so many understand that to fight and slay as binding on them in the Quran. Of course the apostate hypocrites were afraid to, both in Muhammad's day, as well as throughout the next 1400 years.
Surah 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.
Well that's right. Muhammad's doctrine of substitution does not relate to me, because I know the Quran is filled with satanic lies, from the father of lies himself.
However Muslims do indeed believe the Quran is truth, so the doctrine of substitution is how sort out inoperative verses like the more peaceful drivel you posted. The rest of mankind are their victims.
Response: Yet is YOU who says the verse of abrogation says the verse in the Qur'an is cancelled. That means according to your logic, Muhammad is truthful since you claim he truly said those words, which means he is also truthful when he says he is a Prophet. Yet you deny he is a Prophet, therefore, your logic of abrogation fails.
Debunked by your own logic.
Thus it is clear that Islam is peaceful as proven by the fact that there is no compulsion in religion (2:256), and it is prohibited to fight those who incline to peace (8:61).
Did Muhammad exist? Yes, very likely. Did he speak? Yes, very likely. Does the Quran contain his words? Yes, very likely. Do these facts MAKE those words true? Um... no.
To come to the conclusion that |someone saying Muhammad existed and spoke = they are affirming what he said is true| is a mind-boggling lack of logic and leap of blindness.
Quote from: ExMilitary on August 19, 2015, 02:29:11 PM
Did Muhammad exist? Yes, very likely. Did he speak? Yes, very likely. Does the Quran contain his words? Yes, very likely. Do these facts MAKE those words true? Um... no.
To come to the conclusion that |someone saying Muhammad existed and spoke = they are affirming what he said is true| is a mind-boggling lack of logic and leap of blindness.
Response: And what is even more flawed in logic is to say that the words of Muhammad regarding abrogation are true, which makes him trustworthy according to your logic. Then say you do not believe his other sayings regarding he is a Prophet because it is not truthful. That is a contradiction in logic.
Your inability to see that only further supports the delusion in your position and fails validate the argument of abrogation. Debunked as usual. Try again.
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 02:02:52 PM
Quote from: PeteWaldo on August 19, 2015, 01:58:00 PM
Muslims indeed believe the quran is true. That is hundreds of millions of them believe it is Islam's job to rule the world. Why so many understand that to fight and slay as binding on them in the Quran. Of course the apostate hypocrites were afraid to, both in Muhammad's day, as well as throughout the next 1400 years.
Surah 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.
Well that's right. Muhammad's doctrine of substitution does not relate to me, because I know the Quran is filled with satanic lies, from the father of lies himself.
However Muslims do indeed believe the Quran is truth, so the doctrine of substitution is how sort out inoperative verses like the more peaceful drivel you posted. The rest of mankind are their victims.
Response: Yet is YOU who says the verse of abrogation says the verse in the Qur'an is cancelled. That means according to your logic, Muhammad is truthful ......
No, it means that Muhammadans believe it is truthful. It has nothing to do with logic.
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 02:02:52 PM...... since you claim he truly said those words, .........
What matters is what Muhammadans who follow him believe. And orthodox Muslims know those early more peaceful suras that you cite, are thrown out in favor of Muhammad's later, violent verses, that call his followers to "fight and slay" others as "binding" on them "in the Quran".
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 02:02:52 PM...... which means he is also truthful when he says he is a Prophet.
The Quran's lies are of no significance to anyone outside of Muhammadanism
except, as they incite Muhammad's true orthodox followers, into their reprobate murderous behavior against the rest of us.
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 02:02:52 PMYet you deny he is a Prophet, therefore, your logic of abrogation fails.
Debunked by your own logic.
Thus it is clear that Islam is peaceful as proven by the fact that there is no compulsion in religion (2:256), and it is prohibited to fight those who incline to peace (8:61).
Gwaffaw!!!!!!
Like 800 years of Islamic genocide perpetrated against Hindus in India!
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=4712.0
Like the Armenian genocide.
Like Muhammad's beheading of the innocent, peaceful, faithful Jewish farm boys of the Banu Qurayza and rape of their little sisters, mothers and grandmothers.
http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/jesus_or_muhammad.htm#jesus_was_crucified
Let alone the reciprocal murder of Sunnis and Shiites.
And yes I do believe Islam's books when they detail the purely reprobate behavior of Muhammad. Like he and his boys rape of captive women:
Bukhari:V5B59N459 Narrated Ibn Muhairiz: I entered the Mosque and saw Abu Said Al-Khudri and sat beside him and asked him about Al-Azl (i.e. coitus interruptus). Abu Said said, "We went out with Allah's Apostle for the Ghazwa of Banu Al-Mustaliq and we received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus."
Bukhari B#62, #137 Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: We got female captives in the war booty and we used to do coitus interruptus with them. So we asked Allah's Apostle about it and he said, "Do you really do that?" repeating the question thrice, "There is no soul that is destined to exist but will come into existence, till the Day of Resurrection."
Indeed most everything that demonstrates the pure evil of Muhammad and his followers is believable, because they follow Satan himself.
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 02:40:39 PM
Quote from: ExMilitary on August 19, 2015, 02:29:11 PM
Did Muhammad exist? Yes, very likely. Did he speak? Yes, very likely. Does the Quran contain his words? Yes, very likely. Do these facts MAKE those words true? Um... no.
To come to the conclusion that |someone saying Muhammad existed and spoke = they are affirming what he said is true| is a mind-boggling lack of logic and leap of blindness.
Response: And what is even more flawed in logic is to say that the words of Muhammad regarding abrogation are true, which makes him trustworthy according to your logic. Then say you do not believe his other sayings regarding he is a Prophet because it is not truthful. That is a contradiction in logic.
Not at all. I don't doubt that many of those things that demonstrate the pure evil of Islam, are true, because Muhammad and his followers are antichrists.
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 02:40:39 PM
Your inability to see that only further supports the delusion in your position and fails validate the argument of abrogation. Debunked as usual. Try again.
Quote from: PeteWaldo on August 19, 2015, 03:10:21 PM
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 02:02:52 PM
Quote from: PeteWaldo on August 19, 2015, 01:58:00 PM
Muslims indeed believe the quran is true. That is hundreds of millions of them believe it is Islam's job to rule the world. Why so many understand that to fight and slay as binding on them in the Quran. Of course the apostate hypocrites were afraid to, both in Muhammad's day, as well as throughout the next 1400 years.
Surah 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.
Well that's right. Muhammad's doctrine of substitution does not relate to me, because I know the Quran is filled with satanic lies, from the father of lies himself.
However Muslims do indeed believe the Quran is truth, so the doctrine of substitution is how sort out inoperative verses like the more peaceful drivel you posted. The rest of mankind are their victims.
Response: Yet is YOU who says the verse of abrogation says the verse in the Qur'an is cancelled. That means according to your logic, Muhammad is truthful ......
No, it means that Muhammadans believe it is truthful. It has nothing to do with logic.
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 02:02:52 PM...... since you claim he truly said those words, .........
What matters is what Muhammadans who follow him believe. And orthodox Muslims know those early more peaceful suras that you cite, are thrown out in favor of Muhammad's later, violent verses, that call his followers to "fight and slay" others as "binding" on them "in the Quran".
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 02:02:52 PM...... which means he is also truthful when he says he is a Prophet.
The Quran's lies are of no significance to anyone outside of Muhammadanism except, as they incite Muhammad's true orthodox followers, into their reprobate murderous behavior against the rest of us.
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 02:02:52 PMYet you deny he is a Prophet, therefore, your logic of abrogation fails.
Debunked by your own logic.
Thus it is clear that Islam is peaceful as proven by the fact that there is no compulsion in religion (2:256), and it is prohibited to fight those who incline to peace (8:61).
Gwaffaw!!!!!!
Like 800 years of Islamic genocide perpetrated against Hindus in India!
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=4712.0
Like the Armenian genocide.
Like Muhammad's beheading of the innocent, peaceful, faithful Jewish farm boys of the Banu Qurayza and rape of their little sisters, mothers and grandmothers.
http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/jesus_or_muhammad.htm#jesus_was_crucified
Let alone the reciprocal murder of Sunnis and Shiites.
And yes I do believe Islam's books when they detail the purely reprobate behavior of Muhammad. Like he and his boys rape of captive women:
Bukhari:V5B59N459 Narrated Ibn Muhairiz: I entered the Mosque and saw Abu Said Al-Khudri and sat beside him and asked him about Al-Azl (i.e. coitus interruptus). Abu Said said, "We went out with Allah's Apostle for the Ghazwa of Banu Al-Mustaliq and we received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus."
Bukhari B#62, #137 Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: We got female captives in the war booty and we used to do coitus interruptus with them. So we asked Allah's Apostle about it and he said, "Do you really do that?" repeating the question thrice, "There is no soul that is destined to exist but will come into existence, till the Day of Resurrection."
Indeed most everything that demonstrates the pure evil of Muhammad and his followers is believable, because they follow Satan himself.
Response: You made the claim that it is true that Muhammad says the verse is abrogated, which means that your logic says Muhammad spoke the truth. Yet you deny him when he says he is a Prophet, which makes him untrue. Thus your argument for abrogation is also untrue according to your flawed logic. Debunked as usual. Try again.
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 04:09:11 PM
Quote from: PeteWaldo on August 19, 2015, 03:10:21 PM
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 02:02:52 PM
Quote from: PeteWaldo on August 19, 2015, 01:58:00 PM
Muslims indeed believe the quran is true. That is hundreds of millions of them believe it is Islam's job to rule the world. Why so many understand that to fight and slay as binding on them in the Quran. Of course the apostate hypocrites were afraid to, both in Muhammad's day, as well as throughout the next 1400 years.
Surah 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.
Well that's right. Muhammad's doctrine of substitution does not relate to me, because I know the Quran is filled with satanic lies, from the father of lies himself.
However Muslims do indeed believe the Quran is truth, so the doctrine of substitution is how sort out inoperative verses like the more peaceful drivel you posted. The rest of mankind are their victims.
Response: Yet is YOU who says the verse of abrogation says the verse in the Qur'an is cancelled. That means according to your logic, Muhammad is truthful ......
No, it means that Muhammadans believe it is truthful. It has nothing to do with logic.
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 02:02:52 PM...... since you claim he truly said those words, .........
What matters is what Muhammadans who follow him believe. And orthodox Muslims know those early more peaceful suras that you cite, are thrown out in favor of Muhammad's later, violent verses, that call his followers to "fight and slay" others as "binding" on them "in the Quran".
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 02:02:52 PM...... which means he is also truthful when he says he is a Prophet.
The Quran's lies are of no significance to anyone outside of Muhammadanism except, as they incite Muhammad's true orthodox followers, into their reprobate murderous behavior against the rest of us.
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 02:02:52 PMYet you deny he is a Prophet, therefore, your logic of abrogation fails.
Debunked by your own logic.
Thus it is clear that Islam is peaceful as proven by the fact that there is no compulsion in religion (2:256), and it is prohibited to fight those who incline to peace (8:61).
Gwaffaw!!!!!!
Like 800 years of Islamic genocide perpetrated against Hindus in India!
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=4712.0
Like the Armenian genocide.
Like Muhammad's beheading of the innocent, peaceful, faithful Jewish farm boys of the Banu Qurayza and rape of their little sisters, mothers and grandmothers.
http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/jesus_or_muhammad.htm#jesus_was_crucified
Let alone the reciprocal murder of Sunnis and Shiites.
And yes I do believe Islam's books when they detail the purely reprobate behavior of Muhammad. Like he and his boys rape of captive women:
Bukhari:V5B59N459 Narrated Ibn Muhairiz: I entered the Mosque and saw Abu Said Al-Khudri and sat beside him and asked him about Al-Azl (i.e. coitus interruptus). Abu Said said, "We went out with Allah's Apostle for the Ghazwa of Banu Al-Mustaliq and we received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus."
Bukhari B#62, #137 Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: We got female captives in the war booty and we used to do coitus interruptus with them. So we asked Allah's Apostle about it and he said, "Do you really do that?" repeating the question thrice, "There is no soul that is destined to exist but will come into existence, till the Day of Resurrection."
Indeed most everything that demonstrates the pure evil of Muhammad and his followers is believable, because they follow Satan himself.
Response: You made the claim that it is true that Muhammad says the verse is abrogated, which means that your logic says Muhammad spoke the truth.
Already answered. The parts that demonstrate Islam's pure evil are believable enough. Even Muhammadans pick and choose what they like in the Quran and Hadith, while discarding what they don't like.
I choose to believe those parts that confirm what a moral reprobate Muhammad was.
You wishfully choose the parts from Muhammad's early Mecca days, that were thrown out and substituted, by his later verses to fight and slay others.
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 04:09:11 PMYet you deny him when he says he is a Prophet, which makes him untrue.
Every Christian and Jew with the slightest clue as to the 1600 year record of Yahweh to mankind knows Muhammad was a STAND-ALONE false prophet.
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 04:09:11 PMThus your argument for abrogation is also untrue according to your flawed logic. Debunked as usual. Try again.
Quote from: PeteWaldo on August 19, 2015, 04:26:59 PM
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 04:09:11 PM
Quote from: PeteWaldo on August 19, 2015, 03:10:21 PM
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 02:02:52 PM
Quote from: PeteWaldo on August 19, 2015, 01:58:00 PM
Muslims indeed believe the quran is true. That is hundreds of millions of them believe it is Islam's job to rule the world. Why so many understand that to fight and slay as binding on them in the Quran. Of course the apostate hypocrites were afraid to, both in Muhammad's day, as well as throughout the next 1400 years.
Surah 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.
Well that's right. Muhammad's doctrine of substitution does not relate to me, because I know the Quran is filled with satanic lies, from the father of lies himself.
However Muslims do indeed believe the Quran is truth, so the doctrine of substitution is how sort out inoperative verses like the more peaceful drivel you posted. The rest of mankind are their victims.
Response: Yet is YOU who says the verse of abrogation says the verse in the Qur'an is cancelled. That means according to your logic, Muhammad is truthful ......
No, it means that Muhammadans believe it is truthful. It has nothing to do with logic.
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 02:02:52 PM...... since you claim he truly said those words, .........
What matters is what Muhammadans who follow him believe. And orthodox Muslims know those early more peaceful suras that you cite, are thrown out in favor of Muhammad's later, violent verses, that call his followers to "fight and slay" others as "binding" on them "in the Quran".
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 02:02:52 PM...... which means he is also truthful when he says he is a Prophet.
The Quran's lies are of no significance to anyone outside of Muhammadanism except, as they incite Muhammad's true orthodox followers, into their reprobate murderous behavior against the rest of us.
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 02:02:52 PMYet you deny he is a Prophet, therefore, your logic of abrogation fails.
Debunked by your own logic.
Thus it is clear that Islam is peaceful as proven by the fact that there is no compulsion in religion (2:256), and it is prohibited to fight those who incline to peace (8:61).
Gwaffaw!!!!!!
Like 800 years of Islamic genocide perpetrated against Hindus in India!
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=4712.0
Like the Armenian genocide.
Like Muhammad's beheading of the innocent, peaceful, faithful Jewish farm boys of the Banu Qurayza and rape of their little sisters, mothers and grandmothers.
http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/jesus_or_muhammad.htm#jesus_was_crucified
Let alone the reciprocal murder of Sunnis and Shiites.
And yes I do believe Islam's books when they detail the purely reprobate behavior of Muhammad. Like he and his boys rape of captive women:
Bukhari:V5B59N459 Narrated Ibn Muhairiz: I entered the Mosque and saw Abu Said Al-Khudri and sat beside him and asked him about Al-Azl (i.e. coitus interruptus). Abu Said said, "We went out with Allah's Apostle for the Ghazwa of Banu Al-Mustaliq and we received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus."
Bukhari B#62, #137 Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: We got female captives in the war booty and we used to do coitus interruptus with them. So we asked Allah's Apostle about it and he said, "Do you really do that?" repeating the question thrice, "There is no soul that is destined to exist but will come into existence, till the Day of Resurrection."
Indeed most everything that demonstrates the pure evil of Muhammad and his followers is believable, because they follow Satan himself.
Response: You made the claim that it is true that Muhammad says the verse is abrogated, which means that your logic says Muhammad spoke the truth.
Already answered. The parts that demonstrate Islam's pure evil are believable enough. Even Muhammadans pick and choose what they like in the Quran and Hadith, while discarding what they don't like.
I choose to believe those parts that confirm what a moral reprobate Muhammad was.
You wishfully choose the parts from Muhammad's early Mecca days, that were thrown out and substituted, by his later verses to fight and slay others.
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 04:09:11 PMYet you deny him when he says he is a Prophet, which makes him untrue.
Every Christian and Jew with the slightest clue as to the 1600 year record of Yahweh to mankind knows Muhammad was a STAND-ALONE false prophet.
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 04:09:11 PMThus your argument for abrogation is also untrue according to your flawed logic. Debunked as usual. Try again.
Response: You claimed Muhammad (saw) said the verse was abrogated. Not me. So it is you logic that says Muhammad was truthful in his claim. Then you turn around and deny his Prophet which makes him untruthful. You cannot have it both ways. Thus exposing the inconsistency in your lgic and exposing your argument of abrogation is flawed. Debunked as usual. Try again.
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 05:47:30 PM
Quote from: PeteWaldo on August 19, 2015, 04:26:59 PM
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 04:09:11 PM
Quote from: PeteWaldo on August 19, 2015, 03:10:21 PM
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 02:02:52 PM
Quote from: PeteWaldo on August 19, 2015, 01:58:00 PM
Muslims indeed believe the quran is true. That is hundreds of millions of them believe it is Islam's job to rule the world. Why so many understand that to fight and slay as binding on them in the Quran. Of course the apostate hypocrites were afraid to, both in Muhammad's day, as well as throughout the next 1400 years.
Surah 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.
Well that's right. Muhammad's doctrine of substitution does not relate to me, because I know the Quran is filled with satanic lies, from the father of lies himself.
However Muslims do indeed believe the Quran is truth, so the doctrine of substitution is how sort out inoperative verses like the more peaceful drivel you posted. The rest of mankind are their victims.
Response: Yet is YOU who says the verse of abrogation says the verse in the Qur'an is cancelled. That means according to your logic, Muhammad is truthful ......
No, it means that Muhammadans believe it is truthful. It has nothing to do with logic.
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 02:02:52 PM...... since you claim he truly said those words, .........
What matters is what Muhammadans who follow him believe. And orthodox Muslims know those early more peaceful suras that you cite, are thrown out in favor of Muhammad's later, violent verses, that call his followers to "fight and slay" others as "binding" on them "in the Quran".
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 02:02:52 PM...... which means he is also truthful when he says he is a Prophet.
The Quran's lies are of no significance to anyone outside of Muhammadanism except, as they incite Muhammad's true orthodox followers, into their reprobate murderous behavior against the rest of us.
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 02:02:52 PMYet you deny he is a Prophet, therefore, your logic of abrogation fails.
Debunked by your own logic.
Thus it is clear that Islam is peaceful as proven by the fact that there is no compulsion in religion (2:256), and it is prohibited to fight those who incline to peace (8:61).
Gwaffaw!!!!!!
Like 800 years of Islamic genocide perpetrated against Hindus in India!
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=4712.0
Like the Armenian genocide.
Like Muhammad's beheading of the innocent, peaceful, faithful Jewish farm boys of the Banu Qurayza and rape of their little sisters, mothers and grandmothers.
http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/jesus_or_muhammad.htm#jesus_was_crucified
Let alone the reciprocal murder of Sunnis and Shiites.
And yes I do believe Islam's books when they detail the purely reprobate behavior of Muhammad. Like he and his boys rape of captive women:
Bukhari:V5B59N459 Narrated Ibn Muhairiz: I entered the Mosque and saw Abu Said Al-Khudri and sat beside him and asked him about Al-Azl (i.e. coitus interruptus). Abu Said said, "We went out with Allah's Apostle for the Ghazwa of Banu Al-Mustaliq and we received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus."
Bukhari B#62, #137 Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: We got female captives in the war booty and we used to do coitus interruptus with them. So we asked Allah's Apostle about it and he said, "Do you really do that?" repeating the question thrice, "There is no soul that is destined to exist but will come into existence, till the Day of Resurrection."
Indeed most everything that demonstrates the pure evil of Muhammad and his followers is believable, because they follow Satan himself.
Response: You made the claim that it is true that Muhammad says the verse is abrogated, which means that your logic says Muhammad spoke the truth.
Already answered. The parts that demonstrate Islam's pure evil are believable enough. Even Muhammadans pick and choose what they like in the Quran and Hadith, while discarding what they don't like.
I choose to believe those parts that confirm what a moral reprobate Muhammad was.
You wishfully choose the parts from Muhammad's early Mecca days, that were thrown out and substituted, by his later verses to fight and slay others.
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 04:09:11 PMYet you deny him when he says he is a Prophet, which makes him untrue.
Every Christian and Jew with the slightest clue as to the 1600 year record of Yahweh to mankind knows Muhammad was a STAND-ALONE false prophet.
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 04:09:11 PMThus your argument for abrogation is also untrue according to your flawed logic. Debunked as usual. Try again.
Response: You claimed Muhammad (saw) said the verse was abrogated. Not me. So it is you logic that says Muhammad was truthful in his claim. Then you turn around and deny his Prophet which makes him untruthful. You cannot have it both ways.
Of course I can. Just like other Muhammadans that come here your mind has lost its capacity for critical thought. By your premise, I must believe that every single thing in the Quran and Hadith must necessarily be wrong, or never happened, because Muhammad was a false prophet. Can't even you see how ridiculous your premise is?
As I explained, I find that much of the content of the Quran and Hadith that exposes the reprobate nature of Muhammad and the pure evil of Islam whether true or not, is believable enough. Just as we can see through the behavior of true fundamental orthodox Muslims all around the world.
http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/the_islamic_state.htm
And because of Muhammad's doctrine of substitution, that he was compelled to institute because even he saw what a contradictory mess he had made of the Quran over the short span of just 23 years, a good rule of thumb is to conclude that all of the the earlier more peaceful "recitations" are thrown out, for the later suras in which Muhammad calls his followers to fight and slay non-Muslims, after Muhammad suffered what might well have been a psychotic break. Perhaps sparked by loosing Khadijah.
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 05:47:30 PMThus exposing the inconsistency in your lgic and exposing your argument of abrogation is flawed.
My friend, as you can see it is your argument that is not just illogical, but absolutely ridiculous.
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 19, 2015, 05:47:30 PMDebunked as usual. Try again.
Quote from: PeteWaldo on August 20, 2015, 07:13:52 AM
Of course I can. Just like other Muhammadans that come here your mind has lost its capacity for critical thought. By your premise, I must believe that every single thing in the Quran and Hadith must necessarily be wrong, or never happened, because Muhammad was a false prophet. Can't even you see how ridiculous your premise is?
As I explained, I find that much of the content of the Quran and Hadith that exposes the reprobate nature of Muhammad and the pure evil of Islam whether true or not, is believable enough. Just as we can see through the behavior of true fundamental orthodox Muslims all around the world.
http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/the_islamic_state.htm
And because of Muhammad's doctrine of substitution, that he was compelled to institute because even he saw what a contradictory mess he had made of the Quran over the short span of just 23 years, a good rule of thumb is to conclude that all of the the earlier more peaceful "recitations" are thrown out, for the later suras in which Muhammad calls his followers to fight and slay non-Muslims, after Muhammad suffered what might well have been a psychotic break. Perhaps sparked by loosing Khadijah.
My friend, as you can see it is your argument that is not just illogical, but absolutely ridiculous.
Response: By my logic, you don't call a source reliable and unreliable at the same time, like your simple-mined logic says. Stating Muhammad (saw) said the verses were abrogated are true words, means Muhammad is truthful Then you say he is not a Prophet, which makes him untruthful So your logic is based on a contradiction, thus your weak argument of abrogation fails.
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 20, 2015, 05:16:34 PM
Quote from: PeteWaldo on August 20, 2015, 07:13:52 AM
Of course I can. Just like other Muhammadans that come here your mind has lost its capacity for critical thought. By your premise, I must believe that every single thing in the Quran and Hadith must necessarily be wrong, or never happened, because Muhammad was a false prophet. Can't even you see how ridiculous your premise is?
As I explained, I find that much of the content of the Quran and Hadith that exposes the reprobate nature of Muhammad and the pure evil of Islam whether true or not, is believable enough. Just as we can see through the behavior of true fundamental orthodox Muslims all around the world.
http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/the_islamic_state.htm
And because of Muhammad's doctrine of substitution, that he was compelled to institute because even he saw what a contradictory mess he had made of the Quran over the short span of just 23 years, a good rule of thumb is to conclude that all of the the earlier more peaceful "recitations" are thrown out, for the later suras in which Muhammad calls his followers to fight and slay non-Muslims, after Muhammad suffered what might well have been a psychotic break. Perhaps sparked by loosing Khadijah.
My friend, as you can see it is your argument that is not just illogical, but absolutely ridiculous.
Response: By my logic, you don't call a source reliable and unreliable at the same time, ........
Nor, or course would I ever consider anything about the false prophet Muhammad and his cult "reliable". As the video you cited in your first post points out, there is not a shred of evidence that suggests that any of it existed that dates to prior to the 690s.
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 20, 2015, 05:16:34 PM........ like your simple-mined logic says. Stating Muhammad (saw) said the verses were abrogated are true words, means Muhammad is truthful ........
No it means he saw what a horrifically contradictory mess he had made of his recitations over the short span of just 23 years. And I've no doubt he would have tried to get away with it if the Quraish hadn't kept pointing out to his contraditions and that he was rehashing "tales of the ancients", so he was compelled to arrange another "revelation" from his alter-ego "Allah", through which he pretended he was told to institute the doctrine of substitution.
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 20, 2015, 05:16:34 PM...... Then you say he is not a Prophet, ......
If Muhammad was other than a false prophet then the prophets and witnesses in the 1600 year record of YHWH to mankind, whose people have followed Him through two covenants for 3500 years, were false.
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 20, 2015, 05:16:34 PM...... which makes him untruthful So your logic is based on a contradiction, thus your weak argument of abrogation fails.
Not at all. Muhammad realized what a mess he and his alter-ego "Allah" made in his satanic recitations, over the short span of just 23 years. The only weird thing to me, is that even you can't see that.
Quote from: PeteWaldo on August 20, 2015, 05:47:44 PM
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 20, 2015, 05:16:34 PM
Quote from: PeteWaldo on August 20, 2015, 07:13:52 AM
Of course I can. Just like other Muhammadans that come here your mind has lost its capacity for critical thought. By your premise, I must believe that every single thing in the Quran and Hadith must necessarily be wrong, or never happened, because Muhammad was a false prophet. Can't even you see how ridiculous your premise is?
As I explained, I find that much of the content of the Quran and Hadith that exposes the reprobate nature of Muhammad and the pure evil of Islam whether true or not, is believable enough. Just as we can see through the behavior of true fundamental orthodox Muslims all around the world.
http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/the_islamic_state.htm
And because of Muhammad's doctrine of substitution, that he was compelled to institute because even he saw what a contradictory mess he had made of the Quran over the short span of just 23 years, a good rule of thumb is to conclude that all of the the earlier more peaceful "recitations" are thrown out, for the later suras in which Muhammad calls his followers to fight and slay non-Muslims, after Muhammad suffered what might well have been a psychotic break. Perhaps sparked by loosing Khadijah.
My friend, as you can see it is your argument that is not just illogical, but absolutely ridiculous.
Nor, or course would I ever consider anything about the false prophet Muhammad and his cult "reliable". As the video you cited in your first post points out, there is not a shred of evidence that suggests that any of it existed that dates to prior to the 690s.
No it means he saw what a horrifically contradictory mess he had made of his recitations over the short span of just 23 years. And I've no doubt he would have tried to get away with it if the Quraish hadn't kept pointing out to his contraditions and that he was rehashing "tales of the ancients", so he was compelled to arrange another "revelation" from his alter-ego "Allah", through which he pretended he was told to institute the doctrine of substitution.
If Muhammad was other than a false prophet then the prophets and witnesses in the 1600 year record of YHWH to mankind, whose people have followed Him through two covenants for 3500 years, were false.
Not at all. Muhammad realized what a mess he and his alter-ego "Allah" made in his satanic recitations, over the short span of just 23 years. The only weird thing to me, is that even you can't see that.
Response: It means your lies cannot be supported since your whole claim that verses were abrogated is based on Muhammad's words. that means you believe him to be telling the truth, then you deny he is a Prophet. That would mean he is not truthful. Your logic contradicts, thus your argument of abrogation fails. Try again.
You are done obfuscating. Is fighting and slaying "a promise binding" on Muhammad's followers "in the Quran", or is this surah a lie?
Surah 9.111 Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Qur'an: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah. then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme.
Of course that verse tells a filthy lie regarding the Gospel binding Christians to fight and slay, or the law binding Jews to fight and slay, but a literate person can see that according to the Quran it is a promise binding on Muhammad's true, fundamental, non-hypocrite, orthodox followers.
That I believe the quran is a pile of rubbish is completely irrelevant to this subject.
What hundreds of millions of Muslims believe about that verse, is what has robbed them of their humanity. That number would include you, unless of course you are willing to proclaim the verse lies about binding you to fight in his cause and slay. Certainly Islamic scholars like Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi don't have any trouble understanding that verse.
http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/the_islamic_state.htm
Let me embellish with a Hadith footnote:
http://falseprophetmuhammad.com/jihad_islamic_terrorism.htm#muslim_hypocrites
"Summarized Sahih Al-Bukhari" - Maktba Dar-us-Salam's page 580
Chapter 2. The best among the people is that believer who strives his utmost in Allah's Cause with both his life and property.
footnotes:
[1] "Al-Jihad (the holy fighting) in Allah's Cause (with full force of number and weaponry) is given the utmost importance in Islam and is one of its pillars (on which it stands). By Jihad Islam is established, Allah's Word is made superior, [His Word being La ilaha ill-Allah (which means: none has the right to be worshipped but Allah)] and His Religion (Islam) is propagated. By abandoning Jihad (may Allah protect us from that) Islam is destroyed and the Muslims fall into an inferior position; there honour is lost, their lands are stolen, their rule and authority vanish. Jihad is an obligatory duty in Islam on every Muslim, and he who tries to escape from this duty, or does not in his innermost heart wish to fulfill this duty, dies with one of the qualities of a hypocrite.
[2] Of course, nobody can offer Salat (prayer) and observe Saum (fast) incessantly, and since the Muslim fighter is rewarded as if he was doing such good impossible deeds, no possible deed equals Jihad in reward.
Satan through his messenger even commands his followers to fight and subjugate specifically Yahweh's "people of the book", that is, Jews and Christians:
Surah 9.29 Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. 30 The Jews call 'Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!
Please reply without obfuscation. If you bring up another subject it will be split off and locked. No more wasting our mutual time. I will even suggest an additional threat of simply throwing a non-responsive or unrelated post out, to help you keep from wasting your time like that.
Is the verse quoted from the Quran a lie or is fighting and slaying a promise binding on you in the Quran?
Quote from: PeteWaldo on August 20, 2015, 07:23:24 PM
You are done obfuscating. Is fighting and slaying "a promise binding" on Muhammad's followers "in the Quran", or is this surah a lie?
Surah 9.111 Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Qur'an: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah. then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme.
Of course that verse tells a filthy lie regarding the Gospel binding Christians to fight and slay, or the law binding Jews to fight and slay, but a literate person can see that according to the Quran it is a promise binding on Muhammad's true, fundamental, non-hypocrite, orthodox followers.
That I believe the quran is a pile of rubbish is completely irrelevant to this subject.
What hundreds of millions of Muslims believe about that verse, is what has robbed them of their humanity. That number would include you, unless of course you are willing to proclaim the verse lies about binding you to fight in his cause and slay. Certainly Islamic scholars like Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi don't have any trouble understanding that verse.
http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/the_islamic_state.htm
Let me embellish with a Hadith footnote:
http://falseprophetmuhammad.com/jihad_islamic_terrorism.htm#muslim_hypocrites
"Summarized Sahih Al-Bukhari" - Maktba Dar-us-Salam's page 580
Chapter 2. The best among the people is that believer who strives his utmost in Allah's Cause with both his life and property.
footnotes:
[1] "Al-Jihad (the holy fighting) in Allah's Cause (with full force of number and weaponry) is given the utmost importance in Islam and is one of its pillars (on which it stands). By Jihad Islam is established, Allah's Word is made superior, [His Word being La ilaha ill-Allah (which means: none has the right to be worshipped but Allah)] and His Religion (Islam) is propagated. By abandoning Jihad (may Allah protect us from that) Islam is destroyed and the Muslims fall into an inferior position; there honour is lost, their lands are stolen, their rule and authority vanish. Jihad is an obligatory duty in Islam on every Muslim, and he who tries to escape from this duty, or does not in his innermost heart wish to fulfill this duty, dies with one of the qualities of a hypocrite.
[2] Of course, nobody can offer Salat (prayer) and observe Saum (fast) incessantly, and since the Muslim fighter is rewarded as if he was doing such good impossible deeds, no possible deed equals Jihad in reward.
Satan through his messenger even commands his followers to fight and subjugate specifically Yahweh's "people of the book", that is, Jews and Christians:
Surah 9.29 Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. 30 The Jews call 'Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!
Please reply without obfuscation. If you bring up another subject it will be split off and locked. No more wasting our mutual time. I will even suggest an additional threat of simply throwing a non-responsive or unrelated post out, to help you keep from wasting your time like that.
Is the verse quoted from the Quran a lie or is fighting and slaying a promise binding on you in the Quran?
Response: The verse, like all verses of fighting, refer to self-defense, as the Qur'an clearly states not to fight those who are peaceful (8:61).
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 21, 2015, 07:19:38 PM
Quote from: PeteWaldo on August 20, 2015, 07:23:24 PM
You are done obfuscating. Is fighting and slaying "a promise binding" on Muhammad's followers "in the Quran", or is this surah a lie?
Surah 9.111 Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Qur'an: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah. then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme.
Of course that verse tells a filthy lie regarding the Gospel binding Christians to fight and slay, or the law binding Jews to fight and slay, but a literate person can see that according to the Quran it is a promise binding on Muhammad's true, fundamental, non-hypocrite, orthodox followers.
That I believe the quran is a pile of rubbish is completely irrelevant to this subject.
What hundreds of millions of Muslims believe about that verse, is what has robbed them of their humanity. That number would include you, unless of course you are willing to proclaim the verse lies about binding you to fight in his cause and slay. Certainly Islamic scholars like Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi don't have any trouble understanding that verse.
http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/the_islamic_state.htm
Let me embellish with a Hadith footnote:
http://falseprophetmuhammad.com/jihad_islamic_terrorism.htm#muslim_hypocrites
"Summarized Sahih Al-Bukhari" - Maktba Dar-us-Salam's page 580
Chapter 2. The best among the people is that believer who strives his utmost in Allah's Cause with both his life and property.
footnotes:
[1] "Al-Jihad (the holy fighting) in Allah's Cause (with full force of number and weaponry) is given the utmost importance in Islam and is one of its pillars (on which it stands). By Jihad Islam is established, Allah's Word is made superior, [His Word being La ilaha ill-Allah (which means: none has the right to be worshipped but Allah)] and His Religion (Islam) is propagated. By abandoning Jihad (may Allah protect us from that) Islam is destroyed and the Muslims fall into an inferior position; there honour is lost, their lands are stolen, their rule and authority vanish. Jihad is an obligatory duty in Islam on every Muslim, and he who tries to escape from this duty, or does not in his innermost heart wish to fulfill this duty, dies with one of the qualities of a hypocrite.
[2] Of course, nobody can offer Salat (prayer) and observe Saum (fast) incessantly, and since the Muslim fighter is rewarded as if he was doing such good impossible deeds, no possible deed equals Jihad in reward.
Satan through his messenger even commands his followers to fight and subjugate specifically Yahweh's "people of the book", that is, Jews and Christians:
Surah 9.29 Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. 30 The Jews call 'Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!
Please reply without obfuscation. If you bring up another subject it will be split off and locked. No more wasting our mutual time. I will even suggest an additional threat of simply throwing a non-responsive or unrelated post out, to help you keep from wasting your time like that.
Is the verse quoted from the Quran a lie or is fighting and slaying a promise binding on you in the Quran?
Response: The verse, like all verses of fighting, refer to self-defense, as the Qur'an clearly states not to fight those who are peaceful (8:61).
The verses you quoted while claiming the exact of what they indicate, as well as the 1400 year history of Islamic imperialistic conquest against non-Muslims at every opportunity that presented itself, clearly demonstrate what a conspicuously transparent lie you told. Defended themselves all the way up into Europe eigh? Defended themselves through 800 years of Hindu genocide in their imperialistic conquest of India eigh? The imperialistic conquest of Muhammad and then his followers in his wake, conquered nearly the whole "known world" during the Islamic first jihad, all the way up into France and Austria and down into Africa. Let alone that your own books make you a liar, and true non-hypocrite orthodox Muslims like Al-Bagdati would quickly point you - with the point of a sword to what they would identify as the lying throat of an Islamic hypocrite. It really is stunning how you can't see that your antichrist evil murderous cult comes straight out of the pit of hell.
Bukhari, V1 B2 #24 Narrated Ibn 'Umar: Allah's Apostle said: "
I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle, and offer the prayers perfectly and give the obligatory charity, so if they perform a that, then they save their lives an property from me except for Islamic laws and then their reckoning (accounts) will be done by Allah."
So do you believe that Hadith lied about Muhammad proclaiming he was ordered to fight against the people until they testify to that filthy blasphemy? Or do you belive it was Muhammad lying about being ordered to do that?
Quote from: PeteWaldo on August 21, 2015, 07:54:32 PM
The verses you quoted while claiming the exact of what they indicate, as well as the 1400 year history of Islamic imperialistic conquest against non-Muslims at every opportunity that presented itself, clearly demonstrate what a conspicuously transparent lie you told. Defended themselves all the way up into Europe eigh? Defended themselves through 800 years of Hindu genocide in their imperialistic conquest of India eigh? The imperialistic conquest of Muhammad and then his followers in his wake, conquered nearly the whole "known world" during the Islamic first jihad, all the way up into France and Austria and down into Africa. Let alone that your own books make you a liar, and true non-hypocrite orthodox Muslims like Al-Bagdati would quickly point you - with the point of a sword to what they would identify as the lying throat of an Islamic hypocrite. It really is stunning how you can't see that your antichrist evil murderous cult comes straight out of the pit of hell.
Bukhari, V1 B2 #24 Narrated Ibn 'Umar: Allah's Apostle said: "I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle, and offer the prayers perfectly and give the obligatory charity, so if they perform a that, then they save their lives an property from me except for Islamic laws and then their reckoning (accounts) will be done by Allah."
So do you believe that Hadith lied about Muhammad proclaiming he was ordered to fight against the people until they testify to that filthy blasphemy? Or do you belive it was Muhammad lying about being ordered to do that?
Response: Islam is based on the Qur'an and Sunnah, and the Qur'an clearly states not to fight those who are peaceful (8:61). So your impotent argument is refuted as usual.
Unlike your Jesus of the Bible, in which Jesus says he is against peace and brings a sword (Matthew 10:34). So you just exposed your trifling, disgraceful, warlord, violent Christian religion.
Try again.
In the wake of the recent crescendo that culminated in the rapid blizzard of repetitive posts on several threads, contrary to the rules you agreed to when you joined, we will offer you a 3 day vacation, during which time we hope you can collect and compose yourself. You can still log in and use some forum functions.
When you return from your brief vacation.....
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=4733.msg18251#msg18251
.....we will begin by reviewing your repeated filthy antichrist lie against the Gospel and Jesus Christ, that flows from your mouth as easily and comfortably as saying "hello".
Repeating it even after I already showed you through the scriptures exactly what the sword is that Jesus brought.
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=4714.msg18109#msg18109
Ephesians 6:12 .... the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:
Rev 2:16 Repent; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth.
Hbr 4:12 For the word of God [is] quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and [is] a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
Rev 19:15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=225.0
We will see what kind of forum citizenship you can exhibit in that exchange. You will be asked to quote and review the verses I presented in that post, that explained it before you repeated your lie. You can prepare yourself as you wait to return.
Then we will review and address posts you ignored. Like how Abraham, Hagar and Ishmael are supposed to have wandered 1200 kilometers across harsh barren desert from Hebron to Mecca, over a thousand years before the historical record tells us there was a caravan route along the Red Sea, and over 2,000 years before Mecca was initially settled in the 4th century AD.
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=4724.msg18233#msg18233
And if I did not provide a substantive answer to each and every one of your posts to me, I will be happy to review and do that as well.
No new material will be accepted until the posts that you ignored are addressed.
Because of your abusive repetitive spam blizzard, we will focus on one point in one thread at a time.
Quote from: Al-Fatihah on August 21, 2015, 08:08:27 PMResponse: Islam is based on the Qur'an and Sunnah, and the Qur'an clearly states not to fight those who are peaceful (8:61). So your impotent argument is refuted as usual.
But that verse was revealed before Muhammad's mass murder of the innocent, literate, peaceful, faithful, Jewish farm boys of the Banu Qurayza and their dads and grandpas, and rape and sexual enslavement of their little sisters and mothers and theft of their property.
So the verse you cited in your feeble and easily exposed attempt at taqiyyah, is obviously nullified and "consigned to oblivion".....2:106 (Asad)
Any message which, We annul or consign to oblivion We replace with a better or a similar
one. Dost thou not know that God has the power to will anything?
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=116.0
.....while being replaced by the operative verses I quoted, that came later in order of "revelation".
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=609.0
Indeed chapter 9 that I quoted in which Muhammad orders his followers to fight and slay non-Muslims, as binding in them in the Quran, is second to last in order of so-called "revelation" (number 113). So it trumps all of the earlier drivel that contradicts it, that Muhammad later obviously regretted dithering on with, since he had to consign his earlier stuff to oblivion. Here's a Medina Surah and command from the terrorist you follow, from chapter 8, that ranks 88th in order of "revelation":
Surah 8:12 I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them
You can confirm that I am correct in this, with the Islamic scholar Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi (as well as most any other Imam or Mufti that can be candid about what the Quran binds on Muhammad's followers).
So the only question left for you to seriously ask yourself, is whether you believe that men who engage in reprobate behavior like that of Baghdadi and Muhammad, are driven by God or by Satan?
Would you follow Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi?
What has Baghdadi done that Muhammad and his gang of thugs didn't do?http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/the_islamic_state.htm