parisbookaddict:

The intention is to draw parallels between the verses on slavery as contained in the bible and quran(posts 1 and 2). To understand the practise 4000 years in antiquity and shade more light on the subject to folks like u who speak with little understanding on the subject..and often try to attack the bible

On December 10, 1948, the general assembly of the United Nations produced one of the finest documents ever to have been written on behalf of all humans; it is aptly named the universal declaration of human rights. Article 4 of this document states the following:

"No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms."

This declaration forms the basis for 21st century attitude towards slavery. So you must forgive me if I am not at all interested in the parallels and/or orthogonals you wish to draw between two books, both of which explicitly condone slavery; one of the 7th century and another whose compilation spans several centuries BC. I couldn't care less if the Quran asks you to hold a slave for 1,000,000 years and the bible tells you that 6 years is enough to own a slave. Both these books are outdated in this regard and to attempt defending any of them in this era is both preposterous and asinine. I apologise if I didn't make this clear enough the first time.

Empiree:
Those countries you mentioned above were themselves under christian colonial masters. They had no independence. Let's see when they were emancipated by christian slave masters:

1952: Qatar abolishes slavery. Gained freedom from christian slave masters 3 September 1971 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qatar

1960: Niger abolishes slavery. Gained freedom from christian slave masters 3 August 1960
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niger

1962: Yemen Gained freedom from christian slave masters 30 November 1967

1964: The United Arab Emirates Gained freedom from christian slave masters 2 December 1971

1970: Oman Gained freedom from christian slave masters 1960

1981: Mauritania Gained freedom from christian slave masters 28 November 1960

So what much could they do decades before their independence?. They themselves were under slavery of christian slave masters. So what are you talking about.

Ancient Jews and Christians did not abolish slavery. Why didnt they abolish slavery before prophet Muhammad was born?.



^If they abolished slavery back then, why did they give most of these Arab countries freedom in 20th century.
https://www.nairaland.com/2153126/top-ten-signs-youre-fundamentalist/5

Interesting and yet they abolished slavery while under the kaffir rule of their lands..why didn't they do it earlier. Why was the islamic Ottomon Empire trading slaves up until the 20th century before they were defeated by the west and kicked out by the Turks. ..

Interesting empiree...why is Qatar employing slave labor even till this day..google it.

parisbookaddict:


Interesting and yet they abolished slavery while under the kaffir rule of their lands..why didn't they do it earlier. Why was the Ottomon Empire trading slaves up until the 20th century before they were defeated by the west and kicked out by the Turks. ..

Interesting empiree...why is Qatar employing slave labor even till this day..google it.

And why didn't PAUL, MATHEW, MARK, LUKE and JOHN abolished slavery 600years before Muhammad was born? It wasn't in their best interest to do so.

FACTS:

*Did slavery or slave trades exist before prophet Muhammad(Allah's peace and blessings be upon him)? YES

*Did Jews and Christians preceded Muhammad? YES

*Did Jews and Christians have enough grace to abolish slavery before Muhammad? YES

*How many years? 600 years (six centuries)

*Did they abolish slavery within that period? NO

You can not deny these obvious facts. Any wonder why slavery is not recorded much in New Testament?. It's because writers deliberately left it out. How in the world slavery existed before Muhammad and during New Testament era and nothing recorded regarding slavery?. That's hell of culprits. Ancient Jews and Christians had 600 yrs to abolish slavery but Peter, Paul, Mathew, Mark, Luke and John were busy fabricating stories about three-headed gods and left out slavery part.

You can't deny slavery existed between the demise of Jesus (peace be upon him) and advent of Muhammad(peace be upon him). Why did they leave out slave trade in NT?. Slavery recorded in the OT didn't just happen by accident. It happened because Jews, Christians and Pagan Arabs all traded slaves. If you deny this, I ask you why was this event not recorded in NT?. Are you saying Jesus was just sitting around and ignored like it didn't exist?

Ancient Jews and Christians waited for 600 yrs for arrival of Muhammad to abolish what they started. Muhammad was sent to the whole world (of seen and unseen, living and non living things, animals and plants etc). And he delivered the message within 23 yrs period and at the same time had to deal with the mess created Jews and Christians of old.

But MATHEW, MARK, LUKE AND JOHN are not prophets sent by God. They had no job to do. So why did they not talk about slavery?. Why all of a sudden NT barely gives reference to slavery?. So why are you saying Christianity has nothing to do with slavery. That's false. And now you want to blame prophet Muhammad?.

European Christians of course did not start slavery but they pursued the same agenda in different fashion (i:e through secularism) but same agenda of Christians of old. They too quoted Bible at some point during their dirty business. And all the Arab and Muslim countries you mentioned earlier that were forced to end slavery, they themselves were under colonialism of European christian slave traders and masters. They were not independent.

The real reason Paul, Peter, Mathew, Mark, Luke and John made little or no reference to slavery in New Testament was because Old Testament was used to achieve their christiandom, christian civilization etc. They massacred and destroyed primitive people to get to the top. After they achieved everything they wanted, they now claimed their God is now peaceful. That He has renounced violence. That same God now transformed to three headed-god and he's peaceful and loving in New Testament. That's bu'llshit if you ask me.

But in the Old Testament, he is violent, detroyer, He was just killing men, women and children. He killed killed killed and killed and intimidated people. He then went for rehab and came out smiling, loving, caring, "no more crusade" bla bla bla after he already achieved everything by violence. And almost everything about his violence past barely recorded in New Testament. In Old Testament, he had swords of Achilles, shield and armor and wore 'abaya'. He rode on camels and horses. After he came out from rehab as "nonviolence", he now rides on BMW, he puts on suit and tie and declared "no more crusade" after he already destroyed people's lives. And now he wants Muhammad to deal with the mess he created. Nonsense!

parisbookaddict:

Qur'an (23:5-6)- Qur'an (4:24)- Qur'an (8:69)-
[size=4pt]"..who abstain from sex, except with those joined to them in the marriage bond, or (the captives) whom their right hands possess..." This verse permits the slave-owner to have sex with his slaves.

"And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess." Even sex with married slaves is permissible.
"But (now) enjoy what ye took in war, lawful and good" A reference to war booty, of which slaves were a part. The Muslim slave master may enjoy his "catch" because (according to verse 71) "Allah gave you mastery over them."[/size]

Here is the answer. In Islam if a master has sex with his slave, then when the slave girl is pregnant, she and her child is automatically freed after the masters death. But that’s not the only way a slave can get freedom, infact if a slave request his/her freedom, she or he can get it!

Noble Verse 24:33 "Let those who find not the wherewithal for marriage keep themselves chaste, until God gives them means out of His grace. And if any of your slaves ask for a deed in writing (to enable them to earn their freedom for a certain sum), give them such a deed if ye know any good in them: yea, give them something yourselves out of the means which God has given to you. But force not your maids to prostitution when they desire chastity, in order that ye may make a gain in the goods of this life. But if anyone compels them, yet, after such compulsion, is God, Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful (to them),"

As we can clearly see, Islam says that if a slave request freedom, he/she can get it, including some money, in order for the slave to get a good jump start in life.

Beside this, the Prophet (S) also ordered for slaves to not be forced into having sexual intercourse:

"Musaykah, a slave-girl of some Ansari, came and said: My master forces me to commit fornication. Thereupon the following verse was revealed: "But force not your maids to prostitution (when they desire chastity). (24:33)" (Translation of Sunan Abu Dawud, Divorce (Kitab Al-Talaq), Book 12, Number 2304)"

Also read how the Prophet (S) used to free slaves:

Dr. Muzammil H. Siddiqi, former President of the Islamic Society of North America and Director of the Islamic Society of Orange County, Garden Grove, California. He states the following:

"The author claims that “the Bible condemns slavery” and “one who practices slavery contradicts right teachings.” In order to prove his point he even adds “the slave traders” in 1Timothy 1:10. There is no such word there in the Revised Standard Version.

Actually in the whole Bible this word does not exist. The author also makes false allegation against Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) by saying that he used to buy, sell, hire, and rent slaves.

Slavery existed throughout the Biblical period including the time of Jesus (peace and blessings be upon him). Most of the Biblical prophets had slaves, both males and females. Perhaps the author of this flyer did not read his own New Testament. Otherwise he would have found there the following advice to slaves: “Let all who are under the yoke of slavery regard their masters as worthy of all honor, so that the name of God and the teaching may not be defamed.” (1 Timothy 6:1) and “Bid slaves to be submissive to their masters and to give satisfaction in every respect; they are not to be refractory…” (Titus 2:9)

Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) did not own slaves. He had many slaves purchased and freed. The author quotes Muslim scholar Ibn Al-Qayyim who said about the Prophet, “His purchases of slaves were more then he sold.” This is correct because he used to purchase slaves in order to free them, not to sell them. However, the author of the pamphlet mistranslates Ibn Al-Qayyim when he says, “The Prophet used to rent out and hiring many slaves, but he hired more slaves then he rented out.” The author has mischievously added the words “many slaves” and “more slaves” in the text. Ibn Al-Qayyim is not talking here about the sale, purchase, renting, and hiring of slaves, but about general business practices of the Prophet before he received the Prophethood. Actually, he is saying that “the Prophet himself was hired before he became the Prophet to take care of some sheep and he was hired by Khadijah to do business for her.” (see Zad Al-Ma’ad, vol. 1, p. 154)

The Qur’an teaches that freeing the salves is a great virtue (See Surah 90:13). One of the expenditures of zakah (obligatory charity) is to spend the money for the freedom of the slaves (surah 9:60). It is forbidden in Islam to enslave a free person. If Muslims had consistently followed the Islamic teachings in this regard, slavery would have become extinct a long time ago. It is unfortunate that some Muslims did not follow these teachings of Islam and slavery continued in Muslim lands for centuries. We are ashamed that some Muslims practiced slavery against the teachings of Islam. However, it is also a historical fact that for centuries the worst type of slavery in its most extensive and horrible form was practiced by those who claimed themselves to be the followers of Christ. They enslaved millions of free men, women, and children and shipped them like animals from one continent to another. They made millions in profit by this most shameful trade of human beings.

I wish to remind you of what Jesus (peace and blessings be upon him) said: “Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye.” (Matthew 7:3-5)"

(Source: http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?pagename=IslamOnline-English-Ask_Scholar/FatwaE/FatwaE&cid=1119503547546)

So let’s see the points made:

1) Slaves can NOT be forced into having sexual intercourse with

2) Slaves ARE automatically free after the masters death if they bare a child from the master

3) Slaves CAN ask to be freed, and become free , including they will get an amount of money to jump start in life.

So Islam destroyed the social illness called slavery, if you look at the proof open-mindedly.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9cDJTVbQEc

^Op Qur'an (4:24)

When Islam was reveled to Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him), slavery was a worldwide common social phenomenon; it was much older than Islam. Slavery was deeply rooted in every society to the extent that it was impossible to imagine a civilized society without slaves.

In spite of this social fact, Islam was the first religion to recognize slavery as a social illness that needed to be addressed. Since slavery was deeply rooted in the society, Islam did not abolish it at once. Rather, Islam treated slavery in the same manner it treated other social illnesses. Islam followed the same methodology of gradual elimination in dealing with this social disease as it did with other social illnesses, for example: the prohibition of alcohol in three steps.

Concerning having slave women, we would like to let you know that it happens to be a practice necessitated by the condition in which early Muslims found themselves vis-à-vis non-Muslims, as both parties engaged in wars. Slave women or milk al-yameen are referred to in the Qur'an as “Those whom your right hand legally possess” or “ma malakat aymanukum”; they are those taken as captives during conquests and subsequently became slaves, or those who were descendants of slaves.

Thus, it was a war custom in the past to take men and women as captives and then turn them into slaves. Islam did not initiate it, rather, it was something in practice long ago before the advent of Islam. And when Islam came, it tried to eradicate this practice, bit by bit. So it first restricted it to the reciprocal practice of war, in the sense that Muslims took war captives just as the enemies did with Muslims.

But as it aimed at putting an end to such issue, Islam laid down rules which would eventually lead to eradicating the practice. So it allowed Muslims to have intercourse with slave women taken as captives of just and legitimate wars. In so doing, the woman would automatically become free if she got pregnant. What's more, her child would also become free.

Not only that, Islam also ordered a Muslim to treat the slave woman in every respect as if she were his wife. She should be well fed, clothed and given due protection. In the family environment, she had the opportunity to learn about Islam and was free to accept it or reject it. She also had the opportunity to earn her freedom for she could be ransomed.

In the light of the above-mentioned facts, and the nature of the question posed by people, it's clear that some people misunderstand the wisdom behind the permissibility of having female slaves and think that it is meant to unleash men’s desires and give them more enjoyment. Never! That is not the point! It is, rather, means of freeing slaves; and this is clarified above in the fact that if a master got a female slave pregnant, then he could neither sell her nor give her away as a present. And if he died, she would not be considered part of his property. She'd receive her freedom and her baby would also be free.

But, we have to stress that this case should not be confused with that of female servants or maids, for they are free and not slaves. Therefore, it is forbidden to engage in sexual relations with them except through an Islamic marriage.

Slavery has been abolished by international conventions, and goes in line with aims and objectives of Islam, as it has called for centuries ago.

As for marrying slaves, it is something permissible under two conditions: first, if one is unable to pay the dowry of a free woman. Second, if there is fear of committing adultery if one doesn’t get married. This is clarified by the following verse: “And whose is not able to afford to marry free, believing women, let them marry from the believing maids whom your right hands possess. This is for him among you who feareth to commit sin. But to have patience would be better for you.” (An-Nisaa’: 25)

This verse shows that Muslim men should abstain from illicit relations and seek enjoyment through marriage to free women or through their female slaves.

In conclusion, Allah has forbidden certain types of behavior and permitted other kinds of behavior as a safeguard to the individual and to the society. Allah has forbidden fornication and adultery. However, in the case of captives whom your right hands posses, it's something necessitated by the special circumstances which were created when the Muslims were at war.”

(Source: http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?pagename=IslamOnline-English-Ask_Scholar/FatwaE/FatwaE&cid=1119503544596)

POINT:
Quran slaves can request freedom and get it.

You are not supposed to force your slave into sexual intercourse.

1) Show us where in the Bible a slave can request his/her freedom and actually receive it, including some money

2) Respond to the fact that in the Bible, you can literally sell your daughter to be a slave!:

Exodus 21:7-11

When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment.

Qur'an 24:33
"Let those who find not the wherewithal for marriage keep themselves chaste, until God gives them means out of His grace. And if any of your slaves ask for a deed in writing (to enable them to earn their freedom for a certain sum), give them such a deed if ye know any good in them: yea, give them something yourselves out of the means which God has given to you. But force not your maids to prostitution when they desire chastity, in order that ye may make a gain in the goods of this life. But if anyone compels them, yet, after such compulsion, is God, Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful (to them),"

End

Empiree:
^Op Qur'an (4:24)

When Islam was reveled to Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him), slavery was a worldwide common social phenomenon; it was much older than Islam. Slavery was deeply rooted in every society to the extent that it was impossible to imagine a civilized society without slaves.

In spite of this social fact, Islam was the first religion to recognize slavery as a social illness that needed to be addressed. Since slavery was deeply rooted in the society, Islam did not abolish it at once. Rather, Islam treated slavery in the same manner it treated other social illnesses. Islam followed the same methodology of gradual elimination in dealing with this social disease as it did with other social illnesses, for example: the prohibition of alcohol in three steps.

Concerning having slave women, we would like to let you know that it happens to be a practice necessitated by the condition in which early Muslims found themselves vis-à-vis non-Muslims, as both parties engaged in wars. Slave women or milk al-yameen are referred to in the Qur'an as “Those whom your right hand legally possess” or “ma malakat aymanukum”; they are those taken as captives during conquests and subsequently became slaves, or those who were descendants of slaves.

Thus, it was a war custom in the past to take men and women as captives and then turn them into slaves. Islam did not initiate it, rather, it was something in practice long ago before the advent of Islam. And when Islam came, it tried to eradicate this practice, bit by bit. So it first restricted it to the reciprocal practice of war, in the sense that Muslims took war captives just as the enemies did with Muslims.

But as it aimed at putting an end to such issue, Islam laid down rules which would eventually lead to eradicating the practice. So it allowed Muslims to have intercourse with slave women taken as captives of just and legitimate wars. In so doing, the woman would automatically become free if she got pregnant. What's more, her child would also become free.

Not only that, Islam also ordered a Muslim to treat the slave woman in every respect as if she were his wife. She should be well fed, clothed and given due protection. In the family environment, she had the opportunity to learn about Islam and was free to accept it or reject it. She also had the opportunity to earn her freedom for she could be ransomed.

In the light of the above-mentioned facts, and the nature of the question posed by people, it's clear that some people misunderstand the wisdom behind the permissibility of having female slaves and think that it is meant to unleash men’s desires and give them more enjoyment. Never! That is not the point! It is, rather, means of freeing slaves; and this is clarified above in the fact that if a master got a female slave pregnant, then he could neither sell her nor give her away as a present. And if he died, she would not be considered part of his property. She'd receive her freedom and her baby would also be free.

But, we have to stress that this case should not be confused with that of female servants or maids, for they are free and not slaves. Therefore, it is forbidden to engage in sexual relations with them except through an Islamic marriage.

Slavery has been abolished by international conventions, and goes in line with aims and objectives of Islam, as it has called for centuries ago.

As for marrying slaves, it is something permissible under two conditions: first, if one is unable to pay the dowry of a free woman. Second, if there is fear of committing adultery if one doesn’t get married. This is clarified by the following verse: “And whose is not able to afford to marry free, believing women, let them marry from the believing maids whom your right hands possess. This is for him among you who feareth to commit sin. But to have patience would be better for you.” (An-Nisaa’: 25)

This verse shows that Muslim men should abstain from illicit relations and seek enjoyment through marriage to free women or through their female slaves.

In conclusion, Allah has forbidden certain types of behavior and permitted other kinds of behavior as a safeguard to the individual and to the society. Allah has forbidden fornication and adultery. However, in the case of captives whom your right hands posses, it's something necessitated by the special circumstances which were created when the Muslims were at war.”

(Source: http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?pagename=IslamOnline-English-Ask_Scholar/FatwaE/FatwaE&cid=1119503544596)

POINT:
Quran slaves can request freedom and get it.

You are not supposed to force your slave into sexual intercourse.

1) Show us where in the Bible a slave can request his/her freedom and actually receive it, including some money

2) Respond to the fact that in the Bible, you can literally sell your daughter to be a slave!:

Exodus 21:7-11

When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment.

Qur'an 24:33
"Let those who find not the wherewithal for marriage keep themselves chaste, until God gives them means out of His grace. And if any of your slaves ask for a deed in writing (to enable them to earn their freedom for a certain sum), give them such a deed if ye know any good in them: yea, give them something yourselves out of the means which God has given to you. But force not your maids to prostitution when they desire chastity, in order that ye may make a gain in the goods of this life. But if anyone compels them, yet, after such compulsion, is God, Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful (to them),"

End

Wow..some of the lies and ur use of al taqyiaa here was amusing...

U can decieve the ignorant but u can't decieve those of us that have researched islam and know ur hadiths. Lol empiree u are deluded.. continue posting from pro islamic propaganda sites.. Fuwaysiqah

parisbookaddict:

[size=4pt]Wow..some of the lies and ur use of al taqyiaa here was amusing...
U can decieve the ignorant but u can't decieve those of us that have researched islam and know ur hadiths. Lol empiree u are deluded.. continue posting from pro islamic propaganda sites.. Fuwaysiqah[/size]

Same silly tactic. You better stop that nonsense before i send you where you belong again. If you have no reasonable counterclaim, kindly......SHUT UP!



[size=20pt]"When missionaries came to Africa they had the Bible we had the land. They said 'let us pray'. We closed our eyes. When we opened them we had the bible they had the land"[/size] ~ Desmond tutu

Empiree:
Same silly tactic. You better stop that nonsense before i send you where you belong again. If you have no reasonable counterclaim, kindly......SHUT UP!



"When missionaries came to Africa they had the Bible we had the land. They said 'let us pray'. We closed our eyes. When we opened them we had the bible they had the land" ~ Desmond tutu

Bishop Desmond tutu also rejects ur pedophile prophet as a fraud..hope u agree with him as well

parisbookaddict:


Bishop Desmond tutu also rejects ur pedophile prophet as a fraud..hope u agree with him as well

This is annular argument. That claim of yours is refuted time and again. You can continue yelling over that. That's your headache.

And Bishop Desmond Tutu simply doesn't choose Islam for belief purposes not because of your inept allegation.

But same Bishop Desmond is pro homosexual which is forbidden according to your Bible.

Empiree:
This is annular argument. That claim of yours is refuted time and again. You can continue yelling over that. That's your headache.

U can miss present ur quran and add words and ur own understanding yo it but I prefer to go straight to ur sources..


Do u deny that Slavery is deeply embedded in Islamic law and tradition. Although a slave-owner is cautioned against treating slaves harshly, basic human rights are not obliged. The very fact that only non-Muslims may be taken as slaves is evidence of Islam's supremacist doctrine.
Of the five references to freeing a slave in the Qur'an, three are prescribed as punitive measures against the slaveholder for unrelated sin, and limits the emancipation to just a single slave. Another (24:33) appears to allow a slave to buy their own freedom if they are "good." This is in keeping with the traditional Islamic practice of wealth-building through the taking and ransoming of hostages, which began under Muhammad.

A tiny verse in one of the earliest chapters, 90:13, does say that freeing a slave is good, however, this was "revealed" at a time when the Muslim community was miniscule and several of their new and potential recruits were either actual slaves or newly freed slaves. Many of these same people, and Muhammad himself, later went on to become owners and traders of slaves, both male and female, as they acquired the power to do so (there is not record of Muhammad owning slaves prior to starting Islam). The language of the Qur'an changed to accommodate slavery, which is why this early verse has had negligible impact on slavery in the Islamic world.
Contrary to popular belief, converting to Islam does notautomatically earn a slave his freedom, although doing so is said to increase a slave master's heavenly reward (Muslim slaves are implied in Qur'an (4:92)). As far as the Islamic courts are concerned, a master may treat his slaves however he chooses without fear of punishment. Contrary to old testament laws.

By contrast, Christianity was a major impetus in the movement to abolish the age-old institution of slavery. Yet, abolition had to be imposed on the Islamic world by the European West.
Given that there have never been abolitionary movement within the Islamic world, it is astonishing to see contemporary Muslims write their religion into the history of abolition. The lie - that the eradication of slavery had something to do with Islam - has been repeated so often that those who parrot are blissfully ignorant of its lack of factual foundation.
There was no William Wilberforce or Bartoleme de las Casas in Islam. As mentioned, Muhammad, the most revered figure in the religion, practiced and approved of slavery. Even his own pulpit was built with slave labor. Caliphs since have had harems of hundreds, sometimes thousands of young girls and women brought from Christian, Hindu and African lands to serve Islam's religious equivalent of the pope in the most demeaning fashion.

One of Muhammad's closest companions was Umar, who became the 2nd caliph only two years after Muhammad died. It is fair to say that he would have known Islam better than any contemporary apologist - those who say that slaves can only be captured in war and wars can only be waged in self-defense.
Under Umar's authority, Arab armies in Egypt invaded Black Africa to the south and attempted to conquer the Christian Makurians who were living there peacefully. Although the Muslims were held off, the Makurians had to sign a treaty to prevent recurring invasions. The terms of the Baqtincluded an annual payment of 360 "high quality" African slaves. The treaty stood for 700 years with no mention of the slightest opposition from generations of Muslim clerics and scholars.
Umar himself was stabbed to death by a slave whose liberty he refused to grant. In this case, the slave was captured during the campaign against a Persia, one of many offensive wars waged by the Muslims against people who were not attacking them.



Modern day apologists and unintelligent muslim defenders such as urself empiree , while trying to defend slavery under Islam, generally ignore the basic fact that reducing people to property is dehumanizing. Instead, they distract from this by comparing the theoretical treatment of slaves under Sharia with the worst examples of abuse from the era of European slavery.
The first problem with this is that the actual practice of Muslim slavery was often remarkably at odds with the relatively humane treatment prescribed by Sharia. For example, according to the Ghanan scholar John Azumah, nearly three times as many captured Africans died in harsh circumstances related to their transport to Muslim lands than were ever even enslaved by Europeans.
A more insurmountable problem for the Muslim apologist who insists that slavery is "different" under Islam is presented by the many examples of Muhammad and his companions selling captured slaves to non-Muslim traders for material goods. The welfare of the slave was obviously of no consequence.
Another myth about Islamic slavery is that it was not race-based. In fact it was. Muhammad's father-in-law, Umar, in his role as caliph, declared that Arabs could not be taken as slaves and even had all Arab slaves freed on his deathbed. This helped propel the vast Islamic campaign to capture slaves in Africa, Europe and Asia for importing into the Middle East.
The greatest slave rebellion in human history took place in Basra, Iraq beginning in 869. A half-million African slaves staged a courageous uprising against their Arab-Islamic masters that lasted fifteen years before being brutally suppressed.

After the Islamic State kidnapped and pressed into slavery thousands of Yazidi women and children in 2014, the caliphate issued an FAQ of sorts on slavery which included rules on sexually molesting children: It is permissible to have intercourse with the female slave who hasn’t reached puberty if she is fit for intercourse; however, if she is not fit for intercourse, then it is enough to enjoy her without intercourse. The best that "mainstream" apologists could muster in response was a letter appealing to "the reality of contemporary times", meaning that Islam has no fixed moral positionon the rape of woman and children.
Since Muhammad was a slave owner and slavery is permitted by the Qur'an, the Muslim world has never apologized for this dehumanizing practice. Even Muslims in the West will often try to justify slavery under Islam, since it is a part of the Qur'an.


In Accordance with ur dirty religion Islamic State members at one of the caliphate's sex slave markets in November, 2014. A price list was released setting the rate Yazidi and Christian girls between ages 10 and 20 at $130. Women between the ages of 20 and 30 were being sold for $86; a 30 to 40 year was being sold for $75 and 40 to 50 year old women were listed for sale at a price of $43.
The price list began with these words: "In the name of Allah, most gracious and merciful. We have received news that the demand in women and cattle markets has sharply decreased and that will affected Islamic State revenues as well as the funding of the Mujaheddin in the battlefield. We have made some changes. Below are the prices of Yazidi and Christian women."


Qur'an (2:178)- "O ye who believe! Retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of the murdered; the freeman for the freeman, and the slave for the slave, and the female for the female." The message of this verse, which prescribes the rules of retaliation for murder, is that all humans are notcreated equal. The human value of a slave is less than that of a free person (and a woman's worth is also distinguished from that of a man's).
Qur'an (16:75)- "Allah sets forth the Parable (of two men: one) a slave under the dominion of another; He has no power of any sort; and (the other) a man on whom We have bestowed goodly favours from Ourselves, and he spends thereof (freely), privately and publicly: are the two equal? (By no means praise be to Allah." Yet another confirmation that the slave is is not equal to the master. In this case it is plain that the slave owes his status to Allah's will. (According to 16:71, the owner should be careful about insulting Allah by bestowing Allah's gifts on slaves

Qur'an (33:50)- "O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives to whom thou hast paid their dowers; and those (slaves) whom thy right hand possesses out of the prisoners of war whom Allah has assigned to thee" This is one of several personal-sounding verses "from Allah" narrated by Muhammad - in this case allowing himself a virtually unlimited supply of sex partners. Other Muslims are restrained to four wives, but, following the example of their prophet, may also have sex with any number of slaves, as the following verse make clear:
Qur'an (23:5-6)- "..who abstain from sex, except with those joined to them in the marriage bond, or (the captives) whom their right hands possess..." This verse permits the slave-owner to have sex with his slaves. See also Qur'an (70:29-30). The Quran is a small book, so if Allah used valuable space to repeat the same point four times, then sex slavery must be very important to him.
Qur'an (4:24)- "And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess." Even sex with married slaves is permissible.
Qur'an (8:69)- "But (now) enjoy what ye took in war, lawful and good" A reference to war booty, of which slaves were a part. The Muslim slave master may enjoy his "catch" because (according to verse 71) "Allah gave you mastery over them."
Qur'an (24:32)- "And marry those among you who are single and those who are fit among your male slaves and your female slaves..." Breeding slaves based on fitness.

Abu Dawud 1814- "...[Abu Bakr]He then began to beat[his slave]him while the Apostle of Allah (pbuh) was smiling and saying: Look at this man who is in the sacred state (putting on ihram), what is he doing?" The future first caliph of Islam is beating his slave for losing a camel while Muhammad looks on in apparent amusement.
Ibn Ishaq (734)- A slave girl is given a "violent beating" by Ali in the presence of Muhammad, who does nothing about it.
Abu Dawud 38:4458- Narrated Ali ibn AbuTalib: “A slave-girl belonging to the house of the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) committed fornication. He (the Prophet) said: Rush up, Ali, and inflict the prescribed punishment on her. I then hurried up, and saw that blood was flowing from her, and did not stop. So I came to him and he said: Have you finished inflicting (punishment on her)? I said: I went to her while her blood was flowing. He said: Leave her alone till her bleeding stops; then inflict the prescribed punishment on her. And inflict the prescribed punishment on those whom your right hands possess (i.e. slaves)”. A slave girl is ordered by Muhammad to be beaten until she bleeds, and then beaten again after the bleeding stops. He indicates that this is prescribed treatment for slaves ("those whom your right hand possesses".


Do u want more inform on how ur sex craved prophet treated slaves.. continue defending the fraud..

Sorry, you just spinning in circle all the time. I no longer see you intelligent enough. You are dealt with on this thread and other atheist thread by liekiller. You ran away from there. This is one of my responses earlier on this thread.

And why didn't PAUL, MATHEW, MARK, LUKE and JOHN abolished slavery 600years before Muhammad was born? It wasn't in their best interest to do so.

FACTS:

*Did slavery or slave trades exist before prophet Muhammad(Allah's peace and blessings be upon him)? YES

*Did Jews and Christians preceded Muhammad? YES

*Did Jews and Christians have enough grace to abolish slavery before Muhammad? YES

*How many years? 600 years (six centuries)

*Did they abolish slavery within that period? NO

You can not deny these obvious facts. Any wonder why slavery is not recorded much in New Testament?. It's because writers deliberately left it out. How in the world slavery existed before Muhammad and during New Testament era and nothing recorded regarding slavery?. That's hell of culprits. Ancient Jews and Christians had 600 yrs to abolish slavery but Peter, Paul, Mathew, Mark, Luke and John were busy fabricating stories about three-headed gods and left out slavery part.

You can't deny slavery existed between the demise of Jesus (peace be upon him) and advent of Muhammad(peace be upon him). Why did they leave out slave trade in NT?. Slavery recorded in the OT didn't just happen by accident. It happened because Jews, Christians and Pagan Arabs all traded slaves. If you deny this, I ask you why was this event not recorded in NT?. Are you saying Jesus was just sitting around and ignored like it didn't exist?

Ancient Jews and Christians waited for 600 yrs for arrival of Muhammad to abolish what they started. Muhammad was sent to the whole world (of seen and unseen, living and non living things, animals and plants etc). And he delivered the message within 23 yrs period and at the same time had to deal with the mess created Jews and Christians of old.

But MATHEW, MARK, LUKE AND JOHN are not prophets sent by God. They had no job to do. So why did they not talk about slavery?. Why all of a sudden NT barely gives reference to slavery?. So why are you saying Christianity has nothing to do with slavery. That's false. And now you want to blame prophet Muhammad?.

European Christians of course did not start slavery but they pursued the same agenda in different fashion (i:e through secularism) but same agenda of Christians of old. They too quoted Bible at some point during their dirty business. And all the Arab and Muslim countries you mentioned earlier that were forced to end slavery, they themselves were under colonialism of European christian slave traders and masters. They were not independent.

The real reason Paul, Peter, Mathew, Mark, Luke and John made little or no reference to slavery in New Testament was because Old Testament was used to achieve their christiandom, christian civilization etc. They massacred and destroyed primitive people to get to the top. After they achieved everything they wanted, they now claimed their God is now peaceful. That He has renounced violence. That same God now transformed to three headed-god and he's peaceful and loving in New Testament. That's bu'llshit if you ask me.

But in the Old Testament, he is violent, detroyer, He was just killing men, women and children. He killed killed killed and killed and intimidated people. He then went for rehab and came out smiling, loving, caring, "no more crusade" bla bla bla after he already achieved everything by violence. And almost everything about his violence past barely recorded in New Testament. In Old Testament, he had swords of Achilles, shield and armor and wore 'abaya'. He rode on camels and horses. After he came out from rehab as "nonviolence", he now rides on BMW, he puts on suit and tie and declared "no more crusade" after he already destroyed people's lives. And now he wants Muhammad to deal with the mess he created. Nonsense!

And dont forget you havent tell nairalanders about your 3headed-gods you worship.

^

Empiree:
Sorry, you just spinning in circle all the time. I no longer see you intelligent enough. You are dealt with on this post and other atheist post by liekiller. You ran away from there. This is one of my responses earlier on this thread.
And dont forget you havent tell nairalanders about your 3headed-gods you worship.

English ..wow.. your Nigerian government has failed u empiree

@Empiree.Jazakumullah khaeran for all ur relentless effort and resilience. Only Allah(SWT) can reward u.

The girl Ifeann/parisbookaddict na oloriburuku! Honestly, she is under a spell! She has few days left to be sent packing out of Nairaland. Just watch out! She will probably create anothet name nnaefioloriburuku! @Empiree.Jazakumullah khaeran for all ur relentless effort and resilience. Only Allah(SWT) can reward u.

The girl Ifeann/parisbookaddict na oloriburuku! Honestly, she is under a spell! She has few days left to be sent packing out of Nairaland. Just watch out! She will probably create anothet name nnaefioloriburuku!

You should not be worshipping the same god of the people that enslaved you

parisbookaddict:



U can miss present ur quran and add words and ur own understanding yo it but I prefer to go straight to ur sources..


Do u deny that Slavery is deeply embedded in Islamic law and tradition. Although a slave-owner is cautioned against treating slaves harshly, basic human rights are not obliged. The very fact that only non-Muslims may be taken as slaves is evidence of Islam's supremacist doctrine.
Of the five references to freeing a slave in the Qur'an, three are prescribed as punitive measures against the slaveholder for unrelated sin, and limits the emancipation to just a single slave. Another (24:33) appears to allow a slave to buy their own freedom if they are "good." This is in keeping with the traditional Islamic practice of wealth-building through the taking and ransoming of hostages, which began under Muhammad.

A tiny verse in one of the earliest chapters, 90:13, does say that freeing a slave is good, however, this was "revealed" at a time when the Muslim community was miniscule and several of their new and potential recruits were either actual slaves or newly freed slaves. Many of these same people, and Muhammad himself, later went on to become owners and traders of slaves, both male and female, as they acquired the power to do so (there is not record of Muhammad owning slaves prior to starting Islam). The language of the Qur'an changed to accommodate slavery, which is why this early verse has had negligible impact on slavery in the Islamic world.
Contrary to popular belief, converting to Islam does notautomatically earn a slave his freedom, although doing so is said to increase a slave master's heavenly reward (Muslim slaves are implied in Qur'an (4:92)). As far as the Islamic courts are concerned, a master may treat his slaves however he chooses without fear of punishment. Contrary to old testament laws.

By contrast, Christianity was a major impetus in the movement to abolish the age-old institution of slavery. Yet, abolition had to be imposed on the Islamic world by the European West.
Given that there have never been abolitionary movement within the Islamic world, it is astonishing to see contemporary Muslims write their religion into the history of abolition. The lie - that the eradication of slavery had something to do with Islam - has been repeated so often that those who parrot are blissfully ignorant of its lack of factual foundation.
There was no William Wilberforce or Bartoleme de las Casas in Islam. As mentioned, Muhammad, the most revered figure in the religion, practiced and approved of slavery. Even his own pulpit was built with slave labor. Caliphs since have had harems of hundreds, sometimes thousands of young girls and women brought from Christian, Hindu and African lands to serve Islam's religious equivalent of the pope in the most demeaning fashion.

One of Muhammad's closest companions was Umar, who became the 2nd caliph only two years after Muhammad died. It is fair to say that he would have known Islam better than any contemporary apologist - those who say that slaves can only be captured in war and wars can only be waged in self-defense.
Under Umar's authority, Arab armies in Egypt invaded Black Africa to the south and attempted to conquer the Christian Makurians who were living there peacefully. Although the Muslims were held off, the Makurians had to sign a treaty to prevent recurring invasions. The terms of the Baqtincluded an annual payment of 360 "high quality" African slaves. The treaty stood for 700 years with no mention of the slightest opposition from generations of Muslim clerics and scholars.
Umar himself was stabbed to death by a slave whose liberty he refused to grant. In this case, the slave was captured during the campaign against a Persia, one of many offensive wars waged by the Muslims against people who were not attacking them.



Modern day apologists and unintelligent muslim defenders such as urself empiree , while trying to defend slavery under Islam, generally ignore the basic fact that reducing people to property is dehumanizing. Instead, they distract from this by comparing the theoretical treatment of slaves under Sharia with the worst examples of abuse from the era of European slavery.
The first problem with this is that the actual practice of Muslim slavery was often remarkably at odds with the relatively humane treatment prescribed by Sharia. For example, according to the Ghanan scholar John Azumah, nearly three times as many captured Africans died in harsh circumstances related to their transport to Muslim lands than were ever even enslaved by Europeans.
A more insurmountable problem for the Muslim apologist who insists that slavery is "different" under Islam is presented by the many examples of Muhammad and his companions selling captured slaves to non-Muslim traders for material goods. The welfare of the slave was obviously of no consequence.
Another myth about Islamic slavery is that it was not race-based. In fact it was. Muhammad's father-in-law, Umar, in his role as caliph, declared that Arabs could not be taken as slaves and even had all Arab slaves freed on his deathbed. This helped propel the vast Islamic campaign to capture slaves in Africa, Europe and Asia for importing into the Middle East.
The greatest slave rebellion in human history took place in Basra, Iraq beginning in 869. A half-million African slaves staged a courageous uprising against their Arab-Islamic masters that lasted fifteen years before being brutally suppressed.

After the Islamic State kidnapped and pressed into slavery thousands of Yazidi women and children in 2014, the caliphate issued an FAQ of sorts on slavery which included rules on sexually molesting children: It is permissible to have intercourse with the female slave who hasn’t reached puberty if she is fit for intercourse; however, if she is not fit for intercourse, then it is enough to enjoy her without intercourse. The best that "mainstream" apologists could muster in response was a letter appealing to "the reality of contemporary times", meaning that Islam has no fixed moral positionon the rape of woman and children.
Since Muhammad was a slave owner and slavery is permitted by the Qur'an, the Muslim world has never apologized for this dehumanizing practice. Even Muslims in the West will often try to justify slavery under Islam, since it is a part of the Qur'an.


In Accordance with ur dirty religion Islamic State members at one of the caliphate's sex slave markets in November, 2014. A price list was released setting the rate Yazidi and Christian girls between ages 10 and 20 at $130. Women between the ages of 20 and 30 were being sold for $86; a 30 to 40 year was being sold for $75 and 40 to 50 year old women were listed for sale at a price of $43.
The price list began with these words: "In the name of Allah, most gracious and merciful. We have received news that the demand in women and cattle markets has sharply decreased and that will affected Islamic State revenues as well as the funding of the Mujaheddin in the battlefield. We have made some changes. Below are the prices of Yazidi and Christian women."


Qur'an (2:178)- "O ye who believe! Retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of the murdered; the freeman for the freeman, and the slave for the slave, and the female for the female." The message of this verse, which prescribes the rules of retaliation for murder, is that all humans are notcreated equal. The human value of a slave is less than that of a free person (and a woman's worth is also distinguished from that of a man's).
Qur'an (16:75)- "Allah sets forth the Parable (of two men: one) a slave under the dominion of another; He has no power of any sort; and (the other) a man on whom We have bestowed goodly favours from Ourselves, and he spends thereof (freely), privately and publicly: are the two equal? (By no means praise be to Allah." Yet another confirmation that the slave is is not equal to the master. In this case it is plain that the slave owes his status to Allah's will. (According to 16:71, the owner should be careful about insulting Allah by bestowing Allah's gifts on slaves

Qur'an (33:50)- "O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives to whom thou hast paid their dowers; and those (slaves) whom thy right hand possesses out of the prisoners of war whom Allah has assigned to thee" This is one of several personal-sounding verses "from Allah" narrated by Muhammad - in this case allowing himself a virtually unlimited supply of sex partners. Other Muslims are restrained to four wives, but, following the example of their prophet, may also have sex with any number of slaves, as the following verse make clear:
Qur'an (23:5-6)- "..who abstain from sex, except with those joined to them in the marriage bond, or (the captives) whom their right hands possess..." This verse permits the slave-owner to have sex with his slaves. See also Qur'an (70:29-30). The Quran is a small book, so if Allah used valuable space to repeat the same point four times, then sex slavery must be very important to him.
Qur'an (4:24)- "And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess." Even sex with married slaves is permissible.
Qur'an (8:69)- "But (now) enjoy what ye took in war, lawful and good" A reference to war booty, of which slaves were a part. The Muslim slave master may enjoy his "catch" because (according to verse 71) "Allah gave you mastery over them."
Qur'an (24:32)- "And marry those among you who are single and those who are fit among your male slaves and your female slaves..." Breeding slaves based on fitness.

Abu Dawud 1814- "...[Abu Bakr]He then began to beat[his slave]him while the Apostle of Allah (pbuh) was smiling and saying: Look at this man who is in the sacred state (putting on ihram), what is he doing?" The future first caliph of Islam is beating his slave for losing a camel while Muhammad looks on in apparent amusement.
Ibn Ishaq (734)- A slave girl is given a "violent beating" by Ali in the presence of Muhammad, who does nothing about it.
Abu Dawud 38:4458- Narrated Ali ibn AbuTalib: “A slave-girl belonging to the house of the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) committed fornication. He (the Prophet) said: Rush up, Ali, and inflict the prescribed punishment on her. I then hurried up, and saw that blood was flowing from her, and did not stop. So I came to him and he said: Have you finished inflicting (punishment on her)? I said: I went to her while her blood was flowing. He said: Leave her alone till her bleeding stops; then inflict the prescribed punishment on her. And inflict the prescribed punishment on those whom your right hands possess (i.e. slaves)”. A slave girl is ordered by Muhammad to be beaten until she bleeds, and then beaten again after the bleeding stops. He indicates that this is prescribed treatment for slaves ("those whom your right hand possesses".


Do u want more inform on how ur sex craved prophet treated slaves.. continue defending the fraud..

Empiree 9jaforlife u still haven't even tried to explain this. ..defending Mohammed is bound to fail because he was a terrorist..the frist terrorist from Islam.

^I can't even read. It's not interesting at all. Looks perfectly like copy/paste stuff...which is what i am sure it's. It's not legible at all.

You sound miserable. Are you okay?. Like being frustrated bcuz of Islam and you can't even defend trinity or man-god. You just running all over NL.......smh

Empiree:
^I can't even read. It's not interesting at all. Looks perfectly like copy/paste stuff...which is what i am sure it's. It's not legible at all.

You sound miserable. Are you okay ?. Like being frustrated bcuz of Islam and you can't even defend trinity or man-god. You just running all over NL.......smh

Dude u can't read it because the Islamic spirit in u has made u blind to the truth
.the words are in clear and intelligent 21st century English.

Ifeann:


Dude u can't read it because the Islamic spirit in u has made u blind to the truth
.the words are in clear and intelligent 21st century English.

[quote author=Empiree post=31321103][/quote]

Empiree thats Typical childish islamic ab.oki behaviour. .
U resort to this when the truth has overwhelmed ur mind


All is forgiven tho


I prefer the pic below


Mordified ...empiree I see u have removed that silly pic...that's a good boy.

Ifeann:


Empiree thats Typical childish islamic ab.oki behaviour. .
U resort to this when the truth has overwhelmed ur mind


All is forgiven tho


I prefer the pic below

who drew the picture...muslim?. You already blasphemed against God beyond reasonable doubt...so what's my blame? Love yourself

Ifeann:


Empiree 9jaforlife u still haven't even tried to explain this. ..defending Mohammed is bound to fail because he was a terrorist..the frist terrorist from Islam.

Ifeann aka parisbookaddict aka white woman aka black aka male aka female you're simply deluded. Period!

Empiree:
And why didn't PAUL, MATHEW, MARK, LUKE and JOHN abolished slavery 600years before Muhammad was born? It wasn't in their best interest to do so.

FACTS:

*Did slavery or slave trades exist before prophet Muhammad(Allah's peace and blessings be upon him)? YES

*Did Jews and Christians preceded Muhammad? YES

*Did Jews and Christians have enough grace to abolish slavery before Muhammad? YES

*How many years? 600 years (six centuries)

*Did they abolish slavery within that period? NO

You can not deny these obvious facts. Any wonder why slavery is not recorded much in New Testament?. It's because writers deliberately left it out. How in the world slavery existed before Muhammad and during New Testament era and nothing recorded regarding slavery?. That's hell of culprits. Ancient Jews and Christians had 600 yrs to abolish slavery but Peter, Paul, Mathew, Mark, Luke and John were busy fabricating stories about three-headed gods and left out slavery part.

You can't deny slavery existed between the demise of Jesus (peace be upon him) and advent of Muhammad(peace be upon him). Why did they leave out slave trade in NT?. Slavery recorded in the OT didn't just happen by accident. It happened because Jews, Christians and Pagan Arabs all traded slaves. If you deny this, I ask you why was this event not recorded in NT?. Are you saying Jesus was just sitting around and ignored like it didn't exist?

Ancient Jews and Christians waited for 600 yrs for arrival of Muhammad to abolish what they started. Muhammad was sent to the whole world (of seen and unseen, living and non living things, animals and plants etc). And he delivered the message within 23 yrs period and at the same time had to deal with the mess created Jews and Christians of old.

But MATHEW, MARK, LUKE AND JOHN are not prophets sent by God. They had no job to do. So why did they not talk about slavery?. Why all of a sudden NT barely gives reference to slavery?. So why are you saying Christianity has nothing to do with slavery. That's false. And now you want to blame prophet Muhammad?.

European Christians of course did not start slavery but they pursued the same agenda in different fashion (i:e through secularism) but same agenda of Christians of old. They too quoted Bible at some point during their dirty business. And all the Arab and Muslim countries you mentioned earlier that were forced to end slavery, they themselves were under colonialism of European christian slave traders and masters. They were not independent.

The real reason Paul, Peter, Mathew, Mark, Luke and John made little or no reference to slavery in New Testament was because Old Testament was used to achieve their christiandom, christian civilization etc. They massacred and destroyed primitive people to get to the top. After they achieved everything they wanted, they now claimed their God is now peaceful. That He has renounced violence. That same God now transformed to three headed-god and he's peaceful and loving in New Testament. That's bu'llshit if you ask me.

But in the Old Testament, he is violent, detroyer, He was just killing men, women and children. He killed killed killed and killed and intimidated people. He then went for rehab and came out smiling, loving, caring, "no more crusade" bla bla bla after he already achieved everything by violence. And almost everything about his violence past barely recorded in New Testament. In Old Testament, he had swords of Achilles, shield and armor and wore 'abaya'. He rode on camels and horses. After he came out from rehab as "nonviolence", he now rides on BMW, he puts on suit and tie and declared "no more crusade" after he already destroyed people's lives. And now he wants Muhammad to deal with the mess he created. Nonsense!

God bless you! At least if deluded Ifeann aka parisbookaddict want to turn everything around and lay the blame of slavery on the doorstep of Islam, good people will be there to tell her the real facts!

9jaforlife:


God bless you! At least if deluded Ifeann aka parisbookaddict want to turn everything around and lay the blame of slavery on the doorstep of Islam, good people will be there to tell her the real facts!

Amin

@op
Your opinions on this topic are childish, self-serving, comedic, insulting and very vexatious to anyone with common sense and humane.

Here, acting cognitively dissonant, you are trying to spin and rationalise biblical slavery as being " not so bad" because it was necessitated by economic needs rather than racial considerations.
What a load of cow dung.

Slavery is slavery, whether it is your siblings or a foreigner of another race.

The continuing episodes of moral schizophrenia amongst you religiotards always shocks me in no small measure.

plaetton:
@op
Your opinions on this topic are childish, self-serving, comedic, insulting and very vexatious to anyone with common sense and humane.

Here, acting cognitively dissonant, you are trying to spin and rationalise biblical slavery as being " not so bad" because it was necessitated by economic needs rather than racial considerations.
What a load of cow dung.

Slavery is slavery, whether it is your siblings or a foreigner of another race.

The continuing episodes of moral schizophrenia amongst you religiotards always shocks me in no small measure.

We have a word Smith here... I like..

Dude I understand ur view..yes I do.. I actually see why u would say that..but u are wrong..

Before we continue. I want to ask u something. .ur answer is very important.

DO U KNOW THE MEANING OF THE WORD " gentleman'..

How I missed this thread. A lot have been taught to madam ifeann. I forgot this thread completely.

Updated.....