₦airaland Forum

OREMUSSANCTUS:
I want to use dis medium to hail our amiable and vast lecturer of religious affairs. Shez so good in islamic affairs and even d koran itself, kip up d good work of caging d likes of Abuamam Rilwayne001 Tartar Zeezahbee Empiree and co. Wen dey see her on thread, dey tremble. Ifeann, exposing d wickedness of islam since childhood.

I just post articles; verses and stories I see in the hadiths and quran then ask Muslims to explain so I can learn from them...

I am not trying to "cage" them like u said but trying to set them free with truth.

OREMUSSANCTUS:
dey ve bin passive dis days, guess dey can no longer fight d truth!

Hopefully they are busy reading the quran and hadiths to verify what we have been telling them.

MrOlai:
@Ifeann. It's so
unfortunate that u're always here to tarnish d image of Islam &
muslims! The fact that we hav some so-called "muslims" like boko haram
committing evils on d land does not mean Islam & muslims are evils.



I hav gone thru all ur topics. Everything there is all about defamation
of Islam & muslims! Like there are so-called "muslims" creating
problems 4 personal interests, there are also "christians" creating
problems 4 personal interests too just like u! Some of them are into
evils like homosexuality, lesbianism, fraud, ritual killings, having sex
with their church members, etc using bible as their reference!


And for u:
What did Jesus say about fornication/adultery? How many men hav slept
with since u lost ur virginity?
Do u see anything wrong in having sex with different men?
What about ur illicit amoral relationships u hav with ur church
members? Who taught u that?

And u come here always to defame Islam & muslims! Well, u'll get d consequences of ur actions from God Almighty! It's just a matter of time!

U need help. Same insults as last time.. U are not even creative. See what Islam has done to your life.

malvisguy212:
No mislim will want to discuss it with you because the evidence is in the quran and hadith.

I know, its forbidden to question passages in the quran. Hopefully with this evidence they will research about the origins of Islam and not only depend on their imams and shiek for explanations.

OREMUSSANCTUS:
nice write up, by now I tink Rilwayne001 Abuamam Zeezahbee Empiree Tartar all of dem will be crying and shedding tears. Our duty here is to expose d falsehood of islam. And its cruel and wicked ways.

I don't want them shedding tears I want them to cross check and research these facts for themselves. I hope they pray about this to the God of Abraham Issac and Jacob and by Gods grace are made to see the sacrifice of Christ for them on the cross.

Caveat:
Keep the conversation civil and mature, No insults are necessary. Refutations are solicited if there are any.

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
There are many unanswered questions about Islam and it strong association with paganism.
For example;
1. Mohammed's Pagan father was called Abdullah, which means slave of allah long before Mohammed started Islam.

2. The crescent moon and star is seen high above almost every mosque not to mention the moon god was allegedly one of the 360 gods of the kabba.

3. The muslim obsession with black clothes.

4. The Islamic black flag.

5. The kissing of the black stone done by Muslims which was started by Mohammed for no apparent reason.

6. The circling of the kabba.

7. Compulsory pilgrimage for Muslims which was done by pagans in mecca before Islam.

8. Bowing down and facing mecca when praying. Etc

9. Cultural Superstitions and unfounded hate for wall geckos, dogs(mans best friend), cats etc

All these are some of the red flags that indicate that there maybe more to Islam than meets the eye. These pagan practises are not seen in Judaism and Christianity which Mohammed claims are people of the book and says he is one of their "prophets". Could Islam be the worlds largest monotheistic pagan religion. Let's look at more evidence.


Muhammad was born of pagan parents. His father,Abdullah and his mother,Amina were both pagans and they used to worship many idols. His entire childhood (probably up to his teen) was spent in paganism.
Today, many Muhammadans will find it extremely hard to digest this fact. However,Muhammad's pagan origin is disclosed by Hisham ibn al-Kalbi.
On page 17 of his important work,Kitab al-Asnam(The Book of Idols)he writes:
'We have been told that the Apostle of Allah once mentioned al-Uzza saying,
"I have offered a white sheep to al-'Uzza,while I was a follower of the religion of my people."

In the statement above Muhammad clearly admits his past adherence to paganism
- the then religion of the Quraysh.
When Muhammad became an adult and started to attend the annual assembly of poets at Ukazhe was deeply impressed and moved by the thoughts, eloquence, sentiment, freethinking and humanism expounded by many of those poets.

He started questioning the idol-worshipping and began to start preaching a new concept of one God,the creator-similar to the concepts of the Jews and the Christians of that time.

Nonetheless, he was confused as to which god ought to be his God. Allah,at that time, was the supreme god of the pagan Quraysh. From Muhammad's perspective, their only fault was that besides Allah,they used to worship as the intercessors with Allah the supreme god, other smaller gods/goddesses like: Hubal, Al-lat, Al-Uzza, Manat…etc.

So, at the start of his new concept of an almighty creator,Allah was out of his mind. Besides, at that time the magicians, the soothsayers, the sorcerers, and even the Satan worshippers used to vow byAllah. Thus, Muhammad,at the very beginning, found it utterly despicable to make Allah his God (ilah).
During those pagan days the people of Yemen used to worship another deity whose name was Ar-Rahman. Muhammad,for a while, adopted the name Ar-Rahman for God in place ofAllah. Coincidentally,Ar-Rahman was also the Jewish word Rahmana which was a name for God in the Talmudic period.
(Noldeke: The Koran, The Origins of the Koran, p.53).
Muhammad cleverly thought that by using the word Ar-Rahman he ought to be able to attract to his new ‘religion’, theJewsas well as some pagans.
*** Please note that no where in the Quran does Allah say that he has 99 additional names including Ar-Rahman.
In fact these 'names' are Allah's ATTRIBUTES/ SIFAT and NOT NAMES ***
So, when he declared himself to be the messenger ofAr-Rahman,theMeccans,too, were at a loss and confused. The Meccans did not know of any Ar-Rahman,other than the Ar-Rahman of al-Yamamah (some writers say Ar-Rahman,was atYemen).
When we read, with an unbiased mind, the first50 Suras(in chronological order)of theQuran,we note Muhammad’s confusion regrading Lord, Allah and Ar-Rahman. He was quite unsure of whom he should consider as hisGod (Ilah).
Here is a summary of the first50 Suras regarding Muhammad’s idea of hisGod:
Only Lord—68, 92, 89, 94, 100, 108, 105, 114, 97, 106, 75 (11 Suras)
Ar-Rahman, Lord—55, 36 (2 Suras)
Ar-Rahman, Allah, Lord—20
Allah, Lord—96, 73, 74, 81, 87, 53, 85, 50, 38, 7, 72, 25, 35, 56, 26, 27, 28, 17 (18 Suras)
This demonstrates Muhammad’s initial vacillation, confusion and ignorance of the affairs of hisGod (Ilah).
The Quran also confirms that when he started to preach his brand of faithMuhammadwas lost, confused and did not know much of religion. Here is what the Quranwrites:
93.7 And He found thee wandering,and He gave thee guidance.
12.3We do relate unto thee the most beautiful of stories, in that We reveal to thee this (portion of the)Qur'an:before this,thou too was among those who knew it not
42.52And thus have We, by Our Command, sent inspiration to thee:thou knewest not (before) what was Revelation, and what was Faith;but We have made the(Qur'an)a Light, wherewith We guide such of Our servants as We will; and verily thou dost guide (men) to the Straight Way ,-

*** Previously,Muhammad,as aPAGAN,was heedless of earlier revelations ***
Initially,Muhammad even eulogized the important gods (or idols) of the pagans by agreeing with the Quraysh- at some point that these gods were the intercessors ofAllah(The Satanic Verses).On the same page Hisham ibn al-Kalbi writes:
TheQuraysh were wont to circumambulate theKa'baand chant:
53.19ByAllat and al-'Uzza,
53.20AndManah,the third idol besides.
53.21 Verily they are the most exalted females/cranes[Gharaniq]
53.22 Whose intercession is to be sought.
These were also called"the Daughters of Allah: al Lat, al Uzza & al Manat"and were supposed to intercede beforeAllah.
Muhammad,in a moment of desperation and weakness, to try and bring his Quraysh tribe to his way of thinking, compromised his monotheism by allowing himself to state that he received theABOVE'revelation'fromAllah.
The above represent theSATANIC VERSEScontroversy, where by Satan allegedly was able to easily mislead Muhammad into allowing his followers to have partners withAllah,as they had under paganism; that is to allow the three daughters ofAllah to share his divine throne by being intercessors between humanity andAllah.
When Muhammad realised that he had compromised his Monotheism,he later very conveniently, ABROGATED verses 21 & 22 and replaced them with the following:
53.19Have ye seenLat. and 'Uzza,
53.20And another, the third (goddess),Manat?
53.21What! for you the male sex, and for Him, the female?
53.22Behold, such would be indeed a division most unfair
53.23These are nothing but names which ye have devised,- ye and your fathers,- for which Allah has sent down no authority (whatever). They follow nothing but conjecture and what their own souls desire!- Even though there has already come to them Guidance from their Lord!

*** To cover up the fact that he had compromised his monotheism,Muhammad found that the bestSCAPE GOAT is to very conveniently blame the unsuspecting :SATAN.

As u do more research on Islam you see more evidence for yourself.

For more info visit: http://www.inthenameofallah.org/Muhammad%20the%20Pagan.html

malvisguy212:
The quran truth is strange from the bible, what God opposed in the bible, the quranic god approved of it.

Deuteronomy 10:17-19: For Jehovah
your God is the God of gods and the
Lord of lords, the God great, mighty
and fear-inspiring, who treats none
with partiality nor accepts a bribe,
executing judgment for the fatherless
boy and the widow and loving the
foreign resident so as to give him
bread and clothing. You too must
love the foreign resident , for you
became alien residents in the land of
Egypt.
Leviticus 19:9-10: And when you
people reap the harvest of your land,
you must not reap the edge of your
field completely and the leftovers of
your harvest you must not pick up.
You must not gather the leftovers of
your vineyard and you must not pick
up the scattered grapes of your
vineyard. For the afflicted one and
the foreign resident you should
leave them. I am Jehovah your God.
Leviticus 19:33-34: And in case a
foreign resident resides with you as
an alien in your land, you must not
mistreat him. The foreign resident
who resides as an alien with you
should become to you like a native of
yours; and you must love him as
yourself, for you became foreign
residents in the land of Egypt. I am
Jehovah your God.

The contrast is clear. Thanks for this insight.

balash:
I know u mr man, you are looking for everyway to tarnish the prophets name no matter how hard it is I give u evidence u always result in saying trash. Who is ibn ishaq? His he not an individual? So what are u inciting a book someone posted when the prophet already died centuries ago? Is that a quran?? Woh this is the last tym am responding to u. U merely a sadist

Are u claiming ignorance ... U don't know who ibn ishaq is, go ask ur imam.. but i hope u know the the sahih hadiths muslim and bukhari. Because I will throw u wicked deed by your prophet in them.

No knowledgeable muslim will say what u just said about ibn ishaq..

When he says something nice about Mohammed u will appeal to him but when he exposes other of his deeds u forget who he is...

Rilwayne001:
Are you this dull damn.

Debate the man u muslim stop insulting him...

U Muslims keep following the spirit of the anti Christ and keep denying the divinity of Christ...


Your Koran says
Qur'an 4:157
They said (in boast), "we killed christ jesus the son of mary, the messenger of Allah". But they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubt, without(certain) knowledge, but only conjective to follow, for a surety they killed him not.

And

Qur'an 9: 30
"AND THE JEWS SAY, EZRA IS THE SON OF Allah, AND THE CHRISTIAN SAY: THE MESSIAH IS THE SON OF Allah, THESE ARE THE WORDS OF THEIR MOUTHS; THEY INITIATE THE SAYING OF THOSE WHO DISBELIEVED; MAY Allah DESTROY THEM; HOW THEY ARE TURNED AWAY


In Mark 14:61-62, Jesus claimed to be the Son of Man (Daniel 7:13) and
David's Lord (Psalm 110:1)
Jesus helped people who called him Lord, and never rebuked when people worshipped him (Matthew 14:30-33)
Moreover in John 5:22-23 22 , the Father judges no one, but has entrusted all judgment to the Son, that all may honour the Son just as they honour the Father. Whoever does not honour the Son does not honour the Father, who sent him. Jesus judges us all, Jesus is one with God and the son of God.

The scripture is very clear on the nature of Jesus and his mission in the world. Check also Mathew 11:27, 17:5,John 5:17-18 and peters answer to Christ's question about who he was in Mathew 16:16.

The scripture is also very clear in;
1 John 2:22, 'Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that
Jesus is the Christ. Such a person is the antichrist--denying the Father and the Son. This is Islam.

1 John 4:2-3 "By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God; and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God; and this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world." Several times this term is used in the plural, and can be applied to almost anyone who is opposed to Christ. Those who deny that Jesus came in the flesh are anti-Christ or of the spirit of antichrist. Clear description of Islam.

1 John 4:1
beloved,believe not every spirit,but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets has gone into the world. Does this remind u of a certain blood thirsty "prophet".

This is one of the ways to discern a false teacher from a true one.

In 1 Corinthians 14:33 My bible tells me in clear terms that God is not the author of confusion. There is so much confusion in Islam ask the Wahabi, Salafists, sunnis, shites alwaites, ahmedies. They kill each other because of minor differences remember how you sunnis killed ur prophets grand kids. Shia Muslims are still upset.

My bible also tell me in Matthew 7:15-20,“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Therefore by their fruits you will know them."
Islams fruits are rotten and that's the truth my friend.

So in conclusion;
God the father acknowledged Jesus as his son (john 17:5)
Jesus called himself the Son of God.
His disciples called him the son of God.
Isaiah from the old testament prophesied about him and called him the son of God.
Angel Gabriel in the first chapter of Luke called Jesus the Son of God.
John the baptist called Jesus the son of God.
The Jews who hated him accused him of claiming he is the Son of God
Demons he casted out called him the son of God.

Yet u Muslims choose to believe the words of a pagan sex addicted slave trader mass murderer illiterate Arab paedophile who died after he was poisoned.

May the one true God, the God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob, father of Jesus set you free when u come to him for truth.

Rilwayne001:
NOTE: Dont Just Scan Through, Read Thoroughly. This thread is not created to bash anybody but to enlighten the reader.

DEDICATED TO: True2god, Truthman2012, malvisguy212, francistony, macelliot and all other NL members.

INTRODUCTION
It is not the peripatetic "ministry" of Jesus, with all its healings, wise teachings and astounding miracles, that is the bedrock of the Christian religion. Rather, it is the extraordinary melodrama of his death and resurrection, sometimes expressed as the "promise of the cross" or in the pithy aphorism, "No Resurrection, No Christianity."

It is therefore, perhaps, quite shocking that the biblical statements that purport to support the reversal of the most certain of laws – that the dead stay dead – amounts, in toto, to less than 600 words. The "conquest of death", it would seem, rests upon the evidence of rather fewer words than the text of a McDonald's Happy Meal menu!

Sad to relate, but there are NO independent, corroborated, disinterested or contemporary accounts of the "resurrection" of Jesus Christ, although that claim is often made. The truth is that ALL that passes for testimony for the Risen Lord comes from the same storybook and a handful of unsubstantiated characters. Whilst it is almost certainly the case that in their original format the gospels circulated as distinct writings, they are in no sense independent testimonies. This is particularly the case with the passion and resurrection narratives, a motley collection of terse, hearsay reports derived from a common source and built into a common, confused and confusing, tradition.

The rational mind is aghast at the limitations, flaws and contradictions of the biblical sound-bites. Yet this is the bedrock of the Christian faith. For all the deficiency of the incredulous claims, those who want to believe will believe. It's called "faith."

MAIN TOPIC

Mark – a star witness?

"Faith rests on the historical testimony of those who saw and gave witness."

The post-mortem appearances to be found in Matthew, Luke and John, though each adding flourishes of their own, are all built on a core story accredited to a shadowy figure called "Mark".

Whoever "Mark " was, he was certainly no eye-witness to either the life or death of Jesus. Church tradition maintains that "Mark" – said to have been the erstwhile travelling companion of Paul – went to Rome and wrote down the testimony of Peter. But, on Mark's own evidence, Peter himself was NOT a witness to many of the events described in his own gospel, including the baptism of Jesus, the temptation of Jesus, the healing of the Phoenician woman's daughter, Jesus Christ's prayers in the garden of Gethsemane ( all possible witnesses were asleep!) and even the crucifixion itself:

" They all forsook him and fled. " – Mark 14:50.

Even supposing Peter was hanging around Golgotha, how could Peter know, for example, what the centurion said at the cross or Pilate's reaction to Joseph of Arimathea? We have to create multiple, unknown testimonies to keep Peter informed. As for the resurrection appearances, Peter could only rely on information from Mary Magdalen, or perhaps the other Mary or Salome. And yet the women themselves relied on the testimony of an angel – and said nothing!

Matthew, Luke and John copied from Mark, who heard from Peter, who heard from Mary , who heard from an angel .

How's THAT for "eye-witness" testimony?!

"Look – an empty tomb!"

"Every known Gospel of early times, alike in the great Church and in heretical circles, used St Mark as the leading authority for the history of the life of Jesus." – C. Turner, "The Gospel of Mark", A New Commentary on Holy Scripture, III. p46.

Mark's resurrection story begins with a rolled stone and an empty tomb (but even that idea wasn't original*). Early Christians were unhappy with the abrupt and enigmatic ending of Mark and set to work on improving the text.

" At least nine versions of the ending of Mark can be found among the 1,700 surviving ancient Greek manuscripts and early translations of the gospel." – Michael W. Holmes, Easter: Exploring the Resurrection of Jesus , (BAR, 2010)


WHY MOVE THE STONE AT ALL?
The "Rolled Stone" – a theatrical flourish

"On the evening of that day, the first day of the week, the doors being locked where the disciples were for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them [/b]and said to them, "Peace be with you." – John 20.19.

Although the gospels tell us that the resurrected Jesus appeared and disappeared at will, popping up and vanishing " in the midst of them ", it was still necessary to "b[b] move the stone " for him to exit the tomb.

But why?

Why didn't Jesus Christ teleport out of the tomb leaving the stone in place? Now that would have been even more impressive!

The anomaly betrays the fabricated nature of the post- mortem appearances of the Christian godman. A god would not have needed to move the stone but the storyteller did! With the stone still in place who would have known something miraculous had happened?

A god that materializes in a closed room in Jerusalem, on the shore of Lake Tiberias, or on a mountain in Galilee, most certainly needed no stone moved to allow him to leave a tomb. But the narrator of a sacred play needed the "moved stone" as a theatrical flourish, in order that female visitors to the tomb (and the audience) could see "the body ... gone!"
We are talking theatre, not history.

Any intelligent person who has read past commentary by muslim and Christian apologists as well as is knowledgeable on both sides of the argument -i.e crucified or not crucified will immediately tell u that ur argument is baseless and not backed up by historic evidence, not to mention biblical records and OT prophecies .

Don't u see how incredibly flawed this article is, it is biased and with no shred of objectivity. Please make sure u put the name of the pro Islamic propaganda website u copied this from.

I don't have the time to explain these errors to you but I will let one of the leading muslim scholars Reza Aslan , who has extensively studied about Jesus and is an author of books criticising the new testament/historic manuscripts tell u in his own words. I don't agree with all he says ...but da.mn he, a muslim, studied the historic evidence and concluded the quran is wrong..and Jesus was indeed crucified and died..infact click the link let him do the talking....remember ur quran says he wasn't , it was all your allah's deception.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0-7D75ftmk

For any christain,atheist, muslim that is in doubt of the topic please watch this debate by the best muslim apologist in the world shirby Ali (this is not my opinion but he is very intelligent, nakir zaki doesn't come close ) and christain theologian Dr mike licona as they debate the topic...

A Point to note is that upcoming christain apologist Dr Nabeel Qureshi(exmuslim) saw this debate and finally renounced Islam. So be careful when u watch it, u may leave Islam. All my claims are verifiable online, make sure to google for it (mike licona debates shirby Ali on youtube ).Here is the link as well


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

balash:
What's all this nonsense about.

Once a muslim is confronted with truth he uses insulting language..

This "nonsense" as u put it is about the historical context of ur prophet's war crime on the Jewish tribe of the Banu Quraytha as narrated by Ibn Ishaq,

channelz:
I'm not implying anything, but Muslims, could you clarify


cc:

roqchiq
Ifeann
true2god
malvisguy212
OREMUSSANCTUS
balash

That's the religion of "peace" for u...

"Do me I do you"... What a backward idealogy.

balash:
it would have been great if nairaland conduct brain test before allowing most of you retards register on a forum to discuss about life and religion in general.

a very simple messege that i tried explaining the word 'terrorist' which americans have adopted on islamic individuals since 9/11 and i made it known even mandela was named a terroirist but he never killed innocent souls or bbombed anyone and u still came here shouting i shuld never involve mandela in talks of terrorist and the next thing was preaaching about the prophets killing infidels.

we have known about all you sadist trying every method to tarnish prophet muhammeds image and the next thing is quoting a stupid verse and simply highlighting anywhere that has to do with the pprophets name and kill and thats what u will hold not trying to read the full verse and context of the stories.

would it be nice that i bring out from the bible where a disciple of jesus slit someones ear in his presence and i immedietely call jesus an heartless man without finishing the verse? or remind you of how many souls saul killed and jesus accepted him back and call jesus a wicked prophet to accept a murderer without reading the verse completely to know saul asked for forgiveness and jesus told him if he truly wishes to be forgiven and sto his evil activities then he would be forgiven? or you want me to remind you of the prostitute with jesus but i wont read the verse were it shows cllearly that she was seeking forgiveness with jesus and i will just start shouting that your jesus is seen with a prostitute and i assume immedietely?

you see why i call you people sadist opening quraan pinching anything dirty that has muhammeds name involved and the noise begins, you have really shown how stupid and silly you all can be and am not surprised about all you sadist needless to remind you all that may the peace of the lord be upon you and may the good lord forgive you for all insults levelled against the prophet muhhamed because surely you know not what you saying.


salaam

When u can't defend Islam u throw insults and threaten people... At least u haven't killed anyone I hope, unlike ur prophet who approved the assassination of his critics.

Look when ur quran is quoted and the entire context verses are read, it does not vindicate ur prophet, it condemns him..

If u think any verse is misquoted then explain it rather than callin the gentleman a sadist.

He correctly explained to you why u shouldn't put Muslims and Mandela in the same basket. The only thing they have in common is the first letter of their name.


Let's look at a narration of one of
Mohammeds many "unprophetlike" deeds.

Case study, the massacre of the Jewish tribe of the Banu Quraytha..

Ibn Ishaq, pp. 463-64; Tabari vol. 8, p. 34.
Death by decapitation for around 300-600 men and pubescent boys, and enslavement for the women and children. Ibn Ishaq says that the number may have been as high as 800-900 (p. 464).

Now let's see the context. U Muslims often say "look at the historic context". Do u know that everything is termed "history" and has a "historic context" once it is done. Our discussions will be history once it is over. Do u see that the morality or sense in our discussion is not affected by its historical context ie "when" we discussed but rather "what" we discussed, what we discussed is termed inner context.

what Mohammed did "inner context" was wicked and vile ,» when he did it "historic context" is irrelevant since everything becomes history when done. U can use historic context to back up inner context but not vice verse.


I hope ur head is not spinning. Let me elaborate, when Muslims bring up the old testament I usually ask u to go read the entire chapter for the context, I.e inner context and not the historic context because historic context is a non issue. The inner context of the old testament shows how God was patient with the cannaites etc and they continued with their various sexual and wicked immorality including child sacrifice to idols generation after generation, it also shows God's fairness when he let Israel and judah fall to the hands of their enemies and were utterly destroyed when they abandoned their call to righteousness for immorality.. God is perfectly just and kind.
Remember this verse that shows his provocation of war and his intention for the people of that city,

10:When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace
11:If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you.
12:If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city."
13:When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it.
14:As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the Lord your God gives you from your enemies.


So do u see my point,
everything becomes history once it is done but the inner context remains the same.
My point is that the inner context of the verse is immoral and kill... Why does he want to invade the people to start with, why does he want to enslave them...can't Mohammed stay on his own without causing mischief and seeking war aka jihad.
Remember what u the Muslim quoted as Mohammeds command,
10:When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace
11:If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you
Why go and attack the people the people in the first place to make them slave if they accept "Islamic peace" aka forced labour.
Why did he kill unarmed men and young boys. Why didn't he spare them or banish them. Why was he without mercy. Why did he share the women as war booty for sex amongst his men. Why did he pick the prettiest women for himself.. I hope u go read the complete narration yourself and not go to one of ur muslim apologists for explanation...
See what happened next. The apostle had chosen one of their women for himself, Rayhana bint Amr . . . one of the women of . . . Qurayza, and she remained with him until she died, in his power. The apostle had proposed to marry and put a veil on her, but she said: "Nay, leave me in your power, for that will be easier for me and for you." So he left her. She had shown repugnance towards Islam when she was captured and clung to Judaism. (Ibn Ishaq, p. 466) after sometime she converted to Islam. Why wouldn't see, paying the jizyah and shaming her most have caused her to cave in..


Shalom.


For more undertstanding on context read this;
PHYSICAL CONTEXT: includes the material objects surrounding the communication event and any other features of the natural world that influence communication. (e.g. furniture and how it is arranged, size of the room, colors, temperature, time of day, etc.)
INNER CONTEXT: includes all feelings, thoughts, sensations, and emotions going on inside of the source or receiver which may influence how they act or interpret events. (e,g. hungry, sleepy, angry, happy, impatient, nauseous, etc.)
SYMBOLIC CONTEXT: includes all messages (primarily words) which occur before or after a communication event and which influence source or receiver in their actions or understandings of the event. (e.g. previous discussions (words we've said) in this class influence how you understand this handout.)
RELATIONAL CONTEXT: the relationship between the sender and the receiver(s) of a message. (e.g. father-son, student-teacher, expert-layman, friend-friend, etc.)
HISTORIC/SITUATIONAL CONTEXT: what the people who are communicating think of as (label) the event they are involved in -- what we call the act we are engaged in. (e.g. having class, being on a date, studying, playing a game, helping a friend with a problem, etc.)
CULTURAL CONTEXT: The rules and patterns of communication that are given by (learned from) our culture and which differ from other cultures. (e.g. American, Japanese, British, etc.) Some people have suggested that within the U.S. there are sub-cultures. (e.g. Hispanic, Southern, rural-Midwest, urban gang, etc.)

[quote author=Rilwayne001 post=30433458][/quote]It is forbidden in Islam to question your prophet and his deeds etc any attempt is met with strong agression, threats and insults..why is ur religion so insecure...

u know Mohammed did a lot of questionable things. u know Mohammed was
1. A mass murderer
2. Slave owner
3. Slave trader
4. Pedo.phile
5. Assassination orderer of his critics
6. Warlord
7. Owner of sex slaves
8. Caravan raider and many more...
If he did just one of this foul things then he is not a prophet, yet he did all of this and many more, including marrying his own sons wife, something forbidden in most cultures except perhaps some African pagan cultures, Jews of Old forbade this kind of sexual perversion and immorality.

U know it is not right to sleep with a child of nine, yet u refuse to say it is bad because ur prophet did this..

Jesus knew he came to die for our sins as the scriptures (old testament) prophesied. And he said it many times to his disciples in the scriptures. He came, did that and fulfilled the scriptures to set humanity free from sins for sinners like Mohammed and otherwise .

Today he has billions of followers contributing greatly to humanity at all levels. Christain charities cater to everyone including Muslims, however muslim charity aka zakat is only for helping Muslims..don't u see vast differences in christainity and Islam..

However, You seem to be adamant about the validity of ur quran and "lovingly" verses.
verses like this that command u not to pray for pagans while Christ tells us to pray for everyone.


Wait a moment while I grab my handkerchief and clear the tears from my eyes. It is just such a "beauty" and its author the "tolerant" prophet. BUT Let me ask you this.


When you say Islam is true what you are actually saying is that your god sent the great "messenger" ISA, who was born of a virgin woman and performed countless miracles including giving life to clay (in your book), in the holy bible he gave life to the dead, walked on water etc.
And when the Jews/ pharisees get him and take him to his death, your god then tricks the Jews and Romans to believe that ISA was crucified (check this it is in your quran: for he was not crucified but it was made to them as if he was) and there by starting the great way of life/ religion which has helped countless people find true peace.

Do you see the paradox here. What u claim here is that your god could not preserve his own words in the injeel/bible (600 years after Jesus). And u expect the Koran to be preserved 1400years after Mohammed. This defies common sense.

After this your "all knowing" god then sends Mohammed to fight the Jews and Christians (a religion he helped create).

How can u believe this. How can your "all knowing" god create a religion and then send another man, Mohammed who performed no miracles to give commands contrary to most of his early "messenger" ISA.

This makes no sense.
Your Islam is just a mixture of scriptures from the torah, gnostics "christains" and paganism(worship of the moon good, the evidence is still on your mosques- the crescent moon and star).


If you look at it objectively you will see so many of the circumstantial "revelations" came at the whims of Mohammed's desires especially his sexual desires. How do u even explain the numerous abrogations(why does you god change his mind so often) and the fact that many western Muslims now preach that the Quran 's message should be reinterpreted because of those embarrassing verses and the hadiths should be thrown out but u Mohammedians remain rigid to change and clutch tight to the hadiths despite all its flaws and hilarious fallacies.

Ganeeheart:
Am a muslim.If u are a real christain pls read Luke 6.37.Well as for me a day is coming when the tongue and hand will account for its deeds.Pls dont mock the prophet.

Salam,
Luke 6:37 ..." Do not judge others and God will not judge you.....,.....' forgive others and God will forgive You"

This has to do with mercy.. Don't judge or condemn but forgive, this is mercy ..that is the message in the verse u quoted.

The OP is just asking a question as to the reason for a man in his 50s to defiled a 9 year old child..

I maynot agree with the tone of the question but it is a relevant question because this fellow has over 1.2 billion followers, who take him serious ..Mohammed is not asking OP for forgiveness or mercy.