Noted

No I was just suprised, that you tend to feel America has the right to say somebody is a terrorist after all its campaigns offshore. Anyway the thread is not about that. So I rest my case.

@syrup, you have a point

Accusations without proven refrences, yet again, Anywayz I have realised that mrlawng is not here to have an intellectual debate, rather he is here to just share his sentiments and hatred towards Islam.

Quite interesting I must say, and it would be a total waste of time to reason with such an individual, hence I am not debating in regards. I only debate with intellectuals who would reason and lay down facts objectively with the spirit of fairness, good intention that they claim to promote

FBI's most wanted list? Oh this thread is all about America? I see

can someone please explain what really happened back in Nigeria in regards to the comment made by a journalist which went beyond just saying that muhammad would have just approved it? It wasnt made up but was a direct response to a situation.

If the situations was a fiction in regards to an islamic historical event, a written fictional book with a disclaimer, in the past, then we can judge? Otherwise are we saying anything based on actual events that had occured due to an unintentional offending action with an instant disclaimer or instant apologise? I am still trying to figure what you guys are trying to insinuate?

There are such books? so what are we saying?

Lolz there you go again, boring you because I am letting you see the truth patiently? Its pathetic that you gave up, but nevertheless I had an interesting debate I am happy I can clear up things.


Someone saying mohammed might have approved of miss world was directly attacking the muslim faith. This was a response to some muslims then? Am I correct?

Drawing the prophet as a terrorist is an insult unto muslims and the cartoon had an objective, which I supposed was accomplished. Mind you, I don't approve any violent response, but what I am saying was, it is provocative.

Besides what is this thread about? Da Vinci Code? Am I correct? Good lets hit that.

somebody:

This would be my last post because the topic is starting to bore me(yawn). Please just in case, my english teacher did not go a good job of teaching me english. Please tell me what direct and indirect means. Someone saying mohammed might have approved of miss world was directly attacking the muslim faith. But someone saying that Jesus had sexual intercourse with Mary is not attacking christains because as you claim it is fiction. If you want to go down that route, muslims should not have taken the cartoons of Muhammed seriously because it was just art.

I got the excerpt below from a website so maybe you will understand why da vinci code is a direct attck on christainity.

Dan Brown made clear in interviews that this is the HIDDEN TRUTH and that he and his wife are art historians and painstakingly researched every detail. In fact the book has a statement in it that while the situations are made up, the research on the religious organizations and artwork is all fully authentic.

Dan Brown is telling people that the book is based in a fully authentic "environment". This then makes art historians and historians in general furious, because there are many glaring errors in the book. It makes religious people furious, because the book makes some serious claims about what the church has done in the past and is doing in the present. Dan Brown named real peoples' names, and gave backgrounds on real, actual organizations. In his text, some issues are simple errors that any real art historian should have figured out as a basic background check. Others are far more serious errors of genealogy and history."

ok? Am I missing anything here?

The authour of the book says the situations are made up. Only the organisations such as the Opus Dei, etc exist, which of course they do? There are much more cults in records, and that agrees to the existence of the organisation in question?

Or please don't tell me those organisation don't exist? Maybe I might want to brush that up. Thank you.

Well not arguing based on the armed robbery scenario but come to think of it, why do you think a religion is evil when you hardly give it a chance to prove otherwise? Have you ever tried to get a copy of a translated Quran so that when conversations like this come up, you can always be very intellectual?

I mean muslims do that, but some christians are just the way they are. They just argue without laid down facts !!

Islam does not codone innocent killings, nor do I hear any muslim say that before in my entire life.

I am arguing with the basis of marrying at the age of 9? Islam does not promote marriage at 9, not written anywhere?

When I argue, I debate based on what the other co-debator lays down, and I make sure, his angle of reasoning comes into peace with the truth besides giving a perfect explanation to why it is so.

@syrup, you have a perfect point there, culture of the past might not be accepted today. Nevertheless I can still argue that the insinuation and accusation directed towards the prophet in question can be argued in favour,

By the way just for your own education, Islam is a complete way of life. It can be said to be culture too, besides religion. This is the reason why I encourage people to try to read beyound before trying to argue or accuse any religion in question.

Syrup I understand what you are saying

What is culture?

So if marrying at an early age, during the past is acceptable, why is it not now? Culture evolution of course which brings about saying that, what is acceptable is culture, and thus I can reach a conclusion that the practice of that past can be said to be acceptable because it is the culture of the past?

Or am I missing something?

Afeni:

allonym, thanks for keeping up the good fight. These people are sell-outs. In their hopes of getting "Heaven" they shamelessly worshipped the gods of the Aryans and Arabs. It would not be an under statement to refer to their actions as prostitution.

Maybe your might want to explain the reason why you claim what they worship are just gods of a particular race, but come to think of it, God is a diety? A creator of the Aryans and Arabs if I am allowed to say right?

What is wrong with worshipping the creator of Aryans and Arabs that also happens to be the creator of humanity? Can you please explain? And please don't go on saying "The bible say this, the bible said that, ", I want you to reason for yourself and give answers to what you have said, because the bible didnt say the creator of Aryans and Arabs can't be worshipped?

Am I missing something?

emmie4j:

@Basharu!!!
First, when I said that mohamed slept with a nine year old, I wasnt accusing him, it is a fact written down in the quran itself. The dude was a pedophile, and I don't have any respect for a gay like that
peace out!

Written in the Quran? Are you sure? From what I know the life of the prophet is not written in the Quran, Can you please give refrences whenever you make such an "illiterate" statement?

Things you need to understand, which I guess maybe you are infering to his marriage to Aisha? Am I right?

Aisha might be nine, and we are also allowed to deduce that marriage might implied sex right away.

But let me ask you a simple question, was the practice of marrying girls at the age of 9, one thousand plus years ago acceptable?

I guess you learnt history in school, which implies you went to school at the first place, so I guess you would reason objectively in that regards. But if you didnt, then I rest my case, Ignorance is not an excuse. If you are, you need to refrain from arguing, dont you think

Most people one thousand years ago married at a very young age, even at birth in some cultures!! So what are you blabbering?

somebody:

@ Logical. Let me remind you, In 2002, a newspaper "suggested" that Prophet Muhammad would have approved of the Miss World beauty contest. I hope you can remember how many people were killed because muslims reacted violently to that newspaper article.

Just great again, there someone goes again. Do you understand what direct and indirect attacks means? If you understand english perfectly and read my post and my line of argument, the above refrence wouldnt come up at all. But I guess you are not ready to read, because it would either open your eyes to the reality of things at stake or it would end up hurting your pride of not wanting to reach into a compromise that sometimes some threads are uncalled for and has no relevance to the real problem.

Your above refrence is perfectly circumstancial and a direct one in response to some muslims that went against the event in the first place, so doesnt that make it a direct attack? I repeat there are lots of books out there that are written against Islamic preachings !! and if you are smart enough and visit bookshops, you would know what I mean or have come across such books.

I encourage you to read my post, from beginning to the end its just from the next page, before blabbering anything next. Thank you.

I don't support violence, so at the same time I do not codone stupidity, streotypic and myopic people. Argue with something substancial that has relevance to the topic at hand and when someone says something try to argue in regards, not what he didnt say. I wont repeat what I have said, you are urged to re-read my previous post, before you use any @ Logical sign again. If you are an intellectual that is, Thank you.

If I may ask, which section of the bookstore is Da Vinci code placed in, and why is that? What is this thread about, and what was the first basis of my argument? I guess you lost your track.

Can you give a Refrence to where I miss a fact laid down by someone? I didnt ammend anything, I was just letting you know that If I did make a mistake, I would ammend it and apologise in respect. But not this time, because I am on track. It is very human to err, but I guess you are not accepting that fact.

I repeat again, a story can be based on an event that occur, but does not necessarily mean the story is true. Thank you. Go back to my first post and re-read what I said, to understand me. It might take a whole day, take your time , And my apologies for calling you a guy

I was arguing in response to what Afeni ranted. Was just trying to reason with his accusations,

How about the part of "didnt occur" in the sentence? You missed it again to suit your needs? LoL, you are really some smart guy. I argue with logic, friend, and when I make mistakes I ammend them, but not this time You are the one evading simple stuffs.

Afeni:

I am not expecting anything from you followers of a bastard. I just want to bring it your attention. I only have the best interests of you, the follows of the bastard, at hand.

Read the previous post, and stop jumping into conclusion my friend. And if you know that Muhammad is a dissendant of Ishmael through Hagar, you would get what I mean, but I guess you dont know.

I don't slur christianity, you wont find me doing that. I just don't agree with the belief, and so do I have the freedom to choose? Or christianity does not allow freedom to choose? Ah maybe thats my destiny, Poor me.

Anyway if Da Vinci said something was based on fact in his book, does that make the book fact? Or does that make it free from the fiction section in the bookstore? Do tell me?

Lies for example is a perfect applicable word. Lies can also be said to be fiction, because they are untrue, but they are in refrence to an actual event that occured in the past or didnt occur in the past which can be said to be history? So what are we saying here?

Do you really understand what you are saying?

Followers of Bastard?

The word Bastard. Bastard: A child born out of wedlock. You make it sound like its evil , The same person would believe in the american type of lifestyle in regards to children born out of wedlock in the future, when such discussions arise.

So Ishmael should be at blame, for his fathers fun? And should be a bad person, and not of God's creation ? Is that what Christianity preaches? Some of you guys fail to amaze me with the way you just judge and reason.

The phrase I only hate is "WE CHRISTIANS ARE GOOD" and "YOU MUSLIMS ARE EVIL". its so stupid.

syrup:

You should understand that the mind-set of most people in the middle-East is that anything Western is necessarily "Christian".

Someone finally saves the day. Thats exactly what I wanted to hear. The Middle-Easterns, who unfortunately happen to be muslims in majority. Thank you. That wasnt hard to achive was it Although we need to cut that down again. A bit stereotypical too. Maybe Extremist Middle-Easterns would be perfect

A based on B. A is not fact but its related to B. Is that not English? Pardon me?

I read Da Vinci Code alright.

What would Muslims have done if someone had written a fictional piece depicting Muhammad to have been other than the Qur'an and Hadith say of him, tells the whole world reading such a "fiction" that all that people have been taught in Islam are lies?

There are many books in relation? Even open arguments in relation? So what are you blabbering. Many people openly dissagree with the teachings of Islam!!

I don't get you, maybe you might want to rephrase what you are trying to say in explicit words?

Fiction is something framed up, history is fait accompli (things apast). Something framed up based on things apast?

Someone help me here?

Allow me to say, War never ends, just like you said but in direction to your curiousity towards those that "claim" to fight for the religion Islam. We should apply the same thing there. Fairness should be acceptable in this judgement

ok you might have a point there, but based on what my direction of argument is, I am saying that, when a particular person performs an action whatever his primary intention is, we shouldnt throw a blanket and judge !!

I repeat Bush is a christian, and so what do you say to that? Is what he is doing christianic? Or all the soldiers that invaded Iraq, I am sure 80% of them would be christians? What is your say? Since you claim that your religion plays an important role to your actions and nature in life? Or is it otherwise? Please explain.

Or what does the bible preaches? Tell me?

@Ajisafe, so Islam preaches an eye for an eye? (I dont think so)

When someone does bad, you should do so in return? Or what are you trying to say?

dearzi, do you understand what pathetic means? Get your dictionary. I wont help you.

Unlike Moslems however, we are doing it through constitutional and peaceful means like voting, demonstrations and lobbying.

Allow me to say Bush is christian !! But his actions are not of a christian? Or the war he is waging? Common lets call a spade a spade. I am not in favour of any particular group, but I reason objectively without sentiments, so do I expect anybody that argues with me.

Aha !! So does the muslim belief? But that is historical facts? As I said no direct attacks on any religion in question.

Your opinion seems to become understandeable and acceptable when it suits your needs. Quite pathetic dont you think?

90% of muslims are barbaric. Interesting. I rest my case then. Why should I debate with someone that is stereotypical in nature?

Some muslims might be aggressive, I agree. But come to think of it, the whole mess or opinion generated today, is due to the wide coverage by the media after the sept 11 and also the dennish incidents, besides the Palestinian and Israel incidents. Sometimes we forget to put into considerations other war torn countries in Africa and even places like Nepal or even the slightly settle protestant and catholic mess in the UK. All we don't pinpoint because the perpetuators are not Muslims or probably their is no specific propaganda against such, It is really pathetic,

Thank goodness you said you "think", you need to start reading islamic books to know the islamic version of Jesus story. Just a snippet of the story which is not a direct extraction.

According to Islam, Jesus was replaced during the crucifixion with another empty body that has no soul, and he was lifted to heaven, and he wasnt crucified. I guess you didnt know that.

America would likely attack Iran for example? What is your say? Are they peaceful in nature?

I dont know why this thread exist in the first place. If you have read the book in question that is Da Vinci Code, you would agree. The book attacks no religion nor is it based on any religion, so I dont see any basis for saying such a thing like the Muslims you should learn rubbish, even though i forgot to mention it's stereotypical nature.

Da Vinci Code is a fictional historical book based on some fragments of the past that has no direct affiliation with any religious teachings. Please note that Jesus is not only respected by Christians, Muslims respect Jesus the same way they respect Muhammad.