Whats moral about being a christian, muslim, or judist?

Clearly they aren't as moral as they could be....they'd simply remove the parts from their texts that show Mohammad APPROVING of the slaughter of CRITICS of Islam/Mohammad. THAT would actually help the situation, as then Muslims down the road would be less inclined to follow in Mohammad's example (wanting to kill "blasphemers"), which is the reason for the savage riots in the first place. Mohammad is the problem.

 

most tailmud followers are not following judaism.

For example: occupying jerusalem is against most everything 'jewish,' when of force and oppression.

 

that's a stupid as claiming jesus is the christ.

 

Which specific ''texts'' are you referring to?

 

Well, if Mohammad had not approved of killing his critics/blasphemers (ie if he had been tolerant and moral and allowed depictions of himself), then we likely wouldn't see those riots.

Whenever you disconnect from reality (such as having a magic invisible friend in the sky), it's eventually going to cause you problems.

 

Hadith and/or Qur'an.

Mohammad was one savage, morally warped individual:
http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Islam_Undressed:_Muhammad’s_Actions,_Speaking_Louder_than_Words

 

oh really.......

the dude was illiterate and never wrote a word.


The liar is the savage.

Soon we can eat 'em!

 

So then one can conclude that we shouldn't believe anything written about him, and therefore Islam is a made up fairy tale. That makes more sense than "he was the greatest role model to ever live" (paraphrasing Qur'an 33:21).

 

That's not what I would call ''specific.''

Can you quote even one verse from the Quran to support your argument, or are you not aware of any such verses?

Dusty

 

1. The link spells it out: http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Islam_Undressed:_Muhammad’s_Actions,_Speaking_Louder_than_Words

2. Even if you don't believe that, it almost doesn't matter, because when Muslims are asked the following question they won't say "yes" ANYWAY: "If, repeat if, Mohammad did have critics of his slaughtered, do you condemn him for doing that?"

3. Dusty, what's your answer to "If, repeat if, Mohammad did have critics of his slaughtered, do you condemn him for doing that?"?

4. The Quran and the Hadith were both assembled by people who are not very credible, who gave incredible inconsistencies, etc., so it's doubtful if one is more accurate than the other.

 

I didn't see any verses in the Quran referred to on that page, which would appear to support your argument that such verses in the Quran exist. Are we to conclude that your argument is not based on anything you have actually read?

I condemn anyone who kills anyone for merely criticising something. Religions and their associated personalities are no exception.

Dusty

 

I've said "the Islamic texts", since Muslims refer to those texts about Mohammad. For example, why do you think they savagely slaughter homosexuals?....it's because the hadith say to slaughter them. It's naive to think that only the Qur'an is followed. Ideally, Muslims would remove the hadith from what they teach their children about Islam/Mohammad.

P.S. I'm glad to see that you condemn Mohammad (for his approval of slaughter of critics.) It would be great is Muslims themselves could do that.

 

Here's an example of some scripture from the Bible/Torah, where killing for blasphemy is advocated.

Is that the sort of scripture you are referring to, and do you not know of anything similar in the Quran?

Dusty

 

You clearly said ''Hadith and/or Qur'an.'' Are you now withdrawing this allegation?

The difference is that Muslims believe the Quran is ''the word of God'', whereas Hadiths are merely the opinions of various imams etc.

Dusty

 

You're kidding me right? Don't you know that the Chinese were writing long before the Bible was ever even thought of. Don't you realize that if anybody was influenced by prior ideas it was the Jews and their Tora not older cultures. The "golded" rule didn't originate in the bible.

 

So what you are claiming is that Israel and all Hebrew speaking people never had a written language, is that it?

 

Try again, your comprehension is sorely lacking. He says in the last sentence that the golden rule pre-dates Judaism and Christianity both. The reason he can say that with confidence is that the Chinese wrote it down before either of them were more than a campfire tale.

 

Vanka is assuming that God's will was not known before human beings developed a written language……remember Noah? God spoke to Adam after He made Him and gave him instructions and, for a while Adam and Eve lived the way God wanted them to. I’m sure Adam told his children what things were like before they sinned, and tried to impart the hard lessons he learnt as a result of disobeying God. God is not a God that would leave man without any rule or guideline on how to live. The Bible tells us that there was only one language, so no doubt what was handed down to them from their ancestors they had. But in time as people spread out as a result of God confusing speech, some things changed or evolved while some stay the same.

 

Them tails have affected more people than you ever will.

and no god, wrote a dam thing about either of ya.

he has far more written about him over a period of walking the earth, than jesus did for any period of his per se walking life.


I consider quran an evolution of the abrahamic chain. It combined many eastern flavors too. The story goes that he learned what he did for a couple decades from a gabriel (angel) and memorized the lessons.

To me, that mean he perhaps couldnt read and hired people to tell him stories (gabby angels) and perhaps combined the lessons. That is what i see the compiliation to be.

The idiots put in there the 'perfect dis and the perfect dat'.

Have you ever read up on that hairy kristna guy? That blue little fat guy, supposedly serviced 16000 wives. That's gotta be a god.



.

 

Jesus is the Christ

http://youtu.be/vsN4YKF8bI8

 

I agree that all religions are bunk, especially the Bible. Some, like the book about Jesus, and the Qur'an, are especially violent, and should be abandoned.
Jesus even approved of slavery: http://www.evilbible.com/Slavery.htm

 

Our disagreement is whether the Hadith are part of the "Islamic texts", I say they are. So do the people at quranhadith.org

http://www.quranhadith.org/hadith/englishhadith.html

Some hadith are sayings of Mohammad's companions. Such as them saying that Mohammad ordered the brutal TORTURE of people. Mohammad was a brutal person, not worthy of praise.

If Muslims didn't believe in them then they wouldn't give the Hadith to their children, and they wouldn't model any parts of them, as such, in regards to Mohammad's behavior.

 

Just because it has affected many people does not mean that it's TRUE.

 

Not all Hadith are authentic. And not all Muslims consider even any Hadiths authentic.

Sunni and Shia also have their own Hadiths.

It is a concept far more complex than you try to paint it as.

I would use this website instead: http://www.hadithcollection.com/

And start here: http://www.hadithcollection.com/about-hadith-books.html

Great website.

 

Good Question

Christ, "nature's God" said the weightier matters of the Law are Truth, Mercy and Faith.

Perhaps torch does not see these weightier matters of the Law in our current society over the last 150 years or so.

And he has good reason to have not seen them in operation, because we have been in rebellion to these principles for a long time.

Not only that, but we have renounced them and replaced them officially with anti-Christ Noahide Laws as of 1991.