This doesn't explain why he had to conquer the Bani Quraysh at all. Conquest, I'm told, does not correspond to self defense.![]()
Perhaps he got tired of his easy life as a rich merchant and fancied himself as a Chuck Norris wannabe.
This doesn't explain why he had to conquer the Bani Quraysh at all. Conquest, I'm told, does not correspond to self defense.![]()
And you know this did not happen? Remember Mohammed's followers had to leave Mecca because they were persecuted. He chose to come back because he could not give up on his people. Should he have looked the other way because he could make a better life for himself elsewhere? He was married to a rich woman at 25 whom he loved, he was a well known and respected merchant there was no reason for him to live as a guerilla fighting for the rights of others.
Perhaps he got tired of his easy life as a rich merchant and fancied himself as a Chuck Norris wannabe.![]()
And that's their choice. Who am I to tell them to think otherwise? Lead by good example.
I'm sure it seems a romantic notion and surely many loved Julius Caesar protector of the less fortunate and protector of Roma. Of course the near annihilation of the Gauls was the price that was paid. Cutting off both hands of thousands of men and sending them to beg, even to be fed, in the sounding towns seemed a reasonable price to pay for security. And you know, in the end Julius was worshiped as a God. His presence is even felt in the Qur'an - although you'd hardly know it.
Just something to think about anyway,
I'm sure you DO NOT not think it a good thing to begin the massacre of Chinese? So what is the solution to their female infanticide? What if Japan had won the war and used THAT as their pretense for the war in the first place? They are "Asians" after all. Would you accept it?
Michael
Well, Jesus was persecuted too, yet I'm told (if he existed) that he didn't start any wars. Did Allah get less powerful? And why did this kind, Merciful god feel the need to start any? Couldn't he just have made all the nasty non-believers into believers, if he so chose? A bit fickle.
Since the Quraish were most of the people of Mecca numbering in thousands and Mohammed and his men were perhaps 300, that would have been logistically impossible. Maybe he had Saddam's WMDs.
You know what Jesus said then? I believe he said pretty much the same things as Mohammed.
Well I'm told that his victory over them was so gigantic that it's told and retold as an example of Allah's support for him. So, apparently, it did occur. But why can't Allah just make people believe what he wants? I mean, I'm also told that nothing happens without Allah's will in islam. So why couldn't he just make them all believe? Why slaughter?
What? Jesus said "kill the unbeliever"? I don't recall that bit. And did Jesus then try and send people on to Hell too? Wow.
Uh, so Allah's infinite mercy is akin to the slaughter of rats in an experiment?
That sounds merciful.
Sure, haven't you read the Gospels? Oh wait, no one has the Gospels, only the New Testament.![]()
Sure we care about animals and the world and ecosystem and pet cruelty and yet, we still slaughter rats. I kill a few hundreds every six months.![]()
I'm working for science, after all.
Really? Which other Gospel is it in? The invented one that no one's ever seen? Oh boy, I can hardly wait. You have a copy of it, then? Can you post some stuff?
So...Allah cares for us in the same way that we broadly care about animal welfare. He's a "human welfarist".
You know, if that's the extent of islamic theology on the subject, I think I can confidently ascribe it to the circular filing cabinet.
No thats my scientific take on it. You know, 600,000 backward dead Iraqis = oil for another 10 years in USA = democracy and liberation for all (Americans).
btw, do you think animals are less important than people? Perhaps we can generate energy from animals when the oil runs out. Hmm?
Riiiight. The Torah... in which Jesus does not appear...and the Quran...in which Mohammed borrowed his conception of Jesus from a few heretic Manicheans. And then tried to make out he was a revolutionary.
You know, I really don't think I believe in this Jesus fellow, but it's funny how some revisionism, hundreds of years post-fact, gets accepted so easily. I mean, the Christians at least have the benefit of having written their bits down shortly after the whole event. But islam is trying to pick up six hundred years after the fact, and then accuses the Christians of getting it wrong.This is the funniest bit.
The mind is prey to many biases. Most, I suspect, are learned of wishfulness, or repetition.
Actually, if God is ALL POWERFULL he can make a "Perfect Book" (we'll call it the "Dianetics") whose words are sooooo powerful that anyone reading said book will instantly become non-violent and work for the betterment of mankind and be "believers".Well, Jesus was persecuted too, yet I'm told (if he existed) that he didn't start any wars. Did Allah get less powerful? And why did this kind, Merciful god feel the need to start any? Couldn't he just have made all the nasty non-believers into believers, if he so chose? A bit fickle.