Open Debate: Evolution.
- Thread starter Muslim
- Start date
Godless said:That's ok, asshole, I already had.
Nadir is a fucking liar..
Dialog....
But anyhow thanks for reminding all of us, to look at failed apolegists..
Godless
Yeah sure, and Ali Sina is a loser, not only Nadir but he Zakir Naik said well if you're going to debate me then we will do it live on TV and Sina shit himself because he would have been exposed as soon as he stopped hiding behind his monitor.
He is the biggest lair ever, he made some wild claims and falsified hadeeth. At one time he said Muslims burnt down libraries. which later he couldn't back up.
Also if Sina was and honest man then he wouldn't lie about things like he's website crashed and he lost debates and then one of his members apparently had the debates backed up, and then when he was told to OK show proof where Nadir had edited the debates he couldn't hilarious. Do you have any idea of how stupid Sinas followers come across? lol like the old saying goes some people drink from the fountain of knowledge seems like Sinas followers just gargled.
Godless said:Hi Sam, I was answering muslim..This was not directed at you.
Wikipedia can be very bias as it's defenitions are contributed by any one who posts there their opinions.
By the nature of your religion Ali's life is at stake.
Islamic tolerance alert: Ali Sina threatened with death
So in any time this man, comes close to debate any muslim in person he does at great risk of his life.
Rational Thinking explores Islam
Godless
lol, this is a load of crap no ones gave any death threats to Sina he makes this stuff up, so he can hide behind his monitor.
Tell me this dude, the likes of Dr Zakir Naik have debated many ex Muslims from India, even Ahmad deedat has, but I've never seen these guys giving death threats. lol any excuse for you guys will do.
Last edited:
Classical Islamic law
Sharia is Islamic law based on the Quran and the hadith. Fiqh is the science of applying and interpreting sharia, done by qualified judges and legal scholars. We look at two of the most widespread and influential schools in orthodox Sunni Islam: those of Shafii (d. 829) and Malik (d. 795).
(1) Malik was also a reliable collector of hadith.
In one long hadith, Malik first lays the foundation that execution is legal.
Yahya related to me . . . that the Messenger of Allah . . . said, "If someone changes his religion—then strike off his head!"
The first class of apostates leaves Islam for something else, but they are not given the opportunity to repent.
They are killed without being called to repent because their repentance is not recognized. They were concealing their disbelief and making Islam public, so I do not think that one should call such people to repent and one does not accept their word.
The second group of apostates leaves Islam and divulges it. What happens to him?
As for the person who leaves Islam for something else and divulges it, he is called on to repent. If he does not turn in repentance, he is killed . . . If they repent, that is accepted from them.
click
I think that prety much covers it. Your pathetic religion has spoken.
How shall God Guide those who reject Faith after they accepted it and bore witness that the Apostle was true and that Clear Signs had come unto them? but God guides not a people unjust. Of such the reward is that on them (rests) the curse of God, of His angels, and of all mankind. (Quran 3:86-87)
Any one who, after accepting faith in God, utters Unbelief,— except under compulsion, his heart remaining firm in Faith — but such as open their breast to Unbelief, on them is Wrath from God, and theirs will be a dreadful Penalty. (Quran 16:106)
What is more, apostasy is still punishable by death in some Muslim countries, including Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Yemen, Iran, Sudan and Mauritania.10 With growing calls for the adoption of Sharia elsewhere, the list of countries may expand.
Even in countries where the death penalty is not applied, Muslims who leave Islam may be subject to “civil death.” They are forcibly divorced from their spouses, stripped of their inheritance rights and so on. They are also often harassed by government officials and police.
In addition, many converts fear for their lives as they may be targeted by radical Muslims—or even their own family members, who consider themselves disgraced by the person’s conversion. For example, when Mark Gabriel, a former professor of Islamic history at Al-Azhar University, converted to Christianity, his father tried to kill him. Gabriel’s account of when he told his father about his conversion reveals the depth of animosity toward those who leave Islam:
First, my father fainted right there on the street. Some of my brothers rushed out to him, and my mother started crying in fear. I stayed with them as they bathed my father’s face with water. When he came to, he was so upset he could hardly speak, but he pointed at me. In a voice hoarse with rage he cried out, “Your brother is a convert, I must kill him today!”
Oh! wait a minute, yes you are right, some of the verses are "out of context" they may be interpreted wrong.
click
Godless
samcdkey said:
Why should I respect islam? Why should I respect anything I don't believe in? Why should I be killed if I debate something I don't respect? Is failure of respect worth human life? If that's your opinion, then bugger that, and islam along with it.
I have lived in a multicultural society all my life and never have I considered that I might be killed because I debated a belief system that I did not respect. Surely you are not arguing that in North America those who fail to respect another's opinion in debate be killed? What part of the US do you bloody live in then? Waco?
Well in your worldview, apparently death. What is the point of this paragraph? What are you trying to convince me of? That I don't know certain proof of anything so I should respect other people's viewpoints? Fine and dandy: maybe I should. But your followup appears to be: 'cause if you don't you might get killed'. So I shouldn't be so convinced of my own perspective that I fail to offer due homage to those I argue with, but that it's reasonable that other people be so absolutely convinced of their worldview that their killing me strikes you as normal? The hell with that. I don't think that asking not to be murdered for my views constitutes an unreasonable expectation or an excess of optimism. And who decides what constitutes lack of respect? In Pakistan, it can be something as innocuous as raking leaves against the side of a mosque, or even arguing religion with a muslim, or denying the 'prophethood' of Mohammed. Well guess what? I don't think Mohammed was a prophet in the slightest. As you say: what next? Kalashnikovs at dawn? Why is my denial so offensive, and the shahada merely 'business as usual' in islam?
Who indeed? But the shahada, while being fundamental, is hardly fundamentalist - it is the routine denial of the Christian worldview spoken by every single muslim of age in the world. Is it the fundamentalists enforcing this, or is it islam itself? I am reliably told - by every muslim I have ever met - that the shahada represents 1/3 to 1/2 of islam. Is this fundamentalist - or merely fundamental?
And so where is this respect from the other camp? Where the dialogue, except that of supremacy with debate following a distant second - so long as there is respect, that one-way respect of cowed debate and discussion.
Well, possibly since there are so many schools of interpretation. But of course, you find violent and non-violent interpretations in each branch, so objectively that cannot be it. Islam makes much of 'taking out the middle man' (although I have never understood this argument since, after all, an imam is nothing if not 'middle management'); perhaps more middle men are needed. Perhaps there should be unification of islamic thought; but again, there are and have been violent memes in every branch, even the much-vaunted Sufis. What then? I wonder if 'Reformation' even begins to describe the kind of change necessary to change islam to kind.
Very well; but you are fitting verses after the fact to suit.
Not at all - I do not say (though I have said for the sake of insult, and I apologize) that God does not exist. I say that science and religion are non-overlapping magisteria (NOMA; see Gould). We cannot test for God, and so we have nothing to say about His/Her/Its existence.
I cannot; you wish to discuss morality and science and nature - then you tell me which element it is that concerns you most.
Godless said:Classical Islamic law
Sharia is Islamic law based on the Quran and the hadith. Fiqh is the science of applying and interpreting sharia, done by qualified judges and legal scholars. We look at two of the most widespread and influential schools in orthodox Sunni Islam: those of Shafii (d. 829) and Malik (d. 795).
(1) Malik was also a reliable collector of hadith.
In one long hadith, Malik first lays the foundation that execution is legal.
Yahya related to me . . . that the Messenger of Allah . . . said, "If someone changes his religion—then strike off his head!"
The first class of apostates leaves Islam for something else, but they are not given the opportunity to repent.
They are killed without being called to repent because their repentance is not recognized. They were concealing their disbelief and making Islam public, so I do not think that one should call such people to repent and one does not accept their word.
The second group of apostates leaves Islam and divulges it. What happens to him?
As for the person who leaves Islam for something else and divulges it, he is called on to repent. If he does not turn in repentance, he is killed . . . If they repent, that is accepted from them.
click
I think that prety much covers it. Your pathetic religion has spoken.
How shall God Guide those who reject Faith after they accepted it and bore witness that the Apostle was true and that Clear Signs had come unto them? but God guides not a people unjust. Of such the reward is that on them (rests) the curse of God, of His angels, and of all mankind. (Quran 3:86-87)
Any one who, after accepting faith in God, utters Unbelief,— except under compulsion, his heart remaining firm in Faith — but such as open their breast to Unbelief, on them is Wrath from God, and theirs will be a dreadful Penalty. (Quran 16:106)
What is more, apostasy is still punishable by death in some Muslim countries, including Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Yemen, Iran, Sudan and Mauritania.10 With growing calls for the adoption of Sharia elsewhere, the list of countries may expand.
Even in countries where the death penalty is not applied, Muslims who leave Islam may be subject to “civil death.” They are forcibly divorced from their spouses, stripped of their inheritance rights and so on. They are also often harassed by government officials and police.
In addition, many converts fear for their lives as they may be targeted by radical Muslims—or even their own family members, who consider themselves disgraced by the person’s conversion. For example, when Mark Gabriel, a former professor of Islamic history at Al-Azhar University, converted to Christianity, his father tried to kill him. Gabriel’s account of when he told his father about his conversion reveals the depth of animosity toward those who leave Islam:
First, my father fainted right there on the street. Some of my brothers rushed out to him, and my mother started crying in fear. I stayed with them as they bathed my father’s face with water. When he came to, he was so upset he could hardly speak, but he pointed at me. In a voice hoarse with rage he cried out, “Your brother is a convert, I must kill him today!”
Oh! wait a minute, yes you are right, some of the verses are "out of context" they may be interpreted wrong.
click
Godless
Still I don't see a verse which states and apostate should be killed. 90% of the Muslim Sunni scholars believe that only god can carry out the punishment so if someone leaves Islam, then Allah deals with that when he dies. There is not even a single verse in the Qu'ran that says a apostate should be killed by another man.
You don't see shit, cause your blind, dumbed and brain washed.
THE KORAN
Islam makes it incumbent on all adult males, provided they are not disabled and incapacitated, to prepare themselves for the conquest of [other] countries so that the writ of Islam is obeyed in every country in the world.
But those who study Islamic Holy War will understand why Islam wants to conquer the whole world….Those who know nothing about Islam pretend that Islam counsels against war. Those [who say this] are witless. Islam says: Kill them [the non-Muslims], put them to the sword and scatter [their armies]. Does this mean sitting back until [non-Muslims] overcome us? Islam says: Kill in the service of Allah those who may want to kill you! Does this mean that we should surrender to the enemy? Islam says: Whatever good there is exists thanks to the sword and in the shadow of the sword! The sword is the key to Paradise which can be opened only for Holy Warriors! There are hundreds of other [Koranic] psalms and Hadiths [sayings of the Prophet] urging Muslims to value [Koranic] psalms and Hadiths [sayings of the Prophet] urging Muslims to value war and to fight. Does all that mean that Islam is a religion that prevents men from waging war? I spit upon those foolish souls who make such a claim.
……Ayatollah Khomeini
click
this is an example of your "great leaders" Sorry bastard out to be NUKED
Godless
THE KORAN
Islam makes it incumbent on all adult males, provided they are not disabled and incapacitated, to prepare themselves for the conquest of [other] countries so that the writ of Islam is obeyed in every country in the world.
But those who study Islamic Holy War will understand why Islam wants to conquer the whole world….Those who know nothing about Islam pretend that Islam counsels against war. Those [who say this] are witless. Islam says: Kill them [the non-Muslims], put them to the sword and scatter [their armies]. Does this mean sitting back until [non-Muslims] overcome us? Islam says: Kill in the service of Allah those who may want to kill you! Does this mean that we should surrender to the enemy? Islam says: Whatever good there is exists thanks to the sword and in the shadow of the sword! The sword is the key to Paradise which can be opened only for Holy Warriors! There are hundreds of other [Koranic] psalms and Hadiths [sayings of the Prophet] urging Muslims to value [Koranic] psalms and Hadiths [sayings of the Prophet] urging Muslims to value war and to fight. Does all that mean that Islam is a religion that prevents men from waging war? I spit upon those foolish souls who make such a claim.
……Ayatollah Khomeini
click
this is an example of your "great leaders" Sorry bastard out to be NUKED
Godless
Godless said:
A fundamentalist's interpretation of the Quran is equivalent to this:
Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.
Someone who uses power to abuse religion, does not re-write the philosophy of that religion
GeoffP said:
Yes but the fact that it does NOT occur in the Quran means there is no mandate from God regarding death for apostacy. The Hadeeth is open to interpretation and is only used by Islamic jurists to enable decision making; if it is used as to determine Islamic law, that is a misuse of it.
Muslim said:
From the Muslim Student's Association website at the University of Southern California:
Volume 9, Book 84, Number 57:
Narrated 'Ikrima:
Some Zanadiqa (atheists) were brought to 'Ali and he burnt them. The news of this event reached Ibn 'Abbas who said, "If I had been in his place, I would not have burnt them, as Allah's Apostle forbade it, saying, 'Do not punish anybody with Allah's punishment (fire).' I would have killed them according to the statement of Allah's Apostle, 'Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'"
The important distinction being that they were killed with fire, which in the understanding of Abbas was wrong because fire was for Allah alone.
samcdkey said:
Is it? How do you know? It's used in islamic law, by islamic jurists: but why is the one interpretation necessarily wrong and the other right? I agree with you fully that it is morally wrong, but how do you make it so certain that it is also an error of interpretation? Again: no islamic nation on the face of the earth has any doubt about the way it's meant to be interpreted. Perhaps that's argument from demography or common usage; but it's the common usage that concerns me most.
Sam you seem rational, though you have little knowledge of your religions past, or perhaps, you agree with what has been done in the name of your religion:
Genocide committed in the name of Allah: 3,000,000 Bangladeshi Hindus Killed during the Pakistan-Bangladesh war in 1971. From 1894 to 1896 Abdul Hamid, Sultan of the Ottoman Empire, killed 150,000 Armenian Christians. In India, Sikh Guru Tegh Bahadur along with his disciples was burned to death by the Moghul ruler Aurangzeb in 1675. Another Sikh, Bhai Mati Das was sawn into right and left halves while he was still alive. In July 1974, 4,000 Christians living in Cyprus were killed by Fahri Koroturk, president of Turkey and his Islamic army. From 1843 to 1846 10,000 Assyrian Christians including women and children were massacred by the Muslims. From 1915 to 1918 750,000 Assyrians were killed in the name of Islamic Jihad. In 1933 thousands of Assyrian villagers were murdered by the Iraqi soldiers in Northern Iraq. Since 1990 more than 10,000 Kashmiri Hindus have been brutally murdered by Islamic fundamentalists. Over 280,000 Ugandans killed during the reign of Idi Amin from 1971 to 1979. Over 30,000 Mauritanians have been killed by the Islamic dictators since 1960. In 1980, 20,000 Syrians were murdered under the rule of Hafez Al-Assad, President of Syria. Since 1992 120,000 Algerians have been murdered by the Islamic fundamentalist army.
That's just a small portion of the evil brought to the world, by a pathetic schizophrenic, pedophile, terrorist named Mohammed.
I'm not a Hindu, but I did like what I read on this site:
Hinduism tells us that the "Self" which dwells in each and every being in this universe is one and the same with Godhead. Every soul in this uinverse is a reflection of this Supreme Self. Thus every individual has the potential to realize Godhead by the realization of this "Self".
Realization of the "Self" is possible only when someone is free to think on his/her own and act accordingly. The most heinous and barbaric crime in this world would be to stop an individual to think freely. And when such a crime is legalised in the form of a religion, one can easily imagine how disastrous it can be. Islam is such a religion.
Islam imposes a threat to the whole world which is far worse than deforestation, nuclear destruction or AIDS. It is an insidious, devilish disease creeping into the veins of the world. Every individual must realise the destructive and evil nature of this religion, for it eats away at the very foundation of humanity which is an individual's ability to think individually and act accordingly. The following articles logically analyse different aspects of this so called religion and bring forth the true nature of Islam.
click
If any freaking religion, one can be condemed to death, for questioning or choosing not to believe, that is not a religion. But a cult.
Islam: A False Religion
cult
*Islam demands that those who do not convert to Islam be slain or taken as slaves. There is no third option. With the genuine world religions, they tolerate those who do not agree with their tenets. They do not declare that those who do not agree with their dogmas be slain or taken as slaves.
That makes the difference between Islam and the true world religions. The latter allow other religious beliefs to co-exist. Islam demands via the Koran’s Allah that all non-Muslims be slaughtered or taken captive as slaves.
click
The above has been debated here over and over again and again. It's still out that muslims commit the crimes they do, because of interpretation of the Quaran.
Godless
Genocide committed in the name of Allah: 3,000,000 Bangladeshi Hindus Killed during the Pakistan-Bangladesh war in 1971. From 1894 to 1896 Abdul Hamid, Sultan of the Ottoman Empire, killed 150,000 Armenian Christians. In India, Sikh Guru Tegh Bahadur along with his disciples was burned to death by the Moghul ruler Aurangzeb in 1675. Another Sikh, Bhai Mati Das was sawn into right and left halves while he was still alive. In July 1974, 4,000 Christians living in Cyprus were killed by Fahri Koroturk, president of Turkey and his Islamic army. From 1843 to 1846 10,000 Assyrian Christians including women and children were massacred by the Muslims. From 1915 to 1918 750,000 Assyrians were killed in the name of Islamic Jihad. In 1933 thousands of Assyrian villagers were murdered by the Iraqi soldiers in Northern Iraq. Since 1990 more than 10,000 Kashmiri Hindus have been brutally murdered by Islamic fundamentalists. Over 280,000 Ugandans killed during the reign of Idi Amin from 1971 to 1979. Over 30,000 Mauritanians have been killed by the Islamic dictators since 1960. In 1980, 20,000 Syrians were murdered under the rule of Hafez Al-Assad, President of Syria. Since 1992 120,000 Algerians have been murdered by the Islamic fundamentalist army.
That's just a small portion of the evil brought to the world, by a pathetic schizophrenic, pedophile, terrorist named Mohammed.
I'm not a Hindu, but I did like what I read on this site:
Hinduism tells us that the "Self" which dwells in each and every being in this universe is one and the same with Godhead. Every soul in this uinverse is a reflection of this Supreme Self. Thus every individual has the potential to realize Godhead by the realization of this "Self".
Realization of the "Self" is possible only when someone is free to think on his/her own and act accordingly. The most heinous and barbaric crime in this world would be to stop an individual to think freely. And when such a crime is legalised in the form of a religion, one can easily imagine how disastrous it can be. Islam is such a religion.
Islam imposes a threat to the whole world which is far worse than deforestation, nuclear destruction or AIDS. It is an insidious, devilish disease creeping into the veins of the world. Every individual must realise the destructive and evil nature of this religion, for it eats away at the very foundation of humanity which is an individual's ability to think individually and act accordingly. The following articles logically analyse different aspects of this so called religion and bring forth the true nature of Islam.
click
If any freaking religion, one can be condemed to death, for questioning or choosing not to believe, that is not a religion. But a cult.
Islam: A False Religion
cult
*Islam demands that those who do not convert to Islam be slain or taken as slaves. There is no third option. With the genuine world religions, they tolerate those who do not agree with their tenets. They do not declare that those who do not agree with their dogmas be slain or taken as slaves.
That makes the difference between Islam and the true world religions. The latter allow other religious beliefs to co-exist. Islam demands via the Koran’s Allah that all non-Muslims be slaughtered or taken captive as slaves.
click
The above has been debated here over and over again and again. It's still out that muslims commit the crimes they do, because of interpretation of the Quaran.
Godless