Evidence for God from Science

Dan: saying that Muslims are called to violence and all the other horrible things that you say against peoples closely held beliefs is so disingenuous that it is outright deceitful.

Dan: I cannot fathom what type of influence you may have to say such things but they are not from the Christ that I have come to know and love.

Dan: I am not defending the Islamic faith, I think it is a horrible system of knowing God and treating others, but I will however treat it fairly as I will also treat it followers fairly.

Philip wrote:
Disingenuous?!!! Do the indicated Qur'an texts say what they say or not?

It matters not one whit (other than the horrific repercussions, of course) how closely one holds to pagan teachings that encourage violence in the name of a false heathen god! Scripture calls such teachings as of the devil, and warns of the destruction of false prophets leading people into evil. You are in denial of what the Qur'an actually says!

The words of Scripture condemn false teachers, warns of the destruction such teachings bring, and of the fate of those wicked ones proliferating such poison. Have you not read the Bible?

Why would you consider false, dangerous pagan teachings as anything other than what Scripture tells us they are (they are of the devil)? It is God that condemns such - I'm only echoing what He says about such teachings. Now, sure, the people following Islam are deceived, and we should have hearts for them. And if we truly love and care about them, we will let them know (in the correct manner and tone) that these teachings are false and they will only lead to their destruction. And so THAT is what loving Muslims should produce in Christians - and not acting as if their beliefs are legitimate, merely because they are sincerely held. As we could say many people sincerely belief all kinds of dangerous stuff that will only lead them to hell.

I am in denial, hah, pot meet kettle. You are in denial that the Koran holds no historical value whatsoever and base your opinions on it being factually correct.

Philip wrote:
Daniel, the REAL issue is with what the Qur'an definitely says NOW and as it is read by millions of Muslims.

Yes, the past of what Mohammad originally wrote is perhaps somewhat murky. But that's NOT the REAL issue, is it? Also, you defended the text as defensive and reactionary to invasion and being attacked, and yet you say it's not even certain WHAT actually was written. So WHICH is it, as you assert it is about one thing, and then say even that is uncertain?

But the bottom line is that millions of Muslims believe the evil writings for which there is no argument of how they read and are widely interpreted in the hands of today's Muslims - and that is the REAL issue. I don't care how sincere anyone is, it's dark, violent, dangerous pagan stuff. Don't confuse historic authenticity with what today's Muslims believe, read and react to. It's dangerous stuff, made even more so because millions of Muslims 1) believe it is from their god and 2) many of them take the call to violent aggression and Jihad very seriously, precisely based upon what is in the Qur'an. This cannot be denied! To say this is attacking Muslims, well, it is attacking those believing and following the advocated violent actions, as well as the false, pagan teachings that are deluding and endangering our world. If this makes one prejudiced or intolerant - so be it. I don't like Nazi beliefs either! Just differently sides of the very same spiritual coin, in the teachings of both groups.

1over137 wrote:Dan,

The Muslims you talk to, if Quran cannot be historically trusted, how they determine which part of the Quran to believe and which part not? What is their Muslim faith based on?

Danieltwotwenty wrote:

1over137 wrote:Dan,

The Muslims you talk to, if Quran cannot be historically trusted, how they determine which part of the Quran to believe and which part not? What is their Muslim faith based on?

Hey I totally agree, that's why I said it is not an inspired work as everything in it may or may not be true.
Unfortunately they don't really like to discuss these things much and I tread carefully, unlike the nincompoops here. So I am unable to answer your question, but the book I read was quite enlightening and I highly recommend it.

RickD wrote:

Danieltwotwenty wrote:

1over137 wrote:Dan,

The Muslims you talk to, if Quran cannot be historically trusted, how they determine which part of the Quran to believe and which part not? What is their Muslim faith based on?

Hey I totally agree, that's why I said it is not an inspired work as everything in it may or may not be true.
Unfortunately they don't really like to discuss these things much and I tread carefully, unlike the nincompoops here. So I am unable to answer your question, but the book I read was quite enlightening and I highly recommend it.

So, let me get this straight. From your own words, everything in the Quran may be true?

And the Quran is quite enlightening?
Do you understand what enlightening means, when used to describe a religious text?

And, those of us here that point out the truth about this are nincompoops?

Dan wrote:
You have purposely misrepresented everything I have said, you have twisted them completely to suit your own needs, that makes you a flat out liar. You really should be praying for yourself Rick, you are the one who has been deceived, you think that lying about a brother in Christ is ok.

Are you seriously being that dense, may or may not be true as a historical record, not its claims on the metaphysical.

When I said enlightening it was in reference to the books I have been reading and not the Koran, and yes they were enlightening, it gave me a better understanding of what Muslims actually believe and debunked most of the bull I hear regurgitated on here.

Thought I would paste the definition of enlightening because you seem to have a shaky grasp on what it means.
-give (someone) greater knowledge and understanding about a subject or situation.-
So yes learning about what Muslims actually believe and reading as much as I can about the external history of Muhammed has given me a greater knowledge and understanding of the subject. I suggest you do the same as education drives out fear and hatred, ignorance only perpetuates it.

Enlighten-
give (someone) spiritual knowledge or insight.

Danieltwotwenty wrote:

1over137 wrote:Dan,

The Muslims you talk to, if Quran cannot be historically trusted, how they determine which part of the Quran to believe and which part not? What is their Muslim faith based on?

Hey I totally agree, that's why I said it is not an inspired work as everything in it may or may not be true.
Unfortunately they don't really like to discuss these things much and I tread carefully, unlike the nincompoops here. So I am unable to answer your question, but the book I read was quite enlightening and I highly recommend it.

Danieltwotwenty wrote:Bart was right, this place is no longer a safe haven for Christians.

Robert Spencer wrote:Islamic apologists in the West routinely deny that Muhammad married a child or that Islamic law sanctions child marriage. Stories like these show that they’re lying. In reality, few things are more abundantly attested in Islamic law than the permissibility of child marriage. Islamic tradition records that Muhammad’s favorite wife, Aisha, was six when Muhammad wedded her and nine when he consummated the marriage:

“The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death)” (Bukhari 7.62.88).

Another tradition has Aisha herself recount the scene:

The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became Allright, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, “Best wishes and Allah”s Blessing and a good luck.” Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah”s Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age. (Bukhari 5.58.234).


Muhammad was at this time fifty-four years old.

Marrying young girls was not all that unusual for its time, but because in Islam Muhammad is the supreme example of conduct (cf. Qur’an 33:21), he is considered exemplary in this unto today. And so in April 2011, the Bangladesh Mufti Fazlul Haque Amini declared that those trying to pass a law banning child marriage in that country were putting Muhammad in a bad light: “Banning child marriage will cause challenging the marriage of the holy prophet of Islam, [putting] the moral character of the prophet into controversy and challenge.” He added a threat: “Islam permits child marriage and it will not be tolerated if any ruler will ever try to touch this issue in the name of giving more rights to women.” The Mufti said that 200,000 jihadists were ready to sacrifice their lives for any law restricting child marriage.

Likewise the influential website Islamonline.com in December 2010 justified child marriage by invoking not only Muhammad’s example, but the Qur’an as well:

The Noble Qur’an has also mentioned the waiting period [i.e. for a divorced wife to remarry] for the wife who has not yet menstruated, saying: “And those who no longer expect menstruation among your women, if you doubt, then their period is three months, and [also for] those who have not menstruated” [Qur’an 65:4]. Since this is not negated later, we can take from this verse that it is permissible to have sexual intercourse with a prepubescent girl. The Qur’an is not like the books of jurisprudence which mention what the implications of things are, even if they are prohibited. It is true that the prophet entered into a marriage contract with A’isha when she was six years old, however he did not have sex with her until she was nine years old, according to al-Bukhari.

Other countries make Muhammad’s example the basis of their laws regarding the legal marriageable age for girls. Article 1041 of the Civil Code of the Islamic Republic of Iran states that girls can be engaged before the age of nine, and married at nine: “Marriage before puberty (nine full lunar years for girls) is prohibited. Marriage contracted before reaching puberty with the permission of the guardian is valid provided that the interests of the ward are duly observed.”

According to Amir Taheri in The Spirit of Allah: Khomeini and the Islamic Revolution (pp. 90-91), Iran’s Ayatollah Khomeini himself married a ten-year-old girl when he was twenty-eight. Khomeini called marriage to a prepubescent girl “a divine blessing,” and advised the faithful to give their own daughters away accordingly: “Do your best to ensure that your daughters do not see their first blood in your house.” When he took power in Iran, he lowered the legal marriageable age of girls to nine, in accord with Muhammad’s example.

...