• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Why is it that Muslims never learn about Muhammed.

If you people want to talk about Christianity,

Please make a thread on it.

It never fails.
When you Make a thread about Islam,
And everyone who knows nothing about Islam, wants to voice their opinion on Christianity.
 
Elvira said:
And that, my friends, is exactly how scripture gets misinterpreted/distorted/falsified...
Click to expand...

It already is. Why do you think there are four different versions of the same story written by different people at different times? Put two and two together. It's not hard.
 
Elvira said:
Sexual immorality is the only grounds for divorce, otherwise, only death breaks that bond of union...Romans 7:2, 3; 1 Corinthians 7:8, 9...
Click to expand...

So physical and emotional abuse just has to be tolerated?
 
Yasureoktoo said:
Somehow you are missing the whole point.
This is about Islam, not any other religion,
and the written documentation of the religion,
Not what people of a certain religion did on their own.
Click to expand...

You claimed that Islam was the only religion which used orders from God as a justification.

That is patently false.

Nothing exists in a vacuum.

You can’t pretend that Islam is an outlier when Christians— just to name one example— are every bit as violent.

And used God as the justification for their killings just as much as Muslims did.
 
Yasureoktoo said:
Obviously you are having a hard time.
Click to expand...

It's kinda strange for you to not provide any source or link to anything. Like that would reveal something.
 
Yasureoktoo said:
If you people want to talk about Christianity,

Please make a thread on it.

It never fails.
When you Make a thread about Islam,
And everyone who knows nothing about Islam, wants to voice their opinion on Christianity.
Click to expand...

It never fails.

Bigots who want to shriek about Islam lose their **** when it’s pointed out that Christians are every bit as guilty of what they accuse Muslims of.
 
Yasureoktoo said:
If you people want to talk about Christianity,

Please make a thread on it.

It never fails.
When you Make a thread about Islam,
And everyone who knows nothing about Islam, wants to voice their opinion on Christianity.
Click to expand...

It just seems like hypocrisy to talk about the evils and atrocities of Islam, as if Christianity is soooo much better.

Now if you were attacking ALL religion like that, it would make sense. But this is a little like finding you have a cockroach problem in your house, but attacking only the brown-colored ones. It just seems odd.
 
Irredentist said:
Mark is the oldest Gospel, and in Mark Chapter ten Jesus says

“Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery.”

He makes no mention of any grounds for divorce, on the basis of infidelity or otherwise.

"What God has joined together let no one separate."
Click to expand...

Mark and Matthew both describe the same incident. In Mark's account there are no exceptions made to the ban on divorce. In Matthew Jesus said that there was no divorce except for adultery. Since adultery is an allowed exception in Matthew, I can't agree that no divorce ever was a hard and fast teaching by Jesus.
 
bearpoker said:
Mark and Matthew both describe the same incident. In Mark's account there are no exceptions made to the ban on divorce. In Matthew Jesus said that there was no divorce except for adultery. Since adultery is an allowed exception in Matthew, I can't agree that no divorce ever was a hard and fast teaching by Jesus.
Click to expand...

There is no reason to believe that it wasn't, because Matthew uses the Gospel of Mark as a source. But the Gospel of Mark does not have any exception for infidelity. This means that it was a later invention to tone down the original saying against divorce.
 
Tigerace117 said:
You claimed that Islam was the only religion which used orders from God as a justification.

That is patently false.

Nothing exists in a vacuum.

You can’t pretend that Islam is an outlier when Christians— just to name one example— are every bit as violent.

And used God as the justification for their killings just as much as Muslims did.
Click to expand...

That's correct.
The Jews did it thousands of years ago, but long since outlawed it.
Islam cannot change, and the same laws apply.

and no, I am not going to ask you to show me where Christians used justification for killing,
because all you will do is show outdated Jewish writings.

And no, even if there were, there is no comparison with the NT, and the 40 volumes of Taburi, and the 800 pages of fine print in Ishaq.
 
ataraxia said:
It just seems like hypocrisy to talk about the evils and atrocities of Islam, as if Christianity is soooo much better.

Now if you were attacking ALL religion like that, it would make sense. But this is a little like finding you have a cockroach problem in your house, but attacking only the brown-colored ones. It just seems odd.
Click to expand...

Nobody is claiming it is better.
Actually IMO it is a lot better, but that is not the topic and I am trying to avoid that.
There are thousands of religions on earth, and you can't possibly learn anything about any of them, if you want to repeat BS about others.
 
Yasureoktoo said:
That's correct.
The Jews did it thousands of years ago, but long since outlawed it.
Islam cannot change, and the same laws apply.

and no, I am not going to ask you to show me where Christians used justification for killing,
because all you will do is show outdated Jewish writings.

And no, even if there were, there is no comparison with the NT, and the 40 volumes of Taburi, and the 800 pages of fine print in Ishaq.
Click to expand...

No one really knows what’s in their holy books. They just project their latest opinions on to it.

Paul says in the New Testament that women should never talk in church, because it is shameful. Hiw many Christian woman do you know who actually follow that?
 
ataraxia said:
So physical and emotional abuse just has to be tolerated?
Click to expand...

Of course not but if you did divorce, that would not free you to scripturally remarry...
 
ataraxia said:
No one really knows what’s in their holy books. They just project their latest opinions on to it.

Paul says in the New Testament that women should never talk in church, because it is shameful. Hiw many Christian woman do you know who actually follow that?
Click to expand...

The Jewish OT. says to kill homosexuals.

What religion follows that today.
 
Yasureoktoo said:
That's correct.
The Jews did it thousands of years ago, but long since outlawed it.
Islam cannot change, and the same laws apply.

and no, I am not going to ask you to show me where Christians used justification for killing,
because all you will do is show outdated Jewish writings.

And no, even if there were, there is no comparison with the NT, and the 40 volumes of Taburi, and the 800 pages of fine print in Ishaq.
Click to expand...

Christians continue to slaughter each other— and others— to this day. Orthodox Christian Serbs tried to exterminate Muslims in Bosnia and Kosovo. Protestants and Catholics have been killing each other for hundreds of years in Ireland. Christian fanatics continue to operate unchecked in Africa and conduct mass shootings in the West. They shot up a mosque in New Zealand not that long ago.

I’m sure if you asked a peasant in 1600s Germany if the various marauding Christian lords would ever knock it off he wouldn’t think so either.

The Old Testament doesn’t go away just because it’s inconvenient for you.
 
ataraxia said:
No one really knows what’s in their holy books. They just project their latest opinions on to it.

Paul says in the New Testament that women should never talk in church, because it is shameful. Hiw many Christian woman do you know who actually follow that?
Click to expand...

Actually we have the holy books of Islam, translated into lots of languages,
and anyone who choses to, can read them.
 
Yasureoktoo said:
Nobody is claiming it is better.
Actually IMO it is a lot better, but that is not the topic and I am trying to avoid that.
There are thousands of religions on earth, and you can't possibly learn anything about any of them, if you want to repeat BS about others.
Click to expand...

And....case in point right there.

You are simply throwing a ****fit because your bigotry has been called out.
 
Yasureoktoo said:
Nobody is claiming it is better.
Actually IMO it is a lot better, but that is not the topic and I am trying to avoid that.
There are thousands of religions on earth, and you can't possibly learn anything about any of them, if you want to repeat BS about others.
Click to expand...

If you want us to agree that theQuran has a bunch of obsolete laws dating from medieval Arabia, you got it.

So what do you want to do about it? You are not going to change anyone’s mind by insulting or humiliating their holy book. If you can find the underlying Socio economic and political reasons for the violence and address them, on the other hand, they will find ways to “properly interpret” their scripture so they can act in a more civilized and socially acceptable way, in the same way Christians have learned to do recently.

Actually, the Christians did not learn to do this by reading their holy books more closely. They have learned this by getting religion out of their politics, and becoming more secular. Maybe something similar will happen in Islamic countries as well, sometime soon.

Your approach of insults, bigotry, and attempted humiliation is not a fruitful approach.
 
Irredentist said:
There is no reason to believe that it wasn't, because Matthew uses the Gospel of Mark as a source. But the Gospel of Mark does not have any exception for infidelity. This means that it was a later invention to tone down the original saying against divorce.
Click to expand...

Did you not agree that both Jesus and Muhammad are reconstructions of the original men as you said in post #13.

Again, so what? We have lots of documents on all kinds of people. How much is accurate? How much is fabrication? We may never know. Muslims don't worship the "Real Muhammad" any more than Christians worship the "Real Jesus". They worship reconstructions of him.
Click to expand...
 
ataraxia said:
If you want us to agree that theQuran has a bunch of obsolete laws dating from medieval Arabia, you got it.

So what do you want to do about it? You are not going to change anyone’s mind by insulting or humiliating their holy book. If you can find the underlying Socio economic and political reasons for the violence and address them, on the other hand, they will find ways to “properly interpret” their scripture so they can act in a more civilized and socially acceptable way, in the same way Christians have learned to do recently.

Actually, the Christians did not learn to do this by reading their holy books more closely. They have learned this by getting religion out of their politics, and becoming more secular. Maybe something similar will happen in Islamic countries as well, sometime soon.

Your approach of insults, bigotry, and attempted humiliation is not a fruitful approach.
Click to expand...

I never said that,
Why are you just making sh-t up.

The Qur'an is actually a nightmare to read, and few Muslims even know the correct way to read it, to understand what can be understood in it.
 
bearpoker said:
Did you not agree that both Jesus and Muhammad are reconstructions of the original men as you said in post #13.
Click to expand...

Absolutely! What I am attempting to do here is to reconstruct a historical Jesus of Nazareth, Jesus the man, or at least as close as possible given the documentation we have. The gospels do possess some valid historical elements. The trick is to figure out which ones.
 
Elvira said:
Of course not but if you did divorce, that would not free you to scripturally remarry...
Click to expand...

Why not? That doesn't make sense. Someone beats you up and cusses you out for a while, so you are not free to find love and companionship ever again?
 
Is it true that he was a warlord that married 7 year olds? I really dont know I just hear people arguing about it in chat rooms.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom