G*d....what's in a name? (striking down an idol on 9/11)

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  kpr37  •  4 years ago  •  127 comments

G*d....what's in a name? (striking down an idol on 9/11)

imagesizer.jpg

In my opinion, G*D is one of the finest ideas ever conceptualized or recognized by the human species. I however freely acknowledge that misconceptions about G*d or gods have caused some of humanities greatest atrocities. Many of these atrocious acts are with us, still, sadly, today. Men and women still fight and die over a concept of G*d. It is only by further understanding this very complex concept that humanity has any chance at salvation. Whether your salvation is secular or spiritual, it matters not. Knowledge enriches the soul, even among those claiming to be soulless.

In the here and now, 2017 (Anno Domini) fear inappropriately stalks any dialogue of a religious nature in western secular society. Profoundly, and at unprecedented levels a strict silence in enforced. G*d is, without any needed prompting now presumably a "taboo" subject, as more and more violence is committed in its name. But what is in a name you may ask? Far more than you have may have bargained for my friends. My goal is to kill an idea within your conscience. It is a delusional idea that has no basis in reality, secular or otherwise.

Humans throughout our history have believed nonsense, unbelievably ridiculous stupid ass nonsense. No one could possibly believe the shit humans have believed. It's been stunningly, and utterly preposterously nonsensical, yet nevertheless, we have believed! Some of this nonsense is named or identified as religious in nature. Some nonsense is just nonsensical.

 The idea of Abrahamic religions is one such nonsensical idea.

There is the religion of Abraham (Judaism) and that is it. Abraham had one religion right? If you believe I am incorrect, please source any other religion that Abraham had, from Abraham, in his own words asserting that fact. People of the Jewish faith have Abraham as patriarch.

Christians recognize the G*d of Jesus, who was Jewish. Jesus recognized the Jewish concept of G*d. Jesus was, in my opinion the patriarch of the Christian faith. That is a connection clear and easy to follow logically.

It, the same G*d myth is killing Jews, and Christians, as liberals, and progressive mindlessly mouth the dogma of Islam as if it is a secular reality. It is not. But their claims reinforce the dogma of Islam, making it, in my opinion, far more dangerous and aggressive for the believers of the two other faiths to coexist, globally or locally. As even atheists now often times claim to know it is the same god. See word ATHEISTS  When Christians in Africa, are butchered for not accepting allah as their G*d. Know that you, whoever and wherever you are, you hold the same concept of an Abrahamic G*d, used by the butchers slaughtering in the name of allah. You hold the same nonsensical "Abrahamic religions" delusion in common with them.

Let that just sink in for a moment. Do you want to continue to share the same concept of an "Abrahamic religions" with those killers?


The expression 'Abrahamic religions' originates from the Qur'an 's repeated references to the 'religion of Abraham'

(see Surahs 2:130,135; 3:95; 6:123, 161; 12:38; 16:123; 22:78). In particular, this expression refers specifically to Islam, and is sometimes contrasted to Judaism and Christianity, as for example in Surah 2:135: "They say: "Become Jews or Christians if ye would be guided (To salvation)." Say thou: "Nay! (I would rather) the Religion of Abraham the True, and he joined not gods with God." In the Qur'an, Abraham is declared to have been a Muslim, 'not a Jew nor a Christian' (Surah 3:67)


http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Abrahamic_religions

Making this claim, nothing but part of the dogma of Mohammad's ideology. Clearly separating it from a secular reality.

"Abrahamic religions". - It is a semi-modern social construct of half-crazed, solipsistic idealists who's well-meaning intent(?) has supported the dogma of some of the worst theocratic monsters our world has experienced. Yet the world's empty headed progressive dilettantes persist. Christians are killed persistently and repeatedly for not excepting that they share the same god concept with their neighbors. Who hold another god concept entirely.


CAIRO — Dressed in military fatigues, the gunmen waved down the bus filled with Christian pilgrims as it wended its way down a dusty side-road in the desert of western Egypt, headed toward a monastery. Claiming to be security officers, the gunmen ordered the passengers to get out. They separated the men from the women and children, and instructed them to surrender their mobile phones. They told the men to recite the shahada, the Islamic declaration of faith.


Attempting to force them to believe in the same god concept. These men died before accepting the claim of a mutual, shared concept of god. The difference between the two concepts at that time was so great, that they gave up their own lives rather than lie, to save themselves. That is the conviction of belief they had. This "same god", total nonsense is parroted by progressive ideologues, and Islamic ideologues alike for different reasons entirely. Yet still, the effect is the same, to reinforce the dogmatic system of beliefs held by both. Neither Islamic or progressive ideologues have any affinity for the Christian faith whatsoever. They both view it as a competing system of belief. Progressivism and Islamism are both replacement ideologies.


When the men refused, the gunmen opened fire.

At least 28 people were killed, several with a single shot to the head, according to the Egyptian authorities and relatives of the victims, several of whom were children. The attack on Friday in Minya Province, 120 miles south of Cairo, was a coldblooded escalation of sectarian violence targeting minority Christians that has left more than 100 people dead since December and shaken the country’s government.


https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/26/world/middleeast/egypt-coptic-christian-attack.html?_r=0

All G*d concepts have a beginning, at some point in history they were born, recognized, or changed slightly to fit into new cultural, or societal dynamic as needed by those conceptualizing or constructing their G*D concept. Here is the first source of allah in Islamic sources.

We most try to separate often repeated dogmas from reality. The Tafsir of Ibn Kathir will further tell the story of why allah is what it is.


The Story of rebuilding the House by Quraysh before the Messenger of Allah was sent as Prophet


http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=305


The Dispute regarding Who should place the Black Stone in Its Place


http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=304

Taken from the top of the page in the first link.


 In his Sirah, Muhammad bin Ishaq bin Yasar said, "When the Messenger of Allah reached thirty-five years of age, the Quraysh gathered to rebuild the Ka`bah, this included covering it with a roof. However, they were weary of demolishing it. During that time, the Ka`bah was barely above a man's shoulder, so they wanted to raise its height and build a ceiling on top. Some people had stolen the Ka`bah's treasure beforehand,


The treasure referred to here is the black stone of the Kabba.


which used to be in a well in the middle of the Ka`bah. The treasure was later found with a man called, Duwayk, a freed servant of Bani Mulayh bin `Amr, from the tribe of Khuza`ah. The Quraysh cut off his hand as punishment.


The cutting off of hands is clearly an Arab pagan law or a custom.

Now it's codified in the prophet Mohammad's laws of 'allah'.. known as sharia.(the way or path) also, know as Mohammad's habitual practice.


Some people claimed that those who actually stole the treasure left it with Duwayk.

Afterwards, the sea brought a ship that belonged to a Roman merchant to the shores of Jeddah, where it washed-up. So they collected the ship's wood to use it for the Ka`bah's ceiling; a Coptic carpenter in Makkah prepared what they needed for the job. When they decided to begin the demolition process to rebuild the House, AbuWahb bin `Amr bin `A'idh bin `Abd bin `Imran bin Makhzum took a stone from the Ka`bah; the stone slipped from his hand and went back to where it had been. He said, `O people of Quraysh! Do not spend on rebuilding the House, except from what was earned from pure sources. No money earned from a prostitute, usury or injustice should be included.'''IbnIshaq commented here that the people also attribute these words to Al-Walid bin Al-Mughirah bin `Abdullah bin `Amr bin Makhzum.

IbnIshaq continued, "The Quraysh began to organize their efforts to rebuild the Ka`bah, each subtribe taking the responsibility of rebuilding a designated part of it.

However, they were still weary about bringing down the Ka`bah. Al-Walid bin Al-Mughirah said, `I will start to bring it down.' He held an ax and stood by the Ka`bah and said, `O Allah!


The Kaaba is the house of the Pagan Deities or gods, and here the greater one, it's called "allah" in this instance. it's "Akbar" or greater than the other idols.


No harm is meant. O Allah! We only seek to do a good service.'


At this particular time in history, Mohammad is not yet  the prophet of Islam, he and everybody else living in Mecca are pagans. Who only know of pagan gods. There has yet to have been a "revelation" claimed by Mohammad, it will not come for another five years. And we see, Al-Walid bin Al-Mughirah, begging 'allah's' forgiveness, because he is about to strike the house of 'allah' with an axe, and does not want to anger 'allah', who at this time, is a pagan deity. The Kaaba is still now, the house of 'allah', and the black stone is still residing there.


He then started to chop the House's stones. The people waited that night and said, `We will wait and see. If something strikes him, we will not bring it down and instead rebuid it the way it was.

If nothing happens to him, then Allah will have agreed to what we are doing.'


'allah' is the "top stone" the big dog, head honcho, main man," Allah is "Akbar " or Greater than, the other idols


 The next morning, Al-Walid went to work on the Ka`bah, and the people started bringing the Ka`bah down with him. When they reached the foundations that Ibrahim built, they uncovered green stones that were above each other, just like a pile of spears.''IbnIshaq then said that some people told him, "A man from Quraysh, who was helping rebuild the Ka`bah, placed the shovel between two of these stones to pull them up; when one of the stones was moved, all of Makkah shook, so they did not dig up these stones.''


 Now on to the second link.


IbnIshaq said, "The tribes of Quraysh collected stones to rebuild the House, each tribe collecting on their own. They started rebuilding it, until the rebuilding of the Ka`bah reached the point where the Black Stone was to be placed in its designated site .


The corner of the Kaaba ( where it can be found today )


A dispute erupted between the various tribes of Quraysh, each seeking the honor of placing the Black Stone for their own tribe.


Mohammad is from a clan of the Quraysh tribe, the highest deity of the tribe is clearly a black stone. This black stone is a pagan Deity.


The dispute almost led to violence between the leaders of Quraysh in the area of the Sacred House. Banu`Abd Ad-Dar and Banu`Adi bin Ka`b bin Lu'ay, gave their mutual pledge to fight until death.


Fighting to the death over the honor (supremacy ) of a black stone is still ongoing in the contemporary world today. Open a newspaper.


However, five or four days later, Abu Umayyah bin Al-Mughirah bin `Abdullah bin `Amr bin Makhzum, the oldest man from Quraysh then intervened at the right moment. AbuUmayyah suggested that Quraysh should appoint the first man to enter the House from its entrance to be a mediator between them. They agreed.

The Messenger - Muhammad - was the first person to enter the House. When the various leaders of Quraysh realized who the first one was, they all proclaimed, `This is Al-Amin (the Honest one). We all accept him; This is Muhammad.' When the Prophet reached the area where the leaders were gathering and they informed him about their dispute, he asked them to bring a garment and place it on the ground. He placed the Black Stone on it .


Mohammad shows great reverence to the stone and treats it with respect, the black stone is an object of worship. It must have been a great honor to be "in-trusted" with the placement of his family's sacred idol. The black stone was the most revered object of worship at this time and place. Mecca, 5 years before Mohammad became a prophet.


He then requested that each of the leaders of Quraysh hold the garment from one side and all participate in lifting the Black Stone, moving it to its designated area. Next, the Prophet carried the Black Stone by himself and placed it in its designated position and built around it. The Quraysh used to call the Messenger of Allah `Al-Amin' even before the revelation came to him.''


Al-Amin. trustworthy in Arabic, Mohammad was "in trusted" with the well being of the black stone, making sure no harm came to it. He was certainly the man for the job, as now the black stone is still the main (only) attraction in the Kaaba, the "lowly"  tribal deity of the Quraysh tribe, is now what Mohammad wanted, it's the only idol worshiped in the Kaaba. The "jinn" of his pagan father must have been so proud, after all, his name was slave of allah (Abdullah)

How do you possibly explain this to your Jewish neighbors that you are attempting to convince that you, in fact,  share a common, mutual, concept of G*d together in fraternal monotheistic brotherhood. That is going to be tricky, for sure. But the prophet had an answer, as long as that answer is not closely examined.

And how do you explain to your pagan brothers, that you are getting rid of idols because monotheism is the only true faith, and leave the idol of your family standing triumphantly alone at the Kaaba? He turns to the bible for an answer, but he gets the story wrong, to his advantage of course. He is, after all, attempting to transform 'allah' into the G*d of the universe. Mohammad needs a good reason to break all of the idols but one. His, the 'allah' idol.


(57. "And by Allah, I shall plot a plan for your idols after you have gone away and turned your backs.'') (58. So he broke them to pieces, except the biggest of them , that they might turn to it.)


Here is the important thing to remember, Abraham never worshiped the idol he left standing before at any time or place, nor, did he acknowledge it later, as an object of worship. As far as I know the name of the idol he did not break, was so insignificant to Jewish tradition, that the name itself, has been lost in the mists of history.


(59. They said: "Who has done this to our gods He must indeed be one of the wrongdoers.'') (60. They said: "We heard a young man talking against them, who is called Ibrahim.'') (61. They said: "Then bring him before the eyes of the people, that they may testify.'') (62. They said: "Are you the one who has done this to our gods, O Ibrahim'') (63. He said: "Nay, this one, the biggest of them did it. Ask them, if they can speak!'')


http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2638&Itemid=76#1

Here is the Jewish version of the Islamic text above.

THE PREACHER OF THE TRUE FAITH


When Abraham attained the age of twenty years, his father Terah fell ill. He spoke as follows to his sons Haran and Abraham, "I adjure you by your lives, my sons, sell these two idols for me, for I have not enough money to meet our expenses." Haran executed the wish of his father, but if any one accosted Abraham, to buy an idol from him, and asked him the price, he would answer, "Three manehs," and then question in turn, "How old art thou?" "Thirty years," the reply would be. "Thou art thirty years of age, and yet thou wouldst worship this idol which I made but to-day?" The man would depart and go his way, and another would approach Abraham, and ask, "How much is this idol?" and "Five manehs" would be the reply, and again Abraham would put the question, "How old art thou?"--"Fifty years."--"And dost thou who art fifty years of age bow down before this idol which was made but to-day?" Thereupon the man would depart and go his way. Abraham then took two idols, put a rope about their necks, and, with their faces turned downward, he dragged them along the ground , crying aloud all the time: "Who will buy an idol wherein there is no profit, either unto itself or unto him that buys it in order to worship it?


The Patriarch of the Jewish faith (monotheism) seems to greatly disrespect any and all idols.


It has a mouth, but it speaketh not; eyes, but it seeth not; feet, but it walketh not; ears, but it heareth not."

The people who heard Abraham were amazed exceedingly at his words. As he went through the streets, he met an old woman who approached him with the purpose of buying an idol, good and big, to be worshipped and loved. "Old woman, old woman," said Abraham, "I know no profit therein, either in the big ones or in the little ones, either unto themselves or unto others. And," he continued to speak to her, "what has become of the big image thou didst buy from my brother Haran, to worship it?" "Thieves," she replied, "came in the night and stole it, while I was still at the bath." "If it be thus," Abraham went on questioning her, "how canst thou pay homage to an idol that cannot save itself from thieves, let alone save others, like thyself, thou silly old woman, out of misfortune? How is it possible for thee to say that the image thou worshippest is a god? If it be a god, why did it not save itself out of the hands of those thieves? Nay, in the idol there is no profit, either unto itself or unto him that adores it."[26]

The old woman rejoined, "If what thou sayest be true, whom shall I serve?" "Serve the God of all gods," returned Abraham, "the Lord of lords, who hath created heaven and earth, the sea and all therein--the God of Nimrod and the God of Terah, the God of the east, the west, the south, and the north. Who is Nimrod, the dog, who calleth himself a god, that worship be offered unto him?"

Abraham succeeded in opening the eyes of the old woman, and she became a zealous missionary for the true God. When she discovered the thieves who had carried off her idol, and they restored it to her, she broke it in pieces with a stone, and as she wended her way through the streets, she cried aloud, "Who would save his soul from destruction, and be prosperous in all his doings, let him serve the God of Abraham." Thus she converted many men and women to the true belief.

Rumors of the words and deeds of the old woman reached the king, and he sent for her. When she appeared before him, he rebuked her harshly, asking her how she dared serve any god but himself. The old woman replied: "Thou art a liar, thou deniest the essence of faith, the One Only God, beside whom there is no other god. Thou livest upon His bounty, but thou payest worship to another, and thou dost repudiate Him, and His teachings, and Abraham His servant."

The old woman had to pay for her zeal for the faith with her life. Nevertheless great fear and terror took possession of Nimrod, because the people became more and more attached to the teachings of Abraham, and he knew not how to deal with the man who was undermining the old faith. At the advice of his princes, he arranged a seven days' festival, at which all the people were bidden to appear in their robes of state, their gold and silver apparel. By such display of wealth and power he expected to intimidate Abraham and bring him back to the faith of the king. Through his father Terah, Nimrod invited Abraham to come before him, that he might have the opportunity of seeing his greatness and wealth, and the glory of his dominion, and the multitude of his princes and attendants. But Abraham refused to appear before the king. On the other hand, he granted his father's request that in his absence he sit by his idols and the king's, and take care of them.

Alone with the idols, and while he repeated the words, "The Eternal He is God, the Eternal He is God!" he struck the king's idols from their thrones, and began to belabor them with an axe.


The King's idols, Abraham in this text, acknowledges no idols.


With the biggest he started, and with the smallest he ended. He hacked off the feet of one, and the other he beheaded. This one had his eyes struck out, the other had his hands crushed.[27] After all were mutilated, he went away, having first put the axe into the hand of the largest idol.


Why not break that one. Was he trying to elevate the status of the idol he left standing? To promote it, above the other idols?


The feast ended, the king returned, and when he saw all his idols shivered in pieces, he inquired who had perpetrated the mischief. Abraham was named as the one who had been guilty of the outrage, and the king summoned him and questioned him as to his motive for the deed.

Abraham replied: "I did not do it; it was the largest of the idols who shattered all the rest.


So, Abraham left the bigger or the "Akbar" (greater) idol alone to make a point, about the inanimate nature of idols.  Because even the King knows in his heart, that the bigger idol, did not shatter the little ones.

As I read it, Abraham, had no personal connection to the idol, never gave a shit what happened to the idol after he shatters the other ones.

Remember, Abraham, had no political power and was therefore at the mercy of the King when he committed his act. Mohammad broke the other 359 idols after he had supreme power in Arabia, and was an unquestionable theocratic dictator with the habit of having those who did not submit to his requests, beheaded hundreds at a time. Mohammad faced no consequences for breaking all the idols of the Kaaba save for one.


 Seest thou not that he still has the axe in his hand? And if thou wilt not believe my words, ask him and he will tell thee."

IN THE FIERY FURNACE

Now the king was exceedingly wroth at Abraham, and ordered him to be cast into prison, where he commanded the warden not to give him bread or water.[28]

http://philologos.org/__eb-lotj/vol1/five1.htm


Sahih Bukhari : In-book reference / Book 46, Hadith 39

Narrated `Abdullah bin Mas`ud:


The Prophet (ﷺ) entered Mecca and (at that time) there were three hundred-and-sixty idols around the Ka`ba. He started stabbing the idols with a stick he had in his hand and reciting: "Truth (Islam) has come and Falsehood (disbelief) has vanished.


http://quranx.com/Hadith/Bukhari/USC-MSA/Volume-3/Book-43/Hadith-658/

That is a lie. There is one of those idols still in the Kaaba. It is the black stone,(Hajr e Aswad ) the one Mohammad set in its place of honor all those years past.

Now, I asked what is in a name?

Allah, the proper name of the deity of the Islamic faith.

The god of Mohammad was a pagan concept, this is made clear as he attacked the Monotheistic Jews,  who disputed his concept of a Deity or G*d.

He responds that 'allah' is greater, it becomes obvious that Mohammad feels the Jews have a different concept of G*d, and his (Mohammad's) the 'allah concept of a deity is superior to the Jewish concept.Mohammad is recorded to shout in the linked hadith   'allah is greater" as he attempted to force his concept of G*d on to the Jewish people of Khaibar. Mohammad does not shout allah is Yahweh, Elohim or Jehovah. He shouts, 'allah Akbar (Allah is Greater)  and he is establishing the superiority of 'allah' over the Jewish concept of G*d. The Jews would not "submit" to Mohammad's assertion, so they were killed.

Sahih Bukhari / Volume-4 / Book-52 / Hadith-195

Narrated Anas:


The Prophet (ﷺ) set out for Khaibar and reached it at night. He used not to attack if he reached the people at night, till the day broke. So, when the day dawned, the Jews came out with their bags and spades. When they saw the Prophet; they said, "Muhammad and his army!" The Prophet (ﷺ) said, Allahu--Akbar! (Allah is Greater ) and Khaibar is ruined, for whenever we approach a nation (i.e. enemy to fight) then it will be a miserable morning for those who have been warned."


http://quranx.com/Hadith/Bukhari/USC-MSA/Volume-4/Book-52/Hadith-195/

In the classical Arabic used by allah to communicate with Mohammad, saying  "god is great"  would come out as "ilahu kabir"

kabir- is great in Arabic.


The Great History ( Arabic : ; al-Tārīkh al- Kabīr ) is a book by ninth-century Islamic scholar Muhammad ibn Ismail al-Bukhari in the field of biographical evaluation . [1]


it's not the al-Akbar ( the Greater) history, it's the "Kabir " history ( Great history)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_History

One of the many names, or aliases, used by "allah", is "the great" which is naturally, "Al- kabir" and not Akbar.


Al- Kabir ("the Great ") is also one of the 99 names of God in Islam.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kabir


allahu akbar = allah is greater...... Kabir is great..akbar is greater.

Now, ilah (god) in classical Arabic.

Quran 37;4.

If you look, some of the translations use allah. Even though that word does not appear in print, only the word "ilah" is found in the text.


Inna ilah akum lawahidun

Yusuf Ali (Saudi Rev. 1985)

Verily, verily, your Allah is one!-


  http://www.islamawakened.com/quran/37/4/default.htm

 The word god, (ilah) is used in the same verse with the proper name of the deity "Allah".


Innahum kanoo itha qeela lahum la ilah a illa Allahu yastakbiroona 

Yusuf Ali (Saudi Rev. 1985)

For they, when they were told that there is no god except Allah, would puff themselves up with Pride


http://www.islamawakened.com/quran/37/35/default.htm

 


Allah is the name of the existent, the one who is entitled to the divine attributes, the one who is qualified by the qualities of lordship.  He is unique in terms of authentic existence. Certainly no other existent can properly be said to exist by virtue of its essence; and that which acquires existence from it in respect of its essence is perishable, and in respect of the one who follows an existent it isperishable. (In fact, everything is perishable) "save His countenance." It is most that (the name occurs as an indication of this abstract entity in the same way that proper nouns (denote particular beings). Everything that has been said inrespect of etymology and derivation is arbitrary and artificial.

A useful lesson (in this respect): You should know that this name is the greatest of the ninety-nine names because it indicates the essence that brings together all the divine attributes in such a way that no part of them is lacking. Each of the other names indicates a single attribute such as knowledge, power, action and others, whereas is specifically the name (of God). No one applies to any other but God himself, neither literally nor metaphorically, whereas the rest of the names, such as and the like, may be used to designate one other than He. For these two reasons this name is the greatest name of all.


http://www.ghazali.org/books/Ghazali-99-Name-of-God.pdf

Page 11

Neither Jews nor Christians and instructed to venerate a stone.

Chapter:  (37) What Has Been Related About Kissing The (Black) Stone


Abbas bin Rabi'ah said: "I saw Umar bin Al-Khattab kissing the (Black) Stone and saying: 'I am kissing you while I know that you are just a stone, and if I had not seen the Messenger of Allah kissing you , I would not kiss you.'"


https://sunnah.com/tirmidhi/9/53  Y

If a civilization or a culture, in finding a pre-existing need for fantasy Utopian concepts of belief, world transformative beliefs, embrace Islamism. It chooses death over life. Which I hate to point out, is in fact, ongoing in some of the religious, political discourse in parts of the world. You may or may not have noticed (Islam) sanctifies death, the dead, and the martyrs who kill, they are viewed as a cultural or political asset. This philosophy does not sanctify the living, or the learning of men, only the killing of mankind. If you want to be sanctified (renowned), or to become immortal, you must first commit violence and be killed. You don't have to cure a disease,(save a life) or teach children how to act in this diverse world. You just must kill, and then be killed in your sanctified slaughter. This runs counter to the will and aspirations of moral reason intertwined, within a public or GLOBAL sphere. ( this culture of death, is a fantasy ideology) is also worth noting that the political or religious forces governing those parts of the world ( that embrace extremism) form their coalitions out of fear, not love, or universal friendship. They are afraid of the "other", sometimes this "other" is secular, other times the "other" is religious, and sometimes... the "other" just must be killed.

They did not become close out of love, they "love only themselves". They do not share any friendships, nor common aspirations and do not agree on joint political principles. The only thing they share is fear, FEAR of the "other", and if there is no such "other", they create one in their twisted imagination in order to indoctrinate, and to intimidate their followers and become close to one another and to grow a common hate. (a sickening dangerous brotherhood of hate)

 As a Pagan, unless things are soon to change, I hate to tell you, what I see.

"Merry Black" Danann, dancing with Shiva, and "heaven" help us if they invite Kali.( Kalki, the 10th and final avatar of the Hindu God Vishnu )


“Now, I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.”


J. Robert Oppenheimer (and Bhagavad Gita )

Written by Kevin Padig O'Raghailleah, pagan, Tuatha De Danann (child of the Goddess Danu) from Tuath i nGoath Dobhair, Gael. (now a little west of Boston)

 

A second source, confirming all information from the linked Tafsirs, can be found here. in Sirat Rasul Allah by Ibn Ishaq

Abridged version here

https://archive.org/stream/Sirat-lifeOfMuhammadBy-ibnIshaq/SiratIbnIahaqInEnglish_djvu.txt

 full version here.

https://ia801702.us.archive.org/25/items/TheLifeOfMohammedGuillaume/The_Life_Of_Mohammed_Guillaume.pdf#page=7&zoom=200,-3,78


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
kpr37
Professor Quiet
link   seeder  kpr37    4 years ago

I just thought that September 11 was a good day for striking down an idol.

 
 
 
Squirrel!
Freshman Quiet
link   Squirrel!  replied to  kpr37   4 years ago

TLDR

 
 
 
kpr37
Professor Quiet
link   seeder  kpr37  replied to  Squirrel!   4 years ago

Your intelligence and intellectual curiosity is as alway, a sight to behold. Thank you for stopping by.

 
 
 
Squirrel!
Freshman Quiet
link   Squirrel!  replied to  kpr37   4 years ago

I was being kind to you.  The reality is your article is TSDR.

 
 
 
Release The Kraken
PhD Principal
link   Release The Kraken  replied to  Squirrel!   4 years ago

Impasse

That's not an incorrect use of the Impasse rule, it's actually an acronym.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
link   Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Squirrel!   4 years ago

 

Some of us are not teenage texting addicts, so can you please tell us who are not, what the acronym TDLR stands for? 

Ooops.  I meant TLDR, which may be one of the reasons why I didn't know what it meant. LOL (When I first saw THAT acronym I thought it meant "Lots of Love", and you should have heard that laughter THAT mistake caused.)

 
 
 
Pedro
Professor Guide
link   Pedro  replied to  Buzz of the Orient   4 years ago

too long didn't read.

 
 
 
Release The Kraken
PhD Principal
link   Release The Kraken  replied to  Pedro   4 years ago

I thought TSDR was type slow, didn't read!

 

 
 
 
Pedro
Professor Guide
link   Pedro  replied to  Release The Kraken   4 years ago

You might be right.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
link   Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Pedro   4 years ago

Actually, I do prefer more succinct articles - I am (or at least USED to be) a more methodical and therefore slower reader.

 
 
 
kpr37
Professor Quiet
link   seeder  kpr37  replied to  Squirrel!   4 years ago

TSDR.

 

The post-dialectic paradigm of discourse expressed above, obliterating the concept of subtextual reality. Often times it is suggested as one of the leading reasons that Copernicus’ De Revolutionibus Orbium Coelestium (On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Bodies) outlining the heliocentric universe faced similar critical judgment. Of course, they were dogmatic lunatic theocrats.

 

Postmodern reply (LOL) I"m too the left of you.

 
 
 
Squirrel!
Freshman Quiet
link   Squirrel!  replied to  kpr37   4 years ago

YRAFOY

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
Professor Principal
link   Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Squirrel!   4 years ago

OK, I have a problem here. I need my Dick Tracy decoder ring to get through all these acronyms. 

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
link   Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A.   4 years ago

I think she might mean by YRAFOY "You are a fucking old yokel",  but I may be wrong, cause I'm just guessing.

 
 
 
Jerry Verlinger
Freshman Silent
link   Jerry Verlinger  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A.   4 years ago

OK, I have a problem here. I need my Dick Tracy decoder ring to get through all these acronyms. 

Me too. The problem is most of the 'children' here are too young to know who is Dick Tracy.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
link   Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Jerry Verlinger   4 years ago

LOL

Dick Tracy Secret Decoder Ring

DickTracyDecoderRing.jpg

 
 
 
Release The Kraken
PhD Principal
link   Release The Kraken  replied to  Buzz of the Orient   4 years ago

For our younger members let me rephrase. I need to use my Toucan Sam Fruit Loops decoder

download 1.jpg

 
 
 
Jerry Verlinger
Freshman Silent
link   Jerry Verlinger  replied to  Release The Kraken   4 years ago

I need to use my Toucan Sam Fruit Loops decoder

"Fruit Loop", an interesting phrase to find in a comment from Badfish.

(Go away mods, it is just a joke)

 
 
 
Jerry Verlinger
Freshman Silent
link   Jerry Verlinger  replied to  kpr37   4 years ago

My goal is to kill an idea within your conscience. It is a delusional idea that has no basis in reality, secular or otherwise.

At first I stopped reading right there, because to 'kill' a religious idea in any person's mind is a futile and hopeless task. Especially when that idea is about a religion or a belief, ...... but then my eye caught a couple of words in the next paragraph. 

Humans throughout our history have believed nonsense, unbelievably ridiculous stupid ass nonsense. No one could possibly believe the shit humans have believed. It's been stunningly, and utterly preposterously nonsensical, yet nevertheless, we have believed! Some of this nonsense is named or identified as religious in nature. Some nonsense is just nonsensical.

In the first place, using the word 'shit' to describe someone's belief is an incompetent and amateurish approach to presenting your opinion, so you've taken yourself out of the game right there. Plus, the sentence itself is contradictory.  You start by saying no one can believe what they believe, .....how does that work?

Anyway, since humans realized they could think, their minds have always conceived of a super being or superpower. Most people find it hard to believe the endless universe where our world exist just 'happened', so they made up some stories to justify their existence. Now they fight over which story is the truth ....and it will never ever end.     

 
 
 
kpr37
Professor Quiet
link   seeder  kpr37  replied to  Jerry Verlinger   4 years ago

At first I stopped reading right there,

 

So did I.

 
 
 
Jerry Verlinger
Freshman Silent
link   Jerry Verlinger  replied to  kpr37   4 years ago

At first I stopped reading right there,

 

So did I.

Please. You read the comment. No response? That's fine.

 
 
 
kpr37
Professor Quiet
link   seeder  kpr37  replied to  Jerry Verlinger   4 years ago

Jerry, it is laughable. Sorry but is.

 

because to 'kill' a religious idea in any person's mind is a futile and hopeless task

Ever hear of the cult of the Emperor in Japan? 

What ended it?

How did Gen.Mcarthur deal with it?

Unless you have a sky fairy handy,(do you?) gods, deities or associated principle are only ideas.

Bad ideas are killed off. The entire history of human existence proves my point.  

Where are the followers of the tens of thousand various god delusions throughout history? 

Religious ideas are memes, memes die.They don't self-replicate forever.They are challenged and perish if found lacking in substance. 

 

 

 
 
 
Jerry Verlinger
Freshman Silent
link   Jerry Verlinger  replied to  kpr37   4 years ago

Jerry, it is laughable. Sorry but is.

Yeah, I'm laughing my ass off, the comedy is what brings me here.

because to 'kill' a religious idea in any person's mind is a futile and hopeless task

Ever hear of the cult of the Emperor in Japan? 

What ended it?

From your link:

The Japanese concept of the divinity of the Emperor is often misunderstood by Westerners. Neither the Emperor nor most of his people ever thought that the Emperor was a God in the sense of being a supernatural supreme being.

I said:

Most people find it hard to believe the endless universe where our world exist just 'happened', so they made up some stories to justify their existence. Now they fight over which story is the truth ....and it will never ever end.

The Japanese Emperor story is not one of the stories.

How did Gen.Mcarthur deal with it?

From your link:

When the Emperor gave up his divinity on the orders of the USA, in the Imperial rescript of January 1 1946, he in fact gave up nothing that he had ever had, but simply restated an earlier traditional set of beliefs about the Imperial family.

The Japanese people did not give up their beliefs because a Gen. MacArthur order.

Unless you have a sky fairy handy,(do you?) gods, deities or associated principle are only ideas.

I don't understand why you think I disagree with that.

Bad ideas are killed off. The entire history of human existence proves my point.  

Not exactly with most religious ideologies. Many ideologies end because those that are believers do not spread their beliefs and the religion ends when the last believer dies.

Where are the followers of the tens of thousand various god delusions throughout history? 

They died.

Today there are about 4,200 religions, faiths and belief systems in the world. Many of them will disappear with the death of their last believer and new ones will be born in their place.

Religious ideas are memes, memes die.They don't self-replicate forever.They are challenged and perish if found lacking in substance.

I do not disagree with that general concept. However, I never said religions never die, I said, "because to 'kill' a religious idea in any person's mind is a futile and hopeless task.", that's different than a religion dying.

 
 
 
kpr37
Professor Quiet
link   seeder  kpr37  replied to  Jerry Verlinger   4 years ago

Is there, scientifically, a genetic difference between men and women? Clear and concise? Unequivocal?

Any scientist will tell you that t here is nothing clear, concise and unequivocal in scientific studies .

 

Unless it's global warming.(LOL) Doublethink the ability to hold two contrary ideas in one's head simultaneously. Orwell claimed it due to political indoctrination. 

That is you, denying science. the left denies science.

As I said, the science denying left. X y chromosomes were never mentioned in your comment. Why? do you deny they determine sex?

Neither were the differences between the male and female genome.

 

The data also suggests that the female genome now differs from the male genome in at least four ways. First, previous studies had shown that the Y chromosome gives males several genes that are absent in the female. Second, this study shows the fact that some genes on the inactive X are expressed means that about 15 percent of the genes are expressed at higher levels in females than in males. Third, this study also shows an additional 10 percent of genes on the inactive X show variable expression levels in females, whereas men have only a single copy of these genes. And finally, scientists had already known that random nature of X-inactivation shows that females, but not males, are mosaics of two cell populations with respect to X-linked gene expression.

"Although we've shown sex-specific differences, the clinical implications remain unexplored," Carrel said. "We can, however, conclude that these differences should be recognized as potential factors for explaining normal differences between the sexes but also gender differences in how certain diseases are manifested, progress and respond to treatment. Further studies will be required to establish such a role for these genes."

 

 

 

I suppose you mean 'thousands of years old', not 'after discovery'.

 

No, I meant the Egyptian Mummies discovered by the Greeks thousands of years ago. They can tell men from women mummies. Why?

 

Is an eight month old fetus, a human?

Another trick question? If the fetus is in the womb of a human female, it is a human fetus.

 

No, a fetus is, by defination, in utero.

And eight-month-old baby, no longer within its mother's womb, is premature and not in utero.

Let us try this again. it is not a complicated question

Is an eight-month-old fetus, still in utero. a human being? If it is not? what is it?

Science lets watch it change to suit a political ideology  (LOL)

 

 
 
 
Jerry Verlinger
Freshman Silent
link   Jerry Verlinger  replied to  kpr37   4 years ago

Any scientist will tell you that t here is nothing clear, concise and unequivocal in scientific studies .

That is you, denying science. the left denies science.

Apparently you understand that most of the Right Wingnuts have been accused of thinking outside of and being science deniers. Obviously you have learned from Donald Trump that to simply claim whatever you want you can make it true.

Positively no one thinks the Left Wing crowd are science deniers, for you to continue to make such a claim only makes you look very foolish.

As I said, the science denying left. X y chromosomes were never mentioned in your comment. Why? do you deny they determine sex?

Where in my comment do I deny any chromosomes deny sex?!

I'm not a scientist, so I'm not sure if a skeleton thousand of years old will provide chromosomes strong enough to determine the sex of them.  But I do know that a female skeleton does have a pelvic that is shaped differently than one from a male. So that is the  reason for my answer.

Also, I'm not so patient as you to find things to copy and paste in order to carry on a useless discussion, such as the paragraph you copied and pasted here .  

  I suppose you mean 'thousands of years old', not 'after discovery'.

No, I meant the Egyptian Mummies discovered by the Greeks thousands of years ago. They can tell men from women mummies. Why?

What, am I supposed to be a mind reader?  I answered the question you asked, not the question you meant to ask.

  Is an eight month old fetus, a human?

Another trick question? If the fetus is in the womb of a human female, it is a human fetus.

No, a fetus is, by defination, in utero.

I'm not really enjoying this game. You did not ask the definition of a fetus, you asked if it was human. I answered your inexplicit question as correctly as possible. ( you misspelled definition )

And eight-month-old baby, no longer within its mother's womb, is premature and not in utero.

Again, your question did not mention any 'babies', you only said 'fetus'. 

Let us try this again. it is not a complicated question

You made it complicated by not asking the question correctly. 

Is an eight-month-old fetus, still in utero. a human being? If it is not? what is it?

Once again you have changed your question. If you want to play this game you have provide the specifics in the question order to obtain the information you're looking for.

That is the question that is at the heart of the abortion debate. I believe life begins at conception, but I'm not sure when that life becomes a human person. So, I do not have an answer to your revised question, mostly because I'm not a woman. The best I can say is, women, religion and science see the path to personhood as a gradual one. 

Science lets watch it change to suit a political ideology  (LOL)

That is a very weak and thin viewpoint regarding a very serious issue.

Politics does not provide an impact on the opinions of most people regarding abortion. Most right wing people feel that life begins at conception and should not be terminated by the mother. Many left wing people believe 'life' begins at birth, others believe life begins at conception, and in either case can be terminated by the mother, within certain conditions.

I said in my last post regarding this article I said I was leaving the thread. But I decided tp give it another shot. However, not having the mind reader abilities you require to play this game, I'm out of here because you, like most right wingers do not have any problems with cheating.

 

 
 
 
Pedro
Professor Guide
link   Pedro    4 years ago

Stellar article. I enjoyed reading it.

 
 
 
kpr37
Professor Quiet
link   seeder  kpr37  replied to  Pedro   4 years ago

Thank you.

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
Junior Guide
link   Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו    4 years ago

Not to put too fine a point (there's a pun coming up) on it but the germanic (and generic) word, god, is not the name of any specific god as far as I can find.  So, I'm always bemused (and amused) when it's rendered as G-d (or, in this case G*d) in what I think is a nod to the Hebrew tradition of not uttering the Hebrew name of god which is odd (no that's not the pun yet).  But it turns out that the name of god is plastered all throughout the Hebrew bible and thousands of pages of biblical commentary.  Here's how it would have looked in the text before the vowel markings (called "pointings"--there's the pun--or niqqud) began to be added to the text in the early middle ages to aid non-Hebrew speakers in the pronunciation):

יהוה

And here it is with the niqqud: 

                                                           יְהֹוָה

But despite all the trouble taken to show how it's pronounced, it never is when the text is read aloud since it's considered blasphemous to attempt to pronounce it.   Instead, other words are substituted such as "Adonai" ("lord") or "ha shem" which is literally "the name."  

Of course, non-Jews have felt free to pronounce the name anyway and in various ways:  Yahweh, Jehovah, etc. 

Anyway, it's just another way I find the way people deal with religion and its symbols and language so fascinatingly weird or weirdly fascinating. 

 
 
 
kpr37
Professor Quiet
link   seeder  kpr37  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו   4 years ago

Is the subject so objectional for you that you felt a need to derail the subject?

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
Junior Guide
link   Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  kpr37   4 years ago

Is the subject so objectional[sic] for you that you felt a need to derail the subject?

What is it about facts that you find so objectionable?  

 
 
 
kpr37
Professor Quiet
link   seeder  kpr37  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו   4 years ago

What is it about facts that you find so objectionable?

I find nothing objectional about facts. I don't really understand the origin of your statements.I find it mildly amusing however. Facts like everything in life have their place. Those facts were a poor attempt at a derail in my opinion. It's like graffiti splashed on the side of a building by anarchists or street gangs to mark territory. Frustration, juvenal prank. No intellectual effort needed, just something to do 

 

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
Junior Guide
link   Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  kpr37   4 years ago

Facts like everything in life have their place.

 

They certainly didn't find their way into this laugher. 

 
 
 
kpr37
Professor Quiet
link   seeder  kpr37  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו   4 years ago

They certainly didn't find their way into this laugher.

 

Knowledge or intellectual ability would allow you to question or disprove my sourced contentions.(an assertion, especially one maintained in argument.)

Let's see how it plays out shall we (LOL)

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
link   JohnRussell    4 years ago

TLDNR

 
 
 
kpr37
Professor Quiet
link   seeder  kpr37  replied to  JohnRussell   4 years ago

TLDNR

Reality is often greatly detailed, long and harsh. That is why some freely choose to reject reality in place of dogma. Either religious dogma or secular dogma. It is all just dogma.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
link   JohnRussell  replied to  kpr37   4 years ago

Sorry, but there are many others I will rely on to explain Islam before I get to you.

 
 
 
kpr37
Professor Quiet
link   seeder  kpr37  replied to  JohnRussell   4 years ago

Karen Armstrong (LOL)

 Islam is a religion of success. Unlike Christianity, which has as its main image, in the west at least, a man dying in a devastating, disgraceful, helpless death.

 
 
 
 See
 
 
 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
Junior Guide
link   Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  kpr37   4 years ago

Unlike Christianity, which has as its main image, in the west at least, a man dying in a devastating, disgraceful, helpless death.

I've never met any more greedy, grasping, materialistic, superficial and idolatrous people than the "devout" christians that have crossed my path during my lengthy lifetime.  One of those people who claims to be a christian is the current occupant of the White House to this country's everlasting shame. 

 
 
 
Lucifer Morningstar
Professor Guide
link   Lucifer Morningstar  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו   4 years ago

Quite the opposite for me.   I have never met any more kinder, helping and sincere people that the Christians I have encountered in my life.

Guardian Angels if there ever were ones.

 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
Professor Principal
link   Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Lucifer Morningstar   4 years ago

I don't like sweeping generalizations. There are good and bad people of all faiths and even the faithless, too. 

 
 
 
Jonathan P
Sophomore Silent
link   Jonathan P  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A.   4 years ago

Right.

Not all Muslims are bad.

But every Muslim ruling every Muslim country is bad.

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
Junior Guide
link   Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  Jonathan P   4 years ago

But the Israeli government's help in allowing eliminationism  there is good despite it violating every agreement that government has had with the US, right Jonathan? 

 
 
 
Jonathan P
Sophomore Silent
link   Jonathan P  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו   4 years ago

You know, stances of that nature prevent the world from moving their focus to things that are more critical to lasting peace in the region and the world.

Every time you throw your support to the Palestinian dictatorship, more civilians die in Syria. More people who are fighting for democracy in Iran are hanged on cranes in downtown Tehran. More woman are subjugated and abused without fear of prosecution. And more in the Islamic world.

More and more everywhere. Tens of millions of people, worldwide. In the Islamic world. Do the Palestinians deserve attention. Sure, why not? But at the expense of the rest of the world?

You tell me.

 
 
 
kpr37
Professor Quiet
link   seeder  kpr37  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו   4 years ago

Richard Silverstein (LOL) Says a lot!

I agree, that there are legitimate criticisms of Israel. But I don't believe they can be found from bigoted, racist, misogynistic, twits. Richard Silverstein is a hateful racist conspiracy advancing clown.

And Richard Silverstein of Tikun Olam, a blog focused on “exposing the excesses of the Israeli national-security state,” posted on his Facebook page, with a link to her piece: “They finally did it: found a Negro Zionist: Uncle Tom is dancin’ for joy!”

The attacks from his allies are offensive enough, but Silverstein’s racial slurs are beyond the pale. And his river of hate continued to flow, as he called this young African-American woman a “house slave” and said the “Israel Lobby is her Master.” His racist intent with such loaded language could hardly be more clear.

For many in the African-American community, the phrase “Uncle Tom” is as bad as, if not worse than, the N-word. The pejorative has historically been used against African-Americans seen as subservient to oppressive whites.

Few words could be more hurtful, especially from a Caucasian man publicly castigating a young African-American woman.

I’ve seen this too many times before: a supposed “progressive” stepping on the backs of African-Americans, then walking away as if the pain he’s inflicted is different from that caused by any other racist . Why should such hate speech go unchallenged, just because it’s cloaked as criticism of Israel?

As a civil-rights activist and leader in the African-American community, I’m exceptionally disturbed to discover that the response to this attack on Valdary has been subdued, almost nonexistent.

Just as Jews stood with African-Americans during the fight for civil rights in the 1960s, so too must we as leaders of the Black community stand together today with Chloé Simone Valdary, on the one hand, and the Jewish community, on the other hand.

Don’t dismiss this incident as a one-off. It represents a deeply troubling trend in an anti-Israel movement that goes way beyond honest criticism of Israeli policy to dehumanize and vilify Israel, Israelis and anyone who supports the Jewish state.

They do so not only through calls to boycott a liberal democracy, but also by dropping any pretense of decency, fairness or humanity.

To these haters, all the basic rules of liberal society — rejection of hate speech, commitment to academic freedom, rooting out racism, the absolute commitment to human dignity — go out the window when the subject is Israel.

For years some have warned that opponents of Israel are indulging in a new form of anti-Semitism. The vilification of Israel may not always be carried out by non-Jews or directed at Jews, but the dynamic is remarkably similar to the old version. The caricatures, the obviously twisted double standards and the hatred that drives it are all the same.

Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper put it eloquently before the Knesset in January. Calling the anti-Israel hatred “sickening,” he added that “This is the face of the new anti-Semitism. It targets the Jewish people by targeting Israel and attempts to make the old bigotry acceptable for a new generation.”

We who have visited Israel know the truth first hand. The country isn’t perfect (whose is?), but it strives for peaceful coexistence with its neighbors. Israel is the Middle East’s lone functioning democracy and by leaps and bounds the region’s leader in respecting human and civil rights.

Israel welcomes Arabs as citizens contributing to its democracy and legislative process, its military institutions,and universities, sitting in its parliament and in high judicial posts. It’s also the only nation in history to bring tens of thousands of Africans (Ethiopian Jews) out of Africa to be citizens, not slaves.

Valdary’s writings eloquently make the substantive argument for Israel. The comments by Silverstein and his allies show that there is still hate, racism and ignorance in this country that must be confronted.

 

Here is a good link to the delusions of that bigoted, racist, misogynistic, twit.

Do you support, or endorse , racist, misogynistic, bigoted twits?

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
link   Buzz of the Orient  replied to  JohnRussell   4 years ago

I'll repeat what I said above. Some of us are not teenage texting addicts, so can you please tell us what you mean with your acronym TLDNR?

Never mind. From the decypering of the first one I realized that this one means, (for the benefit of non-teenage-texting-addicts): "Too Long Did Not Read". If it means anything else, please provide a translation ot the acronyms you make up and want to use for the benefit of us who are not teenage-texting-addicts.

 
 
 
magnoliaave
Sophomore Participates
link   magnoliaave    4 years ago

So much I didn't know.  Thank you.

 
 
 
kpr37
Professor Quiet
link   seeder  kpr37  replied to  magnoliaave   4 years ago

Your comment alone makes the effort worthwhile.Thank you.

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
Junior Guide
link   Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  magnoliaave   4 years ago

So much I didn't know. 

You don't know how much self-restraint I'm exercising right now.  In fact, I didn't know I had it in me. 

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
link   Kavika     4 years ago

Excellent informative article, thanks.

 
 
 
kpr37
Professor Quiet
link   seeder  kpr37  replied to  Kavika   4 years ago

Thank you Kavika.

 
 
 
Enoch
Masters Participates
link   Enoch    4 years ago

Dear Friend KPR37: Thank you for your fine and high quality scholarship on this topic.

It was on point. 

You were thorough.

Your approach systematic.

We need more high level articles such as this on the news talkers.

In Jewish Scripture (primary Tanach) and many secondary commentaries there are seven names use to refer to G-d.

Each reveals an aspect of His Divine being.

My favorite ascription is from the hymn El Ma'aleh Rachamim.

That means, "G-d filled with mercy".

I stand in awe of G-d that He is filled with this quality.

Well done KPR 37.

We are grateful.

Peace and Abundant Blessings to One and All.

Enoch.

 

 
 
 
kpr37
Professor Quiet
link   seeder  kpr37  replied to  Enoch   4 years ago

Welcome Enoch.

 

In Jewish Scripture (primary Tanach) and many secondary commentaries there are seven names use to refer to G-d.

 

We, Irish pagan's really have no name what so ever for G*d. Danu as a goddess was somewhat imposed by conquering English Christians in the tenth and eleventh centuries. Why? Me, not a clue!!

 

Much of Irish mythology was recorded by Christian monks, who modified it to an extent .

Around 80 to 90% of what is written about the people of Danu, is utter nonsense. Made up, for possibly nefarious reasons. (LOL)

We were, according to what little is left, a tribe of Celts, who were strict monotheists.

The Old Irish word tuath (plural tuatha ) means "people, tribe, nation";

Old Irish evolved from the language my people brought to Ireland, We called ourselves the tribe of Danu. (I think)?

is the genitive case of día and, depending on context, can mean "god, gods, goddess" or more broadly "supernatural being, object of worship"

 

I don't believe  they ever referred to themselves as Tuath De" (people of G*d.) I know Tuatha de" Danann, is made up. It means nothing at all. It has no religious significance at all. It is just a name we were stuck with by people who disliked us, in the tenth century. History is very funny sometimes, isn't it?

 

. [12] In the earliest writings, the mythical race are referred to as the Tuath Dé (plural Tuatha Dé ) .

That is Christian writings. Not from the people identified as the tribe of Danu.

 

[1] However, Irish monks also began using the term Tuath Dé to refer to the Israelites , [1]

Also strict monotheists.

with the meaning "People of God". [13] Apparently to avoid confusion with the Israelites,

In the eleventh century, in Christian Ireland, being compared with the Jewish people was not a term of endearment.

[1] writers began to refer to the mythical race as the Tuath Dé Danann (plural Tuatha Dé Danann )

Again that is Christian writers, defining us. I believe the entire "Danann" thing is just simply made, up by people who did not like us.

The tribe of Danu has a whole lot of Arcological evidence to be a myth as well. There is also the language thing. The tribe of Danu is credited with introducing the language to Ireland.

 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
link   JohnRussell  replied to  Enoch   4 years ago

Enoch, why are you praising an obviously anti-Muslim article?

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
Junior Guide
link   Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  JohnRussell   4 years ago

Enoch, why are you praising an obviously anti-Muslim article?

I think you probably spotted Enoch from the beginning and know the answer to your question. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
link   JohnRussell  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו   4 years ago

Actually I think Enoch is a fine man and a religious leader.  I was just asking why he chose to praise KPR's article.

 

Every article KPR writes about Islam is anti-Muslim, so there wasnt even any need to do more than glance through it.

 
 
 
kpr37
Professor Quiet
link   seeder  kpr37  replied to  JohnRussell   4 years ago

anti-Muslim

Can to define "Muslim" and source what Muslim, I display a bigoted attitude toward?

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
Junior Guide
link   Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  JohnRussell   4 years ago

I think the only thing we knew for certain  about Enoch is he's really smooth.  But now we know something else about him and his views.  I suspect he'll reveal more as time goes on. 

 
 
 
Raven Wing
Professor Principal
link   Raven Wing  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו   4 years ago

It is obvious you know nothing about Enoch at all. Or...perhaps it is your own bias that promotes such a negative opinion of someone who believes in God. Anyone who has been here on NT more than a few weeks or months knows that what you are saying could not be further from the truth.

You should not judge the thinking of others when you know nothing at all about them. I am sure that you would take great exception to others doing that to you.  

 
 
 
kpr37
Professor Quiet
link   seeder  kpr37  replied to  JohnRussell   4 years ago

obviously anti-Muslim article?

 

Muslims are human beings ( I criticize not a single one in this article) there are 1.5 billion of them on this planet. They can not be generalized.

Islam is a set of codified ideas, and as such, is open to critique.

So progressive of you John to want to enforce Islamic blasphemy laws here. 

You most be so very proud of yourself?

Skirting the CoC [ph] that would be grand! Really really, it would, you got my vote dude!

 

 

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
Junior Guide
link   Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  kpr37   4 years ago

Comment removed for context

Comment removed for CoC violation[ph] You've just revealed to us that you don't have a shred of a decent argument to use. 

 
 
 
kpr37
Professor Quiet
link   seeder  kpr37  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו   4 years ago

Comment removed for context

Did you know that the personal attack is the first option of the intellectually inadequate?

So progressive of you John to want to enforce Islamic blasphemy laws here.

No, in reality, something that seems very foreign to you, an article like this could not be published in an Islamic nation due to the blasphemy law. Comment removed for skirting the CoC [ph]

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
link   JohnRussell  replied to  kpr37   4 years ago

an article like this could not be published in an Islamic nation due to the blasphemy law. Which I get the distinct impression John would enforce here were he capable of doing so.

You are imagining things.

 
 
 
kpr37
Professor Quiet
link   seeder  kpr37  replied to  JohnRussell   4 years ago

You are imagining things.

Clueless but funny.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
link   JohnRussell  replied to  kpr37   4 years ago

I am neither pro or anti Muslim, or pro or anti any other religion.

 
 
 
kpr37
Professor Quiet
link   seeder  kpr37  replied to  JohnRussell   4 years ago

I am neither pro or anti Muslim

If true, can you tell me why it is only articles critical of Islam, that you don't like?

Now I could be wrong, please correct if I am. By sourcing similar comments you have left on articles critical of, say Christianity?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
link   JohnRussell  replied to  kpr37   4 years ago

These are your words

"If a civilization or a culture, in finding a pre-existing need for fantasy Utopian concepts of belief, world transformative beliefs, embrace Islamism. It chooses death over life. Which I hate to point out, is in fact, ongoing in some of the religious, political discourse in parts of the world. You may or may not have noticed (Islam) sanctifies death, the dead, and the martyrs who kill, they are viewed as a cultural or political asset. This philosophy does not sanctify the living, or the learning of men, only the killing of mankind. If you want to be sanctified (renowned), or to become immortal, you must first commit violence and be killed. You don't have to cure a disease,(save a life) or teach children how to act in this diverse world. You just must kill, and then be killed in your sanctified slaughter. This runs counter to the will and aspirations of moral reason intertwined, within a public or GLOBAL sphere. ( this culture of death, is a fantasy ideology) is also worth noting that the political or religious forces governing those parts of the world ( that embrace extremism) form their coalitions out of fear, not love, or universal friendship. They are afraid of the "other", sometimes this "other" is secular, other times the "other" is religious, and sometimes... the "other" just must be killed."

You are "rabidly" anti-Muslim. What I don't know is why people fall all over themselves to praise it.

Is it fair to say that there are scholars of Islam that do not agree with you?

 
 
 
kpr37
Professor Quiet
link   seeder  kpr37  replied to  JohnRussell   4 years ago

You are "rabidly" anti-Muslim

 

Again what muslims have I displayed a bigoted atitude toward. You continue the avoid that to continue your DELUSIONAL BELIEFS about me.

 

going in some of the religious, political discourse in parts of the world. You may or may not have noticed (Islam) sanctifies death, the dead, and the martyrs who kill, they are viewed as a cultural or political asset. This philosophy does not sanctify the living, or the learning of men, only the killing of mankind.

.

is an accurate description of reality. Not my fault that you choose to reject it. Did you think I was making that up? Did you think I would not have a sources to back up my writing?

The word ummah means the theocratic community

 

The Shaheed (Martyr/Witness)

1 - The blood of the Shaheed smells of musk:

"By the One in Whose Hand is my soul, no one is injured in the Path of Allah - and Allah knows best who is truly wounded in His Path - except that he comes (with his wound) on the Day of Resurrection, its colour the colour of blood, and its scent that of musk."
[Muslim and Ahmad]
2 - The Most Beloved of the drops to Allah:

"There is nothing more beloved to Allah than two drops or two marks. The teardrop that falls from the fear of Allah, and the drop of blood shed in the Path of Allah. And as for the marks, then a mark in the Path of Allah, and a mark in an obligation from the obligations unto Allah".
(Hasan, reported by at-Tirmidhi)


3 - The Shaheed Wishes to Return to this World:

"Any slave [of Allah] who dies and has been bestowed good from Allah, does not wish to return to the World, even if he is given the World and what it contains; except a Shaheed, due to what he sees from the virtues of Shahaadah [Martyrdom]. So he wishes to return to the World in order to be killed again" - and in another wording - "So that he may be killed ten times due to what he receives from the honour "
[al-Bukhari and Muslim]


4 - Haarithah in the Highest Firdaws:

The Prophet - May the Salaah and Salaam of Allah be upon him - said to Umm Haarithah bint an-Nu'maan - after her son was killed in the battle of Badr - after she asked:
"Where is he (i.e. is he in Paradise or the Fire)?" -
he replied,
"Indeed, he is in the highest Firdaws"
[al-Bukhaari]
In another Hadeeth reported by al- Bukhaari :

"Indeed, in Paradise are a hundred levels which Allah has prepared for the Mujahideen in His Path. The distance between each level is that of between the heavens and the earth. So when you ask of Allah, then ask Him for Firdaws, for it is the center of Paradise, and the highest part of Paradise, and above it is the throne of The Most Merciful, from whence, the highest Firdaws, the rivers of Paradise spring forth"

5 - The Souls of the Shuhadaa` in the Hearts of Green Birds:

"Indeed the souls of the martyrs are in the hearts of green birds, and they have lanterns hanging underneath the ' arsh (the throne of Allaah). They roam around in Paradise wherever they wish, then they return to their lanterns. So, their Lord enquires : "Do you desire anything?" They say, "What can we desire for, when we roam around in Paradise wherever we wish?" And He asks them this three times. When they realize that they will not cease to be questioned, they say, "O Lord! We wish that you return our souls to our bodies, in order that we be killed in Your Path again" When it is realized that they have no need, they will be left alone."
[Muslim]
6 - Special Favours for the Shaheed:

"The Shaheed is granted seven special favours from Allah. He is forgiven (his sins) at the first drop of his blood. He sees his place in Paradise. He is dressed in the clothes of Iman. He is married to the Hoor al-`Ain (beautiful women of Paradise). He is saved from the punishment of the grave. He will be protected from the great fear of the Day of Judgement. A crown of honour will be placed on his head, one jewel of which is better than the whole world and what it contains. He is married to seventy-two of the Hoor al-`Ain (beautiful women of Paradise), and he will be able to intercede for seventy members of his family."
[Saheeh - Related by Ahmad, at-Tirmidhi and Ibn Hibbaan]


7 - ash-Shahaadah is better than cities and villages:

"To be killed in the Path of Allah is more beloved to me than that people of cities and villages belong to me"
[Ahmad - narrators are trustworthy, and the chain is strong]
8 - The Shaheed does not feel the pain of death:

"The Shaheed does not feel [any pain] from killing, except as one of you feels the prick of a needle"
[Ahmad, at-Tirmidhi and an-Nasaa`I and the Sanad is Hasan]
9 - Levels of Shuhadaa`:

"The best of the Shuhadaa` are those who fight in the frontlines, and do not turn away their faces until they are killed. They will be thrown into the highest rooms of Paradise, and Allah will laugh at them. And when your Lord laughs at a slave in a certain instance, then there is no account for him"
[Ahmad with Saheeh chain (Saheeh al-Jami 1118)]
10 - "There are five (deaths) due to which a person is a Shaheed:

The one killed in the Path of Allah is Shaheed, the one who drowns in the Path of Allah is a Shaheed, the one who dies due to stomach illness in the Path of Allah is a Shaheed, the one who dies of plague in the Path of Allah is a Shaheed, and the woman who died in childbirth is a Shaheedah"
[Saheeh, reported by an-Nisaa`i from `Uqbah Ibn Naafi'. Also found in Saheeh al-Jami #3249]

Adopted from the works of ash-Sheikh ash-Shaheed 'Abdullah Azzam

Allah knows best

Wa Alaikumassalam

 

 

 

450 of 452 suicide attacks in 2015 were by Muslim extremists, study shows

INSS think tank report shows global figure is down on 2014, but up on 2013; more women involved; Europe and Africa getting dragged in

 

 

 

 

 

First Khutbah

 

O Muslims! Achieving noble and lofty objectives require enormous sacrifices in proportion. There can be no doubt that the higher an objective is, the greater its sacrifice must be. Therefore, if ones ultimate objective is to please Allaah and hope to be granted Paradise, then defending Allaah’s religion and protecting His Book and sacred places ranks highest in attempting to attain His pleasure.

 

Sacrifice comes in many shapes, forms and levels, it can be performed through many different channels, but there is no doubt that the sacrificing of one’s soul for the sake of Allaah in order to defeat His enemies and support Islaam is the very highest level. This is of course Shahaadah , or martyrdom. The Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam exerted maximum effort to instil the magnitude of Shahaadah as well as the concept of Jihaad deep into the hearts of his companions and his followers who were to come after him. He sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam used two methods in order to achieve this objective:

 

Firstly: By repeatedly declaring his deep love and fervent wish for Shahaadah . Abu Hurayrah , may Allaah be pleased with him, narrated that the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam said: “I swear by the One in Whose Hands my soul is, I wish that I would fight for the sake of Allaah (i.e., Jihaad) and get martyred, then return and fight again and get martyred, then return and fight again and get martyred” (Bukhaari & Muslim) What a wonderful wish coming from the purest of hearts! This is nothing except a reflection of deep love and overwhelming desire; a desire to attain Shahaadah , which is one of the greatest paths to Paradise .

 

Secondly: By explaining the virtues of Shahaadah and the ranks of the martyrs in Paradise as well as descriptions of their bounties, such as in the Hadeeth when Marwaan said: “We asked ‘Abdullaah Ibn Mas’ood, may Allaah be pleased with him, about the following verse: (which translates as): “And never think of those who have been killed in the cause of Allaah as dead. Rather, they are alive with their Lord, receiving provision.” (Aal-‘Imraan: 169).’ He, may Allaah be pleased with him, replied: “We asked the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam about this verse and he replied: “Their (i.e., the martyrs souls) will live inside green birds that dwell in designated lamps which hang on the throne of Allaah, they will roam freely in Paradise as they please, then return to these lamps” ” (Muslim).

 

A Shaheed has six other benefits; Al-Miqdaam Ibn Ma’di Karib , may Allaah be pleased with him, narrated that the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam said: “A martyr has six bounties: He will be forgiven with the first drop of his blood that is spilt; He will see his place in Paradise (at the time of death); He will be saved from the ‘Great Horror’ (on the Day of Judgment): A Crown of Dignity will be placed on his head, which contains many corundums, each one being more precious than this life and all that it contains; He will have seventy two Women of Paradise; And, he will be allowed to intercede for seventy of his family members (who would have otherwise gone to hell).” (Tirmidhi & Ibn Maajah).

 

The pain that a martyr feels at the time of death will be reduced so greatly that he will only feel as if he was stung by a mosquito. Abu Hurayrah narrated that the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam said: “A martyr only feels from the effect of being killed that which one would when being stung by a mosquito.” (Tirmidhi, Nasaa’i and others).

 

Moreover, the finest dwellings in Paradise are those of the martyrs. Samurah Ibn Jundub , may Allaah be pleased with him, narrated that the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam said: “Last night I was inspired (through a dream); I saw two men come to me and take me up a tree (in Paradise) then into a dwelling which was the best I have ever seen; they informed me that it was the dwelling of the martyrs.” (Bukhaari).

 

Also, the angels spread their wings over the body of a martyr as a form of honour, dignity and respect. Jaabir Ibn ‘Abdullaah , may Allah be pleased with him narrated: “ My father’s body was brought to the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam on the day of Uhud. The disbelievers had mutilated it; I went to uncover his face when some of my family members stopped me. Then the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam heard a woman crying, so he said: “Why are you crying? Do not cry, the angels are continuing to shade him” ”.

 

Among all the dwellers of Paradise , only the martyrs would wish to return to this life. This is due to the immense rewards and respect that have been mentioned in the previous Ahadeeth . Anas bin Maalik , may Allaah be pleased with him, narrated that the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam said: “Nobody who enters Paradise would ever wish to return to this life again, even if he was to be given the whole world and everything in it – except for a martyr; for he would wish to return and get killed ten times due to the honour that he received (in Paradise).” and in another narration: “For what he finds as virtues of martyrdom.” (Bukhaari & Muslim).

 

Therefore, it comes as no surprise that these poignant prophetic words had such a great impact on the hearts of the pious chosen generation of the companions of the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam . It deeply instilled the concepts of Shahaadah into their hearts along with the fervent wish of achieving this exalted status, so they toiled continuously to achieve it. There are a multitude of stories that demonstrate this, for example: Anas bin Maalik , may Allaah be pleased with him, narrated: “The Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam took off with his companions and they beat the polytheists in reaching Badr. When the polytheists arrived there, the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam said: “None of you should do anything until I proceed.” Then, when the disbelievers came closer to them, the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam said: “Rise to Paradise , which is as wide as the distance between the heavens and the earth.” ‘Umayr Ibn Al-Hamaam, may Allaah be pleased with him, asked: ‘O Messenger of Allaah, is it really as wide than the heavens and earth?’ He sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam replied: “Yes.” Thereupon ‘Umayr said: ‘Bakh Bakh.’ (an expression reflecting astonishment). The Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam asked: “What made you say Bakh Bakh?” He said: ‘Nothing, except the desire to be of its dwellers.’ The Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam said: “You will be of its people.” Then ‘Umayr, may Allah be pleased with him, took out some dates which he had in his arrow pouch and started eating them, then he stopped and said to himself: ‘Indeed it would a too long a life for me if I were to live long enough to finish eating these dates’ - then he threw them away and fought until he was killed.”

 

Just look at how this companion viewed the few moments needed for eating dates as being too long a time to live! The words of people like these at the time of their martyrdom were as powerful as earthquakes, so much so that in some cases, words like these resulted in their enemies embracing Islaam such as in the following narration:

 

Haraam Ibn Malhaan , may Allaah be pleased with him, was one of a group of companions of the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam who had memorised the Qur’aan and were experts in it. The Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam dispatched seventy of this group to inform a group of polytheist tribes about Islaam and recite the Qur’aan to them. However the tribes of Ra’l and Dhikwaan from among these polytheist tribes betrayed and slaughtered the whole group of companions near a well called Ma’oonah . As Haraam , may Allaah be pleased with him, was being killed, he screamed in front of his killer: “I swear by the Lord of Al-Ka’bah that I won!” After this, his killer went about asking people what these words meant (i.e., that Haraam had won) until he was told that what Haraam , may Allaah be pleased with him, meant was that he had attained martyrdom. Due to this, the killer embraced Islaam. This narration was mentioned in the book of Bukhaari .

 

Some of the companions of the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam would smell the scent of Paradise and it would make them unable to control their desire to fight strongly and valiantly to the death. Anas Ibn Maalik , may Allaah be pleased with him, said: “My uncle Anas Ibn An-Nadhr, may Allaah be pleased with him, missed the battle of Badr, so he said to the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam: ‘O messenger of Allaah, I missed the first battle that you fought against the polytheists, but if Allaah allows me to participate in the next one, then He will see what I can do.’ Then, after the day of the battle of Uhud when the some Muslims retreated he went forth saying: ‘O Allaah I seek your forgiveness for what they have done (i.e., the Muslims for retreating) and I disassociate myself from what those have done (i.e., the polytheists for killing the Muslims)’, as he continued going forth, he came across Sa’d Ibn Mu’aadh, may Allaah be pleased with him, and said: ‘O Sa’d! I swear by the Lord of the tribe of An-Nadhr, it is Paradise (i.e., the reward for martyrdom). I can smell its fragrance close to Uhud.’” After the battle, S a’d Ibn Mu’aadh told the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam: “I swear By Allaah, on that day I could not perform as he did.” Anas Ibn Maalik, may Allaah be pleased with him, continued: “(After the battle) we found more than eighty gashes on his (i.e., Anas Ibn An-Nadhr’s) body which were the result of swords, arrows and spears. In fact, the polytheists had mutilated his body so much that nobody could recognise who it was, except his sister, who identified him from his fingers.” (Bukhaari & Muslim).

 

Here is another narration, one of a Bedouin whose sincere wish for martyrdom was granted: Shaddaad Ibn Al-Haad , may Allaah be pleased with him, narrated: “A Bedouin came to the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam, accepted Islaam and said: ‘I wish to migrate (to Madeenah)’. So the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam asked some of his companions to take care of him. Then after a battle, the Muslims had gained some booty so the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam divided it and gave the Bedouin’s share to some of his companions to look after, as the Bedouin was still at the rearguard. When the Bedouin returned, they gave him his share, so he asked them: ‘What is this?’ they replied: ‘It is your share from the booty which the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam gave us to hold on to for you.’ So the Bedouin took the booty and went to the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam and asked: ‘What is this?’ The Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam replied: “Your share of the booty.” The Bedouin said: ‘This is not why I believe in you and follow you; rather, I follow you so that I can get shot by an arrow right here, (and then he pointed to his throat) then die and enter Paradise .’ The Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam said: “If you are sincere then Allaah will grant you your wish.” After a short while, fighting resumed and the Bedouins body was brought to the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam with an arrow in his throat at exactly the spot where he had pointed to the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam. Thereupon The Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam said: “He was sincere so Allaah granted him his wish.” Then using his own garment, the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam shrouded the Bedouin, prayed the funeral prayer over him and was heard by his companions to say during the prayer: “O Allaah! This is Your slave who migrated for Your sake and was killed as a martyr – and I testify to this” . Which testimony could ever be more honourable, sincere and truthful than this great one given by the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam ?

 

There are abundant examples from the lives of the companions of Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam which illustrate their burning desire to achieve martyrdom – and what a noble objective this is!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
link   JohnRussell  replied to  kpr37   4 years ago

There are one billion Muslims in the world. If they are all compelled by their religion to kill all of mankind, why aren't there A LOT more killings?  You are interpreting Islamic scripture in a way that suits your purposes (as do perhaps the jihadists themselves).  You do not acknowledge the Islamic scholarship that rejects this view. You give part of one side of the story and use it to make a blanket condemnation of the entire religion.

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
Junior Guide
link   Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  kpr37   4 years ago

Again what muslims have I displayed a bigoted atitude[sic] toward.

Here's where you apparently think you're cute by claiming you haven't shown animus to any Muslim individual while smearing the entire world population of them.   You're attempts at sophistry are as transparent and clumsy as your attempts to justify your bigotry.

 
 
 
kpr37
Professor Quiet
link   seeder  kpr37  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו   4 years ago

Here's where you apparently think you're cute by claiming you haven't shown animus to any Muslim individual

 

If I had done what you are claiming, you could source it. But you can not source it. Meaning you are imagining it. Things only imagined are often times deeded delusional.

 

while smearing the entire world population of them.

Source?

  You're attempts at sophistry are as transparent and clumsy as your attempts to justify your bigotry.

 

soph·ist·ry


 : the use of reasoning or arguments that sound correct but are actually false

 

Muslims are human beings. Islam is a set of codified ideas. Purposely confusing the two, is an argument of sophistry.

 

Please source me, using sophistry as it is defined in the dictionary.As I have sourced you attempting the use of sophistry in the argument. See above.

Accusations without any sourced examples, or any proof in support of said accusation, are without merit and are therefore meaningless. Meaningless, like every comment you have posted in this article.They are only expressions of your utter frustration.

 

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
Junior Guide
link   Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  kpr37   4 years ago

 

Sophistry:  the use of reasoning or arguments that sound correct but are actually false

Yes and here are a few example by you:

 The idea of Abrahamic religions is one such nonsensical idea.

There is the religion of Abraham (Judaism) and that is it.

Here the sophism is the substitution of what you think the term "Abrahamic" (apparently that it means the three religions so described are the same) when all it really means is that all three religions accept the OT as the origin of its faith to one degree or another.  You can personally disagree with that definition but you can't change it for your the purpose of your argument and that's where your aspersions and falsehoods come in and you requested sourcing and here it is:

It, the same G*d myth is killing Jews, and Christians, as liberals, and progressive mindlessly mouth the dogma of Islam as if it is a secular reality.

This "myth" you've created to make the aspersions isn't the reason that there's animosity between Islam and Christianity and Jews.  It's history and it's long.  Christians and Moslems killing each other over territory and faith goes back nearly a thousand years.  Christians killing Jews just because they're Jews goes back even longer.  Furthermore, the idea of the "Abrahamic religions" has nothing to do with politics (except the  twisted framework you're offering us) but you need to try to make the sophistic argument to link "progressivism" and "Islam" (it's so preposterous that I almost can't type this from suppressing laughter while I do it).  There is nothing at all "progressive" about Islam.  But that's also true for branches of Christianity and Judaism.  Your brand of extreme fundamentalist conservative Christianity is much more akin to Islam than it is to anything political progressives stand for.  Just look at the retributionism of both:  very pro-death penalty; very rigid about the roles of women;  aggressively anti-homosexual and both are fond of creating governments which would function under its rules.  

So, to conclude, your article is really a screed and not a very clever one.  You're too transparent to pull of any kind of a convincing case that you've created some kind of "scholarly" work.  It's really just a rant.  

 
 
 
kpr37
Professor Quiet
link   seeder  kpr37  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו   4 years ago

 

 

"Dokein moi" my conviction or I'm certain, is the classic Greek root of dogma.

Your entire post is an example of DOGMA It's meaning is taken from that phrase "a certain conviction", your certain conviction became your dogma.

The unsourced opinions expressed above are your dogma. What you believe means nothing to me. As it is your dogma. Nothing more than dogma. You are only expressing dogmatic beliefs originating with Mohammad, a religious figure. What a good atheist you are?


At the turn of the 17th century, dogma  entered English from the Latin term meaning “philosophical tenet.” The Greek word from which it is borrowed means “ that which one thinks is true, and comes ultimately from the Greek dokein which means “to seem good” or “think.”  The origin of the word dogma  acts as a reminder to English speakers that now-established principals and doctrines were once simply thoughts and opinions of ordinary people that gained popularity and eventually found their way into the universal consciousness of society. 20th century

 

Why not just copy paste this. This is the religious dogma you just claimed as true.

Atheist? (LOL) What type of atheist repeats back dogmatic religious beliefs as true?


The expression 'Abrahamic religions' originates from the Qur'an 's repeated references to the 'religion of Abraham'

(see Surahs 2:130,135; 3:95; 6:123, 161; 12:38; 16:123; 22:78). In particular, this expression refers specifically to Islam, and is sometimes contrasted to Judaism and Christianity, as for example in Surah 2:135: "They say: "Become Jews or Christians if ye would be guided (To salvation)." Say thou: "Nay! (I would rather) the Religion of Abraham the True, and he joined not gods with God." In the Qur'an, Abraham is declared to have been a Muslim, 'not a Jew nor a Christian' (Surah 3:67)

 

 

You don't seem to be able to mount any type of intellectual challenge in any way to my sourced contentions. But you sure can regurgitate religious memes, found in holy books, authored by sky fairies.

let me repeat that. You are regurgitating religious memes, found in the holy book of Islam, authored by a sky fairy.

Most atheists don't quote sky fairies. But I see that you do!!!

 

Will you get upset, when I link this stupid claim every time you mock Christianity for the rest of my time on this site?

I think that will be fun. Everybody can see an atheist quoting the Quran as secular reality. Some funny shit there dude.  I don't believe you have thought this out.

Atheists believe religion is a fairytale, made up nonsense. Let us look at nonsense, shall well.

Mickey Mouse is cartoon a fairytale if you will.

 

 

Abraham is declared to have been a Muslim , 'not a Jew nor a Christian' 

If I were to have a claimed revelation from god, and it was revealed to me that Mickey Mouse was the god of the universe and I was its prophet. So I said Walt was neither a cartoonist or an artist. Walt was the first prophet of Mickey, the divine Mouse of Revelation . You would be Ok with this (LOL) look how low you have brought atheists . I mean this is not a good look for you!!!

Could I then claim that Walt Disney was the first disciple of the Mouse? and I am only continuing Walt's good works.

What connects my divine mouse theory to Mr. Disney?

Is there any proof connecting my devine mouse theory to Walt?

Why would anyone in their right mind believe someone who had never met the man, ever?

How about my new disciples start killing those who don't believe my divine mouse claims. Are you ok with that?

God told me ( in direct revelation) that it is true... so, kill the unbelievers!!!

Would it become real if park employees started to believe?

Your non-belief is really unfair. you are oppressing me!!!

What about my religious freedom to believe my nonsense! I have rights, don't I?

I think you may be mouseophobic, that's what I think.

Did you know the mouse is both black and white as well? making this a racial thing,  do you hate race-mixing!!!!

 

 

 

 

 

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
Junior Guide
link   Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  kpr37   4 years ago

All that's another fine example of sophistry.  Thanks for adding it to the growing evidence.  It's like you've rehearsed this and practiced it time and again. It's cant, bombast and an intellectual dog's breakfast.  And those weren't my convictions.  Those were simple and accurate historical facts---and I realize actual history is anathema to someone whose trying to invent a new one to fit his political and religious prejudices.  

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
Junior Guide
link   Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו   4 years ago

All that's another fine example of sophistry.

Specifically, in diverting the discussion to "dogma" to keep from talking about the falseness of your earlier "stuff."

Someone must have told you you "sound" like a intellectual and you thought is was a compliment. 

 
 
 
kpr37
Professor Quiet
link   seeder  kpr37  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו   4 years ago

talking about the falseness of your earlier "stuff.

Because you claim something false does not make it so. I have sourced everything from the primary source material of Islam. See tafsir and Ibn Kathir, and the first biography of the prophet, Ibn Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah .  You just skip that for the sake of your ridiculous dogma. You pretend that it's not there . Because your dogma is exposed, if you accept it, as there. it is like the six thousand-year-old earth thing, with geology. But now you are doing it.

No matter how you wish to express it,or hide, you are claiming this as factual.

 

The expression 'Abrahamic religions' originates from the Qur'an 's repeated references to the 'religion of Abraham'

(see Surahs 2:130,135; 3:95; 6:123, 161; 12:38; 16:123; 22:78). In particular, this expression refers specifically to Islam, and is sometimes contrasted to Judaism and Christianity, as for example in Surah 2:135: "They say: "Become Jews or Christians if ye would be guided (To salvation)." Say thou: "Nay! (I would rather) the Religion of Abraham the True, and he joined not gods with God." In the Qur'an, Abraham is declared to have been a Muslim, 'not a Jew nor a Christian' (Surah 3:67)

 

It is religious dogma, that you assert as fact. There are no two way about it. Own it, it is yours. You have repeated it, again and again. Please continue its amusing to me. You make me laugh. Thank you.

 

 

 

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
Junior Guide
link   Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  kpr37   4 years ago

Because you claim something false does not make it so.

 

Well, look who's talking!  The trait every sophist (and narcissist) has is to believe he's got everybody fooled and no one sees the con. And you just demonstrated that trait perfectly. 

 
 
 
kpr37
Professor Quiet
link   seeder  kpr37  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו   4 years ago

You are good at name calling, any thing else, all you have done is toss insults and say I'm wrong. it is childish, juvenile, infantile. Primitive even. It's like a chimp, tossing feces, nothing more.

 

Let us examine the primitive response of a frustrated primate, engaged in the act of the feces toss. Remember they are our closest relative in the animal world. This, regardless of your first reaction, is a sign of intelligence. Not a whole lot of intelligence, but rudimentary intelligence nevertheless





(PhysOrg.com) -- A lot of people who have gone to the zoo have become the targets of feces thrown by apes or monkeys, and left no doubt wondering  about the so-called intellectual capacity of a beast that would resort to such  foul play. Now however, researchers studying such behavior have come to the  conclusion that throwing feces, or any object really, is actually a sign of high  ordered behavior. Bill Hopkins of Emory University and his colleagues have been  studying the whole process behind throwing and the impact it has on brain  development, and have published their results in Philosophical Transactions  of the Royal Society B.

 

 





In the linked video, a chimpanzee is frustrated by its surroundings. Visibly uncomfortable, enclosed, and literally caged within an environment, not of its making. It lacks the intellectual capacity to alter its situation. The chimp resorts to throwing its feces at the object of its frustration, in an attempt to drive off the offending object or the very idea of the object itself. don't let that be you .

 

 

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
Junior Guide
link   Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  kpr37   4 years ago

Now you're reduced to flailing.  But at least it's more coherent than the crap you put in the article that started this discussion.  

 
 
 
Jerry Verlinger
Freshman Silent
link   Jerry Verlinger  replied to  kpr37   4 years ago

What a waste of time! Do you really think anyone is going to sit and read all that nonsense?

You wasted your time posting it.

You wasted administration money with the space it took.

and

you my members time to have to scroll past it.

Do us all a favor;

Try posting comments that can be absorbed and actually have a discernible meaning.

And I wasted my time posting this comment. Because you don't care, you just want to preach.

 

 
 
 
kpr37
Professor Quiet
link   seeder  kpr37  replied to  Jerry Verlinger   4 years ago

What a waste of time! Do you really think anyone is going to sit and read all that nonsense?

Facts that are contrary to common leftist delusions, I don't expect to be read by the left, however long and detailed they are. I insist they are made aware of them nevertheless. It is like giving a six thousand-year-old earther a book of geology. Might not do anything, but it's still worth the effort.

Some answers are longer than others. In my column, I decide. Don't like it, don't participate. Martyrdom in Islam is a complex subject. It is real and needs exposure.

You wasted your time posting it.

Of course, the leftist opinion is the only valid opinion, the only one that matters. That I feel differently is irrelevant. right? I am an unperson, as I don't follow your narrative?(LOL)

You wasted administration money with the space it took.

Wah...Wah...So many things in the world, so little time to cry about them all. It must be oh so discouraging. You have my pity and sympathy. (no just kidding)

 my members time to have to scroll past it.

Wasted fractions of a second, did you when you could be scolding someone else for some other behavior or expressed idea, you find objectional.

Do us all a favor;

Do as I believe you should, I'm the voice of the authoritarian left.

I will blame the left for Trump's next term in office. As the only reason, we have a reality Tv star in office now, is that he was more appealing than the candidate of the left. So America is saddled with a clown. America chose a clown over your candidate. What does that say about you chosen candidate?

Try posting comments that can be absorbed and actually have a discernible meaning.

Telling people to shut up all the time, is a favorite pastime of the left.It's all they have anymore. Sad, really, really, sad.

The point or discernible meaning was that John was as wrong as possible, Observable, sourceable reality stands in stark opposition to his stated beliefs.  Islam has elevated martyrdom to a special place in its dogma, and maryters are encouraged. 

 

And I wasted my time posting this comment. Because you don't care, you just want to preach.

Yes,  so much information is objectional, so many buzz words are used to describe objectional information, Preaching is associated with religion, religion does not serve leftist objectives, so words connected with religion are buzz words of the left, voicing their disapproval. It is not like the left is not all "preachy" and shit (LOL)

The left has heavily trolled this article since I posted it. All the time without much attempt at countering the statements made within. As they are well sourced and factual. Insults are what one finds as opposed to logical counter points. These are signs of an intellectual inability to reasonably counter the facts presented in the article.

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
Junior Guide
link   Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  kpr37   4 years ago

Facts that are contrary to common leftist delusions

Then why are you so unable to use any? 

 
 
 
kpr37
Professor Quiet
link   seeder  kpr37  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו   4 years ago

Then why are you so unable to use any?

 

Is it pretend time?

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
Junior Guide
link   Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  kpr37   4 years ago

Is it pretend time?

 Thank you for mentioning pretend because that's one of the words I was searching for earlier to describe your "work"-- PRETENTIOUS!  To the nth degree.  It's the work of a poser, a stupendous dilettante. 

 
 
 
Jerry Verlinger
Freshman Silent
link   Jerry Verlinger  replied to  kpr37   4 years ago

"I don't expect to be read by the left, ....."

The words of a typical Right Wing bubble dweller. Wants to preach only to those that agree with their position. 

Some answers are longer than others.

Yeah, like this one. Long, ...... and then some. I gave up after the first few of lines, seems like you don't know when to stop.

In my column, I decide. Don't like it, don't participate.

Great idea! That's the first time I've seen you say anything that makes sense.

Martyrdom in Islam is a complex subject. It is real and needs exposure.

You might be right about that. Try posting a more concise and direct,  (as in 'shorter') article on the issue. Maybe it will be read by more people. 

You waste your time posting it.

Of  course, the leftist opinion is the only valid opinion,

It has nothing to do with your opinion; THE ARTICLE IS TOO FUCKING LONG! It's an interesting topic, that's what brought me here. But, You wasted your time, because many potential readers, like me, have likely passed up reading the entire article.

That I feel differently is irrelevant. right? I am an unperson, as I don't follow your narrative?

I didn't post a narrative regarding your opinion, or your feelings, I simply said the article is too long;

"What a waste of time! Do you really think anyone is going to sit and read all that nonsense?"

You can respond to this comment if you like, but I'm not going to read it because I'm tired of trying to communicate with you. I think I'll try talking to the wall, I likely will get a better response.

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
Junior Guide
link   Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  Jerry Verlinger   4 years ago

 Do you really think anyone is going to sit and read all that nonsense?

I certainly tried but about a third of the way in it was such sophomoric sophistry I decided just to pick paragraphs at random and every sentence was a howler.   

 
 
 
kpr37
Professor Quiet
link   seeder  kpr37  replied to  JohnRussell   4 years ago

 

Is it fair to say that there are scholars of Islam that do not agree with you?

 it is fair to say they dissagree with the consensus of Islamic scholars. I'm am awere of many of them, as I am informed on the subject. (unlike you) Mahmud Muhammad Taha (Sunni) was historically  the most prominent in my opinion.

 R,ight now Iman Tawhidi a Shia, is shaking up the establishment pretty good. I wish him well 

Mahmud Muhammad Taha was, maybe, the best chance at a true, or real reform within Islam itself. He was murdered by the nation of Sudan as an apostate.

Taha’s Second Message of Islam The Second Message, where Taha’s puts forward his main vision, resulted from a prolonged time of religious seclusion. The Quran, according to Taha, contains two messages. He sees a contradiction between the Islamic message of religious freedom and equality between the sexes, as revealed in Mecca and the Medinan verses on the same issues. In trying to solve this problem Islamic jurists developed the principle of abrogation (naskh) whereby verses revealed in Medina abrogate the legal (not the moral) significance of the Meccan verses. Consequently, the Sharia has become based on the Medinan texts, which, according to Taha, violate the values of equality, religious freedom and human dignity. Taha argues that God’s earlier intentions were only suspended temporarily but not abrogated. Society in 7th century Arabia was not spiritually mature enough to live up to the ethically much higher Meccan code. To him the Sharia, as understood by Muslims today, represented temporary concessions only. His Second Message, therefore,is a call to reinstate the Meccan ideals of Islam. This would result in a society characterised by religious freedom, social justice and economic equality.

 He is little publicized, but still an important figure.

The first critical work to examine fully the thought of Mahmud Muhammad Taha (1909-1985) who advanced one of the most radical intellectual projects for the reform of Islam and its reconciliation with modernity.

 

 
 
 
kpr37
Professor Quiet
link   seeder  kpr37  replied to  kpr37   4 years ago

Ahmadi muslims are a peacfull sort as well. As far as I know they are not resposible for any terrorist activity at all, ever.

 They are different of course, it's a very important difference. Reading an Ahmadi Quran makes it apparent.

They are often times sourced for the peaceful nature of Islam. When they represent a small sect in the overall numbers of the faith.

There is one major theme missing however. Only one, and it seems to disqualify them from the "Muslim" club for the 'purists" of the faith. A rejection of armed jihad in the way of allah. 

The only Muslim group that has come to this conclusion are Ahmadi Muslims, whose founder Mirza Ghulam Ahmad in the nineteenth century had the wisdom to declare:

"I have brought a commandment for you people; it is that henceforth 'jihad by sword' [armed jihad] is forbidden ... Now jihad for the sake of religion is prohibited."

 
 

For uttering these words, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was deemed to have blasphemed and was declared an apostate by the orthodoxy in Islam; the same school of thought that provides intellectual sustenance to the Muslim establishment in the West today.

 

The "Ummah" is said to be made up from the entire community of believers, this community in the year 1974 came together and arrived at the conclusion that Ahmadi's were not Muslims. It was only after this decree, issued by the "Ummah", that the legal and extrajudicial systemic repression of Ahmadis started in earnest.

In 1914 when some Muslims left the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community and  rejected Caliphate ,

Ahmadiyya Muslims believe that they are a continuation of the Rashidun (rightly guided) caliphate.

critics once again claimed this was the end of the Caliphate. Instead, the community of Muslims continued to grow rapidly.

In 1974 when the  entire Ummah  declared Ahmadi Muslims outside the fold of Islam, critics claimed the Caliphate would now die off. Instead, the community of Muslims who accepted the Khalifa only grew. In 1984 when the fourth Khalifa of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community left Pakistan under threat of arrest and death, critics once again claimed this was the end of the Caliphate. Instead, the community of Muslims who accepted the Khalifa grew exponentially. And now, as worldwide antagonism against Muslims grows, and worldwide antagonism by Muslims against Ahmadi Muslims increases, the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community remains united under the Khalifa of Islam, celebrates 106 years of unity, and is the world’s fastest growing sect of Islam.

The true Caliphate continues to thrive peacefully without a single act of religious violence ever . Despite the test of time, and despite the ongoing and increasing worldly obstacles it faces, the true Caliphate advances unhindered

 

 

 

 
 
 
kpr37
Professor Quiet
link   seeder  kpr37  replied to  kpr37   4 years ago

 

Malaysia is considered a moderate Sunni nation.

According to the Ahmadis, opposition against the movement started shortly after the movement was introduced to Malaya by an Indian missionary in the 1930s.

Later in 1975, the Selangor Fatwa Council decreed that the Ahmadis were not Muslims, and recommended as a result, that their special Malay privileges be removed.

In December 2008, Selangor executive council chairman (for religious affairs) Hasan Mohamed Ali said that the state government was looking into forcibly grabbing the Baitussalam land.

Six months later, in April 2009, the Selangor Islamic Relgious Council (MAIS) issued a directive forbidding the Ahmadis from using the Kampung Nakhoda mosque for Friday prayers

Indonesia is considered a moderate Sunni nation.


Jakarta.  Members of the Ahmadiyah community in Indonesia continue to be discriminated against and religious leaders say a comprehensive, multi-pronged approach is needed to address persecution against the group.

"In general, the marginalization and stigmatization of Ahmadiyah groups have evolved into acts of discrimination," said Yendra Budiana, spokesman for Jemaat Ahmadiyah Indonesia (JAI).

" Our beliefs are now criminalized and a cause for persecution.”

Members of the Ahmadiyah, an Islamic religious movement deemed heretical by Indonesia’s Sunni majority, have faced increased hostility in recent weeks, with a number of local communities being targeted across Java.

The closure of an Ahmadiyah mosque in Bukit Duri, South Jakarta by local officials on July 8 ingnited a firestorm of controversy, launching anti-Ahmadiyah activities into the national spotlight.

 

Kyrgyzstan is considered a moderate nation

B ISHKEK – Kyrgyz religious authorities have refused to re-register the Ahmadiyya Muslim community, RFE/RL’s Kyrgyz Service reports.

Sagynbek Toktorbaev, a representative of the Ahmadiyya Muslim community in Kyrgyzstan, told RFE/RL on December 29 that the government’s State Commission on Religious Affairs rejected their re-registration.

He said the commission’s decision violates the rights of the some 1,000 members of the Kyrgyz branch of the Ahmadiyya community, an Islamic revivalist movement founded in India in the late 1800s by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. Some of the Ahmadiyya community’s beliefs are considered controversial with mainstream Muslims.

Yusub Baltabaev, an official with the State Commission on Religious Affairs, told RFE/RL that the Spiritual Administration of Muslims of Kyrgyzstan (SAMK) proposed that the activities of Ahmadiyya in Kyrgyzstan be suspended because of its alleged “threat to religious security” in the country.

SAMK official Zhorobay Shergaziev told RFE/RL on December 29 that the Ahmadiyya Muslim community is controversial and does not comply with Shari’a law.

 


 

There are many other nations John, Iran, Sudan, and Saudi Arabia, quickly come to mind, that the Ahmadi Muslim community is persecuted in. They are persecuted because they have regected armed jihad.

Al-Azhar university got a fatwa out against them, I can probably source it . if I remember correctly it called them Kafirs. A derogatory term used by theocratic Muslims to infer a spiritual impurity. (najas)

 

  • You don't seem to be doing well at this John. To me anyways, it looks like you are only exposing a great ignorence in this subject.
 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
Junior Guide
link   Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  kpr37   4 years ago

Now it seems you're just in "cut-and-paste" mode which is definitely a step up in the quality of your offerings from abysmal to pedestrian. 

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
Junior Guide
link   Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  kpr37   4 years ago
      • You don't seem to be doing well at this John.

And there it is...the projection.  No rightwing diatribe is complete without it.  

 

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
link   Buzz of the Orient  replied to  JohnRussell   4 years ago

"I am neither pro or anti Muslim, or pro or anti any other religion."

You may not be "pro Muslim" but you zealously defend them.  Do you defend and respect Ayaan HIrsi Ali, Salmann Rushdie, Iman Tawhidi a Shia, Dr. Jasser? or do you consider them apostates who deserve fatwas calling for their death due to purported blasphemy?

If you were a Christian in Egypt or Pakistan, or a Yazdi in the Middle East you might feel differently.

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
Junior Guide
link   Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  Buzz of the Orient   4 years ago

You may not be "pro Muslim" but you zealously defend them.

While you and your side attack the entire world population of Muslims the nearly a billion peaceful ones with maybe at most a few hundred thousand extreme and violent ones.  That is bigotry writ large and when peaceful, law-abiding Muslims around the world keep hearing these blanket aspersions on them and their religion (from people who really shouldn't be throwing stones) how do you think that makes them feel?  Like really helping us out with the terrorist problems we have or maybe just not being that eager to help?  Which is it? 

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
link   Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו   4 years ago

"While you and your side attack the entire world population of Muslims..."

HOW MANY FUCKING TIMES DO I HAVE TO PROVE THAT I ONLY CRITICIZE EXTREMISTS OF ALL RELIGIONS AND POLITICS FOR YOU TO UNDERSTAND?  I'm getting sick and tired of having to repeat and repeat and repeat that there are Muslims I consider to be heroes (names I mentioned in an earlier comment), that I have taught Muslim students English and met their parents and owners of restaurants where I eat who are among the gentlest, most peaceful people I have ever met in my life.

Any criticism I have had has been for those hundreds of thousands which you yourself identify as extremists, but I will add to them the Imans who preach hatred and the anti-Semites that lurk among the majority, and for THAT you can be critical. And yes, I am concerned about the "creeping caliphate".  I believe that when you move to a modern western society you don't try to change it to your own beliefs and customs - and if that, in your mind, makes you believe that I attack the whole world of Muslims, then it is YOU who has a problem, not me.

 

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
link   Buzz of the Orient  replied to  JohnRussell   4 years ago

"Enoch, why are you praising an obviously anti-Muslim article?"

Although I'm sure Enoch is capable of defending his comment, I would like to point out that it is no surprise to me that an article that criticizes a religion that relies upon a Q'oran that calls for the murder or subjugation of Jews, (if not ALL infidels) and some pretty good evidence in the world that there are a lot of Muslims who take that seriously, to the extent of carrying out that direction, that Enoch would not disagree with it. 

Were they ALL good Muslims who celebrated with distribution of candy the destruction of the Twin Towers, or any other slaughter carried out by their brethren?

 

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
Junior Guide
link   Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו    4 years ago

I had planned to avoid weighing on the massively false and self-serving nature and basis of this "article" (i.e., POS) to try a lighter touch.  But even that offended the sensitivities of the bible thumpers (doesn't everything, though).  But now I feel free to point out just what a mass of historical and religious lies this pile of garbage is.  The OT is rife with stories of Jews slaughtering entire populations because "G*d" told them it was okey dokey.  And the christians.....just about turned every body of water and patch of soil on this planet red with blood spilled by their killing sprees over the centuries.  Even today, these devout "followers" of Jesus are usually the loudest calling for mass murder and applauding every time one of our bombs is dropped causing mass civilian casualties.  All religious are nonsense to me but the ones which preach peace and make war* are the most obscene.  

I.e., all of the abrahamic religions.

 
 
 
Lucifer Morningstar
Professor Guide
link   Lucifer Morningstar  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו   4 years ago

So would would rather not seeking peace and go straight for the bloodshed.  I suppose that works ...

In Hell

 

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
Junior Guide
link   Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  Lucifer Morningstar   4 years ago

So would would rather not seeking peace and go straight for the bloodshed.  I suppose that works ...

That's the prevailing attitude of the vast majority of people in this country who claim to be christian.  Perhaps you've missed that I'm not one of them.  Comment removed for CoC violation [ph]

 
 
 
Jerry Verlinger
Freshman Silent
link   Jerry Verlinger  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו   4 years ago

You can take your snide and cowardly insinuations and shove 'em up your ****. 

'snot the way to prevail when someone disagrees with you. 

 
 
 
kpr37
Professor Quiet
link   seeder  kpr37  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו   4 years ago

The OT is rife with stories of Jews slaughtering entire populations because "G*d" told them it was okey dokey.

 

Got to love the science denying left. Are you a biblical literalist? It would be a funny thing to be, for a "so called" atheist.

 The science of modern archaeology says it never happened anyway, it just did not.Dates do not a line.

Care to tell me your theological impressions of Johah and the whale? (LOL)

 

The mass killing.... they were most likely, telling stories about how fucking bad ass their ancestors were, spoken while sitting around the campfire at night. That is what the science of archaeology and secular reality supports. Perhaps one day you will embrace them.

 
 
 
Jerry Verlinger
Freshman Silent
link   Jerry Verlinger  replied to  kpr37   4 years ago

Got to love the science denying left.

The Left denies science? Seems like you've got your identities a little fucked up here kpr. 

 
 
 
kpr37
Professor Quiet
link   seeder  kpr37  replied to  Jerry Verlinger   4 years ago

The Left denies science?

 

 

Is there, scientifically, a genetic difference between men and women? Clear and concise? Unequivocal?

Can a male skeleton be identified as male, thousands of years after discovery? If so why?

Can a female skeleton be identified as female, thousands of years after discovery? If so why?

Is an eight month old fetus, a human?

If 97% percent of climate scientists believe in global warming, That is 97% percent out of 100.

Provide the list of 100% of climate scientists.

Reality can be sourced, it is tangbile.

Delusions, dogma, politically produced propaganda, are illusionary, and as such, can not be sourced when actually pressed for tangible evidence.

 

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
Junior Guide
link   Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  kpr37   4 years ago

WTF are you blathering on about now?  

 
 
 
Jerry Verlinger
Freshman Silent
link   Jerry Verlinger  replied to  kpr37   4 years ago

Is there, scientifically, a genetic difference between men and women? Clear and concise? Unequivocal?

Any scientist will tell you that there is nothing clear, concise and unequivocal in scientific studies. "A very high degree of likelihood", is the most you will get out of most of them. 

Can a male skeleton be identified as male, thousands of years after discovery? If so why?

Can a female skeleton be identified as female, thousands of years after discovery? If so why?

I suppose you mean 'thousands of years old', not 'after discovery'. I doubt we have many records of studies that were done thousands of years ago. (Unless it's a trick question )

Assuming the former, it depends on how much of the skeleton was found. A female skeleton has a pelvic that is different than that of a male because they allow more room for giving birth.  

Is an eight month old fetus, a human?

Another trick question? If the fetus is in the womb of a human female, it is a human fetus.

However, to get to what I think you mean by the question, some people do not think a fetus is a Human Being until after it is born. Others think it is a Human Being immediately upon conception.

If 97% percent of climate scientists believe in global warming, That is 97% percent out of 100.

97% is 97% of however many climate scientist are being considered. Anyway, I'm not so sure 97% is an accurate estimate of how many climate scientist support the warming theory. 

Provide the list of 100% of climate scientists.

What is a 100% climate scientist?

Reality can be sourced, it is tangbile.

Delusions, dogma, politically produced propaganda, are illusionary, and as such, can not be sourced when actually pressed for tangible evidence.

That is a prosperous statement. There are hundreds, actually thousands of studies that provide evidence the 7 billion people that live on this planet, using fossil fuel to provide most of their energy, have had, and are now causing erratic changes in the atmosphere of the planet. 

There is a list of scientist on both sides of the debate listed in this Wikipedia article that includes;

Scientists questioning the accuracy of IPCC climate projections

Scientists arguing that global warming is primarily caused by natural processes

Scientists arguing that the cause of global warming is unknown  

But the climate change issue is an entirely different debate that does not belong on this thread.

If you want to go there, post an article describing your allusions and I'll provide you with much evidence as strong as science allows, supporting the 7 billion people we live with on this planet with are causing a negative effect on the atmosphere. 

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
Junior Guide
link   Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  Jerry Verlinger   4 years ago

The Left denies science?

 

Like rust, rightwing projection never sleeps. 

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
Junior Guide
link   Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  kpr37   4 years ago

Are you a biblical literalist? It would be a funny thing to be, for a "so called" atheist.

You don't accept the bible as the word of god?  That's funny for a "so-called" believer.  If you don't want to believe in the biblical stories of conquest, that's okay by me.  We can start and finish with what Israel has perpetrated on the Palestinian people over the past 70 years.  

 
 
 
kpr37
Professor Quiet
link   seeder  kpr37  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו   4 years ago

You don't accept the bible as the word of god?

A very good example of the "Dunning Kruger effect", those with the least knowledge of a subject often believe that they are the most informed.

 

 That's funny for a "so-called" believer.

Had you bothered to read the article that you are criticizing, you might have noticed this.

 As a Pagan, unless things are soon to change, I hate to tell you, what I see.

 "Merry Black" Danann, dancing with Shiva, and "heaven" help us if they invite Kali.( Kalki, the 10th and final avatar of the Hindu God Vishnu)

 

I've never read a Bible in my life. I have what little insight that I have on it, from Charlton Heston movies.(LOL)

 
 
 
magnoliaave
Sophomore Participates
link   magnoliaave    4 years ago

I don't know what to say.  I know Arheist's stance on everything. "claim to be Christian" and on and on relentlessly.  Same song, second verse......let's hum.   Man, just give it up!

We got it....you don't care for Christians.  We got it......you hate Christians.  We got it......You hate yourself. 

Man, oh man.   
"

 
 
 
magnoliaave
Sophomore Participates
link   magnoliaave  replied to  magnoliaave   4 years ago

And, you care take yours and shove it up yours!

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
Junior Guide
link   Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  magnoliaave   4 years ago

And, you care[sic] take yours and shove it up yours!

Oh, "care" I?  I imagine you were fighting off the tears as you typed that. 

 
 
 
Jerry Verlinger
Freshman Silent
link   Jerry Verlinger  replied to  magnoliaave   4 years ago

I don't know what to say.

Then you went on and said a bunch of things. 

You should have gone with your first instinct and said nothing. 

 
 
 
Release The Kraken
PhD Principal
link   Release The Kraken  replied to  Jerry Verlinger   4 years ago

How Ironic, dozens of members were thinking the same thing about your comment.

Gee Jerry, nice to see you. Glad you could rudely drop in. See you in a few weeks when you drop in again.

 
 
 
Jerry Verlinger
Freshman Silent
link   Jerry Verlinger  replied to  Release The Kraken   4 years ago

Gee Jerry, nice to see you. Glad you could rudely drop in. 

Nice to see you too BF (I think)

If you say I am being rude you must be right. No one NT has more experience with being rude than you 

See you in a few weeks when you drop in again.

I didn't know Perrie had set up an appearance schedule.

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
Junior Guide
link   Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  magnoliaave   4 years ago

Awww you haz a sad because you can't get away with the stinking sanctimony with me. 

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
link   Buzz of the Orient    4 years ago

Wow ! Are there ever going to be a lot of CoC violations posted on THIS article.

 
 
 
Release The Kraken
PhD Principal
link   Release The Kraken  replied to  Buzz of the Orient   4 years ago

It's very disappointing to see. I had higher hopes for our community.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
link   Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Release The Kraken   4 years ago

Obviously the subject is very controversial. but it's good to be in a country where such a viewpoint is permitted, and the author less likely to be beheaded.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
Professor Principal
link   Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Buzz of the Orient   4 years ago

Buzz,

There are Muslim countries where you can express your ideas with freedom. 

Look at Albania or Bosnia. Here is a little known fact. After WWII, Albania had more Jews than they did before the war. Most of the Balkan states that are Muslim are very peaceful towards other religions. I think when we start to talk about those that are not, we are talking about the M/E and north Africa.  

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
Junior Guide
link   Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A.   4 years ago

There are quite a number of Islamic countries very hostile to radical islam and essential allies to our country in the fight against terrorism.  Their job is made much harder by the islam-hate faction in this country who tar all muslims with the same bigoted brush and for statements that all their leaders are "bad."  First off, the people who claimed that most likely voted for the horrible POS who's now our president so they have no place calling other heads of state bad.  And these people themselves are obviously no paragons of virtue judging by the ugly, bigoted,  hate-driven attacks on decent people in our society as well as cheering for mass killings of innocent people and loving the idea of torture.  What makes them even more intolerable is that they considers themselves as having superior morals based on......nothing at all. 

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online




31 visitors