I know what islam is really about

[Kalam]

"KALAM"

yak yak yak

You can have your own opinions, but you can not have your own facts.

Please

A. Address the Maulana's argument directly and explain specifically why it is incorrect.
B. Fuck off.

 

[Kalam]

You will not be able to cloud the facts with hollow rhetoric .

You'll not be able to distort the clear words of the Qur'an with fallacy-filled commentaries. Now, address the Maulana's argument or go skip rope in traffic.

 

[Kalam]

We have proven conclusively that MM ALI is a total fraud liars and a cheat.

In the post you linked to, you succeeded in nothing apart from showing everyone what an idiot you are.

We have proved using your sig source that your interpretation of "Islam" is not traditional by any stretch of the imagination.

Whether you consider it traditional or not is, like most of what you say, of little consequence to me.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

"KALAM"

yak yak yak

You can have your own opinions, but you can not have your own facts.

Please

A. Address the Maulana's argument directly and explain specifically why it is incorrect.
B. Fuck off.

A.We have proven conclusively that MM ALI is a total fraud liar and a cheat.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/1395883-post429.html
His assertions are logical fallacies, that because the "laws of Islam" were reveal in median abrogation could not be referring to the Quran is wholly preposterous.
His second contention that the"prophet" had a unfailing memory is equally absurd.

B. Right Back @ ya.

 

[Kalam]

A.We have proven conclusively that MM ALI is a total fraud liar and a cheat.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/1395883-post429.html
His assertions are logical fallacies, that because the "laws of Islam" were reveal in median abrogation could not be referring to the Quran is wholly preposterous.
His second contention that the"prophet" had a unfailing memory is equally absurd.

You begin by using logically fallacious ad hominem attacks and end by failing to address any of the assertions upon which his argument actually rests. You fail again, dumbass.

 

[Kalam]

We do not live by The Old Testament.

Then you do not follow the words you attribute to Jesus Christ and shouldn't consider yourselves Christians.

 

[Modbert]

For the record, as a Christian, Christians do believe in the Old Testament. In fact, growing up, I learned about Adam & Eve, Noah, Moses, etc. Christianity may have a focus on Jesus, however they do not disregard "the old laws."

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

A.We have proven conclusively that MM ALI is a total fraud liar and a cheat.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/1395883-post429.html
His assertions are logical fallacies, that because the "laws of Islam" were reveal in median abrogation could not be referring to the Quran is wholly preposterous.
His second contention that the"prophet" had a unfailing memory is equally absurd.

You begin by using logically fallacious ad hominem attacks and end by failing to address any of the assertions upon which his argument actually rests. You fail again, dumbass.

Really? is not his argument that the first alleged abrogation verse was uttered in mekka before the laws of Islam were reveal so there fore he had to be talking about something else?

If not, please elucidate.

 

[PixieStix]

For the record, as a Christian, Christians do believe in the Old Testament. In fact, growing up, I learned about Adam & Eve, Noah, Moses, etc. Christianity may have a focus on Jesus, however they do not disregard "the old laws."

A focus? Really? Why is it that Christians focus on Jesus?

Could it be that He is their Messiah who came to deliver them from the legalisms of the OT?


Could it be that CHRIST, is the main point of CHRISTianity???

 

[THE LIGHT]

Please post a link that proves unequivocally using Islamic scripture that none muslims are innocent.

Several people here have meet your challenge, and refuted every idiotic accusation your little Islamophobic mind could dream up.

So give it up Mr Fitnuts, you lost the battle a long, long time ago.

Please post a link that proves unequivocally using Islamic scripture that non muslims are innocent.

That won't happen

 

[Modbert]

A focus? Really? Why is it that Christians focus on Jesus?

Could it be that He is their Messiah who came to deliver them from the legalisms of the OT?


Could it be that CHRIST, is the main point of CHRISTianity???

He didn't come to deliver them from the "legalisms" of the OT.

Matthew 5:17

17Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

Matthew 5:18-19:

8For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

19Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

John 10:30-35

30I and my Father are one.

31Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.

32Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?

33The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.

34Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?

35If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;

Jesus came to save us because of our sins, not because of the OT. Also, if you would like to abuse the word focus, be my guest.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

A.We have proven conclusively that MM ALI is a total fraud liar and a cheat.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/1395883-post429.html
His assertions are logical fallacies, that because the "laws of Islam" were reveal in median abrogation could not be referring to the Quran is wholly preposterous.
His second contention that the"prophet" had a unfailing memory is equally absurd.

You begin by using logically fallacious ad hominem attacks and end by failing to address any of the assertions upon which his argument actually rests. You fail again, dumbass.

Really? is not his argument that the first alleged abrogation verse was uttered in mekka before the laws of Islam were reveal so there fore he had to be talking about something else?

If not, please elucidate.

 

[THE LIGHT]

For the record, as a Christian, Christians do believe in the Old Testament. In fact, growing up, I learned about Adam & Eve, Noah, Moses, etc. Christianity may have a focus on Jesus, however they do not disregard "the old laws."

Jesus fulfilled the law for us. We are no longer under the law but under grace. Does the law still exist? Yes! However, we as Christians no longer fulfill the law through works but rather through love.

 

[SW2SILVER]

A.We have proven conclusively that MM ALI is a total fraud liar and a cheat.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/1395883-post429.html
His assertions are logical fallacies, that because the "laws of Islam" were reveal in median abrogation could not be referring to the Quran is wholly preposterous.
His second contention that the"prophet" had a unfailing memory is equally absurd.

You begin by using logically fallacious ad hominem attacks and end by failing to address any of the assertions upon which his argument actually rests. You fail again, dumbass.

Really? is not his argument that the first alleged abrogation verse was uttered in mekka before the laws of Islam were reveal so there fore he had to be talking about something else?

If not, please elucidate.

Wowza, I am not feeling to warm and fuzzy reading that bullshit . Don't elucidate, buck-o. we already know. Here we are, 2009, they arrested that Muslim dude plotting to plant bombs. Following the Muslim extremist model in London. Najibullah Zazi. Everyone thought this dude was normal, he was flying under the radar. He's a poster boy for Racial profiling if ever there was one, ever. If only they did that BEFORE 9/11. Islam isn’t exactly the beautiful and charming thing they want us to believe, us non believers are like that. We don’t give a shit. Stop crashing planes, and stop perpetrating hate as religious fervor, assholes. It's getting to look like Muslims are just mass murdering creeps, and not much else. Kindness, no?

 

[ABikerSailor]

For the record, as a Christian, Christians do believe in the Old Testament. In fact, growing up, I learned about Adam & Eve, Noah, Moses, etc. Christianity may have a focus on Jesus, however they do not disregard "the old laws."

A focus? Really? Why is it that Christians focus on Jesus?

Could it be that He is their Messiah who came to deliver them from the legalisms of the OT?


Could it be that CHRIST, is the main point of CHRISTianity???

What part of Jesus was JEWISH do you keep missing? You do realize that He was in Jerusalem to celebrate Passover just before being crucified right?

You're an idiot.

 

[Kalam]

A.We have proven conclusively that MM ALI is a total fraud liar and a cheat.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/1395883-post429.html
His assertions are logical fallacies, that because the "laws of Islam" were reveal in median abrogation could not be referring to the Quran is wholly preposterous.
His second contention that the"prophet" had a unfailing memory is equally absurd.

You begin by using logically fallacious ad hominem attacks and end by failing to address any of the assertions upon which his argument actually rests. You fail again, dumbass.

Really? is not his argument that the first alleged abrogation verse was uttered in mekka before the laws of Islam were reveal so there fore he had to be talking about something else?

If not, please elucidate.

No. Had you actually bothered reading his argument, you'd understand that if the context of each passage is examined, it's clear that they refer to the Qur'an's abrogation of previous scriptures. This is what the Maulana points out.

 

[Intense]

We do not live by The Old Testament.

Then you do not follow the words you attribute to Jesus Christ and shouldn't consider yourselves Christians.

Wrong. I'm not here to live up to Anyones Expectations. I am Accountable to God Through Conscience First Kalam. Unlike You, I do Not Twist Scripture to Force People to Bend to My Will or Fancy. My Message to You is to Put God First in All Things Kalam. That Includes Your Understanding and Interpretation of Scripture, be It The Koran or The Bible, which were written by Men, Well Intentioned Men, just the same Human and Imperfect. Contradictions at the Surface Level are Many, even in conflicting accounts of the same event. On the Surface that is Proof enough on Infallibility. I ask You again Repent, Put God First Through Conscience, and renounce the Evil that You may seek and teach Peace and Justice. The Body is The Temple of The Spirit. You are Beyond Your Right and Justification to do Harm to Any that has left You no alternative. I am A Christian Kalam, and take my role Very Seriously, and I know my place. Can You say that and believe it at the core level of your soul. God wants You intact Kalam. Do not Sin in His Name.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

You begin by using logically fallacious ad hominem attacks and end by failing to address any of the assertions upon which his argument actually rests. You fail again, dumbass.

Really? is not his argument that the first alleged abrogation verse was uttered in mekka before the laws of Islam were reveal so there fore he had to be talking about something else?

If not, please elucidate.

No. Had you actually bothered reading his argument, you'd understand that if the context of each passage is examined, it's clear that they refer to the Qur'an's abrogation of previous scriptures. This is what the Maulana points out.

It is a fact that details of the Islamic law were revealed at Madinah and it is in relation to these details that the theory of abrogation has been broached. Therefore, a Makkah revelation would not speak of abrogation. But the reference in the above verse is to the abrogation, not of the Qur'anic verses but of the previous Divine messages or revelations, consequent upon revelation of the Qur'an.
Exactly as I stated.
A logical fallacy.
Denying the Antecedent

Definition:

Any argument of the following form is invalid:
If A then B
Not A
Therefore, Not B

Show that even though the premises are true, the conclusion may be false. In particular, show that the consequence B may occur even though A does not occur.

 

[Sunni Man]

Definition:

Any argument of the following form is invalid:
If A then B
Not A
Therefore, Not B

Show that even though the premises are true, the conclusion may be false. In particular, show that the consequence B may occur even though A does not occur.

You really crack me Mr Fitnuts

First you cut and paste all kinds of stuff that you don't even understand.

Then you hope someone will answer your post.

In essense, having them explain to you, what you posted.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Definition:

Any argument of the following form is invalid:
If A then B
Not A
Therefore, Not B

Show that even though the premises are true, the conclusion may be false. In particular, show that the consequence B may occur even though A does not occur.

You really crack me Mr Fitnuts

First you cut and paste all kinds of stuff that you don't even understand.

Then you hope someone will answer your post.

In essense, having them explain to you, what you posted.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/1556966-post115.html