FFI is Out-of-Date; Part of the Problem

[sum]

it`s a pity that MesMorial has left the forum as I was hoping that he would eventually answer the two following questions -

Do he support crucifixion?

Is there anything in the Koran that he finds unacceptable and rejects?

So far he has not given a clear answer on crucifixion and has ignored the question regarding anything unacceptable in the Koran. Like many muslims, he chooses to create a "fog" with his answers so that one ends up not being completely certain what he is saying. The other approach that he adopts is ignoring the question. If he is not a muslim, as he claims, then there should be no difficulty in criticising the Koranic guidance. However, I did manage to get him to say that he rejects slavery.

sum

[iffo]

Prophet MM unfortunately is a professional lier, and he feels absolutely no shame for being a lier.

He says he is not Muslim but he in his article on some other website when talking about Allah use
Allah (SWT)

http://allpoetry.com/column/7557577-Is_ ... -Mordegast

[Ghaith]

You are like a mechanical commentary, and no-one is interested.

[Centaur]

The kaffirs of Faithfreedom are weak and dependent on articles written by Ali Sina, Sam Shamoun, and Zakaria Botros. Truth is these monkey's are just today's Anis Shorrosh and Jimmy Swaggart and look what happend to them. Islam always prevails.

nope. we just use Pedophile Mohammed and the book authored by him to expose the bigotry or stupidity called Islam.On the other hand muslims constantly lie and use censorship and intimidation like Mohammed , who assassinated his critic.When the truth about Islam prevails over the lies and intimidation that will be the end of islam.

[ringmaster]

Prophet MM unfortunately is a professional lier, and he feels absolutely no shame for being a lier.

He says he is not Muslim but he in his article on some other website when talking about Allah use
Allah (SWT)

http://allpoetry.com/column/7557577-Is_ ... -Mordegast

(1) A truly professional liar would be able to deceive his audience. MM is not fooling anybody....except himself.

(2) We know he is muslim. I would say he is a Salafist.

(3) That website of his is nothing but gibberish. It's verbal flatulence, just like what he has posted throughout this forum. Verbal flatulence does not make him an intellectual.

[MesMorial]

sum;

Hello MesMorial

You are still running away from my question. It is certainly not the case that no-one is interested. I would suspect that all those who read your posts are very interested in your views and beliefs regarding the Koran. I am not surprised that you are going to have a break as you will be hoping that I will let the matter drift.

I will wait for your return unless you want to let us know if there is anything in the Koran that you find unacceptable and therefore reject. Will you be letting us know?

sum

The unacceptable things in the Qur’an are the illogical things. By now you have learnt that, but I hope you have developed a better standard than emotions.



kaimana;


33:50 always confused me, because it seemed like Muhammad could fornicate with his cousins. But the word “nikah” is used (in the Qur’an) to mean contractual sex, which fits with everything said here. We already agreed there, but I’ll remind you. The point of my discussion was that 4:24 does not mean “rape”. The context (as shown by 4:23) refers to marital sex. You say a man cannot have sex with two sisters at the same time, but I say this is silly. What it means is that he cannot be in a relationship involving marital-sex (i.e. marriage) with two sisters.

There are two contracts, one being marriage, the other guardianship. I already disproved rape for iffo and darth.



ringmaster;


Verse 20:130 says there are five sessions. The word “end” is used, as it is used for “ends” elsewhere. There are three parts to the day.

(1) 9-5 deals with those that are attacked. If they don’t accept islam, they are “untrustworthy” and must be killed. If they accept islam, don’t kill them.
(2) 9-6, don’t kill a person who voluntarily converts before being attacked.
(3) 9-7 to 9-13, make a truce (temporary peace) with those who are still strong enough to defend themselves, and continue to use whatever taquiya, subterfuge etc. that you can. If you reach the point where you are stronger that they, you attack them again

Yes you are still mired in a medieval approach. My next post will re-emphasise your redundant ways. As for 9:5, it deals with those who broke treaties in some way (9:1-4). 9:6 refers to any idolater who seeks refuge. The reason they hear the Qur’an is because they are ignorant. The reason they came was to seek refuge, not to convert. 9:7-13 reminds that 9:5 was about untrustworthy folk.

That basically sums in up. That basically sums up the history of Islamic conquest as well.

Suppose it’s so. So what? Does it justify lying about the Qur’an? Does your support (and sharing) of human stupidity justify it?

I think you can’t accept that you lost That’s okay, because I am not here to convince. I am just putting you in your place. That way, the intelligent people will have less to contend with.

Pure invention.

Bitchboy allah does not restrict the conditions of sura 9. You and muslim apologists are inventing them.

Depends on interpretation, but as for logic, you are starving. You should get the point and adopt my plant analogy. You will get nowhere without, since you are incapable of dancing in the psychological arena. People won’t think you have substance, and following false Qur’an-Islam is (as I suggested) better than living your life. It does not matter whether you care or not; what matters is what you really are.

That said, sura 9 is obviously contextual.

No. It merely means they were still strong enough to defend themselves. Muslims don’t like people who can defend themselves. In the eyes of muslims, people who defend themselves are not fighting fairly.

A muslim's idea of a fair fight is to fight people who cannot defend themselves, especially women, as evidenced by verse 4-34.

More noise, yes?

PS.....re: verse 24-41.....don't forget to pray every time after you fart. That does not contravene said verse, and therefore attention whore allah would surely be pleased.

No it gives specific times, farting not being prescribed.

(1) A truly professional liar would be able to deceive his audience. MM is not fooling anybody....except himself.

(2) We know he is muslim. I would say he is a Salafist.

(3) That website of his is nothing but gibberish. It's verbal flatulence, just like what he has posted throughout this forum. Verbal flatulence does not make him an intellectual.

I know my standards, and even if I were lying, it would be less of a lie than your illogical venom. I know your weakness, which is the weakness of what this forum stands for. Labels. I know I’m right.



darthl


It is not a 3-fold punishment. Dying means perishing means going to Hell. If you cannot realise what it means, that is your fault. Of course you do; you are aware of what you are.

What exactly are you refuting? I have not made any claim or proposed any theory regarding 111. I am merely asking questions which you are unable to answer. These are simple questions - who was abu lahab that he merits an entire sura? What were his crimes that he was given a 3-fold punishment.

I answered them to the extent that every time you repeat yourself, I can feel sorry for you.

Beating around the bush. I checked that verse word by word. Do you agree that it is "chastity" as in relation to guarding one's private parts? Can you now answer without evasion my main question - can a wife be "chaste" by guarding her private parts from her husband? Note that if you answer "yes", it will demolish your other statement in previous post that sex is necessary in an islamic marriage.

24:33 refers to the chastity of guarding one’s parts, which naturally applies to the captive-master. There are different words used for the two “chastities”, meaning you will have to obey my prior demand. As it stands, rape is refuted.

Ok, let me modify it
You want to
Beat (painfully if necessary but non-harmful) a wife to avoid divorce.
and
Divorce a wife to avoid beating her (causing injury).

Your life if thus followed would be an unending cycle
marriage-beat (painfully if necessary) -divorce-marriage-beat (painfully if necessary)-divorce-marriage-beat (painfully if necessary)-divorce.......


You are clutching at straws. The point still remains - beating is beating. The quran allows beating of wife

I’ll just ignore the last line, shall I? According to our accepted translation of “idhrib” (which I only accept so people are not prejudiced!), the striking is an attempt to symbolise his contempt whilst representing the last chance before divorce. It clearly must not accelerate what is not preferred (divorce). It cannot injure, neither is it a punishment. The ultimate punishment is divorce. The previous steps are meant to convey and prevent.

Unbiased? Buddy, you have no clue about objective analysis. You are biased towards the quran and can see no wrong in it. Your arguments reflect this. The only people you can convince are those that want to be convinced (similar muslims). Only a biased muslim will read the word "beat" and then pretend it is splitting the air or some such thing.

So why is it you struggle and I laugh at you, in the meantime having already explained my position clearly? As for “buddy”, I tend to only associate with half-intelligent people who have a point.



piscohot;


Read my next post. It forces FFI to get its priorities right, which means abrogating the current culture. So far it has not been refuted, nor will it be.

Only you can understand what you say, no normal person can.
Point is,
1. you said hand cutting and public flogging is only for deterrence, and you are lying, it is the actual punishment your god wants for thieves and for fornication.
2. You said beating wife is symbolic beating, again you are lying, quran never says its symbolic.

And I challanged you on both to show me where quran says what you are saying, you making your own stories.

I challenge you to refute my logic on 2). As far as I am concerned, I already beat your point into submission.

http://allpoetry.com/poem/9613459-Strik ... -by-Minhaj

As for 1), the actual laws are there for deterrence. The only reason we have laws is for deterrence. The actual implementation of laws (once a crime is committed) involves consideration of circumstances. I believe we were discussing “eye-for-an-eye” in Minhajism, so you should attempt to get the context right. Otherwise, your mixed-words will be very hard to understand.



Antineo


Whatever is your point, proof is good.

[MesMorial]

Now the unchallenged point is that Qur’an-alone is true Islam. I think when people get tired of falling on the backside, they will accept it.

The next post is the follow-on. It is a summary of what I have already said. If you cannot refute it, you should accept it:

http://allpoetry.com/poem/9787483-Horom ... -by-Minhaj

After accepting these 2 points, we realise that interpretation-agitation is a waste of time. What matters henceforth are the values you stand-for. Saying what you DON’T stand-for is a start, but complaining and mocking suggests that you have nothing better. When you have your own standard, there is no need to be jealous (e.g.) of others’. Religion has its general use, although there are better ways to accomplish it. All that you need to acknowledge is what this use is, and whether or not it harms others.

[manfred]

"horomones and Half-witz", you wrote....

Are you feeling well?

First you use a lot of LABELS to attack people from this forum and then you say not to use labels. Well, there are dangers with labels, but as a general rule human beings use labels, otherwise known as WORDS or CONCEPTS, to express themselves and to make sense of the world.

All you are really suggesting is to to stop trying to connect people's actions with the reasons they act like that. Why? Because you don't want people to understand? Or do you mean YOU ALONE may do the labeling?

Also, why would be Qur'an only the "true Islam"? Islam and "true" does not go together in the first place. Why would the London telephone directory not be a better guide as the quran? It has the same amount of spirituality in it: none. At least the phone book does not incite to murder. Is there any reason why anyone should take note of such a hideous book as the Qur'an?

But as you like the filthy little book so much.... here is something it says on that topic:

Whatever Allah has restored to His Messenger from the people of the towns, it is for Allah and for the Messenger, and for the near of kin and the orphans and the needy and the wayfarer, so that it may not be a thing taken by turns among the rich of you, and whatever the Messenger gives you, accept it, and from whatever he forbids you, keep back, and be careful of (your duty to) Allah; surely Allah is severe in retributing (evil)
Qur'an 59:6

So why does the Qur'an refer to sunnah here? Could it be that the editors of the nasty little book wanted keep their options open?

Is it not accurate to describe the quran as the result of the efforts of later editors and collectors, of recollections broadly based on the utterances by a Arab warlord, rapist, pedophile and murderer, with a few bits added here and there? So the quran itself is a PRODUCT of the sunnah.

Why you keep trying to flog a dead horse is beyond me...

[MesMorial]

Manfred;


I will ignore your 3rd line since it is typical. You will not put me on your level.

4th line is fine except I was talking about judging by them. This means patenting your own understanding of what a label is, and whether someone is a true “this” or a true “that”. This is because individuals are not the system.

Lines 5-6 involve you patenting a label according to your understanding. This is indeed dangerous (as you show us). You basically say that people are controlled by the label, but actually the label serves the person. Thus to judge by the label is pointless.

Ignoring the rest, my point was to make you accept that the Qur’an only allows the Qur’an. Once again, you cannot help turning the point into your own personal feelings.

Regarding 59:7: suffice it to say, just read the whole verse – then read 59:8. Explain to me where the Sunna is.

59:7 is the last verse covered:

http://allpoetry.com/poem/9473273-LESSO ... -by-Minhaj

Which takes you back to square 1. The dead horse is your viewpoint, if that is what you meant.

[manfred]

It seems you are ignoring pretty much anything people tell you, and carry on talking gibberish. "I will ignore that" seems to be a mantra of yours....

Let's stick to one thing at a time.

Qur'an only.

What is the Qur'an that anyone should even consider it to be a book of any value? How do you reach that conclusion?

How will you persuade your FELLOW Muslims to abandon sunnah? The five "pillars" of Islam cannot be established from the Qur'an alone.


Do you know the response to "Qur'an only" by 99% of Muslims?

Also, your own approach to the Qur'an is rather different, which Qur'an do you mean? The actual text as we have now, or the notions that your read into it?

[MesMorial]

Stay on topic and don't get off your knees until you have something relevant (and useful) to say.

Understanding gives power to expose (true motivations). Understand?

[yeezevee]

Stay on topic and don't get off your knees until you have something relevant (and useful) to say.

Hmm, You are speaking like a Prophet M&M.You seem to think yourself as leader of the pack that no one should say anything on you =r songs. Well neither you are idol nor a cult leader, also folks in FFI are NOT idolators to stay on their knees . Off course you must have freedom to sing any song on internet. Don't do that in a mosque.

Understanding gives power to expose (true motivations). Understand?

Every control freak and cult leader use similar words, unfortunately FFI folks are smarter than the followers of Jim Jones , Charles Manson , Aum Shinrikyo or that leader of Raelian Church UFO religion.

So get down from your high horse and forget orderings folks on internet.. lol...

A simple Golden Rule will eliminate volumes of religious rubbish that you are singing from Quran...

[MesMorial]

Yeezevee you forgot to highlight the "stay on topic", "relevant" and "useful" parts too.

Until then, same to you.

Interesting about the "smart" bit.

[yeezevee]

Yeezevee you forgot to highlight the "stay on topic", "relevant" and "useful" parts too.

Until then, same to you.

Interesting about the "smart" bit.

"Stay on the Topic".. we are on the topic for the past four months singing songs and running in circles MesMorial and that topic is "FFI is Out-of-Date; Part of the Problem"

FFI Out of date for who?? Problem for who??

As long as freedom of expression is there, freedom to question anything and everything is there, we can make it up to date and we can solve the problems.

But..but I will fully support you singing songs .. First 10 years of Islam in Mecca as long as his first wife Khadija was alive Prophet used to sing songs ..

[MesMorial]

Yes the flock has run in circles (ringmaster (aptly named) made sure of it). But now I want to move past the stalling.

So, if FFI is not out of date, find me "sunna" in the Qur'an. This is the point.

If FFI is out-of-date, it cannot claim to be legitimate. An ineffective solution is itself a problem. Or for what effect it has, it attacks a superior solution.

Your position is inferior, you cannot engage the topic, so what is to do?

[yeezevee]

Yes the flock has run in circles (ringmaster (aptly named) made sure of it). But now I want to move past the stalling.

Well you have full freedom to move

So, if FFI is not out of date, find me "sunna" in the Qur'an. This is the point.

That is silly question., What is Quran?? see your post here it says

I am not of the opinion the Qur'an is divine. I don't need the Qur'an, because I have my own philosophy.... MesMorial

That is you saying., once you say that., In a real Islamic world you are out. You can only sing songs on internet . You will not go beyond that MesMorial

If FFI is out-of-date, it cannot claim to be legitimate.

You are acting like judge and jury, The unfortunate thing is you are not realizing that unsuspected fellows/nominal Muslims will take your songs and think that Quran as a divinely ordained for all life and for all time. And that is from unsuspected fellows/nominal Muslims., Where as real salafi Muslim will put you, your songs, your head in dust bin

An ineffective solution is itself a problem. Or for what effect it has, it attacks a superior solution.

That is a runway statement which you often write in to your posts. It is like I say ..You say .. type. We can go on writing such responses in circles without touching the crust of the problem MesMorial

Your position is inferior, you cannot engage the topic, so what is to do?

you have full rights to believe and write such statements. But you can not be a judge. FFI readers will do that.

With best wishes
yeezevee

[MesMorial]

Well you have full freedom to move

Why do you pay me attention? Anyone would think that I had a point.

That is silly question., What is Quran?? see your post here it says

I asked no question there.

That is you saying., once you say that., In a real Islamic world you are out. You can only sing songs on internet . You will not go beyond that MesMorial

You are acting like judge and jury, The unfortunate thing is you are not realizing that unsuspected fellows/nominal Muslims will take your songs and think that Quran as a divinely ordained for all life and for all time. And that is from unsuspected fellows/nominal Muslims., Where as real salafi Muslim will put you, your songs, your head in dust bin

What are you actually talking about? I am talking about not singing songs that go nowhere. If anyone is going to talk about Islam, they have to first get what Islam says. It is incredibly simple. If you refuse, it will simply show you are insincere. The choice is yours.

That is runways statement and ...I say ..You say .. tyep. We can go on writing such responses in circles without touching the crust of the problem MesMorial

You didn’t answer my question.

you have full rights to believe and write such statements. But you can not be a judge. FFI readers will do that.

Debates don’t work without judgement. The simple fact is that everyone I debate fails to prove their case. If you want to hide behind “FFI readers will judge”, that is your choice. It is not mine.

Your response will be still more of the same anti-substance.

[yeezevee]

Spoiler! :

Well you have full freedom to move

Why do you pay me attention? Anyone would think that I had a point.

That is silly question., What is Quran?? see your post here it says

I asked no question there.

Spoiler! :

That is you saying., once you say that., In a real Islamic world you are out. You can only sing songs on internet . You will not go beyond that MesMorial

You are acting like judge and jury, The unfortunate thing is you are not realizing that unsuspected fellows/nominal Muslims will take your songs and think that Quran as a divinely ordained for all life and for all time. And that is from unsuspected fellows/nominal Muslims., Where as real salafi Muslim will put you, your songs, your head in dust bin

What are you actually talking about? I am talking about not singing songs that go nowhere. If anyone is going to talk about Islam, they have to first get what Islam says. It is incredibly simple. If you refuse, it will simply show you are insincere. The choice is yours.

That is runways statement and ...I say ..You say .. tyep. We can go on writing such responses in circles without touching the crust of the problem MesMorial

You didn’t answer my question.

you have full rights to believe and write such statements. But you can not be a judge. FFI readers will do that.

Debates don’t work without judgement. The simple fact is that everyone I debate fails to prove their case. If you want to hide behind “FFI readers will judge”, that is your choice. It is not mine.

Your response will be still more of the same anti-substance

.

"MesMorial" Spend time writing poetry.. lol.. what do you think this is

So, if FFI is not out of date, find me "sunna" in the Qur'an. This is the point.

And what do you think is "Sunna" "MesMorial" ??

[MesMorial]

It seems you lack the ability to have an intelligent exchange.

Anyone can see you just manipulated the chronology of statements.

[MesMorial]

If anyone wants to engage with the topic and thus look a little less than silly, step up.