Debate on Quran and Jews

[KhaliL]

______________________

[This thread is meant for a one-on-one debate between me and Balls_of_Titanium1. Please do not post here if you are not Balls_of_Titanium1]

Hi Balls_of_Titanium1,

(For convenience, I will address you as BOT1 from hereon. I hope this will not be offending you)

You are supposed to defend two prime contentions in this debate as you did it in another thread from where we are directed to this location. Subsequently, I will be refuting those contentions using your (Muslim) authentic sources. First of all, I will deal with your first contention:

My argument was:

I repeat your book and history proves you wrong. Jews were maltreated by Muhammad and his followers.

You responded:

When you opine, you are just opining. When you provide back up sources, the mode of my reply would be different.

Your response has the undertone of a promise too that when I am proving my points with back up sources you will be replying to them in a different mode than mere rhetoric. So I will substantiate my claim in order for you to add your refutations to it.

First of all, let us see what Quran says about Jews in general. This is excerpt from one of my articles which is highly relevant here:

Jews are an accursed lot according to Quran. Allah cursed them not once but many times. Allah cursed Iblis (Satan) only on a single occasion, but never hesitated to renew his curse in the case of Jews. It doesn't confine the curse to a past generation of Jews. The curse is with them until the resurrection day. See Quran:

The Jews say: "Allah's hand is tied up." Be their hands tied up and be they accursed for the (blasphemy) they utter. Nay, both His hands are widely outstretched: He give and spends (of His bounty) as He pleases. But the revelation that cometh to thee from Allah increases in most of them their obstinate rebellion and blasphemy. Amongst them we have placed enmity and hatred till the Day of Judgment. Every time they kindle the fire of war, Allah doth extinguish it; but they (ever) strive to do mischief on earth. And Allah loves not those who do mischief. [Quran Chapter 5: 64]

See it in the above verses, (focus on the bolded part) Allah says, among them (Jews) he has placed enmity and hatred till the Day of Judgment. So, the hatred and enmity is protracted to the end of days. I bring this up now to help you to not bring the context argument in your defense. Quran (Allah) says Jews are to bear the burden of Allah's wrath until the Day of Judgment. Remember Satan too is cursed by Allah in the same way Jews are cursed. The most merciful god granted respite to Satan until the Day of Judgment. So the logic is, if Jews are flourishing all the times that would be because Allah given them respite just like he gave it to Satan, but believers can not be with them for that. If any believer befriends them, he will be lost. Just like those who follow in the footsteps of Satan will be lost.

For a true believer, who believes in Allah and Muhammad, there can not be any difference between Satan and Jews, because both are cursed by Allah. This is the true Islamic stance.

Is there anything relevant to the mentioning of this Day of Judgment in Quran? Of course there is because after suffering all the hatred and enmity, what will happen to Jews when they happened to be at the end of times? See the hadith:

Narrated Abu Huraira:
Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him." [Sahih Bukhari: Volume 4, Book 52, Number 177:]

This is the portrayal of the Hour. And we see a definite indication for massacre of Jews in the above hadith. That means a Muslim who has to believe in The Hour has to believe in this mass murder too.

The belief in Allah and the Last Day is one of the pillars of Faith in Islam. Do not forget this fact, so by default a Muslim has to believe in the total annihilation of Jews. If a human being is conditioned in this way, do you think he is going to befriend and love Jews? Not at all; in fact he will be longing for The Hour to come when stones and trees betrays Jews to Muslims.

It is dictated to Muslims by their holy scripture and other authentic sources to hate and hate and hate Jews until the end of times then to massacre them with the help of talking stones and trees.

This is what my contention means. Hatred of Jews is a holy ordinance for Muslims. As long as Quran and Muslims authentic sources remain, Muslim can not stop hating Jews.

Next, I will deal with the topic of the treatment of unbelievers in general. I will bring Quran again:

Lo! those who disbelieve, and die while they are disbelievers; on them is the curse of Allah and of angels and of men combined.[Quran: 2:161]

If you carefully focus on the verses above, it says of disbelievers who live and die as disbelievers. On them is the curse of Allah-the god of Muslims. Moreover angels too curse them, again all believing people curse them. This is Quran..! Should I bring more from your holy text to prove my case unbelievers are subjected to the hatred of Muslims since they are an accursed lot? Can you relentlessy curse a group of people and love them at the same time?

How can you prove your case Allah loves unbelievers when in fact he curses them along with his angels and incites believers too to take part in this cursing business?

Now, let me see what you said in the other thread:

In a hadith, Muhamamd said that Allah loves his creation 70 times more than a mother loves his child.

That is about all creation and not just Muslims.

It is the sin that we must abhor.

Similarly, Allah says in the Qur'an that he does not forbids us from being kind and just to those kafirs who don't fight us on the basis of our religion.

Well, I need you to bring the hadith here so that I can scrutinize it. You just mentioned a Hadith, but it needs to be brought. And in advance, I am going to present a verse from Quran and a Hadith to endorse it that would negate your assertion. (Keep in mind, you should bring the hadith you are talking about so that I can show how shallow a claim you made. I know of the hadith you are talking about and it does not mean what you asserted. But I will wait until you bring it up) Now, deal with this below:

It is not for the Prophet, and those who believe, to pray for the forgiveness of unbelievers (or polytheists) even though they may be near of kin (to them) after it hath become clear that they are people of hell fire.[Quran: 9:113]

And to know of this verse’s context see the hadith:

Narrated Al-Musaiyab: When Abu Talib was on his death bed, Allah's Apostle came to him and found with him, Abu Jahl and Abdullah bin Abi Umaiya bin Al-Mughira. Allah's Apostle said, "O uncle! Say: None has the right to be worshipped except Allah, a sentence with which I will defend you before Allah." On that Abu Jahl and 'Abdullah bin Abi Umaiya said to Abu Talib, "Will you now leave the religion of 'Abdul Muttalib?" Allah's Apostle kept on inviting him to say that sentence while the other two kept on repeating their sentence before him till Abu Talib said as the last thing he said to them, "I am on the religion of 'Abdul Muttalib," and refused to say: None has the right to be worshipped except Allah. On that Allah's Apostle said, "By Allah, I will keep on asking Allah's forgiveness for you unless I am forbidden (by Allah) to do so." So Allah revealed:-- 'It is not fitting for the Prophet and those who believe that they should invoke (Allah) for forgiveness for pagans.' (Q: 9.113) [Sahih Bukhari: Book:60, Hadith: 295]

In light of the Quranic verse and the supportive hadith, let me ask you Muslim, how can you even remotely think of loving an unbeliever when in fact it is forbidden for you to pray for them? Do you have a different definition for love?

I would just wind up because it is not appropriate to lengthen a presentation but not before I ask you a question:

Can you bring me any verse from Quran or your Sahih sources to assert any claim that your god “LOVES” unbelievers? If you can, bring it on and argue you are only allowed to hate sin and not the sinners.

Until you come up with your rebuttal…

With regards

KhaliL FarieL

title edited by M

[Balls_of_Titanium_1]

I accept your invitation.

I will add my refutation to your arguments later.

PS: I rejected your invitation in one of the thread in the political section, however, I have reconsidered my opinon.

So considered that statement in consequential.

[Balls_of_Titanium_1]

First of all, let us see what Quran says about Jews in general. This is excerpt from one of my articles which is highly relevant here:

Jews are an accursed lot according to Quran. Allah cursed them not once but many times. Allah cursed Iblis (Satan) only on a single occasion, but never hesitated to renew his curse in the case of Jews. It doesn't confine the curse to a past generation of Jews. The curse is with them until the resurrection day. See Quran:

The Jews say: "Allah's hand is tied up." Be their hands tied up and be they accursed for the (blasphemy) they utter. Nay, both His hands are widely outstretched: He give and spends (of His bounty) as He pleases. But the revelation that cometh to thee from Allah increases in most of them their obstinate rebellion and blasphemy. Amongst them we have placed enmity and hatred till the Day of Judgment. Every time they kindle the fire of war, Allah doth extinguish it; but they (ever) strive to do mischief on earth. And Allah loves not those who do mischief. [Quran Chapter 5: 64]

It is about those Jews who say "Allah's hand is tied up" that is those Jews who go against God.

There are also statements in the Qur'an to the effect that some of the people of the book are on the right course.

See it in the above verses, (focus on the bolded part) Allah says, among them (Jews) he has placed enmity and hatred till the Day of Judgment. So, the hatred and enmity is protracted to the end of days. I bring this up now to help you to not bring the context argument in your defense. Quran (Allah) says Jews are to bear the burden of Allah's wrath until the Day of Judgment. Remember Satan too is cursed by Allah in the same way Jews are cursed. The most merciful god granted respite to Satan until the Day of Judgment. So the logic is, if Jews are flourishing all the times that would be because Allah given them respite just like he gave it to Satan, but believers can not be with them for that. If any believer befriends them, he will be lost. Just like those who follow in the footsteps of Satan will be lost.

As understood by Muslims, Qur'an speaks against evil and those who commit evil and go against God. As such the spirit of Muslim understanding of these statements is totally different from how you have charaterized it.

Muslims have no problem separating a good non-Muslim or a Jew from a bad non-Muslim or a Jew. This thinking is due to other statements in the Qur'an.

For a true believer, who believes in Allah and Muhammad, there can not be any difference between Satan and Jews, because both are cursed by Allah. This is the true Islamic stance.

No, there is HELL OF A LOT OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO.

Let me refute you:

A Jew can potentially become a Muslim, can thus leave the accursed state. However, Satan can do no such thing.

It means your comparison is faulty.

It is this problem that you run into when you try to be over intellectual.

Is there anything relevant to the mentioning of this Day of Judgment in Quran? Of course there is because after suffering all the hatred and enmity, what will happen to Jews when they happened to be at the end of times? See the hadith:

You are relating the Qur'an revealed in a different sense to a hadith which was related in another.

You have by no means shown any link between the verse and the hadith you quoted.

Narrated Abu Huraira:
Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him." [Sahih Bukhari: Volume 4, Book 52, Number 177:]

This is the portrayal of the Hour. And we see a definite indication for massacre of Jews in the above hadith. That means a Muslim who has to believe in The Hour has to believe in this mass murder too.

The Muslim has to believe in this "murder" just as he has to believe in the murder of the people of Noah, the people of Sodom, and other of the likes.

It is a belief regarding what would happen near the end of times, and there are many upheaval events in addition to it that are mentioned in the Qur'an which would occur at or near the hour.

It is by no means a call to commit any massacre.

There is a belief in Christianity that all the Jews will be gathered in the holy land at the end of times and will be masscared by returning Jesus Christ.

Do you know the reason why there are Christian Zionists?

The belief in Allah and the Last Day is one of the pillars of Faith in Islam.

No doubt.

Do not forget this fact, so by default a Muslim has to believe in the total annihilation of Jews.

The Muslim believes in the total annihilation of all forms of unbelief and all forms of unbelievers at the end of times.

Such is the basic case of any religion. It by no means governs the day to day matters of Muslims, as there are other teachings of Qur'an in this regard. Your attempt to mix them up and create YOUR OWN hypothetical Muslim influenced by YOUR MADE UP understanding of Islam is lame.

If a human being is conditioned in this way, do you think he is going to befriend and love Jews?

But no Muslim is conditioned in such a way. You think a Muslim recites these verses and hadiths only all day long?

Not at all; in fact he will be longing for The Hour to come when stones and trees betrays Jews to Muslims.

He will be longing for the day of judgement. All good people should.

It is dictated to Muslims by their holy scripture and other authentic sources to hate and hate and hate Jews until the end of times then to massacre them with the help of talking stones and trees.

From the Muslim perspective, everything in the Qur'an is seen in the light of a grand battle between good and evil. So if a group of Jews is condemned, they are not subject to hatred by Muslims, but to a dislike for doing something really evil. As such, when a Muslim in the real world is confronted with a good Jew, he can very well, on the basis of many other Quranic verses like "Allah does not forbid you to be kind and just to those who do not fight you on the basis of your faith" and "among them (Jews and Christains) there are those who are on the right path", put him in this category.

There is NO sinister, disease like hatred practiced by Muslim on the basis of what is said in the Qur'an.

There is a healthy contempt for evil that Islam generates. As such, it is in general not leathal at all.

This is what my contention means. Hatred of Jews is a holy ordinance for Muslims. As long as Quran and Muslims authentic sources remain, Muslim can not stop hating Jews.

Muslims don't hate Jews in general.

Your contention has been rejected on the above basis.

Next, I will deal with the topic of the treatment of unbelievers in general. I will bring Quran again:

Lo! those who disbelieve, and die while they are disbelievers; on them is the curse of Allah and of angels and of men combined.[Quran: 2:161]

If you carefully focus on the verses above, it says of disbelievers who live and die as disbelievers. On them is the curse of Allah-the god of Muslims. Moreover angels too curse them, again all believing people curse them. This is Quran..! Should I bring more from your holy text to prove my case unbelievers are subjected to the hatred of Muslims since they are an accursed lot? Can you relentlessy curse a group of people and love them at the same time?

Again, you project your own dilemas and confusion on others.

The evil of unbelief is cursed in Islam and this follows that those who practice this evil are also accursed.

However, Qur'an also says that "Allah does not forbid you from being kind and just to those who do not wage war against you on the basis of your religion..." and also "to take one innocent life is to kill all of humanity.."

And the hadith like:

"Allah loves His creation more than a woman does her child."

Even a parent can curse his child.

In the light of all above, I would also say that "unbelief" is not always to be taken in its restrictist sense of not believing in Islam, but more than that - that of rejecting God overall, and to following the evil path.

There is a hadith that Jewish adulteress was forgiven by God just because she was gave water to a thirsty dog. God liked this act of her and forgave her sins.

Thus you can see that no damn Muslim is conditioned the way YOU want us to believe.

How can you prove your case Allah loves unbelievers when in fact he curses them along with his angels and incites believers too to take part in this cursing business?

Allah loves his creation more than a mother loves her child.

Does this not tell you something?

As I said, even a parent can curse his or her child for his or her misdeeds.

That doesn't mean they don't love him.

Now, let me see what you said in the other thread:

In a hadith, Muhamamd said that Allah loves his creation 70 times more than a mother loves his child.

That is about all creation and not just Muslims.

It is the sin that we must abhor.

Similarly, Allah says in the Qur'an that he does not forbids us from being kind and just to those kafirs who don't fight us on the basis of our religion.

Well, I need you to bring the hadith here so that I can scrutinize it. You just mentioned a Hadith, but it needs to be brought. And in advance, I am going to present a verse from Quran and a Hadith to endorse it that would negate your assertion. (Keep in mind, you should bring the hadith you are talking about so that I can show how shallow a claim you made. I know of the hadith you are talking about and it does not mean what you asserted. But I will wait until you bring it up)

It has been brought to the fore. Go ahead and show us what it really means.

Now, deal with this below:

It is not for the Prophet, and those who believe, to pray for the forgiveness of unbelievers (or polytheists) even though they may be near of kin (to them) after it hath become clear that they are people of hell fire.[Quran: 9:113]

And to know of this verse’s context see the hadith:

Narrated Al-Musaiyab: When Abu Talib was on his death bed, Allah's Apostle came to him and found with him, Abu Jahl and Abdullah bin Abi Umaiya bin Al-Mughira. Allah's Apostle said, "O uncle! Say: None has the right to be worshipped except Allah, a sentence with which I will defend you before Allah." On that Abu Jahl and 'Abdullah bin Abi Umaiya said to Abu Talib, "Will you now leave the religion of 'Abdul Muttalib?" Allah's Apostle kept on inviting him to say that sentence while the other two kept on repeating their sentence before him till Abu Talib said as the last thing he said to them, "I am on the religion of 'Abdul Muttalib," and refused to say: None has the right to be worshipped except Allah. On that Allah's Apostle said, "By Allah, I will keep on asking Allah's forgiveness for you unless I am forbidden (by Allah) to do so." So Allah revealed:-- 'It is not fitting for the Prophet and those who believe that they should invoke (Allah) for forgiveness for pagans.' (Q: 9.113) [Sahih Bukhari: Book:60, Hadith: 295]

In light of the Quranic verse and the supportive hadith, let me ask you Muslim, how can you even remotely think of loving an unbeliever when in fact it is forbidden for you to pray for them? Do you have a different definition for love?

Again, don't project your own dilemas on me.

I can very well not pray for a person forgiveness in the hearafter yet I can very well love him.

For example, a Muslim has a parent who is a non-Muslim: Islamic teaching is that the Muslim shoudl be totally respectful and loving towards his parent even though he is a non-Muslim.

He CAN PRAY FOR HIM in any matter he wants - for his good health, for his financial gains, etc - EXCEPT he cannot pray for the forgiveness of his unbelief by Allah.[/b]

Allah has condemned unbelief, and we must leave the matter to Allah.

If Allah can forgive a Jewish adulteress, he can forgive anyone he so choose.

We should not interfere with this.

I would just wind up because it is not appropriate to lengthen a presentation but not before I ask you a question:

Can you bring me any verse from Quran or your Sahih sources to assert any claim that your god “LOVES” unbelievers? If you can, bring it on and argue you are only allowed to hate sin and not the sinners.

Doesn't the hadith that says that Allah loves his creation do it for you?

Doesn't the Qur'anic verse that to kill one innocent human being is like killing the whole of humanity do it for you?

Doesn't the fact that Allah is called "The God of humanity" rather than "God of Muslims" do it for you?

If they don't do it for you, then nothing can do it for you.

[KhaliL]

____________________

First of all, let us see what Quran says about Jews in general. This is excerpt from one of my articles which is highly relevant here:

Jews are an accursed lot according to Quran. Allah cursed them not once but many times. Allah cursed Iblis (Satan) only on a single occasion, but never hesitated to renew his curse in the case of Jews. It doesn't confine the curse to a past generation of Jews. The curse is with them until the resurrection day. See Quran:

The Jews say: "Allah's hand is tied up." Be their hands tied up and be they accursed for the (blasphemy) they utter. Nay, both His hands are widely outstretched: He give and spends (of His bounty) as He pleases. But the revelation that cometh to thee from Allah increases in most of them their obstinate rebellion and blasphemy. Amongst them we have placed enmity and hatred till the Day of Judgment. Every time they kindle the fire of war, Allah doth extinguish it; but they (ever) strive to do mischief on earth. And Allah loves not those who do mischief. [Quran Chapter 5: 64]

It is about those Jews who say "Allah's hand is tied up" that is those Jews who go against God.

Hi BOT1,

Do you really understand what are you talking about?

You argue, the verse 5:64 is all about “those Jews who go against god”. But did you bother to check what I posted? The verse itself says “Allah has placed enmity and hatred among Jews till the day of judgment. All the Jews who goes against Allah = disbelieves in your Allah is cursed by your god and are doomed to bear mutual hatred and enmity. This is a curse Jews are to bear until the Day of Judgment.

Or do you have an argument present day Jews or any kinds of Jews are exempted from this? There is not a single Jew who believes in your Allah. So, the verse I brought in my argument is relevant to all Jews until the Day of Judgment. Otherwise, you will have to argue the god Jews and Muslims believe is the same.

There are also statements in the Qur'an to the effect that some of the people of the book are on the right course.

I would say, please bring them here so that I can deal with them. At the moment, I am not in a mood to blindly trust your words. Please back up your claims.

As understood by Muslims, Qur'an speaks against evil and those who commit evil and go against God. As such the spirit of Muslim understanding of these statements is totally different from how you have charaterized it.

(Let me tell you this secret: If you speak something on behalf of Islam and Muslims you have to back it up with sources. The above is a very shallow claim and I can ignore it if I want to. But I choose to respond you this time, but next time source your statements)

Can my Muslim please define what is evil? I brought a verse in what I see Jews are saying something against god and they are being cursed by your Allah. Does evil mean saying something against Allah? If I say “your Allah is a brothel keeper” does that mean I am an evil person? In what sense..?

You underpin the contention in Islam anything that is evil means disobeying god and prophet. Paedophilia, genocide, rape, banditry… none of these are evils because all these acts are committed by Islam’s prophet and a prophet can not do any evil deeds. Isn’t it so Muslim?

Then the only thing that is evil is saying something against Allah. It is what Jews did in the verses I brought and they are cursed for it. Moreover a highly retributive Allah is not going to let Jews off the hook but the curse is extended to the end of times. That means, Jews have to bear the curse of Allah until heat death..!

And I am yet to get what does it mean going against Allah? Do you mean any act? How can a mere mortal (who can not even be of any regard by the creator and sustainer of this universe or universes) go against god? Do you by any means referring to those who produce surface to air missiles? (Since your god is there upstairs in heavens seated on a glorious throne, I have my reasons to doubt so)

Muslims have no problem separating a good non-Muslim or a Jew from a bad non-Muslim or a Jew. This thinking is due to other statements in the Qur'an.

Really..? Interesting… but sources? You say there are some statements in Quran but didn’t produce them. What makes you keep it to yourself when in fact here there is a force of circumstance that dictates you to bring it up?

Any claim from you on behalf of Muslims (Islam) will be subjected to dismiss if it is not supported by your authentic sources. Please bear this in your mind, so that you can comply with this next time you come up.

For a true believer, who believes in Allah and Muhammad, there can not be any difference between Satan and Jews, because both are cursed by Allah. This is the true Islamic stance.

No, there is HELL OF A LOT OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO.

No.. no…. Muslim; don’t scream. This is a debate and for the smooth furthering you have to abide by some etiquette. Not shouting to your contester is one of them.

Let me refute you:

A Jew can potentially become a Muslim, can thus leave the accursed state. However, Satan can do no such thing.

It means your comparison is faulty.

I left my original post above for the same reason. Focus on the bolded,

Okay, what does it say? Dude, I said JEWS. I said between Satan and Jews. And when you get a potential Jewish convert to Islam, the converted is no longer a Jew. He becomes Muslim.

How many Jews are there in Islam?

Darn.., you call this refutation?

It is this problem that you run into when you try to be over intellectual.

Stop bothering of it. Focus on doing better next time. And let me warn you too. Don’t shoot on your foot in the course. There is every chance for you to do so, and that is why I forewarn you.

You are relating the Qur'an revealed in a different sense to a hadith which was related in another.
You have by no means shown any link between the verse and the hadith you quoted.

I am not combining your Quran to unrelated sources that explain it. In fact what I did is in perfect line of logic. If Jews are cursed and doomed to bear the curse until the Day of Judgment, then what is awaiting them after all the hardships they suffered is massacre.
I brought a Quranic verse which states of your god’s wrath on a certain group of religionists that is protracted to the end of days. Then I brought the hadith which depicts one of the signs of end of days. Isn’t there any connection?
Can you refute me logically?

The Muslim has to believe in this "murder" just as he has to believe in the murder of the people of Noah, the people of Sodom, and other of the likes.

Yes; believing in massacres is what makes a perfect Muslim. I am aware of it.

Dude.., the murder of the people of Noah is past, so is the so-called Sodom incident. I am least bothered of it, but I am talking of an event to come, not something that is past.
Believing in talking stones and trees (ooh… I forgot to omit Garqad.. sorry ) betraying Jews to Muslims to kill them in a time that has yet to come is different to believing in some betrayals and massacres that happened in the past and long became history. As long as you Muslims preserve this belief, what good reason is there for us to trust you Muslims are Jew lovers? After all, you believe in this nonsense of talking stones..! To make matters worse, you believe in a killing spree in which stones and trees (except that of Garqad) is actively partaking..!!

It is a belief regarding what would happen near the end of times, and there are many upheaval events in addition to it that are mentioned in the Qur'an which would occur at or near the hour.

I didn’t argue otherwise. I know there are more signs and symptoms of end of times in Quran, but least bothered of them. This one catches my eye. Don’t call me selective my dear friend…, would you? NO. I am sure you will not.

It is by no means a call to commit any massacre.

Well, describing of a time that has yet to come when Muslims with the help of talking stones and trees will go on killing all Jews (again except those stranded behind Garqad) is not amount to massacre? What does it mean to you? If your god can promise you of this pleasure of killing Jews just prior to Judgment Day, I don’t think the same guy will not be happy to deny you the privilege of killing at least some of Jews. After all, it will relieve the burden of your successors.

Would not it?

>>>>>>

[KhaliL]

____________________

There is a belief in Christianity that all the Jews will be gathered in the holy land at the end of times and will be masscared by returning Jesus Christ.

So what? I would urge my Muslim to have a look on the title of this topic. Or to be aware of the topic we are debating. It is about Quran or Islam and Jews. Don’t bring red herrings or do not attempt for tu quoque. It is not going to work here. Take it from me Muslim, I am not going to allow you to employ tu quoque in this debate.

Do you know the reason why there are Christian Zionists?

NO. I am not interested at all. Don’t bother of it, and don’t try to either tutor me. Be with the topic at hand.

The Muslim believes in the total annihilation of all forms of unbelief and all forms of unbelievers at the end of times.

Yes. Too honest a dude.., I am proud of having you. But sorry, at the moment, I am not interested in the annihilation of all unbelievers at the end of times. I focus on a specific group. Jews..., because let me tell you this secret: Our topic is Islam and Jews..!

Such is the basic case of any religion. It by no means governs the day to day matters of Muslims, as there are other teachings of Qur'an in this regard. Your attempt to mix them up and create YOUR OWN hypothetical Muslim influenced by YOUR MADE UP understanding of Islam is lame.

Basics of any religion is not my business; I am only interested to refute Islam since I am an Ex-Muslim. So stop this fallacy of generalization.
Next, what I said is belief in the day of judgement is one of the pillars of Islamic faith (Iman). And when you connect massacre of Jews to this Judgement day that means you have this faith in your inner circle. Whatever is there as a belief in your inner circle will definitely influence in your day-to-day activities too. It is elementary psychology. You don’t need to be a psychologist to get this fact.

Of course, there are many other teachings in Quran and you are bound to it. It is what makes you a Muslim but you can not shed any of those for convenience. You should believe in all what your Quran says. You should believe in all what your authentic sources dictates you to believe. Finally, you will become a programmed being who can think of hating and hating and hating unbelievers. That makes you a perfect Muslim… Muslim what a glorious name..,

But no Muslim is conditioned in such a way. You think a Muslim recites these verses and hadiths only all day long?

I answered this above, but would like to add more. You ask me whether I think a Muslim recites these verses and hadiths all day along. Yes. You do if you are a true Muslim. Because you have to pray at least five times a day and there is no Salat without Surah Fatiha. I am sure you know this. What is the 4th verse of Surah Fatiha?

“Owner of the Day of Judgment”

You are obliged to renew the thought of the Day of Judgement at least five times a day. It is enough to lock you in a state of dreaming of a day when you Muslims will annihilate Jews with the help of talking stones and trees (again Garqad is omitted).

He will be longing for the day of judgement. All good people should.

Ooh.. thank you for being honest at last.

From the Muslim perspective, everything in the Qur'an is seen in the light of a grand battle between good and evil. So if a group of Jews is condemned, they are not subject to hatred by Muslims, but to a dislike for doing something really evil.

Dislike is synonymous with hate. Keep a dictionary with thesaurus handy all the time so that you can save coming up with baloneys.

As such, when a Muslim in the real world is confronted with a good Jew, he can very well, on the basis of many other Quranic verses like "Allah does not forbid you to be kind and just to those who do not fight you on the basis of your faith" and "among them (Jews and Christains) there are those who are on the right path", put him in this category.

Excuse me Muslim. I hate to repeat this ad nauseum. You can not hate and love at the same time. Either you are with the hate or with love. Make up your mind at first.

Secondly, if you want to substantiate your claims with verses from Quran or Sahih sources, you should bring them with references. Don’t lazily put as my god said this and that…, NO. If you continue in this mode, it is sufficient for me to retort my puppy said otherwise. That would be the end.
You mention two verses above in your quote and I am asking you to bring the exact verses with references. Then I will think of dissecting them. Until then your shallow claim remains shallow as usual.

There is NO sinister, disease like hatred practiced by Muslim on the basis of what is said in the Qur'an.
There is a healthy contempt for evil that Islam generates. As such, it is in general not leathal at all.

That is why I asked you the question earlier what is your understanding of evil. Can you define what amounts to “evil” in Islam? If you successfully do it, then you can be vocal on the healthy or unhealthy contempt for it. We will decide it later whether your hatred towards a certain group or groups or 4/5th of humanity is lethal or not.

Muslims don't hate Jews in general.

Your contention has been rejected on the above basis.

So far, you did nothing but have been an utter disappointment. Try much hard again.

Again, you project your own dilemas and confusion on others.
The evil of unbelief is cursed in Islam and this follows that those who practice this evil are also accursed.

We may talk of this later after you define the concept of ‘evil’ in Islam. Okay?

>>>>>>>

[KhaliL]

__________________
[Continuing from above]

However, Qur'an also says that "Allah does not forbid you from being kind and just to those who do not wage war against you on the basis of your religion..." and also "to take one innocent life is to kill all of humanity.."

Fed up with this…,

Since you don’t bring the exact verses with references, I am going to (forced to) refute this not in the same mode as you did,

You argue “Quran says Allah urges you to be kind and just to those who do not wage war against you”. Well, I know of this verse and its interpretation is obvious to refute your claim. I will reserve it for later, but let me ask you of this verse:

Thou canst not find people who [truly] believe in God and the Last Day and [at the same time] love anyone who contends against God and His Apostle - even though they be their fathers, or their sons, or their brothers, or [others of] their kindred. [As for the true believers,] it is they in whose hearts He has inscribed faith, and whom He has strength­ened with inspiration from Himself, and whom [in time] He will admit into gardens through which running waters flow, therein to abide. Well-pleased is God with them, and well-pleased are they with Him. They are God’s partisans: oh, verily, it is they, the partisans of God, who shall attain to a happy state! [Quran 58:22]

What does the above verse mean? You Muslims are not supposed love anyone who does not believe in your god and prophet, be it your father, son, brother…, the only prerequisite to keep the hatred even for those most close to you is not believing in Allah and Muhammad. This is also Quran; the same Quran which you say is not a bar for you to love unbelievers. What is this all about?

What is your god smoking?

And the hadith like:
"Allah loves His creation more than a woman does her child."

Reference..?
My Puppy says otherwise.
(sorry, I already said this would be the answer for anything you bring up without references)

Even a parent can curse his child.

Only if the parent is really a nutcase. Cursing child? Dude.., I am father of two magnificent kids, and don’t try to unload this baloney here.

In the light of all above, I would also say that "unbelief" is not always to be taken in its restrictist sense of not believing in Islam, but more than that - that of rejecting God overall, and to following the evil path.

This is funny indeed. What about :

"Verily the only acceptable religion to Allah is Islam." [Quran 3:19]

??? If anything other than Islam is unacceptable to your Allah, what makes you argue unbelief does not always mean not believing in Islam? Is it acceptable to Allah to not to believe?
Rejecting god makes one an atheist. That does not mean following the evil path (ah.. you are yet to define evil…!)

There is a hadith that Jewish adulteress was forgiven by God just because she was gave water to a thirsty dog. God liked this act of her and forgave her sins.

I know this hadith but let me tell you a secret, this Jewish adulteress was under Moses, so a believer according to Allah. (there were many believers under Moses. Aren’t there?)

She committed adultery and what is big deal in your god forgiving her? If you as a Muslim commits adultery , Allah will forgive you and admit you in his glorious brothel… sh… paradise. Doubt? See it below:

Narrated Abu Dhar: Allah's Apostle said, "Someone came to me from my Lord and gave me the news (or good tidings) that if any of my followers dies worshipping none (in any way) along with Allah, he will enter Paradise." I asked, "Even if he committed illegal sexual intercourse and theft?" He replied, "Even if he committed illegal sexual intercourse and theft." [Sahih Bukhari: Book :23, Hadith: 329]

So don’t make big deal out of silly matters to Allah my dear Muslim. The only evil for your Allah is: not believing in him. You may fornicate, steal but at last if your belief is perfect, the brothel (oh.. sorry again) paradise is yours. It is what your glorious prophet teaches you.

Thus you can see that no damn Muslim is conditioned the way YOU want us to believe.

I did see nothing in above, nor can any readers who read this. You are yet to make any case my Muslim;

Allah loves his creation more than a mother loves her child.
Does this not tell you something?
As I said, even a parent can curse his or her child for his or her misdeeds.
That doesn't mean they don't love him.

This is dealt above. First bring the hadith with reference. Argue later. And don’t dole out the same baloney about parents cursing their child.

Again, don't project your own dilemas on me.

I can very well not pray for a person forgiveness in the hearafter yet I can very well love him.

If you can not even ask for forgiveness for a person for not for doing any vile deeds but for his disbelief, then don’t tell us that you will love that person.
This will lengthen this debate but I can’t help. Let me clarify how you have to behave with unbelievers: (why does it always take an infidel to tutor Muslims? )

See your Quran:

Let not the believers take the disbelievers as friends instead of the believers, and whoever does that, will never be helped by Allah in any way, unless you indeed fear a danger from them. And Allah warns you against Himself, and to Allah is the final return.[Quran 3:28]

Now, let me just bring the relevant part from Ibn Kathir’s commentary on this verse.

Allah prohibited His believing servants from becoming supporters of the disbelievers, or to take them as comrades with whom they develop friendships, rather than the believers. Allah warned against such behavior when He said, And whoever does that, will never be helped by Allah in any way) meaning, whoever commits this act that Allah has prohibited, then Allah will discard him. >>>> believers are allowed to show friendship to the disbelievers outwardly, but never inwardly. For instance, Al-Bukhari recorded that Abu Ad-Darda' said, "We smile in the face of some people although our hearts curse them.'' [Tafsir Ibn Kathir]

And you say you will pray for unbelievers? Are you kidding? Smiling at the face of unbelievers but cursing them in your hearts? Is it thus how you will love and pray for unbelievers?

For example, a Muslim has a parent who is a non-Muslim: Islamic teaching is that the Muslim shoudl be totally respectful and loving towards his parent even though he is a non-Muslim.
He CAN PRAY FOR HIM in any matter he wants - for his good health, for his financial gains, etc - EXCEPT he cannot pray for the forgiveness of his unbelief by Allah.[/b]
Allah has condemned unbelief, and we must leave the matter to Allah.
If Allah can forgive a Jewish adulteress, he can forgive anyone he so choose.
We should not interfere with this.

All in the above is already refuted. In the case of parents and kids, I have brought a clear verse from Quran above.

Doesn't the hadith that says that Allah loves his creation do it for you?

NO. Bring the reference of the hadith and I will consider it then.

Doesn't the Qur'anic verse that to kill one innocent human being is like killing the whole of humanity do it for you?

NO. This will not do because this verse has a specific context. Bring the verses in context and argue. Do not evade from this. I repeat: Bring the verses in context and argue.

Doesn't the fact that Allah is called "The God of humanity" rather than "God of Muslims" do it for you?

NO. Allah has said many things about himself. In fact, I am yet to come across a self flatterer like your Allah. But sometimes he has gone terribly off-track by depicting himself as the best deceiver too.
The tag “god of humanity” is NOT answering my question at all. I asked you to bring a verse from Quran to attest the claim Allah loves unbelievers. Allah is the god of pigs too but the guy obviously hates pigs. (Not sure whether there would be Bacon in your paradise btw. Perhaps Allah forgot to mention it as he is busy preparing large bosomed virgins for his faithful..!!!)

If they don't do it for you, then nothing can do it for you.

Nothing of the above does for me for obvious reasons; and I made it clear over.

Try again and better luck next time,

KhaliL

[Plexus]

Khalil

Thank you, I’ve for quite some time seen your posts and am so impressed with your knowledge/literacy. Being an ex-Muslim I guess is the reason you spend so much time and patience trying to help those afflicted with Islam. You truly are a humanitarian, a balanced logical human being and I’m sure every sane person here reading this would agree with me.

Any Muslim reading this would also see how Balls_of_Titanium has been made look stupid but of course instead of connecting the dots to see that Islam impairs rational thought and logic will blame BOT for being just that, stupid. They too being afflicted will suggest both of you need to study Islam more, it being perfect and Muslims being not.

This is the common refrain from Muslims when ever one points out how backward, violent basket cases Islamic countries are; it’s always the kafir’s fault or the Muslim’s are not Muslim enough.

Plexus

[KhaliL]

_______________
Hi Plexus,

Thank you for your kind words. You have valid points here but please do not feel offended, stop posting in this thread as this is meant for one-on-one debate between me and Balls_of_Titanium1. There is a thread created by charleslemartel to comment on this debate. All who want to comment can reach there by clicking the link below:

viewtopic.php?f=23&t=745" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Kindest Regards

KhaliL

[Balls_of_Titanium_1]

Hello Khalil,

Two things:

This is a debate between you and I, why are there other people posting in this thread?
Their posts must be deleted or moved to comment section, mustn't they?

Secondly, I may reply to your three posts one by one, so don't produce your reply before I have presented my refutation to all of your posts and whatever you have had said by now.

Having said this, we continue...

____________________

First of all, let us see what Quran says about Jews in general. This is excerpt from one of my articles which is highly relevant here:

Jews are an accursed lot according to Quran. Allah cursed them not once but many times. Allah cursed Iblis (Satan) only on a single occasion, but never hesitated to renew his curse in the case of Jews. It doesn't confine the curse to a past generation of Jews. The curse is with them until the resurrection day. See Quran:

The Jews say: "Allah's hand is tied up." Be their hands tied up and be they accursed for the (blasphemy) they utter. Nay, both His hands are widely outstretched: He give and spends (of His bounty) as He pleases. But the revelation that cometh to thee from Allah increases in most of them their obstinate rebellion and blasphemy. Amongst them we have placed enmity and hatred till the Day of Judgment. Every time they kindle the fire of war, Allah doth extinguish it; but they (ever) strive to do mischief on earth. And Allah loves not those who do mischief. [Quran Chapter 5: 64]

It is about those Jews who say "Allah's hand is tied up" that is those Jews who go against God.

Hi BOT1,

Do you really understand what are you talking about?

Yes.

This rhetorical question is unwelcomed.

You argue, the verse 5:64 is all about “those Jews who go against god”. But did you bother to check what I posted? The verse itself says “Allah has placed enmity and hatred among Jews till the day of judgment. All the Jews who goes against Allah = disbelieves in your Allah is cursed by your god and are doomed to bear mutual hatred and enmity. This is a curse Jews are to bear until the Day of Judgment.

Or do you have an argument present day Jews or any kinds of Jews are exempted from this? There is not a single Jew who believes in your Allah. So, the verse I brought in my argument is relevant to all Jews until the Day of Judgment. Otherwise, you will have to argue the god Jews and Muslims believe is the same.

The Jews who fall in the category of "Among them there are those who are on the right path..." are not going against God. Disbelief in God is a sin, however, actively going against God means you commit mischief on this earth.

As such, Qur'an asks us to be fair and just to those "who do not fight us on the basis of our religion."

Now you will ask me references for this verses, I thought you would already know about them being a self-proclaimed intellectual on Islam, however, I am disappointed at your ignorance or pretence at ignorance.

There are they:

[Allah forbids you not with regard to those who fight you not for your faith, nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them. For Allah loves those who are just. Allah only forbids you with regard to those who fight you for your faith, and drive you out of your homes and support others in driving you out, from turning to them for protection (or taking them as wali). Those who seek their protection they are indeed wrong- doers.] (Al-Mumtahinah 60: 8-9)

002.062
YUSUFALI: Those who believe (in the Qur'an), and those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Christians and the Sabians,- any who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.

This does your argument in, right?

Now I will look if I could also find the reference for the verse "there are among the people of book who are on the right path", however, the above should do it for you, or importantly, do it for the purpose of the argument.

There are also statements in the Qur'an to the effect that some of the people of the book are on the right course.

I would say, please bring them here so that I can deal with them. At the moment, I am not in a mood to blindly trust your words. Please back up your claims.

See above.

As understood by Muslims, Qur'an speaks against evil and those who commit evil and go against God. As such the spirit of Muslim understanding of these statements is totally different from how you have charaterized it.

(Let me tell you this secret: If you speak something on behalf of Islam and Muslims you have to back it up with sources. The above is a very shallow claim and I can ignore it if I want to. But I choose to respond you this time, but next time source your statements)

I am a Muslims, so I can very well say something on the behalf of Muslims.

Can my Muslim please define what is evil?

Evil is that which is prohibited by God.

Disblief in Allah and the last prophet is evil, however, those evils are those that are left for God to address. Other evils are those that create mischeif on the land, for them the teachings are different.

I brought a verse in what I see Jews are saying something against god and they are being cursed by your Allah. Does evil mean saying something against Allah?

Yes, and also - saying such things has implications. By working actively against Islam, you are trying to destroy the religion of God on this earth. The implications are great.

If I say “your Allah is a brothel keeper” does that mean I am an evil person? In what sense..?

Yes, this will make you an evil person. In what sense? In the sense that you curse God.

You underpin the contention in Islam anything that is evil means disobeying god and prophet. Paedophilia, genocide, rape, banditry… none of these are evils because all these acts are committed by Islam’s prophet and a prophet can not do any evil deeds. Isn’t it so Muslim?

I want you to hold your horses.

Accepting your invitation to debate has by no means given you a licence to attack my belief on my face in the above manner.

Scathing, uncultured attacks on the opponent's religious figures is considered not conducive for a civil debate.

Are you really looking for a proper dialogue?

These kinds of statements are unacceptable if you are looking for a serious dialogue.

If you continue, this debate will be terminated.

It is one thing to have a casual discussion on this forum (in which case I may ignore certain remarks) but giving you time in a specially designated thread, means I am directly talking to you as in giving you importance.

So keep your tone under control and show that you deserve my special time. If you continue like the above, you don't.

You started out courteously with me in other threads, you must maintain that.

Consider this a condition for the debate.

In this thread, you can only argue for the proposition you have put up. You are only allowed to do that in this thread.

I am not interested in your opinion in other regards. Therefore you should not express them in this thread, especially if they are offensive towards my beliefs.

We didn't clear up the conditions for the debate a priori, so we may do so as we go along.

Then the only thing that is evil is saying something against Allah. It is what Jews did in the verses I brought and they are cursed for it.

It is just part of it. They did many more things. You can't pretend ignorance about them.

Moreover a highly retributive Allah is not going to let Jews off the hook but the curse is extended to the end of times. That means, Jews have to bear the curse of Allah until heat death..!

Yes, the kind of Jews, and that also applies to other non-Muslims, who work against God.

And I am yet to get what does it mean going against Allah? Do you mean any act? How can a mere mortal (who can not even be of any regard by the creator and sustainer of this universe or universes) go against god?

By disobeying him, by working actively against his teachings in this world.

Do you by any means referring to those who produce surface to air missiles? (Since your god is there upstairs in heavens seated on a glorious throne, I have my reasons to doubt so)

Your childish remarks show that your mind still needs developement.

Thus these must also be avoided in an proper dialogue.

You cannot talk in any demeaning way about "my God" if you want this debate to properly function.

You can only put forward the proposition on which I agreed to debate with you.

Muslims have no problem separating a good non-Muslim or a Jew from a bad non-Muslim or a Jew. This thinking is due to other statements in the Qur'an.

Really..? Interesting… but sources? You say there are some statements in Quran but didn’t produce them. What makes you keep it to yourself when in fact here there is a force of circumstance that dictates you to bring it up?

Any claim from you on behalf of Muslims (Islam) will be subjected to dismiss if it is not supported by your authentic sources. Please bear this in your mind, so that you can comply with this next time you come up.

And any claim you make on the behalf of Muslims will be subjected to dismissal if you not only bring supporting material but also clearly link that supporting material and your argument.

Muslims hate Kufr, or disbelief in Allah, the Almighty. Since we love all people, we hate their disobedience of Allah, the Most High. So, even when people deny the existence of Allah we do not hate them personally; however, we hate their disbelief and disobedience of Allah, Exalted be He. This case is very similar to that of a doctor and a patient. The doctor does not hate the patient or the sick person himself or herself, rather he or she hates the disease and tries every possible means to cure the disease and help the patient to recover. We Muslims hate disbelief and disobedience of Allah and we are striving and sparing no effort to do away with this disease and cure people’s sickness and help them become obedient servants of Allah (God).

http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Sate ... TheScholar" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Just as what I said.

For a true believer, who believes in Allah and Muhammad, there can not be any difference between Satan and Jews, because both are cursed by Allah. This is the true Islamic stance.

No, there is HELL OF A LOT OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO.

No.. no…. Muslim; don’t scream. This is a debate and for the smooth furthering you have to abide by some etiquette. Not shouting to your contester is one of them.

You have already showed lack of respect for many debate etiquette, however, maybe you will behave nicely next time.

And no speaking loudly is my style, and not least offensive. I have had real life debates, in which I say things at the top of my lungs, with being least offensive to the other speaker.

If my passionate rejection of your argument affects you in some negative way, that is your problem. You need to learn that in a debate one must detach onself personally from one's argument.

Look in the mirror and know that any correction of etiquette that is required is on your part.

Let me refute you:

A Jew can potentially become a Muslim, can thus leave the accursed state. However, Satan can do no such thing.

It means your comparison is faulty.

I left my original post above for the same reason. Focus on the bolded,

Okay, what does it say? Dude, I said JEWS.

'Dude' is not something you should say in formal debates, too.

If you have touched upon "etiquette", let me asure you we will go all the way.

Yes, you said Jews.

I said between Satan and Jews. And when you get a potential Jewish convert to Islam, the converted is no longer a Jew. He becomes Muslim.

How many Jews are there in Islam?

Darn.., you call this refutation?

But Satan cannot convert, cannot repent. Repentance and forgiveness is only reserved for mortals, and as such you cannot compare a group of mortals to Satan for rhetorical purpose.

A Jew is a also a potential convert to us - heck, any non-Muslim is.

Not so Satan.

Qur'an has been revealed for all people to convert to Islam. This cannot be applicable to Satan.

For you to support that Jews as a whole (to the last individual) are considered like Satan by Muslims, you have to bring a scholarly Muslim opinon which says that Jews as a whole (to the last individual) are like Satan. Note that the scholarly opinon should be a general opinion shared by ulimas and not an isolated view.

If you maintain that the Qur'an considers Jews and Satan alike, you will have to provide evidence from the Qur'an that it is impossible for Jews to repent at any future time just as it is for Satan, and that a priori God has made the decision to send them to hell just like he has done so in the case of Satan.

This also introduces us to another conundrum that you face in your attempt to be over smart. Since we know that Qur'an no where maintains that Jews cannot repent eventually by accepting Islam, and asks Muslims to "invite the people to your Lord with wisdom and good preaching" at the same time, and also makes this call specific to Jews and Christians, it is clear then that those Jews who will ultimately remain non-Muslims till the end of times - and actually this is true of any non-Muslim - will, from the Qur'anic point of view, represent the vilest bunch of people who disobey God, as by then, through "good preaching" and advocation by Muslims, many among the Jews (and non-Muslims) would have converted to Islam - a possibility no where rejected in the Qur'an.

Thus whenever Muslim look in general towards Jews (or any non-Muslim), we don't see a group that is as a whole condemned by God just like Satan to every single individual - something you would have us believe - but we see among them potential converts, that is good people, that is, those people who fall in the category whom God may even have a good news to tell at the day of judgement, according to the Holy Verse I quoted.

We can thus judge no single Jew just on the basis of him being a Jew.

These are the affects of Islamic belief and Qur'anic teachings on us.

It is this problem that you run into when you try to be over intellectual.

Stop bothering of it. Focus on doing better next time. And let me warn you too. Don’t shoot on your foot in the course. There is every chance for you to do so, and that is why I forewarn you.

Don't forewarn me about anything I might do against myself. I can take care of myself without any of your "forewarning".

You are relating the Qur'an revealed in a different sense to a hadith which was related in another.
You have by no means shown any link between the verse and the hadith you quoted.

I am not combining your Quran to unrelated sources that explain it. In fact what I did is in perfect line of logic. If Jews are cursed and doomed to bear the curse until the Day of Judgment, then what is awaiting them after all the hardships they suffered is massacre.

YOU HAVE SHOWN NOTHING that says that Jews as a whole should be subjected to any "hardship".

God chastising disobedient Jews does not mean they must be subjected to any hardship by the Muslims.

I brought a Quranic verse which states of your god’s wrath on a certain group of religionists that is protracted to the end of days. Then I brought the hadith which depicts one of the signs of end of days. Isn’t there any connection?
Can you refute me logically?

The Muslim has to believe in this "murder" just as he has to believe in the murder of the people of Noah, the people of Sodom, and other of the likes.

Yes; believing in massacres is what makes a perfect Muslim. I am aware of it.

Dude.., the murder of the people of Noah is past, so is the so-called Sodom incident. I am least bothered of it, but I am talking of an event to come, not something that is past.

Believing in talking stones and trees (ooh… I forgot to omit Garqad.. sorry ) betraying Jews to Muslims to kill them in a time that has yet to come is different to believing in some betrayals and massacres that happened in the past and long became history.

First of all, the debate is not about what "bothers" you or what doesn't. I will present what I see supports my arguments and refutes yours - whether you are bothered by it or not is the least of my concern.

There is no difference between the two cases. Just as we believe idolaters were drowned by God as a whole into the sea, we believe that Jews would fight Muslims at the end of times and will be finished off.

Just as at the times of Noah, the unbelief was cleansed of any form of positive remanants within it, and it was thus pure unadulterated evil, and justifed God wiping out a whole people, similarly, when the same will happen at the end of times, when Islamic figures like Mehdi and the returning Propeht Jesus Christ would have arrived, and we would be in the same times as that of long gone by when Prophets came to the earth in the past, at that time, the fight against an evil group of people under the banner of Jews, and non-Muslim, will be as justified as God punishing the people of Sodom by subjecting them to falling stones, or that of inflicting the children of Egyptians with disease and eventual death to make the Eygptians yeild to Moses (as mentioned in the Bible) .

Just like the drowning of Idolaters has no affect in the day to day dealing advocated in their regard by the Qur'an in other verses, the eventual battle of good and evil and the eventual finishing off of disbelief, does not have any affect in our dealings with Jews and non-Muslims in general.

As long as you Muslims preserve this belief, what good reason is there for us to trust you Muslims are Jew lovers?

Do you love Muslims? You said "yes", but then you supported injustice against Palestinians because they are Muslims, betraying yourself.

However, nobody loves any group of people in general. Love has a context. If there is a good Jew who helps humanity in some positive way, he will be respected and loved by the Muslim on the basis of verses I quoted and on the basis of the teachings of the Qur'an. If however, there are those who do evil, they will be subject to a healthy dislike.

After all, you believe in this nonsense of talking stones..! To make matters worse, you believe in a killing spree in which stones and trees (except that of Garqad) is actively partaking..!!

[/quote]

Calling the opponent religious beliefs "nonsense" is not part of a civilized debate, too, nor of good "etiquette".

Which makes me question - do you know the meaning of "etiquette"?

A question I asked because you used the word while going against it a number of times.

You must start practicing necessary debate etiquettes.

It is a belief regarding what would happen near the end of times, and there are many upheaval events in addition to it that are mentioned in the Qur'an which would occur at or near the hour.

I didn’t argue otherwise. I know there are more signs and symptoms of end of times in Quran, but least bothered of them. This one catches my eye.

Not interested again in what bothers you or doesn't. Give me some other reason to accept the invalidity of my statements.

Don’t call me selective my dear friend…, would you? NO. I am sure you will not.

What?

It is by no means a call to commit any massacre.

Well, describing of a time that has yet to come when Muslims with the help of talking stones and trees will go on killing all Jews (again except those stranded behind Garqad) is not amount to massacre?

You inability to understand my statements is not the problem that I must address.

It is this problem you run into if you have a formal debate. If you opponent proves himself to be a nutcase, and you leave the debate, he will claim victory, while having a formal debate with that nutcase becomes tortorous any way.

You are then stuck between a rock and a hard place. I still hope you will not create such a scenario for me.

There is no call to massacre in whatever you highlighted. There is a prediction of an future event.

In a hadith it is said that Muslims will be divided into 70 sects, however, in another hadith, prophet Muhammad warned Muslims against sectarianism and dividing themselves into sects.

This is a enough to refute your confusion between the two.

However, the nonsensical nature of your argument is apparent by employing elementary critical thinking.

What does it mean to you?

It means to me an eventual battle between good and evil, good represented by Muslims, evil represented by non-Muslims, including Jews.

If your god can promise you of this pleasure of killing Jews just prior to Judgment Day, I don’t think the same guy will not be happy to deny you the privilege of killing at least some of Jews.

Whoever said what you "think" matters in the least?

What matters is what you show. And you have not shown anything of the kind.

After all, it will relieve the burden of your successors.

Would not it?

What would reveal the burden would be to bring those people to the right path, with "wisdom and good preaching", as we are ordained, not what you say.

You defining Islam for Muslims doesn't do it - you were already notified.

After a lengthy study of Qur'anic verses regarding Jews, the following article reaches the following conclusion:

http://jews-for-allah.org/Jews-and-Musl ... -koran.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

In conclusion, the Quran is a book for the Jews, Allah loves the Jews and sent the Holy Koran as a book of guidance for the Jews.

So don't think your personal opinion on this matter matters one hoot.

CONTINUED (don't reply after I have replied to all of your posts)

[Balls_of_Titanium_1]

____________________

There is a belief in Christianity that all the Jews will be gathered in the holy land at the end of times and will be masscared by returning Jesus Christ.

So what? I would urge my Muslim to have a look on the title of this topic. Or to be aware of the topic we are debating. It is about Quran or Islam and Jews. Don’t bring red herrings or do not attempt for tu quoque. It is not going to work here. Take it from me Muslim, I am not going to allow you to employ tu quoque in this debate.

Get assurance from me, that your will not be able to evade any attempt at probing your honesty.

The above matters.

Here it is HOW:

If the above Christian belief doesn't bother you, on what basis then is the statement in the hadith you have quoted is a cause of bothering to you? Does it not show that you have some other motives in getting involved in this, rather than having an honest issue with Islam on this? Because if had that honest issue, you would also have the same issue with Christianity? If you do have that issue with Christianty, where have you expressed it? If you say you do have this issue with Christianity, you will have to show us your record of expressing your outrage against it, in the absence of which, your claim will be considered lame and you will rightly be subject to doubt. This will then determine our way of looking at what you are made up of and what your arguments are made up of in a new light.

SO which is it? Does the above Christian belief bother you? If so, where is your outrage?

Do you know the reason why there are Christian Zionists?

NO. I am not interested at all. Don’t bother of it, and don’t try to either tutor me. Be with the topic at hand.

Your interest or lack of it will again not be a determination factor in what will be discussed and what won't.

I am with the topic at hand. And I do not take disobedient pupils.

The Muslim believes in the total annihilation of all forms of unbelief and all forms of unbelievers at the end of times.

Yes. Too honest a dude.., I am proud of having you. But sorry, at the moment, I am not interested in the annihilation of all unbelievers at the end of times. I focus on a specific group. Jews..., because let me tell you this secret: Our topic is Islam and Jews..!

Again, it is not your interest that determines the mode of my argument.

Of course our topic is that of Jews AND non believers in general in Islam.

In any case, the above makes no difference.

Such is the basic case of any religion. It by no means governs the day to day matters of Muslims, as there are other teachings of Qur'an in this regard. Your attempt to mix them up and create YOUR OWN hypothetical Muslim influenced by YOUR MADE UP understanding of Islam is lame.

Basics of any religion is not my business; I am only interested to refute Islam since I am an Ex-Muslim. So stop this fallacy of generalization.

Who is committing this fallacy? You are defining Islam for Muslims, how does this has anything to do with other religions, and their basics?

Next, what I said is belief in the day of judgement is one of the pillars of Islamic faith (Iman). And when you connect massacre of Jews to this Judgement day that means you have this faith in your inner circle. Whatever is there as a belief in your inner circle will definitely influence in your day-to-day activities too. It is elementary psychology. You don’t need to be a psychologist to get this fact.

We connect the battle of good and evil with that of judgement day. Thus this does not have the effect you so desire.

With judgement day, there are connected many events, which includes the finishing off of all of the disbelievers, and all forms of disbelief, just like at one point in the past, whole groups of people were subjected to annhilation by God.

WE have totally different comandemnts in the day to day dealings with non-Muslims, and Jews.

Of course, there are many other teachings in Quran and you are bound to it. It is what makes you a Muslim but you can not shed any of those for convenience. You should believe in all what your Quran says. You should believe in all what your authentic sources dictates you to believe. Finally, you will become a programmed being who can think of hating and hating and hating unbelievers. That makes you a perfect Muslim… Muslim what a glorious name..,

Your opinion is rejected for being empty and self-serving.

But no Muslim is conditioned in such a way. You think a Muslim recites these verses and hadiths only all day long?

I answered this above, but would like to add more. You ask me whether I think a Muslim recites these verses and hadiths all day along. Yes. You do if you are a true Muslim. Because you have to pray at least five times a day and there is no Salat without Surah Fatiha. I am sure you know this. What is the 4th verse of Surah Fatiha?

“Owner of the Day of Judgment”

You are obliged to renew the thought of the Day of Judgement at least five times a day. It is enough to lock you in a state of dreaming of a day when you Muslims will annihilate Jews with the help of talking stones and trees (again Garqad is omitted).

We are forbidden to dream during Prayer.

However, we are asked to recite Qur'an daily, which tells us "Allah does not forbid you from being kind and just...", you know the rest by now.

The hadith you quoted has a no affect in the day to day dealings of Muslims with Jews and their way of thinking. It DOESN'T shape Muslim thinking the way you think it does.

If you keep repeating your argument, I will reject it by simply sayinig "rejected".

He will be longing for the day of judgement. All good people should.

Ooh.. thank you for being honest at last.

I am always honest. I am not like some people here.

From the Muslim perspective, everything in the Qur'an is seen in the light of a grand battle between good and evil. So if a group of Jews is condemned, they are not subject to hatred by Muslims, but to a dislike for doing something really evil.

Dislike is synonymous with hate. Keep a dictionary with thesaurus handy all the time so that you can save coming up with baloneys.

Baloney is a not a word that is exemplary of good "etiquette."

The connotation matters, you were notifed before.

As such, when a Muslim in the real world is confronted with a good Jew, he can very well, on the basis of many other Quranic verses like "Allah does not forbid you to be kind and just to those who do not fight you on the basis of your faith" and "among them (Jews and Christains) there are those who are on the right path", put him in this category.

Excuse me Muslim. I hate to repeat this ad nauseum. You can not hate and love at the same time. Either you are with the hate or with love. Make up your mind at first.

You can repeat this till eternity, for all I care.

What matters is whether what you say is correct. You can love and hate at the same time, who said you couldn't? You hate Islam, but love Muslims - or so you claim, no?

Secondly, if you want to substantiate your claims with verses from Quran or Sahih sources, you should bring them with references. Don’t lazily put as my god said this and that…, NO. If you continue in this mode, it is sufficient for me to retort my puppy said otherwise. That would be the end.

At this point, I wonder what difference would it make?

You mention two verses above in your quote and I am asking you to bring the exact verses with references. Then I will think of dissecting them. Until then your shallow claim remains shallow as usual.

Go and perform your postmortem, they are at the fore.

There is NO sinister, disease like hatred practiced by Muslim on the basis of what is said in the Qur'an.
There is a healthy contempt for evil that Islam generates. As such, it is in general not leathal at all.

That is why I asked you the question earlier what is your understanding of evil. Can you define what amounts to “evil” in Islam? If you successfully do it, then you can be vocal on the healthy or unhealthy contempt for it. We will decide it later whether your hatred towards a certain group or groups or 4/5th of humanity is lethal or not.

There is no such hatred. And you have been provided with the definition.

Muslims don't hate Jews in general.

Your contention has been rejected on the above basis.

So far, you did nothing but have been an utter disappointment. Try much hard again.

No need.

Again, you project your own dilemas and confusion on others.
The evil of unbelief is cursed in Islam and this follows that those who practice this evil are also accursed.

We may talk of this later after you define the concept of ‘evil’ in Islam. Okay?

Who am I to say otherwise?

CONTINUED.

[Balls_of_Titanium_1]

__________________
[Continuing from above]

However, Qur'an also says that "Allah does not forbid you from being kind and just to those who do not wage war against you on the basis of your religion..." and also "to take one innocent life is to kill all of humanity.."

Fed up with this…,

Since you don’t bring the exact verses with references, I am going to (forced to) refute this not in the same mode as you did,

You argue “Quran says Allah urges you to be kind and just to those who do not wage war against you”. Well, I know of this verse and its interpretation is obvious to refute your claim.

So you knew that verse, but yet you pretended ignorance by not honestly taking the verse to the fore yourself.

I will reserve it for later, but let me ask you of this verse:

Thou canst not find people who [truly] believe in God and the Last Day and [at the same time] love anyone who contends against God and His Apostle - even though they be their fathers, or their sons, or their brothers, or [others of] their kindred. [As for the true believers,] it is they in whose hearts He has inscribed faith, and whom He has strength­ened with inspiration from Himself, and whom [in time] He will admit into gardens through which running waters flow, therein to abide. Well-pleased is God with them, and well-pleased are they with Him. They are God’s partisans: oh, verily, it is they, the partisans of God, who shall attain to a happy state! [Quran 58:22]

What does the above verse mean? You Muslims are not supposed love anyone who does not believe in your god and prophet, be it your father, son, brother…, the only prerequisite to keep the hatred even for those most close to you is not believing in Allah and Muhammad. This is also Quran; the same Quran which you say is not a bar for you to love unbelievers. What is this all about?

Again, your inability to understand the beautiful and clear words of the Qur'an are not my problem.

The Holy Ayat is immaculate!

Allahumdulliah!

Allah-u-Akbar!

Let us read the first line of the Ayet with concentration:

Thou canst not find people who [truly] believe in God and the Last Day and [at the same time] love anyone who contends against God and His Apostle...

Especially concentrate on the bolded words, readers.

The above Ayat is specially talking about those people at Prophet's time who rejected Islam and waged wars against the Prophet as in "contend[ing] against" him.

The verse is talking about the those particular people, and not all types of non-believers.

And the hadith like:
"Allah loves His creation more than a woman does her child."

Reference..?
My Puppy says otherwise.
(sorry, I already said this would be the answer for anything you bring up without references)

Your inability to control yourself is not to be forgiven.

You will have to ask me courteously for you to see that hadith.

By then consider it your uncouthness which has forbiden you seeing it.

I will keep on quoting this hadith, if you want its reference, you will have to ask in the manner which is conducive of a good debate and especially show good "etiquette".

Keep your puppy away from the debate, and let it do what you have housed it for....

Even a parent can curse his child.

Only if the parent is really a nutcase. Cursing child? Dude.., I am father of two magnificent kids, and don’t try to unload this baloney here.

Does words like "baloney" indicate good debate "etiquette"?

Do you teach such etiquette to your two "magnificent kids"?

And yes, a parent can curse his child for his gross disobedience or a gross misdeed. They at no point hate their child, however.

In the light of all above, I would also say that "unbelief" is not always to be taken in its restrictist sense of not believing in Islam, but more than that - that of rejecting God overall, and to following the evil path.

This is funny indeed. What about :

"Verily the only acceptable religion to Allah is Islam." [Quran 3:19]

What about it? YES, the only religion acceptable to Allah is Islam.

??? If anything other than Islam is unacceptable to your Allah, what makes you argue unbelief does not always mean not believing in Islam? Is it acceptable to Allah to not to believe?

Who said disbelief in Allah? Your reading problems are my problems?

I said "not believing in ISLAM" not God as a whole.

Rejecting god makes one an atheist. That does not mean following the evil path (ah.. you are yet to define evil…!)

Rejecting God is evil. How God will judge a "good" atheist is up to him. We can never judge.

There is a hadith that Jewish adulteress was forgiven by God just because she was gave water to a thirsty dog. God liked this act of her and forgave her sins.

I know this hadith but let me tell you a secret, this Jewish adulteress was under Moses, so a believer according to Allah. (there were many believers under Moses. Aren’t there?)

Can you prove that she lived at the time of Moses and that it is made to be a significant factor in her forgiveness in the said hadith?

Let us have you disclose your little "secret".

She committed adultery and what is big deal in your god forgiving her?

The big deal is that she was a Jewish and yet she was forgiven, unlike how you would have us believe that Jews as a whole (to the last individual) are considered Satan in Qur'an.

If you as a Muslim commits adultery , Allah will forgive you and admit you in his glorious brothel… sh… paradise. Doubt? See it below:

Since this is a continuation of my previous response, I hope that you will get my advice and refrain from uncultured attacks at my belief next time. The above attitude is not conducive for a proper dialogue.

I will therefore not entertain this part of your "argument." Stick with what we are here for.

Thus you can see that no damn Muslim is conditioned the way YOU want us to believe.

I did see nothing in above, nor can any readers who read this. You are yet to make any case my Muslim;

I have made my case a long time ago. Maybe you didn't get it.

Allah loves his creation more than a mother loves her child.
Does this not tell you something?
As I said, even a parent can curse his or her child for his or her misdeeds.
That doesn't mean they don't love him.

This is dealt above. First bring the hadith with reference. Argue later. And don’t dole out the same baloney about parents cursing their child.

The above manner of talking shows that you are far removed from debate "etiquette", a word you dared mentioned.

And no, don't ask me to forgive your inability to control yourself.

Again, don't project your own dilemas on me.

I can very well not pray for a person forgiveness in the hearafter yet I can very well love him.

If you can not even ask for forgiveness for a person for not for doing any vile deeds but for his disbelief, then don’t tell us that you will love that person.

You DON'T dictate me what I can do or not. In the matter of forgiveness for unbelief, the matter is for Allah. Allah may decide to forgive him, but I can't pray to Allah to do that. I can very well love a non-believer, and even pray for him in other cases - and yet respect this call by Allah.

Don't projecf your dilemas on me.

This will lengthen this debate but I can’t help. Let me clarify how you have to behave with unbelievers: (why does it always take an infidel to tutor Muslims? )

It is I am who is tutoring you.

See your Quran:

Let not the believers take the disbelievers as friends instead of the believers, and whoever does that, will never be helped by Allah in any way, unless you indeed fear a danger from them. And Allah warns you against Himself, and to Allah is the final return.[Quran 3:28]

Now, let me just bring the relevant part from Ibn Kathir’s commentary on this verse.

Allah prohibited His believing servants from becoming supporters of the disbelievers, or to take them as comrades with whom they develop friendships, rather than the believers. Allah warned against such behavior when He said, And whoever does that, will never be helped by Allah in any way) meaning, whoever commits this act that Allah has prohibited, then Allah will discard him. >>>> believers are allowed to show friendship to the disbelievers outwardly, but never inwardly. For instance, Al-Bukhari recorded that Abu Ad-Darda' said, "We smile in the face of some people although our hearts curse them.'' [Tafsir Ibn Kathir]

"Some people" does not necessarily mean non-believers in all cases.

What about those whom Qur'an asks us to be "Kind and Just" with?

As for friendship with disbelievers, we must not get too close to them as this may cause us to go in disbelief's way. However, this doesn't necessarily apply to those people who Allah said might hear "good news" at the day of judgement - as stated in the Ayet I related.

And you say you will pray for unbelievers? Are you kidding? Smiling at the face of unbelievers but cursing them in your hearts? Is it thus how you will love and pray for unbelievers?

You are giving too much importance to what someone said.

Yes, you have shown NOTHIGN which shows that you can't pray for unbelievers in any case. Let me demolish your argument:

Certainly, not only we can, but we are ordained by God to pray for unbelievers to see the light and embrace Islam. This shows that you can pray for disbelievers in certain cases, the only prohibited case that you have shown is that of asking forgiveness for them for their disbelief in God. This also has a greater implication: As long as a disbeliever has not died, we can pray for his return to Islam - which is a way to express our goodwill towards him. Of course, we cannot pray for the forgiveness of his disbelief while he is alive, because God has ordained us that disbelief is a sin, and our doing so would be a tacit admission that we don't wish to make any attempt at "wisdom and good preaching". Rather, as I said, we will pray for his return to Islam. The only time it would come to praying for the forgiveness of his disbelief, it is when he has died. And we are not allowed to do that, because doing so might create confusion in the minds of mortals regarding the importance God gives to belief in him. So God has said that the matter should be left to him. However, within the life time of a disbeliever, we have prayed for his return to Islam, thus maintained the goodwill. Thus this restriction on a specific kind of pray does not have any implications on the day to day dealings with non-Muslims in this world and the goodwill Muslims may maintain towards them.

Also it shows that you can pray for disblievers in other matters other than the restricted area. [/b]

See how your lack of deep thinking made you think there is a problem in the Qur'an? The problem resided in your thinking only.

For example, a Muslim has a parent who is a non-Muslim: Islamic teaching is that the Muslim shoudl be totally respectful and loving towards his parent even though he is a non-Muslim.
He CAN PRAY FOR HIM in any matter he wants - for his good health, for his financial gains, etc - EXCEPT he cannot pray for the forgiveness of his unbelief by Allah.[/b]
Allah has condemned unbelief, and we must leave the matter to Allah.
If Allah can forgive a Jewish adulteress, he can forgive anyone he so choose.
We should not interfere with this.

All in the above is already refuted. In the case of parents and kids, I have brought a clear verse from Quran above.

Nothing is refuted in the light of my response.

Doesn't the hadith that says that Allah loves his creation do it for you?

NO. Bring the reference of the hadith and I will consider it then.

Ok, this is a proper way of asking for reference, unlike your previous attempt at doing so. However, next time you should able to control yourself.

Bukhari, Vol 8, Book 73. Good Manners And Form (Al-Adab). Hadith 029.

Narrated By Abu Huraira: I heard Allah's Apostle saying, Allah divided Mercy into one-hundred parts and He kept its NINETY-NINE parts with Him and sent down its one part on the earth, and because of that, its one single part, His creations are Merciful to each other, so that even the mare lifts up its hoofs away from its baby animal, lest it should trample on it."

Hence this mercy is more than 70 times a mother love his child, because all creatures are loving each other within that single part which Allah has sent down on the earth. That single part is distributed among all creatures. Mercy and love of a mother got only a little portion of it. So we can't believe how merciful and loving Allah swt is!

http://www.islamicity.com/qa/action.las ... html&-find" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Oh, it needs some interpretation, can you do it?

Doesn't the Qur'anic verse that to kill one innocent human being is like killing the whole of humanity do it for you?

NO. This will not do because this verse has a specific context. Bring the verses in context and argue. Do not evade from this. I repeat: Bring the verses in context and argue.

The verse needs no context.

The verse says kiling of an innocent human being is like killing of humanity.

It does not say killing of a "Muslim".

This shows the sanctity of human life - be it Muslim or otherwise - in the eyes of Allah.

IF you have issues with this interpretation on the basis of the Ayat's context, it is you who are free to bring it to light.

Doesn't the fact that Allah is called "The God of humanity" rather than "God of Muslims" do it for you?

NO. Allah has said many things about himself. In fact, I am yet to come across a self flatterer like your Allah. But sometimes he has gone terribly off-track by depicting himself as the best deceiver too.

Again, lower down the tone. He is the greatest of planner, yes.

Just like he is the "God of humanity".

The tag “god of humanity” is NOT answering my question at all. I asked you to bring a verse from Quran to attest the claim Allah loves unbelievers.

Allah loves all his creation. Do you think unbelievers are aliens?

Allah is the god of pigs too but the guy obviously hates pigs.

Allah is not a "guy". I have given you many warnings in this series of postings about your conduct. I hope you will correct it next time around.

What part of loving his creation is too difficult for you to get?

(Not sure whether there would be Bacon in your paradise btw. Perhaps Allah forgot to mention it as he is busy preparing large bosomed virgins for his faithful..!!!)

Stupid jokes are also not conducive for a good debate. I am least impressed by your attempts at buffoonary..

If they don't do it for you, then nothing can do it for you.

Nothing of the above does for me for obvious reasons; and I made it clear over.

Try again and better luck next time,

Then as I said, nothing will do it for you. I might concentrate on what it does for debate only, next time around.

Your turn.

[KhaliL]

__________________

Hello Khalil,
Two things:

This is a debate between you and I, why are there other people posting in this thread?
Their posts must be deleted or moved to comment section, mustn't they?

First of all let me say please do not demonize silly matters. Someone has mistakenly posted in this thread and I have timely alerted the person not to post here again. My post is there above for you to confirm. And if you want to move that post from this thread to comments section, either you or me can request moderators.

Besides, after reading your responses to my posts, what I understand is you are trying to evade this debate by trying to impose unreasonable prerequisites. It is very unfortunate if you leave this debate on false pretexts. Sorry to say this. If carefully analyzed, 80% of what you posted as answers to me amount to the fallacy of argumentum ad hominem. Logical fallacies are not acceptable in a serious debate and I forgot to mention this in my first post. But from hereon the rule should be implemented. There is no room for logical fallacies in a scholarly debate so arguments even come close to any form of logical fallacies will be subject to dismissal.

We have to focus on the topic at hand. In my opening post, I made two assertions and both of us should be with the topic that is: when I am defending my assertions, you are obliged to refute them. That is why I invited you to this thread and you accepted the invitation. For the very purpose, all those in your posts which can be trashed by adding up to argumentum ad hominem will be ignored and I will be dead focused on the substance and refute it.

This is to say, you can not dictate a prerequisite here that “I” as your contester should not attack your belief system. That is an unacceptable demand. Logical fallacy is when I turn towards “YOU” in person. I am not supposed to attack you in person but by all means I can attack your faith. This is very simple and if you do not feel comfortable because I attack your faith, that means you are not supposed to engage in a debate concerning your faith. Are you this much sensitive? I see you are ferociously turning towards me in person in a lot of places in your posts because of this, but all those were uncalled for. You are not supposed to attack me in person and put me limits in attacking your faith simply because this debate can not move on in such a mode. You can not put a demand that I have to argue in a mode that satisfies you. It is not at all sensible. Please reserve your complaints and discharge them only when I am resorting to any kinds of logical fallacies. I want to take this debate very seriously and for the very reason, I will omit all those parts in your posts that you dedicated to attack me in person. That means I will be focusing only on the topic of our debate.

I am going to enter the business:

The Jews who fall in the category of "Among them there are those who are on the right path..." are not going against God. Disbelief in God is a sin, however, actively going against God means you commit mischief on this earth.

There are no Jews on the right path in Quran, because the only right path is Islam according to the book. The verse “Inna al deena indallahi al Islam” (I gave you reference to this in my previous post) is a clear indication of it. If this verse is not sufficient for you to grasp the conception of right path, I am willing to pull off more from your book.

What is right path in Islam? I will bring Quran-the most authentic source of Islam- to clarify it:

The first chapter of Quran is a prayer to Allah. Imam Ibn Kathir mentions in his Tafsir that this chapter is called as ‘Umm al-Quran' or mother of Quran and no prayer (five time prayers in Islam) is valid without reciting this verse in prayers. In this chapter, a Muslim prays to his god to guide him on the right path emphasizing not to let him/her slip into the wrong path. Here are the relevant verses:

Guide us the straight way. The way of those upon whom Thou hast bestowed Thy blessings not of those who have been condemned [by Thee], nor of those who go astray! [Quran chapter 1:6-7]

Here the straight way is defined as the way of those upon who Allah has bestowed blessings and the wrong path which is diametrically opposite to this defined as the way of those who Allah has been condemned and thus gone astray.

This needs to be clarified. Hadiths are considered as interpretations of Quran in Islam so Mufassirs (Quran interpreters) has formed their authentic Tafsirs conforming to hadiths. See how one of the most prominent Tafsirs of Quran composed by two Jalal’s interprets this verse.

The path of those whom You have favored, with guidance (from alladhīna together with its relative clause is substituted by [ghayri l-maghdūbi ‘alayhim]) not [the path] of those against whom there is wrath, namely, the Jews, and nor of those who are astray, namely, the Christians. The subtle meaning implied by this substitution is that the guided ones are neither the Jews nor the Christians.[Tafsir Jalalain on Quan 1:6-7]

Here in the above Tafsir (interpretation of Quran) if you focus on the bolded part you can confirm Jews and Christians are not on the right path. From the very first chapter of Quran it is confirmed that Jews and Christians are people who are bearing the wrath of Allah and thusly gone astray. A Muslim is obliged to recite this verse many times a day.

When it is confirmed through the very first chapter of Quran that Jews (and Christians plus necessarily all unbelievers) are on the wrong path and Muslims are obliged to ask refuge to Allah to not lead to them to path of these unbelievers, what is there left for you to argue there are Jews on the right path? The very conception of right path is confirmed through the first chapter of Quran. IF you are doubtful, please check your book and confirm it.

Now, tell me can you argue there are Jews on the right path?

As such, Qur'an asks us to be fair and just to those "who do not fight us on the basis of our religion."
Now you will ask me references for this verses, I thought you would already know about them being a self-proclaimed intellectual on Islam, however, I am disappointed at your ignorance or pretence at ignorance.
There are they:
[Allah forbids you not with regard to those who fight you not for your faith, nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them. For Allah loves those who are just. Allah only forbids you with regard to those who fight you for your faith, and drive you out of your homes and support others in driving you out, from turning to them for protection (or taking them as wali). Those who seek their protection they are indeed wrong- doers.] (Al-Mumtahinah 60: 8-9)

Thank you for bringing up an argument and sourcing it. I was not pretending to be ignorant, but when I asked you to bring reference I was just conforming to the clauses of a debate as you are making the assertion.

Now, I want to ask you of these verses. You will protrude this as you god commands you to be just to those who are not fighting to you. But the point you forget is, this Ayat is abrogated by the Ayat of sword in Islam. If you are not versed in the doctrine of abrogation in Islam, you can just turn to your sources to confirm it. This verse is connected to the treaty of Hudaybiyya. And Quran chapter 9 verse 5 has abrogated all peaceful verses that related to the treaty with pagans.

Moreover, there are many verses in Quran that prompts believers to initiate fighting against unbelievers without any provocation. Let me bring just one for the reason, I do not want to inflate this which will be much time and space consuming. One verse and a logical explanation will follow:

Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knows, and ye know not. [Quran 2:216]

Here in the above verses we see a god inciting fighting spirit in his faithful. The verse is obviously provocative because it says fighting is ordained to the faithful of Allah even though they dislike it. Simple common sense is sufficient to conclude no living body will dislike fighting in self defense. It is an involuntary reaction and this art is familiar to all living bodies. But when we see a god inflaming his faithful with verses like “You are ordained to fight though you dislike it” the connotation is offensive war. No Muslim can escape from the undertone of this verse as they are definite indicative of hatred towards unbelievers because Allah has ordained you to fight them even though you dislike it. That means you can not stop fighting at all. And if you are divinely prescribed to fight unbelievers there is no reason to believe you will be loving unbelievers. If you do, that can be the best of the best irony.

I can bring more verses and supportive hadiths to underpin my contention only if you insist. Because; it is a waste of time and effort bringing all which are well known to almost all Muslims and critics since the advent of internet.

002.062
YUSUFALI: Those who believe (in the Qur'an), and those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Christians and the Sabians,- any who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.
This does your argument in, right?

Now I will look if I could also find the reference for the verse "there are among the people of book who are on the right path", however, the above should do it for you, or importantly, do it for the purpose of the argument.

Again great… I was certain you will bring up this verse, but there is a problem in this verse. Before bringing Tafsirs, I would urge you to have a close look on the verses itself. “Those who follow Jewish scriptures and the Christians and Sabians who believe in Allah and last day and work righteousness shall have their reward with lord”

Muslims are commanded to believe in all scriptures Allah revealed, and Torah is one of them. Here in the verses Allah says who believe in scriptures and who are on the “right path”. We have already settled what is “right path” according to Islam. It is the path of Muslims who believe in the oneness of Allah and establishing prayers and more importantly, Jews and Christians are not on the right path according to the very first chapter of Quran. Moreover, I would bring the same Quranic verses to underpin my contention, this verse is NOT sufficient for you to prove there is a group among Jews who are saved or you as a Muslim can be in good terms with them. I am bringing Quran to offset Quran.

And whoever seeks religion other than Islam, it will never be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be one of the losers.[Quran 36:85]

Does this mean there is an obvious contradiction in Quran? As a Muslim you can not afford it, so your Mufassirs and Muhaddiths has sorted this out. According to the most prominent Quran interpreter Imam Ibn Kathir, this verse (36:85) cancels out the verse (2:62) you brought. In Ibn Kathir’s own words:

This statement by Ibn `Abbas indicates that Allah does not accept any deed or work from anyone, unless it conforms to the Law of Muhammad that is, after Allah sent Muhammad . Before that, every person who followed the guidance of his own Prophet was on the correct path, following the correct guidance and was saved. [Ibn Kathir: Commentary on Quran 2:62]

Ibn Kathir confirms the verse is not meant for Jews and Christians of the era of Muhammad but is a verse that is only pertaining to the people who followed scriptures carefully before Muhammad’s advent. So, the verse you brought in your defense does not prove anything here as it is one of the cancelled or abrogated verses of Quran through another verse.

In this post, I have rubbed out some parts that pertaining to argumentum ad hominem. Since we want to preserve this debate, I think it is necessary for me to not to retort to them. Now, in my second post, I will deal with the most pertinent part of the concept of evil.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

[KhaliL]

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Evil is that which is prohibited by God.

Disblief in Allah and the last prophet is evil, however, those evils are those that are left for God to address. Other evils are those that create mischeif on the land, for them the teachings are different.

This is a part I am very much interested. I hope you remember how and when we embarked this. When I brought Quranic verses which say “Jews are an accursed lot until the Day of Judgement” you answered me they are accursed because of the evil actions they committed. I asked you to define evil and now you come up with this definition.

So, evil as defined by you is anything that is prohibited by your god. You continue, disbelief in Allah and the last prophet is evil. Let me say, there can not be any lethal definition for evil than the one you projected right now.

I remember you had to turn to me in person when I asked questions regarding to evil in Islam. Obviously, question has embarrassed you because you know Islam has not a proper definition for “evil”. The conception of evil in Islam is flawed. And when I attacked or mocked your faith for having a faulty and lethal understanding of evil, you had to resort to personal attacks. Sorry, since this is a quandary you brought for yourself, I can not help it at all. So, to refute your contention, I have to turn to your belief system and attack it but if you consider it ruthless or aimless, that means the manifestation of your theological stubbornness. I can make sure I am not committing any logical fallacy, because my attack will be aimed at your belief system not at you in person. Let me expose the flaws of Islamic conception of ‘evil’ as understood by you.

Your contention “Evil is what god (Allah) has prohibited” is flawed for many reasons. I can rightfully argue since this concept of Allah has not been proved, there is no basis for your claim and is absurd to the most for the same reason. But I am not moving in that direction. Instead, I will focus on the god I find in Quran and will base my arguments on it.

Allah has not prohibited paedophilia. It is obvious in Quran, and if you have any doubts, I have a much comprehensive article on this that you can find in the home page of this site. Or if you want we can even have debate on the issue (only if you deny this contention).

So, paedophilia which is the most abominable of all sexual crimes is not an evil in Islam.

Secondly, adultery-a-malpractice, and rape-a-sexual crime, both these are not prohibited by Allah. There are clear verses in Quran to confirm this. If you insist, I can bring them in here but why I am not doing now is not to consume space and to save my time too. (Ooh… I have an article on this too in our homepage)

Manslaughter is not prohibited by Allah. There is clear indication for it in Quran. In this case, I am willing to produce one relevant verse because unlike the two I brought above, I have not written any article on this so, I can not bring a comprehensive piece if you ask me. Hence I will present them here briefly and if you want me to elaborate it, I am ready for it too.

It is not for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war until he had made a great slaughter in the land. You desire the good of this world (i.e. the money of ransom for freeing the captives), but Allah desires (for you) the Hereafter. And Allah is All-Mighty, All-Wise” [Quran, 8:67]

The following was revealed when they ransomed those taken captive at Badr: It is not for any Prophet to have prisoners until he has made slaughter in the land, going all the way in fighting disbelievers. You, O believers, desire the transient things of this world, its ephemeral gains, by ransoming, while God desires, for you, the Hereafter, that is, its reward, through your killing them; and God is Mighty, Wise: this was abrogated by His words [and set them free] afterward either with grace or by ransom [Tafsir Jalalain]

The above Quranic verse along with its Tafsir clarifies significant slaughter is allowed by Allah and thus is not an evil in Islam. If you argue otherwise, please bring your sources.

Besides, I can bring more abominable deeds that are sanctioned by Allah thus not falling in the category of evil in Islam. So, Islam has a very flawed and imperfect definition of evil. If slaughtering human beings, abusing minor girls, raping war captives all these are sanctioned by god, this god’s perfection as a moral agent is very much questionable. Islam’s god is in trial here.

Unfortunately, even though very much interesting a subject this is "the moral sense of Islamic god", the topic should be abandoned in this thread to reserve it for another debate. Here my focus is on the concept of evil in Islam. We understood, it is totally imperfect and very much flawed. Muslims’ sense of morality is questionable because it depends on what a morally imperfect god dictates.

So, the only evil Jews committed is saying something against Allah who could not bear it and thusly had to curse them to the end of days. Again, this is putting Allah in trial for not being a moral agent.

Yes, and also - saying such things has implications. By working actively against Islam, you are trying to destroy the religion of God on this earth. The implications are great.

This is your answer to my question “does evil mean saying something against Allah?” Your answer is “Yes” but in what sense? Since you (Muslim) have a corrupted sense of morality as I described above what is your merit in saying so? I am working actively against Islam and this debate is a proof for it. Though, I am not at all near of being a perfect human being, I can make sure, I haven’t ever beheaded any, haven’t abused any minor girls, haven’t raped anyone, so compared to Muhammad the prophet of Islam, I am absolutely a moral person. But I am to be loathed by a Muslim just because I am working against Islam; not by beheading any Muslim, but using my writing skills against this religion.

And let me wind up: Concept of evil is not something one can understand thumbing Quran because the book has a very flawed model to present. It is a matter subjected to a highly philosophical discussion. But one thing is sure from above; Islam does not even have proper conception of morality. The way Muslims define evil is a proof for this.

Yes, this will make you an evil person. In what sense? In the sense that you curse God.

This is the answer you give me when I asked whether calling your god a brothel keeper would make me an evil person. Your answer is yes. And you go on to say because I curse god. But which god..? Let me ask you a very sensible question here. Since your god has not been verified, since you do not even have a claim that your god is a verifiable, tangible entity, it remains only as a concept. And you trash me as an evil person just because I am ridiculing this conception without having any existence in reality. Can you just think of it for a while?

I want you to hold your horses.
Accepting your invitation to debate has by no means given you a licence to attack my belief on my face in the above manner.
Scathing, uncultured attacks on the opponent's religious figures is considered not conducive for a civil debate.
Are you really looking for a proper dialogue?
These kinds of statements are unacceptable if you are looking for a serious dialogue.
If you continue, this debate will be terminated.
It is one thing to have a casual discussion on this forum (in which case I may ignore certain remarks) but giving you time in a specially designated thread, means I am directly talking to you as in giving you importance.
So keep your tone under control and show that you deserve my special time. If you continue like the above, you don't.
You started out courteously with me in other threads, you must maintain that.
Consider this a condition for the debate.
In this thread, you can only argue for the proposition you have put up. You are only allowed to do that in this thread.
I am not interested in your opinion in other regards. Therefore you should not express them in this thread, especially if they are offensive towards my beliefs.
We didn't clear up the conditions for the debate a priori, so we may do so as we go along.

All what you wrote above amount to nothing but mere emotional outbursts, other people who are closely monitoring our debate have already made their observation you are trying for an escape route and what you wrote above are enough for all impartial readers to grasp you are very much in backfoot here. I will not retort to any of the above but will keep with the topic at hand. Argumentum ad hominem is not going to win you any argument but that will only put your credibility at stake. I would like to inform you, our debate has been viewed by more than one hundred so far and there will be more in coming days and if you are trying to evade this on false pretexts by complaining I am attacking your belief system so you have to go…, that will do no good for you. IF you do not want to be a sore loser, you have to continue. Please.

It is just part of it. They did many more things. You can't pretend ignorance about them.

This is in answer to my assertion what Jews did to get accursed by Allah is saying something against him. But you say it is just a part of it. I did not say Jews did not do anything other than it. But in the particular verse I brought, the only sin we see is Jews are saying some words against Allah. Isn’t it so?

Yes, the kind of Jews, and that also applies to other non-Muslims, who work against God.

The kind of Jews? I can bring more verses if you need to assert my contention all Jews are accursed. But is it really necessary? Should I go for it?

Okay, just one:

And when there comes to them a Book from Allah, confirming what is with them,- although from of old they had prayed for victory against those without Faith,- when there comes to them that which they (should) have recognized, they refuse to believe in it so the curse of Allah is on those without Faith. [Quran 2:89]

It is of Jews your god talks here. Any doubt? Read a couple of verses preceding it so that you con confirm it. Jews refused to believe in Allah and Muhammad so is cursed. Here the sin of Jews is only refusing to believe in Allah. Those without faith mean all unbelievers too. (It can be argued so)

By disobeying him, by working actively against his teachings in this world.

Again, this is in answer to my question what does it mean going against Allah. You say by disobeying Allah and working actively against Allah’s teachings. Let me ask you when Allah teaches to kill unbelievers until they become Muslims or paying Jizya in utter humiliation, and if one goes against this teaching, does that mean disobeying Allah’s teaching and going against Allah?

Your childish remarks show that your mind still needs developement.
Thus these must also be avoided in an proper dialogue.
You cannot talk in any demeaning way about "my God" if you want this debate to properly function.
You can only put forward the proposition on which I agreed to debate with you.

Again, sentimental outbursts should be ignored for the smooth furthering of this debate. So, I am sorry if my rather innocuous joke bored you up.

And any claim you make on the behalf of Muslims will be subjected to dismissal if you not only bring supporting material but also clearly link that supporting material and your argument.

This is in answer to my assertion “Any claim from you on behalf of Muslims (Islam) will be subjected to dismissal if it is not supported by your authentic sources.”
But this retort does not pay at all. Because I was commenting on an assertion you made. See what your assertion was. You wrote in previous post:

Muslims have no problem separating a good non-Muslim or a Jew from a bad non-Muslim or a Jew. This thinking is due to other statements in the Qur'an.

So, you made the assertion and you have to prove it. It is not going to work just by shifting the burden of proof. It is a logical fallacy. JFYI.

Therefore, you have to prove Muslims do not have any problem in good Jews from bad Jews. You have to prove it using your authentic sources. Your turn;

Muslims hate Kufr, or disbelief in Allah, the Almighty. Since we love all people, we hate their disobedience of Allah, the Most High. So, even when people deny the existence of Allah we do not hate them personally; however, we hate their disbelief and disobedience of Allah, Exalted be He. This case is very similar to that of a doctor and a patient. The doctor does not hate the patient or the sick person himself or herself, rather he or she hates the disease and tries every possible means to cure the disease and help the patient to recover. We Muslims hate disbelief and disobedience of Allah and we are striving and sparing no effort to do away with this disease and cure people’s sickness and help them become obedient servants of Allah (God).

http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Sate ... TheScholar" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Just as what I said.

I would say, you should not have strived this much hard to go to an Islamic domain and pull off all these...!! There is nothing in above I see as a logical argument that you can use as an excuse to hate unbelievers. You are free to hate “Kufr” but define “Kufr” at first. Then you can argue you only hate “Kufr” and not “Kafirs”. And by doing so, you are not supposed to link me to any web domain but thumb your Quran and authentic hadiths. There are hell lot of apologetic websites around and I am not going to check any of them if they do not source their contentions. In the above, I see a lot of apologetics but no source is mentioned. So, I am sorry, do not please repeat this. I need you bringing your arguments backed up by authentic sources like Quran and your prophet’s sunnah.

You have already showed lack of respect for many debate etiquette, however, maybe you will behave nicely next time.

And no speaking loudly is my style, and not least offensive. I have had real life debates, in which I say things at the top of my lungs, with being least offensive to the other speaker.

If my passionate rejection of your argument affects you in some negative way, that is your problem. You need to learn that in a debate one must detach onself personally from one's argument.

Look in the mirror and know that any correction of etiquette that is required is on your part.

Again… too much argumentum ad hominem…, I ignore for it for the sake of a serious debate.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

[KhaliL]

__________________
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

'Dude' is not something you should say in formal debates, too.
If you have touched upon "etiquette", let me asure you we will go all the way.

If my using of “Dude” offends you, I am abstaining from it. Is it okay now?

Yes, you said Jews.

But Satan cannot convert, cannot repent. Repentance and forgiveness is only reserved for mortals, and as such you cannot compare a group of mortals to Satan for rhetorical purpose.
A Jew is a also a potential convert to us - heck, any non-Muslim is.
Not so Satan.
Qur'an has been revealed for all people to convert to Islam. This cannot be applicable to Satan.

But sorry, I have a different version here.

You say, Satan can not convert but Jews can so Jews and Satan are not the same in Islam or Jews are not viewed as Satan by Muslims. And your reason to say so is Jews can convert but Satan can’t.

I would like to expand this. There are many people mentioned by Allah as “Their hearts are sealed so they will never believe”. If you read your book, it is there in the beginning, I mean in the very second chapter of Quran. I will bring one:

As to those who reject Faith, it is the same to them whether thou warn them or do not warn them; they will not believe. Allah hath set a seal on their hearts and on their hearing, and on their eyes is a veil; great is the penalty they (incur).[Quran 2:6-7]

Focus on the above verses carefully. Allah says to prophet, unbelievers will not believe despite all warnings Muhammad give them because Allah has sealed their hearts and ears. Allah adds: there awaits a great penalty for them.

How is this any different to Allah denying repentance to Satan? Allah seals some hearts to the extent that they will never believe. It is Allah who testifies this. And it is meant for unbelievers. Unbelievers who can never believe in Allah because Allah has sealed their hearts. Very much similar to Satan. Isn’t it so?

And to have more, just go through the same Surah again. Allah says the same kinds of things about unbelievers in verse 17-18 of Chapter 2.

If unbelievers (Jews in particular) hearts have been sealed by Allah, they can not believe and in the case of Jews Allah has cursed them many times in Quran. So, what is the difference between Satan who can never believe and these unbelievers whom Allah has doomed for hellfire?

For you to support that Jews as a whole (to the last individual) are considered like Satan by Muslims, you have to bring a scholarly Muslim opinon which says that Jews as a whole (to the last individual) are like Satan. Note that the scholarly opinon should be a general opinion shared by ulimas and not an isolated view.

If you maintain that the Qur'an considers Jews and Satan alike, you will have to provide evidence from the Qur'an that it is impossible for Jews to repent at any future time just as it is for Satan, and that a priori God has made the decision to send them to hell just like he has done so in the case of Satan.

This also introduces us to another conundrum that you face in your attempt to be over smart. Since we know that Qur'an no where maintains that Jews cannot repent eventually by accepting Islam, and asks Muslims to "invite the people to your Lord with wisdom and good preaching" at the same time, and also makes this call specific to Jews and Christians, it is clear then that those Jews who will ultimately remain non-Muslims till the end of times - and actually this is true of any non-Muslim - will, from the Qur'anic point of view, represent the vilest bunch of people who disobey God, as by then, through "good preaching" and advocation by Muslims, many among the Jews (and non-Muslims) would have converted to Islam - a possibility no where rejected in the Qur'an.

Thus whenever Muslim look in general towards Jews (or any non-Muslim), we don't see a group that is as a whole condemned by God just like Satan to every single individual - something you would have us believe - but we see among them potential converts, that is good people, that is, those people who fall in the category whom God may even have a good news to tell at the day of judgement, according to the Holy Verse I quoted.

We can thus judge no single Jew just on the basis of him being a Jew.

These are the affects of Islamic belief and Qur'anic teachings on us.

Again, let me say: There is no need of bolding if your intention is to catch my eye. When you bold an entire paragraph, it is very hard to go through it so, please use a different mode if you mean emphasizing.

And nothing in the above worth my time…, I handsomely proved how Satan and Jews can be same according to Quran. I was not using any extraneous sources. IT is Quran. It is your Allah who is sealing hearts of unbelievers so that they can never repent. Deal with it.

Don't forewarn me about anything I might do against myself. I can take care of myself without any of your "forewarning".

No comments for argumentum ad hominem;

YOU HAVE SHOWN NOTHING that says that Jews as a whole should be subjected to any "hardship".
God chastising disobedient Jews does not mean they must be subjected to any hardship by the Muslims.

I am bit annoyed of your shouting but no big deal.
I have proved using Quran Jews as a whole are subjected to bear the curse until the day of resurrection. It is hardship. There can not be more of a hardship than this.
I brought a hadith which depicts an odd circumstance. Jews are subjected to be annihilated by Muslims with the help of talking stones and trees (excluding Garqad). It is the hardship they have to suffer from Muslims’ hands. And it is foolish to believe Muslims are going to be friendly to a group whom they are supposed to massacre at the end of days.

And I think I will bring one more hadith to support my contention how Jews are supposed to be treated by Muslims:

Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: Do not greet the Jews and the Christians before they greet you and when you meet any one of them on the roads force him to go to the narrowest part of it. [Sahih Muslim. Book: 26, Hadith: 5389]

And what else you need?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

[KhaliL]

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

First of all, the debate is not about what "bothers" you or what doesn't. I will present what I see supports my arguments and refutes yours - whether you are bothered by it or not is the least of my concern.

Do you think I can not retort at the same coin? I can; but I do not do it because I want this debate to go on. Let me say: When I present my case, you can expect a lot of “I think” “In my opinion” kinds of words. But since you are uncomfortable on that style, in these postings I have adopted a different mode. You can sense it.

There is no difference between the two cases. Just as we believe idolaters were drowned by God as a whole into the sea, we believe that Jews would fight Muslims at the end of times and will be finished off.

And you say there is no difference between past and future? Very strange..!

Just as at the times of Noah, the unbelief was cleansed of any form of positive remanants within it, and it was thus pure unadulterated evil, and justifed God wiping out a whole people, similarly, when the same will happen at the end of times, when Islamic figures like Mehdi and the returning Propeht Jesus Christ would have arrived, and we would be in the same times as that of long gone by when Prophets came to the earth in the past, at that time, the fight against an evil group of people under the banner of Jews, and non-Muslim, will be as justified as God punishing the people of Sodom by subjecting them to falling stones, or that of inflicting the children of Egyptians with disease and eventual death to make the Eygptians yeild to Moses (as mentioned in the Bible) .

Just like the drowning of Idolaters has no affect in the day to day dealing advocated in their regard by the Qur'an in other verses, the eventual battle of good and evil and the eventual finishing off of disbelief, does not have any affect in our dealings with Jews and non-Muslims in general.

The whole paragraph amount to nothing. Let me say, your eventual battle against unbelievers and victory has a lot to do with your present dealings with them. Logically speaking, if you are dealing with a group of people whom you believe are to be perished by your own hands later, that means your closeness to them is very much hypocritical or opportunistic. Eventually you will end them up. Isn’t it so?

Besides, there is Quran to state, you have to be in a state of war with unbelievers until the war lays its burden. I will bring it with Tafsir for you to go through:

Now when ye meet in battle those who disbelieve, then it is smiting of the necks until, when ye have routed them, then making fast of bonds; and afterward either grace or ransom till the war lay down its burdens. That (is the ordinance). And if Allah willed He could have punished them (without you) but (thus it is ordained) that He may try some of you by means of others. And if Allah willed He could have punished them (without you) but (thus it is ordained) that He may try some of you by means of others. And those who are slain in the way of Allah, He rendereth not their actions vain.[Quran 47:4]

These verses are revealed right after the first battle Muhammad and his folks fought against Meccans and won. The core of the above verses is they spur believers to fight war and most interestingly, an all merciful god pinpoints the exact spot where a Muslim has to strike on his opponent’s steel. Odd it is… the god of this universe had to instruct those fellows on how to fight a war and worst of all specify them where and how to smite an opponent..! Then it talks about taking captives of war to either confine or ransom them till the war lays its burdens. Here the indication is to “fight until the war lays its burdens” Emphasize on it, because It is somewhat like an idiom. What does it mean war lays it burdens? Imam Ibn Kathir in his Tafsir Interprets this:

(Until the war lays down its burden.) Mujahid said: "Until `Isa bin Maryam (peace be upon him) descends.'' It seems as if he derived this opinion from the Prophet's saying, There will always be a group of my Ummah victorious upon the truth, until the last of them fight against Ad-Dajjal.) Imam Ahmad recorded from Jubayr bin Nufayr who reported from Salamah bin Nufayl that he went to the Messenger of Allah and said, "I have let my horse go, and thrown down my weapon, for the war has ended. There is no more fighting.'' Then the Prophet said to him, Now the time of fighting has come. There will always be a group of my Ummah dominant over others. Allah will turn the hearts of some people away (from the truth), so they (that group) will fight against them, and Allah will bestow on them (war spoils) from them (the enemies) -- until Allah's command comes to pass while they are in that state. Verily, the center of the believers' abode is Ash-Sham. And goodness is tied around the horses' foreheads till the Day of Resurrection.) An-Nasa'i also recorded this narration. Allah then says, Thus, and had Allah so willed, He could have taken vengeance against them;) which means that had He so willed, He could have taken immediate vengeance against the disbelievers with a chastisement or exemplary punishment directly from Him but (He lets you struggle) so as to test with one another.) meaning, He has ordered Jihad and fighting against the enemies in order to try you and test your affairs. [Tafsir Ibn Kathir on Quran 47:4]

Would this be enough? Please read it carefully if you did not focus well. It tells all;

Do you love Muslims? You said "yes", but then you supported injustice against Palestinians because they are Muslims, betraying yourself.

What injustice I supported against Palestinians? Can you tell me where and how I did it? You accused me so you are obliged to do it. Bring the relevant portion where I supported INJUSTICE against Palestinians. (But at the same time I say, this is not going to let you divert from the topic at hand.)

However, nobody loves any group of people in general. Love has a context.

I don’t get this at all. What does it mean love is contextual? Perhaps you are bringing out your intuitions? This is not to offend you but you have to clarify this more since you made this statement.

If there is a good Jew who helps humanity in some positive way, he will be respected and loved by the Muslim on the basis of verses I quoted and on the basis of the teachings of the Qur'an. If however, there are those who do evil, they will be subject to a healthy dislike.

The above paragraph is a mere reverberation of your initial contention which is effectively refuted. You have to rethink since your Quran says otherwise. Allah obviously refutes you my friend.

Calling the opponent religious beliefs "nonsense" is not part of a civilized debate, too, nor of good "etiquette".

This is in answer to my ridiculing of the notion of talking stones and trees. I can not help trashing them as nonsensical. What do you expect from me? Do you expect me to concord to the notion of stones speaking and trees except Garqad betraying Jews? Ridiculing this superstition is not against etiquette of a civilized debate.

Which makes me question - do you know the meaning of "etiquette"?
A question I asked because you used the word while going against it a number of times.
You must start practicing necessary debate etiquettes.

No comments, since I answered to this above.

Not interested again in what bothers you or doesn't. Give me some other reason to accept the invalidity of my statements.

This is in answer to my statement I am not bothered of the many signs and symptoms of Judgment Day. Of course I am not bothered but yes, you can say my botheration does not discomfort you. But my point is I am focusing on something phenomenal as is described in your sources related to the end of times. I am focused on it particularly; because it is related to the topic at hand.

You inability to understand my statements is not the problem that I must address.

It is this problem you run into if you have a formal debate. If you opponent proves himself to be a nutcase, and you leave the debate, he will claim victory, while having a formal debate with that nutcase becomes tortorous any way.

You are then stuck between a rock and a hard place. I still hope you will not create such a scenario for me.

There is no call to massacre in whatever you highlighted. There is a prediction of an future event.

In a hadith it is said that Muslims will be divided into 70 sects, however, in another hadith, prophet Muhammad warned Muslims against sectarianism and dividing themselves into sects.

This is a enough to refute your confusion between the two.

I will not comment on the personal attacks, but you said of the hadith in which Muhammad said his Ummah will be divided into 70 sects. All right, in the Tafsir I quoted above, there is a Hadith mentioned as Muhammad saying “His Ummah will always be fighting against unbelievers until Jesus slows down for a second term over this planet earth”.

Does it ring any bell?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

[KhaliL]

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

If your god can promise you of this pleasure of killing Jews just prior to Judgment Day, I don’t think the same guy will not be happy to deny you the privilege of killing at least some of Jews.

Whoever said what you "think" matters in the least?
What matters is what you show. And you have not shown anything of the kind.

I left my original post above for the readers to decide whether your answer suffices or not.

What would reveal the burden would be to bring those people to the right path, with "wisdom and good preaching", as we are ordained, not what you say.

But your god has some other plans. I exposed it earlier bringing Quranic verses. You can not bring people into right path because god has sealed their hearts; moreover god has confirmed you they are not going to believe. Care to deal with it?

You defining Islam for Muslims doesn't do it - you were already notified.

After a lengthy study of Qur'anic verses regarding Jews, the following article reaches the following conclusion:

http://jews-for-allah.org/Jews-and-Musl ... -koran.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

In conclusion, the Quran is a book for the Jews, Allah loves the Jews and sent the Holy Koran as a book of guidance for the Jews.

So don't think your personal opinion on this matter matters one hoot.

First of all, please do not link me to sites. I can do the same to save time. I can link you to Robert Spencer or Other critics but I did not do it so far. Bring arguments on your own.

Secondly, of my personal opinion: I made it clear why I adopted such a mode. But in this post so far, I changed the style so that please get used to this change if this looks better.

Get assurance from me, that your will not be able to evade any attempt at probing your honesty.

Well, this is in answer to me as I said, I am not going to allow you to employ tu quoque. You brought issue of Christians here to relieve the burden but this tactic will only work if you are debating a Christian. But please keep in mind, I am not one. For me whatever Christian believes do not matter when I am focused on criticizing Islam because it is an independent framework to work on. “They too” “You too” kinds of fallacis are not going to work at all. If you can defend your Islam within an independent frame of reference; you may, but don’t tell me Christians too are wrong so Islam is better. It is not the way to debate. In logical settings, this is called fallacy of tu quoque.

The above matters.

Let me reiterate: Christian beliefs do not matter at all for me because I am an Ex-Muslim fighting against Islam. Christians do not call for my head but Islam does. Under Islamic Sharia, an Ex-Muslim (Zanadiqa or Mulhid) is supposed to put to death without much delay. Imam Abu Hanifa has very clearly mentioned this and can be found in “Kitab Al-Siyar”. (I can give you reference if you ask)

Here it is HOW:
If the above Christian belief doesn't bother you, on what basis then is the statement in the hadith you have quoted is a cause of bothering to you? Does it not show that you have some other motives in getting involved in this, rather than having an honest issue with Islam on this? Because if had that honest issue, you would also have the same issue with Christianity? If you do have that issue with Christianty, where have you expressed it? If you say you do have this issue with Christianity, you will have to show us your record of expressing your outrage against it, in the absence of which, your claim will be considered lame and you will rightly be subject to doubt. This will then determine our way of looking at what you are made up of and what your arguments are made up of in a new light.

SO which is it? Does the above Christian belief bother you? If so, where is your outrage?

Though the above paragraph does not even amount to an argument, let me say: I have my prerogative to omit any belief system if I want to while attacking. I told you about why I am bothered of Islam too much because it is the only religion which calls for my head for being an apostate. If Christianity calls for my head, then I will reconsider it…but first let me finish this job. The top priority now is Islam. All other belief systems are coming next to it for obvious reasons I stated. So, don’t worry please.

(And let me also say now, I have chopped off some parts of your posts just because they are pure personal attacks. So, don’t consider I am evading any points. NO. Whatever good points you brought up are subjected to address and I address them)

Next, what I said is belief in the day of judgement is one of the pillars of Islamic faith (Iman). And when you connect massacre of Jews to this Judgement day that means you have this faith in your inner circle. Whatever is there as a belief in your inner circle will definitely influence in your day-to-day activities too. It is elementary psychology. You don’t need to be a psychologist to get this fact.

We connect the battle of good and evil with that of judgement day. Thus this does not have the effect you so desire.

With judgement day, there are connected many events, which includes the finishing off of all of the disbelievers, and all forms of disbelief, just like at one point in the past, whole groups of people were subjected to annhilation by God.

WE have totally different comandemnts in the day to day dealings with non-Muslims, and Jews.

I leave my original post above and your response for readers to decide whether your answer makes any sense or refutes my contention.

I answered this above, but would like to add more. You ask me whether I think a Muslim recites these verses and hadiths all day along. Yes. You do if you are a true Muslim. Because you have to pray at least five times a day and there is no Salat without Surah Fatiha. I am sure you know this. What is the 4th verse of Surah Fatiha?

“Owner of the Day of Judgment”

You are obliged to renew the thought of the Day of Judgement at least five times a day. It is enough to lock you in a state of dreaming of a day when you Muslims will annihilate Jews with the help of talking stones and trees (again Garqad is omitted).

We are forbidden to dream during Prayer.
However, we are asked to recite Qur'an daily, which tells us "Allah does not forbid you from being kind and just...", you know the rest by now.
The hadith you quoted has a no affect in the day to day dealings of Muslims with Jews and their way of thinking. It DOESN'T shape Muslim thinking the way you think it does.
If you keep repeating your argument, I will reject it by simply sayinig "rejected".

Again, I left my original post with this for readers to decide. The only point I have to address is you claim Muslims are not allowed to dream in prayers. Too silly an argument. What I said is very much related to thought processes of human beings. If you deny, that does not make the facts fade away. Sorry;

You can simply say rejected to all of my arguments and I can not by any means deny you this privilege. What makes you think I can? But simply rejecting without any basis is not appropriate enough. You are yet to bring anything that is remote to a logical argument in this case while I reinforced my position with more stuffs.

Excuse me Muslim. I hate to repeat this ad nauseum. You can not hate and love at the same time. Either you are with the hate or with love. Make up your mind at first.

You can repeat this till eternity, for all I care.

What matters is whether what you say is correct. You can love and hate at the same time, who said you couldn't? You hate Islam, but love Muslims - or so you claim, no?

This seems to be a sound argument but see:

You as a Muslim hates Kufr, but loves Kaffir. It is what you want to say. How did you acquire this notion? Of course from your Allah, who will also be doing the same as “hating Kufr and loving Kafirs"(???)

But who will Allah put in hell? “Kufr (disbelief)” or “Kafir (disbelievers)?

When you learn to answer this question, you can sort out why hating and loving a Kaffir would not work for Muslims. It is as simple as that.

Go and perform your postmortem, they are at the fore.

This is in answer to my asking of bringing Quranic sources. You say you brought them. Yes, you did in the first but I dissected it too. Now?

There is NO sinister, disease like hatred practiced by Muslim on the basis of what is said in the Qur'an.
There is a healthy contempt for evil that Islam generates. As such, it is in general not leathal at all.

That is why I asked you the question earlier what is your understanding of evil. Can you define what amounts to “evil” in Islam? If you successfully do it, then you can be vocal on the healthy or unhealthy contempt for it. We will decide it later whether your hatred towards a certain group or groups or 4/5th of humanity is lethal or not.

There is no such hatred. And you have been provided with the definition. [/quote]

But your definition proved more lethal. You have to redefine it in a less harmful way. At least; Otherwise you are going to be in big trouble...!!

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

[KhaliL]

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Thou canst not find people who [truly] believe in God and the Last Day and [at the same time] love anyone who contends against God and His Apostle - even though they be their fathers, or their sons, or their brothers, or [others of] their kindred. [As for the true believers,] it is they in whose hearts He has inscribed faith, and whom He has strength­ened with inspiration from Himself, and whom [in time] He will admit into gardens through which running waters flow, therein to abide. Well-pleased is God with them, and well-pleased are they with Him. They are God’s partisans: oh, verily, it is they, the partisans of God, who shall attain to a happy state! [Quran 58:22]

What does the above verse mean? You Muslims are not supposed love anyone who does not believe in your god and prophet, be it your father, son, brother…, the only prerequisite to keep the hatred even for those most close to you is not believing in Allah and Muhammad. This is also Quran; the same Quran which you say is not a bar for you to love unbelievers. What is this all about?

Again, your inability to understand the beautiful and clear words of the Qur'an are not my problem.
The Holy Ayat is immaculate!
Allahumdulliah!
Allah-u-Akbar!

Smiles… What can I say about all this?

Let us read the first line of the Ayet with concentration:

Thou canst not find people who [truly] believe in God and the Last Day and [at the same time] love anyone who contends against God and His Apostle...

Especially concentrate on the bolded words, readers.

The above Ayat is specially talking about those people at Prophet's time who rejected Islam and waged wars against the Prophet as in "contend[ing] against" him.

The verse is talking about the those particular people, and not all types of non-believers.

There are many problems for context argument dear friend. The whole of Quran is contextual, but if you want to claim it is a book with interminable relevance, you have to do without this context. Otherwise, there is a huge dilemma that is waiting for you. I had an article on this in the old forum, and if you insist, I can bring it here to expose the fallacy of context argument.

The very first verse you brought in your defense is contextual, because it was dealing with a specific kind of people of the era of Muhammad. But I didn’t argue with context for the reason I have to be with Muslim argument Quran is for the entire mankind meant to the end of times.

Your inability to control yourself is not to be forgiven.
You will have to ask me courteously for you to see that hadith.
By then consider it your uncouthness which has forbiden you seeing it.
I will keep on quoting this hadith, if you want its reference, you will have to ask in the manner which is conducive of a good debate and especially show good "etiquette".
Keep your puppy away from the debate, and let it do what you have housed it for....

Okay Rocky… keep away from this business until I finish. I promise not to bring my puppy again if you comply with the rules, etiquette of a scholarly debate.

Does words like "baloney" indicate good debate "etiquette"?
Do you teach such etiquette to your two "magnificent kids"?
And yes, a parent can curse his child for his gross disobedience or a gross misdeed. They at no point hate their child, however.

I could not help the notion of cursing my kids, so I retorted. But if it was uncalled for, sorry… but I would never concur to the notion a parent curses his child. What kind of a parent you are talking about?

Who said disbelief in Allah? Your reading problems are my problems?

I said "not believing in ISLAM" not God as a whole.

See..This is what you wrote:

In the light of all above, I would also say that "unbelief" is not always to be taken in its restrictist sense of not believing in Islam, but more than that - that of rejecting God overall, and to following the evil path.

Go through it again. I do not understand what you mean by the above when in fact you will be defending this contention.

Rejecting God is evil. How God will judge a "good" atheist is up to him. We can never judge.

Everything that embarrasses a Muslim is left for Allah because Allah knows best. Your above answer echo it.

There is a hadith that Jewish adulteress was forgiven by God just because she was gave water to a thirsty dog. God liked this act of her and forgave her sins.

I know this hadith but let me tell you a secret, this Jewish adulteress was under Moses, so a believer according to Allah. (there were many believers under Moses. Aren’t there?)

Can you prove that she lived at the time of Moses and that it is made to be a significant factor in her forgiveness in the said hadith?
Let us have you disclose your little "secret". [/quote]

Sure. See the hadith:

Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, "While a dog was going round a well and was about to die of thirst, an Israeli prostitute saw it and took off her shoe and watered it. So Allah forgave her because of that good deed." [Sahih Bukhari Book: 56, Hadith: 673]

The exact word Muhammad used is “Israeli prostitute”. Besides, Muhammad said a story that happened in the past.
IF you need more clarifications, I would suggest checking Fath-el-Bari of Hafiz Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani. At the moment, I am not in mood of it.

The big deal is that she was a Jewish and yet she was forgiven, unlike how you would have us believe that Jews as a whole (to the last individual) are considered Satan in Qur'an.

But she was under Moses. We are talking of Jews from the time of Muhammad. That is a big deal.

Some chopping works since there are a lot of argumentum ad hominem.

You DON'T dictate me what I can do or not. In the matter of forgiveness for unbelief, the matter is for Allah. Allah may decide to forgive him, but I can't pray to Allah to do that. I can very well love a non-believer, and even pray for him in other cases - and yet respect this call by Allah.
Don't projecf your dilemas on me.

The above is mutually contradicting statements. You did not or could not answer my question how can you love a lot when in fact it is forbidden by your god to ask forgiveness for them? The shouting will not help you at all. It stems from your frustration of not being able to answer the questions.

For instance, Al-Bukhari recorded that Abu Ad-Darda' said, "We smile in the face of some people although our hearts curse them.'' [Tafsir Ibn Kathir][/color]

"Some people" does not necessarily mean non-believers in all cases.

But it (some people) can’t be Muslims by any chance. Do you see such?

What about those whom Qur'an asks us to be "Kind and Just" with?

Dealt very early and has almost became a fable.

As for friendship with disbelievers, we must not get too close to them as this may cause us to go in disbelief's way. However, this doesn't necessarily apply to those people who Allah said might hear "good news" at the day of judgement - as stated in the Ayet I related.

Nice excuse. I wouldn’t add more since it is retiring hours here and I am half asleep. Let the readers decide.

You are giving too much importance to what someone said.

Why can’t I? I am giving importance to what your Allah said. I wasn’t quoting Larry King.

Yes, you have shown NOTHIGN which shows that you can't pray for unbelievers in any case. Let me demolish your argument:

Certainly, not only we can, but we are ordained by God to pray for unbelievers to see the light and embrace Islam. This shows that you can pray for disbelievers in certain cases, the only prohibited case that you have shown is that of asking forgiveness for them for their disbelief in God. This also has a greater implication: As long as a disbeliever has not died, we can pray for his return to Islam - which is a way to express our goodwill towards him. Of course, we cannot pray for the forgiveness of his disbelief while he is alive, because God has ordained us that disbelief is a sin, and our doing so would be a tacit admission that we don't wish to make any attempt at "wisdom and good preaching". Rather, as I said, we will pray for his return to Islam. The only time it would come to praying for the forgiveness of his disbelief, it is when he has died. And we are not allowed to do that, because doing so might create confusion in the minds of mortals regarding the importance God gives to belief in him. So God has said that the matter should be left to him. However, within the life time of a disbeliever, we have prayed for his return to Islam, thus maintained the goodwill. Thus this restriction on a specific kind of pray does not have any implications on the day to day dealings with non-Muslims in this world and the goodwill Muslims may maintain towards them.

Also it shows that you can pray for disblievers in other matters other than the restricted area. [/b]

All for the above, I am just asking you a question. Can you show me from your prophet’s life that he ever prayed for any infidel for any case? Before being vocal on praying for unbelievers, bring me one instance from your Muhammad’s life that he is praying for infidels, not for forgiveness as you consent to me it is not allowed for you. But what you have to show me is Muhammad praying for unbelievers' worldly success or any kinds of matters. Come on and that will do a lot than just bringing some stuff which most will evade because of the style you proffer it.

Here is your prophet’s Sunnah for you. See how he prayed for unbelievers:

Narrated 'Abdullah: It (i.e., the imagined smoke) was because, when the Quraish refused to obey the Prophet he asked Allah to afflict them with years of famine similar to those of (Prophet) Joseph.[Sahih Bukhari. Book 60, Hadith 346]

NO. Bring the reference of the hadith and I will consider it then.

Ok, this is a proper way of asking for reference, unlike your previous attempt at doing so. However, next time you should able to control yourself.

Bukhari, Vol 8, Book 73. Good Manners And Form (Al-Adab). Hadith 029.

Narrated By Abu Huraira: I heard Allah's Apostle saying, Allah divided Mercy into one-hundred parts and He kept its NINETY-NINE parts with Him and sent down its one part on the earth, and because of that, its one single part, His creations are Merciful to each other, so that even the mare lifts up its hoofs away from its baby animal, lest it should trample on it."

Hence this mercy is more than 70 times a mother love his child, because all creatures are loving each other within that single part which Allah has sent down on the earth. That single part is distributed among all creatures. Mercy and love of a mother got only a little portion of it. So we can't believe how merciful and loving Allah swt is!

http://www.islamicity.com/qa/action.las ... html&-find" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Oh, it needs some interpretation, can you do it?

The original hadith is:

I heard Allah's Apostle saying, Allah divided Mercy into one-hundred parts and He kept its ninety-nine parts with Him and sent down its one part on the earth, and because of that, its one single part, His creations are Merciful to each other, so that even the mare lifts up its hoofs away from its baby animal, lest it should trample on it."[ Sahih Bukhari: Volume 8, Book 73, Number 29]

The rest are your scholar’s tampering with the hadith. In the above hadith it does not say Allah loves his creation, but just what he does is dividing his mercy into many parts and sending one part to earth so that all creations are merciful each other. Sending mercy (a tiny portion of it) to earth is not synonymous with Allah loving all creations. What I asked is for a Hadith Allah loving all creations regardless of their beliefs. Mercy = Love? I am very much a merciful person but that does not make me a philanthropist in perfect sense. Love is something that means giving without expecting anything in return. Allah expects obedience, servitude in return of his favors. Allah is very much in need of submission and worship from his creatures. He can not be a loving person at all for the same reason. I repeat "Love means giving without expecting anything in return"

Doesn't the Qur'anic verse that to kill one innocent human being is like killing the whole of humanity do it for you?

NO. This will not do because this verse has a specific context. Bring the verses in context and argue. Do not evade from this. I repeat: Bring the verses in context and argue.

The verse needs no context.
The verse says kiling of an innocent human being is like killing of humanity.
It does not say killing of a "Muslim".
This shows the sanctity of human life - be it Muslim or otherwise - in the eyes of Allah.
IF you have issues with this interpretation on the basis of the Ayat's context, it is you who are free to bring it to light.

You can not bring the verse in context because it betrays you. But I will do it and see what does it say:

For that cause We decreed for the Children of Israel that whosoever kills a human being for other than manslaughter or corruption in the earth, it shall be as if be had killed all mankind, and whoso saves the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind. Our messengers came unto them of old with clear proofs (of Allah's sovereignty) , but afterwards lo! many of them became prodigals in the earth.[Quran 5:32]

Read the first part of the verse. It is a decree that is specifically aimed to Children of Israel. Not to the whole of mankind. There were many decrees specifically meant for children of Israel. “Killing each other for worshipping a calf” [Quran 2:54] was one among them. Does it mean the whole of humanity should kill each other if some among them worship a calf?

Again, lower down the tone. He is the greatest of planner, yes.
Just like he is the "God of humanity".

Allah is the greatest deceiver “Makir” when it matters unbelievers. Yet he claims god of humanity. So what? The claim of god of humanity does not make him not a makir = deceiver because he himself admitted it.

Allah loves all his creation. Do you think unbelievers are aliens?

Allha’s love is very much flawed and I exposed the flaws in above. Just scroll if you missed it.

What part of loving his creation is too difficult for you to get?

Because he does not explicitly say he loves all mankind. Besides, his love is not the love in true sense. Allah expects many things in return for his blessings to humanity. That can not amount to his love.

Then as I said, nothing will do it for you. I might concentrate on what it does for debate only, next time around.
Your turn.

Evading this contest is strictly up to you. I can not by any means force you to this thread. But do not forget there are readers-very watchful readers around who are assessing both of us.
If you perform poorly that means your Islam performs poorly because you are representing Islam. And running away from the battlefield is not something Islam encourages…,

Come on dear contester, we have a long way to go.

Regards
KL

[Balls_of_Titanium_1]

__________________

Hello Khalil,
Two things:

This is a debate between you and I, why are there other people posting in this thread?
Their posts must be deleted or moved to comment section, mustn't they?

First of all let me say please do not demonize silly matters. Someone has mistakenly posted in this thread and I have timely alerted the person not to post here again. My post is there above for you to confirm. And if you want to move that post from this thread to comments section, either you or me can request moderators.

Since you started this thread, and put a certain condition, me asking you to look into the matter of others posting in this thread is not in the least "demozing".

Besides, after reading your responses to my posts, what I understand is you are trying to evade this debate by trying to impose unreasonable prerequisites. It is very unfortunate if you leave this debate on false pretexts. Sorry to say this. If carefully analyzed, 80% of what you posted as answers to me amount to the fallacy of argumentum ad hominem. Logical fallacies are not acceptable in a serious debate and I forgot to mention this in my first post. But from hereon the rule should be implemented. There is no room for logical fallacies in a scholarly debate so arguments even come close to any form of logical fallacies will be subject to dismissal.

I am glad you brought this up early in your post. Because we'll have to settle it first before moving to actual debate.

I am absolutely willing to debate you and correct the many wrong conceptions you hold and disseminate about Islam. I have read in full your latest response and believe it wouldn't take a moment's thought to demolish it all, as far as I am concerned. I can't wait to do it, believe you me.

Don't try to project as if I trying to evade this debate. I am not at all interested in it, if the debate functions in the proper manner.

However, if principle dictates me that this debate should be terminated, I will terminate this debate immediately without worrying in the least about how loudly you can shout victory or what impression it leaves to the kind of readers you are impressed with (those posting in the comment thread).

So your painting a scenario about the upheaval that would supposedly follow upon my terminating this dialogue, about this grand battle between Islam and Kufr, doesn't cut it in the least. They are childish tactics on your part. If the terms of the debates are agreed by us, the debate will continue, and if the terms are not agreed or not upheld, the debate will be terminated. This is the ONLY factor which I would consider in determining the future of this debate.

It was our mistake that we did not a priori discussed and agreed to the conditions of this debate. However, it's not too late.

In general, you are right that logical fallacies are unacceptable in a proper debate. However, what constitutes logical fallacies is also a topic of debate.

When I agreed to debate with you, I saw the conduct you exhibited in other threads talking to me. However, in your first rebuttal to me in this thread, you showed a totally different conduct, from not only attacking my belief in inapporiate ways, but also employing street talk and all sorts of adolescent pranks.

Which came as a shock to me, however, I didn't terminate the debate because we didn't agree to the conditions beforehand. I however gave you a warning to change your conduct. Since you raise the above (and other) issues about this warning, it is important we should address it first.

Now, it's not about being sensitive, it's about self-respect and principles.

You mentioned logical fallacies, They are those which prove a barrier to the smooth functioning of the debate, to divert attention, and to prove fallacious arguments in disemebling ways.

This is also include unnecessary offence.

If I hold something sacred and holy to me, you cannot desecrate it in word in a proper debate. Of course, what may constitute desecration for me might not be so to you, however, I am taking it objectively. Of course, as a believer, I have to accept certain offence in a debate about by religion as necessary. But this does not include accepting unneceassary assualt on my beliefs. It does not mean you can't vigorously argue your point against my belief, but you can't involve in attacks which can seen as abusive. That is, repeating that my Prophet, whom are asked to love more than our parents, is this and that, like a child, is a form of unncessary offence that is caused only with the wilful intention that it will offend the Muslim opponent and hamper the smooth functioning of the debate.

For example, let me get this to you on your level by invoking what may be close to you. Let's suppose that a person's father is accused by someone of a crime. Of course, we all love and respect out fathers, and this will cause offence to us - but this is not necessarily an unnecessary offence. It is quite possible that the accuser is right, and if we are brave enough to face facts, we should ask the accuser to prove his contention. However, if the accuser starts shouting and repeating, "Your father is a murderer, your father is a murderer, that son of a b!tch has murdered an innocent person, that barbarian!", what must be your response? You will certainly not find this enviornment conducive to discuss the accusation on its merit. This is causing uncessary offence - something which hampers the appropriate functioning of an argument or debate.


Had we agreed to discuss the propositions "Whether Prophet Muhammad massacred innocents", or "Wether Prophet Muhammad committed paedophilia", or "Whether Prophet Muhammad committed slavery in a brutal fashion", you would then be welcomed to defend your positive reply to the above questions as vigorously as you want. But not even in those debates, based on the terms and conditions reached, you have the right to just repeat "Muhammad was this, Muhammad was that" to cause unnecessary offence to your opponent when you have been notifed that it causes such - something you had one in THIS debate which is not even about those issues.

"Stick to the topic at hand" as you said to me.

Scathing statements like your "Prophet murdered innocents, he committed paedophilia" or "what am I evil, when your prophet committed massares, torture, slavery, etc" are unnecessary offence. They have nothing to do with the topic at hand.

We are not discussiong those propositions. You must stick to the proposition we are discussion.

Saying stuff like "Oh, so I am evil, what about your prophet who did this and that" is also not a kind of reasonble debate argument that must be entertained in a civilized discussion, and to me doens't deserve my special time. Within a specific context, you raised a question. I answered it. You don't need to jump up and down.

Secondly, when we are debating in exclusively, we both would set terms and conditions.

If you don't agree with my conditions, you may not agree to debate. But cannot dictate unilaterally what must be the sole terms of debate. You don't have anything equivalent to a believer's faith, which when attacked in the wrong manner turns into a form of disrespect towards him which effectively amounts to your dreaded "personal attacks".

And when we are discussing the proporition at hand, you cannot bring up any form of attack against my belief - you can attack it regarding the proposition we have choosed to discuss, and not attack in general.

I consider it a form of disprespect to me that in a specially designated thread, my opponents throw such attacks at my belief.

This is then the difference between NOT being senstive but being self-respecting and holding to principles. You know we Muslims are asked to love our Prophet more than our parents, so make this a consideration in this debate. Which does not mean you can't rigorously argue your claims against the Prophet - I can accept that to you, he is nothing - but which does mean that you cannot cause an unncessary offence in the manner as highlighted above. Your rage and outbrusts will not be ignored.

You must take these steps to create a conducive enviornment for the debate.

Of course, it also depends, A Mulism might agree with you to debate in any manner. But that is him. I have also debated with people here who showed zero debate etiquette, but those were casual debates, not done in a specially designated thread. Heck, why do I even repeat this? Actually, we can even have a mud slinging match in the "exclusive rooms" but, on the whole the concept of exclusivness does invoke a positive connotation, and more importantly, we agreed to have a scholarly debate . Thus, any such debate must function in a smooth way, within the terms set by the two opponents.

I am sorry I didn't tell you all the above a priori, but I relied on your past conduct in other threads with me. That was not an appropriate decision, however, we are only humans and we are bound to err.

So it's not too late. The above things must be settled.

ANOTHER POINT - this is a very important point:

Calling my belief "nonsense" whether I believe in talking trees or flying elephants, is an inappropriate form of offence that can be caused. This is elementary, if you repeat any objection on this, the debate will be terminated immediately. As I said, this is ELEMANTARY. We can discuss what I said in the previous paragraphs, BUT NOT THIS ISSUE. It should be clear to you. I can't imagine trying to a have civilized discussion with a person who can't GET THIS. Whether you think my belief is nonsense is not the point, the point is can you control yourself to not attack my belief in such a childish way?

Remember, there is NO second thought in this.

It is important that we clarify the above before preceding. I can't wait to refute your latest rebuttal, so you must realize my intention is only to hold by principles and have a fine debate on these topic with you, and not to evade. But I sense that you want to put me between a rock and a hard place.

If what I have said above may cause some confusion to you, or you think it is unreasonble, you can ask me to clarify. We can discuss this issue. But we must agree to certain terms before we move to the actual debate.

Your response to the above is eagerly awaited so that I can move on to refute your latest rebuttal at the earliest.

[KhaliL]

_________________________

Balls_of_Titanium,

Very disappointing indeed...!!!

I can not help it and I have a lot more to say on your post just above, but I reserve it for a much later time.

You have to come all this way to produce nothing. I remember our THHuxley's comment "Elephant labored a lot but gave a mouse at last"

Nothing in your new post (when in fact what I expected is a rebuttal to my posts) worthy of even addressing as they are (if to use the mildest term) third rate tactics of a miserable loser. Forgive me for using these phrases but you dragged me to it.

The rules for this debate were not set at first but if you carefully (not even necessary to be careful because it is very obvious) go through my first post in this string of responses, you can not help ignoring it. As it is obvious; see it below in the part you quoted. It is my post:

Logical fallacies are not acceptable in a serious debate and I forgot to mention this in my first post. But from hereon the rule should be implemented. There is no room for logical fallacies in a scholarly debate so arguments even come close to any form of logical fallacies will be subject to dismissal.

Did you catch it now? I bolded and highlighted it for the purpose. Rule is set before I started answering your first rebuttal. I say BEFORE I started answering your first rebuttal. And the rule is not at all complex. The only set rule is "NO LOGICAL FALLACIES"

In logical debates, this is the central rule and this has to be abided by both parties. If you are not happy with "No logical fallacies" and you want to employ logical fallacies, then it is time for you to vacate this premise. I mean this premise because you are in the wrong place.

I am forced to use harsh words because you are not stopping your practice of beating around the bush which is a clear-cut "Logical fallacy".

You say you can demolish my arguments without thinking for a moment. So, what thwarts you man to do so? Instead of puffing hot air out, you should have done it and that would have been effective and convincing to the hundreds of readers in this forum. What held you back?

Can you show me a single argument, refutation that can amount to logical fallacy in my responses after I stipulated "No logical fallacies" rule? Just one? Then what are you doing here again by using words like “You will demolish"..??? Did I ever say so? I never resorted to this cheap, I mean dirt cheap tactic but entered straightway to the debate and refuted your arguments. And in doing so I did not resort to any logical fallacy at all. If you can show me one in my last five postings, I challenge you to bring ONE.

So, still you have time to repair the damage. Debate is underway and I have responded you in a very polite manner not resorting to any logical fallacies. If you do not feel comfortable with my logic, that is not my problem. What you are supposed to do is refute what is presented, not to dictate rules again after the rule (the generally accepted rule of a logical debate) is implemented by me. I showed the pattern of it in my posts in this page by not resorting to any logical fallacies.

Go on. Do not become an embarrassment for yourself. My posts are there waiting for your rebuttal. Refute them without resorting to logical fallacies. And remember, this is not Ummah.com or a hardliner Islamic website. This website's aim is to destroy Islam not to butter it up. And do not play tricks here by telling us "You are not supposed to attack my beliefs...." Then what the heck are you doing here? We are here to attack your beliefs. We are here to attack ISLAM. If you thought otherwise, this is the wrong place;

All that said, I am still with this debate. But no more the fallacy of “Beating around the bush”. I have presented my case. And when you notified of my fallacy of argumentum ad hominem, I corrected it and my above five posts do not amount to any logical fallacies. They are strictly in concordance with logic. If I have committed any logical fallacies, you can bring it up WHILE you are responding to them so that I can correct the mistake if there is any. But I am so confident none of the arguments I presented amount to logical fallacies. If you can prove otherwise, this thread is open. I mean O.P.E.N.

Waiting for your rebuttal to my responses to your posts. Since you are so eager to refute me and expose me, go on and don't waste a moment. I will take a nap and when I wake up after a few hours and switch on my PC I hope I will come across your refutation to my posts.

Regards
KH.

[Balls_of_Titanium_1]

_________________________

Balls_of_Titanium,

Very disappointing indeed...!!!

In what sense?

I can not help it and I have a lot more to say on your post just above, but I reserve it for a much later time.

Good, you can control yourself.

You have to come all this way to produce nothing. I remember our THHuxley's comment "Elephant labored a lot but gave a mouse at last"

Thus you can very well understand my feelings?

Nothing in your new post (when in fact what I expected is a rebuttal to my posts) worthy of even addressing as they are (if to use the mildest term) third rate tactics of a miserable loser. Forgive me for using these phrases but you dragged me to it.

Don't consider it off. And no personal attacks are really not my concern, although they are against proper debate etiquette and as such must be avoided.

I did what I think was right. You have a problem with it? Then you must express this problem by touching on my post.

The rules for this debate were not set for this debate at first but if you carefully (not even necessary to be careful because it is very obvious) go through my first post in this string of responses, you can not help ignoring it. As it is obvious; see it below in the part you quoted. It is my post:

Logical fallacies are not acceptable in a serious debate and I forgot to mention this in my first post. But from hereon the rule should be implemented. There is no room for logical fallacies in a scholarly debate so arguments even come close to any form of logical fallacies will be subject to dismissal.

It seems you have ignored the better part of my last post. I did noticed that, and commented on that.

Why didn't you notice THAT?

Did you catch it now? I bolded and highlighted it for the purpose. Rule is set before I started answering your first rebuttal. I say BEFORE I started answering your first rebuttal. And the rule is not at all complex. The only set rule is "NO LOGICAL FALLACIES"

But who says that the rule must be the simplest? This is the crux.

Local fallacies can be of many form, and their definiton or their categorization is NOT complete nor absolute. So we actually have to discuss the terms and conditions before proceeding, rather than simply saying "No logical fallacies" - to which btw I agree.

In logical debates, this is the central rule and this has to be abided by both parties. If you are not happy with "No logical fallacies" and you want to employ logical fallacies in this debate, then it is time for you to vacate this premise. I mean this premise because you are in the wrong place.

I don't need logical fallacies to win the argument. However, you must also think about what you have been employing.

I am forced to use harsh words because you are not stopping your practice of beating around the bush which is a clear-cut "Logical fallacy".

Your hash words can be forgiven, if you eventually come to your senses.

No, it would be a logical fallacy if I employed it to divert an argument while I was involved in the debate.

I clearly indicated that I am suspending the debate till the time we have agreed to the terms and conditions as discussed by us.

As such, this is called discussing a separate topic, not logical fallacy.

I think I need to discuss with you what are actually logical fallacies.

You say you can demolish my arguments without thinking for a moment. So, what thwarts you man to do so? Instead of puffing hot air out, you should have done it and that would have been effective and convincing to the hundreds of readers in this forum. What held you back?

My principles. My self respect.

You know, strict adherence to the above have put me in great trials in real life. This place is nothing comparatively.

I am earger to refute your argument.

Give me your comments on the conditions I outlined, agree to them or show they are unreasonble or false.

Can you show me a single argument, refutation that can amount to logical fallacy in my responses after I stipulated "No logical fallacies" rule?

See, we disagree on what constitute logical fallacies.

Trying to cause unnecessary offence to the opponent may not restrictly be a logical fallacy, but it does hampers the smooth functioning of the debate. I have clarified when you were involved in this.

Actually your latest response was mild compared to your first rebuttal to my first post in this thread.

To which I say, all is not lost. You need not get hystrical. Reply to the posts in which I set up the conditons, accept the conditions, reject the conditions - give reasons. Let us agree to the terms and conditions that would govern this debate, and I am eagerly awaiting to make my rebuttal to your latest round of posting.

Just one? Then what are you doing here again by using words like “You will demolish"..??? Did I ever say so? I never resorted to this cheap, I mean dirt cheap tactic but entered straightway to the debate and refuted your arguments. And in doing so I did not resort to any logical fallacy at all. If you can show me one in my last five postings, I challenge you to bring ONE.

See above.

When I will actually get to respond to your posts, I will then point many things out. Till then the terms and conditions must be clarified. And no its not simply "no logical fallacies", it needs a formal agreement beforehand.

Saying I will demolish your arguments is not strict adherence to debate etiquette, I admit, but this is behind us now as we must agree to the terms and conditions of this debate to proceed.

I am sorry if you it has caused offence to you.

So, still you have time to repair the damage. Debate is underway and I have responded you in a very polite manner not resorting to any logical fallacies. If you do not feel comfortable with my logic, that is not my problem. What you are supposed to do is refute what is presented, not to dictate rules again after the rule (the generally accepted rule of a logical debate) is implemented by me. I showed the pattern of it not resorting to any logical fallacies.

Again this kind of response will be unacceptable. Go through my last posts and tell me do you agree with what I said, or reject it, or partly agree with it, or partly reject it, and on what basis.

Your civilty will be reciprocated. That's all. It's not a favour you bestow on me. So don't try to mention again and again that you are being "very polite". You have to be. Decency demands that. Do you want to be rude?

Go on. Do not become an embarrassment for yourself. My posts are there waiting for your rebuttal. Refute them without resorting to logical fallacies. And remember, this is not Ummah.com or a hardliner Islamic website. This website's aim is to destroy Islam not to butter it up. And do not play tricks here by telling us "You are not supposed to attack my beliefs...." Then what the heck are you doing here? We are here to attack your beliefs. We are here to attack ISLAM. If you thought otherwise, this is the wrong place;

This avenu doesn't necessarily represent the mode of the whole of this forum, as it is an exclusive room and the debate is between me and you.

So now you have indirectly objected to what I said.

I did not mean you should not attack my beliefs in any way, you can attack it as far as the contention we have agreed to discuss demands. However, see my objections to abusive attacks, and the childish ones, and the ones designed to cause unnecessary offence - to cause embarrassment for the opponent - embarrassment not in the sense that the offence contains anything truthful that hurts, but in the sense that it disrespects the opponent.

As I said if you just start shouting at me something against my religion, then there is nothing substantive to debate. However, stick to the argument, and make your case against my arguments in as rigorous a fashion as you can. You will not be notified.

All that said, I am still with this debate. But no more the fallacy of “Beating around the bush”.

There is no fallacy. I have clearly indicated suspension of the debate to first discuss the terms and conditions.

I have presented my case. And when you notified of my fallacy of argumentum ad hominem, I corrected it and my above five posts do not amount to any logical fallacies. They are strictly in concordance with logic. If I have committed any logical fallacies, you can bring it up WHILE you are responding to them so that I can correct the mistake if there is any. But I am so confident none of the arguments I presented amount to logical fallacies. If you can prove otherwise, this thread is open. I mean O.P.E.N.

It matters not in the least when you decide to close this thread, what matter is only and only principles. The dissection of your posts will begin when I will return to the original argument, when we have settled the topic at hand - that of terms and conditions.

You have to clearly express your objection to my last posts and if you find some demands in that unreasonble you should say so. You also should clear your misunderstanding about my demands.

Maybe we are not far away from reaching an agreement on the terms and conditons of this debate, however, confusion and impatience might cause the premature termination of this debate.

Waiting for your rebuttal to my responses to your posts. Since you are so eager to refute me and expose me, go on and don't waste a moment. I will take a nap and when I wake up after a few hours and switch on my PC I hope I will come across your refutation to my posts.

I am so eager for you to comment on my last post in a more comprehensive fashion so that we can agree on the terms and conditions of this debate.

And don't be so impatient, it might take us some time to discuss the terms and conditions of the debate, which may constitute a debate in its own right, and eventually return to the topic. If you think you are on truth, these must be small matters to you.