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

The Qur'an's wording transports current Jews into the past, thereby blaming them for ancient trangressions.

There is a group called Christadelphians that adhere to that. Otherwise hardly any. How does that change anything I've said about the Qur'an?
It's the same thing: there are only some weird fringe groups in every religion that read or take anything in their holy books very seriously.

Are you really not able to imagine how things would be different if ALL Muslims, or even a simple majority, took their holy books seriously like you claim they do? Obviously very different than they are now.
 
Last edited:
Thank you for such a brilliant ad-hom-in-lieu-of-argument example.

Garbage in / garbage out. Your threads always go the same way. Besides, I didn't post in here to talk to you in the first place.

Sorry, bud, I just don't find you all that intellectually stimulating. I think the giant axe you are constantly grinding is the problem, it's too obvious and distracting.

Anyway, have fun with it... and remember, the best way to get me out of your thread is to just stop responding to me. Trust me, it won't take long for me to forget about this thread if you do.
 
It's the same thing: there are only some weird fringe groups in every religion that read or take anything in their holy books very seriously.

I'm willing to talk to you about this as much as you want to.

Let's start with this. Muslims are expected to believe that the Qur'an was revealed to Mohamed by Allah verbatim (via Gabriel). I don't see how a devote Muslim is supposed to take a word-for-word sermon from their god any way other than seriously. Those people are the opposite of members weird fringe groups. They are trying to strictly obey the very words of Allah. Take Hamas' 1988 founding charter for example. It says that Mohamed is their example, and that the Qur'an is their constitution. Therefore, they and their countless supporters very much take the Qur'an seriously.

Does that sound reasonable so far?
 
Last edited:
I'm willing to talk to you about this as much as you want to.

Let's start with this. Muslims are expected to believe that the Qur'an was revealed to Mohamed by Allah verbatim (via Gabriel). I don't see how a devote Muslim is supposed to take a word-for-word sermon from their god any way other than seriously.

Christian supposedly think that the Bible is the word of God and to be taken very seriously. But as you pointed out, only the Christadelphians seem to take it that seriously. Everyone else just cherry picks stuff they like and ignore the rest.

Those people are the opposite of members weird fringe groups. They are trying to strictly obey the very words of Allah. Take Hamas' 1988 founding charter for example. It says that Mohamed is their example, and that the Qur'an is their constitution. Therefore, they and their countless supporters very much take the Qur'an seriously.

Does that sound reasonable so far?
So? The KKK appeals to the Bible.
 
Christian supposedly think that the Bible is the word of God and to be taken very seriously. But as you pointed out, only the Christadelphians seem to take it that seriously. Everyone else just cherry picks stuff they like and ignore the rest.


So? The KKK appeals to the Bible.

Got it.

I took the trouble of addressing your claim about "weird fringe groups", and you completely blew off my response.

See ya in the next thread.
 
Got it.

I took the trouble of addressing your claim about "weird fringe groups", and you completely blew off my response.

See ya in the next thread.
Not sure why Hamas is any less fringe in the Islamic world than the KKK in the Christian world.
 
Not sure why Hamas is any less fringe in the Islamic world than the KKK in the Christian world.

Maybe the fact that NO Muslim state has EVER tried to rein them in is an indication that the greater Muslim world has no problem with them - that they're considered mainstream rather than fringe. You know the countries I mean - like the eight who attacked Israel in 1948. Those countries.

Btw, have you forgotten that Gazans voted Hamas into power?
 
Maybe the fact that NO Muslim state has EVER tried to rein them in is an indication that the greater Muslim world has no problem with them - that they're considered mainstream rather than fringe. You know the countries I mean - like the eight who attacked Israel in 1948. Those countries.

Huh? What do you think that was an act of terrorism and not war?

Btw, have you forgotten that Gazans voted Hamas into power?
So? Americans voted Nixon into power.

1748989281575.webp
 
Deflecting? I thought we were comparing. That’s what you asked for; and now comparing is deflecting?

Anyway- carry on. 🤷‍♂️
 
Deflecting? I thought we were comparing. That’s what you asked for; and now comparing is deflecting?

Anyway- carry on. 🤷‍♂️

Yes, deflecting. I've now written two posts in direct response to your posts, and you've blown both of them off.
 
Tell me the last time anyone took this seriously: 🤭

"Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church."
-Corinthians 14:34-35
that is only Paul speaking, notnJesus ...
 
that is only Paul speaking, notnJesus ...
So we should not really pay attention to the Bible anymore except only Jesus' words now?

God had only one chance in all human history, to help guide a frightened, lost, and bewildered humanity, give them a stable system and framework for ethics, to make sense of a vast and frightening universe they didn't understand at all. He could have revealed entire textbooks of ethics, about systems of government, about science, medicine, engineering, etc... and he revealed a book that we supposedly can't rely on 99.9% of it, and only a handful of puzzling and questionable sentences from his son, like turn your other cheek to your enemies?

That's just odd. It makes no sense.
 
How does that happen, and why is it important? After the Hijrah, Mohamed began preaching to the Jews with whom he lived in Yathrib (later renamed to Medina after he purged in of Jews). Verses 2:47-74 reiterate Old Testament stories, mostly of Moses. Allah reminded the Jews of their history, their covenant with Him, the favors He granted them, the times He intervened on their behalf, and of their transgressions, such as worshipping the golden calf. Most of this Biblical recap must have sounded familiar to the Jews, but oddly, much of it was anachronistically framed in the present tense. These verse's 35 uses of second-person conjugations seemingly transported the Jews of Yathrib into events of the past as though they were the transgressors rather than their ancestors. The third person is occasionally employed, which only serves to create confusing and apparently random trips back and forth in time. The Sahih International Qur'an tried to hide this temporal discontinuity in its translation of verse 2:49. It says "We saved your forefathers from the people of Pharaoh'' in open denial of the 2nd person pronoun "you" used in the original Arabic. This pronoun peculiarity also appears in later verses.

An unfortunate effect of this grammatical to and fro is that verses written in the present tense remain so for all time, thereby making all 'current' Jews appear responsible for the alleged sins of their forefathers. Eventually, in what looks like an attempt to clear up any resulting confusion, and perhaps in response to Jews who did not appreciate being blamed for events of the past, Mohamed revealed verses 2:134 and 2:141, which say, "This is a people that have passed away; they shall have what they earned and you shall have what you earn, and you shall not be called upon to answer for what they did." The back-pedal is so obvious as to be laughable.

But, the damage was done. Every Jew from that time forward has to wear those accusations like a yellow star. Verses such as 2:92-93 perpetuate this unfair time-tripping by using the present tense to again accuse the Jews of Yathrib of worshipping the golden calf, and concludes with an assertion that forever tarnishes Judaism - "How wretched is that which your faith enjoins upon you." This, along with several other verses that denigrate Jews, makes it virtually impossible for modern day Muslims to view Jews as anything other than perpetual blasphemers.
You mean like how Christians call us "Christ killers"?
 
Well hell - there go my plans to convert to Islam.

In the meantime, Christianity has plenty of beams to remove from its own eyes.
Should we get into the Catholic Church's role during WW2 where the Nazis are concerned?
 
The Whatabout room in down the hall two doors on the left.

Btw, based on your "us" remark, I assume you're Jewish.
Whoops - sorry, thought I’d entered the Intellectually Honest Discussions Group. I’ll see my way out. :(
 
Whoops - sorry, thought I’d entered the Intellectually Honest Discussions Group. I’ll see my way out. :(

You didn't make a single comment about the OP, but went straight to whataboutism. How is that intellectually honest?
 
It is not too illogical or abnormal to blame people for the sins of their ancestors. We Serbs do it to Croats for the Ustase and Albanians for supporting the Axis Powers. Balkan nationalists do it all the time, so I am confused at Westoids freaking out over this.
Dude....even the Hatfields and McCoy's look at you and think "Let that shit go".
Thats a child argument.
 
Back
Top Bottom