The bible says that jesus comes from a bastard lineage. Genesis 38:15-30 judah sleeps with his daughter in law and she gives birth to pharez and zarah who are the great grandparents of jesus. Matthew 1:1-16 explains the lineage of jesus. how can such a great prophet come from a wrecked lineage? how does the bible explain this?
Within the context of these verses how is this explained?
This is only one of a number of blasphemies against God and his prophets in the bible.
The bible says jesus has bastard great grandparents!!
Moderator: Moderators
-
muhammad rasullah
- Sage
- Posts: 808
- Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 3:05 pm
- Location: philly
The bible says jesus has bastard great grandparents!!
Post #1Bismillahir rahmaanir Raheem \"In The Name of Allah, the most gracious, the most merciful\"
-
muhammad rasullah
- Sage
- Posts: 808
- Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 3:05 pm
- Location: philly
Re: The bible says jesus has bastard great grandparents!!
Post #2Genesis 15 When Judah saw her, he thought her to be an harlot; because she had covered her face. (harlot means a prostitute or whore)
16 And he turned unto her by the way, and said, Go to, I pray thee, let me come in unto thee; (for he knew not that she was his daughter in law.) And she said, What wilt thou give me, that thou mayest come in unto me?
17 And he said, I will send thee a kid from the flock. And she said, Wilt thou give me a pledge, till thou send it?
18 And he said, What pledge shall I give thee? And she said, Thy signet, and thy bracelets, and thy staff that is in thine hand. And he gave it her, and came in unto her, and she conceived by him.
19 And she arose, and went away, and laid by her vail from her, and put on the garments of her widowhood.
20 And Judah sent the kid by the hand of his friend the Adullamite, to receive his pledge from the woman's hand: but he found her not.
21 Then he asked the men of that place, saying, Where is the harlot, that was openly by the way side? And they said, There was no harlot in this place.
22 And he returned to Judah, and said, I cannot find her; and also the men of the place said, that there was no harlot in this place.
23 And Judah said, Let her take it to her, lest we be shamed: behold, I sent this kid, and thou hast not found her.
24 And it came to pass about three months after, that it was told Judah, saying, Tamar thy daughter in law hath played the harlot; and also, behold, she is with child by whoredom. And Judah said, Bring her forth, and let her be burnt.
25 When she was brought forth, she sent to her father in law, saying, By the man, whose these are, am I with child: and she said, Discern, I pray thee, whose are these, the signet, and bracelets, and staff.
26 And Judah acknowledged them, and said, She hath been more righteous than I; because that I gave her not to Shelah my son. And he knew her again no more.
27 And it came to pass in the time of her travail, that, behold, twins were in her womb.
28 And it came to pass, when she travailed, that the one put out his hand: and the midwife took and bound upon his hand a scarlet thread, saying, This came out first.
29 And it came to pass, as he drew back his hand, that, behold, his brother came out: and she said, How hast thou broken forth? this breach be upon thee: therefore his name was called Pharez.
30 And afterward came out his brother, that had the scarlet thread upon his hand: and his name was called Zarah.
Lineage of Jesus, Matthew 1:1 The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.
2 Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren;
3 And Judas begat Phares and Zara of Thamar; and Phares begat Esrom; and Esrom begat Aram;
4 And Aram begat Aminadab; and Aminadab begat Naasson; and Naasson begat Salmon;
5 And Salmon begat Booz of Rachab; and Booz begat Obed of Ruth; and Obed begat Jesse;
6 And Jesse begat David the king; and David the king begat Solomon of her that had been the wife of Urias;
7 And Solomon begat Roboam; and Roboam begat Abia; and Abia begat Asa;
8 And Asa begat Josaphat; and Josaphat begat Joram; and Joram begat Ozias;
9 And Ozias begat Joatham; and Joatham begat Achaz; and Achaz begat Ezekias;
10 And Ezekias begat Manasses; and Manasses begat Amon; and Amon begat Josias;
11 And Josias begat Jechonias and his brethren, about the time they were carried away to Babylon:
12 And after they were brought to Babylon, Jechonias begat Salathiel; and Salathiel begat Zorobabel;
13 And Zorobabel begat Abiud; and Abiud begat Eliakim; and Eliakim begat Azor;
14 And Azor begat Sadoc; and Sadoc begat Achim; and Achim begat Eliud;
15 And Eliud begat Eleazar; and Eleazar begat Matthan; and Matthan begat Jacob;
16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.
WHAT IS GOING ON HERE?????? A BASTARD LINEAGE FROM JESUS?
16 And he turned unto her by the way, and said, Go to, I pray thee, let me come in unto thee; (for he knew not that she was his daughter in law.) And she said, What wilt thou give me, that thou mayest come in unto me?
17 And he said, I will send thee a kid from the flock. And she said, Wilt thou give me a pledge, till thou send it?
18 And he said, What pledge shall I give thee? And she said, Thy signet, and thy bracelets, and thy staff that is in thine hand. And he gave it her, and came in unto her, and she conceived by him.
19 And she arose, and went away, and laid by her vail from her, and put on the garments of her widowhood.
20 And Judah sent the kid by the hand of his friend the Adullamite, to receive his pledge from the woman's hand: but he found her not.
21 Then he asked the men of that place, saying, Where is the harlot, that was openly by the way side? And they said, There was no harlot in this place.
22 And he returned to Judah, and said, I cannot find her; and also the men of the place said, that there was no harlot in this place.
23 And Judah said, Let her take it to her, lest we be shamed: behold, I sent this kid, and thou hast not found her.
24 And it came to pass about three months after, that it was told Judah, saying, Tamar thy daughter in law hath played the harlot; and also, behold, she is with child by whoredom. And Judah said, Bring her forth, and let her be burnt.
25 When she was brought forth, she sent to her father in law, saying, By the man, whose these are, am I with child: and she said, Discern, I pray thee, whose are these, the signet, and bracelets, and staff.
26 And Judah acknowledged them, and said, She hath been more righteous than I; because that I gave her not to Shelah my son. And he knew her again no more.
27 And it came to pass in the time of her travail, that, behold, twins were in her womb.
28 And it came to pass, when she travailed, that the one put out his hand: and the midwife took and bound upon his hand a scarlet thread, saying, This came out first.
29 And it came to pass, as he drew back his hand, that, behold, his brother came out: and she said, How hast thou broken forth? this breach be upon thee: therefore his name was called Pharez.
30 And afterward came out his brother, that had the scarlet thread upon his hand: and his name was called Zarah.
Lineage of Jesus, Matthew 1:1 The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.
2 Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren;
3 And Judas begat Phares and Zara of Thamar; and Phares begat Esrom; and Esrom begat Aram;
4 And Aram begat Aminadab; and Aminadab begat Naasson; and Naasson begat Salmon;
5 And Salmon begat Booz of Rachab; and Booz begat Obed of Ruth; and Obed begat Jesse;
6 And Jesse begat David the king; and David the king begat Solomon of her that had been the wife of Urias;
7 And Solomon begat Roboam; and Roboam begat Abia; and Abia begat Asa;
8 And Asa begat Josaphat; and Josaphat begat Joram; and Joram begat Ozias;
9 And Ozias begat Joatham; and Joatham begat Achaz; and Achaz begat Ezekias;
10 And Ezekias begat Manasses; and Manasses begat Amon; and Amon begat Josias;
11 And Josias begat Jechonias and his brethren, about the time they were carried away to Babylon:
12 And after they were brought to Babylon, Jechonias begat Salathiel; and Salathiel begat Zorobabel;
13 And Zorobabel begat Abiud; and Abiud begat Eliakim; and Eliakim begat Azor;
14 And Azor begat Sadoc; and Sadoc begat Achim; and Achim begat Eliud;
15 And Eliud begat Eleazar; and Eleazar begat Matthan; and Matthan begat Jacob;
16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.
WHAT IS GOING ON HERE?????? A BASTARD LINEAGE FROM JESUS?
Bismillahir rahmaanir Raheem \"In The Name of Allah, the most gracious, the most merciful\"
-
Nec Spe Nec Metu
- Scholar
- Posts: 419
- Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 1:00 pm
Post #3
I could be wrong, but I believe the Biblical story is that Joseph has nothing to do with the birthing of Jesus. Mary was, according to the story, impregnated by the divine spirit rather than a human.
-
muhammad rasullah
- Sage
- Posts: 808
- Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 3:05 pm
- Location: philly
Post #4
You are correct but is this not the same lineage of David and Solomon two great prophets and also Jesus? how do you explain judah sleeping with his daughter in law who he thought was a prostitute and bearing twins which lead to this lineage?Nec Spe Nec Metu wrote:I could be wrong, but I believe the Biblical story is that Joseph has nothing to do with the birthing of Jesus. Mary was, according to the story, impregnated by the divine spirit rather than a human.
Bismillahir rahmaanir Raheem \"In The Name of Allah, the most gracious, the most merciful\"
-
GaHillBilly
- Student
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2008 8:46 am
Post #5
Muhammed,
I think you may be bringing in assumptions that aren't valid in Christianity.
Most orthodox Christians believe, in one way or another, that sin contaminates all of Creation, including even legitimate births*. The hope of Christianity is not, for most Christians, based on 'measuring up', by good works, by legitimate birth, by money, by conquest, or by any other means. It is quite true that orthodox Christianity has always taught that true Christians will engage in good works, but has also taught that Christians are sinners saved by embracing, in will and in action, God's grace -- undeserved kindness and mercy -- rather than by simply acting in correct ways on their own. All Christians everywhere have believed that no matter how "good" a man may be, he can never make up for his sins, apart from God's gracious forgiveness. As St Paul wrote, "But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.".
In this context, the issue of an illegitimate birth is not the problem it might seem to you. For Christ is descended from sinners through his mother Mary, even if you accept the Roman Catholic doctrine regarding her own individual state of sin. After all, Christ like all men is descended from Adam who sinned while still sinless and by doing so corrupted this entire world!
Apparently, the BIG issue, for the pre-incarnate Christ was not who his ancestors might have been in particular, but rather the shame and humiliation of simply becoming a man in a fallen world. St. Paul wrote of Him that "he [who] was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross."
It is this birth, and this death, that is the 'shame' of Christ, and the 'shame' of all those who follow him. In Hebrews, it's written that we (believers) should "fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy set before him endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God." As Paul wrote, "God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong".
So, I think you might find that most orthodox Christians, who understand their faith, will respond to your challenge with a shrug, and the question, "But what is your point?"
GaHillBilly
* Different Christian groups have different ideas about how sin contaminated Mary's birth, but mostly agree that Christ's birth was somewhat special in being uncontaminated on a purely individual basis. Nevertheless, all agree that He was descended from sinners, even if Mary herself is thought to be an exception.
I think you may be bringing in assumptions that aren't valid in Christianity.
Most orthodox Christians believe, in one way or another, that sin contaminates all of Creation, including even legitimate births*. The hope of Christianity is not, for most Christians, based on 'measuring up', by good works, by legitimate birth, by money, by conquest, or by any other means. It is quite true that orthodox Christianity has always taught that true Christians will engage in good works, but has also taught that Christians are sinners saved by embracing, in will and in action, God's grace -- undeserved kindness and mercy -- rather than by simply acting in correct ways on their own. All Christians everywhere have believed that no matter how "good" a man may be, he can never make up for his sins, apart from God's gracious forgiveness. As St Paul wrote, "But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.".
In this context, the issue of an illegitimate birth is not the problem it might seem to you. For Christ is descended from sinners through his mother Mary, even if you accept the Roman Catholic doctrine regarding her own individual state of sin. After all, Christ like all men is descended from Adam who sinned while still sinless and by doing so corrupted this entire world!
Apparently, the BIG issue, for the pre-incarnate Christ was not who his ancestors might have been in particular, but rather the shame and humiliation of simply becoming a man in a fallen world. St. Paul wrote of Him that "he [who] was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross."
It is this birth, and this death, that is the 'shame' of Christ, and the 'shame' of all those who follow him. In Hebrews, it's written that we (believers) should "fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy set before him endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God." As Paul wrote, "God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong".
So, I think you might find that most orthodox Christians, who understand their faith, will respond to your challenge with a shrug, and the question, "But what is your point?"
GaHillBilly
* Different Christian groups have different ideas about how sin contaminated Mary's birth, but mostly agree that Christ's birth was somewhat special in being uncontaminated on a purely individual basis. Nevertheless, all agree that He was descended from sinners, even if Mary herself is thought to be an exception.
-
muhammad rasullah
- Sage
- Posts: 808
- Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 3:05 pm
- Location: philly
Post #6
It is very much a shame that a christian can read this story of judah fornicating with his daughter in law who he thought was a prostitute and having two children who in turn become the great grandparents of jesus (pbuh). If this doesn't distrub you about the bible how about the fact that in the story of judah sleeping with his daughter in law there is no repremand by god for his actions the story just ends with her giving birth. Another point in the story is that judah is a prophet of god committing fornication what the heck is that about prophet's don't do that. how could they if they are guided by god to deliver the message to the people. There are tons of other stories in the bible were this goes on and there is no repremand by god, no moral behind it, nothing. If this doesn't disturb you when reading it and you can beleive that this is from god then sumthings wrong!!!GaHillBilly wrote:Muhammed,
I think you may be bringing in assumptions that aren't valid in Christianity.
Most orthodox Christians believe, in one way or another, that sin contaminates all of Creation, including even legitimate births*. The hope of Christianity is not, for most Christians, based on 'measuring up', by good works, by legitimate birth, by money, by conquest, or by any other means. It is quite true that orthodox Christianity has always taught that true Christians will engage in good works, but has also taught that Christians are sinners saved by embracing, in will and in action, God's grace -- undeserved kindness and mercy -- rather than by simply acting in correct ways on their own. All Christians everywhere have believed that no matter how "good" a man may be, he can never make up for his sins, apart from God's gracious forgiveness. As St Paul wrote, "But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.".
In this context, the issue of an illegitimate birth is not the problem it might seem to you. For Christ is descended from sinners through his mother Mary, even if you accept the Roman Catholic doctrine regarding her own individual state of sin. After all, Christ like all men is descended from Adam who sinned while still sinless and by doing so corrupted this entire world!
Apparently, the BIG issue, for the pre-incarnate Christ was not who his ancestors might have been in particular, but rather the shame and humiliation of simply becoming a man in a fallen world. St. Paul wrote of Him that "he [who] was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross."
It is this birth, and this death, that is the 'shame' of Christ, and the 'shame' of all those who follow him. In Hebrews, it's written that we (believers) should "fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy set before him endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God." As Paul wrote, "God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong".
So, I think you might find that most orthodox Christians, who understand their faith, will respond to your challenge with a shrug, and the question, "But what is your point?"
GaHillBilly
* Different Christian groups have different ideas about how sin contaminated Mary's birth, but mostly agree that Christ's birth was somewhat special in being uncontaminated on a purely individual basis. Nevertheless, all agree that He was descended from sinners, even if Mary herself is thought to be an exception.
Ezekiel 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.GaHillBilly wrote:Christians are sinners saved by embracing, in will and in action, God's grace -- undeserved kindness and mercy -- rather than by simply acting in correct ways on their own.
21 But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die.
This is what the bible says about salvation everything you said about jesus dying for your sins is wrong compared to this. In the old testament there is no such things mentioned as someone dying for your sins it says the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him the son shall not bear the iniquity of the father we are responsible for our own sins! this is what the bible says nothing about dying for your sins in the old testament this dying for our sins stuff was created by paul. who came after jesus and never met him. who used to be a bounty hunter for the early christians to find them to be killed. why do you trust his words over Gods?
GaHillBilly wrote:St. Paul wrote of Him that "he [who] was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.
God being in the form of a man contradicts this statement in the OT Numbers 23:19 God is not a man that he should lie, neither the son of man that he should repent.
God is not a man! how can god come in the form of a man if he is not a man.
Many of your statements do not come from having read and understood the bible.
I don't see how any christian could read this and think nothing about it. There are many other proofs in the bible hat show Jesus was not crucified!
Bismillahir rahmaanir Raheem \"In The Name of Allah, the most gracious, the most merciful\"
-
GaHillBilly
- Student
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2008 8:46 am
Post #7
Muhammad;
You appear to be telling Christians that they ought be embarrassed by something that you'd find embarrassing. This is rather silly.
OTOH, here something to be embarrassed about:
from http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,344409,00.html
Now, if the Pope, or a major Christian leader said it was OK with for Christians to kill and rape all the Muslims they like . . . I'd find that something to be ashamed of.
But, the murder of Christians, and destruction of churches by Muslims is nothing new. People forget that the Crusades -- during which many evil things were done by Christians -- were a RESPONSE to Muslim destruction of churches throughout North Africa, and Muslim demands for ransom for pilgrims to Jerusalem. In other words, the Crusades were STARTED by Arab and Turkish Muslims, and not the other way round.
There were many cruel and evil acts committed by Christians during the Crusades, and many of these acts have been condemned, both officially and unofficially, by various Christians over the centuries.
But, when was the last time an Islamic official condemned Muslims who, during the Caliphate OR now, committed murder, torture and rape in the name of Allah?
We have soldiers in prison for committing comparatively mild torture against Iraqi Muslims. Personally, I think some of the officers should have been imprisoned as well, and I know of quite a few American soldiers who'd agree. These actions have been condemned by Christians world-wide.
But Al Qaeda operatives have been murdering, raping, and torturing Christians and Jews, all without condemnation by Islamic teachers.
Our soldiers violated policy, by beating Iraqi Muslims with their fists. Al Qaeda's operatives, following their policy manual, beat kidnapped Shiites and Christians with hammers. I have a copy of that manual*, if you want to see it. It details how to torture using drill-bits and motors, hot irons, prying eyes out with screwdrivers, dragging men behind cars, chopping limbs off with axes, using blow torches, breaking limbs by bending them backward over doors and crushing heads slowly in vises.
Which Imam has condemned that?
What Saudi prison holds the men who developed and wrote the manual?
Which Islamic society has strongly repudiated these actions?
GaHillBilly
*If you want a copy, I can provide one.
You appear to be telling Christians that they ought be embarrassed by something that you'd find embarrassing. This is rather silly.
OTOH, here something to be embarrassed about:
from http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,344409,00.html
Apparently, good Muslims can rape and kill all the Christians they like . . . because that's perfectly fine with Muhammad the Prophet and the version of Allah he describes!A report posted on Islam Watch, a site run by Muslims who oppose intolerant teachings and hatred for unbelievers, exposes a prominent Islamic cleric and lawyer who support extreme punishment for non-Muslims including killing and rape.
A question-and-answer session with Imam Abdul Makin in an East London mosque asks why Allah would tell Muslims to kill and rape innocent non-Muslims, including their wives and daughters, according to Islam Watch.
"Because non-Muslims are never innocent, they are guilty of denying Allah and his prophet," the Imam says, according to the report. "If you don't believe me, here is the legal authority, the top Muslim lawyer of Britain."
The lawyer, Anjem Choudary, backs up the Imam's position, saying that all Muslims are innocent.
"You are innocent if you are a Muslim," Choudary tells the BBC. "Then you are innocent in the eyes of God. If you are not a Muslim, then you are guilty of not believing in God."
Choudary said he would not condemn a Muslim for any action.
"As a Muslim, I must support my Muslim brothers and sisters," Choudary said. "I must have hatred to everything that is not Muslim."
Now, if the Pope, or a major Christian leader said it was OK with for Christians to kill and rape all the Muslims they like . . . I'd find that something to be ashamed of.
But, the murder of Christians, and destruction of churches by Muslims is nothing new. People forget that the Crusades -- during which many evil things were done by Christians -- were a RESPONSE to Muslim destruction of churches throughout North Africa, and Muslim demands for ransom for pilgrims to Jerusalem. In other words, the Crusades were STARTED by Arab and Turkish Muslims, and not the other way round.
There were many cruel and evil acts committed by Christians during the Crusades, and many of these acts have been condemned, both officially and unofficially, by various Christians over the centuries.
But, when was the last time an Islamic official condemned Muslims who, during the Caliphate OR now, committed murder, torture and rape in the name of Allah?
We have soldiers in prison for committing comparatively mild torture against Iraqi Muslims. Personally, I think some of the officers should have been imprisoned as well, and I know of quite a few American soldiers who'd agree. These actions have been condemned by Christians world-wide.
But Al Qaeda operatives have been murdering, raping, and torturing Christians and Jews, all without condemnation by Islamic teachers.
Our soldiers violated policy, by beating Iraqi Muslims with their fists. Al Qaeda's operatives, following their policy manual, beat kidnapped Shiites and Christians with hammers. I have a copy of that manual*, if you want to see it. It details how to torture using drill-bits and motors, hot irons, prying eyes out with screwdrivers, dragging men behind cars, chopping limbs off with axes, using blow torches, breaking limbs by bending them backward over doors and crushing heads slowly in vises.
Which Imam has condemned that?
What Saudi prison holds the men who developed and wrote the manual?
Which Islamic society has strongly repudiated these actions?
GaHillBilly
*If you want a copy, I can provide one.
-
Fallibleone
- Guru
- Posts: 1935
- Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 8:35 am
- Location: Scouseland
Post #8
Ohhhh dear.GaHillBilly wrote:Muhammad;
You appear to be telling Christians that they ought be embarrassed by something that you'd find embarrassing. This is rather silly.
OTOH, here something to be embarrassed about:
from http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,344409,00.htmlA report posted on Islam Watch, a site run by Muslims who oppose intolerant teachings and hatred for unbelievers, exposes a prominent Islamic cleric and lawyer who support extreme punishment for non-Muslims including killing and rape.
A question-and-answer session with Imam Abdul Makin in an East London mosque asks why Allah would tell Muslims to kill and rape innocent non-Muslims, including their wives and daughters, according to Islam Watch.
"Because non-Muslims are never innocent, they are guilty of denying Allah and his prophet," the Imam says, according to the report. "If you don't believe me, here is the legal authority, the top Muslim lawyer of Britain."
The lawyer, Anjem Choudary, backs up the Imam's position, saying that all Muslims are innocent.
"You are innocent if you are a Muslim," Choudary tells the BBC. "Then you are innocent in the eyes of God. If you are not a Muslim, then you are guilty of not believing in God."
Choudary said he would not condemn a Muslim for any action.
"As a Muslim, I must support my Muslim brothers and sisters," Choudary said. "I must have hatred to everything that is not Muslim."
'Embarrassing' is letting it off lightly in my opinion. 'Sickening' might be a better word. So proud to be British at this point.''''What I am is good enough if I can only be it openly.''''
''''The man said "why you think you here?" I said "I got no idea".''''
''''Je viens comme un chat
Par la nuit si noire.
Tu attends, et je tombe
Dans tes ailes blanches,
Et je vole,
Et je coule
Comme une plume.''''
''''The man said "why you think you here?" I said "I got no idea".''''
''''Je viens comme un chat
Par la nuit si noire.
Tu attends, et je tombe
Dans tes ailes blanches,
Et je vole,
Et je coule
Comme une plume.''''
-
muhammad rasullah
- Sage
- Posts: 808
- Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 3:05 pm
- Location: philly
Post #9
again this is another interveiw taken out of context he didnt say that all muslims are innocent no matter what they do. what he said was that when it comes to belief in allah muslims are innocent of disbelief and those who do not believe are guilty of disbelief. You make this seem like something so big when this is a basic belief of every religon. Islam does not permit the raping of women at all. This video said nothing about killing or raping anyone what are you trying to do produce more false lies. Whatever manul you have I'm sure does not represent Islam in anywayunless it has something which the prophet has said or something from the quran it is not applicable to me or any other muslim.GaHillBilly wrote:Muhammad;
You appear to be telling Christians that they ought be embarrassed by something that you'd find embarrassing. This is rather silly.
OTOH, here something to be embarrassed about:
from http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,344409,00.htmlApparently, good Muslims can rape and kill all the Christians they like . . . because that's perfectly fine with Muhammad the Prophet and the version of Allah he describes!A report posted on Islam Watch, a site run by Muslims who oppose intolerant teachings and hatred for unbelievers, exposes a prominent Islamic cleric and lawyer who support extreme punishment for non-Muslims including killing and rape.
A question-and-answer session with Imam Abdul Makin in an East London mosque asks why Allah would tell Muslims to kill and rape innocent non-Muslims, including their wives and daughters, according to Islam Watch.
"Because non-Muslims are never innocent, they are guilty of denying Allah and his prophet," the Imam says, according to the report. "If you don't believe me, here is the legal authority, the top Muslim lawyer of Britain."
The lawyer, Anjem Choudary, backs up the Imam's position, saying that all Muslims are innocent.
"You are innocent if you are a Muslim," Choudary tells the BBC. "Then you are innocent in the eyes of God. If you are not a Muslim, then you are guilty of not believing in God."
Choudary said he would not condemn a Muslim for any action.
"As a Muslim, I must support my Muslim brothers and sisters," Choudary said. "I must have hatred to everything that is not Muslim."
Now, if the Pope, or a major Christian leader said it was OK with for Christians to kill and rape all the Muslims they like . . . I'd find that something to be ashamed of.
But, the murder of Christians, and destruction of churches by Muslims is nothing new. People forget that the Crusades -- during which many evil things were done by Christians -- were a RESPONSE to Muslim destruction of churches throughout North Africa, and Muslim demands for ransom for pilgrims to Jerusalem. In other words, the Crusades were STARTED by Arab and Turkish Muslims, and not the other way round.
There were many cruel and evil acts committed by Christians during the Crusades, and many of these acts have been condemned, both officially and unofficially, by various Christians over the centuries.
But, when was the last time an Islamic official condemned Muslims who, during the Caliphate OR now, committed murder, torture and rape in the name of Allah?
We have soldiers in prison for committing comparatively mild torture against Iraqi Muslims. Personally, I think some of the officers should have been imprisoned as well, and I know of quite a few American soldiers who'd agree. These actions have been condemned by Christians world-wide.
But Al Qaeda operatives have been murdering, raping, and torturing Christians and Jews, all without condemnation by Islamic teachers.
Our soldiers violated policy, by beating Iraqi Muslims with their fists. Al Qaeda's operatives, following their policy manual, beat kidnapped Shiites and Christians with hammers. I have a copy of that manual*, if you want to see it. It details how to torture using drill-bits and motors, hot irons, prying eyes out with screwdrivers, dragging men behind cars, chopping limbs off with axes, using blow torches, breaking limbs by bending them backward over doors and crushing heads slowly in vises.
Which Imam has condemned that?
What Saudi prison holds the men who developed and wrote the manual?
Which Islamic society has strongly repudiated these actions?
GaHillBilly
*If you want a copy, I can provide one.
Here is a link you should listen to to tell you the truth about the taliban!
Bismillahir rahmaanir Raheem \"In The Name of Allah, the most gracious, the most merciful\"
-
GaHillBilly
- Student
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2008 8:46 am
Post #10
If this is so, then where are the 'responsible' Imams, who condemn the Al Qaeda manual, or explain how it was 'taken out of context'?again this is another interveiw taken out of context he didnt say that all muslims are innocent no matter what they do. what he said was that when it comes to belief in allah muslims are innocent of disbelief and those who do not believe are guilty of disbelief. You make this seem like something so big when this is a basic belief of every religon. Islam does not permit the raping of women at all. This video said nothing about killing or raping anyone what are you trying to do produce more false lies. Whatever manul you have I'm sure does not represent Islam in anywayunless it has something which the prophet has said or something from the quran it is not applicable to me or any other muslim.
Where are the prisons holding Muslims who do these things?
Where are Imams and teachers who condemned Al Qaeda's use of RETARDED WOMEN, who they FORCED and TRICKED into using suicide bombs?
You claim that these things are taken out of context, yet the Q'uran itself refers to Jews and Christians as "apes and pigs"!
http://hotair.com/archives/2007/06/17/b ... ses-40-75/Then follows the first of the three notorious "apes and pigs" passages. Jihadists today routinely refer to Jews as apes and pigs; this idea is rooted in Quran 2:63-66; 5:59-60; and 7:166. The first of these depicts Allah telling the Jews who "profaned the Sabbath": "Be as apes despicable!" It goes on to say that these accursed ones serve "as a warning example for their time and for all times to come." Traditionally in Islamic theology these passages have not been considered to apply to all Jews. Ibn Abbas says that "those who violated the sanctity of the Sabbath were turned into monkeys, then they perished without offspring." Others, however, such as the early Islamic scholar Ibn Qutaiba, held todays apes are the descendants of the Sabbath-breaking Jews.
And who is punished for killing an ape or pig?
Your "out of context" reply is a frequently used Muslim response, to explain some intemperate statement of another Muslim. But, somehow you never get around to condemning what is said.
Let us hear it from your mouth, your words, your condemnation of Bin Laden for his murder of innocents. Let us hear from YOU, the judgment that his sins are so great he will almost certainly spend eternity in hell.
Muslims like to condemn the rest of the world, and especially the Western world, for its corruption. And, by Christian standards, some of this is deserved, though orthodox Christianity has never accepted the idea that the Church should enforce 'godliness' with a sword. (In the 14th century, Dante's Divine Comedy railed against the church's corruption stemming from its pursuit of political power. He places numerous popes in hell for this sins and corruption!)
Darfur and the incredible suffering of the people there is on many people's minds today. But, it's often forgotten that the problems in Darfur are the direct result of a Muslim governments oppression of Sudan's nominal Christian citzens, whose lands are stolen, whose legal rights are ignored, and whose abusers go unpunished. And after all, why should Sudanese Muslims care about the rights of an ape or a pig?
Muslims seem unable to remember their own corruption and sins very well. They make much of sexual sin in the west, but engage in their own abuse of women in ways even worse. It should not be forgotten that the harem, of multiple wives abused by one husband, has been for thousands of years principally a Muslim institution. Beyond this, Muslims engage in their own version of wife swapping, using their methods of the instant divorce in countries where sharia is law:
It's amazing that the Qur'an itself allows a husband to divorce his wife THREE TIMES before any limitations come into effect. Even then, all he has to do is farm her out to another man, who "marries" her, presumably has sex with her, then divorces her, and returns her to her first husband. How is this NOT wife-swapping? Granted, it's a slightly slower process than the corrupt West's verision, but it amounts to the same thing.The regulations for divorce emphasize that while women "have rights similar to those (of men) over them in kindness," nevertheless "men are a degree above them" (v. 228). This may be why men can divorce their wives simply by saying, "Talaq" I divorce you but women may not do this. Such an easy procedure leads to divorces in a fit of pique, followed by reconciliation and the Quran anticipates this and attempts to head it off by stipulating that a husband who divorces his wife three times cannot reconcile with her until she marries another man and is in turn divorced by him (v. 230). This has given rise to the phenomenon of "temporary husbands," who marry and divorce thrice-divorced women at the behest of Islamic clerics even in our own day, so that these poor women can then return to their original husbands. This practice has, as one may imagine, given rise to abuses.
I could continue, but it's getting tiresome. The supposed purity and integrity of Islamic culture and life is a transparent fiction to anyone with open eyes. This is not to say that there is nothing good in Islamic culture. But there is also much that is vicious and corrupt.
GaHillBilly
=============================================
http://www.infoplease.com/spot/slavery1.html
=============================================The enslavement of the Dinkas in southern Sudan may be the most horrific and well-known example of contemporary slavery. According to 1993 U.S. State Department estimates, up to 90,000 blacks are owned by North African Arabs, and often sold as property in a thriving slave trade for as little as $15 per human being.
"There he found several Dinka men hobbling, their Achilles tendons cut because they refused to become Muslims."
from an ASI report on Sudanese slavery
Animist tribes in southern Sudan are frequently invaded by Arab militias from the North, who kill the men and enslave the women and children. The Arabs consider it a traditional right to enslave southerners, and to own chattel slaves (slaves owned as personal property).
Physical mutilation is practiced upon these slaves not only to prevent escape, but to enforce the owners' ideologies. According to an ASI report: "Kon, a thirteen-year-old Dinka boy, was abducted by Arab nomads and taken to a merchant's house. There he found several Dinka men hobbling, their Achilles tendons cut because they refused to become Muslims. Threatened with the same treatment the boy converted."
