3rdnlng Posted April 19, 2015 Share Posted April 19, 2015 Your words, not mine: "Again, where is it written that female mutilation is forbidden in the Muslim world?" See the words "again" and "forbidden"? That means you clearly said it and more than once, too. The fact is I said Islam does not permit FGM and it's not even mentioned in the Quran and Hadiths. Where do you think Islam comes from other than the Quran and Hadiths, anyways? But you still kept on asking me, "who says its prohibited"? "On what authority is it prohibited?" "Is it prohibited or not"? See a pattern forming there? Even when I told you I meant to say the Quran doesn't give permission to do so, you just kept on asking. "Does not permit", when taken out of context means forbidden, but it doesn't work that way. You must keep my statement in context. You're embarrassing yourself. Like I said before, you should've dropped it at 7:15 a few days ago. Even if you take each statement individually, even though you shouldn't, I'm still not wrong. Islam does not permit FGM and it doesn't. It's not stated anywhere in the Quran or the Hadiths that it's permissible. At the same time it also doesn't forbid it either. Why can't you see you have to keep my statement in context? Is it because it isn't convenient for you to do so? Why are YOU being so obtuse? The fact is I challenged you to show me where I said it's forbidden and of course you went off searching for it. As soon as you spotted the words, "Islam doesn't permit" you were content and stopped reading on. When I challenged you to keep the statement in context you desperately hung on to that first line like a baby with a pacifier so you wouldn't be proven wrong and completely left out my very next sentence. Embarrassing. SMDH. You have become a real bore. "Does not permit" and "forbidden" mean the same thing. Your continued attempts to weasel out of your original contention is pathetic. I asked you if Islam allowed killing as the punishment for apostasy. You said it was not permitted in Islam. You added that nowhere in the Koran or Hadith did it mention it. I then asked you where then was it "forbidden"? You said that you never said that it was forbidden. My attempt was to find out on what basis it was not permitted (forbidden) while you instead chose to go on a multiple post tirade trying to impugn my motives rather than admitting that you lacked an understanding of the English language and had spoke in error. It's ok if English is not your first language and you don't comprehend some of its nuances. You otherwise do very well with it. You are like the adult who plays softball at the company picnic but never grew up playing the game. You're a natural athlete and can run, throw and hit but don't understand what a force-out is and can't comprehend why you must tag up on a fly ball. Instead of listening to the coach you stay at first on a ground ball to second base and insist that you are still safe because no one tagged you out. Instead of making a big deal out of something you cannot comprehend maybe you should just stick to soccer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justice Posted April 19, 2015 Share Posted April 19, 2015 You have become a real bore. "Does not permit" and "forbidden" mean the same thing. Your continued attempts to weasel out of your original contention is pathetic. I asked you if Islam allowed killing as the punishment for apostasy. You said it was not permitted in Islam. You added that nowhere in the Koran or Hadith did it mention it. I then asked you where then was it "forbidden"? You said that you never said that it was forbidden. My attempt was to find out on what basis it was not permitted (forbidden) while you instead chose to go on a multiple post tirade trying to impugn my motives rather than admitting that you lacked an understanding of the English language and had spoke in error. It's ok if English is not your first language and you don't comprehend some of its nuances. You otherwise do very well with it. You are like the adult who plays softball at the company picnic but never grew up playing the game. You're a natural athlete and can run, throw and hit but don't understand what a force-out is and can't comprehend why you must tag up on a fly ball. Instead of listening to the coach you stay at first on a ground ball to second base and insist that you are still safe because no one tagged you out. Instead of making a big deal out of something you cannot comprehend maybe you should just stick to soccer. Yeah well you're the kid in elementary when asked by the teacher what's 1+1, you shout at one and don't pay attention to the full question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted April 19, 2015 Share Posted April 19, 2015 (edited) If something isn't permitted, it's not authorized. If something is forbidden, it's specifically banned. Does this debate really need to continue? You have become a real bore. "Does not permit" and "forbidden" mean the same thing. Your continued attempts to weasel out of your original contention is pathetic. I asked you if Islam allowed killing as the punishment for apostasy. You said it was not permitted in Islam. You added that nowhere in the Koran or Hadith did it mention it. I then asked you where then was it "forbidden"? You said that you never said that it was forbidden. My attempt was to find out on what basis it was not permitted (forbidden) while you instead chose to go on a multiple post tirade trying to impugn my motives rather than admitting that you lacked an understanding of the English language and had spoke in error. It's ok if English is not your first language and you don't comprehend some of its nuances. You otherwise do very well with it. You are like the adult who plays softball at the company picnic but never grew up playing the game. You're a natural athlete and can run, throw and hit but don't understand what a force-out is and can't comprehend why you must tag up on a fly ball. Instead of listening to the coach you stay at first on a ground ball to second base and insist that you are still safe because no one tagged you out. Instead of making a big deal out of something you cannot comprehend maybe you should just stick to soccer. Why would you insult someone's English when the definitions he uses are correct? And when it is clear as day what he meant? Edited April 19, 2015 by FireChan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted April 19, 2015 Share Posted April 19, 2015 Just for the record, take a look at what Merriam Webster says: Full Definition of FORBIDDEN 1 : not permitted or allowed 2 : not conforming to the usual selection principles —used of quantum phenomena <forbidden transition> <forbidden radiation> <forbidden spectral line> Maybe this will help to remove any ambiguity over word definitions. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/forbidden Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted April 19, 2015 Share Posted April 19, 2015 Just for the record, take a look at what Merriam Webster says: Full Definition of FORBIDDEN 1 : not permitted or allowed 2 : not conforming to the usual selection principles —used of quantum phenomena <forbidden transition> <forbidden radiation> <forbidden spectral line> Maybe this will help to remove any ambiguity over word definitions. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/forbidden Of course, we're talking about a translation of an Arabic word into English, so it's likely neither "not allowed" nor "forbidden." It's also a really stupid argument..."Does Islam prohibit female circumcision?" I can't think of a single religion that does prohibit it, frankly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted April 19, 2015 Share Posted April 19, 2015 Of course, we're talking about a translation of an Arabic word into English, so it's likely neither "not allowed" nor "forbidden." It's also a really stupid argument..."Does Islam prohibit female circumcision?" I can't think of a single religion that does prohibit it, frankly. I just threw that out there because it was starting to remind me of the classic "it depends on what the meaning of 'is' is". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted April 19, 2015 Share Posted April 19, 2015 I just threw that out there because it was starting to remind me of the classic "it depends on what the meaning of 'is' is". Give them credit...at least they're discussing similar words, and not trying to argue that tax revenue is earnings, or examples and detail are obfuscation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 Funny. I should try an experiment. The reason I write long posts, when I'm not trolling(like I said I was in one of these threads ), is because I expect excuses/obfuscations/stupid arguments/tangents/subject changes/arguments to extreme....etc., all in an effort by the usual lames to try and avoid their fate. This is the behavior here. Mostly I write long posts, for the same reason long contracts/scope documents are needed: the other side is dishonest, and will say anything, so you have to build a wall of paper around them. My average long post is not redundant. You just aren't paying attention: I'm anticipating and covering the inevitable dodges, ahead of time, one at a time. So my experiment is: I write no more than 2 sentence replies for a while. But.....I also maintain google docs of what I would have wrote normally. Then, rather than 1 long post, see if we get 3 pages of short posts, each dealing with the specific dodge/excuse/etc, all to end up...in the same exact place. I will post the link of the google doc at the same time I post my first 2 sentence post. I fully expect my experiment to prove that a single long post is ultimately more efficient than 3 pages of prattle/obfuscation/dodge containment. But, you never know. There could be...unexpected results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 Funny. I should try an experiment. The reason I write long posts, when I'm not trolling(like I said I was in one of these threads ), is because I expect excuses/obfuscations/stupid arguments/tangents/subject changes/arguments to extreme....etc., all in an effort by the usual lames to try and avoid their fate. This is the behavior here. Mostly I write long posts, for the same reason long contracts/scope documents are needed: the other side is dishonest, and will say anything, so you have to build a wall of paper around them. My average long post is not redundant. You just aren't paying attention: I'm anticipating and covering the inevitable dodges, ahead of time, one at a time. So my experiment is: I write no more than 2 sentence replies for a while. But.....I also maintain google docs of what I would have wrote normally. Then, rather than 1 long post, see if we get 3 pages of short posts, each dealing with the specific dodge/excuse/etc, all to end up...in the same exact place. I will post the link of the google doc at the same time I post my first 2 sentence post. I fully expect my experiment to prove that a single long post is ultimately more efficient than 3 pages of prattle/obfuscation/dodge containment. But, you never know. There could be...unexpected results. Sounds awesome but before you do that you might want to check the Google docs/PPP smiley compatibility matrix. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PearlHowardman Posted May 3, 2015 Author Share Posted May 3, 2015 False Prophet Muhammad Being Visited By Demons Throughout His Life: http://www.answering-islam.org/Silas/demons.htm http://peace-of-mind.net/islamic_belief.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Muhammad https://themuslimissue.wordpress.com/2014/04/20/the-quran-refers-to-the-prophet-of-islam-as-demon-possessed/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted May 3, 2015 Share Posted May 3, 2015 False Prophet Muhammad Being Visited By Demons Throughout His Life: http://www.answering-islam.org/Silas/demons.htm http://peace-of-mind.net/islamic_belief.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Muhammad https://themuslimissue.wordpress.com/2014/04/20/the-quran-refers-to-the-prophet-of-islam-as-demon-possessed/ So, he was a demonic prophet? An antiprophet? THE antiprophet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted May 3, 2015 Share Posted May 3, 2015 False Prophet Muhammad Being Visited By Demons Throughout His Life: http://www.answering-islam.org/Silas/demons.htm http://peace-of-mind.net/islamic_belief.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Muhammad https://themuslimissue.wordpress.com/2014/04/20/the-quran-refers-to-the-prophet-of-islam-as-demon-possessed/ Ironically, while you still believe in demonic possession, Islamic scholars rejected it around 900 AD. http://kitaabun.com/shopping3/product_info.php?products_id=4645 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted May 4, 2015 Share Posted May 4, 2015 False Prophet Muhammad Being Visited By Demons Throughout His Life: http://www.answering-islam.org/Silas/demons.htm http://peace-of-mind.net/islamic_belief.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Muhammad https://themuslimissue.wordpress.com/2014/04/20/the-quran-refers-to-the-prophet-of-islam-as-demon-possessed/ Wouldn't it be easier to just say "bump"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
\GoBillsInDallas/ Posted May 4, 2015 Share Posted May 4, 2015 More workplace violence: http://www.dallasnews.com/news/local-news/20150503-police-kill-2-men-who-opened-fire-outside-muhammad-art-show-in-garland.ece Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted May 4, 2015 Share Posted May 4, 2015 Ironically, while you still believe in demonic possession, Islamic scholars rejected it around 900 AD. http://kitaabun.com/shopping3/product_info.php?products_id=4645 The best trick of demonic possessors is to convince you there is no such thing as demonic possession. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Miner Posted May 4, 2015 Share Posted May 4, 2015 Ironically, while you still believe in demonic possession, Islamic scholars rejected it around 900 AD. http://kitaabun.com/shopping3/product_info.php?products_id=4645 They haven't met my wife. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted May 4, 2015 Share Posted May 4, 2015 The best trick of demonic possessors is to convince you there is no such thing as demonic possession. So Muhammed was followed all his life by Keyser Soze? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted May 4, 2015 Share Posted May 4, 2015 So Muhammed was followed all his life by Keyser Soze? Huh? She sucks in almost everything. I have to admit she was good as the hooker in the World According to Garp though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PearlHowardman Posted May 7, 2015 Author Share Posted May 7, 2015 http://www.muslimhope.com/TestTheSpirit.htm WHO WAS THE SPIRIT THAT SQUEEZED MUHAMMAD AT THE HIRA CAVE? It is of great importance to identify the spirit who squeezed Muhammad at the cave of Hira near Mecca. Was the spirit really angel Gabriel? The answer is absolutely No! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 http://www.muslimhope.com/TestTheSpirit.htm WHO WAS THE SPIRIT THAT SQUEEZED MUHAMMAD AT THE HIRA CAVE? It is of great importance to identify the spirit who squeezed Muhammad at the cave of Hira near Mecca. Was the spirit really angel Gabriel? The answer is absolutely No! No, it was Gabriel. He told me so last Saturday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts