A Telegraph journalist gets it right..



Categories: Extremism, News

164 replies

  1. Very revealing. I think both losers and nonlosers are capable of supporting extremism but losers are more likely to engage in actual extremist violence. Also, it is worth asking to what extent does violence radicalize religion or religious believers?

    Like

  2. Angry, failed relationships, petty criminal- sounds just like his prophet, except there was nothing petty about his slaughterhouse conquering.

    Perfectly Muslim

    Like

    • Yeah, an insignificant, angry, petty criminal was able to subdue and unite all of Arabia-something which the Byzantine and Sassanian empires couldn’t do-and create a civilization which covered half the world. Anyone can do that, right? Idiot.

      Like

    • Touchy. Typical Muslim history- ignore the coercion by force, mandates to convert or die, rebellious tribes etc. it was all peaches, right?

      We could talk about the neighbours comments (more into women that religion) but that might lead us down the treacherous path of 12 wives, sex slaves, sex with nine year olds, etc blah blah blah… Nah nothing similar to his prophet, right?

      Like

    • Okay Paulus. I’ll take you on. The guy who drove through people in Nice was characterized as ‘Angry, failed relationships, petty criminal’. You say he was just like Muhammad (saw). However, prior to his experience on Mount Hira, Muhammad (saw) was a successful businessman, happily married and regarded as ‘the trustworthy’ by the rest of his people. That doesn’t sound like the guy in France.

      In fact, Muhammad (saw) went on to marry numerous women-so he wasn’t affected by failed relationships; he was persecuted severly by the Meccans yet he forgave them when he conquered Mecca whereas the Nice guy killed people who had nothing to do with his misery and did not personally know him. Name one instance in his life when Muhammad (saw) took out his frustrations by killing random people.

      This is enough to show that your comparison between the Nice guy and Muhammad (saw) is severely flawed, as is to be expected from an Islamophobic polemicist troll.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Did Muhammad, or didn’t he, murder more than 80odd people?

      Did Muhammad, or didn’t he, create unity by demandingarab tribes convert or die?

      Did Muhammad, or didn’t he, get killed by a Jewish women after he and his army attacked them and beheaded some men and enslaved the women and children?

      You can try to make it look like Muhammad was some type of respected and trusted apologist, but his success only stemmed from military dictatorship after Hijrah to medina.. The Meccans rejected him time and time again as did most of the Arab tribes. After all, why all the pillaging and military conquest if he was ‘the trustworthy’? Many Hadith mention Muhammad as angry and clearly demonstrate multiple failed relationships. We know he murdered many detractors or those that criticised him. We know he engaged in robbery regularly attacking travelleling caravans to finance his dictatorship. We know lots. You can’t hide from this.

      Like

    • Paulus, name one instance in his life when Muhammad (saw) took out his frustrations by killing random people.

      Like

  3. As expected, Paulus can’t back up his claims. Dishonest piece of crap.

    Like

    • Just like your prophet. Why not try toulate Jesus instead? You’ll feel much more at peace rather than all this anger when we criticise Muhammad’s evil actions.

      Like

    • Paulus: Just like your prophet. Why not try toulate Jesus instead?

      Nope. The Prophet (saw) was brilliant. You’re just a piece of crap.

      Like

  4. Paulus,

    You have exposed yourself as a typical loony missionary.

    I would argue that the Nice attacker was more like the Biblical mass murderers, such as David. You see, David killed many people during his life, and yet your Bible praises him!

    In contrast, the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) only killed his enemies. He never harmed non-combatants. He never killed children or women.

    Now I know none of this will penetrate that thick skull you have, because you are a deceitful and hypocritical missionary who has been brainwashed by your false book and religion. But at least your self-righteous hypocrisy can be exposed for all to see. 😉

    Liked by 1 person

    • “In contrast, the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) only killed his enemies. He never harmed non-combatants. He never killed children or women.”

      He forced people to become his enemies by his aggression. So he could show them his “mercy” after he had slaughtered some of them.

      Are boys who have just reached puberty not children? He had them killed. Banu Qurayza.

      There are hadiths that report Mohammed approving the slaughter of women and children as unintentional collateral damage during night raids. Who is going to take the trouble during a night raid, ( a very civilized form of warfare I might say which Mohammed seemed to like, attacking sleeping people in their beds!!! ), to make sure that no women or children are killed.

      Also Khadir killed a boy in the Koran which set a dangerous precedent:

      The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) used not to kill the children, so thou shouldst not kill them unless you could know what Khadir had known about the child he killed, or you could distinguish between a child who would grow up to he a believer (and a child who would grow up to be a non-believer), so that you killed the (prospective) non-believer and left the (prospective) believer aside. (Sahih Muslim 4457)

      Apparently anyone who thinks he knows, for whatever reason, that a child will grow up to be a kuffar has the right to kill him according to Islam. This is amazing. All those who honour kill their children can get support for it straight from the Koran.

      After capturing Mecca, the prophet of Islam also ordered the execution of two “singing girls” who had mocked him in verse:

      “…two singing-girls Fartana and her friend who used to sing satirical songs about the apostle, so he ordered that they should be killed…” (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 819)

      He used a catapult during the siege of Taif. He must have known that anyone, including women and children, could be killed by such tactics.

      These are all from your sources..

      It seems the best you can do is to get up to the same level as the OT but you cannot be superior to it however much you try.

      Like

    • So you defend Muhammad’s murderous rampages by appeal to another Islamic prophet and his sins? Good one!!

      Unlike you Muslims, I accept that prophets are sinful, as David actually teaches in the Zabur, a revelation revealed by God and also confirmed in the Torah and Injil, also books revealed by God.

      So you’ve just dishonoured Muhammad, David and God by your stupidity. Better go make Dua…

      Like

  5. By the way Paulus, which Jesus do you want us to emulate? The peaceful Jesus or the violent, psychotic Jesus who ordered the mass murder of babies, children, and women? Be more specific, will you dear? There’s a nice chap…

    Like

  6. Paulus’ god describes David as a man after his own heart. Hmmm…Is this the same David who had hundreds of concubines and who killed thousands of innocent people?

    Why do Christian hypocrites find Muhammad’s actions “evil” but seem to have no problem with actual Biblical evil? It’s no wonder people are getting fed up with Christianity and are leaving this false religion by the tens of millions! LOL!!

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Now, now Kmak. I will not allow you to insult pieces of crap by comparing them to Paulus! Even pieces of crap have some dignity. LOL!

    Like

  8. Why have you gone quiet Paulus? Is Satan running short on the lies he feeds you?

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Lol, madmanna. You truly are just another uneducated idiot apologist who copies from pseudoscholarly sources like jihadwatch!

    All of your plagiarized claims have been refuted.

    Islam allows warfare in self-defense and it acknowledges that war requires strategy and risk. Night warfare would be a necessary strategy to take advantage of one’s enemies.

    The prophet acknowledged the risk that night warfare might pose to non-combatants but it was considered to be acceptable since defeating the enemy was paramount. Otherwise, the enemy could grow powerful and become an even bigger threat.

    However, deliberately targeting non-combatants is not allowed, whereas your Bible commanded the killing of babies! So yeah, nothing is superior to the old testament…in monstrous wartime atrocities that is. LOL!!

    How typical of a moron like you to misinteret the explanation of Ibn Abbas. What he was saying was that since no one can claim to have special knowledge of a child’s future, it is not allowed to kill that child. It is categorically prohibited to kill a child. In contrast, your evil Bible encouraged the killing of children. How sick you must be to think that the Bible is “scripture”.

    Shall we list the Bible’s mass murderers? I can think of few off the top of my head: Moses, Joshua, David, Gideon. Are there any others?

    You’re a sick hypocrite who is incapable of rational thinking, madman. The Bible will do that to you. It is not a thinking man’s book. You’re just another brainwashed fanatic who has been deceived by your Satanic religion.

    Like

    • Fighting everyone until sharia is established is not self defence. It is megalomania.

      KIlling babies as an act of judgement happened at the time of the cleansing of the land. Once in Israels history.

      Killing people because they refuse to accept Islam or they offend Islam in some way is the perpetual law of Sharia.

      The law of Moses is thou shalt not kill. Thou shalt not steal. Thou shalt not covet. Thou shalt not commit adultery. Mohammed broke these commands continuously throughout his life.

      The people you mentioned are not mass murderers like your wannabe fake prophet.

      Like

    • madmanna: KIlling babies as an act of judgement happened at the time of the cleansing of the land. Once in Israels history.

      So killing of babies is okay since it happened only once?

      Like

  10. Paulus, you are such an idiot, it’s not even funny! Oh wait, yes it is!

    I noticed you tried to divert to the argument that Islam upholds the Bible. That is the last resort of a weasel apologist who cannot defend his Bible. Unfortunately for you, this argument has been refuted many times. Nice try! 😉

    Back to the Biblical David. You claim he was sinful, but you are contradicting your own Bible. Bad Christian! Have you forgotten about 1 Kings 15:? Go ahead and read it. It states that except for the murder of Uriah, David followed the Lord all his life. Did you get that? It states that David was only blame worthy for killing Uriah. The rest of his behavior was perfectly acceptable! Leave it to the Bible to consider mass murder and genocide as proper behavior!

    Like

    • Faiz
      “The rest of his behavior was perfectly acceptable! ”

      You make this too easy. You see, if you took the time to read the Zabur instead of dishonouring your God, you would find David saying things like this…

      “2Wash away all my iniquity
      and cleanse me from my sin…For I know my transgressions,
      and my sin is always before me…5Surely I was sinful at birth,
      sinful from the time my mother conceived me….9Hide your face from my sins
      and blot out all my iniquity.”

      This would then help you understand statements like the one you mention. But because you are lazy and like to dishonour the prophets and God’s Holy books, you just keep heaping burning coals on your head. And you just make yourself look foolish and juvenile by saying I contradict the Bible, when in actual fact, Prophet David, your prophet, teaches continually that he was sinful.

      So when will you stop dishonouring your prophets and God? Did you go make Dua like I suggested?

      Like

  11. Lol, madman continues to defend Biblical infanticide. You truly are a madman! Just like a brainwashed Christian man-worshipper!

    Like

  12. Lol, Paulus! Why do you keep contradicting your Bible? It’s not my fault your book is so contradictory. 1 Kings 15:5 states the opposite of the Psalms, which by the way, are not necessarily the same the as the Zabur. Muslim scholars generally take a cautious view in this regard. A lazy idiot like you would know that if you did some research.

    How convenient thought that David would ask forgiveNess for repeatedly murdering innocent people!

    Liked by 1 person

    • “How convenient thought that David would ask forgiveNess for repeatedly murdering innocent people!”

      What’s your examples then?

      Like

    • I guess you don’t like being proven wrong, so it boosts your ego to call people names, and then just repeat the same argument that was already shown to be wrong?

      If the Zabur is not the psalms, then perhaps you can show us all this mystical Zabur?

      I see a pattern emerging: Muslims believe in a missing gospel that isn’t the gospel, a missing book of psalms that isn’t the psalms, a missing Torah that isn’t the Torah.

      Or much more likely, Muhammad simply taught a message different to the former prophets. It’s a much simpler solution rather than believing in these imaginary books that Allah failed to preserve, even though your own scriptures teach the opposite?

      How does it feel living in such a conflated, contradictory mindset? Is that why you abuse people?

      Like

  13. And by the way Paulus, even if the Psalms were the same as the Zabur, the former would be the corrupted version and therefore unreliable.

    Like

  14. @Kmak,

    “madmanna: KIlling babies as an act of judgement happened at the time of the cleansing of the land. Once in Israels history.

    So killing of babies is okay since it happened only once?”

    In a judgement it must be ok because it is an authorized act of God carried out by men in some cases. Otherwise it can’t be ok because it’s against the law, thou shalt not kill.

    If a baby dies a natural death has it been killed by somebody or something? If so, who or what?

    Is there any real difference between the natural death of a baby or infant and the commandment to kill babies in the bible?

    If not does Allah have anything to do with it if he is the Lord of the Worlds? Will he tell us if he is involved or not? Or is he keeping mum about it and hoping that we won’t ask any questions as he is wont?

    Like

    • Perhaps you should change your handle to Euthyphro rather than madmanna?

      “In a judgement it must be ok because it is an authorized act of God carried out by men in some cases. Otherwise it can’t be ok because it’s against the law, thou shalt not kill.”

      I thought God could not do anything opposed to his nature so is murdering men, women, babies, and livestock not against his nature?

      Like

  15. Madman,

    Did you not read your fellow weasel apologist Paulus’ post? He quotes your Bible, in which David asks God for forgiveness of his sins. Unfortunately, it doesn’t reveal what sins he was referring to. Based on 1 Kings 15:5, I would think he is referring to his adulterous relationship with Bathsheba (a result of which David should have been stoned as per the Law of Moses) as well as the murder of Uriah the Hittite. 1 Kings 15:5 tells us that with the exception of the murder of Uriah, David lived a life of righteousness:

    “For David had done what was right in the eyes of the Lord and had not failed to keep any of the Lord’s commands all the days of his life—except in the case of Uriah the Hittite.”

    One wonders how a genocidal madman “had done what was right in the eyes of the Lord”. Apparently, the author of 1 Kings didn’t see any problem with killing babies.

    Like

    • Faiz,

      Please prove to me that David was a “genocidal madman” using the biblical texts.

      Obviously you feel confident so I’m giving you have the chance to humiliate me and my beliefs and show that Islam is superior.

      I don’t mind. If it happens I’ll get over it. Why don’t you take the chance?

      Like

    • I’m surprised I need to point this out, but alas, re 1 kings 15

      “This and the like phrases are not to be understood as exclusive of every sinful action, but only of a sinful course or state, or of an habitual and continued apostacy from God, or from his ways, as the very phrase of turning aside from God, or from his commands, does constantly imply, as appears from Exodus 32:8 Deu 9:12,16 1 Samuel 8:3 Psalm 78:57 Isaiah 44:20

      You see Faiz, we know your comment is absolute nonsense because we can read about David’s many other sins elsewhere. You are again just spewing your same defeated comments ad nauseum, too proud to admit your mistake.

      Or perhaps you are just distracted looking for the missing Zabur and Injil you believe in?

      Like

  16. Madman, you are a sick demented individual to compare a natural death to a blood-soaked one at the point of a sword. Your sick theology has destroyed your ability to think in a rational way. Only a monster would try to excuse baby killing as justified “judgment”. Your god, it seems, was no different than the pagan gods which required human sacrifices. In the Bible, the worshipers of Chemosh sacrificed their children to appease their god. And yet, your god demanded the deliberate killing of children and babies. Your god is not much different from Chemosh.

    Like

    • Is that the best you can do? Ad hominem. Philosophical discussion doesn’t seem to be your strong point. If Muslims have no argument they work themselves in to a fit of pique and end of discussion. You are typical.

      “Madman, you are a sick demented individual to compare a natural death to a blood-soaked one at the point of a sword.”

      It’s the same outcome isn’t it? Just a different method.

      Who creates the sickness and disease that kills babies and infants? I thought you believed that Allah is the Lord of the Worlds?

      This world too?

      Why do you let Allah off the hook and the biblical God is genocidal? Both are forms of infanticide.

      Like

  17. Faiz,

    ” If Muslims have no argument they work themselves in to a fit of pique and end of discussion. You are typical.”

    Correction:

    If Muslims have no argument they work themselves in to a fit of pique, repeat the same accusations over and over again like a needle stuck on a record, and end of discussion.

    You are typical.

    Like

  18. Madman said:

    “Please prove to me that David was a “genocidal madman” using the biblical texts.

    Obviously you feel confident so I’m giving you have the chance to humiliate me and my beliefs and show that Islam is superior.

    I don’t mind. If it happens I’ll get over it. Why don’t you take the chance?”

    LOL, sure madman. I can prove to you that the Biblical David was a genocidal madman. Here is a list of his atrocities. Remember, you asked for it! 😉

    1. David slaughters 200 Philistines and brings their foreskins to Saul as a payment for the hand of his daughter:

    “…David took his men with him and went out and killed two hundred Philistines and brought back their foreskins. They counted out the full number to the king so that David might become the king’s son-in-law. Then Saul gave him his daughter Michal in marriage” (1 Samuel 18:25)

    2. David raids various cities and slaughters every man and woman while living in Philistine territory:

    “Now David and his men went up and raided the Geshurites, the Girzites and the Amalekites. (From ancient times these peoples had lived in the land extending to Shur and Egypt.) 9 Whenever David attacked an area, he did not leave a man or woman alive, but took sheep and cattle, donkeys and camels, and clothes” (1 Samuel 27:8-9).

    3, When David conquered the Moabites, he killed many prisoners:

    “David also defeated the Moabites. He made them lie down on the ground and measured them off with a length of cord. Every two lengths of them were put to death, and the third length was allowed to live. So the Moabites became subject to David and brought him tribute” (2 Samuel 8:2).

    4. When David conquered Rabbah, he mercilessly slaughtered its people:

    “And he brought out the people that were in it, and cut them with saws, and with harrows of iron, and with axes. Even so dealt David with all the cities of the children of Ammon. And David and all the people returned to Jerusalem” (1 Chronicles 20:3, KJV).

    The interesting thing about 1 Chronicles 20:3 is that some translations, like the NIV have deliberately sought to hide David’s atrocity by claiming that he only enslaved them. However, the text actually states that he cut them with saws! It seems some Christians are embarrassed and shocked by the brutality of David and have tried to cover them up.

    All told, David killed tens of thousands of people, including soldiers and civilians. Thus, he was a genocidal madman, at least according to the Bible.

    Of course, I don’t believe the real David was like that. The real David was a righteous king who would not have acted like Pol Pot or Stalin.

    Like

    • If God instructs a king to utterly destroy a people, which he did, best bet is to do as he says.

      Like

    • Best bet: if you think God is telling you to kill women and children, he isn’t.

      Like

    • He told Abe to sacrifice his son. He obeyed and God stopped him just before he killed him. He knew who was talking to him or he wouldn’t have stopped. God is holy. God is perfectly holy. God does not condone sin, though he may be patient.

      God can do whatever he chooses to do. He doesn’t have to explain himself. God grieves over us. To think that God is bloodthirsty, that he can’t wait to have people killed, is serious error. He commands us to repent. He pleads with us to turn away from sin. He will not tolerate willful rejection forever. He is just.

      Parents have a sacred responsibility to raise their children with a deep reverence for God. To be God fearing. Our world is proof what happens when we ignore him.

      Like

    • 1. I don’t have a problem with the foreskins ( of the Philistines ).

      They were perpetually at war with the Israelites so it would be a fair fight on open ground, man against man. I’m sure David was not a night r(a)ider like your hero.

      2.The Amalikes were under the ban so I think David was within the will of God. They should have got the hell out of Judah while they had a chance but they didn’t. They probably felt safe behind the Phillistines?

      3.The Moabites seem to have refused to surrender in accordance with Deut 20 v 10 which meant that David had no choice but to put all the males to death:

      10When thou comest nigh unto a city to fight against it, then proclaim peace unto it. 11And it shall be, if it make thee answer of peace, and open unto thee, then it shall be, that all the people that is found therein shall be tributaries unto thee, and they shall serve thee. 12And if it will make no peace with thee, but will make war against thee, then thou shalt besiege it: 13And when the LORD thy God hath delivered it into thine hands, thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword: 14But the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, even all the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself; and thou shalt eat the spoil of thine enemies, which the LORD thy God hath given thee. 15Thus shalt thou do unto all the cities which are very far off from thee, which are not of the cities of these nations.

      4. My bible is the KJV. I am not interested in other translations. Having said that my understanding is the people of Ammon deliberately insulted David by sending his messengers butt naked and with clipped beards back to David. This was a declaration of war. They knew that he would come to get revenge. The wise would have could have just left for a safer place. Those who stayed made themselves complicit in the war which was inevitable. Blood will be shed for blood.

      You sound as if Islam teaches pacifism which we all know is not true. Defensive jihad only is also a myth that we don’t believe.

      I don’t know where the other thread is on slavery now. I take the chance here to say that the bible cleary teaches that slavery is evil because God delivered his people from it by the plagues and the passover. The hebrews are representative of all mankind and were only allowed to become slaves economically. i.e. they had to pay off their debts by work for a maximum of six years.

      The entry point of capturing a man to make him a slave was forbidden. Whatever magnanimity shown after stealing the life of a man does not atone for the sin of stealing the man in the first place. After someone is captured on the battlefield he should be returned to his family and land as everybody was after WW2.

      The concession to foreign slaves was probably because at times there would simply not be enough manpower available to do what needed to be done in the field or construction projects or whatever.

      They could not enjoy the freedom of the hebrew because they were not Israelites under the covenant relation to God. My own theory is that they prefigured the Gentiles who would be brought in to the blessings of the kingdom after the theocracy phase of the national Israel expired.

      Islam seems to delude itself in to thinking that it has replaced the Jews as the people of God and Allah is continuing the old testament national character of the covenant in arabic format.

      Like

  19. Madman said:

    “Is that the best you can do? Ad hominem. Philosophical discussion doesn’t seem to be your strong point. If Muslims have no argument they work themselves in to a fit of pique and end of discussion. You are typical.

    “Madman, you are a sick demented individual to compare a natural death to a blood-soaked one at the point of a sword.”

    It’s the same outcome isn’t it? Just a different method.

    Who creates the sickness and disease that kills babies and infants? I thought you believed that Allah is the Lord of the Worlds?

    This world too?

    Why do you let Allah off the hook and the biblical God is genocidal? Both are forms of infanticide.”

    WOW!!! This pathetic apologist actually thinks that this is a “philosophical discussion”! News flash madman: we are not having a “philosophical discussion”. There is nothing “philosophical” about comparing the deliberate murder of babies to natural death. You keep proving yourself to be a sick individual over and over again! You’re making this too easy for me! LOL!!!

    Apparently, your twisted mind thinks that the “outcome” is what matters, not the means of that outcome. Normal people (i.e. those are not insane) would find this argument rather sickening. Sticking a sword into the flesh of a baby is very different from a baby dying from natural causes. In the latter scenario, a decent person would try his best to save the baby. A decent person would not just stand around and let it happen. That’s why we have medical services. We can still try to save a sick baby rather than letting it die. And if it does die, we would be saddened at such a tragedy.

    In contrast, only a monster would stab a baby with a sword and excuse it as the same “outcome” as natural death. You are clearly a mentally disturbed individual.

    But I don’t blame you madman. This isn’t your fault. You weren’t born this way. You have been turned into a brainless and irrational monster by your Bible. It has turned you into the monstrosity we see now.

    Like

  20. So madman, do you agree that your god was not different than Chemosh? I mean, they both required bloodshed and the murder of innocent children in their names, didn’t they?

    Like

  21. LOL, Paulus! Your blind acceptance of everything you are spoonfed by your ministers only further shows what a pathetic individual you are.

    We know your apologetic claim is utter BS because 1 Kings 15:5 clearly does not mention a sinful “state” but rather a specific sin. The text clearly states that the only exception in David’s life where he did not obey God was in the episode of Uriah’s murder. The meaning is very clear. You are just too blind and proud to admit it.

    1 Kings 15 was written by another person who clearly had a different view of David than author of the Psalms. They were written in different contexts. Thus, using one to explain the other is just another apologetic slight of hand that you deceitful missionaries use to cover up the embarrassing truths about your Bible. No use hiding it now! 😉

    Like

  22. By the way, some copies of the Bible omitted this verse. It seems some scribes realized the contradiction and decided to omit it!

    “In this passage alone do we find this qualification of the praise of David. In the Vatican MS. and other MSS. of the LXX. it is omitted. Possibly it is a marginal note which has crept into the text, or a comment of the compiler of the book on the language of the annals from which he drew.”

    Ouch!

    Like

    • Ouch! Really? I’ve known the critical discussion about this text all along. Clearly, you didn’t, and have only just decided to do some homework on the verse you seem to think you have an interpretative handle on. You are precisely the product of what you charge against me, “bling acceptance” of everything you are “spoonfed”.

      But I’m curious, where exactly does ANY SOURCE say that this verse is ommitted from any MSS .Because “some scribes realized the contradiction”.

      C’mon, let’s see the evidence. The very source you cited gives possible reasons. Can you see your’s? Nup, Nada. Nothing.

      Try not to bring your issues related the Ibn Masud’s different Quranic MS into the discussion please.

      Now, have you found the missing Zabur yet that you believe in?

      Like

  23. Death is not the end nor the worst thing that could happen to someone. Fear him who can cast into hell. I TELL YOU, FEAR HIM

    Like

    • Then why would he throw me into hell?

      I dinto fear a being who would tell me to kill babies. Best bet is that being is not the Almighty but rather a demon. I don’t fear demons.

      Like

    • Your Jesus no.

      12His eyes are like blazing fire, and on his head are many crowns. He has a name written on him that no one knows but he himself. 13He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God. 14The armies of heaven were following him, riding on white horses and dressed in fine linen, white and clean. 15Coming out of his mouth is a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. “He will rule them with an iron scepter.”a He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty. 16On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written:

      KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.

      17And I saw an angel standing in the sun, who cried in a loud voice to all the birds flying in midair, “Come, gather together for the great supper of God, 18so that you may eat the flesh of kings, generals, and the mighty, of horses and their riders, and the flesh of all people, free and slave, great and small.”

      Revelation 19

      Like

  24. David Wood has a great video refuting this nonsense. A BAD Muslims only way to get into Jena is by killing and being killed in Allahs cause

    Like

    • Woods megafail

      Like

    • Kmak correction the ONLY SURE WAY, although I have heard that Muslims can get to Jenna by dying in child birth, or crossing a body of water.

      Like

    • Bruhan and yet no refutation? Please prove to us that Muslims do no go to Jenna if they kill and are killed in Allah’s cause?

      Like

    • Okay. Can you cite one scholar who says killing random non-Muslims is the only sure way to Paradise?

      Liked by 1 person

    • Kmac are you saying that dying while slaying in Allahs cause is not a sure way to allah’s paradise?

      Like

    • Sh ip: Kmac are you saying that dying while slaying in Allahs cause is not a sure way to allah’s paradise?

      Nope. I am asking, can you cite one scholar who says killing random non-Muslims is the surest way to Paradise?

      Liked by 1 person

    • So then you agree that dying while slaying in Allah cause is a sure way to Allahs paradise?

      Like

    • You are avoiding my question.

      Like

    • Kmac you accuse me of avoiding teh question while you are avoiding the question.

      Are we in agreement that dying while slaying in Allah’s cause is a sure way to ALlahs paradise?

      Stop avoiding the Question

      Like

    • Slaying who in God’s cause?

      Like

    • Kmac you don’t know who you are to slay in Allahs cause? Pretty sad.

      So please stop running from the question and just answer it.

      Are we in agreement that dying while slaying in Allah’s cause is a sure way to ALlahs paradise?

      Like

    • Sh IP: Kmac you don’t know who you are to slay in Allahs cause?

      No I don’t know. Can you tell me who we are to slay in God’s cause?

      Like

    • Kmac go get a copy of the Quran and start reading it and allah will tell you who you are to kill.

      Like

    • Why don’t you tell me seeing that you came here looking for a debate?

      Like

    • Kmac there is no debate, and I’m not here to teach you your religion, and I”m not here to tell you who to kill. The only thing I am here to tell you other then Jesus Christ is the Lord of Glory, is that your A game, just aint workin. You need a plan B.

      Look if you have some fictional fantasy land flavor of Islam thats fine, the problem is that there are Muslims who actually take your religion seriously, and there are Muslims who are convicted and convinced in allah and his messenger.

      So when Allah says “Jihad (holy fighting in Allah’s Cause) is ordained for you (Muslims) though you dislike it, and it may be that you dislike a thing which is good for you and that you like a thing which is bad for you. Allah knows but you do not know.” Sura 2:216

      Or when Allah says

      ” Muhammad (SAW) is the Messenger of Allah, and those who are with him are severe against disbelievers, and merciful among themselves. Surah 48:29

      and when Allah says

      “Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture – [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.” Surah 9:29

      They take Allah seriously. Clearly you don’t.

      And when Mohamed pontificates on the sweet smell of the Shahid, or when he goes on about how he would love to be martyred and then be made alive again to be martyred again only to be made alive again be Martyred again and on and on and on.

      There are Muslims who take him at his word.

      And when the quran goes on about the hell fire, there are Muslims who are really afraid of it.

      So clearly you are not one of these Muslims.

      Now it is not for me to judge if your un historical, james white version of Islam is true or not.

      It is for you to convince MUSLIMS who don’t believe in your candy land fantasy Islam that you version is correct.

      So far you are failing.

      But don’ worry Trump is coming soon and he will fix Islam for you.

      Like

    • Sh ip, I suggest you replace the ‘p’ in your name with a ‘t’ because you are full of it. Why is it so difficult for you to answer this question, who do we slay to enter Paradise with certainty?

      Like

    • Kmak like I said you don’t take allahs words seriously, you really don’t believe allah and his messenger. Thats actually a good thing. Now please go out and convince Muslims who actually do believe allah and his messenger. When he says…

      “Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture – [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.” Surah 9:29”

      Like

    • Sh’it, name one scholar who says Surah 9.29 justifies attacks on random non-Muslims.

      Like

    • Kmak I don’t have to, I’m not a Muslim. You need to find a scholar that says the plain teaching of allah is not to kill kuffar, Christians and Jews where ever they are found. You need to teach your candy land version of Islam to Muslims who actually do fear allah.

      BTW do you know in the Shafi school of Islam there is no punishment for a Muslim killing a non Muslim., No Punishment at all.

      Like

    • Sh,it: You need to find a scholar that says the plain teaching of allah is not to kill kuffar, Christians and Jews where ever they are found.

      I can’t find a scholar who says Surah 9.29 allows Muslims to kill random non-Muslims. Can you?

      I am not going to engage you on any other topic until you answer my question, you devious little piece of crap.

      Like

    • So you don’t believe allah and his messenger, instead you want a scholar, but you can not find a single scholar that teaches against the plain meaning of the verse.

      See you need to do that, not for me, I don’t care I’m not a Muslim. You need to do that for those Muslims that do take the plain meaning of the text.

      Like

    • Kmak Don’t run away it was just getting good. So you want a scholar that says you can go and kill random Christians.

      Well here u go…

      Imam Shaffi in The Reliance of the Traveler

      Book (or section) “01.2 The following are not subject to retaliation…

      (2) a Muslim for killing a non-Muslim;”

      There u have it, according to Imam Shafi a Muslim can kill non Muslims and there is no retaliation no punishment.

      Like

    • Sh’it: So you don’t believe allah and his messenger, instead you want a scholar, but you can not find a single scholar that teaches against the plain meaning of the verse. See you need to do that, not for me, I don’t care I’m not a Muslim. You need to do that for those Muslims that do take the plain meaning of the text.

      I just said no scholar understands Surah 9.29 to sanction killing of random non-Muslims. Are you that stupid?

      No Isis supporter has come to this blog arguing 9.29 calls for killing of random non-Muslims. You are the one who came here looking for a debate. Now that you’ve been cornered, you backtrack and deflect. That is to be expected from an ignorant piece of crap.

      Sh’it: Kmak Don’t run away it was just getting good. So you want a scholar that says you can go and kill random Christians. Well here u go…Imam Shaffi in The Reliance of the Traveler Book (or section) “01.2 The following are not subject to retaliation…
      (2) a Muslim for killing a non-Muslim;”
      There u have it, according to Imam Shafi a Muslim can kill non Muslims and there is no retaliation no punishment.

      So one of the opinions of Shafi Madhab is that a Muslim cannot be killed for killing a non-Muslim. Therefore, Islam allows Muslims to randomly kill non-Muslims? Is that the conclusion of the Shafi Madhab or is it your conclusion? While we are at it, show me one instance in which Isis appealed to this law as a justification for killing of random non-Muslims.

      Like

    • Kmak lets review…

      You first asked me to show you a scholar that says Muslims can go around killing random people. First you assumed the non Muslim victims of Islam are random victims. Clearly since they did not believe in “Allah or in the Last Day”… and since the non Muslim victims “do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful” and since these non Muslim victims clearly “do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture ” and since they do not “give the jizyah willingly” and since WE are not ” humbled”. Then they are not Random, but instead they are the intended victims of Islam. Since allah himself commands Muslims to “FIGHT” them\us.

      So you reject allahs words and want the words of a scholar.

      So I give you Imam Shafi that clearly says there is NO punishment for a Muslim if he kills a NON Muslim. And you ask…

      “Is that the conclusion of the Shafi Madhab or is it your conclusion?”

      Its the only conclusion. If there is no punishment for killing someone then that means you can kill them and get away with Murder. There is no insensitive not to Kill them if you so desire it.

      So as you can see allah orders Muslims to kill Non Muslims unless they pay the Jizya and are humbled. Since the victims where non Muslims who did not pay the Jizya and where not humbled Muslims can kill them. Second if you are under Imam Shafi’s school then you can just walk up to a Non Muslim on the street put a gun to his head and pull the triggar and not worry about getting executed, going to prison or even getting arrested.

      So you can continue to reject allah his messenger and even his scholar. Thats actually a good thing. I wish all Muslims did as you did. But just because you lack faith, just because you are “One who lags behind in the fighting” does not mean all Muslims share your lack of faith.

      Like

    • Sh’it, you can’t present evidence of any scholar who understands 9.29 as sanctioning killing of random non-Muslims. Instead, you give me your own explanation. You do realize that you are just some random loser troll and that your opinion of what 9.29 implies doesn’t matter? The same is true of the Shafi opinion that a Muslim cannot be killed in retaliation for killing a non-Muslim. You couldn’t even provide evidence of Isis using this opinion to murder random non-Muslims. That’s because this legal opinion is NOT in the context of war you dumb piece of shi’t.

      Like

    • Kmac can you provide any evidence from any scholar that says the opposite of what I have provided?

      Like

    • Sh’it: Kmac can you provide any evidence from any scholar that says the opposite of what I have provided?

      The fact that no scholar interprets 9.29 and the Shafi opinion as you do is evidence against your position you imbecile. The fact that even Isis doesn’t use the Shafi opinion as you do shows how baseless your claims are. Man, how stupid can you be?

      Like

    • Kmac so no scholar refutes me. Ok good to know. Like I said some Muslims take their religion seriously. You obviously are not one of those Muslims.

      LET ME REPEAT THATS A GOOD THING. Now if only you could convince Muslims who do take their religion seriously and actually believe allah and his messenger that would be a GREAT THING.

      But since you can not even convince a kuffar like my self, and since you can not find a scholar to back up your un islamic position. You will be hard pressed to convince believing Muslims not to obey allah and his messenger.

      I just hope you some day YOU DO NOT repent and actually believing and follow allah and his messenger.

      Like

  25. To reject the bible because it includes accounts of God’s orders to kill on several occasions, is to exalt that which represents a narrow range of God’s sovereignty. Exalt the wide range of God’s love and mercy flowing from the words in the New Testament, to be honest interpreters of his interaction with us.

    Like

  26. When did God tell you to kill babies?

    Like

    • He killed his own son because he is so “loving”, remember. And he ordered you to eat his flesh and drink his blood.

      Like

  27. When we choose hell, we are thrown in.

    Because he loves us, it grieves him when we choose hell. That is why he sent Christ.

    Like

    • This is nonsense. No one “chooses” hell.

      Your god makes a deliberate decision to throw people in hell who don’t believe in him. But if he loves everyone, as you claim, then he would not do that. I wouldn’t throw someone I claimed to “love” in a burning lake of sulfur, no matter how much they disobey me or hate me. Would you?

      Face it. The “love” you speak of is fake.

      Like

  28. When did he order you to kill babies?

    Like

    • “If God instructs a king to utterly destroy a people, which he did, best bet is to do as he says.”

      If your own personal Jesus ordered you to kill babies, you would do it, I’m afraid.

      Like

    • Those were specific instructions given at certain times. He no longer orders anyone to kill.

      Like

    • Wrong. There are people who claim their own personal Jesus ordered them to kill.

      Like

    • He didn’t order me to kill babies. He ordered (according to your Bible) Moses, Joshua, David and others to kill babies.

      What I am saying is that if someone told me to kill babies, and claimed that it was an order from God, I would disobey that order because I don’t believe such an order would come from God. I would base this only everything I know about God. God is just and merciful. A just and merciful being would not order me to kill babies. That sort of order can only come from the devil.

      Like

  29. His son offered himself up to die for you, me, and everyone. He orders us to breathe by virtue of the way we’re formed. Eating his flesh and drinking his blood reminds me that he paid it all, that he gave everything he possibly could. Humbling.

    Like

  30. That’s what love is. It gives. It sacrifices. It hurts. It bleeds. It cries. It pleads.

    Like

  31. Give Jesus his due. If you reject God for ordering his chosen people to wipe out entire people-groups, Why not reject him for sending his son to give all eternal life?

    Like

  32. As long as love is getting on your nerves, he is still doing all he can to draw you to himself. When you no longer kick against the pricks, he’s decided to let you go.

    Like

  33. Like radio broadcasts. They go out to everyone. Not all choose to tune in.

    Like

  34. He broadcasts his love everywhere. We are free to listen to his overtures. We don’t have to. I never heard voices but I know his love and it is the most fantastic, wonderful, powerful, gentle, sweet, good, wholesome, real, beautiful, kind, tender, understanding, incredible, mind-boggling real thing I have ever known, by far, bar none.

    Like

    • Followers

      As Sam Shamoun and he will tell you he has big stomach and does not feel the love of Jesus Christ just like so many Christians are suffering like anyone else. What makes Christians different than other human beings? Every religion also believe it feels love of God. Muslims believed this world is temporal one and their is trial and tribulations and they can sometimes have difficult situation and will strive to stay with Allah.

      Christians on the other hand believed God came down to love them. I cannot see that because Christians are no different from anyone else for they do suffer like Sam Shamoun. Where is Jesus love here?

      Thanks.

      Like

    • Christians vary.

      God works with us individually. Many profess they believe in or follow God, but they don’t. Many believe and suffer terrible pain. God doesn’t say that if we believe we will have no more problems, as far as I know. In fact, he causes us to experience pain and suffering at times. There are reasons for this. Sometimes we understand why only after we’ve gone through the hardship.

      But. I’m no expert on these things.

      Like

    • Flowers

      The worse sex offenders and child molesters are the Fathers in Church and Pastors like Eddie Lee Long, Jimmy Swaggart, Jerry Falwell etc. are all Christians and clergy men as well and are sex offenders with prostitutes, minors, same sex sex etc. Where us the love of Jesus here? to allow his followers like anyone else to harm others and to break God’s commandment.

      Jesus is not God coming down to love anyone. Christians Catholics persecuted anyone else in Europe including other Christians until stopped by secularists. Is this love from Jesus Christ? For secularist to bring freedom from religion and Christians following Jesus commandment below?

      Luke 19:27
      Parallel Verses

      New International Version
      But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them–bring them here and kill them in front of me.'”

      New Living Translation
      And as for these enemies of mine who didn’t want me to be their king–bring them in and execute them right here in front of me.'”

      WHERE IS LOVE HERE? FOR ANYONE? INCLUDING JESUS ENEMIES? Don’t you understand love?

      For a woman whose young daughter had an unclean spirit heard about Him [Jesus—KB], and she came and fell at His feet. The woman was a Greek, a Syro-Phoenician by birth, and she kept asking Him to cast the demon out of her daughter. But Jesus said to her, “Let the children be filled first, for it is not good to take the children’s bread and throw it to the little dogs.” And she answered and said to Him, “Yes, Lord, yet even the little dogs under the table eat from the children’s crumbs.” Then He said to her, “For this saying go your way; the demon has gone out of your daughter.” And when she had come to her house, she found the demon gone out, and her daughter lying on the bed (7:25-30; see also Matthew 15:21-28).

      Source: http://www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=10&article=317

      Thanks.

      Like

    • I can pretend I’m something I’m not. So can anyone. By their fruits you should be able to tell who and what they are.

      God is God. He is beyond my comprehension. A teacher once said, God doesn’t necessarily tell us when or why we are going to die. But, he does say be ready. I will never figure out much of God’s dealings with us, but I can respond favorably to what I do understand, you know?

      Like

  35. I know his love. His love is the greatest thing I’ve ever known. I don’t live for him because someone told me to or because I think it will pay off or buy me a seat in heaven. I don’t love him because I’m forced to. He loves me. He loves me and I appreciate and love him for that.

    If a dog licks my face and follows me and is thrilled to see me and rolls over and goes nuts when we are together, i’m going to like that dog.

    Can you hear me? He loves you. If you give yourself to him, you can know him and experience his love. What do you lose?

    Like

  36. Followers

    You said;
    Christians vary.

    God works with us individually. Many profess they believe in or follow God, but they don’t. Many believe and suffer terrible pain. God doesn’t say that if we believe we will have no more problems, as far as I know. In fact, he causes us to experience pain and suffering at times. There are reasons for this. Sometimes we understand why only after we’ve gone through the hardship.

    But. I’m no expert on these things.

    I say;
    If someone comes down to love you and causes you pain instead then he did not come down to love you. Just imagine going to honeymoon to love your wife and start to cause her stomach to expand and stomach pain. Is that love? No. Why did you go to honey moon with her.

    You preach Jesus love, love, love and when you are cornered you admit he came down to cause pain as well. Why were you not preaching about the pain, pain pain caused by Jesus when he came down? and Sam Shamoun is an example of the pain Jesus is causing to his followers.

    Thanks.

    Like

    • Followers

      You said;

      But. I’m no expert on these things.

      I say;
      Nonsense. You are only expert in the peace lies of Christians but will not tell the truth Jesus came down to cause pain as well.

      Thanks.

      Like

  37. Pain is part of life. Pain is a part of love, too, at times. But pain does not equal love. Love is greater. I disagree with you. I am not an expert on pain or love or Jesus or religion.

    I’m just someone who has experienced his love. And I believe it is beautiful beyond description. I also believe that he reserves the right to do with me what he chooses. If he leads me into pain or if he allows me to experience pain, I can still decide to love him, even if I don’t want to or feel like loving. Loving is an act of the will sometimes. But, love is more than making a decision to obey out of love. Hard to articulate it very well for me. GOD IS LOVE and everything he does results from his love. I believe that. I don’t have to believe it.

    Like

  38. Followers

    You said;

    Followers

    July 22, 2016 • 6:08 pm

    I can pretend I’m something I’m not. So can anyone. By their fruits you should be able to tell who and what they are.

    God is God. He is beyond my comprehension. A teacher once said, God doesn’t necessarily tell us when or why we are going to die. But, he does say be ready. I will never figure out much of God’s dealings with us, but I can respond favorably to what I do understand, you know?

    I say;
    That is the pretention you are doing here. You claim Jesus came down to love but ignored the pain part Jesus is causing his followers to suffer. You conceal the truth and it is a sin. Your fellow Christians are not different from anyone else because they suffer like anyone else like Sam Shamoun with very big stomach. You ignore and conceal fhis and lying that Jesus came down to love us.

    If God is beyond your comprehension, why would you define your God at councils upon councils and conclude He is 3 persons 1 God? that cannot be found in the whole Bible?

    Why do you preach God died for sins? and the Bible says God is immortal-do not die?

    Thanks.

    Like

  39. I don’t ignore the pain. Compared to knowing him and his love, any pain we go through is insignificant in the long run.

    If you want to follow Jesus, prepare to pay the price. It takes every ounce of strength. His love is worth it. His love is the greatest thing in the world.

    Like

    • Followers

      You do ignore pain as you started preaching us. You started with peace, peace, peace like how Christians lie to people and ignore the pain side Jesus Christ has brought to the world and Sam Shamoun is testimony to that. Until I drew your attention that it is not only peace that Christian are getting from Jesus but pain and suffering from Jesus is also what Christians get.

      Well if you do not ignore the pain and suffering that Christians are getting from Jesus now, then to your disappointment all humanity gets pain and suffering from what ever they believe. So, your Jesus coming down to love Christians is false because Christians do have pain and suffering as well and Jesus coming down is useless.

      God coming down to love but it turn out it is not true He had to inflict pain to Christians as well and Mr. Followers agreed to that.

      Imagine a father going to his son cradle to love him but to start using needle to piece the toddler. Is this love? No love. Ask Sam Shamoun the pain he is suffering for not able to walk well because of his big stomach. It is no love from his lord Jesus Christ of Nazareth.

      Visit voodoo shrine and they will tell you they experience peace with their snake idol. Does that make them right or the truth? Because they feel peace with their idol? No.

      Feeling peace with what one believe is not a yardstick to truth.

      In the faith of Prophet Abraham and the Bible, the yardstick for truth is worshiping the only one God of Abraham who is alone. God Man, 3 persons 1 God, God dying for man’s sins etc. is not in the Bible and therefore anyone who preach that preaches false religion.

      Thanks.

      Thanks.

      Like

  40. Followers

    Idol worshipers feel at peace with their idols. Peace, peace does not make your Jesus God or the God Man to be worshipped. Idol worshippers are feeling peace with their idols like you feel peace with Jesus Christ.

    Thanks.

    Liked by 1 person

  41. Followers

    You said;

    Followers

    July 22, 2016 • 4:49 pm

    His son offered himself up to die for you, me, and everyone. He orders us to breathe by virtue of the way we’re formed. Eating his flesh and drinking his blood reminds me that he paid it all, that he gave everything he possibly could. Humbling

    I say;

    Mr. Followers, you sinned because you lied and put words into the mouth of Jesus that he did not say. Where did Jesus said he offered himself to die for me? If he said so, then he contradicts the Bible because it said in numerous verses that he was SENT, SENT, SENT and not offered himself for anything.

    John 20:21
    Parallel Verses

    New International Version
    Again Jesus said, “Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you.”

    New Living Translation
    Again he said, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, so I am sending you.”

    John 17:18
    As You sent Me into the world, I have also sent them into the world.

    Followers, repent and stop worshiping Jesus and rather worship Jesus’s God because Jesus said his God is the only true God but not Jesus himself. Jesus excludes himself from the true God of Abraham.

    “And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.” (John 17:3).

    Mr. Followers, it is about God SENDING, SENDING,SENDING, SENDING, SENDING Jesus Christi of Nazareth and nothing about Jesus offering himself to die for anyone’s sins. You lied completely about this and form your theology and wishful thinking. You can preach this nonsense somewhere else and not on this blog.

    This blog is for adults and critical thinkers with brainstorming experience and what you wrote and I quoted is completely nonsense.

    Thanks.

    Like

  42. Paulus said:

    “Ouch! Really? I’ve known the critical discussion about this text all along. Clearly, you didn’t, and have only just decided to do some homework on the verse you seem to think you have an interpretative handle on. You are precisely the product of what you charge against me, “bling acceptance” of everything you are “spoonfed”.

    But I’m curious, where exactly does ANY SOURCE say that this verse is ommitted from any MSS .Because “some scribes realized the contradiction”.

    C’mon, let’s see the evidence. The very source you cited gives possible reasons. Can you see your’s? Nup, Nada. Nothing.

    Try not to bring your issues related the Ibn Masud’s different Quranic MS into the discussion please.

    Now, have you found the missing Zabur yet that you believe in?”

    LOL!!! Oh reallly? You knew about the “critical discussion about this text all along”, huh? Then why didn’t you bring it up the first time? Me thinks Paulus is pretending to be an objective researcher…

    Did you realize that the “critical discussion” is ONLY with regard to the last sentence in the verse 5, and not the whole verse? Barnes and Comfort state that the phrase “except in the case of Uriah the Hittite” is a possible later addition since it is not found in the LXX (see their commentary on 1 and 2 Kings, p. 134).

    The rest of the verse is not under any “critical discussion”, you lying missionary. That makes it even worse for you. If we remove the last portion of the verse, it says:

    “For David had done what was right in the eyes of the LORD and had not failed to keep any of the LORD’s commands all the days of his life.”

    Thus, according to this reading, David did not have Uriah killed and he kept of the Lord’s commands all of his life. Interestingly, the author of 1 Chronicles also omitted the story from his version of David’s life. I noted this in my blog article on David:

    “Another problem with the story is that it is not found in the other version of David’s life (i.e. 1 Chronicles). The Chronicler repeated many of the stories found in 1 and 2 Samuel (some with contradictory information as we have seen), yet the story of David’s adultery is curiously absent. The author even began the story in the same way as the author of 2 Samuel, with the war against the Ammonites:

    2 Samuel 11:1 – In the spring, at the time when kings go off to war, David sent Joab out with the king’s men and the whole Israelite army. They destroyed the Ammonites and besieged Rabbah. But David remained in Jerusalem.

    1 Chronicles 20:1 – In the spring, at the time when kings go off to war, Joab led out the armed forces. He laid waste the land of the Ammonites and went to Rabbah and besieged it, but David remained in Jerusalem. Joab attacked Rabbah and left it in ruins.

    But while the account of the war in 2 Samuel 11 is interrupted by the Bathsheba affair and only completed at the end of 2 Samuel 12, the account in 1 Chronicles completely omits the story and instead only summarizes the war against the Ammonites.[64] Scholars have noted this discrepancy and suspect that it was deliberate. For example, Marc Zvi Brettler observes that the Chronicler omitted many of the more sordid and embarrassing parts of David’s story. He states:

    “Chronicles similarly omits the unflattering set of events that happened next in Samuel: the rape of David’s daughter Tamar by Amnon, her half-brother; the murder of Amnon by his half-brother Absalom; and the (largely successful) rebellion by Absalom, followed by his death. These events suggest a measure-for-measure punishment of David and his house. They reflect badly on David, so the Chronicler omitted them (perhaps with the hope that his book would displace Samuel as an authoritative version of history).”[65]

    Similarly, John C. Endres states:

    “The stories the Chronicler omitted include many incidents in which David’s loyalty and character seem compromised, where he appears weakened by sin that affects him and most of his household negatively. […] The Chronicler omits much of the negative portrayal of David (“whitewash”), perhaps to make him appear more religious and saintly.”[66]

    These seemingly deliberate omissions have led some scholars to believe that the story of the adulterous affair was inserted by a later redactor.[67]” (http://quranandbible.blogspot.com/2014/04/david-in-bible-and-quran.html)

    So there you go! Another embarrassing performance for you Paulus! LOL!!!

    Like

  43. Madman said:

    “1. I don’t have a problem with the foreskins ( of the Philistines ).

    They were perpetually at war with the Israelites so it would be a fair fight on open ground, man against man. I’m sure David was not a night r(a)ider like your hero.”

    LOL!! So, you have no problem that your circumcising hero mutilated the corpses of the Philistines, because they were “perpetually at war”. You’re off to a great start!

    “2.The Amalikes were under the ban so I think David was within the will of God. They should have got the hell out of Judah while they had a chance but they didn’t. They probably felt safe behind the Phillistines?”

    Another brilliant response! This is too easy!

    So, the Amalekites were fair game for extermination because they didn’t get out of Judah, the land they had lived on for centuries. Thank you madman for showing that you are a supporter of Biblical ethnic cleansing. Great job so far! Keep it up!

    “3.The Moabites seem to have refused to surrender in accordance with Deut 20 v 10 which meant that David had no choice but to put all the males to death:”

    WOW!!! So, if you refuse to surrender, then you are deserve death, huh? Funny, because you and other Christians seem to have a serious problem with the way the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) dealt with the Bani Qurayzah. Hypocrisy much? Christianity and hypocrisy…like a horse and a carriage. No wonder tens of millions of people are leaving your religion every year.

    “4. My bible is the KJV. I am not interested in other translations. Having said that my understanding is the people of Ammon deliberately insulted David by sending his messengers butt naked and with clipped beards back to David. This was a declaration of war. They knew that he would come to get revenge. The wise would have could have just left for a safer place. Those who stayed made themselves complicit in the war which was inevitable. Blood will be shed for blood.”

    LOL!! This one takes the cake!

    So the punishment for insulting David’s messengers was to be sawed and bludgeoned to death! Hmmm. Was David a 10-year old who couldn’t accept an insult, so he threw a temper-tantrum and killed thousands of people to “get revenge”?

    Brother Paul, if you are reading this, I think you should put this up to show as a separate post to highlight madman’s excuses for genocide and mass murder.

    “You sound as if Islam teaches pacifism which we all know is not true. Defensive jihad only is also a myth that we don’t believe.”

    LOL, no one said Islam teaches pacifism. But what every educated man knows, which obviously does not include you, is that Islam does not condone the type of behavior your circumcising, raiding, mass murdering hero David committed in the Bible, and which you are now defending with pathetic excuses. So, I assume you accept my claim that David was a genocidal madman? Regardless of the excuses for his genocide, do you agree that he did commit mass murder, just like Genghiz Khan, or Pol Pot or Stalin?

    Don’t worry madman. Here is the slavery thread: https://bloggingtheology.net/2016/04/25/12937/#comment-15731 😉

    “I don’t know where the other thread is on slavery now. I take the chance here to say that the bible cleary teaches that slavery is evil because God delivered his people from it by the plagues and the passover. The hebrews are representative of all mankind and were only allowed to become slaves economically. i.e. they had to pay off their debts by work for a maximum of six years.”

    LOL!! This is nothing but white-washing the Bible’s clear position that slavery was NOT evil.

    The Hebrews “are representatives of all mankind”? Since when? Does the rest of mankind get a choice in this matter?

    What is clear is that the laws of slavery were DIFFERENT for Hebrews and for non-Hebrews. Thus, your claim that Hebrews were “representatives of all mankind” is complete Christian BS.

    “The concession to foreign slaves was probably because at times there would simply not be enough manpower available to do what needed to be done in the field or construction projects or whatever.”

    LOL!! So, so evidently slavery was not evil when there was not “enough manpower”. And enslaving foreigners, and applying different rules to them, was completely allowed. Not only that, but you could the slave so long as he didn’t die immediately.

    “They could not enjoy the freedom of the hebrew because they were not Israelites under the covenant relation to God. My own theory is that they prefigured the Gentiles who would be brought in to the blessings of the kingdom after the theocracy phase of the national Israel expired.”

    LOL!! So the Hebrews didn’t represent all of mankind after all!

    I am not interested in your crackpot theories. I am interested in facts.

    “Islam seems to delude itself in to thinking that it has replaced the Jews as the people of God and Allah is continuing the old testament national character of the covenant in arabic format.”

    Now, now madman. Don’t take your frustrations and anger out on Islam. You were given a fair chance to defend the madness of your scripture and you failed miserably.

    So, after all this, I think we can conclude that (the Biblical) David was indeed a genocidal madman and that Biblical laws of slavery were discriminatory and savage. Thank God for Islam, which condemns the brutality of the Bible and brought the world much-needed reform.

    Like

  44. “LOL!! So, so evidently slavery was not evil when there was not “enough manpower”. And enslaving foreigners, and applying different rules to them, was completely allowed. Not only that, but you could the slave so long as he didn’t die immediately.”

    The foreigners were already slaves. They were not enslaved by the Israelites. This was against the law. You might say this is hypocritical but if the law of Moses was strictly adhered to by all there would be no slaves to purchase in the first place. Man stealing is strictly forbidden by pain of death under the law of Moses.

    King James Bible
    And he that stealeth a man, and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death.

    Sad for the world that Islam has other laws which perpetuate slavery.

    Like

    • LOL, the only thing “sad” here is your pathetic excuse-making for the Bible’s savagery.

      The Bible clearly allowed slavery. How then could there “be no slaves to purchase in the first place”? You’re full of crap, madman. Admit it.

      Like

  45. ” Was David a 10-year old who couldn’t accept an insult, so he threw a temper-tantrum and killed thousands of people to “get revenge”?”

    But if someone insults your claimed to be prophet what should happen to him in your opinion?

    Like

    • LOL, another deflection. You are trying to defend David’s over-handed and brutal response to a diplomatic insult. But does a diplomatic insult justify cutting people to pieces, especially after they have been defeated and subdued?

      In contrast, the blessed Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) forgave his enemies. The only ones he would fight and kill were the combatants. But even then, in most cases, he would leave the prisoners of war alone. Sometimes he would ransom them, other times he would release them, as the Quran states:

      “Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight), smite at their necks; At length, when ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly (on them): thereafter (is the time for) either generosity or ransom: Until the war lays down its burdens. Thus (are ye commanded): but if it had been Allah’s Will, He could certainly have exacted retribution from them (Himself); but (He lets you fight) in order to test you, some with others. But those who are slain in the Way of Allah,- He will never let their deeds be lost” (47:4).

      Ibn Kathir explained this verse as follows:

      “This is referring to the prisoners of war whom you have captured. Later on, after the war ends and the conflict has ceased, you have a choice in regard to the captives: You may either act graciously toward them by setting them free without charge, or free them for a ransom that you require from them.'”

      Why didn’t David do that with the Moabites or the Amalekites? Why didn’t your Bible urge humane treatment?

      Also, how typical of a weasel apologist like yourself to forget that when the Prophet did get revenge against those who instigated war against him, whether by writing satirical verses or allying with his enemies, it was only against ONLY those specific people and NOT the entire tribe or town!

      In contrast, your circumcising hero David massacred thousands for the insult of one man!

      Like

  46. ” Thank you madman for showing that you are a supporter of Biblical ethnic cleansing. Great job so far! Keep it up!”

    The cleansing of the land so that God could dwell in it, whether in the temple or tabernacle, was on ethnic lines because God’s blessing on mankind was through the election of the Jew.

    This is how it is recorded in the Torah, which is the true book that the Jews had in their hands at the time of Mohammed, according to the koran. You are just making the koran look stupid and worthless.

    Like

    • LOL, so your god didn’t want anything to do with Gentiles, huh? Well, that explains Jesus’ animosity towards the Canaanite woman. 😉

      But anyway, thank you for admitting that your Bible urged the ethnic cleansing, through brutal violence, of Palestine because your god allegedly commanded it. So, do you agree that the Biblical David was a genocidal madman then? I notice you are still avoiding this question.

      Your laughable attempts to deflect the embarrassing truths about your Bible by pointing to the Holy Quran is just another typical apologetic slight of hand. When you weasel apologists get cornered and run out of excuses, you try to use the “Quran endorses the Bible” argument. Yet you idiots don’t realize that the Quran corrects the Bible.

      Case in point: there is nothing in the Quran that endorses the Bible’s stupid claim that God ordered the killing of babies. In fact, the Quran states that God revealed to the Israelites:

      “On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person – unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land – it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our messengers with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land” (5:32).

      Face it. Your Bible is stupid and worthless, at least the parts that don’t make any sense and reflect man-made corruptions rather than divine instructions.

      By the way, you do realize that archaeologists have disproved the Bible’s claims of a rapid and violent conquest of the Holy Land? Historical evidence shows that the Bible’s stories of murder and mayhem are largely made up.

      Like

  47. By the way there is nothing in the Koran that contradicts the truths about David as he is described in the bible. This is just your wishful thinking but you have nothing in your scriptures that contradicts the biblical depiction of David.

    Like

  48. madmanna

    You said;
    This is how it is recorded in the Torah, which is the true book that the Jews had in their hands at the time of Mohammed, according to the koran. You are just making the koran look stupid and worthless.

    I say;
    Can you show us the Torah that which is the book the Jews had in their hands? please show us that Torah. The Jews of the Arabian Peninsula did not speak Greek at that time, so any Greek manuscript is not accepted.

    There are so many manuscripts including the Infancy Gospel of Thomas and Dr. James White says prophet Mohammed got some of his materials from that. Then you have to accept the Gospel of Thomas as a true Gospel when the Quran says believe in the previous scriptures.

    Muslims pick and choose which is in conformity with the Quran. The Torah in the hands of Jews in Arabia at that time could have some contents that conforms with the Quran.

    Thanks.

    Like

  49. No man comes to the father except by me. He who hath seen me hath seen the father. I and the father are one. I am the vine and my father is the husbandman. Every branch in me that doesn’t bear fruit, he purges it.

    Like

    • Jesus made clear he had a God just as we do.

      Like

    • For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believes in him shall never perish but have eternal life.

      Like

    • God and his son, two separate individuals who are not identical to each other.

      vs

      The Lord our God is one Lord.

      Like

    • Are you a father? A son? A brother? Of course they are not identical. Ice, water, steam.

      Was he lying when he said the things he did? Are there mysteries? He made it perfectly clear who and what he was and his ABBA father did too. You cannot find his father God without him.

      You believe in God? Believe also in me, for the father hath sent me.

      Like

    • Modalism is a heresy. Your misunderstanding is proof he DID NOT make it perfectly clear who and what he was. Your personal Jesus is a fake.

      Like

    • Followers

      You said;

      Followers

      July 25, 2016 • 11:20 am

      Are you a father? A son? A brother? Of course they are not identical. Ice, water, steam.

      Was he lying when he said the things he did? Are there mysteries? He made it perfectly clear who and what he was and his ABBA father did too. You cannot find his father God without him.

      You believe in God? Believe also in me, for the father hath sent me

      I say;
      Didn’t God send Moses? Abraham? Noah? and all the prophets of God? Does that make them God? So if Jesus said he was sent by God, why quoting it here? What do you mean by quoting Jesus was sent by God?

      It did not say Jesus is God, God Man, 3 persons 1 God etc.

      A Father, son and brother can be counted as 3 persons(human beings)

      A Divine Father, Divine Son and a Divine brother are counted as 3 Divine Persons/beings. Every person is a being. A person who is not a being is not a person.

      Is timber, table, car a person? They do not have intellect, faculty and some like table do not have consciousness.

      Jesus has consciousness and intellect and the Father who is not Jesus has his consciousness and intellect and that is why Jesus did not know the end day but the Father knows.

      They are 2 Gods and it is polytheism and or idol worship.

      If you put ice on fire, part of the ice will start be become steam and part will be liquid and the rest will remain ice. Notice they are in parts. Is your God divided in parts, so that the Son alone is not one God but needed other parts like how the ice needed the liquid and steam to be one water?

      If I drink the liquid part of the water, the the remaining water is reduced. So when Jesus died, your God remained 2? The Father and the Holy Spirit?

      Thanks.

      Like

  50. Followers

    You said;
    Followers
    July 23, 2016 • 9:49 pm
    No man comes to the father except by me. He who hath seen me hath seen the father. I and the father are one. I am the vine and my father is the husbandman. Every branch in me that doesn’t bear fruit, he purges it.

    I say;
    The above does not say Jesus is God, God-Man, 3 persons 1 God, Trinity etc. so it is rubbish. I quoted from the Bible were it is clear Jesus has the only true God and Jesus whom the only one true God has sent. The people of Moses time will go to God through Moses but not through Jesus. Show me a proof where it is clear the followers of Moses will go to God through Jesus but not Moses. If you are not able to give proof or give a vague verse, then what you quoted above has no meaning and is rubbish.

    Thanks.

    Like

  51. “LOL, yes there is. Read my article about David: http://quranandbible.blogspot.com/2014/04/david-in-bible-and-quran.html

    Get yourself educated first.

    Anyway, I think we can agree that the Biblical David was a genocidal madman. Do you agree?”

    I reply:

    No, I don’t think you have proven it up to now. I argue that David was always within the law as given by Moses. You might argue that this law is inhumane or genocidal. If it is God’s will then it’s all the same to God what men think about his law is it not?

    I read your article but most of it is concerned with contradictions in the biblical account which is not what we are discussing here.

    “So the punishment for insulting David’s messengers was to be sawed and bludgeoned to death! Hmmm. Was David a 10-year old who couldn’t accept an insult, so he threw a temper-tantrum and killed thousands of people to “get revenge”?”

    The law was that the nations under the ban had to be destroyed completely. Those who lived on the outskirts and surrendered before hostilities began would be put to tribute and live in peace in the land. So it was highly probable that David did not go to war solely because of the insult but also because they refused to pay tribute. In this case he had no choice but to go to war with them because that was the condition of peace that the law of Moses stipulated. If we don’t know we should suspend judgment against him.

    1 Chronicles 19 v 6 And when the children of Ammon saw that they had made themselves odious to David, Hanun and the children of Ammon sent a thousand talents of silver to hire them chariots and horsemen out of Mesopotamia, and out of Syriamaachah, and out of Zobah. 7So they hired thirty and two thousand chariots, and the king of Maachah and his people; who came and pitched before Medeba. And the children of Ammon gathered themselves together from their cities, and came to battle. 8And when David heard of it, he sent Joab, and all the host of the mighty men. 9And the children of Ammon came out, and put the battle in array before the gate of the city: and the kings that were come were by themselves in the field.

    The Ammonites also allied themselves with the Syrians and others and paid them a lot of money to fight Israel. So David lost a lot of lives because of the Ammonites stubborn intent to make war against him. So who should pay for the lives of all these dead Israelites? Their king alone?

    Forgiveness sounds good but the law demands that blood be paid for blood.

    ““On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person – unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land – it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our messengers with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land” (5:32).”

    That was never revealed to anyone except the joker who wrote it. It is just plagiarized nonsense.

    Like

    • LOL, madman!

      You obviously didn’t read my article, you idiot. I talked about the Islamic view of David (pbuh).

      You also don’t seem to understand that the Biblical David was a genocidal madman because he killed lots of people. Your excuses for why he did it do not matter. What matters is that his murderous behavior would qualify him as a genocidal madman. It’s like arguing that Genghis Khan was not a genocidal madman because nations refused to give him tribute and therefore he was within his right to kill them all. Only a moron would find that as a rational argument! You are a moron for thinking that David was not a genocidal madman because he was following the “law” of your god. Funny, because that is exactly what the ISIS thugs believe as well. They think they are doing God’s work, but they are actually criminal and heretics who will rot in hell for their actions. Similarly, you try to justify the Bible’s barbarity by claiming that it was God’s will.

      Your brain has become rotten due to years of exposure to the Bible’s toxic writings. Didn’t I tell you? The Bible rots your brain! Your brain is so rotten that you actually think that your genocidal Bible, with its talk of baby killing and extermination, is God’s word whereas compassionate and humane teachings like that of the Quran are “plagiarized nonsense”! LOL!!! That’s the Bible noxious influence on your befuddled mind! Satan has you in his grasp, it seems! You’ve become his follower, Bozo. 😉

      Like

  52. ““So the punishment for insulting David’s messengers was to be sawed and bludgeoned to death! Hmmm. Was David a 10-year old who couldn’t accept an insult, so he threw a temper-tantrum and killed thousands of people to “get revenge”?””

    David was God’s anointed. So I think he had no choice but to punish this insult in the only way that the Ammonites left open to him and which they intended from the get go. The punishment was not just for the insult but for all the lives that were lost through it.

    Like

    • LOL, the excuses are getting dumber and dumber! Your Bible says that he killed everyone for the insult to his messengers. Stop lying, madman. No one is falling for your extrapolations of the text.

      Like

  53. “Keep this in mind the next time you open your big mouth and attempt to criticize the blessed Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), who was merciful even to his enemies and did not commit the violent atrocities your Biblical heroes committed.”

    That’s debatable.

    Like

    • LOL, no it isn’t! Muhammad (pbuh) didn’t cut people to death with saws for the insult of their leaders. He didn’t murder the people of entire cities and leave them in ruins. Rather, he treated people with compassion, even to the point of letting POWs go free without any ransom in some cases.

      Like

  54. While we are on the subject of insults David is not the only one with a thin skin that I know of.

    Like

    • LOL, I don’t know anyone who had as thin a skin as the Biblical David and who threw terrifying temper tantrums when he was insulted!

      Like

  55. “8And when David heard of it, he sent Joab, and all the host of the mighty men. 9And the children of Ammon came out, and put the battle in array before the gate of the city: and the kings that were come were by themselves in the field.”

    The text speaks in David’s favour because it was only after he heard of the others gathering for battle that he sent his own army. A war was now inevitable.

    Like

    • LOL, still not getting it? War is not the issue you clod! The issue is David’s incessant habit of overkill and committing atrocities against his defeated opponents. He did not behave in a compassionate and just manner. If he had fought his enemies, defeated them, and then acted generously with them, we would not be having this discussion.

      Unfortunately, the Biblical David acted like a savage brute…a genocidal madman. And you are nothing more than a shameless defender of Biblically-inspired genocide. But fortunately, we know that your joke of a Bible is wrong about the history. We know from archaeological evidence that the violence and brutality the Bible speaks of actually never happened.

      Like

  56. “Rather, he treated people with compassion, even to the point of letting POWs go free without any ransom in some cases.”

    I reply:

    The law is indifferent to the acts of men. All sins can be forgiven but the law only asks whether a crime has been commited that should be punished or not.

    The living cannot forgive for the dead or for God. No exception to this. Even for islamic prophets.

    Intelligent Christians would argue that the wars of Mohammed agains the Meccans and against the Jews were unjust therefore his “forgiveness” was invalid and really a mockery of the slain. He also had no right to take captives or make slaves.

    Like

    • LOL…”intelligent Christians”. That’s rich! It’s like saying “smart imbecile”!

      You’re not an “intelligent Christian”, madman. You’re a brain-washed weasel who defends Biblical genocide while criticizing the defensive wars of Muhammad (pbuh) as “unjust”. Do you really think anyone cares what you hypocritical imbeciles think? It’s no wonder 100 million people leave your stupid religion every year! They got tired of following the religion of imbeciles! LOL!!

      In any case, it has been thoroughly proven that the Biblical David was a genocidal madman. It is also clear that you are just a Christian version of ISIS, in that you defend murder and genocide because your god allegedly commanded it.

      Muhammad (pbuh) had every right to fight against the Meccans and the Jews. Both had threatened his community and wanted him dead. He kicked their asses and brought them low. In contrast, the Biblical David had no right to massacre thousands, enslave the rest and get tribute from them because their crime was being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

      Like

  57. “No man comes to the except by me”.. plain as day.

    Like

  58. Rejecting Christ because people have done horrible, violent, ridiculous things in his name is like hating democrats because of Governor Wallace, or hating all republicans because of Dick Nixon.

    Like

  59. Followers

    You said;

    Followers

    July 24, 2016 • 9:22 pm

    “No man comes to the except by me”.. plain as day.

    I said;
    You have said nothing above. This is what you believe.

    You have to proof where it says the people of Moses will no go to God except through Jesus.

    Rastafarians believed no man comes to God except through Emperor Haile Selaissie. Do you buy that? We must not use what we believed as yardstick to judge others who do not have that believe.

    My yard stick is the God of Abraham who clearly stated that He is One, Only and Alone. He does not die. Any one who dies no matter how and why death is, he is not God at all. Jesus died and he is not God. You are worshiping Jesus at your own peril because Jesus said “to the only true God, as Jesus who you sent” plain as day.

    Thanks.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: