Jump to content
Islamic Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Chaand

Bible Drawn Into Sex Publication Controversy

Recommended Posts

I love how ###### ignored my posts instead of addressing them when I refuted them.....

 

Anyway, watcha think bout my reasoning for putting a warning label on most religious texts?:sl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PropellerAds

Wow putting a warning label on the bible!!! wow i think they should take any book out of the bible that talks about sex to munch and should be sold sepeartly to 18 year old or up.

 

I was studing the bible on google and i cam across this anti-christian site.. anyway what he said surprised me!! if this is wrong can someone tell me how?? here is the (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetbroadcaster(contact admin if its a beneficial link).uk/section2/transcript/harshlaws.htm"]link[/url]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was studing the bible on google and i cam across this anti-christian site.. anyway what he said surprised me!! if this is wrong can someone tell me how?? here is the (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetbroadcaster(contact admin if its a beneficial link).uk/section2/transcript/harshlaws.htm"]link[/url]

 

:sl:

 

Those laws may very well have been apart of Moses'(pbuh) Law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sex isn't brushed off under the carpet in Islam, if you think otherwise, this is just reflecting your ingorance, and in the worst case bigotry.

OK lets talk about it then.

 

Whats your favourite position? Mine is her on top, from behind. Fantastic.

 

How was your first time, tell me about it.

 

What is the best way to pleasure a woman, and for her to pleasure a man? Could we start that as an entirely new thread on it's own? Or would it be deleted aka swept under the carpet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Whats your favourite position? Mine is her on top, from behind. Fantastic.

 

You are allowed to approach your wife from any position, except in the anus.

 

How was your first time, tell me about it.

 

I don't think even Christians get THIS confortable! And specially with strangers. I dare you to pull this "stunt" on a total Christian stranger. Tell him that most Christians fear sexuality, and when he tells you that it's not true, then ask him this same question.

 

What is the best way to pleasure a woman, and for her to pleasure a man? Could we start that as an entirely new thread on it's own? Or would it be deleted aka swept under the carpet.

 

You are free to open up a new thread, and I can paste links that deal with the subject, or I can paste them here, if you are interested, or if anybody else is.

 

Here's some general advice though:

 

"Not one of you should fall upon his wife like an animal; but let there first be a messenger between you." "And what is that messenger?" they asked, and he replied: "Kisses and words." (Daylami)

 

Seriously, there are lengthy articles written about sex from an Islamic point of view. This isn't a hidden topic, it's not a topic that is shyed away from. Sex is talked about generally, you don't have to go into personal details.

Edited by Younes Ibn Abd' al-Aziz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You are allowed to approach your wife from any position, except in the anus.

I don't think even Christians get THIS confortable! And specially with strangers. I dare you to pull this "stunt" on a total Christian stranger. Tell him that most Christians fear sexuality, and when he tells you that it's not true, then ask him this same question.

You are free to open up a new thread, and I can paste links that deal with the subject, or I can paste them here, if you are interested, or if anybody else is.

 

Here's some general advice though:

 

"Not one of you should fall upon his wife like an animal; but let there first be a messenger between you." "And what is that messenger?" they asked, and he replied: "Kisses and words." (Daylami)

 

Seriously, there are lengthy articles written about sex from an Islamic point of view. This isn't a hidden topic, it's not a topic that is shyed away from. Sex is talked about generally, you don't have to go into personal details.

 

Well, you obviously don't know that many Christians, amongst people I know it's a well discussed subject. Your calling it a "stunt" shows your embarrassment by it all.

 

I opened up a new thread, you can see the title in General Discussions>General Chat but guess what? It's been removed, or "swept under the carpet" LOL.

 

As sex is a personal experience, to discuss it maturely in detail is not filthy, it's a natural function like eating or drinking.

 

Nice to have a point proved, now lets move on.

Edited by freeasabird

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam,

 

Younes is right, they are Mosaic law. Whilst the OT is a useful source, most of the laws were fulfilled by Jesus so we no longer follow them. The difficulty is the willingness many Christians have to suddenly adopt aspects of Mosaic law when they want to be bigoted etc

 

Peace and Love,

 

DARLA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, you obviously don't know that many Christians, amongst people I know it's a well discussed subject. Your calling it a "stunt" shows your embarrassment by it all.

 

Actually I'm not embarrassed, I just don't want to discuss this topic with you for religious reasons. Sharing your personal experiences with others is a sin. Maybe Darla can explain to you that asking total strangers about personal sexual experiences isn't appropriate? But as I said, try this with a Christian you don't know. Don't be suprised if you get ignored or stared at in an unpleasant way. At least on this forum you're anonymous.

 

I opened up a new thread, you can see the title in General Discussions>General Chat but guess what? It's been removed, or "swept under the carpet" LOL.

 

This isn't a highschool boys' locker-room. I can give you links to Islamic texts discussing about the affair, but don't expect anybody to share their personal experiences with you.

 

As sex is a personal experience, to discuss it maturely in detail is not filthy, it's a natural function like eating or drinking.

 

LOL. Obviously it wasn't back in the day of Christianity's history.

Edited by Younes Ibn Abd' al-Aziz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As sex is a personal experience, to discuss it maturely in detail is not filthy, it's a natural function like eating or drinking.

 

Then open a thread that discusses the movements of your bowels.

 

It's natural for a man and wife to have or discuss sex. It is not natural for men and women who are not married to engage in lewd sexual behaviors or discussions.

 

I'd like to take this moment to point out the flaws in your words. Firstly, you refer to sex as a "personal experience". If I refer to something as "personal property", does it mean that it is meant to be public? No.

 

Secondly, you throw in the word "maturely" and yet, just how mature is the title "Name your favorite position"? What is the purpose of it? Is it for educational purposes? Does it serve anything but to create naughty images in one's mind and to arouse one's body?

 

And finally, don't ever use the word "natural" to support your argument. Something is not considered natural only because we are capable of doing it. It is not "natural" for a 300 pound man with thick bulging muscles to beat up a little 10 year old child, because he is capable of it. It is not "natural" to defecate in one's friend's living room because one is capable of it. It is not "natural" to eat until one's stomach feels like it'll drop out, simply because one's able to.

 

Every single natural function has a limit. Sex remains a natural human function only in certain conditions. We are not like animals who cannot control their primitive urges, if you consider yourself lacking in self-control, don't ever try to justify your actions by claiming that it is natural.

 

Salam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

banning the Bible on moral grounds?

 

i would hold that in reserve for those occasions when the 'moral minority' starts screaming hysterically for some book or other to be banned, watching as it becomes illegal for under 18s to hear about their religion will surely make them change their tune about censorship pretty rapidly. :sl:

 

 

peace and love. :sl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam,

 

I think Layna said it all quite nicely.

 

To take it up from Younes:

If you're writing to the pages of Nuts, FHM or Maxim (lads magazines, if you're not British) then maybe your sex life is public property. It just comes down to time and place. I tend to take the self censorship view on this forum of 'would I say this to my parents' because everyone here is a stranger to one another. What I say to friends in the pub is a different matter. Maybe that makes me a prude, I would just say that whilst I reserve the right to talk about my sex life and others also have that right, I exercise a responsibility and realise a lot of people would prefer not to know.

 

For reference, the Christian (or at least RC) theological position on sex is more reserved than the Islamic one. All sex is sinful, it is possible to reduce that sin by having sex in marriage for the main purpose of begetting children but the best position is seen as celibacy. (Also for reference, note status as 'a la carte Catholic.' I'd be the worst kind of hypocrite if I tried to impose this on someone else).

 

Gnuneo, I agree. But then I favour almost total freedom of speech anyway (the almost covers official secrets, defamation and the like).

 

Peace and Love,

 

DARLA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's natural for a man and wife to have or discuss sex.It is not natural for men and women who are not married to engage in lewd sexual behaviors or discussions.

 

I'd like to take this moment to point out the flaws in your words. Firstly, you refer to sex as a "personal experience". If I refer to something as "personal property", does it mean that it is meant to be public? No.

 

Secondly, you throw in the word "maturely" and yet, just how mature is the title "Name your favorite position"? What is the purpose of it? Is it for educational purposes? Does it serve anything but to create naughty images in one's mind and to arouse one's body?

 

And finally, don't ever use the word "natural" to support your argument. Something is not considered natural only because we are capable of doing it. It is not "natural" for a 300 pound man with thick bulging muscles to beat up a little 10 year old child, because he is capable of it. It is not "natural" to defecate in one's friend's living room because one is capable of it. It is not "natural" to eat until one's stomach feels like it'll drop out, simply because one's able to.

 

Every single natural function has a limit. Sex remains a natural human function only in certain conditions. We are not like animals who cannot control their primitive urges, if you consider yourself lacking in self-control, don't ever try to justify your actions by claiming that it is natural.

 

Salam.

 

i throw your own words back - it is also not "natural" for men and women to feel constrained not to discuss such matters.

 

i have had many conversations that deal with highly personal 'lewd' topics with people who are not my "wife" nor "husband". They were not in any sense "unnatural", the converse is also true for your argument about the use of "natural" here.

 

Gnuneo, I agree. But then I favour almost total freedom of speech anyway (the almost covers official secrets, defamation and the like).

 

it should not be permissbale to publish known lies, simple as that. Problem comes with trying to *prove* the lies were deliberate. <_<

 

everything else, most certainly especially with people who are public figures such as politicians, should be regarded as fair reporting.

 

 

peace and love. :wub

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i throw your own words back - it is also not "natural" for men and women to feel constrained not to discuss such matters.

 

It is not natural for people to feel that it is unnatural to not discuss it. Wanna keep at it?

 

Nice use of the word constrained. It reminds me of how opponents of the hijab love to throw around the word "oppression". Hah.

 

i have had many conversations that deal with highly personal 'lewd' topics with people who are not my "wife" nor "husband". They were not in any sense "unnatural", the converse is also true for your argument about the use of "natural" here.

 

My friend, the point sailed straight over your head.

 

I was showing him that the term "natural" is viewed differently by different people. If we begin to argue morality and ethics here, there would be no end to it. However, he can't expect to waltz onto an Islamic forum and tell people that it is "natural" to engage in sexual behaviors with unmarried people or even to have pointless discussions on the forum. He has no proof that it is natural simply because it is a human function. Why? Because other human functions such as eating, drinking, urinating, defacating and etc have their limits before they are considered abnormal. So what reason does he have to argue that sex does not have its limits before it could also be viewed as being abnormal?

 

Salam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL, ever have the urge to just hug someone for a post? :)

 

 

It is not natural for people to feel that it is unnatural to not discuss it. Wanna keep at it?
nor is it unnatural for people to feel it is natural to discuss it... sweetheat, i could keep this up with you all night long. (no unnaturallness intended :D )

 

 

Nice use of the word constrained. It reminds me of how opponents of the hijab love to throw around the word "oppression". Hah.

 

LOL, except i have openly argued the wearing of the hijab is a personal right. To be forced to wear it is oppressive... unless one is surrounded by all other women wearing it as...(drumbeat) NATURAL!!!

 

to be forced to go naked instead, would also be oppressive... unless one is surrounded by all other women being... (drumbeat) NATURALLY NAKED!!!

 

"natural" has no meaning anymore, or rather, it has accepted meanings that are diametrically opposed.

 

unfortunately for your argument however, it is clearly more 'organically healthy' (yes, a synonym for "natural" :j:) to be able to regard sexual topics as "naturally" discussive, due to the inherently important and beneficial effects that sex has upon the human organism, and the benefits from discussing such are therefore inherently important and beneficial - as long as the discussion is mutually respectful and honestly informative.

 

My friend, the point sailed straight over your head.
dear-heart, no it didnt, i just didnt wholly agree with you. :D

 

 

I was showing him that the term "natural" is viewed differently by different people. If we begin to argue morality and ethics here, there would be no end to it.

 

i've already agreed with 1., with 2 - why do you think people still have something to disagree on, without ethics to spur them on? :D

 

 

no way would i even consider debating "manchester FC v liverpool FC" to be an adequate replacement for discussions about morality and ethics, which are topics that *every* generation need to have answered, long before and hopefully long afterwards the term "FC" has any meaning whatsoever.

 

However, he can't expect to waltz onto an Islamic forum and tell people that it is "natural" to engage in sexual behaviors with unmarried people or even to have pointless discussions on the forum. He has no proof that it is natural simply because it is a human function.
course he can - its the internet. :D

 

of course, he is then subject to people like yourself correcting his reasoning - this is also the internet at work. Wonderful, isnt it? :sl:

 

Why? Because other human functions such as eating, drinking, urinating, defacating and etc have their limits before they are considered abnormal. So what reason does he have to argue that sex does not have its limits before it could also be viewed as being abnormal?

 

Salam.

 

ah yes, this is very true - but what then becomes at stake is the setting of that all precious level - is it defined by current social norms? Is it defined by historic beleif structures? Is it defined by the people between whom this 'sexual function' is being constructed? Is it defined by only one, or both of the participants?

 

isn't it wonderful living right now, with all these amazing philosphical positions we can choose from? :no:

 

 

hugz :D

 

peace and love. :sl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

gnuneo, I can't debate with you if you're so friendly, you're killing my destructive ambitious nature here. :sl:

 

(I'm kidding)

 

"natural" has no meaning anymore, or rather, it has accepted meanings that are diametrically opposed.
Bingo!

 

unfortunately for your argument however, it is clearly more 'organically healthy' (yes, a synonym for "natural" laugh.gif) to be able to regard sexual topics as "naturally" discussive, due to the inherently important and beneficial effects that sex has upon the human organism, and the benefits from discussing such are therefore inherently important and beneficial - as long as the discussion is mutually respectful and honestly informative.

 

Aha! But my argument wasn't that it is unhealthy to discuss sex. As brother Younes has mentioned various times, there is no shame in discussing sex in Islam. The prophet Muhammad has openly mentioned the issue to his companions , why else is there so much information on the subject if it is considered taboo in Islam? However, we have etiquettes concerning sex as we do on all other matters. The discussion of it is for educational purposes to enhance enjoyment between married couples, not for flirting or for the sake of engaging conversation, and especially not between complete strangers who are of the opposite sex.

 

Sex is not a taboo in Islam. Neither is, say, what goes on in the bathroom. However, would it be mature and productive to create a topic named "How big is your stool"? Now, how about "What is your favorite position?" You decide.

 

Say to the believing men that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty: that will make for greater purity for them: And Allah is well acquainted with all that they do. [24:30]

 

And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof... [24:31]

 

On the authority of Abu Dharr : Some of the companions of the messenger of Allah said :" O Messenger of Allah, the affluent have made off with the rewards, they pray as we pray they fast as we fast, and they give away in charity the superfluity of their wealth." He said:" Has not Allah made things for you to give away in charity ? Every tasbihah is a charity, every takbirah is a charity, every tahmidah is a charity, and every tahlilah is a charity, to enjoin a good action is a charity, to forbid an evil action is a charity, and in the sexual act of each of you there is a charity." They said: "O Messenger of Allah, when one of us fulfils his sexual desire will he have some reward for that?" He said: "Do you not think that were he to act upon it unlawfully he would be sinning ? Likewise, if he has acted upon it lawfully he will have a reward." [Muslim]

 

Salam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Salaam,

 

Yawn, see countless posts on how Bible is different in structure than Quran. Quran is an instruction manual written all at once. The Bible is history, law, myth, instruction, art, song, prophecy written over hundreds of years.

 

Suggest you do the most basic overview research before attempting critical articles. Wikipedia is normally pretty good for overviews.

 

Peace and Love,

 

DARLA

 

 

Since when Wikipedia replace the Bible? Is Wikepedia a new book of the Bible? hahahahahaha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, and there's nothing questionable in the Quran right (all on another thread so no point repeating)

 

Not sure why you're all so scared of sex anyway, you shouldn't be so ashamed of your bodies. Why for example are you not allowed to look at other mens bodies? Is it because you have very small private....

thoughts, or little self control that it might turn you to the bat for the other team?

 

Come on though, seriously, it's got to be down to insecurity on soooo many different levels.

 

Anyhoo, I'm just off for a swim at our local pool, I best go blind folded, all that evil naked flesh, some of it belonging to <shriek> women...

 

 

Why are there so many are gays, whores, lesbians, illicit sex, adultery, rapes, pornographic tapes etc in the Western countries? It is an irony that they are Christians. Does your God allow the Christians to do such activities?

Edited by wiseguy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So what if there's sex in the bible, get this - sex happens. If it didn't we wouldn't be here (do you need this explaining?) The bible mentions sex because God made sex possible. Why should it not be mentioned? Why brush it under the carpet and make it shameful when it's the most natural thing in the world.

 

 

MY COMMENT:

 

freeasabird......Can you differentiate illicit sex from decent sex? Yeah why brush it under the carpets when there are red light districts in your country! Does your God allow your people to commit illicit sex? Why do Christian pimps create the red district area and and many Christians become their clients and there are Christian whores who wear the crucifixes while committing illicit sex with their clients?

Edited by wiseguy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am quoting and answering darla_1753's statement (May 17 2007, 03:19 PM, post='427154']

 

 

######, chill a little, you're getting hysterical.
I am NOT getting hysterical. After all it is about your Bible that has pornographic contents such as :

"Yet she multiplied her whoredoms, in calling to remembrance the days of her youth, wherein she had played the harlot in the land of Egypt. For she doted upon their paramours, whose flesh is as the flesh of ######, and whose issue is like the issue of horses." (Ezekiel 23: 19-21)

 

"and lusted after her paramours there, whose members were like those of donkeys, and whose emission was like that of stallions." (Ezekiel 23: 21, NRSV)

 

 

Muslims, perfectly correctly, remind non-Muslims on a regular basis not to take verses out of context.

 

It is the Christians who tend to take Quranic verses out of context when they try to slander Islam. I have gone to many Christian websites such the answering-Islam website that try so hard to slander and insult Islam in vain. And there are many examples on how the Christians tend to take Quranic verses out of context in the Islamic forums

 

To give an example, you seem quite upset about Ezekiel ch4. It's not a law book, it's a book of prophecy. In ch4, the siege of Jeruselum is being symbolised, hence the rationing and shortage of fuel. The instruction is not to cook food on human excrement, it is a prophetic description a siege.
Eat Human Feces!

"And thou shalt eat it as barley cakes, and thou shalt bake it with dung that cometh out of man, in their sight. And the LORD said, Even thus shall the children of israel eat their defiled bread among the Gentiles, whither I will drive them." (Ezekiel 4:12-13).......One wonders what nutritional or moral value it would serve the people to eat human feces with their bread! And that is an order "And thou shalt eat it as barley cakes, and thou shalt bake it with dung that cometh out of man, in their sight.'

 

More examples: Eating Dung And Drinking Piss

"But Rabshakeh said unto them, Hath my master sent me to thy master, and to thee, to speak these words? hath he not sent me to the men which sit on the wall, that they may eat their own dung, and drink their own piss with you?" (II Kings 18:27)

 

Isa 36:12 But Rabshakeh said, Hath my master sent me to thy master and to thee to speak these words? [hath he] not [sent me] to the men that sit upon the wall, that they may eat their own dung, and drink their own piss with you?

 

Whatever moral lesson an adult might gain from such questionable verses, one can only wonder. How many parents realize that their children, who might come across such filthy passages, could get the wrong message?

 

Any mention of eating feces and drinking urine in any secular writing would get considered obscene and sick by any righteous minded Christian. Then why should it not receive the same consideration if found in a bible? Might we ask what artistic or social value this verse presents?

 

Note the word "piss" stands as one of the censored vulgar words of the public television industry. If Christians wish to censor such language from secular sources, then it behooves them to give themselves as an example and thus censor the obscene verses from their own Bible.

 

May I suggest that you check future references on any of the various sites on the internet? Biblegateway(contact admin if its a beneficial link) is normally pretty good.

 

I have the Bible.

 

There is plenty in the OT books of laws which is completely unacceptable today. We don't adhere to it because we no longer need to, Jesus fulfilled those laws. But really, my point it that if you are distressed by aspects of the Bible and wish to use examples you'd be much more convincing if you looked at the texts of law rather than the ones of prophecy, history or song. Again, I repeat (as I fear it still hasn't been taken in), the Bible is a wholly different text from the Quran and cannot and should not be read in the same manner. Provide me an oppressive law from the OT *not* cancelled out by Jesus and the discussion would be far less superficial.
The Christian Bible is often called the Holy Bible, Scriptures, or Word of God by Christians. It divides the books into two parts; the Old Testament and the New Testament. Some versions of the Christian Bible also have some of the books listed separately in an Apocrypha section. The Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Old Testament canons contain books not found in the Tanakh, but are found in the Greek Septuagint, oldest known ancient translation of the Hebrew Bible into Greek.

 

How can you Darla say that you Christians don't adhere to the OT because we no longer need to when the OT is a part of the Christian Bible? According to the NT, Jesus did not come to abolish the law of prophets but to fulfill the law:

 

All of the vicious Old Testament laws will be binding forever. "It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid." (Luke 16:17 NAB)

 

According to the NT, Jesus strongly approves of the law and the prophets. He hasn’t the slightest objection to the cruelties of the Old Testament. "Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place." (Matthew 5:17 NAB)

 

The Biblical verses clearly show that the Old Testament is not to be ignored. Its laws should indeed be adhered to, for the New Testament demands it!

 

 

I do think that the continued publication of most religious texts (again, Buddhism seems to be exempt) is an argument for freedom of speech. In areas of all of them there are certificate 18 scenes, lines advocating violence and most tend to stick in a 'kill the ____' somewhere along the line. As I would not want the Bible banned on the basis of offence, and you can be sure others are equally offended by the Quran and Talmud/Torah in my view that's the reason why we should allow as much freedom of speech as possible. I do like the way that HK residents are proving this point. The text isn't the problem, the crazy person who reads it is and there's no need to punish (by a ban) the majority for the sins of the one or two crazies.

 

The problem is the Bible contains so many verses that reject the basic human rights such as selling your own daughter as a sex slave (Exodus 21:1-11), child abuse (Judges 11:29-40 and Isaiah 13:16), and bashing babies against rocks (Hosea 13:16 & Psalms 137:9). This type of criminal behavior should shock any moral person. Murder, rape, pillage, plunder, slavery, and child abuse can not be justified by saying that some god says it’s OK.

 

According to the NT, Jesus also promoted the idea that all men should castrate themselves to go to heaven: "For there are eunuchs, that were so born from their mother's womb: and there are eunuchs, that were made eunuchs by men: and there are eunuchs, that made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it." (Matthew 19:12 ASV) I don't know why anyone would follow the teachings of someone who literally tells all men to cut off their privates.

Edited by wiseguy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

There is ignorance, and then there is just stupid.

 

Honestly, Im surprised you arnt banned for slander amd blasphomy with your hateful little rants. Hell Im not even religious and can even be considered anti-Christian yet even I find your gross revisioning offensive.

 

Honestly, all you are doing at this pt. is making other muslims with a legitamite critizism of christian texts look bad by association.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam,

 

I'm afraid I'm going to have exit this thread because I'm just getting annoyed and I'm afraid I'll start getting nasty.

 

######, I think I've said all I can on this topic in my previous posts which, as you keep replying to my first post and not my later ones, you appear to be ignoring. You are in my prayers.

 

Peace and Love,

 

DARLA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why are there so many are gays, whores, lesbians, illicit sex, adultery, rapes, pornographic tapes etc in the Western countries? It is an irony that they are Christians. Does your God allow the Christians to do such activities?

 

:sl:

 

Do not generalize ######.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My answer for Isambard:

 

All my statements are based on the Bible itself. Is it offensive to expose the contents of the Bible? Am I an anti-Christian for exposing the Bible? How about the anti-Islam websites that always attack, insult, degrade and slander Islam and Muslims and twist the teachings of Islam into a lie mercilessly, severely and cruelly? How about the paranoid Christian preachers who invent lies and fairy tales to slander and degrade Islam and Muslims? How about the Pope who insult and slander the prophet Muhammad? How about the Christian soldiers who are terrorizing, raping, torturing, and massacring innocent and defenseless Muslims in Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Chechnya, Philippine, Sudan, Moluccas (Indonesia) etc? How about the non-Muslims who draw cartoons to insult the prophet Muhammad?

 

You Isambard are biased! If you want the website to ban me for exposing Christianity, then why don't you ask the website to ban all the non-Muslims who insult and slander Islam and Muslims in the forums?

 

In all ages, hypocrites, called priests, have put crowns upon the heads of thieves, called kings. - Robert Green Ingersoll

Edited by wiseguy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My answer for Isambard:

 

All my statements are based on the Bible itself. Is it offensive to expose the contents of the Bible? Am I an anti-Christian for exposing the Bible? How about the anti-Islam websites that always attack, insult, degrade and slander Islam and Muslims and twist the teachings of Islam into a lie mercilessly, severely and cruelly? How about the paranoid Christian preachers who invent lies and fairy tales to slander and degrade Islam and Muslims? How about the Pope who insult and slander the prophet Muhammad? How about the Christian soldiers who are terrorizing, raping, torturing, and massacring innocent and defenseless Muslims in Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Chechnya, Philippine, Sudan, Moluccas (Indonesia) etc? How about the non-Muslims who draw cartoons to insult the prophet Muhammad?

 

You Isambard are biased! If you want the website to ban me for exposing Christianity, then why don't you ask the website to ban all the non-Muslims who insult and slander Islam and Muslims in the forums?

 

In all ages, hypocrites, called priests, have put crowns upon the heads of thieves, called kings. - Robert Green Ingersoll

 

If by based on the bible you mean grossly taking verses out of context and twisting them by-the-by pretending you have some semblance of knowledge.

 

All you do is spout on propaganda which you yourself dont even bother to research (as the links to hate sites int he past have shown). Whenever someone nails you down you simply ignore the psot and continue to spout out more ## and the same tired lines never bothering to engage in any sort of discussion.

 

And you seem to fail at grasping what a legitamite critizism/question is from a non-muslim about Islam as opposed to ramblings you post. Here is the difference, you actually engage when someone refutes you else you are no better than Makko spouting out nothing but hate.

 

But hey thats no bother to you is it? All you care about is "Teh [email protected]"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×