[johnappleseed]

Originally Posted by slawaccess23

What have any of your post got to do with my original post, huh? You just said "you what?" suggesting you don't have a clue about the topic at hand. If you have constructive criticism, i don't mind having it. Funky emoticons don't the job really.

Agreed.

[johnappleseed]

Originally Posted by fab4eva

no one can prove anything.

How is that so?

[The-Serial-Kisser]

Originally Posted by izinku

Let me clarify something for both of you:

To disprove something means to attack the ORIGINAL claim, not present a completely new argument which only serves as a tangent to the main argument.

I simply wanted you to reflect upon the story but your just reprehensible. I don't have the time nor the inclination to debunk every statement on that website because you and your pathetic disciples on this forum have already made up their minds. So any attempt to pose a decent and logical counter-arguement would immediately be rejected because people like you are trapped inside a cloud of denial, you would rather believe in plain error than ever admit that you had been wrong. I have come across individuals like you many a time and nothing is ever solved. Ever. The only outcome is hatred. If spreading hate gives you some twisted and sick sense of pleasure then God help you.

[Democracy]

Originally Posted by slawaccess23

What have any of your post got to do with my original post, huh? You just said "you what?" suggesting you don't have a clue about the topic at hand. If you have constructive criticism, i don't mind having it. Funky emoticons don't the job really.

Lol, you are an absolute joker mate

I bolded "King of Persia and Caeser" which you wrote, mainly cause I'm very interested to show how Caeser (who had been dead for centuries) and the Shah of Persia (who was too busy running an Empire to care) had any idea that he got married to Aisha.

I then commented on the utter irrelevance in your subsequent response which referred to the "emperor of Byzantium".

[izinku]

Originally Posted by The-Serial-Kisser

I simply wanted you to reflect upon the story but your just reprehensible. I don't have the time nor the inclination to debunk every statement on that website because you and your pathetic disciples on this forum have already made up their minds. So any attempt to pose a decent and logical counter-arguement would immediately be rejected because people like you are trapped inside a cloud of denial, you would rather believe in plain error than ever admit that you had been wrong. I have come across individuals like you many a time and nothing is ever solved. Ever. The only outcome is hatred. If spreading hate gives you some twisted and sick sense of pleasure then God help you.

Ahhhh. Quite quick to judge, arent you? I wonder what Muhammad would say about that I wasnt aware I had disciples (lol) but my mind is very open and like the OP says this is an invitation to a debate Whatever helps you sleep at night.

[Charzhino]

Originally Posted by zafaru123

Since the Quran has been right about so many other things which happen hundreds of years later, I don't see how it could be wrong about something that was happening at the time the Quran was revealed.

People will often ask me what has the Quran predicted. And I will reply it predicted 1400 years ago that the galaxy is expanding which is what Edwin Hubble discovered in the 1920's, not even 100 years ago.
Chapter 21. Verse 30 says that it is God that created everything, such as the heavens and the Earth, which were once joint together, but seperated over time.
Some people don't find this convincing.

I then like to quote Chapter 75 Verse 8-9, where it says that the sun will one day collide with the moon. If we look at what science says, the sun will change into a star known as the "red giant", which will expand and collide with mercury and venus, and will become very close to the earth, taking the moon with it as well.

The reason why I have quoted this is because there are thousands of things the Quran has said which have been proved to be true, and I doubt that onw of the most important things the Quran talks about is false.

Please not another science in Quran topic, that has been debunked time and time again on this forum.

[slawaccess23]

Originally Posted by Democracy

Lol, you are an absolute joker mate

I bolded "King of Persia and Caeser" which you wrote, mainly cause I'm very interested to show how Caeser (who had been dead for centuries) and the Shah of Persia (who was too busy running an Empire to care) had any idea that he got married to Aisha.

I then commented on the utter irrelevance in your subsequent response which referred to the "emperor of Byzantium".

Haha thanks.

The emperors of the Byzantinian and Persian were both invited to accept Islam by the Prophet himself, he sent messengers to both of them, along with all the information of the person that claimed to be a Prophet of God, infact, Muhammad and Qiasar (Ceaser he was definitely called, this was reported with an authentic transmission) used to exchange gifts as Christians did have some level of respect for the early muslims. They found various information about each other, it is not a shock to find out Ceasar also knew exactly who Muhammad was married to.

[CombineHarvester]

Originally Posted by Itchynscratchy

All of that sounds quite plausable to me, although I would like to know why you don't consider that last sentence to be a bit of a problem. How reliable can a source written 300 years after the event possibly be?

That's the reason a lot of people think he married a 6 year old because there's a lot of unreliable sources out there. There was also a lot of anti-Muhammad/Islamic press back by members of other groups such as followers of other religions who suddenly had another religion come out of nowhere and claim to be following on from Judaism/Christianity - a lot of people thought it to be offensive. Also, the reasons why these sources got so much publicity was because they used heavily during the Crusades as war time propaganda.

It's very difficult to know the exact details on age back then and it makes it impossible given the conflicting sources available and calling someone a paedophile based on it is ridiculous when you don't the details. Also, nowhere does it say Aisha was abused. Every source which involves her she never says anything negative about Muhammad and frequently praises him in her own words/writings. Muhammad also had numerous marriages and this was by far the youngest indicating it was a special case rather than him having a fetish for young girls. If you include Aisha the average age of his wives is 31.

[Keithzor]

A prophet of what? God isn't proven to exist, no one knows. So what was so special about him if he did exist which he most likely did? He was just a normal guy who fought and believed in something and now millions for what he believed in.

I might do the same soon.

[Charzhino]

Originally Posted by Keithzor

A prophet of what? God isn't proven to exist, no one knows. So what was so special about him if he did exist which he most likely did? He was just a normal guy who fought and believed in something and now millions for what he believed in.

I might do the same soon.

I doubt you can become one of the most influential people in history and gain billions of followers worldwide.

[The-Serial-Kisser]

How does this essay disprove he wasn't a "true" prophet? Why don't you try reading an unbias article for once

[johnappleseed]

Originally Posted by Charzhino

...that has been debunked time and time again on this forum.

What! No it hasn't. The majority of the non-Muslims do not understand the Qur'an, not even a verse or a word! The problems lies in the translation which misled people like you.

[R£SP£CT]

Originally Posted by izinku

Ahhhh. Quite quick to judge, arent you? I wonder what Muhammad would say about that I wasnt aware I had disciples (lol) but my mind is very open and like the OP says this is an invitation to a debate Whatever helps you sleep at night.

What exactly do you want debating?. Any specific parts?.

[Keithzor]

Originally Posted by Charzhino

I doubt you can become one of the most influential people in history and gain billions of followers worldwide.

I'll just come up some nonsense like he did. It worked for him, so why not

[roots]

The first accusation is pedophile. The best refutation to this is the behaviour of the Arabs who opposed Muhammad (pbuh). These people even made up falsehoods about him yet they forgot to use his marriage in their attack. These people were stronger in enmity than most, if not everyone after them.

Another accusation is murderer. Those people who broke treaties and covenants with the Muslims time after time and would take any chance to behave treachorously against the Muslims, even going as far as preparing for war. That is war, not murder.

Another one is assasination. The one who was killed planned to assasinate Muhammad (pbuh) and was openly hostile.

Another one is lecher. Maria al-Qibtiyya was given to the Prophet by the ruler of Egypt. Do you insult Abraham (pbuh) for his relationship to Haagar or David or Solomon (pbut).

The next one is torturer. The response can be found here:

http://muslim-responses.com/The_Kill...ling_of_Kinana

The next one is narcissism. I'm confident that most people who study Islam, Muslim or Non Muslim will testify that he was anything but narcissistic.

The next one is looter. One of the first paragraphs is just so wrong. If he wanted to take advantage he could have lived in palaces or mansions like any other powerful leader but he lived very simply, even his bed was absolutely bare. Also, yes, the spoils of war are permissable.

The one after that is misogynist. This one is not worth the read. Almost every person, whether they are an enemy of Islam, scholar, Muslim will disagree with the statement that "women had more rights before Islam than after it." After that i stopped reading, it's clear to me that this personis filled with hate and actually doesn't care if they are telling the truth, lying or presenting things fully and accurately. If you want to know more about the points he mentions, then i'll answer you.

Another one is cult leader. This is just one big attack. If you want to bring up an individual point the writer makes, i'll answer that.

Terrorist? The author is stretching it.

Notice i haven't given you a long answer. Short and simple.

If you want to discuss Islam, we'll happily discuss it but please don't use such extreme websites, it only weakens your position. You can ask about what you like, whatever objections they are but using websites like that breeds a really bad attitude, to the level that noone can debate with you.

Notice i haven't given you a long answer. Short and simple.

[CHEM1STRY]

Surely every religious leader did this >.>

[johnappleseed]

Originally Posted by Keithzor

I'll just come up some nonsense like he did. It worked for him, so why not

Relate to me the nonsenses you perceives.

[izinku]

Originally Posted by R£SP£CT

What exactly do you want debating?. Any specific parts?.

Any rational attempt to refute the claims is acceptable in my books.

[izinku]

Originally Posted by The-Serial-Kisser

How does this essay disprove he wasn't a "true" prophet? Why don't you try reading an unbias article for once

Why dont you try some critical thinking for once?

[Sabbir.M]

Originally Posted by Donnahh

Yeah, it's sick and I don't see how anyone could worship someone like that. But hey, people will believe in anything these days...

Muslims don't "worship" Muhammad but God.