Biggest L for reer Holland

[Bohol]

@Canuck @Abdalla already confirmed she is Somali, he knows her in Holland. Case closed.

 

[The_Cosmos]

That's bullshit man. The only executions I've heard of are executions involving murderers. Unless you're situated in Al Shabaab held territories, you're safe. Even your atheist friends will agree with me on this one.

When was the last time you actually went there?

Having a law that persecuted certain crimes doesn't have to be enacted in order for it to be valid. Somalia, by law, has the death penalty for apostasy but it does not get carried out. Now, this is a different government to the one prewar so that would be a false comparison. I gave you an article showing you that Somalia has the death penalty for apostasy.

 

[McLovin]

I wouldn't be able to tell the difference. I don't see Greek and roman history as the basis of my culture. So it explains why I would not readily identify a bust of some Greek or a roman emperor.

I took philosophy in college and got an A on it, but that is it for me. Others who want something to hang on to since they lack culture of their own can run around with the busts.

I am superior to any you lot associate with by virtue of me being Somali. Plus good percentage of the Greeks carry the same blood as Somalis. Funny how we might have given birth to this general himself to teach a lesson to the romans who defeated our tribesmen who were part of the Iberian Soldiers.


I just felt pride surge through my body thinking how any time in history we fucked up anyone who messed with us.

Why would a Somali have low self-esteem and think of himself and herself as subhuman ape for being African surprises me. Somali atheists accept such teachings from their new religion.

And they have the audacity to criticize a nomad FOR DIGNIFYING himself and go into the woods to attend to nature while their roman idols defecated in public.

You're a strange cat

 

[The_Cosmos]

You are wrong about couple things. Let me start with the most important:

- Somalis sought privacy in the woods when attending to nature. They did this as many societies do to this day and hide from other people's eyes in attending to nature. To maintain dignity, to save others from the disgust and the smell of defecation. There is level of unease as a human being to do this in front of people because people are born with good instincts to do the right thing. Your indictment of that is barbarity or being uncivilized.

Compare that dignified method of seeking privacy to this:

- Romans defecated and threw the feces out of the window paying no respect to the passers-by in the streets. When that subhuman behavior got too much for the emperor, he imposed fines and built public toilets. These toilets were lined up so people sat next to each other and opposite of each other as they defecated. The pictures are there to prove. It was the norm for the romans to talk as they defecated. You see this as civilized and criticize basic human instinct to be dignified and avoid to be seen and see others when defecating.


Me and you are supposedly from the same culture but we have zero in common as shown in your views and what you value as a good culture.


Question for you:

Have you been to Somalia? Have you spent ten years in Somalia or even five years as a kid? Because you seem so out of touch with reality that it feels I am talking to some Jonathan dude passing as a nomad.


Saxib, there is basic etiquette in dealing with others, to treat them as you would like to be treated. Show respect and don't criticize people's norms when they are superior to what alien concept you carry as superior even though no human with dignity would give a look at it for consideration.


The guy is Carthaginian you have on doesn't make my general comment invalid. I merely pointed out what you replaced with your people's culture since you see it as superior even though by comparison, nomads were more dignified and never engaged in social debauchery and the like as a norm like romans were known for doing.

You and your crew preach otherness that are inferior when it comes to culture and practice. We like who we are sahib, and we appreciate if you try to be part of us here, that you share what we have in common. We are not interested in other religions.



Second part:

Just because I have a different culture doesn't lead me to not learn from and accept what is useful in the west. My secular education is western and I do practice skills I learned through western schools and colleges. I separate good culture from bad culture in this society and take what is good. That is what Muslim is. They take wisdom wherever they find it. You should do the same when it comes to Somalis and Muslims.

Less criticism more cohesion while you keep your religious atheist doctrines that teach you as an African to be sub-human.

This is essentially your problem. You keep accusing me of believing things and holding views that I have never claimed I held. I have never put the culture of others before the culture of my people, this is something that you have made up to invalidate me as a Somali due to my atheism. Almost every time we conversed, you straw manned me. If you wish to have a discussion with me (which you claimed the atheist can't have) then work with what I give you.

My criticism of Somalis and Somali culture isn't to invalidate the people and the culture as a whole, it is to point out the bad in order so that we can move on from it. I have never shown any hate towards the Somali people. My statement on the nomad deification was not a jibe at my people, it was me getting at you for trying to demean one of the most influential civilisations that have ever graced the planet. You would have known that if you actually opened your eyes to what you read.

Furthermore, your last point is very interesting. If I were to respond by criticising Islam, you wouldn't take heed. Nonetheless, I'm going to refrain from that and correct you on what your clearly lacking in knowledge. Atheism has no doctrine or dogma, atheism is simply a definition that defines those whom lack a belief in any deities. Atheism doesn't have any teachings nor does preach that Africans are subhuman. I challenge you to find me evidence of this.

 

[Burhan]

You're a strange cat

If being proud nomad in my history and culture, now and before makes me strange, then blessed be the stranger I am and my strangeness.

 

[Burhan]

This is essentially your problem. You keep accusing me of believing things and holding views that I have never claimed I held. I have never put the culture of others before the culture of my people, this is something that you have made up to invalidate me as a Somali due to my atheism. Almost every time we conversed, you straw manned me. If you wish to have a discussion with me (which you claimed the atheist can't have) then work with what I give you.

My criticism of Somalis and Somali culture isn't to invalidate the people and the culture as a whole, it is to point out the bad in order so that we can move on from it. I have never shown any hate towards the Somali people. My statement on the nomad deification was not a jibe at my people, it was me getting at you for trying to demean one of the most influential civilizations that have ever graced the planet. You would have known that if you actually opened your eyes to what you read.

Furthermore, your last point is very interesting. If I were to respond by criticizing Islam, you wouldn't take heed. Nonetheless, I'm going to refrain from that and correct you on what your clearly lacking in knowledge. Atheism has no doctrine or dogma, atheism is simply a definition that defines those whom lack a belief in any deities. Atheism doesn't have any teachings nor does preach that Africans are subhuman. I challenge you to find me evidence of this.

You defend Darwin and Darwinian philosophy about life and living things. Atheism being the brain child of his. He had no regard and respect for other human beings. He is quoted to have said when he encountered people in the islands of the Americas: ""one can hardly make oneself believe that they are fellow creatures". At its core, atheism gave rise to social Darwinism that decimated millions of people throughout the world because these people were seen as non-developed human beings. Straight out of Darwinian evolution. If you are brainless to espouse such bigotry and see it liberating, don't preach that to us and pick on Islam that gives people equality, freedom, brotherhood, social cohesion, and universal call to mankind to be responsible in all they do because they are accountable to their creator.

Your beliefs are useless sahib. Calling them science isn't gonna make them palatable to smart people. You have no justification to demean Islam and Somali Muslims when you have nothing better to show for. If you mind your business and keep your views to yourself, no one will bother you or even ask you what religion you adhere to. If you make a point on the forums and demean Islam, then expect anything from others.

You choose your battle, then deal with the consequences.

 

[Burhan]

Having a law that persecuted certain crimes doesn't have to be enacted in order for it to be valid. Somalia, by law, has the death penalty for apostasy but it does not get carried out. Now, this is a different government to the one prewar so that would be a false comparison. I gave you an article showing you that Somalia has the death penalty for apostasy.

If you don't concern yourself with the laws and minded your business in Somalia, no one would bother you. If you want to be vocal about how bad Islam is, of course, you are asking for trouble.

To be empowered and feel empowered, to maintain your lifestyle that doesn't jive well with Somali culture, to be whatever you want in life without caring about or worrying social reaction to your deeds, stay in the west.

How difficult is that? Why do you strange humans seek change in society when you have nothing useful to offer?

 

[The_Cosmos]

You defend Darwin and Darwinian philosophy about life and living things. Atheism being the brain child of his. He had no regard and respect for other human beings. He is quoted to have said when he encountered people in the islands of the Americas: ""one can hardly make oneself believe that they are fellow creatures" At its core, atheism gave rise to social Darwinism that decimated millions of people throughout the world. If you are brainless to espouse such bigotry and see it liberating, don't preach that to us and pick on Islam that gives people equality, freedom, brotherhood, social cohesion, and universal call to mankind to be responsible in all they do because they are accountable to their creator.

Your beliefs are useless sahib. Calling them science isn't gonna make them palatable to smart people. You have no justification to demean Islam and Somali Muslims when you have nothing better to show for. If you mind your business and keep your views to yourself, no one will brother you or even ask you what religion you adhere to. If you make a point on the forums and demean Islam, then expect anything from others.

You choose your battle, then deal with the consequences.

Atheism can be traced all the way back to antiquity and the ancient Greeks and so giving to a man who isn't even an atheist is evidence of your intellect prowess.

Not only are you a liar (calling you ignorant no longer cuts it) but it seems you take pride in lying and being ignorant. Charles Darwin was not an atheist and so it doesn't make sense how he can be a brain child of something he himself doesn't hold. Atheism, by definition, is the lack of belief in any deities but it seems that the dictionary definition of atheism doesn't seem to be enough for you so you associate atheism (which has no dogma or beliefs) with the actions of people who had their own agendas. Charles Darwin was a product of the time in which he lived (can't say the same for a prophet you claim is an example for all) and those views were widespread. Nonetheless, Charles Darwin was actively against slavery and supported the abolitionist movements of his time. Now, your prophet was a Slave owner who bought and sold slaves. I am against social Darwinism and atheism doesn't espouse such things as it does not espouse anything at all. Atheism, by definition, is the lack of belief in any deities. Some atheists have killed many (nowhere near the deaths caused by believers through history and today) but atheism cannot take blame as there is nothing within atheism that is inherently evil or calls for the deaths of people. Atheism is only a definition.

Muslims hate it when people conflate religion with people but then they turn around and blame the actions of atheists on atheism knowing full well that atheism has no dogma or beliefs.

You have shown yourself to be, not only a liar but also an ignorant fool who says whatever he thinks.

 

[The_Cosmos]

If you don't concern yourself with the laws and minded your business in Somalia, no one would bother you. If you want to be vocal about how bad Islam is, of course, you are asking for trouble.

To be empowered and feel empowered, to maintain your lifestyle that doesn't jive well with Somali culture, to be whatever you want in life without caring about or worrying social reaction to your deeds, stay in the west.

How difficult is that? Why do you strange humans seek change in society when you have nothing useful to offer?

You can't say that Islam is about equality, justice and peace harmony and what not, and then actively justify the Islamicly justified killing of apostates and blasphemers. That is hypocrisy. To claim Islam is any of those things is to lie through your teeth.

 

[Burhan]

Straight from the Decent of Man by Darwin:

"At some future period not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes...will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest Allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as the baboon, instead of as now between the Negro or Australian and the gorilla" (1874, p. 178).

 

[The_Cosmos]

Straight from the Decent of Man by Darwin:

"At some future period not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes...will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest Allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as the baboon, instead of as now between the Negro or Australian and the gorilla" (1874, p. 178).

I don't see what you're trying to point out, that Darwin had some outdated views? Absolutely true, but how does that invalidate his work which has been proved to be a fact of science? You're trying to invalidate a mans works by attacking his character. He was a man of his time. However, he was also an abolitionist which the prophet was not. Let's look at the supposedly best human whoever lived:

Narrated 'Abdul 'Aziz: Anas said, 'When Allah's Apostle invaded Khaibar, we offered the Fajr prayer there yearly in the morning) when it was still dark. The Prophet rode and Abu Talha rode too and I was riding behind Abu Talha. The Prophet passed through the lane of Khaibar quickly and my knee was touching the thigh of the Prophet . He uncovered his thigh and I saw the whiteness of the thigh of the Prophet. When he entered the town, he said, 'Allahu Akbar! Khaibar is ruined. Whenever we approach near a (hostile) nation (to fight) then evil will be the morning of those who have been warned.' He repeated this thrice. The people came out for their jobs and some of them said, 'Muhammad (has come).' (Some of our companions added, "With his army.") We conquered Khaibar, took the captives, and the booty was collected. Dihya came and said, 'O Allah's Prophet! Give me a slave girl from the captives.' The Prophet said, 'Go and take any slave girl.' He took Safiya bint Huyai. A man came to the Prophet and said, 'O Allah's Apostles! You gave Safiya bint Huyai to Dihya and she is the chief mistress of the tribes of Quraiza and An-Nadir and she befits none but you.' So the Prophet said, 'Bring him along with her.' So Dihya came with her and when the Prophet saw her, he said to Dihya, 'Take any slave girl other than her from the captives.' Anas added: The Prophet then manumitted her and married her..."
Sahih Bukhari 1:8:367

 

[Burhan]

I don't see what you're trying to point out, that Darwin had some outdated views? Absolutely true, but how does that invalidate his work which has been proved to be a fact of science? You're trying to invalidate a mans works by attacking his character. He was a man of his time. However, he was also an abolitionist which the prophet was not. Let's look at the supposedly best human whoever lived:

Narrated 'Abdul 'Aziz: Anas said, 'When Allah's Apostle invaded Khaibar, we offered the Fajr prayer there yearly in the morning) when it was still dark. The Prophet rode and Abu Talha rode too and I was riding behind Abu Talha. The Prophet passed through the lane of Khaibar quickly and my knee was touching the thigh of the Prophet . He uncovered his thigh and I saw the whiteness of the thigh of the Prophet. When he entered the town, he said, 'Allahu Akbar! Khaibar is ruined. Whenever we approach near a (hostile) nation (to fight) then evil will be the morning of those who have been warned.' He repeated this thrice. The people came out for their jobs and some of them said, 'Muhammad (has come).' (Some of our companions added, "With his army.") We conquered Khaibar, took the captives, and the booty was collected. Dihya came and said, 'O Allah's Prophet! Give me a slave girl from the captives.' The Prophet said, 'Go and take any slave girl.' He took Safiya bint Huyai. A man came to the Prophet and said, 'O Allah's Apostles! You gave Safiya bint Huyai to Dihya and she is the chief mistress of the tribes of Quraiza and An-Nadir and she befits none but you.' So the Prophet said, 'Bring him along with her.' So Dihya came with her and when the Prophet saw her, he said to Dihya, 'Take any slave girl other than her from the captives.' Anas added: The Prophet then manumitted her and married her..."
Sahih Bukhari 1:8:367

Slavery and Islam are well debated topics. And Islam is the only religion that taught:

- Freeing Slaves as a means to repent from some sins
- Muslims are Equal to the Slave who believed In God
- Muslims can marry a slave.
- Muslims were to free a slave when the slave became a believer.

This is well established and even non-Muslims wrote extensively about this. Now compare this Darwin who saw you as Monkey since you are black. To Darwin, you were lower than a human slave, you are an Ape.

I can quote you what proves his atheism as well. He started as a believer in God but eventually gave up on it settling for blacks like you to be monkeys.

Besides, if you fight Muslims unjustly/justly, they will take you a prisoner. Just as any country like America , or any other community who goes to war does take captives. Today, that would not be called a slave but a prisoner of war. And the rights Islam gave to prisoners and slaves were far more superior to what the so called civilized did back then and today practice on their captives. Islam was back then the only religion that addressed the human plague and trade of slavery. Islam introduced the emancipation of slaves as stated above.

If you think you have a case. you are beating a dead horse. I know every trick in your books and even can guess what you will write next

 

[Burhan]

I don't see what you're trying to point out, that Darwin had some outdated views? Absolutely true, but how does that invalidate his work which has been proved to be a fact of science? You're trying to invalidate a mans works by attacking his character. He was a man of his time. However, he was also an abolitionist which the prophet was not. Let's look at the supposedly best human whoever lived:

Out curiosity, quote me remarks made by Darwin regarding equality of mankind.

Prophet Mohamed's departing sermon stated how mankind is equal. The Quran itself clarifies men are equal.

: "O People! Your God is one; your father is one; no preference of an Arab neither over non-Arab nor of a non-Arab over an Arab or red over black or black over red except for the most righteous. Verily the most honored of you is the most righteous."
"


Equality of humans is stated in the Quran itself. But you can openly come out and slander the prophet as your lot does when they give up selling their ape theories.

 

[Burhan]

You have shown yourself to be, not only a liar but also an ignorant fool who says whatever he thinks.

Very human, aren't you? Getting angry finally. I am happy for you brother. You met your match and you shouldn't get angry. I hope in the least you revisit your dearly held beliefs, whatever you label them.

 

[The_Cosmos]

Slavery and Islam are well debated topics. And Islam is the only religion that taught:

- Freeing Slaves as a means to repent from some sins
- Muslims are Equal to the Slave who believed In God
- Muslims can marry a slave.
- Muslims were to free a slave when the slave became a believer.

This is well established and even non-Muslims wrote extensively about this. Now compare this Darwin who saw you as Monkey since you are black. To Darwin, you were lower than a human slave, you are an Ape.

I can quote you what proves his atheism as well. He started as a believer in God but eventually gave up on it settling for blacks like you to be monkeys.

Besides, if you fight Muslims unjustly, and cause harm to them, they will take you a prisoner . Just as any country like America , or any other community who goes to war does take captives. Today, that would not be called a slave but a prisoner of war. And the rights Islam gave to prisoners and slaves were far more superior to what the so called civilized did back then and today practice on their captives. Islam was back then the only religion that addressed the human plague and trade of slavery. Islam introduced the emancipation of slaves as stated above.

If you think you have a case. you are beating a dead horse. I know every trick in your books and even what you will write next

You are exposing your intellectual dishonesty. Charles Darwin was a man of his time and thus conformed to the opinions of his time which often time referred negatively towards other human beings, however, to state that Darwin views black peoples exclusively as apes is beyond a shadow of a doubt wrong. Charles Darwin has reiterated that all human beings, including himself, are apes (proven by DNA evidence). You speak of Darwin but it's kind of sad that I have to correct you every time.

Now, I knew you were going to jump to the defence of the prophet because... you're a Muslim! You'll defend the indefensible if it is done by your prophet. The prophet was a man who is claimed by Muslims to be an example for every single people of every time. They claim he is the best human being who ever lived (Charles Darwin has no such attributes, he was only a man of his time). Now, how does it make sense that a prophet of God, sent to all mankind, to engage in the act of slavery. Comparing it to a prisoner of war shows how dishonest you are. A prisoner of war is an individual who was captured in war whilst a slave is someone who can be bought and sold the same as property. The prophet took women and children as his slaves as we have witnessed with the case of Banu Qurayza. Saying he freed slaves (which many societies have done and encouraged) does not negate the cruel and barbaric act of slavery that he facilitated. Charles Darwin was an abolitionist with some twisted views (expected from a man who lived 200 years ago) but cannot be compared to a prophet who was sent by an omnipotent God who could have ended slavery if he wanted to like he did with the Jews of ancient Egypt. Cyrus the great ended the practice of slavery but he wasn't a man inspired by God was he?

You'll attack Charles Darwin and his ideas for a few words he said that have nothing to do with his work but will gladly defend a man who engaged in massacres, assassination and worst of all all, slavery! Only the religious will defend the indefensible.

Very human, aren't you? Getting angry finally. I am happy for you brother. You met your match and you shouldn't get angry. I hope in the least you revisit your dearly held beliefs, whatever you label them.

You have accused me of being a liar on many occasions, falsely even when I provided evidence, but you get upset by words that seem fitting for a man who tries to degrade an idea based on the character of a man who lived 200 years ago? A man who was anti slavery whilst you defend the slavery that was conducted by your prophet? It seems you need to educate yourself (excuse me for using this term, I usually never use it only when needed).

 

[Burhan]

You are exposing your intellectual dishonesty. Charles Darwin was a man of his time and thus conformed to the opinions of his time which often time referred negatively towards other human beings, however, to state that Darwin views black peoples exclusively as apes is beyond a shadow of a doubt wrong. Charles Darwin has reiterated that all human beings, including himself, are apes (proven by DNA evidence). You speak of Darwin by its kind of sad that I have to correct you every time.

Now, I knew you were going to jump to the defence of the prophet because... you're a Muslim! You'll defend the indefensible if it is done by your prophet. The prophet was a man who is claimed by Muslim to be an example for every single people of every time. They claim he is the best human being who ever lived (Charles Darwin has no such attributes, he was only a man of his time). Now, how does it make sense that a prophet of God, sent to all mankind, to engage in the act of slavery. Comparing it to a prisoner of war shows how dishonest you are. A prisoner of war is a soldier who was captured in war whilst a slave is someone who can be bought and sold the same as property. The prophet took women and children as his slaves as we have witnessed with the case of Banu Qurayza. Saying he freed slaves (which many societies have done and encouraged) does not negate the cruel and barbaric act of slavery that he facilitated. Charles Darwin was an abolitionist with some twisted views (expected from a man who lived 200 years ago) but cannot be compared to a prophet who was sent by an omnipotent God who could have ended slavery if he wanted to like he did with the Jews of ancient Egypt. Cyrus the great ended the practice of slavery but he wasn't a man inspired by God was he?

You'll attack Charles Darwin and his idea for a few words he said that have nothing to do with work but will gladly defend a man who engaged massacres, assassination and worst of all all, slavery! Only the religious will defend the indefensible.



You have accused me of being a liar on many occasions, falsely even when I provided evidence, but you get upset by words that seem fitting for a man who tries to degrade an idea based on the character of a man who lived 200 years ago? A man who was anti slavery whilst you defend the slavery that was conducted by your prophet? It seems you need to educate yourself (excuse me for using this term, I usually never use it only when needed).

I will just quote far more dignified non-Muslims(some of them anti Islam) and prominent figures in the west and what they said about prophet Mohamed: This to prove what I was saying all along that you have zero dignity and connection to us here and your presence is only to insult Islam, Prophet Mohamed and Somalis for being Muslims. This is why I never treated you as anyone genuinely interested in learning something about Islam. So this quote will conclude for me and the rest will be up to the website owner in case you engage in anything blaspheming towards the prophet and I mean it:



Thomas Carlyle in 'Heroes and Hero Worship and the Heroic in History,' 1840
"The lies (Western slander) which well-meaning zeal has heaped round this man (Muhammad) are disgraceful to ourselves only."
"A silent great soul, one of that who cannot but be earnest. He was to kindle the world, the world’s Maker had ordered so."

A. S. Tritton in 'Islam,' 1951
The picture of the Muslim soldier advancing with a sword in one hand and the Qur'an in the other is quite false.

De Lacy O'Leary in 'Islam at the Crossroads,' London, 1923.
History makes it clear, however, that the legend of fanatical Muslims sweeping through the world and forcing Islam at the point of sword upon conquered races is one of the most fantastically absurd myths that historians have ever repeated.

Gibbon in 'The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' 1823
The good sense of Muhammad despised the pomp of royalty. The Apostle of God submitted to the menial offices of the family; he kindled the fire; swept the floor; milked the ewes; and mended with his own hands his shoes and garments. Disdaining the penance and merit of a hermit, he observed without effort of vanity the abstemious diet of an Arab.

Edward Gibbon and Simon Oakley in ‘History of the Saracen Empire,’ London, 1870
"The greatest success of Mohammad’s life was effected by sheer moral force."
“It is not the propagation but the permanency of his religion that deserves our wonder, the same pure and perfect impression which he engraved at Mecca and Medina is preserved after the revolutions of twelve centuries by the Indian, the African and the Turkish proselytes of the Koran....The Mahometans have uniformly withstood the temptation of reducing the object of their faith and devotion to a level with the senses and imagination of man. ‘I believe in One God and Mahomet the Apostle of God’ is the simple and invariable profession of Islam. The intellectual image of the Deity has never been degraded by any visible idol; the honors of the prophet have never transgressed the measure of human virtue, and his living precepts have restrained the gratitude of his disciples within the bounds of reason and religion.”



This should be enough to let others who visit here to see you for who you are. Your presence is to annoy Somalis for disagreeing with you on what your religion is.. That should suffice it.

 

[The_Cosmos]

I will just quote far more dignified non-Muslims(some of them anti Islam) and prominent figures in the west and what they said about prophet Mohamed: This to prove what I was saying all along that you have zero dignity and connection to us here and your presence is only to insult Islam, Prophet Mohamed and Somalis for being Muslims. This is why I never treated you as anyone genuinely interested in learning something about Islam. So this quote will conclude for me and the rest will be up to the website owner in case you engage in anything blaspheming towards the prophet and I mean it:



Thomas Carlyle in 'Heroes and Hero Worship and the Heroic in History,' 1840
"The lies (Western slander) which well-meaning zeal has heaped round this man (Muhammad) are disgraceful to ourselves only."
"A silent great soul, one of that who cannot but be earnest. He was to kindle the world, the world’s Maker had ordered so."

A. S. Tritton in 'Islam,' 1951
The picture of the Muslim soldier advancing with a sword in one hand and the Qur'an in the other is quite false.

De Lacy O'Leary in 'Islam at the Crossroads,' London, 1923.
History makes it clear, however, that the legend of fanatical Muslims sweeping through the world and forcing Islam at the point of sword upon conquered races is one of the most fantastically absurd myths that historians have ever repeated.

Gibbon in 'The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' 1823
The good sense of Muhammad despised the pomp of royalty. The Apostle of God submitted to the menial offices of the family; he kindled the fire; swept the floor; milked the ewes; and mended with his own hands his shoes and garments. Disdaining the penance and merit of a hermit, he observed without effort of vanity the abstemious diet of an Arab.

Edward Gibbon and Simon Oakley in ‘History of the Saracen Empire,’ London, 1870
"The greatest success of Mohammad’s life was effected by sheer moral force."
“It is not the propagation but the permanency of his religion that deserves our wonder, the same pure and perfect impression which he engraved at Mecca and Medina is preserved after the revolutions of twelve centuries by the Indian, the African and the Turkish proselytes of the Koran....The Mahometans have uniformly withstood the temptation of reducing the object of their faith and devotion to a level with the senses and imagination of man. ‘I believe in One God and Mahomet the Apostle of God’ is the simple and invariable profession of Islam. The intellectual image of the Deity has never been degraded by any visible idol; the honors of the prophet have never transgressed the measure of human virtue, and his living precepts have restrained the gratitude of his disciples within the bounds of reason and religion.”



This should be enough to let others who visit here to see you for who you are. Your presence is to annoy Somalis for disagreeing with you on what your religion is.. That should suffice it.

I am truly loving this 'discussion' we're having as it is clearly exposing that you have nothing to offer in a serious discussion. What you want is almost like a teacher and student relationships where I ask questions and you answer. That's not a discussion mate. If I wanted to learn more about Islam I'll go online, which I have done in several occasions.

This post is indicative of your debating skills as what you have done is dismiss my arguments (which have been articulated and backed up by evidence from the Hadith) with a few western intellectuals who I respectfully disagree with. You are arguing from authority here (argumentum ad verecundiam). I respectfully disagree with them.

My previous post has clearly articulated the reasoning behind why I believe that the prophet was not an example for all times and should be confined to the point in history in which he lived. If you'd like, I can cite other intellectuals who clearly disagree with these intellectuals or you can address my points and try to find the faults in them.

Their words don't invalidate my arguments which are backed up by sheer logic and evidence.

 

[Gojo Satoru]

I've never said that it's haram for women to teach or anything, or that they can't open businesses. We can see that that the ummiteel'al'mumineen done exactly that.

But that doesn't change the fact that women are deficient in their intelligence, easily led, emotional, lack reasoning in comparison to men. This is why Allah ordered men to rule over women in the household. Allah made us men excel compared to women.

This is why the Prophet (saw) said: “No people who appoint a woman as their leader will ever prosper.” (Reported by al-Bukhaari, 13/53).

Imaam al-Ghazaali said: “The position of leader (imaam) could never be given to a woman even if she possessed all the qualities of perfection and self-reliance. How could a woman take the position of leader when she did not have the right to be a judge or a witness under most of the historical governments?”

It so obivous you dont know shit

 

[The_Cosmos]

I will just quote far more dignified non-Muslims(some of them anti Islam) and prominent figures in the west and what they said about prophet Mohamed: This to prove what I was saying all along that you have zero dignity and connection to us here and your presence is only to insult Islam, Prophet Mohamed and Somalis for being Muslims. This is why I never treated you as anyone genuinely interested in learning something about Islam. So this quote will conclude for me and the rest will be up to the website owner in case you engage in anything blaspheming towards the prophet and I mean it:



Thomas Carlyle in 'Heroes and Hero Worship and the Heroic in History,' 1840
"The lies (Western slander) which well-meaning zeal has heaped round this man (Muhammad) are disgraceful to ourselves only."
"A silent great soul, one of that who cannot but be earnest. He was to kindle the world, the world’s Maker had ordered so."

A. S. Tritton in 'Islam,' 1951
The picture of the Muslim soldier advancing with a sword in one hand and the Qur'an in the other is quite false.

De Lacy O'Leary in 'Islam at the Crossroads,' London, 1923.
History makes it clear, however, that the legend of fanatical Muslims sweeping through the world and forcing Islam at the point of sword upon conquered races is one of the most fantastically absurd myths that historians have ever repeated.

Gibbon in 'The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' 1823
The good sense of Muhammad despised the pomp of royalty. The Apostle of God submitted to the menial offices of the family; he kindled the fire; swept the floor; milked the ewes; and mended with his own hands his shoes and garments. Disdaining the penance and merit of a hermit, he observed without effort of vanity the abstemious diet of an Arab.

Edward Gibbon and Simon Oakley in ‘History of the Saracen Empire,’ London, 1870
"The greatest success of Mohammad’s life was effected by sheer moral force."
“It is not the propagation but the permanency of his religion that deserves our wonder, the same pure and perfect impression which he engraved at Mecca and Medina is preserved after the revolutions of twelve centuries by the Indian, the African and the Turkish proselytes of the Koran....The Mahometans have uniformly withstood the temptation of reducing the object of their faith and devotion to a level with the senses and imagination of man. ‘I believe in One God and Mahomet the Apostle of God’ is the simple and invariable profession of Islam. The intellectual image of the Deity has never been degraded by any visible idol; the honors of the prophet have never transgressed the measure of human virtue, and his living precepts have restrained the gratitude of his disciples within the bounds of reason and religion.”



This should be enough to let others who visit here to see you for who you are. Your presence is to annoy Somalis for disagreeing with you on what your religion is.. That should suffice it.

Your presence is to annoy Somalis for disagreeing with you on what your religion is.

Atheism - Lack of belief in any deities

Religion - the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.



Not only have you claimed in not dignified, you also claimed on another post that I'm intellectually dishonest and a liar. That there should cover it. Mr Google never lies and holds no biases.

 

[Burhan]

To the Somali Muslims here: The US supreme court in a gesture of Goodwill and recognition of prophet Mohamed's contribution to Justice, Peace and Law, Added a sculpture of the prophet next to Prophet Moses and other historic greats in a mural right above where the judges sit. This happened 60 years ago and Most Muslims and Americans don't know about it. Trump for sure doesn't know about it and those who voted for him

I will post the link for the supreme court that briefly explains each person represented there. When some Muslims complained about the sculpture after they found out about it, the matter was referred to Muslim scholars and the intent was looked. The edict was in favor and appreciation of what the US supreme court did. Muslims were happy in the end and supreme court itself refused to remove it debating for the intent. This is important to remember when someone who claims to be a Somali just seeks the company of Somalis to annoy them and harass them for their beliefs, you have class act, more educated non-somali Muslims in authority recognizing the value of Prophet Mohamed.

Enough said.