Misconceptions about Islam

[The_Cosmos]

So Cyrus did this

By Muslim Somalis who followed the teachings of the Quran. I think we actually agree, but our words were lost in confusion. I'm being serious.

Anyways is there any more to add then?

The Prophet didn't do that though...


He took women and children as slaves. When your arguments fall apart, you then begin to lean to the actions of good Muslims to justify Islam.

The Prophet executed any male over the age of puberty and then took the women and children as slaves diving them up to his companions.

 

[Layth]

The Prophet didn't do that though...


He took women and children as slaves. When your arguments fall apart, you then begin to lean to the actions of good Muslims to justify Islam.

The Prophet executed any male over the age of puberty and then took the women and children as slaves diving them up to his companions.

We've addressed this already.

 

[The_Cosmos]

@Discontinous he's definitely trolling. You are honestly going round in circles, we've addressed all this. There are 3 options; the opponents of the Muslims can be either:

1) Murdered (which is what happens during a war)
2) Taken as prisoners of war
3) Emancipated en masse (which is a silly thing to do for obvious reasons).

Hence why I was saying it's a necessary part of war to either murder or take prisoners of war from among your opponents . I've also mentioned that the gradual emancipation of slaves is something that's actually institutionalized, which no other religion has done.

Even non-Muslims take prisoners of war. Is their actions according to the teachings of the Prophet (SAW)?



Like I said, it's a necessary part of war.

Seriously, this shit has exposed that Allah couldn't end slavery immediately until the West came along and pressured Muslim into doing it.


Again, POWs are not slaves and so comparing them to slaves is being stupid.

Slave - Property

POW - Enemy combatant.

Women and children are NOT enemy combatants. Secular law was established to end precisely barbarity such as that.

 

[NoName]

There are 3 options; the opponents of the Muslims can be either:

1) Murdered (which is what happens during a war)
2) Taken as prisoners of war
3) Emancipated en masse (which is a silly thing to do for obvious reasons).

Hence why I was saying it's a necessary part of war to either murder or take prisoners of war from among your opponents .

I've already pointed out the problems with this in my reply to @Discontinous.

This is a confirmation bias. You're manipulating the circumstances in a way you wish it to support slavery. There's nothing to say that letting them be would lead to them dying out. This is what I meant when I said you are relying on 'hypotheticals' earlier, but you bizarrely responded with what appears to be ascribing validity to the enslavement of Africans by Europeans (why am I not surprised?). Not to mention that for my position on the moral abhorrence of slavery to be valid I don't have to provide any alternative. There's no interdependence between the two. Now over to you to fork out a single sentence or two that may or may not be vaguely related to the discussion at hand (like the enslavement of Africans comment).

It's bullshit to try and argue that it's necessary, and you're jumping through all kinds hoops!

 

[VixR]

As I'm catching up reading through this, it's interesting how the situations hinted at are ones where international law or domestic law dealt with, for instance, the Serb leadership for their inclusion of systematic rape of the Bosniaks in their scheme, and convicted them of a war crime on the international stage! All these horrible things being grabbed at; rape of Bosniaks, sexual humiliation of Iraqi soldiers, and so forth, are wartime occurrences that are wont to happen at varying levels through human inclination in the height of war, but they aren't accepted and brushed aside as divinely ordained acts, but largely viewed as injustices, offenders being liable to the full extent of the law for their transgressions, to investigation, to trial to the best of human ability towards whatever justice can be attained.


The_Cosmos: It's the same model/concept being applied by Isis today, I'm asking you if it's permissible yes or no?

Discontinuous & Layth: No (Yes!) But...see this video where a Muslim guy was shot surrendering, they aren't Islamic if they do that, so it doesn't count! *Inherent nature of war stance that was being argued all the while in support of full on enslavement thrown conveniently right out the window for distrust (understandable), iconic of wartime, for "surrenders" on the possibility the may even be bluffs *

 

[The_Cosmos]

We've addressed this already.

By claiming that it was in their best interest. Are you telling me that Allah had no other solutions but slavery.

The Banu Nadir pitied them so much that they traded for them. It seems only the Jewish had any ounce of moral decency.

 

[NoName]

By claiming that it was in their best interest. Are you telling me that Allah had no other solutions but slavery.

The Banu Nadir pitied them so much that they traded for them. It seems only the Jewish had any ounce of moral decency.

They don't understand that a morally abhorrent act being drafted into their religious code of ethics creates a paradox.

 

[The_Cosmos]

They don't understand that a morally abhorrent act being drafted into their religious code of ethics creates a paradox.

Layth:

"It's in their best interests otherwise they'll be undefended"

All the while it was the Prophet who executed all the male even kids who had reached puberty. Any male who reached puberty was literally killed.

"it was in their best interest"

Because your prophet killed their entire male family apart from the children (whom he took as slaves).

 

[The_Cosmos]

Only Muslims will defend slavery.

 

[VixR]

Only Muslims will defend slavery.

Muh slavery.

Muh "consensual" sex slaves.

Layth changed the rhetoric several times from slaves to servants, did u notice like halfway through they started garnering wages.

 

[The_Cosmos]

Muh slavery.

Muh "consensual" sex slaves.

Layth changed the rhetoric several times from slaves to servants, did u notice like halfway through they started garnering wages.

I saw that!!

I was literally fuming how they tried to conflate the actions of the Prophet to the actions of Cyrus the great who outlawed slavery. The man is praised for his human rights thatvwere so ahead of his time. Their entire point is rested on POWs being conflated with slaves. Nobody is against not letting go an enemy combatant, people are against enslaving them!!! The Geneva convention demands that they be treated with human dignity. Does slavery give you dignity or does it take it away?

This is one of the reasons why I left Islam... how could an omnipotent and omnibenevolent God ever allow such barbarity.

The irony of this is that Allah destroyed Ancient Egypt (story is bullshit but the narrative is the point) for not freeing the Jews!! Why does Allah demand the immediate freedom of the Jews but then decide to sanction slavery for the Prophet???

 

[Lord Flacko]

No you didn't!! You kept talking about how ISIS executed some of its captives and that has nothing to do with my point. You lot claim Islam only allows slavery throws times of war, ISIS has taken its captives as slaves. Is this justified? It is literally a simple answer that you refused to address directly. I don't care what else they might have done, answer this specific point.

I didnt?
Let's check our conversation

Plus, it haram outlaw what Allah has made lawful for you. Where does it say that people like ISIS are wrong to own slaves today? They captured those people in war so Islamically it is justified, no? They even distribute them the same way the prophet did.

ISIS execute their captors who surrenderer

4:89
Except for those who take refuge with a people between yourselves and whom is a treaty or those who come to you, their hearts strained at [the prospect of] fighting you or fighting their own people. And if Allah had willed, He could have given them power over you, and they would have fought you. So if they remove themselves from you and do not fight you and offer you peace, then Allah has not made for you a cause [for fighting] against them.

It is not permissible in Islam.

Again, I can find (you didn't) verses that justify to them the killing of some prisoners as a means of endowing terror on the hears of the unbelievers. Nevertheless, you've deflected on purpose here . ISIS have the right to own slaves, Islamically, if they captured them through war. Do you agree? You've been arguing that slaves can only taking through war so defend your point.

So you said I deflected your point, which I didn't. And you call on me to prove my point which I have.

Reread.

ISIS execute their captors who surrenderer

4:89
Except for those who take refuge with a people between yourselves and whom is a treaty or those who come to you, their hearts strained at [the prospect of] fighting you or fighting their own people. And if Allah had willed, He could have given them power over you, and they would have fought you. So if they remove themselves from you and do not fight you and offer you peace, then Allah has not made for you a cause [for fighting] against them.

It is not permissible in Islam.

ISIS fight, execute and torture whomever is in their path. Even if that person is a Muslim, which most are, and has surrendered, which most have. ISIS are not the reprensentation of Muslims and go against the teachings of the Quran.

Example;

Iraqi Special Forces surrender to ISIS and gets executed


@The_Cosmos in case you got a small case of amnesia

And you're back to saying I never answered your point and I deflected. I said what ISIS does is unislamic and proved it. You said it's not and didn't prove it, aswell as ignoring my arguement.

 

[Lord Flacko]

You're recycling the same garbage I've already answered. Got me wondering if youre slightly autistic.



Hasta la vista done talking to an "enlightened" wall of internet warriors

 

[Layth]

Discontinuous & Layth: No (Yes!) But...see this video where a Muslim guy was shot surrendering, they aren't Islamic if they do that, so it doesn't count! *Inherent nature of war stance that was being argued all the while in support of full on enslavement thrown conveniently right out the window for distrust (understandable), iconic of wartime, for "surrenders" on the possibility the may even be bluffs *

Nah y'all are definitely trolling.




Let me put it in another way so that it's easier for your minds to grasp. If I was to fund an Islamic cause, that would be a virtuous deed in Islam; but if I was to fund an anti-Islamic cause, that would be a sin. It's not funding a cause in of itself that is Islamic/unIslamic, it depends on the cause.

When the Bynzatines murdered a large number of Muslims (when the two were at war with eachother), that was definitely unIslamic. It's not murdering during war (which is a necessity) that's the problem, it's the cause.

The irony of this is that Allah destroyed Ancient Egypt (story is bullshit but the narrative is the point) for not freeing the Jews!! Why does Allah demand the immediate freedom of the Jews but then decide to sanction slavery for the Prophet???

They've unjustly enslaved the Jews (who were merely migrants into their country), it was not a result of a war or anything.

 

[VixR]

I saw that!!

I was literally fuming how they tried to conflate the actions of the Prophet to the actions of Cyrus the great who outlawed slavery. The man is praised for his human rights thatvwere so ahead of his time. Their entire point is rested on POWs being conflated with slaves. Nobody is against not letting go an enemy combatant, people are against enslaving them!!! The Geneva convention demands that they be treated with human dignity. Does slavery give you dignity or does it take it away?

This is one of the reasons why I left Islam... how could an omnipotent and omnibenevolent God ever allow such barbarity.

The irony of this is that Allah destroyed Ancient Egypt (story is bullshit but the narrative is the point) for not freeing the Jews!! Why does Allah demand the immediate freedom of the Jews but then decide to sanction slavery for the Prophet???

The Jews are the chosen ppl, even in the Quran (but alas they have strayed from God's...rope). I swear theirs a love-hate element. It's like when a favorite son severely displeases a father and is dead to him, so he tries to take comfort in the second son, but he's no first-son-the-favorite, so he just ends up muttering inconsolably about him to second-best.

 

[The_Cosmos]

I didnt?
Let's check our conversation



So you said I deflected your point, which I didn't. And you call on me to prove my point which I have.


And you're back to saying I never answered your point and I deflected. I said what ISIS does is unislamic and proved it. You said it's not and didn't prove it, aswell as ignoring my arguement.

Look at this idiot!!


I made my point very clear. I was talking about them taking captured women and children as slaves and asking you if it was fine for them to do so and you then turn around talk about how they killed those whom they captured??


What does that have to do with my point?? You lot have claimed that it's fine to take your captives as slaves if it's done during war (hence the prophet's actions) but then reject ISIS for doing the exact same thing.

 

[The_Cosmos]

Nah y'all are definitely trolling.




Let me put it in another way so that it's easier for your minds to grasp. If I was to fund an Islamic cause, that would be a virtuous deed in Islam; but if I was to fund an anti-Islamic cause, that would be a sin. It's not funding a cause in of itself that is Islamic/unIslamic, it depends on the cause.

When the Bynzatines murdered a large number of Muslims (when the two were at war with eachother), that was definitely unIslamic. It's not murdering during war (which is a necessity) that's the problem, it's the cause.


They've unjustly enslaved the Jews (who were merely migrants into their country), it was not a result of a war or anything.

What about all the people in the world "unjustly" enslaved? Allah just lets that pass.

Muhammad can take women and children as slaves but you'll claim "its for their own good" even though it was Muhammad who killed ALL the males that reached puberty (he checked for public hair) but it's wrong for anyone else to take slaves because Allah has some twisted sense of what is right and wrong????

You're defence of Islam has literally fallen flat on its back.

 

[Layth]

What about all the people in the world "unjustly" enslaved? Allah just lets that pass.

Muhammad can take women and children as slaves but you'll claim "its for their own good" even though it was Muhammad who killed ALL the males that reached puberty (he checked for public hair) but it's wrong for anyone else to take slaves because Allah has some twisted sense of what is right and wrong????

You're defence of Islam has literally fallen flat on its back.

You think you're the first one that's raising these points but you get most of your nonsense from wikiIslam and all of these arguments have been thoroughly refuted by the people of knowledge. I'm not going to waste anymore time going back and forth with you. If you're looking for the truth, refer to scholars of Islam.

What intrigues me is that you can spend hours of your day speaking about a religion that you've left. Wallahi that's truly sad

I'm out.

*unwatches thread*

 

[The_Cosmos]

You think you're the first one that's raising these points but you get most of your nonsense from wikiIslam and all of these arguments have been thoroughly refuted by the people of knowledge. I'm not going to waste anymore time going back and forth with you. If you're looking for the truth, refer to scholars of Islam.

What intrigues me is that you can spend hours of your day speaking about a religion that you've left. Wallahi that's truly sad

I'm out.

*unwatches thread*

"It has been thoroughly refuted by knowledgable scholars"

Provides no refutation and directs me to no scholars refuting my points.



And what intrigues me is how you can spend hours defending the most heinous of crimes.

"Muh Islam"

:siilaanyolaugh:

 

[The_Cosmos]

This is why international law is secular and not based on any supposed "divine" commandments because otherwise Layth and his mandem would be chilling with their sex slaves.