2 of 5
2
Ayaan Hirsi Ali on “Fitna” and the Dutch response.
Posted: 31 May 2008 11:48 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 16 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  885
Joined  2008-01-23
CalmWind - 31 May 2008 03:39 PM

Since the Christians on the board wont do it, let me be the one to say to you, Jack.

You need Jesus and the Bible. Yes you do. Turn to the light named the father, the son and the holy ghost, Jack. That is why you are here. That’s why you logged on, became a member, posted. This is your road to Christianity.
Praise the Lord!

Your right, I do need Jesus (peace be upon him) and the bible.  I believe in these, just not as some Christians might.  I believe like the other Christians, who believe Jesus might have been a prophet, and who agree that the bible has undergone much human meddling, although many truths still remain within it.

Read E.P. Sander’s book about the historical Jesus.  I agree with his understanding.

Prais the Lord indeed!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 May 2008 11:56 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 17 ]  
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  626
Joined  2006-08-01

But this is not enough, Jack. You have already told us that you are not a good muslim. That means you are destined for the eternal fires. Lava. Skinrash, well…
Jesus can save you though, set you on the right path to Heaven. He is you saviour, Jack. Maybe he was more than a prophet, no?. Maybe he truly was the son of God. Maybe you will dream about him tonight.
Christianity awaits. Why else would the Lord have guided you here?
Blessed and great will the day be, the day a coming.

 Signature 

“If your original Hebrew disagrees with my original King James—- your original Hebrew is wrong.”—FSTDT

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 May 2008 01:00 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 18 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  885
Joined  2008-01-23
CalmWind - 31 May 2008 03:56 PM

But this is not enough, Jack. You have already told us that you are not a good muslim. That means you are destined for the eternal fires. Lava. Skinrash, well…
Jesus can save you though, set you on the right path to Heaven. He is you saviour, Jack. Maybe he was more than a prophet, no?. Maybe he truly was the son of God. Maybe you will dream about him tonight.
Christianity awaits. Why else would the Lord have guided you here?
Blessed and great will the day be, the day a coming.

There is no evidence based on studies of the bible to suggest that Jesus (peace be upon him) ever claimed to be more than a prophet of God.  That, plus the consideration that God has sent other prophets according to the very same bible, none of which claimed to be God, and the consideration that the Qur’an, which unlike the bible, is a much more reliably transmitted text, suggests that Jesus was a prophet, provide good reason to conclude Jesus never claimed to be more than a prophet.

I hope God will forgive me for my transgressions, but your right, He may not if my repentence is not sincere.  But so long as I die upon faith, I don’t believe God would punish me eternally in the hell-fire.

I believe Jesus can intercede for me on the day of judgement, although so can the prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), and other prophets (peace be upon them all), and the righteous, such that the best of creation all the way to the worst can intercede for the persons that have less with God (i.e. in terms of nearness to God), until no believing person is left in the flame.

As to why I am here?  My intentions in posting on this forum are good, and I hope God accepts any good that comes from this.  I hope to provide another perspective to the assault on Islam, which often stems from ignorance.  If even one person becomes more tolerant and educated, that would be a bonus, let alone the possibility that someone accepts the truth of Islam.  Apart from these, there may be many reasons why I am here, for which God alone knows.  In the grand scheme of things, only time will tell.

How about yourself?  From whence did you come, and “where then are you going?” as God asks in the Qur’an.  Verily, from your Lord you came, and to your Lord you will return, though now you may percieve not.

[ Edited: 31 May 2008 04:12 PM by Jack Shooter]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 May 2008 04:29 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 19 ]  
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  626
Joined  2006-08-01

I did not know why I was here, but truly I know now, I am here to open your eyes. Is it not said in the Koran 56:41, that left handed people will be boiled? “Such will be their entertainment, their welcome on the Day of Doom”.
Surely you are guilty of worse than this? But Jesus is waiting for you, Jack. Yes he is. With love, peace and safety. I am only here to put him in your ear, he will place himself in your mind and great will be the day when you take him in your mouth.

 Signature 

“If your original Hebrew disagrees with my original King James—- your original Hebrew is wrong.”—FSTDT

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 May 2008 04:49 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 20 ]  
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1814
Joined  2006-11-10
CalmWind - 31 May 2008 08:29 PM

I did not know why I was here, but truly I know now, I am here to open your eyes. Is it not said in the Koran 56:41, that left handed people will be boiled? “Such will be their entertainment, their welcome on the Day of Doom”.

Come on Calmwind,

That is such an unsophisticated reading of the Koran.
First of all, you have to place this in a historical context and if that doesn’t work for you then you have to read and re-read the Koran so often that this sentence, and pretty much anything else, will make perfect sense to you.

If, after doing this, you still have problems with 56:41 then I am sure that Jack or some of the other resident Muslims can explain to you that ‘being boiled’ can be interpreted in many different ways. The last defense is always ‘the metaphor’.

It is like Jihad.
It doesn’t mean that some crazy bearded numbnuts are trying to cut off Ayaan’s head, it means ‘inner struggle’.

Inner struggle, inner boiling….same thing.

I hope this clears things up for you.

 Signature 

“You know I’m born to lose, and gambling is for fools.
But that’s the way I like it baby, I don’t want to live forever.”

From the autobiography of A.A.Mills, ‘The passage of time, according to an estranged, casual tyrant.’

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 May 2008 05:08 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 21 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  885
Joined  2008-01-23
Sander - 31 May 2008 08:49 PM
CalmWind - 31 May 2008 08:29 PM

I did not know why I was here, but truly I know now, I am here to open your eyes. Is it not said in the Koran 56:41, that left handed people will be boiled? “Such will be their entertainment, their welcome on the Day of Doom”.

Come on Calmwind,

That is such an unsophisticated reading of the Koran.
First of all, you have to place this in a historical context and if that doesn’t work for you then you have to read and re-read the Koran so often that this sentence, and pretty much anything else, will make perfect sense to you.

If, after doing this, you still have problems with 56:41 then I am sure that Jack or some of the other resident Muslims can explain to you that ‘being boiled’ can be interpreted in many different ways. The last defense is always ‘the metaphor’.

It is like Jihad.
It doesn’t mean that some crazy bearded numbnuts are trying to cut off Ayaan’s head, it means ‘inner struggle’.

Inner struggle, inner boiling….same thing.

I hope this clears things up for you.

Actually, CalmWind had it right.  God’s punishment for disbelievers is severe.  Whether disbelievers will be boiled literally or not is not the point.  Just know that the consequence of disbelief is painful.  So Sander no, you can’t reinterpret the verse to mean anything you like.  Disbelievers are punished by God, plain and simple.

In the Qur’an, God has forewarned you so you have no excuses.

As for jihad.  It means struggle.  It usually has two meanings when used by Muslims.  In legal terminology, it refers to the physical act of fighting.  In more common usage, it refers to the inner struggle against the lower self, sort of like the battle between the superego and ego described by Freud.

[ Edited: 31 May 2008 05:11 PM by Jack Shooter]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 May 2008 06:41 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 22 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  274
Joined  2007-07-03

“Jack Shooter”
Actually, CalmWind had it right.  God’s punishment for disbelievers is severe. Disbelievers are punished by God, plain and simple.
In the Qur’an, God has forewarned you so you have no excuses.
As for jihad.  It means struggle. In legal terminology, it refers to the physical act of fighting.

Why is so that if Disbelievers are punished by God, that so many muslims are willing to help?

 Signature 

“Life is the COEXISTENCE of opposites values”
Love is Forgiveness
Peace is Tolerance
“In the beginning Man created God according to his own image and understanding. Over the years as Men understanding of morality, violence and tolerance evolves, so evolves our understanding of a Loving God”.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 May 2008 08:12 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 23 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  985
Joined  2005-12-16
Jack Shooter - 31 May 2008 03:31 PM

Have you ever considered one man inserting his penis into another man’s anus, or a woman’s anus for that matter?  If you are anything like your fellow atheist on this forum, I take it that sodomy does not seem grotesque or revolting to you.  Until you can explain to me why not, I don’t need to explain to you why an older man having sex with a young adolescent girl is acceptable.

Jack,

Sodomy is easily understood. In case of one man inserting his penis into another man’s anus the explanation is the shortage of other options. In case of man inserting his penis into a woman’s anus some consider it a convenient form of contraception. Both can be enjoyable and moral when practiced by consenting adults and it’s none of your business to tell anybody how they should behave in their bedrooms. I don’t find sodomy grotesque or revolting but I fail to understand why I owe you an explanation. On the other hand if you find it revolting I think you owe us an explanation. Please, tell us. I am all ears.

In case of an older man having sex with a child we have a problem because we care about the welfare of a child. We have laws saying that such behavior is illegal and punishable. Dutch got a little smarter now and tell aspiring immigrants from Muslim countries how their society functions. Sodomy - legal. Homosexuality - legal. Child molestation - illegal. Got it? If you don’t like it go back to Saudi Arabia, Somalia or wherever you want to practice your moral values to your heart content. Going back to the Islamic “land of the free” will have an added benefit that you can quote Quran to the receptive audience. If you didn’t get a hint yet let me say it bluntly. We are not very receptive when it comes to looking for wisdom in Quranic verses. To put it simply we think our Constitutions and laws are far superior to the Quranic teachings. To put it even simpler the Quranic teachings are revolting to us and scare us. I don’t mean to be disrespectful. It just the way it is. I think the guys like you, and that includes some Christians, imagine that secular society is bent on persecuting you. We are not. Rest assure that I will not follow you to Saudi Arabia, or Afghanistan cursing your holly scriptures or insulting your prophet. I am not interested at all in persecuting you.

Yes, I admitted that sometimes the Quranic teachings scare us. But let’s be straight about one thing. We are not scared by the vision of hell and eternal punishment waiting for disbelievers. Those fairy tales only make us laugh. We are scared by seeing and imagining what guys like you who take those fairy tales to their hearts are capable of doing.

And one more detail. Sander’s face doesn’t make me lose my sleep (Sander, please bring it back). But your posts do.

If coexisting in peace means we have to live in separate countries so be it. So please oblige me and go to the Muslim paradise. Peace be with you, brother.

[ Edited: 31 May 2008 08:18 PM by Thomas Orr]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 May 2008 08:13 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 24 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2927
Joined  2006-12-17
Jack Shooter - 31 May 2008 03:43 PM
Mel Olontha - 27 May 2008 10:42 AM

Just know that Aisha was the age of maturity when the marriage between her and the prophet (peace be upon him) was consumated.  Now, what is wrong with a forty year old + man consumating a marriage with a female who has reached the age of maturity (i.e. puberty) from your “enlightened” perspective?

That’s the whole point, no? What use are “revelations” from the iron age when children were forced to marry old men? How moral is it today to follow the rules of those primitive tribal societies?

As a believer you thus have to choose: either you follow the book dogmatically a la Taliban or you “reinterpret” this texts to make it fit our time. The later option however means you admit that morals are not dictated by “god” as unalterable but rather always subject to human reasoning and social change.
That might speak for the idea that they are not “dictated” by “god” at all.

Actually, moral principles never change.  They constitute truth.  How we apply the principles may change given the circumstance, but not the principles themselves.

Now, only in the so-called “developed” world, which increasingly has little moral bearing it seems, and where child pornography flourishes, is an elder man marrying a younger woman considered primitive and tribal.  Despite your value based judgements (remember, values change like the $, whereas virtues do not), in many societies, even today, an older man marrying a younger woman is considered practical for both parties.

Jack, if the Quran is the divine book that you believe, rather than a revelation coming across, and so constrained by, the cultural limitations of a 7th century Prophet (peace be with him) then it seems to me that it ought to contain within itself the instructions on how it is to be adapted to changing times and cultural conditions.  If that is so, then the problem with Islam today is the idolization of fixed semantic interpretations of the word rather than recognition of its instructions for renewal.  That renewal, of course, has to come from within….

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 June 2008 04:56 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 25 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  885
Joined  2008-01-23
mammooth - 31 May 2008 10:41 PM

“Jack Shooter”
Actually, CalmWind had it right.  God’s punishment for disbelievers is severe. Disbelievers are punished by God, plain and simple.
In the Qur’an, God has forewarned you so you have no excuses.
As for jihad.  It means struggle. In legal terminology, it refers to the physical act of fighting.

Why is so that if Disbelievers are punished by God, that so many muslims are willing to help?

Muslims with the correct understanding of their faith would have no such desire to punish you for your disbelief.  I desire that you and I be saved from God’s punishment.  Bad actions, however, are punishable (according to Islamic law, like any law), whether Muslim or otherwise.

The punishment and the reward of the afterlife are for God to mete out.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 June 2008 05:19 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 26 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  885
Joined  2008-01-23
Thomas Orr - 01 June 2008 12:12 AM
Jack Shooter - 31 May 2008 03:31 PM

Have you ever considered one man inserting his penis into another man’s anus, or a woman’s anus for that matter?  If you are anything like your fellow atheist on this forum, I take it that sodomy does not seem grotesque or revolting to you.  Until you can explain to me why not, I don’t need to explain to you why an older man having sex with a young adolescent girl is acceptable.

Jack,

Sodomy is easily understood. In case of one man inserting his penis into another man’s anus the explanation is the shortage of other options. In case of man inserting his penis into a woman’s anus some consider it a convenient form of contraception. Both can be enjoyable and moral when practiced by consenting adults and it’s none of your business to tell anybody how they should behave in their bedrooms. I don’t find sodomy grotesque or revolting but I fail to understand why I owe you an explanation. On the other hand if you find it revolting I think you owe us an explanation. Please, tell us. I am all ears.

In case of an older man having sex with a child we have a problem because we care about the welfare of a child. We have laws saying that such behavior is illegal and punishable. Dutch got a little smarter now and tell aspiring immigrants from Muslim countries how their society functions. Sodomy - legal. Homosexuality - legal. Child molestation - illegal. Got it? If you don’t like it go back to Saudi Arabia, Somalia or wherever you want to practice your moral values to your heart content. Going back to the Islamic “land of the free” will have an added benefit that you can quote Quran to the receptive audience. If you didn’t get a hint yet let me say it bluntly. We are not very receptive when it comes to looking for wisdom in Quranic verses. To put it simply we think our Constitutions and laws are far superior to the Quranic teachings. To put it even simpler the Quranic teachings are revolting to us and scare us. I don’t mean to be disrespectful. It just the way it is. I think the guys like you, and that includes some Christians, imagine that secular society is bent on persecuting you. We are not. Rest assure that I will not follow you to Saudi Arabia, or Afghanistan cursing your holly scriptures or insulting your prophet. I am not interested at all in persecuting you.

Yes, I admitted that sometimes the Quranic teachings scare us. But let’s be straight about one thing. We are not scared by the vision of hell and eternal punishment waiting for disbelievers. Those fairy tales only make us laugh. We are scared by seeing and imagining what guys like you who take those fairy tales to their hearts are capable of doing.

And one more detail. Sander’s face doesn’t make me lose my sleep (Sander, please bring it back). But your posts do.

If coexisting in peace means we have to live in separate countries so be it. So please oblige me and go to the Muslim paradise. Peace be with you, brother.

Thomas,

The fact that you find scripture revolting, but not sodomy is a good demonstration of how blind disbelievers can be, as mentioned by God in the Qur’an time and again.  Have you ever even read the Qur’an in its entirety, as opposed to simply reading the “bad” quotes put forth by some to make some point to further their agenda?

Now, the fact that I need to explain to you that sodomy is revolting because it involves inserting one’s private parts into a place whose only function is to excrete filth from the body is an indication of how hostile atheism is to morality, and even plain old common sense.

In any event, if the mere picture of sodomy does not disturb you, then perhaps the health concerns will.  Read here: http://www.slate.com/id/2126643/

Peace.

[ Edited: 01 June 2008 05:23 AM by Jack Shooter]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 June 2008 05:32 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 27 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  885
Joined  2008-01-23
burt - 01 June 2008 12:13 AM
Jack Shooter - 31 May 2008 03:43 PM
Mel Olontha - 27 May 2008 10:42 AM

Just know that Aisha was the age of maturity when the marriage between her and the prophet (peace be upon him) was consumated.  Now, what is wrong with a forty year old + man consumating a marriage with a female who has reached the age of maturity (i.e. puberty) from your “enlightened” perspective?

That’s the whole point, no? What use are “revelations” from the iron age when children were forced to marry old men? How moral is it today to follow the rules of those primitive tribal societies?

As a believer you thus have to choose: either you follow the book dogmatically a la Taliban or you “reinterpret” this texts to make it fit our time. The later option however means you admit that morals are not dictated by “god” as unalterable but rather always subject to human reasoning and social change.
That might speak for the idea that they are not “dictated” by “god” at all.

Actually, moral principles never change.  They constitute truth.  How we apply the principles may change given the circumstance, but not the principles themselves.

Now, only in the so-called “developed” world, which increasingly has little moral bearing it seems, and where child pornography flourishes, is an elder man marrying a younger woman considered primitive and tribal.  Despite your value based judgements (remember, values change like the $, whereas virtues do not), in many societies, even today, an older man marrying a younger woman is considered practical for both parties.

Jack, if the Quran is the divine book that you believe, rather than a revelation coming across, and so constrained by, the cultural limitations of a 7th century Prophet (peace be with him) then it seems to me that it ought to contain within itself the instructions on how it is to be adapted to changing times and cultural conditions.  If that is so, then the problem with Islam today is the idolization of fixed semantic interpretations of the word rather than recognition of its instructions for renewal.  That renewal, of course, has to come from within….

The Qur’an indeed is a living text.  Throughout it, one finds many verses where God asks people “don’t you use your intellect?” and praises the “people of understanding”, and so forth.  Of course, these illustrate the need to use the intellect in even understanding the Qur’an.  Likewise, there are many verses asking people to contemplate the Qur’an.  In every age, in every culture, people are capable of using their intellect, and this is why Islam continues to spread today in these modern times.  There is little of the core injunctions of Islam that cannot be practiced today.

The renewal occurs within the existing framework, and it has to do with interpreting the Qur’an and hadith in light of current circumstances.

I don’t know if this answers your question.  Please let me know if not. Thanks.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 June 2008 10:50 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 28 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  985
Joined  2005-12-16
Jack Shooter - 01 June 2008 09:19 AM

The fact that you find scripture revolting, but not sodomy is a good demonstration of how blind disbelievers can be, as mentioned by God in the Qur’an time and again.  Have you ever even read the Qur’an in its entirety, as opposed to simply reading the “bad” quotes put forth by some to make some point to further their agenda?

Jack, you accuse me of being blind but offer no logical argument other than your opinion. One way to settle our dispute is to put it to popular vote. The number of Muslims might be impressive but I think that homosexuals and sodomists combined still outnumber them. There is one catch, however. How do you propose we should count homosexual Muslims?

Jack Shooter - 01 June 2008 09:19 AM

Now, the fact that I need to explain to you that sodomy is revolting because it involves inserting one’s private parts into a place whose only function is to excrete filth from the body is an indication of how hostile atheism is to morality, and even plain old common sense.

Jack, if you support the idea of using the body parts according to their intended function why then you violate your mental faculties by following your religion which teaches you nothing but blind obedience? Why millions of Muslim youth struggle to suppress their sexual urges for no good reason?

In any event, if the mere picture of sodomy does not disturb you, then perhaps the health concerns will.  Read here: http://www.slate.com/id/2126643/
Peace.

Jack, I am too lazy to read the link you provided. However, as far as health is concerned there are sexually transmitted diseases, genital warts, yest infections etc. which can still get you no matter how careful you are avoiding the anal dangers.

You are right, however, in one aspect of this discussion. If you are willing to debate on this forum bringing up health concerns, social concerns and scientific reasons you will find the atheists here quite receptive and willing to listen to what you have to say.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 June 2008 02:56 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 29 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  885
Joined  2008-01-23
Jack Shooter - 01 June 2008 05:26 PM
Thomas Orr - 01 June 2008 02:50 PM
Jack Shooter - 01 June 2008 09:19 AM

The fact that you find scripture revolting, but not sodomy is a good demonstration of how blind disbelievers can be, as mentioned by God in the Qur’an time and again.  Have you ever even read the Qur’an in its entirety, as opposed to simply reading the “bad” quotes put forth by some to make some point to further their agenda?

Jack, you accuse me of being blind but offer no logical argument other than your opinion. One way to settle our dispute is to put it to popular vote. The number of Muslims might be impressive but I think that homosexuals and sodomists combined still outnumber them. There is one catch, however. How do you propose we should count homosexual Muslims?

Jack Shooter - 01 June 2008 09:19 AM

Now, the fact that I need to explain to you that sodomy is revolting because it involves inserting one’s private parts into a place whose only function is to excrete filth from the body is an indication of how hostile atheism is to morality, and even plain old common sense.

Jack, if you support the idea of using the body parts according to their intended function why then you violate your mental faculties by following your religion which teaches you nothing but blind obedience? Why millions of Muslim youth struggle to suppress their sexual urges for no good reason?

In any event, if the mere picture of sodomy does not disturb you, then perhaps the health concerns will.  Read here: http://www.slate.com/id/2126643/
Peace.

Thomas Orr

Jack, I am too lazy to read the link you provided. However, as far as health is concerned there are sexually transmitted diseases, genital warts, yest infections etc. which can still get you no matter how careful you are avoiding the anal dangers.

You are right, however, in one aspect of this discussion. If you are willing to debate on this forum bringing up health concerns, social concerns and scientific reasons you will find the atheists here quite receptive and willing to listen to what you have to say.

Well Thomas (and others of the same elk), at least please put your opinions about sodomy on hold until you have considered both sides of the argument, which apparently you are too lazy to do.  To say that other things cause disease too is a red herring.  The truth is, anal sex has a much higher risk, apparently 50 times more risky in terms of resulting in disease than oral sex, if you only cared to read the article.  By the way, laziness in considering opposing sides is the opposite of intellectual rigor and the scientific ethos.

Having said that, part of what I have been doing on this forum is to show that religion, Islam anyway, is beneficial to individuals and society when applied properly.  The benefits, or aversion from harm, can be seen in legal, social, economic, health, and other spheres of human life - all of which are inter-related.

Now that I have given you the logic and reason behind why sodomy is a disgusting or revolting act, why don’t you now tell me, with respect to an older man having sexual relations with a female who has reached puberty (i.e. an adolescent), what you find so revolting about it, and please be ‘scientific, logical, and reasonable’ about it as I have been about sodomy, as opposed to being, as it seems you and others have been until now, simply dogmatic.

I suspect you will talk about consent.  I’ve already explained how consent can be given on behalf of a guardian to marry a female child to a man (after she reaches puberty, the females consent is required for her to be married to anyone), and that consumation before the age of maturity is not an acceptable within Islam, hence the reason why although the prophet (peace be upon him) was given Aisha to marry by her father at age 6, the marriage was not consumated until she was 9 years old, when she had reached puberty.  Remember, puberty in girls begins on average around the age of 10.  So tell me, what is wrong with a biologically ready female having sex with an older male within the confines of marriage?  I’m waiting for a non-dogmatic answer, though I don’t expect that I will get one.

Let’s be honest, Islam wins again.

Now, do I need to expound on the many reasons why pornography is immoral as well, or will you concede religion is right when it comes to this too?

From the Qur’an in the chapter entitled Signs:

Soon will We show them our Signs in the (furthest) regions (of the earth), and in their own souls, until it becomes manifest to them that this is the Truth. Is it not enough that thy Lord doth witness all things?


Assorted verses from the chapter entitled Yunus:

And they say: Why is not a sign sent to him from his Lord? Say: The unseen is only for God; therefore wait—surely I too, with you am of those who wait.

Though every sign should come to them, until they witness the painful chastisement

And if your Lord had pleased, surely all those who are in
the earth would have believed, all of them; will you then force men till they become believers?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 June 2008 04:21 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 30 ]  
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1538
Joined  2006-12-04
Jack Shooter - 01 June 2008 09:19 AM

Now, the fact that I need to explain to you that sodomy is revolting because it involves inserting one’s private parts into a place whose only function is to excrete filth from the body is an indication of how hostile atheism is to morality, and even plain old common sense.

Sexual organ all serve multiple functions. Funny how a perfect creator couldn’t think to separate our sex organs from our waste eliminators, isn’t it?  And then you condone FGM and have the nerve to preach proper treatment and use of genitalia?

 Signature 

“The hands that help are better far than the lips that pray.”
          — Robert G. Ingersoll

Profile
 
 
   
2 of 5
2
 
‹‹ Worlds’s largest      Kill the apostate! ››
RSS 2.0     Atom Feed