Liberate wrote:Truth Seeker-Joshua wrote:
What we have here are mus1ims who try to justify their prophet being a sick, perverted person, by saying, "the Jews did it too".
aburaees wrote:
Are you not understanding what he is trying to say? Is it really that difficult??
Fact: God commanded Moses/Joshua to conquer the Holy Land, even resorting to the killing of women and children.
This was not a basis for Israel residing in the Holy Land, the basis for Israel residing in the Holy Land was because of the covenant between Abraham, Jacob and Isaac, if you were to read the context of those chapters you are glossing over, you will see the so called conquering of the canaanites, hittites, amalekites, were 1) For punishment as they attacked Israel in the same manner when they were in the wilderness, no jew practices this anymore, and this has no bearing on christianity 2) The Israelites were not asked to conquer the neighbouring tribes, or asking them to pay the jizya in willing submission and subjecting their women and children to join sexual harems for the mullahs, caliphs and imams,
the Israelites were told to wipe out these tribes, they did not do so, and again this has no bearing on christianity.
Fact: Muslims have conquered lands, even in the same manner that Moses/Joshua did. And it is claimed that God commanded it.
This is an error, if you were to read the context of those verses you would see that the jews did not subject the women to rape or passing among themselves to practice coitus interruptus with as Mohammed and his mujaheddins did. The very context of these verses are what condemns a muslim trying the logical fallacy of tu quoque, rape is wrong, why on earth would a human being in this day and age say "well it was done alledgedly by the same God so we are ok alhamduillah" this is insanity.
Taking a look at Numbers 31:17-18:
Numbers 31:17-18
"Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man."
To a muslim ofcourse the "save for yourselves" obviously means rape, since they are fully aware Mohammed raped jewish women, and his mujaheddins practiced coitus interruptus with them, so tanishing and bringing everybody down to their level makes them feel a little justified no matter how sick this mentality is.
Reading the very chapter of that verse gives the context of exactly what it meant with "save for yourselves"
"The LORD said to Moses, ‘Take the count of the booty that was taken, both of man and of beast, you and Elea'zar the priest and the heads of the fathers' houses of the congregation; and divide the booty into two parts, between the warriors who went out to battle and all the congregation. And levy for the LORD a tribute from the men of war who went out to battle, one out of five hundred, of the persons and of the oxen and of the asses and of the flocks; take it from their half, and give it to Elea'zar the priest as an offering to the LORD. And from the people of Israel's half you shall take one drawn out of every fifty, of the persons, of the oxen, of the asses, and of the flocks, of all the cattle, and give them to the Levites who have charge of the tabernacle of the LORD.’ And Moses and Elea'zar the priest did as the LORD commanded Moses. Now the booty remaining of the spoil that the men of war took was: six hundred and seventy-five thousand sheep, seventy-two thousand cattle, sixty-one thousand asses, and thirty-two thousand persons in all, women who had not known man by lying with him. And the half, the portion of those who had gone out to war, was in number three hundred and thirty-seven thousand five hundred sheep, and the LORD's tribute of sheep was six hundred and seventy-five. The cattle were thirty-six thousand, of which the LORD's tribute was seventy-two. The asses were thirty thousand five hundred, of which the LORD's tribute was sixty-one. The persons were sixteen thousand, of which the LORD's tribute was thirty-two persons. And Moses gave the tribute, which was the offering for the LORD, to Elea'zar the priest, as the LORD commanded Moses. From the people of Israel's half, which Moses separated from that of the men who had gone to war- now the congregation's half was three hundred and thirty-seven thousand five hundred sheep, thirty-six thousand cattle, and thirty thousand five hundred asses, and sixteen thousand persons- from the people of Israel's half Moses took one of every fifty, both of persons and of beasts, and gave them to the Levites who had charge of the tabernacle of the LORD; as the LORD commanded Moses. Then the officers who were over the thousands of the army, the captains of thousands and the captains of hundreds, came near to Moses, and said to Moses, ‘Your servants have counted the men of war who are under our command, and there is not a man missing from us. And we have brought the LORD's offering, what each man found, articles of gold, armlets and bracelets, signet rings, earrings, and beads, to make atonement for ourselves before the LORD.’ And Moses and Elea'zar the priest received from them the gold, all wrought articles. And all the gold of the offering that they offered to the LORD, from the commanders of thousands and the commanders of hundreds, was sixteen thousand seven hundred and fifty shekels. (The men of war had taken booty, every man for himself.) And Moses and Elea'zar the priest received the gold from the commanders of thousands and of hundreds, and brought it into the tent of meeting, as a memorial for the people of Israel before the LORD." Numbers 31:25-54 RSV
Again the context is clear from the chapter at hand, "the save for yourselves" bit does not even remotely refer to rape, but the exact opposite they were to be used for God, in the service of the tabernacle, which applied to all persons and property taken, the modus operandi normally utilised by the Israelites on all such property and people were that they were to be destroyed. Again this has no bearing on christianity, we have the law of grace, as stated in a world without penicillin you cut the leg to save the body or you risk destruction of the whole body.
What everyone needs to admit is that if Islam is to be judged based of the deeds of Muhammad, then Christianity and Judaism should be open to judgement based on the deeds of Moses.
You are denying the antecedent, affirming a negative premise, and practicing the fallacy of tu quoque, why are you skipping entirely what Jesus has to say? we are no longer subject to the law, man cannot fulfill the law, it leads to ridiculous legalism islam is notorious for such as how many pieces of toilet tissue to use and which hand to use it with, you cannot judge christianity based solely on the law of Moses, this is ridiculous reasoning, the jews did not rape captured women, they were kept in quarantine for several days before being allowed to join the Israelites, hardly the behaviour of sexual lechers, the bible reaffirms in several places the Israelites were to be fair to those taken in war becase
"remmeber you were slaves in Egypt"
And don't forget, Christianity is not independent of what happened in the Old Testament - Christianity is as dependent on the Old Testament as Judaism is. Without the Old Testament there is no basis for Jesus' claim to be the Saviour/Messiah.
I fail to understand the point of your argument, as I have highlighted in your statement, if you understand that without the old testament there is no basis of Jesus's coming, then you will understand that Jesus's coming was a fulfillment of the entire old testament, legalism cannot work, doing things in a partcular routine will not save you, it will be a burden to you at the end of the day, the law was meant to be in the heart, like food you eat it to live, with legalism you pile the food in ridiculous laws, skipping and hopping to maintain a balance to the point that the food becomes a burden, when you are supposed to eat the food to give you the strength you need. How many muslims will tell you how hard it is to maintain their 5 times washing and prayer a day?
I know I'm going to be criticised for what I have written here, but people do need to be honest.
What it seems you are doing, far from being an honest objective look at both religious text and their context is to align christianity with the practice of rape and coitus interruptus done by Mohammed and the early muslims, and attested by the earliest and authentic religious biography of Mohammed and the early muslims, this is tu quoque, the jews did not practice raping their captured women, neither do christians, what exactly is your point?
It is double standards for Christians to honour Moses and then turn around and judge Muhammad based on deeds that were also commanded to Moses by God.
Again God did not command Moses to rape women, would you care to show me where it says so?, Mohammed on the other hand raped women, this is undeniable and authenticated by the most rigorous matn and isnad that Mohammed was a rapist.
It is true that Christianity came at a different time to Judaism, and that there is a time for war and a time for peace, but the foundations of Christianity are in Judaism - so Christianity is not innocent of the bloody conquests by Moses/Joshua.
This is a denial of the antecedent and tu quoque logical fallacies, the so called conquest by Moses and Joshua was not to spread religion, which is what Mohammed commands every muslim to do via jihad which is what muslims wether they be a moderate muslim in Florida or a wahabi in saudi arabia aims to do, judaism is notorious for not seeking proselytes, it was fought for survival and it is still being fought to this day.
Look, what needs to be admitted is that God can command, and has commanded the killing of civillians in the Old Testament. Islam claims the same divine authority.
Don't you find it a little strange that the same God who commaned the Israelites to wipe out the ancestors of the muslims, would all of a sudden command the muslims to wipe out the Israelites? Mohammed as you well know told the muslims to rid the arabian peninsula of jews, Isn't that a little strange? would the same God be responsible for both messages?
What needs to be established is that even though God did give the authority to Moses/Joshua, he did not give this same authority to Muhammad...
This is a moot point, it is established beyond any reasonable doubt that the prophet who commited adultery, incest, fornication, pedofilia, without a prophecy to his name, frothing in the mouth in an elipetic fit was not speaking on behalf of God.
Lets move on from the Ad-Hominem attacks against Muhammad, and it is Ad-Hominem to disregard someones theological viewpoint because of their sexual or millitary adventures.
what are you trying to say here? that we should disregard the raping, pedofilia, incest, adultery and fornication of Mohammed? is this what you are trying to say? that in the midst of contradicting the old and the news testaments he still has some basis for prophethood?
"By their fruits you shall know them" we as christians cannot disregard someone's fruits because they claim to be speaking on behalf of God, their fruits will give us proof, for Mohammed his fruits are an insult to associate it with God.
How shall we now go about showing that God did not command Muhammad to do the things he did?
From the koran...