I have no idea what he says in the audio interview, I haven't listened. I've shown that he is a liar. If I already know that he is a liar, why would I care what he has to say? I have to get ready for work later. I'm not interested in spending the time to dissect everything he says in a 37 minute audio.
The real Islam from a 30 year scholar
- Thread starter Bubbajay
- Start date
"In the Qur’an, a mysterious figure, known as Khidr in Islamic tradition, kills a boy in an apparently random and gratuitous attack. He then explains: “And as for the boy, his parents were believers, and we feared that he would overburden them by transgression and disbelief. So we intended that their Lord should substitute for them one better than him in purity and nearer to mercy.” (18:80-81)"Proof of "honor killing". Theres over a dozen examples on his website.
Germany: Relatives of Muslim who killed woman mock victim’s family, ‘The girl played with my brother’s honor’
Few in the courtroom likely realized the importance of what the murderer's sister said. Saying that the victim "played with" her brother's "honor" meant that killing her was justified, as far as the killer's family was concerned. In the Qur’an, a mysterious figure, known as Khidr in Islamic...www.jihadwatch.org
this is so wrong but I can't help but find it hilarious- the story of Khidr in Surah Al Kahf is a proof for honor killing?????
where did Robert Spencer come up with this? I wonder if there is some weird Sufi sect that really believes in this. I think there are some extreme Sufis out there who believe Khidr is some sort of proof for doing all kinds of weird stuff.
I wouldn't be surprised if there was a weird fringe esoteric Sufi sect somewhere that believed something crazy like Khidr being some kind of proof for doing crazy actions. I heard there are extreme Sufi sects where it is believed that their Sufi masters can make haraam things halal.
anyways, unless you actually know about Surah Al Kahf there's no way some random non Muslim is really going to understand what that verse is talking about. I do think there are weird Sufi cults where they think they can make haraam things halal. I heard for example that with the Shia, according to their beliefs, their "Ayatollahs" can actually order them to commit haraam acts like murder and they have to be obey as part of blind obedience to their leaders.
just like there are fringe Christian cults, there are fringe Muslim cults out there. but this weird idea that the story of Khidr promotes honor killing is alien to orthodox, mainstream Islam. Khidr in the story did all kinds of things that seemed strange and shocking but it was because he was receiving direct orders from God or revelation or something. There is even speculation that he was actually an angel rather than a human. To take that story as proof for doing things like killing children- that's like taking the story of Abraham (peace be upon him) and Isaac (peace be upon him) as a proof that parents should sacrifice their children. it's completely warping it from the conventional understanding. no ordinary Quran commentator is going to say that the story of Khidr means Muslims are allowed to commit murder. there might be some weird fringe sects that believe something crazy like that.
Its not "some crazy Sufi sect". Its happening all around the world, and only with Muslims, and the guy in the article admitted it was an honor killing.
Its happening in Germany, UK, and here in America. There's a case in Arizona of an attempted kidnapping by a Muslim family who wanted to kill a woman because of her sons " honor". Its 100% real.
No I am talking about the interpretation of the verse from Surah Al Kahf about Al-Khidr. That would be a weird interpretation if there is really an interpretation like that floating around somewhere.
Honor killing is a cultural thing. It's like saying the KKK is part of Christianity or that Christianity teaches people to bomb Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan.
if someone from a Muslim country doing something means that what they do is part of Islam then according to that logic, bombing countries all over the world, invading them, overthrowing their governments is all part of Christianity and Christianity has invaded most of the world. Christians have invaded a lot more of the world than Muslims have.
India under the Muslims used to be the richest country under the world. They were a lot better than off than what they endured after the British invaded. And what religion were the British? By your standards, we should blame Christianity for the crimes of the British. The British, the Spanish and the French have invaded way more of the world than Muslims have. It's crazy how Christians at the behest of their Zionist overlords bomb and invade the Muslim world while they paint the Muslims as the aggressors.
You'd be surprised what's taught in some Arab Countries. The same Islam taught there isn't the same Islam taught here. Its more filtered and cleaned up for the American audience.No I am talking about the interpretation of the verse from Surah Al Kahf about Al-Khidr. That would be a weird interpretation if there is really an interpretation like that floating around somewhere.
Honor killing is a cultural thing. It's like saying the KKK is part of Christianity or that Christianity teaches people to bomb Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan.
if someone from a Muslim country doing something means that what they do is part of Islam then according to that logic, bombing countries all over the world, invading them, overthrowing their governments is all part of Christianity and Christianity has invaded most of the world. Christians have invaded a lot more of the world than Muslims have.
India under the Muslims used to be the richest country under the world. They were a lot better than off than what they endured after the British invaded. And what religion were the British? By your standards, we should blame Christianity for the crimes of the British. The British, the Spanish and the French have invaded way more of the world than Muslims have. It's crazy how Christians at the behest of their Zionist overlords bomb and invade the Muslim world while they paint the Muslims as the aggressors.
You don't know what I do or don't know about Islam. I don't follow a US version of Islam. I was taught by Arabs and I follow Arab scholars. You didn't even understand the verse about Al-Khidr. I am not an expert on Islam, I am layman but I know a lot more about Islam than you do.
And honestly that is why you fall for Robert Spencer. If you had a basic understanding of the Quran, you would not fall for his bizarre misinterpretation of the verse about Al-Khidr. He is preying on people who have very little understanding of Islam.
Last edited:
Spencer has traveled the US and Europe debating Muslim Scholars. He knows more about Islam than you do, and he knows more than any Muslim scholar is willing to admit. Again dispute anything he says in the interview.
I don't follow Western scholars. You don't have a basic grasp of the Quran and you're trying to lecture on Islam. Spencer is a Zionist propagandist, not a serious scholar of Islam. The man is a liar who makes stuff up about Islam to fool gullible people who want reasons to be anti-Islam. I don't care what he says, I'm not interested in giving him 37 minutes of my time and then responding. And I think I'm done with this conversation, I have things to do.
He studied the Quran and Islam for 30 years. I never once tried to lecture anyone on Islam, but its obvious the American version is cleaned up. In fact when you press a Muslim from Arabia about the Quran and quote English verses he always says the English version is corrupt, and it should only be read in Arabic lol
Of coarse you dont. You couldn't prove him wrong even if you wished. It proves once again he's right.
It doesn't matter who he is or where he's from as long as what he states are facts. That's all that matters
I'd like to show everyone viewing what a strawman argument looks like. This is a textbook definition. Someone using a completely unrelated subject to make a point or create a diversion. The thread is about all the lies and disgusting things in Islam, but InfoHarb tries to turn it into something completely different. Shill tactic 101No I am talking about the interpretation of the verse from Surah Al Kahf about Al-Khidr. That would be a weird interpretation if there is really an interpretation like that floating around somewhere.
Honor killing is a cultural thing. It's like saying the KKK is part of Christianity or that Christianity teaches people to bomb Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan.
if someone from a Muslim country doing something means that what they do is part of Islam then according to that logic, bombing countries all over the world, invading them, overthrowing their governments is all part of Christianity and Christianity has invaded most of the world. Christians have invaded a lot more of the world than Muslims have.
India under the Muslims used to be the richest country under the world. They were a lot better than off than what they endured after the British invaded. And what religion were the British? By your standards, we should blame Christianity for the crimes of the British. The British, the Spanish and the French have invaded way more of the world than Muslims have. It's crazy how Christians at the behest of their Zionist overlords bomb and invade the Muslim world while they paint the Muslims as the aggressors.
TempestOfTempo
Superstar
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2018
- Messages
- 8,758
Watching your two camps go back and forth regarding Islam would be comical were it not for the possibility that your tomfoolery might effect others negatively. Both camps keep commenting about this topic all over the forums, yet none ever address the evidence when its presented... the rest of us knew you would show up here, so lets get it out of the way...
Language:
English
Urdu اردو
كتاب النكاح
67
Wedlock, Marriage (Nikaah)
(40)
Chapter: The marrying of a daughter by her father to a ruler
(39)
باب تَزْوِيجِ الأَبِ ابْنَتَهُ مِنَ الإِمَامِ
Narrated `Aisha:
that the Prophet (ﷺ) married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: I have been informed that `Aisha remained with the Prophet (ﷺ) for nine years (i.e. till his death).
حَدَّثَنَا مُعَلَّى بْنُ أَسَدٍ، حَدَّثَنَا وُهَيْبٌ، عَنْ هِشَامِ بْنِ عُرْوَةَ، عَنْ أَبِيهِ، عَنْ عَائِشَةَ، أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صلى الله عليه وسلم تَزَوَّجَهَا وَهْىَ بِنْتُ سِتِّ سِنِينَ، وَبَنَى بِهَا وَهْىَ بِنْتُ تِسْعِ سِنِينَ. قَالَ هِشَامٌ وَأُنْبِئْتُ أَنَّهَا كَانَتْ عِنْدَهُ تِسْعَ سِنِينَ.
TempestOfTempo
Superstar
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2018
- Messages
- 8,758
Why cant you or your "opposing" parties ever just address what is presented? Why are you both so insistent on changing the focus to your contentions which have previously been addressed? You both claim Im incorrect, yet never even address the evidence presented...
Your "evidence" is revisionist history. Also why didn't YOU address what was in the audio interview. Hypocrite. You were born a hypocrite it seems.
Why can't you refute what was in the interview as I stated before you posted?
Are you claiming Sahih al-bukhari is lying in Book 67 Hadith 70? Was it conveniently "mistranslated"? Please explain why this Hadith is wrong in YOUR eyes.
Why can't you refute what was in the interview as I stated before you posted?
Are you claiming Sahih al-bukhari is lying in Book 67 Hadith 70? Was it conveniently "mistranslated"? Please explain why this Hadith is wrong in YOUR eyes.
TempestOfTempo
Superstar
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2018
- Messages
- 8,758
Why are you asking me questions I have already answered? I never agreed to watch any video interview you posted. In multiple other threads you have claimed to have "Quranic proof" of Aisha's age being 6-9 when she married Muhammed, why havent you produced any of that evidence? Its clear you didnt watch the video because your questions regarding Bukhari were addressed in it. So why cant you just address the evidence that has been presented?
If you're not willing to listen to the audio I posted, why do you expect me to watch your video? Hypocrite again. Its most definitely a trend with you.
Let me guess. The video is about discrediting the writings of Bukhari some how? How convenient. How do you explain away the other Muslims scholars? You're not worth anyone's time. Either dispute what's in the interview or shut up. I already know you cant, because if you could you'd already have tried. Your goofy comment has earned a BLOCK!!!
TempestOfTempo
Superstar
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2018
- Messages
- 8,758
Because you have made these outlandish claims over a number of other threads and this is just another place your dumpster fire is burning at, so Im still asking you to produce the evidence you claimed to have. Why would I be interested in debating a new topic when you still cant do so with the original one? You just admitted you didnt watch the video, after trying to play it off like you did... "Hey lets debate about Bukhari... what, you want me to address your contentions which I said I wanted to debate about in the first place? BLOCK!!!" lol
AdjeYen
Established
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2020
- Messages
- 147
Amazing. Since 9/11, you say? Amazing.
So, you're saying that Islam is responsible for 9/11? Were they also responsible for the Crusades or the Inquisition? What about the 1st world war, the 2nd world war? Oh, yes, Adolf Hitler was actually a Muslim, a jihadist, how dumb of me, sorry. Mussolini also was a Muslim who loved to kill people, more than 400.000 people were killed, to be precise. He loved to kill more than hugging his own mother, the true definition of a "Muslim."
Ah, those Muslims, they never learn.
Wait, were you trying to tell me that Christianity were responsible for the entire Mayan language, culture destruction, too?
No, you're wrong, Muslims did that, too.
Muslims were also responsible for the departure of Yugoslavia and the Bosnia war, too. Oh, right, even the war in Pakistan, Afghanistan, those bloody savages Jihadists, my goodness. Muslims are bloody savages, killer-machines, they're all pedos, killers, they even hate their own parents, and as soon as they're born, the parents give them a machete because why not? It's a satanic religion, right?
You thought I was done? You better be joking, mate. Ancient Greece was also affected by Islam.
Did you think that all of this damage started after pagan Rome corrupted Christianity? You mean to tell me the good 'ole Christanity? No way would they ever do that, it was Islam.
Pagan Rome corrupted Islam, not Christianity. How dare they to mock the perfect religion called Christianity, and their God called Jesus, who was born into this earth as a man, but it turns out later on that he was unsure of himself and his so-called quest, he wasn't just a man, a normal human being, he was a God in a human body, he was born on earth to understand mankind better, a God, the Almighty, the Saviour, the creator of this Universe. So, what did he do afterwards?
Well, he allowed the Rome's and the Jews, practically gave him a two thumbs up, a green light to nail him on the cross because that's what Gods do. Gods love to bleed and die, according to Christians. They're the holiest people of all, they have never started any war, not them good 'ole Christians.
Christians are also extremely skilled at doing maths, they're the best in business, hands down. They believe 1+1+1 equals 1.