Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Does Islam preach forcible conversion?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • rogue06
    replied
    Originally posted by Sparko View Post

    Your citation from a popular article written by a muslim apologist site?
    But hey, she has provided me with another example of taqqiya/idtirar (lying to non-Muslims) to include.

    The piece by Hassam Munir, who's bio says that he

    ...is currently pursuing an MA in Mediterranean and Middle East History at the University of Toronto. He is the founder of iHistory, a public history project, and was recognized as an Emerging Historian at the 2017 Heritage Toronto Awards


    where he writes

    A key “fact” of this spread-by-the-sword narrative is the notion of forced conversions of non-Muslims to Islam. This is part of a constellation of questionable “facts” that have been repurposed many times in history.


    which tees up the following beaut

    The Positions of Historians

    The notion of Islam being “spread by the sword” can be traced to the Crusades and remained a cornerstone of European Christians’ anti-Islam polemics for centuries.


    Yup. Just something that the Crusaders came up with.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    Originally posted by Sparko View Post

    Your citation from a popular article written by a muslim apologist site?
    You didn't read my other posts?

    Leave a comment:


  • rogue06
    replied
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

    Where are the texts?

    Without context your googled comments have no relevance.

    You seem unable to grasp this simple fact.

    I did at least provide my citations.
    Yes. I have most definitely touched a nerve.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sparko
    replied
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

    Where are the texts?

    Without context your googled comments have no relevance.

    You seem unable to grasp this simple fact.

    I did at least provide my citations.
    Your citation from a popular article written by a muslim apologist site?

    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    FIFY
    Where are the texts?

    Without context your googled comments have no relevance.

    You seem unable to grasp this simple fact.

    I did at least provide my citations.

    Leave a comment:


  • rogue06
    replied
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
    I must deflect and distract so hopefully nobody realizes just how many times I faceplanted in this thread
    FIFY

    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    All you've done is provided yet another opportunity to demonstrate that you are a fraud who came here posing as an academic historian.

    Congrats.
    Yes. I have most definitely touched a nerve.

    Leave a comment:


  • rogue06
    replied
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

    I've definitely touched a nerve!
    All you've done is provided yet another opportunity to demonstrate that you are a fraud who came here posing as an academic historian.

    Congrats.

    Leave a comment:


  • rogue06
    replied
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

    I am waiting for you to provide some comments from some accredited Islamicist academics.
    You mean like
    • Muhyiddin Ibn 'Arabi (revered Spanish scholar, poet and sage)
    • Ismail ibn Kathir (regarded by many as the Muslim world's most respected qur'an commentator, the revered Muslim expert on tafsir (Quranic exegesis) and faqīh (jurisprudence))
    • Ibn Ishaq (regarded as the earliest and most thorough of Islam's historians)
    • Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari (well respected historian and exegete of the qur'an)
    • Umdat as-Salik wa 'Uddat an-Nasik (author of one of the most highly respected works on Islamic theology and jurisprudence)
    • Farid Esack (visiting Professor at Auburn Theological Seminary)
    • Bassam Tibi (Professor for International Relations at Göttingen University as well as having 18 visiting professorships at top universities such as the University of California Berkeley and Princeton along with being a visiting senior fellow at Yale University)
    • Shaul Bakhash (historian in Iranian studies at George Mason University where he is a "Clarence J. Robinson Professor of History")
    • Mohammed Adam El-Sheikh (head of the Islamic Judiciary Council of the Shari'ah Scholars' Association of North America)
    • Yvonne Haddad (professor in the Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding in the School of Foreign Service and the Department of History at Georgetown University)
    • Asma Afsaruddin associate professor of Arabic and Islamic studies at the University of Notre Dame, later a professor in the Department of Near Eastern Languages and Cultures at Indiana University in Bloomington and chair of the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy board of directors


    How many times do you have to demonstrate that you skimmed at the very best the OP because each of them are cited in the very first post?

    Again, this is more evidence of your desperation to change the subject.

    For some funny reason you have a need not to discuss your many hilarious claims you made in this thread

    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
    Islam does not preach forcible conversion.
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
    We do not know what Muhammed said. The Qur'an was written down centuries later.
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
    Around 800 CE biographies of Muhammed came to written and these were carefully preserved. Before that? We have nothing.
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
    The Qur'an is silent on Gabriel's revelations or any supernatural voice. The figure does appear in some verses but there is no mention of that figure being the messenger of supernatural revelations.
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
    Nor were the hadiths ever intended to be considered in such a manner.
    And then, of course, there's been your fitful attempts to show that Jesus also commanded conversion by the sword that has been a virtual fail factory producing one howler after another.

    And who could forget you offering up someone who had the gaslights turned up all the way when he insisted that the notion that Muhammad converted by the sword was made up during the Crusades.

    Then again, it's pretty clear why you would want to ignore them (even though you were awfully cock sure of yourself when you posted them), although this post makes clear you are still seeking to make a clown out of yourself.

    Mission accomplished.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
    Why the need for "accredited Islamicist academics" when one can get access straight to the translated texts?
    I will treat that remark with the contempt it decidedly deserves.

    Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
    Patently untrue just from what has been posted in this thread. Keep flailing.
    Oh he's very good at Googling.

    But do you not find it odd that despite reading those "stacks of books" he cannot recall to mind one comment made in any of them? He cannot even provide a paraphrase! It seems that what he read was never retained.

    Leave a comment:


  • One Bad Pig
    replied
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

    I am waiting for you to provide some comments from some accredited Islamicist academics.
    Why the need for "accredited Islamicist academics" when one can get access straight to the translated texts? You handwaved away what was provided in that regard because you can find them online.
    Oh but I forgot! You never wrote anything down. Or if you did you cannot bring any of it to mind!
    Patently untrue just from what has been posted in this thread. Keep flailing.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    I'll note that this bit pretty much pulverizes H_A's claim that nothing was written down until centuries later.

    I wonder if H_A can comprehend why that is so.
    I am waiting for you to provide some comments from some accredited Islamicist academics.

    Oh but I forgot! You never wrote anything down. Or if you did you cannot bring any of it to mind!

    Leave a comment:


  • rogue06
    replied
    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post




    More than once my own comments are interspersed within what I was writing down (the last citation in post #127 being a good example):

    What happened to some of the missing parts? Would you believe the “my dog ate it,” or a similar schoolboy excuse has been presented? In his book (volume 8, part II, pages 235-36) Ibn Hazm clearly states: “The verses of stoning and breast feeding were in the possession of A’isha in a (Koranic) copy. When Mohammed died and people became busy in the burial preparations, a domesticated animal entered in and ate it.” Mustafa Husayn, who edited and reorganized the book “al-Kash-Shaf” by the Zamakh-Shari, asserts this fact on page 518 of part 3, claiming that Abdulla Ibn Abi Bakr and A’isha herself related this story to him. This same incident is mentioned by Dar-al-Qutni, al-Bazzar and al-Tabarani, on the authority of Muhammad Ibn Ishaq, who heard it from Abdulla who had himself heard it from A’isha. So I guess, “my goat ate it” would probably be more correct.



    I'll note that this bit pretty much pulverizes H_A's claim that nothing was written down until centuries later.

    I wonder if H_A can comprehend why that is so.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    These were for notes for oral discussions/debates with friends and associates where stopping to provide the type of citations that H_A demands from others but gets indignant when the shoe is on the other foot[1] was not only unnecessary but would be deemed a bit strange to say the least.

    More than once my own comments are interspersed within what I was writing down (the last citation in post #127 being a good example):

    What happened to some of the missing parts? Would you believe the “my dog ate it,” or a similar schoolboy excuse has been presented? In his book (volume 8, part II, pages 235-36) Ibn Hazm clearly states: “The verses of stoning and breast feeding were in the possession of A’isha in a (Koranic) copy. When Mohammed died and people became busy in the burial preparations, a domesticated animal entered in and ate it.” Mustafa Husayn, who edited and reorganized the book “al-Kash-Shaf” by the Zamakh-Shari, asserts this fact on page 518 of part 3, claiming that Abdulla Ibn Abi Bakr and A’isha herself related this story to him. This same incident is mentioned by Dar-al-Qutni, al-Bazzar and al-Tabarani, on the authority of Muhammad Ibn Ishaq, who heard it from Abdulla who had himself heard it from A’isha. So I guess, “my goat ate it” would probably be more correct.


    which was another reason, although a minor one, why I didn't write down sources -- because only part of it came from one.

    Further, prior to 9/11 there was an apparent lack of Islamic scholarly writings available online in English. That changed as more and more people here wanted to access the hadiths and other works. IOW, what is available in 2023 can hardly be declared to have been available nearly 30 years ago.

    But all of this is nothing more than H_A desperate to avert attention away from her japery in this thread. She doesn't want to discuss her wronger than wrong proclamations made from her comfy chair







    Or her fitful attempts to show that Jesus also commanded conversion by the sword that has been a virtual fail factory producing one howler after another, as well as her offering up someone who had the gaslights turned up all the way when he insisted that the notion that Muhammad converted by the sword was made up during the Crusades.

    After that performance I really can't blame her for grasping at straws. I'd be humiliated too if I were her.




    1. Just one example of the typical hypocrisy from Hypocrite_Again

    I've definitely touched a nerve!

    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    Typically when I'd go I'd gather up at least half a dozen books to pour through. Multiply that by something like 8 to 10 times and the description of "stacks of books" is spot on.
    Who cares? You cannot bring a single text to mind. Your boast is therefore rendered irrelevant.
    Last edited by Hypatia_Alexandria; 01-24-2023, 10:39 AM.

    Leave a comment:

Related Threads

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by whag, Yesterday, 03:01 PM
14 responses
42 views
0 likes
Last Post tabibito  
Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
21 responses
129 views
0 likes
Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
78 responses
411 views
0 likes
Last Post tabibito  
Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
45 responses
303 views
1 like
Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
Working...
X