Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Sign in to follow this  
Murteza

Bany Qurayzah

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Protestants don't need priests but have them anyway. Thats the difference between them and catholics. You can goto a legal priest for wedding and other matters.

So you claim to be a protestant priest . You seem to have missed a huge chunk in your classes on the OT.

I recommend that you attend remedial classes with a special emphasis on protestant views on the OT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are not obsessed about OT and we don't admire jewish ways otherwise we would have admired them crucifying jesus but anyway like i said religion doesn't justify human suffering and suffering of this kind, whether done by christians, jews or arabs is unacceptable.

Why can't muslims say that its unacceptable ? I am shocked. Are you people still living in the twenty first century or are you living in the fifteenth century? :squeez:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

Look Criag D,

The Jews of Bani Qurayzah were part of the Islamic state of Medina. They were citizens of Medina. They betrayed their state. The punishment for treason is the death penalty.

Why can't muslims say that its unacceptable ? I am shocked. Are you people still living in the twenty first century or are you living in the fifteenth century?

You mean the 15th century when you Protestants conspired to divide Europe or the 21st century where you use the White House to conquer the Middle East in the name of some "rapture" heresy?

There has been plenty of occasions when we Muslims have protested against people committing outrageous acts of violence outside any legal and acceptable context.

Bani Qurayzah were traitors and got what any traitor gets in any civilized society. This has nothing to do with "God" ordering David to invade neighboring nations and exterminate every living creature WITHOUT any legal reason. People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones....

Bani Qurayzah were NOT POW they were traitors. We have other battles where the Prophet (pbuh) emprisons POW. A clear proof that you lie Craig D.

kind regards

Bahadur Ali Shah

Edited by Bahadur Ali

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(salam)

Look Criag D,

The Jews of Bani Qurayzah were part of the Islamic state of Medina. They were citizens of Medina. They betrayed their state. The punishment for treason is the death penalty.

Palestinians also are under the state of israel so they should all be given death penalty, especially israeli arabs, for betraying their country again and again.

You mean the 15th century when you Protestants conspired to divide Europe or the 21st century where you use the White House to conquer the Middle East in the name of some "rapture" heresy?

Did the US openly massacre thousands of muslims in iraq in one go and accept it as their responsibility and then justify it by using their bibles or moslem koran? Won't the UN condemn this? If you think the world is so against islam and moslems then why did the world condemn the massacre of moslems in bosnia and serbia? Those moslems were the citizens of Yugoslavia so they deserved their fate?

There has been plenty of occasions when we Muslims have protested against people committing outrageous acts of violence outside any legal and acceptable context.

But you wouldn't accept something done by Prophets army even though its wrong? Suppose if prophet wasn't involved would you have then accepted it as wrong?

Bani Qurayzah were traitors and got what any traitor gets in any civilized society. This has nothing to do with "God" ordering David to invade neighboring nations and exterminate every living creature WITHOUT any legal reason. People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones....

If Bani Qurayzah were traitors then so so were the moslems massacred in yugoslavia and their murder was justified, and palestinians are just waiting for their end then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

Dear Craig D,

1.Palestinians are NOT Israeli citizens to start with and Israel with its millions of European Jews is an usurper state created by the West to accommodate antisemitism and zionism. Again your analogy is misplaced.

2.

Did the US openly massacre thousands of muslims in iraq in one go and accept it as their responsibility and then justify it by using their bibles or moslem koran?

Yes! The US massacre HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of innocent Muslims, defile mosques, burn Qurans, rape Muslim women because deep down we are subhumans to you!

3.

But you wouldn't accept something done by Prophets army even though its wrong? Suppose if prophet wasn't involved would you have then accepted it as wrong?

The Prophet (pbuh) never committed any war crime. The executions of the male members of the Bani Qurayzah was nothing more than the execution of traitors not that of POW. You don't make sense.

4.

If Bani Qurayzah were traitors then so so were the moslems massacred in yugoslavia and their murder was justified, and palestinians are just waiting for their end then.

The Prophet (pbuh) didn't massacre the females and children of Bani Qurayzah only the male as they were fighting AFTER capturing them. The Serbs bombed innocent civilians on purpose. Also Bosnia was a recognized independent political entity which is different from the case of the Bani Qurayzah who merely conspired against the state of Medina.

kind regards

Bahadur Ali Shah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(salam)

Dear Craig D,

1.Palestinians are NOT Israeli citizens to start with and Israel with its millions of European Jews is an usurper state created by the West to accommodate antisemitism and zionism. Again your analogy is misplaced.

Bany Qurayzah weren't citizens of Muhammad's kingdom to begin with, and mohammad usurped their lands and killed all of their men and what not.

Yes! The US massacre HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of innocent Muslims, defile mosques, burn Qurans, rape Muslim women because deep down we are subhumans to you!

First of all gross exagerration and even if they did it they are ashamed to admit it instead of proudly advertising it and then justifying it using koran or bible.

3.

The Prophet (pbuh) never committed any war crime. The executions of the male members of the Bani Qurayzah was nothing more than the execution of traitors not that of POW. You don't make sense.

Well then the Guantanamo bay is full of traitors NOT POWs... and God willing we will increase its size too :D

How can someone of different race who happens to live near a place where you have usurped be your traitor ? War crimes, and guantanamo is a war crime nothign to be proud of. You condemn what happened to jews of medina first.

4.

The Prophet (pbuh) didn't massacre the females and children of Bani Qurayzah only the male as they were fighting AFTER capturing them. The Serbs bombed innocent civilians on purpose. Also Bosnia was a recognized independent political entity which is different from the case of the Bani Qurayzah who merely conspired against the state of Medina.

First you call them traitors then you say they were fighting so they come POWs. The serbs caught them as POWs and then massacred them and bombing as technically in the middle of the war since Bosnia was breaking away from Yugoslavia thus they were betraying their nation.

Banu Qurayzah conspired against the state of medina or is it just govt. propaganda of that time hiding the facts that they were even willing to give them their lands and property if they let their men go but they were massacred nonetheless. That is what we call ethnic cleansing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

Dear Craig D

Bany Qurayzah weren't citizens of Muhammad's kingdom to begin with, and mohammad usurped their lands and killed all of their men and what not.

1. The Prophet (pbuh) was never crowned king of any kingdom to start with.

2. Bani Qurayzah were part of the Islamic state.

First of all gross exagerration and even if they did it they are ashamed to admit it instead of proudly advertising it and then justifying it using koran or bible.

Check youtube for videos made by American soldiers in Iraq. War is nothing to be proudly advertised. When there is a crisis in a state such measures need to be taken. Bani Qurayzah were traitors they got what traitors get in any civilized country.

Well then the Guantanamo bay is full of traitors NOT POWs... and God willing we will increase its size too biggrin.gif

Except that several prisoners were proven to be innocent. I am glad you are proud of X-Ray camp. Because you just illustrated my point about the previous point. You guys advertise it proudly!

You condemn what happened to jews of medina first.

1.They signed a treaty

2. They broke that treaty and knew fully well the consequences

3. They only have themselves to blame

Banu Qurayzah conspired against the state of medina or is it just govt. propaganda of that time hiding the facts that they were even willing to give them their lands and property if they let their men go but they were massacred nonetheless. That is what we call ethnic cleansing.

1. Prove that it was propaganda.

2. If it were ethnic cleansing then all JEws in Arabic would have been wiped out. Something Europeans seemed to have become champion in since the Middle Ages. I wonder why the Jews came to Muslim countries for refuge when they were facing ethnic cleansing in Spain...

kind regards

Bahadur Ali Shah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(salam)

Dear Craig D

1. The Prophet (pbuh) was never crowned king of any kingdom to start with.

2. Bani Qurayzah were part of the Islamic state.

First you say he wasn't the king of arabs nor the islamic state then you say that there was an islamic state when there wasn't?

Mohammad was invited by only two (not all the tribes of medina) to live in medina, but not only did he come there, he made the whole city his "islamic state" and then even proceeded to punish the others who didn't invite him ever to be killed for fighting against him?

Did the jews invite him to medina or live under an islamic state?

Check youtube for videos made by American soldiers in Iraq. War is nothing to be proudly advertised. When there is a crisis in a state such measures need to be taken. Bani Qurayzah were traitors they got what traitors get in any civilized country.

Lol you are willing to compare these American soldiers to prophet mohammad's holy army of sinless men?

Bani Qurayzah were not traitors because there wasn't any islamic state and they were supposed to be treated as POWs. I am surprised even Koran tells Prophet mohammad to keep prisoners of wars but here he gets them killed [edited]? I am shocked really since i thought this was a shia site not a wahhabi one.

Even hitler used the same premises to kill the jews calling them "traitors". What a civilised country indeed hitler's nazi germany was :wacko:

Except that several prisoners were proven to be innocent. I am glad you are proud of X-Ray camp. Because you just illustrated my point about the previous point. You guys advertise it proudly!

1.They signed a treaty

2. They broke that treaty and knew fully well the consequences

3. They only have themselves to blame

How many treaties have palestinians broken against the state of israel? If you say Israel is imposed upon palestinian then so was islamic emirate of that time.

Using your own words whatever happens to palestinians is their own fault, even the Jenin camp massacre and lots more to come.

2. If it were ethnic cleansing then all JEws in Arabic would have been wiped out. Something Europeans seemed to have become champion in since the Middle Ages. I wonder why the Jews came to Muslim countries for refuge when they were facing ethnic cleansing in Spain...

well all jews eventually were out of arabia history testifies that and no israel isn't part of arabia.

Why are you comparing sinful ordinary christian men to your sinless prophet ?

Hmm amazing so two wrongs do make a right, only in this case, one wrong was done by "the greastest human being who ever lived".

Edited by Ali_Imran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think most of us can agree that the history of Bani Qurayzah is somewhat accurate. The new issue seems to be if it was acceptable, or to whom it was acceptable.

The Jewish tribe (not the Jews but a single tribe in this case) was handed their sentence according to their own laws from a man of their own tribe.

Likewise, since you are adamant that in today's day and age it would be seen as a war crime, the following article of the United States constitution reads as follows:

C. Article III, Section 3 of the United States Constitution

Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

Therefore, it would be lawfully acceptable to a quite modern country as well.

Also,

Palestinians also are under the state of israel so they should all be given death penalty, especially israeli arabs, for betraying their country again and again.

As I recall, after WWII, the Jews were guests of Palestine, and committed treason against their host country. Perhaps if the Palestinians had followed the example of Mohammad (pbuh) they wouldn't be in the state they are in now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

Dear Craig D

First you say he wasn't the king of arabs nor the islamic state then you say that there was an islamic state when there wasn't?

Mohammad was invited by only two (not all the tribes of medina) to live in medina, but not only did he come there, he made the whole city his "islamic state" and then even proceeded to punish the others who didn't invite him ever to be killed for fighting against him?

Did the jews invite him to medina or live under an islamic state?

Sorry to break your Laurence of Arabia type Orientalist fantasies but the Prophet pbuh) was indeed the ruler of Medina without being a king. Has it ever crossed your mind that statesmanship doesn't require monarchy?

Lol you are willing to compare these American soldiers to prophet mohammad's holy army of sinless men?

Bani Qurayzah were not traitors because there wasn't any islamic state and they were supposed to be treated as POWs. I am surprised even Koran tells Prophet mohammad to keep prisoners of wars but here he gets them killed like nazis got them killed? I am shocked really since i thought this was a shia site not a wahhabi one.

Even hitler used the same premises to kill the jews calling them "traitors". What a civilised country indeed hitler's nazi germany was wacko.gif

Bani Qurayzah signed a treaty and were part of the Islamic state. They betrayed the state and were therefore punished. I wonder why you care so much about the Jews of Arabi from 1400 years ago. Where were your Protestant brothers when 6 millions Jews were eliminated?

How many treaties have palestinians broken against the state of israel? If you say Israel is imposed upon palestinian then so was islamic emirate of that time.

Using your own words whatever happens to palestinians is their own fault, even the Jenin camp massacre and lots more to come.

The Islamic state was created by the Prophet (pbuh) on invitation of the tribes of Medina. Israel is even by orthodox Jewish standards and illegitimate state and an insult to God. It's only you Protestant who support it because your "prophecies". You can't compare both situations. There is a difference between one man being asked to created a new state and millions of Ashkenazi Jews stealing Palestinian land because of Western and Christian antisemitism. Shall I perhaps remind everyone of what the founding father of Protestantism , Martin Luther thought of Jews?

Here is a link for Martin Luther's "The Jews and their lies":

http://www.humanitas-international.org/sho...luther-jews.htm

Stop kidding people here on this forum with your self-righteous attitude. The words contained in Martin Luther's work about the Jews would have been heavily condemned by Ahl ul Bayt (as). If there is someone who belongs to an institution known for its antisemitism its YOU not us Shi'a! I may hate Zionism but I don't hate Jews at all.

well all jews eventually were out of arabia history testifies that and no israel isn't part of arabia.

Probably why a Jew had been able to take Imam Ali (as) to court during his caliphate. You sound so credible...

Why are you comparing sinful ordinary christian men to your sinless prophet ?

I wasn't comparing. Maybe you should have gotten your theology degree from a REAL Christian institution (catholic or orthodox) where they would teach you logic besides Hebrew, Latin and Greek.

censeo sectam tuam protestantam hereticam delendam esse quoniam heresiae satanicae matrix est. tu fratresque tui odii, pestilentiae et sanguinis fluvius estis que terram mendacii venenum det. Destetatio divina super maledicta capita vostra esset.

Vir Altissmus Rex

(Bahadur Ali Shah)

Edited by Bahadur Ali

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think most of us can agree that the history of Bani Qurayzah is somewhat accurate. The new issue seems to be if it was acceptable, or to whom it was acceptable.

The Jewish tribe (not the Jews but a single tribe in this case) was handed their sentence according to their own laws from a man of their own tribe.

Ofcourse, anyone can alter history by adding that, for example, just read your hadith books.

Likewise, since you are adamant that in today's day and age it would be seen as a war crime, the following article of the United States constitution reads as follows:

C. Article III, Section 3 of the United States Constitution

Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

Therefore, it would be lawfully acceptable to a quite modern country as well.

There was NO SUCH state as islamic empire or USA at that era. Also, what happened there was like a freedom struggle against muslims, not even close to even being called a civil war.

Death penalty is as outdated as chopping off hands of human beings for stealing. If you admire that ethnic cleansing of jews whose sunnah hitler followed, then you should be proud of Taliban and Al qaeda.

As I recall, after WWII, the Jews were guests of Palestine, and committed treason against their host country. Perhaps if the Palestinians had followed the example of Mohammad (pbuh) they wouldn't be in the state they are in now.

Mohammad and his people were guests of yathrib, and committed treason against treason against their host country, thus deserving "death penalty", using your logic. Perhaps if jews had dealt with moslems back then, the world would have been a much much better place.

I cannot believe how openly you talk about ethnic cleansing of jews. I bet Hitler was moslem.

(salam)

Dear Craig D

Sorry to break your Laurence of Arabia type Orientalist fantasies but the Prophet pbuh) was indeed the ruler of Medina without being a king. Has it ever crossed your mind that statesmanship doesn't require monarchy?

No he wasn't. He was a guest there and as your friend above has told us, he had technology committed treason by usurping the land first and making himself the dictator of yathrib, and then committed a horrible crime of ethnic cleansing, and Hitler followed his footsteps word to word, the only difference being that he wasn't a guest in Germany, or maybe he was. Oh well, similarities are striking.

Bani Qurayzah signed a treaty and were part of the Islamic state. They betrayed the state and were therefore punished. I wonder why you care so much about the Jews of Arabi from 1400 years ago.

There was no islamic state, it was yugoslavia at best. Jewish wanted their own legitimate land and were thus dealt with. They weren't killed fighting, they were first made POWs and then killed.

Where were your Protestant brothers when 6 millions Jews were eliminated?

Are you comparing a pathetic excuse of a human being hitler's actions with your prophet? Don't we all condemn him then and now? Didn't the allies fight against the germans ?

The Islamic state was created by the Prophet (pbuh) on invitation of the tribes of Medina.

Ok how many tribes were there in yathrib and how many of them invited your prophet to yathrib?

Only two. The rest didn't want him there and were forced to sign a treaty like a dictator forces a country (in this case it was only a small city) to submission, with brute force. Wasn't Ali forced to accept Abu Bakr's caliphate? Does that make his caliphate legitimate?

Israel is even by orthodox Jewish standards and illegitimate state and an insult to God.

So was the "islamic state" of yathrib which committed terrible crimes against humanity, only difference is that they didn't manage to kill 6 million jews since there weren't as many and if they were there surely moslems would have lost the war.

It's only you Protestant who support it because your "prophecies". You can't compare both situations. There is a difference between one man being asked to created a new state and millions of Ashkenazi Jews stealing Palestinian land because of Western and Christian antisemitism. Shall I perhaps remind everyone of what the founding father of Protestantism , Martin Luther thought of Jews?

Mohammad wasn't asked by jews to create a state. Was he their leader? no.

How many jews did Martin Luther kill? We don't consider him to be an apostle, we just follow the principles he happened to have laid, which i am sure someone else would have done anyway against the church.

Here is a link for Martin Luther's "The Jews and their lies":

http://www.humanitas-international.org/sho...luther-jews.htm

Stop kidding people here on this forum with your self-righteous attitude. The words contained in Martin Luther's work about the Jews would have been heavily condemned by Ahl ul Bayt (as). If there is someone who belongs to an institution known for its antisemitism its YOU not us Shi'a! I may hate Zionism but I don't hate Jews at all.

Still we would condemn the genocide of jews if it had happened at the hands of Martin luther, and he wouldn't kill them. You, on the other hand, BRAG about it and won't condemn it, infact like the person above, you would rather prefer to repeat bani qurayzah massacre. Thank God the world isn't ruled by Hitler and his likes.

Probably why a Jew had been able to take Imam Ali (as) to court during his caliphate. You sound so credible...

He managed to take him to the court only because some jews were forced to convert to islam so jewish sahabas managed to control the situation somewhat. Otherwise, I am sure Ali was waiting to take out his sword and try to repeat the marhab incident.

I wasn't comparing. Maybe you should have gotten your theology degree from a REAL Christian institution (catholic or orthodox) where they would teach you logic besides Hebrew, Latin and Greek.

Sorry we don't follow the church, because God doesn't live in churches, He dwells in our heart. And i am sorry to say but there is no logic in church and even the majority of shias' system of appointing someone else to control his or her life. We can make our own decisions, thank you very much.

censeo sectam tuam protestantam hereticam delendam esse quoniam heresiae satanicae matrix est. tu fratresque tui odii, pestilentiae et sanguinis fluvius estis que terram mendacii venenum det. Destetatio divina super maledicta capita vostra esset.

Vir Altissmus Rex

(Bahadur Ali Shah)

??? English please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

Dear Craig D,

he had technology committed treason

You surely meant "technically" right? I thought priests were fairly educated. Sorry but he was invited to come and bring order over Medina as statesman. Check your facts.

Also, what happened there was like a freedom struggle against muslims

Freedom struggle against a minority of the Arab population? yeah very credible...

There was no islamic state, it was yugoslavia at best. Jewish wanted their own legitimate land and were thus dealt with. They weren't killed fighting, they were first made POWs and then killed.

1. Anachronism and contradiction. On one hand you say there was no USA at that time but yes a Yougoslavia. I have news for you: neither nor!

2. They were executed for treason. The Jews of Khaybar were made POW and were not massacred because they weren't traitors.

So was the "islamic state" of yathrib which committed terrible crimes against humanity, only difference is that they didn't manage to kill 6 million jews since there weren't as many and if they were there surely moslems would have lost the war.

The basis for saying that Israel's existence is unjustified is from rabbinical sources.So from Jewish sources.

Give me one Islamic source that says that the state of Medina was not justified?

QUOTE

censeo sectam tuam protestantam hereticam delendam esse quoniam heresiae satanicae matrix est. tu fratresque tui odii, pestilentiae et sanguinis fluvius estis que terram mendacii venenum det. Destetatio divina super maledicta capita vostra esset.

Vir Altissmus Rex

(Bahadur Ali Shah)

??? English please.

As predicted you have shown your true colours. You claim to be a priest which of course doesn't exist at all in Protestantism. Protestants have pastors not priests! The fact that you don't understand a single line of Latin, Greek or Hebrew proves that you haven't followed any serious theological training and are therefore unfit to be called a member of any clergy. You are a fraud! Your mistakes in English, your inability to use logic, your confusion of Sunni-Shi'a (Shi'as hate al Qaeda and the Taliban fyi) all this clearly proves that you are not a "Protestant priest". You might at best be some semi literate Evangelical preacher but even that doesn't qualify you as a Christian.

According to the Gospels Jesus clearly established an apostolical lineage that is respected by Catholics, Orthdox, Ethiopian and Anglo-Catholic churches: traditional Christianity. Outside of that lineage there is no real Christianity. You are at best an heretic Evangelical philistine or a liar or both.

In any case you neither have the culture nor the intellectual abilities to debate. I can't believe you seriously thought that you could follow divinity classes from a good university without knowing Latin. [Edited] A man who hasn't studied Greek, the language of the Gospels, yet claims to be a "priest"!!! How ridiculous!!! Your fraud has been exposed!!!

kind regards

Bahadur Ali Shah

Edited by Ali_Imran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(salam)

You surely meant "technically" right? I thought priests were fairly educated. Sorry but he was invited to come and bring order over Medina as statesman. Check your facts.

By two tribes only.

Freedom struggle against a minority of the Arab population? yeah very credible...

This is hilarious. Arabs in arabia becoming minorities? :lol:

They were executed for treason. The Jews of Khaybar were made POW and were not massacred because they weren't traitors.

http://www.answering-faithfreedom.org/foru...15&start=30

However, let us give you the benefit of the doubt that they betrayed. The punishment again did not fit the crime. Lining up 700 males (some who were very young because they had just attained puberty), and hacking them to death is an abominable act, especially from a guy who claims to be a prophet. Rather, it’s a classic example of ethinic cleansing & genocide. What he wanted was to get rid of any outside influences from the Yathrib area. He wanted the Jews to acknowledge him as a messenger of God, and when they told him to fu*k off, he turned against them with vengeance.

After the treaty of Hudaybiya, he channeled the energies of the Bedouin Arabs to the Jews of Khyber. They were the first dhimmis. There too he tortured to death Kinnana after he refused to reveal where the hidden treasures were. I suppose this story is a fabrication as well!!

http://www.answering-faithfreedom.org/foru...=a&start=50

It was mass extermination & genocide to its nth degree. You then go on to another lie claiming that he only killed the warriors. He killed all males who had reached the age of puberty, and sold their women & children to slavery. A "genuine prophet" would not engage in such gruesome acts, he wouldn't need to. The Bani Qaynuqa were lucky to have escaped with their lives, or else they would have suffered the same fate. Thanks to the intervention of Abdullah Ibn Ubay that it did not happen to them.
What act of betrayal did BQ commit? I have asked you this question before and you have been evasive. In fact they locked themselves up in their forts, and refused to cooperate with the pagans, and you call this betrayal? Whom did they betray? What was wrong with what they did? Muslims should have been grateful to them for not allowing the pagans into to their gates to attack them. But instead they ended up murdering them. Annihilation of person or person on mere speculation that is void of evidence cannot be justified. You cannot hang a person on an assumption that they are going to commit a murder. One has to get caught in the act or needs to be found guilty prior to commencement of punishment. "Guilty until proven innocent" was the modus operendi of the muslim prophet in case of BQ.
You are comparing apples to oranges. The Rosenbergs (assuming its them you are referring to) were found guilty of espionage & treason in the court of law and were therefore hanged. Ample evidence was produced in court to undertake such action, unlike the kangaroo court of Sad bin Mudah & his apostle.

Book 019, Number 4366:

It has been narrated by 'Umar b. al-Khattib that he heard the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) say: I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula and will not leave any but Muslim.

So much for him letting jews live beside him, let alone christians.

The basis for saying that Israel's existence is unjustified is from rabbinical sources.So from Jewish sources.

Give me one Islamic source that says that the state of Medina was not justified?

lol islam was a religion made up of whatever came into your prophets mind so all the laws were made on the spot if not copied from jewish and christian texts.

Anyway, do you justify the building of state of medina without jewish (according to you, majority) consent just because mohammad said it was ok for him to be their dictator?

Furthermore, do you know about the talmudic 3 oaths? What if the jewish messiah has indeed come (forget my christianity because i am half jewish ) and they are concealing him from muslims eyes so that they don't assasinate him and thus entering and creating israel is now legitimate for them?

Either way, Israelis haven't killed 900 palestinians in their jails for them "betraying them".

As predicted you have shown your true colours. You claim to be a priest which of course doesn't exist at all in Protestantism. Protestants have pastors not priests! The fact that you don't understand a single line of Latin, Greek or Hebrew proves that you haven't followed any serious theological training and are therefore unfit to be called a member of any clergy. You are a fraud! Your mistakes in English, your inability to use logic, your confusion of Sunni-Shi'a (Shi'as hate al Qaeda and the Taliban fyi) all this clearly proves that you are not a "Protestant priest". You might at best be some semi literate Evangelical preacher but even that doesn't qualify you as a Christian.

Huh? I proved that protestants don't need priests, call them whatever you wanna, call them your papa your mama whatever.

According to the Gospels Jesus clearly established an apostolical lineage that is respected by Catholics, Orthdox, Ethiopian and Anglo-Catholic churches: traditional Christianity. Outside of that lineage there is no real Christianity. You are at best an heretic Evangelical philistine or a liar or both.

Who are you to call me a heretical christian? Look at you, someone who justifies ethnic cleansing and is willing to kill all jews and wipe israel off the map of the earth and then calls someone else a heretic so that you could impose another khomeini-esque fatwa against me? I am sorry but this is the future, and brutes like you aren't invited. Go back to pagan arabia.

In any case you neither have the culture nor the intellectual abilities to debate. I can't believe you seriously thought that you could follow divinity classes from a good university without knowing Latin.

Are you insane? I don't even goto university. I do a job, and i have finished my studies long time ago.

Is this the best you can offer? Start shouting like a madman and pass fatwas like "Somebody kill him! He is a heretic with no culture! Blah blah blah"

Sorry the world hasn't been run over by talibans as yet. And God willing, if you muslims continue to talk about killing more jews in the form of ethnic cleansing like some people here have, then we will get rid of all the talibans and Al Qaeda and will free iran from a regime of terror.

What a liar!!! A man who hasn't studied Greek, the language of the Gospels, yet claims to be a "priest"!!! How ridiculous!!! Your fraud has been exposed you heretic!!!

kind regards

Bahadur Ali Shah

Protestants don't need priests or pastors mamas or papas or mullahs either. You seem to like catholics a lot. Enjoy what they think of your holy prophet :

http://catholic.shrineofsaintjude.net/homec074.html

kind regards......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are a liar. You claimed to be a Protestant priest yet you admit to not even have studied theology.

Do you seriously expect me to accept the views of a half literate Protestant [Edited]? Do you actually realize that there are different views about the holy Prophet (pbuh) by different movements within Catholicism [Edited]? Do you think you can impress me with your Evangelical cheap literature? You are nothing but blind people guiding blind people! Thank God I can still have a friendly dialogue with real traditional EDUCATED Christians (Orthodox and Catholic). Protestantism is the [Edited Out]house of heresy that has polluted Europe and the whole world with its hordes of illiterate preachers like you. You and your Wahabi brothers are the Christian and Islamic version of the same Satanic evil and proof is that your leaders support each other. Go [Edited] and come back no more for we know your true colours now you [Edited]!

Edited by Ali_Imran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before responding [edited], i would like to advise all the mods not to get this thread locked because this is exactly what he wants, i.e. getting this thread closed so that the truth is kept buried.

Edited by Ali_Imran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You are a liar. You claimed to be a Protestant priest

All protestants are priests.

yet you admit to not even have studied theology.

Still we are all priests.

[Edited]

Do you seriously expect me to accept the views of a half literate Protestant [Edited]?

You seem to think that i will get offended by your attempts to make me believe that i am illiterate. [Edited]

Do you actually realize that there are different views about the holy Prophet (pbuh) by different movements within Catholicism you heretic retard?

Hey, thats a catholic site not protestant :lol: Don't you just love catholics?

Do you think you can impress me with your Evangelical cheap literature? You are nothing but blind people guiding blind people! Thank God I can still have a friendly dialogue with real traditional EDUCATED Christians (Orthodox and Catholic).

Mohamamd wasn't educated. I suppose you will not talk to him either. [Edited]

Protestantism is the [Edited Out]house of heresy that has polluted Europe and the whole world with its hordes of illiterate preachers like you.

Nice attempt to get the thread locked. I would advise the mods not to lock the thread, just edit his post since he is calling the religion of protestants "heretic". What a wahhabi of a moslem you are. I heard only wahhabis label shias as kuffar, but here i see a jewish wahhabi shia labelling others as such.

You and your Wahabi brothers are the Christian and Islamic version of the same Satanic evil and proof is that your leaders support each other.

It is you who is behaving like a wahhabi here not me. Anyway, you can keep on shouting, and the facts will remain what they are. I would like to tell the mods not to lock this thread unless you are feeling afraid too of the truth getting revealed.

Go heretic and come back no more for we know your true colours now you illiterate moron!

Congratulations, you made this site an official sponsor of another fatwa, this time against all the protestants of the world :lol:

And i would be proud to be called an illiterate since mohammad was one.

Anyway, i hope this thread doesn't get locked because of a buffoon like you.

Sticking to the topic, why indeed did the ethnic cleansing of jews occur in arabia forteen hundred years ago?

Edited by Ali_Imran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There was NO SUCH state as islamic empire or USA at that era. Also, what happened there was like a freedom struggle against muslims, not even close to even being called a civil war.

I am aware that there wasn't an Islamic empire or USA. I was only responding to your earlier assumption of them being tried for war crimes in this day and age for what happened then and wanted to give you the modern laws on such. Also, I said NOTHING of a civil war. You seem to be thinking within racial bounds instead of practicality. The article that I quoted you applies now, in wartime or without wartime, for any act of treason within the USA, civilian or non-civilian. If you would like another then:

The United States Code at 18 U.S.C. 2381 states, "Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States."

Death penalty is as outdated as chopping off hands of human beings for stealing. If you admire that ethnic cleansing of jews whose sunnah hitler followed, then you should be proud of Taliban and Al qaeda.

Never said I admired it, only that it was a practical punishment performed upon the Bani Qurayzah by their own laws in their own land for breaking a TREATY that both parties had agreed upon. Once again, you seem to be thinking within racial bounds. The Bani Qurayzah weren't fought against because they were Jewish. They were fought against because the unbelievers of Quraysh sowed jealousy in their hearts to the point where they would treat the Muslims of Yathrib with hostility when dealing with them in the market place, or just even passing by thus causing their jealousy to reach a point where they committed treason by breaking this treaty and declaring war on the Muslims.

Mohammad and his people were guests of yathrib, and committed treason against treason against their host country, thus deserving "death penalty", using your logic. Perhaps if jews had dealt with moslems back then, the world would have been a much much better place.

SOME of his people were guests of Yathrib, but a vast majority of Muslims there had been converts from Yathrib. Remember, some were immigrants and some were helpers. And, like I said earlier, they weren't just hosting them, they were living together under an agreed treaty. Also, if the Jews had won, I have no doubt they would have "dealt with the moslems," as you so put it, with the same demeanor seeing as it was their law to which they were held to abide.

You seem to be looking upon Islam as a religion that imposes upon others for ethnic reasons when the reasons are really related to the practicalities of war. Nay, that is not the reason at all for it is a religion that recognizes all the Peoples of the Book:

Surah Al-Ma'idah 5:69 Those who believe (in the Qur'an) those who follow the Jewish (Scriptures) and the Sabians and the Christians any who believe in Allah and the Last Day and work righteousness on them shall be no fear nor shall they grieve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am aware that there wasn't an Islamic empire or USA. I was only responding to your earlier assumption of them being tried for war crimes in this day and age for what happened then and wanted to give you the modern laws on such. Also, I said NOTHING of a civil war. You seem to be thinking within racial bounds instead of practicality. The article that I quoted you applies now, in wartime or without wartime, for any act of treason within the USA, civilian or non-civilian. If you would like another then:

The United States Code at 18 U.S.C. 2381 states, "Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States."

Are USA's constitution and statutes directly from God? They are human. If you are justifying the genocide of jews with this, then what you are saying is that mohammad's laws were also human, not by God, for God won't allow an ethnic cleansing.

Ok let me find the laws of germany which justify the holocaust. I am sure they were there in place but who cares right? Genocide is a genocide.

But what i will bring forth are some new laws. As you can see, any one can manipulate laws to his whim nowadays and at the time of mohammad. But we still know right from wrong, right? Apparently moslems don't.

Ok if you are living in one of these countries and you publicly deny the holocaust, then you have broken the "law" :lol:

http://www.antisemitism.org.il/eng/Legisla...the%20Holocaust

see these laws are stupid yet harmless. Atleast these kind of laws don't make a particular race getting erased from that region and their women treated as slavegirls for the perverts to enjoy.

Never said I admired it, only that it was a practical punishment performed upon the Bani Qurayzah by their own laws in their own land for breaking a TREATY that both parties had agreed upon.

Incorrect. The person who decided to give jews this punishment was from the tribe of Awz, the ones who invited mohammad to medina. Will anyone be possibly as stupid as to sign a treaty in which their ethnic cleansing is in the list and their women getting raped as well? I think not.

Once again, you seem to be thinking within racial bounds. The Bani Qurayzah weren't fought against because they were Jewish. They were fought against because the unbelievers of Quraysh sowed jealousy in their hearts to the point where they would treat the Muslims of Yathrib with hostility when dealing with them in the market place, or just even passing by thus causing their jealousy to reach a point where they committed treason by breaking this treaty and declaring war on the Muslims.

The only thing you got right in that paragraph was that Quraysh didn't believe in prophet mohammad, and so didn't the tribe of qurayzah, that is the only reason why they were treated so harshly. You will say that quraysh were all forgiven in the end. Ofcourse they were! They converted to islam in fear :!!!: but qurayzah didn't.

SOME of his people were guests of Yathrib, but a vast majority of Muslims there had been converts from Yathrib. Remember, some were immigrants and some were helpers. And, like I said earlier, they weren't just hosting them, they were living together under an agreed treaty. Also, if the Jews had won, I have no doubt they would have "dealt with the moslems," as you so put it, with the same demeanor seeing as it was their law to which they were held to abide.

I am not sure jews, if they had won, would have been able to do that, since moslem don't follow jewish laws nor did the tribes of aws. Jews might have killed moslems on the battlefield, sure, like as mentioned in the jewish laws, but NEVER as POWs.

You seem to be looking upon Islam as a religion that imposes upon others for ethnic reasons when the reasons are really related to the practicalities of war. Nay, that is not the reason at all for it is a religion that recognizes all the Peoples of the Book:

Surah Al-Ma'idah 5:69 Those who believe (in the Qur'an) those who follow the Jewish (Scriptures) and the Sabians and the Christians any who believe in Allah and the Last Day and work righteousness on them shall be no fear nor shall they grieve.

And koran also calls jews pigs and apes. your point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, talk about taking words out of context. I wasn't saying that the USA laws were the word of God, only that in your previous posts you were opposed to the situation in this day and age so I posed modern laws from a mostly Christian country to prove that it is still in use.

You seem to also think that maybe I am a holocaust approver, too. At this time, I would like to let you know that I personally condemn the horrendous actions taken against the Jews and other ethnic groups that occurred during the holocaust.

Next, yes the sentence was handed down by a man from the tribe of Awz, to which the people of Bani Qurayzah agreed for him to be the decider. Before, this happened, long before, probably a year before, is when the Treaty was signed and there was nothing in it about sentencing the Bani Qurayzah to death in war. It was a treaty to not have a war and to live in peace which the Bani Qurayzah broke, thus becoming traitors.

And the Bani Qurayzah at the time would definitely follow Jewish law, and if the other were defeated then it is quite feasible for them to do as they would wish.

On another note, Craig D, you seem to be holding a lot of hate for anyone who doesn't think in the same manner as yourself. Now, before you go on about how I must be full of hate or something of the sort, please review your posts. You will see them comparing myself and other members of this forum to Wahhabis and various terrorist organizations. I actually don't mind being compared to a Jew. I like Jews, so please don't offend my Jewish friends by insinuating that that is an insult as well. But, honestly, name calling?

Edited by zmhs5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wow, talk about taking words out of context. I wasn't saying that the USA laws were the word of God, only that in your previous posts you were opposed to the situation in this day and age so I posed modern laws from a mostly Christian country to prove that it is still in use.

Still, USA doesn't have the guts to execute even 200 men of same race in one day. I am not saying its something to be proud of that moslems managed this bravery :lol:

What i am saying is that they would shiver thinking about doing something like that, unless you live in afghanistan where its easy and common to even shoot a woman in public.

You seem to also think that maybe I am a holocaust approver, too. At this time, I would like to let you know that I personally condemn the horrendous actions taken against the Jews and other ethnic groups that occurred during the holocaust.

Not you, but i have seen few here in this topic and other one in the judaism/christiantiy subforum.

Many moslems do deny holocaust, but what they believe in or don't don't hurt anybody. But i am sorry to say that killing someone of the other race like that, a definite no no. Maybe in combat, even then i oppose war.

Next, yes the sentence was handed down by a man from the tribe of Awz,

Ok care to mention his name and religion here ? :rolleyes:

to which the people of Bani Qurayzah agreed for him to be the decider.

I admit they were very stupid, maybe even retarded, for choosing such an arbitrator but still massacre of retards in germany was considered wrong. No offense to mentally retarded people, thats what they call you, not me.

First of all, he wasn't of their tribe. Secondly, i am sure he wasn't jewish. Thirdly, he was of the tribe which fought alongside mohammad against them. Why in the blue hell would they choose him as their arbitrator?

And even if they did, did the arbitrator (i admit i don't know his name but i think he was muslim) have no mercy on them? Please, mohammad showed mercy to his enemies in makkah and i bet he knew that most of the maccans had converted only to save their lives.

Before, this happened, long before, probably a year before, is when the Treaty was signed and there was nothing in it about sentencing the Bani Qurayzah to death in war. It was a treaty to not have a war and to live in peace which the Bani Qurayzah broke, thus becoming traitors.

Oh man this just got worse. They didn't sign a treaty in which their eradication was mentioned? I am sorry but a tribe is not survived by its women. Traitors or not, ethnic cleansing was a very harsh punishment, especially after they were more like POWs than traitors.

Just imagine americans ordering execution of ALL the prisoners in guantanamo in one day. They may do it one at a time or at most two or three, but not more. And keep in mind that americans aren't following the direct orders of jesus here.

And the Bani Qurayzah at the time would definitely follow Jewish law, and if the other were defeated then it is quite feasible for them to do as they would wish.

That is quite debateable. Will jews kill 1000 arab israelis if they fight alongside palestinians, after making them POWs?

On another note, Craig D, you seem to be holding a lot of hate for anyone who doesn't think in the same manner as yourself. Now, before you go on about how I must be full of hate or something of the sort, please review your posts. You will see them comparing myself and other members of this forum to Wahhabis and various terrorist organizations. I actually don't mind being compared to a Jew. I like Jews, so please don't offend my Jewish friends by insinuating that that is an insult as well. But, honestly, name calling?

lol i should have said pharisees. But sorry, i will keep using wahhabis as an insult if someone is showing wahhabi mindset.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are USA's constitution and statutes directly from God? They are human. If you are justifying the genocide of jews with this, then what you are saying is that mohammad's laws were also human, not by God, for God won't allow an ethnic cleansing.

Ok let me find the laws of germany which justify the holocaust. I am sure they were there in place but who cares right? Genocide is a genocide.

But what i will bring forth are some new laws. As you can see, any one can manipulate laws to his whim nowadays and at the time of mohammad. But we still know right from wrong, right? Apparently moslems don't.

Ok if you are living in one of these countries and you publicly deny the holocaust, then you have broken the "law" :lol:

http://www.antisemitism.org.il/eng/Legisla...the%20Holocaust

see these laws are stupid yet harmless. Atleast these kind of laws don't make a particular race getting erased from that region and their women treated as slavegirls for the perverts to enjoy.

Incorrect. The person who decided to give jews this punishment was from the tribe of Awz, the ones who invited mohammad to medina. Will anyone be possibly as stupid as to sign a treaty in which their ethnic cleansing is in the list and their women getting raped as well? I think not.

The only thing you got right in that paragraph was that Quraysh didn't believe in prophet mohammad, and so didn't the tribe of qurayzah, that is the only reason why they were treated so harshly. You will say that quraysh were all forgiven in the end. Ofcourse they were! They converted to islam in fear :!!!: but qurayzah didn't.

I am not sure jews, if they had won, would have been able to do that, since moslem don't follow jewish laws nor did the tribes of aws. Jews might have killed moslems on the battlefield, sure, like as mentioned in the jewish laws, but NEVER as POWs.

And koran also calls jews pigs and apes. your point?

(salam)

(salam)

You are misrepresenting everything. After Banu Qurayzah there were still Jewish tribes in Medinah. In fact, according to the oldest Christian sources when the Muslims liberated Jerusalem (you christians did not let Jews in) they described it as a confederation of Arabs and JEWS(under Umar) who came to liberate the city for the house of Abraham (as).

Why do you people remain obsessed with Banu Qurayzah? Are you that desperate?

Read the famous "contract of Medinah" where the Prophet (salli Allahu alaihi wa alihi wa salam) declared Muslims and Jews as "ummah wahidah" meaning one people. Three tribes ofJews broke that promise: two were kicked out, and one which tried to destroy the small Ummah by breaking the covenant was punished (Moses killed his own people for breaking their covenant). Many more smaller tribes remained and Jews under Islam flourished especially in Iraq and later in Spain.

Don't forget: the Banu Qurayzah agreed to the mediation.

I am amazed by you Christians that now you like Jews!? How strange! Your desperate attempt shows how pathetic you are and believe me if any group of people in the world comited ethnic cleansing it was yours: from the celts to the native americans.

Ask yourself: If the Prophet (salli Allahu alaihi was alihi) wanted to commit ethnic cleansing why did he allow the other tribes to live and remain untouched? Why did the Jews join the Muslims in liberating Jerusalem? Why did thousand of Jews come with palm leaves to greet Imam Ali (as) in Persia?

Remember when you christians came to Jerusalem in 1099? Do you know hwat you did there after you had already killed many Jews on the way?

It seems that you Christians blame the Prophet (Salli Allahu alaihi wa alihi was salam) for what you are guilty of: it is called transference.

Get better soon. By the way, Craig D is a mediocre singer at best... definitely aint an Al Green or a Marvin Gaye

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(salam)

(salam)

You are misrepresenting everything. After Banu Qurayzah there were still Jewish tribes in Medinah. In fact, according to the oldest Christian sources when the Muslims liberated Jerusalem (you christians did not let Jews in) they described it as a confederation of Arabs and JEWS(under Umar) who came to liberate the city for the house of Abraham (as).

Why do you people remain obsessed with Banu Qurayzah? Are you that desperate?

Read the famous "contract of Medinah" where the Prophet (salli Allahu alaihi wa alihi wa salam) declared Muslims and Jews as "ummah wahidah" meaning one people. Three tribes ofJews broke that promise: two were kicked out, and one which tried to destroy the small Ummah by breaking the covenant was punished (Moses killed his own people for breaking their covenant). Many more smaller tribes remained and Jews under Islam flourished especially in Iraq and later in Spain.

Don't forget: the Banu Qurayzah agreed to the mediation.

I am amazed by you Christians that now you like Jews!? How strange! Your desperate attempt shows how pathetic you are and believe me if any group of people in the world comited ethnic cleansing it was yours: from the celts to the native americans.

Ask yourself: If the Prophet (salli Allahu alaihi was alihi) wanted to commit ethnic cleansing why did he allow the other tribes to live and remain untouched? Why did the Jews join the Muslims in liberating Jerusalem? Why did thousand of Jews come with palm leaves to greet Imam Ali (as) in Persia?

Remember when you christians came to Jerusalem in 1099? Do you know hwat you did there after you had already killed many Jews on the way?

It seems that you Christians blame the Prophet (Salli Allahu alaihi wa alihi was salam) for what you are guilty of: it is called transference.

Get better soon. By the way, Craig D is a mediocre singer at best... definitely aint an Al Green or a Marvin Gaye

By the way

The "be ye apes and pigs" passage refers to Jews who wanted to leave Allah and break the Covenant and sabbath. It is not refering to all Jews, nice try again.

Compare with the gospels' "his blood be on our hands and our childrens hands" (before the crucifixion) and for that you people blamed Jews for thje blood guilt of your god.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(salam)

(salam)

You are misrepresenting everything. After Banu Qurayzah there were still Jewish tribes in Medinah. In fact, according to the oldest Christian sources when the Muslims liberated Jerusalem (you christians did not let Jews in) they described it as a confederation of Arabs and JEWS(under Umar) who came to liberate the city for the house of Abraham (as).

Why do you people remain obsessed with Banu Qurayzah? Are you that desperate?

Read the famous "contract of Medinah" where the Prophet (salli Allahu alaihi wa alihi wa salam) declared Muslims and Jews as "ummah wahidah" meaning one people. Three tribes ofJews broke that promise: two were kicked out, and one which tried to destroy the small Ummah by breaking the covenant was punished (Moses killed his own people for breaking their covenant). Many more smaller tribes remained and Jews under Islam flourished especially in Iraq and later in Spain.

Don't forget: the Banu Qurayzah agreed to the mediation.

I am amazed by you Christians that now you like Jews!? How strange! Your desperate attempt shows how pathetic you are and believe me if any group of people in the world comited ethnic cleansing it was yours: from the celts to the native americans.

Ask yourself: If the Prophet (salli Allahu alaihi was alihi) wanted to commit ethnic cleansing why did he allow the other tribes to live and remain untouched? Why did the Jews join the Muslims in liberating Jerusalem? Why did thousand of Jews come with palm leaves to greet Imam Ali (as) in Persia?

Remember when you christians came to Jerusalem in 1099? Do you know hwat you did there after you had already killed many Jews on the way?

It seems that you Christians blame the Prophet (Salli Allahu alaihi wa alihi was salam) for what you are guilty of: it is called transference.

Get better soon. By the way, Craig D is a mediocre singer at best... definitely aint an Al Green or a Marvin Gaye

One name : Sa'd bin Mu'adh

End of discussion. Bani Qurayzah tribe were SCREWED :angel:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sa%27d_ibn_Mua%27dh

Edited by Craig D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lool i talked with some moslems about this subject few hours ago they told me that since they were young they were told story about a jew man of his own tribe judging the tribe of banu qurayzah, this is how just Prophet Muhammad was. I said ok fine makes sense to me.

Now i see this. Not only was Sa'd bin Mu'adh NOT of their own tribe, he wasn't even jewish. And to compound the matter, he was a MUSLIM. How fair is that? :o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One name : Sa'd bin Mu'adh

End of discussion. Bani Qurayzah tribe were SCREWED :angel:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sa%27d_ibn_Mua%27dh

No, don't end when you want to... unless of course you have nothing to say lol

One name: SAad bin Muadh

One fact: Qurayzah asked for his mediation themselves.

One Name: Paul

One fact: Called the Torah "death"

big screw job on Jews and on Isa's (as) true teaching

If you want to be simplistic and opt out go ahead.

Buy a few books: not pathetic pamphlets by such and such a church but scholarly books and do a comparitive research on Islam and the Qurayzah episode as well as Islam's treatment of Jews. WHen you do that then you can come back and try to write something.

STay off the WWE because wrestling, like your argument, is FAKE!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and let's observe Deuteronomy 20 which was used to massacre the unfortunate tribe of Banu Qurayzah first :

http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0520.htm

10 When thou drawest nigh unto a city to fight against it, then proclaim peace unto it.

11 And it shall be, if it make thee answer of peace, and open unto thee, then it shall be, that all the people that are found therein shall become tributary unto thee, and shall serve thee.

12 And if it will make no peace with thee, but will make war against thee, then thou shalt besiege it.

13 And when the LORD thy God delivereth it into thy hand, thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword;

14 but the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, even all the spoil thereof, shalt thou take for a prey unto thyself; and thou shalt eat the spoil of thine enemies, which the LORD thy God hath given thee.

Just read it and you will get the idea. After the moslems seiged the city, Did the banu qurayzah start a war with moslems or did they not come out? They did the latter. Is that an act of war?

In the end they agreed to peace.

One name: SAad bin Muadh

One fact: Qurayzah asked for his mediation themselves.

irrespective of whom they choose they were screwed. Awz supposedly tried to help them but actually they screwed them even more.

They only had to choose between awz tribesmen, one of their leader. If islam is so just, why weren't they allowed to choose one of their own?

And why do moslems spread amongst themselves such a horrendous lie that the person arbritating was jewish and was also a member of banu qurayzah?

Don't lie to me i have met many moslems and all of them said the same thing..

lol now you have no answers. If you say they fought against moslems then they will become POWs. If you say they stayed put and accepted peace then jewish law tells them to become slaves for a while (i don't endorse jewish laws they are outdated)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and let's observe Deuteronomy 20 which was used to massacre the unfortunate tribe of Banu Qurayzah first :

http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0520.htm

Just read it and you will get the idea. After the moslems seiged the city, Did the banu qurayzah start a war with moslems or did they not come out? They did the latter. Is that an act of war?

In the end they agreed to peace.

irrespective of whom they choose they were screwed. Awz supposedly tried to help them but actually they screwed them even more.

They only had to choose between awz tribesmen, one of their leader. If islam is so just, why weren't they allowed to choose one of their own?

And why do moslems spread amongst themselves such a horrendous lie that the person arbritating was jewish and was also a member of banu qurayzah?

Don't lie to me i have met many moslems and all of them said the same thing..

Uh no...lol

step one: go up to city. Muslims did that

step two:if they want peace make them slaves. Qurayzah did not want peace in fact they fought for quite a while. On eof Imam ALi's (as) famous joust tok place

step three: then besiege city. Muslims did that

step four: kill the males and make females slaves. That is what hapenned

Can you follow that? Are you okay?

and let's observe Deuteronomy 20 which was used to massacre the unfortunate tribe of Banu Qurayzah first :

http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0520.htm

Just read it and you will get the idea. After the moslems seiged the city, Did the banu qurayzah start a war with moslems or did they not come out? They did the latter. Is that an act of war?

In the end they agreed to peace.

irrespective of whom they choose they were screwed. Awz supposedly tried to help them but actually they screwed them even more.

They only had to choose between awz tribesmen, one of their leader. If islam is so just, why weren't they allowed to choose one of their own?

And why do moslems spread amongst themselves such a horrendous lie that the person arbritating was jewish and was also a member of banu qurayzah?

Don't lie to me i have met many moslems and all of them said the same thing..

lol now you have no answers. If you say they fought against moslems then they will become POWs. If you say they stayed put and accepted peace then jewish law tells them to become slaves for a while (i don't endorse jewish laws they are outdated)

(salam)

This is in reply to your citation of Deuteronomy:

step one: go up to city. Muslims did that

step two:if they want peace make them slaves. Qurayzah did not want peace in fact they fought for quite a while. On eof Imam ALi's famous joust tok place

step three: then besiege city. Muslims did that

step four: kill the males and make females slaves. That is what hapenned

Can you follow that? Are you okay?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Uh no...lol

step one: go up to city. Muslims did that

step two:if they want peace make them slaves. Qurayzah did not want peace in fact they fought for quite a while. On eof Imam ALi's (as) famous joust tok place

step three: then besiege city. Muslims did that

step four: kill the males and make females slaves. That is what hapenned

Can you follow that? Are you okay?

You are confusing battle of khyber with the massacre of banu qurayzah. jews of khyber, even though they fought for so many days, weren't massacred. Want to know why? They had more lands and war booty and women and men were needed to handle the lands and farms so they needed them as slaves.

Banu Qurayza were relatively poor and gave them no booty and they didn't even fight muslims when they seiged gthem, so they were conveniently killed because they were of no use, and ofcourse the women, why should they be killed? they should be raped instead.

Anyway, i feel like throwing up and crying as well after knowing about the details of their massacre and if you don't feel the same way, well, you are a terrorist.

What i learnt today, the most important piece of information, was that the arbitrator was himself muslim and not even a member of banu qurayza.

So much for islamic justice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok i was so shocked to read this i went to my friend's mother and asked her about it. She is a very knowledgeable shia woman and she knows everything about early islam. She says that these are lies either fabricated by the sahabas or jews themselves against moslem. Banu Qurayzah massacre NEVER HAPPENED.

She is saying how can A Prophet be so cruel and his grandson be so innocent as to give his enemies water to drink when the enemy is abusing them? She is telling me, "Tell these shias what kind of shias of Ali are they to believe in such nonsense.. Our Prophet would NEVER EVER allow something like this happen"

and she started crying. So i cried with her. How can Imam Hussayn's grandfather be that cruel?

If you believe in this nonsese even after reading this, i suggest you stop calling yourselves shia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You are confusing battle of khyber with the massacre of banu qurayzah. jews of khyber, even though they fought for so many days, weren't massacred. Want to know why? They had more lands and war booty and women and men were needed to handle the lands and farms so they needed them as slaves.

Banu Qurayza were relatively poor and gave them no booty and they didn't even fight muslims when they seiged gthem, so they were conveniently killed because they were of no use, and ofcourse the women, why should they be killed? they should be raped instead.

Anyway, i feel like throwing up and crying as well after knowing about the details of their massacre and if you don't feel the same way, well, you are a terrorist.

What i learnt today, the most important piece of information, was that the arbitrator was himself muslim and not even a member of banu qurayza.

So much for islamic justice.

poverty does not excuse treason. You brush of treason as a minor issue. This treason if it had worked would have wiped out Islam in its infancy. I am sure you would have shed tears on the death and enslavement of Muslims.

You now accuse these early muslims of rape shame on you they were not as the Christian crusaders who took Jerusalem and waded knee dep in the blood of the inhabitants.

Even as you speak you reveal your true colors. It appears you are a Christian wannabee You know nothing about the OT and its relevance to protestantism. Yet you have the arrogance to claim you are a 'priest'. You know nothing about Islam and yet want to debate about the finer points of monotheism. You shed tears on the death of a few traitorous Jews and yet still fail to talk about the protestants who manned the killing camps of Aushwitz and Belsen etc. These protestants killed millions of innocent Jews.

Why should it come as as surprise that protestants should man these killing camps. They drew their inspiration from Martin Luther. His writings are replete with antisemitism and gross characterisation of the Jews.

It wasn muslims that killed 6,000,000 jews it was the Germans the German as everyone knows are a predominantly protestant nation.

As to catholiscim they either told the Jews to get of the country or walled them up in ghettos. I do not excuse the occasional programs but the real atrocity and attempted genocide of an entire race was carried out by protestants.

The people who try to gloss of this violent history of christians claim that the Nazis were atheistic. Yes the organisation may have been atheists but their menbers werent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ ok those who are willing to believe that this incident happened and continue on with their discussion aren't shias, says the sayyida.

For others who believe in this incident and don't condemn it, :

poverty does not excuse treason. You brush of treason as a minor issue. This treason if it had worked would have wiped out Islam in its infancy. I am sure you would have shed tears on the death and enslavement of Muslims.

What moslems feared would happen to them, they actually did to the jews. Was yathrib a state? no it wasn't. Should jews have worried about moslems being killed by maccans? No they shouldn't have and they didn't, they distanced themselves from meccans as well as moslems. And what moslems do is get them involved to see them massacred with no regard for human suffering. How utterly shameful.

You now accuse these early muslims of rape shame on you they were not as the Christian crusaders who took Jerusalem and waded knee dep in the blood of the inhabitants.

Whats the difference between early moslems and crusaders? None they were both rapists since enslaving women and then doing whatever they want to do with them is RAPE.

Why is moslem rape more significant? It is like saying that the twelve apostles of jesus massacred a town and raped their women, as they were companions of jesus.

How can you compare the crusaders to the twelve apostles?

You shed tears on the death of a few traitorous Jews and yet still fail to talk about the protestants who manned the killing camps of Aushwitz and Belsen etc. These protestants killed millions of innocent Jews.

The massacre of jews in germany wasn't done by the twelve apostles. However, the massacre of jews was done by the "companions" of prophet under his instructions.

Would Jesus have ordered the massacre of jews or moslems?

Are you still mentally challenged not to see the significance of this event?

Why should it come as as surprise that protestants should man these killing camps. They drew their inspiration from Martin Luther. His writings are replete with antisemitism and gross characterisation of the Jews.

It wasn muslims that killed 6,000,000 jews it was the Germans the German as everyone knows are a predominantly protestant nation.

We don't consider Martin luther to be the apostle of jesus we just follow his doctrine of separating from church and if he hadn't said it somebody else would have risen against the church anyway.

The difference between me and you is that i CONDEMN the atrocities done by the pagan nazi party members of germany, as they had left their religion anyway.

Whereas you stop one step closer to CONGRATULATING the moslems on this horrendous massacre.

And whats more, you are willing to compare nazis with your prophet's companions to see who was more brutal. Is this a competition?

Edited by Craig D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
^ ok those who are willing to believe that this incident happened and continue on with their discussion aren't shias, says the sayyida.

For others who believe in this incident and don't condemn it, :

What moslems feared would happen to them, they actually did to the jews. Was yathrib a state? no it wasn't. Should jews have worried about moslems being killed by maccans? No they shouldn't have and they didn't, they distanced themselves from meccans as well as moslems. And what moslems do is get them involved to see them massacred with no regard for human suffering. How utterly shameful.

Whats the difference between early moslems and crusaders? None they were both rapists since enslaving women and then doing whatever they want to do with them is RAPE.

Why is moslem rape more significant? It is like saying that the twelve apostles of jesus massacred a town and raped their women, as they were companions of jesus.

How can you compare the crusaders to the twelve apostles?

The massacre of jews in germany wasn't done by the twelve apostles. However, the massacre of jews was done by the "companions" of prophet under his instructions.

Would Jesus have ordered the massacre of jews or moslems?

Are you still mentally challenged not to see the significance of this event?

We don't consider Martin luther to be the apostle of jesus we just follow his doctrine of separating from church and if he hadn't said it somebody else would have risen against the church anyway.

The difference between me and you is that i CONDEMN the atrocities done by the pagan nazi party members of germany, as they had left their religion anyway.

Whereas you stop one step closer to CONGRATULATING the moslems on this horrendous massacre.

And whats more, you are willing to compare nazis with your prophet's companions to see who was more brutal. Is this a competition?

You draw your inspiration from an anti-semite whose letters and comments appeared to have inspired protestant nazi Germany to commit the worst crime in recorded history. Christian apologists of course dismiss this as being due to the atheistic Nazis. I am sure a good number went to church on Sunday before throwing the switches at Belsen and Aushwitz.

In order to cover your protestant crime against humanity you draw attention to an incident that occured 1400 years ago. Your anti muslim tendencies are revealed by your attitudes to the Palestinians. You support the stealing of their land the massacre of their people and in real terms enslavement of them as well. All this because your protestant brethren killed 6,000,000 innocent Jews. Your brethren did the crime the palestinians pay the price.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Craig is not what he claims to be. He's a liar, a fake and charlatan. He's ignorance only equals his hatred which are the fruit of his Protestant heresy. The guy claims to be a priest but never followed a single serious divinity seminar. Liar!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Craig is not what he claims to be. He's a liar, a fake and charlatan. He's ignorance only equals his hatred which are the fruit of his Protestant heresy. The guy claims to be a priest but never followed a single serious divinity seminar. Liar!!!

I know that is why he is so laughable. I belong to a local interfaith forum. I dont agree with everthing they say but i know a fake when i see one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You draw your inspiration from an anti-semite whose letters and comments appeared to have inspired protestant nazi Germany to commit the worst crime in recorded history. Christian apologists of course dismiss this as being due to the atheistic Nazis. I am sure a good number went to church on Sunday before throwing the switches at Belsen and Aushwitz.

Sigh. Martin Luther wasn't Jesus. You still don't get it?

In order to cover your protestant crime against humanity you draw attention to an incident that occured 1400 years ago. Your anti muslim tendencies are revealed by your attitudes to the Palestinians. You support the stealing of their land the massacre of their people and in real terms enslavement of them as well. All this because your protestant brethren killed 6,000,000 innocent Jews. Your brethren did the crime the palestinians pay the price.

Oh man your prophet ordered these executions whilst jesus didn't order the execution of jews. You still don't understand the difference?

And you don't condemn that criminal act and we condemn everything nazi, even though they were all atheists.

Craig is not what he claims to be. He's a liar, a fake and charlatan. He's ignorance only equals his hatred which are the fruit of his Protestant heresy. The guy claims to be a priest but never followed a single serious divinity seminar. Liar!!!

This is exactly how the pharisees shouted at Jesus since he didn't have "formal" jewish education. I, on the other hand, don't need to be educated because jesus is my savior who didn't commit any war crimes.

And please if you don't have any arguments don't post. Forget that i exist. Just concentrate on the topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...