Islam: A Religion of Lies...

[Pliny]

Originally Posted by Walks_in_islam

Originally Posted by Pliny
It is apparent that your “information” comes from this site:
http://discover-the-truth.com/2013/0...omment-page-1/
Here is the citation for the quote from the Islamic apologetic source:

Please note this is point 2 and footnote 1.

Posted by WII
You are not implying that dusty old books like "Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, Volume 8 edited by G. Johannes Botterweck, Helmer Ringgren, Heinz-Josef Fabry" were secretly written for Muslims are you? That's ridiculous.

ROTFL! What is ridiculous is that you would even say what you said! LOL! The point here is that you were trying to establish that Rebekah was three years old. Your information appears to have come from this site because everyone of your “evidences” are on this Islamic apologetic site. Yet, this site has a written document stating that Rebekah was much older than that.

There is a written statement:
Minimum Age For Marriage In The Bible
Kaleef K. Karim
In this article I will establish that the age for marriage, when someone is allowed to get married Biblically, is when one enters puberty.
http://discover-the-truth.com/2014/0...-in-the-bible/

ROTFL! Your own Islamic apologetic site states this is the MINIMUM age. LOL!

So what about intellectual integrity. Why would someone post something they knowingly disagree with? I guess it’s that inventive spirit of islam. The end justifies the means.

Next thing you know you will try to say Joseph was 90 years old when betrothed to Mary! ROTFL!!!

Originally Posted by Walks_in_islam

Me? I care less what the Talmud says actually. It was you who said that God did not spell out every single sin and it was those who developed the Talmud who represented the ministry assigned by God to do it

Actually it’s the Bible (Deu. 17:8-11).

Originally Posted by Walks_in_islam

Originally Posted by Pliny
It doesn’t matter what the Talmud states. It’s only correct inasmuch as it agrees with the Bible. The Bible is the standard not Judaism’s rabbis, oral traditions or the Talmud. You are aware that Jesus taught against the doctrines of the Pharisees right? Please see Matthew 16:12 for one example, there are others as well. Why would I or any other Apostolic attempt to establish doctrine from the teachings Jesus specifically preached against?

Posted by WII
Did he? You ARE aware that Jesus specifically said (at least you would be if you had followed my recommended bible study the other day)

2 The Pharisees and the teachers of the Law are experts in the Law of Moses. 3 So obey everything they teach you, but don’t do as they do. After all, they say one thing and do something else.

I have no idea as to possible motives as to why you would establish doctrine that is different from the teachings Jesus specifically said to follow. Can you explain why you just said one thing and Jesus in Matthew 23 said the exact opposite? Is this another example of where you are using "ministerial guidance" to explain what Jesus probably MEANT to say? LOL

Firstly, the point here is that you built another one of your infamous straw man arguments. You attempted to justify your prophet by the Talmud. The Talmud is the written oral traditions handed down generation to generation until the writing of the Talmud.

Secondly you definitely need to find a Bible believing church somewhere and start learning proper exegesis. It’s abundantly clear all you have is an agenda.

A.T. Robertson is a well-known Greek scholar. This means he read and interpreted the Greek into English. He wrote a verse by verse word picture of the Greek New Testament. He says this about your verse:

Matthew 23:3
For they say and do not (legousin kai ou poiousin). “As teachers they have their place, but beware of following their example” (Bruce). So Jesus said: “Do not ye after their works “ (mē poieite). Do not practice their practices. They are only preachers. Jesus does not here disapprove any of their teachings as he does elsewhere. The point made here is that they are only teachers (or preachers) and do not practice what they teach as God sees it.

See how easy that was? So easy even a cave man can do it. Unless that cave man has an agenda…

Just another straw man argument to keep from dealing with the fact that your prophet consummated his marriage to a nine year old girl. Through his “good example” and “exalted character” Mohammedans around the world continue to practice this distasteful act.

Interesting that you believe your prophet is distasteful which clearly contradicts your own “holy writings”.

Originally Posted by Walks_in_islam

One quick question because this is sort of a double standard -

Originally Posted by Pliny

Posted by WII
First you posted this is good, these girls were headed for loving, wholesome, biblical marriages, no way were they mistreated:

Another invention by the resident muslim apologist wannabe. I guess intellectual integrity means nothing. ROTFL

I challenge you to find the quote where I said:
“this is good, these girls were headed for loving, wholesome, biblical marriages, no way were they mistreated”

If you can’t then I guess that tells us all we need to know. Once again you are entitled to your opinion but you are not entitled to your own facts. Facts are stubborn tings.

Once again we see that your posts have the substance of a vacuum.

Originally Posted by Walks_in_islam

(Num 31:15 KJV) And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive?
(Num 31:16 KJV) Behold, these caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to commit trespass against the LORD in the matter of Peor, and there was a plague among the congregation of the LORD.
(Num 31:17 KJV) Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.
(Num 31:18 KJV) But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.

Since you don’t know how to document your assertions or how to keep it in context, I can only guess at what or where this came from.

Therefore, I must conclude that this was posted in the context of your attempt to justify the prepubescent consummation of marriage to Aisha (the nine year old) by your prophet. As I recall this was one of your “proof texts” that fell flat on its face. One of the “evidences” that the God of the Bible allowed the same thing as exemplified by your prophet.

What is really hilarious about all this is:
1) That you now say Rebecca was older than this, almost twice the age of Aisha at the time of the consummation.
2) That the Islamic web site that you seem to get your information from does not believe this either.

It’s in this context that the passage was used. Apparently you have never learned that a text with no context is a pretext. In other words your agenda is revealed once again.

Originally Posted by Walks_in_islam

Then you posted look at this terrible thing that happened in the news:

Since January, 2011 through March, 2014, over 550 Christian girls were kidnapped by Muslim men and forced to convert and marry their abductors, often after suffering violence at the hands of their kidnappers

I do not in any way condone these terrible deeds by these so-called "muslims". I do wonder. Suppose all of their family members, fathers, mothers, brothers, were lined up and butchered in front of them, then they were taken, would that constitute "suffering violence" and if this happened wouldn't that be exactly what happened in this little story that you post over and over and over and isn't what happened to them actually better than what happened to young girls in the bible?

Because in posting this, and waving the (probab-lie) good things that happened later to these little girls ("they were slaves but hey they had freedom of choice so look at how good they had it blah blah") you are actually openly condoning everything that happened for these girls to end up as "freedom of choice slave girls".

I am glad you don’t condone the acts of those muslims who act in accordance with the example of Muhammad. In the narrative of Numbers it’s a tragedy that judgment fell on that group of people because of their sinful exploits. Just as it is a tragedy that the world prior to the flood had to be cleansed from the mikvah of the flood. It was also a tragedy for the people of Sodom and Gomorrah.

The fact is the females that were saved from the destruction had the choice to become married or not. They did not have to marry a Jewish man. The statement of facts are amoral.

This is simply a Red Herring.