He isn't doing anything the Prophet Mohammed didn't do. The problem for this primate is that this is a different century and in North America. He should be boiled in oil.
These sick fucks come in all creeds and colours. If he used his religion to justify it, which he doesn't seem to have done, then we could blame prophet precedent. This guy is just a run of the mill kiddy diddler. Plenty of them can be found in western clergy and youth groups
Actually I posted this story, because when a Priest does it, it's news.
I see instances of pervs taking advantage of being able to hide and take advantage of power in an institution all the time. What would you call it "institutional perving?"
Personally it feels to me like school teachers are the most prolific in terms of getting caught, these days, but it happens everywhere you can perv and pretend you're powerful enough that your victim doesn't want to rat you out, I bet.
Every once in awhile it's good to remind people it's not just in one place, I think.
"ShepherdsDog" said If he used his religion to justify it, which he doesn't seem to have done, then we could blame prophet precedent.
This is mildly interesting I think. I saw an incident of how that works yesterday.
Actually it concerns this older video debate. It's old but I just saw it yesterday, because I was reading up on that Mohammedan kid who build the hoax bomb in a suitcase.
His dad is a slightly psycho-seeming taqiyya artist who calls himself an Imam.
The guy is so outrageous that towards the end, Robert Spencer, who was debating him could only laugh.
But this guy was expressing his outrage at how the kufar complainers were always making such a big deal out of the bit from his religion's Holy story where their Holy Prophet starts banging a 9 year old. His defence was, "That was a long time ago. Everybody did it."
Spencer's first argument against that was something like "But the problem there is Mohammed is presented in the holy texts as the perfect example for all humanity, and that's for all time. So anything he did then can be preached as good for today. For example when the Ayatolah Komeni took over in Iran one of the first things he did was bring the marriage age limit down to 9 for girls.' according to Spencer.
"But the problem there is Mohammed is presented in the holy texts as the perfect example for all humanity, and that's for all time
In actuality, Islam has stated that Jesus was the perfect man, as God had intended Adam to be before he was cast out from Eden. Only Jesus was born without sin and lived without sin. In the Koran Jesus is the only man to be referred to as blessed and untouched by Satan.
He (the angel) said: I am only a messenger of thy Lord, that I may bestow on thee a faultless son. She said: How can I have a son when no mortal hath touched me, neither have I been unchaste? He said: So (it will be). Thy Lord saith: It is easy for Me. Qur'an 19:19-21
And Mary, daughter of `Imran, whose body was chaste, therefor We breathed therein something of Our Spirit. .Qur'an 66:12
When you look very closely at Islam, it isn't that far off from early Christianity. But just as the the Catholics created a cult of Mary, the Muslims created a cult of Mohammed.
I believe the "perfection" there is the perfection of immaculate conception.
I was reading about that one time. When Mohammed steals the Christ story for his new religion it's spun a little different though, isn't it. In Mohammed's version doesn't light come out the angel's sleeve, or elbow, or something, because he's empowered by Allah to plant the seed.
I believe in the Koran though, Jesus is seen more though as just another prophet.
It's all fascinating of course but it's not the same thing as what they say about Mohammed.
(I can't give you a link for these, because I got a virus warning, but they're all over the place and easy to access with a Google.)
In Islam, the Prophet Muhammad is known as al-Ins?n al-K?mil (the perfect human) and uswa hasana (an excellent model of conduct)
Many Muslims and non-Muslims alike, often attempt to excuse away Muhammad's immoral behavior using moral relativism and/or a "tu quoque" defense against the actions of other religious figures from various faiths. They claim he was a �product of his time� and that he should not be judged by modern standards, but what they fail to mention is that this particular Islamic doctrine, the belief that Muhammad is the uswa hasana, leaves those defenses redundant.
Muhammad repeatedly told his followers to follow his Sunnah (example) and in the Qur'an we see that Allah even asserts his morality as being �sublime� (Qur'an 68:4), therefore Muhammad cannot be seen as simply a product of his time. To do so, would mean to also concede the fact that the Qur'an is outdated and not relevant to the modern world. From an Islamic perspective, this is unthinkable. The Qur'an is beyond the constraints of time. It is not simply 'inspired' but the very words of Allah, uttered through the lips of his final messenger. Hence, Muhammad's actions are (and always will be) morally acceptable to the Muslim.
The assertion by Qur�an confirms it even further: �Wammaa arsalnaaka illaa rahmatal lil- aalameen! (21:107).� [O Muhammad We sent you not, but as a mercy for all creature.�
All Muslims are required to accept and adhere to all of the teachings of Prophet Muhammad. Allah told Muslims in the Qur�an-(8:24): �O you who believe! Answer Allah (by obeying Him) and As His Messenger (obeying him) when he calls you to that which will give you life.�
And so on...and it does go on.
But for me if the bible tells you to be like Christ and you want to emulate Christ - fill your boots. It's not going to hurt me. But if you want to emulate Mohammed in all he did (Rape, theft, murder, pedophilla) you become the enemy of western civilization.
You were doing the Adam/Jesus comparison thing. Or at least in relevance to the way Muslims see them.
There's this story from one of Mohammed's early biographers. It tells of a time when Mohammed was young and debating Christians in the public square.
He makes the point that because God creates Jesus without a father it does not make him divine, because his birth is similar to the way God created Adam.
To me it always seems like Muslims see Jesus more as a sign that Mohammed is coming. He's kind of their John the Baptist.
In fact, you quoted Surah 19:19-21. It continues...
and We will make him a sign to the people and a mercy from Us. And it is a matter decreed.' "
It was marriage.
Canada needs to become more tolerant.
I see instances of pervs taking advantage of being able to hide and take advantage of power in an institution all the time. What would you call it "institutional perving?"
Personally it feels to me like school teachers are the most prolific in terms of getting caught, these days, but it happens everywhere you can perv and pretend you're powerful enough that your victim doesn't want to rat you out, I bet.
Every once in awhile it's good to remind people it's not just in one place, I think.
If he used his religion to justify it, which he doesn't seem to have done, then we could blame prophet precedent.
This is mildly interesting I think. I saw an incident of how that works yesterday.
Actually it concerns this older video debate. It's old but I just saw it yesterday, because I was reading up on that Mohammedan kid who build the hoax bomb in a suitcase.
His dad is a slightly psycho-seeming taqiyya artist who calls himself an Imam.
The guy is so outrageous that towards the end, Robert Spencer, who was debating him could only laugh.
But this guy was expressing his outrage at how the kufar complainers were always making such a big deal out of the bit from his religion's Holy story where their Holy Prophet starts banging a 9 year old. His defence was, "That was a long time ago. Everybody did it."
Spencer's first argument against that was something like "But the problem there is Mohammed is presented in the holy texts as the perfect example for all humanity, and that's for all time. So anything he did then can be preached as good for today. For example when the Ayatolah Komeni took over in Iran one of the first things he did was bring the marriage age limit down to 9 for girls.' according to Spencer.
"But the problem there is Mohammed is presented in the holy texts as the perfect example for all humanity, and that's for all time
In actuality, Islam has stated that Jesus was the perfect man, as God had intended Adam to be before he was cast out from Eden. Only Jesus was born without sin and lived without sin. In the Koran Jesus is the only man to be referred to as blessed and untouched by Satan.
He (the angel) said: I am only a messenger of thy Lord, that I may bestow on thee a faultless son. She said: How can I have a son when no mortal hath touched me, neither have I been unchaste? He said: So (it will be). Thy Lord saith: It is easy for Me. Qur'an 19:19-21
And Mary, daughter of `Imran, whose body was chaste, therefor We breathed therein something of Our Spirit. .Qur'an 66:12
When you look very closely at Islam, it isn't that far off from early Christianity. But just as the the Catholics created a cult of Mary, the Muslims created a cult of Mohammed.
I was reading about that one time. When Mohammed steals the Christ story for his new religion it's spun a little different though, isn't it. In Mohammed's version doesn't light come out the angel's sleeve, or elbow, or something, because he's empowered by Allah to plant the seed.
I believe in the Koran though, Jesus is seen more though as just another prophet.
It's all fascinating of course but it's not the same thing as what they say about Mohammed.
(I can't give you a link for these, because I got a virus warning, but they're all over the place and easy to access with a Google.)
Many Muslims and non-Muslims alike, often attempt to excuse away Muhammad's immoral behavior using moral relativism and/or a "tu quoque" defense against the actions of other religious figures from various faiths. They claim he was a �product of his time� and that he should not be judged by modern standards, but what they fail to mention is that this particular Islamic doctrine, the belief that Muhammad is the uswa hasana, leaves those defenses redundant.
Muhammad repeatedly told his followers to follow his Sunnah (example) and in the Qur'an we see that Allah even asserts his morality as being �sublime� (Qur'an 68:4), therefore Muhammad cannot be seen as simply a product of his time. To do so, would mean to also concede the fact that the Qur'an is outdated and not relevant to the modern world. From an Islamic perspective, this is unthinkable. The Qur'an is beyond the constraints of time. It is not simply 'inspired' but the very words of Allah, uttered through the lips of his final messenger. Hence, Muhammad's actions are (and always will be) morally acceptable to the Muslim.
All Muslims are required to accept and adhere to all of the teachings of Prophet Muhammad. Allah told Muslims in the Qur�an-(8:24): �O you who believe! Answer Allah (by obeying Him) and As His Messenger (obeying him) when he calls you to that which will give you life.�
And so on...and it does go on.
But for me if the bible tells you to be like Christ and you want to emulate Christ - fill your boots. It's not going to hurt me. But if you want to emulate Mohammed in all he did (Rape, theft, murder, pedophilla) you become the enemy of western civilization.
You were doing the Adam/Jesus comparison thing. Or at least in relevance to the way Muslims see them.
There's this story from one of Mohammed's early biographers. It tells of a time when Mohammed was young and debating Christians in the public square.
He makes the point that because God creates Jesus without a father it does not make him divine, because his birth is similar to the way God created Adam.
To me it always seems like Muslims see Jesus more as a sign that Mohammed is coming. He's kind of their John the Baptist.
In fact, you quoted Surah 19:19-21. It continues...