Was Muhammad a good man?

[1robin]

I am not saying respect like pull me off the street and force me to have tea and biscuits with you..lol,

That is not respect. Respect is approval and admiration. I approve of you but not Islam or what you say many times and do not know you enough to admire you.

I think you are wrong in thinking everyone is as confrontational as yourself, it might be your military background and Americas quest for World domination,as evidenced by reports that have emerged post Cold-War.

1. I never mentioned confrontation.
2. The latest Muslim debated and the very first thing posted was a threat. Who is confrontational.
3. The US is anti-expansionist. We were attacked by Mexico, Germany, Japan, Britain. We whipped them all then rebuilt their nations and then gave them back. We protected them until they could do so on their own. We took over Kuwait, Iraq, most of Afghanistan and rebuilt them all and gave them back including the oil. We took over the Philippines, Cuba, France, and many Pacific islands. helped them become stable and ten gave them back with lots of money. If you read the transcripts between Roosevelt and Churchill we stopped Britain from resuming their own expansionist policies at the threat of war. We are the most powerful and benevolent nation in history. We have made some grave errors but have saved the world twice from tyranny, communism, and several nations from Islamic oppression and asked for nothing in return. We have even saved many Islamic groups and nations and been attacked in return. We spend billions and lose lives doing everything we can to eliminate civilian casualties something terrorist specialize in doing the opposite concerning. It is impossible to make a more wrong argument than you did there. It is also offensive to a veteran who has lost friends doing those very things but unlike Muslims I am not crying about hatred and sarcasm.

The Soviet threat was never a real one, atleast not on a global level and certainly not sustainable. Propoganda plays a big part in how the general public views an issue. The same applies now to your Islam bashing, If we had internet during the cold war I bet you would be the biggest advocate against the Soviets and accuse them of crimes they did not intend to commit. The essays criteria is specifically how the American and Soviet historians recorded and perceived the events of the war and what their plans were, reports which could only be contrasted once the war was over. Basically the orthodox view was a load of military hogwash fed to the public, Amazingly alot of people still hold that view.

Good Lord Monotheist, the USSR had more nuclear weapons that the rest of the Earth combined at one time and the insanity to use them. They almost starved east Berlin to death. They spread communistic oppression all over Asia and the Middle East. If we did not exist the entire world would by ruled by the latest communist Czar. They even stated their goal was world domination many times and no one else could have stopped them. We even enabled Islamic Afghanistan to win against them. They were loosing bad until we got involved. That is where Osama got started. If your writing that paper for a school and this is the stuff your putting in it and it is not an Islamic school I will bet you that you will be lucky to get a C. The USSR almost the entire middle east melted by coming using Lebanon and Syria like slaves to go up against Israel and the US. For your paper there are three times we have almost went to total nuclear war. Cuban missile crisis, a mistaken exercise in Eastern Europe in the 80s and when Israel and we warmed up our nukes when Russia used Islam to attack Israel and US. WE had a fleet fully ready to melt everything in the middle east but Russia got scared and changed their minds and Israel destroyed Syria's tank force in Jezreel valley. Then the Russians called back their air force and we stood down.

I dont know man, If I debate a Hindu on here I will be respectful of their deities regardless of whether I think they are a joke, Its called people skills, get with it.

I do not think Islam is a joke. I wish it was. It is causes far too much damage and instability to be a joke. You can think I am wrong all you wish but can you not see how constant terrorism and many of the most violent and unstable nations on Earth being Islamic can cause someone to get the idea that something is very wrong with Islam. I'm not confrontational about Hinduism or the Baha'i' etc because they are not a constant problem everywhere they exist. Is the middle east or India the most violent area on Earth? I disagree with their faith but their guys are not denying the right to exist to others or blowing up twin towers. Just since we have been debating Muslims blew up a church in Pakistan. It is every single day man, do you not see how this looks to everyone outside of Islam even if I am wrong about everything the world is getting less patient and less patient.

Have a good one man and study a little more on that paper. I have to get.

 

[FearGod]

Let me

5. What I work on is classified and I can't describe it but it's war record is a little less than 200 kills and 0 losses.

i guess i knew who are you now.

Let's just pretend all those surah's about cutting off heads, hands, and feet are not in the Quran and forget that Muhammad killed hundreds and ordered the death of thousands. Even if that never occurred, can you honestly blame any modern person for picking up the paper every day and seeing a Muslim that blew something up and achieved nothing but death and resentment. Even if they are not truly Muslim's and this same thing had not been going on almost daily since Muhammad started it. Can you really not understand that Islam's problems are caused by those claiming to be Muslims. I must know what level of denying reality we are dealing with here. I am running short of time so I will get to the rest later. Have a good day and think on this a bit.

:yes:

[youtube]8WR0NHeAH8k[/youtube]
‫

 

[1robin]

Lol what have you been smoking dude? I do ignore ad skim through most of your posts, this one keeps popping up on my replies tab,which is annoying so I click on it I honestly wish this thread died ages ago, but thanks to you..it's heart still beats.




I would argue seeds of mistrust were sewn when the US and UK tried to crush the Russian Revolution of 1918 and when Stalin signed the Soviet-Nazi pact at the start of WW2. At the end of the day it was a clash of ideologies and the uncertainty and mistrust in each other was reflected in their aggressive foreign policies. My essay is concentrated on the specific events as they unfolded towards the end of the war and the several years that followed. I also have to contrast the different approaches Historians have taken over the years, I personally agree with the new post 91 view..

This is an excerpt from an essay by John Gaddis in 1996 titled On Moral Equivalency and Cold War History.



Im writing it for a History elective at Uni. I have to discuss how the views changed over the years from the Orthodox (Soviets want world domination) through the various revisionist, post-revisionist and finally the new post 91 interpretations of who the burden of the unnecessary quest for world domination should be placed on. Have about five hundred words and referencing left, and exactly 12 hours till its due.

I think you probably are my equal in debate. Unfortunately you have chosen to defend the indefensible. However military history is my favorite subject and have studied it for 40 years. I am going to get into what you stated here soon but am out of time. Have a good one. You have the Enola gay issue way out of whack.

 

[illykitty]

Even if that never occurred, can you honestly blame any modern person for picking up the paper every day and seeing a Muslim that blew something up and achieved nothing but death and resentment.

I'll keep that in mind for next time I see a Christian do something bad...

 

[Monotheist 101]

I'll keep that in mind for next time I see a Christian do something bad...

Some people apparently think that what they see on T.V is all that happens in the world.

 

[psychoslice]

Its hard to say if he was a good man or not, when someone is put up on a pedastal for so long they end up becoming a god, we have done this to many throughout history.

 

[Quagmire]

Fine, uneasy truce it is.

You can call it that if it makes you feel better. I'll just keep looking at it as my being patient with people who don't know any better or can't help themselves.

Is the circus over then?

Why? didn't you get any cotton candy?

How is it you started this anyway?

Confronting trolls and propagandists you mean? Well, I sat down one day and realized I needed to start doing something to make the world a better place.

What in the world did I do to inspire this obsession?

I don't know: did you use a lot of drugs in college?

Anyway, if you want to talk about my personal history or your personal problems you should probably start another thread.

 

[1robin]

i said to you many times where is your sources and evidences,your opinion is biased and then is unbelievable.

Sorry that is the truth,you have nothing but just bla..bla..bla

I am the one that posted 4 lists from different secular sources that show the top ten scientists of all time and one that listed the top 100. If there was even a single Islamic name on why of them I did not see it. I do not know how evidence could get any better. It certainly beats the nothing you have posted. Either prove those list wrong or my claim has been perfectly proven and your not even attempted. I even gave lists that covered great inventions, founded fields of science themselves, or did foundational work and no Muslim name appeared. You can't possibly call yourself unbiased and still think what you claim. In fact that would go beyond bias into brainwashing or something. You can't fight those lists from secular source.

You have already told me for the hundred time that you are an engineer for the most sophisticated machines in the world ,but what that to do with history.

I do not believe I have ever said that. I have math degree not engineering degree. What I do is a part of engineering called military integration but that does not make me an engineer.

You didn't offer any source to prove any of the nonsense that you have pointed to.

I have posted five lists of the greatest scientists of all time plus where the major breakthroughs in each field took place. How could you possibly say this, one list was 100 of the greatest scientists. It must be that preference and convenience is just completely keeping you from seeing facts. How many more do I have to pot before you conceded this ridiculous claim. It is will always be more than what I have then there is no point. Those lists are proof, the contained less that 2 Muslims. The end.

Just show me any reliable source and then i'll discuss it with you,but your own words,sorry,i don't believe your own words even if you are an engineer,oh sorry not ordinary engineer :sorry1: but dealing also with the most sophisticated machines in the world.

1Isaac Newtonthe Newtonian RevolutionAnglican (rejected Trinitarianism, i.e., Athanasianism; believed in the Arianism of the Primitive Church)2Albert EinsteinTwentieth-Century ScienceJewish3Neils Bohrthe AtomJewish Lutheran4Charles DarwinEvolutionAnglican (nominal); Unitarian5Louis Pasteurthe Germ Theory of DiseaseCatholic6Sigmund FreudPsychology of the UnconsciousJewish; Atheist; Freudian psychoanalysis (Freudianism)7Galileo Galileithe New ScienceCatholic8Antoine Laurent Lavoisierthe Revolution in ChemistryCatholic9Johannes KeplerMotion of the PlanetsLutheran10Nicolaus Copernicusthe Heliocentric UniverseCatholic (priest)11Michael Faradaythe Classical Field TheorySandemanian12James Clerk Maxwellthe Electromagnetic FieldPresbyterian; Anglican; Baptist13Claude Bernardthe Founding of Modern Physiology 14Franz BoasModern AnthropologyJewish15Werner HeisenbergQuantum TheoryLutheran16Linus PaulingTwentieth-Century ChemistryLutheran17Rudolf Virchowthe Cell Doctrine 18Erwin SchrodingerWave MechanicsCatholic19Ernest Rutherfordthe Structure of the Atom 20Paul DiracQuantum Electrodynamics 21Andreas Vesaliusthe New AnatomyCatholic22Tycho Brahethe New AstronomyLutheran23Comte de Buffonl'Histoire Naturelle 24Ludwig BoltzmannThermodynamics 25Max Planckthe QuantaProtestant26Marie CurieRadioactivityCatholic (lapsed)27William Herschelthe Discovery of the HeavensJewish28Charles LyellModern Geology 29Pierre Simon de LaplaceNewtonian Mechanicsatheist30Edwin Hubblethe Modern Telescope 31Joseph J. Thomsonthe Discovery of the Electron 32Max BornQuantum MechanicsJewish Lutheran33Francis CrickMolecular Biologyatheist34Enrico FermiAtomic PhysicsCatholic35Leonard EulerEighteenth-Century MathematicsCalvinist36Justus LiebigNineteenth-Century Chemistry 37Arthur EddingtonModern AstronomyQuaker38William HarveyCirculation of the BloodAnglican (nominal)39Marcello MalpighiMicroscopic AnatomyCatholic40Christiaan Huygensthe Wave Theory of LightCalvinist41Carl Gauss (Karl Friedrich Gauss)Mathematical GeniusLutheran42Albrecht von HallerEighteenth-Century Medicine 43August KekuleChemical Structure 44Robert KochBacteriology 45Murray Gell-Mannthe Eightfold WayJewish46Emil FischerOrganic Chemistry 47Dmitri Mendeleevthe Periodic Table of Elements 48Sheldon Glashowthe Discovery of CharmJewish49James Watsonthe Structure of DNAatheist50John BardeenSuperconductivity 51John von Neumannthe Modern ComputerJewish Catholic52Richard FeynmanQuantum ElectrodynamicsJewish53Alfred WegenerContinental Drift 54Stephen HawkingQuantum Cosmologyatheist55Anton van Leeuwenhoekthe Simple MicroscopeDutch Reformed56Max von LaueX-ray Crystallography 57Gustav KirchhoffSpectroscopy 58Hans Bethethe Energy of the SunJewish59Euclidthe Foundations of MathematicsPlatonism / Greek philosophy60Gregor Mendelthe Laws of InheritanceCatholic (Augustinian monk)61Heike Kamerlingh OnnesSuperconductivity 62Thomas Hunt Morganthe Chromosomal Theory of Heredity 63Hermann von Helmholtzthe Rise of German Science 64Paul EhrlichChemotherapyJewish65Ernst MayrEvolutionary Theoryatheist66Charles SherringtonNeurophysiology 67Theodosius Dobzhanskythe Modern SynthesisRussian Orthodox68Max Delbruckthe Bacteriophage 69Jean Baptiste Lamarckthe Foundations of Biology 70William BaylissModern Physiology 71Noam ChomskyTwentieth-Century LinguisticsJewish atheist72Frederick Sangerthe Genetic Code 73LucretiusScientific ThinkingEpicurean; atheist74John Daltonthe Theory of the AtomQuaker75Louis Victor de BroglieWave/Particle Duality 76Carl Linnaeusthe Binomial NomenclatureChristianity77Jean PiagetChild Development 78George Gaylord Simpsonthe Tempo of Evolution 79Claude Levi-StraussStructural AnthropologyJewish80Lynn MargulisSymbiosis TheoryJewish81Karl Landsteinerthe Blood GroupsJewish82Konrad LorenzEthology 83Edward O. WilsonSociobiology 84Frederick Gowland HopkinsVitamins 85Gertrude Belle ElionPharmacology 86Hans Selyethe Stress Concept 87J. Robert Oppenheimerthe Atomic EraJewish88Edward Tellerthe BombJewish89Willard LibbyRadioactive Dating 90Ernst Haeckelthe Biogenetic Principle 91Jonas SalkVaccinationJewish92Emil KraepelinTwentieth-Century Psychiatry 93Trofim LysenkoSoviet GeneticsRussian Orthodox; Communist94Francis GaltonEugenics 95Alfred Binetthe I.Q. Test 96Alfred KinseyHuman Sexualityatheist97Alexander FlemingPenicillinCatholic98B. F. SkinnerBehaviorismatheist99Wilhelm Wundtthe Founding of Psychologyatheist100Archimedesthe Beginning of ScienceGreek philosophy

That is the top 100 scientists of all time. You see any Muslim's there might be 1 or 2 at best?
100 Scientists Who Shaped World History
That site has nothing to do with theology so it is not biased.

How about those words since you ignored them the first time. I can give you lists from where to eternity showing Islam was not a major scientific player. How many are necessary? Always one more than you have.

Continued:

 

[1robin]

History says that Europe was in the dark ages when the Islamic Empire wasn't.

Should i change the facts of the history to please you.

You seem to change, ignore, or misunderstand facts quite often but do not do it for me. I don't need it. I have said at least 6 times that what you said is true and that it makes no difference whatever. Because the great breakthroughs and the great heydays of science did not occur during those times. Islam had a golden chance to take over science. Instead they did most theory and very little application and were soon eclipsed by Europe again and were never a meaningful part of science again. I know what Islam did and was very generous in laying it out. They did not found anything, they only took a few steps on the shoulders of others, then faded away and only make an occasional discovery these days. There is far more world history and most of science history than in that one time period.

So be wise enough and change those words from your dictionary and the western universities.

What the heck was this? I was the one that said Islam gave the name Algebra. However just Descartes, Euclid, Archimedes, and Pythagoras did more algebra alone than the entire Muslim caliphate. I posts lists and names including what they do and you post a picture. I am running out of reasons to keep this up. Are you trying to say that Islam is the best graphic book title namers? That word is an Arabic rods used to describe a type of math far older than Arabic it's self. That math built the pyramids in Egypt not Syria. Do you want an award for naming something (which by the way we use so have no need of changing anything whatever that means anyway).

Lets the picture talks and not me

Maybe they can say something. This is a picture of the Christian Wright brothers first flight under power. No help for Islam. What was the point here? You seem to be making my case.

And this is an Russian IL-62M and is not the fastest, not the deadliest, in fact nothing special and it is certainly not Islamic. It was designed by Mikoyan I think but it is definitely Russian. Again no help to Russia.

There is no muslim country on earth nowadays.

Country% of MuslimsMuslim PopulationMauritania99.9%3,083,772Maldives99.9%348,756Western Sahara99.8%272,461Somalia99.5%8,548,670Turkey99%68,963,953Iran99%67,337,681Algeria99%32,206,534Afghanistan99%29,629,697Yemen99%20,519,792Tunisia99%9,974,201Oman99%2,971,567Comoros99%664,534Djibouti99%471,935

Well how about that, another book. I did not say Islam was illiterate did I. They can write. Do you read anything you post. This is the third scholar that was educated in the US you have posted. His book was completed at Oxford not Beirut. Every advanced thing he knows was taught by Christian nations to him. This book Is written about a class my boss has had. It is an introductory class for computer engineering. He looks Indian and his home page does not mention Islam or Muslim. What are you doing?

What i want is a proof that refutes the effective role of muslims in science and civilization to Europe in the middle ages.

See any of the lists of the greatest scientists I gave.

Can you study computer science without understanding logarithm.

You can but it would be very hard. Why did you ask this? I studied algorithms far more than any computer engineer does for math degree.

They found nothing about science ,that is your words,but to me is nonsense.

Its nonsence because apparently you do not understand the difference between founded and found. They found many things but founded almost nothing.

Change also the word (chemistry) because it is an arabic name which was introduced to Europe in the middle ages.

Chemistry (the science) was founded in 1000BC. That is 1500 years before Muhammad. Who cares where the name came from. It was science not scientific words we are discussing.

Abû Hurayrah relates that Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) said: “Islam began strange, and it will become strange again just like it was at the beginning, so blessed are the strangers.” [Sahîh Muslim (1/130)]

Strange is one word for it I guess. What is the point here?

Regarding going to work to Saudu Arabia,then that is a normal thing you are a worker and they pay money to hire you.

Because they have mountains of oil money (or at least a few guys at the top do) and not enough sense to use a multi-meter. The reason I met the guy from Jordan for lunch the other day was to get his (he is a Christian and I trust him) perspective on SA. He said they have nothing but oil, pride, and Islam. They have no significant technical capacity of any kind. He also said I had to make sure to get every picture and piece of information of my phone because terrorist will use them for blackmail. SA is one of the more progressive Islamic nations yet is still so bad I had to receive escape and evasion training because of the threat and will always have armed US military escorts. Why is it almost always that way in Islam but almost never in Christian nations. You want to come over here come on.

Will you go there if not paid ?

Not there no but somewhere nice I would. Money has nothing to do with the point I was making.

Saudi Arabia is among the richest countries and i think they like to relax and let others do the job,but i don't think that to be kind of slaving,but just business relationship.

It is rich but far less than 1% of them have all the money. The invest next to nothing it scholarships and universities. That is why even you Islam scholars you posted were educated outside Islam. The version of the equipment they have was the oldest one we made. It is primitive compared to the new one I am working on. They could almost take it to any radio shack and a good shade tree technician if they had either. Since they don't they are going to cough up tens of millions to have us do what a US tech school grad could do for a few thousand dollars. Yet you think they are a significant source of modern technical science. Their a source of almost zero. I do not think I am saying anything I shouldn't but I might slip and do and get in trouble so I am going to lay off what it is I work on.

Well how about that, another book. I did not say Islam was illiterate did I. They can write. Do you read anything you post. This is the third scholar that was educated in the US you have posted. His book was completed at Oxford not Beirut. Every advanced thing he knows was taught by Christian nations to him. This book Is written about a class my boss has had. It is an introductory class for computer engineering. He looks Indian and his home page does not mention Islam or Muslim. What are you doing?

What i want is a proof that refutes the effective role of muslims in science and civilization to Europe in the middle ages.

See any of the lists of the greatest scientists I gave.

Can you study computer science without understanding logarithm.

You can but it would be very hard. Why did you ask this? I studied algorithms far more than any computer engineer does for math degree.

They found nothing about science ,that is your words,but to me is nonsense.

Its nonsense because apparently you do not understand the difference between founded and found. They found many things but founded almost nothing.

Change also the word (chemistry) because it is an arabic name which was introduced to Europe in the middle ages.

Chemistry (the science) was founded in 1000BC. That is 1500 years before Muhammad. Who cares where the name came from. It was science not scientific words we are discussing.

Continued below:

 

[1robin]

Well how about that, another book. I did not say Islam was illiterate did I. They can write. Do you read anything you post. This is the third scholar that was educated in the US you have posted. His book was completed at Oxford not Beirut. Every advanced thing he knows was taught by Christian nations to him. This book Is written about a class my boss has had. It is an introductory class for computer engineering. He looks Indian and his home page does not mention Islam or Muslim. What are you doing?

What i want is a proof that refutes the effective role of muslims in science and civilization to Europe in the middle ages.

See any of the lists of the greatest scientists I gave.

Can you study computer science without understanding logarithm.

You can but it would be very hard. Why did you ask this? I studied algorithms far more than any computer engineer does for math degree.

They found nothing about science ,that is your words,but to me is nonsense.

Its nonsence because apparently you do not understand the difference between founded and found. They found many things but founded almost nothing.

Change also the word (chemistry) because it is an arabic name which was introduced to Europe in the middle ages.

Chemistry (the science) was founded in 1000BC. That is 1500 years before Muhammad. Who cares where the name came from. It was science not scientific words we are discussing.


Here is another exhaustive list from a neutral site you can ignore. It is all the names of those who have founded a fields of science. If you will still not give up your cherished but false idea after all the evidence I have given and all the problems I have proven with what you have, then facts and evidence have nothing to do with what you believe and cognitive dissonance has no cure. I will leave to think as you wish as you will anyway no matter how many pages of proof I supply.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_considered_father_or_mother_of_a_scientific_field
That list is true and proves without doubt Islam did not found a meaningful portion of science of any kind.

 

[1robin]

Lol what have you been smoking dude? I do ignore ad skim through most of your posts, this one keeps popping up on my replies tab,which is annoying so I click on it I honestly wish this thread died ages ago, but thanks to you..it's heart still beats.

I like talking about Islam. I would rate what I know most about and enjoy discussing this way.

1. Military history.
2. Christianity.
3. Science and math.
4. Philosophy.
5. Islam.

I know squat about most other things and if you looked back you would see my posts match that priority list.

I would argue seeds of mistrust were sewn when the US and UK tried to crush the Russian Revolution of 1918 and when Stalin signed the Soviet-Nazi pact at the start of WW2. At the end of the day it was a clash of ideologies and the uncertainty and mistrust in each other was reflected in their aggressive foreign policies. My essay is concentrated on the specific events as they unfolded towards the end of the war and the several years that followed. I also have to contrast the different approaches Historians have taken over the years, I personally agree with the new post 91 view..

Crush how? We did not fire a shot that I am aware of and we certainly did not attack them. I agree with the rest closely enough.

This is an excerpt from an essay by John Gaddis in 1996 titled On Moral Equivalency and Cold War History.

The Enola Gay controversy focused narrowly on whether or not the United States did the right thing
in dropping atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945. Implied in it, though, is a
much larger issue: What are the moral implications of having been the only nation, so far, to use
nuclear weapons against human targets? That is where the question of alternatives comes in, and it
does so in several different ways

I'm writing it for a History elective at Uni. I have to discuss how the views changed over the years from the Orthodox (Soviets want world domination) through the various revisionist, post-revisionist and finally the new post 91 interpretations of who the burden of the unnecessary quest for world domination should be placed on. Have about five hundred words and referencing left, and exactly 12 hours till its due.

What I have shown about the countries that have attacked us and the ones we invaded and our handing just about every single one back to them and even rebuilding them and protecting them. Remember all the people saying Iraq was about oil. Who has the oil, they do. We even rebuilt the wells their own guy destroyed plus more schools, power, and infrastructure than they had ever had and charged no one anything except our selves. Plus our forcing Britain to not resume it's age old expansionist policies which has never been done any nation in human history but the US to any significant degree. Islam, Rome, nor Greece ever willing gave back and rebuilt entire nations that attacked them. Why do you think all the Germans risked death to run into our lines instead of Russia's. As for Nukes on Japan that guy leaves out many things necessary to understand the situation.

The estimated casualties when we took Japan by conventional methods were 500,000 on our side and 2 - 3 million on theirs. However that is not all, we had been fighting for 4 years and were sick of it. We did not want to spend billions and maybe 6 more months or a year taking the Island. Japan believe their emperor was divine and had already shown they would choose suicide rather than death because of the ancient and stupid Bushido code or PRIDE. We were already killing hundreds of thousands in fire bombing techniques (if anything was immoral that was) that killed ten time what the nukes did. Instead of kamikaze's and suicide bombers, and probably 2.5 total million casualties for the next year or so. We demanded surrender and when refused killed less than 200,000 people in nuclear attacks. My question was always why they did not at least drop one on unpopulated areas and see if that scared them into surrender. Well since we did drop one on a city and it did not do so then I think that answers that question but there is another reason. We spend hundreds of billion on a place called Oak Ridge. I have been there. It used 1/10 of all power in the US its self to enrich Uranium. WE could only make enough for two bombs in a year. We had to make them have the greatest impact in the hope they would give it up (if you watch the Emperor most of them wanted to fight until they were all dead anyway, the emperor overruled them). Thank God. What did we do move in take over and milk it for everything it had. No we administered it until we rebuilt it and then protected it until they could do so themselves and they have a better nation because of it. We are not colonialists at least for anything beyond this continent. Add in no-one could see what the nuclear arms race would become and the idea that these weapons may end war and you get what we have. Certainly not a situation I would have preferred but also one hard to find specific fault with. It is the condition of man.

 

[1robin]

Do you think it was Moses who ordered the cruel punishments in the Old Testament?

No, I think God ordered them and Moses enacted them. You will never hear me deny the OT does not have it's share of violent actions but 70% of them are just recording history (God nor any prophets ordered them they were just writing down what had been happening all the time anyway). 20% of them were ordered by God after much patience in most cases and regretfully, but with justification, the last 10% were God's people doing things God never ordered and they record God's angel and massive punishments in most cases. Muhammad in his own words many times was acting out of greed, revenge, lust, and retribution. There are quite a few where he said Allah ordered it and I rarely mention them even though I do not believe Islam's Allah is God. The NT however never allows violence of any kind.

 

[Godobeyer]

I do not believe Islam's Allah is God. The NT however never allows violence of any kind.

Ibelieve Allah is arabic word
Elah is aramaic word , and also hebrew close to the arabic spelling "eloah"

so do you believe ORIGIN NT or OT ,is wrote by aramaic or hebrew ?

check my signature link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBTnwFq0Lf4

 

[FearGod]

I am the one that posted 4 lists from different secular sources that show the top ten scientists of all time and one that listed the top 100. If there was even a single Islamic name on why of them I did not see it. I do not know how evidence could get any better. It certainly beats the nothing you have posted. Either prove those list wrong or my claim has been perfectly proven and your not even attempted. I even gave lists that covered great inventions, founded fields of science themselves, or did foundational work and no Muslim name appeared. You can't possibly call yourself unbiased and still think what you claim. In fact that would go beyond bias into brainwashing or something. You can't fight those lists from secular source.



I do not believe I have ever said that. I have math degree not engineering degree. What I do is a part of engineering called military integration but that does not make me an engineer.



I have posted five lists of the greatest scientists of all time plus where the major breakthroughs in each field took place. How could you possibly say this, one list was 100 of the greatest scientists. It must be that preference and convenience is just completely keeping you from seeing facts. How many more do I have to pot before you conceded this ridiculous claim. It is will always be more than what I have then there is no point. Those lists are proof, the contained less that 2 Muslims. The end.

Our discussion was about the role of Muslims during the dark age of Europe,so mentioning Scientists after the decline of the Islamic Empire won't help you.

Tell me a name of one scientist in Europe during the dark age,no one,no books,no records,no interest in science,full ignorance.

Why you keep denying this fact.

Europe were in the dark ages while muslims were in the golden ages from the 8th century till the 13th century.

That is a fact,no one can deny what i had said.

The Islamic world made important advances in science, such as in algebra, chemistry, geology, spherical trigonometry, etc. which were later also transmitted to the West.[1][5] Stefan of Pise translated into Latin around 1127 an Arab manual of medical theory. The method of algorism for performing arithmetic with Indian-Arabic numerals was developed by the Persian al-Khwarizmi (hence the word “Algorithm”) in the 9th century, and introduced in Europe by Leonardo Fibonacci (1170–1250).[6] A translation by Robert of Chester of the Algebra by al-Kharizmi is known as early as 1145. Ibn al-Haytham (Alhazen, 980–1037) compiled treatises on optical sciences, which were used as references by Newton and Descartes. Medical sciences were also highly developed in Islam as testified by the Crusaders, who relied on Arab doctors on numerous occasions. Joinville reports he was saved in 1250 by a “Saracen” doctor.[7]

Reference : Islamic contributions to Medieval Europe - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The prophet prophesied that the Islamic nation will become weak after its strength and it will return to strength after it weakness and that will be once the Khilafah is established.

Some Ahadith foretelling some events

the Messenger of Allah said: "The nations are about to call each other and set upon you, just as diners set upon food." It was said: "Will it be because of our small number that day?" He said: "Rather, on that day you will be many, but you will be like foam, like the foam on the river. And Allah will remove the fear of you from the hearts of your enemies and will throw wahn (weakness) into your hearts." Someone said: "O Messenger of Allah! What is wahn?" He said: "Love of the world and the hatred for death.

Was that not true,of course those things are already planned by God to happen for a purpose,that if you believe that God planned those things to happen and not me and you.

Another hadith

The people used to ask the Messenger of Allah sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam about the good, and I used to ask him about the evil out of fear that it would reach me." So I asked the Messenger of Allah: "O Messenger of Allah, we were living in ignorance and evil, then Allah brought this good to us. So will there be any evil after this good?" He replied: "Yes." I then asked: "Will there be any good after this evil?" He replied: "Yes, but it will be tainted." So I asked: "What will be its taint?" He replied: "A people who guide others to other than my way, you will approve of some of their actions and disapprove of others." I further enquired: "Then is there any evil after this good?" He said: "Yes! Callers at the gates of Hell - whoever responds to their call, they will be thrown into the fire." I then said: "O Messenger of Allah! Describe them to us." He said: "They will be from our people and speak our language." I asked: "So what do you order me to do if that reaches me?" He said: "Stick to the Jama'ah (the united body) of the Muslims and their Imam (ruler)." I further asked: "What if they have neither Jama'ah or an Imam?" He said: "Then keep away from all those sects, even if you have to bite upon the roots of a tree, until death reaches you whilst you are in that state." 7

Another Hadith

There will be Prophethood for as long as Allah wills it to be, then He will remove it when He wills, then there will be Khilafah on the Prophetic method and it will be for as long as Allah wills, then He will remove it when He wills, then there will be biting Kingship for as long as Allah Wills, then He will remove it when He wills, then there will be oppressive kingship for as long as Allah wills, then he will remove it when He wills, and then there will be Khilafah upon the Prophetic method" and then he remained silent

So tell me wasn't that true,aren't muslims oppressed by their rulers.

 

[1robin]

Ibelieve Allah is arabic word
Elah is aramaic word , and also hebrew close to the arabic spelling "eloah"

so do you believe ORIGIN NT or OT ,is wrote by aramaic or hebrew ?

check my signature link
[youtube]yBTnwFq0Lf4[/youtube]
,in aramaic JESUS CALLED GOD: ALLAH - YouTube

The entire Arabic language is Semitic (Semite) and come from Israel and it's general area. That is one of the meanings of Arabic "of/from the West". However language roots are not that important. Both "car" and "ride" can refer to an automobile. They do not mean the same car. One of them or even both can also be referring to cars that do not exist. If I say my car was destroyed on an automotive rack and you say your car was never on any rack then it isn't the same car. The only record of what Jesus said is in the Bible. It does not contain Allah, Islam, or Muhammad in any of it's original language. Everything else is a speculation from silence and is actually a fallacy. Are you reading some Arabic version of the Bible or something.

 

[1robin]

Our discussion was about the role of Muslims during the dark age of Europe,so mentioning Scientists after the decline of the Islamic Empire won't help you.

Yes it will (though I don't need them) because this was about science not science between such and such dates. That is a stupid debate. It is not impressive how fast the man crawling is if everyone else was sitting still and if it had been about only that small period in time my agreeing that they did do some science then when others were not would have ended this long debate days ago. Yet you kept going because it what occurred during the most flattering dates you can find is meaningless. Why don't I just choose any decade I wish? Because it is pointless and means nothing. How about science done between noon and 3pm, or by left handed people, or at the Vatican? Who cares? The issue who that Islam is nothing special in science history and Christianity is along with a few others. They had their day and did a little with it. We have had longer done much more, and done it much bigger and are still doing it while many current Islamic nations can't even remain nations.

Tell me a name of one scientist in Europe during the dark age,no one,no books,no records,no interest in science,full ignorance.

Don't care.

Why you keep denying this fact.

Never have. In fact I have agreed with it, brought up myself, and never thought otherwise. You have the most selective and creative memory I have ever encountered.

Europe were in the dark ages while muslims were in the golden ages from the 8th century till the 13th century.

Stating this over and over will never make it important nor make me disagree with it. It does not matter. This is like loosing the game but only talking about the half of one quarter where you did better. The scoreboard says Christianity - 21 Islam 10 and instead of honorably admitting you did not win the game you want to only discuss the 5 plays you gained yards on. It is one thing doing this kind of stuff in a debate with me but you are wagering everything you have and ever will have on arguments like this. The stakes are too high for this type of reasoning or lack of. When it's over and if the score board says FearGod lost with 10 minutes here or any single year make any difference. This is no game and no contest it is for everything. I say this to you because I like you. I really fear your making some massive mistakes in the way you think about things but that is certainly your right.
That is a fact,no one can deny what i had said. Don't take any insult I would have not said it if I did not care and many times I don't (though I am sure I should) but you have grown on me a little.

The Islamic world made important advances in science, such as in algebra, chemistry, geology, spherical trigonometry, etc. which were later also transmitted to the West.[1][5] Stefan of Pise translated into Latin around 1127 an Arab manual of medical theory. The method of algorism for performing arithmetic with Indian-Arabic numerals was developed by the Persian al-Khwarizmi (hence the word “Algorithm”) in the 9th century, and introduced in Europe by Leonardo Fibonacci (1170–1250).[6] A translation by Robert of Chester of the Algebra by al-Kharizmi is known as early as 1145. Ibn al-Haytham (Alhazen, 980–1037) compiled treatises on optical sciences, which were used as references by Newton and Descartes. Medical sciences were also highly developed in Islam as testified by the Crusaders, who relied on Arab doctors on numerous occasions. Joinville reports he was saved in 1250 by a “Saracen” doctor.[7]

Yes they did. Which is probably why I have said they did over and over. Let me change the way judge this a little. On a scale of 1 - 10 you claim Islam is a 9 or 10. If I deny they are a 9 or 10 you act as if I said they were a 0. I have never thought or said that. I would put them at about a 4 or 5. Yes they did some great stuff. Yet they did almost nothing in foundations of science, creating fields of science, or applying practical science. Every bit of exhaustive information I have posted is consistent with that. Posting they created a better toothbrush, named algebra, or created a microscope especially since they all so far went to Western universities does not make any appear on a single list of great scientists I posted.

continued:

 

[1robin]

Reference : Islamic contributions to Medieval Europe - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I will just concede whatever this is because it will not change anything.

The prophet prophesied that the Islamic nation will become weak after its strength and it will return to strength after it weakness and that will be once the Khilafah is established.

The Bible prophesied that Nebuchadnezzar will attack troy and destroy it's mainland city and that later Alexander would destroy the Island fortress and sweep it clean and no one would ever live in a Phoenician Tyre ever again and they haven't. It went on to add that Nebuchadnezzar would not collect enough money to pay his troops so would be allowed to sack Egypt and money other details including what happened to every one of Alexander's 4 generals in detail. It has 351 prophecies about details of one man. It predicted that once a nation again no-one will ever be able to take Israeli away from the Jews again. Now those are prophecies (and Muslims would be alive by the thousands if they had believed them). God provides detail in abundance because only he can. Anyone can and have many times predicted things that almost certainly would occur with little detail. I will so right now. You will be sick in the future yet you will get well. Who can't do that? Even Nostradamus was far more explicit. Islam is many times jokingly called a non-profit system. The best the Quran has is about Rome loosing a battle but then wining in the end. Very unimpressive. The bible has 2500 and they are all better than that and many are far more detailed even to the day things would happen thousands of years away than what I mentioned above and the Quran can't even attempt to match the one I posted from memory about TYRE.

Some Ahadith foretelling some events

the Messenger of Allah said: "The nations are about to call each other and set upon you, just as diners set upon food." It was said: "Will it be because of our small number that day?" He said: "Rather, on that day you will be many, but you will be like foam, like the foam on the river. And Allah will remove the fear of you from the hearts of your enemies and will throw wahn (weakness) into your hearts." Someone said: "O Messenger of Allah! What is wahn?" He said: "Love of the world and the hatred for death.

Was that not true,of course those things are already planned by God to happen for a purpose,that if you believe that God planned those things to happen and not me and you.

Another hadith

The people used to ask the Messenger of Allah sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam about the good, and I used to ask him about the evil out of fear that it would reach me." So I asked the Messenger of Allah: "O Messenger of Allah, we were living in ignorance and evil, then Allah brought this good to us. So will there be any evil after this good?" He replied: "Yes." I then asked: "Will there be any good after this evil?" He replied: "Yes, but it will be tainted." So I asked: "What will be its taint?" He replied: "A people who guide others to other than my way, you will approve of some of their actions and disapprove of others." I further enquired: "Then is there any evil after this good?" He said: "Yes! Callers at the gates of Hell - whoever responds to their call, they will be thrown into the fire." I then said: "O Messenger of Allah! Describe them to us." He said: "They will be from our people and speak our language." I asked: "So what do you order me to do if that reaches me?" He said: "Stick to the Jama'ah (the united body) of the Muslims and their Imam (ruler)." I further asked: "What if they have neither Jama'ah or an Imam?" He said: "Then keep away from all those sects, even if you have to bite upon the roots of a tree, until death reaches you whilst you are in that state." 7

Another Hadith

There will be Prophethood for as long as Allah wills it to be, then He will remove it when He wills, then there will be Khilafah on the Prophetic method and it will be for as long as Allah wills, then He will remove it when He wills, then there will be biting Kingship for as long as Allah Wills, then He will remove it when He wills, then there will be oppressive kingship for as long as Allah wills, then he will remove it when He wills, and then there will be Khilafah upon the Prophetic method" and then he remained silent

So tell me wasn't that true,aren't muslims oppressed by their rulers.

You guys spent a lot of time telling me over and over that only the Quran can be used even though I knew you didn't believe that but if you or they are going to say it then why must I go with Ahadith's claims. I will however agree here. Muslims are oppressed by their leaders (which are more than not Muslims themselves). So was America (by the most powerful empire the Erath had ever seen for it's time). Being Christians with faith and moral fortitude we whipped the crap out of Great Britain twice. The middle east seems to replace one tyrant with another tyrant. It is almost like there is no good leader to choose from. I tell what would work. If Syria would say to the US, that they would become a strict democracy and would make Islam available just like every other faith and not enforce any religion exclusively we would help them militarily and financially and they would have peace. However Pride prevents this or some spiritual stronghold on the area does.

You have employed a tactic I noticed a while back more than anyone else I know.

Many things I have posted just demolish your claims about Islam and science history. You know they do, you have to. Every time I post a list or history it disappears and some random picture of a plane (which was Russian) or the name of a type of Math (not the math its self) takes it's place. It is not debated or even mentioned. What is the point of a debate if everything that can settle it disappears in your hands? I like you because your less arrogant and hostile than others and you try hard but a case can't be proven any better than what I have and it all just goes away like it never existed. How can I justify doing this in that case. BTW algorithms have been used long before Islam ever existed. Do you think naming things is grounds for claiming scientific excellence. If you think Allah may be the King of naming things (even though Rome named far more) he is still not King in doing science. Keep trying if you wish but deleting everything that can resolve the issue and posting things that don't make for silly debates. In fact until you can contend with at least one list I will not debate this further. Why are Muslims almost absent from secular top ten lists of scientists, top 100 lists of scientists, and lists of the hundreds of the fields of science and who founded them?

 

[Godobeyer]

The entire Arabic language is Semitic (Semite) and come from Israel and it's general area. That is one of the meanings of Arabic "of/from the West". However language roots are not that important. Both "car" and "ride" can refer to an automobile. They do not mean the same car. One of them or even both can also be referring to cars that do not exist. If I say my car was destroyed on an automotive rack and you say your car was never on any rack then it isn't the same car. The only record of what Jesus said is in the Bible. It does not contain Allah, Islam, or Muhammad in any of it's original language. Everything else is a speculation from silence and is actually a fallacy. Are you reading some Arabic version of the Bible or something.

INDEED I READ SOME ARABIC VERSION OF BIBLE ? THEY (the arabic christians) CALLED GOD "ALLAH"

maybe you ignore that the arabic chrisians used the word ALLAH to mention to GOD ?

you right , ALLAH and Muhammad are not found in english bible .

 

[1robin]

INDEED I READ SOME ARABIC VERSION OF BIBLE ? THEY (the arabic christians) CALLED GOD "ALLAH"

maybe you ignore that the arabic chrisians used the word ALLAH to mention to GOD ?

you right , ALLAH and Muhammad are not found in english bible .

I am aware that Arabians long after the Bible was written have called Elohim Allah and that Bibles translated into Arabic have used Allah. My claim was that Allah is not the original Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek word for God and the two words describe two mutually exclusive beings claims opposite things. Neither is Muhammad mentioned in the Bible in any of it's original forms. The names for God in the bible are:

El Shaddai (Lord God Almighty)
El Elyon (The Most High God)
Adonai (Lord, Master)
Yahweh (Lord, Jehovah)
Jehovah Nissi (The Lord My Banner)
Jehovah-Raah (The Lord My Shepherd) <LI id=yui-gen22>Jehovah Rapha (The Lord That Heals)
Jehovah Shammah (The Lord Is There)
Jehovah Tsidkenu (The Lord Our Righteousness)
Jehovah Mekoddishkem (The Lord Who Sanctifies You)
El Olam (The Everlasting God) <LI id=yui-gen27>Elohim (God)
Qanna (Jealous)
Jehovah Jireh (The Lord Will Provide) <LI id=yui-gen30>Jehovah Shalom (The Lord Is Peace) <LI id=yui-gen29>Jehovah Sabaoth (The Lord of Hosts)
Study Resources :: The Names of God in the Old Testament

There are no Muslims in the Bible, no Allah, and no Muhammad in the original bible.
I have little interest in what people may call God outside the Bible. I can call God a blue unicorn but that does not make him one. The Islamic Allah and Biblical Yahweh are irreconcilable. Most of the latter religions try their best to gain credibility by associating with the Biblical God but have nothing to do with him.

 

[Godobeyer]

I am aware that Arabians long after the Bible was written have called Elohim Allah and that Bibles translated into Arabic have used Allah. My claim was that Allah is not the original Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek word for God and the two words describe two mutually exclusive beings claims opposite things. Neither is Muhammad mentioned in the Bible in any of it's original forms. The names for God in the bible are:

El Shaddai (Lord God Almighty)
El Elyon (The Most High God)
Adonai (Lord, Master)
Yahweh (Lord, Jehovah)
Jehovah Nissi (The Lord My Banner)
Jehovah-Raah (The Lord My Shepherd) <LI id=yui-gen22>Jehovah Rapha (The Lord That Heals)
Jehovah Shammah (The Lord Is There)
Jehovah Tsidkenu (The Lord Our Righteousness)
Jehovah Mekoddishkem (The Lord Who Sanctifies You)
El Olam (The Everlasting God) <LI id=yui-gen27>Elohim (God)
Qanna (Jealous)
Jehovah Jireh (The Lord Will Provide) <LI id=yui-gen30>Jehovah Shalom (The Lord Is Peace) <LI id=yui-gen29>Jehovah Sabaoth (The Lord of Hosts)
Study Resources :: The Names of God in the Old Testament

There are no Muslims in the Bible, no Allah, and no Muhammad in the original bible.
I have little interest in what people may call God outside the Bible. I can call God a blue unicorn but that does not make him one. The Islamic Allah and Biblical Yahweh are irreconcilable. Most of the latter religions try their best to gain credibility by associating with the Biblical God but have nothing to do with him.

who said that the arabic is the origne of hebrew or aramaic ?

how you explian that the arabs christians used the word ALLAH in their arabic bible ?

and how about Jesus (pbuh) who called his God (Elahi) exactly as we used in arabic ?