Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts


Discussion about "My Orde...
Today at 05:18 AM

Conference on Freedom of ...
Today at 05:06 AM

Richard Dawkins event can...
Today at 02:23 AM

Greetings ! My story:
Today at 12:53 AM

Idle Thoughts
Today at 12:43 AM

MMA (Mixed Martial Arts)
Today at 12:28 AM

كنت اعتقد انه على ما يرام...
by akay
Yesterday at 07:19 PM

25 killed in blast near L...
Yesterday at 06:49 PM

Pakistan: The Nation.....
Yesterday at 06:31 PM

Everything to debunk day ...
Yesterday at 05:05 PM

24 killed as car bomb exp...
Yesterday at 02:00 PM

Random Islamic History Po...
Yesterday at 01:26 PM

Theme Changer

 Topic: My responses to the masked arab

 (Read 6257 times)
  • Previous page 1 23 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • My responses to the masked arab
     Reply #30 - March 01, 2016, 09:00 PM

    Quote
    your point being?


    that you are wasting so much time saying nothing at all. If there are some good points in there somewhere you should cut out the irrelevant stuff and just stick to them.

    Quote
    despite the fact that i showed how the masked arab cited weak hadiths and fabricated narration from al-tabari, and the fact that the tafsires he cited non of them claim literal interpretation after all of that it's not worthy to respond to him?


    Well i can't really bothered to sift through your dross to find the good points you are making. Your reputation precedes you. You are going to have to make it a bit easier. What is the single best point you make?
  • My responses to the masked arab
     Reply #31 - March 01, 2016, 09:02 PM

    Found one good point from you. He confused 'sahih in chain' with 'sahih'.  Although it is pretty obviously an honest and not massively significant mistake.

    Are there any other good points? If so, what is the best?


    Edit: I changed my mind. Not such a great point afterall, since there was a version graded sahih. You point out that it was graded sahih by a modern scholar. That seems pretty irrelevant. He didn't claim it was graded sahih by anybody in particular. Only that it was graded sahih and gave the reference.


    actually you are wrong he said and i quote "yah the hadith is sahih, highest authenticity" he explicitly said that the hadith he cited is the highest authenticity when clearly anyone who read carfull it says "sahih in chain" and as i demonstrated in my article, the hadiths that are classified as sahih in chain only are not considered authentic

    because the hadith is consistent of two parts
    sanad and Matin
    Sanad is the chain of narration, the narrators who are orally transmitting a hadith
    Matin is the raw text of the hadith
    in order for a hadith to be considred Sahih hadith, both Sanad and Matin must be connected and considered authentic
    the hadith brought by the masked arab is not authentic in matin
    subsequently making it not authentic as a hole

    i also noticed you ignored the part where i talked about him citing a fabricated narration from al-tabari
  • My responses to the masked arab
     Reply #32 - March 01, 2016, 09:03 PM

    Good luck debunking MA. He backs his claims up with solid sources that are available to everyone. He works hard to make his arguments airtight in ways that other youtubers come no where close to.

    However, I'll give your blog a read when I can.


    MA did mess up on the one hadith which was claimed to not be from a chain of narrations with Urwa. At least when I looked it up it seems to be. Although the translation used the word Erwa rather than Urwa. Others can confirm or deny this who can read Arabic.
  • My responses to the masked arab
     Reply #33 - March 01, 2016, 09:05 PM

    Quote
    i also noticed you ignored the part where i talked about him citing a fabricated narration from al-tabari


    yes and i intend to continue ignoring it. One point at a time. Is this weak hadith thing your strongest point? Just pick something.

    What point most directly undercuts his overall argument?
  • My responses to the masked arab
     Reply #34 - March 01, 2016, 09:11 PM

    si
    that you are wasting so much time saying nothing at all. If there are some good points in there somewhere you should cut out the irrelevant stuff and just stick to them.

    Well i can't really bothered to sift through your dross to find the good points you are making. Your reputation precedes you. You are going to have to make it a bit easier. What is the single best point you make?



    single best point? what I'm trying to point out is the following
    the masked arab claimed that wajadah is found 35 times in the Quran, when a simple search on Quran.com will show him that it's over 200 more there, the other issue is that he challenged muslims to show one example of the word wajadah in the Quran outside location use, i have more than one i gave 7 examples, so his challange is answered
    i also pointed out how he made an error in his facebook post citing the same hadith where he claim that it's authentic since i casted doubt on it, however after only 2 mintes of research i found out that the source he gave in his Facebook post is not a classical work of sayuti and albani but rather a modern revolutionist scholar who wrote the book in 2008 and as the intructuon of his book says this book is just to clear up duplicated hadiths to make it easier to read, i looked up the source of the hadith used in the book he cited using the same hadith number to find out that al albani is referring to sunnan abu dawood, i looked up sunnan abu dawood and low and behold the hadith is classified as sahih in chain only
    later on i show that he fabricated the narration of al tabari, only few pages later al-tabari the man himself cited by the masked arab is claiming that the narration used by the masked arab is not authentic, so the masked arab is either a terrible researcher or that he lied here
    later on i show how non of the tafsirs he cited claims literal interpretation, what makes matters worse is that he cited a shia tafsir at the end to verify his claim the issue here is that the tafsir is shia which makes the overwhelming majority of muslims reject it, and it was written after the discovery of the sun being larger, so that tafsir is very late

    do you see now?
  • My responses to the masked arab
     Reply #35 - March 01, 2016, 09:26 PM

    AZ. you brought up the Scientists thus:

    Quote
    Girls reach puberty from 8-12 accommodating with 3 years of biological changes in their body, if you are saying by that that i approve a 53 year old marriage to a 9 year old then go and insult the doctors at the university of Chicago and almost every other scientific who makes the claim that girls reach puberty at the age of 8 or 9,


    I agree with the other posters, that your positions are not clearly articulated.   I only wished to emphasize the point that reaching puberty did no mean a girl was ready for the consequences of marriage.  If we agree, good.

    And lastly. I believe that Mohammed was  just a  man of his times.   I don't believe he or any one in this world ever had a direct connection to god, as I am an athiest.

  • My responses to the masked arab
     Reply #36 - March 01, 2016, 09:31 PM

    Quote
    the masked arab claimed that wajadah is found 35 times in the Quran, when a simple search on Quran.com will show him that it's over 200 more there


    i ask you for your single best point, and the first thing you present is something which in your blog you concede "is irrelevant". It really is irrelevant. I don't know or care which of you has the more accurate word count. I notice that word counts often do vary widely. Maybe he was counting the specific word, whereas you were also including variations of it. Whatever.

    But then you finally do get on to the crux of the matter. i.e the 'challenge' and I agree that this does appear to be your most direct attack on his overall argument.

    You describe his challenge in the following way: "he challenged muslims to show one example of the word wajadah in the Quran outside location use". But that isn't the challenge at all. The challenge in his own words is:

    "I challenge anyone to show me an example of where this word is used in the quran to indicate something that is only from the visual perspective of someone."

    The challenge is to find an instance of the word being used to describe how something appeared to somebody, but in reality was not the case. In each of your examples, whatever was 'found' to be the case, was in fact the case in reality.

    Quote
    Did He not find thee an orphan and give thee shelter (and care)?


    did it only seem like he as an orphan, but in reality he had parents? No, he 'found' him to be an orphan precisely because he was in reality, an orphan.

    Quote
    They said, "We found our fathers worshiping them."


    Were their fathers only seemingly worshipping idols, but not in reality? No. they really were worshipping them. That is precisely why they we 'found' to be doing so.

    Quote
    And He found thee wandering, and He gave thee guidance.


    Was it only an apparent wandering from the incorrect perspective of someone? No. You have not understood what the challenge is. You present some other examples, but it's the same pattern.
  • My responses to the masked arab
     Reply #37 - March 01, 2016, 09:31 PM

    "Quote from: AhmedZaid9119 on Today at 01:45 PM
    "You are using anachronisms to argue your point which make it irrelevant."
    example?


    I provided an example within my comment. Also look up what anachronism means then reread your blog with that in mind.

    Quote
    "Also you are using stereotypes to argue your point which also make these irrelevant. "


    I provided an example in the comment. Read it again.

    Quote
    I only respond to his insults with equal ones


    Which undermines your logic since you need to use insults as part of your argument.


    Quote
    "Girl also play violent video games so there goes that argument"
    i never said they don't don't strawman me, dolls are primarily a female thing, and saying that girls who keep dolls or teady bears are children is out most idiotic, my own sister is one year older than me she is 25 and she have dolls she is a college graduate, all her friends aswell have dolls, are they all children to you?


    You still used it as an example thus still a stereotype. You are still ignoring that a doll is consider idolatry. The exception for children is based on the verse by Aisha about dolls itself. That is my point. Dolls within Islam are for children only. If an adult has one then they are are breaking idolatry rulings

    http://www.healthguidance.org/entry/15910/1/List-of-Gender-Stereotypes.html

    Quote
    "Your are using opinions as if opinions matter. You could delete everything after the definition of pedophilia and your point would be sound"
    delete what?
     


    Sorry I wasn't specific enough. Kecia Ali view on hadith is an opinion only.

    Quote
    i cited academic sources and references all agree that you can't just look at someone sexually attracted to children and immediately label them as pedophiles, also they said that if someone follows a tradition or religion that allow them for child marriage they are not pedophiles, that is not what I'm saying at all that is what academics and sexologist say
    " Everything after it does more damage then good. For example "The Jurisprudence have made the judgment in marriage and gave permission to young ones under one condition that they are to be consulted in marriage and they should reach adulthood or pass nine years of age" Notice there is no mention of puberty just an age requirement. "


    I already said these were fine

    adulthood is when they are mentally and physically ready, notice how i provided academic and biological sources that even at the age of 8 you can still hit puberty, these are all undisputed academic sources, and the university of Chicago is not the only place where you can find such claim, but i also noticed how you ignored all the sources i gave from classical scholars where they explicitly say that child marriage is only allowed if there is special benefit for the child, I.e giving your child to a rich man so she can grow up in a rich house, non of them said that you can give away your child to a husband who is sexually attracted to her, Infact almost all of them agree that if the husband is sexually deviant he should not be handled to the child, but rather wait for her to be ready, notice how many of them said that she should not be handled if she will be damaged [/quote]

    Hit puberty but not finish puberty. There is a difference. I never ignored these sources. These sources are the very ones I said did more harm than good. You contradict yourself by providing ground for child marriage.

    Quote
    "You should link the videos themselves so people can see the references directly."
    why would i, only his fans know about my blog, plus from the title and the name of the person they can easily google him and see the video I'm targeting


    You made the assumption that his fans are here and they know his videos well. Obviously I didn't. It is sloppy work that is my point.

    Quote
    "Your work also looks like a draft. It is very hard to read due to poor grammar, sentence structure and punctuation."
    English is not my first language, I'm an arab i didn't grow up in Uk like he did, second of all how come all English speaking audience including muslims who have read my rebuttal clearly understood it? and you didn't?


    I said it was hard to read not that I didn't understand it. Also the blog's format seems smaller than whatever you used to type up the article thus distorts what you wrote by forcing line drops and paraphrases.

    Quote
    this is partly true i struggled for 30 minutes editing my blog live on the website when it messed up some endnootes


    Yes like I said it looks like the blog format reformatted what you wrote. Software conflicts.

    Quote
    Mistakes such as? as for child molester this is also addressed in the academic sources i provided, but he still doesn't fall under child molester purely because he was following his tradition


    Tradition is irrelevant as child abuse is not dictate by culture. Also your argument is relativistic so I can use the same argument against Islam. Islam is not longer suitable in modern cultures, done.

    Quote
    let me ask you for real, why is it only anti-islam polemicists such as yourself i assume, and TMA or any ex muslim claim Muhammad is a pedophile but when you present your argument to any sexologist they will not take it seriously when they immediately know that Muhammad was simply following his tradition?


    I never said pedophile. I said child molester. Tradition is irrelevant, it only shows the human nature of Islam in which human standards are acceptable  Again the same argument can be used against Islam."

    "I provided an example within my comment. Also look up what anachronism means then reread your blog with that in mind."
    you didn't read your original comment this is what you said "You are using anachronisms to argue your point which make it irrelevant" that is it, just that no example was given

    "Quote
    "Also you are using stereotypes to argue your point which also make these irrelevant. "


    I provided an example in the comment. Read it again.
    "

    i think you are referring to the example of boys and girls being both can play violent video games

    which is again I NEVER SAID that violent video games are exclusive to boys, please don't strawman me

    "Quote
    I only respond to his insults with equal ones


    Which undermines your logic since you need to use insults as part of your argument. "

    where did said and make a statement similar to that? all i did is comment on HIS insults that is it, then proceed to the refutation

    "You still used it as an example thus still a stereotype. You are still ignoring that a doll is consider idolatry. The exception for children is based on the verse by Aisha about dolls itself. That is my point. Dolls within Islam are for children only. If an adult has one then they are are breaking idolatry rulings "
    "That is my point. Dolls within Islam are for children only."
    citation needed

    "Sorry I wasn't specific enough. Kecia Ali view on hadith is an opinion only. "
    same as the scholars he cited in his video where he shared videos of scholars in an interview condoning (or seams so) pedophilia, these are also opinions, so let me guess, the masked arab according to you can cite opinions, i can't?

    "Hit puberty but not finish puberty. There is a difference. I never ignored these sources. These sources are the very ones I said did more harm than good. You contradict yourself by providing ground for child marriage."

    why are they the harmful ones? where did i provide ground for child marriage, these are Not my opinion, here let me make it simple
    the masked arab claimed that you can marry a child even in cradle for no reason
    i showed that there need to be a special benefit as juries claim in order to have a child marriage, not that you can go and marry a child for no reason
    he claimed that you can have sex with a child even when they are in cradle or no matter what age they are
    i showed that not only he mistranslated the sources but that is a total nonsense, and i provided classical sources to back up my claim

    "Tradition is irrelevant as child abuse is not dictate by culture. Also your argument is relativistic so I can use the same argument against Islam. Islam is not longer suitable in modern cultures, done.

    "I never said pedophile. I said child molester. Tradition is irrelevant, it only shows the human nature of Islam in which human standards are acceptable  Again the same argument can be used against Islam"

    and again how do you diffine child molester, how do sexologist define child molester? do they apply it on someone who is simply following the tradition?

    you have to provide academic sources to backup your claims, can you show me an academic who claims that a child molester can be also applied to anyone who is also following a tradition or religion?

    and next time don't use the quote function as it makes your comment so long, simply copy my statement as quote and quote and reply under it
  • My responses to the masked arab
     Reply #38 - March 01, 2016, 09:39 PM

    It’s difficult to read through your arguments, let alone be convinced by them.

    You can also use the quote feature by clicking on the “Insert Quote” icon above. You can highlight whatever it is you are quoting then use that icon to engage the feature.

    Or, you can do what I often do and just type out the quote function. With no spaces, type [ q u o t e ] (insert text you want to quote here) [ / q u o t e ] .

    It’ll make it much easier for us to read what you are writing.

    "God will say, "O Jesus, son of Mary, did you say to the people, 'Make me and my mother gods beside God?" Qur'an 5:116

    "I told them clearly that I am a man...and that they should never make a mistake in assuming or pretending that the human being is emanated from a deity." - Haile Selassie
  • My responses to the masked arab
     Reply #39 - March 01, 2016, 09:45 PM

    i ask you for your single best point, and the first thing you present is something which in your blog you concede "is irrelevant". It really is irrelevant. I don't know or care which of you has the more accurate word count. I notice that words often do vary widely. Maybe he was counting the specific word, whereas you were also including variations of it. Whatever.

    But then you finally do get on to the crux of the matter. i.e the 'challenge' and I agree that this does appear to be your most direct attack on his overall argument.

    You describe his challenge in the following way: "he challenged muslims to show one example of the word wajadah in the Quran outside location use". But that isn't the challenge at all. The challenge in his own words is:

    "I challenge anyone to show me an example to show me an example of where this word is used in the quran to indicate something that is only from the visual perspective of someone."

    The challenge is to find an instance of the word being used to describe how something appeared to somebody, but in reality was not the case. In each of your examples, whatever was 'found' to be the case, was in fact the case in reality.

    did it only seem like he as an orphan, but in reality he had parents? No, he 'found' him to be an orphan precisely because he was in reality, an orphan.

    Were their fathers only seemingly worshipping idols, but not in reality? No. they really were worshipping them. That is precisely why they we 'found' to be doing so.

    Was it only an apparent wandering from the incorrect perspective of someone? No. You have not understood what the challenge is. You present some other examples, but it's the same pattern.




    Ok it seams that you don't speak Arabic that is when when you said
    "Maybe he was counting the specific word, whereas you were also including variations of it. Whatever."
    this is not correct, the words i used are the exact root of the very word he used, the variations are dependent on the speaker for example if i use wajadah it's referring to a male , if i use wajadat, it's referring to female, if i use wajadtu, it's referring to myself
    the tweak comes from first person perspective or so on, despite that the word remains the same in the same root the same use the same meaning
    i didn't strawman his challenge at all
    the word wajadah has two uses as most, either for location, or visual perspective (or thought perspective as you can put it) if we are focusing of visual perspective then it's correct for me to claim that his challenge is where to use the word wajadah outside location perspective, because what else can use use wajadh other than location? will vision is the most common outside of it

    "
    Were their fathers only seemingly worshiping idols, but not in reality? No. they really were worshiping them. That is precisely why they we 'found' to be doing so.

    Was it only an apparent wandering from the incorrect perspective of someone? No. You have not understood what the challenge is. You present some other examples, but it's the same pattern."

    ok you are having knee jerking reaction, you didn't criticize my examples so let's go throw each one you cited
    the first one is where it says "don't you find the orphan?" let me ask you when you look at someone and say i found him an orphan does this mean in location spectrum? of course not, therefore it's of visual perspective

    as for the last one of worshiping idols, let us see, if we apply the masked arab logic "we found them in place worshiping idols" then please tell me does this make sense to you? do you find people in terms of location worshiping idols, or do you observe them in terms of visuals as they are worshiping idols?

    so no it's not the same pattern you have not presented a single logical response to my examples, anyone who think logically will clearly say that when i say "i found them worshiping idols" will clearly understand that i was speaking from my visual perspective NOT location perspective therefore the patterns are not the same, therefore his challenge is answered
  • My responses to the masked arab
     Reply #40 - March 01, 2016, 09:46 PM

    It’s difficult to read through your arguments, let alone be convinced by them.

    You can also use the quote feature by clicking on the “Insert Quote” icon above. You can highlight whatever it is you are quoting then use that icon to engage the feature.

    Or, you can do what I often do and just type out the quote function. With no spaces, type [ q u o t e ] (insert text you want to quote here) [ / q u o t e ] .

    It’ll make it much easier for us to read what you are writing.



    what argument you are referring to? are you referring to my blog or here?
  • My responses to the masked arab
     Reply #41 - March 01, 2016, 09:46 PM

    Never mind. Don't even worry about it. 

    "God will say, "O Jesus, son of Mary, did you say to the people, 'Make me and my mother gods beside God?" Qur'an 5:116

    "I told them clearly that I am a man...and that they should never make a mistake in assuming or pretending that the human being is emanated from a deity." - Haile Selassie
  • My responses to the masked arab
     Reply #42 - March 01, 2016, 09:50 PM

    Never mind. Don't even worry about it. 


    ok you are not dealing with a buffoon here, what argument you were referring to?
  • My responses to the masked arab
     Reply #43 - March 01, 2016, 10:30 PM

    Quote
    the words i used are the exact root of the very word he used


    Here they say the root is found 107 times. http://corpus.quran.com/qurandictionary.jsp?q=wjd#%2818:86:6%29 You say over 200. It is totally unsurprising that different word counts can be arrived at. It is the main reason those word count miracles are so unimpressive. We both agree that the number is irrelevant. If it's over 200, then it will be even easier for you to find an example of its use where it meets the challenge.

    The challenge is to find an instance of the use of the word describing something that is NOT the case. Something that APPEARS to be the case (found to be the case). But is not the case in reality.

    TheMaskedArab does also add the qualifier 'visual', but in the context of his argument, it isn't actually relevant (and i'm sure he'd be happy to omit it). Any kind of perspective at all will suffice. A blind person can still mistakenly 'find' a state of affairs to be the case. But the question is, does the quran ever use the word to describe a state of affairs that is mistakenly 'found' to be the case?
    None of the examples you present are instances of this.



    Quote
    if we are focusing of visual perspective then it's correct for me to claim that his challenge is where to use the word wajadah outside location perspective


    I don't know what you mean by 'location perspective'. The important distinction is between something that was apparent, but was not actual; and something that was apparent because it was actual.


    Quote
    let me ask you when you look at someone and say i found him an orphan does this mean in location spectrum? of course not, therefore it's of visual perspective


    When you say you found an orphan, it means that your senses have led you to believe that you have found an orphan. The question is whether or not your conclusion is accurate. The question is whether or not the sun really was found to actually be in a muddy spring, or whether it was merely a sensory (in this case visual) experience, that didn't actually describe reality.

    Maybe you dreampt finding an orphan. Maybe you did find a kid, but the kid lied about being an orphan. Maybe the kid thought he was an orphan but was mistaken himself. In the case of the sun setting in a muddy spring, and in the case of you finding an orphan, you could say that your senses have deceived you, and have not accurately described reality. Although it APPEARED as if the sun was setting in a muddy spring from an individual's perspective, in reality it was not. Although you found it to be the case that this kid is an orphan, you could have got it wrong.

    The response to the claim that the sun really was found to be setting in a muddy spring, is precisely this defense - It merely appeared to be the case, but was not in reality. It's not an unreasonable response. The problem that TheMaskedArab has with this response however, is that whenever the word 'found' is used in the quran, it always describes something that IS the case in reality. Including the other instance of its use in the very same verse.

    This is why you would have a good counterargument IF you could find an example of the word being used to describe something that was only an appearance (perspective/belief/point of view), but was not reality.

    Nothing you are saying about 'location spectrum' is relevant, and i don't know what you even mean by it.

  • My responses to the masked arab
     Reply #44 - March 01, 2016, 10:41 PM


    Quote
    where did said and make a statement similar to that? all i did is comment on HIS insults that is it, then proceed to the refutation


    Re-read your work again. I am not the only one telling you about the insults in your post. Do you see me mocking your logic as childish? That type of tripe is used to gain emotional appeal. Both of you did it, this does not make it right anyways.

    Quote
    citation needed


    https://islamqa.info/en/9473
    http://askaquestionto.us/question-answer/fiqh/are-animal-toys-and-dolls-forbidden-in-islam

    Quote
    same as the scholars he cited in his video where he shared videos of scholars in an interview condoning (or seams so) pedophilia, these are also opinions, so let me guess, the masked arab according to you can cite opinions, i can't?


    No he didn't. He used scholars as a source as in ahadith. You used a scholars opinion on ahadith backed by nothing. There is no evidence for the reason for her belief. It is an opinion, that is it. Just like the opinion MA mocked. I already told your your health science articles are fine, stop bring it up. Those are backed by evidence.

    Quote
    why are they the harmful ones? where did i provide ground for child marriage, these are Not my opinion, here let me make it simple


    The very quote is from your blog. It sets an maturity limit in one case and an age in the other. The age is 9 while your own health science sources shows 9 is not standard. The quote is an exception to the very puberty claim you are making.

    Quote
    the masked arab claimed that you can marry a child even in cradle for no reason


    By you never thought this rebuttal thought. You were so focused on cradle robbing that you failed to realize you just quoted a source which still allows a child marriage with an age restrict not a puberty restriction.

    Quote
    i showed that there need to be a special benefit as juries claim in order to have a child marriage, not that you can go and marry a child for no reason
    he claimed that you can have sex with a child even when they are in cradle or no matter what age they are
    i showed that not only he mistranslated the sources but that is a total nonsense, and i provided classical sources to back up my claim


    It is still an endorsement. You crippled your own argument and provided evidence for MA's.

    Quote
    and again how do you diffine child molester, how do sexologist define child molester? do they apply it on someone who is simply following the tradition?


    From the same type of health-sciences that you used.

    http://www.webmd.com/mental-health/features/explaining-pedophilia

    Quote
    you have to provide academic sources to backup your claims, can you show me an academic who claims that a child molester can be also applied to anyone who is also following a tradition or religion?


    Irrelevant as child molestation is an act that does not exempt religion nor traditions. Your reliance on tradition is special pleading.

    Quote
    and next time don't use the quote function as it makes your comment so long, simply copy my statement as quote and quote and reply under it


    Not happening otherwise post will look like the mess I had to respond to. I quote to address specific points. Beside the quote function is exactly what you just asked me to do. Quote something then post below.
  • My responses to the masked arab
     Reply #45 - March 01, 2016, 10:43 PM

    There are some things you'd argue for on the Internet that if you were to argue in a room full of people would leave you thoroughly ashamed.

    Would you justify marriage of 8 year old or sexual relationship if a minor to any adult at least 18 years of age? No? Then screw what your warped misinterpretation of scientific literature States - it's plain wrong. You are justifying the most perverse aspect of Muhammad's career as a self proclaimed Messiah.

    No free mixing of the sexes is permitted on these forums or via PM or the various chat groups that are operating.

    Women must write modestly and all men must lower their case.

    http://www.ummah.com/forum/showthread.php?425649-Have-some-Hayaa-%28modesty-shame%29-people!
  • My responses to the masked arab
     Reply #46 - March 01, 2016, 10:45 PM


    as for the last one of worshiping idols, let us see, if we apply the masked arab logic "we found them in place worshiping idols" then please tell me does this make sense to you? do you find people in terms of location worshiping idols, or do you observe them in terms of visuals as they are worshiping idols?


    There are places called shrines, temples, grooves, etc. Study religion outside of Islam. Beside if people are doing anything there is a location. Right now my location is my home. Get the idea?
  • My responses to the masked arab
     Reply #47 - March 01, 2016, 10:54 PM

    There are some things you'd argue for on the Internet that if you were to argue in a room full of people would leave you thoroughly ashamed.

    Would you justify marriage of 8 year old or sexual relationship if a minor to any adult at least 18 years of age? No? Then screw what your warped misinterpretation of scientific literature States - it's plain wrong. You are justifying the most perverse aspect of Muhammad's career as a self proclaimed Messiah.


    ok there is a reason why i say reply with logic and not ad homnienm, you are another example why i don't allow insults in my blog

    if you have a problem present it as
    "ok here is your claim A
    and here is the problem according to B and C and sources
    therefore your claim falls apart"

    this is how you reply

    not insults, now as for my position regarding child marriage there is a reason why i call this refutation, my blog is meant to refute him not to present my argument also read my previous posts here where i explained my stance regarding hadith
  • My responses to the masked arab
     Reply #48 - March 01, 2016, 10:59 PM

    There are places called shrines, temples, grooves, etc. Study religion outside of Islam. Beside if people are doing anything there is a location. Right now my location is my home. Get the idea?


    and no where does the verse i cited use the word shrine or temples or anything similar to it, if it does it will say "we found them worshiping them in temples" but no where does the verse make such statement it state the following "we found our fathers worshiping them" i.e they look at their fathers observe them either by watching them pray or having historical record of them worshiping, this is not an indication of location, any common sense observer will easily say this is saying (we found them) as in visual not location

    if i saw i found you sad, it means i found you in a condition which means i found you in visual perspective, the location is not relevant, i didn't say "i found you sad in your house" or "i found you sad in your school"

    i simply said "i found you(or him) sad" that is it
  • My responses to the masked arab
     Reply #49 - March 01, 2016, 11:01 PM

    ok there is a reason why i say reply with logic and not ad homnienm, you are another example why i don't allow insults in my blog


    That wasn't an ad hominem. He didn't say you are wrong because you are stupid or whatever. He thought the result of your conclusion was horrible.


  • My responses to the masked arab
     Reply #50 - March 01, 2016, 11:10 PM

    and no where does the verse i cited use the word shrine or temples or anything similar to it, if it does it will say "we found them worshiping them in temples" but no where does the verse make such statement it state the following "we found our fathers worshiping them" i.e they look at their fathers observe them either by watching them pray or having historical record of them worshiping, this is not an indication of location, any common sense observer will easily say this is saying (we found them) as in visual not location


    It doesn't matter. Those were examples. If people are at a place this is called a location. To observe someone you need to be at said location otherwise there is nothing to observe as you are not there. It what the word means. I'm sorry but this is where your English is the problem which makes your conclusion illogical. Where are you right now? Is it a place or do you not exist in any spatial location within the present? If someone walks to your home, a place, from say 5 miles away, another place, that someone finds you at your home, a place all are still locations.

    http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/location
    http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/place

    Quote
    if i saw i found you sad, it means i found you in a condition which means i found you in visual perspective, the location is not relevant, i didn't say "i found you sad in your house" or "i found you sad in your school"


    Emotion vs location found, hence there is a difference, see above. Your argument makes no sense in relation to the topic. Besides if I or someone still has to be at a location regardless. Again you seem not to understand what place and location means.

    Is worshiping idols an emotion or an act? Identify the method of identifying the emotion of idol worship. After all you claimed it was similar to an emotion so support your argument. Otherwise it is dismissed due to English comprehension issues nothing more. Sorry but your analogue is not a rebuttal at all.



  • My responses to the masked arab
     Reply #51 - March 01, 2016, 11:11 PM

    Re-read your work again. I am not the only one telling you about the insults in your post. Do you see me mocking your logic as childish? That type of tripe is used to gain emotional appeal. Both of you did it, this does not make it right anyways.

    https://islamqa.info/en/9473
    http://askaquestionto.us/question-answer/fiqh/are-animal-toys-and-dolls-forbidden-in-islam

    No he didn't. He used scholars as a source as in ahadith. You used a scholars opinion on ahadith backed by nothing. There is no evidence for the reason for her belief. It is an opinion, that is it. Just like the opinion MA mocked. I already told your your health science articles are fine, stop bring it up. Those are backed by evidence.

    The very quote is from your blog. It sets an maturity limit in one case and an age in the other. The age is 9 while your own health science sources shows 9 is not standard. The quote is an exception to the very puberty claim you are making.

    By you never thought this rebuttal thought. You were so focused on cradle robbing that you failed to realize you just quoted a source which still allows a child marriage with an age restrict not a puberty restriction.

    It is still an endorsement. You crippled your own argument and provided evidence for MA's.

    From the same type of health-sciences that you used.

    http://www.webmd.com/mental-health/features/explaining-pedophilia

    Irrelevant as child molestation is an act that does not exempt religion nor traditions. Your reliance on tradition is special pleading.

    Not happening otherwise post will look like the mess I had to respond to. I quote to address specific points. Beside the quote function is exactly what you just asked me to do. Quote something then post below.


    "No he didn't. He used scholars as a source as in ahadith. You used a scholars opinion on ahadith backed by nothing. There is no evidence for the reason for her belief. It is an opinion, that is it. Just like the opinion MA mocked. I already told your your health science articles are fine, stop bring it up. Those are backed by evidence. "

    again I'll repeat myself, where is your evidence that dulls in islam are only for children? what you did is cite a source where it says that dolls where made as an exception for aisha since they resemble idols? please read carefully what i demanded
    and no he didn't cite any hadith to justify his claim that only children play with dolls

    "The very quote is from your blog. It sets an maturity limit in one case and an age in the other. The age is 9 while your own health science sources shows 9 is not standard. The quote is an exception to the very puberty claim you are making. "
    red herring fallacy, Again i will repeat myself
    scholars have agreed that child marriage is not allowed until there is special benefits for her
    scholars agreed that you can't have sex with a child before they are physically capable to handle it
    the masked arab claimed that a man can have sexual intercourse with a child at any age, i showed he mistranslated several sources to justify this claim, and he claimed that you can marry at any age for no reason at all, i demanded evidence for that

    THAT IS MY MAIN ARGUMENT, the scientific sources i cited give average age of puberty to 8 or 9 but the blog in where my main argument is is that to address TMA claims

    "By you never thought this rebuttal thought. You were so focused on cradle robbing that you failed to realize you just quoted a source which still allows a child marriage with an age restrict not a puberty restriction."

    False i stated sources that allow child marriage if there is a special reason for it, not that they are allowed at any age, please read my blog

    "http://www.webmd.com/mental-health/features/explaining-pedophilia

    Irrelevant as child molestation is an act that does not exempt religion nor traditions. Your reliance on tradition is special pleading. "

    ok you are not paying attention (no offense) I'm saying where is your academic sources that define and give characters to child molester and where do they claim that even if you follow your tradition you are still a child molester

    this is the final part that you ignored
  • My responses to the masked arab
     Reply #52 - March 01, 2016, 11:12 PM

    ok there is a reason why i say reply with logic and not ad homnienm, you are another example why i don't allow insults in my blog

    if you have a problem present it as
    "ok here is your claim A
    and here is the problem according to B and C and sources
    therefore your claim falls apart"

    this is how you reply

    not insults, now as for my position regarding child marriage there is a reason why i call this refutation, my blog is meant to refute him not to present my argument also read my previous posts here where i explained my stance regarding hadith

    Who cares about your stance regarding Hadith?

    My stance regarding tabloid news journalism is irrelevant. If they justify perverse acts and you try to justify it too the. It's inexcusable.

    Do you know what adhominen means? I didn't attack you I attacked your ideas.

    No free mixing of the sexes is permitted on these forums or via PM or the various chat groups that are operating.

    Women must write modestly and all men must lower their case.

    http://www.ummah.com/forum/showthread.php?425649-Have-some-Hayaa-%28modesty-shame%29-people!
  • My responses to the masked arab
     Reply #53 - March 01, 2016, 11:15 PM

    Would you have sex with girl who reached puberty at 8 or 9?

    No free mixing of the sexes is permitted on these forums or via PM or the various chat groups that are operating.

    Women must write modestly and all men must lower their case.

    http://www.ummah.com/forum/showthread.php?425649-Have-some-Hayaa-%28modesty-shame%29-people!
  • My responses to the masked arab
     Reply #54 - March 01, 2016, 11:33 PM


    again I'll repeat myself, where is your evidence that dulls in islam are only for children? what you did is cite a source where it says that dolls where made as an exception for aisha since they resemble idols? please read carefully what i demanded


    I provided the evidence, look at the links.

    Quote
    and no he didn't cite any hadith to justify his claim that only children play with dolls


    Yes he did. If you looked at the links, which you didn't, the very hadith he cited is used by my references....

    Quote
    red herring fallacy, Again i will repeat myself


    No it isn't. You provided the source, I didn't, thus you brought the source into the argument. You are calling your own source a red herring. The source shows an exception to maturity in regards of marriage. Remember you are arguing that there is a maturity restriction on marriage then link a source contradicting your claim. Remember the title of your own blog post. "Does Islam encourage pedophilia." By provide said source which is an exception leaves Islam open to abuse by pedophiles. Keep in mind open to abuse does not mean encourage.

    Quote
    scholars have agreed that child marriage is not allowed until there is special benefits for her


    Your own source contradicts you.

    Quote
    scholars agreed that you can't have sex with a child before they are physically capable to handle it


    See above. Is consummation of marriage not required?

    Quote
    the masked arab claimed that a man can have sexual intercourse with a child at any age, i showed he mistranslated several sources to justify this claim, and he claimed that you can marry at any age for no reason at all, i demanded evidence for that


    This is a red herring as I am not talking about what MA said. I am talking about what you said and what source you provided in your own blog.

    Quote
    THAT IS MY MAIN ARGUMENT, the scientific sources i cited give average age of puberty to 8 or 9 but the blog in where my main argument is is that to address TMA claims


    Yet part of your argument shows that there is an exception. Your sources show the beginning of puberty not the end of it. You are create a conclusion your sources do not support.

    In your rush to undermine MA you undermined your own argument on your own without help. I already told you that you didn't think your arguments through properly. You still making the same mistake.

    Quote
    False i stated sources that allow child marriage if there is a special reason for it, not that they are allowed at any age, please read my blog


    I read it your blog, where do you think I got the reference about the exception from...... It didn't say of any age, it said 9. You are becoming willfully ignorant rather than admitting your mistake. Your source is list under Issue #8.

    Quote
    ok you are not paying attention (no offense) I'm saying where is your academic sources that define and give characters to child molester and where do they claim that even if you follow your tradition you are still a child molester


    It doesn't have to as it is an action that goes beyond tradition and religion. Not my problem you use moral relativism as a defense which undermines Islam completely. Hilarious. Where does your source allow for tradition in pedophilia? Of wait it doesn't mention it at all. Double standards your point is fallacious.

    What is more amusing is that religion is one of the causes of child molestation due to irrational thinking as your own. There are laws which specific address your special pleading of tradition and religion.

    https://www.uic.edu/labs/pll/bottoms-shaver-goodman-qin-1995-jsi.PDF
    http://www.ndaa.org/pdf/2-11-2015%20Religious%20Exemptions%20to%20Child%20Neglect.pdf

  • My responses to the masked arab
     Reply #55 - March 01, 2016, 11:52 PM

    It doesn't matter. Those were examples. If people are at a place this is called a location. To observe someone you need to be at said location otherwise there is nothing to observe as you are not there. It what the word means. I'm sorry but this is where your English is the problem which makes your conclusion illogical. Where are you right now? Is it a place or do you not exist in any spatial location within the present? If someone walks to your home, a place, from say 5 miles away, another place, that someone finds you at your home, a place all are still locations.

    http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/location
    http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/place

    Emotion vs location found, hence there is a difference, see above. Your argument makes no sense in relation to the topic. Besides if I or someone still has to be at a location regardless. Again you seem not to understand what place and location means.

    Is worshiping idols an emotion or an act? Identify the method of identifying the emotion of idol worship. After all you claimed it was similar to an emotion so support your argument. Otherwise it is dismissed due to English comprehension issues nothing more. Sorry but your analogue is not a rebuttal at all.






    this is false, how can if i say if i was to find you sad location matter? when i say "i found you sad" and never mention location it doesn't count at all because i exclusively counter my example to
    infact you can look it up and it's meanings in Badawi & Abdel-Haleem, Arabic-English Dictionary, p. 1012
    a word can have multiple meanings but it CAN'T have multiple uses at the same time when there is not a single indication of a specific use
    your argument can only be valid and logical if i said i found you sad in your house
    therefore when i say i found you sad and stop at one point there is no point to argue location, if i say bogart is black, does your location matter? not every comment and an observation require a location
    therefore your argument is a nonsequitor
  • My responses to the masked arab
     Reply #56 - March 02, 2016, 12:01 AM

    It has nothing do with location. It has to do with whether the appearance of the event was an accurate appearance, or merely an appearance.

    Your seven examples

    Quote
    1. Did He not find thee an orphan and give thee shelter (and care)?

    In appearance: Muhammed  was found an orphan
    In actuality: Muhammed  was found an orphan

    Quote
    2.They said, "We found our fathers worshiping them."

    In appearance: fathers were found worshipping (idols)
    In actuality: fathers were found worshipping (idols)

    Quote
    3. And He found thee wandering, and He gave thee guidance.

    In appearance: Muhammed was found wandering
    In actuality: Muhammed was found wandering

    Quote
    4. And He found thee in need, and made thee independent.

    In appearance: Muhammed was found in need
    In actuality: Muhammed was found in need

    Quote
    5. The Hypocrites will be in the lowest depths of the Fire: no helper wilt thou find for them

    In appearance: No helpers will be found for the hypocrites
    In actuality: No helpers will be found for the hypocrites

    Quote
    6. Strongest among men in enmity to the believers wilt thou find the Jews and Pagans; ..etc

    In appearance: you will find the jews and pagans most hostile,
    In actuality: you will find the jews and pagans most hostile

    Quote
    7. They said: "Nay, but we found our fathers doing thus (what we do)."

    In appearance:  fathers were found worshipping idols
    In actuality:  fathers were found worshipping idols

    ----------------------------------------------
    Can you continue the pattern? Fill in the blank

    Quote
    Until, when he reached the setting of the sun, he found it set in a spring of murky water.

    In appearance:  The sun was found set in a spring of murky water
    In actuality:  ..................................Huh?Huh?

    If you want to say 'in actuality, the sun was NOT setting in a spring of murky water, it merely appeared that way', then your seven examples do absolutely nothing to establish a precedent for using the word in this way, and they do a lot to agree with the argument you think you are refuting.
  • My responses to the masked arab
     Reply #57 - March 02, 2016, 12:38 AM

    I provided the evidence, look at the links.

    Yes he did. If you looked at the links, which you didn't, the very hadith he cited is used by my references....

    No it isn't. You provided the source, I didn't, thus you brought the source into the argument. You are calling your own source a red herring. The source shows an exception to maturity in regards of marriage. Remember you are arguing that there is a maturity restriction on marriage then link a source contradicting your claim. Remember the title of your own blog post. "Does Islam encourage pedophilia." By provide said source which is an exception leaves Islam open to abuse by pedophiles. Keep in mind open to abuse does not mean encourage.

    Your own source contradicts you.

    See above. Is consummation of marriage not required?

    This is a red herring as I am not talking about what MA said. I am talking about what you said and what source you provided in your own blog.

    Yet part of your argument shows that there is an exception. Your sources show the beginning of puberty not the end of it. You are create a conclusion your sources do not support.

    In your rush to undermine MA you undermined your own argument on your own without help. I already told you that you didn't think your arguments through properly. You still making the same mistake.

    I read it your blog, where do you think I got the reference about the exception from...... It didn't say of any age, it said 9. You are becoming willfully ignorant rather than admitting your mistake. Your source is list under Issue #8.

    It doesn't have to as it is an action that goes beyond tradition and religion. Not my problem you use moral relativism as a defense which undermines Islam completely. Hilarious. Where does your source allow for tradition in pedophilia? Of wait it doesn't mention it at all. Double standards your point is fallacious.

    What is more amusing is that religion is one of the causes of child molestation due to irrational thinking as your own. There are laws which specific address your special pleading of tradition and religion.

    https://www.uic.edu/labs/pll/bottoms-shaver-goodman-qin-1995-jsi.PDF
    http://www.ndaa.org/pdf/2-11-2015%20Religious%20Exemptions%20to%20Child%20Neglect.pdf





    again please don't use the Quotation function, i know you are used to it but it's getting annoying to read through your comment , i won't respond further if you use it again, I'm used to " and " quotation marks

    "Yes he did. If you looked at the links, which you didn't, the very hadith he cited is used by my references...."
    Again i say the source doesn't say that dolls are only for children, the source cited by you says that Aisha is young, and she had dolls, and there dolls were exceptional since it's forbidden to have dolls that resamble humans, that is the abstract of the article


    "No it isn't. You provided the source, I didn't, thus you brought the source into the argument. You are calling your own source a red herring. The source shows an exception to maturity in regards of marriage. Remember you are arguing that there is a maturity restriction on marriage then link a source contradicting your claim. Remember the title of your own blog post. "Does Islam encourage pedophilia." By provide said source which is an exception leaves Islam open to abuse by pedophiles. Keep in mind open to abuse does not mean encourage.
    "
    how I'm i calling it red herring? i'm making a comment on your quotation Not mine again i will post my comment
    "scholars have agreed that child marriage is not allowed until there is special benefits for her
    scholars agreed that you can't have sex with a child before they are physically capable to handle it
    the masked arab claimed that a man can have sexual intercourse with a child at any age, i showed he mistranslated several sources to justify this claim, and he claimed that you can marry at any age for no reason at all, i demanded evidence for that"
    my argument is as above the statment
    your statment was as follows
    "The very quote is from your blog. It sets an maturity limit in one case and an age in the other. The age is 9 while your own health science sources shows 9 is not standard. The quote is an exception to the very puberty claim you are making"
    this is a red herring because this is not my main argument
    the reason why i brought this up is because the masked arab claimed that verse 65:4 in the quran talks about girls who have not yet menstruated , so i brought up the argument that girls reach puberty at the age of 8-12 in which it occurred BEFORE menstruation

    "Your own source contradicts you."
    such as? where? and what is my argument?

    "See above. Is consummation of marriage not required?"

    it's not allowed until they are physically ready

    "This is a red herring as I am not talking about what MA said. I am talking about what you said and what source you provided in your own blog. "
    this is not a red herring, I'm addressing the masked arab directly which means if you address me you are then speaking from TMA potion


    "Yet part of your argument shows that there is an exception. Your sources show the beginning of puberty not the end of it. You are create a conclusion your sources do not support.

    In your rush to undermine MA you undermined your own argument on your own without help. I already told you that you didn't think your arguments through properly. You still making the same mistake."

    so far you are claiming my sources undermine me yet you provided no logical reason and you didn't even presented my view in the first place to even claim my sources undermine my position
    here is my potion
    the masked arab claims that verse 65:4 reference to girls who didn't reach puberty, i asked for evidence for that, then i proceeded that girls who didn't maturated already hit puberty 3 years ago
    then i proceed into his arguments which are two
    islam allow sex with children at an age, i reply to that by showing his mistranslated and sources that actually claim you can't have sex at any age, but when she is physically ready
    he claimed you can marry at any age for no reason, i provided sources that claims the opposite

    "I read it your blog, where do you think I got the reference about the exception from...... It didn't say of any age, it said 9. You are becoming willfully ignorant rather than admitting your mistake. Your source is list under Issue #8. "

    and where do you claim i contradict it? at no point
    in Issue#8 this is what is says
    "According to Dr.Muhammad Rafat uthman a member of the Islamic research section in Al-Azhar University
    He state the following
    “لفقهاء أفاضوا في مسألة الزواج فأوضحوا جواز ذلك للصغيرات لكن بشرط أن تستأذن في الزواج وأن تكون بلغت أو تجاوزت سنّ التاسعة”[38]

    Translate into: The Jurisprudence have made the judgment in marriage and gave permission to young ones under one condition that they are to be consulted in marriage and they should reach adulthood or pass nine years of age
    But don’t take my word for it, take the word of one of the most influence grand muftis in the Middle East Dr.Ali Jum’a"

    I'm simply playing the same game of authority the masked arab is saying by citing my own sources that disagree with him, what are you talking about? are you not a careful reader?

    "
    It doesn't have to as it is an action that goes beyond tradition and religion. Not my problem you use moral relativism as a defense which undermines Islam completely. Hilarious. Where does your source allow for tradition in pedophilia? Of wait it doesn't mention it at all. Double standards your point is fallacious."



    now again please don't use Quotation function
  • My responses to the masked arab
     Reply #58 - March 02, 2016, 12:40 AM

    this is false, how can if i say if i was to find you sad location matter? when i say "i found you sad" and never mention location it doesn't count at all because i exclusively counter my example to
    infact you can look it up and it's meanings in Badawi & Abdel-Haleem, Arabic-English Dictionary, p. 1012


    Except that the versus wasn't an emotion thus your point is irrelevant. More so it doesn't use either word.

    http://corpus.quran.com/wordmorphology.jsp?location=%2818:86:4%29

    Quote
    a word can have multiple meanings but it CAN'T have multiple uses at the same time when there is not a single indication of a specific use
    your argument can only be valid and logical if i said i found you sad in your house


    Irrelevant as the specific is given in the verse and corpus

    Quote
    therefore when i say i found you sad and stop at one point there is no point to argue location, if i say bogart is black, does your location matter? not every comment and an observation require a location


    Irrelevant as per the verse.

    Quote
    therefore your argument is a nonsequitor


    Nope as the verse is specific and you are using emotion, You argue is the non-sequitor since you ignore the word itself in the corpus.
  • My responses to the masked arab
     Reply #59 - March 02, 2016, 12:59 AM


    It has nothing do with location. It has to do with whether the appearance of the event was an accurate appearance, or merely an appearance.

    Your seven examples
    In appearance: Muhammed  was found an orphan
    In actuality: Muhammed  was found an orphan
    and it;s from visual perspective
    In appearance: fathers were found worshipping (idols)
    In actuality: fathers were found worshipping (idols)
    visually perspective again
    In appearance: Muhammed was found wandering
    In actuality: Muhammed was found wandering
    visual perspective
    In appearance: Muhammed was found in need
    In actuality: Muhammed was found in need
    visual perspective
    In appearance: No helpers will be found for the hypocrites
    In actuality: No helpers will be found for the hypocrites
    tought pesrpective (not location)
    In appearance: you will find the jews and pagans most hostile,
    In actuality: you will find the jews and pagans most hostile
    thought perspective (not location)
    In appearance:  fathers were found worshipping idols
    In actuality:  fathers were found worshipping idols
    visual observation (not location)
    ----------------------------------------------
    Can you continue the pattern? Fill in the blank
    In appearance:  The sun was found set in a spring of murky water
    In actuality:  ..................................Huh?Huh?
    Red herring, we are not talking whither or not it actually sits, this all falls down on Dul-Qaranain wither he was stupid or not, we are talking about how HE SAW IT

    If you want to say 'in actuality, the sun was NOT setting in a spring of murky water, it merely appeared that way', then your seven examples do absolutely nothing to establish a precedent for using the word in this way, and they do a lot to agree with the argument you think you are refuting.
    Strawman fallacy, the examples i provided has nothing to do at all with the verse, but rather to answer the challenge he asked for
  • Previous page 1 23 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »