GWG's resource thread
Post Reply
Thread Rating:
  • 6 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
29-10-2014, 07:28 PM (This post was last modified: 29-07-2018 11:22 AM by goodwithoutgod.)
In Mormonism, men and women have the potential of becoming gods. President Lorenzo Snow said, "As god once was, man is. As God is, man may become." In order to reach this exalted state of godhood, a person must first become a good Mormon, pay a full ten percent tithe to the Mormon church, follow various laws and ordinances of the church, and be found worthy. At this point, they receive a temple recommend, whereupon the Mormon is allowed to enter their sacred temples in order to go through a set of secret rituals: baptism for the dead, celestial marriage, and various oaths of secrecy and commitment. Additionally, four secret handshakes are taught so the believing Mormon, upon entering the third level of Mormon heaven, can shake hands with god in a certain pattern. This celestial ritual is for the purpose of permitting entrance into the highest level of heaven. For those who achieve this highest of heavens, exaltation to godhood awaits them. Then he or she will be permitted to have his or her own planet and be the god of his own world and the Mormon system will be expanded to other planets.

Book of Mormon issues:

1. The book originally claimed that the Indians were all descended from Jews who left Jerusalem about 621 B.C.E. because of the imminent Babylonian captivity. Now, after several thousand edits, it claims that the BofM people were "one of many" of the people of the New World. All available DNA evidence indicates that racially the American Indians came from either Asian, Pacific islander or even some input from Early European mixtures in Asia, but none, zero, from Semitic sources.

2. The Nephites and Lamanites, the 2 Jewish groups that were opposed to each other, supposedly brought with them horses, sheep, cattle and a variety of grains and fruits. NONE of which were evident when the European explorers arrived. There was no knowledge or history of these animals among the Indians of that time.

3. None of the animals that were native to either North or South America; Mountain lions, buffalo, elk, deer, grizzly bears, jaguars, howler monkeys and so on are not mentioned.

4. The location of their landing, a place identified as a "narrow neck of land" has never been identified. The church originally located it in Central america, due to all the archaeology that was being discovered during the last century. Now they make no claims. No specific terrain formations that obviously stand out, like volcanoes, are not mentioned. Central America is home to over 40 volcanoes, some of which were known to be active during the 1900 year period that encompasses the Book of Mormon.

5. The book speaks of vast cities, numerous armies numbering in the thousands, bloody battles and so on by armed and armored forces on horseback and on foot. None of the cities described or any remnant of any battles or anything indicating what the book describes has ever been found.

6. The book mentions coinage, a monetary system, the smelting of metals-including steel, which was unknown to the Israelis of 621 BC- and the ability to mine, smelt, and forge all manner of implements and weapons. Native Americans possessed no such technology and there is no evidence it ever existed prior to the Europeans arriving. In the Holy Land, where coinage was in use for centuries, there today you can still find ancient coins in numerous locations. None in the Americas.

7. The Book of Mormon itself was not an original idea. The concept of Indians being Jewish-which was lampooned by Mel Brooks in "Blazing Saddles"- was an idea currently popular when the book was written. A book entitled "View of the Hebrews" was already in print prior to the Book of Mormon's publication. there are many parallels between to two books, oddly enough.

8. The Golden Plates from which the BofM was translated were supposed to have magically been kept in a hill that happened to be close to Joseph Smith's home. He was seen carrying a bundle under his arm which he claimed were the plates. The plates, made of gold or an alloy of gold, were supposedly about nine by six by nearly a foot thick, a bundle that would weigh 300 pounds, that he was carrying around under his arm.

9. the book was published in 1830. The First Vision, from which Joseph supposedly was told by God about the book, happened in 1820. In the intervening period he was married and applied for membership to the Methodist church. He was denied because he was known as a man of low character. The First Vision story did not come out until after the publication of the book, and his own mother, who wrote a diary of that time, never mentions it.

10. Many aspects of the BofM and characters in the book-Laban, from whom the golden plates were taken in Jerusalem- just happen to be characters in Masonic ceremonies. Joseph Smith became a Mason along with his brothers and Brigham Young during the period of time all this was happening.

The characters in the BofM only encountered 2 other groups that were not a part of their solo journey- both of which also came from Judea. There is no mention of any other tribe or group. In that period of American history, the entirety of North and South America were populated from Canada to Patagonia with millions of Native Americans, none of which were ever encountered.

BOM Specifics:
2 Nephi 2:25 Adam fell that men might be; and men are, that they might have joy.
False: Men exist without Adam's fall

Birth of Jesus
Alma 7:10 And behold, he shall be born of Mary, at Jerusalem which is the land of our forefathers, she being a virgin, a precious and chosen vessel, who shall be overshadowed and conceive by the power of the Holy Ghost, and bring forth a son, yea, even the Son of God.
CONTRADICTS Matt. 2:1, Now after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea Alma 7:10 contradicts the Bible in Matt. 2:1

Cimeter (Scimitar)
Mosiah9:16 And it came to pass that I did arm them with bows, and with arrows, with swords, and with cimeters, and with clubs, and with slings, and with all manner of weapons which we could invent, and I and my people did go forth against the Lamanites to battle. (See also Enos 1:20; Mosiah 10:8; Alma 2:12; 27:29; 43:18,20,37; 44:8; 60:2; Helaman 1:14)
Scimitars (Curved Swords) didn't exist until the 500's. 200-187 B.C.

Ether 9:19 And they also had horses, and asses, and there were elephants and cureloms and cumoms; all of which were useful unto man, and more especially the elephants and cureloms and cumoms.
Elephants weren't in America at the time of the BOM

Honey Bees
Ether 2:3 And they did also carry with them deseret, which, by interpretation, is a honey bee; and thus they did carry with them swarms of bees, and all manner of that which was upon the face of the land, seeds of every kind.
Honey Bees were introduced to the Americas by the Spanish

God Indwells the Righteous
Alma 34:36 And this I know, because the Lord hath said he dwelleth not in unholy temples, but in the hearts of the righteous doth he dwell; yea, and he has also said that the righteous shall sit down in his kingdom, to go no more out; but their garments should be made white through the blood of the Lamb.
CONTRADICTS D&C 130:3, "The appearing of the Father and the Son, in that verse, is a personal appearance; and the idea that the Father and the Son dwell in a man's heart is an old sectarian notion, and is false." BOM contradicts D&C

1 Nephi 18:25 And it came to pass that we did find upon the land of promise, as we journeyed in the wilderness, that there were beasts in the forests of every kind, both the cow and the ox, and the ass and the horse, and the goat and the wild goat, and all manner of wild animals, which were for the use of men. And we did find all manner of ore, both of gold, and of silver, and of copper. (Horses see 2 Nephi 12:7; 2 Nephi 15:28; Enos 1:21; Alma 18:9,10,12; 20:6; 3 Nephi 3:22; 4:4; 6:1; 21:14; Ether 9:19; )
Horses didn't exist in America until the 16th Century 590-589 BC

1 Nephi 4:9 And I beheld his sword, and I drew it forth from the sheath thereof; and the hilt thereof was of pure gold, and the workmanship thereof was exceedingly fine, and I saw that the blade thereof was of the most precious steel. (See also 1 Neph 16:18; 2 Nephi 5:15; Jarom 1:8; Ether 7:9)
The Jews didn't have steel at that time. 600-592 B.C.

2 Nephi 25:23 For we labor diligently to write, to persuade our children, and also our brethren, to believe in Christ, and to be reconciled to God; for we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do. After all we can do
Salvation by works, not by Grace; disagrees with Christian belief

Alma 4:6 And it came to pass in the eighth year of the reign of the judges, that the people of the church began to wax proud, because of their exceeding riches, and their fine silks, and their fine-twined linen, and because of their many flocks and herds, and their gold and their silver, and all manner of precious things, which they had obtained by their industry; and in all these things were they lifted up in the pride of their eyes, for they began to wear very costly apparel.
Jews didn't have silk then. The Jews didn't have silk at that time 86-83 B.C.

Joseph Smith, the founder:

1. Came from a family that was known for their slothfulness and illegal behavior. Joseph Smith was tried and convicted of a crime called "money digging" which was a scam wherein he and some unscrupulous friends convinced local people that they knew the whereabouts of secret treasure, and would con them into being paid to dig for it.

2. While leading the church in Illinois, created an illegal bank by convincing his followers to contribute their life savings. He did this by showing them a box that was supposedly full of coins, but in fact had one layer and the rest filled with rocks. He, the chosen prophet of god, then invested the money in bad land schemes and lost it all, first running from the law and then blaming it all on other people who he had coerced into signing their names to the contracts.

3. Became a polygamist first without bothering to tell his wife, until he was supposedly caught shanking his 16 year old housemaid, Fanny Alger. There is some dispute about that, but it is known he polygamously married at least ten women all under the legal marrying age, the youngest 14. She later admitted, after going to Utah with the Mormons, that he sired a child by her.
The "revelation" on polygamy happened after he began having affairs with women. He even sent men on missions and then convinced their wives at home to engage in sexual congress with him.

4. Joseph smith was imprisoned because the people of Nauvoo, Illinois, rebelling against him, published a paper denouncing him. Smith's henchmen destroyed the printing press, a direct offense against the constitutional right of freedom of the press. He also threatened the lives of everyone involved with the paper and confiscated their goods and property by force.

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-10-2014, 07:35 PM (This post was last modified: 02-05-2015 04:25 PM by goodwithoutgod.)
The official Scientology organization is composed of a number of “levels”. One begins as a “preclear” & works their way up. One must purchase virtually every service crucial to advancement directly from the "church" & at staggering prices. "Auditing", for example, is purchased in 12½ hour blocks, costing anywhere from $200-$750 for introductory sessions to between $8,000 & $9,000 for advanced sessions. Basically, Scientology claims to possess exclusive knowledge of the path to religious redemption & then charges obscene amounts of money for every tiny incremental step towards this end. $380,000 is a conservative estimate for the total cost of moving all the way up the Scientology hierarchal ladder.

At level OT III (Operating Thetan Level 3), some very strange & fiercely guarded secrets are imparted upon worthy members who have paid enough money to advance to such a level (and no, this isn't a joke): The evil alien ruler Xenu killed millions of aliens (Thetans) from around the universe by kidnapping them, bringing them to earth in golden DC-8 “space-planes”, stacking them around volcanoes & blowing them up by dropping “h-bombs” into the volcanoes. Scientologists believe the souls of these aliens (these souls are "Body Thetans") were captured, brainwashed & released; they then attached themselves to our ancestors (and according to Scientology’s belief in Thetan immortality, they also attached to us during “past lives”) & cause many of our mental & physical ills to this day. Auditing is said to “clear” us of these Body Thetans as well as the “mental implants” they supposedly impose on our minds.

fellow members here is some internal documents. If one goes to their official site, you of course get the politically correct, gentle version of their...."religion". One has to dig just a tad deeper to find the depth of their..."view". They work very hard to snuff out anything written against them and sling law suits like a fry cook slings potatoes at anyone who takes a stand in the media. Lot of info out there on them, feel free to do a little research, it is eye opening to say the least. Here is what I was able to find within 2 mins of looking last night...

and the final document in his handwriting no less....

Then consider this famous quote from the good creator of this.."religion";

Response to a question from the audience during a meeting of the Eastern Science Fiction Association on (7 November 1948), as quoted in a 1994 affidavit by Sam Moskowitz.

"You don't get rich writing science fiction. If you want to get rich, you start a religion".

He said it, he did it, and they fell for it.

Some other great quotes:

Writing for a penny a word is ridiculous. If a man really wanted to make a million dollars, the best way to do it would be start his own religion.
-- As quoted in the Los Angeles Times (27 August 1978)

THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN CONTROL PEOPLE IS TO LIE TO THEM. You can write that down in your book in great big letters. The only way you can control anybody is to lie to them.
-- Lecture: "Off the Time Track" (June 1952) as quoted in Journal of Scientology issue 18-G, reprinted in Technical Volumes of Dianetics & Scientology Vol. 1, p. 418

You can get a much better fee — I tell you as auditors quite frankly — it's much easier to get a great deal of money out of somebody who's on a down spiral into becoming MEST than it is to get money out of somebody who is going on an up spiral toward becoming theta.
-- "Philadelphia Doctorate Course" #15 (1952)
Scientology is the only specific (cure) for radiation (atomic bomb) burns.
-- All About Radiation (1952) p. 109

You are only three or four hours from taking your glasses off for keeps.
-- "Eyesight and glasses" in Dianetic Auditor's Bulletin Vol. 2, No. 7, (January 1952)

Twenty-five hours of Scientology by an auditor who fairly understands how to process arthritis can be said to produce an invariable alleviation of the condition. Some cases, even severe ones, have responded in as little as two hours of processing, according to reports from auditors in the field.
-- Journal of Scientology Issue 1-G, (1952)

Leukemia is evidently psychosomatic in origin and at least eight cases of leukemia had been treated successfully by Dianetics after medicine had traditionally given up. The source of leukemia has been reported to be an engram containing the phrase 'It turns my blood to water.'
-- Journal of Scientology Issue 15-G (1953)

Not smoking enough will cause lung cancer! If anybody is getting a cancerous activity in the lung, the probabilities are that it's radiation dosage coupled with the fact that he smokes. And what it does is start to run out the radiation dosage, don't you see.
-- Saint Hill Special Briefing Course 35 (19 July 1961)

Advanced Courses are the most valuable service on the planet. Life insurance, houses, cars, stocks, bonds, college savings, all are transitory and impermanent ... There is nothing to compare with Advanced Courses. They are infinitely valuable and transcend time itself.
-- On his Operating Thetan Courses, in Flag Mission Order 375 (1970)

Arthritis vanishes, myopia gets better, heart illness decreases, asthma disappears, stomachs function properly and the whole catalog of illnesses goes away and stays away.
-- 1987 Edition of Dianetics : The Modern Science of Mental Health (1950)p. 72

Hubbard wrote:
Now, get this as a technical fact, not a hopeful idea. Every time we have investigated the background of a critic of Scientology, we have found crimes for which that person or group could be imprisoned under existing law. We do not find critics of Scientology who do not have criminal pasts.
-- "Critics of Scientology" (5 November 1967)

The purpose of the suit is to harass and discourage rather than to win. The law can be used very easily to harass, and enough harassment on somebody who is simply on the thin edge anyway, well knowing that he is not authorized, will generally be sufficient to cause his professional decease. If possible, of course, ruin him utterly.
-- A Manual on the Dissemination of Material (1955)

If attacked on some vulnerable point by anyone or anything or any organization, always find or manufacture enough threat against them to cause them to sue for peace.
-- Dept. of Govt. Affairs policy letter (15 August 1960)

A truly Suppressive Person or group has no rights of any kind and actions taken against them are not punishable.
-- "Ethics, Suppressive Acts, Suppression of Scientology and Scientologists" policy letter (1 March 1965)

This is the correct procedure: Spot who is attacking us. Start investigating them promptly for felonies or worse using our own professionals, not outside agencies. Double curve our reply by saying we welcome an investigation of them. Start feeding lurid, blood sex crime actual evidence on the attackers to the press. Don't ever tamely submit to an investigation of us. Make it rough, rough on attackers all the way.
-- "Attacks on Scientology" policy letter (25 February 1966)

ENEMY: SP Order. Fair game. May be deprived of property or injured by any means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist. May be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed.
-- "Penalties for Lower Conditions" policy letter (18 October 1967)

The practice of declaring people FAIR GAME will cease. FAIR GAME may not appear on any Ethics Order. It causes bad public relations.
This P/L does not cancel any policy on the treatment or handling of an SP.
-- "Cancellation of Fair Game" policy letter (21 October 1968)

A psychiatrist today has the power to (1) take a fancy to a woman (2) lead her to take wild treatment as a joke (3) drug and shock her to temporary insanity (4) incarnate [sic] her (5) use her sexually (6) sterilize her to prevent conception (7) kill her by a brain operation to prevent disclosure. And all with no fear of reprisal. Yet it is rape and murder… We want at least one bad mark on every psychiatrist in England, a murder, an assault, or a rape or more than one… This is Project Psychiatry. We will remove them.
-- Confidential memo "Project Psychiatry" (22 February 1966)

Yup folks, bat-shit-crazy as I see it. Knowledge is power


"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes goodwithoutgod's post
29-10-2014, 07:38 PM (This post was last modified: 02-05-2015 04:26 PM by goodwithoutgod.)
Faith, failed method of epistemology
Faith - the belief in something without evidence.

Delusion: an idiosyncratic belief or impression that is firmly maintained despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality or rational argument, typically a symptom of mental disorder. A belief held with strong conviction despite superior evidence to the contrary.

Religion - The embracement of delusion.

The "god of the gaps" argument is the believer's appeal to god as an explanation for whatever phenomenon we cannot explain scientifically. For example, if the scientific understanding of the day cannot explain lightning bolts, the believer will say "god did it".Once we can scientifically explain the mechanism behind lightning, the believer will move on to another phenomenon and attribute god as the cause of that phenomenon.

Faith IS the delusion, belief without evidence. Faith is pretending to know things that you dont know. To say "I have faith in god" really means "I pretend to know things I don't know about god"....THINK about it, you dont know, you HOPE. Faith is an epistemology. It's a method and process people use to understand reality. Faith-based claims are knowledge claims. For example, "I have faith that jesus christ will heal my sickness because it says so in Luke" is a knowledge claim. The utterer of this statement is asserting jesus will heal her. Those who make faith claims are professing to know something about the external world. For example, when someone says "jesus walked on water" (matthew 14:22-33), that person is claiming TO KNOW there was an historical figure names jesus and that he, unaided by technology, literally walked across the surface of the water. This is a knowledge objective statement of fact.

Your religious beliefs typically depend on the community in which you were raised or lived. The spiritual experiences of people in ancient greece, medieval japan or 21st century saudia arabia do not lead to belief in christianity. It seems, therefore, that religious belief very likely tracks not truth but social conditioning.

Faith is a failed epistemology. Showing why faith fails has been done before and done well. (Bering 2011, Harris 2004, Loftus 2010, 2013, McCormick 2012, Schick & Vaughn 2008, Shermer 1997, 2011, Smith 1979, STenger & Barker 2012, Torres 2012, Wade 2009 etc)

If a belief is based on insufficient evidence, than any further conclusion drawn from the belief will at best be of questionable value. This can not point one to the path of truth. Here are five points believers/non believers should be able to agree upon.

1) There are different faith traditions.
2) Different faith traditions make different truth claims.
3) The truth claims of some faith traditions contradict the truth claims of other faith traditions. For example, Muslims believe muhammad (570-632) was the last prophet (Sura 33:40). Mormons believe Joseph Smith (1805-1844), who lived after muhammad was a prophet.
4) It cannot both be the case that muhammad was the last prophet, and someone who lived after him was also a prophet.
5) Therefore: At LEAST one of these claims must be false....perhaps both....

It is impossible to figure out which of these claims is incorrect if the tool one uses is faith. As a tool, as an epistemology, as a method of reasoning, as a process for knowing the world, faith cannot adjudicate between competing claims. The ONLY way to figure out which claims about the world are likely true, and which are likely false, is through reason and evidence. There is no other way.....yet

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes goodwithoutgod's post
29-10-2014, 07:40 PM (This post was last modified: 02-05-2015 04:28 PM by goodwithoutgod.)
First cause
You cannot state with any degree of validity that the first causal theory doesn't apply to the mythical egocentric abrahamic god because you have the unique opinion he is the "eternal god", thus wasn't "caused". How did you arrive at that thought? How did you ascertain your version of "god" is eternal? Which god by the way? There are so many, yet each fan club thinks their god is the only god, the true god and the only true religion. The irony of that kills me.

The major premise of the argument, ""everything had a cause," is contradicted by the conclusion that "god did not have a cause." You can't have it both ways. If everything had to have had a cause, then there could not be a first cause. If it is possible to think of a god as uncaused, then it is possible to think the same of the universe.

Some theists, observing that all "effects" need a cause, assert that god is a cause but not an effect. But no one has ever observed an uncaused cause and simply inventing one merely assumes what the argument wishes to prove. If a god can be thought eternal, then so can the universe. The word "cause" is a transitive verb. Causality requires temporality. If god exists outside of time, he cannot cause anything.

The latest spin on this position by christian philosophers like William Lane Craig is that:

1) Everything that begins to exist has a cause.
2) The universe began to exist.
3) Therefore, the universe has a cause.

This may be seductive to those who already believe in a god. To me, it seems awfully suspicious. The clause "Everything that begins to exist" sounds artificial. It is not a phrase we hear outside the context of theistic philosophy. It appears to be an Ad Hoc construction designed to smooth over earlier apologetic efforts.

Nice try though.

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes goodwithoutgod's post
29-10-2014, 07:42 PM (This post was last modified: 29-03-2016 07:31 PM by goodwithoutgod.)
Flavius Josephus
Christian apologetic fan’s most popular non-Christian writer that mentions Jesus is Flavius Josephus. Although he was born in 37 CE and could not have been a contemporary of Jesus, he lived close enough to the time to be considered a valuable secondhand source. Josephus was a highly respected and much quoted Roman historian. He died sometime after the year 100 and his two major tomes were ‘The antiquities of the Jews’ and ‘the wars of the Jews’. Antiquities was written sometime after the year 90 CE. In book 18, chapter 3, this paragraph is encountered:

“now, there was about this time, Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works – a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, and condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and 10,000 other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.”
This does appear to give historical confirmation for the existence of Jesus. But is it authentic? Most scholars, including most fundamentalist scholars, admit that at least some parts of this paragraph cannot be authentic. Many are convinced that the entire paragraph is a complete forgery, an interpolation inserted by Christians at a later time. There are at least seven solid reasons for this:

1) The paragraph is absent from early copies of the works of Josephus. For example, it does not appear in Origen’s second century version of Josephus, in ‘Origen Contra Celsum’, where Origen fiercely defended Christianity against the heretical views of Celsus. Origen quoted freely from Josephus to prove his points, but never once used this paragraph, which would have been the ultimate ace up his sleeve.

In fact, the Josephus paragraph about Jesus does not appear at all until the beginning of the fourth century, at the time of Emperor Constantine. Bishop Eusebius, a close ally of the Emperor, was instrumental in crystallizing and defining the version of Christianity that was to become Orthodox, and he is the first person known to have quoted this paragraph of Josephus. Eusebius once wrote that it was a permissible “medicine” for historians to create fictions – prompting historian Jacob Burckhardt to call Eusebius “the first thoroughly dishonest historian of antiquity.”

The fact that Josephus – Jesus paragraph shows up at this point in history – at a time when interpolations and revisions were quite common and when the Emperor was eager to demolish gnostic Christianity and replace it with literalistic Christianity – makes the passage quite dubious. Many scholars believe that Eusebius was the forger and interpolator of the paragraph on Jesus that magically appears in the works of Josephus.

2) Josephus would not have called Jesus “the Christ” or “the truth.” Whoever wrote these phrases was a believing Christian. Josephus was a messianic Jew, and if he truly believed Jesus was the long-awaited Messiah (the Christ), he certainly would have given more than a passing reference to him. Josephus never converted to Christianity. Origen reported that Josephus was “not believing in Jesus as the Christ.”

3) The passage is out of context. Book 18 (containing the interval of 32 years from the banishment of Archelus to the departure from Babylon) starts with Roman taxation under Cyrenius in 6 CE and talks about various Jewish sexts at the time, including the Essenes and a sect of Judas the Galilean, which he devotes three times more space than to Jesus. He discusses at great depth the local history in great detail. But oddly this single paragraph can be lifted out of the text with no damage to the chapter or the way it flows.… Almost as if it was added after the fact, which of course it was.

4) The phrase “to this day” shows that this is a later interpolation. There was no “tribe of Christians” during Josephus time. Christianity did not get off the ground until the second century.

5) In all of Josephus voluminuous works, there is not a single reference to Christianity anywhere outside of this tiny paragraph. He relates much more about John the Baptist than about Jesus. He lists the activities of many other self-proclaimed Messiahs, including Judas of Galilee, Theudas the magician and the Egyptian Jew Messiah, but is mute about the life of one whom he claims (if he had actually wrote it) is the answer to this messianic hopes.

6) The paragraph mentions that the “divine prophets” foretold the life Jesus, but Josephus neglects to mention who these prophets were or what they said. In no other place does Josephus connect any Hebrew prediction with the life of Jesus. If Jesus truly had been the fulfillment of divine prophecy, as Christians believe, Josephus would’ve been the one learned enough to document it.

7) The hyperbolic language of the paragraph is uncharacteristic of a careful historian: “… As the divine prophets had foretold these and 10,000 other wonderful things concerning him…” This sounds more like sectarian propaganda – in other words, more like the new testament – than objective reporting. It is very unlike Josephus.

Christians should be careful when they refer to Josephus as historical confirmation for Jesus. If we remove the forged paragraph, as we should, the works of Josephus become evidence against historicity. Josephus was a native of Judea and a contemporary of the apostles. He was governor of Galilee for a time, the province in which Jesus allegedly lived and taught. He transversed every part of this province and visited the places where but a generation before Christ performed his prodigies. He resided in Cana, the very city in which Christ is said to have wrought his first miracle. He mentions every noted personage of Palestine and describes every important event that occurred there during the first 70 years of the Christian era. But Christ was of so little consequence and his deeds too trivial to merit a line from this historian’s pen.

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like goodwithoutgod's post
29-10-2014, 07:44 PM (This post was last modified: 02-05-2015 04:31 PM by goodwithoutgod.)
Hell isn't hot
First, odds are hell doesn't even exist, as it is just another man made boogey man concept to keep people in check, and control them by fear, and religion sells fear with gusto. Hell doesn't even exist in accordance with Christian doctrine in the manner of which it is presented in the bible. Hell is allegedly a place devoid of god, thus devoid of good, no fire, no pitchforks, no little demons running around, no eternity in pain.

Source is Reason, Faith and Tradition by Martin C. Albl, Chapter 7 page 188 – describing hell.

"We begin with a reminder of limitations of our language. Since hell, according to Christian doctrine, is a supernatural reality, it can only be described in analogies. Holy Scripture teaches us the essence of hell in images. When it speaks of the fire of hell, it is not to be understood in a grossly realistic sense. The images of fire and pain were ways of expressing the essential Christian understanding of hell – that it is a separation from God. We may define heaven as simply being with God, and hell, in contrast, is simply being without God. It is thus an existence without goodness and without meaning."


"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes goodwithoutgod's post
29-10-2014, 07:46 PM (This post was last modified: 29-03-2016 07:36 PM by goodwithoutgod.)
Hitler was not an atheist
I often hear the simplistic, reductionist claim that there is a kind of equation between atheism and Nazism....for example, statements like "atheism leads to evil or such things as Nazism (epitome of evil)" There have been any number of similar claims made in various quarters: Nazism was an inevitable product of Darwin, or of Luther, or of the Versailles treaty, or of Wagner's opera, or of Nietzsche, or of Hegel. All of these break down under the obvious objection that there were plenty of atheists, darwinists, Lutherans, objectors to the Versailles treaty, Wagnerians, Nietzsche and Hegelians who did not become Nazis. These are all vacuous arguments from a historiographical perspective.

Was Adolf Hitler an atheist? Hitler cannot be called a church going christian, but neither can he be used as an example of an atheist. Hardly the product of an anti-christian childhood and upbringing, he attended mass with his devout mother and was a choirboy, which he quite enjoyed. Indeed, the majesty and pageantry of the church heavily influenced the staging in Nazi rallies and rituals.

born and raised a roman catholic, Hitler remained a nominal catholic for the rest of his life. he never officially renounced the church or his membership in it, but he was hostile to the church's impulses of caring for the weak, infirm, and mentally handicapped, who he wished to destroy. Hitler never doubted the divinity of Jesus, just his jewishness, convinced that he was actually an Aryan. The portraits of a fair haired, blue eyed Jesus that grace so many American homes would have doubtless met with his approval.

Consider the following examples rebutting the claim that he was an atheist:

1) When party secretary martin bormann closed a convent, Hitler reversed the order.

2) Hitler allowed the German army to have catholic and protestant chaplains in field. In fact the troops wore a belt buckle embossed with the inscription "god is with us".

3) In endless monologues to those around him, Hitler never once professed to be an atheist or unbeliever in the Abraham god of Islam, Judaism, and Christianity. In particular, he had the greatest admiration for Islam, particularly its military tradition.

4) Survivor of over a dozen assassination plots and attempts, Hitler credited "divine providence" and "almighty god" for saving him to complete his great mission. On the eve of the soviet invasion, Hitler ended his address to his troops with "Almighty god bless our arms".

5) The first foreign policy coup of nazi germany was the "Concordat with the Vatican", allowing the church independence and catholic schools ot remain open in exchange for staying out of politics. The church also "welcomed the way" when operation barbarossa..the campaign against the godless soviet union was launched. Hitler, SS chief Heinrich Himmler, and architect of the holocaust Reinhard Heydrich, nominal catholics all, were never excommunicated by the holy sec. To this very day they remain catholics in good standing.

6) When overzealous nazi party officials removed crucifixes from classroom walls in bavaria, hitler personally reversed the order and had them rehung.

Now, some of the myths surrounding hitler's atheism can be attributed to an inaccurate and poorly translated version of Table Talk. Table Talk is a book of transcribed conversations that hitler had with those close to him. Some versions of this book that were translated from german to other languages contained fabricated statements not found in the original german manuscript.

Again, this is all irrelevant, with or without religion good people do good things, evil people will do evil things, for good people to do evil things takes religion. Hitler however was the very epitome of evil bastard, but to claim he was an atheist is misinformation and disingenuous in nature.

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like goodwithoutgod's post
29-10-2014, 07:50 PM (This post was last modified: 02-05-2015 04:49 PM by goodwithoutgod.)
Islam -Sunni/Shia
For those of you out there that aren't as familiar with this particular version of delusion as I may be, let me expound:

The division between Shia and Sunni dates back to the death of the Prophet Muhammad, and the question of who was to take over the leadership of the Muslim nation. Sunni Muslims agree with the position taken by many of the Prophet's companions, that the new leader should be elected from among those capable of the job. This is what was done, and the Prophet Muhammad's close friend and advisor, Abu Bakr, became the first Caliph of the Islamic nation. The word "Sunni" in Arabic comes from a word meaning "one who follows the traditions of the Prophet."

On the other hand, some Muslims share the belief that leadership should have stayed within the Prophet's own family, among those specifically appointed by him, or among Imams appointed by God Himself.

The Shia Muslims believe that following the Prophet Muhammad's death, leadership should have passed directly to his cousin/son-in-law, Ali bin Abu Talib. Throughout history, Shia Muslims have not recognized the authority of elected Muslim leaders, choosing instead to follow a line of Imams which they believe have been appointed by the Prophet Muhammad or God Himself. The word "Shia" in Arabic means a group or supportive party of people. The commonly-known term is shortened from the historical "Shia-t-Ali," or "the Party of Ali." They are also known as followers of "Ahl-al-Bayt" or "People of the Household" (of the Prophet).

From this initial question of political leadership, some aspects of spiritual life have been affected and now differ between the two groups of Muslims.
It is important to remember that despite these differences in opinion and practice, Shia and Sunni Muslims share the main articles of Islamic belief and are considered by most to be brethren in faith. In fact, most Muslims do not distinguish themselves by claiming membership in any particular group, but prefer to call themselves simply, "Muslims."

Shia Muslims believe that the Imam is sinless by nature, and that his authority is infallible as it comes directly from God. Therefore, Shia Muslims often venerate the Imams as saints and perform pilgrimages to their tombs and shrines in the hopes of divine intercession.

Sunni Muslims counter that there is no basis in Islam for a hereditary privileged class of spiritual leaders, and certainly no basis for the veneration or intercession of saints. Sunni Muslims contend that leadership of the community is not a birthright, but a trust that is earned and which may be given or taken away by the people themselves.

Shia Muslims also feel animosity towards some of the companions of the Prophet Muhammad, based on their positions and actions during the early years of discord about leadership in the community. Many of these companions (Abu Bakr, Umar ibn Al Khattab, Aisha, etc.) have narrated traditions about the Prophet's life and spiritual practice. Shia Muslims reject these traditions (hadith) and do not base any of their religious practices on the testimony of these individuals. This naturally gives rise to some differences in religious practice between the two groups. These differences touch all detailed aspects of religious life: prayer, fasting, pilgrimage, etc.

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like goodwithoutgod's post
29-10-2014, 07:52 PM (This post was last modified: 02-05-2015 04:51 PM by goodwithoutgod.)
Islam madness
Dalia Mogahed and John Esposito co-authored the book "Who Speaks for Islam" which grew out of a 2008 survey conducted by the Gallup polling agency, which was intended to answer this very question.

Unfortunately, the controversy-riddled Dalia Mogahed and John Esposito are both Islam apologists, so there is little surprise that they had to "cook the books" in order to create the desired results.

The authors claim only 7 percent of the world's Muslims are "political radicals". Yet in order to reach this figure, they were forced to term Muslims who think 9/11 was "partially" or "some way justified", who want to impose Shari'ah law, who support suicide bombings, and who oppose equal rights for women, as "moderate" followers of Islam.
So from their own scholars, over 7%, 7% of 1.6 billion is a lot of radical thinking muslims, and guess what is the fastest growing religion in America? Islam. When you factor in the numbers of those they classified as moderate, but in actuality should have been classified as radical thinkers, it is over 30%.
According to the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, the World Christian Database as of 2007 Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world.

More than 95 percent of all suicide bombing attacks conducted worldwide are carried out by Muslim extremists

Ref: Amir Lechner - “Changing Tack” The Ever-Changing Profile of the Suicide Bomber

The Muslim "holy" book is the Koran - and so it follows that, if you are a Muslim, you must believe in the tenets of the Koran. After what I read, I was determined never to trust a Muslim, (moderate or radical) for what I learned was not only enlightening, but frightening:

"Prophet make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their home." (Surah 9:73)

"Slay them wherever you find them...Idolatry is worse than carnage...Fight against them until idolatry is no more and God's religion reigns supreme." (Surah 2:190-)

"Believers, make war on the infidels who dwell around you. Deal firmly with them." (Surah 9:121-)

"Fight for the cause of God with the devotion due to Him...He has given you the name of Muslims..." (Surah 22:78-)

"Blessed are the believers...who restrain their carnal desires (except with their wives and slave-girls, for these are lawful to them)...These are the heirs of Paradise..." (Surah 23:1-5-)

""Muhammad is God's apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another." (Surah 48:29)

"Fighting is obligatory for you, much as you dislike it." (Surah 2:216)

"Believers, do not make friends with any but your own people...They desire nothing but your ruin....You believe in the entire Book...When they meet you they say: 'We, too, are believers.' But when alone, they bite their finger-tips with rage." (Surah 3:118, 119)

"Forbidden to you are...married women, except those you own as slaves." (Surah 4:20-, 24-)

Seek out your enemies relentlessly." (Surah 4:103-)

"Make war on them until idolatry shall cease and God's religion shall reign supreme." (Surah 8:36-)

"It ill becomes the idolaters [non-Muslims] to visit the mosques of God..." (Surah 9:17)

"If you do not fight, He will punish you sternly, and replace you by other men." (Surah 9:37-)

Allah managed to hand down quite a few "revelations" that sanctioned Muhammad's personal pursuit of sex to the doubters around him. Interestingly they have become part of the eternal, infallible word of the Qur'an, to be memorized by generations of Muslims for whom they have no possible relevance.

Qur'an (33:37) - "But when Zaid had accomplished his want of her, We gave her to you as a wife, so that there should be no difficulty for the believers in respect of the wives of their adopted sons, when they have accomplished their want of them; and Allah's command shall be performed." No doubt millions of young Muslims, trying to outdo one another at memorizing the Qur'an, have wondered about what this verse means and why it is there. In fact, this is a "revelation" of convenience that Allah just happened to hand down at a time when Muhammad lusted after his daughter-in-law, Zaynab, - a state of affairs that disturbed local customs. The verse "commands" Muhammad to marry the woman (following her husband's gracious divorce). As for why this should be part of the eternal word of God...?

Qur'an (33:50) - "O Prophet! surely We have made lawful to you your wives whom you have given their dowries, and those whom your right hand possesses out of those whom Allah has given to you as prisoners of war, and the daughters of your paternal uncles and the daughters of your paternal aunts, and the daughters of your maternal uncles and the daughters of your maternal aunts who fled with you; and a believing woman if she gave herself to the Prophet, if the Prophet desired to marry her-- specially for you, not for the (rest of) believers; We know what We have ordained for them concerning their wives and those whom their right hands possess in order that no blame may attach to you; " This is another special command that Muhammad handed down to himself that allows virtually unlimited sex, divinely sanctioned by Allah. One assumes that this "revelation" was meant to assuage some sort of disgruntlement in the community over Muhammad's hedonism.

Qur'an (33:51) - "You may put off whom you please of them, and you may take to you whom you please, and whom you desire of those whom you had separated provisionally; no blame attaches to you; this is most proper, so that their eyes may be cool and they may not grieve, and that they should be pleased" This is in reference to a situation in which Muhammad's wives were grumbling about his preference for sleeping with a slave girl (Mary the Copt) instead of them. Accordingly, Muhammad may sleep with whichever wife (or slave) he wishes without having to hear the others complain... as revealed in Allah's literal and perfect words to more than a billion Muslims.

Qur'an (66:1-5) - "O Prophet! Why ban thou that which Allah hath made lawful for thee, seeking to please thy wives?..." Another remarkable verse of sexual convenience concerns an episode in which Muhammad's wives were jealous of the attention that he was giving to a Christian slave girl. But, as he pointed out to them, to neglect the sexual availability of his slaves was against Allah's will for him!

Qur'an (4:24) - "And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess." Allah even permitted Muhammad and his men to have sex with married slaves, such as those captured in battle.

Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) narrated that the Prophet (may the blessing and peace of Allah be upon him) married her when she was six years old, and he consummated her in marriage when she was nine years old. Then she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death).

Khadijah died three years before the Prophet (the blessing and peace of Allah be upon him) departed to Madina. He stayed there for two years or so and then he married Aisha when she was a girl of six years of age, and he consummated that marriage when she was nine years old.

Urwa narrated: The Prophet (may the blessing and peace of Allah be upon him) wrote the (marriage contract) with Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years.

Aisha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house when I was nine years old.

Aisha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) married her when she was seven years old, and she was taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, and her dolls were with her; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old.

This is just a sample of the early Muslim traditions reporting Muhammad’s marriage to the young Aisha, but it is sufficient to show that she certainly wasn’t fifteen years old at the time of the consummation, as some Muslims claim.

here is an educational link for you showing the Islamic proof that his wife was 9yo upon marriage/sex.

Muslims are quick to point out immorality around the world, especially in the West. It seems, then, that they are suggesting a very inconsistent message. When confronted with an immoral practice in another culture, Muslims cry out in one accord, "We condemn these practices, for they are against the eternal, perfect, and unalterable Law of God!" Yet, whenever the moral character of Muhammad is being scrutinized, Muslims suddenly say, "Don’t judge Muhammad! You should remember that he was from a different culture! Marrying young girls was common in Arabia, and it still is, thanks to Muhammad’s precedent. Different people have different moral standards, so no one should worry about Muhammad’s sexual relationship with a nine-year-old girl."

This convenient switch from moral absolutism to moral relativism is logically unacceptable. If it is wrong to judge the practices of another culture, then both Muhammad and the Qur’an were wrong for condemning immoral practices in Arabia. But if condemning immoral practices is acceptable, then Muslim apologists need a better response to criticisms of Muhammad’s relationship with Aisha.

First, Consider a husband on trial for beating his wife. When he takes the stand, he explains, "Your Honor, many women are victims of spousal abuse, and they need someone to talk to. Out of the kindness of my heart, I decided to beat my wife, so that she would be able to comfort other women whose husbands beat them." Such an explanation would never be accepted (except, perhaps, in countries under Islamic rule, where the Qur’an guarantees a husband’s right to beat his wife). Besides, if Muhammad had outlawed sex with children instead of becoming a willing participant, little girls wouldn’t have to worry about sex, and they wouldn’t need to question Aisha.

Second, it isn’t necessary for a lawgiver to institute laws by performing actions that create a precedent. In other words, Muhammad didn’t need to marry a young girl in order establish a law about marrying girls who had reached puberty. Muhammad, as Islam’s lawgiver, could have simply issued a decree. For instance, Muhammad allowed husbands to beat their wives. Was it necessary for Muhammad to beat his wives in order to establish this as a law? Certainly not. Similarly, when an American lawmaker says that killing someone in self-defense is acceptable, no one argues that the lawmaker must go out and kill someone in self-defense if his law is to stand. Hence, the argument that Muhammad needed to marry a young girl to establish puberty as the appropriate age for marriage completely fails.

Third, the Muslim claim that Aisha was a "precocious child" strains the evidence. Aisha herself reports that, when she was taken to Muhammad’s house, she was playing on a swing with her friends. She was also still playing with dolls. Based on the evidence, Aisha sounds like a normal little girl, not like a young adult. Besides, Muhammad didn’t marry her because she was precocious; he married her because he was dreaming about her.

Fourth, it is unlikely that God was using Muhammad’s relationship with Aisha to establish puberty as the appropriate age for marriage, since the Qur’an itself seems to allow marriage to prepubescent girls. According to Surah 65:4, a man must wait three months to divorce a wife who hasn’t yet reached menses. If Islam allows a man to divorce a girl who isn’t old enough to have her period, it follows that Islam also allows a man to marry a girl who hasn’t yet reached menses. And if the Qur’an allows marriage to prepubescent girls, then Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha would in no way rule out such a practice.

Fifth, Muslims search for reasons to justify Muhammad’s relationship with Aisha because they are convinced that everything Muhammad did had a divine purpose behind it. When critics point out Muhammad’s numerous murders and assassinations, Muslims claim that these violent acts were just. When critics note the extent of Muhammad’s polygamy, or his participation in the slave-trade, or his countless robberies, Muslims provide answers based on the view that Muhammad was an outstanding moral example. Similarly, when Muslims are confronted with the evidence for Muhammad’s sexual encounters with Aisha, they assume that there must have been a reason for it. They then invent reasons for Muhammad’s behavior (i.e. the other little girls needed someone to talk to about sex), and they offer these reasons as a defense of Muhammad’s morality. However, non-Muslims do not share this confidence in Muhammad’s moral perfection. Indeed, when non-Muslims hear about Muhammad’s violence, his greed, his polygamy, and his support of spousal abuse, we aren’t as quick to say "He must have had a reason" as Muslims seem to be. Because of this, Muslim justifications for Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha sound hollow when presented as a logical defense of his actions.

Finally, Muslim explanations for Muhammad’s behavior fail to take into account the dangers that accompany sex at a young age. Many Muslims claim that, as soon as a young girl gets her first period, she is ready to bear children. This "old enough to bleed, old enough to breed" mentality, aside from being disgusting, is completely false. A nine-year-old girl isn’t ready for sex or children, even if she reaches menses earlier than other little girls. Children that young are still growing; when they become pregnant, their bodies divert nutritional resources to the developing fetus, depriving the growing girls of much-needed vitamins and minerals. Further, complications often result from adolescent pregnancies, because the bodies of the young girls simply aren’t ready to give birth.

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes goodwithoutgod's post
29-10-2014, 07:52 PM
RE: GWG's resource thread
Islam madness part 2

"Muhammad was married to thirteen women, including eleven at one time. He relegated them to either consecutive days or (according to some accounts) all in one night. He married a 9-year-old girl and even his adopted son's wife. On top of that, Muhammad had a multitude of slave girls and concubines with whom he had sex - sometimes on the very days in which they had watched their husbands and fathers die at the hands of his army."

So, by any realistic measure, the creator of the world's most sexually restrictive religion was also one of the most sexually indulgent characters in history.

From the Hadith:

Muslim (8:3309) - Muhammad consummated his marriage to Aisha when she was only nine. (See also Bukhari 58:234 and many other places). No where in the reliable Hadith or Sira is there any other age given.

Bukhari (62:18) - Aisha's father, Abu Bakr, wasn't on board at first, but Muhammad explained how the rules of their religion made it possible. This is similar to the way that present-day cult leaders manipulate their followers into similar concessions.

Muslim (8:3311) - The girl took her dolls with her to Muhammad's house (something to play with when the "prophet" was not having sex with her).

Bukhari (6:298) - Muhammad would take a bath with the little girl and fondle her.

Muslim (8:3460) - "Why didn't you marry a young girl so that you could sport with her and she sport with you, or you could amuse with her and she could amuse with you?" Muhammad posed this question to one of his followers who had married an "older woman" instead of opting to fondle a child.

Bukhari (4:232) - Muhammad's wives would wash semen stains out of his clothes, which were still wet from the spot-cleaning even when he went to the mosque for prayers. Between copulation and prayer, it's a wonder he found the time to slay pagans.

Bukhari (6:300) - Muhammad's wives had to be available for the prophet's fondling even when they were having their menstrual period.

Bukhari (93:639) - The Prophet of Islam would recite the 'Holy Qur'an' with his head in Aisha's lap, when she was menstruating.

Bukhari (62:6) - "The Prophet used to go round (have sexual relations with) all his wives in one night, and he had nine wives." Muhammad also said that it was impossible to treat all wives equally - and it isn't hard to guess why.

Bukhari (5:268) - "The Prophet used to visit all his wives in a round, during the day and night and they were eleven in number." I asked Anas, 'Had the Prophet the strength for it?' Anas replied, 'We used to say that the Prophet was given the strength of thirty men.' "

Bukhari (60:311) - "I feel that your Lord hastens in fulfilling your wishes and desires." These words were spoken by Aisha within the context of her husband having been given 'Allah's permission' to fulfill his sexual desires with a large number of women in whatever order he chooses. (It has been suggested that Aisha may have been speaking somewhat wryly).

Muslim (8:3424) - One of several narrations in which a leering Muhammad orders a clearly startled woman to suckle a grown man with her breast so that he will become "unlawful" to her - meaning that they can live under the same roof together.

Tabari IX:137 - "Allah granted Rayhana of the Qurayza to Muhammad as booty." Muhammad considered the women that he captured and enslaved to be God's gift to him.

Tabari VIII:117 - "Dihyah had asked the Messenger for Safiyah when the Prophet chose her for himself... the Apostle traded for Safiyah by giving Dihyah her two cousins. The women of Khaybar were distributed among the Muslims." He sometimes pulled rank to reserve the most beautiful captured women for himself.

On the other hand, Muhammad passed down revelations from Allah that clearly condoned sleeping with underage girls, even by the standard of puberty. Qur'an (65:4) relates rules for divorce, one of them being that a waiting period of three months is established to determine that the woman is not pregnant. But the same rule applies to "those too who have not had their courses," meaning girls who have not begun to menstruate.

Thanks to Muhammad's extremely poor judgment (at best) and explicit approval of pedophilia, sex with children became deeply ingrained in the Islamic tradition. For many centuries, Muslim armies would purge Christian and Hindu peasant villages of their menfolk and send the women and children to harems and the thriving child sex slave markets deep in the Islamic world.

When it comes to child marriage, contemporary clerics warn fellow Muslims against succumbing to the disapproval of the Christian West: "It behooves those who call for setting a minimum age for marriage to fear Allah and not contradict his Sharia, or try to legislate things Allah did not permit. For laws are Allah’s province; and legislation is his excusive right, to be shared by none other. And among these are the rules governing marriage.”

The Ayatollah Khomeini, who married a 12-year-old girl, even gave his consent to using infants for sexual pleasure (although warning against full penetration until the baby is a few years older).

Some clerics show relative mercy on underage girls by advocating a process known as "thighing" (also known as child molestation in the West). According to a recent fatwa (number 23672), an imam answers this question: "My parents married me to a young girl who hasn't yet reached puberty. How can I enjoy her sexually?" by telling the 'man' that he may "hug her, kiss her, and ejaculate between her legs."

A prominent member of Saudi Arabia's highest religious council said in 2012 that girls can be married "even if they are in the cradle," then went on to explain that intercourse may occur whenever "they are capable of being placed beneath and bearing the weight of the man."

stop the bacha bazi tradition, you know the hiring and raping of little boys...or the marrying of 9 yo girls, raping them the night of the wedding and then when the child dies from bleeding, not even holding the man accountable, the mutilation of girls genitals so that she doesnt feel pleasure, the stoning of women accused of adultery, the honor killing of daughters who had the audacity to allow themselves to be raped...etc etc you know, all those great islam traditions.

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes goodwithoutgod's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: