Apostates of Islam

[Ramo]

Why would Ibn Ishaaq lie?

I told you already. To make Muslims seem more badazz.

Do all the other sources say explicitely: the massacre of Banu Qurayza didn't take place, or do they just don't mention it?
Anyway, You have to ask yourself if they do not have an interest in denying or not mentioning this fact.

Your position isn't consistent. If Muslim leaders were ashamed of BQ, why would they choose the single chronicle that mentions the event, out of all the others, as the primary biography of Mohammed? If they wanted the event in the official biography, why shouldn't Ishaq have had motive to make it up?

It's interesting that Jewish literature for the past 1200 years very rarely references the incident.

[MRT144]

oerdin is the secular OBL

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Ramo
Your bigotry towards Islam is disgusting.

Completely unable, as usual, to defend his position Ramo resorts to the cowards last redoubt of name calling and finger pointing. I guess you admit that you lost. BTW it is quoted from numerous period sources including the Koran that Mohammed ordered the killing and enslavement of the Jews of Medina (the city which was the heart of Judaism in Arabia at the time) your weak efforts to deny the truth is right up there with holocaust denials or Turkish denials of the Armenian genocide. It is simply a historical fact and it is not bigotry to ackowledge this great historical genocide which Mohammed caused.

To Ramo.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Ramo
It's interesting that Jewish literature for the past 1200 years very rarely references the incident.

It's amazing when you kill or enslave everyone that they don't write about it?! What type of fantasy world do you live in?

[Spiffor]

Oerdin:

Maybe you'll get more positive reactions if you backed your arguments with cites and links. Tell us where in the Koran the genocide of Medina is mentioned, and you'll have proven Ramo wrong. Until then, I would see no reason to believe you unless I shared your bias.

In another debate, about the actual existence of a Jesus person, Boris hinted to a debate among scholars. You haven't substantiated your claims to the contrary.

I started reading this thread as a rather neutral observer (because I really think the Muslim dogma has more potantial for bigotry than the Catholic or the Jewish one). But so far, by the way this thread is going, I'm increasingly favourable to Boris' and Ramo's claims over yours, simply because they bring some interesting points that you don't even attempt to disprove.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Oerdin
Yeah, sure.... There was no one named JEsus who existed

I don't see any proof here, or a refutation of the information in the link. In fact, judging by your post, I'd say you didn't even bother to read it.

and everything about him from his followers,

None of whose first-hand accounts are extant, since it is probable that none of the gospels were written by the men to whom they are ascribed. As the link showed, there is considerable debate on the authorship of the gospels.

to the Jewish King's writings

Which Jewish king would that be? What writings? You seem to making stuff up again.

to the Roman Governor's writings

Which governor is that? What writings? This is a bizarre statement, because no such writings exist or have been known to exist.

I'll repeat it for the slow: There do not exist ANY contemporary corraborative documents for the existence of Jesus. Not a one. The earliest documents we have that makes mention of Jesus are Paul's letters, and they are quite vague on any details of him.

is all one giant international multimellianial Jewish conspiracy.

Who mentioned a Jewish conspiracy at all?

Get back to us when you stop making **** up out of thin air and actually want to address the arguments.

[Ramo]

Jewish literature for the past 1200 years isn't limited to the people killed/enslaved in Medina.

And you were the one name-calling Muslims, I guess that means you have no argument. I still haven't seen any facts from you. It'd be great if you could start with this Qur'an cite for the killing and enslavement of all Jews in Medina.

to Oerdin. Bigot.

[Dinner]

To Ramo showing everyone what a fool he is.

As for quotes about the genocide of the Jews of Medina and the Hajiz:

Here is an excellent article by the American Public Broadcasting System (PBS) which details the historical details of Mohammed and his genocide of the Jews of the Hajiz (western Arabia).

http://www.pbs.org/muhammad/ma_jews.shtml

The Muslims now commenced a 25-day siege against the Banu Qurazya's fortress. Finally, both sides agreed to arbitration. A former ally of the Banu Qurayza, an Arab chief named Sa'd ibn Muadh, now a Muslim, was chosen as judge. Sa'd, one of the few casualties of battle, would soon die of his wounds. If the earlier tribal relations had been in force, he would have certainly spared the Banu Qurayza. His fellow chiefs urged him to pardon these former allies, but he refused. In his view, the Banu Qurayza had attacked the new social order and failed to honor their agreement to protect the town. He ruled that all the men should be killed. Muhammad accepted his judgment, and the next day, according to Muslim sources, 700 men of the Banu Qurayza were executed. Although Sa'd judged according to his own views, his ruling coincides with Deuteronomy 20:12-14

From Bat Ye'or, The Dhimmi, (NJ: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 1985), pp. 43-44.

Muhammad, the founder of Islam, traveled to Medina in 622 A.D. to attract followers to his new faith. When the Jews of Medina refused to convert and rejected Muhammad, two of the major Jewish tribes were expelled; in 627, Muhammad's followers killed between 600 and 900 of the men, and divided the surviving Jewish women and children amongst themselves.(3)

The Muslim attitude toward Jews is reflected in various verses throughout the Koran, the holy book of the Islamic faith. "They [the Children of Israel] were consigned to humiliation and wretchedness. They brought the wrath of God upon themselves, and this because they used to deny God's signs and kill His Prophets unjustly and because they disobeyed and were transgressors" (Sura 2:61). According to the Koran, the Jews try to introduce corruption (5:64), have always been disobedient (5:78), and are enemies of Allah, the Prophet and the angels (2:97Â98)

http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/sina/jews.htm

This is the story of the tragic end of the Jews of Medina. A case of ethnic cleansing, betrayal and genocide carried out by the Messenger of Allah (PBUH). The prophet raided the 2000 year old Jewish communities of Medina, killed their men, confiscated their properties, enslaved their wives and children and banished the unwanted with no provocation on the part of he Jews. The holy Prophet's sole motive was greed for their wealth and lust for their women.

Dispite Ramo's whining and his denials of the genocide the Jews did in deed write about how the Jews of the Hajiz were murdered and enslaved. The Jewish Encyclopedia details it well.

Mohammed Attacks Jews.

Finally Mohammed began to use actual violence toward the Medina Jews. After the battle of Bedr a woman called Asma, said by some to be a Jewess, wrote satirical verses, and was killed in her sleep, probably with Mohammed's consent. Not long before, Abu 'Afak of the Banu Amr, who had been converted to Judaism, had been assassinated for having displeased Mohammed by writing verses ridiculing the new religion. Mohammed then seems to have decided to get rid of the Jews in a body, since they were a constant menace to his cause. He began with the Banu Ḳainuḳa', who were goldsmiths, and lived by themselves in a fortified suburb. He first summoned them to accept his religion, and they refused. Soon a pretext was found for an open attack. A Moslem girl was insulted by a Jew of the Banu Ḳainuḳa'; the Jew was killed by a Moslem, and the latter in turn was killed by the brothers of the murdered Jew. Mohammed immediately marched against the Banu Ḳainuḳa' and besieged them in their stronghold. After a siege of fifteen days they surrendered, and their lives were spared only at the urgent request of Abdallah ibn Ubai, the influential leader of the Arab opposition, whose pleading Mohammed dared not ignore. Being allowed to leave the country, they emigrated toward the north. Their departure weakened the Jews, who if they had been united might have withstood Mohammed's attacks.

About a month after the emigration of the Ḳainuḳa', Abu Sufyan, the leader of the Meccan opposition, visited Ḥuyayy of the Banu al-Naḍir, but, being refused admittance by him, spent the night with another influential man of the same tribe and obtained information from him concerning the state of Medina. Another Jewish poet was assassinated about this time at Mohammed's desire. This was Ka'b ibn al-Ashraf of the Banu Naḍir, who had been stirring up the Ḳuraish at Mecca by his verses after the battle of Bedr. Ibn Sanina, a Jewish merchant, was killed on the day after Ka'b; and the Jews now began to fear to leave their houses. In the summer of 625 Mohammed attacked and besieged the Banu al-Naḍir. There appears to have been no satisfactory pretext for the attack. Mohammed claimed that he had received a revelation telling him of the treachery of the Jews. After a siege of fifteen or twenty days Abdallah ibn Ubai prevailed on the Naḍir to surrender. They were exiled, being allowed to take their goods with them, and emigrated toward the north, settling in Khaibar and in Syria.

Fate of Medina Jews.

There were now left only the Banu Ḳuraiẓa, and Mohammed soon found a pretext to attack them. Some of the Jewish exiles, chief among them being the above-mentioned Ḥuyayy, had stirred up the Ḳuraish and other Arab tribes against Mohammed, and they persuaded the Banu Ḳuraiẓa to join them in their plans. Mohammed, however, succeeded in making the Jews and their Arab allies suspicious of each other; and the allies, who had been besieging Medina, suddenly departed in the midst of a storm, thus leaving the Ḳuraiẓa unsupported. Mohammed marched against them, claiming to have received a special revelation to that effect, and laid siege to their fortress, which was a few miles to the southeast of the city. They surrendered after a month's siege, without having risked a fight. Their fate was left to the decision of Sa'd ibn Mu'adh of the tribe of Aus, who, in spite of the pleading of his own tribe, condemned the men to death and the women and children to slavery. The sentence was executed; and 750 Jews were killed in cold blood. Ḥuyayy was the last to die, with his last breath denouncing Mohammed as an impostor. The prophet wished to make a beautiful woman of the tribe, by the name of Riḥanah, his wife, but, tradition says, she preferred to be his slave instead. Thus the last of the powerful Jewish tribes in Medina was destroyed. Neither Mohammed, however, nor his successor drove all the Jews out of the country. That extreme measure was taken by Omar, who claimed to have heard the prophet say that all Jews should be exiled. Medina is one of the Moslem cities that neither Jews nor Christians may enter. See Banu Ḳainuḳa'; Banu Ḳuraiẓa; Banu al-Naḍir.

[Ted Striker]

Ted Striker

[Ramo]

1. Rare isn't the same thing as non-existent. And the "Jewish Encyclopedia" account has no primary sources.
2. I don't deny that the account exists. Ishaq wrote it. I probably mentioned that a dozen times in this thread (and note that the justification mentioned by Ishaq is totally different from what you claimed).
3. The Qur'anic verses in no way document what you claim they do, and are not written in any context.

[Dinner]

To be fair we are not going to find a 7th century manuscript on the internet so we must rely upon the work of scholars who have examined the manuscripts. It is a valid account from a good source.

[Ramo]

We can find the Qur'an on the internet. We can find many of the guys that I referred to earlier.

And online encyclopedias are hardly peer-reviewed scholarly sources.

I'm still waiting for those Qur'an verses.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
Actually the Ottoman military was originally predominantly Slav and Greek. The famous Janissaries, wo comprised the bulk of the Turkisn military well into the 19th century,

Yes, but not in the way you think. Originally, in Anatolia, large numbers of Greek and Slav soldiers defected to the Ottoman cause (many converting to Islam, too). As the Empire grew and stabilized, the military was reserved only for Muslims. The Janissary corps was the elite of the military, but they numbered less than ten thousand until Suelyman gave them perission to marry and made them a heriditary class (which, incidentally, is what led to the downfall of the Empire).

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Oerdin
To be fair we are not going to find a 7th century manuscript on the internet

http://www.hti.umich.edu/k/koran/

Although I admit it is probably a 8th century manuscript

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Oerdin
Janissaries were created when muslims would raid Christian towns and steal Christian children. The Sultan wanted to raise the children to be muslims and military slaves of his empire.

That's not true. The children were "taxed," and frequently, because it was a gateway to much better life and those children could help their family in the future, parents would bribe the officials to take their chidlren. Muslims would even have Christians pretend to be the parents of their children. Not all of the children became Janisaries, however. One Serbian who became Grand Visier used his position to make his Chrisitan brother the Patriarch of Belgrade. Being taken for the devsirme was a very good thing if you could get it, depite what Blakan nationalists will tell you today.

BTW, the Janissary corps was abolished in 1826, but by then it was too late to save the Empire.

We may think it unconscionable today, but remember, even in Chrisitan Europe, most people were bound to the land and complpetely subject to the whims of their lords.