12 replies

  1. Brown selectively chooses which islamic texts to take at “face value” and which not. Who gave him this choice?

  2. Brown selectively chooses which islamic texts to take at “face value” and which not. Who gave him this choice?

    The fact that people of the book were not forced to convert, after they had been put to the sword, does not make this hadith invalid. The people of the book were just an exception to the rule. Brown tries to restrict it to the Arabian Peninsula at the time of Mohammed by noting that it contradicts the Koran. Who allows him to invalidate the law because it is wider in scope than the koranic text?

    “fight people until they say there is no God but Allah”.

    Non Muslims treated polytheists like people of the book, lol. So they were enslaved and exploited instead of being made to convert. Why, because Muslims are so nice following the example of their prophet? No. Because otherwise there would be no spoils to be shared out. If everyone was allowed to convert they would keep everything they had and there would be no spoil.

    The point is that according to the islamic sources fighting non-Muslims is morally good for all Muslims. What Muslims do afterwards to humiliate their victims is all the same to Allah.

    I find it funny how Brown tries to give the impression that Mohammed treated the Jews with kindness, allowing them to continue practising their religion and only making them pay a tax. After that they lived happily ever after in Arabia. If that is the case where have they all vanished to?

  3. Haven’t been on here in a while… A few of my Muslim friends have recommended reading Brown’s books, but I have a negative opinion of him after watching a few of his lectures. … Btw, I’m in Jerusalem right now… Love it here

  4. Everything is great here: The people, the food, the weather.

Leave a Reply

%d