Whats the point?

[Black Orchid]

I knew little about her until recently, other than she had a baby. Big whoop.

I didn't know that she won on a reduced immigration policy and if that is the case I don't expect her to get up in the next election but time will tell I guess.

[billy the kid]

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-09/ ... ia/9811340

muslims in hiding....deary me...what are they afraid of.....

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... ralia.html

ooops..here more....note the video clip on the bottom right....

[billy the kid]

The death penalty for apostasy is part of islamic law. It’s based on the koran: “They wish you would disbelieve as they disbelieved so you would be alike. So do not take from among them allies until they emigrate for the cause of allah. But if they turn away, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them and take not from among them any ally or helper.” (koran 4:89)

A hadith depicts mohammad saying: “Whoever changed his islamic religion, then kill him” (Bukhari 9.84.57). The death penalty for apostasy is part of islamic law according to all the schools of islamic jurisprudence.

This is still the position of all the schools of islamic jurisprudence, both Sunni and Shi’ite. Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the most renowned and prominent muslim cleric in the world, has stated: “The muslim jurists are unanimous that apostates must be punished, yet they differ as to determining the kind of punishment to be inflicted upon them. The majority of them, including the four main schools of jurisprudence (Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi’i, and Hanbali) as well as the other four schools of jurisprudence (the four Shiite schools of Az-Zaidiyyah, Al-Ithna-‘ashriyyah, Al-Ja’fariyyah, and Az-Zaheriyyah) agree that apostates must be executed.”

Qaradawi also once famously said: “If they had gotten rid of the apostasy punishment, islam wouldn’t exist today.”

So, according to muslim clerics...apostates mus be killed....I suppose thats fair enough...considering all other religions do the same..........

[billy the kid]

This video is getting a lot of attention, and Abd Al-Aziz Al-Khazraj Al-Ansari is being laughed at. But he is no “extremist.”

https://www.memri.org/tv/qatari-sociolo ... wife-islam

“Men have authority over women because Allah has made the one superior to the other, and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because Allah has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them.” — Qur’an 4:34

Muhammad “struck me on the chest which caused me pain, and then said: Did you think that Allah and His Apostle would deal unjustly with you?” — Aisha (Sahih Muslim 2127)

“Qatari Sociologist Abd Al-Aziz Al-Khazraj Al-Ansari Demonstrates Correct Wife-Beating in Islam,” MEMRI, March 29, 2019:

On March 29, 2019, Qatari sociologist Abd Al-Aziz Al-Khazraj Al-Ansari uploaded a video to the Al-Mojtama YouTube channel in which he gave a demonstration and explanation about how to beat your wife in an Islamically permissible fashion. He said that it is not necessary to beat one’s wife frequently, but that a man – as the leader of the house – must sometimes exercise his authority and discipline his wife “out of love” so that “life can move on.” Al-Ansari said that the beating should be light and painless, and that it should make the wife feel her husband’s masculinity and strength, as well as her own femininity. Al-Ansari then demonstrated how to beat one’s wife on Nayef – a little boy who might be his son – by slapping him on the shoulders, grabbing him and shaking him, and saying loudly: “I told you not to leave the house! How many times do I have to tell you?” Al-Ansari said that punching your wife or striking her in the face is prohibited and explained that it is in some women’s nature to like domineering, authoritative, violent, and powerful husbands. For additional clips from Al-Ansari, see MEMRI TV Clip No. 7108 and No. 7085.

Following are excerpts:

Abd Al-Aziz Al-Khazraj Al-Ansari: Dear viewers, many people – especially people who are married – would like to know how to beat one’s wife. Is beating your wife necessary? Must a man beat his wife every day? No

First, we must understand that the man is the leader of the house. A leader has authorities, just like a company manager.

The leader of the house may decide to discipline the wife so life can move on.

How does a husband beat his wife? He gives her a disciplinary beating out of love. He loves her. The beating should be light, and must make the wife feel her femininity and her husband’s masculinity. Now, let’s see how Islam teaches how to beat your wife. Let’s imagine that Nayef here… How are you, Nayef? Nayed is obviously a boy, but let’s imagine that he is the wife. How should a husband beat his wife? First, he must “admonish her” – in other words, he should advise her. Then, he should refrain from sharing a bed with her. If all of this doesn’t help, we start the beating as a last resort. What is beating in Islam? Beating in Islam… Wait, don’t move… The husband must make his wife feel his strength. Why aren’t you listening to me?! How many times do I have to tell you?! How many times do I have to tell you so you’ll listen?! Didn’t I tell you not to leave the house without my permission?! You see how? A little bit of rebuke… Obviously, she’s starting to talk back… I told you not to leave the house! How many times do I have to tell you? See how the beating is done? I told you not to leave the house! The beating is light, brothers. Don’t leave the house again! Do you understand?! Yes or no?! You see, brothers? This is beating in Islam. But some people punch her or slap her on the face… That’s not allowed. The Prophet Muhammad… Look how merciful Islam is. The Prophet forbade striking the face. He forbade men from beating their wives on the face. Slapping the face, hitting the head, punching the nose – all of this is prohibited. The beating is for discipline. Let’s see how it’s done. Don’t leave the house again! Listen to what I tell you! This is a painless beating that does not leave bruises or cause bleeding.

The beating I just gave Nayef is the true gentle beating in Islam.

Brothers, why do husbands beat their wives? Because some wives like domineering and authoritative husbands. By nature, they like violent and powerful husbands.

With some women, admonishing them and refraining from sharing their beds won’t help. The only thing that helps with such women is beating. She needs to feel that you are a real man. That’s her nature. Dear brothers, I hope you understood the right to discipline a wife in Islam. We must not start asking questions about whether our religion is cruel. No, our religion is a religion of mercy and kindness.

Straight from the horses mouth...so to speak....ladies...doesnt it make you want to marry a muslim.....cant wait, can you....

[brian ross]

The Bible is full of misogyny - afterall it reflects the culture that created it:

An unmarried woman could be compelled to marry her rapist, as long as the rapist could pay the standard bride price and the woman’s father was comfortable with the marriage (Deuteronomy 22:28–29). Polygyny (a man having multiple wives at the same time) was not condemned, but was an accepted and legal custom (Deuteronomy 21:15–17; Genesis 4:19–24; and 2 Samuel 3:2–5). A woman’s religious vow could be nullified by her father or her husband (Numbers 30:3–15). And the assumption of the text is that the priesthood is all male (Leviticus 21). In short, within the legal literature of the Bible, women were not accorded the same status as men.

[1 Timothy 2] begins by stating that “men should pray” (and the word used here for men is andras, a gendered word that refers only to males) and then says “women should dress themselves modestly and decently” (vv. 8–9). So men are to pray, and women are to dress modestly. That’s quite a contrast. But there’s more: “Let a woman learn in silence and full submission. I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she is to be silent” (vv. 11–12). The rationale: “For Adam was formed first, then Eve, and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor” (vv. 13–14). According to this text, women were to be silent in worship gatherings (and men were certainly not told to be silent), and the rationale for this mandate is that woman (Eve) was created second and sinned first. And the final blow is this: A woman “will be saved” (the future tense of the standard word for “be saved,” “be given salvation”) “through childbirth if she remains in faith and love and sanctification with modesty” (1 Timothy 2:15).

These are but a few of the Biblical misogynist instructions. They are the equal of the Q'ran's. Both Christians and Muslims largely ignore the instructions in their Holy Books nowadays, except for traditionalists and extremists. Today's modern society has moved on markedly from those days, thankfully, both Christian and Muslim. To characterise the majority viewpoint of Muslims as being the same as the traditional or extremists one is to ignore the same groups within Christianity...

[billy the kid]

The Bible is full of misogyny - afterall it reflects the culture that created it:

An unmarried woman could be compelled to marry her rapist, as long as the rapist could pay the standard bride price and the woman’s father was comfortable with the marriage (Deuteronomy 22:28–29). Polygyny (a man having multiple wives at the same time) was not condemned, but was an accepted and legal custom (Deuteronomy 21:15–17; Genesis 4:19–24; and 2 Samuel 3:2–5). A woman’s religious vow could be nullified by her father or her husband (Numbers 30:3–15). And the assumption of the text is that the priesthood is all male (Leviticus 21). In short, within the legal literature of the Bible, women were not accorded the same status as men.

[1 Timothy 2] begins by stating that “men should pray” (and the word used here for men is andras, a gendered word that refers only to males) and then says “women should dress themselves modestly and decently” (vv. 8–9). So men are to pray, and women are to dress modestly. That’s quite a contrast. But there’s more: “Let a woman learn in silence and full submission. I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she is to be silent” (vv. 11–12). The rationale: “For Adam was formed first, then Eve, and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor” (vv. 13–14). According to this text, women were to be silent in worship gatherings (and men were certainly not told to be silent), and the rationale for this mandate is that woman (Eve) was created second and sinned first. And the final blow is this: A woman “will be saved” (the future tense of the standard word for “be saved,” “be given salvation”) “through childbirth if she remains in faith and love and sanctification with modesty” (1 Timothy 2:15).

These are but a few of the Biblical misogynist instructions. They are the equal of the Q'ran's. Both Christians and Muslims largely ignore the instructions in their Holy Books nowadays, except for traditionalists and extremists. Today's modern society has moved on markedly from those days, thankfully, both Christian and Muslim. To characterise the majority viewpoint of Muslims as being the same as the traditional or extremists one is to ignore the same groups within Christianity...

Somehow I dont think too many ministers of religion would preach TODAY what you have quoted.
The instructions given verbally by muslim leaders TODAY would be at odds with those given by
Ministers of religions. I really cant see the point in comparing biblical quotes from YESTERYEAR, to those practices taught TODAY
by muslim leaders.................
BTW I sense from your quotes and general posting that at one stage you may have been well versed in theology...Were you at any stage a minister of religion, and then packed it in....just wondering............

[brian ross]

The Bible is full of misogyny - afterall it reflects the culture that created it:

An unmarried woman could be compelled to marry her rapist, as long as the rapist could pay the standard bride price and the woman’s father was comfortable with the marriage (Deuteronomy 22:28–29). Polygyny (a man having multiple wives at the same time) was not condemned, but was an accepted and legal custom (Deuteronomy 21:15–17; Genesis 4:19–24; and 2 Samuel 3:2–5). A woman’s religious vow could be nullified by her father or her husband (Numbers 30:3–15). And the assumption of the text is that the priesthood is all male (Leviticus 21). In short, within the legal literature of the Bible, women were not accorded the same status as men.

[1 Timothy 2] begins by stating that “men should pray” (and the word used here for men is andras, a gendered word that refers only to males) and then says “women should dress themselves modestly and decently” (vv. 8–9). So men are to pray, and women are to dress modestly. That’s quite a contrast. But there’s more: “Let a woman learn in silence and full submission. I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she is to be silent” (vv. 11–12). The rationale: “For Adam was formed first, then Eve, and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor” (vv. 13–14). According to this text, women were to be silent in worship gatherings (and men were certainly not told to be silent), and the rationale for this mandate is that woman (Eve) was created second and sinned first. And the final blow is this: A woman “will be saved” (the future tense of the standard word for “be saved,” “be given salvation”) “through childbirth if she remains in faith and love and sanctification with modesty” (1 Timothy 2:15).

These are but a few of the Biblical misogynist instructions. They are the equal of the Q'ran's. Both Christians and Muslims largely ignore the instructions in their Holy Books nowadays, except for traditionalists and extremists. Today's modern society has moved on markedly from those days, thankfully, both Christian and Muslim. To characterise the majority viewpoint of Muslims as being the same as the traditional or extremists one is to ignore the same groups within Christianity...

Somehow I dont think too many ministers of religion would preach TODAY what you have quoted.
The instructions given verbally by muslim leaders TODAY would be at odds with those given by
Ministers of religions. I really cant see the point in comparing biblical quotes from YESTERYEAR, to those practices taught TODAY
by muslim leaders.................
BTW I sense from your quotes and general posting that at one stage you may have been well versed in theology...Were you at any stage a minister of religion, and then packed it in....just wondering............

Ah, and you know this, how, Billy? Been to any Mosques lately, Mmmm? No, I don't think you've even met a single Muslim in your entire life, have you?

Mosques, like Churches reflect what the congregation wants to hear, as well as what the Imam/Priest wants to preach. Mosques are actually more democratically controlled, unlike most Churches. There is no hierarchy in Islam - were you aware of that? Churches OTOH rely upon direction "from above" and have bishops/arch-bishops/Cardninals/etc. dictating theology and doctrine. Islam is much more individualistic as well, compared to Christianity.

Oh, and invariably as one Muslim put it to me, the Imam is the most unworldly and more ignorant person in the congregation, compared to the majority of it's members. Why? 'cause the Imam doesn't need to "live in the real world," he just needs to learn the Q'ran.

You, like most Islamophobes, like to seize upon the worst aspects of Islam, rather than actually talking to ordinary, everyday, Muslims. You ignore the similarities between the Christianity and Islam, in favour of just slamming Islam. Christianity has learnt to live with modern soceity - yet you can still hear "fire and brimstone" preachers. Same in Islam. Just like the Christian preachers, the Muslim ones largely get ignored by most of their congregations. Funny that, hey?

Then you have a problem. You like to paint all Muslims as devout, as members of Daesh or the Taliban or other extremist groups, that they pray five times a day and attend Mosque daily. Yes, a tiny minority do but only approximately 40-45% of Muslims attend Mosque each week. Rather different to the Borg-like Muslims that you portray them as...

As to my personal career, no, I've never been a Minister or a Priest, Billy. I hold however, a DD - a Doctor of Divinity Degree. I studied it 'cause I find theology rather interesting and I treat the Bible as rather a poor history lesson, rift with propaganda. And I'm an agnostic as well. Funny that, hey?

[billy the kid]

The Bible is full of misogyny - afterall it reflects the culture that created it:

An unmarried woman could be compelled to marry her rapist, as long as the rapist could pay the standard bride price and the woman’s father was comfortable with the marriage (Deuteronomy 22:28–29). Polygyny (a man having multiple wives at the same time) was not condemned, but was an accepted and legal custom (Deuteronomy 21:15–17; Genesis 4:19–24; and 2 Samuel 3:2–5). A woman’s religious vow could be nullified by her father or her husband (Numbers 30:3–15). And the assumption of the text is that the priesthood is all male (Leviticus 21). In short, within the legal literature of the Bible, women were not accorded the same status as men.

[1 Timothy 2] begins by stating that “men should pray” (and the word used here for men is andras, a gendered word that refers only to males) and then says “women should dress themselves modestly and decently” (vv. 8–9). So men are to pray, and women are to dress modestly. That’s quite a contrast. But there’s more: “Let a woman learn in silence and full submission. I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she is to be silent” (vv. 11–12). The rationale: “For Adam was formed first, then Eve, and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor” (vv. 13–14). According to this text, women were to be silent in worship gatherings (and men were certainly not told to be silent), and the rationale for this mandate is that woman (Eve) was created second and sinned first. And the final blow is this: A woman “will be saved” (the future tense of the standard word for “be saved,” “be given salvation”) “through childbirth if she remains in faith and love and sanctification with modesty” (1 Timothy 2:15).

These are but a few of the Biblical misogynist instructions. They are the equal of the Q'ran's. Both Christians and Muslims largely ignore the instructions in their Holy Books nowadays, except for traditionalists and extremists. Today's modern society has moved on markedly from those days, thankfully, both Christian and Muslim. To characterise the majority viewpoint of Muslims as being the same as the traditional or extremists one is to ignore the same groups within Christianity...

Somehow I dont think too many ministers of religion would preach TODAY what you have quoted.
The instructions given verbally by muslim leaders TODAY would be at odds with those given by
Ministers of religions. I really cant see the point in comparing biblical quotes from YESTERYEAR, to those practices taught TODAY
by muslim leaders.................
BTW I sense from your quotes and general posting that at one stage you may have been well versed in theology...Were you at any stage a minister of religion, and then packed it in....just wondering............

Ah, and you know this, how, Billy? Been to any Mosques lately, Mmmm? No, I don't think you've even met a single Muslim in your entire life, have you?

Mosques, like Churches reflect what the congregation wants to hear, as well as what the Imam/Priest wants to preach. Mosques are actually more democratically controlled, unlike most Churches. There is no hierarchy in Islam - were you aware of that? Churches OTOH rely upon direction "from above" and have bishops/arch-bishops/Cardninals/etc. dictating theology and doctrine. Islam is much more individualistic as well, compared to Christianity.

Oh, and invariably as one Muslim put it to me, the Imam is the most unworldly and more ignorant person in the congregation, compared to the majority of it's members. Why? 'cause the Imam doesn't need to "live in the real world," he just needs to learn the Q'ran.

You, like most Islamophobes, like to seize upon the worst aspects of Islam, rather than actually talking to ordinary, everyday, Muslims. You ignore the similarities between the Christianity and Islam, in favour of just slamming Islam. Christianity has learnt to live with modern soceity - yet you can still hear "fire and brimstone" preachers. Same in Islam. Just like the Christian preachers, the Muslim ones largely get ignored by most of their congregations. Funny that, hey?

Then you have a problem. You like to paint all Muslims as devout, as members of Daesh or the Taliban or other extremist groups, that they pray five times a day and attend Mosque daily. Yes, a tiny minority do but only approximately 40-45% of Muslims attend Mosque each week. Rather different to the Borg-like Muslims that you portray them as...

As to my personal career, no, I've never been a Minister or a Priest, Billy. I hold however, a DD - a Doctor of Divinity Degree. I studied it 'cause I find theology rather interesting and I treat the Bible as rather a poor history lesson, rift with propaganda. And I'm an agnostic as well. Funny that, hey?

So youre saying that muslims beat there wives....ok...thanx for that...
Forgot to ask...when and where did you graduate...is that another name for a degree in bullshitology.....

[billy the kid]

The Bible is full of misogyny - afterall it reflects the culture that created it:

An unmarried woman could be compelled to marry her rapist, as long as the rapist could pay the standard bride price and the woman’s father was comfortable with the marriage (Deuteronomy 22:28–29). Polygyny (a man having multiple wives at the same time) was not condemned, but was an accepted and legal custom (Deuteronomy 21:15–17; Genesis 4:19–24; and 2 Samuel 3:2–5). A woman’s religious vow could be nullified by her father or her husband (Numbers 30:3–15). And the assumption of the text is that the priesthood is all male (Leviticus 21). In short, within the legal literature of the Bible, women were not accorded the same status as men.

[1 Timothy 2] begins by stating that “men should pray” (and the word used here for men is andras, a gendered word that refers only to males) and then says “women should dress themselves modestly and decently” (vv. 8–9). So men are to pray, and women are to dress modestly. That’s quite a contrast. But there’s more: “Let a woman learn in silence and full submission. I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she is to be silent” (vv. 11–12). The rationale: “For Adam was formed first, then Eve, and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor” (vv. 13–14). According to this text, women were to be silent in worship gatherings (and men were certainly not told to be silent), and the rationale for this mandate is that woman (Eve) was created second and sinned first. And the final blow is this: A woman “will be saved” (the future tense of the standard word for “be saved,” “be given salvation”) “through childbirth if she remains in faith and love and sanctification with modesty” (1 Timothy 2:15).

These are but a few of the Biblical misogynist instructions. They are the equal of the Q'ran's. Both Christians and Muslims largely ignore the instructions in their Holy Books nowadays, except for traditionalists and extremists. Today's modern society has moved on markedly from those days, thankfully, both Christian and Muslim. To characterise the majority viewpoint of Muslims as being the same as the traditional or extremists one is to ignore the same groups within Christianity...

Somehow I dont think too many ministers of religion would preach TODAY what you have quoted.
The instructions given verbally by muslim leaders TODAY would be at odds with those given by
Ministers of religions. I really cant see the point in comparing biblical quotes from YESTERYEAR, to those practices taught TODAY
by muslim leaders.................
BTW I sense from your quotes and general posting that at one stage you may have been well versed in theology...Were you at any stage a minister of religion, and then packed it in....just wondering............

Ah, and you know this, how, Billy? Been to any Mosques lately, Mmmm? No, I don't think you've even met a single Muslim in your entire life, have you?

Mosques, like Churches reflect what the congregation wants to hear, as well as what the Imam/Priest wants to preach. Mosques are actually more democratically controlled, unlike most Churches. There is no hierarchy in Islam - were you aware of that? Churches OTOH rely upon direction "from above" and have bishops/arch-bishops/Cardninals/etc. dictating theology and doctrine. Islam is much more individualistic as well, compared to Christianity.

Oh, and invariably as one Muslim put it to me, the Imam is the most unworldly and more ignorant person in the congregation, compared to the majority of it's members. Why? 'cause the Imam doesn't need to "live in the real world," he just needs to learn the Q'ran.

You, like most Islamophobes, like to seize upon the worst aspects of Islam, rather than actually talking to ordinary, everyday, Muslims. You ignore the similarities between the Christianity and Islam, in favour of just slamming Islam. Christianity has learnt to live with modern soceity - yet you can still hear "fire and brimstone" preachers. Same in Islam. Just like the Christian preachers, the Muslim ones largely get ignored by most of their congregations. Funny that, hey?

Then you have a problem. You like to paint all Muslims as devout, as members of Daesh or the Taliban or other extremist groups, that they pray five times a day and attend Mosque daily. Yes, a tiny minority do but only approximately 40-45% of Muslims attend Mosque each week. Rather different to the Borg-like Muslims that you portray them as...

As to my personal career, no, I've never been a Minister or a Priest, Billy. I hold however, a DD - a Doctor of Divinity Degree. I studied it 'cause I find theology rather interesting and I treat the Bible as rather a poor history lesson, rift with propaganda. And I'm an agnostic as well. Funny that, hey?

OK So let me get this straight....you wont defend or criticize mohammed...you wont defend or criticize islam...you say that imams are the most unworldly and ignorant in the congregation...so where do muslims get their knowledge....oops sorry
only half the planets muslims attend their mosque...but you cant provide proof of that...as usual you just dance around.....
and then tell me you hold a Doctor of Divinity Degree....I dont really think you know much at at all...
BTW Im an apostate....

[billy the kid]

The Bible is full of misogyny - afterall it reflects the culture that created it:

An unmarried woman could be compelled to marry her rapist, as long as the rapist could pay the standard bride price and the woman’s father was comfortable with the marriage (Deuteronomy 22:28–29). Polygyny (a man having multiple wives at the same time) was not condemned, but was an accepted and legal custom (Deuteronomy 21:15–17; Genesis 4:19–24; and 2 Samuel 3:2–5). A woman’s religious vow could be nullified by her father or her husband (Numbers 30:3–15). And the assumption of the text is that the priesthood is all male (Leviticus 21). In short, within the legal literature of the Bible, women were not accorded the same status as men.

[1 Timothy 2] begins by stating that “men should pray” (and the word used here for men is andras, a gendered word that refers only to males) and then says “women should dress themselves modestly and decently” (vv. 8–9). So men are to pray, and women are to dress modestly. That’s quite a contrast. But there’s more: “Let a woman learn in silence and full submission. I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she is to be silent” (vv. 11–12). The rationale: “For Adam was formed first, then Eve, and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor” (vv. 13–14). According to this text, women were to be silent in worship gatherings (and men were certainly not told to be silent), and the rationale for this mandate is that woman (Eve) was created second and sinned first. And the final blow is this: A woman “will be saved” (the future tense of the standard word for “be saved,” “be given salvation”) “through childbirth if she remains in faith and love and sanctification with modesty” (1 Timothy 2:15).

These are but a few of the Biblical misogynist instructions. They are the equal of the Q'ran's. Both Christians and Muslims largely ignore the instructions in their Holy Books nowadays, except for traditionalists and extremists. Today's modern society has moved on markedly from those days, thankfully, both Christian and Muslim. To characterise the majority viewpoint of Muslims as being the same as the traditional or extremists one is to ignore the same groups within Christianity...

Somehow I dont think too many ministers of religion would preach TODAY what you have quoted.
The instructions given verbally by muslim leaders TODAY would be at odds with those given by
Ministers of religions. I really cant see the point in comparing biblical quotes from YESTERYEAR, to those practices taught TODAY
by muslim leaders.................
BTW I sense from your quotes and general posting that at one stage you may have been well versed in theology...Were you at any stage a minister of religion, and then packed it in....just wondering............

Ah, and you know this, how, Billy? Been to any Mosques lately, Mmmm? No, I don't think you've even met a single Muslim in your entire life, have you?

Mosques, like Churches reflect what the congregation wants to hear, as well as what the Imam/Priest wants to preach. Mosques are actually more democratically controlled, unlike most Churches. There is no hierarchy in Islam - were you aware of that? Churches OTOH rely upon direction "from above" and have bishops/arch-bishops/Cardninals/etc. dictating theology and doctrine. Islam is much more individualistic as well, compared to Christianity.

Oh, and invariably as one Muslim put it to me, the Imam is the most unworldly and more ignorant person in the congregation, compared to the majority of it's members. Why? 'cause the Imam doesn't need to "live in the real world," he just needs to learn the Q'ran.

You, like most Islamophobes, like to seize upon the worst aspects of Islam, rather than actually talking to ordinary, everyday, Muslims. You ignore the similarities between the Christianity and Islam, in favour of just slamming Islam. Christianity has learnt to live with modern soceity - yet you can still hear "fire and brimstone" preachers. Same in Islam. Just like the Christian preachers, the Muslim ones largely get ignored by most of their congregations. Funny that, hey?

Then you have a problem. You like to paint all Muslims as devout, as members of Daesh or the Taliban or other extremist groups, that they pray five times a day and attend Mosque daily. Yes, a tiny minority do but only approximately 40-45% of Muslims attend Mosque each week. Rather different to the Borg-like Muslims that you portray them as...

As to my personal career, no, I've never been a Minister or a Priest, Billy. I hold however, a DD - a Doctor of Divinity Degree. I studied it 'cause I find theology rather interesting and I treat the Bible as rather a poor history lesson, rift with propaganda. And I'm an agnostic as well. Funny that, hey?

OK So let me get this straight....you wont defend or criticize mohammed...you wont defend or criticize islam...you say that imams are the most unworldly and ignorant in the congregation...so where do muslims get their knowledge....oops sorry
only half the planets muslims attend their mosque...but you cant provide proof of that...as usual you just dance around.....
and then tell me you hold a Doctor of Divinity Degree....I dont really think you know much at all...
BTW Im an apostate....