Debate With A Mahomettan

Go down

Debate With A Mahomettan

Post  Admin on Thu Oct 22, 2009 11:27 am

I had posted this earlier:

«Was discussing with a Mahomettan coworker what Bogusordian means, and came to Shirk. He objected to my categorization that it was copied from Christianity and Judaism. Now that is idiotic, because Mahomettanism came 700 years after Christianity, and so Mahomettanism could not have originated it:

While on Shirk, one mustn't forget Naskh either:

This Wikipedia entry is written from a purely Moslem viewpoint, and lacks neutrality. Naskh considered correctly proves Moslemism is pure hogwash (See my earlier discussion with the Mahomettan "Imp" for more about this).

While on the topic, one notices that the fight between Deobandian Mahomettanism (Tablighism / Salafism / Talibanism / Saudi-ism / Wahhabism / Al-Qaida-ism) on the one side and Barelvian Mahomettanism on the other side is over the principle of "Ada'a."

The Wikipedia article on this subject is un-encyclopedic, written from a purely Sundan legalistic perspective:

(Sundan refers to the large Sunda Archipelago of the East Indies).

According to the principle of Ada'a, converts to Mahomettanism who are attached to particular practises that contradict Mahomettanism or which are against the principles of Mahomettanism, are permitted those practises as a sort of indulgence.

Thus the Mahomettans of North-West Africa are permitted to eat pork; Mahomettans of Buner are permitted NOT to circumcise; Mahomettans with a fetish for grave-worship of 'saints' are permitted to continue doing so.

This principle was established by the Mahomet the Accursed, the False Prophet, Piss Be Upon Him, and is a recognized principle of Mahomettanism.

Deobandian Mahomettanism has waged war against these practises and forbids them as un-Mahomettanism»

This discussion began with an avowal by the Mahomettan co-worker that he is a humanist. However, as soon as I affirmed that Shirk is a principle copied from Judaism and Christianity, he threw off the mask and revealed his true face, as a Mahomettan bigot.

He has since tried to ridicule me in front of others, particularly other fellow-Mahomettans, on this issue of Shirk being copied, trying to antagonize them against me, and to instigate mischief against me, an old tactic that I have seen and experienced many times before. I haven't been giving him much opportunity to do so, however, as our work timings do not match, and as I have been ignoring him since.

The last time he did try to instigate a Mahomettan co-worker, whom I will call Mr. A, he (that is Mr. A) began to "explain" to me by an alleged analogy of different versions of Microsoft Windows, with newer versions superceding older ones.

I told him that I understood the analogy, but the analogy does not apply. I did not discuss this any further, because the workplace is not the place for such discussions, and I do not see the profit in discussing with closed minds.

But while I am on the subject, I would like to point out that this alleged principle of supercession of older revelations by later revelations is part of the pretension of Mahomettanism.

However, Mahomettanism also pretends that this principle of supercession has ended and that Mahomettanism itself cannot be superceded.

There have been several Mahomettan sects that have gone "beyond Mahomettanism" by claiming to be "newer revelations" that have superceded Mahomettanism, and Mahomettans have reacted with vicious terrorism and genocides against their followers for so teaching and believing.

Such are the Druze, Alawite, Bahai, Qadianite and other religions.
Similar to them is Yazidism, a religion prevalent among a small section of Kurds (the ancient Gordiae), a religion that is inspired by confluence of Gnosticism and Mahomettanism which both claim that the Devils will be finally forgiven and admitted to heaven.

This is the heresy of Universalism, also taught by the Modernist heresiarch Karol Wojtyla or "Pope John-Paul II" of Bogusordianism, the Roman Liberal Protestant religion.

Any and every pretension of Mahomettanism is a falsehood. Taken as an integral whole, Mahomettanism is untenable.

Its greatest defect is the principle of Naskh or Abrogation.

While parts of the pretended Mahomettan revelation affirms that other parts of these pretended revelations have been abrogated, it is nowhere defined WHAT exactly is abrogated and what is not.

Given that fact, one is forced to the conclusion that all of the pretended revelations of Mahomettanism, accursed in themselves because they blaspheme and falsify God, are Abrogated.

Lucio Mascarenhas

Posts : 51
Join date : 2009-09-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Back to top

- Similar topics

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum