[MERGED]-Debmey: SHOW PROOF THAT PROPHET MOHAMMAD IS A PAEDOPHILE?

Debmey

yeah man, muslims fit into this description. Juts look at all the denials you do.

Fuzzman

Debmey wrote: Where? Where does it say sex at all. I don't see it.

Numbers 31:17-18  reads :"Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.[31:18]But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves."

Numbers 31:35-40 reads  [35]And thirty and two thousand persons in all, of women that had not known man by lying with him.[40]And the persons [were] sixteen thousand; of which the LORD'S tribute [was] thirty and two persons.

Debmey wrote: yeah man, muslims fit into this description. Juts look at all the denials you do.

So who is it that is in denial of paedophilia not made legitimate in the Bible. Written proof and its all in the Bible. They say Prophet Mohammad is a paedophile who indulges in paedophilia - but then they do not have the written proof?

There is a verse in a new Bible  now known as Fuzzman's Bible that can only be found on this forum where there is one particular verse that befits people who cannot see the faults that lie within the Holy Bible. This is the verse concerned :
" You can bring a donkey to a water trough but you cannot force it to drink from it."
Fuzzman 1:01 NKVE

ARI FUZZMAN

[ Last edited by Fuzzman on 23-2-2005 at 01:43 AM ]

Debmey

There is no mention of sex in those verses you showed Fuzzy.

You must be crazy.

Fuzzman

Originally posted by Debmey at 2005-2-23 01:49 AM:
There is no mention of sex in those verses you showed Fuzzy.You must be crazy.

[Numbers 31:18] But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves."
What does women children that have not known a man by lying with him means to you? This is getting to be real fun!

[Numbers 31:35]And thirty and two thousand persons in all, of  women that had not known man by lying with him.[Numbers 31:40]And the persons [were] sixteen thousand; of which the LORD'S tribute [was] thirty and two persons.
Why does God need a tribute of 32 women that have not known man by lying with him means to you?

No paedophilia you say?

" You can bring a donkey to a water trough but you cannot force it to drink from it."
Fuzzman 1:01 NKVE

ARI FUZZMAN

Debmey

Thanks for showing us those verses but I don't see any mention of sex nor tribute at all. You are simply adding meanings to verses you quoted. These virgins were simply people who were innocent of fornication because the Midianites were known to use sex as a tool of seduction. God is merciful and took those who were clearly innocent from judgment. 'Taking them for yourselves' simply means integrating them into the Hebrew society. Only a twisted mind like Fuzzy's will distort its meaning.   

What is stark clear is paedophilia by Mohd in the hadith below.
From Bukhari vol. 7, #65:

            "Narrated Aisha that the prophet wrote the marriage contract with her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old.  Hisham said:  "I have been informed that Aisha remained with the prophet for nine years (i.e. till his death).""

No need to talk so much Debmey.

All we know is that this matter about paedophilia that has been stupidly associated with the Holy Prophet's (peace be upon him) perfectly legitimate and legal marriage to Lady Ayesha was never  questioned by anyone, especially those who lived during the time of the prophet. The high and deep respect, love, reverence and trust in the Holy Prophet never abated throughout the more than 1400 years of Islam and for the centuries to come.

You christians only started making noise about this after your clergies and priests were, have been and are still being caught for paedophilia (not legal marriages to young girls as you know but raping young boys).

Never admitting your own gross behaviour as usual, you start pointing fingers at others to divert the world's attention  from your paedophiliac & gay  christian  culture.

It will never work.  The world knows better. God knows best.

[ Last edited by KENNKID on 23-2-2005 at 12:02 PM ]

greekgod

Originally posted by Debmey at 23-2-2005 03:36 AM:
Thanks for showing us those verses but I don't see any mention of sex nor tribute at all. You are simply adding meanings to verses you quoted. These virgins were simply people who were inno ...

You want to condemn Aisha, but you use words from Aisha.
Why only take only one hadith from her, whilst there are many good
hadith from Aisha.

If you want to condemn Aisha, I think you had picked a wrong hadith, because from that hadith, clearly we see that Aisha did not condemn Mo.

So, what would you suggest next?

Paul was gay?

FaithHealer3

Whats stupid is people are unable to realise that having sex with a 9 year old girl is wrong.

Not recognising a pedophilia act is also stupid.

Instead of condemning the person who had sex with a 9 year old, muslims are claiming that he married her. What sort garbage is that? Married or not, having sex with a 9 year old girl IS pedophilia.

What's apparent is, p.Muhammad was an excellent example to be avoided.

A person who claims to be an exampler, should know that having sex with a 9 year old girl is bad and wrong. Today, we know much better than the 7th century Arabians. We know,its a harmful practice to have sex with kids. Its harmful to the kids physically and psychologically.

Marrying a 9year old is wrong and should not be imitated. Prophert or no prophet, p.Muhammad was a bad example to follow. Muslims know this, they just can't openly say it.

Fuzzman

Debmey wrote: Thanks for showing us those verses but I don't see any mention of sex nor tribute at all. You are simply adding meanings to verses you quoted.

I'll just quote DivinePonytail again for you.

DivinePonytail wrote:
[quote]Debmey wrote: Where? Where does it say sex at all. I don't see it.

"To the pure, all things are pure, but to those who are corrupted and do not believe, nothing is pure. In fact, both their minds and consciences are corrupted." Titus 1:15 NIV.[/quote]

Debmey wrote: These virgins were simply people who were innocent of fornication because the Midianites were known to use sex as a tool of seduction. God is merciful and took those who were clearly innocent from judgment.

I can go with the part about God being Merciful but then again, what about the special "tribute" of an allocation of 32 dark-eyed maidens of young age for God's personal taking? First of all I find it loathing at the best to think that the Creator would want any part in acts of paedophilia from his Creations but then again I'll give you the benefit of the doubt by asking you some more. So as to get your really brilliant and creative answers. So answer me this:-
1. Why does God need a tribute of 32 young vigin dark-eyed maidens?
2. What does this tribute stand for?
3. Could it be possible that, the 32 young girls in Numbers 31:40 were meant to be "Chosen child prodigies", to be nurtured as prominent and religious figures in Hebrew society after intergration?

Debmey wrote: 'Taking them for yourselves' simply means integrating them into the Hebrew society. Only a twisted mind like Fuzzy's will distort its meaning.   

I take that you're now trying to make your point here with regards to Numbers 31:17-18. Let's say I play along, and go eat from your bag of Twisties, by buying your idea of "taking them for themselves" as the most idealistic a nd humane thing to do in getting those young virgin girls intergrated into Hebrew society. Now tell me two things.
1. Why this there no such record in Hebrew history of this?
2. Why intergrate the young virgin girls [Num 31:18] and not the married
    women [Num 31:17] who were all put to the death instead? Why must the
    married women either still married or divorced be put to the death?

Now if you can convincingly answer me all these questions, than maybe I might go along with your twisting. By the way, if you do win us over with a truthful answer, you get to choose your flavor from the below !

But I'd prefer you go for the Chicken flavor because after this you definately gonna do Fuzzman a Chicken Run out of this thread. LOL.

So answer the questions highlighted in Red!

ARI FUZZMAN

[ Last edited by Fuzzman on 24-2-2005 at 10:46 AM ]

Debmey

No sex and no tribute mentioned.

What is clear is that Mo had sex with Aisha when she was only 9 years old.

Baiduri Othman

Originally posted by Fuzzman at 2005-2-24 10:33 AM:

I'll just quote DivinePonytail again for you.

"To the pure, all things are pure, but to those who are corrupted and do not believe, nothing is ...

My response:-

That's something really refreshing & entertaining with that Twisties picture.:lol

Fuzzman

Awww.. shucks? So there won't be any answers coming from Debbo with regards to my red highlights. Seems like Debbo ain't that intelligent, brilliant or even smart at all? Debbo can't answer my simple questions and why? Because my darlings, Debbo knows that those verses, smell to high Heaven of paedophilia and Debbo very well knows that Jewish paedophiles inserted those absurd verses where there were no mention of marriage contracts.

And yes Debbo,..you may not have the Red Twisties as you flip-flopped your bias by not answering my red highlighted simply questions. However like I "foresaw" you are instead eligble for the Chicken flavor because you "chickened-out" of helping out Moses and God HIMSELF?!! Munch on it for you've earned it.

Perhaps FaithHealer, DivinePonytail or any others in the same toilet with Debbo might want to collabbo on this matter? Any takers?

ARI FUZZMAN

Debmey

Looks like Fuzzy is stuck in the face once agin. Ahahahahahahahahahaha..............

Fuzzman

Come on FaithHealer? How about you DivinePonytail? ..or even Nightlordy? Anybody? Don't you people wanna safe your partner in Trinity from this quagmire? Debbo has shown that Debbo cannot take on my highlighted questions made out to Debbo. Since the lot of you have been in "close alliance" with Debbo, therefore naturally the help forthcoming from you peeps should factually be swift, not this silence. Come on show your mettle. Help Debbo out. Debbo's drowning here.

ARI FUZZMAN

Debmey

Come on Fuzzy, didn't you start this thread abt Mo's paedophilia? Now you run away from your own topic. Ahahahahahahahahhaha..............................

cheers

aenemy7

:lol :lol :lol,

Still u guys didn't proof yet about Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) as a phaedophile because he married Aisha legally,u all just proof that Aisha is legally married to Muhammad(pbuh)...that's all,nothing related to a phaedophile case...

Aisha is legally married and fit to married(even fit to have a baby,remember the 9 year thai girl???:ah.......

:lol :lol :lol

Allah Knows Best,Peace Yall.....

Fuzzman

Originally posted by Debmey at 2005-2-24 08:05 PM:
Come on Fuzzy, didn't you start this thread abt Mo's paedophilia? Now you run away from your own topic. Ahahahahahahahahhaha..............................cheers

Yes I'm running away from because you're always correct and I'm always wrong. In fact I'm so sacred of you. Can you ever forgive me. You gave such strong answers here that I'm too scared to admit that I'm always wrong. Your faith has protected you. Even when you refused to answer all my questions, I know that you're very very strong and wish not to show your overwhelming knowledge because you wish to save my face from further shame.

SATISFIED? Now give me my answers for the questions in red.

You wrote: These virgins were simply people who were innocent of fornication because the Midianites were known to use sex as a tool of seduction. God is merciful and took those who were clearly innocent from judgment.
The above with regards to Numbers 31:40.
1. Why does God need a tribute of 32 young vigin dark-eyed maidens?
2. What does this tribute stand for?
3. Could it be possible that, the 32 young girls in Numbers 31:40 were meant to be "Chosen child prodigies", to be nurtured as prominent and religious figures in Hebrew society after intergration?

You wrote: 'Taking them for yourselves' simply means integrating them into the Hebrew society. Only a twisted mind like Fuzzy's will distort its meaning.
The above with regards to Numbers 31:17-18.
1. Why this there no such record in Hebrew history of this?
2. Why intergrate the young virgin girls [Num 31:18] and not the married women [Num 31:17] who were all put to the death instead? Why must the married women either still married or divorced be put to the death?

This post and the ones before it all have to do with your accusation of Prophet Mohammad's so-called act of paedophilia. What we need to make clear is your apprehension, understanding and judgement of paedophilia. That is why Fuzzman is putting up case studies of these acts to see how well you fare in recognising paedophilia.

Simple test actually. If you know what means paedophilia, you will instantly see paedophilia in Numbers 31:40 and Numbers 31:17-18. If you don't admit so, it shows that you cannot differiantiate what is paedophilia and what is not. Then again if you refuse to answer it will finally show that you have the mental incapacity called denial which will block out almost anything that your mind refuses acceptance. This sickness is uncurable and will eventually lead to insanity. Once we can diagnose the last one, then we will all agree that there is no point carrying on this thread, as you will until Armageddon not speak the truth. Something I'm sure not even DivinePonytail and the rest [who have a conscience] will not want to be party to for this will only damage their reputation in the long run. So answer those questions in Red and save yourself some face!

ARI FUZZMAN

[ Last edited by Fuzzman on 25-2-2005 at 10:07 AM ]

nightlord

U guys are the dumbest lot of muslims I have ever met.

Dont u know that the stories from where Fuzzy took came from the jewish books.

AND SINCE MUSLIM CLAIM A DIRECT LINE FROM

ADAM => MOSES => ABRAHAM => MO

U are just proving exactly what Debmey has claim,

U HAVE A DIRECT LINE OF TRADITION OF SEX WITH CHILDREN.

DUH.........

And if u really want to bring this up, dont make me post ARAB TRADITION of having sex with children male or female.

DONT SHOOT UR MOUTH OFF IF U DONT READ.

aenemy7

Go to "Freemason" thread nightlord if u wanna know who's the king of child pornography.....:lol :lol :lol


Allah Knows Best,Peace Yall....

Fuzzman

Nightlord wrote: U guys are the dumbest lot of muslims I have ever met.

I'd appreciate it if person/s who's contributions work to zilch or of no debate value please stop shooting off your mouthpieces here by being apologetical to Debbo's glaring weaknesses here. Don't just write for the sake of writing. Write with merit. Stuff that wins over respect from the other forumers. If you peeps wanna know what is it that I'm trying to push here then read without bias. If you wanna hold on to bias, then be my guest - take a walk. Nobody's gonna miss what comes out of your trap. At least not me for sure.

This far Debbo cannot differiantiate between what's paedophilia and what's not? That's either pretending in the highest order or Debbo's really not worthy of debate.

Get the picture Nightlordy? If you cannot give me a 30 yard touchdown on the endzone to aid Debbo, then stay on the sidelines cos nobody's gonna rough you up for not trying. But if you try really hard over your mistakes, I might just give you a ten yard penalty for helping Debbo or even a fifteen yard penalty if you display unsporting conduct! LOL.

ARI FUZZMAN