so when trump says that he doesn’t know who david duke is, after saying david duke is an awful individual, one is a strong hadith and one is a weak hadith. but which?
noticed the following after scrolling up for a moment
Volume 4, Book 52, Number 185:
Narrated Abdullah:
Once the Prophet was offering the prayer in the shade of the Ka’ba. Abu Jahl and some Quraishi men sent somebody to bring the abdominal contents of a shecamel which had been slaughtered somewhere in Mecca, and when he brought them, they put them over the Prophet
so covering Mo with the entrails/ womb of a camel is reasonable treatment of a ‘prophet ?
Very important question: Is Mohammed’s ‘kindness’ shown only to Muslims or to non-Muslims as well? If the Hadith only talk of Mohammed being kind to his followers, then it demonstrates the exclusionary, discriminatory and non-universal nature of Islam. I have not read the Hadith so do not know the answer to this question. Would be most interested to know as it is critical for understanding the psychology and morality being pushed by strident pro-Islam people.
It is the typical “good” and “bad” of all the teachings of islam (quran as well as [a]hadith). In the quran some verses are nice to all people, others are terrifying for the infidels. The difference is basically between the peaceful meccan verses (when mohamed was a new prophet, no followers) and the later medinan verses (when he had a powerful gang of followers). The latter (medinan) abrogate the early meccan peaceful ones.
“people of the book” are to be respected
Yes and no… once a mozlim army conquers a non mozlim country, the chief has a choice for the captives: (it’s the conqueror’s choice, not the vanquished ones)
-kill
-convert
-or live as a dhimmi for the “people of the book” – which entails paying (extremely) high taxes [jyzzia] for ‘protection’ and living as a second class citizen.
Before we jump into mocking Islam, the Prophet and the Haditha, we should acknowledge that Christianity and Judaism also plays games of casuistry. I am no advocate for any of them. All have twisted words for their own advantage. Today’s cartoon highlights this quite brilliantly.
a phobia is an irrational fear
given that the goal of islam as a concept is ultimate world conquest [ regardless of how fervently actual muslims pursue that goal]
it is not wholly irrational to be concerned
Whether a hadith is strong or weak is nothing to do with what it says about Mo, it’s to do with whether the hadith is considered to be believable or not.
And since none of them were written down until about a hundred years after the death of Mo, the hadiths are actually the end product of the biggest game of Chinese Whispers ever played!
Although I have to agree with Canneloni about “strong” and “weak” (which basically goes to the perceived trail of evidence back to the Prophet and his immediate Companions), nevertheless the latest Jesus & Mo cartoon is meant to convey a satirical point, not a historical one. We rarely hear a hadith about the Prophet’s preference in dates or toilet paper, just as we’re more likely to hear Christians remembering Jesus’s peace and love proclamations than his cursing of a fig tree or sending a poor farmer’s pigs over a cliff.
“Before we jump into mocking Islam, the Prophet and the Haditha, we should acknowledge that Christianity and Judaism also plays games of casuistry.”
SJW drivel. Why do we need to bring up the other two when mocking Islam? Can you add the links in your comments where XTians and Jews flew planes into buildings, beheaded someone or killed people over cartoons recently? There is plenty of comedic material available with Islam alone.
The best hadiths (Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim) have all the worst parts of Islam. Killing infidals, raping slave girls, killing apostates, pedophilia etc are all in the most authoratitive hadiths. ISIS gleefully quotes these hadiths to justify their own acts of rape, beheading, enslavement etc. It amazes me that people still try to see the “good” in Islam when it is far, far worse than the Mafia.
We rarely hear a hadith about the Prophet’s preference in dates or toilet paper
not quite true- from the hadith it is clear that mo never had toilet paper – only sand and gravel
Abu Huraira reported: The Messenger of Allah (way peace he upon him) said: When anyone performs ablution he must clean his nose and when anyone wipes himself with pebbles (after answering the call of nature) he must do that odd number of times.
oh yes and it also says that you must ‘only touch the penis with the left hand’
Qur’an, Hadith and Scholars:Toilet Etiquette
in web search supplies a whole list of rules and hadith concerning this topic
We rarely hear a hadith about the Prophet’s preference in dates or toilet paper
not quite true- from the hadith it is clear that mo never had toilet paper – only sand and gravel
a web search for ‘Qur’an, Hadith and Scholars:Toilet Etiquette’
supplies a whole list of rules and prohibitions
including that men must never touch their penis with the right hand
How on earth can any Muslim, having read the Hadith in question, and being satisfied as to its authenticity, still proclaim this man as the supreme example for humanity?
Must mean awkward masturbation for righthanders.
The quran/hadith give pronouncements on that too
Mo it would appear had a keen interest in male and female genitalia
Alan Flynn said: How on earth can any Muslim, having read the Hadith in question, and being satisfied as to its authenticity, still proclaim this man as the supreme example for humanity?
The answer, Alan, is that anyone daring to differ is committing blasphemy, for which the penalty is separation of head and body…
This is unrelated but I wanted some impartial opinions if nobody minded!
I have religious friends who know I’m an atheist and to keep their friendship I refrain from making jokes as we already had a massive fight once before-is this right?
Also-am I wasting my time? I took Philosophy and Ethics to actually learn about Philosophy but guess who’s looking at it all through the context of Christianity and occasionally Islam? I find it interesting but it isn’t what I wanted to do…
Also Mo for your best friend’s sake would you stop being so damn inconsistent?! Great cartoon Author 🙂
aidni: I took Philosophy and Ethics to actually learn about Philosophy but guess who’s looking at it all through the context of Christianity and occasionally Islam? I find it interesting but it isn’t what I wanted to do…
In my view, that depends how much effort you are prepared to invest. If you take one aspect at a time, and then split teh reli from the non-reli argumentation, and THEN look how much YOUR result differs from the official one. And if any, which result you prefer.
Time consuming, but can be very rewarding. Success!
I have religious friends who know I’m an atheist and to keep their friendship I refrain from making jokes as we already had a massive fight once before-is this right?
Widen your circle of friends and then drop the delusional ones
I took Philosophy and Ethics to actually learn about Philosophy but guess who’s looking at it all through the context of Christianity and occasionally Islam
a] How did you not know this before enrolling -as you must have known something about the subject to get enrolled
b] you can separate religion from ethics in your own viewpoint – but not from a course which studies them as they are closely related, ‘god’ being a philosophical construct
Just as peace studies in Bradford mainly studies wars in order to understand them; ethics are important in such a course because religions tend to be virulently opposed to human ethics & rights.
Aldni, philosophy is a complete waste of time, paper, effort and lives. All philosophers do is spend decades on the equivalent of arguing whether the naked female human teat is obscene or how many thoughts can dance on the top of a thumb-tack. They never solve issues, problems or anything else.
You will produce far more fun for the planet drawing “Superman” comics than creating volumes of philosophy books.
Philosophy is masturbation for elderly, intellectuals with erectile dysfunction.
There are only two good aspects to philosophy, it occupies the attention of people who might otherwise disrupt society by being minor irritants and it isn’t so evil as religion – though it is just as useless.
Actually, philosophy is far more useless than religion. Unlike religion, few philosophys give an excuse to rape and thieve and kill.
Yes, I took philosophy at University, as a minor filler along with the Sciences and Mathematics.
I was more impressed with Media Studies. 🙂
Aldni, have you looked at the jobs available to graduates with degrees in Philosophy? Philosophy lecturer or talking head on the BBC are about the limit. Unless you want a career stacking shelves in ASDA.
At least with Graphics Arts, Media Studies or Business Management you could become upper management in banks, ITV, newspapers or even the BBC.
Would you consider “I swear to god I’m an atheist” to be a self canceling phrase or an oxymoron? I’m just asking for my invisible friend who has identity issues.
Perhaps a little late, but omg says:
March 26, 2014 at 9:10 pm
I have faith that planet x will not destroy the earth. I can’t prove that planet x didn’t exist, but I’m very confident.
Is it faith or is it scientific evidence? I think people that believe in planet x must present some evidence, so there no faith in thinking it didn’t exist.
May I refer to the cover item od Scientific American of february 2016?
No EVIDENCE yet, but pretty strong incications…
Perhaps a little late, but that shows where I am in catch-up reading: omg says:
March 26, 2014 at 9:10 pm
I have faith that planet x will not destroy the earth. I can’t prove that planet x didn’t exist, but I’m very confident.
Is it faith or is it scientific evidence? I think people that believe in planet x must present some evidence, so there no faith in thinking it didn’t exist.
May I refer to the cover item od Scientific American of february 2016?
No EVIDENCE yet, but pretty strong incications…
@dr+John+de+Wipper
It’s funny how skip the planet 9, and refer to it as X, as in 10, just like the Microsoft did with Windows. Is nine somehow bad word?
Actually, from the article, it was tantatively conjectured to exist, from orbit anomalies of varios Kuiper Belt Objects (KBOs), and hence named “the big unknown”, “big” as in ~ 10 earth sizes, and in mathematics an unknown usually is named X.
Showing up late again but wanted to thank everyone for their comments! And no I didn’t know about the course as the teacher promised me it would be all about concepts of thymos, pathos, logos etc unfortunately. Also my friends are lovely and I don’t really mind hiding my beliefs as it’s not a massive factor of my life really but thanks for the tips 🙂 and yeah dropping p&e soon-but too late to transfer! So I’m going to put much effort in but to be fair it was just a qualification I took to learn about debate and human mind and stuff! Thanks all 🙂
Jesus & Mo (the characters) are absurd, blinkered, and oddly very sweet. J&M (the cartoon) is brilliant: sharp, delicious, irresistible. Salman Rushdie
Jesus and Mo cartoons are wonderfully funny and true. Richard Dawkins
Jesus and Mo make the world a better place, bless their little hearts. Ophelia Benson
In a world defined by outrage and offence and liberal spinelessness, Jesus and Mo is a treasure, whose value we should never fail to recognize. Read them. Laugh. And think. Kenan Malik
The brilliant, celebrated, freaking hilarious atheist comic strip ... Greta Christina
...rays of sanity in a befuddled world. Keri Hulme
The liveliest depictions of Muhammad currently available... Malise Ruthven
J & Mo is the funniest and most consistently thought-provoking cartoon strip on the Net. In a saner world, it would run in a major newspaper. Nelson Jones, Heresy Corner
Consistently amusing, frequently thought-provoking and often heart-warming. New Humanist
Jesus & Mo is one of the most wonderful things on the internet.. JT Eberhard
Wittily captures much of the absurdity of religious apologetics. Mano Singham
I love jesusandmo.net cartoons - witty and sharp! Katha Pollitt
Often hilarious, frequently wry, these cartoons do what all the best cartoons do: they tell the truth through humour. Terry Sanderson, NSS President
...a wonderfully acid British cartoonist... Nick Cohen
I love the scrappy mockery of Jesus and Mo. Freedom of speech
includes the freedom to mock any person, any thing, any activity, and
any belief -- and J&M stands up for this unflinchingly Richard Stallman
...empowering, important and deeply progressive, not to mention hilarious... Council of Ex-Muslims
January 9, 2006
Good old ‘Sophisticated theology’ that pretends black is white when convenient!
so when trump says that he doesn’t know who david duke is, after saying david duke is an awful individual, one is a strong hadith and one is a weak hadith. but which?
(mentioning trump is godwin’s law’s best friend (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law).)
This is clear proof that everything good in the west was copied from Muslims!
…about as meaningful and ridiculous as debating how many angels can stand on the end of a pin. These theologians, eh. Such a waste of consciousness.
1] Are Trump’s rantings ‘holy’
or perhaps Trump has a bifurcated brain
2] So basically 99% of the quran and the hadith are weak
3] and everything bad in the west was copied by daesh
re -Thanks to @RichardDAWAkins
Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 261.
noticed the following after scrolling up for a moment
Volume 4, Book 52, Number 185:
Narrated Abdullah:
Once the Prophet was offering the prayer in the shade of the Ka’ba. Abu Jahl and some Quraishi men sent somebody to bring the abdominal contents of a shecamel which had been slaughtered somewhere in Mecca, and when he brought them, they put them over the Prophet
so covering Mo with the entrails/ womb of a camel is reasonable treatment of a ‘prophet ?
Very important question: Is Mohammed’s ‘kindness’ shown only to Muslims or to non-Muslims as well? If the Hadith only talk of Mohammed being kind to his followers, then it demonstrates the exclusionary, discriminatory and non-universal nature of Islam. I have not read the Hadith so do not know the answer to this question. Would be most interested to know as it is critical for understanding the psychology and morality being pushed by strident pro-Islam people.
I’ve read that all “people of the book” are to be respected (in an article about the Moors in Spain), but I don’t recall the details.
It is the typical “good” and “bad” of all the teachings of islam (quran as well as [a]hadith). In the quran some verses are nice to all people, others are terrifying for the infidels. The difference is basically between the peaceful meccan verses (when mohamed was a new prophet, no followers) and the later medinan verses (when he had a powerful gang of followers). The latter (medinan) abrogate the early meccan peaceful ones.
Is this “strong” humor or “weak” humor? I wonder – during just a tenthousand of a split second.-
“people of the book” are to be respected
Yes and no… once a mozlim army conquers a non mozlim country, the chief has a choice for the captives: (it’s the conqueror’s choice, not the vanquished ones)
-kill
-convert
-or live as a dhimmi for the “people of the book” – which entails paying (extremely) high taxes [jyzzia] for ‘protection’ and living as a second class citizen.
There is no mercy in islam for non-mozlims.
Bruce said March 9, 2016 at 4:13 pm: Such a waste of consciousness.
What makes you think theologians are conscious anyway?
Before we jump into mocking Islam, the Prophet and the Haditha, we should acknowledge that Christianity and Judaism also plays games of casuistry. I am no advocate for any of them. All have twisted words for their own advantage. Today’s cartoon highlights this quite brilliantly.
Islamophobia!!!
a phobia is an irrational fear
given that the goal of islam as a concept is ultimate world conquest [ regardless of how fervently actual muslims pursue that goal]
it is not wholly irrational to be concerned
Caroline, the Hadiths are awful, much worse than the Quran. Without them Islam would be about 100 x nicer.
“Basically… but it took years to smother it in obtuse langauge to make it less obvious!” – My read of Mo’s reply in panel four.
Whether a hadith is strong or weak is nothing to do with what it says about Mo, it’s to do with whether the hadith is considered to be believable or not.
And since none of them were written down until about a hundred years after the death of Mo, the hadiths are actually the end product of the biggest game of Chinese Whispers ever played!
Although I have to agree with Canneloni about “strong” and “weak” (which basically goes to the perceived trail of evidence back to the Prophet and his immediate Companions), nevertheless the latest Jesus & Mo cartoon is meant to convey a satirical point, not a historical one. We rarely hear a hadith about the Prophet’s preference in dates or toilet paper, just as we’re more likely to hear Christians remembering Jesus’s peace and love proclamations than his cursing of a fig tree or sending a poor farmer’s pigs over a cliff.
“Before we jump into mocking Islam, the Prophet and the Haditha, we should acknowledge that Christianity and Judaism also plays games of casuistry.”
SJW drivel. Why do we need to bring up the other two when mocking Islam? Can you add the links in your comments where XTians and Jews flew planes into buildings, beheaded someone or killed people over cartoons recently? There is plenty of comedic material available with Islam alone.
Guys go to school for YEARS to learn how to do that highly sophisticated science.
Yes guys specifically. It’s too sophisticated for girls.
The best hadiths (Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim) have all the worst parts of Islam. Killing infidals, raping slave girls, killing apostates, pedophilia etc are all in the most authoratitive hadiths. ISIS gleefully quotes these hadiths to justify their own acts of rape, beheading, enslavement etc. It amazes me that people still try to see the “good” in Islam when it is far, far worse than the Mafia.
‘Good’ hadith 1%
‘Bad’ Hadith 9%
‘Meaningless irrelevant dark age drivel’ hadith 90%
I’ve hadith up to here.
We rarely hear a hadith about the Prophet’s preference in dates or toilet paper
not quite true- from the hadith it is clear that mo never had toilet paper – only sand and gravel
Abu Huraira reported: The Messenger of Allah (way peace he upon him) said: When anyone performs ablution he must clean his nose and when anyone wipes himself with pebbles (after answering the call of nature) he must do that odd number of times.
oh yes and it also says that you must ‘only touch the penis with the left hand’
Qur’an, Hadith and Scholars:Toilet Etiquette
in web search supplies a whole list of rules and hadith concerning this topic
We rarely hear a hadith about the Prophet’s preference in dates or toilet paper
not quite true- from the hadith it is clear that mo never had toilet paper – only sand and gravel
a web search for ‘Qur’an, Hadith and Scholars:Toilet Etiquette’
supplies a whole list of rules and prohibitions
including that men must never touch their penis with the right hand
apologies for repeating- my first comment did not show and then both appeared a few mins later
including that men must never touch their penis with the right hand
uhmm… Must mean awkward masturbation for righthanders.
How on earth can any Muslim, having read the Hadith in question, and being satisfied as to its authenticity, still proclaim this man as the supreme example for humanity?
Must mean awkward masturbation for righthanders.
The quran/hadith give pronouncements on that too
Mo it would appear had a keen interest in male and female genitalia
Alan Flynn said: How on earth can any Muslim, having read the Hadith in question, and being satisfied as to its authenticity, still proclaim this man as the supreme example for humanity?
The answer, Alan, is that anyone daring to differ is committing blasphemy, for which the penalty is separation of head and body…
and if they don’t commit blasphemy, muslims suffer the penalty of separation of mind from thought
This is unrelated but I wanted some impartial opinions if nobody minded!
I have religious friends who know I’m an atheist and to keep their friendship I refrain from making jokes as we already had a massive fight once before-is this right?
Also-am I wasting my time? I took Philosophy and Ethics to actually learn about Philosophy but guess who’s looking at it all through the context of Christianity and occasionally Islam? I find it interesting but it isn’t what I wanted to do…
Also Mo for your best friend’s sake would you stop being so damn inconsistent?! Great cartoon Author 🙂
aidni:
I took Philosophy and Ethics to actually learn about Philosophy but guess who’s looking at it all through the context of Christianity and occasionally Islam? I find it interesting but it isn’t what I wanted to do…
In my view, that depends how much effort you are prepared to invest. If you take one aspect at a time, and then split teh reli from the non-reli argumentation, and THEN look how much YOUR result differs from the official one. And if any, which result you prefer.
Time consuming, but can be very rewarding. Success!
Ahhh.
FINALLY succeeded in getting my handle properly spaced!
I have religious friends who know I’m an atheist and to keep their friendship I refrain from making jokes as we already had a massive fight once before-is this right?
Widen your circle of friends and then drop the delusional ones
I took Philosophy and Ethics to actually learn about Philosophy but guess who’s looking at it all through the context of Christianity and occasionally Islam
a] How did you not know this before enrolling -as you must have known something about the subject to get enrolled
b] you can separate religion from ethics in your own viewpoint – but not from a course which studies them as they are closely related, ‘god’ being a philosophical construct
Just as peace studies in Bradford mainly studies wars in order to understand them; ethics are important in such a course because religions tend to be virulently opposed to human ethics & rights.
you could always try a subject transfer
Aldni, philosophy is a complete waste of time, paper, effort and lives. All philosophers do is spend decades on the equivalent of arguing whether the naked female human teat is obscene or how many thoughts can dance on the top of a thumb-tack. They never solve issues, problems or anything else.
You will produce far more fun for the planet drawing “Superman” comics than creating volumes of philosophy books.
Philosophy is masturbation for elderly, intellectuals with erectile dysfunction.
There are only two good aspects to philosophy, it occupies the attention of people who might otherwise disrupt society by being minor irritants and it isn’t so evil as religion – though it is just as useless.
Actually, philosophy is far more useless than religion. Unlike religion, few philosophys give an excuse to rape and thieve and kill.
Yes, I took philosophy at University, as a minor filler along with the Sciences and Mathematics.
I was more impressed with Media Studies. 🙂
Aldni, have you looked at the jobs available to graduates with degrees in Philosophy? Philosophy lecturer or talking head on the BBC are about the limit. Unless you want a career stacking shelves in ASDA.
At least with Graphics Arts, Media Studies or Business Management you could become upper management in banks, ITV, newspapers or even the BBC.
Would you consider “I swear to god I’m an atheist” to be a self canceling phrase or an oxymoron? I’m just asking for my invisible friend who has identity issues.
jerry+www-
depends whether the ‘god’ in question is a theistic type of ‘god’ or not
Perhaps a little late, but
omg says:
March 26, 2014 at 9:10 pm
I have faith that planet x will not destroy the earth. I can’t prove that planet x didn’t exist, but I’m very confident.
Is it faith or is it scientific evidence? I think people that believe in planet x must present some evidence, so there no faith in thinking it didn’t exist.
May I refer to the cover item od Scientific American of february 2016?
No EVIDENCE yet, but pretty strong incications…
Perhaps a little late, but that shows where I am in catch-up reading:
omg says:
March 26, 2014 at 9:10 pm
I have faith that planet x will not destroy the earth. I can’t prove that planet x didn’t exist, but I’m very confident.
Is it faith or is it scientific evidence? I think people that believe in planet x must present some evidence, so there no faith in thinking it didn’t exist.
May I refer to the cover item od Scientific American of february 2016?
No EVIDENCE yet, but pretty strong incications…
@dr+John+de+Wipper
It’s funny how skip the planet 9, and refer to it as X, as in 10, just like the Microsoft did with Windows. Is nine somehow bad word?
Hotrats: that was surah a good one.
Actually, from the article, it was tantatively conjectured to exist, from orbit anomalies of varios Kuiper Belt Objects (KBOs), and hence named “the big unknown”, “big” as in ~ 10 earth sizes, and in mathematics an unknown usually is named X.
Showing up late again but wanted to thank everyone for their comments! And no I didn’t know about the course as the teacher promised me it would be all about concepts of thymos, pathos, logos etc unfortunately. Also my friends are lovely and I don’t really mind hiding my beliefs as it’s not a massive factor of my life really but thanks for the tips 🙂 and yeah dropping p&e soon-but too late to transfer! So I’m going to put much effort in but to be fair it was just a qualification I took to learn about debate and human mind and stuff! Thanks all 🙂