you were.

Submitted by bos (United Kingdom), Mar 21, 2008 at 10:25

ad hominem.? I dont think so.

Sorry if you don't like what I'm saying

If i hadnt seen at least some merit in at least some of your comment I wouldnt have asked why you marred your argument with that question. Though you do misconstrue various things

I apologise for the fact that I dont have time for an in depth response and must simply say; yes there are many modes of conduct and action cited in the Quran that please Allah, and a life in perfect emulation of the prophet, or perfect adherance to islamic codes of conduct would lead to paradise.

But the whole concept of the prophet as unparalleled perfect manhood is predicated on the notion of mans inperfection. Faith and good conduct today doesnt guarantee paradise unless on balance it can negate the imperfection of yesterday and tomorow thus soliciting Allahs not entireley guaranteed mercy (simplistically stated I know).

Military martyrdom of the faithful cuts through all that crap and sends you straight to paradise and allows you to intercede on behalf of others who on balance may not a have made it. This makes it the only guaranteed way into paradise.

your clearly too inteligent not to be able to understand this, so in good faith I counsel you against getting caught up in the confrontation of argument and subsequently adopting apologist nonsense into your frame of reference. (i'm not trying to patronise, we are none of us immune to it)

Who's obfuscating? I think on reflection you will know that you were.

Peace

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".