freediver wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2018 at 7:32pm:


Oh wow FD, what a trauma to admit you were wrong. Especially after being such a smart arse about "bringing facts to the table" 

My question:

polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 16^th, 2018 at 11:09am:


Your answer:

freediver wrote on Mar 16^th, 2018 at 11:34am:


You were flat out, 100%, unambiguously wrong.

Are you going to be a man and just concede that?

freediver wrote on Mar 24^th, 2018 at 10:09am:


Yes - more than 45.

75 alone visited Muhammad in Mecca before he left. I gave you the wiki article.

Can you do the sum FD? Is 75+45 more than 45? Take your time.

The point is, you clearly have no idea about the actual history of events. No idea that contact had been made with Medina months before the actual hijra, and the documented cases of conversion by members of the Aws and Kazraj, most notably Sa'd ibn Mu'adh, who yes, the historical accounts assert got his Aws people to convert. You clearly had no inkling of the concept of the 'Ansar' - Medinans who had already converted who were tasked with accommodating the emigrants when they arrived. Clearly, there is no doubt that before the 45 emigrants left Mecca, there were muslims in Medina, waiting for the emigrants to arrive.

Your kindergarten version goes like this:
1. 45 muslims - the entire muslim population show up, out of the blue, in Medina
2. Muhammad says "garr - lets rape and pillage" - and everyone joins Islam for no other reason than to have a jolly rape and pillage romp. ~ the spread of Islam, by FD.

Quote:


I did spend quite a long time asking you to provide the numbers, prior to you demanding that I do it.

Also, Abu had a completely different narrative to you. His was that Muhammad was invited to Medina by non-Muslims to be some kind of impartial judge. You'll have to forgive our confusion when every Muslim tells a different story.

Quote:


Ah - so they did not become destitute and have to murder Meccan traders?

freediver wrote on Mar 29^th, 2018 at 9:50pm:


Thats your excuse for making up crap without bothering to check whether its true, passing it off as "actual facts", and not even acknowledging it as wrong when proven so?

That there were more than 45 could easily have been discovered with the most simple google search. I even provided you with your favourite (only) source on all things on Islamic history - wikipedia. Now you seem to be excusing yourself by saying 'its ok I made up crap without even bothering to find out whether it was true - because gandalf wouldn't tell me the numbers.'

freediver wrote on Mar 29^th, 2018 at 9:50pm:


Good point FD. Far better to rely on your proven unreliable memory of what Abu said, many years ago - rather than do a 5 second google search and find the readily-available facts for yourself.

Also, what did Abu actually say? That there were exactly 45 muslims at the time of the hijra? Why don't we see the actual quote eh FD? It is not disputed that the delegation of Medinans were non-muslims when they first met the prophet - its likely they were still non-muslim when they invited him to Medina. But I'll bet you anything Abu doesn't disagree that the Aws and the Kazraj converted to Islam in the period between the first meeting and the actual hijra. In which case, it makes quite a mockery of your claim that it was a "completely different narrative" to mine.

freediver wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2018 at 7:16pm:


Oh my FD - are you actually saying there is a difference between being a muslim and subscribing to a "political allegiance"? Hilarious. I'll be sure to remember the distinction the next time you rabbit on about Islam being nothing but a political ideology, and how all converts back then were nothing but opportunistic thugs after some slaughtering and pillaging.

freediver wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2018 at 7:16pm:


right, which even if true, is on face value not a "completely different narrative" to mine, as you claim - given that the claim that the people who invited him to Medina were non-muslims does not contradict anything I said. All I'm saying is that in the time between first contact and the actual hijra, a lot of Medinan's converted - thus easily refuting your BS claim that there were a sum total of 45 muslims at the time of the first caravan raid.

So feel free to have another go FD, do you have any evidence that suggests that Abu's narrative was a "completely different narrative" to mine?

freediver wrote on Apr 6^th, 2018 at 6:55pm:


Whether or not it was mere 'political allegiance' is neither here nor there. Who is going to read the true motives of a group of 7th century arabs? The point is they were clearly identified as muslims - by your very own gospel truth source - Wikipedia. 

Do you agree its quite rich for you of all people to try and make a distinction between true believing muslims, and people who merely subscribe to a 'political allegiance'?

Do you at least concede that the most implausible and unbelievable of these scenarios is that precisely zero of them converted (including the ones that met with Muhammad) in the months between the invitation and first caravan raid, and that the entire muslim population during that time remained at exactly 45?

freediver wrote on Apr 6^th, 2018 at 6:55pm:


I know right - what ridiculous logic that says that only non-muslims wanted Muhammad in Medina  - oh wait, thats your logic FD.

I'll take that as conceding you were wrong to state the number as 45. Good.

But there are still some unanswered questions here. Firstly, do you acknowledge the inconsistency in you attempting to make a distinction between converting to Islam and merely declaring a "political allegiance" - given all your previous arguments about adherance to Islam being not much more than a political thing?

And secondly, do you understand how ridiculous it is to say that Abu's alleged claim about Muhammad being first invited by a group of non-muslims is a "completely different narrative" to mine - given that it says nothing about my actual "narrative" - which was merely to say that a lot of Medinan's converted between the time of the first invite to the first raid.

And thirdly, exactly how is getting entire tribes loyal to your "religion" (even if its a political allegiance, which I assume you still consider as synonymous with being muslim - despite your most recent attempts to backpeddle on that), even before you move in to their community equate to having "bugger all success converting people to his religion"?