> first becuse then there wouldn't be any sign of the messiah


That's literally begging the question. "It can't be young woman" because then it would not be about my messiah Jesus.

THat's literally standard circular reasoning.

No, because a young woman giving birth isn't something unusual

So it makes no sense that Isaiah would say that is a sign

lmao

It is not a messianic prophecy.

It's about Hezekiah IIRc.

It has been since before Christ was born lmao

Why should I think so?

Muslims already believe in the virgin birth and this passage is not about virgin birth nor a messiah

You did not engage my claims above about miracles, prophecies and war.

You completely droppted those and jumped the gun to prophecies about Jesus

IT is, for the reasons I have explained. It was seen as a messianic prophecy even before Christ. I have responded to every claim

Which Jesus failed to fulfill pretty much any (except donkey to Jerusalem)

Regarding miracles, Muhammed even had to come up with verses trying to explain why he had no miracles

>It was seen as a messianic prophecy even before Christ.

This is exactly what I am asking you to justify.

>Muhammed even had to come up with verses trying to explain why he had no miracles

That's not true.

You can't drop silly claims and expect me to take them as rebuttals.

Regarding war, Muhammed was bloodthirsty. He didnt just reluctantly participate in a war for a goal determine by God, he directs

let me check the exact number

>e didnt just reluctantly participate in a war for a goal determine by God,

That's literally circular reasoning again. For somebody who thinks Muhammad is a prophet. He would not share that assumption.

MORE than 15 military campagin. Source, these hadith: https://sunnah.com/search/?q=military+campaigns

Why should I believe that claim?

Sixteen military campaigns.

That also includes the mention of how he kept one fifth of the spoils of war for himself

And that's fine as said above. A lot of those were defensive or to spread a political empire.

He did not. He used it as tax (he was also head of state)

Lmao, those are the ones he kept for himself

"It has been narrated on the authority of Abdullah b. 'Umar that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) used to give (from the spoils of war) to small troops seat on expeditions something more than the due share of each fighter in a large force. And Khums (one-fifth of the total spoils) was to be reserved (for Allah and His Apostle) in all cases."

No he did not. he took those spoils and used them for infrastructure. He was clearly very poor (https://www.quora.com/Did-the-prophet-Muhammad-live-in-poverty)

Yes, he took a fifth which I did not deny.

For himself, which is the entire point of reserving them for himself lmao

>responding to a direct quotation of your holy book with a quora link

The infrastructure of his palace lmao

Yeah, he can keep the money for himself and spend it on the infrastructure. By "keeping it for himself", that means it was reserved for him as head of state

Which is perfectly consistent with his harem of up to 9 women which even breaks the rules he gives to others

Is Horatio a heretic,

Hadith is not holy scripture and the Quora has nothing but hadiths.

Yeah, Polygamy is fine.

I really don't care what you think is moral/immoral