Are all true Muslims expected to lie?

Consider this post and comment

There are lots of Islamic sanctioned lies expected of all true Muslims making it appear that if any Muslim does NOT lie about JIHAD, he has left Islam.

There are SIX DIFFERENT WAYS of deception that are permissible in Islam:

1) taqiyya
2) kitman
3) tawriya
4) taysir
5) darura
6) muruna

•Taqiyya (Shia) or Muda’rat (Sunni): tactical deceit for the purposes of spreading Islam

•Kitman: deceit by omission

•Tawriya: deceit by ambiguity

•Taysir: deceit through facilitation (not having to observe all the tenets of Sharia)

•Darura: deceit through necessity (to engage in something “Haram” or forbidden)

•Muruna: the temporary suspension of Sharia to make Muslim migrants appear “moderate.”

Furthermore, through the principle of ‘hijra’ (Muslim immigration), the first Muslims to enter a territory lay a red herring of ‘peaceful Islam’. The first ‘peaceful’ Muslim immigrants actually constitute a Trojan horse. The Kafir or Kufaar community gets the false sense that the early immigrants are not a threat, at least not until the Muslim community has gained strength of numbers. When Muslims become strong, they aggressively begin to demand Sharia law against the will of the kafir victims of supremacism. This creeping persecution against the host culture begins and continues until Islam becomes the supreme and unanswerable political ideology in the territory. When the territory becomes officially Islamic, the persecution of non-Muslims goes into full gear to humiliate and inconvenience them to the extent that they will convert to Islam in order to avoid Islam’s official policy of persecution. Jihad is warfare against disbelievers. Deception is a huge part of jihad.

Allah is the greatest deceiver – “Allahu khayru al-makireena” – K. 3:54; cf. 8:30

lagostokd:
Are all true Muslims expected to lie?

I hope you are posting for knowledge.
Lying is a sin, and a major one, no doubt. But Allah, (Glorified and Exalted) is He has created us, and knows us better than we know ourselves, and has made life easy for us. In a matter of life and death, something which is normally prohibited could be made permissible.
For example, when fasting, deliberately eating food during the fasting hours is a grave sin. But if it becomes a matter of life and death, then one can eat, and it is no sin on him.

Consider this post and comment

There are lots of Islamic sanctioned lies expected of all true Muslims making it appear that if any Muslim does NOT lie about JIHAD, he has left Islam.

When you make claims so bold, you have to back them with authentic Islamic sources, but you will never find authentic sources to back the above claim, and I will have to declare you a liar. No offence though.

There are SIX DIFFERENT WAYS of deception that are permissible in Islam:

1) taqiyya
2) kitman
3) tawriya
4) taysir
5) darura
6) muruna

•Taqiyya (Shia) or Muda’rat (Sunni): tactical deceit for the purposes of spreading Islam

I'm really marvelled at the posts some people write. How can one use deceit to spread truth? This makes no sense.

•Kitman: deceit by omission

•Tawriya: deceit by ambiguity

•Taysir: deceit through facilitation (not having to observe all the tenets of Sharia)

•Darura: deceit through necessity (to engage in something “Haram” or forbidden)

•Muruna: the temporary suspension of Sharia to make Muslim migrants appear “moderate.”

Like I said, provide your proofs, and you can never provide them, so, I declare you a liar.

Furthermore, through the principle of ‘hijra’ (Muslim immigration), the first Muslims to enter a territory lay a red herring of ‘peaceful Islam’. The first ‘peaceful’ Muslim immigrants actually constitute a Trojan horse. The Kafir or Kufaar community gets the false sense that the early immigrants are not a threat, at least not until the Muslim community has gained strength of numbers. When Muslims become strong, they aggressively begin to demand Sharia law against the will of the kafir victims of supremacism. This creeping persecution against the host culture begins and continues until Islam becomes the supreme and unanswerable political ideology in the territory. When the territory becomes officially Islamic, the persecution of non-Muslims goes into full gear to humiliate and inconvenience them to the extent that they will convert to Islam in order to avoid Islam’s official policy of persecution. Jihad is warfare against disbelievers. Deception is a huge part of jihad.

Do as above.

Allah is the greatest deceiver – “Allahu khayru al-makireena” – K. 3:54; cf. 8:30

So you've also been conned into believing that makr means to deceive. That's too bad.
But just so you know, makr or the inflected forms, means to plan, or plot, that is why there is makr as sayy (evil plot, or plan), as in Quran 35:43. And there is the plan of Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He).
Finally, I don't think you have read the verses you quoted, but just the usual copy and paste. Because if you did, perhaps you would see the truth. And while reading, you should check for notable translators like Pickthall or Saheeh International, Yusuf Ali, etc.

Haroun13:

I hope you are posting for knowledge.
Lying is a sin, and a major one, no doubt. But Allah, (Glorified and Exalted) is He has created us, and knows us better than we know ourselves, and has made life easy for us. In a matter of life and death, something which is normally prohibited could be made permissible.
For example, when fasting, deliberately eating food during the fasting hours is a grave sin. But if it becomes a matter of life and death, then one can eat, and it is no sin on him.


When you make claims so bold, you have to back them with authentic Islamic sources, but you will never find authentic sources to back the above claim, and I will have to declare you a liar. No offence though.


I'm really marvelled at the posts some people write. How can one use deceit to spread truth? This makes no sense.


Like I said, provide your proofs, and you can never provide them, so, I declare you a liar.


Do as above.


So you've also been conned into believing that makr means to deceive. That's too bad.
But just so you know, makr or the inflected forms, means to plan, or plot, that is why there is makr as sayy (evil plot, or plan), as in Quran 35:43. And there is the plan of Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He).
Finally, I don't think you have read the verses you quoted, but just the usual copy and paste. Because if you did, perhaps you would see the truth. And while reading, you should check for notable translators like Pickthall or Saheeh International, Yusuf Ali, etc.

You're a true Muslim by this your reply because not agreeing with my post only proves the point am making.

Am not new to this type of response because that's the norm.

1. First, ask for verses to justify a claim
2. After providing the verse, then you'll claim it's quoted out of context
3. Then the trail continues...

A lot of people have written about these lies sanctioned by the Qur'an... Those that have ears will know

lagostokd:


You're a true Muslim by this your reply

الحمدلله

because not agreeing with my post only proves the point am making.

You haven't made any point yet. When you do, I'll still be here, In shaa Allah.

Am not new to this type of response because that's the norm.

OK.

1. First, ask for verses to justify a claim

This is of paramount importance because I do not follow, except what has been revealed in the Qur'an and Authentic hadith, so, if you can't provide evidence from these sources to justify your claims, then your claims are irrelevant.

2. After providing the verse, then you'll claim it's quoted out of context

Nope. I'll explain them. But if you have truly quoted out of context, then you have. But like I said, you will never be able to provide any evidence.

3. Then the trail continues...

A lot of people have written about these lies by the Qur'an... Those that have ears will know

A lot of people? Perhaps, you do not understand. I do not follow "a lot of people", I follow the Qur'an and authentic hadith.
Provide your proof (though you can never) or rest your case.

Haroun13:

I hope you are posting for knowledge.
Lying is a sin, and a major one, no doubt. But Allah, (Glorified and Exalted) is He has created us, and knows us better than we know ourselves, and has made life easy for us. In a matter of life and death, something which is normally prohibited could be made permissible.
For example, when fasting, deliberately eating food during the fasting hours is a grave sin. But if it becomes a matter of life and death, then one can eat, and it is no sin on him.

If lying is prohibited BUT could be made permissible what are we to make of it? That there is really no standard of MORALITY in Islam?

Mohamed raided caravans all over the Arabian Peninsula. In virtually every one, Moslems were the aggressors, pushing to accomplish the big objective of taking over the economic and political power in the region.

In the çourse of the battle of the Trenches Mohamed plotted deceit.

A recent convert to Islam, Nuaym, of the Ghatafan tribe, offered to be part of the deception plan. Muhammad set out on a plan, using Nuaym’s affiliations with the Quraysh and the Jews:

The apostle said: 'You are only one man among us, so go and awake distrust among the enemy to draw them
off us if you can, for war is deceit.' Thereupon Nutaym went off to B. Quray?

Sura 33:25-27:

25 Allah turned back the unbelievers [Meccans and their allies] in a state of rage, having not won any good, and Allah spared the believers battle [q-t-l]. Allah is, indeed, Strong and Mighty. 26 And He brought those of the People of the Book [Qurayza] who supported them from their fortresses and cast terror into their hearts, some of them you slew [q-t-l] and some you took captive. 27 And he bequeathed to you their lands, their homes and their possessions, together with land you have never trodden. Allah has power over everything.

Eventually the Jews accepted to sign some form of agreement. But Mohamed reneged on this and ended up murdering the hundreds of Jews including young boys.

For example, in Hadith (Bukhari) 5:59.369, Moslems can lie and pretend in some situations:
"Allah's Apostle said, "Who is willing to kill Ka'b bin Al-Ashraf who has hurt Allah and His Apostle?" Thereupon Muhammad bin Maslama got up saying, "O Allah's Apostle! Would you like that I kill him?" The Prophet said, "Yes," Muhammad bin Maslama said, "Then allow me to say a (false) thing (i.e. to deceive Kab). "The Prophet said, "You may say it."

There is the answer as to whether Muslims can lie and do much more.

plainbibletruthpost=58099384:

If lying is prohibited BUT could be made permissible what are we to make of it? That there is really no standard of MORALITY in Islam?

You are allowing your bias towards Islam to cloud your judgement. Like the example I gave, a fasting person, breaking his fast before dusk is a grave sin, but if for example, that person has, say an accident, and after treatment, he is asked by the doctor to eat, he should eat, and break the fast, because it's a matter of life and death. So also, in a situation of life and death, lying can be permitted.
For example, the story a of woman and her husband, whose house was raided by robbers. The woman was brave but unarmed. The man on the other hand had a machete, but was shivering because he was scared. When the woman saw the situation, she told the robbers that when her husband starts shivering like that, he is ready to kill, even though that wasn't true. But she said that to the robbers, and as a result, they left.

Mohamed raided caravans all over the Arabian Peninsula. In virtually every one, Moslems were the aggressors, pushing to accomplish the big objective of taking over the economic and political power in the region.

In the çourse of the battle of the Trenches Mohamed plotted deceit.

A recent convert to Islam, Nuaym, of the Ghatafan tribe, offered to be part of the deception plan. Muhammad set out on a plan, using Nuaym’s affiliations with the Quraysh and the Jews:

The apostle said: 'You are only one man among us, so go and awake distrust among the enemy to draw them off us if you can, for war is deceit.' Thereupon Nutaym went off to B. Quray?

Well, I have not seen any war where one side tells the other side their true plans and tactics, that would be plain stupid.

Sura 33:25-27:
25 Allah turned back the unbelievers [Meccans and their allies] in a state of rage, having not won any good, and Allah spared the believers battle [q-t-l]. Allah is, indeed, Strong and Mighty. 26 And He brought those of the People of the Book [Qurayza] who supported them from their fortresses and cast terror into their hearts, some of them you slew [q-t-l] and some you took captive. 27 And he bequeathed to you their lands, their homes and their possessions, together with land you have never trodden. Allah has power over everything.

If you have a problem with the verse, put it forward.

Eventually the Jews accepted to sign some form of agreement. But Mohamed reneged on this and ended up murdering the hundreds of Jews including young boys.

Baseless.

For example, in Hadith (Bukhari) 5:59.369, Moslems can lie and pretend in some situations:

"Allah's Apostle said, "Who is willing to kill Ka'b bin Al-Ashraf who has hurt Allah and His Apostle?" Thereupon Muhammad bin Maslama got up saying, "O Allah's Apostle! Would you like that I kill him?" The Prophet said, "Yes," Muhammad bin Maslama said, "Then allow me to say a (false) thing (i.e. to deceive Kab). "The Prophet said, "You may say it."

https://www.bismikaallahuma.org/islam/what-about-the-killing-of-kaab-bin-al-ashraf/
Visit that site concerning the killing of Kaab bin al ashraf.

There is the answer as to whether Muslims can lie and do much more.

Salaam

Haroun13
You are allowing your bias towards Islam to cloud your judgement. Like the example I gave, a fasting person, breaking his fast before dusk is a grave sin, but if for example, that person has, say an accident, and after treatment, he is asked by the doctor to eat, he should eat, and break the fast, because it's a matter of life and death. So also, in a situation of life and death, lying can be permitted.
For example, the story a of woman and her husband, whose house was raided by robbers. The woman was brave but unarmed. The man on the other hand had a machete, but was shivering because he was scared. When the woman saw the situation, she told the robbers that when her husband starts shivering like that, he is ready to kill, even though that wasn't true. But she said that to the robbers, and as a result, they left.

Well, I have not seen any war where one side tells the other side their true plans and tactics, that would be plain stupid.

If you have a problem with the verse, put it forward.

Baseless.

Mohamed, in hadith Sahih Bukhari is stated to have said: “If I take an oath and later find something else better, I do what is better and break my oath”.
This is Islam’s ‘exemplary’ prophet saying he can go back on a promise he made.

https://www.bismikaallahuma.org/islam/what-about-the-killing-of-kaab-bin-al-ashraf/
Visit that site concerning the killing of Kaab bin al ashraf.
Salaam

Now on the same hadith (Bukhari) 5:59:369 which I quoted:
“Allah’s Apostle said, ‘Who is willing to kill Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf who has hurt Allah and His Apostle?’ Thereupon Muhammad bin Maslama got up saying, ‘O Allah’s Apostle would you like that I kill him?’ The Prophet said “Yes”, Muhammad bin Maslama said, ‘Then allow me to say a (false) thing (i.e. to deceive Kab). The Prophet said, “You may say it”.

Look at what a comment on the SITE you referred me to said: “By slandering the Prophet, … and by showing sympathy for the enemies of the Muslims (lamenting their dead and inciting them against the Muslims) …. His blood could be shed with IMPUNITY. (Emphasis mine).
The article goes on to say: “The exigencies of the State required that WHATEVER SHOULD BE DONE should be done swiftly and noiselessly upon those whom public opinion had arraigned and condemned”. (Emphasis mine).

There are many things to say against that article, but in order not to complicate the trend here suffice it to say that taking the CONCLUSION of the article ALONE is enough to put a nail to its coffin. How can a person say there is INFRINGEMENT of “the PROMULGATED LAW” and then claim that a SECRET EXECUTION was justified in administering judgement? What is “public opinion” doing arraigning and condemning IF a “promulgated Law” exists? Where they in a BANANA REPUBLIC? And then to add a DISCLAIMER he ends as many of you have learnt to do – “And only God knows best!”

This is obviously an attempt to make the VICTIM the VILLAIN in order to COVER UP the Prophet of Islam. Unfortunately it does not add up to any objective scrutiny.

This is a ‘Prophet’ calling for the DEATH of someone who offended him, then approving that LIE be told in order to achieve such a despicable thing.

Under NO CIRCUMSTANCE did Jesus engage in nor prescribe any such thing as these!

If lying can be made permissible then the human being can ALWAYS find a REASON to make the lie fall under what is permissible. When that happens the lying becomes norm rather than an exception.

The summary is this: Mohamed had no MORALITY. The end justified the means for him. Clearly LYING was one of those means for him as Islamic literature unmistakably show.

Only a change of heart which only Jesus Christ can bring about can truly change a person to be what God wants him to be. That is why he said: “Come to Me, all who are weary and heavily burdened [by religious rituals that provide no peace], and I will give you rest [refreshing your souls with salvation]. Matt. 11:28.

plainbibletruth:

Mohamed, in hadith Sahih Bukhari is stated to have said: “If I take an oath and later find something else better, I do what is better and break my oath”.
This is Islam’s ‘exemplary’ prophet saying he can go back on a promise he made.

Yes, In fact, this goes to show how wonderful the personality of the prophet (peace be upon him) is. He didn't mind going against his statement so long as it was to help people. The problem most of you Christians have is copy and paste. You just quoted one tiny little part of a hadith, to slander the prophet (peace be upon him).
Now, you just read the hadith below

Book 15, Number 4044:
Abu Musa al-Ash'ari reported: I came to Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) along with a group of Ash'arites requesting to give us a mount. He (the Holy Prophet) said: By Allah, I cannot provide you with a mount, and there is nothing with me which I should give you as a ride. He (the narrator) said: We stayed there as long as Allah willed. Then there were brought to him (to the Holy Prophet) camels. He (the Holy Prophet) then ordered to give us three white humped camels, We started and said (or some of us said to the others): Allah will not bless us. We came to Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) begging him to provide us with riding camels. He swore that he could not provide us with a mount, but later on he provided us with that. They (some of the Prophet's Companions) came and informed him about this (rankling of theirs), whereupon he said: It was not I who provided you with a mount, but Allah has provided you with that. So far as I am concerned, by Allah, if He so wills, I would not swear, but if, later on, I would see better than it, I (would break the vow) and expiate it and do that which is better.
What an exemplary behaviour. He swore to those people that he couldn't provide them with mount (because he had none). But as soon as he received mounts, he went back on his word and gave them from that which he had received.
That is what is meant by breaking your oath if you find something better. Next time, just make time to read and understand, and you might just see the truth.

Now on the same hadith (Bukhari) 5:59:369 which I quoted:
“Allah’s Apostle said, ‘Who is willing to kill Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf who has hurt Allah and His Apostle?’ Thereupon Muhammad bin Maslama got up saying, ‘O Allah’s Apostle would you like that I kill him?’ The Prophet said “Yes”, Muhammad bin Maslama said, ‘Then allow me to say a (false) thing (i.e. to deceive Kab). The Prophet said, “You may say it”.

I have no issue with the killing of Kab bin Al ashraf. His was a matter of treason. His people agreed to a pact/treaty with the Muslims, of which he was a member. And one of the stipulations of the treaty was that no person involved was to aid the enemies of either parties. But Kab bin Al ashraf went against that by inciting the pagan Arabs to war against the Muslims and not just that, but also slandering the women with his poetry.
Just like from the article, it was stated;
"As Philip K. Hitti himself notes,
No people in the world, perhaps, manifest such enthusiastic admiration for literary expression and are so moved by the word, spoken or written, as the Arabs. Hardly any language seems capable of exercising over the minds of its users such irresistible influence as Arabic."

Look at what a comment on the SITE you referred me to said: “By slandering the Prophet, … and by showing sympathy for the enemies of the Muslims (lamenting their dead and inciting them against the Muslims) …. His blood could be shed with IMPUNITY. (Emphasis mine).

Please tell me where in the world treason against the state has been rewarded. The punishment for treason is death.

The article goes on to say: “The exigencies of the State required that WHATEVER SHOULD BE DONE should be done swiftly and noiselessly upon those whom public opinion had arraigned and condemned”. (Emphasis mine).

It was necessary for it to be done that way, considering the fact that the banu qaynuqa already displayed their treachery, Kab's people would have resorted to violence, and innocent lives would have been lost, even if it was clear to them that their kinsman had committed treason. In order to avoid such blood shed, it had to be done that way.

There are many things to say against that article, but in order not to complicate the trend here suffice it to say that taking the CONCLUSION of the article ALONE is enough to put a nail to its coffin. How can a person say there is INFRINGEMENT of “the PROMULGATED LAW”

This part is clear. Kab committed treason.

and then claim that a SECRET EXECUTION was justified in administering judgement?

It was necessary to prevent loss of innocent lives like I explained above.

What is “public opinion” doing arraigning and condemning IF a “promulgated Law” exists? Where they in a BANANA REPUBLIC? And then to add a DISCLAIMER he ends as many of you have learnt to do – “And only God knows best!”

Yes, only God knows best. Unless you want to argue that you know better than God.

This is obviously an attempt to make the VICTIM the VILLAIN in order to COVER UP the Prophet of Islam. Unfortunately it does not add up to any objective scrutiny.

There is no make of victim and villain here. The circumstances of the situation, showed that that was the safest method in handling the issue.

This is a ‘Prophet’ calling for the DEATH of someone who offended him

This is not the issue, because many people had slandered the prophet and they were not harmed. The major reason for his death was treason. And I said "show me a place in the world were treason has been rewarded".

then approving that LIE be told in order to achieve such a despicable thing.

You need to be open minded to see that this was the best way to go about it. Now just imagine the ruckus it would have caused, if they had made it an open affair. Mind you, the banu Nadir later declared war against the Muslims, breaking the pact. Now imagine what they would have done, knowing their kinsman was to be executed, even if it was for treason.

Under NO CIRCUMSTANCE did Jesus engage in nor prescribe any such thing as these!

Under no circumstances did Jesus (peace be upon him) and those who followed him enter a pact with, say the Pharisees for example, and was betrayed by one of them. The circumstances are incomparable.

If lying can be made permissible then the human being can ALWAYS find a REASON to make the lie fall under what is permissible. When that happens the lying becomes norm rather than an exception.

You are trying to twist things here. Where did I say lying is a norm. In fact, I said that lying is indeed a sin, and a major one. But thankfully, God has made life easy for everyone, and as such in matters of life and death, it could be permissible, if it would save the life of the person in danger, provided other innocent people are not endangered in the process. I gave you the example of the story of a woman and her husband, whose home was invaded by robbers. You can point out what is wrong from that story.

The summary is this: Mohamed had no MORALITY.

Your saying, just like your missionary brethren have said before you, but it holds no water and carries no weight.

The end justified the means for him. Clearly LYING was one of those means for him as Islamic literature unmistakably show.

Still carries no weight.

Only a change of heart which only Jesus Christ can bring about can truly change a person to be what God wants him to be. That is why he said: “Come to Me, all who are weary and heavily burdened [by religious rituals that provide no peace], and I will give you rest [refreshing your souls with salvation]. Matt. 11:28.

The time of the prophethood of Jesus (peace be upon him) ended 1400 years ago. Jesus (peace be upon him) cannot save you now, even if you were following his true teachings [except you follow him, and the last and final prophet, Muhammad (peace be upon him)]. But you are not even following his teachings to begin with.

Haroun13:

........
I have no issue with the killing of Kab bin Al ashraf. His was a matter of treason. His people agreed to a pact/treaty with the Muslims, of which he was a member. And one of the stipulations of the treaty was that no person involved was to aid the enemies of either parties. But Kab bin Al ashraf went against that by inciting the pagan Arabs to war against the Muslims and not just that, but also slandering the women with his poetry.
..........
Please tell me where in the world treason against the state has been rewarded. The punishment for treason is death.
...........
It was necessary for it to be done that way, considering the fact that the banu qaynuqa already displayed their treachery, Kab's people would have resorted to violence, and innocent lives would have been lost, even if it was clear to them that their kinsman had committed treason. In order to avoid such blood shed, it had to be done that way.

This part is clear. Kab committed treason.

It was necessary to prevent loss of innocent lives like I explained above.

You need to be open minded to see that this was the best way to go about it. Now just imagine the ruckus it would have caused, if they had made it an open affair. Mind you, the banu Nadir later declared war against the Muslims, breaking the pact. Now imagine what they would have done, knowing their kinsman was to be executed, even if it was for treason.

Under no circumstances did Jesus (peace be upon him) and those who followed him enter a pact with, say the Pharisees for example, and was betrayed by one of them. The circumstances are incomparable.

You are trying to twist things here. Where did I say lying is a norm. In fact, I said that lying is indeed a sin, and a major one. But thankfully, God has made life easy for everyone, and as such in matters of life and death, it could be permissible, if it would save the life of the person in danger, provided other innocent people are not endangered in the process. I gave you the example of the story of a woman and her husband, whose home was invaded by robbers. You can point out what is wrong from that story.

Let’s not lose sight of this:
The man was said in the Hadith to “hurt Allah and his Prophet”. When did slander of a prophet become treason? If a head of a government is slandered, how does that become an offense against the state? However in order for you Moslems to explain away your Prophet’s decadence you resort to REINTERPRETING words and stories to polish his image.

Let me simplify issues.
If like it is claimed in that article there was a “promulgated law” – now, we are not even sure whether it was a LAW or pact/treaty; you may need to clarify because the two are not quite the same – why was a proper SETTING not constituted to examine the matter or try the alleged offender? IF an agreement was drawn up or a law put in place what were the terms and conditions - it MUST be clear to ALL the parties involved; shouldn't it? Or was a one-sided law or agreement that only Mohamed had all the details and power to execute?

Why a kangaroo court?

Why was judgement and punishment given outside a proper legal process?

These all the more confirm my position that Mohamed had NO MORALITY.

And btw, this is ONLY one out of many other occasions that people were murdered with Mohamed’s approval or on his instigation. This (extra judicial killing) was done REPEATEDLY even when the circumstances varied.

If Mohamed ran an OPEN government or system why then resort to SECRECY? If everybody KNOWS the LAW or agreement and someone has been seen to have violated it, why would it difficult to have A FAIR HEARING to PROVE to everyone that such a person has broken the law or agreement and is liable to the PRESCRIBED(?) punishment?

This man in question ONLY used poetry. He did not carry arms. Yet this was enough for him to be SECRETLY executed.

So, again I ask: Since the man allegedly violated a law or agreement which, I suppose, was PUBLICLY KNOWN why the resort to a Kangaroo Court to try an offender? Do you want us to now believe that those who were BRILLIANT ENOUGH to draw up Laws and Agreements suddenly LOSE ALL CIVILITY when it comes to executing such rules and regulations?

Surely the Arabian world of the 7th century must have been better organized than that!

The time of the prophethood of Jesus (peace be upon him) ended 1400 years ago. Jesus (peace be upon him) cannot save you now, even if you were following his true teachings [except you follow him, and the last and final prophet, Muhammad (peace be upon him)]. But you are not even following his teachings to begin with.

Can you prove that Jesus’ prophethood ended? It still continues till today since he is still alive. He is only one who can be DEFINITELY said to be with God not awaiting any judgement – Q. 4:158 and referred to as SAVIOUR (Messiah) even in the quran.
His saving work does not depend on following any set of teaching. His saving work is in what he did on the cross. His offer still stands today:
“Come to Me, all who are weary and heavily burdened [by religious rituals that provide no peace], and I will give you rest [refreshing your souls with salvation]. Matt. 11:28.

plainbibletruth:

Let’s not lose sight of this: The man was said in the Hadith to “hurt Allah and his Prophet”. When did slander of a prophet become treason? If a head of a government is slandered, how does that become an offense against the state? However in order for you Moslems to explain away your Prophet’s decadence you resort to REINTERPRETING words and stories to polish his image.

You know, it seems you've run out of points. Didn't you read the inciting poems of Kab? They even showed you a statement by a non Muslim concerning the deep meaning of the Arabic language.

Let me simplify issues.

You are doing the opposite, complicating issues for yourself.

If like it is claimed in that article there was a “promulgated law” – now, we are not even sure whether it was a LAW or pact/treaty; you may need to clarify because the two are not quite the same –

Since you seem to be a very good lawyer, why don't you tell us the difference. Is if difficult to understand that there was a treaty between the Muslims and the Jews of Madina, and that the treaty, was established, with laws to govern the people?

why was a proper SETTING not constituted to examine the matter or try the alleged offender?

What trial are you looking for. The man committed treason. Mind you, that was 7th century Arabia, so, don't come here to paint black, what you do not understand, a situation in the 7th century, by using your opinions from the 21st century. Please, be reasonable.

IF an agreement was drawn up or a law put in place what were the terms and conditions - it MUST be clear to ALL the parties involved; shouldn't it?

And it was indeed clear to everyone.

Or was a one-sided law or agreement that only Mohamed had all the details and power to execute?
Why a kangaroo court?
Why was judgement and punishment given outside a proper legal process?

You are talking about a legal process? I'm talking about 7th century Arabia, and you are looking for a building with a blindfolded person holding a scale and a sword in front, and a man wearing a wig, and black robe, holding perhaps a gavel, and sitting behind a cabinet, with a witness box, and lawyers of the defendant and the state. Please come out of your delusion.

These all the more confirm my position that Mohamed had NO MORALITY.
And btw, this is ONLY one out of many other occasions that people were murdered with Mohamed’s approval or on his instigation. This (extra judicial killing) was done REPEATEDLY even when the circumstances varied.
If Mohamed ran an OPEN government or system why then resort to SECRECY? If everybody KNOWS the LAW or agreement and someone has been seen to have violated it, why would it difficult to have A FAIR HEARING to PROVE to everyone that such a person has broken the law or agreement and is liable to the PRESCRIBED(?) punishment?

Did the banu qaynuqa not also know the law? Yet they openly declared war. Admist the controversial situation, where the banu Nadir were also heated up, you are looking for a public execution?

This man in question ONLY used poetry. He did not carry arms. Yet this was enough for him to be SECRETLY executed.

That's like saying that during a war, a man can leave his state, and go to another state, and incite them to fight against his state. And when he is found out, he is given an award of excellence by his state which he just betrayed. Congrats.

So, again I ask: Since the man allegedly violated a law or agreement which, I suppose, was PUBLICLY KNOWN why the resort to a Kangaroo Court to try an offender? Do you want us to now believe that those who were BRILLIANT ENOUGH to draw up Laws and Agreements suddenly LOSE ALL CIVILITY when it comes to executing such rules and regulations?
Surely the Arabian world of the 7th century must have been better organized than that!

I'm not that old. But since you were alive in that period, kudos to you. Besides, that's the period we are talking about here.

Can you prove that Jesus’ prophethood ended?

First, I did not mean that Jesus (peace be upon him) is no longer a prophet of God, but rather, what I meant is that even if you were following his true teachings, if you do not follow the last prophet, Muhammad (peace be upon him), you are wasting your time. And I went on to say that you are not even following his true teaching.

It still continues till today since he is still alive. He is only one who can be DEFINITELY said to be with God not awaiting any judgement – Q. 4:158 and referred to as SAVIOUR (Messiah) even in the quran.

Jesus (peace be upon him) is in the heavens, just like Moses, Abraham, and other prophets of God, as we know, from the narration of the night journey of the prophet.
Also, Jesus (peace be upon him) is going to come, live and die as we understand from Qur'an 19:33 and 3:185.
Concerning judgement, it is unlikely that the messengers of God will be judged, but I do not have sufficient references to back this claim yet.

His saving work does not depend on following any set of teaching. His saving work is in what he did on the cross. His offer still stands today:
“Come to Me, all who are weary and heavily burdened [by religious rituals that provide no peace], and I will give you rest [refreshing your souls with salvation]. Matt. 11:28.

Of course. The cowardice of man knows no bounds. That you believe that someone that wasn't there when you where stealing, or watching inappropriate things paid for your sins. What a delusion. Besides, that means if I accept that Jesus has died for my sins, then I can do anything I like, whether right or wrong, because someone already paid for it. Kudos. What a good way to deceive yourself.

Haroun13:

What trial are you looking for. The man committed treason. Mind you, that was 7th century Arabia, so, don't come here to paint black, what you do not understand, a situation in the 7th century, by using your opinions from the 21st century. Please, be reasonable.

And it was indeed clear to everyone.

You are talking about a legal process? I'm talking about 7th century Arabia, and you are looking for a building with a blindfolded person holding a scale and a sword in front, and a man wearing a wig, and black robe, holding perhaps a gavel, and sitting behind a cabinet, with a witness box, and lawyers of the defendant and the state. Please come out of your delusion.

7th century AD Arabia was well developed in many areas. It was not as backward as many of you are made to believe or you want to have us think. They may not have had the 21st century technology but they were certainly CIVILIZED in many fronts.

Here are excerpts from a study by the University of Oxford - http://krc.orient.ox.ac.uk/aalc/index.php/en/
on Arabia of those days:
“The numerous and diverse cultures which developed in ancient Arabia are monuments to human ingenuity and creativity within challenging natural environments. The ancient Arabs had extensive contacts not only with their Near Eastern neighbours, Iran, Mesopotamia, the Levant, Egypt and the peoples of the Mediterranean, but also with Africa and India. From a very early period, Arabs are reported as living in many parts of the Middle East and they were famous merchants. They were particularly associated with frankincense and myrrh which grew in southern Arabia, and other aromatics which they imported from Africa, India and beyond, and sold on to neighbouring peoples. This commerce in what were some of the most valuable commodities in the ancient world, together with their strategic geographical position in the Middle East meant that the Arabs were deeply involved in the life of the region and, from at least the 6th century BC, attracted the interest of the Greeks and later of Rome.
Literacy was widespread throughout ancient Arabia from at least the early 1st millennium BC, and vast numbers of inscriptions in a variety of languages and scripts have been discovered there, with more coming to light every year. Arabia was unique in the ancient world in having its own branch of the alphabet (the South Semitic script family), varieties of which were used from the far north of the Peninsula to the south. It survives in the script used for Ge'ez, Amharic, etc. in Ethiopia.”


It doesn’t take “a building with a blindfolded person holding a scale and a sword in front, and a man wearing a wig, and black robe, holding perhaps a gavel, and sitting behind a cabinet, with a witness box, and lawyers of the defendant and the state” to have some jurisprudence.

Jurisprudence existed in Rome and with other peoples well before even the 1st century AD.

The region had a highly organized system of trade and commerce. Do you think they ran such without clearly defined rules?

Very minute details of Mohamed’s life were recorded. Who do think wrote these details – dummies?

And you think that when it comes to the administration of justice they are suddenly backward into the Stone Age?

There was a fairly well organized system of doing things. If Mohamed NEVER followed them it was not because 7th century Arabia was that PRIMITIVE. It was because Mohamed chose to resort to Neolithic way of handling things.

That ISIS chose barbaric means and ways to operate the way they do does not mean 21st century Arabia is
undeveloped; does it?

To choose to using JUNGLE JUSTICE speaks volume about the kind of person Mohamed was! Unfortunately, even though IT MAY be embarrassing to SOME Moslems (certainly not majority), the history of Mohamed cannot be told WITHOUT the mention of HIS violence, deceit and self-aggrandizement.

That's like saying that during a war, a man can leave his state, and go to another state, and incite them to fight against his state. And when he is found out, he is given an award of excellence by his state which he just betrayed. Congrats.

What WAR are you really talking about? Tell us. Who was fighting who? Give us the real setting so that we can appreciate things better.

First, I did not mean that Jesus (peace be upon him) is no longer a prophet of God, but rather, what I meant is that even if you were following his true teachings, if you do not follow the last prophet, Muhammad (peace be upon him), you are wasting your time. And I went on to say that you are not even following his true teaching.

Jesus (peace be upon him) is in the heavens, just like Moses, Abraham, and other prophets of God, as we know, from the narration of the night journey of the prophet.
Also, Jesus (peace be upon him) is going to come, live and die as we understand from Qur'an 19:33 and 3:185.
Concerning judgement, it is unlikely that the messengers of God will be judged, but I do not have sufficient references to back this claim yet.

So if I follow the TRUE TEACHINGS of Jesus but not Mohamed, I'm wasting my time? According to you Moslems wasn’t Jesus supposed to be a Moslem who proclaimed Islam? In that case, wouldn’t his TRUE TEACHINGS not be the same as Mohamed’s?
Now, are you beginning to SEE that your TRUE worship is ACTUALLY IDOLATROUS? You worship BOTH Allah and Mohamed. Not one God as you claim. That is why you DAILY give reverence to Mohamed. DAILY!! Indeed like I’ve pointed out earlier, Islam and the quran are more about your SECOND OBJECT OF WORSHIP – Mohamed – than it is about Allah himself.

Of course. The cowardice of man knows no bounds. That you believe that someone that wasn't there when you where stealing, or watching inappropriate things paid for your sins. What a delusion. Besides, that means if I accept that Jesus has died for my sins, then I can do anything I like, whether right or wrong, because someone already paid for it. Kudos. What a good way to deceive yourself.

I think DELUSION is when a person thinks he can stack up enough good deeds to qualify for God’s approval. How many good deeds does it take to make it to Paradise – 5 pillars for how many times and how many years? Is it to just fulfil the RITUALS no matter how else you live your life – lying, deceiving, etc or how bad you think towards others? DELUSION is when in the face of the quran’s uncertain assurance of Paradise you still grab on to that straw.

Jesus was UNIQUE and lived an exemplary life. Those are FACTS. He was the ONLY one that lived a life that pleased God by ALL standards. By going to the Cross he showed that he was willing to die as a substitute for everyone else. God accepted his sacrifice of himself. Doesn’t it make sense then that anyone who comes to God through him will be saved?

Jesus said: “I am the way, and the TRUTH, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through me” John 14:6
He still is the way, the truth and the life.

This thread is just one big back-and-forth between two stupidities.

One the one hand, a Righteous Christian painting the entirety of Islamic history with one brush, without respect to it's historical grounds.

On the other, a thick-minded Muslim who cannot criticize nor contemplate problems with the reasoning, bases or proofs which reside behind their beliefs, masking themselves with a facade of pseudo-intellectual prose.

Dispelling some of the crap discussed heavily above:

-Allah is not real. Shariah law has zero basis other than tradition and a misplaced belief in a creator being which does not exist.

-God isn't real either.

-Muslims absolutely did and still do practice various forms of taqiyya.

-Jesus DID wish death upon people, particularly villages who refused to hear his lectures.

-Mohammad was a hedonistic and malicious warlord who used the Islamic faith as an excuse for his own disgusting impulses (rape, multiple wives, cheating, pedophilia, etc.) to spread Arab control over nearby territories.

-Similar practices were done by Christian nations within and outside Europe at the time.

-Contrary to some racist Westerners who claimed that the early Caliphates turned back the clock, the Islamic Caliphates were FAR more advanced than European nations up until around the beginnings of the European renaissance, after which the West rocketed ahead in science and technology.

-Also contrary to common belief is the fact that many of the caliphates (e.g. Abbasid, Ummayad, etc.) were actually more progressive and less literalist to the Quran and Hadiths than Salafist and Islamist groups and governments today, e.g. ISIS, Saudi Arabia, Al-Quaeda, etc. Even though today ISIS and Saudi Arabia strictly forbid music, music flourished in the Caliphates of 1000 years ago and was celebrated as a science much like the ancient Greeks the Islamic World took inspiration from. Beer and alcohol was also common, among the caliphs themselves might I add. Poetry, one of the biggest cultural developments of the caliphates, often challenged Quranic beliefs and narratives and prodded social values and lifestyle. The Caliphates of yore were constantly innovating (at least for their time), compared to Saudi Arabia and ISIS and conservative Muslims nowadays who are a bunch of brutish nostalgic apes.

plainbibletruth:

7th century AD Arabia was well developed in many areas. It was not as backward as many of you are made to believe or you want to have us think. They may not have had the 21st century technology but they were certainly CIVILIZED in many fronts.
Here are excerpts from a study by the University of Oxford - http://krc.orient.ox.ac.uk/aalc/index.php/en/
on Arabia of those days:
“The numerous and diverse cultures which developed in ancient Arabia are monuments to human ingenuity and creativity within challenging natural environments. The ancient Arabs had extensive contacts not only with their Near Eastern neighbours, Iran, Mesopotamia, the Levant, Egypt and the peoples of the Mediterranean, but also with Africa and India. From a very early period, Arabs are reported as living in many parts of the Middle East and they were famous merchants. They were particularly associated with frankincense and myrrh which grew in southern Arabia, and other aromatics which they imported from Africa, India and beyond, and sold on to neighbouring peoples. This commerce in what were some of the most valuable commodities in the ancient world, together with their strategic geographical position in the Middle East meant that the Arabs were deeply involved in the life of the region and, from at least the 6th century BC, attracted the interest of the Greeks and later of Rome.

Literacy was widespread throughout ancient Arabia from at least the early 1st millennium BC, and vast numbers of inscriptions in a variety of languages and scripts have been discovered there, with more coming to light every year. Arabia was unique in the ancient world in having its own branch of the alphabet (the South Semitic script family), varieties of which were used from the far north of the Peninsula to the south. It survives in the script used for Ge'ez, Amharic, etc. in Ethiopia.”

It doesn’t take “a building with a blindfolded person holding a scale and a sword in front, and a man wearing a wig, and black robe, holding perhaps a gavel, and sitting behind a cabinet, with a witness box, and lawyers of the defendant and the state” to have some jurisprudence.
Jurisprudence existed in Rome and with other peoples well before even the 1st century AD.

The region had a highly organized system of trade and commerce. Do you think they ran such without clearly defined rules?

Thank you for pointing out their "civilization", even though I never denied it. But it might interest you to know that they also held festivals where they danced round the Ka'aba naked. Or that they used to bury their female children alive. Or that women weren't entitled to inheritance. It's you women who complain about such things, yet you come here to praise such society.

Very minute details of Mohamed’s life were recorded. Who do think wrote these details – dummies?
And you think that when it comes to the administration of justice they are suddenly backward into the Stone Age?

The excerpt you quoted really only duelt on commercial activities. Why don't you give us an excerpt on their judicial system, then, we can start from there.

There was a fairly well organized system of doing things. If Mohamed NEVER followed them it was not because 7th century Arabia was that PRIMITIVE. It was because Mohamed chose to resort to Neolithic way of handling things.

Nice one. Giving women rights to inheritance and stopping burying of female children alive must really be neolithic. Yet that is what the west has been trying to "fight" for.

That ISIS chose barbaric means and ways to operate the way they do does not mean 21st century Arabia is undeveloped; does it?
To choose to using JUNGLE JUSTICE speaks volume about the kind of person Mohamed was! Unfortunately, even though IT MAY be embarrassing to SOME Moslems (certainly not majority), the history of Mohamed cannot be told WITHOUT the mention of HIS violence, deceit and self-aggrandizement

OK.

What WAR are you really talking about? Tell us. Who was fighting who? Give us the real setting so that we can appreciate things better.

Your asking this question shows that your arguments have been blind. Is it news that the Muslims were persecuted in Makkah, by the pagan Arabs for many years? Or that even after the migration there were still attacks from them? Or that even the Jews of Madina with whom treaties were made violated those treaties and performed treacherous acts? That's what I'm talking about.

So if I follow the TRUE TEACHINGS of Jesus but not Mohamed, I'm wasting my time?

If you follow the true teachings of Jesus (peace be upon him), it will lead you to Muhammad. But you do not follow his teachings. But let's assume you did, but ignored the part about the messenger coming after him (because he preached that), and hence, refused to follow the last and final messenger, Muhammad (peace be upon him), then yes, you are wasting your time.

According to you Moslems wasn’t Jesus supposed to be a Moslem who proclaimed Islam?

All the messengers preached the Oneness of God, all the messengers submitted in totality to God, in other words, they professed Islam (submission to the will of God), and Jesus (peace be upon him) was no different.

In that case, wouldn’t his TRUE TEACHINGS not be the same as Mohamed’s?

Just like I said, all messengers preached the Oneness of God. That was the basic message. Though some other things would be different, depending on the time and place of the messenger, but the basic message of the Oneness of God was the same.
For one to say he has submitted to God, means to obey God in all respects. God sent Jesus (peace be upon him), Jesus proclaimed the coming of another messenger from God. Meaning that the moment the new messenger came, belief in him was and is a must. If you don't, then obviously, you have disbelieved in the statement of Jesus (peace be upon him) concerning the coming of a new messenger. In that case, would you still be following the teachings of Jesus in truth? I doubt that would be possible since you just ignored a major thing he has said.
It's like saying that the even though a new President has be sworn in, the former president is whom you would follow, as the present one. It makes no sense. (This is just a similitude on a much lower scale)

Now, are you beginning to SEE that your TRUE worship is ACTUALLY IDOLATROUS? You worship BOTH Allah and Mohamed. Not one God as you claim. That is why you DAILY give reverence to Mohamed. DAILY!! Indeed like I’ve pointed out earlier, Islam and the quran are more about your SECOND OBJECT OF WORSHIP – Mohamed – than it is about Allah himself.

I'm truly amazed at this statement, truly. A person who worships 3 gods, saying that they are one, even though I have never seen where 1+1+1 adds up to one, says that a person who acknowledges only one God, worships him alone not even through his messenger, is idolatrous? Please, be reasonable. Your statement makes no sense.

I think DELUSION is when a person thinks he can stack up enough good deeds to qualify for God’s approval. How many good deeds does it take to make it to Paradise – 5 pillars for how many times and how many years? Is it to just fulfil the RITUALS no matter how else you live your life – lying, deceiving, etc or how bad you think towards others? DELUSION is when in the face of the quran’s uncertain assurance of Paradise you still grab on to that straw.

Another meaningless passage.

Jesus was UNIQUE and lived an exemplary life. Those are FACTS.

All messengers were unique and lived exemplary lives. If you want to know what true trials are, look at the life of Prophet Ayyub (Job) (peace be upon him), the trials he went through. Though, I don't know what lies have been fabricated against him in the bible, since the bible is fond of that, like the lies fabricated against Lut (Lot) or Dawud (David) and other great prophets of God.
Or look at the life of Muhammad (peace be upon him).

He was the ONLY one that lived a life that pleased God by ALL standards. By going to the Cross he showed that he was willing to die as a substitute for everyone else. God accepted his sacrifice of himself. Doesn’t it make sense then that anyone who comes to God through him will be saved?

It doesn't even make sense that 3 gods exist who have no beginning and no end [even though Jesus (peace be upon him) was born] and are coequal. Then one day, one of them decides to come down to the earth to die, for a sin which all 3 ought to have forgiven a long time ago (though he was supposed to have no end) in order to appease the other one. And then, one begins to wonder how these 3 gods are all powerful, if in order to forgive a mistake (yes, a mistake. What you Christians all fuss about, dread like hell, which gave rise to your doctrine of "original sin" is described as a mistake, a slip, in the Qur'an) one of them has to come and die.
God has given us the ability to reason. So please tell me, why would He reveal himself to us in away that defies all of the reasoning He has given us?

They have certainly disbelieved who say that Allah is Christ, the son of Mary. Say, "Then who could prevent Allah at all if He had intended to destroy Christ, the son of Mary, or his mother or everyone on the earth?" And to Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth and whatever is between them. He creates what He wills, and Allah is over all things competent. (Qur'an 5:17)

And [for] their saying, "Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah." And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain. (Qur'an 4:157)

Could you tell me who else could make such an emphatic statement, clarifying all the misconceptions concerning the alleged crucifixion if not God?

Jesus said: “I am the way, and the TRUTH, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through me” John 14:6
He still is the way, the truth and the life.

He didn't tell a lie, but now, Muhammad (peace be upon him) is the way to God.
Drawing a similitude on a lower level, Olusegun Obasanjo, like Goodluck Ebele Jonathan were in time past, the Commanders in chief of the arms forces of the federal republic of Nigeria. Now, they are not. Anyone who says they still are would either be ignorant or plain stupid.

Haroun13:


If you follow the true teachings of Jesus (peace be upon him), it will lead you to Muhammad. But you do not follow his teachings. But let's assume you did, but ignored the part about the messenger coming after him (because he preached that), and hence, refused to follow the last and final messenger, Muhammad (peace be upon him), then yes, you are wasting your time.

Let's consider the promise by Jesus of someone coming after him

"If you love me, keep my commands. And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another advocate to help you and be with you forever— the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you." John 14:15-17

Jesus asked his disciples to wait in Jerusalem for the promised advocate (Acts 1:4), the promised advocate is the Holy Spirit and he descended on the disciples on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-4)

Going back to Jesus quote above - Jesus said 'he will ask the Father to give you another advocate to help you and be with you forever - the Spirit of truth"
**Mohammed is not a spirit - he was human!
**The Holy Spirit as promised by Jesus cannot be seen or known by the world whereas the world saw Mohammed and also know him because he was human
**The Holy Spirit as promised by Jesus lives in the disciples of Jesus and is in them whereas Mohammed lived on the earth and cannot live inside Jesus' disciples - in fact, he murdered Jesus' disciples

Haroun13:
All the messengers preached the Oneness of God, all the messengers submitted in totality to God, in other words, they professed Islam (submission to the will of God), and Jesus (peace be upon him) was no different.

Until you understand that the word 'God' is not a name but a position, you will continue mixing things up

Haroun13:
Just like I said, all messengers preached the Oneness of God. That was the basic message. Though some other things would be different, depending on the time and place of the messenger, but the basic message of the Oneness of God was the same.
For one to say he has submitted to God, means to obey God in all respects. God sent Jesus (peace be upon him), Jesus proclaimed the coming of another messenger from God. Meaning that the moment the new messenger came, belief in him was and is a must. If you don't, then obviously, you have disbelieved in the statement of Jesus (peace be upon him) concerning the coming of a new messenger. In that case, would you still be following the teachings of Jesus in truth? I doubt that would be possible since you just ignored a major thing he has said.
It's like saying that the even though a new President has be sworn in, the former president is whom you would follow, as the present one. It makes no sense. (This is just a similitude on a much lower scale)

Every sane person knows that the Holy Spirit is entirely different from Mohammed.

Haroun13:
I'm truly amazed at this statement, truly. A person who worships 3 gods, saying that they are one, even though I have never seen where 1+1+1 adds up to one, says that a person who acknowledges only one God, worships him alone not even through his messenger, is idolatrous? Please, be reasonable. Your statement makes no sense.
You can never understand the workings of God by using human standard. Muslims argument has always been that God does not have a wife, so he cannot have a son. Jesus existed before Mary, even before Abraham. He only came in human form to the world through Mary - whose DNA is Jesus carrying?

Another meaningless passage.


All messengers were unique and lived exemplary lives. If you want to know what true trials are, look at the life of Prophet Ayyub (Job) (peace be upon him), the trials he went through. Though, I don't know what lies have been fabricated against him in the bible, since the bible is fond of that, like the lies fabricated against Lut (Lot) or Dawud (David) and other great prophets of God.
Or look at the life of Muhammad (peace be upon him).

Stop associating your prophet with the people of Yahweh!

Haroun13:
And [for] their saying, "Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah." And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain. (Qur'an 4:157)

This lie didn't start here, some jews started it "They told the soldiers, "You must say, 'Jesus' disciples came during the night while we were sleeping, and they stole his body.' Mathew 28:13

Compare and contrast the characteristics of the gentle and loving Holy Spirit with that of Mohammed and you will better understand John 10:10 and John 16:2

Haroun13

Thank you for pointing out their "civilization", even though I never denied it. But it might interest you to know that they also held festivals where they danced round the Ka'aba naked. Or that they used to bury their female children alive. Or that women weren't entitled to inheritance. It's you women who complain about such things, yet you come here to praise such society.

Religion always has a way of making even intellectually bright people become dummies when it comes to its rituals. That can be proven throughout history.
Khadija who married Mohamed was an Arabian woman!!! It is not fair for Islam, which like ISIS destroys every document and monument they consider “un-Islamic”, to now turn round and want to make the world believe nothing good existed in Arabia before Islam. Was Khadija ‘marginalized’? Islam actually did more harm to women than it wants to admit.

The excerpt you quoted really only duelt on commercial activities. Why don't you give us an excerpt on their judicial system, then, we can start from there.

Thanks to the availability of information today many issues can easily be found on the internet. A search will show you that pre-Islamic Arabia had legal systems they followed. This existed among the nomadic and sedentary groups. For your information there had always been interactions between peoples in the world. Many settlements of Jews were in the Arabian Peninsula – Khaybar where Mohamed was given the poison that eventually led to his death was a Jewish settlement; and the Jews had had a long history of Jurisprudence which those they interacted with may have adopted or modified for their own use if they had none. Besides, Greek and Roman influences were also there.
It will be a dishonour to the people and in fact deceit to want to claim that it was only after Islam that those societies became ‘civilized’.

Nice one. Giving women rights to inheritance and stopping burying of female children alive must really be neolithic. Yet that is what the west has been trying to "fight" for.


Your asking this question shows that your arguments have been blind. Is it news that the Muslims were persecuted in Makkah, by the pagan Arabs for many years? Or that even after the migration there were still attacks from them? Or that even the Jews of Madina with whom treaties were made violated those treaties and performed treacherous acts? That's what I'm talking about.

KNOW THIS: the “persecution” of Mohamed DID NOT go beyond verbal attacks. No physical attack was carried on Mohamed. He was the one that initiated physical attacks on his opponents. If you think this is not so provide your evidence.

If you follow the true teachings of Jesus (peace be upon him), it will lead you to Muhammad. But you do not follow his teachings. But let's assume you did, but ignored the part about the messenger coming after him (because he preached that), and hence, refused to follow the last and final messenger, Muhammad (peace be upon him), then yes, you are wasting your time.


All the messengers preached the Oneness of God, all the messengers submitted in totality to God, in other words, they professed Islam (submission to the will of God), and Jesus (peace be upon him) was no different.


Just like I said, all messengers preached the Oneness of God. That was the basic message. Though some other things would be different, depending on the time and place of the messenger, but the basic message of the Oneness of God was the same.
For one to say he has submittedjavascript:void(0); to God, means to obey God in all respects. God sent Jesus (peace be upon him), Jesus proclaimed the coming of another messenger from God. Meaning that the moment the new messenger came, belief in him was and is a must. If you don't, then obviously, you have disbelieved in the statement of Jesus (peace be upon him) concerning the coming of a new messenger. In that case, would you still be following the teachings of Jesus in truth? I doubt that would be possible since you just ignored a major thing he has said.
It's like saying that the even though a new President has be sworn in, the former president is whom you would follow, as the present one. It makes no sense. (This is just a similitude on a much lower scale)

Can you show me where Jesus “proclaimed the coming of another messenger from God”? If you do maybe I can better answer this your question.

I'm truly amazed at this statement, truly. A person who worships 3 gods, saying that they are one, even though I have never seen where 1+1+1 adds up to one, says that a person who acknowledges only one God, worships him alone not even through his messenger, is idolatrous? Please, be reasonable. Your statement makes no sense.

As a Moslem can you believe in Allah alone and qualify for Paradise?

The Moslem Creed puts Mohamed alongside Allah. This means Islam requires a belief in Allah as well as BELIEF IN A MAN.

Belief in Allah ALONE is not sufficient. The focus of the Moslem is therefore not DIRECTED AT ONE GOD but on him PLUS another person - Mohamed. Q. 49:15

This then makes Islam inextricably tied to a man; the man Mohamed.

Islam INSISTS that Mohamed MUST be obeyed. This again means that other than Allah a man is given a position of a deity because it's ONLY a deity that it can be said MUST be obeyed.

Islam states that disobedience to Allah and Mohamed leads to hell. Q. 4:14 So Allah and Mohamed are again placed at par as NOT OBEYING EITHER ONE of them leads to hell.

For a religion that PRIDES itself in being MONOTHEISTIC it's interesting that some other person APART from Allah MUST be the focus of attention ALL THE TIME.

Moslems are ACTUALLY doing exactly what they loudly proclaim must not be done and what they constantly accuse others of - obedience and focus on more than one God.

Another meaningless passage.

All messengers were unique and lived exemplary lives. If you want to know what true trials are, look at the life of Prophet Ayyub (Job) (peace be upon him), the trials he went through. Though, I don't know what lies have been fabricated against him in the bible, since the bible is fond of that, like the lies fabricated against Lut (Lot) or Dawud (David) and other great prophets of God.
Or look at the life of Muhammad (peace be upon him).


It doesn't even make sense that 3 gods exist who have no beginning and no end [even though Jesus (peace be upon him) was born] and are coequal. Then one day, one of them decides to come down to the earth to die, for a sin which all 3 ought to have forgiven a long time ago (though he was supposed to have no end) in order to appease the other one. And then, one begins to wonder how these 3 gods are all powerful, if in order to forgive a mistake (yes, a mistake. What you Christians all fuss about, dread like hell, which gave rise to your doctrine of "original sin" is described as a mistake, a slip, in the Qur'an) one of them has to come and die.
God has given us the ability to reason. So please tell me, why would He reveal himself to us in away that defies all of the reasoning He has given us?

They have certainly disbelieved who say that Allah is Christ, the son of Mary. Say, "Then who could prevent Allah at all if He had intended to destroy Christ, the son of Mary, or his mother or everyone on the earth?" And to Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth and whatever is between them. He creates what He wills, and Allah is over all things competent. (Qur'an 5:17)

And [for] their saying, "Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah." And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain. (Qur'an 4:157)

Could you tell me who else could make such an emphatic statement, clarifying all the misconceptions concerning the alleged crucifixion if not God?

Tell me, are you only a physical being or do you have an invisible aspect – a soul – in addition to your physical body? So if one say you are 2-in-one yet a single individual would that be a lie and something that “doesn’t even make sense”, and “defies all of the reasoning He has given us”, like you said above?

He still is the way, the truth and the life.
He didn't tell a lie, but now, Muhammad (peace be upon him) is the way to God.

Notice Jesus' statement didn't just stop at the three you listed above. It went further and you cannot choose part and disregard the other.
He said:
Jesus said: “I am the way, and the TRUTH, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through me” John 14:6
From what you can see he also said: "NO ONE COMES TO THE FATHER BUT THROUGH ME"
That is a statement that is for all time.

"And there is salvation IN NO ONE ELSE; for there is NO OTHER NAME under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved" Acts 4:12

lagostokd:


Let's consider the promise by Jesus of someone coming after him

"If you love me, keep my commands. And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another advocate to help you and be with you forever— the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you." John 14:15-17

Jesus asked his disciples to wait in Jerusalem for the promised advocate (Acts 1:4), the promised advocate is the Holy Spirit and he descended on the disciples on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-4)

And [mention] when Jesus, the son of Mary, said, "O children of Israel, indeed I am the messenger of Allah to you confirming what came before me of the Torah and bringing good tidings of a messenger to come after me, whose name is Ahmad." But when he came to them with clear evidences, they said, "This is obvious magic." (Qur'an 61:6)

Going back to Jesus quote above - Jesus said 'he will ask the Father to give you another advocate to help you and be with you forever - the Spirit of truth"
**Mohammed is not a spirit - he was human!
**The Holy Spirit as promised by Jesus cannot be seen or known by the world whereas the world saw Mohammed and also know him because he was human
**The Holy Spirit as promised by Jesus lives in the disciples of Jesus and is in them whereas Mohammed lived on the earth and cannot live inside Jesus' disciples - in fact, he murdered Jesus' disciples

Yet you Christians say that spirit refers to man in the bible.

Pick one, then we can start from there.

Until you understand that the word 'God' is not a name but a position, you will continue mixing things up

Alright. So, you have 3 beings occupying this position, and all three are coequal. This claim has been dismissed 1400 years ago.

Allah has not taken any son, nor has there ever been with Him any deity. [If there had been], then each deity would have taken what it created, and some of them would have sought to overcome others. Exalted is Allah above what they describe [concerning Him]. (Qur'an 23:91)

Had there been within the heavens and earth gods besides Allah, they both would have been ruined. So exalted is Allah, Lord of the Throne, above what they describe. (Qur'an 21:22)


So, you really think that there could be 3 beings, coequal and powerful, and the universe would be in this much peace and tranquillity? Think again.
Verily, of knowledge, Mankind has been given little.

Every sane person knows that the Holy Spirit is entirely different from Mohammed.

Depends on what you mean by holy spirit. Allah let's us know that the holy spirit is Jibril (Peace be upon him). And Jibril and Muhammad are two very different beings.
But if you are talking about the Bible passage, refer to my question above, answer it, then we can start from there.

Stop associating your prophet with the people of Yahweh!

Right. The people of Yahweh. Lut (peace be upon him) who has been accused of incest for example. What a book the Bible is. You say have 3 coequal, all powerful gods, yet they could not prevent their messengers from faahishah (immoral acts). That's why the bible is full of false, unfounded accusations against the prophets of God.
But, no cause for alarm, all those lies have been corrected by God, in the Quran.

Haroun13:


And [mention] when Jesus, the son of Mary, said, "O children of Israel, indeed I am the messenger of Allah to you confirming what came before me of the Torah and bringing good tidings of a messenger to come after me, whose name is Ahmad." But when he came to them with clear evidences, they said, "This is obvious magic." (Qur'an 61:6) [/b


Yet you Christians say that spirit refers to man in the bible.

Pick one, then we can start from there.


Alright. So, you have 3 beings occupying this position, and all three are coequal. This claim has been dismissed 1400 years ago.

[b]Allah has not taken any son, nor has there ever been with Him any deity. [If there had been], then each deity would have taken what it created, and some of them would have sought to overcome others. Exalted is Allah above what they describe [concerning Him]. (Qur'an 23:91)

Had there been within the heavens and earth gods besides Allah, they both would have been ruined. So exalted is Allah, Lord of the Throne, above what they describe. (Qur'an 21:22)


So, you really think that there could be 3 beings, coequal and powerful, and the universe would be in this much peace and tranquillity? Think again.
Verily, of knowledge, Mankind has been given little.


Depends on what you mean by holy spirit. Allah let's us know that the holy spirit is Jibril (Peace be upon him). And Jibril and Muhammad are two very different beings.
But if you are talking about the Bible passage, refer to my question above, answer it, then we can start from there.


Right. The people of Yahweh. Lut (peace be upon him) who has been accused of incest for example. What a book the Bible is. You say have 3 coequal, all powerful gods, yet they could not prevent their messengers from faahishah (immoral acts). That's why the bible is full of false, unfounded accusations against the prophets of God.
But, no cause for alarm, all those lies have been corrected by God, in the Quran.

And [mention] when Jesus, the son of Mary, said, "O children of Israel, indeed I am the messenger of Allah to you confirming what came before me of the Torah and bringing good tidings of a messenger to come after me, whose name is Ahmad." But when he came to them with clear evidences, they said, "This is obvious magic." (Qur'an 61:6)
You quoted koran 61:6 Which was written 600 and something years after Jesus Christ had lived and died, and declared it more potent than the former?
Jesus says he will ask his father to send his followers a comforter who will comfort them from the persecution which awaited them, He said, that Comforter shall live inside of them, only those who have Him shall know him because others won't see him.
Are you saying that the koranic verse you quoted isa saying he was going to send Ahmad supersedes this one?

Yet you Christians say that spirit refers to man in the bible.

Pick one, then we can start from there
What do you mean by 'spirit refers to man?' Christians tell you that as a human being, you are triune in nature.

Ask what this ^^^means and pls pay attention when the explanation is given.

The real you can't be seen with the physical eyes. The real you is a spirit, the flesh (body) is just a cloak, a cover a material substances which enables you (the spirit) function in this realm.

Muhammed was a spirit too who had a soul and lived in a body. He was triune too, like you. But he was not the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit does not have sex with Children, He doest steal, He doesn't lie and brag about it. He doesn't rape slaves and definitely didn't of poisoning by a mere girl
The Holy Spirit is eternal, Muhammed is dead and your koran says he is in hellfire right now.

Allah has not taken any son, nor has there ever been with Him any deity. [If there had been], then each deity would have taken what it created, and some of them would have sought to overcome others. Exalted is Allah above what they describe [concerning Him]. (Qur'an 23:91)

Going by the above koranic verse its evidently clear that Yahweh is not Allah, so you insisting that they are doesn't make sense.
If Allah has not taken any son, but Yahweh declared Jesus to be his son and Jesus always calling Yahweh 'Father', do you think these two entities are not the same?

How can one claim 'Jesus is my Son', but the other rejects having a son and yet you insist they are one and the same?

Depends on what you mean by holy spirit. Allah let's us know that the holy spirit is Jibril (Peace be upon him). And Jibril and Muhammad are two very different beings.
But if you are talking about the Bible passage, refer to my question above, answer it, then we can start from there.
Hmmm, so allah says Jibril is the Holy Spirit eh?righttttt.
So, Muhammed being the Holy Spirit and the Holy Spirit is Jibril, that means Muhammed was Jibril? Wow. This muhammed guy must be some spectacular guy.
He was an Angel, the Holy Spirit and a man at the same time. Yeahhhh.

Right. The people of Yahweh. Lut (peace be upon him) who has been accused of incest for example. What a book the Bible is. You say have 3 coequal, all powerful gods, yet they could not prevent their messengers from faahishah (immoral acts). That's why the bible is full of false, unfounded accusations against the prophets of God.
But, no cause for alarm, all those lies have been corrected by God, in the Quran

You know, I see where Yahweh (whom you claim is allah, but at the same time deride Him) took a stand against the incest committed by Lots daughters and declared that his people never intermarry with the chikdren which came from that stock. I See where he punished them, but i can't see allah punishing Muahmmed for peeping at his son's wife's nudeness, lusting after her, instigating a divorce and turns around to marry the lady. Instead Allah encouraged muhammed to go ahead and marry Zainab. What are we talking about here?

Haroun13:


And [mention] when Jesus, the son of Mary, said, "O children of Israel, indeed I am the messenger of Allah to you confirming what came before me of the Torah and bringing good tidings of a messenger to come after me, whose name is Ahmad." But when he came to them with clear evidences, they said, "This is obvious magic." (Qur'an 61:6)


Yet you Christians say that spirit refers to man in the bible.

Pick one, then we can start from there.


Alright. So, you have 3 beings occupying this position, and all three are coequal. This claim has been dismissed 1400 years ago.

Allah has not taken any son, nor has there ever been with Him any deity. [If there had been], then each deity would have taken what it created, and some of them would have sought to overcome others. Exalted is Allah above what they describe [concerning Him]. (Qur'an 23:91)

Had there been within the heavens and earth gods besides Allah, they both would have been ruined. So exalted is Allah, Lord of the Throne, above what they describe. (Qur'an 21:22)


So, you really think that there could be 3 beings, coequal and powerful, and the universe would be in this much peace and tranquillity? Think again.
Verily, of knowledge, Mankind has been given little.


Depends on what you mean by holy spirit. Allah let's us know that the holy spirit is Jibril (Peace be upon him). And Jibril and Muhammad are two very different beings.
But if you are talking about the Bible passage, refer to my question above, answer it, then we can start from there.


Right. The people of Yahweh. Lut (peace be upon him) who has been accused of incest for example. What a book the Bible is. You say have 3 coequal, all powerful gods, yet they could not prevent their messengers from faahishah (immoral acts). That's why the bible is full of false, unfounded accusations against the prophets of God.
But, no cause for alarm, all those lies have been corrected by God, in the Quran.

Guy, the summary of all these 'argument' is that Allah is completely different from God whose name is Yahweh

Here are some differences

1. God’s only begotten Son is Jesus. Allah has no begotten son.
2. God made salvation available by sacrificing His Son and promises salvation by grace to those who believe. Allah sacrificed nothing, and only saves if sufficient works are done.
3. God (Yahweh) has a payment for sins—Jesus Christ. Allah has no payment for sins.
4. God’s Christ paid for the sins of mankind. Allah paid for nothing, and all men pay for their own sins.
5. God’s salvation is through Christ’s work. Allah’s salvation is through people’s works.
6. God’s saving work is, “Come to Christ.” The major part of Moslem salvation is to believe Mohammed was the sum and seal of the prophets.
7. God’s book is very different from Allah’s book. They contradict each other, so they cannot both be true. For example, the Bible says Christ was resurrected from the dead. The Moslems reject that as a lie.
8. God says his Son is the Way, the Truth and the Life. Allah says Christ is “only a messenger” (Chap. 5, “The Food” sect. 10, par. 75).
9. God treats men and women equally. Allah does not.
10. God says marriages today (Christian) are to be monogamous. Allah allows more than one wife.
11. There is no marriage in God’s Paradise. Faithful men get many virgins in Allah’s.

The op is correct. Islam claim to be a religion of peace. This is a deceit as we know that they are the terrorists groups all over the world .

plainbibletruth:

Religion always has a way of making even intellectually bright people become dummies when it comes to its rituals. That can be proven throughout history.
Khadija who married Mohamed was an Arabian woman!!! It is not fair for Islam, which like ISIS destroys every document and monument they consider “un-Islamic”, to now turn round and want to make the world believe nothing good existed in Arabia before Islam. Was Khadija ‘marginalized’? Islam actually did more harm to women than it wants to admit.

Yes, like giving them rights to inheritance

Thanks to the availability of information today many issues can easily be found on the internet. A search will show you that pre-Islamic Arabia had legal systems they followed. This existed among the nomadic and sedentary groups. For your information there had always been interactions between peoples in the world. Many settlements of Jews were in the Arabian Peninsula – Khaybar where Mohamed was given the poison that eventually led to his death was a Jewish settlement; and the Jews had had a long history of Jurisprudence which those they interacted with may have adopted or modified for their own use if they had none. Besides, Greek and Roman influences were also there.
It will be a dishonour to the people and in fact deceit to want to claim that it was only after Islam that those societies became ‘civilized’.

Like I said, I have not denied their "civilization". But to say all their practices were civilized is fallacious. I showed some of their practices, which even you women would frown at. So, why the fuss?

KNOW THIS: the “persecution” of Mohamed DID NOT go beyond verbal attacks. No physical attack was carried on Mohamed. He was the one that initiated physical attacks on his opponents. If you think this is not so provide your evidence.

Philip K Hitti
"...The Quraysh - particularly its Umayyad clan - custodians of the Kaabah and the Zamzam, controllers of the caravan trade, and oligarchic masters of the city, had special reasons for resistance (to Muhammed). The new preaching might jeopardize pilgrimage to the Kaabah, next to trade their main source of income. Moreover, the once-poor orphan was introducing such dangerous economic doctrines as the rightful claim of beggars and the destitute to a share in the wealth of the rich. Additionally he (Muhammed) advocated a dangerous doctrine, one that would substitute faith for blood as the social bond of community life. If "the believers are naught but brothers" (Quran, 49:10) was acted upon, the entire family, clan, and tribal unity would be undermined and replaced by religious unity..." (Islam - A Way of Life)

Now coming to physical attacks on the Muslims.

Among the victims of persecution were: Bilal, the Ethiopian slave of Umayya bin Khalaf. His master and other idolaters tortured him in the savage glare of the sun of Makka, and they tortured him beyond the limits of human endurance. But he was fortified by inner sources of strength and courage which never failed him. Love of Allah and love of His messenger made it possible for him to endure torture with cheer. Abu Bakr brought deliverance to Bilal from torture when he bought him from his master, and set him free. When the Apostle of God and his followers migrated to Medina, he appointed Bilal the first Muezzin of Islam. His rich and powerful voice rang through the air of Medina with the shout of "Allah-o-Akbar" (=Mighty is the Lord). In later years, when the conquest of the peninsula was completed, the Apostle appointed Bilal his secretary of treasury.
Khabab ibn el-Arat. He was a young man of 20 when he accepted Islam. He was a client of Bani Zuhra. The Quraysh tortured him day after day until the time came when he migrated to Medina with the Prophet of Islam. Suhaib ibn Sinan. Suhaib came to Makka as a slave. When he became a Muslim, his master beat him up brutally, but could not break his spirit.
Abu Fukaiha, the slave of Safwan bin Umayya. He accepted Islam at the same time as Bilal. Like Bilal, he was also dragged on hot sand by his master with a rope tied to his feet. Abu Bakr bought him and emancipated him. He migrated to Medina but died before the battle of Badr. Lubina was a female slave of Bani Mumil bin Habib. Amin Dawidar writes in his book, Pictures From the Life of the Prophet (Cairo, 1968), that Umar ibn al-Khattab, a future khalifa of the Muslims, tortured her, and whenever he paused, he said: "I have stopped beating you not out of pity but because I am exhausted." He resumed beating her after he had taken rest.
Abu Bakr bought her and set her free. Zunayra was another female slave. When she declared that she had accepted Islam, Umar ibn al-Khattab and Abu Jahl, took turns in torturing her. They tortured her until she became blind. Amin Dawidar says that a few years later she recovered her sight, and the Quraysh attributed this recovery to the "sorcery" of Muhammed. Abu Bakr bought her and set her free.
Nahdiyya and Umm Unays were two other female slaves, and their masters tortured them for accepting Islam. Abu Bakr is said to have bought both of them and emancipated them.
Muhammad Husayn Haykal
...Abu Bakr bought many of the slaves and clients who were thus being tortured by the unbelievers. Among these there was even a slave woman whom Abu Bakr had bought from Umar ibn al-Khattab before the latter's conversion. One woman is known to have been tortured to death because of her attachment to Islam and her refusal to return to the old faith. (The Life of Muhammad, Cairo, 1935)
There were some other Muslims who though not slaves, were "poor and weak," and were, therefore, exposed to the malevolence of the Quraysh. One of them was Abdullah ibn Masood. He was distinguished among the companions of the Prophet by the vast range of his knowledge and learning. He had probably more familiarity with the ethos of Islam and the vitals of the Islamic legal system than most of the companions of the Prophet. Abdullah ibn Masood was one of the earliest huffaz (=men who know Quran by heart) in Islam. As each new verse was revealed, he memorized it, and he compiled his own copy of Quran. This copy was seized by Uthman bin Affan, the third khalifa, during his caliphate, and was burned.
It is reported that when a new chapter of Quran - Sura Rahman (the 55th chapter) - was revealed, the Apostle of God asked his companions who among them would go into the Kaaba, and read it before the pagans. Other companions staggered but Abdullah ibn Masood volunteered to go. He went into the Kaaba and read the new chapter out aloud. Next to Muhammed Mustafa himself, Abdullah ibn Masood was the first man to read Quran in Kaaba before a hostile crowd of the idolaters. They mauled him, not once but repeatedly, but they could not intimidate him into silence.
https://www.al-islam.org/restatement-history-islam-and-muslims-sayyid-ali-ashgar-razwy/early-converts-islam-and-their

Can you show me where Jesus “proclaimed the coming of another messenger from God”? If you do maybe I can better answer this your question.

And [mention] when Jesus, the son of Mary, said, "O children of Israel, indeed I am the messenger of Allah to you confirming what came before me of the Torah and bringing good tidings of a messenger to come after me, whose name is Ahmad."... (Qur'an 61:6)

As a Moslem can you believe in Allah alone and qualify for Paradise?

As a Muslim, YES.

The Moslem Creed puts Mohamed alongside Allah. This means Islam requires a belief in Allah as well as BELIEF IN A MAN.

Can you say you have believed in Allah, if, you refuse to believe in His messenger whom He has sent, and ordered you to follow?

Belief in Allah ALONE is not sufficient. The focus of the Moslem is therefore not DIRECTED AT ONE GOD but on him PLUS another person - Mohamed. Q. 49:15

"The believers are only the ones who have believed in Allah and His Messenger and then doubt not but strive with their properties and their lives in the cause of Allah. It is those who are the truthful." (Qur'an 49:15)
Thank you for this verse. Read the phrase in bold. You should understand that Muslims do not interpret the Qur'an as Christians do the Bible. We do not twist to give unfounded meanings. You are interpreting it in such a way as to make Muhammad (peace be upon him) God, which is a lie. But you only do this because your mind has been programmed to do the same with Jesus (peace be upon him).
“Do not exaggerate about me as was exaggerated about ‘Eesa ibn Maryam. Say: the slave of Allah and His Messenger.” (Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 6830.)

This then makes Islam inextricably tied to a man; the man Mohamed.
Islam INSISTS that Mohamed MUST be obeyed. This again means that other than Allah a man is given a position of a deity because it's ONLY a deity that it can be said MUST be obeyed.

Please, during the times of Moses, Jesus, and other messengers of God, (peace be upon them all), were they not to be obeyed? Did the revelations not come through them? How were you to succeed in attaining paradise if you did not obey them? Please, let's be reasonable.

Islam states that disobedience to Allah and Mohamed leads to hell. Q. 4:14 So Allah and Mohamed are again placed at par as NOT OBEYING EITHER ONE of them leads to hell.

Refer above.

For a religion that PRIDES itself in being MONOTHEISTIC it's interesting that some other person APART from Allah MUST be the focus of attention ALL THE TIME.

Your Christian Bible interpretation has clouded your mentality.
Would your belief in God be complete if you disobeyed what he has said, that you should follow his messenger in whatever he commands, because his command is directly from God (I.e, revealed), therefore, his command is God's?

Moslems are ACTUALLY doing exactly what they loudly proclaim must not be done and what they constantly accuse others of - obedience and focus on more than one God.

Muslims believe in the messengership of Muhammad, Jesus, Moses, and all messengers of God (peace be upon them). But you practice idolatry by worshipping a man alongside God.
If belief in the messengership of Muhammad (peace be upon him) makes you think he is placed on equal footing with God, then think again, because we have been commanded to believe in all the messengers of God, so, how many Gods will we be talking about?
Please, be reasonable.

Tell me, are you only a physical being or do you have an invisible aspect – a soul – in addition to your physical body? So if one say you are 2-in-one yet a single individual would that be a lie and something that “doesn’t even make sense”, and “defies all of the reasoning He has given us”, like you said above?

We are not two in one. The soul is the essense, the body is just a kind of housing for the soul, in this world. So, if we should compare, out of Jesus, God, and the holy ghost, which is the essense and which is the housing for the essense, which will eventually be shed (death), and will decay, and will be formed again?

Notice Jesus' statement didn't just stop at the three you listed above. It went further and you cannot choose part and disregard the other.
He said:
Jesus said: “I am the way, and the TRUTH, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through me” John 14:6

Two points here.
1. "no one comes to the Father but through me"-If he was God, why didn't he just say no one comes to me but through me?
2. Similarly, Moses, Abraham, and all the messengers of God (peace be upon them), during their time were the way to God. If you disagree, tell me how people would have made paradise in the time of Abraham (peace be upon him) when Jesus (peace be upon him), whom according to you, is and was the only way had not come?
Similarly, the times of those prophets are gone, and now, it's the time of prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Therefore, disbelief is him is an outright disbelief in God's commands.

From what you can see he also said: "NO ONE COMES TO THE FATHER BUT THROUGH ME"

Thank you, refer above.

That is a statement that is for all time.

Two points;
1. Nope, but for his time.
2. If you say all time, what of the time of Abraham? Did the people know Jesus (peace be upon him) then?
Besides, if you ask the President who the commander in chief of the Armed forces of the federal republic of Nigeria is, he would say no one else but him, but do we not know that it is only for a time?

"And there is salvation IN NO ONE ELSE; for there is NO OTHER NAME under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved" Acts 4:12

Refer above.

701ecilana:
And [mention] when Jesus, the son of Mary, said, "O children of Israel, indeed I am the messenger of Allah to you confirming what came before me of the Torah and bringing good tidings of a messenger to come after me, whose name is Ahmad." But when he came to them with clear evidences, they said, "This is obvious magic." (Qur'an 61:6)
You quoted koran 61:6 Which was written 600 and something years after Jesus Christ had lived and died, and declared it more potent than the former?

If God sends a messenger, and as time passes, after that messenger has passed, [or in the case of Jesus (peace be upon him), been raised to the heavens], and his teachings begin to erode, in the form of corruption by the people, and God sends a new messenger, which would be more authentic? The new messenger, coming to restore the original message, or the corrupted message of the old messenger?

Yet you Christians say that spirit refers to man in the bible.
Pick one, then we can start from there
What do you mean by 'spirit refers to man?'

Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. 1 John 4:1 | NIV
Please, what does spirit stand for here?

Christians tell you that as a human being, you are triune in nature. Ask what this ^^^means and pls pay attention when the explanation is given.
The real you can't be seen with the physical eyes. The real you is a spirit, the flesh (body) is just a cloak, a cover a material substances which enables you (the spirit) function in this realm.

The human being has an essence, which is the soul. The body is just a housing for the soul in this world. Hence, on removal of the soul from the body (at the time of death), the body becomes useless, and functionless. So, where is this "triune" nature coming from?

Muhammed was a spirit too who had a soul and lived in a body. He was triune too, like you. But he was not the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit does not have sex with Children, He doest steal, He doesn't lie and brag about it. He doesn't rape slaves and definitely didn't of poisoning by a mere girl

No one is triune. Your essence is your soul. The body is a housing for the soul in this life, nothing more. Or, does the body function without the soul?
Using this to justify your trinity is just blindly arguing. Besides, even if for a second, we are to believe that the human is triune like you said, please, which is the essence (soul), and which is the functionless body (when there is no soul), amongst your "father", " son", and "holy ghost"?

The Holy Spirit is eternal, Muhammed is dead and your koran says he is in hellfire right now.

Is that so? Why don't you show me the verse? But you will not be able to, so, I declare you a liar like most of your "brothers and sisters in Christ" on nairaland.

[b]Allah has not taken any son, nor has there ever been with Him any deity. [If there had been], then each deity would have taken what it created, and some of them would have sought to overcome others. Exalted is Allah above what they describe [concerning Him]. (Qur'an 23:91) [/b]Going by the above koranic verse its evidently clear that Yahweh is not Allah, so you insisting that they are doesn't make sense.

I never insisted that Yahweh is Allah. Allah is the creator of all that exists, Lord, and Cherisher of the Universe. If your Yahweh doesn't have these attributes, then your Yahweh is a false deity.

If Allah has not taken any son, but Yahweh declared Jesus to be his son and Jesus always calling Yahweh 'Father', do you think these two entities are not the same?

If your Yahweh fathered a son, then your Yahweh is a false deity, because Allah has created all that exists, and cannot father a child with His creation.
Besides, I thought your Yahweh also called Israel his son, in fact, his first born. Also called David his begotten son, Ephraim his begotten son. Seems like your Yahweh fathered plenty children, by your interpretation, so, he has many children who are gods like him. Seems like we are going back to Greek mythology, tales of Zeus, the head god and his many children, who are also gods.

How can one claim 'Jesus is my Son', but the other rejects having a son and yet you insist they are one and the same?

Like I said, if your Yahweh fathered a son, then he has failed the test, and cannot, can never be Allah, because Allah is the creator of all that exists, and cannot father a child with his creation.
Say, "He is Allah, [who is] One, Allah, the Eternal Refuge. He neither begets nor is born, Nor is there to Him any equivalent." (Qur'an 112)
If your Yahweh fails any of the requirements above, then he is a false deity.

Depends on what you mean by holy spirit. Allah let's us know that the holy spirit is Jibril (Peace be upon him). And Jibril and Muhammad are two very different beings. But if you are talking about the Bible passage, refer to my question above, answer it, then we can start from there. Hmmm, so allah says Jibril is the Holy Spirit eh?righttttt.
So, Muhammed being the Holy Spirit and the Holy Spirit is Jibril, that means Muhammed was Jibril? Wow. This muhammed guy must be some spectacular guy. He was an Angel, the Holy Spirit and a man at the same time. Yeahhhh.

Even from my post from which you quoted, I wrote that Jibreel and Muhammad are two very different beings. You obviously have nothing to say.

Right. The people of Yahweh. Lut (peace be upon him) who has been accused of incest for example. What a book the Bible is. You say have 3 coequal, all powerful gods, yet they could not prevent their messengers from faahishah (immoral acts). That's why the bible is full of false, unfounded accusations against the prophets of God. But, no cause for alarm, all those lies have been corrected by God, in the Quran
You know, I see where Yahweh (whom you claim is allah, but at the same time deride Him) took a stand against the incest committed by Lots daughters and declared that his people never intermarry with the chikdren which came from that stock. I See where he punished them,

I never claimed Yahweh to be Allah. If your Yahweh passes the test above, then he is. If not, then he is false.
Also, you say that these are the people chosen by God, yet, they committed incest, and they were drunkards. Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) never did any such crap, yet, you disbelieve in him. This must be a case of misplaced priorities.

but i can't see allah punishing Muahmmed for peeping at his son's wife's nudeness, lusting after her, instigating a divorce and turns around to marry the lady. Instead Allah encouraged muhammed to go ahead and marry Zainab. What are we talking about here?

Provide your evidence for the bolded.

Haroun13
Yes, like giving them rights to inheritance


Like I said, I have not denied their "civilization". But to say all their practices were civilized is fallacious. I showed some of their practices, which even you women would frown at. So, why the fuss?


Philip K Hitti
"...The Quraysh - particularly its Umayyad clan - custodians of the Kaabah and the Zamzam, controllers of the caravan trade, and oligarchic masters of the city, had special reasons for resistance (to Muhammed). The new preaching might jeopardize pilgrimage to the Kaabah, next to trade their main source of income. Moreover, the once-poor orphan was introducing such dangerous economic doctrines as the rightful claim of beggars and the destitute to a share in the wealth of the rich. Additionally he (Muhammed) advocated a dangerous doctrine, one that would substitute faith for blood as the social bond of community life. If "the believers are naught but brothers" (Quran, 49:10) was acted upon, the entire family, clan, and tribal unity would be undermined and replaced by religious unity..." (Islam - A Way of Life)

Now coming to physical attacks on the Muslims.

Among the victims of persecution were: Bilal, the Ethiopian slave of Umayya bin Khalaf. His master and other idolaters tortured him in the savage glare of the sun of Makka, and they tortured him beyond the limits of human endurance. But he was fortified by inner sources of strength and courage which never failed him. Love of Allah and love of His messenger made it possible for him to endure torture with cheer. Abu Bakr brought deliverance to Bilal from torture when he bought him from his master, and set him free. When the Apostle of God and his followers migrated to Medina, he appointed Bilal the first Muezzin of Islam. His rich and powerful voice rang through the air of Medina with the shout of "Allah-o-Akbar" (=Mighty is the Lord). In later years, when the conquest of the peninsula was completed, the Apostle appointed Bilal his secretary of treasury.
Khabab ibn el-Arat. He was a young man of 20 when he accepted Islam. He was a client of Bani Zuhra. The Quraysh tortured him day after day until the time came when he migrated to Medina with the Prophet of Islam. Suhaib ibn Sinan. Suhaib came to Makka as a slave. When he became a Muslim, his master beat him up brutally, but could not break his spirit.
Abu Fukaiha, the slave of Safwan bin Umayya. He accepted Islam at the same time as Bilal. Like Bilal, he was also dragged on hot sand by his master with a rope tied to his feet. Abu Bakr bought him and emancipated him. He migrated to Medina but died before the battle of Badr. Lubina was a female slave of Bani Mumil bin Habib. Amin Dawidar writes in his book, Pictures From the Life of the Prophet (Cairo, 1968), that Umar ibn al-Khattab, a future khalifa of the Muslims, tortured her, and whenever he paused, he said: "I have stopped beating you not out of pity but because I am exhausted." He resumed beating her after he had taken rest.
Abu Bakr bought her and set her free. Zunayra was another female slave. When she declared that she had accepted Islam, Umar ibn al-Khattab and Abu Jahl, took turns in torturing her. They tortured her until she became blind. Amin Dawidar says that a few years later she recovered her sight, and the Quraysh attributed this recovery to the "sorcery" of Muhammed. Abu Bakr bought her and set her free.
Nahdiyya and Umm Unays were two other female slaves, and their masters tortured them for accepting Islam. Abu Bakr is said to have bought both of them and emancipated them.
Muhammad Husayn Haykal
...Abu Bakr bought many of the slaves and clients who were thus being tortured by the unbelievers. Among these there was even a slave woman whom Abu Bakr had bought from Umar ibn al-Khattab before the latter's conversion. One woman is known to have been tortured to death because of her attachment to Islam and her refusal to return to the old faith. (The Life of Muhammad, Cairo, 1935)
There were some other Muslims who though not slaves, were "poor and weak," and were, therefore, exposed to the malevolence of the Quraysh. One of them was Abdullah ibn Masood. He was distinguished among the companions of the Prophet by the vast range of his knowledge and learning. He had probably more familiarity with the ethos of Islam and the vitals of the Islamic legal system than most of the companions of the Prophet. Abdullah ibn Masood was one of the earliest huffaz (=men who know Quran by heart) in Islam. As each new verse was revealed, he memorized it, and he compiled his own copy of Quran. This copy was seized by Uthman bin Affan, the third khalifa, during his caliphate, and was burned.
It is reported that when a new chapter of Quran - Sura Rahman (the 55th chapter) - was revealed, the Apostle of God asked his companions who among them would go into the Kaaba, and read it before the pagans. Other companions staggered but Abdullah ibn Masood volunteered to go. He went into the Kaaba and read the new chapter out aloud. Next to Muhammed Mustafa himself, Abdullah ibn Masood was the first man to read Quran in Kaaba before a hostile crowd of the idolaters. They mauled him, not once but repeatedly, but they could not intimidate him into silence.
https://www.al-islam.org/restatement-history-islam-and-muslims-sayyid-ali-ashgar-razwy/early-converts-islam-and-their

There is nothing, I repeat NOTHING, in all that you quoted that says that Mohamed himself was physically persecuted. Was it also "persecution" that made Mohamed to raid caravans? Did the people of Khaybar persecute any Moslem?

As a Muslim, YES.


Can you say you have believed in Allah, if, you refuse to believe in His messenger whom He has sent, and ordered you to follow?


"The believers are only the ones who have believed in Allah and His Messenger and then doubt not but strive with their properties and their lives in the cause of Allah. It is those who are the truthful." (Qur'an 49:15)
Thank you for this verse. Read the phrase in bold. You should understand that Muslims do not interpret the Qur'an as Christians do the Bible. We do not twist to give unfounded meanings. You are interpreting it in such a way as to make Muhammad (peace be upon him) God, which is a lie. But you only do this because your mind has been programmed to do the same with Jesus (peace be upon him).
“Do not exaggerate about me as was exaggerated about ‘Eesa ibn Maryam. Say: the slave of Allah and His Messenger.” (Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 6830.)

Please, during the times of Moses, Jesus, and other messengers of God, (peace be upon them all), were they not to be obeyed? Did the revelations not come through them? How were you to succeed in attaining paradise if you did not obey them? Please, let's be reasonable.

Refer above.

Your Christian Bible interpretation has clouded your mentality.
Would your belief in God be complete if you disobeyed what he has said, that you should follow his messenger in whatever he commands, because his command is directly from God (I.e, revealed), therefore, his command is God's?


Muslims believe in the messengership of Muhammad, Jesus, Moses, and all messengers of God (peace be upon them). But you practice idolatry by worshipping a man alongside God.
If belief in the messengership of Muhammad (peace be upon him) makes you think he is placed on equal footing with God, then think again, because we have been commanded to believe in all the messengers of God, so, how many Gods will we be talking about?
Please, be reasonable.

If your “YES” is to be accepted, that would mean you Moslems can STOP mentioning Mohamed in your prayers, mention ONLY belief in Allah in your Islamic Creed, etc and still be Moslems. But you know (if you will be truthful) that Islam cannot do that because it has elevated Mohamed to a deity.

You claim that you only believe in the “messengership” of Mohamed YET he is the CENTRAL FOCUS of all Moslem, not Allah. No Moslem prays without the mention of Mohamed. No one is a Moslem without the mention of Mohamed. Mohamed is the example to be followed not Allah. At the end of the day you can see that it’s all about Mohamed!

How come Allah didn’t deem it fit to use this “FINAL MESSENGER” to list some of the previous Prophets’ examples for all to follow? How come no mention of other prophets’ names in the Islamic Creed even if just one or two others; e.g. Job and Moses? What confers on Mohamed anything special other than that he was a ‘Prophet’, even if the last one?

We are not two in one. The soul is the essense, the body is just a kind of housing for the soul, in this world. So, if we should compare, out of Jesus, God, and the holy ghost, which is the essense and which is the housing for the essense, which will eventually be shed (death), and will decay, and will be formed again?


Two points here.
1. "no one comes to the Father but through me"-If he was God, why didn't he just say no one comes to me but through me?
2. Similarly, Moses, Abraham, and all the messengers of God (peace be upon them), during their time were the way to God. If you disagree, tell me how people would have made paradise in the time of Abraham (peace be upon him) when Jesus (peace be upon him), whom according to you, is and was the only way had not come?
Similarly, the times of those prophets are gone, and now, it's the time of prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Therefore, disbelief is him is an outright disbelief in God's commands.


Thank you, refer above.


Two points;
1. Nope, but for his time.
2. If you say all time, what of the time of Abraham? Did the people know Jesus (peace be upon him) then?
Besides, if you ask the President who the commander in chief of the Armed forces of the federal republic of Nigeria is, he would say no one else but him, but do we not know that it is only for a time?

Refer above.

The Trinity is ONE in essence but three in personality.
If the human analogy is difficult for you to understand or accept (?) let me use the sun: are the fireball of the sun which we see, the light the sun gives and the heat of the sun of one and the same thing?
Can you say: “I can see with the LIGHT of the Sun”?
Can you say: “I am being burned with the HEAT of the Sun?”
Can you say: “I can see the BRIGHT ROUND sun?”
Will these three statements be referring to three (3) independent things or ONE thing - the Sun?

Mohamed has come and gone. Jesus Christ is still alive. Jesus Christ is UNIQUE. He existed before time. He came in flesh to take care of the sin problem between man and God. Because he resolved the sin problem he QUALIFIES as the only go-between for man and God. He overcame death by his resurrection; a proof of his victory. As a result he became a once-for-all acceptable offering and PROPHET to God. No one else was needed and no other thing or way was necessary after him.
It is interesting that the quran calls him “Messiah” yet Moslems fail to grasp the implication of that title. It simply means that whereas the quran refers to Jesus as “Saviour” – that is what MESSIAH means – Moslems still refuse his salvation work on their behalf.

No other name or way brings salvation:
"And there is salvation IN NO ONE ELSE; for there is NO OTHER NAME under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved" Acts 4:12

Haroun13:

If God sends a messenger, and as time passes, after that messenger has passed, [or in the case of Jesus (peace be upon him), been raised to the heavens], and his teachings begin to erode, in the form of corruption by the people, and God sends a new messenger, which would be more authentic? The new messenger, coming to restore the original message, or the corrupted message of the old messenger?


Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. 1 John 4:1 | NIV
Please, what does spirit stand for here?


The human being has an essence, which is the soul. The body is just a housing for the soul in this world. Hence, on removal of the soul from the body (at the time of death), the body becomes useless, and functionless. So, where is this "triune" nature coming from?


No one is triune. Your essence is your soul. The body is a housing for the soul in this life, nothing more. Or, does the body function without the soul?
Using this to justify your trinity is just blindly arguing. Besides, even if for a second, we are to believe that the human is triune like you said, please, which is the essence (soul), and which is the functionless body (when there is no soul), amongst your "father", " son", and "holy ghost"?


Is that so? Why don't you show me the verse? But you will not be able to, so, I declare you a liar like most of your "brothers and sisters in Christ" on nairaland.


I never insisted that Yahweh is Allah. Allah is the creator of all that exists, Lord, and Cherisher of the Universe. If your Yahweh doesn't have these attributes, then your Yahweh is a false deity.


If your Yahweh fathered a son, then your Yahweh is a false deity, because Allah has created all that exists, and cannot father a child with His creation.
Besides, I thought your Yahweh also called Israel his son, in fact, his first born. Also called David his begotten son, Ephraim his begotten son. Seems like your Yahweh fathered plenty children, by your interpretation, so, he has many children who are gods like him. Seems like we are going back to Greek mythology, tales of Zeus, the head god and his many children, who are also gods.


Like I said, if your Yahweh fathered a son, then he has failed the test, and cannot, can never be Allah, because Allah is the creator of all that exists, and cannot father a child with his creation.
Say, "He is Allah, [who is] One, Allah, the Eternal Refuge. He neither begets nor is born, Nor is there to Him any equivalent." (Qur'an 112)
If your Yahweh fails any of the requirements above, then he is a false deity.


Even from my post from which you quoted, I wrote that Jibreel and Muhammad are two very different beings. You obviously have nothing to say.


I never claimed Yahweh to be Allah. If your Yahweh passes the test above, then he is. If not, then he is false.
Also, you say that these are the people chosen by God, yet, they committed incest, and they were drunkards. Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) never did any such crap, yet, you disbelieve in him. This must be a case of misplaced priorities.


Provide your evidence for the bolded.

quote author=Haroun13 post=59214219]
If God sends a messenger, and as time passes, after that messenger has passed, [or in the case of Jesus (peace be upon him), been raised to the heavens], and his teachings begin to erode, in the form of corruption by the people, and God sends a new messenger, which would be more authentic? The new messenger, coming to restore the original message, or the corrupted message of the old messenger?[/quote]

Haroun this is what the scripture that came first says, but it will left for you to believe what you want.

Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.
Isaiah:44:6

I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.
Revelation:22:13
Jehovah through the mouth of his prophet said he was the first and the last. Jesus repeated it again.

The first and the last means the first and the last.

If the was going to be another messenger shouldn't the teachings of this new messenger be in conformity with those who have come before him? Shouldn't they have a meeting point? The New Testament is the confirmation of the Old, why is the koran in total rejection of the Old and the New Testament?
Bros, you have believed and are walking in a lie.

Haroun13:

Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. 1 John 4:1 | NIV
Please, what does spirit stand for here?

The Spirit here is the spirit of ERROR. A Llying spirit. Summersaulting and twisting what has been established for thousands of years before him, and Pretending to be of God but lying. We are also warned not to take them by their words but to look out for their fruits. By their actions, you'd know them. Now friend, Muhammad's fruits are evident.

No prophet in the past ever did what muhammed did in his life time. If he was one of the prophets, there's no way he will be so different from others before him. The spirit in him was obviously different hence, his fruits.

Haroun13:

The human being has an essence, which is the soul. The body is just a housing for the soul in this world. Hence, on removal of the soul from the body (at the time of death), the body becomes useless, and functionless. So, where is this "triune" nature coming from?

lol. Can't you see it from what you just said?

You are a spirit being, but you have to live and function in a materiel realm (Earth), Spirits can't function here in their essence hence the body which houses the spirit. But in order for him to relate with his environment you need consciousness hence your soul/mind.

Wait, at resurrection what did the koran tell you? That you won't need the body you committed all the sins in to stand judgement?

U just dey argue for argument sake?

Haroun13:

No one is triune. Your essence is your soul. The body is a housing for the soul in this life, nothing more. Or, does the body function without the soul?
Using this to justify your trinity is just blindly arguing. Besides, even if for a second, we are to believe that the human is triune like you said, please, which is the essence (soul), and which is the functionless body (when there is no soul), amongst your "father", " son", and "holy ghost"?

You have not asked a reasonable question here. Nothing is worthless. Your body at resurrection will be changed to an eternal one, more like up graded. Your soul is your consciousness, everything you ever did here, you'd remember without which you can't stand Judgement. Your spirit is of God who created it, but if found guilty after judgement, all of you gets thrown into hellfire. You will be there remembering why you got there, feeling the pain in the flesh which will never burn off.

Haroun13:

I never insisted that Yahweh is Allah. Allah is the creator of all that exists, Lord, and Cherisher of the Universe. If your Yahweh doesn't have these attributes, then your Yahweh is a false deity.

Wow, what can i say? Aminusanti come and see your saying allah is not the same as Yahweh o.
Me, i have shouting from the start that God of the Bible is not the same with the god of koran, but you won't believe me. Now here is a Muslim agreeing with me.
Guy, we are competing anything. Your god is who he is, and my God is who He is.
Muslims have been the ones forcing themselves into our space, not the other way round. If you'd worship your allah without giving us any ish, for me and all of us, you won't exists. House flies will be taken more seriously than you muslims. Trust me.

Haroun13:


If your Yahweh fathered a son, then your Yahweh is a false deity, because Allah has created all that exists, and cannot father a child with His creation.
Besides, I thought your Yahweh also called Israel his son, in fact, his first born. Also called David his begotten son, Ephraim his begotten son. Seems like your Yahweh fathered plenty children, by your interpretation, so, he has many children who are gods like him. Seems like we are going back to Greek mythology, tales of Zeus, the head god and his many children, who are also gods.

I won't waste time on this. First and foremost Jehovah is our father, but allah is not a father to any muslim. You said it yourself, we don't worship the same God. So take your allah and vamos.

Here is your answer.

Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is Antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.
1 John:2:22
Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.
1 John:2:23

You asked about the Spirit before, here is the lying Spirit of the Antichrist. Have you seen yourself in those verses?

Haroun13:


Also, you say that these are the people chosen by God, yet, they committed incest, and they were drunkards. Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) never did any such crap, yet, you disbelieve in him. This must be a case of misplaced priorities.

Who committed incest with who?
Wait, Haroun did you just say this to me or you think you can lie? Talking about incest what causes inbreeding? There's no group of people on earth today who commits incest like the moslems. You are all brian dead becos of inbreeding.
Who was Zainab? The woman Noble prophet muhammes peeped and saw here nakidness? Wasn't she Muhammad's cousin? That's not incest?

Pls don't make me laugh. Muhammed was a drunk only pretended before you his followers not to drink becos he wanted you clear minded to kill people for him.

The way he lied about alcohol is the same way he he lied about women. He told you to marry 4, but how many did he marry? How many sex slaves did he have? This was hard to miss, so everyone knew oga lied, oh but wait, allah justified it only for him, so that made it right. If he was caught drinking allah would have justified it also.

Haroun, I will ask you to calmly list the prophets whom you claim came before muhammed. You know these prophets you just accused of Incest and drunkenness, pls mention and give us scriptures were we can find this their activities.

Remember to add pedophilia, Rape, sex slaves, stealing, high way robbery, thuggery, murder, sexual infidelity, and most of all, mention any of them who sees his visions only wen he wears women clothes.

Why was muhammes dressing like a woman before receiving visions?

plainbibletruth:
There is nothing, I repeat NOTHING, in all that you quoted that says that Mohamed himself was physically persecuted. Was it also "persecution" that made Mohamed to raid caravans? Did the people of Khaybar persecute any Moslem?

You keep claiming that the pagan Arabs did nothing wrong and that the Jews with whom the Muslims had a pact did nothing wrong by betraying the pact and siding with the enemy. So, you've been shown how the Muslims were persecuted by the pagan Arabs. The prophet (peace be upon him) never took revenge on personal injuries, so, whatever defense mechanisms the Prophet commanded was as a result of persecution of the Muslims, not himself.

If your “YES” is to be accepted, that would mean you Moslems can STOP mentioning Mohamed in your prayers, mention ONLY belief in Allah in your Islamic Creed, etc and still be Moslems. But you know (if you will be truthful) that Islam cannot do that because it has elevated Mohamed to a deity.

Look, your problem is that you Christians have been brainwashed into believing that Jesus (peace be upon him) is God, so, you think this can apply to the Muslims as well.
So, since you are the most ignorant Christian I have come across, get enlightened. In order for one to be called a Muslim, he must believe in God, His prophets (all of them), the angels, the books (e.g, Qur'an, Injeel, Taurah, Zabur, and any other book revealed by God), the day of judgement, and the divine Qadr (decree) of Allah.
Now coming to the way you reason, it would mean that all the prophets of God (peace be upon them), the angels, the books, the day of judgement, and the divine decree of God are all God. Perhaps you might just be dumb enough to believe that. Like I said, your problem is that you Christians have been brainwashed. If you are so eager to worship a person, I'll advice you to worship Melchizedek, your bible says he is superior to Jesus. He had no beginning and no end, I'm sure you know how Jesus was born, and made his mother unclean for a number of days, and was circumcised on the eight day (all in your bible). He had no family, we know the family of Jesus, his mother, Zackariah, John, even according to your bible, he had brothers, even though his mother was supposed to be a virgin, don't know how that happens.

You claim that you only believe in the “messengership” of Mohamed YET he is the CENTRAL FOCUS of all Moslem, not Allah.

It would be really dumb, if the president sent a representative to enlighten a people on his new policies, and the people then turn around and say; "you know what? We believe in the president, but we don't believe in his representative's office, as a representative." Yet, they claim to believe in the president, but when he sent them a message, they disbelieved. Plain stupidity. The problem of most of you Christians is ignorance.

No Moslem prays without the mention of Mohamed.

Another ignorant statement. We call his name saying what? Do we say he is God?
Please, be reasonable.

No one is a Moslem without the mention of Mohamed.

Please, tell me what you mean by "mention". I'm pretty sure you've mentioned the name Muhammad before, how does that make you a Muslim?

Mohamed is the example to be followed not Allah. At the end of the day you can see that it’s all about Mohamed!

When you say follow someone's example, does it not mean to do what he does, behave the way he behaves? Please, show me the example of God, tell me the way God "behaves", show me the way God " lives his life" so that I can follow his example. Your ignorant rantings are beginning to get too unintelligible.

How come Allah didn’t deem it fit to use this “FINAL MESSENGER” to list some of the previous Prophets’ examples for all to follow? How come no mention of other prophets’ names in the Islamic Creed even if just one or two others; e.g. Job and Moses?

I knew what I meant when I said your problem is ignorance. Go and do your research, because the Jews do not believe in the messengership of Jesus and Muhammad (peace be upon them), when a Jew reverts to Islam, and takes the shahadah, after proclaiming that he testifies that there is no deity worthy of worship except Allah, he has to first testify that Jesus (peace be upon him) is the messenger and servant of Allah, before testifying that Muhammad is the messenger and servant of Allah.

What confers on Mohamed anything special other than that he was a ‘Prophet’, even if the last one?

All messengers are special, they are more than us, because of the trials they face, and the privileges God gave them.
But lemme ask you something. Drawing a similitude on a much lower scale, we all know that a new president gets elected every 4 years (according to the constitution of Nigeria), and say after a long time, you are elected to be the last president, and none will come after you, your rule will be till the end, won't it be appropriate to say that though all the presidents were privileged to get that position, you are the most privileged?

The Trinity is ONE in essence but three in personality.

Thank you, we are saying the same thing. Three personalities, meaning 3 different persons, one position, of God. So, if one person is God, the other is also God, and finally, the last is also God, how many gods are there? The answer is 3.

If the human analogy is difficult for you to understand or accept (?) let me use the sun: are the fireball of the sun which we see, the light the sun gives and the heat of the sun of one and the same thing?

No, they are not. The "fireball" which you see is the sun. The light and heat of the sun are it's characteristics.

Can you say: “I can see with the LIGHT of the Sun”?
Can you say: “I am being burned with the HEAT of the Sun?”
Can you say: “I can see the BRIGHT ROUND sun?”
Will these three statements be referring to three (3) independent things or ONE thing - the Sun?

Actually, the former is more correct. The heat of the sun is not the sun, neither is the light. They are only characteristics. We feel the heat, but the heat itself is not the sun, rather, just as a result of some radiation which the sun gives off. It's like saying that someone spat into a bowl, then the spit is the person. No, it's just something which he has given off from himself.

Mohamed has come and gone.

If death is your problem, then you'll have to renounce all the prophets you believe in, like Moses, Abraham and other prophets of God (peace be upon them).

Jesus Christ is still alive. Jesus Christ is UNIQUE. He existed before time. He came in flesh to take care of the sin problem between man and God.

So you are saying that he is not God, since he is acting as a mediator between man and God.

Because he resolved the sin problem he QUALIFIES as the only go-between for man and God.

Could you tell me more about this "sin" problem. Because it looks like it was too big for God to handle.

He overcame death by his resurrection; a proof of his victory.

So, where's the sacrifice. When you sacrifice something, you lose it completely. Meaning that you were only saved for the incomplete 3 days that he was "supposedly" dead. The sacrifice escaped, so, you are back to being lost.
Let's see this example. In the African traditional religion, they sacrifice to the gods. So, one day, they sacrifice a goat to the gods, then after 3 days (though incomplete), the goat rises and runs away. Would that still be a sacrifice?

As a result he became a once-for-all acceptable offering and PROPHET to God. No one else was needed and no other thing or way was necessary after him.

Even though according to you, he unoffered himself?

It is interesting that the quran calls him “Messiah” yet Moslems fail to grasp the implication of that title. It simply means that whereas the quran refers to Jesus as “Saviour” – that is what MESSIAH means – Moslems still refuse his salvation work on their behalf.

He is the messiah because he will come back, kill the dajjal (antichrist), destroy the cross, abolish the jizya, kill the swine, and during his time, all worship will be for Allah, and he will rule according to the Shari'ah of the prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).
Not because he was claimed to have gone on a suicidal mission to clean an inexistent sin, then, unoffered himself.

No other name or way brings salvation:
"And there is salvation IN NO ONE ELSE; for there is NO OTHER NAME under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved" Acts 4:12

Of course. Quoting Paul, who never knew Jesus (peace be upon him) but persecuted his followers. Here's what God Almighty Himself says;
"And whoever desires other than Islam as religion - never will it be accepted from him, and he, in the Hereafter, will be among the losers." (Qur'an 3:85)

AS YOU PLAN ALL, ALSO PLAN FOR ETERNITY
www.nairaland.com/3560501/holineness-righteousness-revival-daily-messages/6#59488101