Empiree:
I am asking you again what's your business with him and why are you so concern about him?. You have lots of nonsense in your Bible to preoccupy yourself with. What's your problem with us?

Why are christian missionaries and evangelists so much lean toward Ibn Ishaq?. Ibn Ishaq was not our prophet. Why must we believe everything he collected?.

proudkafir:
I have never seen any Islamic scholar who do not study the life of Mohammed, by ibn Ishaq, before attaining his scholarship. It is only online scholars like you, who have no any single scholarly work on Islam, that will condemn his work as a fabrication. If Ibn Ishaq's work is a fabrication, why did Imam Bukhari used his 'fabricated' works as a reference while compiling his hadith and Ibn Hisham, while compiling the edited sirah rasool Allah?

I almost gave up on you when you made a claim that he is a Jewish man. This is the height of Islamic desperation and cover-ups! How can you call Ibn Ishaq a Jew because he was sincere enough while writing the biography of your prophet? If Ibn Ishaq's work is a fabrication, why is the book still being sold in all Islamic shops in Saudi Arabia? Nigerian Muslims are wonderful!

Now back to the hadith, which is a mere rumour, gossips and Chinese whispers, how can you trust sahih Bukhari who never seen or meet Mohammed. Imam Bukhari wrote his hadith about 250 years after Mohammed, how do you know its not filled with lies since many hadith narrations had been classified as either a weak or fabricated hadith. Besides, Imam Bukhari is from Uzbekistan and not even an Arab and most of what he wrote cannot be found in the Qur'an.

Your Quran does not also help. Mohammed never asked his sahabas to compile the alleged revelation he gave to his sahabas. It was Umar ibn katab, the second rightly guided khalifa, who came up with the idea of compiling the ayah as a book, under the leadership of the first khalifa, Abu Bakr. They came up with this idea after Muslims lost many men (who have some ayah in their memory) at the battle of yamama, two years after Mohammed died.

Both Abu Bakr and Uthman ibn katab did not live to see the final compilation, but Uthman ibn Affan finished the compilation and burnt the rest of the Quran he doesn't like. Basically, the present Qur'an is a govt project and the final work of Uthman Ibn Affan, how can you call it the word of a god? You have to be objective in your way and reasoning and be sincere with yourself. Muslims can only fool people that are ignorant of Islamic history (over 95% of mankind).

Islam thrives and flourished under the atmosphere of ignorance.

OLUWABIG:








If Ibn Ishaq's work is a fabrication, why is the book still being sold in all Islamic shops in Saudi Arabia? :



I wonder ooo my brother

Samunique:
Read the bible for yourself and you will find the answers, and if you're not clear then we can help you out.

Samunique:
Bros stop being arrogant in ignorance here, u know noting about the bible. We know your like, who get puffed up in what they know noting about. You've not been able to successfully defend your religion, and we all see how tru2god is taking you to the cleaner here, anyways, that's the spirit of Islam, always pride themselves in ignorance. Adepoju comes to mind !


Pls try and bring up your so called biblical contradictions regarding the gospel, I shall attend to them when I'm back from work.

Religion blinds, but Christ saves !!!


You can be forgiven !

Empiree:
This is your homework. Who is Jesus?

Human being

God

Holy spirit

All to above.



Easy question, isn't?.



If you ask a muslim who is Muhammad?. He will reply " he is human being and messanger of God. Simple isn't?. Why is yours complicated?.

Please answer that question above. Thanks

Empiree:
who is this confused guy?

Samunique:




Yea, Jesus is who He is !!!

Or is that to hard for u to understand

Empiree:
who was he, human or God?. Clarify yourself

Rilwayne001:
Why don't you kuku write a book and copy all these long and boring bunkum into it? Only your fellow ignorant jobless twerp will sit to go through all these conjoined crappy poo.

The other day, I created a thread that destroyed the very pillar that your religion stands on, up till now, you and tru2god are MIA.

**piss on thread**

OLUWABIG:








If Ibn Ishaq's work is a fabrication, why is the book still being sold in all Islamic shops in Saudi Arabia? :



I wonder ooo my brother

Samunique:
He is the Son of the living God !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!

Are u ready to give your life to him that you might receive the gift of the holy spirit ?

3. Another narrator of the same event
[b]It is worthy of note that another important early historical book of Islam – Kitab Al-tabaqat Al-Kabir by Ibn Sa’d – also narrated this same story.
- Is this book also ‘faulty’ in some respect especially where it ‘paints’ Mohamed in bad light by ordering the killing of this 120 year old man - Abu Afak?
- Are we now being told these stories are ‘lies’ and ‘fabrications’ simply because these “Islamic” values do not line up with today’s values for human rights and moral standards?
- Again, if these materials such as this one are called to question, then what right do Islamic apologists like yourself have to reference them on other matters – is it simply because they agree with your position on those other matters?
I wonder what scholars of Islam say about this writer too. Is his own rendition of this same story ‘fabricated’ also? Maybe Empiree can give us his take on this.

plainbibletruth:
[size=6pt][/size]

This is another Islamic writer I wrote about:

basilico:
I have followed this thread though ignoring Emp.iree and his fellow Muslims.
Now we have lots of videos on youtube , memri. etc from muslim clerics explaining Islam.
Emp.iree do you agree with them

I have watched countless Zakr
Naikh TV series lying and beating around the bush on matters plainbibletruth has raised.

Empiree:


It is understandable when people hate something they can come up with trash to discredit the truth. If you read this attachment, the comment talks about the importance of ISNAD which Ibn Ishaq and his gang lacked.

Empiree:
okay. "Son of the living God". Fair enough. Just want to let you know that all of us good and well mannered human beings are sons and daughters of the living God. Thanks for the reply. Now, how about those who say Jesus is God, and he's the same holy spirit that formed three in one. Do you believe this as well?.




not that fast. Why are you in hurry?. I'm not convinced yet

Samunique:


1. All of us who are good mannered are sons and daughters of God ? ( though surprised to hear this from a Muslim, cause no Islamic theology/doctrine support this, I know u are trying to play smart here).

Having said that, I'm yet to see in my Bible where it says, all that are well mannered are God's children.

Though plsam 82:6 says, "I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High. And the "title" Son (s) of God was also used for the Angels in the book of job and genesis chapter six, and God did use this same term for the nation of Isreal when He said, "Isreal is my first born, and Jesus also states it in the betitudes that blessed are the peace makers for they shall be called the children of God.

ADOPTION IN THE OLD TESTAMENT: God called the nation of Isreal his first son bcs it is the bearerer of the abrahamic covenant through which the promised seed, the future messiah would be born ( not bcs they were well mannered as you suggest in your post) and also, to show how fatherly He was to them relationship wise most especially as the first nation to receive the law of God, the bearer of the oracle of God. Exo 4:23.

ADOPTION IN THE NEW TESTAMENT: This is more profound and real than the mere proclamation made in the old testament regarding the nation of Isreal bcs it is done by the spirit of God through faith in Christ. Emp.iree, this is a definite experience that all those who have been born of the spirit have. Take it or leave, it is true !
It more than being emotional or fanatic, it is a sweet experience !

The Bible says so and I found it so !

This is one of the many reasons I will never doubt the Bible, bcs I had not this experience when i was a muslim until I came to Christ. These following scriptures confirm it, John 1:12-13, Rom 8:14-17 , pls read.

Now, the Bible is not calling us here God's children bcs we are well mannered but bcs of the redemption through which we are born again by the Spirit of God !
John 3:5-7.

NOW LET'S GO TO THE REAL DEAL: Is Jesus the Son of God by title or adoption ?

This answer is capital NO, except we want to break the scriptures !

Jesus is not a son of God, but the Son God. John 1:1, 1:18, 3:16-17, 5:17-23, mark 14:61-62, matt 16:13-18 etc.

There are so many instances in the Bible which make Jesus as the only Son of God undisputable.

Em.piree , let me ask you this questions:

Then why do u people think it is impossible for God to have a Son or a Child without woman ?

* Pls I will answer your last question latter bcs of space and time .

Thanks !

plainbibletruth:


BUT Empiree, I gave you another Islamic source other than Ibn Ishaq.

You seem to be the one hung up on him and repeating disclaimers on him.

Is Kitab Al-tabaqat Al-Kabir by Ibn Sa’d – who also narrated this same story also wrong?
- Is this book also ‘faulty’ in some respect especially where it ‘paints’ Mohamed in bad light by ordering the killing of this 120 year old man - Abu Afak?

Be clear in your answer.

That Islam has contradictory position on virtually everything is VERY CLEAR to you Moslems.

As a result you can always be shifty; using whatever side is convenient at any point in time to support your claims.

plainbibletruth:


BUT Empiree, I gave you another Islamic source other than Ibn Ishaq.

You seem to be the one hung up on him and repeating disclaimers on him.

Is Kitab Al-tabaqat Al-Kabir by Ibn Sa’d – who also narrated this same story also wrong?
- Is this book also ‘faulty’ in some respect especially where it ‘paints’ Mohamed in bad light by ordering the killing of this 120 year old man - Abu Afak?

Be clear in your answer.

That Islam has contradictory position on virtually everything is VERY CLEAR to you Moslems.

As a result you can always be shifty; using whatever side is convenient at any point in time to support your claims.

Empiree:
It is clear you didnt read the attachments or you read but chose to ignore. It is clearly written there that Ibn Sa’d and Ibn Ishaq wrote identical story that has no chain of transmission. It is said that Ibn Sa’d copied Ibn Ishaq

Demmzy15:
So you're still alive?

alienvirus:
What Muslims must know about Christians

Empiree:
I simply referred to your own doctrine. If Jesus is the son of God, how about other good people who are called children of God?. This goes to show you that Jesus is not the only son of God. There are other sons and children of God too. So don't get things mixed up with muslims John 1:12, Matthew 5:9



Don't capitalize on my choice of words, "well mannered". It means the same thing as "good character", "peacemakers" which is what your bible alluded to in John 1:12, Matthew 5:9. That's what Quran calls "righteous conduct". But you people called it "son of God". Question, is Jesus the only son of God now?




And your point is?. What you said here is my point. It shows that Jesus is not the only son of God. Help yourself.




Told you that "well mannered" is my choice of words. It means RIGHTEOUSNESS in Islamic terminology. It is clear from the verses and the way you are talking so far that "Son of God" means someone of good and moral character. It doesn't mean biological son of God. Correct?




You are about to get yourself in full blown contradictions..but let me read further see where you trying to drive at.




"Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— 13 children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.

Unfortunately you were borne of human being (FLESH). What is "born of God" means to you?. Apart from that, this shows that Jesus is not the only one born of God. You have just proved me right again. So why do you guys keep saying Jesus is the Only son of God if you are son of God too?





Jesus answered, “Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit. 6 Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit[a] gives birth to spirit. 7 You should not be surprised at my saying, ‘You[b] must be born again.’

This bible verse is simply speaking in parable. I would use islamic standard to rephrase it. The verse simply means to have Faith and to be good in conduct. This verse of Quran clarifies it, thus:


"Righteousness is not that you turn your faces to the east and the west [in prayer]. But righteous is the one who believes in God, the Last Day, the Angels, the Scripture and the Prophets; who gives his wealth in spite of love for it to kinsfolk, orphans, the poor, the wayfarer, to those who ask and to set slaves free. And (righteous are) those who pray, pay alms, honor their agreements, and are patient in (times of) poverty, ailment and during conflict. Such are the people of truth. And they are the God-Fearing." (Quran 2:177)


See how clear the Quran phrase it without getting anyone confused?. Bro, you are born of human flesh not spirit. It is when you follow God orders and truly worship Him alone and not Jesus, that's when you are truly close to God in spirit. Anyone can experience anything regardless of religion affiliation. Buddhists have spiritual experiences too. Does that make their religion right?. No.





I said earlier that you were about to get yourself into serious confusion. If you can think critically, you should already noticed John 1:1 and 18 are enough confusion. Obviously, John 3:16-17 is spoken by someone unknown. Your confusion has began and i will help you further your confusion until your eyes are open. But allow me to ask you, son of God mentioned in this quote are different from Son of God you have been saying earlier?. You said son of God is different from Son of God. This simply means capital S depicts Jesus. Fine. But the same John said Son is also God. Yet in the same Bible it says God can not been seen not His voice could be heard at all by any human John 5:37. But Jesus was seen and his voice was heard.

"son of God" in the language of the Jews was a very innocent term used to describe a loyal servant of God. Whether the translators and editors chose to write it as "Son of God" (with a capital S) in reference to Jesus and "son of God" (with a small S) in reference to everyone else does not diminish the fact that in the original language, both cases are exactly the same.


Grolier's encyclopedia, under the heading "Jesus Christ," says:


"During his earthly life Jesus was addressed as rabbi and was regarded as a prophet. Some of his words, too, place him in the category of sage. A title of respect for a rabbi would be "my Lord." Already before Easter his followers, impressed by his authority, would mean something more than usual when they addressed him as "my Lord.".... it is unlikely that the title "Son of David" was ascribed to him or accepted by him during his earthly ministry. "Son of God," in former times a title of the Hebrew kings (Psalms 2:7), was first adopted in the post-Easter church as an equivalent of Messiah and had no metaphysical connotations (Romans 1:4). Jesus was conscious of a unique filial relationship with God, but it is uncertain whether the Father/Son language (Mark 18:32; Matt. 11:25-27 par.; John passim) goes back to Jesus himself" .




You are about to enter into serious confusion but let me take it slow. But remember, you have merged God and Jesus to be one entity. At the same time you wanna differentiate them?.





Oh really?. How about this where Jesus claimed to be "Son of man" (eg. Matt. 17:12,Mark 8:38, Luke 9:56)





See highlighted, you are insinuating that Jesus is biological Son of God without having intercourse with woman. You have just committed heinous sin that can not be forgiven unless you make tawbah and desist from such belief. Begotten is animal act. God is not animal nor does He resembles His creations. The moment you equate God with human attributes, you have got yourself in big trouble. Quran has this to say to rebuke your doctrine.


[He is] Originator of the heavens and the earth. How could He have a son when He does not have a companion and He created all things? And He is, of all things, Knowing. (6:101)


He begets not, nor was He begotten. (surah Ikhlas)



But they have attributed to Allah partners - the jinn, while He has created them - and have fabricated for Him sons and daughters. Exalted is He and high above what they describe (6:100)



And say, "Praise to Allah , who has not taken a son and has had no partner in [His] dominion and has no [need of a] protector out of weakness; and glorify Him with [great] glorification."




Finally Quran says,


O People of the Scripture, do not commit excess in your religion or say about Allah except the truth. The Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, was but a messenger of Allah and His word which He directed to Mary and a soul [created at a command] from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers. And do not say, "Three"; desist - it is better for you. Indeed, Allah is but one God. Exalted is He above having a son. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. And sufficient is Allah as Disposer of affairs.

plainbibletruth:

Thank you for your encouraging words.

true2god:
Bro so much of inconsistencies in allahh's Quran. My favorite quranic verse is Quran 33:53:

O Ye who believe! Enter not the dwellings of the Prophet for a meal without waiting for the proper time, unless permission be granted you. But if ye are invited, enter, and, when your meal is ended, then disperse. Linger not for conversation. Lo! that would cause annoyance to the Prophet, and he would be shy of (asking) you (to go); but Allah is not shy of the truth. And when ye ask of them (the wives of the Prophet) anything, ask it of them from behind a curtain. That is purer for your hearts and for their hearts. And it is not for you to cause annoyance to the messenger of Allah, nor that ye should ever marry his wives after him. Lo! that in Allah's sight would be an enormity.

How can a God reveal such a childish instruction? If Mohammed was not comfortable with his sahabas hanging around his wives and concubines, why didn't he just tell them straightforward without dragging his imaginary allahh into it.

tamethem:


No be only that place alone Muhammad attributed his selfish intention to Allah.

Another story is that he went to the house of his adopted son , he didn't meet him but met the wife who was bathing. Mohammed later called his son and told him Allah said the woman in his house belongs to the Prophet, and who is the Prophet? Muhammed!

That is called Ojukokoro in Yoruba.

How would a true God tell you to snatch someone else's wife talk less you own son's.

Evil trick by evil prophet directed by an Evil god.

plainbibletruth:

Did Mohamed murder Abu Afak & Asma?

It is clear that you are using another one of Islam's "ingenious" ways to wriggle out of arguments.

If the oldest extant history of Mohamed’s life is questioned by you guys, then on what basis do you have to think later documents should be accepted as more reliable?

Are you aware that Sunan Abu Dawud ALSO narrated the killing of the poetess - Asma? Is this hadith now no more "authentic" because of this portrayal of Mohamed as a cold blooded murderer?

I repeat; that Islam has contradictory position on virtually everything is VERY CLEAR to you Moslems.

Islam has been divided right from virtually after Mohamed as to what Mohamed said or didn't say or what he do or didn't do.

Efforts to clear the mist has led subsequent Moslem generations to come up with all kinds of verification systems. The isnad is one of them.

The koran has very little narrative material about Mohamed's life, yet the Moslem is supposed to see him as an example to be followed. This then leaves people like you with the only option of resorting to the biographies and hadiths on Mohamed.

But in these you meet a brick wall. Unpallatable stories about this "example" for all mankind show up. How to deal with these now becomes the issue: do you throw away the entire writings? Or what?

Then comes the usual Islam's "ingenious" way of coming up with "solutions". The "isnad" is "invented". It is dubbed "scientific". Problem solved, at least for some.

Others who are not completely convinced or cannot truthfully live with these CONTRADICTIONS but still "feel" Islam is the way, resort to being "KORAN ONLY" Moslems.

A conclusion we can ULTIMATELY come to then is that the Koran, believed by every Moslem to be pure revelation, can only be proved and justified as pure revelation, by using the human systems.

Does Chains of Transmitters Guarantee Truth?
Certainly chains of narrators are useful but they are only one aspect of history.

If we get an unbroken line of transmitters of a lie or a distortion, does that TURN the narration into the truth? Does the mere fact of an unbroken chain of transmitters make a document valid or reliable? Are the biases of the transmitters irrelevant? The plain answer to all these questions is an unequivocal "NO!"

At the end of the day it's not just an "unbroken chain" that the Moslem has to resolve. He has to battle with perhaps dozens of other "requirements" as to the reliability of the transmitters and the mode of transmission.

Emp.iree, one big question you've FAILED to answer is this: Are all these other CONTRIBUTORS to Islam "inspired" by Allah or not?

plainbibletruth:

Did Mohamed murder Abu Afak & Asma?

]