@vedaxcool

Like Jesus disciples in the NT u are bereft of understanding, as the word angry does not occur in the Qur'an. Now the use of angry instead of Ill conduct leaves us with the notion, that even in trivial matters a man can beat his wife, which is why when u use angry to deliberately misconstrue the verse. E.g. say seyi went to Mr.Brown and say I need money to buy attachment to show off, mr. Brown becomes angry and say I do not have money, you know that, accd.to your interpretation of the verse Mr. Brown is allowed to beat seyi, the question is those this count as a misconduct? No, as in Islam the man is responsibility for his wife upkeep and hence she has the right to ask for her dues, hence your use of "angry" is far from right as the verse clearly states arrogance and Ill conduct. Hence i donot know whether u used your brain in understanding the verse or rely on the drunken ghost for interpretation in any case u are wrong, as Ill conduct and being angry are two words apart, though they can be interrelated.

[b]I am sorry, vedaxcool! I think you are just arguing for the sake of arguing as you have not made any sense so far in trying to prove my ASSERTION THAT THE QURAN ENJOINS MEN TO BEAT THEIR WIVES OR NOT SLEEP WITH THEM WHEN ANGRY WITH THEM. Your argument so far from this quote above is kind of saying that "angry " is different from "ill conduct and arrogance". Yes it is! I NEVER SAID that the Quran says the man should beat his wife when HE IS ARROGANT OR OUT OF ILL-CONDUCT or that the WIFE SHOULD BE BEATEN WHEN SHE IS ANGRY! My interpretation which I believe is clear for all to see is that WHETHER AS A RESULT OF THE WIFE'S ARROGANCE OR ILL-CONDUCT (WHICH WILL MAKE THE MAN ANGRY), HE IS ALLOWED TO BEAT HIS WIFE OR REFUSE HER SEX, BY ALLAH'S COMMANDMENT.

It does not make sense to say that the QURAN SAYS TO BEAT YOUR WIFE/REFUSE HER S*E/X FOR AN ACT OF ARROGANCE OR ILL-CONDUCT WHICH YOU DO NOT MIND! If she acts IN A WAY THAT YOU DO NOT LIKE (ILL-CONDUCT/ARROGANCE), THE QURAN COMMANDS YOU TO BEAT HER IF SHE DOES NOT RESPOND TO ADMONISHMENT OR YOUR REJECTION(sexwise)!

What exactly was the point of your argument and denial? That the word angry does not appear in the text? Anybody who beats his wife for doing something that makes him happy/something that does not make him angry/something he couldn't care less about REALLY REALLY NEEDS TO GET HIS HEAD CHECKED!

Now, are you still confident that the Quran tells you to beat your wife when she has done NOTHING to ANGER you by the way of ARROGANCE AND/OR ILL-CONDUCT?    . . .  because I still stand with the interpretation that Allah says that muslims should only beat their wives if they make them angry (by way of arrogance/ill-conduct or whatever). I DON'T EVEN HAVE TO BE A MUSLIM TO UNDERSTAND THE SPIRIT(INTENTION) OF THIS WIFE-BEATING COMMANDMENT! IT DEFINITELY IS NOT TO ALLOW YOU TO BEAT YOUR WIFE ANYTIME YOU WISH FOR NO REASON AT ALL! [/b]

Again this is not in the qur'an, but one read the statement if at all/ if there is, note that The prophet did not believe in omens we read the statement below:

Definition of Omen: a circumstance, phenomenon, etc that is regarded as a sign of a future event, either good or evil. A phenomenon supposed to portend good or evil
The creation, maintenance and eventual destruction of the universe and its contents are by Allah’s command, and both good and bad occur according to Allah’s will. However, man has always wondered “Is there any way of knowing before hand whether good times or bad times are coming?” For, if there is a way of knowing ahead of time, misfortune could then be avoided and success could be ensured.
Pre-Islamic Arabs used to consider the direction in which birds and animals moved to be a sign of impeding good or bad fortune and would plan their lives around such signs. The practice of reading good and bad omens in bird and animal movements was referred to as Tiyarah
Prophet said “Whoever does Tiyarah, or has it done for himself, … is not one of us” (Tirmidhee). That means, he is not a Muslim.
Abdullaah ibn ‘Amr ibn al ‘Aas reported that the Prophet (PBUH) said,”Whoever is prevented from doing something by Tiyarah, has committed shirk.” The companions asked, “What is its atonement?” He replied, “Say: ‘Allaahumma laa khayra illaa khayruk wa laa Tayra illaa Tayruk wa laa elaaha ghayruk.’ (‘Oh Allah, there is no good except Your good, nor birds except Yours, and there is no god beside You’).”  (Collected by Ahmed and at-Tabaraanee)
There are many forms of Omens: Black cats, knock on wood, Friday the 13th, etc
In Islam, only Allah has absolute knowledge of everything and knows the secrets of tomorrow. Allah does not reveal the secret of tomorrow to any man except His prophets, as needed.
Pls point were omen was used in this hadith, again this proves your usual inclination to lie at will when the situation favors it, as the hadith has nothing to do with omen and it is very much easy to understand, as we can all see the kinds of behavior women of this day invovle in all in the name of God knows what.


Daftom I further explained that the hadith started with If at all there is bad omen.  .   .  ,hence inessence it is saying there is non, it jst like if i say if At all seyi is mad then she would be found in an assylum, this simply gives a notion that she is not arctually mad, hence the statement the prphet made was more like saying there are no such things as omen, as the other hadiths in my quote proved it. And being a cassava eating Liar u initially claimed that ALLAH revealed to Muhammad that women are omen, rather than even accept that u are mistaken in your initial assertion u walk on that the kingdom of Christ will always heartily accepts a liar doing it's cause? That indeed is a pity.

[b]First, you say omen can be good or bad and then go on to give me examples of BAD OMENS only, and not sparing me all that unecessary arabic which has NOTHING to do with WHETHER MOHAMMED SAID WOMEN WERE OMENS OR NOT; then you go on to say the prophet said 'IF AT ALL THERE IS BAD OMEN' which you claim means that THERE IS NO OMEN somehow FORGETTING that it is recorded in verse 30 that EVIL OMEN IS IN THE WOMEN, THE HOUSE AND THE HORSE! Did you refuse to paste the relevant verses that I quoted on purpose?  I repeat tehm below for you AND TEHY ARE FROM THE QURAN:

4. "Women are omens" (SAHIH BUKHARI, BOOK 62 (Wedlock, Marriage Nikaah))

30 'Narrated Abdullah bin 'Umar: Allah's Apostle said, "Evil omen is in the women, the house and the horse.'
31' Narrated Ibn 'Umar: Evil omen was mentioned before the Prophet: The Prophet said, "If there is evil omen in anything, it is in the house, the woman and the horse."
32 ' Narrated Sahl bin Sad: Allah's Apostle said, "If at all there is bad omen, it is in the horse, the woman, and the house."
33 ' Narrated Usama bin Zaid: The Prophet said, "After me I have not left any affliction more harmful to men than women."

[/b]

General Hypocrite you were the same person that said it is alright for your son to call you woman and assert that what joins me and you together following the example of Jesus, despite the fact that his mum bore insults on his account and also faced pain(pls follow the link and u will be surprised how this munafiq is as shameless as a unclothed mad woman in the street https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-527852.320.html#msg7367475) in carrying Jesus and suckling him. Now on the affliction cliam, u are poorly knowledgeable enough to understand simple things, as the afliction means Trial that men face on the account of women, look at how the world have commercialze women in a bid to sell stuff imagine how ridicules it has become using a woman to advertize shaving stick for men! this is the kind of affliction it refers to, women are being used as tools for spreading indecency and immorality and over desensitization of people, the affliction refers to the role womam play knowingly or unknowingly in the devil's spread of evil,                                                                                                       
and again men are easily manipulated by women into doing wrong well due to the weakness in most men, for example seyi tells mr. Brown, isn't it your mate that is driving hummer? and u Brown claim that you are a director, don't u see the cars other directors are driving, in other words Mr. Brown is mostly likely to comply to seyi insults if it continues. Azs for suicide bombings what is the percetage of men that arfe invovle in it? not too intellligent, just an insignificant few. And again we should ask seyi for the records whether it is acceptable for Jesus to call his mum woman, contrast to the nt the Qur'an writes this about Jesus and his mum "And He (God Almighty) hath made me (Jesus) kind to my mother, and not overbearing or unblest" (19:31)." now the shameless author of the NT wrote that Jesus spoke rudely to his mum, what a pity you people are bereft of understanding.

You say that 'affliction' (in the context of that verse) means 'trial that men face on account of women'. Let us try to fit your definition into the scripture:

33 ' Narrated Usama bin Zaid: The Prophet said, "After me I have not left any affliction more harmful to men than women."

It will read something like:

33 ' Narrated Usama bin Zaid: The Prophet said, "After me I have not left any [color=#770077]'trial that men face on account of women' more harmful to men than women."[/color]

NONSENSE! PLEASE, TRY AGAIN! Besides, I did not write the Quran translations, MUSLIMS DID!

As regards the second part(demarcated with the space) of your quoted response above: You are the one who has a problem with what the NT author wrote and disputes it! I don't dispute that Jesus used the word 'woman'(the original word could have been used as mrs/madam/ma), and it doesn't bother me as MY SALVATION IS NOT BASED ON THAT WORD BUT HIS BLOOD; and I doesn't bother me what the Quran says about its own Jesus because he is NOT THE ONE I KNOW! If you prefer the QURAN'S JESUS and what it records of him, I personally have no probs with that; Just let me hold on to the BIBLE'S JESUS and what it records of him! it I hope that settles it!

Olodo, this is what I wrote:

LIFE GOES BEYOND CRAMMING WHAT OTHER PEOPLE WRITE/SAY. YOU NEED TO GET INTO THE MIND OF THE WRITER/SPEAKER THROUGH WHAT THEY HAVE WRITTEN, AND UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY HAVE WRITTEN IN LIGHT OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES, WHICH ALSO INCLUDES THEIR OTHER WRITINGS.

You need to let go of the 'reading without understanding' habit that has grown with you!


STILL EDITING  . . .  PLS LET ME FINISH!

seyibrown:

vexdacool,
Did CHRIST PRACTICE/PREACH/TEACH SEXUAL IMMORALITY? The answer is NO, and that MAKES YOU A LIAR in saying that Sexual Immorality has everything to do with Christ. Show me where in the Bible he committed Sexual immorality if you can !

vedaxcool:

Mud-glutton, your belief that he has paid the debt for sin committed and uncommitted is what is fueling all sort of sin as you like behavior amongst you drunken misfits who claim piety without being pious.

Just when I was thinking you would give me Bible verses in support of your claims that 'Jesus has everything to do with sexual immorality', YOU CHICKEN OUT IN SHAME AND EMBARASSMENT!

seyibrown:

vexdacool,
Did Mohammed on the other hand practice sexual immorality? YES, HE DID, and this is backed by Islamic scriptures that tell of his many sexual partners, forced and willing!

vedaxcool:

Sweetnecta reply is enough for the wise

YOU COULD HAVE AT LEAST GIVEN A BOLD ANSWER TO DISPROVE MY CLAIM SINCE I MIGHT JUST NOT FIND PROOF IN THE QURAN AND HADITHS JUST LIKE YOU DID NOT FIND PROOF TO YOUR CLAIM IN THE BIBLE!

Cassava eating fool! point where he resoundingly condemned polygamy, Mrs. Religion by conjecture, not this condemnation of divorce. This same Jewish tradition that Jesus followed as we read Jesus was circumcised. Deluded souls indeed best describes you. In addition u claimed that monogamy was the plan of God right from Adam, right? but you low intelligence failed u as u did not add that Inbreeding was allowed by God, as Adam children married each other, the question is why is it now a taboo for any one to talk of marrying his sister? or are you saying the opposite? PLs explain if ye are truthful. Because this would mean God's plan was to allow brother - sisters marriage also. your intelligence is barely capable of matching my superior arguments.

[b]Colossians 2:8 (King James Version)

8Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, [color=#990000]after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.[/color]

Now let me repeat my earlier response:

Again, Sorry, what was the question again? Stop swallowing maggots first; start drinking milk and you will then grow teeth fit for meat. Sexual immorality has nothing to do with Christ. It is one Man and one woman as it was in the garden of Eden and Jesus referred to that fact in Matthew 19: 3 -12. No man loves his wife so much that he marries another one, or loves his wife so much that he demands faithfulness from her but he himself is not faithful to her.  . . .  and you did rightly say 'JEWISH TRADITION', it was their practice to marry more than one woman instead of following GOD'S ORIGINAL PLAN OF ONE EVE TO ONE ADAM! Enjoy your four wives (many sexual partners ) and let the sheep of Christ enjoy their one wife!

GOD GAVE ADAM ONE EVE; SUBSEQUENT MEN TOOK MULTIPLE WIVES FOR THEMSELVES! God's plan or man's tradition: YOUR CHOICE! BTW, God COMMANDED Abraham as regards circumcision and his descendants followed it (before and after Jesus)! DID GOD COMMAND ADAM TO HAVE ANOTHER WOMAN ALONGSIDE EVE?

Your SUPERIOR ARGUMENTS! I 'DOFF' MY TRASHCAN'S LID FOR YOU ON ITS BEHALF! [/b]


PLS LET ME FINISH . . .  STILL EDITING

I know to you fuller explanation means clarifictaion, Pity as the Qur'an refutes the numerous imbecilities of the bible, fuller explanation is  more than clarifying them, like when u cretins claim Jesus is the begotten son of God auzobillah, the Qur'an says auzobillah, God has no need for children, clear refutation of falsehood.

So you now AGREE that the Quran does CLAIM THAT IT 'CLARIFIES'(and even does more than that) THE 'REVELATIONS/BOOKS' THAT WENT BEFORE IT? What was all the earlier argument against for? 

Children of Isreal does not include the you Christians, further more explains simply gives us the understanding that it gives the right point of view that the diputing children of Isreal are berift off, which is more than clarifying, it gives the truth just like in the when Jesus calls his mum woman did the Qur'an clarifies it and say he meant to say Jureman? No it refutes such notions by stating categorically that Jesus was too humane to call his mum woman. Again your nonesense interpretation falls flat on your face.

Here, Your SUPERIOR INTELLECT stops you from being able to read AND UNDERSTAND  Quran 10: 26 in connection with Quran 10:37! and that which you already agree with!


STILL EDITING  . . . PLES LET ME FINISH

Liar! Liar!! tell the truthas this ws your claim:

Quote from: seyibrown on December 24, 2010, 12:12 AM
[b]The same way you usually prove things? Prove my shalanga! Or the same way the Quran 'clarifies and confirms' what was sent through Moses and Jesus? Siddon for there. It is clear to all who do not call darkness light that the [b]Quran actually mostly commands people to do the opposite of Moses and Jesus!

Ode, quote what the new testament says about this, instead of this foolishness u are exhibiting, wheren't u complaining that Islam is unfair for not letting a woman return to her husband after being divorced despite if she wants to return to her? and sweetnecta explanation suffice:


Quote from: Sweetnecta on December 31, 2010, 12:10 AM
A wife and her husband are allowed to marry each other 3 times before the woman must be forbidden to the man, not being able to remarry her as he did in the previous 2 remarriages. There is wisdom in it and in marriage processes. You are a married woman, you should know how in time the hearts are attached, and divorce becomes a very bitter pill, though it rather be taken instead of fatal attraction.

[b]Like I presented in my earlier post: From the OT, It is an abomination before the Lord for A WOMAN TO GO BACK TO HER FORMER HUSBAND AFTER HAVING BEEN MARRIED TO ANOTHER MAN. The Quran which claims to confirm and clarify the Bible, says that the a woman MUST CONSUMMATE MARRIAGE WITH ANOTHER MAN BEFORE SHE CAN GO BACK TO HER FORMER HUSBAND! The b ible says she cannot go back having been 'known' by someone else, the Quran says she has to be 'known' by someone else! If you still do not SEE THE THAT THE QURAN LITERALLY COMMANDS THE OPPOSITE HERE, Go back and get a refund from all the schools you have ever attended, western or Islamic! 

While the NT condemns Divorce, It is not the subject of discussion here, and neither have I COMPLAINED 'that Islam is unfair for not letting a woman return to her husband after being divorced despite if she wants to return to her'. I mentioned this 'practice' in reference to the Qurans' claims of 'confirming and clarifying' the books/revelation that went before it! It is about what the Quran claims to confirm and clarify, not what I did or did not complain about. I am not in the habit of denying what my Bible says! [/b]

seyibrown:

In the OT, thieves are to RESTORE FIVE TIMES what they stole; Islam AMPUTATES the thief! The OT principle is for property theft be repaid with property, The Quran TAKES AWAY AN IMPORTANT PART OF THE THIEF'S LIFE and adds to his burden FOR LIFE by taking away his Hand or Leg, DESTROYING part of him! The Bible tells me that the THIEF (DEVIL) HAS COME TO STEAL, KILL & DESTROY! The devil's main purpose is to KILL MAN before he CAN RECONCILE WITH HIS CREATOR! Anyone, institution, organisation that robs a man of the opportunity to reconcile with God is OF THE DEVIL!

vedaxcool:

Ode do u know the meaning of opposite? The opposite to the OT, will mean that the qur'an says stealing is right, but the cretin that u are confuses opposite with severity, the opposite of repaying five times when you stole is what? we need answers Seyibrown. And didn't the Ot state how Yew ah told the children of Isreal to wipe out entire people? are u suggesting that Yahweh is the devil? pls explain oh! Highly Ignorant woman who refuses to think.

Your SUPERIOR INTELLECT at play here again! You know that the PUNISHMENT is the focus here, not MORALITY, as you point out that I 'confuse opposite with severity' (however that was supposed to be really written)! The OT in the matter of theft, requires that the thief RESTORE to the owner but The Quran requires that the thief's limb (life) be TAKEN (STOLEN) from him! SEE ANY OPPOSITES YET? Looking at it from another angle, the OT prescribes PROPERTY PAYMENT for PROPERTY THEFT but the Quran prescribes LIFE (BLOOD/BODY PART) PAYMENT for PROPERTY THEFT! Now, HOW EXACTLY DOES THE QURAN CONFIRM OR CLARIFY MOSES here?

I tire for you!


STILL EDITING  . . . PLS LET ME FINISH

Olodo rapata! Who was the father of Adam?

God

who was the mother of ADAM?

God

according to seyi God is the father and mother of Adam. hence Adam is also the begoten son of God non sense indeed.

Adam is a Son of God! I AM A DAUGHTER OF GOD! JESUS IS 'THE' SON OF GOD!

have you heard pf cloning? do u know that it is possible for a man not to have any biological father or mother? kai! o what humans can do is hard for the biblical NT god to do? poor woman

Yes, ke! Ki lo fi mi pe!  [/i]My 'not so superior to vedaxcool's intellect'  still allows me to understand the News and do research! This same INTELLECT allows me to understand that these 'CLONERS' DO NOT MAKE ANY CLONES OUT OF ANY MATERIAL THEY MADE BUT OUT OF MATERIAL THAT GOD HAS ALREADY MADE! Dearest vedaxcool, IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS THE CLONERS THAT ACTUALLY CANNOT DO WHAT GOD HAS DONE AS THEY CANNOT MAKE ANYTHING WITHOUT USING SOMETHING THAT GOD HAS ALREADY MADE!

Jejune, Daftom, Mud-glutton , 'Cassava eating fool',  [i]ode

vedaxcool, you could really have driven your points (you didn't really make any, just went round and round in a circle, concluding that I WAS RIGHT TO BEGIN WITH ) home without using such COLOURFUL LANGUAGE! I beg your pardon! Please, be a GENTLEMAN! Stop expressing yourself like an agbero, omo gutter, omo ita, amugbo etc. Secondary school leavers should not even use those kind of words during intelligent discourse!

In short, GROW UP!  You don grow pass roforofo fight

Over to you!

^^^^^^^ seyi o. maybe what you need to factor in is the reality of human nature. ex(s) tend[s] to get attached to each other. the old adage applies; the person you are used to is easier to deal with than a new experience which you have no idea what you gonna get. Islam says in essence a man who is dumb enough to divorce his wife for the 3rd time, deserves not to be able to have her like that again, even if he wants her so desperately. let her try her fortune with someone else instead of the carelessness of the revolving door predicament in the previous marriage[s] bringing her to divorcee status 3 times already.

what you do not pay attention to in the OT that you are putting up as the grand marquee of "ideal" of marriage at all cost or if there is a divorce no chance of reconciliation is contrary to human nature where people long for the spouse known and want each other back, because the heart rules, overcoming the ego that led to the divorce in the first place. Islam allows the fool me once to extend to fool me thrice.

finally, dont forget that we say that the OT is corrupt, just as NT is. while Jesus of NT laid out a different law than the OT, the reality is that it is human to give each other another chance on top of another, reconciling and getting back together mending the marriage, rather than saying after first divorce, never to get back together or not to divorce at all. the reality, again is what you find to be in human nature; to err is human, the reason Islam allows the possibility of return, after another. after the grandiose of OT, we see in it that a woman who is married and lost her husband is passed on to a brother of the deceased, whether she wants it or not. she may have to wait until a little boy is old enough to mount her. she is at the mercy of a ruling that completely dehumanized her, and opposes the ruling of after divorce you are not to comeback together. Just imagine the humiliation of being stuck with men in a family that a widow will have to wait for the brother, even when he is already married and you said Eve was the only woman in the life of Adam, yet Jesus said all the OT must be fulfilled, without dropping a jot from it! who is not being sincere here?

the thing i like that seyi said is that no one can make anything except using what God provides. This is a Quranic verse in Surah Ghafir which says "Allahu qalaqa kun, Allahu ta ma lun": Allah is your Maker and He is the Maker of what you make. Seyi is on her to Islam. May Allah make her journey easy. Amin.

Sweetnecta:

^^^^^^^ seyi o. maybe what you need to factor in is the reality of human nature. ex(s) tend[s] to get attached to each other. the old adage applies; the person you are used to is easier to deal with than a new experience which you have no idea what you gonna get. Islam says in essence a man who is dumb enough to divorce his wife for the 3rd time, deserves not to be able to have her like that again, even if he wants her so desperately. let her try her fortune with someone else instead of the carelessness of the revolving door predicament in the previous marriage[s] bringing her to divorcee status 3 times already.

what you do not pay attention to in the OT that you are putting up as the grand marquee of "ideal" of marriage at all cost or if there is a divorce no chance of reconciliation is contrary to human nature where people long for the spouse known and want each other back, because the heart rules, overcoming the ego that led to the divorce in the first place. Islam allows the fool me once to extend to fool me thrice.

finally, dont forget that we say that the OT is corrupt, just as NT is. while Jesus of NT laid out a different law than the OT, the reality is that it is human to give each other another chance on top of another, reconciling and getting back together mending the marriage, rather than saying after first divorce, never to get back together or not to divorce at all. the reality, again is what you find to be in human nature; to err is human, the reason Islam allows the possibility of return, after another. [size=18pt]after the grandiose of OT, we see in it that a woman who is married and lost her husband is passed on to a brother of the deceased, whether she wants it or not. she may have to wait until a little boy is old enough to mount her. she is at the mercy of a ruling that completely dehumanized her, and opposes the ruling of after divorce you are not to comeback together. Just imagine the humiliation of being stuck with men in a family that a widow will have to wait for the brother, even when he is already married and you said Eve was the only woman in the life of Adam, yet Jesus said all the OT must be fulfilled, without dropping a jot from it! who is not being sincere here? [/size]

the thing i like that seyi said is that no one can make anything except using what God provides. This is a Quranic verse in Surah Ghafir which says "Allahu qalaqa kun, Allahu ta ma lun": Allah is your Maker and He is the Maker of what you make. Seyi is on her to Islam. May Allah make her journey easy. Amin.

It is very funny that this woman does not find it strange that people behaved such no, As I read Jesus Never condemed past your brother's wife round the family tradition. I usually laugh when she comes hyperventilating about teachings in Islam.

seyibrown:

@vedaxcool

[b]I am sorry, vedaxcool! I think you are just arguing for the sake of arguing as you have not made any sense so far in trying to prove my ASSERTION THAT THE QURAN ENJOINS MEN TO BEAT THEIR WIVES OR NOT SLEEP WITH THEM WHEN ANGRY WITH THEM. Your argument so far from this quote above is kind of saying that "angry " is different from "ill conduct and arrogance". Yes it is! I NEVER SAID that the Quran says the man should beat his wife when HE IS ARROGANT OR OUT OF ILL-CONDUCT or that the WIFE SHOULD BE BEATEN WHEN SHE IS ANGRY! My interpretation which I believe is clear for all to see is that WHETHER AS A RESULT OF THE WIFE'S ARROGANCE OR ILL-CONDUCT (WHICH WILL MAKE THE MAN ANGRY), HE IS ALLOWED TO BEAT HIS WIFE OR REFUSE HER SEX, BY ALLAH'S COMMANDMENT.

It does not make sense to say that the QURAN SAYS TO BEAT YOUR WIFE/REFUSE HER S*E/X FOR AN ACT OF ARROGANCE OR ILL-CONDUCT WHICH YOU DO NOT MIND! If she acts IN A WAY THAT YOU DO NOT LIKE (ILL-CONDUCT/ARROGANCE), THE QURAN COMMANDS YOU TO BEAT HER IF SHE DOES NOT RESPOND TO ADMONISHMENT OR YOUR REJECTION(sexwise)!

What exactly was the point of your argument and denial? That the word angry does not appear in the text? Anybody who beats his wife for doing something that makes him happy/something that does not make him angry/something he couldn't care less about REALLY REALLY NEEDS TO GET HIS HEAD CHECKED!



Now, are you still confident that the Quran tells you to beat your wife when she has done NOTHING to ANGER you by the way of ARROGANCE AND/OR ILL-CONDUCT?    . . .  because I still stand with the interpretation that Allah says that muslims should only beat their wives if they make them angry (by way of arrogance/ill-conduct or whatever). I DON'T EVEN HAVE TO BE A MUSLIM TO UNDERSTAND THE SPIRIT(INTENTION) OF THIS WIFE-BEATING COMMANDMENT! IT DEFINITELY IS NOT TO ALLOW YOU TO BEAT YOUR WIFE ANYTIME YOU WISH FOR NO REASON AT ALL! [/b]

This was your statement:

seyibrown:

sweetnecta,

I would have bought that from[b] Allah but he also[b] said that MEN SHOULD BEAT THEIR WIVES and REFUSE TO SLEEP WITH THEM WHEN ANGRY WITH THEM[/b]. He also revealed to Mohammed that there were more Women in hell, that women are omens, the intelligence of a woman is half that of a man, Women cannot return to their husbands who divorced them UNLESS they first marry somebody else and sleep with that person! I also DO NOT WISH TO BE FORCED TO WEAR OR VEIL OR FORCED TO DO ANYTHING ELSE FOR THAT MATTER! Grin [/b]

to which I said

Like Jesus disciples in the NT u are bereft of understanding, as the word angry does not occur in the Qur'an. Now the use of angry instead of Ill conduct leaves us with the notion, that even in trivial matters a man can beat his wife, which is why when u use angry to deliberately misconstrue the verse. E.g. say seyi went to Mr.Brown and say I need money to buy attachment to show off, mr. Brown becomes angry and say I do not have money, you know that, accd.to your interpretation of the verse Mr. Brown is allowed to beat seyi, the question is those this count as a misconduct?

The use of anger like I said anger is not synomous with Ill conduct. You can maintain they are, and you and the drunken ghost you talk to can assert anger and ill conduct are the same thing, but anybody with sound common sense would know they are not. As the Qur'an says clearly Ill conduct insisting on a dubious interpretation is only a mark of deficient learning, when people like you deliberately use anger any sensible muslim must object as having been in contact with anti Islamic materials, wrong interpretations are usually the way Misguided individuals like yourself use to misrepresent Islam, as I have asserted anger gives us a whole lot of scenarios that would make the verse unacceptable. But u can continue to pretend you do notunderstand my gruse aginst using anger rather than Ill conduct, that is how intelligent u can be, as my very fisrt response asked Is that how you read it i the Qur'an.  And like this guy said:

Jon.Bee:

Seyi, Seyi,

Go ahead "interpreter",  Nairalanders can't comprehend simple, obvious and self-explanatory messages. Can they?

how true the statement is, in your bid to always foster your anti Islamic campaign, you deliberately distort issues to obtain your desired goals.  Who is more wicked than a man who invents a falsehood about ALLAH. Indeed non.

seyibrown:

First, you say omen can be good or bad and then go on to give me examples of BAD OMENS only, and not sparing me all that unecessary arabic which has NOTHING to do with WHETHER MOHAMMED SAID WOMEN WERE OMENS OR NOT; then you go on to say the prophet said 'IF AT ALL THERE IS BAD OMEN' which you claim means that THERE IS NO OMEN somehow FORGETTING that it is recorded in verse 30 that EVIL OMEN IS IN THE WOMEN, THE HOUSE AND THE HORSE! Did you refuse to paste the relevant verses that I quoted on purpose?  I repeat tehm below for you AND TEHY ARE FROM THE QURAN:

Like I said, you berift of proper learning experience, as 31 explains 30. period.

seyibrown:

You say that 'affliction' (in the context of that verse) means 'trial that men face on account of women'. Let us try to fit your definition into the scripture:

33 ' Narrated Usama bin Zaid: The Prophet said, "After me I have not left any affliction more harmful to men than women."

It will read something like:

33 ' Narrated Usama bin Zaid: The Prophet said, "After me I have not left any [color=#770077]'trial that men face on account of women' more harmful to men than women."[/color]

NONSENSE! PLEASE, TRY AGAIN! Besides, I did not write the Quran translations, MUSLIMS DID!

I dey laugh! I simply gave an interpretatgion of the hadith, if you cannot get that, don't blame me . Madam what is wrong with you? You quoted hadith and you are now claiming it is the Qur'an, kai, it is a pity because your first claim was that ALLAH revealed to Muhammad that . . ., that women are omens. . ., you were lieing as the statement is clearly Muhammad's PBUH statement, which I indicated to you right from my first response, yet you still due to your nature, refuse to accept correction, or even accept you were mistaken. then how can you even accept that your path is false. Pathetic Hiss.

seyibrown:

As regards the second part(demarcated with the space) of your quoted response above: You are the one who has a problem with what the NT author wrote and disputes it! I don't dispute that Jesus used the word 'woman'(the original word could have been used as mrs/madam/ma), and it doesn't bother me as MY SALVATION IS NOT BASED ON THAT WORD BUT HIS BLOOD; and I doesn't bother me what the Quran says about its own Jesus because he is NOT THE ONE I KNOW! If you prefer the QURAN'S JESUS and what it records of him, I personally have no probs with that; Just let me hold on to the BIBLE'S JESUS and what it records of him! it I hope that settles it!

Original what? madam why are you such a hypocrite? we do not need "could have" statements here, we need direct statement, in the thread which link I gave, you asserted that it does not matter how a child speaks to his mum when trying to correct her, now you are  samasaulting badly only to your deservice, we read woman what have i to do with thee? if for the sake of arguement we agree that the word ma occured right lets put it in context, Ma what have I to do with thee? the insult still remains. Since you say your salvation does not depend on how Jesus behaved to his mum, but yet you made all the fuss about people mum suckling them quote author=seyibrown link=topic=487580.msg7434874#msg7434874 date=1293727649]
vexdacool,
Was it an affliction to have given birth to you, suckled you for months, comforted you when you cried, taken care of you for a long time?  [/b]

[/quote]
n now because you god is found wanting then it is no more an issue it is called hypocrisy as if I said it is alright for a man to sleep with his daqughter you would say it is henious but if I say I read out of the bible and show iot to u, u will simply say I am cool with it, or give another moronic defense of it, i pity individuals like yourself whom cannot tell yourself simple truths.  from the forgoing we can say that it is alright to say that Jesus way of talking to his mum is very much ok to u and you children, being a guide to people like you and your children, the way he behaved seems not to concern u. I won't be surprised if that is how u talk to your mum. I wonder how someone is suppose to make it to heaven by being rude to his mum? Only seyi can explain.

[quote author=seyibrown link=topic=487580.msg7456048#msg7456048 date=1294096510]

LIFE GOES BEYOND CRAMMING WHAT OTHER PEOPLE WRITE/SAY. YOU NEED TO GET INTO THE MIND OF THE WRITER/SPEAKER THROUGH WHAT THEY HAVE WRITTEN, AND UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY HAVE WRITTEN IN LIGHT OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES, WHICH ALSO INCLUDES THEIR OTHER WRITINGS.

You need to let go of the 'reading without understanding' habit that has grown with you!

Obviously, your advise is for you alone, in addition, you need to let go of hypocrisy.



    * Sometimes I enter prayer and I intend to prolong it, but then I hear a child crying, and I shorten my prayer thinking of the distress of the child's mother.
          o Fiqh us-Sunnah, Volume 2, Number 51b

    * The best among you are those who are best to their wives.
          o Narrated in Ibn Majah, #1978, and Al-Tirmizi, #3895.
Falsehood by it nature is bound to fade.

seyibrown:

[b]Like I presented in my earlier post: From the OT, It is an abomination before the Lord for A WOMAN TO GO BACK TO HER FORMER HUSBAND AFTER HAVING BEEN MARRIED TO ANOTHER MAN. The Quran which claims to confirm and clarify the Bible, says that the a woman MUST CONSUMMATE MARRIAGE WITH ANOTHER MAN BEFORE SHE CAN GO BACK TO HER FORMER HUSBAND! The b ible says she cannot go back having been 'known' by someone else, the Quran says she has to be 'known' by someone else! If you still do not SEE THE THAT THE QURAN LITERALLY COMMANDS THE OPPOSITE HERE, Go back and get a refund from all the schools you have ever attended, western or Islamic! 

Pls when you quote what Moses taught in the OT not accd. to OT as your claims are that The Qur'an Contradicts Moses and Jesus Teachings, this ur swirling arguement are les sensible and inconsistent so simple quote us thi(e)se teachings of Moses and Jesus that you cliam the Qur'an contradicts. furthermore it is very "Smart?" using different  post as response to a previous Post this was the direct response to your post:
Quote from: seyibrown on December 24, 2010, 12:12 AM
The same way you usually prove things? Prove my shalanga! Or the same way the Quran 'clarifies and confirms' what was sent through Moses and Jesus? Siddon for there. It is clear to all who do not call darkness light that the Quran actually mostly commands people to do the opposite of Moses and Jesus! Grin . . . don't even think of asking me to prove it! Grin

Vedaxcool:Show were the word Clarifies was used in the Qur'an with regards to the torah and injel, And from all indications u are just another Paulish Liar in this thread always making allegations which are notr consistent with its prove,again I dare you, your Pastor to prove that the Qur'an commands Muslims to do opposites of what Moses and Jesus did, silly Liar! i hope fear has not overwelmed u? As even a goat in my Back yard will know that the Qur'an, hadiths aencourages muslims to do what is right, the ten commandments are very consistent with Qur'anic injuctions laws such as not stealing, back biting, defruading, commiting Aldultry etc and we read Jesus in the NT saying he has not come to abolish the comandments but to confirm them,instead the hypocrit in you claims his death Abolished every form of punishment in the OT, very pathetic indeed is the situstion oof one who has taken a servant to be his god, indeed there is no diety worthy of Worship except ALLAH and Muhammad PBUH is his messenger. The Jews rejected JEsus till date because of the one sensible reasoning "A jew can not be God to another jew" to jews Jesus is just another Jew, Moses is just another Jew, but to the unthinking Jesus(who claims to be a servant of God) became ajust as equal to God Auzobillah. Falsehood by it's nature is bound to fade

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-487580.192.html#msg7427044


I still dey Laugh! , see how you are manipulating things, to what ends . . . .,

seyibrown:

While the NT condemns Divorce, It is not the subject of discussion here, and neither have I COMPLAINED 'that Islam is unfair for not letting a woman return to her husband after being divorced despite if she wants to return to her'. I mentioned this 'practice' in reference to the Qurans' claims of 'confirming and clarifying' the books/revelation that went before it! It is about what the Quran claims to confirm and clarify, not what I did or did not complain about. I am not in the habit of denying what my Bible says! [/b]

Now you claim it is a practice, in other words what? are you trying to assert that they were not even sanctioned by God? or even moses? it is very funny how NT contradicts Moses "Practices" and that does not bother you, to you they are mere "Practice" then you have no case, if the NT contradicts the OT at will then what are you trying to demostrate and again i sai show us the Practice" of the NT divorce not using the OT, all this 419 behavior u display only makes we wonder whether you serve God or the devil? As the NT is also in the habit of Denying the OT, every accusation u raise points back at you.

seyibrown:

seyibrown:
vedaxcool:
Your SUPERIOR INTELLECT at play here again!   You know that the PUNISHMENT is the focus here, not MORALITY, as you point out that I 'confuse opposite with severity' (however that was supposed to be really written)! The OT in the matter of theft, requires that the thief RESTORE to the owner but The Quran requires that the thief's limb (life) be TAKEN (STOLEN) from him! SEE ANY OPPOSITES YET? Looking at it from another angle, the OT prescribes PROPERTY PAYMENT for PROPERTY THEFT but the Quran prescribes LIFE (BLOOD/BODY PART) PAYMENT for PROPERTY THEFT! Now, HOW EXACTLY DOES THE QURAN CONFIRM OR CLARIFY MOSES here? 

Pls what is the opposite of pay 5 times? looking for any intelligent Christian to answer. Pls any intelligent Christians should tell us what is the opposite of pay 5 times. And again help me ask seyi what the NT gives as the punishment for stealing, why is she running to the OT or did Jesus bring any teachings' .

I tire for you![quote][/quote]

Poor woman, I have tried hard to educate you but you prefer listening to a drunken ghost who lovese shayo.

Funny thing is that if you hard any atom of verbal reasoning, you would begin to question why u can hardly refer to the NT for any teachings instead you run to the OT, remember your allegation is that the Qur'an contradicts Moses and Jesus teachings.

Falsehood by its' nature is bound to fade.

seyibrown:



God

God

Adam is a Son of God! I AM A DAUGHTER OF GOD! JESUS IS 'THE' SON OF GOD!

Good ADAM is 'THE' SON of God hence all this talk about Jesus sonships is just a ruse.

seyibrown:

[b][i]Yes, ke! Ki lo fi mi pe!  [/i]My 'not so superior to vedaxcool's intellect'  still allows me to understand the News and do research! This same INTELLECT allows me to understand that these 'CLONERS' DO NOT MAKE ANY CLONES OUT OF ANY MATERIAL THEY MADE BUT OUT OF MATERIAL THAT GOD HAS ALREADY MADE! ;

Your inability to comprehend people statements usually baffles me, I wonder what kind of School did you go to? My innocent question was Scientist are able to Produce individuals that have no biological father, no father at all, your sicknening arguement is that since we cannot point at Jesus father then god is the father of Jesus, hence I simply said using your queer logic and poor intelligence, we should ask if Scietist who are able to clone(even though they use materials substance) and produce individuals without fathers then how on earth would someone claim that God couldn't have create Jesus without any father? poor thinking indeed

seyibrown:

D Dearest vedaxcool, IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS THE CLONERS THAT ACTUALLY CANNOT DO WHAT GOD HAS DONE AS THEY CANNOT MAKE ANYTHING WITHOUT USING SOMETHING THAT GOD HAS ALREADY MADE! [/b]

What I was saying is that they make individuals without father, it does not matter whether the use something or not? it is about that fact that using material substance they can make an individual without father, you on the other hand claims that Jesus must have a father, and further add that Father is god, now ALLAH reply to this nonsense thinking is that how can I have a son when I have no wife? it seems you agree with Billy Graham who says:
"The eminent Billy Graham from the United States of America dramatized this verse in front of 40,000 people in King Park, Durban, with his index finger sticking out and swinging his outstretched arm from right to left, he said: "And the Holy Ghost came and impregnated Mary!" On the other hand St. Luke tells us the very same thing but less crudely."

well that remains a great shame to people like yourself who believe that Jesus must have a father. Jesus had no father. God is way above your faulty thinking to have sons. Madam you need to stop being deceitful in your arguement as you do so to your own peril. and it is something anybody can do, deliberately distorting people's arguement.

seyibrown:

seyibrown:
vedaxcool:
Just when I was thinking you would give me Bible verses in support of your claims that 'Jesus has everything to do with sexual immorality', YOU CHICKEN OUT IN SHAME AND EMBARASSMENT!

There is the saying 'Ignorance is a diesease' but I add 'Self deciet is a curse' as you deliberately misinterpreted my satement which was simple:

seyibrown:

vexdacool,


Obviously, u are the maggot eating cretin who is apperntly an expert in the art of eating maggot. And as for somking something, i only hope you are not a not-so-smart person as I have told u smoking is not in my book/not a way of doing things for me, bear parlour drunk, [size=18pt]Sexual imorality has everthing to do with Christ since cretins like yourself claim that u live under grace, u only need believe you are saved and then you are, did u claim that jesus died for your sins, or is it only a mere staement with no sensible meaning, as we understand you people to say that the blood of Jesus takes the responsibility of your sins.[/size] Good Muslims do not drink Alcohol, but both good and bad Christians drink Alcohol and lose their way under it influence, reminds me of my corper days, how many Christians were always drinking at night and misbehaving, to the extent of sleeping in Gutters let me not state other idiosities they did in camp under the influnece of Alcohol, in fact no muslim in the room i stayed drank Alcohol only the merry Christians out doing theirselves in the devil's foolery, yet you will see this same fellow claiming rightoeusness that exceed those of the pope, till this moment the Holy Ghost has no sensible advise to give this misguided band of Drunks, even HIV activist during my time on Camp often say of how Drunkeness has lead people to do stuffs that land them in the AIDS palaver,  The solution Islam has given muslims has Not Only saved us from disgraace but from also dishonor. As for your claims of me  proving things I have have not prove, I say this, have you taken time to go through this thread, I guess not, Being a fan of Alcohol, it seems u have a memory lapse problem, which is only part of the diesease you find in  Alcohol, Like the Zakir Niak once said, Alcohol is the only diesease sold in bottle". What a shame the Holy Ghost has not got that piece of Information. As for feigning pretence to verses from the Qur'an, I can only say that it is you usual dubious understanding of simple english(to me it is a deliberate mis-understanding) that usually earns u the Tag of Lying Hypocrit again I refer others to this link which shows how easily u fail to read and understand:
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-527852.352.html#msg7367475

I had explained my statement right from time, but again we did not expect serious thinking from you no, we only know that your delusions are better left to your shayo budies tounderstand. The question arises were u drinking or on drugs when you replied? Cowardice is what you do not me as that ws why u fled the thread https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-527852.320.html#msg7426623 and also https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-554674.64.html#msg7333462.

seyibrown:

seyibrown:
vedaxcool:
YOU COULD HAVE AT LEAST GIVEN A BOLD ANSWER TO DISPROVE MY CLAIM SINCE I MIGHT JUST NOT FIND PROOF IN THE QURAN AND HADITHS JUST LIKE YOU DID NOT FIND PROOF TO YOUR CLAIM IN THE BIBLE!

since you are going blind to the truth let me restate here again:

Sweetnecta:

If Seyibrown did feel that she lied in many things, in above post, she can make herself happy as she wishes. She has the right. However, I cant stomach this lie of her in the quote.

Not being married may be regarded as irresponsibility. Marrying more than 1 wife for a man cant be considered as immoral, since Abraham who the Jews, Christians and Muslims all clamor on, calling him their father in faith. Are you kidding me, Seyibrown?

And remarrying is not a bad idea, either for either man or woman, especially if they still have sexual desire, after marriage to former spouses. How a people act, if different from the book that the profess to be their religious guide, we call them hypocrites. Even a bad religion will still have hypocrites in it, so is the good religion.

A wife and her husband are allowed to marry each other 3 times before the woman must be forbidden to the man, not being able to remarry her as he did in the previous 2 remarriages. There is wisdom in it and in marriage processes. You are a married woman, you should know how in time the hearts are attached, and divorce becomes a very bitter pill, though it rather be taken instead of fatal attraction.

'It is very easy to behave foolish but very  difficult to accept wisedom'.

seyibrown:

[b]Colossians 2:8 (King James Version)

8Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, [color=#990000]after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.[/color]

This practices you sight earlier that the Qur'an contradicts? I still dey laugh! where on earth could u have contradicted yourself so many times if not on NL, I am usually satisfied proving you a Liar, as if there is any truth left in your heart, you definately would have a rethink on what the fruits of Christianity has offered u.

Now let me repeat my earlier response:

seyibrown:

GOD GAVE ADAM ONE EVE; SUBSEQUENT MEN TOOK MULTIPLE WIVES FOR THEMSELVES! God's plan or man's tradition: YOUR CHOICE! BTW, God COMMANDED Abraham as regards circumcision and his descendants followed it (before and after Jesus)! DID GOD COMMAND ADAM TO HAVE ANOTHER WOMAN ALONGSIDE EVE?

Aya! Where in the whole Genesis did God categorically state that Adam single wife is his original plan? Your knack for interpreting is misleading you far astray than the devil is, as the devil would simply say she is a goner let me not waste my time this failed state , as again you could not bring yourself to show were Jesus condemed polygamy, the whole OT does not condem polygamy, which would indicate that the Children of Isreal with all their closeness to God, where not guided to the right part. Again I asked the following question:

[size=18pt]1. we learn from the OT that adams Children intermarried, that is Brothers married sisters, was this also part of God's original plan? as we know that that that was their only option, Just as eve was Adam only option.
[/size]
But we are putting you to answer questions that are more than your intellectual capacity to answer, imagine asking a child to explain why people die or a blind man to describe how a OBJ look, they are bound to fail this simple questions. Just as you are going to fail this simple question.

Your SUPERIOR ARGUMENTS! I 'DOFF' MY TRASHCAN'S LID FOR YOU ON ITS BEHALF! [/b]
[quote][/quote]

Madam you are a very "Dirty person" dufffing a trash can, hope u do not use your dirty hands to cook for Mr. Brown(whatever his name is) -abi you wan poison am sef?Lol

@yummyUK well am sorry for the late reply i have been busy lately but am glad my brother sweetnecta answer you post already but i'll respond to some

yommyuk:

Numbers 20 told us how Moses struck the rock in disobedience to God at Kadesh making him a sinner

2 Samuel 11 also confirms David sin. Abraham was not perfect either by bowing to the will of Sarah and marrying a slave. Araon too bowed down to the pressure of the Israel by allowing them to make a golden calf - the list goes on

So can I throw this question to you, Did Jesus Christ sin? what about Mohammed?

Please get your brain working Alhaji.

Well disrupting business men and women from there business throwing the goods away does that count as a sin? if yes then he sin more to come

Numbers 20 told us how Moses struck the rock in disobedience to God at Kadesh making him a sinner

2 Samuel 11 also confirms David sin. Abraham was not perfect either by bowing to the will of Sarah and marrying a slave. Araon too bowed down to the pressure of the Israel by allowing them to make a golden calf - the list goes on

So can I throw this question to you, Did Jesus Christ sin? what about Mohammed? Please get your brain working Alhaji.
(Well disrupting business men and women from there business throwing the goods away does that count as a sin? if yes then he sin more to come)

Bros, what can I say
your ignorance knows no boundary
You are highly rated

Now you have no answer na insult exactly what am talking about

Honesty bro, this is no insult at all but the truth.

(Well disrupting business men and women from there business throwing the goods away does that count as a sin? if yes then he sin more to come)

If you find people buying and selling stuff in the mosque, what will u think or do if you were the caretaker?

Secondly, then calling Jesus reaction a sin? Hajji, u have scored 10/10 in my book for ignorance

^^^^ he could have ask them to leave the premises with respectful manner instead of displaying the Animal in him, i seek forgiveness from Allah

Sweetnecta:

^^^^^^^ seyi o. maybe what you need to factor in is the reality of human nature. ex(s) tend[s] to get attached to each other. the old adage applies; the person you are used to is easier to deal with than a new experience which you have no idea what you gonna get. Islam says in essence a man who is dumb enough to divorce his wife for the 3rd time, deserves not to be able to have her like that again, even if he wants her so desperately. let her try her fortune with someone else instead of the carelessness of the revolving door predicament in the previous marriage[s] bringing her to divorcee status 3 times already.

what you do not pay attention to in the OT that you are putting up as the grand marquee of "ideal" of marriage at all cost or if there is a divorce no chance of reconciliation is contrary to human nature where people long for the spouse known and want each other back, because the heart rules, overcoming the ego that led to the divorce in the first place. Islam allows the fool me once to extend to fool me thrice.

finally, dont forget that we say that the OT is corrupt, just as NT is. while Jesus of NT laid out a different law than the OT, the reality is that it is human to give each other another chance on top of another, reconciling and getting back together mending the marriage, rather than saying after first divorce, never to get back together or not to divorce at all. the reality, again is what you find to be in human nature; to err is human, the reason Islam allows the possibility of return, after another. after the grandiose of OT, we see in it that a woman who is married and lost her husband is passed on to a brother of the deceased, whether she wants it or not. she may have to wait until a little boy is old enough to mount her. she is at the mercy of a ruling that completely dehumanized her, and opposes the ruling of after divorce you are not to comeback together. Just imagine the humiliation of being stuck with men in a family that a widow will have to wait for the brother, even when he is already married and you said Eve was the only woman in the life of Adam, yet Jesus said all the OT must be fulfilled, without dropping a jot from it! who is not being sincere here?

the thing i like that seyi said is that no one can make anything except using what God provides. This is a Quranic verse in Surah Ghafir which says "Allahu qalaqa kun, Allahu ta ma lun": Allah is your Maker and He is the Maker of what you make. Seyi is on her to Islam. May Allah make her journey easy. Amin.

vedaxcool:

It is very funny that this woman does not find it strange that people behaved such no, As I read Jesus Never condemed past your brother's wife round the family tradition. I usually laugh when she comes hyperventilating about teachings in Islam.

vedaxcool, Somehow, your 'superior intellect' did not allow you reason that you should have allowed me to state my opinion on the matters raised by sweetnecta which was ADDRESSED TO ME and NOT YOU, VEDAXCOOL, BEFORE YOU DECIDED ON MY BEHALF THAT I WELCOMED WHAT YOU CALL 'BROTHR'S WIFE ROUND THE FAMILY' TRADITION ! In a way, you that you just shot yourself in the foot for reasons that I will bring up in answer to that post!




sweetnecta, on the post you addressed to me:

^^^^^^^ seyi o. maybe what you need to factor in is the reality of human nature. ex(s) tend[s] to get attached to each other. the old adage applies; the person you are used to is easier to deal with than a new experience which you have no idea what you gonna get. Islam says in essence a man who is dumb enough to divorce his wife for the 3rd time, deserves not to be able to have her like that again, even if he wants her so desperately. let her try her fortune with someone else instead of the carelessness of the revolving door predicament in the previous marriage[s] bringing her to divorcee status 3 times already.

what you do not pay attention to in the OT that you are putting up as the grand marquee of "ideal" of marriage at all cost or if there is a divorce no chance of reconciliation is contrary to human nature where people long for the spouse known and want each other back, because the heart rules, overcoming the ego that led to the divorce in the first place. Islam allows the fool me once to extend to fool me thrice.

finally, dont forget that we say that the OT is corrupt, just as NT is. while Jesus of NT laid out a different law than the OT, the reality is that it is human to give each other another chance on top of another, reconciling and getting back together mending the marriage, rather than saying after first divorce, never to get back together or not to divorce at all. the reality, again is what you find to be in human nature; to err is human, the reason Islam allows the possibility of return, after another.

[b]I did not write the OT or the NT! The Jews were commanded not to commit what was an abomination before the lord, defiling the land. In the NT, Jesus equates 'divorce and re-marriage to someone else' as adultery on account of both partners and stated the plan as it was in the garden of eden! All in all, both OT and NT views are that A COUPLE SHOULD STAY TOGETHER!

The OT, in saying that where a man should not get his wife back after he lets go of his wife and she has gone to someone else, IS SAYING THAT YOU SHOULD NOT SEND HER AWAY JUST BECAUSE OF YOUR INSECURITY/ANGER/LUST FOR ANOTHER WOMAN etc ONLY TO WANT TO HAVE HER BACK LATER! Which wan be 'wife ping-pong'? Jesus in the NT, gave of his authority that A RE-MARRIED(to another person) DIVORCEE IS AN ADULTERER/ADULTERESS. RECONCILING WITH AND RE-MARRYING THE ORIGINAL PARTNER IS NOT FORBIDDEN, IN FACT DOING SO WITHOUT HAVING 'JOINED ONESELF TO ANOTHER PARTNER' IS THE ONLY WAY TO NOT BE AN ADULTERER/ADULTERESS UPON DIVORCE!

The OT Law is not changed in the NT. It is basically the same but with THE ADDITTION OF GRACE FOR REPENTANCE AND FORGIVENESS FROM THE SIN OF ADULTERY THROUGH THE BLOOD OF JESUS IF WE FIND THAT WE HAVE ERRED![/b]


NOBODY FORCES XTIANS TO STAY IN A MARRIAGE THEY DO NOT WANT. JESUS HIMSELF SAID IN THIS MATTER ' THAT NOT ALL MEN CAN RECEIVE THIS SAYING'. We are called to follow the plan of God for 'ADAM AND HIS EVE' but if we find that we have fallen short of GOd's STANDARD, we have GRACE TO APPROACH HIM FOR MERCY! WE CAN ASK GOD TO HELP HEAL A TROUBLED MARRIAGE SO THAT WE CAN LIVE ACCORDING TO HIS PLAN!

I hope that it is clear that both the OT and the NT DO NOT CONDONE  the 'ping-ponging' of one's wife from one man to another, back to the first man, back to another man, back to the first man, back to another man AS IS MANDATED IN ISLAM !

after the grandiose of OT, we see in it that a woman who is married and lost her husband is passed on to a brother of the deceased, whether she wants it or not. she may have to wait until a little boy is old enough to mount her. she is at the mercy of a ruling that completely dehumanized her, and opposes the ruling of after divorce you are not to comeback together. Just imagine the humiliation of being stuck with men in a family that a widow will have to wait for the brother, even when he is already married and you said Eve was the only woman in the life of Adam, yet Jesus said all the OT must be fulfilled, without dropping a jot from it! who is not being sincere here?

[b]vedaxcool and sweetnecta,

You two, and I, being YORUBAS, WILL BE FOOLING OURSELVES TO SAY THAT THE 'TRADITION' OF 'BROTHER MARRYING HIS BORTHER'S WIDOW' DOES NOT EXIST IN YORUBALAND! IT DOES and DOES NOT HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH CHRISTIANITY! The three of us are descended from PEOPLE WHO PRACTICED THIS TRADITION!   If you IGNORANTLY CLAIM THAT IT IS A JEWISH THING, THEN WE ARE ALL DESCENDANTS OF THE ISRAELITES!   which will mean that the two of you being Muslims and always anti-judaism and xtianity HAVE BEEN KICKING YOURSELVES IN THE BALLS FOR SO LONG, IN ACTUALLY FIGHTING AGAINST YOUR ORIGINS!

A Man marrying his brother's widow IS NOT XTIAN DOCTRIN/PRACTICE/COMMANDMENT! It WAS PART OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAWS OF BIBLICAL ISRAEL and IT WAS AND STILL IS YORUBA TRADITION but which enlightened Yorubas DO NOT ENGAGE IN!  I happen to be one of those XTIANITY ENLIGHTENED YORUBAS!    

Xtian widows DO NOT WAIT TILL THEIR HUSBANDS BROTHERS ARE OLD ENOUGH TO TAKE THEM AS WIFE AND WE THREE KNOW IT! So why DID YOU EVEN BRING THE MATTER UP?  What has it got to do with the MANDATORY CONSUMMATION OF MARRIAGE WITH ANOTHER BEFORE A MUSLIM WOMAN IS ALLOWED BACK TO HER HUSBAND or DIVORCE IN XTIANITY OR JUDAISM?[/b]

seyibrown:

vedaxcool:
vedaxcool, Somehow, your 'superior intellect' did not allow you reason that you should have allowed me to state my opinion on the matters raised by sweetnecta which was ADDRESSED TO ME and NOT YOU, VEDAXCOOL, BEFORE YOU DECIDED ON MY BEHALF THAT I WELCOMED WHAT YOU CALL 'BROTHR'S WIFE ROUND THE FAMILY' TRADITION ! In a way, you that you just shot yourself in the foot for reasons that I will bring up in answer to that post!




sweetnecta, on the post you addressed to me:


I did not write the OT or the NT! The Jews were commanded not to commit what was an abomination before the lord, defiling the land. In the NT, Jesus equates '[size=18pt][b]divorce and re-marriage to someone else' as adultery[/size] on account of both partners and stated the plan as it was in the garden of eden! All in all, both OT and NT views are that A COUPLE SHOULD STAY TOGETHER!



The OT, in saying that where a man should not get his wife back after he lets go of his wife and she has gone to someone else, IS SAYING THAT YOU SHOULD NOT SEND HER AWAY JUST BECAUSE OF YOUR INSECURITY/ANGER/LUST FOR ANOTHER WOMAN etc[/b] ONLY TO WANT TO HAVE HER BACK LATER! Which wan be 'wife ping-pong'? Jesus in the NT, gave of his authority that A RE-MARRIED(to another person) DIVORCEE IS AN ADULTERER/ADULTERESS. RECONCILING WITH AND RE-MARRYING THE ORIGINAL PARTNER IS NOT FORBIDDEN, IN FACT DOING SO WITHOUT HAVING 'JOINED ONESELF TO ANOTHER PARTNER' IS THE ONLY WAY TO NOT BE AN ADULTERER/ADULTERESS UPON DIVORCE!

The OT Law is not changed in the NT. It is basically the same but with THE ADDITTION OF GRACE FOR REPENTANCE AND FORGIVENESS FROM THE SIN OF ADULTERY THROUGH THE BLOOD OF JESUS IF WE FIND THAT WE HAVE ERRED![/b]

Pls point were in Moses Law do you get the mobom Jumbo about Blood to wipe out adultery, as Moses Law punishes adulterers with stoning to death, hence again u people make  Jesus contradicts Moses Law.

seyibrown link=topic=487580.msg7464932#msg7464932 date=1294215998
NOBODY FORCES XTIANS TO STAY IN A MARRIAGE THEY DO NOT WANT. JESUS HIMSELF SAID IN THIS MATTER ' THAT NOT ALL MEN CAN RECEIVE THIS SAYING'. We are called to follow the plan of God for 'ADAM AND HIS EVE' but if we find that we have fallen short of GOd's STANDARD, we have GRACE TO APPROACH HIM FOR MERCY! WE CAN ASK GOD TO HELP HEAL A TROUBLED MARRIAGE SO THAT WE CAN LIVE ACCORDING TO HIS PLAN!

[/quote:


Very much Contradictory statements, here you are trying hard to assert that Divorcees  gave of his authority that A RE-MARRIED(to another person) DIVORCEE IS AN ADULTERER/ADULTERESS. But again you say nobody Forces a Xtian to stay in a Marriage they do not want, does that Nobody includes Jesus, since once a person divorceses he can no longer re-marry anybody except her/his ex -spouse, this will make divorce in Christianity an almost imposssible situation and hence contradicting Judaism/Moses Law which allows a woman to re-marry. In any  your usual inability to comprehend things hardly baffles me, as the response does not reply what sweetnecta wrote as sweetnecta referred to this verse:

27 Some of the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to Jesus with a question. 28 “Teacher,” they said, “[size=18pt]Moses wrote for us that if a man’s brother dies and leaves a wife but no children, the man must marry the widow and raise up offspring for his brother. 29 Now there were seven brothers. The first one married a woman and died childless. 30 The second 31 and then the third married her, and in the same way the seven died, leaving no children. 32 Finally, the woman died too. 33 Now then, at the resurrection whose wife will she be, since the seven were married to her?”[/size]

34 Jesus replied, “The people of this age marry and are given in marriage. 35 But those who are considered worthy of taking part in the age to come and in the resurrection from the dead will neither marry nor be given in marriage, 36 and they can no longer die; for they are like the angels. They are God’s children, since they are children of the resurrection. 37 But in the account of the burning bush, even Moses showed that the dead rise, for he calls the Lord ‘the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.’[a] 38 He is not the God of the dead, but of the living, for to him all are alive.”

39 Some of the teachers of the law responded, “Well said, teacher!” 40 And no one dared to ask him any more question

Now if Jesus did not come to abolish the law which Moses brought of which you claim the Qur'an contradicts, now I will ask, do you Christian follow the law moses wrote which Jesus never comdemed and from all indication Jesus even accepted as a valid Law. That was the question, this law you now write off as a tradition, this was the simple question that since I presumed wrongly that you won't find Qualms with it then tell us categorically do you accept this law as being valid to you Christians and to you in particular, would u accept such law applaicable to you if u -God forbid- if u were  in the position of the woman accept it. No Christian family have I heard of Practice such Religious obligations making the Charge of Disserting the Law and outright Infidelity to God.




[quote author=seyibrown link=topic=487580.msg7464932#msg7464932 date=1294215998
I hope that it is clear that both the OT and the NT DO NOT CONDONE  the 'ping-ponging' of one's wife from one man to another, back to the first man, back to another man, back to the first man, back to another man AS IS MANDATED IN ISLAM !

The old testament condoles that ping pong based on the above verse and it is that ping pong that I reffered to, which u are apparently ignorant of.


[quote author=seyibrown link=topic=487580.msg7464932#msg7464932 date=1294215998
[b][color=#990000]vedaxcool and sweetnecta,

You two, and I, being YORUBAS, WILL BE FOOLING OURSELVES TO SAY THAT THE 'TRADITION' OF 'BROTHER MARRYING HIS BORTHER'S WIDOW' DOES NOT EXIST IN YORUBALAND! IT DOES and DOES NOT HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH CHRISTIANITY! The three of us are descended from PEOPLE WHO PRACTICED THIS TRADITION!   If you IGNORANTLY CLAIM THAT IT IS A JEWISH THING, THEN WE ARE ALL DESCENDANTS OF THE ISRAELITES!   which will mean that the two of you being Muslims and always anti-judaism and xtianity HAVE BEEN KICKING YOURSELVES IN THE BALLS FOR SO LONG, IN ACTUALLY FIGHTING AGAINST YOUR ORIGINS!

, Now what you call Tradition I have sighted above was Not merely a tradition as it was the Law Moses wrote, and Jesus accepted it, Do Hausa people practice such? do Arabs Practice such? U as a Christian do you practice such? Pls your usual wiser by half tactics are ment for your Kids at home. As I have asserted it was simply Law which u Christians claim are too mordern/enlightened to follow or are merely traditions.

seyibrown link=topic=487580.msg7464932#msg7464932 date=1294215998
A Man marrying his brother's widow IS NOT XTIAN DOCTRIN/PRACTICE/COMMANDMENT! It WAS PART OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAWS OF BIBLICAL ISRAEL and IT WAS AND STILL IS YORUBA TRADITION but which enlightened Yorubas DO NOT ENGAGE IN!  I happen to be one of those XTIANITY ENLIGHTENED YORUBAS!    [/color:
[/quote]

Aya,  did Jesus say so? or the drunken Ghost is playing fiddlely Lies with you, the verse clearly indicated that Moses wrote, and jesus did not disprove that Moses wrote neither did he chastise the children of Isreal for such Laws. We know you are too enlighten to follow Moses Laws, u are too enlighten to stop eating Pork, you are too enlighten to avoid Alcohol, u are too enlighten to Practice Sister and brothers marriage being -using your technique of interpretation- God's? Original Plan just like Adam marrying Eve, we know . . . . ,


[quote author=seyibrown link=topic=487580.msg7464932#msg7464932 date=1294215998
Xtian widows DO NOT WAIT TILL THEIR HUSBANDS BROTHERS ARE OLD ENOUGH TO TAKE THEM AS WIFE AND WE THREE KNOW IT! So why DID YOU EVEN BRING THE MATTER UP?  What has it got to do with the MANDATORY CONSUMMATION OF MARRIAGE WITH ANOTHER BEFORE A MUSLIM WOMAN IS ALLOWED BACK TO HER HUSBAND or DIVORCE IN XTIANITY OR JUDAISM?[/b]

Xtians widow do not follow the Law of Moses which Christ said he did not come to abolish. Now that is some real beans.

yommyuk:

Honesty bro, this is no insult at all but the truth.

If you find people buying and selling stuff in the mosque, what will u think or do if you were the caretaker?

Secondly, then calling Jesus reaction a sin? Hajji, u have scored 10/10 in my book for ignorance

what score did you get in your book of Ignorance? or have you showed us were you read from history that Muhammad read the bible? I tire for una sef.

jesus sinned accrd. to the NT when he called reffered to Non - jews as dogs, ' do not cast the bread meant for the children for dogs' In Islam calling people dogs is very much a sin and racist. and that statement shows proudness that is unacceptable from a Prophet of God. again we read Jesus called his Mum woman and further asked her what Joins you and me together, it is the hight of disreespect to call your own mum a woman and hence a sin, so Jesus accd. to the Nt commited the sin of disrespect to his Mum.

vedaxcool:


Pls what is the opposite of pay 5 times? looking for any intelligent Christian to answer. Pls any intelligent Christians should tell us what is the opposite of pay 5 times. And again help me ask seyi what the NT gives as the punishment for stealing, why is she running to the OT or did Jesus bring any teachings'

the answer to this simple question is Not to pay at all. Simple Yet Madam re -interprete could not give us the opposite of this and want us to believe that the Qur'an says you should not pay 5 times when u steal an article in opposition to the Law. falsehood by its Nature its' bound to fade indeed it has always fade at every junction. . .



what was Jesus trying to prove?

Behold (have a look at) my hands and my feet, that it is I myself (I am the same fellow, man!): handle me and see; for A SPIRIT has no flesh and bones, as you see me have. . . And he showed them his hands and his feet." (HOLY BIBLE) Luke 24:39-40

Here we read Jesus was trying to convince his disciple that he was not dead because he was not spirit, in other words he was trying to assert that he did not die on the cross neither has he ressurrected and Paul is reported to have said:

"But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? And with what body do they come?…so also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption…It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit. Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual".

in essence Oga Paul was saying that dead people ressurect as spiritual bodies and from every indication Jesus was not spirirt because he had not died. Hence he had not died for any one's sin. More in due time will be said of Non Crucifixion.

what score did you get in your book of Ignorance? or have you showed us were you read from history that Muhammad read the bible? I tire for una sef.Jesus sinned accrd. to the NT when he called reffered to Non - jews as dogs, ' do not cast the bread meant for the children for dogs' In Islam calling people dogs is very much a sin and racist. and that statement shows proudness that is unacceptable from a Prophet of God. again we read Jesus called his Mum woman and further asked her what Joins you and me together, it is the hight of disreespect to call your own mum a woman and hence a sin, so Jesus accd. to the Nt commited the sin of disrespect to his Mum.

I am resisting the temptation that you are employing to move on from this thread, then u come up with the above.
I think u can do better than this.

Pls don't bashy demy me bro

Yummy no response to my post huh

yommyuk:

I am resisting the temptation that you are employing to move on from this thread, then u come up with the above.
I think u can do better than this.

Pls don't bashy demy me bro

Your Ignorance is universally acknowledged as you couldn't even provide evidence to your claim:

yommyuk:


[size=18pt]Before Islam, History told us that Mohammed read the bible. [/size]

Till date you have not shown us the history. I ask what would you score yourself in your book of Ignorance? I think 90/10.

Now again if I ask you what was this thread about, you will begin to mopp like a 2yr old. Let me give you some hints:

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-487580.0.html#msg6472196

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-487580.32.html#msg6518951

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-487580.32.html#msg6523731

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-487580.32.html#msg6546806

But aren't you too much of a no reader to ever comprehend what is happening?