Ibkhaleel001:
Islam does not condone womanizers.  Neither the Prophet was a womanizer, nor does Islam condone womanizing.  Islam honors marriage and considers its covenant to be a Solemn Covenant! (ميثاقا غليظا). 

Many anti-Islamics give this false claim against our beloved Prophet peace be upon him.   Below is a Noble Verse and its description that insha'Allah (if GOD is willing) will shed some light regarding this issue.  This Noble Verse is used a lot by the anti-Islamics to try to prove that Muhammad peace be upon him was a womanizer.

"Thou mayest defer (the turn of) any of them that thou pleasest, and thou mayest receive any thou pleasest: and there is no blame on thee if thou invite one whose (turn) thou hadst set aside. This were nigher to the cooling of their eyes, the prevention of their grief, and their satisfaction - that of all of them - with that which thou hast to give them: and God knows (all) that is in your hearts: and God is All-Knowing, Most Forbearing.  (The Noble Quran, 33:51)"

The following Saying is a description for the Noble Verse:

Aisha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: "I felt jealous of the women who offered themselves to Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) and said: Then when Allah, the Exalted and Glorious, revealed this: 'You may defer any one of them you wish, and take to yourself any you wish; and if you desire any you have set aside (no sin is chargeable to you)' (xxxiii. 51), I ('Aisha.) said: It seems to me that your Lord hastens to satisfy your desire.  (Translation of Sahih Muslim, The Book of Marriage (Kitab Al-Nikah), Book 008, Number 3453)"

As we clearly see from the Noble Verse and the Narration of our beloved Prophet's wife, Aisha, may Allah Almighty be pleased with her, our Prophet did not seek women.  They used to come to offer themselves to him for marriage. Allah Almighty wanted to make it more comfortable for our Prophet by allowing him to choose only the ones that he desired for marriage.

But the point of our Prophet peace be upon him seeking women and divorcing women as he pleased for his own sexual desire is a complete hoax.

Another false criticism against our beloved Prophet peace be upon him is in this narration:

Narrated 'Abdul 'Aziz: "Anas said, 'When Allah's Apostle invaded Khaibar, we offered the Fajr prayer there yearly in the morning) when it was still dark. The Prophet rode and Abu Talha rode too and I was riding behind Abu Talha. The Prophet passed through the lane of Khaibar quickly and my knee was touching the thigh of the Prophet . He uncovered his thigh and I saw the whiteness of the thigh of the Prophet. When he entered the town, he said, 'Allahu Akbar! Khaibar is ruined.  Whenever we approach near a (hostile) nation (to fight) then evil will be the morning of those who have been warned.' He repeated this thrice. The people came out for their jobs and some of them said, 'Muhammad (has come).' (Some of our companions added, "With his army." We conquered Khaibar, took the captives, and the booty was collected. Dihya came and said, 'O Allah's Prophet! Give me a slave girl from the captives.' The Prophet said, 'Go and take any slave girl.' He took Safiya bint Huyai. A man came to the Prophet and said, 'O Allah's Apostles! You gave Safiya bint Huyai to Dihya and she is the chief mistress of the tribes of Quraiza and An-Nadir and she befits none but you.' So the Prophet said, 'Bring him along with her.' So Dihya came with her and when the Prophet saw her, he said to Dihya, 'Take any slave girl other than her from the captives.' Anas added: The Prophet then manumitted her and married her." 

Thabit asked Anas, "O Abu Hamza! What did the Prophet pay her (as Mahr)?" He said, "Her self was her Mahr for he manumitted her and then married her." Anas added, "While on the way, Um Sulaim dressed her for marriage (ceremony) and at night she sent her as a bride to the Prophet . So the Prophet was a bridegroom and he said, 'Whoever has anything (food) should bring it.' He spread out a leather sheet (for the food) and some brought dates and others cooking butter. (I think he (Anas) mentioned As-SawTq). So they prepared a dish of Hais (a kind of meal). And that was Walrma (the marriage banquet) of Allah's Apostle."  (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Prayers (Salat), Volume 1, Book 8, Number 367)"

In this narration, we clearly see that our beloved Prophet peace be upon him:

1- Had the opportunity to keep the woman, Safiya bint Huyai, as a slave, but instead, he honored her, manumitted her, and married her, and she became his honorable wife instead of his slave.

2- Safiya bint Huyai was chief mistress of the tribes of Quraiza and An-Nadir.

Where do you see our beloved Prophet peace be upon him being a womanizer here? 

Yeah. Your prophet was not a womanizer but he married eleven women. He even snatched the woman from the poor guy. Haba!! Talk about covetousness. Isn't that a sin in your books?
Did she request to be married to him or he married her as a war booty. Prophet wey dey acquire slaves. That one na prophet?

Agboriotejoye:


Muhammad could copy from it because the book were available in Mecca and Medina. Bahira tutored Mohammed on Coptic Christianity. Kadijat's cousin was also a Christian. There were Jews in both Mecca and Medina in those days. So there is no way Muhammad will claim ignorance of the Torah and Bible as they were popular texts in his days. Have you ever wondered why all the main characters in the Quran were people of Jewish descent? The story of creation, of Noah, Abraham, Moses and even Jesus are similar to those found in the Torah and Bible. How come? Was Muhammad a Jew? What is his business with Moses, David, Joseph and other Jewish people? It's obvious he plagiarized those texts. How come he was looking to impose his religion on others. Mecca was a multi-religious society just like Nigeria is. Muhammad raised conflict simply because he wanted his brand of religion to be the dominant one. He converted their Kaabah to his. Their black stone he converted to his as well. Where is the mention of Kaabah or black stone in the Torah? Every evidence point to Muhammad plagiarizing the Jewish religion. Simple.

Apart from your number 1,7,8 and 9, I do not see anything worth responding to in your so-called contradictions. Those are errors of numbers which any individual can make. So to claim that proves the Torah/Bible is fake is a joke really because both texts never claimed to be revealed to the writers. Instead, they were accurate recordings of events by humans who tried to keep it as accurate as possible. Your Quran also became a subject of debate or have you never heard of burning of scrolls that did not align with the views of Bukhari? It is thus safe to say you are practicing Bukahri's religion and not Muhammad's.

1 John 5:7 was removed because of doubts in its interpretation, not whether it existed or not. Since the Greek words usually could take on multiple meaning, any such words which were unclear and whose context was also doubtful was usually removed. Note though that 1 John is a letter from Apostle John the Beloved to Jerusalem. It is not part of the Gospels of Jesus Christ so I do not see how removing anything from their tarnishes the Bible. Jesus said in John 14 that "I and my Father are one". He also said in the same chapter that "I am in the Father and he is in Me". So that settles that.

As for your number 7, it is not that Jesus Christ told his disciples that John is Elijah What Jesus said is Elijah has come and they have done to him what they will. Whereas, John said he is not Elijah. The question then is how is that a contradiction? If Jesus said John is Elijah, it would have been different. But it is generally accepted that Jesus was referring to John the Baptist as Elijah. So I wonder what exactly you see there as a contradiction. The fact is John came as a forerunner for Jesus. But he was in no way a product of reincarnation. If John was aware that he is Eijah, that will mean he was a reincarnation. Now let me ask. Do you Muslims believe in reincarnation? If you do show me in your books were reincarnation is written.
8. How exactly is a cross and a tree different? Are both not made from wood?
9. Jesus had not even ascended to heaven at the time he was speaking. He was answering Nicodemus who was wondering how one could be born again. The verse 11 says "We speak of what we know" then in 13 he says no one has ascended into heaven except he who comes from heaven. In other words. No one has been to heaven amongst them who were in that gathering except for him who came down from heaven. So Jesus was not making a general statement about ascension from heaven because he had not even ascended then. It's just like an American saying no one has been to America except I who came from America. Will that indicate he is saying no one has gone to America from Nigeria?

Quran declares all Bibles are corrupt.


When was the New Testament written??

The church thoroughly admits that NT is badly altered, and earliest copies of NT don't date before year 200. So not only the Aramaic original language of Jesus was never documented, hence his original sayings are permanently lost, but the Greek writings (a language Jesus never spoke) had been badly corrupted. Trinity and all its faulty analysis are based on writings that are totally off (different language and phrases spoken altogether) and utter nonsense.


Catholics tell Protestants that their religion is false because it was
originated in year 1507 by Martin Luther while the Catholic church
was original and is a continuation to what Jesus' apostles/disciples
built and preached. Protestants respond by demonstrating the great
deal of corruption and alteration done, and how the scriptures of
the Bibles' (plural) New Testaments were written 200+ years
after Jesus, and how the traditions are marred with corruption.
Muslims answer both polytheist trinitarian pagans by inviting them
to Islam, because Islam came to restore the original Faith of GOD
Almighty, and Islam is GOD Almighty's Divine Truth.

no one knows regarding the "Gospel of John":

Who wrote it.
How many people wrote it.
When it was written.
Where it was written.
Also, when one reads this gospel, he would immediately notice that it was not written by John himself. Christians say that it was John the Apostle writting about John the Baptist. The evidence in the quotes above clearly proves that this is a desperate lie! I submit to you that neither John wrote anything! Let us look at the following verses from the gospel:

"And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou? (From the King James Version Bible, John 1:19)"

"John answered them, saying, I baptize with water: but there standeth one among you, whom ye know not; (From the King James Version Bible, John 1:26)"

"For John was not yet cast into prison. (From the King James Version Bible, John 3:24)"

etc...

Whoever wrote the gospel, was he appointed or inspired by GOD Almighty? If yes, then who is that man? It can't be John for it is quite obvious from the above verses and many more throughout the gospel that John wasn't the original author. One has to be ridiculously biased and blind in faith to deny that.

kingxsamz:


I don't understand. Is this how questions are answered? I'm asking A and you're saying Z.

It's exactly how jokers and jokes should be attended to. The boring lifecycle of a joker is as seen below.


Interaction with chief joker: Does God exist?
Joker: No, never, rubbish, intelligence, science *&#@^~

Interaction with chief joker: Believe in God friend.
Joker: God is a murderer, rapist, genocide, evil commander, yes or no before I hang myself.

Interaction with chief joker: But how can a God that doesn't exist do all this?
Joker: Your bible is written by herdsman, roftlmao. (remembers the real life depression massaged by masturbation and games).

Agboriotejoye:


Yeah. Your prophet was not a womanizer but he married eleven women. He even snatched the woman from the poor guy. Haba!! Talk about covetousness. Isn't that a sin in your books?
Did she request to be married to him or he married her as a war booty. Prophet wey dey acquire slaves. That one na prophet?

Islamic critics tend to criticize Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) because he had more than four wives. They ask, "If the Quran limited each man to have 4 wives (Surah 4:3) then how come the Prophet was able to have more?"

Some people may see this as a privilege to the Prophet. However, with privileges did come restrictions as well.

Qiyam Al Layl (prayers at two third of the night) are not compulsory on Muslims, however they were compulsory on the Prophet.

Surah 17:79

And during a part of the night, pray Tahajjud beyond what is incumbent on you; maybe your Lord will raise you to a position of great glory.

This verse is directly addressed to the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). (See Tafsir of Ibn Kathir)

So here we see an example of God making exceptions to Prophet Muhammad in certain situations.


Back to the issue of the exception of why the Prophet was allowed to keep more than four wives. Well there was wisdom behind the marriage to each of the wives of the Prophet

His marriages were for mainly political reasons. If he married a woman from a tribe, then he'd save the Muslims bloodshed and battles with that tribe, and ultimately, that tribe would embrace Islam through this marriage.

Reminderz:

I said Qur'an

What's the difference? You read both and abide by their rules.

Ibkhaleel001:



Quran declares all Bibles are corrupt.


When was the New Testament written??

The church thoroughly admits that NT is badly altered, and earliest copies of NT don't date before year 200. So not only the Aramaic original language of Jesus was never documented, hence his original sayings are permanently lost, but the Greek writings (a language Jesus never spoke) had been badly corrupted. Trinity and all its faulty analysis are based on writings that are totally off (different language and phrases spoken altogether) and utter nonsense.


Catholics tell Protestants that their religion is false because it was
originated in year 1507 by Martin Luther while the Catholic church
was original and is a continuation to what Jesus' apostles/disciples
built and preached. Protestants respond by demonstrating the great
deal of corruption and alteration done, and how the scriptures of
the Bibles' (plural) New Testaments were written 200+ years
after Jesus, and how the traditions are marred with corruption.
Muslims answer both polytheist trinitarian pagans by inviting them
to Islam, because Islam came to restore the original Faith of GOD
Almighty, and Islam is GOD Almighty's Divine Truth.

no one knows regarding the "Gospel of John":

Who wrote it.
How many people wrote it.
When it was written.
Where it was written.
Also, when one reads this gospel, he would immediately notice that it was not written by John himself. Christians say that it was John the Apostle writting about John the Baptist. The evidence in the quotes above clearly proves that this is a desperate lie! I submit to you that neither John wrote anything! Let us look at the following verses from the gospel:

"And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou? (From the King James Version Bible, John 1:19)"

"John answered them, saying, I baptize with water: but there standeth one among you, whom ye know not; (From the King James Version Bible, John 1:26)"

"For John was not yet cast into prison. (From the King James Version Bible, John 3:24)"

etc...

Whoever wrote the gospel, was he appointed or inspired by GOD Almighty? If yes, then who is that man? It can't be John for it is quite obvious from the above verses and many more throughout the gospel that John wasn't the original author. One has to be ridiculously biased and blind in faith to deny that.

Quran can't have the moral stand to declare anything corrupt when it is a plagiarized text itself. How does all this your story change the plagiarized nature of Quran?
FYI, The gospel according to John was written by John The Beloved not The Baptist. The Epistle was also written by him. You are simply ignorant. Go and face your plagiarized text which commands you to cut off people's head.

Ibkhaleel001:
[s][/s]
Trash!!!

It pain am!

Agboriotejoye:


Quran can't have the moral stand to declare anything corrupt when it is a plagiarized text itself. How does all this your story change the plagiarized nature of Quran?
FYI, The gospel according to John was written by John The Beloved not The Baptist. The Epistle was also written by him. You are simply ignorant. Go and face your plagiarized text which commands you to cut off people's head.

Is the Bible a womanizer for allowing polygamy in NT and OT?

What about the Bible's Prophets' marriages?

When we read the Bible, we learn about some Prophets marrying many wives, even hundreds of wives in some cases. Let us look at some of the verses from the Old Testament:

In Exodus 21:10, a man can marry an infinite amount of women without any limits to how many he can marry.

In 2 Samuel 5:13; 1 Chronicles 3:1-9, 14:3, King David had six wives and numerous concubines.

In 1 Kings 11:3, King Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines.

In 2 Chronicles 11:21, King Solomon's son Rehoboam had 18 wives and 60 concubines.

And knowing that the Bible's Old Testament allowed before for men to have sex with girls who were at the age of 3, then it wouldn't surprise me that those Prophets who had 700 wives for instance, had many very young teenage girls before as their wives.





3- What about the X-Rated Pornography in the Bible?

When we read the Bible, we learn about some weird pornographic teachings that are certainly not appropriate for anyone with morals to read. Please visit X-Rated Pornography in the Bible to see the many pornographic verses in the Bible. You will read for instance, about Solomon's wife's vagina tastes like wine for him!

You will also see examples of Prophets sleeping with their neighbor's wives, such as the following:

David watches a woman bathe, likes what he sees, and "goes in unto her." Let us look at 2 Samuel 11:2-4

Agboriotejoye:


It pain am!

I will keep disgracing you malo!

How come Leviticus 20:10 was compromised in the Bible and was never applied to King David?! Didn't King David know about this law? Yet, the Jews use his star as their holy symbol; the David Star, and the Christians call Jesus his son; "Son of David".

It seems to me quite clearly that the Bible is nothing but a compromised corrupted Book as Jeremiah 8:8, 2 Samuel 11:2-4 and Leviticus 20:10 suggest.

If the strong eats the weak in the Bible, then what moral and wisdom are we to learn from this book?

Adisa89:

What's the difference? You read both and abide by their rules.

Leemao.. theres a big difference.. Quran is authentic...no fabricated lies.. but in Hadiths, there are ones which has been fabricated by enemies of Islam.. so any Hadiths you see that goes against the Quran is fabricated..peace

Ibkhaleel001:

Islamic critics tend to criticize Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) because he had more than four wives. They ask, "If the Quran limited each man to have 4 wives (Surah 4:3) then how come the Prophet was able to have more?"

Some people may see this as a privilege to the Prophet. However, with privileges did come restrictions as well.

Qiyam Al Layl (prayers at two third of the night) are not compulsory on Muslims, however they were compulsory on the Prophet.

Surah 17:79

And during a part of the night, pray Tahajjud beyond what is incumbent on you; maybe your Lord will raise you to a position of great glory.

This verse is directly addressed to the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). (See Tafsir of Ibn Kathir)

So here we see an example of God making exceptions to Prophet Muhammad in certain situations.


Back to the issue of the exception of why the Prophet was allowed to keep more than four wives. Well there was wisdom behind the marriage to each of the wives of the Prophet

His marriages were for mainly political reasons. If he married a woman from a tribe, then he'd save the Muslims bloodshed and battles with that tribe, and ultimately, that tribe would embrace Islam through this marriage.

Imagine the shamelessness. Your prophet was indulging in contract marriage and hyper-gamy and you're proud to say it.
I hope you won't come and criticize yahoo boys who marry old women for US citizenship tomorrow o

Besides, why will the prophet be given exception? Does that mean that he is above the laws given to him to mankind? What makes him above the law? If he who received the law will not keep it, why should I keep it? Have you asked yourself this before? Your prophet don run you street boss.

Agboriotejoye:


It pain am!

Hilarious indeed!



Any pornographic and drunkard bible follower, the book of women's vaginas and breasts taste like "wine", would've enjoyed her for at least one night and then divorced her, that if he would even divorce her!


Thank you Mr. Dull xtian for helping me prove the Beauty of our beloved Prophet Muhammad!



Again, Prophet Muhammad's wives were mostly divorced and widow women. His marriages were for mainly political reasons. If he married a woman from a tribe, then he'd save the Muslims bloodshed and battles with that tribe, and ultimately, that tribe would embrace Islam through this marriage.

Agboriotejoye:


Imagine the shamelessness. Your prophet was indulging in contract marriage and hyper-gamy and you're proud to say it.
I hope you won't come and criticize yahoo boys who marry old women for US citizenship tomorrow o

Besides, why will the prophet be given exception? Does that mean that he is above the laws given to him to mankind? What makes him above the law? If he who received the law will not keep it, why should I keep it? Have you asked yourself this before? Your prophet don run you street boss.

Can a woman be forced into marriage in Islam?

Absolutely not! Let us look at what Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him said regarding this issue:

Abu Huraira (Allah be pleased with him) reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as having said: "A woman without a husband (or divorced or a widow) must not be married until she is consulted, and a virgin must not be married until her permission is sought. They asked the Prophet of Allah (may peace be upon him): How her (virgin's) consent can be solicited? He (the Holy Prophet) said: That she keeps silence. (Translation of Sahih Muslim, The Book of Marriage (Kitab Al-Nikah), Book 008, Number 3303)"

Allah Almighty said in the Noble Quran: "O ye who believe! Ye are forbidden to inherit women against their will. Nor should ye treat them with harshness, that ye may take away part of the dower [money given by the husband to the wife for the marriage contract] ye have given them, except where they have been guilty of open lewdness; on the contrary live with them on a footing of kindness and equity. If ye take a dislike to them it may be that ye dislike a thing, and God brings about through it a great deal of good. (The Noble Quran, 4:19)"

The following Saying is an explanation to Noble Verse 4:19:

Narrated Abdullah ibn Abbas: "About the Qur'anic verse: 'It is not lawful for you forcibly to inherit the woman (of your deceased kinsmen), nor (that) ye should put constraint upon them.' When a man died, his relatives had more right to his wife then her own guardian. If any one of them wanted to marry her, he did so; or they married her (to some other person), and if they did not want to marry her, they did so. So this verse was revealed about the matter. (Translation of Sunan Abu-Dawud, Marriage (Kitab Al-Nikah), Book 11, Number 2084)" So according to Noble Verse 4:19, a woman can not be forced into marriage by any mean.

Narrated AbuHurayrah: "The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: An orphan virgin girl should be consulted about herself; if she says nothing that indicates her permission, but if she refuses, the authority of the guardian cannot be exercised against her will. (Translation of Sunan Abu-Dawud, Marriage (Kitab Al-Nikah), Book 11, Number 2088)"

Agboriotejoye:


Imagine the shamelessness. Your prophet was indulging in contract marriage and hyper-gamy and you're proud to say it.
I hope you won't come and criticize yahoo boys who marry old women for US citizenship tomorrow o

Besides, why will the prophet be given exception? Does that mean that he is above the laws given to him to mankind? What makes him above the law? If he who received the law will not keep it, why should I keep it? Have you asked yourself this before? Your prophet don run you street boss.

Isaiah 65 & 66 alone declare Christianity to be a false religion!

Ibkhaleel001:
Is the Bible a womanizer for allowing polygamy in NT and OT?

What about the Bible's Prophets' marriages?

When we read the Bible, we learn about some Prophets marrying many wives, even hundreds of wives in some cases. Let us look at some of the verses from the Old Testament:

In Exodus 21:10, a man can marry an infinite amount of women without any limits to how many he can marry.

In 2 Samuel 5:13; 1 Chronicles 3:1-9, 14:3, King David had six wives and numerous concubines.

In 1 Kings 11:3, King Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines.

In 2 Chronicles 11:21, King Solomon's son Rehoboam had 18 wives and 60 concubines.

And knowing that the Bible's Old Testament allowed before for men to have sex with girls who were at the age of 3, then it wouldn't surprise me that those Prophets who had 700 wives for instance, had many very young teenage girls before as their wives.





3- What about the X-Rated Pornography in the Bible?

When we read the Bible, we learn about some weird pornographic teachings that are certainly not appropriate for anyone with morals to read. Please visit X-Rated Pornography in the Bible to see the many pornographic verses in the Bible. You will read for instance, about Solomon's wife's vagina tastes like wine for him!

You will also see examples of Prophets sleeping with their neighbor's wives, such as the following:

David watches a woman bathe, likes what he sees, and "goes in unto her." Let us look at 2 Samuel 11:2-4

Lol. You are just latching unto the OLD TESTAMENT to justify your prophet's shenanigans. Do you realize it's called OLD for a reason? Show me where in the New Testament polygamy was endorsed. Your prophet's high libido and crave for sex led him to even make claims of 72 virgins in heaven and a perpetual erection.
Yet you are here complaining of pornography? Which bigger pornography exists than your Al-Jannah with orgy of 72 women to one man. Even your Allah self go watch porn tire.
Sorry. David was not a prophet. It is one of the effects of plagiarism by the illiterate mohammed. He was a king in Israel and he never claimed God commanded him to steal another man's wife like Muhammad. He acknowledged it was a sin and repented. Unlike your Muhammad who gave himself exceptions!!

Ibkhaleel001:
Isaiah 65 & 66 alone declare Christianity to be a false religion!

How does that solve your prophet's covetousness and high libido?

Ibkhaleel001:
I will keep disgracing you malo!

Ho[b]w come Leviticus 20:10 was compromised in the Bible and was never applied to King David?! [/b]Didn't King David know about this law? Yet, the Jews use his star as their holy symbol; the David Star, and the Christians call Jesus his son; "Son of David".

It seems to me quite clearly that the Bible is nothing but a compromised corrupted Book as Jeremiah 8:8, 2 Samuel 11:2-4 and Leviticus 20:10 suggest.

If the strong eats the weak in the Bible, then what moral and wisdom are we to learn from this book?

Let me help you. He was given exception. Just like Muhammad!!

Ibkhaleel001:
Hilarious indeed!



Any pornographic and drunkard bible follower, the book of women's vaginas and breasts taste like "wine", would've enjoyed her for at least one night and then divorced her, that if he would even divorce her!


Thank you Mr. Dull xtian for helping me prove the Beauty of our beloved Prophet Muhammad!



Again, Prophet Muhammad's wives were mostly divorced and widow women. His marriages were for mainly political reasons. If he married a woman from a tribe, then he'd save the Muslims bloodshed and battles with that tribe, and ultimately, that tribe would embrace Islam through this marriage.

Lies!! Muhammad was a womanizer and forced his religion on people under threat of death. Can you show us who Muhammad ever preached to like Christ preached to Nicodemus? It was always through subterfuge and force. What a prophet!! What a religion!!

Agboriotejoye:


Let me help you. He was given exception. Just like Muhammad!!

Wrong interpretation of Christianity? Or a complete failure of receiving the Holy Spirit?

You Christians might argue and say something like:

"Ok, but even if you're right, then so what?! How does this disprove Christianity?! At the worst case, it only shows that Christians are wrong in interpreting their Holy Scriptures. That's all!"

This statement is full of problems. Here are the reasons:

1- Almost the entire religion of Christianity is built on the alleged inspirations of the Holy Spirit.

2- The New Testament (Christianity's main scriptures) promises over and over and over that the Holy Spirit will inspire its followers, lead them, and protect them from:

False guidance.
Bewitchment of demons.
Not only that, but Christians are so fond on declaring that it is the Holy Spirit that is inspiring them and even speaking through their mouths when they preach Christianity. Therefore, if the overwhelming majority of all Christians (almost the entirety of all Christians world-wide and throughout history) utterly and completely failed to receive the Guidance of the Holy Spirit to prevent them from eating pork and violating the Sabbath, while GOD Almighty supposedly in Isaiah 65 and 66 repeatedly cursed those who eat pork till the last day of this life, then either Isaiah 65 and 66 are lies, or Christianity is a lie. And Christianity would be a lie in either case, because it is standing on the Old Testament. Therefore, if Isaiah is a lie, then Christianity is also a lie.

Ibkhaleel001:
Can a woman be forced into marriage in Islam?

Absolutely not! Let us look at what Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him said regarding this issue:

Abu Huraira (Allah be pleased with him) reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as having said: "A woman without a husband (or divorced or a widow) must not be married until she is consulted, and a virgin must not be married until her permission is sought. They asked the Prophet of Allah (may peace be upon him): How her (virgin's) consent can be solicited? He (the Holy Prophet) said: That she keeps silence. (Translation of Sahih Muslim, The Book of Marriage (Kitab Al-Nikah), Book 008, Number 3303)"

Allah Almighty said in the Noble Quran: "O ye who believe! Ye are forbidden to inherit women against their will. Nor should ye treat them with harshness, that ye may take away part of the dower [money given by the husband to the wife for the marriage contract] ye have given them, except where they have been guilty of open lewdness; on the contrary live with them on a footing of kindness and equity. If ye take a dislike to them it may be that ye dislike a thing, and God brings about through it a great deal of good. (The Noble Quran, 4:19)"

The following Saying is an explanation to Noble Verse 4:19:

Narrated Abdullah ibn Abbas: "About the Qur'anic verse: 'It is not lawful for you forcibly to inherit the woman (of your deceased kinsmen), nor (that) ye should put constraint upon them.' When a man died, his relatives had more right to his wife then her own guardian. If any one of them wanted to marry her, he did so; or they married her (to some other person), and if they did not want to marry her, they did so. So this verse was revealed about the matter. (Translation of Sunan Abu-Dawud, Marriage (Kitab Al-Nikah), Book 11, Number 2084)" So according to Noble Verse 4:19, a woman can not be forced into marriage by any mean.

Narrated AbuHurayrah: "The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: An orphan virgin girl should be consulted about herself; if she says nothing that indicates her permission, but if she refuses, the authority of the guardian cannot be exercised against her will. (Translation of Sunan Abu-Dawud, Marriage (Kitab Al-Nikah), Book 11, Number 2088)"

What about slaves captured in war. Does this verse also cover them?

Agboriotejoye:


Lies!! Muhammad was a womanizer and forced his religion on people under threat of death. Can you show us who Muhammad ever preached to like Christ preached to Nicodemus? It was always through subterfuge and force. What a prophet!! What a religion!!

Is the entire Bible truely the word of GOD?

No credible Biblical scholar on this earth will claim that the Bible was written by Jesus himself. They all agree that the Bible was written after the departure of Jesus peace be upon him by his followers. So, if the authors of the Bible were people other than Jesus, then did they have Jesus or the Holy Spirit in them guiding their hands and dictating to them word for word what to write? As it happens, once again the answer is no. Who says so? The majority of today's credible Christian scholars do.

Image123:


It's exactly how jokers and jokes should be attended to. The boring lifecycle of a joker is as seen below.


Interaction with chief joker: Does God exist?
Joker: No, never, rubbish, intelligence, science *&#@^~

Interaction with chief joker: Believe in God friend.
Joker: God is a murderer, rapist, genocide, evil commander, yes or no before I hang myself.

Interaction with chief joker: But how can a God that doesn't exist do all this?
Joker: Your bible is written by herdsman, roftlmao. (remembers the real life depression massaged by masturbation and games).

Lol, I don't read rants. Good day.

Agboriotejoye:


What about slaves captured in war. Does this verse also cover them?

If you consider the Bible the word of GOD, well, it is quite obvious that Luke decided to write his Gospel because he wanted to please the president or the
leader at that time Theophilus. This however has several problems: (1) It compromises GOD because there is a biger purpose than GOD to write the Gospel, (2) It shows that Luke wouldn't have written his Gospel if it wasn't for that leader, and (3) Luke was not inpired when he wrote his Gospel because he said that he decided to write it after he had full understanding of it, which means that he wrote it with his own human words and thoughts and not GOD's.

For a closer look at reliability of the NT and its development dont forget to check out Is the NT really reliable ?

kingxsamz:


Lol, I don't read rants. Good day.

Joker in chief, spare us the gnashing of teeth. There'd be enough in hell for the unrepentant.

Agboriotejoye:


What about slaves captured in war. Does this verse also cover them?

Has not the Qur'an actually legalized adultery by allowing for
the master to have sexual relationships with his female slaves?

Female slaves are the natural by-product of the system of
slavery. The situation that prevailed in all societies where the institution
of slavery existed was such that slave women were used at will and
were employed to gain economic advantage by inciting them towards
prostitution. As for Islam, it provided for a facility which would, in the
course of one generation, bring an end to the system through the slave
women themselves.
The slave woman is the property of the master. However, the
master has no right, whatsoever, to incite her towards adultery. Like
the male slaves, the female slaves, too, have rights of their own. It is
the duty of the master to provide her with food, shelter, clothes and
other necessities. Moreover, the Qur'an has asked the owner to make
the necessary arrangements for her marriage as well (Qur'an 24:32).
This, in effect, means that the Qur'an has prompted the owner
towards having sexual relations with an unmarried female slave. This
permission is however restricted to the owner alone. No one else is
allowed to use her in this fashion even if it be with the permission of
the master!
In giving birth to the child of the master, the slave woman
becomes entitled to new rights. Thenceforth, the master has no right
to sell her. She becomes the mother of her master’s children. These
children, too, become entitled to all the rights and privileges enjoyed by
the master’s other children. Islam disagrees with the Jewish stand
that the children born through a slave woman have none of the rights
that should naturally be given to them by virtue of paternity. These
children are, in all respects, his own children. There is to be no
discrimination of any kind between them and the other children. With
the death of the master, the slave woman, who is the mother of his
children, becomes a free woman. She is then protected by her own
children. They, too, like the other children, will becomes entitled to a
share in their father’s inheritance.
The permission to accept slave women as one’s life-partner
was, in fact, a provision which would, in the course of one generation,
cut out the very root of slavery. In reality, therefore, the permission
granted for having relations with slave women was one among the
many unique steps taken by Islam in practically eradicating slavery.
It is not possible to equate the permission given for having
relations with slave women to adultery. These acts stand at two extreme
poles. One is the case of the woman who lives under her master
enjoying the protection that he confers upon her. It is a relationship in
which he fully agrees to take up the responsibilities that may result as
a product of that relationship. It is a relationship in which her personality,
beyond the contours defined by sex, is accorded full recognition. It is
a relationship which opens to her the door to freedom. As for the
second, it is nothing but a carnal relationship with a prostitute without
any sort of commitment.

Agboriotejoye:


What about slaves captured in war. Does this verse also cover them?

Sir Isaac Newton On The Bible

In 1690, Sir Isaac Newton (died 1727) wrote a manuscript on the corruption of the text of the New Testament concerning I John 5:7 and Timothy 3:16. It was entitled, "A Historical Account of Two Notable Corruptions of Scripture."   Due to the prevailing environment against criticism, he felt it unwise to profess his beliefs openly and felt that printing it in England would be too dangerous.   Newton sent a copy of this manuscript to John Locke requesting him to have it translated into French for publication in France. Two years later, Newton was informed of an attempt to publish a Latin translation of it anonymously. However, Newton did not approve of its availability in Latin and persuaded Locke to take steps to prevent this publication.  Below are excerpts from "A Historical Account of Two Notable Corruptions of Scripture."

Newton on I John 5:7

Newton states that this verse appeared for the first time in the third edition of Erasmus's New Testament.  When they got the Trinity; into his edition they threw by their manuscript, if they had one, as an almanac out of date. And can such shuffling dealings satisfy considering men?....It is rather a danger in religion than an advantage to make it now lean on a broken reed.  In all the vehement universal and lasting controversy about the Trinity in Jerome's time and both before and long enough after it, this text of the "three in heaven" was never once thought of. It is now in everybody's mouth and accounted the main text for the business and would assuredly have been so too with them, had it been in their books.  "Let them make good sense of it who are able. For my part, I can make none.  If it be said that we are not to determine what is Scripture what not by our private judgments, I confess it in places not controverted, but in disputed places I love to take up with what I can best understand. It is the temper of the hot and superstitious art of mankind in matters of religion ever to be fond of mysteries, and for that reason to like best what they understand least. Such men may use the Apostle John as they please, but I have that honour for him as to believe that he wrote good sense and therefore take that to be his which is the best."

Newton on I Timothy 3:16

Hmmm

Ibkhaleel001:
Wrong interpretation of Christianity? Or a complete failure of receiving the Holy Spirit?

You Christians might argue and say something like:

"Ok, but even if you're right, then so what?! How does this disprove Christianity?! At the worst case, it only shows that Christians are wrong in interpreting their Holy Scriptures. That's all!"

This statement is full of problems. Here are the reasons:

1- Almost the entire religion of Christianity is built on the alleged inspirations of the Holy Spirit.

2- The New Testament (Christianity's main scriptures) promises over and over and over that the Holy Spirit will inspire its followers, lead them, and protect them from:

False guidance.
Bewitchment of demons.
Not only that, but Christians are so fond on declaring that it is the Holy Spirit that is inspiring them and even speaking through their mouths when they preach Christianity. Therefore, if the overwhelming majority of all Christians (almost the entirety of all Christians world-wide and throughout history) utterly and completely failed to receive the Guidance of the Holy Spirit to prevent them from eating pork and violating the Sabbath, while GOD Almighty supposedly in Isaiah 65 and 66 repeatedly cursed those who eat pork till the last day of this life, then either Isaiah 65 and 66 are lies, or Christianity is a lie. And Christianity would be a lie in either case, because it is standing on the Old Testament. Therefore, if Isaiah is a lie, then Christianity is also a lie.

What is the sense in what this one is saying

Acts 10:9-16

The next day at about the sixth hour,c as the men were approaching the city on their journey, Peter went up on the roof to pray. 10He became hungry and wanted something to eat, but while the meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance.

11He saw heaven open and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. 12It contained all kinds of four-footed animals and reptiles of the earth, as well as birds of the air. 13Then a voice said to him: “Get up, Peter, kill and eat!”

14“No, Lord!” Peter answered. “I have never eaten anything impured or unclean.”

15The [b]voice spoke to him a second time: “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.”

[/b]16This happened three times, and all at once the sheet was taken back up into heaven.

I know you guys have beef with pigs because of what they did to your prophet. But you guys should not blame the pig na. It could just not resist.

If you call Holy spirit bewilderment, what do you call the spirit that possesses your Muhammad and slams him into a fever and convulsion. It seems epilepsy is a proper name for such spirit. Is that a good spirit for a prophet? Can you give example of any other prophet who became epileptic when possessed by God's spirit?

Ibkhaleel001:
Sir Isaac Newton On The Bible

In 1690, Sir Isaac Newton (died 1727) wrote a manuscript on the corruption of the text of the New Testament concerning I John 5:7 and Timothy 3:16. It was entitled, "A Historical Account of Two Notable Corruptions of Scripture."   Due to the prevailing environment against criticism, he felt it unwise to profess his beliefs openly and felt that printing it in England would be too dangerous.   Newton sent a copy of this manuscript to John Locke requesting him to have it translated into French for publication in France. Two years later, Newton was informed of an attempt to publish a Latin translation of it anonymously. However, Newton did not approve of its availability in Latin and persuaded Locke to take steps to prevent this publication.  Below are excerpts from "A Historical Account of Two Notable Corruptions of Scripture."

Newton on I John 5:7

Newton states that this verse appeared for the first time in the third edition of Erasmus's New Testament.  When they got the Trinity; into his edition they threw by their manuscript, if they had one, as an almanac out of date. And can such shuffling dealings satisfy considering men?....It is rather a danger in religion than an advantage to make it now lean on a broken reed.  In all the vehement universal and lasting controversy about the Trinity in Jerome's time and both before and long enough after it, this text of the "three in heaven" was never once thought of. It is now in everybody's mouth and accounted the main text for the business and would assuredly have been so too with them, had it been in their books.  "Let them make good sense of it who are able. For my part, I can make none.  If it be said that we are not to determine what is Scripture what not by our private judgments, I confess it in places not controverted, but in disputed places I love to take up with what I can best understand. It is the temper of the hot and superstitious art of mankind in matters of religion ever to be fond of mysteries, and for that reason to like best what they understand least. Such men may use the Apostle John as they please, but I have that honour for him as to believe that he wrote good sense and therefore take that to be his which is the best."

Newton on I Timothy 3:16

Who were the authors of the Bible? Were they really the original Prophets and Desciples?

So, who then are the authors of the books of the Bible? Obviously the Church must know them very well since they are popularly believed to have received divine inspiration from God Himself. Right? Actually, they don't. For example, we will note that every Gospel begins with the introduction "According to....." such as "The Gospel according to Saint Matthew," "The Gospel according to Saint Luke," "The Gospel according to Saint Mark," "The Gospel according to Saint John." The obvious conclusion for the average man on the street is that these people are known to be the authors of the books attributed to them. This, however is not the case. Why? Because not one of the vaunted four thousand copies existent carries its author's signature. It has just been assumed that certain people were the authors. Recent discoveries, however, refute this belief. Even the internal evidence suggests that, for instance, Matthew did not write the Gospel attributed to him:

"...And as Jesus passed forth thence, HE (Jesus) saw a man, named Matthew, sitting at the receipt of custom: and HE (Jesus) saith unto HIM (Matthew), follow ME (Jesus) and HE (Matthew) arose, and followed HIM (Jesus). (Matthew 9:9)"

Did "Matthew" write this about himself? Why then didn't Matthew write for example: "he (Jesus) saw ME, and my name is Matthew. I was sitting at the receipt of custom…" etc.

Such evidence can be found in many places throughout the New Testament. Granted, it may be possible that an author sometimes may write in the third person, still, in light of the rest of the evidence that we shall see throughout this book, there is simply too much evidence against this hypothesis.

Ibkhaleel001:
Sir Isaac Newton On The Bible

In 1690, Sir Isaac Newton (died 1727) wrote a manuscript on the corruption of the text of the New Testament concerning I John 5:7 and Timothy 3:16. It was entitled, "A Historical Account of Two Notable Corruptions of Scripture."   Due to the prevailing environment against criticism, he felt it unwise to profess his beliefs openly and felt that printing it in England would be too dangerous.   Newton sent a copy of this manuscript to John Locke requesting him to have it translated into French for publication in France. Two years later, Newton was informed of an attempt to publish a Latin translation of it anonymously. However, Newton did not approve of its availability in Latin and persuaded Locke to take steps to prevent this publication.  Below are excerpts from "A Historical Account of Two Notable Corruptions of Scripture."

Newton on I John 5:7

Newton states that this verse appeared for the first time in the third edition of Erasmus's New Testament.  When they got the Trinity; into his edition they threw by their manuscript, if they had one, as an almanac out of date. And can such shuffling dealings satisfy considering men?....It is rather a danger in religion than an advantage to make it now lean on a broken reed.  In all the vehement universal and lasting controversy about the Trinity in Jerome's time and both before and long enough after it, this text of the "three in heaven" was never once thought of. It is now in everybody's mouth and accounted the main text for the business and would assuredly have been so too with them, had it been in their books.  "Let them make good sense of it who are able. For my part, I can make none.  If it be said that we are not to determine what is Scripture what not by our private judgments, I confess it in places not controverted, but in disputed places I love to take up with what I can best understand. It is the temper of the hot and superstitious art of mankind in matters of religion ever to be fond of mysteries, and for that reason to like best what they understand least. Such men may use the Apostle John as they please, but I have that honour for him as to believe that he wrote good sense and therefore take that to be his which is the best."

Newton on I Timothy 3:16

Compendium of lies. Newton wrote nothing on new testament. Go and throw away that plagiarized text you call Quran

Ibkhaleel001:

Who were the authors of the Bible? Were they really the original Prophets and Desciples?

So, who then are the authors of the books of the Bible? Obviously the Church must know them very well since they are popularly believed to have received divine inspiration from God Himself. Right? Actually, they don't. For example, we will note that every Gospel begins with the introduction "According to....." such as "The Gospel according to Saint Matthew," "The Gospel according to Saint Luke," "The Gospel according to Saint Mark," "The Gospel according to Saint John." The obvious conclusion for the average man on the street is that these people are known to be the authors of the books attributed to them. This, however is not the case. Why? Because not one of the vaunted four thousand copies existent carries its author's signature. It has just been assumed that certain people were the authors. Recent discoveries, however, refute this belief. Even the internal evidence suggests that, for instance, Matthew did not write the Gospel attributed to him:

"...And as Jesus passed forth thence, HE (Jesus) saw a man, named Matthew, sitting at the receipt of custom: and HE (Jesus) saith unto HIM (Matthew), follow ME (Jesus) and HE (Matthew) arose, and followed HIM (Jesus). (Matthew 9:9)"

Did "Matthew" write this about himself? Why then didn't Matthew write for example: "he (Jesus) saw ME, and my name is Matthew. I was sitting at the receipt of custom…" etc.

Such evidence can be found in many places throughout the New Testament. Granted, it may be possible that an author sometimes may write in the third person, still, in light of the rest of the evidence that we shall see throughout this book, there is simply too much evidence against this hypothesis.

I guess Muhammad wrote the Quran himself abi? BTW, who is the true successor to Muhammad, Ali or Rashul?

Agboriotejoye:


Compendium of lies. Newton wrote nothing on new testament. Go and throw away that plagiarized text you call Quran

Denying the truth will never save you tonight....

Did Moses write his own obituary? Similarly, Joshua too speaks in detail about his own death in Joshua 24:29-33.

How comes?