Ibkhaleel01: Anti-Muslim demagoguery relies on the demonization of the Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam), who is characterized by Islam-hating liars as being especially violent and warlike.
This propaganda has certainly gained currency in the “Judeo-Zionist-Freemasonic-Christian West and Nigeria hateful christians”.
When it is pointed out that the Biblical prophets–including Moses, Joshua, Samson , Saul , David , among many others–were far more violent and warlike (and even engaged in religiously sanctioned genocide ), anti-Muslim pro-Christian ideologues will respond by disregarding or downplaying the Old Testament and will instead focus on the personality of Jesus in the New Testament.
Didn’t Jesus preach nonviolence and “loving one’s enemies”?
anti-Muslim ideologues use this idea to assault the religion of Islam. comparing Islam to Christianity by juxtaposing carefully selected quotes from Jesus to Islamic texts. “Muhammad vs Jesus” section. citing the following sayings of Jesus in the Bible:
“Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you”
“If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also”
“Blessed are the peacemakers”
“Blessed are the merciful for they shall obtain mercy”
“But love your enemies, and do good”
These so-called “peaceful” verses of the Bible are compared to select battle revealed-Quranic verses.
The violent verses of the Bible “don’t count” and are craftily excluded from the comparison (“that’s just the Old Testament!”).
To tighten the noose, peaceful verses of the Glorious Qur’an are also excluded from the heavily biased analysis, the shaitaan gives his evil reason for that: these “don’t count” since they are supposedly from when Muhammad was still in Mecca.
To understand the last point, one needs to have a basic understanding of the Prophet Muhammad’s (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) biography: he first declared his prophethood in the city of Makkah. Only a very small segment of society accepted him (mostly the weak and poor), whereas the masses–especially the powerful leaders of the city–not only rejected him but actively persecuted him.
The chapters of the Qur’an that were revealed during this period are known as the Makkan chapters. Eventually, Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) was commanded by God to fled to the city of Madinah, whose people accepted him as their ruler. He went from persecuted prophet to ruler and commander-in-chief of a fledgling city-state.
The anti-Muslim ideologues claim that the peaceful and tolerant verses of the Qur’an come from when Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) was weak and persecuted in Mekkah. According to this islamophobe Baboon, These verses are “cancelled”, they argue, by the violent-sounding verses in the Medinan chapters.
The Islamophobe deceivers portray Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) as opportunistic:
when he was weak and under the rule of the pagans, he called for peace. Without being in a position of authority, Muhammad was hardly in a position to do otherwise. As soon as he came to power, however, he waged “jihad warfare” (what a strange phrase!) against them. This is why, they argue, the peaceful verses of the Quran simply “don’t count”.
For now, however, we will demonstrate that, using such logic, it is equally possible to invalidate the “peaceful” sayings of Jesus. While he was a persecuted prophet, Jesus advocated nonviolence and peaceful resistance. He was hardly in a position to do otherwise, right? Once in power, however, this changes dramatically and violent warfare becomes the new modus operandi .
God has allowed for just wars throughout the history of His people. From Abraham to Deborah to David, God’s people have fought as instruments of judgment from a righteous and holy God. Romans 13:1-4 tells us to submit ourselves to government authorities and that nations have the right to bear the sword against evildoers, both foreign and domestic.
Violence occurs, but we must recognize the difference between holy judgment on sin and our own personal vendettas against those we dislike, which is the inevitable outcome of pride
Jesus sayings...
Luke 19:27 But these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and kill them in my presence.
Death and destruction will be the fate of whoever does not accept Jesus’ reign as Warrior King. This was hardly an innocuous story. It reminds us of a scene in the movie Gladiator when the evil Roman emperor Commodus tells his nephew a story about an “emperor” who was betrayed by his sister (“his own blood”) and how he “struck down” her son as revenge. (
One can only hardly imagine how Islamophobes would react had it been the Prophet Muhammad who had used such a violent parable, threatening to return to earth in order to “slay” anyone who “did not want me to reign over them”! This would certainly “count” since all violence in the Quran “counts” whereas whatever is peaceful in the Quran “doesn’t count”, and whatever is violent in the Bible “doesn’t count” and whatever is peaceful in the Bible “counts”. Heads I win, tails you lose.
Prophet Muhammad is a red line for many of us, a line that must not be crossed. By Allah, we love him more than our parents, our siblings, our children and friends. People should learn to show some respect for our religion & Prophets I may forgive you if you insult my father, mother and siblings. I may forgive you if you mistakenly kill any of my loved ones. I may forgive you if deny me my rights, BUT I will never forgive you if you disparage my Prophet, I will never forgive you if you laugh & make joke out the unfair statements & insults some people make against my prophet Prophet Muhammad is the best human being I have ever known and read about. He was a model of righteousness, a man that was praised by Allah Himself as enshrined in the Quran. He is the most admirable figure in Islam. He was known to be very pious, compassionate, empathetic, forgiving, caring and loving. Numerous non Muslims made good remarks about him. In fact, one of them rated him as the best man to ever lived Prophet Muhammad lived a selfless life, he lived for the good of humanity. He gave up his own personal gains & comfort to liberate mankind from ignorance & idolatry as commanded by his Lord. He underwent persecution for his belief, and even when his patience was tried severally, he was never unkind in words or deeds. So for anyone or group to compare the prophet with a bigot like Igboho for whatsoever reason is malicious, distasteful and unfair to say the least. Why should the prophet's name be mentioned in matters involving Mr. Sunday in the first place? Why If you have nothing good to say about the prophet, please leave him alone. We know his value & quintessential status in Islam and you know not. LEAVE HIM ALONE! May Allah continue to exalt our noble Prophet Muhammad (Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam)
Absolute gibberish as usual. Very laughable defence of the Mad One. So you will need God to "command" you to flee for your life as an adult who is faced with imminent death? Its very simpl3. The Mook fled for his life. Its the natural law of survival taking place. You will never forgive anyone who disparage your prophet because that is what he commanded you to do. You cannot be above your master. You either be equal or beneath him. You do exactly what he stands for and that is intolerance and psychosis. You do not know God.
Mohammed was trained by Roman Catholic priests. He eas groomed to start what he started so as to prevent the true believers from reaching the Arabs.
U see all ur comment just shows that u have little knowledge about d topic. In Quran Jesus is mention there 500% percent than Muhammed. Mary the mother of jesus have a complete sura dedicated to her but in Quran there's no sura name Muhammed. Lastly no where in Quran or any book in Islam that Jesus Christ was denied. Any Muslim that don't believe in Jesus christ is NOT Muslim!!!!!!!!
I followed both of them cos they were both preaching same thing. Oneness of God and we should be kind to others. Mind u Jesus is Jew not xtian that means u following something different. Search for knowledge so that u can be free!
I followed both of them cos they were both preaching same thing. Oneness of God and we should be kind to others. Mind u Jesus is Jew not xtian that means u following something different. Search for knowledge so that u can be free!
you cant follow both, choose one Jesus or mohammed
Jesus said whoever believes He is the Son of God is saved
Mark 16:16a He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved;
Then Jesus said whoever rejects He is the Son of God is damned
Mark 16:16b but he that believeth not shall be damned.
you cant follow both, choose one Jesus or mohammed
Jesus said whoever believes He is the Son of God is saved
Mark 16:16a He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved;
Then Jesus said whoever rejects He is the Son of God is damned
Mark 16:16b but he that believeth not shall be damned.
So mohammed is damned
Jesus never said all what u said earlier. Na according to John not jesus himself said that! God have no son! No one is damned cos Almighty God is forgiving if u believe in God! I believe in Jesus christ!!!!!!
Jesus never said all what u said earlier. Na according to John not jesus himself said that! God have no son! No one is damned cos Almighty God is forgiving if u believe in God! I believe in Jesus christ!!!!!!
jesusjnr2020: You said my claim that mount Sinai was the mount of transfiguration wasn't Biblically correct because it was situated in Israel, yet you couldn't bring up a single place in the Bible that stated the mount of transfiguration was in Israel but just making assumptions, so what exactly do you mean by "not biblically correct"?
And although Jesus was said to be in cesarea Philip in the previous chapter, which you say was located in Israel, it was clearly stated that after six days, Jesus took His disciples to a mountain apart, where He was transfigured, so doesn't that suggest that the mountain wasn't in Israel but somewhere far away?
Moreover this is not about who Jesus preached to or didn't preach to, or where He preached but where the mount of transfiguration was located, so since there's no where in the Bible which stated the location of the mount, doesn't that mean your comment that my claim wasn't Biblically correct is not correct but just your assumption?
As for the Holy Spirit being the rod and the mantle and not the Word of God as i stated because of Psalm 23 according to you, although that doesn't add up, even if it does, didn't Jesus say He would send another comforter? So doesn't that make Jesus, who is the Word of God that was made flesh, a comforter also?
Also concerning the representations of the Holy Spirit, the instances you gave weren't physical representations as the rod and mantle, but spiritual, and actually the forms the Holy Spirit appeared in. Hence you'd see it being stated, He came or appeared "as a dove", "as a clove of fire", "as a mighty rushing wind", so they were not necessarily representations but the form the Holy Spirit appeared in Person, and it was always to confirm or perform the Word of God.
So you should now see that you don't know who you speak of, but if you are sure you do, I have no reason to continue with this conversation.
I suggest you study the Bible dispassionately to understand what is written there. Don't just apply your own bias to interpret the Bible. There are a lot of Bible commentaries and Thesaurus that can help you. It is obvious you are very confused while being conceited about the Bible and its narratives.
The phrase "mountain apart" does not refer to the location of the mountain but instead, the fact that he took three of his disciples apart with himself to the top of the mountain. There are three separate accounts of the transfiguration in the Gospels and only Matthew used that phrase. Mark explained the phrase more clearly and Luke did not even use it at all. See how Mark used it here
Mark 9:2 And after six days Jesus taketh with him Peter, and James, and John, and bringeth them up into a high mountain apart by themselves and he was transfigured before them
I hope you get the proper understanding now. You can read Mark 9 and Luke 9 as well for a proper orientation of the story. You will also realize that after Jesus came down from the mountain, he met the disciples in a dispute with the multitude about a boy suffering from the unclean spirit of epilepsy. So you now have to wonder how a multitude followed Jesus on a journey for six days deep into the Arabian desert. Note also that both Mark and Matthew gave accounts of Jesus' movement as clearly as possible. From Caesarea Philippi, he moved to Galilee according to both books. So it will be hard to imagine that Jesus undertook a journey of six days away from Israel and the four Gospels failed to mention that. I plead with you. Stop adding your own imaginations to the Bible. You are tethering on the brink of becoming a false messenger.
Mark 9: 30 And they went forth from thence, and passed through Galilee; and he would not that any man should know it.
I will not get into the argument of the person of the Holy Spirit with you. As you said, if that is how you understand it, no problem. Whether the rod and mantle is Jesus or the Holy Spirit, they are both from the same God and serve same purpose of perfecting His works in our lives.
I suggest you study the Bible dispassionately to understand what is written there. Don't just apply your own bias to interpret the Bible. There are a lot of Bible commentaries and Thesaurus that can help you. It is obvious you are very confused while being conceited about the Bible and its narratives.
The phrase "mountain apart" does not refer to the location of the mountain but instead, the fact that he took three of his disciples apart with himself to the top of the mountain. There are three separate accounts of the transfiguration in the Gospels and only Matthew used that phrase. Mark explained the phrase more clearly and Luke did not even use it at all. See how Mark used it here
I hope you get the proper understanding now. You can read Mark 9 and Luke 9 as well for a proper orientation of the story. You will also realize that after Jesus came down from the mountain, he met the disciples in a dispute with the multitude about a boy suffering from the unclean spirit of epilepsy. So you now have to wonder how a multitude followed Jesus on a journey for six days deep into the Arabian desert. Note also that both Mark and Matthew gave accounts of Jesus' movement as clearly as possible. From Caesarea Philippi, he moved to Galilee according to both books. So it will be hard to imagine that Jesus undertook a journey of six days away from Israel and the four Gospels failed to mention that. I plead with you. Stop adding your own imaginations to the Bible. You are tethering on the brink of becoming a false messenger.
I will not get into the argument of the person of the Holy Spirit with you. As you said, if that is how you understand it, no problem. Whether the rod and mantle is Jesus or the Holy Spirit, they are both from the same God and serve same purpose of perfecting His works in our lives.
Bless you
Thank God it's not up to men to determine who's a false messenger and who's true, but up to God so there's nothing men like you can do to alter the truth.
It's a good thing though, you've come out of your shell and no longer pretending now, so I know the kind of person I'm dealing with making things easier for me.
It's now obvious that this has nothing to do with the mount of transfiguration being mount Sinai or not, or the rod and staff being the Word of God or not, because those are trivial matters, but that you're trying to join issues, just to justify your malicious and ulterior tendencies.
You talk about studying the Bible dispassionately, yet you're the one portraying your own assumptions as that of the Bible. I stated my opinion and you said it wasn't biblically correct. Hence i told you, show me where it was stated in the Bible that said the mount of transfiguration was in Israel, and I'd accept, but up til now, you're still beating about the bush with your own interpretations, adding what wasn't there which you're accusing me of. You assume Jesus coming down from a hill, means He's coming down from the mount of transfiguration, really?
By the way, I never said Jesus took a journey of six days, but that it was six days later after He left the place you mentioned, that He went up the mount so stop trying to stress it.
That said, at least i now know the kind of person behind the moniker i'm conversing with, so I wouldn't even sweat it, because this is just a smokescreen, it has nothing to do with your real motive here. But as I already said, your opinion concerning whether I'm a false or true is of no bearing whatsoever, though you can keep deceiving yourself that it is.
Yes. The same way the person who warns a child not to play with a loaded gun is a tyrant, right?
Unreasonable comparison, u don't make loaded gun accessable to a child. Anybody that sees a child with a loaded gun and all he does is warn the child is actually a foolish person. So yes your god if he exist is foolish but unfortunately he doesn't.
jesusjnr2020: Thank God it's not up to men to determine who's a false messenger and who's true, but up to God so there's nothing men like you can do to alter the truth.
It's a good thing though, you've come out of your shell and no longer pretending now, so I know the kind of person I'm dealing with making things easier for me.
It's now obvious that this has nothing to do with the mount of transfiguration being mount Sinai or not, or the rod and staff being the Word of God or not, because those are trivial matters, but that you're trying to join issues, just to justify your malicious and ulterior tendencies.
You talk about studying the Bible dispassionately, yet you're the one portraying your own assumptions as that of the Bible. I stated my opinion and you said it wasn't biblically correct. Hence i told you, show me where it was stated in the Bible that said the mount of transfiguration was in Israel, and I'd accept, but up til now, you're still beating about the bush with your own interpretations, adding what wasn't there which you're accusing me of. You assume Jesus coming down from a hill, means He's coming down from the mount of transfiguration, really?
By the way, I never said Jesus took a journey of six days, but that it was six days later after He left the place you mentioned, that He went up the mount so stop trying to stress it.
That said, at least i now know the kind of person behind the moniker i'm conversing with, so I wouldn't even sweat it, because this is just a smokescreen, it has nothing to do with your real motive here. But as I already said, your opinion concerning whether I'm a false or true is of no bearing whatsoever, though you can keep deceiving yourself that it is.
which you say was located in Israel, it was clearly stated that after six days, Jesus took His disciples to a mountain apart, where He was transfigured, so doesn't that suggest that the mountain wasn't in Israel but somewhere far away?
Compare the two bolded you wrote and see how you're contradicting yourself. What is obvious and I stand by is Jesus never travelled to Saudi Arabia in His lifetime. I have solid biblical evidence to prove this.
1. Jesus spent his adult life in Israel and it's surrounding areas which Saudi Arabia was not a part of. The only account of Jesus travelling far from Israel was as a child when he was taken to Egypt to escape Herod's threat to his life. With how detailed accounts of his movements are, it is difficult to imagine Jesus will undertake a journey to Arabia and it will not be mentioned by the Gospel writers but hidden inside a word "apart". That's totally preposterous.
2. Biblical accounts indicate Jesus spent six days in Caesarea Philippi before going to the mount of transfiguration. If your claim that he travelled within that six days to Arabia is true, then may I ask who the multitude were that he met when he came down from the mountain? Where they Arabians or Israelites? If they were Arabians, then one wonders how they got wind of who Jesus was and more importantly how Arabians who speak Arabic were able to converse with Jews who speak Hebrew? You will need to explain how the conversation took place in Arabic or Hebrew between both of them. If however they were Israelites, then it would imply that the multitude followed Jesus on that journey. In that case you will need to explain why the journey was not mentioned in the biblical accounts or do you think it is a small matter that over 200 people travelled a tortuous journey along dangerous routes as the Arabian peninsular then was?
3. There are many mountains in northern Israel, Carmel and Hebron being chief among them. Carmel is actually where Elijah hid from Jezebel and commanded rain from, while Hebron is where David hid from Saul and was first crowned King of Israel. So if one of the two is the mount of transfiguration, I believe the particular mount would have been mentioned if it was one of these. The mount was probably one of the many other mounts not one of those known before then.
Lastly, as I said, study the Bible very well to show yourself approved unto God. Stop assuming things in your head and giving meanings not intended or written in the Bible to cover your ignorance or puff yourself up. Such empty pride leads to nowhere.
No one knows, the bible was written years after the said event, the writers of the bible did not even meet any of the disciples, Mathew was written by Mathew or John by John, it was the Catholic church who ascribe name's to this passages. The bible was written from a third person perspective, that is I am writing a story someone told me he heard. The scrolls were actually more than a thousand, it was during the canonization of the bible by the Catholic church that they choose these 66 passages as the holy scriptures then they claim that the remaining books were not written from inspiration, during those days only the pope was allowed to read n interpret the bible.
This is the truth no one will tell u about the bible unless u are willing to learn n unlearn.
Compare the two bolded you wrote and see how you're contradicting yourself. What is obvious and I stand by is Jesus never travelled to Saudi Arabia in His lifetime. I have solid biblical evidence to prove this.
1. Jesus spent his adult life in Israel and it's surrounding areas which Saudi Arabia was not a part of. The only account of Jesus travelling far from Israel was as a child when he was taken to Egypt to escape Herod's threat to his life. With how detailed accounts of his movements are, it is difficult to imagine Jesus will undertake a journey to Arabia and it will not be mentioned by the Gospel writers but hidden inside a word "apart". That's totally preposterous.
2. Biblical accounts indicate Jesus spent six days in Caesarea Philippi before going to the mount of transfiguration. If your claim that he travelled within that six days to Arabia is true, then may I ask who the multitude were that he met when he came down from the mountain? Where they Arabians or Israelites? If they were Arabians, then one wonders how they got wind of who Jesus was and more importantly how Arabians who speak Arabic were able to converse with Jews who speak Hebrew? You will need to explain how the conversation took place in Arabic or Hebrew between both of them. If however they were Israelites, then it would imply that the multitude followed Jesus on that journey. In that case you will need to explain why the journey was not mentioned in the biblical accounts or do you think it is a small matter that over 200 people travelled a tortuous journey along dangerous routes as the Arabian peninsular then was?
3. There are many mountains in northern Israel, Carmel and Hebron being chief among them. Carmel is actually where Elijah hid from Jezebel and commanded rain from, while Hebron is where David hid from Saul and was first crowned King of Israel. So if one of the two is the mount of transfiguration, I believe the particular mount would have been mentioned if it was one of these. The mount was probably one of the many other mounts not one of those known before then.
Lastly, as I said, study the Bible very well to show yourself approved unto God. Stop assuming things in your head and giving meanings not intended or written in the Bible to cover your ignorance or puff yourself up. Such empty pride leads to nowhere.
Peace.
You are obviously driven by preconceptions and blind sentiments to quote the place I made the comment and still not see how you it's only in your imagination I said that the journey took six days, when you have actually proven me right that i said it was six days after it was stated Jesus was in that place you mentioned. You mean Jesus couldn't have left that place and gone to another place, and left and gone to another place, and left and gone to another place in six days, before taking the disciples up to the mount?
Moreover all the good points I made in my comment, it's only faults you could pick out to prove how shallow minded you are, and that you're nothing but an envious fault finder, likely an antichrist, who has no regard for Jesus and His Words, hence you trying to rubbish all that with what you deem errors, including the fact that the rod and staff represented Jesus, which is really petty.
What you should understand is that i'm not of your type, like the Pharisees who study for a show to gain man's approval, but don't keep the Word of God. I study instead to obey because that's the only way to show one's self approved unto God, and regardless of how someone studies the Word of God, if he doesn't keep it, his studying is a waste because the purpose of studying has been defeated.
What you should also know is that except God reveals certain things to you, you would never come to the Knowledge of the Truth, that's the reason people like you are still wallowing in spiritual ignorance in spite of all your studying, because God has not revealed such things to the wise and prudent but to the babes. Hence the disciples who hadn't studied to show themselves approved, had knowledge of the Truth but the Pharisees who studied like you, were yet ignorant of the Truth. So instead of studying to show yourself approved unto men, why not humble yourself before God and become a babe who keeps His Word, so God would reveal the mysteries of His Kingdom and His Word to you as He has done to us.
But even up til this moment, with all your studying to show yourself approved, you have still been unable to prove your claim that the mount of transfiguration was in Israel, and mount Sinai wasn't Biblically correct, but just ironically adding your assumptions and imaginations to the Bible, otherwise show me where the Bible said that Jesus spent six days in Caesarea Philippi if not just your own assumption?
You seem to underestimate Jesus to think that everything He did or said, or everywhere He went was recorded in Bible. That shows how bereft of knowledge you really were. You don't even know that Jesus had the power to disappear or time travel with the disciples from anywhere they were in Israel to anywhere else in the world where need be. Just to lecture you for free, Moses didn't enter into the promise land Israel. Elijah also left the land of Israel before he departed from the Earth, and these were the two men that appeared to Jesus on that mount, to suggest the possible location that took place.
But even if it didn't take place there and my idea was wrong, it's not unusual because even some accounts in the Gospels contradict themselves, such as, the six days and eight days given in different accounts of how many days it was after that saying, before Jesus took His disciples up to the mount, and the two couldn't be right at the same time, but just one. But that doesn't mean that the giver of the wrong information was a false messenger if it was just an aberration. Only the ignorant and shallow minded could assume such a thing.
By the way, you sound really familiar, as one of those Christians haters God put to shame on a certain thread, in spite of how many they were gathered against me, coming in the guise of another moniker, with the same flesh based preconceptions and blind sentiments. So i'm not surprised, because i'm already used to it here in NL, but in spite of all the disapproval and envying, God keep putting y'all to shame. So keep hating, envying, and disapproving, if you like, and even call me a false prophet or messenger, it's would actually be my pleasure and an honor coming from you. If the ignorant Pharisees did it to Jesus, who am i?
Ibkhaleel01: Anti-Muslim demagoguery relies on the demonization of the Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam), who is characterized by Islam-hating liars as being especially violent and warlike.
This propaganda has certainly gained currency in the “Judeo-Zionist-Freemasonic-Christian West and Nigeria hateful christians”.
When it is pointed out that the Biblical prophets–including Moses, Joshua, Samson , Saul , David , among many others–were far more violent and warlike (and even engaged in religiously sanctioned genocide ), anti-Muslim pro-Christian ideologues will respond by disregarding or downplaying the Old Testament and will instead focus on the personality of Jesus in the New Testament.
Didn’t Jesus preach nonviolence and “loving one’s enemies”?
anti-Muslim ideologues use this idea to assault the religion of Islam. comparing Islam to Christianity by juxtaposing carefully selected quotes from Jesus to Islamic texts. “Muhammad vs Jesus” section. citing the following sayings of Jesus in the Bible:
“Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you”
“If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also”
“Blessed are the peacemakers”
“Blessed are the merciful for they shall obtain mercy”
“But love your enemies, and do good”
These so-called “peaceful” verses of the Bible are compared to select battle revealed-Quranic verses.
The violent verses of the Bible “don’t count” and are craftily excluded from the comparison (“that’s just the Old Testament!”).
To tighten the noose, peaceful verses of the Glorious Qur’an are also excluded from the heavily biased analysis, the shaitaan gives his evil reason for that: these “don’t count” since they are supposedly from when Muhammad was still in Mecca.
To understand the last point, one needs to have a basic understanding of the Prophet Muhammad’s (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) biography: he first declared his prophethood in the city of Makkah. Only a very small segment of society accepted him (mostly the weak and poor), whereas the masses–especially the powerful leaders of the city–not only rejected him but actively persecuted him.
The chapters of the Qur’an that were revealed during this period are known as the Makkan chapters. Eventually, Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) was commanded by God to fled to the city of Madinah, whose people accepted him as their ruler. He went from persecuted prophet to ruler and commander-in-chief of a fledgling city-state.
The anti-Muslim ideologues claim that the peaceful and tolerant verses of the Qur’an come from when Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) was weak and persecuted in Mekkah. According to this islamophobe Baboon, These verses are “cancelled”, they argue, by the violent-sounding verses in the Medinan chapters.
The Islamophobe deceivers portray Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) as opportunistic:
when he was weak and under the rule of the pagans, he called for peace. Without being in a position of authority, Muhammad was hardly in a position to do otherwise. As soon as he came to power, however, he waged “jihad warfare” (what a strange phrase!) against them. This is why, they argue, the peaceful verses of the Quran simply “don’t count”.
For now, however, we will demonstrate that, using such logic, it is equally possible to invalidate the “peaceful” sayings of Jesus. While he was a persecuted prophet, Jesus advocated nonviolence and peaceful resistance. He was hardly in a position to do otherwise, right? Once in power, however, this changes dramatically and violent warfare becomes the new modus operandi .
God has allowed for just wars throughout the history of His people. From Abraham to Deborah to David, God’s people have fought as instruments of judgment from a righteous and holy God. Romans 13:1-4 tells us to submit ourselves to government authorities and that nations have the right to bear the sword against evildoers, both foreign and domestic.
Violence occurs, but we must recognize the difference between holy judgment on sin and our own personal vendettas against those we dislike, which is the inevitable outcome of pride
Jesus sayings...
Luke 19:27 But these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and kill them in my presence.
Death and destruction will be the fate of whoever does not accept Jesus’ reign as Warrior King. This was hardly an innocuous story. It reminds us of a scene in the movie Gladiator when the evil Roman emperor Commodus tells his nephew a story about an “emperor” who was betrayed by his sister (“his own blood”) and how he “struck down” her son as revenge. (
One can only hardly imagine how Islamophobes would react had it been the Prophet Muhammad who had used such a violent parable, threatening to return to earth in order to “slay” anyone who “did not want me to reign over them”! This would certainly “count” since all violence in the Quran “counts” whereas whatever is peaceful in the Quran “doesn’t count”, and whatever is violent in the Bible “doesn’t count” and whatever is peaceful in the Bible “counts”. Heads I win, tails you lose.
Prophet Muhammad is a red line for many of us, a line that must not be crossed. By Allah, we love him more than our parents, our siblings, our children and friends. People should learn to show some respect for our religion & Prophets I may forgive you if you insult my father, mother and siblings. I may forgive you if you mistakenly kill any of my loved ones. I may forgive you if deny me my rights, BUT I will never forgive you if you disparage my Prophet, I will never forgive you if you laugh & make joke out the unfair statements & insults some people make against my prophet Prophet Muhammad is the best human being I have ever known and read about. He was a model of righteousness, a man that was praised by Allah Himself as enshrined in the Quran. He is the most admirable figure in Islam. He was known to be very pious, compassionate, empathetic, forgiving, caring and loving. Numerous non Muslims made good remarks about him. In fact, one of them rated him as the best man to ever lived Prophet Muhammad lived a selfless life, he lived for the good of humanity. He gave up his own personal gains & comfort to liberate mankind from ignorance & idolatry as commanded by his Lord. He underwent persecution for his belief, and even when his patience was tried severally, he was never unkind in words or deeds. So for anyone or group to compare the prophet with a bigot like Igboho for whatsoever reason is malicious, distasteful and unfair to say the least. Why should the prophet's name be mentioned in matters involving Mr. Sunday in the first place? Why If you have nothing good to say about the prophet, please leave him alone. We know his value & quintessential status in Islam and you know not. LEAVE HIM ALONE! May Allah continue to exalt our noble Prophet Muhammad (Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam)
It seems you only know how to throw jabs against other religions but can't take any criticism of yours. That I respond to your post with historical facts and sources suddenly make me "Anti-Muslim" and an Islamphobe? Do you have to be so petty and shallow rather than responding to issues with facts?
And for your information, the Luke 19:27 you quoted was done out of context and maliciously. What Jesus was saying from verse 12 to 27 was a parable about a man who had himself appointed a king in a distant land and that fact is clear to anyone reading from verse 11 - "While they were listening to this, he went on to tell them a parable..." For you to attempt to maliciously misrepresent a simple and unambiguous Bible verse just to try to falsely portray Jesus as supporting violence paints an unsavoury picture of your person and integrity.
If you have to lie and twist facts to support any cause, then such cause is not really worth supporting in all honesty. You need to have a rethink.
No one knows, the bible was written years after the said event, the writers of the bible did not even meet any of the disciples, Mathew was written by Mathew or John by John, it was the Catholic church who ascribe name's to this passages. The bible was written from a third person perspective, that is I am writing a story someone told me he heard. The scrolls were actually more than a thousand, it was during the canonization of the bible by the Catholic church that they choose these 66 passages as the holy scriptures then they claim that the remaining books were not written from inspiration, during those days only the pope was allowed to read n interpret the bible.
This is the truth no one will tell u about the bible unless u are willing to learn n unlearn.
leave their religion for them must you talk about them .I'm suspecting you .I feel people like you are been paid to cause instability in this country because the way you go about finding ways to cause chaos through any means.i think nairaland should start screening message .
Absolute gibberish as usual. Very laughable defence of the Mad One. So you will need God to "command" you to flee for your life as an adult who is faced with imminent death? Its very simpl3. The Mook fled for his life. Its the natural law of survival taking place. You will never forgive anyone who disparage your prophet because that is what he commanded you to do. You cannot be above your master. You either be equal or beneath him. You do exactly what he stands for and that is intolerance and psychosis. You do not know God.
Mohammed was trained by Roman Catholic priests. He eas groomed to start what he started so as to prevent the true believers from reaching the Arabs.
bros its easier to deal with the folly of mohammed than to start explaining that the true origin of islam
Na why if you what this video moslems are finding out there is no archeological evidence of islam
adm212144: leave their religion for them must you talk about them .I'm suspecting you .I feel people like you are been paid to cause instability in this country because the way you go about finding ways to cause chaos through any means.i think nairaland should start screening message .
Mohammed was just an illiterate that capitalized on what the christians were already doing.
Islamic religion is more of an extension of the old testament Christianity.
Muslim very much believe in the bible like christians, what I wrote up there is not something a Muslim will say because they too believe in the bible like u christians.
So don't think I'm a Muslim criticizing the bible.
