₦airaland Forum

@ allonym

Umm, what do you mean by "want to have one"? I'm trying to see how a morally upright girl fits into the picture? Do you mean if he wants a girlfriend and still keep himself from indulging in sexual activities, he should find someone who is also committed to the selfsame goals?

Exactly, this is what I mean. At least his partner will also be a restraining party, and that will put one more and a significant obstacle on his part to keep practising illicit sex. My own way has been to avoid even having girlfriends, and as much as possible, avoid being with girls in places where my desires will get the better part of me. This may not be the best method though, but atleast, it has helped me avoid unsavoury results from illicit sexual affairs.

Zahymaka, which secondary school u go?

@ Donnie
I told you to tell me what the live miracle was, you said I should read my bible? That's queer.

@ Ijebuman
U sure are right about that.

Hmmm
The reverend is at it again. Please supply proof that the Quran copied all those sources. Also, where was it stated that semen comes from the brain in the Quran? The Quran rightly said it proceeded from between the backbone and the ribs, which is exactly what modern day science has come to corroborate. If you think otherwise, prove it.

Which Muslims believe that Jesus said Allah, Allah when we know he was never crucified. And Eli means my God in Hebrew, so what your point?

Reverend, the earliest Quran was written in the lifetime of the Prophet(SAW), except if you have proof to the contrary.

@ onnie
Please tell me what this miracle was about?

@ mlks_baby

I see your point.

@ donnie
It's good you noticed that CNN, MTV and WWF are selling lies to us. But the interesting thing is that these stations are also banned by the NBC from being shown over terrestrial TV in Nigeria. You can however pay to get these lies on DSTV or tother satelite channels. So may be you should go on DSTV to sell your miracles.

@ reverend
Thanks very much for your advice. I can assure you that I am as straight as can be, and I will not even stick my sausage into anything until I get marrried. So, I am safe and perfectly home to the Sharia law.

@ mlks_baby

Thanks for your explanations, they really helped. But you must also know that much of the law governing Western Nations, and their former colonies are Judeo-Christian in nature and thus the reason why a person convicted of killing is also liable to be put to death. Even though a lot of these laws have been modified into even forms that are presently anti-christian, their roots are still Judeo-christian. This is the same way the Sharia tries to be a judge for Muslims.

And I am happy christianity supports man's insurbudination to criminal as well as civil laws. Now, I am also sure that if there was a law to be introduced that will for instance legalise anti-christian beliefs, christianity will oppose this law. This therefore means a tacit effort to contribute to the laws that will judge mankind. So, christianity also influences how man is governed in just the same way as Islam tries to influence the laws according to it's interpretation of God's law. It's only that the latter seems to enforce it's law more than the former. If this proves to be true, then Jesus (ASW) obviously did not want people to keep on being prostitutes or adulteresses and did not abolish a punishment for adultery. He only asked the Jews what the Prophet of Islam also asked Muslims to do, use their hearts as the first Judge, and try to repent secretly between themselves and God, but also allows a public law that forbids the proliferation of that crime on the scale witnessed today. That is to say, the law should be punitive enough to serve as a deterrent to others from exhibiting their sexual profligacy and indiscretion publicly. This is what Islam seeks to do. It is wrong to interprete this to mean a blood-thirstiness on the part of Islam, but rather a control measure to ensure that crimes like that are rarely shown brazenly in public, while at the same time allowing people who fall to repent secretly.

You know, I watch Christembassy's programs on Sundays here in Nairobi. I actually take it as a form of panacea to the nostalgia that I sometimes fell. I am not against airing religious programs, I am just saying, miracles should not be part of the advertisement that churches put on TV to win followership. Many Miracles are a farce today.

Yes, the boadcasting code should be reviewed in line with our progress as a nation, but freedom to sell lies should not be allowed. It's not NBC that's the problem, it's the minds of those who are been beguiled. Eventually, they'll realise and that will spell doom for the perpetrators of this deception.

@ Jagunlabi
Interesting. You are a theist, but do not subscribe to religin, so how do you worship that God, or you think He doesn't need to be worshipped?

Interesting,


I understand why the reverend feels more threatened with Islam. Islam will effectively and efficiently carry out the punishment for sodomy on him than christianity would. My advise, please avoid countries that practice Sharia law, otherwise, it may just be you that amnesty and other will be shouting about.

@ mlks_baby

When do we know what kind of interpretation to give to what verse in the Bible? Some are interpreted allegorically, while others literarily. What are the yardsticks for their interpretations? The verse where Jesus (ASW) asked the person without sin to cast the first stone as you rightly said, is expected to reprove the hypocritical Jews, but still it doesn't say we should not have human Judges as you asserted. Just imagine a world without law, wouldn't that be chaotic? So saying Jesus (ASW) meant that the heart should be the judge of our afairs is definitely not entirely workable. In the past, even adherents of Judaism worked with the heart too. But the law is the collective hearts of every member of the society which rewards good and punishes evil to serve as a deterrent to other people who may just have lost their hearts. Have you ever heard of cold-blooded? It means tthe person has no conscience again. Now, assuming christianity was governing the world, how would you say society should deal with a cold-blooded killer that has no intention to stop killing? Please respond to this questions as it is very findamental if I have to understand the system christianity proposes to govern life on earth.

@ Isaho and IG
Thanks for your prayers. May God The Most High, The Most Beneficient, The Creator of The Heavens and Earth, The King of The Day of Judgement, bless you too, your families, and all others that want to establish Justice and peace on earth for the good of all of humanity.

@ syrup,
Thanks for being understanding and open-it is the hallmark of good reasoning, sound mind and wisdom.

The truth is NBC was right to ban any kind of unverified miracles being televised. The National Broadcast Code, which is the document with full legal effect that governs broadcasting in Nigeria, clearly states that all religions should be given 10% of airtime. The prevailing situation of using valuable TV time for showing 'miracles' that are an obvious lie, surely derives from the lack of manpower on the part of NBC to enforce that particular legislation. If the 10 % was strictly adhered to, I am sure 'miracles'as a marketing tool will be downplayed or eliminated by the churches that advertise on TV. At least now with the ban, the churches will reduce the lenght of their programmes and consequently tailor them to evangelising with brevity, which serves the purpose of the NBC at maintaining the 10% religious content which has consistently been flouted by most of the TV stations in Nigeria.

It is instructive to note that in Kenya just last week,a woman who tried to copy the Nigerian Pastors was recommended by their first lady, for investigation by the police, of fraud by claiming to heal HIV/AIDS by miracles etc. Promptly she was indeed investigated and charged to court on those charges. This is what should happen in sane societies. Nigeria ought not to be an exception. I will implore the Nigerian police to do their jobs so that NBC will not even need to issue that kind fof directive. Any pastor that lays claim to healing by miracles, and uses this to attract and defraud people should be made to face the full wrath of the law.

@ Reverend

You sure know how to dig for controversial issues. I only hope you will gain sufficient attention from christians to dispel all these allegations which this article has raised.

@ exu
Right !!! U are right.

@exu

I share your humour.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ah a aha ha h ahah ahah hahaaha haha aha ah ha ha

Make dem no know say we be Naija.

@mlks_baby

Actually as a muslim, I am made to believe God possesses no sons or daughters. So it is of no consequence when somebody says he is son of God. I recognise myself and other created beings as servants of God. I am very happy for you that you got your admission into the law faculty. I certainly feel you would make a very good lawyer, and I will be proud of you when you do become an outstanding and accomplished one. I am also sorry about your boyfriend's death. Except if he was a soldier fighting the Iraqis, I do not support the deaths of people unconnected with the war, irrespective of faith. And I posit that I am against in all it's forms wanton killings going on there perpetrated in the name of The One God which I serve. Even God will issue a disclaimer to some of the things being done there, it is most regrettable. But I would want to go further to say we can all put our hands together to liberate the opressed and the oppressors so that the world would be a better place.

I will also like to be your friend even beyond these discussions. I am on msn messenger if you'd like to meet me, then I would reveal somethings to you.

@ mlks_baby
This is why I felt earlier you were being an artful dodger. You said something about Jesus referring (or not) to himself in the Quran once before, and I indeed took the pains to explain to you that Jesus is always discussed as a third person singular in the Quran, implying that he was never reported as saying ANYTHING directly in the Quran except what God said Jesus did or said. So, using the logic did Jesus say so,  and so,  in the Quran is dodging the real questions.

And since Jesus (ASW) did not call himself God in the bible, even by biblical accounts, he still remains son of God, not God.

And talking about questions, you had better respond to Nubian quickly. Seems like you have another admirer and I must say you have surely awed more than my humble self in your knowledge of both sides, even if you just consider the Islamic knowedge purely academic, which explains why you see things from the perspectives you view them.

sly invectives? Funny you should notice. It was delibrate to make you understand some of your earlier positions in proper perspective ( things like  talk from noise) etc. And I think you may have been referring to IG not Gl as you stated. As you will have observed, I am also given to peace, but only to the extent that it can be tolerated. In some wisesayings titled desiderata which I have used to be my guiding principle since I was small, there is this quote saying, As far as possible without surrender, be on good terms with all persons, speak your truth quietly and clearly  and listen to others,  I have listened to you, and I respect you and your intellect, but I couldn't help but notice all those subtle punches you threw. The discussion was better without them.

Now for that verse 3:85, the correct translation is
And whoever seeks a religion other than Islam, it will never be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be one of the losers.

It does not connote what you said that 'no other religion is tolerated except Islam' Since youhave the Original translation, do not further translate or expantiate it by lifting specific vague statements or changing some words that change the thought of the verse completely. It is wrong to do that and you know it.

Like I said before I examined those hadiths and I have told you what they mean to a muslim and I am not apologetic about it.

I didn't refer to myself as a polytheist monotheist worshipper, but said if given a choice I would rather appear ostensibly to be polytheist when really I am monotheist, judging by your submissions that Islam is really polytheist as against it's claims to monotheism.

You also state your belief in pacifism,but you actually abused Ajisafe in earlier posts because he abused you first, now that's not a good example of sticking to peace against all odds is it?
If you felt slighted by my earlier posts, I didn't mean to be rude.

@ mlks_baby

I went to check out the Hadiths you quoted, and I can say that you did not complete quoting. There are many books of hadiths in Islam, and I expected you will say Al-Bukhari before the volume and number, because this is indeed where you quoted those sayings from. Now,the explanation, after he (SAW) had preached to them (pagans), and they refused to accept, but instead chose to inflict severe punishment on the Muslims, God then ordered that he fight them till they accept God. They did not have the option of remaining pagan. They could however have been christians or Jews who were not persecuting the Muslims, in which case they'd have been let free to practice their faith. The second Hadiths about Ali is explained below, though it is again concerned with atheists as the Arabic word Zanadiqa means atheist.

However, IG is right that a person that converts from Islam is regarded as a treacherous person and should be treated as such. Islam is a nation and a government and muslims, it's citizens. So it is generally seen as better to put the person to death if he is sane . He will be spared the torment of the hereafter. That is the Muslim belief based on hadiths and I am not apologetic about it.

@IG

Please quote as much as you can from their Holy book, just to show them that indeed it is not as perfect as they think, and may be, just may be, we may get mlks_baby back. You are right about her misquoting and mis interpreting the Quran.
The funny thing is that the rule is to kill anybody who reverts from Islam, and claims to still be within Islam but introducing heresy into the religion. For most practical purposes, a muslim converting to christianity may not be hurt if he chooses not to be governed by the Sharia.

Also you cAN SEE how TayoD and mlks_baby tactically avoided the issue of pacifism which the bible preaches. Nobody would readily agree to lead that kind of peaceful life, meaning it is unrealistic, and I am sure neither of them readily subsribes to that doctrine otherwise, they would not have traded insults with Ajisafe earlier.

From now on, I will react to one issue after the other and only if they are put down objectively as I have discovered that mlks_baby delibrately tries to use technical points and sometimes outright falsehood by misquoting and  misinterpreting the Quran and holding on to discredited Muslim ideologies purposely to derive strenghts for her view of an argument. She neglects the history of the revelations she quotes, the circumstances of these same revelations, and most importantly the Hadith explanation of these verses which clearly puts the verses into proper perspective knowing fully well that the Quan cannot be interpreted successfully without the Hadiths. Using these Qurannic verses, she interpretes the verses to take her own meanings and then justifies her point. For instance, the Quran ordered a war against the pagans when the muslims had attained a number strength that could confront them after years of persecution, but @mlks_baby would rather see that verse as one ordering muslims to slay christians and Jews even when unprovoked inspite of my attempts to prove otherwise. She first acknowledges that I am right that it refers to pagans, but went on to state also that it also refers to christians and Jews, which the Quran did not state. This is totally unobjective and is akin to beating around the bush instead of hitting the nail on the head.

I am sure she will agree with me that I have not misquoted the bible as it is- even when I know that it has been manipulated, and I have not even misinterpreted it. But I have noticed  some delibracy in obfuscating issues, a lack of magnanimity to accept the truth when confronted with reality-even when it was proven from her very own statements and attempts to intimidate her opponents by a subtle untilisation of a carrot and stick approach. Notice how she tries many times to play on my vanity by using patronising remarks that imply that I have been rather peaceful unlike other muslims, and thanking me profusely for such as if I was doing something extraordinary or out of Islam. And at the same time, she hits me when I debunk some of her assertions by implying that I make noise and it is her duty to separate noise from talk, or other equally condescending remarks. The combination of these two approaches is a powerful tool for breaking your ooponent in an argument even when you do not have valid points to present, I know this, and thus far, I have been able to steer clear of this tactics. I therefore implore her that in future, complimenting or patronising your ooponent in an argument is largely unneccesary, and should be avoided at any cost.
On one hand she claims that by stating that Muhammad (SAW) is the seal of Prophets, the Quran was comparing him with others, and elevating him above them. Now, I want anybody to show how this is a comparison in the sense that she wants us to believe. Seal meaning last. is not equivalent to superior, except if she's not talking of Queen's English, however in Arabic, hatimal nabiyy or rosul certainly does not translate to being superior. She says since the seal means nothing then the Kalimah Shahadah also means nothing. I however failed to establish a sense of correlation between these two things. The Shahadah does not even mention that Muhammed (SAW) is the seal of Prophets, all it says is that he is God's messenger. How this relates to Muhammad (SAW) being superior is still a mystery to me. She asserts further that I sound like one of those who compare and retracts when I have not even attempted to compare in the first place. After failing to prove the Quran made a comparison, she went on to latch unto the Mahdi's statement even when it is clear that he and other scholars of his ilk have been declared non-muslim by their beliefs. She then justifies her position by claiming that the bible or christianity compares even quoting from the bible to support this. TayoD countered this claim and tried to set Jesus (ASW) apart but declaring a caveat that other prophet's could not be compared. She then compliments him without retracting her earlier statements, while stating that it is Muslims who compare. She refuses to unconditionally accept she was wrong to say invocation is not prayer inspite of incontrovertible evidence that it is. She goes further to posit by implication that saying SAW or ASW by muslims is equivalent to necromancy-meaning
1. The practice of supposedly communicating with the spirits of the dead in order to predict the future.
2. Black magic; sorcery.
3. Magic qualities.
How in God's name does saying 'peace be upon him' translate to engaging in necromancy?

She says because the translators use capital letters to define the Word of God -Jesus, that means that he is something special or the Quran thus compares or distinguishes between Jesus (ASW) and the others. This cannot be father away from the truth. Any attribute of God is referred to in capital letters in the interpretation of the Quran. So if the Word of God became Jesus, then it has to be translated in capital letters. She also takes it upon herself not only to know the true christians, but also the Muslims with the correct views and interpretation of Islam, thus seeking to define how Islam is to be interpreted. This is inspite of I being a bonafide Muslim telling her that some muslims commit faux pas when they take certain actions, she'll explain that away by saying things such as 'not many muslims share your views' suggesting that I were some kind of Minority muslim with views at variance with the majority of muslims. Yet, not one person has come to challenge what I say about Islam on this thread. I posit therefore that as a holder of the aqeedah of the ahlu-sunnah wa Jama'a, I represent the correct Islamic Ideology. Where I err , it is completely my error, but much of what I say is the Islamic position on these things.

So you see from the matters arising that mlks_baby has lost track of the original objective in her bid to show that Islam is fraught with errors and muslims are on the wrong path, while making pretensions to being logical, peaceable and knowledgeable. It remains to be seen if she will amend her tactics.

@mlks

Just so that you will realise your perfidy, and will in the future stop quoting wrongly or misquoting out of context Qurannic verses. Please all look at the preceeding verse, the quoted verse (quoted by mlks_baby to support her assertion that the Quran orders death to anybody that converts from Islam), and the following verse, and tell me if this verse talks about anybody who reverts from Islam?

Quran 4 Verse
87
Allah! there is no god but He: of a surety He will gather you together against the
Day of Judgment about which there is no doubt. And whose word can be truer
than Allah's?



Fight against hypocrisy and
hypocrites
88
Why should ye be divided into two parties about the hypocrites? Allah hath upset
them for their (evil) deeds. Would ye guide those whom Allah hath thrown out of
the way? For those whom Allah hath thrown out of the way never shalt thou find
the way.

89
They but wish that ye should reject faith as they do and thus be on the same
footing (as they): but take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of
Allah (from what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades seize them and slay
them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from
their ranks.

90
Except those who join a group between whom and you there is a treaty (of
peace) or those who approach you with hearts restraining them from fighting you
as well as fighting their own people. If Allah had pleased He could have given
them power over you and they would have fought you: therefore if they withdraw
from you but fight you not and (instead) send you (guarantees of) peace then
Allah hath opened no way for you (to war against them).

Now this verse definitely refers to those who accepted Islam, and were pretentious about it by aligning with the pagans secretly to fight the muslims. They were not converts, but rather hypocrites. And you can see that in the following verse, God says if they incline to peace, it is a sin to fight them. And it can be inferred from these verses that the order was reactionary. It had nothing to do with christians or Jews, it was revealed against some certain people who accepted Islam for material purposes and when they failed to achieve their aims, the still claimed to be Muslim, but were actually leaking secrets to the Pagans that were fighting the Muslims.

Now you see that the Quran cannot be interpreted in Isolation without the Hadiths. Also, I see mischief in the way mlks_baby quoted this verse while linking it to converts. This is needless.
I am quite happy that IG has corrected the other verse that was misquoted. Please desist from using such unbecoming tactics, it will not help your case and will only reveal that you mix up falsehood with ambiguities to pursue your agenda.

@ Reverend

I must say I have become quite accustomed to your sense of humour. Keep it up, u'll lighten the darkest days for anyone. Keep it up.

Why are you guys persecuting the reverend-if that's what he is for telling the truth? There are so many contradictions, and TayoD please don't try to explain yourself, as all your explanations about the contradictions always end up in 'it was Jesus that was being referred to'. Mlks_baby, good to know the spirit is poured fully into you. Reverend carry go. Only say i know say you no get good intention for doing it. You dey try justify your preferences for men- e no go work. My Religion say e no good to sodomise, so abeg stop am.

Mlks_baby, TayoD

Well, welll, where do I start from? I must say I got a handful here, but I'll take the time to redress some errors, and where it is mine, I'll humbly acknowledge.

This confession is commonly known as the "Two Testimonies", the second part of which is found in the Qur'an in Sura 48:29; and an even stronger one in Sura 33:40 where Muhammad is called "the Messenger of Allah, and the Seal of the Prophets." If that was not comparing by placing Muhammad above the other prophets, what do you call that?

In this statement you definitely implied that the Quran compares prophets. I accept your retraction if that's what u intended in your rejoinder when you denied saying the Quran did. And I am glad you say scholars. And since you are not muslim, it will be difficult for you to know who a true Islamic scholar is, just the same way I cannot call lavigne a reverend or scholar in christianity. Now leave Mahdi alone, a lot of muslims have denounce he, and others of his ilk.
Invocation, prayer? What are you getting at? Look at the meaning of invocation from an online dictionary.

in·vo·ca·tion (nv-kshn) KEY

NOUN:

The act or an instance of invoking, especially an appeal to a higher power for assistance.
A prayer or other formula used in invoking, as at the opening of a religious service.


A prayer or other formula used in invoking, as at the opening of a religious service

Now I hope you see your error. Invocation also means a prayer, and that's exactly what Muslims do when they say ASW or SAW. They pray for their leaders, now I hope the bible does not ban this?
I'll continue later,

@ owo

This still remains to be proven. I certainly know that trying to explain the contradictions away by using such ideas as have been posted here simply confirms that there is a confusion, and people are trying very hard to explain the unclear areas subjectively.

@ IG

If you took time to read my earlier posts, you'll see that I already posted the full version of that convenant Muhamad (SAW) had with the christians before. But, the christians I have been engaged with just managed to conveniently ignore it and instead choose to hold on to their prejudical and aberrant view that Muhamad (SAW) was actually a man given to violence.

mlks_baby

I took your advice, and I learnt that the basic reason why God uses we to describe himself in the Quran is as expression of His Majesty. Think about it, a king decides something, but when he speaks to his people he says We decided. Similarly, God who is responsible for ordering the creation, is worthy of this Grandiose kind of language. If you feel otherwise, well goodluck to you.

@ Kag, and Nferyn Check out these predictions.

These are verses from the Holy Quran Chapter 30 (The Romans) about the prediction,

2 ;The Romans have been defeated (by the Persians, in Syria - A.D. 615;
the Prophet Muhammad's sympathies were with the Romans who were
Christians, while the pagan Arabs were on the side of the Persians who
were idol worshippers)

3
in the neighboring land, but they, after this defeat, will soon be
victorious

4
within a few years. The command lies with Allah in the past instance as
well as in the future. On that day the believers will rejoice


5
for the victory of the Romans as well as their own victory against the
pagans with the help of Allah. He helps whom He pleases and He is the
All-Mighty, the Most Merciful.

6
This is the promise of Allah and Allah never breaks His promise; but
most people do not know.





The prediction made in the initial verses of this Surah is one of the most outstanding evidences of
the Quran's being the Word of Allah and the Holy Prophet Muhammad's being a true Messenger of
Allah. Let us have a look at the historical background relevant to the verses.

Eight years before the Holy Prophet's advent as a Prophet the Byzantine Emperor Maurice was
overthrown by Phocus, who captured the throne and became king. Phocus first got the Emperor's
five sons executed in front of him, and then got the Emperor also killed and hung their heads in a
thoroughfare in Constantinople. A few days after this he had the empress and her three
daughters also put to death. The event provided Khusrau Parvez, the Sassanid king of Iran; a
good moral excuse to attack Byzantium. For Emperor Maurice had been his benefactor; with his
help he had got the throne of Iran. Therefore, he declared that he would avenge his godfather's
and his children's murder upon Phocus, the usurper. So, he started war against Byzantium in 603
A. D. and within a few years, putting the Phocus armies to rout in succession, he reached Edessa
(modern, Urfa) in Asia Minor, on the one hand, and Aleppo and Antioch in Syria, on the other.
When the Byzantine ministers saw that Phocus could not save the country, they sought the
African governor's help, who sent his son, Heraclius, to Constantinople with a strong fleet.
Phocus was immediately deposed and Heraclius made emperor. He treated Phocus as he had
treated Maurice. This happened in 610 A.D., the year the Holy Prophet was appointed to
Prophethood.

The moral excuse for which Khusrau Parvez had started the war was no more valid after the
deposition and death of Phocus. Had the object of his war really been to avenge the murder of his
ally on Phocus for his cruelty, he would have come to terms with the new Emperor after the death
of Phocus. But he continued the war, and gave it the color of a crusade between Zoroastrianism
and Christianity. The sympathies of the Christian sects (i.e. Nestorians and Jacobians, etc.) which
had been excommunicated by the Roman ecclesiastical authority and tyrannized for years also
went with the Magian (Zoroastrian) invaders, and the Jews also joined hands with them; so much
so that the number of the Jews who enlisted in Khusrau's army rose up to 26,000.

Heraclius could not stop this storm. The very first news that he received from the East after
ascending the throne was that of the Iranian occupation of Antioch. After this Damascus fell in 613
A.D. Then in 614 A.D. the Iranians occupying Jerusalem played havoc with the Christian world.
Ninety thousand Christians were massacred and the Holy Sepulcher was desecrated. The Original
Cross on which, according to the Christian belief, Jesus had died was seized and carried to
Mada'in. The chief priest Zacharia was taken prisoner and all the important churches of the city
were destroyed. How puffed up was Khusrau Parvez at this victory can be judged from the letter
that he wrote to Heraclius from Jerusalem. He wrote: "From Khusrau, the greatest of all gods, the
master of the whole world : To Heraclius, his most wretched and most stupid servant: 'You say
that you have trust in your Lord. why didn't then your Lord save Jerusalem from me?'"

Within a year after this victory the Iranian armies over-ran Jordan, Palestine and the whole of the
Sinai Peninsula, and reached the frontiers of Egypt. In those very days another conflict of a far
greater historical consequence was going on in Makkah. The believers in One God, under the
leadership of the Prophet Muhammad (may Allah's peace be upon him), were fighting for their
existence against the followers of shirk under the command of the chiefs of the Quraish, and the
conflict had reached such a stage that in 615 A.D., a substantial number of the Muslims had to
leave their homes and take refuge with the Christian kingdom of Habash, which was an ally of the
Byzantine Empire. In those days the Sassanid victories against Byzantium were the talk of the
town, and the pagans of Makkah were delighted and were taunting the Muslims to the effect:
"Look the fire worshipers of Iran are winning victories and the Christian believers in Revelation
and Prophethood are being routed everywhere. Likewise, we, the idol worshipers of Arabia, will
exterminate you and your religion."

These were the conditions when this Surah of the Quran was sent down, and in it a prediction
was made, saying:"The Romans have been vanquished in the neighbouring land and within a few
years after their defeat, they shall be victorious. And it will be the day when the believers will
rejoice in the victory granted by Allah." It contained not one but two predictions: First, the
Romans shall be Victorious; and second, the Muslims also shall win a victory at the same time.
Apparently, there was not a remote chance of the fulfillment of the either prediction in the next
few years. On the one hand, there were a handful of the Muslims, who were being beaten and
tortured in Makkah, and even till eight years after this prediction there appeared no chance of
their victory and domination. On the other, the Romans were losing more and more ground every
next day. By 619 A.D. the whole of Egypt had passed into Sassanid hands and the Magian armies
had reached as far as Tripoli. In Asia Minor they beat and pushed back the Romans to Bosporus,
and in 617 A.D. they captured Chalcedon (modern, Kadikoy) just opposite Constantinople. The
Emperor sent an envoy to Khusrau, praying that he was ready to have peace on any terms, but
he replied, "I shall not give protection to the emperor until he is brought in chains before me and
gives up obedience to his crucified god and adopts submission to the fire god." At last, the
Emperor became so depressed by defeat that he decided to leave Constantinople and shift to
Carthage (modern, Tunis). In short, as the British historian Gibbon says, even seven to eight years
after this prediction of the Quran, the conditions were such that no one could even imagine that
the Byzantine Empire would ever gain an upper hand over Iran. Not to speak of gaining
domination, no one could hope that the Empire, under the circumstances, would even survive.

When these verses of the Quran were sent down, the disbelievers of Makkah made great fun of
them, and Ubayy bin Khalaf bet Hadrat Abu Bakr ten camels if the Romans became victorious
within three years. When the Holy Prophet came to know of the bet, he said, "The Quran has used
the words bid i sinin, and the word bid in Arabic applies to a number up to ten. Therefore, make
the bet for ten years and increase the number of camels to a hundred." So, Hadrat Abu Bakr
spoke to Ubayy again and bet a hundred camels for ten years.

In 622 A.D. as the Holy Prophet migrated to Madinah, the Emperor Heraclius set off quietly for
Trabzon from Constantinople via the Black Sea and started preparations to attack Iran from
rear. For this he asked the Church for money, and Pope Sergius lent him the Church collections on
interest, in a bid to save Christianity from Zoroastrianism. Heraclius started his counter attack in
623 A.D. from Armenia. Next year, in 624 A.D., he entered Azerbaijan and destroyed Clorumia, the
birthplace of Zoroaster, and ravaged the principal fire temple of Iran. Great are the powers of
Allah, this was the very year when the Muslims achieved a decisive victory at Badr for the first time
against the mushriks. Thus both the predictions made in Surah Rum were fulfilled
simultaneously within the stipulated period of ten years.

The Byzantine forces continued to press the Iranians hard and in the decisive battle at Nineveh
(627 A.D.) they dealt them the hardest blow. They captured the royal residence of Dastagerd, and
then pressing forward reached right opposite to Ctesiphon, capital of Iran in those days. In 628 A.
D. in an internal revolt, Khusrau Parvez was imprisoned and 18 of his sons were executed in front
of him and a few days later he himself died in the prison. This was the year when the peace treaty
of Hudaibiya was concluded, which the Quran has termed as "the supreme victory", and in this
very year Khusrau's son, Qubad II, gave up all the occupied Roman territories, restored the True
Cross and made peace with Byzantium. In 628 A.D., the Emperor himself went to Jerusalem to
instal the "Holy Cross" in its place, and in the same year the Holy Prophet entered Makkah for the
first time after the Hijrah to perform the Umrah-tul-Qada.

After this no one could have any doubt about the truth of the prophecy of the Quran, with the
result that most of the Arab polytheists accepted Islam. The heirs of Ubayy bin Khalaf lost their bet
and had to give a hundred camels to Hadrat Abu Bakr Siddiq. He took them before the Holy
Prophet, who ordered that they be given away in charity, because the bet had been made at a
time when gambling had not yet been forbidden by the Shariah; now it was forbidden. Therefore,
the bet was allowed to be accepted from the belligerent disbelievers, but instruction given that it
should be given away in charity and should not be brought in personal use.


More later,