You might want to objectively consider islam, just putting it out there.

lexiconkabir:


using your example, is Aisha's last name her father's name or another name of her's?

It's another name of hers using my example. Just noticed the question and answered it so as not to seem rude, but like I already posted I agree with imam nawawi's view

Well I was just putting my 2 cents in, not like I'm an authority or have any studies in the matter. Thanks for the civilised discussion. I do understand your view, and I am also in agreement with imam Nawawi. Again I stress that i didn't mean to annoy or derail the thread but just to share my thoughts. May Allah forgive us our shortcomings

From a quick search on Google (FYI since its Google, it may not be correct) his name was Ab al-Qsim Muhammad ibn'Abd Allh ibn' Abd al-Mualib ibn Hshim. In other words his lineage is traced 3 generations without any mention of tribe. Hence why I said in Arab culture they utilise the father name not the family name, I should have clarified that I meant utilised it for tracing lineage. Which is why it is forbidden to change the father's name for a person. I am yet to see any hadith that forbids the change of the tribe.

The point of that is because you made a claim that Arabs trace their lineage with tribal names. If you were to mention the full name of the prophet, you would see that he is Muhammad ibn Abdullah...I think his lineage can be traced back several generations this way, I would Google it. While he is recognised as a qurayshi, his lineage is not traced by his tribe but rather the paternal direct ancestors. I didn't mean to annoy or seem pigheaded

Do you mind telling me the name of the prophet?

Last name and father's name are not the same thing. Changing the father's name is what is haram. In Arab culture they don utilise last names. I mentioned this because of the hadith that was referred to about attributing to other than their fathers

I don't think that is what was meant. Changing your last name is not the same as changing your father name. If you are a girl named Aisha, and your last name is x, and your father's name is y, according to nigeriana customs you are called X Aisha, according to Arab customs you are called Aisha bint Y (Aisha daughter of Y). If you get married to a man with the last name of Z, you change the last name to become Z Aisha but must still retain your father's name Y. Don't confuse father's name with family name.

From a spiritual perspective,It may be that God puts His blessing in the remaining time they have to do other stuffs, it's not too farfetched to assume God would be pleased with anyone to puts aside the various distractions daily to pray 5 times.
Looking at it from a psychological perspective, the various prayers act as a well spaced out series of breaks from whatever activities you're doing, and could serve as mental benchmarks hence time doesn't just "fly by".
From a moral perspective, having to maintain the 5 solat (prayers) on a daily basis in the midst of all the variables life can offer builds up ones level of discipline which would in turn translate to other spheres of life.
These should begin to explain why some people regularly find the time to worship the one who gifted and still gifts them with time.

tbaba and albaqir in agreement?!

The surah wasn't pointing towards the "bible", it was pointing towards the "people" who had read the "sciptures" that were before him. There is a subtle but significant difference between the two. Just saying. Besides didn't you see the beginning of the verse? It says if you're in doubt...then ends with be not one of the waverers...it so happens that the issue of the status of Jesus isn't a thing muslims doubt, we would be sure to hala at y'all if we got something that our scholars and our intellect can't comprehend. Thanks

I have no clue about the respectable aspect, but my "favourite" lecturers are Mufti Menk, Nouman Ali Khan, Abu Mussab and one abdulnasir (I think) from Nigeria.

Just posting this to confirm that the shahada declaration is still active. Either we have a serious case of muslims with shaky iman or we gotten some folks who feel telling lies online don't count as lies...

Some more advice would be that you make realistic plans daily for the solat. Plan your day around the solat, rather than plan your solat around your day. Try using the solat as benchmarks, like you could set a target to do ABC right up until zuhr, take a nap between zuhr and asr, make an appointment for a meeting to be 15 minutes after asr. This way the solat becomes a part of your daily schedule.
Allah says in the qu'ran (I am not quoting) that He has gifted us with solat for it to be a relief from burden.

In addition, you can try to look around for other muslims (who also would like to perform their solat regularly) at your Workplace and form a kinda solat clique. So that "peer pressure " can be used to your benefit.
Actively try to ginger yourself with incentives, like you could "convince" yourself that for every solat you make Allah is gonna give you a huge reward. This is true, but most people have a Lil bit of issue with valuing "akhira" benefits since they really can't imagine them, so you could just imagine that for every solat you perform within its time, you get 1million or something like that.
Most importantly make dua

You guys make it seem like Nigerians were faring so much better before Christianity and islam was introduced . Last time I checked the people were happily pagan and deeply connected to their roots when the villages were raided by other natives on the command of their leaders to supply the slave market, many "deities" were simply warriors that had died (eg Sango), and communities fought against each other.
Anyhow, you are entitled to your butt-hurt.

To tie up my claim, I have attempted to clarify that the father, the son, and the spirit are in fact 3 separate entities, but one may still argue (like you have) that that's the deal, the 3 are indeed different but when they are together they make up God.
That claim however is very farfetched and can't stand in the light of the message of the bible. Several times God is quoted to stress that He is the only one and he shares none of His power nor dominion with any other, buut that's theology. Let's try to tackle this with logic.
If I am to agree with you that Jesus is a part of God, then it follows that you believe that God could not forgive the offspring of Adam and Eve for the "original sin", so the only way out was for God to plan for those same offsprings to commit an even greater sin by killing a part of God. That sacrifice then becomes the scapegoat and as a result returns to being a part of God which he always was. From this some points to be drawn are:
-there was no forgiveness, because the punishment was still carried out, aand still is being carried out (the wages of sin is death, people still die)
-a part of God was killed, if that part really was crucial for the existence of God, that would insinuate that for the time Jesus was dead, God was not existing
-the offsprings of Adam added another grievous crime to their record.
So going by logic, it is provable that the father son aand spirit are different, but I just attempted to prove That in the very least there are strong arguments to discredit the trinity's claim of the concept of God.
May God forgive me for my errors and guide us to truth

Well, you said no christian would accept that bible, but there are "christians" already using it to do same sex marriages in churches. So who draws the line as to how much the bible caan be revised and how much you accept of it.
Concerning your claims to be unable tto copy and paste, and that you got these info from your book, both can't stand in light of Thaat link mentioned by agent of allah. Just admit you got the answers from the link already or a similar source

A question, since many christians claim that all the versions of the bible are authentic even with the changes and revisions, would christians accept the bible that has been edited to allow gay marriages in some parts of the world?

Regarding the holy spirit I won't venture much into that, partly because I have never seen God tthe spirit written in the scripture (it's always the spirit of God, and although I have reservations against that, it really isn't as controversial as the other points raised).
You said people usually don't give a logical reason to debunk the trinity claim. So lemme attempt to do so. The whole premise of your notion of trinity is that the 3 are the same in essence but can be seen in different perspectives. I would try to show "logically " why that caant stand
Firstly going by your analogy of space and matter existing in 3 forms. Let's take the verse from kings again saying the heavens and the earth can't contain the father. If the father is solid, aand a cuup can't contain that solid, would it be logical to expect a teaspoon to contain the liquid of that solid? I say teaspoon because the womb of Mary is so tiny when compared to the whole universe. Of course you could argue that it was only a tiny fragment of the solid that was turned into liquid and sent to the earth, but that would logically be countered by the claim that God is indivisible.
Moving on , let's analyse the components of the trinity again, the father and the son are clearly portrayed to have different personalities and memories, for example Jesus feared death (before he was captured), Jesus didn't have perfect knowledge (he didn't know the time of the last day), etc. From this we can deduce that in terms of their memories mind they were different entities
God is everliving, all knowing, all powerful, in need of no rest, in need of no nourishment, the same yesterday, today, and forever more etc. These are qualities that God possesses, but Jesus was created, didn't know the last day nor did he know whether the cup would be overturned from his head, he was not all powerful, slept like every other person, ate and drank explicitly like everyone else, asin he felt hungry, he grew in every sense of the Word (he grew in physique, in terms of knowledge). Hence in terms of qualities the father and the son are also not equal. When you couple that with the concept that God Doesn't share his attributes with anyone else, we can deduce that Jesus isn't the father from the perspective of their attributes
This has already gone soooooooo long, lemme just add this, the mere fact that most trinitarians claim That as a result of the deeds of Jesus (ie dieng for the sins of man) he was "GIVEN" dominion should be a clear pointer At the falsehood. If he was given, then there was a time before that he didn't have it, if he didn't have it thenn he wasn't God or a part of God, and whoever it was that GAVE him dominion would have to have been greater than him. And if Jesus was given dominion over all things, you are inevitably implying that a God was made...
May God forgive me for my shortcomings

@jmoore, 1 kings 8:27 isnt confirming That God is everywhere, it seems to be doing the exact opposite. I checked revised standard version.
Regarding Matthew 28:20, Jesus is quoted to have said that you should teach all that he taught, and a common teaching of Jesus was that he and the father (God) are not equal. Eg "the one who sent me is greater than i", "I have no will of my own, but whatever my father in heaven wills I shall do", "...none is good but my father in Heaven " etc. so you coming now to try and sell this concept of the 3 (father, son, and spirit) being equal is directly against Jesus's instructions .
Further more, if God is everywhere, why would Jesus lie about where God is? You may ask, where did Jesus mention the location oof God...there are plenty of places, a common one is the "Lord's prayer": Our Father who art in heaven...
In summary one doesn't need to fetch far to realise even from the biblical account that :
1) God isn't everywhere in body, but His Knowledge and power encompasses everything
2) the fact that the heavens and the earth is mentioned tto be unable to contain God, yet Jesus was contained on earth (and allegedly in hell for a while) should mean in the very least that Jesus is not equal to God
3) it was a constant theme throughout his stay on earth to preach servitude to the father, and that the father was greater than him. So if you really wanna follow Jesus, follow him, don't follow what others said about him
4) this doesn't have to be an argument or emotional debate, I just am mentioning my view on the matter, and it isn't compulsory on you to try and debunk nor must you accept it. If you don't have an intellectual response, your silence wouuld be very much more appreciated than your words.
May God forgive my shortcomings .

Rilwayne001 got it spot on jazakallahu khayran . Empiree barakallahu feekum

Actually according to bible scholars, the author of the gospel according to John is anonymous, and like the other canonical gospels, it is believed to have been authored by more than one person. But I know you christians would most likely claim your bible scholars don't know what they are saying so there's no need to stress that point.
As for the topic of the thread, YES muslims would go to paradise according to the quran, and as was pointed out before even according to the bible...soooooooo you can argue all you want, the truth would remain the truth still.

Sure, I was just caught unaware, I had assumed you were christian, meaning that you would of course subscribe to the biblical account of the origin of man to be from Adam. Are you not christian?