₦airaland Forum

gimakon:
Prove it.

#laughing# exactly.. you people really know nothing about Christianity nor anything related to it

TruthHurts1:
Why you be dunce like this? Moses belongs to the Jewish Religion (Judaism) while Mary belongs to us, the Christians (usually Catholics)

I get it. Muslims have nobody of equal moral standing in their fake ass religion so they must poach holy figures from Christianity and Judaism. Poor f.o.o.ls. Classic abeed mentality.

Mary was never a Christian... Mary never call Jesus God nor son of God nor go church nor read Bible

Blackfire:
ok agreed i will be in hell, but not Islamic hell... But what hell are all Muslims including our holly prophet in, and everyone including our holly prophet are awaiting judgement, some will be saved from hell, others wouldn't(maybe u)? Are u scared ? U should be.. This are things u should sit down and analyse and ask questions, come up with your own conclusion with common sense.
- how can a prophet be in hell till now.
- how can after been a faithful(jihadist and conservative) Muslim, i will be in hell first.
- am not even sure u will make the list , are u scared? U should be? .
- who is going to judge u Muslims on that day?.
-was mohamed deceiving himself or all of us.
- why is mohamed ibn abdulallah really afraid of? Why do we ve to shout peace on him everyday? .

And if decide to leave Islam,mohamed, quran, why will anyone including mohamed, Allah, Islam and Muslims issued fatwa of death on u.. Why the compulsion?.

Shkr

This is blackfire

You a fool

true2god:
mohammed said:“If I take an oath and later find something else better than that, then I do what is better and expiate my oath” (Bukhari: V7B67N427). He had further said: “Allah and his Messenger dissolve obligations” (Quran 9:3). Also in Quran 66:2, Muhammad had declared: “Allah has already sanctioned for you the dissolution of your vows.” MUSLIMS ALWAYS LIE ...they have shown that MANY times in their comments on nairaland.

It is islamically ok to lie to deceive infidels, never trust a muslim.

you brain dead.. chai..

true2god:
Shameless muslims without conscience. See what you lying prophet said in the hadith below:

Bukhari Volume 3, Book 49, Number 857: Narrated Um Kulthum bint Uqba: That she heard Allah’s Apostle saying, “He who makes peace between the people by INVENTING good information or saying good things, is not a liar.”

Muslim Book 032, Number 6303: Humaid b. ‘Abd al-Rahman b. ‘Auf reported that his mother Umm Kulthum daughter of ‘Uqba b. Abu Mu’ait, and she was one amongst the first emigrants who pledged allegiance to Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him), as saying that she heard Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: A liar is not one who tries to bring reconciliation amongst people and speaks good (in order to avert dispute), or he conveys good.

Dont tell me those al-hadith are weak or fabricated, the standard muslim excuse.

you know nothing about the rules guarding hadith authenticity . yet you blabbing...


you that you don't know Bible will understand hadith .. tsw

Peritus:
Catholic Bible? you must be kidding. The only difference found in Catholic Bible is the inclusion of deuterocanonicals in the old testament. What you wrote up there has no place in the Bible. Do your research well, and let your proof be based not on subjective postulations of some individuals.
Can you tell me one moral justification or the rationale behind child/kid marriage.

see this fool o.. 15-18 years old lady is a kid?


go and do research on age ladies get married...

its 13-18... that's legalized by law in almost every country..

Blackfire:
our holly prophet and all Muslims must first be in hell, instead of al jannah awaiting judgement , so is all Muslims, according to the quran and hadiths.

Have u gotten yourself a Christian you will throw over the bridge to be able to enter al jannah?..

Who will suffer? me? No, is you that ve been suffering from backward - reading- Arabic -brainwashed - slavery.
U are a dumb sick Zap jihadist apologist.

#laughing# ... this is how I will be laughing when. you burn in hell.. you rejected your Creator (Allah), rejected prophet isa, you lied against him by calling him God and son of God and you reject prophet Muhammad (saw)... see all your offense... if you die with those belief... Hell awaits you

parisbookaddict:
Lol. Mr al taqiyya muslim why did u post a silly link, post the hadith let's see how it differs. Let everyone reading this see it. No one has time to visit a silly muslim website and increase its traffic.

Ur muslim tricks is well known.

believe whatever you want.. you want proofs, you were given.. then you reject it.. not my problem.. its yours

parisbookaddict:
Once muslims are confronted with thE truth they become belligerent. Why must u use words like "split your brains".

Always prone to violence.

laughing #this is serious #

TruthHurts1:
It must be very painful to be obsessed with another religion. Especially when that religion considers you to be a nuisance. Poor abeed.

Even in the crookran Jesus receives more mentions than MUMUhaMAD

and Moses is mentioned hundred times more than Jesus in Bible



Quran mentioned Mary mother of Jesus 80% more times than she was mentioned in Bible..

Scholar8200:
Thanks for the compliment! I guess you either didnt see the clause acknowledging the unreliability of the traditions (depended on by your 'scholars') or you deliberately ignored it

olodo... "your scholars" means Christian scholars

Annunaki:
When you deny facts that mohamed was a armed robber, rapist, paedophile, adulterer, murderer, liar and sex maniac as recorded in your quoran and sahih hadiths, you are denying mohamed.

Allah do not permit us(Muslim) to curse non believer's...


am tired of all your non sense... I really wish to curse you because of all your blatant lies.. am even tired of debunking all your lies..


all you said, you have no proofs.. when you were given proofs.. you still wont understand..


your brain needs attention..

true2god:
mohammed said:“If I take an oath and later find something else better than that, then I do what is better and expiate my oath” (Bukhari: V7B67N427). He had further said: “Allah and his Messenger dissolve obligations” (Quran 9:3). Also in Quran 66:2, Muhammad had declared: “Allah has already sanctioned for you the dissolution of your vows.” MUSLIMS ALWAYS LIE ...they have shown that MANY times in their comments on nairaland.

It is islamically ok to lie to deceive infidels, never trust a muslim.

OMG! .. Olodo rabata.. definition of foolishness.. na u sabi.. believe what u wanna believe.. I sha can't split your brains and put in explanations.. #lol#

TruthHurts1:
First of all, THANK YOU for counting me in the exallted company of Annunaki and Parisbookaddict. I'm really PROUD of such an association. The real shame and embarrassment would be if I were connected with I'd.iots like DeathStroke007, Facheux (a.k.a Abeed) Lexiconkabir etc, all of whom were awarded first class degrees in mumulogy.

Secondly, here is the source of MuhamMAD and his sexual misconduct with Mary the Copt:

"Also it is reported that the Prophet had divided his days among his wives. And when it was the turn of Hafsa, he sent her for an errand to the house of her father Omar Khattab. When she took this order and went, the prophet called his slave girl Mariyah the Copt who bore his son Ibrahim, and who was a gift from the king Najashi and had sexual intercourse with her. When Hafsa returned, she found the door locked. So she sat there behind that locked door until the prophet finished the business and came out of the house while "pleasure"was dripping from his
face. When Hafsa found him in that condition she rebuked him saying you did not respect my honor; you sent me out of my house with an excuse so you could sleep with the slave girl. And in the day that was my turn you had intercourse with someone else. Then the Prophet said, "Be quiet for although she is my slave and halal to me. For your contentment I at this moment make her haram to myself."
But Hafsa did not do this and when the Prophet went out of her house she knocked at the wall that separated her room from that of Aisha and told her everything. She also gave the glad tidings that the Prophet had promised to make Mariyah haram to himself.

Tafseer Al- Quran 66:1-5 by Mohammad Kazem Mo’refi.

Telling lies is a sin.. May Allah never forgive you for quoting and framing lies against prophet Muhammad (saw)..






http://www.islamicstudies.info/tafheem.php/?sura=66&verse=1&to=5



this is the real translations and footnotes of the verse.. its in detailed expiation..


go read and learn .. and know that nothing except lie will always come out of this kufar mouth

TruthHurts1:
Muhammad was up for anything when it came to sex. In fact, if he had lived in the 21st century, he would probably have been a top p.o.r.n.s.tar. What do we expect when Allah generously empowered him with s3xual stamina to handle 30 women a day?

Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 5,
Number 268:

Narrated Qatada:
Anas bin Malik said, “The Prophet
used to visit all his wives in a
round, during the day and night
and they were eleven in number.”
I asked Anas, “Had the Prophet
the strength for it?” Anas replied,
“We used to say that the Prophet
was given the strength of thirty
(men).” And Sa’id said on the
authority of Qatada that Anas had
told him about nine wives only (not eleven)

Can you imagine allahh's greatest prophet having sex day and night? Even his followers (like Facheux (Abeed) Deathstroke007, Lexiconkabir etc) marveled.

http://www.islamicstudies.info/tafheem.php/?sura=66&verse=1&to=5




go read...

Blackfire:
our holly prophet is the best of Allah 's creation. *receives e-slaps*

#laughing #... this guy will suffer for grave and hereafter like unimaginable... u and the likes of fools that do insult prophet Muhammad (saw)

Scholar8200:
Op, basing your 'research' on questionable sources is a faulty practice. Show us ONE Bible person that married a 12 year old or a child.


Abraham seniored Sarah by approx. 10 years, Jacob, Isaac, David etc married women not kids.

The angel told Mary she was favoured among WOMEN not girls! Luke 1:28

How will a twelve year old be cousin to an old woman? when that old woman is old enough to be her grandma?

you are educated illiterate..


despite quoting from different bible scholars and from Catholic Bible
. yet you saying trash...

unphilaz:
deathstroke... look at the bolded and tell me you did not mean that becos if you do... then mohammed is just an ordinary man who did what annuki,true2god,truthman has been pointing from the hadith and koran which are so despicable....

see this fool o.. he knows absolutely nothing about prophet Muhammad (saw), yet he's accusing him... ain't you guys educated

unphilaz:
CONFAM!! this is authentic hadith

I was banned and due to non internet network availability here.. that's why I couldn't reply you earlier...










(66:1) O Prophet, why do you forbid what Allah has made lawful for you?1Is it to please your wives?2Allah is Most Forgiving, Most Compassionate.3(66:2) Allah has prescribed for you a way for the absolution of your oaths.4Allah is your Guardian. He is All-Knowing, Most Wise.5(66:3) The Prophet confided something to one of his wives and then she disclosed it (to another); so after Allah revealed to the Prophet (that she had disclosed that secret), he made a part of it known to her and passed over a part of it. And when he told her about this (i.e., that she had disclosed the secret entrusted to her), she asked: “Who informed you of this?” He said: “I was told of it by He Who is All-Knowing, All-Aware.”6(66:4) If the two of you turn in repentance to Allah (that is better for you), for the hearts of both of you have swerved from the Straight Path.7But if you support one another against the Prophet,8then surely Allah is his Protector; and after that Gabriel and all righteous believers and the angels are all his supporters.9(66:5) Maybe if he were to divorce you, your Lord might grant him in exchange wives better than you10– those who truly submit to Allah,11are full of faith, obedient,12disposed to repentance,13and given to worship14and fasting15– both previously wedded ones and virgins.1. This is not, in fact, a question but an expression of disapproval. The object is not to ask the Prophet (peace be upon him) why he had done so, but to warn him that his act to make unlawful for himself what Allah had made lawful is not approved by Allah. This by itself gives the meaning that nobody has the power tomake unlawful what Allah has made lawful; so much so that the Prophet (peace be upon him) himself also did not possess any such power. Although the Prophet (peace be upon him) did not regard this as unlawful as a matter of faith nor legally but only forbade himself its use, yet since he was not an ordinary man but Allah’s Messenger, and his forbidding himself something could have the effect that his followers too would have regarded it as forbidden, or at least reprehensible, or the people of his community might have thought that there was no harm in forbidding oneself something his Allah had made lawful, Allah pointed it out to him and commanded him to refrain from such prohibition.2. This shows that in this case the Prophet (peace be upon him) had not made a lawful thing unlawful because of a personal desire but because his wives had wanted him to do so, andhe had made it unlawful for himself only in orderto please them. Here, the question arises: why has Allah particularly made mention of the cause of making the thing unlawful besides pointing out the act of prohibition? Obviously, if the object had been to make him refrain from making a lawful thing as unlawful, this could be fulfilled by the first sentences and there was no need that the motive of the act also should havebeen stated. Making mention of it in particular clearly shows that the object was not to check the Prophet (peace be upon him) only for making a lawful thing as unlawful, but along withthat to warn the his wives also to the effect that in their capacity as the Prophet’s wives they had not understood their delicate responsibilities and had made the Prophet (peace be upon him) do a thing which could lead to making a lawful thing as unlawful.Although it has not been mentioned in the Quranas to what it was that the Prophet (peace be upon him) had made forbidden upon himself, yetthe traditionists and commentators have mentioned in this regard two different incidents, which occasioned the revelation of this verse. One of these relates to Mariyah Qibiyyah (Mary, the Copt lady) and the other to his forbidding upon himself the use of honey.The incident relating to Mariyah is that after concluding the peace treaty of Hudaibiyah, one of the letters that the Prophet (peace be upon him) sent to the rulers of the adjoining countries was addressed to the Roman Patriarch of Alexandria also, whom the Arabs called Muqawqis. When Hatib bin Abi Baltaa took this letter to him, he did not embrace Islam but received him well, and in reply wrote: I know thata Prophet is yet to rise, but I think he will appear in Syria. However, I have treated your messenger with due honor, and am sending two slave-girls to you, who command respect among the Coptics. (Ibn Saad). One of those slave-girls was Sirin and the other Mariyah (Mary). On his way back from Egypt, Hatib presented Islam before both and they believed. When they came before the Prophet (peace be upon him), he gave Sirin in the ownership of Hassan bin Thabit and admitted Mariyah into hisown household. In Dhil-Hijjah, A.H. 8 she gave birth to the Prophet’s (peace be upon him) son, Ibrahim. (Al-Istiab; Al-Isabah). This lady was verybeautiful. Hafiz Ibn Hajar in Al-Isabah has related this saying of Aishah about her: No woman’s entry into the Prophet’s household vexed me so much as that of Mariyah, because she was very beautiful and pleased him much. Concerning her the story that has been narrated in several ways in the Hadith is briefly as follows:One day the Prophet (peace be upon him) visited the house of Hafsah when she was not at home. At that time Mariyah came to him thereand stayed with him in seclusion. Hafsah took it very ill and complained of it bitterly to him. Thereupon, in order to please her, the Prophet (peace be upon him) vowed that he would have no conjugal relation with Mariyah in future. According to some traditions, he forbade Mariyah for himself, and according to others, he also swore an oath on it. These traditions have been mostly reported by the immediate successors of the companions without mentioning any intermediary link. But some of these have been reported from Umar, Abdullah bin Abbas and Abu Hurairah also. In view of the plurality of the methods of narration, Hafiz Ibn Hajar in Fath al-Bari has expressed the view that there is some truth in the story. But in none of the six authentic collections of the Hadith has this story been narrated. In Nasai only this much has been related from Anas: The Prophet (peace be upon him) had a slave-girl with whom he had conjugal relations. Then, Hafsah and Aishah began to point out this to him repeatedly until he forbade her for himself. There upon, Allah sent down this verse: O Prophet, why do you make unlawful that which Allah has made lawful for you.The other incident has been related in Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Daud, Nasai and several other books of Hadith from Aishah herself and its purport is as follows:The Prophet (peace be upon him) usually paid a daily visit to all his wives after the Asr Prayer. Once it so happened that he began to stay in thehouse of Zainab bint-Jahsh longer than usual, for she had received some honey from somewhere as a gift and the Prophet was very fond of sweet things; therefore, he would have adrink of honey at her house. Aishah states that she felt envious of this and spoke to Hafsah, Saudah and Safiyyah about it and together they decided that whoever of them was visited by theProphet, she should say to him: Your mouth smells of maghafir. Maghafir is a kind of flower, which gives out an offensive smell, and if the bee obtains honey from it, it is also tainted by the same odor. They all knew that the Prophet was a man of very fine taste and he abhorred that he should emit any kind of unpleasant smell. Therefore, this device was contrived to stop him from staying in the house of Zainab and it worked. When several of his wives told him that his mouth smelt of maghafir, he made apromise not to use the honey any longer. In one tradition his words are to the effect: Now, I will never have a drink from it: I have sworn an oath. In another tradition he only said: I will never havea drink from it, and there is no mention of the oath.



http://www.islamicstudies.info/tafheem.php/?sura=66&verse=1&to=5



continue reading from the link if you truly wanna know

Annunaki:
Very soon I am sure one moronic imam will issue a fatwa against all non muslims for reading islamic material on the internet. the internet is really islam's waterloo all of islam's dirty secrets kept under wraps for centuries are now freely available to everybody on the internet and devout muslims like deathstroke007 are even denying mohamed by denying his deeds. Islam is crumbling like a pack of cards and it's really gonna be fun watching islam go into oblivion over the next few decades

prove it i deny prophet Muhammad (saw)
..

And finally, let us closely consider the latest translation of John 1:1 by the able scholar of theGreek language and New Testament theologian,SirAnthony F. Buzzard:“In the beginning there was God’s grand design, and that declaration was with God, related to Him as His project, and it was fully expressive ofGod Himself.”[12]In sum, we should not put Jesus on the same pedestal of divinity with the Father as he does not belong there. To place Jesus on equal footing with the Father is to create a usurper to the Divine Throne and Jesus is no usurper. Nor is he an upstart of any kind. He has ever been and shall ever be God’s supreme messenger that walked humbly in God’s shadow and adhered to every letter of His command as an obedient servant, even unto death (after his second coming).

Fear not, I shall try to break down the technicalities that may have blurred your readingof Heinfetter’s translation and interpretation above. In a nutshell, Heinfetter posits that since there is no indication that the word should be described as “the God” or one that shares equal power and majesty with the Father, it is only suitable and fitting that he interprets this “word” as being “a god” with a small “G” whose role was that of God’s “command.” Since the appellation (a god) is without the definite article that is given to the Father, in John 1:1b (ton theon), therefore, it is only fitting that this being, if it is a being, be stripped of the reverence that one would afford the Being in John 1:1b. In short, Heinfetter, rebukes the Trinitarian view that the “word” should be seen as the person “Jesus Christ” or as the “Son of God” who is supposedly “God” in this instance. He is in concert with Colin Brown and Anthony Buzzard after him in the view that Jesus was God’s “grand design” or His “plan” and as such he may correctly be designated the small “g”, “god” just as his brother prophet Moses was designated with in Exodus 7:1.

“A God. Was this used as an Appellation of Almighty God, the Article would certainly have been expressed before it; its omission therefore determines, that it must be used as an Appellation of some other, and this other, I judge from the context to be what I have expressed in the paraphrase. I judge my view to be somewhat strengthened by the 2nd verse, which would otherwise be mere repetition of the 3rd Clause of the first verse.”

Commenting on his choice translation “A God”, he writes:

“In vindication of my Translation of this verse, I would inquire. 1st. What Rule, Usage, or Customary Form of Exprssion, does it Ttransgress? 2nd. What better Form of Greek could be employed to express the Sense that I have given, than that which is in the original. 3rd.In relation to the Sense this verse is commonly regarded to afford, I would inquire, Where is there any authority for a Word preceded by the Article in the commencement of a record, without any explicit Definition, being regarded asan Appellation of an Individual, when such Word is not only, not previously well known as an acknowledged Appellation of the Individual, but is, on no other occasion, ever applied as an Appellation of the Individual. To admit such to be the casem is to admit the Article is a nullity. Rev. xix. 13, Is not the same Appellation. It is not, And his name is called the word, but, And hisname is called the word of God. To say nothing of its having been written, 28 years afterwards

When John 1:1c is rendered as “a god”, it loses the intensity that is exuded by “God” with a capital “G”, which seems to excite Trinitarians so much, with which they would proclaim the divinity of Jesus. Once John 1:1c is translated inthe indefinite form, theos loses its traction as a proof text for deifying Jesus and he now seems more like an agent (a Shaliach), acting on behalfof God just like Moses in Exodus 7:1.In close, we refer to the ancient Vatican manuscripts, in its literal rendering by the scholar Herman Heinfetter, which reveals how profoundly the “orthodox” rendering of John 1:1 has departed from true monotheism.“In commencing this Dispensation, the command was existing, i.e., had been spoken, yet the command was with the God, he having to fulfil it, as a God the command was, i.e., had relation to, this God was existing in commencingthis Dispensation with the God,” (John 1:1-2)Commenting on the “logos” which he translates as “the command” Heinfetter writes,

Newcome cites Crellius (even though what he opines here according to Newcome relies on noauthority) who interpreted and understood John 1:1c as saying “the Word” belongs to God, i.e., “the Word was God’s”. This would most certainlyrest squarely within the Islamic framework, i.e., ultimately everything belongs to God, but since itis only Crellius’ conjecture, we may simply leave it aside for a moment as an interesting trinket and hang it as a decorative mantelpiece that comes from a non-Christian, extra-Qur’anic source that coincidentally gives credence to what Islam believes.In Newcome’s understanding of John 1:1, Jesusplays the role of God’s representative, his spokesperson. As a close or intimate ambassador and mouthpiece of God, He revealed Himself by Jesus (“Jesus is so called because God revealed himself or his word by him.”; take note of the preposition which may seem minor, but it does in fact impart a meaningthat is significantly different than if it were “God revealed himself or his word IN him”[9]). Newcome does not see John 1:1c as the word being labelled with the exact same epithet as the Father, therefore, making him co-equal and co-eternal as the Father. Instead, he sees this asJohn’s belief that Jesus is God’s messenger, butbecause of his supreme position as God’s instrument, he is bestowed the divine title “god” just as Moses is given the exact title in Exodus 7:1.