₦airaland Forum

usermane:
The emergence of Empyree introduced a new position into the discourse. "Apostasy in punishable but only when the apostate becomes a threat to the Muslim state. Apostasy is treason."

Then tbobo1234 would come in later to refine Empyree's position. If you still recall, this is the same position promulgated by ShiaMoslem as early as page 1 but barely earned as much thumbs up.





Empyree, tbobo1234 and ShiaMoslem sought to strike a balance, by deriving an interpretation that would appeal to Muslims while asserting the validity of the hadith. But how successful were they?

They failed to convince lexiconkabeer to change his stand. In fact if you read till the end of the thread, Newnaz, bosar, Hebariom, easymoh, AminuRanu, yahmuh27 joined the discussion on the side of lexiconkabeer.

Lexiconkabeer sees the position of Empyree or tbobo1234 hold no support from the traditional Muslim jurisprudence. And he remained unshaken by their long winded exegesis. He may seem like an extremist, but in the end he's just another Muslim trying hard to tell it as it is.

Now, tbobo1234 and Empyree's view seem some what less harsh, but it is highly toxic. It'll definitely attract the approval of the masses, 99% of whom know nothing about sharia. These Muslims will continue in ignorance, denying killing for apostates.

But as more of these Muslims learn of sharia, they'll uncover the truth about the penalty for apostasy. And in bid to be honest like lexiconkabeer, they'll begin admitting the truth. Thus, even beyond 2018, this barbaric law will continue to be approved in the Muslim community.

love the way you interpolated my moniker.


Anyways, my stance and tbaba was the fair one bcus Quran gives free will to renounce Religion and at the same time it regulates Islamic state society (that's, people are checked from saying things not protected by Islamic Constitution).


Anyways, same people who criticize blasphemy law, remember they have this too



Deuteronomy 13:6-9 "If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying: Let us go and worship other gods (gods that neither you nor your fathers have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other, or gods of other religions), do not yield to him or listen to him. Show him no pity. Do not spare him or shield him. You must certainly put him to death. Your hand must be the first in putting him to death, and then the hands of all the people."


Case Settled

Are you saying that Hadith 8 is meant to perpetrate injustice, that is, a Muslim should not be killed for killing disbeliever?. Is that what you considered "injustice"?. I just wanna clarify this.

I think I did respond to this earlier. But before you criticize the Hadith, you need to look into the Qur'an first on this issue since you Believe Quran alone.

We all know that Qur'an talks about paying price for killing believer by another believer by mistake. But when it comes to "normal killing" of disbeliever by believer, there is no evidence to kill believer in QUR'AN either.

Normal Killing after severe rage and dispute:

There is no evidence from the Glorious Quran that the Muslim who really lost himself and kills a Dhimmi, due to severe personal issues between them, must be punished to death. Certainly, the following Laws would apply:

Pay blood money to the slain person's family.

Free a believing slave.

--OR--

Fast 2 consecutive months if he can't afford the these expenses.


However, if the Muslim is a serial and cold killer, and one that just wants to kill, then he is one who spreads mischief. And here are the Laws for those who spread mischief and injustice in the land:


Quran: 2:27

Those who break God's Covenant after it is ratified, and who sunder what God Has ordered to be joined, and do mischief on earth: These cause loss (only) to themselves.


This was repeated in another verse


[028:077]


"But seek, with the (wealth) which God has bestowed on thee, the Home of the Hereafter, nor forget thy portion in this world: but do thou good, as God has been good to thee, and seek not (occasions for) mischief in the land: for God loves not those who do mischief."


Finally, the punishment for such people is pronunced in this ayah.


[005:033]

The punishment of those who wage war against God and His Apostle, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter;


But I don't see where it says to kill Muslim who kills a disbeliever. Go to Qur'an first before that hadith. You will see that Hadith is saying the same thing. I hope i made accurate reference to what you portrayed?

true2god:
It seems we are saying the same thing but from different angles. As I said earlier, and as you rightly concurred, the shahada is a wartime declaration imposed upon the non-muslims who were forced to join the Muslim ummah or die (Qur'an 9:28-30, sahih Bukhari 4:52:196 and sahih Muslim 33).

My point is this, why saying the shahada since the ummah is no longer fighting the kafir, at least for now? You tired making a parallel between the US oath of citizenship but I smoked your ass, hope you won't do that again.

On Muslims' popular biblical verse, to create a moral relativism between righteous Jesus and evil Mohammed, you quoted:

Jesus said in Luke 19:27
"But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them--bring them here and kill them in front of me."

Can you please read the entire chapter of Luke 19 and see how disingenuous an average Muslim is?

stop your trash. Shahada has nothing to do with war on kufar. This is your own twist. Declaration Of Faith is just a way of Christian baptism. You baptise to be born again, right?. So in Islam, you take shahada and enter the fold of Islam and then take bath afterwards. What's that nonsense you are trying to attach to it.

And Luke 19:27 of the NT, is equally violent as OT. JESUS supported OT letter by letter. Therefore, Luke 19:27 is not parable. It means exactly what it says. It is your fraudulent pastors and Bishop, and pope that interpreted it in parable version. Not Jesus

Kuanku:
Islam is the religion of peace and highest following as well. Prophet of Islam have told the Muslims to stay positive with the Christian. A Muslim guy is allowed to marry with a Christian lady. Everyone needs to stay in limit while talking about the religion. What do you people think?

yes, right. They don't want to stay within limit. They want to come up with spurious stories and insult the prophet (saw) on top of that.

OLUWABIG:
@plainbibletruth I don't know when the UNESCO be came comedians when they claim Islam is the most peaceful religion isn't that a mockery of the highest order ?

you never made sensible contributions. You are just like the other dude who now ran away after been battered

plainbibletruth:
[size=6pt][/size]

The NT is said to be "NEW". Can a new thing be different from an old one? If the New replaces the Old why would you want to insist on referring to the Old?

The Christian has moved on from the old: If Islam still wants to cling to its past so be it.

In Luke 2:35 we have:
"so that the thoughts of many hearts will be revealed. And a sword will pierce your own soul too".
].

Lie, Lie, Lie. No, Jesus Did Not Soften the Old Testament–In Fact He Did the Opposite, and Here’s What That Means.

Moderate Christians love to talk about how Jesus fixed the Old Testament, or, in other words, obsoleted the horribly offensive parts about slavery, keeping women in their place, killing gays, etc. In fact, he did no such thing.


I will show two things here:



* That Jesus fully supported everything in the Old Testament


* Show you exactly how horrible that is.


So first, here is Jesus speaking specifically on the topic of Old Testament teachings:


The Law Stands


“For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” — Matthew 5:18-19




“It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid.” (Luke 16:17)



“Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place.” (Matthew 5:17)




“Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law” (John7:19)



Keep in mind, this is Jesus Christ saying this–in the Bible that all Christians own and cherish. Don’t take my word for it; look it up–it’s all there.

So now that we understand that he fully supported what’s in the Old Testament, let’s take a look at what he actually just commanded you to uphold.



The Law That Stands


You criticized Islam for blasphemy law. Here, we see that Jesus upholds the law.

Blasphemy is Punishable by Death


One who blasphemes the name of the LORD shall be put to death; the whole congregation shall stone the blasphemer. Aliens as well as citizens, when they blaspheme the Name, shall be put to death. (NRSV) — Leviticus 24:16


But you said Christians have moved away from Old Testament?. But you still use it in church. You are a joke.



Death sentence to adulterers



If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife—with the wife of his neighbor—both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death. (NIV) — Leviticus 20:10

You criticised Islam for punishing adulterers. Here you have it in your bible.



Dishonoring Your Mother or Father is Punishable by Death


Anyone who dishonors father or mother must be put to death. Such a person is guilty of a capital offense. (NLT) — Leviticus 20:9



People Who Work on Sunday Should be Killed



You have six days each week for your ordinary work, but the seventh day must be a Sabbath day of complete rest, a holy day dedicated to the LORD. Anyone who works on that day must be put to death. (NLT) — Exodus 35:2

Why don't Christians enforced this law?. Why did you run away from it?




If a Woman is Not a Virgin When She Gets Married, She Has to Die



“If any man takes a wife, and goes in to her, and detests her, and charges her with shameful conduct, and brings a bad name on her, and says, ‘I took this woman, and when I came to her I found she was not a virgin,’ … and evidences of virginity are not found for the young woman, then they shall bring out the young woman to the door of her father’s house, and the men of her city shall stone her to death with stones … (NKJV) — Deuteronomy 22:13-14,20-21




There’s Nothing Wrong With Slavery


Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. (NIV) — Leviticus 25:44



Gays Should be Put to Death



If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death; their blood is upon them. (NRSV) — Leviticus 20:13



You accused Islam of maltreating women or lack of freedom for women in Islam. Here see what your bible says.


Women Should Shut the Hell Up and Do as They’re Told



A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. (NIV) — Timothy 2:11-12


Keep in mind, these aren’t suggestions. They’re not optional. Remember what Jesus said, “Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven…” He also said they’re not open to any personal interpretation. It’s all very clear to anyone willing to actually read their Bible.

So, no, Christians did not move on from Old Testament

.....

plainbibletruth:
Are you saying you have no motive yourself?

my only motive is in defense of my prophet (peace be upon him)

Emp.iree, it is CLEAR to any careful reader of Islamic literature – Koran, Hadiths, biographies, etc – that you can ALWAYS find opposite views or claims about the SAME ISSUE in ALL of these Islamic documents.

It needs repeating: ISLAM SPEAKS FROM BOTH SIDES OF THE MOUTH!

And you don't do the same when it comes to Old & New Testaments?. You should even appreciate the fact that Islam has comprehensive background and that Islam encompasses a whole aspects of life. It covers wide range of things including very tiny little issues. Can you imagine your OT has some details about slavery but suddenly, the whole of thing disappeared in your NT to shield Jesus and his disciples?. Yet, Quran makes reference to slavery. This is very suspicious.

Consequently, for every issue pointed out, Islam can quickly easily throw up the opposite. The GOOD, the BAD, and the UGLY have ALL been thrown into the cesspool of Islam.

You wanna hear?. I don't care if you quote me for reference. If you care to know, Islam teaches us to be smart. No slack moment because once we spot the motives, we either play or get played. In another word you are being played . We don't accept nonsense stories. Is it any wonder that you cling on to this narration while you ignored many positive good things reported about him?.

For instance, a man walked to the mosque and defecated inside where Muslims prayed. This is a sacred place. Some of the companions were about to lynch him when the prophet intervened. His words were: "this is a place of worship we don't defecate here." Then he cleaned the place.

Can you spare someone who pees on the podium during service in your church?. I'm sure you guys would chase him out with beating. So imagine our prophet's handsome character here compared to ibn Ishaq's story about Asma, that the prophet ordered assassination of someone just because of slight criticism?. Obviously, this is fabricated story and it is in conflict with Quran. Therefore, we would reject it.

So, I can be sure that you will either claim a “misunderstanding” of those verses or run to the same materials you may claim are “questionable”

whatever rock your boat bro.

You have taken pains to paste portions of Islamic literature advocating peaceful relations with others. Now what about these:
Fight those who believe not in God and the Last Day and do not forbid what God and His Messenger have forbidden -- such men as practise not the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book -- until they pay the tribute out of hand and have been humbled. Q. 9:29 Arberry

Desperation

Am not gonna bother myself explaining the verse because I know you will keep going in cycle. In order to shut you up one time, this verse is equivalent to this Bible verse.


Deuteronomy 13: 6-11

If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods” (gods that neither you nor your ancestors have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other), do not yield to them or listen to them. Show them no pity. Do not spare them or shield them. You must certainly put them to death. Your hand must be the first in putting them to death, and then the hands of all the people. 10 Stone them to death, because they tried to turn you away from the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. Then all Israel will hear and be afraid, and no one among you will do such an evil thing again.


There are many more of this, you know that. Please don't reply me with "this is old testament". It is YOUR BIBLE.




[

b]But (even so), if they repent, establish regular prayers, and practise regular charity, - they are your brethren in Faith: (thus) do We explain the Signs in detail, for those who understand. But if they violate their oaths after their covenant, and taunt you for your Faith, - fight ye the chiefs of Unfaith: for their oaths are nothing to them: that thus they may be restrained[/b]. Q. 9:11-12 Y. Ali

Exodus 22:20


Whoever sacrifices to any god other than the LORD must be killed.

Need I quote from the hadith also?

Islam finds all sorts of excuses to wriggle out of what is ordinarily a clearly bad picture of Mohamed. For instance: Mohamed engages in clearly UNPROVOKED RAIDS on a people, kill, destroy, loot their properties; then a man is grabbed and asked to reveal the location of hidden treasures and then killed; and what do Moslem ‘scholars’ and apologists do? SIMPLE! The man is BRANDED a war criminal, guilty of murder and treason! You saw right: WAR CRIMINAL! A man whose community was invaded by Mohamed and whose people NEVER INITIATED the attack becomes ‘a war criminal’! All to justify what the “prophet” did as just and right. That can only be Islamic “ingenuity”. Even when a man whose home is INVADED kills another in self defence he is branded a “war criminal”. That can only be in Islam.

Everything that earliest extant writers of Islam wrote is being turned upside down and are labelled as “fabrications” simply because current human rights will show Mohamed as the war criminal and since Islam STANDS OR FALL ON MOHAMED his apologists must “defend” him at all cost, no matter how ridiculous.

Thanks for helping me out. I need not waste my time replying this. You already knew the answer

If today's Moslem like you Empiree are seeing things in a different light maybe REFORMATION is coming to Islam; just maybe!

you mean like your bible was completely interpolated and changed?

Your old God was violent criminal before he reformed himself and brought about new testament and renounced violence. But in reality he didn't eschew violence. He simply took a new dimension violence in modern world

This is his new way of waging war on DISBELIEVERS {MUSLIMS}


Matthew 10:34-39


Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn "'a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law--a man's enemies will be the members of his own household.' "Anyone who loves their father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves their son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. Whoever does not take up their cross and follow me is not worthy of me.


Sword mentioned in the Bible verse is now gun, white phosphorus, wmd. Christian terrorists have these today and they use them indiscriminately. So you can see clearly this is a Christian dinning with terrorists. His profile speaks volume.

LadunaI:
I....

what's your take on awuyewuye in Nigeria about Ogun sise and njé anobi so'ogun?. Many are kinda confused.

There are section of Muslims who believe ogun(both for charm & iwosan) exist. There are oppositions who believe ogun(iwosan) is okay but ogun( charm whether Haram or halal) don't exist and are not acceptable in Islam.

Where Do You Stand On This?

jeff1607:
How can he still hug a woman who deeply wants the unborn child not to be his

Crazy world we live in. So pathetic. Disrespect for marriage and they are both 19. She will never close her legs for men

WORDWORLD


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6Hea0NK3_E

Samunique:
Pls what is your point here with all this long post, bcs u have not made any point ?

who started long epistle, me or you?.

Are you saying here that the Bible doesn't support Jesus as being the Son of God or what is your point ?

Your Bible is self CONTRADICTORY. There is no difference between son of God and Son of God. Both mean the same thing in essence.

I want state here that this your logic is very boring , the same over and over.

exactly what happens when you can not defend your religious doctrines. I know from the start that you have little clue how your bible works.

You asked whether Jesus is the son of God, and I went to the Bible the very source of his birth, life and teachings,

See your confusion again?. Here you affirmed how Jesus was born of Mary and at the same time you said he's son of God borne without woman. You asked me if God can do anything, why can He give birth to Jesus without a woman?. You are very ridiculous. I will ignore you soon because you guys can turn good brain to lifelessly one with your silly doctrines.

all u could do was to bore me with what you copy from Wikipedia and some Quranic verses from a man whose source of revelations was uncertain, that's if he had any at all. Bcs some of the stories he told about Jesus were all in apocrypha that were already in circulation during his time, and some plagiarized biblical stories and characters.

Why are you throwing tantrum?. You shouldn't worry about Wikipedia. You shouldn't worry about Quran. You shouldn't worry about plagiarism. You should worry about defending your bible, which obviously you failed at. Your next move now is to insult. Yet you said at the beginning that you wanted no insult. Fake ex-muslim.

So u want to use the words of a man who thought he was demon possessed as criterion to disprove the Lordship and Sonship of our Lord Jesus Christ
You must be a joker ?

See see, now you have started just because you can't defend your silly beliefs. Your bible is false. Your bible is your source of confusion and I can't help you, sir. Sonship and Lordship of Jesus is nothing but fake story cooked up by people who probably smoked weed before writing trash. I know how to insult the moment you crossed my line.

JUST LOOK AT YOUR HYPOCRISY HERE !

SO U BELIEVED THIS JARGONS YOU COPIED WITHOUT QUESTIONING BUT CANNOT BELIEVE THE BIBLE THE BOOK YOUR ALLAHH ASKED HIS PROPHET TO CONSULT IF HE HAS ANY DOUBT

the same way you believe unfounded stories posted by your buddy up there without second guess. So it is a tit for tat. Your bible is filled with hearsays from head to bottom

U SEE WHY I REFUSED TO ANSWER YOU IN THE FIRST PLACE?

CAUSE I KNEW IT WOULD BE SAME SAME OLD STORY, LOGIC AND PATTERN.

pls, u may not bother to quote me if it,s this same boring old logic of yours is all that u have to offer. Except if u have any tangible evidences to show that the "holy bible" does not support the claim that Jesus is God's Son, or concrete scholarly and historical evidences ( which i know may not exist anywhere )to buttress your points. As for that your Quran , forget about it !

your bible is your own nightmares. There are lots of confusing therein. It portrays Jesus a man born of human being and at the same time, some writers tried to make him God and they came up with Trinity.

There is no way you can get out of your confusion for as long as you have your bible. The question is, WHO WROTE THE BIBLE?

plainbibletruth:
Did Mohamed murder Abu Afak & Asma?

]

The more I read the story the more it sounds bogus. I'm just wondering why Christians are the ones vocal about this fake stories?. Jews don't even worry much about it unlike you. This shows that you guys have ulterior motives. We muslims are under no obligation to believe the bogus stories narrated by Ibn Ishaq and subsequently narrated in Abi Daud and ibn Saad


Here are further arguments to consider.

https://books.google.com/books?id=qUZZDQAAQBAJ&pg=PT103&lpg=PT103&dq=sunan+abu+dawud:+the+killing+of+poetess&source=bl&ots=kYdXX5oHgq&sig=73WS-vIG7YT37REqd4ncacnnuKw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj_pYzsk73dAhWBg-AKHSbZDKcQ6AEwAXoECAgQAQ#v=onepage&q=sunan%20abu%20dawud%3A%20the%20killing%20of%20poetess&f=false

.

plainbibletruth:
Did Mohamed murder Abu Afak & Asma?

It is clear that you are using another one of Islam's "ingenious" ways to wriggle out of arguments.

If the oldest extant history of Mohamed’s life is questioned by you guys, then on what basis do you have to think later documents should be accepted as more reliable?

Are you aware that Sunan Abu Dawud ALSO narrated the killing of the poetess - Asma? Is this hadith now no more "authentic" because of this portrayal of Mohamed as a cold blooded murderer?

I repeat; that Islam has contradictory position on virtually everything is VERY CLEAR to you Moslems.

Islam has been divided right from virtually after Mohamed as to what Mohamed said or didn't say or what he do or didn't do.

Efforts to clear the mist has led subsequent Moslem generations to come up with all kinds of verification systems. The isnad is one of them.

The koran has very little narrative material about Mohamed's life, yet the Moslem is supposed to see him as an example to be followed. This then leaves people like you with the only option of resorting to the biographies and hadiths on Mohamed.

But in these you meet a brick wall. Unpallatable stories about this "example" for all mankind show up. How to deal with these now becomes the issue: do you throw away the entire writings? Or what?

Then comes the usual Islam's "ingenious" way of coming up with "solutions". The "isnad" is "invented". It is dubbed "scientific". Problem solved, at least for some.

Others who are not completely convinced or cannot truthfully live with these CONTRADICTIONS but still "feel" Islam is the way, resort to being "KORAN ONLY" Moslems.

A conclusion we can ULTIMATELY come to then is that the Koran, believed by every Moslem to be pure revelation, can only be proved and justified as pure revelation, by using the human systems.

Does Chains of Transmitters Guarantee Truth?
Certainly chains of narrators are useful but they are only one aspect of history.

If we get an unbroken line of transmitters of a lie or a distortion, does that TURN the narration into the truth? Does the mere fact of an unbroken chain of transmitters make a document valid or reliable? Are the biases of the transmitters irrelevant? The plain answer to all these questions is an unequivocal "NO!"

At the end of the day it's not just an "unbroken chain" that the Moslem has to resolve. He has to battle with perhaps dozens of other "requirements" as to the reliability of the transmitters and the mode of transmission.

it is quite easy to spot your motives. Bro, it will not work. It is over 1400years now and Islam is still winning. You can say whatever you want. You simply trying to say that "since Muhammad killed innocent people I would stop believing in him". If that's your mission, I swear you are wasting your time. I am telling this right now. I understand history is very important. And yes, chain of transmission doesn't always guarantee authenticity of a report. When it comes to history or written docs, if something is not removed something has gotta be added because it is not REVEALATION. Only Quran has absolute authority in Islam and Qur'an did not give order to our prophet to kill someone just for being criticized. We have seen many handsome characters of the prophet (saw) in many ahadith how he treated his antagonists.

However, when it comes to war, there is no room for nonsense but rules of engagement prevail. If incident of Asma etc ever happened at all, it was definitely act of treasonous or wickedness on their part which perhaps posed these to the Muslim community at that time. This kind of thing exist today. Take the case of Pakistani woman, Affia Siddiqui for example who was jailed by US for posing a threat to it's army. She was arrested and now serving life behind bars. Similarly this is what happened t in the case of Asma and others. They were Jews, the killers of your God. The only reason that make me consider your case is because we seen traces of these Jewish activities on several attempts to kill our prophet (saw), and one of them finally succeeded in planning poison in his food. Possibilities exist that they posed threats to muslims which resulted to them being killed just as the case of Banu Qurayza tribe. Now, read the attachment. Here is one example of their activities probably left out by Ibn Ishaq etc.

Emp.iree, one big question you've FAILED to answer is this: Are all these other CONTRIBUTORS to Islam "inspired" by Allah or not?

Was Ibn Ishaq inspired by Allah?. Who certified accuracy of his report?.

World media is quite because it is Islam and muslims, PERIOD. But a British gets killed, you will hear media scream for months about it. Humans are not equal.

plainbibletruth:
BUT Empiree, I gave you another Islamic source other than Ibn Ishaq.

You seem to be the one hung up on him and repeating disclaimers on him.

Is Kitab Al-tabaqat Al-Kabir by Ibn Sa’d – who also narrated this same story also wrong?
- Is this book also ‘faulty’ in some respect especially where it ‘paints’ Mohamed in bad light by ordering the killing of this 120 year old man - Abu Afak?

Be clear in your answer.

That Islam has contradictory position on virtually everything is VERY CLEAR to you Moslems.

As a result you can always be shifty; using whatever side is convenient at any point in time to support your claims.

It is clear you didnt read the attachments or you read but chose to ignore. It is clearly written there that Ibn Sa’d and Ibn Ishaq wrote identical story that has no chain of transmission. It is said that Ibn Sa’d copied Ibn Ishaq

Samunique:
1. All of us who are good mannered are sons and daughters of God ? ( though surprised to hear this from a Muslim, cause no Islamic theology/doctrine support this, I know u are trying to play smart here).

I simply referred to your own doctrine. If Jesus is the son of God, how about other good people who are called children of God?. This goes to show you that Jesus is not the only son of God. There are other sons and children of God too. So don't get things mixed up with muslims John 1:12, Matthew 5:9

Having said that, I'm yet to see in my Bible where it says, all that are well mannered are God's children.

Don't capitalize on my choice of words, "well mannered". It means the same thing as "good character", "peacemakers" which is what your bible alluded to in John 1:12, Matthew 5:9. That's what Quran calls "righteous conduct". But you people called it "son of God". Question, is Jesus the only son of God now?

Though plsam 82:6 says, "I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High. And the "title" Son (s) of God was also used for the Angels in the book of job and genesis chapter six, and God did use this same term for the nation of Isreal when He said, "Isreal is my first born, and Jesus also states it in the betitudes that blessed are the peace makers for they shall be called the children of God.

And your point is?. What you said here is my point. It shows that Jesus is not the only son of God. Help yourself.

ADOPTION IN THE OLD TESTAMENT: God called the nation of Isreal his first son bcs it is the bearerer of the abrahamic covenant through which the promised seed, the future messiah would be born ( not bcs they were well mannered as you suggest in your post) and also, to show how fatherly He was to them relationship wise most especially as the first nation to receive the law of God, the bearer of the oracle of God. Exo 4:23.

Told you that "well mannered" is my choice of words. It means RIGHTEOUSNESS in Islamic terminology. It is clear from the verses and the way you are talking so far that "Son of God" means someone of good and moral character. It doesn't mean biological son of God. Correct?

ADOPTION IN THE NEW TESTAMENT: This is more profound and real than the mere proclamation made in the old testament regarding the nation of Isreal bcs it is done by the spirit of God through faith in Christ. Emp.iree, this is a definite experience that all those who have been born of the spirit have. Take it or leave, it is true !
It more than being emotional or fanatic, it is a sweet experience !

You are about to get yourself in full blown contradictions..but let me read further see where you trying to drive at.

The Bible says so and I found it so !

This is one of the many reasons I will never doubt the Bible, bcs I had not this experience when i was a muslim until I came to Christ. These following scriptures confirm it, John 1:12-13, Rom 8:14-17 , pls read.

"Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— 13 children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.

Unfortunately you were borne of human being (FLESH). What is "born of God" means to you?. Apart from that, this shows that Jesus is not the only one born of God. You have just proved me right again. So why do you guys keep saying Jesus is the Only son of God if you are son of God too?

Now, the Bible is not calling us here God's children bcs we are well mannered but bcs of the redemption through which we are born again by the Spirit of God !
John 3:5-7.

Jesus answered, “Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit. 6 Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit[a] gives birth to spirit. 7 You should not be surprised at my saying, ‘You[b] must be born again.’

This bible verse is simply speaking in parable. I would use islamic standard to rephrase it. The verse simply means to have Faith and to be good in conduct. This verse of Quran clarifies it, thus:


"Righteousness is not that you turn your faces to the east and the west [in prayer]. But righteous is the one who believes in God, the Last Day, the Angels, the Scripture and the Prophets; who gives his wealth in spite of love for it to kinsfolk, orphans, the poor, the wayfarer, to those who ask and to set slaves free. And (righteous are) those who pray, pay alms, honor their agreements, and are patient in (times of) poverty, ailment and during conflict. Such are the people of truth. And they are the God-Fearing." (Quran 2:177)


See how clear the Quran phrase it without getting anyone confused?. Bro, you are born of human flesh not spirit. It is when you follow God orders and truly worship Him alone and not Jesus, that's when you are truly close to God in spirit. Anyone can experience anything regardless of religion affiliation. Buddhists have spiritual experiences too. Does that make their religion right?. No.

NOW LET'S GO TO THE REAL DEAL: Is Jesus the Son of God by title or adoption ?

This answer is capital NO, except we want to break the scriptures !

Jesus is not a son of God, but the Son God. John 1:1, 1:18, 3:16-17, 5:17-23, mark 14:61-62, matt 16:13-18 etc.

I said earlier that you were about to get yourself into serious confusion. If you can think critically, you should already noticed John 1:1 and 18 are enough confusion. Obviously, John 3:16-17 is spoken by someone unknown. Your confusion has began and i will help you further your confusion until your eyes are open. But allow me to ask you, son of God mentioned in this quote are different from Son of God you have been saying earlier?. You said son of God is different from Son of God. This simply means capital S depicts Jesus. Fine. But the same John said Son is also God. Yet in the same Bible it says God can not been seen not His voice could be heard at all by any human John 5:37. But Jesus was seen and his voice was heard.

"son of God" in the language of the Jews was a very innocent term used to describe a loyal servant of God. Whether the translators and editors chose to write it as "Son of God" (with a capital S) in reference to Jesus and "son of God" (with a small S) in reference to everyone else does not diminish the fact that in the original language, both cases are exactly the same.


Grolier's encyclopedia, under the heading "Jesus Christ," says:


"During his earthly life Jesus was addressed as rabbi and was regarded as a prophet. Some of his words, too, place him in the category of sage. A title of respect for a rabbi would be "my Lord." Already before Easter his followers, impressed by his authority, would mean something more than usual when they addressed him as "my Lord.".... it is unlikely that the title "Son of David" was ascribed to him or accepted by him during his earthly ministry. "Son of God," in former times a title of the Hebrew kings (Psalms 2:7), was first adopted in the post-Easter church as an equivalent of Messiah and had no metaphysical connotations (Romans 1:4). Jesus was conscious of a unique filial relationship with God, but it is uncertain whether the Father/Son language (Mark 18:32; Matt. 11:25-27 par.; John passim) goes back to Jesus himself" .


You are about to enter into serious confusion but let me take it slow. But remember, you have merged God and Jesus to be one entity. At the same time you wanna differentiate them?.

There are so many instances in the Bible which make Jesus as the only Son of God undisputable.

Oh really?. How about this where Jesus claimed to be "Son of man" (eg. Matt. 17:12,Mark 8:38, Luke 9:56)

Em.piree , let me ask you this questions:

Then why do u people think it is impossible for God to have a Son or a Child without woman ?

* Pls I will answer your last question latter bcs of space and time .

Thanks !

See highlighted, you are insinuating that Jesus is biological Son of God without having intercourse with woman. You have just committed heinous sin that can not be forgiven unless you make tawbah and desist from such belief. Begotten is animal act. God is not animal nor does He resembles His creations. The moment you equate God with human attributes, you have got yourself in big trouble. Quran has this to say to rebuke your doctrine.


[He is] Originator of the heavens and the earth. How could He have a son when He does not have a companion and He created all things? And He is, of all things, Knowing. (6:101)


He begets not, nor was He begotten. (surah Ikhlas)



But they have attributed to Allah partners - the jinn, while He has created them - and have fabricated for Him sons and daughters. Exalted is He and high above what they describe (6:100)



And say, "Praise to Allah , who has not taken a son and has had no partner in [His] dominion and has no [need of a] protector out of weakness; and glorify Him with [great] glorification."




Finally Quran says,


O People of the Scripture, do not commit excess in your religion or say about Allah except the truth. The Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, was but a messenger of Allah and His word which He directed to Mary and a soul [created at a command] from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers. And do not say, "Three"; desist - it is better for you. Indeed, Allah is but one God. Exalted is He above having a son. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. And sufficient is Allah as Disposer of affairs.

basilico:
I have followed this thread though ignoring Emp.iree and his fellow Muslims.
Now we have lots of videos on youtube , memri. etc from muslim clerics explaining Islam.
Emp.iree do you agree with them

I have watched countless Zakr
Naikh TV series lying and beating around the bush on matters plainbibletruth has raised.

Where have u been bro?. I thought you accepted islam and travelled to Saudi Arabia to further your education?. Anyways, i barely watch Memri so i have no idea what goes on there. That answers your question.

And plainbibletruth raised nothing. He just shot himself in the legs all the time. The only thing i can agree with is lots of atrocities in your bible you are yet to clear from your so called "holy book"

plainbibletruth:
[size=6pt][/size]

This is another Islamic writer I wrote about:

So you had to go to any length to ensure I'm convinced about this spurious stories?. I tell you right now that you are watering your time with me. I swear it doesn't change anything. You know why?

Because message of Islam that None Had The Right To Be Worshipped Except Allah, Muhammad Is His Messanger. This Declaration Of Faith Which Is Missing In Your Religion Is My Backbone.

It is understandable when people hate something they can come up with trash to discredit the truth. If you read this attachment, the comment talks about the importance of ISNAD which Ibn Ishaq and his gang lacked.

I know you are seriously looking for loopholes to bail Islam but you failed to realize that this is more than 1400 years and people still coming into the Religion in large crowd. And I know the reason you evangelical Christians so much concerned about false stories like this it's to appeal the killer of your God's audience.

Pay attention to what the writer says. You can't just come up with stories about our prophet without proper chains. Yes doing this nonsense really because you can not defend your Christian doctrines. Besides, your bible is filled with murder, rape, genocide etc. So why are you so much concerned about islam?. You can say "that's old testament" but does this in anyway vindicates your Bible as long as it remains in it?. And if that's old testament for the sake of this thread, how about your contemporary leaders who continue to kill around the world today by destroying muslim countries?. Are they not following the Bible (O & NTs)?

Some of the alleged ahadith you cited can not be found. I think you should post direct link to the source instead of copying just the Hadith.

I decided to be quiet yesterday when I couldn't find one of the Hadiths you posted. As for this one you posted saying that the prophet (saw) allowed his companions to have intercourse anyways with slave girls, can't find that either buy common sense tells us this is false. No religion in Earth permits rape, intercourse outside of marriage needless to say Islam.

Try to improve your source of information. And if you think you can please those mushrikun you are wasting your time. You could see how Christian guy scolded you the other day because regardless of how you try to paint 'traditional muslims" as you called them, they see you too as Muslim who is trying excuse himself.

@rashid, how did the poetic rhythm come about?. I don't think you stated that.

The ummah could not have forged the poem all these centuries. Where did the poem come from?. What is the historical background of it if the source was not linked to the arrival of the prophet in Medina?.

Was the poem forged for over 1400 years?

Just questions. Nothing more

Samunique:
He is the Son of the living God !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!

okay. "Son of the living God". Fair enough. Just want to let you know that all of us good and well mannered human beings are sons and daughters of the living God. Thanks for the reply. Now, how about those who say Jesus is God, and he's the same holy spirit that formed three in one. Do you believe this as well?.

Are u ready to give your life to him that you might receive the gift of the holy spirit ?

not that fast. Why are you in hurry?. I'm not convinced yet

Samunique:
Yea, Jesus is who He is !!!

Or is that to hard for u to understand

who was he, human or God?. Clarify yourself

olarid01:
You know, I really do pray that your heart and the likes of yours be softened to deen,it will save a lot of headaches.

Firstly, I don't know where you see it that seyidinah umar celebrated it. Perhaps a proof? I doubt you will have one, but if you do, let's see........

And secondly, if I may ask you, what's is the precedence for considering proofs in shariah?
1. Allah
2. Rosul
3. Sohabahs

I'm just gonna say it one more time. Nabi didn't recognize the day of Hijra or singled out the day. But Umar(ra) did. So you need to first condemn Umar for setting the day of Hijra aside as the start of the Islamic calendar. If you can successfully come off with this then we can talk about 'celebration'


Amin to your prayer

technicallyrich:
My name is tunde,I am a christian from benue state,my parents and friends have been killed,and i fell bad everyday,a friend advised me to convert to islam that allah will make me happy and give me peace. To forget the pain expecially of my kid sister,so i want to convert to muslim,i heard they will pay me if i do is that true
how and where do i start.
Allah akha kuba

sorry for your losses. Sorry, no one pays you to convert. Being Muslim is conviction. And being Muslim you get assurance that the people you lost were made possible by Allah's permission.

This way you can be at peace that Inna Lilah waina ilai rajiun

olarid01:
No, but we do have to ask ourself is what we are doing is exactly as the prophet did it(as far as deen is concerned). And brother, be very careful of generalization and deductive reasoning when it come to deen (just to justify your deeds).
The Prophet said explicitly that the Muslims only have to 'IDs which should be celebrated, any other ids other than those two is digression.

then start your condemnation with Ameer mumin Umar ibn Khattab (ra) because the prophet did not single out the day of Hijra as a recognized day. When you do this, only then you have the right to condemn greetings and celebration of hijra.

You guys have very limited understanding. Isn't the day of jummah eld too?. Hadith says jummah is eld. This has nothing to do with librarlism

Samunique:
Bros stop being arrogant in ignorance here, u know noting about the bible. We know your like, who get puffed up in what they know noting about. You've not been able to successfully defend your religion, and we all see how tru2god is taking you to the cleaner here, anyways, that's the spirit of Islam, always pride themselves in ignorance. Adepoju comes to mind !


Pls try and bring up your so called biblical contradictions regarding the gospel, I shall attend to them when I'm back from work.

Religion blinds, but Christ saves !!!


You can be forgiven !

who is this confused guy?. You were given question to answer but you decided to skip.

Here it is again. Let's see how brave and knowledgeable you are

Empiree:
This is your homework. Who is Jesus?

Human being

God

Holy spirit

All to above.



Easy question, isn't?.



If you ask a muslim who is Muhammad?. He will reply " he is human being and messanger of God. Simple isn't?. Why is yours complicated?.

Please answer that question above. Thanks

Samunique:
Read the bible for yourself and you will find the answers, and if you're not clear then we can help you out.

so you don't know anything. Now, don't ever quote me again.

OLUWABIG:
If Ibn Ishaq's work is a fabrication, why is the book still being sold in all Islamic shops in Saudi Arabia? :



I wonder ooo my brother

Hitler's book still sell in Germany. Is that a proof of heroism or genuity?. Saudi condemns the use of rosary but they still sell them.

This is irrelevant

Thanks for your epistle. Are you done?. You still failed to Avery my question. Why do Christian evangelists and missionaries so attracted I bin ishaq's?. Is it because he said what you want to hear?. Yes, I read it before that he was a Jew or had just background just as he had Christian background.

And if you read my attachments, you would see that calling him a liar was not established by me but he was called a liar by earliest Muslims like Imam Malik(ra). And I am sure you only like ibn Ishaq for his work. You still don't like him for his religion (Islam).

Thank you for your contribution Mr. Kufar



[quoteor=proudkafir post=71182468]....[/quote]

adekoyejo659:
We Are Getting There. This Cute Robot Is asked If She Would Destroy
Human?. She said 'Yes'.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0_DPi0PmF0[color=#F6F6F6].[/color]

we in trouble lol. They gonna join forces in armageddon