₦airaland Forum

LadunaI:
Wow, I love the way you covered this baby up. But isn't that BLACK cover will attract more heat? or there are inbuilt material that will reduce that.

LadunaI:
This is nice, cruising round the Queens if I guess right.

How can one retire at 20 yrs old and invest like 60 yrs old from the advert I over heard from that video clip lol talking about financial education and investment.

Coincidentally, I had subscribed to that company year ago, Online Trading Academy and they normally sent me their various training programs. In fact I just missed out one training class yesterday, just because I was unable to update my Adobe flash on my system needed for that online meetings/training class.

IbnAbdullah1:
Those who started the hijri calendar did not celebrate it, but only recognised it as a day, then some generation later some people started something they had no idea of?
please, some of you can carry your liberalism else where we do not need it.
The salaf are best when it comes to everything in this deen and if we refuse to imitate we will inevitably imitate and follow the worst.
This is has been Allaah's sunnah.

Hijri calender recognised yes, celebrating it? NO!

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:
[size=2pt] Pls I want you to reread what u wrote here and judge your own double standard and hypocrisy !

Little wonder that u apply the same principle to the bible. Any verse which you can manipulate to support your lies you Cherri pick while treating the ones that expose the ingenuity of your prophet as fake and corrupt.

Now tell me what is special about your Qur'an ? is it,
Plagiarism ?
Repetitive ?
Disjointed ?
Contradictions and so many blunders ?

You know what ? if Muhammad had laid his hand on any copy of the Quran before his death i would have taken u serious. But the fact that the Quran was copy after him, and the first copy of it which was in circulation amongst the early Muslims was ordered to be destroyed before this current one completely erase the muslims acclaimed perfect nature of the Qur'an.

Lastly, you Muslims claim that the Bible has many authors, hence he cannot be trusted, well, I started hearing that from my Alfa since 1983 when I started attending what we call "ile kewu" to learn Qur'an. But I will tell u something today, that it's better to believe the testimony of many witnesses than that of a man who went to the cave and claimed to av seen an angel and received revelations without any other witnesses except himself and Allahh, who could only witness through no one to confirm the message but this same man ( Muhammad ).

As Christians, we know that anyone can claim to be a prophet but not all prophets are from God, not all angels are holy angels, not all voices are of God, so all revelations are not from him.

Bro if u like try till tomorrow, no real Christian will take Muhammad as the prophet of God nor the so call Angel jubril ( Gabriel ) who he claimed gave him the revelations as the real Gabriel of the Bible was said Jesus shall be called the "Son of God".

Moreover, the holy Bible tells us that any spirit that deny that Jesus is the Son of God is the spirit of Antichrist. So u see why we Christians reject your prophet as God's prophet ?

2:21 I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth.

2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.

2:23 Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also. 1 John 2:21-23.




[/size]

Empiree:
..

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

It is obvious you are unable to respond to each of my points clearly. You seem to prefer to muddle things up. Just something i noticed. You don't have to respond to this.

usermane:
More cases of Hadith disapproving slave manumission



Special thanks to our regular opponent for bringing up this Hadith. There can be no genuine reason in Islam to donate a slave instead of freeing such a slave. This Hadith show us how normal slavery is in traditional Islam..

Similar to our first Hadith. Confirm slavery is OK in traditional Islam. Otherwise, the messenger would have honored the dying man's decision and raised money for him through alternative means to slave trading.

proudkafir:
Ibn ishaq was born in Medina (his ancestral home) but died in Baghdad, Iraq. He is not an Iraqis; don't deny your own.

Since you have decided to throw Ibn Ishaq under the bus, do you now accept Imam Bukhari (from Uzbekistan) hadith as the authentic Islamic source document? How can an Uzbek's man (born 250 years after Mohammed) give us authentic report about your prophet? Is hadith not about rumours, gossips and Chinese whispers?

proudkafir:
It is quite ridiculous that Nigerians now understand Islam/Mohammed than Ibn Ishaq himself, a 9th century biographer of the prophet of Islam.

Ibn Ishaq is from Mecca, born and raised in Mecca,

plainbibletruth:
[/size]

[size=3pt]Did you see my Point 1? You are CONFIRMING it right here!
See how:
“I barely quote Ibn Ishaq”

“he appeared to be complicated individual and he was a Jew”

“And yes, he did write nice things too”

“Written historical docs by humans are bound to have hearsays and not only third party but they got infos from 20th party, too. Therefore, anything they said that are questionable … …”

“for someone to make up stories that our prophet killed someone without a just cause, such individual must be doubted.”

“There is a hadith narration which states that anything narrated by the Jews and Christians in history should be treated as neither true or false”

“But when it comes to our prophet and they cooked up stories against him, regardless of how great historian the person is, if his narrations are against characteristics of the prophet in the Qur’an, we throw it out.”

“Yes, I can quote Ibn Ishaq if he narrated good stories about our messenger”

“So history books, Hadith etc are bound to have misconceptions, interpolation, corruption, distortion”

“Therefore, I am not bound by them especially in this day and age of technology where they can easily edit them electronically.”

So, in short Moslems can pick and choose whatever they like from whichever source they want. That’s exactly what I stated. One can immediately begin to see confusion for the rational mind which only the “Moslem mind” can accept as clear.

If a Moslem historian is not “pure” Arab his word may be taken with a pinch of salt. His loyalty to Islam becomes questionable. If ANY of his statements or position FURTHERS the Islamic course it is accepted as true. Where his position CONFLICTS with ‘Islam’ the truth of it is no longer the issue; it must be rejected, his personal integrity notwithstanding.

Men other than Mohamed WROTE the koran right down to the copy you have today. Have you used the same criterion for “written historical documents” for it? Were these men who eventually DOCUMENTED the koran “INSPIRED”? Did Allah commission them to do the work? if he did, what are the implications? If he didn’t, what are the implications?

Moslems like yourself may claim that the koran is what you hold in high esteem yet MOST of what you practice DO NOT come from the koran but these same other Islamic sources. When you are asked if these sources are equally “divine” revelations you begin to give shifty answers.
Can you honestly say that ALL that you seek to pattern your life with about the life of Mohamed comes from the Koran?

Man, is it only electronic copies of these texts that are available today? Do Islamic sites not also have even these electronic copies; can you not trust even those sites? Come on, buddy!

plainbibletruth:
Empiree

RESPONSE TO EMPIREE ON QUERY OF ABU AFAK'S STORY (PART 1)
Empiree, I can see that you are willing to go into some detail in order to get to the truth of matters. So, as we look at these issues about the RELIABILITY or otherwise of these Moslem source documents I hope OBJECTIVITY and HONESTY will be expressed.
Now, your contention is simple: Moslems have a methodology they use in ascertaining the trustworthiness of any Islamic historical document. One of these is that there must be a traceable chain of narrators for events or stories to accept them as valid. Other criteria were also stated.
My response:
1. Islam double-speaks on most if not virtually ALL issues.
2. This means Islam can apply double standard as it suits it.
3. Consequently, the same Moslem apologists like yourself who will easily run to Ibn Ishaq’s work that we are looking here when it presents Mohamed in a good light, will almost immediately REJECT him using the “METHODOLOGY” above when he presents Mohamed in a ‘bad’ light.
4. Moslem historians HAD NO REASON to lie against Mohamed. No Moslem writer, at the time these were written, would have wanted to write something about Mohamed that they thought were not genuine. Remember that theses were MOSLEM WRITERS, not non-Moslem writers.
5. Mohamed was in the PLAIN VIEW of history. Because his followers BELIEVED that he was from Allah they simply did not question anything he did. Even in the koran Allah seem to approve of all that Mohamed did. So, the followers and writers NEVER saw these as flaws in Mohamed but as a sign of his DOMINANCE. That was why the usual tendency to cover up a leader’s errors and weaknesses was not done by these writers. If this were not so Moslems who venerated Mohamed so much would have ensured that those negatives about him were erased from history long before now.
6.What we therefore find is that where the story is generally accepted by Moslems, no validity of chain of narrators is challenged. Even from the same source document some things can be picked while others are discarded at will.
7. In the eyes of early followers of Mohamed, who perhaps lived a shielded life from other people groups, whatever his lifestyle was made no difference to them. It was later Moslems who, when now being confronted by other civilizations as to the morality and civility of many of these questionable acts of Mohamed, now felt they needed to find ways out the quagmire Islam has placed itself.
8. If, like the source you pasted said, "the biographies (of Mohamed) contain all kinds of reports, both true and false", who put the "false" there? If this is taken at its face value then can we REALLY trust the entire documents? Should they not all be simply discarded? If documents written closest to Mohamed's time are found wanting can we TRULY trust later Moslems scholars who want to tell us which portion to accept and which not to?

LadunaI:
Ok...I understand now. Ohh I'm in your old college state lol...ILR, KW.

LadunaI:
Talked to the guy I said earlier, but said he has invested into property lately. So couldn't think of having this now.

I am trying out other avenue also, hopefully it yields positive result. I even try to help put on jiji but the site yet to update the ads with those pictures.

It's well, is gonna get buyer soon!

In that pics I don't really understand how that woman actually escaped.

Braze9:
Some times I ask myself this question, why do Nigerians want to remain backward? Have they not suffered enough? Have they not been humiliated enough?
Why do they want backward, incoherent, unintelligent, wimpish, technophobic, reactive, blind and clumsy old men to continue to continue to govern them.
Take a look at France President, Emmanuel Macron. That is the kind president Nigeria needs now. A young proactive, smart, intelligent, healthy, courageous president.

If we must progress as a nation, we must put tribalism and religion aside and vote for intelligent people who can use creative intelligence to solve the problem of Nigeria. There is no holy man in Nigeria. Almost everyone is corrupt to certain extent. It will be almost impossible to stop corruption at this level of national development. So let no one come to claim he is a saint. Let no one come to tell you he is fighting corruption. Corruption is part of us, so let no one waste our time telling us he is fighting corruption. Corruption can only leave Nigeria with strict laws and technology.

While we continue to fight the twin problem of corruption and poverty, we need an intelligent man to be at the helm of affairs to lead national development. Nigeria cannot afford to have blind leader as a president because the speed at which other countries are developing is scaring. We don't have time to waste.

Nigerians know deep inside their heart that Dr. Bukola Saraki is the smartest and the most intelligent politician in the country today and he is vying for the office of the president. We don't have time to waste with any unintelligent leader. So let's vote for Dr. Bukola Saraki and make him our president. Though he is not a Saint of which none of us is, he will redeem our image with his intelligence and world class education. Nigeria will no longer be a dustbin where anything goes.

We are late on National Development, so we don't have time to try unintelligent leaders again. An average Nigerian does not want to live in Nigeria. 90% of Nigerian youths if given opportunity will run away from Nigeria. All Nigerians both the youths and elderly will prefer to school in Europe or America. All Nigerians if given an opportunity will dump Nigerian Citizenship for American Citizenship or somewhere in Europe or Australia. We are backward in everything to the extent that a white man's garbage is a luxury for Nigerians.
All these happened because we have been allowing incompetent and unintelligent people to lead us.

I beg my fellow Nigerians to give Bukola Saraki a chance to lead the affairs of this great country as a president.

plainbibletruth:
DID MOHAMED REFLECT ALLAH'S "MERCY" AND "GRACIOUSNESS" ? (7)

If a man claims to be one thing but his actions REPEATEDLY show him to be the opposite, can that man's words be taken at their face value or the man regarded as genuine? That is the decision each person has to make in the light of all these revelations about the life of Mohamed.

“Abu Afak was one of B. Amr b. Auf of the B. Ubayda clan. He showed his disaffection when the apostle killed al-Harith b. Suwayd b. Samit… The apostle said, ‘Who will deal with this rascal for me?’ whereupon Salim b. Umayr, brother of B. Amr b. Auf one of the ‘weepers’, went forth and killed him…When Abu Afak had been killed she (Asma b. Marwan) displayed disaffection… When the apostle heard what she had said he said, ‘Who will rid me of Marwan’s daughter?’ ‘Umayr b. Adiy al-Khatmi who was with him heard him, and that very night he went to her house and killed her. In the morning he came to the apostle and told him what he had done and he said, ‘You have helped God and His apostle, O ‘Umayr!’ When he asked if he would have to bear any evil consequences the apostle said, ‘Two goats won’t butt their heads about her,’ so Umayr went back to his people.” (Pages 675-676)

Here are yet two more innocent people who were ordered to be killed by Mohamed. What was their crime? They wrote poetry against him. Yes, that’s right. They dared to write poetry against him! Any wonder then about the reactions of Moslems when cartoonists who draw Mohamed are threatened with death.

Clearly, do these actions portray mercy or graciousness?

Did Mohamed who is said to be "the mercy to all mankind" exhibit mercy in all these instances?

Why is it that Allah, said to be the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful, never prevailed on his prophet to exercise restraints and show mercy?

usermane:
Hadith #9
Hadith breeding Slavery

Rilwayne001:
That's most likely a Photoshop.

Samunique:
And you think u are better than him ?

Moreover, is this the hallmark of all Muslims ?

You cannot make a simple sentence without abuses ?

Islam ?