₦airaland Forum

plainbibletruth:
You like analogies.
Now, if a writer tells you he is writing a 'fiction' would you be right in arguing that you want to see the material as a 'non-fiction'?
If the Bible says something is a 'parable' why would you want to insist that you want to see it as literal?

Show us where a parable has been CLEARLY stated as being a parable in the koran and we have taken it as literal;then we would admit we were wrong but wanting to compare different issues and claim that they are on the same level just doesn't make for honest scholarship.

So in short, the entire Bible is parable, right?. If your answer is 'yes', then Jesus in the bible doesnt exist. He's just a fiction. Satan is fiction. Dream and vision are fictions. All prophets mentioned in your bible are fictional characters. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were all fictional characters who wrote fairy tales. Therefore Bible is fictional book and it is not real. All the so called prophecies are mere fiction. You are very ridiculous.

I can see why many christians turned atheists and called bible fictional Book. Henceforth, I will not take you serious anymore and everything you have been saying in this thread, including God the father, God the son and God the holy spirit bcus they are all fictions. His so called crucifixion and resurrection are fictions too.

The Bible is not real. So why are you wasting ,my time since?

So, do you agree that your ALLEGIANCE as a moslem is BOTH to Allah and Mohamed?

Yes, allegiance of muslims to God and His messanger is affirmation of faith. Worship is when you claim Jesus is God which muslims dont do with Muhammad(p). Your attempt to try to corrupt Shahada in your head is very very idiotic

plainbibletruth:
It's EITHER that you're being outrightly deceitful OR you simply need basic tutorials in English language.

That portion of Luke 19 started from verse 11.
There it is stated CLEARLY that Jesus was speaking in parable.
"... he (JESUS ) went on to tell them a parable. ..."

What is literal here?

If can't simply explain your koran or hadith to enquirers doesn't that show you guys that you have a problem?

Am i surprised?. Every verse that you guys are not comfortable with is always "parable". I wonder why "son of God" is not parable?. Why Jesus is not parable?. Hell and Heaven, i wonder why they arent parables?. Every good word and good things are literal except when it is nasty and violent by nature, it becomes "parable". You are fantastic. So why not apply this same parable to the hadith quoted by your brother?. Why are you being deceitful?.

You danced round the shahada and now this.
In the shahada Moslems have turned Mohamed into an associate or partner with Allah. This violates several portions of the koran.

The koran asks Moslems to invoke NO ONE along with Allah.

The koran tells us that there were other prophets and messengers of Allah. Why this special identification of ONLY Mohamed with Allah all the time?

Islam is really the religion of submitting to Allah AND Mohamed and majority of Moslems are actually Mohamedans, i.e. those who worship Mohamed, whether they admit it or not.

So can it be said that Islam, as it is today, is strictly a monotheistic religion?

Dont even go there...You are having billions of problems in your bible that you failed to convince me and you wanna talk abnout Quran?. What do you understand about "partner with Allah"?. In Islamic terminology it is called 'shirk'. So how is mentioning muhammad's name next to Allah constitute "partner" with Allah?.

Let's go to Quran and let me quote at least 3 verses where Allah mentioned His name and Muhammad simultaneously



"O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger..." 4:59



"Say: If your fathers, and your sons, and your brethren, and your wives, and your tribe, and the wealth ye have acquired, and merchandise for which ye fear that there will no sale, and dwellings ye desire are dearer to you than Allah and His messenger..." Q9:24



"You will not find a people who believe in Allah and the Last Day having affection for those who oppose Allah and His Messenger,.." Q58:22


See these verses of Quran, God mentioned His Name with His messanger (Muhammad). So this is setting up partner with God?. You definitely don't know what you are saying.

PrinceZahzah:


Oga Ojopagogo, you MUST continue o

Lol when you were busy casting spells, praising the gods and throwing cowries upandan, you no complain!

The gods are in love with you already.

lol

true2god:
Don't put words into mouth; I can't reminder telling you that shahada is a prerequisite for peace and harmony, you said so.

Do you now repudiate the fact that saying the shahada is the condition for peace to reign between the Muslims and the kafirs? Do you know Islam better than your prophet and his sahabas?

Look, you quoted Hadith and you want me to explain to you. Even though I knew before hand that you were not interested in my explanation, this was the reason I drew parallel example from contemporary world system of govt. But instead you came up with their system is not about religion. But you forgot that they separated religion from State but they maintained their religious status which means they are still influenced by their Christian religion one way or the other. I simply used similarity btw their system and Islamic system.

I sensed you would reject my analysis was the reason I said that the hadith you cited was in the context of military classification not a general rule. Please go back and re-read if you missed it. The Hadith in that context is mostly referring to Quraishi people who were fighting the prophet (saw) and the Muslims. I explained this to username before. Here I found this short video to buttress my position.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Coo6Po_7STk&t=323s

But if you insist that the Hadith is present continuous tense, then, the Hadith is perfectly in harmony with this Bible verse. They have the exact same undertones


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."



Just has the Hadith you quoted is literal, this Bible verse is literal. There is nothing metaphorical about it at all. It is direct because you believe that Jesus is coming back to take the believers (Christians) to heaven, and fight and kill non-believers (Muslims).


But if you reject this explaination, I will ask you if Luke 19:27 is past tense, present tense or future tense?


What is Jesus coming back to do?. Is he going to love his enemies and take them too to paradise or fight and kill them for not believing in him as Son of God according to your belief?.

true2god:
Islam, unlike the US, is not a country or a race but a belief system, a religion. The shahada you gave was given on the premise that you have believed in the oneness of God and the prophethood of Mohammed, a believe which is quite subjective. A Christian or a Jew, sharing the same country with a Muslim will never say the shahada. No any Muslim country I know make the taking of the shahada a prerequisite for granting citizenship to foreigners. It is like asking a prospective US citizen to say 'the lord's prayer' before he becomes a US citizen. You always make a wrong moral equivalence bro!

You said the shahada is a prerequisite for enjoying peace and harmony with Muslims; I think we are in agreement here. It means if I don't say the shahada in a Muslim-majority country or community, I won't enjoy peace and harmony. You just echoed my point and validated sahih Muslim hadith number 33. Please note that the American constitution, unlike the sharia, is not discriminatory; it does not divide the citizens between the kafir and the ummah. The same rule apply to all because the US constitution takes all citizens as equal; no dhimmi, no ummah. The US system is over 1000% better than allahh's sharia system.

You made mention of zakat, please note that zakat is for only the Muslim ummah. The Christians and the Jews are to pay the jizya with willing submission and feel themselves subdued, under an ideal Islamic system (Quran 9:29, also read the exegesis of this ayah in the tafsir by ibn kathir)

bro, you started it and i played you along. I have given you bilateral examples. Take it or leave it.. Islam doesn't force you as a non Muslim to take shahada before you enjoy everything Muslims enjoy. Your are the one that brought issue of shahada as precondition for peace and enyoment. I will continue to play along with your head.

LadunaI,

I came across this video of Dr. Bilal. It is sad but it is reality. I said it last year that muslims need to revive islamic spirituality in its true essence. They can't be tagging everything bid'a. If i understood this lecture very well, Dr, Bilal philips said traditional islam makes muslims especially the young ones feel sense of connection with islam. This video is all about many young people are living islam (at least in Canada) but he doesn't restrict to Canada.

Maybe they can see gradually that their approach (literal interpretation devoid of spirituality) is not helping. Remember back in the day, masajid were filled up with children on average days. But today, due to condemnation or tagging everything innovation is causing real side effect. If you go to many mosques in the US/canada, most of their halaqa only involve adult lectures. You hardly find children except those African and Asian subcontinent masajid who still hold on to traditional approach like group dhikr and group dua after each salah. They organize sunday as-salatu like they do in nigeria. But these puritans see them as alhubida.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7pChq-3Qjs&t=581s

Exactly a year ago today {Sept 9, 2017} since Ikupakuti disappeared from NL. I just hope he is okay wherever he is.

AbdelKabir,

I was banned but my comment is restored. Stroll up this page to read

Listen, im not gonna engage you in any complex arguments to try to convince you Islamically when I know for a fact that you aren't here to reason with anything I have to say. I'm just gonna use similar comparison like I did with usermsne. Now read on below.

true2god:
Can your please explain the caveat in the hadith narrations below:

It has been narrated on the authority of Abdullah b. 'Umar that the Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the
messenger of Allah, and they establish prayer, and pay Zakat and if they do it, their blood and property are guaranteed protection on my behalf except when justified by law, and their affairs rest with Allah.

What surprises most in this discussion how you intentionally and deliberately ignore the clause below:

.'...and if they do it (shahada and zakat), their blood and property are guaranteed protection on my behalf except when justified by law, and their affairs rest with Allah'.

Can you please shed more light on this clause? Don't pretend as if you can't see it again.

You see, Western State is earthly reflection of Islamic system. That's, anytime you try to criticize Islam for something I will almost always give you similarities from our contemporary Western world that you love.

Now with respect to the above, that shahada is prerequisite for enjoying peace and harmony with Muslims, it is exact thing with (slight difference) in US for instance. If you leave in US and you speak ill of the country in a manner that doesn't constitute free speech, and you are not citizen, you put yourself at high risk of not only being denied citizenship or your citizenship application rejected but being deported as well.

For you to have guarantee protection of your life and property, if you wanna be citizen, you must make declaration of to be law abiding, to not work against the country with foreign govt, to not spy and not jeopardize the country, and to pay your tax. Sounds familiar, right?.

Therefore, if you violate any of these, you risk being called to testify before the Congress under 5th Amendment to the Constitution in which if you are found guilty or refuse to testify, you go to jail for a long time or get killed if you have indeed committed crimes mentioned above. If you are not citizen, you risk jail and deportation. Sounds familiar with what you criticize Islam for?.

I'm telling you they will put your name on hit list and kill you wherever you may be around the world. Does it sounds familiar with what you accused Islam of?. Do the math yourself.

Their system is modern reflection of the Hadith you criticized. Now the Hadith you cited is under military classification not a general rule. So Shahada (just like declaration of your allegiance to US), and zakat(just like tax in the US), are similar systems from different sides. You will be jailed if you don't file or pay your tax. Which means you violate your allegiance.

So help yourself, buddy.

true2god:
You seems to lack a simple comprehension skill; read the hadith again:

It has been narrated on the authority of Abdullah b. 'Umar that the Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, and they establish prayer, and pay Zakat and if they do it, their blood and property are guaranteed protection on my behalf except when justified by law, and their affairs rest with Allah.

This is where Muslims get the idea of shahada from. You also failed to mention the consequence of failing to recite the shahada: 'there blood and property are not guaranteed'. Whose life and property are not guaranteed? The non-muslims.

It remains a mystery that you deliberately failed to understand that the shahada itself is a wartime proclamation, imposed on non-muslims by Mohammed and his sahabas. If you say the shahada while doing your dally salat that does not nullify its origin. The fact remains shahada is a statement of allegiance to Mohammed the consequence of disobedience which is death.

You compare the shahada with the US' oath of citizenship for naturalized citizens, this is height of Islamic evil. Why making a moral equivalence of unrelated scenario? The first, which is shahada, is to be recited or else your blood and property is not secured under the blood thirsty Muslims while the US oath of citizen has no life consequence. Read the hadith again and don't pretend it is not there.

Baptism was expressly commanded by Jesus for all Christian, without the condition that your blood and property are not safe, why make an unrelated moral equivalence?

You know why i am not taking your seriously?. bcus you have mind of your own. You are quoting me different contexts entirely but before, you quoted Abu Huraira(ra) that, it is there we got our shahada now you brought entirely another context to buttress your claim and you think i will take you serious? There are bunch of shahada or testimonies mentioned throughout Quran. Sura Imran 18 is a command. You are not my teacher and there is no need for a baby born in muslim or non-muslim homes to make the declaration. He/she is already upon Islam at birth.


Importance Of Declaration Of Faith: It just like you invite people to your wedding. In order to do so you print invitation cards to create awareness. You call pastor to bless your union etc. Why don't you and your fiance simply make wedding wow btw you two only?. The reason you proclaim your wedding is basically for the public to know for various reasons so that the world know who marries who in case either party cheats behind one another's back or major life event changes like death, birth, family ties etc

Similarly in Islam, a non-muslim who is convinced that islam is the truth, it is essentially necessary to publicly affirm his faith in the presence of at least two people. And ofcourse, it is not all mandatory to do so especially if you live in isolated area. The same reason you proclaim your wedding is the same reason you proclaim your shahada so that if muslims see you go to church to worship, or synagogue or elsewhere, so we may question your declaration of faith to begin with.

Again, faith is essentially inside the heart, and God alone is Sufficient but if God knows, let men also know in case we see you go to other houses of worship without muslim presence. Another reason it is very important to declare your faith is because of death which could strike anytime. Muslims are advised to go their county municipal office to clearly state on the Will that they are muslim and in case they pass away, the city will call on muslim community to prepare your burial. Otherwise, the city (which perhaps may be majority non-muslims) will bury you as they wish or according to their religion. So you need to declare your shahada and make it clear on your Will that you are a muslim and want to be buried according to islamic rites.

This has caused confusion in the US at some point where a muslim convert, a son, passed away but he had no will prepared. His family is christian so his mother insisted her son be buried according to christian way. Muslim know too well the guy was muslim and was well known. But Will is a legal document, it is what the city goes by. Muslims were ready to take his body for burial when his mother came and city released the body to his mother. Weeks and months after burial, muslims continued to pressure his family and informed the mother the importance of burying her son islamically and she accepted. The body was exhumed and islamic burial was performed. This is why shahada to God (which is internal) is btw you and God. It is important to let the muslim community know which is what gave birth to public declaration. And it is even more important to let the city you live have the record your of faith, which means you declare your shahada to them too.

And finally, why is this your concern baffles me. After all, muslims declare their faith in islam every single say inwardly and outwardly when we call to adhan and when we pray. So is this your problem?. And Jesus did not order or command baptism. The verse many of you use (John 3:3-7), if this is your evidence, then, Quran also has various speeches like this when it emphasizes Faith in Oneness of God many times.



"Whoever works righteousness, whether male or female, while he (or she) is a true believer (of Islamic Monotheism) verily, to him We will give a good life (in this world with respect, contentment and lawful provision), and We shall pay them certainly a reward in proportion to the best of what they used to do (i.e. Paradise in the Hereafter)." {16:97}




And whoever does righteous good deeds, male or female, and is a true believer in the Oneness of Allah (Muslim), such will enter Paradise and not the least injustice, even to the size of a Naqira (speck on the back of a date­stone), will be done to them. {4:124}



You are not my teacher

Salam alaikum

true2god:
There is no shahada, Islamic testimony of faith in the Qur'an. There is no place the Quran asked Muslims to recite the shahada before they become a Muslim. See what sahih Muslim hadith number 33 says:

It has been narrated on the authority of Abdullah b. 'Umar that the Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, and they establish prayer, and pay Zakat and if they do it, their blood and property are guaranteed protection on my behalf except when justified by law, and their affairs rest with Allah.

The hadith came up with this article of faith which Muslims were to swear before they can become Muslims. The shahada itself, aside creating partner with allahh with the person of Mohammed (the Qur'an is filled with the phrase 'allahh and his messenger'), is also a false testimony by anyone testifying the creed now.

The shahada itself started with the phrase 'I bear witness'. What are you making a testimony about or bearing witness for? There is no god but allahh and Mohammed is his messenger. The questions arise:

Do you bear witness, testimony, for someone you never met physically? If you are taken to a court of law, on what ground will you bear witness for a person you never saw or knew physically? The shahada is a bad religious creed because no Muslim, after the death of Mohammed, saw him to bear any witness of his prophethood.

The shahada, though a bad religious creed, was meant for his sahabas who knew and saw him, during his lifetime, as a way of paying allegiance to his leadership and also a way to recognizing his leadership authority, as the first leader of the Muslim ummah.

Muslims, who never knew or saw Muslim, yet bearing witness to his prophethood is a sign of religious and legal ignorance. If you know the genesis of the shahada, you will understand that it is a wartime creed that all Muslims are meant to recite in the presence of Mohammed, especially after the conquest of mecca. Once a person does that, his life and property are safe from destruction in the hand of Mohammed's Muslim army (according to the hadith of Bukhari and Muslim).

Let him give you a local scenario you can relate with. In 1967, when the Nigerian soldiers invaded Asaba, all the local indigenes where asked to repeat the words: ONE NIGERIA. To them, that is the shahada they have to say so that their lives and properties will be save in the hands of the Nigerian army.

At peace time and after the death of Mohammed, shahada is pure nonsense, because it was no longer relevant. You use the genesis of a scenario know the reason a particular instruction was given at a particular time. The shahada is a wartime Islamic creed bro!

Asalama lekum!

rubbish. But thank God you said shahada is a form of allegiance. We say shahada everyday in salat which means we constantly renew our faith. It is the same if you are a naturalized US citizen, you must declare your allegiance else, you are not a citizen. It is rubbish you said that shahada only valid for sahaba. Now sahaba have gone but Quran is still present. You think you know?. You know nothing

When we call for adhan in masjid everyday, we return our shahada. So I wonder why Christians also baptise new converts. What you don't know you don't know. Stop acting as if you know Islam.


God's Magnificent RESPECT for His prophet Muhammad{saw}

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=404TmGSzFhs

Seems abdelkabir is missing my point. Someone who claims his Dua will not be answered unless and until he goes to the grave to make Dua is wrong. I said it up there that such is questionable. Dua can be made anywhere.

And when I said "glaring proofs", I was referring to permissibility is waseela at the grave as highlighted above by albaqir and there are more like that..

But to say your prayers can not be answered unless you go to grave is innovation. The three forms of waseela you mentioned, that's true but it is indeed permmisible to use pious people if one wishes to do so as well. That's what solati Ibrahimiya teaches.

Prophet Muhammad (saw) used waseela of prophet ibrahim (as) indicating the permmisibility of such waseela. But I don't support folks praying directly to someone to grant their wishes. Like sheikh Oniwasiagbaye said, "to those who make Ziyara to the graves, you pray for the dead you don't pray to the dead. The dead needs your prayers". Sheikh was simply talking about Dua here not tawasul. Tawasul is separate.

^^

"Majority of the scholars" is their opinion. They says that to empathize their opinion. Their is no favoritism in Islam. A Muslim who kills non-Muslim unjustly faces justice. A job Muslim who kills Muslim unjustly faces justice. How about that?.

So Mr. Usermane, you can not use opinion of some people to criticize "traditional Islam" as you called them. That's another injustice on your part. You could see clearly the article gives other differing opinion with scholars too. Are you sure you are sincere in what your are doing at all?.

plainbibletruth:
It unfortunate!

It's either that you don't know Allah well enough to talk about him and answer questions regarding him or you're afraid.

"There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment." 1 John 4: 18

"... God is love." 1 John 4: 8

See this one who can't tell us is whether Jesus is human it Good, and he wants to lecture me on Islam?.

There are many ridiculous people in this world, you know?. I know your mind isn't settled anymore since I scrutinized your believe system. The only thing you have more is to stubbornly cling on to falsehood. This is just sad.

I have absolutely nothing else to explain to you because I know you know what you are doing.

^
you may be compounding problem from what you just posted. Albaqir may easily refute you. There are some glaring proofs faah. I dont mean praying to whatever is in the grave. I mean making dua to Allah through waseela of the person in the grave. Whether it is done at the graveyard or not it is the same. We do waseela everyday. The difference is, if a muslim says he/she can not perform waseela unless he goes to the grave. That may be questionable

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_IxATHVj-X8

AlBaqir:
So, is it allowed in your wahabi religion to invoke Allah at the grave using the dead as wasila?

you catched that right

Habayomie:
1

how?

You mean to tell me you typed this trash just because you can not say La ilaha ila Allah Even arab christians used Allah in their daily activities. You are the jokest man of the century

plainbibletruth:
The name Allah was in existence long before Islam. That is evidenced from the name Abdullah (meaning servant of Allah) - the name of Mohamed's father. The question is this: To whom was this
name originally revealed?

That it is Arabic is not in question.

Mohamed wanted to unite the Arab race under a theocratic setting, but there was no way he could carry along all those 360 idols, so Mohamed decided to pick from among the idols of his clan. Naturally he picked Allah, the idol for which his father was named. Any of the idols would have served;

Mohamed could just as easily have picked Manaf, Al-Lat, Al-Uzza, or any of the others; and his choice didn't win the support of everyone, including his uncle, Abdul Manaf. That is clear from the fact that Abdul didn't submit to Allah and Islam until his death. He held on to Manaf

In the shahada Mohamed was calling on people to reject all other God's but the one named Allah.

So, Allah was not a "new" god that Mohamed was presenting to his people and others.

Therefore, was the Koranic concept of Allah a continuation of the pre-Islamic one, or did the former represent a complete break with the latter? Were there some essential-not accidental-ties between the two concepts signified by one and the same name? Or was it a simple matter of a common word used for two different objects?

In the mind of moslems, anything (negative or positive) done to further the cause of Islam is justifiable, so your asking me to say your creed feels okay by you. The issue however is honesty and not deception or triviality.

A religion where INTEGRITY means nothing is not worth its salt.

Let's seek the truth of this matter.
“It is better to be divided by truth than united in error.”

Is Allah Yahweh? Is Allah Jehovah?

Does Allah save from sin?

Is Allah the Father of the Son - Jesus Christ?

Your honest answers please!

"No one who denies the Son has the Father; whoever acknowledges the Son has the Father also." (1 John 2:23 NIV)

You are incredible. I have nothing to explain cuz we will be here till eternal. You understood perfectly well what you are doing. I dont live on NL. I have pretty much important things to take care of

The Jeep on the road last night. So it runs great


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FIs04RlXeac

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZN1I1HjFo4

I have not read this hadith before but I will check it out.

usermane:
Hadith Fostering Muslim Supremacy and Bias

Hadith #1; "Never say salaam to Jews & Christians, Push them to the narrowest path of the road". Some poster attempted distorting the straight forward meaning of this hostile directive to Muslims. But only those who lie to themselves undermine the harm in this hadith.

Now enter, Hadith #8. Another proof at the depth of anti-non Muslim bigotry in traditional Islam.

Hadith #8:


Because in traditional Islam, non-Muslims are lower in status than Muslims, a Muslim can't be executed even for deliberate murder of a non-Muslim. Such is the degree of respect for non-Muslim life in Hadith grounded Islam.

Instead of receiving a death sentence, the killer in an homicide may be fined to compensate the victim's family. In this fine, more proof of Muslim supremacy is evident.

For the mean time, like I have said before, there are always examples in our contemporary world for every Hadith you criticize bcus you are on a mission. I will return here to address this hadith if there is any contextual references for it. For now, from what I understood is that this hadith shields muslims if they guilty of murdering non-muslims, correct?.

When was the last time you saw Western citizens (UK, US, CANADA etc) punished for crimes committed in another countries?. These countries shield their citizens by having him or her extradited to his or her home country for lesser punishment waived. Pls don't tell me this doesn't happen. I will give you references really quickly. Besides, did you not watch news few yrs ago (even now still happening). A while man committed terror!st act, we all know how they react if accused is Arab or black but this white guy was peacefully handcuffed and was taken to restaurant to eat and drink because he said he was hungry. That's how you treat criminal right? . It is called privilege

Far as I'm concerned, Islam embraces justice regardless of religion affliation color of your skin.

plainbibletruth:
Even when you have not CLEARLY told me who this Allah is?

Even when you have not clarified if there is a word for "god" or "God" in the Arabic apart from the name Allah?

Allah means God. So, now say "There is no deities worthy of worship except God ", say it

usermane:
You're kidding, right? You personally have no consistent response. Sometimes you ignore the hadith like stoning adulterers, other times you ignore the verse like reciting salat audibly. The so called sahabas who reportedly saw Muhammad recite silently also reportedly heard Muhammad order stoning of adulterers.

Look, I'm not a Christian or Atheist. You can't hornswoggle me that easily. I've entertain your dishonesty for so long and it's made me appreciate salafists like New.naz, Fundam.entalizt, lexiconkabeer who fiercely oppose me but have a consistent and honest approach to hadith. If an hadith contradict the Qur'an, Muslims' defer to the scholars for clarification, that is the official policy in your religion.

so when I said we don't necessarily discard such ahadith you think that's just my opinion?. Nope. It depends on what you dealing with. So sorry, I made mistake actually. It was supposed to be like this:

Hadiths that are in harmony with Quran are placed at the top.

Hadiths that neither conform nor contradict Quran are place on hold or at the bottom.

Hadiths that contradict Quran (with no supporting evidence) are rejected.

And yes, you can still place Hadith of stoning on hold and reserved for Nigerian politicians for instance. I just don't believe it's general rule for Muslims. It is useful for hardened criminals not general rule, just like they have death penalty in some countries.

usermane:
I'm vindicated for not joining the congregation on Friday because they violate Qur'an 72:18. By invoking Muhammad in the site for God Alone, they violate the monotheistic value of Islam.

shaking my head man...I see you have serious problem. You have dented manhaj. So Quran is wrong for mentioning name of the prophet next to Allah in many verses of the Qur'an?.

There are many verses you read "Allah and His messanger"

Al-Qur'an 64:8]

Al-Qur'an 48:13

Al-Qur'an 7:158

Al-Qur'an 63:1

Al-Qur'an 8:20

Al-Qur'an 24:54

Al-Qur'an 33:66]

To name a few. Did Allah make mistake for mentioning prophet Muhammad next to His Name all the time?. Or don't we recite verses in the masjid those verses in salat?. So we violate monotheism for reciting those verses too?. Check yourself man.

plainbibletruth:

So, The word "god" in Arabic is different from "Allah"?

That means "Allah" is the personal name of Mohamed's and Arabian god; doesn't it?

There is a word for "god" or "God" in the Arabic!
And, that word is not Allah! RIGHT?

stop wasting your time. Say what I asked you to say, La ilaha ila Allah, if truly you believe in Allah, simple.

usermane:
I know, right? He understood perfectly what Qur'an is saying. That's why he permitted Muslim imperialism, slavery or killing apostates, and forbade combing the hair daily.
And his sahabas learnt it from him. So we have to trust them.

If you wanna comb your hair, comb it. If you wanna unkempt, pls do so. Na by force? Have told you there is also possibility of mistakes with matn.

Of course, I won't bother the congregation. But the imam is violating Qur'an.

Quran mandate obligatory Friday prayer, do you pray this every friday?. This is fard congregational salah. You can't prayer yours separate. So do you offer Jummah in congregation or not?. If not then you have disbelieve.

usermane:
Fella, please answer these questions;

- Do you believe some Hadith contradict
Qur'an? If yes, what should be done?

Doesn't necessarily discarded but place on hold.

Next what's your general view on Hadith?

Sayings, deeds and silent approval of nabi(saw). This is basic definition. I need not go to subcategories.

- Do you believe Muhammad received divine
revelations outside the Qur'an?

Absolutely due to this ayah Q53:3 but this is not exclusive part of Quran. It is something called "Divine wisdom". This Divine Wisdom/Hikam was applied by prophet muhammad himself when it comes to salat. He understood it.

- Do you believe Muhammad had authority
forbid or prescribe what Qur'an is silent on?

Whatever Quran made Halah is made Hala by nabi. He did not go against Allah's Order. Whatever Allah made Haram, he(nabi) too made them haram. Whatever Quran is silent on, prophet(saw) had right to make prescribe on it in his sunnah.


And We have not sent down the Book (the Quran) to you (O Muhammad SAW), except that you may explain clearly unto them those things in which they differ, and (as) a guidance and a mercy for a folk who believe. [Quran 16:64]


From the above verse it is clear like day and night that Prophet Muhammad (p) is here to explain the Quran to Mankind, hence, he explained how to offer salat.


Now, let me put that aside for a second. Let me apply simple logic you want from me and i know you are gonna agree to certain extent.

Concerning daily salat, the current practice of prayer amongst "traditional Muslims" (as you called us) fulfills the requirements of the Quran. I am personally convinced in light of verses (64:16, 39:18; 39:55) which encourages one to strive to do one's best in religious matters, that the mutawatir propagation of the prayer that we have with us today ‘as best practice’ does not contravene any verse of the Quran. It fulfills the overarching requirement of the Quran with the guidance it offers with establishing prayer. Therefore, I find absolutely no cogent reason to 'reinvent the wheel'


In conclusion, muslims of different communities have TWO choices:


Establish a certain method which fulfills the guidance principles/aspect alluded to in the Qur'an.

Or

Assimilate with the existing prayer method particularly in congregations.

plainbibletruth:
I believe Allah is a god.
Now, answer my questions like you said you would.

okay, say la ilaha ila Allah. Can you?

Also it is God not god

usermane:
Your inconsistency is unbelievable. You've repeated previously that you'll reject any Hadith that contradict Qur'an. Why betray such principle now?

Please clarify your stand;

- Do you believe some Hadith contradict Qur'an? If yes, what should be done?

Next what's your general view on Hadith?
- Do you believe Muhammad received divine revelations outside the Qur'an?
- Do you believe Muhammad had authority forbid or prescribe what Qur'an is silent on?

He(saw) understood perfectly what the Quran is saying. He practicalized it and his sahaba saw him. If you wanna do contrary, pls do so in your privacy. No one holds you sinful for that but don't disrupt the congregation. And how does loud or silence in salat contradicts that ayah of Quran?. It doesn't.

Hkana:
I'm thinking if there's a possibility that "dhurriyat" means something besides the "offspring/seed" it is usually translated as.

I'm not questioning, per se, I'm just trying to see if I can understand why He asked for a sign.

"dhurriyat" is used for offspring in this ayah too, and it refers to Mary(as)


But when she delivered her, she said, "My Lord, I have delivered a female." And Allah was most knowing of what she delivered, "And the male is not like the female. And I have named her Mary, and I seek refuge for her in You and [for] her descendants from Satan, the expelled [from the mercy of Allah ]." Q3:36

true2god:
OK na, since you have consistently failed to provide where Muslims were asked to recite the shahada, before accepting Islam, I will assist you.

There is no proclamation or testimony of faith in the Qur'an; the shahada is in the hadith. Below is where Muslim ummah formed the modern day shahada:


You like quoting the first sentence of Quran 48:29, which is quit disingenuous of you. You knowingly and deliberately left out the clause 'those who believe in him (Mohammed) are merciful to themselves but ruthless against unbelievers'.

So much for the religion of peace.

this is what you asked for

true2god:
Can you show me the ayah you have the shahada in the quran?

If you show me the shahada in the Qur'an I will become a Muslim now.

And you are shown. Shahada is simply testimony of oneones of God and I showed you. Shahad is testimony of messengership of Muhammad(saw) and I showed you.

Listen, you are not ignorant of islam unlike some non-muslims who may be excused and admitted to paradise. But truth is glaring at your face but you stubbornly cling on to falsehood.

There are bunch of places in the Quran where La ilaha ila Allah is mentioned but you said it is not there. Now you switched your question to "where Allah said we should give testimony of faith". Dont you think you are playing yourself?. Listen, you are not playing God with your monkey trick