₦airaland Forum

raphieMontella:
all these wahala jst to use ordinary toilet?

how do you clean urself after using bathroom?

Is there any biblical guides or instructions on CLEANLINESS?. You are welcome to quote O & N Testament.


Directed at OP

Plappvillemoi:
Of a truth, you are possessed with Islamic lying spirit...

You dont need to blame "islamic spirit". Your sister in crime already faulted the book. She said it is a FALLACY. The trash was refuted by the way whether you like it or not. You are one of the perfectly fitted candidates in the verse quoted above (sura 31:6)


^

WORDWORLD:
According to the English saying: "NONE IS SO DEAF AS THOSE WHO WILL NOT HEAR". [size=20pt]Matthew 13:13 & Mark 4:12[/size]


These are people who DELIBERATELY SHUT their ears from hearing the TRUTH because it doesnt appeal to them.

"When Our signs are rehearsed to such a one, he turns away in ARROGANCE, as if He heard them not, as if there were DEAFNESS in both his ears. ANNOUNCE TO THEM A GRIEVOUS PENALTY" Q31:7.

Plappvillemoi:
This book is an eye opening. I am taking it slowly and i noticed it gives the true picture of Muhammad. I have shared on whatapps and other social network. Its not a boring book at all, just the contrary! !

I didn't expect you to say contrary. "Deaf Dump & Bind" ~ Matthew 13:13 & Mark 4:12

parisbookaddict:
i wonder if you actually have brain cells my friend.

most people here are not saying that the book is perfect. no book is.

but its a nice collection of most of the atrocities committed by Mohammed during his reign of terror in arabia. i really appreciate that brave jewish woman for poisoning him.

you can criticize the book all you want for been blunt but its a nice go to source if u want to see how depraved mohammed was without having to read the entire quran and hadiths.

Still repeating yourself like a defected robot.

Thank goodness you speak a truth for once that the book is fallacy. Any book that is not PERFECT must contain elements of fallacy. USERNA.ME just broke it down for you which means the author's mind is ulterior motively preconceived. The book is becoming irrelevant gradually.

Roti Canai & The Tarik

usermane:
Peace! parisbookaddict. I 've gone through half of the book, thanks to your link. I was a bit let down by the book, I think the writer focused too much reiterating, emphasizing or divulging the mind of Muhammad

Dang! The author will soon shot himself in the head.

Thus, the book is unnecessarily span over 300 pages for content that about 200 pages would have sufficed.

It is already getting criticisms on fb by non-muslims. Crazy ahadith or not, they wonder if the man named Muhammad was that evil, how come he has 1b+ followers today?. I didn't even comment. was just reading theirs.

Next issue I have with the book is reference. Some of the Hadith the writer put forth as his evidences in the book are not referenced.

Gbam! Gbam!! Gbam!!! Exactly what the White guy in the video did. That's what i was telling true2god and parris but they have their own mind made up. Same thing those who refute him said. Does the writer think we stupid. Sincere non-Muslims can see through what he's trying to do.

A book this controversial ought to have its evidenced fully referenced for verification or else the professionalism of the author may be doubted.

They wont becuase they want to do "WAYO". Since parrisbookaddict and co like you but you criticize the book, perhaps, they should rethink their stands about it. You even tried. Me just dey reached 60th page.

To a limited extent, I think it is a good criticism of traditional portrayal of Muhammad & mainstream Islam but for the presentation, and excessive focus on Muhammad rather than teachings ascribed to him, it could have been a much better work

Listen, I think being muslim this long, you should have understood their mindset. Whether we try to "modernize" Islam or not, be apologetic or not. Their goal is one - to lie about islam, denigrate the religion and make sure it's eradicated. They dont give a fig leaf whether you are Quranite or part of mainstream muslims. You can see that for yourself. That's what the guy who claimed to be muslim for 16yrs did. He pinpoints hadith to suit his agenda. He's failing by the way.

That being said, I am determined to complete the book,

And by the time you done with it you will realise it is the same old boolSh!t and it's very boring

I think by now, your eyes should clear gradually base on your own posts

usermane:
Nope, not my opinion. If you grasp the concept of monotheism, you 'd easily see that taking any other entity beside God as source of religious or spiritual law negate La ilaha illa Allah.

This is some serious accusation but, yet, laughable. You can as well say Allah Himself joined the prophet(SAW) and even believers with HImself. There are many verses in the Qur'an like this,

"Allah and His messanger..........." OR "Anyone who do good deeds for Allah and His messanger..."


You so funny

Sura 9:105 is one example

Which thread? I have always maintained that Muhammad's examples were derived from the Qur'an. As the deliverer of the revelation, the onus is upon him to abide by the revelations, thus he becomes an example. The problem with the position that Hadith are necessary to follow Muhammad's example is that it downplays the significance of the Qur'an, implying that even the "Book of Allah" is not sufficient for one to lead an exemplary and pious life.

This thread.


You said

usermane:
The word 'litubayyinah' in that verse mean to make manifest and known, not to explain with surplus details. Example, if Qur'an 5:6 explaining ablution is revealed, only Muhammad knows about it and its ruling at first, others are unaware. Muhammad makes clear and manifest to others, what had been revealed to only him by reading and recording it 4 others. This is what this verse mean. The revealation of God is fully detailed(Qur'an 6:114).

Think, if Muhammad did explain Qur'an as traditionalists imply, he would have recorded this explanations along with the Qur'an.

Peace!

My response was

Empiree:
You have a problem here. If prophet Muhammad(Allah's blessings and peace be upon him and his household)'s explanation of some verses of Quran are to be recorded along with Quran (within Quran) as you implied, then, that's distortion. People would have problem distibguishing word of Allah from his prophet. There would have been mix ups like Bible for instance. Word of Allah is Quran, tafsir must be separated. Very simple

Wasalam

You said this afterward

usermane:
so, weren't there enough papers for Muhammad to record his explanations separately in Book format before his death, as he recorded the Qur'an?

Then, I knocked you out with this

Empiree:
Interesting...lol. First, this ayah answers your question Al-Araf:157. Second, isn't that what they recorded separately known as hadith/sunnah?. Usermane is getting interesting

That was our last discussion on this a year and three months ago. That's why i said you have unfinished business with me. And I hope this is not gonna be extension of that

Great analogy. Usually, manuals are not often detailed,

Great! See how you shot yourself in the foot

thus necessitating further instruction.

Now you are talking. That "instruction" was no one else than the man named Muhammad Ibn Abdullah, the messanger of Allah (Allah's Blessings and Peace Be Upon him), his SUNNAH. His Sunnah or path is Allah's Path. Your eyes should be opened ALL THE WAY by now. You made it so easy for me and yourself unless you want to complicate the whole thing over.

But when we take account of the numerous verses describing Qur'an as "detailed", it is hard to see any need for seeking examples or instructions outside Quran

I see you genuinely confused by your statement. Nothing is hard if ONLY the messanger whom the Qur'an was revealed is the practical aspect of the theory or manual.

Now, let me give you homework to do. Let's say a family member of yours passes away, you are the only one in the family they look up to as the most learned man of Islamic knowledge. They call you for burial procedure etc. How do you bury the dead using Qur'an alone

Hint: the details are embedded in the prophet as example to follow. That's the detail

And you are in the middle, right?

By His Grace, am trying

I have been with you here for 2 years, and even though my rejection of all Hadith may seem extreme to you, I do not believe that a Muslim's degree of accepting or rejecting Hadith is a measure of how extreme he is.

That's why Quraniyun failed practically Islamically.

Even though I reject Hadith as divine revelations, there are numerous Hadith whose matn am fine with. I condone Hadith that neither contradict nor add to the Qur'an as long as we realise that Hadith are mere hearsay.

Oh well, i partially agree. This boredown to authenticity of it.

Fabricated Hadith and clearly a desperate attempt to pre-empt any rejection of Hadith. If Hadith fabrication was a fact, is it any surprising how far the fabricators of Hadith would go to cover their track?

This is just attempt to brush all of them off. How about Hadith Quds?. That's direct communication with God. My point is you do not have to accept some narrations like:

"urine for medicine"

"if your food drop on the floor pick it and eat it"

"recite ayat Qursiy before you sleep"

"Muhammad ordered men to fight"

"He married 9 wives"

"Dye your beard with henna" Etc

These are mustahab. If you reject them there is no fault on you. What I am saying is you went too far by rejecting obligatory practices as practically demonstrated by the prophet(SAW) and there is no objection throughout Islamic history to that. These are Salat, Zakat, haj, saum etc . I mean how to practice them. This is where you failed. That's very dangerous.

You're free to reject examples cited above. That has no impact on salvation

Well, he blasphemed his god. What is the punishment for blaspheming in Christianity Bible?

author=lexiconkabir post=48016242

Personally, I dont dispute this. Imam Bukhari was great Muslim and his works MUST be commended. However, what I am particularly concerned about is not just my own conclusion. Sheik Imram Hussein also raised same concern.

Since inventions of computer and electronics, they have placed hadith on electronic devices in order to easily edit them. The Sheik raised this allegation few years ago. You may as well do some tough research on this, that sometimes if you compare certain ahadith copied from internet to hard-copy, you would see variations. In late 2014-15, we had some talks in tbaba's thread titled "Jinn Stories". During this period, i see clearly during my research where they skipped certain phrases from the hadith I was going to use. It was exactly like what they did to Bible where certain verse or verses are expunged. That is my point. Even tbaba said it might be mistake. So that's the point.

But then, I also argued that most definitely the Jews in the early days most likely touched certain ahadith. This has nothing to do with istikhaarah made by Imam. I gave example earlier but neither you nor newnas respond to that. In the hadith where Jizya is said to be abolished by Jesus upon his return. That pretty much sound in the best interest of Jews and christian. It is very possible to have tampered with it becus the Jizya was for them.

usermane:
In summary, all these verses states "Obey God & Obey the messenger"
You believe that Obey God = Obey Qur'an & Obey the messenger = Obey Hadith books. This way, you mean obeying God is not necessarily same as obeying the messenger since the books of Hadith covers laws and doctrines absent in the Qur'an. Thus, to you, the messenger becomes a partner a with God, making decrees that may even abrogate God 's decrees.
There is only one authority that legislates in monotheistic faiths; God, and he shares His authority with none.

Hence, the reason why “obey the messenger” is mentioned after “obey God” is because the latter is a vague command. Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians and Pagans at the time of revelation through Muhammad all claimed to be obeying God(although they were actually obeying conjectures). To clarify what “obey God” imply, “obey the messenger” is mentioned. Thus, explaining that obedience to God is obedience to the messenger calling them, not the conjectures and man made doctrines attributed to God.



So where does Muhammad get his examples from? For him to be of exemplary character, where did he look for guides to conduct his affairs? Are you implying that a Muslim can't lead exemplary life with all the details from the Qur'an?



This deals with distribution of spoils of war. Not relevant to topic.

You see highlighted part, that's your opinion. I am not really interested in this argument.

But then, we already dealt with this. You have unfinished business where I asked you where is EXAMPLE, PRACTICES etc of Muhammad(P)? You admitted this had to be documented separately which is hadith. I hope you remember that?. You later left the thread.

Qur'an is MANUAL and YOU are the example for your children. Your children would document or memorise what you do and instructions you give them. That is separate from the manual. Get my analogy?. It is impossible for 23yrs period not to have documented or memorized practices laid down by the prophet in separate sheets by eyewitnesses.

So newnas is ONE EXTREME. You are ANOTHER EXTREME. Both can not be right.

I leave you with this


Miqdam ibn Ma’di reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “Verily, I have been given the Quran and something along with it, but the time is coming when a man will recline on his couch and say: Keep to the Quran, for whatever you find in it lawful is lawful and whatever you find in it unlawful is unlawful....."

Source: Sunan Abu Dawud 4604

emis8:
Those scriptures are in the old testament.

Exactly! I expected this cheap response in order to out-rightly downplay undesirable texts. Are you not using Old Testament still?. Are you not carrying it around your arm to the church today?. Christians use Old T instructions in 21 century but you do it in different fashion. If you want to support the State of Israel you are going to use Old Testament to buttress your point. Stop deceiving yourself.

[s]Yes those things did happened,, but they were not instructed by God.
Though they belonged to the Chosen ones, they did do things out of their own reasoning.

if you read that same judges21:10 to the end, its written clearly there in verse 25 "in those days, there was no king in Israel:everyman did that which was right in his own sight"

During the reign of kings, there was more revelation knowledge of God as they began to consult the priest.[/s]

when Jesus Christ came, he came to show us the way. Christians are those who follow the teachings of Christ so dont quote the old testament to justify the atrocities Muslims comit even in this 21st century.

Why Jesus or Paul didnt abolish SLAVERY?. If they did Muhammad did not have to deal with it. Dont tell me slavery did not exist in their times.

When last did you hear of Christians doing such?

Are you blind?. How about these christian countries invading and blowing up muslim countries in the name of democracy and freedom?. Oh, because they did not put up the cross around their neck and carry Bible by their arms before you recognize them?. Listen, politicians are doing that barbaric violence for you. The reason you dont want to blame christian religion is bcus they have separated Church from State but they still pursue the same old agenda. Gaza and Gitmo are clear example of modern slavery by Christians/Israel. Compare how Muhammad treated captives with how Captives in Gitmo are being treated now by christian extremist nations. If you type the names of those leaders in your google search you notice they are Christians. Stop deceiving yourself. When GWB invaaded Iraq he said GOD told him so.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvsCa4s_JJs

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

And what difference does it make if I typed anything out?. You are folks who already made up your mind. Y'all simply scared to watch it. He brilliantly refuted those silly accusations. You people simply have made up your mind that no matter what, Muhammad did this and that.

Unfortunately i cant help you. I am sure some christians will eventually take their time to watch. I am not going to waste my time.



Now, same accusations you guys raised are pretty much in your Bible. Let us look at female captive in the Bible (Deuteronomy 21:10-14)




10 “When you go out to war against your enemies, and the Lord your God gives them into your hand and you take them captive,

11 and you see among the captives a beautiful woman, and you desire to take her to be your wife,

12 and you bring her home to your house, she shall shave her head and pare her nails.

13 And she shall take off the clothes in which she was captured and shall remain in your house and lament her father and her mother a full month. After that you may go in to her and be her husband, and she shall be your wife.

14 But if you no longer delight in her, you shall let her go where she wants. But you shall not sell her for money, nor shall you treat her as a slave, since you have humiliated her."


That's just a tip of iceberg ^


If you want muslims to reject Islam base on story of Saffiya etc. I can go to the Bible for a similar incident Judges 21:10-24


10. So the assembly sent twelve thousand fighting men with instructions to go to Jabesh Gilead and put to the sword those living there, including the women and children.

11 “This is what you are to do,” they said. “Kill every male and every woman who is not a virgin.”


QUESTION: How do they know they are not virgin?. Interesting question, isn't?


Let's continue.....


Murder, rape, and pillage at Jabesh-gilead [size=14pt](Judges 21:10-24 NLT)[/size]

So they sent twelve thousand warriors to Jabesh-gilead with orders to kill everyone there, including women and children. “This is what you are to do,” they said. “Completely destroy all the males and every woman who is not a virgin.” Among the residents of Jabesh-gilead they found four hundred young virgins who had never slept with a man, and they brought them to the camp at Shiloh in the land of Canaan.

The Israelite assembly sent a peace delegation to the little remnant of Benjamin who were living at the rock of Rimmon. Then the men of Benjamin returned to their homes, and the four hundred women of Jabesh-gilead who were spared were given to them as wives. But there were not enough women for all of them. The people felt sorry for Benjamin because the LORD had left this gap in the tribes of Israel. So the Israelite leaders asked, “How can we find wives for the few who remain, since all the women of the tribe of Benjamin are dead? There must be heirs for the survivors so that an entire tribe of Israel will not be lost forever. But we cannot give them our own daughters in marriage because we have sworn with a solemn oath that anyone who does this will fall under God’s curse.”

Then they thought of the annual festival of the LORD held in Shiloh, between Lebonah and Bethel, along the east side of the road that goes from Bethel to Shechem. They told the men of Benjamin who still needed wives, “Go and hide in the vineyards. When the women of Shiloh come out for their dances, rush out from the vineyards, and each of you can take one of them home to be your wife! [size=14pt]And when their fathers and brothers come to us in protest, we will tell them, ‘Please be understanding. Let them have your daughters, for we didn’t find enough wives for them when we destroyed Jabesh-gilead. And you are not guilty of breaking the vow since you did not give your daughters in marriage to them.'”[/size] So the men of Benjamin did as they were told. [size=20pt]They kidnapped the women[/size] who took part in the celebration and carried them off to the land of their own inheritance. Then they rebuilt their towns and lived in them. So the assembly of Israel departed by tribes and families, and they returned to their own homes.



^^^

So this is what the Bible says about taking captives when their is shortage of them. They hide behind the bush and ambushed the people without their consent. Is this not rape?


Now, let's see what the Bible say about rape, THE LAW OF RA!PE (Deuteronomy 22:28-29)

"If a man is caught in the act of ra!ping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her."

^^^ WOWOW WOWO WOWOWOW WOWOWOW. tHIS IS WHAT THE bible SAYS ABOUT RA!PE. SO THE VICTIM THAT HAS BEEN RA!PED, NOT ONLY BEEN RA!PED BUT THEN HAS TO SUFFER THE BENEFITS OF THE RAPIST. tHIS IS WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS ABOUT RAPE. This is what the Indians practice. They force the victim to marry her rapist. INTERESTING!!!

They copied the deed your bible


Regarding treatment of Slaves in Islam from a non Muslim perspective:


On the attitude of Muslim masters with his slaves, Will Durant says,

".......he handled them with a genial humanly that made their lot no worse - perhaps better as more secure than that of factory worker in nineteen century Europe"

That's what Will Durant said about female captives in Islam.


Source: Hurgronje C., Mohamadanism, (NY, 1916), p. 128 as quoted by W. Durant, The Story Of Civilization, vol. IV (NY 1950) p. 209

At the end of the 18 century , Mouradgea d'Ohsson (a main source of information for the Western writers on the Ottoman Empire) declared:

[size=13pt]"There is perhaps no nation where the captives, the slaves, the very toilets in the galleys are better provided for or treated with more kindness than the Muhammadans."[/size]


There are more quotes by non-Muslims on treatment of slaves in Islam. I can go ahead and quote more. So you guys can keep grumbling over and over. I dont owe any of you explanation. Force S!x and ra!pe are prohibited in Islam. The guy who claimed to be Muslim for 16 years is a liar. His arguments are completely refuted. Watch the video and educate yourselves.


Again, this is the refutation. If y'all brave enough just watch it and stop complaining.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AM63YokBbGI

See Newnas, see what's going on and how are you going to defend these?. Now, the reason I mute is becus the way you started off with me. I was going to respond to hadith compilation earlier but thank goodness my man did. I deliberately ignored you because you took it upon yourself to compare your fellow muslims to Jews and you even made takfir. It is either your way or the high way.

Now I agree with Userman's first part. Exactly what I was going to say. However, I digress a little bit becus me and usermane did converse on this before if you go through my profile. Imam Bukhari came after Sahaba which means he could not have compiled the Qur'an. When we say the same people who passed down the Quran to us are the same folks with hadith. This simply means chains.


Quran was compiled long before Imam Bukhari(ra). I am not here to criticize the Imam. He did great works and may Allah have mercy on him. Ameena.

As for the last part of usermane's, again, me and him have discussed that before. It is true that Qur'an doesnt necessarily says "Sunnatul Nabi" but Qur'an talks about following prophet's path. No doubt, the path is none other than Muhammad(saw). Sunna means path. Pay attention to terminology Mr. Usermane.

These Quran verses talk about Following the prophet, following his path 3:31,3:32, 3:132, 4:13,4:59,4:64,4:69, 4:80, 5:92, 8:1,8:20, 8:46, 9:71, 24:52, 24:54, 24:56, 33:21, 33:33, 33:71, 47:33, 48:17, 59:7, 64:12.


I only disagree with you (newnas) for saying Sahih hadith (everything recorded in it) it infallible. This is very unfortunate for you. Again, take a look at Baqir's post about stoning monkey. Me and him have discussed that last year months after the same hadith or the like was brought up by true2.god. Unless there are two ahadith relate to the hadith, the hadith is talking about a dream narrated by Sahaba. I researched it myself early last yr when the christian guy brought it up. The guy wanted to ridicule islam by saying how could Muhammad implement judgement of stoning on animal that committed "adultery". Fact is, Imam Bukhari categorized the hadith in the dream section. It is not actual event or incident.

The hadith is much longer than what Albaqir quoted. Probably he quoted excerpt reported in another hadith. But I am 100% sure the hadith is longer than that and it is talking about dream. Second, the hadith has absolutely nothing to do with the prophet(saw). I clarified that to the guy last year and he shut it.

I even feel bad for explaining this. I should have left you (newnas) to defend it first. You seem to think I am a fool with nonsense you posted earlier. Point i was trying to raise was any ahadith that speak about dua (that usually have to do with tassawuf), they are graded daif or fabricated and are placed in other than Sahih Bukhari. But ahadith that sound ridiculous are graded sahih. That was simply my point. But you took it to another level and i had to ignore you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yt4gvf1KVN4#t=2417.115694

[quote author=Newnas post=47985813][/quote]Your post is better directed at the Qur'aniyun not me because you don't get it.

true2god:
This guy was used to be a Muslim, for 16 years, but decided to quit after he could no longer defend the criminal behaviours of Mohammed. He spoke Arabic very fluently and understood Islam in and out. I am very sure you have a very little or no understanding of Arabic, the Islamic coded language.

You will soon leave Islam, there is no way a sane man can continue defending the atrocities of Mohammed as recorded in the hadith.

Receive sense

lol

true2god:
I gat no time to watch Islamic propaganda video which is designed to polish the image of your criminal prophet Mohammed. [size=3pt]All his evil activities are well documented in the hadith. No sane person defends are criminal free of charge, except if that criminal is a close Family member. Below is a short story of one of Mohammed's numerous criminal behaviors.

Safiyyah: Muhammad’s War Booty
An example of Muhammad’s questionable ethics is his marriage to a seventeen-year-old Jewish girl named Safiyyah whom he took from the plunder of Khaibar:

Narrated Abdul Aziz:
Anas said, "When Allah's Apostle invaded Khaibar, we offered the Fajr prayer there (early in the morning) when it was still dark. The Prophet rode and Abu Talha rode too and I was riding behind Abu Talha. The Prophet passed through the lane of Khaibar quickly and my knee was touching the thigh of the Prophet. He uncovered his thigh and I saw the whiteness of the thigh of the Prophet. When he entered the town, he said, ‘Allahu Akbar! Khaibar is ruined. Whenever we approach near a (hostile) nation (to fight) then evil will be the morning of those who have been warned.’ He repeated this thrice.
The people came out for their jobs and some of them said, ‘Muhammad (has come).’ (Some of our companions added, ‘With his army.’) We conquered Khaibar, took the captives, and the booty was collected. Dihya came and said, ‘O Allah's Prophet! Give me a slave girl from the captives.’ The Prophet said, ‘Go and take any slave girl.’ He took Safiya bint Huyai. A man came to the Prophet and said, ‘O Allah's Apostle! You gave Safiya bint Huyai to Dihya and she is the chief mistress of the tribes of Quraiza and An-Nadir and she befits none but you.’ So the Prophet said, ‘Bring him along with her.’ So Dihya came with her and when the Prophet saw her, he said to Dihya, ‘Take any slave girl other than her from the captives.’ " Anas added: "The Prophet then manumitted her and married her."
Thabit asked Anas, "O Abu Hamza! What did the Prophet pay her (as Mahr)?" He said, "Her self was her Mahr for he manumitted her and then married her." Anas added, "While on the way, Um Sulaim dressed her for marriage (ceremony) and at night she sent her as a bride to the Prophet. So the Prophet was a bridegroom and he said, ‘Whoever has anything (food) should bring it.’ He spread out a leather sheet (for the food) and some brought dates and others cooking butter. (I think he (Anas) mentioned As-Sawaq). So they prepared a dish of Hais (a kind of meal). And that was Walima (the marriage banquet) of Allah's Apostle." ( Sahih al-Bukhari , Volume 1, Book 8, Number 367 ).

Mohammed killed safiya's family members and took her as a war booty, and 'married' and slept with her the same night he killed her family. However allahh (obviously a demon in disguise because Mohammed was afflicted with magic, according to his child-bride Aisha) asked Muslims to wait for three months before sleeping with a woman that was previously married to another man (according to the Qur'an) , as safiya was originally married to khinana, a rich Jewish merchant whom Mohammed tortured and killed when khaibar was invaded.

Mohammed broke his own rule and slept with her the very day he killed her people. No normal human being will willingly marry a man that killed her family members. Mohammed raped safiya, full stop![/size]

That's your problem. Keep living in your world. You dont have time but you have time to type poo that suits you. Go on. Your problem is solved here if you care.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AM63YokBbGI

yazach:
Honestly when I read his(seun) I thought of this Ayah and his comments, you can see the perfect answer from the aaya, if he still denying the existence of Almighty Allah, his denial also shows the perfection and completeness of the QUR'AN because another verse will say they know the truth but they will intentionally reject it

You dey mind. That's why he didnt care to respond when he saw obvious proofs

Clash of titans!

The moment I read "Shia are coming for your head" i knew this is going to be all out war and it's not going to end in peace

Anyways, interesting read on Abū Bakr ‘Abdallāh bin Abī Quḥāfah aṣ-Ṣiddīq


Jazakallahu Khayran

true2god:
This doesn't change the fact that Mohammed raped safiya the very day he killed all her family members in khaibar.

Quiet obvious you guys can not have constructive argument. You have a good day



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otn3o54I2Ss

^^^

I am sure none of you two watched the video. It is only an hour. And even if you watched it, it doesn't really change anything with you because you are people described as deaf, dump and blind. Dont get me started bcus the same accusations written in the book against Islam are abound in your Bible as well. If you say one more thing in a negative way on this issue I shall quote those Bible verses that you probably dont know are there. They are exact same thing (yours even worse) that you accused Islam of.

The video brilliantly trashed nonsense written in the Book. Do yourself a favor. Just watch and listen to the video.

A Comprehensive Video Refuting A Guy Who Left Islam And Started Making Videos Against Islam. It Also Refutes Accusations Raised In A Book Titled In The Headline

Help Yourselves & Watch The Whole Video



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AM63YokBbGI

Demmzy15:

Seun:
Check this out first:



Yes, science teaches us about a phenomenon called diffusion. If you pour salt water and fresh water into any container, they will mix. The mixing will not be very fast if you don't shake the container, but it happens nonetheless. The same laws of nature apply to the seas.


Knowing what I know now, I think this verse was simply describing a phenomenon that was known about in the time of the prophet. Because the prophet wasn't a scientist, he didn't realize that there was no actual barrier between the seas. That the 'partition' was only an illusion.

If it would take a long time to mix, how long would that be without shaking it as you rightly said?. These seas have been around for far too long and I am not aware of them mixing. Note, I dont think Quran is referring to just any sea. I think it's specific contrary to the picture you posted. Many seas have surged against each other and they in fact mixed up but not this one referred to in the Quran.

Would it not be interesting to watch some video(s) see how that feels?.


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


The quran states there are barriers BETWEEN two seas. Modern science found there are barriers (called a pycnocline) in the sea. Although some have argued that Pycnocline is not the same kind of barrier that is mentioned in the quran and that might constitutes fallacy of equivocation. Sir, the video is quiet convincing. The two seas could have easily mix in matter of minutes.

BUT Will They Finally Mix? I doubt that without Allah's Will


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PXRW18ty0Ag


For now, the verses of Quran stand

youngguru23:
I've studied u...

I will just give u one advice...

Don't give urself illness dat won't be cure or kill urself because of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH).

He mentions Islam and Muhammad(p) a lot than his Paul and Christianity. Dont worry. He's working for us. Let him keep it up

Newnas:
# As this deviant Empiree Sufi claimed that if Bukharee and his likes had finished the work, why did Albany still have work to do? A


via iQuran

I only brought up some documented sufi forms of dhikr which are frown upon or takfired by people like you. I have not turned this to factions but you have just did that. You just sabotaged my reply. Boy bye. Am out

^ May Allah ease your condition. Ameena

May Allah Bless Your Union. Ameena