₦airaland Forum

LagosShia:
^^^^^^^

my friend first you are taking[b] ths topic into another direction of "two wrongs make a right".[/b]and even at that,you will fail to point out your own wrong you think the other side has done to justify the murder of Edoardo Agnelli.

as for the Bahai,you asked an important question:

"i wonder why they are so despised in Iran".

you have asked a big question because you have not being told the answer they conceal from you or you are the one concealing it from us.

you will know the answer to your question,by telling us this:

where is the headquarter (or what is called the "administrative center" of the bahai faith in the world? tell us where then connect the dots to find your answer in identifying their political role they played in Iran.

LagosShia:
truly so or not,that has nothing to do with why this man deserved to be killed.

this man got the right to whatever political role he can attain.

why the beaf?

they are not murdered at all.they are a banned movement in Iran.likewise,in many countries even in europe you find that Jehovah's witnesses are also banned.

in the united states of america,the christian polygamist sect is persecuted and their leader (Warren Jeffs) is in prison.

in the united states of america,the christian polygamist sect is persecuted and their leader (Warren Jeffs) is in prison.

they are not murdered at all.they are a banned movement in Iran.

LagosShia:
Western propaganda!

you think the Iran loves Muslims less than Westerners? it has shown time and again it will risk life and limb for muslims.

if this dude had been a normal guy on the street would the zionists spend political capital on this assasination? No.its cause the man is a son to a popular industrialist.

there are people who choose Islam from other religions and are given similar treatement. Also,there are tens of thousands of Muslims in Ita;y who are hounded or harassed because they are muslims,so this guy's story is not different.

its propaganda (he committed suicide).[b]Italy should be tolerant to its religious minorities just like Iran is to theirs [/b]and stop whining.

ivoice247:
[color=#990000]

There are many so called muslims that are hypocrites, but truly islam has no iota of hypocrisy. I hear some so called muslims in the northern part of Nigeria force religion on non-muslims but that doesn't mean that's what the quran preaches. It's just like saying; because some pastors & priests supported gay marriages in america and europe, that means christianity and the bible supports it, NO!

LagosShia:
the hate of christians through braiwashing is what will extinguish the falsehood of christianity and further illuminate the light of Islam for people to see the truth!!!

the most ridiculous remarks:"the kuffar defennding themselves".the terrorists who castigated,persecuted and oppressed muslims in the early days of Islam are not referred to by the ungodly trinitarian christian pagans as the victims who were "defending themselves".

i wonder how Jesus would feel about his so called "followers"!!!he must really be very angry that when he returns,he will bring with him the sword of Peter to cut off their deaf ears!!!!

LagosShia:
another forgery!!! and you still shamelessly quote these forgeries!!!

the fatwa goes thus in reply to a question from a questioner who asked what to do if a child is abused.the fatwa does not say men can abuse children:

"if a man have intimate pleasure with a child,and penetrates a child and the child is harmed,then he should be responsible for her sustenance all her life.this girl,however would not count as one of his four permanent wives.the man would not be eligible to marry the girl's sister".

the above is aside the punishment of flogging the man would undergo!!!

Sweetnecta:
^^^ You are correct. I am from her generation so we have this umbrerra in common. Happy? Good. The most important thing is that you get the idea of my post. I am sure you got it so much that you have to get angry with me as a christian since i oppose your opinion of God, His Messengers and Prophets which include Jesus. When I am on Nairaland, I am also on many other issues. So I sometimes get distracted and since NL is just a thing meant for my fun of the day, I come out as I do; Truth as I know it [with reason], emotional at times, along with the fun of just letting off steam, without hurting anyone.

Enjoy. You may learn something at the end of this whole nairaland thing.

""A man can marry a girl younger than nine years of age, even if the
girl is still a baby being breastfed. A man, however is prohibited from
having intercourse with a girl younger than nine, other intimate acts
such as pre-intimacy, rubbing, kissing and sodomy is allowed. A man having
intercourse with a girl younger than nine years of age has not
committed a crime, but only an infraction, if the girl is not
permanently damaged. If the girl, however, is permanently damaged, the
man must provide for her all her life. But this girl will not count as
one of the man’s four permanent wives. He also is not permitted to
marry the girl’s sister.” - Ayatollah Khomeini, “Tahrir- ol-vasyleh”, Volume 4, Darol Elm, Qom, Iran, 1990, p. 221.

http://www.iranian.com/main/news/2010/02/10/tahrir-ol-vasyleh

LagosShia:
hahahahaha  

see how dumb christians can be out of fanaticism.they just go on any anti-islamic websites even those that forge hadith or twist them and come here to spread their garbage.

i know you would not be able to present those hadiths because you copied them from anti-islamic websites that turn them upside down.

LagosShia:
please dont run and avoid the bomb shell you just fired minutes ago.you have provided summarized hadiths or rather forgeries and presented us with their references.you also presented forgery attributed to Ayatollah Khomeini.the only hadith you presented verbatim is the one on Aisha's marriage and that too has been explained and refuted in another thread i presented the link earlier of.

so really,who would take you and your likes seriously?

dont you look into the mirror and ask yourself:"why am i so stu.pid"? "why am i dam.ned"? "why am i ignorant and arrogant"?"why am i christian"?

you need to reflect and ask yourself because what you have just done by copying forgeries shows deep hatred burning in your christian mind and your brainwashed head filled with fanaticism and ignorance to fight,attack and blackmail anything muslim and islamic.shame on you and your filthy religion.

at least,if you dont accept Islam improves on christianity,you should have no joy about that because christianity is shameful.

mumu!

are we to believe you or to believe what the bible says?

the subject of Aisha'a marriage was discussed in another thread where the allegation she was young was refuted and the christians themselves were put on the defense for Mary.you contributed the same rubbish in that thread:

LagosShia:
this isn't the iranian leader.but nonetheless that is highly respected Shia scholar.what he is doing is no pedophilia.it is a cultural practice in the middle east for men to kiss themselves.the iranians  particular peck/kiss on the lips.

dont even try to pretend holiness.christians hang the cross on their chests while they perform entertainment videos that show indecent images of women and even them would be half na.ked if not completely,

Muslim (8:3311) - The girl Aisha took her dolls with her to Muhammad's house.

Sahih Bukhari (6:298) - Muhammad would take a bath with the little girl and handle her.

The permanent committee for scientific research and religious sanctions:

Fatwa (religious sanction)

Number 41409 dated 7/5/1421

August 8, 2000
As for the thighing of the messenger of God to his fiancée Ayesha, she was six years old and he could not engage in intimate intercourse with her because of her young age, therefore he used to place his p.  e.n  .i  . s  between her thighs and rub it lightly.  In addition, the messenger of God had full control of his joystick in contrary to the believers.

Aisha’s father did not approve at first

Aisha's father, Abu Bakr, wasn't on board at first, but Muhammad explained how the rules of their religion made it possible.

Sahih Bukhari 7.18
Narrated 'Ursa:
The prophet asked abu Bakr for 'Aisha's hand in marriage. Abu Bakr said "but I am your brother." the prophet said, "you are my brother in Allah's religion and his book, but she (Aisha) is lawful for me to marry."

Aisha was not the only one Muhammad thought about

In the classic history, Sirat Rasul Allah (The Life of Muhammad) by Ibn Ishaq, there is an account in which Muhammad expressed a marital interest in a crawling baby. This event seems to have occurred around the time of the battle of of Badr, when he was about 55 years old. He had married Aisha two years earlier, when he was 53 years of age.

(Suhayli, ii. 79: in the Riwaya of Yunus i. I. Recorded that the apostle saw her (Ummu'lfadl) when she was a baby crawling before him and said, 'if she grows up and I am still alive I will marry her.' but he died before she grew up and sufyan b. Al-aswad b. 'Abdu'l-asad al-Makhzumi married her and she bore him rizq and lubab… [Ibn Ishaq, The Life of Muhammad, Karachi, p. 311]

Muhammad saw Um Habiba the daughter of Abbas while she was fatim (age of nursing) and he said, "if she grows up while I am still alive, I will marry her." (Musnad Ahmad, number 25636)

LagosShia:
you have really made no sensible point.in fact you have only given me more bullets to shoot.let me make the following points to finish you off:

1.) just as the words you are pointing to show that the record concerning the marriage of Joseph,"husband of Mary",is disputed,likewise the writings pointing to Aisha's age at 6 or 9 years old are also unreliable because there are contradictory records on her age.there are records which are historic which point that Aisha could have been 16 to 19 years old at the time of her marriage.are there records to show that Mary was anything older than 12-14 years old and Joseph anything less than 90 years old? i have seen none.

2.) any writing that does not suit the church and their doctrines,from "gospels" or books that support arianism,refutes the trinity,crucifxion,and other roman catholic imposed doctrines are called apocrypha.why should anyone in his right senses follow what the church says and believe a book or record is an apocrypha because the church says so? who determines what is and what is not "apocrypha"? based on what conditions and why?

3.) for as long as christians exploit contradictory records on the marriage of Aisha to attack the person of our Prophet (sa),it is only fair and just for us to also make use of records which expose the tender age of Mary,the old age of Joseph and the conception of Mary to rub on the faces of christians.

4.) whether you agree with those records or not,is none of my business for so long as you do not have any record to prove that Mary was older than 12-14 years old and Joseph was younger than 90 years old.but as for us muslims,we have records which are reasonable and logical and can be relied upon that show that Aisha when she was married by the Prophet (sa) was 16-19 years old and may be even older based on calculations.so you can do yourself good by bringing us proof that Mary was not 12-14 years old and Joseph was not 90 years old at the time of their engagement and when Mary conceived Jesus miraculously.if you cannot provide us with evidence contrary to the record the church deems apocrypha then you have no excuse not to accept that record.calling it "apocrypha" without presenting another historic record to show otherwise amounts to running away!!!

it is evident that had the church had any reliable or acceptable or any record at all that puts the age of Mary older and that of Joseph younger,they would have presented the record instead of [b]showing us record on their ages which they later turn and twist to call "apocrypha".[/b]them presenting what they call "apocrypha" on such an important subject,shows that they are out of words and record.it is also worth noting that,many reliable records and "gospels" existed from the early centuries of christianity which were rejected by the church because they did not appeal to their line of thinking and the doctrines they invented in their councils and the bible books they selected and voted for to add into the "canon of the bible" and the new testament.so really,i am not here to even debate what is acceptable or not to the church and christians knowing their method and history of cherry-picking to form their bible and doctrines.the point is there is record to make my case and counter your attack convincingly.