₦airaland Forum

Interesting inputs - and you're absolutely right dominionbaby + retro.

Intermarriages between faiths have not always promoted unity but rather broadened the divisions.

Well, that's life - and that's for real!

xkape:
You guys shouldnt go around provoking muslims with this kind of rhetoric.
Anybody can claim the miraculouis or the spiritual. Arguments like these only alienate muslims the more and stirs up hate.

Nobody is alienating muslims - it's nobody's fault if they can't speak up for themselves about the miracles in their religion. If we rejoice in the miracles God gives through faith in the name of Jesus Christ, why should anyone want to hate Christians for that?

The topic needs important qualification and perhaps an editing that is all accommodating; and that's why I held my peace until now. Muslims indeed speak of some 'miracles' in Islam, no doubt. What we would like to see is a sharing of those occurences classified as 'miraculous' by them. In such cases, important questions need to be addressed: (a) does the Qur'an speak of miracles performed by the Prophet Muhammad? (b) how do the miracles in Islam benefit its adherents? (c) in what way do those miracles reveal God's glory? (d) what is distinct about the miracles in the Qur'an (if any), and how do they relate to those performed by the Biblical prophets? etc. . .

Even as Christians we need to be careful and objective enough to tacle the same questions we ask our Muslim discussants. Indeed, there are miracles recorded in the Bible - and many of them were great and brought spectacular blessings to their recipients. But we don't find the same things happening through the dispensations between the OT and the NT. For example, I don't remember anyone casting out a demon in the OT, while we read of this a number of instances in the NT.

This is not to dampen the zest of this thread; however, I know several other adherents of other religions who might just as well say the same thing that: "Our xyz religion is the only faith that is alive!" What I would rather like to encourage is a dialogue between both sides of the divide in order to better understand the raison d'etre of whatever faith we profess.

An Open Letter To Palestinians
- By Youssef M. Ibrahim
Jewish World Review

With Israel entering its fourth week of an incursion into the same Gaza Strip it voluntarily evacuated a few months ago, a sense of reality among Arabs is spreading through commentary by Arab pundits, letters to the editor, and political talk shows on Arabic-language TV networks. The new views are stunning both in their maturity and in their realism. The best way I can think of to convey them is in the form of a letter to the Palestinian Arabs from their Arab friends:

Dear Palestinian Arab brethren:

The war with Israel is over.

You have lost. Surrender and negotiate to secure a future for your children.

We, your Arab brothers, may say until we are blue in the face that we stand by you, but the wise among you and most of us know that we are moving on, away from the tired old idea of the Palestinian Arab cause and the "eternal struggle" with Israel.

Dear friends, you and your leaders have wasted three generations trying to fight for Palestine, but the truth is the Palestine you could have had in 1948 is much bigger than the one you could have had in 1967, which in turn is much bigger than what you may have to settle for now or in another 10 years. Struggle means less land and more misery and utter loneliness.

At the moment, brothers, you would be lucky to secure a semblance of a state in that Gaza Strip into which you have all crowded, and a small part of the West Bank of the Jordan. It isn't going to get better. Time is running out even for this much land, so here are some facts, figures, and sound advice, friends.

You hold keys, which you drag out for television interviews, to houses that do not exist or are inhabited by Israelis who have no intention of leaving Jaffa, Haifa, Tel Aviv, or West Jerusalem. You shoot old guns at modern Israeli tanks and American-made fighter jets, doing virtually no harm to Israel while bringing the wrath of its mighty army down upon you. You fire ridiculously inept Kassam rockets that cause little destruction and delude yourselves into thinking this is a war of liberation. Your government, your social institutions, your schools, and your economy are all in ruins.

Your young people are growing up illiterate, ill, and bent on rites of death and suicide, while you, in effect, are living on the kindness of foreigners, including America and the United Nations. Every day your officials must beg for your daily bread, dependent on relief trucks that carry food and medicine into the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, while your criminal Muslim fundamentalist Hamas government continues to fan the flames of a war it can neither fight nor hope to win.

In other words, brothers, you are down, out, and alone in a burnt-out landscape that is shrinking by the day.

What kind of struggle is this? Is it worth waging at all? More important, what kind of miserable future does it portend for your children, the fourth or fifth generation of the Arab world's have-nots?

We, your Arab brothers, have moved on.

Those of us who have oil money are busy accumulating wealth and building housing, luxury developments, state-of-the-art universities and schools, and new highways and byways. Those of us who share borders with Israel, such as Egypt and Jordan, have signed a peace treaty with it and are not going to war for you any time soon. Those of us who are far away, in places like North Africa and Iraq, frankly could not care less about what happens to you.

Only Syria continues to feed your fantasies that someday it will join you in liberating Palestine, even though a huge chunk of its territory, the entire Golan Heights, was taken by Israel in 1967 and annexed. The Syrians, my friends, will gladly fight down to the last Palestinian Arab.

Before you got stuck with this Hamas crowd, another cheating, conniving, leader of yours, Yasser Arafat, sold you a rotten bill of goods — more pain, greater corruption, and millions stolen by his relatives — while your children played in the sewers of Gaza.

The war is over. Why not let a new future begin?



Source: http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0706/ibrahim.php3?printer_friendly

Open Letters of Concerned Individuals

The Middle East has experienced some very involving intermittent upheavals for quite some time. On almost all sides are people who feel their course of actions (usually involving some form of violence) are justified. However, it's interesting to note that a few individuals are taking other approaches to the issue by making appeals to all stake-holders to seek a peacful resolve. Here are some open letters from individuals who view the troubles in the Middle East differently:

Majid Tehranian

More powerful force
Open letter to Palestinians and Israelis

October 25, 2000
The Iranian

Like millions of others, I have shared your pains and sufferings from a distance and over a long period of time. I am a Muslim by birth, but I have a Jewish son and therefore emotional ties to both sides. I am also a proud disciple of Buddha, Jesus, Rumi, Gandhi, Buber, King, and Hosseini.

Following the seven years of the slow Oslo peace process and the breakout of the new Intifada of October 2000, I feel that the time has come for you to seriously consider a new mass strategy towards peace, namely a strategy of non-violence.

A new PBS documentary on the history of non-violence during the 20th century, "A Force More Powerful," makes it abundantly clear that time and time again the struggles for justice have best succeeded through carefully planned strategies of non-violent and active resistance. In order to take its moral and practical lessons to heart, this excellent documentary must be viewed by all of you.

We now know how in India, the United States, the Philippines, South Africa, Poland, Czechoslovakia, and Yugoslavia, non-violent struggles for independence, civil rights, and freedom from the tyrannies of apartheid and dictatorial rules have succeeded.

This is not a romantic appeal to abstract moral principles. Non-violence is both moral and practical. It takes the highest possible moral grounds, but it also works. It requires commitment, courage, discipline, and persistent hard work. These are qualities that are not lacking among the Israelis and Palestinians.

First of all, it takes for two small groups of Israelis and Palestinians to come together and pledge themselves to a joint non-violent struggle for peace and justice in the Holy Lands. Second, the group would have to go through a period of careful training in non-violent philosophy, strategies, and tactics. Third, the group needs to set out its long, medium, and short-term objectives.

The short-term is easy to define. All acts of violence on both sides must unconditionally stop before a process of confidence building can start. The medium term is more difficult, but considerable progress has already been made on that front by the peace process.

An independent Palestine must be part of the plan, but an end to terrorism against Israelis must be its quid pro quo. The long-term objectives are the most difficult on which to agree.

The Israeli and Palestinian economies have already become so interdependent that the basis for long-term cooperation between the two states and an eventual federation is not impossible to imagine. Wars and violence are failures of human imagination.

We must have the courage to imagine the impossible in order to achieve what is within our grasp in the short run. An Israel at peace with its Arab neighbors is such a dream.

Exchanging Israeli scientific and technological know-how with the enormous Arab human and financial power presents an unmatched complementary.

Last but not least, a non-violent active resistance for peace and justice requires leadership. Credible leadership for non-violent struggles emerges only out of traditions of civility and in the trenches of the struggle itself.

Authentic Jews, Christians, and Muslims are second to none in their profound commitment to peace and justice. The greetings in both Hebrew and Arabic convey Peace (Shalom, Salam) upon the recipients. For Christians who also consider the Holy Lands as their sacred grounds, Jesus of Nazareth was a Prince of Peace. Pious wishes, however, are not enough. It is in the process of the non-violent struggle itself that Gandhis, Kings, and Mandelas are made.

Some Israelis and Palestinians have tried violence for sometime to achieve their objectives. It has brought them and innocent by-standers nothing but pain, suffering, misery, and death.

I appeal to you, dear bothers and sisters, to give peace a chance.

Majid Tehranian

Kyoto, Japan
October 22, 2000.


Source: http://www.iranian.com/MajidTehranian/2000/October/Letter/

@babyosisi,

The last two weblinks are really eye-opening. Thank you.

[quote author=me,myself link=topic=17418.msg503961#msg503961 date=1153347909]awwww! Gwaine, i tot u were online now! nyways, l8erz then.[/quote]Awww, dearie! I was online for quite a while but didn't see you - and our ISP was frequently throwing me off the net for some inexplicable reason. If you saw me online but not getting responses from me - you know what was happening. How bodi?

Lioness dearie, ur the best

Bo, my broder donnie, God multiply His blessings on you.

OlaAjia:
Big Shame on you Gwaine! I've only come to realize that the quality of your posts alongside your incomprehensibility of simple words such as pornographer and delinquent, that a 10 year old will define almost accurately, is comparable to that of an eight year old or below. If I lie, tell me if 1, I have shown a tendency to commit crime, 2, I have failed to pay money that is owed or 3, I have not payed any money in time. Those are the definitions of deliquents I found in the Oxford dictionary.

Now-now crybaby, first let me welcome you back from your exile. It really doesn't matter how much shame you want to impress upon me - you're way too late to bring that on, and I'm too mature for your infantile brouhaha. The quality of my posts is way too much for you to handle, and that's simply because you're juvenile - and it shows.

There's more than one English dictionary in the world, and if Oxford is the only one you have in your shoe box cupboard, ask you dad (or whoever is responsible for your tutelage) to broaden the scope of your readership by expanding your library. Try these other definitions of the words 'delinquent' and/or 'delinquency' (note the spelling, because I noticed you have a hard time spelling 'deli[b]n[/b]quents' and yet you want to correct others) -

From Encarta online:
de·lin·quen·cy ¤ noun
Definition: 1. unlawful behavior: antisocial or illegal behavior or acts, especially by young people.
2. neglect of duty: failure to fulfill a duty, commitment, or responsibility (formal)

From Merriam-Webster online:
delinquency ¤ noun
Definition: 1 (a) : a delinquent act (b) : conduct that is out of accord with accepted behavior or the law;
especially : JUVENILE DELINQUENCY.

Okay, hope you get the gist. When you posted your goose's cry previously, did you consider that your disparaging the faith of others and calling them outlandish names were aptly 'deliquent' in the sense of displaying "antisocial behaviour. . . especially by young people" (according to Encarta) and a "conduct that is out of accord with accepted behaviour" (according to Merriam-Webster)?? Perhaps, you didn't realise it so - and I can forgive your myopia thereto. The problem is, you're above a 10 year old who perhaps wouldn't have been able to tell the difference in the other definitions you skipped while fixating your sob-story on Oxford alone. Run along - your 10-year-old peers are waiting to play with you, and don't forget to take along the dolls that Aisha left you.

OlaAjia:
I am not surprised anyway, you have a tendency to post hogwash. As a result, not withstanding whatever you post again, I will ignore you as I will ignore an eight year old that has nothing relevant to say, because you are no better, if not worse.

You're missing the lesson, my boy - so pay attention. The hogwash I post is exactly the hogwash you can't handle about the Bedouin Prophet Muhammad who couldn't keep his long-john in his billowy pants or shalwar. Imagine the hogwash of Muhammad's pedophilia in having sex with a 9 year old; his insatiable womanizing and lewd tendencies with 'war booty' (female captives); and his outrageous X-RATED porn in the Qur'an. You know, a minor/juvenile like you shouldn't really pay attention to Muhammad's hogwash, much less an eight year old. It's quite relevant to reveal these adventures of the Quraish prophet so that youngsters like you shouldn't be harmed any further than you already have been. Ignore me all you want - and that to your own malady.

OlaAjia:
See, I am even tired of trying to educate you. You are very thick Gwaine. Educating you is like casting pearls before swines! Have a nice day.

No-no-no, my dear: it's the other way round. Indeed, I'm very 'thick' and roundly educated in the things you can't handle, which explains why your attempt at educating your elders is hilarious. Don't tire out so quickly. . . just keep crying, you hear?

And since when did 'casting pearls before swines' become an Islamic adage?? I suspected as much - you guys are now being forced to come closer to currying favour with the Bible you once disparaged, which is a good sign that you're reforming. BTW, don't fail to attend your next extra-curricula classes in elementary English (and pay particular attention to spellings and lexis); then you can go play at the swing park near Aisha's house.

lordimpaq:
@gwaine
you are awsome,
but i'd prefer you take a diplomatic approach to answeriing the posts from time warp and ola ajia,
i'm learnin everyday, i love u guys

@Lordimpaq,

Many thanks, and believe me - that's the very thing I've tried to offer the Muslim discussants on this Forum, again and again. If diplomacy didn't work and instead had the effect of helping them belch out uncivilized tantrums, then it's only sad that they pressed the wrong botton. My offers are still open - they should behave, talk to people, calm down and respect the convictions of others. I promise them there would be no need to read undiplomatic stuff from me if they blend well, or I would have no choice than to sanitise their rascality. I hope they take the offer - it's up to them.

Much love to you.

@Time_Warp,

[quote author=Time_Warp link=topic=7756.msg503266#msg503266 date=1153335457]Muslims do not go about and pillage people left and right. There are extremists that do horrible things for ideas that they believe are truely worthy of such wrongful acts. They however are not true muslims. The true faith in Islam is to show forgiveness and mercy.[/quote]And Muhammad was not a Muslim then - because he never went on rampage killing people indiscriminately?? How much mercy did that Bedouin self-declared prophet show?? When you've woken up from your Arabian slumber, post some sense.

[quote author=Time_Warp link=topic=7756.msg503266#msg503266 date=1153335457]And you cannot accept that, then you are a hypocrite and you need psychological help before you end up murdering someone with this viccious behavior of yours.[/quote]By posting the pedophilic, lewd and murderous career of the Quraish prophet, I've become vicious?? Quaint. You'd rather that the facts continue to be swept under the carpet and we all sit round a table having coffee while the 'true' followers of Muhammad follow his murderous spirit and drive, to blow us all into oblivion with the promise of 72 virgins awaiting them for more lustful games in paradise - yes? Clap for you.

[quote author=Time_Warp link=topic=7756.msg503266#msg503266 date=1153335457]And no I am not a muslim. I am a Draneist. People who practice the faith of absolute truth.
We take both sides of an argument and we completely despise the ridicule some people constantly show towards others without any proof other than what one says. Draneism is an actual faith, just not one that is known about or spoken about, because it's very new and very old.[/quote]How much actually were you paid as bribe to post your sob-story on the Forum, please tell me. I'm sorry to notice that your faith of 'absolute truth' is blind from start to finish. You despise "ridicule" - but you can choose to pour it out on people you find yourself conveniently and politically opposed to - yes? Did you not 'ridicule' the Christian faith in your first post by behaving irresponsibly with your uncouth verbiage of -

  # Christian stupidity

  # these wildly vicious beliefs

  # these hateful christians

  # the muslims should hate christianity

  # the christians for performing such an atrocity??

I can forgive the garboil in that coffin-nailed religion of yours - especially because you sound as confused as the origin of your Draneism that is neither here nor there, as it is neither "known about or spoken about, because it's very new and very old". Titters.

[quote author=Time_Warp link=topic=7756.msg503266#msg503266 date=1153335457]You people seriously need help if you actually believe that Islam is a faith of absolute hatrid and fear. Because that I believe is called Islamaphobia or Muslimophobia. The fear of Islam or the fear of those that practice Islam. For goodness sakes, if the muslims were really hateful people, then wouldn't they have lead invasions directly into Europe after the massacres? And how you dare say that I'm trolling. You have just shown how you absolutely have no idea what that word means. Furthermore, if you are saying that my posts are provoking flame wars and such, then you are just showwing how prejudicist you are to ideas differ from yours and to such an extent that you are unable to control your temper.[/quote]I shouldn't be wasting my time with your lullaby, but just so you don't run away with that lollygag idea of yours, here are a few things you should know:

1. You need to check in fast into a psycho-therapic center if you're deliberately blinding yourself to the murders perpetrated in the career of Muhammad, and now in true spirit and like-nature is being perpetrated by his ardent followers. Who have been killing fellow Muslims in Iraq? (Hint: the Shiites and the Shias). Who blew up innocent lives just a year ago in London? (Hint: Muslims in what is now "London's 7/7". You forgot your Draneist history that the Bedouin hordes of the Arab prophet attempted an invasion sometime ago into Europe, and they failed woefully. Don't sleep on your belly now, because some ardent Muslims have been humming a likely invasion into Europe - because they believe that must take place to fulfill a "prophecy" made by that Quraish prophet.

2. As for the Islamophobia and Muslimophobia that you see but can't see the anti-Christian antics and 'Christianophobic' responses you trailed in your first post, let me guarantee you that I don't fear Islam or Muhammad - I'm not that chicken to pretend Muhammad's claims and career can't be questioned.

3. You might have misquoted me in the 'provoking flame wars'; nevertheless you could easily feel the heat in my temperaments but choose not to feel any in the derision pandered by your Muslim friends - no? Let me show you what prejudice is - (a) your pretences in not having been able to spot the same issues informing your complaints in the Muslim posts on the Forum, while being very quick to spot them in the Christian posts; (b) you jumping in the middle  of a discourse without having visited other threads to check out issues.

I have severally offered the Muslim discussants on the Forum to calm down and talk to people and refrain from their uncouth expressions and castigations of the faiths and convictions of other people - my offers went largely unheeded. You should be talking to them about your complaints, because as long as I remain "Gwaine", I've promised to not pretend about their intolerance anymore. Good to know that most are now waving a tattered white flag with the quips of "ignoring" me.

[quote author=Time_Warp link=topic=7756.msg503266#msg503266 date=1153335457]People are or should be responsible for their own actions and you always have the choice of ignoring those posts that you don't like, discussing what they meant with the one that made them, or decide to go and post in a different thread.[/quote]No problem - only if you'd take your own advice. I've tried to do that severally in the past to no avail. This time, cry with them - they could console you with something in Quraish.

[quote author=Time_Warp link=topic=7756.msg503266#msg503266 date=1153335457]So stop being such an "actual" internet troll. It's quite obvious that you get confused between the words and identities of a newbie and a troll. In which, I'm a newbie and because of mass hysteria, I'm depicted as a troll against my very existence as a newcomer. And for what? Because I said christians were more hostile that muslims. Well they are if you study your history books. And here I am being persecuted or being completed harassed by angry christians and perhaps some athiests and anti-muslims. If you really think I'm wrong, then why are you proving what I say to be true?[/quote]Now I know you're half-baked - sorry, but it's true. I have nothing against your being a newbie; but your pun on troll is hilarious. Mass hysteria - from where, by who?? I'm not angry, to assure you - I'm only refusing to be passive while you hope to take the liberty at throwing missives at Christians and pretend your Draneist religion. You're rather proving your true colour by offering the harrassments in the very first paragraph of your very first post.

[quote author=Time_Warp link=topic=7756.msg503266#msg503266 date=1153335457]So start behaving yourself. I'm not the enemy here.[/quote]After you, pal. Behave and you'll find your snivelling unnecessary.

OlaAjia:
Softee, I would advise that you treat anybody as who he claims to be. If he tells you he is not a Muslim, you have no right to call him such, until he admits by himself that he is. I don't think Christianity teaches you to jump into unconfirmed conclusions. Softee, afterall, what he quoted was how Christianity was propagated and not what the bible says.

Rubbish. Anyone reading Time-Warp's entry without jiga in his eyes knows that he's a munafiq - a muslim religious hypocrite. It's glaring that apart from his Islamic polarisation, calling for a Muslim anti-Christian hate exposes his seething prejudices, and is not a neutral or objective perspective on religious issues. Did you notice this in his post? See again -

[quote author=Time_Warp link=topic=7756.msg496400#msg496400 date=1153166127]It appears to me that the same Christian stupidity has been stirred up again.
And no I'm not a muslim, but I will comment about the faith of Islam in an unbiased truth. . .
In addition, these wildly vicious beliefs against muslims being a merciful religion are contributed to people who actually believe in what these hateful christians have to say against Islam. . .To be honest the muslims should hate christianity for being so hateful towards them. But since the muslim practice a truely merciful faith, they would more than likely forgive the christians for performing such an atrocity.[/quote]Classic Muslim prejudice at work, did you notice? An unbiased contributor to a debate does not polarise towards one party while trying to ridicule the other, much less casting that ridicule in hate-speech. Not only did he clearly take sides gleefully with his Islamized lunacy, but he has helped to dent Muhammad's religion by offering a cheap interpolation -

[quote author=Time_Warp link=topic=7756.msg496400#msg496400 date=1153166127]Think of it as being a parent and raising a child. We are all children of god (a synonym for Allah) and as our parent it is his duty to insure that we are disciplined and punished[/quote]Since when did 'god' become a synonym for "Allah" in Islam? And when did Muhammad ever speak of worshippers of Allah as 'children of god', much less of Allah as "our parent"? I expected you guys to correct this munafiq and preserve your religion, instead of allowing your glut bias to run amock on Softee.

OlaAjia:
Softee, if this really exists in the Bible, then I am just tired of pointing out contradictions in the bible, that you intensionally ignore, or claim are old testament passages, when indeed the God of the old testament is the God of the new testament, and does not change His mind.

You really need to remove your jiga, my dear. The text in Softee's quote was Col. 4:5-6, and that is not from the Old Testament, but from the New. To reassure you, God does not change His mind about any issue; but that does not mean He's stereotypical, rigid, or robotic in His ways. Quite unlike the deity of the Bedouin prophet Muhammad who fluctuates between one pole to another, and couldn't quite make up his mind about who gets 4 or 72 virgins among the Quraish prophet's companions.

OlaAjia:
Softee, don't you get? this is not a competition on who is the most forgiving God. If it is, then sorry to say, your God is certainly confused and not forgiving! Because here he says put to death the unbelievers, then somewhere else, he says, the opposite. What exactly is his position . We are dealing with justice and false accusations here.

There again, my boy - while crying your hoo-ha on the discourses not being about a competition on God(s), it's sort of eccentric that you see a "confused" God in the faith of others while pretending the "Allah" of the Qur'an isn't worse off. Muhammad could receive "revelations" to murder anyone he perceived as a threat to his lustful and blood-thirsty career; and then would often follow such verses with: "Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful." If the "Allah" of the Qur'an could grant a licence to the Quraish prophet to pursue his licentious, womanizing and pedophilic games on the one hand, while pretending the self-declared prophet was 'holy', what exactly is that "Allah's" position?

Lol, I can't laugh enough, ajia23. Aiight, I'll just ignore all your requests on the Forum henceforth until you learn the meaning of "reform" and "respect" when discussing publicly affecting issues.

I tried severally to offer those previously, but you chaps simply went haywire and continued unabated in the opposite direction. . . until 'Gwaine' served you in just the same flavour, and you're now holding a white flag. Do the right thing, and you won't need to worry much about your complaints.

Lol. . . cheer up - you didn't make a mistake. That was just a way of saying that for emphasis, my name is "Gwaine" - meaning, that I'm not usually passive at issues. Whenever you're ready, I'll be up. Sorry that my PC threw me off the net a moment ago. . . happenz a few times.

First, let me attend to @ajia23:

I wasn't being selective in responding to anyone's missives, much less Abeem's. If anything, you've just been very selective yourself and have not displayed a mature sense of dialogue on the Forum.

If you could delineate or outline your concerns then I could make an attempt to offer some answers. Meanwhile, in another thread, you'd stated that you'll ignore me completely - so I wonder if answering your questions is worth the waste of time and effort.

Very much so - I'm open to ideas. But a word of caution: my name is "Gwaine" - and in just the same manner you serve me, I'll be all the more pleased to offer you in return.

@ajia23,

Many thanks for your disappointment in me and all else that followed your foaming in the mouth. You're being very political in pretending here to wave a white flag when in very fact you and your twin OlaAjia have been the epitome of derision at other people's faith and convictions. I'm not pretending at all - and won't even try to be passive anymore, since you chaps refused the several offers I made, urging you to be composed in discoursing with people. As long as you continue to invite unsympathetic proposals, try not ignoring me when I serve you as you so require.

As for the farjaha you didn't see in Sura 021:091, and instead substitued Furuj, I wonder why you chose not to explain the word you devised to your readers. Try not messing with the Qur'an - Muhammad spoke those words quoted in those texts in exactly the way rendered to show indeed that he had a dirty mind. If you can't take that, talk to your twin OlaAjia to respect the convictions of other people before he posts his goose's cry. You'd need more than bleach and elephant detergent to dry-clean Muhammad's pedophilic and lurid acts.

Ignore me all you want - that's one less problem to worry over.

@Softee, don't make excuses for Muhammad by saying Aisha's age wasn't specific when he had his was with her. She was 9 years old when it happened - she said so herself:

Abu Dawud, Vol. 2, Number 2116:
Aisha said, "The Apostle of Allah married me when I was seven years old. (The narrator Sulaiman said: "Or six years.". "He had intercourse with me when I was 9 years old."

I know u're not making excuses for him, but I thought you should know that Aisha was specifically a 9 y.o. minor when Mo' took her to bed and ¤¤¤¤¤!! Urrgggghhh!!

Aisha wasn't 18 when 54 y.o. Muhammad married and had his way with her. Even if a 65 year old married an 18 year old, I would have no problem with that. But Aisha herself testified that she was only half that age (9 years old) when the prophet had intercourse with her (Abu Dawud, Vol. 2, Number 2116) - and this is the very thing that the general Muslim community and imams would not want the world to know about; so they excuse it away with "no one knows her true age when it happened!" Puleeeeze!

[quote author=me,myself link=topic=17418.msg498458#msg498458 date=1153223636]@ ajia23, im not being silent because im scared of being spanked by Gwaine or some other naira landers,im just waitin4d right moment2put in my 2cents n your method, well, i wouldnt totally criticize it because compared to Ajisafe's method, its much more matured.[/quote]Relax, I'm not on a trail to spank you or anyone, believe me. In my reply just above, I've tried to explain to ajia23 why I get miffed at some stuff that shouldn't go unnoticed. I've read a bit of Ajisafe on Nairaland. Guess what? If he makes the mistake of blowing hot air in my face, you guys will abandon the Qur'an altogether when I'm done with him. That's no threat - just a friendly reminder.

[quote author=me,myself link=topic=17418.msg498458#msg498458 date=1153223636]emmm Gwaine, bout callin my Prophet a pedophile n all those digustin names, i've dealt wit dt issue before, her real age isnt really known, she might have been young but had attained puberty, one of the beliefs is that she was 10yrs at the time of proposal and 15yrs before the actual CONSUMATION.the fact that it was consummated, doesnt actually mean he slept with her, so please get your facts straight! and he slept with her with HER PERMISSION, so it really isnt anyone's problem if she was young! he didnt force her![/quote]Okay, these are the facts that I get straight right out of Aisha's mouth:

Sahih Muslim, Book 8: Number 3310: (The Book of Marriage [Kitab Al-Nikah])
'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house when I was nine years old.

So, from her own mouth, she was not 10 or 15 at marriage and consummation respectively. See again:

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64
Narrated 'Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 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."

Abu Dawud, Vol. 2, Number 2116:
Aisha said, "The Apostle of Allah married me when I was seven years old." (The narrator Sulaiman said: "Or six years.". "He had intercourse with me when I was 9 years old."

Now I know that the testimony of a woman is half or less that of a man, and that women are not regarded as worthy of human respect in Islam. But I'm sorry to say contrary to your assertion that "consummated, doesnt actually mean he slept with her", Aisha herself who knew what happened behind doors in the quiet of the night actually said Muhammad actually had intercourse with her when she was 9 years old. That's the facts I get straight out of the Hadith and other Islamic sources.

Like I promised, I won't spank you. But what I must do here is point out that Muhammad is quite qualified for whatever he was called if and only if he did those things that shock our senses. Make no excuses for him - he did those things that merit the appellations ascribed to him; and therefore one cannot help but append those names to him; especially because his activities are written down in black and white on the pages of the most revered books of Islam - the Qur'an and the Hadith.

ajia23:
Me, myself
It really is curious that you do not approve of my methods but choose to be silent about the methods of others especially Gwaine who described the Prophet of Islam as follows.

[quote author=Gwaine link=topic=7756.msg494402#msg494402 date=1153115225]That's why you continue to be a juvenile delinquent. You're cheaply applauding yourself when you have nothing more to grasp at because you know that your Quraish prophet Muhammad was a pedophile, a womanizer and an Arab pornographer. Whining the way you're doing is amusing me all the more, because you're still unable to deny the claims that Muhammad was all of that and more - and your desperation is pathetic since you now can see that Muhammad obtained his licence from the "Allah" of the Qur'an to pursue his unbridled sexual promiscuities. You said people are meant to learn more by the day? Exactly - because more revelations about what you're ignoring in Muhammad's pornographic and licentious career will be posted in days to come, so that you could learn more about what your imams haven't told you.

Now, see those who claim peace and accuse others of violence are they any better? You would be charitable enough to me that I never went that far.[/quote]@ajia23,

Please don't take it that badly. For your sake, believe me, I would rather concentrate on a personal rubbing of minds with you and refrain from whatever expressions that may cause the discomfort of a pebble in the shoe of the general Muslim public. What I can't passively tolerate is the excuse of the notion that because Christians are asked to be "peaceful", it therefore gives Muslims the ticket to bash Christians and ridicule their faith in hope that they would do nothing. I'm not a very good exponent of the graces in the Bible - I know that quite well and my family (especially my dad who knows how stubborn I can be) have tried to help better my very 'gymnastic' outlook on life. You should be thankful I didn't enter the Forum in my former temperaments.

You'll be surprised that 4get_me has written several emails pleading with me to refrain from my tone in recent posts (for whatever personal reasons). I hear you all. But when especially in this thread, muslims like your twin OlaAjia are at liberty to call Christians liars and rebellious, and you followed through gleefully consenting to that display of infantile exuberance, you seem to be inviting some very unsympathetic proposal. Further, the same OlaAjia was only too glad to bad-mouth the Bible as a pornographic material - in such a situation, what would you have expected me to do than help turn his gaze closer home to his Qur'an where indeed more graphic pornographic stuff litter the pages of Muhammad's "holy" book? Believe me, there are far more lurid material in that book than most muslims are wont to acknowledge, that's why I take the time to look at the original arabic words and post them for all to see. Yusuf Ali, Picthal, Shakir and several others are just deceiving the world with their political English translations of the Qur'an, because they know only too well that Muhammad's "holy" book is fraught with stuff too much out of taste with the senses of an unbiased reader.

As soon as you Muslims - here and beyond - start respecting the Christian faith, this chap called "Gwaine" will not be so obliged to serve you the same unsympathetic proposal that you call for in your missives. OlaAjia thought Solomon was pornographic and thus he had a problem with the entire Bible; but has he taken a look at the Qur'an and Hadith about who Muhammad really was, and what he did in the sexual arena? If you can't stand the rocks you throw at other people's glass houses, then try not whining when they pelt pebbles at your huts. However, as far as the holy writs of Islam are concerned, Muhammad was precisely what we read of him - a pedophile, a womanizer and an Arab pornographer from the Quraish tribe. It's high time we call the bluff of that self-proclaimed "prophet" who was additionally addicted to his blood-thristy and murderous appetites.

lioness:
Moreover, its written in your quran that " Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty" What time does Puberty start ? Did you say 13yrs? well it says she had not yet reached 13yrs.

Perhaps you meant the Hadith (not the Qur'an)?

Sahih Bukhari Volume 8, Book 73, Number 151
Narrated 'Aisha: I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet, and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah's Apostle used to enter (my dwelling place) they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me. (The playing with the dolls and similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for 'Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty.) (Fateh-al-Bari page 143, Vol.13)

Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 58, Number 234:
Narrated Aisha: The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became Allright, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, "Best wishes and Allah's Blessing and a good luck." Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah's Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age.

Abu Dawud, Vol. 2, Number 2116:
Aisha said, "The Apostle of Allah married me when I was seven years old. (The narrator Sulaiman said: "Or six years.". "He had intercourse with me when I was 9 years old."

Tabari IX:131
My mother came to me while I was being swung on a swing between two branches and got me down. My nurse took over and wiped my face with some water and started leading me. When I was at the door she stopped so I could catch my breath. I was brought in while Muhammad was sitting on a bed in our house. My mother made me sit on his lap. The other men and women got up and left. The Prophet consummated his marriage with me in my house when I was nine years old. Neither a camel nor a sheep was slaughtered on behalf of me.”

@Time_Warp,

Forget the game - so many of your type have trolled various blogs pretending to be "not a muslim" when in fact the style of their missives reveal them to be just that: muslims! Don't take it too badly, because you may not really like what you're reading about Muhammad lately; but whether anyone likes it or not, the Bedouin prophet was exactly what you're finding posted on the Forum - a murderous, pedophilic womanizer and Arabian porn-monger. Cry "Christian stupidity" all you want - that doesn't change the truth being unearthed about Muhammad's lewd escapades. Why do I have this feeling you're someone already on the Forum but decided to sign in a different ID?

[quote author=Time_Warp link=topic=7756.msg496400#msg496400 date=1153166127]Islam is a faith of forgiveness. In Islam, Allah is the one that decides who shall be punished. And that all punishment is temporary, unlike in christianity. Moreover, it is wrong to carry out the will of Allah or to enact out as Allah in Islam.[/quote]Is that really "unbiased" as you claim? Islam - "a faith of forgiveness" you say? That's only because you arrived from another planet and have not been following the events that prove otherwise. Muhammad did not wait for the "Allah" of the Qur'an to 'decide' who shall be punished when he pronounced death to all who sensibly refused to follow his porn-infested and murderous religion. Infact, you'll find it there in the Qur'an as a "revelation" from his "Allah" to murder people of other religions - for the simple reason that they chose to be non-Muslims. Not only so, the Hadith is fraught with his adventures of murder and lascivious career. If you haven't read them, do yourself the favour of doing some reading before posting your goose's cry on the Forum.

[quote author=Time_Warp link=topic=7756.msg496400#msg496400 date=1153166127]Now I'm not saying there aren't some extremists that pertain to the religion of Islam. I'm just saying that most of it is just ludicrous made up by christians that use photoshop and some other nifty editing program or staged actors. In addition, these wildly vicious beliefs against muslims being a merciful religion are contributed to people who actually believe in what these hateful christians have to say against Islam.[/quote]Tell me something: how much were you paid as bribe to post your ignorance here? So, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and Usama bin Ladin were 'stage actors' who were "made up by christians" using photoshop techniques and nifty editing program? Suicide bombers and the almost daily massacres committed by Muslims themselves against their fellows as you see in the news are what - staged managed multimedia soap opera clips?? Many thanks for your perceived vexations against "these hateful christians" - but, at least, they ain't fooled by your melodramatic lullaby.

[quote author=Time_Warp link=topic=7756.msg496400#msg496400 date=1153166127]To be honest the muslims should hate christianity for being so hateful towards them. But since the muslim practice a truely merciful faith, they would more than likely forgive the christians for performing such an atrocity. The same cannot be said if this revelation and treatment was reversed.[/quote]Applause. However, you didn't do a good job at hiding your Muslim identity - so you shouldn't have very quickly attempted pulling the wool over anyone's eyes by claiming to be "not a muslim" initially. Here again, as typical of you guys, it's not a good day if you haven't posted your seething and perennial anti-Christian hate in any article. Let me leave you something to worry over - what do you think would have happened if Dan Brown had written a fictional work about Muhammad and his illicit pedophilic womanizing 'secrets'?? Would muslims still have demonstrated that they "practice a truely merciful faith" - the type that we saw not too long ago in rampage, murders and destruction that trailed the cartooning of the Bedouin prophet?

@Abeem,

I'm definitely not 'given to' (characterized by) insulting people who hold "a different opinion" from mine. Apply the rules to your own case and try not insulting the faith of Christians by referring to it as -

¤ 'derogatory demotion' ¤ 'such ridicule and blasphemy'

Abeem:
The Bible describes God in human form, with human characteristics and with limited knowledge because man can hide from him. But the Qur’an clearly absolves God (the most High, the all-Knowing and all-Powerful Being) of such derogatory demotion.

Further while the Bible presents God in several passages as being sorry and repentant, as weak and one that was defeated by a man; the Qur’an, the criterion and a guide to all truth lack such ridicule and blasphemy.

It was just quizzical to me that you chaps would like to trample the faith and convictions of other people, but can't take the heat when someone speaks of your own religion and convictions in such like language as you've served others. Notice my opening remarks in my previous reply: "I notice you chaps have a penchant for starting a religious harangue you can't finish." If you engage in dialogue without trying first to be derogatory or scornful of the religion and convictions of other people, then there would be no need to come back nursing any bruises. Talk to people - ask questions at issues you don't understand; then you'll find them responding in like manner that won't make you lose sleep.

Well, I'm not surprised that you would go this far to even open a thread to post what you already have in another thread - Are Christians in Conflict or Does the Bible Contradict Itself?. In anycase, I've posted a reply there, and you can read it by clicking on this link: https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria?topic=2496.msg493943#msg493943 .

OlaAjia:
@crybabyGwaine,
On the contrary, each time I see your posts I laugh because, in one way or the other, you usually upgrade your level of illiteracy negatively. I thought people are meant to learn more by the day, but you seem to be losing it the more! Very ironical to me.

That's why you continue to be a juvenile delinquent. You're cheaply applauding yourself when you have nothing more to grasp at because you know that your Quraish prophet Muhammad was a pedophile, a womanizer and an Arab pornographer. Whining the way you're doing is amusing me all the more, because you're still unable to deny the claims that Muhammad was all of that and more - and your desperation is pathetic since you now can see that Muhammad obtained his licence from the "Allah" of the Qur'an to pursue his unbridled sexual promiscuities. You said people are meant to learn more by the day? Exactly - because more revelations about what you're ignoring in Muhammad's pornographic and licentious career will be posted in days to come, so that you could learn more about what your imams haven't told you.

OlaAjia:
Now, tell me who's Blubbering? Tell me "older-crybaby", whats the difference between Chastity and gurding your private part or sexual organ as you put it? You read what you've posted yourself and see your illiteracy in action. Since it's your tradition to go out of point, or try to escape reality, I will only try and remind readers that my challenge to you was to qoute verses of the Quran, and so far, you have not proved sign of X-RATED porn in the Quran. As regards 021:091, it says: And (remember) she who guarded her chastity [Virgin Maryam (Mary)], We breathed into (the sleeves of) her (shirt or Garment) [through our Ruh - Jibrael (Gabriel)], and We made her and her son [Iesa (Jesus)] a sign for Al-Alamin (the mankind and Jinns).

Typical again of your Islamic juvenile delinquency, because you're excusing the hardcore X-RATED porn in the Qur'an. The arabic word used in Sura 021:091 is not 'chastity' but 'farjaha' (virgina) - and that is the place where Muhammad claimed the "Allah" of the Qur'an was blowing into! What your 'Jibril' was looking for in a woman's farjaha is beyond me. If that is not luridly X-RATED enough to stagger your juvenile mind, we can understand it's because you're a 'minor' who shouldn't be reading such things. So, don't cry so much by making excuses for Muhammad's explicit pornographic tendencies in the Qur'an.

OlaAjia:
EDUCATION: Since Hadiths are meant to teach Muslims how to behave and lead good lives, they should naturally not leave any aspect of living uncovered! And our sex life should not be an exclusion, however, they do not go as far as the telling us how women's breasts taste, or to have sexual lust for our own sisters for that matter

Are you really educating yourself? Didn't Muhammad receive "revelation" from the "Allah" of the Qur'an to pursue his own relatives with his lewd lust - his maternal and paternal cousins?? Or is Sura 033.050 not part of the Qur'an anymore that you're pretending you chaps were not exposed to the possibility of having sexual intercourse with your sisters and relatives??

"Since Hadiths are meant to teach Muslims how to behave and lead good lives, they should naturally not leave any aspect of living uncovered!" That's precisely what I simply helped you to see - uncover the illicit frolic of your Prophet Muhammad with the many women that he lusted after! And it's from the hadiths that we read about Muhammad's confession that your Qur'an was revealed to him while he was 'performing' (having sex) with Aisha -

Sahih Bukhari Volume 5 Book 57 Number 119
". . .the Prophet said, "O Um Salama! Don't trouble me by harming 'Aisha, for by God, the Divine Inspiration never came to me while I was under the blanket of any woman amongst you except her."

So, the Qur'an was "revealed" while he was under the blanket of (having sex with) Aisha! Another hadith is quite revealing, for there we read about the connection between the Qur'an and the lurid dirty game the companions of the Bedouin Prophet Muhammad were playing - messing around with "war booty" (female captives) -

Sahih Bukhari: Volume 7, Book 62, Number 136:
Narrated Jabir:We used to practice coitus interruptus while the Quran was being revealed.
(see Sahih Bukhari: Volume 7, Book 62, Number 135: Narrated Jabir: We used to practice coitus interruptus during the lifetime of Allah's Apostle).

So, the Qur'an was being revealed while Muhammad was engaged in his pedophilic porn business with Aisha and while his comrades were messing around with female captives! Quaint. That's the example in the hadith that Muhammad left as a legacy to teach you "how to behave and lead good lives", abi?

OlaAjia:
Its a pleasure @crybabyGwaine. It's a good omen that I am actually beginning to irritate you. Usually, when adult-crybabies find it difficult to defeat young challengers, the result is usually an "un-called for" irritation, which I am glad you have succumbed to.

You really have no idea the extent of irritation and damage you're causing your brethren - and you're so glad as to call that a pleasure! Pity. My irritation has nothing to do with succumbing to your juvenile ignorance, so there's no need for you to cheaply applaud yourself as a 'young challenger'. Rather, like I said, 'I really don't mind' if you'd like to know more about the X-RATED porn adventures of your Quraish prophet Muhammad that you never knew existed. And it's quite hilarious to notice you're learning a few vocabs from me with the pun on 'crybaby'. So, keep crying - more illicit porn adventures in the career of the Quraish prophet will be uncovered at your request - both in the Qur'an and the hadiths.

Dear Abeem,

I notice you chaps have a penchant for starting a religious harangue you can't finish. It's often easier to point accusing fingers at others and see them as 'infidels' with a pagan religion than it is to look closer home and see the details that would make you grimace in shame. Now that you took a detour from your 'contemplation' in order to post your vexations about the Bible, allow me a few moments to help turn your gaze on the Qur'an about issues you're happy to skip and pretend don't exist in your religion.

In the preliminaries, I'd like you to notice that the Qur'an has short-changed you guys. Genesis 1:26 was already written and has never been altered in history - and that is part of what the Qur'an had actually endorsed when it claimed that "Allah" confirmed the Torah before having sent down 'the Book' unto Muhammad. Sura 003:003 reads - "He hath revealed unto thee (Muhammad) the Scripture with truth, confirming that which was (revealed) before it, even as He revealed the Torah and the Gospel." So, did the "Allah" of the Qur'an actually reveal the Torah, or that was just a cheap game that Muhammad dreamed up to blow smoke over your eyes?

The Torah is the first five books of the Hebrew Scriptures usually referred to as the Pentateuch; and notice that the Qur'an  in Sura 003:003 endorsed and "confirmed" the Pentateuch - of course, with the Genesis 1:26 and every other verse (such as those in Exodus) in the Pentateuch that you referenced. Your problem here is that you failed to realise that the "Allah" of the Qur'an who bragged about his having previously "confirmed" and "revealed" the Torah, ought to have known that God made man in His image and likeness, as well as rested on the seventh day. This means that "Allah" was confirming that there was nothing wrong with Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Leviticus and Deuteronomy - more so because he was purporting that he was the very one who revealed the Torah!

Question: was the "Allah" of the Qur'an blind to those verses, or he was just offering Muslims a bogus claim that had no substance? If on the other hand, 'Allah' actually confirmed the Torah, then he was agreeing that there was nothing wrong with the same Torah or Pentateuch. . . until, of course, Muhammad was check-mated in his typical Arabian conceit.

Abeem:
“…He has made for you pairs from among yourselves …there is nothing whatever like unto Him…” (Q42:11).  We have indeed created man in the best of moulds.” (Q95:4)  “Allah! There is no God but He, the living, the Self Subsisting, Supporter of all.  No slumber can seize Him, nor sleep…” (Q2:255)  “No vision can grasp Him, but His grasp is over all vision: He is above all comprehension, yet is acquainted with all things” (Q6:103).  “…He knows whatever there is on the earth and in the sea.  Not a leaf fall but with His knowledge… It is He who does take your souls by night and has knowledge of all that you have done by the day…” (Q6:59).

To be sure, the collective testimony of the Old Testament reveals God's nature, character, power and love as far above anything comprehensible to any of His creation - whether man or angels.

# There is indeed none like Him - "And he said, To morrow. And he said, Be it according to thy word: that thou mayest know that there is none like unto the LORD our God" (Exo 8:10); ". . . that thou mayest know that there is none like me in all the earth" (Exo. 9:14); "Wherefore thou art great, O LORD God: for there is none like thee, neither is there any God beside thee, according to all that we have heard with our ears" (2 Sam. 7:22); "Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me" (Isa. 46:9); "Forasmuch as there is none like unto thee, O LORD; thou art great, and thy name is great in might" (Jer. 10:6).

# "He will not suffer thy foot to be moved: he that keepeth thee will not slumber. Behold, he [i.e., God] that keepeth Israel shall neither slumber nor sleep" (Psa. 121:3-4).

# "Thou knowest my downsitting and mine uprising, thou understandest my thought afar off. . . For there is not a word in my tongue, but, lo, O LORD, thou knowest it altogether" (Psa. 139:2, 4).

Your problem is that you're reposting here what some blind Islamic munafiq of 'Deen Digest' with half-baked knowledge of the Bible posted somewhere on the net, without having gone through the Bible yourself to see the other texts that you conveniently left out. You chaps are trained in partial quotes and thus reveal your sleight of hand anytime you betake yourselves to your craft.

Abeem:
Further while the Bible presents God in several passages as being sorry and repentant, as weak and one that was defeated by a man; the Qur’an, the criterion and a guide to all truth lack such ridicule and blasphemy. . .
“And the LORD was with Judah: and he drove out the inhabitants of the mountain, but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley because they had chariots of iron” (Judges 1:19)

I can't stop laughing at your infantile delinquency here in poor readership. Let me help you: Judges 1:19 does not say that the LORD could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley. Rather, the "he" in the statement 'he drove out the inhabitants of the mountain, but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley' refers to Judah, and not to the LORD. Thus, Judah could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley - and that's the context of that verse.

Abeem:
What the Muslim should believe is that, the earlier scriptures (Tawrah, Zaburah and Injeel) were from Allah but later corrupted by the Jews as confirmed by Prophet Jeremiah in the Bible, “why do you say, ‘we are wise and the law of the Lord is with us’, for the false hands of the scribes has turn it into a lie” (Jeremiah 8:.  Further, he must believe in the infallibility of the Qur’an as promised by Allah, “We have without, sent down the Message (Al-Qur’an), and We will assuredly guard it (from corruption). (Q15:9). Truly amazing is the Qur’an.

What you want the Muslim to believe is not going to change the lies and bogus claims about the Qur'an that Muhammad dreamed up. And you know that the Bedouin Prophet himself said that part of the Qur'an was revealed to him while he was sweating in sexual intercourse with Aisha, while others were revealed as his companions were messing around with "war booty" (female captives) -

Sahih Bukhari Volume 5 Book 57 Number 119
". . .the Prophet said, "O Um Salama! Don't trouble me by harming 'Aisha, for by God, the Divine Inspiration never came to me while I was under the blanket of any woman amongst you except her."

Sahih Bukhari: Volume 7, Book 62, Number 136:
Narrated Jabir:We used to practice coitus interruptus while the Quran was being revealed.

If you are claiming that the 'earlier scriptures' of the Torah and Gospel were from "Allah" but later corrupted, you should remember that what "Allah" was purporting to have confirmed and revealed were the same Pentateuch that remain unchanged since they were inscribed. Jeremiah 8:8 was reproaching some dubious political scribes who attempted to falsify some texts of the Law of the LORD but were checkmated in their scheme - in just precisely the way that Agur the son of Jakeh reproved them (Prov. 30:5-6).

Jesus Himself testified that "scripture cannot be broken" (John 10:35), and all through His earthly ministry He quoted freely from the same Torah that remained unaltered after several centuries up until in His day. That was why He accused the Pharisees that they were laying aside God's commandment in preference for their man-made laws and doctrines ("For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do" - Mark 7:8 ).

Further, if the Qur'an was indeed infallible, then why was "Allah" not able to protect his book from Caliph Uthman who ordered its initial copies to be burnt with fire? Certainly, what Muslims have today is the political redaction of Caliph Uthman - an edited codex from the originals that the Caliph saw as a threat of instability of Muslim cohesion.

You could contemplate further on what next serial to post; and you might just be surprised to read some stuff you have been ignoring about the grey areas of Islam, the religion of the Quraish Prophet Muhammad.

Seun:
As far as I know, muslims generally mind their own religion. Christians are the ones who try to convert you.

That's true, Seun. If we don't preach the Gospel to people, would we be obeying Jesus Christ our Lord who Himself enjoined that on us?
Matt. 28:19 - 'Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost'
Mark 16:20 - 'And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen.'

But before I travelled out, the minarets were not so 'minding-their-own-religion' with the loud calls for prayer from the public address systems blarring in the wee mornings. Believe it or not, where we formerly lived Muslim clerics severally were heard 'preaching' over their loud PAS in English, and most often it was about how the Bible was corrupt and Christians were following a pagan religion. Just think of what would have happened if a pastor did the same with the PAS mounted outside his church so that passers-by could hear how he would have been referring to the Qur'an as 'corrupt' and Muslims following a 'pagan religion'!

Good point, Darkchild.

@OlaAjia, patience, my pal - patience. I take it one pace at a time, and in ernest I'll post some interesting stuff for your read. My ISP seem to be having a small technical problem and slowing my efforts and attempts to post stuff; so as soon as this is rectified, I'll follow through. Thanks.

@OlaAjia,

OlaAjia:
Thanks for the attack! its more of a harm to your acclaimed peaceful nature than to me.

Don't cry so much - I haven't even touched you yet. If you'd be more accommodating towards the people you discuss with, you won't need to worry so much about the peace you see in me but you rarely, if ever, exhibit.

OlaAjia:
As long as your post is, have you quoted anywhere in the Quran that makes it a book of X-RATED pornography? I would only assume you forgot to qoute the text, and challenge you once more to do that! Or with the level of your learnedness you still don't know the difference between Hadith and Quran?

You're crying so much my dear, and that's because as I predicted, you really are skipping the pornographic texts in the Qur'an. Open your eyes crybaby: I already gave you one Qur'anic text in my previous reply - Sura 033.050 - or is that not part of the Qur'an anymore? That text is as pornographic as you defined the word, because Muhammad was actually "a person who produces or sells pornography" in collaboration with the deity (the "Allah" of the Qur'an) that licenced him by "revelation" to pursue his promiscuous adventure - yes?

Crying about how long my post was is not going to help your case if you're hoping that I should not reveal so much. Wait for more - you know only too well that that Bedouin prophet Muhammad was a pornographer par excellence, for not only did he actually do some very mind-blowing stuff with women, but his own companions recorded him saying stuff that kids like you should not be reading.

BTW, the word 'pornography' includes the idea of "lurid or sensational material" as defined by Answers.com - and by that, Muhammad gave his followers the precedence of pursuing after licentuous lifestyles. You're whining as if Muhammad was so "holy" he could not have said or done the things you're frantically trying to cover up. We'll see some in just a moment (and I've had to conceal stuff not suitable for your age as a 'minor' until you grow up a little older). Sample some of these:

Following through with a few more from the same Qur'an >>>

Sura 002:223
"Your women are a tilth for you (to cultivate) so go to your tilth as ye will, and send (good deeds) before you for your souls, and fear Allah, and know that ye will (one day) meet Him. Give glad tidings to believers, (O Muhammad)."

The expression "as ye will" is also rendered as "when or how ye will" in Yusuf Ali's translation.

Sura 021:091
"And (remember) her who guarded her SEXUAL ORGAN (Arabic-farjaha): We breathed into her from Our Spirit, and We made her and her son a Sign for all people."

(Many translators of the Qur'an render the arabic word 'farjaha' as chastity/chast, when in fact that word is clearly referring to the sexual organ of a female. The same word appears in Sura 066:012, and any unbiased reader of the Qur'an has to ask where Muhammad's deity was blowing into when he said: "and We breathed INTO IT" or as in Pickthal - "therefor We breathed therein". Is it not unspeakably lewd that Muhammad would even utter such words by "revelation" as to mean that his 'deity' breathed therein, meaning that he breathed in the farjahaa! This is what Muslims don't want the world to know - but there you have in in black and white: farjahaa is a female's sexual organ!).

Infact, in reference to this troubling "revelation", Mahmoud M. Ayoub comments in contrasting the birth narratives of the Gospel of Luke with that mentioned in the Quran:

"The language of this verse (author- Luke 1:35) is clearly circumspect. It implies no sexual union or divine generation of any kind. Furthermore, while Luke's description agrees both in form and spirit with the Qur'anic idea of the conception of Christ, the language of the Qur'an IS FAR MORE GRAPHIC AND OPEN TO INTERPRETATION." (Christian-Muslim Encounters, ed. Yvonne Yazbeck Haddad & Wadi Z. Haddad [University Press of Florida, 1995], p. 67).


And coming to the question of other sources such as the hadith for Muhammad's pornographic adventures, there's just an encyclopedic collection of statements made by the Quraish prophet that I'm sure you're familiar with:

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 173
Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah: The Prophet said, "If you enter (your town) at night (after coming from a journey), do not enter upon your family till the woman whose husband was absent (from the house) shaves her pubic hair and the woman with unkempt hair, combs her hair" Allah's Apostle further said, "(O Jabir!) Seek to have offspring, seek to have offspring!"

Sunaan Abu Dawud: Book 11, Number 2126:
Narrated Basrah: A man from the Ansar called Basrah said: I married a virgin woman in her veil. When I entered upon her, I found her pregnant. (I mentioned this to the Prophet). The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: She will get the dower, for you made her vagina lawful for you. The child will be your slave. When she has begotten (a child), flog her (according to the version of al-Hasan). The version of Ibn AbusSari has: You people, flog her, or said: inflict hard punishment on him.

(Did you notice what the prophet mentioned by word of mouth - "you made her vigina lawful for you"? See the 'holy' prophet you're trying desperately to protect and pretending he was better than the Solomon you want to hang. If Muhammad was not a pornographer, what was he?).

Sunaan Abu Dawud: Book 13, Number 2380:
Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin: The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) used to kiss her and suck her tongue when he was fasting.

Sunaan Abu Dawud:Book 12, Number 2302:
Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin: The Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) was asked about a man who divorced his wife three times, and she married another who entered upon her, but divorced her before having intercourse with her, whether she was lawful for the former husband. She said: The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) replied: She is not lawful for the first (husband) until she tastes the honey of the other husband and he tastes her honey.

Sunaan Abu Dawud: Book 1, Number 0228:
Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin: The Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) would sleep while he was sexually defiled without touching water.

And one would have to be very imaginative at what the Bedouin prophet does atimes - run from his hut to the mosque after a 'performance'??

Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 4, Number 231:
Narrated Sulaiman bin Yasar: I asked 'Aisha about the clothes soiled with semen. She replied, "I used to wash it off the clothes of Allah's Apostle and he would go for the prayer while water spots were still visible. "

Sahih Bukhari: Volume 7, Book 62, Number 137:
Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: We got female captives in the war booty and we used to do coitus interruptus with them. So we asked Allah's Apostle about it and he said, "Do you really do that?" repeating the question thrice, "There is no soul that is destined to exist but will come into existence, till the Day of Resurrection."

(see Sahih Bukhari: Volume 7, Book 62, Number 135: Narrated Jabir: We used to practice coitus interruptus during the lifetime of Allah's Apostle.)

Sahih Bukhari: Volume 7, Book 62, Number 136:
Narrated Jabir:We used to practice coitus interruptus while the Quran was being revealed.

(Do you know the meaning of coitus interruptus? Simply means - 'sexual intercourse intentionally interrupted in order to avoid pregnancy'; in order words. . . just let your imagination fly and wonder at what the Prophet's companions were doing in his full knowledge!) Perhaps one has to just imagine if the last text quoted above was Muhammad's version of chanting the Kamasutra verses - you might be too much of a minor to know what that means! So, if you ask for more texts from the Qur'an and other Islamic sources like the hadith to expose the escapades of your Quraish prophet, just call knock once - there's just too much to make Solomon grimace in disgust in contrast to Muhammad's adventures.

OlaAjia, keep crying - your juvenile lullaby is beginning to irritate me, really. But I don't mind - as long as you require, you'll be served the much you've been ignoring about the career of the Bedouin Prophet Muhammad, who could not keep his long-john in his billowy dross.