₦airaland Forum

[b]What Happened to Him?

It Feburary this year,it was rumoured that fashek was dead,however it was later dispelled!What sparked off the death rumour is the present state of Majek Fashek as he has grown lean and looks older than his age.

Apart from his physical appearance, the Prisoner of Conscience crooner's mode of dressing is not as sparkling as it used to be.

Majek, as he is popularly called, was said to have run amock while in the US, an allegation he denied.

He was also said to have been hooked on drugs and alcohol, among other things.

Speaking through some of his friends, especially Rutheousman, the Rain Maker said ”I am alive, my new album will put the records straight.

It has been revealed that the reggae musician is hale and hearty and currently working at an Adeniyi Jones, Ikeja-based studio on a new album.[/b]Tanx man, 4 de update

Beaf:
di ode wen?

Fhemmmy:
[size=14pt]We already have a one party system, except in some states where people are a lil wiser and dont just vote like "mumu" [/size]

Votes dont count in Nigeria, the party that rigs better wins, simple.

Witi:
I wonder why youths of nowadayz don't have respect for culture. No be una culture.

Dat has never been part of the Tiv culture. By the way, who told you I am your age mate? Cant you respect older people? May be daz part of your culture?

redsun:
Nigerians are corruptly obsessed,split the country into even family groups,you still have the dog eat dogs altitude.

CGKing:
One rubbish follows another everyday in this Nigeria. Just fed up men. Its just glaring that they are systematically chopping away. Now the militants have finally connected to the national cake - their dream is now fulfilled.

[size=14pt]Well, since my posts are been deleted, I think I will not post again. You know I was banned why posting my reply to babs last week.

Cheerz [/size]

Muhammad also believed in a young earth and that the world was about to end shortly after his advent. The following citations are taken from The History of al-Tabari, Volume 1 - General Introduction and from the Creation to the Flood (trans. Franz Rosenthal, State University of New York Press, Albany 1989), with all bold emphasis being ours:

"According to Ibn Humayd- Yahya b. Wadih- Yahya b. Ya'qub- Hammad- Sa'id b. Jubayr- Ibn Abbas: This world is one of the weeks of the other world - seven thousand years. Six thousand two hundred years have already passed. (The world) will surely experience hundreds of years, during which there will be no believer in the oneness of God there. Others said that the total extent of time is six thousand years." (Tabari, pp. 172-173; emphasis ours)

"According to Abu Hisham- Mu'awiyah b. Hisham- Sufyan- al-A'mash- Abu Salih- Ka'b: This world is six thousand years." (Ibid.)

"According to Muhammad b. Sahl b. 'Askar- Isma'il b. 'Abd al-Karim- 'Abd al-Samad b. Ma'qil I- Wahb: Five thousand six hundred years of this world have elapsed. I do not know which kings and prophets lived in every period (zaman) of those years. I aksed Wahb b. Munabbih: How long is (the total duration of) this world? He replied: Six thousand years." (Tabari, pp. 173-174; emphasis ours)

According to at-Tabari Muhammad believe that the end of the world was to occur 500 years after his coming:

"According to Hannad b. al-Sari and Abu Hisham al-Rifa'i- Abu Bakr b. 'Ayyash- Abu Hasin- Abu Salih- Abu Hurayrah: The Messenger of God said: When I was sent (to transmit the divine message), I and the Hour were like these two, pointing at his index and middle fingers." (Tabari, p. 176; emphasis ours, see also pp. 175-181)

Similar traditions are found in Sahih Muslim:

Book 41, Number 7044:

This hadith has been reported by Sahl b. Sa'd that he heard Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: I and the Last Hour are (close to each other) like this (and he, in order to explain it) pointed (by joining his) forefinger, (one) next to the thumb and the middle finger (together).

Book 41, Number 7046:

Shu'ba reported: I heard Qatada and Abu Tayyab narrating that both of them heard Anas as narrating that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: I and the Last Hour have been sent like this, and Shu'ba drew his forefinger and middle finger near each other while narrating it.

Book 41, Number 7049:

Anas reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: I and the Last Hour have been sent like this and (he while doing it) joined the forefinger with the middle finger.

At-Tabari comments on the meaning of the Hour being as close as Muhammad's index and middle fingers:

"Thus, (the evidence permitting) a conclusion is as follows: The beginning of the day is the rise of the dawn, and its end is the setting of the sun. Further, the reported tradition on the authority of the Prophet is sound. As we have mentioned earlier, he said after having prayed the afternoon prayer: What remains of this world as compared to what has passed of it is just like what remains of this day as compared to what has passed of it. He also said: When I was sent, I and the Hour were like these two- holding index finger and middle finger together; I preceded it to the same extent as this one- meaning the middle finger- preceded that one- meaning the index finger. Further, the extent (of time) between the mean time of the afternoon prayer- that is, when the shadow of everything is twice its size, according to the best assumption ('ala al-taharri)- (to sunset) is the extent of time of one-half of one-seventh of the day, give or take a little. Likewise, the excess of the length of the middle finger over the index finger is something about that or close to it. There is also a sound tradition on the authority of the Messenger of God, as I was told by Ahmad b. 'Abd al-Rahman b. Wahb- his paternal uncle 'Abd-allah b. Wahb- Mu'awiyah b. Salih- 'Abd al-Rahman b. Jubayr b. Nufayr- his father Jubayr b. Nufayr- the companion of the Prophet, Abu Tha'labah al-Khushani: The Messenger of God said: Indeed, God will not make this nation incapable of (lasting) half a day- referring to the day of a thousand years.

"All these facts taken together make it clear that of the two statements I have mentioned concerning the total extent of time, the one from Ibn Abbas, and the other from Ka'b, the one more likely to be correct in accordance with the information coming from the Messenger of God is that of Ibn 'Abbas transmitted here by us on his authority: The world is one of the weeks of the other world - seven thousand years.

"Consequently, because this is so and the report on the authority of the Messenger of God is sound- namely, that he reported that what remained of the time of this world during his lifetime was half a day, or five hundred years, since five hundred years are half a day of the days, of which one is a thousand years- the conclusion is that the time of this world that had elapsed to the moment of the Prophet's statement corresponds to what we have transmitted on the authority of Abu Tha'labah al-Khushani from the Prophet, and is 6,500 years or approximately 6,500 years. God knows best!" (Tabari, pp. 182-183, bold emphasis ours)

Hence, according to these traditions Muhammad believed that not only was the world less than 7,000 years old but it was to end on the seventh day, or seven thousand years from the time it was created.

Accordingly, the world should have ended sometime between 1070-1132 AD, approximately 500 years after the birth and death of Muhammad. This is based on the fact that according to at-Tabari and others, the advent of Muhammad took place approximately 6,500 years from the time of creation. This is clearly a false prophecy.

Yet this date contradicts the one approximated by Abu Dawood in his Sunan. There, we saw that Antichrist was to appear seven months after the conquest of Constantinople, an event that took place in 1453 AD. This being the case, how could Muhammad have claimed elsewhere that the world was to end 500 years after his own birth and death? To make matters worse, the Islamic traditions claim that Antichrist was actually present during Muhammad's lifetime. In fact, according to the traditions Antichrist was a man named Ibn Saiyad:

Muhammad allegedly claimed that the Antichrist (called the Dajjal) was to appear shortly after the Muslim conquest of Constantinople. The following traditions are taken from the Sunan Abu Dawud:

Book 37, Number 4281:

Narrated Mu'adh ibn Jabal:

The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: The flourishing state of Jerusalem will be when Yathrib is in ruins, the ruined state of Yathrib will be when the great war comes, the outbreak of the great war will be at the conquest of Constantinople and the conquest of Constantinople when the Dajjal (Antichrist) comes forth. He (the Prophet) struck his thigh or his shoulder with his hand and said: This is as true as you are here or as you are sitting (meaning Mu'adh ibn Jabal).

Book 37, Number 4282:

Narrated Mu'adh ibn Jabal:

The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: The greatest war, the conquest of Constantinople and the coming forth of the Dajjal (Antichrist) will take place within a period of seven months.

Book 37, Number 4283:

Narrated Abdullah ibn Busr:

The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: The time between the great war and the conquest of the city (Constantinople) will be six years, and the Dajjal (Antichrist) will come forth in the seventh.

Accordingly, Muslims conquered Jerusalem in 636 AD. Constantinople was taken over by Muslims in May 1453 AD. Yet the prophecy regarding Yathrib (Medina) being in ruins and Antichrist's advent to take place seven months after the conquest of Constantinople did not materialize. Based on the preceding traditions Antichrist was to appear in November 1453.

Some may wish to argue that these events refer to future conquests. For instance some may wish to say that Constantinople is used as a synonym for the Roman Christian Empire. This would therefore be predicting that Muslims are to takeover Rome before Antichrist appears.

The problem with this is that if Muhammad was speaking of Rome he could have simply used the word Romans (Arabic: Ar-Rum). In fact, Romans/Ar-Rum is the name given to chapter 30 of the Quran. To call Rome either Constantinople or even Byzantium would be rather anachronistic. See above.

Hence, in light of the preceding factors we are forced to conclude that Muhammad's predictions failed to materialize, thus disqualifying him regarding his claim to prophethood.

Reasons why I believe Mo was a false prophet:

On Entering Mecca

Sura 48:27 makes the following promise:

"Truly did Allah fulfill the vision for His Messenger. Ye shall enter the Sacred Mosque, IF ALLAH WILLS, with minds secure, heads shaved, hair cut short, and without fear. For He knew what ye knew not, and He granted, besides this, a speedy victory."

This verse was revealed in conjunction with the Muslims' failed attempt of entering Mecca to perform Tawaf (the ritual during Hajj of running between two mountains that was supposed to commemorate Hagar's fetching of water for Ishmael).

On their way to the Ka'bah, they were met with a Meccan deputation headed by Suhail b. Amr who forbade the Muslims from completing their journey. This meeting then led to the signing of the treaty of Hudaibiya.

Several problems arise from this whole incident. First, at the signing of the Hudaibiya treaty Muhammad agreed with the pagan Meccans to return to them those who had converted to Islam. At the same time Muhammad also bowed to their demands of replacing his signature of 'Muhammad, Messenger of God' with 'Muhammad, son of Abdullah' so that he might be allowed to make pilgrimage to Mecca the following year. The following is taken from Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 50, Number 891:

"When Suhail bin Amr came, the Prophet said, ‘Now the matter has become easy.' Suhail said to the Prophet 'Please conclude a peace treaty with us.' So, the Prophet called the clerk and said to him, 'Write: By the Name of Allah, the most Beneficent, the most Merciful." Suhail said, 'As for "Beneficent," by Allah, I do not know what it means. So write: By Your Name O Allah, as you used to write previously.' The Muslims said, 'By Allah, we will not write except: By the Name of Allah, the most Beneficent, the most Merciful.' The Prophet said, 'Write: By Your Name O Allah.' Then he dictated, 'This is the peace treaty which Muhammad, Allah's Apostle has concluded.' Suhail said, 'By Allah, if we knew that you are Allah's Apostle we would not prevent you from visiting the Kaba, and would not fight with you. So, write: 'Muhammad bin Abdullah.' The Prophet said, 'By Allah! I am Apostle of Allah even if you people do not believe me. Write: Muhammad bin Abdullah.' (Az-Zuhri said, 'The Prophet accepted all those things, as he had already said that he would accept everything they would demand if it respects the ordinance of Allah, (i.e. by letting him and his companions perform 'Umra.)') The Prophet said to Suhail, 'On the condition that you allow us to visit the House (i.e. Ka'ba) so that we may perform Tawaf around it.' Suhail said, 'By Allah, we will not (allow you this year) so as not to give chance to the Arabs to say that we have yielded to you, but we will allow you next year.' SO, THE PROPHET GOT THAT WRITTEN.

"Then Suhail said, 'We also stipulate that you should return to us whoever comes to you from us, even if he embraced your religion.' The Muslims said, 'Glorified be Allah! How will such a person be returned to the pagans after he has become a Muslim?'" (bold emphasis ours)

One of those forced to return to Mecca with the pagans was Abu Jandal. In Ibn Ishaq's Sirat Rasulullah (The Life of Muhammad, trans. Alfred Guillaume, Oxford University Press), p. 505 we are told:

'When Suhayl (the Meccan representative and the treaty's compiler) saw Abu Jandal he got up and hit him in the face and took hold of his collar, saying, 'Muhammad, the agreement between us was concluded before this man came to you.' He replied, 'you are right.' He began to pull him roughly by his collar and to drag him away to return him to Quraysh, while Abu Jandal shrieked at the top of his voice, 'Am I to be returned to the polytheists that they may entice me from my religion O Muslims?' and that increased the people's dejection'" (bold and italic emphasis ours)

And:

'While they were in this state Abu- Jandal bin Suhail bin 'Amr came from the valley of Mecca staggering with his fetters and fell down amongst the Muslims. Suhail said, 'O Muhammad! This is the very first term with which we make peace with you, i.e. you shall return Abu Jandal to me.' The Prophet said, 'The peace treaty has not been written yet.' Suhail said, 'I will never allow you to keep him.' The Prophet said, 'Yes, do.' He said, 'I won't do: Mikraz said, 'We allow you (to keep him).' Abu Jandal said, 'O Muslims! Will I be returned to the pagans though I have come as a Muslim? Don't you see how much I have suffered?'

Abu Jandal had been [previously] tortured severely for the cause of Allah' (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 50, Number 891)

We need to ask did Moses ever return a convert (especially one who was an Egyptian) back to the pagan Pharaoh in order to please the latter in obtaining what he wanted? Did Jesus ever compromise the truth of God by agreeing with the Pharisees in turning back all gentile seekers in order to be accepted by the Jewish ruling council? Would either Moses or Jesus go so far as to deny their apostleship in order to please the demands of pagans? Would these men refuse to glorify the true God in the manner commanded by the Creator and acquiesce to the request of addressing God in a manner pleasing to the unbelievers, much like Muhammad did?

As one would expect the Muslims were enraged, especially Umar b. al-Khattab who rebuked Muhammad:

'Umar bin al-Khattab said, 'I went to the Prophet and said, "Aren't you truly the messenger of Allah?" The Prophet said, "Yes, indeed." I said, "Isn't our cause just and the cause of the enemy unjust?" He said, "Yes." I said, "Then why should we be humble in our religion?" He said, "I am Allah's messenger and I do not disobey Him, and He will make me victorious"' (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 50, Number 891)

The anger of the Muslims is justifiable when we realize that Muhammad promised that his followers would have access to Mecca that very same year. When that did not occur, Muhammad attempted to justify his statement by stating, "Yes, did I tell you that we would go to Ka'ba this year?" (Ibid)

In other words, since he did not specify when they would enter Mecca this cannot be considered a false prophecy! This is simply erroneous since the Muslim contingent was on their way to Mecca when a deputation from the pagan Arabs stopped them. In fact, one of Muhammad's demands in signing the treaty was that the pagans permit the Muslims to complete their journey to Mecca in order to perform Tawaf. Suhail denied Muhammad's request and instead made an agreement that the Muslims could enter Mecca the following year. Ibn Kathir further supports this in his commentary on S. 48:27:

"In a dream, the Messenger of Allah saw himself entering Makkah and performing Tawaf around the House. He told his Companions about this dream when he was still in Al-Madinah. When they went to Makkah in the year of Al-Hudaybiyyah, none of them doubted that the Prophet's vision WOULD COME TRUE THAT YEAR. When the treaty of peace was conducted and they had to return to Al-Madinah that year, being allowed to return to Makkah the next year, SOME OF THE COMPANIONS DISLIKED WHAT HAPPENED. 'Umar bin Al-Khattab asked about THIS, saying, 'Haven't you told us that we will go to the House and perform Tawaf around it?'" (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Abridged, Volume 9, Surat Al-Jathiyah to the end of Surat Al-Munafiqun, Abridged by a group of scholars under the supervision of Shaykh Safiur-Rahman Al-Mubarakpuri [Darussalam Publishers & Distributors, Riyadh, Houston, New York, London, Lahore; first edition, September 2000], p. 171; bold and capital emphasis ours)

Al-Tabari writes:

"While the Messenger of God was writing the document - he and Suhaly b. 'Amr - suddenly Abu Jandal, the son of Suhaly b. 'Amr, came walking with short steps in shackles. He had escaped to the Messenger of God. The companions of the Messenger of God had set out NOT DOUBTING that they would conquer, because of a vision the Messenger of God had seen. Therefore, when they saw what they saw - the peace, the retreat, and the obligations the Messenger of God had taken upon himself - the people felt so grieved about it that they were close to despair. When Suhayl saw Abu Jandal, he went up to him, struck him on the face, and grabbed him by the front of his garment. "Muhammad," he said, "the pact was ratified between me and you before this fellow came to you." "You are right," he replied. Suhayl began pulling and dragging [his son Abu Jandal] by the front of his garment to return him to Quraysh. Abu Jandal began screaming at the top of his vouce, "People of the Muslims, shall I be returned to the polytheists for them to torment me for my religion?" This made the people feel even worse. The Messenger of God said: "Abu Jandal, count on a reward, for God will give you and those who are oppressed with you relief and a way out. We have made a treaty and peace between oursleves and these people; we have given them and they have given us a promise, and we will not act treacherously toward them." (The History of Al-Tabari: The Victory of Islam, Volume VIII, pp. 86-87; bold and capital emphasis ours)

This proves that Muhammad actually believed he was going to enter into Mecca, a plan that never materialized. In order to save face he had to deny admitting that he actually implied that the Muslims would enter Mecca that same year.

Allah commands, like every Surah in the Quran to humans, His people, to make prayers by it (Salah). To rememeber Allah by it (dhkir) and to get blessing by its reading (Qari). Allah does not pray to Himself.

It therefore imply Allah praying to himself and asking you to do the same? funny

Your thinking is a straw man process. You are sinking and you know it. You gave your life to a person who didnt ask for it and could not protect you, anyhow, because according to you, he was killed by ordinary people. That shows that he could not protect his own life. Why trust him with yours, then?

I hope your imam is listening to that, dont you people refer to him as Prophet who knew no sin? What makes more sense here? trusting in mohammed or Jesus?

Fhemmmy:
For a good standard hospital, that is not a bad budget at all.
How much would u think is a good price tag for a standard hospital, and not just another hostels with some uniform oh

nikinash:
I hire graduates waiting to go for youth service, but you must be willing to do marketing and be paid on commission. Anyone interested should send an email to medallionltd@yahoo.com.

a-beg, no go turn dem into slaves-o. This one wey una go siddon for one place, send people make dem go sell products for una

philip0906:
@kosovo
better warn that fool called yar'adua.If he does not recognise kosovo does kosovo recognise him?

lastpage:
Sometimes, l am forced to think Nairaland is made-up of mostly "Juveniles", 'mental Juveniles' (as opposed to age), judging by the caliber of comments you get on serious matters like these!

Forgive me if that comes across as "arrogant of sort" but you will agree with me that some of these comments show a complete lack of "grasp and historical perspective" to what the actual problems are.

For example, now that we are into "hiking of tuition fees", some are taking the elitist position that education is not supposed to be free!, criminal tuition-hike is a necessary means to force some people not to achieve University education!!
Some even suggested that by charging less, Nigeria is turning to a father Christmas!!!

Well, l dont want to descend low to the level of using foul language otherwise, l will directly engage some people here.

Having said that, let us look at the matter from various angles and ask pertinent questions:

1.) What are some of the social responsibilities of a state? Does it include provision of education to its citizens?
2.) Even in Capitalist societies like the U.S, do they have schools (colleges) that are tuition-free, for its citizens? What is the situation in other western climes like Europe (Spain, Ireland, France, U.K, e.t.c), Scandinavian countries like Sweden, e.t.c.

3. Based on our natural resources endowment, compared to countries like say Ireland that does not have a single endowment, or say Sweden, do these countries still offer free tuition to their citizens and if so, "Why do they do so? Why should this be impossible in a much more endowed Nigeria ?

4. What is the "cost-ratio" of a completely tuition-free education, for all qualified Nigerian students vis-a-vis our GDP, bearing in mind that on the average, a Nigerian Politician (Senator) takes home about #50Million naira annually, as constituency allowance (for doing what?) and the country did not go broke! Even wives of Counselors (Ward Counselors, Ward first lady!) are entitled to and cashing no less than a million naira in "Egunje loan" and money is routinely shared at all levels of Government (We can all attest to these, going by the way people run into sudden wealth, once they take official portfolio). Is it better to save the money so that it can be embezzled or to use it to train our Human Capital?

5. If a country like Sweden can offer Nigerian students, FREE TUITION, not knowing them from Adam, but seeing it as a "Social responsibility" (the real father X-mas!), what is the problem with Nigerians that they can not even bother to take care of their own?, much less be socially responsible to others!

6) If most of our current leaders went through University education, tuition free, even when Nigeria was yet to discover or start harnessing oil wealth, how come they want to "remove the ladder" by which they climbed-up, so that others may not follow through?

7. While attending "Choice Schools" is costly and not mandatory for everyone except your parents are very rich, is it not criminal that we consign those whose parents are average in wealth (the primary school teachers, the Artisans, the office Typists, the Bus Drivers, the Cleaners and all those whose YEARLY WAGE is just about #200,000) to illiteracy or half education (very dangerous), not because the country can not afford the cost but because we want to create an "elitist society" of "have excess" and "have nothings"?

8. In a country that "Leaders" loot Billions of naira (enough to pay for everyone's University tuition! ) like it was going out of fashion, what the heck are the constraints against free education? If the Government think its an acceptable solution, to pay a "militant" about #65,000 monthly (#20,000 plus #1,500 chop-money daily ), are they encouraging all of us to become "Millitants" or what, since it seems "banditry" is the only language this government understands? What percentage of #180,000 is #65,000? Would it not have been better if such money has been invested in the life of the "Militant" a few years back so that today, he would be productive instead of carrying weapons? What kind of "culture and mentality" are we encouraging?

So many more questions, I weep for this country, seriously!

I know that when trauma lasts too long, there is a tendency to think it is "a normal way of life"!
Nigerians have been sooo abused that they seem to have just dissolved into their shells, very fearful and intimidated!

Okay, lets take it from another angle:
Obasanjo and Atiku ruled this country for Eight years and both went out of office to build Universities! Ask yourselves: Why Universities? Ask yourself, where are the children of your Ministers? How come, since they can afford the 180K proposed tuition, why are they all schooling abroad? Or did Obasanjo' son not graduate from an American University while he was Nigeria's President? Why not from Uni-Ife or Unilag? Is something fishy here?

How about the current Ministers? The Minister for Information whose daughter got married last weekend did not tertiary-school in Nigeria, Why? with all the re-branding of Nigeria!
And l can assure you today, if a poll is taken, nothing less than 98% of the children of Nigeria's rulers are schooling abroad! WHY?

Loans or not, for a country with serious manpower issues like Nigeria, education is a right (Awolowo was the one who towed this line in the 50's and 60's and that was one of the reasons the Westerners were generally the more educated, among older generations of people in their 50's today!with its consequent advantages, that "Quota System" tried to redress ).

What has this country done for its citizens? No good roads, No electricity, No portable water, Hospitals are death centres, Food is now "0-1-0", Security of life and property is a joke even when they build 1km high fences around their mansions! House rent has hit the roof since Govt can not stabilize it?
What is governance and what is it purpose?
Hardworking and ingenious as Nigerian youths are, this country's leaders have changed their destiny (at least for most of them) into Yahoozy-youths?

I hate it when l read the way "people lambast our head of state" but then l quickly come back to reality and ask myself "What have l done for this country", that it should treat me this way?

Why cant Americans or British treat their children (their Youths, their future) the way we oppress ours?
Does anyone still wonder if in about twenty years time, Nigerians become so wicked to themselves that you would wonder whether they are still human?

What is the problem with our rulers? Are they plain Evil?, MAD?, just devilishly wicked? Please, somebody help me with an answer, Please, Please. It cant just be lack of ideas?

My own Mother graduated from Unilag when, not just tuition was free but FOOD (the greatest problem of most poor Nigerians) was FREE! With 90 pieces of Monthly "food-tickets" @25Kobo each, you're assured of a well-balanced 3-square meals, with Ice-Cream, Coffee or Cocoa to choose from , and Saturday afternoon was wicked, "solid Jollof Rice with Chicken"! You can bet l was purposely eating at the Cafeteria long before l became a student there

If you're an Undergraduate, imagine what it means if you dont have to cook or bother parents or even worry about your next meal? Would you not have more time for your studies, good health and focus, to assimilate what you read and most likely come out of the University a better student than the current ones that are "desperate for money", for everything from tuition, to food, to "hand-outs", to Accommodation fees, e.t.c, C'mmon, this wickedness MUST STOP.

You can not steal the nations wealth, use it to send your own children abroad for "quality education" and then turn around to ruin the future of those ones whose parents are hardworking and paying their taxes.
If MAN can not hold you responsible, there is a higher being, an infinite power that would lay in-wait for you, at your old age, and those offsprings that you think you are propping-up, !
Ask Obasanjo, when his son alleges that he is a bloody incest! Just one of those things!!

While "our oppressors" are wicked and seek to perpetuate a "class division" amongst the citizen, it is even more heart-wrenching that some people from humble backgrounds, simply because they think they are above the poverty-line (like leaving abroad, having a good job or just with a few wads of money in the bank) open their foul mouth to say its right to raise fees astronomically, justifying "Orange with Apples"; (they pay in the U.S!), maybe out of ignorance or just mere mischief, since we all know that the same U.S is the land of Milk and Honey (Go and see the Queue at the Embassy, no arguments there!) and it (U.S) takes absolute care of its own children (Obama is even trying to revolutionize Education and Health care with Billions of Dollars while "our own rulers" are doing same for their various foreign bank accounts!).

I can go on till tomorrow but l wont. Enough is Enough!

If America predicted that Nigeria will "implode" in a few years time, my patriotic sense would not allow me to take them seriously but if care is not taken, the way things are going, it will be a tragedy that despite that "embarrassing warning", WE DID NOTHING TO CHANGE COURSE!

Lastage.

BTW: Even if University tuition became One Million Naira today, some will be able to afford it and to God be the glory, l can, for my own children BUT it will still not stop me from saying it is Sheer Wickedness and Evil with respect to those who cant afford it, after-all, fingers are not equal!

In summary, the hike is not justifiable, instead of this long grammer

girls sef,,,

What the Quran is saying about "Ruuh" there is the spirit of man. It is the spirit that is the "Soul" when a person is alive! But when the person dies, and the soul is removed, in that nature/stage of not being in the body of a person so that the body is alive, the soul is now spirit, "Ruuh" because it has no human housing or shelter!

Then what happened here:

The orthodox Muslim view of the Quran introduces a rather amusing dilemma or paradox. For example, if we assume that the Quran is eternal then we must assume that the following prayer is eternal since it is part of the eternal Quran:


In the name of ALLAH, the Gracious, the Merciful. All praise is due to ALLAH alone, Lord of all the worlds. The Gracious, the Merciful. Master of the Day of Judgment. THEE alone do we worship and THEE alone do we implore for help. Guide us in the straight path, The path of those on whom THOU hast bestowed THY favours, those who have not incurred THY displeasure and those who have not gone astray. S. 1:1-7 Sher Ali
Here is a prayer directed to Allah, and yet this is supposed to be an eternal prayer. This either means that the Quran is a living personal entity or that Allah has been praying to himself from all eternity!

"My God, my God, !", instead of My father, my father.

I think I provided verses where he called God, Father!!

The statement of Nezan therefore fly in his own face, since the Christians in general, orthodoxy or not believe in the Bible and the Bible post Jesus postulates that God is Three!

Trinity does not mean three gods, but one God, manisfesting as a Triune, read my posts very well

I am a muslim and I understand Islam more than you, until you become a muslim, then we are equal or you may be better because Allah give you abundant of knowledge.

The same way I know Christianity and Trinity more than you

The life of an atheist is funny.

This was what one atheist said:

Thank [size=14pt]God[/size], I am an atheist.

Funny, is'nt it?

babs,

[size=14pt]In closing, I would like to state that the usage of the Quran does not mean I believe in its inspiration or its authority. It is quoted simply to demonstrate to Muslims who do believe in it that if they remain consistent in their methodology they would discover that most of their arguments against Christianity actually discredit their belief as well. [/size]

babs,


Annemarie Schimmel writes:


The problem of the nature of Christ, so central in the dogmatic development of the early church, has also influenced, in a certain way, the development of Islamic dogma. Christ's designation as logos, as the Word of God, "born not created," has most probably influenced Islamic theories about the Koran, which is regarded by the Muslim as the uncreated Word of God. Phenomenologically seen, the Koran has the same position in Islamic dogmatics as has Christ in Christianity. Harry A. Wolfson therefore coined the term "inlibration," the "Word become Book," in contrast to the Christian concept of incarnation, "the Word became Flesh." That explains why theologians emphasized the designation ummi for Muhammad; this term, first probably meaning "the prophet sent to the gentiles" was interpreted as "illiterate." The Prophet had to be a vessel unstained by external knowledge for the Word's inlibration, just as Mary had to be a virgin in order to be a pure vessel for the Word's incarnation. That is, the Koran is much more than simply a book , (Schimmel, Islam - An Introduction [State University of New York Press, Albany 1992], pp. 74-75; bold emphasis ours)

The Quran is likened to Christ in that, like Christ, it is eternal in one sense (being the eternal speech of Allah), and yet finite in another sense (the book and ink used to record it). In light of the preceding factors, Muslims have no case against the Trinity or the Incarnation since they themselves must affirm that Allah is somehow triune as well as affirming that the Quran, like Christ, is both eternal and finite at the same time.

We, thus, see that Christians weren't the only ones debating and persecuting each other regarding the implications of Jesus being the Word of God. Muslims had to struggle over the issue of the Quran being God's Speech and hammer out the exact implications this had on its nature, i.e. whether it is eternal or created or both! Much like Christianity before it, Islam had, and continues to have, its own Arians, Monophysites and Trinitarians debating and persecuting one another over the exact nature of the Quran.

Hence, if Christians are blasphemers for believing that God is a triune Being or for believing that Jesus is both eternal and finite at the same time, then Muslims themselves are unbelievers. Muslims either believe that there are three distinct eternal beings, implying that there are three gods or must admit that God is a multi-personal Being.

Finally, the orthodox Muslim view of the Quran introduces a rather amusing dilemma or paradox. For example, if we assume that the Quran is eternal then we must assume that the following prayer is eternal since it is part of the eternal Quran:


In the name of ALLAH, the Gracious, the Merciful. All praise is due to ALLAH alone, Lord of all the worlds. The Gracious, the Merciful. Master of the Day of Judgment. THEE alone do we worship and THEE alone do we implore for help. Guide us in the straight path, The path of those on whom THOU hast bestowed THY favours, those who have not incurred THY displeasure and those who have not gone astray. S. 1:1-7 Sher Ali
Here is a prayer directed to Allah, and yet this is supposed to be an eternal prayer. This either means that the Quran is a living personal entity or that Allah has been praying to himself from all eternity! We do know from other passages that Allah does pray:


He it is who sends PRAYERS on you (Arabic- yusallii alaykum), as do His angels , S. 33:43
Allah and His angels PRAY for the Prophet (Arabic- yasalluuna alan-Nabiyy): O ye that believe PRAY for him (salluu `alayhi), and salute him with all respect. S. 33:56

Thus, it is quite plausible that Allah has actually been praying surah Fatihah to himself.

babs,

Muslims try to evade the fact that Jesus is the very Word of God by indicating that he is called God's Word solely because he was created directly by God's command, kun fayakun - "Be and it is." First, as we have already demonstrated, Jesus is not simply a by-product of God's command, but is the very Word of God to man. This is based primarily on the fact that the Quran clearly teaches that the Word of God is personal and became man in the person of Jesus.

Secondly, if it were true that Jesus is God's word solely because he was created by the command of God then we would expect to find Adam called the Word of God since he was also created by God's command according to the Quran (cf. S. 3:59). Yet, neither Adam nor anyone else is ever called the Word of God.

This implies that the Quran acknowledges that the eternal Word of God became flesh, two aspects (eternal and finite) united in one Person.

In fact, not only is Christ eternal and finite at the same time, the Quran itself is believed by Muslims to be the eternal speech of God in book form. This would imply that the Quran also has a dual aspect, one eternal and one finite. Yusuf K. Ibish, in an article entitled "The Muslim Lives by the Quran," writes:


I have not yet come across a western man who understands what the Quran is. It is not a book in the ordinary sense, nor is it comparable to the Bible, either the Old or New Testaments. It is an expression of Divine Will. If you want to compare it with anything in Christianity, you must compare it with Christ Himself. Christ was an expression of the Divine among men, the revelation of the Divine Will. That is what the Quran is. If you want a comparison for the role of Muhammad, the better one in that particular respect would be Mary. Muhammad was the vehicle of the Divine, as she was the vehicle , There are western orientalists who have devoted their life to the study of the Quran, its text, the analysis of its words, discovering that this word is Abyssinian, that word is Greek by origin, But all this is immaterial. The Quran was divinely inspired, then it was compiled, and what we have now is the expression of God's Will among men. That is the important point. (Charris Waddy, The Muslim Mind [New York: Longman, 1976], p.14)
In his Ideals and Realities of Islam, Seyyed Hossain Nasr writes,


The Word of God in Islam is the Quran; in Christianity it is Christ, To carry this analogy further one can point to the fact that the Quran, being the Word of God therefore corresponds to Christ in Christianity and the form of this book, which like the contents is determined by the dictum in heaven, corresponds in a sense to the body of Christ. The form of the Quran is the Arabic language which religiously speaking is as inseparable from the Quran as the body of Christ is from Christ Himself. Arabic is sacred in the sense that it is an integral part of the Quranic revelation whose very sounds and utterances play a role in the ritual acts of Islam. (Op. cit. [London: George Allen & Urwin, 1975], pp. 43-44)
This next author says:


The Quran is eternal, whereas its form (i.e., the Arabic language and the book in which it is written) is temporal. In fact, in early Islamic history it was considered blasphemous to say that the Quran was created, with the Caliph Al-Mutawakkil (d. AD 850) going so far as to "decree the death penalty for anyone who taught that the Word of God (i.e., the Quran) is created." (John Alden Williams, ed., Islam [New York: George Braziller, 1962], p. 179)

And another author claims:


"The Qur'an is God's speech, which he uttered, and it is uncreated. Who holds the opposite is a Jahmit, an unbeliever. And who says: 'The Qur'an is God's speech', and stops at that point without adding 'uncreated', speaks even more infamously than the latter. Also, who maintains our sounds, our Qur'an recitation would be created, the Qur'an itself, however, God's speech, is a Jahmit, too. And who doesn't declare all these people as unbelievers, is like them." (according to Ibn Abu Ya'la, Tabaqat al-Hanabila, ed. Muhammad Hamid al Fiqh, Cairo 1952, vol. I, p. 29; transl. Dr. Christopher Heger)
Noted Islamicist, F.E. Peters, quotes Muslim scholar Ahmad Ibn Hanbal as saying:


The Quran is the Word of God and it is not created. It is not wrong to say, "It is not created," for God's Word is not separated from Him, and there is nothing of Him that is created. Beware of discussing this with those who speak about this subject and talk of the "creation of sounds" and such matters, and those who go midway and say, "I don't know whether the Quran is created or uncreated, but it is God's Word." Such a one is guilty of a religious innovation as is the one who says, "It is created," for it is God's Word and that is not created. (Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, Creed) [WILLIAMS 1971:29] (Peters, Judaism, Christianity, And Islam: The Classical Texts and Their Interpretation [Princeton Uinversity Press, Princeton, NJ, 1990 paperback], p. 47)
Peters quotes another Muslim writer who says:


The Quran is God's speaking, which is one of His attributes. Now God in all His attributes is One and with all His attributes is eternal and not contigent, (so His speaking is) without letters and without sounds, not broken up into syllables or paragraphs. It is not He nor is it other than He, (Ibid.)

Muslim scholar, Mahmoud M. Ayoub, speaking of Muhammad's relation to the Quran, writes:

, that the words that Muhammad conveyed to his people were not his own, but were revealed to him by God. It is also understood to mean that his mind was not contaminated by human wisdom. Rather it was a pure receptacle for the divine word in the same way that Mary's virginity means for Christians that her body was a pure vessel fit to receive Christ, the Word of God.

In fact, there is an interesting parallel between Christ and the Qur'an. Christ is, for Christians, the incarnate Word of God. While the Qur'an is, like Christ, the eternal divine word, it does not play a role in the creation of the world. It is the eternal word of God preserved for moral and spiritual guidance. It is an eternal book: "This surely is a glorious Qur'an, preserved in a well-guarded Tablet" (Q. 85:21-22). (Ayoub, Islam: Faith and History [Oneworld Publications, Oxford England, 2004], p. 41)

One Salafi website writes in answer to a question regarding whether the Quran is created:


The evidence that the Qur'aan is not created is the aayah (interpretation of the meaning):

"Surely, His is the creation and commandment" [al-A'raaf 7:54]

So Allaah describes creation as one thing and commandment as another. The conjunction implies that the second thing mentioned is different, and the Qur'aan is part of the commandment because of the evidence of the aayah (interpretation of the meaning):

"And thus We have sent to you (O Muhammad) Rooh (a revelation, and a mercy) of Our Command. You knew not what is the Book, nor what is Faith? But We have made it (this Qur'aan) a light wherewith We guide whosoever of Our slaves We will"

[al-Shoora 42:52]

If the Qur'aan is part of the command or commandment, which is different from creation, therefore it is not created, because if it were created, this division of categories would not be correct. This is the evidence from the Qur'aan. (10153: The Qur'aan was revealed by Allaah, not created)

The verse which this site posted is actually referring to Allah's Spirit since the Arabic word Ruh (spelled Rooh in the above) means Spirit. Thus, not only have they argued for the Quran being uncreated but also for the Spirit's uncreatedness! After all, if the Quran being part of Allah's command means that it is uncreated, since Allah's commands are not part of creation, then the Spirit must be uncreated as well since the text that is quoted is actually referring to Allah's Spirit. This leaves us with Allah, His Word (the Quran) and His Spirit being all uncreated!

@babs,

Quran and hadiths clearly demonstrate that the Holy Spirit is not Gabriel:


"They ask thee concerning the Spirit (of inspiration). Say: "The Spirit (cometh) by command of my Lord: of knowledge it is only a little that is communicated to you, (O men)!" S. 17:85
According to Sahi Bukhari this verse came down when the Jews questioned Muhammad on the Spirit's identity:


Narrated Ibn Mas'ud:
While I was walking in company with the Prophet in one of the fields of Medina, the Prophet was reclining on a palm leave stalk which he carried with him. We passed by a group of Jews. Some of them said to the others, "Ask him about the spirit." The others said, "Do not ask him, lest he would say something that you hate." Some of them said, "We will ask him." So a man from among them stood up and said, 'O Abal-Qasim! What is the spirit?" The Prophet kept quiet and I knew that he was being divinely inspired. Then he said: "They ask you concerning the Spirit, Say: The Spirit; its knowledge is with my Lord. And of knowledge you (mankind) have been given only a little." (17.85) Volume 9, Book 93, Number 554

Hence, Muhammad did not even know the identity of God's Spirit. Two hadiths from Sahi Muslim affirm that the Spirit is not Gabriel:


"Narrated Aisha: The Messenger of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) used to pronounce while bowing and prostrating himself: All Glorious, all Holy, Lord of the Angels and the Spirit." Book 4, Number 0987
This tradition makes a distinction between Angels, of which Gabriel is one, and the Spirit. This indicates that Gabriel is not the Holy Spirit.


"Narrated Aisha:
Allah's Messenger (peace_be_upon_him) said: Satirize the (non-believing amongst the) Quraysh, for (satire) is more grievous to them than the hurt of an arrow. So he (the Holy Prophet) sent (someone) to Ibn Rawahah and asked him to satirise them. He composed a satire, but it did not appeal to him (to the Holy Prophet). He then sent (someone) to Ka'b ibn Malik (to do the same, but what he composed did not appeal to the Holy Prophet). He then sent one to Hassan ibn Thabit. As he entered his presence, Hassan said: Now you have called for this lion who strikes (the enemies) with his tail. He then brought out his tongue and began to move it and said: By Him Who has sent you with Truth, I shall tear them with my tongue as the leather is torn.

"Thereupon Allah's Messenger (peace_be_upon_him) said: Don't be hasty; (let) AbuBakr who has the best knowledge of the lineage of the Quraysh draw a distinction for you in regard to my lineage, as my lineage is the same as theirs. Hassan then came to him (AbuBakr) and after making inquiries (in regard to the lineage of the Holy Prophet) came back to him (the Holy Prophet) and said: Allah's Messenger, he (AbuBakr) has drawn a distinction your lineage (and that of the Quraysh). By Him Who has sent you with Truth, I shall draw out from them (your name) as hair is drawn out from the flour.

"Aisha said:

I heard Allah's Messenger (peace_be_upon_him) saying to Hassan: Verily Ruh al-Qudus (The Holy Spirit) will continue to help you so long as you put up a defence on behalf of Allah and his Messenger. And she said: I heard Allah's Messenger (peace_be_upon_him) saying: Hassan satirized them and gave satisfaction to the (Muslims) and disquieted (the non-Muslims). You satirized Muhammad, but I replied on his behalf, and there is a reward from Allah for this. You satirized Muhammad, the virtuous, the righteous, the Apostle of Allah, whose nature is truthfulness.

"So verily my father, his father and my honour are a protection to the honour of Muhammad. May I lobe my dear daughter if you don't see her wiping away the dust from both sides of Kaba. They pull at the reins, going upward. On their shoulders are spears thirsting (for the blood of the enemy). Our steeds are sweating--our women wipe them with their mantles. If you had not interfered with us, we should have performed the Umrah. And (then) there was the Victory, and the darkness cleared away. Otherwise wait for the fighting on the day on which Allah will honour whom He pleases. Allah said: I have sent a servant who says the Truth in which there is no ambiguity. Allah said: I have prepared an army--they are the Ansar whose object is fighting (the enemy). There arrives every day from Ma'add abuse, fighting or satire. Whoever among you satirizes the Apostle, or praises him and helps him it is all the same; and Gabriel, the Apostle of Allah is among us, and the Holy Spirit who has no match." Book 30, Number 6081

According to this hadith, Muslims have both Gabriel and the Holy Spirit assisting them, indicating once again that the Holy Spirit is someone distinct from Gabriel.

The Quran also indicates that the Word of God became a person, with the implication being that this person is both divine and human:


"Then the angels called to him as he stood praying in the sanctuary: That Allah gives you the good news of Yahya verifying a Word from Allah, and honorable and chaste and a prophet from among the good ones." S. 3:39 Shakir
John is to bear witness to a Word from God, namely Jesus the Christ. Here, Jesus is the one who is the Word from God. The fact that he is a Word from God implies preexistence, that Jesus preexisted as God's Word. This point is brought out more clearly in the two following passages:


"(And remember) when the angels said: O Mary! Lo! Allah giveth thee glad tidings of a word from him, whose name is the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, illustrious in the world and the Hereafter, and one of those brought near (unto Allah)." S. 3:45 Pickthall
According to this passage God's Word is not a mere abstraction but rather a person. This is due to the fact that the Word of God is given a personal name, Jesus. This implies that the Muslim argument that Jesus is only a by-product of God's creative command cannot be sustained. Hence, according to this one passage the Word of God is a person who shall be known as Jesus, implying that Christ is the personal Word of God come down from heaven.


"O People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion: Nor say of Allah aught but the truth. Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) a messenger of Allah, and His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him: so believe in Allah and His messengers. Say not ‘Trinity': desist: it will be better for you: for Allah is one Allah: Glory be to Him: (far exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is Allah as a Disposer of affairs." S. 4:171 Y. Ali
Jesus is both the Word of God, not just a word from him, given to Mary and a spirit that proceeds from God himself. We discover that in one sense the Quran denies the divinity of Jesus and yet in other places it affirms that he is the divine preexistent Word and Spirit from God.

@babs,

Nowhere in the Quran does one find the orthodox Christian position of the Trinity attacked or defined. Instead, the Quran attacks the belief that God is the third of three and therefore those who believe such must stop saying that God is three. Furthermore, the Quran defines Christian teaching on the Trinity as the belief in God, Mary and Jesus as three gods and accuses Christians of believing in Jesus and Mary as two separate gods apart from the true God.

In fact, according to Ibn Ishaq the Quran was specifically correcting this erroneous belief in God, Mary and Jesus as three separate divinities. In his work, Sira Rasulullah, Ibn Ishaq records that a Christian deputation from Najran came to debate Muhammad on the person of Jesus. Accordingly, these Christians allegedly believed that Jesus, "is God; and He is the son of God; and He is the third Person of the Trinity, which is the doctrine of Christianity." (Alfred Guillaume trans., The Life of Muhammad [Oxford University Press, Karachi], p. 271 )

He goes on to say, "They argue that he is the third of three in that God says: We have done, We have commanded, We have created and We have decreed, and they say, If He were one He would have said I have done, I have created, and so on, but He is He and Jesus and Mary. Concerning all these assertions the Quran came down." (Ibid., pp. 271-272)

Another renowned Muslim commentator, al-Zamakhshari, candidly admitted that this passage was attacking the belief in Father, Mary and Jesus as three gods:


The (word) three is the predicate to an understood subject. If one accepts the Christian view that God exists in one nature (jauhar) with three divine persons, namely the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and (if one accept) the opinion that the person of the Father represents (God's) being (dhat), the person of the Son represents (his) knowledge ('ilm), and the person of the Holy Spirit represents (his) life (hayat), then one must supply the subject as follows: 'God is three(fold).' Otherwise, one must supply (the subject) thus: 'The gods are three.' ACCORDING TO THE EVIDENCE OF THE QUR'AN, the Christians maintain that God, Christ, and Mary are three gods, and that Christ is the child of God by Mary, AS GOD SAYS (in the Qur'an): 'O Jesus son of Mary, didst thou say unto men: "Take me and my mother as gods, apart from God"?' (Sura 5:116), or: 'The Christians say: "The Messiah is the Son of God"' (Sura 9:30). Moreover, it is well known that the Christians maintain that in Jesus are (combined) a divine nature derived from the Father and a human nature derived from his mother, At the same time these words [Sura 4:171] exclude (the Christian view) that Jesus had with God the usual relationship between sons and (their) fathers, (Helmut Gätje, The Qur'an and its Exegesis [Oneworld Publications, 1996], pp. 126-127; bold, capital and underline emphasis and words within brackets ours)

The errors cited by Ibn Ishaq and al-Zamakhshari on what Christians believe becomes apparent to anyone familiar with the basics of Christian doctrine. First, orthodox Christians have never taken Mary as a goddess alongside God. If the Quran were referring to a heretical group of Christians known as the Maryamites, this would serve to strengthen the case that these verses do not address Trinitarians, but apostates that deviated from the true faith. This also calls into question the whole episode of Ibn Ishaq's report on the Christians from Najran and their beliefs. Either these Christians were heretical and if so, then Ibn Ishaq is wrong for claiming that their belief that Jesus was the third of three is the doctrine of Christianity since these Christians do not speak on behalf of all Christendom. Or, the whole story was fabricated to present Muhammad and the Muslims in a favorable light, as well as to present the Christians very negatively.

Second, as we have already indicated the historic Christian teaching has never been that God is three or the third of three which is tritheism, three separate gods forming a unity; as opposed to Trinity, ONE God who exists in Three distinct yet inseparable Persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Thirdly, as we mentioned earlier, orthodox Christians have never taught as part of their doctrine that Jesus is the third Person of the Trinity. Rather, he is the Second Person, with the Holy Spirit being the third Person of the Godhead. Matthew 28:19

Fourthly, Muslims believe that Allah of the Quran is the same as God the Father of the Holy Bible since they do not believe in God the Son, Jesus Christ, or in God the Holy Spirit who to Muslims is the angel Gabriel. This again causes a problem since if Allah is indeed the same Person as God the Father then the Quran is wrong in saying that Christians believe that the Father is the third of three. Christians teach that the Father is the First Person of the One True Godhead, not the third deity of three gods.

Finally, the fact is that the Quran itself teaches that Allah is tri-personal in some sense since it views God's Word and His Spirit as entities that are both distinct from Allah and yet at the same time eternal and inseparable from him. For instance, God's Spirit is personal as well as the instrument through which God grants life to man and strengthens believers:


"When I have fashioned him (in due proportion) and breathed into him of My spirit, fall ye down in obeisance to him." S. 15:29
Man was given life by God's Spirit, implying that the Spirit is the source of life.


"She (Mary) placed a screen (to screen herself) from them: then We sent Our Spirit (ruh), and he appeared before her as a man in all respects." S. 19:17
God's Spirit assumes the form of a man and is described with masculine pronouns. This indicates that the Spirit is not just some force, but is a divine personality.


"Thou wilt not find any people who believe in Allah and the Last Day, loving those who resist Allah and His Messenger, even though they were their fathers or their sons, or their brothers, or their kindred. For such He has written Faith in their hearts, and strengthened them with a spirit from Himself. And He will admit them to Gardens beneath which Rivers flow, to dwell therein (forever). Allah will be well pleased with them, and they with Him. They are the Party of Allah. Truly it is the Party of Allah that will achieve Felicity." S. 58:22 Y. Ali
Believers are strengthened by a spirit from Himself, i.e. a spirit from God. In order for the Spirit to be able to strengthen believers everywhere implies that the Spirit is omnipresent. Yet, only God is omnipresent which essentially means that the Spirit is God. This is precisely the conclusion one Muslim scholar comes to in his footnote. Yusuf Ali notes:


"Cf. ii 87 and 253, where it is said that God strengthened the Prophet Jesus with the holy spirit. Here we learn that all good and righteous men are strengthened by God with the holy spirit. If anything, the phrase used here is stronger, ‘a spirit from Himself'. Whenever any one offers his heart in faith and purity to God, God accepts it, engraves that faith on the seeker's heart, and further fortifies him with the Divine Spirit, which we can no more define adequately than we can define in human language the nature of God." (Ali, The Meaning of the Holy Quran, p. 1518, f. 5365)
Yusuf Ali wasn't alone. Shia writer Irshaad Hussain, in his The Soul: Between Spirit and Clay, says in regards to God's Spirit which was breathed into Adam:

The Spirit, which derives from God, IS A REALITY THAT POSSESSES ALL THE DIVINE ATTRIBUTES. IT REPRESENTS A DIRECT MANIFESTATION OF GOD. Remember, it is only after this Spirit is breathed into Adam that God orders the angels to prostrate themselves before Adam. It is only after this receiving of the Spirit that Adam is given knowledge of the names of all things. The Spirit then MANIFESTS in some way THE ATTRIBUTES OR NAMES OF GOD. It is luminous, alive, subtle, unseen, knowing, unified etc. The body on the other hand has many parts and is overcome by darkness, ignorance, inanimate matter, and a lack of divine attributes. So spirit and body have no common measure - One is from God who is Unique, who is One. The other is from the material world which is characterized by multiplicity and dispersion. (Source; capital emphasis ours)

Hence, the Spirit is of the divine essence, is incomprehensible, omnipresent, personal, and the source of Life, all qualities that are true of God.

lekan fayz:
i thought our president had only kidney failure i guess the docs should have also tested his brain too, cos he must really be suffering from such. well don't blame me the symptoms of brain failure are all around him, + he's so slow, snails would wanna give him an award

KnowAll:
Alao Akala would never have imagined in his widest dream that he will ever become a Governor, he was perfectly happy with his Deputy Governor role and believed he has achieve something extra-ordinarily, but when the Governor at the time would not settle the God-Father of Ibadan politics, he got thrown out of office. That singular act ushered in Akala, how a sacked bent police officer can become Governor is a story for another day. Akala is still enjoying his honey moon and he knows for sure he isn’t coming back as Governor in 2011, so for now he had better hurry up and award any contract no matter how mundane and insignificant it appears, it is still a better way to top up on his loot without drawing too much attention from that greedy woman ( Madam Farida ) in Abuja, knowing for sure she will demand her own 10% of any bent or fraudulent deals.

ha ha ha ha

MEND? wat do they really want?

No they dont

Naturez:
Best= Musa Yar'adua
Worst= Jonathan Goodluck