₦airaland Forum

To the idolaters!

keep to rule!

Naomijt, rule breaker!

idolworshipper deitified him!

begged his Lord!

Eat, fatigued, humanly

Lived like human

Prophet of God

Son of Mary

@Mazaje: Davidylan is from Ijebu Ode. Even though he is a Keferi or kiriyo, We in Ijebu Ode, will not reject him! Some day, InshaAllah, he will wise up!

@~Lady~: The young woman who got joke. Except that the joke is stale! Read and learn so that you may recognized truth apart from your Biblical falacies!

It was a personal attack.
I responded to a ridiculous question.

And your response was worse than ridiculous, coupled with blatant dishonesty. Infact, what you are doing is going by conjecture, without any real proof that anyone can sink any tooth or teeth in.

How do you know that his parents didn't tell him about it. After all our parents are responsible for teaching us about laws or dos and don'ts.

Is there a single proof from your Bible, catholic or its protestant version that Adam and or Eve told Cain how to murder and please point it out to me  if they tolf him how to bury a dead body! The rest of us are very certain that no human had ever died and there was no need for burial ritual for Cain to learn of how to bury anyone. Please explain yourself instead of just taking potshots. Lets learn from your Bible and not from what you are now capable of culling out on your own!

I think you don't give Adam and Eve enough credit, they probably weren't stupid. Ever heard the saying "nothing is new under the sun"? While you may be thinking that they probably didn't understand it as you and I do now, does not mean that it was not apparent to them.

Was there everything under the sun clearly known? Please explain to me the nature of human soul. Everyone has a soul, yet no one can give its true nature. Since you have claimed that Adam and Eve knew fully well everything, without anything unknown to them, please tell me how was it that they were lied to so easily by Satan that they eat the fruit? I am not bringing Islam to this. The Bible said that Adam blamed the woman. Now, woman you have some explaining to do.

After all unclothedness was apparent to them. It's not rocket science.

It is rocket science because the unclothedness that you said is apparent to them did not happen in the open and uncontrolled earth. That is if we use your Bible. It was in the Garden of Eden, wasn't it? Wasn't it not that people were supposed to not experience death, if our parents were not kicked out of the Garden? Wasn't it a known fact that deah is only introduced to man's earthly equation, after the Garden episode? It is very clear that there was no way that they knew anything about death when they were in the Garden. The thing not new under the garden of Eden sun was not death. It was actually unknown to them.

The opposite of life is death, the opposite of love is anger, anger leads you to do wrongful things. It is human nature. There needs not be teaching on it.

New babies have to be taught how to take the mother's nipple, for the first time. That has to be learnt and they just dont come out ready to suckle! Your human nature idea just does not add up. There are something in human nature that have to be learn by awaking the instinct that deal with it!

There are people that haven't heard of the Bible (some parts of Africa and the amazon) or haven't engaged with civilization as we know it, yet they know that when a snake bites, it is venomous.

And long time before the Bible, your book of yrdstick, humans have known that some snakes are venomous. And it is not all snakes that can kill or have venom in them! There are snakes that are pets by even lyoung children! The Bible is not the book you should put forward for the whole world! Please, woman.

It is called human instinct, we all have it. It is a part of natural law. Christianity does not condemn natural law you know. Well at least Catholic Christians don't.

There are limited instinct in the overall human instinct. Natural law calls for male and female productive materials to come together so that a baby can be born! Therefore to beget a child by a woman for an entity without the sexual material of theat Entity mixing together with that of the woman begs your natural law, which you said that is not condemned by Christianity! I guess the begetting is a dudd!

As for the Islamic version, lol. Well I guess they even need to explain with some sort of human explanation, even with natural law. Sheesh. It's natural law for goodness sake.

Laugh all you want. I guess many people in the past have laughed at the truth. Remember the people who were laughed at Noah and his vessel? And in all your laugheter, after you finally come down to earth, please tell us how you can show us Cain was well aquinted with how to bury a person? Was there a death in the family before? Did he not carry his dead brother around for sometime before he buried him? Why did he? Why was the burial not so immediately after he was dead? Can you tell us if his parents held out the information of how to bury a body, for all that time and all of a sudden they decided to tell him so that he may finally bury him? Did they participate in the burial of their own son?

Lady, you have no idea of the amount of lack of true information that your piece have shown! When you calm down, I will teach you the reality of the early human on earth! I will teach you that human specie created among all the creations. No one can tell me that there was sex between Adam and Eve until they were out of the garden, into the real world! Same condition about death and burial! The animals who have been here in the real world are way before us are actually some of our teachers, in the things that we now do.


Before human began to hunt and kill for his meat supplies, the animals have been masters of it. We learnt from them, since your Bible said that we only eat fruits in your Garden of eden, somewhere in Iraq! Now am laughing because I need somebody to point to the exact location of the Garden of Eden and what happened to the Apple tree that caused so much mayhem! Now am waiting to read from you.

I will laugh at every poor assumptions that you make. But not the haha because I still love you.

@A_K_O: Eyi wa le ni o si nkon? Big deal e po ju! lol.

@naomijt: Bad, bad, bad girl! Is avoidance the way to have a dialogue? A friend was just tell me that in Surah Al Maidah, Allah says in verses 72 through 75, that they blaspheme by saying "God is christ, son of Mary!But Jesus said "Oh children of israel worship God, my Lord and your Lord (Is there anybody who does not see the similarity with Mark 12 verse 29?). Jesus said, also that if any do not worship God, alone, Paradise is forbidden to him (How is the parallel with the Bible verse talking about those who shall abolish and advocate to others to abolish the laws and the prophets being the least in the Kingdom of Heaven).

God says that there are people who say that God is One of three in a Trinity. And He the Almighty further ask why they do not turn to Him to seek forgiveness of the evil thing they say? One may observe that the Christians always ask forgiveness from Jesus and some even go to the deadliest extreme of begging Mary to pray for them since she is the mother of their supposed God!

In verse 75, the Almighty God says that Christ is no more than a messenger, in the same way as the past messengers! His mother, Mary was a woman of truth, believer! God then asked, dont you see that they both have their need for daily foods, as humans do!

A person with perchant for deceit may say, well he Jesus wanted to be like human. But at least I say that we are getting somewhere with our argument. We now agree that Jesus is human and he does all the things humans do, including the need to fall asleep, deficate, etc. Here is the problem with anyone who may say that his consumption of food does not take away his godliness or son of God. My response to that is that if he had wanted to show that he was God, he would have demostrated at some point in his earthly life, the ability to not have the need for all the things human need!


He should have not eaten for a long and protracted period of time! Say a whole year continuously without any ill effect on him. We saw ithe effect of a mere 40 days had on him; cursing a vibrant fig tree that is obeying the law of its nature to die simple because it did not carry any fruit in that particular off season period! His inability to control fatigue, therefore falling asleep! Allah the Almighty says in the Qur'an that He is never fatigued or tired and never slumber, but alway capable to perform all His Godly duties over all the creations!

We also read from the Bible that Jesus was tempted by the devil, at least not less than 3 times. In the temptations, food was part of what was used against him! The devil also dubiously ask if he iwas sure that he was son of god, then he should fall of, a suggestion in the manner that Satan uses against mankind, the cliff and call on God to save him!

In all of the answers that Jesus gave, especial "thou shall not tempt God," is a direct statement that Jesus is not God nor son of God! I hope that this piece will be read by somebody who Allah will soften his/her heart, so that the real truth can be accepted by it.


I am sure many will argue blindly their cases! I am not one of them! Naomi, don't be arrogant! God Almighty is higher than all that you call Him!

(b) the teachings of the apostle Paul are not different from what the Lord Jesus taught - and certainly not on this subject of the condition of the heart. As is clear in the context of JeSoul's contribution, the apostle exposes the problem with the heart of man when dealing with spiritual things, especially here in the question of fruitfulness.

It is clear from JeSoul's comments that there are no "differences" as assumed by Olabowale, if the latter had read contextually: "We must follow the teaching of Paul in throwing off these things". I'm sure that Jesus Christ did not teach the direct opposite of that.

My comment: What was the explanation given by Jesus, concerning his statements as recorded by thos who witnessed his ministry?

1). Why call me good, was his statement of caution to the woman who adulated him so highly! Jesus said further that the Only One who is Good is God, alone! This statement of Jesus is plain and direct enough that there should not be a need for intepretation or contextual reading! Where is the ambiquity in that speech of jesus that we would need more than human mind and understanding to get it?

2). If we examine Mark 12 verse 29, we will see that Jesus was making plain to everyone who wa in his eudience that they and he Jesus have the same Lord and God, who in this case One Lord! For all natural intents and purposes, Jesus personally declared tht he is not that Lord and god! Why should anyone need to consult a ghost or spirit to understand this verse?

I can give my christian pundits many more verses to chew on. Each one of them will be point to the same theme; Jesus is no God Almighty Creator Lord!

There is a saying in Boston, that goes this way, "Tell me something I don't know?!" Can anyone?

And i missed all of that fun! Subhannah! I am waiting for Stimulus, MrPataki, Davidylan, Gweine and the like, include but limited Nossycheek!

Let me whet your appetite for what is coming to you: The mother of the Book is in Laumafuhz! From this station, each of the revealed Books to the prophets were reveals, in their due times to the intended prophets (AS)! So when Torah was revealed to Moses, they were words from Ummuh Kitab in laumafhuz! The same with David's Sabur, and Jesus Injil! The same with Muhammad's Qur'an! On earth the Ummuh Kitab among the 4 and the other pamphlets revealed to Ibrahim, and others, The Qur'an stands as the mother for them, since it contains all that are essential and essentially their messages and what is revealed to them.

Let me give you example: There is no deity of worship, except God (Allah, in Arabic phonetic)! This is essentially what all the prophets and messengers (AS) spoke to their people. Unfortunately, the Christians after Jesus have been raised up, they injected 3 godheads instead of what Jesus actually told them, that he was a prophet of God to the Children of Israel!

It is interesting to note though, that babs787 was the only person responding to the many Christians! Now lets talk about it and I hope that Stimulus is returned safely from his journey! At least Queenisha, Davidylan and co along with nossycheek are here to represent! Les do it. Its ramada and conversation like this is very adequate! Anybody home?

Jesus was a being on earth. Just like any being that walked on earth. If one is now labelling him as a son or begotten son of God, one will have to bear in mind, that the writers of the Bible Books were ordinary men. These ordinary men, the Christians argue, were inspired on the ideas in the Bible. But the words are of their own! In view of the above, we have seen the Bible going to changes, whereby in some editions, of say Circa 1951 of the KJV, there were essential verses which were relegated to mere footnotes or completely absent, when compared to edition that preceeded it! Then in later editions, say from 1970 onward, we see that the same verses were reinserted as fully part of the Bible!

This alone, for a keen observer and seeker of truth, should be enough to seiously question the ever changing word of Christian God! I am not even talking about the missing Books that are present in the Catholic Bible, but not in the Protestant's Bible. The same Protestants are now accusing the Catholics of Idolatory, even though, their own Bible is copied from them. The Protestants have the burden of proof with the catholics. The Christians have the burden of proof with the muslims!



I have only brough this to the attention of our notable pundits, that if are to be generous and accept their concept of Inspired writers, we will find that there is almost a zero percent chance to accept any version of the Bible as 100% authentic! The Christians among themselves have problems of uniform definition of Jesus. Some say he is human prophet and no more. Yet some say that he is son, alone, begotten or otherwise. Yet others say that he is combinations of both and the God! Well if the christians can't even agree among themselves, how do they think that they can convince the non-christians to hold a firm definition, except the weakest of all!


But the christians, as they say that he is son or begooten and or God, we see that they do not have any concrete proof to affirm any of these. What we can see clearly, is that they are making empty statements. There is no pudding to eat so that we may know whether the taste fit the flavor! What is known, going by many previous example, is that Jesus was a human prophet, with special situations, and miracles.



On the other hand, to take the opinion that Jesus was not a son and therefore was not begotten, but created like every human creation, is very easy. There are profound evidence abound in the reminant of Truth that the Bible still contain! Adam was created from admixture of water and different hues of soil from the earth! If there is any person that could be considered begotten because of the absence of father, since our minds only understand that human zygote can be formed by the coming together of male and female germents, Adam would have qualified, perfectly. But we also see that Eve who was cloned from already human Adam, could have qualified as begotten, for the same reason at least that Adam could! But then Eve's creation is so profound that she came out of the body of a male! I guess the process of the creation of Eve should put a stop to the adage of "The Chicken or the Egg!"


If I say a man is a woman because he does not have a beard, does it truly makes him a woman? The answer is no! This is the same with calling Jesus son or begotten. The only way a son or begotten comes about, is to sire, to mount to have a sexual intercourse! The process that does not include this essential ingredient is completely off the mark, regardless of how loud the beat of its drum!


In the time of the Kalifa of Umar Kattab, a muslim responded with great wisdom by saying to Umar that he is grateful to Allah, who has made him possessed 3 things, which Allah Him does not possess. Umar was shocked, but ashamed to ask this muslim what he meant. In time he met with Ali bin Talib, the cousin and the son-inlaw of the prophet (AS). He related the statement of this muslim and asked if Ali had any knowledge of what the muslim was saying. Allah gave knowledge from the Qur'an and Ahadith to Ali, who told Kalifah Umar Kattab that the 3 things that the man have, which are not part of what Allah would have because they are meant for the creations, humans, etc are Offsprings, begotten or adopted, wife or wives and I think parent is the third.


We therefore should realise that Allah God Almighty Creator Lord, does not possess any of these. You can not say that God does not have a parent and all of a sudden you spring son or begotten son on Him! You can't say that God does not have a wife, yet the child born by a husbandless believing young virgin woman, is therefore the son of God! Since she did not lose her virginity in the pregnancy, we must have to accept that there was no intercourse, but a miraculous conception had occurred! But in this case, it is in no way insinuating that God must be the father of the Baby, the same way He is not the father of Adam and or Eve, whose individual process of coming to life must not able to be replicated by any scientist or group of scientists!


God says in the Qur'an, that the creation of Jesus is in the same light/line as the creation of Adam. When God decrees a thing, He but says to it, in command, Be! So it must becomes. The thing will come into being, following the charted path that God has ordained for it! In the case of Jesus, he incubated in the womb of his mother and when matured enough was delivered. Adam came from outside, without the luxury of any womb, as matured male and hit the complete garmut and ranges of human activities! Adam's immediately began to talk, eat grown people foods. He eat the apple, if we go by the christian story! The fact that he skipped all the period of preadulthood should tell us that God is capable of doing all things and creating a boy through a young virgin should not surprise us!


By the way sex is the last thing on my mind, right now. But whoever is not married amongst those who are matured, and there is no glearing reason not to, should do so! Academics should not be used as the open excuse, while the heart yearns for companionship and intimacy! To have a first degree or a Ph. D., mrriage is not a cog in the wheel of any possible progress of a determined individual. Where is Queenisha? I miss you woman. lol.

@Bomany: May Allah accept all your good efforts, Amin.

@Queenisha:                                          Al-Azhar fatwa on adult suckling
                                                                        From WikiIslam
                                                                 Jump to: navigation, search
                                                               This article is an essay by Akira.



A spectre is haunting the Islamic world — the spectre of adult suckling. All the powers of Islam have entered into a holy alliance to exorcise this spectre: scholars and politicians, mullahs and intellectuals. They are all struggling to get rid of this spectre which increasingly causes headaches to more and more muslims by exposing some astonishing contradictions in their religion.

Is it halal (allowed) for a Muslim woman to suckle strange men? Moreover, could suckling of adult men help to improve the communication between not related men and woman within a company? A highly recognised holy text of Islam seems to confirm this - according to a scholar from Al-Azhar University, one of the most repudiated universities of the Islamic world!

Contents [hide]
1 Background
2 The Fatwa of an Al-Azhar scholar
3 The holy text in question
4 Waves in the Islamic World - and in the Rest of the World
5 Conclusions
6 References


[edit] Background
In Islamic societies gender segregation is a common practice to avoid any form of adultery. Thus men and women are not advised to stay in the same room if they are alone, and any adult woman is required to wear a veil in public.

Though there are also some Islamic scholars who deny the need to wear a veil in public, it has become common sense in many Islamic countries and societies. In many cases scholars refer to the Surah of the Light:

YUSUF ALI: And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof; that they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to their husbands, their fathers, their husband's fathers, their sons, their husbands' sons, their brothers or their brothers' sons, or their sisters' sons, or their women, or the slaves whom their right hands possess, or male servants free of physical needs, or small children who have no sense of the shame of sex; and that they should not strike their feet in order to draw attention to their hidden ornaments. And O ye Believers! turn ye all together towards Allah, that ye may attain Bliss.
Qur'an 24:31

My Comment: Is there a need for intepretation here? No. It is clear and the Christian should copy from this, instead of giving us the mumbo jumbo called intepretation.


Thus, only if men and women are closely related or married there is no need for gender segregation and hijab. However, it is obvious that the strict application of Islamic law may cause some trouble and difficulties to daily life, particularly concerning business.

For example, if there is a small company employing a man and two women there maybe nothing wrong if they all work in the same room (in some countries, however, such as Saudi Arabia, even this would be strictly prohibited). However, if one of the woman becomes ill for a while, the remaining man and woman cannot work together any more!

In many Islamic societies this would be strictly forbidden, and even if not, man and woman could both face severe criticism, rumours and tittle-tattles. But how can this be avoided?

[edit] The Fatwa of an Al-Azhar scholar
Here comes the head of the Hadith Department in Al-Azhar University, Dr. Izzat Atiyya into play. It has to be noticed, that the Al-Azhar University in Kairo is considered to be the world´s most renowned islamic university for all Sunni muslims.


My comment: And regardless of the esteem consideration and regard of the School, if any opinion comes out of it and has no foundation in Qur'an and authentic Hadith and sunnah, it will not be accepted, and must be rejected. Islam is complete and its not like the others who are always evolving, just as quick as the weather. Climate takes a long time.

Only a few months ago, Dr. Atiyya published a fatwa. According to this verdict the Islamic rules of gender segregation and veiling can be circumvented if the woman suckles the man. Alternatively, the man could also become breastfed by a sister or the mother of the woman.

My comment: Anyone can claim scholarship. But are they truly scholars, especially when their academic opinion is different and completely opposite the essence of what they are drawing their scholarship on? Allah says that mankind should obey Him and His messenger and those in authority among us. But the people in authority have to obey Allah and Muhammad (AS)! From the fatwa of this professor, and the 90, 000 who may be supporting him, we see that they are completely opposite Allah and His prophet (AS), when it comes to sexuality, sensuality, morality and nudity. How can anybody takes this man and his supporters, seriously? This is a joke. The jok is on him and his supporters and the christians and others who will quote him.

The idea behind this ruling is that there is no law for adoption in many Islamic societies. However, a mother-son-relationship can be established by breast-feeding.

My comment: Adoptions where family ties are broken and names are changed without continuinty of heritage is not permissable. This should not therefore be the reason for lewdness as proposed, above.

The scholar of Al-Azhar University explained his ruling in an interview given to Al-Watani Al-Yawm, a weekly newspaper published by Egypt's ruling National Democratic Front party.

According to this interview it was the prophet himself who confirmed that a man and a woman are allowed to be together in private if the man has been breastfed by the woman before.

My Comment: Am very sure it is not a boy who is completely over the age whereby the wetnurse can be of help. Definitely, not sexually matured and ready men.

Then, it must be added that Dr. Abd Al-Mahdi Abd Al-Qadir, just another Al-Azhar scholar, wrote and published a book rendering similar ideas referring on the same Islamic sources.

[edit] The holy text in question
Here is a part of the holy text Dr. Atiyya referred to in an English translation:

'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Salim, the freed slave of Abu Hadhaifa, lived with him and his family in their house. She (i. e. the daughter of Suhail came to Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) and said: Salim has attained (puberty) as men attain, and he understands what they understand, and he enters our house freely, I, however, perceive that something (rankles) in the heart of Abu Hudhaifa, whereupon Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) said to her: Suckle him and you would become unlawful for him, and (the rankling) which Abu Hudhaifa feels in his heart will disappear. She returned and said: So I suckled him, and what (was there) in the heart of Abu Hudhaifa disappeared.
Sahih Muslim 8:3425


My comment: [b]Please consider that the age of the boy is not given, here. It is even assuming that the ahadith is not complete. For the sake of argument, the ahadith can never be Sahih, must be clasified as weak, with a strong affirmation that it is a fabrication. If we take the opposite view and believe that it is an ahadith that it is not weak and not fabricated, we will see that the ahadith was left as incomplete, with the dubious distinction to lie us into the wrong view point, away from Qur'an and the over whelming evidence from other ahadiths and sunnah that will compel us, to know that the truth. We do know that some young boys, as young as betwwen 3 to 5 years old can be aware of sexuality. I know becaus of my very young nephew, who is now 33. The boy or male in the ahadith could have been that young, capable of being left alone to go and come as he wished, in a crimelesss Madina, being freed and no more a slave, a benefit he derived from islam. Since we do not know the age of the boy, could he be even be as young as between 2 and 3? There is no way that a person can prove to me that he was a grown man, say 20 years old when this ahadith was proposed! It would never have been suggested, considering what we know from Qur'an, and all the ahadith that speak against nudity and sexuality with others except with the husband![/b]


It should be added that Dr. Atiyya repeatedly declared that the sources he quoted belonged to the Islamic holy texts with the highest possible authority. According to him no less than 90 000 contemporary scholars confirmed that the hadith referred to is authentic.

My comment: And as lewd as Arabs are, they have not enacted this ahadith all these centuaries? And even noew that the fatwa is proposed, not passed, everyone is completely against it, yet the muslims are quick to jump to the chances of marrying more than 1 wife? Queenisha, if this is not a way to have concubines, i don't know what is. Yet the Arabs are avoiding the chance, it is a pointer to the fact that they may culturally loose, just like my Yoruba, but they at least know that it is not islamic. How do you now defend all the sexual lies you have told about the prophet, considering that those who follow him, the muslims are morally and ethically inferior to him?

[edit] Waves in the Islamic World - and in the Rest of the World
The fatwa released by Dr. Atiyya and the book of Dr. Abd Al-Mahdi Abd Al-Qadir raised many questions and caused harsh reactions by many muslims:

Is it really an appropriate solution to suckle an adult to avoid the veil and gender segregation in islamic companies?

Can muslims throughout the world still rely on the knowledge of Al-Azhar scholars?

Can muslims throughout the world still rely on the holy texts of Islam - and even on the wisdom of their prophet?

According to the Institut für Islamfragen in Germany there have been 60 books about that subject published in Egypt alone. They are also stating that there were already foreign women renouncing from Islam because of the discussion.

My comment: The lying author is at it again. Foreign women, he says. All women and men are equal before Allah. And Islam is not an Arab only or middle eastern only religion! All your question belongs to your foolish mind. If the Foreign nationals, according to his lingo, whse culture is wild in a contemporary sense about sex, just like doctors are wild about sex compared to nuns, we should note that everyone who truly is a muslim must agree that Islam can never advocate and accept such a terrible process to only rectify in a fake way what continues to be haram! The owner of this web must be a terrible liar!

Obviously many women who work are scared that they might become harassed. Others regard it as disgusting to breastfed strange men in order to get the permission to work with him.

The Muslim Brotherhood criticised the fatwa harshly and brought the matter even to the parliament, thus putting pressure on the Egyptian government also.

The leaders of Al-Azhar University rejected the fatwa as well and suspended Dr. Atiyya.

There are also discussions about the hadith quoted by Dr. Atiyya. Most scholars still regard it as authentic, but there are also voices that it may be a fake.

My Comment: See Queenisha, and i thought i can trust you. You disappoint me. You completely avoided this part. lol.

There are now many efforts by political and religious authorities to stop the debate. However, this is not an easy task since the quoted sources belong to the holiest texts of Islam.

Therefore most political and religious leaders call for a thoughtful approach to the holy texts. Fatwas should agree with logic and common sense and ancient texts should not be misused for thrilling headlines.

[edit] Conclusions
The issue clearly exposes many doubts and questions concerning Islam. Are the holy texts of Islam really as reliable as considered by the Muslim world?

We must ask this question since the Islam is the main source for law in many Muslim countries and there are many muslims who still believe that their Islamic law is derived from god and therefore it is supposed to be superior to any law made by humans.

My comment: We can see that this guy has no respect for God, since he is concluding that the law of man is probably superior.

However, if we take a look at the fatwa of Dr. Atiyya and the hadith quoted by him, we can clearly see that there is no divine logic behind it. For many people, it just looks like twisted logic - if there is any logic at all.

A woman is forced to wear a veil to prevent herself from becoming harassed. To avoid the veil, she has to breastfeed a strange man.

Does this improve the life of anybody?

My Comment: Please tell me how you arrived at 3 godheads if you are christian, in the face of Mark 12 Verse 29, and others which argue that God Lord is One, and Jesus is not it?

@Queenisha: « #44 on: Today at 02:49:56 AM »

I see you carefully avoided the hadith to proceed with altaquiyyah AKA deceptions.
I'm smarter than that.

Authenticity of Ahadith must be based on Qur'an and Muhammad (AS), who the Qur'an was revealed on. Can ahadith that allows nudity or sexual pre-intimacy with whoever it is forbidden with, be acepted as authentic? The answer is no, since Qur'an commands against such actions. To therefore suggest it, since Muhammad (AS), the human Legislator of the Qur'an, did not differ from the Qur'an, in his explanation, is therefore deception. You Queenisha are full of deception. I hav asked you in previous post, if you will breast a grown man, so that you become haram to him. You avoided the question.

In surah Azhab, the women are commanded to hide themselves from the lust of the hearts of men, but to speak with firmness towards them, when the opportunity arises, so that being so soft or meek may not be taken or assumed to mean whatever it was not intended. Such a religion under such a prophet could not allow the suckling of grown men, who are always haram to the women in the first place, to bring about halal only in conversation. Queenisha, Duuh!



Therefore considering Prophet Muhammad (AS) who even did not allow a male to sit on the spot where a woman he just saw a trace of disappearing from his view, because the prophet wanted to avoid any sexual though that the man may have about the woman who had sat in there, even though the man did not even see her face. Do you think that such a prophet will now advocate that a grown woman should suckle a grown man! That statement from you and your webmasters is idiotic at best. I will address the issue further below. I love you, but sometimes, you make me soooooooooooooo mad with all your lies! Lol. Maybe i should just let Zainab file a suit against you. An Igbo woman who is a muslim, suing another who is a christian! I will love to see her argue the case against your southern lawyer!

Is your anger the fact that the hadiths are in a non Muslim site?
The highest Islamic body in Egypt recently issued a fatwa based on that hadith and suckling palours are now available for woem to suckle their male co workers so that they could work together since they are now haram to each other after that.

Those who will be haram, later in life when suckled are children, whom the woman served as a wetnurse. Already grown men are always haram, except the husband who is halah, can never suddenly be halah to suckle, just because you want them to be haram by doing what is haram in the first place! Breast suckling and handling, and touching are all part of the sexuality procedure between husband and wife. A husband who suckles his wife does not become haram for the wife. And there is nothing wrong in swallowing the milk. Neither the suckling nor the swallowing of the milk thereof negates the relation that they have, since she was never a wetnurse for him regardless of their age difference. Instead it is a good way to express intimacy. You should know that Queenisha. Oh, sorry, you are not a muslim, so you guys miss all of that benefits.

To suggest that Egypt passed a fatwa to make grown men, who are stranger to the women starting out being haram to them, now turn what is haram, breast suckling of grown people except husband, to still then make the men haram for sex, but halah for being alone with, is completely and utterly idiotic and stupid. How is it halah to undertake an action that is haram except that is only halah with the husband and nursing children so that all of a sudden it will be permissable for men and women to feel comfortable in each others companies? Where are the inferences from the Qur'an and the actions of the prophet?

I have an older sister, it is not permissable for me to suckle her breast, yet she is always haram for me to have sex with, but halal for me to be alone with, even without her wearing Hijab, as long as she is not completely nude. And please know that I have spoken to a person about this and no one has ever heard about your egyptian fatwa. Frizy lives in Cairo and am sure he has never heard about this. I will be talking to many in the islamic communities and among them will be matriculated Egyptian and Arabs, later on today. Am certain no one will accept your statement! It is not possible.

How will a woman bare out her breasts to a strange man, for this? Even the decadent USA will not do it, even in nude beaches and places where sex is looked upon, casually. Egypt is considered to be a muslim country, it will not be possible to suggest something like this. That will give the Arab all kinds of excuses to do all that is posible to bring about sex. Will you do it, Queenisha? If you will, I will talk to my brother, your Oga that you are no good.

I'm sure I'm teaching you things you never heard of.
This whole discusion may be deleted by tomorrow but the memory of the new knowledge will remain with you.
happy fasting

I am hopeful that it will not be deleted. I am hopeful that when it is all said and done, you will be shaken enough, that it will reach your core! Maybe, you will become a muslim, quikly as this conversation will get better, exposing all your lies! lol. Na wah for you o, Queenisha. You no go gree. lol.

Report to moderator Logged

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
lover as usual

@Mazaje: I am shocked that you did not take a crack at the begotten/beget child/son notion! Interesting, indeed. This na the way you guys do am? You left leprosy and you intensify your treatment of mere temporary skin ailment. Omo 9ja!

@Queenisha: Are you there, honey? How are the begottened children? Now read the below and learn from it:

The case is a very simple one - and up until now you have not been able to show very simply that the prophets were speaking of "sexual intercourse" when they used the terms "beget/begotten".

If there is no sexual intercourse, then the idea of beget/begotten is therefore a fantastic fantasy of lies. A made up concept without any shred of evidence, concrete or leading, except misleading to its probability. A bogus pronouncement should not be left to ride its waves for so long, without expecting a definite challenge.

Already, I have repeatedly highlighted the fact that they used the terms to demonstrate the concept of a divine relationship and divine 'sonship' of the Messiah without connoting the idea of sex. Here again (predictably) you kept crying that someone show "explain" what they mean! Person wey no dey hear word will continue to miss simple answers!

Whats devine in a relationship and sonship that is shrouded in blatant lie? A Phulani or Phular friend of mine, from Mauritania always joke with me that we, he and I, being black men are from Fir'awn of Egypt. I always deny it and argue with him that he, a Phular may be, but I am a Yoruba man, the remoteness that I am related to Fir'awn bloodline is not clear or does not exist.


His response, always is that we are from Adam and Fir'awn was also from Adam (AS). He is right, except that the reality is that Adam (AS) is the Root and Trunk of the tree of Mankind. I as a Yoruba man belong to a twig from that tree, but on a different subbranch, if not a major branch, but definitely different from what this Mauritania friend came from and definitely, different from what Fir'awn of Egypt, the good, the bad and the ugly of them came from.

My point is this, relationship and or sonship that is mislabeled or misdefined, begs reality and the honesty of the matter. The dishonesty among the Christians is so profound that they boldly move ahead to claim that Jesus is God Almighty Himself.


While at the same time they ignore Jesus declarations, which are contrary to this claim! Jesus in the pages of the Bible escoriated a woman, saying to this woman, right there on the spot, "Why call me (Jesus) good? The Only One who is good is God!" Jesus also declared in Mark 12 Verse 29 that God and Lord, he has is the same as what his audience has.


In essence, Jesus pointed to tha fact that he is not that good as the woman might have thought, but only God Almighty is that Good. And his saying to the listening crowd, that he and they have the same Lord God! What is it that confound you, Davidylan? I am sure these verses are written in plain and simple enough English for a person living among the english speakers of Europe and the North America and the Australian continent to understand, without any intepretation! Why intepreting what is so simple and plain as "John comes to school?"





[Quote]
In the above case, does the "title" connote "sexual intercourse"? And if it does not, does that not negate your assumption of forcing "sex" into everything? Na wah for you![/quote]Since there is no sex, where do you get your sonship? The absence of sex negates sonship. Sonship means progeny. Someone to carry the dynasty. But God does not die! The same God existed longtime before He decided, all by Himself to create man! The same God will exist, all by Himself, without ever diminishing after all things, man and Angels and genie, etc included are perished by His command! How do we bring a son to God Almighty Who has no need of it? God declares in Surah Azumar, commanding Muhammad (AS); Say, if God has a son I would have been the first to worship him (that son)!

Read that verse in the Qur'an, it gives a tone of negation, that is, it is impossible for Him to have a son, because He does not need any. But if He had had a son, I (Muhammad) would have been informed of it, because I am His last Prophet and messenger and I am informed of all things, all the things that happened before me, now during my prophetship and messengership and the things that will happen, even after I am dead and up to the end of time.


I would have been therefore commanded to worship that son, so that other people, the believers would have been made aware to worship him! This is the very essence of that verse, which clearly states God does not have any children or a son! The Jews will deny that they are children of God, even though the Bible stitches that label on them. This is another proof that what the Bible says in many cases are different from the realities.

In surah Nisaa, Allah declares, further, in verses171 and 172, thet the Christians, as a people of the Book should speak the truth and not lie about God. They should know that Jesus is no more than an apostle, messenger prophet of Allah. And if God had wanted a son, could He not have chosen from the Angels who are near or dear to Him, obedience to Him, without any "will" of their own, like what the humans have? In surah Al Maidah, Allah spoke about Jesus, using his mother as the very base of understanding the nature of Jesus, human being.

Anyhow, just a little concrete reminder about the divine relationship where it is clear that "sexual intercourse" was not intended:

In conclusion, there is no proof that there is any sonship, even though the stubbornness to insist that there are continue to cloud peoples judgement. I have asked for evidence from the bible that will stand strong against negating arguments from the same Bible, no christian have been able to produce it! Is this not an endictment against your very conscience, saying sometime thats unbelievable, which you can produce any evidence except Fairytale? Mazaje, this is for you my man. lol.

"And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith the LORD, Israel is my son, even my firstborn" -- Exodus 4:22

Bingo! First this verse proves that Israel who is a son of his father,Isaac, is even claimed as first son of the Biblical God! You then have to conclude that sonship, "begotten?" or not, does not truly mean that there is a father/son relationship with God! The Christians have argued blindly that because Jesus did not have a human father, he must be son of God. Well, those sperm donor clinic babies don't have known fathers, too, and none is requested by the women or mothers.


But more importantly is the fact that the Christians diminish the capability of God to create a man without a father, but just with a mother that must be made plain. But He created Eve through a father, Adam, without a mother and no pregnancy! And Queenisha, I guess the above statement about Israel being first son destroys your idea that just because the Bible is first before the Qur'an, the Qur'an must have copied from the Bible!

You will see therefore that if Israel is declared as first son, he must exist before every other son or sons.Then Jesus must not have existed before his Big Brother, Israel, the first son! lol. If he did, and am sure that you will argue it so, then know that AlQur'an was alway in Laumafuth, a book or tablet already preserved as mother of all Books, in Heaven, long time, before human was created. And very very long time before verses f it began to be revealed to Muhammad to answer and address the issues of mankind! How is my brother, the Big Oga? The man who truly beget your children!

That was Moses' declaration to Pharaoh. Did Moses assume your idea of "sexual intercourse" when he declared that Israel was the firstborn of the LORD? Of course not! Such an idea did not once cross the mind of even Pharaoh - because it simply was understood to mean that Israel was in a divine covenant relationship with God. That is why we read in other texts that: "Ye are the children of the LORD your God" (Deut. 14:1).

And we did not read devine sonship, in the above explanation. But dubiously, it was inserted to illustrate that special something, higher than just devine relationship with God! This is deceit and even though as it is introduced in a subtle manner, it is completely wrong! And we read that many are children of God in the Torah! Are these children don't know that there is no true father/children realation? Of course they know! But the Christians turn it around when it comes to Jesus and God. They insist that God is the very and actual father of Jesus! Now thats a lie!

This is why it is important to read contextually before nosing your ignorance.

In all the contextual reading, no one in good conscience must conclude that Jesus is the very and actual son of God! I guess only dubious opinions may lean or lead in that direction, to conclude that Jesus is anything but a human prophet and messenger!

I guess admirer of noble person can attach him, as a means of honoring him, with a title of being the child/son of a greater entity. The Yorubas are called Omo Oduduwa. Yet Oduduwa could not have been the only male in the entourage of the people who were the ascentors of the present day Yorubas. We can see how a word could be use to honor, but later generations may actually take it not as honor any longer, but the reality of the matter.

Thats even between humans. Is that a parallel with God? Does God need a child, when he is the Creator of all? When He actually created Adam in a way that He had not done before, even though He was always capable of it, before hand. He also created Eve,by a process that you may say it is human cloning, except that he changed the gender so that they can be sexual partners, in order to bring about the race of mankind.

Finally, the yoruba adage, ti a ba ka eru, inu eru abaje. Could Jesus be anything other than the slave of Allah, even though a great number of humans say he was a son? This is the crock of the matter! Queenisha, Davidylan, where are you guys?

Will somebody be bold enough to explain to us what is meant by beget/begotten in the Bible? Please use easy to understand english. Am eager to read from any pundit. Davidylan and Queenisha, where are you?

@Mazaje: Take a crack at the beget/begotten idea from the Bible. Hey man, I want you to try to convince me. I wanna get out of what you call state of delutional. Can you help and please explain away? You can do it, can you? Its all a farce! Abi? lol,

So who can tell me what beget means? Who can tell me that a father begets a son and he did not sleep with his mother? Queenisha, can you try, since there are many begottened children with you? Now tell me what beget means in plain english. Please use example that are familiar with humans. Is there anyway that a male overshadows a female and a baby comes out afterward, except, it is a soffisticated way of saying sex took place when being overshadowed?

Someday, I will overshadow my wife and when a baby comes out, I will argue that there was no sex, even though as the boy may be my spitting image! I wonder anybody will buy that? And all those people who call me their father, did i sire/beget them, in the only way it can truy happen?

Finally there is no overshadow, as a word in Qur'an. I remember the american military evangelitical christian who was foolish enough to demostrate how to overshadow a woman to late Shekh Ahmed Deedat (ra). People can see that all his procedure of overshadow is exactly what is expected in sex. Well, the christian may deny that they do not mean sex, but when they continue to insist that there is someone begets, then that someone must have mounted to be able to beget.

Inshort, if there is no sex, there is no begotten! Any clain therefore of begotten son is a farce. Its raining heavily in New York City, right now. Thats the reality. To then say that it is ocean that has just found its way into the street of Manhattan, will be false. I can see the rain water strands coming from a higher level from from the sky. Reality. You can not be a begotten, except sex s involved.

When the Bible refers to a clan of people as sons of God, we will see that they are just foolishly or zealotly label as such. The same applies to Jesus, in the begottened classification.

Davidylan, Queenisha, am restless. lol. Where are you guys? Warriors, come out to playyee.

@Missy B: I quite agree with you. My statement is rhetoric to Davidylan about his past statement about this board. By the way, no one is stopping the non-muslims from contributing in the so called muslim board. Its a free world, with the essential element is simply, telling the truth, even when youre in disagreement.

@Mazaje: I have many children calling me Dad! But only two are sired by me. So these two bear my family name. The rest bear the family names of the people who sired them, who mounted or overshadowed their mothers. Am I truly the father of the other children who were sired by others? Absolutely not.

If I claim therefore that I sired the children, apart from mine two, then I must have not really meant it in the true nature of how human understands it. The children do know that am not truly their father. If their mothers are not my wives just before they took in, then I have performed illegal sex acts or for sure, those who claim that am their father among them, along with their mother who planted such idea into their heads have not told us the truth. Considering that I did not mount or overshadow any of the mothers! I can not see how it can be humanly possible.

Many, is more than 1. But when it is in the context of today's Children of Israel population of over 13 M, worldwide, the many must be insignificant! By an large, the Kennessett of Isael has no Christian Jewish member! The Jews have only One God. The Jews don't have more than that. They may say that they believe in jest, which many reform jews do, but they will never claim that God is more than 1!

Hurt could mean disappointed. Allah is disappointed in the children of Adam, who are able to do for others, in a way of seeking the pleasure of God, or for God's sake, but refuse to do so. Thats what is meant by hurt here. Not that there is a need for soothing or dressing up a wound, because of the hurt. Allah is Greater and Holier than that. It is His way of telling believers, you are obligated, from the sustenance that you have to care for the less fortunate, for Allah's sake. God is free of all needs.

Suppositions and more suppositions! The truth of the matter is that reality is reality. Assumptions do not translate to realities, always.

@Tpia: Before you run to far with the topic, please tell me what is the meaning of beget, apart from sired? I remember as a child when the Christians will say that Mary said that she was overshadowed. Please as a man or woman, get into your private room and think about what it is meant by being overshadowed!

When you say beget and you are now running away from the sexuality intent, i wonder if any really know what beget really means! I beget my sons. InshaAllah, there are still more children to be begottened by me.

Finally, can there be anyone greater than the greatest Prophet, the Lover of the Most Merciful? Muhammad was both a prophet and a messenger. David was a prophet, only! I will like to have a referenced source where it is mentioned by Prophet Muhammad (AS), that Prophet David (AS) was the best of worshippers among mankind, including the generations of Jesus (AS) and that of Muhammad (AS)!

Making a statement to cloud the ignorants that one is making a valid argument, without expecting to be tested, is just not acceptable. Just the same way that I have asked if anyone being called son of God is truly His son, since his mother must therefore have to be at just before pregnancy be a legal wife, to the father of the child! I am the son of my late father, (ra) and no other father for me. I will not claim what is false, even if it looks very attractive.