Rashduct4luv:


I once discussed this with Taiwo here. It's like you are gradually embracing Atheism poco a poco.

If you are confused then ask those that know.

1 – Dhu’l-Qarnayn who is mentioned in the Qur’aan is not Alexander the Macedonian or Greek who built Alexandria. This Alexander is the one who died at the age of 33, as mentioned in the Christian books. He lived 323 years before the birth of the Messiah (peace be upon him).

Dhu’l-Qarnayn who is mentioned in the Qur’aan lived at the time of Ibraaheem (peace be upon him), and it is said that he became Muslim at the hands of Ibraaheem (peace be upon him), and he went on pilgrimage to the Ka’bah walking. The scholars differed concerning him, as to whether he was a Prophet or a righteous slave and just king, but they agree that he was a Muslim, a monotheist (believer in Tawheed) and one who was obedient to Allaah.

The correct view is to refrain from stating what he was, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “I do not know whether Tubba’ was a Prophet or not, and I do not know whether Dhu’l-Qarnayn was a Prophet or not.”

(Narrated by al-Haakim and al-Bayhaqi; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Jaami’, no. 5524).

2 – The difference between this righteous slave, and the Macedonian Alexander who was a kaafir, is well known to Muslim scholars. Ibn Katheer (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in al-Badaayah wa’l-Nahaayah (1/493):

“It was narrated that Qutaadah said: Alexander was Dhu’l-Qarnayn and his father was the first of the Caesars, and he was one of the descendants of Saam ibn Nooh (Shem the son of Noah). As for Dhu’l-Qarnayn, he was Alexander son of Philip… ibn Roomi ibn al-Asfar ibn Yaqaz ibn al-‘Ees ibn Ishaaq ibn Ibraaheem al-Khaleel. This is the genealogy of him given by al-Haafiz ibn ‘Asaakir in his Taareekh. (He is known as) the Macedonian, the Greek, the Egyptian, builder of Alexandria, on the events of whose life the Greeks based their calendar. He came much later than the first Alexander. This was approximately three hundred years before the Messiah. The philosopher Aristotle was his minister and he is the one who killed Daar ibn Daar (Darius) and humiliated the kings of Persia and invaded their land.

We have drawn attention to him because many people think that they are one and the same and that the one who is mentioned in the Qur’aan is the one whose minister was Aristotle, which has resulted in a lot of mistakes and far-reaching corruption. The former was a righteous believing slave and a just king, and the latter was a mushrik and his minister was a philosopher. There were more than two thousand years between the two, so what comparison can there be between them? They are not alike at all and they have nothing in common, except in the mind of a fool who does not know anything.”

Once again you are mistaken again. Our Dhu’l-Qarnayn was a Muslim. Not a Zoroastrian or a Mushrik. And we need no external sources to complete our Books for us.

tintingz:


This does not nullify the gospel originality we see today, it's just the interpretations the people made up.

Muslims themselves cannot produce the so called original gospel.

And thirdly, we don't even see Christians fighting and killing each other because of this, but in the Muslim world they are fighting and killing themselves because of their doctrines that differ.

Empiree:
I wanted to strike through this nonesense you just posted because you don't make sense. I have l showed you clear illustration and this is all you could come up with?.

For 2 Christians to be Trinitarian and Unitarian while reading the same Bible is a major flaw. It is like saying Jesus is human and God at the same time. Or Jesus is limited and unlimited at the same time. If you don't see anything wrong with this then you have serious comprehension problem.

Oh what am I even saying since you believe FSM is your god how are you gonna understand self.

And in this age of information it is pathetic for a guy like you in 2019 still believe crisis in majority Muslim countries is based on religion or different doctrines?. Chai

tintingz:


Let me make it clearer to you.

We have a religion Supermanism and our book is the Superman comic, I said Superman can fly without cape and my fellow person said he can't fly without the cape and we both read the same comic, does this mean the Superman comic is fake?

Empiree:
dumbest post ever

Empiree:
First all, get your fact right. Tafsir(explanation of the meaning of Quran). Tawil(interpretation of the meaning of Qur'an). There is different btw the two.

Example of tasfir, if I suddenly hit a car in front of me and the victim calls the police, police come and I will try to explain what and how it happened.

Example of Tawil, if I say he "kicks the bucket". I will now interpret what that means. Neither tasfir not tawil changes the text of the Qur'an. Muslims don't have to agree with xyz tafsir of Ayah. There may be others credible explanations. Then you pick whichever is close to the meaning of Qur'an. But to reject the Ayah itself is another thing entirely.

Empiree:
this is Creed not tafsir or Tawil. This is rejection of certain portion of the Bible. Anyone who rejects certain portion of Quran is a disbeliever.

Empiree:
this is flaw with Christianity. If a Christian sect rejects mainstream Creed like Sonship or divinity of Jesus it means they don't believe that aspect. Therefore, we look into why they reject that. If their argument is based on 'Bible doesn't say that' while other CHRISTIANs believe that then, Bible is the problem.

Empiree:
no sects in Islam reject major Creed. Where differences lie are non paradise threatening issues. 73 sects Hadith is subjective to tafsir.

Empiree:
kindly point out which sect of Islam reject

Shahadah

Salat

Ramadan

Zakat

Hajj

If any sect rejected any of these is not in the fold of Islam. These are simple required and obligatory practices that must not be rejected. So which muslim group have you seen rejected these?

true2god:
This is a suggestion and not a classical way of interpreting the koran. Most of the ayah in the koran will make no sense without the hadith and when two contradictory hadith are used to interpret a single ayah, then there a problem. You can't just brush aside a serious flaw in Islam as 'nothing' knowing fully well that this singular variation can make 2 muslims go after each other's throat, especially in the Arab world. Most of the religious violence in the middlle east has to do with variance in the interpretation of the quran; and this interprattion also has to what with what the hadith (what I personally call 'gossips') says or did not say.

Creed or no creed, muslims call one other hypocrites for disagreeing with a portion of the quran, based on the hadith used, and often kill each other for that. For the fact that this is not common in Yorubaland does not mean it doesnt happen almost daily in the arab world. If a JW disagree with the mainstream christian creed his life is still safe but an Ahmadiya will lose his life for same reason in Pakistan.

Islamic creed is nowhere found in the quran (you can show me the ayah where the creeds are clearly written). Creeds are mostly religious traditions which serves as the official doctrinal position. Of course there is nowhere you can see the word 'shahada' in the quran. It was a later incorporation to standardize Islamic beliefs. However the good thingis that you cannot see any christian killing a JW for disagreeing with the mainstream christian doctrine (what you call creed) but I can give you many examples where muslims fight and kill each other over doctrinal differences.

What do you mean by 'non paradise threatening issues'? Are you saying the hajj, zakat and shahada are paradise threatening issues? Do you mean if a muslim refuse to pay the zakat and deliberately deny hajj as not going to paradize?

I don't get you bro. Are you disputing your prophet? All the 73 sects, as you rightly said, belief in all the 5-pillars (or creeds) of Islam but only 1 is actually following the real sunnah of the prophet. It seems you are confusing yourself or deliberately misrepresenting your prophet who said only 1, out of 73, sects on Islam will be the true one. Going by mathematical probability, according to your prophet, the probability that you are on the right track is 1/73 or 0.0136 or 1.4%. There is no ambiguity at all, the chance that you will make al-janah going by what your prophet said is 1.4% which is too small for someone that strife to go to heaven when he leaves this world.

Empiree:
PROPAGANDA!!! How does this correlate with tafsir and tawil?

Empiree:
No evidence.. Just talk talk and talk. Show us which muslim sect that doesn't believe in shahadah, salat, Ramadan, zakat, Hajj?. If you can not point it out we are wasting out time here.

Empiree:
I regret responding to you to begin with. You are not saying anything.

Empiree:
only sensible thing you ever said. Yes, if a Muslim denies zakat or Hajj, this is major disbelief. If he believes them but doesn't have capacity or means to fullfil them that's a different story.

Empiree:
i have told you that 73 sect Hadith is subjective to tafsir. Some muslims take the Hadith face value but this is wrong. Islam is one. No Muslim sect deny obligatory practices in Islam. This Hadith you are trying to scheme is only telling Muslims to avoid sectarianism. If you insist this Hadith enforces Muslims breakups into 73, then, what do you think of this Qur'anic Ayah which enforces unity
Sura Al-Imran verse 103?.

This Hadith forbids sects or factions. Help is ooo

Empiree:

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

true2god:
Summarize please; the network is not stable here. I cant watch youtube now.

sino:


Brother mane, after we have congratulated you that "o da bo o" you have left the Ummah, you come show again?! I know you are at liberty to post anywhere, I had thought you wouldn't have anything to do with us again, but I see you are looking for validation or you are proselytizing your new found (lack of) faith?!

Anyways, let me just say that seven heavens, the meaning and understanding can rightly be understood from the Qur'an! But I know you just like taking one verse, and find a way to suite your opinion regardless of what other verses might suggest. Please also note that the Qur'an had made mention of creations which cannot be SEEN by our naked eyes! Today a lot has been said about multiverse, dark matter, black hole etc. by scientists, but can we see them?!

If the verse states that "Do you not see how Allah has created the seven heavens, one above another", if you can't see the remaining six, at least you can see the one you look up to, does it look like something that anyone could have done except for the Creator?!

Bro mane, have you forgotten this verse of the Qur'an?

"O company of jinn and mankind, if you are able to pass beyond the regions of the heavens and the earth, then pass. You will not pass except by authority [from Allah ]." (Qur'an 55:33)

Hello! Jinn are also creations of Allah (SWT) and they are amongst us, and we can't see them! Again, Allah (SWT) has given permission to explore the heavens, knowing fully well that man would definitely venture into space, and we are "SEEING" things that are mind blowing! Giving credence to the truth that Allah (SWT) is indeed the creator, because there isn't any better explanation for all these!

Finally, Allah (SWT) states in the Qur'an:

"It is Allah who has created seven heavens and of the earth, the like of them. [His] command descends among them so you may know that Allah is over all things competent and that Allah has encompassed all things in knowledge." (Qur'an 65:12)

The 7th century Muslims understood that there are creations of Allah (SWT) that cannot be seen by the naked eyes except by permission of Allah, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist, and if they explained it the way they understood it, using analogy of a tower with dome layers doesn't mean they were wrong and that we can't use our own analogy from modern science to explain this!

All in all, if you want to see the seven heavens, you should look at the one you can see! Do you have better explanations for how it came to be?!

Rashduct4luv:


But your family still follows what you call fairy tales. Omo buruku loma fi owo osi juwe ile baba e.

Funny you can be an atheist online and hypocrite among your kith.

The parable of a black sheep...

akure1stson:


Chai, you are seriously pained here.

Rashduct4luv:


But your family still follows what you call fairy tales. Omo buruku loma fi owo osi juwe ile baba e.

Funny you can be an atheist online and hypocrite among your kith.

The parable of a black sheep...

whitelotus:



Wow.... this is so low. Insulting an atheist"s family..

Tomorrow, you will come here and claim that you are the victim and that atheists are the one insulting you.

Rashduct4luv:


Keep looking for something to smear people's image. You will soon get what you deserve just like your friend 'Mubarak".

His family are Muslims yet he comes online to release his tensions... i just sent him to begin the charity at home.

whitelotus:


His family is none of your business. Address his arguments and leave family at home.

I know that you are a radical and barbaric muslim, that is why you want me arrested like Bala Mubarak.

Rashduct4luv:


An adage says "Charity begin at Home". You can't leave your Muslim family at home and start criticising Muslims online.
How do you define hypocrisy?

whitelotus:



And what makes you think that he does not talk to his family about his beliefs?

Do you have any proof? Assuming makes you an ass

Rashduct4luv:


Mr. Defender why you carry his matter on your head like this? Do u even know where the matter started? It wasn't from this post here.
You are just too forward. Hopefully you will follow Mubarak soon.

whitelotus:


This Mubarak case will cause embarrassment to islam in Nigeria. So, I'm not worried.

As a Muslim that lives in the west, you know many Yoruba muslims who come from Christian families and vice versa. So, are you saying that muslims from such families cannot talk about islam to others until they convert their whole family?

Rashduct4luv:


Even if Mubarak is released today surely he has learnt a lesson. His supporters are at their respective homes supporting him on internet over a cup of tea.

Where did i say this?

Rashduct4luv:


Even if Mubarak is released today surely he has learnt a lesson. His supporters are at their respective homes supporting him on internet over a cup of tea.

Where did i say this?

Rashduct4luv:


An adage says "Charity begin at Home". You can't leave your Muslim family at home and start criticising Muslims online.
How do you define hypocrisy?

whitelotus:



And what makes you think that he does not talk to his family about his beliefs?

Do you have any proof? Assuming makes you an ass

tintingz:


His family knows he's an atheist, this isn't the first time he was held, his family actually held him around 4 years ago or so before people protested for his release from his family. He's an outspoken Atheists and I commend his courage for that, for him to come out in a Muslim dominated society where it's dangerous and Muslims there are known to oppressive non-muslims.

I hope he's safe from those dangerous Muslims and the Religion.

tintingz:


Yes, he learnt that Islam is a religion of oppression.

whitelotus:



Mubarak has been locked up before. So, this will only make him more determined.

If you dont believe that Yoruba muslims should convert the christian sides of their family, why bring up the fact that an atheist comes from a muslim family?


As for Mubarak Bala, see the pic below and realise what muslims should think about his case;

Rashduct4luv:


And your families that practices Islam are what?

A. Oppressors.

B. A.

C. B.

D. All of the above.

E. None of the above.

Rashduct4luv:


Stop the rants. Go over there you'll and help him.

Rashduct4luv:


Why not join him in prison to celebrate your brotherhood? All this online audio love isn't appropriate.