₦airaland Forum

dudebuck:
when Jesus started his ministry, where did he start from? BTW the bible is the guide so we show people what is written in it and allow them to conclude ON THEIR OWN.

My question is: who made the JW the judge of other churches? You are making a wrong comparism if you attempt to place Jesus and his disciples in the same league with the JW They healed the sick, raised the dead and did many wonderful things which the JW of today denied it's do-able.

Bro take it or leave it, the JW is an anti-christian body and you know it unless you choosed to be deceptive

dudebuck:
You live in nigeria, so chances are that you are a Christian, BTW judgement starts from the house of the Lord not outside.

So who made JW the judge over other Christian denominations? The JW governing body?

removetheturban:
Bro, are we supposed to feel sorry for you that you have no pride in your own beliefs or your God? No one stops you from priding in your religion. As for the JW, we pride in our God, Jehovah and we bear his name.
God so kind you did not claim to have sponsored the publishing of the publications. Well, if you have the energy, why not get into the publishing of expository materials?
Well, why not do it and prove your point instead of supposing? Bro, how many persons have you helped to convert to Christianity?

Taking pride in ones religion does not include, and should never include, a bimonthly publication to malign and ridicule other people's belief systems, which the JW are notorious for. In any large organization and system, Christianity inclusive, there is bound to be variations in beliefs and interpretations of the scripture. Hence Christianity have many sects and doctrines, and there will never be a centralized belief system.

Where the issue lies is when JW boasted to be the 'one and only true religion' which make their claim bogus and unreasonable to a sane mind. It is on record that JW has the official policy of 'enhancing' and 'modifying' doctrines which they always justify by claiming that 'the light are becoming brighter'. There are many JW official doctrine, accepted and published by the founder of JW (Russell) which were nullified by his predecessor, Rutherford. How can JW be a mouthpiece of God when doctrines are continually changed to accommodate present beliefs. That's how JW can be so inconsistent.

If the JW can be so inconsistent in their own beliefs, what moral justification do they have to condemn the entire Christian religion, except the JW? Why aren't the JW converting the Muslims, atheist, freethinkers, etc, to JW but are quick to bounce on people of other Christian denominations to recruit new JW members. How many kingdom halls do we have in Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Iran, north Korea, Uzbekistan, etc. If you can be honest with a genuine answer I will appreciate you. In most (or all) of the countries I listed, I can assure you that there is none. If, however, another Christian organization took the risk and steps to establish a sizable Christian presence in any of those countries, the JW will quickly go there and, not to preach to the non- Christian, start discouraging the converts from continuing with Christianity but follow the watchtower organizations. This is exactly how JW works.

JW is never established to win souls for Christ but to souls away from Christ. They are like the biblical 'wolves in sheep clothing', the real enemies of Christianity. In international politics, they are called the 'fifth columnists'. Islam made their hatred for Christianity open, the JW made their hatred for Christianity hidden.

alBHAGDADI:
Mathew 28:19
Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:


Did you read the above verse? That was Jesus Christ speaking to his disciples and giving them a great commission. They are to go into all parts of the world and preach the gospel to every human on earth.

Today, the group called Jehovah's Witnesses often pride themselves saying they are the only ones doing that assignment given by Jesus Christ. Whenever they make such statement, they hardly get any objection cos most people have at one time had them knock on their door to preach to them. I also fell for that talk from them which made me see them as the only ones fulfilling Christ's commission. It made me feel bad about folds in Christianity cos I can't recall the last time someone approached me to preach.

Over the years, I've come to realize how much of a falsehood the statement is and how it positions them to reap from where they did not sow.
Where were the JW when Christians were facing challenges spreading the gospel in difficult parts of the world? Do you know the trouble faced by the missionaries who brought Christianity to Africa and even South America? They battled malaria, diseases, voodoo, ritualists, hostile communities, pagan beliefs and culture, wickedness, cannibalism etc. Yet, God helped them succeeded. That's why we have Christianity in Africa and other parts of the world. Did the JW face any of those or were part of those missionaries? NO.

When the missionaries had succeeded in establishing Christianity in major places, the JW now showed up when conditions had become favorable. What they are doing now is going from door to door, trying to convert Christians and turn them to JW. It now becomes nauseating that they are boasting of being the only organization that preaches from door to door. Where was the JW organization when conditions were harsh?

If they really want sensible people to accept their claims, then they should go establish in a ground that is hostile. They should try and establish Kingdom Halls in hostile Islamic countries like Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan etc. They should go preach from door to door and see if they will last a day. Yet, we have Christian bodies in those countries going through the storm of persecution in those countries.

The Europe where JW are at peace today, do they know what the Catholic Church faced before Christianity could be established there?

So, before a JW boasts to you of how is Organization are the only ones preaching from door to door, let him know that they were never around when conditions were harsh and hostile.

You are right. JW is an organization set up primarily to oppose established Christian Churches and doctrines; they have no business with non-christians. I have spent more than 10 years studying the JW's 'AWAKE' and 'WATCHTOWER' magazines and come to conclusion that they are filled with Christian-biased messages and doctrines, twisting the Bible to conform to their 'what the Bible really teaches'. The JW magazines with never attack Islam, Hinduism, Budism, etc, never, but will spend all their energy attacking the Catholics, the Orthodox and the Pentecostal churches, mostly in a rather subtle ways.

On a political note, they attack the German Nazis of events that took place almost 80 years ago, and how the JW members suffered in their hands, as if no other human beings suffered in world war 2. I am 100% sure if the Nazis had won the second world war, their current magazines won't attack the Nazis but the allied forces for crime against humanity. This is one of the things that make the JW very deceptive and cunny.

They have stopped knocking at my door when I challenged one of them with facts, points and scholarly evidences, even taking them back to their own history. I didn't ask them to stop coming but they used their brains wisely seeing the futility of engaging me. To make matter worse, it seems they even tell other witnesses to avoid my house completely; they knock my neighbour's doors but always miraculously avoiding my doors.

Lirqur:
How don't you get? We believe in Jesus (pbuh) But he is not the Lord, He can never be only Allah is Lord. Only He is God. No Other. You Christians should be grateful. Allah's mercy is all we are all benefiting from.

You will agree with me that the Islamic version of Jesus, in a computer programming language, can be called Jesus 2.0. The Islamic Jesus (2.0) never existed and its the imagination of Mohammed and his sahabas.

If I say I also believe in Mohammed but he is not a prophet but a farmer in Mecca, will I make sense to a Muslim? The same way a Mohammed who was a farmer never existed, an Islamic Jesus never existed as well. Islam is 100% about Mohammed and allahh is just a dormant partner in Islam. The real and the most important actor in Islam is Mohammed. Remove Mohammed from the picture and there will be no Islam.

Mohammed was an illiterate, together with his sahabas. Mohammed himself confessed that Muslim nations are nations of illiterates. See Mohammed's own statement below:

Sahih bukahri Volume 3, Book 31, Number 137 :
Narrated by Ibn 'Umar
The Prophet said, "We are an illiterate nation; we neither write, nor know accounts. The month is like this and this, i.e. sometimes of 29 days and sometimes of thirty days."

If Mohammed himself admitted they were illiterates (an ignorant people) and called the Christians the people of the book (educated people), why do you take the words of an illiterate man on its face value?

Abdulgaffar22:
Christians are programmed to believe that THE WHOLE of the Bible is divine word of God: yet Paul wrote extensively and gave judgments on the issue of marriage and divorce without being inspired by God- " But to the rest, I (PAUL), NOT THE LORD, say: If any brother has a wife who does not believe, and she is willing to live with him, let him not divorce her...... Now concerning virgins, I HAVE NO COMMANDMENT FROM THE LORD, yet I give judgment as one whom the Lord in His mercy has made trustworthy.(1st Corinthians 7:12-25) You see here how Paul is saying that he is using his best personal judgement,and that what he was writing is not directly from God. Why would God “inspire” Paul to say that his words were NOT from Him? Have you now seen that Bible is a mixture of word of God and word of men? It is not stated in any verse that EVERY WORD of the Bible is word of God. In fact, the author of the book of Luke wrote as follows: “IT SEEMED GOOD TO ME ALSO, having had perfect understanding of all things from the beginning, to write to you an orderly account, most excellent Theophilus (Luke 1:3)”. You can see again that St Luke wrote his Gospel not because he was inspired by God but because it seemed good to him to write such an account due to his thought of having a sound knowledge on the matter. In fact, he wrote his Gospel not to the general humanity (like you and I) but to one specific influential person he addressed as "most excellent Theophilus" as clearly seen in the verse cited above. The only verse often used by Christians to prove that every word of the Bible is word of God is word of Paul in 2nd Timothy 3:16 which says “All scripture is given by inspiration of God”. But how can we believe that the term “All scripture” used by Paul refers to the entire Bible especially when the author of this very verse confessed that he wrote some things which were not actually inspired by God? Besides, at the time this verse was written by Paul, most of the New Testament books were yet to be penned down talk less of putting them together; therefore there is no any reason to believe that Paul has the other books of New Testament in mind when he was writing; “All scripture is given by inspiration of God". Even if we assume that this statement written by Paul refers to the entire Bible, there is still need for external evidence to prove that this very verse written by Paul is also divinely inspired by God. The fact that a friend of yours simply tell you “I AM NOT LYING" is not enough to prove that he has actually spoken the truth about the matter he was telling you. What if the statement “I AM NOT LYING” is another lie? Of course, this principle also applies to 2nd Timothy 3:16, 2nd peter 1:21 and any other verses used by Christians to claim divine origin for the entire Bible. The fact that these verses declare that the Bible writers were inspired by God and guided by the holy spirit are not enough to prove that the entire Bible is word of God because these verses themselves also require their own external evidence to prove their divinity; just like the statement “I AM NOT LYING” require its own external evidence to prove that this very statement itself is not another lie on its own.( Hope you have really gotten my point.) The only exception to this rule is when we have a verse COMING DIRECTLY from God's mouth. This kind of verse where God would be speaking to us directly using the first person pronouns like " I, ME,MY, WE, US etc" does not require any external evidence to establish its divine origin because God of truth would never allow a deliberate liar to impersonate Him reasonably for a long time ( Jeremiah 28:1-17, Psalm 101:7, Deuteronomy 18:20) just like a man of truth would never allow his friend-talk less of his enemy-to impersonate him. Therefore, the statements like "All scripture is given by inspiration of God (2nd Timothy 3:16)", “For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spoke as they moved by the holy spirit (2nd Peter 1:21)” and the likes cannot be used to establish the divine origin for all the books in the Bible because 1. These verses are not coming directly from God's mouth. 2. These verses are not specific enough for anyone to conclude that they refer exclusively to the entire Bible. However, such statements like " All scriptures in this Bible is given by inspiration from Me”. These holy men were moved by My spirit to speak what is written inside this Bible” and the likes can be used to establish divine origin for all the books in the Bible because they are sufficient to prove their divine origin. However, such statements coming directly from God’s mouth and at the same time establishing the divine origin for all the books in the Bible is nowhere to be found inside the Bible. Even the word “BIBLE” cannot be found within the Bible; talk less of a verse coming directly from God’s mouth which would establish the divine origin for all the books in the Bible. Therefore, Bible still maintains its identity as being the word of God mixed together with the word of men; there are some verses which came directly from God’s mouth (like “If My people, who are called by My name will humble themselves, and pray and seek My face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sins and will heal their land(2 Chronicles 7:14)” and yet there are some verses which came directly from men( like the word of Paul and St Luke quoted at the beginning) . Among those verses in the Bible which came directly from God's mouth, there is none that establish divine origin for all the books in the Bible. That is, statements like “This Bible was inspired by Me or these people were moved by My spirit to write down all the books in the Bible" are nowhere to be found inside the Bible. The reason why such a verse is important and necessary to be present in the Bible is that, unlike Qur’an which is a single book, Bible is not a single book but a collection of books written by different authors at different times. Therefore, it is either each of every book in the Bible contains its own evidence for its divine origin or there is a verse uniting all the books in the Bible together as a single entity called Bible and then establishing divine origin for the whole of such Bible. However, not all the books in the Bible contain such verses coming directly from God’s mouth. Again, there is no a single verse in the Bible uniting all the books in the Bible together as an entity called Bible( i:e the word “Bible” is not found inside the Bible) talk less of a direct verse from God’s mouth that would establish divine origin for the whole of the Bible. This simply shows that selection and compilation of all the books in the Bible was not something commissioned by God Almighty. Therefore, the reason why Catholic Bible contains seven more books than the Protestant Bible is now clear to us. But does the Qur’an suffer similar problem? Certainly not! Beside the fact that Qur’an unite all its part together by making reference to its self as an entity called Qur’an (i:e the word “Qur’an” is found inside the Qur’an) in more than seventy places (in places like Qur’an 17:88, 10:37, 38:1, 47:24, 36:2, 50:1, 59:21 etc); there are also many verses coming directly from God’s mouth which establish the divine origin for the whole of the Qur’an. Examples of such verses are as follows: This is the revelation sent down from the Lord of the worlds. If he (Muhammad-pbuh) had forged some of the sayings concerning Us, We surely should have seized him by his right hand. And then We certainly should have cut off his life artery (Qur’an 69:43-46).
“O children of Israel! Remember My favor which I bestowed upon you, and fulfill your covenant with Me as I fulfill My covenant with you, and fear none but Me. And believe in what I have sent down ( i:e this Qur’an) confirming that which is with you, and be not the first to reject it, nor sell My verses for a small price; and fear Me, and Me alone(Qur’an 2:40-41).
We have not sent down the Qur’an unto you (O Muhammad-pbuh) to cause you distress. But only as a reminder to those who fear God. A revelation from Him who created the earth and the high heavens (Qur’an 20:2-3).
You can see that all the first person pronouns like “Us, We, MY, I, Me” in all the verses of Qur’an quoted above can never be referred CONTEXTUALLY to any other person except God. . Other examples of similar verses can be found in Qur’an 15:9, 12:2-3, 21:10.50, 35:31-32, 17:105-106 16:101-103, 6:92 etc. However, example of such verses “coming directly from God’s mouth which would establish divine origin for the WHOLE of the Bible” cannot be found inside the Bible.

Just as Muslims are programed to believe in whatever Mohammed told them as the truth. Did Mohammed see angel jibril? No.

Did the so-called jibril tell Mohammed he was angel jibril? No.

Did allahh at any time spoke to Mohammed directly? No.

Have any Muslim seen angel jibril? No.

Has any allahh spoke to any Muslim, either by dream or vision? No.

Are Muslims programmed never to doubt or question Muhammad? Yes.

So what's your point in all your epistle? Nothing.

Abdulgaffar22:
'How can you say, "We are wise, for we have the
law of the LORD," when actually the lying pen of
the scribes has handled it falsely (Jeremiah 8:. Have you now seen that it is Bible itself that confess its own corruption. But there are still some truth that God delibrately allowed to be kept inside the Bible. The reason why God allowed the bible to be corrupted is that it is not the final revelation from God. But being the last revelation from God, Quran cannot suffer such corruption because it was God Himself that promise to protect it:" It was We who has revealed the the reminder and We will surely guard it against corruption(Quran 15:9)". Please show me any biblical verse where God promise to protect the whole Bible. In fact, the word Bible is not found inside the bible. This implies that selection and compilation of books in the bible is not commission by God .This explain the reason why catholic bible is seven books more than the protestant bible

That's the most important Islamic Bible verse Muslims apologist have always used to discredit the Bible even when allahh had said he will protect his words, the Torah and the injil inclusive. If the Bible is corrupt, as Muslims are taught to belief, then allahh is not wise and all-knowing as Qur'an falsely claimed. There is nowhere in the Quran that allahh said the torah and the injil had been corrupted. Ok, now let's look at what the hadith say about your Qur'an which was not compiled by Mohammed, but the product of the third al-khalifa nurudeen, the third rightly guided khalifa, Uthman ibn Affan. See hadith below;

Sahih bukhari: Volume 4, Book 52, Number 69 :
Narrated by Anas bin Malik
For thirty days Allah's Apostle invoked Allah to curse those who had killed the companions of Bir-Mauna; he invoked evil upon the tribes of Ral, Dhakwan, and Usaiya who disobeyed Allah and His Apostle. There was reveled about those who were killed at Bir-Mauna a Quranic Verse we used to recite, but it was cancelled later on. The Verse was: "Inform our people that we have met our Lord. He is pleased with us and He has made us pleased".

Where is this verse in the Quran? Uthman, the author of the current Quran, burnt it. See another verse cancelled in the Quran:

Sahih bukhari Volume 3, Book 31, Number 169 :
Narrated by Tawus
Ibn 'Abbas said, "Allah's Apostle set out from Medina to Mecca and he fasted till he reached 'Usfan, where he asked for water and raised his hand to let the people see him, and then broke the fast, and did not fast after that till he reached Mecca, and that happened in Ramadan." Ibn 'Abbas used to say, "Allah's Apostle (sometimes) fasted and (sometimes) did not fast during the journeys so whoever wished to fast could fast, and whoever wished not to fast, could do so."

Sahih bukhari Volume 3, Book 31, Number 170 :
Narrated by Nafi
Ibn 'Umar recited the verse: "They had a choice either to fast or to feed a poor person for every day, and said that the order of this Verse was cancelled.

So how many more Qur'anic verses do you know that had been cancelled? Why did Uthman delete them from his Quran? If a verse in the Quran is cancelled, is the Quran still a complete words of allahh? Muslims, even at the time of Mohammed are illiterates hence the confusion and grammatical errors and structures in the Quran. The Quran makes no common sense to any reasonable man hence Muslims, to solve the problems, decided to rather commit it into memory rather than reading it as a scholarly text.

Even your prophet admit that Muslim nations are filled with illiterates: see hadith below:

Sahih bukahri Volume 3, Book 31, Number 137 :
Narrated by Ibn 'Umar
The Prophet said, "We are an illiterate nation; we neither write, nor know accounts. The month is like this and this, i.e. sometimes of 29 days and sometimes of thirty days."

If Mohammed himself admitted that Muslims are illiterates while he called the Jews and the Christians the people of the book (learned people), why are Muslims still following an illiterate man with an illiterate mentality?

frosbel2:
Yeah right, who are these people deceiving?

Fake Apostle is Guilty as charged.

You are an evil and untruthful soul who needs to change his ways. Your quoting the Bible is mischievous, even the devil quoted from the Bible while tempting Jesus.

Abdulhakeem78:
Please,stop spreading falsehoods.The verse you quoted was extremely spurious.
This is what Allah says in Surah 5 Al-Màidah verse 52:And you see those in whose hearts there is a disease(of hypocrisy),they hurry to their friendship,saying:"we fear lest some misfortune of a disaster may befall us" perhaps Allah may bring a victory or a decision according to His will.Then they will become regretful for what they have been keeping as a secret in themselves.This is the correct translation published by Dar-us -Salam publications Riyadh,Saudi Arabia.
Sir in case you wish to tackle Islam you will need to learn exegesis of Quran which I believe take many years.So taking a verse from the Quran to receive some likes or shares takes you nowhere.

Thank you bro. The correct ayah is Quran 5:51. The ayah asked Muslims not to take the Jews and the Christians as friends and that any Muslim that do take then as friends is part of them hence enemy of allahh and his messenger.

BluntBoy:
This is not about Suleman but about you as a Christian. If Suleman is guilty, what curse should come upon your head?

Except I was not called of God will sunshine return into your life. As from this day on, misfortune shall follow you all the days of your life.

Except I was not sent forth by my Father who lives in Heaven and except the sincere love for the Church does not dwell within me will you find success in life.

Except the Word are not fashioned by He who lives in me will you find helpers in life. As from this day on, you are cursed.

When the curse takes effect in your life, you will learn to be cautious before using your fingers to type curses onto your own worthless head.

Bros I'm equally shocked what nairaland had suddenly become; an avenue for unwanton character defamation, blackmail and all sort of malicious and demonic beings hiding behind the keyboard to destroy people's character. These demons will never see anything good in people.

It's pathetics bro!

[quote author=frosbel2 post=64602525][/quote]Bros, I think you have a problem and you need a psychiatric evaluation. I have seen many mentally unstable people speaking good english. You are not a witness to an incidence, and you have zero impact on the incidence. But what seems to be your part-time hobby is jumping up and down whenever Christianity, a pastor or a church's image is portrayed in a negative way by the media, whether it true or false. You should be ashamed of yourself with your toddler mentality.

You are judging and condemning a man who probably you never met, never seen and might never come in contact with. Guy please get a job and engage yourself more productively.

Rilwayne001:
He's not my friend, i don't even read his threads, maybe I've seen him on some occasions giving you guys a run for your money. I don't even care.



If it starts are end on nairaland, why are you now so perturbed that you are sounding pained?



Yes, thanks. I've been busy with school.

I wasn't perturbed bro, I only hate inconsistency and hypocrisy. I don't care if anyone bashes Christianity, after all I also bash Islam and other belief systems.

Criticism is good, as far as I am concerned, but outright lies, insults and blackmail, which Frosbel2 always employ, is a bad virtue for someone who supposedly wants to 'free the sheeples'. You cannot claim to want to help someone you have formed the habit of maligning, cursing and abusing. That mean you are the one that needs help and not the 'victim' you attempted to help.

You don't make a claim without any substantial proof or evidence. Defamation of character, which Frosbel2 is notorious for, is not what we know the real Frosbel for.

Rilwayne001:
You really need i grow up and stop this foolery. You really new to see people and accept them for who they are. Frosbel had been attacking most Christian doctrine before deleting his main account and adoption this new one. Just because he's no longer a fishbrain Christian like you doesn't make him a Muslim. You guys are so fond of doing this and it doesn't make sense at all. He's still a Christian, albeit a reasonable one.

Oh yes, the enemy of my enemy is my friend. I like your analogy and the quick defence of your unpaid advocate. As long as Christianity is under attack, irrespective of the source, is a source of strength to Islamists.

Whether you admit he is not Frosbel but an imposter Frosbel2, makes no difference, as long as it benefits allahh and his messenger, that's all right. But you know what, the activities, energy, ranting, hatred and anger of the so-called Frosbel2 starts and ends on Nairaland, it has no effect on anyone or the society.

That aside, it been long time no see Mr Rilwan, hope you are kool.

frosbel2:
Wrong, this is the original FROSBEL , I deleted my old account

You are a great liar bro. I have access to all your old topics and post. From the day you registered on NL, as the the fake Frosbel, that is Frosbel2, all your topics and comments are against Christianity, pastors, churches. I have debated Frosbel and I understood his writing and debate pattern.

You are a Muslim, from day one, which is never a crime, but you are a very dishonest dude who stood on the fence of 'neutrality' in order to attack Christianity and at the same time defend Islamic values such as polygamy, Islamic hijrah to Europe and the islamic concept of monotheism.

Guy stop deceiving yourself, come out straight and defend Islam, the same way empire, rilwayne001, abuzola, etc did and some are still doing.

new2012:
Frosbel the atheist.. Abandoing the faith u once held supreme.


suleman, Otobo and the others doesnt bother me. What bothers me is making my life right with mt God.. At the end of the day, its a personal journey

This is not the real frobel but frosbel2, an Islamist, a confusionist and an imposter. He, from the starts, hates anything Christianity.

Lagusta:
Boss, you are arguing with the wrong person, I am not among those that carry religion on their heads like a burden, I just deal with facts.....

I believe you're an atheist, so go and find out more....

Byebye

Thank you for your time. Women's right in Islam is an oxymoron; it is a myth.

tartar9:
Should i quote the book of mormons to talk about your faith?

What's the name/title of the book of Mormon you are talking about? If the Shi'a are not using the sahih bukhari hadith they are justified because sahih bukhari selected narrations that favoured the Sunnis' Islamic beliefs. Most of the narrators in sahih bukhari are actually the enemies of imam Ali and Fatima (Mohammed's daughter).

Why did Imam bukhari exclude the testimonies of Fatima and Imam Ali from the chain of narrators? Fyi, the same narrators (and their supporters) in sahih bukhari were the ones that killed Imam Ali and Mohammed's families (hassan and Hussein) and were equally responsible for the ultimately death of Fatima. If I am to accept Islam tomorrow, I will be a Shi'a because they are more rational in their approach to Islam and equally closer to the Islamic prophet.

Why condemn 220 million Muslims because of slight theological difference? This is a huge human population.

Lagusta:
Hadith.com is a known Shi'ite website and is not meant for the 90% Sunni Muslims we have all over the world....

You don't need to be harsh with your words, the evidence is in the books, and u know it.....

And moreover, I am not a liar, I am not lazy, and I am not an extremist....

Please don't quote me again....

So in essence the shia are not Muslims anymore and have no right to discuss the hadith. So the Iranians and the Iraqis and not Muslims because they are majority Shi'a?

Are are free not to accept any hadith that speak ill of your prophet, but you guys should stop telling us they are weak or fabricated hadith. If you don't have 100% confidence in the hadith why are Muslims still using it as a religious book? After all the compiler of the most trusted hadith, Imam bukhari, is not even an Arab but from Uzbekistan (a Persian).

Lagusta:
Well, I did more research on this and this is what I got....

https://islamqa.info/en/164216

Cc: true2god

You don't want me to quote you again and you put me in copy of your googled-searched link.

Do you believe in the hadith that I provided to be sahih or not?

Oricha62:
Did you read my previous post? Go back and read it before you talk again.

You are not far away from pretending to be a Muslim in order cause trouble.

God forbid! I was never a Muslim and will never be one.

Lagusta:
Well, I have gone through my own Shaheen Muslim, checked and checked again, and I didn't see this hadith in book 4 "the book of prayers"

Since you are spreading false information on nairaland, I would hope the mods give you a lengthy ban....

Take care.....

You are not serious Sir. You can create your Islamic website and apply your draconian sharia rule there. You can even issue a fatwa to that effect.

You are a lying Muslim if you are denying your own hadith and giving caveat in spite of your gross ignorance.

Lazy man, goto hadith.com and look for the reference with reference to sahih Muslim 4:2127. Don't be ashamed of the sunnah of the prophet.

Oricha62:
You lied,
Who is Your oga seun teaching islam ?
The hadith you quote were all false. You are all quoting from your head .

You are a fake and a lying student of Islamic online university (IOU). Read and believe your hadith:

Sahih Muslim 4:2127:

He (Muhammad b. Qais) then reported that it was 'Aisha who had narrated this: Should I not narrate to you about myself and about the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him)? We said: Yes. She said: When it was my turn for Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) to spend the night with me, he turned his side, put on his mantle and took off his shoes and placed them near his feet, and spread the corner of his shawl on his bed and then lay down till he thought that I had gone to sleep. He took hold of his mantle slowly and put on the shoes slowly, and opened the door and went out and then closed it lightly. I covered my head, put on my veil and tightened my waist wrapper, and then went out following his steps till he reached Baqi'. He stood there and he stood for a long time. He then lifted his hands three times, and then returned and I also returned. He hastened his steps and I also hastened my steps. He ran and I too ran. He came (to the house) and I also came (to the house). I, however, preceded him and I entered (the house), and as I lay down in the bed, he (the Holy Prophet) entered the (house), and said: Why is it, O 'Aisha, that you are out of breath? I said: There is nothing. He said: Tell me or the Subtle and the Aware would inform me. I said: Messenger of Allah, may my father and mother be ransom for you, and then I told him (the whole story). He said: Was it the darkness (of your shadow) that I saw in front of me? I said: Yes. He struck me on the chest which caused me pain, and then said: Did you think that Allah and His Apostle would deal unjustly with you? She said: Whatsoever the people conceal, Allah will know it. He said: Gabriel came to me when you saw me. He called me and he concealed it from you. I responded to his call, but I too concealed it from you (for he did not come to you), as you were not fully dressed. I thought that you had gone to sleep, and I did not like to awaken you, fearing that you may be frightened. He (Gabriel) said: Your Lord has commanded you to go to the inhabitants of Baqi' (to those lying in the graves) and beg pardon for them. I said: Messenger of Allah, how should I pray for them (How should I beg forgiveness for them)? He said: Say, Peace be upon the inhabitants of this city (graveyard) from among the Believers and the Muslims, and may Allah have mercy on those who have gone ahead of us, and those who come later on, and we shall, God willing, join you.

Mohammed hit Aisha on the chest. Its in your hadith.

Oricha62:
Iam not surprised that non muslims claimed the above verses contradictory without knowledge for the following reasons

1. They are not a Muslim
2. They never believes in either Quran,hadith or Prophet Muhammad(saw).They only read to argue.
3. They never read the tafsir of the quran.
NOTE: tasfir is different from translation
4. They never learned asbab al-nuzul of each surah of the Quran.

IF YOU REMOVE THE ABOVE REASONS FROM YOURSELF,YOU WILL BELIEVE THAT THERE IS NO CONTRADICTION IN THE ENTIRE QURAN.


For any further discussion contact me through oricha62@gmail.com

Why will I be a Muslim and lose my right to critical thinking?

Why should I believe in the Qur'an and the hadith, Arabian story books of no moral or educational significance to any non-arabic society. Each society has it unique moral codes, culture and value system.

Why must I believe in the tasfir when allahh, in the Quran, said his words are very clear. Are you telling me allahh is a bad communicator that need human beings to make his words comprehendable?

Why must I learn the exigencies of each surah when I have more profitable and reasonable things to do with my life?

I can't learn Islam from you, just as a prof cannot learn under the feet of a KG pupil.

Lagusta:
Nice points by everyone.....

However, I just want to point out that Islam does not support domestic violence of any form.... Seun please....

Yes, there is a verse of the Qur'an that states the Arabic word أضرب but it won't mean "beat" in the literal context, but would mean "scold" or "reprimand"....

And popular culture puts the man as the head of the home, and to give him full control of the family, so if he sees his wife doing something bad eg keeping bad company, he has the right to reprimand her to stop doing those stuff, that's normal....

Prophet Muhammad never hit his women, none of the companions did so too, if I'm wrong bring evidence....

And Islam raises the status of women far better than other religions.... The only argument everyone has is the issue of hijab and polygamy.... And it's purely unjustifiable (another argument for another day)

It's funny that non-muslims in nairaland are teaching Muslims their religion and I am equally amazed that Oga Seun is well 'knowledgeable' in Islam but always pretended otherwise. Well that's a good business strategy.

You said Mohammed never beat his wives, you are very wrong. See hadith below;

Sahih Muslim (4:2127) - Muhammad struck his favorite wife, Aisha, in the chest one evening when she left the house without his permission. Aisha narrates, "He struck me on the chest which caused me pain."

The sahabas also beat their wives:
Sahih Bukhari (72:715) - "Aisha said, 'I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women '" Muhammad's own wife complained Muslim women were abused worse than other women.

Mohammed's father in laws also slapped their daughters on behalf of Mohammed:

Sahih Muslim (9:3506) - Muhammad's fathers-in-law (Abu Bakr and Umar) amused him by slapping his wives (Aisha and Hafsa) for annoying him. According to the Hadith, the prophet of Islam laughed upon hearing this.

Please always get your facts right.

Oricha62:
READ THE TRANSLATION OF THE QUR'AN YOU QUOTED

Surah Al-Baqara, Verse 256:
لَا إِكْرَاهَ فِي الدِّينِ قَد تَّبَيَّنَ الرُّشْدُ مِنَ الْغَيِّ فَمَن يَكْفُرْ بِالطَّاغُوتِ وَيُؤْمِن بِاللَّهِ فَقَدِ اسْتَمْسَكَ بِالْعُرْوَةِ الْوُثْقَىٰ لَا انفِصَامَ لَهَا وَاللَّهُ سَمِيعٌ عَلِيمٌ

There is no compulsion in religion. Verily, the Right Path has become distinct from the wrong path. Whoever disbelieves in Taghut and believes in Allah, then he has grasped the most trustworthy handhold that will never break. And Allah is All-Hearer, All-Knower.


You are just arguing without knowledge.
The verse you quotes is NOT among the abrogated verses. If you disagree with me,then, WHAT IS AN ABROGATED VERSE IN ISLAM?

You are getting it damn wrong. I taught I have explain this Islamic principles to you before. The latter ayah, if it contradicts the former ayah automatically abrogates it. Time and situation of events dictates what allahh allegedly sent down to Mohammed as a revelation.

Let look at the verses again:

surah al-baqara 2 ayah 256:

Yusuf Ali translation: Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth.

The ayah above talks about religious freedom when Mohammed was in Mecca in the formative years of Islam.

Now let's look at Quran 9:29:

Yusuf Ali translations: Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

The second surah was allegedly given to Mohammed in Medina when Islam had matured and militarily strong to fight off the mushrikoons and the kafirs. The two ayah are very contradictory (to non-muslims) but not contradictory (to an informed Muslim, unlike you). The second ayah (Qur'an 9:29) is the latter ayah which abrogated the former ayah (Qur'an 2:256).

I believe you get this simple logic.

Oricha62:
Answer my question before we continue the discussion. Give me abrogated verse that is in the Quran of today?

Quran 2:256.

true2god:
Stop this bro, there is nothing like 'the entire Quran' when Mohammed was alive and there is nowhere any jibril used to read any 'entire Quran' to Mohammed. The so-called revelations were allegedly revealed bit by bit under different circumstances and different locations, notably mecca and Medina.

While the so-called angel jibril gave the revelations, the sahabas, who among are zaid ibn thabit and Abdullah ibn sarh ibn abi sard wrote them down. This so-called revelations are written on leaves, horse back, bones, and any other place so that some of the sahabas can always remember an ayah. There is no any of the sahaba that commited the entire revelation into memory.

A sahaba can commit 2 ayah, some 3, etc. So when the apostle of allahh died and uthman wanted to preserve his legacy, asked all the surviving sahabas to come and recite whatever ayah they might have in their memory, this is how the Quran was made: See hadith below:

Sahih al-Bukhari Book 60 Hadith 201
Narrated Zaid bin Thabit Al-Ansari: who was one of those who used to write the Divine Revelation:

Abu Bakr sent for me after the (heavy) casualties among the warriors (of the battle) of Yamama (where a great number of Qurra' were killed). 'Umar was present with Abu Bakr who said, 'Umar has come to me and said, The people have suffered heavy casualties on the day of (the battle of) Yamama, and I am afraid that there will be more casualties among the Qurra' (those who know the Qur'an by heart) at other battle-fields, whereby a large part of the Qur'an may be lost, unless you collect it. And I am of the opinion that you should collect the Qur'an." Abu Bakr added, "I said to 'Umar, 'How can I do something which Allah's Apostle has not done?' 'Umar said (to me), 'By Allah, it is (really) a good thing.'

So 'Umar kept on pressing, trying to persuade me to accept his proposal, till Allah opened my bosom for it and I had the same opinion as 'Umar." (Zaid bin Thabit added Umar was sitting with him (Abu Bakr) and was not speaking. me). "You are a wise young man and we do not suspect you (of telling lies or of forgetfulness): and you used to write the Divine Inspiration for Allah's Apostle. Therefore, look for the Qur'an and collect it (in one manuscript). " By Allah, if he (Abu Bakr) had ordered me to shift one of the mountains (from its place) it would not have been harder for me than what he had ordered me concerning the collection of the Qur'an. I said to both of them, "How dare you do a thing which the Prophet has not done?" Abu Bakr said, "By Allah, it is (really) a good thing. So I kept on arguing with him about it till Allah opened my bosom for that which He had opened the bosoms of Abu Bakr and Umar.

So I started locating Quranic material and collecting it from parchments, scapula, leaf-stalks of date palms and from the memories of men (who knew it by heart). I found with Khuzaima two Verses of Surat-at-Tauba which I had not found with anybody else, (and they were):-- "Verily there has come to you an Apostle (Muhammad) from amongst yourselves. It grieves him that you should receive any injury or difficulty He (Muhammad) is ardently anxious over you (to be rightly guided)" (9.128) The manuscript on which the Quran was collected, remained with Abu Bakr till Allah took him unto Him, and then with 'Umar till Allah took him unto Him, and finally it remained with Hafsa, Umar's daughter.

This is how your Qur'an came to be finally brought together as a single religious book. And you know what, uthman ibn Affan burnt some copies of the Quran he didn't agree with. Why did uthman burn some copies of the Quran that might have been used as today's evidence for or against Islam?

Sahih al-Bukhari Book 61 Hadith 510
Narrated Anas bin Malik:

Hudhaifa bin Al-Yaman came to Uthman at the time when the people of Sham and the people of Iraq were Waging war to conquer Arminya and Adharbijan. Hudhaifa was afraid of their (the people of Sham and Iraq) differences in the recitation of the Qur'an, so he said to 'Uthman, "O chief of the Believers! Save this nation before they differ about the Book (Quran) as Jews and the Christians did before." So 'Uthman sent a message to Hafsa saying, "Send us the manuscripts of the Qur'an so that we may compile the Qur'anic materials in perfect copies and return the manuscripts to you." Hafsa sent it to 'Uthman. 'Uthman then ordered Zaid bin Thabit, 'Abdullah bin AzZubair, Said bin Al-As and 'AbdurRahman bin Harith bin Hisham to rewrite the manuscripts in perfect copies. 'Uthman said to the three Quraishi men, "In case you disagree with Zaid bin Thabit on any point in the Qur'an, then write it in the dialect of Quraish, the Qur'an was revealed in their tongue." They did so, and when they had written many copies, 'Uthman returned the original manuscripts to Hafsa. 'Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what they had copied, and ordered that all the other Qur'anic materials, whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt. Said bin Thabit added, "A Verse from Surat Ahzab was missed by me when we copied the Qur'an and I used to hear Allah's Apostle reciting it. So we searched for it and found it with Khuzaima bin Thabit Al-Ansari. (That Verse was): 'Among the Believers are men who have been true in their covenant with Allah.' (33.23)

Why did uthman ibn Affan burn some copies of the Koran and compiled the rest? What was he hiding from people? The current Qur'an is by uthman and had nothing to do with allahh or Mohammed.

Oricha62:
Did you read the hadith well ?

Angle jibril normally read the entire Quran with prophet Muhammad(saw) every Ramadan before he passed away.

Do you know the number of Ramadan that passes during his time?

Stop this bro, there is nothing like 'the entire Quran' when Mohammed was alive and there is nowhere any jibril used to read any 'entire Quran' to Mohammed. The so-called revelations were allegedly revealed bit by bit under different circumstances and different locations, notably mecca and Medina.

While the so-called angel jibril gave the revelations, the sahabas, who among are zaid ibn thabit and Abdullah ibn sarh ibn abi sard wrote them down. This so-called revelations are written on leaves, horse back, bones, and any other place so that some of the sahabas can always remember an ayah. There is no any of the sahaba that commited the entire revelation into memory.

A sahaba can commit 2 ayah, some 3, etc. So when the apostle of allahh died and uthman wanted to preserve his legacy, asked all the surviving sahabas to come and recite whatever ayah they might have in their memory, this is how the Quran was made: See hadith below:

Sahih al-Bukhari Book 60 Hadith 201
Narrated Zaid bin Thabit Al-Ansari: who was one of those who used to write the Divine Revelation:

Abu Bakr sent for me after the (heavy) casualties among the warriors (of the battle) of Yamama (where a great number of Qurra' were killed). 'Umar was present with Abu Bakr who said, 'Umar has come to me and said, The people have suffered heavy casualties on the day of (the battle of) Yamama, and I am afraid that there will be more casualties among the Qurra' (those who know the Qur'an by heart) at other battle-fields, whereby a large part of the Qur'an may be lost, unless you collect it. And I am of the opinion that you should collect the Qur'an." Abu Bakr added, "I said to 'Umar, 'How can I do something which Allah's Apostle has not done?' 'Umar said (to me), 'By Allah, it is (really) a good thing.'

So 'Umar kept on pressing, trying to persuade me to accept his proposal, till Allah opened my bosom for it and I had the same opinion as 'Umar." (Zaid bin Thabit added Umar was sitting with him (Abu Bakr) and was not speaking. me). "You are a wise young man and we do not suspect you (of telling lies or of forgetfulness): and you used to write the Divine Inspiration for Allah's Apostle. Therefore, look for the Qur'an and collect it (in one manuscript). " By Allah, if he (Abu Bakr) had ordered me to shift one of the mountains (from its place) it would not have been harder for me than what he had ordered me concerning the collection of the Qur'an. I said to both of them, "How dare you do a thing which the Prophet has not done?" Abu Bakr said, "By Allah, it is (really) a good thing. So I kept on arguing with him about it till Allah opened my bosom for that which He had opened the bosoms of Abu Bakr and Umar.

So I started locating Quranic material and collecting it from parchments, scapula, leaf-stalks of date palms and from the memories of men (who knew it by heart). I found with Khuzaima two Verses of Surat-at-Tauba which I had not found with anybody else, (and they were):-- "Verily there has come to you an Apostle (Muhammad) from amongst yourselves. It grieves him that you should receive any injury or difficulty He (Muhammad) is ardently anxious over you (to be rightly guided)" (9.128) The manuscript on which the Quran was collected, remained with Abu Bakr till Allah took him unto Him, and then with 'Umar till Allah took him unto Him, and finally it remained with Hafsa, Umar's daughter.

This is how your Qur'an came to be finally brought together as a single religious book. And you know what, uthman ibn Affan burnt some copies of the Quran he didn't agree with. Why did uthman burn some copies of the Quran that might have been used as today's evidence for or against Islam?

Oricha62:
Thanks so brother,you don't have to say sorry ,you are entitled to your opinion provided there is harsh words in your opinions.

You said the Quran of today is that uthman not The Qur'an revealed to prophet Muhammad(saw) because of abrogated verse in the Quran.

WHAT YOU SAID IS NOT TRUE.

Yes,there are abrogated verse in the Qur'an for a valid reasons BUT both verses are present in the Quran of today.
Quran was revealed within the period of twenty three years to prophet Muhammad(saw) before he passed away. It wasn't revealed once as a single but gradually with the periods mentioned. The first surah revealed to him by angle Jibril was ssuratulAlaq.verse 1-5 when he was in the cave hira.Angel jjibrilintroduced himself to the prophet Muhammad(saw) before the revelation.
prophet Muhammad(saw) ask a companion named Zaid bin thabbit to record any surah or verse revealed before die.and Also many companions memory the Qur'an because prophet normally teach them any surah revealed.

When prophet (saw) died, majority of people that memoried Qur'an were killed.
Uthman fear that he may loss the Qur'an without getting to the generation of Muslims.
He thought of the only solution is to complile it in one book.
Zaid bin thabit was ask to put Quran together. People that memories then were called to affirm its correctness. which they affirmed.

After the death of the prophet Muhammad(saw) ,revelation stop.
Abrogated verses,the new and old are still present in the Quran of today.

THANKS FOR YOUR QUESTION.

Now give me the abrogated verse that is not in the quran of today as you claimed.

Bros don't be deceitful, we have studied Islam and discovered that it is a pack of lie by some group of illiterate Arab bandits in the medieval ages who are hell bent on global conquest using religion as a means to achieving that goal. You need to study Islam, with an open mind, and a little bit smart to understand this simple fact.

On the points you raised, there is a difference between abrogated and cancel verses. The abrogated verses are still in the Qur'an while the cancelled verses are no longer in the Qur'an. The cancelled verses were no included among what uthman ibn Affan compiled and called the Quran. As a matter of fact, allahh's apostle, that is Mohammed, never asked Muslims, in his life time, to compile the Quran as a religious book.

The Qur'an was allegedly revealed in two cities, mecca and Medina. Mohammed's Qur'an in mecca was conciliatory and diplomatic because he was used to be a persecuted minority in the hand of the Meccans. This verse was revealed in mecca when Mohammed was weak. Sura al-baqra 2:256, 'there is no compulsion in religion.....'

The above ayah was abrogated by this ayah below, which was revealed in Medina, Qur'an 9:28-30, 'fight those who do not believe in allahh or the last days...' These two ayah are contradictory to a non-muslim but to a Islamic scholar, the second revelation nullified the first and the two ayahs are still in the Quran.

There are many more verses in the Qur'an like that that abrogated each other. The cancelled ayah are nowhere found in the Quran.

The verse of stoning adulterer is in the hadith but nowhere in the Quran. it was also cancelled (sunnah ibn maggah hadith number 1944):

It was narrated that 'Aishah said:

“The Verse of stoning and of breastfeeding an adult ten times was revealed 1, and the paper was with me under my pillow. When the Messenger of Allah died, we were preoccupied with his death, and a tame sheep came in and ate it.”

Stoning of adulterers to death is still halal under the 5 schools of Islamic jurisprudence, it is in the hadith of bukhari, Muslim and the sunnah of ibn maggah and Abu dawood but nowhere in the Quran, why? Is it that allahh could not ensure that it is also contained in the Qur'an?

butterfly777:
You said 'Iqra does not mean read bacause Mohammed could not read and write' . This is a pathetic fallacy and shows your write up is based on sentiment, not logic and objectivity. You cant just reject the meaning of a word because it doesnt tally with the little information you have. The information is even likely to be incomplete and untrue.

Iqra, or ikra, in Arabic means 'read'. This is one of the first words the entity, whom waraqa told Mohammed was jibril, asked Mohammed to do (according to sirah rasul allah by ibn Ishaq). How is it that that the entity never knew Mohammed couldn't read?

If Muslim apologist spin the word ikra to mean 'recite', what was Mohammed to recite, since that was the first encounter with Mohammed? It's like a stranger seeing another stranger in an open desert and the second stranger asking the first stranger to 'recite' without any form of formal introduction or familiarization. No reasonable communication can be started by two strangers without any form of introduction.

The so-called jibril never told Mohammed he was jibril and Mohammed never knew the so-called jibril was jibril. It was Mohammed's uncle that told him it was jibril he met at the cave of hirah. Did waraqa see or hear from the so-called jibril? No. So essentially, waraqa started Islam, and not Mohammed.

Oricha62:
Brief Introduction to "Quran Tafsir" What it is and Why We Need it We start with the word "Quran"

The word "Quran" in Arabic means "Recitation" (not written word). Too many people today are telling us what the Quran of Allah is and what it means.

All too often we are hearing from both Muslims and Non-Muslims; 'The Quran says this-or-that and the Quran means so-and-so' without giving reference to their actual source for meaning and understanding.

Many misconceptions, misquotes, misunderstandings and misrepresentations are tossed around in the media, news and public discussions about Islam and what it teaches.

The solution is to go back to the original source in the original language as understood by the people who first heard the Quran from the lips of the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, along with his own definitions and explanations.

The good news is the Quran exists today in its entirety, exactly as it at the time of the prophet, peace be upon him.

The prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, heard the words directly from the Angel Gabriel (Jibril in Arabic) and these words were memorized by Muhammad, peace be upon him, and then recited to his companions, who then memorized and passed on these same words to their followers and this has continued to this very day.

The first word Angel Gabriel spoke to Muhammad, peace be upon him, was "Iqra", which comes from the same root for Quran, and it was a command to "Recite!" (Many people, even Muslims today think this word meant 'read', but it is incorrect because the prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, was not able to read or write). Immediately we see the importance of going back to the most authentic and original source - the Quran in Arabic - to better understand the meanings.

The Word TAFSIR is an arabic word تفسير which is derived from the root 'fassara' . Someone who writes tafsir is a 'mufassir...". IBN KATHIR - Famous Mufassir (commentator of Quran) مفسر . Well known and respected for his keen memory and a highly regarded scholar of tafsir (commentary) - Born 1302 AD. Memorized entire Quran, word-for-word along and memorized huge number of sayings and teachings (hadeeth) of the prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, along with sayings and commentary about Quran from Muhammad's companions, may Allah be pleased with them. The Tafsir of Ibn Kathir is of the most respected and accepted explanations for the Quran and is the most widely used explanations in Arabic used today. The difficulty of translating Quran to English is quite another problem and not one to be taken lightly nor is it for the average translators to decide what is meant by the words of Almighty God.

While we agree it is impossible to bring the exact meaning of everything from Quran to English, it is our intention to bring about a better understanding for non-Arab speakers at least a basic understanding of the meaning of the Quran for the English speaking readers.

I am sorry bro, the Quran you have today is not the Quran of Mohammed ibn Abdullah but the handwork of uthman ibn Affan, the 3rd khalifah. Many Quranic verses had been cancelled or burnt before the final compilation, by uthman ibn Affan, what you have today as the quran.

The hadith below might be of a bit help to you:

Sahih bukhari: Volume 4, Book 52, Number 69 :

Narrated by Anas bin Malik:

For thirty days Allah's Apostle invoked Allah to curse those who had killed the companions of Bir-Mauna; he invoked evil upon the tribes of Ral, Dhakwan, and Usaiya who disobeyed Allah and His Apostle. There was reveled about those who were killed at Bir-Mauna a Quranic Verse we used to recite, but it was cancelled later on. The Verse was: "Inform our people that we have met our Lord. He is pleased with us and He has made us pleased".

Sahih bukhari
Volume 3, Book 31, Number 169 and 170 :
Narrated by Tawus

Ibn 'Abbas said, "Allah's Apostle set out from Medina to Mecca and he fasted till he reached 'Usfan, where he asked for water and raised his hand to let the people see him, and then broke the fast, and did not fast after that till he reached Mecca, and that happened in Ramadan." Ibn 'Abbas used to say, "Allah's Apostle (sometimes) fasted and (sometimes) did not fast during the journeys so whoever wished to fast could fast, and whoever wished not to fast, could do so."

sahih bukhari Volume 3, Book 31, Number 170 :
Narrated by Nafi:

Ibn 'Umar recited the verse: "They had a choice either to fast or to feed a poor person for every day, and said that the order of this Verse was cancelled.

Where are the above ayas written in the Qur'an? The above verses have been removed, cancelled, deleted, removed, declined and expunged from the Qur'an, according to your own authoritative source, sahih bukhari. If that's the case, how many more Qur'anic verses had been cancelled by men when allahh said it the Qur'an that his words can never be changed by men (Quran 6:115). So it is either the current Qur'an is never the word of any allahh or Mohammed was confused when he said allahh's words can never be changed.

You said jibril revealed the Qur'an to Mohammed, please can you show me a single place/proof where jibril personally told Muhammad 'I AM JIBRIL'?