₦airaland Forum

seunwen2:
Fundamentalist Christians view the Bible as the inspired and inerrant word of God. They therefore say people should live according to biblical teachings. Modern analysis of the Bible, however, provides many reasons why the book cannot be considered a reliable guide.
In the first place, the contradictions contained in the Bible prove that numerous assertions in it are false, because two contradictory statements cannot both be true. Examples of the hundreds of biblical contradictions are the conflicting genealogies of Jesus (Mt. 1:1-16 vs. Lk. 3:23-38), the inconsistent stories of Judas’ death (Mt. 27:5 vs. Acts 1:18), and the contradictory accounts of Paul’s conversion (Acts 9:7 vs. Acts 22:9).
Moreover, the cruelties that the Bible says God ordered, approved, or committed make the book totally unacceptable to persons applying modern standards of justice and humaneness. Examples of biblical atrocities include Moses telling his soldiers to kill women and children (Num. 31:15-18), God sending two bears that killed 42 children because they were making fun of a prophet’s bald head (2 Kgs. 2:23-24), and the promise that non-Christians will be sent to the eternal fires of hell (e.g., Mt. 25:41; Rev. 21:.
Additionally, the Bible’s stories of events violating the laws of nature cannot be accepted by scientific persons today. They know it’s much more likely the writers of the Bible either lied or were mistaken than that incidents occurred such as sticks turning into snakes (Exod. 7:10-12), a donkey talking (Num. 22:28), a dead man reviving when his corpse came in contact with the bones of a prophet (2 Kgs. 13:21), and a man living for three days and nights in the belly of a fish (Jonah 1:17).
Other reasons the Bible is not the word of God include its false ideas about the structure of the physical world (e.g., 1 Sam. 2:8, where the earth is said to rest on pillars); its prophecies that have proved to be false (e.g., Mk. 13:24-30, where the prediction is made that the world would end within the lifetime of persons living in the first century C.E.); and its historical inaccuracies (e.g., Dan. 5:31, where one “Darius the Mede” is said to have captured Babylon in the sixth century B.C.E., whereas historians know it was Cyrus of Persia who did so).
Furthermore, the Bible is an unreliable authority because of its harmful teachings (e.g., Mk. 16:18, where believers are taught to handle snakes, drink poison, and rely on faith healing instead of medical science); its obscene passages; the fact that parts of it were written many years – and in some cases many centuries – after the events it purports to describe; and the fact that we have no idea who wrote most of it.
Findings of modern biblical scholarship support Thomas Paine’s position. The American patriot and proponent of common sense wrote in his book The Age of Reason: “People in general know not what wickedness there is in this pretended word of God. Brought up in habits of superstition, they take it for granted that the Bible is true, and that it is good. . . . Good heavens! It is quite another thing: it is a book of lies, wickedness and blasphemy.”
The application of reason, observation, and experience – what the great nineteenth-century agnostic Robert Ingersoll called “the holy trinity of science” – reveals that the Bible was written solely by humans who lived in a barbaric and superstitious age.
Those same methods of science, and not a reliance on religious dogma, are needed to expose falsehood and discover truth in all other fields as well.

Matthew and Luke actually give two different genealogies. Matthew give the genealogy of Jesus through Joseph, the legal, though not the physical father of Jesus. Luke, on the other hand, gives the ancestry of Jesus through Mary from
whom Jesus was descended physically
as to his humanity. This is a beautiful
fulfillment of prophecy and actually
testifies to the accuracy of the Bible.
Through Joseph, Jesus became the legal
heir to the throne while at the same time bypassed the curse of Coniah as
prophesied in Jeremiah 22:24-30. Both, of course, were in the line of David so that Jesus had a legal right to the throne as the adopted son of Joseph and was at the same time a physical descendent of David through Mary.
The Ryrie Study Bible gives an excellent
summary of the issues here:
Although Coniah had seven sons
(perhaps adopted; cf. 1 Chron. 3:17),
none occupied the throne. So, as far as
a continuing dynasty was concerned,
Coniah was to be considered
“childless.” Although his line of
descendants retained the legal throne
rights, no physical descendant (no man
of his descendants) would ever
prosperously reign on the Davidic
throne. The genealogy of Matthew
traces the descent of Jesus through
Solomon and Jeconiah (Heb., Coniah;
Matt. 1:12); this is the genealogy of
Jesus’ legal father, Joseph. Luke traces
Jesus’ physical descent back through
Mary and Nathan to David, bypassing
Jeconiah’s line and showing accurately
the fulfillment of this prophecy of
Jeremiah. If Jesus had been born only
in the line of Joseph (and thus of
Jeconiah), He would not have been
qualified to reign on the throne of David
in the Millennium. See note on Matt.
1:11.

Alleged contradiction in Paul's conversion

The Bible is replete with examples of where an event is recorded multiple times. Sometimes the repetition will be by different writers, as in the case of certain narratives in the books of Kings and Chronicles, or in the Gospel records. At other times a single writer may repeat the record of an event for the sake of a slightly different point of emphasis. Chapters 1 and 2 in Genesis are an example of such. In Acts, chapters 10 and 11, there are two accounts of the conversion of the Roman centurion, Cornelius. The first is Luke’s depiction of the event; the second is Peter’s rehearsal of the circumstances when he subsequently defends his actions before the Jews in Jerusalem.

Another New Testament illustration of this literary phenomenon is the record of Paul’s conversion, as set forth three times in the book of Acts (chapters 9, 22, and 26). This repetition has puzzled some Bible students. Others, searching for flaws in the sacred Scriptures, contend that the repetition is superfluous and contradictory, and thus constitutes evidence against the inspiration of the sacred narrative. One critic recently asked:

“If the New Testament is without contradictions, why does Paul give three totally different memories of Jesus appearing to him?”

In the first place, the author reveals his own lack of knowledge of the facts. The initial record of Saul’s conversion (Acts 9) is not Paul’s account; it is that of the historian Luke.

Secondly, the criticism fails to take into account the epochal nature of the conversion of Saul, and its importance in the divine scheme of things. Add to this the fact that there were different circumstances underlying the case histories the apostle later introduced, in defending his transformation from Judaism to Christianity (Acts 22,26).

Thirdly, the critic, doubtless sincere but lacking mature analytical skills, charges that the accounts contradict one another. They do not. Yes, there are differences; one record may supplement another narrative. But supplementation is not the same as contradiction.

The Significance of Paul’s Conversion
The conversion of Saul, that rabid persecutor of the early church, is one of the most significant events in the history of the first-century church. One historian has expressed the matter in the following way.

“In all the history of Christianity no single conversion to Christ carried with it such momentous results to the whole world, as that of Saul the persecutor, afterward Paul the Apostle” (J.L. Hurlbut, The Story of the Christian Church, Philadelphia: John C. Winston Co., 1954, p. 30).
Another historian describes Saul’s conversion as “one of the most important events in the entire course of Christianity” (Kenneth Latourette, A History of Christianity, Vol. I, San Francisco: Harper, 1953, p. 70). Quotations of a similar nature could be multiplied many times over.

If the Holy Spirit saw fit to initiate four Gospel accounts of the death of Jesus Christ, surely no reasonable person can fault the divinely guided historian, Luke, in including three accounts of the conversion of Christianity’s greatest missionary — especially since there is unique purpose in each narrative.

The Three Narratives
Perhaps brief notice should be given to the nature of the three “conversion” records in the book of Acts.

Luke’s personal description of Saul’s dramatic conversion, and certain accompanying events, is found in Acts 9:1-30. The narrative may be divided topically into the following segments:


Saul’s mission of persecution to Damascus (vv. 1-2);
the zealot’s confrontation with the resurrected Christ (vv. 3-9);
the details of Saul’s conversion (vv. 10-19);
Saul’s immediate, post-conversion proclamation of the Christ (vv. 20-22);
the Jewish assassination plot (vv. 23-25);
the apostle’s eventual return to Jerusalem (vv. 26-30).
This section of Acts constitutes the primary historical record of this event. It is wonderfully condensed (which reflects an example of the restraint of the inspiration process), and is entirely accurate. This was forcefully illustrated by the research of noted archaeologist, Sir William Ramsay (1851-1939). Originally Ramsay doubted the credibility of Acts. However, after years of personal investigation and discovery, he championed the position that “Luke’s history is unsurpassed in respect of its trustworthiness” (The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament, Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979, p. 81).

The second narrative that contains a record of Paul’s conversion follows a vicious attempt on the part of certain militant Hebrews in Jerusalem to lynch the apostle — based upon the false charge that he had defiled the Jews’ temple (21:27ff). When Paul was providentially rescued from the bloodthirsty mob, he asked permission to address the crowd from the stairs of the fortress of Antonia. His request was granted.

The address delivered on this occasion was a benevolent, evangelistic polemic, the design of which was to present an argument to his Hebrew kinsmen, explaining why he had come to acknowledge Jesus of Nazareth as the Messiah. He chronicles his illustrious background in Judaism, his days as a persecutor of the Christian faith, the details of his “new birth,” and his subsequent commission to proclaim Jesus. There thus is ample reason as to why this testimony was recorded by the inspired historian.
Agrippa II, who governed certain territories in northern Palestine, was the last Jewish ruler to wear the title “king.” Having been appointed by Claudius Caesar, he was a powerful political figure of that day. When Porcius Festus became the Roman procurator over Palestine, he found Paul imprisoned at Caesarea. Not knowing exactly how to deal with his famous prisoner, he sought the counsel of Agrippa. After some discussion, the two of them (together with Agrippa’s sister, Bernice) determined they would interview the celebrated apostle. Paul then had the opportunity to put his case before a Jewish official (allegedly an “expert” in Hebrew matters — 26:3), and a pagan governor; these were legal dignitaries. The apostle begins his address directly to Agrippa, but quickly broadens his remarks to include the others (as reflected by the plural pronoun — 26:.

That he made a devastating defense of his cause (thus also for the validity of Christianity) is evidenced by the response that he received from his hitherto hostile audience. After an initial explosive outburst from Festus (obviously to “save face”), the king, the governor, and powerful and wicked Bernice, had a private conference.

In this clandestine session, they discussed Paul’s case extensively (as suggested by the verbal tenses; “spoke” — imperfect; “saying” — present, v. 31). Their verdict was this: “This man is doing nothing worthy of death or imprisonment.” Agrippa even added that Paul deserved to be released, and likely would be, were he not under the restraint of his own appeal to Caesar (v. 32). Protocol demanded that that legal process be satisfied.
The late E.M. Blaiklock, former Professor of Classics at University College (Auckland, New Zealand), once raised the question as to whether the extensive inclusions relative to Paul’s conversion, as displayed in Acts, were justified. He responded in the affirmative. He called attention to the fact that Paul’s case was a great legal test for the authenticity of Christianity, and that the apostle’s eventual acquittal (as evidenced by the letters of 1, 2 Timothy and Titus) justifies the volume of Luke’s material, and demonstrates that the historian’s purpose was achieved (Acts of the Apostles, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1959, p. 186).

Contradiction vs. Supplementation
Let us now give brief notice to the charge that the records of Paul’s conversion conflict with one another.

The most-frequently-cited example, that is said to mar the harmony of the narratives, is the alleged conflict between 9:7 and 22:9. The former, in earlier versions (KJV, ASV) states that the men accompanying Saul “heard the voice” of the Lord, while the latter text contends that they “heard not the voice.”

A common method of reconciliation has been to note that in 9:7 “hearing” (akouo) is used with the genitive case, which merely specifies that a “sound” was heard. On the other hand, akouo in 22:9 takes an accusative object, which indicates “extent,” i.e., though a sound was heard, the extent (the “meaning”) was not to the point of comprehension. A.T. Robertson, the prince of grammarians, declared that this approach is “perfectly proper” (Historical Grammar of the Greek New Testament, London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1919, p. 506).

A contemporary scholar suggests that an appropriate harmony is explained best by Luke’s use of different sources to compose his document. Professor Daniel Wallace surmises that Luke preserved the precise phraseology of dual sources (cf. Luke 1:3), and that his record reflects the fact that both akouo (hear) and phone (voice) are capable of different nuances, e.g., hear/understand and sound/voice. Thus, no contradiction may be charged legitimately, even without the “case” argument (Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996, pp. 133-134).
Factual “supplementation” (the addition of non-contradictory details), of course, presents no problem for the perceptive student who is aware of the nature of a genuine discrepancy. And the three “conversion” accounts do supplement one another quite richly. Consider but one example.

When Saul opened his eyes, following the brilliant vision, he was unable to see anything, and it was necessary that he be led by his companions into the city of Damascus. Even though these men also “beheld the light,” they were not blinded (22:9). Why not? This unique detail explains the matter. It was the “glory” of the light, i.e., the radiance of the Lord Jesus himself (22:11; cf. v. 14), that his companions did not see, that temporarily robbed Saul of his vision.
Yes, wonderfully complementary are the details, but no contradictions exist. The critic’s charge, as stated at the beginning of this piece, is without credibility. Truth ever triumphs.

sukkot:
https://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/35501969.jpg

Stu.pid is as stu.pid does.

SirShymexx:
Gathering of racist fvckers and brainwashed coons who celebrate their nonsense .

Chris Rock killed it. The smartest and most intelligent comedian of the post-Chapelle era. Only unemployed folks call for boycott especially when the woman who initiate the move cos of her husband that has always been a semi-coon did so cos of selfish reasons. I respect Jada but in as much as I admire Will Smith, he has never been down with the struggle lol.

Stacey Dash just made a fool of herself - the biggest coon since Uncle Tom's chronicles. Who added that prick to the show? She has always been a Z-list actress and if not for Dame Dash, no one cares about her trifling arse.

And fvck Leonardo DiCaprio's honkey arse as well. You know darn well you were not the best actor last year. Stop it, white boy.

Cc: sukkot

Don't get it. Hollywood has championed liberal causes such as civil rights and integration for probably the last 60 years and all of a sudden they have become the propaganda wing of the Klu Klux Klan just because they failed to nominate blacks for ONE academy awards ceremony. Awards are based on merit not affirmative action. When will black people grow back bones and stop this idiotic and immature craving for white acceptance and recognition? Asians don't behave that way and they are leaps and bounds ahead of you.
That m.o.ron Al Sharpton is the classic example of what black people stand for. Always willing to play the victim and wallow in the whiteman's pity.

Thank goodness these views are from a Muslim woman:

Saudi journalist, Nadine Al-Budair who lives in Qatar, penned an article in the Kuwaiti daily Al-Rai in which she wondered how Muslims would have acted if Christians had blown themselves up in their midst or tried to force their faith on them.

She presented the hypothetical question while calling on the Muslim world to be introspective and enact reforms, instead of condemning Western attitudes towards it.

“Imagine a Western youth coming here and carrying out a suicide mission in one of our public squares in the name of the Cross. Imagine that two skyscrapers had collapsed in some Arab capital, and that an extremist Christian group, donning millennium-old garb, had emerged to take responsibility for the event, while stressing its determination to revive Christian teachings or some Christian rulings, according to its understanding, to live like in the time [of Jesus] and his disciples, and to implement certain edicts of Christian scholar,” she wrote, according to a translation of the article by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI).



“Imagine hearing the voices of monks and priests from churches and prayer houses in and out of the Arab world, screaming on loudspeakers and levelling accusations against Muslims, calling them infidels, and chanting: ‘God, eliminate the Muslims and defeat them all.’”

“Imagine that we had provided an endless number of foreign groups with visas, ID cards, citizenships, proper jobs, free education, free modern healthcare, social security, and so on, and later a member of one of these groups came out, consumed by hatred and bloodlust, and killed our sons on our streets, in our buildings, in our newspaper [offices], in our mosques and in our schools.”

“Imagine a Frenchmen or a German in Paris or Berlin leading his Muslim neighbor [somewhere] in order to slaughter him and then freeze his head in an ice box, in a cold and calculating manner… as one terrorist did with the head of an American in Riyadh years ago.”

She was referring to American engineer Paul Marshall Johnson, who was abducted and beheaded by Al-Qaeda operatives in Saudi Arabia in 2004. His severed head was found in an ice box in a Riyadh apartment approximately one month later.

“Imagine that we visited their country as tourists and they shot at us, blew up car bombs near us, and announced their opposition to our presence [there] by chanting: ‘Remove the Muslims from the land of culture.’”

“These images are far from the mind of the Arab or Muslim terrorist because he is certain, or used to be certain, that the West is humanitarian and that the Western citizen would refuse to respond [in this manner] to the barbaric crimes [of the Muslim terrorists]. Despite the terrorist acts of Al-Qaeda and ISIS [the Islamic State], we [Muslims] have been on [Western] soil for years without any fear or worry. Millions of Muslim tourists, immigrants, students, and job seekers [travel to the West] with the doors open [to them], and the streets safe [for them].”

“However, how much longer [will this last]? Today things are different. [Western] anger [at Muslims] is apparent, and they make scary declarations.”

“It is strange that we [Muslims] believe we have the right to condemn such statements rather than address the implications of some of our extremist curricula, our education, and our regimes, and be ashamed [of them]… It is strange that we condemn [the West] instead of addressing what is happening in our midst – the extremist ways in which we interpret the shari’a and our reactionary attitudes towards each other and the world. It is strange that we condemn instead of apologizing to the world.”

“How would you react if a European blew up a theater in your city or a café that your son frequents? What would you do if you heard curses against your religion and faith every Sunday, as they hear [against theirs] from some of our imams on Fridays and other days?

“Imagine being in Amsterdam, London, or New York and knowing that students [there] learn as part of their curricula that you are an infidel, and that killing you is jihad that leads to the virgins of paradise. Would you extend your stay there to the end of the summer, or stay away? [Would you] blow yourself up [as the Muslim terrorists do], or would you do less than that: [Merely] conquer your rage and demand to ban Christians from entering Arab countries. What would you do?

“[Imagine] the war that would break out had Westerners shed their values in the face of the bloody crimes committed by foreigners, and if Western or Christian counter-radicalism had emerged in our Arab cities?

“After all these farces, some Arab analyst comes out touting a pathetic message, and reciting the same words in his friend’s ear that he has repeated millions of times: ‘Those [Muslims who commit terrorism] do not represent Islam, but only themselves.’

“This is all we [know how to do] – absolve [ourselves] of guilt.”

By: United with Israel Staff
(With files from MEMRI)

DeathStroke007:
Telling lies is a sin.. May Allah never forgive you for quoting and framing lies against prophet Muhammad (saw)..




http://www.islamicstudies.info/tafheem.php/?sura=66&verse=1&to=5



this is the real translations and footnotes of the verse.. its in detailed expiation..


go read and learn .. and know that nothing except lie will always come out of this kufar mouth

It must be very painful to be obsessed with another religion. Especially when that religion considers you to be a nuisance. Poor abeed.

Even in the crookran Jesus receives more mentions than MUMUhaMAD

See what n Arsenal fan said he would do if Marcus Rashford scores

Nna see as market full ground berekete

dunkem21:
We have repeatedly said that "newspunch" is a zombie propaganda site ..

I don't want to come back from church and see this crap on FP ..

..I see a mod viewing

This "crap" will hit the Front Page, be rest assured. It is the kind of expensive "crap" that everyone likes to read about.

IslamOoooooo!!! Everyday I learn something new and ridiculous about this bastard religion. Chai! So Camel Urine is okay but alcohol consumption is punishable with prison? Bwahahaahahah!!!! Abeed people!!!

Horner:
I know we Somalis have good hair and features but why you guys so jealous and hating? you guys ugly with wide noses and big lips

We're not jealous of skinny starving Somalis;

We're not jealous of your terrorism (Al Shabaab);

We're not jealous of your piracy;

We're not jealous of your poverty;

We're not jealous of your backwardness;

If you hate Nigerians so much then f.u.ck off and find your way to a Somali Forum, if such a thing even exists.

Get off Nairaland, you cheap mogadishu I.d.iot.

A Romanian woman, Elena Smocot, 27, has been jailed for 18 years for callously killing her defenceless newborn child after realising how different he looked to her other children.

She was at home with her four-year-old
son, seven-year-old nephew, and her
newborn son when she realised the
differences between them.

She told police that as soon as she noticed the similarity with her lover, she had grabbed the child by the legs and swung him around, bashing his head against the furniture several times until
the child stopped screaming.

She then went outside, put it on the floor and stamped on his body repeatedly.

Her two other children in her care, who
heard her shouting, went outside and
then quickly ran away to raise the alarm with neighbours.

In the meantime, the mother grabbed a
broken tile and attacked the baby with it.

She then pulled out his intestines, put
them in the bath tub and then switched
on the shower where she stood inside
the same bath to wash herself.

The horrific murder that took place at the woman's home in the town of Barlad in Romania’s Vaslui County has shocked
the country.

During the court case, judges heard
evidence that the woman might have
been suffering from depression because
in both 2010 and 2012 she had suffered
from postnatal depression.

She said that nobody had known she
had a lover, and in interviews with
detectives she gave chilling details of the killing.

Mrs Smocot's sentence begins immediately and she will not be entitled to parole because of the exceptional gravity of her offence.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3465584/Romanian-mother-cut-newborn-son-half-broken-roof-tile-eviscerated-realised-looked-like-husband-lover-s-child.html

ObiOmaMu:
I can't confirm how true this photo is but according to Justice, this is what a LION has been reduced to in the old Jos zoo!


http://www.lailasblog.com/2016/02/see-what-lion-has-been-reduced-to-in.html

See as dem abandon King of the Jungle. Omashe.

Woah

true2god:
I have watched the film now, it is rather a cheap movie shot in one of this middle-eastern countries, probably Iran. The language use in the movie is persian with an english sub-title.

It exposes the oppression of women in Islam, and the hypocrisy of the mullahs and sheiks in the Islamic republic of Iran. Ironically all the cast in the movie are all muslims.

More sincerely, there is nothing so special in the movie, it is a bit boring.

It's based on a true life story. And it happens to thousands of women in the islamic world every year.

She looks out of place.

KashyBaby:
It depends what food I'm drooling on that day...a minimum of 10dollars per lunch is fine with me...

Hello cutie

Jadekitana:
You can imagine the rate at with conji be killing some guys! to say i'm disappointed is an understatement. I'v been friends with this guy for some months,he's been on my case and has agreed to give me all the time I need before we start dating.

I was on my own last night when he invited me to go take sharwarma somewhere around.
We were just gisting normally about life and next thing he said was he's getting really bored and there's a new place on the island he would like to take me to.

We got there, I noticed the bouncers were really fierce looking! I got scared and asked him why they had 6 hefty bouncers,he just laughed and said it's cos the place is new. He quickly paid for VIP and when they opened the door first thing I saw was a fair beautiful girl stark naked dancing holding a pole. There were about 10ladies or more completely naked, with guys having fun with them!

I didn't bother to proceed to the VIP, I left in annoyance, boarded a cab and deleted his number sharply.

A guy who takes a lady to a strip club to watch other naked ladies and probably partake in frolicking with them can never be serious in a relationship! Quote me anywhere.

WT eff!?? Strip Clubs?!? In Lagos!?! And I never knew?!? Time to soji.

There's a number of cuties amongst the female folk on NL that have caught my eye.

The Bianca look alike who posted this topic is one:-). Sinaj, Pretydiva,Kashybaby all rate highly on my list.

As for the sex thing, just know that with me, you will never be pressured into doing anything you don't want to. I don't bite. Unless biting's your thing ;-)

Has anyone watched the movie, "The Stoning of Soraya M?" That film which was written by a muslim couple sums up the contemptuous attitude that islam has of women. Please watch the film.

Sahih Bukhari

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

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

ROTFL!!!!!

Muhammad was up for anything when it came to sex. In fact, if he had lived in the 21st century, he would probably have been a top p.o.r.n.s.tar. What do we expect when Allah generously empowered him with s3xual stamina to handle 30 women a day?

Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 5,
Number 268:

Narrated Qatada:
Anas bin Malik said, “The Prophet
used to visit all his wives in a
round, during the day and night
and they were eleven in number.”
I asked Anas, “Had the Prophet
the strength for it?” Anas replied,
“We used to say that the Prophet
was given the strength of thirty
(men).” And Sa’id said on the
authority of Qatada that Anas had
told him about nine wives only (not eleven)

Can you imagine allahh's greatest prophet having sex day and night? Even his followers (like Facheux (Abeed) Deathstroke007, Lexiconkabir etc) marveled.

DeathStroke007:
your brain works exactly like annunaki and parosbookaddict FOOLS OF LIFE



UNA no go school ni.. always support your claims with proof..


stupid idiot.. disgrace to human race..

always talking about what they have no knowledge about.. making false claims..


if court dey for NL.. I for charge you.. its so damn sure that you will be sentence to DIE BY HANGING became what you just did is defamation

First of all, THANK YOU for counting me in the exallted company of Annunaki and Parisbookaddict. I'm really PROUD of such an association. The real shame and embarrassment would be if I were connected with I'd.iots like DeathStroke007, Facheux (a.k.a Abeed) Lexiconkabir etc, all of whom were awarded first class degrees in mumulogy.

Secondly, here is the source of MuhamMAD and his sexual misconduct with Mary the Copt:

"Also it is reported that the Prophet had divided his days among his wives. And when it was the turn of Hafsa, he sent her for an errand to the house of her father Omar Khattab. When she took this order and went, the prophet called his slave girl Mariyah the Copt who bore his son Ibrahim, and who was a gift from the king Najashi and had sexual intercourse with her. When Hafsa returned, she found the door locked. So she sat there behind that locked door until the prophet finished the business and came out of the house while "pleasure"was dripping from his
face. When Hafsa found him in that condition she rebuked him saying you did not respect my honor; you sent me out of my house with an excuse so you could sleep with the slave girl. And in the day that was my turn you had intercourse with someone else. Then the Prophet said, "Be quiet for although she is my slave and halal to me. For your contentment I at this moment make her haram to myself."
But Hafsa did not do this and when the Prophet went out of her house she knocked at the wall that separated her room from that of Aisha and told her everything. She also gave the glad tidings that the Prophet had promised to make Mariyah haram to himself.

Tafseer Al- Quran 66:1-5 by Mohammad Kazem Mo’refi.

MuhamMAD be like.....

The "perfect example" for all muslims......I dey laff o

DeathStroke007:
fool of the century.. na today we dey treat Aisha real age for NL?



lol.. abi you think say na biblical Mary we talking about.. Mary and Joseph.. lol

Hear O Ye Abeed/Muslims! Your "prophet" Na Sex-Addict!

The story thus goes


Mariya was a Coptic maid to one of his wives named Hafsa.
One day Muhammad lies to Hafsa that her father wanted to see her. Dutifully she goes but on getting to her father he tells her there was no such thing .
She goes back home to the harem and what does she find? Prophet Muhammad in bed with her maid.
The prophet promises her that he will not touch Mariya again if only she keeps quiet. She does not. She tells the harem what the prophet was on to while she was away.
The harem becomes unhappy and grumbles.

Allah comes to his prophets aid and reveals a verse that the prophet should not suffer for what he desires.
Muhammad then vows to stay away from them for one month.
He also threatens to divorce all of them.
During that month he lives with Mariya Some sources day she got pregnant around that time.


. O Prophet! Why do you ban (for yourself) that
which Allâh has made lawful to you, seeking to
please your wives? And Allâh is Oft-Forgiving,
Most Merciful.

This prophet loved having sexxxx.

DeathStroke007:
fool of the century.. na today we dey treat Aisha real age for NL?



lol.. abi you think say na biblical Mary we talking about.. Mary and Joseph.. lol

Abeed is this the "perfect example" set by MuhamMAD? Muslums are real dindinrins, oponus and sugomus to respect a sex addict like MuhamMAD:

Mariah was a very beautiful Coptic Christian slave-girl of Hafsa, a wife of MuhamMAD. Though MuhamMAD had promised his wives that he would not have sex with Mariah, he cleverly planned and sent Hafsa out to her father Omar’s house on the pretext of an urgent matter, and had sex with Mariah when Hafsa was gone. When Hafsa found out that father didn’t call for her and returned home quickly, she found MuhamMAD having sex with Maria in her bed!

DeathStroke007:
fool of the century.. na today we dey treat Aisha real age for NL?



lol.. abi you think say na biblical Mary we talking about.. Mary and Joseph.. lol

M0r0n of the millenium. Where in the Bible is Mary's age ever mentioned? Unlike in the Crookran where Aisha's age is SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED!

DeathStroke007:
have you read what you just wrote?/lol..


No religion on earth has its own rulings like Islam.. Islam talks about life, grave, death and heaven.. past, present and future..




you can't blame Islam nor Muslim for human fault ...


Islam is separate, Muslims are separate.. human being is different..


Islam makes Muslim a better human..


any Muslim that has any bad behavior or any odd thing you don't like or odd thing you see... your question should be that, is this in Islam or in your own human nature


Terrorism is not in Islam, its not in a Muslim but in human nature...



You people are just being foolish... many Christians, pastors, Reverend, pope and people of dignity in your religion have done ,doing and is going to do unspeakable evil things... DO YOU SEE PEOPLE BLAME CHRISTIANITY OR BIBLE?


AND TERRORISM, EVIL ACTS AND COMMANDMENTS ARE PLENTY IN BIBLE..


always think before you talk...



AND NO REAL MUSLIM WILL GO BACK TO BE A CHRISTIAN.. ITS IMPOSSIBLE..


ITS JUST LIKE YOU ABANDONING CLOTHING'S FOR unclothedness..







CHRISTIANITY WEY JESUS KNOWS NOTHING about.. NOR HE GO CHURCH NOR READ BIBLE

The 53 year old groom steps out onto the dancefloor for a slow dance with his 9 year old bride and the wedding guests go gaga! Marriage of the millenium!

Based on everything in islam

Let us please observe a moment of silence in memory of the unspeakable crime which this poor girl suffered many years ago......

unphilaz:
hia

This is from Wafa Sultan's powerful book "A God Who Hates"