Abusing muhammad?

[Sister_Amy]

My simple answer to this: Islam permits the beating of wives. Beating makes no sense if it is not to inflict pain that’s why the qualification stated by you is laughable. It makes this verse seems very stupid indeed when you explain it that way because it makes no sense at all if a beating that being executed should inflict no pain at all.

However, no matter the qualification for the painless beating, Muslim women have no chance against their husband in this area because of the place Islam put their women in an Islamic community. Clearly their women are second-class citizens, inferior and to be treated with disdain just like domestic animals. In this situation, the reality of the beating when it happens will surely not the unrealistically non-beating that you professed. Sorry, but I have to disagree with your understanding on all this. I know that can be the Islamic teaching but the verse concerned and Islam’s position of women in its society does not point to it. So you are teaching something that is actually the opposite of what the Quran and Islam has on the treatment of women.

I tell you this, it is a bad verse on women. It should not appear in the Quran. Thus when you have it and all the hadiths on women, your explanation seems to be against the context altogether.

If you mean Christianity does not excel on the way it views women, I think you are under-informed. But this should be for another thread.

This is simply not true. It never was and has been.

That might be but I don’t see how that can be practiced in your community considering Islamic way of life would not permit this culture to really flourish. I am very convinced of this – you cannot establish a practice if you put in contravening rules there. You need a conducive structure, teaching, culture and spirit in order to make honoring and respecting women a reality. Not in Islam where in principle Mohammad and the Quran had clearly put women in less than equal position with the men. There are many examples, one of which is the permission of polygamy.

Islam puts men and women in the places God created for them. It’s not sensible to say that one is better than the other, or even that they are completely the same–either would do an injustice.

And I see you are horribly informed about the realities of wife-beating, so I can beseech you only to do research on the subject. Not until very recently (in Western Christian countries, mind you) was it considered to be an issue at all, as wives were considered to be the property of their husbands.

Whereas in Islam a woman has never been considered property of her husband. I know it’s tough to admit, but Islam does have the higher ground, the far superior model for inclusiveness of women in society at large, as well as rights in the public and private spheres of life.

 

[Sister_Amy]

Sister Amy, for whatever reason, your post here just made me sad. You seem to have closed your mind to learning the truth (or maybe I misinterpreted your earlier posts where you seemed to put forth more objective arguments.)

Sometimes it’s worthwhile to explain a point, and sometimes it’s not. The posts in this thread are kind of like those of kindergardeners, as regards their sophistication. There’s not really anything to respond to, and any attempt on my part to do so would surely go right over everyone’s heads. (Except for a couple of posters with whom I am more familiar, and for whom I do make an effort to explain things properly.)

The posts here aren’t even worth opening my mind to develop an articulate response–much less to make me inclined to, as you put it “learn the truth.” I have the truth, you see, and I spend considerable effort trying to understand and act on it. Enough truth to see, for instance, what is a sophisticated question, and what is a sophomoric attempt at debate.

No, this is what Muhammad told you. He contradicts the Bible which has yet to be proven corrupted.

Muhammad spoke only what he was commanded to by God. What matters to me is God’s words, in the Qur’an. The validity of the Bible doesn’t even matter in comparison to the greatness of the Qur’an. I mean, as a Catholic you can concern yourself with whether the Bible is corrupt or not, whereas for me, I’ll spend my time understanding the Qur’an, which is far more important in my daily life.

I found some medical and historical evidence for the crucifixion here… Maybe it will help you if you actually read it.

Sorry, it doesn’t prove anything to me. I’m not sure if you knew this or not, but many people had been crucified at that time–it’s not something that the people couldn’t imagine or describe. My only assertion is that Jesus was not killed, and that he wasn’t crucified. There are limitless explanations as to the events, even if they are honestly reported (and I’m not convinced even that they are!) So like I said, it doesn’t prove anything to me, not about Jesus.

I hope not. IMO, I don’t think you fully studied Christianity when you were a Christian in the same way you are studying Islam now. I hope that you will keep an open mind and that the Holy Spirit will lead you.

Of course I didn’t fully study Christianity–why would I have needed to? Do all Christians need to fully study Christianity to be Christians?

Certainly, not all Muslims need to “fully” study Islam–only enough to get through the basics, really. I’ve gone beyond that, and perhaps you’d like to know why. It’s because for me, the guidance (and it was God who guided me!) towards Islam has just been so amazing and overwhelming, I want to know everything about Islam I possibly can because I continue to discover such beautiful gems that attach my heart more strongly to it. I study Islam because it increases my faith in it. The more about Islam, the more I believe in Islam, and the more I learn about Christianity… the more I believe in Islam! And the more I believe in Islam, the more I love, really love, my Creator.

No, but I would consider his evidence more trustworthy than Muhammad.

Muhammad, incidentally enough, was called Al-Amin by his tribe, before he preached Islam. It means the trustworthy. He was called the trustworthy person, Al-Amin, and you consider who again to be more authoritative? Interesting.

Why do you refuse to acknowledge eyewitnesses’ (plural) accounts, but you are willing to accept the testimony of one man (Muhammad) when his words contradict Jesus whom you accept as a prophet?

It’s quite simple really, the elegance here. The most important evidence to me is the testimony of the Almighty, the Creator, the All-Knowing. That is of absolute importance. It doesn’t matter what anyone else saw, or thought they saw, or said they saw, or said they thought they saw, or said they heard that someone saw… get my drift? And I have the testimony of God–how could I accept anything else over that?

continued…

 

[Sister_Amy]

continued from above…

Have you even considered that some of Islam could be false - I don’t mean in a debate or on a forum, but in your own personal thinking.

Sure. Especially at the beginning, before I knew much at all. I never doubted the Qur’an though. I sometimes doubted that all the teachings of Muhammad were sound, but I got over it after learning more about him, and the science of hadith. I sometimes wonder about some strange teachings–and so I investigate them and typically find something kind of nifty–either something to explain them, or explain the reason for the strangeness, like perhaps a misunderstanding on the part of someone who was interpreting things. All in all the investigation just reaffirms my faith.

Just for one example, do you not ever wonder why God would void someone’s prayer just because he didn’t say it at the “right” time or he didn’t wash himself in a prescribed manner.

Can’t be sure exactly what you’re talking about. Does God void someone’s prayer because it’s not at the “right” time? What does that even mean? Are you sure you understood properly? Because I’m afraid I don’t follow.

Deep down inside does this sound logical to you? Maybe it does, in which case I’ll just have to pray harder.

Why does everything have to be logical? I mean, what is logical about eating the flesh and blood of God?

Perhaps, if your mind is still open to learning, you can read about the lives of the Saints or the other book I suggested in another thread about Eucharistic Miracles. God has been and is still today trying to bring His children to the Truth.

You must be joking… I don’t even believe that your most authentic book, the Bible, tells the truth about Jesus. And you think I’m going to believe some random author telling a story about a saint? Seriously?

Edit: I thought of a Saint you should look up: St. Faustina Kowalska. I think her diary would be interesting for you to read.

Sorry, not interested.

If that was the only teaching Muslims followed I would have no problem with Islam. It’s the condoning of murder (which you have already accepted), poor treatment of women (which you sometimes excuse/rationalize as being ok), and the evil intention to “take over the world” (not sure where you stand on that one.) that I have a problem with.

Condoning of murder? That’s pure silliness. Islam does not condone murder. Neither does Islam condone poor treatment of women. The standard for treatment of women is actually quite high in comparison to other religions/cultures, but in my opinion it is perfectly correct.

I’ve never heard of the intention to take over the world, except on a cartoon I used to watch as a kid called “Pinky and the Brain.”

 

[Sister_Amy]

Sister Amy is giving us all the perfect reason of why we must continue our critical examination of mohammet, the qur’an, hadiths, and sunnah. Islam is a cult of enslavement and indoctrination of its followers, and is very dangerous for mankind now and the future.

I at least will not die without putting up the good fight for the salvation of mankind from this death cult.

:knight1:
The 21st Century Crusade : arm yourself with knowledge, fire with words.

What cracks me up is that if I said the same thing, I would probably be called a terrorist.

 

[Reuben_J]

Islam puts men and women in the places God created for them. It’s not sensible to say that one is better than the other, or even that they are completely the same–either would do an injustice.

And I see you are horribly informed about the realities of wife-beating, so I can beseech you only to do research on the subject. Not until very recently (in Western Christian countries, mind you) was it considered to be an issue at all, as wives were considered to be the property of their husbands.

Whereas in Islam a woman has never been considered property of her husband. I know it’s tough to admit, but Islam does have the higher ground, the far superior model for inclusiveness of women in society at large, as well as rights in the public and private spheres of life.

If you can differentiate what are Western Society and Christian Society then it’s good. What do you mean by Western Christian countries?

I was talking about Christian teaching and Christian people, not Western people which are two different things… Now who is horribly informed?

 

[Sister_Amy]

If you can differentiate what are Western Society and Christian Society then it’s good. What do you mean by Western Christian countries?

I was talking about Christian teaching and Christian people, not Western people which are two different things… Now who is horribly informed?

Bravo!!!

Bravo!!!

I am impressed, Reuben J, I truly am.

I was talking about countries in Western Europe and the Americas (Western) which are predominantly made up of Christians. (Although I have no doubt that Christian people are as subject to mistreatment of women as non-Christian people.)

I wonder, then, if you can make the distinction between countries which happen to be comprised of Muslims… and yet which operate under Islam? It isn’t the subject of this thread, of course, I just wonder if we are on that even playing field.

 

[R_not]

The post by sister amy is pleading for us to research more into the abuse of women in islam. We are supposed to go against the facts - just like the rest of what she asserts about islam.

Well, here is a fascinating bit of news on how muslim men are now able to divorce their little wifees via facebook and sharia lawyers say it is a-ok. yep - keep telling me how women are treated in islam. To tell you the truth, I treat my guinea pigs better than muslim women are treated in islam.

Yes, women can divorce in islam but only in certain cases such as his absence, if he gives her an STD, has sexual dysfunction, or if he is found to have a terminal disease. Otherwise, she is to let the husband decide such matters.

divorce via facebook and sharia lawyers uphold it

Facebook divorce
By PEARL LEE February 09, 2009

Syariah lawyers said that it’s perfectly all right for a Muslim to divorce their spouse on Facebook or any other social networking website as long as it is in line with hukum syarak (Islamic law).

They were commenting on the curious case of Neil Brady, a 39-year-old Briton who ended his six-year marriage to his wife Emma, 35, and announced it on Facebook last week, making it the first Facebook divorce ever recorded. ( see accompanying story )

Syariah lawyer Muhamad Burok said it does not matter how the declaration of divorce is made as long as it is communicated to the spouse.

“A declaration of divorce among Muslims that follows the hukum syarak is a communication between parties, in this case between a husband and his wife.

“This includes putting down words in writing and sending it to the spouse. It does not matter what medium was used; be it email or SMS; as long as it’s later verified in the (Syariah) court.”

Muhamad also said that the issue of time lapse does not arise in this case. If one makes the declaration of divorce against his spouse today on Facebook and the spouse only learns of it a week later, the effective date is still on the day the posting was made.

Although he has not yet heard of a similar case here, another Syariah lawyer, Zulkifli Che Yong, said: “It is merely a new way of declaring your intentions. In the old days, people used to send letters, telegrams and faxes, but with the advent of technology, it’s becoming easier. It does not matter what medium you use as long as the intent is clear.”

Zulkilfi said that as long as the words used were clear and conclusive (soreh ), then the declaration of divorce accepted. He said another type of declaration is known as kinayah . This is not as clear as the first type of declaration and needs to be coupled with intent and would have to be verified later by the Syariah court.

He also added that the words used must not leave any doubts as to intent, such as “I hereby divorce you with talak satu”.

However, if the statement reads: “I want you out of my house from now on”, then the Syariah court would have to find out what the husband’s intention was at the time he made that statement.

The lawyers also said that it did not matter if the declaration of divorce on Facebook was not made known to a spouse directly as it could also be communicated via a third party.

“A divorce has taken place as soon as the individual finishes writing and as long as there is intent,” Zulkifli added.

Meanwhile, lawyer Surjan Singh said divorce declarations made on Facebook would not apply to non-Muslim couples who will have to get their marriages annulled by the courts.
Neil makes history

Neil Brady, a 39-year-old Briton ended his six-year marriage by making an announcement on Facebook last week – making it the world’s first Facebook divorce.

Foreign news reports had said that Emma Brady, 35, only found out about her husband’s intentions when he changed his Facebook status to read, “Neil Brady has ended his marriage to Emma Brady”. Emma only found out after a friend in Denmark called her up to see how she was coping.

Emma, a mother of one who works as a conference organiser, was shocked by her husband’s actions. This was disclosed during a magistrate’s court hearing in Blackburn at Neil’s sentencing hearing for allegedly assaulting Emma at their home in nearby Accrington.

The Daily Mail had also reported that Emma only joined Facebook because the girls at work said it was good fun.

“What upset me the most was not the fact that Neil had written he had ended our marriage, but the comment from a girl in Canada who said: ‘You are better off out of it’. It hurt me that he had been speaking to someone else about it,” Emma told the Daily Mail .

Emma alleges that even after Neil posted that message, he still didn’t tell her for a while that he wanted a divorce.

“He acted like everything was fine, so we carried on as normal,” she said.

Neil Brady said he did tell his wife about wanting to leave her, stating, “I’d had enough of her.”

Neil now lives with his mother.

 

[rtconstant]

Islam puts men and women in the places God created for them. It’s not sensible to say that one is better than the other, or even that they are completely the same–either would do an injustice.

What place does Islam say they are in?

And I see you are horribly informed about the realities of wife-beating, so I can beseech you only to do research on the subject. Not until very recently (in Western Christian countries, mind you) was it considered to be an issue at all, as wives were considered to be the property of their husbands.

This is a bad example, as western nations have progressed beyond that. While those attitudes are alive and well in Muslim nations. Women in the Muslim world (unless westernized) are always under the authority of a man. Beginning with their fathers, brothers and brother in laws, and eventually their husbands.

Whereas in Islam a woman has never been considered property of her husband. I know it’s tough to admit, but Islam does have the higher ground, the far superior model for inclusiveness of women in society at large, as well as rights in the public and private spheres of life.

That is quite obviously not true. Women in practically ALL nations in the past were property. The difference is that in the Christian world that eventually changed, whereas in the Muslim world it is much the same as it was in the middle ages. Unless of course the Muslims in question are westernized. Further, these repression is enforced by the religious authorities. You don’t find it odd, that secular Muslim nations, and Western nations have much better human rights records for women than religious Muslim nations? Even atheist nations have a better records and that is sad.

I remember a sad event in Pakistan where that its secular government tried to reform its laws so that a woman did not have to have male witnesses in order to file a rape charge. The religious leaders called for massive protests in order stop even that slight gain in human dignity.

Do not attempt to say that Islam respects women when it actively seeks to slow down, or in the case of Sharia in Afghanistan reverse the progress of women.

Muslims in general would find themselves more readily listened to, if they would be honest in their introspection. Almost every other religion realizes that it has things to answer for, or that it shouldn’t be proud of. Only Islam seems to feel that it is above reproach no matter what its practitioners do. For a religion that names itself on submission, Islam often shows a surprising lack of a good, healthy fear of God.

 

[rtconstant]

Rather, I think you have missed the point. You said what more or less means that the major fallacy of the Qur’an was in claiming that Jesus wasn’t crucified. And you used for proof of crucifixion the writings of Josephus. Meaning that Josephus is more authoritative than God (i.e., Qur’an.) Historians can’t really report the truth if it isn’t available or widely known. Whereas God witnesses all things, and can report the truth that is otherwise unknown. The Qur’an is from God–far more authoritative than anything else you can produce.

Josephus is significant because he is a contemporary outside source. Its always good when outside sources agree with a point of view. When this is taken along with Sacred Scripture it makes for a good argument. Since the only significant opposition didn’t occur until Mohammed had his book written centuries later. It makes the case that much stronger.

I forget sometimes people still believe this nonsense. You’re convinced that there were 600 years worth of eyewitnesses to the life of Jesus. I wonder when sense will strike you, and how you will respond. More to the point, the “trial” of Jesus is pretty much irrelevant, since I haven’t taken one side or the other as to the historical accuracy of it. It is only the death and crucifixion part to which I object. And quite frankly, I’m much more willing to believe God’s word preserved for 1400 years than I am anything you could produce.

No there wasn’t 600 years of eyewitnesses. However the gospels were written by eyewitnesses. They are collaborated by secular eye witnesses. And really no one significant seems to have had a different story until a raider from the Arabian peninsula centuries later, who most certainly wasn’t an eye witness, said otherwise. Exactly why should Mohammed be taken seriously at all?

Makes you wonder, doesn’t it, why would the Qur’an claim such a strange thing then, if it weren’t true?

The Quran makes many strange claims, then again its author, was a strange man.

Muhammad didn’t write the Qur’an. Haven’t I made that clear yet? Should I put it in my signature?

Well, if that’s true it would go a long way to improving his reputation.

Do you really believe this to be the case? Have not some of your brethren claimed that Muhammad was only repeating a “gnostic heresy?” Implying therefore that such a claim, regarding Jesus’s death, had in fact been questioned before the Qur’an. Food for thought. Either way–I trust God’s words on the matter over those of men.

Well more accurately many (including some Muslims interestingly) believe that when Muhammed wrote the Quran he based it on a blending of Christian, Jewish and Gnostic beliefs. I don’t believe there was a Gnostic belief about Jesus being smuggled off the Cross, but they did hold to ideas that Jesus was not truly physical and such.

I never said otherwise. I have read some of Josephus, by the way–and I have also read some scholars of his work who consider the passages regarding the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ to be forgeries… ouch! But that’s neither here nor there. Let’s take the writings at their word, for now.

Again, you assume I don’t know who Josephus was. I guess I can say you’re missing the point. Who knows better what really happened–God, or Josephus? Simple question, I would think. The very fact that the Qur’anic account differs from Christian theology is reason to take notice, and quite frankly given your poor evidence, a reason to believe the Qur’an instead.

God certainly. Which is why it is interesting that outside sources agree with God’s inspired word in the Bible.

Rewrite history? The truth was covered, hidden. The Qur’an actually revealed the truth.

We would believe that why?

Why do you think he didn’t, then? Why would he say that Jesus didn’t die at all, and was just raised up to heaven? Unless it were true!

Madness? Desire for personal gain? There are many reasons that are much more believable than eye witnesses and outside sources, combined with centuries of a never changing story, suddenly being pronounced wrong by someone with no connection to the events.

Rather, God said it. Are you claiming that God does not know what happened? I’ve never seen any indisputable proof that (a) John witnessed the alleged crucifixion of Jesus, or that (b) John actually recorded it in the Gospel you refer to as John.

Yes God said through through the Gospels that Christ died and rose from the dead. So John the beloved of Christ lied, but some desert raider centuries later was right? Again why would anyone believe this?

It’s easy to pretend that others are wrong. But in this case, it’s you who were mistaken. Muhammad wouldn’t have said a word on the subject except that God revealed the truth. It’s time for you to listen to it.

You’re right God has revealed the Truth, and that Truth is the Christ died on the Cross and rose from the dead. As foretold. Muhammed tried to obfuscate this and unfortunately led many of his people astray. Yet the truth remains untarnished to this day.

 

[Reuben_J]

Bravo!!!

Bravo!!!

I am impressed, Reuben J, I truly am.

I was talking about countries in Western Europe and the Americas (Western) which are predominantly made up of Christians. (Although I have no doubt that Christian people are as subject to mistreatment of women as non-Christian people.)

I wonder, then, if you can make the distinction between countries which happen to be comprised of Muslims… and yet which operate under Islam? It isn’t the subject of this thread, of course, I just wonder if we are on that even playing field.

Really, Sister Amy, so what? My subject was about Christianity and Islam. Yes, I can consider myself ‘Western’ as much as your are, perhaps with Jewish ancestry thrown in somewhere, but what that got to do with this topic?

I am not talking about mistreatment of women either. It’s about our respective theology regarding women in our respective religion, Christianity and Islam. I would not like to challenge you into this nor I think you want to, but if you can show me women are treated as bad as in Islam in Christianity, it would be interesting.

OK, so men and women are not made the same. As far as that statement goes I am all for it. It’s not my business but as a woman yourself, are you comfortably and willingly aceepting this? There are more but this first:

Bukhari:V3B48N826 “The Prophet said, ‘Isn’t the witness of a woman equal to half of that of a man?’ The women said, ‘Yes.’ He said, 'This is because of the deficiency of a woman’s mind.’”

Does this mean that I should not take seriously all your posts because what’s said in this hadith? Do you agree that your mind is deficient? Personally I don’t so and I think you are an intelligent person, but certainly that was not what the Prophet said.

Here the rest concerning women in Islam (It’s a cut n paste job):

Tabari IX:113 “Allah permits you to shut them in separate rooms and to beat them, but not severely. If they abstain, they have the right to food and clothing. Treat women well for they are like domestic animals and they possess nothing themselves. Allah has made the enjoyment of their bodies lawful in his Qur’an.”

Bukhari:V1B22N28 “The Prophet said: ‘I was shown the Hell Fire and the majority of its dwellers were women who are disbelievers or ungrateful.’ When asked what they were ungrateful for, the Prophet answered, ‘All the favors done for them by their husbands.’”

Muslim:B1N142 "‘O womenfolk, you should ask for forgiveness for I saw you in bulk amongst the dwellers of Hell.’
Qur’an 4:15 “If any of your women are guilty of lewdness, take the evidence of four witnesses from amongst you against them; if they testify, confine them to houses until death [by starvation] claims them.”

Ishaq:584 “Tell the men with you who have wives: never trust a woman.”
Tabari VIII:62

Ishaq:496 “Ali [Muhammad’s adopted son, son-in-law, and future Caliph] said, ‘Prophet, women are plentiful. You can get a replacement, easily changing one for another.’”

Even if women are not created the same but must they be created to this level vis-a-vis men?

 

[swariffin]

** In the name of Allah , the Most Gracious , Ever Merciful **

Salaam/ Peace

let me clear one thing . Muslims believe , the most major sin is blasphemy /shirk/ take diety besides God.

If one is the best person in the earth but take deities , then s/he will get rewards in this world only. To get reward from God in hereafter , u must worship God without partner.

Prophet Muhammed (p) taught us to respect both Mother Mary & Jesus (pbut) but also taught not to take any human as equal to God. Before his death , he warned followers not to overpraise him as Christians made the mistake about Jesus (p).

And what about worshipping God without doing good deed?

 

[chrisse]

I’m sorry, I can’t keep myself from laughing out loud at such an outrageous statement. I remain unimpressed, not the least by your refusal to acknowledge the reality of the suffering of people around the world because you wish to take sides with the aggressor. It’s very typical, unsurprising, and well… lame. It really does not elevate your opinion, as much as you might wish to seem on top. My values are based on teachings from God, directly. And I will take God’s laws over man’s any day of the week.

Again with the puffiness. I am seething that my texts are freely available? What did I say before? That being in a library does not make a person well-read. Indeed. The fact that texts are available means they can be read, not that you understand them (as quite clearly, you do not.) I’m not angry about that, though I imagine you can be quite embarassed–having access to so much knowledge yet unable to grasp it. Too high on the shelf perhaps?

Madam, again. I’m merely making fun of you, not even attempting a debate. Because you have no legitimate argument against me.

As what I said before–you are armed only with lies. Seek the truth.

Madam, you are still attacking the person, not engaging in the points raised in the debate. If you are not here to debate, but rather ridicule, then please leave the forum.

Again, you have lost the debate. You have declared that you have no answers to legitimate criticisms raised other than ridicule and insults to the person. As far as I am concerned, you are no longer a participant on this forum.

:yyeess: One down to the armour of knowledge.

:knight1:
21st Century Crusade : arm yourself with knowledge, fire with words.

 

[paarsurrey]

Hi:

What are some of the other “many”.

The other source is revelation:

alislam.org/library/links/5-80.html

In short, if God Almighty designs to bestow perfect understanding upon His seekers then He has certainly kept open the way of converse with them. In this context God, the Glorious, has taught us the supplication in the Holy Quran: Guide us along the path of those upon whom Thou hast bestowed Thy favors (1:6-7). Here by divine favors is meant heavenly knowledge by way of revelation and visions that are bestowed directly upon man.

At another place it is said: Upon those who, having believed in God, continue to be steadfast, descend God’s angels reassuring them: Fear not, nor grieve, and rejoice in the paradise that you have been promised (41:31). Here it is clearly stated that the righteous servants of God receive revelation from God at times of fear and grief and angels descend upon them to reassure them.

At another place it is said: that the friends of God receive glad tidings in this life through revelation and converse with God and will also have the same experience in the hereafter (10:65).

alislam.org/library/links/5-80.html

Second Coming 1835-1908 had an aceess to this source as did obviously Jesus and Moses had.

I love Jesus , Moses and Muhammad

Thanks

 

[Muslim_Woman]

** In the name of Allah , the Most Gracious , Ever Merciful **

Salaam/ Peace

And what about worshipping God without doing good deed?

On the final day , many will go to hell . After spending there few days/ months/years —depends on the mercy & will of God Almighty , those who worshipped God alone will come out of fire

Eternal fire is for those who took diety besides God.

Surely, they have disbelieved who say: “Allah is the Messiah (Iesa (Jesus)), son of Maryam (Mary).”

But the Messiah (Iesa (Jesus)) said: “O Children of Israel! Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord.”

Verily, whosoever sets up partners in worship with Allah, then Allah has forbidden Paradise for him, and the Fire will be his abode. And for the Zalimoon (polytheists and wrongdoers) there are no helpers.

( سورة المائدة , Al-Maeda, Chapter #5, Verse #72)

 

[Numinous]

Be ready to stand for the Truth, right and true members of the Catholic Church. A war with Islam is coming, and rivers of blood will flow. A new age of martyrs is upon us.

 

[dolphinlove]

** In the name of Allah , the Most Gracious , Ever Merciful **

Salaam/ Peace

On the final day , many will go to hell . After spending there few days/ months/years —depends on the mercy & will of God Almighty , those who worshipped God alone will come out of fire

Eternal fire is for those who took diety besides God.

So who worships another deity besides God, us Catholics dont, we worship the one true God.

Surely, they have disbelieved who say: “Allah is the Messiah (Iesa (Jesus)), son of Maryam (Mary).”

But the Messiah (Iesa (Jesus)) said: “O Children of Israel! Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord.”

Verily, whosoever sets up partners in worship with Allah, then Allah has forbidden Paradise for him, and the Fire will be his abode. And for the Zalimoon (polytheists and wrongdoers) there are no helpers.

( سورة المائدة , Al-Maeda, Chapter #5, Verse #72)

WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG!

We do not put partners in with God, he is ONE true God.
Your flawed quran has made a mistake, proving what that your religion is wrong and not a religion of God.

 

[swariffin]

** In the name of Allah , the Most Gracious , Ever Merciful **

Salaam/ Peace

On the final day , many will go to hell . After spending there few days/ months/years —depends on the mercy & will of God Almighty , those who worshipped God alone will come out of fire

Even without doing any good deeds??

 

[Sam_777]

he made a deal with the devil (most likely),

I thought such deals with devil are only movies based concept.

:ehh: Do you really think so, is there any incident in the past for such thing?

Hmm…, you have opened my eyes for a new possibility, I will research that.

 

[chrisse]

I thought such deals with devil are only movies based concept.

:ehh: Do you really think so, is there any incident in the past for such thing?

Hmm…, you have opened my eyes for a new possibility, I will research that.

I don’t think he made a deal with the devil in reality, but I have a saying, “when you lie down with the devil, you wake up in hell” and another one, “when you lie down with dogs, you wake up with fleas”.

Both apply to mohammet

 

[Sam_777]

WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG!

:console:

:shamrock2: