Who Is Allah?

Aug 24, 2007 Full story: The Brussels Journal 207,333

“Allah is a very beautiful word for God. Shouldn't we all say that from now on we will name God Allah? [...] What does God care what we call him?”

From the desk of Soeren Kern on Fri, 2007-08-24 11:56 Europeans love to mock the salience of religion in American society. via The Brussels Journal

Full Story
Buford

Hurricane, WV

#161571 Feb 3, 2013
bmz wrote:
Christianity is 100% heresy and you cannot say that it is a Jewish heresy.
This heresy was created and fuelled by foreign pagans and their philosophers. Islam has nothing to do with the Christian cult and her heresies.
And what are the things that Christianity has got it right? Nothing!
Mental Blockhead and Liar,

Of course you don't "remember" ever expressing your approval of the Sermon on the Mount and other less Mohammadanism threatening passages in the Gospel record.
Buford

Hurricane, WV

#161573 Feb 3, 2013
bmz wrote:
"Do you think people of the world can be fooled with the above ridiculous stuff in these modern times?
Mental Blockhead,

The Meccans of 7th century Arabia weren't fooled with the "ridiculous stuff" that your "prophet" brought, which is why he made no progress at all in converting them to his "true" religion until he came back years later with an army of cutthroats.

But speaking of "ridiculous stuff in these modern times," have you read any of the absurd fatwas that have been issued by Al-Azhar University?

The adult breast feeding fatwa is classic!

http://frontpagemag.com/2012/raymond-ibrahim/...

Back in May 2007, Dr. Izzat Atiya, head of Al Azhar University’s Department of Hadith, issued a fatwa, or Islamic legal decree, saying that female workers should “breastfeed” their male co-workers in order to work in each other’s company. According to the BBC:

He said that if a woman fed a male colleague “directly from her breast” at least five times they would establish a family bond and thus be allowed to be alone together at work.“Breast feeding an adult puts an end to the problem of the private meeting, and does not ban marriage,” he ruled.“A woman at work can take off the veil or reveal her hair in front of someone whom she breastfed.”

Atiya based his fatwa on a hadith —a documented saying or doing of Islam’s prophet Muhammad and subsequently one of Sharia law’s sources of jurisprudence. Many Egyptians naturally protested this decree —hadith or no hadith— though no one could really demonstrate how it was un-Islamic; for the fatwa conformed to the strictures of Islamic jurisprudence. Still, due to the protests—not many Egyptian women were eager to “breastfeed” their male coworkers—the fatwa receded, and that was that.

However, because it was never truly rebutted, it kept making comebacks.

For instance, three years later in 2010, a high-ranking Saudi, Sheikh Abdul Mohsin al-Abaican issued a fatwa confirming that “women could give their milk to men to establish a degree of maternal relations and get around a strict religious ban on mixing between unrelated men and women.” But unlike Atiya’s fatwa,“the man should take the milk, but not directly from the breast of the woman. He should drink it [from a cup] and then [he] becomes a relative of the family, a fact that allows him to come in contact with the women without breaking Islam’s rules about mixing.”

Now, a report titled “Kuwaiti Activists: Husband Breastfeeding from Wife not Prohibited,” published earlier this month by Arabic RT (see also Garaa News) opens by announcing that “The adult breastfeeding fatwa has returned once again to the spotlight, after Kuwaiti Islamic activists supported the adult breastfeeding fatwa issued by the Egyptian Salafi, Sheikh Jamal al-Murakbi [different from Al Azhar’s Sheikh Atiya]. This time around, the Kuwaitis examined the adult breastfeeding fatwa in the context of relations between a man and his wife.”
Buford

Hurricane, WV

#161575 Feb 3, 2013
Top 10 Bizarre or Ridiculous Fatwas
http://listverse.com/2010/02/25/top-10-bizarr...

#3 In 2007, the former dean of Islamic law at al-Azhar University in Cairo issued a fatwa that nudity during sexual intercourse invalidates a marriage between husband and wife. Debate was immediate. Suad Saleh, head of the women’s department of Al-Azhar’s Islamic studies, pleaded for “anything that can bring spouses closer to each other” and Islamic scholar Abdel Muti concurred, saying “Nothing is prohibited during marital sex, except of course sodomy.”

For his part, Al-Azhar’s fatwa committee chairman Abdullah Megawar backpedaled and said that married couples could see each other naked but should really cover up with a blanket during sex. http://listverse.com/2010/02/25/top-10-bizarr...

bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#161576 Feb 3, 2013
Buford wrote:
<quoted text>Mental Blockhead and Liar,
Of course you don't "remember" ever expressing your approval of the Sermon on the Mount and other less Mohammadanism threatening passages in the Gospel record.
Sorry, I forgot about that. That is the only thing which Christianity managed to get right.

The quantum of right things in Christianity is just like a pinch of salt in a container load.
Buford

Hurricane, WV

#161577 Feb 3, 2013
More "ridiculous stuff" that governs the lives of "modern" Muslim people:

Muslim bathroom etiquette
http://islamqa.info/en/ref/2532

Excerpt:

Any impurity should be washed or wiped three times or an odd number of times greater than three, according to whatever is needed to cleanse it, because ‘Aa’ishah (may Allaah be pleased with her) reported that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) used to wash his posterior three times. Ibn ‘Umar said:“We did this too and found it to be healing and cleansing.”(Reported by Ibn Maajah, 350; see also Saheeh al-Jaami’, 4993). Abu Hurayrah (may Allaah be pleased with him) reported that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:“When anyone of you cleans himself (with stones or similar material) let him use an odd number.”(Reported by Imaam Ahmad; classed as hasan in Saheeh al-Jaami’, 375).
__________
Yes, ALLAH prefers odd numbers!!!

bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#161578 Feb 3, 2013
Buford wrote:
<quoted text>Mental Blockhead,
You won't visit this link, https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/584... , but even if you do and actually read the article, you'll dismiss it as you do all such writings as the work of "ignorant fools," because, as already noted, you are unteachable, knowing all things about Christianity that can possibly be known, INCLUDING, what Jesus did "in the first thrity years of his life."
As you are fond of pointing out, "No one can deny this fact."
Christianity has always been successful in defending her lies and uses emotional blackmail.

This another fact, which no one can deny.

The spin master at your link did exactly the same.

My point is that Jesus should have refused the dip, if he were really sinless.

Also, notice that the voice called only for the first time in 30 years of his life, not before. So, the voice called only after he was cleansed of his sins of the past, whatever they were.
Buford

Hurricane, WV

#161579 Feb 3, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, I forgot about that. That is the only thing which Christianity managed to get right.
The quantum of right things in Christianity is just like a pinch of salt in a container load.
Mental Blockhead and Liar,

You don't even agree with your "prophet," who affirmed that Jesus was a miraculously conceived miracle worker.
Lone Worker

Bellevue, WA

#161580 Feb 3, 2013
After Jesus was baptized, the Spirit led him up to be tempted by the devil which is the spirit of sin and he resisted and overcame by quoting what was written in the word of God. The Spirit of God was upon Jesus and he proved he was able to serve as the instrumentality for God's salvation of man and it pleased God to send him to his ministry and to the cross.

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#161582 Feb 3, 2013
Lone Worker wrote:
After Jesus was baptized, the Spirit led him up to be tempted by the devil which is the spirit of sin and he resisted and overcame by quoting what was written in the word of God. The Spirit of God was upon Jesus and he proved he was able to serve as the instrumentality for God's salvation of man and it pleased God to send him to his ministry and to the cross.
spam

bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#161583 Feb 3, 2013
Buford wrote:
<quoted text>Mental Blockhead and Liar,
You don't even agree with your "prophet," who affirmed that Jesus was a miraculously conceived miracle worker.
I am talking about the biblical Jesus.

It was not the child, who was miraculous, the mother was a miraculous woman, who conceived a child without anyone touching her. She knew no one and no man ever knew her.

Qur'aan and the Prophet affirmed that the son of Mary was a messenger of God. Both never affirmed that the son of Mary, was a miraculously conceived miracle worker.
Buford

Hurricane, WV

#161584 Feb 3, 2013
bmz wrote:
My point is that Jesus should have refused the dip, if he were really sinless.
Mental Blockhead,

The point is that you understand nothing about "biblical Jesus," but are quite prepared to imagine all manner of filth about him, which is one of your least endearing qualities.
Lone Worker

Bellevue, WA

#161585 Feb 3, 2013
Jesus prayed that the cup that he was to take be done some other way, but no other way was found even after he had fervently cried to his father so much that his sweat was as great drops of blood. Jesus said to his father to then let his will be done and he willfully went to the cruel cross.

bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#161586 Feb 3, 2013
Lone Worker wrote:
After Jesus was baptized, the Spirit led him up to be tempted by the devil which is the spirit of sin and he resisted and overcame by quoting what was written in the word of God. The Spirit of God was upon Jesus and he proved he was able to serve as the instrumentality for God's salvation of man and it pleased God to send him to his ministry and to the cross.
Why was he led to Satan for testing? Wasn't the Father, who was mighty pleased, sure? He should not have been sent to Satan at all!
Buford

Hurricane, WV

#161587 Feb 3, 2013
bmz wrote:
I am talking about the biblical Jesus.
It was not the child, who was miraculous, the mother was a miraculous woman, who conceived a child without anyone touching her. She knew no one and no man ever knew her.
Qur'aan and the Prophet affirmed that the son of Mary was a messenger of God. Both never affirmed that the son of Mary, was a miraculously conceived miracle worker.
Mental Blockhead,

There really must be something structurally wrong with the way your brain processes information...

bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#161588 Feb 3, 2013
Buford wrote:
<quoted text>Mental Blockhead,
The point is that you understand nothing about "biblical Jesus," but are quite prepared to imagine all manner of filth about him, which is one of your least endearing qualities.
Not true.

I can imagine all the filth generated about him by the early Church fathers, Paul and the writers of the gospels. I see no filth in the son of Mary through Islamic lens.

And keep in mind that I look at the biblical Jesus through the biblical lens.

The Church has churned out so much rubbish in the name of Jesus and this should ring alarm bells in the mind of every Christian. I have already found that out. It is time you start studying and discover the true Jesus.

Buford, everything that Christianity claims about Jesus, gets ZERO support from Jesus. It is extremely hagiographic.
Lone Worker

Bellevue, WA

#161589 Feb 3, 2013
Jesus is the lamb of God given in sacrifice for the atonement of man and for all the work of God. Bless his Holy name!

bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#161590 Feb 3, 2013
Buford wrote:
<quoted text>Mental Blockhead,
There really must be something structurally wrong with the way your brain processes information...
Not really.

Keep on reading and absorbing my posts. You will learn.

bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#161591 Feb 3, 2013
Good night all.
rabbee yehoshooah adam

Denver, CO

#161592 Feb 3, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
If you want me to believe that Jesus is YOUR God, then do me a favour. Kick the Father and the alleged Holy Ghost out!
Throw away all junk and stuff of various stupid and absurd man-made doctrines, which do not have any leg to stand upon.
Do that asap (as soon as possible)
rabbee: it is not appropiate, for any even alleged as holy man. to commit blastphemy, and encourage any one to sin reguardless of the situation. and shall never be considered, as cute, funny, or witty by G-D. if you can't keep your responses true to G-D, then it is better to not say anything at all. least you reveal your lack of, any holiness in yourself.
rabbee yehoshooah adam

Denver, CO

#161593 Feb 3, 2013
Paul WV wrote:
<quoted text>
Unlike with islam that can make up whatever they want, the Catholic Church only speaks what God wants not what man wants.
rabbee: which is considered, worse by G-D? to make up your own unholy text, or to alter The Holy Text.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Roman Catholic Church Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 12 min June VanDerMark 559,547
Protesters: "Not the time" to change Cuba relat... 41 min barefoot2626 20
Vatican signals new tone on US nuns 1 hr Raymond F Rice 2
Amazing change occurred at transgendered woman'... (Jan '14) 2 hr LoriTG 40
Pope plays key role in Cuba-US policy shift 3 hr Doc Proper 12
Saint of the Day thread (May '10) 7 hr MichelleMC 2,527
Catholic Church Waging War on Women and Gays (Oct '07) 20 hr feces for jesus 219,634
More from around the web