Who Is Allah?

Aug 24, 2007 Full story: The Brussels Journal 214,838

“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

Read more

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#205591 Apr 27, 2014
Muhammad teaches Allah how to be a good whore and except adultery as being lawful for Muslims.
Page 201

Al Hadis, Vol. 2, p. 705, Abu Hurairah reported that the Prophet said, "Every divorce is lawful except the divorce of an idiot or someone deranged in intellect." Attested by Tirmizi.

But then we find that Allah hates the very thing he made to be lawful:

Al Hadis, Vol. 2, p. 702, Ibn Omar reported that the Apostle of Allah said, "The most detestable of lawful things to Allah is divorce. Attested by Abu Daud.

You may ask, "How can Allah do this?" Here is the answer:

Al Hadis, Vol. 2, p. 706, Ibn Abbas reported, "There is expiation in unlawful things: Verily there is an excellent example for you in the Apostle of Allah." Attested by agreement.

Mohammed is thus the example of how Allah changes his own standards if you are high enough in the Islamic hierarchy.

And, proving that Allah creates and tolerates evil and divorce:

Al Hadis, Vol. 2, p. 708, Ma`uz-b-Jabal reported that the messenger of Allah said to him, "Allah created nothing on the face of the earth more disliked by him than divorce." Attested by Darqutni.

Please send for that one by mail if you don't believe me. Allah, in association with Satan, invented the evil of divorce, made it lawful, and his dear prophet, Mohammed, boldly exemplified the doctrine.

THE BIBLE REJECTS
Mohammed'S DIVORCE DOCTRINE
The prophet Malachi said in the Bible:

The Bible, Malachi 2:16, For the LORD, the God of Israel, saith that he hateth putting away (divorce): for one covereth violence (adultery) with his garment, saith the LORD of hosts: therefore take heed to your spirit, that ye deal not treacherously (with your wife).

The God of the Bible never approved of divorce, and He never once used a man, as a prophet or leader, who had divorced his wife. According to Jesus Christ, the only reason divorce was tolerated in Moses' law, was because of the hardness of your (Jewish) hearts... but in the beginning (in the Garden of Eden) it was not so. The Bible, Matthew 19:8.

God created the first family, and Adam, after God married him to Eve, gave us the doctrine of marriage which allowed for no divorce as we see in.....

The Bible, Genesis 2:24, Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

Let us give Jesus Christ, the righteous Judge, the last verdict against Mohammed's evil divorce doctrine:

The Bible, Luke 16:18, Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.

Since: Sep 13

UAE

#205592 Apr 27, 2014
JOEL COOL DUDE wrote:
RICHARD DAWKINS MAKES FOOL OF HIMSELF YET AGAIN - WINGS
IN THE GOD DELUSION, Richard Dawkins says that a partially formed wing would work to the extent that it is formed - a quarter of a wing would function up to 25%, a half formed wing up to 50% and so on.
He fails to see a system as an integrated whole composed of connected parts that bring the system into existence and are responsible for the functional capacities of the system.
Would a bird with a quarter of wing fly - would its pinion be capable of generating the requisite power against air currents to cause it to lift off from the ground?
Would a partially formed wing be sufficiently aerodynamically streamlined to minimize air resistance during flight?
Would a partially formed wing maintain the center of gravity of the body by keeping the line of equilibrium within the needed range to sustain balance? Of course not.
The bird with a partial wing (or with partial wings) would neither take off nor be capable of flying.
If it happens to take off from a tree branch it would simply crash to the ground below and injure itself or die due to the impact of the fall.
Take an aeroplane. Would it fly if it has a wing that is just 50% of its requisite length and the needed aerodynamic shape? No.
If the wing of a plane in midair breaks off to the extent of 25% or 50% as the case may be would it continue flying up to 25% or up to 50% in the air or would it crash? Obviously, it would crash.
The systems view is that a system is an integrated whole with all the parts of it being interconnected; destruction of any part would disable the system and the absence of any part would render the system non-functional.
Richard aiming for fame and I think he is mason
Those fight any thing related to god
They worship deviil and waiting for anti-christ
And they call him god refer him as G

G is symbol of mason
Mean eye of god who have one eye

Star refer to devil worshipper

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-OU9lYhOGDTY/TpXQbKI...

Antichrist has one eye andd he is blind and god is not blind

Symbol one eye

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Nfr53BETtjQ/UZWGWai...

• people following them blindly

Richard speech is not sacred

There is possibility to be false

He is not prophet and he is normal person

He said that human body after. Death will ruin in term
Of cells.......

But iiit was proved he is. Wrong

Prophet muhammad peace be upon him said prophet body doesn't decay

Andd it was prove

So we follow one whoo is not sure his speech or one who is sure?

http://m.youtube.com/watch...

Since: Sep 13

UAE

#205593 Apr 27, 2014
Alex WM wrote:
<quoted text>
This deranged low class troll is a Confirmed Sicko.
Let them follow there way and they will gain

http://m.youtube.com/watch...

Corruption proved from they book and they refuse to wake up

Jeremiah 23:36 &#9658;
Parallel Verses
New International Version
But you must not mention 'a message from the LORD' again, because each one's word becomes their own message. So you distort the words of the living God, the LORD Almighty, our God.

http://biblehub.com/jeremiah/23-36.htm

• wish you all happy and success in your life
hMuslim

UAE

#205594 Apr 27, 2014
Shamma wrote:
Muhammad teaches Allah how to be a good whore and except adultery as being lawful for her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.
This is worse than you mentioned about islam
God in bible allow divorce and he describe it as
Adultery as sin?!
We see several people divorcing in christianity
And so many prophet married more than one wife
Like abraham and so solomon and so on
How could do you say christianity come to complete judaism and they call them as adultery commiter
No wwonder
Prophet in bible commit adultery by actiion
Like david who killed urai to sleep with his wife bashiba
According to bible
Descriibe prophet as sinful people
As sinful as women that come to jesus who commit adultery
If so how could you call david as prophet?!
Wrong is not in david but those whoo disort god speech
Bible, Luke 16:18, Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.
• many christian celebrity got divorce
That mean law of current christianity is not god
For every time
People fight divorce law
God rule is good for every time
But as we see it doesn't last which mean it is not good for every time
In islam
God hate divorce is weak hadith
You should check it not true hadith

• let's claiim this hadith true
Crazy person testonmy is not accepted

Is not that true
In order person take decision he should be healthy and so divorce ( he doesn't know what divorce mean he maay say yes and he doesn't mean it

How could you except such person think about sex

In fact you just like who throwing ball in air instead of basket as if he say maybe this time I will do it but he fail

Every divorce is lawful except the divorce of an idiot or someone deranged in intellect." Attested by Tirmizi.

It doesn't change fact about corruption as mentioned in jeraimaih

Since: Dec 06

Location hidden

#205595 Apr 27, 2014
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
Indeed, Robert
The present does not look good because most of the lying polemic Christian apologists do not have a single cell of the qualities that Jesus had. It is hard to educate them.
Have a nice weekend.
BMZ
bmz

Peace

It does appear that most people who post are passionate about their views. But I think in real life, they are very much more composed, than their "thinking" implies....

I suppose the challenge is to first fathom one's own understanding, and for some it may be shallow, or deep, muddy or clear, and then explain it. It is in explaining things, through language, that something goes amiss.

Most people think logically, to be sure, but the concepts become clouded with words....

Peace
Roy

Narre Warren, Australia

#205597 Apr 27, 2014
Islam shucks
El Cid

Saint Albans, WV

#205598 Apr 27, 2014
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
You are really an amazing ignorant fool, Buford!
Read your own post.
IDIOT,

You only addressed one of the concerns.

Read my initial post, IDIOT.
El Cid

Saint Albans, WV

#205599 Apr 27, 2014
IDIOT,

Here's the link to my initial post: http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/islam/TT8...

You can count, can't you?
El Cid

Saint Albans, WV

#205600 Apr 27, 2014
MUQ1

Will Allah reward the good deeds of Unbelievers? S. 9:17 and 9:69 clearly say no. However, S. 99:7 implies yes. Moreover, S. 2:62 promises Christians reward for their good deeds. But S. 9:28-33; 5:17, 72-73 calls Christians idolaters, and S. 9:17 is very clear that idolaters will have no reward.

bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#205601 Apr 27, 2014
El Cid wrote:
IDIOT,
Here's the link to my initial post: http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/islam/TT8...
You can count, can't you?
I wrote in your mother language that you should bring on one at a time. Why do you fail to understand.

I have already explained one about "who was the first Muslim?", which most ignorant polemic fools bring up.

So, bring on the next verse, which neither you nor the idiot Christian polemicists can fathom. This is another fact which no Christian can deny.

bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#205603 Apr 27, 2014
Robert F wrote:
bmz
Peace

It does appear that most people who post are passionate about their views. But I think in real life, they are very much more composed, than their "thinking" implies....

I suppose the challenge is to first fathom one's own understanding, and for some it may be shallow, or deep, muddy or clear, and then explain it. It is in explaining things, through language, that something goes amiss.

Most people think logically, to be sure, but the concepts become clouded with words....
Peace
Indeed, Robert

It is a pleasure to read your thoughts. I try my best to explain but some just oppose for the sake of opposing it.

Another problem is that we are expected to provide answers, but our questions remain unanswered.

My sincere apologies to you on my remark to Shamma in response to his vain comment.

BR
BMZ

bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#205604 Apr 27, 2014
Shamma wrote:
The prophet Malachi said in the Bible:
The Bible, Malachi 2:16, For the LORD, the God of Israel, saith that he hateth putting away (divorce): for one covereth violence (adultery) with his garment, saith the LORD of hosts: therefore take heed to your spirit, that ye deal not treacherously (with your wife).
The God of the Bible never approved of divorce, and He never once used a man, as a prophet or leader, who had divorced his wife. According to Jesus Christ, the only reason divorce was tolerated in Moses' law, was because of the hardness of your (Jewish) hearts... but in the beginning (in the Garden of Eden) it was not so. The Bible, Matthew 19:8.
God created the first family, and Adam, after God married him to Eve, gave us the doctrine of marriage which allowed for no divorce as we see in.....
The Bible, Genesis 2:24, Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.
Let us give Jesus Christ, the righteous Judge, the last verdict against Mohammed's evil divorce doctrine:
The Bible, Luke 16:18, Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.
The ignorant fools among the Church fathers did not even know how to understand Jesus and neither do the Christian apologists and evangelist.

Read this with a magnifying lense and see what Jesus said:

"I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.""

Even a 3rd Grader can understand that there is an exception clause ",except for sexual immorality,".

So, if a man finds out that his wife was sexually immoral, he can divorce his wife.

Jesus therefore accepts that a man can divorce his wife if she is sexually immoral.

This is a fact which even the grandfathers of the Church cannot deny!!!

“SATYAMEV JAYATE-TRUTH WINS ”

Since: Mar 14

JUBAIL, KSA

#205605 Apr 27, 2014
STEFANO COLONNA wrote:
<quoted text>
Muhammad didn't testify anything about Jesus and Mary.
You have not read Quran, otherwise you would not say it.
Truth Seeker

New Delhi, India

#205606 Apr 27, 2014
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
Why are you licking Buford's ass? His comprehension is as bad as that of yours.
The Comprehensions are strictly between TS and Buford ..... Why you are bothered about It? You funny IDIOT of this thread !!!!!!!
Just loo at the recent posts .... 80% of them address you as a branded IDIOT. If you have some shame left, please try to use some logic or, stop commenting...
El Cid

Saint Albans, WV

#205607 Apr 27, 2014
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
I wrote in your mother language that you should bring on one at a time. Why do you fail to understand.
I have already explained one about "who was the first Muslim?", which most ignorant polemic fools bring up.
So, bring on the next verse, which neither you nor the idiot Christian polemicists can fathom. This is another fact which no Christian can deny.
IDIOT,

Will Allah reward the good deeds of Unbelievers? S. 9:17 and 9:69 clearly say no. However, S. 99:7 implies yes. Moreover, S. 2:62 promises Christians reward for their good deeds. But S. 9:28-33; 5:17, 72-73 calls Christians idolaters, and S. 9:17 is very clear that idolaters will have no reward.
Truth Seeker

New Delhi, India

#205608 Apr 28, 2014
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
"For example, yours truly finds that your New Testament cannot match Qur'aan in terms of the message, the prose and poetry, clarity and coherence.
Another example: 2nd and the 3rd gospels say that Peter said to Jesus, "You are the messiah"
Another says that Peter said, "You are the messiah, the son of the living God".
And we are told that Jesus told Peter that it was not his flesh and blood but the Father in heaven, who told him.
The fourth says it was Peter's flesh and blood Andrew, who told him that they had found the messiah."
Dear BMZ,

Do you actually believe that you can fool me with your deceptions???

These are no contradictions. It simply does not make any difference, whether 2nd and 3rd Gospel quote Peter as saying - "You are the messiah"

2nd and 3rd Gospel have already proclaimed Jesus as Son of God at the very first Chapter. Please see below -

The beginning of the good news* of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.*(Mark 1:1)

The angel said to her,‘The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born* will be holy; he will be called Son of God.(Luke 1:35)

Now coming back to the 2nd so called contradiction regarding Flesh and Blood. If you had really meant it, then you are a confirmed IDIOT.

In Gospel of Matthew, when Jesus said, it was not Peter's flesh and blood that told him that he is the Messiah, he simply meant that it was not his material senses and material knowledge that have reveled this fact to him, but it was his God realized Spiritual knowledge that made him realize that Jesus Christ is indeed the Messiah.

And in the Gospel of John, it was mentioned it was Peter's flesh and blood Andrew, who told him that they had found the messiah. Does this contradict with 1st Gospel? Of course not. Here Flesh and Blood refers to blood relation between Andrew and Peter. This has nothing to do with the word "Flesh and Blood" mentioned by Jesus in Gospel of John.

Initially I chose not to reply to you in detail simply because, I knew that it will be a shear wastage of time. Anyways, since you asked for it, I decided to spare some for you.

Since: Apr 14

Location hidden

#205609 Apr 28, 2014
Truth Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>
The Comprehensions are strictly between TS and Buford ..... Why you are bothered about It? You funny IDIOT of this thread !!!!!!!
Just loo at the recent posts .... 80% of them address you as a branded IDIOT. If you have some shame left, please try to use some logic or, stop commenting...
Mr. Truth Seeker alias HYENA why dont u stop rattling and blubbering all times..
You call BMZ and idiot first look at your conduct..

“SATYAMEV JAYATE-TRUTH WINS ”

Since: Mar 14

JUBAIL, KSA

#205610 Apr 28, 2014
El Sid wrote:
MUQ1

Will Allah reward the good deeds of Unbelievers? S. 9:17 and 9:69 clearly say no. However, S. 99:7 implies yes. Moreover, S. 2:62 promises Christians reward for their good deeds. But S. 9:28-33; 5:17, 72-73 calls Christians idolaters, and S. 9:17 is very clear that idolaters will have no reward.
Ans.

There is no "good deed" without proper belief. So called "good deeds" without correct faith are like buildings without any foundations.

They do not stand and would fall at the slightest push. In the hereafter such "good deeds" would not have any weight.

God rewards such people in this world itself, because if they do not have true faith and worship idols or false gods or associate partners with God, then they really do not seek pleasure of God.

So why not get proper faith, so you get rewards for your good deeds and also get reward and forgiveness from your God and your Creator and One who cherished you?

What is holding you back?
bmzblower

New Delhi, India

#205611 Apr 28, 2014
BMZ....( a.k.a. IDIOT)...if you cant comment anything logical or sensible please utilize your bullshit for something else.. Great people like TS & Ei Cid (buford) comment so wonderful

“SATYAMEV JAYATE-TRUTH WINS ”

Since: Mar 14

JUBAIL, KSA

#205612 Apr 28, 2014
True Guidance and Light series (5)

The Promised Prophet of the Bible By: Munqidh Bin Mahmoud Assaqqar, PhD. Part-68

Ch-21 (Contd.) The PARAKLETOS is a human prophet, not the Holy Spirit:

- The Parakletos as Jesus (PBUH) mentioned "reminds you of all what I said to you". There was no need to such a reminder ten days after his resurrection. In addition, the New Testament did not report that the Holy Spirit reminded the apostles of anything. In the contrary, we find that their writings and epistles contain what indicates that some of them had forgotten to write details mentioned
by others. The messenger of God, Muhammad (PBUH), reminds us of God's commands that were unknown to humanity, in which he revealed to his prophets including Jesus (PBUH)

.
The Parakletos has duties that the Holy Spirit did not perform on the fiftieth day. "And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment."

The Holy Spirit did not blame or correct anyone on the fiftieth day, but that was the doing of Muhammad (PBUH) with atheists and pagans.

Abdul Ahad Dawood sees, that Jesus explained the blame on the righteousness. "as of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and you see me no more”. It means that, he will blame those who believed in his crucifixion, and denied that he was saved from his wicked enemies. He told them that they will seek him but they will not find him, because he will ascend to heaven.

“Little children, yet a little while I am with you. You will seek me, and just as I said to the Jews, so now I also say to you,'Where I am going you cannot come.'(John: 13/33)

The coming prophet will blame the devil too, and indict him with the guidance and revelation that he will announce "Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged.".

Blaming does not match the one who was named the “comforter”, as it is told that he came to give condolence to the disciples for the loss of their master and prophet. Nevertheless, the condolence is given in calamities, and Jesus (PBUH) gave them good news of his departure and the arrival of the coming prophet after him.

In addition, the condolence is offered at the time of the calamity or a little after, but not ten days,(the time the Holy Spirit came to the disciples), and why did not the comforter offer condolences to the mother of Jesus, as she deserves it more than anyone else? Christians have no right to consider killing Jesus (PBUH) a calamity that requires condolences. They believe that it is the reason for humanity’s salvation and everlasting happiness. Its occurrence should be an unmatchable joy; therefore, if Christians insist that the disciples were in need for condolences from the Holy Spirit, then the Atonement creed is meaningless.

The above mentioned proved that the Holy Spirit is not the Parakletos. The Parakletos’ descriptions are descriptions of a prophet who will come after Jesus (PBUH). The prophet that Moses (PBUH) prophesized, "He does not speak from himself, but all what he hears he speaks ", and, "I will put my words in his mouth, so he speaks to them with all what I command him ". These are the descriptions of the prophet Muhammad (PBUH) as God said:

“Nor does he speak of (his own) desire. It is only an Inspiration that is inspired. He has been taught (this Qur'ân) by one mighty in power [Jibrael (Gabriel)].}(Al-Najm: 3-5).

Not only that, but also whatever mentioned about the Parakletos has signs in the Quran and the tradition of Muhammad (PBUH). These signs indicate that this prophecy is Muhammad’(PBUH). He was the testifier for Jesus (PBUH), he was the one who told about the future, and he is the final prophet, who God has accepted his faith until the Day of Judgment.

(Contd.)

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.

Archaeology Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News From parking lot to cathedral, Richard III is c... 16 hr SpaceBlues 2
News New theory on Stonehenge describes it as 'an an... Mar 23 Garry Denke 1
News On This Day: King Tut's Tomb Unsealed (Jan '13) Mar 18 susan 3
News Origin of Hindu Brahmins (Aug '08) Mar 16 original indian 188
News How ISIS Is Destroying Ancient Art in Iraq and ... Mar 11 jinxi 6
News Mummy Problems: As Florida Bans 'Climate Change... Mar 10 IB DaMann 3
News Islamic State destroying another ancient site i... Mar 7 Jeff Brightone 1
More from around the web