Miracles of Muhammad at Speaker’s Corner
Hatun and a Christian brother ask Muslims what miracles Muhammad performed?
“And We refrain from sending the signs, only because the men of former generations treated them as false: We sent the she-camel to the Thamud to open their eyes, but they treated her wrongfully: We only send the Signs by way of terror (and warning from evil).” Sura 17:59
To support the work of DCCI https://paypal.me/supportDCCI
Miracles of Muhammed: 1) finding the only 9-year old girl in Arabia who was ready for marriage and sex with a 54-year old man. 2) Producing no male heirs to his family line in spite of marrying about triple the limit of wives everyone else was allowed. For a young woman the probability of conceiving is about 60% per year. The probability that Aisha would not get pregnant over 9 years would be about one in 3815. (if you believe the rest of the Hadith) 3) Fooling all of Arabia about being a Prophet except possibly Aisha and Hafsa.
Narrated Ibn Masud:
During the lifetime of Allah’s Messenger (?) the moon was split into two parts; one part remained over the mountain, and the other part went beyond the mountain. On that, Allah’s Messenger (?) said, “Witness this miracle.”
USC-MSA web (English) reference : Vol. 6, Book 60, Hadith 387
Arabic reference : Book 65, Hadith 4864
Narrated Anas bin Malik:
saw Allah’s Messenger (?) when the `Asr prayer was due and the people searched for water to perform ablution but they could not find it. Later on (a pot full of) water for ablution was brought to Allah’s Apostle . He put his hand in that pot and ordered the people to perform ablution from it. I saw the water springing out from underneath his fingers till all of them performed the ablution (it was one of the miracles of the Prophet).
Reference : Sahih al-Bukhari 169
In-book reference : Book 4, Hadith 35
USC-MSA web (English) reference : Vol. 1, Book 4, Hadith 170
(deprecated numbering scheme)
Narrated Anas:
A man came to the Prophet (?) on a Friday while he (the Prophet) was delivering a sermon at Medina, and said, “There is lack of rain, so please invoke your Lord to bless us with the rain.” The Prophet (?) looked at the sky when no cloud could be detected. Then he invoked Allah for rain. Clouds started gathering together and it rained till the Medina valleys started flowing with water. It continued raining till the next Friday. Then that man (or some other man) stood up while the Prophet (?) was delivering the Friday sermon, and said, “We are drowned; Please invoke your Lord to withhold it (rain) from us” The Prophet smiled and said twice or thrice, “O Allah! Please let it rain round about us and not upon us.” The clouds started dispersing over Medina to the right and to the left, and it rained round about Medina and not upon Medina. Allah showed them (the people) the miracle of His Prophet and His response to his invocation.
Reference : Sahih al-Bukhari 6093
In-book reference : Book 78, Hadith 120
USC-MSA web (English) reference : Vol. 8, Book 73, Hadith 115
(deprecated numbering scheme)
“Danny Newton says: Miracles of Muhammed: 1) finding the only 9-year old girl in Arabia who was ready for marriage and sex with a 54-year old man.”
-Not only Aisha, even the old woman Sawdah can’t move on from her true love of the Prophet.
-Aisha has 3 years of waiting during the time of Makkah to reject the Prophet before then she goes to Madinah, and she chooses not to do so.
-Aisha has a moment to divorce the Prophet when he takes the 3rd wife Hafsa, a 17 y.o. daughter of Umar.
-In Hadith, Aisha befriends Hafsa, and she talks to her as her friend of the same age, she doesn’t consider Hafsa as her older friend.
Close to Aisha’s age (18 y.o. for Aisha, and 19 y.o. for Hafsa), a young Hafsa was welcomed into the household of Aisha and Sawdah. Aisha and Hafsa had a lasting relationship. As soon as Hafsah had completed her Iddah, Umar offered her to Uthman Ibn Affan, and then to Abu Bakr, but they both refused her. When Umar went to the Prophet to complain about this, he replied: Allah will marry your daughter to better than Uthman (i.e. Prophet himself).
By assuming that Hafsah was born in 605, and the Prophet married Hafsah in Shabaan 30 months after Hijra, thus Hafsah was 19 years old at that time.
“2) Producing no male heirs to his family line in spite of marrying about triple the limit of wives everyone else was allowed. For a young woman the probability of conceiving is about 60% per year. The probability that Aisha would not get pregnant over 9 years would be about one in 3815. (if you believe the rest of the Hadith) ”
There’s wisdom for that, it is to end the line of Prophethood at our Prophet Muhammad.
“3) Fooling all of Arabia about being a Prophet except possibly Aisha and Hafsa.”
Impossible…If so, Why don’t those two earliest wives choose to divorce him unlike other wives did? Once the women fall in love with the Prophet, they won’t reject him.
I understand your reasoning for the conclusion that Aisha was older than nine when they consummated the marriage but I don’t understand throwing out the contradictory Hadith attributed to Aisha that says she was nine years old. According to the tradition, Aisha was a slender and delicate woman who weighed so little, nobody noticed she was not in her place when her carrier(howdah) was set upon a camel. As a nine-year old, who was likely to be even more slender and delicate, a marriage to a 53/54 year shocks modern sensibilities.
Once you start cherry picking the Hadith or the Qur’an, you suddenly become like a lot of Christians who want to ignore difficult sections of the Bible. Like a lot of things in Islam, there are contradictory facts and conclusions resulting in duality that gives scant confidence that the Truth is actually known. If Muslim scholars can not agree on this, it is not likely that I will crack the code any time soon.
I do believe Aisha and Hafsa were fast and close friends and that they worked together to make the best of their situation. I also view the idea that Aisha had the option of divorce as ridiculous. I suspect that Aisha knew that Muhammed was a false prophet and was manipulating the people for his own benefit. After all, Muhammed was getting 20% of the war booty and 100% of the booty if there was no fight. A lot of the marriages were attributed to political alliances thus putting an additional layer of pressure to stay in the marriage. Aisha watched the beheading of the Jews and kafirs at the Trench. If she was half as smart at the legend claims, she would keep her mouth shut. Sura 58:5 says: ” Those who oppose Allah and his Messenger will be laid low…” I further suspect that the whole idea of taking his wives on Jihad had the goal of producing a male heir more likely.
Any Muslim who converts to Christianity or even atheism has a huge hill to climb with respect to pressure from relatives and the Muslim community at large. I have heard people in the Dawah team want to know the names of Muslims who become Christians. No one answers for good reasons. If you live in America, you may get lucky and just be disowned passively but there are cases where a member of the family has been dispatched to kill a sister, aunt or brother. A student who claimed that the earth was round and took the form of an oblate spheroid was killed in a Mosque in Phoenix, Arizona by two other Muslim assassins. The message is clear: Keep your doubts to yourself.
“Danny Newton says: I understand your reasoning for the conclusion that Aisha was older than nine when they consummated the marriage but I don’t understand throwing out the contradictory Hadith attributed to Aisha that says she was nine years old.”
This is a classic mistake of the readers of Hadith. That’s why the Moslem debaters keep asking a circular question to Non-Moslems: do you speak Arabic fluently?
Aisha uses idiom known only by Arabs at her time, as Hadith of Abu Dawud explains it:
-Six year in Arabic idiom means “day when I got my first menses”.
-Nine year in Arabic idiom means I am fully mature several years after I got menses.
Arabic has idioms, like in English idioms “reading it between the line” (how could you read an empty line spacing? no), or”it is for your eyes only” (is this about the glasses or contact lens? no).
English idioms relate to age, such as “knee-high to a grasshopper”, “tender age”, “over the hill”, “long in the tooth”.
Abi Dawud, Book 42, Hadith 4915
Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu’minin: The Messenger of Allah married me when I was seven or six. ….Abu Dawud said: That is to say: I menstruated, and I was brought in a house, and there were some women of the Ansari in it. They said: With good luck and blessing. The tradition of one of them has been included in the other.
“According to the tradition, Aisha was a slender and delicate woman who weighed so little, nobody noticed she was not in her place when her carrier(howdah) was set upon a camel. As a nine-year old, who was likely to be even more slender and delicate, a marriage to a 53/54 year shocks modern sensibilities.”
Aisha had never been a chubby fat lady until she enjoyed much food after Khaybar’s tributary.
Shama’il Muhammadiyah, Book 24, Hadith 140
Masruq says. I went to ‘Aisha. She ordered’ food for me and began saying: I never eat a stomach-full but feel like crying, then I do cry. Masruq asked: Why do you feel like crying? She replied: I remember that condition of Rasulullah on which he left us for the next world. I swear by Allah that, he never filled his stomach twice in one day with meat or bread.
“Once you start cherry picking the Hadith or the Qur’an, you suddenly become like a lot of Christians who want to ignore difficult sections of the Bible.”
Other Hadith is explained by other Hadith especially in the use of Arabic idioms.
In English, we have idioms concerning one’s age, such “Last time I saw you, you were knee-high to a grasshopper”, “It’s easier to learn languages at a tender age”, et cetera.
“Like a lot of things in Islam, there are contradictory facts and conclusions resulting in duality that gives scant confidence that the Truth is actually known.”
That’s why Moslems used to firstly ask the Non-Moslems “do you know how to speak in Arabic?”
Arabic translations do not give a clue or hint about Arabic idioms.
“If Muslim scholars can not agree on this, it is not likely that I will crack the code any time soon.”
Most Moslem scholars know very well the uses of Arabic idioms, such as expression of “6 y.o.”, except ones who don’t know much about Arabic.
Languages have idioms of their own.
“I do believe Aisha and Hafsa were fast and close friends and that they worked together to make the best of their situation. I also view the idea that Aisha had the option of divorce as ridiculous. I suspect that Aisha knew that Muhammed was a false prophet and was manipulating the people for his own benefit.”
On the contrary, I think, and many Moslems agree with me, that so many old women *rushed* to be the Prophet’s wives and fiances (I think, the number could be perhaps more than what Historians and Hadith knew or mentioned) in order to get an easy “shortcut” to Heaven, as well as a honorable title of Ummul Mu’minin, double blessing, and protection.
Being the Prophet’s wife to get Heaven is a more easier way than any other option.
“After all, Muhammed was getting 20% of the war booty and 100% of the booty if there was no fight. ”
Whatever is received by the Prophet in the morning gets distributed quickly for the alms (of 8 groups of recipients) before the afternoon.
Whatever is received by the Prophet in the afternoon gets distributed immediately for the alms (of 8 groups of recipients) before the forenoon.
“A lot of the marriages were attributed to political alliances thus putting an additional layer of pressure to stay in the marriage.”
Prophet Muhammad have a lot of the women who divorced him, rejected him, and avoided him, being more greater than the number of his wives:
Mulayka bint Kaab,
Fatima al-Aliya bint Zabyan al-Dahhak,
Asma bint Al-Numan,
Amra bint Yazid,
Ghaziya (Umm Sharik) bint Jabir,
Khawla bint Hudhayl,
Sharaf bint Khalifa,
Layla bint al-Khutaym,
Umm Habib bint Al-Abbas,
Sana al-Nashat bint Rifaa (Asma) ibn As-Salt,
Umra bint Rifaa,
Bint Jundub ibn Damra of Janda’a,
Jamra bint Al-Harith,
Al-Shanba’ bint Amr,
Qutayla (Habla) bint Qays,
Women who refused the Prophet:
Fakhita (Umm Hani) bint Abi Talib,
Habiba bint Sahl,
Al-Ansariya,
Khawla bint Hakim,
Dubaa bint Amir,
Izza bint Abi Sufyan,
Durrah bint Abi Salama,
Umama bint Hamza,
Safiyah bint Bashshama al-Anbari.
“Aisha watched the beheading of the Jews and kafirs at the Trench. If she was half as smart at the legend claims, she would keep her mouth shut. Sura 58:5 says: ” Those who oppose Allah and his Messenger will be laid low…” I further suspect that the whole idea of taking his wives on Jihad had the goal of producing a male heir more likely.”
There’s no loss of Heavens whatsoever for any Moslem woman who refused or gets divorced by Prophet Muhammad in accordance to her consent.
We Moslems do not consider the divorcement as a way of apostasy or Kafir.
“Any Muslim who converts to Christianity or even atheism has a huge hill to climb with respect to pressure from relatives and the Muslim community at large. I have heard people in the Dawah team want to know the names of Muslims who become Christians. No one answers for good reasons. If you live in America, you may get lucky and just be disowned passively but there are cases where a member of the family has been dispatched to kill a sister, aunt or brother.”
Yes, the insulting apostates need to be stopped by imprisonment (per Q.5, v.33).
“A student who claimed that the earth was round and took the form of an oblate spheroid was killed in a Mosque in Phoenix, Arizona by two other Muslim assassins. The message is clear: Keep your doubts to yourself.”
Doubting is not a strong reason to spill a precious Moslem blood. There are three sins by which the blood of person is counted Halal, but the doubting is not one of them.
The family of victim and Ummah has a duty to Retaliate the killers in the name of Qisas.
By his “bad” fruits, Paul misuses the Holy Spirit to curse Elymas to be blind, by claiming that “Lord’s hand” produces evil thing.
Isn’t an evidence of Paul’s black magic?
where’s love?
where’s excuse “vengeance belongs to God”?
Acts 13:9
Then Saul, who also is called Paul, filled with the Holy Ghost, set his eyes on him,10 And said, O full of all subtilty and all mischief, thou child of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord?11 And now, behold, the hand of the Lord is upon thee, and thou shalt be blind, not seeing the sun for a season. And immediately there fell on him a mist and a darkness; and he went about seeking some to lead him by the hand.
Most Christians believe that Paul would not be able to “use the Holy Spirit” because the Holy Spirit is one of the three persons of the Trinity. The fact that Muslims reject the notion of a Trinity is probably making it hard to understand from the Christian perspective. Most commentators say that Bar-Jesus and Elymas are the same person.
I think he got off pretty light compared to Hafsa’s slave girl who was accused of sorcery.
Yahya related to me from Malik from Muhammad ibn Abd ar-Rahman ibn Sad ibn Zurara that he had heard that Hafsa, the wife of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, killed one of her slave-girls who had used sorcery against her. She was a mudabbara. Hafsa gave the order, and she was killed.
Malik said, “The sorcerer is the one who uses sorcery for himself and no one else uses that for him. It is like the one about whom Allah, the Blessed, the Exalted, said in His Book, ‘They know the one who devotes himself to it will have no share in the Next World.’ (Sura 2 ayat 102) I think that that person is killed if he does that himself.”
“Danny Newton says: Most Christians believe that Paul would not be able to “use the Holy Spirit” because the Holy Spirit is one of the three persons of the Trinity. The fact that Muslims reject the notion of a Trinity is probably making it hard to understand from the Christian perspective. Most commentators say that Bar-Jesus and Elymas are the same person.”
My point is, Causing a blindness on a person is a hallmark of the “Black magics”. Paul doesn’t summon the Holy Spirit. How could a holy thing cause sickness such as blindness?
Paul casts a spell of Black magics by using the unholy spirits, i.e. demons.
“I think he got off pretty light compared to Hafsa’s slave girl who was accused of sorcery.”
The chain of Hadith aboit Hafsa’s slave girl doesn’t reach to the acts of Prophet Muhammad, thus her action is not binding. Moreover, Hafsa doesn’t use the Black magics to kill the accused witch.
Thus, the Hadith has a different context from a story of “Paul’s Black magics”.
[email protected]:
If Paul used “black magic” so effectively, why did he not use it to curse, control and be more effective in routing out early Christians when his name was Saul? (before his conversion) If you object to black magic, who cast the spell to protect Issa from being seized and crucified? Does Allah use “black magic” or is his Prophet Issa using black magic for his own purposes? The idea that Paul used black magic is something that you have read into the text. I don’t see any evidence in the text that black magic was used or approved by anyone who should be admired. Jesus was accused of doing miracles by the power of Satan to damage his reputation. I assume that this means that at the time, the use of black magic was frowned upon. The use of black magic by a learned Jew seems highly improbable.
“Danny Newton says: If Paul used “black magic” so effectively, why did he not use it to curse, control and be more effective in routing out early Christians when his name was Saul? (before his conversion)”
Perhaps he used it secretly, thus the author of Book of Acts doesn’t witness what he did, but in Acts 13:9-10 Paul’s evil mask slipped. Paul is a dark wizard.
Also, Paul or Saul was possessed by unknown devils so he got a trance under an unknown “voice” in Acts 22:-17-18.
This is a difference: Jesus healed, not blinded, whereas Paul blinded a person’s eyes. You know Paul by his evil fruit. Jesus didn’t judge in his time, whereas Paul judged men during his time, thus evil fruits.
“If you object to black magic, who cast the spell to protect Issa from being seized and crucified?”
Black Magics doesn’t deal with a good thing such as protection.
Black magics harms, hurts, and hits.
Jesus never blinded any person, not even Pilate, Judas, and High Priest.
“Does Allah use “black magic” or is his Prophet Issa using black magic for his own purposes?”
Never. Isa heals the blindness, not blinded a person’s eyes.
But Paul blinded a person Elymas, and he was possessed by devils so he got a trance under an unknown “voice” in Acts 22:-17-18.
“The idea that Paul used black magic is something that you have read into the text.”
That’s a simple judging with his evil fruit: Causing the blindness via a spell is a hallmark of the Black Magics.
Paul is a dark wizard. Paul causes a sickness.
“I don’t see any evidence in the text that black magic was used or approved by anyone who should be admired.”
None would admire the dark wizard.
We just examine the fact: Paul casts a spell that makes a blindness, thus he is evil.
“Jesus was accused of doing miracles by the power of Satan to damage his reputation.”
Jesus healed, not blinded a person’s eyes.
Jesus didn’t judge the sinners, he didn’t hurt the sinners.
“I assume that this means that at the time, the use of black magic was frowned upon. The use of black magic by a learned Jew seems highly improbable.”
There are a long time 3 years in Arabia that could allow Paul a trained Jew to learn the Black Magics from the Solubba.
Solubba or Sleb, were Hutaymi tribal group from 7000 BC in the northern part of the Arabian Peninsula who were clearly distinguishable from the Arabs.
Solluba were known as fortune-tellers and magicians. They retained some of their traditional beliefs, worshipping the boulder al-Weli Abu Ruzuma, located in the Syrian Desert. Their emblem, which was shown at ceremonial festivities, was a cross wrapped with a dress.
[email protected]:
My point is, Causing a blindness on a person is a hallmark of the “Black magics”. Paul doesn’t summon the Holy Spirit. How could a holy thing cause sickness such as blindness?
Paul casts a spell of Black magics by using the unholy spirits, i.e. demons.
D. Newton: I will have to yield to your superior knowledge of the Black Arts in this case but God does not need Black Arts to accomplish His purposes. The use of Black Arts is thought to be a sign of spiritual weakness. In the case of Saul, the King from the Old Testament, he worried too much about the future and consulted a witch. As a general pattern, the good kings of Israel had faith in God and the bad kings of Israel compromised with the temptation to worship other gods. Christians believe that mankind must be “delivered from evil” because we are not able on our own power to do it ourselves. Only God has the knowledge and power to see the big picture and truly deliver us from evil. Ephesians 6:12 , Paul says:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
This passage says that Paul is wrestling against evil, not using evil .
[email protected]: My point is, Causing a blindness on a person is a hallmark of the “Black magics”. Paul doesn’t summon the Holy Spirit. How could a holy thing cause sickness such as blindness?
Paul casts a spell of Black magics by using the unholy spirits, i.e. demons.
Danny Newton: I don’t see any “black magic” being used by Paul. This is a confrontation between good and evil. It was the sorcerer who was using black magic and it was Paul letting the sorcerer know from where his downfall was coming. The normal action of the Holy Spirit is to instruct people concerning a critical matter like the condition of their soul. I assume that the sorcerer was getting in the way of a bigger and more important plan in Paul’s ministry and would serve as a more useful too if he was temporarily blinded.
[email protected] says:
12 December 2018 at 2:31 pm
By his “bad” fruits, Paul misuses the Holy Spirit to curse Elymas to be blind, by claiming that “Lord’s hand” produces evil thing.
Isn’t an evidence of Paul’s black magic?
Did you suspect black magic when you first read of Muhammed presenting water flowing from between his fingers for ablution ?(Sahih Muslim 2279a) What about the time half a wasq of barley that was given to a bigger provided a never ending supply of food until the bigger attempted to weigh it? What about the fountain of Tabot where Muhammed transforms a skinny stream of water into a gushing stream of water fit for irrigation? What about the never ending supply of clarified butter that is interrupted by the woman who tried to squeeze the skin? Was that black magic? Didn’t Muhammed consider magic second to shirk as one of the seven sins that dooms one to Hell?
Peter forces a Christian couple to give him all money of the selling of land they owned, in other word Peter confiscates their money, by using a threat to scare them.
Eventually the couple were killed suddenly in their fear:
where’s love?
isn’t threatening a sin?
isn’t act of forcing the people to give the tithes a sin?
Acts 5
4 Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God.5 And Ananias hearing these words fell down, and gave up the ghost: and great fear came on all them that heard these things.9 Then Peter said unto her, How is it that ye have agreed together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord? behold, the feet of them which have buried thy husband are at the door, and shall carry thee out.10 Then fell she down straightway at his feet, and yielded up the ghost: and the young men came in, and found her dead, and, carrying her forth, buried her by her husband.11 And great fear came upon all the church, and upon as many as heard these things.
Most Christians understand this passage as referring to a voluntary pledge to give the church the proceeds from a sale of property that was broken. Unfortunately, the pledge was made to the Holy Spirit and the vow was broken by taking a little off the top first. Once again, I dread the idea of trying to explain to a Muslim the concept of a Trinity but, the Holy Spirit is one of the three persons of the Trinity. What these two people did was lie to the Holy Spirit. This is considered an unpardonable sin. Matthew 12: 31 “Therefore I say to you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven men. 32 Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come.” The idea of God having a Holy Spirit is found even in the Old Testament. Some Christians believe that a very bad habit such as proclaiming “God told me or you to do (fill in the Blank) amounts to the unpardonable sin. You might recognize this as religious innovation. Manufacturing unauthentic contacts with the Holy Spirit is usually associated with manipulative secular behavior not holiness.
I think you will find that Abu Bakr had a bad attitude about withholding Zakat:
It was narrated that Abu Hurairah said: “When Abu Bakr mobilized to fight them, ‘Umar said: ‘O Abu Bakr, how can you fight the people when the Messenger of Allah (?) said: “I have been commanded to fight the people until they say La ilaha illallah (there is none worthy or worship except Allah). Whoever says La ilaha illallah, his life and his property are safe from me, except for its right, and his reckoning will be with Allah?'” Abu Bakr, may Allah be pleased with me him, said: ‘By Allah, I will surely fight those who separate prayer and Zakah, for Zakah is what is due on wealth. By Allah, if they withhold from me a small she-goat that they used to give to the Messenger of Allah (?) I will fight them for withholding it.’ (‘Umar said) ‘By Allah, when I realized that Allah, the Most High, had opened the chest of Abu Bakr to fighting them, then I knew that it was the truth.'”
Sunan an-Nasa’I 3093
“Danny Newton says: Most Christians understand this passage as referring to a voluntary pledge to give the church the proceeds from a sale of property that was broken. Unfortunately, the pledge was made to the Holy Spirit and the vow was broken by taking a little off the top first.”
Voluntary tithe is supposed to not provoke any punishment.
Voluntary charity is not forced.
If it is made obligatory (all money of the sales has to be given), it is not voluntary any longer.
Ironically, the changing of definition is a lie.
“Once again, I dread the idea of trying to explain to a Muslim the concept of a Trinity but, the Holy Spirit is one of the three persons of the Trinity.”
Do you imply that 1/3 of the Trinity is not a person of love, but a hatred, a terror, and a death?
Can you revise your Bible to a new statement “God is not anymore always love”, eh?
“What these two people did was lie to the Holy Spirit. This is considered an unpardonable sin.”
Unpardonable sin = death on the spot?
Is it a new definition or new consideration?
Voluntary tithe = confiscating the money by force?
“Matthew 12: 31 “Therefore I say to you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven men. 32 Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come.” The idea of God having a Holy Spirit is found even in the Old Testament. Some Christians believe that a very bad habit such as proclaiming “God told me or you to do (fill in the Blank) amounts to the unpardonable sin. You might recognize this as religious innovation. Manufacturing unauthentic contacts with the Holy Spirit is usually associated with manipulative secular behavior not holiness.”
The Bible is manipulative:
– It changes the definition of voluntary (voluntary tithe) to a forced confiscation.
– It changes the definition of charity to a deadly punishment.
– It changes the love to death.
– It changes the definition with a lie.
[email protected]
The Bible is manipulative:
– It changes the definition of voluntary (voluntary tithe) to a forced confiscation.
– It changes the definition of charity to a deadly punishment.
– It changes the love to death.
– It changes the definition with a lie.
Danny Newton:
Involuntary or coerced religious contributions are only found, as far as I know, in Islam and Mormonism. Mormons, though they pretend to be Christians, are not . The punishment was for lying to the Holy Spirit. I am not sure they even had time to turn over the money. Besides, God does not need your money. When you convert to Christianity, it will be the Holy Spirit informing you of your error. I have no idea how you got the idea that God is Santa Clause. God, among other things, is just. How can He overlook sin? How can he not eventually punish all unforgiven sin? Your only refuge is Jesus.
While we are on the subject of coerced charity, I think the Sunna is full of warnings about paying the Zakat and what happens to people who don’t pay the Zakat. I see a lot of warnings to women to give Charity on penalty of Hell Fire. So brother, as Jesus would say, take care of the beam in you own eye before noticing the spec in my eye. A great theologian and author named Norman Geisler wrote a book called the “Big Book of Bible Difficulties.” I will save you about $25 by telling you the over arching conclusion: The purpose of the Bible is to find out what is wrong with you rather than you trying to find out what is wrong with the Bible. Merry Christmas.
P.S. Are you still dodging the question about the Zakat being used for Jihad?
“Danny Newton says: Involuntary or coerced religious contributions are only found, as far as I know, in Islam and Mormonism.”
In Islam, charity is voluntary, whereas Zakat is just taken 2.5% from accumulative yearly money, “after” reaching 87.48 grams of gold that remains your yearly deposit.
Zakat is taken after you have $3,509.22 in deposit.
2.5% = just $87.73.
“I have no idea how you got the idea that God is Santa Clause.”
Sorry maybe I am bit rude on this: Jesus was a defilement coming from a woman’s private organ. You celebrate her defilement as “Christmas” with a flying Santa?
Mk 7:15
There is nothing from without a human, that entering into him can defile him: but the things which come out of him, those are they that defile the human.
“While we are on the subject of coerced charity, I think the Sunna is full of warnings about paying the Zakat and what happens to people who don’t pay the Zakat.”
Charity is volutarily, there’s no percentage, but Zakat is annually, it is just taken 2.5% from accumulative yearly money “after” reaching 87.48 grams of gold that remains your yearly deposit, so it could be as much as $3,509.22.
2.5% of it = just $87.73.
“The purpose of the Bible is to find out what is wrong with you rather than you trying to find out what is wrong with the Bible. Merry Christmas.”
Tell me, what comes out of Mary is a defilement, isn’t it?
Merry defilement, eh?
“P.S. Are you still dodging the question about the Zakat being used for Jihad?”
No, killing our innocent children and Palestinian youths is not Jihad, but a crime Zionists did.
IF what the US court found about HLF is true, not a conspiracy deceit, then the US helps Islam take care of the Moslem children from a likeness of Zionist plot.
IF what the US court found about HLF is true, not fabrication, then it has disliked and abandoned the Sunnah of not killing the women and children, thus it is not among the follower of Prophet Muhammad.
Worse, whosoever mimics other religion is its follower: Zionists kill the innocent children of Arabs. By letting the children commit suicide bombings, it is an act of mimicking what Zionist do, thus becoming its follower.
[email protected]:
Sorry maybe I am bit rude on this: Jesus was a defilement coming from a woman’s private organ. You celebrate her defilement as “Christmas” with a flying Santa?
D. Newton :Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) was asked about the deed which will be foremost to lead a man to Jannah. He replied, “Fear of Allah and the good conduct.” Then he was asked about indulgence which will admit a man to Hell (Fire) and he answered, “The tongue and the genitals.”
[At- Tirmidhi].
Arabic/English book reference
: Book 1, Hadith 627
Jesus said that (Matt 15- 17) What comes out of the mouth proceeds from the heart and this is what defiles a person. Jesus had to be born in a natural way to fulfill a prophecy and to provide a genealogy that would lead back to David. Jews will object to this because the path back to David does not lead to the tribe of Levi. The Levites were divorcing their Jewish wives in order to marry non-Jewish wives. This and other transgressions are thought to be the reason the Levites will lose their right of priesthood in the future.
Modern versions of Santa Clause do take things a little far. Try watching “Earnest Saves Christmas.” There was an actual man named Saint Nick, who later turned into Santa Clause but it is part of the human condition that there are those among us who like to embellish stories to the point of ridiculousness.
[email protected]:
Do you imply that 1/3 of the Trinity is not a person of love, but a hatred, a terror, and a death?
Can you revise your Bible to a new statement “God is not anymore always love”, eh?
D. Newton: It may help you to understand the Trinity by comparing it to water. Water can exist in three phases: liquid, solid and vapor. Every phase still contains the same identical molecules. The Trinity exists as three persons and we experience God in three different ways. When the Children of Israel left Egypt, they did not want to see God. They believed it would be a death sentence to see God. Jesus came as a man so that He could interact and have fellowship with His creation. I can imagine nothing more terrifying than to be before God Almighty without the intercession of Jesus who has canceled my sin debt. The Holy Spirit has always existed in both the Old and New Testament. I can tell you about the Good News but only the Holy Spirit can reveal it to you. If it ever happens, you will never forget that day and you will never fear the Will of God as you do now. Merry Christmas.
Is the right hand of Jehovah (Psalms 110:1) the divine seat?
The answer in Judaist interpretation is “No”, in fact Abraham’s seat is more “higher” the Messiah’s, and interestingly it is also correlating with a crucial verse Psalms 110:5 where Jehovah is described as “The LORD (Adonay) at thy (Abraham’s) right hand”, in a very “sentimental” story how Jehovah consoles Abraham, as in Midrash on Psalms, Tehillim.
Midrash Tehillim.
R. Yudan said in the name of R. Hama: In the time-to-come, when the Holy One, blessed be He, seats the lord Messiah at His right hand, as is said The Lord saith unto my lord: Sit thou at My right hand (Ps. 110:1), and seats
Abraham at His LEFT, Abraham’s face will pale, and he will say to the Lord: My son’s son sits at the right, and I at the left. Thereupon the Holy One, blessed be He, will comfort Abraham, saying: Thy son’s son is at My right,
but I, in a manner of speaking, am at thy right: The Lord (Adonay) is at thy (Abraham’s) right hand (Ps. 110:5).
Also in Yalqut Shimoni, Jehovah assures Abraham that Abraham’s seat at the left hand of Jehovah is more higher than the seat at his right hand:
Yalqut Shimoni Ps. 110, Nedarim 32b and Sanhedrin 108b.
Rabbi Yodan says in Rabbi Bar Haninan’s name that: The Holy One will set the coming Messiah-King at his RIGHT hand and Abraham at his LEFT, and so Abraham’s face will become white with envy, and he will say: The son of my son sits on your right and I must sit on your left? Then the Holy One will appease him by saying, Your son is on your right and I am on your right.
Other Midrash has Ephraim instead of Messiah at the right hand:
Midrash Alpha Betot, 2:438-425
God says: Ephraim, My firstborn, you sit on My right untul I subdue the army of the hosts of God and Magog, your enemies, under your footstool.
On the subject of Aisha’s age at consummation, [email protected]. replied to explain why Aisha, in the Hadith seems to lead the casual reader into error as to the age of Aisha when she was betrothed to Muhammed. The Response follows.
This is a classic mistake of the readers of Hadith. That’s why the Moslem debaters keep asking a circular question to Non-Moslems: do you speak Arabic fluently?
Aisha uses idiom known only by Arabs at her time, as Hadith of Abu Dawud explains it:
-Six year in Arabic idiom means “day when I got my first menses”.
-Nine year in Arabic idiom means I am fully mature several years after I got menses.
D. Newton:
Please forgive me for being so skeptical, but when someone translates from one language to another, I expect that person, or group of people, to be aware of idioms and be kind enough to render the translation into a form that does not mislead. There is a story about translating the Bible into an Asian dialect. Perhaps I should be more precise since people in England apparently think Muslims are Asians for some reason. At the time, there was no word for “sinner” that could be used in the Asian dialect. A very bad decision was made to use the word for criminal in the text. The results were quite bad because instead of the text reading “all are sinners,” it was rendered as “all are criminals.” So, I admit these misunderstandings can happen. I often see Muhammed saying something like, “May my mother and father be sacrificed for you.” The context was a conversation at the Battle of Uhud. I always thought that was a strange thing for an orphan to say. So, I have to give you a few points on the figure of speech and translation angle.
However, to make this theory fly, I think you need to explain why the age of menses is grossly different from what it is today. Over 1400 years later, the age of first menses is closer to 12 or 13. Are women’s bodies evolving? What pressure is causing this? Global Warming? There is some evidence in the traditions that people used to be taller and according to at least one Hadith the Houris are sixty cubits high. Do Muslims believe in evolution? This Arabic figure of speech must be why you rarely see Muslims smoking or going to consume liquor. They would be asked how old they were and be immediately turned away.
On the subject of Islamic divorce, I would like to point out to [email protected], that to the Western eye, the women never seems to get a fair treatment since they tend to be negotiations between the husband and a wife with a a “deficient mind.” against a man who is considered superior to them. The tone of Sharia looks to me , an unrepentant kafir, like it is always the prerogative of the man to get rid of the woman. If one of Muhammed’s wives wanted to divorce, it seems that she would be breaking the bargain and end up leaving the marriage with nothing, not even the dowry, and would have no support. The success of Khadija, before Islam came, shows that women could take care of themselves and have a successful business. But in the perfect Islamic Utopia, how does the woman prosper outside of the marriage? Please save me some time and tell me what happens when the woman wants to leave because of adultery. In the old days , the man would be stoned, thus taking care of the divorce. In the case of Aisha going back to find a borrowed necklace, there was a convenient lack of witnesses against the Companion who escorted her home. Today, would the husband have to get caught in adultery on an internet video to get a divorce? How would she go about getting those four witnesses without fear of being punished for making the accusation?
As a Christian, I do not think that men and women who are married are equal. Rather they would be, in the ideal state, complimentary. Thus, I am no champion of having men and women being equal in the sense that Western society seems to think required for a “just society.” We are devolving into a society where half of the marriages are ending in divorce but I don’t think Islam is the answer to that problem.
“Danny Newton says: On the subject of Islamic divorce, I would like to point out to [email protected], that to the Western eye, the women never seems to get a fair treatment since they tend to be negotiations between the husband and a wife with a a “deficient mind.” against a man who is considered superior to them.”
That’s a partial prejudice. Islam has a “feminine” body called Ummah (Motherhood) to illustrate superiority of “Mother Club”, we have a Million-adherence of Polygamy system to strengthen such a “Wives Clubs”, we have a Qur’anic Sura with title “Nisa” (Woman) instead of “Rijal (Males) that hints for a power of women in such “Women Clubs”.
More than that, we have the longest verse in Q.2, v.282 that is dedicated for “Business women”, thus it is a boost for such a “Rich Female Clubs”.
Opportunity is given a lot for women, but they refuse to use it. Why? Woman prefers to be a “housemaid” without payment for her hubby (in fact, Islamic hubby’s money has to go for paying the daily foods, daily clothes and housing and the bills for women).
“The tone of Sharia looks to me , an unrepentant kafir, like it is always the prerogative of the man to get rid of the woman.”
We Moslems are not Jewish, not Catholics.
Islam has a Khula system, that is, the divorcement by wives. In marriage a hubby (even a Moslem male) may turn to be a bad monster, even like dog and swine, after a few years.
Why do women stay to live with a monster?
“If one of Muhammed’s wives wanted to divorce, it seems that she would be breaking the bargain and end up leaving the marriage with nothing, not even the dowry, and would have no support.”
Life is unfair, man.
If woman keeps depending herself to man, just wait for a quick moment to be his slave.
I think it is partly a mistake of her “irresponsible parents”. Please, do not make your little princess a poor slave for her hubby. A stupid daddy makes her daughter’s life change from a princess to a beggar.
“The success of Khadija, before Islam came, shows that women could take care of themselves and have a successful business.”
Exactly, Khadija survives without depending on her deceased hubby’s ATM cards, right, heh?
Islam does not make Khadija lose her business instinct, but enhances her.
Read Q.2, v.282, and be amazed.
“But in the perfect Islamic Utopia, how does the woman prosper outside of the marriage?”
Simple, by running her family inheritance, and her parent’s business, per Q.2, v.282.
Husband’s wallet or ATM card is not a primary income for Moslem women.
“Please save me some time and tell me what happens when the woman wants to leave because of adultery.”
Islamic advice: Do some business, be a business women:
sell Hijabs,
sell child’s dolls,
sell menstrual tampons,
sell female perfumes,
sell pregnancy foods,
sell post-birth medicines,
sell women’s cosmetics and facial maskers.
sell pregnancy tester.
sell children’s comics.
sell breastfeeding pumps.
sell women’s magazines.
“In the old days , the man would be stoned, thus taking care of the divorce.”
Marriage should not become a female slavery.
But most women in today’s Arab society are “masked enemy” of Islam thru their “betrayal nod” to old misogyny.
“In the case of Aisha going back to find a borrowed necklace, there was a convenient lack of witnesses against the Companion who escorted her home.”
Indeed. Actually, our Qur’anic verse of requiring 4 (four) witnesses can be regarded a “sarcasm” to humiliate the accuser’s inability to even bring forth just 1 witness only, let alone for 2 witnesses.
Primitive case with a primitive tribal prejudice.
“Today, would the husband have to get caught in adultery on an internet video to get a divorce?”
Yes, if the videos are genuine.
But it cannot be used if the video gets edited.
“How would she go about getting those four witnesses without fear of being punished for making the accusation?”
She can use or hire a Modern prosecutor. We Moslems are not so stupid or primitive, you know.
The strong evidences eventually accuse a suspect. That’s fair.
“As a Christian, I do not think that men and women who are married are equal.”
In Christianity, the women are spiritual Najis, a religious defilement per Rev 14:4.
Worse, if a Christian woman commits adultery with other men, there’s no worldly punishment whatsoever for her sin, so she can repeat it again and again (with a “slick” dirty plan of repenting shortly on her deathbed, so it is easy to fool the Trinity’s god).
“Rather they would be, in the ideal state, complimentary.”
I suppose you meant it as complementary.
The word “Complementary” may conceal a huge disparity and injustice, such as 99 are complemented by 1. Complementary can be a disparity.
“Thus, I am no champion of having men and women being equal in the sense that Western society seems to think required for a “just society.” ”
In Islam, both wife and hubby have “equal opportunity” to get Heavens.
Wives have equal right to divorce.
Wives have right to demand Platonic Marriage.
“We are devolving into a society where half of the marriages are ending in divorce but I don’t think Islam is the answer to that problem.”
Islam is more “liberal” in marital options.
We have Polygamy system.
We have betrothal system.
We have Platonic Marriage (such as Prophet-Sawda relation).
“Danny Newton says: Please forgive me for being so skeptical, but when someone translates from one language to another, I expect that person, or group of people, to be aware of idioms and be kind enough to render the translation into a form that does not mislead. There is a story about translating the Bible into an Asian dialect. Perhaps I should be more precise since people in England apparently think Muslims are Asians for some reason. At the time, there was no word for “sinner” that could be used in the Asian dialect. A very bad decision was made to use the word for criminal in the text. The results were quite bad because instead of the text reading “all are sinners,” it was rendered as “all are criminals.” So, I admit these misunderstandings can happen. I often see Muhammed saying something like, “May my mother and father be sacrificed for you.” The context was a conversation at the Battle of Uhud. I always thought that was a strange thing for an orphan to say. So, I have to give you a few points on the figure of speech and translation angle.”
Thanks Danny, it’s useful.
“However, to make this theory fly, I think you need to explain why the age of menses is grossly different from what it is today. Over 1400 years later, the age of first menses is closer to 12 or 13. Are women’s bodies evolving? What pressure is causing this? Global Warming? There is some evidence in the traditions that people used to be taller and according to at least one Hadith the Houris are sixty cubits high. Do Muslims believe in evolution? This Arabic figure of speech must be why you rarely see Muslims smoking or going to consume liquor. They would be asked how old they were and be immediately turned away.”
I have a concern if we humans are heading to the slow extinction.
Ancient humans may eat a kind of “super foods” to gain longevity and stronger stamina, but those super foods may be very rare right now and must be so bitter like hell.
In religious perspectives, our Edenic supply (from the Edenic foods Adam and Eve ate before their fall) has run out tremendously in our body.
Extreme climates such as Global warming and air-water-land pollution greatly reduce the health of our blood pressures and heart, thus they slice down our longevity a lot.
This is apocalyptic disaster in global scale.
Also, a bad lifestyle.
Turtles have higher longevity because they just work for themselves, whereas we humans work so harder for spouse, parents, child, and grandchild, even for great grandchild. We live for paying bills, doing a daily stressful job, no vacancy. If even you live in the more fresh rural area, still you are exposed by such the harder works to hunt down animals for daily life or die in hunger, thus it is more lethal.
Sadly, doing some sports such as Yoga and exercises do not help much any longer. Our body loses its foundation’s strength, whereas the exterior enhancement thru daily exercises doesn’t give significant impact. It is too late.
In a nutshell, deep inside in our chromosomes, our DNA’s life-span is getting small and more smaller. That’s ironic, perhaps right now we have 7 Billion humans on the earth who are “sleep-walking” into a same path of extinction.
We reach the clouds with our high skyscrapers, we visited the Moon, Mars, Interstellar space, but apparently we just forget to invest big for our longevity as humans. But I hope I’m wrong.
I share your concern about the degradation of the human condition but the Christian point of view sums up the problem In Romans Chapter 8: 20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope; 21 because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.
We know via the Second Law of Thermodynamics, the eventual fate of the universe will be a cold death as energy becomes less and less concentrated. Before that time however, the Earth survive until what you call The Last Day. Some of the decay in our DNA is caused by imperfect duplication of instructions in our cells, another factor in the continued futility of relying on our earthly body. In Heaven, the Christian body will be transformed and we will be like angels. We will not be married to our former spouse or spouses but will have a different relationship with God. Until that day we can only strive against injustice knowing full well that our understanding of justice is limited. Everyone, including Muslime has been given three lines of defense against evil. The first is the conscience which can be damaged or seared. The second is the family but it can be defeated by death, divorce and lack of respect for the family. The last is the government which , according to the Bible “does not bear the sword for nothing.” In my country the government is breaking down and seems to be prone to rewarding bad behavior rather than rewarding it.
“Danny Newton says: On the subject of Islamic divorce, I would like to point out to [email protected], that to the Western eye, the women never seems to get a fair treatment since they tend to be negotiations between the husband and a wife with a a “deficient mind.” against a man who is considered superior to them.”
That’s a partial prejudice. Islam has a “feminine” body called Ummah (Motherhood) to illustrate superiority of “Mother Club”, we have a Million-adherence of Polygamy system to strengthen such a “Wives Clubs”, we have a Qur’anic Sura with title “Nisa” (Woman) instead of “Rijal (Males) that hints for a power of women in such “Women Clubs”.
More than that, we have the longest verse in Q.2, v.282 that is dedicated for “Business women”, thus it is a boost for such a “Rich Female Clubs”.
Opportunity is given a lot for women, but they refuse to use it. Why? Woman prefers to be a “housemaid” without payment for her hubby (in fact, Islamic hubby’s money has to go for paying the daily foods, daily clothes and housing and the bills for women).
“The tone of Sharia looks to me , an unrepentant kafir, like it is always the prerogative of the man to get rid of the woman.”
We Moslems are not Jewish, not Catholics.
Islam has a Khula system, that is, the divorcement by wives. In marriage a hubby (even a Moslem male) may turn to be a bad monster, even like dog and swine, after a few years.
Why do women stay to live with a monster?
“If one of Muhammed’s wives wanted to divorce, it seems that she would be breaking the bargain and end up leaving the marriage with nothing, not even the dowry, and would have no support.”
Life is unfair, man.
If woman keeps depending herself to man, just wait for a quick moment to be his slave.
I think it is partly a mistake of her “irresponsible parents”. Please, do not make your little princess a poor slave for her hubby. A stupid daddy makes her daughter’s life change from a princess to a beggar.
“The success of Khadija, before Islam came, shows that women could take care of themselves and have a successful business.”
Exactly, Khadija survives without depending on her deceased hubby’s ATM cards, right, heh?
Islam does not make Khadija lose her business instinct, but enhances her.
Read Q.2, v.282, and be amazed.
“But in the perfect Islamic Utopia, how does the woman prosper outside of the marriage?”
Simple, by running her family inheritance, and her parent’s business, per Q.2, v.282.
Husband’s wallet or ATM card is not a primary income for Moslem women.
“Please save me some time and tell me what happens when the woman wants to leave because of adultery.”
Islamic advice: Do some business, be a business women:
sell Hijabs,
sell child’s dolls,
sell menstrual tampons,
sell female perfumes,
sell pregnancy foods,
sell post-birth medicines,
sell women’s cosmetics and facial maskers.
sell pregnancy tester.
sell children’s comics.
sell breastfeeding pumps.
sell women’s magazines.
“In the old days , the man would be stoned, thus taking care of the divorce.”
Marriage should not become a female slavery.
But most women in today’s Arab society are “masked enemy” of Islam thru their “betrayal nod” to old misogyny.
“In the case of Aisha going back to find a borrowed necklace, there was a convenient lack of witnesses against the Companion who escorted her home.”
Indeed. Actually, our Qur’anic verse of requiring 4 (four) witnesses can be regarded a “sarcasm” to humiliate the accuser’s inability to even bring forth just 1 witness only, let alone for 2 witnesses.
Primitive case with a primitive tribal prejudice.
“Today, would the husband have to get caught in adultery on an internet video to get a divorce?”
Yes, if the videos are genuine.
But it cannot be used if the video gets edited.
“How would she go about getting those four witnesses without fear of being punished for making the accusation?”
She can use or hire a Modern prosecutor. We Moslems are not so stupid or primitive, you know.
The strong evidences eventually accuse a suspect. That’s fair.
“As a Christian, I do not think that men and women who are married are equal.”
In Christianity, the women are spiritual Najis, a religious defilement per Rev 14:4.
Worse, if a Christian woman commits adultery with other men, there’s no worldly punishment whatsoever for her sin, so she can repeat it again and again (with a “slick” dirty plan of repenting shortly on her deathbed, so it is easy to fool the Trinity’s god).
“Rather they would be, in the ideal state, complimentary.”
“Thus, I am no champion of having men and women being equal in the sense that Western society seems to think required for a “just society.” ”
In Islam, both wife and hubby have “equal opportunity” to get Heavens.
Wives have equal right to divorce.
Wives have right to demand Platonic Marriage.
“We are devolving into a society where half of the marriages are ending in divorce but I don’t think Islam is the answer to that problem.”
Islam is more “liberal” in marital options.
We have Polygamy system.
We have betrothal system.
We have Platonic Marriage (such as Prophet-Sawda relation).
D Newton said:
“If one of Muhammed’s wives wanted to divorce, it seems that she would be breaking the bargain and end up leaving the marriage with nothing, not even the dowry, and would have no support.”
[email protected] said:
Life is unfair, man.
D:Newton asks: Is this injustice too much to protest or do you fear your place in Paradise if you object?
[email protected] said:
In Islam, both wife and hubby have “equal opportunity” to get Heavens.
D: Newton Replies: Did not Muhammed see that in Hell, the majority are women? It seems to this Islamophobe that the treadmill to Paradise for the women is set at a higher angle than for the men. The traditional explanation is that the reason for so many women to be in Hell is that they are ungrateful, have diminished capacity and are also deficient in prayer since they are forbidden attendance at the mosque when they are menstruating. Trying to imagine how all the men get 70 virgins plus two Houris in Paradise is quite a mathematical challenge until one factors in the people who will be released from Hell. Does Allah have an open borders policy between Hell and Paradise? Theoretically these women are transformed in age. I hope it is not six or nine years old. When someone claims equality, there should be a way to statistically check that fact. We only have the observation of Muhammed to be certain that equality of women does not exist in Paradise. Did the Prophet fail to count the Houris and the women of the Jihadis? I really don’t see why women of diminished capacity are disqualified from Paradise since, in my humble opinion, the men of Paradise are utilizing very little of the womens mental capacity anyway.
[email protected] said:
Islam is more “liberal” in marital options.
We have Polygamy system.
We have betrothal system.
We have Platonic Marriage (such as Prophet-Sawda relation).
D Newton says:
Polygamy is an unstable social system. We can see that from our experience with fundamentalist Mormonism. The bulk of orthodox Muslims do not practice it. This example of polygamy devolves into all of the old men getting the young girls and the young unattached men leave the faith or marry non-Mormons. It also has mathematical problems when you consider the natural birthrate that is roughly 50-50 men and women. If you put a thousand Muslims on a space ship to another star system, what would be the ideal ratio of men to women? I don’t see Platonic marriage as a positive thing and if was a good thing there would be more of it. It fails to meet Biblical criteria and it fails to mirror the love of Jesus Christ for his Church. Even if a marriage ages into a relationship that lacks sex, it can still maintain a close personal relationship spiritually and emotionally. Three main points of marriage is to raise children, defend morality by teaching the children and to have a positive relationship that allows two to become as one. This theory of marriage is also central in rejecting the concept of a homosexual marriage.
“Danny Newton says: Is this injustice too much to protest or do you fear your place in Paradise if you object?”
That’s just my rational assessment of reality, this world opens many doors of unfair plays.
Woman is given many chances to develop but she chooses to not follow her path.
“Did not Muhammed see that in Hell, the majority are women? It seems to this Islamophobe that the treadmill to Paradise for the women is set at a higher angle than for the men. The traditional explanation is that the reason for so many women to be in Hell is that they are ungrateful, have diminished capacity and are also deficient in prayer since they are forbidden attendance at the mosque when they are menstruating.”
The amount is the number *before* those “hellish women” are released in great scale from Hell to Heavens known as Jahannamilyn.
Moreover, the numerous Houris are not yet counted because they are not originally daughters of Adam.
“Trying to imagine how all the men get 70 virgins plus two Houris in Paradise is quite a mathematical challenge until one factors in the people who will be released from Hell.”
The large number of men is not so hard to count.
Houris are not originally daughters of Adam.
“Does Allah have an open borders policy between Hell and Paradise?”
Yes, exactly, it is called Shafaa, which is the way for admitting the already-scorched Hell’s dwellers to Heavens. But it is limited only for Monotheist ones.
“Theoretically these women are transformed in age. I hope it is not six or nine years old.”
Woman who enters the Heaven will be transformed to be a mature lady ripe in age.
No old, no underage one, in Heaven.
“When someone claims equality, there should be a way to statistically check that fact. We only have the observation of Muhammed to be certain that equality of women does not exist in Paradise.”
Female ones from species of Houris exceed the human men in Heaven.
Human females from Jahannamilyn will exceed the human men in Heaven.
“Did the Prophet fail to count the Houris and the women of the Jihadis?”
Houris are not originally daughters of Adam.
Most women will undergo Purgatory.
“I really don’t see why women of diminished capacity are disqualified from Paradise since, in my humble opinion, the men of Paradise are utilizing very little of the womens mental capacity anyway.”
Now, it is you who are utilising feminist bias.
How do women have higher mental capacity?
“Polygamy is an unstable social system. We can see that from our experience with fundamentalist Mormonism. The bulk of orthodox Muslims do not practice it. This example of polygamy devolves into all of the old men getting the young girls and the young unattached men leave the faith or marry non-Mormons. It also has mathematical problems when you consider the natural birthrate that is roughly 50-50 men and women. If you put a thousand Muslims on a space ship to another star system, what would be the ideal ratio of men to women?”
Polygamy is not obligatory.
It has a strict precondition before being approved by the Islamic wedding officials, namely a hubby’s financial security, his character of fairness, and acceptance of his existing wife.
“I don’t see Platonic marriage as a positive thing and if was a good thing there would be more of it. It fails to meet Biblical criteria and it fails to mirror the love of Jesus Christ for his Church. Even if a marriage ages into a relationship that lacks sex, it can still maintain a close personal relationship spiritually and emotionally.”
Indeed, maintaining a close relation is what Islamic Platonic Marriage is all about.
We Moslems have Sawda’s platonic marriage as example.
“Three main points of marriage is to raise children, defend morality by teaching the children and to have a positive relationship that allows two to become as one. This theory of marriage is also central in rejecting the concept of a homosexual marriage.”
That’s why I said, the marriage in Islam is quite liberal, not conservative: Most polygamists follow what early Moslems prefer to do in their polygamy: Azl (coitus interuptus) or the Modern Planned Parenthood.
It is something that a Moslem hubby has the rights to choose and do, with or without permission of his wives.
Please excuse the sloppy reply and mistake I made by substituting “Muslims” for “Mormans” above. There are a lot of similarities but spelling is not one of them. I have a lot more experiences with Mormons than Muslims. Mormons have a lot of trouble leaving Mrmonism beause of family pressure. They believe that the reward of the parents is diminished if a child leaves Mormonism.
Jehovah Witnesses in their NWT version translate the Greek phrase “tou Theou” of the last part of Rev 3:14 with “by God” (instead of “of God”) to emphasize the creation by God alone in the “beginning of creation”, which is fully suitable with Mark 13:19 that clearly tells “beginning of the creation, which God created”.
Thus, the “Amen” at Revelation 3:14 is a creation, the first of creations by God, and he had a beginning which God created.
Moreover, the Septuagint also correlates the name Amen with the Wisdom in Proverbs 8:22 who was similarly created in the beginning of God’s works.
Amen means the fulfillment of righteous hopes. The Wisdom in Prov 8:21 depicts herself as the fulfillment or granting, by her statement: “I may cause those that love me to inherit substance and I will fill their treasures” which is exact definition of Amen.
Mk 13:19
For in those days shall be affliction, such as was not from the beginning of the creation, which God created (Greek: arches ktiseos hen ektisen ho Theos), unto this time, neither shall be.
Rev 3:14 (NWT)
And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation by God (arche tes ktiseos tou Theou).
Is Jesus referring to himself on “Me, a good one, the God” in Mark 10:18?
No. Mark 18:10 has been known well as the most heretics (Modalist-Oneness Pentecostal) proof-text that Jesus (Me) is that good “one”, the God. There’s no other.
For Pentecostals, by using “Me” referring to himself alone, Jesus is that “one, Me the God.
But for the Trinity, Jesus isn’t attributed with “the” (definite article) for his divinity, and he still has two other persons, as equal “good ones” (plural) instead of “Me”.
Mk 10
17 And when he was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?18 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.19 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother.21 Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.
Moreover, if Jesus were really that “one”, as Me the God, surely it is absurd in for him in the context of verses to add a saying “follow me”.
In other words, if Jesus were that same, one, “good” God who produces 10 Commandments, it’s absurd for Jesus to ask the Jew “follow me”.
“Danny Newton says: I share your concern about the degradation of the human condition but the Christian point of view sums up the problem In Romans Chapter 8: 20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope; 21 because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.”
Immortality is another thing. I just hope someday the future humans would focus all their effort to regain the lost longevity. Longevity doesn’t mean immortality. Longevity just means still having a productivity age at 200-500 years old.
After his second coming perhaps Jesus can send down the super food from Eden again. Perhaps he will reveal the “secret” ingredient for human’s longevity for his 1000 years Kingdom. Perhaps.
“We know via the Second Law of Thermodynamics, the eventual fate of the universe will be a cold death as energy becomes less and less concentrated.”
Astronomers never have comparison for a fate of “Goldilocks planet”. Such a “lucky” planet like our earth *could* have a different way of “Lucky survival” as well.
But that’s maybe yes, maybe not.
“Before that time however, the Earth survive until what you call The Last Day. Some of the decay in our DNA is caused by imperfect duplication of instructions in our cells, another factor in the continued futility of relying on our earthly body.”
I don’t agree with your pessimism. After his second coming perhaps Jesus can send down the super food from Eden again. Perhaps he will reveal the “secret” ingredient for human’s longevity for his 1000 years Kingdom. Maybe.
Moreover, certain animals such as the turtles still have their longer age, they maintained a secret for longevity for their own kind.
“In Heaven, the Christian body will be transformed and we will be like angels. We will not be married to our former spouse or spouses but will have a different relationship with God.”
Like groom and brides, huh. Sorry, for me there’s a silly irony that mocks a basic human’s reading comprehension and intelligentsia in such a Biblical belief of afterlife: There’s “no” marriage but there are “marital entities” of brides and groom. What is this? This’s nonsense. Is Pope a catholic, eh? Be honest, that is a mess.
It is like another silliness in statement: you can’t swim in the water.
“Until that day we can only strive against injustice knowing full well that our understanding of justice is limited. Everyone, including Muslime has been given three lines of defense against evil. The first is the conscience which can be damaged or seared. The second is the family but it can be defeated by death, divorce and lack of respect for the family. The last is the government which , according to the Bible “does not bear the sword for nothing.” In my country the government is breaking down and seems to be prone to rewarding bad behavior rather than rewarding it.”
As my expectation. Finally when the Christian Government turns evil, corrupt, and abusive in national level, the Bible gives no permission to fight it, because there’s no concept of “just war”. In Goverment’s level, a criminal is an untouchable Biblical saint. That’s a religious mistake of the Bible.
[email protected] Says:
As my expectation. Finally when the Christian Government turns evil, corrupt, and abusive in national level, the Bible gives no permission to fight it, because there’s no concept of “just war”. In Goverment’s level, a criminal is an untouchable Biblical saint. That’s a religious mistake of the Bible.
D Newton: In a fair world you would be called an infidelophobe for a statement like that. The concept of a “just war” was invented by the Catholic Church and may not be explicit in our scriptures. For sure, it is not as explicit as your Verse of the Sword. But, we do have the right of self defense. Jesus sent his disciples out to spread the Gospel trusting only in the kindness of believers but near the end of his life he sent them out with swords for self defense. Luke 22:36 Then He said to them, “But now, he who has a money bag, let him take it, and likewise a knapsack; and he who has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one. 37 For I say to you that this which is written must still be accomplished in Me… 38 So they said, “Lord, look, here are two swords.” And He said to them, “It is enough.” The scriptures imply that the government is ordained by God and there is ample evidence that the overthrow of the Northern and Southern Kingdoms of Israel was a judgement of God. In both cases, the resulting rulers over the Jews were heathen. The scripture tells us to cooperate with the government until it forces a choice between the Law of God and the Law of man. There is also an assumption on the part of the scriptures that the government is there to do good. (Romans 13) Truly flawed governments will eventually fail but don’t expect it to happen over night. I use the Fall of the Roman Empire as an example.
I have no idea of the location of a “Christian Government.” In the USA, what you call a” Christian Government” has allowed abortion and gay marriage. If anyone tries to speak against it, they are called “fundamentalist,” “against women’s rights” and “homophobe.” Fornication, single parent families and out- of -wedlock births are routine in this society. Further degradation can be witnessed by seeing local governments defy the national law and permit smoking marijuana and open borders. If the Christian opposes this, they are called names like “racist”and their favorite phobia, “xenophobes.” The government promotes sloth via generous welfare benefits and their next fiasco threatens to be a minimum guaranteed income. The government hands out needles to addicts and suffers and permits people to live on the street regardless of the bad decisions they make to maintain their lifestyle. Socialism is contrary to Christian thinking because it is using the government to take wealth involuntarily and redistribute it to those who may or may not be worthy of receiving charity. A wise man once said, “Socialism is for people who are too lazy to work and too nervous to steal.” So, they get the government to make tax slaves of the people. Charity, ideally, should be voluntary and should in no way reinforce bad behavior.
I don’t stand with every foreign invasion in my lifetime but there is a major difference between a nation that has the capability of preventing evil and a nation that has no such capability. There is plenty of historical evidence that suggests doing nothing against evil only makes the eventual conflict more severe and more tragic for both sides. Churchill saw WWII as a mere continuation or failure to finish WWI. It is not impossible that pacifist have caused as much carnage in the world as non-pacifist.
Here in the US, we hear almost nothing from Muslims who claim to be peaceful when the terrorist shoots people, set bombs or run down innocents with vehicles. Behind our backs they collected charity and turn it over to terrorist(Holy Land Foundation). Where are the voices of the good and peaceful Muslims in London when it comes to rapes and grooming gangs? They seem to be more concerned with Islamophobia than the crimes committed. Like Muslims, Christians are only able to vote or advise the secular government in power.
Danny Newton says: In a fair world you would be called an infidelophobe for a statement like that.”
Moslems do not fear the infidels at all.
The word “Islamophobia” implies that the infidels have a fear of terror that makes them look like a coward.
“The concept of a “just war” was invented by the Catholic Church and may not be explicit in our scriptures. For sure, it is not as explicit as your Verse of the Sword. But, we do have the right of self defense. Jesus sent his disciples out to spread the Gospel trusting only in the kindness of believers but near the end of his life he sent them out with swords for self defense. Luke 22:36 Then He said to them, “But now, he who has a money bag, let him take it, and likewise a knapsack; and he who has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one. 37 For I say to you that this which is written must still be accomplished in Me… 38 So they said, “Lord, look, here are two swords.” And He said to them, “It is enough.” ”
So “buying” two swords without doing it is that “fighting”of self-defense, eh? Unbelievable. How suicidal the Bible is.
“The scriptures imply that the government is ordained by God and there is ample evidence that the overthrow of the Northern and Southern Kingdoms of Israel was a judgement of God. In both cases, the resulting rulers over the Jews were heathen. The scripture tells us to cooperate with the government until it forces a choice between the Law of God and the Law of man. There is also an assumption on the part of the scriptures that the government is there to do good. (Romans 13) Truly flawed governments will eventually fail but don’t expect it to happen over night.”
Is that what Christians called a “just war”? By doing nothing to fight, and letting the evil Government fail by itself.
Fatalism as a self defense? How insane.
“I use the Fall of the Roman Empire as an example.”
Why don’t you make the WW2 as example? Christian’s swords didn’t do anything.
In The Fall of Roman Empire, there’s no Christian sword. 410 the Visigoths under Alaric breached the walls of Rome and sacked the capital of the Roman Empire. In 476 Emperor Romulus was overthrown by the Germanic leader Odoacer, who became the first Barbarian to rule in Rome.
“I have no idea of the location of a “Christian Government.” In the USA, what you call a” Christian Government” has allowed abortion and gay marriage. If anyone tries to speak against it, they are called “fundamentalist,” “against women’s rights” and “homophobe.” Fornication, single parent families and out- of -wedlock births are routine in this society. Further degradation can be witnessed by seeing local governments defy the national law and permit smoking marijuana and open borders. If the Christian opposes this, they are called names like “racist”and their favorite phobia, “xenophobes.” The government promotes sloth via generous welfare benefits and their next fiasco threatens to be a minimum guaranteed income. The government hands out needles to addicts and suffers and permits people to live on the street regardless of the bad decisions they make to maintain their lifestyle. Socialism is contrary to Christian thinking because it is using the government to take wealth involuntarily and redistribute it to those who may or may not be worthy of receiving charity. A wise man once said, “Socialism is for people who are too lazy to work and too nervous to steal.” So, they get the government to make tax slaves of the people. Charity, ideally, should be voluntary and should in no way reinforce bad behavior.”
If those sins happened in Moslem nation, the immoral Government would have been toppled just overnight.
Islam makes a difference in Moslem states. We don’t wait Fatalism to make a difference.
“I don’t stand with every foreign invasion in my lifetime but there is a major difference between a nation that has the capability of preventing evil and a nation that has no such capability.”
My question is, what is the position of the Bible for the use of swords for invading the evil states?
Is it sin according to the Bible to use the swords to correct the evil nations under evil Government?
“There is plenty of historical evidence that suggests doing nothing against evil only makes the eventual conflict more severe and more tragic for both sides.”
So now you open your eyes how false the Bible is.
“Churchill saw WWII as a mere continuation or failure to finish WWI. It is not impossible that pacifist have caused as much carnage in the world as non-pacifist.”
Churchill follows Qur’an, not the Bible.
“Here in the US, we hear almost nothing from Muslims who claim to be peaceful when the terrorist shoots people, set bombs or run down innocents with vehicles.”
We are limited by our Islamic ruling of letting the option of Qisas or retaliation taken by the groups of victims.
Our silence is our sympathy.
Thus, if there’s a Moslem among the victims, usually the Moslem group and family will carry out a retaliation by many ways (hiring detectives and hitmen, tracking down, searching the perpetrators, et cetera) as the religious duty, and to be solved as a “personal matter”, not leaving it to be as Government’s job.
“Behind our backs they collected charity and turn it over to terrorist(Holy Land Foundation). Where are the voices of the good and peaceful Muslims in London when it comes to rapes and grooming gangs?”
As I said, We are limited by our Islamic ruling to let the option of Qisas or retaliation taken by the groups of victims.
“They seem to be more concerned with Islamophobia than the crimes committed.”
Precisely and exactly.
Islamophobia’s victims are Moslems, thus Qisas is open and available.
” Like Muslims, Christians are only able to vote or advise the secular government in power.”
Fatalism is not an option in Islam. Islam makes a difference in Moslem states. We don’t wait Fatalism to make a difference.
Fatalism proves how false the Bible is.
Fatalism is in the Qur’an. When it suggests that Allah decides who the believers are and who will be in paradise. It almost seems that there is no need of a Dawah Team, since the inhabitants of Paradise are already known to Allah.
We Moslems tend to think that it is so rational for any sane person to think this way: Infidel = evil = needs to be reduced = conquest or Jizya.
Now, it is insane, stupid, suicidal and irrational for the infidels to think : radicals = evil = Jesus pacifism as answer = no jihad = fatalism = love.
Who is rational? Moslems.
[email protected]:
If Paul used “black magic” so effectively, why did he not use it to curse, control and be more effective in routing out early Christians when his name was Saul? (before his conversion) If you object to black magic, who cast the spell to protect Issa from being seized and crucified? Does Allah use “black magic” or is his Prophet Issa using black magic for his own purposes? The idea that Paul used black magic is something that you have read into the text. I don’t see any evidence in the text that black magic was used or approved by anyone who should be admired. Jesus was accused of doing miracles by the power of Satan to damage his reputation. I assume that this means that at the time, the use of black magic was frowned upon. The use of black magic by a learned Jew seems highly improbable.
[email protected]:
My question is, what is the position of the Bible for the use of swords for invading the evil states?
Is it sin according to the Bible to use the swords to correct the evil nations under evil Government?
Danny Newton: There is very little Biblical precedent for a Christian government to attack even the heathen government. I look to the Old Testament for such a precedent and the purpose of the attack was to punish the depraved heathens who were worshipping false gods and doing human sacrifice, mostly children, for nearly 400 years. Liberals howl and complain about these passages as you well know. They call it genocide. The new Testament requires that we live peacefully with one another on the local level within the boundaries of the prevailing government. Pacifism can be taken to extremes. I offer you the history of the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Viet Nam. It was quite popular in the US but the result was that there was a blood bath following the withdrawal when the communist killed over two million people. To this day, no Liberal in the US takes responsibility for this action which resulted in so much death and destruction. To stay in Southeast Asia would have meant losing American lives at a lower level but there was no will to do so. Was this a moral failure? We have a similar problem with Saudi Arabia. Turkey is a fair weather friend too. Over the grand scheme of things, the Roman invaders of the fifth century were at least partially Christians invading a partially Christian country of Rome. Perhaps it made the carnage less but an army of that time had to live on plunder. Crusading armies outside of Constantinople were a threat to the food supply the longer they stayed there, so they were encouraged to make haste for the Levant. It was probably stories of forced conversions and lack of tolerance among Muslims that most fueled the Crusades. In the US, we had Christians fight against each other over the question of slavery. There were a minimum of 600,000 casualties. Almost parallel to that time, the British took the less violent route and ended slavery by a series of small steps over a long time. It is not easy to bless other peoples while giving arms at the same time. A lot of the arms left in Iraq eventually were used against us. It is hard to make giving arms to other governments look like a good idea, especially when you seem to be making a lot of money in the exchange. On the whole, it is probably best to look at armed conflict as being the most moral when it is mostly defensive. Such a philosophy has served the Swiss quite well. It always seems to be more noble to fix the problems of other people but it is really harder to address your own depravity.
According to the Bible, there is no state that thinks of itself as evil. Every state thinks of itself as good and doing good while it could be quite evil. How can limited men bring forth a perfect government? It can’t. Only God can do that over the long run but over the short run, limited men may inform the government of what it is doing wrong even though there may be the risk of being called “hate preachers and islamophobes.”