Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Saudi Salafi

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 ... 16
No Germans were involved in the quoted news link.

The link is quoting concerns of the official authorities, pretty much the exact same concerns that you yourself mentioned before. You said Daesh terrorists will come with the Syrian refugees and the European officials should have done more to vet the refugees that were coming in. This is virtually exactly what the US officials are saying.

Aside from the right-wing Republicans, who like most other far-right people live in paranoia of external enemies, the quoted link had no blaming of the "Syrian masses".

Again where is the evidence that the German authorities allowed the refugees to come into their country for the specific purpose of blaming them when some of them were inevitably going to commit crimes.

 Debating with conspiracy theorists is a very tough thing thing since it never ends and it is very stressing. I praise you for that.

Thank you brothers, this really helped me. Now i'm not sure what these people on wikiislam are trying to call an "error".

 You should read the whole anti-Islamic article. There are two main interpretations of this verse:

"With regard to the barrier between the two seas that is mentioned in these verses, there are two scholarly views concerning it:


That what is meant by the barrier between the two seas (i.e., between rivers and seas) is the vast lands that separate the rivers from the seas, so that there is no mixing of their waters; rather each of them has its own course and destination that is separate from that of the other.

This is the literalist interpretation that we find with many of the commentators.

Al-Haafiz Ibn Katheer (may Allah have mercy on him) said: “and He has set a barrier and a complete partition between them” [al-Furqaan 25:53] means: between the sweet water and the salty water

“a barrier”, i.e., the dry land

“a complete partition” i.e., an obstacle that prevents one of them reaching the other.

End quote from Tafseer al-Qur’aan al-Azeem, 6/117 "

 They claim on the site itself (Wikiislam) that this interpretation does NOT contradict with science and that it is correct.  And the brothers over here demonstrated that the second interpretation is right. 


 It is Eid and all what you are doing is watching anti-Islamic videos. I gave you links which deal with these so called scientific errors many times but you still ignore them. I'm not gonna post them again.

But the Christians say they have 4,000 and are proud of it.

 You should provide a source for that. And if they did, then they are wrong because they don't have this many.

 Assalamu alaikum,

 Brother, there isn't 4000 sects in Christianity. There were 72 at the prophet's (peace be upon him) time and we can identify about 40 of them.

 He was a good debater but sometimes a huge idiot. He deserved it. However him getting arrested in British prison might be harmful. Terrorism is quite common in British prison.

@AMuslimDude123 i see thanks for the link. But what have scholars of old said regarding these verses ? Did they teach the earth was flat like the Christians ?

 Read my oldest comment in this section. Almost all scholars said that the Earth is round.

You should also read this article:

 It refutes every verse which the anti-Islamics bring up. Read it.

From the scholars I have read, the narrations which depict this event as: the Prophet calling the Quraish to come to him, then he raising his index finger, due to which the Moon gets split into two, with such a distance between the two portions that one of its parts gets hidden behind a mountain - are unreliable narrations. The companions to whom such narrations are attributed were either not present or unable to be witness to the event. The most significant personality among them is Ibn Abbas, but the huge and obvious problem with Ibn Abbas being a witness is that, from other sources we know, he was around 13 years old when the Prophet died and this event happened during the Makkan period which means that during this event Ibn Abbas was 1-3 years old therefore making him unable to be a witness to this. Apparently, because of the high status of Ibn Abbas, he has often become the preferable "narrator" of fabricated narrations.

Some scholars, even though they believe in the splitting of the moon, contend that this wasn't a miracle of the Prophet because he didn't call people to come to him and told them he is going to show them a miracle but it was an event (actual splitting of the moon or whatever) that happened during the Prophet's time in Makkah and he directed the attention of the Quraish towards it.

No, the hadiths are authentic. I don't know why everybody is against the moon split so much.

Narrated Ibn Masud:
During the lifetime of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) 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 (ﷺ) said, "Witness this miracle."

Grade: Agreed Upon

USC-MSA web (English) reference    : Vol. 6, Book 60, Hadith 387
Arabic reference    : Book 65, Hadith 4864

There is atleast a bit of proof of Moses PBUH splitting the sea,as mentioned in the Qur'an AND HADITH,
but there is no Proof for Muhammad PBUH splitting the moon.

There is proof from both the Quran and the hadith of the moon splitting. "The Hour has come near, and the moon has split [in two]." 54:1

and in the Muhsin Khan translation:

"The Hour has drawn near, and the moon has been cleft asunder (the people of Makkah requested Prophet Muhammad SAW to show them a miracle, so he showed them the splitting of the moon)." 54:1

and the authentic hadith above.

You should also read the tafsirs:

Tafsir Ibn Kathir Surat Al-Qamar verse 1:

وقوله : ( وانشق القمر ) : قد كان هذا في زمان رسول الله - صلى الله عليه وسلم

And his saying ( the moon has split [in two].): This was at the time of the prophet (peace be upon him).


The Moon-splitting is only a un-authentic hadith,not an authentic one,a fabricated one.

NOPE! The hadith from Abdullah ibn Mas'ud (may Allah be pleased with him) regarding the moon split is authentic. Whether the people on this site like it or not, the view that Muhammad (peace new upon him) split the moon is the view of most of the scholars and the best view. Why are you so against this miracle? Why are you not against Moses (peace be upon him) splitting the sea?

Hello my dear brothers

I had some question regarding the miracle of the prophet when he split the moon

1- Did the moon really split, or was it a solar eclipse? (I remember reading an article on a website which says NASA confirmed an eclipse took place during the prophet's life). So how do we know it was not an eclipse and the moon did actually split?

2-Is there any good , reliable documentation of this event outside of Islam?


1- NASA never said anything about the moon split, that's a lie.

2- As far as I know no.  However I read something about how some Indians saw the moon split and put it into their culture. It is a miracle done by our prophet (PBUH). Do you see Christians or Jews asi8jg about historical evidence for Moses (peace be upon him) splithing the sea? Nope. And even if they did there isn't. It is a miracle, it isn't supposed to be proven scientifically or historically.

 Assalamu alaikum brother Idris,

 Welcome back. This link proves that Mecca existed long before the 4th century. Please read it:

Obviously when the Glorious Quran talks to salafies, It talks to dead walls.  The fact that Allah Almighty Said that the creation of WHITE MILK comes from BLOOD (red blood to the naked eye) does indeed sound ridiculous and false to the average disbeliever.  But yet, it's been scientifically confirmed to be True.

Do your readings go straight to your rear end from your eyes?  Doesn't any of this sound like True Scientific Notions and Miracles in your Holy Book?  Like Dr. Zaghloul Al-Najjar said in response to the Muslims who deny the Scientific Notions and Miracles, and to also the infidels who disbelieve:

Why would Muhammad indulge in such statements and topics???

Think about this before you vomit your next reply.

Take care,
Osama Abdallah

 I will discuss this later on in an other thread. My point was that this "scientific miracle" has to do nothing with the question. Everyone else answered the question but you only posted your "scientific miracles".


Why would Muhammad indulge in such statements and topics???

Think about this before you vomit your next reply.

Take care,
Osama Abdallah

That is what always struck me about the Quran, the author is very confident. Extremely confident, in fact. He is continuosly challenging the reader to find faults.

Is Abdullah Almadi a salafi?

 I never called my self a Salafi before. Osama just accused me of being a Salafi. However I  support the Salafi message and its goals. Which is the authentic Sunnah of the prophet (peace be upon him) and fighting against innovation.

As'salamu Alaikum dear brothers,

Please visit the following links to see the formation of milk Miracle in the Glorious Quran:

This Miracle happens to be one of my favorite ones.  The milk is produced from digested food and the BLOOD!  The Quran claimed it and science has confirmed it.  See the scientific articles that I quoted.

Take care,
Osama Abdallah

YUP! Osama Abdallah can't do anything but post his "scientific miracles". Anyways, what is meant by "pure" is pure from the cow blood. A similar question was asked in a fatwa. الشبكة الإسلامية


 Question Number: 2627678
  Assalamu alaikum, My question is regarding verse 16:66. In it, it states that milk is pure. But scientific studies show that raw milk can be very dangerous and that it contains some bacteria which can cause dangerous infections. Raw milk has some very good benefits, but it still has many harmful things in it. Authobillah, I have met some kafirs who stated that this was a mistake in the Quran. What is your response to this? Baraka Allah fikkum.
 All perfect praise be to Allaah, The Lord of the Worlds. I testify that there is none worthy of worship except Allaah, and that Muhammad, sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam, is His slave and Messenger.
Allaah says (what means): {And indeed, for you in grazing livestock is a lesson. We give you drink from what is in their bellies - between excretion and blood - pure milk, palatable to drinkers.} [Quran 16:66]
The Quran speaks in this verse about a great Sign, that the milk is free from any harm or dirt found in the blood or in the excrement.
Tafseer at-Tabari reads:
Allaah says (what means): {…between excretion and blood - pure milk…} [Quran 16:66]; meaning: We give you to drink milk, and We get it out for you from between blood and excretion pure; He says: it is free from mixing with blood and excretion; {palatable to drinkers} Allaah says that it is suitable for whoever drinks it, so a person does not choke on it as he chokes when eating some other food, and it was said: that no one ever chokes by drinking milk.” [End of quote]
Besides, Tafseer al-Baghawi reads: “Pure milk, from blood and excretion, and it does not have the color of blood or the smell of excretions, palatable to the drinkers, smooth and easy in going down the throat. It was also said: “No one has ever choked by drinking milk. Ibn ‘Abbaas said: “When the animal eats animal feed and it settles in its stomach, and it digests it, underneath it there is excretion and in the middle is milk, and on the top is the blood; the liver controls it and divides it with the Decree of Allaah, so the blood flows in the veins and the milk in the udder and the excretion stays as it is.” [End of quote]
The verse does not negate all harms from milk; rather, the verse did not speak about this at all, so the alleged mistake does not exist.
What some contemporaries claim –if it is scientifically proven – can be removed by pasteurization and the like.
Allaah Knows best.

@submit I see. Thank you for clarifying. So are there truly errors as they say or are they just the same washed up claims ?

 I read Hamza's article regarding embryology a long time ago. The critics for the most part weren't saying that there are errors in the Quran but that the stuff in it aren't miracles. And this is why Hamza Tzortis stopped believing in the "scientific miracles". And the critics weren't even scientists. Why do you need the scientific miraCleese anyway?

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 ... 16

What's new | A-Z | Discuss & Blog | Youtube