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.

Topics - AMuslimDude213

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 ... 13
« on: June 29, 2018, 06:30:49 PM »
The extreme importance of Hadith: I've seen people nowadays deny hadith altogether and only accept the Quran,so I'll refute them one by one,and also their claims.

So first let me refute them from their roots,that Muhammad SAW is not needed for the Quran.
First of all Muhammad SAW is VERY important according to the Quran itself,infact he is the main model for the Muslims.
According to Surah al Sajda,verse 21
"There has certainly been for you in the Messenger of Allah an excellent pattern for anyone whose hope is in Allah and the Last Day and [who] remembers Allah often."
This pattern that the Quran mentions is not to be found in the Quran,but in the hadith,then my argument of interpretation comes,which the Quranist can never escape,and it destroys the Quranist from his roots
"And We revealed to you [O Muhammad] the message [Qur’an] that you may make clear to the people what was sent down to them and that they might give thought."[Qur’an 16:44]

This says the Prophet SAW himself was COMMANDED to interpret the Quran,the Interpretation is not in the Quran,but the hadith,nowhere else will you find it,except in the hadith

Muhammad SAW also has been made for Muslims a Judge,as seen in this verse
"But no, by your Lord, they will not [truly] believe until they make you, [O Muhammad], judge concerning that over which they dispute among themselves and then find within themselves no discomfort from what you have judged and submit in [full, willing] submission." [Qur’an 4:65]

So nor is Muhammad SAWs judgement found in the Quran,but in the hadith,now to my other 3 arguments before I get to refuting claims.
My argument is that,the Quran never tells you you can't have sex with a five year old,only hadith forbids that,the Quran tells you beat your wife,but the Hadith explains and says not to beat your wife very harshly,but very lightly.

Infact the Quran supports the hadith,and says there was a revelation,a revelation NOT INSIDE the Quran,infact outside the Quran,this outside revelation is mentioned in Surah an najm
Your companion [Muhammad] has not strayed, nor has he erred,"(53:2)
"Nor does he speak from [his own] inclination."(53:3)
"It is not but a revelation revealed,"(53:4)
"Taught to him by one intense in strength -"(53:5)
"One of soundness. And he rose to [his] true form"(53:6)

This whole description of the revelation,fits with the hadith.
And my last one is that the Prophet SAWs commandments are important,and the commandments arent in the Quran,but the hadith
“And let those who oppose the Messenger's (Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)) commandment (i.e. his Sunnah— legal ways, orders, acts of worship, statements) (among the sects) beware, lest some Fitnah (disbelief, trials, afflictions, earthquakes, killing, overpowered by a tyrant) should befall them or a painful torment be inflicted on them”

[an-Noor 24:63].

Now to the verses the Hadith-rejector provides,and once this has been refuted,we can conclude.
This is the most quoted verse by Quranists,Quran 6:114-5.
This first of all,is an error by the Quranist
The verse says Anyone who does shirk,and seeks Judges other than Allah
"[Say], "Then is it other than Allah I should seek as judge while it is He who has revealed to you the Book explained in detail?" And those to whom We [previously] gave the Scripture know that it is sent down from your Lord in truth, so never be among the doubters."(6:114)
And the book explained in detail,who explained this book in detail,and where is this explanation found?
The Quran says the Messenger SAW explained it
":And We revealed to you [O Muhammad] the message [Qur’an] that you may make clear to the people what was sent down to them and that they might give thought. [Qur’an 16:44]"

So therefore it can only mean the hadith,and not the Quran only.

Now the second argument that they bring up,Is how do we know the hadith are true??
First of all,how do we know the Quran are true? through chain of narration,afcourse the Quran has a solid chain of narration and therefore due to that it is unchanged, and we have the earliest Quran aswell.
Same is with the hadith,The hadith was transmitted through solid chain of narration,we first look at,and then look at classical commentaries on these narrations,then decide which hadith is true or not, And we have As Sahifa Us Sadiqa,which was a hadith written by Sahabi Abdullah Bin Amr Al A'as. R.A
Now claiming these ways donot lead us to truth is an absurdity,thats like saying,Quran doesn't lead us to truth,we know these hadith are true due to their historical and narrative authenticity,not due to a presupposition a hadith rejector makes.

Therefore we can conclude.

That The hadith is indeed a authentic Islamic source and is indeed a outside-revelation that Muslims must follow in light of the Quran

Argument 1:
“Read! In the Name of your Lord, Who has created (all that exists),

Has created man from a clot (a piece of thick coagulated blood).

Read! And your Lord is the Most Generous”

[al-‘Alaq 96:1-3].

In arabic the Word of "clot" is Alaq'

Now what does Alaq mean? it also used in these 2 verses

O People, if you should be in doubt about the Resurrection, then [consider that] indeed, We created you from dust, then from a Nutfah, then from a Alaqah... [Quran 22:5]

{ثُمَّ خَلَقْنَا النُّطْفَةَ عَلَقَةً}
Then We made the Nutfah into a Alaqah... [Quran 23:14]
The Qur’an describes one of the stage of the developing human embryo with the word alaqah. This word carries various meanings including: to hang, to be suspended, to be dangled, to stick, to cling, to cleave and to adhere. It can also mean to catch, to get caught, to be affixed or subjoined.[20] Other connotations of the word alaqah include a leech-like substance[21], having the resemblance of a worm; or being of a ‘creeping’ disposition inclined to the sucking of blood. Finally, its meaning includes clay that clings to the hand, blood in a general sense and thick, clotted blood - because of its clinging together.[22] This view (that alaqah means clotted blood - because of its clinging together) is supported by Ibn Kathir, as he explains the word to mean a “dangling clot”.[23]

Below is a correlation of the following meanings of the word alaqah and modern embryology:

1.      Hanging/suspended
2.      Suckling blood
3.      Leech/worm like substance
4.      Blood-clot

Embryologists Barry Mitchell and Ram Sharma explain the ‘hanging’ or ‘suspended’ aspects of the alaqah stage. They describe the embryo as being:

connected to the cytotrophoblast by a connecting stalk of extra-embryonic mesoderm (primitive connective tissue). The stalk is the forerunner of the umbilical cord.[24]

Interestingly John Allan and Beverley Kramer use the word “suspend” to describe the role of the connecting stalk

2.)The hadith of Jabir ibn Abdullah R.A

There is a hadith concerning the Prophet SAW telling Jabir R.A to marry young girls

Christian prince quotes the whole hadith except a part of the hadith

He said, “O Messenger of Allah! My father died  a martyr at Uhud, leaving behind daughters, so I did not wish to marry a young girl like them, but rather an older one who could take care of them and look after them.” The Prophet salla Allahu ʿalayhi wa salam replied, “You have made the correct choice.”

3.)Christian Prince and the word 'Salah'
This is the stupidest argument by far

The argument that Al Salawat or Sallalahu Alayh means Prayer or prayers be upon you. This made me cringe so hard, CP Is deceiving people by saying he knows arabic and thats only modern arabic,not classical or formal arabic, Sali ala=/=Salah/salat.

You see
Salah/Sali or Yusallee means To bless,

to bless


Now to the arabs who might scream out now, "SALI MEANS PRAYER TOO"
Well you see,it depends on the context of the word

To say Sali Ala Muhammad SAW basically means Prayers on Muhammad SAW? What does that mean? There is no context or any logical meaning to it, we dont Pray on a statue of Muhammad SAW which doesnt exist,We dont pray on Muhammad SAW.

So the context would fit when we say Sali Ala Muhammad SAW Means Blessings on Muhammad SAW, since this provides context,meaning,etc to it and makes more sense and also fits in as compared to Sali meaning prayers.

But now when it comes to how to use Prayer,whenever you say you pray to something,someone or a deity you Say ILA,which means To
And in arabic a logical example would be
Sali Ila Allah, Blessings to Allah, wont make sense, since you dont invoke blessings to Allah, Allah needs no blessings he is the creator of Blessings, so in this case, the context of "Sali=Prayer" Would fit

In which case it'd make the Context into prayers to Allah.

Concerning the name Allah this is from a christian blog:
The normal generic word for God is "alaha"/"aloho" (ܐܠܗܐ), which is linguistically related to the Hebrew word for God "elohim".

The translation of the tetragrammaton, YHWH, on the other hand, is "maria"/"morio" (ܡܪܝܐ), usually decomposed as mar-yah, Lord-Yah ("mar", lord, also being used by syriac speaking churches as a title for saints/doctors of the Church: "mor Ephrem" = Saint Ephrem). (Note: this word has nothing to do with the proper name Maria, coming from the Hebrew Mariam)

To answer your question, Jesus would almost certainly have used one of the two, or both at the same time as it is commonly done in Syriac: Maria Alaha.

Last remark: The arabic word Allah, used also by Arabic Christians, is no more no less related to the Aramaic Alaha than to the Hebrew Elohim. The three share a common linguistic root, which is nothing exceptional, so no point being dragged on sterile arguments concerning this point.

« on: May 31, 2018, 06:07:22 AM »

(Video below has all of the removed images.  Osama)

 (I tried to reply to Essence of Thought with this comment but I got an error and only half this comment was posted,waiting for a reply back from him)
As for right hand posseses, You're literally making the same repeated BS again

Do you anti-Islam advocators not bring anything new?

As for right hand possesses you must know the context behind it

Who abstain from sex, - except with those joined to them in the marriage bond, or (the captives) whom their right hands possess,- for (in their case) they are free from blame, ( Al Quran #23:5, 23:6)

“But those whose desires exceed those limits are transgressors;” - ( Al Quran #23:7 )

It is saying that you must Marry what your right hands possess, then you can have sex with them, and this is completely fine since even the the treatment we're supposed to give them before marrying them is DONOT force your women into sex
"Musaykah, a slave-girl of some Ansari, came and said: My master forces me to commit fornication. Thereupon the following verse was revealed: "But force not your maids to prostitution (when they desire chastity). (24:33)"  (Translation of Sunan Abu Dawud, Divorce (Kitab Al-Talaq), Book 12, Number 2304)"

So that disproves your point of that promoting Rape, now keep repeating your claims. I've watched your other video too,its just emotional drivel.

And you listed 4:23 THAT IS SPEAKING ABOUT FORBIDDING OF INCEST, It has nothing ZERO to do with Rape at all,
You literally probably went to some anti Islamic site and copy pasted all of this,
You literally shot yourself in the foot by mentioning that verse
'O you who have believed, indeed, intoxicants, gambling, [sacrificing on] stone alters [to other than Allah ], and divining arrows are but defilement from the work of Satan, so avoid it that you may be successful.'

Quran 2:219
Again shoots you in the foot Islam doesnt play a part in Grooming gangs nor do they use it for it The grooming gangs literally intoxicate the woman yet in Islam you're not even allowed to sell wine,its prohibited

'They ask you about wine and gambling. Say, "In them is great sin and [yet, some] benefit for people. But their sin is greater than their benefit." And they ask you what they should spend. Say, "The excess [beyond needs]." Thus Allah makes clear to you the verses [of revelation] that you might give thought.'

And even the hadith you mentioned shoots you in the foot

'Narrated Anas bin Malik:

"The Messenger of Allah (Peace be upon him) cursed ten involved in wine: The one who presses it, the one who has it pressed, its drinker, its carrier, and the one it is carried to, its server, its seller, the consumption of its price, the one who purchases it and the one it was purchased for."

[Abu 'Eisa said:] This Hadith is Gharib as a narration of Anas. Similar to this has been reported from Ibn 'Abbas, Ibn Mas'ud, and Ibn 'Umar, from the Prophet (Peace be upon him).'

And as for the hadiths you mentioned same claims over and over,Aisha R.A,etc,etc you must know Aisha R.A was NOT raped, her father gave her away to the Prophet SAW and I already replied to you on that,

And since you mentioned 5:38 as a verse, you're literally grasping for straws here, NONE OF THE VERSE has ANY little thing to do with Islams stance on rape, infact nothing at all.,

and as for you blaming Hamza for putting his religion forward, if you understood the context of the video he made, you'd realize it was a response to a vile and anti-Muslim Man called Tommy Robinson, who was using it as a argument for Islam, if he didnt put his religion forward, do you think it'll be fair? people can then say Islam endorses rape,etc because Hamza didnt reply with his religion.

Anyways moving on,
You mentioned Syria,etc,etc do you know whos causing the rape there? you have no degree in Islamic studies, you have not even a clue of what the interpretation of each passage is, you know nothing about Middle east, you're like a pawn Muslims will easily intellectually demolish, lets go to Syria and Iraq,etc and Middle eastern countries, whos going for 'sex tourisms' there to Middle east in Syria and Iraq,etc I wonder? WHITE MALES

And now what else do you want to claim if its mostly Muslims? They're also Pakistanis, how come Pakistanis arent blamed for it? Ethnicity? I disagree It feels like you are trying to push an Agenda forward,

But since you carry on blaming our Prophet SAW on the Issue of Aisha and consider that 'Proof' Let me refute that,
Okay now, this was a normal thing in the medieval world since people lived a short life and died earlier and hit puberty earlier
Now if you want to apply 21st century standards to the 7th century, that would be fallacious since then you'd be calling everyone from that time a rapist,

Now the Question is did Sayyida Aisha R.A hit puberty?
Yes,yes she did,
Narrated AISHA: (the wife of the Prophet) I had seen my parents following Islam since I attained the age of PUBERTY. Not a day passed but the Prophet visited us, both in the mornings and evenings.” (Sahih al-Bukhari volume 1, Book 8, Hadith 465

Was she raped or forced into sex at all?
No,no she wasnt
 lets see what french philosopher Montesquieu in his book "The Spirit of the Laws" which became later one of the foundations of the US law says in that book:
"Women are marriageable in hot climates at eight, nine, and ten years of age. thus, childhood and marriage almost always go together there. They are old at twenty: thus reason in women is never found with beauty there"

And as for rape there is no proof, the Family of Aisha R,A agreed to have to have her married
Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 58, Number 234:

Narrated Aisha:

The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became Allright, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, "Best wishes and Allah's Blessing and a good luck." Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah's Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age."

Notice how no Woman had any problem with Aisha R.A

if you still want to ramble on about Pedophilia, know that Pedophilia is only being attracted to children,as for our prophet SAW all of his wives were even older than him, his first wife was 40 and our Prophet SAW was 25
Safiur-Rahman al-Mubarakpuri’s biography:

Khadijah Bint Khuwailid:

In Makkah — prior to Hijra — the Prophet’s household comprised him [pbuh] and his wife Khadijah bint Khuwailid. He was twenty-five and she was forty when they got married. She was the first woman he married. She was the only wife he had till she died. He had sons and daughters with her. None of their sons lived long. They all died. Their daughters were Zainab, Ruqaiya, Umm Kulthum and Fatimah.

Zainab was married to her maternal cousin Abu Al-‘As bin Al-Rabi‘ and that was before Al-Hijra. Ruqaiya and Umm Kulthum were both married to ‘Uthman bin ‘Affan successively (i.e. he married one after the death of her sister). Fatimah was married to ‘Ali bin Abi Talib; and that was in the period between Badr and Uhud battles. The sons and daughters that Fatimah and ‘Ali had were Al-Hasan, Al-Husain, Zainab and Umm Kulthum.

It is well-known that the Prophet [pbuh] was exceptionally authorized to have more than four wives for various reasons. The wives he married were thirteen. Nine of them outlived him. Two died in his lifetime: Khadijah and the Mother of the poor (Umm Al-Masakeen).

Now tell me if the Prophet SAW woukd have been a pedophile he would've always preyed after girls who hadnt hit puberty,yet all his wives did cross puberty including Aisha R.A according to the hadith and why did the Prophet SAW wait 3 years for Aisha RA, Pedophiles and rapists are impatient and forceful but our Prophet SAW wasnt, and he waited for over 3 years so she could hit puberty,which disproves your point of our Prophet SAW being anything you claim him to be

So theres your whole bogus claim refuted Now I challenge you something, if you claim to know the Quran so well, go study the whole Quran and hadith a bit extensively, orelse you'll make another crap video with misleading footnotes.
theres your whole claim refuted.'

And as for all your responses to Hamza, The girls do know the predators,etc,etc but you did not get his point at all, what he's trying to say is that cut it right in the start, as soon as you see the girl acting strangely or with a strange man, try to step in,find out whats going on, and as for grooming gangs, they rape CHILDREN, they dont go after adult women, they're PEDOPHILES, they are the special type of scum and subhuman, so if you want to really know what is Hamza saying instead of misrepresenting him since you're an anti-islam advocate, thats your job, to misrepresent all what Muslims say, actually take the time to understand and watch his video and what he is saying,

And as for Basis and evidence of what Hamza says, here is a article

Now he did have a basis for it, and he responded in the Manner that should be responded in, against that said culture, all he said, was that most of these victim are children, and its due to their families neglecting them, and that study supports this,busted again.

« on: April 26, 2018, 11:23:15 PM »
So theres this quarell that happened around a week ago between Br Hamza and Essence Of Though

Now while watching through this 3 things really pissed me off in essence of thoughts video about Hamza Myatt,
1)Rape victim card
2)Rape profiteering claim
3)Claim that Hamza puts his religion more than Rape victims,
4)Victim blaming
Now thing is

HOW THE ACTUAL HELL CAN HE CLAIM HAMZA IS RAPE PROFITEERING WHEN HE CLAIMS TO BE A RAPE VICTIM WITH NO EVIDENCE AND GAINING MONEY OFF OF THAT, That is rape profiteering! You're promoting your own self and some false childhood rape claim about yourself and getting people to donate you over it, is that NOT rape profiteering?! This really pissed me off, if someone was a rape victim noticing this, you can imagine how stressful he'd feel about this

As for Hamza I dont think Hamza is rape profiteering,Hamza didnt claim to be a rape victim,he spoke against rape, by the logic of Essence of Thought, we can say Psychiatrists who help rape victims are Rape profiteers since they get money and donations from that, its like saying Policemen who get money for warning and protecting against rape are rape profiteers, Hamza made it clear if anyone knows or finds out a person in such a acts,report him to the police immediatly in the video and he never begged for money in the video at all.

As for the last claim, the whole context of the video is purposefully removed and never shown I wonder why huh? the video clearly shows this is a response to Tommy robinson and his group saying Islam is supposed to promote rape gangs,
If Hamza didnt put his religion forward he wouldve failed to make a argument and done a strawman, and thats why he had to give the religions view, indirectly if you notice EoT is making an Islamophobic claim that hes lying about the Muslim stance even though what Hamza said has proof in the Islamic sources, so really EoT is trying to hide the video since he knows how much of a liar he is.

As for Victim blaming this one made me question such an individuals existence.
How can ANYONE TAKE this argument seriously after watching Hamzas video, in Hamzas video the idea is that

These Victims became vulnerable due to neglect by society, now is Hamza saying NO IT IS THE VICTIMS FAULT FOR BEING VULNERABLE, no Hamza is saying that noone cares that these vulnerable little girls are being completely neglected by their families and hence they tend to look for love, which is a natural feeling, Hamza himself said we cant blame them for that, but thing is, noone questions the fact  a young girl is drinking out with an old Man, and this is a fact, its true noone questions some teenager at the bar in the middle of the night, so who is it to blame? ISLAM? No, The victim? No, The western culture? Yes, since its due to the western culture such an idea is promoted that once the child is a teenager he has to be neglected and left alone.

This is the reason they become vulnerable due to this culture, and it shouldnt be this way,their parents are to blame for neglecting them

if these people really believe in the concept of Darwinian evolution
It actually goes against homosexuality
You see,darwinian evolution promotes an idea, that Humans need to survive and reproduce offsprings
Thats the nature of humans
And homosexual sex
does not produce offspring
So its not natural for the human to have homosexual sex
So these beliefs just contradict,and this in the atheist mind,and the agnostic and the LGBT liberals mind
is a huge contradictions
they cannot solve
Until they realise most of what they believe is false

When you meet Arab nationalists,they burn from the inside out when you quote them the hadith in which The Prophet SAW said That the arab is not superior to the non arabs
Many Companions of the Prophet SAW werent arab,some where Persian,some were greek,some were also from Africa. It wasnt completely arab,Islam by its nature was diverse and fair to every race.

So if Arab nationalists like Dhahi Khalfan have the guts to speak against Pakistanis,he must speak against the Prophet Muhammad SAW,this UAE government has been building temples for hindus,etc so Indian Hindus become their slaves and are obedient to them, trying to restart what Our Prophet SAW finished. Racism and Paganism.

And when you go to India you see Hindu indian nationalists killing innocent Muslims "Indians are innocent"my ass,Dhahi Khalfan doesnt know what hes speaking about, Pakistan houses Millions of Muslims and protects their rights as much as they can,as for India,it destroys the right of Muslims, so really, India has done more crimes against Humanity than Pakistan could ever imagine, heck these people force Muslims into Paganism and Pagan based culture like Sufism.
So really
If Dhahi Khalfan has anyone to speak about for "crimes against humanity" it should be India,they're backwards Hindu fools who kill other religious groups for a bit of satisfaction.

So thats all I want to say,Dhahi Khalfan is being a racist hypocrite as even some arabs called him instead of seeing what India is doing.

Gays often claim safe sex will lower the possibility of STD.
can we refute it?

« on: March 26, 2018, 03:16:21 PM »
So basically I went to a Islamic chat group to share some thought but just because I had a fight with a Liberal Muslim in which I got extremely frustrated and did say some violent things. from then on EVERYTHING I said was being misinterpreted to killing.

Really if some of our own secular Muslim brothers from the west is treating Muslims in the west like this.

I cant imagine what the Muslims of the west have to bare when it comes to Anti Muslim and white supremacists.

GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / This is getting ridiculous.
« on: March 23, 2018, 10:04:07 AM »
Look I get that you have the problems you have. but dont spam the wall to the point other and more beneficial knowledge is put down by a bunch of anti Islam arguments.

if you want your questions to be answered go to Islamqa or some site like that. we dont deal with spiritual problems but we deal with doubts.

So Atheists. if you ask them is killing a child wrong? they say yes and why Does God allow that. is God immoral? now if you ask the atheist Is Morality objective? they will say no its subjective.
Now this is where the Muslim should argue. How can you call God immoral when according to you,Morality is subjective? what if killing that child considered Moral in the eyes of a person in China persay, what if it is Moral to rape for an Indian? so how can you judge God by a subjective standard of Morals and call him evil? isnt that unfair?

GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / The Quran against the Atheist.
« on: March 06, 2018, 05:19:23 AM »
So there have been a people from the Atheist people, who say "Quran is unproductive",Although no proof at all.

So I'm here to debunk this. why? because thats like saying,Science is unproductive,also like saying caring for family is unproductive,its like saying research is unproductive

Why so?
Because you have to read in science,and Scientific research can be time consuming.
So thats why if you say Qur'an is unproductive,just because you have to read it,you're shooting yourself in the leg with this claim,really.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 ... 13

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