Status: Age: 76 Faith: Islam Gender:
Zodiac: Joined: Jun 12, 2007
Posts: 614
Post subject:
Hello, Ahmed
Can you please post Khalil's post on "Ahsanal-Khaliqeen", which you dismissed recently, here in the Slam Dunk and also up-date the Slam Dunk on FFI?
Thanks
BMZ
Posted:
Wed 10 Jun, 2009 4:56 pm
AhmedBahgat Site Admin
Status: Age: 59 Faith: Islam Gender:
Zodiac: Joined: Oct 16, 2006
Posts: 3236 Location: Australia
Post subject:
KhaliL FarieL wrote:
Trojan wrote:
AhmedBahgat wrote:
Here you have it, you can link to my slam dunk animation if you wish
:heartbeat: How nice Bhagat and debunker make peace..... (no pun intended)
I was sure about it. Ahmed can not stop being Ahmed Bahgat.
AhmedBahgat wrote:
debunker wrote:
As for Khalil's super silly argument about the use of the word Ra'ouf to describe Muhammed, we use this word to describe each other! There are people whose name is Ra'ouf. Kareem is another adjective we use to desrcribe each other. Not ALL the adjectives of God are exclusive to Him.
If you want to totally slam dunk the kafir, then tell him that Allah also called Ibrahim, "Halim", which is also used to describe Allah:
Here is the word Halim, describing Allah:
2:225 لا يؤاخذكم الله باللغو في ايمانكم ولكن يؤاخذكم بما كسبت قلوبكم والله غفور حليم
And here is the word Halim, describing Ibrahim:
9:114 وما كان استغفار ابراهيم لابيه الا عن موعدة وعدها اياه فلما تبين له انه عدو لله تبرا منه ان ابراهيم لاواه حليم
11:75 ان ابراهيم لحليم اواه منيب
Therefore describing Mohammed with a name of Allah, is not exclusive to him, as Ibrahim too was described using a name of Allah
Here you have it, you can link to my slam dunk animation if you wish
Hello Ahmed,
You should not have been strived to find the above verse in Quran to tell me all of Allah�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s attributes are not exclusive to him. Here are some from �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??Asma�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??Al-Husna�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??
Hakim: The All-Wise (having absolute wisdom in All His decrees and acts).
Alim: The All-Knowing (One Who knows all that is hidden from us and all that is known to us).
Sami': The All-Hearing.
Basir: The All-Seeing (One Who witnesses all things and events).
Any human can be described with the above said attributes of Allah. We have'Hakims'and �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??Alims' among us. Human can hear, so he is 'Sami'. He can see so he is �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??Basir�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??.
The point is you should discern attributes �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??exclusive to Allah�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?? from the many of his attributes. �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??Asma-al-Husna�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?? is about 99 attributes but not all are restricted to Allah.
�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??Halim�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?? is a mild attribute of Allah almost exactly like what it means. It�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s meaning might be �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??Clement, Kind�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?�?????�????�???�??�?�¦ but it is not like �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??Raheem�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?? which is an exclusive attribute of Allah because it connotes �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??the one who is merciful to believers only in the hereafter�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??. That is why it is often seen after �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??Rahman�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?? which generates almost the same literal meaning of �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??Raheem�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??
This attribute of being merciful to believers only in the hereafter is given to Muhammad.
Should not Rashad Khalifa concerned of this? Of course because it is lethal. Allah is being shared which a faithful Rashad Khalifa could not have tolerated.
Two verses of Quran are missing in Rashad Khalifa�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s translation. And they are the verses which share Allah�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s exclusive attribute with Muhammad.
Regards
KF
Hello Khalil
You are missing a very important point regarding the word "Rahim", let's see how Allah been described in comparison with anyone who is Rahim:
And say: My Lord! Forgive and grant mercy, and You are the best of the merciful.
[The Quran ; 23:118]
23:118 وقل رب اغفر وارحم وانت خير الراحمين
-> Here you have mister Khalil, see Allah is the best of the merciful: خير الراحمين, Khair Al-Rahmeen, i.e. the best of the merciful, and as you know well, no one waqs described as such, except Allah
Let's have another example:
He (Yusuf) said: No blame against you today; Allah may forgive you, and He is the most Merciful of the merciful. [The Quran ; 12:92]
12:92 قال لا تثريب عليكم اليوم يغفر الله لكم وهو ارحم الراحمين
-> See this one: وهو ارحم الراحمين, Wa Hua Arahm Al-Rahmeen, i.e. And He is the most Meciful of the merciful, again, no one is described as such except Allah
Therefore if Mohammed was described as being merciful, then Allah is the best of the merciful, as well, Allah is the most Merciful of the merciful
That should send you back to your confusion and shiftiness board to try and cook another crap of yours
Last edited by AhmedBahgat on Wed 23 Sep, 2009 4:39 pm; edited 2 times in total
Posted:
Thu 11 Jun, 2009 3:47 pm
BMZ Moderator
Status: Age: 76 Faith: Islam Gender:
Zodiac: Joined: Jun 12, 2007
Posts: 614
Post subject:
AhmedBahgat wrote:
KhaliL FarieL wrote:
Trojan wrote:
AhmedBahgat wrote:
Here you have it, you can link to my slam dunk animation if you wish
:heartbeat: How nice Bhagat and debunker make peace..... (no pun intended)
I was sure about it. Ahmed can not stop being Ahmed Bahgat.
AhmedBahgat wrote:
debunker wrote:
As for Khalil's super silly argument about the use of the word Ra'ouf to describe Muhammed, we use this word to describe each other! There are people whose name is Ra'ouf. Kareem is another adjective we use to desrcribe each other. Not ALL the adjectives of God are exclusive to Him.
If you want to totally slam dunk the kafir, then tell him that Allah also called Ibrahim, "Halim", which is also used to describe Allah:
Here is the word Halim, describing Allah:
2:225 لا يؤاخذكم الله باللغو في ايمانكم ولكن يؤاخذكم بما كسبت قلوبكم والله غفور حليم
And here is the word Halim, describing Ibrahim:
9:114 وما كان استغفار ابراهيم لابيه الا عن موعدة وعدها اياه فلما تبين له انه عدو لله تبرا منه ان ابراهيم لاواه حليم
11:75 ان ابراهيم لحليم اواه منيب
Therefore describing Mohammed with a name of Allah, is not exclusive to him, as Ibrahim too was described using a name of Allah
Here you have it, you can link to my slam dunk animation if you wish
Hello Ahmed,
You should not have been strived to find the above verse in Quran to tell me all of Allah�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s attributes are not exclusive to him. Here are some from �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??Asma�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??Al-Husna�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??
Hakim: The All-Wise (having absolute wisdom in All His decrees and acts).
Alim: The All-Knowing (One Who knows all that is hidden from us and all that is known to us).
Sami': The All-Hearing.
Basir: The All-Seeing (One Who witnesses all things and events).
Any human can be described with the above said attributes of Allah. We have'Hakims'and �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??Alims' among us. Human can hear, so he is 'Sami'. He can see so he is �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??Basir�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??.
The point is you should discern attributes �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??exclusive to Allah�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?? from the many of his attributes. �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??Asma-al-Husna�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?? is about 99 attributes but not all are restricted to Allah.
�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??Halim�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?? is a mild attribute of Allah almost exactly like what it means. It�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s meaning might be �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??Clement, Kind�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?�?????�????�???�??�?�¦ but it is not like �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??Raheem�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?? which is an exclusive attribute of Allah because it connotes �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??the one who is merciful to believers only in the hereafter�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??. That is why it is often seen after �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??Rahman�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?? which generates almost the same literal meaning of �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??Raheem�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??
This attribute of being merciful to believers only in the hereafter is given to Muhammad.
Should not Rashad Khalifa concerned of this? Of course because it is lethal. Allah is being shared which a faithful Rashad Khalifa could not have tolerated.
Two verses of Quran are missing in Rashad Khalifa�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s translation. And they are the verses which share Allah�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s exclusive attribute with Muhammad.
Regards
KF
Hello Khalil
You are missing a very important point regarding the word "Rahim", let's see how Allah been described in comparison with anyone who is Rahim:
And say: My Lord! Forgive and grant mercy, and You are the best of the merciful.
[The Quran ; 23:118]
23:118 وقل رب اغفر وارحم وانت خير الراحمين
-> Here you have mister Khalil, see Allah is the best of the merciful: خير الراحمين, Khair Al-Rahmeen, i.e. the best of the merciful, and as you know well, no one waqs described as such, except Allah
Let's have another example:
He (Yusuf) said: No blame against you today; Allah may forgive you, and He is the most Merciful of the merciful. [The Quran ; 12:92]
12:92 قال لا تثريب عليكم اليوم يغفر الله لكم وهو ارحم الراحمين
-> See this one: وهو ارحم الراحمين, Wa Hua Arahm Al-Rahmeen, i.e. And He is the most Meciful of the merciful, again, no one is described as such except Allah
Therefore if Mohammed was described as being merciful, then Allah is the best of the merciful, as well, Allah is the most Merciful of the merciful
That should send you back to your confusion and shiftiness board to try and cook another crap of yours
You have been slam dunked
cheers
It is not just confusion, Ahmed. The FFI freaks just do not have brain to think.
Any person can understand that any person can be forgiving and merciful to others but the FFI goons cannot and do not understand that Allah is the most forgiving and the most merciful.
And the title "the Most Forgiving" and "the Most Merciful" is not given to anyone, not even to the Prophet.
Hope the FFI birdbrains can now understand better.
BMZ
Posted:
Thu 11 Jun, 2009 4:03 pm
AhmedBahgat Site Admin
Status: Age: 59 Faith: Islam Gender:
Zodiac: Joined: Oct 16, 2006
Posts: 3236 Location: Australia
Post subject:
Salam all
To take myself out of the depression that was caused by the massive failure of the Egyptian soccer team, I decided to write one of my long Quran comments, I enjoy doing so as I don�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??t only consider it a lesson to others, but to others and myself.
On FFI, a guy named Manfred who is a Christian is debating some Muslims, to whether the God of the Quran is all-powerful or not?
Despite that such guy claims to be a Christian, he proved to be one of those who sleeps with the enemy, and what I mean by the enemy, is the enemy of God, the Atheists and their likes, those who claim that god does not exist, so what they do, thinking that they will corner those who believe in a god, is to ask them some Tom and Jerry or Barbie questions, like:
-> Can god create a heavy rock that he cannot lift it?
-> Can god turn into a poo?
The above two questions are examples of the thoughts of such deluded mentality of clear cut losers who are called Atheists. Now ,I for myself don�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??t like to debate such deluded people bound to hell, they are dismissed on the fly in my books, not because they present some solid arguments, rather because they never present any solid argument. So I salvage every second of my time and just ignore them while wishing them all the best in their worldly life, in the hereafter and if God exists, why I should wish them the same at such point in the future and after this life ends?
What puzzles me that while those atheists think of themselves as smart humans, yet, non of them managed to answer Pascal Wager argument against them, which is a very solid argument that is not even based on the belief, rather based on security and insurance for the self, a concept that every one tries to adhere to in life, even insuring a car against a POSSIBLE drastic situation in the future. Such failure to refute Pascal Wager exposes their stupidity fair and square. They will never be able to refute such solid and simple argument which I already presented to them so many times in different ways, and at best you get a Barbie answer from them. So they are virtually life dismissed in my books.
What surprised me though that, this Christian named Manfred, dared to use such stupid argument against the Muslims on FFI. So I have had to reply thoroughly with yet another mother of slam dunks to send him and his Atheists pals back in their blaze wagon nick named Destination Hell �?????�????�???�??�?�¢?? Welcome Aboard Dumbs
Let me first clear a few points:
1) This comment is about the definition of All-Powerful of a God, I also don�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??t take what Tom, Dick, or Harry says what it should mean, I only take how the God in Whom I believe defined it, therefore the only evidences that will be provided are from the Quran, to explain the definition of the All-Powerful God, and consequently I will bring many verses that mention such aspect of Allah.
2) If you apply the above logic of taking how the god of any religion defined such aspect of being all-powerful, then confused Christian Manfred of FFI, should use his corrupt Bible to answer those confused Atheist questions. For Manfred, he thinks that he has beaten them, for Manfred, yes god can make himself anything, like a human who is not all-powerful. Not just that, for Manfred, the all-powerful god can allow anything to happen to him, like getting bashed and fuked by his slaves whom he suppose to have created and have all power over them. How bloody funny, those confused Christians who try to use their stupid excuse of salvation of sin that it must be through death, then I tell them, how dumb you are, if your imaginary god could not just say to his slaves I forgive you instead of getting killed by his own creatures, then your god is not all powerful, you confused.
3) Most of the translation I brought in is my translation, however, because I only finished the translation of the first 45 suras, I will use my translation up to sura 45, then from sura 46 onwards, I will use Shakir translation, I will leave Shakir�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s one intact so you can compare and understand how I translated such aspect of God.
4) The aspect is mentioned in the Quran by using the following sentence:
الله علي كل شئ قدير , Allah Ala Kul Shai Qadir
Let me break it word for word and translate each word:
-> الله , Allah, i.e. Allah
-> علي , Ala, i.e. Over
-> كل , Kul, i.e. Every
-> شئ , Shai, i.e. Thing
-> قدير , Qadir, i.e. Capable
If we put the words above together, then it should be:
Allah over everything Capable.
We need to add the verb to be because it exists (virtually) in Arabic, so it should be
Allah is, over everything, Capable.
Or:
Allah, over everything, is Capable.
I lean to go for the first one, but I will still seek advice in my last translation run.
I also have no problem if anyone wants to translate the word قدير , Qadir, to All-Powerful., i.e. I accept the following two possible translations:
Allah is, over everything, all-Powerful.
Or:
Allah, over everything, is all-Powerful.
Be aware that the name Allah may be replaced with He in some verses
5) My argument is based on the two words كل شئ , Kul Shai, i.e. Everything or all things, the first is more accurate though. So we need to logically define everything, for example:
a- It is every creature.
b- It is every action. But upon whom should be the action done?
c- Or both a & b
Now, I accept that everything means both �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??a�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?? and �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??b�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??
I.e. everything means every creature and every action.
We should have no argument regarding every creature, because God can not be a creature due to the fact that He created every creature. i.e. Every creature cannot include God.
Therefore if we take the first part as following:
Allah is, over every creature, all-Powerful.
Then it should logically mean that Allah can do anything that we can imagine or not imagine to any creature that He created. Being, turning them into a poo, turning them into monkeys, destroying them, burning them, blessing them, you name it, absolutely anything.
Now we come to the main point of this long comment, how about when we apply the other part, i.e.
Allah is, over every action, all-Powerful.
Well, the definition of that according to the Quran, i.e. according to Allah, that it has to be every action that is done upon any of His creatures.
Such very logical understanding should be obvious to a child, of course a real and all-powerful god cannot do degrading actions to himself, like turning into a human then allowing other humans to fuk him and kill him, how ridiculous. IT IS OBVIOUS THAT IF GOD ALLOWED THAT TO HAPPEN, THEN HE WILL AUTOMATICALLY LOSE THE ALL-POWERFUL ASPECT. That is obvious under the flawed Christian theology when the suppose to be a human god failed to even save himself from getting humiliated and killed. And even before that, in many occasions, he failed to do healings to some humans or un-curse the tree that he wrongly cursed.
Based on all the above, I had to bring many of the verses where such aspect is mentioned in the Quran, and we should see that almost in each verse, Allah is giving us an example of A THING of EVERYTHING, and we should see that it should clearly apply to any of His creatures not upon Himself:
5:17 Indeed they have disbelieved who said: Allah is the Messiah, son of Mariam. Say: Who then could stop Allah if He wished to destroy the Messiah son of Mariam and his mother and those on the earth all together? And to Allah is the kingdom of the heavens and the earth and what is between them; He creates what He desires; and Allah is, over everything, Capable.
5:17 لقد كفر الذين قالوا ان الله هو المسيح ابن مريم قل فمن يملك من الله شيئا ان اراد ان يهلك المسيح ابن مريم وامه ومن في الارض جميعا ولله ملك السماوات والارض وما بينهما يخلق ما يشاء والله علي كل شئ قدير
-> See, the verses ended by telling us: and Allah is, over everything, Capable. , in the same verse, Allah has given us two examples of His powerful capability to do anything to any of His creatures:
a- if He wished to destroy the Messiah son of Mariam and his mother and those on the earth all together.
b- He creates what He desires
I.e. He is, over His creatures, Capable, and this ultimate capability is by doing anything to any of His creatures or creates other creatures to do with them whatever He wants FREELY and at any point of time.
5:40 Do you not know that Allah, to Him is the kingdom of the heavens and the earth; He castigates whom He wills; and forgives whom He wills and Allah is, over everything, Capable.
5:40 الم تعلم ان الله له ملك السماوات والارض يعذب من يشاء ويغفر لمن يشاء والله علي كل شئ قدير
-> Another example of Allah�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s ultimate power of doing anything to any of His creatures: He castigates whom He wills; and forgives whom He wills and Allah is, over everything, Capable.
6 17 And if Allah touches you with harm, then there is none to take it off but He; and if He touches you with good, then He is, over everything, Capable.
6:17 وان يمسسك الله بضر فلا كاشف له الا هو وان يمسسك بخير فهو علي كل شئ قدير
-> See this example: And if Allah touches you with harm, then there is none to take it off but He; and if He touches you with good, then He is, over everything, Capable.
9:39 If you do not go forth, He will castigate you with a painful torture and will replace you with another people, and you will not harm Him a thing; and Allah is, over everything, Capable.
9:39 الا تنفروا يعذبكم عذابا اليما ويستبدل قوما غيركم ولا تضروه شيئا والله علي كل شئ قدير
-> Another example: If you do not go forth, He will castigate you with a painful torture and will replace you with another people, �?????�????�???�??�?�¢?�?????�????�???�??�?�¦�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?�?????�????�???�??�?�¦.; and Allah is, over everything, Capable.
11:4 To Allah is your return, and He is, over everything, Capable.
11:4 الي الله مرجعكم وهو علي كل شئ قدير
-> See how our return to Allah is expressed before telling us that He is, over everything, Capable: To Allah is your return, and He is, over everything, Capable.
16:77 And to Allah belongs the unseen of the heavens and the earth; and the command of the hour is not but a glance of vision, or it is nearer; indeed, Allah is, over everything, Capable.
16:77 ولله غيب السماوات والارض وما امر الساعة الا كلمح البصر او هو اقرب ان الله علي كل شئ قدير
-> See this unique capability over a thing that is not really a physical creature walking or swimming in the universe, rather a virtual creature (the Hour) and see how the verse is expressing such ultimate capability over the hour by telling us that: the command of the hour is not but a glance of vision, or it is nearer; indeed, ]Allah is, over everything, Capable.
Of course the hour is A THING that Allah created, consequently He is, over it, Capable. How articulate the Quran is.
22:6 That is because Allah is the Truth and because He gives life to the dead, and because He is, over everything, Capable.
22:6 ذلك بان الله هو الحق وانه يحي الموتي وانه علي كل شئ قدير
-> See how giving life is an action that Allah can perform over the dead creatures anytime He wants: He gives life to the dead, and because He is, over everything, Capable.
The ultimate capability of reviving the dead is also accompanied with the ultimate capability of causing death:
57:2 His is the kingdom of the heavens and the earth; He gives life and causes death; and He has power over all things.
57:2 له ملك السماوات والارض يحيي ويميت وهو علي كل شئ قدير
-> See: He gives life and causes death; and He has power over all things., as translated by Shakir, which is ok with me, i.e. Allah has power over all creatures to cause death to them or give them life.
The aspect of such ultimate power of taking life by Allah, CANNOT be performed upon Himself, this is because, at such moment of time He must lose another ultimate aspect that He also told us about it, let�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s see this verse:
25:58 And rely upon the Alive Who does not die, and glorify (Him) with His praise; and Sufficient is He to be of the sins of His servants, Acquainted.
25:58 وتوكل علي الحي الذي لا يموت وسبح بحمده وكفي به بذنوب عباده خبيرا
-> How clear: And rely upon the Alive Who does not die,, therefore Allah CANNOT cause death to Himself because He does not die, and certainly Allah CANNOT do any action to Himself that degrades or weakens Him, because He told us that He is the Strong, The Mighty, The Exalted and The Great.
Apply such very logical understanding that does not even need the Quran to explain it on the corrupt Christian theology of god: At the moment their imaginary god turned into a human, he became ignorant and weak, ignorant when he cursed a good fig tree that might have fed many hungry creatures, and weak when he admitted that he cannot do anything of his own, and when he was helpless to defend himself against a mob of perpetrators, that he can easily blow them away as a god. Yet you see the shameless and deluded Christian apologists telling us that it does not make sense to us because we do not bloody understand the concept of salvation, how dumb and deluded, well here is the simple concept of salvation by a suppose to be god
By telling the sinners:
Sinners, I am the God, the Forgiver and the Merciful. I forgive you all.
If he cannot do that while being a god (not morphed into a weak human to get fuked by some perverts), then he can not be the all powerful god. i.e. such dumb Christian apologist like Manfred of FFI, has shot himself in the foot after sleeping with the atheist enemy of God, he is telling us that his imaginary god is all powerful and can do anything even morphing into a weak human getting killed to offer his creatures salivation, yet his own imaginary god CANNOT forgive the sinners by simply telling them I forgive you sinners, rather he MUST AND HAD TO morph into a weak human to get nailed then killed and hanged on a cross for his creatures sins. SUCH CRAP does not only make sense to any Muslim, in fact it does not even make any sense to most of the Christians along with their fellow atheists.
Let�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s move on to the next example of such ultimate capability of the real God towards His creatures
24:45 And Allah has created every walking creature from water, so of them is that which walks upon its belly, and of them is that which walks upon two legs, and of them is that which walks upon four (legs); Allah creates what He wills; indeed, Allah is, over everything, Capable.
24:45 والله خلق كل دابة من ماء فمنهم من يمشي علي بطنه ومنهم من يمشي علي رجلين ومنهم من يمشي علي اربع يخلق الله ما يشاء ان الله علي كل شئ قدير
-> This is a good example, the verse is telling us that Allah has created some creatures that walk on bellies, and others that walk on 2 legs, and others that walk on 4 legs, and others according to His will. Then the verse ends by reminding us with such ultimate capability that Allah has over His creatures: of them is that which walks upon its belly, and of them is that which walks upon two legs, and of them is that which walks upon four (legs); Allah creates what He wills; indeed, Allah is, over everything, Capable.
Such ultimate power over how the creatures are created does not only apply to humans, rather to any creature, see this example:
35:1 Praise be to Allah, the Originator of the heavens and the earth, Who made the angels, messengers having wings, two, and three, and four; He increases in creation what He wills; indeed, Allah is, over everything, Capable.
35:1 الحمد لله فاطر السماوات والارض جاعل الملائكة رسلا اولي اجنحة مثني وثلاث ورباع يزيد في الخلق ما يشاء ان الله علي كل شئ قدير
-> Who made the angels, messengers having wings, two, and three, and four; He increases in creation what He wills; indeed, Allah is, over everything, Capable.
59:6 And whatever Allah restored to His Messenger from them you did not press forward against it any horse or a riding camel but Allah gives authority to His messengers against whom He pleases, and Allah has power over all things.
59:6 وما افاء الله علي رسوله منهم فما اوجفتم عليه من خيل ولا ركاب ولكن الله يسلط رسله علي من يشاء والله علي كل شئ قدير
-> See in this example how such ultimate capability by Allah, also covers giving the authority to any of His messengers: Allah gives authority to His messengers against whom He pleases, and Allah has power over all things.. Another translation by Shakir.
Finally, as I stated earlier, Allah cannot be a thing of the things, these things being a creature or an action, are all created by Allah, see this verse:
6:101 The incomparable Originator of the heavens and the earth! How could He have a child when He has no female companion, and He created everything, and He is, concerning everything, all-Knowing. [The Quran ; ]
6:101 بديع السماوات والارض اني يكون له ولد ولم تكن له صاحبة وخلق كل شئ وهو بكل شئ عليم
-> How clear: and He created everything, and He is, concerning everything, all-Knowing
And again:
The One, to whom belongs the kingdom of the heavens and the earth, and Who did not take a child, and there is not to Him a partner in the kingdom, and Who created everything, and measured it according to a measure. [The Quran ; ]
25:2 الذي له ملك السماوات والارض ولم يتخذ ولدا ولم يكن له شريك في الملك وخلق كل شئ فقدره تقديرا
-> See: Who created everything, and measured it according to a measure.
Here you have it, another mother of all slams, in which the Quran conclusively slam dunked such stupid questions by the confused Atheists and their fellow Christians who dare to argue with the Muslims using non sense.
Last edited by AhmedBahgat on Wed 23 Sep, 2009 4:32 pm; edited 9 times in total
Posted:
Mon 22 Jun, 2009 9:10 pm
BMZ Moderator
Status: Age: 76 Faith: Islam Gender:
Zodiac: Joined: Jun 12, 2007
Posts: 614
Post subject:
Hello, Ahmed
Thanks for reminding the Christian poster at FFI. I think this slam dunk was timely and necessary.
Actually, any Christian on FFI should not even disclose that he/she is a Christian because Christianity is really not a religion. It is a Cult that has become popular just because it was marketed as an easy-to-do product.
do any damn thing, sin without fear and load on all the sins of humanity on Jesus, till the poor fellow will not be even able to walk on the big Day.
I came across a Christian who told me "God can do anything. Right?"
I replied, "Yes!"
Then I asked him, "Can God become a donkey or a monkey?" He said, "No!"
When you come across polemic Christians, you will note that he/she would argue and talk exactly in the same silly manner the gospels were written.
The gospels and the New Testament are based on polemics and Tu Quoque. Anyone can see that. Thus we see the same NT culture which the average Polemic Christians like LCD and Manfred display.
This is known as the Bible culture and they cannot think outside the Bible Box. lol!
"Innal-laha alaa kulle shaiyin-qadeer" was a very good reply.
Salaams, mate
BMZ
Posted:
Tue 23 Jun, 2009 1:48 am
Rigel Pawn
Status:
Faith:
Joined: Aug 17, 2007
Posts: 110
Post subject:
BMZ wrote:
Salaams, Ahmed
Concentrate more on the translation of Qur'aan and hammer the FFI goons only when you see something which deserves to be responded to.
Baig
Posted:
Tue 23 Jun, 2009 7:56 am
BMZ Moderator
Status: Age: 76 Faith: Islam Gender:
Zodiac: Joined: Jun 12, 2007
Posts: 614
Post subject:
Rigel wrote:
BMZ wrote:
Salaams, Ahmed
Concentrate more on the translation of Qur'aan and hammer the FFI goons only when you see something which deserves to be responded to.
Baig
Yes, bro. Ahmed is doing that. He has cut down writing on FFI but hammers the fools to educate them, when necessary.
Glad to see you back.
Salaams
Baig M Z
Posted:
Tue 23 Jun, 2009 1:09 pm
ronny
Status:
Faith:
Joined: Jun 30, 2009
Posts: 5
Post subject:
Hello AhmedBahgat
in reference to the topic of ma malakat aymanukum, do you hold that sex with them is absolutely forbidden out of wedlock? if you do then how do you explain 70:30,23:6 telling men to "guard their private parts" from their wives OR their ma malakat aymanukum. doesn't it mean that sex with these categories is allowed outside marriage?
thanks
Posted:
Sat 11 Jul, 2009 9:01 am
AhmedBahgat Site Admin
Status: Age: 59 Faith: Islam Gender:
Zodiac: Joined: Oct 16, 2006
Posts: 3236 Location: Australia
Post subject:
ronny wrote:
Hello AhmedBahgat
Hello ronny
ronny wrote:
in reference to the topic of ma malakat aymanukum, do you hold that sex with them is absolutely forbidden out of wedlock?
No, it is ok outside the wedlock AS LOING AS SHE CONSENTS
ronny wrote:
if you do then how do you explain 70:30,23:6 telling men to "guard their private parts" from their wives OR their ma malakat aymanukum. doesn't it mean that sex with these categories is allowed outside marriage?
No explanation is required, according to the Quran, sex is allowed with Ma Malakat Ayman outside the wedlock, however weddding Ma Malakat Ayman is encouraged in the Quran
On the other hand my understanding is based on what I understand of who is Ma Malakat Ayman accoridng to the Quran, certainly not slaves, and surely not POWs, rather weak humans who have no one to support them. therefore an oath was taken by a capable human to take care of such weak human as Ma Malakat Ayman, i.e. what the oath possesses
its a while i havent posted anywhere including FFI because i was traveling for work and also they banned me there after i exagerated the insults on two of their monkeys, ugly lyin bin trashbin and the pastor nosolution (nosubmission, probably the filthiest of their members and the most full of hate for islam).
i wanted to share my thoughts again on this topic of ma malakat aymanikum. concerning sexual relations with them, i do not believe it is allowed outside of wedlock for the following reasons:
-4:3 includes them with other regular women who should be married (this is an encouragement, not yet an obligation to marry them)
-4:25 the believer is told to marry Ma Malakat aymanikum if he cannot sustain a free (financially) believing woman, and he has to take the consent of her family (again, this is an encouragement, not yet a clear obligation to marry them before having sex with them)
-5:5,24:33 clearly tell the believers not to have sex outside of wedlock with any member of society. More precisely 24:33 explains the important point that if a believer does not have the means to marry then he must keep chaste at all costs, until Allah frees him from his financial needs out of His grace, so that the believer may sustain a wife and children. Fornication is a heavily punishable sin 24:2 and the guilty becomes unlawful for marriage with a believer as long as he/she perseveres in such behavior 24:3. Fornication is thus strictly forbidden in all situations, and the Quran particularly emphasizes this fact towards the weak people of society under our authority and protection, such as slaves or servants 24:32,2:221 as exemplified throught the story of prophet Yusuf, bought as a slave and whom his mistress wanted to abuse sexually under the threat of emprisonnement. The noble Quran condemned such action and God annuled her guile and answered Yusuf's wish to preserve his chastity 12:30-34.
the only 2 verses that may cause difficulty in understanding the permissibility or not of having sex with Ma Malakat aymanikum outside wedlock are 70:30,23:6.
The believers are told to "guard their private parts" from all persons outside their mates or (aw) ma malakat aymanukum.
Similarly to 70:30,23:6 and in the context of marriage, 33:50 mentions the women lawful for the prophet such as his wives and other categories of women are mentionned seperately, including ma malakat aymanukum 33:50"O Prophet! surely We have made lawful to you your wives whom you have given their dowries, and those whom your right hand possesses.."
But the fact the verse mentions ma malakat aymanukum seperately than the wives does not mean the latter are lawful outside of wedlock otherwise the verse would be allowing extra-marital sexual relations with, not only ma malakat aymanukum in contradiction with 4:3,24:33, but also with the daughters of the paternal uncles and aunts, the migrant and homeless daughters of the maternal uncles and aunts etc. which is of course an absurdity alien to the meaning of the Quran.
As in other languages, the particle aw (or) used in 70:30,23:6 does not necessarly denote an alternative or an exclusion. It is also used for "tafseel" meaning elaboration, in correlation, to connect alternative terms for the same thing or rephrase what was previously said by adding some charachteristics -"in other words" or "that is"- (Lane�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s Arabic-English Lexicon) for example
4:110-111
And whoever does evil or (AW) acts unjustly to his soul, then asks forgiveness of Allah, he shall find Allah Forgiving, Merciful. And whoever commits a sin, he only commits it against his own soul; and Allah is Knowing, Wise.
the quran is full of verses where sinning is synonymous to destroying one's soul.
25:62
And He it is Who made the night and the day to follow each other for him who desires to be mindful or (AW) desires to be thankful.
50:37
Most surely there is a reminder in this for him who has a heart or (AW) he gives ear and is a witness.
in those 2 verses AW is clearly used for elaboration, not exclusion.
96:11-12
Have you considered if he were on the right way, Or (AW) enjoined guarding (against evil)?
again, clearly used for elaboration, not exclusion
48:16
Say to those of the dwellers of the desert who were left behind: You shall soon be invited (to fight) against a people possessing mighty prowess; you will fight against them until (AW) they submit
shakir's translation for AW as "until" is not correct obviously (it should literaly be "or") but, like other translators, i believe he did so because AW in that verse is again used for something else than an alternative. it is used for the consequence of an action; the believers are invited to fight a people, they shall fight them until they submit.
since the verse is telling the believers that they shall effectively fight them (tuqaatilunahum), then AW cannot be used for an alternative, meaning that they will fight them or they will submit. the submission will necessarly come because of the fighting.
(i would apreciate your feedback or corrections for the translation of that verse)
Finally, who says that 70:30,23:6 are referring exclusively to males guarding their private parts from females?
The Quran applies the terms believers (mu'minun) 4:124, mates (azwaj) 2:232,234 to men and women alike (could you also tell me if ma malakat aymanikum can be males or females, i have an idea but im not sure) therefore and keeping in harmony with the repeated protective statements regarding the weak people in society and the encouragement to marry them, more precisely ma malakat aymanukum and the prohibition of sex outside wedlock, 70:30,23:6 speak of both husbands and wives, who "rightfully possess" one another by virtue of marriage "Except before their mates or (that is) those whom their oaths possess".
Posted:
Sat 11 Jul, 2009 8:24 pm
AhmedBahgat Site Admin
Status: Age: 59 Faith: Islam Gender:
Zodiac: Joined: Oct 16, 2006
Posts: 3236 Location: Australia
Post subject:
shindeiru wrote:
salaam brothers how are you doing
Salam mate
Good to see you around
shindeiru wrote:
its a while i havent posted anywhere including FFI because i was traveling for work and also they banned me there after i exagerated the insults on two of their monkeys, ugly lyin bin trashbin and the pastor nosolution (nosubmission, probably the filthiest of their members and the most full of hate for islam).
I did not know that they banned you, what a bummer by them, however FFI site has become so boring lately so you are not missing on anything of a value, and true that punk bin lyin trashbin is a clear cut jerk, he has been life dismmissed.
shindeiru wrote:
i wanted to share my thoughts again on this topic of ma malakat aymanikum.
Sure mate, your input will be appreciated in this tough subject
shindeiru wrote:
concerning sexual relations with them, i do not believe it is allowed outside of wedlock for the following reasons:
Before I read your reasons, I tend to agree with you, however I just want a compelling evidence from the Quran before I conlcude that this is the case, I donlt want the goons to play a lengthy and wasteless ping pong game, so my understanding is sort of literal that sex is allowed, however be wrong, so I am eager to read your reasons because honestely I would love to be proven wrong in this subject of sex with Ma Malakat Ayman
shindeiru wrote:
-4:3 includes them with other regular women who should be married (this is an encouragement, not yet an obligation to marry them)
yes
shindeiru wrote:
-4:25 the believer is told to marry Ma Malakat aymanikum if he cannot sustain a free (financially) believing woman, and he has to take the consent of her family (again, this is an encouragement, not yet a clear obligation to marry them before having sex with them)
I agree again
shindeiru wrote:
-5:5,24:33 clearly tell the believers not to have sex outside of wedlock with any member of society.
Let me bring 5:5 in here:
This day the good (of all food) is made lawful for you; and the food of those who were given the book is lawful for you and your food is lawful for them; and the protected from among the believing women and from among the protected women of those who were given the book before you; that is, you give them their dowries seeking to protect (them), not fornicating nor taking them in secret; and whoever rejects the faith, indeed his work has become vain, and in the hereafter he shall be among the losers. [Al Quran ; 5:5]
الْيَوْمَ أُحِلَّ لَكُمُ الطَّيِّبَاتُ وَطَعَامُ الَّذِينَ أُوتُواْ الْكِتَابَ حِلٌّ لَّكُمْ وَطَعَامُكُمْ حِلُّ لَّهُمْ وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنَاتِ وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ الَّذِينَ أُوتُواْ الْكِتَابَ مِن قَبْلِكُمْ إِذَا آتَيْتُمُوهُنَّ أُجُورَهُنَّ مُحْصِنِينَ غَيْرَ مُسَافِحِينَ وَلاَ مُتَّخِذِي أَخْدَانٍ وَمَن يَكْفُرْ بِالإِيمَانِ فَقَدْ حَبِطَ عَمَلُهُ وَهُوَ فِي الآخِرَةِ مِنَ الْخَاسِرِينَ (5)
-> Indeed, you have a very strong point through these words: مُحْصِنِينَ غَيْرَ مُسَافِحِينَ وَلاَ مُتَّخِذِي أَخْدَانٍ, i.e. seeking to protect (them), not fornicating nor taking them in secret
Bro, I think you have nailed it, no need for more evidences, thanks for clearing my ignorance, it is sort of like I was still infected with the virus of the days of ignorance
shindeiru wrote:
More precisely 24:33 explains the important point that if a believer does not have the means to marry then he must keep chaste at all costs, until Allah frees him from his financial needs out of His grace,
Let me bring 24:33 in here:
And let those who do not find the means to marry keep chaste until Allah makes them rich out of His grace. And those who ask for the book (of marriage) from among those whom your oaths possess, give them the writing if you know in them good, and give them from the money of Allah which He has given you; and do not compel your girls to prostitution if they desire protection (of their private parts), in order to seek the span of the life of this world; and whoever compels them, then indeed, Allah after their compulsion is Forgiving, Merciful. [Al Quran ; 24:33]
وَلْيَسْتَعْفِفِ الَّذِينَ لَا يَجِدُونَ نِكَاحًا حَتَّىٰ يُغْنِيَهُمُ اللَّهُ مِنْ فَضْلِهِ ۗ وَالَّذِينَ يَبْتَغُونَ الْكِتَابَ مِمَّا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ فَكَاتِبُوهُمْ إِنْ عَلِمْتُمْ فِيهِمْ خَيْرًا ۖ وَآتُوهُمْ مِنْ مَالِ اللَّهِ الَّذِي آتَاكُمْ ۚ وَلَا تُكْرِهُوا فَتَيَاتِكُمْ عَلَى الْبِغَاءِ إِنْ أَرَدْنَ تَحَصُّنًا لِتَبْتَغُوا عَرَضَ الْحَيَاةِ الدُّنْيَا ۚ وَمَنْ يُكْرِهْهُنَّ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ مِنْ بَعْدِ إِكْرَاهِهِنَّ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ (33)
-> Another very powerful point through the words: وَلْيَسْتَعْفِفِ الَّذِينَ لَا يَجِدُونَ نِكَاحًا حَتَّىٰ يُغْنِيَهُمُ اللَّهُ مِنْ فَضْلِهِ , i.e. And let those who do not find the means to marry keep chaste until Allah makes them rich out of His grace.
Look man, you have certainly proved me wrong and I am so delighted that you have done so, somehow I was distorted when I answered roony and if I was patient and went through the Quran again, I might have been guided to the answer as you have been, but no losses, I am also been guided to the annswer through you so I thank you from the bottom of my heart.
shindeiru wrote:
so that the believer may sustain a wife and children. Fornication is a heavily punishable sin 24:2 and the guilty becomes unlawful for marriage with a believer as long as he/she perseveres in such behavior 24:3. Fornication is thus strictly forbidden in all situations, and the Quran particularly emphasizes this fact towards the weak people of society under our authority and protection, such as slaves or servants 24:32,2:221 as exemplified throught the story of prophet Yusuf, bought as a slave and whom his mistress wanted to abuse sexually under the threat of emprisonnement. The noble Quran condemned such action and God annuled her guile and answered Yusuf's wish to preserve his chastity 12:30-34.
No question about it, another compelling Quran evidences
shindeiru wrote:
the only 2 verses that may cause difficulty in understanding the permissibility or not of having sex with Ma Malakat aymanikum outside wedlock are 70:30,23:6.
The believers are told to "guard their private parts" from all persons outside their mates or (aw) ma malakat aymanukum.
Similarly to 70:30,23:6 and in the context of marriage, 33:50 mentions the women lawful for the prophet such as his wives and other categories of women are mentionned seperately, including ma malakat aymanukum 33:50"O Prophet! surely We have made lawful to you your wives whom you have given their dowries, and those whom your right hand possesses.."
Very strong arguments, but not for me to refute as I already conceded, it is going to be one hell of an argument to the FFI goons and many confused Muslims, so I will use your reply from now on against them. That is what I like about Free Islam site, it is going to be filled with very valuable information regarding our religion, no chit chat, no bickering, no fightes and no waste of time.
Straight to the point, this is what Free Islam was planned to be
shindeiru wrote:
But the fact the verse mentions ma malakat aymanukum seperately than the wives does not mean the latter are lawful outside of wedlock otherwise the verse would be allowing extra-marital sexual relations with, not only ma malakat aymanukum in contradiction with 4:3,24:33, but also with the daughters of the paternal uncles and aunts, the migrant and homeless daughters of the maternal uncles and aunts etc. which is of course an absurdity alien to the meaning of the Quran.
Glad that you came up with strong logic regarding such issue as I know that it will be used by the goons of FFI to refute your reply.
shindeiru wrote:
As in other languages, the particle aw (or) used in 70:30,23:6 does not necessarly denote an alternative or an exclusion. It is also used for "tafseel" meaning elaboration, in correlation, to connect alternative terms for the same thing or rephrase what was previously said by adding some charachteristics -"in other words" or "that is"- (Lane�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s Arabic-English Lexicon)
I agree totally, I have seen a few examples of such type of elaboration by breaking up a main group into sub groups, I will try to find these verses inshaallah.
shindeiru wrote:
for example
So you are going to beat me to it to, lol, great bro, that what we need, examples from the Quran, let's see:
shindeiru wrote:
4:110-111
And whoever does evil or (AW) acts unjustly to his soul, then asks forgiveness of Allah, he shall find Allah Forgiving, Merciful. And whoever commits a sin, he only commits it against his own soul; and Allah is Knowing, Wise.
the quran is full of verses where sinning is synonymous to destroying one's soul.
25:62
And He it is Who made the night and the day to follow each other for him who desires to be mindful or (AW) desires to be thankful.
I sort of get it but not entirely, so I would appreciate elaboration and how the verses above use such techique of talking about a main group using its sub groups?
50:37
Most surely there is a reminder in this for him who has a heart or (AW) he gives ear and is a witness.
in those 2 verses AW is clearly used for elaboration, not exclusion.
Have you considered if he were on the right way, Or (AW) enjoined guarding (against evil)?
again, clearly used for elaboration, not exclusion
48:16
Say to those of the dwellers of the desert who were left behind: You shall soon be invited (to fight) against a people possessing mighty prowess; you will fight against them until (AW) they submit
Here we have it, that is the nail required and you nailed it again, very strong argumennt man, thanks
shindeiru wrote:
shakir's translation for AW as "until" is not correct obviously (it should literaly be "or")
Of course
shindeiru wrote:
but, like other translators, i believe he did so because AW in that verse is again used for something else than an alternative. it is used for the consequence of an action; the believers are invited to fight a people, they shall fight them until they submit.
Certainly a good believer will do both:
1) be on the right way,
2) enjoined guarding (against evil)
shindeiru wrote:
since the verse is telling the believers that they shall effectively fight them (tuqaatilunahum), then AW cannot be used for an alternative, meaning that they will fight them or they will submit. the submission will necessarly come because of the fighting.
Of course
shindeiru wrote:
(i would apreciate your feedback or corrections for the translation of that verse)
Mate, I believe you nailed it and I will use your work from now on to reply to such issue of Ma Malakat Aymanikum
For the translation, please see the verses in the Draft Translation forum and you may correct the translation if you find any mistakes, certainly I will use the literal meaning for AW which is OR, most likely I already did so in what I draft translated so far, please have a look and let me know if you have time inshaallah.
shindeiru wrote:
Finally, who says that 70:30,23:6 are referring exclusively to males guarding their private parts from females?
I agree with you on that, in fact even Ma Malakat Aymanikum covers Males, the Quran told us about the prophet wives who had Ma Malkat Ayman, therefore this add strong merit to your already powerful argument.
shindeiru wrote:
The Quran applies the terms believers (mu'minun) 4:124, mates (azwaj) 2:232,234 to men and women alike (could you also tell me if ma malakat aymanikum can be males or females, i have an idea but im not sure) therefore and keeping in harmony with the repeated protective statements regarding the weak people in society and the encouragement to marry them, more precisely ma malakat aymanukum and the prohibition of sex outside wedlock, 70:30,23:6 speak of both husbands and wives, who "rightfully possess" one another by virtue of marriage "Except before their mates or (that is) those whom their oaths possess".
Most certainly
Thanks mate for your excellent understanding to these many verses (together) indeed you proved again that the Quran explains itsself
Take care mate and I would appreciate your continues coontribution to this place, bear in mind that this place is about helping the confused Muslims and getting them united again under the rope of Allah (the Quran) _________________ http://free-islam.com
Posted:
Sat 11 Jul, 2009 9:44 pm
AhmedBahgat Site Admin
Status: Age: 59 Faith: Islam Gender:
Zodiac: Joined: Oct 16, 2006
Posts: 3236 Location: Australia
Post subject:
Salam roony
I believe that brother shindeiru has slam dunked this issue of Ma Malakat Ayman, for good
If you have something to say please say it to him as I am in total agreement with him
I did not know that they banned you, what a bummer by them, however FFI site has become so boring lately so you are not missing on anything of a value
frankly, i do not give a shit about this site and its population of monkeys. a few months ago there were still a few guys who could argue but now, its all racist rants. i prefer concentrating on increasing my quran knowledge inshallah with Allah's guidance.
AhmedBahgat wrote:
I agree totally, I have seen a few examples of such type of elaboration by breaking up a main group into sub groups, I will try to find these verses inshaallah.
yes bro, could you please give more evidence of such cases in the quran if you have time? the ones i found i quickly looked them up. the aim is to gather as much strong arguments as we can.
AhmedBahgat wrote:
I agree with you on that, in fact even Ma Malakat Aymanikum covers Males, the Quran told us about the prophet wives who had Ma Malkat Ayman, therefore this add strong merit to your already powerful argument.
can you please show how the quran conclusively refers to Ma Malakat Ayman as males
AhmedBahgat wrote:
Take care mate and I would appreciate your continues coontribution to this place, bear in mind that this place is about helping the confused Muslims and getting them united again under the rope of Allah (the Quran)
with Allah's help and guidance inshallah
Posted:
Sat 11 Jul, 2009 10:24 pm
BMZ Moderator
Status: Age: 76 Faith: Islam Gender:
Zodiac: Joined: Jun 12, 2007
Posts: 614
Post subject:
Hello, Shindeiru & Ahmed
I am glad, Shindeiru that you have been banned. It is a good way for coming out of Ali Sina's FFI cesspool.
I am also glad to see Ahmed writing less. This gives us all more time to do work on Qur'aan. I do read once in a while but do not write on that hate site full of hate-bags. I have noticed that even Khalil has left and there are not many Muslims there anymore.
Once the Muslim posters stop writing, the hate scum-bags will be writing and nodding to each other for a while and will soon start quarreling amongst themselves. lol!
As for your discussions, all I have to say is this and this is what Allah wants us to do:
"Afalam yaddabirul qaul?" This short verse says it all. Once we study each verse in the passage, we find the answers ourselves.
Salaams
Baig
Posted:
Sun 12 Jul, 2009 12:41 am
AhmedBahgat Site Admin
Status: Age: 59 Faith: Islam Gender:
Zodiac: Joined: Oct 16, 2006
Posts: 3236 Location: Australia
Post subject:
AhmedBahgat wrote:
I agree totally, I have seen a few examples of such type of elaboration by breaking up a main group into sub groups, I will try to find these verses inshaallah.
shindeiru wrote:
yes bro, could you please give more evidence of such cases in the quran if you have time? the ones i found i quickly looked them up. the aim is to gather as much strong arguments as we can.
Salam mate
There are two examples that come quickly to my mind:
1) When Allah says that He sent down the book AND the wisdom
Both words mean Quran
There should be no arguments that the book that was sent down is the Quran
For the wisdom that is also sent down with the Quran, we clearly read in verses 17:22-39 that Allah means by the wisdom that was sent down, the verses and messages of the Quran
i.e. Allah referred to the Quran using the book AND the wisdom in one sentence
And your Lord has decreed that you serve not except Him, and kindness to the parents, wether one or both of them reach old age with you, and say not to them: Uff and do not insult them, and say to them an honourable saying. [Al Quran ; 17:23]
And lower to them the wing of humility out of mercy, and say: My Lord! Have mercy upon them, as they raised me up (when I was ) little. [Al Quran ; 17:24]
Indeed, your Lord stretches the provision for whom He wills and He restricts (it); indeed, He is of His servants Acquainted, Seeing. [Al Quran ; 17:30]
And kill not the soul which Allah has forbidden, except with right, and whoever is killed unjustly, We have made to his guardian (heir) an authority, so let him not exceed the (right of) killing; indeed, he is helped. [Al Quran ; 17:33]
And go not near to the money of the orphan except in a way that is best till he reaches his strength and fulfil the covenant; indeed the covenant shall be questioned. [Al Quran ; 17:34]
And cause not (others) to follow that of which you have no knowledge; indeed, the hearing and the vision and the heart, about all of these, you shall be questioned. [Al Quran ; 17:36]
That is of what your Lord has revealed to you of the wisdom, and do not make with Allah another god, lest you be thrown into hell, blamed, rejected. [Al Quran ; 17:39]
And certainly We have given you seven verses and the great Quran. [Al Quran ; 15:87]
AhmedBahgat wrote:
I agree with you on that, in fact even Ma Malakat Aymanikum covers Males, the Quran told us about the prophet wives who had Ma Malkat Ayman, therefore this add strong merit to your already powerful argument.
AhmedBahgat wrote:
can you please show how the quran conclusively refers to Ma Malakat Ayman as males
And say to the believing women that they lower their visions and guard their private parts and do not show their adornment except what appears thereof, and let them draw their scarfs over their bosoms, and not show their adornment except to their husbands or their fathers, or the fathers if their husbands, or their sons, or the sons of their husbands, or their brothers, or the sons of their brothers, or the sons of their sister, or their women, or those whom their oaths possess, or the attendants of men who do not have need (for women), or the children who are not aware of the private parts of women; and let them (the believing women) not strike their legs so that what they conceal of their adornment may be known; and repent to Allah all of you , O believers! That you might succeed. [Al Quran ; 24:31]
-> See how is the message is directed at the believing women to not to show their adornment except to: their husbands or their fathers, or the fathers if their husbands, or their sons, or the sons of their husbands, or their brothers, or the sons of their brothers, or the sons of their sister, or their women, or those whom their oaths possess, or the attendants of men who do not have need (for women), or the children who are not aware of the private parts of women;
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
All times are GMT + 10 Hours Ported for PHP-Nuke by nukemods.com