Status: Age: 58 Faith: Islam Gender:
Zodiac: Joined: Oct 16, 2006
Posts: 3236 Location: Australia
Post subject: The Muslims on faithfreedom web site
Hello all
I decided to stop posting on FFI for a long time, I just have enough work and I can't mock around any more, I'm still reading them thought, lately I was very intimidated by two Muslims on FFI web site in the last two weeks or so, one is a woman and the other is a guy
The woman is nothing but a freak Muslim who is a clear cut Mushrik who comes to FFI to slander Aysha aqnd Hafsa, I'm sure that you guessed it right, she is a shia secterian who is definitely bound to hell unless Allah desires otherwise, unfortunatly FFI is still down that I can not post a url to her slandering of Aysha and Hafsa, later on inshaalllah I will post the url to her crap, she was lucky that I decided not to post because I was planning to absolutely demolish such freak and send her back to her SHIRK hole, she should better stick to making fish and chips for her children and leave defending Islam to the Muslims.
The other guy sounds a bit reasonable than her however he is still indulged in freakish action of defending some lies in the hearsay hadith that the prophet stoned a woman who committed adultery, if you read such hadith, it will be clear as light that it has to be a lie, I will give you a summery to such hadith as far as I remember the dialogue on FFI
It is alleged that a woman who committed adultery came to the prophet admitting her sin as welll asking him to purify her, he let her go, she came back to him a second time admitting the same and asking the same, again he let her go
She came back to him the third time but this time she told him that she is pregnant, so he ordered her to wait until she delivers her baby, and when she did, he stoned her
What total crap is that dear Muslim borthers and sisters?
How come the prophet refused to execute the Hadd of Allah (assuming it was ordained by Him to kill the adulterers) yet the prophet declined at least two times to execute the alleged Hadd of Allah of killing the adulterers, however he only oredered her to be killed after knowing that she is pregnant and after she delivered the child
Now I have to ask, why waiting all that long?, why to bring a new born child then kill his/her very remoursed mother? would that child be raised by others better than by his/her remoursed mother?
The above argument is only based on the assumption that Allah ordained such killing, however Allah never did as such in the Quran, the Quran is very clear that the Zani and Zania (the male and female who commit adultery) must be lashed 100 lashes in public, a group of believers must witness the punishment and no mercy should be offered to the Zani or the Zania
Now I agree that killing the adulterers was ordained in the corrupt Bible, however the prophet was ordered by Allah not to follow the people of the Book, he was also told by Allah in the Quran that for every religion, Allah has ordained its own laws, I have to say that if the punishment of Zina (adultery) was not mentioned in the Quran then I won't dare to question such hearsay hadith, but it was clearly ordained by Allah and of course no killing is involved
See how those confused Muslims damage our great religion as well damage the reputation of our great prophet, I really can't believe that thay are such stupid freaks, for me I have to take them as enemy, they are indeed the enemy within
I seek refuge by Allah
Salam all
Posted:
Sat 15 Mar, 2008 3:22 pm
IntellectualWarfare1 Knight
Status: Age: 34 Faith: Islam Gender:
Zodiac: Joined: Oct 13, 2007
Posts: 68
Post subject:
But bro, aren't the Zani and the Zaniyyah the people who have pre-marital sex?
Because I believe that the hadiths also say that a fornicator must be whipped in public whilst the adulterer (which is different from a fornicator) is stoned to death in public.
Adultery is when you cheat on your wife
Fornication is when you have pre-marital sex.
Salam _________________ Islam will overcome
Posted:
Sat 15 Mar, 2008 3:53 pm
AhmedBahgat Site Admin
Status: Age: 58 Faith: Islam Gender:
Zodiac: Joined: Oct 16, 2006
Posts: 3236 Location: Australia
Post subject:
IntellectualWarfare1 wrote:
But bro, aren't the Zani and the Zaniyyah the people who have pre-marital sex?
Salam mate
Total crap what is suggested to you by Al Mushrikoon trying hard to justify their bloody shirk
Again, the Zani and Zania are those who commit sex ouside what is allowed in the Quran, i.e. the wives/husbands and Ma Makakat Aymanina
Would you like to see the verses?
IntellectualWarfare1 wrote:
Because I believe that the hadiths also say that a fornicator must be whipped in public whilst the adulterer (which is different from a fornicator) is stoned to death in public.
Haha, crap indeed
So what the Mushrikoon are suggestinig to you that Allah left ordering one of the capital punishments to one of His prophets?, let me tell you and tell all the Mushrikoon, at least CAPITAL PUNISHMENT MUST BE ORDAINED BY ALLAH ALONE. It is impossible to be left for the humans while killing an inccocent human is one of the biggest crimes in all religions including Islam of course
IntellectualWarfare1 wrote:
Adultery is when you cheat on your wife
Funny indeed
Adultry is to indulge your arse in sexual activities with others who are not partners nor Ma Malakat Aymanika
IntellectualWarfare1 wrote:
Fornication is when you have pre-marital sex.
Salam
Hahahaha, here is one for you to think about, you may throw it as well at the Mushrikoon that you refer to their crap, this argument is similar an alleged argument that Omar Ibn Al Khataab threw at the prophet regarding the allegation of killing only the married humans who commit Zina as we read in the hearsay hadith:
Pesron A) is a sexual freak who decided not to marry at all but sleep with every woman he may find, he is also 60 years old, that very mature person will never be killed according to Al Mushrikoon man made laws.
Person B) is a young 17 years old man, whom was forced by his family to marry young, (one of the relatives for example), a year later the guy cheated on his wife, now under al Mushrikoon man made laws, that young and inexperienced man must be killed.
What crap is that?
No wonder it is alleged in the hearsay hadith that Omar Ibn Al Khatab and many with him could not believe it
Now here is the mother of all arguments that should send those Mushrikoon back to their shirk hole:
Ask the freaks, why it is alleged that the prophet declined to include the stoning verses in the Quran when they were collecting it? did he modify Allah words?
Would you llike to see the stoning verses?
Man, I can't believe that Satan is such a clever enemy but I better believe it, he indeed fuked many humans, and what is really sad that they think that they are fukin guided, the Quran exposes such freaks fair and square
Salam mate and sorry about my language (you made me angry man, now if you insist on Al Mushrikoon crap, I have to take you as an enemy , just kiidin mate, you are still young and have plenty to learn about your great religion)
Last edited by AhmedBahgat on Sun 16 Mar, 2008 12:06 pm; edited 1 time in total
Posted:
Sat 15 Mar, 2008 4:11 pm
AhmedBahgat Site Admin
Status: Age: 58 Faith: Islam Gender:
Zodiac: Joined: Oct 16, 2006
Posts: 3236 Location: Australia
Post subject:
It seems that FFI is running better now, here is some quotes by that confused secterian:
maysuma wrote:
Please remember that the world of Muslims are not my sect. The majority of Muslims in the world are Sunni and their beleifs are different. And even there are different schools in the Shia sect as well which may beleive different things. When I speak, I speak from where my sect stands on these issues.
I do not know if you have visited Pakistan, but I have had the pleasure. Pakistan has a large Wahabi population. These are the brilliant minds who beleive that by killing a Shia, you are promised paradise. I have a family member who was forced to leave Karachi because he was a reputable Shia doctor. Because of this, a Wahabi sniper sat in a tree outside his door and was shooting at the house, waiting for someone to come out. Luckily, no one was killed and he fled Karachi to live here.
maysuma wrote:
It would appear I have made another mistake (my thanks to the person who brought it to my attention). I am NOT a sunni... I am a Shia of Ali. That is the reason I use Imam Ali ibn abi Talib in many of my points and examples. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
maysuma wrote:
To your first paragraph... Prophet Muhammad said the Quran must be taken in accord to how he and the Imam's act. Before he died, he clearly said: I leave two things for you, the Quran and the Ahlul Bayt. Hold onto them and you shall never go astray.
There are a few points one must examine when bringing forth these verses to me. Firstly, who was this Ursa who narrated these verses? Secondly, who was Ayesha? Thirdly, what happened in the Battle of Jamal and how does it relate to the different sects in Islam?
maysuma wrote:
Aisha herself narrates most of the lines you give. You cannot take her word because she is directly involved. She would benefit from marrying the Prophet at a very young age because her status would be raised.
maysuma wrote:
Imagine, Fatima was brought up in the house of the Prophet and she became known as one of the 5 women promised paradise. She represents the apex of spirituality for women in Islam. Aisha also would want a title like that wouldn?????????????????????¢??t she? This same Aisha who insulted the Prophet of Allah on many occasions.
maysuma wrote:
Whenever Muhammad would visit the house of his wife Zainab, she would make him a honey drink. Muhammad really liked this honey drink but Aisha and Hafsa were both jealous of it; why did he enjoy her drink so much but not their own. Aisha devised a plot.
maysuma wrote:
She knew that the Holy Prophet disliked unpleasant smells, so when he came back from Zainab?????????????????????¢??s house, she held her nose and accused him of eating maghafir (a nauseating herb). He replied that I have only had honey, and she said that ?????????????????????¢??the bees had fed on maghafir.?????????????????????¢?????????????????????? She told Hafsa to talk in this manner to the Prophet as well.
maysuma wrote:
Now we must come and examine the battle of Jamal in relation to the different sects of Islam. The Shia?????????????????????¢??s are those who believe Imam Ali was the rightful successor to the Holy Prophet and the Sunni are those who believe that Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman are the first three rightful caliphs after Muhammad and then they add Ali in there.
maysuma wrote:
Talha and Zubayr both nominated Abu Bakr as the caliph (nominated as though Muhammad has already not made it clear enough). So they were always against Ali. Aisha had many times when Ali would be placed above her, which she obviously did not like. There was one incident where Muhammad gather Ali, Fatima, Hassan and Hussein around him and said ?????????????????????¢??Oh Allah, these are my Ahlul Bayt. Keep off impurity from them.?????????????????????¢?????????????????????? Aisha asked Muhammad, am I not part of this group and Muhammad said no.
maysuma wrote:
As I have shown before, Aisha was a person who would become very jealous. In another incident, on Muhammad?????????????????????¢??s day with Aisha, Ali came by and began speaking with Muhammad. Aisha stormed into the room and said, Ali! I only get a little bit of time with him, can you please leave us alone! Muhammad looked at her and said, Ayesha, do not ever yell at Ali for whoever displeases him, displeases me. And whoever displeases me, displeases Allah.
maysuma wrote:
All three caliphs were jealous of two things in common. Something Ali had which none of the rest of them were given. Firstly, Ali was given the position of Flag Bearer in the battle of Khayber. All the followers of Muhammad were asking for the honor but it was awarded to Ali who brought victory when no one else could. The second, was that Muhammad had said, Ali, you are to me like Aaron was to Moses. This jealousy was then passed on to Aisha who unleashed an army upon Ali in the battle of Jamal.
maysuma wrote:
On one side of the army, you had Imam Ali (the caliph at the time) and Ammar bin Yasir, whereas on the other side, you had Aisha, Talha and Zubayr. Talha and Zubayr were both gunning for the position of caliph; they both wanted to replace Ali as the Caliph of the Muslims. Also, the reason they joined Aisha is because when Ali became Caliphate, he removed people like al-Walid bin Uqbah and his kind who were placed there by the previous caliphs.
maysuma wrote:
These people were removed because they were more focused on bringing in wealth and power rather than increasing the spirituality of the people. Talha and Zubayr liked these people because they made them rich. They resented Ali for removing them. Aisha has a long-standing feud with Ali that stemmed from the Holy Prophet paying more attention to him than to her. Now tell me, if Rasulullah placed Ali on a greater level than Aisha, who do you think is greater?
maysuma wrote:
Ali shows why Muhammad named him his successor many times. One of which is when during the Battle of Jamal, a man comes to the army of Ali and asks, where is the Imam? They ask him why have you come; he replied I have a question for him. They asked what is the question, he said I want to ask him why he believes God is one. Now if this were any normal person, we would have said at the very least, go away and come back when the battle is over but Ali called the man and explained to him why his beliefs were so. The followers of Ali are the people that the Shia find credible. Those who lived by his message.
maysuma wrote:
Therefore, when you come and bring me verses from the ?????????????????????¢??Sahih?????????????????????¢?????????????????????? of Bukhari and Muslim, look at who said the verses first. Ayesha would want to have Muhammad ask for her hand in marriage because it would elevate her status.
maysuma wrote:
Many Sunni?????????????????????¢??s call her the mother of the believers because they believe that she is the greatest wife of Rasulullah. However, someone who is jealous of the other wives, someone who fights the self of Rasulullah (Imam Ali) cannot be considered a credible source of information.
maysuma wrote:
Furthermore, the words of Ursa ibn Zubayr can also not be trusted because they were the ones who nominated Abu Bakr as the ?????????????????????¢??rightful?????????????????????¢?????????????????????? caliph after the passing of Muhammad. They would also seek to elevate his status and how high must you be if Muhammad asks to marry your daughter. This is an area of much dispute between Shia and Sunni schools of thought and therefore, if you wish to argue with a Shia, it is only common sense that you bring me Shia sources, especially when the Sunni sources you bring contradict each other.
What can I say man, well, nothing but Jerry Springer crap by a coonfused woman
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
, just kiidin mate, you are still young and have plenty to learn about your great religion)
