• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Was Muhammad a good man?

What is your opinion on Muhammad?

  • He was a great man and those who insult him must be punished!

    Votes: 60 27.9%
  • He was a great man, but people are free to insult him

    Votes: 47 21.9%
  • He was not a good man, but we should respect him because I believe in respecting other religions

    Votes: 23 10.7%
  • He was a terrible man and we should condemn his awful actions!

    Votes: 85 39.5%

  • Total voters
    215

mahasn ebn sawresho

Well-Known Member
My friend ---
Password beat them ----
Are ordered ---
It's the second Edlohn ---
The meaning of the tensile
It's the third Ahjrōhn in their beds -
The meaning of Atemarson sex with them ---
The full meaning is locked away in homes with beatings -
This is the law of Islam in dealing with women ---God you if you do not know Arabic
I speak Arabic and I know the verse ---
The right of the state ---
Fear of nushuz ---
Three orders Edlohn and beat them and Ahjrōhn -----
read Á verse quietly and you will know that it is true analytical
 

FearGod

Freedom Of Mind
My friend ---
Password beat them ----
Are ordered ---
It's the second Edlohn ---
The meaning of the tensile
It's the third Ahjrōhn in their beds -
The meaning of Atemarson sex with them ---
The full meaning is locked away in homes with beatings -
This is the law of Islam in dealing with women ---God you if you do not know Arabic
I speak Arabic and I know the verse ---
The right of the state ---
Fear of nushuz ---
Three orders Edlohn and beat them and Ahjrōhn -----
read Á verse quietly and you will know that it is true analytical

Lol, What are you talking about ?

Arabic is my native language besides i studied the Arabic grammar.

The verse says leave their beds(forsake them) and strike them is explained already by leaving their beds as an objection till relationship is improved,if not then the last choice is divorce,so there is no place for beating except in your willful ignorance and the minds of hypocrites who wanted to oppress women in the name of religion.

Men are in charge of women by [right of] what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend [for maintenance] from their wealth. So righteous women are devoutly obedient, guarding in [the husband's] absence what Allah would have them guard. But those [wives] from whom you fear arrogance - [first] advise them; [then if they persist], forsake them in bed; and [finally], strike them. But if they obey you [once more], seek no means against them. Indeed, Allah is ever Exalted and Grand (4:34)


4_34.png


strike.jpg
 
Last edited:

Triumphant_Loser

Libertarian Egalitarian
My friend ---
Password beat them ----
Are ordered ---
It's the second Edlohn ---
The meaning of the tensile
It's the third Ahjrōhn in their beds -
The meaning of Atemarson sex with them ---
The full meaning is locked away in homes with beatings -
This is the law of Islam in dealing with women ---God you if you do not know Arabic
I speak Arabic and I know the verse ---
The right of the state ---
Fear of nushuz ---
Three orders Edlohn and beat them and Ahjrōhn -----
read Á verse quietly and you will know that it is true analytical

Is this even English?
 

1robin

Christian/Baptist
The story is fiction. No action could cost an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent God anything since he could not have free will, and the freedom of choice, and could never be harmed by anyone, and could never suffer physically, or emotionally. Your God demands that people suffer, but he cannot suffer. Without choice, morality has no meaning. It would be impossible for an Omni God to ask people to love him since he always has to do what he does, and can only do good things. Therefore, the God of all of the Abrahamic religions does not exist.

If the God of the Bible had free will, then there are circumstances under which he would not have kept his promise to give believers eternal life, but that would be impossible for an Omni God. In other words, if the God of the Bible had free will, he would have the option not to keep his promise to give believers eternal life, but that would be impossible for an Omni God.

You have said that God did not have to create humans, but no logic supports such an absurd notion. If God did not create humans, and offer eternal life to believers, and keep his promise to give eternal life to believers, he would not be God.

John 3:16 says that one of God's motives for giving his Son to mankind was love. According to you, God did not have to manifest his love by creating humans, and offering them eternal life. That is ridiculous. An Omni God must always do the best possible thing since his omnibenevolent nature controls his thoughts, and actions.

Sacrificing animals, and people to God has been historically practiced by many people as a means to try to please God, but no God has ever made such an absurd request. A God making a sacrifice is even more ridiculous than humans making sacrifices. It is an absurd notion that during Old Testament times, God wanted humans to make sacrifices, and thousands of years later God made a sacrifice, and no longer wanted humans to sacrifice animals to him.

Christians criticize Judas, but why since the New Testament says that without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin? If bad people had not killed Jesus, who else would have killed him, good people?

The vast majority of people have always chosen to believe in Gods since that is typical for humans. If Christianity had not come along, the vast majority of today's Christians would follow other religions, and would not be atheists, or agnostics. If theisticly minded people will usually choose some religion whether it is true or not, that proves that if one religion is true, and all other religions are false, God has not set up a system where people who honestly want to find the truth can always find it.
What you responded to is not fictitious, I lived it. However that is not the big problem. Even if I had lied you would have no way to know it, even if I was mistaken you could not possibly know it. You were not there, you can't read minds, your not God are you. QUIT claiming to know what you CAN'T possibly know, and then maybe I would be more inclined to believe what you might could know. What you quoted is more of a fact than your existence to me and I am the worlds greatest expert on that particular event as it occurred to me.
 
Last edited:

1robin

Christian/Baptist
Like the existence of God?:eek:

On what basis can you claim another person cannot know there is a God? You are obviously not omniscient. Hundreds of millions of claims to experiencing God would all have to be lies for you to be right, and even if they were you have no way to know it. For my world view to be correct only one has to be truthful. The odds are not on your side.
 

Triumphant_Loser

Libertarian Egalitarian
On what basis can you claim another person cannot know there is a God? You are obviously not omniscient. Hundreds of millions of claims to experiencing God would all have to be lies for you to be right, and even if they were you have no way to know it. For my world view to be correct only one has to be truthful. The odds are not on your side.

Which God? Muslims, Hindus, Jews, Zoroastrians, Pagans, Baha'is, Wiccans, Mormons, all claim to have experiences from their gods as well. Hundreds of millions of them would have to be wrong as well for you to be right. The odds are not in your favor either.
 

gnostic

The Lost One
one-answer said:
The age of marriage in England in the seventeenth century was 12.

don't know if it is true or not, it is wrong regardless of the time periods or ages or what century.

look at the bible, none of big biblical figures were shown in which a man marry a young child of 9 or 12 - Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, etc.
 

Sabour

Well-Known Member
don't know if it is true or not, it is wrong regardless of the time periods or ages or what century.

look at the bible, none of big biblical figures were shown in which a man marry a young child of 9 or 12 - Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, etc.

It is not wrong if she is not under age and if the act is not socially wrong. So based on what you are saying it is wrong.

Dontuse the bible arguement. When I look at it I see incest and a prophet who was alcoholic. Both of which are not true.
 

YmirGF

Bodhisattva in Recovery
It is not wrong if she is not under age and if the act is not socially wrong. So based on what you are saying it is wrong.

Dontuse the bible arguement. When I look at it I see incest and a prophet who was alcoholic. Both of which are not true.
An alcoholic? That's a new low, even for a Muslim poster.
 

Sabour

Well-Known Member
An alcoholic? That's a new low, even for a Muslim poster.

Genesis 9


20 Noah, a man of the soil, proceeded[a] to plant a vineyard. 21 When he drank some of its wine, he became drunk and lay uncovered inside his tent.



Which of course is not true.
 
Top