Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Shari'a, errancies, miracles and science
User avatar
Muhammad bin Lyin
Posts: 5859
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 4:19 pm
Location: A Mosque on Uranus

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by Muhammad bin Lyin »

debunker wrote:Hello Bin Lyin,

I'll make it easier for the both of us: You got your faith and I got mine. End of story.
No, I asked you what you know about the prophet you are supposed to revere and where do you get that information from. But maybe I should first ask if you even revere Muhammad at all. And if you do, why? What would you base it on? This is what I always ask those who choose the "Quran only" escape hatch. and even the escape hatch ends up not working either, but for right now, since you've decided on that escape in order to reconcile Islam for yourself, I would like to ask you these things.

I also asked you whether the bible was entirely rewritten or partially rewritten. And if partially, can you explain the third person narrative form that it has rather than first person form? Does God send down letter for letter dictations in third person narrative form? And if not, then why can't we find even one tiny little shred of any past Abrahamic book written entirely in first person form like the Quran is supposed to be? Every single shred disappeared? Come on. Let's be serious. This was a nonsense claim by Muhammad so that he could get rid of anything that would contradict his contended prophethood. HE is the conspirator, not the Bible.
Last edited by Muhammad bin Lyin on Tue Mar 31, 2009 4:10 pm, edited 2 times in total.
orange jews for breakfast and 20 oz he brews at night

User avatar
Muhammad bin Lyin
Posts: 5859
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 4:19 pm
Location: A Mosque on Uranus

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by Muhammad bin Lyin »

debunker wrote:
What happens if that piece of land is somebody's doorstep or their city itself?
read the link above (the city of Jerusalem was surrounded).
What about all the other battles that you apparently don't want to speak about?
It said you are allowed to have sex with male prisoners captured from the battlefield?
:) How about you bring me the verse?[/quote]

Read this again.
debunker wrote:
True the quran did not say: Rape your prisoners, the quran however DID SAY: you are allowed to have sex with your prisoners.
Again, you seem to imply that "prisoners" means non combatants, when the fact is it's the men captured in the battlefield.
You said it, not me. There it is in an exact quote. Would you care to explain?
orange jews for breakfast and 20 oz he brews at night

User avatar
Muhammad bin Lyin
Posts: 5859
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 4:19 pm
Location: A Mosque on Uranus

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by Muhammad bin Lyin »

debunker wrote:LOOOOOOOOL!

Hello there Piscohot,

First off, I never heard of this story before in the Quran... apparently you're referring to some history book?

Anyway, I looked it up and found this link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banu_Mustaliq" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Again, I take Hadith+history with a grain of salt.
What do you know about Muhammad and where do you get this information from? Do you revere Muhammad? If so, based on what? But anyway, it's pretty obvious that you operate on an ala carte basis for yourself, and cherry pick to build your religion the way you want it to be. That's obvious, and the Hadith rejection was the first step. That's how you actually pull off reconciling this stuff in your mind. If it meets your sensibilities, that's the true part. If it doesn't, that's the false part. Ultimately, people that do this only fool themselves.

But the "Quran only" ideas only marks the beginning of the end for Islam. It's the first retreat and as education becomes more prevalent among Muslims, they will then attempt to reinterpret the Quran to clean that up as well. In fact, this has already been started. Massive reinterpretation is underway to interpret away any problems. A_B is doing this very same thing right now. He's one stage ahead of you. So far, you have only rejected the hadiths but you haven't begun ridiculous reinterpretations of the Quran to suit your personal sensibilities. That'll come later.
orange jews for breakfast and 20 oz he brews at night

User avatar
Muhammad bin Lyin
Posts: 5859
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 4:19 pm
Location: A Mosque on Uranus

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by Muhammad bin Lyin »

I think Debunker is a Muslim because he doesn't know anything about Muhammad.
orange jews for breakfast and 20 oz he brews at night

User avatar
ixolite
Posts: 3089
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 1:19 am
Location: Berlin, D
Contact:

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by ixolite »

I have to remind you that this forum is called "The Quran and Hadith" and this thread is called "Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook". If you want to discuss the bible, take it to the appropriate forum.

User avatar
debunker
banned
Posts: 2616
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 10:09 pm

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by debunker »

Hello Bin Lyin,

First off, I don't want to discuss the Bible ever again.

Second, you asked if I revered Mohammed. The answer is yes. According to the Quran him (and all the prophets) are to be revered.

Also, I really don't spend my time thinking about him. I do NOT worship him. I think of God most of the time.

Finally, I do not reject Hadith. I treat it as it is, a NON sacred book(s) and thus I allow myself to question it. Besides, regardless of the issue of sacredness, according to Muslims Quran was written during the prophet's life while Hadith was written/collected 200 years after his death... that by itself, casts a lot of doubt on Hadith.

I hope that answers some of your questions?
I think Debunker is a Muslim because he doesn't know anything about Muhammad.
Mohammed, according to many Hadiths is an UGLY DISGUSTING monster! Don't tell me that I don't know anything about Mohammed... It's amazing how those Muslims read these so called "Sahih" Hadith and still have any respect for their prophet! Just because Bukhari said that he perfected the method of hearsay then they have to accept Hadith as genuine.
account suspended for inappropriate language

User avatar
Muhammad bin Lyin
Posts: 5859
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 4:19 pm
Location: A Mosque on Uranus

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by Muhammad bin Lyin »

debunker wrote:Hello Bin Lyin,

First off, I don't want to discuss the Bible ever again.
You brought it up, not me, and the first person third person problem is a really big one.

Second, you asked if I revered Mohammed. The answer is yes. According to the Quran him (and all the prophets) are to be revered.[/quote]

So you revere him simply because you are told to? No traits or actions that you like?
debunker wrote: Also, I really don't spend my time thinking about him. I do NOT worship him. I think of God most of the time.

Finally, I do not reject Hadith. I treat it as it is, a NON sacred book(s) and thus I allow myself to question it.
OK, so why are the Hadiths about Ayesha's age false? Why are the hadiths about all of the monstrosities Muhammad committed false? Is it because Muhammad was not that kind of guy? How would you know?

debunker wrote: Besides, regardless of the issue of sacredness, according to Muslims Quran was written during the prophet's life while Hadith was written/collected 200 years after his death... that by itself, casts a lot of doubt on Hadith.
But you accept some of it. So what is your criteria for what you accept and what you reject?

I hope that answers some of your questions?
I think Debunker is a Muslim because he doesn't know anything about Muhammad.
debunker wrote: Mohammed, according to many Hadiths is an UGLY DISGUSTING monster! Don't tell me that I don't know anything about Mohammed... It's amazing how those Muslims read these so called "Sahih" Hadith and still have any respect for their prophet! Just because Bukhari said that he perfected the method of hearsay then they have to accept Hadith as genuine.
Why would pious, believing Muslims want to lie about their prophet and invent such horrible stories? Doesn't make sense to me. If anything, I think it makes more sense that they would embellish in favor of Muhammad, rather than against him. So perhaps the good stories are more suspect than the bad ones?
orange jews for breakfast and 20 oz he brews at night

User avatar
debunker
banned
Posts: 2616
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 10:09 pm

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by debunker »

But you accept some of it. So what is your criteria for what you accept and what you reject?
I already answered this question many times before. I accept/reject Hadith based on my Quranic background. (and by the way, the Quran does say a lot of nice things about him and all the prophets). The only Hadiths I can't judge using Quran is the details of the rituals, simply because rituals don't have to make any sense as per any background.
Why would pious, believing Muslims want to lie about their prophet and invent such horrible stories? Doesn't make sense to me. If anything, I think it makes more sense that they would embellish in favor of Muhammad, rather than against him. So perhaps the good stories are more suspect than the bad ones?
Why would pious, believing Muslims (even in early Islam) go to war against each other? Why do they even demolish the holy of holies during their wars (the Ka'aba)? Let me give you a good reason for one lie for example, this story brought up by Piscohot about the battle with Banu al-Mustaliq. In this story, Mohammed allegedly captured women and children (non combatants). Based on this story, a Muslim ruler when he goes to battle can enslave whomever he wants from the peoples of the conquered cities... works for him, don't you think? His appointed religious scholars can invent lies (alter stories) to help him do what he wants.

Another reason why would Muslims lie: Munafiqeen who always were living among Muslims unknown to them could tell all sorts of lies to distort the prophet's image, so when Mr. Bukhari started collecting Hadith he couldn't have had any way to know whether anyone in the line of narrators could have been a Munafiq. There are many possible scenarios.

And again, I don't need Hadith to hear good things about the prophet. The Quran is more than enough in that department. In fact, there are many so called Sahih Hadiths that basically deify him even though the Quran repeatedly asserts he was a SLAVE of God and human like us.

Finally, like I said, I don't spend my time glorifying Mohammed. I glorify and worship God.
account suspended for inappropriate language

User avatar
Maersk
Posts: 701
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:32 pm
Location: Mecca

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by Maersk »

Indeed a Muslim is the SALVATION for the Allah of TORAH!! The smell of camel piss is hard to camouflage. Salvation has come to Islam yet again in the form of deceit. :lotpot:

User avatar
debunker
banned
Posts: 2616
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 10:09 pm

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by debunker »

airheads are attention whores.
account suspended for inappropriate language

User avatar
Muhammad bin Lyin
Posts: 5859
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 4:19 pm
Location: A Mosque on Uranus

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by Muhammad bin Lyin »

debunker wrote:
But you accept some of it. So what is your criteria for what you accept and what you reject?
I already answered this question many times before. I accept/reject Hadith based on my Quranic background. (and by the way, the Quran does say a lot of nice things about him and all the prophets). The only Hadiths I can't judge using Quran is the details of the rituals, simply because rituals don't have to make any sense as per any background.
OK, so the Hadiths about Muhammad successfully consummating the marriage (copulating) are untrue because the Quran says so? Where does this account violate the Quran? Where does the Quran say you may not copulate with a nine year old girl?
debunker wrote:
Why would pious, believing Muslims want to lie about their prophet and invent such horrible stories? Doesn't make sense to me. If anything, I think it makes more sense that they would embellish in favor of Muhammad, rather than against him. So perhaps the good stories are more suspect than the bad ones?
Why would pious, believing Muslims (even in early Islam) go to war against each other?
For power. Common human error. But I don't think they thought they were doing the wrong thing. They thought they were closest to Allah or their idea of Allah was correct and the other guy's wasn't. Typical. But if they were even the least bit Muslim, then they would have the hellfire to fear, right? So did Bukhari get the recollections from apostates?
debunker wrote: Why do they even demolish the holy of holies during their wars (the Ka'aba)? Let me give you a good reason for one lie for example, this story brought up by Piscohot about the battle with Banu al-Mustaliq. In this story, Mohammed allegedly captured women and children (non combatants). Based on this story, a Muslim ruler when he goes to battle can enslave whomever he wants from the peoples of the conquered cities... works for him, don't you think?
And Bukhari's in on this? He documents who reported what. Did he lie and therefore risk the hellfire? This seems more like you inventing "possibilities".

debunker wrote: His appointed religious scholars can invent lies (alter stories) to help him do what he wants.
That doesn't seem to be who Bukhari interviewed. Definitely not in the case of the stories of Ayesha's age.
debunker wrote: Another reason why would Muslims lie: Munafiqeen who always were living among Muslims unknown to them could tell all sorts of lies to distort the prophet's image, so when Mr. Bukhari started collecting Hadith he couldn't have had any way to know whether anyone in the line of narrators could have been a Munafiq. There are many possible scenarios.
Oh boy, here comes the conspiracy again. Muslims are the most conspiracy prone people there are. Why? Because their prophet was as well, and the entire religion of Islam is based upon an assumption of a conspiracy involving prior religions. Without that conspiracy, Islam could not legitimately exist, or at least be considered a legitimate continuation of the Abrahamic tradition. I'm sure the Jews would be blamed here if it were even .0005% chance of that being true. :lol: But it's not, so instead, it's the Munafiqeen. But this means that pious Muslims believed such stories about Muhammad and passed it along the chain?

But, even aside from Munafiqeen, the question still remains as to how we decide what comes from a Munafiqeen and what doesn't. So how do you decide whether the hadiths about Ayesha's age come from a Munafiqeen or not? You can't decide based on the quran as mentioned above, so do you decide based on what you know about Muhammad?
debunker wrote: And again, I don't need Hadith to hear good things about the prophet. The Quran is more than enough in that department.
What do you mean? It barely even mentions Muhammad. Maybe 4 times or something?
debunker wrote: In fact, there are many so called Sahih Hadiths that basically deify him even though the Quran repeatedly asserts he was a SLAVE of God and human like us.
Well, see, we've run into the classic logic problem and I thank you for pointing this out or arriving at this spot. The Quran is right because Muhammad said so and Muhammad is right because the Quran said so. It's like saying, "why am I a prophet? Because this here book I'm reciting says so". Maybe I can now see why the books in the Bible always seemed to be written by a narrator, because you can't write a book yourself that makes you a prophet and your book divine. That will always come off as fishy or suspicious. More suspicious than if someone else writes an account of you and calls you a prophet. Interesting. I never thought of that before.
Last edited by Muhammad bin Lyin on Tue Mar 31, 2009 6:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
orange jews for breakfast and 20 oz he brews at night

User avatar
Maersk
Posts: 701
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:32 pm
Location: Mecca

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by Maersk »

Modk the Pedophile certainly needed reminders his head is not empty for the echoes of hearing Allah giving him too much attention. :worthy:

User avatar
Muhammad bin Lyin
Posts: 5859
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 4:19 pm
Location: A Mosque on Uranus

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by Muhammad bin Lyin »

And, one other thing to consider Debunker.

You keep on going back to what God surely would and wouldn't do, but even in the Quran, it talks about how God wiped out entire peoples. It just didn't give specifics like the Bible did because the Quran never tried to retell the actual story, it would merely reference it, but obviously there was some pretty nasty stuff going on and that was the point the Quran was trying to convey.

But here's something even more fundamental to consider, and it ends up being far worse than anything any human has done.

According to Islam and other religions
1) God is all knowing
2) Therefore, God knows the future outcomes with absolute certainty
3) There will be many people in hell
4) God knows whether a person will end up in hell or not, even before he creates them
5) God can choose not to create them if he knows they will end up in hell
6) God chooses to create them anyway, knowing he will torture them in hell
7) God created them to be tortured in hell. If that was the known outcome, then that was the purpose.

So that's pretty much as bad as it gets, right? So why does God go ahead and create the person anyway rather than sparing them? Does he want to punish them for sins that they have yet to do by creating them so that they will end doing the sins they have yet to do and end up in hell? Remember, God could have easily prevented them from going to hell by not even creating them at all. So when you talk about knowing what God would and wouldn't do, I think you need to solve this very fundamental riddle first before you can even begin to think you know how God would or wouldn't behave.

This is why I'm actually one of the few here that actually does not use Muhammad's behavior to disqualify him as a prophet, I use what he says in the Quran because that's all i really need anyway. The stuff that he did in the hadiths, I find horrifying. But technically speaking, that's my own value judgment. I reject the Quran mainly because of it's claim to be the letter for letter dictation of Allah while showing perceptions and understandings of the cosmos that mirror that of a 7th century man perfectly.. To me, THAT'S my proof. That doesn't require a value judgment, it's an obvious thing or blunder. Recognizing an obvious blunder is not a value judgment.
orange jews for breakfast and 20 oz he brews at night

User avatar
debunker
banned
Posts: 2616
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 10:09 pm

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by debunker »

Hello Bin,
For power. Common human error. But I don't think they thought they were doing the wrong thing. They thought they were closest to Allah or their idea of Allah was correct and the other guy's wasn't. Typical. But if they were even the least bit Muslim, then they would have the hellfire to fear, right? So did Bukhari get the recollections from apostates?
First of all Bukhari didn't report any of these civil wars, it's reported in many history books with different versions of the story... but shocking events like destroying the Ka'aba is common in all of them. So, yes when they destroyed the Ka'aba they didn't have the slightest fear of hell.
And Bukhari's in on this? He documents who reported what. Did he lie and therefore risk the hellfire? This seems more like you inventing "possibilities".
Again, Bukhari didn't report the Banu al-Mustaliq story. A history book by Ibn Ishaq did. And I don't think Ibn Ishaq (or Bukhari) intentionally lied. They reported stories according to what they heard, that's all they did. And yes, I am merely "speculating" as to why these stories were invented (altered).
That doesn't seem to be who Bukhari interviewed. Definitely not in the case of the stories of Ayesha's age.
Again, Bukhari came more than 150-200 years later and started collecting stories. He interviewed storytellers.
But it's not, so instead, it's the Munafiqeen. But this means that pious Muslims believed such stories about Muhammad and passed it along the chain?
A Munafiq reporting the story could be at the beginning of the chain, its end or somewhere in between. Besides, that's just one possibility. And yes, just like Muslims of today have no problem believing stories of cold blooded assassinations of Mohammed's enemies, for example, so were Muslims of old. All they needed was to hear someone they trusted saying: Mohammed did it, so it automatically becomes OK.
But, even aside from Munafiqeen, the question still remains as to how we decide what comes from a Munafiqeen and what doesn't. So how do you decide whether the hadiths about Ayesha's age come from a Munafiqeen or not? You can't decide based on the quran as mentioned above, so do you decide based on what you know about Muhammad?
Based on the Quran's description of him and other prophets.
What do you mean? It barely even mentions Muhammad. Maybe 4 times or something?
The Quran mentioned Mohammed only about 4 times or so?! Obviously you haven't read the Quran.
Well, see, we've run into the classic logic problem and I thank you for pointing this out or arriving at this spot. The Quran is right because Muhammad said so and Muhammad is right because the Quran said so. It's like saying, "why am I a prophet? Because this here book I'm reciting says so". Maybe I can now see why the books in the Bible always seemed to be written by a narrator, because you can't write a book yourself that makes you a prophet and your book divine. That will always come off as fishy or suspicious. More suspicious than if someone else writes an account of you and calls you a prophet. Interesting. I never thought of that before.
First off, many times before, I said no one can prove the divinity of the Quran. NO ONE! PERIOD. So, why do I choose the Quran over say, Veda? Ans: Due to my personal taste. Now, I don't see what's the difference between writing the book yourself or having someone else narrate that you were a prophet. And since you mention the Bible "yet again", know this: the 5 books of the Torah were written by Moses, including the last book of Deuteronomy where Moses describes his own death and burial, now it can't get any fishier than that, can it?
But here's something even more fundamental to consider, and it ends up being far worse than anything any human has done.

According to Islam and other religions
1) God is all knowing
2) Therefore, God knows the future outcomes with absolute certainty
3) There will be many people in hell
4) God knows whether a person will end up in hell or not, even before he creates them
5) God can choose not to create them if he knows they will end up in hell
6) God chooses to create them anyway, knowing he will torture them in hell
7) God created them to be tortured in hell. If that was the known outcome, then that was the purpose.
Ok, so according to Islam and other religions, that's what God said about Himself, next.
So that's pretty much as bad as it gets, right? So why does God go ahead and create the person anyway rather than sparing them? Does he want to punish them for sins that they have yet to do by creating them so that they will end doing the sins they have yet to do and end up in hell? Remember, God could have easily prevented them from going to hell by not even creating them at all. So when you talk about knowing what God would and wouldn't do, I think you need to solve this very fundamental riddle first before you can even begin to think you know how God would or wouldn't behave.
Although I did try to justify this, I still don't know why God even created any of us in the first place. But remember, I never tried to think for God. I simply took what He said about Himself/prophets etc and used it to judge things.
I reject the Quran mainly because of it's claim to be the letter for letter dictation of Allah while showing perceptions and understandings of the cosmos that mirror that of a 7th century man perfectly.. To me, THAT'S my proof. That doesn't require a value judgment, it's an obvious thing or blunder. Recognizing an obvious blunder is not a value judgment.
And I am one of the very few Muslims who believe that the Quran does NOT have any science in it AT ALL. The Quran simply demanded the Arabs to appreciate God's creation as they understand it. "See the moon and the sun, how they move in the sky in perfect order?" This is basically what one the verses said. There's absolutely no science in it at all, it simply reminds them of the magic of creation all around them. And don't believe the stupid lie by Muslims that everything in the Quran is for all time and all ages. The religion as a whole is. But not every verse is.
account suspended for inappropriate language

Pragmatist
Posts: 1785
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 9:20 am

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by Pragmatist »

debunker wrote:Hello Bin,



And I am one of the very few Muslims who believe that the Quran does NOT have any science in it AT ALL. The Quran simply demanded the Arabs to appreciate God's creation as they understand it. "See the moon and the sun, how they move in the sky in perfect order?" This is basically what one the verses said. There's absolutely no science in it at all, it simply reminds them of the magic of creation all around them. And don't believe the stupid lie by Muslims that everything in the Quran is for all time and all ages. The religion as a whole is. But not every verse is.
:roflmao:

Thanks for the admission so you have now just told us the Qu,oran tells LIES because it is the Krap Kran ITSELF which makes the stupid ridiculous claim for ITSELF that it is 'for all men for all time' Nowhere does it say my CULT is for all men for all time or only bits of this book are no it says IT is for all men for all time.

So now you have admitted that YOUR so called God allah is a LIAR then he can be discounted as any kind of God at all and whats more YOU are now an APOSTATE. :*)

So its just a History book for 7th Century desert Arabs after all is it. :lotpot:
Does a God create you simply to punish you in Hellfire well PREDESTINATING evil, illogical, sadistic allah DOES.

User avatar
debunker
banned
Posts: 2616
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 10:09 pm

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by debunker »

Prag! If you don't behave yourself, I won't give you any treats for a whole week... now be a good dog.
account suspended for inappropriate language

User avatar
AhmedBahgat
Posts: 3094
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:38 am
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by AhmedBahgat »

debunker wrote:Prag! If you don't behave yourself, I won't give you any treats for a whole week... now be a good dog.
Did you run out of bones?

User avatar
debunker
banned
Posts: 2616
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 10:09 pm

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by debunker »

no. he's just been a bad doggy, pooping everywhere he goes in this forum...
account suspended for inappropriate language

User avatar
AhmedBahgat
Posts: 3094
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:38 am
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by AhmedBahgat »

debunker wrote:no. he's just been a bad doggy, pooping everywhere he goes in this forum...

Cool, as I thought that you do npot have more bones to throw to the dog

User avatar
sunshine
Posts: 827
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 10:26 pm

Re: Exposing a hadith worshipper (Neveen Salah Labib) Facebook

Post by sunshine »

Hey Ahmed

why are you calling other peoples name when you yourself are running away from my question like a COWARD.
Your beliefs become Your thoughts, Your thoughts become Your words, Your words become Your actions, Your actions become Your habits, Your habits become your Destiny


http://www.faithfreedom.org" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Post Reply