FFI is Out-of-Date; Part of the ProblemRe: FFI is Out-of-Date; Part of the Problem
One cannot be "nice" and be a real muslim. To be a real muslim, one must obey his pimp whoremaster allah (who admits to being a liar) and follow the example of his prophet. The prophet was not a nice guy. The prophet of Islam was nothing more than a common criminal.
Please tell me if this is accurate: “I have fabricated things against God and have imputed to Him words which He has not spoken.” ~MUHAMMAD (Al-Tabari 6:111)
Re: FFI is Out-of-Date; Part of the Problem
I have to interrupt on this issue , that loonwatch article http://loonwatch.wordpress.com/tag/nikah/ is dishonest at best. I will explain why below
These loons at loonwatch describe lanes as saying sexual intercourse is a "tropical expression" outside the normal range of meaning  they can't be serious.If you scroll down on this muslim site http://www.ezsoftech.com/omm/handbook.asp You will find this
These clowns danios and dawood are clearly manipulating the dictionaries they show regarding nikah In fact -Lane's Lexicon does mention coitus (sexual intercourse) under two different entries for n k h word usages. Lane notes that the n k h word for "he married" also means, according to Ibn Faris (IF), "and others," that "it signifies coitus; and coitus without marriage; and marriage without coitus". It is obvious that Lane in that part is talking about the different uses of the word and the different opinions on the uses In fact, what Lane says is that there are different opinions on the meanings- and on what he calls tropical versus proper uses, and it seems that he is referring to both marriage and sexual intercourse. In addition, for another n k h entry, Lane notes, for the phrase someone who marries often, the apparent meaning is someone "vehement in coitus"! I think it is clear that Dawood has misrepresented Lane's Lexicon. I provide the link here http://www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume8/00000102.pdf so that everyone may judge for themselves
Danios and dawood lied about there eisegeses of the encyclopedia of islam. why would they do that?  Normally, marriage in the Qur'an means a marriage intended to involve sexual intercourse - Muhammad urged his followers to get married and to not be celibate. When nikah refers to marriage, it refers to a marriage with sexual intercourse in most cases. I find it hard to believe that Schacht would get this wrong, so I suspect it is a misinterpretation those clowns at loonwatch- That is, I don't believe Schacht meant "exclusively" for marriage where sexual intercourse does not occur and is not expected. Anyways, my sources indicate that nikah in the Qur'an normally connotes both marriage and sexual intercourse (see above). One verse, 2:230, indisputedly uses nkh for no other then sexual intercours . Furthermore, i have searched through some online arabic dictionaries as i don't have access to Al-Mu‘jam al-Wasit, Here's what you can do go to http://www.baheth.info/and search with النِّكاحُ or نكاح You will get النِّكاحُ: الوَطْءُ، والعَقْدُ لَهُ. "Marriage: intercourse, and [the] contract." النُكاحُ: الوَطْءُ، وقد يكونُ العقدَ. "Marriage: intercourse, and may be the contract."
I laughed hard at those examples these two clowns made regarding nikah all you have to do is read the nikah chapter in muslim's sahih and the reliance of the traveler and see that those books are filled with SEXUALITY - they deal with sex, private parts, looking or touching private parts/or not, virginity, fertility, chastity, sexual desire, waiting periods and menstrual periods, etc. The Sahih Muslim Book of Nikah even talks about Muslim jihadists having sex with slave and captive women They are books of sex literally- in actuality marriage is a euphamistic term from nikah.
You mean you can't f@#$ two sisters together!! Your source is not a very dependable source mesmorial.
Re: FFI is Out-of-Date; Part of the Problem
He hung himself from the very moment he used the word "trend". Actually, he hung himself even before that.
He simply cannot deal with the what the word "nikah" meant at the time the koran was written. I speak several languages, with Spanish being among them. I used examples of "trends" for words in both Spanish and English. All languages have "trends". The prophet of Islam was nothing more than a common criminal.
Please tell me if this is accurate: “I have fabricated things against God and have imputed to Him words which He has not spoken.” ~MUHAMMAD (Al-Tabari 6:111)
Re: FFI is Out-of-Date; Part of the Problem
Yeah, are you proficient in german ringmaster?
Re: FFI is Out-of-Date; Part of the Problem
The reason i ask- is to see if you can translate this for me
Arabisches Wörterbuch für die Schriftsprache der Gegenwart: Arabisch-Deutsch By Hans Wehr 5. Auflage p. 1313 نكاح "nikah pl. ‘ankiha Heirat, Eheschließung; Ehevertrag; Ehe; (ehelicher) Beischlaf" Does Beischlaf mean sexual intercourse?
Re: FFI is Out-of-Date; Part of the Problem
I speak passable German. I am not proficient at an academic level, but I am proficient at a conversational level. The prophet of Islam was nothing more than a common criminal.
Please tell me if this is accurate: “I have fabricated things against God and have imputed to Him words which He has not spoken.” ~MUHAMMAD (Al-Tabari 6:111)
Re: FFI is Out-of-Date; Part of the Problem
I definitely speak enough German to answer that one. Beischlafen means to "sleep next to"....or to sleep physically beside somebody. Im Haus meiner Freundin kann Ich immer mit ihr beischlafen. That basically means that in my girlfriend's house, I can always sleep beside her. In other words, I can (and in my case, I do) have sexual intercourse with her. (Ehlicher) means in marriage.......but it is in brackets, which means it can be either/or. That is another example of a "trend" in language. German has its trends too. The prophet of Islam was nothing more than a common criminal.
Please tell me if this is accurate: “I have fabricated things against God and have imputed to Him words which He has not spoken.” ~MUHAMMAD (Al-Tabari 6:111)
Re: FFI is Out-of-Date; Part of the Problem
Thanks ringmaster- i merely wanted to get the jest of what it means in basic german today - and that confirms my point in english we say "did you sleep with her" Which of course means did you f%$# her or visa versa
Re: FFI is Out-of-Date; Part of the Problem
Exactly. The prophet of Islam was nothing more than a common criminal.
Please tell me if this is accurate: “I have fabricated things against God and have imputed to Him words which He has not spoken.” ~MUHAMMAD (Al-Tabari 6:111)
Re: FFI is Out-of-Date; Part of the Problem
Yes Beischlaf is a rather legalistic term for sex. It is a NOUN.
That is shocking German, who taught you that? Sack your German tutor. You can say Im Haus meiner Freundin kann Ich immer bei ihr schlafen. That means what you said. German verbs often have prefixes that come off in certain situations. e.g. ausgehen=to go out,Ich gehe aus, I go out, but I werde ausgehen, I shall go out. Wen you use the verb in this way, the meaning is a little wider, and could mean "sleeping with her", a sort of double-entendre which Germans use in jokes (German jokes are not always very good) The noun Beischlaf does NOT have that double meaning. The dictionary entry translates as نكاح "nikah pl. ‘ankiha Heirat, Eheschließung; Ehevertrag; Ehe; (ehelicher) Beischlaf" نكاح "nikah plural ankiha, Marriage,Wedding, Marriage Contract, Married life,( marital) sex
Re: FFI is Out-of-Date; Part of the Problem
Thanks peterpin
Re: FFI is Out-of-Date; Part of the Problem
Like I said Peter...my German is not at an academic level. But I have no trouble conversing and making myself understood in it. The prophet of Islam was nothing more than a common criminal.
Please tell me if this is accurate: “I have fabricated things against God and have imputed to Him words which He has not spoken.” ~MUHAMMAD (Al-Tabari 6:111)
Re: FFI is Out-of-Date; Part of the Problem
iffo
Don’t know about the honest part, since despite claiming I am lying you could not rebut my conclusions.
Then drop your religion of twisting the Qur’an. That is first stage. I am no help to your religion, but believe me my approach leaves FFI for dead. That is what this thread shows. It is also not ultimately about “Qur’an-alone”, so you really need to stop labelling me. In the meantime, I don’t want to have to feel sorry for you. Connedbymo+co; Labels again. I have shown FFI up, which is why you all need to gather together in group therapy. ringmaster; No there are 5 prayers in 20:130. There is dawn, before sunset, night and the parts of the day. The word “part” should be ends. How many times is the sun at its furthest point? 3 times. So that’s 5 prayers. And zakat was clearly defined in 2:219. If it was implemented as a tax then it would be progressive, like the jizya was (according to ahadith). Untrustworthy folks were in 9:1-4, but the Sura is not applicable now. It’s an example of what 33:53 is (contextual advice).
No, 9:5 already said how to deal with converts. 9:6 applies to idolaters who seek asylum, not who convert. They do not come to hear the word of God. They come for asylum. The reason they are to hear the word of God is that they are ignorant (9:6).
Vague, always vague. You seem to miss 9:7-13 every time. While I think of it, 9:29 does not apply for all times since otherwise it would say “fight non-Muslims. 9:5 is easy because it applies to specific people (9:1-3).
 Yet I am still here making fools of all of you. There is no more discussion on “nikah”. It was already shown in 4:23 that the context is marriage.
No that point has been destroyed too. Playing with debris won’t help you. kaimana1; Let's make it quick. Your reply to my point on 4:23 is not good enough. The chapter does mention polygamy (4:3). Your point on 2:230 is based on what? Cheers. Last edited by MesMorial on Tue May 15, 2012 1:31 am, edited 2 times in total.
Re: FFI is Out-of-Date; Part of the Problem
Now FFI is always going to lose as long as it relies on emotionalism. We are at the stage now where people see that it cannot refute Qur'an-alone, but more importantly it is a blubbering mess when I disagnose its reliance on labels. Thus the rodents need to gather together, in the hope of creating the illusion of strength.
FFI is out-of-date; its priorities are all messed up. People are Muslims for different reasons, and belief is belief. If someone accepts only the Qur'an, or only certain ahadith etc., there is squat you can do about it. It's still Islam. FFI could not defend the claim that ahadith are part of Islam, so it should admit it is not good enough there. It appears no scholar is good enough. People like ringmaster need a specific version to be right, or else their whole life is invalidated. They need ISLAM to be the problem, but the problem is mentality. The mentality that sustains bad "Islam" is what drives the stupidity I have seen in this forum. If you deal with "good" and "bad" things on their own terms, rather than with the label "Islam", it will be liberating, less frustrating and will actually have hope. You need to have a rationale (idea, philosophy) that gives consistency to your standard (i.e. regardless of label), or you can be no better than anyone else. The serious person will get their priorities right, and focus on what people do, not what label they wear. Whether Islam is REALLY this or that (i.e. this or that version of false), it's irrelevant to what people do and what intention/rationale they have. Again, "Islam" is not the problem; it's people's approach. There are many problems under many labels. FFI's approach is a problem, since it relies on emotional attachment to labels and does not address the problems which cause problems. Those who dispute this thread appear more like people trying to escape the mud that's sucking them down.
Re: FFI is Out-of-Date; Part of the Problem
In your dreams. In your dreams. The truth is you could not rebut iffo. Your “rebuttal”s are a figment of your imagination. You are a legend only in your own mind.
You are only here to help yourself. It is clear that nobody is helping you….not even your whoremaster allah guy. If your approach were alive, you would have muslims following you. You don’t. You would have non-muslims following you. You don’t. Maybe you should open your own website and see if you can have as active a website as Ali Sina.
The koran doesn’t tell us to do that either.
I guess you have to brag about yourself. Nobody else has anything good to say about you.
Mesmorial’s wishful fraud continues. 20-130 does not define any number of prayers. The parts of the day are not defined, nor are the number of prayers in any given part of the day. You are attempting to define for yourself something to suit what you want. Trouble is, your definition is not in the koran.
The zakat is not a progressive tax. It is a fixed percentage. The timing and the amount (i.e., the terms) are not mentioned in the koran. Neither is the jizyah a progressive tax. It is tax determined purely on the basis of one’s religion. More of Mesmorial’s wishful fraud.
Untrustworthy folks are clearly the non muslims who rejected the invitation to islam. That automatically makes them “untrustworthy”. Your claims about the current-day applicability of suras 9 & 33 are not mentioned in the koran either. That’s is merely a continuation of your wishful thinking.
9-5 only deals with converts who surrendered after being attacked. 9-6 deals with converts who converted to spare themselves from attack.
I am clear…always very clear. Verses 9-7 to 9-13 clearly only apply to idolators who are still strong enough to defend themselves against an attack from muslims, as is made abundantly clear from 9-8. They in no way absolve 9-5 or 9-6. If 9-5 and 9-6 were meant to be absolved, they would not be there in the first place.
In your dreams. In your dreams. You are making a fool of yourself. You voluminous verbiage actually helps the kufar’s position. Any sensible person can see from your rubbish the desperate and non-sensical lengths to which you go to defend the koran. The more your prattle your rubbish, the more it becomes apparent to all of us that islam is indefensible. To have the likes of you defending it is proof positive that islam is a fraud.
You have been shot down so badly on that one that you must clearly be embarrassed about it.
It’s you that keeps harping on the debris, which would consist of your abrogated Mecca verses and your constant fabrications. We stick to substance.
The koran’s mention of polygamy proves that allah is a whoremaster. Your question about 2-230 clearly means you are wilfully blind. Last edited by ringmaster on Tue May 15, 2012 4:27 am, edited 1 time in total.
The prophet of Islam was nothing more than a common criminal.
Please tell me if this is accurate: “I have fabricated things against God and have imputed to Him words which He has not spoken.” ~MUHAMMAD (Al-Tabari 6:111)
Re: FFI is Out-of-Date; Part of the Problem
Spoiler! :
What you mean could not rebut?, you lost every debate and I caught you cheating. Saying cutting hand or lashing in public is just for threat and deterrence. Like here, I told you where is it that quran says beat symbolically ?? Can you show me? And you are silent when I said was it difficult for Allah to say "hit gently" instead of pages after pages of threats and stupidity. Did God created quran for only MM that only you understand the rest could not understand for last 1400 years, he definately failed miserably in his final message to mankind if only one person understood that. FFI is doing a good job in exposing Islam, I don't personally agree if any member use it to incite hate against muslims and doing hate mongering. Last edited by iffo on Tue May 15, 2012 3:13 am, edited 3 times in total.
Re: FFI is Out-of-Date; Part of the Problem
Clearly you have no shame. The prophet of Islam was nothing more than a common criminal.
Please tell me if this is accurate: “I have fabricated things against God and have imputed to Him words which He has not spoken.” ~MUHAMMAD (Al-Tabari 6:111)
Re: FFI is Out-of-Date; Part of the Problem
Why a rope around her neck? What did she encourage him that she should die? What was the crime that was so severe? Why will his hands be ruined? Why will he perish? Why the 3-fold punishment. You have gone on for so many pages and at least two threads without answering this. (I will not get into the argument of whether fire means hell or earthly flames since you have a habit of losing track)
His wealth is mentioned in 111.2. You are saying that in the entire surah only 111.2 is needed? The other verses can be thrown away? Why then does this allah waste his time and ours detailing all of abu lahab's punishment? Again, I ask - why is his hands ruined, why does he perish and his wife hung? At this point - all you need to do is admit that you have no idea, but can come up with some spin. Telling us we don't need to know is not an acceptable response.
The word, mess, the word - chastity/modesty how close is the word used to private parts etc.
Wisdom from mess and the quran - Steps for a suspicious man to take - advice, withhold sex and beat up wife. This results in a happy marriage...
Oh, I get it! According to you beating your wife results in a happy marriage and avoid divorce. That is clear now. 
You still don't see the contradiction in your mind - You want to Beat a wife to avoid divorce. and Divorce a wife to avoid beating her. Your life if thus followed would be an unending cycle marriage-beat-divorce-marriage-beat-divorce-marriage-beat-divorce....... But none of this spin removes the central point of this argument (if you have not already forgotten it) - quran still says "beat"
Are you kidding me? I read enough of your gibberish on this site. Now you want me to go somewhere else?
Did I use the word "unnatural". I believe I used the word "wierdos". Weirdos to me are those who would let an unproven religious dogma dictate their habits and life. This includes those weirdos that keep spinning and weaving trying to defend an idiotic 7th century book. By the way, Not having sex can be quite a natural state too - for example, right now as I am typing, I am not having sex. When i go in to work I spend nearly 10 hours not having sex. It is still a natural state, you know. I was helping out delivering packages for an elderly couple sometime ago. Very old (over 95) happily married couple. But they are very fragile and need assistance and certainly are in no shape for sex. But, very natural state for them.
You say it is very clear. That is because you are projecting what you want it to be on to the verse. That is not an objective analysis. An objective analysis would show you that one cannot say with certainty whether the quran meant a minimum wait period of 4 months or a maximum wait period of 4 months (unless of course you refer to external texts) The rest of your post is the usual repetitive gibberish which I am going to ignore
Re: FFI is Out-of-Date; Part of the Problem
I don't believe we do that. We are against a particular philosophy or set of ideas, not against any group of people. I have not seen anybody incite hatred or violence against anybody on this forum. The moderators are quite strict about that, I believe.
Re: FFI is Out-of-Date; Part of the Problem
The koran incites hate in lots of places: Verse 5-60 Verse 7-166 Verse 9-5 To name but a few. The prophet of Islam was nothing more than a common criminal.
Please tell me if this is accurate: “I have fabricated things against God and have imputed to Him words which He has not spoken.” ~MUHAMMAD (Al-Tabari 6:111)
Who is onlineUsers browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests |
Who is online
In total there are 0 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 0 guests (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 135 on Mon Dec 06, 2010 7:37 pm
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests