Why no record of prophets in europe,australasia and america?
-
There is no evidence whatsoever that Buddah existed in the past, all you say guys is hearsay like the hadith exactly, Haha
-
My uncle has been asking me a question for some time now...He asks Why were prophets only seemingly sent to arab/semitic people only?...
Where is prophet 'bob' of the US,or nabi 'nick' of the Uk?...And while we are on the topic...rasool 'Sheila' from australia? Why no women,europeans,australians or americans?....My uncle sometimes mischieviously says,its because those areas with the 'traditional' 'documented' prophets,are the ones that most needed guidance,and so prophets were sent therehello
the followings may be the reasons
1- God couldnt find any briton/englishman who was spiritually, morally eligible for being a prophet. D
2- God wants all britons to be hell creatures and deliberately he has not sent them any messenger. D
3- No need to send any messenger to britons because britons as fierce imperialists have already been everywhere to exploit the rest of the world and so britons could easily access all scriptures sent to other people all over the world. D
If britons were believers then we would have to go on putting up with them in the nextworld, but they are hell creatures... Thank God! ) )
- Verily, those who are bent on denying the truth - from among the followers of earlier revelation or from among those who ascribe divinity to aught beside God - will find themselves in the fire of hell, therein to abide they are the worst of all creatures.
-
Peace Ahmed
Partly yes, partly know.
As I said, we will never fuly know the details of his life and, you?re right, every other claim is hearsay.
But of course a certain philosophy does not come from nowhere.So, studying those pieces of Buddhist philosophy that are deemed (!) as most old and most authentic (not all of Buddhism is) I?d say
Wherever and from whomever that stuff comes, it preaches in most parts a message that is not in contradiction to al-qur'?n and could have come from a nab? or a ras?l.And, no, those pieces do not include ideas of literal reincarnation, atheism or other parts of later Buddhism.
Additionally, these pieces forbid worship of images and call to the aknowledgement of one truth and to an ethical life.But, again, we will never fully know .....
-
peace layla,
1- God couldnt find any briton/englishman who was spiritually, morally eligible for being a prophet.
2- God wants all britons to be hell creatures and deliberately he has not sent them any messenger.
3- No need to send any messenger to britons because britons as fierce imperialists have already been everywhere to exploit the rest of the world and so britons could easily access all scriptures sent to other people all over the world.
YOU CALL THIS GOD THE MERCIFUL BENEFACTOR ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? o
-
P.S
Ahmed, believing that Muhammad Ibn Abdullah existed as a historical person is also hearsay, to a certain extent.
We will not fully know that one as well.
Though I do believe that he existed.Lol Layla
that is exactly what I'm saying, so when the Quran aloners suggest as such, they have to show us exactly how they accept history records, in a way we can not prove that anyone existed whom we never saw
agree?
-
For those who call Mohammad, "Mohammad ibn Abd Allah", can you please tell me where you got this info from and how you verfied it?, how did you know that Mohammad father was named Abd Allah
please don't bring any hadith, I need somethin from the Quran
cheers
-
Sal?m Ahmed
Oh, sorry. Obviously I missed an important development of yours. )
Last time I discussed with you you were the one who got angry when someone says that there is no historical proof for the existence of the man Muhammad.
Sorry for taking for granted that you still think that way!Regards,
Leyla
-
There Never Was A People Without A Warner
Verily We have sent thee (Muhammad) in truth as a bearer of glad tidings and as a warner, And there never was a people without a warner having lived among them (in the past).(24)
For We assuredly sent amongst every People an apostle (with the Command) "Serve Allah and eshew Evil" Of the people were some whom Allah guided and some on whom Error became inevitably (established). So travel through the earth and see what was the end of those who denied (the Truth).
(36)
Allah desired not to tell us about all the messengers He sent
And Messengers (Prophets who received revealed books) We have mentioned unto thee (Muhammad) before, And Messengers We have not mentioned unto thee; And Allah spake directly unto Moses.(164)
Why Allah did not mention all the messengers in the Quran?, because Allah is a God and He does what He wants and his creatures can't ask him why
Abiding therein so long as the heavens and the earth endure, except as your Lord please; surely your Lord is the mighty doer of what He intends.(107)
In many other cases though, when lost humans take their ego as their own man made god, i guess that weak man made god does what his master (the human) intends
Salam
-
Sal?m Ahmed
salam sister
Oh, sorry. Obviously I missed an important development of yours.
nice one sister, no development here, i'm using the Quran aloners flawed logic, you and Mquran call him Moahammad Ibn Abd Allah, now I can prove to myself where this name came from, i want you to enlighten me in how you managed to call him Mohammad Ibn Abd Allah using the Quran alone please?
if you resorted to the hadith then sorry this is double standards, confusion and non sensible by you
if you believed the sunni when they called him Mohammad Ibn Abd allah, then how come you did that?, it still sounds double standards, confusion and non sensible by you
Last time I discussed with you you were the one who got angry when someone says that there is no historical proof for the existence of the man Muhammad.
well, I can't remember really, whoever that man is, i'm sure according to the Quran that he is heading to a secured seat in hell, next to "possibly" Satan and Bin Laden
as I said sister, i can prove to myself that Mohammad exitsed or not and I care less if others believe in that
what i'm asking you now dear sister, how a Quran aloner like you and Mquran call Mohammad, Mohammad Ibn Abd Allah?, i need an answer from the Quran please, or at least you explain to me why you followed the sunni in that asspect if you fail to get me an answer from the Quran?, thanks
Sorry for taking for granted that you still think that way!
Regards,
Leyla
of course I think the same way regarding The Quran and message since i was a teen so please do and take it for granted what you have concluded in the past, however I can't take it for granted now that you are a Quran aloner, because you follow the sunni in calling Mohammad, Mohammad Ibn Abd Allah
no offence dear sister, but i'm a professional in catching others red handed
Peace
-
No red hand catch, sorry!
I only call him Muhammad Ibn Abdullah out of social convention.
But this convention has no relevance in the d?n for me.
I could likewise call him Muhammad the Arab or whatever.
The whole historical person has no relevance in the d?n for me, only that maybe probably (!) revelation of al-qur'?n was given to him. Maybe probably, not more.While I have conviction in al-qur'?n, I do not have conviction of the historical existence of that person.
I only ASSUME that he existed.So, your last post does not speak much to me.
-
There is no evidence whatsoever that Buddah existed in the past, all you say guys is hearsay like the hadith exactly, Haha
Peace Ahmed,
Yes, we don't have clear cut proof that somone called the "buddha" existed. There is some evidence though. Like the existence of the religion "Buddhism." And they even have "hadith" of buddha, his sayings in everything.
-
No red hand catch, sorry!
I only call him Muhammad Ibn Abdullah out of social convention.
But this convention has no relevance in the d?n for me.
I could likewise call him Muhammad the Arab or whatever.
The whole historical person has no relevance in the d?n for me, only that maybe probably (!) revelation of al-qur'?n was given to him. Maybe probably, not more.While I have conviction in al-qur'?n, I do not have conviction of the historical existence of that person.
I only ASSUME that he existed.So, your last post does not speak much to me.
well sister
it does, it made you admit that you assume he existed, well i see you using the wrong word "assume" that's all, i guess you meant "Believe"
haha sister
see, it is all about believing
now please help an english language ignorant like me and explain to me what the english language mean by the word believe?
btw, i never called Mohammad, Mohammad ibn abd Allah
thank you
-
There is no evidence whatsoever that Buddah existed in the past, all you say guys is hearsay like the hadith exactly, Haha
Peace Ahmed,
Yes, we don't have clear cut proof that somone called the "buddha" existed. There is some evidence though. Like the existence of the religion "Buddhism." And they even have "hadith" of buddha, his sayings in everything.
Peace bro
thanks man, so if we will give the haidth of mister Buddah any value, why not giving the haidth of mister Mohammad any value?
cheers
-
Ahmed of course I think the same way regarding The Quran and message since i was a teen
Just wanted to repeat that one. It was too good to leave it unnoticed.
Hope you don?t mind, Ahmed?The problem is believe can mean two things. It can refer to a conviction and it can refer to an assumption.
My motherlanguage is also different from English so I am not too firm in that use as well.
But I can assure you
Assuming or believing, whatever word I may use, that a Muhammad Ibn Abdullah did exist has no relevance whatsoever in the d?n for me.
And if it was a social convention t call him Muhammad Ibn Yusuf I would just simply call him that way.
Did you get it, Ahmed?
For me it?s just a social convention, while for you it is faith in something outside of qur'?n!bye,
leyla
-
Peace bro
thanks man, so if we will give the haidth of mister Buddah any value, why not giving the haidth of mister Mohammad any value?
cheers
yes, why not?
I don't have anything against gaining wisdom from the hadith.
What i do have a problem with is when- people use hadith to fill in what they think are "gaps" in the quran.
- when people follow something blindly without questioning.
We can't be sure if that person, buddha really existed, or if those sayings are really buddha's, but there was someone, or a group of people, who did exist that started this whole "buddhism" thing.
Like Muhammad started Islam. -
Ahmed of course I think the same way regarding The Quran and message since i was a teen
Just wanted to repeat that one. It was too good to leave it unnoticed.
Hope you don?t mind, Ahmed?not at all, now hope you don't mind to elaborate?, i like straightwforward people, sop please be as such with me if you don't mind that i may like you
The problem is believe can mean two things. It can refer to a conviction and it can refer to an assumption.
well if it is for a conviction, then it canlt be belief any more, it will be certain
only if it is assumotion, then you believe
i'm not talking emotions here, i'm only talking LOGIC, so please keep it logical
My motherlanguage is also different from English so I am not too firm in that use as well.
But I can assure you
Assuming or believing, whatever word I may use, that a Muhammad Ibn Abdullah did exist has no relevance whatsoever in the d?n for me.hold on, we have a possible red hand case, let me repeat what you said in breif
?Believing that Mohammad did exist has no relevance WHATSOEVER IN THE DIN FOR YOU, ?
well you need to explain how the following verse apply to you then
O ye who believe! Believe in Allah and His Messenger, and the scripture which He hath sent to His Messenger and the scripture which He sent to those before (him). Any who denieth Allah, His angels, His Books, His Messengers, and the Day of Judgment, hath gone far, far astray.
(136)
-> if you agree that ?Rasoolihi? in 4136 is about Mohammad and according to your belief ?I mean Mohammad ibn Abd Allah?, then please explain would the above verse apply to you or not?, thank you
-> but bear in mind sister, if you believe via conviction or assumption ?whatever you want to call it? in Allah, this means you believe or assume that He exists, now 4136 is telling us ? O ye who believe! Believe in Allah and His Messenger,?,, would Allah be talking to some group of people that you don?t belong to them?
And if it was a social convention t call him Muhammad Ibn Yusuf I would just simply call him that way.
Did you get it, Ahmed?No sister I don?t get it, because calling him as such clearly means you agree on it and accept from the sunnah, unless what you say is not entirely accurate
For me it?s just a social convention, while for you it is faith in something outside of qur'?n!
Excuse me, don?t assume or believe about me what I never suggested about myself, did I say I believe that Mohammad was Mohammad Ibn Abd Allah?, no I don?t, all I said I can prove to myself where the name came from, did I say from where I will prove that?, no I didn?t, so please don?t assume as such because you got it wrong twice in one sentence, so I take it that what you say is not entirely accurate?
bye,
leyla
Cheers
Ahmed
-
Peace Ahmed
I did once discuss the same issue with you, as far as I recall.
I already saw the same questions and would not give other answers now.
You also discussed the same questions with the same answers with mquran and others.
You know my answers here and I don?t need to repeat them over and over to you.
This leads to nothing, only that we will start with a not so nice language again.
You know that.Call this running away, if you like. I don?t care. Believe me (assume? have conviction?), this is not the case.
I just simply feel very strong at the moment where this is going.Peace peace peace,
Leyla