Jesus not sent to be crucified!

[God love us]

hay nako ang MUSLIM talaga di raw napako c Jesus pero nong nagtanong ako kong saan si Jesus kong di napako ang sabi nasa Ulap daw siya, iba naman Nasa Makkah daw, ang iba naman di nila alam kong san c Jesus c Allah lang daw nkakaalam.,., ano ba talaga ang Totoo ? at ilan ba ang klase ng Muslim bkit ibaiba sila ng Sagot sa Tanong ko. at isa pa bakit ayaw nila may ibang relihiyon sa middle east kong ang Islam ang Totoong Relihiyon ..,., basta ako i believe JESUS IS MY Savoiur nabuhay xa Muli.

 

[mathed1925]

hay nako ang MUSLIM talaga di raw napako c Jesus pero nong nagtanong ako kong saan si Jesus kong di napako ang sabi nasa Ulap daw siya, iba naman Nasa Makkah daw, ang iba naman di nila alam kong san c Jesus c Allah lang daw nkakaalam.,., ano ba talaga ang Totoo ? at ilan ba ang klase ng Muslim bkit ibaiba sila ng Sagot sa Tanong ko. at isa pa bakit ayaw nila may ibang relihiyon sa middle east kong ang Islam ang Totoong Relihiyon ..,., basta ako i believe JESUS IS MY Savoiur nabuhay xa Muli.

dito ka bisita sa thread nato...
http://www.symbianize.com/showthread.php?t=735735

tapos dipensahan mo na si Jesus ay naipako at sa TS naman ay
stoning to death.

nabuhay muli, sinong disciple ba yong nakawitness? at yong nagnarrate ng story na met nya ba ang isa sa mga disciple?

 

[pcruztemp]

saan mo naman nakuha na second class lang sila?

In Islam, women are entitled to the right of inheritance, Qur'an 4:7. In general, Islam allows females half the inheritance share available to males who have the same degree of relation to the deceased

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_Islam

The status of women's testimony in Islam is disputed.

In cases of hudud, punishments for serious crimes, 12th-century Maliki jurist Averroes wrote that jurists disagree about the status of women's testimony.[1] According to Averroes, most scholars say that in this case women's testimony is unacceptable regardless of whether they testify alongside male witnesses.[1] However, he writes that the school of thought known as the Zahiris believe that if two or more women testify alongside a male witness, then (as in cases regarding financial transactions, discussed below), their testimony is acceptable.[1][2][3][4] In case of witnesses for financial documents, the Qur'an asks for two men or one man and two women.[5][6] It is disputed whether this means that a woman's testimony worth half that of a man either in disputes about financial transactions or as a general matter. On the other hand, Javed Ahmed Ghamidi writes that Islam asks for two women witnesses against one male because this responsibility is not very suited to their temperament, sphere of interest, and usual environment. He argues that Islam makes no claim that woman's testimony is half in other cases.[7]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status_of_women's_testimony_in_Islam

 

[pcruztemp]

Question:

Why are rape victims often punished by Islamic courts as adulterers?


Summary Answer:

Under Islamic law, rape can only be proven if the rapist confesses or if there are four male witnesses. Women who allege rape, without the benefit of the act having been witnessed by four men who subsequently develop a conscience, are actually confessing to having sex. If they or the accused happens to be married, then it is considered to be adultery.


The Qur'an:

Qur'an (2:282) - Establishes that a woman's testimony is worth only half that of a man's in court (there is no "he said/she said" gridlock in Islam).

Qur'an (24:4) - "And those who accuse free women then do not bring four witnesses (to adultery), flog them..." Strictly speaking, this verse addresses adultery (revealed at the very time that Muhammad's favorite wife was being accused of adultery on the basis of only three witnesses, coincidentally enough) however it is a part of the theological underpinning of the Sharia rule.

Qur'an (24:13) - "Why did they not bring four witnesses of it? But as they have not brought witnesses they are liars before Allah."

Qur'an (2:223) - "Your wives are as a tilth unto you; so approach your tilth when or how ye will..." There is no such thing as rape in marriage, as a man is permitted unrestricted sexual access to his wives.


From the Hadith:



Bukhari (5:59:462) - The background for the Qur'anic requirement of four witnesses to adultery. Muhammad's favorite wife, Aisha, was accused of cheating [on her polygamous husband]. Three witnesses corroborated the event, but Muhammad apparently did not want to believe it, and so established the arbitrary rule that four witnesses are required.




Additional Notes:

Rape is virtually impossible to prove under strict Islamic law (Sharia). If the man claims that the act was consensual sex, there is very little that the woman can do to refute this. Islam places the burden of avoiding sexual encounters of any sort on the woman.



A recent fatwa from a mainstream Islamic site echoes this rule and even chides a victim of incest for complaining when she has no "evidence":

However, it is not permissible to accuse the father of rape without evidence. Indeed, the Sharee’ah put some special conditions for proving Zina (fornication or adultery) that are not required in case of other crimes. The crime of Zina is not confirmed except if the fornicator admits it, or with the testimony of four trustworthy men, while the testimony of women is not accepted.

Hence, the statement of this girl or the statement of her mother in itself does not Islamically prove anything against the father, especially that the latter denies it.

Therefore, if this daughter has no evidence to prove that her accusations are true, she should not have claimed that she was raped by her father and she should not have taken him to the court. (IslamWeb.net, Image)

Since it is incredibly unlikely that a child molester will violate his victim in front of "four trustworthy men", Islamic law amounts to a free pass for sexual predators.



Islamic law rejects forensic evidence (such as DNA) in favor of testimony. An interesting situation thus sometimes develops in cases where a victim alleges rape and the man denies that sex even took place. In the absence of four male witnesses, rape cannot be proven. The woman's testimony then becomes a "confession" of adultery. She can be stoned, even though the male is unpunished, since he never "confessed" to a sexual act!



Also, there can be no such thing as rape in marriage, even if the husband has to hit the wife in order to bring about her submission. Another recent fatwa reminds a woman, she "does not have the right to refuse her husband, rather she must respond to his request every time he calls her." (Islam Q&A, Fatwa No. 33597).



Keep in mind that most Muslim countries do not operate under strict Islamic law, but rather under legal codes imported from the West. Therefore rape victims in these countries can and often do receive justice under more reasonable standards of proof.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/002-rape_adultery.htm

GMA News TV (Philippines) reported today about an alarming development in the case of a Filipino worker who was raped in Saudi-Arabia this August and jailed for it. After miscarrying the fetus, the woman now faces lashing before being released.

As we’ve previously reported, the woman who worked as a janitor was raped by a Bangladeshi co-worker last August. In September, as part of the reparation process, the woman had to undergo a physical examination during which it was discovered that she’s pregnant. Since September 11 the woman has been jailed at the Hafer Al Baten Central Jail for having an “illicit affair”. Due to the bad conditions in the prison, in December she suffered a miscarriage. After spending time in the hospital she was transferred back to prison.

The form of Sharia law applied in Saudi Arabia sentences woman who have had sex out of wedlock – even in cases of unproven rape – to prison and lashing. If the woman is pregnant, the lashing is carried out after the end of the pregnancy. The number of lashes is determined in a hearing before the woman is freed. The Filipino woman told her mother over the phone that the usual number of lashings her fellow prisoners received after giving birth was a hundred lashes. The court date for this case is unknown, but according to the Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs, it is set to happen this month.

http://www.migrant-rights.org/2010/...er-faces-lashing-after-miscarriage-in-prison/

 

[God love us]

dito ka bisita sa thread nato...
http://www.symbianize.com/showthread.php?t=735735

tapos dipensahan mo na si Jesus ay naipako at sa TS naman ay
stoning to death.

nabuhay muli, sinong disciple ba yong nakawitness? at yong nagnarrate ng story na met nya ba ang isa sa mga disciple?

brod parang ang lau ng sagot mo sinxa nah hah.Peace

 

[sevenshadows]

Re: False and a great lie, Muslims sanctioned slavery.

This is also a response to rafh27 and minsboy.

who is guilty of slavery?
Romans, Persians, Mongolians, Vikings, Greeks, Pharaoh, up to
10th to nearly 20th century, Spain, Japan, America, Britain
conqueror.

teka halos lahat ata ah,
alam mo kasi sir 7shadows noon it was someting usual before
lalo after war.

Proof that Religion including Islam WAS used as an excuse to do slavery. This is very simple case - premise was about Islam, my refutation is about Islam.

Today Muslims like Christians, especially under the auspices of the United Nations declaration on human rights would quote the Holy Scriptures against slavery.

I am pointing to a hypocrisy of religion, it just so happen (was it Fate or God's Will?) that it was Islam on the hot-seat right now. So someone presented a modern anti-slavery formula composed from the Holy Quran. I am here proving that words are mere words, the deeds of men are what counts. Actions are the true witness to the faiths held by men. And sorry to say, they did base their slavery authority on the Holy Quran.

That is historical truth documented and resulted into a conflict even commented on by significant third parties such as the great Admiral Nelson of the British Empire and Pope Pius VII of the Catholic Church.

but here try to know how the Prophet Muhammad, the 4 Khalifa; Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali treated their slaves.
and also worth to mention those former slave sooner became scholar of Islam and earned thier high status.

1. Bilal Al-Harith - one of the companion of prophet Muhammad
2. Salman Farasi - slave from persian until he meet prophet Muhammad.
3. Zayd Ibn Harith - a slave then adopted by prophet Muhammad as his own son, died on the battle to the Romans.
4. Salim Mawla Abu-Hudhayfah - a freed slave, where the sahaba commanded by prophet Muhammad to learn the recitation of the Qur'an from him, he was one of the Huffaz...

In a hadith narrated upon the authority of Abd-Allah ibn 'Amr (May Allah be pleased with him)

Individual Charity vs. Practical Policy of an Islamic Dominion
Well the bad news is this was an official policy of not only a nation, but an entire dominion; the Ottoman Empire. Sure an individual's charity is divine (as what you listed above) but an empire's wrath which draws authority for slavery from the Holy Quran is just pure atrocity.

ngayon pinagmalaki mo pa ang america with the involvement of the Agnostic?



who is this people, can you give me your source...

The founding fathers' Deistic and irreligious beliefs have many common links to Agnosticism. Some background, The Pilgrimage from Deism to Agnosticism by Moncure Daniel Conway. Real book here https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Author:Moncure_Daniel_Conway.

1. George Washington

The first president of the United States, never declared himself a Christian according to contemporary reports or in any of his voluminous correspondence. Washington Championed the cause of freedom from religious intolerance and compulsion. When John Murray (a universalist who denied the existence of hell) was invited to become an army chaplain, the other chaplains petitioned Washington for his dismissal. Instead, Washington gave him the appointment. On his deathbed, Washinton uttered no words of a religious nature and did not call for a clergyman to be in attendance.

Source: George Washington and Religion by Paul F. Boller Jr., pp. 16, 87, 88, 108, 113, 121, 127 (1963, Southern Methodist University Press, Dallas, TX), real book here http://www.amazon.com/George-Washin...0210/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1338297132&sr=8-1.

2. Thomas Paine

I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turkish church, by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of...Each of those churches accuse the other of unbelief; and for my own part, I disbelieve them all."

Source: The Age of Reason by Thomas Paine, pp. 8,9 (Republished 1984, Prometheus Books, Buffalo, NY), real book here http://www.amazon.com/Age-Of-Reason...sr_1_sc_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1338297480&sr=8-3-spell.

3. John Adams

"the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion."

Sources: The Character of John Adams by Peter Shaw, pp. 17 (1976, North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC) Quoting a letter by JA to Charles Cushing Oct 19, 1756, and John Adams, A Biography in his Own Words, edited by James Peabody, p. 403 (1973, Newsweek, New York NY) Quoting letter by JA to Jefferson April 19, 1817, and in reference to the treaty, Thomas Jefferson, Passionate Pilgrim by Alf Mapp Jr., pp. 311 (1991, Madison Books, Lanham, MD) quoting letter by TJ to Dr. Benjamin Waterhouse, June, 1814. Real book (only one to save space) http://www.amazon.com/Character-Joh...8568/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1338297925&sr=8-1.

4. Thomas Jefferson creator of the "Jefferson Bible"

The Christian priesthood, finding the doctrines of Christ levelled to every understanding and too plain to need explanation, saw, in the mysticisms of Plato, materials with which they might build up an artificial system which might, from its indistinctness, admit everlasting controversy, give employment for their order, and introduce it to profit, power, and pre-eminence. The doctrines which flowed from the lips of Jesus himself are within the comprehension of a child; but thousands of volumes have not yet explained the Platonisms engrafted on them: and for this obvious reason that nonsense can never be explained.

Sources: Thomas Jefferson, an Intimate History by Fawn M. Brodie, p. 453 (1974, W.W) Norton and Co. Inc. New York, NY) Quoting a letter by TJ to Alexander Smyth Jan 17, 1825, and Thomas Jefferson, Passionate Pilgrim by Alf Mapp Jr., pp. 246 (1991, Madison Books, Lanham, MD) quoting letter by TJ to John Adams, July 5, 1814. Real book (only one to save space) here http://www.amazon.com/Thomas-Jeffer...8339/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1338299415&sr=8-1.

mussulman? ano yan turkz language tapos gusto ipaalam sa
english speaker or like us who undestand english na ang Islam
love the slavery.

doubtful ang source mo sir? nagquote tapos mali pa yata.
wag kang mag-alala di naman sayo galing yan eh.

Mussulman? from reliable source kuno.

hinanap ko kung ano ang Mussul, nagsuggest si google na instead Mussul eh Muscle na lang.

pero di nagtagal nahanap ko rin,
sa bandang Northern ng Iraq may lugar doon tinatawag na Mosul.

so, pwedeng ang ibigsabihin ng nagquote ay from Mussulman
to Mosul Man meaning taong taga bandang Norte ng Iraq.

Simply lang naman, taga saan ba yang nag quote na yan taga
Kweba ba? siguro di nya alam na may word na Muslim siguro
sa kweba pinanggalingan nila Mussul ang tawag nila doon
tapos kinakausap si 7shadows e di mas lalong nagkagulo.

I am not the type who will invent anything, unlike religions. It is from the English language, specifically, an older version.

Proof:
1. The Barbary Treaties 1786-1816
Treaty of Peace and Friendship, Signed at Tripoli November 4, 1796

ARTICLE 11.

As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion,-as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen,-and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

2. Musulman, "Muslim" in a number of languages (also used archaically in English as Mussulman, Musselman)
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mussulman

3. MUSSULMAN
Definition of MUSSULMAN
: muslim
Source: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mussulman

It is ironic, maybe fate or God's will, that later the United States will engage the Ottoman Empire in a war that will end a slavery trade.

This is history, and that is the reality. It just strengthens the argument against religion.

 

[minsboy]

Islam is the most misunderstood religion today. Those with the Agenda of destroying Islam have put forth challenging questions to cast doubt in the hearts of Muslims, and increase hatred in the hearts of those who have accepted their lies. However, all questions they pose regarding Islam, Muslims, Quran, Sunnah, the Prophets etc... can be answered. Islam is perfect, and the challenge remains for any person to prove otherwise.

http://www.islamic-shield.com/2007/12/saudi-rape-victim-is-lashed-real-truth.html

 

[pcruztemp]

Islam is perfect, and the challenge remains for any person to prove otherwise.

so if anyone can make a claim like that and its up to others to disprove it, then any other religion can also make that claim. hindus, buddhists, shintos, aztecs, vikings or pastafarians can makre such a claim and its automatically valid unless someone else can disprove it


dude, mag aral ka ng "burden of proof"

 

[sevenshadows]

Sorry You are Proven False Many Times

Islam is the most misunderstood religion today. Those with the Agenda of destroying Islam have put forth challenging questions to cast doubt in the hearts of Muslims, and increase hatred in the hearts of those who have accepted their lies. However, all questions they pose regarding Islam, Muslims, Quran, Sunnah, the Prophets etc... can be answered. Islam is perfect, and the challenge remains for any person to prove otherwise.

http://www.islamic-shield.com/2007/12/saudi-rape-victim-is-lashed-real-truth.html

It shows that you are a "robotic" copy paste preacher.

Don't you even read your own sources and discussions? A lot of your claims were debunked. You did not even lift a finger to provide any sufficient clarifications or corrections to historical and scientific claims.


And by the way, that claim is also being held by Christians and Jews. Islam does not have monopoly of a mere claim by words.

 

[minsboy]

Sabi ng bible hindi naipako si Jesus sa krus kasi iniligtas siya ng Dios....

May naipako nga sila sa krus ngunit hindi si Jesus yun. Ayon sa Isaiah 53:7 si Jesus ay tahimik lang ni hindi nagbuka ng bibig

Isaiah 53:7Siya'y napighati, gayon man nang siya'y dinalamhati ay hindi nagbuka ng kaniyang bibig; gaya ng kordero na dinadala sa patayan, at gaya ng tupang nasa harap ng mga manggugupit sa kaniya ay pipi, gayon ma'y hindi niya binuka ang kaniyang bibig.
----------

Eh yung nakapako sa krus todo sigaw (((Mateo 27:46)))nag complain pa sa Dios eh kaya hindi si Jesus yan nasa krus kasi lalabas false prophecy yan Isaiah 53:7

Mateo 27: 46Nang mag-aalas tres na ng hapon, sumigaw si Jesus, "Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani ?" na ang ibig sabihi'y "Diyos ko, Diyos ko, bakit mo ako pinabayaan?"

Dibasi Jesus yan ....Psalm91:11 Sapagka't siya'y magbibilin sa kaniyang mga anghel tungkol sa iyo, upang ingatan ka sa lahat ng iyong mga lakad.))) papaanong maipapako nila si Jesus eh iniingatan nga siya ng Dios...

iniligtas si Jesus ng Dios kasi nagdasal siya sa Mateo 26:39 at nakahula na yan sa ..
..Psalm 91:15 Siya'y tatawag sa akin, at sasagutin ko siya; ako'y sasa kaniya sa kabagabagan: aking ililigtas siya, at pararangalan siya.
16 Aking bubusugin siya ng mahabang buhay, at ipakikita ko sa kaniya ang aking pagliligtas.)))

Eto mas matibay napatunay na hindi namatay si Jesus ...Psalm 118:18Pinarusahan akong mainam ng Panginoon; nguni't hindi niya ako ibinigay sa kamatayan. ))

Pati nga diablo alam na iniingatan ng Dios si Jesus eh papaano pa nila maipapako siya...

Lucas 4:
9 At dinala niya siya sa Jerusalem, at inilagay siya sa taluktok ng templo, at sinabi sa kaniya, Kung ikaw ay Anak ng Dios, ay magpatihulog ka mula rito hanggang sa ibaba:
10 Sapagka't nasusulat, Siya'y magbibilin sa kaniyang mga anghel tungkol sa iyo, upang ikaw ay ingatan:

 

[God love us]

Sabi ng bible hindi naipako si Jesus sa krus kasi iniligtas siya ng Dios....

May naipako nga sila sa krus ngunit hindi si Jesus yun. Ayon sa Isaiah 53:7 si Jesus ay tahimik lang ni hindi nagbuka ng bibig

Isaiah 53:7Siya'y napighati, gayon man nang siya'y dinalamhati ay hindi nagbuka ng kaniyang bibig; gaya ng kordero na dinadala sa patayan, at gaya ng tupang nasa harap ng mga manggugupit sa kaniya ay pipi, gayon ma'y hindi niya binuka ang kaniyang bibig.
----------

Eh yung nakapako sa krus todo sigaw (((Mateo 27:46)))nag complain pa sa Dios eh kaya hindi si Jesus yan nasa krus kasi lalabas false prophecy yan Isaiah 53:7

Mateo 27: 46Nang mag-aalas tres na ng hapon, sumigaw si Jesus, "Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani ?" na ang ibig sabihi'y "Diyos ko, Diyos ko, bakit mo ako pinabayaan?"

Dibasi Jesus yan ....Psalm91:11 Sapagka't siya'y magbibilin sa kaniyang mga anghel tungkol sa iyo, upang ingatan ka sa lahat ng iyong mga lakad.))) papaanong maipapako nila si Jesus eh iniingatan nga siya ng Dios...

iniligtas si Jesus ng Dios kasi nagdasal siya sa Mateo 26:39 at nakahula na yan sa ..
..Psalm 91:15 Siya'y tatawag sa akin, at sasagutin ko siya; ako'y sasa kaniya sa kabagabagan: aking ililigtas siya, at pararangalan siya.
16 Aking bubusugin siya ng mahabang buhay, at ipakikita ko sa kaniya ang aking pagliligtas.)))

Eto mas matibay napatunay na hindi namatay si Jesus ...Psalm 118:18Pinarusahan akong mainam ng Panginoon; nguni't hindi niya ako ibinigay sa kamatayan. ))

Pati nga diablo alam na iniingatan ng Dios si Jesus eh papaano pa nila maipapako siya...

Lucas 4:
9 At dinala niya siya sa Jerusalem, at inilagay siya sa taluktok ng templo, at sinabi sa kaniya, Kung ikaw ay Anak ng Dios, ay magpatihulog ka mula rito hanggang sa ibaba:
10 Sapagka't nasusulat, Siya'y magbibilin sa kaniyang mga anghel tungkol sa iyo, upang ikaw ay ingatan:

labo ng sagot mo bro.

 

[yuginishai]

Dont judge what is written, pnu kung totoo nga? walang mawawala sa inyo kung maniniwala kayo, pero kpag hindi kayo naniwala at totoo nga, ang laki ng mawawala sa inyo .

 

[rudy castro]

kasi dapat basahin nyong maigi ang bible ,kasi ang tinubos nya ng kanyang sariling dugo ay ang iglesia ng dios or church of god na itinayo ng dios ama at hindi ang catholiko or iba pang reliyon ,anu ba ang pakialam ni kristo sa ibang reliyon e sa church of god sya namumuno kaya yun lang ang concern nya na maligtas.

 

[mikestan]

Kaya palagi meron gyera dahil sa mga ganitong usapan. Respect they faith na lang. Siguro naniniwala kayo na meron din mankukulam?

Let's have peace na lang at walang awayan!

 

[sevenshadows]

Kaya palagi meron gyera dahil sa mga ganitong usapan. Respect they faith na lang. Siguro naniniwala kayo na meron din mankukulam?

Let's have peace na lang at walang awayan!

I agree.

But asking them to "respect" the faith of other people is a dream that may not come true.

 

[greyhame]

I agree.

But asking them to "respect" the faith of other people is a dream that may not come true.

As Edward Wilson, in his book "Consilience," says, “[E]very major religion today is a winner in the Darwinian struggle waged among cultures, and none ever flourished by tolerating its rivals.”

 

[sevenshadows]

As Edward Wilson, in his book "Consilience," says, “[E]very major religion today is a winner in the Darwinian struggle waged among cultures, and none ever flourished by tolerating its rivals.”

Thank you for the share.

Nice info. Why? The Irony.

Islam is now against Darwinian theory of evolution, and yet they are dominant because of Darwinian tactics.

 

[BolJon]

yun ay kung totoo talaga ang kwento sa buhay ni Hesus.

 

[jaymhar]

respeto nalang po at pagmamahal sa isat isa ang kailangand po dapat mag away2x!!!!!!yan lang po......

 

[janerome]

John 3:16 "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life"