This is pathetic! Talking about horses passing wind and children dying, and then pass it off as something that critics will use to criticise Islam with.
Let’s be honest when were these Hadiths compiled and who actually memorised them over the years? How many years after the prophet?
why is is pathetic? Give your actual reasons
It’s pathetic because of what the guy on the video was saying that Satan plays with your bowels, if you don’t enter the toilet left foot first and say a certain word(s)
This is why I say yahyaslimw is a joke like the sunnah: https://youtu.be/g5wR8R7XGz4
Liked by 1 person
It is clear that western Muslims are embarrassed and ashamed of their Islamic texts so they have to reinvent the religion to suit their own tastes.
Wow; that was hilarious and really really embarrassing for Islam. (the Sheikh admitted the Hadith says these things and that if you don’t pray the dua and put your left forward into the toilet room, the Shaytan will play with your bowels.)
Wow, what an embarrassing religion. Wow. . .
Eric bin Kisam
With the name of Allah
It is silly watching these trinitarian missionaries like shame-on who mock something they dont really understand well.
Even when the narrations are to be understood on face value, there is nothing wrong with that. The jinn are similar to human in their behaviour , social structure. They eat drink, marry etc.
However the word durooth ‘ضرط’ in classical arabic does not necessarily imply straightforward meaning. One who learn classical arabic know also recognise fact that the word durooth ‘ضرط’ is never limited to this particular understanding only.
Classical arabic is rich in metaphors , and this word is no execption. In the book of ” Collection of parables” جمع الأمثال by Imaam Abu Al Fadli Miidani الإمام أبو الفضل الميداني
it is written:
(انظر: مجمع الأمثال 1/180؛ والأمثال ص 367)
It is explicitly mentioned that the word duroot in sentence “أجبن من المنزوف ضرط” is something to do with scared or frightened as in cowardice. Like a man who has deserted from his battle is more coward than one who duroot (lit: release gas from stomach) , the book explained. So the word carries metaphoric expression not in literal sense.
The approach of this kind of is also well founded and strong.
Also in Lane Arabic-English Lexicon mention this. On page 1786 of the dictionary under the definition of ‘ضرط’ we find the following:
It is explicitly mentioned that these are proverbs. It is taken as a figure of speech and not in literal sense.
So Missionaries and Islamophobes have a lot to learn than resorting cheap polemics.
Brilliant reply, brother Eric! Jazak Allah Khair!
wa jazakallahu lakum
In addition to what brother Eric said, releasing gas is still metaphorically associated with a sense of cowardice in modern Arabic. Those who speak Arabic will no doubt recognise that in the phrase “toz fi america” which is sometimes used to express sentiment against American invasion and influence. It is understood as something like “in reality America can do nothing”.
The same is true for English and probably many other languages. One might say for example, the Israel i army found its confidence in its military superiority deflated — that is, humbled and diminshed, not literally releasing gas — and had to turn back after a couple of weeks spent in the south of Lebanon.
Excruciating to watch. The poor guy with the fez was trying so hard not to crack up – I feel for him.
What madness is the prophet Muhammad teaching Muslims…Satan plays with your bowels
right. A spirit can pass gas. right. did the spirit/demon/Shatan eat food, and digest it, and it went to his bowels and the digestive juices and acids make it into physical gas? right.
LOL, right because you know a lot spirits personally! Did the holy spirit tell you how Satan functions? How is that going? Your holy spirit coming out soon? 😉
Do you often wonder how an angel will be able to bind Satan and seal him up in the “Abyss” for a thousand years? A spirit can be tied up and locked in a pit? Right…
Or how about those “sons of god” who had sex with human women? How’d that happen? Did these “sons of god” impregnate the women with their semen? Right…
And by the way, you silly Christian, the Jinn do eat according to the Ahadith. So, your ludicrous polemic against this particular hadith is more the result of your ignorance and interjecting your own interpolations into it. You Christians do that a lot, even with your own Bible! But your a priori beliefs don’t determine whether a specific hadith is believable or not.
Your language and attitude is quite childish.
It is obviously blatant to everyone that the “farting” episode is embarrassing but you can’t swallow if you have to try and find something in the bible.
1. The Holy Spirit coming out…there is some serious blasphemy right there.
2. The binding of Satan…there is nothing wrong with the spiritual binding of the enemy of God,
2Pe 2:4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;
There is nothing wrong with Gods angels or even God himself overpowering the fallen spirits.
3. Genesis 6 if you want to believe that demons had sex with women and had children that’s up to you, oh I forgot and they got married as well.
It’s real funny that you say it’s demons causing yet it is man who is held accountable for the sin in the earth.
Gen 6:3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.L
Gen 6:5 And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
Gen 6:6 And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.
Gen 6:7 And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.
God didn’t say anything about destroying man mixed with demon off the earth.
Then you are calling Ken stupid you are so deceived that you think only Muslims have the intelligence to explain scripture.
Did Allah tell Muhammad that Satan farted? That’s real spiritual truth for you lol
Interesting that the “Qur’an Only” movement started from Muslims being embarrassed about this Hadith, because it is so ridiculous, they realized a spirit / demon cannot pass gas / fart / break wind.
And switching the subject to horses and being around animals (and, probably implied being around camels ) – horses and camels are physical, but Jinn / demons/ evil spirits are not physical and they do not eat food, so the whole Hadith is discredited as goofy and absurd.
I was referring to the You tube that Sam put up.
The one that is really embarrassing for Islam and the Hadith commentators and the Sheikh refutes Yahya “snow job”.
so you prefer the Sheik’s interpretaion over Yahya’s? What’s the rationale behind your preference?
He is very humorous- Muslims should definitely attend his mosque rather than this metaphorical Disneyland mosque with farting demons that aren’t farting.
I think that interpretation is sufficient. Satan runs away very fast, in much the same way as horses, camels etc , accelerate from a standing position, farting loudly as they go. Makes great sense. Before hearing this clip I might have thought that hadith dubious, but now I have no problem with it.
It could be also a reference to hypocrites of the time, they hear the adhaan and make excuses not to join in prayer, then scurry off leaving the sincere ones bemused, and Muhammad (saw) might have said it in jest “Look, the satan runs away passing wind (at horse-like speed) when he hears the adhaan.
Totally acceptable even for the most skeptical Quranist.
“Be ‘umble and patient, and we can absorb much needed understanding, but when we lash out immediately at something we don’t yet understand, we end up shamefaced and remorseful.
spirits / demons / Shatan cannot eat or digest food or pass gas (fart), because they are not physical beings.
The Sheikh is a higher authority (doesn’t he have to have gone through education to become a “Sheikh” ?) than Yahya snow-job, so his interpretation is more credible, but also more embarrassing for Islam and the credibility of the Hadith.
The “sons of God” in Genesis 6 are not evil spirits, but men who were following God, “of God”, whereas the contrast was with the “daughters of men” (women who were worldly and did not follow God, but were “of mankind” in their thinking. The beautiful women tempted the men because of their beauty. Some commentators take “sons of God” to be fallen angels, or demon possessed men, but I don’t agree with that interpretation, because of the way Jesus describes angels and spirits in Matthew 22:29-30 (spirits cannot have physical sex; they cannot get married).
The binding of Satan is metaphorical, meaning he is stopped by the power of God from deceiving the nations anymore during that time.
A good article on the Genesis 6 passage:
“The Sheikh is a higher authority …”…….there is no hierarchy..whoever gets it right carries the debate.
Also a good clip on how ridiculous it is to take the “sons of God” in Genesis 6 as fallen angels who had sex with women. (critique of Jimmy Swaggart’s view, who was discredited a long time ago)
LOL, it seems I’ve struck a chord with the reference to Genesis 6 and the “sons of god”. The Christians are a bit embarrassed having realized that they are barking up the wrong tree!
“spirits / demons / Shatan cannot eat or digest food or pass gas (fart), because they are not physical beings.”
LOL, but you still don’t know any spiritual beings personally do you? So how can you say how they function? Moreover, why do you assume that when Satan passes gas, he does it the same way humans do? Tell me, when the Bible says that God “sees”, does it mean that He literally sees with 2 eyes which have an iris, a lens, vitreous humor, a retina, rods and cones etc?
You are a silly man! Your holy spirit hasn’t given you intelligence, it seems. 😉
“The Sheikh is a higher authority (doesn’t he have to have gone through education to become a “Sheikh” ?) than Yahya snow-job, so his interpretation is more credible, but also more embarrassing for Islam and the credibility of the Hadith.”
LOL, and yet when a “higher authority” like Mike Licona says that the Bible is corrupted, the know-it-all Ken thinks he has the authority to overrule and disagree with him. But apparently, Muslims cannot overrule “higher authorities” like a sheik. Christian logic strikes again!
“The “sons of God” in Genesis 6 are not evil spirits, but men who were following God, “of God”, whereas the contrast was with the “daughters of men” (women who were worldly and did not follow God, but were “of mankind” in their thinking. The beautiful women tempted the men because of their beauty. Some commentators take “sons of God” to be fallen angels, or demon possessed men, but I don’t agree with that interpretation, because of the way Jesus describes angels and spirits in Matthew 22:29-30 (spirits cannot have physical sex; they cannot get married).”
Oh, you sly snake! A bit embarrassed, eh? So, what authority do you have to not agree with “some commentators”?
Shall I show you the reality of these verses? Get ready for some more embarrassment! Remember, you asked for it!
Here are two excellent articles from Christians that analyze Genesis 6 and come to the conclusion that the “sons of god” were fallen angels, and thus, spiritual beings:
What is interesting is that the earliest authorities understood the “sons of god” to be fallen angels! According to the first source:
“The strange events recorded in Genesis 6 were understood by the ancient rabbinical sources, as well as the Septuagint translators, as referring to fallen angels procreating weird hybrid offspring with human women-known as the “Nephilim.” So it was also understood by the early church fathers.”
Ouch! But it gets worse for Ken, It seems that later authorities strayed from the traditional teaching because of incessant attacks by critics. The first source states:
“It was in the 5th century a.d. that the “angel” interpretation of Genesis 6 was increasingly viewed as an embarrassment when attacked by critics. (Furthermore, the worship of angels had begun within the church. Also, celibacy had also become an institution of the church. The “angel” view of Genesis 6 was feared as impacting these views.)
Celsus and Julian the Apostate used the traditional “angel” belief to attack Christianity. Julius Africanus resorted to the Sethite interpretation as a more comfortable ground. Cyril of Alexandria also repudiated the orthodox “angel” position with the “line of Seth” interpretation. Augustine also embraced the Sethite theory and thus it prevailed into the Middle Ages. It is still widely taught today among many churches who find the literal “angel” view a bit disturbing. There are many outstanding Bible teachers who still defend this view. ”
But wait, here is some evidence straight from the Bible that confirms the “fallen angel” interpretation:
“And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire” (Jude 6).
“The binding of Satan is metaphorical, meaning he is stopped by the power of God from deceiving the nations anymore during that time.”
So then why can’t Satan farting also be metaphorical, as many classical Islamic scholars thought?
“A good article on the Genesis 6 passage:
The above articles refute this apologetic garbage. Christians are too embarrassed so they have to reinterpret Genesis 6. LOL!!
What happened Ken? You bit off more than you could chew? Regretting opening your big mouth? 😉
You’re obviously upset at the embarrassing truth about your Bible (i.e. fallen angels having sex with human women). Read the articles I linked above. They do a good job of destroying the revisionist arguments of people like you.
By the way, I don’t blaspheme the holy spirit who is the blessed Gabriel (as). I simply mock Ken’s self-righteous judging of others by pointing out the holes in his theology and his inability to prove that he has the “holy spirit”. Christians like to make these wild claims, but they can never prove them. If they want to live in that fantasy world, that’s their business. But when they act righteous and judge others, I have no qualms against mocking them and putting them in their place. I get a kick out of it! So stop your whining. 😉
Okay…show me where Gabriel is the Holy Spirit?
According to the Koran who made Mary pregnant with Jesus?
Here is further proof that the “sons of God” in Genesis 6 were angels. In Job 1, it states:
“One day the angels[a] came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan[b] also came with them” (Job 1:6, NIV).
Notice the term “angels”. But there is a footnote in the NIV, which states:
“Hebrew the sons of God” (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=job+1&version=NIV).
So, in the original Hebrew, the verse refers to the “sons of God”. Here is the Hebrew:
So, the “sons of God” are “angels”. The revisionist deceivers like Ken and Defendchrist are simply too embarrassed to admit it, and now ever more so since they decided to open their mouths in their pathetic attempts to criticize the hadith about Satan passing gas. As I said, they barked up the wrong tree!
Here you go again thinking you know all about what we actually know.
Job 1:6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them.
Notice…Satan came also among them…he is not classed as a son of God.
And in any case how is Genesis 6:1-8 an embarrassment to me it’s all about context Faiz.
Question who does God hold responsible for the increase of sin Man or half man half demon?
Question if a demon can get a woman pregnant the the virgin birth is nothing special.
Question. If Giants are the result of the demon and woman relationship, how do you account for the Giants already in the land.
As for critising the Hadith are you so insecure and afraid of the opinions of people who don’t believe what you believe.
I have not disrespected you on this blog but you seem to always want to make comments which is okay as long as you can take it in return.
“Okay…show me where Gabriel is the Holy Spirit?”
The Quran refer to Gabriel (as) as the holy spirit:
“Say: The Holy Spirit brought it down from your Lord with the truth, to strengthen those who believe, and as a guidance and good tidings to the Muslims” (Surah An-Nahl, 102).
Gabriel is the one who brought the Quran down to the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). Thus, he is the holy spirit referred to in the Quran.
“According to the Koran who made Mary pregnant with Jesus?”
The Quran states:
“And Mary the daughter of ‘Imran, who guarded her chastity; and We breathed into (her body) of Our spirit; and she testified to the truth of the words of her Lord and of His Revelations, and was one of the devout (servants)” (Surah At-Tahrim, 12).
Jesus was conceived by the command of Allah (swt). He merely willed for him to be created, and he was:
“The similitude of Jesus before Allah is as that of Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him: “Be”. And he was” (Surah Al-Imran, 3:59).
“Here you go again thinking you know all about what we actually know.
I have not disrespected you on this blog but you seem to always want to make comments which is okay as long as you can take it in return.”
Satan was not classed as a “son of God”, but the angels were. Also, what you have to understand is that the author of the book of Job did not share the same theology as later Jews and Christians. Satan was not considered the epitome of evil but rather simply an agent of God. As The Jewish Study Bible states:
“The Adversary…Heb “ha-satan”, is one of the divine beings. He functions as a kind of prosecuting attorney, and should not be confused with the character of Satan as it developed in the late biblical (see 1 Chron. 21.1) and especially the postbiblical period…” (p. 1506).
In any case, it is clear that the “sons of god” are the angels in God’s court. Thus, the “sons of god” in Job 1 are the same.
I also noticed that you ignored Joel 6-7, which clearly refers to the fallen angels going after “strange flesh”:
“And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their proper dwelling—these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day.
In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire.”
Notice how the author compared the angels to the people of Sodom and Gomorrah. What else was he referring to?
Moreover, you are following an opinion that was not followed by the earliest Christian authorities, as the source above showed. We know why the other views arose. It was due to the incessant criticisms and the embarrassment that Christians felt. Thus, they tried to re-interpret Genesis 6.
You asked some questions that should not be posed to me. I don’t believe in the Bible. Those are questions you need to ask yourself. They are good questions, and if you think about it, you will realize that they put the Bible between a rock and a hard place. The Bible contradicts itself in many places. The reason is that its many books were written by different authors, in different times, and with different beliefs. So, it’s not surprising that all sorts of contradictions and inconsistencies arise within it.
The “sons of God” in Genesis 6 cannot be human beings because human beings are clearly treated differently. As you said, you need to look at the context:
“When human beings began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of humans were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose.”
If they were really human beings, then why not clearly call them “human beings”? Why refer to them separately?
Also, why does Genesis 6 refer to the “sons of God” being attracted to “the daughter of humans”? If they were themselves “humans”, why even say “the daughter of humans”? Who else would they have been attracted to?
Hey DC, any chance for a response?
Avoiding Jude??? I don’t think so!
Jude is describing the characters of the false teachers in this letter, and he uses three events to explain himself as to why Christians need to contend for the faith.
1. The unbelief of Israel.
2. The rebellion of the Angels
3. The immorality of Sodom and Gormarrah.
Jud 1:5 I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once knew this, how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not.
Jud 1:6 And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.
Jud 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
The issue of the Angels starts and finishes with verse 6.
We now at verse 7 and there is another characteristic being revealed by Jude.
And the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example…suffering the vengeance of fire.
The cities round about are Admah and Zeboim…the in like manner refers to them and not angels. Furthermore the text says “fornication” how can you commit fornication with a woman you are married to.
The issue in verse 6 has nothing to do with the issues in verse 7.
You want this to be Angels? Well you need to do some explaining because the whole text is dealing with MAN and how God judges MAN for what MAN has done.
Verse 3 this is a key scripture…my spirit will not always strive with man.
Verse 5 God saw the wickedness of MAN.
Verse 6 God was sorry he made MAN.
Verse 7 God said he will destroy MAN
If you want find demonic activity here in this text I can’t find it.
Lev 10:8 And the LORD spake unto Aaron, saying,
Lev 10:9 Do not drink wine nor strong drink, thou, nor thy sons with thee, when ye go into the tabernacle of the congregation, lest ye die: it shall be a statute for ever throughout your generations:
Lev 10:10 And that ye may put difference between holy and unholy, and between unclean and clean;
Lev 10:11 And that ye may teach the children of Israel all the statutes which the LORD hath spoken unto them by the hand of Moses.
This plainly obvious that Moses is talking about lifestyle of a person that will serve at the altar.
2Co 6:14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?
2Co 6:15 And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?
2Co 6:16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
2Co 6:17 Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,
2Co 6:18 And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.
Paul talking to the church at Corinth that there lifestyle as Christians was important.
There has always been a call from God to his people not to run with the unrighteous of this world.
Faiz said : “Satan was not classed as a “son of God”, but the angels were.”
I think this is a classic example of Faiz’s fuzzy logic.
As I understand the sons of God in Genesis 6 are those who have kept themselves free from corruption.
Eventually they mixed with those who were corrupt and intermarried with them.
That is what the text is saying in my view:
“That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
v 3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.
The spirit of God was striving to preserve the community of the sons of God who walked obediently in the midst of a world that was becoming more and more corrupt.
Jesus said plainly that angels have no sexual urge:
29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. 30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.
You don’t really have a belief about the bible and Christianity and so you try to make points not understanding the text you are coming against you use people’s opinions and sometimes those opinions are not correct.
If you were so secure in what you believe you wouldnt be spending your time trying prove s religion wrong.
You said the following…
Jesus says the devil was a liar from the beginning, why are you trying to play down what he is. He is the deceiver and destroyer of mankind…attorney?? I don’t think so.
Erasmus, what you said makes no sense and ironically exposes your own “fuzzy” logic. Your presuppositions are the problem.
Why did the author of Genesis have referred to the “daughters of men” if he understood the “sons of God” to simply be those who “kept themselves free from corruption”? Here is what your KJV Bible (I know you place a lot of confidence in that translation):
” And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,
2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
3 And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.
4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.”
If the “sons of God” were just human beings, then why did the author keep referring to their lust for the “daughters of men”? Who else would they have been attracted to?
Your appeal to Matthew 22 is misplaced because it refers to heaven, not earth:
“Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. 30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.”
Thus, we can see your “fuzzy” logic in action. Your entire post is a non-sequitur.
Would and does God call demons his sons?
I’m not sure what the problem is about that hadith according to christians .
Yes, many scholars of Islam don’t say it’s figurative rather it’s literal’ but what is the problem ?
Christian believe that their “Almighty god” literally drinks, eats, and farts, then they make this big noise about that hadith?!
I literally can’t get their problem and complain about that Hadith.
Anyone heard of this guy? Pretty shocking.
Full of error and misinformation?? I don’t agree with everything in the video but in one part a guy mentions about stoning for adultery…where does the Koran state stoning for adultery or fornication?
it is not in the Quran
I have read the following.
Stoning for adultery…not in the Koran but…
Volume 9, Book 83, Number 37:
Narrated Abu Qilaba:
I said, “By Allah, Allah’s Apostle never killed anyone except in one of the following three situations: (1) A person who killed somebody unjustly, was killed (in Qisas,) (2) a married person who committed illegal sexual intercourse and (3) a man who fought against Allah and His Apostle and deserted Islam and became an apostate.”
Ibn Ishaq (970) –
“The adulterer must be stoned.” These words were a part of Muhammad’s farewell address to his people on the occasion of his final pilgrimage to Mecca.
Islamic Law –
“The stone shall not be so big so as to kill the person by one or two strikes, neither shall it be
On what scriptural basis was Prophet Muhammad ordering people to stoned when it was not in the text of Koran?
The difference I think is Jesus was living in the physical realm, while Satan on the other hand is living in the spiritual realm.
It’s not even a part of Gods word and I will say that a lot of things that Muslims believe is not in the Koran.
Muhammad is a prophet of God. His teaching is also source of legislation along with the Qur’an. Both together make up the shariah.
This is another topic by itself! it’s called ( the unseen world).
As muslims, we believe in creations of God called ( Jinn).
They are like us in term of that they have to obey God and his messengers to enter paradise otherwise they will be punished in the hell. There’s no problem at all about that hadith to be taken literally for that is the unseen world.
Who invented that? The Matrix is Hollywood! What proof do you have that they are like us?
Form an Islamic perspective, the evidence is Quran and Sunnah.
So no muslims have anything to say about the fact that Muslim religious practice is not found taught in the quran, and that you follow the works of men who lived hundreds of years after mohammed died?
It seems christians have no clue about hadith science, which is restricted to the nation of islam.
This science is something we proud of. Christians keep saying that hadiths are very late. But that is becuase of their ignornce in hadith scenice. Hadiths which were written in the the 2nd & the 3rd century had been circulated from the the 1st century. They were written with ( Isnad) i.e the men who transmitted these hadiths !
For example, the men between imam Malik , who wrote Mutta’, and the the companion of the prophet were just (one man) in some hadiths.
The period between Imam Malik and the prophet ( pbuh) was just 2 men, one of whom is the companion of the prophet.
Bukhari, in his some Hadiths , the period between him and the prophet ( pbuh) was just 3 men, one of whom is the companion of the prophet ( pbuh) .
Morover, we know those men , where they lived, died, and their status.
FYI, the last one among the companion of the prophet died in 102 H whose name ABU ALTUFAIL AMER IBN WATHELAH.
Christians , you are not even close to the minimum standard that we have reagrding the ( the transmission criteria)
To make it clear. Let’s suppose that we live in the 2nd century( the same period that gospel of john was written at), and we try to collect the sayings of Jesus. For a particular saying of jesus, if we know all the men who transmitted that saying of jesus except one man whom we know his name , yet we don’t know who he is ( his status) . We would have considered that saying as ( WEAK) not authentic. So imagine what we would do for all your books which you have no idea who wrote them? You have no idea about , thier names, their status ( i.e liars or not) , and whether they met the apostles of jesus or not. Since back then , christians have not had objective criteria why the church decided to canonize these books, and Remember, all what have been said is just in case if these books have been preserved as they were written in the first time which is not the case obviously .
full of error and misinformation
You are just picking and choosing to suit your presuppositions.
Paul’s definition of the sons of God shows that they can also be normal human beings:
Romans 8 v 14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. 15 For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father. 16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:
Romans 8 v 19 For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God. 20For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope, 21 Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.
“If the “sons of God” were just human beings, then why did the author keep referring to their lust for the “daughters of men”? Who else would they have been attracted to?”
The text brings out the contrast between the two groups of mankind on the earth. The community of righteous called the sons of God and the community of the rest of mankind represented by the phrase, daughters of men, not led by the Spirit of God.
The righteous community begins to marry indiscriminately with the non-righteous community and this accelerates the world in to further corruption.
The idea that angels change their nature when they cross some invisible border is absurd.
The nature of all things is immutable.
Erasmus, you are again inserting your own presuppositions into the text. What you need to understand is that the author of Genesis did not have the same theology as Paul. The books of the Bible were written by different people, who often times had different theological perspectives. Case in point: you believe that Satan caused Adam and Eve’s downfall (as do I), but when you read Genesis, there is no mention of Satan, only a talking serpent. Now, you may think that the serpent was actually Satan, but early Jews did not. We can see this in Josephus’ explanation of the fall. No where does he mention Satan in his summary of the fall.
Your statement that the idea of angels changing their nature is “absurd” is precisely the point. You find the idea embarrassing and absurd, but the fact is that early Jews and Christians did not. They didn’t have the luxury of your presuppositions. You are interpreting the Bible in light of your presuppositions. You find it embarrassing that angels could copulate with humans, so you want to change the meaning of Genesis 6.
Here is further proof that the “sons of God” were understood to be angels by the authors of the Tanakh. As another Christian source states:
““Sons of God” (angels) were present at the laying of the foundation of the earth:
To what were its foundations fastened? Or who laid its cornerstone, When the morning stars sang together, And all the sons of God shouted for joy? Job 38:6-7” (http://versebyversecommentary.com/jude/jude-6/).
Can you show me one verse in the Tanakh, outside of Genesis 6, where “sons of God” were anything other than angels? EVERY TIME the phrase “bene elohim” is used in the Tanakh, it refers to angels. Why would Genesis 6 be any different?
Ironically, notice that in Jude 7, after mentioning the angels, the author makes the following statement:
“Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.”
Also, just as the author of Jude mentioned the angels and Sodom and Gomorrha together, so did the author of 2 Peter! 2 Peter 2 states:
“For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;
5 And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly;
6 And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly;
7 And delivered just Lot, vexed with the filthy conversation of the wicked:”
Why do two NT authors mention the angels in the same context as Sodom and Gomorrha? Look at the text without your presuppositions.
You think you know it all to the point that you can now accuse people of not being able to prove their point.
I only need one right?
Hos 1:10 Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God.
Where in the previous scriptures do we read beings living a parallel reality to ours, as there there seems to be in the bible the understanding that we God, Angels and fallen angels along with the devil.
Where is did Muhammad get this understanding of such beings called Jinn? What scriptures speak of that.
“Jesus says the devil was a liar from the beginning, why are you trying to play down what he is. He is the deceiver and destroyer of mankind…attorney?? I don’t think so.”
See, you have the same problem as Erasmus. You guys think that the authors of the various books of the Bible had the same beliefs and theology! But the fact is that they didn’t!
Jesus (pbuh) did call Satan a liar, but that’s exactly the point! Some of the authors of the Tanakh clearly did not believe in the devil as you and I believe. They also did not believe in demons. Therefore, to compare their beliefs to later Christian beliefs is absurd. It’s like comparing apples and oranges.
Just as I asked Erasmus, I ask you as well. Can you find one verse in the Tanakh where “sons of God” were anything other than angels?
No it’s not added or has scribal changes so you shot yourself in the foot.
At least I have the humility to say I have no reputation or looking for one, I hope you are humble enough to say you are wrong.
And no me and Erasmus do not have the problem you do! Of course the theology is different it’s not the same God and Muhammad comes along and wants to be cut and pasted into the bible.
LOL, madman! Here is my reply to DefendChrist. Enjoy!
LOL DC! You appealed to Hosea 1:10 in response to my challenge but you just exposed your own ignorance and shabby research! I asked where in the Tanakh does it mention “sons of God”, which in the Hebrew is “bene ha-elohim”. You quoted Hosea 1:10 which states:
“Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God (bene el-hay)“.
And as a Christian source states:
“The term translated “the Sons of God” is, in the Hebrew, B’nai HaElohim, “Sons of Elohim,” which is a term consistently used in the Old Testament for angels,4 and it is never used of believers in the Old Testament” (http://www.khouse.org/articles/1997/110/).
Try again, DC! Where in the Tanakh is the phrase “bene ha-elohim” used in reference to human beings?
You know the answer. Just admit it. You don’t want your cheerleader madman celebrating prematurely again!! LOL!!
Here is some more proof for the sons of God being angels. In the other other thread, you appealed to the church fathers in a desperate attempt to legitimize the trinity idea. Well, let’s see what they said about Genesis 6, shall we? I have a feeling you will soon disown these very same church fathers!
St. Justin Martyr (c. 100 – 165): God, when He had made the whole world, and subjected things earthly to man, and arranged the heavenly elements for the increase of fruits and rotation of the seasons, and appointed this divine law – for these things also He evidently made for man – committed the care of men and of all things under heaven to angels whom He appointed over them. But the angels transgressed this appointment, and were captivated by love of women, and begat children who are those that are called demons; and besides, they afterwards subdued the human race to themselves, partly by magical writings, and partly by fears and punishments they occasioned, and partly by teaching them to offer sacrifices, and incense, and libations, of which things they stood in need after they enslaved by lustful passions; and among men they sowed murders, wars, adulteries, intemperate needs, and all wickedness. . . . (Second Apology, “How the Angels Transgressed,” #5)
Tatian the Assyrian (ca. 120 – 180 AD): “[God]… committed the care of men and of all things under heaven to angels whom He appointed over them. But the angels transgressed this appointment, and were captivated by the love of women, and begat children who are those who are called demons; and besides, they afterwards subdued the human race to themselves, partly by magical writings, and partly by fears and the punishments they occasioned, and partly by teaching them to offer sacrifices, and incense, and libations, of which things they stood in need after they were enslaved by lustful passions; and among men they sowed murders, wars, adulteries, intemperate deeds, and all wickedness.” [2nd Apology, #5].
St. Irenaeus of Lyons (d. 202): And for a very long while wickedness extended and spread, and reached and laid hold upon the whole race of mankind, until a very small seed of righteousness remained among them and illicit unions took place upon the earth, since angels were united with the daughters of the race of mankind; and they bore to them sons who for their exceeding greatness were called giants. And the angels brought as presents to their wives teachings of wickedness,1 in that they brought them the virtues of roots and herbs, dyeing in colors and cosmetics, the discovery of rare substances, love-potions, aversions, amours, concupiscence, constraints of love, spells of bewitchment, and all sorcery and idolatry hateful to God; by the entry of which things into the world evil extended and spread, while righteousness was diminished and enfeebled. [Proof of the Apostolic Preaching, #18].
Tertullian (ca. 160 – 225 AD): For they, withal, who instituted them are assigned, under condemnation, to the penalty of death, — those angels, to wit, who rushed from heaven on the daughters of men; so that this ignominy also attaches to woman…Was it that women, without material causes of splendour, and without ingenious contrivances of grace, could not please men, who, while still unadorned, and uncouth and — so to say — crude and rude, had moved (the mind of) angels? or was it that the lovers would appear sordid and — through gratuitous use — contumelious, if they had conferred no (compensating) gift on the women who had been enticed into connubial connection with them?… Women who possessed angels (as husbands) could desire nothing more; they had, forsooth, made a grand match! [On the Apparel of Women, Chapter 2, “The Origin of Female Ornamentation, Traced Back to the Angels who had Fallen”].
So, there you go. The church fathers, at least the “earlier” ones, believed that the “sons of God” were angels. Sorry to disappoint you, but your Bible says that angels copulated with human women. You may be embarrassed by it, but it doesn’t change anything.
“Ken Temple says: Wow; that was hilarious and really really embarrassing for Islam. (the Sheikh admitted the Hadith says these things and that if you don’t pray the dua and put your left forward into the toilet room, the Shaytan will play with your bowels.).”
Demons do eat and take the foods that are served as demonic offerings, however we in the physical world don’t see or realise that.
Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord’s table, and of the table of devils.
Praying for Allah’s protection before a place of potential diseases and defilement such as toilet is meant to teach us that we should be mindful of our heaths and environmental cleanness.
As comparison, in Judaism the orthodox Rabbis have to bring along a special handkerchief or a tissue paper to protect and avoid any possible defilement by the urine, blood of menses, feces, spitting, even carcasses. In Islam our protection is made easier with a praying.
It is important to note that causing the farting thru a usual digestive mechanism is just a natural healthy thing, being too far less dangerous than causing the deadly sickly foams out of the mouth due to a satanic epilepsy.
And they brought him unto him: and when he saw him, straightway the spirit tare him; and he fell on the ground, and wallowed foaming.
More lethal than farting, Satan causes diseases that related to the blood oozed of vagina and stroke.
11 And, behold, there was a woman which had a spirit of infirmity eighteen years, and was bowed together, and could in no wise lift up herself.16 And ought not this woman, being a daughter of Abraham, whom Satan hath bound, lo, these eighteen years, be loosed from this bond on the sabbath day?
And a woman having an issue of blood twelve years, which had spent all her living upon physicians, neither could be healed of any,
“Article says: the satan runs away passing wind (at horse-like speed) when he hears the adhaan.”
Satan who causes a deafness can’t stand hearing certain heavenly words.
33 And he took him aside from the multitude, and put his fingers into his ears, and he spit, and touched his tongue; And looking up to heaven, he sighed, and saith unto him, Ephphatha, that is, Be opened. 35 And straightway his ears were opened, and the string of his tongue was loosed, and he spake plain.
“Article says: As I understand the sons of God in Genesis 6 are those who have kept themselves free from corruption…The spirit of God was striving to preserve the community of the sons of God who walked obediently in the midst of a world that was becoming more and more corrupt. Jesus said plainly that angels have no sexual urge:”
Which angels? Only angels “of heavens” that have no sexual urge.
Before the time of his fall, Lucifer was once a sinless cherub (angel of Eden) whose armies are then the angels that choose to change their heavenly nature to be such a lowly earthy sexual demon. Hence, the earthy angels can mate women, animals, or each other
And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:
You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Google+ account. ( Log Out / Change )
Connecting to %s
Notify me of new comments via email.
Notify me of new posts via email.