We do like to sing praises of allah, but we also like bringing people to the true path of Allah in our eyes. You obviously dont think this is true so fair enough, but since this is an islamic forum, and we want to spread the teachings of islam to others, and since these other sikh bros came onto this forum, they are bound to be given da'wah
So he just happened to go somewhere where he wasn't allowed, whilst looking and acting like the people who were allowed?
How was he not allowed if it's noted he was lying with his feet towards the Kabba!
Fact is the Kuran speaks of many messengers to have come before Mohammed and many more to come after. It's the Kuran that states this not me. If you don't believe what the Kuran says then you're not following Islam!
People can distort Sikhism anyway they feel, but it shall remain as pure as the day God started it via Guru Nanak Dev Ji!
If you do not give evidence for this claim, and provide it with verse numbers and the number of the Surah, then you are acting suspiciously. If you do provide a quote, along with a surah number and a verse number, and it's not in the translation of the Quran that is sitting on the desk in front of me, then you are either a liar or deluded enough not to check your facts. And about the last comment about not following Islam, congratulations! If you don't provide any proof, you are now in my hall of shame, for falsely accusing almost every Muslim of commiting kufr! And unlike yoke, who didn't know much about Islam, you will stay there a lot longer.
How was he not allowed if it's noted he was lying with his feet towards the Kabba!
Fact is the Kuran speaks of many messengers to have come before Mohammed and many more to come after. It's the Kuran that states this not me. If you don't believe what the Kuran says then you're not following Islam!
People can distort Sikhism anyway they feel, but it shall remain as pure as the day God started it via Guru Nanak Dev Ji!
Since Muhammad (pbuh) was infallible, he was allowed to have more than four wives, because he definitely wouldn't have abused them. The rest of us are not infallible prophets, so we are only allowed less than four wives as a compromise.
As for the prostitutes, Muhammad was helping them out, by taking them out of their horrible profession and putting them into a good, happy household, where they wouldn't need to sell themselves anymore.
And if you respect Muhammad (pbuh), then why are you acusing him of being a hypocrite? And the issue of how Guru Nanak got into Makkah still isn't solved. But, as I said before, we can solve it logically:
Problem: was Guru Nanak a true prophet?
Fact 1. Guru Nanak was not a Muslim, and never considered himself one.
Fact 2. Entry to Makkah has been illegal for Non-Muslims ever since Muhammad took the city.
Fact 3. Guru Nanak entered Makkah.
Because it was illegal for non-Muslims to get into Makkah, then Guru Nanak must have done something deciteful to enter.
Fact 4. Sikhs consider a true prophet to be sinless.
Fact 5. Decite is a sin in Sikhism.
Fact 6. Guru Nanak comitted decite when he entered Makkah.
from this we can conclude that Guru Nanak was not a true prophet, because he did something which is deciteful, and decite is a sin in Sikhism.
Just so all of you know, there is a difference between an insult and an argument. If I were to say 'Guru Nanak was a false prophet', that would be an insult. But if I were to say 'Guru Nanak was a false prophet because of such-and-such', that is not an insult, it's an argument. If I were to make something up completely, like the Christians do with the 'Allah-Moon God' thing, that would be an insult. But I am just using what I have learnt from you, which I assume is true, unless you are lying to me, which is not likely.
Pointing your feet towards the Kaaba can be considered disrespectful in some Middle-Eastern countries.
what I mean is, he got in without permission. If you got into somewhere without permission, knowing full well that you were breaking the rules, is that not dishonest?
If you do not give evidence for this claim, and provide it with verse numbers and the number of the Surah, then you are acting suspiciously. If you do provide a quote, along with a surah number and a verse number, and it's not in the translation of the Quran that is sitting on the desk in front of me, then you are either a liar or deluded enough not to check your facts. And about the last comment about not following Islam, congratulations! If you don't provide any proof, you are now in my hall of shame, for falsely accusing almost every Muslim of commiting kufr! And unlike yoke, who didn't know much about Islam, you will stay there a lot longer.
How am I distorting Sikhism? I'm only using the facts that you and other Sikh sources gave me. If my arguments are wrong, that's not my fault, and I am human and make mistakes. But I am not trying to lie or distort anything, as that is not the Islamic thing (or the right thing in any circumstance) to do.
How am I distorting Sikhism? I'm only using the facts that you and other Sikh sources gave me. If my arguments are wrong, that's not my fault, and I am human and make mistakes. But I am not trying to lie or distort anything, as that is not the Islamic thing (or the right thing in any circumstance) to do.
All these links you've provided are based on a muslims point of view. It means nothing
If secretly entering a place where you have no permission mean that you commit decite, and Guru Nanak entered a place where he had no permission to go, then he has commited decite. It's as logical as that, and you can only disprove it by proving that:
a) It's not deciteful to sneak into places where you have no permission to go;
or b) Guru Nanak didn't go to somewhere where he had no permission to go.