Now again, let's review some very important issues about this kibosh of no pictures in Islam. Reminder:

               Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 4, Book 54, Num. 448:

               Narrated Abu Talha: I heard Allah's Apostle saying; "Angels (of Mercy)
               do not enter a house wherein there is a dog or a picture of a living creature
               (a human being or an animal)."


Since Islam forbids the pictures of both human beings and animals

1. What would you do if you were required to submit passport photos in applications for employment, school, etc??

2. What would you do where you're required to submit passport photos of yourself for visa and travelling passport applications?

3. How would the Islamic world have ever been able to cope in media advancements such as reporting news in newspapers, journals and magazines? (I'm sure Muhammad didn't foresee this at all!)

4. How would the media houses in the islamic world have handled TV programs? Would they have been showing trees and grasses and not even the faces of newscasters and VIPs interviewed on their media coverage? (again, Muhammad didn't think of this at all)

5. How would the Islamic world have been able to cope with advances made in visual technology - videos, cameras, etc?

6. What about combating crime - will policemen who use pictures in their investigative work be severely punished as well (especially when they uncover the hideous faces of terrorists on most-wanted lists)??


You see, this idea that Allah will punish who make pictures (Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 3, Book 34, Num. 428) is simply a waste of space, intellect, and one's future. There's no such thing as ending up in hell for having, making, or posting your pictures on MySpace, Flickr, etc.

YOU WON'T BE PUNISHED IN HELL BY NOBODY FOR HAVING PICTURES _{(as long as you don't worship them)} - OR EVEN VIEWING THEM!! _{(as long as they're not porn!)}

Free yourselves from the personal fear of one man who didn't like pictures: you won't go to hell for having pictures!! If them ask you who deliver you from this misplaced fear, tell them say na me send you!!

fadal:

there's no prblem taking pictures in islam,i don't know what u talking about i got a hole bunch of my family pictures and they never hated i don't know what's u talking about.

Really? then why did you all start frothing in the mouth when cartoons of mohammed were made? At least you at liberty to make potraits of Jesus and come and start your hypocritical "wondering" on Nairaland, i wonder what would have happened had we done the same for Mohammed.

mukina2:

i sometimes wonder too.

i remember asking my pals one time and one of them told me .they got an image of Jesus's face when they used a cloth to wipe his face

O la la! You are no where to be found when Islam's deciet is being exposed but as soon as it has to do with a potrait of Jesus, there you are also pretending to "wonder too".

@davidylan

because's not cool we don't know how he looks like,when you draw something with your hand and started to take that drawing as a your prophet face's not cool amin that sum juju stuff.

fadal:

@davidylan

because's not cool we don't know how he looks like,when you draw something with your hand and started to take that drawing as a your prophet face's not cool amin that sum juju stuff.

and you think its cool to come here posting fake pictures and asking ridiculous questions about our God? Is it because christians turn the other cheek while islamic barbarians bring out their knives, shouting allahu akbar?

@macalur
dont say what u dont know
u bettere keep ur not critisize . yes u r entitled to ur own opinion but then u should think of what u r saying bro. if u dont believe in jesus, then dont dare critisize him.

jo-z:

@macalur
don't say what u don't know
u bettere keep your not critisize . yes you're entitled to your own opinion but then u should think of what you're saying bro. if u don't believe in jesus, then don't dare critisize him.

So if I believe in Jesus, I should go on with my criticism?

Its just embarrasing to see replies that start off with "white people, "


Okay, we have established that Muslims And Chrsistians do NOT hate pictures! nice.

We have also established that NONE of us has seen either the Prophet Mohammed or Jesus Christ! nice.

I am also guessing here, but no matter what we decide as to the phsyical appearance, dress code, hair style, jewellery, boxer shorts, pants, or even shoes, it WILL not and SHOULD not affect our conclusions on both faiths?!

so, apart from clogging up the web, this "discussion" has no objective end, and will NEVER be a unification tool.

but please feel free to go right ahead with this discussion. when you have analysed and dissected the face and shape of both figures, please let me know what waist size JC was as I am sure he was 33" (get it! LOL)

thesilent1:

Its just embarrasing to see replies that start off with "white people, "

Okay, we have established that Muslims And Chrsistians do NOT hate pictures! nice.

so, apart from clogging up the web, this "discussion" has no objective end, and will NEVER be a unification tool.

but please feel free to go right ahead with this discussion. when you have analysed and dissected the face and shape of both figures, please let me know what waist size JC was as I am sure he was 33" (get it! LOL)

@thesilent1,

You're beginning to add some silly notes of your own in the discussion, not to mention your caricature of the "waist size" and reducing Him to an abbrevation.

Even if the thread was started with no rational objectives, at least it helped to dislodge the unfounded notion that possessing or making pictures of ANY human being or animals in Islam merits the severest punishment in hell. It is not just a matter of who or what Jesus or Muhammad looked like. Rather, it is now a matter of the picture of ANY person at all!

The idea of 'picture-takes-you-to-hell' was merely one man's unfounded fear; and people should simply set themselves free from that man's personal dread.

And about that so-called "unification tool", did you for one moment imagine that Islam was designed to seek unification in any way? How many throats have been slit to pursue that purpose?

Now as to the descriptions of the physical traits of the 'Jesus' spoken of in Islam, why are Muslims here pretending that they have no idea whatsoever about the fact that it was Muhammad who projected the image of a 'white/red' Jesus? See the following hadiths:

Of Moses, Jesus and Muhammad --


Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah's Apostle said, "On the night of my Ascension to Heaven,
I saw (the prophet) Moses who was a thin person with lank hair, looking like one
of the men of the tribe of Shanua; and I saw Jesus who was of average height with
red face as if he had just come out of a bathroom. And I resemble prophet Abraham
more than any of his offspring does. . . //
>>>Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 4, Bk 55, Num. 607.


Narrated Ibn Abbas: The Prophet said, "On the night of my Ascent to the Heaven,
I saw Moses who was a tall brown curly-haired man as if he was one of the men of
Shan'awa tribe, and I saw Jesus, a man of medium height and moderate complexion
inclined to the red and white colors and of lank hair. . .//
>>>Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 4, Bk 54, Num. 462.


Narrated Ibn 'Abbas: The Prophet said, "One should not say that I am better than Jonah
(i.e. Yunus) bin Matta." So, he mentioned his father Matta. The Prophet mentioned the
night of his Ascension and said, "The prophet Moses was brown, a tall person as if from
the people of the tribe of Shanu'a. Jesus was a curly-haired man of moderate height."
He also mentioned Malik, the gate-keeper of the (Hell) Fire, and Ad-Dajjal.
>>>Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 4, Bk 55, Num. 608.


Muhammad was a white man, no?

Narrated Anas bin Malik: While we were sitting with the Prophet in the mosque,
a man came riding on a camel. He made his camel kneel down in the mosque,
tied its foreleg and then said: "Who amongst you is Muhammad?"
At that time the Prophet was sitting amongst us (his companions) leaning on his arm.
We replied, "This white man reclining on his arm."
The an then addressed him, "O Son of 'Abdul Muttalib."
>>>Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 1, Bk 3, Num. 63.


I wonder why you guys will continue to pretend about issues that have straight answers. So, there you have it. It was Muhammad who described Jesus as a man with a complexion of white and red colours (whatever that means) - and today, Muslims shrug their shoulders in pretence that no descriptions exists about Him in their own books. The joke that they now turn round to "ask" - One Question For All Christians! This joke is a wonder on its own!

fadal:

^{because's not cool we don't know how he looks like,when you draw something with your hand and started to take that drawing as a your prophet face's not cool} amin that sum juju stuff.

Lol, abeg no make me laff!!

What's the "juju stuff" about taking pictures?? The point has been made that as long as you don't worship such pictures, there's no hell to be dreaded just because Muhammad said so. It is only "juju" to over-react for a cartoon; whereas the 'Muslim love for Jesus' has been standing limp in the face of cartoons about Him.

Man, just free yourself from such unfounded dread. There are many things Muhammad SAW and heard that he didn't like - they were his personal dread. People's personal phobias do not have to be your own!!

Take pictures, keep them, share them, preserve your cherished moments and make them evergreen memories - and your progeny will bless you long after your time!! Na me Gwaine send you!    _{imagine your cousins or grandchildren having no clue what you look like - in the 21st century!}

Enjoy! 

David
so what if i wonder too

how do you guys know the face of someone you have never seen beats me

why not tell me . how you guys know it was him

no disrespect i just want to know

mukina2:

no disrespect i just want to know

I'll be honest with you - I really don't know!

Do I want to know?? Oh, you bet! At least, this much we know - there'll be no faceless person on Judgement day!

The question is not about whether Jesus or Muhammad looked precisely like anybody. he himself said in Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 4, Bk 55, Num. 607 that he resembled Abraham more than any person! Now you tell me - how were his companions supposed to know what Abraham looked like??

The core issue here is not about portraying Jesus or Muhammad in artistic expressions. Go read the Hadiths and you'll see for yourself that the concern expressed there was one related to the fear of being severely punished in HELL just because somebody makes or have pictures!

So, with that king of mentality, what hope does a professional photographer have in reading such hadiths that qualify him for hell? he should just throw away his professional career, not so?? Not to even mention that most Muslims (perhaps including you) have actually contravened those commands and posed for photo-shots!!

The Islamic injucntion is not as narrow as most moderate Muslims today are trying so hard to present before us. In its broad context, it involves the making or possession of ANY type of pictures - whether they're of human beings or animals!! Nobody said the pictures should be worshipped; but to enforce a ban on ALL pictures within the Islamic context is what is in question here.

Gwaine:

I'll be honest with you - I really don't know!

Do I want to know?? Oh, you bet! At least, this much we know - there'll be no faceless person on Judgement day!

The question is not about whether Jesus or Muhammad looked precisely like anybody. he himself said in Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 4, Bk 55, Num. 607 that he resembled Abraham more than any person! Now you tell me - how were his companions supposed to know what Abraham looked like??

The core issue here is not about portraying Jesus or Muhammad in artistic expressions. Go read the Hadiths and you'll see for yourself that the concern expressed there was one related to the fear of being severely punished in HELL just because somebody makes or have pictures!

So, with that king of mentality, what hope does a professional photographer have in reading such hadiths that qualify him for hell? he should just throw away his professional career, not so??  Not to even mention that most Muslims (perhaps including you) have actually contravened those commands and posed for photo-shots!!

The Islamic injucntion is not as narrow as most moderate Muslims today are trying so hard to present before us. In its broad context, it involves the making or possession of ANY type of pictures - whether they're of human beings or animals!! Nobody said the pictures should be worshipped; but to enforce a ban on ALL pictures within the Islamic context is what is in question here.

but you didnt answer my question

Don't just glance over or read it in a hurry. I actually answered your question:

Gwaine:

I'll be honest with you - I really don't know!

. . . and then I offered the rest as substance to my response.

I don't see how you answered my question, though:

Gwaine:

he himself said in Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 4, Bk 55, Num. 607 that he resembled Abraham more than any person! Now you tell me - how were his companions supposed to know what Abraham looked like??

Want to give it a try? 

Gwaine:

Now as to the descriptions of the physical traits of the 'Jesus' spoken of in Islam, why are Muslims here pretending that they have no idea whatsoever about the fact that it was Muhammad who projected the image of a 'white/red' Jesus? See the following hadiths:

Of Moses, Jesus and Muhammad --

Muhammad was a white man, no?

Narrated Anas bin Malik: While we were sitting with the Prophet in the mosque,
a man came riding on a camel. He made his camel kneel down in the mosque,
tied its foreleg and then said: "Who amongst you is Muhammad?"
At that time the Prophet was sitting amongst us (his companions) leaning on his arm.
We replied, "This white man reclining on his arm."
The an then addressed him, "O Son of 'Abdul Muttalib."
>>>Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 1, Bk 3, Num. 63.


I wonder why you guys will continue to pretend about issues that have straight answers. So, there you have it. It was Muhammad who described Jesus as a man with a complexion of white and red colours (whatever that means) - and today, Muslims shrug their shoulders in pretence that no descriptions exists about Him in their own books. The joke that they now turn round to "ask" - One Question For All Christians! This joke is a wonder on its own!

I thought that MO was an Arab, how come he is white?

Secondly, maybe he had a picture of Moses which he showed to his companions, otherwise his description made no sense there.

fine if you really dont know .why then are pictures of Him all voer and  even you beleive that those pictures are of him?


in reference to ur question.

He (Muhammam SAW) was refering  to his apostles  , he was explaining to them, they have never seen Abraham . In the same hadith he described Jesus and Moses .He didnt expect them to know what Abraham looked like. he was just explaining about his night Journey to heaven

mukina2:

^{fine if you really don't know .why then are pictures of Him all voer and even you beleive that those pictures are of him?}

Awww, mukina2. I don't remember anywhere in my lines where I suggested that even I believed that those pictures are of Him (Jesus). The closest thing to my references to those pictures is that there's nothing wrong in having artistic impressions about Him - and in the same vein, that should go for Muhammad as well.

The gist of my argument is that the fear of being severely punished for making or possessing pictures in Islam is quite unfounded - and I don't see what any Muslim has to fear for taking, having or sharing pictures.

Just to make this point clearer - it's most likely you haven't seen or met face to face people like George Bush (incumbent President of the United States); or Kofi Anan; or many a VIP. The only way you might have a vague idea what they look like is through pictures - whether images projected on TV, or printed in newsprints, etc. How are you supposed to know who is who if Islam places a ban on making pictures??

Again, i don't think anything is wrong with artistic impressions of who Jesus, Muhammad or any other prophet. As long as no one is calling for the worship of these pictures, then what is wrong with having them at all?

mukina2:

<sup>in reference to your question.

He (Muhammam SAW) was refering  to his apostles  , he was explaining to them, they have never seen Abraham . In the same hadith he described Jesus and Moses . He didnt expect them to know what Abraham looked like. he was just explaining about his night Journey to heaven</sup>

I have a small concern here. If Muhammad didn't expect his companions to know what Abraham looked like, why was he comparing himself to the patriarch? I really don't see how this could be circumvented with such explanations. He categorically described Moses, Jesus and a few others - and when someone begins to describe people to you, that person is painting an image in your mind.

If you debate that, then my question is this: what do you understand by Muhammad's description of Jesus as a man with "a moderate complexion inclined to the red and white colors and of lank hair" (Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 4, Bk 54, Num. 462)??

Is that not painting a picture in your mind already? If the injunction against making pictures at all should hold, then Muhammad should not have complained about the pictures which were coming back to his mind (Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 7, Book 72, Num. 842). As long as the mind acts like a canvass for projecting pictures of people, Muhammad should not have tried to describe any physical traits of ANYONE and then come back complaining about the pictures in his mind!

There's nothing wrong with having pictures - as long as we don't have them for worship purposes. To pronounce a total ban on ALL pictures simply misses the mark.

Gwaine:

Awww, mukina2. I don't remember anywhere in my lines where I suggested that even I believed that those pictures are of Him (Jesus).

i was addressing it to you .i didnt say you said so
you beleive in them  

The gist of my argument is that the fear of being severely punished for making or possessing pictures in Islam is quite unfounded - and I don't see what any Muslim has to fear for taking, having or sharing pictures.

Muslims do take and share pictures, but we do not have pictures showing the images of any  Prophets .even with Islamic Documentaries .you wont see a pic of any Prophet, even in the ones Assosciated with Jesus.

Just to make this point clearer - it's most likely you haven't seen or met face to face people like George Bush (incumbent President of the United States); or Kofi Anan; or many a VIP. The only way you might have a vague idea what they look like is through pictures - whether images projected on TV, or printed in newsprints, etc. How are you supposed to know who is who if Islam places a ban on making pictures??

the difference with the people you listed is that, they are alive and well known figures. known to this present Generation .No one has an idea of what our prophet looked like, so why must we be creating images sayin its him. Understood, he told his Apostles that he resembled Abraham, they didnt know  how Abraham looked  either so why must we be  passing images around.

Again, i don't think anything is wrong with artistic impressions of who Jesus, Muhammad or any other prophet. As long as no one is calling for the worship of these pictures, then what is wrong with having them at all?

for Islam it is very wrong infact it is Haram, we do not know how Our prophet looked like ,any image of any kind of him is just pure ridicle.

I have a small concern here. If Muhammad didn't expect his companions to know what Abraham looked like, why was he comparing himself to the patriarch?

Like  i said before , he was comapring himself to  Abraham because he wanted to give his apostles an idea of what he looks like. Spiritually , Pysically and Mentally.

If you debate that, then my question is this: what do you understand by Muhammad's description of Jesus as a man with "a moderate complexion inclined to the red and white colors and of lank hair" (Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 4, Bk 54, Num. 462)??   Is that not painting a picture in your mind already

Yes . i am painting an image of him in my mind.  note: that doesnt warrant that i will have a complete image of him , which i will  create and  give to people. No .Muhaamad(saw) saying that wants to give his apostles an idea of what  he (Jesus) looked like.

There's nothing wrong with having pictures - as long as we don't have them for worship purposes. To pronounce a total ban on ALL pictures simply misses the mark.

we can take pictures as long as it is not Depicting the image of the prophet or Any other Prophet.

@mukina 2,

i was addressing it to you .i didnt say you said so

you beleive in them

I appreciate your addressing them to me; but let's not get this mixed up - I never said anywhere that I believed those artistic representations were exactly what Jesus looked like.

Muslims do take and share pictures, but we do not have pictures showing the images of any Prophets .even with Islamic Documentaries .you wont see a pic of any Prophet, even in the ones Assosciated with Jesus.

First of all, for Muslims to "take" and "share" pictures, they must be directly contravening what the hadiths stipulate - which for me is a welcome development, because it is high time people stopped making other people's phobias their own.

Secondly, what is behind the idea that pictures are now allowed of other people in Islam but still forbidded of any prophet?

Thirdly, one must not miss the real issue here: it is not about the pictures or images of any prophets; but rather about the pictures of ANY human being or animals. To narrow it down to just about "prophets" is to circumvent the hadiths.

the difference with the people you listed is that, they are alive and well known figures. known to this present Generation .No one has an idea of what our prophet looked like, so why must we be creating images sayin its him. Understood, he told his Apostles that he resembled Abraham, they didnt know how Abraham looked either so why must we be passing images around.

Whether well-known figures are alive or dead is not the point. The hadiths quoting Muhammad are about any human being or animal - dead or alive. The point is clear that even when he was alive, he expressly forbade any one to make pictures of any human being - including himself. The excuse that it makes any difference between the "dead" and "living" is too weak a point to make here; unless you deliberately want us to cast the hadiths behind us.

for Islam it is very wrong infact it is Haram, we do not know how Our prophet looked like ,any image of any kind of him is just pure ridicle.

That's what Muslims have made out of the core concern of having pictures - ridicule. As far as I know, no hadith ever said that or gave the idea that pictures were forbidden because of "ridicule". Please correct me where I'm wrong - and then reference the partcular text otherwise.

The two straightforward reasons for forbidding pictures of ANY human being or animal were these:

#1. because it is assumed that angels do not enter houses having pictures in them

Narrated Abu Talha: I heard Allah's Apostle saying; "Angels (of Mercy) do not enter
a house wherein there is a dog or a picture of a living creature (a human being or an animal)."
-----------------------------------------------
(Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 4, Book 54, Num. 448).

Narrated Salim's father: Once Gabriel promised the Prophet (that he would visit him,
but Gabriel did not come) and later on he said, "We, angels, do not enter a house
which contains a picture or a dog."
-----------------------------------------------
(Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 4, Book 54, Num. 450).


#2. because it is assumed that picture makers will be asked to put life in them

Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar : Allah's Apostle said, "Those who make these pictures
will be punished on the Day of Resurrection, and it will be said to them. 'Make alive
what you have created.'"
-----------------------------------------------
(Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 7, Book 72, Num. 835).

Narrated Ibn 'Abbas: I heard Muhammad saying, "Whoever makes a picture in this
world will be asked to put life into it on the Day of Resurrection, but he will not be
able to do so."
-----------------------------------------------
(Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 7, Book 72, Num. 846).


As you can see, it has nothing to do with what most Muslims would have us believe - that it is a question of "ridicule". No it is not. Just because Muhammad had that phobia on his own should not mean that everyone else should translate that dread as their own. The fear of having pictures in Islam (far from the idea of a 'ridicule') is quite unfounded. At least, you as a Muslim have taken pictures and I'm certain that the question of "ridicule" never crossed your mind!

Here's precisely why most Muslims dread having, sharing, or making pictures - because of the fear of a severe punishment:

Narrated Muslim: We were with Masruq at the house of Yasar bin Numair. Masruq
saw pictures on his terrace and said, "I heard 'Abdullah saying that he heard the
Prophet saying, "The people who will receive the severest punishment from Allah will
be the picture makers.'"
-----------------------------------------------
(Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 7, Book 72, Num. 834).

This is totally unfounded, as up until now no Muslim has been able to offer a well-reasoned answer for this threat of a severe punishment for merely making pictures! It has nothing to do with the thousand-and-one excuses that are being offered today; and certainly nothing to do with the idea of a ridicule!

Even Muhammad himself uncovered a picture when it was shown him, and he did not express any phobia or fright from doing so:

Narrated 'Aisha: That the Prophet said to her, "You have been shown to me twice
in my dream. I saw you pictured on a piece of silk and some-one said (to me).
'This is your wife.'When I uncovered the picture, I saw that it was yours. I said,
'If this is from Allah, it will be done"
-----------------------------------------------
(Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 5, Book 58, Num. 235).

Can you please explain why Muhammad did not denounce whoever showed him Aisha's picture (which the same Muhammad "uncovered"?? Or why he did not threaten the person with the severest punishment for having shown him Aisha's picture?? What is wrong here in real life is wrong in one's dreams. If it is wrong to steal or commit adultery in real life, then dreaming about them doesn't make them any less a serious matter.

Like i said before , he was comapring himself to Abraham because he wanted to give his apostles an idea of what he looks like. Spiritually , Pysically and Mentally.

And as has been noted earlier, painting pictures in people's minds is a direct contradiction of Muhammad's complaints. Look again as the texts: Muhammad was clearly describing outward features and projecting images of Abraham into the minds of his listeners. There's no going round this issue, and another excuse won't cut it.

Yes . i am painting an image of him in my mind. note: that doesnt warrant that i will have a complete image of him , which i will create and give to people. No .Muhaamad(saw) saying that wants to give his apostles an idea of what he (Jesus) looked like.

So, what's the difference between painting a picture in your mind, then projecting that mental picture into someone else's mind? It is all a question of different media used; but the same thing in effect. You cannot even begin to dream up the notion of a partial image of Muhammad, so the idea of not having a complete image of him does not arise at all.

we can take pictures as long as it is not Depicting the image of the prophet or Any other Prophet.

Wrong. The hadiths expressly forbid Muslims to make ANY kind of pictures of both human beings or animals. To begin to make that claim as you have up there is a direct contravention of the injunctions in the hadiths!!

when you go in a church you gonna see the pastor having a picture of jesus and evrytime his praying his facing the picture,that's what you call whorshiping,is against the muslim religion you can't not get down on the grown for someone ecept Allah.

@fadal,

fadal:

when you go in a church you going to see the pastor having a picture of jesus and evrytime his praying his facing the picture,that's what you call whorshiping,is against the muslim religion you can't not get down on the grown for someone ecept Allah.

You're absolutely right. Worshipping those pictures and images are discountenanced as well in the Bible; and I've severally opined that one can take and share pictures - as long as one doesn't worship them.

In anycase, my little knowledge of this issue in Islam reminds me of the discontentment expressed in several islamic sources. I'll reference a few:

Narrated 'Aisha: Um Habiba and Um Salama mentioned about a church they had seen
in Ethiopia in which there were pictures. They told the Prophet about it, on which he said,
"If any religious man dies amongst those people they would build a place of worship at
his grave and make these pictures in it. They will be the worst creature in the sight of
Allah on the Day of Resurrection."
------------------------------------------------
Sahih Bukhari Vol. 1, Bk. 8, Num. 419

Now, the problem here is that Muhammad was only conjecturing and had no concrete basis for his ideas. In the first instances, I'd like you to carefully read the Bible and search out a text that says churches were built at the burying site of any saint for worship. Secondly, not every church or public place display pictures for worship purposes.

Biblically speaking, Christians do not worship any pictures at all. Those who do so may have their reasons; but it cannot be defended intelligently from the Bible. In just about the same way, there are so many issues that Muslims are involved in today that cannot be intelligently defended from the Qur'an; and taking the Hadith as the final authority for such practices makes one wonder if such Muslims are placing the Hadith above the Qur'an. Please reflect on this.

At the end of the day, we've all got to review this issue carefully on both sides. Especially the case of not having pictures based on the texts in the Hadiths, my submission is that the phobias there are quite unfounded.

Why are you folks wasting time with teenagers that can't even construct simple correct sentences?
They should first learn how to read and write
_{If that's possible in run down inner city schools}
that may benefit our country Naija in the long run

We are tired of illiterate presidents,a ghetto one will not be a worthy substitute!

i aint say nothing to you girl you gotta stop thinking like that,girl you better calm down cuz i will hate that azz in the middle of next-week.

you have just confirmed what I said earlier.
All good boys and girls in New York are currently at school at 1 oclock
Now we know the juvenile centers are lax on their internet policies.

am in school too,am just in my computer class,i aint in no street youngdice$'s in the street.

So this boys are still teenagers, who should be locked down in their books?

fadal:

am in school too,am just in my computer class,i aint in no street youngdice$'s in the street.

don't let him drag you down and out into the streets.
Stay in school and say no to drugs!
I'm sure mama would tell you the same.

@babyosisi

THANKS SISTER I SURE WILL,DICE$'S MY FIRST COUSIN I KNOW HIM MORE THEN HE KNOW HE'S SELF,DICE$ DON'T CARE ABOUT NOTHING ECEPT,MONEY,CARs,girls AND CLOTHES THATS ALL GOD SEND HIM ON EARTH FOR.

Amazing. . .

Was that Mukina2 crying hypocritically about "answering her question"? the same Mukina2 who has used EVERY trick in the book to dodge every question that has been asked of muslims?

Deciet indeed is the face of islam!

:-x :-x :-x

@macalurs
i can only tell u to watch ur tongue.

jo-z:

@macalurs
i can only tell u to watch your tongue.

Best thing you can serve such attention-seekers is simply ignore them and get on with the discussion. When they realize no one's paying them attention from their cheap popularity campaigns, they'll fizzle out of the Religion motherboard.