Thursday, 23 July 2015

Muslim Message to Tomi Lahren


Hi Tomi Lahren, I'm a Muslim. Please don't send America to bomb me. In fact, please don't send America to bomb anybody in Muslim countries because every time America does this, many babies, toddlers, teens, women (some whom are pregnant) and elderly people die. So please Tomi Lahren, please don't encourage the bombings of any more Muslims.

By the way Tomi, I don't live in a Muslim country, I am a British Muslim but every time the West bombs a Muslim country it makes it more difficult for me to live here in safety because it radicalises a bunch of Muslims to revenge attack Britain and that leads to the deaths of my fellow countrymen and women as in the 7/7 bombings (London).

Yeah Tomi Lahren, American and British state terrorism results in terrorism from terrorist groups in the Middle East.

So please Tomi Lahren, rise above right wing extremist talk and start thinking about peace. I would also like to invite Tomi Lahren to Islam (if she's not a Muslim already).

Barack Obama accused of terrorism by Noam Chomsky


Muslim Message to US Army Murderer - Jeremy Morlock
US Special Forces Kill Innocents - Blamed Taliban and Honour Killings (Jeremy Scahill)
 
Are Muslims ordered to kill people in the West? No. Imam Suhaib Webb.

Noam Chomsky on How to Stop Terrorism from ISIS etc.

Did Prophet Muhammad p Die in 666 CE? No. Dr Yasir Qadhi

Sharia Law against terrorism

Christians having dreams and converting to Islam

Learn about Islam

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk
 

Wednesday, 22 July 2015

Muslim Scholar on Recent Quranic Manuscript Carbon 14 Dating



The recent carbon dating of an ancient Quranic manuscript at the University of Birmingham has now added even more proof regarding the unparalleled degree of certainty with which the Quran has been preserved. These folios have been Carbon 14 dated to within the same time frame, or perhaps shortly after, our Prophet (salla Allahu alayhi wa sallam). In other words, if this parchment wasn't written for/by a Companion, then it was written by/for a student of one of the Companions.

In this image, prepared by Prof Godlas, you can see the original manuscript, written in the ancient Hijazi manuscript, and compare it with its modern, typed equivalent.

This collection, called the 'Mingana collection' (after the researcher Alphonse Mingana, d. 1937) was purchased by Mingana in either Iraq or Syria, almost a hundred years ago. Edward Cadbury, the founder of the famous chocolate company, sponsored Mingana's trips to the Middle East. His collection, which includes hundreds of manuscripts, is primarily housed at the University of Birmingham, in the UK.

 Many Muslims ask me, 'How come so many Islamic documents and manuscripts ended up in non-Muslim lands and libraries?' The response, in a nutshell is: colonialism, and the power of money. Some manuscripts were simply 'acquired'; but most were sold by private owners, or on the black market, to travelers from Europe who could pay what would have been considered astronomical prices for the time.

And frankly, that is a good thing. The Muslim world simply did not have (nor does it have!) the latest technology or the scientific means to take care of these manuscripts the way that the Western world is now doing. It is my belief that Divine Will is allowing these manuscripts to be preserved in the best manner possible, even if that is occurring at the hands of those who do not believe in them in the first place.

"Truly, we have sent down this Remembrance, and We shall, for sure, preserve it" [Quran]

[Photo and Arabic type up courtesy of Prof Alan Godlas]

Taken from Dr Yasir Qadhi's FB

Tuesday, 21 July 2015

Debate Review: "What Was The True Faith of Jesus' Disciples?" - Br. Ijaz Ahmad vs Rev. Steven Martins


I review a debate entitled "What Was The True Faith of Jesus' Disciples?"

The debaters

Br. Ijaz Ahmad of Calling Christians

Rev. Steven Martins of Nicene International Ministries Canada.

I did the bulk of the review a while ago but never managed to finish it in the detail I would have liked but never got back to it through procrastination and other priorities I've quickly tidied up what I had and rolled it out.
 
"None of the Apostles could have written or sanctioned these stories about themselves" - Ijaz Ahmad
 

Were the Gospel Accounts eye-witness reports

Steven Martins' approach was to draw upon the New Testament in his attempt to present what he believes the disciples believed. Steven believes the Gospels are the historical eye-witness records of  the disciples. This was rejected outright by Ijaz Ahmad who pointed out the 4 Gospels were not contemporary to Jesus p and nor are the writers of these Gospels known so how can somebody take these works as eye-witness accounts? None of the authors of the documents which make up the NT were eye-witnesses. Paul himself indicates this of himself (and his writings are the earliest written amongst the NT writings). On top of this the authors of the 4 Gospels are anonymous (these names Mark, Matthew, Luke and John were later given to the anonymous authors). So weighing up all these points it's sad to hear Steven insist these writings were eye-witness accounts. Perhaps this is what he was taught by his mentors and other Christian apologists but that does not make it true.

Also, just knowing these two basic facts would preclude one from claiming the authors were eye-witnesses - the Gospels are written by highly literate Greek speakers while the companions of Jesus were considered to be illiterate and Aramaic speakers (these people were lower class men). This suggestion they were unschooled is backed up by the writer of Acts as Ijaz cites:

When they saw the courage of Peter and John and realized that they were unschooled, ordinary men, they were astonished and they took note that these men had been with Jesus. [Acts 4:13]

This may seem odd to us folk living in the 21st Century but the vast majority of the ancient world did not know how to read and write.

Ijaz Ahmad offers an analysis that many may have never come across - the alleged chains of transmission of the Gospel accounts. 4 out of the 6 lead to what Trinitarians would call heretical beliefs and the other two are anonymous - further highlighting the range of differing beliefs amongst early Christians. Ijaz states these chains of transmission indicate Peter, Matthew and John rejected a belief in the death of Jesus (which as Ijaz says, it sounds like they had an Islamic belief!).
 
Do the Gospels contain myths and legends

Ijaz argues there are erroneous stories in the Gospels. One of Steven Martins' arguments against the claim the Gospels contains myth and legend is that there was not enough time between Jesus' life and the recording of the Gospels for myth and legend to enter. He then concludes the Gospels are historical based on this.
 
Has Steven considered William Lane Craig's unease at the biggest resurrection story in all of Christian literature - that of the resurrection of the many saints in Matthew. He finds it difficult to accept as a literal event, see here:
 
 
Now, if Steven Martins believes this story literally then why does nobody else mention it? A story of many dead people coming out of their graves, is that not something that would get people writing according to Steven? Or does he think this is a myth that was added to the account?

However, a point that it is not unrelated to Steven's theory, Ijaz Ahmad ran through early Christian history pointing out there were multiple competing Christian traditions which all differed from each other - there were even Gospels which differed from each other. So if at the time of Paul there were different Gospels (now lost) then how can Steven be so confident to believe there are no myths and legends in the four Gospels he has ended up with?

In addition the theology amongst various Christian groups in early Christianity was radically different to the Trinitarian theology the majority of modern-day Christians subscribe to.

There were Christian groups which believed in 2 gods, 12gods and 365 gods. Ijaz Ahmad mentions the Arian controversy as a case in point to demonstrate rival factions were competing with each other. This is a good example to highlight as Arianism is Non-Trinitarian and it drew upon the same scriptures as the Trinitarian faction/s as well as it being a good demonstration of how popularity and a sympathy with the ruling elite promoted one faction over another

Arianism taught that Jesus was created by God and was distinct from God. This belief had it's scriptural basis in John 14:28

These varying theologies within early Christianity should be something Steven should look into further.

Ijaz taught Paul did not mention or use the four Gospels which modern-day Christians use today so even Paul did not sanction these Gospels. Is it possible Paul was unaware of these Gospels? Not that Paul is a criterion of right and wrong but is it possible Paul would have considered some of the writings in the four Gospels spurious?

Another point mentioned, by Steven I think, Paul abolished circumcision. The question is, who gave him authority to do so?

These are further points for Steven to consider.


Object of worship?
 
Steven Martins claims throughout the Gospels Jesus is the object of worship - paradoxically he mentions this in the same breath as his mentioning of Satan tempting Jesus p. Think about it, he effectively claimed Jesus was God and Jesus was tempted by Satan. Playing games with the belief of the hypostatic union is not going to get the Bible believing Trinitarian away from this problem. Ijaz Ahmad refers to original language of the scripture to show Steven that the word he uses does not denote the type of worship God receives.
 
'Son of God' title
 
 
Steven emphasises the 'Son of God' attribution given to Jesus in one of the Gospel narratives after Jesus performed a miracle (walked on water) but this just simply meant somebody who was chosen by God - as taught by Prof. Bart Erhman.
 
The Gospel of John
 
Rather predictably, Martins in his attempt to prove Jesus was divine, leans heavily on the Gospel of John. Almost as though the Gospel of Mark (the earliest Gospel) does not exist!
 
The irony is, Steven Martins tells Ijaz Ahmad to give priority to the earlier sources (Gospels) when Ijaz brought up the church history. Sadly, many Christians don't do this with the Gospels and they lean disproportionately to the last Gospel - John's Gospel.
 
Another Christian apologetics argument presented is that some doubted in the story where Jesus is said to have been worshipped. Martins claims the story must be true because it mentions 'doubt'. I guess he's utilizing the idea of a criterion of embarrassment argument here.
 
Martins rattles off the 'he who has seen me has seen the Father' argument in his attempt to prove Jesus was divine. Similarly Martins uses the Gospel teaching of  Jesus pre-existing before his birth and the 'I am' statements.
 
Martins states Jesus was omnipotent and omniscient as well as being capable of forgiving sins in order to prove his Trinitarian case. Martins also claims Jesus was called by the name of God, 'my Lord my God'
 
Steven Martins would do well to look at where these things are written. Are they written in the Gospel of Mark, the earliest Gospel, or the latest one which is the most Christologically developed whose author is effectively described as a liar by Christian apologist Mike Licona (accused of changing stories to make theological points - thus he was forging stories to get his theology across).This anonymous author (later named John) is not the person Steven wants to be going to to get important aspects of theology or proof texts!
 
Peter
 
Gleeson Archer is cited by Martins to support the claim that the authorship of 2 Peter should not be corrected. Bart Ehrman teaches us that virtually all scholars (with the exception of conservative evangelicals) are unified that 2 Peter is not from Peter. The bombshell is that Prof.Ehrman does not believes 1 and 2 Peter are not written by Peter at all as hebelieves Peter was illiterate.
 
And would Ijaz's citation of Acts not support the view that disciples were illiterate?
 
When they saw the courage of Peter and John and realized that they were unschooled, ordinary men, they were astonished and they took note that these men had been with Jesus. [Acts 4:13]
Miracles
 
Martins acknowledges other Prophets performed miracles but he tries to draw a distinction between the miracles performed by Jesus and the other Prophets. Martins intimates, erroneously, that these were done by Jesus independently while the miracles of the other Prophets were done by the authority of God. Has Steven got any proof of this? Does he even have a quotation attributed to Jesus to this effect?
 
There is something in the Gospel of John that militates against Steven's claim:
 
but Jesus said to them, "I have shown you many good works from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?" [10:32]
 
Steven Martins starts talking about the Quran
 
I'm not sure why he did this but he just presented dated and already refuted Christian missionary material.
 
Martins mentions the Quran 10:94 and 5:47. Martins claims the Bible was already in existence at the time of the Quran revealed. Martins just presents the standard intellectually dishonest and shallow Christian apologist material on this.
 
Ijaz touches on this here:
 
Bassam Zawadi here:
 
I think Steven Martins also used one of these missionary arguments too:
 
Steven Martins and IjazAhmad on Paul of Tarsus
 
Ijaz Ahmad focuses on the historicity of multiple traditions within early Christianity which were competing against each other contemporaneously. To support this claim, Ijaz cites Paul twice
 
 
Galatians 1:6
I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel [ESV]
 
 
Romans 2:16
 on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus. [ESV]
 
 
Ijaz makes a point worthy of consideration, when Paul mentions 'gospel' he's not referencing the 4 we see in the New Testament as he wrote his letters prior to those 4. Ijaz supports this conclusion through the absence of references from those 4 Gospels within Paul's letters. So here, 'my gospel' is referring to 'my teachings of Christ'.
 
 
Steven Martins offers his argument for Paul being truthful, yet if Steven thinks about it, the throwing yourself into hardship from comfort argument can be used with much greater force to show Prophet Muhammad (p) was truthful. Think about it, just read his life  - the Prophet risked his life and was rejected by his tribe. The argument Steven presents is better suited for Prophet Muhammad (p). If Steven is consistent and objective he would accept Prophet Muhammad (p).
 
When Reverend Steven Martins wrongly claimed Paul's writing constituted 75% of the NT it suggested to me that Reverend Steven Martins WAS just eager to deliver a response to defend his already-held world view. Is Steven at home thinking about the points presented deeply and re-evaluating his beliefs, is he searching for the truth or is he simply searching for material to offer in defence of his already-held beliefs?
 
Ijaz argues Paul turned towards the Gentiles in his preaching because he was weak in his arguments and thus was rejected by the Jews, hence why he turned towards the Gentiles - whom Ijaz believes Paul considered to be an easier audience. Interestingly enough, the Gentiles came from pagan backgrounds where mythology was rampant, this fits in with why the stories about Jesus (p) would have presented him as a god-man, the pagans were accustomed to such stories.
 
This also ties in with the discussion Ijaz and Steven have on why Paul did not quote from the Gospels. The hardest hitting point as made by Ijaz: Paul was being rejected by the Jews yet he never quoted from the Gospels, why would he not quote something that he believes to be authority to people who were rejecting him?
 
 
Disingenuous claim by Christians about Bart Ehrman
 
I've heard this before from Christian apologists. Steven Martins makes the same appeal, claiming even Ehrman believed in the death of Jesus p. However, what Christian apologists always do, they never mention that Ehrman is not accepting miracles and thus is of course going to believe a man who was born over 2000 years ago has died. Thus Ehrman, as a historian, accepts the most popular early story about Jesus p and thus he believes he died. Christians really should stop making this point, it's not like Ehrman believes in the resurrection belief despite the story of the resurrection is in the same account as the death by crucifixion story.
 
 
Controlled or Uncontrolled Texts
 
Ijaz Ahmad offers a good rebuttal to the James White-style attempt in trying to take a positive out of the lack of a controlled text within early Christianity. The Quran, which was controlled in it's copying, was scribed in a more suitable environment for accuracy. Chunks were being added to the Gospels by dishonest scribes, so clearly the environment in which the scribes were operating in did not offer restrictions against such doctoring of texts.
 
If I recall correctly Steven mentioned Uthman. Many Christians are fed misinformation regarding Uthman's burning of manuscripts. Here's an expert to explain it:
 
A really bad argument by Steven pounced on by Ijaz
 
Martins appeals to the fact that Herod, Pontius Pilate, the pool of Siloam are mentioned in the Gospel accounts as being testimony to the historicity of the Gospels. This is an odd argument - it's absurdly odd.
 
To be honest, Steven opened himself up to ridicule when he continued with the argument that geographical locations being mentioned in the Gospels as being evidence for their authenticity. Ijaz hit back by pointing out that the same argument could be used on Harry Potter as it includes King's Cross station (London). What I'd like to know is, from where did Steven get this line of argumentation? Was it an argument from a Christian apologetics school which he accepted blindly?  And would Steven be consistent enough to now claim Islam is true because in Islamic sources real people and real places are mentioned?

 
 
The Christian tradition in 7th century Arabia
 
I feel it's misleading when Christian apologists bang on about how their canon was formed by this time and thus assume people in Arabia had the modern-day Bible in their possession in the 7th century as though they were Trinitarian Pauline Christians exactly as we find them in a Baptist church somewhere in Texas.
 
Christians really need to stop making this assumption and they need to stop basing arguments on this erroneous assumption that all Christians had the same books.
 
Ijaz Ahmad refutes the superficial (and intellectually dishonest) argument It's obvious this is not the case. Ijaz mentions Christians and Jews converting to Islam during the time of Prophet Muhammad. I would recommend Reverend Steven Martins looks into the story of Salmam Al Farsi, who converted to Christianity, before the coming of Prophet Muhammad, from a Zoroastrian tradition.
 
 
Salman Al-Farsi, the son of a Zoroastrian priest, met a Christian monk in Persia and converted to Christianity at the hands of the monk. Salman Al-Farsi ran away to Syria and joined the monk's Christian sect which was dying sect. Salman Al-Farsi learned, from his Christian sect, of a Prophet to come who was predicted by Jesus (p). He was told of three signs the Prophet would meet:
 
He shall appear in a land full of dates.
He will have a physical mark on his back.
This man will accept gifts but never accept charity.
 
From Syria, Salman Al-Farsi ended up in Yathrib after being enslaved. He wound up toiling away as a slave for decades. A time came when talk spread about Prophet Muhammad (p) emigrating to Medina. Salman Al-Farsi heard of this talk and came to Prophet Muhammad (p), he soon realised Prophet Muhammad (p) fulfilled all three signs and converted to Islam.
 
 
Salman's story indicated how few real Christians were left at the time of Prophet Muhammad (p).
 
Another story illustrating this was that of the Emperor Heraclius, who received a letter from Prophet Muhammad (p). In the account, Heraclius mentions that there are Scriptures in which a Prophet is predicted to come after Jesus (p) and that Prophet Muhammad (p) fits the description.
 
Both stories indicate that there were Scriptures that the majority of Christians at the time did not have access.
 
City of Village?
 
The difference between a village of a city - the village of Bethsaida. Ijaz Ahmad picks on the author of John for making an error of anachronism. Luke also calls it a city. Perhaps it was one of those loose Gospel scribes writing after it was changed to a city. Whatever the case may well be (the Gospel authors or the scribes), it's an interesting point raised by Ijaz Ahmad to possibly further impugn the reliability of those texts.
 
Ijaz accuses the author of John of an anachronistic error regarding the city of Bethsaida and Ijaz spends some time relaying discrepancies concerning the Gospel accounts. I think he could have offered more examples to the audience of discrepancies but perhaps he wanted to focus on stories involving companions of Jesus rather than the standard show of contradictions between the Gospels such as what Barth Ehrman presents here:
If clear evidence is shown of discrepancies and changes within the Gospels then the question the truth-seeker may ask is, how can these texts be trusted to think they weren't changed in other ways to the extent that the texts do not even represent the theology of Jesus?

 
Conclusion

 
What's established from the debate, the Trinitarian narrative is not sound. The Gospels are not reliable. There were competing Gospels and traditions. Basing one's beliefs entirely on the New Testament is effectively accepting conjecture.
 
Ijaz Ahmad
 
Clearly he, for such a young man, has a burgeoning apologetics CV. He and Zakir Hussain could well be the mainstay of Muslim debates with Christians for the next few decades.
 
It's also nice to hear an accent other than a North American or British accent.
 
I think Ijaz rushed his positive case for the disciples being Muslims. Ijaz shows links between Jewish Christianity and Islam. His focus was heavily leaning on refuting Reverend Steven Martins and the Trinitarian narrative - this he achieved easily in clearly demonstrating the Trinitarian narrative is not sound.
 
Another point I would pick on here, Ijaz went for the more complex points which for an audience tuned in to apologetics may well have been suitable but I'd imagine the majority of the live audience and those viewers of the recorded debate are not too familiar with the bread and butter points regarding Gospel contradictions and textual criticism.
 
 
Ijaz possesses faith shattering information for the Christian, it would be wise to always ensure the audience is invited to Islam at the end of the debate. Most apologists and debaters don't do this but surely we want them to come to the truth of Islam rather than not invite them to the truth after effectively destroying their faith.
 
 
Where does Ijaz go from here? Well, I'd imagine on his island the scope for engaging with seasoned apologists is quite limited so I'd personally like him to debate local pastors. People want to see apologists debate but let's see Muslims go to churches to dialogue with pastors (who have flocks of people following them). I would also hope the pastors aren't marred by some of the dishonest arguments Christian apologists are plagued with today so the discussion is easier - less rubbish to wade through before engaging the Christians productively.
 
Ijaz has charisma and seems like a nice guy too so these qualities could well endear him to Christians which can only be a good thing in witnessing the truth of Islamic monotheism to Christians


Steven Martins of Nicene International Ministries


For me, Steven was visibly struggling in this debate. This should be a sign to Steven that he's not on the right side of the fence.

I think he's a victim of bad information from those who has learned from. The person who gave him the argument he was making based on the mention of geographical locations should be banned from apologetics!


I really think Steven should not debate again. He's better off just remove himself from Christian apologetics and begin a search for the truth. Think about some of the questions raised. Think about why Jesus p never mentioned a man called Paul or 4 books that he wanted people to believe were 'Gospels'.

Research Islam with an open heart and mind.

From my experience with Christians, it appears many have been hooked by emotional preaching. It's not that they have been convinced intellectually to accept the idea of the Trinity or the god-man concept.

Monday, 20 July 2015

Hadith More Women in Hell Discussed by Dr Jonathon Brown


Dr Jonathon Brown mentions the opinion of Abu Huraira and the scholar Ibn Hajar. He stresses the importance of the wisdom of this Hadith and touches on views of the companions of the Prophet as well as the generations of scholars on this issue. He also warns against reading Ahadith from a hermeunitc of suspicion.




Narrated Ibn ‘Abbas: The Prophet said: “I was shown the Hell-fire and that the majority of its dwellers were women who were ungrateful.” It was asked, “Do they disbelieve in Allah?” (or are they ungrateful to Allah?) He replied, “They are ungrateful to their husbands and are ungrateful for the favors and the good (charitable deeds) done to them. If you have always been good (benevolent) to one of them and then she sees something in you (not of her liking), she will say, ‘I have never received any good from you.” (Sahih Bukhari, Hadith 28)

Waqar Akbar Cheema of the Islamic Center for Research and Academics has discussed the Hadith here:

Do women form majority in the hell?

Whether you are a Christian or Muslim, it's important to avail yourself of these points as superficial and intellectually dishonest Christian apologetics are being  circulated both offline and online.

Here are a few take-home points from Cheema's article:

Women don't go to Hell for simply being women.

In the Hadith mentioned by Christians, the Prophet stated only what he had seen during his Miraculous Journey which is not bound to remain the same for ever.

Other traditions plainly establish that in the Paradise women will be much larger in number compared to men

Rebuking Rev. Steven Martins of Evangelium & Apologia Ministries - 'Western Values'

Is the Gospel of John Reliable?

The Sicarii

More about the Paraclete

Prophecies of the Messiah - Reza Aslan

Christians having dreams and converting to Islam


Learn about Islam

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk
 

Women Crooked Rib Hadith Explained Dr Jonathan Brown


Don't allow ignorant and hateful people to mislead you into thinking this Hadith is a sexist (anti-woman) Hadith. Listen to Dr Jonathan AC Brown explain it and view the link below.



This video was also uploaded here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOMCqhb3xtM

Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) said: “And I command you to take care of the women in a good manner for they are created from a rib and the most crooked portion of the rib is its upper part; if you try to straighten it, you will break it, and if you leave it, it will remain crooked, so I command you to take care of the women in a good manner.”[1]

 Some scholars have said the hadith means Allah Almighty first created Adam and then created Eve from his rib.[2] However, other scholars have interpreted the Hadith differently (in a figurative sense)[3] stating that the example of a woman is like a rib which appears to be crooked/bent but the real beauty of it is in being crooked. If one tries to straighten it, it will break and then one will have to put it back together, it would not return to its original beautiful state.

Read more:
http://icraa.org/creation-from-a-crooked-rib-does-islam-look-down-upon-women/

Also see:
The Meaning Of The Hadeeth "Women Are Like A Crooked Rib - Amazing - Bilal Assad

Jonathan AC Brown on Honor Killings

Prurient Lie About Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt

Sahriah Courts: Age and Physical Maturity for Sex

Quran Only Movement is Not Intellectually Honest - Dr Jonathan AC Brown

Dr Jonathan Brown: The Hadith of the Sun Prostrating

What is Isnad in Hadith Studies
Sharia Law against terrorism

Christians having dreams and converting to Islam


Learn about Islam

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk

What is a Muhsin?


Muhsin: A good-doer who performs good deeds totally for Allah's sake only without any show-off or to gain praise or fame, and in accordance with the Sunnah of Allah's Messenger Muhammad p


[From the explanatory section in the Interpretation of the Meanings of the Noble Quran in the English Language]

Guidance is of two kinds

[QURAN MIRACLES] The Miracles of the Number 19 in Quran | Dr. Shabir Ally



More Poor Scholarship from Dr James White: More Women in Hell Hadith


Here we see Dr James White resorting to low-level internet arguments. The inconsistency is quite striking as highlighting in this video via clips of Prof. Bart Ehrman and Dr Shabir Ally who point to parts of the Bible which White, if consistent, would be sharing 'just for the ladies' in his church.

To this day, I'm yet to meet that consistent Christian apologist. To this day, I continue to campaign in order to educate lay Christians that their apologists present low-level internet arguments which betray their ignorance of the Islamic source material and traditional scholarship. Sadly, lay Christians have trust in their apologists. They trust folk such as Dr James White, thinking they know they are talking about. I've repeatedly demonstrated James White's arrogance, ignorance and bad scholarship. I hope this stimulates lay Christians to stop relying on their apologists and actually start researching and thinking for themselves.



If this video does not play, it can also be viewed here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdTzTjLK6EQ

Alpha and Omega apologist James White presenting more inconsistency and poor scholarship. Christians often use a Hadith to malign Islam that women are not given equal rights and are condemn to remain in the hell fire. While they mislead they try to make some issue out of the following Hadith. Do women form majority in the hell:
http://www.letmeturnthetables.com/2009/01/why-is-it-said-in-hadith-that-women.html


James White: Show Me Where Prophet Muhammad Said He was the Last Prophet p

Does James White Know Jesus was a Middle Easterner?

Muslim CORNERS James R. White - Does the HOLY SPIRIT speak on His OWN AUTHORITY? (The Comforter)

James White Believes Jesus Allowed 'Sex Slaves' (if consistent)

James R. White Proven Wrong by his Buddy Shamoun

James White Debate v 2 Hate Preachers?

A Muslim Bursts James White's Ego

Is the Bible FORGED? Dr. Bart Ehrman answers James White - MUST WATCH!!

Alpha and Omega Ministries Asked To Switch The Lamp On

An Oldie: Disagreement with Alpha and Omega Ministries' James White


British Muslims Protested to Defend Jesus p

Sharia Law against terrorism

Christians having dreams and converting to Islam


Learn about Islam

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk

Sunday, 19 July 2015

A Response to Adam Deen's 'Exodus to ISIS - a Tale of Two Dars'


Just a few points in response to Brother Adam Deen's latest blog in which he seems to be attempting to shoe-horn snippets of news into his theory of 'toxic theology' being the motor for ISIS terrorism as opposed to foreign policy.

Brother Adam writes:

The narrative went something like this: British Muslim men travel to Syria to join ISIS due to Western foreign policy – these angry and radicalized men felt a moral duty to help their Muslim counterparts in foreign lands.  Ironically, it’s the lack of British military intervention that has allowed Assad to remain in power.

Brother Adam is keen to state there has been no foreign intervention in Syria to make his point against foreign policy. However, he would well be advised that foreign policy is not the same as foreign intervention. You can have an unjust foreign policy impacting on a country without foreign intervention. Let's mention, Ron Paul who stated 'ISIS Is A Reflection Of A Deeply Flawed Foreign Policy" and let's recognise the proxy war that the US has engaged in within Syria as well as extending one's vision of ISIS as a whole - is Iraq not the place where ISIS spawned? And we all know about Iraq's history of being pulverised psychologically, economically and physically by Western powers, right?

Having said that, Brother Adam is mistaken - Syria has felt the force of foreign intervention. Drones.
David Axe reported that according to U.S. military officials, during the past year, drones have conducted nearly 900 airstrikes in Iraq and Syria [Source].

Brother Adam needs to have a rethink on this point.

The problem Brother Adam is encountering is his espousal of a simplistic (as well as erroneous) way at looking at things. Would Brother Adam really claim the ex-Baathists, who served under Saddam, recruited by Baghdadi all of a sudden decided to change theology? So the facts that they all were imprisoned by the US (and possibly tortured) and their desire for power have nothing to do with their motivations for joining ISIS?

Simplistic thinking is not going to get us anywhere.

An exodus, really?

The news of so called “Jihadi brides” and now entire families immigrating to the state of ISIS means that the grievance narrative doesn’t seem to cut it anymore. Organizations such as Cage and MPAC, among others, argue that we should look to foreign policy to make sense of such incidents. However, the mantra of ‘foreign policy’ has limited explanatory scope in providing a convincing explanation for this latest exodus.

Brother Adam picks on families relocating to ISIS controlled areas from the West and calls it an 'exodus'. However, how many families is Adam talking about here?  Three? It's not even more than a handful, right? How's that an exodus? It's not.

Brother Adam fails to see that the actions of these families offers no support for his theory of 'toxic theology' being behind motivations to join ISIS. Did Brother Adam call any of these sisters and ask them questions about theology? The truth is we don't know what they are about but I, having lived in Bradford, can tell you the majority are Barelvis and Deobandis - hardly groups that are pushing ideas to join ISIS.

In any case, we have a possible smoking gun as to why these families may have moved out there - it does not support Brother Adam but rather deflates his argument. Brother Adam puts a dent in his own argument by mentioning 'the brother of one of the mothers is said to be an ISIS fighter. This maybe where the indoctrination started'. Keith Vaz seems to agree with this theory of the brother 'radicalising' the sisters to the point they took their kids to this war zone “Plainly, by the NECTU [North East Counter Terrorism Unit] allowing this contact they have been complicit in the grooming and radicalising of the women.”

It's hardly something to hang an argument on against the very real narrative of foreign policy (amongst other factors such as those outlined by Brother Adam's wife) alienating and radicalising vulnerable Muslims who misguidedly come to the conclusion they don't have access to any other recourse other than joining ISIS.

Adam Deen's wife is at loggerheads with Adam's new found enthusiasm to push this narrative of 'toxic theology' being behind terrorism:

Adam Deen Blinded By Sectarian Motives on BBC Panorama?

I would really like to raise awareness to myopia which sweeps across Muslims in Britain. In never linking Western foreign policy to Muslim terrorists one is never going to end this cycle of violence that scholars are quick to highlight as the solution to the problem of terrorism. Not only this, but to point fingers at a particular interpretation of Islam which differs to your own really is a dangerous game of hypocrisy which could come back to bite you on the backside.

Here's a video highlighting Brother Adam and his Deen Institute, despite all his protestations and finger pointing at a sect other than his own, would also be considered as a subscriber to 'toxic theology' by the British establishment sooner or later.

Adam Deen is an Non Violent Extremist According to Some Government Officials



Why Do Sikhs Commit Terrorism, Douglas Murray?

Israelis Blame Muslims in Britain for Exposing Israel!
 
Growing Problem of Islamophobia in Britain

Muslim Complains About BBC The Big Questions - Nicky Campbell

About 20% of British Muslim Women Feel Unsafe in Britain

Bradford Man Fooled by ISIS (Terrorist Group)

Britain First's Jayda Fransen and Paul Golding Learn About Anti-Semitism and Christianity

British Muslims in Preston Helping to Save Lives

Sharia Law against terrorism

Christians having dreams and converting to Islam


Learn about Islam

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk
 

Is Salafism Behind ISIS Terrorism - DR YASIR QADHI


I've clipped this short clip of Dr Yasir Qadhi, a trained Islamic theologian, answering the question on whether Wahhabism is responsible for terrorism. Previously I showcased a clip of Chris Hedges answering this question to a similar tune but seen as Dr Yasir Qadhi specialises in theology it should be more than sufficient to make those motivated by sectarian reasons amongst us Muslims to be more balanced and academic...rather than ignorantly blaming Wahhabis for terrorism. Think deeper.

Dr Yasir Qadhi does not think ISIS is directly caused by Wahhabism.

Here are some take home points from Dr Yasir Qadhi on this:

Wahhabism is a strand of Sunni Islam. Wahhabism/Salafism is predominant in Saudi Arabia and Qatar - it's becoming more and more popular in Egypt too.

Groups such as Al Qaeda mainly owe their genesis to radical breakaway movements of the Muslim Brotherhood. The militantism and terrorism of ISIS does not come from Salafism/Wahhabism. Most Salafis are aplolitcal. As a comparison, Dr Yasir Qadhi tries to make easier for the Western audience to understand by saying they are somewhat similar to the Amish and the Orthodox Jews in their desire to live pure lives. They are an innocent and innocuous group within broader society - they just want to live their own lives.



If the video does not play please see:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94lbKhbId9A&feature=youtu.be


ISIS Refuted by Dr Abdul-Rahman Dimashqia

The Truth About ISIS - Dr Yasir Qadhi

Muslim Response to Yezidi (Yazidi) Girls Rape by ISIS Report

Muslim Imam on Beheading of Journalist, Steven Sotloff (Imam Suhaib Webb)

Muslim Scholar on ISIS and the Jordanian Pilot

Jizya and Reported ISIS Thugs Rape Assyrian Mother and Daughter

Dr Yasir Qadhi and Nouman Ali Khan on Charlie Hebdo Killings

Sh Haitham al Haddad exposes ISIS

Why isn't ISIS a Caliphate?

Russell Brand: Haters of Islam Encourage Muslims towards Extremism

Sharia Law against terrorism

[QURAN MIRACLES] The Miracles of the Number 19 in Quran | Dr. Shabir Ally

Christians having dreams and converting to Islam

Learn about Islam

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk

Christian Polemicist David Wood Attracted to Deception like a Fly is to Dung - Re Abdullah Al Andalusi and Taqiya


I feel sorry for Christians who empty their pockets of cash for David Wood of Acts 17 Apologetics. This man has been cashing in on hating Muslims and Islam for a few years now. You'd think he would have found proper employment by now and given up on the hate campaign.

What's he done now? Well he's only just posted Andrew Gilligan's article, which has been roundly denounced as misleading.

To see how deceptive Gilligan's article was see:

1. Chairman of Atheist Ireland, Michael Nugent, runs through Mr Gilligan's betrayal of journalistic integrity:http://www.michaelnugent.com/2015/07/14/gilligan-misrepresents-abdullah-al-andalusi/

2. Mr Andalusi himself offers a responses which sheds further light on Mr Gilligan's lack of journalistic scruples:
http://abdullahalandalusi.com/2015/07/12/a-response-to-andrew-gilligans-disingenuious-distortion-of-my-views/

Is it any wonder David Wood reposted it while banging on about something that he wrote five years ago (I did not bother wasting my time clicking and reading what he wrote five years ago - I kind of know Dave's modus operandi pretty well. Well enough to know the truth and accuracy are regular casualties at his hands)

Oh and David Wood also tries hard to prop up the old adage of  'you can't teach an old dog new tricks' as he appends a video at the end of the post about Taqiya. Erm, Dave's already been refuted and rebuked on his propaganda regarding the concept of Taqiya previously. That did not stop him from sounding like a stuck record and presenting the same misinformation to those who encounter his recent blog.

Seen as Deception Dave presents the same spiel on Taqiya, I was obliged to offer a similar rebuke to the previous one.

Christians, stop giving this man cash to pervert truth and blur the lines of accuracy.





Taqiyah: The Lie they made against Islam - Shadid Lewis:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/taqiyah-lie-they-made-against-islam.html

Article explaining what Taqiyyah is:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/know-truth-about-muslims-and-taqiyah.html

Nabeel Qureshi section

ABN, Sam Shamoun and David Wood Plus 'Stupid' Christians

Is David Wood of Answering Muslims the Most Ignorant Paid Islamophobe?

Sam Shamoun and David Wood Caught Using a Forgery

What Does Jesus is the Word of God Mean According to Muslims? Dr Shabir Ally

Response to Muhammad and the Death of Kinana ibn al-Rabi ABN

James White Exposes Dishonesty of AnsweringIslam and AnsweringMuslims

James White: Show Me Where Prophet Muhammad Said He was the Last Prophet p

James R. White Proven Wrong by his Buddy Shamoun

[QURAN MIRACLES] The Miracles of the Number 19 in Quran | Dr. Shabir Ally

 

 

Saturday, 18 July 2015

Why Muslims Should Complain About Andrew Gilligan


Muslims should scare journalists like the Jewish community do

I have sent a complaint off to the Telegraph about Andrew Gilligan's recent article. Other Muslims should do this too. Don't allow inertia to suppress your actions.

In a piece on the 18th of July, Andrew Gilligan labelled a Muslim activist with a history of condemning terrorism as ' one of Britain’s most notorious Islamic extremists'.

Of course it was all untrue and propped up by disingenuous quoting and an appeal to binary thinking such as appealing to Abdullah Al-Andalusi's description of ISIS as “no different to Western armies”. The fact that Al-Andalusi condemns both ISIS and Western armies is lost on Gilligan...it is possible to equate both ISIS and Western armies without siding with either. Gilligan is not stupid he knows all this, rather he banks on the stupidity of his readers and the inability of Muslims to organise and lobby like the Jewish community in the West.

I guarantee you, Andrew Gilligan would not have dared to present such a dishonest smear job on a Jewish activist. The opprobrium of the Jewish lobby would come down on him like a ton of bricks in next to no time.

So silent are we that the likes of Andrew Gilligan unfairly attack Muslims regularly, as Mehdi Hasan pointed out:

Gilligan is a journalist who makes lots of money from "outing" as many British Muslims as he can as "Islamists" or "extremists", often on deeply dubious grounds, and with the aid of selective quotation

What does that say about Muslims and what does it say about folk such as Gilligan who feels he can (without much in the way of impunity) smear Muslim activists?

Yep, people do think we are sitting ducks. The only reason why we are perceived this way is due to our unwillingness to put aside theological, personal and cultural differences in order to act as a block. I guarantee you the likes of Gilligan would think twice before smearing a Muslim if that was the case.

And don't fall into the trap of perceived insignificance, just because somebody is smearing Muslims on a national/international stage it does not mean your little Facebook page, blog, website or YouTube channel cannot make any difference. The internet is an equaliser. It may act as a fly in the face of the media monster and better still 100s of Muslims doing the same thing would certainly have a similar affect that the Jewish community have on the media - no journalist wants 100s of flies in his/her face.

The Telegraph's complaints page:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/topics/about-us/10831533/Editorial-complaints.html

Here's my complaint I sent to The Telegraph

Hi

I would like to express great concern at a clear breach of your paper's desire for accuracy and integrity.

Mr Andrew Gilligan in the piece has clearly been demonstrated to have embarked on disingenuous quote-mining. Quite how he labels Mr Abdullah Al Andalusi as 'one of Britain's most notorious Islamic extremists' when Mr Andalusi has consistently denounced terrorism is beyond me.
However, what may dismay you more than Mr Gilligan's sensationalist labeling without any supporting evidence is Mr Gilligan's disingenuous quoting. He somehow managed to misuse an anti-ISIS article by Mr Andalusi for the purposes of smearing Mr Andalusi as a supporter of ISIS!

Please do look into these two responses to Mr Gilligan's article to further your investigation.

1. Chairman of Atheist Ireland, Michael Nugent, runs through Mr Gilligan's betrayal of journalistic integrity:
http://www.michaelnugent.com/2015/07/14/gilligan-misrepresents-abdullah-al-andalusi/

2. Mr Andalusi himself offers a responses which sheds further light on Mr Gilligan's lack of journalistic scruples:
http://abdullahalandalusi.com/2015/07/12/a-response-to-andrew-gilligans-disingenuious-distortion-of-my-views/

I would urge you to fully investigate this as Mr Gilligan's article is misleading to say the least.

Another question does arise here, would Mr Gilligan have abandoned honesty in an attempt to smear a Jewish public speaker or is this simply Mr Gilligan feeling standards of consistency and honesty are not so important when attacking Muslim activists in this current climate of Islamophobia.

Kind regards
Yahya Snow

Muslim Complains About BBC The Big Questions - Nicky Campbell

Why Do Sikhs Commit Terrorism, Douglas Murray?
Did Muslims or Zionists Send Death Threats to Jenny Tonge?


Dr. Jonathan Brown's Response to - ISIS - Terrorism - Beheadings!

Noam Chomsky on Barack Obama's Most Extreme Terrorist Campaign in Modern History

Noam Chomsky on How to Stop Terrorism from ISIS etc.

BBC's Andrew Neil Disgusts British Muslims and All Others Who Value Good Journalism

Sharia Law against terrorism

Christians having dreams and converting to Islam


Learn about Islam

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk