A Response to Islamophobia: Why Did The Mufti of Jerusalem Support Hitler in World War 2? (A Response Concerning Haj Amin al-Husseini)

Bishop Friedrich Coch saluting Hitler in 1933

Anti-Muslim propaganda has no regard for humanity, context and truth. Of course it serves the interests of the Zionists, rogue Christian missionaries and the extreme far-right to portray Muslims as folk who are ready to butcher innocent Jews at the drop of a hat. This bout of anti-Muslim propaganda also distorts history and context with regards to Hajj Amin al-Hussaini (Mufti of Jerusalem).

The interesting thing here is, those very advocates of this propaganda against Muslims re the Mufti of Jerusalem's support of Hitler do not bat an eye-lid when it comes to Italy, the home of the Vatican (the centre of Catholic Christianity) nor do they bother to ponder upon Protestant Christian Germany which was the birthplace of Martin Luther (who initiated the Protestant Reformation). We could find a ton of Christians who sided with Nazi Germany at one point in time. Would it be fair to label these folk as Jew-hating racists? No.

Having said, the Islamophobes pluck out the example of the Mufti of Jerusalem without offering any context and even offering deception. Right wing propaganda is geared towards people who are bigoted in some capacity, poorly educated and/or those who have little inclination to research further - that's the right-wing in a nutshell.

Why did the Mufti of Jerusalem side with Hitler against Britain and the Allies?

The answer is partly in the question: 'Britain'. Britain had occupied the Arab territories (specifically Palestine) for decades at that time. There was a growing Zionist movement which was pushing for a Zionist stateas well as a growing Arab nationalist movement which championed a Palestinian state.

The Mufti, seeing that Britain (the country occupying his land) was at war with Germany, chose a side - he chose Germany. Think about it, this seemed to be an opportunity for him to free his people of British hegemony and realise the Arab Nationalist movement's goal of a Palestinian state. There was no anti-Jewish motivation.

In fact he even told local Jews that he had no enmity towards them:

 

A more rational explanation for the work  of this man was that he was an Arab National. Initially he was against the British occupation of Palestine, and fought against this occupation, leading to his subsequent arrest and exile. When the British gave amnesty to all exiled nationals, he returned and found that the Zionist movement was gaining momentum, and he fought against the movement to try to protect Palestine. There are records of him addressing the local Jews, who had resided there for centuries, telling them that he had no enmity towards them. The big issue hat he had was with the loss of Palestinian land in an unjust land-grab.

 

Sadly, the Islamophobes and those who have been duped by this Muslim Nazi SS Division propaganda are oblivious to the  facts and context concerning Haj Amin al-Husseini's support of Germany

 

The propaganda: ‘Muslims aided the Nazis in World War II against the Jewish people’

 

Have the Islamophobes been offering forgeries in their attempts to make more out of the Mufti of Jerusalem's support of Germany? Well, the following claim is not even backed up by the transcript records:

This is one of the most horrific accusations against the Muslims. This is based upon the allegations that the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem colluded with Hitler during the Second World War to exterminate Jews. There is also allegations that during post war trials against the Nazis, the Mufti ‘s name was mentioned in testimony alleging his support of the Nazis.

The aforementioned Pamela Gellar mentions in an article:

During the Nurmeberg Trials in July 1946, Eichmann’s assistant, Dieter Wisliczeny, testified that Mufti was a central figure in the planning of the genocide of the Jews

However, court transcripts of the Nurmeburg trials show no mention of the Mufti in Wilsliczeny’s testimony.

 

Hmm, no court transcripts. Interesting. Do Islamophobes even ask for evidence or do they just run with stuff that supports their agenda of hatred?

Muslims Saved Jews From Hitler - Some Information for the Islamophobes

It had been built by the French government to honour the Muslim forces that fought alongside the French in World War I. The history of the beautiful mosque does not stop there. During World War II, the imam of the mosque was well-known to have distributed falsified certificates to Jews to fool the Nazi forces into thinking that they were Muslims.

The Grand Mosque of Paris: A Dtory of How Muslims Rescued Jews During the the Holocaust by Karen Gray Ruelle and Deborah Durland Desaix. - According to this book, the Jews as well as downed Allied forces were sheltered in the mosque until they could escape safely.

For more examples of Muslims saving Jews during World War II, please see:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/2010/10/muslims-saved-jews-from-rape-and-death.html

Quotes in red from, Islam: Silencing the Critics, Zia Sheikh, 2nd Edition, 2012

Conclusion

Yes, the Mufti of Jerusalem did side with Hitler's Germany (just like millions of Christians in Italy and Germany) but the Mufti did not side with Hitler for reasons of anti-Semitism. He wanted freedom from British rule and a Palestinian state - this was his motivation in siding with Germany. He was even on record telling local Jews he had no enmity towards them - his enemy was Britain and Zionism (there are a number of Jews who oppose Zionism)

One wonders why the Islamophobes don't make mention of such. Intellectual dishonesty, deception, spin and distortion of facts are the hallmarks of Islamophobes who want folk to hate Muslims.

My message to the Islamophobes and those who in contact with their material is, think and research!

Jesus taught people to do the Will of God (according to Mark 3:35) in order to become his brothers, mothers or sisters. A Muslim means one who submits to the Will of God. Do you want to become a brother of Jesus? If yes, become a Muslim. Now is the time.

Learn about Islam:
http://www.whyislam.org/

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk

James White Refuted

One wonders what the average James White supporter really thinks when they see James in action. His material on Biblical additions is unconvincing to say the least. Here we see James White facing rebuke and refutation once again.

James White's Desperation and Poor Scholarship on the Compilation of the Quran

James White has a couple of problems, pride and ignorance (a lack of knowledge) when it comes to speaking about Islam - this precludes him from speaking on the subject in an authoritative and scholarly capacity.

In this video we see James bragging (he does a lot of that) about his 'scholarship' whilst presenting a complete fabrication about Ibn Masud being beaten up for not handing his mushaf over. He even fails to understand why Ibn Masud refused to hand over his mushaf despite it being explained to him as well as it being in the actual source material. Shoddy. Shamoun-esque!

What makes this video expose even more telling is that this man even claimed to be able to narrate ahadith like imams as well as having read more than most imams (oh let's not forget his claim to have 'translated' portions of the Quran). If you think that's just ridiculous and I'm making this up, here's the video:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/james-whites-pride-keeps-bound-to.html

OK, let's get on topic and view this video compilation highlighting James White's pride, ignorance and absolute inability/unwillingness to present the facts in an accurate fashion despite these facts staring him right in the face concerning Ibn Masud.

Correcting James White Again and Again

James White really needs to drop this charade. James is not the only victim of his pride, shoddy scholarship and ignorance. Do you know who else is a victim? Those who follow him - Christians.

This is one of the biggest problems that affects Christian apologetics today - the churning out of inaccurate information. You can bet someone somewhere just took James at face value and has presented these arguments elsewhere. Does James even care. Making a hoo-ha over Ergun Caner is one thing but this is something totally different - both of which further dents the credibility of Christian evangelists.

It's also quite telling that we see Christians going to such an extent of source-fudging just to attempt to make the Quran appear to be similar to the New Testament in reliability. It speaks volumes. Absolute volumes.

Related: Switch James White's Lamp on

Jesus taught people to do the Will of God (according to Mark 3:35) in order to become his brothers, mothers or sisters. A Muslim means one who submits to the Will of God. Do you want to become a brother of Jesus? If yes, become a Muslim. Now is the time.

Learn about Islam:
http://www.whyislam.org/

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk

Muslim Responds to Ron Atkinson and the Bomb Comment - Channel 5 Reprimands Ron Atkinson - Muslim Response: Invite Ron Atkinson to a Mosque

Ron Atkinson in Channel 5's Celebrity Big Brother has just made a 'joke'  which is all too common in the UK nowadays - 'jokes' linking Muslims with terrorism.

Ron Atkinson whilst speaking to a female contestant on the show who happened to be covering her head with a jumper (similar to the manner Muslim women cover their hair with a hijab) made a 'I hope you haven't got a bomb under there' type comment.

Now Ron Atkinson is in his 70s and did state he did not mean to offend anybody but Muslims are subjected to similar terrorist accusations as part of 'humour' in everyday life in the UK. I'm glad Channel 5 reprimanded Ron and did consider the comment to be unacceptable:

A spokeswoman for Big Brother said: “Ron made an unacceptable comment last night. He has received a formal warning.”

As a Muslim Brit I truly hope this incident will help the lay person in the UK to realise this type of comments is hurtful to Muslims and if left unchecked could escalate into something even more worrisome. There is already a strong right-wing backlash against Muslims so it's important for everybody to try and tackle the existing anti-Muslim feeling amongst some people in Britain.

After Ron Atkinson leaves the Celebrity Big Brother House, perhaps it would be wise for the Muslim community in the Midlands (where Ron lives) to invite Ron to a mosque and let him understand more about the beauty of Islam.

Christian Head Coverings:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/christian-head-coverings-stops-sexual.html

Jesus taught people to do the Will of God (according to Mark 3:35) in order to become his brothers, mothers or sisters. A Muslim means one who submits to the Will of God. Do you want to become a brother of Jesus? If yes, become a Muslim. Now is the time.

Learn about Islam:
http://www.thedeenshow.com

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk

Ask James White to say 'Hey Sam this internet apologetics thing is a disaster..'

It appears Sam's 'look at me approach' is not limited to spamming blog comment sections (like he does on here and on Paul Williams' blog). He even has people making silly debate challenge videos. I think he had someone make one directed at me a while back. Here is the latest one which Ijaz Ahmed of Calling Christians has responded to.

Notice the sheer lack of regard people on the debate circuit give Sam Shamoun. Really. His opponents seem to think he has a mental problem - Paul Williams has agreed to debate Shamoun with the proviso that Sam Shamoun gets a doctor's note certifying Sam is mentally stable for a debate. You'd think he would have got the message by now.

Sam Shamoun heaps ridicule on himself. Is there someone out there who loves Sam enough to actually tap him on the shoulder and say, "hey Sam this internet apologetics thing is detrimental to you reputation wise, mentally and financially; it's time to step aside and get a job"?

You'd think one of his fellow Christian apologists would think this guy is an apologetics disaster and attempt to get the guy out of the arena before he embarrasses them even more. Perhaps they have...

Ijaz Ahmed Response:

I’m officially responding on behalf of Sami Zataari. Here’s the alleged challenge:


Sam Shamoun should atleast have the testicular fortitude to issue challenges himself and not through 3rd parties who are largely unknown. I call upon Shamoun to show his counterparts some respect by being responsible enough to do his dirty work himself. If he believes that he can earn a debate from Islam’s two foremost debaters by disrespecting them, then surely he’s lost the plot. Sami’s conditions are hereby listed as follows:

• An official doctor’s note from a well qualified psychologist attesting to Sam’s mental stability.
• An apology to Muslims for his abusive, threatening and abhorrent behaviour.
• A sworn oath to not use abusive, threatening, insulting, mocking or R rated language on any platform (shared or otherwise).
• To illustrate Sam’s support of David Wood’s cross dressing video, by him wearing the same pink lingerie and posted to YouTube singing along to “Dude Looks Like a Lady” by Aerosmith, while dancing like Shakira in her video to, “Hips Don’t Lie“.

These conditions are non-negotiable
From: http://callingchristians.com/2013/08/22/response-challenge-to-sami-zaatari-and-bassam-zawadi-from-sam-shamoun/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Related:
Sam Shamoun, Answering-Islam's biggest ignoramus

The Sam Shamoun section:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/Sam%20Shamoun

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk

Sam Shamoun, the biggest ignoramus of Answering-Islam.org?

 

Confused and noisy

This Sam Shamoun fella just doesn't get it, does he? During the day people go to work, they study, they have meetings and do other productive stuff. Not Sam Shamoun. He spams my comment sections with hormone-fuelled nonsense. Could somebody take this guy to one side and have a word? Please.

I've just deleted a bunch of his comments. However, I had a look at one of the links he was championing. As per usual the man does not deign to argue against the pure monotheism of Islam - I reckon deep down he knows it's far superior than his trinity (I bet even he cannot picture Moses, Abraham (pbut) or any other prophet worshipping a trinity)

Another Answering-Islam.org argument backfires

Let's have a look at his argument. As is his wont, Shamoun writes a tome for no reason at all (does anybody really read his material in its entirety?). His basic point is that Islam forbade adultery and fornication yet allowed intimacy with the slave girls. He then uses this to insult the brother of Jesus (Prophet Muhammad, pbut).

Some cultural, Biblical and practical education for Sam Shamoun

Firstly (sexual) intimacy is allowed with concubines (female slaves) in the Judeo-Christian tradition too. According to their traditions a number of figures in the Bible had concubines: Abraham had two concubines; Gideon: at least 1; David: many; Nahor: 1; Jacob: 1; Eliphaz: 1; Gideon: 1; Caleb: 2; Manassah: 1; Saul: 1; David: at least 10; Rehoboam: 60; Solomon: 300; an unidentified Levite: 1; Belshazzar: more than 1. [Sourced from ReligiousTolerance.org]

Back in ancient times having a concubine was similar to marriage (though it was not marriage in name) and the children from such a union were seen to be legitimate. The same applies to Islamic times - having a female slave was similar to a marriage as well.

This 'Christian' (Shamoun) either does not know this or just throws this knowledge aside to attack Islam. It's amazing to see the number of criticisms this man levels at Islam which also insult his Judeo-Christian tradition too. Has this man no sense and no self-control?

'Concubinage was practised in many ancient cultures, especially in Mesopotamia.....where a private citizen might have one or two concubines in addition to his primary wife.....a concubine was often a slave or part of the booty of war (Judges 5:30). A man might have a concubine simply as an economical form of marriage, since no dowry or bride-price was required. A concubine could add to a man's prestige by giving him two wives and thus an increased capacity for children. Such offspring were normally delivered onto the knees of the legal wife, thus establishing their legitimacy as family members. The concubine was also another servant to add to his work force.' (Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible, 1997, Vol 1, p504). [sourced from UKapologetics]

The Bible allows sex with captured women (even if already married?)

A major facet of his argument is that in Islam a man can have sexual intimacy with his slave girl (concubine) even if she was married prior to being captured. Again, this Shamoun fella misses the important context. Shamoun conveniently forgets to mention that the previous marriage is annulled and this relationship between the slave girl and the master is similar to a marriage. Therefore one can see this is not adultery/fornication.

However, this is something which may be in his Bible too. Deuteronomy 21:10-14 allows a man to marry a female captive of war that he finds beautiful. What if this woman happens to have been married prior to being captured? This seems to be extremely likely as in ancient times the women married early (the Biblical age of marriage was in fact puberty). Would one say that the modern day Bible allows adultery? No. The obvious answer seems to be that, in Judeo-Christian times, the previous marriage of the captured woman was annulled thus this was not seen as adultery. Is this not similar to what the ignoramus from answering-islam.org was attacking Islam for? Yes, it's another case of this 'Christian' not thinking and/or throwing his Bible behind his back in order to attack Islam.

Welcome to the weird world of answering-islam.org's biggest ignoramus!

See how quick and easy it is to refute Answering-islam.org's biggest ignoramus? He spends all day/week/month to write  a tome (of nonsense). The one refuting him offers a spot of common sense, a bit of insight and a few paragraphs. It tells its own story!


In the Sam Shamoun section you will find over 50 posts denouncing, rebuking, exposing and even mocking the biggest ignoramus at answering-islam.org. Enjoy:

http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/Sam%20Shamoun

Related:

The insincere Christians who compare Jesus (p) with Muhammad (p):
http://bloggingtheology.wordpress.com/2013/08/20/15101/#comment-17178

Jesus taught people to do the Will of God (according to Mark 3:35) in order to become his brothers, mothers or sisters. A Muslim means one who submits to the Will of God. Do you want to become a brother of Jesus? If yes, become a Muslim. Now is the time.
Learn about Islam:http://www.thedeenshow.com

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk

Jews and Christians Fasting

Here Ali Ataie offers some scholarship and shows fasting is part of the Judeo-Christian tradition. Sadly there are some /Christians still unaware of this.




Zaytuna College faculty member, Ali Ataie reflects on fasting in the Judeo-Christian Tradition in relation to its practice in Islam.

Ustadh Ali Altaie is the founder and president of the Muslim Interfaith Council.He was born in Tehran, Iran and came to the United States in 1979. Altaie earned his bachelor's degree in accounting from Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo. He is currently a visiting assistant instructor of religious studies at Cal Poly, as well as an instructor of apologetics at the World Alliance for Humanity in Fremont, California. He is a student of sacred knowledge at Zaytuna Institute in Hayward, California and an author of several books. His organization is dedicated to spreading and defending the truth about Islam in America. His two books include "In Defense of Islam: Confronting the Christians with Their Own Scriptures" and "Injil-ul Haq: the True Gospel of Jesus Christ."

Jesus taught people to do the Will of God (according to Mark 3:35) in order to become his brothers, mothers or sisters. A Muslim means one who submits to the Will of God. Do you want to become a brother of Jesus? If yes, become a Muslim. Now is the time.

Learn about Islam:
http://www.thedeenshow.com

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk

'tell him to bite his father’s penis' Hadith translation EXPLAINED by Waqar Cheema

So the haters of Islam have seen all their regular criticisms of Islam refuted and thus have now turned to a new argument - the argument based on the 'tell him to bite his father’s penis' translation of a hadith.

As you can imagine the desperate critics once again misunderstood the context and the meaning of the actual hadith. Do they really want to understand or is their hatred of Islam motivating them to continue burying their heads in the sand?

Some missionaries (especially Sam) have been quoting this hadith as if it is explicit and gross.

من تعزى بعزاء الجاهلية فأعضوه بهن أبيه ولا تكنوا

Orientalist, James Robson translated it as:

Ubayy b. Ka‘b told that he heard God’s messenger say, “If anyone proudly asserts his descent in the manner of the pre-Islamic people, tell him to bite his father’s penis, and do not use a euphemism.”

Here is a detailed explanation of the hadith and answer to objections;
Telling Someone to Bite Their Father’s Genitals: Explicit Phrase or Misunderstood Expression?

http://icraa.org/telling-someone-to-bite-their-fathers-genitals-explicit-phrase-or-misunderstood-expression/


Please view the link above to gain an understanding of the hadith. I would advise the critic to view the link above and read the explanation if you value context and fairness.
 

Jesus taught people to do the Will of God (according to Mark 3:35) in order to become his brothers, mothers or sisters. A Muslim means one who submits to the Will of God. Do you want to become a brother of Jesus? If yes, become a Muslim. Now is the time.

Learn about Islam:
http://www.thedeenshow.com

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk

 

Switch James White's Lamp On: A few comments on 'Why Can't Muslim By Choice Understand?'

MuslimbyChoice, a YouTube producer of videos, has been exposed to a tremendous amount of the light of truth, and yet remains the most blind to it. He listens to almost everything I do, whether it is YouTube videos, Dividing Lines, or here, my filling in for Janet Mefferd on her program last week. But what is amazing is that though he hears the truth repeatedly, it just doesn't sink in. The phrase, "there is a veil," fits incredibly well here, sadly. We surely need to pray for this individual, for to have encountered so much light, and yet to not even seem to understand what it is saying, let alone have a response to it, is a weighty thing indeed.

James White just doesn't get it. It's sad to see this quality in a man. He will label others as blind yet fails to the see (pardon the pun) his own blindness.

James fails to see what Muslims see when he starts talking about the additions in the NT. James White feels his mere pronouncement of an addition (i.e. a forgery) to the NT coupled with some background information concerning the manuscripts in question is 'a tremendous amount of the light of truth'. The information he presents on Luke 23:34, the last 12 verses of Mark and the periscope in John (7:53-8:11) is essentially a mere luxury addition to what the lay man can find by looking at the footnotes of the NT.

What James White is not doing is pondering upon 'the light of the truth'. 'The light of the truth' outlines that there are forgeries in the NT. However, James White and his followers are not benefitting from this light.

Think about it, prior to the 18th century when Dr Von Tischendorf discovered the Codex Sinaiticus the James Whites of the time (i.e. conservative Christians) believed they had the inerrant and inspired word of God. They believed they had the Holy Spirit dwelling in them and guiding them through Christian scripture. They really believed this. They also really believed that the last 12 verses of Mark were inspired parts of scripture, they really believed in that version of Luke 23:34 and they really believed in that periscope in John. What happened?

It turned out they believed in forgeries. Additions that were not supported by their most ancient 'witnesses' (manuscripts). Christians nowadays effectively believe their co-religionists of that bygone era were believing in forgeries. Yet those Christians of the past sincerely trusted the NT and sincerely believed the Holy Spirit as guiding them through the NT.

I think you can see where I'm going with this. James, to me, for some reason does not deign to reflect openly upon this?! For him his outward enunciation of what we all know coupled with some surplus manuscript information is 'the light of the truth'. In reality, this is not the light of the truth but merely a lamp which has not been switched on yet. It gets interesting when you switch it on - you switch the lamp on by following the thought pattern outlined above.

James, if you do decide to turn on that lamp you will also come to the question; how can you be sure there is no manuscript discovery around the corner which will wrench whole chunks from the NT just like what happened to John 7:53-8:11 and Mark 16:9-20 in the 18th century? You have no guaranty. Thus you will see that your NT is not reliable as the precedent has been set - another discovery (similar to Codex Sinaiticus) would mean you would have to pronounce other parts to be forgeries. Another discovery cannot be discounted. It's happened before to such an extent that the Bible-believing Christians prior to the 19th century are now considered to have believed in NT forgeries!

James when you sincerely turn that lamp on you will realise it to be faith shattering.

I invite you and your followers, after switching the lamp on, to Islam - the direction the light leads to.

If you are a James White supporter PLEASE think. Really. It's insufficient for him to basically pronounce the forgeries we all know about and not even ponder upon the SIGNIFICANCE of such forgeries. This is a huge problem within Christian apologetics today. The absolute unwillingness to go beyond the mere text book apologetics.

I understand why James considers the mere pronouncement of these forgeries as a big deal as there is a closed-ear approach within certain sectors of the Christian community when it comes to textual criticism. Today I came across a Christian who began to abuse me and claim I was presenting nonsense (in a crude fashion) at the mention of the last 12 verses of Mark being forgeries. Thus there are still Christians out there who don't even have the lamp never mind being at the point of contemplating on nudging that  'on' switch.

For the record, here's Prof Bart Ehrman confirming those verses in Mark being additions:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gt78TFDLdOc

James White's 'Arabic' Pride

Jesus taught people to do the Will of God (according to Mark 3:35) in order to become his brothers, mothers or sisters. A Muslim means one who submits to the Will of God. Do you want to become a brother of Jesus? If yes, become a Muslim. Now is the time.

Learn about Islam:
http://www.thedeenshow.com

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk

Sadducees

Author of Acts (Luke): Mistake of Ignorance (Geza Vermes)

The Acts of the Apostles goes even further than Jospehus and the Gospels when it turns the Sadducees into complete materialists who denied not only the resurrection of the dead, but also the existence of angels and spirits (Acts 23:8). However, this exaggeration should probably be blamed more on the Gentile Luke’s unfamiliarity with Palestinian Jewish thought than on the Sadducees, for angels are commonly mentioned in the Bible and the Sadducees were sticklers for the letter of the scripture. [1]

Inspired?

Luke wrote the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts* – both of which, Christians believe to be inspired by God – yet, Luke seems to have blundered through ignorance or exaggeration. One must ask, if the author could blunder to this extent then what other mistakes did he make. And if he was making inaccurate statements then how can one sincerely believe he was inspired by the Holy Spirit?

This is another problematic issue for our Christian friends to ponder upon. Previously, we have seen that the Christian belief that the Holy Spirit guides them in scripture is problematic for them and now we are seeing their belief of the evangelists and authors of the Bible being inspired by the Holy Spirit (whom Trinitarian Christians believe to be God) as problematic too.

You decide if this is an error on the part of Luke!

*Some scholars attribute to Luke the third Gospel and the Acts of the Apostles, which is clearly meant to be read as a sequel to the Gospel account. Other scholars question Luke's authorship of these books [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luke_the_Evangelist]

[1] The Resurrection, Geza Vermes, Penguin Books, 2008, pg. 48

What Every Christian Should Know About the New Testament

Jesus taught people to do the Will of God (according to Mark 3:35) in order to become his brothers, mothers or sisters. A Muslim means one who submits to the Will of God. Do you want to become a brother of Jesus? If yes, become a Muslim. Now is the time.

Learn about Islam:
http://www.thedeenshow.com

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk

Christians Don't Listen to Wafa Sultan وفاء سلطان‎

Jesus taught people to do the Will of God (according to Mark 3:35) in order to become his brothers, mothers or sisters. A Muslim means one who submits to the Will of God. Do you want to become a brother of Jesus? If yes, become a Muslim. Now is the time.

Learn about Islam:
http://www.thedeenshow.com

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk

Nonie Darwish Lying About Islam on ABNSat.

One wonders why Christians are so easily duped by these Eastern Christians presenting themselves as folk who are in-the-know about Islam. In this video we catch Nonie Darwish portraying Islam negatively through falsehoods. Anybody with an ounce of knowledge of Islam will know that Islam does encourage patience as well as teaching against anger and envy. Why would Nonie Darwish be presenting such falsehoods? To demonize Muslims and Islam?

Must Watch ..Does Islam Preach Anger as Christian's Lie about...Part 1


Nonie Darwish is an Egyptian-American human rights activist, and founder of Arabs For Israel, and is Director of Former Muslims United. [Wiki]

Christians, please wake up. Islamophobia is in your communities big time. So much so that it's on yout TV shows and even in your churches. Time to wake up and start outing the bigots and deceivers within your communities.

Jesus taught people to do the Will of God (according to Mark 3:35) in order to become his brothers, mothers or sisters. A Muslim means one who submits to the Will of God. Do you want to become a brother of Jesus? If yes, become a Muslim. Now is the time.

Learn about Islam:
http://www.thedeenshow.com

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk

Bassim Gorial Afraid to Debate a Muslim?

Now I don't do this fancy stuff of debating; I'm simply a blogger and vlogger. I recently threw out a debate challenge to the influential folk at ABNSat in an attempt to get a debate going between them and a few Muslim debaters. There was no response. Well actually, one of ABN's employees claimed that the debate challenge was not a direct challenge from myself. He was right. I'm not sure why that matters. Why would it matter? A Muslim whom I find to debate Bassim should be more than sufficient as it's not about personalities but rather about beliefs.

However, just so Dr Bassim Gorial has no excuses made for him, I'm throwing my hat in the ring. OK I will debate him. I would rather have somebody else debate him on behalf of the Muslims but if this is a genuine stipulation (i.e. that I debate) then I will debate him online.

Original debate challenge to the Islamophobic ABNSat:

For those who have been following some of the recent blogging and vlogging; you will know much refutation, condemnation and rebuke has been poured on the claims and actions of folk on ABNSat:

 

http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/ABN%20Sat

Rather than give the main protagonists further attention how about we challenge those with editorial/managerial control of the ABN programming?

Yes, indeed this is an open debate challenge to Bassim Gorial, Haifa Gorial, Samar Gorial and Pastor Joseph Najm (you can also bring along Pastor Joseph Habibi too)

It's time to engage with the more influential people at ABN rather than the career foot-soldiers of ABN – who have been discredited and/or refuted:

David Wood (cross-dresser)

Walid Shoebat (try not to laugh at his title ‘ex-terrorist’)

Sam Shamoun (considered foolish)

Kamal Saleem (be wary of this fella, he has 3 different conversion stories out there)

Usama Dakdok (Doesn’t know Islam nor classical Arabic yet is selling a book which he styles as a ‘translation of the Quran’ for ‘donations’ of ~ $25 or ~ $50!)

So Bassim and Haifa, you folk believe in Christianity right? I assume you’ve read this part from 1 Peter 3:15:

Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have

So here’s the challenge for Dr Bassim and Haifa Gorial. I and all other Muslims believe the trinity is something Jesus never taught. Sir Anthony Buzzard states, there’s 12000 accounts of ‘God’ in the Bible; none of which are mentioning tri-unity. You believe in the trinity. If you are confident in this, I ask you to come to the table and respond to this challenge.

Here is the challenge for Pastor Joseph Najm and Pastor Joseph Habibi; you both believe that Jesus is divine, right? Well, we as Muslims see him as a Prophet who NEVER taught that he was divine. This is a huge stumbling block between us, how about coming to the table and discussing this?

That leaves Samar Gorial, well Samar I assume you believe in the inerrancy of the New Testament. Your faith as a Bible-believing Christian is based on believing the NT is reliable and inspired. I invite you to come to the table and accept a debate challenge on such (if you believe in the above). Here is a sample of the type of discussion to expect:

 

http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/is-gospel-of-john-reliable.html

If any of you are indeed willing to accept this offer for a dialogue please be in touch, I shall endeavour to find a suitable Muslim debate opponent for each one of you.

To those whom are addressed in this blog-post, feel free to contact me to accept an invitation to debate/dialogue:

yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk

Did you know Jesus has Muslim brothers and sisters? Would you like to become the brothers/sisters of Jesus? To learn more please see:

http://www.thedeenshow.com/

Negeen Mayel Condemns the Radicalized David Wood!

I have had email conversation with a young lady called Negeen Mayel. She used to be part of Acts 17 Apologetics/Answering Muslims. As the emails are confidential I shall not publish them, however she did leave a comment on my blog which is open to the public so I shall feature it in this blog post. Through Negeen Mayel's comments one can observe that people do see through the hatred and sheer radicalisation which Islamophobia brings upon a person.

I honestly to this day have never viewed that video that David posted. I don't need to, he is wearing a womans spaghetti strap and posted it on his website that is associated with his ministry that seeks to win Muslims to Christ. This degree of outlandishness displays a lack of sheer respect towards the muslim community and that video should not have been posted. Over time I have come to seriously doubt the wisdom behind certain things that David does. Self radicalization can happen to anyone. Unfortunately, I think David has self radicalized himself into having a perspective of Islam that is heavily influenced by evil actions committed by bad people. If I wanted to spend all day reading articles about evil actions committed by Afghanis I would begin to hate all Afghans, but because I have a broader understanding of the Afghan community, because I have been around Afghans who love, laugh, and give generously I understand that not all Afghans are terrorists who hate women. I really wish David would spend less time self radicalizing himself and spend more time amongst the homes of normal muslims who love the good things in this world

It's sad to see a bloke who absolutely oblivious to the irony of him painting Muslims as extremists looking to rape, plunder and butcher whilst he himself is being labelled a radical by his own friends/colleagues. Speaking about his friends and colleagues, where's Nabeel Qureshi? That's right, he is not part of Dave's crew anymore? Where's Hogan, I haven't seen him for a while? Has he left hatred of Muslims and Islam too?

I think this is a success story that should help inspire all those who are opposing Islamophobes - people do turn away from the Islamophobes and recognise THEM as the radicals!

David, is this the what you want to be known for? People who donate to you and feed your ego are not your friends. I've seen the comments of some of your followers - these people hate Muslims. What happens when these people get bored or just grow up? They will leave you - no more donations and no more ego-feeding yelps. Look at the example of Sam, he's been doing his stuff for well over a decade and he is scratching around on the net for donations with a miserable reputation amongst his own and amongst Muslims. Is this what you want? Is this what you really want? This IS what Islamophobia delivers.

Dave, please have a rethink.

NOTE: I hope this post helps encourage others affiliated with Islamophobic elements to break free.

What David's Islamophobic supporters do not want you to see (over 40 posts rebuking David Wood - scroll down and also view the older posts in this section):
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/David%20Wood

Watch a Muslim dominate a debate about whether Muhammad is in the Bible - Samuel Green and Zakir Hussain:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/debate-review-muhammad-in-bible-zakir.html

Jesus taught people to do the Will of God (according to Mark 3:35) in order to become his brothers, mothers or sisters. A Muslim means one who submits to the Will of God. Do you want to become a brother of Jesus? If yes, become a Muslim. Now is the time.

Learn about Islam:
http://www.thedeenshow.com

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk

New Testament Studies for Muslims and Christians

Biblical Insight From Dr Jerald Dirks

Muslims believe in the ORIGINAL Scriptures but the ORIGNIAL scriptures (in their entirety) have been lost, hence the need for the Quran (God’s final Revelation to mankind)



NOTES from Dr Jerald Dirks’ lecture (plus additions from Dennis Bratcher, ChristianAnswers, Bruce Metzger, BibleResearcher)

We are not speaking about translations (ie KJV, NRSV etc). Christianity has never agreed upon what constitutes the Bible.

Are Christians agreed on what constitutes the Old Testament? No!

OT Protestant Bible is 39 books whilst the Roman Catholics add a number of books to this as well as additions to the book of Daniel and the book of Esther. Greek Orthodox add EVEN MORE than the Roman Catholics; they have a 151st Psalm rather than ending with 150. They have additions to the book of Jeremiah and add 3rd and 4th Maccabees amongst others.

The Ethiopian Orthodox Church has a canon of 46 books in their Old Testament. Thus Christianity has NEVER agreed upon what makes up the OT

Have Christians agreed upon what constitutes the New Testament?

No, never!

Protestant and Roman Catholics agree upon 27 books but the Coptic Orthodox have 29 books (adding 1st and 2nd Clement) in their New Testament! The Nestorian Church omits 5 books (including Revelation) which are found in the Catholic and Protestant 27 book NT. The Ethiopian Orthodox Church has 35 books in their New Testament (including the Shepherd of Hermes).

Did Moses author the first 5 Books of the Old Testament? (plus history of the Old Testament compilation)

We know Moses did not write all of it though this is the traditional belief of the Christians. It is a cut and paste compilation from earlier source material:

J – 950 BCE
E- 750 BCE
D- 600s BCE
P- 400-500 BCE

And they were finally put together around the year 400.

Moses (p) lived is thought to have lived within the 1600-1200 BCE range. Amazingly that is at least 250 years before the first source (J) material of the Old Testament.

The letters JEDP are a designation used by scholars to identify the component parts or sources that they understand were used to compile the first five books of the Old Testament. There have been various opinions as to whether these sources were written or oral traditions, and whether each source represents an independent strand or a stage in the development of an older source. [Dennis Bratcher: JEDP: Sources in the Pentateuch]

The Torah

Most modern Biblical scholars believe the Torah (as we have it today) to be a cut and paste compilation in Babylon. The law (Torah) was actually believed to be lost in Palestine and Ezra brought the law back to Palestine from Babylonian (around year 400 BCE).

Three parts to the OT

1. Torah (first 5 books of the OT)
2. Prophets (Nabiyim),
3. The Writings (Kethubim), Christians call this the Hagiographa (the holy writings)

The Roman Catholic Church, in order to construct their OT went to the Septuagint – thus automatically accepted EVERYTHING that was in there.

Protestants used the Hebrew text rather than the Greek Septuagint and thus ended up with a shorter OT (as the Jews at the time of writing the Septuagint had not decided what constitutes the OT)

In many cases we don’t know who authored parts of the OT (e.g. Deuteronomy, 1Kings, 2Kings). We DON’T know who authored all the books of the Old Testament. Can the OT be considered reliable based on this information? No!

New Testament Reliability and Authorship

None of the disciples wrote the Gospel accounts, sadly, many Christian wrongly believe this despite being untrue.

Gospel of Matthew – (80-85 CE) we don’t know who wrote it and it is a compilation of earlier material (proto-Mark and the theoretical Sayings Gospel (Q) and M?). First mention of Matthew writing a Gospel comes around 120 CE despite the Matthew we have being in Greek rather than Hebrew and a non-sayings Gospel

Hebrews was NOT written by Paul despite legend associating it with him.

A problem with the Bible is that it is difficult to ascertain what Jesus said and we did not; the same applies to his actions. There are NO chains of transmission either which further compounds the issue of unreliability as it is second, third hand, fourth hand information.

Does the New Testament contain forgeries (unauthorised insertions)?

The last part of the Gospel Mark (Mark 16:9-20)

Earlier manuscripts show chapter 16 to end at verse 8 but in later manuscripts there is a whole chunk (12 verses) which is added after this. We KNOW this is a later (unauthorised) insertion!

Mark 16:9-20 has been called a later addition to the Gospel of Mark by most New Testament scholars in the past century. The main reason for doubting the authenticity of the ending is that it does not appear in some of the oldest existing witnesses, and it is reported to be absent from many others in ancient times by early writers of the Church. Moreover, the ending has some stylistic features which also suggest that it came from another hand. The Gospel is obviously incomplete without these verses, and so most scholars believe that the final leaf of the original manuscript was lost, and that the ending which appears in English versions today (verses 9-20) was supplied during the second century. [ BibleResearcher]

Even the internal evidence militates against this addition:

The internal evidence for the shorter ending (2) is decidedly against its being genuine. Besides containing a high percentage of non-Markan words, its rhetorical tone differs totally from the simple style of Mark's Gospel. [Bruce Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (Stuttgart, 1971), pages 122-126.]

More info:
http://www.bible-researcher.com/endmark.html

The story of the adulteress in John (John 1:53 – 8:11)

It does NOT exist in the earliest manuscripts we have; (the ENTIRE section does not exist). Further explanation: Biblical scholars are nearly all agreed that the Story of the Adulteress (also known as the Pericope Adulterae or the Pericope de Adultera) usually printed in Bibles as John 7:53-8:11 is a later addition to the Gospel. [BibleResearcher.com]

American Standard Version (1901). Marginal note: "Most of the ancient authorities omit John vii. 53--viii. 11. Those which contain it vary much from each other."

If the story of the adulteress was an ancient story about Jesus, why did it not immediately become part of the accepted Gospels? Riesenfeld has given the most plausible explanation of the delay in the acceptance of this story. The ease with which Jesus forgave the adulteress was hard to reconcile with the stern penitential discipline in vogue in the early Church. It was only when a more liberal penitential practice was firmly established that this story received wide acceptance. (Riesenfeld traces its liturgical acceptance to the fifth century as a reading for the feast of St. Pelagia.) [Raymond E. Brown, The Gospel According to John (i-xii), in the Anchor Bible series (Garden City, New York: Doubleday, 1966), pages 335-6.]

This clearly shows there was a CULTURE of scribal addition which imputes tangible suspicion upon the whole of the New Testament.

More info on this scribal addition:
http://www.bible-researcher.com/adult.html

Dr Jerald Dirks has presented sufficient material to do away with the doctrinal view of Biblical inerrancy.

Christians; become familiar with your own scripture. Study carefully.

"'How can you say, "We are wise, for we have the law of the LORD," when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely? (NIV Jeremiah 8:8)

God willing your studies will lead you to Islam

Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free." (NIV, John 8:32)

Are they then unaware that Allah knoweth that which they keep hidden and that which they proclaim? (77) Among them are unlettered folk who know the Scripture not except from hearsay. They but guess. (78) Therefore woe be unto those who write the Scripture with their hands and then say, "This is from Allah," that they may purchase a small gain therewith. Woe unto them for that their hands have written, and woe unto them for that they earn thereby. (79) [Pikthal translation of the Holy Quran,

Yasir Qadhi - Refutes some anti-Muslim claims

Sheikh Yasir Qadhi delivers an extremely beneficial lecture which aids us against the Islamophobic hatred on the net. Yasir Qadhi runs through some of the primary modes of attack against Prophet Muhammad (p) whilst giving some examples of the slanders and lies against the Prophet (p). Make this a must listen - it is less than an hour long

For those who want to go a little further than listening to the lecture you can re-upload it and/or spread it via social media networks so other Muslims can benefit from it.





Part 2 by Yasir Birjas can be found here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UiEMnv5j3dc&feature=relmfu

Some of the Atttacks Discussed by Yasir Qadhi:

Aisha's marriage to Prophet Muhammad (p)

The story of Zayed-Zainab and Prophet Muhammad (p) marrying Zainab

Accusation of robbing caravans

Accusation of epilepsy

Christian Peter the Venerable's lie of Prophet Muhammad (p) being born in the year 666

Lie of distorting the name 'Muhammad'

Danish Cartoons

William Muir's 'Satanic verses' claim

Let them bark, don't be disheartened

Yasir Qadhi reminds us that Prophets and holy men have been ridiculed and insulted in the past by riff raff. Thus it should not come as a surprise for us to be met by some of the distortions and slanders against the Propet Muhammad. The Sheikh also teaches us that as Muslims we should respond with nobility, academically and intellectually.

May Allah guide us all and send His peace and blessings upon all His Prophets. Ameen

Is Islam a Religion of Peace? Robert Spencer and Shadid Lewis

Here is Shadid Lewis' opening statement in his debate with Robert Spencer on whether Islam is a religion of peace

Shadid's Opening Statement



Related:

Robert Spencer caught red-handed presenting lies:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/robert-spencer-making-rape-claims-up.html


Debate: Robert Spencer v Nadir Ahmed on whether slave girls are allowed to be raped:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/debate-review-does-islam-teach-rape-of.html

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Miracles performed by Prophet Muhammad (p):http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/did-prophet-muhammad-p-perform-miracles.html

Jesus taught people to do the Will of God (according to Mark 3:35) in order to become his brothers, mothers or sisters. A Muslim means one who submits to the Will of God. Do you want to become a brother of Jesus? If yes, become a Muslim. Now is the time.

Learn about Islam:
http://www.thedeenshow.com

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk

RZIM's Dr Nabeel Qureshi Caught in Shamoun Deception

This is Dr Nabeel Qureshi (now part of Ravi Zacharias' Christian missionary organisation) passing on lies that he appears to have got from a dodgy ABNSat Christian apologist.

Nabeel Qureshi Copying Somebody Else's Lies



Note, this lie has been addressed here:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/a-false-claim-about-preservation-of.html

I ask Dr Nabeel Qureshi to think about things. Is deception really something you are willing to use in your attempts to convert Muslims to Trinitarian Christianity? I worry for Nabeel Qureshi's students at Biola University.

Jesus taught people to do the Will of God (according to Mark 3:35) in order to become his brothers, mothers or sisters. A Muslim means one who submits to the Will of God. Do you want to become a brother of Jesus? If yes, become a Muslim. Now is the time.
Learn about Islam:http://www.thedeenshow.com

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk

A Resonse to UK Aplogetics (Robin A Brace)

Hi Robin, in your article entitles 'Are the 'Older' Bible Texts Necessarily Better?' you discussed Luke 23:34 and came to the following conclusion:

The first part of Luke 23:34 ('Jesus said, Father forgive them for they know not what they do'), has full authority and certainly should be included in all Bibles.

Sir, this seems to be a grossly irresponsible conclusion to arrive at based on the fact that 'a wide variety of earliest witnesses' do not contain this text. Certainly the Codex Sinaiticus does not contain such. For you to arrive at the conclusion that this saying has full authority is irresponsible.

I humbly ask you to look into the following link on this subject as well as do some further reading on such and revise your view:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/is-luke-2334-another-new-testament.html

Peace

Miracles performed by Prophet Muhammad (p):http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/did-prophet-muhammad-p-perform-miracles.html

Jesus taught people to do the Will of God (according to Mark 3:35) in order to become his brothers, mothers or sisters. A Muslim means one who submits to the Will of God. Do you want to become a brother of Jesus? If yes, become a Muslim. Now is the time.

Learn about Islam:
http://www.thedeenshow.com

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk

Is Luke 23:34 another New Testament corruption?

Here's Dr James White acknowledging Luke 23:34 does have a major textual variant - i.e. what makes up the longer version of Luke 23:34 ("Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing")  is an insertion (forgery).

³⁴ Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.”^[a] And they divided up his clothes by casting lots.

The really interesting thing here, which James does not discuss (perhaps does not deign to discuss) is that this verse prior to Dr Von Tischendorf's discovery of the Codex Sinaiticus in the 1800s was believed to be the inspired word of God by Christians. Yet now Christians today recognise it (the longer ending of the verse) to be an insertion into Luke 23:34 (i.e. a forgery into the NT). One just wonders what else they will recognise to be insertions (forgeries) in the next 20 years.

Is Luke 23:34 another Biblical corruption? Featuring James White and Bart Ehrman




James White's Conclusion

In my estimation, given the judgment of the weight of both the external and internal support [internal support was not covered in this blog post], it is reasonable to place about a 75-90% degree of probability that the longer reading is a scribal insertion early into the transmission history. The attestation among text-types and the diverse early geographical witnesses and their genealogical weight strengthens the probability of the shorter reading being primary. Whereas the longer reading is attested primarily early on in only the Western text. Not to mention the nature of the Western texts often introduces traditional readings. Extra-biblical Jesus-logia in the first couple of centuries would explain the addition of the words. And this would be consistent with the tendency of the early church to add logia than to omit it.

And in this case, if the numerical motivation theory is correct [see again here], it was first introduced most likely into a gospel harmony or some form of collection of sayings that were harmonized before it entered an actual place in Luke. Concerning the argument that this reading was excised early because of anti-Judaic bias, in this particular variant, it is not a sufficiently cogent reason as explained.

Up until the second century, the shorter reading was read widely. It was until sometime during the second century, probably the middle to the late part, that the longer reading was added and from then eventually found its way into all the text-types and the majority textual history thereafter.

Christians please think about these things

Modern New Testament scholarship is promoting the belief that originally people did not believe Jesus was divine but later on through the evolution of the Gospel narratives Jesus (p) was falsely being made out to be God. James White does not mention that there exists a group of people (a group which has existed well before modern NT scholarship) who believe that Jesus is not divine and the NT is not authoritative. Who are these people? The Muslims.

Christians, I ask you to think about this. Why would you believe a Prophet (Jesus,p) is God based on the NT  whose authors had no authority whatsoever and which has undergone scribal changes? There is no reason to do so. I invite you to look into Islam. Islam is the religion of Jesus,p, it's about doing the Will of God. We are all sinners and we all need to humble ourselves. Please think about Islam. I invite you to become Muslims.

Miracles performed by Prophet Muhammad (p):http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/did-prophet-muhammad-p-perform-miracles.html

Jesus taught people to do the Will of God (according to Mark 3:35) in order to become his brothers, mothers or sisters. A Muslim means one who submits to the Will of God. Do you want to become a brother of Jesus? If yes, become a Muslim. Now is the time.

Learn about Islam:
http://www.thedeenshow.com

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk

Robert Spencer Making Rape Claims Up

Here's Robert Spencer caught red-handed in presenting a lie. The modus operandi of Islamophobes such as Robert Spencer is to foment an atmosphere of fear, that's to say these folk want people to view Muslims as the bogey-man. Inciting such emotions will obviously be a factor in increasing the revenue Robert Spencer and those of his ilk are generating. $$$

Robert Spencer is rebuked for his false allegation that Prophet Muhammad (p) raped his wife, Safiyyah (ra). This is a huge lie. A lie which flies in the face of scholarship. In this video we see scholarship expose Robert Spencer for the liar that he is.

Robert Spencer's Rape Lie




Robert Spencer just highlighted his ignorance as Saffiyah was given the choice between being set free and going back to her people or marrying Prophet Muhammad (p). She chose to marry Prophet Muhammad (p), see this citation from the biography writer Martin Lings:

He [the Prophet Muhammad - Ed.] then told Safiyyah that he was prepared to set her free, and he offered her the choice between remaining a Jewess and returning to her people or entering Islam and becoming his wife. “I choose God and His Messenger,” she said; and they were married at the first halt on the homeward march.⁵ Sourced from:

http://www.bismikaallahuma.org/archives/2005/umm-ul-mukminin-safiyyah-the-jewish-wife-of-muhammad/#article

There was no rape.

A quick synopsis on the situation of Safiyyah (ra). After the battle of Khaiber she became a captive. Prophet Muhammad (p) gave her the option of going back to her people or staying with the Muslims and marrying him. She CHOSE to marry him.

She loved the Prophet a great deal and even mentioned that she never met anybody with better character/manners than the Prophet (p).

Related


Debate: Robert Spencer v Nadir Ahmed on whether slave girls are allowed to be raped:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/debate-review-does-islam-teach-rape-of.html

Islam on slave girls/concubines:

http://islamicresponse.blogspot.co.uk/2011/06/islam-on-slave-girlsconcubines.html

Does Islam allow rape of captives:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/are-muslims-really-allowed-to-rape.html

 
Christian apologist appears to believe rape is allowed in Bible:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/christian-seems-to-believe-rape-is.html

Miracles performed by Prophet Muhammad (p):http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/did-prophet-muhammad-p-perform-miracles.html

Jesus taught people to do the Will of God (according to Mark 3:35) in order to become his brothers, mothers or sisters. A Muslim means one who submits to the Will of God. Do you want to become a brother of Jesus? If yes, become a Muslim. Now is the time.

Learn about Islam:
http://www.thedeenshow.com

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk