Sunday, 29 September 2013

Christian questioned his faith and wants to go to a mosque after seeing Sahdid Lewis Debate David Wood on 'Is Islam a threat to the West'

Shadid Lewis of the MDI appears to be doing a great job in getting the message of Islam out there

I have not seen the debate but I will point to a Christian, who is a member of the church which hosted the debate between David Wood and Shadid Lewis, admitting Shadid Lewis made many good points and who now has an interest in going to a mosque and learning about Islam!

Folks, this is what can happen when you  combine a switched-on Muslim who is willing to engage Christians in dialogue with a Christian who is willing to listen and think with sincerity.

Christian Audience member admits good points of Shadid and now is interested in Islam
After Shadid Lewis' debate with David Wood another honest Christian audience member comes to him on his own accord and confirms he (Shadid) made many good points vs David Wood, plus he expresses his interest in Islam. All Praise be to Allah

Shadid Lewis' website:
http://the-case-for-islam.webs.com/

Related

Is the Gospel of John reliable?

James White and defending the NT reliability?

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

Bart Ehrman Educates an Angry Fundamentalist Christian

An Assyrian Christian (Triple B) was playing the fool in a YouTube comment section. He was insulting Prophet Muhammad (p) due to him (p) being unable to read or write.

It was lost on the Assyrian Christian (Sam Shamoun aka Triple B) that in the process he was actually insulting the friends of Jesus (p). Bart Ehrman, a well known Bible scholar, informs us that lower class people in 1st century Palestine were likely to have been uneducated and illiterate.

The ignorant Assyrian Christian (Triple B) was challenged by the idea that Peter was illiterate too. Triple B began insulting and making his ignorance known. I wonder if Triple B thinks the scholar Bart Ehrman is a ‘mental misfit’ too?

Bart Ehrman uses Peter as an example and believes he was illiterate – in turn Ehrman believes Peter did not write 1st or 2nd Peter (he believes they were forgeries)



If the video does not play, please view the video here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sk2vfZcMhLM

I hope Triple B repents for his insults and desists from such disrespectful and anti-Jesus behaviour in the future

James White v Usama Dakdok

Related

Is the Gospel of John reliable?

James White and defending the NT reliability?


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

Debate Review: Can we trust the Islamic View of Jesus? Shadid Lewis and C.L Edwards

Shadid Lewis keeps winning debates against Christians!

Muslim apologist and debater, Shadid Lewis of the Muslim Debate Initiative (US branch), seems to be making waves in Christian communities. He debated a Christian named C.L Edwards under the topic 'Can we trust the Islamic View of Jesus?'.

I have not watched this debate myself but I can point to an eye-witness report from a Christian audience member who commends Shadid for his 'great job' in the debate, his 'logical defence' of the Muslim position and for doing 'a better job than his opponent'.


Video: Christian admits to the success of Shadid Lewis in the debate with C.L Edwards


After his debate with CL.Edwards "Can we trust the Islamic View of Jesus" This honest Christian Audience member came to Shadid Lewis on his own and declared that he felt Shadid had the better arguments and made a good case for the debate topic. All praise is to Allah.

Here is a written review of this debate by Ijaz of Calling Christians:
http://callingchristians.com/2013/09/13/criticism-of-cl-edwards-debate-methodology-versus-br-shadid-lewis/

Here is a review of Shadid's debate with Bob Siegel on whether the New Testament can be trusted:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/debate-review-can-we-trust-new.html

Related

Is the Gospel of John reliable?

James White and defending the NT reliability?

Christian Tampering of Josephus?

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

Sunday, 22 September 2013

Debate Review: Can We Trust the New Testament? Bob Siegel and Shadid Lewis


The Muslim debater, Shadid Lewis, clearly won this debate.

Shadid Lewis argued against New Testament (NT) reliability by highlighting what appears to be be false ‘prophecies’ attributed to Jesus (p) in the NT, the anonymous authorship of New Testament books, the differences or ‘evolution’ between the Gospel accounts and the additions in the Gospels (such as John 7:53-8:11 and Mark 16:9-20).

Bob Siegel was off topic and presented nothing positive to support his belief that the NT is reliable. Nothing. He was simply preaching.

‘Scribes wrote something stupid’

A quick contexualisation of Bob’s comments concerning the scribes writing something stupid and then being corrected by later scribes. I think people may make more out of this statement than it actually is. I reckon Bob was simply referencing noticeable errors that scribes did make – which are discernible and thus easily corrected. Examples of these would include dittography and haplography. These terms describe errors that result in repeating text or omitting text. They frequently occur when a word, phrase, or line begins with a similar string of letters (homoeoarcton) or ends with a similar string of letters (homoeoteleuton), causing the eyes to skip forward or backward. One example of haplography resulting from homoeoteleuton can be found in Matt. 5:19-20 of the Codex Sinaiticus.* The first sentence of verse 19 ends with ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ τῶν οὐρανῶν and the end of the verse also ends with ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ τῶν οὐρανῶν. Thus, the scribe of the Codex Sinaiticus has accidentally omitted everything from the first occurrence to the end of the verse. The scribe of the Codex Bezae has gone even further by skipping from the end of the first sentence of verse 19 to the end of verse 20 which also ends with ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ τῶν οὐρανῶν. [http://blog.ancientlives.org/2013/05/06/scribal-error-in-biblical-manuscripts/]

Bob Siegel gets desperate

Having offered nothing positive to support his belief that the New Tesament is trustworthy he throws out the standard Christian missionary (mis)claim of the Quran supporting the NT’s reliability. It says more about Bob and his lack of arguments for NT reliability than anything else. Of course, this old Christian missionary claim has been refuted many times over. In fact Shadid has corrected Ravi Zacharias’ colleague Nabeel Qureshi on this misdirection before:

http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/does-quran-568-ask-muslims-to-accept-4.html
 
Bob Siegel and Shadid Lewis: Contrasting styles
 
Bob Siegel was off topic, unclear and seemed under pressure. Shadid Lewis was methodical, calm, on-topic and coherent. One can see who had the more comfortable ride in the debate just by contrasting the demeanours of both debaters.

Shadid Lewis' opening statement



You can view the entire debate here:
http://callingchristians.com/2013/09/13/debate-video-pulled-br-shadid-lewis-vs-bob-siegel/

Conclusion

Look, it’s established and recognised by scholars (both conservative and liberal) that there are anonymous books in the NT and there are examples of additions (tampering) in the Gospels. Would you trust a dictionary that was of anonymous authorship and has a history of tampering? No. Think about it…

The interesting story here is that scholarship is agreeing with the Muslim belief that Jesus (p) never claimed to be God but people changed the story after the event so as to convince people he was God. Interesting...

Related

Is the Gospel of John reliable?

James White and defending the NT reliability?

Christian Tampering of Josephus?

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


Can we trust Josephus?

Sadly, our Christian friends are discovering, due to the dishonesty of the Gospel writers/Bible scribes, they have been misled – that’s to say they are realising they have been conned. However, Christian forgery (deception) has been so rampant that it appears that zealous Trinitarian Christians even tampered with the work of the Jewish historian Josephus in order to work their Trinitarian Christian agendas.

Before discussing the possible deceptive Christian alterations of Josephus’ work let’s discuss another problematic account within the Gospels – Matthew 2:16:

When Herod realized that he had been outwitted by the Magi, he was furious, and he gave orders to kill all the boys in Bethlehem and its vicinity who were two years old and under, in accordance with the time he had learned from the Magi. [NIV, Matthew 2:16]

Matthew 2:16 depicts Herod as murdering all the young male children in Bethlehem. You would expect this act to have been chronicled by Josephus.

Yet, significantly, the massacre of Bethlehem’s young boys which is mentioned in Matthew finds no place even in the bloody history of Herod that Josephus recorded! Certainly such an event had it really happened, would have been mentioned in a historical record that narrates, amongst other details of the history of Herod, his brutal actions. Again, the conclusion must be that the massacre that Matthew details has no place in history. It should be stressed here, however, that this is not a form of negative evidence, for Josephus did record a detailed history of Herod in which the alleged massacre does not figure at all. [1]

Josephus chose not to record it?

Our Christian apologist friends may claim Josephus deliberately chose not to record “the massacre” as Josephus disagreed with the theological conclusion of Herod. However, this style of argumentation is inconsistent as Josephus alleged accounts of Jesus are indeed supportive of Christian theology.

The account in the Jewish War calls Isa [Jesus] a “miracle-worker”, attributing to him various miraculous acts, and goes as far as suggesting that “man” might not be the right word to describe him (Josephus, JW:398-400)!

Josephus also wrote Isa [Jesus] was raised from the dead the third day after his crucifixion. All these claims are mentioned more briefly in another of Josephus’ books, Jewish Antiquities, in which the Jewish writer goes that step further and claims that Isa was al-Masih [Messiah] (Josephus, JA, XVII: 63-64)! [1]

What didn’t the Christians forge?

It appears early Trinitarian Christians were not only busying themselves in adding forgeries to the Bible but were also tampering with the work of Josephus:

Critics have thrown doubts on the authenticity of Josephus’ supposed accounts of Isa [Jesus] which sounded too Christian to have been written by the Jewish historian. Other scholars, on the other hand, accept the genuineness of those accounts arguing that they contain points that cannot be reconciled with Christian tradition and they do not reflect a writer with a Christian faith but rather depict him as a doubting onlooker (Williamson, 1974: 396-397).


However, critics have raised a number of strong points against the authenticity of the controversial passages. Concerning the account in the Jewish War, the main argument of critics is that the piece about Isa [Jesus] is found in the Slavonic version of Josephus’ book but not in the Greek version. The principle arguments against the genuineness of the account in the Jewish Antiqiuities are as follows:


(i) The Jewish Josephus could not have described Isa [Jesus] as al-Masih [Messiah]


(ii) While the bishop and historian Eusebius of Caesarea (d. ca. 340 CE) mentions the controversial passage, the Greek theologian Origen (ca. 185-254 CE) had expressly stated that Josephus did not believe Isa [Jesus] to be al-Masih; and finally


(iii) The suspicious passage breaks continuity of Josephus’ description of a series of riots (Feldman, 1965:49)

Most scholars do not accept the authenticity of the two accounts in Josephus about Isa [Jesus]. In all probability, these references to Isa [Jesus] are inauthentic and must have been forged by Christians, but this is not relevant to our present discussion. [1]

Tough question for our Christian friends…

Whether the passages about Isa in Josephus’ works are genuine or not they still raise the following significant question: Why would the writer of those two accounts fail to make any reference to the alleged killing of the young boys that was intended to kill boy Isa? The answer cannot be anything other than that writer had no knowledge of the alleged massacre.

[1] History Testifies to the Infallibility of the Quran – early History of the Children of Israel – Dr Louay Fatoohi and Prof. Shetha Al-Dargazeli, Adam Publishers and Distributers, 1999, p 203-205
Further reading:

Sexism: A reason to the change the Bible?

Numbers and the Bible do collide on more than one occasion

Discover Islam

Monday, 9 September 2013

What is the English word for Wudu (Wudhu)? Lumination - Sheikh Hamza Yusuf



Ablution is not the best English word for wudhu (wudu); lumination is the better word. Sheikh Hamza Yusuf explains in the video.

For Christians: 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/sister of Jesus? If yes, become a Muslim. Now is the time.

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

Sunday, 8 September 2013

Ali Sina's Brazen Effrontery

Ali Sina, the owner of Faith Freedom International, is an intellectual bankrupt man, a charlatan by all means, and even more so a loathsome person (if you get to know him, even briefly). On September 8, 2013 I had a short discussion with Ali Sina on Twitter, challenging him on certain premises he was unable to defend. He casually remarked I was pulling red herrings out of my pocket -- which I'll give him for the benefit of doubt. However, what struck me about this man (or woman, possibly?), is he couldn't help but keep his pretentious, and at times brazen behavior in check. The following tweets certainly demonstrate that Ali Sina willfully gives into ostentation whenever he is challenged:

"I am the expert. Invite any pretender to this title to debate with me. I will give each of you $50 k if he wins."
"I understand Islam better than ALL the Muslims and offer to pay $50 k to anyone who can show I am mistaken on Mo."
"It must be embarrassing for you. I have spent 19 years studying Islam and can defeat any Muslims scholar."

What we find here is that Ali Sina happens to be an extremely brazen individual. With little to no shame or honor, he claims "I am the expert" -- one would have to admit the man must have gotten a bit carried away. However, Ali Sina then says that "I understand Islam better than ALL Muslims...", probably another shameless gaffe on Ali Sina's part? Of course not. Finally, Ali Sina proudly states he's studied Islam for "19 years". The only problem with this assertion is that Muslims study their faith to the time of their death, give or take 60+ years? 

Ali Sina, come out of your closet and have debates with real men; with people who've dedicated their entire lives to the faith. We suggest debaters such as Adnan Rashid and/or Shabir Ally. If you truly are the "expert" you claim to be, let's see you in action rather than pretending and building a digital facade for your fans to indulge over.

Friday, 6 September 2013

Sam Shamoun Confuses Hindu Philosophy with Christianity: Debate "Is Jesus God?" Inamullah Mumtaz vs Farhan Qureshi


Panentheism (from Greek πᾶν (pân) "all"; ἐν (en) "in"; and θεός (theós) "God"; "all-in-God")  [Wiki]
 
Here's a lesson for us all, wake up and pay attention!
 
In this debate, it becomes apparent, to those who stay awake and pay attention, that Farhan Qureshi is not defending the Trinitarian Christian concept of 'deity of Christ'. In fact, he was promoting the belief that all humans are 'god-men' - Farhan believes all humans (and everything else) are inside God and one with God. This is a Hindu concept that Farhan was promoting - panentheism.
 
Shamoun: '[Farhan Qureshi]  is now defending the Deity of Christ in debate against Muslims!' 
 
I let Farhan know of Shamoun's comment. Here is Farhan's response:
 
Farhan Qureshi: My metaphysical beliefs don't matter but it's always an interesting discussion or debate about what makes more sense about our reality. I believe in panentheism and monism, that all is within God and one with God. Therefore Jesus according to mystical traditions was awakened or enlightened when he spoke of his divinity. Before Abraham was born, I AM. Each of us can realize this. Each of us can realize we are one with God. I simply debated my beliefs on the subject. 
 
I listened to a fair bit of Farhan in the debate and he was not making sense whilst imposing his Hindu beliefs on the Gospel accounts. It makes it stranger still that an experienced Christian apologist (Sam Shamoun) would pronounce this as 'defending' Christian beliefs.
 
Wake up and pay attention. Oh can somebody hop over to Shamoun's and nudge him so he wakes up and stops showing himself incapable of differentiating between a Hindu concept and the Trinitarian concept of god-man. I just checked Shamoun's latest comment on the debate, he STILL remains in absolute delusion that Farhan is defending Christianity despite having seen the debate:

As you will see from the debate itself, Farhan admits he is not a Christian which makes his willingness to stand up for the Christian faith concerning this topic all the more amazing. Pray since he seems to be at the door

Shakes head

A comment on the debate
 
I don't recommend the debate at all. Farhan was making no sense at all. Inamullah dismissed Farhan as 'confused'. I would like to offer a lengthy review but I'm pushed for time.
 
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 /sisterof Jesus? If yes, become a Muslim. Now is the time.

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

 

Wednesday, 4 September 2013

Center For Religious Debate Do it Once Again!

One would have thought The Center for Religious Debate would have learnt its lesson from the Osama Abdallah debates? That's not the case.

There is a saying, fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me. What's this about? Harp your minds back to the Osama Abdallah debates that The Center for Religious Debate organised. They drafted Osama in at short notice and had him debate 4 different  topics with 4 different opponents:

Osama, from my understanding had FOUR DEBATES against FOUR different opponents in TWO days
This is a ridiculous amount of responsibility to take on. I actually criticise Osama for taking on such a work load. Why he did so I am not sure. It certainly is not wise and nor beneficial to oneself or the audience. How does he expect to do each topic justice with his attention diverted 4 ways? This is not a game – it’s serious business.

You can’t offer the same clarity, quality information and quality argumentation in each debate as you would if you focussed on one debate like each one of his opponents
 
Allowing the Muslim to take on such a huge workload obviously affected the quality of the dialogues.

So one would have thought The Center for Religious Debate would not go down that route again. Well they have. Here we see, from the flyer, Shadid Lewis (Muslim debater) is due to debate 4 different topics against 4 different opponents all in the course of 4 days. In fact, I'm not sure but I suspect it may even be 5 debates as Shadid Lewis has another debate lined up which is not mentioned in the flyer.

One wonders whether this is something the Christian debate group (The Center for Religious Debate) welcomes as it offers the Christian debaters an advantage.

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/

The History of the Kabah

By Kaleef K. Karim. Edited by Ijaz Ahmad (spelling, formatting, content, etc). From:
http://callingchristians.com/2013/09/04/the-historicity-of-the-kabaah/

One of the recent things I have heard from Christian missionaries, when debating with them is that they say, the Ka’bah in Mecca where Muslims go for pilgrimage annually has no history before the advent of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). These ridiculous and fictitious claims have no basis whatsoever. I shall now bring forth evidences that Kabaah in Makah did exist before the coming of Muhammad (peace be upon him).
The Kabah stone In Mecca
Diodorus Siculus (Born: 90 BC – Died: 30 BC)

Diodorus Siculus was a Greek historian, who wrote works of history in the 1st Century BC. He is known for the monumental universal history Bibliotheca historica. Diodorus is the first known Historian long before the coming of Islam that makes mention of Mecca.

Reverend Charles Augustus Goodrich a Christian, was an American author and Congregational minister comments on Kaaba and Mecca, although, he is not fond of the Prophet Muhammed (pbuh), but he is sincere in admitting that Ka’bah existed at time of Patriarchs. He says:
“Among the variety of fabulous traditions which have been propagated by the followers of Mahomet, concerning the origin of this building, we find it asserted, that its existence is coeval with our parents, and that it was built by Adam, after his expulsion from paradise, from a representation of the celestial temple, which the almighty let down from heaven in curtains of light and placed in Mecca, perpendicular under the original. To this the patriarch was commanded to turn his face when he prayed, and to compass it by way of devotion, as the angels did the heavenly one. After the destruction of this temple by the deluge, it was rebuilt by Abraham and his son Ishmael on the same spot, and after the same model, according to directions, which they received by revelation; and since that time, it has continued to be the object of veneration to Ishmael’s descendants. Whatever discredit we may give to these, and other ravings of the Moslem imposter concerning the Caaba its high antiquity cannot be disputed; and the most probable account is, that it was built and used for religious purposes by some of the early patriarchs; and after the introduction of idols, it came to be appropriated to the reception of the pagan divinities. Diodorus Siculus, in his description of the cost of the Red Sea, mentions this temple as being, in his time, held in great veneration by all Arabians; and Pocoke informs us, that the linen or silken veil, with which it is covered, was first offered by a pious King of the Hamyarites, seven hundred years before the time of Mahomet.” [1]

John Reynell Morell says:

“…historically speaking, Mecca was a holy city long before Mohammed. Diodorus siculus, following agatharcides, relates that not far from the red sea, between the country of the Sabeans and of the Thamudites there existed a celebrated temple, venerated throughout Arabia.”[2]
Encyclopædia Britannica: Or, A Dictionary of Arts, sciences and Miscellaneous Literature, Edited by Colin Macfarquhar says:
“the science of astronomy was cultivated at Babylon; but the school of the Arabs was a clear firmament and a naked plain. In their nocturnal marches, they steered by the guidance of the stars: their names and order, daily station were familiar to the curiosity and devotion of the bedoween; and he was taught by experience to divide in 28 parts the Zodiac of the moon, and to bless the constellations who refreshed, with salutary rains, the thirst of the desert. The reign of the heavenly orbs could not be extended beyond the visible sphere; and some metaphorical powers were necessary to sustain the transmigration of the souls and the resurrection of bodies: a camel was left to perish on the grave, that he might serve his master in another life; and the invocation of departed spirits implies that they were still endowed with consciousness and power. Each tribe, each family, each independent warrior, created and changed the rites and the object of this fantastic worship; but the nation in every age has bowed to the religion as well as to the language, of Mecca. The genuine antiquity of the Caaba extends beyond the Christian era: in describing the coast of the Red Sea, the Greek historian Diodorus has remarked, between the Thamaudites and the Sabeans a famous temple, whose superior sanctity was revered by ALL THE ARABIANS: the linen or silken veil, which is annually renewed by the Turkish Emperor, was first offered by a pious King of the Homerites, who reigned 700 years before the time of Mahomet.“ [3]
Andrew Crichton also comments on the ‘Kabah’ in his book; ‘The history of Arabia, ancient and modern.’ He says:
“From the celebrity of the place, a vast concourse of pilgrims flocked to it from all quarters. Such was the commencement of the city and the superstitions fame of Mecca, the very name of which implies a place of great resort. Whatever credit may be due to these traditions, the antiquity of the Kaaba is unquestionable; for its origin ascends far beyond the beginning of the Christian era. A passage in Diodorus has anobvious reference to it, who speaks of a famous temple among the people he calls Bizomenians, revered as most sacred by all Arabians.” [4]
Claudius Ptolemy (Born: 90 AD – Died: 168 AD)
Claudius Ptolemy was a Greco-Roman writer of Alexandria, known as a mathematician, astronomer, geographer; is another person, centuries before Islam who makes mention of Makkah. He uses the name ‘Makoraba’ for Makkah.
In the Book: ‘The New Encyclopedia of Islam’, written by Cyril Glassé says that Ptolmey in the second century mentioned Makkah. Here is what he wrote:
“Mecca (Makkah al-Mukarramah, lit ‘Mecca the blessed’). For thousands of years Mecca has been a spiritual center. Ptolemy, the second century Greek geographer, mentioned Mecca, calling it ‘Makoraba’. Some have interpreted this to mean temple (from Maqribah in south Arabian) but it may also mean ‘Mecca of the Arabs’.” [5]
Ilya Pavlovich Petrushevsky (1898–1977) was an Professor of History of the Near East at the University of Leningrad for twenty years, he also makes mention that Ptolemy in the second Century mentions Makkah:
“On the caravan route from Syria to the Yemen, in the Hijaz neighbourhood, lay Mecca. Ptolemy, the Greek geographer, mentions it as early as the second century calling it Makoraba, which is derived from the south Arab word Maqrab meaning ‘sanctuary’. [6]
Michael Wolfe:
“Mecca lies midway along the west coast of Arabia in a mountainous barrier region named the Hijaz. This narrow tract of land about nine hundred miles long with the Tropic of Cancer passing through its center. The second-century Greco-Egyptian geographer Ptolemy called the city Makoraba, the temple.” [7]
Paul Wheatley:
“it was its virtual monopoly of Hijaz commerce which made of Mecca, in the words of the Quran, ‘a city secure and at peace; provisions flowing in from every side’. But all this is concerned with the expansion of the influence of a city which already existed. The name Mecca (strictly transliterated as Makkah) had been mentioned in the Ptolmaic corpus in the 2nd century AD under the orthography Makoraba, which itself derived from the Sabaean Makuraba, meaning ‘sanctuary’. Long before Muhammad the Ka’bah had served as the central shrine of a group of clans, each of whom had deposited its ritual stone, symbolizing its own god, in the sacred precinct.” [8]
In the book ‘A Comparative Study of Thirty City-state Cultures: An Investigation’, edited by Mogens Herman Hansen; in Note 24 makes clear when Ptolemy mentioned the name ‘Macoraba’ he meant Mecca:
“Ptolemy in Geographies refers to Mecca as Macoraba.” [9]
Conclusion

From all the evidences which I have presented from objective and academic sources, it can clearly be seen that it is a fact that Kabaah existed before the advent of Islam and Muhammad (peace be upon him).  Sealing my arguments, I refer you to Reverend Charles Augustus Goodrich, a Christian historian, who admitted that the Kabaah existed and was built by the Patriarchs. In his own words, he says, “Caaba its high antiquity cannot be disputed; and the most probable account is, that it was built and used for religious purposes by some of the early patriarchs.”

References:
[1] Religious Ceremonies and Customs, Or: The Forms of Worship Practised by the several nations of the known world, from the earliest records to the present time Charles Augustus Goodrich [Hartford: Published by Hutchinson and Dwine 1834] page 124
[2] Turkey, Past and Present: Its History, Topography, and Resources By John Reynell Morell page 84
[3] Encyclopaedia Britannica: Or, A Dictionary of Arts, sciences and Miscellaneous Literature Constructed on a Plan Volume 2, Part 1 edited by Colin Macfarquhar page 183 – 184
[4] The history of Arabia, ancient and modern Volume 1 [second edition] By Andrew Crichton page 100
[5] The New Encyclopedia of Islam By Cyril Glassé page 302
[6] Islam in Iran by I. Pavlovich Petrushevsky page 3
[7] One Thousand Roads to Mecca: Ten Centuries of Travelers Writing about the Muslim pilgrimage Michael Wolfe introduction xv
[8] Paul Wheatley The Origins and Character of the Ancient Chinese City: volume 11 page 288
[9] A Comparative Study of Thirty City-state Cultures: An Investigation, Volume 21 edited by Mogens Herman Hansen page 248 NOTE 24

Tuesday, 3 September 2013

Apocrypha Books also in a number of Protestant Bibles

Myth: The Apocrypha are books found only in Roman Catholic Bibles.

Although the Apocrypha—or what Catholics call the Deutero-canonical books—are an intrinsic part of Roman Catholic translations of scripture, a number of Protestant Bibles also include them. Even the King James Bible, a distinctly Protestant version, included the Apocrypha in every printing until the middle of the nineteenth century. To be sure, the apocryphal books were placed at the end of the Old Testament, to set them apart (unlike in Roman Catholic Bibles), but they were nevertheless included. - Daniel Wallace

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/

The Rationalizer Refuted Comprehensively by Hafiz Chuck Connors

Here we have it. Some folk have been waiting a while to see 'The Rationalizer' refuted. The wait is over.

The truth is, there are a number of folk on the net akin to 'The Rationalizer' who have little or next to no knowledge on Islam yet argue against it as though they are scholars.

The Rationalizer Debunked


'The Rationalizer' is the worst kind of charlatan and an embarrassment to both religious and non-religious people, not to mention Edward Woodward.

Here, physics graduate and Islamic scholar Hafiz Chuck Connors exposes his gaffes and bargain - basement sophistry.

He also takes Muslim apologists and speakers to task for forcing 'scientific' explanations into the Quran when they shouldn't.

'The Rationalizers' errors in the fields of science, history and religion are way too numerous to all be addressed individually, but this representative sample of his molestation of cosmology, mauling of the Arabic language and abuse of the historical method should suffice for intellectually engaged Muslims and Atheists, though it won't stop him subjecting the public to his cheap polemics.

Thanks to Nazam for the upload and description.
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

Monday, 2 September 2013

False Claim: 'Muhammad learnt from Waraqa - the relative of Khadija'

Some folk continue to make the ignorant claim of Waraqa being the source of the Quran. If these folk were actually aware of the facts their reasoning would not allow them to make such a claim. The fact remains, Prophet Muhammad (p) only ever met him twice, Waraqa was a blind man and he died three years into the revelation of the Quran (the Quran was revealed in a period of roughly 23 years):

Muhammad's contacts with the Jewish and Christian scholars were very limited. The most prominent Christian known to him was an old blind man called Waraqa ibn-Naufal who was a relative of the Prophet's first wife Khadija (ra). Although of Arab descent, he was a convert to Christianity and was very well versed with the New Testament. The Prophet (pbuh) only met him twice, first when Waraqa was worshipping at the Ka'aba (before the Prophetic mission) and he kissed the Prophet's forehead affectionately.

The second occasion was when the Prophet (pbuh) went to meet Waraqa accompanied by his wife Khadija (ra) after receiving the first revelation. Waraqa died three years later and the revelation continued for about 23 years [in total the revelation took about 23 years]. It is therefore ridiculous to assume that Waraqa was the source of the contents of the Quran, as he died at the very beginning of the Prophet-hood [Bracketing mine] - Quotes in red from, Islam: Silencing the Critics, Zia Sheikh, 2nd Edition, 2012

Scientific facts in the Quran:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TiLBGHwX_4c

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/


A pre-debate comment: Does Islam Teach Pure Monotheism? Shadid Lewis vs. Anthony Rogers

Is it silly season? Is it?

I hope you're sitting down, we have a Christian missionary group setting up a debate 'Does Islam Teach Pure Monotheism?'

Now, even the one who has basic knowledge of Islam knows Islam teaches pure monotheism - all scholars of the faith will agree on this.

However, when you have a Christian apologist (Anthony Rogers) who actually believes an angel in the Old Testament is God one would not be so surprised such a debate is arranged as this Christian apologist's reckoning does not comply with orthodoxy, scholarship nor sound reasoning.

Here is a scholar to tell you what all other scholars of Islam will tell you - Islam is PURE MONOTHEISM:

"Our doctrine could not be more straight forward. The most pure, exalted, uncompromising monotheism: the clearest idea of God there has ever been" - Dr T J Winter

In fact, this 'debate' has already been executed in some capacity with Anthony Rogers' colleague (Sam Shamoun - who also, upon last check, shares similar views to Anthony Rogers). You can view the 'debate' here:



Having said that - this site may well feature a review for this debate as per Anthony Roger's previous debate: http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/debate-review-does-prophet-muhammad.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.whyislam.org/