Effectively, Christians believe God transferred the sin of mankind upon (a person of) Himself and had Himself killed at the hands of a bunch of Jews and Romans in order to forgive sin. On the other hand Muslims believe God simply forgives sin out of His Mercy without a need to kill Himself.
The Muslim view does in fact make more sense once an individual considers the Attributes of God and the history of sin.
The History of Sin
Does sin have a point of inception? It does. The concept of sin only came into existence due to God. Think about it; an individual down the road who happens to have sexual intercourse is commiting sin because he is doing this act in an unmarried state whilst the individual next door is doing the SAME act but not committing a sin as his actions are under the umbrella of marriage. Who set the criteria of what constitutes sin and what does not? God.
So Who brought the concept of sin into existence? God.
Did God kill Himself in order to bring the idea of sin into existence? No.
Think about it, if God can introduce the idea of sin without a need to kill Himself then surely you can believe God can forgive people without sacrificing Himself.
NOTE: For intellectual honesty purposes it must be stated there is a distinction between the idea of sin and the act of sin.
Attributes of God
The relevant attributes of God for the purposes of this article are:
*God being the Ever Living
*God being the Forgiver
We realise God does not die and is the Forgiver of sin; therefore the Christian belief of God dying for the sin of people is problematic but the Islamic belief of God forgiving without dying is in line with a consistent and correct view of God
So, do we need God to sacrifice Himself in order to forgive sinners? No. The Islamic view of God simply forgiving out of His Mercy is sufficient.
All this philosophising does throw further refutation upon the neo-Christian idea of atonement
Feedback: yahyasnow@hotmail.com
More about Jesus and Christianity plus Islam:
Encouragement to learn about Islam:http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.com/2010/08/assyrians-and-arab-christians-please.html
The Brothers of Jesus: Who are they?http://yahyasnow.wordpress.com/2009/12/25/jesus-teaches-muslims-are-right/
Which incarnation? I personally feel both beliefs are gateways to paganism:http://thegrandverbalizer19.blogspot.com/2010/08/two-incarnations-god-became-dove.html
Wednesday, 15 September 2010
Michael Moore Defends the Quran against Christian Attack
Micaheal Moore on the "Burn the Quran Day"
Michael Moore is not a Muslim as far as I know but he really does educate Christians on the Quran and Islamic teachings. Christians, we (Muslims) BELIEVE in Jesus (pbuh).
Also the Quran even MENTIONS JESUS - the question is why would the Christians be burning a Book which mentions Jesus on a number of occasions? Here is Michael Moore presenting a few home truths to Christians in America whilst denouncing the latest attempts to hurt Muslims
Video decription from Truth0will0prevail:
Today On CNN Michael Moore commenting on Burn the Quran day says Christ is mentioned 25 times in it! Why burn it?
More info: http://www.ediscoverislam.com/World-Religions/Islam-Religion/maryam-mary-quran
international Burn the Quran day MY ENTRY Pastor Terry Jones Wayne Sapp Dove World Outreach Center Science Atheist Ignostec
Burn the Koran day vs know Quran initiative: South Park Muhammad in bible debate Ahmed Deedat ground zero mosque 2012 Barack Obama Judaism Orthodox Jewish monotheism Rambam Maimonides Islam Christianity Shabir Ally Zakir Naik catholic pope benedict Christ Jesus Moses Shir HaShirim Song of Songs 5:16 almudic prayer Ohel Moshe Ohal Mosha Bet Shemesh Beth Israel Abdul Raheem Green jerusalem Mecca madina Yeshua Mashiach YHWH Torah Talmud tanahk prophecies mishnah
Listen to Quran rather than burning it:
***Angelina Jolie Opposes Quran Burning and Helps Muslims***
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.com/2010/09/angelina-jolie-slams-pastor-terry-jones.html
***CONVERTS TO ISLAM***
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.com/search/label/Conversions
Michael Moore is not a Muslim as far as I know but he really does educate Christians on the Quran and Islamic teachings. Christians, we (Muslims) BELIEVE in Jesus (pbuh).
Also the Quran even MENTIONS JESUS - the question is why would the Christians be burning a Book which mentions Jesus on a number of occasions? Here is Michael Moore presenting a few home truths to Christians in America whilst denouncing the latest attempts to hurt Muslims
Video decription from Truth0will0prevail:
Today On CNN Michael Moore commenting on Burn the Quran day says Christ is mentioned 25 times in it! Why burn it?
More info: http://www.ediscoverislam.com/World-Religions/Islam-Religion/maryam-mary-quran
international Burn the Quran day MY ENTRY Pastor Terry Jones Wayne Sapp Dove World Outreach Center Science Atheist Ignostec
Burn the Koran day vs know Quran initiative: South Park Muhammad in bible debate Ahmed Deedat ground zero mosque 2012 Barack Obama Judaism Orthodox Jewish monotheism Rambam Maimonides Islam Christianity Shabir Ally Zakir Naik catholic pope benedict Christ Jesus Moses Shir HaShirim Song of Songs 5:16 almudic prayer Ohel Moshe Ohal Mosha Bet Shemesh Beth Israel Abdul Raheem Green jerusalem Mecca madina Yeshua Mashiach YHWH Torah Talmud tanahk prophecies mishnah
Listen to Quran rather than burning it:
***Angelina Jolie Opposes Quran Burning and Helps Muslims***
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.com/2010/09/angelina-jolie-slams-pastor-terry-jones.html
***CONVERTS TO ISLAM***
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.com/search/label/Conversions
Sunday, 12 September 2010
Mass Muslim Marriage and Rape of Prepubescent Girls: Hoax
Lies about Islam
There is an Islamophobe hoax circulating the internet which showcases a Hamas mass wedding celebration and claims the brides were all prepubescent girls. A couple of key picture the Islamophobes use in this “Hamas pedophile” hoax:
Now then, the Islamophobes allege the prepubescent girls in this picture were being married off to the men and subsequently move seamlessly onto their sinister agenda of painting Muslim men as paedophiles and rapists. The reality is the girls in the picture were not the brides but were family members of the brides/grooms who were getting married– the girls pictured were NOT getting married.
It was simply a bunch of pictures (and video footage) from a Palestinian (Hamas) mass marriage celebration. This fact is confirmed by a SKY NEWS reporter, Tim Marshall, who was present at the marriage celebration; Tim Marshall was indeed livid at the sinister nature of the hoax as a result he came out to expose the hoax.
Tim Marshall went to the extent of leaving comments on the sites which ran with the hoax “paedophile marriage” claims:
“Dozens, and I mean dozens, of websites took the video of the event and wrote lurid stories about Hamas mass paedophilia with headlines about '450 child brides', and endless copy about how disgusting this was…I spent a few hours visiting websites and leaving comments where I could. To little avail.
Instead I received a steady stream of vitriol. The best response was on a site run by a Debbie Schlussel . The guy who posted it said he wasn't interested in the detail. The detail being the fact that the girls weren't the brides.
It showed how much some people want to believe nonsense like this, as it re-inforces their prejudices.. "[1]
In fact, Hamas also denounced the hoax and confirmed most of the girls who were married were above the age of 18 and the youngest was 16. [2]
Summary
There was no mass marriage of prepubescent girls (or any rape for that matter). The girls pictured were NOT the brides but were actually the family members attending the wedding celebrations.
Somebody started this hoax off deceptively or through a lack of research and scrutiny. Sadly hateful, ignorant and unwise people spread this hoax all over the internet.
Herein lies the problem, people are willing to throw aside scrutiny and in some cases even fabricate plus invent in a malicious capacity in order to have a dig at Muslims and mudsling at Islam.
My dear friends learn about Islam from the Muslims rather than anti-Muslim hate sites. A funny quote I recently heard from a YouTube user (qwertyfshag): “don’t visit retarded anti-Muslim sites because they will make you retarded”
For further information on the concerning this hoax see hoax slayer:
http://www.hoax-slayer.com/mass-muslim-marriage.shtml
References
[1] Tim Marshall from Sky News http://blogs.news.sky.com/foreignmatters/Post:dcc9d723-8046-4857-b618-5c1135ba6417
[2] http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=106002
Indonesian Muslims Converting to Christianity?
[QURAN MIRACLES] The Miracles of the Number 19 in Quran | Dr. Shabir Ally
ISIS Members Having Dreams of Jesus?
People having dreams and visions showing Jesus is not divine
Russell Brand Exposes Muslim Terrorism Percentage
There is an Islamophobe hoax circulating the internet which showcases a Hamas mass wedding celebration and claims the brides were all prepubescent girls. A couple of key picture the Islamophobes use in this “Hamas pedophile” hoax:
Now then, the Islamophobes allege the prepubescent girls in this picture were being married off to the men and subsequently move seamlessly onto their sinister agenda of painting Muslim men as paedophiles and rapists. The reality is the girls in the picture were not the brides but were family members of the brides/grooms who were getting married– the girls pictured were NOT getting married.
It was simply a bunch of pictures (and video footage) from a Palestinian (Hamas) mass marriage celebration. This fact is confirmed by a SKY NEWS reporter, Tim Marshall, who was present at the marriage celebration; Tim Marshall was indeed livid at the sinister nature of the hoax as a result he came out to expose the hoax.
Tim Marshall went to the extent of leaving comments on the sites which ran with the hoax “paedophile marriage” claims:
“Dozens, and I mean dozens, of websites took the video of the event and wrote lurid stories about Hamas mass paedophilia with headlines about '450 child brides', and endless copy about how disgusting this was…I spent a few hours visiting websites and leaving comments where I could. To little avail.
Instead I received a steady stream of vitriol. The best response was on a site run by a Debbie Schlussel . The guy who posted it said he wasn't interested in the detail. The detail being the fact that the girls weren't the brides.
It showed how much some people want to believe nonsense like this, as it re-inforces their prejudices.. "[1]
In fact, Hamas also denounced the hoax and confirmed most of the girls who were married were above the age of 18 and the youngest was 16. [2]
Summary
There was no mass marriage of prepubescent girls (or any rape for that matter). The girls pictured were NOT the brides but were actually the family members attending the wedding celebrations.
Somebody started this hoax off deceptively or through a lack of research and scrutiny. Sadly hateful, ignorant and unwise people spread this hoax all over the internet.
Herein lies the problem, people are willing to throw aside scrutiny and in some cases even fabricate plus invent in a malicious capacity in order to have a dig at Muslims and mudsling at Islam.
My dear friends learn about Islam from the Muslims rather than anti-Muslim hate sites. A funny quote I recently heard from a YouTube user (qwertyfshag): “don’t visit retarded anti-Muslim sites because they will make you retarded”
For further information on the concerning this hoax see hoax slayer:
http://www.hoax-slayer.com/mass-muslim-marriage.shtml
References
[1] Tim Marshall from Sky News http://blogs.news.sky.com/foreignmatters/Post:dcc9d723-8046-4857-b618-5c1135ba6417
[2] http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=106002
Indonesian Muslims Converting to Christianity?
[QURAN MIRACLES] The Miracles of the Number 19 in Quran | Dr. Shabir Ally
ISIS Members Having Dreams of Jesus?
People having dreams and visions showing Jesus is not divine
Russell Brand Exposes Muslim Terrorism Percentage
Saturday, 11 September 2010
The Danger of Levonelle (a Morning After Pill)?
The Irresponsible Side Effects of LevonelleI was watching channel 4 on YouTube (a British TV station) and an advert for a product, Levonelle popped up. I viewed this product as a potential health-hazard whilst being in a state of utter shock and concern for British girls and society. I would imagine advertising and popularising products such as Levonelle is a backward step in the fight against Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STDs) – never mind the negativities which surround the use of any drug yet alone a drug which is designed as a morning after pill!
Think about it; how good for the body can an "emergency" drug such as a MORNING AFTER PILL be?
Levonelle even acknowledge the side effects one may experience, they are listed as such:
• Sickness
• Changes to periods
• Spotting or irregular bleeding before your next period
• More than 5 days late – we’re talking about your period!
• Late period and pain
Is Levonelle encouraging unprotected sex and STDs?
Of course there is nothing overtly suggesting Levonelle supports either unprotected sex or STDs BUT Levonelle offers a “safety net” to those who are sexually irresponsible. This of course has negative knock-on-effects; one of the two main reasons a “couple” would utilize contraception is the fear of pregnancy (the other reason being a precaution against Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STDs).
Now, it does not take a rocket scientist to predict with the popularising of morning after pills (i.e. Levonelle) we will see an increase in irresponsible sex of an unprotected nature. Therefore a prediction in the increase of STD rates!
British girls have it tough already – this peer and even societal expectation for teens to embark on sexual relations is out of control. We have the highest rates of teen-pregnancy in Europe [1]. Levonelle is NOT helping – Levonelle is a product which shouts the horse has bolted!Surely the potential health concern is teenage girls and even girls beyond will begin to use Levonelle in the stead of traditional contraceptives (i.e. condoms) – this screams STDs and other complications.
Tackling social and moral degradation in Britain
Why can’t we engender some good old fashioned education and views related to sex? Let’s educate the future generations that sex should only be carried out in a stable partnership (marriage) and not in a casual form. Levonelle is part of the problem and not the cure – in my view. This is Levonelle’s introduction (taken form their website):
“Are you anxious because you've had unprotected sex? Concerned that you could be at risk of pregnancy and not sure where to turn?” [2]
Something just seems so wrong about this. If sexual relationships were only taking place under the umbrella and safety net of a stable relationship (marriage) there would be no genuine requirement for the “safety net” of Levonelle. Allow me to opine; Levonelle is profiteering from the moral degradation of Britain – popularising Levonelle, through advertisements, is indicative of the road secularist Britain is travelling on.
References
[1] http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/uk-has-highest-teenage-pregnancy-rate-in-europe-397153.html
[2] Levonelle website
Feedback: yahyasnow@hotmail.com
Useful links
A religion which would help Britain tackle the problems of promiscuity and STDs:
http://www.ediscoverislam.com/
Worried about having an STD? Or want more information on various STDs and their respective signs and symptoms? See here:
http://www.avert.org/std-statistics-uk.htm
Church Holy Penis Prepuce Hoax
Do Christians Worship the Penis Prepuce of Jesus?
This may seem like an outrageous article but it has come to my attention claims of Christians worshipping and or revering penis prepuce are abound in chat rooms on the internet – hence my addressing of these claims
Those of you who are familiar with the New Testament you will know Jesus (pbuh) was circumcised on the 8th day according to the Gospel of Luke (2:21)
What Happened to the Foreskin?
The penis prepuce is considered the foreskin which is removed through circumcision. The natural question is what happened to the foreskin (prepuce)? Relic hunters would have deemed it lucrative to collect such a relic – was the relic preserved?
No, the penis prepuce certainly does not appear to have been preserved and any claims of the preservation of such can be dismissed as a hoax. Jewish custom dictates the foreskin is to be buried after the (brit milah) [1]; thus it is considered the same occurred with respect to Jesus (pbuh). There is no authentic evidence to suggest the penis prepuce was preserved.
Desperation for Wealth leads to Church Hoaxes
For the churches of the past, relics meant wealth – any relic would attract visitors and subsequently wealth. Obviously a claim of possessing the prepuce would boost a church’s popularity, congregation, wealth and influence. This explains why different churches lay claim to possessing the relic simultaneously; yes, more than one church claimed possession at the same time!
Did Christians Worship these Alleged Prepuces?
Some may have but the more balanced view would be a reverence on the part of the Christians, though paradoxically this reverence would be deemed oddly irreverent. I would imagine orthodox Trinitarian apologetic would state the penis prepuce was part of the human nature and thus Christians are not required to worship it.
Do any Alleged Penis Prepuce Relics exist Today?
“In a 1997 television documentary for Channel 4, British journalist Miles Kington travelled to Italy in search of the relic. He was unable to find any remaining example” [2]
I would not rule out a struggling church, in the future, laying claim to it – wealth and desperation for popularity leads humans to irreverent measures.
A Modern Day Church Hoax
Rome, Apr 23, 2008 / 06:36 am (CNA).- A former church custodian accused of faking an incident where a Virgin Mary statue wept blood was put on trial in the northern Italian city of Forli’ on Friday, ANSA reports.
Police accuse Vincenzo Di Costanzo of dripping his own blood onto the face of the statue in Forli’s Santa Lucia Church in a March 2006 attempt to simulate a miracle.
Forensic experts who examined the blood found the DNA matched that of a saliva sample taken from Di Costanzo.
Feedback: yahyasnow@hotmail.com
References
[1] Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh Deah, 265:10 (sourced from wikipedia)
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Prepuce
More about Jesus and Christianity plus Islam:
Encouragement to learn about Islam:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.com/2010/08/assyrians-and-arab-christians-please.html
The Brothers of Jesus: Who are they?
http://yahyasnow.wordpress.com/2009/12/25/jesus-teaches-muslims-are-right/
Which incarnation? I personally feel both beliefs are gateways to paganism:
http://thegrandverbalizer19.blogspot.com/2010/08/two-incarnations-god-became-dove.html
Friday, 10 September 2010
American Military Psycopaths Dehumanize Afghans
Look, stealing somebody's hashish is one thing, stealing a country's resources is another BUT dehumanizing the people of Afghanistan is a totally different kettle of fish.
The latest US military scandal is that of marines killing Afghans for sport and even collecting their fingers as trophy pieces. The attrocities in Afghanistan go largely unreported, in my view, but when something such as this latest morally-warped episode comes to the surface I only wonder to the extent of the unreported and unsurfaced sufferings that have been dealt to the Iraqis and Afghanis at the hands of the US marines and her allies. Chris McGreal from the Guardian entitles the latest attrocity to surface:
US soldiers 'killed Afghan civilians for sport and collected fingers as trophies'Soldiers face charges over secret 'kill team' which allegedly murdered at random and collected fingers as trophies of war
He goes on to write:
Twelve American soldiers face charges over a secret "kill team" that allegedly blew up and shot Afghan civilians at random and collected their fingers as trophies.
Five of the soldiers are charged with murdering three Afghan men who were allegedly killed for sport in separate attacks this year. Seven others are accused of covering up the killings and assaulting a recruit who exposed the murders when he reported other abuses, including members of the unit smoking hashish stolen from civilians.
Andrew Holmes, Michael Wagnon, Jeremy Morlock and Adam Winfield are four of the five Stryker soldiers who face murder charges
Read full article here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/sep/09/us-soldiers-afghan-civilians-fingers
These are sad and sobering times
May Allah protect the people of Iraq and Afghanistan from further abuse. Ameen
The latest US military scandal is that of marines killing Afghans for sport and even collecting their fingers as trophy pieces. The attrocities in Afghanistan go largely unreported, in my view, but when something such as this latest morally-warped episode comes to the surface I only wonder to the extent of the unreported and unsurfaced sufferings that have been dealt to the Iraqis and Afghanis at the hands of the US marines and her allies. Chris McGreal from the Guardian entitles the latest attrocity to surface:
US soldiers 'killed Afghan civilians for sport and collected fingers as trophies'Soldiers face charges over secret 'kill team' which allegedly murdered at random and collected fingers as trophies of war
He goes on to write:
Twelve American soldiers face charges over a secret "kill team" that allegedly blew up and shot Afghan civilians at random and collected their fingers as trophies.
Five of the soldiers are charged with murdering three Afghan men who were allegedly killed for sport in separate attacks this year. Seven others are accused of covering up the killings and assaulting a recruit who exposed the murders when he reported other abuses, including members of the unit smoking hashish stolen from civilians.
Andrew Holmes, Michael Wagnon, Jeremy Morlock and Adam Winfield are four of the five Stryker soldiers who face murder charges
Read full article here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/sep/09/us-soldiers-afghan-civilians-fingers
These are sad and sobering times
May Allah protect the people of Iraq and Afghanistan from further abuse. Ameen
Thursday, 9 September 2010
Angelina Jolie Slams Pastor Terry Jones (and Supports Muslims)
It appears Angelina Jolie is rocking the boat of ingrained attitudes of a bygone era. As far as my memory spans back into time the perception has always been of the Church being the morally decent and well-reputed whilst those spiritually impoverished from the debauched echelons of Hollywood were lacking in decency whilst drowning in their egos.
In my cyber-vocation of investigating Christian outreaches, missionaries and internet ministries for accuracy, consistency and morality I have been shocked by the sheer irreligious nature of such; a genuine lack of honesty and scruples.
Now, just imagine my shock and horror in hearing of a PASTOR from the “Dove World Outreach Center”, Dr Terry Jones, announcing his intent to have a burn the Quran day on September 11th - can you imagine a “religious” authority acting in such an outrageously childish, reckless and offensive fashion? . This state of shock was perpetuated and further compounded by Angelina Jolie’s heart-warming visit to Pakistan.
Angelina Jolie, despite not being trained in any religious or spiritual capacity (as far as I know) was willing and able to put aside stereotypes and prejudice in favour of humanity by going out and helping the Muslims of Pakistan whilst the reckless egomaniac Pastor Terry Jones was scheming and working his hate-filled agenda assiduously. Do you not see a fundamental problem here? Angelina Jolie (from Hollywood) out-performs a Pastor (from the Church) in humanity and basic decency.
Cultural Sensitivities – Jolie Vs Pastor Jones
Angelina Jolie even had the foresight and decency to dress in a culturally sensitive fashion – a fashion which would have removed her to a back seat and given the platform of publicity, mainly, to the plight of the poor Pakistanis. This, my friends, is a selfless act and certainly free from ego.
How does the Christian Pastor fare in this regard? Well, whilst many Muslims in Pakistan are suffering from the effects of the flooding the Pastor had a real disconnection from concern and humanity and his eyes were firmly fixed on publicity at the cost of offending billions of Muslims worldwide. Quite simply the Pastor had no concern for cultural sensitivities or wisdom – he wanted his mug in the spotlight. What a sad egomaniac.
Hollywood shows the Church up (Again)
There is very little wonder as to why the Church is losing influence and followers in the West. Christians have put their own ego-laden agendas ahead of humanity and decency whilst the traditionally decadent institute of Hollywood continues to score moral victories over the Church.
Angelina Jolie Slams Pastor Terry Jones’ Evil Scheme of Burning the Quran
Jolie was asked about pastor Terry Jones’ intentions of burning the Quran, she offered a response which poured scorn upon the moral-midget that is Terry Jones:
"I have hardly the words that somebody would do that to somebody's religious book," she told reporters in Islamabad after returning from overflowing refugee camps in the northwest part of the country.
Read more: http://ca.eonline.com/uberblog/b199291_angelina_jolie_attacks_quran-burning.html#ixzz0z5xqn83G
It says it all when somebody from Hollywood is educating and rebuking somebody from a supposed “church”. Amazing, truly amazing!
Beaten + Humiliated by Angelina Jolie: The egomaniac that is Pastor Terry Jones
Terry Jones should grow up and have a rethink. What matters more to him - his ego or humanity? Pastor Terry Jones has failed this particular investigation for morality; his ministry has been brought into disrepute. Ministries being brought to shame is nothing new and is in fact a phenomenon which is becoming increasingly regular in occurence
UPDATE: It appears Pastor Terry Jones has had a change of heart I received this update from the BonsaiSky YouTube channel:
http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/09/09/flor...
Ok, now he's "rethinking" his canceling of the Quran burning. Whatever that means. Like I said, if he does it, more people will come to Islam. Decisions. Decisions.
Donate to help the Pakistani flood victims then please see:
http://www.islamic-relief.org.uk/?gclid=COD2w5Cb_KMCFan-2AodamPlGw
Learn more about Islam even if you are not looking to convert:
http://www.ediscoverislam.com/
Feedback: yahyasnow@homtail.com
In my cyber-vocation of investigating Christian outreaches, missionaries and internet ministries for accuracy, consistency and morality I have been shocked by the sheer irreligious nature of such; a genuine lack of honesty and scruples.
Now, just imagine my shock and horror in hearing of a PASTOR from the “Dove World Outreach Center”, Dr Terry Jones, announcing his intent to have a burn the Quran day on September 11th - can you imagine a “religious” authority acting in such an outrageously childish, reckless and offensive fashion? . This state of shock was perpetuated and further compounded by Angelina Jolie’s heart-warming visit to Pakistan.
Angelina Jolie, despite not being trained in any religious or spiritual capacity (as far as I know) was willing and able to put aside stereotypes and prejudice in favour of humanity by going out and helping the Muslims of Pakistan whilst the reckless egomaniac Pastor Terry Jones was scheming and working his hate-filled agenda assiduously. Do you not see a fundamental problem here? Angelina Jolie (from Hollywood) out-performs a Pastor (from the Church) in humanity and basic decency.
Cultural Sensitivities – Jolie Vs Pastor Jones
Angelina Jolie even had the foresight and decency to dress in a culturally sensitive fashion – a fashion which would have removed her to a back seat and given the platform of publicity, mainly, to the plight of the poor Pakistanis. This, my friends, is a selfless act and certainly free from ego.
How does the Christian Pastor fare in this regard? Well, whilst many Muslims in Pakistan are suffering from the effects of the flooding the Pastor had a real disconnection from concern and humanity and his eyes were firmly fixed on publicity at the cost of offending billions of Muslims worldwide. Quite simply the Pastor had no concern for cultural sensitivities or wisdom – he wanted his mug in the spotlight. What a sad egomaniac.
Hollywood shows the Church up (Again)
There is very little wonder as to why the Church is losing influence and followers in the West. Christians have put their own ego-laden agendas ahead of humanity and decency whilst the traditionally decadent institute of Hollywood continues to score moral victories over the Church.
Angelina Jolie Slams Pastor Terry Jones’ Evil Scheme of Burning the Quran
Jolie was asked about pastor Terry Jones’ intentions of burning the Quran, she offered a response which poured scorn upon the moral-midget that is Terry Jones:
"I have hardly the words that somebody would do that to somebody's religious book," she told reporters in Islamabad after returning from overflowing refugee camps in the northwest part of the country.
Read more: http://ca.eonline.com/uberblog/b199291_angelina_jolie_attacks_quran-burning.html#ixzz0z5xqn83G
It says it all when somebody from Hollywood is educating and rebuking somebody from a supposed “church”. Amazing, truly amazing!
Beaten + Humiliated by Angelina Jolie: The egomaniac that is Pastor Terry Jones
Terry Jones should grow up and have a rethink. What matters more to him - his ego or humanity? Pastor Terry Jones has failed this particular investigation for morality; his ministry has been brought into disrepute. Ministries being brought to shame is nothing new and is in fact a phenomenon which is becoming increasingly regular in occurenceUPDATE: It appears Pastor Terry Jones has had a change of heart I received this update from the BonsaiSky YouTube channel:
http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/09/09/flor...
Ok, now he's "rethinking" his canceling of the Quran burning. Whatever that means. Like I said, if he does it, more people will come to Islam. Decisions. Decisions.
Donate to help the Pakistani flood victims then please see:
http://www.islamic-relief.org.uk/?gclid=COD2w5Cb_KMCFan-2AodamPlGw
Learn more about Islam even if you are not looking to convert:
http://www.ediscoverislam.com/
Feedback: yahyasnow@homtail.com
Wednesday, 8 September 2010
Nabeel Qureshi's Deception Concerning Quranic Preservation
It's axiomatic my dear friends!
If you are so careless with the truth you are bound to get caught red-handed deceiving people sooner or later; Nabeel Qureshi's time has come.
Here, Nabeel Qureshi has been caught using a "narration" to attack the preservation of the Quran despite knowing this "narration" does not even exist. Here is the awful truth:
Dr Nabeel Qureshi of Acts 17 Apologetics Caugh in Deceit Scandal - The best home videos are here
If the video does not play please visit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VdI0o4SmY0
The narrations critics are using to attack the Preservation of the Quran
Here is a forged “narration” dishonest critics are using:
“The people have been guilty of deceit in the reading of the Quran. I like it better to read according to the recitation of him [ie Muhammad] whom I love more than that of Zaid ibn Thabit”
(Ibn Sa’d, Kitab al Tabaqat al Kabir, Vol2, p444)
This “narration” is infamous for being the “narration” Dr Nabeel Qureshi used in his attack against the preservation of the Quran. Qureshi used it despite KNOWING it was bogus – how dishonest!
This narration does NOT even exist! This fact is confirmed by Muslim apologist, Bassam Zawadi [1]
The statement; “The people have been guilty of deceit in the reading of the Quran” does not exist in the actual source material. It appears somebody just fabricated this.
Honest people would not and should not use this "narration".
Uploaded by Yahya Snow
Feedback/questions: yahyasnow@hotmail.com
Reference
[1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VdI0o4SmY0
*****UPDATE*****
Nabeel Qureshi has responded with a bizarre conspiracy theory!!!
See here:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.com/2010/09/bassam-zawadi-rebukes-nabeel-qureshi.html
For more information on this topic please view a refutation of Qureshi's video:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.com/2010/09/responding-to-acts-17-apologetics.html
If you are so careless with the truth you are bound to get caught red-handed deceiving people sooner or later; Nabeel Qureshi's time has come.
Here, Nabeel Qureshi has been caught using a "narration" to attack the preservation of the Quran despite knowing this "narration" does not even exist. Here is the awful truth:
Dr Nabeel Qureshi of Acts 17 Apologetics Caugh in Deceit Scandal - The best home videos are here
If the video does not play please visit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VdI0o4SmY0
The narrations critics are using to attack the Preservation of the Quran
Here is a forged “narration” dishonest critics are using:
“The people have been guilty of deceit in the reading of the Quran. I like it better to read according to the recitation of him [ie Muhammad] whom I love more than that of Zaid ibn Thabit”
(Ibn Sa’d, Kitab al Tabaqat al Kabir, Vol2, p444)
This “narration” is infamous for being the “narration” Dr Nabeel Qureshi used in his attack against the preservation of the Quran. Qureshi used it despite KNOWING it was bogus – how dishonest!
This narration does NOT even exist! This fact is confirmed by Muslim apologist, Bassam Zawadi [1]
The statement; “The people have been guilty of deceit in the reading of the Quran” does not exist in the actual source material. It appears somebody just fabricated this.
Honest people would not and should not use this "narration".
Uploaded by Yahya Snow
Feedback/questions: yahyasnow@hotmail.com
Reference
[1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VdI0o4SmY0
*****UPDATE*****
Nabeel Qureshi has responded with a bizarre conspiracy theory!!!
See here:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.com/2010/09/bassam-zawadi-rebukes-nabeel-qureshi.html
For more information on this topic please view a refutation of Qureshi's video:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.com/2010/09/responding-to-acts-17-apologetics.html
Sunday, 5 September 2010
Muslims Rebuke Dr James White
Right, for those who want a quick backdrop as to why Muslims are rebuking James White I will inform you White, in his debate with Sheikh Awal, claimed Allah repents in Surah 2:37 and he (White) was later taken to task on this issue and his odd claim was styled a “lie” as NO translation of the Quran agreed with James White’s assertion. Sheikh Awal was stunned and confused over White’s bizarre proclamation too.
Subsequently James White was harshly rebuked (see here) and criticised for being inconsistent and inaccurate. White responded by claiming he was RIGHT (even though ALL the expert translators of the Verse disagreed with him). White cited a bloke from a missionary website as proof he was RIGHT and thus all the EXPERTS WERE WRONG!!! See Appendix 1 for the article in which James White is adamant he is right (and thus EVERY expert translator is incorrect), evocatively titled as “Facts for the Honest (To Be Ignored by the Dishonest)”
Muslim Apologist, 1MoreMuslim, Gives James White a lesson in Arabic grammar and a Stern Ticking Off
The latest (and final) chapter was an Arabic speaker giving James White a lesson in Arabic grammar and REBUKING James White and confirming what we all KNEW – that James White is in the wrong. It's time for White to come clean and up his level of scholarship. Here is 1MoreMuslim’s rebuke and lesson directed at James White:
Conclusion – White involved himself in inaccurate and inconsistent scholarship
James White shunned ALL expert translations and translators in favour of a bloke on the internet who is NOT qualified in Arabic. Once James White was found out he adamantly insisted he was RIGHT and started accusing those who found him out of dishonesty. James White was left with no hiding place after 1MoreMuslim exposed his dodgy internet translation to be grammatically incorrect.
White KNOWS he cannot just go around eschewing (shunning) expert scholarship and translations in favour of a dodgy missionary translation on the internet as this is inconsistent and intellectually dishonest. White KNOWS this but his pride fails to allow him to admit to his error.
White is being inconsistent. To paraphrase James White; inconsistency is the sign of a failed argument and a failed faith too.
If White deceived you with his helping of inaccuracy please contact him and let him know of your disapproval.
May God guide us all and may God bless those who took part in bringing James White’s misinformation, inconsistency and unreliability to the fore. Ameen.
Contact the author of this piece: yahyasnow@hotmail.com
Appendix 1
James White’s fallacious article in its entirety:
Facts for the Honest (To Be Ignored by the Dishonest)
06/25/2010 - James White
For the few who are interested in the brief statement I made (styled a "lie" by the PPO&D, the "promoters of perpetual outrage and dishonesty"---a new term I have quoted for a certain very small, very irrelevant, but very vocal group of Muslim trouble-makers) at one point in the debate with Sheikh Awal, pointing out the contradiction between his asserting the Bible cannot be the Word of God because God "repents" (the Hebrew is nacham) and the fact that Allah is described as "oft-repenting." I made reference to Surah 2:37 simply because it was the first in a long list of substantiating texts. It says: "Then Adam received commandments from his Lord, and his Lord repented (fataba) towards him; for He is Oft-Repenting (huwa al-tawwabu), Most Merciful." He is oft-repenting. What's so difficult to understand? Well, it's simple: Muslims, as I demonstrated over and over again a few days ago, have one standard for the Bible, another standard for the Qur'an. "Oh, well, in the Qur'an, that means..." and off they go. But, if you attempt to explain that nacham likewise has a contextual meaning in the Bible, they ignore your explanation. So, the Qur'an can be explained, the Bible cannot. Double standards. Inconsistency. Sign of a failed argument, and in this case, a failed religion.
Want to read more? The Assyrian Encyclopedia (I evidently am in the name-creating mood this evening), Sam Shamoun, has laid it out clearly here. Read. Learn.
Appendix 2
Encouragement to learn about Islam:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.com/2010/08/assyrians-and-arab-christians-please.html
The Brothers of Jesus: Who are they?
http://yahyasnow.wordpress.com/2009/12/25/jesus-teaches-muslims-are-right/
Which incarnation? I personally feel both beliefs of incarnation are gateways to paganism:
http://thegrandverbalizer19.blogspot.com/2010/08/two-incarnations-god-became-dove.html
Find 1MoreMuslim here:
http://www.youtube.com/user/1MoreMuslim
Subsequently James White was harshly rebuked (see here) and criticised for being inconsistent and inaccurate. White responded by claiming he was RIGHT (even though ALL the expert translators of the Verse disagreed with him). White cited a bloke from a missionary website as proof he was RIGHT and thus all the EXPERTS WERE WRONG!!! See Appendix 1 for the article in which James White is adamant he is right (and thus EVERY expert translator is incorrect), evocatively titled as “Facts for the Honest (To Be Ignored by the Dishonest)”
Muslim Apologist, 1MoreMuslim, Gives James White a lesson in Arabic grammar and a Stern Ticking Off
The latest (and final) chapter was an Arabic speaker giving James White a lesson in Arabic grammar and REBUKING James White and confirming what we all KNEW – that James White is in the wrong. It's time for White to come clean and up his level of scholarship. Here is 1MoreMuslim’s rebuke and lesson directed at James White:
Conclusion – White involved himself in inaccurate and inconsistent scholarship
James White shunned ALL expert translations and translators in favour of a bloke on the internet who is NOT qualified in Arabic. Once James White was found out he adamantly insisted he was RIGHT and started accusing those who found him out of dishonesty. James White was left with no hiding place after 1MoreMuslim exposed his dodgy internet translation to be grammatically incorrect.
White KNOWS he cannot just go around eschewing (shunning) expert scholarship and translations in favour of a dodgy missionary translation on the internet as this is inconsistent and intellectually dishonest. White KNOWS this but his pride fails to allow him to admit to his error.
White is being inconsistent. To paraphrase James White; inconsistency is the sign of a failed argument and a failed faith too.
If White deceived you with his helping of inaccuracy please contact him and let him know of your disapproval.
May God guide us all and may God bless those who took part in bringing James White’s misinformation, inconsistency and unreliability to the fore. Ameen.
Contact the author of this piece: yahyasnow@hotmail.com
Appendix 1
James White’s fallacious article in its entirety:
Facts for the Honest (To Be Ignored by the Dishonest)
06/25/2010 - James White
For the few who are interested in the brief statement I made (styled a "lie" by the PPO&D, the "promoters of perpetual outrage and dishonesty"---a new term I have quoted for a certain very small, very irrelevant, but very vocal group of Muslim trouble-makers) at one point in the debate with Sheikh Awal, pointing out the contradiction between his asserting the Bible cannot be the Word of God because God "repents" (the Hebrew is nacham) and the fact that Allah is described as "oft-repenting." I made reference to Surah 2:37 simply because it was the first in a long list of substantiating texts. It says: "Then Adam received commandments from his Lord, and his Lord repented (fataba) towards him; for He is Oft-Repenting (huwa al-tawwabu), Most Merciful." He is oft-repenting. What's so difficult to understand? Well, it's simple: Muslims, as I demonstrated over and over again a few days ago, have one standard for the Bible, another standard for the Qur'an. "Oh, well, in the Qur'an, that means..." and off they go. But, if you attempt to explain that nacham likewise has a contextual meaning in the Bible, they ignore your explanation. So, the Qur'an can be explained, the Bible cannot. Double standards. Inconsistency. Sign of a failed argument, and in this case, a failed religion.
Want to read more? The Assyrian Encyclopedia (I evidently am in the name-creating mood this evening), Sam Shamoun, has laid it out clearly here. Read. Learn.
Appendix 2
Encouragement to learn about Islam:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.com/2010/08/assyrians-and-arab-christians-please.html
The Brothers of Jesus: Who are they?
http://yahyasnow.wordpress.com/2009/12/25/jesus-teaches-muslims-are-right/
Which incarnation? I personally feel both beliefs of incarnation are gateways to paganism:
http://thegrandverbalizer19.blogspot.com/2010/08/two-incarnations-god-became-dove.html
Find 1MoreMuslim here:
http://www.youtube.com/user/1MoreMuslim
Friday, 3 September 2010
Responding to Turretinfan’s probing on the Islamic view of the Gospels
Turretinfan presented a few probing questions concerning Imam Shabir Ally’s ideas pertaining to the Gospels as well as his “Christological evolution” theory with relation to the Gospels.
Of course I cannot answer for Imam Shabir Ally and nor am I attempting to but having planned to review the Shamoun-Ally debate in the near future I will add some insight of my own which may expand upon TurretinFan’s understanding with regards to the Islamic position and even Imam Shabir’s position. I also do this to depart from some of the yaa-hoo brigade of Christian apologists on the internet who I have recently been rebuking – TF certainly seems to be respectful and a serious thinker contrary to some of the Christian folks I have had the displeasure of countering of late
TF asked a few questions so I will respond with a few answers as well as questioning of my own.
TF begins by giving us a succinct summary of Imam Shabir’s claims:
Shabir Ally argues that Mark is the first gospel and the other three gospels show evidence of a progressive trend, with John having the "highest" Christology. Indeed, he sometimes even accuses the other synoptic gospels of omitting words or changing words that are found in Mark so as to move toward divinizing Jesus.
I do want to add in the way of explanation to our Christian readers, who may be taken aback by Imam Shabir’s thoughts, a quick explanation to add some flesh to the over-arching point of the progressive trend within the Gospels as a whole. Imam Ally has strong argumentation to back his ideas up; the Gospel of Mark has NO teachings of Jesus divinity and nor does it have a teaching of incarnation – simply put, Jesus is NOT God and has the profile of a human being (a Prophet) within the Gospel of Mark.
Why is this so significant?
As taught by Bart Ehrman the Gospels were written as separate documents and were not reliant upon other Gospels – they were meant to be read individually. Coupling this fact with that of the Gospel of Mark being the EARLIEST of the four Gospels we realise a conclusion quite profound
The reason behind the significance is that this points to early Christians (as well as the author of Mark) NOT believing in the Trinity, incarnation or divine-sonship of Jesus. This sounds very much Islamic as Islam teaches Jesus to be a Prophet rather than divine.
In the way of intellectual honesty I would state the virgin birth is not mentioned in the Gospel of Mark either
I have analytically combed through the Gospel of Mark with an Islamic comb and I am of the conclusion much of it is very much Islamic in nature.
Now, if your (Christian) EARLIEST source material NEVER mentions anything to do with the incarnation or “divinity” of Jesus then you have problems within Christianity as key theological teachings of Christianity are thrown into further doubt.
As a matter of fact the incarnation ONLY appears in the Gospel of John which is distinct from the Synoptics and is the most theologically evolved; not to mention the dubious nature of the alleged “quotes” attributed to Jesus within this Gospel. So we are now back to Imam Shabir’s ideas of evolution – ideas which make perfect sense in my view
I hope this gives the Christian reader some impetus for further study and TF some extra insight in order to aid his grasping of Imam Shabir’s argumentation
TF asks: So what is Shabir Ally's theory regarding what happened to the Muslim Injeel ("gospel")? That seems to be a tricky problem for Shabir Ally. Why on Earth would the Word of God be completely lost while various revisions of a false gospel be maintained?
Good question TF but as a Christian this question is problematic for yourself and is simple for a Muslim. How so? Well, open up your Bible and note Jesus preached the Gospel and all your four Gospels were NOT sanctioned nor EVER seen by Jesus – they came into existence AFTER Jesus departed from this world. Thus it is clear your four Gospels are not the Gospel of Jesus so I ask TF to answer his own question. It is a VERY tough question for a Christian; one which will bring one closer to Islam, God Willing.
I would also ask TF to produce the Q Gospel? Can he do this? No. He may lay claim to it being a “theoretical Gospel” but logic dictates a strong argument for the sayings Gospel (Q) being in existence at the time of “Matthew” and Luke. Where is it?
Why would the word of God be lost according to a Muslim? Well, Muslims believe the Prophets of the past (those before Muhammad) were sent to their respective people during those respective times and thus any Scriptures left behind after the passing of the said Prophets would NOT be guaranteed safeguard by God. Thus scriptures were corrupted and lost as God did not take responsibility to their preservation.
This belief manifests itself today as the Quran mentions the Suhuf of Abraham and mankind do not have these Scriptures today. In short, not having the Scriptures of past Prophets is not an issue for Muslims as we believe we are NOT meant to have them and the ONLY Scripture which we have in its entirety is the Quran.
In fact, ironically, the Bible backs the Muslim belief up:
Where is the Gospel of Jesus (I don’t see it in the Bible)
Where is the Suhuf of Abraham?
The Bible also points to the lying pens of the scribes (Jeremiah 8) thus indicating scriptures were manipulated, altered and ultimately lost – this sounds very much in agreement with Islam
Our friend TF queries further:
Also, why would the earliest Christians have attempted to preserve all four gospels, if they were simply revisions of one another - or if the Christology of Mark were too low? To put it another way, if Matthew were really just an editing of Mark, why wouldn't Mark just be thrown away or suppressed?
That is a good question posed by TF on the superficial level. However, the question does not negate the lack of Christology within the Gospel of Mark; this is the main point which can not be circumnavigated by a question of intent which effectively amounts to a red herring
Why did the Christians hold on to the Old Testament as the Christology within this document is lacking? In fact the Old Testament is at odds with the New Testament and contradiction plus confusion is impossible to avoid – just look at Marcionism.
In addition, I’d like to remind TF many Gospels were indeed lost (refer to the Lost Scriptures by B. Ehrman)
TF: There is really not a consistent theory of the textual transmission that makes sense from the Muslim standpoint. Basically, the Christians have to become experts at eliminating the true Word of God (such that it goes out of mention immediately, and none of the proto-Muslims are able to preserve even one copy of the Injeel), but for some reasons the Christians don't eliminate Matthew, Mark, and Luke (or any of them) but maintain them.
TF again asks a fine question. I do believe a thought out Muslim view of textual transmission is very much in line with textual criticism and modern scholarship.
TF is adamant Christians preserved Gospels. This is far from the case – where is “Q”? Surely Q is of more historical (and dare I say theological) value than the four passion narratives you have within your possession today? What about the 17 non-canonical Gospels Ehrman lists in his Lost Scriptures?
Our response to TF’s questioning and statement-making can conclude with a quick thought on why there are only four Gospels:
The earliest Christians don't even try to hide them - we find references to the four-fold gospel quite early in the patristic literature: Irenaeus died 202 and referred to the fact that the gospels are four in number, and argues that they cannot be more or fewer than four.
This is getting close to the heart of the matter now, TF. On whose authority do you rigidly stick to four Gospels? Did Jesus say four? Did James say four? Who said four?
This is indeed the type of questioning that comes with a powerful statement – pondering upon this should be done alone and in a serious fashion.
I throw in a further caveat of editing of the Bible, who told you the Church has authority to edit the Bible? Edits have indeed taken place through scribal error, forgery insertion (
and even forgery removal!) not to mention the unending “apocrypha” saga.
NOTE: This was a quick response, I do plan to do more short written responses to individuals in the future to help switch tack vis-a-vis this blog
Email suggestions: yahyasnow@hotmail.com
Appendix 1
Some encouragement to convert to Islam:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.com/2010/08/assyrians-and-arab-christians-please.html
The Brothers of Jesus: Who are they?
http://yahyasnow.wordpress.com/2009/12/25/jesus-teaches-muslims-are-right/
Which incarnation? I personally feel both beliefs of incarnation are gateways to paganism:
http://thegrandverbalizer19.blogspot.com/2010/08/two-incarnations-god-became-dove.html
Of course I cannot answer for Imam Shabir Ally and nor am I attempting to but having planned to review the Shamoun-Ally debate in the near future I will add some insight of my own which may expand upon TurretinFan’s understanding with regards to the Islamic position and even Imam Shabir’s position. I also do this to depart from some of the yaa-hoo brigade of Christian apologists on the internet who I have recently been rebuking – TF certainly seems to be respectful and a serious thinker contrary to some of the Christian folks I have had the displeasure of countering of late
TF asked a few questions so I will respond with a few answers as well as questioning of my own.
TF begins by giving us a succinct summary of Imam Shabir’s claims:
Shabir Ally argues that Mark is the first gospel and the other three gospels show evidence of a progressive trend, with John having the "highest" Christology. Indeed, he sometimes even accuses the other synoptic gospels of omitting words or changing words that are found in Mark so as to move toward divinizing Jesus.
I do want to add in the way of explanation to our Christian readers, who may be taken aback by Imam Shabir’s thoughts, a quick explanation to add some flesh to the over-arching point of the progressive trend within the Gospels as a whole. Imam Ally has strong argumentation to back his ideas up; the Gospel of Mark has NO teachings of Jesus divinity and nor does it have a teaching of incarnation – simply put, Jesus is NOT God and has the profile of a human being (a Prophet) within the Gospel of Mark.
Why is this so significant?
As taught by Bart Ehrman the Gospels were written as separate documents and were not reliant upon other Gospels – they were meant to be read individually. Coupling this fact with that of the Gospel of Mark being the EARLIEST of the four Gospels we realise a conclusion quite profound
The reason behind the significance is that this points to early Christians (as well as the author of Mark) NOT believing in the Trinity, incarnation or divine-sonship of Jesus. This sounds very much Islamic as Islam teaches Jesus to be a Prophet rather than divine.
In the way of intellectual honesty I would state the virgin birth is not mentioned in the Gospel of Mark either
I have analytically combed through the Gospel of Mark with an Islamic comb and I am of the conclusion much of it is very much Islamic in nature.
Now, if your (Christian) EARLIEST source material NEVER mentions anything to do with the incarnation or “divinity” of Jesus then you have problems within Christianity as key theological teachings of Christianity are thrown into further doubt.
As a matter of fact the incarnation ONLY appears in the Gospel of John which is distinct from the Synoptics and is the most theologically evolved; not to mention the dubious nature of the alleged “quotes” attributed to Jesus within this Gospel. So we are now back to Imam Shabir’s ideas of evolution – ideas which make perfect sense in my view
I hope this gives the Christian reader some impetus for further study and TF some extra insight in order to aid his grasping of Imam Shabir’s argumentation
TF asks: So what is Shabir Ally's theory regarding what happened to the Muslim Injeel ("gospel")? That seems to be a tricky problem for Shabir Ally. Why on Earth would the Word of God be completely lost while various revisions of a false gospel be maintained?
Good question TF but as a Christian this question is problematic for yourself and is simple for a Muslim. How so? Well, open up your Bible and note Jesus preached the Gospel and all your four Gospels were NOT sanctioned nor EVER seen by Jesus – they came into existence AFTER Jesus departed from this world. Thus it is clear your four Gospels are not the Gospel of Jesus so I ask TF to answer his own question. It is a VERY tough question for a Christian; one which will bring one closer to Islam, God Willing.
I would also ask TF to produce the Q Gospel? Can he do this? No. He may lay claim to it being a “theoretical Gospel” but logic dictates a strong argument for the sayings Gospel (Q) being in existence at the time of “Matthew” and Luke. Where is it?
Why would the word of God be lost according to a Muslim? Well, Muslims believe the Prophets of the past (those before Muhammad) were sent to their respective people during those respective times and thus any Scriptures left behind after the passing of the said Prophets would NOT be guaranteed safeguard by God. Thus scriptures were corrupted and lost as God did not take responsibility to their preservation.
This belief manifests itself today as the Quran mentions the Suhuf of Abraham and mankind do not have these Scriptures today. In short, not having the Scriptures of past Prophets is not an issue for Muslims as we believe we are NOT meant to have them and the ONLY Scripture which we have in its entirety is the Quran.
In fact, ironically, the Bible backs the Muslim belief up:
Where is the Gospel of Jesus (I don’t see it in the Bible)
Where is the Suhuf of Abraham?
The Bible also points to the lying pens of the scribes (Jeremiah 8) thus indicating scriptures were manipulated, altered and ultimately lost – this sounds very much in agreement with Islam
Our friend TF queries further:
Also, why would the earliest Christians have attempted to preserve all four gospels, if they were simply revisions of one another - or if the Christology of Mark were too low? To put it another way, if Matthew were really just an editing of Mark, why wouldn't Mark just be thrown away or suppressed?
That is a good question posed by TF on the superficial level. However, the question does not negate the lack of Christology within the Gospel of Mark; this is the main point which can not be circumnavigated by a question of intent which effectively amounts to a red herring
Why did the Christians hold on to the Old Testament as the Christology within this document is lacking? In fact the Old Testament is at odds with the New Testament and contradiction plus confusion is impossible to avoid – just look at Marcionism.
In addition, I’d like to remind TF many Gospels were indeed lost (refer to the Lost Scriptures by B. Ehrman)
TF: There is really not a consistent theory of the textual transmission that makes sense from the Muslim standpoint. Basically, the Christians have to become experts at eliminating the true Word of God (such that it goes out of mention immediately, and none of the proto-Muslims are able to preserve even one copy of the Injeel), but for some reasons the Christians don't eliminate Matthew, Mark, and Luke (or any of them) but maintain them.
TF again asks a fine question. I do believe a thought out Muslim view of textual transmission is very much in line with textual criticism and modern scholarship.
TF is adamant Christians preserved Gospels. This is far from the case – where is “Q”? Surely Q is of more historical (and dare I say theological) value than the four passion narratives you have within your possession today? What about the 17 non-canonical Gospels Ehrman lists in his Lost Scriptures?
Our response to TF’s questioning and statement-making can conclude with a quick thought on why there are only four Gospels:
The earliest Christians don't even try to hide them - we find references to the four-fold gospel quite early in the patristic literature: Irenaeus died 202 and referred to the fact that the gospels are four in number, and argues that they cannot be more or fewer than four.
This is getting close to the heart of the matter now, TF. On whose authority do you rigidly stick to four Gospels? Did Jesus say four? Did James say four? Who said four?
This is indeed the type of questioning that comes with a powerful statement – pondering upon this should be done alone and in a serious fashion.
I throw in a further caveat of editing of the Bible, who told you the Church has authority to edit the Bible? Edits have indeed taken place through scribal error, forgery insertion (
and even forgery removal!) not to mention the unending “apocrypha” saga.
NOTE: This was a quick response, I do plan to do more short written responses to individuals in the future to help switch tack vis-a-vis this blog
Email suggestions: yahyasnow@hotmail.com
Appendix 1
Some encouragement to convert to Islam:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.com/2010/08/assyrians-and-arab-christians-please.html
The Brothers of Jesus: Who are they?
http://yahyasnow.wordpress.com/2009/12/25/jesus-teaches-muslims-are-right/
Which incarnation? I personally feel both beliefs of incarnation are gateways to paganism:
http://thegrandverbalizer19.blogspot.com/2010/08/two-incarnations-god-became-dove.html
Responding to Acts 17 Apologetics' Dramatic Claims on Quranic Preservation
Well, David Wood and Nabeel Qureshi opted for a double act in trying to attack the Quran and its Preservation - fortunately people don't fall for such a charade so easily. Here is our rebuke of their attacks on Quranic Preservation
The narrations critics are using to attack the Preservation of the Quran
Here is a forged narration critics are using:
“The people have been guilty of deceit in the reading of the Quran. I like it better to read according to the recitation of him [ie Muhammad] whom I love more than that of Zaid ibn Thabit”
(Ibn Sa’d, Kitab al Tabaqat al Kabir, Vol2, p444)
This narration does NOT even exist! This fact is confirmed by Muslim apologist, Bassam Zawadi [1]
The statement; “The people have been guilty of deceit in the reading of the Quran” does not exist in the actual source material. It appears somebody just fabricated this.
Honest people should not use this narration.
[1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VdI0o4SmY0
Here is Dr GF Hadad adding some helpful insight regarding the narrations critics are using:
John Burton quotes plenty of additional evidence explaining the workings of the abrogation of that particular verses in part 5 of his book The Collection of the Qur'an (1977) which was posted in full three years ago in SRI and from which Katz et al. cull their insinuations then rechew them before us every year.
`A'isa explains how the wording came to be omitted from the mushaf: The stoning verse and another verse were revealed and recorded on a sheet (sahifa) which was placed for safe-keeping under her bedding. When the Prophet fell ill and the household were preoccupied with nursing him, a domestic animal got in from the yard and gobbled up the sheet. (Burhan al Din al Baji, "Jawab", MS Dar al Kutub, Taimur "majami`", no. 207, f. 15)
The above report is also taken from Burton. I consider it a forgery and add that its content is absurd, since the Companions did not rely on this missing piece to ascertain the existence of the wording or its abrogated status. At any rate, such a report stands out for not being cited in any of the recognized sources in the technical literature.
---
Many of (the passages) of the Qur'an that were sent down were known by those who died on the day of Yamama... but they were not known (by those who) survived them, nor were they written down, nor had Abu Bakr, Umar or Uthman (by that time) collected the Qur'an, nor were they found even with (one person) after them. (Kitab al-Masahif, p.23)
Kitab al-Masahif was compiled by `Abd Allah ibn Sulayman ibn al-Ash`ath al-Sijistani, known as Ibn Abi Dawud, the son of the major early hadith master Abu Dawud. This is what the authorities said about Ibn Abi Dawud:
Ibn `Adi narrated in al-Kamil fi al-Du`afa' with his chain from `Ali ibn al-Husayn ibn al-Junayd: I heard Abu Dawud say: "My son, `Abd Allah, is a liar."
Ibn Sa`id said: "Suffice it for us, what Ibn Abi Dawud's father said about him."
Ibrahim ibn Awrama al-Asbahani said: "Ibn Abi Dawud is a liar."
Abu al-Qasim al-Baghawi received a paper from Ibn Abi Dawud in which the latter asked him about the wording of a hadith related from his grandfather. Al-Baghawi read the paper then said: "I swear by Allah that in my view you have brought yourself out of hadith science."
Sources: Ibn `Adi, al-Kamil fi al-Du`afa' (4:226); al-Dhahabi, Mizan al-I`tidal (2:433) and Siyar A`lam al-Nubala' (10:582).
It follows that anything that comes only from Kitab al-Masahif must be held in suspension until corroborated by an independent, reliable source or declared authentic by one of the competent authorities, or adduced by them.
---
Full article by Dr G F Haddad can be found here:
http://www.sunnah.org/history/memorizers.htm
IslamResponses weighs in and shatters the "Ate by a Goat" nonsense and clarification concerning "the Quranic verse on stoning" issue.
IslamResponses also focusses on the tired and refuted argument of 2Surah al-Walayah & Surah al-Nurayn" - don't be surprised it is a response video to the most shoddy Christian missionary I have ever come across (Christian Prince). Christian Prince is reliant on lies and tired plus refuted arguments:
Video description:
Christian missionaries fail to prove the readability of the bible so they try desperately to prove the Quran has been altered and changed as the bible .
Note this post is still under construction and constant addition, inshaAllah
The narrations critics are using to attack the Preservation of the Quran
Here is a forged narration critics are using:
“The people have been guilty of deceit in the reading of the Quran. I like it better to read according to the recitation of him [ie Muhammad] whom I love more than that of Zaid ibn Thabit”
(Ibn Sa’d, Kitab al Tabaqat al Kabir, Vol2, p444)
This narration does NOT even exist! This fact is confirmed by Muslim apologist, Bassam Zawadi [1]
The statement; “The people have been guilty of deceit in the reading of the Quran” does not exist in the actual source material. It appears somebody just fabricated this.
Honest people should not use this narration.
[1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VdI0o4SmY0
Here is Dr GF Hadad adding some helpful insight regarding the narrations critics are using:
John Burton quotes plenty of additional evidence explaining the workings of the abrogation of that particular verses in part 5 of his book The Collection of the Qur'an (1977) which was posted in full three years ago in SRI and from which Katz et al. cull their insinuations then rechew them before us every year.
`A'isa explains how the wording came to be omitted from the mushaf: The stoning verse and another verse were revealed and recorded on a sheet (sahifa) which was placed for safe-keeping under her bedding. When the Prophet fell ill and the household were preoccupied with nursing him, a domestic animal got in from the yard and gobbled up the sheet. (Burhan al Din al Baji, "Jawab", MS Dar al Kutub, Taimur "majami`", no. 207, f. 15)
The above report is also taken from Burton. I consider it a forgery and add that its content is absurd, since the Companions did not rely on this missing piece to ascertain the existence of the wording or its abrogated status. At any rate, such a report stands out for not being cited in any of the recognized sources in the technical literature.
---
Many of (the passages) of the Qur'an that were sent down were known by those who died on the day of Yamama... but they were not known (by those who) survived them, nor were they written down, nor had Abu Bakr, Umar or Uthman (by that time) collected the Qur'an, nor were they found even with (one person) after them. (Kitab al-Masahif, p.23)
Kitab al-Masahif was compiled by `Abd Allah ibn Sulayman ibn al-Ash`ath al-Sijistani, known as Ibn Abi Dawud, the son of the major early hadith master Abu Dawud. This is what the authorities said about Ibn Abi Dawud:
Ibn `Adi narrated in al-Kamil fi al-Du`afa' with his chain from `Ali ibn al-Husayn ibn al-Junayd: I heard Abu Dawud say: "My son, `Abd Allah, is a liar."
Ibn Sa`id said: "Suffice it for us, what Ibn Abi Dawud's father said about him."
Ibrahim ibn Awrama al-Asbahani said: "Ibn Abi Dawud is a liar."
Abu al-Qasim al-Baghawi received a paper from Ibn Abi Dawud in which the latter asked him about the wording of a hadith related from his grandfather. Al-Baghawi read the paper then said: "I swear by Allah that in my view you have brought yourself out of hadith science."
Sources: Ibn `Adi, al-Kamil fi al-Du`afa' (4:226); al-Dhahabi, Mizan al-I`tidal (2:433) and Siyar A`lam al-Nubala' (10:582).
It follows that anything that comes only from Kitab al-Masahif must be held in suspension until corroborated by an independent, reliable source or declared authentic by one of the competent authorities, or adduced by them.
---
Full article by Dr G F Haddad can be found here:
http://www.sunnah.org/history/memorizers.htm
IslamResponses weighs in and shatters the "Ate by a Goat" nonsense and clarification concerning "the Quranic verse on stoning" issue.
IslamResponses also focusses on the tired and refuted argument of 2Surah al-Walayah & Surah al-Nurayn" - don't be surprised it is a response video to the most shoddy Christian missionary I have ever come across (Christian Prince). Christian Prince is reliant on lies and tired plus refuted arguments:
Video description:
Christian missionaries fail to prove the readability of the bible so they try desperately to prove the Quran has been altered and changed as the bible .
Note this post is still under construction and constant addition, inshaAllah
Wednesday, 1 September 2010
ABN Sat Homosexuality and Islam
Here we have it folks. Pastor Joseph Najm and Brother Hamoudy claiming Islam allows and even encourages homosexuality!
This, of course, is blatantly untrue; these two Christians on the 'News and Views' show (via the Aramaic Broadcasting Network)) were obviously wrong; everybody and their dog KNOWS Islam does NOT allow homosexuality and is in fact very strictly against the homosexual act.
I guess the axiomatic truth is no obstacle for Pastor Joseph Najm and Brother Hamoudy - these two Christians make it quite apparent they have no regard for accuracy and truth. They are shown to be the charlatans they clearly are in this embarrassing and spectacular video.
The scholars at Islamonline discuss homosexuality:
The Qur’an tells us the story of the people of Lut (Lot), who deviated from the natural way and got involved in this abnormality, refusing every word of advice from their Prophet Lut. Thus, their destiny was destruction and punishment. Almighty Allah says: “And Lo! (Remember) when he said unto his folk: Will ye commit abomination such as no creature ever did before you? Lo! ye come with lust unto men instead of women. Nay, but ye are wanton folk. And the answer of his people was only that they said (one to another): Turn them out of your township. They are folk, forsooth, who keep pure. And We rescued him and his household, save his wife, who was of those who stayed behind. And We rained a rain upon them. See now the nature of the consequence for evil doers!” (Al-A`raf: 80-84)
The eminent Muslim scholar Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, states:
“Almighty Allah has prohibited illegal sexual intercourse and homosexuality and all means that lead to either of them. This perverted act is a reversal of the natural order, a corruption of man’s sexuality, and a crime against the rights of females.
The spread of this depraved practice in a society disrupts its natural life pattern and makes those who practice it slaves to their lusts, depriving them of decent taste, decent morals, and a decent manner of living. The story of the people of Prophet Lut as narrated in the Qur’an should be sufficient for us. Lut’s people were addicted to this shameless depravity, abandoning natural, pure, lawful relations with women in the pursuit of this unnatural, foul and illicit practice. That is why their prophet, Lut (peace be upon him) told them: “What! Of all creatures, do you approach males and leave the spouses whom your Lord has created for you? Indeed, you are people transgressing (all limits)!” (Ash-Shu`araa: 165-166)
The strangest expression of these peoples’ perversity of nature, lack of guidance, depravity of morals, and aberration of taste was their attitude toward the guests of Prophet Lut (peace be on him), who were angels of punishment in human form sent by Allah to try these people and to expose their perversity.
The Qur’an narrates the story: “And when Our messengers came to Lut, he was grieved on their account and did not know how to protect them. He said, ‘This is a day of distress.’ And his people, who had long since been practicing abominations, came rushing toward him. He said, ‘O my people, here are my daughters. They are purer for you, so fear Allah and do not disgrace me in front of my guests. Is there not a single upright man among you?’ They said, ‘Thou knowest well that we have no right to thy daughters, and certainly thou knowest what we want.’ He said, ‘If only I had strength to resist you or had some powerful support!’ Said (the angels) ‘O Lut, truly, we are messengers of thy Lord; they shall not reach thee….’”(Hud: 77-81)
Muslim jurists hold different opinions concerning the punishment for this abominable practice. Should it be the same as the punishment for fornication, or should both the active and passive participants be put to death? While such punishments may seem cruel, they have been suggested to maintain the purity of the Islamic society and to keep it clean of perverted elements.”
Moreover, Sheikh Muhammad Saleh Al-Munajjid, a prominent Saudi scholar and lecturer, adds:
“Islam emphatically forbids this deed [homosexual sex] and prescribes a severe punishment for it in this world and the next. How could it be otherwise, when the Prophet of Islam (peace and blessings be upon him) said: ‘Whoever you find committing the sin of the people of Lut, kill them, both the one who does it and the one to whom it is done.’ (At-Tirmidhi: 1376) That is, if it is done with consent.”
The scholars of Islam, such as Malik, Ash-Shafi`i, Ahmad and Ishaaq said that (the person guilty of this crime) should be stoned, whether he is married or unmarried.
There is no doubt that this act, which goes against the pure human nature created by Allah, by making men content with men and women with women, destroying families, adversely affecting the birth rate, causing the spread of killer diseases, harming the innocent when children are raped, and generally spreading corruption on earth, should be uprooted and stamped out.”
Thinking of the wisdom behind prohibiting homosexuality and lesbianism, the following can be said:
First, such acts lead to the spread of passivity among the young generation and destroy their morality, since they cannot practice such perversion except after taking some drugs to create for themselves a virtual atmosphere where they feel fake joy. Sufficient unto any person to feel that his manhood is lost.
Second, it destroys the lives of women whose husbands leave them in pursuit of this perversion and they, in turn, try to find a way to satisfy their sexual needs. In such case, the whole society will be no more than chaos.
Third, it is a fierce attack on progeny and pregnancy, which increases the human race.
Fourth, the dangerous diseases that are caused by it are unavoidable and fatal. Topping these illnesses is HIV/AIDS.
Lesbianism
As for lesbianism, it is also no more than a perversion and an attack against the natural relation between a man and a woman.
There is no certain punishment for lesbianism. Still, disciplinary punishment is there for any perverted person who commits it. The Kuwaiti Encyclopedia of Islamic Jurisprudence states:
“Muslim jurists agree that there is no certain hadd (punishment) for lesbianism. However, they agree that disciplinary punishment should be administered since it is a sin.”
Such an act spoils the doer’s character and make her testimony unacceptable, as stated in the above named encyclopedia:
“Muslim Jurists agree that a witness should be morally sound. A pervert cannot be taken as a witness. Since lesbianism is an act of perversion, a lesbian cannot be a witness. Even with the jurists not declaring this openly, it can still be understood from their words and conditions.”
Almighty Allah knows best.
Read more: http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?pagename=IslamOnline-English-Ask_Scholar/FatwaE/FatwaE&cid=1119503547102#ixzz0xXgbehNg
Is David Wood of Answering Muslims the Most Ignorant Paid Islamophobe?
Islamophobes: Think Before you Quote from Tareekh al Tabari
This, of course, is blatantly untrue; these two Christians on the 'News and Views' show (via the Aramaic Broadcasting Network)) were obviously wrong; everybody and their dog KNOWS Islam does NOT allow homosexuality and is in fact very strictly against the homosexual act.
I guess the axiomatic truth is no obstacle for Pastor Joseph Najm and Brother Hamoudy - these two Christians make it quite apparent they have no regard for accuracy and truth. They are shown to be the charlatans they clearly are in this embarrassing and spectacular video.
The scholars at Islamonline discuss homosexuality:
The Qur’an tells us the story of the people of Lut (Lot), who deviated from the natural way and got involved in this abnormality, refusing every word of advice from their Prophet Lut. Thus, their destiny was destruction and punishment. Almighty Allah says: “And Lo! (Remember) when he said unto his folk: Will ye commit abomination such as no creature ever did before you? Lo! ye come with lust unto men instead of women. Nay, but ye are wanton folk. And the answer of his people was only that they said (one to another): Turn them out of your township. They are folk, forsooth, who keep pure. And We rescued him and his household, save his wife, who was of those who stayed behind. And We rained a rain upon them. See now the nature of the consequence for evil doers!” (Al-A`raf: 80-84)
The eminent Muslim scholar Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, states:
“Almighty Allah has prohibited illegal sexual intercourse and homosexuality and all means that lead to either of them. This perverted act is a reversal of the natural order, a corruption of man’s sexuality, and a crime against the rights of females.
The spread of this depraved practice in a society disrupts its natural life pattern and makes those who practice it slaves to their lusts, depriving them of decent taste, decent morals, and a decent manner of living. The story of the people of Prophet Lut as narrated in the Qur’an should be sufficient for us. Lut’s people were addicted to this shameless depravity, abandoning natural, pure, lawful relations with women in the pursuit of this unnatural, foul and illicit practice. That is why their prophet, Lut (peace be upon him) told them: “What! Of all creatures, do you approach males and leave the spouses whom your Lord has created for you? Indeed, you are people transgressing (all limits)!” (Ash-Shu`araa: 165-166)
The strangest expression of these peoples’ perversity of nature, lack of guidance, depravity of morals, and aberration of taste was their attitude toward the guests of Prophet Lut (peace be on him), who were angels of punishment in human form sent by Allah to try these people and to expose their perversity.
The Qur’an narrates the story: “And when Our messengers came to Lut, he was grieved on their account and did not know how to protect them. He said, ‘This is a day of distress.’ And his people, who had long since been practicing abominations, came rushing toward him. He said, ‘O my people, here are my daughters. They are purer for you, so fear Allah and do not disgrace me in front of my guests. Is there not a single upright man among you?’ They said, ‘Thou knowest well that we have no right to thy daughters, and certainly thou knowest what we want.’ He said, ‘If only I had strength to resist you or had some powerful support!’ Said (the angels) ‘O Lut, truly, we are messengers of thy Lord; they shall not reach thee….’”(Hud: 77-81)
Muslim jurists hold different opinions concerning the punishment for this abominable practice. Should it be the same as the punishment for fornication, or should both the active and passive participants be put to death? While such punishments may seem cruel, they have been suggested to maintain the purity of the Islamic society and to keep it clean of perverted elements.”
Moreover, Sheikh Muhammad Saleh Al-Munajjid, a prominent Saudi scholar and lecturer, adds:
“Islam emphatically forbids this deed [homosexual sex] and prescribes a severe punishment for it in this world and the next. How could it be otherwise, when the Prophet of Islam (peace and blessings be upon him) said: ‘Whoever you find committing the sin of the people of Lut, kill them, both the one who does it and the one to whom it is done.’ (At-Tirmidhi: 1376) That is, if it is done with consent.”
The scholars of Islam, such as Malik, Ash-Shafi`i, Ahmad and Ishaaq said that (the person guilty of this crime) should be stoned, whether he is married or unmarried.
There is no doubt that this act, which goes against the pure human nature created by Allah, by making men content with men and women with women, destroying families, adversely affecting the birth rate, causing the spread of killer diseases, harming the innocent when children are raped, and generally spreading corruption on earth, should be uprooted and stamped out.”
Thinking of the wisdom behind prohibiting homosexuality and lesbianism, the following can be said:
First, such acts lead to the spread of passivity among the young generation and destroy their morality, since they cannot practice such perversion except after taking some drugs to create for themselves a virtual atmosphere where they feel fake joy. Sufficient unto any person to feel that his manhood is lost.
Second, it destroys the lives of women whose husbands leave them in pursuit of this perversion and they, in turn, try to find a way to satisfy their sexual needs. In such case, the whole society will be no more than chaos.
Third, it is a fierce attack on progeny and pregnancy, which increases the human race.
Fourth, the dangerous diseases that are caused by it are unavoidable and fatal. Topping these illnesses is HIV/AIDS.
Lesbianism
As for lesbianism, it is also no more than a perversion and an attack against the natural relation between a man and a woman.
There is no certain punishment for lesbianism. Still, disciplinary punishment is there for any perverted person who commits it. The Kuwaiti Encyclopedia of Islamic Jurisprudence states:
“Muslim jurists agree that there is no certain hadd (punishment) for lesbianism. However, they agree that disciplinary punishment should be administered since it is a sin.”
Such an act spoils the doer’s character and make her testimony unacceptable, as stated in the above named encyclopedia:
“Muslim Jurists agree that a witness should be morally sound. A pervert cannot be taken as a witness. Since lesbianism is an act of perversion, a lesbian cannot be a witness. Even with the jurists not declaring this openly, it can still be understood from their words and conditions.”
Almighty Allah knows best.
Read more: http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?pagename=IslamOnline-English-Ask_Scholar/FatwaE/FatwaE&cid=1119503547102#ixzz0xXgbehNg
Is David Wood of Answering Muslims the Most Ignorant Paid Islamophobe?
Islamophobes: Think Before you Quote from Tareekh al Tabari
Tuesday, 31 August 2010
The Truth About the Thighing (Mufakhathat) Canard
The Mufakhathat (Thighing) Claim is a Deception
It is wise to make people aware of a fabrication (falsification) traversing the internet which states Islam allows Muslim men to gratify themselves sexually with pre-pubescent girls (even as young as 3 years of age) via a method known as mufakhafat (thighing).
This claim of theirs is errant nonsense. The early classical scholar, Hasan al-Basri (642 - 728 or 737 AD), has already made it known Islam does NOT allow Muslim men to approach prepubescent girls in a sexual fashion. [1]
As for the fabrication (falsified fatwa) on the internet; Ebrahim Saifuddin confirms the thighing claims are erroneous (“a fabricated lie”) and points out Christian missionaries made this malicious, untrue and vile allegation up. [2] Moreover Muhaddith.org inform us the falsified fatwa has ALREADY been commented upon by Saudi scholars and they have denounced it as a lie as well as informing us Islam does not allow such a sick practice. The Saudi scholars also confirm the Prophet Muhammad NEVER took part in such a practice, thus further denouncing and disproving the Christian missionary lies. [1]
I have appended a typical sample of the false claim to this article (see appendix 1).
Looking Stupid
I have recently come across two people parroting the false claims and using these fabrications in order to satisfy their anti-Muslim agenda – one of these individuals is a Christian tele-evangelist of ill-repute whilst the other is a member (Kevin Carroll) of a far right group named “English Defence League” (EDL). These people do not realise how unscholarly and silly they look when repeating such nonsense even though it does not take much in the way of research to realise the material they use is a fabrication (false).
Another Fabrication?
Alongside the “fatwa” fabrication there seems to be another fabrication of this nature attributed to Khomeini which is being circulated on the internet. I would like to state Khomeini is NOT seen as an authority and is seen as a deviant by recognised scholarly authorities. Nevertheless the quotes attributed to Khomeini are thought to be fabrications too.
The “book” where the alleged Komeini’s quotes were taken from ("Tahrirolvasyleh" fourth volume, Darol Elm, Gom, Iran, 1990) does not seem to even exist! [3]. Alongside the alleged quotes of approving child-sex there are alleged quotes approving sex with animals [4]. Both are outrageously false allegations; Islam does not allow these depraved actions
Summary
Essentially, somebody/group of bodies made a malicious lie up about Islam and other Islamophobes have been propagating (spreading) it without checking for accuracy and truth.
The fact remains, Islam does not allow thighing (mufakhafat) of prepubescent girls. There are forgeries on the internet which are being used in a smear campaign against Muslims - be alert to these false and nasty claims.
Any feedback: send it to Yahya Snow at yahyasnow@hotmail.com
References
[1] http://www.muhaddith.org/islam_answers/earlymarriage-part2.doc
[2] http://ebrahimsaifuddin.wordpress.com/2007/05/15/mufakhathat-or-thighing/
[3] http://www.shiachat.com/forum/index.php?/topic/22934-kohmeinis-alleged-pedophile-qoute/
[4] http://yahyasnow.wordpress.com/2010/06/18/is-sex-with-animals-allowed-in-islam/
Appendix 1
Here is a typical sample of the falsehood we have discussed in this article (increase screen size to read it, it was shrunk for compaction purposes):
Regarding the practice of "thighing", the masterbating between the legs of a female infant or actually sodomizing her, Islamic clerics have this to say:
Pedophilia decrees from www.islamic-fatwa.net
Question 1809
After the permanent committee for the scientific research and fatwahs (religious decrees) reviewed the question forwarded by the grand scholar of the committee with reference number 1809 issued on 3/5/1453 and 7/5/1421 (Islamic calendar)
Question: ‘It has become widespread these days, and especially during weddings, the habit of mufa’khathat of the children. (mufa’khathat - literally translated, it means “placing between the thighs” which means placing the male member between the thighs of a child).
What is the opinion of scholars, knowing full well that the prophet, the peace of Allah be upon him, also practiced the “thighing” of Aisha - the mother of believers - may Allah be pleased with her ?
Answer: After studying the issue, the committee has answered as follows:
As for the prophet, his thighing his fiancée Aisha when she was six years of age and not able to consummate the relationship was due to her small age. That is why the Prophet used to place his male member between her thighs and massage it, as the prophet had control of his male member not like other men.
Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, The Supreme Leader of Iran, the Shia Grand Ayatollah, 1979-89 said in his official statements:
"A man can quench his sexual lusts with a child as young as a baby. However, he should not penetrate. Sodomizing the baby is halal (allowed by sharia). If the man penetrates and damages the child, then he should be responsible for her subsistence all her life. This girl, however, does not count as one of his four permanent wives. The man will not be eligible to marry the girl’s sister. It is better for a girl to marry when her menstruation starts, and at her husband's house rather than her father's home. Any father marrying his daughter so young will have a permanent place in heaven."
Khomeini, "Tahrirolvasyleh" fourth volume, Darol Elm, Gom, Iran, 1990
“It is not illegal for an adult male to 'thigh' or enjoy a young girl who is still in the age of weaning; meaning to place his penis between her thighs, and to kiss her.”
Ayatu Allah Al Khumaini's "Tahrir Al wasila" p. 241, issue number 12
"Young boys or girls in full sexual effervescence are kept from getting married before they reach the legal age of majority. This is against the intention of divine laws. Why should the marriage of pubescent girls and boys be forbidden because they are still minors, when they are allowed to listen to the radio and to sexually arousing music?"
"The Little Green Book" "Sayings of the Ayatollah Khomeini", Bantam Books
Appendix 2
Ebrahim Saifuddin of IqraProductions exposes the thighing (mufa’khathat) lie:
More info can be obtained here:
http://ebrahimsaifuddin.wordpress.com/2007/05/15/mufakhathat-or-thighing/
Other subjects:
Did Prophet Muhammad Have Epilepsy? No. Dr Yasir Qadhi
Christians and the 'Mahound' Lie About Prophet Muhammad p
Muslim Rapes in Norway and Sweden? Stop with the Propaganda Against Muslims!
Smear on British Pakistanis: Stats and Facts of British Pakistanis Grooming Girls
Sharia Law against terrorism
Christians having dreams and converting to Islam
Learn about Islam
Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk
It is wise to make people aware of a fabrication (falsification) traversing the internet which states Islam allows Muslim men to gratify themselves sexually with pre-pubescent girls (even as young as 3 years of age) via a method known as mufakhafat (thighing).
This claim of theirs is errant nonsense. The early classical scholar, Hasan al-Basri (642 - 728 or 737 AD), has already made it known Islam does NOT allow Muslim men to approach prepubescent girls in a sexual fashion. [1]
As for the fabrication (falsified fatwa) on the internet; Ebrahim Saifuddin confirms the thighing claims are erroneous (“a fabricated lie”) and points out Christian missionaries made this malicious, untrue and vile allegation up. [2] Moreover Muhaddith.org inform us the falsified fatwa has ALREADY been commented upon by Saudi scholars and they have denounced it as a lie as well as informing us Islam does not allow such a sick practice. The Saudi scholars also confirm the Prophet Muhammad NEVER took part in such a practice, thus further denouncing and disproving the Christian missionary lies. [1]
I have appended a typical sample of the false claim to this article (see appendix 1).
Looking Stupid
I have recently come across two people parroting the false claims and using these fabrications in order to satisfy their anti-Muslim agenda – one of these individuals is a Christian tele-evangelist of ill-repute whilst the other is a member (Kevin Carroll) of a far right group named “English Defence League” (EDL). These people do not realise how unscholarly and silly they look when repeating such nonsense even though it does not take much in the way of research to realise the material they use is a fabrication (false).
Another Fabrication?
Alongside the “fatwa” fabrication there seems to be another fabrication of this nature attributed to Khomeini which is being circulated on the internet. I would like to state Khomeini is NOT seen as an authority and is seen as a deviant by recognised scholarly authorities. Nevertheless the quotes attributed to Khomeini are thought to be fabrications too.
The “book” where the alleged Komeini’s quotes were taken from ("Tahrirolvasyleh" fourth volume, Darol Elm, Gom, Iran, 1990) does not seem to even exist! [3]. Alongside the alleged quotes of approving child-sex there are alleged quotes approving sex with animals [4]. Both are outrageously false allegations; Islam does not allow these depraved actions
Summary
Essentially, somebody/group of bodies made a malicious lie up about Islam and other Islamophobes have been propagating (spreading) it without checking for accuracy and truth.
The fact remains, Islam does not allow thighing (mufakhafat) of prepubescent girls. There are forgeries on the internet which are being used in a smear campaign against Muslims - be alert to these false and nasty claims.
Any feedback: send it to Yahya Snow at yahyasnow@hotmail.com
References
[1] http://www.muhaddith.org/islam_answers/earlymarriage-part2.doc
[2] http://ebrahimsaifuddin.wordpress.com/2007/05/15/mufakhathat-or-thighing/
[3] http://www.shiachat.com/forum/index.php?/topic/22934-kohmeinis-alleged-pedophile-qoute/
[4] http://yahyasnow.wordpress.com/2010/06/18/is-sex-with-animals-allowed-in-islam/
Appendix 1
Here is a typical sample of the falsehood we have discussed in this article (increase screen size to read it, it was shrunk for compaction purposes):
Regarding the practice of "thighing", the masterbating between the legs of a female infant or actually sodomizing her, Islamic clerics have this to say:
Pedophilia decrees from www.islamic-fatwa.net
Question 1809
After the permanent committee for the scientific research and fatwahs (religious decrees) reviewed the question forwarded by the grand scholar of the committee with reference number 1809 issued on 3/5/1453 and 7/5/1421 (Islamic calendar)
Question: ‘It has become widespread these days, and especially during weddings, the habit of mufa’khathat of the children. (mufa’khathat - literally translated, it means “placing between the thighs” which means placing the male member between the thighs of a child).
What is the opinion of scholars, knowing full well that the prophet, the peace of Allah be upon him, also practiced the “thighing” of Aisha - the mother of believers - may Allah be pleased with her ?
Answer: After studying the issue, the committee has answered as follows:
As for the prophet, his thighing his fiancée Aisha when she was six years of age and not able to consummate the relationship was due to her small age. That is why the Prophet used to place his male member between her thighs and massage it, as the prophet had control of his male member not like other men.
Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, The Supreme Leader of Iran, the Shia Grand Ayatollah, 1979-89 said in his official statements:
"A man can quench his sexual lusts with a child as young as a baby. However, he should not penetrate. Sodomizing the baby is halal (allowed by sharia). If the man penetrates and damages the child, then he should be responsible for her subsistence all her life. This girl, however, does not count as one of his four permanent wives. The man will not be eligible to marry the girl’s sister. It is better for a girl to marry when her menstruation starts, and at her husband's house rather than her father's home. Any father marrying his daughter so young will have a permanent place in heaven."
Khomeini, "Tahrirolvasyleh" fourth volume, Darol Elm, Gom, Iran, 1990
“It is not illegal for an adult male to 'thigh' or enjoy a young girl who is still in the age of weaning; meaning to place his penis between her thighs, and to kiss her.”
Ayatu Allah Al Khumaini's "Tahrir Al wasila" p. 241, issue number 12
"Young boys or girls in full sexual effervescence are kept from getting married before they reach the legal age of majority. This is against the intention of divine laws. Why should the marriage of pubescent girls and boys be forbidden because they are still minors, when they are allowed to listen to the radio and to sexually arousing music?"
"The Little Green Book" "Sayings of the Ayatollah Khomeini", Bantam Books
Appendix 2
Ebrahim Saifuddin of IqraProductions exposes the thighing (mufa’khathat) lie:
More info can be obtained here:
http://ebrahimsaifuddin.wordpress.com/2007/05/15/mufakhathat-or-thighing/
Other subjects:
Did Prophet Muhammad Have Epilepsy? No. Dr Yasir Qadhi
Christians and the 'Mahound' Lie About Prophet Muhammad p
Muslim Rapes in Norway and Sweden? Stop with the Propaganda Against Muslims!
Smear on British Pakistanis: Stats and Facts of British Pakistanis Grooming Girls
Sharia Law against terrorism
Christians having dreams and converting to Islam
Learn about Islam
Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk
Saturday, 28 August 2010
English Defence League (EDL): Embarrassing Video Footage in Bradford (August 2010)
Spectacular footage of EDL getting absolutely humiliated and exposed for the trouble-makers they are
Talk about morons travelling to a city (Bradford) and humiliating themselves. I've always considered the EDL as social misfits and here is the proof which exposes them for what they really are.
I have embedded two videos in this post. The first shows Sky News humiliating the EDL by showcasing their botched attack on a car as well as their in-fighting.
The second shows the infamous punch thrown at an EDL trouble-maker (which is now dubbed as the “super-punch”).
First video: EDL getting humiliated by Sky News (via Yahya Snow)
Sky news humiliate and “pwn” the EDL who were in Bradford causing trouble. Sadly for them their antics backfired and they were arrested and were even on the end of a hiding by Bradford youths.
And they have the audacity to wonder why English women avoid EDL members!
If you are sympathetic to the EDL then please have a rethink and stop wasting your lives with these losers.
Second Video: EDL member is on the end of a shuddering punch from a Bradford youth. Why travel all the way to somebody's city (Bradford in this case) to "protest" when NOBODY in the city of Bradford wants you to enter (never mind carry out your silly "protest"):
bradf ed - The best home videos are here
Interesting insight into the EDL reaction from a YouTube video uploader:
The EDL demo in Bradford was a disaster. EDL organiser Jeff Marsh chickened out of attending their own demo, less than 800 EDL showed up, and “peaceful” EDL jar-heads attacked police with bricks and bottles and even attacked the EDL’s own stewards!
EDL supporter “British Lion” posted on Facebook saying “What a F**king shambles. 700 – 1000 up (sic) throw some rocks and start fighting each other. No surrender? No fucking clue would be more like it” – http://twitpic.com/2j31to
EDL’s Steve Caroll admitted attacking an Asian before the Bradford demo had even started – http://twitpic.com/2iynno
As for the EDL supporters shown in this video – people oppose the EDL because of what it is, not because of what some EDL activists say they’d like it to be, and the facts are simple – the EDL is being used as a Trojan Horse by Nazis and BNP activists…
Taken from video description:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ftj7X_oknSo
Any info or feedback: yahyasnow@hotmail.com
I found a succinct summary of the EDL:
Many of these characters suffer from low esteem and seek to blame others for the impoverishment of their lives. By organising tiny grupuscules, giving themselves titles, and bleating away on internet forums they believe they are doing ‘something’ and are actually being ‘someone.’
Taken from:
http://1millionunited.org/blogs/blog/2010/08/29/edlena-vs-bradford/comment-page-1/#comment-4401
Talk about morons travelling to a city (Bradford) and humiliating themselves. I've always considered the EDL as social misfits and here is the proof which exposes them for what they really are.
I have embedded two videos in this post. The first shows Sky News humiliating the EDL by showcasing their botched attack on a car as well as their in-fighting.
The second shows the infamous punch thrown at an EDL trouble-maker (which is now dubbed as the “super-punch”).
First video: EDL getting humiliated by Sky News (via Yahya Snow)
Sky news humiliate and “pwn” the EDL who were in Bradford causing trouble. Sadly for them their antics backfired and they were arrested and were even on the end of a hiding by Bradford youths.
And they have the audacity to wonder why English women avoid EDL members!
If you are sympathetic to the EDL then please have a rethink and stop wasting your lives with these losers.
Second Video: EDL member is on the end of a shuddering punch from a Bradford youth. Why travel all the way to somebody's city (Bradford in this case) to "protest" when NOBODY in the city of Bradford wants you to enter (never mind carry out your silly "protest"):
bradf ed - The best home videos are here
Interesting insight into the EDL reaction from a YouTube video uploader:
The EDL demo in Bradford was a disaster. EDL organiser Jeff Marsh chickened out of attending their own demo, less than 800 EDL showed up, and “peaceful” EDL jar-heads attacked police with bricks and bottles and even attacked the EDL’s own stewards!
EDL supporter “British Lion” posted on Facebook saying “What a F**king shambles. 700 – 1000 up (sic) throw some rocks and start fighting each other. No surrender? No fucking clue would be more like it” – http://twitpic.com/2j31to
EDL’s Steve Caroll admitted attacking an Asian before the Bradford demo had even started – http://twitpic.com/2iynno
As for the EDL supporters shown in this video – people oppose the EDL because of what it is, not because of what some EDL activists say they’d like it to be, and the facts are simple – the EDL is being used as a Trojan Horse by Nazis and BNP activists…
Taken from video description:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ftj7X_oknSo
Any info or feedback: yahyasnow@hotmail.com
I found a succinct summary of the EDL:
Many of these characters suffer from low esteem and seek to blame others for the impoverishment of their lives. By organising tiny grupuscules, giving themselves titles, and bleating away on internet forums they believe they are doing ‘something’ and are actually being ‘someone.’
Taken from:
http://1millionunited.org/blogs/blog/2010/08/29/edlena-vs-bradford/comment-page-1/#comment-4401
Sunday, 22 August 2010
Robert Spencer: Genocidal Maniac?
Here's the thing; I don't deal with Robert Spencer as he is being monitored and refuted by people/groups who are far more familiar with him than I am (same applies to Pam Geller). Dare I also say he has become old hat and he has been refuted fully thus there is no need for all of us to bang on about him though there is obviously a need for those who are currently surveying him and his material to continue doing so for the benefit of the ummah. May God bless all those who have/still are refuting and monitoring him. Ameen
However, I have decided to dedicate a little section to Robert Spencer and I will begin to feature refutation-based material on this blog. Most (or all) of which will not be produced by myself but will consist of second hand uploads. I do recall ozzycda making a few refutation videos on Robert Spencer so perhaps I will delve into his collection and embed some of them into the Robert Spencer section on this blog.
To kick off proceedings let's have a quick look at Robert Spencer's links to a group which wants/wanted to commit genocide upon Muslims. How anti-Muslim can you get?
Video is by refuting acts 17 apologetics team
Here is their video description:
Did you know....
Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch calls for the ethnic cleansing of Muslims?
Please visit: http://www.loonwatch.com/ & http://www.spencerwatch.com/ for more news and information.
However, I have decided to dedicate a little section to Robert Spencer and I will begin to feature refutation-based material on this blog. Most (or all) of which will not be produced by myself but will consist of second hand uploads. I do recall ozzycda making a few refutation videos on Robert Spencer so perhaps I will delve into his collection and embed some of them into the Robert Spencer section on this blog.
To kick off proceedings let's have a quick look at Robert Spencer's links to a group which wants/wanted to commit genocide upon Muslims. How anti-Muslim can you get?
Video is by refuting acts 17 apologetics team
Here is their video description:
Did you know....
Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch calls for the ethnic cleansing of Muslims?
Please visit: http://www.loonwatch.com/ & http://www.spencerwatch.com/ for more news and information.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)