FaithFreedom.org

Beating up Women for Allah

lubna hussein

A New York Time op-ed piece by Egyptian journalist Mona Eltahaway demonstrates just how “great” Islam is for women. Pointing out that 164 women in Muslim countries were sentenced in the past month (7/09) to the cruel punishment of flogging, for mostly inane and unfair “offenses,” Eltahaway sensibly asks, where is the outrage?

The fact is that Islam gets a pass because it is a “religion,” it has so many adherents, and its “radicals” and “extremists” (i.e., devout Muslims) have been blowing up, beheading, slaughtering and terrorizing much of the world. People are frankly terrified to speak out against this atrocity because the “religion of peace” has never been anything of the kind. As Eltahaway says concerning the women of Sudan, for example:

They have served as the whipping girls for the Sudanese regime’s cheap game of flogging women to show off its “Islamic principles.”

The International Criminal Court has indicted President Omar Hassan al-Bashir of Sudan for war crimes and crimes against humanity in Darfur. His janjaweed allies in Darfur have been accused of rape. Trousers are “indecent” but rape is just another reminder of how useful women’s bodies are in conveying the message.

There it is in a nutshell: Brutal and vicious rape, beheading, stoning, acid attacks, “honor killings”—none of these horrors and indecencies sully the name of Islam, but a woman wearing trousers does.

Abusing Women and Islam
Women’s Rights in Islam

Short URL: http://www.archive2012.faithfreedom.org/?p=5558

Posted by on Aug 18 2009. Filed under Women in Islam. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback to this entry

791 Comments for “Beating up Women for Allah”

  1. Oh my goodness! Impressive article dude! Thanks, However I am going through problems with your RSS. I don’t understand why I can’t subscribe to it. Is there anyone else having similar RSS issues? Anyone who knows the solution can you kindly respond? Thanx!!

  2. Title…

    [...]just beneath, are numerous totally not related sites to ours, nonetheless, they’re surely really worth going over[...]…

  3. Title…

    [...]one of our visitors not long ago proposed the following website[...]…

  4. I really enjoy the blog.Thanks Again. Will read on…

  5. I am glad for commenting to make you know what a remarkable experience my friend’s girl went through going through your web site. She discovered so many issues, which include what it is like to have an awesome helping nature to have the others effortlessly master specific complex topics. You undoubtedly surpassed visitors’ desires. Thank you for imparting such great, trusted, educational and unique thoughts on the topic to Lizeth.

  6. What’s up everybody, I am sure you will be enjoying here by watching such comic video lessons.

  7. Title…

    [...]Here is a superb Blog You might Come across Exciting that we Encourage You[...]…

  8. wow, awesome article post.Really thank you! Really Cool.

  9. ass

    Title…

    [...]the time to read or go to the subject material or websites we have linked to beneath the[...]…

  10. This is getting a bit more subjective, but I much prefer the Zune Marketplace. The interface is colorful, has more flair, and some cool features like ‘Mixview’ that let you quickly see related albums, songs, or other users related to what you’re listening to. Clicking on one of those will center on that item, and another set of “neighbors” will come into view, allowing you to navigate around exploring by similar artists, songs, or users. Speaking of users, the Zune “Social” is also great fun, letting you find others with shared tastes and becoming friends with them. You then can listen to a playlist created based on an amalgamation of what all your friends are listening to, which is also enjoyable. Those concerned with privacy will be relieved to know you can prevent the public from seeing your personal listening habits if you so choose.

  11. Regards for helping out, great information. “Job dissatisfaction is the number one factor in whether you survive your first heart attack.” by Anthony Robbins.

  12. I am so grateful for your blog article. Cool.

  13. I think this is a real great article.Really looking forward to read more. Awesome.

  14. Great post.Thanks Again. Great.

  15. Title…

    [...]Here is a good Weblog You might Come across Exciting that we Encourage You[...]…

  16. This paragraph offers clear idea for the new viewers of blogging, that genuinely how to do blogging.

  17. Megha

    LS,

    There are two other comments I have posted in the “awakened” asside from the one obtaing info about the Stephen Knapp article….based on your comment, I see you didn’t even bother to look….I said…..they arrived after the article was taken off the “recent posts” list…..look in the section on apostasy in the “awakened” article……did you not see them? Are you blind?

    lmao

    They are there….no mention of Stephen Knapp in them….stop playing your stupid manipulative games!

  18. Raisin Head

    If the women remain in Islam maybe they are STUPID and a bad omen Hadith 9:162,3 Tabari 1:280

  19. Women

    The thing is Islam is like the abusive spouse, And muslim women know, leaving islam can be even deadly for them.

    horrible brutal murders have been carried out against women and girls for leaving islam!!

    Remember its illegal to even verbally offend islam to denounce it altogather is down right deadly dangerous!!!

  20. Megha

    hmmmmm…..does this bring on a new perspective or what? lol We have two Muslim regulars who claim Islam does not sanction wife beating, rape and worse yet…they value and honor women more than any other religion. Perhaps they themselves do not commit any of these barbaric crimes, but they follow a prophet who did and so many others who have followed in his footsteps….so….Muslim regulars…what have you to say to this……..!!!

    Muslims use women to set examples because they do not know how to pick on anyone their own sizes! Why don't you punish men as equally for committing the same crimes? Find me an article or a verse in the Koran that says men are stoned if they commit adultery, have premarrital sex, mingle with men outside their family, etc and I'll keep my mouth shut and my keys on permanent lock! Lashes don't equal to being put to death!

    Find me a Muslim male who believes that a man can be as much of a whore as a woman.

    Find me a Muslim woman who will not be put to death for leaving Islam in a country like Saudi!

    Find me a Muslim male who has been "honored killed" for putting his family to shame by committing such an act as premarrital sex!

  21. londonspirit

    MEGHA: You seriously make me laugh. You have not yet responded to a single one of my comments, about the harsh killings of female children in india and china before they are born. You have bypassed that question completely. You also havent told me why every 15 seconds a woman gets beaten by her partner in america. If all you guys are so against wife beating and against inhumanity against female, why does it happen the most in non-muslim nations.

    Stop bypassing questions and answer it. You people think that just because there are so many of you, you can bypass questions without thinking that I would realise.

    Not a single of you have evn produced a single verse from the quran that permits intolerance against woman and yet you have the mouth to accuse.

    MEGHA: The verses I got were not from islamic watch, they were from different website, but alot of them were taken from an online glossary of the hindusim scriptures. All you have to type in is woman, and every verse that contains woman comes up. I just wrote sati, and I got alot of verses.

    Any way i looked at the website. And i couldnt stop laughing. It is a debate between a well known lier called Abul Kasem, who is even on this site misquoting quranic verses. He is known for his misquotation.

    The difference between him and me is that I am not misquoting. I have got direct verses. Ok do me a favour, i will quote two verses from you scriptures and I only want you to answer them. The first one is

    Her father protects (her) in childhood, her husband protects (her) in youth, and her sons protect (her) in old age; a woman is never fit for independence. Manusmriti 9.3

    “It is the highest duty of the woman to immolate herself after her husband,”[Br.P. 80.75] [Sheth 103]

    1. why should a woman give her life up just because her husband died?
    2. Why isnt a woman never fit for independence?

    If you answer these two questions Megha I will disregard all the other verses I have that teaches against woman

  22. Megha

    Kabirlaw,

    How have you tried getting to know me? How does arguing over religion qualify for getting to know somone…you don't know me either….you know my anger!

    I said…maybe….I never said it did. If indeed the same punishment applies to both…then perhaps you should make it a point to preach to these Muslims who are disobeying the koran that they will indeed burn in hell for their cruel and barbaric punishments…..if the laws of Allah are not the laws of the land….my advice…do something to change it so hatred towards Islam will stop! Otherwise, there is no need to argue/defend your faith!

    As far as the flashbacks…it was only the one comment…..anything can trigger them…not just you personally….

    As for the challenge…I'm entitled to change my mind….I do live in a free country, you know! I never wrote the word promise……except for the comment where I said I'm not keeping it….how can I keep a promise I never made…..

    Fine….I hate Islam….but I do not hate all Muslims….I don't hate you….I hate your religion….

    Fine….I'll calm down my temper….if you want to know me a little better…fine….you'd probably actually like me if you saw me and spoke with me in person…..I can understand your dislike towards me…..I just wish you understood my dislike/hatred towards Islam…..

    Ok….this promise I shallkeep if you are willing to accept…..I shall not lash out at you or swear at you or say anything cruel to you…..but I will give my opinions on Islam as everyone else does….Right here, right now in front of everyone….I will apologize for my anger towards you…..but don't mistake that as an apology towards Islam.

    I do also apologize for calling you a pig…..sincerely apologize….if you want to get to know me….great….I'm actually a likable person….I'm not a bad person….just a bit angry….have a good day.

    LS…..read the comments….do you want me to repeat it twice more…is 5 a number you understand? There are two comments on the other article…the last two, I believe….READ THEM for the 3rd time!

    As far as China…what does that have to do with me? I'm not chinese and yes, they have mistreated women over centries upon decades and upon years….I'm not saying India has been fair….neither has America…..u don't even answer Marie's questions….so why should I feel any different.

    Kabirlaw…I meant what I said…..I will keep my promise and be nicer to you….until I have a valad reason not to…..

    Yes, I think many Muslims are liars…..I lived with them…remember? Perhaps you are a good person…..I'm sure you're not bad outside the site….but…I can't avoid what I feel towards your religion…..

    l8r

  23. Demsci

    Megha, I too read Jean Sassons books a few years ago, the titles had the word “Sultana’s” in them. And there are by now many other books about 2nd rate-status of women and honor killings in Islamic societies and now even in Islamic communities in Western countries/ India.

    I admire your commitment about informing women all around the world about the treatment many Muslims give many of them, in Islamic countries and communities.

    But unhesitatingly I will also agree with Kabirlaw and LondonSpirit, that many other groups of people, believing in other religions, in History, also treated women bad, as 2nd rate citizens. And they are absolutely right in asserting that honor killings happened in a lot of places and still happen outside of Islam too.

    But when some religions, ways of organising societies, are sometimes, even often, mal-functioning, dangerous, that does not go away merely by pointing out that there are other causes of the exposed mal-functioning and danger too. It does not make the mal-functioning, dangerous religion harmless. It would still be an improvement for humanity to examine that religion thoroughly, and let people either abandon it or improve it. To let members of that religion declare what is right and wrong in the interpretations/ practices of their religion worldwide. TO THEIR CO-RELIGIONISTS, not just to its critics.

    My theme is that Muslims should look with much humbleness and modesty to their religion. Because they have this ambiguous Holy text, presumably beautiful and beneficial, but in effect very ineffective in the world. Due to lack of any beautiful or beneficial interpretations/ practices anywhere it seems. At least lack of any that are not also practiced by believers of other faiths.

    Resulting in: Performance of the Muslim part of mankind that at least nowadays on average, by and large, nowhere is any better than most common religions, faiths, ways of life. Islam, however meant, just doesn’t work in a way that makes it worth something extra! This is abundantly shown on FFI/ Islam Watch and many other places and it will be abundantly shown for a long time to come!

    So, there is NO justification for any extra power, privileges for Islam anywhere anymore, so not in Islamic countries also, or in future in Democratic countries. Unless of course it is derived from fair elections.

  24. londonspirit

    MEGHA do you even no the debate me an marie had. There was conflict, she posed 8 questions and I posed 1. I answered 7 requesting her to answer my single 1. I said no before i answer your last question you have answer my single question. She saidNO. She wants me to answer her last accusation before she answers my one question. How is it fair in a debate whereby one party asks all the question without answering a single question. If that is the case it no longer becomes a debate, but rather more of a question and answering session.

    I never denied to answer her last accusation, i am just waiting for her to answer MY ONE AND SINGLE QUESTION. One question is all i need to ask to prove the whole of christianity wrong and look how she avoids answering that one single question.

    So now you know the story, just think of it with an open mind, did i answer her questions of is she avoiding to answer a single one of my question.

    You wrote what has china got to do with me and how they mistreat woman. That is an appauling answer. So your telling me if someone was getting injustice you would just sit back and relax.

    I ask that question because

    1. You say islam teaches to beat the woman and dis honour them but you cant find a single verse that says such a thing.

    2. two countries, india and china which consists of 1/3 of the world population practice killing featuses once they are identified as female. These countries are not muslim nations.

    3. Every 15 seconds in america a woman is getting beaten by her husband or partner and america is not a muslim nation.

    Wife beating and intolerance to ladies is happening more in non muslim countries than in muslim countries and yet your saying islam encourages it.

    Why cant you people see outside the scope. Lets look at it logically. 1/5 of population is muslim and 2/3 of wife beating and intolerance to ladies happen in non-muslim nations. Do you see the trend here. These two countires alone cancels out the whole muslim population. And that is even before considering all african, european and aemrican nations.

  25. Marie

    londonspirit I have given my answer to your accusations against Jesus's divinity and so have five other people. My answer was Jesus spoke in parables about his divinity and I gave you my response to the verse about Jonah. So stop playing victim.

    UNLIKE YOU I DID NOT DISAPPEAR FROM THE DEBATE.

    I can't wait for your response when I post my article.

  26. Marie

    I've just spoke with one of the editors and it doesn't look like my article will be posted here on the main site so I'm gonna try to post it on the forums.

  27. kabirlaw

    To: All Y'all

    It's Ramadhan tomorrow, the first fast of the Holy Month of mercy and forgiveness. I wanted to wish you all a happy Ramadhan cuz I feel kinda good tonight, just finished my taraweh. Probably won't be on this site that much this month (you're all probably shouting hoooray!). Just wanted to say the following:

    To Focussed;

    Thanks for being the first person on the site to respond properly to me. I'm sorry I haven't joined the forum yet like I promised but I hope to do it eventually.

    To Demsci:

    Thanks for keeping things ever so democratic, scientific and for accepting when you have been wrong. Oh yeah and for the little support you offer every now and then.

    To Kenmirrz:

    Mate, thanks for trying to stick up for me that one time (I haven't forgotten) although it didn't work. But don't worry, I'm a soldier!

    To Pakshaitan:

    You need to change that name cuz I know you're not a devil.

    To Marie:

    Thank you for letting me call you babes! and, for being trusting enough to offer to give your email address to me (see, I haven't sent you any email viruses!)

    To Jonc:

    Peace and blessings of this Holy month. I know we've a got a score to settle I haven't ignored you its just that you've got a bit of an eye for detail and you require more time than many others. Watch this space.

    To R_not:

    Happy Ramadhan.

    To Raisin Head:

    Happy Ramadhan to you too.

    To Mooo and Ibnsahr:

    I apologise for ridiculing your English, it's not a nice thing to do, please forgive me my mistakes.

    To Londonspirit (my brother in faith):

    Ramadhan Mubarak brother. I pray that Allah (SWT) forgives you your sins and grants you his mercy and forgiveness. Please pray for me.

    To Ali Sina:

    Peace and blessings of the Holy month of Ramadhan to you. Please try to see past what the early Muslims had to do for their very survival in hostile 7th century Arabia and try to concentrate on the Prophet's eternal message to unite the whole world regardless of race, sex, and creed into one brotherhood (the concept of a seamless humanity we ALL talk about, but of which, very little is seen nowadays)

    And lastly but definately not least,

    To Megha:

    Apology accepted. Please forgive me if I've caused you any offence, BABES! (don't care, i'm still gonna call you it!), Will speak/write to you soon, please stay in touch.

  28. Demsci

    Happy Ramadhan, Kabirlaw,

    That was beautiful, thank you.

    You know, you should be on our side. Even as a Muslim. But for democracy and autonomy of women worldwide. And why not? I can never see you live in an Islamic Theocratic or Tyrannical country as a subservient person. And if you there spoke in the way you speak here, you would not last a year, alive or free.

    You must either a big deceiver/ helper of tyrants or a true democrat like me.

  29. Megha

    Londonspirit,

    I've squared you and Kabirlaw on comments marked at "August 21, 2009 • 12:34 am" and " August 21, 2009 • 1:00 am". I AM MORE THAN CONVINCED THAT BOTH OF YOU WILL NOT BE ABLE TO PROTECT your Male-whore Prophet….. (LOL) It is my challenge to you guys to respond to those queries. If you cannot then accept your defeat gracefully and call Muhammad a MALE-WHORE. When you respond to those two posts, I shall quote the original Sanskrit text, the meaning, and the true context of the verses you have quoted. Before that you must remember that the authentic sources of Hindu scriptures are the 4 Vedas, Puranas, Brahmasutras, and Vedanta. Anything outside of this is not considered authentic by any school of thought of Hinduism.

    Well, LS and KL I am eagerly waiting to hear from you on posts marked "August 21, 2009 • 12:34 am" and " August 21, 2009 • 1:00 am". Remember more than any Hindu scripture, your prophet's reputation is at risk. Would you like him being called a "MALE WHORE"? You better respond first to get a sound reply on your queries.

  30. Demsci

    Hi, LondonSpirit,

    The UN in no way supports your conclusions, I looked. And on FFI there is the article of Jeffrey Imm, on 7 march 2009, about Islamic Supremacists maltreating women in many places. And in the coming years FFI and Islam Watch, Jihad Watch will no doubt give us an avalanche of incidents and statistics about violence on women by Muslims, in both Islamic and Western countries, where they now specify the religion of perpetrators. Many ex-Muslima's, like Megha, will give testimony. You will have a very tough job refuting even a fraction of it.

    What you can do is mitigate these statistics by showing the results of America-Canada-Europe-Australia and many other countries. But the UN states specifically that they do not have all the statistics of all the countries, but only of 69.. They say specifically that statistics show 3 things, or lack thereof, not just 1.
    1. Occurrence. (you assume this is all it shows, it seems).
    2. Preparedness to report to the police by the public, due to trust in the effectiveness of the police.
    3. Adequate response by the police in terms of reporting and reacting.

    So a country can look as quilty as hell, but only being the country with the best reacting police, which is being trusted the most by the female population so it reports the most. This seems to be the case in the Western countries. And the most innocent looking countries may be the quiltiest, but with a worthless, corrupt police, not trusted for a dime by the female population. This seems to be the case in the Islamic countries.

    So as so often we are for now uncertain, we have a draw. Islamic countries almost certainly do not score better, which is what you suggested.

    It is so important to see the context that: Islamic teachers and parents, books, media tell Musims constantly, from birth, how superior Islam is and how it therefore deserves supremacy. But now I think FFI/ Islam Watch/ Jihad Watch can meet any challenge over time of any alleged Islamic superiority or advantage in any significant respect. Hence any Islamic Supremacy is unjustified and Muslims later in the 21st century at best just participate in honest democracy everywhere, like so many other followers of other beliefs already do.

  31. rationalist

    Megha,

    Yup, you have squared them (Londonspirit n Kabirlaw) already. They won't risk answering those questions and becoming a laughing stock. I guess the best idea is to repeatedly post those question again and again on discussion boards of other articles. I remember LS failed to answer my query on apostacy. At that time I had squared him up. My question to him was just like a beautiful outswinger!

  32. Megha

    KL,

    Thanks….look, I will explain this to you….no, I do not like your religion at all! I'm not saying mine is the absolute right thing for everyone, but when I speak harshly against Islam, it is nothing personal towards you. I would love to wish you happy Ramadan, but I can't. So, I will wish you a great weekend…live it up as long as it is good and have fun!

    I think fasting is a good practice and belief for many reasons. When I left Islam, I was going to participate in Ramadan. I called the local mosque to find out when it was, but the man (an Arab, I'm pretty certain by the accent) was rude to me…..I bit my tongue, told him thank you when he responded and hung up. Later that week, after I began the fast, I heard a story about another woman who I thought was in my same situation….I became very angry and drank a Coke……Yes, I still have a lot of things to sort out…yes, if presented, I'll warn a woman about the difficulties of marrying a Muslim male……but ultimately, the choice is theirs….I'm sorry I do not like your religion or your prophet who I think is psychotic indeed, but I will do my best to respect you…..if you do indeed believe that domestic violence is wrong, then I commend you and I wish you would spread this to other Muslims who impose these barbaric crimes….as well as men around the world in general…..if you are playing games…please stop because it is not fun….The truth is I absolutely hate arguing with people, but when it comes to Islam, my heart is hardened….I don't see it as a good way of life at all, but…to each his own…all I can do is say what I believe…harsh or not….I wish you again, a good weekend and hope our differences will dissolve somewhat and we can respect each other as brothers and sisters of humanity and not barbarity.

    LS….of course I would not sit there and watch a sister of humanity go through unjust experiences….we were talking about Islam so I didn't see what China had to do with our topic, but ok.

    It has to be restated that some of my questions were not answered…regarding child abduction and left behind parents and the fact the Islamic country will not allow the child to be returned without the Muslim parent's consent…especially a father….I don't get it….Mothers love their children more than any other human and so many Muslim men do not respect it! It goes against nature, karma and humanity if a child is taken away from a good mother…regardless of religion…a mother loves her child no matter what…no matter which culture we're speaking of…fathers love their children without a doubt, but if a mother is a good deserving mother, the child should stay with her.

    Of course, there are plenty of mothers who do not deserve their children….I know of one particular father, an awesome friend of mine who has gone through some tough times due to the fact that his daughter is not with him now and the mother in my opinion is unfit! So, I don't limit the subject to left behind moms because deserving fathers have been left behind as well…

    Well, since it is your holy month….have a good weekend, too….:)

  33. Marie

    Kabirlaw:

    To: All Y’all

    It’s Ramadhan tomorrow, the first fast of the Holy Month of mercy and forgiveness. I wanted to wish you all a happy Ramadhan cuz I feel kinda good tonight, just finished my taraweh. Probably won’t be on this site that much this month (you’re all probably shouting hoooray!).

    I say:

    As long as you behave yourself, you are welcome to come here.

    Tomorrow I will be going to a picnic and I will be definitely thinking about you as I eat all that good food.

  34. Marie

    Does this mean Londonspirit will not be visiting during the month of Ramadan? If so then hooooray! That will be one less annoying pest to deal with.

  35. ibnsahr

    kabirlaw,

    sincerity always welcome, i have more respect to you as human being who makes mistake, than allah who instead preaching love, care to others different than us, but rather talking about how man can pursue sex in the world

    after all, we as human ever said something that not other people liking, so i apologise to.
    to all muslim may be apologises and forgives can happen every day not only during the ramadhan and ied

  36. Hmm..It's allow it to beat women in izlam! You have to say once,twice and third time with nice "dialect,lol" But You can beat her if she still dont listen to you,aldough after 4 times! They all are morons or what!!

    Attention PLZ;Dont involve Aryans into this discution,couse you muzslimsz are nothing but "idiots from desert"!
    All thoes stuf they saying here counts as "Takkiye" and this Takkiyeh have nothing with damn shia to do!

    shia sunna,mujahid,taliban..they all have it,just like their dear muhamad did!
    And last izlam IS NOT A RELIGION;

    It's a way of life(lies),thats why it destroy everything,culture,religion and history of a land,just it did to my Motherland IranZamin!!

    Peace!

  37. rationalist

    LS and KL are using Ramadan as an excuse to run away from answering those questions. OK Londonspirit and Kabirlaw, please hide behind your moms and wives or answer those questions.

  38. Marie

    Yippy no londonspirit for a month.

  39. Megha

    Changes are made on this site more than I change underwear…..just joking admin and staff….u do a wonderful job indeed!

    Rationalist….hmmmm….perhaps u are right….never thought of that, but I shal remain civil if they do…..but rice and black beans sure sound good right about now! yum…..nothing wrong with being a hard core vegie….yeah, baby!

    Marie…..you're awful, girl! lol

    Well, we'll be awaiting answers we might not receive after Obamadan/Osamadan….I mean, Ramadan completes…..probably won't receive them cuz they are damn good questions with no answers (fair ones).

    oam shanti shanti shanti, yall!

  40. londonspirit

    DEMSCI: i dont know why you keep saying that in islamic countires the police may be corrupt or so on and that woman are more scared to report to the police. It makes no difference because it still doesnt change the fact the woman are getting beated by their husband every 15 seconds in america. And these are only reported accounts. You say i PROVIDED WRONG INFO

    Look at these sites:
    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=8bc_1219341039

    This shows a video and says that American Women are victims of the worst violence on this planet ,it is estimated that 3 in 5 american woman has been abused atleast once by her husband .This is a shocking story of one such american woman who was a victim to this brutality .

    Demsci you said you couldnt find

    As with the “every 15 seconds” a variety of (eventual) sources are cited, from unrelated UN committees to a jointly-issued FBI/National Institute of Justice report from May of 2000.

    But lets just say all this information is untrue. Ask me this question. Alot of these nations are not even muslim nations. so why does it still happen not in the hundred but in the thousands and maybe in the millions?

    It shouldnt happen. And yes In islamic countires it also happens as well. You have already judged that we are following the quran to justify our beatings without even providing a single verse that permits it. So now I ask you DEMSCI what is your justification to wife beating in the millions?

  41. londonspirit

    MARIE: Londonspirit I have given my answer to your accusations against Jesus’s divinity and so have five other people. My answer was Jesus spoke in parables about his divinity and I gave you my response to the verse about Jonah. So stop playing victim.

    ANSWER: Dont make me laugh marie, the verses i presented to you were not speaking in parables. They were clear concise verses, look at the verse and answer. Like I said once you answer i will give my answer. I already know many websites that have answered you question. All it takes for me is to copy and paste. But I am just waiitng on your answer.

  42. londonspirit

    MEGHA WROTE: It has to be restated that some of my questions were not answered…regarding child abduction and left behind parents and the fact the Islamic country will not allow the child to be returned without the Muslim parent’s consent…especially a father….I don’t get it….Mothers love their children more than any other human and so many Muslim men do not respect it! It goes against nature, karma and humanity if a child is taken away from a good mother…regardless of religion…a mother loves her child no matter what…no matter which culture we’re speaking of…fathers love their children without a doubt, but if a mother is a good deserving mother, the child should stay with her.

    ANSWER: Megha it has been answered on the previous post which you decided to leave. Go back to awakened post, and you will see the answer. Islam makes it clear that the child stays with the mother and it is mandatory for the father to provide services. Go back to that post and you will see answer.

  43. Demsci

    Hi, LondonSpirit, thanks for the response,

    I looked at this website:
    http://www.unifem.org/campaigns/vaw/facts_figures….

    Now I sense a lot of misunderstandings between us. That UN-statistics-website exists to look at the whole world, not just America. Only it is severely limited because until now only 69 (out of 191 or so) countries provided statistics, some more reliable than others.

    And I meant that your conclusions were not justified, but not that you gave wrong information. And now I have looked at the video you showed me, thank you. Of course I am trying, like you, to form a balanced picture, about the whole situation, in the whole world, concerning wife-beating.

    I think it is very important that you and I agree on the "PER CAPITA"-measurement. For example; China has 1,3 billion inhabitants, and Luxemburg only 1 million or so. So when we count the wife-beatings, in absolute sense, of these 2 countries China is bound to look worse than Luxemburg. The USA now has 305 million people, 7 % of whom are Muslims by the way (Obama mentioned it). And we must do a lot of mathemathics to compare the behavior of citizens of countries in general if we are to be fair. When absolute statistics by UN were given for domestic violence USA was nr 1. But when they were given PER CAPITA USA was only 9th. South Africa headed the list.

    It is very unfortunate if you cannot acknowledge the difference between measuring only occurrence of domestic violence and doing that while taking into account whether it is reported or not. And whether or not it is then recognized and recorded by the police as such and whether or not the police even wants to handle it. And we even hear about police in Islamic countries accusing and punishing and locking up VICTIMS! Now imagine how much havoc that creates with the statistics! Because it is never the quilty parties that report, you know. Reporting is only supposed to be in the interest of the victims.

    It is my position that the Western countries are the only countries, and only relatively recently, that give high priority to recognize domestic violence, and to its treatment. SO it is like:
    I. Old situation; domestic violence happens everywhere, it is a universal phenomenom. But victims do not report much, police does not recognize most of it, and police does not know how to respond well, police does not record it in any reliable way.
    II. New situation. The Western countries now encourage victims to report everything, the police and healthcare-people are getting trained to recognize it, to report it well, to help the victims very well. And words gets around and victims now finally come forward in a majority of cases, which before never happened.

    Now you see why America looks like the most violent country? But it isn't, not PER CAPITA, not per average citizen. The former East Block, Africa, Latin America are considered PER CAPITA, as a lot more violent. Not enough is known about the Islamic Belt from Morocco to Indonesia, I grant you. BUT FFI/ Islam Watch/ Jihad Watch ominously report everything they hear. Already FFI has a section of articles under "Women in Islam" that is pretty impressive. This is for decades going to come your way. Your debate-partners will use it more and more.

    But what does that mean for you, me and the readers of FFI? I for one am now prepared to a so-called draw; saying, OK, LS, it is not sure where there is more and where there is less domestic violence at this point.
    I certainly concede your point of mal-functioning, dangers in Western societies, I can't refute that.

    But: As yet you can't conclude, as you did, that the Islamic countries function any better in this respect than the Western countries. And I am content with that.

    Because I think that: Muslims in the end should acquiesce everywhere to democracy and autonomy of women. And for that it is very important that we show the world that Islam has brought no extra advantages to mankind, that other faiths not also brought. So that Islam is not superior, therefore has no right to have supremacy anywhere (unless by fair elections), not even in now Islamic countries. And once Muslims bow for democracy everywhere I think "our war is over".

  44. Megha

    Yes, I saw that….but why do they remain with the father….because, if the father is a Muslim…the children are Muslim and that is why…duh, me! If the children are returned to their mothers, they run the risk of leaving Islamic and God forbid that happen right?

    Children are allowed to stay with the mom to a certain age if both parents are living in the Islamic country!

    Remember LS and KL…..according to your religion, the devil is locked up this "holy month" so if you are rude, inconsiderate, etc…it is not shaitan…it's on you….I did learn something from the Islamic teacher!

    Happy Obamadan/Osamadan!

    KL…as I said….don't take me too personally….babes! lol

  45. londonspirit

    demsci you still fail to understand my point. Lets brush aside all there statistics because it is really hard to take into account all aspects such as population,ratios an so on. Lets just say it happens alot in both muslim an non muslim nations. The question tat is raised here is accordin to you muslims get their motives of wife beating from the quran although you cant prove it. So where do non muslims get their motives from for beating their wife. Please just answer this

  46. Demsci

    LS,

    Thanks for your reaction. I concede you your point. I have to. We agree on some sort of "draw". I can't say much else that that non-muslims just abuse their power. It is not fair to say Muslims have only the motivation given by Islam and not that they too are not just abusing their power. I can't prove it, I just don't know.

  47. Demsci

    Great reaction, Megha, thank you! Both here and in the other thread (Awaken to truth).

    You were referring there to an Afghan who had converted to Christianity, was threathened with death, in Afgh. 2007, I believe. And eventually was given asylum in Italy. Ibn Kammuna, in a debate about apostasy, showed LS a video in which it was shown that in Saudi Arabia a girl was executed because she converted to Christianity and would not give it up. I remember LS brushed it off by saying that senseless killings happen everywhere. In Iran there are even now 2 girls in jail for having converted to Christianity. Top of the iceberg, we think.

    Kabirlaw and LondonSpirit, in a good democratic society, in which Muslims by and large also behave impeccably democratic, your explanations make much sense. But in the past, when these rules were implemented, in the societies where they were implemented, men were very dominant over women, everywhere. And Muslims, being militarily superior, became ever more dominant over other religions, such as Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism. But no attempt was made by Muslims to guarantee equal marital rights for the underlying religions. And still not today in most Islamic countries. Now we know this, we more and more demand justice, balance, equality in these societies, as we have them in the Democratic countries.

    And now bring the conversion-component into play. In a country where Islam is dominant, it is OK for Christians/ Jews/ Hindus to become Muslims but absolutely unacceptable that Muslims become Christians/ Hindus. That’s the first great injustice in such societies. Under those circumstances it is also ruled that Muslim men can take wives from Christian/ Hindu, no doubt converting these women, because of male dominance over female. But in such societies it would be blasphemous for a Christian/ Jewish/ Hindu man to even consider marrying a Muslimah. And the idea that that would be OK if only the Muslimah stepped out of Islam is again totally unacceptable by the vast majority of Muslim men in such societies.

    These are other injustices, imbalances among religions, we feel. In the long run some religions just must give the other religions their fair share of influence, rights, space, power, we feel. The same for women versus men. Kabirlaw is very good in carefully pointing out the differences in anatomy, character, mother&fatherhood of men and women, but frankly, after the enlightenment, many of us Westerners just prefer simple autonomy for women, to let them be their own boss.

    In the end, it always boils down to LS and Kabirlaw explaining and defending the interpretations of Islam in a way that makes it look fair, reasonable, even beautiful. But then we see the other interpretations of Islam in countries where Islam has majority and power and we see a different picture.

    So FFI reports this and deduces the role of Islam in it. Then Muslims like LS and Kabirlaw vehemently defend their interpretation of Islam, but the real cause of the criticism in the FFI-articles is the different mainstream interpretation. So that is what makes Islam look bad, not the mere observing or commenting on it by FFI. So that is the issue that really should be addressed, by Muslims themselves!

    And yes, Muslims are welcome to point out all the relevant faults and shortcomings of other religions/ society-organizing ways, but Islam is just again shown not to be an improvement on them, which is enough to be shown for me.

  48. rationalist

    Well done Megha. Londonspirit will now say "I HEREBY ACCEPT THAT MY PEDOPHILE PROPHET MUHAMMAD IS A MALE-WHORE".

    Londonspirit, there is no logic to justify the marriage between Zainab and Muhammad. Don't you agree that Muhammad booted out Zaid to sleep with Zainab? Gosh…. Allah helped him with this. Good on you Allah, you are so kind and merciful to Muhammad! Nowhere in the history a woman has acted as a daughter-in-law and wife of one man. Zainab is an exception to this. Muhammad desired and Allah blessed from Cloud 9! Phew… what a dirty Prophet and what a dirty God!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  49. Moooo

    After this long and boring posts still noone answers my question and challenge, pathetic. Woman in islam, this problem is as clear as daylight. Go look at islamic countries first, before you talked bullsh*t. Noone can beat reality.

  50. Demsci

    Hi, LondonSpirit,

    First of all, your latest post was like a breath of fresh air, so positive, idealistic, I enjoyed it. If imams were to talk like that in mosques I would commend them. I shall endeavour to answer your questions as best I can.

    Second of all, everybody here has the same objective, to protect women from being beaten by their husbands, let us remember that. In Holland, and my city, Rotterdam, domestic violence is now taken on with high priority by the government, police, health-services. And we are getting to know the causes and best treatments ever better. 1 measure is that misbehaving husbands now get evicted out of the house when caught, even if the wife requests that he is pardoned, even then he gets evicted for 10 days. For over a 100 times this has been done now in 2009 and it started only 1 january.

    Now, about this draw, I now warn you that that is the very least that we on FFI/ Islam Watch/ Jihad Watch will strive for. And for a long time to come too. We democrats/ followers of other beliefs may be hard put to refute your arguments when you argue that democracy/ other beliefs are ALSO fallible or shortcoming. But for you to prove to us that Islam, or its interpretation, is superior to our beliefs or society-organising ways? No, sorry, no superiority of Islam anymore, no rights anywhere on supremacy, other than through fair elections.

    But, what you CAN do, LondonSpirit, is go on along the lines you were thinking. And it seems that your version of Islam has more merits than current Islamic interpretations and practices around the world. So; I commend you on your line of thinking, I encourage you to go on with exploring how Islam could be used for the good of mankind. And especially how it could be used to diminish wife-beating enormously. In what you wrote I saw a man with ideals and passion and great potential.

    Yes, I have always admired Islam’s stand on alcohol. No argument from me that alcohol is a very bad influence concerning wife-beating. All the best wishes in trying to diminish it. BUT forbidding has been tried, LondonSpirit, and in the opinion of many forbidding alcohol just did not work, by and large. Its nasty side-effect was that the Maffia grew enormously in power through alcohol-prohibition.

    The other one; anger-control; I also admire and encourage you to follow that line of thinking, AND based on these undoubtedly good elements in Islam.

    OK, on principle I agree that there is merit in all your propositions. And you know that an Islam, operating under democratic rules, giving good education and complete autonomy to women, THAT Islam is perfectly OK with me. As it is with the overwhelming majority of my colleaques, family, countrymen.

    Just you Muslims don’t defend the damned Ayatollahs & Revolutionary guards in Iran, and don’t you call freedom fighters: Those damned Taliban and other Islamic radicals, that oppress minorities, women, gays. And don’t you hate and abuse Jews and Americans so much! Because, frankly, we KNOW now how a part of the Muslims is so arrogant, haughty and incredibly abusive to Jews and Americans. We know it because ex-Muslims told us many times. We on FFI literally pale by comparison. And we are firmly committed to peaceful action, and they are not!

  51. londonspirit

    DEMSCI WROTE:If imams were to talk like that in mosques I would commend them.

    ANSWER: I have never visited a mosque whereby imams spoke against the quran or put their opionons into it. Imams speak as i do. We do not speak of our own, what we read is what we speak. You see Islam is in a crisis just like the british was n a crisis just under 100 years ago. Whereby men where dominant and what ever they said goes. Fortunantly the europeans and americans have left that stage but in middle eastern and asian countires that stage is currently on going. But in due time as people become more educated people will start to realise and answer back to these things that the elders say.

    DEMSCI WROTE: OK, on principle I agree that there is merit in all your propositions. And you know that an Islam, operating under democratic rules, giving good education and complete autonomy to women, THAT Islam is perfectly OK with me. As it is with the overwhelming majority of my colleaques, family, countrymen.

    ANSWER: Your correct 100%. islam can adjust to democracy. There are many articles found on the interent which gives clear clear indication of islam and democracry. Democrarcy is good. Islam used to practice it during the times of the prophet of voting and so on.

    And islam also teaches that when we enter a foreign country we must abide by their laws and customs. So it is a rule upon me that if i were to enter america i must abide to american laws.

    All in all i have established that islam helps to discourage wife beating

  52. londonspirit

    MEGHA WRTOE: Londonspirit, I know you cannot answer them

    ANSWER: Megha you are just picking up on questions which have been posted hundreds of times and which has been answered thousands of times.

    Any way lets look at the verses of the holy quran. What does islam have to say in regards to zainab, zaid and muhammed (pbuh). Well the first verse to take into account is

    [33:4] GOD did not give any man two hearts in his chest. Nor did He turn your wives whom you estrange (according to your custom) into your mothers. Nor did He turn your adopted children into genetic offspring. All these are mere utterances that you have invented. GOD speaks the truth, and He guides in the (right) path.*

    From this verse of the quran, it can clearly be seen that your adopted son can never be your real son and that these traditions are only customs invented by men. An adopted son is a son from a stranger person.
    The verse after that says

    [33:5] You shall give your adopted children names that preserve their relationship to their genetic parents. This is more equitable in the sight of GOD. If you do not know their parents, then, as your brethren in religion, you shall treat them as members of your family. You do not commit a sin if you make a mistake in this respect; you are responsible for your purposeful intentions. GOD is Forgiver, Most Merciful.

    So now the quran is saying that the same name shouldnt even be given to an adopted son The foster father would still have to treat the adopted son with kindness and fulfill all of his needs. But the adopted son can never be an actual son.

    So from these two verses it can be established that adopted son can never be your actual son, the adopted son cannot even inherite your name and the adopted son whilst in your care should be treated nicely.

    Now lets look at the marraige. If muhammed wanted zaids wife so desperately the follwoing verses would have been revealed differently

    Zayd's, the Prophet's alleged "adopted son" by the haters of Islam, wife, was the one who wanted to divorce him and marry the Prophet. She was not forced into the marriage by any means. Let us look at Noble

    Verse 58:1 "God has indeed heard (and accepted) the statement of the woman who pleads with thee concerning her husband and carries her complaint (in prayer) to God: and God (always) hears the arguments between both sides among you: for God hears and sees (all things)."

    Let us look at Noble Verse 33:37 "Behold! thou didst say to one who had received the grace of Allah and thy favour: 'Retain thou (in wedlock) thy wife, and fear Allah.' But thou didst hide in thy heart that which Allah was about to make manifest: thou didst fear the people, but it is more fitting that thou shouldst fear Allah. Then Zayd had dissolved (his marriage) with her, with the necessary (formality), we joined her in marriage to thee: In order that (in future) there may be no difficulty to the believers in (the matter) of marriage with the wives of their adopted sons, when the latter have dissolved with the necessary (formality) (their marriage) with them. And Allah's command must be fulfilled."

    According to Islamic laws, where from the quran do you see it state the muhammed married his daughter in law. Inallahs eyes zaid was never his son. This is not incest.

    And what does the quran say to all men about marrying of adopted son wife:

    [33:37] Recall that you said to the one who was blessed by GOD, and blessed by you, "Keep your wife and reverence GOD," and you hid inside yourself what GOD wished to proclaim. Thus, you feared the people, when you were supposed to fear only GOD. When Zeid was completely through with his wife, we had you marry her, in order to establish the precedent that a man may marry the divorced wife of his adopted son. GOD's commands shall be done.

    As you can see form the last section a man may marry the divorced wife of his adopted son.

    Now lets look about the woman a man may not marry

    Prohibited to you (for marriage) are your mothers, daughters, sisters; father's sisters, mother's sisters; brother's daughters, sister's daughters; foster-mothers (who gave you suck), foster-sisters; your wives' mothers; your step-daughters under your guardianship, born of your wives to whom ye have gone in no prohibition if ye have not gone in (those who have been) wives of your sons proceeding from your loins; and two sisters in wedlock at one and the same time, except for what is past for Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. (The Noble Quran, 4:23)"

    So according to eyes of allah. did muhammed commit incest. NO.

    Did muhammed marry his daughter in law. NO

  53. londonspirit

    MEGHA WROTE: Manu smriti 9.3 states “Her father should protect her in childhood, her husband should protect her in her youth, and her sons should protect her in her old age: she should not be left to go astray through sheer independence.” There are Muhammad-like people that attack and take away kapphir women

    ANSWER: What are you talking about. The verse says woman are not fit for independence. Indicating to me that according to your scripture they lack the assets and quality for independence. Its got nothing to do with going astray. And why do you keep mentioning muhammed like people and relating it too islam. Muslims didnt exist 4000 years ago. So stop blaming your scripture faults to islam. That is the second time you done that now.

    MEGHA WROTE: In part 1, there are 38 chapters; In part 2 there are 43 chapters; In part 3 there are 30 chapters; In part 4 there are 30 chapters. None of the parts has 80 chapters (quoted by you). Who taught you this Al-Taqqiyya – the deception tactic? Mr. Londonspirit, in a debate one is expected to quote the correct Part, Chapter, and verse number. No part has 80 chapters.

    ANSWER: If you think i am lying. why dont you just right [ Br.P. 80.75 ] [ Sheth 103 ] in google and see how many results you get. And than check what that verse from your scripture says.

    You further say that the first verse i quoted in not true as it is not legitimate. But i can point out hundreds of such verses whereby woman is degraded in hinduism, i can also point out many in which woman is degraded in christianity.

    Why dont you MEGHA point out a single verse from the quran in which it traches to degrade woman. Just one single verse. And by your permission I can reveal all that is written in your hindu scripture about degration of woman. Do you step upto the challenge.

  54. Kabirlaw

    To Megha, Marie and Rationalist

    Rationalist said:

    Yup, you have squared them (Londonspirit n Kabirlaw) already. They won’t risk answering those questions and becoming a laughing stock.

    I say:

    I'm going to give you some pearls of wisdom here. The sky is blue and grass is green. Wake up and smell the coffee or simply re-read what happened to Megha and her earlier challenge. Also, see below and keep posted.

    Marie you said:

    Try addressing Muhammed as a transvestite who likes boys.

    I say:

    I think you are some hypocrite Marie. Islam has withstood ALL this website has to offer and Islam is still the fastest growing religion. I'll let you in on some knowledge that really should keep you quiet if you had even an iota of sense. If you think aspects of Islam can be intellectually challenged then ALL of Christianity can be annihilated, Totally, Wiped Out, No leg to stand on, Nada, nada, Whooooosh, curtains, finito, fat lady singing. If you want we can debate Christianity instead of letting you sit in the distance and take cheap shots at Islam. And you know I won't be letting you get away with your spinning tactics like you use on Londonspirit when you are dumbfounded.

    Megha said:

    Londonspirit, I’ve squared you and Kabirlaw on comments marked at “August 21, 2009 • 12:34 am” and ” August 21, 2009 • 1:00 am”. I AM MORE THAN CONVINCED THAT BOTH OF YOU WILL NOT BE ABLE TO PROTECT your Male-whore Prophet….. (LOL) It is my challenge to you guys to respond to those queries.

    I say:

    Yaaaaaawwwwwwn. Oh Please.

    Just like you were convinced about me not being able to answer your "NOT SO OLD CHALLENGE THAT WAS ANSWERED IN A COUPLE OF POSTS." Any other person would have died of embarrasment by now let alone post a second challenge in quick succession and make a similar claim!

    Megha also said:

    Well, LS and KL I am eagerly waiting to hear from you on posts marked “August 21, 2009 • 12:34 am” and ” August 21, 2009 • 1:00 am”. Remember more than any Hindu scripture, your prophet’s reputation is at risk. Would you like him being called a “MALE WHORE”? You better respond first to get a sound reply on your queries.

    I say:

    Well you've already (via complete ignorance) called the Holy Prophet that word, in any event, not surprising since it comes from you. I bet if you shake your head about, your brain would sound like a bumble bee in an empty canteen. I realise it doesn't take you any time in insulting people or their faiths. You or anyone else calling him that will not in itself make the Holy Prophet guilty of that. I've said this before to other Challengers it shall stand for you too:

    The day your brain intellectually challenges me I promise I will strip naked, paint myself pink, go out in public and oink like a pig and then jump off the highest building in England head first and hope to catch my eye on a protruding sharp pole on the way down. Let alone you challenging the reputation of a Prophet who holds sway over more than 1.5 billion people the world over. (The Red Indians would describe you as thus: Big Mouth, Small Brain), Ha.

    However, PLEASE NOTE THAT I HAVE TAKEN NOTE OF YOUR SECOND CHALLENGE AND I WILL BE RESPONDING TO BOTH YOUR POSTS. Give me some time because I'm busy due to Ramadhan. But this time I'm gonna spice things up a bit. Once I've responded and answered your challenge I'm going to start posting some challenges myself on Hinduism. Yeah, that's right and then if you are NOT able to answer them I'm going to start calling you some names myself, I've got a beauty lined up for Kali Ma and for Ganesh (that's Godess Black Mama and the small dude with elephant's head for you English speakers)! Deal?

    Megha you also said:

    Changes are made on this site more than I change underwear….

    I say:

    If I'm not mistaken, the last change this website made was about three weeks ago. Hygienically, you really should be changing your underwear more regularly than that! The troubling part of your remark was the fact that you believed that you were a regular changer of your undergarments! Uuuuurrrrgggghhh. What a backfire!

  55. Somewhat related bit of news and something worthy of debate:

    Afghan Husbands Win Right to Starve Wives by Robert Mackey

    …Last week, though, Human Rights Watch discovered that a revised version of the Shiite Personal Status Law had been quietly put into effect at the end of July — meaning that Shiite men in Afghanistan now have the legal right to starve their wives if their sexual demands are not met and that Shiite women must obtain permission from their husbands to even leave their houses, “except in extreme circumstances.”

  56. londonspirit

    B.SHANTANU what you have just published has already been answered. This is work of afgan people with motives other than what ISLAM teaches. I seriously dont know what is wrong with you people. Instead of constantly putting postsup of what this afgan guy is doing or what this nation is doing, why dont you do us a favour and quote from the quran and show me how bad the quran really is.

    My challenge still stands, actually I will make it much more interesting. If anyone finds a single verse which says that man should beat his wife whenever he ffels like, or a man is allowed to degrade his wife if she doesnt give him sex than in the name of allah i will leave islam and i will distribute the information through out every single person I know. I will even distribute fliers and put posts up on the internet showing of cruelty of islam.

    JUst one single verse Is all i ask for. And dont bother quoting 4:34 as that has already been dealt with and is a way of actually reducing wife beating.

    So who will step up to the challenge. JUST 1 VERSE. I dont want to know what the afgans or the pa***tani teaches. I want to know what islam teaches.

    Now who will accept this challenge. But whoever does has to take into account that if i find one verse that teaches wife beating or degradition of woman in their scripture they are to put a post up on this site , a letter to ali sina stating how sorry they are for accusing islam on such a matter.

    THIS IS MY CHALLENGE TO ANY OF YOU. ARE YOU INTERESTED MEGHA AND MARIE

  57. Marie

    Kabirlaw:

    I think you are some hypocrite Marie. Islam has withstood ALL this website has to offer and Islam is still the fastest growing religion. I’ll let you in on some knowledge that really should keep you quiet if you had even an iota of sense. If you think aspects of Islam can be intellectually challenged then ALL of Christianity can be annihilated, Totally, Wiped Out, No leg to stand on, Nada, nada, Whooooosh, curtains, finito, fat lady singing. If you want we can debate Christianity instead of letting you sit in the distance and take cheap shots at Islam. And you know I won’t be letting you get away with your spinning tactics like you use on Londonspirit when you are dumbfounded.

    I say:

    Now we are seeing the real Kabirlaw.

    Kabirlaw if you can answer these questions to show you have actually read the Bible instead of copying and pasting verses from some Muslim website then I will accept your challenge to a debate:

    What did the Serpent say to Eve in Genesis 3?

    What evil deed did Cain commit against his brother Abel?

    When God first spoke to Moses what was the first thing God said to Moses?

    What were the plagues sent against the Egyptians in the book of Exodus?

    What is the genealogy of Jesus in the new testament?

  58. Kabirlaw

    To Marie:

    You said:

    Kabirlaw if you can answer these questions to show you have actually read the Bible instead of copying and pasting verses from some Muslim website then I will accept your challenge to a debate:

    What did the Serpent say to Eve in Genesis 3?

    My Answer: The watermelon sucks, try the apple.

    What evil deed did Cain commit against his brother Abel?

    My Answer: Sold him a dodgy laptop.

    When God first spoke to Moses what was the first thing God said to Moses?

    My Answer: Watch out for the people who will say I begot a son.

    What were the plagues sent against the Egyptians in the book of Exodus?

    My Answer: HIV and swine flu.

    What is the genealogy of Jesus in the new testament?

    My Answer: Errrrm, Trick question eh? He shouldn't have one, He's the son of God, is he not?

    The fact is Marie, You don't need to read the Bible cover to cover in order to see the absurdities of your belief and to seek confirmation that it is NOT from God.

    After Ramadhan I want to debate Christianity with you. Lets stop beating around the bush shall we, I'm sick of trying to be nice to you and receiving only insults on Islam in return. We are going to keep it simple, so simple that kids can understand, we don't even need to go into intricacies since we are debating Christianity, its just sooo simple to expose. Do we have a deal hypocrite?

  59. k

    To Marie:

    I'm buying a Bible this Ramadhan for our debate, which version of the word of God shall I buy? Is the King James version ok? let me know, I'm buying a catholic bible as well since that book of god has extra bits in it that God failed to incorporate into the Protestant versions!

  60. Kabirlaw

    Marie:

    With reference to all of the stuff you are posting above concerning the saying that Mary is the sister of Aaron (apparently cutting and pasting from pro-christian or anti-islam websites – and then you have the nerve of accusing me of similar things without evidence) reflect on the following:

    The Quran has given detailed stories of the earlier Prophets including, Noah, Abraham, Lot, Isaac, Ishmael, Jacob, Jonah, Joseph, Solomon, David and Jesus etc. If the Quran knew about all of these histories in detail are you really telling me that the Quran thought that Mary and Aaron were siblings and lived in the same time as Jesus?

    The Quran has also made reference to Aaron and Moses separately in the Quran when relating Moses' story and there was no mention of Jesus or his mother at that time (Full knowledge that Jesus was the penultimate Prophet to mankind and came later).

    So you have a problem here Marie, A VERY BIG problem. If you claim that the Quran is forged or copied from the Bible or that Muhammad knew about Christianity due to local Christians etc then how could the Quran get such a simple fact wrong but other more difficult facts right? And if the Quran thought that Mary (mother of Jesus), Jesus and Aaron were around at the same time then why is Mary and Jesus not mentioned in the flesh when Moses's and Aaron's stories are mentioned and vice versa? surely Aaron would have figured in Mary's story and Mary and Jesus figured in Aaron and Moses's story.

    Drowning people clutch at straws.

  61. Kabirlaw

    Marie:

    And I think the world is already aware of what religion breeds child molesters, but if you're not aware just ask the Padre's!

  62. Marie

    Kabirlaw:

    The Quran has given detailed stories of the earlier Prophets including, Noah, Abraham, Lot, Isaac, Ishmael, Jacob, Jonah, Joseph, Solomon, David and Jesus etc. If the Quran knew about all of these histories in detail are you really telling me that the Quran thought that Mary and Aaron were siblings and lived in the same time as Jesus?

    I say:

    No the Quran does not give complete details of stories of earlier prophets, it does mention them and some important events but they don't give complete details like the books in the Bible.

    Kabirlaw:

    Marie:

    With reference to all of the stuff you are posting above concerning the saying that Mary is the sister of Aaron (apparently cutting and pasting from pro-christian or anti-islam websites – and then you have the nerve of accusing me of similar things without evidence) reflect on the following:

    I say:

    Kabirlaw look at some of my posts again. You will see I have actually checked out the reference on Answering Christianity and Islamic awareness which I did give my response to. Also I have two Qurans, one by Dawood and the other by Yusuf Ali and I did check out the verses about Mary in them.

    From Islamic Awareness:

    In Sahih Muslim, the hadith related by Mughirah ibn Shu`bah [5326] says:

    When I came to Najran, they (the Christians of Najran) asked me: You read "O sister of Harun" (i.e. Maryam) in the Qur'an, whereas Moses was born much before Jesus. When I came back to Allah's Messenger(P) I asked him about that, whereupon he said: The (people of the old age) used to give names (to their persons) after the names of Apostle and pious persons who had gone before them.

    Yusuf Ali

    Surah 19:28

    O' Sister of Aaron! Your father was not a man of evil, nor your mother an unchaste woman

    In fact the Quran keeps on referring to Mary as the daughter of Imran the father of Moses and Aaron

    Surah 33:3

    Allah did choose Adam and Noah, the family of Abraham, and the family of 'Imran above all people. Offspring, one of the other: And Allah heareth and knoweth all things. Behold! a woman of 'Imran said: "O my Lord! I do dedicate unto Thee what is in my womb for Thy special service: So accept this of me: For Thou hearest and knowest all things." When she was delivered, she said: "O my Lord! Behold! I am delivered of a female child!"- and Allah knew best what she brought forth- "And no wise is the male Like the female. I have named her Mary, and I commend her and her offspring to Thy protection from the Evil One, the Rejected."

    The problem with this is Mary is the not the sister of Moses and Aaron nor is she a descendent of Aaron as some Muslims claim. The books of Matthew and Luke include the geneology of Jesus and the line of Aaron is not mentioned. In fact Mary is from the tribe of David.

    This is not the only mistake the Quran has made with Biblical history. Here are more examples:

    The Quran states the pharaoh used crucifixion in dealing with sorcerers ( Surah 7:120-125 ). The problem is crucifixion did not exist in the time of Moses and it was not practiced by the Egyptians.

    The Quran says a Samaritan helped Moses built the Golden Calf ( Surah 20:90-100 ). The problem is the Samaritans did not exist in the time of Moses and they are descendents of the Jews who were left in Samaria the Jewish capital after the Assyrians conquered it. Also the Samaritans are also descendents of the Jewish priests and the priesthood did not exist yet that period of time when the Jews were in the desert.

    The Quran says Jews call Ezra the son of God ( Surah 9:30 ). The problem is the Jews never referred to Ezra as the son of God, he was a Jewish prophet and it would have been blasphemous to call him the son of God.

    Islam states Mary is part of the Trinity ( father, mother, and son ). References to this belief can be found in Surahs 5;116, 5:73-75.

    Here is what Muslim commentator Al-Zamakhshari says:

    The (word) three is the predicate to an understood subject. If one accepts the Christian view that God exists in one nature (jauhar) with three divine persons, namely the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and (if one accept) the opinion that the person of the Father represents (God’s) being (dhat), the person of the Son represents (his) knowledge (’ilm), and the person of the Holy Spirit represents (his) life (hayat), then one must supply the subject as follows: ‘God is three(fold).’ Otherwise, one must supply (the subject) thus: ‘The gods are three.’ ACCORDING TO THE EVIDENCE OF THE QUR’AN, the Christians maintain that God, Christ, and Mary are three gods, and that Christ is the child of God by Mary, AS GOD SAYS (in the Qur’an): ‘O Jesus son of Mary, didst thou say unto men: “Take me and my mother as gods, apart from God”?’ (Sura 5:116), or: ‘The Christians say: “The Messiah is the Son of God”’ (Sura 9:30). Moreover, it is well known that the Christians maintain that in Jesus are (combined) a divine nature derived from the Father and a human nature derived from his mother… At the same time these words [Sura 4:171] exclude (the Christian view) that Jesus had with God the usual relationship between sons and (their) fathers… (Helmut Gätje, The Qur’an and its Exegesis [Oneworld Publications, 1996], pp. 126-127; bold, capital and underline emphasis and words within brackets ours)

    What does the Concise Dictionary of Islam have to say about this:

    In some cases the “material” which forms the substance of Quranic narrative, details of the creeds of Christianity and Judaism for example, does not correspond to those religion’s own understanding of their beliefs. This could be said, for example, of the notion of the Trinity found in the Quran, the story of Satan’s refusal to bow down to Adam, the Docetist view of the crucifixion, all of which can be traced to the dogmas of Gnostic sects, which are heretical in relationship to orthodox Christianity and Judaism. The Trinity “seen” in the Quran is not the Trinity of the Apostles Creed, or of the Nicene Creed.

    What did the early Church Fathers say on the trinity:

    Ignatius of Antioch

    Study, therefore, to be established in the doctrines of the Lord and the apostles, that so all things, whatsoever ye do, may prosper both in the flesh and spirit; in faith and love; in the Son, and in the Father, and in the Spirit; in the beginning and in the end; with your most admirable bishop, and the well-compacted spiritual crown of your presbytery, and the deacons who are according to God. Be ye subject to the bishop, and to one another, as Jesus Christ to the Father, according to the flesh, and the apostles to Christ, and to the Father, and to the Spirit; that so there may be a union both fleshly and spiritual.

    Didache

    After the foregoing instructions, baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living [running] water…. If you have neither, pour water three times on the head, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.

    Justin Martyr

    We will prove that we worship him reasonably; for we have learned that he is the Son of the true God himself, that he holds a second place, and the Spirit of prophecy a third. For this they accuse us of madness, saying that we attribute to a crucified man a place second to the unchangeable and eternal God, the Creator of all things; but they are ignorant of the mystery which lies therein.

    Theophilus of Antioch

    It is the attribute of God, of the most high and almighty and of the living God, not only to be everywhere, but also to see and hear all; for he can in no way be contained in a place…. The three days before the luminaries were created are types of the Trinity, God, his Word, and his Wisdom.

    Irenaeus

    For the Church, although dispersed throughout the whole world even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and from their disciples the faith in one God, the Father Almighty …and in one Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who became flesh for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit.

    Kabirlaw:

    The Quran has also made reference to Aaron and Moses separately in the Quran when relating Moses’ story and there was no mention of Jesus or his mother at that time (Full knowledge that Jesus was the penultimate Prophet to mankind and came later).

    I say:

    Mary is listed as Imran's daughter in the surah of Imran. By the Imran was not the name of Mary's father, her father's name was Joseph.

    Kabirlaw:

    So you have a problem here Marie, A VERY BIG problem. If you claim that the Quran is forged or copied from the Bible or that Muhammad knew about Christianity due to local Christians etc then how could the Quran get such a simple fact wrong but other more difficult facts right? And if the Quran thought that Mary (mother of Jesus), Jesus and Aaron were around at the same time then why is Mary and Jesus not mentioned in the flesh when Moses’s and Aaron’s stories are mentioned and vice versa? surely Aaron would have figured in Mary’s story and Mary and Jesus figured in Aaron and Moses’s story.

    I say:

    Muhammed got his info from local heretical Christian sects who teachings and books like the Gospel of the Nativity of Mary ( written between the 4th-6th centuries ) are not part of mainstream Christianity and those sects no longer exist.

  63. Marie

    Kabirlaw:

    Marie:

    And I think the world is already aware of what religion breeds child molesters, but if you’re not aware just ask the Padre’s!

    I say:

    I am not Catholic ( I am Lutheran )and the Catholic Church has gotten into trouble with their pedophile priests.

  64. Marie

    To Marie:

    I’m buying a Bible this Ramadhan for our debate, which version of the word of God shall I buy? Is the King James version ok? let me know, I’m buying a catholic bible as well since that book of god has extra bits in it that God failed to incorporate into the Protestant versions!

    I say:

    To my knowledge those extra books were not added into the Catholic Bible after the Protestant Reformation. I wouldn't recommend the King James because it is written in Shakespearan old english. I recommend the New International Version ( NIV ).

  65. Marie

    Kabirlaw:

    After Ramadhan I want to debate Christianity with you. Lets stop beating around the bush shall we, I’m sick of trying to be nice to you and receiving only insults on Islam in return. We are going to keep it simple, so simple that kids can understand, we don’t even need to go into intricacies since we are debating Christianity, its just sooo simple to expose. Do we have a deal hypocrite?

    I say:

    Kabirlaw I am not beating around the bush, my condition is for real. I am getting tired of debating Muslims who only get their knowledge of the Bible from Muslim websites while alot of my time is consumed trying to answer their questions by looking in the Bible. Also I am tired of giving the same answers to the same accusations they pose. A good example of this is your partner in crime londonspirit.

    From now on I am not going to debate any Muslim unless they can prove they actually read the Bible. I want to have a real debate with a Muslim who has actually read the Bible.

  66. Megha

    Londonspirit, I showed your response to some of my college friends… both males and females. They laughed and said you are either as innocent as a child that does not understand anything or have abnormality — holy deception kinda of thing….. This is the most funniest part of your post: "Then Zayd had dissolved (his marriage) with her, with the necessary (formality), we joined her in marriage to thee: …"

    Question: Why would God be interested in seeing the marriage between Male-whore Muhammad and Zainab, his former DAUGHTER-IN-LAW? If the marriage between Zainab and Zyed was dissolved, why couldn't he find another match for his beloved ex DAUGHTER-IN-LAW?

  67. Marie

    Besides I want to see if there is any proof in your bragging ( that you can annihilate Christianity ) and answering my questions gives me proof that you do have knowledge of the Bible because in order to annihilate Christianity you must know the Bible and not some copy and paste from Muslim websites.

  68. Megha

    Continuing further Londonspirit, why should Allah be interested in seeing Zainab in the bed of Muhammad? Is he a pimp? (pardon me moderators for using this against Allah)….Any sane person will know the motive behind this. I had been a muslimah for sometime and I know the fuzzy logic and history behind this. Here is the reason for Muhamme'd misadventure!!!!

    Muhammad Ibn Yahya Ibn Hayyan narrated, "The Messenger of God came to Zaid Ibn Haritha's house seeking him. Perhaps the Messenger of God missed him at that time, that is why he said, 'Where is Zaid?' He went to his house seeking him and, when he did not find him, Zainab Bint Jahsh stood up to [meet] him in a housedress, but the Messenger of God turned away from her. She said, 'He is not here, Messenger of God, so please come in; my father and mother are your ransom.' The Messenger of God refused to come in. Zainab had hurried to dress herself when she heard that the Messenger of God was at her door, so she leapt in a hurry, and the Messenger of God liked her when she did that. The heart of the Prophet was filled with admiration for her He went away muttering something that was hardly understandable but for this sentence: 'Praise be to God who disposes the hearts.' When Zaid came back home, she told him that the Messenger of God came. Zaid asked, 'You asked him to come in, didn't you?' She replied, 'I bade him to, but he refused.' He said, 'Have you heard [him say] anything?' She answered, 'When he had turned away, I heard him say something that I could hardly understand. I heard him say, "Praise be to God who disposes the hearts." ' Zaid went out to the Messenger of God and said, 'O Messenger of God, I learned that you came to my house. Did you come in? O Messenger of God, my father and mother are your ransom. Perhaps you liked Zainab. I can leave her.' The Messenger of God said, 'Hold on to your wife.' Zaid said, 'O Messenger of God, I will leave her.' The Messenger of God said, 'Keep your wife.' So when Zaid left her, she finished her legal period after she had isolated herself from Zaid. While the Messenger of God was sitting and talking with `A�isha, he was taken in a trance, and when it lifted, he smiled and said, 'Who will go to Zainab to tell her that God wedded her to me from heaven?' The Messenger of God recited; 'Thus you told someone whom God had favoured and whom you yourself have favoured: "Hold on to your wife." ' `A�isha said, 'I heard much about her beauty and, moreover, about how God wedded her from heaven, and I said, "For sure she will boast over this with us." ' Salama, the slave of the Messenger of God, hurried to tell her about that. She gave her some silver jewellery that she was wearing."

    SORRY LONDONSPIRIT I HAVE TO CALL YOUR PEDOPHILE MUHAMMED A "MALE-WHORE"

  69. londonspirit

    megha you seriously cant read english can you. I have clearly stated through clear interpretation from the quran that an adopted son can never be an actual son an that marraige is permitted between an adopted son wife wit the foster parent. An if you read the verse you would see that muhammed was ordered to marry her to show future generations that this is allowed. Read the verse mate. An i dont know why your laughin about somethin like that. Because me an my friends laugh at the fact that you worship a cow as your god an at the same time the world is slaughtering your gods an enjoying a nice meal. I swear down beef burgers taste great. Could you tell me what part of your god i ate. Lol. Further more we laugh at the fact that your elephant god was given an elephant head because his dad who is god couldnt tell if he was his son so he chopped his head off. An when he found out that it was his son he replaced it wit an elephant head. Lol. A god doesnt know his son. An than couldnt replace his sons head but replaced it wit a elephant head. I can go on megha. Lol. When i broke my fast today i enjoyed nice beef. Your god tasted so good. Lol

  70. Megha

    Londonspirit, I posted you the link for index of Brahmanda Puran (you couldn't even write this coz you copied it straight from a googled source). I showed you that chapter no. 80 does not exist in Brahmanda Puran. There are many conmen busy in publishing their own chapters and there are equally starved men like you who are ready to push it down the throat of others. The onus is on you LS…. Why should I search for something that you ask for? If you want to debate, you have got to go through the right source and then present it here. Don't behave like your illiterate pedophile Prophet LOL…..

    OK regarding your comments on Manu smriti, I say it was written by a mere mortal and definitely not by the Final Messenger of God for Humanity. To err is human and so we reject that. Haven't you seen Mrs. Indira Gandhi as the PM of India for almost 25 yrs? Who is the current President of India? Mrs. Pratibha Patil. The seers have told us to verify the teachings before accepting them. We DON'Tsay "Manu smriti is the literal word of God" …. however, you say "Quran is the literal word of God". If you want to believe we defied the laws of some book, so be it. This is the real difference between a Muslim and a non-Muslim. We are ready to evaluate our scriptures, however you guys are adamant. Common LS, you are unable to see the light through the end of the tunnel. Muhammed cheated on Zyed to sleep with Zainab…. and you are getting the help from Allah to bless that marriage! What a Pimp God you have! Are you teaching here to some kindergarten kids? You have an irrational mind…. Wake up and be ready to scrutinize any scripture… be it a Muslim one or Hindu one or Christian one.

  71. londonspirit

    megha you see you just speak from your uneducated mind. Since your brain is not yet developed yet let me explain it to you again. Zaid an zainab broke off the marraige. Muhammed spoke to zaid to stick wit the marraige. But they still broke it off. So you tell me now how can he cheat when the quran says the maraige was nullified. Your just going round an round in circles. Anyway if you think i am lying about the verse why dont you step up to my challenge an find a single verse from the quran that teacher violence to woman since this is what this post is about. An i will do vice versa. Agree or not. By the way it is nearly time for rehri i am gonna enjoy eating parts of ur god again

  72. Marie

    Megha:

    Continuing further Londonspirit, why should Allah be interested in seeing Zainab in the bed of Muhammad? Is he a pimp? (pardon me moderators for using this against Allah)

    I say:

    Megha you are not the first person to call Allah a pimp and you won't be the last.

  73. Megha

    LS don't worry about what we believe or worship. According to your Quran we all land up in a place of boiling oil and fire. Well well… you say the marriage between Zyed and Zainab didn't work. If your Muhammed was the real caretaker of Zainab, HE SHOULD HAVE FOUND ANOTHER MALE FOR HER. Am I right? Forget justifying your sick prophet by quoting verses from Quran. Use your logic, if it is in your brain!

    Secondly, if Allah knew that adoption of Zyed would bring so much trouble to his pet-dog Muhammed, he would have stopped in the first place by revealing some verse it to the latter. By doing so, there wouldn't be any adoption or marriage between Zyed and Zainab. DID YOUR ALLAH AND MUHAMMAD GOOF UP HERE? I can't stop laughing here…….

    My verdict: Allah was the brainchild and trick of Muhammed, who lusted for women and wealth. Muhammad was a conman….

  74. Megha

    Demsci,

    WOW! Well said….I honestly could not have said it any better myself! You're a gem to humanity!

  75. Megha

    Londonidiot….fyi…I am remarried…lol….how many wives do you have….4? Boy I bet you're tired!

    Koran does allow the beating of women…as a last resort…moron…it should not be ANY resort!

    What part of Koran do you not understand!
    You know…I have tried to be nice to both you and KL, but it is pointless…I noticed KL was nicer to Rationalist (even though he didn't agree with him) than he was to Marie and I…hmmmm….u both can't stand the fact that women are standing up to you so you want to ridicule us and try to get us in a weak spot because you know we are emotional creatures….I almost fell into that trap with KL, but forget it! You both show your true colors on this site…anyone can see that….go away and celebrate Osamadan and come back when you actually have developed a brain….both of you.

    L…..you can thank you bellow brother LondonIdiot…..I was trying to make peace with you, at least, but I can see it is not going to work…u made that clear lin your last post….

    aas my underwear go…I change regularly, thank you which is more than I can say for you filthy Muslim Pakis who rape Christian girls, rade villages and rape girls and women (Bangladesh)….yes, we know you're only half….half Brit and half s..t!

  76. londonspirit

    megha lol. I aint against woman standing up for yourself. You go ahead an do tat. You say it shouldnt be any resort well people throughout the world is using it as a first resort. An if you follow accordin to the quran you would never reach that stage. In regards to me marryin. I think i havent reached a age to marry yet. So no wife. Lol. An not interested in one yet. I dont think i can deal wit so emotional creatures in my life. Lol. If you were trying to make peace you would have said why dont we speak about the similarites between hinduism an islam an discuss how to avoid conflict. That is a message of peace. I dont no in which language a message of peace involves callin the prophet of islam names. Why dont you go an figure out why ganesh was given a elephant head instead of a human head an i will go an eat your god. Lol

  77. Megha

    Oh, now Allah would not approve of that during Osamadan, now would he? At least not until maghrib! Go ahead and eat what you want….you're not bothering me in the least little boy! Karma will catch up to you…make no mistake of that!
    As for my message of peace, I don't see Islam making much of that these days!

    If it were a religion of peace, this site would never have been created!

  78. Megha

    And as far as guys I can and cannot keep…I got rid of him…I left him!

    And yes, I'm aware that many men from all walks of life use wife beating as a first resort….your book simply sanctions it…last resort or not!

    T,ttle boy….if your wife to be does not obey you and the first two options do not work, are you going to hit her…lightly? lol

    If a husband is bad and does not respect the wife, why does the wife not have the same options? submission submission submission

    Islamic knowledge does NOT equal common sense/logic!

  79. Marie

    londonspirit:

    So peace to you MARIE and MEGHA. Carry on with your name calling.lol. at least the prophet of islam had a lady. you two cant even get a guy for yourself let alone stay with you. lol

    I say:

    Yeah the prophet of Islam had many wives, concubines, slaves, and a 6 year old girl.

  80. Marie

    Megha:

    You know…I have tried to be nice to both you and KL, but it is pointless…I noticed KL was nicer to Rationalist (even though he didn’t agree with him) than he was to Marie and I…hmmmm….u both can’t stand the fact that women are standing up to you so you want to ridicule us and try to get us in a weak spot because you know we are emotional creatures….I almost fell into that trap with KL, but forget it! You both show your true colors on this site…anyone can see that….go away and celebrate Osamadan and come back when you actually have developed a brain….both of you.

    I say:

    Well I tried being nice to Kabirlaw and gave him my email even though I did not like his nastiness and insulting other posters, but now it looks like he is showing his true colors.

    Megha:

    aas my underwear go…I change regularly, thank you which is more than I can say for you filthy Muslim Pakis who rape Christian girls, rade villages and rape girls and women (Bangladesh)….yes, we know you’re only half….half Brit and half s..t!

    I say:

    Calm down Megha, calm down.

  81. Kabirlaw

    To Demsci

    You said:

    You know, you should be on our side. Even as a Muslim. But for democracy and autonomy of women worldwide. And why not? I can never see you live in an Islamic Theocratic or Tyrannical country as a subservient person. And if you there spoke in the way you speak here, you would not last a year, alive or free.

    You must either a big deceiver/ helper of tyrants or a true democrat like me.

    I say:

    I can never be a contributor to an Anti-Islam site. Never. How can I make a contribution to bigoted and blind hatred to the thing I hold dearest, My Faith? Even democracy, I do believe in freedom, I believe in Islamic democracy and freedom with checks and balances. Freedom to BE yourself but not IMPINGE on others rights and freedoms. You're right, I am only subservient to my Lord, Allah (SWT), I bow down to no man. I would be absolutely comfortable in a true Islamic state and I believe I would still be able to be myself and speak my mind. I've tried it in Saudi Arabia (although not truly 100% Islamic), they loved Me!

    About me being a big deceiver or a true democrat! I would support any good cause you fight for Demsci, be it eliminating poverty, feeding the hungry, supporting the rights of women, progress in less developed countries, But I cannot support the notion of trying to eliminate a persons beliefs by force or ridicule, even if I think those beliefs are untrue. Because it is differences that makes each human unique.

    So please, when you consider my position, try not to be influenced by the lies that you've read about Muslims told by those trying to paint us all with one brush but make your own independent judgement about me or Londonspirit from the dealings we have with you and how we are with you. Then, you will truly be the democrat, you so love being.

  82. Kabirlaw

    To Marie:

    I'm going to buy the KJ version, the TNIV, The red letter bible and a catholic bible, If there is any other version that I need to read, tell me now because I'm going to read them all just so that I meet your condition before we start our debate.

    True colours?! Give me a break. I've tried to be right with you. Marie you are not refraining from insulting my religion, If you had any sort of respect for me you would have stopped insulting and kept it professional. So, I don't think we can be friends. Sorry, I now know we cannot be friends because you are evil and heartless. The same way you would not be able to be friends with someone whose favourite hobby was to insult Christianity, Christ, Mary, Paul, the disciples and Lutheran Christian followers.

    So stop you're whining, every NORMAL person would be utterly shocked by your contempt for anothers religion. But I now know what Christians are really like. So I've learned something. Thanks.

    Now, pick a title for our debate.

  83. Marie

    Kabirlaw:

    True colours?! Give me a break. I’ve tried to be right with you. Marie you are not refraining from insulting my religion, If you had any sort of respect for me you would have stopped insulting and kept it professional. So, I don’t think we can be friends. Sorry, I now know we cannot be friends because you are evil and heartless. The same way you would not be able to be friends with someone whose favourite hobby was to insult Christianity, Christ, Mary, Paul, the disciples and Lutheran Christian followers.

    I say:

    At least I did not hide my true feelings.

    Besides I have no problem talking with someone who insults my faith for I truly believe the soul of these people can be saved.

    Kabirlaw:

    Now, pick a title for our debate.

    I say:

    You pick it. Your the one who wants to have a debate with me. I have nothing I want to bring up so I will be just responding to your accusations.

  84. Kabirlaw

    To Megha

    You got issues, girl.

    And.

    Drama Queen.

  85. Marie

    Kabirlaw:

    To Megha

    You got issues, girl.

    And.

    Drama Queen.

    I say:

    Be nice Kabir. It sounds like Megha was married to an abusive SOB.

  86. Kabirlaw

    To Marie:

    The soul of EVERY human being can be saved. That has nothing to do with being disrespectful if you know better than the person who IS being insulting. And you're supposed to be an educated Christian!

    My True Feelings – A Summary

    I love Allah

    I love my Religion

    I love my Prophet

    I love the Quran

    Yes I can be respectful to those who have a different belief but are respectful in their denial of Islam.

    No I cant tolerate someone insulting my faith for the sake of insulting my faith and then pretending to respect me as a human being.

    We'll leave it like this since we both believe in God.

    God Almighty knows what your true feelings were towards me and God Almighty knows what my true feelings were towards you before your last outburst against My Prophet. So leave it to God.

    I'll think of a subject for our debate and I'll get back to you.

  87. Marie

    Kabirlaw:

    To Marie:

    The soul of EVERY human being can be saved. That has nothing to do with being disrespectful if you know better than the person who IS being insulting. And you’re supposed to be an educated Christian!

    I say:

    Kabir I ain't no saint, I am a sinner and I fully admit that. I pray forgiveness from my lord everyday.

    Kabirlaw:

    My True Feelings – A Summary

    I love Allah

    I love my Religion

    I love my Prophet

    I love the Quran

    I say:

    My true feelings:

    I love Jesus for he is my lord and savior who gave his life on the cross in order to save mine.

    Kabirlaw:

    No I cant tolerate someone insulting my faith for the sake of insulting my faith and then pretending to respect me as a human being.

    I say:

    I can tolerate someone who insults my faith because I hold no grudge against them and they are worthy of being saved.

  88. ibnsahr

    ***We’ll leave it like this since we both believe in God.***

    You believe in pedophile evil

    ***God Almighty knows what your true feelings were towards me and God Almighty knows what my true feelings were towards you before your last outburst against My Prophet. So leave it to God***

    You mean leave it to god or allah, if you leave it to allah aka pedo mo floppy c@ck, he wants us to be kill for not believing at him

  89. Demsci

    Here on this thread (about Beating women) I mostly with great interest followed the correspondende of: Kabirlaw, LondonSpirit, Megha, Marie, Moooo and myself. More than the others.

    Yes, I am not ashamed to say I am deeply touched by the way LondonSpirit and Kabirlaw corresponded with me. With the mutual respect, the attention. Thank you from the bottom of my heart. And; yes, I learned to respect the Quran more. See much more what the “Islamic side” sees.

    But talking about “you should be on our side” I especially meant the big geo-political situation, as you probably know by now of me. For:
    I. Keeping ACEA (America-Canada-Europe-Australia) Democratic, and let there be as much as possible autonomous people, including most women!, instead of subservient “sheep”

    Now, here, KL and LS by their zealousness, willingness to discuss a lot of questions, in my opinion, BEHAVED very democratic. And, with a mixture of good and bad arguments, but oftentimes just too good or too hard for me to be able to refute.

    But the 2nd worldwide-goal, even more important than nr 1., for me is:
    II. Gradual Democratization of the Islamic world, thereby by and large making the majority of Muslims. OR EX-MUSLIMS!!! our allies in the end, with common goals and opponents.

    And here you have the reason I love Ali Sina, because the scary scenario we see before us is that: The overwhelming majority of Muslims, who are the fastest growing religion, intend to do away with Democracy, and presumably autonomy for women too. In favor of Theocracy and Sharia. And if that were to be really true, then it is a very important matter to bring the Muslims over to the side of Democracy and one of the other 6 faiths, apart from Islam, including the faith of atheism/ freethinking/ Darwinism. And that is what Ali Sina, also a Darwinist, is trying to do. NOT with hate/ contempt for Muslims in general, BUT with contempt for Islam.

    BUT if people like LS and KL, who indeed bow down to no man, who say they are not against Democracy, were much more present in Islamic countries & communities, fighting the according to them so-called Islamic republic of Islam, the so-called Islamic Taliban, yes, through NATO, with the Americans, yes, for now under Obama. And more governments/ organizations like these, Islamic or not, but certainly Theocratic and Male Chauvinistic. Well, Ooooooh, that would create an entire different picture for all of us!

    So I hope KL and LS understand why I, a Democrat and Darwinist to the core, am firmly on the side of Megha, Marie, Moooo, who have my sympathy.

  90. londonspirit

    KABIRLAW why do you wish to start a debate with Marie. Her ideology is that you should answer all her questions before she even bothers replying to your question. We had our very own debate, which was which is more authentic, the quran or the bible. I agreed with this debate. She posted why she belives the bible is authentic using not the contents of the bible., but what we have found over the past decades to support that the bible existed. Which in know way proves that the bible is authentic. She cant seem to understand that we muslims agree that their is a bible. Anyway never theless she posed 8 questions to me to answer which i would answer in due course and i just presented her with one question. I answered 5 of her questions than told her to answer my one. I than answered a further two and told her to answer my one. She refused again until i answer her last question. I refused to answer until she answered my one question. And than the debate dissapeared.

    Now what just happened between us to is that we just done a question an answer session, whereby she posed the questions and I answered.

    So having a debate with marie is just a waste of time as she will not respond to any accusations you bring forward.

  91. rationalist

    From the debate it was found that "Muhammad was a pedophile prophet of Islam who slept with his own daughter-in-law by invoking his bloody God Allah". Londonspirit and Kabirlaw are following a pedophile rapist. These baby faces are unable to understand the tricks played by Muhammad. This is the reason why Muslims have been lagging behind in virtually every field.

  92. rationalist

    Londonspirit, you said Zainab liked Muhammad. Where is your evidence? Quote from hadiths and Quran to prove it! Common nobody can marry his own daughter-in-law! Only a sick prophet can do it

  93. londonspirit

    demsci lets stick to the topic. Now that you know from the quran that islam doesnt permit wife beating an that it is not the duty of men to treat woman harshly why dont you be a true honest guy an tell this to ali sina an to remove his posts on the lie that is spreadin. Because this lie can only spread further hatred. Furthermore why dont you ask marie an megha to quote verses from the bible that shows how to treat a woman an lets see if it even comes in comparison to what the quran teaches.i mean they have yet to accept the challenge i put forth so it tells me that they dont have any confidence in their religion on this matter

  94. rationalist

    Londonspirit, remember that Quran advocates beating of wives, albeit lightly. Under any circumstance- with or without reason-beating is not allowed. What if the husband makes a mistake? Does Quran sanction beating of husband lightly by his wife (or wives)? All Muslims are considering those unholy crap verses as God-sent. Common dude, gimme a break!

  95. Marie

    londonspirit:

    Because this lie can only spread further hatred. Furthermore why dont you ask marie an megha to quote verses from the bible that shows how to treat a woman an lets see if it even comes in comparison to what the quran teaches.i mean they have yet to accept the challenge i put forth so it tells me that they dont have any confidence in their religion on this matter

    I say:

    londonspirit the Bible had many prominent and important women who contributed greatly to Jewish and Christian history.

    Does the Quran have any prominent and important women? The only important female in the Quran was a 6 year old girl.

    Christian women are allowed to serve as deaconesses, ministers, secrataries, treasurers, teachers, and nuns while Muslim women are segregated from the men during worship and have no role in the Mosque.

  96. [...] in Islam: Beating up Women for Allah – Acharya S/D.M. [...]

  97. Marie

    Anti-Jewish Violence in Pre-State Palestine/1929 Massacres

    Arab violence against Jews is often alleged to have begun with the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948 or as a result of Israel's capture in 1967 of territories occupied by Jordan. But even before the Mandate for Palestine was assigned to Great Britain by the Allies at the San Remo Conference (April 1920) and endorsed by the League of Nations (July 1922), Palestinian Arabs were carrying out organized attacks against Jewish communities in Palestine. Systematic violence began in early 1920 with murderous assaults by groups of local Arabs against settlements in the north and by Muslim pilgrims against Jerusalem's Jews. Again in 1921, Arab rioters attacked Jews in Jaffa and its environs. The primary agitator behind these attacks was Haj Amin al Husseini, who marshalled Arab discontent over Jewish immigration into violent riots.

    In 1929, Husseini and his associates fomented a violent jihad as they called upon Muslims to "defend" their holy places from the Jews. As a result, pogroms were carried out across Palestine. Arab villagers sympathetic to Jews were often targets of murderous attacks by their Arab brethren as well. British forces were sharply criticized for not policing the territory adequately, for sympathizing with the Arabs, and for standing by and allowing havoc to be wreaked upon Jewish communities in Palestine.

    In 1936, the Arab Higher Committee, led by Grand Mufti Husseini, launched a campaign of anti-Jewish violence across Palestine. Accompanied by a six-month-long strike, the campaign became known as "The Arab Revolt." As the British increasingly became targets of Arab violence, they used massive force to suppress the aggression. The revolt was finally quashed in 1939. The resulting White Paper of 1939 reversed British commitment to a Jewish State (the raison d'etre of the Mandate) and drastically limited Jewish immigration into Palestine.

    1920-21: Attacks and Riots
    Josef Trumpeldor

    Organized anti-Jewish violence began in earnest at the beginning of 1920. In January, Arab villagers attacked Tel Hai, a Jewish settlement in the Galilee near the Syrian border (then under French control), killing two members. Two months later, on March 1, 1920, hundreds of Arabs from a nearby village descended on Tel Hai again, killing six more Jews. Among them was Josef Trumpeldor — a Russian wartime hero who had fought in the Russo-Japanese war and who organized the defense of the settlements in the Galilee.

    During the months of March and April, over a dozen Jewish agricultural settlements in the Galilee were attacked by armed Palestinian Arabs. These included Kfar Tavor, Degania, Rosh Pina, Ayelet Hashahar, Mishmar Hayarden, Kfar Giladi and Metulla. (Four of these — Hamara, Kfar Giladi, Metulla and Bnei Yehuda were evacuated after being repeatedly attacked, and the latter was completely abandoned.)

    Around the same time, during the Passover and Easter holidays, a group of Palestinian Arab "Nebi Musa" pilgrims (making their annual pilgrimage from Jerusalem to the site they believed was Moses' tomb), were incited by Haj Amin al Husseini's anti-Jewish rhetoric to ransack the Jewish Quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem and launch violent anti-Jewish riots. The violence, which took place between April 4 and April 7, claimed the lives of nine people — five Jews and four Arabs — and left 244 wounded, the vast majority Jews. The British military administration, sympathetic to the Arabs, did not allow the Jews to arm themselves.

    Jewish victims of Nebi Musa riots

    Ze'ev Jabotinsky

    Ze'ev (Vladimir ) Jabotinsky, a Russian journalist and Zionist activist, organized the defense of the Old City Jews with demobilized soldiers from the Jewish Legion who had participated in the British military campaign against the Ottomans. (Jabotinsky and Trumpeldor had organized and helped lead the Jewish volunteer military units that had fought with the British.) When the British authorities finally quelled the riots, Jabotinsky and 19 associates were arrested for possession of illegal weapons. Jabotinsky was stripped of his commission in Palestine, and was sentenced to 15 years of penal servitude. The Arab aggressors, by contrast, received much lighter sentences. Worldwide protests, however, forced the British to shorten and eventually revoke the sentences of Jabotinsky and his associates (as well as the incarcerated Arabs).
    Haj Amin al Husseini

    Meanwhile, Haj Amin al Husseini and other Arab leaders continued to incite against the Jews. On May 1, 1921, Arab rioters and policemen with knives, pistols and rifles took to the streets of Jaffa, beating and murdering Jews, and looting Jewish homes and stores. Twenty-seven Jews were killed and 150 were wounded. Attacks by Arab villagers spread to the Jewish communities of Petach Tikvah, Rehovot, Hadera, and as far north as Haifa. According to an Interim Report on the Civil Administration of Palestine to the League of Nation, dated June 1921:

    Troops were employed and suppressed the disturbances, and the attacks on the [Jewish] colonies were dispersed with considerable loss to the [Arab] attackers. Martial law was proclaimed over the area affected, but much excitement prevailed for several days in Jaffa and the neighbouring districts, and for some weeks there was considerable unrest. 88 persons were killed and 238 injured, most of them slightly, in these disturbances, and there was much looting and destruction of property. There were no casualties among the troops…

    A commission of inquiry, led by Sir Thomas Haycraft, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in Palestine, was set up to investigate the causes and circumstances of the riots and concluded that the violence was due to Arab resentment of Jewish immigrants to Palestine. As a result, the British High Commissioner, Sir Herbert Samuel, ordered a temporary halt to Jewish immigration. Ships carrying Jews were not allowed to land in Palestine.

    In November 1921, another Arab attack on the Jewish quarter of the Old City was repelled by the Haganah, Jewish defense volunteers.

    1928-1929: Jihad against Jews

    Between 1918 and 1928, the Jewish population in Palestine doubled, to about 150,000. Palestinian Arabs were concerned about this and their leaders, with Haj Amin al Husseini at the forefront, fanned the flames of hatred and suspicion. Husseini, now the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, used the Western (Wailing) Wall — the last remnant of the Jewish Holy Temple compound — as a focal point for his anti-Zionist campaign.

    In September 1928, a small group of Jews erected a "mechitza" (a divider to separate men and women during prayers) for Yom Kippur prayers at the Western Wall. The British forcibly dismantled the divider, but Husseini used this incident as a pretext to incite Muslims. He accused the Jews of attempting to seize Muslim holy sites, including the al Aqsa Mosque.
    Arab rioters on Temple Mount, 1929 (from: Pillar of Fire)

    A virulent propaganda campaign calling for jihad against the Jews resulted in the frequent beating and stoning of Jews worshipping at the Wall and culminated in widespread, murderous riots across Palestine in August 1929.

    August 15, 1929 was Tisha B'Av, the day on which Jews commemorate the destruction of the Holy Temple. Thousands of Jews marched to the Wall to protest British restrictions on Jewish prayer there, and to reaffirm their Jewish connection to the holy site. They displayed their nationalistic fervor by singing Hatikvah (later to become Israel's national anthem). The following day, mobs of armed Arab worshippers inflamed by anti-Jewish sermons, fell upon Jewish worshippers at the Wall, destroying Jewish prayer books and notes placed between the stones of the wall. On August 17, a Jewish boy was killed by Arabs during ensuing riots in the Jerusalem neighborhood of Bukharan.

    According to the Davar newspaper of August 20, 1929, incitement against the Jews was rampant, especially in the Jerusalem and Hebron area. Rumors were spread that Jews had cursed Islam and intended to take over their holy places; Muslims were told that it was their duty to take revenge. "Defend the Holy Places" became the battle cry.

    On August 23, more than 1000 Arabs launched attacks on Jews throughout Jerusalem. Forty-seven people were killed. This was followed by widespread attacks on Jews throughout Palestine. Again, the British forbade Jews to organize armed self-defense units and within several days, 133 Jews had been killed and 339 wounded. Arab attackers sustained high numbers of casualties (116), almost all of whom were killed by British police trying to quell the violence. Jewish leaders reported that Arab attacks showed evidence of organized warfare; Arab assaults on Jewish communities extended from as far south as Hebron to Haifa, Safed, Mahanaim and Pekiin in the north. A state of emergency was declared and martial law was imposed by the British.

    1929 Hebron Massacre

    A trail of blood running down the stairs of a Jewish home in Hebron

    According to Dutch-Canadian journalist Pierre Van Passen who was in Palestine at the time, fabricated pictures of Muslim holy sites in ruins were handed out to Hebron Arabs as they were leaving their mosques on Friday, August 23, 1929. The captions on the pictures claimed that the Dome of the Rock was bombed by the Zionists. That evening, armed Arabs broke into the Yeshiva (Talmudic academy) and murdered the lone student they found. The following day, an enraged Arab mob wielding knives, axes, and iron bars destroyed the Yeshiva and slaughtered the rest of the students there. A delegation of Jewish residents on their way to the police station was lynched by an Arab mob. The mob then proceeded to massacre Hebron's Jews — both Sephardi and Ashkenazi — who had lived peacefully with their Arab neighbors for years. With only one British officer supervising, the Arab police made no attempt to prevent the massacre.

    The head of Hebron's Ashkenazi community, Rabbi Ya'akov Slonim, had been on good terms with his Arab colleagues and offered his home as a refuge to Hebron's Jews, believing that they would be spared. But the mob broke in and killed the Rabbi, members of his family and all those assembled there. Van Passen gave the following account, revealing an attempted cover-up by British officials:
    Photo of some of the members of the Slonim family, murdered in the massacre

    What occurred in the upper chambers of Slonim's house could be seen when we found the twelve-foot-high ceiling splashed with blood. The rooms looked like a slaughterhouse. When I visited the place in the company of Captain Marek Schwartz, a former Austrian artillery officer, Mr. Abraham Goldberg of New York, and Mr. Ernst Davies, correspondent of the old Berliner Tageblatt, the blood stood in a huge pool on the slightly sagging stone floor of the house. Clocks, crockery, tables and windows had been smashed to smithereens. Of the unlooted articles, not a single item had been left intact except a large black-and-white photograph of Dr. Theodore Herzl, the founder of political Zionism. Around the picture's frame the murderers had draped the blood-drenched underwear of a woman.

    We stood silently contemplating the scene of slaughter when the door was flung open by a British solder with fixed bayonet. In strolled Mr. Keith-Roach, governor of the Jaffa district, followed by a colonel of the Green Howards battalion of the King's African Rifles. They took a hasty glance around that awful room, and Mr. Roach remarked to his companion, "Shall we have lunch now or drive to Jerusalem first?"

    In Jerusalem the Government published a refutation of the rumors that the dead Jews of Hebron had been tortured before they had their throats slit. This made me rush back to that city accompanied by two medical men, Dr. Dantziger and Dr. Ticho. I intended to gather up the severed sexual organs and the cut-off women's breasts we had seen lying scattered over the floor and in the beds. But when we came to Hebron a telephone call from Jerusalem had ordered our access barred to the Slonim house. [Van Passen, Pierre, Days of Our Years, Hillman-Curl, Inc., New York 1939]

    In total, sixty-seven Jews were killed and 60 were wounded. The Jewish community in Hebron was destroyed.

    Those who survived the Hebron massacre became refugees

    In 1931, the community attempted to rebuild, but during the riots of 1936, the British authorities evacuated Hebron's Jewish residents and did not allow them to return to their homes. Hebron, one of the four cities holy to Jews, which had always had a Jewish presence, remained Judenrein for over 30 years. It was only in 1968, after Hebron came under Israel's control, that Jews resettled there.

    1929 Safed Massacre

    Barely a week after the Hebron massacre, Safed, another one of the four Jewish holy cities, was subject to the same depredations. On August 29, 1929, Arabs from Safed and nearby villages assaulted and murdered their Jewish neighbors, burning and pillaging their homes. Witnesses called it a pogrom. Eighteen Jews were killed, 40 wounded, and 200 houses were burned and looted.

    The following is an eyewitness account by David Hacohen, who immigrated in 1907 to Israel from Russia and later served in the Israeli Knesset from 1949-69:

    I believe I was the first Jew to reach Safed from the outside after the massacre there. One Friday morning we heard that there had been a pogrom in Safed. We read the official announcement:

    "On August 29, at 6:15, disturbances broke out in Safed. The army arrived on the scene at 8:35 and immediately restored order. There were some fatal casualties and many houses were burnt. The Jewish inhabitants were at once transferred to safety. Since then calm has prevailed in Safed" …

    …We had enough experience not to trust the reassuring official announcement…

    We set out on Saturday morning. When at noon we entered the town through the main road, I could not believe my eyes. . . I met some of the town's Jewish elders, who fell on my neck weeping bitterly… Inside the houses I saw the mutilated and burned bodies of the victims of the massacre, and the burned body of a woman tied to the grille of a window. Going from house to house, I counted ten bodies that had not yet been collected. I saw the destruction and the signs of fire. Even in my grimmest thoughts I had not imagined that this was how I would find Safed where "calm prevailed."

    The local Jews gave me a detailed description of how the tragedy had started. The pogrom began on the afternoon of Thursday, August 29, and was carried out by Arabs from Safed and from the nearby villages, armed with weapons and tins of kerosene. Advancing on the street of the Sefardi Jews from Kfar Meron and Ein Zeitim, they looted and set fire to houses, urging each other on to continue with the killing. They slaughtered the schoolteacher, Aphriat, together with his wife and mother, and cut the lawyer, Toledano, to pieces with their knives. Bursting into the orphanages, they smashed the children's heads and cut off their hands. I myself saw the victims. Yitshak Mammon, a native of Safed who lived with an Arab family, was murdered with indescribable brutality: he was stabbed again and again, until his body became a bloody sieve, and then he was trampled to death. Throughout the whole pogrom the police did not fire a single shot. The British police commander, Farradav, walked up and down the main street of the town, where everything was quiet, and did not go down to the scene of the massacre… Instead of protecting the Jewish population and its property, the police commander had evacuated four thousand Jews from their homes to the courtyard of Government House, leaving their homes to be looted and burned. While the looting and killing were still going on, the police were searching the Jews for arms… [Hacohen, David, Time to Tell: An Israeli Life 1898-1984, English translation from the original Hebrew, Cornwall Books, New York 1985]

    1936-39

    Toward the end of 1935 and the beginning of 1936, Arab demonstrations were held against Jewish immigration and purchase of land in Palestine. Tensions between the Arab and Jewish population grew. On April 15, 1936, Arabs attacked Jewish vehicles on the highway and murdered three Jews. The following night, two Arabs were shot by unidentified masked gunmen, in what the Arab community believed to be a reprisal attack by Jews. The gunmen were not identified, but soon false rumors were spread that Jews had murdered Arabs in the Jaffa area, upon which a Jewish bus was attacked and local Jews were assaulted. Within days, Arab mobs were assaulting and murdering random Jews and destroying Jewish property.

    The violence — including murders, ambushes, plunder and arson — quickly spread throughout the country, and was accompanied by a general Arab strike to put a stop to Jewish immigration and the sale of property to Jews, and to demand the establishment of an Arab national government. It was the beginning of a three-year-long campaign of terrorism against Jews and British soldiers and officials, orchestrated by the Arab High Command led by Haj Amin al Husseini and known as the "Arab Revolt."

    Onslaught of Arab Terror, 1936:

    April 15, 1936: 3 Jews in Tulkarm killed by Arabs.

    April 19: 9 Jews in Jaffa killed by Arabs.

    April 20: 5 Jews in Jaffa killed by Arabs.

    April 22: Jewish woman in Jaffa killed by Arabs.

    April 26: Jewish houses in Nazareth and Beit Shean burned by Arabs.

    April 26: An Arab mob beats up Jewish boy in Jerusalem.

    April 28: 4 Jewish farm workers in Migdal injured by Arabs.

    April 29: Arabs burn down a Jewish forest in Balfouriya.

    April 29: Arab mob forms in Jerusalem, but British police break it up before Jews harmed.

    May 1: 2 Jews in Haifa killed by Arabs.

    May 3: Arab mob burns down Jewish timber yard in Haifa.

    May 4: Jewish orchards in Mishmar Ha-Emek burned by Arabs.

    May 4: Arabs destroy 200 acres of wheat in Ramat David.

    May 5: 500 orange trees uprooted in Tel Mond by Arabs.

    May 7: Arabs fire on Jewish bus in Beit Dagan.

    May 10: Arabs burn crops and haystacks in Givat Ada.

    May 10: Arabs uproot newly planted olive grove in Zikhron Yaakov.

    May 11: Arabs burn Jewish crops in Ramat David.

    May 12: Arabs burn threshing floor in Zikhron Yaakov.

    May 13: 2 elderly Jews murdered by Arabs in Old City.

    May 13: Jewish shops in Haifa stoned by Arabs.

    May 13: More orchards burned in Mishmar Ha-Emek.

    May 16: 3 Jews in Jerusalem exiting a cinema are shot dead by Arabs.

    May 19: Arabs kill a Jew in the Old City of Jerusalem.

    May 20: 2 Jews wounded during Arab attack on bus.

    May 24: Arabs severely wound a Jewish guard at Majd el Krum.

    May 25: Arabs kill a Jew at Hebrew University.

    From May 30 – June 13, 1936, in more than 11 attacks, the Arabs destroy over 30,000 trees planted by Jews, as well as many fruit orchards,crops and barns. Telephone wires are cut throughout the district, roads are barricaded, and bridges and culverts are mined. Volunteers from Syria and Iraq aid the Arabs in their attacks.

    May 31: Jew at Givat Shaul killed by Arabs.

    June 1: Jewish bus passenger killed by Arab rifle fire.

    June 5: 5 Jewish passengers injured when Arabs threw bomb at bus in Haifa.

    June 6: Jewish girl severely injured by Arab fire while traveling on bus.

    June 8: Arabs attack Jews on their way to the Dead Sea Potash works.

    In the third month of terror (June 16 – July 17) campaign, 9 Jews were killed, mostly in Arab ambushes on buses, and 75,000 trees planted by Jews were destroyed.

    The Arab campaign of murder, intimidation, and sabotage continued through 1939, and on occasion, sparked isolated Jewish reprisals. According to the Report of the British government for 1937:

    The [Arab] terrorist campaign took the form of isolated murder and attempted murder; of sporadic cases of armed attacks on military, police and civilian road transport; on Jewish settlements and on both Arab and Jewish private property…" In 1938, public security in Palestine "continued to cause the administration grave preoccupation. [Report by the British Government to the Council of the League of Nations on the Administration of Palestine and Trans-Jordan for the year 1937]

    According to the Report of the British government for 1938:

    The main difference between the course of events in 1938 and that in 1937 lay in the gradual development during 1938 of Arab gang warfare on organized and to a certain extent co-ordinated lines. By the end of the year, as the result of the arrival in the autumn of large military reinforcements, this gang organization was first dislocated and finally reduced to comparative impotence in the field. But in the towns terrorism persisted and the roads were still largely unsafe for normal traffic. In fact, the events of 1938 succeeded in seriously affecting the economic and social life of the country to an extent far greater than was the case in 1937. [Report by the British Government to the Council of the League of Nations on the Administration of Palestine and Trans-Jordan for the year 1938]

    1938 Tiberias Massacre

    On October 2 1938, an organized groups of Arab attackers massacred 21 Jews — including three women and 10 children between the ages of one and twelve — in the Old Jewish Quarter of Tiberias. The Arabs stabbed, shot and burned their victims. The New York Times described the organized rampage:

    New York Times article about the Tiberias massacre

    Not since the riots of 1929, when Arabs fell on Jewish men, most of whom were rabbinical students, as well as women and children, in the ancient towns of Hebron and Safed, has there been in Palestine such a slaughter as the attack of last night. The main synagogue of the town was destroyed by fire, and the district offices, the police station and the British police billet were fired on.

    The attack apparently was well organized, since the Arab gang, before descending on Tiberias, cut all telephone communications. Coming in two parties from opposite directions at a given signal, which was a whistle blown from the hills surrounding the town, the firing began simultaneously in all quarters…

    …The bandits rushed to the central synagogue and, finding there a beadle named Jacob Zaltz, killed him and then set the building afire…

    …the Arabs broke in and stabbed and burned to death Mr. Kabin [an elderly American Jew who had recently come to Palestine] and his sister…

    From there the bandits went on to the house of Joshua Ben Arieh, where they stabbed and burned to death Joshua, his wife and one son, and then shot dead his infant son. In the same house three children of Shlomo Leimer, aged 8, 10, and 12, were stabbed and burned to death. Proceeding farther, the Arabs broke into the house of Shimon Mizrahi, where they killed his wife and five children, ranging in ages from 1 to 12 years, and then set fire to the house…. [New York Times, Oct. 4, 1938]

    The three-year campaign of violence was finally suppressed in 1939, after which a British White Paper limited Jewish immigration into Palestine. As a result, many of the Jews fleeing Nazi Germany were denied a haven from destruction.

    I BET THE TWO BIG MOUTHS WILL STILL SAY ISLAM IS THE RELIGION OF PEACE.

  98. Marie

    By the way londonspirit Jesus had women disciples, the first person who revealed his messiahship to was a woman, and it was women who discovered the empty tomb. On top of that women had prominent roles in the early Church as phoebe the first deaconess in the book of Romans and there are many women saints.

  99. Marie

    By the way londonspirit if Islam promotes women's rights then how come so many Muslim countries treat their women like sh*t while in the west women are treated with dignity and respect. In fact the only countries where Muslimah's flourish are nonmuslim countries.

  100. Demsci

    OK, LondonSpirit,

    Well, you studied the Quran and some Hadith. You know your verses well. But there were before you and there are now countless other self-confessed Muslims, some of them very powerful, influential, who did the same and came to different conclusions in regard to treatment of women. I maintain that.

    By far the most criticism of this site is on different interpretations and practices in regard to women-treatment than your brand. And it is more trustbuilding or mistrust-building how self-confessed Muslims interpret and practice Islam where they have majority & power than what others say the interpretation should be, but only theoretically.

    BUT: You may well be right they do it in ignorance of real Islam. But other Muslims should tell them that. FFI mostly observes, reports, and yes, comments very harshly. But it is the self-confessed Muslims that provide both much motivation and much material to FFI.

    But it IS OK if you dismiss these perpetrators of wife-beating, oppressing women FFI reports on as not practicing Islam! That you say that what they practice has nothing to do with Islam (or your interpretation of it). We can find other names for those who behave oppressively and violently against women, namely Patriarchalists (Male Chauvinists), who merely abuse/ misuse Islam. We CAN indeed leave Islam out of this. We can ask other self-confessed Muslims, like you, to be in favor of Autonomy of Women worldwide. AND this supported by Islamic Holy Scriptures too. Thank heaven for people like you!

    AND if a massive group of "Women-Autonomy-Muslims" offer us a great deal in regard to Women-Autonomy worldwide, then: The ex-Muslims indeed could stop their critical/ insulting approach on Islam. And Women-Autonomy-people like us would no longer have to depend on the ex-muslims for the good deal they offer us now. In stark contrast to what the overwhelming majority of self-confessed Muslims offer us now; only silence or secret or overt support to our enemies; the Patriarchalists; the Iranian and Saudi government, the Taliban and other SO-CALLED Islamic movements.

  101. ibrahim

    I see light at the end of the tunnel.

  102. Moooo

    Still no response from the 2 big mouths. What a cowards.

  103. Kabirlaw

    To Ibnsahr

    Also, by the way, That list is not in the Quran in totality, only some incidents and especially not the sadistic and cold-blooded and gruesome murders appraently committed by God (the Bible is not in its original form so, whilst, there could be original divine truths in it we reject it because of the corruption MEN have put in it. Like God killing Prophets, Prophets committing adultery, God killing children purposefully etc etc (Muslims don't believe God would do this).

    So, try finding a list like that in the Quran. Go on, lets see if you can do it. The surpisring thing is Ibnsahr, you don't even seem that bothered about all the killing in the Bible and you criticise Islam.

    So who is agaisnt humanity US or YOU.

  104. Kabirlaw

    Marie, you are a seriously SICK individual and you're twisting tactics are not going to work any longer.

  105. londonspirit

    moo you want me to respond to your accusation. Let me ask you a question. Your the one that brought forth this accusations not me. So it is you who should provide the references so that i can look at them an judge an speak back. If you have no references your basing your accusations on sheer individual knowledge which may i say is not so good. Generally in court the person is required to bring forth proof to support his accusations. If the person has no proof his accusation is just a word of of mouth an is baseless.so do me a favour an bring proof

  106. ibnsahr

    ***My point exactly. Thank you. Even you can see it, eh? It’s the same God and some of these things are mentioned in the Quran (like the flood) but the Bible still outflanks the Quran in violence and killing***

    you don't have good understanding of the big picture of monotheism religion, do you?

    those stories that you questioning us is the very story that become the base of monotheism religion, including your false religion, but where the continuity of the story goes, like most muslim appeasement say, islam is continuity of christianity, why there is no story of jesus teaching in quran

    if you want to compare the story you listed with your quran, ask the jews, cause their wouldn't be a bible without NT, you going nowhere if you try to counter christianity, but quote story from OT. OT and NT go hand in hand, as it tells you story about the chaotic, barbaric, and immoral behaviour of people without guidance, and it gives you NT as guidance while learn from past story.

    if god tells you don't do that don't do this to early people, they don't understand, but when they see example what it will caused, they start to understand.

    the big question is, if muslim appeasement says, islam is continuity of christianity that preach love to others different, than why muslim following and back to the barbaric periods in OT.

    Is the contribution of islam to completion of monotheism religion is addition of seeking sexual pleasure and individual hate for not believing in pedo mo imaginary god?, at least in OT is attacking some nation, not individual, so muslim making the attack to more specific individual

    i agree with the barbaric OT, but seen the light in the new revelation, so kabir don't live in the dark past history

  107. ibnsahr

    Kabir,

    ***(the Bible is not in its original form so, whilst, there could be original divine truths in it we reject it because of the corruption MEN have put in it. Like God killing Prophets, Prophets committing adultery, God killing children purposefully etc etc (Muslims don’t believe God would do this).***

    so, slay unbeliever, mary your right hand posses are original divine truths that we must accept?

    so, the only thing that muslim's god will do is to urge the heard of goats to mary prepubescent girls?

    pubic hair is for the reason, kabir

  108. Kabirlaw

    Ibnsahr

    There is a lapse in your understanding and not mine.

    Point 1

    Islam is the culmination of revelations to mankind which confirms the tradition of earlier Prophets and expels the myths and corrupted texts that have been incorporated over time.

    Point 2

    If a person believes in the divinity of the Bible and in the religion of Judaism and/or Christinaity he/she really has no ground to criticise Islam as the Bible is full of Barbarism and IT IS attributed to God. If all the bloodshed is attributed to God in the OT then It is the SAME God who has now revealed the NT. So regardless of what the message of the NT is, that same God who now preaches the NT stands by and supports the OT.

    Unless of course, Ibnsahr, God has undergone a personality change and has taken counselling lessons and changed his outlook on human life!

    Us Muslims confirm that the earlier prophets were GOOD people, they did not commit adultery, murder non-virgins women (as the Bible claims), murder kids. Yes they went to war, but in the same manner the Prophet went to war with rules and for the religion. Remember God does not undergo personality changes. OT or NT, the Christian version of God is barbaric according to your own Bible. Rememeber the common Christain saying attributed to God "For God so Loved the world……" I'm asking you what about the world before Jesus? Why did God discriminate against the people of the OT? Why did they not benefit from the NT and Jesus' blood? How did Jesus die for those people who lived before him? How? What? When?

  109. Moooo

    Londospiritous, you failed to understand my posts. When i meant "Does quran bla…bla.." that means that i didn't find the verse related to my questions.

  110. Moooo

    To kebirilewd a.k.a the coward.

    Check my response in that article "will muslim be the caused of armageddon". I posted it yesterday. It's obvious that you didn't read it all, you pathetic coward.
    You muslim arsehole. You can't prove anything and your sun science is cheap fake forgery, you can't answer my question and challenge. Pathetic liar. A loser never admit that he is a loser. What a shameless muslim.

  111. Moooo

    I urge everyone to go to the post “Will Muslims be the Cause of the Armageddon” and see what happened to Kebirilewd and how he was TRASHED. Pathetic. 3-0 to me.

  112. Kabirlaw

    Poooo

    Someone has an inferiority complex and wants to be like ME, Since you love copying the manner in which I communicate. If you want to be like me then the first thing you need to do is read the Shahada. Ha ha ha.

  113. Moooo

    Stupid response again kebir. Pathetic loser, you still can't answer my question and challenge. Shameless muslim indeed.

  114. Moooo

    If you can't answer it, just be honest and admit it, coward. Talking big when you are trashed is embarassing you know. Ha..ha…ha… Well i guess all big mouth muslim like you behave like this. No surprise to me.

  115. BustedDivinity.

    I simply can't fathom some individuals, why argue for days if you can't bring forth a glaring evidence, you believe in a god, another person also does that but in a different deity, easy resolution will be verification of evidences, but I understand the whole game of belief in gods, these believers consider the earth as one big Las vegas where they can set a good gamble, hold tight to a lord just in case what their prophet says turns out to be true, deep in them they are doubters but the Pascal's wager is too tempting to ignore, I'll tell where you and Pascal got it wrong, your god is a said omniscient being, he/it/she knows exactly what you got up in your thoughts, so if you aren't sure but you are forcing yourself to remain in the flock, your belief is not along the lines of total submission to the will, it is more like a total manoeuvre, but remember god is a total control freak.

    I posit that all these religious-without-evidence holier than thou buddies think about their similarities with other religious people, I know I did when I was a Muslim, I used to think "could this true religion be all a part of my natural emotional appeal to strenghthen my defence mechanism?" it turned out to be just that, the nature of god as described by the zealots is all knowing and he won't take the great gamblers to paradise, you have to believe a 110% to get to the pearly gates, but is that kind of belief possible for an educated person? I say it is not, the arguments against a god the monotheistic version is too uncomfortable for believers to have true conviction.

    The next time you see a Muslim that is in the know of all the continents, various heriditary religions the world over, environmental determinism, the logical contradictions in religions, the awful lack of evidence for an anthropomorphic allah, just shrug him/her off, they are in denial, the best technique he/she will fool you with is scriptural verses debate, he/she will want to explain the righteousness of those verse till he/she gains more confidence in the fake belief, that kind of debate on the believer's side is called "assuming too much"

  116. londonspirit

    MOO WROTE: Londospiritous, you failed to understand my posts. When i meant “Does quran bla…bla..” that means that i didn’t find the verse related to my questions.

    ANSWER: WOOOOOOOOW wait a minute here. Your putting through accusations that islam teaches so and so but you havent found a single verse from the quran that proves your accusation. I am literally god smacked. What is the world coming to. Seriously mate you need to get your head checked.

    Why dont you do this MOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. I will suggest you a way of trying to find verses in relation to your accusation. Go on google and type in does islam teach so an so. Maybe just maybe you might come up with some results from other islam haters like yourself, trying to prove a point that is non existance.

    LOL

  117. Marie

    Kabirlaw:

    1 God drowns everyone on earth (except Noah and his family) Genesis 7:23 – 30,000,000- 30,000,000
    2 God rains fire and brimstone on Sodom and Gomorrah, Genesis 19:24 1,000? 30,001,000
    killing everyone.

    I say:

    This number is not in the Bible. Where did you get this from?

    Kabirlaw:

    I SUPPOSE THE DELUSIONAL AND DEVILISH HYPOCRITE (YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE) WILL STILL SAY THAT THE QURAN IS WORSE AND THE GOD OF THE BIBLE IS NOTHING BUT LOVE.

    PALESTINIANS ARE SMALL CHEESE COMPARED TO YOUR GANGSTER OF A GOD.

    I say:

    This coming from someone who does not care about the suffering of the nonmuslims in Muslim countries nor does he care about the number of Muslims killed by Muslims.

    Muslims are clearly thier own worst enemies:

    Number of Muslims killed by other Muslims in the 1990's Algerian civil
    war: 100,000.

    Number of people, including some Muslims, killed by Muslims in Sudan
    between 1955 and today: 2.6 million- 3 million.

    Number of Muslims killed by other Muslims in the Afghan civil war of the
    1980's-90's: 1 million

    Number of Muslims killed by other Muslims since 1977 in Somalia's civil
    war: Between 400,000- 550,000.

    Number of Muslims in Bangladesh killed by other Muslims from Pakistan
    since 1977: 1.4 million-2 million

    Number of Muslims killed by other Muslims in Indonesia since 1965: at
    least 400,000.

    Number of Muslims in East Timor killed between 1975-1999 by Muslims from
    Indonesia: 100,000 – 200,000

    Number of Muslims killed in Iraq by other Muslims (mostly those in the
    regime of Saddam Hussein): 1.54 million- 2 million

    Number of Iranian Muslims killed in their war with Iraq: 450,000 –
    970,000

    Number of Lebanese killed by other Lebanese or by Syrians between 1975-
    1990: at least 112,000.

    Number of Yemenites, Egyptians, and Saudis killed in the Yemen civil war
    of 1962, and in the Yemen riots of 1984-1986: 100,000 – 150,000

    Number of Arabs and Muslims killed in Jordan (includes at least a few
    thousand Palestinians), Chad, Yugoslavia, Tajikistan, Syria, Iran,
    Turkey, and Zanzibar in the course of smaller conflicts in the 1970's,
    80's, and 90's: at least 150,000. Muslims are clearly thier own worst enemies:

    Number of Muslims killed by other Muslims in the 1990's Algerian civil
    war: 100,000.

    Number of people, including some Muslims, killed by Muslims in Sudan
    between 1955 and today: 2.6 million- 3 million.

    Number of Muslims killed by other Muslims in the Afghan civil war of the
    1980's-90's: 1 million

    Number of Muslims killed by other Muslims since 1977 in Somalia's civil
    war: Between 400,000- 550,000.

    Number of Muslims in Bangladesh killed by other Muslims from Pakistan
    since 1977: 1.4 million-2 million

    Number of Muslims killed by other Muslims in Indonesia since 1965: at
    least 400,000.

    Number of Muslims in East Timor killed between 1975-1999 by Muslims from
    Indonesia: 100,000 – 200,000

    Number of Muslims killed in Iraq by other Muslims (mostly those in the
    regime of Saddam Hussein): 1.54 million- 2 million

    Number of Iranian Muslims killed in their war with Iraq: 450,000 –
    970,000

    Number of Lebanese killed by other Lebanese or by Syrians between 1975-
    1990: at least 112,000.

    Number of Yemenites, Egyptians, and Saudis killed in the Yemen civil war
    of 1962, and in the Yemen riots of 1984-1986: 100,000 – 150,000

    Number of Arabs and Muslims killed in Jordan (includes at least a few
    thousand Palestinians), Chad, Yugoslavia, Tajikistan, Syria, Iran,
    Turkey, and Zanzibar in the course of smaller conflicts in the 1970's,
    80's, and 90's: at least 150,000.

    5 Million Muslims killed by Muslims since 1970

    Islam and the Myths of Unity and Peace

    Posted by Lee Jay Walker on 7/06/09 • Categorized as Persecution

    A Kurdish refugee holds her baby. The Kurds are an Ethnic-Iranian ethnolinguistic group mostly inhabiting a region known as Kurdistan including adjacent parts of Iran, Iraq, Syria, Turkey.

    By Lee Jay Walker

    The so-called Islamic world is in crisis because many see enemies all over the place, be it democracy, Westernization, liberalism, socialism, and so forth. While alternative faiths are frowned upon, therefore, Christian and Buddhist missionaries must be aware for merely talking about your faith can mean either prison or death. Yet the real threat to Muslims and minority Muslim groups within various different nations is their fellow co-religionists, so why are outsiders hated so much when the real threat is Islam itself?

    After all, since 1970 approximately 5 million Muslims have been killed by fellow Muslims, however, one mention of Israel, and we hear about the Muslim unity card. However, the real “Muslim unity card” is a non-starter and this applies to the very foundations of Islam itself because the majority of early Muslim caliphs were killed by Muslims. Therefore, the current situation is similar to the past because it is based on internal tensions and mutual hatreds which run deep.

    The Kurds are a prime example because the majority of Kurdish people follow the Islamic faith, most are Sunni. Despite this, the Kurds, irrespective if Sunni or Shia, face persecution in modern day Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Turkey. The Kurds, ironically, have much greater freedoms in mainly Christian Armenia where a minority reside or throughout the European Union where many have fled because of persecution in the Middle East.

    Therefore, the Kurds, the biggest stateless people in the world are marginalized and persecuted by fellow Muslims throughout the Middle East where they reside. Yet Muslims in the Middle East often speak-out for the Palestinian cause, however, the very same people often remain silent about the Kurdish cause. Therefore, it is clear that double standards are at play and Israel is a very easy scapegoat.

    After all, look at recent history and the reality of the modern world. For since 1970 at least 5 million Muslims have been killed by their co-religionists on the grounds of Sunni-Shia divisions, ethnic tensions, political tensions, and other issues.

    This applies to the Iran-Iraq war; the persecution of African Muslims in Darfur by the Arab Muslim dominated government in Khartoum; Kurdish persecution in Iran, Iraq, and Turkey (deaths have been a lot lower in Syria but persecution does take place); Pakistan-Bangladesh war; Algeria, Somalia, Syria (1982); Tajikistan; Yemen; and other nations. Also, roughly 150,000 Shia Muslims have been killed in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan, by Sunni Islamic fanatics.

    Despite this reality we have world leaders like President Obama of America appealing to the so-called Muslim world for a fresh start. Yet surely an internal fresh start is needed first, however, it seems most unlikely because the spiral of hatred runs very deep.

    Therefore, do Shia Muslims in America, France, Japan, South Korea, the United Kingdom, and other mainly non-Muslim nations reside in fear? Of course the answer is no. Yet Shia Muslims have been targeted in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, and other nations, by Sunni Islamic zealots. Meanwhile in Saudi Arabia it is clear that Shia Muslims are second-class citizens because the Sunni elite do not believe in religious equality.

    Then if we look at two different Muslim branches, the Ahmadiyya’s and Bahai’s, it becomes apparent that internal Islamic hatred and persecution is strong. After all, the Bahai community in Iran and the Ahmadiyya community in Pakistan, suffer enormous persecution.

    Therefore, many Bahai’s and Ahmadiyya’s have fled both Iran and Pakistan respectively, but if either branches fled to Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia, or other conservative Muslim nations, then they would suffer persecution once more. Given this, many Bahai’s and Ahmadiyya’s have fled to mainly non-Muslim nations because they have much greater freedom.

    Then if we focus on al-Qaeda (al-Qaida) and Osama Bin Laden and fellow Sunni Islamic zealots, then we see a similar pattern. For when al-Qaeda emerged in Afghanistan they took their deadly sectarian ways with them and Shia Muslims were murdered in cold blood by forces loyal to al-Qaeda. The same happened when al-Qaeda entered the Iraqi civil war because once more they slaughtered Shia Muslims at will and moderate Sunni Muslim leaders were also killed by Sunni Muslim fanatics who had been brainwashed.

    Given this, it is clear that Muslim unity is not only a sham but it is based on lies and sadly many elements within the mass media are ignoring this reality. Yet if Israel kills Palestinians in self-defence or during a military operation, then the usual mantra of Muslim brotherhood and Muslim persecution is raised.

    However, the real reality is very different because the vast majority of Muslims who are killed throughout the world are killed by their co-religionists.
    Therefore, the biggest persecutor of Muslims in the modern world is being done by their own co-religionists. At the same time, the deniers of democracy, religious freedom, female emancipation, and other important issues, are Muslim elites in many Muslim majority nations.

    Also, it is abundantly clear that America and other nations are not anti-Muslim. After all, you have had three wars in Europe involving Muslims and Orthodox Christians in recent times. This applies to Cyprus, Bosnia, and Kosovo (Serbia), and every time America supported Islam against Orthodox Christianity. Just like America supported Indonesia despite countless massacres of Timorese people in the 1970s, 1980s, and early 1990s.

    However, when the Arab dominated regime in Khartoum, Sudan, was killing millions of mainly African Christians and Animists in southern Sudan did mainly Muslim nations enter Sudan to stop the bloodshed. Of course they did not and many African slaves in Sudan were sold internally but the outcry was very silent in the so-called Muslim world.

    Despite everything, the President of America, Obama, is offering an “olive branch” but surely it should be the other way around. For in America people have the right to follow any religion they want or to have no religion. Yet in the land of Mecca and Medina (Saudi Arabia) you are not allowed to have one single Christian church, Buddhist temple, Hindu temple, or any other non-Muslim place of worship.

    Therefore, what is the real agenda? Is it that Saudi Arabia can do whatever it likes because of their massive amounts of oil reserves? For this nation is spreading radical Sunni Islam to Afghanistan, Chechnya (Russian Federation), Iraq, Pakistan, Somalia, and many other nations, without any fear. Or is it that political correctness means we have to be pro-Islamic to show how nice we are, therefore, minority Muslim branches, Christians and other non-Muslims are allowed to be “lambs to the slaughter of Islam?” Or is it a mixture of both or collective amnesia?

    Maybe I will always be in lament because Israel is the easy scapegoat and of course many Muslims appear to believe that they are victims. However, the real truth couldn’t be further away because the biggest threat to minority Muslim groups and to the freedom of Muslims, is being done in the name of Islam by either radical zealots or despotic rulers who invoke Sharia Islamic law in order to preserve their respective power bases.

    The mass media should take a long look at itself and start to question the so-called House of Islam, Arab unity, Muslim brotherhood, and so forth. For Arab unity ignores both Arab disunity and the many non-Arab groups who reside in Arab dominated nations. While the House of Islam was divided within a short time of the death of Mohammed and Muslim brotherhood is based on unreality.

    ALL KABIRLAW CARES ABOUT IS PROMOTING THE RELIGION OF PEACE.

  118. Marie

    Kabirlaw:

    After you’ve digested the following from the Book of God we can then maybe start on the inquisitions, witch hunts, crusades, burning at the stake, colonialism and imperialism.

    I say:

    My response is awaiting approval from the moderators.

    The Crusades:

    The Crusades were in fact a late small scale response to Islamic Jihad conquests that began 450 years before the first crusad and overwhelmed what had been up to the time of the conquests over half of Christendom. Three of the five principal of early Christianity-Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem were conquered and Islamized before the first crusade and a fourth, Constantinople would fall in 1453, 150 years after the Islamic conquest of the last crusader kingdom.

    The initial pace of these Jihad conquest was breathtakingly fast . In 635 , the Jihadists took Damascus in 636 , al-Basrah in Iraq in 637, Antioch and in 638 Jerusalem. The Muslims took ceasarea in 641 and Armenia in 643 and the conquest of Egypt took place in the same period. They also won decisive victories over the Byzantines at Sufetula in Tunisia in 647, opening up North Africa , and over the persians at Nihavand in 642. By 709 they had complete control of Africa, by 711 they had subdued northern Spain and were moving into France. Sicily fell in 827.

    In the early 11th century conditions for Christians in the Holy land deteriorated. In 1004, the Fatamid Caliph Abu Ali al-Mansur al-Hakim ordered churches destroyed and church property seized. Over the next 10 years 30,000 churches were destroyed Untold numbers of Christians converted to Islam to save their lives. In 1009 al-Hakim ordered the Church of the Holy Sepulcher to be destroyed along several other Churches including the church of the resurrection. He ordered Christians to wear heavy crosses around their necks. He piled on other humiliating decrees, culminating in order that they accept Islam or leave. In 1056 Muslims expelled 300 Christians from Jerusalem and forbade European Christians from entering the newly rebuilt Church of the Holy Sepulcher ( al-Hakim was erratic and allowed the Byzantines to rebuilt the Church in 1027 )

    In 1071 the Seljuke Turks crushed the Byzantines in the battle of Manzikert. They conquered Syria in 1076. It was against this backdrop that the Byzantine emperor Alexius 1 Comnenus appealed to the Pope for help. Pope Urban 11 in 1095 sent out a call for a crusade to take back Jerusalem.

    Kabirlaw read The New Concise History of the Crusades by Thomas F. Madden.

    As for the witchhunts of the middle ages it was nothing but misogyny committed against women and while there were Christians who took part in the practice there were Christians who came to their senses and opposed it. Kabirlaw to my knowledge while the Christians mentioned the devils name in regards the persecutions, they did not use any verses from the Bible to justify these atrocities. If you can prove that Christians did use the Bible to commit these atrocities please let me know.

    Colonialism and imperialism as far as I know it was greed that fueled this drive to expand the European empire.

    Kabirlaw please respond to this:

    Theophanes in entry for 629 wrote:In this year died Mouamed, the leader and false prophet of the Saracens, after appointing his kinsman Aboubacharos {to his cheiftainship. At the same time his repute spread abroad} and everyone was frightened. At the beginning of his advent the misguided Jews thought he was the Messiah who is awaited by them, so that some of their leaders joined him and accepted his religion while forsaking that of Moses, who saw God. Those who did so were ten in number, and they remained with him until his murder.* But when they saw him eating camel meat, they realized that he was not the one they thought him to be, and were at a loss what to do; being afraid to abjure his religion, those wretched ment aught him illicit things directed against us, Christians, and remained with him.

    I consider it necessary to give an account of this man’s origin. He was descended from a very widespread tribe, that of Ishmael, son of Abraham; for Nizaros, descendant of Ishamel, is recognized as the father of them all. He begot two sons, Moudaros and Raias. Moudaros begot Kourasos, Kaisos, Themimes, Asados, and toehrs unknown. All of them dwelt in the Midianite desert and kept cattle, themselves living in tents. There are also those farther away who are not of their tribe, but of that of lektan, the so-called Amanites, that is Homerites. And some of them traded on their camels. Being destitute and an orphan, the aforesaid Mouamed decided to enter the service of a rich woman who was a relative of his, called Chadiga, as a hired worker with a view to trading by camel in Egypt and Palestine. Little by little he became bolder and ingratiated himself with that woman, who was a widow, took her as a wife, and gained possession of her camels and her substance. Whenever he came to Palestine he consorted with Jews and Christians and sought from them certain scriptural matters. He was also afflicted with epilepsy. When his wife became aware of this, she was greatly distressed, inasmuch as she, a noblewoman, had married a man such as he, who was not only poor, but also an epileptic. He tried deceitfully to placate her by saying, “I keep seeing a vision of a certain angel called Gabriel, and being unable to bear his sight, I faint and fall down.” Now, she had a certain monk living there, a friend of hers (who had been exiled for his depraved doctrine Arianism), and she related everything to him, including the angel’s name. Wishing to satisfy her, he said to her, “He has spoken the truth, fot this is the angel who is sent to all the prophets.” When she had heard the words of the false monk, she was the first to believe in Mouamed and proclaimed to other women of her tribe that he was a prophet. Thus, the report spread from women to men, and first to Aboubacharos, whom he left as his successor. This heresy prevailed in the region of Ethribos, in the last resort by war: at first secretly, for ten years, and by war another ten, and openly nine. He taught his subjects that he who kills an enemy or is killed by an enemy goes to Paradise; and he said that this paradise was one of carnal eating and drinking and intercourse with women, and had a river of wine, honey, and milk, and that they women were not like the ones down here, but different ones, and that the intercourse was long-lasting and the pleasure continuous; and other things full of profligacy and stupidity; also that men should feel sympathy for one another and help those who are wronged.

    Theophanes in entry for 630 wrote:Mouamed, who had died earlier, had appointed four emirs to fight those members of the Arab nation who were Christian, and they came in front of a billage called Mouchea, in which was stationed the vicarius Theodore, intending to fall upon the Arabs on the day when they sacrificed to their idols. The vicarius, on learning this from a certain Koraishite called Koutabas, who was in his pay, gathered all the soldiers of the desert guard and, after ascertaining from the Saracan the day and hour when they were intending to attack, himself attacked them at a village called Mothous, and killed three emirs and the bulk of their army. On emir, called Chaled, whom they call God’s Sword, escaped. Now some of the neighbouring Arabs were receiving small payments from the emperors for guarding the approaches to the desert. At that time a certain eunuch arrived to distribute the wages according to custom, the eunuch drove them away, saying “The emperor can barely pary his soldiers their wages, much less these dogs!” Distressed by this, the Arabs went over to their fellow-tribesmen, and itwas they that led them to the rich country of Gaza, which is the gateway to the desert in the direction of Mount Sinai.

  119. Marie

    The New Inquisition: Spanish Inquisition does not live up to reputation of injustice
    Cornell Review ^ | 1/31/02 | G. Quentin Mull

    Posted on Thursday, October 09, 2003 8:18:02 AM by Aquinasfan

    Since the epiphany of last September, we have heard countless comparisons between the murders by militant Mohammedans and various epochs of Western history, in a bizarre, masochistic, self-condemning attempt to extenuate the current jihad movement. Dominating the examples of a Western conduit for bloodthirsty religious fervor similar to that of the Osama Movement has been the Spanish Inquisition. Unfortunately for our media and this self-deprecating sequela, examination of the Spanish Inquisition reveals it to be none of the things it is alleged to be, but to be in fact the most just tribunal of its time.

    The very word “Inquisition” (which actually comes from the verb ‘to inquire’) conjures up morbid notions of torture, lynch mobs, and oppressive totalitarian men in brown robes carrying out sadistic punishments for no proven cause. This is the image taught and depicted as an apodictic truth by mainstream society. Modern scholars, and a recent BBC expose, have found the truth to be quite to the contrary.

    One must first realize why the Spanish Inquisition was founded. At the time (late 15th century), Spain was under attack by, believe it or not, Turkish Muslims set on their own jihad – as it turns out the Iberian Peninsula was also infringing on Muslim Holy Ground. False conversions to Christianity to avoid suspicion were common – producing converts who would later clandestinely aid their invading cohorts. The uprooting of these bogus conversions in an attempt to halt the invading Turks was the initial aim of the Spanish Inquisition.

    Within this and all later purposes, the only persons the Spanish Inquisition had jurisdiction over were self-proclaimed Christians. Contrary to popular belief, the Inquisition could not, nor did, prosecute anyone for being Jewish or Islamic. In fact, one way to avoid the trial or punishment by the Inquisition was simply to say that you were not a Christian. One could believe whatever he or she cared to, as long as the person did not claim to be Christian.

    A common vision of the Inquisition is a mob of ignoble churls throwing accusations at some poor widow for being a witch, as portrayed by Monty Python. William Thomas Walsh describes the purpose of the Inquisition as “…a judicial instrument of conformity, which would eliminate the caprice, the anger, and the misinformation of the mob.” This view as a stabilizing effect seems more founded, since the Inquisitors, who as Alphonsus Duran points outs “were university lawyers and not even always priests,” claimed that witchcraft was a figment of the imagination. No one could be tried or burnt for witchcraft under the Spanish Inquisition, however there were harsh punishments for false accusation. In contrast, as the BBC points out: in the 350 years of the Spanish Inquisition, only between 3,000 and 5,000 people were killed, while at the same time the rest of Europe burnt 150,000 women for witchcraft alone.

    Some of the information used by the BBC came from the annals of the Catholic Church, which kept in-depth internal records of each case. Since these were internal, and hence secret (until recently), their veracity is held in high regard, as forgery would gain nothing.

    These records give startling enlightenment with regards to the practice of torture, which was universal in the contemporary courts of Europe. Professor Stephen Haliczer of Northern University of Illinois found that the Spanish Inquisition used torture in only 2 percent of more than 7,000 cases studied, and never for more than 15 minutes. Less than 1 percent were tortured more than once, and he found no evidence that anyone was ever tortured more than twice. This during a time when damaging shrubs in a common garden was an offence punishable by death in England.

    The dungeon-like, filthy jails of the Inquisition shown in movies such as “Man of La Mancha” are another fabricated slur against the Inquisition. Prof. Haliczer claims the Inquisition’s jails were superior to all other jails in Spain, and notes, “I found instances of prisoners in secular criminal courts blaspheming in order to get into the Inquisition prison.” This is a far cry from the Neanderthal brutality and insane religious fanaticism being alluded to by the media, let alone being analogous to Bin Laden, the Taliban and the Palestinian terror groups.

    So if the Inquisition did not just go from town to town executing anyone accused of heresy, how did it operate? Here is the account given in Alphonsus Duran’s book “Why Apologize for the Spanish Inquisition,” with information provided by the BBC documentary: Upon coming into a district, the Inquisitors would announce a “period of grace.” During this time, anyone accused could freely repent, whereupon a penance would be given and the offender forgiven. After this the accused would appear before the court. At this time he would be given the incredible privilege of writing a list of all his enemies who might want to commit calumny against him, whose testimony would automatically be thrown out. At this point the trial would take place guided by strict procedures which were constantly reviewed and revised by the hierarchy. The defendant could seek the assistance of lawyers. A conviction needed the agreement of at least two witnesses (our courts only require one), and a judge thought to be biased could be rejected by the accused. If convicted, there were multiple levels of appeal available to the accused.

    This strict and just method defies our inherited notions of the Spanish Inquisition, but the statistics collaborate this. The BBC research shows that more men and women were executed by the guillotine of the French Revolution in one day than by the Spanish Inquisition during the entire 16th century. In the vast majority of cases, an Inquisition ended in absolution, penance, or a warning – not an execution.

    With the chimera of the monolithic, nefarious Spanish Inquisition now debunked, one might still raise the question as to whether it is acceptable to punish, and in particular execute, in the name of God at all; even when done in this comparatively just and benevolent manner.

    Is it justifiable to kill for the good of a society or an institution (for a church is an institution, divinely ordered or not)? Our own penal code says yes. Timothy McVeigh can attest to that. If the institution is a church instead of a state, heresy becomes equivalent to treason. American law holds execution as the standard punishment for treason, so the “malodorous” and “fanatical” Inquisitors can not be vilified by our own standards. Would we be better off if Bin Laden and company had been sent to a Muslim Inquisition and made to recant or die, stopping him before he spread his evil ideology? The U.S. response in Afghanistan seems to allude to such a sentiment, making the pathos of the Inquisition more similar to our War on Terror than to the attack on America.

    By the way the "innocent Muslims" of the Spanish decided to get back at the Europeans for kicking them out of lands they had no right to live in the first place by attacking their ships and enslaving them. Read White Gold: The Extraordinary Story of Thomas Pellow and Islam's One Million White Slaves by Giles Milton

  120. Marie

    Historical revision of the Inquisition
    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Jump to: navigation, search
    This article is about Historical revision of the Inquisition. For other uses, see Inquisition (disambiguation).

    The Historical revision of the Inquisition is a historiographical project that has emerged in recent years. In the last forty years, with opening of formerly closed archives, the development of new historical methodologies, and, in Spain, the death of Francisco Franco in 1975, new works of historical revisionism have reread the history of the Roman and Spanish Inquisitions.

    Writers associated with this project share the view of Edward Peters, a prominent historian in the field, who states: "The Inquisition was an image assembled from a body of legends and myths which, between the twentieth and the sixteenth centuries, established the perceived character of inquisitorial tribunals and influenced all ensuing efforts to recover their historical reality."[1]
    Contents
    [hide] [hide]

    * 1 Significant works
    o 1.1 Understanding inquisitions
    * 2 The Inquisitions in France
    o 2.1 Cathars and Waldensians
    o 2.2 The "Grand Program"
    o 2.3 The "Albigensian Crusade"
    o 2.4 Codes and torture
    * 3 The Inquisitions in Spain
    o 3.1 Antisemitism and the "conversos"
    o 3.2 Papal Bull
    o 3.3 Procedure and torture
    o 3.4 The auto de fe
    * 4 The Inquisitions in Italy
    o 4.1 Context
    o 4.2 The creation of the Holy Office
    o 4.3 "Heresies" of the Italian Inquisitions
    o 4.4 Evolution of the Holy Office
    * 5 The Creation of "The Inquisition"
    o 5.1 "A Protestant Vision…"
    o 5.2 The Revolt of the Netherlands
    o 5.3 Montanus
    o 5.4 William of Orange
    o 5.5 The Black Legend
    o 5.6 The Enlightenment and Art
    * 6 See also
    * 7 Resources
    * 8 Footnotes
    * 9 External links

    [edit] Significant works

    The two most significant and extensively cited sources of this revised analysis of the historiography of the inquisitorial proceedings are Inquisition (1988) by Edward Peters and The Spanish Inquisition: An Historical Revision (1997) by Henry Kamen. These works focus on exposing and correcting what they argue are popular modern misconceptions about the inquisitions and historical misinterpretations of their activities. The following text presents Peters’ and Kamen’s ideas.

    [edit] Understanding inquisitions

    Because the inquisitorial process was not based on tolerant principles and doctrines such as freedom of thought and freedom of religion that became prominent in Western thinking during the eighteenth century, modern society has an inherent difficulty in understanding the inquisitorial institutions. From the Middle Ages well into the seventeenth century in Catholic Europe, the law stated that the worst offence one could commit was that which threatened the unity and security of the Catholic Church, and most importantly, the salvation of souls.[2] Uniformity of worship does not appear to have been the motivation for setting up the Spanish Inquisition at all.[3] “The Inquisition can only be understood within the framework of the centuries of its existence, when religious uniformity and orthodoxy and obedience to authority were enforced by almost all political and religious institutions, and were considered essential for the very survival of society" (Hitchcock 1996).

    Regardless of the century, inquisitions were ecclesiastical investigations conducted either directly by the Catholic Church or by secular authorities with the support of the Church. These investigations were undertaken at varying times in varying regions under the authority of the local bishop and his designates or under the sponsorship of papal-appointed legates. The purpose of each inquisition was specific to the outstanding circumstances of the region in which it was held. Investigations usually involved a legal process, the goal of which was to obtain a confession and reconciliation with the Church from those who were accused of heresy or of participating in activities contrary to Church Canon law. The objectives of the inquisitions were to secure the repentance of the accused and to maintain the authority of the Church. Inquisitions were conducted with the collaboration of secular authorities. If an investigation resulted in a person being convicted of heresy and unwillingness to repent punishment was administered by the secular authorities.

  121. Marie

    londonspirit:

    marie you have the nerve to say that palestinians did so an so. But you turn a blind eye to the horrendous acts of what the israelis done to the palestinians this year alone. Over1000 dead mainly children an thousands an thousands injured. The true scale is not even known yet as the media were not even allowed in. They had to sit on top of a hill in israel to see the destruction. An what did the world do about this crime on humanity. Nothing. I remember watchin a clip on youtube about a 2 month old baby had both arms an legs blown off an was be eaten by dogs. Nothing in this world deserves that treatment. Marie you make me sick when you write paragraph an paragraph of what muslims done. Muslims are human. They are influenced by their own ego just like any other human. People do things bad muslims an non muslims. An in this century an the last century all wars were created my the christians not the muslims.

    I say:

    Hey londonspirit what about the Palestinians who kidnap and murder innocent israeli civilians on roads and in public places? What about Palestinians who commit terrorist attacks at Israeli checkpoints. In fact that is why there are Israeli checkpoints on the roads because Palestinians made it a habit of killing civilians and committing terrrorists acts on these roads.

    You want to know the real number of how many Palestinians who have been killed by Israelis? Go to CAMERA: Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America and see if you can find these statistics.

    BY THE WAY LONDONSPIRIT THE ATTROCITIES THAT ARE MENTIONED IN THE ARTICLE TOOK PLACE YEARS BEFORE ISRAEL WAS ESTABLISHED. THE CALIPH OF JERUSALEM GAVE MUSLIMS ORDERS TO COMMIT SOME OF THESE ATTROCITIES.

  122. Marie

    Kabirlaw:

    My point exactly. Thank you. Even you can see it, eh? It’s the same God and some of these things are mentioned in the Quran (like the flood) but the Bible still outflanks the Quran in violence and killing YET that hypocrite Marie is criticising the Quran and is happy with all the violence in the Bible and believes it.

    I say:

    It's the Muslims who outflank the Bible and Christian history in terms of killing.

  123. Marie

    Kabirlaw:

    Point 1

    Islam is the culmination of revelations to mankind which confirms the tradition of earlier Prophets and expels the myths and corrupted texts that have been incorporated over time.

    I say:

    Oh really? Prove it!

    Point 2

    If a person believes in the divinity of the Bible and in the religion of Judaism and/or Christinaity he/she really has no ground to criticise Islam as the Bible is full of Barbarism and IT IS attributed to God. If all the bloodshed is attributed to God in the OT then It is the SAME God who has now revealed the NT. So regardless of what the message of the NT is, that same God who now preaches the NT stands by and supports the OT.

    The Bible was inspired by God not written by him and yes we have ground to criticize the Quran because most of the violence had more to do with Israels survival and these were secular wars. Plus the violence is descriptive not prescriptive ( which means commands that believers must carry out for generations ) and violence was never sanctioned as something that is divine, while Muslims say they must commit Jihad until the whole world has submitted to Islam.

  124. Demsci

    Moooo, I see your point, it is almost impossible to convince LondonSpirit.

    What it boils down to is that LS stands apart in his explanations of Islam, in the real Islamic countries interpretation and practice is different from them. LS’explanations are beneficial, great + hard to refute, but because of other Muslims they become irrelevant. Iranian and Saudi government and Taliban etc. say they are Islamic and they behave often different from what LondonSpirit says they should do. And is they who have the power, which LS does not have.

    LS has this problem so long as FFI keeps reporting on these real situations and events in the real Islamic world. And these other Muslims continue in their current behavior. So that is his real problem, not FFI. What FFI does is NOT about hating Islam, it is primarily about caring about the victims of violence and oppression, now and in future.

    And about Bush and Mugabe and others being Christians. Well, if they did or do murder, oppression, atrocious behavior and then say that that was for Christianity other Christians everywhere would distance themselves from them. So we like Muslims to distance themselves from Taliban-barbarians, Iranian oppressors, etc. too.

  125. Marie

    londonspirit has a problem because he will not acknowledge that Muslims are killing people using the Quran.

  126. Demsci

    LondonSpirit, Marie and I are just as emotional involved as you and Kabirlaw, in regards to Israel-Palestine.

    I assure you I try to think balanced and that I know both sides have guilties and innocents.

    But maybe I respect Palestinians and Lebanese even more than you do in one respect; They are responsible human beings, not simpletons, not crazy. I daresay they are in the same leaque with the Israeli's with being sensible, accountable. If you want, I'll say they may be even more responsible, accountable because of being Muslims.

    It is perhaps the belief and knowledge of almost the whole world, including most Muslims, that Israel simply would NOT have attacked Lebanon in 2006, Gaza in 2009 if they could have avoided it. They had too, they were desperate, saw no other way. They knew how it would be used against them by Muslims and many others in advance and dreaded that.

    And later we heard the other Lebanese shout at Hizbollah: Why did you unnecessarily provoke the Israeli's, who would never have bombed us without you! And so Hizbollah has stopped and Israel has stopped. Same with Gaza, how evil/ irresponsible was HAMAS provoking Israel with rockets for years, getting 1000's of warnings from Israel? How evil/ irresponsible were they firing from schools, occupied apartments? With those very children you mourn in them! Think about it , LS, would you deliberately pull the tail of a tiger?

    You keep hammering on the innocence of Palestinians and you are right, now look at the other innocents, in history, victims of Muslims. Because I look at 2000 years, not just 100 as you do. And we are informed about Islamic Jihad, by Arabs, Turks. And there were many innocents from that too, just as innocent as the victims you see. I am wise enough to see balance, why can't you? and if you see balance, then sooner or later you must forgive, you cannot forgive one guilty party because they are your brothers, and condemn the other party because they are different. Not with the same crimes, you can't. Forgive both or condemn both. Mourn for all victims, not just the ones you like. I can do that, can you?

  127. Marie

    Demsci:

    It is perhaps the belief and knowledge of almost the whole world, including most Muslims, that Israel simply would NOT have attacked Lebanon in 2006, Gaza in 2009 if they could have avoided it. They had too, they were desperate, saw no other way. They knew how it would be used against them by Muslims and many others in advance and dreaded that.

    Hamas and Hezbollah were firing off rockets into Israel and that is why Israel went after them.

    Demsci:

    And later we heard the other Lebanese shout at Hizbollah: Why did you unnecessarily provoke the Israeli’s, who would never have bombed us without you! And so Hizbollah has stopped and Israel has stopped. Same with Gaza, how evil/ irresponsible was HAMAS provoking Israel with rockets for years, getting 1000’s of warnings from Israel? How evil/ irresponsible were they firing from schools, occupied apartments? With those very children you mourn in them! Think about it , LS, would you deliberately pull the tail of a tiger?

    I say:

    Lebanon is a secular government and many innocent people were killed during the war.

    Besides the terrorists are sick people. They believe that an innocent person who is accidentally killed by Israelis is a martyr ( this includes children )

    Demsci:

    Mourn for all victims, not just the ones you like. I can do that, can you?

    I say:

    Well stated.

  128. kabirlaw

    To Megha

    You said:

    hmmmmm…..does this bring on a new perspective or what? lol We have two Muslim regulars who claim Islam does not sanction wife beating, rape and worse yet…they value and honor women more than any other religion. Perhaps they themselves do not commit any of these barbaric crimes, but they follow a prophet who did and so many others who have followed in his footsteps….so….Muslim regulars…what have you to say to this……..!!!

    I say:

    (1) The article does mention WHY they were flogged, so we cannot really come to any conclusion on this can we. For all we know it could be something totally unrelated, I say, could be.
    (2) The article is not talking about wife beating but punishments handed out to them by the State (Not their husbands)
    (3) There is no rape mentioned in the article, so try that one on another occasion.
    (4) There is punishment for pre-marital sex for both males and females in Islam and so this legislation is not gender discriminatory. Therefore the premise of your argument here is false
    (5) Crime happens everywhere and punishments take place everywhere. Muslim countries nowadays are not the epitome of the of the Islamic system. Almost ALL muslim countries do not adhere to the notion of a pure Islamic State. None. Saudi Arabia is far from being an Islamic State as it has an absolute monarchy and Monarchies and Kingdoms are Illegal in Islam. So when you use these countries as examples you are missing the mark by miles.

    You then said:

    Muslims use women to set examples because they do not know how to pick on anyone their own sizes!

    I say:

    I think picking on the whole of the Roman empire, Byzantium empire and the Persian empire by a group of desert Arabs was pretty brave of them!

    You then say:

    Why don’t you punish men as equally for committing the same crimes? Find me an article or a verse in the Koran that says men are stoned if they commit adultery, have premarrital sex, mingle with men outside their family, etc and I’ll keep my mouth shut and my keys on permanent lock! Lashes don’t equal to being put to death!

    I say:

    If you are a sincere and honourable person you better stick by what you said here and shut your mouth in future. Your question is basically equality in punishment for the same crimes for men and women in Islam. the question of whether stoning to death is in the quran or not is irrelevant because it is in Authentic hadith and so is indeed a precribed punishment in islam. Here I go:

    (The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication,- flog each of them with a hundred stripes: Let not compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by Allah, if ye believe in Allah and the Last Day: and let a party of the Believers witness their punishment.) (An-Nur 24: 2).

    and:

    The most accepted collection of Hadith Sahih al Bukhari has 4 entries under 3829, 8804, 8805 and 8824 which refer to stoning by death. The case under 4829 involved Jews who were stoned to death in accordance with the Law of the Torah. 8805 says: "A married man from the tribe of Bani Aslam who had committed illegal sexual intercourse and bore witnesses four times against himself was ordered by the Prophet (s.a.s.) to be stoned to death". 8804 and 8824 overlap each other. I dont know what happened to the lady, I think she might of got off because she did not admit it like the man did.

    Therefore, it is crystal clear that the punishments that apply in Islam are the same for both men and women. Now lets see if you will shut your trap or not like you promised.

    You then said:

    Find me a Muslim male who believes that a man can be as much of a whore as a woman.

    I say:

    Forget Muslims! Allah and the Prophet are telling you that men are to be punished equally for being whores, as you so eloquently put it. Megha, baby, the punishment IS THE SAME FOR BOTH GIRL AND BOY.

    You then retorted:

    Find me a Muslim woman who will not be put to death for leaving Islam in a country like Saudi!

    I say:

    We need to ask the Saudi Government. What does that have to do with the other 1.45 billion Muslims. Also, see above about Saudi Monarchy.

    You then retorted:

    Find me a Muslim male who has been “honored killed” for putting his family to shame by committing such an act as premarrital sex!

    I say:

    Megha, I'm not fighting with you, but seriously you are being very childish and ridiculous. Honour killings happen in a lot of places. They happened before the advent of Islam. They happen in predominantly Hindu India. There is no such thing as an honour killing in Islam because the punishment for pre-marital sex (as I have shown you above) is 100 lashes for both men and women (Not an honour killing).

    Honour killing is culturally ingrained in the people that do it. The cruel truth is that these families find it less shameful for the men of their families to have engaged in pre-marital sex than their women. What does Islam have to do with that. We are not debating culture, traditions and mindsets of people in different parts of ther world, we are debating the religion of Islam. And Islam is telling you that if a woman has pre-marital sex she should be lashed 100 times and if a man has pre-marital sex he also should be lashed 100 times.

    If a woman has sex with another man whilst she is married she should be stoned to death and if a man has sex with another woman whilst he is married he should be stoned to death (BUT, and thats a big BUT, the trial should be conducted in line with Islamic Justice which requires there to be 4 adult sane witnesses who have actually witnessed the physical act of penetration (So the chance of them being convicted of the offence if it is denied is next to nothing). Moreover, adultery and fornication happen in Islamic countries as well and people ARE indeed getting off scot free because of the high standard of proof required.

    I'm looking forward to silence from you now. Take care babes.

  129. Kabirlaw

    To Marie:

    You have raised from very unusual posts and made some strange comments. Please don't get off the topic. We are talking about he Divine origin of Christinaity and/or Islam.

    You are cutting and pasting many opinions, historical inaccuracies, and biased findings that do not share consensus among modern intellectuals. So what you are doing is using any shred, coming from any avenue which is derogatory to Islam and it's Prophet and you are then posting it as if it is truth or beyond reasonable doubt.

    Marie, your co-pilots might not be able to decipher the tricks you are playing but for any neutral or objective person your bias, prejudices and selective use of information is clear as daylight.

    However, in case you wrongly try to make out that I am avoiding answering your posts I say (I'm only responding to the juicy bits as I'm using my own brain instead of Answering Islam's! but you, and others, will get my point (because you can't lie to yourself!)

    You said:

    The Crusades were in fact a late small scale response to Islamic Jihad conquests that began 450 years before the first crusad and overwhelmed what had been up to the time of the conquests over half of Christendom.

    I say:

    Now is the above a contradiction of terms or a contradiction of terms. Your above stupid statement calls the Crusades small scale and in the same breath states that it overwhelmed OVER HALF OF CHRISTENDOM. It's ok. Marie, the crusades were probably just two Welsh farmers fighting over a lost sheep!

    Now read the following from Wikipedia and then tell me if it was small scale and whether it was only conducted to help oppressed people (your pure lies!).

    The Crusades were a series of religiously-sanctioned military campaigns waged by much of Latin Christian Europe, particularly the Franks of France and the Holy Roman Empire. The specific crusades to restore Christian control of the Holy Land were fought over a period of nearly 200 years, between 1095 and 1291. Other campaigns in Spain and Eastern Europe continued into the 15th century. The Crusades were fought mainly against Muslims, although campaigns were also waged against pagan Slavs, Jews, Russian and Greek Orthodox Christians, Mongols, Cathars, Hussites, Waldensians, Old Prussians, and political enemies of the popes.[1] Crusaders took vows and were granted penance for past sins, often called an indulgence.[1][2]

    The Crusades originally had the goal of recapturing Jerusalem and the Holy Land from Muslim rule and were launched in response to a call from the Christian Byzantine Empire for help against the expansion of the Muslim Seljuk Turks into Anatolia. The term is also used to describe contemporaneous and subsequent campaigns conducted through to the 16th century in territories outside the Levant[a] usually against pagans, heretics, and peoples under the ban of excommunication[3] for a mixture of religious, economic, and political reasons.[4] Rivalries among both Christian and Muslim powers led also to alliances between religious factions against their opponents, such as the Christian alliance with the Sultanate of Rum during the Fifth Crusade.
    (Wikipedia)

    The same goes for the wool you pulling over people's eyes concerning the inquisitions etc. Now you also made the unsubstantiated statement that I do not care about other Muslims but it is clear from your own stance that you couldn't care less for the victims of the Crusades who also happened to be some Christians who were following different sects to your own.

    Marie, like I said, read from neutral and reliable sources. ALL your posts contain information from bias, Anti-Islam websites and books. You take from those books and articles the opinions that are in harmony with your own hate filled views on Islam and your own version of Christianity. You are NOT an objective and fair minded person. Thank God you are not a Judge in a court of law.

    You then said:

    This coming from someone who does not care about the suffering of the nonmuslims in Muslim countries nor does he care about the number of Muslims killed by Muslims.

    I say:

    Unsubstantiated and vicious accusation! Now, show me where I said that I do not care about the suffering of non-Muslims or Muslims. Specifically point it out for all to see. In anticipation.

    You then went on and gave us a massive list of muslims killing muslims that you probably pulled from (No Surprises for guessing!) an Anti islam or Pro Zionist or Pro Christian source. Again Marie, I can do the same thing but because the net is so wide and diverse I say, Stick to the topic and don't start pulling out red herrings. i.e. The divine origin of Christinaity and/or Islam.

    I said to you:

    Islam is the culmination of revelations to mankind which confirms the tradition of earlier Prophets and expels the myths and corrupted texts that have been incorporated over time.

    You said:

    Oh really? Prove it!

    I say:

    Oh I will Marie, when we start our debate, let me meet your condition first and read the whole of the Bible and it's variants.

    Youn then said:

    The Bible was inspired by God not written by him and yes we have ground to criticize the Quran because most of the violence had more to do with Israels survival and these were secular wars. Plus the violence is descriptive not prescriptive ( which means commands that believers must carry out for generations ) and violence was never sanctioned as something that is divine, while Muslims say they must commit Jihad until the whole world has submitted to Islam.

    I say:

    What a crock of S***t!
    Point 1 – Are you conceding that there are things in the Bible that have not been put there by God or authorised by God. If so, END OF DEBATE, Curtains Marie, YOU LOSE. The Muslims whole premise is that the Bible in its modern form is a corrupted text of an ORIGINAL THAT WAS INSPIRED BY GOD. So please clarify for me your position on human hands contributing to the text of the Bible.

    Point 2- You say wars of survival and secular wars. YOU ARE ONE SHAMELESS LIAR. Where is the survival aspect in ALL of the following:

    1 God drowns everyone on earth (except Noah and his family) Genesis 7:23 – 30,000,000- 30,000,000
    2 God rains fire and brimstone on Sodom and Gomorrah, Genesis 19:24 1,000? 30,001,000
    killing everyone.
    3 Lot’s wife for looking back Genesis 19:26 1 30,001,001
    4 Er who was “wicked in the sight of the Lord” Genesis 38:7, 1 Chronicles 2:3 1 30,001,002
    5 Onan for spilling his seed Genesis 38:10 1 30,001,003
    6 A 7 year, world-wide famine Genesis 41:25-54 70,000 ? 30,071,003
    7 7th Egyptian Plague: Hail Exodus 9:25 300,000? 30,371,003
    8 God kills every Egyptian firstborn child. Exodus 12:29-30 1,000,000? 31,371,003
    1 God drowns everyone on earth (except Noah and his family) Genesis 7:23 – 30,000,000- 30,000,000
    2 God rains fire and brimstone on Sodom and Gomorrah, Genesis 19:24 1,000? 30,001,000
    killing everyone.
    3 Lot’s wife for looking back Genesis 19:26 1 30,001,001
    4 Er who was “wicked in the sight of the Lord” Genesis 38:7, 1 Chronicles 2:3 1 30,001,002
    5 Onan for spilling his seed Genesis 38:10 1 30,001,003
    6 A 7 year, world-wide famine Genesis 41:25-54 70,000 ? 30,071,003
    7 7th Egyptian Plague: Hail Exodus 9:25 300,000? 30,371,003
    8 God kills every Egyptian firstborn child. Exodus 12:29-30 1,000,000? 31,371,003

    10 God and Moses help Joshua kill the Amalekites Exodus 17:13 1000? 31,377,003
    11 Israelites for dancing naked around Aaron’s golden calf Exodus 32:27-28, 35 3000 31,380,003
    12 God plagued the people because of the calf that Aaron made Exodus 32:36 1000 31,381,003
    13 Aaron’s sons for offering strange fire before the Lord Levit’s 10:1-3; Nu’s 3:4, 26:61 2 31,381,005
    14 A blasphemer Leviticus 24:10-23 1 31,381,006
    15 God burned people to death for complaining Numbers 11:1 100? 31,381,106
    16 God sent “a very great plague” for complaining about the food. Numbers 11:33 10,000? 31,391,106
    17 God killed ten scouts with a plague. Numbers 14:35-36 10 31,391,116
    18 A man who gathered firewood on the sabbath Numbers 15:32-36 1 31,391,117
    19 Korah, Dathan, and Abiram (and their families) Numbers 16:27 12 31,391,129
    20 Burned to death for offering incense Numbers 16:35 250 31,391,379
    21 For complaining Numbers 16:49 14,700 31,406,079
    22 Massacre of the Aradites Numbers 21:1-3 3,000? 31,409,079
    23 For complaining about the lack of food and water, God sent fiery serpents to bite the people, and many of them died. Numbers 21:6 100? 31,409,179
    24 God delivers the Bashanites into Moses’ hands and Moses kills everyone “until there was none left alive.” Numbers 21:34-35 1,000? 31,410,179
    25 Phinehas impales a mixed-race couple having sex Numbers 25:6-8 2 31,410,181
    26 Israelites for “committing whoredom with the daughters of Moab” Numbers 25:9 24,000 31,434,181
    27 Midianite massacre (32,000 virgins were kept alive) Numbers 31:1-35 200,000 31,634,181
    28 God kills the entire Israelite army Deuteronomy 2:14-16 500,000 32,134,181
    29 The slaughter of the Zamzummim, Horim, Avim, and the Caphtorim Deut 2:21-2210,000? 32,144,181
    30 God hardened the king of Heshbon’s heart so that the Israelites could massacre his people. (included several cities) Deuteronomy 2:33-34 3,000? 32,147,181
    31 All the men, women, and children in 60 cities Deuteronomy 3:3-6 60,000? 32,207,181
    32 Massacre of Jericho Joshua 6:21 1,000? 32,208,181
    33 Achan (and his his sons and daughters) for taking the accursed thing
    Joshua 7:10-12, 24-26 5 32,208,186
    34 The Ai Massacre Joshua 8:1-25 12,000 32,220,186
    35 God slaughters the Amorites and even chases them “along the way”
    as they try to escape. Joshua 10:10-11 1,000? 32,221,186
    36 Joshua kills 5 kings and hangs their dead bodies on trees Joshua 10:24-26 5 32,221,191
    37 Massacre of 7 cities Joshua 10:28-42 7,000? 32,228,191
    38 God delivers the Hazorites. Joshua 11:8-12 1,000? 32,229,191
    39 Massacre of the Anakim Joshua 11:20-21 1,000? 32,230,191
    40 God delivers the Caananites and Perizzites Judges 1:4 10,000? 32,240,191
    41 Ehud delivers a message from God: a knife in the belly Judges 3:15-22 1 32,240,192
    42 God delivers the Moabites Judges 3:28-29 10,000 32,250,192
    43 Massacre of the Canaanites Judges 4:14 1,000? 32,251,192
    44 God forces Midianite soldiers to kill each other Judges 7:22, 8:10 120,000 32,371,192
    45 God delivered the Ammonites to Jephthah to slaughter. Judges 11:32-33 1,000? 32,372,192
    46 The spirit of the Lord comes on Samson Judges 14:19 30 32,372,222
    47 The spirit of the Lord comes mightily on Samson Judges 15:14-15 1,000 32,373,222
    48 Samson’s God-assisted act of terrorism Judges 16:27-30 3,000 32,376,222
    49 “The Lord smote Benjamin” Judges 20:35-37 25,100 32,401,322
    50 God smites more Benjamites Judges 20:44-46 25,000 32,426,322
    51 For looking into the ark of the Lord 1 Samuel 6:19 50,070 32,476,392
    52 God delievered Philistines to Jonathan 1 Samuel 14:12 20 32,476,412
    53 God forces the Philistine soldiers to kill each other. 1 Samuel 14:20 1,000? 32,477,412
    54 God orders Saul to kill every Amalekite man, women, and child. 1 Samuel 15:2-3 1,000? 32,478,412
    55 Samuel hacks Agag to pieces before the Lord 1 Samuel 15:32-33 1 32,478,413
    56 God delivers the Philistines. 1 Samuel 23:2-5 1,000? 32,479,413
    57 “The Lord smote Nabal.” 1 Samuel 25:38 1 32,479,414
    58 God delivers the Philistines to David (again). 2 Samuel 5:19, 25 1,000? 32,480,414
    59 Uzzah for trying to keep the ark from falling 2 Samuel 6:6-7, 1 Chronicles 13:9-10 1 32,480,415
    60 David and Bathsheba’s baby boy 2 Samuel 12:14-18 1 32,480,416
    61 God sent a three-year famine because of something Saul did. 2 Samuel 21:1 5,000? 32,485,416
    62 The seven sons of Saul hung up before the Lord 2 Samuel 21:6-9 7 32,485,423
    63 From plague as punishment for David’s census (men only; probably 200,000 if including women and children) 2 Samuel 24:15, 1 Chronicles 21:14 200,000 32,685,423
    64 A lion is sent by God to kill a prophet for believing another prophet’s lie 1 Kings 13:1-24 1 32,685,424
    65 Baasha killed everyone in the house of Jeroboam “according to the saying of the Lord.”
    1 Kings 15:29 1,000? 32,686,424
    66 Zimri killed everyone in the house of Baasha “according to the word of the Lord.”
    1 Kings 16:11-12 1,000? 32,687,424
    67 Religious leaders killed in a prayer contest 1 Kings 18:22-40 450 32,687,874
    68 God delivers the Syrians into the Israelites’ hands 1 Kings 20:28-29 100,000 32,787,874
    69 God makes a wall fall on Syrian soldiers 1 Kings 20:30 27,000 32,814,874
    70 God sent a lion to eat a man for not killing a prophet 1 Kings 20:35-36 1 32,814,875
    71 Ahaziah is killed for talking to the wrong god 2 Kings 1:2-4, 17; 2 Chronicles 22:7-9 1 32,814,876
    72 Burned to death by God 2 Kings 1:9-12 102 32,815,978
    73 God sends two bears to kill 42 children for making fun of Elisha’s bald head
    2 Kings 2:23-24 42 32,816,020
    74 An unbeliever is trampled to death 2 Kings 7:17-20 1 32,816,021
    75 God calls for a seven year famine. 2 Kings 8:1 10,000? 32,826,021
    76 Jezebel 2 Kings 9:33-37 1 32,826,022
    77 Jehu killed “all that remained unto Ahab in Samaria … according to the saying of the Lord”
    2 Kings 10:16-17 100? 32,826,122
    78 God sent lions to kill “some” foreigners for not fearing him 2 Kings 17:25-26 20 32,826,142
    79 Sleeping Assyrian soldiers 2 Kings 19:35; Isaiah 37:36 185,000 33,011,142
    80 Saul 1 Chronicles 10:14 1 33,011,143
    81 God delivers Israel into the hands of Judah 2 Chronicles 13:15-17 500,000 33,511,143
    82 Jeroboam 2 Chronicles 13:20 1 33,511,144
    83 “The Lord smote the Ethiopians.” 2 Chronicles 14:9-14 1,000,000 34,511,144
    84 God kills Jehoram by making his bowels fall out 2 Chronicles 21:14-19 1 34,511,145
    85 Judean soldiers killed for forsaking God 2 Chronicles 28:6 120,000 34,631,145
    86 God delivered the Israelites into the hand of the Chaldeans. 2 Chronicles 36:16-17 1000? 34,632,145
    87 God and Satan kill Job’s children and servants Job 1:1-19 60? 34,632,205
    88 Ezekiel’s wife Ezekiel 24:15-18 1 34,632,206
    89 Ananias and Sapphira Acts 5:1-10 2 34,632,208
    90 Herod Acts 12:23 1 34,632,209
    10 God and Moses help Joshua kill the Amalekites Exodus 17:13 1000? 31,377,003
    11 Israelites for dancing naked around Aaron’s golden calf Exodus 32:27-28, 35 3000 31,380,003
    12 God plagued the people because of the calf that Aaron made Exodus 32:36 1000 31,381,003
    13 Aaron’s sons for offering strange fire before the Lord Levit’s 10:1-3; Nu’s 3:4, 26:61 2 31,381,005
    14 A blasphemer Leviticus 24:10-23 1 31,381,006
    15 God burned people to death for complaining Numbers 11:1 100? 31,381,106
    16 God sent “a very great plague” for complaining about the food. Numbers 11:33 10,000? 31,391,106
    17 God killed ten scouts with a plague. Numbers 14:35-36 10 31,391,116
    18 A man who gathered firewood on the sabbath Numbers 15:32-36 1 31,391,117
    19 Korah, Dathan, and Abiram (and their families) Numbers 16:27 12 31,391,129
    20 Burned to death for offering incense Numbers 16:35 250 31,391,379
    21 For complaining Numbers 16:49 14,700 31,406,079
    22 Massacre of the Aradites Numbers 21:1-3 3,000? 31,409,079
    23 For complaining about the lack of food and water, God sent fiery serpents to bite the people, and many of them died. Numbers 21:6 100? 31,409,179
    24 God delivers the Bashanites into Moses’ hands and Moses kills everyone “until there was none left alive.” Numbers 21:34-35 1,000? 31,410,179
    25 Phinehas impales a mixed-race couple having sex Numbers 25:6-8 2 31,410,181
    26 Israelites for “committing whoredom with the daughters of Moab” Numbers 25:9 24,000 31,434,181
    27 Midianite massacre (32,000 virgins were kept alive) Numbers 31:1-35 200,000 31,634,181
    28 God kills the entire Israelite army Deuteronomy 2:14-16 500,000 32,134,181
    29 The slaughter of the Zamzummim, Horim, Avim, and the Caphtorim Deut 2:21-2210,000? 32,144,181
    30 God hardened the king of Heshbon’s heart so that the Israelites could massacre his people. (included several cities) Deuteronomy 2:33-34 3,000? 32,147,181
    31 All the men, women, and children in 60 cities Deuteronomy 3:3-6 60,000? 32,207,181
    32 Massacre of Jericho Joshua 6:21 1,000? 32,208,181
    33 Achan (and his his sons and daughters) for taking the accursed thing
    Joshua 7:10-12, 24-26 5 32,208,186
    34 The Ai Massacre Joshua 8:1-25 12,000 32,220,186
    35 God slaughters the Amorites and even chases them “along the way”
    as they try to escape. Joshua 10:10-11 1,000? 32,221,186
    36 Joshua kills 5 kings and hangs their dead bodies on trees Joshua 10:24-26 5 32,221,191
    37 Massacre of 7 cities Joshua 10:28-42 7,000? 32,228,191
    38 God delivers the Hazorites. Joshua 11:8-12 1,000? 32,229,191
    39 Massacre of the Anakim Joshua 11:20-21 1,000? 32,230,191
    40 God delivers the Caananites and Perizzites Judges 1:4 10,000? 32,240,191
    41 Ehud delivers a message from God: a knife in the belly Judges 3:15-22 1 32,240,192
    42 God delivers the Moabites Judges 3:28-29 10,000 32,250,192
    43 Massacre of the Canaanites Judges 4:14 1,000? 32,251,192
    44 God forces Midianite soldiers to kill each other Judges 7:22, 8:10 120,000 32,371,192
    45 God delivered the Ammonites to Jephthah to slaughter. Judges 11:32-33 1,000? 32,372,192
    46 The spirit of the Lord comes on Samson Judges 14:19 30 32,372,222
    47 The spirit of the Lord comes mightily on Samson Judges 15:14-15 1,000 32,373,222
    48 Samson’s God-assisted act of terrorism Judges 16:27-30 3,000 32,376,222
    49 “The Lord smote Benjamin” Judges 20:35-37 25,100 32,401,322
    50 God smites more Benjamites Judges 20:44-46 25,000 32,426,322
    51 For looking into the ark of the Lord 1 Samuel 6:19 50,070 32,476,392
    52 God delievered Philistines to Jonathan 1 Samuel 14:12 20 32,476,412
    53 God forces the Philistine soldiers to kill each other. 1 Samuel 14:20 1,000? 32,477,412
    54 God orders Saul to kill every Amalekite man, women, and child. 1 Samuel 15:2-3 1,000? 32,478,412
    55 Samuel hacks Agag to pieces before the Lord 1 Samuel 15:32-33 1 32,478,413
    56 God delivers the Philistines. 1 Samuel 23:2-5 1,000? 32,479,413
    57 “The Lord smote Nabal.” 1 Samuel 25:38 1 32,479,414
    58 God delivers the Philistines to David (again). 2 Samuel 5:19, 25 1,000? 32,480,414
    59 Uzzah for trying to keep the ark from falling 2 Samuel 6:6-7, 1 Chronicles 13:9-10 1 32,480,415
    60 David and Bathsheba’s baby boy 2 Samuel 12:14-18 1 32,480,416
    61 God sent a three-year famine because of something Saul did. 2 Samuel 21:1 5,000? 32,485,416
    62 The seven sons of Saul hung up before the Lord 2 Samuel 21:6-9 7 32,485,423
    63 From plague as punishment for David’s census (men only; probably 200,000 if including women and children) 2 Samuel 24:15, 1 Chronicles 21:14 200,000 32,685,423
    64 A lion is sent by God to kill a prophet for believing another prophet’s lie 1 Kings 13:1-24 1 32,685,424
    65 Baasha killed everyone in the house of Jeroboam “according to the saying of the Lord.”
    1 Kings 15:29 1,000? 32,686,424
    66 Zimri killed everyone in the house of Baasha “according to the word of the Lord.”
    1 Kings 16:11-12 1,000? 32,687,424
    67 Religious leaders killed in a prayer contest 1 Kings 18:22-40 450 32,687,874
    68 God delivers the Syrians into the Israelites’ hands 1 Kings 20:28-29 100,000 32,787,874
    69 God makes a wall fall on Syrian soldiers 1 Kings 20:30 27,000 32,814,874
    70 God sent a lion to eat a man for not killing a prophet 1 Kings 20:35-36 1 32,814,875
    71 Ahaziah is killed for talking to the wrong god 2 Kings 1:2-4, 17; 2 Chronicles 22:7-9 1 32,814,876
    72 Burned to death by God 2 Kings 1:9-12 102 32,815,978
    73 God sends two bears to kill 42 children for making fun of Elisha’s bald head
    2 Kings 2:23-24 42 32,816,020
    74 An unbeliever is trampled to death 2 Kings 7:17-20 1 32,816,021
    75 God calls for a seven year famine. 2 Kings 8:1 10,000? 32,826,021
    76 Jezebel 2 Kings 9:33-37 1 32,826,022
    77 Jehu killed “all that remained unto Ahab in Samaria … according to the saying of the Lord”
    2 Kings 10:16-17 100? 32,826,122
    78 God sent lions to kill “some” foreigners for not fearing him 2 Kings 17:25-26 20 32,826,142
    79 Sleeping Assyrian soldiers 2 Kings 19:35; Isaiah 37:36 185,000 33,011,142
    80 Saul 1 Chronicles 10:14 1 33,011,143
    81 God delivers Israel into the hands of Judah 2 Chronicles 13:15-17 500,000 33,511,143
    82 Jeroboam 2 Chronicles 13:20 1 33,511,144
    83 “The Lord smote the Ethiopians.” 2 Chronicles 14:9-14 1,000,000 34,511,144
    84 God kills Jehoram by making his bowels fall out 2 Chronicles 21:14-19 1 34,511,145
    85 Judean soldiers killed for forsaking God 2 Chronicles 28:6 120,000 34,631,145
    86 God delivered the Israelites into the hand of the Chaldeans. 2 Chronicles 36:16-17 1000? 34,632,145
    87 God and Satan kill Job’s children and servants Job 1:1-19 60? 34,632,205
    88 Ezekiel’s wife Ezekiel 24:15-18 1 34,632,206
    89 Ananias and Sapphira Acts 5:1-10 2 34,632,208
    90 Herod Acts 12:23 1 34,632,209

    (I have taken out the reference to God drowning the Egyptian Army (Exodus) – now care to explain how all of the above is fighting for Israel's survival and HOW ON GOD's GREEN EARTH IT WAS SECULAR (Isn't the Bible religious and NOT secular).

    You then said:

    You then posted a massive list of Muslim V Muslim type stuff. Again, Marie you are going off topic and getting a bit wild now, so steady on. I can just as easily post masses and masses of information on Chrisrtian V Christian, Christian v Jews, Christian V Muslim, Christian V Secular, Christian V Japanese, Christian V Vietnamese, Christian V Iraqi etc etc. So ALL I ask is stick to the topic and stop trying to confuse the audience by posting massess of irrelevant information.

    Topic is he Divine origin of Christianity and/or Islam

    You then said:

    Kabirlaw please respond to this:

    Theophanes in entry for 629 wrote:In this year died Mouamed, the leader and false prophet of the Saracens, after appointing his kinsman Aboubacharos {to his cheiftainship. At the same time his repute spread abroad} and everyone was frightened. At the beginning of his advent the misguided Jews thought he was the Messiah who is awaited by them, so that some of their leaders joined him and accepted his religion while forsaking that of Moses, who saw God. Those who did so were ten in number, and they remained with him until his murder.* But when they saw him eating camel meat, they realized that he was not the one they thought him to be, and were at a loss what to do; being afraid to abjure his religion, those wretched ment aught him illicit things directed against us, Christians, and remained with him.

    I say:

    Now who on Earth is Theophanes? Is he an objective Oberver/Historian/Academic? Does he have any affiliation to Christiniaty, Judaism or Islam? If he does have any affiliation with any of these religions does that not explain why he is so biased and against the other.

    Now I'll show you the errors in Theophanes small rant:
    (1) Abu Bakr was NOT appointed by Muhammad but elected to the caliphate after the Prophet's death.
    (2) The early Muslims were NOT Saracens but Arabs (find out where the word saracen came from and whether Theophanes used it in a derogatory manner, if so this is evidence enough of his partiality!?)
    (3) The Jews who converted to Islam remained Muslims and convinced of the Prophethood of Muhammad (See conversion of Rabi Abdullah Ibn Salam)

    Marie get back to me in a concise manner and lose the off the cuff crap you are pulling out. Lets talk quality and not quantity. And o yeah, STICK TO THE TOPIC.

    Now read what George Bernard Shaw had to say about the same Prophet:

    I have always held the religion of Muhammad in high estimation because of its wonderful vitality. It is the only religion which appears to me to possess that assimilating capacity to the changing phase of existence which can make itself appeal to every age. I have studied him – the wonderful man and in my opinion far from being an anti-Christ, he must be called the Saviour of Humanity. I believe that if a man like him were to assume the dictatorship of the modern world, he would succeed in solving its problems in a way that would bring it the much needed peace and happiness: I have prophesied about the faith of Muhammad that it would be acceptable to the Europe of tomorrow as it is beginning to be acceptable to the Europe of today.

    Sir George Bernard Shaw in 'The Genuine Islam,' Vol. 1, No. 8, 1936.

    Now read about what Mahatma Gandhi had to say about the same Prophet:

    I wanted to know the best of one who holds today's undisputed sway over the hearts of millions of mankind….I became more than convinced that it was not the sword that won a place for Islam in those days in the scheme of life. It was the rigid simplicity, the utter self-effacement of the Prophet, the scrupulous regard for his pledges, his intense devotion to this friends and followers, his intrepidity, his fearlessness, his absolute trust in God and in his own mission. These and not the sword carried everything before them and surmounted every obstacle. When I closed the 2nd volume (of the Prophet's biography), I was sorry there was not more for me to read of the great life.

    Mahatma Gandhi, speaking on the character of Muhammad, (pbuh) says in (Young India):

    Now stop your bombardment of BS and wait until I've finished your Bible(s) and we can start off from where we left off.

    Peace.

  130. Kabirlaw

    To Poooo

    Where are OUR answers Poooo? You ask a question, You get a direct answer and then you still AVOID our questions. Now Answer Our Questions. Because in reality you are the one who is running and a coward.

    My challenge still stands Poooo, wanna meet and call me bastard to my face? Do you? or you just gonna swear and call names from a safe distant over the internet? Who is the Coward Pooo? You can't even use your correct name (you use a psedonym so the Muslims can't identify you). Do you think that's a brave thing to do?

    Answer OUR questions?

  131. Kabirlaw

    To Marie

    Here's another INDEPENDENT view of the Prophet Muhammad:

    "Muhammad is the most successful of all Prophets and religious personalities."

    Encyclopedia Britannica

  132. ibnsahr

    yes kabirlaw,

    in what way, slay unbeliever, mary your right hand posses are original divine truths that we must accept from god of islam?

    kabirlaw***Remember God does not undergo personality changes.***

    please show me how pedo mo related to moses and abraham, what is pedo mo family tree that goes back to abraham, regarding the promised prophet that will come from abraham jacob issac moses?

    if god does not undergo personality changes, why he wants to change something that he has revealed?

    or pedo mo made up story, because jew know their script?

  133. ibnsahr

    kabirlaw, if you care answer my post above, while you answer it try to think of pedo mo laughing from hell for his always breaks fasting early, he couldn't even keep up with his bogus fasting from jewish fasting tradition.

    and you call him someone to look up to, come on, lot of 60s years old stupid people still doing full day fasting

  134. Kabirlaw

    To Ibnsahr

    Look, you are confused. You say the following:

    1) Slay unbeliever.
    Islam says yes slay BUT in battle (self defence) (I have explained this in much details in older posts). In war you KILL the enemy Ibnsahr, You're not supposed to throw petals on them.

    2) Marry what your right hand possess.
    It is better to marry them than for them to remain in captivity. Moreover, This was a practice of Abraham (do a little research- Hagar was a right hand possession (bondswoman) of Abraham. You cannot compare practices in different times in the history of mankind. Jewish prophets also did the same. It is a practice at those specifc times in history.

    3) Allah did not enforce this state of affairs He ALLOWED/PERMITTED it. This does not in any way mean that Islam is not divine truth. If you think this makes Islam untrue please explain how?

    You also said:

    please show me how pedo mo related to moses and abraham, what is pedo mo family tree that goes back to abraham, regarding the promised prophet that will come from abraham jacob issac moses?

    if god does not undergo personality changes, why he wants to change something that he has revealed?

    or pedo mo made up story, because jew know their script?

    I say:

    I have already explained the link with Abraham through his son Ishmael in another post. So I won't repeat myself. (I think it was in the post "Will Muslims be the cause of the Armageddon" so please take a look. Muhammad was not a Isaacite but an Ishmaelite. See Wikipedia for the geneology and lineage of the Arabs of Northern and central Arabia. See also Ancestory of Muhammad from Karen Armstrong (Scholar of comparative religion) and Josephus (Jewish Historian)

    Allah has not changed what he has revealed in the past (YOU SEE THIS IS MY WHOLE POINT). MEN have corrupted the Torah, the Gospel and the Psalms of David over time and people have started associating partners with God (Trinity) and bringing in absurd beliefs about God. So Allah sent Muhammad as a final messenger to bring people back to the original message that WAS ONCE found in the Torah, Gospel, Psalms of David.

    If you would like, Ibnsahr, Me and you can have a discussion about how Muhammad is the true final Prophet and the one God promised to the Jews and the one mentioned in Jewish and NT writings. I am happy to discuss this with you if you are serious.

  135. Marie

    Kabirlaw:

    You are cutting and pasting many opinions, historical inaccuracies, and biased findings that do not share consensus among modern intellectuals. So what you are doing is using any shred, coming from any avenue which is derogatory to Islam and it’s Prophet and you are then posting it as if it is truth or beyond reasonable doubt.

    I say:

    The crusades:

    The first crusade was called by Pope Urban II and was provoked by the rise of power by the Seljuk, which interfered with traditional pilgrimages to Palestine.

    Alexius Comnenus:

    In 1095 he approached Pope Urban II for help in recruiting mercenaries , a call that led to the first crusade, which the Pope hoped would save the empire from the Seljuk Turks.

    From the Oxford Desk Enclyclopedia of World History.

    Hey ding dong even Thomas Madden supports this argument.

    Thomas F. Madden (born 1960) is an American historian, the Chair of the History Department at Saint Louis University in St. Louis, Missouri, and Director of Saint Louis University's Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies.[1] He is considered one of the foremost historians of the Crusades in the United States, and was often called upon as a historical consultant after the events of September 11, to discuss the connections between the medieval Crusades and modern Islamic terrorism.[2][3][4][5] He has frequently appeared in the media, as a consultant for various programs on the History Channel and National Public Radio.[6] In 2007, he was awarded the Haskins Medal from the Medieval Academy of America, for his book Enrico Dandolo and the Rise of Venice, which was also a "Book of the Month" selection by the BBC History magazine.

    Read his book The New Concise History of the Crusades

    Kabirlaw:

    Now is the above a contradiction of terms or a contradiction of terms. Your above stupid statement calls the Crusades small scale and in the same breath states that it overwhelmed OVER HALF OF CHRISTENDOM. It’s ok. Marie, the crusades were probably just two Welsh farmers fighting over a lost sheep!

    I say:

    I say ther Crusades were a delayed response to Islamic invasions into Christian lands and destruction of countries that were once predominately Christian.

    Kabirlaw:

    Now read the following from Wikipedia and then tell me if it was small scale and whether it was only conducted to help oppressed people (your pure lies!).

    The Crusades were a series of religiously-sanctioned military campaigns waged by much of Latin Christian Europe, particularly the Franks of France and the Holy Roman Empire. The specific crusades to restore Christian control of the Holy Land were fought over a period of nearly 200 years, between 1095 and 1291. Other campaigns in Spain and Eastern Europe continued into the 15th century. The Crusades were fought mainly against Muslims, although campaigns were also waged against pagan Slavs, Jews, Russian and Greek Orthodox Christians, Mongols, Cathars, Hussites, Waldensians, Old Prussians, and political enemies of the popes.[1] Crusaders took vows and were granted penance for past sins, often called an indulgence.[1][2]

    I say:

    Kabirlaw the information on wiki is not written by scholars or people who are experts in the field. Wikipedia has a policy were anyone is allowed to contribute information on it's enclyclopedia and it does not matter whether or not the people have a ph.d in that field or done scholarly research. The info I gave you is from books and one from Cornell University. In fact college professors tell their students not to get their info from wiki. I do get some of my info from wiki but this because I had checked out the info somewhere else.

    From Inside Higher ED

    A Stand Against Wikipedia
    January 26, 2007

    As Wikipedia has become more and more popular with students, some professors have become increasingly concerned about the online, reader-produced encyclopedia.

    While plenty of professors have complained about the lack of accuracy or completeness of entries, and some have discouraged or tried to bar students from using it, the history department at Middlebury College is trying to take a stronger, collective stand. It voted this month to bar students from citing the Web site as a source in papers or other academic work. All faculty members will be telling students about the policy and explaining why material on Wikipedia — while convenient — may not be trustworthy.
    Share This Story

    * Bookmark and Share
    * E-mail
    * Print

    Related Stories

    * 'The World Is Open'
    August 25, 2009
    * The Accidental Celebrity
    August 24, 2009
    * Where Phones in Class Are OK
    August 20, 2009
    * Prophets of Deceit
    August 19, 2009
    * Teaching the Quarantined
    August 19, 2009

    FREE Daily News Alerts
    Advertisement

    "As educators, we are in the business of reducing the dissemination of misinformation," said Don Wyatt, chair of the department. "Even though Wikipedia may have some value, particularly from the value of leading students to citable sources, it is not itself an appropriate source for citation," he said.

    The department made what Wyatt termed a consensus decision on the issue after discussing problems professors were seeing as students cited incorrect information from Wikipedia in papers and on tests. In one instance, Wyatt said, a professor noticed several students offering the same incorrect information, from Wikipedia.

    There was some discussion in the department of trying to ban students from using Wikipedia, but Wyatt said that didn't seem appropriate. Many Wikipedia entries have good bibliographies, Wyatt said. And any absolute ban would just be ignored. "There's the issue of freedom of access," he said. "And I'm not in the business of promulgating unenforceable edicts."

    Wyatt said that the department did not specify punishments for citing Wikipedia, and that the primary purpose of the policy was to educate, not to be punitive. He said he doubted that a paper would be rejected for having a single Wikipedia footnote, but that students would be told that they shouldn't do so, and that multiple violations would result in reduced grades or even a failure. "The important point that we wish to communicate to all students taking courses and submitting work in our department in the future is that they cite Wikipedia at their peril," he said.

    He stressed that the objection of the department to Wikipedia wasn't its online nature, but its unedited nature, and he said students need to be taught to go for quality information, not just convenience.

    The frustrations of Middlebury faculty members are by no means unique. Last year, Alan Liu, a professor of English at the University of California at Santa Barbara, adopted a policy that Wikipedia "is not appropriate as the primary or sole reference for anything that is central to an argument, complex, or controversial." Liu said that it was too early to tell what impact his policy is having. In explaining his rationale — which he shared with an e-mail list — he wrote that he had "just read a paper about the relation between structuralism, deconstruction, and postmodernism in which every reference was to the Wikipedia articles on those topics with no awareness that there was any need to read a primary work or even a critical work."

    Wikipedia officials agree — in part — with Middlebury's history department. "That's a sensible policy," Sandra Ordonez, a spokeswoman, said in an e-mail interview. "Wikipedia is the ideal place to start your research and get a global picture of a topic, however, it is not an authoritative source. In fact, we recommend that students check the facts they find in Wikipedia against other sources. Additionally, it is generally good research practice to cite an original source when writing a paper, or completing an exam. It's usually not advisable, particularly at the university level, to cite an encyclopedia."

    Ordonez acknowledged that, given the collaborative nature of Wikipedia writing and editing, "there is no guarantee an article is 100 percent correct," but she said that the site is shifting its focus from growth to improving quality, and that the site is a great resource for students. "Most articles are continually being edited and improved upon, and most contributors are real lovers of knowledge who have a real desire to improve the quality of a particular article," she said.

    Experts on digital media said that the Middlebury history professors' reaction was understandable and reflects growing concern among faculty members about the accuracy of what students find online. But some worry that bans on citing Wikipedia may not deal with the underlying issues.

    Roy Rosenzweig, director of the Center for History and New Media at George Mason University, did an analysis of the accuracy of Wikipedia for The Journal of American History, and he found that in many entries, Wikipedia was as accurate or more accurate than more traditional encyclopedias. He said that the quality of material was inconsistent, and that biographical entries were generally well done, while more thematic entries were much less so. Like Ordonez, he said the real problem is one of college students using encyclopedias when they should be using more advanced sources.

    "College students shouldn't be citing encyclopedias in their papers," he said. "That's not what college is about. They either should be using primary sources or serious secondary sources."

    In the world of college librarians, a major topic of late has been how to guide students in the right direction for research, when Wikipedia and similar sources are so easy. Some of those who have been involved in these discussions said that the Middlebury history department's action pointed to the need for more outreach to students.

    Lisa Hinchliffe, head of the undergraduate library and coordinator of information literacy at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, said that earlier generations of students were in fact taught when it was appropriate (or not) to consult an encyclopedia and why for many a paper they would never even cite a popular magazine or non-scholarly work. "But it was a relatively constrained landscape," and students didn't have easy access to anything equivalent to Wikipedia, she said. "It's not that students are being lazy today. It's a much more complex environment."

    When she has taught, and spotted footnotes to sources that aren't appropriate, she's considered that "a teachable moment," Hinchliffe said. She said that she would be interested to see how Middlebury professors react when they get the first violations of their policy, and said she thought there could be positive discussions about why sources are or aren't good ones. That kind of teaching, she said, is important "and can be challenging."

    Steven Bell, associate librarian for research and instructional services at Temple University, said of the Middlebury approach: "I applaud the effort for wanting to direct students to good quality resources," but he said he would go about it in a different way.

    "I understand what their concerns are. There's no question that [on Wikipedia and similar sites] some things are great and some things are questionable. Some of the pages could be by eighth graders," he said. "But to simply say 'don't use that one' might take students in the wrong direction from the perspective of information literacy."

    Students face "an ocean of information" today, much of it of poor quality, so a better approach would be to teach students how to "triangulate" a source like Wikipedia, so they could use other sources to tell whether a given entry could be trusted. "I think our goal should be to equip students with the critical thinking skills to judge."

    Several colleges push to ban Wikipedia as resource
    By: Lysa Chen
    Issue date: 3/28/07 Section: News
    Last update: 3/28/07 at 5:43 AM EST

    * Print
    * Email
    * Article Tools

    *
    Page 1 of 2 next >

    Although Wikipedia-like Google-has carved its way into the common vernacular, some say students should think twice before turning to the free online encyclopedia for their academic work.

    Middlebury College's history department recently banned Wikipedia as a source for student papers, and professors at other schools, including the University of Pennsylvania and the University of California at Los Angeles, have followed suit.

    Although Duke has yet to take an authoritative stance on the site, the academic ban has been supported by Wikipedia itself.

    "We came out and said it was a sensible policy," said Sandra Ordonez, the Wikipedia Foundation's communications manager. "Students shouldn't be citing Wikipedia or any other encyclopedia for term papers or exams. It is not a primary source, not an authoritative source."

    Sarah Deutsch, dean of social sciences and professor of history, said Wikipedia has not been a major concern with undergraduates at Duke.

    "Our students know better to identify sources and check the validity of information," she said.

    Ordonez said Wikipedia could be helpful to students in other ways.

    "It's a really good place to start your research and get a global picture of the topic," she said. "Some professors actually use Wikipedia to show students how to use different sources to conduct research."

    Margaret Humphreys, professor of history and associate clinical professor of medicine, said Wikipedia might be useful as a starting point but should not be the last source students check.

    "The message of unreliability should be out there," she said. "The student could have written the article. His buddy next door could have changed it just for fun. Supposedly, there are these watchdogs-but who are they?"

    Professors may also view a student citing Wikipedia as lazy, Humphreys added.

    "It's not immoral or bad to use it-just stupid," she said.

    Junior David Fiocco said he has used Wikipedia to find background information and references for papers but added that he would never cite the encyclopedia as a source.

    "It's not reliable," he said. "But if I have a question about something I'm reading, I'll definitely Wikipedia it."

    Freshman Natalie Harrison said her professors have advised against using Wikipedia.

    "All my professors say, 'Don't trust Wikipedia,'" she said. "At the beginning of the semester, one of my professors went on a 10-minute rant."

    Harrison agreed that college students should not turn to Wikipedia for their research but said she was surprised Middlebury College had to create an explicit policy.

    "The school shouldn't have to tell students they shouldn't be using it in that way," she said. "They should be smart enough to realize Wikipedia is all nonsense."

    Despite warnings from professors, some students said they have made the mistake of citing the source in the past.

    Sophomore Nate Jones said he once cited Wikipedia on a paper, under the impression that it was similar to Encyclopaedia Britannica.

    "[My friend] told me not do it, and I never did it again," he said. "I didn't know it was easily corruptible. If a professor sees that, he'd be instantly skeptical." Jones added that he thought Encyclopaedia Britannica was "perfectly legit."

    Although most professors and students acknowledged the problems with citing Wikipedia as an academic source, others nonetheless commended the site for its potential informational value.

    Joshua Davis, lecturing fellow and teaching assistant professor of mathematics, who is also a Wikipedia moderator, said the site should have the same standing as any other encyclopedia.

    "You don't want to use any encyclopedia as a source for research-just as a starting point," he said. He added that different subject areas might treat the use of Wikipedia differently. "I imagine it would make a big difference to a history teacher," he said. "You can't truly rely on Wikipedia on either facts or interpretations, which could be misguided or biased."

    One proponent of the resource is Eric Katz, an assistant research professor of mathematics and a self-proclaimed "Wikipedia addict." He said the encyclopedia's math-related articles were relatively accurate, adding that he has often recommended the site to students.

    "In one of my lessons, Wikipedia was my main reference," he said.

    Davis said Wikipedia, which allows virtually anyone to edit most of its articles, has recently developed an undeserved bad reputation.

    "A lot of people in the media who write about Wikipedia don't understand the many different mechanisms for increasing reliability and peer review," Davis said. "If someone vandalizes one of my articles, I can detect it quickly and fix it."

  136. Marie

    Kabirlaw:

    The same goes for the wool you pulling over people’s eyes concerning the inquisitions etc. Now you also made the unsubstantiated statement that I do not care about other Muslims but it is clear from your own stance that you couldn’t care less for the victims of the Crusades who also happened to be some Christians who were following different sects to your own.

    I say:

    The killing of innocent Christians cannot be excused, but there murders had nothing to do with religious intolerance. In fact it was common practice at the time for invaders to deal harshly with cities that resisted and leniently with those that surrendered without a fight. In other words the crusaders behavior at that time was consistent as all states subscribed to the same notions of seige and resistence.

    By the way my great-grandfather was from Palestine so the Christians who were trapped were also my ancestors and I have high respect for some of the practices of the older Christian sects and their Churches.

    Kabirlaw:

    Marie, like I said, read from neutral and reliable sources. ALL your posts contain information from bias, Anti-Islam websites and books. You take from those books and articles the opinions that are in harmony with your own hate filled views on Islam and your own version of Christianity. You are NOT an objective and fair minded person. Thank God you are not a Judge in a court of law.

    I say:

    Typical Muhammeden argument. You can't refute my arguments so therefore you claim they are biased.
    By the way the books where I got my info from they have cited works from The Decline of Medieval Hellenism in Asia Minor and the process of Islamization from the Eleventh through Fifteenth Century by Speros Vryonis

    Speros Vryonis Jr. (b. 1928) is an American historian of Greek descent and a specialist in Greek and Byzantine history.[1] He is the author of a work on Byzantine-Turkish relations, The Decline of Medieval Hellenism in Asia Minor and the Process of Islamization from the Eleventh through the Fifteenth Century and The Mechanism of Catastrophe: The Turkish Pogrom of September 6-7, 1955, and the Destruction of the Greek Community of Istanbul (2005). Vryonis is professor emeritus of history at UCLA, the former Director of the Speros Basil Vryonis Center for the Study of Hellenism (which was named in memory of his son) and is currently the AHIF Senior Fellow for Hellenism and for Greek and Turkish Studies.[2]

    He is currently working on a new history of the AD 1071 Battle of Manzikert.

    In the meanwhile you get your scholarly works from wikipedia.

    Kabirlaw:

    Unsubstantiated and vicious accusation! Now, show me where I said that I do not care about the suffering of non-Muslims or Muslims. Specifically point it out for all to see. In anticipation.

    I say:

    This is coming from someone who has called me heartless and evil along with being nasty and using filthy language towards other people.

    You then went on and gave us a massive list of muslims killing muslims that you probably pulled from (No Surprises for guessing!) an Anti islam or Pro Zionist or Pro Christian source. Again Marie, I can do the same thing but because the net is so wide and diverse I say, Stick to the topic and don’t start pulling out red herrings. i.e. The divine origin of Christinaity and/or Islam.

    I say:

    Well the first article I got off some forum but the other one I found one The Seoul Times

    Kabirlaw:

    What a crock of S***t!
    Point 1 – Are you conceding that there are things in the Bible that have not been put there by God or authorised by God. If so, END OF DEBATE, Curtains Marie, YOU LOSE. The Muslims whole premise is that the Bible in its modern form is a corrupted text of an ORIGINAL THAT WAS INSPIRED BY GOD. So please clarify for me your position on human hands contributing to the text of the Bible.

    I say:

    There's no evidence to prove your accusations and in the meanwhile there are thousands upon thousands of archaeological finds that support the picture presented in the Bible.

    Besides there is some evidence that the Bible was inspired by a divine mind. For example the unity of the Bible: There are 66 books written in different literary styles by perhaps 40 different authors with diverse backgrounds over a span of 15 hundred years and yet the Bible amazingly unfolds once continuous drama with one central message. That points to the existence of the divine mind that the writers claimed inspired them.

    Kabirlaw:

    Point 2- You say wars of survival and secular wars. YOU ARE ONE SHAMELESS LIAR. Where is the survival aspect in ALL of the following:

    I say:

    You call me a shameless liar? KABIRLAW YOU ARE THE SHAMELESS LIAR BECAUSE YOU WILL NOT ACKNOWLEDGE THAT MUHAMMED USED VIOLENCE AGAINST PEOPLE AND MUSLIMS HAVE BEEN COMMITTING ATROCITIES AGAINST HUMANITY FOR 1400 YEARS, while I have admitted that there is violence in the Bible and Christians have committed atrocities humanity.

    As for the violence and killing they were either one of three things: They were secular wars, methods to keep people from harassing the Jews, and as for some individuals who were killed most of it was the result of their own actions.

    Kabirlaw:

    Now who on Earth is Theophanes? Is he an objective Oberver/Historian/Academic? Does he have any affiliation to Christiniaty, Judaism or Islam? If he does have any affiliation with any of these religions does that not explain why he is so biased and against the other.

    I say:

    Theophanes was a member of the Byzantine aristocracy, who became a monk and chronicler who work has been cited by historians.

    The term Saracen comes from Greek Σαρακηνός, which has often been thought to be derived from the Arabic word شرقيين sharqiyyin ("easterners"), though the Oxford English Dictionary (s.v.) calls etymologies from this "not well founded"; The term spread into Western Europe through the Byzantines and Crusaders.[1] After the rise of Islam, and especially at the time of the Crusades, its usage was extended to refer to all Muslims, including non-Arab Muslims, particularly those in Sicily and southern Italy.[2]

    Kabirlaw:

    The early Muslims were NOT Saracens but Arabs (find out where the word saracen came from and whether Theophanes used it in a derogatory manner, if so this is evidence enough of his partiality!?)

    I say:

    Theophanes is considered to be a Byzantine historian and his works are used in Universities and Colleges. Fordham College mentions his works in their Byzantine Studies page.

    The term Saracen comes from Greek Σαρακηνός, which has often been thought to be derived from the Arabic word شرقيين sharqiyyin ("easterners"), though the Oxford English Dictionary (s.v.) calls etymologies from this "not well founded"; The term spread into Western Europe through the Byzantines and Crusaders.[1] After the rise of Islam, and especially at the time of the Crusades, its usage was extended to refer to all Muslims, including non-Arab Muslims, particularly those in Sicily and southern Italy.[2]

    In Christian writing, the name meant "those empty of Sarah" or "not from Sarah," as Arabs were, in Biblical genealogies, descended from Hagar and also called the Hagarenes (Ἀγαρηνοί). According to the Arthurian Lancelot-Grail Cycle, the name derives from Sarras, an island important in the Quest for the Holy Grail.

  137. Marie

    Kabirlaw:

    Marie get back to me in a concise manner and lose the off the cuff crap you are pulling out. Lets talk quality and not quantity. And o yeah, STICK TO THE TOPIC.

    Now read what George Bernard Shaw had to say about the same Prophet:

    I have always held the religion of Muhammad in high estimation because of its wonderful vitality. It is the only religion which appears to me to possess that assimilating capacity to the changing phase of existence which can make itself appeal to every age. I have studied him – the wonderful man and in my opinion far from being an anti-Christ, he must be called the Saviour of Humanity. I believe that if a man like him were to assume the dictatorship of the modern world, he would succeed in solving its problems in a way that would bring it the much needed peace and happiness: I have prophesied about the faith of Muhammad that it would be acceptable to the Europe of tomorrow as it is beginning to be acceptable to the Europe of today.

    I say:

    You want to talk about the quality of Islam? Tell me Kabirlaw what good things Islam has done to change the society where Muslims reside in and why are so many Muslims committing violence in the name of Islam.

    In regards to Christianity, the Christian world did not become violent until the 4th century when religion and state combined as one and this lasted until the reformation. Yes Christians did treat people like sh*t but that was despite the teachings of Jesus.

    The role of women in Christianity:

    In short women in the time of Jesus were treated like sh*t, but Jesus in an unusual and radical matter treated women in a humane and respectful way and gave them the dignity that was deprived from them by their society. The first person he told of his messiahship was a samaritan woman, he taught Martha in John 11:25-26 the words of the Christian Gospel ( Teaching women was forbidden in Rabbinic law of that time ). The first person he appeared to after the resurrection was to several women and told them to tell others of his resurrection. Why did he not appear to his disciples and tell them to spread the news? Because he often came to the defense and assistance of the despised and neglected . His actions here brings to mind the words he spoke on another occasion: There are those who are last who will be first, and first who will be last ( Luke 13:13 )

    Jesus allowed women to follow him during his ministries who was highly unusual in Jesus's time. Noted scholars have stated in the culture of that time only prostitutes and women of low repute would follow a man in public without a male escort. So welcome was Christ's message to women that they defied conventional social norms in order to follow him, and he uttered no words of reproof.

    Jesus's acceptance of women was not lost on the early Church. Early Christians ignored the confining restrictive cultural norms to which women were subjected to in their society. women often had prominent roles in the early Church. Apphia was a leader of a house church in the city of Colossae ( Philemon 2 ) and Paul states one Priscilla was one of his fellow workers in his promotion of the Gospel of Jesus Christ ( Romans 16:3 ). In Romans 16:1-2 he refers to Phoebe as a Deaconess and a leading officer. As every Church historian knows women were very active in the early Church. St. Chrysostem stated: The women of those days were more spirited them men. The historian W.E.H. Lecky credits women "in the great conversion of the Roman empire", and he adds "in the ages o f persecution female figures occupy many of the foremost places and ranks of martyrdom". Leopold Zscharnack says: Christendom dare not forget that it was primarily the female sex that for the greater part brought about its rapid growth. It was the evangelistic zeal of women in the early Church, and later , which won the weak and the mighty. They exercised the sword of the spirit to promote the growth of the Church.

    Yes there were some anomalies in Church history but that is no longer in practice. Modern Christian women have many important roles in the Church. They are secretaries, treasurers, elders, lectores, teachers, ministers, deaconess, nuns and saints.

    Where in Islam are women are treated with dignity and respect? As far as I know Muslim women are treated like sh*t.

    Early Christian opposition to slavery:

    When Paul in the 1st century told Philemon that he was no longer to treat a runaway slave , Onesimus as a slave but as a brother, he uttered a revolutionary statement that was contrary to the values and beliefs of all societies of that era. Paul in effect told Philemon he was no longer to practice slavery. Similarly he told the Galatian Christians that from a Christian perspective there was neither slave nor free for you are all one in Christ. To the Christians in Corinth he declared: For by one spirit we were all baptized into one body-Jews or Greeks, slaves or free and to the Colossian Christians he wrote : Here there is not Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave, freeman, but Christ is all in all.

    Kabirlaw:

    Now read about what Mahatma Gandhi had to say about the same Prophet:

    I wanted to know the best of one who holds today’s undisputed sway over the hearts of millions of mankind….I became more than convinced that it was not the sword that won a place for Islam in those days in the scheme of life. It was the rigid simplicity, the utter self-effacement of the Prophet, the scrupulous regard for his pledges, his intense devotion to this friends and followers, his intrepidity, his fearlessness, his absolute trust in God and in his own mission. These and not the sword carried everything before them and surmounted every obstacle. When I closed the 2nd volume (of the Prophet’s biography), I was sorry there was not more for me to read of the great life.

    I say:

    Oh gee did Muhammed promote Muslim charity the way Christ promoted Christian charity?

    In the world of the early Christians faced it had a colossal void with regard to compassion. Thucydides the honored historian of ancient Greece recounts an example of this during the plague that struck Athens during the Peloponnesian War in 430 B.C. Many sick and dying Athenians were deserted by their loved ones and fellow residents who feared they to would catch the plague.

    Speaking about the Alexandrian 700 yrs later Dionysius said the pagans thrust aside anyone who began to look sick and kept away from their dearest friends and threw out the sufferers out on public roads half dead and treated them with utter contempt when they died. But the Christians cared for the sick and dying ignoring the danger themselves: Very many of our brethren , while in their exceeding love and other kindness did not spare themselves, but visited kept by each other, and visited the sick without thought of their own peril, and ministered to them assiduously and treated them for their healing in Christ, died from time to time most joyfully, drawing upon themselves their neighbors diseases and willingly taking over to their own persons the burden of sufferings of those around them.

    Many medical historians in more recent times similarly have noted this reality. Fielding Garrison, a physician and historian, says that before the birth of Christ "the spirit toward sickness and misfortune was not one of compassion", and he adds "The credit of ministering to human suffering on an extended scale belongs to Christianity".

    But can we say the same thing about Islam?

    All four of the Gospels reveal that Christ had great compassion for the sick and healed many. Not only did he heal the sick but he expected his disciples to do the same and he sent many of them out to the villages to preach and heal the sick.

    Numerous other actions and statements incompatible with the ethic of slavery soon surfaced in the early Church: Christians interacted with slaves as they did with freemen, slaves communed with Christians at the same alter, and they were catechized and treated as non-slaves. In many instances Christians freed slaves. According the Robin Lane Fox, during the second and third centuries the early Christians were most numerous in the setting of urban households where freeing of the slaves was most frequent.

    Freeing slaves not only took conviction but courage as well. Edicts issued by Roman emperors did not favor liberating slaves.

    Yes there were Christians who practiced slavery but that was despite the teachings of Christianity and slavery was permantly abolished in the west, while slavery is still practiced in Islamic countries.

    Kabirlaw:

    Now stop your bombardment of BS and wait until I’ve finished your Bible(s) and we can start off from where we left off.

    Enjoy!

  138. Marie

    Kabirlaw:

    Allah has not changed what he has revealed in the past (YOU SEE THIS IS MY WHOLE POINT). MEN have corrupted the Torah, the Gospel and the Psalms of David over time and people have started associating partners with God (Trinity) and bringing in absurd beliefs about God. So Allah sent Muhammad as a final messenger to bring people back to the original message that WAS ONCE found in the Torah, Gospel, Psalms of David.

    I say:

    What do you mean associating partners with God? God has no wife and the trinity ( The father, Son, and Holy Spirit ) refers to Jesus's divinity, he is the son of God, and he is the holy spirit meaning he is with us in spirit. Christians have never believed God had a partner. That is nothing but your Islamic indoctrination.

    Kabirlaw:

    If you would like, Ibnsahr, Me and you can have a discussion about how Muhammad is the true final Prophet and the one God promised to the Jews and the one mentioned in Jewish and NT writings. I am happy to discuss this with you if you are serious.

    I say:

    HA HA HA HA HA HA HA! This is coming from someone who claims the current Bible is corrupted and is not divine.

  139. ibnsahr

    1. Slay unbeliever.
    Islam says yes slay BUT in battle (self defence) (I have explained this in much details in older posts). In war you KILL the enemy Ibnsahr, You’re not supposed to throw petals on them.

    You say slay unbeliever, islam says yes, we Christian been taught to pray for ones who prosecute you, which one that more sounds like from god?, and what not believing got to do with wars?

    2. Marry what your right hand possess.
    It is better to marry them than for them to remain in captivity. Moreover, This was a practice of Abraham (do a little research- Hagar was a right hand possession (bondswoman) of Abraham. You cannot compare practices in different times in the history of mankind. Jewish prophets also did the same. It is a practice at those specifc times in history.

    why you need a captives in the first place, Abraham is earlier people if god try to he hasn’t received fully guidance, god still try to draw attention towards one god beliefs, that’s why in NT it tells you people who works in the field get paid

    3. Allah did not enforce this state of affairs He ALLOWED/PERMITTED it. This does not in any way mean that Islam is not divine truth. If you think this makes Islam untrue please explain how?

    its futile to explain it to some muslim as muslim has different standard of universal acceptance of things, for example, I can talk on behalf Christ follower that killing is no no, no matter what, and you can not find it in NT that you allowed to kill, but muslim says killing is ok in quran at war (which muslim always at war until all religion for pedo mo imaginary god alone)

    *** I have already explained the link with Abraham through his son Ishmael in another post,…………..Allah has not changed what he has revealed in the past (YOU SEE THIS IS MY WHOLE POINT).***

    If Allah has not changed what he has revealed Then why man would change the script to deny some one who will come thousand years later, when for all these years the script has been acceptance, until pedo mo turn out? Has it even crossed your mind that the hole quran is made up by pedo mo?, from earlier prophet most of them humble in front of god, feeling like not deserve serving god, but I never heard pedo mo humble before god, like moses when he first chosen

    Kabir, im not stupid enough to having serious discussion with muslim, as it will be endlessly futile, waste the time, as muslim always chase their own tail,
    But basically what my agreement is, like what written in one of article below that I quote from, Was muhammad the promised final prophet of the torah and gospel

    ***in the following verse, Allah made this central paradigm of the Torah succinctly clear:
    We gave (Abraham) Isaac and Jacob, and ordained among his progeny Prophethood and Revelation… [Quran 29:27]
    This means, only those—carrying the seed of all three patriarchs: Abraham, Isaac and Jacob—can make a legitimate claim to prophethood.
    Verses 45:16 and 29:27—affirming facts of the Torah concerning the genealogical requirement for prophethood—were, it appears, intended to create a favorable and friendly impression upon the Jews (and Christians) about Muhammad, so that Allah’s later claim that Muhammad was their promised prophet would be more acceptable to them.
    But the Jews, who had thorough knowledge of their scripture, had no difficulty to refute Muhammad’s claim to prophethood—given Muhammad, an Arab and the offspring of Ishmael, could not be a promised prophet
    Unaware of the Jews’ depth of their scriptural knowledge, Allah initially spoke with honesty of the true requirement for prophethood without realizing that it would disqualify Muhammad’s claim to prophethood; Allah got caught red-handed in His own words. He obviously had no answer, except extreme embarrassment

    Next, to legitimize Muhammad’s claim to prophet, Allah embarked on an extraordinary mission to create a completely new foundational paradigm of his creed, altering all that He had been affirming in His verses until now. First, Allah hit-back at the Jews, accusing them of corrupting the Torah.***

    and start prosecuting jews, tell me what other reason pedo mo put haterd verse towards jews in filthy quran?

    i dont need to know what make up the branch of the tree, just taste and see the fruits it produced

  140. ibnsahr

    gee i always forgot to address comment, above to kabirlaw

  141. Kabirlaw

    To Marie

    You have not answered my Questions. You have, once again, bombarded the site with useless, irrelevant and at times partially related information.

    I'll give you one example of your approach: I challenged your quotation on Theophanes (which you asked me to respond to – see above) and raised some counter questions about the massive mistakes in his take on Islam, yet you listed a brief biography of Theophanes and did not answer my questions. Why?

    I ask you again If he is such a great and accurate historian (and he is nothing of the sort) how did he get the succession of the first caliphate TOTALLY WRONG. Even I (cuz I aint no Muslim scholar or anything, far from it) knew that Abu Bakr was elected to the caliphate AFTER the death of the Prophet and NOT appointed.

    WHY? WHY? WHY? Oh Marie?

    The rest of your retorts are similar to varying degrees and you have avoided ALL the questions I raised. I think you are playing the game of hiding your spinning tactics and lack of knowledge and prejudices and posting BS to make out that you have answered my questions or responded satisfactorily when in actual fact you have not answered anything. You are indeed a liar and a hypocrite.

    Answer MY questions? Is it too much to ask?

  142. Kabirlaw

    To Marie

    You have also pulled out further red herrings. You have mentioned some stories about the Christians helping plague ridden people.

    I can show you many incidents where Muslims have helped the poor, oppressed and the ill. But this is going off topic. We can discuss that when we finish our debate.

    But in case you cant wait until then please refer to the assistance the caliphate (governership was in Turkey at that time) gave to the Irish during the famine (they put the British monarch to shame with their level of assistance. I think it was in the early 1900's or late 1800's. I'm sure you'll find it. If you can't I'll dig it out for you AFTER our debate. And that's just ONE incident. Now stick to the topic.

  143. Kabirlaw

    To Marie

    You then said:

    What do you mean associating partners with God? God has no wife and the trinity ( The father, Son, and Holy Spirit ) refers to Jesus’s divinity, he is the son of God, and he is the holy spirit meaning he is with us in spirit. Christians have never believed God had a partner. That is nothing but your Islamic indoctrination.

    I say:

    You are on record with your above rant. Totally silly and contradictory (oxymoron). The true God of mankind is one God (ONE – 1). He has always been ONE and he will always be ONE. This is also the central message of Monotheism and the message to the Jewish prophets and to Muhammad and ALL the prophets sent to ALL nations.

    Now, If God has a son and he is one of three in a TRINITY how is he monotheistic? How is he the same God of the Jews? What Muslims mean by the term "associating partners with God" is that people associate any other entity/form/idol/spirit/human/anything with God (making him NOT the ONE and ONLY INDIVISIBLE God). Therefore, Christianity is NOT Monotheistic as it does not believe in the oneness of God Like Abraham, isaac, ishmael, Jacob, Jospeh, Jonah, John, Jesus, Lot, Noah, Adam, Eve and Muhammad believed. Now you can do all the verbal or written acrobatics you want but how on earth are you going to take 3 and make it equal 1. IMPOSSIBLE. You Christians have split the Unity of God and destroyed the notion of the true essence of God. Trinity is a grave blasphemy, an abomination and destroys the concept of the essence of the true God. And, it is this reason why Jews have not accepted Christianity. THEY WERE TOLD AND WARNED BY THEIR PROPHETS NOT TO BELIEVE IN DIFFERENT GODS AS GOD IS ONE not ONE in THREE.

    He is ONE Marie NOT THREE. Also, I hope you now understand waht Muslims mean by "associating partners with God" It does not necessarily mean that someone is saying God has a Wife or a business partner.

    You then said:

    HA HA HA HA HA HA HA! This is coming from someone who claims the current Bible is corrupted and is not divine.

    I say:

    Be realistic marie. Corrupt does not mean that everything in it is totally untrue and bears no resemblance to the original teachings God inspired. It's like a glass of water Marie. If someone puts a drop of cyanide in a glass of water it becomes impure although there is still contituent water in the glass you cannot drink it.

    The Bible is indeed NOT in its original form, It can't be, you would also be silly to say otherwise. However, there are incidents in the Bible that relate to the stories in the Quran. Since the Quran is unchanged we can rely on it. Therefore, everything that IS in accordance with the Quran we can accept it as true. If anything in the Bible is contradicted by the Quran, we reject the bit in the Bible. If there is something in the Bible which is not againsts the Quran but it is not specifically mentioned by the Quran we may treat that as neautral (could be from God but could also be a corruption). This is the Muslim stance on the Bible. So when You people say Trinity, this is most monstrous for a Muslim as he strictly believes in ONE INDIVISIBLE GOD, The True God, The God of Abraham.

  144. Kabirlaw

    To Ibnsahr

    I understand that you are a Christian and you do not want a discussion. OK. But me and Marie (your co-religionist) are going to have a debate on "The Divine Origin of the Bible and Quran" or the "Divinity of Jesus" or "Was Jesus Crucified" (whichever topic she wants to pick) and you can follow.

    Since you don't want a serious discussion this is my last post to you. Thanks for taking the time to read what I have had to say.

    By the way, you contradicted yourself above (first you were saying you need proof that ishmael is the ancestor of Muhammad and now you are using this as an accepted fact. (You see, you have to accept it, your Bible tells you to). End of story.

  145. ibnsahr

    Kabir,

    i say killing people for what ever reason is no, and you said slay unbeliver ok for self defence or in war, what is not believeing go to do with war.

    i can never understand the concept of war in religion, religion shouldn't talk about war (don't tell me about OT, once again OT just example to show you what war will bring to people, and you learn from the past)

    i see 1+1 = 2 and you see 1+1 = 11, and you want serious discussion?, if you agree killing people for what ever reason is not allowed (as most people on earth accept it), than i will get into serious discussion.

    your concept of religion is different, so we never come to mutual conclusion and understanding.
    thats religion is all about, let it be, pray for them for they not know what they are doing.
    why don't you learn kung fu for self defence.

    you said "It is better to marry them than for them to remain in captivity", i ask, what's the chance for the ugly ones get screwed.(or being married)
    if quran not contradictive, it will include ishmael as well on below surah, unless you may call it inconsistency in quran.

    "We gave (Abraham) Isaac and Jacob, and ordained among his progeny Prophethood and Revelation… [Quran 29:27]"

    kabirlaw, thanks for meet me half way to understand my language, i see you in another topic

  146. Kabirlaw

    To Ibnsahr:

    You said:

    i say killing people for what ever reason is no, and you said slay unbeliver ok for self defence or in war, what is not believeing go to do with war.

    I say:

    The verses you are referring to were revealed when the non-Muslims were hostile to the Muslims. The Muslims had no adversary amongst themselves, their only enemy were the non-Muslims (or unbelievers) at that time. Even then Allah was talking of battle and war not kill them generally. Which is insane.

    You then said:

    i can never understand the concept of war in religion, religion shouldn’t talk about war (don’t tell me about OT, once again OT just example to show you what war will bring to people, and you learn from the past)
    To Ibnsahr

    i see 1+1 = 2 and you see 1+1 = 11, and you want serious discussion?, if you agree killing people for what ever reason is not allowed (as most people on earth accept it), than i will get into serious discussion.

    I say:

    Most people on earth DO NOT accept it! You are assuming that they do. You cannot speak for the whole world without their authority. Killing in certain Western countries is even allowed by way of punishment and in accordance with their countries laws. Killing in war and combat is also allowed to ALL Western Countries (see Iraq and Afghanistan). Ibnsahr, a Coalition of the Worlds richest countries got together to attack, kill and ravage two of the World's poorset countries.

    Therefore, killing in combat and in accordance with prescribed punishments is allowable not only to Muslims but to Western "CIVILISED" nations as well. Therefore I cannot agree that you are NOT allowed to kill in self defence or if you or your family or country were attacked. No-one likes war it is allowed only for self defence and within specific guidelines.

    If that is what you believe, Ibnsahr, which is very shocking, then why don't you campaign for getting rid of your own countries weapons systems since you do not believe war is permissable? BY the way you cannot get away with all the violence in the OT simply becasue you dislike it. All that violence is associated with your OWN GOD and YOUR OWN RELIGION, bit to make an excuse for that you say it is to teach a lesson. Well why was GOD so mean to teach us such a mean lesson. Have you read about all the killing in the Bible, even God killed people, he even sent a lion to kill 42 children!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What kind of lesson is that? You see you people have hypocritical traits. You justify your own violence and killing but you condemn the Muslims.

    You then said:

    your concept of religion is different, so we never come to mutual conclusion and understanding.
    thats religion is all about, let it be, pray for them for they not know what they are doing.
    why don’t you learn kung fu for self defence.

    I say:

    Your concept of religion is indeed different to mine. Mine is realistic and built for mankind, yours I cannot understand because you are making contradictory statements but Christianity is not the true teachings of Jesus as he did not even come to create a NEW religion, he did not say that he is God and he did not preach a Trinitarian divine being.

    Kung Fu wont stop cruise Missiles, air raids, carpet bombing, laser guided missiles, M16 bullets or nuclear bombs like the ones that hit Negasaki and Hiroshima.

    You then said:

    you said “It is better to marry them than for them to remain in captivity”, i ask, what’s the chance for the ugly ones get screwed.(or being married)
    if quran not contradictive, it will include ishmael as well on below surah, unless you may call it inconsistency in quran.

    “We gave (Abraham) Isaac and Jacob, and ordained among his progeny Prophethood and Revelation… [Quran 29:27]”

    Again, you fail to understand. Allah did indeed make a covenant with the progeny of Isaac (See various verses in the Quran on Allah's covenant with the children of Israel). The children of Isaac were sent the most Prophets, more than any other nation, however, the Covenant was conditional upon the children of Israel living by God's Rules. Ishmael did NOT have a such a Covenant with God but he was also blessed as he was the son of Abraham. Abraham prayed for the prosperity of his children on both sides not Just Isaac. See Bible where God promises to send a Prophet like Moses from among "the Brethren" of the israelites (the brethren of the Isrealites were and are the Arabs). If you have an open mind Ibnsahr, everything is clear and in black and white. There is NOTHING contradictory, if there is please point it out for ALL to see. The Arabs and the Jews are the result of Abraham's prayers.

    You then said:

    kabirlaw, thanks for meet me half way to understand my language, i see you in another topic

    I say:

    See you soon. Inshallah.

  147. Marie

    Kabirlaw:

    You have not answered my Questions. You have, once again, bombarded the site with useless, irrelevant and at times partially related information.

    I ask you again If he is such a great and accurate historian (and he is nothing of the sort) how did he get the succession of the first caliphate TOTALLY WRONG. Even I (cuz I aint no Muslim scholar or anything, far from it) knew that Abu Bakr was elected to the caliphate AFTER the death of the Prophet and NOT appointed.

    I say:

    I am trying to answer your questions as best as I can. Darn it in your last post you gave me 200 verses from the Bible to answer! The best thing I can do is look at your post and give you the best answer I can give.

    Kabirlaw:

    I ask you again If he is such a great and accurate historian (and he is nothing of the sort) how did he get the succession of the first caliphate TOTALLY WRONG. Even I (cuz I aint no Muslim scholar or anything, far from it) knew that Abu Bakr was elected to the caliphate AFTER the death of the Prophet and NOT appointed.

    I say:

    Kabirlaw Theophanes had made some mistakes in his chronicles and it has been edited by other people. But regardless of his mistakes his chronicle is still one of the best in Byzantine history. If his work was of poor scholarship colleges and universities would use his or mention it in their Byzantine studies page
    http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/byzantium/texts/by

    Kabirlaw:

    Answer MY questions? Is it too much to ask?

    I say:

    WHICH QUESTIONS DID I NOT ANSWER? POINT THEM OUT TO ME! AS FAR AS I KNOW I GAVE YOU MY ANSWERS TO MOST OF MY QUESTIONS OR ELSE I MUST HAVE BEEN DELIRIUS YESTERDAY.

    Kabirlaw:

    But in case you cant wait until then please refer to the assistance the caliphate (governership was in Turkey at that time) gave to the Irish during the famine (they put the British monarch to shame with their level of assistance. I think it was in the early 1900’s or late 1800’s. I’m sure you’ll find it. If you can’t I’ll dig it out for you AFTER our debate. And that’s just ONE incident. Now stick to the topic.

    I say:

    Kabirlaw I have no idea what you are talking about.

    Kabirlaw:

    Now, If God has a son and he is one of three in a TRINITY how is he monotheistic? How is he the same God of the Jews? What Muslims mean by the term “associating partners with God” is that people associate any other entity/form/idol/spirit/human/anything with God (making him NOT the ONE and ONLY INDIVISIBLE God). Therefore, Christianity is NOT Monotheistic as it does not believe in the oneness of God Like Abraham, isaac, ishmael, Jacob, Jospeh, Jonah, John, Jesus, Lot, Noah, Adam, Eve and Muhammad believed. Now you can do all the verbal or written acrobatics you want but how on earth are you going to take 3 and make it equal 1. IMPOSSIBLE. You Christians have split the Unity of God and destroyed the notion of the true essence of God. Trinity is a grave blasphemy, an abomination and destroys the concept of the essence of the true God. And, it is this reason why Jews have not accepted Christianity. THEY WERE TOLD AND WARNED BY THEIR PROPHETS NOT TO BELIEVE IN DIFFERENT GODS AS GOD IS ONE not ONE in THREE.

    I say:

    There not three gods in the trinity. The trinity is about the characteristics of Jesus. Jesus is the father referring to his divinity, the son referring to the fact he is son of God and the holy spirit meaning he is with us in a spiritual way. Jesus is the father, son, and holy spirit just I am a daughter, friend, and a worker ( the best example I can come up with. The trinity is not three gods but three in one.

    In fact Muhammed got that whole idea of the trinity being three gods from heretical Christian sects in Arabia along with the rediculous idea that Mary was part of the trinity:

    Surah 5:116 And behold! Allah will say: "O Jesus the son of Mary! Didst thou say unto men, 'Take me and my mother for two gods beside Allah'?" He will say: "Glory to Thee! Never could I say what I had no right (to say). Had I said such a thing thou wouldst indeed have known it. Thou knowest what is in my heart, though I know not what in Thine. For Thou knowest in full all that is hidden.

    Kabirlaw:

    Be realistic marie. Corrupt does not mean that everything in it is totally untrue and bears no resemblance to the original teachings God inspired. It’s like a glass of water Marie. If someone puts a drop of cyanide in a glass of water it becomes impure although there is still contituent water in the glass you cannot drink it.

    I say:

    So now you are saying Jews and Christians have corrupted the message of God except his prophesies? In that case how do you know whether or not the prophesies are the true words of God and not just some corruption?

    Kabir:

    The Bible is indeed NOT in its original form, It can’t be, you would also be silly to say otherwise. However, there are incidents in the Bible that relate to the stories in the Quran. Since the Quran is unchanged we can rely on it. Therefore, everything that IS in accordance with the Quran we can accept it as true. If anything in the Bible is contradicted by the Quran, we reject the bit in the Bible. If there is something in the Bible which is not againsts the Quran but it is not specifically mentioned by the Quran we may treat that as neautral (could be from God but could also be a corruption). This is the Muslim stance on the Bible. So when You people say Trinity, this is most monstrous for a Muslim as he strictly believes in ONE INDIVISIBLE GOD, The True God, The God of Abraham.

    I say:

    It's silly and rediculous to say that Jews and Christians have corrupted the word of God except his prophesies and prophesies are the word of God. That means the prophesies have been corrupted also.

  148. Marie

    Kabirlaw:

    You have also pulled out further red herrings. You have mentioned some stories about the Christians helping plague ridden people.

    I say:

    No there are actually more stories of Christian charity but did not want to spend a lot of time typing several pages from books.

  149. Moooo

    Kebirilewd a.k.a the coward

    LLOOLLL, Are you stupid or what? You have failed to answer my questions (ismail), you have failed to prove "sun" science and you have failed to response to my challenge and you boasted like a moron. Boring, coward.

    My challenge about islamic science still stand and none can do it. Where is your response, coward? I challenge you more that a month ago when you first showed up and until now you still can't do it. Pathetic. Where are my answers for my questions and challenge, eh coward? Check again in "muslim the caused of armageddon". Running away with "i already answered that" or "i have done your challenge (when, how, where?)" is embarassing. Pathetic coward.

    Sometimes i never understand how muslim brain works.

    To londo spirtus,

    Where are the verses that i asked you? and about pedo mo too as a comforter. Running away?

  150. Kabirlaw

    To Marie:

    You said:

    Kabirlaw Theophanes had made some mistakes in his chronicles and it has been edited by other people. But regardless of his mistakes his chronicle is still one of the best in Byzantine history. If his work was of poor scholarship colleges and universities would use his or mention it in their Byzantine studies page

    I say:

    Marie, he has made COLOSSAL mistakes (and that is just from the short paragraph you posted). Can you even begin to imagine how inaccurately he has portrayed Islamic History if you were to look at his full chronicles???? So be careful whose OPINIONS you follow in future. HE DOES NOT UNDERSTAND ISLAM AND THAT IS EVIDENCED AS WELL.

    You then said:

    WHICH QUESTIONS DID I NOT ANSWER? POINT THEM OUT TO ME! AS FAR AS I KNOW I GAVE YOU MY ANSWERS TO MOST OF MY QUESTIONS OR ELSE I MUST HAVE BEEN DELIRIUS YESTERDAY.

    I say:

    The questions like:

    (1) Is Theophanes a Christian? Islam critic? Is he independent?
    (2) Now, If God has a son and he is one of three in a TRINITY how is he monotheistic?
    (3) How does Three equal One?
    (4) Where in the Bible does it say that the final prophet will be from the line of Isaac?
    (5) What does the Bible sday about Arabs and Ishmaelites?

    You then said:

    Kabirlaw I have no idea what you are talking about.

    I say:

    In 1845, the onset of the Great Irish Famine resulted in over a million deaths. Ottoman Sultan Khaleefah Abdul-Mejid I declared his intention to send 10,000 sterling to Irish farmers but Queen Victoria requested that the Sultan send only 1,000 sterling, because she had sent only 2,000 sterling herself. The Sultan sent the 1,000 sterling but also secretly sent 3 ships full of food. The English courts tried to block the ships, but the food arrived in Drogheda harbor and was left there by Ottoman Sailors. Due to this the Irish people, especially those in Drogheda, are friendly to the Turks.
    (Note, in 1845, the 10,000 pounds dedicated to the Irish from the Sultan would be worth approximately 800,000 pounds today, that is $1,683,280 US Dollars.On the other hand, the Queen gave the equivilant of 160,000 pounds today or 336,656 US Dollars)

    The Osmanli Traveller blog has copied to text a writeup by a Christian Priest who wrote about the Sultan of the time in his travelogue. His account mentions this incident briefly. What is interesting is that without knowing of the secret sending of the ships, the priest was already impressed with the character of the Sultan in his response to the Queen.
    On the Character of Sultan Abdul-Majid Khan, by the Rev. Henry Christmas M.A. (Christian Priest) written in 1853:
    ‘One or two anecdotes will put his character in its true light. During the year of famine in Ireland, the Sultan heard of the distress existing in that unhappy country; he immediately conveyed to the British ambassador his desire to aid in its relief, and tendered for that purpose a large sum of money.

    It was intimated to him that it was thought right to limit the sum subscribed by the Queen, and a larger amount could not therefore be received from his highness. He at once acquiesced in the propriety of his resolution, and with many expressions of benevolent sympathy, sent the greatest admissible subscription.It is well known that his own personal feeling dictated the noble reply of the divan to the threatening demands of Austria and Russia for the extradition of the Polish and Hungarian refugees.

    “I am not ignorant,” was his reply, “of the power of those empires, nor of the ulterior measures to which their intimations point; but I am compelled by my religion to observe the laws of hospitality; and I believe that the sense and good feeling of Europe will not allow my government to be drawn into a ruinous war, because I resolve strictly and solemnly to adhere to them.”

    This is the true spirit of Christianity, and there is more it in the Mohammedan Sultan of Turkey, than in any or all of the Christian princes of Eastern Europe.’
    Reference: “The Sultan of Turkey, Abdul Medjid Khan: A Brief Memoir of His Life and Relign, with Notices of The Country, its Navy, & present Prospects” by the Rev. Henry Christmas, M.A., 1853
    Also note, this generosity and compassion occurred during the time of the supposed ‘downfall’ of the Ottoman empire according to Western history books, and Sultan Abdul Majid in himself is not counted as one of the greatest of Ottoman Sultans.

    You then said:

    There not three gods in the trinity. The trinity is about the characteristics of Jesus. Jesus is the father referring to his divinity, the son referring to the fact he is son of God and the holy spirit meaning he is with us in a spiritual way. Jesus is the father, son, and holy spirit just I am a daughter, friend, and a worker ( the best example I can come up with. The trinity is not three gods but three in one.

    I say:

    Now how silly is what you have just written? Your example is not applicable either. Your concept of God is 3 Gods in a TRINITY. No matter what you do you cannot escape that. If Jesus is the same as the father and the Holy Spirit then WHY didn't God say that "I" will become flesh and die for the sins of the world instead of saying "I will give my "only begotten son." Moreover, when Jesus was dead on the cross WHO was controlling the Universe? And, How can God DIE in the first place (isn't the true God EVERLASTING and ETERNAL and Immortal). You see Marie no matter what you do, when you think of your God you will always have THREE distinct images or concepts in your head (It will never be unified and ONE).

    Your example is ridiculous and not thought through for the following reasons:

    A father is a father and cannot be his own son's son.
    A son is a son and cannot be his father's father.

    You say you are a daughter, friend and worker. Fine. You can also be mother, daughter, granddaughter, worker, friend, sister, co-worker, wife and worshipper (I can go on and on and on). But this is a wholly inaccurate way to describe the TRINITY. The concept of the Trinity says that YOU are MOTHER of your SON But you are also DAUGHTER of your SON and your SON is your FATHER. How does that work? There simply is NO realistic example so stop mincing words. AND if there is ONE GOD anyway, Why is there even a need for metamorphosis and for God to beget a son through an earthly virgin? Make any sense?

    You said:

    The trinity is not three gods but three in one.

    I say:

    OXYMORON. laughable. Three in One, i.e. Three Gods in One God? equals THREE so how is it ONE?

    You then said:

    In fact Muhammed got that whole idea of the trinity being three gods from heretical Christian sects in Arabia along with the rediculous idea that Mary was part of the trinity:

    Surah 5:116 And behold! Allah will say: “O Jesus the son of Mary! Didst thou say unto men, ‘Take me and my mother for two gods beside Allah’?” He will say: “Glory to Thee! Never could I say what I had no right (to say). Had I said such a thing thou wouldst indeed have known it. Thou knowest what is in my heart, though I know not what in Thine. For Thou knowest in full all that is hidden.

    I say:

    I've caught you in the act again. I don't know where you got the above translation from but the following is the Abdullah Yusuf Ali translation:

    Surah 5:116
    And behold, Allah will say: O Jesus the son of Mary! Didst thou say unto men, "Worship me and my mother as gods in derogation of Allah"?

    Now, Marie, sincerely tell me do certain Christians not worship Mary or attach divinity to Mary or pray to Mary. Even if we go by your own translation which you posted above, HOW IS IT WRONG? Allah will ask Jesus (pbuh) on the day of judgement as a witness if he told people to worship him and his mother as gods besides Allah. It really is simple. There is not a single mention of the trinity in the verse you quote!

    Muhammad did not get his ideas from Christians, he was divinely inspired. Muhammad could not even read or write. The Quran he was preaching paid glowing tributes to Jewish prophets which was an insane and non-existent thing to do for an Arab since the Jews looked down upon the Arabs as they had not been given prophesy like the Jews.

    Nowhere in that verse does it say that Mary was part of the Trinity. But again, not surprisingly the Quran is CORRECT above because read the following:

    A number of important doctrines concerning Mary are held by Christian churches. Primary among these are that Mary lived a sinless life, and that as mother of Jesus, she became Theotokos, literally the "God-bearer", or "Mother of God". This doctrine was confirmed by the Ecumenical Council of Ephesus in the year 431. Christians of the major ancient traditions including the Catholic and the Orthodox offer prayers to God through Mary and venerate her as intercessor and mother of the church. Many Protestants, however, do not follow these devotions. Mary is also honoured in Islam as the virgin mother of Jesus. In Jewish Toledot Yeshu Jesus was recorded as the son of Mary and Joseph ben Pantera.
    (Wikipedia)

    You then said:

    It’s silly and rediculous to say that Jews and Christians have corrupted the word of God except his prophesies and prophesies are the word of God. That means the prophesies have been corrupted also.

    In say:

    Corruption can happen in a number of ways (1) certain verses lost or amiss (2) intentional changing of certain verses or sections (3) unintentional mistakes when writing down (4) political influences leading to changes (5) addition of jewish folklore (6) writing down many years after the message was preached (the closer to the source the more authentic it will be (7) differing accounts by different writers.

    See above about what I said about Muslim stance on the Bible. Did you know that Muhammad is mentioned BY NAME in the Bible?

  151. Moooo

    The stupid coward still can't do my challenge. What a coward.

  152. Marie

    Kabirlaw:

    (1) Is Theophanes a Christian? Islam critic? Is he independent?

    I say:

    He was a Christian monk.

    Kabirlaw:

    (2) Now, If God has a son and he is one of three in a TRINITY how is he monotheistic?

    I say:

    Christ is not one of three, it is three persons ( characteristics ) in one.

    Kabirlaw:

    (3) How does Three equal One?

    I say:

    Easy. I will explain the trinity using myself as an example: I am a daughter, friend, and worker.

    Kabirlaw:

    (4) Where in the Bible does it say that the final prophet will be from the line of Isaac?

    I say:

    The Bible never said the final prophet will be from the line of Isaac. It said it will be from the line of David:

    2 Samuel 7:12-13

    When your days are over and you rest with your fathers, I will raise up your offspring to succeed you, who will come from your own body, and I will establish his kingdom. He is the one who will build a house for my Name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever.

    Isaiah 11:10

    10 In that day the Root of Jesse will stand as a banner for the peoples; the nations will rally to him, and his place of rest will be glorious.

    Kabirlaw:

    (5) What does the Bible sday about Arabs and Ishmaelites?

    I say:

    Ishmael was the illegitimate son Abraham therefore he is the rightful inheriter of Israel and God's covenant was between him and the Jews not the Arabs.

    Here's what the Bible says in regards to Ishmael:

    Genesis 21:11-13

    11 The matter distressed Abraham greatly because it concerned his son. 12 But God said to him, "Do not be so distressed about the boy and your maidservant. Listen to whatever Sarah tells you, because it is through Isaac that your offspring [a] will be reckoned. 13 I will make the son of the maidservant into a nation also, because he is your offspring."

    Basically this says the promise is with Isaac but since Ishmael is your son I will give him something also so don't worry.

    Kabirlaw:

    This is the true spirit of Christianity, and there is more it in the Mohammedan Sultan of Turkey, than in any or all of the Christian princes of Eastern Europe.’

    I say:

    Actually that was the true spirit of the Britisth empire. Many Irish were allowed to immigrate to America ( a Christian nation ). So how can this be the true spirit of Christianity when the Irish were allowed to start all over in America?

    Kabirlaw:

    Your concept of God is 3 Gods in a TRINITY.

    I say:

    No it is not three gods because we don't worship three seperated entities it is three persons ( characteristics ) in one.

    Kabirlaw:

    OXYMORON. laughable. Three in One, i.e. Three Gods in One God? equals THREE so how is it ONE?

    I say:

    I already answered your question.

    Kabirlaw:

    Now, Marie, sincerely tell me do certain Christians not worship Mary or attach divinity to Mary or pray to Mary.

    I say:

    No. Protestants give little or no recognition to Mary. Catholics believe in Mary as a mediatrix ( A mediator in the salvation process ) and Theotokos ( Mother of God or God-bearer ). That is why they pray to Mary. But they have stated that Mary is not a god.

    Kabirlaw:

    Muhammad did not get his ideas from Christians, he was divinely inspired. Muhammad could not even read or write. The Quran he was preaching paid glowing tributes to Jewish prophets which was an insane and non-existent thing to do for an Arab since the Jews looked down upon the Arabs as they had not been given prophesy like the Jews.

    I say:

    Muhammed was married to a Christian ( Khadijah ) and he heard their stories.

    Read this Kabirlaw:

    Here is what Muslim and nonmuslim scholars have to say about Christians worshipping Mary:

    1. "Allah will say, "O Jesus, son of Mary, did you say to the people, `Make me and my mother idols beside Allah?' Yusuf Ali, in footnote 829 commenting on this verse says, "The worship of Mary, though repudiated by the Protestants, was widely spread in the earlier Churches, both in the East and the West." (The holy Qur'an, text, translation and commentary by Abdullah Yusuf Ali. 1872-1952, First published in 1938, 1973 ed., p. 280, footnote 829, commenting on 5:116)

    1. "The passage of the Qur'an which suggests that the Trinity consists of Father, Son, and Virgin Mary is doubtless a criticism of some nominally Christian Arabs who held this view." (Muhammad at Mecca, W. Montgomery Watt, 1953, p 23-29)

    2. "In rude misconception or wilful perversion, Mohammed seems to have understood the Christian doctrine of the trinity to be a trinity of Father, Mary, and Jesus. The Holy Spirit is identified with Gabriel. "God is only one God! Far be it from his glory that he should have a son!" Sura 4, ver. 169; comp. 5, ver. 77. The designation and worship of Mary as "the mother of God" may have occasioned this strange mistake. There was in Arabia in the fourth century a sect of fanatical women called Collyridians, who rendered divine worship to Mary. Epiphanius, Haer. 79." (Philip Schaff, History of the Christian church, Vol 4, Ch 3)

    3. The Qur'an shows that there was little knowledge in Mecca of the New Testament apart from the story of the virginal conception of Jesus (19.16-21). On the other hand several mistaken ideas about Christianity appear to have been current among the Meccans. They supposed that Christians worshipped three gods, taking both Jesus and Mary as gods. (Muhammad's Mecca, W. Montgomery Watt, Chapter 3: Religion In Pre-Islamic Arabia, p26-45)
    4. "The Qur'an here denounces the idea of a Triad of Gods, consisting of God, Jesus and Mary. Christians have never believed in this Triad. It is only too true that many ignorant "Christians" in Muhammad's time worshipped Mary (as some still do), asking her to intercede with her Son for them, and the early Muhammadans may hence have fancied that belief in three separate Gods, of which Mary was one, was what was meant by the doctrine of the Trinity. But such an idea was wrong and of heathen origin." (A Manual of the Leading Muhammadan Objections to Christianity. W. St. Clair Tisdall, 1904, p 147)
    5. These passages leave no doubt that Mohammed denied the doctrine of the Trinity and that he conceived it to be, or affirmed it to be, a species of tritheism consisting of God, Mary and Jesus Christ. [Whether Mohammed had a correct idea of the Trinity and deliberately put forth this travesty of the Christian idea, we will consider later.] The commentaries interpret the Koran as follows: Zamakhshari on 4:169 remarks, "The story received among Christians is that God is one in essence and three persons, (akanim) the person of the Father, the person of the Son and the person of the Holy Spirit. And they verily mean by the person of the Father, the Being, and by the person of the Son, knowledge, and by the person of the Holy Spirit, life. And this supposes that God is the third of three, or, if not, that there are three gods. And that which the Koran here refers to is the clear statement of theirs, that God and Christ and Mary are three gods and that the Christ is a child (walad) of God from Mary." For proof he then quotes Surah 5:116, and adds: "And it is universally known concerning Christians that they hold the deity and humanity of Christ as regards his father and mother." From this it is evident that Zamakhshari had a more correct idea of the doctrine of the Trinity than did Mohammed and that after offering a modal trinity as the creed of Christians he covers up the Koran mistake by asserting, without proof, that the trinity was a triad of Father, Son and Mother. (Vol. I. of the Kishaf, p. 241.) Beidhawi (on 4:169) remarks: "Jesus is called the Spirit of God because He makes the dead to live or quickens hearts." On the following verse he is doubtful; "Either God is the third of three gods or is a triad of Father, Son and Holy Spirit." (Vol. I., p. 319.) He, too, avoids a real explanation of the gross misstatement in the Koran that Mary is one of the persons of the Trinity. The Jilalain (Vol. I., p. 278) prove that Jesus cannot be God, "because He has a spirit and everything possessed of a spirit is compounded (murakkib and God is absolutely without compounding, arrangement (tarkib), i.e., simple." He says the Trinity consists of "Allah and Jesus and His mother." (The Moslem Doctrine Of God, Samuel M. Zwemer, 1905, p 80)
    6. It is interesting to note that the charges against Christians of looking upon the Virgin Mary as the third person of the Trinity is made in the last of all the Suras:- O Jesus, Son of Mary, hast thou said unto mankind 'Take me and my mother as two Gods beside God? ' He shall say: 'Glory be unto Thee! it is not for me to say that which I know to be not the truth.' Sura Al-Ma'idah (v) 116. Whether Muhammad knew better or not is uncertain, but, however that may be, this is his parting accusation. He could have ascertained the true facts of the case, for on Christian monuments found by Dr. B. Glaser in Yemen, the Sirwah inscription opens with the words, 'In the power of the all-Merciful and His Messiah and the Holy Ghost.' (Zwemer, Islam, p. 21.) To say the least, Muhammad here made a serious mistake, which it is difficult to reconcile with the verbal inspiration of the Qur'an. (The Historical Development Of The Qur'an, Edward Sell, 1869-1932, p 172)

    D. The Collyridians: A heretic sect in Arabia!

    "There was in Arabia in the fourth century a sect of fanatical women called Collyridians (), who rendered divine worship to Mary. Epiphanius, Haer. 79." (Philip Schaff, History of the Christian church, Vol 4, Ch 3)

    1. "Epiphanius, in his seventy-eighth Heresy, combats the advocates of the opposite view in Arabia toward the end of the fourth century (367), as heretics under the title of Antidikomarianites, opposers of the dignity of Mary, i.e., of her perpetual virginity. But, on the other hand, he condemns, in the seventy-ninth Heresy, the contemporaneous sect of the Collyridians in Arabia, a set of fanatical women, who, as priestesses, rendered divine worship to Mary, and, perhaps in imitation of the worship of Ceres, offered little cakes to her; he claims adoration for God and Christ alone. Jerome wrote, about 383, with indignation and bitterness against Helvidius and Jovinian, who, citing Scripture passages and earlier church teachers, like Tertullian, maintained that Mary bore children to Joseph after the birth of Christ. (Philip Schaff, History of the Christian church, Vol 3, Ch 7)
    2. "Kollyridians or Collyridians were adorers of Mary in the 4th century Arabia, as Epiphanius mentioned in his writing against heretics (see: Haer. 78, 23; 79). He coined the expression Collyridians which has the meaning of "cake-eater-sect". Leontius of Byzance had a different name for them. He called them "Philomarianites", meaning Mary-lovers (PG 87, 1364). The priestesses of this sect used to present Our Lady with cakes or a special kind of bread (kolluris) intended as offerings as was the custom in pre-Christian times. This sect, mainly consisting of women or at least led by woman priests, propagated what amounts to a Goddess cult regarding Our Lady. Epiphanius had this warning on their behalf: "Although Mary is the most beautiful and holy and worthy of praise, we don't owe her adoration" (Haer. 79, 7, PG 42, 752). In a different passage Epiphanius uses even stronger words: "Adoration must cease. For Mary is no goddess nor has she received her body from heaven. (oute gar theos hae Maria oute ap'ouranou exousa to soma)" (Haer. 78, 24). Collyridians are also known and mentioned by John Damascene (PG 94, 728)." (The Marian Library/International Marian Research Institute, Roman Catholic commentary)
    3. Collyridlans. Under this name Epiphanius (Haer. 79) assails certain women who had brought from Thrace into Arabia the practice of performing on certain days rites in honour of the Blessed Virgin, the chief being the offering of a cake, and the partaking of it by the worshippers. Epiphanius condemns their conduct because (a) women ought not to offer sacrifice, and (b) Mary is to be honoured, God only to be worshipped. The name Collyris (or kindred forms) is to be found in the LXX translation of Lev. vii. 12, viii. 26 ; 2 Sam. vi. rg, xiii. 68 ; and the word passed thence into the Latin versions. [G.s.] (A dictionary of Christian biography and literature to the end of the sixth century a.d., Henry Wace, Collyridians)

    Kabirlaw I looked up the Collyridians and this is what I found:

    From wikipedia

    Collyridianism was an obscure early Christian heretical movement whose adherents apparently worshipped Mary, the mother of Jesus, as a goddess. The main source of information about them comes from their strongest opponent, Epiphanius of Salamis, who wrote about them in his Panarion of about AD 375. According to Epiphanius, certain women in then-largely-pagan Arabia syncretized indigenous beliefs with the worship of Mary, and offered little cakes or bread-rolls (Greek κολλυρις – a word occurring in the Septuagint) to her. Epiphanius states that Collyridianism originated in Thrace and Scythia, although it may have first travelled to those regions from Syria or Asia Minor. Little else is known.

    In his book The Virgin, however, Geoffrey Ashe puts forward the hypothesis that the Collyridians represented a parallel Marian religion to Christianity, founded by first-generation followers of the Virgin Mary, whose doctrines were later subsumed by the Church at the Council of Ephesus in 432. Averil Cameron has been more sceptical about whether a cult even existed, noting that Epiphanius is the only source for the cult, and that later authors simply refer back to his text.[1] Some women interested in feminist spirituality claim the Collyridians as precursors.

    The Collyridians have become of interest in some recent Muslim-Christian religious discussions in reference to the Islamic concept of the Christian Trinity. The debate hinges on some verses in the Qur'an, primarily [Qur'an 5:73], [Qur'an 5:75], and [Qur'an 5:116] in the sura Al-Ma'ida, which have been taken to imply that Christians considered Mary part of the Trinity. This has never been a widespread belief or doctrine among Christian or quasi-Christian groups at any period of history, and has led to speculation that Muhammad was mistaken, perhaps confusing heretical Collyridian beliefs with those of orthodox Christianity. However, there is no evidence that Collyridianism still existed in Muhammad's time (the 6th and 7th centuries AD). Some reject the interpretation according to which the Qur'an is said to assert that Mary was part of the Trinity, as the relevant statements can be seen as emphasizing the purely human nature of Mary to reinforce the Islamic belief in the purely human nature of Jesus.

    Kabirlaw:

    Corruption can happen in a number of ways (1) certain verses lost or amiss (2) intentional changing of certain verses or sections (3) unintentional mistakes when writing down (4) political influences leading to changes (5) addition of jewish folklore (6) writing down many years after the message was preached (the closer to the source the more authentic it will be (7) differing accounts by different writers.

    I say:

    Why would God let some verses from the Bible get lost? Why would God let people change some of the verses? Why would God let people make mistakes? Why would God let politics influence changes in the Bible? Why would God allow people to make additions to the Bible?

    Kabirlaw:

    See above about what I said about Muslim stance on the Bible. Did you know that Muhammad is mentioned BY NAME in the Bible?

    I say:

    Kabirlaw what you wrote down is nothing new. I debated this stuff with Muslims before and no Muhammed is not mentioned in the Bible and don't try to tell me which verses mention the supposed coming of Muhammed because I heard them before.

  153. Marie

    Kabirlaw I did some more research on the Collyridians and it turns out they believed in tritheism which is three seperate gods forming a unity. Christians do not believe in trithiesm believe in the trinity ( another word is triun which means tri-unity ) one God who exists in three distinct yet inseperable persons ( the father, son, and holy spirit ). No this is not a form of polytheism because Christians do not worship three separate entities as you have accused us of. By the way Quran does not mention

    Here's what the Concise Dictionary of Islam says:

    In some cases the "material" which forms the substance of Quranic narrative, details of the creeds of Christianity and Judaism for example, does not correspond to those religion’s own understanding of their beliefs. This could be said, for example, of the notion of the Trinity found in the Quran, the story of Satan’s refusal to bow down to Adam, the Docetist view of the crucifixion, all of which can be traced to the dogmas of Gnostic sects, which are heretical in relationship to orthodox Christianity and Judaism. The Trinity "seen" in the Quran is not the Trinity of the Apostles Creed, or of the Nicene Creed. (Morey, The Islamic Invasion: Confronting the World’s Fastest Growing Religion [Harvest House Publishers, Eugene, Oregon 1992], pp. 152-153)

    Kabirlaw:

    Nowhere in that verse does it say that Mary was part of the Trinity. But again, not surprisingly the Quran is CORRECT above because read the following:

    I say:

    What is your point Kabirlaw? The word trinity is not in the Quran but you keep on saying the trinity is three separate gods when in fact Trinity means tri-unity one God who exists in three yet inseperable persons and as the Concise Dictionary of Islam states such belief in three gods is heretical to orthodox Christianity.

  154. Marie

    In regards to the British not helping the Irish during the famine, Kabirlaw it was your country and your ancestors who did not help the Irish. I believe you should be pissed off at your country and ancestors for not helping the Irish instead of blaming Christianity. Besides it was Christian America that allowed them to immigrate and start over.

  155. BustedDivinity.

    The likes of kabirlaw and LS are what married off beauty to the beast, good people turned bad because alternative interpretations were there to lessen the barbarism in Islam, in Afghanistan, the Taliban gave Islam its true picture this made even the muslims flinch at the mention of that regime, a muslim society where sugar-coating is the norm could hardly understand its own bondage.

    Keeping the average muslim half-informed is a sure way of maintaing the number, when Islam conquered new lands it went with the promises of mercy and equity, this generates a form of stockholm syndrome to the conquered and subjugated population.

    They infuse the 'religion of peace' line till it permanently becomes a subconscience, they ridicule the position of an unmarried woman in the umma till she becomes ready to accept an abusive husband as 'the god's chosen one'

    The whole Islamic concept is one big divorce from reason, the placebo effect is taken as an answer to a prayer, the aesthetic side of nature becomes a premeditated symbol of Allah's existence, honor for Allah oftenly take the place of real love for children from their parents, sometimes it is hard to grasp the fact that Islam coexists with the current freedom loving and technologically advanced biosphere we all live in.

    My advice to muslims is to get off their butts and knees and work hard to better their not too appealing habitats, as the saying goes 'whoever keeps praying without working, will be playing without knowing'

  156. Moooo

    "so when people says prophet from arabic descent, then we know its false"

    ibnshar,

    From the jews and christians perspective you are right. Prophets in the bible were all offsprings of isaac not ismael. That bastard child already had been driven out by his own father. According to pedo mo, the sacrificed child was ismael, so by the same logic we can conclude that ismael was so dear to his father and the covenant must had fallen to ismael and his offsprings, but the story didn't go that way. Jews wrote about jewish people, jewish rules, and jewish nation, nothing outside of that.

  157. Kabirlaw

    To Marie:

    You said:

    By the way kabirlaw if it looks like several of my answers contradict each other it is because I am feeling tired and not as sharp as a I usually am.

    I say:

    No worries. Get some beauty sleep (Im not implying that you need it, before you go and bite my head off)!

  158. Kabirlaw

    To Marie:

    If you read your answers, it is very clear that you've got your knickers in a twist! I'm not even warmed up yet. This is how easy it is to challenge Christianity (and I haven't even read the Bible yet!)

  159. Marie

    Kabirlaw:

    If you read your answers, it is very clear that you’ve got your knickers in a twist! I’m not even warmed up yet. This is how easy it is to challenge Christianity (and I haven’t even read the Bible yet!)

    I say:

    I looked over my answers and I am sticking with the first ones except a few:

    Kabirlaw:

    The concept of the Trinity says that YOU are MOTHER of your SON But you are also DAUGHTER of your SON and your SON is your FATHER. How does that work? There simply is NO realistic example so stop mincing words. AND if there is ONE GOD anyway, Why is there even a need for metamorphosis and for God to beget a son through an earthly virgin? Make any sense?

    I say:

    The concept of the trinity does not say you are the mother of your son but you are also the daughter of your son and your son is your father. The trinity does not say that.

    The Trinity means Father ( referring to Jesus divinity and he is an image of God ), Son ( he is the son of God ), and Holy spirit ( meaning since he is no longer on earth he is with us in spirit ).

    To answer your question about God and metamorphosis Christians do not use the term. We use incarnate:

    From wikipedia

    Incarnation which literally means embodied in flesh, refers to the conception and birth of a sentient creature (generally a human) who is the material manifestation of an entity or force whose original nature is immaterial.

    In its religious context the word is used to mean the descent of a divine being or the Supreme Being (God) in human form on Earth.

    The reason for the incarnation and for God to begat a son was part of his divine plan to bring redemption and reconciliation between humans and him. In order to do this a blood sacrifice was needed ( because it is blood that gives us life ) and a perfect being ( a person born without sin ) to do this. Jesus was that perfect sacrifice because he was born without sin. By sending his son to die on the cross God performed the ultimate act of love, by sacrificing something he loved in order to bring salvation and reconciliation between him and humans. Basically he used his son to bring us back to him. Look even Islam states that humans had fallen away from God and that God had to use someone to bring the people back to him.

    Kabirlaw:

    Why did God even feel a need to have a son?

    I say:

    All I know is that Jesus was groomed to bring salvation to the world and this is the only answer I can give to this question.

  160. ibnsahr

    Kabirlaw
    ***it is very clear that you’ve got your knickers in a twist!***

    typical muslim perverter mind, the follower of pedo mo sunnah.
    did you see it trough peep hole or by the curtain wall, kabir?

  161. ibnsahr

    Kabirlaw
    ***it is very clear that you’ve got your knickers in a twist!***

    typical muslim perverter mind, the follower of pedo mo sunnah.
    did you see it trough peep hole or by the curtain wall, kabir?

    you must have got the idea from the set of haddhits that you bought?

  162. Moooo

    Boring and old discussion. Let me get this simple:
    according to Christians = 1 x 1 x 1 = 1 (faith, not proven)
    according to muslims = 1 + 1 + 1 = 3 (faith, not proven too)

    It's all about assumption, imagination and faith. Nothing more than that. The funny thing is that muslim are suddenly become "logical" and "sophisticated" when they attack other faiths. BUT when they are talking about their own faith, bbbaaammm, they suddenly become stupid.

    ibnshar,

    "typical muslim perverter mind, the follower of pedo mo sunnah."

    Yes…yes.. what do you expect from a muslim? Good things? Nah…not in a million years.

  163. straliangirl

    Judaism, Judeo-christianity, Judeo-islam AD NAUSEUM

  164. AFFAS

    see this comment..you will get to know more about yours cowardly religions…
    http://www.faithfreedom.org/2009/02/24/beating-wo
    you fools have to understand that non of the other religions respect women but was utmost care and equality is given in ISLAM.. you IDIOTS HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THAT equally means not the parts of the human nor the acts of the human i.e. women and man.. they never same again.. EQAULITY MEANS AS PER THE NATURE OF WOMEN very good rights and respect is given to the women and what is required to give respect as MAN and very much respect is given to MAN as well.. YOU ARE ONLY THE FOOLS WHEN EVER YOU WANT YOU WILL CHANGE AS PER SITUTATION FOR YOUR PERSONAL BENEFITS.. YOU IDIOT.. FOOOOOOOOOL.. MOOOOOOOOOO.. IDIOT.. YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE ONLY BEAUTIFUL AND GOOD ANF FINAL RELIGION ON THIS EARTH IS ISLAM.. NO ONE CAN CHANGE THIS BY YOUR DEBATES.. BECAUSE YOU IDIOTS DONT LIKE THE TRUTH.. YOU FOOLS ARE EVILS AND EVIL FRIENDS.. YOU DO EVIL DEEDS.. YOU ARE CHOOSING YOURSELF TO THE HELL. STILL TIME IS THEIR AFTER THE DAYS GOES ON WHO KNOWS YOUR CHILDREN'S KIDS MAY REVERT TO THIS BEAUTIFUL ISLAM..

    YOU IDIOT MOOooo…. IDIOTT.. FOOL… YOU ARE WORSE THAN ANIMAL AND WORSE THAN DOG.. YOU FOOOOOL.. first you correct your nonsense riligion that you are talking about HINDUism.. SRIKRISHA THIS BLACK MAN.. IS A GIRLS PLAYER .. WHO HAD PLAYED WITH 12,000 WIVES.. what you are talking about the women of islam.. THIS BLACK MAN OR BLUE MAN IS A BIG PLAYER AND ONE TIME HE PLAYS WITH SUDRA GIRLS WHEN GIRLS TAKE BATH NAKED IN A RIVER. THIS BLUE MAN STEALS THEIR CLOTHES AND PLAYS WITH THEM..WHEN THE GIRLS COME NEAR BY COVERING THEIR PARTS WITH HANDS.. THIS BAD FELLOW ASKS these women to hold up their hands so that he gives their clothes back if they do so.. this is only possible for a man like you and you fool.. IDIOT.. HONESTLY YOU ASK YOUR MIND that you are doing and worshiping this kinds IDOLS is it right?????? Not only this incidents by this black man.. YOUR KRISHNA ALSO STEALS CURD POTS from the home when he alone or in the absense of their parents…….************ ONLY FOOLS ON THIS EARTH TO CREATE AS YOU LIKE WHAT EVER beleive as God. and everything is RIGHT FOR your PERSONAL BENEFITS.. not only just this tell your religion.. ONE DRAUPADI and 5 PANDAVA'S SHARE THEIR PERSONAL OR SEXUAL EXPERIENCE *** IS IT NOT A UN HUMAN OR THE WAY OF DOGLY ACTS.. WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE TO THE HUMAN BEING AND ANIMALS..

  165. AFFAS

    ONE WOMEN IS DRAUPADI. ONE IDIOT ARUJUN SHARE THIS WITH HIS BROTHERS MEANS ALL FIVE BROTHERS(HUSBANDS TO ONE GIRL).. AT THE SAME TIME ONE HINDU FELLOW KOURAV KING LOOTS HER RIGHTS.. INFRONT OF ALL PUBLIC.. IS IT A RELIGION.. THESE IDIOTS.. I DONT HOW THEY FOLLOW.. THESE IDIOTS .. FOOLS.. MAKES THE IDOLS AND VERY FAMOUS IS GANAPATHI ( ELEPHANT HEADED MAN) THEY CALL THIS AS NIMAJJAN.. FOR THIS MAN TO MAKE HIM HAPPY THEY PUTS ALL THE STUFF FRUITS, LEAVES WHAT AND ALL HE EATS I DONT KNOW.. THEY WASTE LOTS OF TREES THEY CUTS ESPECALLY MANGO AND BANANA LEAVES AT EVERY HINDU HOME AND FINALLY THESE IDIOTS.. KICKS THIS IDOLS WITH THEIR LEGS TO THESE IDOLS AND THROWS IN A CANAL OR WATER TANKS**** THOUGH THEY FEEL GREAT WORK THEY DONE BY CREATING BAD ATMOSPHERE AND MAKES EVERYWHERE UGLY.. DIRT EVERYTHING IN THE STREETS.. MOST IMPORTANTLY THE PURE WATER TURNS TO DIRTY WATER BY THEIR ACTS.. THEY SAYS ENVIRONMENT FRIENDLY.. THESE FOOLS HAVE UNIONS.. FOR THIS COWARDLY ACTS..

  166. Moooo

    "EQAULITY MEANS AS PER THE NATURE OF WOMEN very good rights and respect is given to the women and what is required to give respect as MAN and very much respect is given to MAN as well."

    Ck..ckk…ckkk. Islam treats woman as cattle and second class human (REALITY). The "very good rights and respect thing" is pathetic, Lies and more lies, boring. Your barbarian standard is nothing new. Attacking hinduism don't make your evil religion looks good, on the contratry muslim is the only religious global threat in this world. BBOOOMMMM….. Love that sound?

    The rest of your comment is nothing but blabbering of a vermin.

  167. affas

    mOO.. SEE THE MEN HOW THEY RESPECT THE WOMEN IN HIDUISM.. WHY ANY ONE TO REFER. ASK YOUR OWN HEART..

    see this truth very happend recently…
    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=c95_1241303458

    http://www.thehindu.com/2009/09/18/stories/200909

    http://www.sloppynoodle.com/wp/hindu-radicals-bea

    WHAT DO YOU CALL THIS ACT.. ????
    http://books.google.co.in/books?id=fEgW-Toh8FgC&a

    SEE THIS COWARDLY ACT NEITHER YOU ARE GOOD AT HUMAN BEINGS NOR AT WOMEN…

    ALL YOU WORRIES ARE FOR THE STATUS AND MONEY.. AND TRADITIONS.. USE LESS TRADITION.. YOUR TRADITIONS HAVE KEPT INDIANS BACKWARDS.. ALMOST SEVERAL HUNDREDS AND THOUSANDS OF YEARS.. BECUASE OF YOUR ACTS.
    http://indianchristians.in/news/content/view/3327
    http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/uncategorized

  168. sarvodaya

    I see that people in this forum take for granted whatever is written in Quran or the vedas as is interpreted by them. I would not take the liberty of disputing what is written in those great scriptures of two great religions. But clearly all the muslims are trying to justify what is written in qoran and the hindus are trying to justify what is written in the vedas. Instead of that it would be better if we could inquire the truth and the context in which these are written and interpreted.

  169. Moooo

    Affas,

    Read again my post about hinduism. Who cares about hindu. They are not aggressive and their ideology is not to conquer this world. India is secular and advanced nation, they know how to progress and slowly but surely adapting modern world.

    "ASK YOUR OWN HEART.."

    Funny to hear it from you, the follower of barbaric prophet.

    "YOUR TRADITIONS HAVE KEPT INDIANS BACKWARDS."

    Really? How about muslim? India vs pakistan and Bangladesh. You see, don't speak about backwardness if you yourself are backward countries.

  170. srs

    Moo.. you dont have any religion.. you are neither a hindu nor a christian.. you are a big idiot.. your are a Evil man…

  171. Moooo

    srs,

    Is that all? You have said nothing but ad hominem and baseless accussation. From this alone anyone can see who is the evil one. Who had made atrocities in the name of religion, eh? Well it's not me, that's for sure.

  172. Moooo

    To:Comment ID #22409 …Yess……yessss…Christians are evil people.. just EVIL suits for chrstian minded people.
    Ck..ckk…ckkk. Christianity treats woman as cattle, sexual toys, have sexual abusing with the counter parts at parks, office and homes, streets and in cars like animals… and second class human (REALITY). The “very good rights and respect thing” is pathetic, Lies and more lies, boring. Your barbarian standard is nothing new. Attacking Islam don’t make your evil religion looks good, on the contratry Chrsitianity is the only religious global threat in this world. BBOOOMMMM…. Love that sound?…bbbusssssssssssssssss…(nuclear bombs) soundless bombs can kill all over..

    The rest of your comment is nothing but blabbering of a vermin.

  173. Moooo

    Wrong again, copying words without proof is pathetic. Let's see:

    "Ck..ckk…ckkk. Christianity treats woman as cattle, sexual toys, have sexual abusing with the counter parts at parks, office and homes, streets and in cars like animals… and second class human (REALITY)"

    Are you a doll or robot? imitating me like a little fool. No Christians treat woman like that. Again no proof.

    "he “very good rights and respect thing” is pathetic, Lies and more lies, boring. Your barbarian standard is nothing new."

    Wrong again, boring is that the best you can do muslim? pathetic. Islam is the only religion that still using sharia from 7th century. Who's the barbarian now eh? Pathetic little fool. Again no proof.

    "Attacking Islam don’t make your evil religion looks good, on the contratry Chrsitianity is the only religious global threat in this world. BBOOOMMMM…. Love that sound?…bbbusssssssssssssssss…(nuclear bombs) soundless bombs can kill all over.."

    Christians have evolved and adapting modern world unlike islam. The only global terrorists in this world is muslim. Boommm, that the sound of your own bombs, pathetic. Many countries have nuclear bombs (muslim, secular, communism, etc) to make energy and defend their nation. Where is the explosion? I don't see it anywhere? But your bombs explode everyday. Pathetic fool with no proof.

    "The rest of your comment is nothing but blabbering of a vermin."

    Well, vermin, you have just proved yourself that you are nothing more than a vermin. Blabbering vermin. Do you ever know what that mean, vermin? Of course you will never know it, because you're just a vermin. LOL

  174. Moooo

    Moooo..is a bloody idiot..? is it doing foolish here is my question??

    Christians have not evolved and not adapting modern world for the personal benefits. The only global terrorists in this world is christians& jews kaffirs. Boooooossssssss that the sound of your own neclear missile test for neclear bombs, pathetic. Many countries have nuclear bombs (christians, jews and muslim, secular, communism, etc) to make energy and defend their nation. Where is the explosion? I don’t see it anywhere? But your mouths explode everyday of HELL You pathetic fool with no proof in your words, except all boasting and confusing yourself is barbaric views..

  175. free

    Moooo.
    Wrong again, boring is that the best you can do muslim? pathetic. Islam is the only religion that still using sharia from 7th century. Who’s the barbarian now eh? Pathetic little fool. Again no proof.

    Moooo. is a un imaginable barbar who bambarding his head into nothing..
    Islam is the only religion that still using sharia from 7th century which is unchangeble.. We have no need to change our sharia. Our sharia is forever, you bloody idiots are more concerned with sharia and the true rules in islam is scarring you. That's why dont need to change them there is no two morales for human beings. This sharia is forever and until the end of days.

    First of all, you chrisitans/jews/kafffirs are blastards.. why do you know that? You are correncting whenever you want to change your laws for the sake of your personal benefits.. You are not in the way of God. You are in the way of EVIL. Christians are doing all EVIL deeds..

  176. Moooo

    "Christians have not evolved and not adapting modern world for the personal benefits. The only global terrorists in this world is christians& jews kaffirs. Boooooossssssss that the sound of your own neclear missile test for neclear bombs, pathetic."

    Yes they are (America and Europe are secular). The only global terrorists are muslim (fact), period. Nuclear tests are everywhere (The west, North Korea, Iran, Pakistan, etc). Understand now, fool? Where are the global Christian terrorists eh? Again no proof. Pathetic. Booommm, the sound of suicide bombers. Do you want to join them, eh?

    "But your mouths explode everyday of HELL You pathetic fool with no proof in your words, except all boasting and confusing yourself is barbaric views."

    It only means 1 thing. You can't prove it. Pathetic barbarian. I asked about nuclear explosion and you can't answer it, pathetic. On the contrary, your islamic bombs explode on daily basis and you can't deny it. Pathetic forever.

    "Our sharia is forever, you bloody idiots are more concerned with sharia and the true rules in islam is scarring you. That’s why dont need to change them there is no two morales for human beings. This sharia is forever and until the end of days."

    That's why you are barbarian, you can't change at all. The mentality of 7th barbarian. Once again i have proved it.

    "First of all, you chrisitans/jews/kafffirs are blastards.. why do you know that? You are correncting whenever you want to change your laws for the sake of your personal benefits.. You are not in the way of God. You are in the way of EVIL. Christians are doing all EVIL deeds.."

    Wrong again, barbarian. I know you hate non musim a lot because of your sick religion, no surprise to that. Non muslim's law is a progress to value human more than before. Human rights, protection of children from early marriage and abuse, and gender equality are the result of that. You muslim never know this kind of things. Personal benefits? Wrong, humanity benefits to be more precise. On the contrary, it is you who are after personal benefits (banging whore in heaven, drinking wine, etc).

  177. Moooo

    Your constant changing of names and even used mine is pathetic. Try to be deceptive eh? Cowards are all the same, can't prove anything but keep barking like a dog with no teeth.

  178. free

    Yes they are not secular like America and Europe and australia. The only global terrorists are christians in australia, europe is fact, period. Nuclear tests are everywhere (The west, North Korea, Iran, Pakistan, etc). When western has got the Neclear weapons.. is not the morale to keep quite for others..When countries like Russia, America, France, UK, Israel have neclear weapons.. Others also may try for neclear tests.. Understand this now, fool? Where are the terrorists eh? Chrisitans are the terrorists.. Again what proof is rquired you idiot..? Pathetic. Booommm & Booooossssss, the sound of christian neclear bombers. Do you want to join them, eh? Do you want enjoy by killing innocent people like in Iraq?? hhe.. Blastard?

    It only means 1 thing. You can’t prove it. Pathetic barbarian christians. I asked about nuclear explosion and you can’t answer it, pathetic. On the contrary, your bombs are exploded which are supplied by christian countries on daily basis and you can’t deny it. Pathetic forever.


    That’s why you are barbarian, you can change whenever you want anything The mentality of christians barbarian. Once again i have proved it.

    christian barbarian. I know you hate musims a lot because of your skin & racist religion, no surprise to that. muslim’s law is already in a progress to value human more forever. Human rights, protection of children from early marriage and abuse, and gender equality are the result of that. muslim already know this kind of things from 1400+ years. Christians are for Personal benefits? Yes, christians are the fools and animans who uses alchohol, have sexual intercourse with un married girls, roaming in the streets naked etc.

  179. Moooo

    Is that all, barbarian? You failed to refute all my posts and your best effort is copying me? Pathetic.
    Let's summarize your stupidity:

    - I have proved that all countries (muslim, communism, secular, etc) have nuclear weapons. What is your response? None, you just copying me without any proof.
    - I have proved that America and Europe don't have religious law, that's why you muslim can enjoy your parasite nature there. What is your response? None, you just copying me without any proof.
    - I have proved that no nuclear explosion exist, but your suicide bombs are happening on daily basis. What is your response? None, you just copying me without any proof.
    - I have proved that muslim are still barbaric for using quran from 7th century while the others don't. What is your response? None, you just copying me without any proof.

    Pathetic little copy cat.

  180. Raisin Head

    Kabirlaw why lie.
    allah is the greatest liar deceiver and schemer and planner to lie deceive and scheme Sura 3:54.
    4 witnesses to see a rape. If 4 men saw a rape why not stop it. How insane! allah is insane!
    Sura 4:34 said men can BEAT women but can women beat men. Even gay MEN are forgiven but gay women are killed sura 4:15,16.

    If a Christian killed it is wrong, so why try to compare killings. Both are wrong. Everytime a Muslims says something they either blame a JEW or a Christian. Why cant Muslims take responsibility for their own mess.

  181. Demsci

    Kabirlaw said:
    “(5) Crime happens everywhere and punishments take place everywhere. Muslim countries nowadays are not the epitome of the of the Islamic system. Almost ALL muslim countries do not adhere to the notion of a pure Islamic State. None. Saudi Arabia is far from being an Islamic State as it has an absolute monarchy and Monarchies and Kingdoms are Illegal in Islam. So when you use these countries as examples you are missing the mark by miles.”

    May I point out to you, Kabirlaw, that we get all these articles about behavior of Muslims in countries where they have majority and power. One would think that there eventually the true result of the Islamic faith would be shown.

    So much of criticism on Islam, which you abhor, comes about because of what we see Muslims practice in these countries, especially the Muslims in power. Or the ones that have the majority-upper hand and unjust more rights than minorities etc.

    Now I hardly dare ask you, but what about people like you and LS every now and then siding with us against these Muslims that
    I. Have too much power, because they let the followers of other beliefs have too less.
    II. Who abuse that power, even according to your interpretation of Islam, which you inform us of so well. Well, there seem to be plenty of other interpretations believed and practiced.

    Please side with us:
    I. For NATO against Taliban.
    II. For the demonstrators against the oppressors in Iran.
    III. For the apostates in Islamic countries against those who imprison or kill or threathen them. Because YOU maintain “There is no compulsion in Religion” but they don’t.
    IV. Even support the GOAL of democracy in Islamic countries somewhere in the 21st century. Because that would give the followers of other beliefs equal rights to Muslims there, and that is only fair.
    Furthermore; MUST Islam depend on force? Look at Turkey, Islam is doing so well there, but it relies on democracy there.

    If you were WITH us on those 4 points, then your words would gain so much more credibility, I believe.

  182. Marie

    kabirlaw:

    To Marie,

    Hello stranger, how are you? Is it ok me calling you babes or similar? Or do you find it offensive like Megha?

    I say:

    I have no problem with it as long as there is no sexual intent behind it.

  183. rationalist

    Hello Megha, I am sure you have flogged Kabirlaw and Londonspirit with your tough questions. I am confident that they will not be able to respond to your questions. I noticed that they didn't respond to Marie's questions either. Megha and Marie, you are doing a fine job.

  184. wagamama

    Male-WHORE Muhammad….. ha ha ha it definitely sounds great for Muhammad. I would add something to it… Bose-d-k male-WHORE Muhammad.

  185. Moooo

    Megha,

    "If they want to downsize India’s laws vs. Hinduism, they need to take a look at their own religion and laws of Islamic nations!"

    They are hypocrites. India is a secular country and many people from different culture live there. India is a great nation and cradle of asian civilization. Reality speak for itself, between pakistan and india, who is the better nation? About hinduism, there are no global threat from the hindus, because their religion is the nation's religion. Hindus in my country never create any problem, unlike muslim. Even when muslim in minorities they always create problems.

    "How did you come up with that name? It is definitely different? Not trying to get off topic."

    Did you mean my nick or those big mouths's nick? If you talked about my nick, i got it from their prophet.
    - Their prophet is Mo (short english version)
    - Sound of a cattle (Moo) represents the condition of woman under islamic law.
    If you talked about those big mouths's nick, well search it at indonesian and english dictionary. You can see what is the position of a person from their nicks.

  186. Moooo

    Kebirilewd,

    Begining to show your true self, i see. No need to shy, let it out big mouth.

  187. Megha

    Rationalist,

    LS says he is not blind…..lmao (laugh my ass off)…..if he only knew…..;) Thanks for your encouragement, bro!

    I suppose LS thinks I'm the blind one…or rather…all of us khaphirs…what do yoou think? ;)

  188. Megha

    Kabirlaw,

    Stop being so naughty….we love reading what you have to say so tone down the filthy language! lol

  189. Megha

    Moooo,

    Cows are very lovely animals! :) That is why I asked that question….liked your last comment by the way.

    Hindus hardly bother anyone…sure u have your nasty ones….I don't live in India…the u.s…..but some Americans I know very well will tell me that they've never been bother by a Hindu because they go about their business…unlike Muslims who bitch and whine about their equal rights when they know damn well they would not give others of different religions the same treatment/equality they are given here……It is our own fault for being so trusting of them!

    The only problem some Americans I have talked to have with Indians is they try to bargain and that is for the majority, not allowed here and sometimes they are rude about it and some clerks can be greedy…but rudeness and greed are in every culture…..

    I had a professor from Indonesia….she was one of my favs….she and her husband were Muslims, but from what I could tell, nonpracticing….she said they had to separate her from her siblings in religion classes because she questioned so much….she also said they tied her left hand back in order to make her use her right….to eat and such…she is a lefty….how stupid was that??? See…no tolerance of anything "unhalal"/different!

  190. kabirlaw

    To Megha and her cheer leaders.

    You said:

    I am keeping my promise as I said I would, but you Kabirlaw have proven to be nothing more than a Muslim sexist pig like your pedo Mo prophet and pimp Allah! You intimidate women….I’m not your baby/babes…I might be a khaphir, but I’m sure as hell not yours for the taking…..you will see that more and more you’ll prove yourself to be the big hypocrite! Goodbye!

    I say:

    You don’t know me for ****. I’m not sexist, I respect and value women. You say I intimidate women! Are you serious? This site is full of people who share your opinion on Islam. I am vastly outnumbered here and if you check the exchanges I have had with your comrades and go by the abuse that I have been receiving despite trying to be polite in return you will realise who was trying to intimidate who. It is quite a job to come up on top in the face of so much criticism, sarcasm, insults, degradation, numbers and bigoted BS!
    I’m sorry for calling you babes if that offends you (it’s just how I am but I meant it in a nice way). I never meant to imply that you are MY babes or that you are mine for the taking. There is nothing that you have said that has filtered through as attractive or appealing that would captivate me.

    Megha You then said:

    You know what….I changed my mind! Ok, KL….maybe your hadith says women and men should get equal punishment,

    I say:

    Thank you for accepting that you were wrong. It takes a lot of bottle to do that. So end of story, what’s all the fuss about and the name calling and swearing and the preconceived ideas of me being a sexist when you yourself have conceded defeat of your challenge that was blindly championed by others? What’s all that about then?

    You then said:

    When I left that sorry bastard of a husband…I made a vow I would help women and educate them on the evils of Islam….this promise means more to me than my silly challenge to you…..I would not be an hornorable and sincere if I allow women to go on believing Islam is for them…..as far as I’m concerned…this challenge is void anyway because even you Muslims do not stick to your Koran and hadith….everyone knows women are not equal fairly in Islam…koran and hadith alike so sorry…you will not be blessed with my silence…..women throughout history have suffered through enough intimidation…especially by you Muslim pigs!

    My duty and honor is towards humanity…not you…you don’t bother honoring anyone or respecting anyone elses beliefs….there is no tolerance in you! Sorry you will not get what you want like you are used to…promise or no promise!

    I say:

    Then you go around calling Muslims liars?! Then you go around calling Muslims hypocrites?! Then you go around calling Muslims deceptive?! Then you go around calling Muslims insincere?!

    Then you wonder why I am so angry with you people. Megha, I would have more respect for you if you simply said you hated Islam and All Muslims no matter what they say. At least you would be honest instead of trying to disguise your unconditional hatred with trying to make out that you are an academic or intellectual opponent and that Islam teaches inequality and hatred of women.

    I never asked you to post a challenge. You did that on your own accord. I never asked you to keep your mouth shut if you lost, you promised that you would. Now that you yourself have accepted that you were wrong, you are failing to adhere to your own promise which you so proudly and arrogantly posted not long ago! AND the f****** icing on the cake is that YOU call ME the f****** liar and hypocrite.

    I personally do not want women (or men) to be silent (I note the insinuation you are trying to conjure up). Where’s the fun in that? You said you that you will keep your mouth shut Megha, not me! You are a proven liar for ALL to see. It’s exactly what Ali Sina is going to do when he’s proven wrong when he is challenged.

    Do you really think he’s going to remove this website? Do you really think he is going to give $50,000 and convert to Islam if proven wrong. My a****! He’s going to do the same thing that you have just done, he’s going to say something as follows:

    “Well, I still think Islam is bad and I will carry on teaching humanity the evils of Islam.” I say: well done pal, well f***** done

    You then said:

    I sometimes have flashback and nightmares about my ex and experience….Kabirlaw caused me to have a flashback and remember the pain and intimidation again, but I snapped out of it….sometimes when that happens, I forget I’m no longer under his power….I’m sure many women who were blessed to get out of the evil clutches of husbands like this go through the same thing. My heart goes out to them!

    I say:

    Well, if that is what happens everytime I reply to you then I tell you what this is my final post to you. I’m not here to cause people psychological or emotional pain. And I pray also that no woman, Muslim or otherwise goes through what you have been through at the hands of an abusive partner. (However, since my comment was deleted I see you have recovered quite remarkably and are now posting OTHER challenges).

    You then said:

    KL….I don’t get it….you seem at times so kind and sincere….it is a shame we disagree….but nonetheless…I blieve you followed the teachings of a mad man…..It is nothing personal towards you just as I’m sure the fact that you do not believe as I do is anything personal towards me, but point blank….most members on this site disagree with you….I’m not the only one…..perhaps my emotions are still high as I have said, but….no one here blames me just as I don’t blame them!

    I say:

    Megha, You just called me a Muslim Pig earlier. Leave it be, I’ve tried to be nice to you and even get to know you, but, I know what you’re all about. Everyone knows in their heart of hearts that you lost miserably. Have a nice life.

  191. Marie

    londonspirit:

    ANSWER: Dont make me laugh marie, the verses i presented to you were not speaking in parables. They were clear concise verses, look at the verse and answer. Like I said once you answer i will give my answer. I already know many websites that have answered you question. All it takes for me is to copy and paste. But I am just waiitng on your answer.

    I say:

    londonspirit we already had this discussion about Jesus's divinity before we got into a debate. At least five other people and I have explained to you using verses from the new testament about Jesus's divinity.

    In regards to you saying that you already have the answer is it going to be something like this:

    Allegation of Mary being the sister of Aaron and her mother being the wife of Imran.

    Here 'Answering Islam' states :

    >>>This is faulty reasoning. Only Aaron became a Priest of the Lord and in fact the first High Priest. And only Aaron's descendents became priests. Neither Moses nor their sister Miriam are ever understood to be in "priestly lineage." Amram is definitely not a priest. If Mary's lineage of being part of a priestly family should be stressed then necessarily she would have to be called a daughter of Aaron, since all of Israel's priests are descendants of Aaron, while his brother and sister are not counted among the priestly line. <<<

    The So called Dificulty can be found in
    http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Contra/qbhc0

    Jochen, It is indeed very surprising that you have answered your own question basically concerning Mary (ro). But I see you have not failed to construe what Allah is saying in the Holy Quran. If there was any actual righteousness in yourself , you would have not chosen this path.

    We read in the Quran:

    `O sister of Aaron, thy father was not a wicked man, nor was thy mother an unchaste woman !' (19: 29.)

    The reference used here is one of Question, not that Mary was actually the sister of Aaron, but as decendant of the house of Aaron she would become a spiritual sister of Aaron with this in the eyes of the Jews they asked her as to what she had done.

    Here is my response:

    Mary is not a descendent of Aaron, she is a descendent of King David.

    The Holy Quran does not make a historical mistake here or anywhere.

    Some Christian writers in their ignorance of the Arabic language have accused the Quran of a historical Anachronism inasmuch it has spoken Mary ‘sister of Aaron’. Instead of regretting their own ignorance they seek to find fault in the Quran. The question of Mary having been called the sister of Aaron in the Quran was put forth to the Holy Prophet Muhummad (saw) himself, and he asked the Questioner that did he not know that the Israelites used to name their children after Prophets and Saints. (Bayan vol. 6, p.16; Jarir vol. 16, p,15).

    Mary has here been called the sister of Aaron and not that of Moses thou both were brothers. for whereas Moses was the founder of the Jewish Law, Aaron was the head of a Jewish priestly class (Enc. Bib. & Enc. Brit. under Aaron) And Mary also belonged to the priestly order.

    My response:

    Mary's family did not come from a priestly family, they were regular people and poor.

    Tabari has related an incident from the life of the Holy Prophet Muhummad (saw) which gives an insight to the words (ab) and (amm) and (ukht) ect. When Safiah, the Holy Prophets wife, and incidentally a Jewess by decent, once complained to the Holy Prophet that some of his other wives had called here a Jewess in contempt, The Prophet Muhummad (saw) told her to return the taunt by saying that Aaron was here father Moses her Uncle and Muhummad (saw) Arabia her Husband. Now the Holy prophet certainly knew that Aaron was not her brother and Moses not her uncle, this tradition shows that that the implication of these Arabic words is by no means confined to the so called blood relations.

    Mary might have been called a sister of Aaron by way of reproach or taunt inasmuch as another Mary, the real sister of Aaron and Moses’s stepsister or his sister in-law, had charged him (Moses) with having unlawfully married a woman (numbers 12:1). A reference to this accusation can also be found in the Quran in (chapter 33:70) Thus the elders of the Jews, by calling Jesus’s mother sister of Aaron, meant that as Mary the sister of Aaron had, by accusing Moses of unlawfully marrying a woman, committed a heinous crime, so did she like her name sake, commit a heinous act of giving birth to an illegitimate child.

    My response:

    The Jews do not believe in Jesus nor do they believe in his mother.

    The allegation made by you is further supported supposedly by the following verse..

    Remember when a women of Imran said, `My Lord, I have vowed to Thee what is in my womb to be dedicated to Thy service. So do Thou accept it of me; Verily Thou alone art All-Hearing, All-Knowing.' (3: 36.)

    In this verse the mother of Mary who’s name was Hannah (Enc. Bib.) has been spoken of as woman of (Imran) while in 19:29, Mary herself has been addressed the (sister of Aaron). ‘Imran (Ammram) and Aaron are respectively the father and Brother of Moses, while he had also a sister named Miriam.

    Being ignorant of Arabic Idiom and Quranic style, Christian writers who ascribe the authorship of the Quran to the Holy Prophet Muhummad (saw) , think that in his ignorance he confused Mary mother of Jesus, with Miriam sister of Moses. This the pretend to have discovered a serious Anachronism in the Quran–an absurd charge, inasmuch as quite a number of passages can be cited to show that the Quran considers Moses and Jesus separated from each other by a long line of Prophets (e.g. 2:88; 5:44-46).

    These Christian writers are not the first to make this discovery. The credit for it belongs to the Christians of Najran who, as long as 1350 years ago, raised the same objection and received a prompt reply. It is on record that when the Holy Prophet sent (Mughira) to Najran, the Christians of that place asked him:

    "Do ye not read in the Quran Mary (mother of Jesus) being mentioned as sister of Aaron, while you know Jesus was born a long time after Moses?"

    "I did not know the answer"

    says Mughira,

    "and on my return to Medina I inquired about it of the Holy Prophet Muhummad (saw) who readily answered,"

    "Why did you not tell them that the Israelites used to name their children after their deceased Prophets and Saints?" (Thirmidhi).

    In fact, there is a tradition to the effect that the husband of Hannah and the father of Mary was named Imran whose father (i.e. Mary’s Grandfather) had the name Yoshhim or Yoshim. (Jarir & Kathir) Thus this Imran is different from Imran the father of Moses and whose own father was Kohath (Exodus. 6: 18–20)

    The fact that Hannah’s husband for that fact Mary’s father, has been named Joachim in the Christian scriptures (Gospel of the birth of Mary and the Enc. Brit. under Mary) should not perplex us as Joachim is the same as Yoshim as mentioned by (Ibn Jarir) as the father of Imran. The Christian scriptures give the name of the Grandfather instead of the father, which is not an uncommon practice. Besides there are instances in the Bible of one person being known by two names. Gideon, for instance, was also called Jerubbaal (Judg. 7:1). So there should be no surprise if the second name of Joachim happened to be Imran.

    My response:

    The Gospel of the Nativity of Mary was written by a heretical Christian sect between the 4th-6th century and is no longer in existence. Also the Gospel of the Nativity of Mary is not recognized in mainstream Christianity.

    Moreover, like individuals , families, too, are sometimes known after the names of their distinguished ancestors. In the Bible the name Israel sometimes stands for the Israelites (Deut 6:3–4) and Kedar for the Ishmalites (Isa, 21:16; 42:11). Similarly, Jesus has been called son of David (Matt. 1:1).

    So the Words "when the woman of Imran" a woman from the family of Imran, or a perfect woman from the family of Imran. It is admitted that Hannah the mother of Mary, who was a cousin of Elisabeth (John’s mother) belonged to the House of Aaron and through him to that of ‘Imran (Luke 1:5, 36)

    Like I stated at the beginning of this writing there Is no contradiction in the Quran, the Contradiction and Achronism lies in the heart of the deceiver, which is the Christian scholar who has attempted to spread a false accusation.

    It is odd that one would do this knowing that Jesus was called (Son of David), or supposedly being the seed of David to become the Messiah, but the Bible does not prove to be the seed of David, being born with out the agency of a father.

    My response:

    The Bible prophesied Jesus would be born in the line of David ( be a descendent of David )

    It is sad thou that Christians in their over zealousness have missed this and so many other arguments that can be raised against their own beliefs if they continuously attempt to allege contradictions in the Quran..

    Back to Responces to Polemics against Islam

    Back to Answering Christianity

  192. Marie

    Here's more from Islamic Awareness and more of my responses:

    Mary, Sister Of Aaron(P)?

    M S M Saifullah, Muhammad Ghoniem & Mustafa Ahmed

    © Islamic Awareness, All Rights Reserved.

    Last Modified: 1st September 1999

    Assalamu-alaikum wa rahamatullahi wa barakatuhu:

    Christian missionaries have been calling Mary addressed as Sister of Aaron(P) a contradiction. Below is the verse:

    At length she brought the (babe) to her people, carrying him (in her arms). They said: "O Mary! truly an amazing thing hast thou brought! "O sister of Aaron! Thy father was not a man of evil, nor thy mother a woman unchaste!" [Qur'an 19:27-28]

    It turns out that Christians in Najran during the time of the Prophet(P) raised a similar objection and it was answered by the Prophet(P). In Sahih Muslim, the hadith related by Mughirah ibn Shu`bah [5326] says:

    When I came to Najran, they (the Christians of Najran) asked me: You read "O sister of Harun" (i.e. Maryam) in the Qur'an, whereas Moses was born much before Jesus. When I came back to Allah's Messenger(P) I asked him about that, whereupon he said: The (people of the old age) used to give names (to their persons) after the names of Apostle and pious persons who had gone before them.

    This claim of contradiction is apparently mistaken because it disregards both the Arabic idiom and the context of the verse. In Arabic the word akhun or ukhtun (Underlined with Red colour in the images) carries two meanings.

    1. Blood brother or sister and
    2. Brotherhood/sisterhood in clan and faith.

    The above verse has used the word ukhtun in the second sense. This is not unusual as the Qur'an uses the same idiomatic expression in several earlier verses. In chapter 11 verse 78, Prophet Lot refers to the women folk of his community as my daughters.

    And his people came rushing towards him, and they had been long in the habit of practising abominations. He said: "O my people! Here are my daughters: they are purer for you (if ye marry)! Now fear Allah, and cover me not with shame about my guests! Is there not among you a single right-minded man?" [Qur'an 11:78]

    In Chapter 7 verses 65, 73 and 85 Prophets Hud, Saleh and Shuaib(P) are referred to as "brothers" of their respective peoples.

    And unto (the tribe of) A'ad (We sent) their brother, Hud. He said: O my people! Serve Allah. Ye have no other Allah save Him. Will ye not ward off (evil)? [Qur'an 7:65]

    And to (the tribe of) Thamud (We sent) their brother Salih. He said: O my people! Serve Allah. Ye have no other Allah save Him. A wonder from your Lord hath come unto you. Lo! this is the camel of Allah, a token unto you; so let her feed in Allah's earth, and touch her not with hurt lest painful torment seize you. [Qur'an 7:73]

    And unto Midian (We sent) their brother, Shu'eyb. He said: O my people! Serve Allah. Ye have no other Allah save Him. Lo! a clear proof hath come unto you from your Lord; so give full measure and full weight and wrong not mankind in their goods, and work not confusion in the earth after the fair ordering thereof. That will be better for you, if ye are believers. [Qur'an 7:85]

    The people of Lot are also mentioned in chapter 50 verse 13 as the brothers of Lot except for the word "banatii" which means my daughters in 11:78, all other references have used the word "akhun" which means brother.

    The 'Ad, Pharaoh, the brethren of Lut, (Qur'an 50:13)

    And in another place, the Qur'an addresses the believers as brothers-in-faith.

    The Believers are but a single Brotherhood: So make peace and reconciliation between your two (contending) brothers; and fear Allah, that ye may receive Mercy. [Qur'an 49:10]

    George Sale in his translation of the Qur'an says:

    From the identity of names it has been generally imagined by Christian writers that the Koran here confounds Mary the mother of Jesus with Mary of Miriam, the sister of Moses and Aaron; which intolerable anachronism, if it were certain, is sufficient of itself to destroy the pretended authority of this book. But though Mohammed may be supposed to have been ignorant enough in ancient history and chronology, to have committed so gross a blunder; yet I do not see how it can be made out from the words of the Koran. For it does not follow, because two persons have the same name, and have each a father and brother who bear the same names, that they must therefore necessarily be the same whereby it manifestly appears that Mohammed well knew and asserted that Moses preceded Jesus several ages. And the commentators accordingly fail not to tell us, that there had passed about one thousand eight hundred years between Amran the father of Moses and Amrean the father of the Virgin Mary: they also make them the sons of different persons; the first, they say, was the son of Yeshar, or Izhar (though he was really his brother) the son of Kahath, the son of Levi; and the other was the son of Matthan, whose genealogy they trace, but in a very corrupt and imperfect manner, up to David and thence to Adam. It must be observed that though the Virgin Mary is called in the Koran, the sister of Aaron, yet she is nowhere called the sister of Moses.[1]

    My response:

    The names of Mary's parents and siblings are not mentioned in the Bible.

    In the Bible, Elizabeth was called daughters of Aaron(P). Was she literally a daughter of Aaron?

    My response:

    Where in the Bible does it say Elizabeth was called daughters of Aaron? There is only one Elizabeth mentioned in the Bible and she was Mary's relative and nothing is mentioned of being a daughter of Aaron.

    In the days of Herod, King of Judea, there was a priest named Zechari'ah, of the division of Abi'jah; and he had a wife of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth. [Luke 1:5, RSV]

    Or Jesus(P) was addressed as Son of David in the Bible. Was he literally Son of David(P)?

    And the crowds that went before him and that followed him shouted, "Hosanna to the Son of David! Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord! Hosanna in the highest!" [Matthew 21:9 RSV]

    But when the chief priests and the scribes saw the wonderful things that he did, and the children crying out in the temple, "Hosanna to the Son of David!" they were indignant; [Matthew 21:15 RSV]

    If we take that literally then it is also a contradiction in the Bible.

    And Allah knows best.

  193. Marie

    From Answering Islam:

    Mary, the Mother of Jesus and Sister of Aaron

    Sam Shamoun

    The Quran confuses Mary, the mother of the Lord Jesus, with Miriam the sister of Moses. The Quran identifies Mary as the sister of Aaron, the daughter of Imran, whose mother was the wife of Imran:

    When the wife of Imran said, 'Lord, I have vowed to Thee, in dedication, what is within my womb. Receive Thou this from me; Thou hearest, and knowest.' And when she gave birth to her she said, 'Lord, I have given birth to her, a female.' (And God knew very well what she had given birth to; the male is not as the female.) 'And I have named her Mary, and commend her to Thee with her seed, to protect them from the accursed Satan.' S. 3:35-36 Arberry

    Then she brought the child to her folk carrying him; and they said, 'Mary, thou hast surely committed a monstrous thing! Sister of Aaron, thy father was not a wicked man, nor was thy mother a woman unchaste.' S. 19:27-28

    And Mary, Imran's daughter, who guarded her virginity, so We breathed into her of Our Spirit, and she confirmed the Words of her Lord and His Books, and became one of the obedient. S. 66:12

    Compare this to what the Holy Bible says:

    "Then Mary (Hebrew- Mariam), the prophetess, the sister of Aaron, took the timbrel in her hand…" Exodus 15:20

    "The name of Amram's wife was Jochebed, the daughter of Levi, who was born to Levi in Egypt; and to Amram she bore Aaron and Moses and their sister Miriam." Numbers 27:59

    "The children of Amram: Aaron, Moses, and Miriam. The sons of Aaron: Nadab, Abihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar." 1 Chronicles 6:3

    "For I brought you up from the land of Egypt and redeemed you from the house of slavery, and I sent before you Moses, Aaron, and Miriam." Micah 6:4

    "Miriam and Aaron spoke against Moses because of the Cushite woman whom he had married, for he had married a Cushite woman. And they said, ‘Has the LORD indeed spoken only through Moses? Has he not spoken through us also?" And the LORD heard it. Now the man Moses was very meek, more than all people who were on the face of the earth. And suddenly the LORD said to Moses and to Aaron and Miriam, ‘Come out, you three, to the tent of meeting.’ And the three of them came out. And the LORD came down in a pillar of cloud and stood at the entrance of the tent and called Aaron and Miriam, and they both came forward… When the cloud removed from over the tent, behold, Miriam was leprous, like snow. And Aaron turned toward Miriam, and behold, she was leprous. And Aaron said to Moses, ‘Oh, my lord, do not punish us because we have done foolishly and have sinned. Let her not be as one dead, whose flesh is half eaten away when he comes out of his mother's womb.’ And Moses cried to the LORD, ‘O God, please heal her–please.’ But the LORD said to Moses, ‘If her father had but spit in her face, should she not be shamed seven days? Let her be shut outside the camp seven days, and after that she may be brought in again." So Miriam was shut outside the camp seven days, and the people did not set out on the march till Miriam was brought in again." Numbers 12:1-5, 10-15

    It is very hard to accept the idea that the Quran wasn’t identifying Jesus’ mother with the sister of Moses in light of the fact that both these Marys had brothers named Aaron and fathers named Imran/Amram! It is rather obvious to any unbiased reader that Muhammad has clearly confused the identity of Jesus’ mother with the sister of Aaron and Moses. He mistakenly thought that the mother of the Lord Jesus was the sister of Moses and Aaron.

    Some Muslims try very hard to get around this and have sought to refute the assertion that the Quran is mistaken:

    http://bismikaallahuma.org/Quran/Contra/External/

    But to no avail. The Muslim responses have been thoroughly addressed and refuted in the following papers:

    http://answering-islam.org/Quran/Contra/qbhc06.ht
    http://answering-islam.org/Silas/mary.htm
    http://answering-islam.org/Shamoun/davids_seed.ht
    http://answering-islam.org/Shamoun/badawi-jesus3….
    http://answering-islam.org/Shamoun/god.htm

    What we want to do in this paper is to quote two specific narrations from two of Islam’s premier commentators so as to see the confusion these Quranic statements caused for Muslims.

    According to renowned Sunni Muslim commentator, Ibn Kathir, Aisha thought that Moses was Jesus’ maternal uncle! Aisha was convinced that Mary, the mother of Jesus, was the actual sister of Aaron, Moses’ biological brother, making the latter Christ’s maternal uncle!

    And from whom would Aisha have gained this understanding that led to her conviction, if not from Muhammad?

    Here is what Ibn Kathir narrated:

    وَقَالَ اِبْن جَرِير حَدَّثَنِي يَعْقُوب حَدَّثَنَا اِبْن عُلَيَّة عَنْ سَعِيد بْن أَبِي صَدَقَة عَنْ مُحَمَّد بْن سِيرِينَ قَالَ أُنْبِئْت أَنَّ كَعْبًا قَالَ إِنَّ قَوْله : " يَا أُخْت هَارُون " لَيْسَ بِهَارُون أَخِي مُوسَى قَالَ فَقَالَتْ لَهُ عَائِشَة كَذَبْت قَالَ يَا أُمّ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ إِنْ كَانَ النَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَهُ فَهُوَ أَعْلَم وَأَخْبَر وَإِلَّا فَإِنِّي أَجِد بَيْنهمَا سِتّمِائَةِ سَنَة قَالَ فَسَكَتَتْ وَفِي هَذَا التَّارِيخ نَظَر

    It was narrated from Ibn Jarir, narrated from Yaqub, narrated from Ibn U’laya, narrated from Sa’id Ibn Abi Sadaqa, narrated from Muhammad Ibn Sireen who stated that he was told that Ka’b said the verse that reads, "O sister of Harun (Aaron)!" (of Sura 19:28) does not refer to Aaron the brother of Moses. Aisha replied to Ka’b, "YOU HAVE LIED." Ka’b responded, "O Mother of the believers! If the prophet, may Allah’s prayers be upon him, has said it, and he is more knowledgeable, then this is what he related. Besides, I find the difference in time between them (Jesus and Moses) to be 600 years." He said that she remained silent.

    (From the Arabic commentary of Ibn Kathir on Sura 19:28, online edition; bold, underline and capital emphasis ours)

    Aisha, whom Muslims claim was one of the most knowledgeable persons of Islam, clearly understood the expression, "Sister of Aaron," to refer to Moses’ brother Aaron, i.e. understanding that Mary the mother of Jesus was the sister of Moses and Aaron, which would make Moses Jesus’ maternal uncle! More specifically, she understood this phrase to be literally saying that Mary was the actual, biological sister of Aaron, the brother of Moses. Although Kab was wrong regarding the length of the time gap between Jesus and Moses, he was correct to see the problem and dilemma that Muhammad’s words caused.

    Another prominent Sunni commentator and historian named Al-Tabari narrated a hadith which is also found in our rebuttals above:

    الْقَوْل فِي تَأْوِيل قَوْله تَعَالَى : { يَا أُخْت هَارُون } اِخْتَلَفَ أَهْل التَّأْوِيل فِي السَّبَب الَّذِي مِنْ أَجْله قِيلَ لَهَا : يَا أُخْت هَارُون , وَمَنْ كَانَ هَارُون هَذَا الَّذِي ذَكَرَهُ اللَّه , حَدَّثَنَا اِبْن حُمَيْد , قَالَ : ثنا الْحَكَم بْن بَشِير , قَالَ : ثنا عَمْرو , عَنْ سِمَاك بْن حَرْب , عَنْ عَلْقَمَة بْن وَائِل , عَنْ الْمُغِيرَة بْن شُعْبَة , قَالَ : أَرْسَلَنِي النَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فِي بَعْض حَوَائِجه إِلَى أَهْل نَجْرَان , فَقَالُوا : أَلَيْسَ نَبِيّك يَزْعُم أَنَّ هَارُون أَخُو مَرْيَم هُوَ أَخُو مُوسَى ؟ فَلَمْ أَدْرِ مَا أَرُدّ عَلَيْهِمْ حَتَّى رَجَعْت إِلَى النَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ , فَذَكَرْت لَهُ ذَلِكَ , فَقَالَ : " إِنَّهُمْ كَانُوا يُسَمُّونَ بِأَسْمَاءِ مَنْ كَانَ قَبْلهمْ " . وَقَالَ بَعْضهمْ : عَنَى بِهِ هَارُون أَخُو مُوسَى , وَنُسِبَتْ مَرْيَم إِلَى أَنَّهَا أُخْته لِأَنَّهَا مِنْ وَلَده , – حَدَّثَنَا مُوسَى , قَالَ : ثنا عَمْرو , قَالَ : ثنا أَسْبَاط , عَنْ السُّدِّيّ { يَا أُخْت هَارُون } قَالَ : كَانَتْ مِنْ بَنِي هَارُون أَخِي مُوسَى

    The people of commentary and interpretation have differed on the reason why it was said "O sister of Harun!" (Of Sura 19:28), and who this Harun was that Allah mentioned…

    It was narrated by Ibn Hamid, narrated by Al Hakam Ibn Bashir, narrated by Amr, narrated by Simak Ibn Harb, narrated by Alkama Ibn Wa’il, narrated Al Mughira Ibn Shu’ba who said, "The prophet, may Allah’s prayers be upon him, sent me to fetch some of his needs from the people of Najran who said, ‘Doesn’t your prophet claim that Harun the brother of Mariam (Mary) is the brother of Moses?’ I did not know how to respond to them until I returned to the prophet, may Allah’s prayers be upon him. I related to him all what was said and he replied, ‘They used to name themselves after the names of those who came before them.’"

    Others said the Harun referred to is the brother of Moses, and Mariam was classified as his sister for she is a (descendent) of (his) son.

    It was narrated by Musa, narrated by Amr, narrated by Asbat, narrated by Al Suddi who said regarding "O sister of Harun!" (Of Sura 19:28) that (Mariam) was a descendent of the tribe of Harun, the brother of Moses.

    (From the Arabic commentary of Al-Tabari on Sura 19:28, online edition; bold and underline emphasis ours)

    Here is another instance where Arabs, people whose mother tongue was Arabic, understood the Quran’s statement to be saying that Jesus’ mother was the biological sister of Moses. So, in the Islamic traditions themselves, we now have two witnesses supporting the fact that Muhammad made a gross mistake: one witness who is viewed by Muslims as one of the most knowledgeable persons, the other witness from native Arabic speaking Christians, and both groups understood Muhammad to be teaching that Moses was Jesus’ uncle!

    We have already addressed the responses given by Al-Tabari (see the above links for details), so we will only briefly address them here. The Muslims are wrong on two counts. First, Muhammad was wrong when he said that this is what people used when they wanted to name themselves after those who came before them. The way people named themselves after their predecessors wasn’t by calling someone a brother or a sister of so and so, but rather a son or daughter of so and so.

    The following Muslim disagrees with this position and tries to provide an example to the contrary:

    … In Semitic language the words father, mother, brother and sister are used broadly and do not necessarily imply the very close relations of real mother, father, brother and sister. Thus Prophet Muhammad is reported to have said: "I am the answer of the prayer of my father Abraham." (Bukhari)

    In ancient Semitic usage, a person's name was often linked with that of a renowned ancestor or founder of the tribal line. Thus, for instance, a man of the tribe Banu Tamim was some times addressed as son of Tamim or brother of Tamim. Since Mary belonged to the priestly class and hence descended from Aaron, she was called a sister of Aaron. In the same manner her cousin Elizabeth, the wife of Zechariah, is spoken of in Luke 1:5, as one of the daughters of Aaron.

    Numerous are the instances in Bible where tribal names are used to mention descendants. For example, Lot is called Abraham’s brother (Genesis 14:14), though he was in fact Abraham's nephew (Genesis 11:31). Similarly Abraham spoke to Lot saying: "We men are brothers" (Genesis 13:8). But Abraham was actually was the uncle of Lot! Likewise the Babylonian queen referred to Nebuchadnezzar as the father of Belshazzar, when, Nabonidus was evidently his father and Nebuchadnezzar his grandfather (Daniel 5:11). Thus, in New Testament Abraham is referred to as the father of us, when actually he was a distant forefather (Acts 7:2, Romans 4:12, James 2:21). A member of the Jewish race removed from Abraham as much by 2000 years can still refer to Abraham as his father (Luke 16:24-25, 1:67-73; 13:16). In Numbers (20:14), the Israelites are referred to as the brother of the king of Edom, even though Esau and Jacob were the brothers from whom both groups descended. Similarly, Obed is referred to as Naomi's son in Ruth 4:17, even though he was the son of her daughter-in-law, Ruth. Laban is called Nahor’s son (Genesis 49:5) when he is actually the son of Bethuel, the son of Nahor (Genesis 4:47). Jesus in the synagogue on the Sabbath healed the woman who had a spirit ofresponse to criticism of the healing, Jesus referred to her as a daughter of Abraham (Luke 13:16). In the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, Jesus placed Lazarus on Abraham’s bosom (Luke 16:22). Zacchaeus, as tax collector, was socially alienated. The crowd murmured against Jesus' voluntary visit to Zacchaeus’ house. After his declaration that he would give back to the poor half of his wealth and restore fourfold to those he had defrauded, Jesus called him a son of Abraham (Luke 19:9).

    In the longest statement recorded in the New Testament (John 8:37-59), Jesus has used Abraham’s children thrice. St. Paul referred to Jesus as the offering [sic] of Abraham (Galatians 3:16-18, 24:29). Persons in authority are also known as Fathers in Biblical language: priestly officials (Judges 17:10), Prophets (2 Kings 2:12, 6:21), Persons holding office (Genesis 45:8, Isaiah 22:21), benefactors (Job 29:16). Sometimes, families are known after the names of their distinguished ancestors. In the Bible, the name Israel sometimes stands for the Israelites (Deuteronomy 6:3-4) and Kedar for the Ishmaelite (Isaiah 21:16, 42:11). Jesus was titled son of David (Matthew 9:27, 15:22, 20:30-31, Mark 10:47-48). (Source)

    The author apparently didn’t realize how all these examples actually prove our case since they demonstrate that Muhammad made a major blunder. In every single example that the author provided, the word used in connection with one’s lineage, to descendants, isn’t "brother of" or "sister of" but rather "son of" or "daughter of"! Not a single example provided by the author which refers to a person’s lineage ever use the expression "brother of" or "sister of."

    The one example he provides where "brother of" or "brothers" is actually used (i.e. Abraham and his nephew Lot) it refers not to descendants but to two contemporaries! Hence, by using the example of Abraham’s relation to Lot, the author has provided indirect proof that the Quran erroneously assumes that Mary and Aaron were contemporaries and lived at the same time!

    His appeal to the Arabic is no better. When a person speaks of "a/the brother of Tamim," what he/she is implying is that the individual in question is a contemporary of that particular tribe, that both the tribe and the person are living at the same time.

    The second mistake made by the Muslims is to assume that Mary was of the tribe of Aaron, i.e. a Levite from the lineage of Aaron. Both the Holy Bible and the extra-biblical evidence show that Mary was from the tribe of Judah, from the line of David. She had no connection to the priestly line. Some Muslims try to appeal to the statement made by Luke 1:36 where Mary is said to be a relative of Elizabeth, the mother of John the Baptist, who was from the house of Aaron (Cf. Luke 1:5). The only thing this proves is that Elizabeth had Judean blood from her mother’s side, that her mother was of the tribe of Judah, since it wasn’t uncommon for priests to marry women from the other Israelite tribes. Case in point:

    "Now when Athaliah the mother of Ahaziah saw that her son was dead, she arose and destroyed all the royal family of the house of Judah. But Jehoshabeath, the daughter of the king, took Joash the son of Ahaziah and stole him away from among the king's sons who were about to be put to death, and she put him and his nurse in a bedroom. Thus Jehoshabeath, the daughter of King Jehoram and wife of Jehoiada the priest, because she was a sister of Ahaziah, hid him from Athaliah, so that she did not put him to death." 2 Chronicles 22:10-11

    Jehoram was the King of Judah and from the line of David, making his daughter a descendant of David. She was married to the Aaronic high priest, proving that priests could marry women from the brethren tribes of Levi. For a more detailed discussion of this argument, see the links provided above as well as this article.

    As it stands, all the evidence conclusively shows that the Quran contains a gross mistake since it erroneously teaches that the mother of Christ was the biological sister and contemporary of Aaron the high priest, making Moses Jesus’ uncle!

    IS MARY THE SISTER OF AARON?

    by Silas

    Muhammad was confused about Jesus' mother's identity. In the Quran he erred by identifying her as Aaron's sister. When presented with this error Muhammad created an ad hoc explanation to cover his mistake. This paper explains why Muhammad's explanation is wrong and thereby shows that the Quranic statements remain in error."

    INTRODUCTION

    As Islam grew in power, Muhammad's people began to preach Islam throughout the Arabian peninsula. Eventually, Islamic force of arms insured that Islam was preached and established throughout the entire region.

    There were Arabian Christians living in a town called Najran who had heard the stories of Islam. One Quranic passage about Mary and Jesus struck them as strange, (Surah 19:27, 28). It reads:

    "Carrying the child, (Jesus), she (Mary) came to her people, who said to her: "Mary, this is indeed a strange thing! Sister of Aaron, your father was never a whore-monger, nor was your mother a harlot."" [The Koran, Dawood's translation, pages 215, 216].

    NOTE: My words are in parenthesis.

    This verse states that after Mary gave birth to Christ, her townsfolk reproached her. They thought she was not married, and assumed that she committed sexual sin because she gave birth. In their reproach, they called her, "Sister of Aaron".

    This mistake was discerned by the Arabic Christians of Najran. There is a record of them exposing Muhammad's mistake about Mary. It's found in authentic Islamic writings, known as the Hadith, or Traditions. The quote is from the collection of Traditions compiled by an Islamic scholar known as "Imam Muslim". Imam Muslim's collection of Hadith, known as "Sahih Muslim", is considered to be the 3rd most important set of books in Islam, following the Quran, and Hadith collection of Bukhari. "Sahih" means, more or less, "authentic", i.e., they are regarded as authentic by Islamic scholarship.

    In Sahih Muslim, the Hadith related by Mughirah ibn Shu'bah, #5326, says:

    "When I came to Najran, they (the Christians of Najran) asked me: You read "Sister of Harun", (i.e. Mary), in the Qur'an, whereas Moses was born well before Jesus. When I came back to Allah's Messenger I asked him about that, and he said: "The (people of the old age) used to give names (to their persons) after the names of Apostle and pious persons who had gone before them."" [Sahih Muslim, translated by Abdul Siddiqi].

    END OF QUOTE FROM SAHIH MUSLIM

    In effect, when Muhammad was confronted with the mistake of confusing Mary as the sister of Aaron he said that Mary was called the "sister of Aaron" because Aaron was a pious person and Mary was called after Aaron. Muhammad meant that the use of the idiom "sister of Aaron" was not literal, but metaphorical.

    ANALYSIS

    Here is the issue: was Muhammad confused about Mary's identify, or was Mary really identified with and metaphorically called "sister of Aaron"?

    Was Muhammad telling the truth, or did he cover a mistake with a lie? If Muhammad did lie then in what does that make him? And, if the Quran does contain an error then should it be considered the literal word of God or just the synthesis of Muhammad's imagination and various religious stories? I will address this later.

    #1 The first important clue to note here, and one that is easily overlooked, is found in the text itself. The Arabic Christians of Najran objected to Mary being called "sister of Aaron". This speaks volumes, don't miss this fundamental point…..

    Muhammad said that this manner of using the idiom, "sister of Aaron", was done by the pious people of the "old age", i.e. people who lived during Mary's time. Those people called their fellow citizens after pious persons who had lived earlier. But the Christians of Najran did not recognize the use of this idiom. Although they lived some 600 years after Christ's time, they were familiar with their own religious stories, and certainly those of the Jews. But this idiom struck their ears as peculiar. If the idiom were familiar to them, they would not have objected. But the expression "sister of Aaron", when applied to Mary in relation to Aaron, was not familiar.

    Further, they did not recognize the technique or model in which this idiom was used. Had they known the custom that Muhammad said existed, of people calling other people "brother" or "sister" of ancient pious people, like possibly, "sister of Moses", "brother of David", "sister of Abraham", "brother of Isaac", they would have understood what the Quran was saying and raised no objection. But both the idiom, and the model in which it is used, were foreign to them.

    Note the next critical event. Again, it is fundamental to the point. The Arabic Muslim who came to Najran, and spoke with the Christians, did not know that the term was metaphorical. When confronted with the mistake he was dumbfounded! He had to go and see Muhammad to find out why there was a mistake in the Quran. Had he known that it was a metaphorical idiom, he would not have had to go and see Muhammad; he could have told the Najran Christians the meaning of the metaphor. Instead, the Muslim was confused because he also understood the passage to mean that Mary was Aaron's literal sister.

    In sum, the Christians understood the Arabic of the Quran to mean a literal brother and sister relationship between Aaron and Mary. Further, they did not recognize the idiom "sister of Aaron" when Muhammad used it with respect to Mary. In fact, the term, "sister of Aaron" was abnormal to them when applied to anyone other than Aaron's real sister – Miriam. Further the Arabic Muslim, Mughira Shu'bah, also did not know this idiom was metaphorical. He also understood it to be literal. When told of the error, he was confused. and went to see Muhammad to get an answer.

    POINT 1: The context of this passage shows that people, both Christian and Muslim, understood this idiom to be literal, not metaphorical, and the text shows clearly that both did not recognize the idiom to be metaphorical.

    I do not have a problem with someone using metaphors. The Bible and Quran are full of metaphors. Most all great literature uses metaphors. My point is that Muhammad lied when he said that idiom, "sister of Aaron" was used by people during Christ's time. I object to saying a metaphor existed when did not. I object to Muhammad making a mistake and covering it with a lie.

    An easy Muslim defense at this point is to say that both the Najran Christians, and the Muslim man were ignorant of actual historical use of this type of idiom. They would say I'm drawing to quick a conclusion. Let's continue to investigate.

    Examine Muhammad's explanation. He said, "The (people of the old age) used to give names (to their persons) after the names of Apostle and pious persons who had gone before them".

    Do we have any evidence that anyone else was ever called, "sister of Aaron", besides his real sister?

    THE EVIDENCE

    EVIDENCE FROM THE BIBLE

    If there would be one place where Mary or someone else might be called "sister of Aaron", it might be in the Bible. But there is no place where Mary or anyone else is metaphorically called "sister of Aaron".

    Perhaps I am being too narrow. Let's expand our search to find, "sister of Aaron", "brother of Aaron", "sister of Moses", and "brother of Moses", used as a metaphor.

    Again, there is no one metaphorically referred to in the Bible as any of the above. Moses was truly a great Israelite leader. Certainly if the Jews were going to call people "brother" or "sister" after saints of old, Moses would get his fair share of people identified with him. I would expect that he would get a larger amount of people called after him than Aaron would. But, no where, is it found in the Bible that anyone is called, "brother of Moses", "sister of Aaron", etc.

  194. Marie

    Two of my posts are waiting approval from the moderators.

  195. londonspirit

    DEMSCI WROTE: . We agree on some sort of “draw”. AND FURTHER SAID I can’t prove it, I just don’t know.

    ANSWER: NO demsci there is no such draw. I wanted to know why so many woman are being beaten in non-muslims nations since they are not influenced by islam, whereby you gave the response you just dont know. But i will give you the answer. The reason why wife beating is common around the world is due to three things, male dominance, anger and ALCOHOL. YES ALCOHOL plays the biggest factor on wife beating

    The qualitative work demonstrates that wife abuse is more likely when dowries are perceived as inadequate, when husbands are alcoholic, and when the cause of the abuse is perceived as “legitimate” by the community. Hypotheses generated from the qualitative work are tested with survey data, which confirm that the risk of wife abuse significantly increases with smaller dowry payments and alcohol consumption.
    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleU

    The role of alcohol and drug abuse in family violence is featured in many studies, and it is a factor in physical violence and stalking, according to such researchers as Pam Wilson et al. who examined the issue in their article "Severity of Violence against Women by Intimate Partners and Associated Use of Alcohol and/or Illicit Drugs by the Perpetrator" (Journal of Interpersonal Violence, vol. 15, September 2000.)
    http://www.libraryindex.com/pages/2045/Causes-Wif

    These are studies which shows that alcohol fuels wife beating.

    NOW demsci you said that ISLAM is ineffective in todays society. Well you couldnt be more wrong. ISLAM can totally diminish wife beating to a level whereby it becomes very rare. HOw?

    Well we have established already that alchol fuels a large majority of wife beating. So what does the quran say about alcohol

    [2:219] They ask you about intoxicants and gambling: say, "In them there is a gross sin, and some benefits for the people. But their sinfulness far outweighs their benefit." They also ask you what to give to charity: say, "The excess." GOD thus clarifies the revelations for you, that you may reflect,

    So quran knows that some intoxicants have benefits and science also proves today that alcohol has some benefits. But the quran forbids these intoxicants because the disadvantages are far greater than the advantages. So in ISLAM alcohol is forbidden. Now if it was forbidden in all nations than the rate of wife beatings would go down.

    BEAUTIFUL OR WHAT?

    How will islam further help to reduce wife beating. Well We all know anger is one other cause. And when people are angry at their wife usually the first course of action is to hit them. So how does the quran respond to this. Well it goes like this

    [4:34] The men are made responsible for the women, ** and GOD has endowed them with certain qualities, and made them the bread earners. The righteous women will cheerfully accept this arrangement, since it is GOD's commandment, and honor their husbands during their absence. If you experience rebellion from the women, you shall first talk to them, then (you may use negative incentives like) deserting them in bed, then you may (as a last alternative) beat them. If they obey you, you are not permitted to transgress against them. GOD is Most High, Supreme.

    So the quran is saying and is giving a law that the man must first communicate with her. Resolve the issue. If arguments still prevail than the next course of action is for the man to use some neglecting incentives and as a last resort than man is permitted to hit.

    Now you may say well the quran says to hit. That means the man can do what ever he wishes to his partner as it is permitted in the quran.

    But no because if you read the last section of the verse it gives indication that the hitting must be light. Because it says

    you are not permitted to transgress against them. GOD is Most High, Supreme.

    So there are limits to what a man can do, and in a nother verse says that god hates those people who transgresses.

    Now you may say so what happens if the man is behaving badly. Well quran also has answer to that

    “You who believe! It is not lawful for you to inherit women by force. Nor may you treat them harshly so that you can make off with part of what you have given them, unless they commit an act of flagrant indecency. Live together with them correctly and courteously. If you dislike them, it may well be that you dislike something in which Allah has placed a lot of good.” (4:19)

    So the quran gives clear guidlines that woman in no circumstances can be treated harshly.

    SO DEMSCI LETS THINK THIS THROUGH LOGICALLY.

    ISLAM FORBIDS ALCOHOL. THIS ALONE WILL RESOLVE ALOT OF WIFE BEATINGS THAT TAKE PLACE. AGREE OR DISAGREE?

    ISLAM FORBIDS MAN TO TREAT THEIR WIFE HARSHLY. THIS AGAIN WILL HELP TO RESOLVE WIFE BEATING. AGREE OR DISAGREE?

    IF ARGUMENT STARTS ISLAM FORBIDS ANY FORM OF PHYSICAL ABUSE UNLESS IT ACCOUNTS AS A LAST RESORT MEASUREMENT. HENCE THIS WILL REDUCE THE NUMBER OF ACCOUNTS OF WIFE BEATING. AGREE OR DISAGEE?

    SO ALL IN ALL ISLAM WILL HELP TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF ACCOUNTS OF WIFE BEATING IF THE GUIDLINES ARE FOLLOWED PROPERLY. AGREE OR DISAGREE?

    DEMSCI DONT THINK THAT ISLAM IS SAYING THIS LAW. THINK OF IT AS SOMEONE TELLING YOU HOW TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF ACCOUNTS OF WIFE BEATING.

  196. Megha

    Londonspirit, my two posts still remain unanswered by you and KL…. Here they are: 1) marked at “August 21, 2009 • 12:34 am” and 2) ” August 21, 2009 • 1:00 am”. I AM MORE THAN CONVINCED THAT BOTH OF YOU WILL NOT BE ABLE TO PROTECT your Prophet…..

    NOW WOULD YOU READ THEM AND GET BACK TO ME ASAP? Or else, please acknowledge your defeat to a woman……which is unbearable for Muslim men, right? Look LS I am asking you for the second time to respond to those two comments. Please tell me if you are "ashamed" of tackling those posts.

    Have a nice day,

    Megha

    P.S: IF YOU CANNOT ANSWER THEM THEN IN EVERY POST I SHALL ADDRESS YOUR PROPHET AS 'MALE-WHORE'. Would you risk that?

  197. londonspirit

    megha unlike you i have to tackle alot of post. You lots keep thinkin me an kabirlaw avoid questions but u cant seem to realize its just me an him compared to all you guys. If we never answer to any of urs or anyone elses question than what are we answering to. Everytime we answer a question a new one gets posed to us. So it is likely that some questions will remain unanswered. We have got other things to do than sit an type messages all day. I am currently having a discussion wit demsci. So while i am doing that why dont you answer to my 2 questions which you fail to do. You dont have an increase in the number of posts you recieve. So far it has been only me that has asked a question an you still havent replied to that. I got ibnkanmvma marie you demsci kikl an many more who want me to answer their questions. Whereas i have only asked you one question. Why dont you answer my one question

  198. Marie

    Megha:

    P.S: IF YOU CANNOT ANSWER THEM THEN IN EVERY POST I SHALL ADDRESS YOUR PROPHET AS ‘MALE-WHORE’. Would you risk that?

    I say:

    Try addressing Muhammed as a transvestite who likes boys.

  199. Marie

    Ok my first post is not showing so I am going to post it again.

    londonspirit:

    ANSWER: Dont make me laugh marie, the verses i presented to you were not speaking in parables. They were clear concise verses, look at the verse and answer. Like I said once you answer i will give my answer. I already know many websites that have answered you question. All it takes for me is to copy and paste. But I am just waiitng on your answer.

    I say:

    londonspirit I already had a discussion with you about Jesus's divinity before we got into this debate and so did five other people. My response is still the same.

    You say have an answer to my question? Tell me londonspirit would it be something like this:

    Allegation of Mary being the sister of Aaron and her mother being the wife of Imran.

    Here 'Answering Islam' states :

    >>>This is faulty reasoning. Only Aaron became a Priest of the Lord and in fact the first High Priest. And only Aaron's descendents became priests. Neither Moses nor their sister Miriam are ever understood to be in "priestly lineage." Amram is definitely not a priest. If Mary's lineage of being part of a priestly family should be stressed then necessarily she would have to be called a daughter of Aaron, since all of Israel's priests are descendants of Aaron, while his brother and sister are not counted among the priestly line. <<<

    My response:

    Mary's family did not come from a priestly lineage. They were regular people and poor.

    The So called Dificulty can be found in
    http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Contra/qbhc0

    Jochen, It is indeed very surprising that you have answered your own question basically concerning Mary (ro). But I see you have not failed to construe what Allah is saying in the Holy Quran. If there was any actual righteousness in yourself , you would have not chosen this path.

    We read in the Quran:

    `O sister of Aaron, thy father was not a wicked man, nor was thy mother an unchaste woman !' (19: 29.)

    The reference used here is one of Question, not that Mary was actually the sister of Aaron, but as decendant of the house of Aaron she would become a spiritual sister of Aaron with this in the eyes of the Jews they asked her as to what she had done.

    My response:

    Mary is not a descendent of the house of Aaron she is a descendent of the house of David.

    The Holy Quran does not make a historical mistake here or anywhere.

    Some Christian writers in their ignorance of the Arabic language have accused the Quran of a historical Anachronism inasmuch it has spoken Mary ‘sister of Aaron’. Instead of regretting their own ignorance they seek to find fault in the Quran. The question of Mary having been called the sister of Aaron in the Quran was put forth to the Holy Prophet Muhummad (saw) himself, and he asked the Questioner that did he not know that the Israelites used to name their children after Prophets and Saints. (Bayan vol. 6, p.16; Jarir vol. 16, p,15).

    Mary has here been called the sister of Aaron and not that of Moses thou both were brothers. for whereas Moses was the founder of the Jewish Law, Aaron was the head of a Jewish priestly class (Enc. Bib. & Enc. Brit. under Aaron) And Mary also belonged to the priestly order.

    Tabari has related an incident from the life of the Holy Prophet Muhummad (saw) which gives an insight to the words (ab) and (amm) and (ukht) ect. When Safiah, the Holy Prophets wife, and incidentally a Jewess by decent, once complained to the Holy Prophet that some of his other wives had called here a Jewess in contempt, The Prophet Muhummad (saw) told her to return the taunt by saying that Aaron was here father Moses her Uncle and Muhummad (saw) Arabia her Husband. Now the Holy prophet certainly knew that Aaron was not her brother and Moses not her uncle, this tradition shows that that the implication of these Arabic words is by no means confined to the so called blood relations.

    Mary might have been called a sister of Aaron by way of reproach or taunt inasmuch as another Mary, the real sister of Aaron and Moses’s stepsister or his sister in-law, had charged him (Moses) with having unlawfully married a woman (numbers 12:1). A reference to this accusation can also be found in the Quran in (chapter 33:70) Thus the elders of the Jews, by calling Jesus’s mother sister of Aaron, meant that as Mary the sister of Aaron had, by accusing Moses of unlawfully marrying a woman, committed a heinous crime, so did she like her name sake, commit a heinous act of giving birth to an illegitimate child.

    The allegation made by you is further supported supposedly by the following verse..

    Remember when a women of Imran said, `My Lord, I have vowed to Thee what is in my womb to be dedicated to Thy service. So do Thou accept it of me; Verily Thou alone art All-Hearing, All-Knowing.' (3: 36.)

    In this verse the mother of Mary who’s name was Hannah (Enc. Bib.) has been spoken of as woman of (Imran) while in 19:29, Mary herself has been addressed the (sister of Aaron). ‘Imran (Ammram) and Aaron are respectively the father and Brother of Moses, while he had also a sister named Miriam.

    Being ignorant of Arabic Idiom and Quranic style, Christian writers who ascribe the authorship of the Quran to the Holy Prophet Muhummad (saw) , think that in his ignorance he confused Mary mother of Jesus, with Miriam sister of Moses. This the pretend to have discovered a serious Anachronism in the Quran–an absurd charge, inasmuch as quite a number of passages can be cited to show that the Quran considers Moses and Jesus separated from each other by a long line of Prophets (e.g. 2:88; 5:44-46).

    These Christian writers are not the first to make this discovery. The credit for it belongs to the Christians of Najran who, as long as 1350 years ago, raised the same objection and received a prompt reply. It is on record that when the Holy Prophet sent (Mughira) to Najran, the Christians of that place asked him:

    "Do ye not read in the Quran Mary (mother of Jesus) being mentioned as sister of Aaron, while you know Jesus was born a long time after Moses?"

    "I did not know the answer"

    says Mughira,

    "and on my return to Medina I inquired about it of the Holy Prophet Muhummad (saw) who readily answered,"

    "Why did you not tell them that the Israelites used to name their children after their deceased Prophets and Saints?" (Thirmidhi).

    In fact, there is a tradition to the effect that the husband of Hannah and the father of Mary was named Imran whose father (i.e. Mary’s Grandfather) had the name Yoshhim or Yoshim. (Jarir & Kathir) Thus this Imran is different from Imran the father of Moses and whose own father was Kohath (Exodus. 6: 18–20)

    The fact that Hannah’s husband for that fact Mary’s father, has been named Joachim in the Christian scriptures (Gospel of the birth of Mary and the Enc. Brit. under Mary) should not perplex us as Joachim is the same as Yoshim as mentioned by (Ibn Jarir) as the father of Imran. The Christian scriptures give the name of the Grandfather instead of the father, which is not an uncommon practice. Besides there are instances in the Bible of one person being known by two names. Gideon, for instance, was also called Jerubbaal (Judg. 7:1). So there should be no surprise if the second name of Joachim happened to be Imran.

    My response:

    The Gospel of the Nativity of Mary belonged to a heretical Christian sect that no longer exists and it was written between the 4th-6th century. Also mainstream Christianity does not recognize the Gospel of the Nativity of Mary.

    Also Christian scriptures did give the name of Mary's father and grandfather.

    Moreover, like individuals , families, too, are sometimes known after the names of their distinguished ancestors. In the Bible the name Israel sometimes stands for the Israelites (Deut 6:3–4) and Kedar for the Ishmalites (Isa, 21:16; 42:11). Similarly, Jesus has been called son of David (Matt. 1:1).

    So the Words "when the woman of Imran" a woman from the family of Imran, or a perfect woman from the family of Imran. It is admitted that Hannah the mother of Mary, who was a cousin of Elisabeth (John’s mother) belonged to the House of Aaron and through him to that of ‘Imran (Luke 1:5, 36)

    My response:

    Mary's mother did not belong to the house of Aaron nor was her family of the priest clan. Elizabeth was married to someone of the priest clan.

    Like I stated at the beginning of this writing there Is no contradiction in the Quran, the Contradiction and Achronism lies in the heart of the deceiver, which is the Christian scholar who has attempted to spread a false accusation.

    It is odd that one would do this knowing that Jesus was called (Son of David), or supposedly being the seed of David to become the Messiah, but the Bible does not prove to be the seed of David, being born with out the agency of a father.

    My response:

    The reason Jesus was called son of David was because he is a descendent of the house of David.

    It is sad thou that Christians in their over zealousness have missed this and so many other arguments that can be raised against their own beliefs if they continuously attempt to allege contradictions in the Quran..

    Back to Responces to Polemics against Islam

    Back to Answering Christianity

  200. Megha

    Londonspirit, I know you cannot answer them. OK let me go ahead and answer the questions you have posed.

    Her father protects (her) in childhood, her husband protects (her) in youth, and her sons protect (her) in old age; a woman is never fit for independence. Manusmriti 9.3
    >> Manu smriti 9.3 states "Her father should protect her in childhood, her husband should protect her in her youth, and her sons should protect her in her old age: she should not be left to go astray through sheer independence." There are Muhammad-like people that attack and take away kapphir women. Anyway, Manusmriti is not an authentic Hindu scripture. The four vedas, Puranas, and Vedanta constitute the list. Even if you were to argue that Manu smriti is an authentic scripture, then I can say that it is not uttered by any Final Prophet of God or God himself. So it should be scrutinized by everyone, including me, before accepting or rejecting it. This is because a mere mortal or a set of mortals had written it.

    “It is the highest duty of the woman to immolate herself after her husband,”[Br.P. 80.75]
    >> You are inflicting Al-Taqqiyya on me here. Here is the link for the contents of "Brahmanda Purana" http://www.exoticindiaart.com/book/details/IDF069… ; In part 1, there are 38 chapters; In part 2 there are 43 chapters; In part 3 there are 30 chapters; In part 4 there are 30 chapters. None of the parts has 80 chapters (quoted by you). Who taught you this Al-Taqqiyya – the deception tactic? Mr. Londonspirit, in a debate one is expected to quote the correct Part, Chapter, and verse number. No part has 80 chapters. Did you learn this at your madrassa? I know you have taken up this from some source and now want to push it down the throat of others. Why don't you do a personal research and then quote the Sanskrit verse and its transliteration? Here is the verse from Rig Veda which goes against what you have conceived – “Rise, woman, and go to the world of living beings: Come, this man near whom you lie is dead: You have enjoyed this state of being the wife of your husband, the suitor who took you by the hand.” Rig Veda (10.18.8).

    Now, let us deal with your pedophile Prophet in detail. This is the third and the last time I am asking you to respond to my queries marked at “August 21, 2009 • 12:34 am” and ” August 21, 2009 • 1:00 am. IF YOU DON'T ANSWER THEM THEN IN EVERY POST I SHALL ADDRESS YOUR PROPHET AS ‘MALE-WHORE’. Would you risk that?

  201. Marie

    Megha:

    There are many conmen busy in publishing their own chapters and there are equally starved men like you who are ready to push it down the throat of others.

    I say:

    londonspirit is a man? I though he was a baby?

  202. Megha

    Londonspirit, how can you marry someone unless you are attracted to her? Muhammed got attracted to Zainab… which is narrated in By using his pimp "Allah" as an effective tool, Muhammed used some 'dodgy' verses to lay claim on Zainab. Thank God for Muslims… Amina (Muhammed's mother) passed away before the Prophet reached his puberty. When a mentally sick person can marry his own daughter-in-law, I am sure he wouldn't spare any of his other close relatives. Here is the real stock (sunnah) for you from hadith–"The Messenger of God refused to come in. Zainab had hurried to dress herself when she heard that the Messenger of God was at her door, so she leapt in a hurry, and the Messenger of God liked her when she did that. The heart of the Prophet was filled with admiration for her He went away muttering something that was hardly understandable but for this sentence: ‘Praise be to God who disposes the hearts…." Mashallah, how crooked Muhammed was!

    Yuk… what a filthy prophet!

  203. Demsci

    LS, thank you for your post and time. It was wonderful to hear you say that democracy is good. And also to see you talking about Islamic society undergoing some crisis and change. Which the Americans-Canadians-Europeans-Australians (ACEA) also had (sounds very true). But ACEA is now over it, while the Islamic world is still in it. Great comment. Honestly I look with renewed respect to the original teaching in the Quran, thanks to you. And with a renewed respect for many Muslims who honestly endeavour to diminish the scourge of wife-beating.

    But how about if I were to say that especially you, LS + Kabirlaw, and with you I suppose many Muslims, including Imams, are standing on a theoretical Island? The island of only one interpretation of Quran and Hadith (Q & H)? And how about there being quite a few other interpretations of Q & H?

    Look, FFI, Islam Watch, Jihad Watch and many others are going to do the following:
    I. Scrutinizing Q & H to the last comma and point in the end. And Q & H are unchangeable. Thus time is at the side of the Islam-critics and they are only gathering strength ever more. They already at Islam Watch have a long list of contradictions in the Quran.
    II. Monitoring behavior of self-confessed Muslims, all over the world, but especially in countries where Muslims have majority and power.

    And don’t you see that in order to build trust in Islam and Muslims the actions of Muslims where they have majority and power is what really counts, not an idealistic, fine-looking interpretation?

    What also would count for building trust is large-scale protests of Muslims like you and Kabirlaw in the Western world, who are profiting from and approving of democratic rules, against:
    Taliban, Iranian regime, Saudi regime, Shiite laws in Afghanistan etc. And Muslims can take their clues about what to protest against from the many reports FFI/ Islam Watch/ Jihad Watch show. Because the behavior of self-confessed Muslims IN POWER, and majority, is what really tarnishes the reputation of Islam, not the reporting of it or commenting on it.

    And what have you to look forward in the coming decades? Avalanches of articles about the behavior of Muslims with other interpretations and practices of Islam than you, spoiling your positive interpretations time and again. And getting endless criticism and debates of enraged victims and their supporters because of that.

  204. Megha

    Ok, KL….it is so obvious babe that u hate me and that is fine. I still meant my apology towards you…rather, I still mean it. My hatred towards Islam is not dirrected at u personally, but I think our comments are going too far as far as personal reasons go.

    The underwear comment was certainly nothing personal towards you….I have my reasons why I said that, but unfortunately I cannot reveal them on the site for fear of being recognized by my ex. A lot has happened in my life over the past 7 years……you don't know me and the whole sotry and I can't risk my safety by publishing it…..but if you knew….u would indeed understand my anger…..As I told you before, I don't like Islam nor your prophet….but I don't hate you! I told you not to take me too personally and I'm sorry things got that far….trust me…as much as I've been through….I no longer embarrass….I'll be willing to exchange emails and share a little of my story….trust me….u'll be disgusted and ashamed to call this guy a brother Muslim if you truly believe women should be respected and valued….we won't ever agree on religious points of view, but I'm a firm believer in Karma so….write me if you'd like to know a little about my story…..and of course, whatever you say to me in email will be kept confidential….I'm a counselor….I deal with confidentiality all the time so…nothing new….write if u wish, but hear me out before u blow up…and please do not send a virus.

    eghasky13@gmail.com

  205. Megha

    Marie…cummon, girl….don't disgracenight yall

  206. Megha

    ooops…kl, it is meghasky13@gmail.com

    Marie…I was trying to write…don't digrace the poor babies by comparing them to brain washed Muslims.

  207. Moooo

    To 2 big mouths. Where are my answers???? Deceptive muslims like you is nothing new. You bring nothing and nothing will change in islamic (hell) countries. Reality and your mouth never match. Boring posts.

    Does quran forbid beating woman? No, it doesn't
    Does quran allowed woman to get a job? No, it doesn't
    Does quran allowed woman to go out with by herself or with female friends? No, it doesn't
    Does quran allowed woman to wear normal clothes? No, it doesn't
    Does quran allowed woman to have a relationship or pick his husband before marriage? No, it doesn't
    Does quran forbid slavery and rape slaves? No, it doesn't
    Does quran forbid forced sex in marriages? No, it doesn't
    Does quran forbid muslim for marrying a child? No, it doesn't
    Does quran allowed muslim to have kafir's friends or have kafir's leader? No, it doesn't
    Does quran forbid marriage with contract? No, it doesn't
    Does quran allowed muslim to have kafir's law (secular and democracy)? No, it doesn't
    Does quran allowed music, dance, art, etc? No, it doesn't
    Does quran respect other religions (people of the book, hindu, buddha, confucians, etc)? No, it doesn't
    Can those 2 big mouths prove that islamic science is real? No, They can't
    Are there any islamic countries (with sharia law) that bring democracy and advanced society? No, There aren't.

    Case closed. As simple as ABC.

  208. londonspirit

    MARIE WROTE: Megha you are not the first person to call Allah a pimp and you won’t be the last.

    ANSWER: It doesnt concern me in anyway what you call the prophet of islam. Call him by any name you wish. Why i say this because the quran clearly says:

    025.063 And the servants of (God) Most Gracious are those who walk on the earth in humility, and when the ignorant address them, they say, "Peace!";

    So peace to you MARIE and MEGHA. Carry on with your name calling.lol. at least the prophet of islam had a lady. you two cant even get a guy for yourself let alone stay with you. lol

    MEGHA WROTE: LS don’t worry about what we believe or worship. According to your Quran we all land up in a place of boiling oil and fire. Well well… you say the marriage between Zyed and Zainab didn’t work. If your Muhammed was the real caretaker of Zainab, HE SHOULD HAVE FOUND ANOTHER MALE FOR HER. Am I right? Forget justifying your sick prophet by quoting verses from Quran. Use your logic, if it is in your brain!

    ANSWER: I dont worry at all what you follow. its got nothing to do with me. But what worries me now is that your religion teaches to degrade woman. And if you had confidence in your religion and how it treats woman you would have stepped up to my challenge. But because you dont AND YOU YOURSELF KNOWS YOUR SCRIPTURE TEACHES OF THE DEGRATION OF WOMAN THAT IS WHY YOU DONT STEP UP TO THE CHALLENGE.

    in regards to burning in the fire, instead of asking me where you will end up why dont you just wait till you die. I firmly belive i have nothing to worry about. Because in hinduism when i die i get reincarnated. In chrisitanity when i die i will not go to hell because hell dont exist, and because all sins are forgiven when you die i will go to heaven. If i die as an athiest than nothing will happen to me. So you see there is no point beliving in these religions as i will not suffer any consequences if i dont.

    You further said he should have found another male for her. I ask what part of the story didnt you understand in the fact that zainab wanted to marry muhammed. What part didnt you understand in the fact that muhammed didnt want to see them get divorced. Am i not speaking english here.

  209. londonspirit

    DEMSCI WROTE: Scrutinizing Q & H to the last comma and point in the end. And Q & H are unchangeable. Thus time is at the side of the Islam-critics and they are only gathering strength ever more. They already at Islam Watch have a long list of contradictions in the Quran.

    ANSWER: All muslims have one interpretation of the quran. There is no second or third interpretation. Just one. The problem with some muslims and non-muslims who have their own motives, which the usual case is not good is that they take verses out of their context to satisfy their desires.

    One such person is gert wilders. If you see his documentary the fitnah. He has stated two verses that speak about killing people. Now if you look closely at those verses he has stated them in a fashion whereby he has stated one verse, ignored the verse after that and than stated the third verse and ignored the verse after that. He done this primarily for his own motives so that he can show to the world what bad influence islam is. If he was a true character he would have stated those verses in between and showed to the world how peace and loving islam is, because between those verses sends a messgae of peace.

    Again muslims also do this again primarily for their own motives. Now in regards to contradiction. Many sites and many people have tried to contradict the quran, but they have all failed. And many people will continue to try and fail. When its gods word which is unchanged no man can prove it wrong.

    Previously people have said that your quran teaches that the sun revolves in its motion, this wasnt a scientific fact then but it had many muslim people confused and most probably some muslims left islam believing god cannot make mistakes. These people thought they had a winner but new science has revealed to us the the sun does revolve in its own motion

    Today some people are using the quranic verse to show that people do not come from one male and one female. Obviously it isnt being agreed by todays science. But in the future it will be.

    DEMSCI WROTE: Taliban, Iranian regime, Saudi regime, Shiite laws in Afghanistan etc.

    ANSWER: Wat has these regimes got to do with islam. Just like what has mugabes, bush adminsitration and many more got to with christianity. NOTHING.

  210. londonspirit

    Does quran forbid beating woman? No, it doesn’t

    ACTUALLY YES IT DOES

    Does quran allowed woman to get a job? No, it doesn’t

    ACTUALLY YES IT DOES. WITH RESTRICTIONS.

    Does quran allowed woman to go out with by herself or with female friends? No, it doesn’t

    ACTUALLY YES IT DOES. AGAIN WITH RESTRICTIONS

    Does quran allowed woman to wear normal clothes? No, it doesn’t

    ACTUALLY YES IT DOES, SO LONG BODY FIGURE ISNT SHOWN AND COVERED FROM HEAD TO TOE.

    Does quran allowed woman to have a relationship or pick his husband before marriage? No, it doesn’t

    HELL YES IT DOES

    Does quran forbid slavery and rape slaves? No, it doesn’t

    ACTUALLY IT DOES

    Does quran forbid forced sex in marriages? No, it doesn’t

    ACTUALLY IT DOES

    Does quran forbid muslim for marrying a child? No, it doesn’t

    ACTUALLY IT DOES

    Does quran allowed muslim to have kafir’s friends or have kafir’s leader? No, it doesn’t

    ACTUALLY IT DOES

    Does quran forbid marriage with contract? No, it doesn’t

    ACTUALLY IT DOES

    Does quran allowed muslim to have kafir’s law (secular and democracy)? No, it doesn’t

    ACTUALLY IT DOES

    Does quran allowed music, dance, art, etc? No, it doesn’t

    NO DANCE BUT THE REST ACTUALLY IT DOES

    Does quran respect other religions (people of the book, hindu, buddha, confucians, etc)? No, it doesn’t

    ACTUALLY IT DOES

    Can those 2 big mouths prove that islamic science is real? No, They can’t

    YES I CAN

    Are there any islamic countries (with sharia law) that bring democracy and advanced society? No, There aren’t.

    DEMOCRACY IS WAY OF LIFE. SHARIAH IS ALSO A WAY OF LIFE. TO US SHARIAH IS BETTER. TO YOU DEMOCRACY IS BETTER.

    YOUR RIGHT ASNWERING THOSE QUESTIONS IS JUST AS EASY AS READING ABC.

    NOW MOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. DO US ALL A FAVOUR AND PROVE YOUR ACCUSATIONS USING VERSE OF THE QURAN.

  211. Moooo

    Londospiritous, Prove your answer using the verses in quran, not just "Yes it does". Boring. Where is the verses??? And you haven't answered to my questions about pedo mo as a comforter. I asked the question "Does quran bla..bla…bla…" and it's your job to prove it using quran.

    To kebirilewd, Where are my answers for my question and challenge, coward?

  212. Moooo

    About islamic science, how about you do it right now, londonspiritous?

  213. Moooo

    "Does quran forbid beating woman? No, it doesn’t

    ACTUALLY YES IT DOES

    Does quran allowed woman to get a job? No, it doesn’t

    ACTUALLY YES IT DOES. WITH RESTRICTIONS.

    Does quran allowed woman to go out with by herself or with female friends? No, it doesn’t

    ACTUALLY YES IT DOES. AGAIN WITH RESTRICTIONS

    Does quran allowed woman to wear normal clothes? No, it doesn’t

    ACTUALLY YES IT DOES, SO LONG BODY FIGURE ISNT SHOWN AND COVERED FROM HEAD TO TOE.

    Does quran allowed woman to have a relationship or pick his husband before marriage? No, it doesn’t

    HELL YES IT DOES

    Does quran forbid slavery and rape slaves? No, it doesn’t

    ACTUALLY IT DOES

    Does quran forbid forced sex in marriages? No, it doesn’t

    ACTUALLY IT DOES

    Does quran forbid muslim for marrying a child? No, it doesn’t

    ACTUALLY IT DOES

    Does quran allowed muslim to have kafir’s friends or have kafir’s leader? No, it doesn’t

    ACTUALLY IT DOES

    Does quran forbid marriage with contract? No, it doesn’t

    ACTUALLY IT DOES

    Does quran allowed muslim to have kafir’s law (secular and democracy)? No, it doesn’t

    ACTUALLY IT DOES

    Does quran allowed music, dance, art, etc? No, it doesn’t

    NO DANCE BUT THE REST ACTUALLY IT DOES

    Does quran respect other religions (people of the book, hindu, buddha, confucians, etc)? No, it doesn’t

    ACTUALLY IT DOES

    Can those 2 big mouths prove that islamic science is real? No, They can’t

    YES I CAN

    Are there any islamic countries (with sharia law) that bring democracy and advanced society? No, There aren’t.

    DEMOCRACY IS WAY OF LIFE. SHARIAH IS ALSO A WAY OF LIFE. TO US SHARIAH IS BETTER. TO YOU DEMOCRACY IS BETTER.

    YOUR RIGHT ASNWERING THOSE QUESTIONS IS JUST AS EASY AS READING ABC.

    NOW MOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. DO US ALL A FAVOUR AND PROVE YOUR ACCUSATIONS USING VERSE OF THE QURAN."

    Mouth don't solve anything, prove it. About sharia law, why you are living in london, eh? Go to islamic countries and live there you hypocrite. And i don't like barbarian and criminal's law.

  214. Moooo

    Demsci, don't bother. Woman autonomy is democratic and againts sharia, so forget it. Muslim always want sharia law, no question asked.

  215. Moooo

    Marie,

    "By the way londonspirit if Islam promotes women’s rights then how come so many Muslim countries treat their women like sh*t while in the west women are treated with dignity and respect. In fact the only countries where Muslimah’s flourish are nonmuslim countries."

    Where are the verses, i don't see it. Don't forget that quran and islam was born in 7th century where woman were treated differently. Let me give you an example: In indonesia, not so long ago there was a movie about muslimah's life in madrassa around '80. This muslimah were treated just like in islamic countries (maybe about 70-80% similar to the condition in middle east). Muslimah have no rights there and submit to man. This created controversies and the director of this movie (who is muslim – hypocrite) had a hot debate againts islamic scholar. This debate was intense that created insults and anger between both side.

  216. Kabirlaw

    TO: You Know Who

    After you've digested the following from the Book of God we can then maybe start on the inquisitions, witch hunts, crusades, burning at the stake, colonialism and imperialism. I see the game you're playing.

    Numbers of Humanity Killed in the Bible and How they were killed (YES, In the Bible, The one that Marie Follows and Loves)

    Verse Number killed Cumulative total

    1 God drowns everyone on earth (except Noah and his family) Genesis 7:23 – 30,000,000- 30,000,000
    2 God rains fire and brimstone on Sodom and Gomorrah, Genesis 19:24 1,000? 30,001,000
    killing everyone.
    3 Lot's wife for looking back Genesis 19:26 1 30,001,001
    4 Er who was "wicked in the sight of the Lord" Genesis 38:7, 1 Chronicles 2:3 1 30,001,002
    5 Onan for spilling his seed Genesis 38:10 1 30,001,003
    6 A 7 year, world-wide famine Genesis 41:25-54 70,000 ? 30,071,003
    7 7th Egyptian Plague: Hail Exodus 9:25 300,000? 30,371,003
    8 God kills every Egyptian firstborn child. Exodus 12:29-30 1,000,000? 31,371,003
    9 God drowns Egyptian army Exodus 14:8-26 5000? 31,376,003
    10 God and Moses help Joshua kill the Amalekites Exodus 17:13 1000? 31,377,003
    11 Israelites for dancing naked around Aaron's golden calf Exodus 32:27-28, 35 3000 31,380,003
    12 God plagued the people because of the calf that Aaron made Exodus 32:36 1000 31,381,003
    13 Aaron's sons for offering strange fire before the Lord Levit's 10:1-3; Nu's 3:4, 26:61 2 31,381,005
    14 A blasphemer Leviticus 24:10-23 1 31,381,006
    15 God burned people to death for complaining Numbers 11:1 100? 31,381,106
    16 God sent "a very great plague" for complaining about the food. Numbers 11:33 10,000? 31,391,106
    17 God killed ten scouts with a plague. Numbers 14:35-36 10 31,391,116
    18 A man who gathered firewood on the sabbath Numbers 15:32-36 1 31,391,117
    19 Korah, Dathan, and Abiram (and their families) Numbers 16:27 12 31,391,129
    20 Burned to death for offering incense Numbers 16:35 250 31,391,379
    21 For complaining Numbers 16:49 14,700 31,406,079
    22 Massacre of the Aradites Numbers 21:1-3 3,000? 31,409,079
    23 For complaining about the lack of food and water, God sent fiery serpents to bite the people, and many of them died. Numbers 21:6 100? 31,409,179
    24 God delivers the Bashanites into Moses' hands and Moses kills everyone "until there was none left alive." Numbers 21:34-35 1,000? 31,410,179
    25 Phinehas impales a mixed-race couple having sex Numbers 25:6-8 2 31,410,181
    26 Israelites for "committing whoredom with the daughters of Moab" Numbers 25:9 24,000 31,434,181
    27 Midianite massacre (32,000 virgins were kept alive) Numbers 31:1-35 200,000 31,634,181
    28 God kills the entire Israelite army Deuteronomy 2:14-16 500,000 32,134,181
    29 The slaughter of the Zamzummim, Horim, Avim, and the Caphtorim Deut 2:21-2210,000? 32,144,181
    30 God hardened the king of Heshbon's heart so that the Israelites could massacre his people. (included several cities) Deuteronomy 2:33-34 3,000? 32,147,181
    31 All the men, women, and children in 60 cities Deuteronomy 3:3-6 60,000? 32,207,181
    32 Massacre of Jericho Joshua 6:21 1,000? 32,208,181
    33 Achan (and his his sons and daughters) for taking the accursed thing
    Joshua 7:10-12, 24-26 5 32,208,186
    34 The Ai Massacre Joshua 8:1-25 12,000 32,220,186
    35 God slaughters the Amorites and even chases them "along the way"
    as they try to escape. Joshua 10:10-11 1,000? 32,221,186
    36 Joshua kills 5 kings and hangs their dead bodies on trees Joshua 10:24-26 5 32,221,191
    37 Massacre of 7 cities Joshua 10:28-42 7,000? 32,228,191
    38 God delivers the Hazorites. Joshua 11:8-12 1,000? 32,229,191
    39 Massacre of the Anakim Joshua 11:20-21 1,000? 32,230,191
    40 God delivers the Caananites and Perizzites Judges 1:4 10,000? 32,240,191
    41 Ehud delivers a message from God: a knife in the belly Judges 3:15-22 1 32,240,192
    42 God delivers the Moabites Judges 3:28-29 10,000 32,250,192
    43 Massacre of the Canaanites Judges 4:14 1,000? 32,251,192
    44 God forces Midianite soldiers to kill each other Judges 7:22, 8:10 120,000 32,371,192
    45 God delivered the Ammonites to Jephthah to slaughter. Judges 11:32-33 1,000? 32,372,192
    46 The spirit of the Lord comes on Samson Judges 14:19 30 32,372,222
    47 The spirit of the Lord comes mightily on Samson Judges 15:14-15 1,000 32,373,222
    48 Samson's God-assisted act of terrorism Judges 16:27-30 3,000 32,376,222
    49 "The Lord smote Benjamin" Judges 20:35-37 25,100 32,401,322
    50 God smites more Benjamites Judges 20:44-46 25,000 32,426,322
    51 For looking into the ark of the Lord 1 Samuel 6:19 50,070 32,476,392
    52 God delievered Philistines to Jonathan 1 Samuel 14:12 20 32,476,412
    53 God forces the Philistine soldiers to kill each other. 1 Samuel 14:20 1,000? 32,477,412
    54 God orders Saul to kill every Amalekite man, women, and child. 1 Samuel 15:2-3 1,000? 32,478,412
    55 Samuel hacks Agag to pieces before the Lord 1 Samuel 15:32-33 1 32,478,413
    56 God delivers the Philistines. 1 Samuel 23:2-5 1,000? 32,479,413
    57 "The Lord smote Nabal." 1 Samuel 25:38 1 32,479,414
    58 God delivers the Philistines to David (again). 2 Samuel 5:19, 25 1,000? 32,480,414
    59 Uzzah for trying to keep the ark from falling 2 Samuel 6:6-7, 1 Chronicles 13:9-10 1 32,480,415
    60 David and Bathsheba's baby boy 2 Samuel 12:14-18 1 32,480,416
    61 God sent a three-year famine because of something Saul did. 2 Samuel 21:1 5,000? 32,485,416
    62 The seven sons of Saul hung up before the Lord 2 Samuel 21:6-9 7 32,485,423
    63 From plague as punishment for David's census (men only; probably 200,000 if including women and children) 2 Samuel 24:15, 1 Chronicles 21:14 200,000 32,685,423
    64 A lion is sent by God to kill a prophet for believing another prophet's lie 1 Kings 13:1-24 1 32,685,424
    65 Baasha killed everyone in the house of Jeroboam "according to the saying of the Lord."
    1 Kings 15:29 1,000? 32,686,424
    66 Zimri killed everyone in the house of Baasha "according to the word of the Lord."
    1 Kings 16:11-12 1,000? 32,687,424
    67 Religious leaders killed in a prayer contest 1 Kings 18:22-40 450 32,687,874
    68 God delivers the Syrians into the Israelites' hands 1 Kings 20:28-29 100,000 32,787,874
    69 God makes a wall fall on Syrian soldiers 1 Kings 20:30 27,000 32,814,874
    70 God sent a lion to eat a man for not killing a prophet 1 Kings 20:35-36 1 32,814,875
    71 Ahaziah is killed for talking to the wrong god 2 Kings 1:2-4, 17; 2 Chronicles 22:7-9 1 32,814,876
    72 Burned to death by God 2 Kings 1:9-12 102 32,815,978
    73 God sends two bears to kill 42 children for making fun of Elisha's bald head
    2 Kings 2:23-24 42 32,816,020
    74 An unbeliever is trampled to death 2 Kings 7:17-20 1 32,816,021
    75 God calls for a seven year famine. 2 Kings 8:1 10,000? 32,826,021
    76 Jezebel 2 Kings 9:33-37 1 32,826,022
    77 Jehu killed "all that remained unto Ahab in Samaria … according to the saying of the Lord"
    2 Kings 10:16-17 100? 32,826,122
    78 God sent lions to kill "some" foreigners for not fearing him 2 Kings 17:25-26 20 32,826,142
    79 Sleeping Assyrian soldiers 2 Kings 19:35; Isaiah 37:36 185,000 33,011,142
    80 Saul 1 Chronicles 10:14 1 33,011,143
    81 God delivers Israel into the hands of Judah 2 Chronicles 13:15-17 500,000 33,511,143
    82 Jeroboam 2 Chronicles 13:20 1 33,511,144
    83 "The Lord smote the Ethiopians." 2 Chronicles 14:9-14 1,000,000 34,511,144
    84 God kills Jehoram by making his bowels fall out 2 Chronicles 21:14-19 1 34,511,145
    85 Judean soldiers killed for forsaking God 2 Chronicles 28:6 120,000 34,631,145
    86 God delivered the Israelites into the hand of the Chaldeans. 2 Chronicles 36:16-17 1000? 34,632,145
    87 God and Satan kill Job's children and servants Job 1:1-19 60? 34,632,205
    88 Ezekiel's wife Ezekiel 24:15-18 1 34,632,206
    89 Ananias and Sapphira Acts 5:1-10 2 34,632,208
    90 Herod Acts 12:23 1 34,632,209

    I SUPPOSE THE DELUSIONAL AND DEVILISH HYPOCRITE (YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE) WILL STILL SAY THAT THE QURAN IS WORSE AND THE GOD OF THE BIBLE IS NOTHING BUT LOVE.

    PALESTINIANS ARE SMALL CHEESE COMPARED TO YOUR GANGSTER OF A GOD.

  217. Kabirlaw

    To Pooooo

    You shameless arsehole.

    I urge everyone to go to the post "Will Muslims be the Cause of the Armageddon" and see what happened to Poooo and how he was CLAMPED, yet he is shamelessly trying to spin his way out of his shitty performance by pretending that it is HIS questions that remain unanswered.

    Take a break pal, your losing the plot.

  218. londonspirit

    marie you have the nerve to say that palestinians did so an so. But you turn a blind eye to the horrendous acts of what the israelis done to the palestinians this year alone. Over1000 dead mainly children an thousands an thousands injured. The true scale is not even known yet as the media were not even allowed in. They had to sit on top of a hill in israel to see the destruction. An what did the world do about this crime on humanity. Nothing. I remember watchin a clip on youtube about a 2 month old baby had both arms an legs blown off an was be eaten by dogs. Nothing in this world deserves that treatment. Marie you make me sick when you write paragraph an paragraph of what muslims done. Muslims are human. They are influenced by their own ego just like any other human. People do things bad muslims an non muslims. An in this century an the last century all wars were created my the christians not the muslims.

  219. ibnsahr

    yo yo yo…. slowdown kabir, those list supposed to be in quran too, if pedo mo have a good memory, its the same god with pedo mo imaginary god, who tells story about prophecy during that time too, so whats your point?

    don't copy/paste, read the bible from beginning, about prediction of nation which will become a handfull and against other nations (why would anyone will write story about diversion, when life back then only simple plain), and carry on with NT, now tell me whose god stuck in the past

    palestinians are just rats scrambelling looking for cheese's crumb on the empty house

  220. Kabirlaw

    To Ibnsahr

    You said:

    yo yo yo…. slowdown kabir, those list supposed to be in quran too, if pedo mo have a good memory, its the same god with pedo mo imaginary god, who tells story about prophecy during that time too, so whats your point?

    My point exactly. Thank you. Even you can see it, eh? It's the same God and some of these things are mentioned in the Quran (like the flood) but the Bible still outflanks the Quran in violence and killing YET that hypocrite Marie is criticising the Quran and is happy with all the violence in the Bible and believes it.

    So BIG Questions.

    How is the Bible better than the Quran (in terms of violence and killing)?

    If you can digest the sheer magnitude of violence in the Bible, why can you not digest the Quran when it talks of fighting in self-defence when it is 100% less violent and 0% sadistic when it comes to comparing it with the Bible?

  221. Demsci

    And Marie,

    I read your post about the numbers, thanks. Staggering. I too read that the Israeli-Palestinian-conflict in the 20th century was nr 49 in terms of casualties. The other conflicts included also the conflicts you mentioned in the Islamic world, but of course also WWI, WWII, Rwanda, Cambodia. We must try to think balanced, not selectively as soon as the Jews are involved, as some Muslims seem to do. Instead of ignoring victims, we should acknowledge them all! Crimes are crimes, no matter who commits them, no matter who falls victim.

    In the end we must strive for peace and forgiving, where we can. And the good news is, really, that we see a dimishing of wars, we see a diminishing of casualties, victims. In time, ever since the Middle ages and even before. But this is per capita. If people insist on using absolute numbers in war-casualties and murders, we can then retort that the number of people who die of old age has astronomically risen in history. And dying of old age is what happens if you are not killed in war or murdered isn't it?

    And democratic nations so far have never fought each other! Northern Ireland was not a fight of one democratic nation against another, nor was the Yougoslav conflict a inter-democratic war. Never have Israel or America fought a democratic opponent!

  222. londonspirit

    MARIE your doing it again. Did bangladesh and pakistan fight over islam. NO. They fought over land

    Did somilians and residents of somaliland fight over islam. NO. Again land

    Muslims killing muslims is only over to aquire land. You have stated so many killings that muslims do. If you equate everything of what you said, exlcluding all the ones you repeated just to make the post bigger it adds up to 6.9 million muslims killed.

    OK. Now i will just post one thing. Hitler (christian) killed 7 million jews in world war 2. That just wipes out every single one of your claim.

    I still havent mentioned, ww1, ww2,. hiroshma, paelstinian, iraqi,afgani war, kosovo, bosnia, falcons, and many more.

    You just cant admit to the fact that chrisitans have commited more crimes than muslims in this decade alone. THIS IS A FACT.

    And yet i havent even mentioned the british empire, the wipeout of all native american apart from a few, the wipeout of all aboriginis apart from a few.

    DO I NEED TO GO ON?

  223. londonspirit

    an by the way stick to the topic. I am still waitin for a single person to find a single verse from the quran where it says men are allowed to treat woman as they wish. Marie you still havent stepped up to the challenge. An megha seems to have left the post. Lol.

  224. Marie

    londonspirit:

    MARIE your doing it again. Did bangladesh and pakistan fight over islam. NO. They fought over land

    Did somilians and residents of somaliland fight over islam. NO. Again land

    Muslims killing muslims is only over to aquire land. You have stated so many killings that muslims do. If you equate everything of what you said, exlcluding all the ones you repeated just to make the post bigger it adds up to 6.9 million muslims killed.

    I say:

    londonspirit didn't you once say that Muslims from all races and backgrounds live in peace and unity but these numbers show that Muslims don't live in peace and unity.

    londonspirit:

    OK. Now i will just post one thing. Hitler (christian) killed 7 million jews in world war 2. That just wipes out every single one of your claim.

    I say:

    Hitler was not a Christian and he also persecuted the Christian Churches. He even once plotted to have the Pope kidnapped ( Hitler was raised Catholic and what type of Catholic would plot to have the Pope kidnapped? ). Hitler even said that Christianity was a foreign religion that didn't belong in Germany and promoted the old German pagan religions and tried to create his own brand of religion where the people worship him.

    londonspirit:

    I still havent mentioned, ww1, ww2,. hiroshma, paelstinian, iraqi,afgani war, kosovo, bosnia, falcons, and many more.

    I say:

    We already got into an argument about Kosovo before and my position of the KLA being the provocateurs still stands. As for Bosnia during WWII the Caliph of Jerusalem armed the Muslims in that region and as a result they terrorized the nonmuslim populace. Bosnia was once also part of the Ottomen empire where nonmuslims suffered heavy persecution under Muslim rule.

    By the if the Bosnian war was suppose to be a civil war and the Serbs were committing genocide then why did Al-Qaida get involved and send some of it's members to fight with the Bosnian Muslims:

    Al-Qaeda in Bosnia: Bosnian Muslim War Crimes Trial

    By Carl Savich

    Bosnian Muslim War Crimes: The ICTY Trial of Enver Hadzihasanovic and Amir Kubura

    Bosnian President Alija Izetbegovic, left, taking a proud photo with al-Qaeda.

    The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) indicted senior Bosnian Muslim military commanders General Enver Hadzihasanovic and Colonel Amir Kubura on war crimes charges on July 13, 2001 in Case No: IT-01-47-PT. Bosnian Muslim General Mehmed Alagic, who commanded the Bosanska Krajina unit of the 3rd Corps, was also charged in the initial war crimes indictment but died on March 7, 2003 awaiting the start of the trial. The complaint was amended to charge Hadzihasanovic with 7 counts and Kubura with 6 counts. Initially, the defendants were charged with 19 counts. The Hadzihasanovic and Kubura war crimes trial, known as the “Central Bosnia” case, began on December 2, 2003.

    The trial is important in showing the extent of Al-Qaeda involvement in the Bosnian Civil War of 1992-1995. Hadzihasanovic and Kubura are charged with command responsibility for war crimes committed by mujahedeen troops in the Bosnian Muslim Army. These foreign Muslim Jihad or “Islamic holy warriors” were assembled in a special Bosnian Army unit called the “El Mujahed unit”. This unit committed some of the worst war crimes and crimes against humanity against Bosnian Serb and Bosnian Croat civilians and POWs.

    The commander of the Bosnian Muslim unit “El Mujahed” was Abu Abdel Aziz “Barbaros”, described as a “senior Al-Qaeda recruiter” in a report before the National Commission of Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, or known as the 9/11 Commission chaired by Thomas H. Kean. Aziz, also known as Abdelrahman al-Dosari, was born in Saudi Arabia in 1942. He was a veteran of the mujahedeen in Afghanistan. His nickname was “Hown” because he established a reputation for his use of the Soviet-made “Hound” artillery rockets. He was an early member of the Al-Qaeda movement established by Ossama bin Laden and Abdullah Azzam. He was made the amir, or military commander of the Saudi Arabian and Afghani mujahedeen in Bosnia. Aziz established his headquarters at the Mehurici camp outside of Travnik in central Bosnia.

    Ekkehard Witkopf, the ICTY prosecutor, noted the significance of the mujahedeen trial: “This trial… will show war crimes were committed by both sides of the conflict in central Bosnia. This trial will give the world a more complete picture of the war in Bosnia.” It is the first “command responsibility” case tried at the Hague tribunal. The defendants were charged with criminal responsibility for acts of murder, cruel treatment, wanton destruction and plunder of personal and private property of Bosnian Serbs and Bosnian Croats, and the willful destruction of religious institutions.

    Faith in Allah in action: A Muslim brigade of the Bosnian army marching in a military parade in Bosnia shouting Allahu Akhbar and wishing death to West.

    Witkopf assigned criminal responsibility as follows: “They knew, or had reason to know, that the forces under their command had committed or were going to commit these acts… They did not take necessary and reasonable measures to prevent them or punish those who committed them.”

    Enver Hadzihasanovic was the commander of the 3rd Corps of the Muslim Army of Bosnia and Hercegovina (ABiH). He was later made part of the joint command of the Bosnian Muslim Army and was the Chief of the Supreme Command Staff. Amir Kubura was made the commander of the 7th Muslim Brigade of the 3rd Corps of the Army of Bosnia. They were both charged with war crimes by the ICTY for command and control responsibility. The 7th Muslim Brigade was formed on November 19, 1992 based in Zenica. It was comprised of three battalions: The first was located in Travnik, the second in Zenica, and the third in Kakanj. It was used as an “infantry manoeuvre unit” in the Bosnian Muslim Army.

    The military commander of the Bosnian Muslim Army, Rasim Delic, reviewing the mijahedeen unit, accused of committing war crimes by the Hague Tribunal.

    El Mujahed Unit

    “Mujahedin” or “holy warriors” arrived in Bosnia in the summer of 1992 from Saudi Arabia. Mujahedeen means literally in Arabic one who is a “struggler” or one who is willing “to do battle” In the modern context, it means to be a soldier or guerrilla waging a war in the name of Islam, a religious war. It comes from the Arabic root “JHD”, Jihad, and means someone who wages a struggle for Islam. In Islam, there is no distinction between the political and religious sector. In Islam, all aspects of a person’s life are guided by Islam. Islam is more than a religion, but a way of life. It is an ideology that is all-encompassing. Alija Izetbegovic explained this unity of Islam and the state in the Islamic Declaration (1970; republished, 1990):

    A Muslim generally does not exist as an individual. If he wishes to live and survive as a Muslim, he must create an environment, a community, and order…History knows of no true Islamic movement which was not at the same time a political movement as well…. The shortest definition of the Islamic order defines it as a unity of faith and law, … spiritual community and state…

    There is no religious or political tolerance in an Islamic state, as explained by Izetbegovic: “There can be no peace or coexistence between the ‘Islamic faith’ and non-Islamic societies and political institutions.”

    Picture of an ID Bosnian Muslims issued to an Al-Qaeda terrorist Ahmed Zumair. Thousands of al-Qaeda got these IDs as well as passports.

    The reason Saudi Arabia sent mujahedeen in Bosnia first and organized the effort is because Arabs see Islam as their creation or invention. Saudi Arabia is regarded as the base or center of Islam with Mecca and Medina located there. The yearly pilgrimage or haj is made to Saudi Arabia each year by Muslims. Moreover, the language of The Koran and or Islamic religious texts is in Arabic. The Wahhabi sect of Islam in Saudi Arabia is a radical fundamentalist version of Islam founded by Muhammad Ibn Abd al-Wahhab (1703-1792). The Wahhabi movement advocates the “oneness” of Allah and of Islam, rejecting the Shi’ite or Sufi sects of Islam. Wahhabism seeks to establish one, single version of Islam that interprets The Koran strictly. It gives Saudi Arabia dominance over global Islam. Islam is an Arabic religion and way of life. This is why Saudi Arabia was there first. It is about self-interest.

    The ICTY indictment noted that mujahedeen “were prepared to conduct a ‘Jihad’ or ‘Holy War’ in Bosnia.” Ossama bin Laden’s right hand man and top lieutenant, Saudi Abu Sulaiman al-Makki, was part of the first mujahedeen force to arrive in Bosnia. These were mujahedeen recruited, financed, and organized by Ossama bin Laden. Al-Makki joined Barbaros in the first attack by about 43 Saudi Arabian mujahedeen in central Bosnia against Bosnian Serb forces. This is the engagement where the Saudi Arabian mujahedeen decapitated three Bosnian Serb troops near Teslic and held their heads as war trophies. A prominent member of this mujahedeen contingent that attacked Bosnian Serb forces, Abu Asim al-Makki, later was the major planner of the October, 2000 attack on the USS Cole that killed 17 US sailors.

    Bosnian Muslim mujahedeen march through Zenica, wearing green head band with Arabic script: "Our way is the Jihad."

    The objective was to create terror and panic in the Kafir or kaurin, the infidels and the unbelievers. Al-Makki was paralyzed from the waist down in combat against Bosnian Serb troops. He was shown in the famous video released in 2001 where Ossama bin Laden and al-Makki are shown sitting on a couch discussing the 9/11 attack. Bin Laden takes full responsibility for the 9/11 attack in this video. Bosnian civil war veteran Al-Makki has a blanket over his legs in the video.

    We now know that senior Al-Qaeda leaders fought and were seriously injured in Bosnia. German reporter Renate Flottau of Der Spiegel reported that she personally saw and spoke to Ossama bin Laden in 1994, when he allegedly visited Alija Izetbegovic in Sarajevo. Bin Laden was issued a Bosnian passport through the Bosnian Embassy in Vienna in 1993. One of the suicide hijackers in the 9/11 attack had a Bosnian passport. Moreover, four to six Bosnian citizens, Algerian Muslim mujahedeen who were granted Bosnian citizenship by the Bosnian Muslim Government, were arrested by US forces and sent to the Guantanamo prison where they were questioned on their connections to Al-Qaeda.

    The mujahedin were “incorporated and subordinated” within the structure of the 7th Muslim Brigade when it was formed on November 19, 1992. On August 13, 1993, the mujahedeen were organized in the “El Mujahed” unit. The Battalion of the Holy Warriors, or Kateebat al-Mujahideen, was “officially mobilized… on the personal orders of Bosnian president Alija Izetbegovic, to whom the unit was directly responsible.”

    Under the ICTY legal doctrine of command responsibility, Izetbegovic should have been tried as a war criminal for the war crimes known to have been committed by the mujahedeen unit. The Bosnian Muslim military command put this unit in the 3rd Corps area of operations and subordinated it to the command of that Corps. The mujahedeen troops acted as shock troops to spearhead offensives by the 3rd Corps of the Bosnian Muslim Army.

    The Jihad combatant was a shahid or martyr, willing to die for Islam. Many of the Arab mujahedeen sought “shuhada” or “martyrdom” in Bosnia, dying for the propagation of Islam. By the end of 1992, out of a total mujahedeen force of 300 in Bosnia, at least 22 Saudi Arabian mujahedeen were killed in combat, along with 12 mujahedeen from Egypt. In Travnik, 53 mujahedeen were killed. Abu el-Ma’ali justified the loss in human life: “The way of Jihad must have its pure blood which Allah picks and chooses to be a fuel for those who are left.” How many mujahedeen troops were in Bosnia? Estimates range from several thousand up to ten thousand troops.

    Many of the mujahedeen left “testaments” in case they were killed in Bosnia. Abu Abd Al-Aziz Muntesib, a Saudi Arabian mujahedeen killed in the Teslic assault in 1992, left a testament that explained why he was waging a Jihad in Bosnia:

    In the name of Allah, the Benevolent and Merciful!

    Praise to Allah and blessings and salvation to the Servant of Allah. May Allah bless and save Him….

    I entreat Allah to convey this testament to you while I rejoice with my Lord in the gardens of paradise, happy that Allah is content with me… with my brothers who died a martyr’s death that I yearned for so long and Allah, may he be glorified and exalted…Moreover to exalt his faith and fulfill my desire with the death of my enemies, may Allah curse them! Furthermore, to rejoice at the sight of an Islamic caliphate that will fill the land with its justice, after so much violence.

    Oh, my parents, I beg Allah for you to receive the news of my death with joy, because I shall not die for the sake of liberty nor out of patriotism, nor any other false aim. On the contrary I shall die, if Allah wills, for the sake of Allah, and erecting the first pillar of Islam, for Islam to spread and take root in the world…

    And you, my father, know that a martyr’s death for the eternal goal is the privilege only of those whom Allah has chosen. And, as Allah the Exalted says: “And, among you there will be chosen ones who will die a martyr’s death for the holy purpose.” May Allah be praised three times for bestowing and designating me to die a martyr’s death! …

    The Exalted furthermore said: “Do not say of those who died for the sake of Allah that they are dead, but that they are living” …

    I entrust you to take care that my brothers are raised in the spirit of the jihad, to instill the love of a martyr’s death in them, the splendour of the faith and its words…

    Al-Qaeda in Bosnia: Senior Al-Qaeda recruiter Abu Abdel Aziz "Barbaros", who commanded the El Mujahed unit, first on right, with a group of Arab-Afghan mujahedeen in Bosnia, December, 1992.

    This testament of a Saudi Arabian mujahedeen gives a good picture of the mindset of the mujahedeen and their motivations. The objective of the jihad is to create a global “Islamic caliphate”. This is a fact censored and suppressed in US government and media accounts of the mujahedeen. US propaganda claims that the mujahedeen is defensive in nature. But this is not so. Al-Qaeda seeks a global Islamic community, a series of interconnected Muslim states from Spain to China. Moreover, the mujahedeen do not fight for liberty or patriotism but for the establishment of Islam. The mujahedeen have one goal and one goal only, to establish Islam. Islam is the root and basis for everything. The notion of the separation of religion and politics and the state is unknown in Islam. For Muslims, there is only Islam and nothing else. The mujahedeen perceive martyrdom, or suicide bombings and attacks, as legitimate and appropriate tactics in advancing Islam. Martyrdom is an essential tactic in the global jihad. Finally, the mujahedeen are guided by a religious fanaticism and zealotry that is unknown in the West. In Western thought, religion is seen as only one aspect or dimension in defining man. There is a secular and multi-dimensional component to human identity in Western thought. In Islam, man becomes one dimensional. As noted in the mujahedeen testament, man lives and dies for only one thing, “for the sake of Allah.”

    These Muslim troops were trained, funded, and commanded by senior Al-Qaeda leaders. Abu Abdel Aziz Barbaros, the commander of the mujahedeen unit, the Kateebat al-Mujahideen or the Mujahideen Battalion, the odred el-Mujahedin, was described by the 9/11 Commission as a “senior Al-Qaeda recruiter”.

    A video made by the mujahedeen showing the ritual beheading of a Bosnian Serb POW. Images such as these were carefully censored and deleted in the US media but openly sold in Bosnian Cultural Centers.

    Ritual Beheadings

    The “El Mujahed” unit was charged with the murder, ritual execution, ritual beheading, torture, and imprisonment of Bosnian Serb and Bosnian Croat civilians and POWs. Bosnian Serb and Bosnian Croat civilians and POWS were forced to dig trenches under fire for the Bosnian Muslim Army and were used as human shields during offensive operations of the Bosnian Muslim armed forces. According to the ICTY indictment, “at least 200 Bosnian Croat and Bosnian Serb civilians were killed.” Bosnian Croat and Bosnian Serb POWs were killed and tortured.

    At the Orasac Camp, which was staffed and run by Saudi-Afghan mujahedeen, Bosnian Serb civilian Dragan Popovic was ritually beheaded by mujahedeen on October 20, 1993. Other POWs were then forced to kiss his severed head. During the Muslim Turkish Ottoman Empire occupation of the Balkans, Serbian Orthodox Christians, the kaurin, or unbelievers, were ritually beheaded by Muslim Turkish forces to terrorize the rayah or Christian population known as Dhimmis, a conquered population. Ritual beheadings were part of the Dhimmitude policies of Muslim occupation forces, who sought to subjugate and conquer the Christian infidels of Europe. There were Muslim “Crusaders” and there were Christian “Crusaders”. Ossama bin Laden falsely and mistakenly asserted that there were only Christian Crusaders. But Islam has been expansionist ever since the time of Mohammed, invading eastern and western Europe, Asia, and north Africa, and forcefully converting the subjugated subjects to Islam. Bosnia was under Muslim Ottoman Turkish occupation for over four centuries. Spain was under Muslim occupation for over 700 years.

    ICTY prosecutor Witkopf characterized the beheading of Bosnian Serb civilian Dragan Popovic as “a beheading that can only be described as a ritual beheading.” Other POWs and civilians were forced to dig their own graves. POWs were terrorized and physically and psychologically abused and mistreated. POWs were also forced to give blood.

    Mujahedeen Atrocities and War Crimes

    Islam is stated to be a religion of peace and compassion. But this is not how Bosnian Serb and Bosnian Croat Christians perceived Islam in Bosnia. The Al-Qaeda and US-sponsored mujahedeen were supposed to provide protection to embattled Muslims in Bosnia. Most of the mujahedeen were able to gain entry to Bosnia posing as workers for so-called Islamic humanitarian and charity organizations. But the war crimes and atrocities the mujahedeen committed in Bosnia against Bosnian Serb and Bosnian Croat Christians showed the utter contempt Islam has for Christianity and for Christians. The mujahedeen war crimes put Srebrenica in perspective. They also showed that co-existence between Islam and Christianity was not feasible in Bosnia. The Bosnian Serbs maintained this all along, contrary to US propaganda. The mujahedeen war crimes proved this point. What US foreign policy sought to accomplish in Bosnia was the domination and subjugation and marginalization of the Serb and Croat Christian population by Muslims.

    The mujahedeen war crimes demonstrated the contempt the mujahedeen had for Christianity and for so-called Western civilization and culture. Evan Kohlmann wrote about “their remarkable fanaticism and blind cruelty”. Mujahedeen troops from Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia had “routinely performed crude, disfiguring, non-medical circumcisions on Bosnian Serb soldiers”. An 18-year old Bosnian Serb soldier “was so brutally circumcised that eventually the entire organ required amputation.” No only were Bosnian Serb Orthodox Christians the victims of Islamic terror, horrific war crimes committed in the name of Allah. Bosnian Croat Roman Catholic Christians were also victims. The mujahedeen ethnically cleansed all non-Muslims from Zenica, the mujahedeen stronghold. In 1992, Dejan Jozic, a 13-year old Roman Catholic Bosnian Croat teen, was asked by mujahedeen: “Why doesn’t your family leave Zenica?” Three mujahedeen then attacked Jozic and wrestled him to the ground. The ring finger of his right hand was then amputated. The Jozic family then fled from Zenica after this shocking example of Islamic terror. The US propaganda machine censored and suppressed these horrific acts of genocide committed by Muslim forces in the name of Islam. The CIA propaganda outlet in Europe, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, similarly covered-up and censored these Muslim war crimes and atrocities committed against Orthodox and Roman Catholic civilians and POWs.

    Bosnian Muslim leader Alija Izetbegovic with Amir Kubura's 7th Muslim Brigade of Zenica, which committed war crimes against Bosnian Serb and Croat civilians and POWs according to the ICTY.

    A Bosnian Serb POW described his treatment after the engagements in the Vozuci region on May 27, 1995:

    I was captured by a group of 12 mujaheddins including a Bosnia Muslim who served as interpreter… One of the mujaheddins ordered me to kneel down, took out his butcher knife with semi-circular blade and small handle which he held hanging around his neck, on his chest. He wanted to cut my had [sic] off, but the Muslim interpreter intervened, telling him something in Arabic… They put a knife under our necks, as if they were going to cut our throats. Then they brought a cardboard box in which there were two cut off human heads with blood still dripping… One day, they brought us out in the camp area for all the mujaheddins to see us. In my assessment, there were one thousand of them. The lined us up in such a way that we were surrounded by them, and they were singing and shouting something in Arabic. One of them had a knife in his hands and was persistently trying to come close and cut our throats, but two others prevented him. He was foaming with rage.

    Another Bosnian Serb POW stated:

    As soon as we arrived, the mujaheddins tied us with a hose, into which they let air under pressure, to make it expand and press our legs. This cause terrible pains and Gojko Vujicic swore [to] God, so one mujaheddin took him aside and cut his head off. I did not see what he used for the cutting, but I know that he brought the head into the room and forced all of us to kiss it. Then the mujaheddin hung the head on a nail in the wall.

    Bosnian Serb POWs were “held like animals and starved for days, slowly being tortured to death.” Serb POWs were given knives and forced to kill each other or be killed themselves.

    [O]nce they fell from wounds, Mujahedeen would decapitate them, with cleavers or chain saws, and those who were still alive were forced to kiss severed heads that were later nailed to tree trunks. Prisoners were hung upside down by ropes, they were nailed, or the Mujahdeen [sic] tied bricks to their testes and penises and pushed them into barrels where they slowly drowned pulled down by the weight of the bricks.

    Videotapes were made of these war crimes by the mujahedeen and sold to encourage recruits to join the mujahedeen and Al-Qaeda. Mujahedeen also forcefully converted Bosnian Serb POWs to Islam. The US media and government censored and suppressed these horrific war crimes and atrocities committed against Bosnian Serb and Bosnian Croat Christians by Muslims. Why? The Bosnian Muslims were the proxies of the US government, of NATO, and of the EU. The US media and government carefully concealed and covered up the war crimes its Muslim Al-Qaeda proxies committed in Bosnia. If that failed, the appropriate media spin was put on the story by US government-sponsored reporters.

    US reporter John-Thor Dahlburg of the Los Angeles times was told by a Bosnian Muslim soldier who was a member of the mujahedeen forces that the mujahedeen “like to kill. Whenever they could kill with their knives, they would do so.” The US media and government knew of the war crimes and atrocities that were being perpetrated against Bosnian Serb and Croat Christians. Nevertheless, this information was censored and suppressed. Instead, the US media and government focused on alleged Bosnian Serb war crimes against Bosnian Muslim troops in Srebrenica. But why is it no crime or Geneva Convention violation when Bosnian Muslim troops and mujahedeen torture and execute Bosnian Serb civilians and POWs? It is a perverted and convoluted moral calculus. Why can the mujahedeen take over Bosnian Serb towns and villages and torture and execute Bosnian Serb POWs at will? Why can the Al-Qaeda mujahedeen do this without any criminal culpability? Why are the Bosnian Serb forces accused of war crimes and even genocide when they retaliate in kind?

    Muslim Ottoman Empire Redux

    The mujahedeen goal was to re-establish the Muslim Ottoman Turkish Empire in Bosnia and in Europe, the so-called Muslim empire or Khalifah or khalifate or Caliphate. Al-Qaeda still has the goal to re-create a Muslim Caliphate that would include Bosnia and Kosovo. Ironically, US foreign policy is achieving for Al-Qaeda what they could not achieve on their own. Kohlmann chronicles several mujahedeen operations and offensives in 1995 against Bosnian Serb forces. But he failed to mention that these mujahedeen offensives were launched in conjunction with massive US and NATO bombings and strategic air strikes, known as Operation Deliberate Force, against strategic Bosnian Serb positions. The air strikes began on August 30, 1995, and consisted of 60 US and NATO aircraft flying over 500 sorties against Bosnian Serb targets. The US/NATO air force was in fact the air force for the mujahedeen/Al-Qaeda. Kolhmann does not even note this fact. It was US/NATO airpower that allowed the mujahedeen to drive out and kill Bosnian Serb troops and take over Bosnian Serb villages and towns.

    Indeed, one Bosnian Serb village, Bocinja Donja, was taken over by mujahedeen soldiers once the Bosnian Serb inhabitants were driven out. There is a sign on the outskirts of town that warns residents to “be afraid of Allah.” There are up to 100 mujahedeen in the formerly Serbian town. The mujahedeen ever wrote graffiti on one abandoned Serbian house: “El Mudjahidin”. The mujahedeen/Al-Qaeda military victories were a gift or present from the US/NATO. The US/NATO only empowered and encouraged Al-Qaeda to later kill 17 US sailors aboard the USS Cole and approximately 3,000 civilians in the 9/11 World Trade Center and Pentagon bombings. The story would come full circle.

    Abu Abdel Aziz Barbaros, the "senior Al-Qaeda" who commanded the Bosnian Muslim mujahedeen unit of the Bosnian Muslim Army.

    Iraqi Connection

    There were reports that Ossama bin Laden’s Al-Qaeda mujahedeen veterans from the Bosnian civil war were now killing US troops and Western civilians in Iraq. In a Tanjug news report from December 29, 2004, “French Journalists’ Captors Were Bin Laden’s Veteran from Bosnia”, it was reported that French journalist Christian Chesnot, of Radio France Internationale, along with Georges Malbrunot of Le Figaro, was held by “veterans of Ossama Bin Ladin from Bosnia-Herzegovina.” Chesnot was held hostage for four months in Iraq by the “Islamic Army in Iraq”. Chesnot told Tanjug reporters:

    Our captors told us they had fought in Bosnia… One of them, a youngish man, aged 30 or so, told us he had been in Bin Ladin’s camp in Afghanistan and that he had fought in Bosnia… We realized that this was one of the Arab war leaders that had fired rockets in Bosnia and chanted ‘Jihad, Jihad.’… We realized also that some of our abductors were members of what we called Planet Bin Ladin.

    Chesnot stated that one of their abductors played them a tape of Bosnian music and informed them that two Macedonian hostages and the Italian journalist Enzo Baldoni had been executed by the Islamic Organization in Iraq. One of their Arabic captors spoke about the “international jihad”, “Sheikh Osama”, and “the dream of a Muslim state from Andalusia to China, and the fight against Christians.”

    The US would experience blowback from its creation of the Afghanistan mujahedeen not only in the 9/11 attack, but in the US occupation of Iraq.

    9/11 Commission

    Steven Emerson presented a report on July 9, 2003 to the 9/11 Commission in which he detailed the activities of the commander of the Bosnian Muslim “El Mujahed” unit, Abu Abdel Aziz Barbaros:

    When senior Al-Qaeda recruiter Shaykh Abu Abdel Aziz Barbaros was interviewed in 1994 about his experiences organizing the Arab-Afghan jihad in Bosnia, he explained: I—alhamdulillah [Arabic, “All praise is due to Allah”] —-met several prominent Ulema [Muslim scholar]. Among them…. Sheikh Abdel Aziz Bin Baz… and others in the Gulf area. Alhamdulillah, all grace be to Allah, they all support the religious dictum that “the fighting in Bosnia is a fight to make the word of Allah supreme and protect the chastity of Muslims.”

    Abu Muaz al-Kuwaiti, one of the mujahedeen commanders in Bosnia, explained why the mujahedeen were in Bosnia:

    As for why we came to Bosnia-Hercegovina, we did not come here except for Jihad in the Way of Allah (Glorified and Most High), and to assist our Mujahideen brothers.

    According to Evan Kohlmann, Barbaros told other senior Al-Qaeda members who were assembled at a meeting in Zagreb that the Al-Qaeda objective in Bosnia was not to bring humanitarian assistance to Bosnian Muslims as US propaganda claimed, but “was to establish a base for operations in Europe against al-Qaeda’s true enemy, the United States.” Thus, Al-Qaeda saw through the US game from the start.

    The mujahedeen were formed, armed, trained, and financed by the US Government beginning in 1979 when US National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski initiated their use as proxies. He manipulated Islam to get them to fight Soviet troops in Afghanistan. The goal was to make the Soviets bleed according to Brzezinski. The mujahedeen were just pawns in his bigger chess game. Brzezinski was a Roman Catholic Pole who still spoke with a Slavic/Polish accent. His ultimate goal was to get the Soviet forces out of Poland so that Poland could join the US NATO alliance.

    A rare photo of the 10,000 strong mujahedeen unit in the Bosnian Muslim Army on parade in downtown Zenica in 1995. They are wearing green head bands that read in Arabic: "Our way is the Jihad."

    US President Ronald Reagan declared the mujahedeen were “freedom fighters… defending … freedom…” in the early 1980s and the US Government established “Afghanistan Day” in the US. Absurdly, the “war on terrorism” is rationalized as a global struggle to safeguard “freedom” from “freedom fighters…defending….freedom…” Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter and Zbigniew Brzezinski did much to transform a US policy of realpolitik based on divide and conquer, divide et impera, into a moralist Manichean foreign policy based on “good” and “evil”, invoking God to sanction US foreign policy in a cynical manipulation of religion. This US manipulation of religion to advance US geo-political strategic interests during the Cold War unleashed the mujahedeen Jihad and Al-Qaeda.

    US support empowered the mujahedeen and encouraged bin Laden to expand the mujahedeen Jihad across the globe beyond the borders of Afghanistan. Ed Bradley of CBS’ 60 Minutes even argued that Muslims should be grateful to the US Government because it allowed them to kill Serbian Christians and to take their lands. Didn’t we kill the Serbian Christians for you Muslims? Didn’t we take their lands and give them to you Muslims? Didn’t we demonize the Serbian Christians for you Muslims with our propaganda so you could kill them? Where is the gratitude? This was Ed Bradley’s reasoning.

    But Muslims saw through the ruse and sham. The mujahedeen and Al-Qaeda share the view of the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini that the United States is the “Great Satan” and is the actual enemy of Islam. Abu el-Ma’ali even issued a communiqué from Zenica on September 22, 1995, where he stated that: “We know that we will have a day in which to fight the Jews, and the Almighty will grant us victory…” They knew that Bosnia was just a rehearsal and a game. The real target for Al-Qaeda and for the mujahedeen is ultimately the United States and Israel. US foreign policy in the Middle East and Zionism are the ultimate targets. Bosnia was just a diversion, a sideshow. Slobodan Milosevic and the Bosnian Serbs were merely straw men and a smokescreen to cover up the real targets of Islam.

    The mujahedeen were just cannon fodder and worthless pawns in advancing the goals of US foreign policy. Brzezinski told the mujahedeen that “God is on your side”, exploiting Islam as a religion and using it to get Muslims to kill Soviet troops. But the mujahedeen saw through this shameless ploy. The denouement of this policy came on September 11, 2001, when veterans of the Afghan war organized the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center in New York. What went around, came around.

    Al-Qaeda, or The Base, was created in 1988 by bin Laden with veterans of the war in Afghanistan because he wanted the mujahedeen war to be extended as a global or world-wide jihad. In 1992, the Soviet-backed regime was overthrown and a civil war emerged between various mujahedeen factions. In 1996, the Taliban (from Pashtun “students of the book”, the Koran, from Arabic talib, “student”) mujahedeen seized power in Afghanistan with help from Pakistani troops and the Pakistani and US governments. US foreign policy favored the Pakistani-sponsored Taliban over the Russian-backed Northern Alliance which allowed for the emergence of the Taliban Government. In 2001, the US would reverse its allegiance away from its Taliban ally to the Russian-sponsored Northern Alliance. The Taliban was the fruit of US policy in Afghanistan. US policy had allowed the Taliban to emerge.

    Former US President Bill Clinton at memorial to killed mujahedeen soldiers at Srebrenica. The memorial is in Arabic, not Slavic "Bosnian" language. [Click to enlarge photo]

    Pact with the Devil

    The US Government knew Al-Qaeda forces were being deployed to Bosnia but allowed them to come through channels established in Croatia. Unmarked Lockheed C-130 Hercules transport aircraft were bringing arms and weapons to the Bosnian Muslim troops at the airport in Tuzla. Bosnian Serb forces even recorded communications from the aircraft and determined that it was piloted and manned by US forces on a clandestine mission. Transport aircraft routinely landed in the Zagreb airport where arms, weapons, and supplies from Iran were unloaded for trans-shipment to Bosnia in plain sight. It was common knowledge that the US was in cahoots with Teheran and mujahedeen forces to bring arms and troops from Iran to Bosnia illegally, in contravention of the UN arms embargo. The US turned a blind eye to the shipment of arms to the Bosnian Muslim forces by Iran, a Muslim fundamentalist state. The US was instrumental in allowing the Afghan-Arab mujahedeen and Al-Qaeda to infiltrate Bosnia.

    US Ambassador to Croatia Peter Galbraith and Bosnian Muslim president Alija Izetbegovic should also be charged with war crimes. Indeed, US President Bill Clinton can be charged for war crimes based on command responsibility. The US Government used diplomatic code to conceal the fact that it was working with Al-Qaeda and Iranian forces in Bosnia. The US Government told US diplomats in the Balkans that it had “no instructions” on Al-Qaeda and Iranian terrorist troops entering Bosnia. This was a green light to Al-Qaeda and Iranian forces. US President Bill Clinton bears criminal responsibility for bringing Al-Qaeda to Bosnia where these terrorist forces committed atrocities and war crimes against Bosnian Croat and Bosnian Serb civilians and POWs. Why isn’t Bill Clinton in the dock at the ICTY?

    Richard Holbrooke claimed that the Bosnian Muslim regime could not otherwise survive without Al-Qaeda mujahedeen support and the aid provided by Muslim fundamentalist Iran. Izetbegovic was even allowed to visit Teheran by the US Government during the civil war, although the US media ignored the event and suppressed it. As Holbrooke himself conceded, it was a “pact with the devil”. This “pact with the devil” did not begin or end in Bosnia. It was a pact with the devil that saw its apotheosis or denouement with the 9/11 terrorist attacks against the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

    Why weren’t US President Bill Clinton or Alija Izetbegovic indicted for war crimes at The Hague? Instead, we see the ICTY charging two patsies and small fry, Hadzihasanovic and Kubura. Why not go after the big fish and the big fry?

    The ICTY announced that it was investigating Alija Izetbegovic for war crimes on October 22, 2003, the day of his funeral. The ICTY waited until his death and funeral to announce the war crimes investigation because the ICTY did not want to undermine the political mission of the ICTY which the US/NATO/EU set for it, which was to hold the Serbian leaders and people totally responsible for the civil wars in Bosnia and the former Yugoslavia. Florence Hartmann, an ICTY spokeswoman, released a statement, which was quoted in the BBC news story for October 22, 2003, “Bosnia Leader was War Crimes Suspect: “Izetbegovic was one of the suspects who was under investigation…The fact he died means all investigations are stopped.”

    Izetbegovic, like Bill Clinton, bears command responsibility for the atrocities and war crimes of the Al-Qaeda mujahedeen in the “El Mujahed” unit of the Bosnian Muslim Army. They knew or had reason to know that Al-Qaeda mujahedeen were committing atrocities against Bosnian Serb civilians and POWs and did nothing to prevent them. Izetbegovic was photographed with the commanders of the 7th Muslim Brigade of Zenica and Bill Clinton was at a memorial for dead mujahedeen troops in Bosnia.

    The ICTY has brought war crimes charges against the following Bosnian Muslim military leaders: Enver Hadzihasanovic, Amir Kubura, Mehmed Alagic, Sefer Halilovic, the chief of the supreme command of the Bosnian Muslim Army, Naser Oric, the Bosnian Muslim military commander of Srebrenica. Bosnian Muslim camp guards Hazim Delic and Esad Landzo were convicted for war crimes against Bosnian Serbs at the Celebici camp. Bosnian Muslim Zejnil Delalic was acquitted.

    Blowback

    Before the attack on 9/11, Al-Qaeda regrouped in Bosnia during the civil war there where it found a new mission and was able to consolidate its bases and to finalize its strategy of global terrorism. What we are not told is that this was all “Made in the USA”. It was a “pact with the devil” that resulted in blowback and the result was the World Trade Center and Pentagon attack on 9/11.

    Also in regards to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, londonspirit they are in no way being motivated by Christianity.

    londonspirit:

    You just cant admit to the fact that chrisitans have commited more crimes than muslims in this decade alone. THIS IS A FACT.

    I say:

    Lets see 13,911 terrorist attacks have been committed by Muslims since 9/11 while America has only fought in two wars.

    As for Hiroshima londonspirit America was at war with Japan and the military believed that they had no other choice but to bomb Hiroshima or else we would have lost countless American lives to the war.

    londonspirit:

    And yet i havent even mentioned the british empire, the wipeout of all native american apart from a few, the wipeout of all aboriginis apart from a few.

    I say:

    Yeah well you should now all about that londonspirit since you are British and the British colonized America for greed and in order to spread their empire so it was your British ancestors that took part in this. As for me I don't what part do I have in this bloody history because my ancestors were not British and I am only 5th generation American.

  225. Marie

    Surah 4:34

    Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all).

  226. ibnsahr

    LS,

    surah 4:34 justify spanking the women, why you always deny it, its there loud and clear, “YOU MAY BEAT THE WOMEN”

    when the writting is there and you still says no, you just degrading your self that low in the name of islam, see, how low human being will put themselves to defend false religion

    while on the subject,

    why you stoning person in the name of islam, when there is no where in the islamic book to do so?,
    remeber it happended in islamic country, why?

    remember LS, pedo mo will laughing from hell for his always broke fasting early, like ayesha told in the hadiths, if pedo mo some one to be followed, he couldn't give good example, look at the false leader you follow

  227. ibnsahr

    Kabir,
    ***Islam is the culmination of revelations to mankind,…… Why did they not benefit from the NT and Jesus’ blood? ***

    Kabir that’s you and all muslim want to believe, but Islam is NOT the culmination of revelations to mankind, islam is hoax invented by false prophet.

    Story in OT just for lesson to learn for next generation, how you can win with god on your side, how the cruel barbaric atrocities is only bring misery to life, its all just god try to give example, as I said on my comment above, if no one knows touching live wire will get you electrocuted, of course when some one tell you that you will not believe it until you see the prove, god can spare million people just to prove his point

    Bible is story inspired by god not actual word of god, so it may have mistake in it what we asked for to read between the line.

    Now what about my question from your comment earlier to me
    slay unbeliever, mary your right hand posses are original divine truths that we must accept from god of islam?

    And is the only thing that muslim’s god will do is to urge the follower to mary prepubescent girls?
    All these above lack in bible

  228. Moooo

    Londo Spirtus,

    "Why dont you do this MOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. I will suggest you a way of trying to find verses in relation to your accusation. Go on google and type in does islam teach so an so. Maybe just maybe you might come up with some results from other islam haters like yourself, trying to prove a point that is non existance."

    LLLOOOLLLLL. It's obvious that you didn't even understand my posts. Here, let me explain to your shrunk brain, ok. 1 example:

    Does quran forbid muslim to marrying a child? No, it didn't
    That statement means that i didn't find verses in quran that forbid muslim from doing it and when you look at reality you will find so many muslim practice it. In sharia law marrying children is legal.
    Do you understand know? or your brain need more stimulation.

    And don't forget, you still haven't answered my question about pedo mo as a comforter. Ignoring it it's embarassing for you.

  229. Moooo

    Busted divinity,

    What i was talking about with that coward was my unanswered question and challenge, not evidence of god (not allah). You see, when you saw someone claiming about something, that someone must prove it in logical and simple way, not deceptive or cheap fake article.

    For example: That coward claimed that islamic science is real and he showed me a verse related to it. But when you saw that verse, it turned out to be cheap kindergarten words (nothing scientific) which any common man in that era knew it. Then i just reversed the pattern of islamic science (verse comes 1st, then the new discovery), that coward couldn't answer it. If this simple way failed, you still call that proof?

  230. Moooo

    Demsci,

    you forgot one thing about LS. He is just one from many muslims that claimed "My intrepretation is right". That's why we have thousands sects in islam. In indonesia there are more than 250 small sects of islam! Each other claimed as the true islam and calling others heretics. Can you imagine that? What we are talking about here in FFI is the reality of islam and example of muhammad the pedo. In my country there are some muslims who claimed that slaves is legal, childern is halal, marriage with contract is halal and kafir's blood is halal if you got in the their way. That's why in indonesia we've got so many cases involving: child marriages, contract marriages, and humans trading. Reality is harsh and ignoring it is embarassing for any muslim who is on denial.

  231. ibnsahr

    way to go Marie,

    kabirlaw said:***Therefore, killing in combat and in accordance with prescribed punishments is allowable not only to Muslims but to Western “CIVILISED” nations as well***

    western nation go to war for nation's interest but islam, prescribe fighting for you, even you, kabirlaw, didn't like it, can you make a different kabirlaw?

    If you have an open mind Kabirlaw, everything is clear and in black and white (muslim go to war was prescribed in their holy book, but westerner go to war not follow their book)

    Kabirlaw, when you finished read bible, tell me where in NT says kill or fight if we get attacked

  232. Marie

    Thanks ibnsahr.

  233. Moooo

    Londo spirtus, i'm still waiting for the verses. Stop running away like your brother here.

  234. Kabirlaw

    Watch this space. My answer to marie and Ibnsahr is coming up.

    But in the meantime, if you read what marie wrote she has NOT anwered the trinity conundrum amongst other red herrings. Don't get me wrong, she knows exactly what she is doing. I din't call her a hypocrite for no reason.

    Read my question to her above and then read her answer. It really is easy to see that she has no answer and is repeating her nonsense (i.e. she is daugher, co-worker etc etc). If you go by that logic Allah has 99 attributes yet he is ONE and INDIVISIBLE. marie you are pulling the wool over everyone's eyes but it's not going to work with me and my question is not going to just go away.

    Stay tuned, until tomorrow.

  235. Marie

    Kabirlaw:

    Read my question to her above and then read her answer. It really is easy to see that she has no answer and is repeating her nonsense (i.e. she is daugher, co-worker etc etc). If you go by that logic Allah has 99 attributes yet he is ONE and INDIVISIBLE. marie you are pulling the wool over everyone’s eyes but it’s not going to work with me and my question is not going to just go away.

    I say:

    Kabirlaw read my last post again.

    In my last post I have stated Trinity is short for tri-unity ( tri means three and unity means united ) which is one God who exists in three distinct and inseperable persons which means united and cannot be separated therefore making one God.

    What you keep on referring to is tritheism. Tritheism is three seperate gods forming a unity therefore making three separate gods.

  236. Moooo

    Londo Spirtus still on the run eh? Pathetic.

  237. Kabirlaw

    To Marie

    I say:

    Hold on. Lets stick to this topic of the Trinity until we resolve it. Leave everything else for another day altogether.

    You said (see above):

    There not three gods in the trinity. The trinity is about the characteristics of Jesus. Jesus is the father referring to his divinity, the son referring to the fact he is son of God and the holy spirit meaning he is with us in a spiritual way. Jesus is the father, son, and holy spirit just I am a daughter, friend, and a worker ( the best example I can come up with. The trinity is not three gods but three in one.

    I then said above (which remains unanswered):

    Now how silly is what you have just written? Your example is not applicable either. Your concept of God is 3 Gods in a TRINITY. No matter what you do you cannot escape that. If Jesus is the same as the father and the Holy Spirit then WHY didn’t God say that “I” will become flesh and die for the sins of the world instead of saying “I will give my “only begotten son.” Moreover, when Jesus was dead on the cross WHO was controlling the Universe? And, How can God DIE in the first place (isn’t the true God EVERLASTING and ETERNAL and Immortal). You see Marie no matter what you do, when you think of your God you will always have THREE distinct images or concepts in your head (It will never be unified and ONE).

    Your example is ridiculous and not thought through for the following reasons:

    A father is a father and cannot be his own son’s son.
    A son is a son and cannot be his father’s father.

    You say you are a daughter, friend and worker. Fine. You can also be mother, daughter, granddaughter, worker, friend, sister, co-worker, wife and worshipper (I can go on and on and on). But this is a wholly inaccurate way to describe the TRINITY. The concept of the Trinity says that YOU are MOTHER of your SON But you are also DAUGHTER of your SON and your SON is your FATHER. How does that work? There simply is NO realistic example so stop mincing words. AND if there is ONE GOD anyway, Why is there even a need for metamorphosis and for God to beget a son through an earthly virgin? Make any sense?

    I then also said the following about Allah (and how he is still STRICTLY considered as ONE God):

    Read my question to her above and then read her answer. It really is easy to see that she has no answer and is repeating her nonsense (i.e. she is daugher, co-worker etc etc). If you go by that logic Allah has 99 attributes yet he is ONE and INDIVISIBLE. marie you are pulling the wool over everyone’s eyes but it’s not going to work with me and my question is not going to just go away.

    You then said:

    Kabirlaw read my last post again.

    In my last post I have stated Trinity is short for tri-unity ( tri means three and unity means united ) which is one God who exists in three distinct and inseperable persons which means united and cannot be separated therefore making one God.

    What you keep on referring to is tritheism. Tritheism is three seperate gods forming a unity therefore making three separate gods.

    I say:

    I AM ASKING DIRECT QUESTIONS AND I WANT DIRECT ANSWERS. DONT GIVE ME LECTURES ON THE MEANING OF WORDS, I KNOW VERY WELL THE MEANING OF ENGLISH WORDS, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

    Q1) If the three gods form a unity of one godhead then who was controlling the universe when Jesus died on the cross?

    Q2) When you think of the Trinity, the idea of three separate beings is conjured up, then what is stopping these three separate beings from making independent decisions of their own without consulting the other gods? Who is the CEO in this Godhead?

    Q3) If Jesus is God then who did he cry out to on the cross "God, God, why have thou forsaken me? If he was God did HE not know what HIS mission was? Did he not know that HE had decreed to die for the sins of the world, then WHY cry out to someone else for his fate?

    Q4) When Jesus was not born yet where was he? What age is Jesus and when did he actually come into being? for him to be the son of God the main God must have existed first and not at the same time, therefore Jesus cannot be a God as he has a begining! Understand. Why did God even feel a need to have a son?

    Q5) Why did God choose Mary to be the mother of his divine son? and not a White, Black, Asian, Oriental or Hispanic woman? What is wrong with them?

    Q6) Why did God choose his son to be born a hebrew jew and not a White, Black, Arab, Asian, or Hispanic human? Are these other alternatives inferior? if so, why? (You see Marie, by God choosing to beget a son as a middle-eastern jewish semite, he has forever stigmatised the rest of humanity who have a different race as inferior or not suitable for this divine purpose).

    Q7) Why did God (Jesus) call a gentile woman a dog simply because of her race? If he despised gentiles why did he create the race in the first place?

    Marie, the list is endless, and I'm not exaggerating, the questions will not stop. This is why I think we should stick to the Trinity and the divinity of Jesus, because you are throwing up red herrings. Now, I respectfully request that you ACTUALLY ANSWER the questions instead of trying to MAKE OUT that you have.

    Peace.

  238. Marie

    Kabirlaw:

    Now how silly is what you have just written? Your example is not applicable either. Your concept of God is 3 Gods in a TRINITY. No matter what you do you cannot escape that. If Jesus is the same as the father and the Holy Spirit then WHY didn’t God say that “I” will become flesh and die for the sins of the world instead of saying “I will give my “only begotten son.” Moreover, when Jesus was dead on the cross WHO was controlling the Universe? And, How can God DIE in the first place (isn’t the true God EVERLASTING and ETERNAL and Immortal). You see Marie no matter what you do, when you think of your God you will always have THREE distinct images or concepts in your head (It will never be unified and ONE).

    I say:

    Ok then you still don't believe my answer then try this one:

    The doctrine of the trinity is the Biblical assertion that there is only one God. From Genesis to Revelation, scripture consistently testifies to only one true God. In the new testament as God continued to unfold revelation about himself, he made clear that within the unity of the one God are three coequel and coeternal persons which is the father, son, and holy spirit, fully equal in the divine nature but distinct in personhood. Basically as God revealed more of himself in the new testament, he show that he is the father, son, and holy spirit.

    Jesus is the same as the father meaning he is equal to the father for Jesus had the ability to forgive sins and in Judaism only God has the right to forgive sins.

    God was still in control of the universe when Jesus died.

    How could God die in the first place?

    My best answer: While Jesus was also divine he was also human because he was born of a human women and therefore had the ability to know suffering and death.

    Kabirlaw:

    A father is a father and cannot be his own son’s son.
    A son is a son and cannot be his father’s father.

    I say:

    Jesus is divine and an image of his father.

    Kabirlaw:

    The concept of the Trinity says that YOU are MOTHER of your SON But you are also DAUGHTER of your SON and your SON is your FATHER. How does that work? There simply is NO realistic example so stop mincing words. AND if there is ONE GOD anyway, Why is there even a need for metamorphosis and for God to beget a son through an earthly virgin? Make any sense?

    I say:

    Nope the concept of the trinity is Jesus is the father referring to his divinity and he is the son meaning he is the son of God.

    Kabirlaw:

    Q1) If the three gods form a unity of one godhead then who was controlling the universe when Jesus died on the cross?

    I say:

    I already answered your question.

    Kabirlaw:

    Q2) When you think of the Trinity, the idea of three separate beings is conjured up, then what is stopping these three separate beings from making independent decisions of their own without consulting the other gods? Who is the CEO in this Godhead?

    I say:

    I don't know what you are talking about.

    In the trinity there is only one mind for all three are of the same mind.

    Kabirlaw:

    Q3) If Jesus is God then who did he cry out to on the cross “God, God, why have thou forsaken me? If he was God did HE not know what HIS mission was? Did he not know that HE had decreed to die for the sins of the world, then WHY cry out to someone else for his fate?

    I say:

    Yes Jesus did know what his mission was. But Jesus was also human and therefore had the human fear of death.

    Kabirlaw:

    Q4) When Jesus was not born yet where was he? What age is Jesus and when did he actually come into being? for him to be the son of God the main God must have existed first and not at the same time, therefore Jesus cannot be a God as he has a begining! Understand. Why did God even feel a need to have a son?

    I say:

    Theologians believe he was up in heaven with the father.

    I don't know how old is Jesus just as I don't know how is God the father ( God the father is infinite ) and when he came into being I don't know. As far as I know where was born into the human flesh about 2000 years ago.

    Why did God even feel the need to have a son? Kabirlaw if God can create the whole world then why can't he not have son?

    Kabirlaw as far as I know part of the reason God had a son was to bring reconciliation between him and his creation. Now this does not mean God did not love his son, he truly did love his son and knew that his would with him again.

    Kabirlaw:

    Q5) Why did God choose Mary to be the mother of his divine son? and not a White, Black, Asian, Oriental or Hispanic woman? What is wrong with them?

    Q6) Why did God choose his son to be born a hebrew jew and not a White, Black, Arab, Asian, or Hispanic human? Are these other alternatives inferior? if so, why? (You see Marie, by God choosing to beget a son as a middle-eastern jewish semite, he has forever stigmatised the rest of humanity who have a different race as inferior or not suitable for this divine purpose).

    I say:

    God chose Mary because his covenant was with the Jews and because of her relationship with God. God did not use race as a factor when determining which group of people his son would be born into but upon the relationship the group of people had with him. Abraham ( the father of the Jews ) was a godly man who sought out God and God knowing what is in the heart and mind of Abraham chose him.

    Besides God chose the Jews to bring salvation to the world.

    Also Kabirlaw that is a very rediculous question to ask. Lets say if Jesus was born of a hispanic woman then by choosing a hispanic woman God has forever stigmatized the rest of humanity who have a different race as inferior or not suitable for this divine purpose. Also didn't your Allah choose an Arab as his messenger? Then by choosing an Arab to he has forever stigmatised the rest of humanity who have a different race as inferior or not suitable for this divine purpose.

    Kabirlaw:

    Q7) Why did God (Jesus) call a gentile woman a dog simply because of her race? If he despised gentiles why did he create the race in the first place?

    I say:

    I know what you are referring to. In the originally Greek kunarion means small dog like the ones found in people's homes. Jesus point in this parable was the Gospel is to be given to the Jews first. The woman understood what he was saying and was willing to settle for crumbs. Jesus rewarded her faith.

    Jesus did not despise gentiles for he came to bring salvation to him salvation. The first person he revealed his messiahship to was samaritan woman.

    Kabirlaw:

    Marie, the list is endless, and I’m not exaggerating, the questions will not stop. This is why I think we should stick to the Trinity and the divinity of Jesus, because you are throwing up red herrings. Now, I respectfully request that you ACTUALLY ANSWER the questions instead of trying to MAKE OUT that you have.

    I say:

    If you don't like my answers then tough!

  239. Marie

    By the way kabirlaw if it looks like several of my answers contradict each other it is because I am feeling tired and not as sharp as a I usually am.

  240. ibnsahr

    Kabirlaw ,
    your understanding of god is different than me, thats why islam always refering to physical being, like virgin in heaven, milk and honey's river, god is like spirit, son has son attribute, father has father attribute and so does the spirit, look at the jew, (i think) they expect god to be something extraordinary being, so thats why they still expecting some creature to come down from the sky, god is in every body's heart, thats why he sent jesus to earth, to give example to create the god within. listen to your heart, that's is listen to your god, the funny thing is this voice has been silence soon you are muslim, unless you have willing ness to questioning

    your question is pointing to physical things and funny like CEO,
    thats why when jesus preach about the comforter, the spirit will recognised my teaching, because its one same divine united entity or spirit

    regarding mary and hebrew, thats just to fullfilled the book part of prophecy, use your brain to see what its says in the book and reality, so when people says prophet from arabic descent, then we know its false

Leave a Reply

More

Log in | Designed by Freedom Bulwark Networking