Shaming the Muslims Out of Islam (by Telling the Truth)

Submitted by Bill Warner on Wed, 07/22/2009 - 16:50

When I read MA Khan's new book, Islamic Jihad, I was struck by two things, the high quality of his scholarship and an emerging historical trend. Khan is firmly in the Foundationalist School of scholarship. He does not indulge opinion, but bases his work on the Islamic doctrine of jihad and its historical effects on civilization, with a focus on the destruction of India. He investigates and documents two little known areas--the Sufis and the enslavement of the Hindus. The excellence of his book is part of an historic pattern. When Islam attacked us on September 11, 2001 we were unprepared for war. Our intellectuals were spineless dhimmis who have been bought and paid for by the Saudis and the Muslim Brotherhood, and as a result, were apologists and not able to defend our civilization. However, in one of the more remarkable intellectual events in history, a new type of intellectual was drawn into the study of Islam. Trained critical and scientific thinkers who were amateurs in the field of Islam applied their critical reasoning to this subject and produced a wealth of excellent books and articles. The new Islamic scholarship was fact-driven and took up Islam's challenge of war. Khan's Islamic Jihad is an excellent intellectual weapon. BW: Welcome Mr. Khan. Tell us about your motivation behind writing this book. Khan: Thank you Bill giving me this opportunity to share my thoughts on the kind of danger the progressive world faces from an Islamic resurgence and how we deal with it. What we are witnessing today in Muslim countries-namely in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, and Sudan etc-is the Talibanization or Saudization of the society, i.e., the establishment of Sharia in all spheres of life and society. In other Muslim countries, the demand for the same is solidifying; in a few decades, the face of the entire Islamic world will dramatically change. The Islamic world is heading toward that which it embraces: Islam as a complete code of life, as believed by every Muslim. This transformation seems inescapable at this moment. But our major concern now is the infidel world, particularly the West. The native population in Europe is declining from low birthrate, while Muslims are procreating at unbridled rates. In the UK, Muslim population is increasing 10 times faster than the rest; the trend should be similar in other Western European countries. And where does this lead? By the middle of this century, Muslims will become the largest religious group in Europe. And what will happen under that circumstance? We can easily make a guess. Take the example of Pakistan: in elections, only 10% of Pakistanis support parties that seek to institute Sharia rule. Now look at Britain: some 40% of the Muslims support Sharia rule, with only 37% opposed. This figure, I believe, is skewed to a good extent as Muslims don't speak the truth. Nonetheless, what these figures mean is that a much greater proportion of Muslims living in the West are Sharia-loving or Taliban minded as compared to those living in Islamic countries like Pakistan or Afghanistan. Therefore, unless the mentality of Western Muslims changes drastically in coming decades, which is unlikely, the Talibanization of Europe would become an inescapable reality by the middle of this century, undoubtedly spreading to North America, Australia, Russia and India. We know what Sharia means to civilized humanity. We witness it in Saudi Arabia; we witness it in Afghanistan under the Taliban; we witness it in Talibanized areas of Pakistan. We clearly know that the plight of women-Muslim or not-would become worse. Treatment of non-Muslims is horrible and extremely degrading under Sharia rule: it is happening in Taliban-occupied regions in Pakistan. The Hindus and Sikhs are being subjected to humiliating jizya, which is an exorbitant discriminatory tax for the security of the life and property of non-Muslims in Islamic state (see Quran 9:29). The Taliban attacked the Sikh community in Orakzai for failing to pay the demanded jizya, slayed the men, took possession of their homes and properties, and enslaved the women and children, in accordance with the Quranic commands (33:26) and Muhammad's example of dealing with the Jewish tribe of Banu Quraiza [M.A. Khan, Islamic Jihad, p47-49]. Thousands of Hindus have already relocated to India in recent months in order to escape the Taliban oppression. What is at stake today is obviously the Talibanization of globe-that is, the establishment of the governance of the Quran and Sunnah (i.e. Sharia) globally-which is a central demand of the Quran (2:193, 8:39), and the ultimate goal of Islam. And that will be the worst disaster ever to befall humankind. Therefore, averting this Talibanization of the world, which seems inescapable at this moment unless something drastic happens, should be the central concern for the civilized humanity as I see it. My book is an effort to make the world, both Muslim and non-Muslim, understand what Jihad, the scourge of our time, truly means for our future and take real measures to defeat it. BW: How do you think we must fight battle? Khan: In recent years, many ingenious measures have been tried and are being tried: the global war on terror, regime change in Afghanistan and Iraq for spreading freedom, democracy and modernity, and efforts to engage and work with the so-called moderate Muslims for winning the hearts and minds of the wider Muslim community etc. But nothing is working; since the 9/11 attacks in the U.S., the number of Jihadis, in the form of numerous radical Islamic groups around the world, are increasing exponentially. The overall Muslim mindset is also becoming increasingly radicalized everywhere, including the West. There are also many initiatives amongst the so-called moderate Muslims to reform Islam. Many of these Muslims are also making rewarding careers in the guise of their phony reform campaigns. But attempts at reformation as occurred in Christianity, which was basically going back to the root, the originality of the religion, makes things worse in the case of Islam. A genuine and successful effort by the brilliant Saudi scholar Abdul Wahhab (1703-91) to reform Islam, in the mold of reformation of Christianity by Martin Luther (1483-1546), gave birth to Wahhabism, the Islamic scourge that we are confronting today. Efforts to reform Islam away from orthodoxy, i.e., along a rational and humanistic line, have been tried by some powerful Islamic rulers, namely the Baghdad caliphs, al-Mamun, al-Mutassim and al-Wathik (813-847), as well as Akbar the Great in India. They were the greatest monarchs in the world of their time and ruthlessly dictatorial. While they effected some positive changes during their rule, soon after their departure, it was all overturned. Islamic orthodoxy struck back with greater brutality and horror in every instance. Thus, efforts at reformation have worsened the situation or failed. Any new attempt at reforming Islam is meaningless today because Muslims are becoming well-educated and can read the Quran, which has been translated in all major languages, by themselves. They are no less intelligent than the "reformers" and can understand what the verses of the Quran truly mean. Reformation in the age of modern education is a meaningless exercise and is destined to failure. What might work, something that has not been tried, is what I personally call 'shaming the Muslims out of Islam'. Islam is a horrible and shameful ideology, unfit for the civilized world. But most Muslims, who are average human beings, do not know what is actually in the Quran and Sunnah, or, they have never analyzed the contents of Islam's fundamental texts critically. They have no idea what it means to be a true Muslim and how shameful it is in the modern civilized conscience. If they are made aware of the true nature of Islam, they will leave this barbaric and dehumanizing cult in large numbers. Islam will be condemned to the dustbin of history where it always belonged. This is the only measure that has not been tried. And I have been trying exactly that in my Website, islam-watch.org http://www.islam-watch.org/iw-new/index.php (founded November 2005): "Telling the Truth about Islam". And my book, Islamic Jihad, is also an extension of that effort. I have convincing evidence that it will work. BW: Would you elaborate on the shaming of Muslims and how it would work? Khan: If you look closely at the history of Islam, you would realize that Islamic orthodoxy, with its violent underpinnings of Jihad, has tremendous resilience. As elaborated already, every attempt to reform it from within was followed by its resurgence with greater ferocity. From the 19th century onward, the European colonial powers did effect significant changes in the Islamic world like the equality of religions, liberation of slaves, and the ideas of secularism, progressiveness and modernity. But after colonial withdrawal, these positive changes are all being over turned. Humanity is now being threatened by Islamic orthodoxy and its Jihadis, on a scale unprecedented in history. What these factors tell us is that attempt to reform and secularize Islam is not only doomed to failure, but its survival in any form will turn calamitous to humanity. So those, who care for our progressive and modernist civilization, particularly those in position of power, must understand this critical factor while dealing with Islam. We probably have time, this time round, to save humanity from the ongoing scourge of Islam, albeit sustaining damages of whatsoever scale it may be, we will be left with no such option if Islam has another opportunity to strike. So the need of the hour is to break the back of Islam once and for all. And here comes into play the idea of 'shaming the Muslims out of Islam'. What we need is to discredit Islam root and branch, to the level of cells and atoms. This is not difficult to achieve. Simply telling the truth about Islam will do. I have already mentioned: 'Islam is a horrible and shameful ideology, unfit for the civilized world.' The thing is, most Muslims have little idea of what Islam truly is, what it means to be a true Muslim. Most of them, particularly outside the Arab world, are ignorant about Islam; very few of them read the basic texts of Islam with a proper understanding. They know about Islam mainly from hearsay as part of their growing up. And when it comes to living their life, they are under tremendous influence of the kafir world from their surrounding, through the media, through all the goodies the kafir world bring to them. At the same time, they also remain indoctrinated rather subconsciously with the cardinal thoughts in Islam, namely: 1. Islam is a complete code of life, 2. Islam is the perfect religion and Muhammad was the ideal man for all time; therefore, both are beyond questioning or criticism, 3. Only Muslims are destined to receive God's succor, and 4. Islam will eventually dominate the world, i.e. all people will become Muslim some day. This subconscious indoctrination of the so-called moderate or liberal majority of Muslims easily plays into the hands of the extremists. When the extremists make noise on the ground that the prophet has been defamed or blasphemed or that Islam has been insulted, both being perfect and beyond finger-pointing in their subconscious mind, they too join the orgasmic frenzy with the extremists. We have seen this in the controversy over Salman Rushdie's Satanic Verses, and more recently, over the printing of Prophet Muhammad's cartoons in a Danish paper or Pope Benedict's comment on Muhammad. I think that this so-called moderate variety of Muslims can easily be dissociated from Islam. What we need to do is to say the truth that Islam is not a "religion of peace" as goes the popular discourse, but a barbaric, inhuman and uncivilized cult; that Muhammad was not a noble, a perfect man for all time, but he was a brutal plunderer and mass-murderer lusting for power, wealth and sex; that he was a sex-maniac with a pedophilic urge for a kid as young as six when he was in his 50s and not far from death; that Islam, as initiated by Prophet Muhammad, is a barbaric institution of imperialism, forced conversion, and slavery and sex-concubinage. Islam, as depicted in its sacred texts, is more horrifying than this. What we need is to hold the pages of the Quran, prophetic traditions and biographies, and Islamic history bare to Muslims and to the world. This will be enough to shame the Muslims out of Islam. Why would this work? Let me start with my own example. I was one such liberal/moderate Muslim. When 9/11 occurred, I felt that the attack was rather justified because of the United States' unjust policies toward the Palestinians. I was lucky, I should say, that I was already involved in some internet groups that were critical of Islam. But after the 9/11 attacks, as critical analysis of Islam, the Quran and hadiths flourished dramatically, I became a defender of Islam for quite some time. I continued to resist looking into the basic texts of Islam, the Quran, Sunnah and Muhammad's biographies for 2-3 years. But I eventually read them, and I was shattered and frustrated with myself. I was ashamed because the Quran reads like a manual of unconditional war against non-Muslims, Muhammad was one of the most horrible, if not the worst, human being in the history of mankind. And I had believed that Islam was the most perfect and peaceful religion, a perfect code to human life, for 35+ years of my life. For a Muslim, living Islam is the most difficult thing in the world, and this was the case with me. Only when I read the basic text of Islam and understood its truth was I able to leave Islam with ease. If I hadn't read these texts, I couldn't have mastered the courage to leave Islam despite the horrible things Muslim Jihadis continued to perpetrate, or howsoever hard the critics would criticize those fanatics. Similarly, after reading my website, islam-watch.org, and faithfreedom.org etc.-websites that focus on the criticisms of Islam based on its foundations: the Quran, the Sunnah, and Prophet Muhammad-many Muslims are leaving Islam, even some potential suicide-bombers and mosque imams amongst them. I have testimonies from Muslims, who considered themselves "Muslims for life" just a couple of months ago, that they would never leave the most fulfilling creed of Islam. But after reading my book, which basically expose the true nature of Jihad against the popular discourse that it is a peaceful struggle with the self, against vice, for eradication of poverty, for human rights and women's rights etc., they found their whole life, based on a lie, was shattered. Their faith in Islam was shattered. So the challenge in front of us is to bare the foundation of the Islamic creed in front of these so-called moderate/liberal Muslims and to make them read the foundational texts of Islam. Once they do that, a majority of them will find their faith in Islam shattered. And there it begins: the collapse of Islam like a castle of sands. Humanity will be rescued from its lasting horrors once and for all. BW: There has been a good deal of truth-telling about Islam since the 9/11. But it is not working so far; we are not winning the battle. What do you think is need to be done? Khan: That's absolutely true. A lot of literature has been produced, particularly in the form of books, telling the truth about Islam. But you must also take into account that a much greater volume of literature has been produced, selling the lies of Islam. Let me emphasize that for 'shaming the Muslims out of Islam', we need books and literature focusing the Quran, Sunnah and Islamic history, books like Ibn Warraq's Why I Am Not A Muslim, Andrew Bostom's Legacy of Jihad, Dr. Ali Sina's Understanding Muhammad, and probably my Islamic Jihad. Very few penetrative books of this type, except those of Ibn Warraq and Bostom, have been successful. Most books of this type are not picked up by reputed publishers, fearing Muslim backlash; they are often being self-published published and receive little attention. Most important factor of all is that very few Muslims, who in general have a very poor book-buying and reading habit, buy books like these. Therefore, those books, telling the truth about Islam, have very little impact on Muslims, our prime target. On the other hand, books telling the lies about Islam, which are produced in much larger volumes and the media is eager to promote, are the books that most Muslims and non-Muslims buy. So we have, on the whole, a nullification of the impact of truth-telling books by the lies-telling ones. And when it comes to the news media, which Muslims read to a large extent: there the truth-telling is largely absent; lies-telling is overwhelmingly prevalent. Our mainstream media (MSM) is based on lies, on falsehood, when it comes to the coverage of Islam. And whatever little truth-telling is done, very little of it is focused on the foundational texts and doctrines of Islam. The MSM is the biggest culprit, the biggest accomplice, in the success of radical Islam. They are most eager to circulate the messages-audio-tapes and videos etc.-of Osama bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri and other top al-Qaeda and radical Islamic leaders and ideologues as such. And getting these messages to Muslim audience, harboring potential recruits, is crucial to the success, with which the radical Islamic agenda is progressing. At the same time, the MSM rigorously filter out the few voices that are trying to focus their criticism on the foundations of Islam, criticism that will matter in enlightening both Muslims and non-Muslims about Islam and in shaming the Muslims out of it. The same goes with the internet. It has played tremendous role in the success of al-Qaeda and like-minded radical Islamic groups in spreading their messages, which is the linchpin of their tremendous success in popularizing their violent mission and recruiting cadres. While the truth-tellers have some success there, where they can spread their messages with relative freedom, but there are only few such websites with limited readership against a deluge of pro-Islam and militant Islamic websites. And most of all, the truth-telling websites are banned in most Islamic countries, and even in the West. For example, most educational institutions in Australia have banned all truth-telling websites, namely faithfreedom.org, thereligionofpeace.com, jihadwatch.org, islam-watch.org and islammonior.org amongst others categorizing them as hate-sites. So, it will become clear why we are not making significant ground in our truth-telling efforts. The outcome of this battle, I think, will be determined by the media. We must recognize that the investment of hundreds of billions of dollars annually in strengthening intelligence apparatus, tightening security and the war of terror is going waste. Some of these measures are also working counter to their intended objectives, by helping the radicalization of the Muslim mind on various grievances, howsoever unjustified they may be. And of course, it is causing loss of lives in large numbers on both sides. In the media, we can kill this menace with a small fraction of the investment and with much less loss in life and properties. The battle can be won with ease. Muslims can ignore the noise made by truth-tellers, often discredited as fringe Muslim-hating Islamophobes, in a negligible few and little-known websites, but they cannot ignore the Mainstream Media. When the truth-tellers get the opportunity to bare the fundamental sacred texts of Islam in the pages of the MSM to show how horrible and barbaric the cult of Islam is, Muslims at all levels would be forced to defend their creed by looking into those texts. Every attempt to defend Islam would lead to their enlightenment about the filth and inhumanity that lies at its heart. We have more than convincing evidence to affirm that the so-called peaceful majority of moderate/liberal Muslims, ashamed, frustrated, and angered of what they have unwittingly believed for their whole life, would start leaving Islam en masse. The West's problem would be solved in a decade or two with the collapse of Islam; I can challenge you on that. From there, the remedy to the Islamic problem in the rest of the world, including Muslim countries, would soon begin. The fact is that the Islamists have tremendous advantages against the truth-tellers in every aspect of this battle. The truth-tellers are fighting this battle against mountainous odds: their opponents have annual investment of billions of dollars against zero on their own side; the Islamists have almost all the ground in the MSM, the decisive battleground of this struggle.

I realize that there is little chance of this changing at all. The future of this battle remains hugely tilted toward the Islamist side as of now. The Talibanization of the globe remain an inescapable possibility unless circumstances changes drastically, possibly horribly.

BW: Thank you for enlightening us, Mr. Khan.

Bill Warner Permalink copyright (c) CBSX, LLC politicalislam.com Use and distribute as you wish; do not edit and give us credit.

Average:

Your rating: None

Dears,please check out this

Submitted by krishna786 (not verified) on Wed, 07/22/2009 - 18:27.

Dears,please check out this video "The Third Jihad" http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-864522917532871834

Taliban need to know that we

Submitted by Raisinhead (not verified) on Wed, 07/22/2009 - 18:36.

Taliban need to know that we fight back today. If they want to really try to demean the lesser of us they better thank again. the allah of infidels told us to fight back and kill you. allah loves us too loool. Allah gave us the bomb you want. Allah of infidels freed Africans from slavery. Our allah told us that Muslims are not worth saving so he came over to the infidel side.

And don't forget about

Submitted by Moooo (not verified) on Wed, 07/22/2009 - 19:06.

And don't forget about taliban's supporters here in this site. Taliban want sharia, muslims here also want it. The deceptive big mouths are taliban's accomplice.

Hi friend Bill Warner I

Submitted by paarsurrey (not verified) on Wed, 07/22/2009 - 23:53.

Hi friend Bill Warner

I think you got it wrong to say ,"When Islam attacked us on September 11, 2001". Islam is a religion; not a person; it never attacked. It were the terrorists that attacked; I think you will revise and correct your sentence.

Thanks

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

paarsurrey, you haven't go

Submitted by ibnsahr (not verified) on Thu, 07/23/2009 - 01:19.

paarsurrey,

you haven't go to mental clinic yet?
the terrorist chantting "allahu akbar" before slamming the damn things in to the the damn buildings
is "allahu akbar" = islam
islam is a cult, if you don't want me to called it pile of sh*t.
go see doctor and take half of your rotten's brain out,
i can ignore jah and laugh about him, but this guy is insane

Amputation of limbs as

Submitted by Marie (not verified) on Thu, 07/23/2009 - 02:52.

Amputation of limbs as punishment will “bring you more peace and security”.
July 21st, 2009 Ahmed Leave a comment Go to comments

Yep. That is what Sheikh Suhaib Hasan offers Brits.

Hardline Islamic penal codes, such as the amputation of limbs as punishment for theft, would make Britain a safer and better place, the founder of the country’s oldest sharia court has told The Times.

Sheikh Suhaib Hasan, the secretary of the Islamic Sharia Council, said that the enforcement of such laws was “something to bring you more peace and security”.

Dr Hasan, who presides over a sharia court in East London that rules on civil matters such as divorce, emphasised that he neither sought nor expected the implementation of the criminal penal code in Britain because it was not a Muslim country.

He said, however, that problems such as knife crime would be better resolved if harsher puni…

One Million Failed Asylum

Submitted by Marie (not verified) on Thu, 07/23/2009 - 02:55.

One Million Failed Asylum Invaders Get Free NHS Treatment
Calais migrants scum, riffraff, third world crims ambush Britons at knifepoint in terrifying ‘highway robberies’

* This has been going on for a long time, previously it was mostly the truckers that were attacked and robbed. Now its the tourists. But hey: its all about cultural enrichment, and these poor deprived people are just following their prophets teachings. Who are we to judge, right? Right?

By JAMES SLACK and IAN SPARKS/Daily Mail

Migrant gangs in Calais are targeting British holidaymakers in terrifying ‘highway robberies’.

Would-be illegal immigrants are forming human roadblocks to force motorists passing through the French port town to stop.

Travellers are then robbed at knifepoint by the migrants, who are desperate for funds to help them sneak into the UK.

A group of migrants in Calais

On the move: A group of migrants in Calais. Some have been robbing British travellers at the French port town as they try and find enough funds to help them sneak into the UK

Last night police in Calais issued a warning to the nine million Britons a year who pass through Calais - the equivalent of 25,000 every day.

They urged motorists to keep their windows closed and doors locked until they are safely inside the ferry terminal.

Officers said they had received several reports from holidaymakers of having to ‘run a gauntlet’ of migrants between the town and the ferry port.

One British couple reported being forced to stop by bedraggled refugees on the port approach road last week.

A Calais police spokesman said: ‘Frontier police received a report from a British couple who said the gang formed a human chain across the road to stop them.

‘Around six of them then surrounded the car and waved a knife in the male driver’s face and demanded cash. He threw his wallet out of the window and sped off. The refugees fled into the woods on foot.’
Riot police face migrants in Calais following a morning raid in April

Unrest: Riot police face migrants in Calais following a morning raid in April

Police said several days later another British family ploughed through a refugee roadblock, knocking down and injuring one of the migrants.

Robert Moncrieff, 80, following in a car close behind, said: ‘There was a refugee lying in the road who looked injured. He was surrounded by several of his accomplices.

‘We drove straight past and when we reached the port, the driver told us the refugees had tried to flag him down but he had driven through them and knocked one over.’

The police spokesman added: ‘We advise drivers to drive slowly at anyone blocking the road, giving the clear intention you do not want to be stopped.

‘If the road remains blocked, keep the windows closed and doors locked, and call the police. Drivers should take any opportunity to drive away once the road is clear.’

He added: ‘We are stepping up security and police patrols in the area around the port, especially over the busy summer months.’
France's immigration minister Eric Besson

Promises: France’s immigration minister Eric Besson has vowed to bulldoze Calais, where a London journalist was raped

Since the closure of the Red Cross refugee centre at Sangatte in 2002, would-be migrants have been sleeping rough in and around Calais while they attempt to sneak on board cross-Channel trains and ferries.

There are currently around 2,000, many living in a squalid camp known as the Jungle, which the French government has said will not be cleared away until next year.

In April immigration minister Eric Besson vowed to bulldoze the litter-strewn shanty town - where a London journalist was raped by a migrant last year - after admitting it had become a hotbed for people smugglers and criminal gangs.

But he has now said the camp must remain in place until it can be dismantled ‘in a dignified manner’.

French politicians have blamed Britain for the return of migrant camps to Calais.

The mayor of Calais, Natacha Bouchart, said the lure of the UK’s ‘enormous’ state handouts to asylum-seekers was the reason why thousands of foreigners are using the French port as a staging point to get across the Channel.

Mrs Bouchart said the UK Government’s policies were ‘imposing’ thousand of migrants on the town, costing the local economy millions of pounds.

Earlier this month, Gordon Brown agreed to give France £15million for new technology to search vehicles heading for Britain.

In return, France undertook to step up the repatriation of illegal immigrants.

Last night a UK Border Agency spokesman said: ‘We are confident the French authorities will take any action necessary to protect those travelling back to Britain.’

So who's planning on taking a trip to Europe during the summer?

Parsurrey: Since when

Submitted by Kam Baksh (not verified) on Thu, 07/23/2009 - 05:20.

Parsurrey:

Since when Ahmadiyas have become muslims? The Quadiyanis, AKA Ahmadiyas, have never accepted finality of Mohammd, so how can you be muslims when you doubt the very Kalima?

You every sentence is wrong. Islam is not a religion but a cult of Mohammad.
Those who attacked were puritanical Mohammedans. Tell us how it was not so.
Islam surely needs drummer boys like you to survive.

ibnsahr wrote: "the

Submitted by Moooo (not verified) on Thu, 07/23/2009 - 20:00.

ibnsahr wrote:

"the terrorist chantting “allahu akbar” before slamming the damn things in to the the damn buildings
is “allahu akbar” = islam"

Not only "allahu barbar", but they also holding quran as a guideline for terror, just as pedo mo did back then. The pedo mo won with terror and sudden attack (similar to present terrorist).

"islam is a cult, if you don’t want me to called it pile of sh*t."

Pile of muhammad's sh*t to be more precise, and muslim are very happy eating that SH*T then offer the SH*T to non-muslims.

PaarSurrey / IbnSahr: The

Submitted by jonc (not verified) on Thu, 07/23/2009 - 21:11.

PaarSurrey / IbnSahr:

The fact that the 9/11 terrorists were chanting" Allah-akbar!" and waiving Korans when they committed mass murder should not be used per se to condemn Islam.
I remind people that Christian Crusaders cried "Deos Vult!" (="God wills it") when they carried out their atrocities as well.

The real question is this:
Were the actions of any particular group in accordance with, or in opposition to, the teachings of their religion?

Given the' verses of violence and terror' in the Koran, then (at the very least) the case can be made (and most certainly is, esp. by Wahhabis) that the actions of the 9/11 mass-murderers are in accordance with Islam.
Indeed, one could go further and interpret certain verses in the Koran to show that Muslims must be in a perpetual state of war with non-muslims until the whole World is under Islamic control.
Again, certain Islamic groups and schools of thought do just that and regrettably, it is these schools that seem to have teh greatest influence.

Contrast this with the Crusaders: Had they read the New Testament, they would have found no religious justification for atrocity or brutality and precious little for war itself.
(NB: This is not to say that the crusades were, of themselves, unjustifiable under Christian rules.)

Thus I think that MA Khan (not B.Warner btw) is at least partly accurate to say "when Islam attacked us on 9/11..." since Islam itself justifies and promotes such action.
Where I might differ, is to point out that Westerners (including both UK and US) have been the victims of Islamic terror way before 9/11 (Luxor Massacre, Lockerbie etc).

Perhaps he should have said "When Islam attacked us again..."

Paarsurrey, you know as well

Submitted by R_not (not verified) on Thu, 07/23/2009 - 21:12.

Paarsurrey, you know as well as all of us know that islam is not only a religion but politics, a legal system and basically a way to control people right down to what they do in their bedrooms and bathrooms. In fact, if you look at islam and how it was taught by Muhammed, I think, it is more of a political system that uses all its religious rites as a front to gain entry into countries under the guise of 'religion'.

People are never sure they are saved, in order to be saved the things that are required (jihad which is explained in 97% of the Islamic passages is to do violence), are atrocities against a fellow human being. Of which, 'human being' is not even a concept in islam - only believers vs unbelievers. And islam is in a constant state of war with unbelievers which means anything goes against unbelievers. It doesn't even respect more than half of its population, of women or even of people who are in a different sect of islam.

Its goals are imperialistic and either deadly, or a way of enslavement (subjugation and also slavery), of anyone who rejects islam and all of its junk that claims it is a religion.

And then when it gets its way of conquest - it has absolutely nothing to offer and instead sucks the lifeblood out of the dhimmi until they are as mindless as the muslims.

One thing we keep on doing is just blindly accepting what comes out of the muslim's mouths. We never question what their definitions of words are such as 'innocent, 'oppression', 'sin', etc. If we did we would start seeing that it is the complete opposite of what we know of these words and would start realizing that 'moderates' do not exist. It is only a wish on our part. Bad (hypocrites) and good muslims exists though - and that is all explained in the koran.

I really loved what this

Submitted by R_not (not verified) on Thu, 07/23/2009 - 21:23.

I really loved what this article had to say and it, to me, is the truth.

Coming up against Muslims is not easy though, and our own are even worse, when they are in full 'apologetic mode' (as I say). But, I just keep on referencing the koran, hadiths and sira. Types like paarsurrey who want to give us his translation are not valid because he is not one of the accepted translators.

Unfortunately, we have a TV that is in full 'apologetic mode' and making the muslims out to be victims in various stories and then not telling the full truth in such stories as 'The Secrets of the Koran' on the History channel. I write to them (I wish EVERYONE would write to them) and tell them where they went off track and they do not respond. But, if they cannot be trusted with this history how can they be trusted with any history they shovel out?!

Being in Act for America, we get notice of articles that we can login and respond to on various news outlets. I never miss an opportunity to do that.

And Mr. Sina's book, 'Understanding Mohammed' is very good. I use that as reference all the time! Muslims especially do not like the conclusions of this book, but I just keep going and referencing their own texts.

Hi everybody here I agree

Submitted by paarsurrey (not verified) on Fri, 07/24/2009 - 11:52.

Hi everybody here

I agree with the following comments dated July 23, 2009 of brother jonc
‎
PaarSurrey / IbnSahr:
‎
The fact that the 9/11 terrorists were chanting” Allah-akbar!” and waiving Korans when ‎they committed mass murder should not be used per se to condemn Islam.

I remind people that Christian Crusaders cried “Deos Vult!” (=”God wills it”) when they ‎carried out their atrocities as well.
‎
The real question is this:‎
‎
Were the actions of any particular group in accordance with, or in opposition to, the ‎teachings of their religion?
‎
Contrast this with the Crusaders: Had they read the New Testament, they would have ‎found no religious justification for atrocity or brutality and precious little for war itself.
‎
Jonc got it alright; though to some extent.
‎
Thanks brother jonc

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

To Bill Warner Y ou talk

Submitted by londonspirit (not verified) on Fri, 07/24/2009 - 14:52.

To Bill Warner

Y ou talk about how impressed you are by the intellect of Mr. Khan, but your just claming what he says is right without no prior knowledge of whether he is talking the truth or not.

YOU WROTE: What we are witnessing today in Muslim countries-namely in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, and Sudan etc-is the Talibanization or Saudization of the society, i.e., the establishment of Sharia in all spheres of life and society. In other Muslim countries, the demand for the same is solidifying; in a few decades, the face of the entire Islamic world will dramatically change.

ANSWER: Sharia is a law, to bring about a good way of life. it does not indudge in any way of killing inncent people. Just like britain and other countries impose laws likewise saudia arabia imposes the shariah law. There is absolutely nothing wrong with imposing shariah law. Yes it may have some punishments that may be barbaric or inhumane in the modern day, such as cutting hands of for theft and lashing for comitting fornication. But it is your fault if you get these punishments and the way to avoid it is simple to not do it.

Why dont you Bill find a law of the shariah that says that we should kill innocent people who are not muslim and that woman are not allowed education.

YOU WROTE: And what will happen under that circumstance? We can easily make a guess. Take the example of Pakistan: in elections, only 10% of Pakistanis support parties that seek to institute Sharia rule. Now look at Britain: some 40% of the Muslims support Sharia rule, with only 37% opposed.

ANSWER: This is total utter nonsense because although birth rate plays a large volume in increasing religious population it isnt the main factor. The main factor is that alot of these europeans are now moving away from chrisitanity into a new way which is darwinism. That is why christianity in europe is declining. Another reason why chrisitanity is not only declining in europe but in america is because alot are converting from chrsitianity to islam, take russia for example, this country has an increasing number of people converting from orthadox christianity to islam. Britian is another prime example where churches are closing down at an alarming rate and mosques are being built not because of immigration but because english people are leaving the chrisitan fath for islam. That is a prime reason why not by mid century but in a few decades islam will be biggest relgion in the world. An to say 40% of muslims want shariah rule in britian and europe is total nonse. This is because a lot of the muslims in this country enjoy drinking, taking alcohol doing fornication and many things else. They have a more western culture to them because they have been brought up in that enviroment.

YOU WROTE: Treatment of non-Muslims is horrible and extremely degrading under Sharia rule: it is happening in Taliban-occupied regions in Pakistan. The Hindus and Sikhs are being subjected to humiliating jizya, which is an exorbitant discriminatory tax for the security of the life and property of non-Muslims in Islamic state

ANSWER: Please find me information in islam from the quran where it says that non-muslims should be degraded. I am very curious to know this verse. What the taliban do is not islam or shariah. It is stupid and done due to their own understanding and beliefs.

londonspirit I am still

Submitted by Marie (not verified) on Fri, 07/24/2009 - 20:32.

londonspirit I am still waiting for your response to my debate on the forums ( I've been waiting for 5 days ). If you don't respond my tomorrow night ( U.S. time ), I am taking it down and you can forgot about debating me.

Marie I do want a debate. I

Submitted by londonspirit (not verified) on Fri, 07/24/2009 - 20:36.

Marie I do want a debate. I have been job searching. And i tried searching for the post but couldnt find it, and this new edition of this website doesnt allow me to return to older posts or it may do but i dont know how to. I told you before create a post like this with your views and lets have a debate. Simple.

PaarSurry: I am glad you

Submitted by jonc (not verified) on Fri, 07/24/2009 - 21:08.

PaarSurry:
I am glad you agree with me in part at least.
Your 'cut-and-paste' of my comment is quite interesting, since you agree with my point about the Crusaders and say nothing about the Jihadists (though I didn't use that name for them).

LS:
You wrote: "Sharia is a law, to bring about a good way of life."
Guess what, I AGREE with you!
The only proviso I would add is that you are speaking from an entirely Moslem viewpoint (as is your right, of course).
The Musselman in particular has a good way of life brought about by Sharia law.
The Musselima less so.
The non-muslim, not at all.
You see, that is one big difference between religious Sharia and secular Western law, the secular law does not discriminate against any person on the basis of religion, colour, sex or anything else.
You are free, LS, in Britain, to practice your faith, build a mosque as you choose (short of incitement to violence in the former and with planning permission for the latter), prosletise on the streets, your wife can wear the Hejab or gil-bab if she (or you) want.
I, as a Christian, in say, the home of Islam, Suadia Arabia, cannot pray openly, display even a tiny (non-Islamic) religious symbol or build a Church because of Sharia law.
Sharia law discriminates in favour of the Umma (especially the men) and against the unbelievers.

You wrote: a lot of assertions about conversion to Islam without providing any facts, or even statistics, to back them up.
Here is a statistic: in the last UK census (2001) which, for the first time, asked people to provide religious information, 72% of the total responding UK population stated that they were Christian and 15% were agnostic/atheist, Muslims were in fourth place with ~2%. Of this ~2% (~1.1M), 947K were Pakistani/Bangladeshi. (Source: www.statistics.gov.uk)
This leaves a total of ~150 000 for moslems from ALL other Countries in the WORLD + UK converts.
Given that the UK has reasonably large populations from Asia/Arab Countries/Indian moslem etc, I'd say that the conversion rate is pretty low.
(NB I had to approximate the total number of Moslems because the graph section was soo small.)

You wrote: "Please find me information in islam from the quran where it says that non-muslims should be degraded."
Try Sura 9:29.:
“Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, and those who acknowledge not the religion of Islam among the People of the Book, until they pay the until they pay the tribute ..."
Hilali & Yusuf Ali then continue"...with willing submission and feel themselves subdued."
Pickthall: "...readily, being brought low. "
Shakir: "...in acknowledement of [Islamic] superiority and they are in a state of subjection."
Rodwell: "...out of hand, and they be humbled".

Now, I don't know about you, but if I had to pay a special tax "in submission" to "acknowledge" the "superiority" of Moslems and was "subdued" and in a state of "humbled subjection", I'd feel degraded as a human being.

Note: The only 'context' for this verse is 9:28, which tells Muslims that unbelievers are "unclean" or "impure" and that if Moslems are poor, then Allah will enrich them from loot. The verses before and after are on different subjects (how Allah gives the Moslems military victories and erroneous complaints about the beliefs of Jews and Christians, respectively).

We'll have the debate here.

Submitted by Marie (not verified) on Fri, 07/24/2009 - 21:52.

We'll have the debate here. Sorry for the length but I never had an online debate, so I'm not familiar with the proper etiquette.

Marie VS. londonspirit

Postby Marie » Mon Jul 20, 2009 12:12 am
This debate is about the authenticity of the Quran being divine and the corruption of the Bible between me and londonspirit on this forum.
To spice up the challenge londonspirit said that if he lost he would convert to Christianity ( I told him I don't expect him to convert to Christianity, it's his choice to convert ) and if I lost, I must write an article apologizing about my harsh criticism about Islam ( These are posted on the main site ).

To start off the debate here is my arguments for the Bible and against the Quran:

Arguments for the Bible:

What archaeology says about the Bible

The Ugarit Tablets

In the 1920's the Ugarit Tablets were found in the field of a Syrian farmer. 6 of the Ugarit texts tell us that the Canaanites did worship a fertility/rain god named Baal who is often mentioned in the old testament.

The Mari Tablets

The Mari Tablets were found in 1933 in the city of Mari, a semitic state in located in northern Mesopotamia. Among the twenty thousand tablets that were found are references to the Habiru ( Akkadian for Hebrew ) people. They were described as warlike wanderers and people from the otherside. This term might be a reference to the people of Israel after the crossing over of the River Jordan.

The House of David inscription

In 1993 Dr. Avraham Biran discovered a royal plaza as he excavated Tell Dan in northern Galilee at the foot of Matt. Hermon. Among the rubble he found remains of a black basalt stele, which had parts of thirteen lines of Aramaic inscriptions. From these inscriptions the following two phrases are clearly visible: "The king of Israel" and house of David." The stele had been erected to celebrate the defeat of the kings of Judah and Israel.

The crucifixion in the Bible

While there is no concrete evidence that Jesus did exist, there is a description of how the Romans crucified people.

Info from wiki:

Cross shape

See also Cross or stake as gibbet on which Jesus died

Justus Lipsius: De cruce, p. 47
Image by Justus Lipsius of the crucifixion of Jesus
Crux simplex, a simple wooden stake. Image by Justus Lipsius.

The gibbet on which crucifixion was carried out could be of many shapes. Josephus describes multiple tortures and positions of crucifixion during the Siege of Jerusalem as Titus crucified the rebels;[12] and Seneca the Younger recounts: "I see crosses there, not just of one kind but made in many different ways: some have their victims with head down to the ground; some impale their private parts; others stretch out their arms on the gibbet."[13]

At times the gibbet was only one vertical stake, called in Latin crux simplex or palus. This was the simplest available construction for torturing and killing the criminals. Frequently, however, there was a cross-piece attached either at the top to give the shape of a T (crux commissa) or just below the top, as in the form most familiar in Christian symbolism (crux immissa).[14] Other forms were in the shape of the letters X and Y.

The earliest writings that speak specifically of the shape of the cross on which Jesus died describe it as shaped like the letter T (the Greek letter tau),[15] or composed of an upright and a transverse beam, together with a small ledge in the upright.[16]

[edit] Nail placement in crucifixion

In popular depictions of the crucifixion of Jesus (possibly because in translations of John 20:25 the wounds are described as being "in his hands"), Jesus is shown with nails in his hands. But in Greek the word "χείρ", usually translated as "hand", referred to arm and hand together, and to denote the hand as distinct from the arm some other word was added, as "ἄκρην οὔτασε χεῖρα" (he wounded the end of the χείρ, i.e. he wounded her hand).[17]

A possibility that does not require tying is that the nails were inserted just above the wrist, between the two bones of the forearm (the radius and the ulna).[18]

An experiment that was the subject of a documentary on the National Geographic Channel's Quest For Truth: The Crucifixion,[19] showed that a person can be suspended by the palm of their hand. Nailing the feet to the side of the cross relieves strain on the wrists by placing most of the weight on the lower body.

A foot-rest (suppedaneum) attached to the cross, perhaps for the purpose of taking the person's weight off the wrists, is sometimes included in representations of the crucifixion of Jesus, but is not discussed in ancient sources. Some scholars interpret the Alexamenos graffito, the earliest surviving depiction of the Crucifixion, as including such a foot-rest.[20] Ancient sources do mention the sedile, a small seat attached to the front of the cross, about halfway down,[21][22][23] which could have served a similar purpose.

In 1968, archaeologists discovered at Giv'at ha-Mivtar in northeast Jerusalem the remains of one Jehohanan, who had been crucified in the first century. The remains included a heel bone with a nail driven through it from the side. The tip of the nail was bent, perhaps because of striking a knot in the upright beam, which prevented it being extracted from the foot. A first inaccurate account of the length of the nail led some to believe that it had been driven through both heels, suggesting that the man had been placed in a sort of sidesaddle position, but the true length of the nail, 11.5 centimetres, suggests instead that in this case of crucifixion the heels were nailed to opposite sides of the upright.[24][25][26]

[edit] Cause of death

The length of time required to reach death could range from a matter of hours to a number of days, depending on exact methods, the prior health of the condemned, and environmental circumstances. Death could result from any combination of causes, including blood loss, hypovolemic shock, or sepsis following infection, caused by the scourging that preceded the crucifixion, or by the process of being nailed itself, or eventual dehydration.[27][28]

A theory attributed to Pierre Barbet holds that, when the whole body weight was supported by the stretched arms, the typical cause of death was asphyxiation. He conjectured that the condemned would have severe difficulty inhaling, due to hyper-expansion of the chest muscles and lungs. The condemned would therefore have to draw himself up by his arms, leading to exhaustion, or have his feet supported by tying or by a wood block. Indeed, Roman executioners could be asked to break the condemned's legs, after he had hung for some time, in order to hasten his death.[29] Once deprived of support and unable to lift himself, the condemned would die within a few minutes. Experiments by Frederick Zugibe have, however, revealed that, when suspended with arms at 60° to 70° from the vertical, test subjects had no difficulty breathing, only rapidly-increasing discomfort and pain. This would correspond to the Roman use of crucifixion as a prolonged, agonizing, humiliating death. Legs were often broken to hasten death through severe traumatic shock and fat embolism. Crucifixion on a single pole with no transom, with hands affixed over one's head, would precipitate rapid asphyxiation if no block was provided to stand on, or once the legs were broken.[30]

Archaeological evidence for ancient crucifixion

Despite the fact that the ancient Jewish historian Josephus, as well as other sources, refer to the crucifixion of thousands of people by the Romans, there is only a single archaeological discovery of a crucified body dating back to the Roman Empire around the time of Jesus which was discovered in Jerusalem in 1968. It is not necessarily surprising that there is only one such discovery, because a crucified body was usually left to decay on the cross and therefore would not be preserved. The only reason these archaeological remains were preserved was because family members gave this particular individual a customary burial.

The remains were found accidentally in an ossuary with the crucified man’s name on it, 'Yehohanan, the son of Hagakol'.[32][33] Prof. Nicu Haas, an anthropologist at the Hebrew University Medical School in Jerusalem, examined the ossuary and discovered that it contained a heel bone with a nail driven through its side, indicating that the man had been crucified. The position of the nail relative to the bone indicates that the feet have been nailed to the cross from their side, not from their front; various opinions have been proposed as to whether they were both nailed together to the front of the cross or one on the left side, one on the right side. The point of the nail had olive wood fragments on it indicating that he was crucified on a cross made of olive wood or on an olive tree. Since olive trees are not very tall, this would suggest that the condemned was crucified at eye level. Additionally, a piece of acacia wood was located between the bones and the head of the nail, presumably to keep the condemned from freeing his foot by sliding it over the nail. His legs were found broken, perhaps as a means of hastening his death as described in John 19:31-35.[30] It is thought that, since in Roman times iron was expensive, the nails were removed from the dead body to cut the costs, which would help to explain why only one has been found, as the tip of the nail in question was bent in such a way that it couldn't be removed.

Prof. Haas had also identified a scratch on the inner surface of the right radius bone of the forearm, close to the wrist. He deduced from the form of the scratch, as well as from the intact wrist bones, that a nail had been driven into the forearm at that position.

In short the description of Jesus's crucifixion matches the description given by historians and archaeologists.

Arguments against the Quran:

Lack of evidence to support the divinity.

If God sent the Quran to Muhammed, then why is it so incoherent, ambigous, vague, and not organized chronologically?

If the god of the Quran is almighty and powerful, why would he allow the Jews and Christians to corrupt his scriptures?

If Muhammed was visited by the angel Gabriel why did he think he was demonically possessed? The visitation of an angel is suppose to be a pleasant experience and in the Quran Muhammed is worried that this visitation means he was possessed by a demon.

Discrepancy on Jesus's parentage in the Quran

The Quran states that God has no son and Jesus is not his son, he is only a prophet. But Surah's 19:17-23 says Jesus was conceived through God. The problem with this is if Jesus was not conceived by a human male then who is his father. The Quran states that Jesus was conceived through God and therefore that would make God his father and Jesus the son of God. Also in Surah 19:17-18 it states that Gabriel appeared to Mary in a form of a man and Mary was afraid of him because she said I seek refuge from you to (Allah) most gracious: ( come not near ) if you fear Allah. Once again the visitation of an angel is suppose to be a pleasant experience and here Mary is afraid of Gabriel.
Historical fallacies and inaccuracies found in the Quran:

The Pharaoh

According to Surah 7:120-125, the pharaoh used crucifixion with dealing the sorcerers. The problem is there is no evidence that crucifixion was used before the Babylonian Empire.

The Golden Calf

According to Surah 20:90-100 a Samaritan helped the Israelites build the Golden Calf. The problem is the samaritans are the descendents of Jews intermarrying with Gentiles and they did not exist until 1,000 years after the time of Moses.

Judaism

According to Surah 9:30 the Jews believed that Ezra is the son of God-the Messiah. The Jews do not believe Ezra is the son of God and this assertion is blasphemous in Judaism.

Mary

According to Surahs 19:28 and 3:33-36 Mary the mother of Jesus, was the daughter of Imran or Amran, the father of Moses and Aaron. These verses also say Mary was the sister of Moses and Aaron. Clearly Muhammed confused Mary with Miriam.

There is also the story of Mary and the date palm speaking and offering fruit to her ( Surah 19:23

This legend is traced to similar legends found in the apocryphal "Protoevangelium of James" and "the Gospel of the Nativity of Mary" which have been dated to the fourth to sixth centuries, and was believed by the sects found in Arabia.

Now it is your turn londonspirit

PS: londonspirit I know I posted a lot here as I don't have any experience in an online debate. Take your time

This excellent article begins

Submitted by Demsci (not verified) on Fri, 07/24/2009 - 22:03.

This excellent article begins with explaining there is a threat and therefore a need to defend our civilization, especially in Western Europe, due to demographic changes.

If Scientology were growing rapidly, while it would have an authoritarian style of government, organizing society, treating women and minorities, while Islam would be a 3rd-rate religion, then Scientology and not Islam, would be scrutinized, criticized, even insultingly so.

But Muslims do not seem sensitive to this feeling of threat by Westerners or Indians. They primarily see unbearable insults, injustice to their Quran/ Prophet it seems, and react to that. They seem to react far more to Islam-critics than they try to reassure the Westerners. They react to accusations of past and present bad behavior of Muslims with the equivalent bad behavior of other humans, and not with distancing themselves radically, unequivocally from the radicals, siding with us.

When a connection between bad behavior of Muslims is made with Islamic Holy scriptures, teachings, they chastize the critic who says this and they say terrorist, oppressive, bad behavior in general is un-Islamic. But they mostly do not follow through by siding with the critics against the culprits. This gives us the suspicion they have some sort of secret agenda, that they really do side with radical Muslims, but merely want to lull as many Westerners and Indians into a sense of false security.

LondonSpirit, democratic people never object to voluntary conversion, so also not to Christians becoming Muslims, we respect that. But we do see a threat in bigger growth-numbers, when:
A. Radical Muslims propagate world domination, with as a result: many subservient: Women, minorities, even Islamic ordinary people, who have much less autonomy than in current Western countries.
B. When Muslims, radical or not, behave the way they do when they do have the majority and power, as they do in Islamic countries. We desperately like more Muslims, when in majority and power, to behave impeccably democratic.

I wished with all my heart that Muslims like you try to reassure the Westerners and Indians that are aware of growing threat to their civilization, to the autonomy (instead of subservience) of all their citizens, especially their women. Muslims could do that by unequivocally siding with democracy worldwide. Especially in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan. Then it would be us all against, say, North Korea, Burma or big organized crime groups.

When they would be doing that, in an honest way, a load would fall off of our shoulders. Converts to a 100 % democratic Islam would not bother us. But you don't reassure us when we see a threat to our sacred freedom of speech, autonomy, political system, when you point out how powerful Islam is going to be and not at the same time invest in supporting democracy worldwide and siding with its other supportes.

And that is why for now we rejoice in the rise of the number of EX-Muslims, and in scrutinizing and criticizing Islam and Muslims, always and everywhere, so that being well informed is our weapon to defend our civilization. Thank God for the ex-Muslims, because they are for our democracy, human rights, golden rule (which is much more important to me than being against Islam, which I view as big potential obstacle to my democratic ideal). And they are: Well informed about Islam, and as highly or even higher motivated than most Muslims are.

Paarsurrey, Arab Christians

Submitted by Raisinhead (not verified) on Sat, 07/25/2009 - 04:00.

Paarsurrey, Arab Christians sent a message for help from Pope Urab and then the Crusades happened. Muslims had attacked the Arab christians.

The Golden Calf was made by the Foreign slaves from Egypt who followed the Jews out of Egypt.

Adolph Hitler loved Islam as Islam is from the Occult. The SSS loved the occult and the pagan gods of Germany. Hitler, The Occult of Hyprocrisy, is a good film. Hitler was the Prophet and Messiah to the NAZIs.

Under Infidels Muslims can be ex-muslims and black slaves from Muslim lands like Sudan escape and are telling us about the evil things Arab Muslims do to African Muslims and Christians/Animist. After using the African Muslims they are now killing them and laughing at them calling them gorrillas. Wow Muhammad and allah called them bad names too and allah is their god and Muhammad is their prophet.

Londonspirit, you are very

Submitted by ibrahim (not verified) on Sat, 07/25/2009 - 08:05.

Londonspirit, you are very right in saying that the Sharia law is wonderful and it should be applied to all lands, including the lands where the kafirs are the dominant majority. It is only after these fools are made to suffer by the hands of muslims will they understand the truth of "Religion of Peace"

londonspirit, have you even

Submitted by R_not (not verified) on Sat, 07/25/2009 - 09:10.

londonspirit, have you even read the koran? I mean the degradation of unbelievers is all over the place and if there is something that resembles a peaceful passage - it was abrogated.

I guess calling them apes and pigs to dehumanize them, or saying to slay them wherever you find them, doesn't count as degradation. Or telling us continually that 'islam doesn't say to kill innocents' when in fact the word 'innocent' doesn't apply to non-muslims. Or that taqiyya is a part of your posts while leaving out that islam divides up the realm of war (dar al harb) and dar al islam, and that in dar al harb muslims are in a constant state of war. Or even admitting that mohammed did all the atrocities that the koran, and other texts, bolding tell us - is beyond most muslims - unless they are *FORMER* muslims.

How can people have a debate with muslims when they are not telling us the full scope of what islam is all about and they either leave things out or just boldly tell us something that is wrong? That sort of a debate isn't a debate, but a session in futility.

Raisin Head: The Golden Calf

Submitted by Marie (not verified) on Sat, 07/25/2009 - 19:54.

Raisin Head:

The Golden Calf was made by the Foreign slaves from Egypt who followed the Jews out of Egypt.

I say:

"Sharia is a law, to bring

Submitted by Moooo (not verified) on Sat, 07/25/2009 - 20:41.

"Sharia is a law, to bring about a good way of life. it does not indudge in any way of killing inncent people. Just like britain and other countries impose laws likewise saudia arabia imposes the shariah law. There is absolutely nothing wrong with imposing shariah law. Yes it may have some punishments that may be barbaric or inhumane in the modern day, such as cutting hands of for theft and lashing for comitting fornication. But it is your fault if you get these punishments and the way to avoid it is simple to not do it."

This is the perfect example about a person that knows nothing about reality, this kind of person only knows theory. sharia law is full of holes and anyone can make advantages over others, especially woman.

"But it is your fault if you

Submitted by R_not (not verified) on Sat, 07/25/2009 - 21:24.

"But it is your fault if you get these punishments and the way to avoid it is simple to not do it.”

Considering that the idea of a judicial system in these barbaric lands where sharia laws are implemented is what is coming right behind sharia laws - I would say that the pure ignorance of such a statement as this is astonishing.

It is the same with 'honor killings', or doing anything to non-muslims, sharia laws allow an individual muslim to get their 'eye for an eye' without having any consequences for their poor behavior.

And they keep telling us that this is not islam. hogwash. Sharia laws are based on islamic texts - this is a bias to one religion as I have ever seen it. (and I don't believe islam is a religion but just a set of rites that are made to appear as a religion)

JONC firstly to you. Your

Submitted by londonspirit (not verified) on Sat, 07/25/2009 - 22:19.

JONC firstly to you. Your talking about conversion rates to muslims in the UK, i am living in the uk and i see in my mosque alone many converting to islam. The conversion rate in UK is very high and islam is the fastest growing religion through converts not just in uk but throughout europe and one dominant country is USA, where islam is growing abnormally since 9/11.

JONC WROTE: The Musselima less so. The non-muslim, not at all.

ANSWER: Jonc i suggest you read surah al nisa. The chapter dedicated to woman and their rights. And lets see if the quran says muslim woman have no rights. Your basing your judgement on the spread of word and nothing else. Muslim woman have the most rights in comparison to any other religion. Its just your illeterate way of thinking that makes you bring about this judgement.

Example: When a muslim woman wears a hijab you say she is forced to wear it. But when a christian gal wears a headscarf you say she is modest. You say that muslim woman dont like wearing nikab but eyt when the french president wanted to ban the nikab and hijab it was the woman who were protesting, NOT THE MEN.

As for the non-muslim, find a single verse in the quran where it says we should treat non-muslims unfairly. Muslims and chrisitans in the older days used to share the same building as a church and as a mosque. The lived peacefully. You quote a single verse

Try Sura 9:29.:
“Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, and those who acknowledge not the religion of Islam among the People of the Book, until they pay the until they pay the tribute …”

But like every other person here you quote completely out of context. When are you people going to learn to quote in context. Its getting really pathetic and boring now. Surah 9-28-29 is talking about a war. There are many answers in google and I have wrote an answer on this countless number of times. If i could access older posts i would just copy and paste my previous answers but since i cant i really cant be bothered to explain this verses again. Jonc this verses has been answered many times, and is in the context of war and what happened during the war.

MARIE you havent proved

Submitted by londonspirit (not verified) on Sat, 07/25/2009 - 22:29.

MARIE you havent proved nothing on the authenticity of the Bible. Your just talking about tablets being found. I aint denying that the bible is not word from god. Because as muslims we are specifically taught that jesus was given a scripture. What i deny is the modern bible and what you believe.

1. JESUS BEING THE SON OF GOD.
There is not a single verse in the bible whereby jesus he himself said that he is the son of god and that we should worship him.

2. Trinity
There is not a single verse in the bible whereby jesus himself says the word trinity.

3. Crucification
You wrote about people being on the cross for too long suffered pain and so on. But do you know the virtues that the people who put jesus on the cross had. Jesus was put on the cross on a friday. And in those days it was superstitious to kill someone after sunset on a friday. So these people took jesus down of the cross only after a couple of hours after he was put up. Therefore he was still alive as he was put on the tomb.

And one thing jesus said when the people asked for miracles was as jonah was 3 days and 3 nights in the belly of a whale, so shall the SON OF MAN be 3 days and 3 nights in the belly of the earth.

1. First thing to note here is jonah was always alive in the whale. that was the miracle. So if jesus was dead in the belly of the whale, than jesus was lying and he didnt fulfill his prophecy.

When i have more time marie, i will go into the corruption of the moden bible, as you have made no attempt to say it is authentic. Why dont you do this. Look at king james bible version and look at another bible from another author and just check if it is the same.

ICAN TELL YOU RIGHT NOW IT WONT BE. So if two bibles are not the same of different authors how can you claim the modern bible to be authentic. And if the modern bible talks about angels mating with earthlings and creating big giants, and that unicorns exist in this world and many more how can you call this authentic.

londonspirit: MARIE you

Submitted by Marie (not verified) on Sat, 07/25/2009 - 23:39.

londonspirit:

I say:

Those tablets support the fact that certain people in the Bible did exist and that certain events did take place, which means they do support the modern Bible.

londonspirit:

2. Trinity
There is not a single verse in the bible whereby jesus himself says the word trinity.

I say:

That's because Jesus spoke in parables to get his message across.

londonspirit:

I say:

Before Jesus was hung on the cross he was tortured by romans who used a whip with a type glass that caused massive wounds to his back ( possibly exposing his spine ). These wounds would have caused significant blood loss to his body which may have put more pressure on his heart to pump blood. Jesus did not get any sleep the night before he was tortured so his body was already exhausted when he was tortured. While on his way to be hung on the cross the romans made Jesus carry the cross he was to be hung on which put weight on his already broken body and at some point during the procession he fell and might have punctured his heart preventing blood flow and causing a pouch of blood to develop, which might have burst sometime while he was hanging on the cross ( an anuerysm of the heart ). The romans nailed Jesus to the cross by his hands and feet which would have caused more blood loss. There is also speculation that crucifixion in such a position might have put weight on the chest causing asphyxiation. In either way there is no way Jesus would have survived the cross because of all the massive blood loss and injuries on his body.

londonspirit:

And one thing jesus said when the people asked for miracles was as jonah was 3 days and 3 nights in the belly of a whale, so shall the SON OF MAN be 3 days and 3 nights in the belly of the earth.

1. First thing to note here is jonah was always alive in the whale. that was the miracle. So if jesus was dead in the belly of the whale, than jesus was lying and he didnt fulfill his prophecy.

I say:

This prophesy is a metaphor describing Jesus was going to hell for three days.

londonspirit:

I say:

londonspirit we are moving on until you respond to my accusations about the Quran. IF YOU DON'T RESPOND TO MY ACCUSATIONS THEN I AM GOING TO END THE DEBATE. DO YOU UNDERSTAND?

As I stated before Jesus did

Submitted by Marie (not verified) on Sat, 07/25/2009 - 23:41.

As I stated before Jesus did not literally state he was the son of God, he spoke in parables.

While on one side people like

Submitted by rickishi (not verified) on Sun, 07/26/2009 - 02:25.

While on one side people like Londonspirit indulge in word games filled with half truths , lies and one sided opinions, the rest of the followers of "religion of peace" gleefully carry on with full fervour the Islamic jihad of violence and killing, suppressing people of other religion and hatred.

After all the havoc created , a small people like LondonSpirit come out professing that Islam is a religon of peace with beautifully constructed words and misleading thoughts making the world buy it

Forget all the word games, just tell us why the whole world is vary of muslims ? ask any non-muslim community living beside muslims in large numbers any where in the world and they all overwhelmingly have a bad opinion about muslims , why ?

you dont fear if a group of people come out from a temple or a church , but everyone will have a test of his wits everytime a group comes out of a mosque , why ? coz they are more likely to create mayhem and violence every friday afternoon

have you seen the site http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/ ? I dont think any other religon people carry out so much violence in name of religion as updated there , worse is the number just keeps increasing

londonspirit, you are doing

Submitted by R_not (not verified) on Sun, 07/26/2009 - 04:57.

londonspirit, you are doing just what we expect of a muslim to do - deflect onto a different subject and the favorite subject is to start discussing the Bible while we can tell you haven't read any of it - just some cleric's interpretation of it which is also questionable as to whether they read it or not.

We at least give you the courtesy of reading your islamic texts and can discuss them, while we do not get that same courtesy back from muslims. Whether muslims get upset that we read it or not, we at least have read it more extensively than most muslims! And if the clerics, or you, did read the Bible you would also know that:
John 8
56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to think that he would see my Day; he saw it and was glad.
57 The Jews then said, 'You are not fifty yet, and you have seen Abraham!'
58 Jesus replied: In all truth I tell you, before Abraham ever was, I AM.

St John said 'He was the Word and the Word was made FLESH.'

There is more than 1 person who wrote about the life of Jesus and His teachings vs mohammed who came around later, met a questionable angel and changed the message of the Bible, and also the message of the koran which nullified all his efforts at making islam a religion. In fact, the one who was known as the 'Prince of Lies' was Lucifer - also known as Satan - of which allah was known as the greatest of deceivers.

"For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace." (Isaiah 9:6)

And that is just the tip of the iceberg. Jesus is the Light of the world. And He is your only Savior, so if I were you I wouldn't slander Him. Instead, open your heart and your mind and ask God to reveal Himself to you - and persevere in your search for the Truth. (Have you read Isaiah 53?)'

Your koran tells you to read the Bible too which might be hard to do when the muslims keep burning the Bibles, or ban them. tsk tsk - afraid of something? Anyway, here is from your own text: surah 10:94 Basically, it is telling the muslims to read the Bible - the 'books before them'. He even says that it is 'truth from our Lord'. There are a few other surahs that tell muslims to do the same. So, if the Bible is considered the Truth even from the koran, then it nullifies the koran since the koran has a completely different message.

Also 10:37

In the Name of Allah, Most

Submitted by IslamTheTrueReligion (not verified) on Sun, 07/26/2009 - 05:56.

In the Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful

Islam is a religion that God commanded humanity to follow as God Almighty “Allah” (s.w.t) said in Holy Qur'an Al Ma'idah 5:3:

"...This day I have Perfected your religion for you, completed my favour upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion.

In Surah Aal-I-Imran 3:85, God Almighty “Allah” (s.w.t.) also says:

“If anyone desires a religion other than Islam never will it be accepted of Him and in the hereafter is one of the losers”.

The name of religion “Christianity”, “Judaism”, “Buddhism”, “Hinduism”, “Zoroastrianism”, and other sects and religions are not mentioned in their holy books (i.e. from very first page to last page of Bible whether in New Testament or Old Testament, and other holy book respectively) that God said mankind has to follow their religion respectively because these religions are made by men. They are not made by God. This is the reason that such religions are named after names of men who supposedly teach or reform the people. For example, Christianity is named after Jesus Christ(a.s.), Judaism after the clan Judah, Buddhism after the reformer Buddha, Hinduism after the tribe Hindus, Zoroastrianism after Zoroaster, etc... Finally, the most important reason of all, is that all these religions in one way or another, WORSHIP A CREATION, which contradicts the Purpose of Creation.

If all the above mentioned religions don’t have evidence themselves that their religion is to be followed, so, how much more Darwin’s Theory of Evolution? All parts of human body and fossils discovered as evidence of the theory did not evolve but remain the same for billions and billions of years until today - - an evidence that they are created.

God Almighty “Allah” (s.w.t.) says so many times in the Qur’an how Allah (s.w.t.) Created All Creations as Signs for people to reflect. Allah (s.w.t.) chose the name Islam as a religion for humanity because of its meaning “Submission to the will and commands of Allah (s.w.t.)” . Obviously, ALL Creations including all parts of your body (i.e. heart beats, blood flows, etc...) function under the Will and Command of Allah (s.w.t.).

Think how all parts of your body, inside and outside, are systematically and intricately shaped, formed and organized, each part serves a purpose - - your heart beats, your blood flows, even the tiniest part that you don’t know exists. That is how God Almighty “Allah” (s.w.t.) puts or “commands” them to do. All parts of your body are true muslims than what you think - - not Christians, atheists or whatever religion you follow - - since they just function under the commands of Allah (s.w.t.).

Well, that is cute - since

Submitted by R_not (not verified) on Sun, 07/26/2009 - 06:36.

Well, that is cute - since many don't believe that allah is anything other than either mohammed, or his pagan moon god altered to fit mohammed's needs, or a part of each - you can write the longest note on earth, quote all the surahs you want, and it is still hogwash.

God gave us a free will for a reason - not to follow anything that claims to be a god. He stated several times not to worship the sun, the moon, or any of the other things in the heavens (stars).

- The Old Testament constantly rebuked the worship of the Moon-god
- Deut. 4:19 And when you look up to the heavens and behold the sun or the moon or any star among the heavenly hosts, do not be led astray into adoring them and serving hem. These the Lord, your God has let fall to the lot of all other nations under the heavens.
- Deut. 17:3 ...by serving other gods, or by worshiping the sun or the moon or any of he host of the sky, against my command.
- II Kngs. 21:3,5; II Kngs. 23:5; Jer. 8:2; 19:13; Zeph. 1:5

And we are warned of false prophets and gods, such as mohammed and allah, quite often too. And your god and mohammed ignored the 10 commandments, which were directly from God. Instead mohammed made up his own definitions of sin which has led islam to be the scourge of the earth for so many.

Your messenger of allah gets away with committing murder for greed, adultery, child-molesting, incest, lying, and incorporates pagan beliefs into your 'religion, it most certainly wasn't dispatched by the True God of Israel.
The True God isn't interested or impressed with your rituals. The best you can offer Him is describd as 'dirty rags', a 'stench in His nostrils'.

Jesus said there would be 'false prophets after him'
Matthew 7 15 Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

Matthew 24 11 And many false prophets shall rise, and shall seduce many.

Matthew 24
24 For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect.

(wow - to 'deceive' - that is the whole basis of islam - to deceive!)

LS ***i suggest you read

Submitted by ibnsahr (not verified) on Sun, 07/26/2009 - 09:47.

***i suggest you read surah al nisa. The chapter dedicated to woman and their rights.......Muslim woman have the most rights in comparison to any other religion***

surah al nisaa, is surah allah the pimp, allah aka satan allowed us to marry captives and slaves where is the right of woman to have undivided love from their husband, and its only about 40 verses talking about women out of 176, the rest just haterd satanic verses, so much dedicated to women, SHAME ON YOU MUSLIM, the satan put women as sex object, thats what happend if you dont have money to pay 'mahr' to enjoy sex, you become suicide bomber with the promise of women which never have period for four weeks of sex, hope its not blow up dolls

surah 9:29 "Fight those who believe not in Allah" if you said its in contex of war, there are people whos not belive in allah 1400 years ago and there are still approx. 80% normal being whos not believe in allah now, are we still in the war now?, either two, quran out of date or you being hypocrite

what do you mean out of contex? the whole quran is just juggling mumbo jumbo, all mixed up, good example with stupid satan supposed to dedicated the satanic verses for women but mix it up with haterd dedicated verses, now that is what you call putting something in the wrong contex

To R_not and all Christians,

Submitted by IslamTheTrueReligion (not verified) on Sun, 07/26/2009 - 14:28.

To R_not and all Christians,

Wow, you have such great knowledge of your holy book, the Bible.

Anyway, can I ask all of you who worship Jesus Christ (a.s.), son of Mary, your prophet who told you that Jesus Christ, son of Mary, said "I am the son of God and worship me for I am the Way, the truth and the life?

Remember, the Bible is two parts - - the Old Testament and the New Testament. As a Christian, you don't follow the Old Testament. The OLd Testament mentions many prophets and One God. The New Testament are Gospels of Luke, Matthew, John, Mark and Acts.

As a Christian, you follow the Gospels (all in the New Testament), not the Old Testament. Who are the prophets in the Gospels who said to Worship Jesus, son of Mary?

Dont mention gospels according to Mark, Luke, Matthew and John because these are NOT WORD OF GOD. They are equivalent to Hadith - - a compilation of the sayings of Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.s.) on how he did and said about different matters while he was alive. Some compilers of hadith are authentic and some are not. Authentic Hadith are to be accepted while unauthentic ones are rejected.

What is interesting is the Gospels according to Mark, Luke, Matthew and John don't have chain of narrators, therefore, not authentic, and should be rejected. These people did not live with Jesus Christ at all. They were not disciples of Jesus Christ as well. They are not even eyewitnesses of Jesus Christ. Mark was written 60 to 75 A.C. He was the son of St. Barnabas’ sister. Mathew was a tax collector, a minor official who did not travel around Jesus. Luke’s Gospel was written much later, and is in fact drawn from the same source as Mark’s and Mathew’s. Luke was Paul’s physician and like Paul never met Jesus. John’s Gospel was written in about 100 A.C. He should not be confused with John, the Disciple who was another man.

I want a prophet of God who mention all your quotations:

Matthew 7 15 Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

Matthew 24 11 And many false prophets shall rise, and shall seduce many.

Matthew 24
24 For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect.

Who are your prophets in the New Testament, not the Old Testament?

To R_Not, You said "God gave

Submitted by IslamTheTrueReligion (not verified) on Sun, 07/26/2009 - 14:43.

To R_Not,

You said "God gave us a free will for a reason – not to follow anything that claims to be a god. He stated several times not to worship the sun, the moon, or any of the other things in the heavens (stars)."

Who are you fooling, you are the one WORSHIPPING A SON OF GOD, a created being, who claims to be a god.

Allahu-Akbar, it's coming from your own mouth?

LOL, muslims don't worship any created being like you? Who created the son of God? The same Creator who created Jesus Christ (a.s.), son of Mary, before Jesus (a.s.) became son of God, the same Creator who created you, Ali Sina, and ALL Humanity that Ali Sina wanted to be saved from, is the God of Muslims, Non Muslims and the Universe.

Now go to your Bible and the New Testament and prove to me that Jesus Christ (a.s.), son of Mary, said "Worship Me. I am the son of God, Lord and Saviour!"

IslamTheTrueReligion, #1. we

Submitted by R_not (not verified) on Sun, 07/26/2009 - 15:57.

IslamTheTrueReligion, #1. we are discussing islam here and I already posted some proof. You chose not to accept it and keep arguing the same point.

Ironic that you believe in a God that can do all things but you think He cannot become Man. I believe God can do all things. But, if you read the koran it is no wonder that you think your god cannot do it all - it needs mohammed to help him out. mohammed had set himself right up there with your god to help him judge people, and to condemn them too.

Your allah was overly concerned with mohammed's sex life! I suppose that took up so much of its time that it couldn't take the time to make your 'perfect religion' itself - so a questionable angel was sent to mohammed. While in the Bible, we got the word from God Himself - both testaments.

The koran is nothing but mohammed's rants. The Gospels are what several men directly witnessed. mohammed witnessed nothing. He could not get one of the Old, or New, TEstament stories straight so he had to tell everyone that the Bible was corrupted. But, muslims won't read the Bible so they just blindly accept mohammed's rants.

And how can you trust a deceiver with allah, and mohammed, being the greatest of deceivers!? We teach our children that basic principle because we tell them they will not be trusted if they lie - one concept your mohammed, or allah, didn't grasp. One simple, childlike, principle your god couldn't grasp - lying is a no no. And that simple principle means that all of islam is a joke, a sick joke, on all muslims. To put the aura of holiness on such an evil message, the opposite of what God gave to us in the Bible, is really sad.

Go and read the Bible this time unless you are afraid of the truth. (which is ironic since the koran tells you to read it for the truth! surah 10:94, Also 10:37 - read the Bible - the 'books before them'. He even says that it is 'truth from our Lord'.)

R-NOT you just contradicted

Submitted by londonspirit (not verified) on Sun, 07/26/2009 - 16:28.

R-NOT you just contradicted yourself. lets look at your quote that you wrote to me

We at least give you the courtesy of reading your islamic texts and can discuss them, while we do not get that same courtesy back from muslims.

And than you wrote to islamthe true religion

Well, that is cute – since many don’t believe that allah is anything other than either mohammed, or his pagan moon god altered to fit mohammed’s needs, or a part of each – you can write the longest note on earth, quote all the surahs you want, and it is still hogwash.

Can you see the error of what your saying. And than you judge us for not reading the bible. What is the need of discussing islamic texts when even if we give you an explanation you think its HOGWASH. First open your mind and than come back to me for a discussion.

I am for tolerance and

Submitted by Ant (not verified) on Sun, 07/26/2009 - 16:39.

I am for tolerance and sharing of true writings about christianity, islam and judaism and not calling names.
sharing knowledge truthfully will eventually make people make right choices. Islam may be 7th century way of life of saudi arabia exported to the world with violence, conquering of other nations, raping of women and forceful conversion. It might be the biggest bundle of lies as well. It might be nothing but oppression of women. It might be whatever negative and wrong is in the world. BUT, by criticising and name-calling the people who come to this site or others, and contribute their view-point will make them go back to their shells, their safety zones, whether christian, islam, hinduism, bahais, buddhism or whatever.

First of all we shall have tolerance for others' viewpoints, howsoever different from our way of life, our up-bringing, education level, cult-thinking, religious faith and cultural background. Once we have tolerance for others' view-point and can talk without fear and favor, truth will come out and prevail.

I am not supporting Islam but requesting for level-headedness in our debates, contribution. We want all human beings to be equal, live in peace and leave this world for our children where they can interact and prosper. For that to become a reality we shall start a movement " Freedom of Speech" in America and Europe. No restrictions on writings about (un)holy books full of contradictions and not worth the paper they are written on. We shall fight for "Freedom of Speech and Writing". Once that is achieved, war will be won against all degrading taboos, cultures, cults which spread hatred, crime against humanity, be it idol-worshippers, demi-gods, dictatorial one-man(prophets/son of god) or ...XXX.

We need love and not hatred even when criticizing hatred and violence. Sober mind and tolerance will win. History has shown time and again, truth prevails and good wins evil.....

I have read not only the

Submitted by R_not (not verified) on Sun, 07/26/2009 - 17:16.

I have read not only the koran, but much of the hadith and sira (more than I can say most muslims read) and I find the religious part of it hogwash. Ironic that muslims don't accept the words of men who were with Jesus, but accept a book that was compiled decades later and much of it was written on edible things that the goats ate! And then Uthman compiled it and who knows what he did to mess the koran up since he destroyed whatever the goats left behind.

Yes, I find the koran a bunch of hogwash as far as religion, allah, and anything 'holy' in it. I do find it 'holey' though.

I find that allah was overly concerned with mohammed's love life so much so that he sanctioned taking another man's wife, and a child. I find that allah was overly concerned with mohammed getting a bunch of slaves and other loot - so he could do as he willed with them including doing what he willed to the children no matter how perverse. I find that allah was overly concerned with killing and torturing people, that he would create people just so as to watch them burn in hell, or be subjugated to a group of people who treated them with vile and contempt.

Most importantly, the allah of the koran couldn't make up its mind - should I give a message of peace, or violence? It just couldn't make up its mind to keep the same message of the Bible so it changed the Bible and then couldn't even convey the stories of the Bible correctly via its 'angel'. And then choses an illiterate who was able to lose (we don't know how much) of the koran via hungry goats, and then lose the rest of it to a questionable man, Uthman, because he destroyed the original.

Then lastly, conveniently, allah and mohammed both admitted to being deceivers. Which should put it all into perspective to anyone who actually reads the koran with 'an open mind'. Like muslims tell us to do (roll eyes). I read the koran not expecting anything much back in 2002 and that is when I started discovering where the violence in islam comes from, and why muslims tell us one thing while doing another. I found out that the closed minds are not the non-muslims, but the muslims who justify such atrocious behavior not only from mohammed, but from a god.

I should add that the 'error'

Submitted by R_not (not verified) on Sun, 07/26/2009 - 17:55.

I should add that the 'error' you are telling me about is actually the conclusion that came about after I read much of your islamic texts. In the beginning, I could tell right off that allah was not the God of Israel. I figured that it must be mohammed's god from his pagan religion. Then when I delved into that a bit, allah was not the blood thirsty, overly concerned with mohammed's love life, deceiver that mohammed said it was. In fact, it began to conveniently sound more like mohammed making up things to excuse his poor behavior.

mohammed became more warped as islam progressed. He did not start out as a pediphile (that we know of), or a blood thirsty warlord that craved loot and slaves. He lived off of his rich wife for quite a long time, until he drained her of money. But, that is not a crime - maybe a disgusting display of a man, but still not a crime. It was after he thought up islam is when we find a mohammed that became the lustful, vengeful man and he created a god to suit his needs.

And if we even look further into islamic texts we find it wasn't the Meccans who were nasty in Mecca - but mohammed. The Meccans even went to mohammed's uncle to ask him to stop mohammed from behaving so poorly. But, it seems that everyone wants to keep up the myth that it was mohammed who was mistreated. I don't.

These three texts say about the same thing Ishaq:119, Tabari VI:93, 95-96, I will post the first one:

[B]Ishaq:119 "'Abu Tabib, your nephew Muhammad has cursed our gods [at this point he had cursed all of them, including Allah], insulted our religion [more correctly, insulted them by trying to steal their religion], mocked our way of life and accused our forefathers of error. Either you stop him or let us get to him. For you, like us, are in opposition to him. He gave them a conciliatory reply. They returned a second time and said, 'We have asked you to put a stop to your nephew's activities but you have not done so. By Allah, we cannot endure having our fathers reviled and our customs mocked.' Muhammad thought that his uncle had the idea of abandoning and betraying him, and that he was going to lose his support. The Apostle broke into tears."

This uncle who raised mohammed, cared for mohammed, made sure he ate and had clothes - was the same uncle that mohammed cursed on his deathbed.

This is the man you guys hold up as a prophet. And these are just two of the reasons why I find mohammed nothing but a wretched man who lost his way in life.

MARIE like i said i belive in

Submitted by londonspirit (not verified) on Sun, 07/26/2009 - 18:00.

MARIE like i said i belive in the bible, if you cared to read that bit. As we are told to belive by your enemy muhammed. What i dont belive is the modern bible.

MARIE WROTE: IF YOU DON’T RESPOND TO MY ACCUSATIONS THEN I AM GOING TO END THE DEBATE. DO YOU UNDERSTAND?

ANSWER: Before we start the devbate you want to end it. This is truly pathetic. I will respond to your accusations

1st accusation: If God sent the Quran to Muhammed, then why is it so incoherent, ambigous, vague, and not organized chronologically?

ANSWER: You say the quran is incoherent i.e not logical. I say it is very logical considering it teaches us to believe that there is one god, and that we should do good and refrain from evil.

It is not ambigious. What is ambigious is the arabic language as it is a very sensitive language. It is your illeterate thinking, whereby you take texts out of context which make it seem ambigious.

Again it is only vague if you take things out of context and interpret it to something that suits your needs. If i was to take specific verses from the bible to suit my needs, the bible will also be vague.

And finally you wrote not organized chrnoigically. Just because it is not organized in that manner does it assume now that it is not word of god. You look at the content not how it is presented. Presentation doesnt make it god's word it is the content that does.

2nd Accusation

If the god of the Quran is almighty and powerful, why would he allow the Jews and Christians to corrupt his scriptures?

ANSWER: This is just a stupid meaningless accusation. I can say the same thing. If jesus was god why didnt he just make the jews follow him.

If this is god's will that the other scriptures get corrupted than thats that. He has his own motives. If god wanted to make everyone a muslim he can. but we have been given our own free will. Now if there are some people who want to corrupt the scriptures than let it be.

Rather than think of this as an accusation you should see it as a miracle. For none of the other srciptures has god mention that these scriptures will be guarded from corruption apart from the quran. And it is only the quran that has been guarded unlike the rest which has been corrupted.

And even after serious attempts to corrupt the quran by many, one such gropu has recently published the FURQAN. yet people are just ignoring these selfless attempt.

3rd accusation

ANSWER: Muhammed was a humble man, he felt possessed becuase it was un natural. he was terrified and scared. Any thing we humans experience out of the unexplained we all feel scared, whether it was an angel or not.

The question you should ask yourself. Is that if it was a demon or devil, why would this devil teach good to mankind. just use your logic, it is impossible for it to be a demon or devil becuase if you look at islam today, it is the only religion that makes it a law upon its people to give 2.5% of annual earnings to charity, only religion where it is obligatory to fast so that our heart softens to the poor, only religion which completely removes the concept of wealth, race and many things eles via the annual gathering of hajj. Surely a devil or demon wouldnt teach its followers to do that.

4th accusation

Historical fallacies and inaccuracies found in the Quran:

About pharoah

ANSWER: You basing your knowledge on present historical finds. Are you now trying to say to me that in the future no further historical findings will be made. Dont base inaccuracies just because it doesnt agree with modern times.
many quranic verses didnt agree with past times but agrees with modern times. another inaccurarcy that doesnt agree with modern times is that the quran says we came from one man and one female. But it will be proved right in the future.

i will get on with the rest of the accusations later.

londonspirit: ANSWER: You

Submitted by Marie (not verified) on Sun, 07/26/2009 - 18:29.

londonspirit:

ANSWER: You say the quran is incoherent i.e not logical. I say it is very logical considering it teaches us to believe that there is one god, and that we should do good and refrain from evil.

I say:

Just because the Quran states there is one god and we should do good and refrain from evil does not mean it is divine. Every religion states one should do good and refrain from evil and any ordinary person can say there is one god and do good and refrain from evil.

londonspirit:

If the god of the Quran is almighty and powerful, why would he allow the Jews and Christians to corrupt his scriptures?

ANSWER: This is just a stupid meaningless accusation. I can say the same thing. If jesus was god why didnt he just make the jews follow him.

I say:

Answer the question.

Why would God allow the Jews and Christians to corrupt his holy word?

londonspirit:

If this is god’s will that the other scriptures get corrupted than thats that. He has his own motives. If god wanted to make everyone a muslim he can. but we have been given our own free will. Now if there are some people who want to corrupt the scriptures than let it be.

I say:

Then according to your logic he purposely lead the Jews and Christians away from him. Why would God purposely lead his followers astray away from him.

londonspirit:

No it is not miracle. It just shows that God does not love his creation.

londonspirit:

I say:

londonspirit I know many people who had encounters with angels including me and none of us did not think we were possessed, nor terrified, nor scared.

londonspirit:

I say:

londonspirit I know people who are demonologists, work in the paranormal field, and have seen demons ( including me ), even the devil can teach good things in order to fool people and lead them away from God.

Also just because the Quran teaches good things does not make it divine. Any ordinary person can teach good things.

londonspirit:

I say

londonspirit Egyptians did not practice crucifixion, only the Persians, Seleucids, Carthaginians, and Romans take part in this practice.

'ANSWER: You say the quran is

Submitted by R_not (not verified) on Sun, 07/26/2009 - 18:38.

'ANSWER: You say the quran is incoherent i.e not logical. I say it is very logical considering it teaches us to believe that there is one god, and that we should do good and refrain from evil. '

Ok, tell the truth about what good and evil is in islam. And make sure to include the definitions of the words you use, such as 'innocent', 'human beings', 'sin', etc. These words do not have the same meanings in islam and therefore you know, as well as I do, that you are being disingenuous about the whole thing.

'ANSWER: This is just a stupid meaningless accusation. I can say the same thing. If jesus was god why didnt he just make the jews follow him.'

There is this thing called 'free will'. And if one choses not to follow Him then so be it. Just as you chose to follow a false prophet. Keep in mind that you are also given the opportunity to the Truth and if you chose to ignore it - then it is your decision.

2 Cor 11
12 I will go on acting as I do at present, to cut the ground from under the feet of those who are looking for a chance to be proved my equals in grounds for boasting.
13 These people are counterfeit apostles, dishonest workers disguising themselves as apostles of Christ.
14 There is nothing astonishing in this; even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. <++++++ take note of this passage that talks about mohammed's 'Gabriel'.

2 Peter
1 As there were false prophets in the past history of our people, so you too will have your false teachers, who will insinuate their own disruptive views and, by disowning the Lord who bought them freedom, will bring upon themselves speedy destruction.
2 Many will copy their debauched behaviour, and the Way of Truth will be brought into disrepute on their account.
3 In their greed they will try to make a profit out of you with untrue tales. But the judgement made upon them long ago is not idle, and the destruction awaiting them is for ever on the watch.

This goes into the 3rd part of your note too - that 'angel' that mohammed saw scared mohammed. The Angel Gabriel came to Mary, who was a child in comparison to mohammed, and I am sure she was scared. But, that angel put Mary at ease even while telling her she was going to bear a child in a time and era that women were stoned to death for doing such a thing out of wedlock. That angel was not the same angel that an old man who had nothing to lose, saw.

As for the historical inaccuracies - I have never heard a more weird explanation for it - in that 'word of your god' who couldn't get its facts straight. (roll eyes)

Correction, took part in this

Submitted by Marie (not verified) on Sun, 07/26/2009 - 18:39.

Correction, took part in this practice.

To,londonspirit, You say,

Submitted by surj (not verified) on Sun, 07/26/2009 - 21:53.

To,londonspirit, You say, "Please find me information in Islam from Quran where it says, that non-muslims should be degraded. I am very curious to know this verse. What the Taliban do is not Islam or Sharia Law. It is stupid and done due to their own understanding and beliefs." I think Taliban are more Muslims than you are, because they follow the Islam to the letter. From Muslim Quran Sura 9:29," Fight those who believe NOT in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are)the People of the Book, until they pay the JIZYA( special tax on non believers)with willing submission and feel themselves subdued " Why is it that you Muslims always jump up in the defence of Islam ,even knowing that Islam is evil to its core.? But then again I can understand it, because Mo-Ham-Mad( may piss be upon him)asked you muslims to defend Islam at any cost , even with your life. That is why you have suicide bomber. Sura 48:13" And if any believe NOT in Allah and his Messenger ,we have prepared for those who reject Allah, a Blazing Fire" Please tell me what wrong have I done to your Allah or his messenger, that he had prepared Blazing Fire for me? From the Book " Facts are Facts, The Untold Story Of India's Partition" By Wali Khan, in it he says , " Muslims have always been denied access to truth and historical evidence.Luckily, however, history has a way of revealing itself sooner or later, no matter how much effort is made to camouflage it with pretty untruth. " So you see you Muslims will never accept the truth even it hits you straight in the face. That is so unfortunate of Muslims. In think those who are trying to convince the muslims of their wrong doing and EVILS of Islam will go blue in the face and Muslims will still not be convinced. Prime examples are on these threads.

parrsurry, " I am an Ahmadi

Submitted by surj (not verified) on Sun, 07/26/2009 - 22:06.

parrsurry, " I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim." First of all you can't be a Muslims according to Pakistani constitution which they amended it so as to bar Ahmahia to call themselves Muslims. You are NOT allowed to practice Islam in Pakistan, you would be arrested. Where is in India you have full right as any Indian to practice your religion , The only peaceful Muslim is a dead Muslim. Why don't we see you Ahmadi Muslims on the streets demonstrating against EVILS of Islam?

To R_Not & All Christians

Submitted by IslamTheTrueReligion (not verified) on Mon, 07/27/2009 - 00:49.

To R_Not & All Christians here,

I know what I am talking about because I was devoted Catholic Christian before I accepted Islam. You are referring quotes from the Gospel according to Matthews about false prophets, etc... and you are referring to prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.s.)This is the reason I asked you who is the prophet of Christianity who said that Jesus Christ (a.s.), son of Mary, said: "Worship Me. I am the Son of God, Lord and Saviour?

I know all of you cannot provide that because the New Testament doesn't have prophets who said that. I have already done the brainwashing of Christinaity for 30 years of my life, reading the Bible every night and every sunday.

Have all of you ever wondered why the New Testament has Acts and Paul's Letters? What are the role of Paul's Letters? What is Acts, Romans, etc... for? These should give you an idea of who preach and teach Christianity.

Paul as a Messenger of Christianity that Jesus Christ did not teach and preach is in (First Letter of Paul to the Corinthians) or 1 Corinthians 9:1-2 that states:

Am I not a free man? Am I not an apostle? Haven’t I seen Jesus our Lord? And aren’t you the result of my work for the Lord? Even if others do not accept me as an apostle, surely you do! Because of your life in union with the Lord you yourselves are proof of the fact that I am an apostle.

Paul was not a prophet and messenger of God. He was also not a disciple of Jesus Christ (a.s), son of Mary. He was a jew and inhabitant of Tarsus. He had spent a long time in Rome and was a Roman citizen. As Cardinal Danielou (the author of “A New Representation of the Origins of Christianity: Judeo Christianity) says that Paul had an access among the Jews who were living in far off lands across the Mediterranean sea in areas around Rome & Greece in the Roman Empire. The pagan people living in those areas were worshipping the Sun, the Moon, the Mars, the Venus and various other stars as their gods. In addition, they were also worshipping many other stone idols and deities. Paul began to preach Christianity to these people his own band of mysticism. Paul gave them an alternate god in the person of Jesus Christ to worship. The people thought they got a nearer god instead against the distant gods, in the person of Jesus who had performed a number of miracles as well. In order to win the confidence and faith of these people, Paul therefore had to compromise with their beliefs & legends. Paul said circumcision of males was not really necessary. This he said despite the fact that Jesus himself was circumcised on the 8th day after his birth. Gentiles were already celebrating Sunday as a holiday in honor of their god-the Sun. Paul replaced Saturday-the day of Sabbath of the Jews with Sunday to coincide with their holiday, which they were already observing. The gentiles used to observe 25th of December as the birthdate of their god-the Sun. Now, this date was adopted as the birth date of their new found god- the Jesus. Paul also rejected the Jewish form of worship, which was practiced in the Synagogues, i.e., the WORSHIP OF ONE TRUE GOD. Instead, Paul offered Jesus Christ as an alternate god. He raised the status of Jesus Christ from the Messenger of God to the “son of God”. Paul borrowed from pagans and gave the concept of “Trinity”, i.e., the three gods- the father, the son, and the holy ghost. Paul put forward the concept of a “begotten son of God”. But all of these were contrary to the preaching and teachings of Jesus Christ. There was therefore an opposition from Barnabas.

Barnabas, as recorded in the Acts, represented those who had become a personal disciple of Jesus and was among the dynamic evangelist among the disciples, and Paul cooperated with them for some time. He is mentioned in the ff. Verses of the Bible (Acts 4:36-37; 9:26-27; 11:22-30; 12:25; 13:1-4; 14:11-15; Paul’s Epistles to the Galatians 2:9). The rift is in Acts 15. In the Acts, Barnabas disappears after the rift.

His first call as a Messenger of Jesus Christ (a.s.), son of Mary, was through a dream as stated in Acts 26:14-16:

I heard a voice say to me in Hebrew, “Saul, Saul! Why are you persecuting me? You are hurting yourself by hitting back like an ox kicking against its owner’s stick. Who are you Lord? I asked. And the Lord answered, ‘I am Jesus, whom you persecute. But get up and stand on your feet. I have appeared to you to appoint you as my servant. You are to tell others what you have seen of me today and what I will show you in the future.”

The Second Call of Paul as Messenger is in First Letter of Paul to the Corinthians or 1 Corinthians 3:10-11 that states:

"Using the gift that God gave me, I did the work of an expert builder and laid the foundation, and another man is building on it. But each one must be careful how he builds. For God has already placed Jesus Christ as the one and only foundation and no other foundation can be laid."

His Final Call as stated in First Letter of Paul to Timothy or 1 Timothy 2:5-7:

"For there is one God, and there is one who brings God and mankind together, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself to redeem all mankind. That was the proof at the right time that God wants everyone to be saved, and that is why I was sent as an apostle and teacher of the Gentiles, to proclaim the message of faith and truth."

Bismillahir-ir-Rahman-ir-Rahi

Submitted by IslamTheTrueReligion (not verified) on Mon, 07/27/2009 - 01:42.

Bismillahir-ir-Rahman-ir-Rahim (In The Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful)

To R_not, All Christians, ex-muslims and others,

I firmly reject your offer to accept Jesus Christ (a.s.), son of Mary, as son of God, Lord and Saviour. But I firmly believe that Jesus Christ, son of Mary, is a Saviour to Mankind in his second coming - - he will save mankind from further degeneration through the uncorrupted Book of God, the Qur'an.

Muslims have Qur'an as the Book of God and Hadith as compilations for the sayings of Prophet Muhammad on how he did and said about different matters while he was alive. Some compilers of hadith are authentic and some are not.

The New Testament as this is the source of Authority for Christians cannot be compared with the Qur'an since the Gospels according to Mark, Luke, Matthew and John are like UNAUTHENTIC Hadith, not the Word of God. They are UNAUTHENTIC Hadith because these compilations don't have chain of narrators going back if they are what really Jesus Christ (a.s.), son of Mary, said and did. They are not eyewitnesses of Jesus Christ (a.s.). In addition, as I already wrote before, the time frame of these Gospels were written 60 to 100 years after Jesus Christ (a.s.), son of Mary, left the earth. Moreover, Acts, Romans, Corinthians and Other Paul's Letter will show to all of you Christians that you are following St. Paul who was never a prophet, never a messenger of God, and was not even a disciple of Jesus Christ (a.s.), son of Mary.

While Allah (s.w.t.) says so straight in the Qur’an about Jesus Christ (a.s.), son of Mary, about his birth, his mission, his miracles, his disciples, he is compared to prophet Adam (a.s) who was created without mother and without father, his crucifixion that he was saved and taken to heaven alive in his own body, etc...

Hello my christian friends

Submitted by IslamTheTrueReligion (not verified) on Mon, 07/27/2009 - 01:53.

Hello my christian friends and fellows,

My sisterly advice to all of you, seek without bias if you need to ask it to Holy Ghost or to Jesus Christ, ask that they show you the truth and the light. It is for your own soul, not for my soul, not for the soul of the founder of faithfreedom.org Ali Sina who want to destruct humanity. Jesus Christ (a.s), son of Mary, will deny you of teaching and telling you Christians to worship him for he never did that. St. Paul did that to you.

Christians here said muslims are brainwashed. Why do you let St. Paul brainwash all of you?

Christians here said Muslims are following a false prophet. Why do you follow St. Paul who was never a prophet, never a Messenger of God, not even a disciple of Jesus Christ (a.s.), son of Mary?

Christians here said Muslims are following prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.s), the Dajjal? Do you know what Dajjal means? Dajjal is arabic word for Anti-Christ. Why do muslims believe and respect Jesus Christ (a.s), son of Mary, as apostle, prophet and messenger of God if Muslims are Anti-Christ?

Christians here also said that Allah (s.w.t) is "devil/satan". Christians who speak arabic call God, Allah! Allah (s.w.t) is the one who created Jesus before Jesus became son of God, who created Ali Sina and All Humanity that Ali Sina wants to destruct. Allah (s.w.t.) created the Heavens and the Universe, who created and give all the blessing you enjoy in this short life.

Random Articles from All categories

Safiyah, the Jewish Wife of Muhammad

Hogwash Muslim apology

Israel Facing the Islamist Declaration of War - Part 3

Search

Navigation

Articles

Taxonomy

Tags

Shaming the Muslims Out of Islam (by Telling the Truth)

Comment viewing options

Random Articles from All categories

FFI Bloggers

Syndicate