Thoughts and Truth from the Impossible Life

Breaking the manacles of Islam

A specter is haunting the Mullahs. The specter of Islamic truth. Pardon me for paraphrasing those two famous lines of Karl Marx from his ‘The Manifesto of the Communist Party.’ I could find no better sentences than those two lines about the frantic efforts by the Mullahs to cover up the true colors of Islam in the world of Internet. Many recent essays in NFB (News From Bangladesh), secularIslam, Rational Thinking, etc., have exposed the other side of many religions including the Islam. The writers of these essays have taken great risks in terms of their personal safety to expose the intolerance, cruelty, injustices and irrationalities of many facets of Islam, the religion of “Peace.” Their forceful arguments, painstaking researched and extraordinary dedication are really going to shake the very foundation of the religion. I think the Mullahs could never believe that there is so much of disgust and disdain for the irrationalities and the backwardness in Islam in the present-day context. They thought that the fear of death sentence and the declaration of Jihad (Holy War) would silence the voices of rationality, logic and progress. No wonder, the Mullahs are desperate to counter attack with theirs every possible means. Amongst them are the illogical blind quotations of fear, the mindless hate, personal attacks, intimidation, charges of apostasy and blasphemy and what not. If only they could identify and catch those Kafirs and the infidels, I am sure they cannot wait to hang them in public. Unfortunately, the cyber world is too huge for them to start the killing spree. Therefore, they have little choice but to resort to intellectual assassinations.

After reading through a number of those venomous essays by these Islamists, I could categorize them into two broad groups; namely:

1 . The hard-core bigots. These Mullahs preach nothing but hatred towards anyone suspected of uttering a single word against Islam. They are completely devoid of any logical or rational thinking. Their languages are filthy (mostly four letter words), full of personal threats, distasteful and incomprehensible writings, etc. They usually judge a Muslim through his/her name. They challenge the writers to declare their apostasy in public so that they can take care of them (that is, kill them). They usually send their threats through the personal e-mails of the authors. So, many readers may not be aware of these threats. They do not realize that a person’s name has very little to do with his/her religion although it (the name) may be useful in many cases. I know many Lebanese whose names sound like Muslims but I see them wearing crosses on their necks that tells me what is his/her real religious affiliation is (that is they are actually Christians). Bertrand Russell seems to be a Christians name, but he wrote the book ‘Why I am not a Christian.’ The name given to a person during his birth is beyond his/her control. Similarly, the birth religion of a person has nothing to do with his/her personal belief when he grows up and starts to think and act on his/her own. This is a fundamental human right. Thus, a person being born in a Muslim family and given a Muslim (or rather Arabic) name does not necessarily must follow Islam when he grows up. But these fanatic bigots will not accept this basic right of a human being. When the bigot finds that a person has a Muslim name and he argues certain points in Islam, he is immediately declared as an apostate and, therefore, that person automatically becomes a target for annihilation. I just do not understand this mindless thinking. Never have I seen a secularist/humanist declare any person who does not agree with him or who talks and writes against the secularists/humanists/atheists should be killed. These people will not accept the truth that a person has every right to examine critically his/her birth religion. What kind of religion these bigots are preaching to the civilized world?

Readers, have you seen that these hard-core bigots are greatly alarmed even though they know that it is not that simple to kill people in the cyber world? Their frustration is then manifested in the personal attacks to the writers. There are many examples that can be found in many criticisms of the essays written by the secularists/humanists authors. A recent example is the criticism of Kamran Mirza’s two essays; one was on the ancient Arabian practices of worship of the Moon God Allah and the other was the serious questions about fasting in Islam. The Islamic critics resorted to severe personal innuendoes, abusive languages and false accusations. I cannot quote all those remarks. Please refer to NFB back issues if you want details. Another example is the personal and shameless attack on Taslima Nasrin in an article titled ‘True color of Taslima Nasrin.’ The bigoted writer of this article has tried to depict Taslima as a sex maniac and has delved into her private married life with her deceased husband. They wanted to finish her off physically by slaughtering her but that did not happen. They grossly underestimated her courage and conviction. So, now they are trying to kill her through character assassination. Nothing could be more unjust than this type of intrusion in some ones personal and private life. But then, again, we cannot expect anything more decent from these hard-core bigots.

These types of bigots have very little understanding even the religion that they love so much and not to talk of their knowledge of other religions or other philosophical/belief matters. Their main language is violence, Jihad, and terrorizing people to the extent that the author is compelled to stop disseminating his/her views. This tactic is nothing new in religion. Terror and violence had always been used in Islam (and some other religion too) to silence it’s critics. You will find many references to these types of activities if you read the relevant passages in Koran and the Hadiths.

2 . .The intellectual bigots: These bigots have very good knowledge of Islam, Koran Hadiths……etc. They are fully aware that what is being written by the Kafirs and the infidels are very difficult if not impossible to refute. These intellectual bigots are frustrated by the logic, rationality, coherence and the realistic arguments extended by the authors. They too wished that these writers were eliminated but then they also feel a little guilty about the open call for their annihilation. So, they resort to psychological killing. This involves the quotations from Koran and Hadiths about the dreadful punishments that will be meted out to those who dare to criticize Islam. They openly declare that whoever questions Islam is no more a Muslim. Of course, the infidel writers are very little concerned whether they are considered Muslims or not. But then, the declaration by this group of bigots has some significance. What are those? The significance is that the author becomes an enemy of Islam and therefore, subject to all the punishments that are applicable to non-believers and the apostates.

These bigots are very shrewd and intelligent. They will extend subtle threats to the authors, like becoming an outcast in society, to rot in hell, not to have the advantages of the petrodollars, not to be favored by the Arabs, etc. etc. This type of threat is designed to instill the fear and greed in the minds of the authors. A preferred fear is the fear of death. The greed is the greed of going to heaven/petro-dollars, etc. They will quote from their scriptures about the terrible death that awaits those who question and doubt the religion (Islam). Most of the time these bigots will avoid going into logical or rational reasoning because they know rather well that that won’t be fruitful. Their main armor is the quotations and the regurgitation of only what they know about their religion. For example, when the question of haram/halal food is raised, they will give no reason as to why the halal food should be eaten except that religious scriptures have decreed so. And, therefore, it should not be questioned. The nutritional values of haram/halal foods are irrelevant in this case. All that matters is that the religion has approved certain foods and to the contrary has banned certain foods. Many haram foods are as nutritional as many halal foods are if not better. If halal foods are good, then the Muslims must be the healthiest people in the world. How come then that those who eat haram foods have better physique? This is a commonsense question. However, the religious bigots will never answer this question in an honest and straightforward fashion. They will simply hide behind the cloak of their scriptures and confuse people more. Similar examples can be cited on many other archaic practices in Islam. Like fasting, performing haj, praying five times every day, etc. These bigots will never give any good reasons as to their practices except to say that they are the pillars of Islam. Is there anything wrong in knowing the reasons behind them? Many of these rituals were actually practiced by the pagan Arabs long before the advent of Islam. However, if this question is put to the bigots, all you get is personal vilification and branding you as an enemy of Islam. This reminds me my childhood. As a child, I was asked to memorize the verses of Koran. I used to ask the Hujur (Mullah) what meanings were conveyed by those verses? The reply I used to get from the Hujur was a few strokes of the cane and rebukes. He used to say that one should never ask any question on the matter of Islam especially on Koran. The penalty for asking questions is whipping. So, I stopped questioning and memorized the verses without understanding anything. The Hujur was a symbol of terror to me. I had no choice but to follow whatever he asked of me. That was how fear was and still is being introduced in the minds of the people and these bigots are repeating the same things over and over again. This is what is called a mass hypnotization induced through intimidation and fear. The fact is that if the real truths about the religion leak out these Hujurs will be out of work. Pure and simple.

Another ploy employed by these people is to blame the translators of the Koran, Hadiths and Sunnah. Even the eminent translator like A. Yusuf Ali is not considered as authentic translator. These bigots will never say which one is the authentic English version of the Koran, Hadiths, Sunnah, etc. They will simply say that one must be very good in Arabic to interpret Koran. This is akin to saying that one must be very good in Aramaic and Hebrew languages to understand the Bible and the Talmud. Or that you must be very good in Greek, Latin and Dutch languages to understand Aristotle, Roman laws, Copernicus’ ‘laws of heavenly bodies,’ etc. These are absolutely illogical ideas. Strangely though, you will notice that these bigots will use the English translation of the Koran when it suits their purposes. But when the inconsistencies, irrationalities and illogical things are pointed out, these bigots will simply say that the English translation is perverted. What kind of hypocrisy is that? In many cases, they warn people that the interpretations will vary depending on who is interpreting as well as the context of interpretation. This means that only those interpretations offered by them are valid and the rest are simply invalid. At the same time, these Mullahs also insist by quoting from Koran that the mishandling (wrong interpretations) is a great sin and the interpreter/s will have to face severe penalty No wonder, it is next to impossible to gauge any logic from these talks of the Mullahs.

Has it occurred to the readers of NFB that these bigots give them the impression that the Koran is an extremely difficult piece to understand and to interpret. Why should Allah make his words so difficult that ordinary people have great difficulties in understanding them? It simply doesn’t make any sense, whatsoever. One does not need a Ph.D in the ancient Arabic language and culture to understand the Koran. Then, why do these Mullahs insist so much on the mastery of the Arabic language? They know that most followers of Islam do not know Arabic and even if they know their skill in the language is not enough to interpret the ancient language of Koran. Furthermore, it takes many years to master a language. Most people have no time, patience and the motivation for that. So, they simply take the advantage of people’s ignorance and pretend that they are the sole agents of the Koran and it’s interpretations. Many people are not conversant in the English language as well. So, they do not know the exact meanings in many verses of the Koran. How about the Bangla and other translations of Koran? The Mullahs simply ignore them while accepting only those that suit them. Ironically, think about what will happen to the Mullahs if every Muslim masters the Arabic language! People will start interpreting the Koran in the way they understand and not be dependent upon the Mullahs. This may open the eyes of the masses and dehypnotize them. These Mullah’s will then simply be defeated in their own game, will they not?

This is what the Mullhas fear most. The Mullahs desperately need the uneducated, ignorant and fearful mass to perpetuate their stranglehold on the salesmanship of Islam.

However, the development in new technology and the introduction of the Internet has really alarmed the Mullahs. Many people are now able to exchange ideas almost instantly on any matter including religions. Many Mullahs could never believe that there are so many born Muslims who dare to question Islam and challenge its archaic practices. This was unthinkable even a few years ago. The reason is very simple. Many of these thinkers always had doubts about what they were supposed to believe but thought that they were alone and hence they were fearful about speaking their minds in public or to their peers. They kept that question to themselves. The Internet and the modern electronic mass media had opened an opportunity for them to be united if not physically at least electronically. This is a very bad news for the Mullahs. They simply cannot digest the truth that one day Islam will not go unchallenged. This is now happening as it had already happened with Christianity and with other religions as well many years ago. The innate nature of humanity to seek the truth, to explore the unexplored, to question and to innovate can never be suppressed. One day Islam will surely realize that.

By the way, it is interesting to note that innovation in Islam is haram. The dictionary definition of innovation is to introduce changes or to introduce new things. This is the foundation of civilization. Imagine what would have happened if mankind was not innovative. The people of other religion prospered only when they freed themselves from their religious irrationalities and started innovating. That is why Islam is so paranoid about innovative ideas and free-thinking. These two things hit at the heart of Islam.

Curiously, you will notice that many of the innovative ideas and inventions are used by the Mullahs to propagate their doctrines. You can see many examples of these. Like TV, Radio, modern appliances and the latest is Internet. They have realized the immense power of modern science and technology. When you ask them why should the Islamic people accept these innovative things that are mainly due to the innovative ideas of the Kafirs and the infidels, the Islamists have ready answers. The answer is that these inventions are the gifts of Allah. Some will even say that science and technology are Allah’s blessings to mankind. I have no problem in accepting the compliment. How about the Islamic bomb? This maut be the greatest gift of Allah to His followers. How about the Hindu bomb? Since Allah is the only god could it be that Allah is also responsible for this great gift to the Hindus as well? And how about the Christian and the Buddhist bombs? If these questions are asked to the Islamists I do not know what will be the answer? The other question is that why is it that the followers of Islam have next to nothing contribution to the modern science and technology? Isn’t that because Islam had kept its followers blind for centuries? Now, many of these blind people are getting their sights back. What were impossible to think for centuries for many innocent followers of Islam, are now having a second look at their ancestor given faith. It is simply a matter of time before the arrogance and the irrationality of Islam becomes a distant history. And with that, is the demise of the Mullahs like, Ayatollahs, Talibans, Golam Azam, Maulana Nizami, etc.

Finally, I must pay homage to the few braves who took the risk to demystify Islam. You are the pioneers. You have taught me how to think the unthinkable. You have taught me how to be courageous. You have taught me how to rekindle the human spirit. You have taught me how to fight for the justice. You have taught me how to accept merciless criticisms with grace. You have taught me how to conquer the unconquerable. A hundred years from now humanity will remember you as the greatest innovators in finding a cure for the religious blinds. That is because you dared to think differently. Truly, you are the alarm bells of the Mullahs. History won’t forget you for being the Agradoot (harbinger) who are bent on breaking the manacles of Islam.

————————

By Abul Kasem.

abul88@hotmail.com

ORIGINAL POSTING:

January 19, 2011 Posted by | Understanding Islam | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Islamic Inspire Magazine Proof of Terrorism and Violent Intent

From Issue 1 | Summer 1431 | 2010 Inspire Magazine
Under the media foundation of al-Malahem, we present the first magazine to be issued by the al-Qā`idah Organization in the English language.

    From Page 2

Allāh is commanding His Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم to save the believers from perishing by inspiring them to fight. This meaning is supported by another verse in Qur’ān where Allāh جل جلاله says: (O you who believe! Respond to the call of Allāh and His Messenger when they call you to what will give you life) [al-Anfāl: 24]. Imām al-Qurtubī states that this verse is referring to jihād. It is jihād that gives this nation life. We survive through jihād and perish without it. Our history is a testimony to that.

    From Page 17

O Muslims rise up in defense of your Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم: a man with his knife, a man with his gun, a man with his rifle, a man with his bomb, by learning how to design explosive devices, by burning down forests and buildings, or by running over them with your cars and trucks. The means of harming them are many so seek assistance from Allāh جل جلاله and do not be weak and you will find a way. The rights of the Messenger of Allāh صلى الله عليه وسلم upon us are great and it is nothing for all of us to die for his sake; may our mothers be bereaved of us if we do not defend him .صلى الله عليه وسلم O Muslims you have no excuse in front of Allāh except if you fight in defense of his Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم

    From Page 17

The means of harming them are many so seek assistance from Allāh and do not be weak and you will find a way.

    From Page 17

Allāh جل جلاله says: (Say: “Do you await for us except one of the two best things [i.e., martyrdom or victory] while we await for you that Allāh will afflict you with punishment from Himself or at our hands? So wait; indeed we, along with you, are waiting)
[at-Taubah: 52]

Q9: In the end what is your advice to the Muslims in the West?
My advice to my Muslim brothers in the West is to acquire weapons and learn methods of war. They are living in a place where they can cause great harm to the enemy and where they can support the Messenger of Allāh .صلى الله عليه وسلم

    From Page 27

All of these acts of good were a manifestation of the solidarity of Muslims in defense of the Messenger of Allāh صلى الله عليه وسلم. On the other hand, there were some completely misguided efforts such as those of some of the callers to Islām who paid a visit to Denmark along with young Muslim boys and girls to start a dialogue in order to build bridges of understanding between the Muslims and the people of Denmark! It is not enough to have the intention of doing good. One must do good in the proper way.

So what is the proper solution to this growing campaign of defamation? The medicine prescribed by the Messenger of Allāh صلى الله عليه وسلم is the execution of those involved. A soul that is so debased, as to enjoy the ridicule of the Messenger of Allāh صلى الله عليه وسلم, the mercy to mankind; a soul that is so ungrateful towards its Lord that it defames the Prophet of the religion Allāh جل جلاله has chosen for his creation does not deserve life, does not deserve to breathe the air created by Allāh جل جلاله and enjoy a life provided for by Allāh جل جلاله. Their proper abode is Hellfire.

    From Page 28

We will fight for him, we will instigate, we will bomb and we will assassinate, and may our mothers be bereaved of us if we do not rise in his defense.

A cartoonist out of Seattle, Washington, named Molly Norris started the “Everybody Draw Mohammed Day”. She should be taken as a prime target of assassination along with others who participated in her campaign.

This would make the attacking of any Western target legal from an Islāmic viewpoint. The entire Western system is staunchly protecting and promoting the defamation of Muĥammad صلى الله عليه وسلم and therefore, it is the entire Western system that is at war with Islām. Assassinations, bombings, and acts of arson are all legitimate forms of revenge against a system that relishes the sacrilege of Islām in the name of freedom.

    From Page 33

My Muslim brother: we are conveying to you our military training right into your kitchen to relieve you of the difficulty of traveling to us. If you are sincere in your intentions to serve the religion of Allāh جل جلاله, then all what you have to do is enter your kitchen and make an explosive device that would damage the enemy if you put your trust in Allāh جل جلاله and then use this explosive device properly. Here are the main qualities of this bomb:

1 Its ingredients are readily available.
2 Buying these ingredients does not raise suspicion.
3 It is easily disposed of if the enemy searches your home. Sniffing dogs are not trained to recognize them as bomb making ingredients.
4 In one or two days the bomb could be ready to kill at least ten people. In a month you may make a bigger and more lethal bomb that could kill tens of people.

January 18, 2011 Posted by | Christianity / God, Constitutional Issues, Politics/Government/Freedom, Societal / Cultural Issues, Understanding Islam, World Affairs | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

New Jersey becoming the Sharia State

New Jersey, the Garden State, has just taken its first step toward becoming the Sharia State, with Governor Christie’s nomination of Sohail Mohammed, an attorney to detained terrorist suspects, to a Superior Court judgeship in Passaic County. The Sohail nomination continues Christie’s unfortunate pandering to the American Muslim Union and the Islamic Center of Passaic County.

Passaic County has the second largest Muslim population in the country. And the Islamic Center of Passaic County is the state’s largest mosque, and it’s the only one run by an an Imam who was a member of the Hamas terrorist organization. But when the United States government attempted to deport Mohammed Qatanani, New Jersey’s pols and wannabe pols like Christie, quickly came to his aid. Despite the fact that Mohammed Qatanani was a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, the organization that is behind both Al Qaeda and Hamas, despite his own guilty plea to being a member of Hamas, and despite the fact that even in the United States, he had defended a charity that provided funds to children of suicide bombers (this is done as an incentive to reassure terrorists that if they die their families will be taken care of), Qatanani was not deported.

The pioneering terrorism researcher, Steve Emerson called it, “a disgrace and an act of pure political corruption”. He stated, “I know for certain that Christie and the FBI SAC had access to information about Qatanani’s background, involvement with and support of Hamas.” Defending Qatanani required Christie to pit himself against the Department of Homeland Security, which wanted him deported. But the Department of Homeland Security wasn’t running for office in New Jersey. Christie was.

The first Imam of the Islamic Center of Passaic County, Mohammad El-Mezain, was convicted of funneling money to Hamas. El-Mezain had actually boasted of raising almost 2 million dollars for Hamas. And his replacement, Qatanani, actually was a member of Hamas. An ordinary politician might have been forgiven for not knowing this, but Christie was the US Attorney for New Jersey. It’s absolutely impossible that he would not have known the background of the Islamic Center of Passaic County. Yet Christie attended a Ramadan dinner, in the same place where terrorists had fundraised, and kissed Qatanani on the cheek.

Now Christie has nominated Sohail Mohammed, Qatanan’s former lawyer, to a Superior Court judgeship. Sohail Mohammed is a board member of the American Muslim Union, an organization that has interlocking leadership with groups that have fundraised for Hamas and hosted a Hamas speaker. The American Muslim Union is closely interlinked with Qatanani’s Islamic Center of Passaic County.

Sohail Mohammed defended suspected terrorist detainees and was the go-to man for local and national media looking for a good quote. He lobbied against the use of both ‘Islamic’ in descriptions of Islamic terrorists, condemned the television show 24 for depicting Muslim terrorists and made an appearance outside the Qatanani trial. After the massacre of a Coptic Christian family, Sohail Mohammed tried to have some Copts investigated for opposing Muslim attendance at their funeral. And most importantly, Sohail Mohammed was Qatanani’s original lawyer when the government began its case against him.

So after helping Mohammed Qatanani escape deportation, Christie then nominated his lawyer to a Superior Court judgeship. Sohail is the second Muslim Superior Court judge in New Jersey after Hany Mawla. And if you want a preview of New Jersey’s future, you can see it in Judge Hany Mawla conducting the swearing in ceremony for Mayor Mohamed T. Khairullah in Passaic County’s Prospect Park borough. And the opening prayer for the event is delivered by none other than Imam Qatanani, leading a prayer in the name of Allah.

There’s still an American flag in place and the pledge of allegiance is recited, but those are symbols masking the hijacking taking place underneath the red, white and blue.

Some might compare the situation in Passaic County to France with its “no go zones” where the local authorities and non-Muslims cannot enter, but it’s actually a good deal worse. The government and the judiciary is being taken over, small pieces of Muslim ruled territory are being carved out and expanded with the support of the state’s leading politicians, who trade political support and campaign contributions for something dangerously close to treason. It’s not just New Jersey. America is being carved up this way, piece by piece…

January 18, 2011 Posted by | Constitutional Issues, Politics/Government/Freedom, Societal / Cultural Issues, Understanding Islam, World Affairs | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

My View From Here

ORIGINALLY POSTED AS COMMENT TO SON’S FACEBOOK POSTING

As a patriotic American concerned with the future of my country, I’m less worried about the idiots trying to get into office than where we are heading. The Chinese are lending us money to finance our debt we can’t pay so we can by more stuff from them and for oil, while the Islamic stealth jihad slowly gets Sharia Law replacing both our Constitutional freedoms and eliminating our freedoms. And our government, DEMS and REP both allowing these travesties.

Palin is mental inferior and not qualified for election for dog catcher. And before anyone starts screaming liberal, I’m not. I’m a thinking American. And, my choice for someone with the intelligence and integrity to be MY president, it is Mitt Romney.

If anyone REALLY wants to know where we are heading on the course George and Barack have set us on, watch the Glenn Beck show. He will tell you the truth and it will make you mad, especially if you are like most Americans, head firmly stuck in the sand (or some other place not polite to mention).

And if you really want some truth that will make you unhappy or enlightened, depending on how well you can handle reality, you are welcome to go to paulmarcelrene.wordpress.com

January 15, 2011 Posted by | Constitutional Issues, Politics/Government/Freedom, World Affairs | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Talking with Muslims about Qur’an Contradictions

Talking with Muslims about Qur’an Contradictions

A web page and a personal dialog need very different approaches. The big handicap of a web page is that I cannot lead a dialog but have to present my whole case in a monolog. Since I am not able to respond to the agreement or disagreement of my dialog partner I have to lay out the complete argument at once and can’t ask questions without answering them myself on the same page.

For everybody it is much easier to accept as well as be impressed with that which he found himself, therefore it is so much more effective to ask questions and help others to discover facts than to just tell them.

Also, be sensitive. The suggestion that there are contradictions in the Qur’an is an attack on the most holy and central element of a Muslim’s faith. If there is no need, I would prefer to not even mention the issue. But if the topic of the discussion moves in this way and the Muslim makes the property that the Qur’an is free of contradiction a major part of his argument, then you might want to have a few of them ready to talk about them.

But when you want to use some of the difficulties in the Qur’an, please make yourself thoroughly familiar with the argument first. Don’t use it if you haven’t clearly understood it yourself.

Second, reformulate it and make it a sequence of questions. Don’t come up to a Muslim and claim that Allah said to Moses that he can find Muhammad mentioned in the Gospel and that is a clear contradiction since the Gospel does not exist in Moses time.

Rather take the information you find in the article “Moses and the Gospel?” and ask the Muslim to read the verses 155-158 and that if he could tell you who speaks to whom in each of these verses. Maybe you can even be so bold to ask if the wrong interpretation is possible: In 157 and 158 “unlettered” is mentioned, and since 158 speaks to Muhammad, doesn’t that mean that 157 also have to speak to Muhammad? If the Muslim is fluent in Arabic or even has a clear perception of the English translation, he will deny and insist that 156-157 is spoken to Moses. After he has committed himself to that correct interpretation, THEN you ask the question whether it makes sense that Allah tells Moses that he can find Muhammad mentioned in the Gospel.

If he doesn’t realize it, ask him “Whom was the Gospel revealed to?”, and “When did Jesus live?” and supply the information if he doesn’t know.

This way the Muslim himself will discover the problem, instead of you pushing it on him, and after he has committed that 157 is spoken to Moses, he can’t really just change his mind after he has rejected the wrong interpretation already when you suggested it.

In a similar way, for any contradiction you want to use for yourself, reformulate it in a sequence of questions when you use it in a personal face to face dialog. Never give all the details away in the beginning. Leave some of it to strengthen your case after the Muslim will start to defend and try to explain it away. So, you will need some more material to back up your claim. On the web page, no interaction happens, and I have to give the whole argument away from the start.

But most of all, ask God that he will give you wisdom and love and sensitivity who to present these issues. We are not here to score points, but to win people. If you win the argument and loose the person then you have lost, not won.

December 29, 2010 Posted by | Christianity / God, Politics/Government/Freedom, Societal / Cultural Issues, Understanding Islam, World Affairs | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Ex-Muslims Speak Out – Book

I found two books I am ordering that I thought others might be interested in also that give an insiders view of Islam:

Why We Left Islam: Former Muslims Speak Out & Inside the Revolution Study Guide: How the Followers of Jihad, Jefferson, and Jesus Are Battling to Dominate the Middle East and Transform the World

December 22, 2010 Posted by | Christianity / God, Constitutional Issues, Politics/Government/Freedom, Societal / Cultural Issues, Understanding Islam, World Affairs | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Proof For Muhammad’s Prophethood – video

December 15, 2010 Posted by | Christianity / God, Societal / Cultural Issues, Understanding Islam | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

A God Who Hates Video

December 11, 2010 Posted by | Societal / Cultural Issues, Understanding Islam, World Affairs | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Contradictions in the Qur’an

العربية: القرآن في متحف التاريخ الطبيعي في نيو...

Image via Wikipedia

There are three basic categories of contradictions in the Qur’an:

1. Internal contradictions: Verses contradicting each other or the laws of logic
2. External errors: Verses contradicting the facts of history or science
3. Verses contradicting the earlier revelations

Internal contradictions:

# Who suffers loss if Muhammad was wrong? Sura 34:50 commands Muhammad to say, “If I go astray, I go astray only to my own loss,” which is a severe factual error in the Qur’an as well as contradicting the teaching of the Qur’an in a number of other verses.
# Allah, Adam, and the Angels. There are a great number of problems and inconsistencies between the several accounts of Adam’s creation, Allah’s command to prostrate before Adam, Satans refusal, etc.
# Who Was the First Muslim? Muhammad [6:14, 163], Moses [7:143], some Egyptians [26:51], or Abraham [2:127-133, 3:67] or Adam, the first man who also received inspiration from Allah [2:37]?
# Can Allah be seen and did Muhammad see his Lord? Yes [S. 53:1-18, 81:15-29], No [6:102-103, 42:51].
# Were Warners Sent to All Mankind Before Muhammad? Allah had supposedly sent warners to every people [10:47, 16:35-36, 35:24], Abraham and Ishmael are specifically claimed to have visited Mecca and built the Kaaba [2:125-129]. Yet, Muhammad supposedly is sent to a people who never had a messenger before [28:46, 32:3, 34:44, 36:2-6]. This article also raises other issues: What about Hud and Salih who supposedly were sent to the Arabs? What about the Book that was supposedly given to Ishmael? Etc.
# What will be the food for the people in Hell? The food for the people in Hell will be only “Dhari” [Sura 88:6], or only foul pus from the washing of wounds [S. 69:36], or will they also get to eat from the tree of Zaqqum [S. 37:66]? Together, these verses constitute three contradictions.
# Can Angels Cause the Death of People? The Qur’an attacks those who worship anyone besides God (e.g. angels or prophets) because those can neither create, nor give life, nor cause anyone to die. Yet, the Qur’an explicitly states that one angel or several angels are causing certain people to die [Sura 4:97, 16:28, 32, 32:11].
# Confusion Concerning Identity of the Spirit and Gabriel (a long discussion of dozens of references)
# ‘Iddah rules for divorced and widowed women appear to be arbitrary and inconsistent.
# Is there a minimum age of marriage for girls?
# To Marry or Not to Marry? The Qur’an forbids believers to marry idolatrous women [Sura 2:221], and calls Christians idolaters and unbelievers [9:28-33], but still allows Muslims to marry Christian women [5:5].
# Will it be accepted of them or not?
# Will Allah reward the good deeds of Unbelievers? S. 9:17 and 9:69 clearly say no. However, S. 99:7 implies yes. Moreover, S. 2:62 promises Christians reward for their good deeds. But S. 9:28-33; 5:17, 72-73 calls Christians idolaters, and S. 9:17 is very clear that idolaters will have no reward.
# Should Muslims Accept Peace or Not?
# Fighting All People Until They Do What?
# Compel them or Not?
# Can They Disbelieve in the Last Day and be Safe?
# Should Muslims show kindness to their parents? On the one hand, the Quran commands all Muslims to show kindness to their parents, even if they are disbelievers [17:23-24, 31:14-15, 29:8, etc.]. On the other hand, it demands not to show any love or friendship to those who oppose Muhammad, even if they are their parents [9:23, 58:22].
# Can one be a believer in God and oppose Muhammad at the same time?
# How many mothers does a Muslim have? Only one [58:2, the woman who gave birth and none else], or two [4:23, including the mother who nursed him], or at least ten [33:6]?
# And it just doesn’t add up: Sura 4:11-12 and 4:176 state the Qur’anic inheritance law. When a man dies, and is leaving behind three daughters, his two parents and his wife, they will receive the respective shares of 2/3 for the 3 daughters together, 1/3 for the parents together [both according to verse 4:11] and 1/8 for the wife [4:12] which adds up to more than the available estate. A second example: A man leaves only his mother, his wife and two sisters, then they receive 1/3 [mother, 4:11], 1/4 [wife, 4:12] and 2/3 [the two sisters, 4:176], which again adds up to 15/12 of the available property.
# How many angels were talking to Mary? When the Qur’an speaks about the announciation of the birth of Jesus to the virgin Mary, Sura 3:42,45 speaks about (several) angels while it is only one in Sura 19:17-21. (This article has received many Muslim responses which are quoted or linked and/or discussed at the end of the article.)
# Further numerical discrepancies Does Allah’s day equal to 1,000 human years (Sura 22:47, 32:5) or 50,000 human years (Sura 70:4)? — According to Sura 56:7 there will be THREE distinct groups of people at the Last Judgement, but 90:18-19, 99:6-8, etc. mention only TWO groups. — There are conflicting views on who takes the souls at death: THE Angel of Death [32:11], THE angels (plural) [47:27] but also “It is Allah that takes the souls (of men) at death.” [39:42] Angels have 2, 3, or 4 pairs of wings [35:1]; but Gabriel had 600 wings. [Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 54, Number 455]
# How many days did Allah need to destroy the people of Aad? One day [54:19] or several days [41:16; 69:6,7]
# Six or eight days of creation? Sura 7:54, 10:3, 11:7, and 25:59 clearly state that God created “the heavens and the earth” in six days. But in 41:9-12 the detailed description of the creation procedure adds up to eight days. (This topic also includes many Muslim responses and further discussion.)
# Quick or Slow Creation? Allah creates the heavens and the earth in six days [7:54] and many Muslims want to be modern and scientific, and make that six eons, but then again, He creates instantaneously [2:117], “Be! And it is”.
# Heavens or Earth? Which was created first? First earth and then heaven [2:29], heaven and after that earth [79:27-30].
# Calling together or ripping apart? In the process of creation heaven and earth were first apart and are called to come together [41:11], while 21:30 states that they were originally one piece and then ripped apart.
# What was man created from? A blood clot [96:1-2], water [21:30, 24:45, 25:54], “sounding” (i.e. burned) clay [15:26], dust [3:59, 30:20, 35:11], nothing [19:67] and this is then denied in 52:35, earth [11:61], a drop of thickened fluid [16:4, 75:37]
# What were jinn created from?
# The descent of the Quran: Piecemeal or all at once?
# Examining the inherent problems with the descent of the Quran
# Is half the Quran already fully detailed?
# Fully Detailed Or Incomplete? The Qur’an claims for itself to be (fully) detailed, that nothing is left out of the book [6:38, 6:114, 12:111, 16:89 etc.]. However there are plenty of important issues which are left unclear in the Qur’an. This article discusses the confusion found in the quranic statements on wine.
# Is the Quran Completely Clear or Not?
# The Perspicuity of the Quran and It’s Mysterious Letters
# Worshiping the Same or a Different God? Muhammad is commanded to speak to the disbelievers: … nor do you worship what I worship [109:3]. However, other verses in the Qur’an state clearly that those disbelieving his message are in fact worshiping the same God, Allah.
# Did the Meccan Polytheist Believe That Allah Was The Supreme Being?
# To Intercede or Not To Intercede? – That is the Question! The Qur’an makes contradictory statements whether on the Day of Judgment intercession will be possible. No: [2:122-123, 254; 6:51; 82:18-19; etc.]. Yes: [20:109; 34:23; 43:86; 53:26; etc.]. Each position can be further supported by ahadith.
# How the Islamic Doctrine of Intercession undermines Allah’s Omniscience
# Where is Allah and his throne? Allah is nearer than the jugular vein [50:16], but he is also on the throne [57:4] which is upon the water [11:7], and at the same time so far away, that it takes between 1,000 and 50,000 years to reach him [32:5, 70:4].
# The origin of calamity? Is the evil in our life from Satan [38:41], Ourselves [4:79], or Allah [4:78]?
# How merciful is Allah’s mercy? He has prescribed mercy for himself [6:12], yet he does not guide some, even though he could [6:35, 14:4].
# Does Allah command to do evil? No [7:28, 16:90]. Yes [17:16, ]. Two examples are also given, where Allah clearly commanded or permitted indecent actions [2:229-230, 2:187].
# Should Muhammad Get Paid Or Shouldn’t He?
# A Contradiction Regarding Muhammad’s Fatherhood
# Will there be inquiry in Paradise? “neither will they question one another” [23:101] but nevertheless they will be “engaging in mutual inquiry” [52:25], “and they will … question one another” [37:27].
# Are angels protectors? “NO protector besides Allah” [2:107, 29:22]. But in Sura 41:31 the angels themselves say: “We are your protectors in this life and the Hereafter.” And also in other suras is their role described as guarding [13:11, 50:17-18] and protecting [82:10].
# Is Allah the only Wali? On the one hand, Allah is supposedly the only wali (protector, helper, friend) [9:116, 17:111, 32:4, 42:28], on the other hand, the messenger and the believers are walis [5:55, 9:71], Allah has walis [10:62], and he raises walis [4:75].
# Does Allah Act Alone Or Does He Have Partners That Assist Him?
# Is Allah the Only Judge or Not?
# Is Allah the only sovereign or isn’t he?
# Are all obedient and prostrating to Allah? That is the claim in 16:49 and 30:26, but dozens of verses speak of the proud disobedience of Satan [7:11, 15:28-31, 17:61, 20:116, 38:71-74, 18:50] as well of many different human beings who reject His commands and His revelations.
# Does Allah forgive shirk? Shirk is considered the worst of all sins, but the author of the Qur’an seems unable to decide if Allah will ever forgive it or not. No [4:48, 116], Yes [4:153, 25:68-71]. Abraham committed this sin of polytheism as he takes moon, sun, stars to be his Lord [6:76-78], yet Muslims believe that all prophets are without any sin.
# Abraham and the Sun
# Abraham’s Monotheism
# Abraham’s Progeny? How the Qur’an messed up Abraham’s family tree
# Did All Prophets Receive the Same Book?
# The event of worship of the golden calf: The Israelites repented about worshipping the golden calf BEFORE Moses returned from the mountain [7:149], yet they refused to repent but rather continued to worship the calf until Moses came back [20:91]. Does Aaron share in their guilt? No [20:85-90], yes [20:92, 7:151].
# Was Jonah cast on the desert shore or was he not? “Then We cast him on a desert shore while he was sick” [37:145] “Had not Grace from his Lord reached him, he would indeed have been cast off on the naked shore while he was reprobate.” [68:49]
# Moses and the Injil? Jesus is born more than 1,000 years after Moses, but in 7:157 Allah speaks to Moses about what is written in the Injil [the book given to Jesus].
# Can slander of chaste women be forgiven? Yes [24:5], No [24:23].
# How do we receive the record on Judgment Day? On Judgement day the lost people are given the Record (of their bad deeds): Behind their back [84:10], or in their left hand [69:25].
# Can angels disobey? No angel is arrogant, they all obey Allah [16:49-50], but: “And behold, we said to the ANGELS: ‘Bow down to Adam’. And THEY bowed down, EXCEPT Iblis. He refused and was haughty.” [2:34]. This article includes links to answers to four Muslim responses.
# How many wings does an angel have? Angels have 2, 3, or 4 wings [35:1]; but Gabriel had 600 wings according to Sahih al-Bukhari.
# Is Satan an angel or a jinn?
# Three contradictions in 2:97 and 16:101-103 Who brings the revelation from Allah to Muhammad? The ANGEL Gabriel [2:97], or the Holy Spirit [16:102]? The new revelation confirms the old [2:97] or substitutes it [16:101]? The Qur’an is PURE Arabic [16:103] but there are numerous foreign, non-Arabic words in it.
# Do not say, “Three”!? It is impossible to recite Sura 4:171 without transgressing the command contained in it.
# The infinite loop problem Sura 26:192,195,196: “It (the Qur’an) is indeed a revelation from the Lord of the Worlds, … in clear Arabic speech and indeed IT (the Qur’an) is in the writings of the earlier (prophets).” Now, the ‘earlier writings’ are the Torah and the Injil for example, written in Hebrew and Greek. HOW can an ARABIC Qur’an be contained in books of other languages? Furthermore, it would have to contain this very passage of the Qur’an since the Qur’an is properly contained in them. Hence these earlier writings have to be contained in yet other earlier writings and we are in an infinite loop, which is absurd.
# Is the Torah like the Qur’an, or is it not? The Muslim claim of the corruption of the Bible leads to a contradiction between S. 2:24 and 17:88 on the one hand, and 28:49 and 46:10 on the other.
# Should Jews and Christians follow the Bible or the Quran?
# “An old woman” and God’s character About the story of Lot: “So we delivered him and his family, – all exept an old woman who lingered behind.” [Sura 26:170-171] And again: “But we saved him and his family, exept his wife: she was of those who lagged behind. [Sura 7:83]. Either this is a contradiction or if indeed Lot’s wife is derogatorily called “an old woman” then this does not show much respect for her as a wife of a prophet.
# More problems with the story of Lot “And his people gave NO answer but this: They said, “Drive them out of your city: these are indeed men who want to be clean and pure!” [Sura 7:82 & 27:56]. Yet: “But his people gave NO answer but this: They said: “Bring us the Wrath of Allah if thou tellest the truth.” [Sura 29:29]. Obviously these answers are different.
# The “pleasure” of Allah? Is God’s action of punishment or mercy and guidance or misguidance arbitrary?
# Did Abraham smash the idols? The accounts of Abraham, Suras 19:41-49, 6:74-83 differ quite a bit from Sura 21:51-59. While in Sura 21 Abraham confronts his people strongly, and even destroys the idols, in Sura 19 Abraham shuts up after his father threatens him to stone him for speaking out against the idols. And he seems not only to become silent, but even to leave the area (“turning away from them all”).
# What about Noah’s son? According to Sura 21:76, Noah and his family is saved from the flood, and Sura 37:77 confirms that his seed survived. But Sura 11:42-43 reports that Noah’s son drowns.
# Was Noah driven out? “Before them *the people of Noah* rejected (their messenger): They rejected Our servant and said, ‘Here is One possessed!’ And he was driven out.” [Sura 54:9] Now, if he is driven out [expelled from their country] how come they can scoff at him while he is building the ark since we read “Forthwith he (starts) constructing the Ark: Every time that the Chiefs of *his people* passed by him, they threw ridicule on him.” [Sura 11:38] He cannot be both: Driven out and near enough that they can regularly pass by.
# Pharaoh’s Magicians: Muslims or Rejectors of Faith? Did the Magicians of Pharaoh, Egyptians, become believers in the God of Moses [7:103-126; 20:56-73; S. 26:29-51] or did only Israelites believe in Moses [10:83]?
# How many gods did the Egyptians worship?
# Pharaoh’s repentance in the face of death? According to Sura 10:90-92, Pharaoh repented “in the sight of death” and was saved. But Sura 4:18 says that such a thing can’t happen.
# Abrogation? “The words of the Lord are perfect in truth and justice; there is NONE who can change His words.” [Sura 6:115] Also see 6:34 and 10:64. But then Allah (Muhammad?) sees the need to exchange some of them for “better ones” [Sura 2:106, 16:101]. And it is not for ignorant people to question Allah because of such practices!
# Guiding to truth? “Say: ‘God – He guides to the truth; and which is worthier to be followed …?” [Sura 10:35] But how much is left over of this worthiness when we also read: “Allah leads astray whom he pleases, and he guides whom He pleases, …” [Sura 14:4]. And how do we know in which of Allah’s categories of pleasure we fall? How sure can a Muslim be that he is one of those guided right and not one of those led astray?
# What is the punishment for adultery? Flogging with a 100 stripes (men and women) [24:2], “confine them to houses until death do claim them (lifelong house arrest – for the women) [4:15]. For men: “If they repent and amend, leave them alone” [4:16]. 24:2 contradicts both the procedure for women and men in Sura 4. And why is the punishment for women and men equal in Sura 24 but different in Sura 4?
# How are the sexually immoral supposed to be punished?
# The Problem of Divine Sovereignty, Predestination, Salvation and Human Free Will
# Who suffers the consequence of sins? The Qur’an declares that everyone will be held responsible only for his own sins [S. 17:13-15, 53:38-42]. Yet, the Qur’an accuses the Jews of Muhammad’s day for the sins committed some 2000 years earlier by other Jews, e.g. worshipping the Golden Calf idol.
# Will Christians enter Paradise or go to Hell? Sura 2:62 and 5:69 say “Yes”, Sura 5:72 (just 3 verses later) and 3:85 say “No”.
# God alone or also men? Clear or incomprehensible? The Qur’an is “clear Arabic speech.” [16:103] Yet “NONE knows its interpretation, save only Allah.” [3:7]. Actually, “men of understanding do grasp it.” [3:7]
# Was Pharaoh Drowned or Saved when chasing Moses and the Israelites? Saved [10:92], drowned [28:40, 17:103, 43:55].
# When Commanded Pharaoh the Killing of the Sons? When Moses was a Prophet and spoke God’s truth to Pharaoh [40:23-25] or when he was still an infant [20:38-39]?
# When/how are the fates determined? “The night of power is better than a thousand months. The angels and spirit descend therein, by the permission of their Lord, with all decrees.” [97:3,4] “Lo! We revealed it on a blessed night.” [44:3] To Muslims, the “Night of Power” is a blessed night on which fates are settled and on which everything relating to life, death, etc., which occurs throughout the year is decreed. It is said to be the night on which Allah’s decrees for the year are brought down to the earthly plane. In other words, matters of creation are decreed a year at a time. Contradicting this, Sura 57:22 says, “No affliction befalls in the earth or in your selves, but it is in a Book before we create it.” This means it is written in the Preserved Tablet, being totally fixed in Allah’s knowledge before anyone was created. All of the above is contradicted by “And every man’s fate We have fastened to his own neck.” This says that man alone is responsible for what he does and what happens to him. [17:13]
# Wine: Good or bad? Strong drink and … are only an infamy of Satan’s handiwork. [5:90, also 2:219]. Yet on the other hand in Paradise are rivers of wine [47:15, also 83:22,25]. How does Satan’s handiwork get into Paradise?
# Good News of Painful Torture? Obviously, announcing torment and suffering to anyone is bad news, not good news. However, the Qur’an announces the good news of painful torment [3:21, 4:138, 9:3, 9:34, 31:7, 45:8, and 84:24].
# Jinns and men created for worship or for Hell? Created only to serve God [Sura 51:56], many of them made for Hell [Sura 7:179].
# Preferred for Hell? S. 17:70 says that Allah prefers (all) the children of Adam over many of his creatures, but S. 98:6 declares the majority of men to be the worst of creatures, many of them being even created specifically for Hell (S. 7:179).
# Will people stay in Hell forever, or not?
# Will all Muslims go to Hell? According to Sura 19:71 every Muslim will go to Hell (for at least some time), while another passage states that those who die in Jihad will go to Paradise immediately.
# Will Allah disgrace Muslims? On the day of judgment Allah will not humiliate or disgrace the Prophet and those who believe in him [S. 66:8]. However, 19:71 says that everyone will enter Hell, and 3:192 states that whomsoever Allah sends to Hell, is disgraced thereby.
# Will Jesus burn in Hell? Jesus is raised to Allah, [Sura 4:158], near stationed with him [Sura 3:45], worshiped by millions of Christians, yet Sura 21:98 says, that all that are worshiped by men besides Allah will burn in Hell together with those who worship them.
# Is Jesus God or Not? In Sura 16:17, 20-21 and S. 25:3 we find a criterion to distinguish the true God from false gods. Yet, according to S. 3:49, 55, 4:157-158, 5:110, 6:2, and 38:71-72 Jesus satisfies the definition and should be considered true Deity.
# Is Jesus Like Adam? S. 3:59 makes this claim, but how many aspects of likeness are there really?
# Can there be a son without a consort? Allah cannot have a son without a consort [Sura 6:101], but Mary can have a son without a consort because that is easy for Allah [Sura 19:21].
# Who is the father of Jesus? A more involved argument that is difficult to summarize in one sentence.
# Begetting and Self-sufficiency A self-contradiction on account of confused terminology.
# Could Allah have a son? Sura 39:4 affirms and Sura 6:101 denies this possibility.
# Did Jesus Die already? Sura 3:144 states that all messengers died before Muhammad. But 4:158 claims that Jesus was raised to God (alive?).
# One Creator or many? The Qur’an uses twice the phrase that Allah is “the best of creators” [23:14, 37:125]. What other creators are in mind? On the other hand, many verses make clear that Allah alone is “the creator of all things” [e.g. 39:62]. There is nothing left for others to be a creator of.
# From among all nations or from Abraham’s seed? Sura 29:27 states that all prophets came Abraham’s seed. But 16:36 claims that Allah raised messengers from among every people.
# Marrying the wives of adopted sons? It is important that Muslims can marry the divorced wives of adopted sons [Sura 33:37], yet it is forbidden to adopt sons [Sura 33:4-5].
# Messengers were never sent to other than their own people? So it is claimed in Sura 14:4 and 30:47. However, the Bible and the Qur’an, and the Muslim traditions confirm that Jonah was sent to a different nation.
# Messengers Were Sent Only to Their Own People? Sura 14:4 states that never was a messenger sent except in the language of his own people. Yet, the Quran itself claims that Jesus is supposed to be a sign to all people, that the Torah and Gospel are for all people, that Moses was sent to Pharaoh of Egypt, and that Muhammad is sent to all of mankind. The hadith also claim that Noah was sent to “the inhabitants of the earth”.
# Did Allah give a Greek Injil to the Jews?
# What kind of book is the Injil?
# Messengers Amongst the Jinns and Angels? Allah sent only men as messengers [Suras 12:109, 21:7-8, 25:20-21] but there seemingly are messengers from Jinns and Angels [6:130; 11:69,77; 22:75; etc., see article for details].
# Do all of God’s messengers eat food?
# A Messenger from among the beasts? Allah sent only men as messengers [Suras 12:109, 21:7-8, 25:20-21]. Yet, the Qur’an also speaks about a beast that is a messenger from Allah to men [S. 27:82].
# Is Muhammad Only A Warner or a Prophet/Messenger?
# Did the Messengers Perform Miracles?
# Divinely Inspired Ignorance?
# Which Prophets Did the Jews Kill?
# Another eleven contradictions…

External errors:

Science:

# Solomon listening to ants? In Sura 27:18-19 Solomon overhears a “conversation of ants”.
Is this possible based on our knowledge about the mode and complexity of ant communication?
# The stars and the moon The Qur’an teaches that there are seven heavens one above the other [67:3, 71:15], and that the stars are in the lower heaven [67:5, 37:6, 41:12], but the moon is depicted as being in/inside the seven heavens [71:16], even though in reality the stars are much further away from the earth than the moon.
# Qur’an and Science: Section Four in Dr. Campbell’s book
# Qur’an and Embryology
# Can non-living matter think, feel and have a will?
# The human embryonic development
# The place of Sun rise and Sun set
# The Seven Earths
# Stars created to be thrown at devils?
# Sun and moon are subject to man?
# Mountains and Earthquakes
# The impossible conversation
# Solomon and the animals…
# Allah’s forgotten creatures
# Shaking the trunk of the palm tree?
# Thinking with the breasts?
# All things are made in pairs? Sura 51:49 claims that everything is created in pairs. But this is not true! There are quite a number of things that have no counterpart and species where only one gender exists.
# Are Fruits Male and Female?

History:

# The Qur’an Attacks … Christianity?
# Selling Joseph for a few Dirhams? (before coins were even invented)
# Moses and the Samaritan?
# The farthest Mosque?
# Alexander the Great, a Muslim?
# None else was named “John” before John the Baptist?
# Two Pharaohs who crucified?
# Burnt bricks in Egypt?
# How many gods did the Egyptians worship?
# Israel, the Quran and the Promised Land
# Were they utterly destroyed?
# What kind of book is the Injil?
# Jesus was not crucified?
# The anachronistic title al-`Aziz given to Potiphar

(Here is an important question. Muslims affirm that the Qur’an / Islam encourages to seek knowledge. What happens if that knowledge doesn’t match what the Qur’an teaches? I strongly believe that “all truth is God’s truth.” That also means that God will not contradict himself in the “natural” revelation of history and science and in the “special” revelation of his written word. But if the Qur’an contradicts what we so clearly know from history or science, does this indicate that maybe the author of truth in the natural realm and the author of the Qur’an might not be the same? )

The Qur’an in Contradiction to the Earlier Revelations:

Ultimately, the strongest, most serious problem of the Qur’an is that it affirms the scriptures of the Jews and the Christians as authentic and true revelation from God (cf. what the Qur’an says about the Bible), while radically denying central aspects of their message, e.g. the core themes of sacrifice and atonement in the Torah, the crucifixion of Jesus, the deity of Jesus and even the mere messianic title “Son of God” for Jesus, the very nature of God, the fall and the sinfulness of man, necessity and means of salvation, etc. For this reason Muslims had to invent the unwarranted theory of corruption of the earlier scriptures, even against the clear testimony of the Qur’an itself.

In the following some smaller discrepancies between the Qur’an and the scriptures it supposedly confirms.

1. Historical Compressions: Saul, David, Gideon and Goliath
2. A Samaritan tempting the Israelites in Moses time?
3. Prophets and Kings in Israel before the time of Moses?
4. Moses and the Gospel?
5. Punishment for future disobedience?
6. Mary, the sister of Aaron?
7. Pharaoh and Haman?
8. A Pharaoh Who Forgot to Die in Time?
9. Was there a second period of slaying the sons of the Israelites?
10. Moses or Jacob?
11. Did Joseph’s parents go to Egypt?
12. Abraham’s name
13. Abraham and Solomon

Other contradictions in comparison to the Bible:

14. Did God teach Adam the names of the animals?
15. Noah’s Age
16. Were Believers Really Called Muslims Before the Time of Muhammad?
17. The Quran’s Mistakes regarding the Biblical Patriarchs
18. Who Adopted Moses: Pharaoh’s Daughter or Pharaoh’s Wife?
19. Adoption by Adaption analyzes various discrepancies inf the quranic version of the stories of Moses and Joseph.
20. A Flood in the time of Moses?
21. Israel, the Quran and the Promised Land
22. The Quran, Moses and the Tablets of Stone
23. Solomon Working with Demons
24. Israel’s Response to the Covenant: ‘We Obey’ or ‘We Disobey’?
25. Where is the Blood?
26. Divinely Inspired Ignorance?
27. Which Prophets Did the Jews Kill?
28. What kind of book is the Injil?
29. Animal sacrifices for Christians?
30. Why did the Queen of Sheba come to Solomon?
31. Ezra the Son of God?
32. Jesus reached old age?
33. Did the golden calf say ‘Moo’?
34. Did disobedience result in extra commandments?
35. How many messengers were sent to Noah’s people?
Further discussion: Who are those messengers that were rejected by Noah’s people?
36. The Progeny of Abraham?
37. Two young men?
38. How many wings does an angel have?

# More contradictions between Qur’an and Bible

Do they not ponder on the Qur’an?
Had it been from other than Allah,
they would surely have found therein much discrepancy.
– Sura 4:82

Since this verse is claiming that there is “no contradiction / discrepancy” in the Qur’an, therefore itself has to be part of the list of contradictions because it contradicts the existence of the above listed contradictions. Or would you say because it says “much” and the above aren’t “enough of them” yet to qualify for “much”, all is actually fine?

***********************************************************************************************

CONTRADICTIONS WITHIN THE QURAN

“Do they not consider the Quran? Had it been from other than Allah, they would surely have found therein much discrepancies.” (Sura 4:82).

This verse is further amplified by the already quoted texts:

“No change can there be in the Words of Allah (Sura 10:64)
“There is none that can alter the Words of Allah (Sura 6:34)

We Christians believe this too. Let us assume for a moment that there is no discrepancy between the message of the Bible and the Quran, which, as we have seen, is not the case, and consider the Quran on its own.

The problem of abrogation.

“When We substitute one revelation for another, – and Allah knows best what He reveals, – they say ‘Thou art a forger: But most of them understand not. Say, the Holy Spirit has brought the revelation from thy Lord in truth.”

“None of our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or similar–Knowest thou not that Allah hath power over all things?….Would you question your Apostle as Moses was questioned of old?” (Suras 16:101 and 2:106,108).

We should like to find out how a divine revelation can be improved. We would have expected it to have been perfect and true right from the start. Yusuf Ali tries to explain:

“….it means that God’s message from age to age is always the same, but that its form may differ according to the needs and exigencies of the time. Some commentators apply it also to the Ayat (revelation) of the Quran. There is nothing derogatory in this if we believe in progressive revelation.
In Sura 3:7 we are told distinctly about the Quran, that some of its verses are basic and fundamental, and others are allegorical, and it is mischievous to treat the allegorical verses and follow them (literally).” (comm 107).

This is fully acceptable. God has revealed His Word progressively, the revelation being levelled at the comprehension and culture of the people to whom it was first given. Everybody will agree that an allegory should not be taken literally. But what about the law of ‘mansukh’ (=abrogated verse; please note Sura 2:106 does not speak of intellect, culture or progressive revelation with reference to scriptures given prior to Mohammed, but to Quranic verses only!) and ‘nasikh’ (=the verses that take the place of the mansukh verses)? .

We must recognize one important principle: If we want to know what a certain passage really means we have to make a proper exegesis. We have to establish what exactly the text in question was intended to say to the original hearers. How did they understand it? Only having done that can we interpret a text in today’s situation without distortion. There are various possible ways of establishing the original meaning, but one should also look at the very old commentaries and see how they understood and interpreted the text.

The “Tafsir-i-Azizi” explains three kinds of abrogations (=cancellations):

i) where a verse has been removed from the Quran and another given in its place;

ii) where the injunction (command) is abrogated and the letters of the verse remain; !

iii) where both the verse and its injunction are removed from the text

Jalalu’d-Din, says that the number of abrogated verses has been variously estimated to range from 5 to 500 (“Dictionary of Islam”, page 520)

In his ‘Itqan’ he furnished a list of 20 verses, which are acknowledged by all commentators to be abrogated (“Dictionary of Islam”, page 520).

Just a few be mentioned here:

The Qibla (prayer direction) was changed from Jerusalem to Mecca (Sura 2:142-144);

The division of inheritance left by parents or other relatives according to Sura 4:7 had to be equal (a share and a share which has to be determined). This was abrogated and replaced by verse 11, where it is commanded that males must get double the share of females.

The night prayer performed by reciting the Quran ought to be more or less half the time of the night (Sura 73:2). This was changed to as much as may be easy for you (verse 20).

The treatment of adulteresses is to be life imprisonment (Sura 4:15), which was changed to flogging with 100 strokes (Sura 24:2). This despite the leniency prescribed for homosexuals (Sura 4:16) on repenting.

The retaliation in cases of crime, particularly murder, was to be confined to people of equal rank (slave for slave, free for free etc.) (Sura 2:178) This is in disagreement with Sura 5:48 and Sura 17:33 where retaliation is allowed against the murderer only.

The Jihad or Holy War was forbidden in the sacred months (Sura 9:5) but is allowed, even encouraged in verse 36 which replaces the former.

“Sura 2:106 occurs immediately before a series of sweeping changes, or rather modifications, introduced by Muhammad in both the ritual and the legal spheres.The verse thus precedes a change in the Qibla (vss. 115,177,124-151); in the pilgrimage rites (vs. 158); in the dietary laws (vss. 168-l74); in the law relating to talio (vss. 178-179); in bequests (vss. 180-182); in the fast (vss. 182-187); and again in the pilgrimage (vss. 191-203).

Similarly, Sura 16:101 is followed by allusions to modifications in the dietary laws (vss 114-119), and in the Sabbath laws (vs.124)” (“The Collection of the Quran” by John Burton).

Elaborating on this we note that the fast is compulsory “but if any of you is ill or on a journey, the prescribed number (should be made up) from days later. For those who can do it (with hardship) is a ransom, the feeding of one, that is indigent.” (Sura 2:184).

“‘Here one can hardly escape the conclusion that the first verse (i.e. 184) allows a rich man to buy himself out of the fast.” (“Islam” by A. Guillaume). The next verse is said to replace the former. It allows no compensation of any kind for the fast.

In verse 180 of the same Sura “it is prescribed, when death approaches any of you, if he leaves any goods, that he make a bequest to parents and next of kin….”. This is said to be replaced by Sura 4:11, according to which a double portion of inheritance falls to males compared to that of females.

The much discussed “verses of the sword”: “….fight and slay the pagans wherever ye find them and seize them, beleaguer them and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (or war).” (Sura 9:5) and “….when you meet the unbelievers (in fight) cut off their necks…” (Sura 47:4) are “said to have cancelled no less than 124 verses which enjoined toleration and patience.” (A. Guillaume).

To us it is surprising to find the mansukh and nasikh verses often near to each other. We judge these to be cases of interpolation.

As stated earlier, we do believe in progressive revelation. The Old Covenant of the Law, as given to Moses, was superseded by the New Covenant of grace, which Jesus introduced. But these developments took place over a considerable time (1 500 years) with many prophetic warnings and predictions in between, so that no arbitrary action may be assumed on the side of God. In the light of this we find it unacceptable that within a space of 20 years a need for change or correction can become necessary. This surely suggests that God is either not all-knowing or else the recorder made a correction.

There are other verses which further add to the confusion:

“If we wished, we could make away with what we have revealed to you!” (Sura 17:86). “We shall teach you to recite it (i.e. the Quran) and you will not forget – except that Allah wills (Sura 87:6-7).

Why should anything be forgotten of an eternal revelation? To “substitute for it something better”? We do admit that an inspired man can err at times, but an inspired book (nazil) cannot!

Zarkasi explains the above concept more deeply. He states (vol. I p. 235):

“The ‘naskh’ (sic) of the wording and recital occured by means of God’s causing them to forget it. He withdrew it from their memories, while commanding them to neglect its public recital and its recording in the mushaf. With the passage of time, it would quite disappear like the rest of God’s revealed Books which He mentions in the Quran, but nothing of which is known today. This can have happened either during the Prophet’s life so that, when he died, the forgotten material was no longer being recited as part of the Quran; or it might have happened after the death of the Prophet. It would still be extant in writing, but God would cause them to forget it. He would then remove it from their memories. But, of course, the naskh of any part of the revelation after the death of the Prophet is not possible.” (“The Collection of the Quran” by John Burton p.97).

We suggest that Allah could have spared us a lot of confusion, doubt and explaining, had He given the better text right from the beginning.

“There was a series of Hadiths designed expressly to give the impression that Muhammad had forgotten part of the revelations. The reports were specific and detailed enough to identify the actual wording of the verses in question. Anas is reported in the two Sahih’s (i.e. al-Bukhari and Muslim) as declaring: There was revealed concerning those slain at Bi’r Ma’una a Quran verse which we recited until it was withdrawn: “Inform our tribe on our behalf that we have met our Lord. He has been well pleased with us and has satisfied our desires.’ (“al-Itqan by Jalal al Din).

‘Abdullah b. al Zubair therefore asked ‘Uthman what had possessed him to include Sura 2:240 in the ‘mushaf’ (document or canon), when he knew it to have been abrogated by Sura 2:234. ‘Because’, he replied ‘Uthman, ‘I know it to be part of the Quran text.’ ‘(ibid.). (“The Collection of the Quran” by John Burton).

A further problem arises from the fact that there is by no means any certainty which verses are mansukh and which nasikh, since the order in which the Quran was written down is not chronological, but according to the length of the Suras. However, even the Suras were not necessarily given in one piece. It happened that a certain portion of a Sura was given, and the next given text would be directed by Mohammed to be added to another Sura, and later again another addition was made to the first again, etc. The Hadis gives no conclusive information about the chronological order either, so that strictly speaking, there is no means of determining which of two disagreeing texts is mansukh, and which nasikh.

In any case we Christians see in this whole subject just a theological gimmick to “explain” contradictions. The quotation:

“No change can there be in the Words of Allah” and “There is none that can alter the Words of Allah. Already hast thou received some account of those Apostles.” or “the other Apostles also said so.” (Suras 10:64 and 6:34).

is contradicted by all those Muslims who claim that the Bible which is admitted to be a revealed book, has been altered and corrupted.

To underline our point let us just look at two passages of the Quran that have not been reconciled in terms of the law of abrogation.

In Sura 41:9-12 we read that the world was created in eight days, in Sura 7:54 we are told it were six days. It is, we suppose, up to the believer to make up his mind which of the two he will accept.

QUESTION: Must we assume that God is inconsistent? Knowing all things, such contradiction surely does not originate from God?

Problems regarding the consistency of Revelation.

The Quran is inconsistent regarding commitments on the part of Allah on which the believer can reckon or on which he can build his life. Commitments that are given are contradicted elsewhere:

“Allah has inscribed for himself (the rule of) mercy”

or

“Allah has prescribed for himself as law to act merciful” (Sura 6:12).

is contradicted in the same Sura: (verses 35-39):

“If it were Allah’s will, he would gather them into true guidance…. Whom Allah willeth he leaves to wander, whom he willeth, he placeth on the way that is straight”.

As we shall see (pp 21ff.), the Muslim’s hope rests on that despairing word:

“IF it pleases Allah.”

This is striking, for even in the Old Testament the believer was aware of the Law of cause and Effect. Once a believer broke any of God’s Laws he was cut-off from God, and was lost and perishing. But if he atoned therefor in repentance according to God’s prescribed ordinance (the sacrifice) his sin was forgiven. God had committed Himself to it. This is even further elaborated in the New Testament:

“If we confess our sins (while we have fellowship with God: vs. 6), He is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” (I John 1:9).

We see a definite regression from this standard in the Quran.

We also find it strange to read:

“Strongest among men in enmity to the believers wilt thou find the Jews and Pagans; and nearest among them in love to the believers wilt thou find those who say, ‘we are Christians’.” (Sura 5:85)

This is supported to some extent by an explanatory note in the “Mishkat” (IV page 103, note 2380) where we are told that “nearly two-thirds of paradise” will be filled with “the followers of the Holy Prophet and the followers of other prophets will form one-third.” In strange contrast to this are the words of Sura 5:51

“Take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends.”

What about being together in Paradise? The reason is just as strange:

“They (Jews and Christians) are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust.

It can hardly be said that Jews and Christians have ever protected each other, except that they agree on the authenticity of the Old Testament.

It is said of Mohammed that he was the first to bow down to Allah (in Islam) (Sura 6:14, 163, 39:12). But it is also said of Abraham, his sons and Jacob that they were Muslims (Sura 2:132), and of all earlier prophets who brought ‘books’ (i.e. Moses, David and Jesus) (Sura 28:52-53). Again it is reported of the disciples of Jesus that they were Muslims (Sura 3:52).

All these we view as contradictions. Some would not be of a serious nature, were it not for the claim that the Quran is “nazil” or “brought down” from heaven to Mohammed without the touch of human hand – except for the act of writing itself.

QUESTION: Is there any uncontradicted statement in the Quran on which a Mulsim can rely to have eternal life in heaven?

http://www.answering-islam.org/Nehls/Ask/contra.html

December 11, 2010 Posted by | Christianity / God, Societal / Cultural Issues, Understanding Islam, World Affairs | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Violence and Qu’ran

July 7, 2010 Weylan Deaver

The New Testament teaches Christians are at war with evil. But Christians fight with spiritual (i.e. non-physical) weapons for a spiritual kingdom. When it comes to our relationship to fellow men, the gospel teaches we are to be peacemakers, turning the other cheek when mistreated, not retaliating, but leaving vengeance to God (cf. Matt. 5:9; Luke 6:29; Rom. 12:17-21; 2 Cor. 10:4; Eph. 6:12; 2 Tim. 2:3-4; etc.). Jesus put it this way: “But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven” (Matt. 5:44f., ESV).

That’s a far, far cry from advocating physical violence against the enemies of the church in the name of Christ. Anyone teaching or practicing physical violence in the name of Christ to further the religion of Christianity is, in fact, contradicting the New Testament.

When it comes to the religion of Islam, there are, without question, many who advocate and practice physical violence against those they consider “infidels.” Often, politically-correct (and ignorant) American politicians condemn terrorist atrocities, offering the explanation that Islam has been hijacked by radical extremists. But is that so? Consider several quotations from A. J. Arberry’s respected translation of the Koran (New York: Collier Books, 1955).

“And fight in the way of God with those who fight with you, but aggress not: God loves not the aggressors. And slay them wherever you come upon them” (from sura II).

While on the one hand aggression seems discouraged, killing in the name of Allah is definitely okay: kill your enemy wherever you happen to find him. It makes the part about non-aggression seem a little hollow, doesn’t it?

“O believers, take not Jews and Christians as friends; they are friends of each other. Whoso of you makes them his friends is one of them” (from sura V).

Whereas Jesus taught his followers to do good to enemies, the Koran forbids even friendship with Christians. A Muslim who befriends a Christian is, per Muhammad, as bad as a Christian (and Christians—as unbelievers—deserve to be slain).

“I shall cast into the unbelievers’ hearts terror; so smite above the necks, and smite every finger of them!” (from sura VIII).

Notice the word “terror,” as in “terror”-ist. The gospel of Christ is a message of peace, hope, and kindness. Granted, it has ample warnings of the coming Judgment, but God will take care of that after we leave earth. Muhammad’s is a message of terror and Muslims smiting unbelievers on earth. Huge difference.

“Then, when the sacred months are drawn away, slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them, and confine them, and lie in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they repent, and perform the prayer, and pay the alms, then let them go their way” (from sura IX).

Again, more slaying of non-Muslims. It’s difficult to harmonize all the sanctioned smiting with not being an aggressor, but theological coherence and consistency are not Muhammadan hallmarks.

“…the Christians say, ‘The Messiah is the Son of God.’ That is the utterance of their mouths, conforming with the unbelievers before them. God assail them! How they are perverted!” (from sura IX).

In the eyes of a Muslim, it is perversion to believe Jesus is truly the son of God. With a religion that far removed from Christ, it is no wonder Islam practices what it does. Jesus proved himself to be God’s son and died on the cross for every future Muslim some 600 years before Muhammad was even born. Millions today live in fear of speaking against Muhammad. In point of fact, Muhammad should have lived in fear of blaspheming Jesus Christ. One day, Muhammad, and all his followers, will be judged by the words of Christ (John 12:48).

“O believers, fight the unbelievers who are near to you, and let them find in you a harshness” (from sura IX).

They can’t help but be noticed, the complete opposite approaches to life found in the New Testament and the Koran. The former encourages gentleness (Gal. 5:23; 2 Tim. 2:25); the latter prescribes “harshness.” Jesus taught kindness and love toward enemies—not cutting off their heads.

“When you meet the unbelievers, smite their necks, then, when you have made wide slaughter among them, tie fast the bonds; then set them free, either by grace or ransom, till the war lays down its loads” (from sura XLVII).

More of the same: smiting and slaughter for unbelievers. Anyone who thinks the Koran does not teach violence ought to look again. American society will tolerate and warm up to Islam at its own peril. If their influence and respectability continue to grow on the world stage, is there any doubt that Muslims will increasingly enforce on unbelievers the kind of treatment the Koran demands? So, back to the question. Are Islamic terrorists simply radical people who have hijacked, twisted, perverted, misinterpreted the Koran to sanction violence? Or, are Islamic terrorists really the ones living up to what Islam has always taught?

December 8, 2010 Posted by | Societal / Cultural Issues, Understanding Islam, World Affairs | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 6 Comments

Does a large Muslim presence in the United States equal terrorism?

a large Muslim presence in the United States unnecessarily increases the danger of terrorist attacks on American soil or on American airplanes.

It should not really be necessary to talk about this, nor should we have to document it at length. Please, do not waste our time with talk of Timothy McVeigh. Muslim attacks have taken place or have been intercepted before taking place time and time again in recent years against American citizens on American soil or airplanes, from 9/11 to Nidal Hasan to the Christmas underwear bomber to the plot against the fuel lines at JFK to a plot to bomb the subways in D.C. to the New Jersey Muslims planning to train abroad to commit terrorism at home–the list goes on and on and on. The most recent as of this writing is, of course, Somali immigrant Mohamed Osman Mohamud, the would-be Christmas tree bomber, but he won’t be anywhere near the last. Jihad Watch, with typical dark humor, refers to such terrorists as “misunderstanders of Islam,” and googling that phrase at Jihad Watch turns up a huge number of highly informative posts, a compendium of the acts and plans of those “misunderstanders” of the Religion of Peace here and abroad.

It is folly to try to tell us that this has nothing to do with Islam. This is not a matter of abstract argument. Tell it to the perpetrators, and let us know how that’s working out for you after a few more plots and attacks. And tell it to all the air travelers and victims who have paid the price for multiculturalism in loss of time, loss of privacy, and loss of freedom, not to mention loss of life.

Really, point I is almost too easy to substantiate. It is so easy to substantiate that the really religiously committed multiculturalist tacitly acknowledges it when, as in the case of General Casey, he implies that the deaths of Americans really don’t matter all that much, that non-discrimination is more important than saving lives. We should be willing to die for the religion of non-discrimination–no airport profiling, no sacrificing of diversity in the military, no matter what the cost. One blogger has said as much, calling on the people of the West to be “brave” by refusing profiling on airlines, because “it is more important to you to preserve an open and tolerant society than to survive this trip.”

II. We should disinvite Islam because too many Muslims in the West stubbornly refuse to assimilate or to assimilate fully and, by their refusal, succeed in changing and interrupting Western life in unacceptable ways.

The only difficulty in discussing this point is one of organization of the wealth of material available. First, there are the many relatively small incidents of assimilation refusal and Muslim bullying, but those relatively small incidents may not be small to those directly affected. They also add up.

–A Muslim woman brings a complaint against a gymnasium for not taking her side when she was interrupted in prayer by another woman trying to get past her to a locker.

–Somali meat packing workers have caused enormous problems by demanding that they all receive the same time off for prayer day after day, resulting in unfair treatment of other workers and interruption of the plant’s work.

–At George Mason University, Muslims have taken over the supposedly non-denominational “prayer room” and on one occasion refused to allow a Christian to pray the rosary there.

–Muslims have received the privilege of special religious footbaths, installed in state facilities, so that they can wash for prayer.

Under “miscellaneous and disturbing” we can file…

–A Muslim woman refuses to allow her face to be seen when she testifies in court, challenging the centuries-old Anglo legal principle that seeing the face is important for evaluating testimony. She sued over the judge’s refusal to allow her to testify with her face covered.

–A Muslim woman demands that the city of Grand Rapids, Michigan, make an exception for Muslim women to its standing security policy requiring that faces not be covered when traveling on public transportation. Grand Rapids caves and rescinds the rule.

–Muslim taxi drivers refuse to accept blind people with dogs.

–Muslim husbands in Western countries have put medical workers in intolerable positions by refusing to allow treatment of their wives by male doctors, even in emergency situations.

Under “serious problems” we can file…

–Medical workers demand that they be allowed to wear long sleeves, despite public health concerns.

–Muslims take over Paris streets during certain hours. A similar problem appears to be beginning in New York City now. Reportedly, the mayor of New York City has ordered that those clogging the streets with illegally parked vehicles for prayer not be ticketed.

–Attacks on Christian missionaries, preventing Christian missions work, that involve the police of a heavily Muslim town.

–Honor killings in the West (too many to list)

–Female genital mutilation in the West (many incidents)

–A fatwa against American citizen Molly Norris for angering Muslims, together with the presence of people in the U.S. who might carry it out, forcing her to go into hiding.

Americans have legitimate reasons not to want a population that brings these problems with it. There is nothing wrong with not wanting our streets clogged week after week with praying (not to mention belligerent) Muslims and their vehicles. There is nothing wrong with wanting Western rules of hygiene observed in hospitals. There is nothing wrong with wanting our factories to be able to continue to operate even when it is sundown during Ramadan. And there is certainly nothing wrong with not wanting our citizens forced into hiding by a murderous immigrant population.

Moreover, it is entirely legitimate for us to say that we simply do not want our police forces and our social workers to have to deal with problems so horrific and so alien as female genital mutilation and with cultural groups that carry out these mutilations in secret. Honor killings, too, ought to be something that “does not happen here.” The notion that our country should have a distinctive cultural quality and should be a haven from such practices is a good one and one of which we should not be ashamed.

But there is more than that. Last summer one author (Lydia) caused a great deal of shock by relating the issue of Muslim immigration to Christian parental rights. That post has been repeatedly denounced and even misunderstood. The point was not that liberals will come to like conservative Christians if we gang up on Muslims. The point was simply this: When one group of people abuses its freedoms, those freedoms become tenuous for other people. In our present, increasingly anti-Christian culture, the upside-down truth is that the people most likely to suffer are not those who are actually guilty of, say, threatening, abusing, and murdering their children for religious reasons but rather those who are entirely innocent, who adhere to a completely different religion that does not support such abuses, but who will be targets of opportunity for social workers once it becomes acceptable to say that our country has a growing problem with “religious fundamentalist” child abuse. Just as the refusal to profile in airlines and even ethnic quotas on stopping passengers mean that people who are extremely unlikely to be terrorists must submit tamely to humiliating and inappropriate pat-downs, body scans, and searches, so an increased awareness of Muslim abuse of parental authority, combined with a refusal actually to admit that Muslims are a special problem, is likely to result in increased persecution of innocent Christian families. The Melissa Busekros case in Germany illustrates this point quite well; German authorities specifically cited their interest in preventing the rise of “parallel societies” (a clear allusion to concerns about immigrant groups) as a reason for outlawing home schooling for everyone and for persecuting the completely German and mainstream Busekros family. Americans have a legitimate interest in not importing populations whose members are especially likely to abuse the freedoms that America offers. Doing so places those freedoms at risk.

The third type of objection to our importing these problems should be discussed as a partially independent point:

III. We should disinvite Islam because of the real danger that we will assimilate to Islam and change important things in our country that must not be changed. This will, among other things, make it difficult if not impossible to do any good for those who wish to leave Islam in the United States or who are victims within Muslim groups and families in the United States.

–I have already discussed above, as a very disturbing consequence of the development of unassimilated Muslim groups, the dangers to Christian freedom to evangelize. But it is especially important to emphasize the way in which the Dearborn police and mayor have become complicit in this problem. They have so internalized the norms of the Muslim populace that they consider the missionaries who simply engaged in peaceful conversations to be the problem, and they considered them to be the problem because the Muslims did not like their behavior. This means that, in effect, the City of Dearborn has assimilated to Islam in this area, not the other way around. What that means, in turn, is that it is now harder than it would otherwise be to evangelize the Muslims that do reside in Dearborn. Insofar as Muslim values are adopted by Western jurisdictions, our ability to help Muslims to (for example) leave Islam, understand the problems with Islam, and learn about Christianity is compromised. This is a point that too many Christians, concerned merely with reaching out to Muslims, do not understand. When too many Muslims are present, concentrated, and not well assimilated, you cannot help them. You will be stopped from doing so. Those who want to witness to or change Muslims have, therefore, an interest in limiting their numbers.

–This problem is particularly noticeable in the United Kingdom, where reports have surfaced of Muslims in the social work professions who betray women attempting to flee their abusive families. In a related and specific story, UK social workers attempted explicitly to dissuade a teenage girl from converting to Christianity, forbidding her to attend Christian activities, firing her Christian foster mother, and urging her to reconsider on the grounds of the danger to her from Muslims for converting. So much for the “helping professions.” It is obvious that the UK is losing its ability to help the victims of Islam in its midst and that it is losing this ability precisely because there are already so many Muslims in its midst! When you invite Muslims to your country and treat Islam as just another religion, this is an entirely natural and predictable result.

Repeatedly, in ostensibly Western countries, courts have either been asked or, even more disturbing, have agreed, to consider “cultural” excuses for outrageous Muslim behavior.

–In Canada, defense attorneys for a brother who murdered his sister and her fiance literally argued “provocation” in mitigation of his crime, attempting to reduce the crime to manslaughter. What was the provocation? The daughter’s bringing “dishonor” on the family by becoming engaged without the consent of her own male relatives and moving in with the family of her fiance. So the Western lawyers for a murderer in a Western country have deliberately attempted to get honor killings treated as mere manslaughter because they are honor killings.

–In Italy, a daughter was beaten by her parents and brother, but the sentence was struck down by the high court for “cultural” reasons on the grounds that the parents’ motivation had been for her own good and not out of anger.

–A German judge, later removed from the case, expressly relied on the Koran’s permission to beat wives in her denial of a fast-track divorce to an abused wife. It was the husband’s culture, you see, that he was permitted to beat his wife, and his wife was supposed to have taken that into account when she married him.

–In New Jersey, a judge refused to consider a husband guilty of spousal rape in a protective order case because his religion (Islam) teaches that he should have sexual access to his wife at all times. While the decision was struck down by a higher court, it is extremely disturbing that it should have been made at all.

Some would try to say that these courts or judges are just being “bad judges” or “jerks” or “insensitive to domestic violence,” and are not really enforcing sharia, as though it is illicit for Islam critics to mention sharia in these contexts at all. But these decisions expressly cite the religious beliefs of the Muslims involved, which are, like it or not, beliefs fostered by sharia. By deferring to these cultural beliefs and expectations, the courts are deferring to sharia whether they call it that or not. In America, it is entirely unacceptable that this should happen in any shape or form. It should not even need to be said, but laws against raping and beating wives and beating daughters, much less killing sisters, are good laws, and it should not make the slightest difference in a legal context to charges, sentencing, or other legal matters such as protective orders or divorce law if someone’s “culture” tells him that such behaviors are permitted. Western laws should not budge on these matters, yet they are budging.

The very existence of large populations or heavy concentrations that hold these cultural views exerts a tacit pressure on the legal system of a region to accommodate it. The mechanisms for this pressure are multiple. There is, of course, sheer fear and intimidation, but that is only the beginning. Mayors, police, prosecutors, judges, and social workers want to be perceived as culturally sensitive. Those tasked with enforcing laws rejected by a resistant immigrant population are likely to suffer from sheer fatigue and frustration. And ultimately, democracy takes over. Today’s immigrants are tomorrow’s citizens, and their children, born on American soil, are today’s citizens.

Muslim populations that do not assimilate produce members of the voting public who elect people who represent or at least defer to their values and who will appoint others who do the same. Where those values are destructive of important aspects of the American way of life, the result is disastrous.

This quoted summary is neither my opinion, nor do I necessarily agree wit all points OR the author’s proposed “solution”, but it does list a very accurate set of examples of Islam’s implementation of Sharia Law in the US and the West.

December 2, 2010 Posted by | Constitutional Issues, Politics/Government/Freedom, Societal / Cultural Issues, Understanding Islam, World Affairs | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Qu’ran, the Real Satanic Verses

A time came in Islamic history when the Muslims faced severe persecu-
tion from the unyielding Meccans, so severe in fact, that eighty three of
Muhammad’s followers had to flee to Abyssinia (Ethiopia). When the
persecution grew worse, Muhammad underwent a moment of despair
and made compromising “revelations.” He declared the possibility of
Allah having a wife, Al-Lat and two daughters, Al-Uzza and Mannat, as
recorded in Surat an-Najim:

“For truly did he see, the signs of his Lord, the greatest! Have ye
seen Lat, and Uzza, and another, the third [goddess] Manat?
What! For you the male sex, and for him, the female? Behold,
such would be indeed a division most unfair!” (Sura 53:18-22).

This indirect confession of polytheism made the Meccan pagans
happy. Their bone of contention had been done away with (earlier, he
had fearlessly lashed out against polytheism). The Meccans immediately
lifted the boycott, stopped the persecution, and peace again reigned in
Mecca. The Muslims who had migrated to Ethiopia heard the good news
and returned home. But by then, Muhammad had withdrawn his
confession. It appears that Muhammad realized the far reaching negative
effect his compromise with the polytheists would have on his ministry.
So on at least this one occasion, he admitted that he was actually
inspired by Satan, as we read in Surat al-Hajj:

“Never did we send an Apostle or a prophet before thee but
when he frame a desire, Satan threw some [vanity] into his
desire. But God will cancel anything [vain] that Satan throws in.
And God will confirm [and establish] his signs. For God is full of
knowledge and wisdom, that he may make the suggestions
thrown in by Satan, but a trial. For those in whose hearts is a
disease and who are hardened of heart: Verily the wrong doers
are in a schism far [from truth]” (Surat al-Hajj 22:52,53).

The Al-Jalalayn interpretation is that after Muhammad recited Surat
an-Najim (Sura 53) before a Council, the angel Gabriel informed him

Islam Reviewed 35

that the verses were put in his tongue by Satan. Muhammad felt sorry and
confessed his mistakes, supposing a similar fate befell preceding apostles.
Later on Allah annulled these Satanic verses with better “revela-
tions.” As the last part of verse 53 suggests, Allah supposedly permitted
Satanic utterances to be in the Koran to test weak Muslims or to cut off
those who had hardened hearts. Thus, Islam itself regards Sura 53:18-22
to be Satanic, and Muhammad did indeed reject them later. Remember
Salman Rushdie? He didn’t invent those Satanic verses. Those Satanic
verses are really in the Koran.

Here is a serious point for Muslims to ponder:

So, provably, there was one occasion when Muhammad was unable
to tell the difference between the voice of Satan and the voice of Allah.
Is that the only time it happened? Could there be other revelations
believed to be from Allah that were really from Satan? Is it possible that
the whole Koran is little more than Satanic verses?

Muslims claim that the Koran contains the words of Allah, 100%, but
the Koran not only has Satanic verses, but also a demonic sura. Unbeliev-
ably, a whole sura (chapter) in the Koran is named after the demons.
Shocking but true. Sura 72 is entitled Jinn (demons), Here is a short
quote:

“1. Say: It has been revealed to me that a company of Jinns
listened [to the Koran] They said, we have really heard a
wonderful Recital!
2. It gives guidance to the right, and we have believed therein
we shall not join [in worship] any [gods] with our Lord.
3. And exalted is the majesty of our Lord: He has taken neither
a wife nor a son.
4. There are some foolish ones among us who used to utter
extravagant lies against God.
5. But we do think that no man or spirit should say aught that
is untrue against God.
6. True, there were persons among mankind who took shelter
with persons among the jinns but they increased them in folly.
7. And they [came to] think as ye thought, that God would not
raise up anyone [to judgement].
8. And we pried into the secret of heaven: but we found it filled
with stern guards and flaming fires.

36 Islam Reviewed

9. We used, indeed, to sit there in [hidden] stations, to [steal] a
hearing: but any who listen now will find a flaming fire watch-
ing him in ambush.
10. And we understand not whether it is intended to those on
earth or whether their Lord [really] intends to guide them to
right conduct.
11. There are among us that are righteous and some the
contrary: we follow divergent path.
12. But we think that we can by no means frustrate God,
throughout the earth, nor can we frustrate Him by flight.
13. And as for us, since we have listened to the guidance, we
have accepted it: and any who believes in his Lord has no fear,
either of a short [account] or of any injustice.
14. Amongst us are some that submit their wills [to God] and
some that swerve from justice. Now those who submit their
wills-they sought out [the path] of right conduct.
15. But those who swerve, they are [but] fuel for hell fire.”

It should disturb every Muslim that demonic conversations are consid-
ered to be part of the supposed word of Allah. But upon reflection you
can see how and why they are.

First of all, let us define Jinns.

Advanced Learners Dictionary of Current English defined jinns to be
genies or goblins – mischievous demons – ugly looking evil spirits. The
Bible defines demons as angels who followed Satan in his rebellion
against God:

And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought
against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, and
prevailed not: neither was their place found anymore in heaven.
And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the
Devil, and Satan which deceiveth the whole world; he was cast
out into the earth and his angels were cast out with him. (Rev.
12:7-9)

No one should take a jinn’s claim seriously, that “some of them are
righteous,” Sura 72:11. Satan is the father of lies (John 19:44), so why
should we believe what his Jinns said in the Koran? Jinns, like their
Master (Satan), are liars. To deceive us, they gather half-baked truths
into bundles of lies. That demons and Satan are barred from the true

Islam Reviewed 37

heaven forever is indicated from their own confession in verses 8-9.

There they admit that they unsuccessfully tried to storm heaven but met
opposition from stern-looking angelic guards. Even their attempt to spy
at heaven was foiled as they admit in verse 9. The true nature and root
of Islam is revealed in verse 14 when the jinns, (whom the Bible God
cast out of heaven) became Muslims and found a refuge in Islam.

“Among us [jinns-demons] are some that submit wills (to God)
[i.e. Muslims] and some that swerve from justice. Now those
who submit their wills [demonic Muslims] they sought out [the
path] of right conduct.” (Sura 72, Jinn, 14).

God forbid that I should belong to the same religion that the arch-
enemies of God, the demons, also profess. Who could sponsor a religion
that includes God’s arch-enemies, i.e. the jinns (demons)? Only Satan
posing as Allah would do so. Before their conversion, the evil spirits
confessed what was later to be a central theme of Islam, that Allah has
neither taken a wife nor had a son (72:3).

It is clear at this point that while posing as the angel Gabriel and
claiming to be from Allah, one of these jinns (demons), gave Muhammad
a denial of the sonship of Christ and the fatherhood of God. This blatant
falsehood is repeated over twenty times in the Koran. Bearing in mind
the Satanic verses incident, one must acknowledge that the devil can
impersonate a holy angel. (2 Corinthians 11:13-15). As an interesting
note, when Muhammad received his first “revelations,” he was not sure
of the source of them himself. His wife (Khadija) convinced him that
they must have come by the angel Gabriel.1

Muhammad’s encounter with the jinns (demons) is also recorded in
another sura, Sura 46, Al-Ahqaf, 29-32:

29: “Behold, we turned towards the company of jinns [quietly]
listening to the Koran; when they stood in thy presence thereof,
they said “Listen in silence!” when the (reading) was finished,
they returned to their people, to warn [them of their sins].
30: They said, O our people! we have heard a Book revealed
after Moses, confirming what came before it: It guides [men] to
the truth and to straight path.
________________________________

1 See Yusuf Ali’s Commentary No. 31-33.
______________________

38 Islam Reviewed

31: O our people hearken to the one who invite [you] to God,
and believe in him: He will forgive you your faults, and deliver
you from a penalty grievous.
32: If any does not hearken to the one who invites [us] to God,
he cannot frustrate [God's plan] on earth, and no protectors can
he have besides God; such men [wonders] in manifest errors.”

These are admissions, within the Koran, that Muhammad had actual
contacts with demons. This encounter is believed to have taken place at
a time Muhammad lost his first wife, Khadija, and his uncle, Abu Talib,
who had been protecting him all along. Muhammad tried to seek refuge
in Taif, a village on the hilly side of Mecca, but the villagers rejected him,
and he slipped out to the desert where the jinns (demons) met with him
as he recited the Koran.

This second sura, dealing with the same event as in Sura Jinn, goes
so far as to reveal that the jinns (demons), after listening to the Koran,
began to proclaim it to others. In other words, demons became mission-
aries for Islam. Their support for the Koran shows that the jinns and
Islam are inseparable. The conversion of seventy three Yatrib (Medina)
pagans to Islam, before the Prophet Muhammad even set foot there,
cannot be unconnected with the evangelistic activities of “faithful” jinns
(demons). As expert whisperers, demons whispered to villagers, “Lo! we
have heard a wonderful recitation, [i.e. the Koran], so believe it” (Sura
46:31). Obviously, demons played a crucial role in the formation of
Islam, and today they are playing a significant role in its spread. The
jinn’s are true Muslims!

December 2, 2010 Posted by | Christianity / God, Understanding Islam | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Taqiyya – Kitman – Islamic Lying

Lying (Taqiyya and Kitman) — Question: Are Muslims permitted to lie?

Summary Answer:

Muslim scholars teach that Muslims should generally be truthful to each other, unless the purpose of lying is to “smooth over differences.”

There are two forms of lying to non-believers that are permitted under certain circumstances, taqiyya and kitman. These circumstances are typically those that advance the cause Islam – in some cases by gaining the trust of non-believers in order to draw out their vulnerability and defeat them.

The Qur’an:

Qur’an (16:106) – Establishes that there are circumstances that can “compel” a Muslim to tell a lie.

Qur’an (3:28) – This verse tells Muslims not to take those outside the faith as friends, unless it is to “guard themselves.”

Qur’an (9:3) – “…Allah and His Messenger are free from liability to the idolaters…” The dissolution of oaths with the pagans who remained at Mecca following its capture. They did nothing wrong, but were evicted anyway.

Qur’an (40:28) – A man is introduced as a believer, but one who must “hide his faith” among those who are not believers.

Qur’an (2:225) – “Allah will not call you to account for thoughtlessness in your oaths, but for the intention in your hearts”

Qur’an (66:2) – “Allah has already ordained for you, (O men), the dissolution of your oaths”

Qur’an (3:54) – “And they (the disbelievers) schemed, and Allah schemed (against them): and Allah is the best of schemers.” The Arabic word used here for scheme (or plot) is makara, which literally means deceit. If Allah is deceitful toward unbelievers, then there is little basis for denying that Muslims are allowed to do the same. (See also 8:30 and 10:21)

Taken collectively these verses are interpreted to mean that there are circumstances when a Muslim may be “compelled” to deceive others for a greater purpose.

From the Hadith:

Bukhari (52:269) – “The Prophet said, ‘War is deceit.’” The context of this is thought to be the murder of Usayr ibn Zarim and his thirty unarmed men by Muhammad’s men after he “guaranteed” them safe passage (see Additional Notes below).

Bukhari (49:857) – “He who makes peace between the people by inventing good information or saying good things, is not a liar.” Lying is permitted when the end justifies the means.

Bukhari (84:64-65) – Speaking from a position of power at the time, Ali confirms that lying is permissible in order to deceive an “enemy.”

Muslim (32:6303) – “…he did not hear that exemption was granted in anything what the people speak as lie but in three cases: in battle, for bringing reconciliation amongst persons and the narration of the words of the husband to his wife, and the narration of the words of a wife to her husband (in a twisted form in order to bring reconciliation between them).”

Bukhari (50:369) – Recounts the murder of a poet, Ka’b bin al-Ashraf, at Muhammad’s insistence. The men who volunteered for the assassination used dishonesty to gain Ka’b’s trust, pretending that they had turned against Muhammad. This drew the victim out of his fortress, whereupon he was brutally slaughtered despite putting up a ferocious struggle for his life.

From Islamic Law:

Reliance of the Traveler (p. 746 – 8.2) – “Speaking is a means to achieve objectives. If a praiseworthy aim is attainable through both telling the truth and lying, it is unlawful to accomplish through lying because there is no need for it. When it is possible to achieve such an aim by lying but not by telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible (N:i.e. when the purpose of lying is to circumvent someone who is preventing one from doing something permissible), and obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory… it is religiously precautionary in all cases to employ words that give a misleading impression…

“One should compare the bad consequences entailed by lying to those entailed by telling the truth, and if the consequences of telling the truth are more damaging, one is entitled to lie.

Additional Notes:

Muslims are allowed to lie to unbelievers in order to defeat them. The two forms are:

Taqiyya – Saying something that isn’t true.

Kitman – Lying by omission. An example would be when Muslim apologists quote only a fragment of verse 5:32 (that if anyone kills “it shall be as if he had killed all mankind”) while neglecting to mention that the rest of the verse (and the next) mandate murder in undefined cases of “corruption” and “mischief.”

Though not called Taqiyya by name, Muhammad clearly used deception when he signed a 10-year treaty with the Meccans that allowed him access to their city while he secretly prepared his own forces for a takeover. The unsuspecting residents were conquered in easy fashion after he broke the treaty two years later, and some of the people in the city who had trusted him at his word were executed.

Another example of lying is when Muhammad used deception to trick his personal enemies into letting down their guard and exposing themselves to slaughter by pretending to seek peace. This happened in the case of Ka’b bin al-Ashraf (as previously noted) and again later against Usayr ibn Zarim, a surviving leader of the Banu Nadir tribe, which had been evicted from their home in Medina by the Muslims.

At the time, Usayr ibn Zarim was attempting to gather an armed force against the Muslims from among a tribe allied with the Quraish (against which Muhammad had already declared war). Muhammad’s “emissaries” went to ibn Zarim and persuaded him to leave his safe haven on the pretext of meeting with the prophet of Islam in Medina to discuss peace. Once vulnerable, the leader and his thirty companions were massacred by the Muslims with ease, belying the probability that they were mostly unarmed, having been given a guarantee of safe passage (Ibn Ishaq 981).

Such was the reputation of Muslims for lying and then killing that even those who “accepted Islam” did not feel entirely safe. The fate of the Jadhima is tragic evidence for this. When Muslim “missionaries” approached their tribe one of the members insisted that they would be slaughtered even though they had already “converted” to Islam to avoid just such a demise. However, the others were convinced that they could trust the Muslim leader’s promise that they would not be harmed if they simply offered no resistance. (After convincing the skeptic to lay down his arms, the unarmed men of the tribe were quickly tied up and beheaded – Ibn Ishaq 834 & 837).

Today’s Muslims often try to justify Muhammad’s murder of poets and others who criticized him at Medina by saying that they broke a treaty by their actions. Yet, these same apologists place little value on treaties broken by Muslims. From Muhammad to Saddam Hussein, promises made to non-Muslim are distinctly non-binding in the Muslim mindset.

Leaders in the Arab world routinely say one thing to English-speaking audiences and then something entirely different to their own people in Arabic. Yassir Arafat was famous for telling Western newspapers about his desire for peace with Israel, then turning right around and whipping Palestinians into a hateful and violent frenzy against Jews.

The 9/11 hijackers practiced deception by going into bars and drinking alcohol, thus throwing off potential suspicion that they were fundamentalists plotting jihad. This effort worked so well, in fact, that even weeks after 9/11, John Walsh, the host of a popular American television show, said that their bar trips were evidence of ‘hypocrisy.’

The transmission from Flight 93 records the hijackers telling their doomed passengers that there is “a bomb on board” but that everyone will “be safe” as long as “their demands are met.” Obviously none of these things were true, but these men, who were so intensely devoted to Islam that they were willing to “slay and be slain for the cause of Allah” (as the Qur’an puts it) saw nothing wrong with employing Taqiyya in order to facilitate their mission of mass murder.

The near absence of Qur’anic verse and reliable Hadith that encourage truthfulness is somewhat surprising, given that many Muslims are convinced that their religion teaches honesty. In fact, it is because of this ingrained belief that many Muslims are quite honest. When lying is addressed in the Qur’an, it is nearly always in reference to the “lies against Allah” – referring to the Jews and Christians who rejected Muhammad’s claim to being a prophet.

Finally, the circumstances by which Muhammad allowed a believer to lie are limited to those that either advance the cause of Islam or enable a Muslim to avoid harm to his well-being (and presumably that of other Muslims as well). Although this should be kept very much in mind when dealing with matters of global security, such as Iran’s nuclear intentions, it is not grounds for assuming that the Muslim one might personally encounter on the street or in the workplace is any less honest than anyone else.

Conquests of Prophet Muhammad and the Rashidun...

Conquests of Prophet Muhammad and the Rashidun Caliphate, 630-641

October 13, 2010 Posted by | Islamorealism, Politics/Government/Freedom, Societal / Cultural Issues, Understanding Islam, World Affairs | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

   

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 129 other followers

%d bloggers like this: