Chaud's Blog

Emir Caner and The Quran , a response to his PDF.

2010-06-30T19:18:00.000+03:00

By Chaud

The Quran Vs The Bible

Note : A special thanks to FakeExMuslims.com for posting my responses to Ergun Caner's PDF's , with my permission brother Muhammad Khan elaborated on my points with extra details , you can view his version of the articles here.

I always thought Emir Caner is a less messed up version of his older brother Ergun but after reading this PDF on Emir's website , my views radically changed , he is as ignorant as his brother Ergun.

Emir allegedly read the Quran since he was a "former Sunni Muslim" , is this true ? Lets find out.

Note : In this article I will not respond to his general defense of the bible , the purpose of this article is to prove Emir never read the Quran nor is he familiar of the fundamental basis of Quranic scholarship , however I will respond to what I find absurd or goes against mainstream bible scholarship.

Emir Caner's PDF says :

"The Quran...114 Surahs (Chapters) written according to length (6616 verses)."

Is this some kind of sick joke ?

Emir NEVER read the Quran , if he did he would have known that the shortest Sura in the Quran is Sura 108 yet it is not the final Sura , Sura 103 is shorter than Sura 114....etc , Muslim children know this but the "former devout Sunni Muslim" does not.

This proves that Emir never read the Quran properly.

Emir Caner's PDF says :

"The Quran...Muhammed doubted revelation given to him at first,even considering it potentially demonic.
(Surah 2:23)."

So what ? Muhammad (pbuh) is a man , just like any one of us , if you encounter the super natural you will be afraid , scared , doubting...etc

Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) lived in a society that was strictly pagan , if anything super natural happens they would say "SATAN DID IT ! DEMONS DID IT !" , but Emir does not mention what happened next , how the Angel Gabrial himself came to him afterward , introduced himself ,informed him that the revelation he received is from God and of his divine mission.

Emir Caner's PDF says :

"The Bible...Though some like Abraham doubted whether the prophecies would come true, no inspired author doubted the source from which it came — God. "

Let me try to get this straight , someone who was inspired by God and knew it was from God DOUBTED the prophecies ? Does this make sense to anyone ? If Abraham (pbuh) allegedly doubted the prophecies , that means he allegedly doubted the authenticity of the revelation , HE DOUBTED GOD ACCORDING TO THE BIBLE.

How can Emir boastfully claim no "inspired" author doubted his "revelation" ? Emir doesn't know who the authors are ! we can't examine their lives , personality and sincerity therefore Emir can not make this claim , please read this , since Emir is a bible scholar I will assume he follows the modern SCHOLARLY VIEW , unless he follows the debunked traditional view.

Add to that , some of these "inspired" authors did not know they were inspired by the holy spirit nor did they claim to be , take author of Luke for example :

"Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus" [Luke 1:3]

The author of Luke was writing down his findings , he did not believe he was writing an inspired Gospel.

Emir Caner's PDF says :

"The Qur’an is the ultimate miracle or God, the only miracle that Muhammed claimed.(Surah 10:38; 17:88)"

Did you all notice something weird ? lets quote again:

"The Qur’an is the ultimate miracle or God"

Muslims do not believe the Quran is God ! Emir could have possibly made a spelling error and used "or" instead of "of" , however I think Emir believes Muslims believe The Quran is God because he is ignorant enough to believe it , in the end he is the one who claimes that Shk.Abdul Wahab was a prophet.

Emir Caner's PDF says :

"The Qur’an has been perfectly preserved.(Surah 15:9). Ironically, Arthur Jeffery, in Materials for the History of the Text of the Qur’an, demonstrates that the compilation of the Qur’an required editing."

Emir is so desperate , he can't quote Muslim sources ! we have every single detail of the compilation of the Quran documented in our authentic sources , yet Emir mentions Arthur Jeffery , this is sad.

Please watch this debate between brother Bassam Zawadi and another fake ex muslim Nabeel Qureshi on the preservation of the Quran , Nabeel uses the exact same argument and gets exposed.

Emir Caner's PDF says :

"The Bible has been perfectly preserved in its original manuscripts. The problem is not lack of evidence, by the vast amount of copies, a few of which may differ."

We already know that the manuscripts are contradictory , but did you all notice what Emir did ?

"The Bible has been perfectly preserved in its original manuscripts."

Ok , let me assume this is true , can Emir show me these manuscripts ? the answer is no , all he can show is flawed copies of copies of copies....of the original but no original , how can this possibly establish a case for perfect preservation like the Quran does ?

This is how Emir's argument sounds like :

"Well , there are errors in the bible we have today because of the contradictory copies , but there is a lost document that contains the original ! "

Please read this brief article.

Emir Caner's PDF says :

"The Qur’an claims to be consistent and noncontradictory — fully unified. Yet Muhammed changed some revelations, claiming better inspiration.(Surah 24:2; 53:21-23) "

First of all there is no evidence that prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was changing his revelation , no serious historian makes that claim , however ignorant Islamophobes do.

Second , Emir is referring the doctrine of abrogation , which deals with temporary Sharia' laws , for more please consult this post.

Emir Caner's PDF says :

"The Bible, written over a period of 1500 years with 40 different authors, has no discrepancies. Simply put, Scripture interprets Scripture."

Can Emir show me these 40 authors ? he definitely can't.

Has no discrepancies ? I doubt that.

101 Clear Contradictions In The Bible : By Shabir Ally

Dr.Zakir Naik's overwhelming victory over Dr.William Campbell : The Bible and The Quran in the light of science and history

Emir ends his ridiculous PDF with these 2 verses :

"Surah 10:94 If you were in doubt as to what We have revealed to you, then ask those who have been reading the Book from before you: the Truth has indeed come to you from your Lord: so be in no wise of those in doubt."

Does Emir actually think we Muslims (or at least Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)) are ordered to ask the Jews and Christians on the revelation of the Quran if we are in doubt , absolutely not !

First of all there is no evidence that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) asked the Jews and Christians to verify the revelation of the Quran for him , which means he did not understand this verse to mean what Emir wants it to mean.

Second , we know the response of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) he said according to Ibn Kathir in his commentary :

Qutadah bin Dua'am said we have recieved that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) said : "I have no doubts" , this has reported through Ibn Abbas , Said bin Jubair and Al-Hassan Al-Basri as well.

This same response in mentioned by Al-Jalalyn , At-Tabari and Al-Qurtubi.

I can honestly say Emir never read any of the major commentaries on the Quran as well.

"II Timothy 3:16-17 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God (Godbreathed), and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work."

Paul is referring to the Old Testament since the New Testament didn't exist went he wrote that , even if a Christian wants to argue this refers to the New Testament as well , this does not change the fact that the criteria given by Paul himself debunks their case.

Late Shk.Ahmed Deedat (rahamt allah a'lyhi) in his debate with Dr.Anis Shorrosh on the Quran and the Bible mentions this verse :

"One day Samson went to Gaza, where he saw a prostitute. He went in to spend the night with her." [Judges 16:1]

and he wonders:
-where is the doctrine ? does Christianity teach that when you see a prostitute , you spend the night with her ?
-where is the reproof ? did God punish Samson for his action ?
-where is correction ? did God tell Samson to marry her then he can spend the night with her ?
-where is the instruction in righteousness ? THERE IS NON !

Many stories in the do not fall into any of these 4 categories , thus according to Paul they are not inspired.

More Evidence Proving That Ergun Caner Is A Fake [Introduction]

2010-06-16T12:18:00.011+03:00

By Chaud

[Introduction] [Glossary of Arabic Terms] [Islam vs Grace] [Jehovah God vs Allah] [Jesus Christ vs Muhammad] [Jihad vs Religious Liberality]

Fake Ex-Muslim "Dr".Ergun Caner has demonstrated his ignorance of Islam and the Arabic language on several occasions , the case is closed and the verdict is out , Ergun Caner is a fraud , in this article series I am going to provide more evidence to support this fact from the RESOURCE PDFs published on his website.

I will prove that Ergun's publications are full of misquotations ,anti-islamic propaganda and factual errors , most of the errors and arguments in these PDFs are not made by former Muslims since they actually know the Quran and what it teaches , unlike Ergun Caner.

Please navigate with the links above and start with " Glossary of Arabic Terms " because it contains a great deal of the evidence.

Notes:

Some of these PDFs are published on John Ankerberg's website here , this shows that John has no interest in publishing facts rather he is interested in spreading false propaganda.
I am responding the errors in these PDFs , not the whole publication.

More Evidence Proving That Ergun Caner Is A Fake [Jihad Vs. Religious Liberty]

2010-06-16T12:18:00.009+03:00

By Chaud

[Introduction] [Glossary of Arabic Terms] [Islam vs Grace] [Jehovah God vs Allah] [Jesus Christ vs Muhammad] [Jihad vs Religious Liberality]

Jihad vs Religious Liberty

This PDF does not deserve a response , like you all saw I don't mind taking Ergun's arguments head on , but he brought no facts in this PDF , only absurdities and false propaganda , the same propaganda uttered by every islamophobe.

However I will touch on a few points and provide a number of Muslim articles about Jihad and what it really means.

Before I begin I will revisit one of Ergun Caner's errors in "Glossary of Arabic terms" , to clarify quickly what the meaning of Jihad is in Islam.

"JIHAD: “Holy fighting.”"

This mistake is usually made by fake ex-muslims who resent Islam , just like Ergun.

Jihad in Islam has multiple and a wide definitions depending on context , but there is not a single authoritative definition that says "Holy fighting" , in the context of war , Jihad does mean to fight back the enemy in the name of God , but this is no the greater meaning of Jihad in Islam or Arabic , for more about this please read this (recommended reading before you continue)

In the Arabic language Jihad means "to strive" or "to struggle" , in Islam it means to strive for righteousness , for example it takes "Jihad" [جهاد] to resist alcohol .

The problem with Christians who adhere to the false definition is that they do not know the same word "Jihad" [جهاد] in their bible , and in the Arabic New Testaments to be specific. (Source)

Luke 22:44
وَإِذْ كَانَ فِي جِهَادٍ كَانَ يُصَلِّي بِأَشَدِّ لَجَاجَةٍ، وَصَارَ عَرَقُهُ كَقَطَرَاتِ دَمٍ نَازِلَةٍ عَلَى الأَرْضِ.

Philippians 1:30
إِذْ لَكُمُ الْجِهَادُ عَيْنُهُ الَّذِي رَأَيْتُمُوهُ فِيَّ، وَالآنَ تَسْمَعُونَ فِيَّ.

Colossians 2:1
فَإِنِّي أُرِيدُ أَنْ تَعْلَمُوا أَيُّ جِهَادٍ لِي لأَجْلِكُمْ، وَلأَجْلِ الَّذِينَ فِي لاَوُدِكِيَّةَ، وَجَمِيعِ الَّذِينَ لَمْ يَرَوْا وَجْهِي فِي الْجَسَدِ،

1 Thessalonians 2:2
بَلْ بَعْدَ مَا تَأَلَّمْنَا قَبْلاً وَبُغِيَ عَلَيْنَا كَمَا تَعْلَمُونَ، فِي فِيلِبِّي، جَاهَرْنَا فِي إِلهِنَا أَنْ نُكَلِّمَكُمْ بِإِنْجِيلِ اللهِ، فِي جِهَادٍ كَثِيرٍ.

1 Timothy 6:12
جَاهِدْ جِهَادَ الإِيمَانِ الْحَسَنَ، وَأَمْسِكْ بِالْحَيَاةِ الأَبَدِيَّةِ الَّتِي إِلَيْهَا دُعِيتَ أَيْضًا، وَاعْتَرَفْتَ الاعْتِرَافَ الْحَسَنَ أَمَامَ شُهُودٍ كَثِيرِينَ

2 Timothy 4:7
قَدْ جَاهَدْتُ الْجِهَادَ الْحَسَنَ، أَكْمَلْتُ السَّعْيَ، حَفِظْتُ الإِيمَانَ،

Hebrews 12:1
لِذلِكَ نَحْنُ أَيْضًا إِذْ لَنَا سَحَابَةٌ مِنَ الشُّهُودِ مِقْدَارُ هذِهِ مُحِيطَةٌ بِنَا، لِنَطْرَحْ كُلَّ ثِقْل، وَالْخَطِيَّةَ الْمُحِيطَةَ بِنَا بِسُهُولَةٍ، وَلْنُحَاضِرْ بِالصَّبْرِ فِي الْجِهَادِ الْمَوْضُوعِ أَمَامَنَا،

Go to any English translation of these verses , somehow it will always have a positive meaning of struggling and putting effort for the truth , did the Arab Christians make a mistake ? because according to Ergun , it seems like Jesus was on an unjustified violent holy war , Paul was on an unjustified violent holy war , and all Christians are commanded to go on a violent unjustified holy war as well. (More Evidence Proving That Ergun Caner Is A Fake [Glossary of Arabic Terms] - Jihad)

Ergun knows he can not find a single authoritative hadith , verse from the Quran , scholarly definition that can support his claims on Jihad , so he gives no definition to the term "Jihad" to somehow allude to the islamophobic definition of the term.

Another problem with people like Ergun , they can not answer or refute other points related to Jihad like the Greater Jihad which is a personal struggle to be ethical and righteous , or the laws of war in Islam , all Muslims must adhere to this law , when Muslims go to war they do not kill civilians , women , children , animals , plants , they are forbidden to burn homes , destroy crop , loot....etc

Ergun's PDF begins with

"THE ISLAMIC FAITH AND JIHAD (HOLY WAR)......CHRISTIANITY AND RELIGIOUS LIBERTY "

Did Ergun address the issue of religious liberty in Islam ? NO ! he is assuming religious liberty does no exist in Islam and somehow exists in the New Testament (when in reality it doesn't) , this former "sunni Muslim" never read seera books , hadith or even the Quran , I will use one example from the Quran , a whole chapter on religious liberty , does Ergun know this chapter exists ? I doubt it.

1. Say : O ye that reject Faith!
2. I worship not that which ye worship,
3. Nor will ye worship that which I worship.
4. And I will not worship that which ye have been wont to worship,
5. Nor will ye worship that which I worship.
6. To you be your Way, and to me mine. (Quran , Sura 109 The Disbelievers)

With these facts in mind , let us move on.

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"Islam......Guilty of atrocious crimes against humanity.(Crusades in the past, Sudan in the present)"

Where does Islam teach atrocious crimes ? If certain "Muslims" in the past were guilty of certain crimes then blame them , if Ergun wishes to blame Islam he must show beyond any doubt that Islam's teachings are responsible.

Sudan in the present ? Readers , I listed the laws of war according to Islam , do the "jihadists" in Sudan comply with these laws ? How can this be "Islamic Jihad" if the EXPLICIT laws of Jihad are not being followed ? if the Quran is not being followed ?

"Christianity......Guilty of atrocious crimes against humanity. (Crusades in the past, none in the present)"

Unlike Ergun I am not a double standard hypocrite , I do believe that Christianity just like Islam is a religion that teaches peace and ethics , I do not believe all the violence going on the world is from religion (except the violence committed by the satanic state of Israel) , so I will not accuse Christianity of any violence.

Ergun argues that Christianity is not guilty of any present crimes , lets adapt his methodology which can be summarized as :

1- Find a state with some violence in it , disregarding how and why the violence exists.

2- Find Christians comitting them.

3- Rip their scriptures out of context.

4- Ignore what their scriptures really say on the issue of peace and war.

5- Write a document about it.

and that is what I will do.

We all heard about the current Muslim-Christian violence going on in Nigeria , while the media likes to conceal the truth , in reality the Muslims did not start the violence there , it was THE CHRISTIAN CONTROLLED GOVERNMENT THAT TREATS MUSLIMS LIKE 2ND CLASS CITIZENS

"The government there is Christian-controlled, and Muslims have complained they are treated as second-class citizens there. Aid workers said the most recent violence came in response to a January attack in Muslim areas." (Source)

Do more research on this topic (Religious violence in Nigeria) and see for yourself what Christianity is guilty of according to the standards set by Ergun Caner himself.

Now for scriptures , do I need to remind Ergun that he believes in the Old Testament ? the most violent book of all time ? weather he believes it's abrogated or not , it can still influence violence and backward thinking in the world .

some examples from the "all loving God" :

When the LORD your God brings you into the land you are entering to possess and drives out before you many nations the Hittites, Girgashites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites, seven nations larger and stronger than you- and when the LORD your God has delivered them over to you and you have defeated them, then you must destroy them totally. Make no treaty with them, and show them no mercy. (Deuteronomy 7:1-2)

"Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourself every girl who has never slept with a man." (Numbers 31:17-18)

Hence according to Ergun's methodology , Christian violence is supported by scriptures.

Note to Christians : I do not hold this view , I am showing how absurd Ergun is , if you got a problem with this , then you know you have a problem with Ergun Caner.

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"Based in their scriptures. (Surah 9:5; 9:29)"

I would say "Based on your ignorance , Sura 9:5 & 9:29 teaches unnecessary violence" .

Islamophobes like Caner totally ignore the historical context , the reasons of revelation , what Islam has to teach about violence and peace as a whole .

Dr Jamal Badawi explains these verses along with the context in the following video :

So let me get this straight , it's ok for the non-believers to attack and kill Muslims and Muslims are not allowed to defend themselves ? because this is what Ergun believes weather he knows it or not.

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"Since conversion of state to Islam comes via the sword, Church and State should be combined."

There a number of difficulties and errors here , I previously explained the reasons Muslims might go to war could be self defense or to promote religious freedom.

First of all since when did the conversation of a state to Islam comes ONLY via sword ? I challenge Ergun to bring one authentic historical source that records one Muslim solider going to Indonesia (currently the biggest Muslim state) or East Africa.

2nd , this assertion creates even more historical problems , How did the Mongols become Muslim ? The Mongols where the only case in history in which the invader adapts the religion of the invaded , how did the weak defeated Muslims convert the Mongols ? How did the Mongolian empire become a Muslim state ? By the sword ? No historian says it was by the sword, but by the teachings if Islam .

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"Membership into Islamic faith from birth. The father speaks the Creed into his child’s ear."
This has nothing to do with the topic , but he makes a factual error here.

When Muslims welcome a newborn into this world , the father does not speak the creed (shahada) into the child's ear , the father speaks the AZAN (the call for prayer) , I thought Ergun was the son of Mu'zin ? and he does not know the difference between the Azan and the shahada , amazing !

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"Since Evangelical Christians hold to a Believers’Church, Church and State should remain separate."

Christians like Ergun like to pretend their faith has nothing to do with politics and the state when in reality they bring up the bible all the time ! which Christian supports the liberation of pornography ? strip clubs , drugs , divorce ? the oppose all this because of their faith and what the bible teaches.

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"Membership into the Christian body is voluntary and personal. The person must make a profession of faith when reaching the age of understanding."

What a joke ! what do Christian do to their children before the age of understanding ? they teach them the bible , it's stories , it's theology ("Jesus died for your sins") , no wonder he/she will profess faith since he/she was taught to believe it with no evidence.

There is a fact we all must accept , children are usually converted to a certain faith by their parents , or by birthrights , Christianity is not better .

In Islam , a person is accounted for his/her actions and beliefs when reaching the age of understanding , so if Ergun wishes to make that argument for Christianity , it is easily applicable for Islam as well.

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"Where Christians are a minority, they are limited in their freedoms. They cannot worship openly,denominations cannot give an education, etc.Tragically, millions have given their lives for the faith."

I see no limited freedoms where I live , Christians still give out pamphlets , talk about faith openly , we have discussions with them all the time , and "limited freedom" is not supported by Islam .

Millions have given their lives for the faith ? Limited freedom in Islam ? I ask Ergun to entertain us with evidence and sources because this is a lie uttered by the Coptic Christians all the time !

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"(Islam).....Infidels have no right to exist(Hadith 9:57) , (Christianity) Infidels should be protected in order to give them every opportunity to accept the Gospel. (2 Peter 3:9)"

What kind of reference is this ? This is reference to nothing ! which hadith collection is he referring to ? Burkhari , Muslim , Musnad Ahmad ?

this what I meant by double standard hypocrisy , Ergun doesn't mind quoting Sura 9:5 , why doesn't he quote Sura 9:6 ? what is he afraid of ? it is the same "violent" sura that teaches "Jihad: , I'll tell you why because it refutes his case and exposes him as a lair.

"If one amongst the Pagans ask thee for asylum, grant it to him, so that he may hear the word of Allah. and then escort him to where he can be secure. That is because they are men without knowledge." (Sura 9:6)

This is exactly what 2 Peters 3:9 teaches (according to Ergun) , no where does Islam teach that the nonbeliever has no right to exist , however I can bring a couple of old testament bible verses.

Ergun's bogus conclusion :

"(Islam) If they act according to what their scriptures say, violence and force is commanded.(Christianity) If they act according to what their Scriptures say peace is commanded."

Did he bring any evidence to support this claim ? Do I need to bring up the Old Testament to prove how Christianity can never bring peace ? Unnecessary violence and force is not taught in Islam , but Ergun is deluded when he believes it is based on his false understanding of Islam due to the fact he was never a Muslim to begin with.

I recommend reading this article :

Jihad: A War Against All Non-Muslims or Not?: by Kevin Abdullah Kareem

More Evidence Proving That Ergun Caner Is A Fake [Jehovah God vs Allah]

2010-06-16T12:17:00.014+03:00

By Chaud

[Introduction] [Glossary of Arabic Terms] [Islam vs Grace] [Jehovah God vs Allah] [Jesus Christ vs Muhammad] [Jihad vs Religious Liberality]

"Jehovah God vs Allah"

This has got to be one of the worse publications I have ever seen ! is this a joke ? I had thoughts back and forward....should I respond or not ? I decided to respond to show how ignorant Ergun is.

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"God does not change.James 1: 17: Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no varying, neither shadow of turning."

How does this explain the alleged incarnation ? God who is infinite becoming finite (a man) ? God who is timeless became subjected to time ? The Old Testament makes it clear that God is not a man , so if God doesn't change , how did he become a man thus CHANGING ?

"Allah of Islam changes.Surah 2: 106 If We supersede any verse or cause it to be forgotten, We bring a better one or one similar. Do you not know that Allah has power over all things!"

Muslims ! do you know any scholar who understands this verse this way ? This verse is speaking about the doctrine of abrogation , in specific on the abrogation of certain laws , what does this have to do with God changing ? by the way God does not change in Islam.

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"God loves everyone.John 3: 16: For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son…"

As a Muslim I do not claim that Allah (swt) loves everyone equally , but the claim that God unconditionally loves everyone is ABSURD , it's not logical nor is it biblical.

If God loves everyone unconditionally , why did he create hell ? why did he order the death of women and children in the Old Testament ? Does God love satan ? Does God love serial killers ? Christians might try to argue that God hates the sin not the sinner , well the bible does not support this claim at all.

⁴ You are not a God who takes pleasure in evil;
with you the wicked cannot dwell.
⁵ The arrogant cannot stand in your presence;
you hate all who do wrong.
⁶ You destroy those who tell lies;
bloodthirsty and deceitful men
the LORD abhors. (Psalm 5:4-6)

²³ You must not live according to the customs of the nations I am going to drive out before you. Because they did all these things, I abhorred them. (Leviticus 20:23)

¹³Just as it is written: "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated." (Romans 9:13)

What a great all loving God !

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"Allah is tempermental.Surah 32: 13:If we so willed, we could have brought every soul its true guidance,but the word from me will come true: ‘I will fill Hell with demons and men all together.’ "

This man has the audacity to fabricate this lie ! he believes in the Old Testament ! did he read the Old Testament ? God there is jealous and proud of it , he is the one who has a temper .

How does this verse prove that Allah has a temper ? I would really appreciate a response from Ergun explaining this absurdity because a simple reading of this verse does not prove that Allah has a temper.

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"Allah deceives.Surah 8: 30: They plot and plan, and Allah, too plans, but the best of planners (deceivers) is Allah."

Ergun quotes the verse correctly , but insists on adding "deceivers" to prove his point , this is pathetic.

The word "MAKR" in the Arabic language has 2 different meanings , one of blame (mathmum) and one of praise (mahmood) , in this verse it is of praise (mahmood) meaning "to plan" , God plans and still plans , and he is the best of planners, is this hard for Ergun to believe ?

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"Islam believes the Christian trinity is God the Father, God the Mother (Mary) and God the Son (Jesus). Surah 5: 116: “And behold! God will say: O Jesus the son of Mary didst say unto men, worship me and my mother as gods’ in derogation of Allah?"

This misunderstanding happens when trinitarians try to shove their beliefs into the Quran , this verse does not even mention the trinity ! so how can it be addressing it ?

Muslims have refuted this claim over and over again , just search the internet and see for yourself , I believe the best explanation is that this verse is addressing those who took Jesus and Mary (peace be upon them both) as intercessors between God and man , thus committing shirk.

In the "Jesus vs Muhammad" section in Ergun's PDF , he relies heavily on the book of Revelation and the letters , I do not want to go into a biblical authenticity discussion , so I will ignore it and focus on his false accusations against Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and some of issues regarding Jesus (pbuh).

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"Jesus forbade the use of the sword.Matthew 26: 52: Then said Jesus unto him,Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword."

I assume Ergun believes Jesus is God , did he read the Old Testament ? "Jesus" ordered nations to be destroyed , women , children , even donkeys to be put down by the sword , does this verse Ergun quotes erase all that ? This is hypocrisy at its best.

This verse also begs the question , if Jesus forbade the use of a sword , why did he order the disciples to get them in the first place ?

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"Muhammed taught revenge.Surah 2: 194 The sacred month for the sacred month, prohibitions are (subject to) retaliation. If any one aggresses against you, so aggress against him with the likeness of that which he has aggressed against you."

The limits of Ergun's desperation to discredit and slander prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is amazing !

All Muslims know that "revenge" is totally forbidden in Islam , Islam teaches something similar to "an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth" but it urges forgiveness and doing good to those who have harmed you depending on the situation , a fair balance.

Imam Al-Qurtubi gives is the reason of revelation in his commentary :

"The disbelievers said to the prophet - peace be upon him - : "Did you forbid o'Muhammad fighting in the sacred months ? he (the prophet) said : Yes , yet they (the disbelievers) want to fight , so this verse was revealed. The meaning : if they (the disbelievers) did not forbid fighting in this months , then fight back , so Allah allowed this for self defense" (Source)

Does this look like a teaching of "revenge" ? NO ! it is righteous teaching of self defense ?

For more on the teachings of forgiveness in Islam click here (recommended reading).

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"Muhammed was Sinful. Surah 18: 110: Say: 'I am only a human like you, revealed to me is that your God is One God. Let him who hopes for the encounter with his Lord do good work, and not associate anyone with the worship of his Lord.' "

In what loony-toon fairy tale does this prove Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was "sinful" ? Yes Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was only a human , we do not claim he is God , how does this prove he was sinful ?

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"Jihad is the only eternal security.Surah 3: 157: And if you are slain, or die in the way of Allah,forgiveness and mercy from Allah are far better than all they could amass."

The concept of Jihad , salvation in Islam along with a refutation for this can be found here and here.

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"Allah forces worship.Surah 2: 193: Fight against them until there is no dissension, and the religion is for Allah. Surah 9: 29: Fight those who neither believe in Allah nor the Last Day, who do not forbid what Allah and His Messenger have forbidden, and do not embrace the religion of the truth, being among those who have been given the Book (Bible and the Torah), until they pay tribute out of hand and have been humiliated."

I am not sure if Ergun lives on planet earth anymore , how do these verses prove Allah (swt) forces worship ? these are war time verses that deal with the time of war in certain situations , and poorly translated too.

How can Allah (swt) force worship when he says explicitly in the Quran :

"Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things." (Sura 2:256)

More Evidence Proving That Ergun Caner Is A Fake [Jesus Christ vs Muhammad]

2010-06-16T12:17:00.013+03:00

By Chaud

[Introduction] [Glossary of Arabic Terms] [Islam vs Grace] [Jehovah God vs Allah] [Jesus Christ vs Muhammad] [Jihad vs Religious Liberality]

"Jesus Christ vs Muhammad"

Did Ergun read one authentic biography of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) ? Is this comparison valid ? You decide.

The PDF starts with :

"MUHAMMED (570-632 AD)......JESUS CHRIST"

What is he trying to say ? Jesus Christ is eternal ? I'd like to see him prove that a man who was born of a woman and died on cross was "eternal".

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"Sixth and final prophet sent to defend monotheism (Surah 48:8-9)."

So this "former muslim" thinks Allah (swt) sent 6 prophets into the world ? did he read the Quran ? the Quran mentions 25 prophets and Muslims believe that Allah (swt) sent 124000 prophets into the world through out history until the advent of prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and the beginning of his ministry.

It seems like Ergun confuses the number of prophets in Islam , with the mightiest prophets sent to man-kind according to Islamic theology (arranged according to time) :

1- Noah (pbuh)

2- Abaraham (pbuh)

3- Moses (pbuh)

4- Jesus (pbuh)

5- Muhammad (pbuh)

Does this look like 6 ? Did Ergun pass 1st grade mathematics ?

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"Married 10 women and had 2 other concubines. In fact, his youngest wife Aisha was six when they engaged and nine when consummated in marriage. (Surah 33:28)"

and ? what is he trying to prove ? is Ergun anti-marriage or something ?

So Ergun knows that Aisha was 6 and the marriage to her was consummated when she was 9 , how come he tried to deceive his readers over here ?

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"Never knew a woman."

So let me get this straight , the bible mentions Jesus's birth , then some things he did when was 12....Abra Kadabra !! he is now 30 ! 18 years of his life , not a single record of what he was doing and the problems is not there ! his 3 years of ministry as the bible records is extremely contradictory , if it wasn't for my Muslim faith I would argue this man is a myth , how can anyone verify anything personal with this obscure character ?

Note : I am not accusing Jesus (pbuh) of adultery , I am just pointing to the fact that Ergun can't prove that his "man-god" never knew a woman.

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"Doubted whether the revelation he received was divine or demonic."

So what ? Muhammad (pbuh) is a man , just like any one of us , if you encounter the super natural you will be afraid , scared , doubting...etc

Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) lived in a society that was strictly pagan , if anything super natural happens they would say "SATAN DID IT ! DEMONS DID IT !" , but Ergun does not mention what happened next , how the Angel Gabrial himself came to him afterward , introduced himself ,informed him that the revelation he received is from God and of his divine mission.

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"He Himself was the divine revelation, knowing His purpose of being born was to die.(Luke 19:10) "

He himself was a revelation ? When did Jesus (pbuh) claim to be one ? which disciple understood him to be revelation ? and don't get me started on Paul !

So God's purpose of being born was to die ? this is absurd , this reminds me of heavy metal lyrics , not divine revelations.

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"Won a following by military victory and/or forced conversion. "

This is exactly why I doubt Ergun never read an authentic biography , forced conversions NEVER HAPPENED , it is not recorded in our sources, and even contemporary Christian sources ! for more about this please read this (recommended reading).

How can Ergun explain all the conversions that happened in Mecca ? or the huge number of people who came to Islam peacefully during the final years of the life of prophet Muhammad (pbuh) ? based on Ergun's history I can understand why he needs to come up with this garbage.

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"Viewed men as superior to women.(Surah 4:34)"

Islam teaches that men and women are equal but different , please consult this (recommend reading).

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"Did not know his eternal destiny.(Hadith 5.266)"

What a lie ! please reading this article by Bassam Zawadi (recommend reading).

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"He is the Creator and Sustainer of the Universe,Himself Judge.(John 1:1-18) "

A man created the universe , yet another biblical absurdity.

This topic is very huge and subjected to extreme debate , so I will recommend the reader to check out the argument online , but I personally recommend watching this debate between Abdullah Al-Andalusi and James White on the topic of the trinity , it is very educational.

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"Muhammed shed other people’s blood."

Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) never went to war or order the death of certain individuals without a valid reason , if "shedding blood" is a problem for Ergun why does accept the Old Testament and its God ?

More Evidence Proving That Ergun Caner Is A Fake [Islam vs Grace]

2010-06-16T12:17:00.012+03:00

By Chaud

[Introduction] [Glossary of Arabic Terms] [Islam vs Grace] [Jehovah God vs Allah] [Jesus Christ vs Muhammad] [Jihad vs Religious Liberality]

"Islam vs Grace"

This PDF by Ergun is all about false propaganda , the title "Islam vs Grace" suggests that somehow Islam has no grace , this stems from Ergun Caner's ignorance of religion and the concept of grace in Islam.

There is a the concept of grace in Islam ; The Qur'an describe God as good. Speaking of Allah's favor, grace and kindness, the Qur'an uses words derived from the Arabic roots RDW[روض], FDL[فضل], LTF[لطف] and N'M[نِعَم]. According to the Qur'an Allah(swt) manifests his grace in spiritual and material blessings bestowed upon human beings. Allah is the constant giver (surah 3:6; 38:8; 52:28). Allah shows his common grace in the creation of man and all other creatures, including the angels (surah 15:29-35; 17:72; 38: 71-85).

One of the 99 excellent names of Allah(swt) is "Ar-Rahman" [الرحمن] which means "The Compassionate, The Beneficent, The Gracious" (source) ,The Qur'an emphasizes over and over again that Allah is "Merciful", the "sum of all that is good." Surah 7:156 even says "My mercy comprehends all."This common grace of Allah, his benevolent kindness towards creation.

Ergun fails to realize this , and thus he comes up with his ridiculous publication.

Under the title in Ergun's PDF you will see "ISLAM AND SALVATION BY WORKS" , one of the biggest misunderstandings of Islam ! only ignorant fools utter this , well I guess Ergun falls into that category.

Salvation in Islam depends on FAITH AND WORKS (GOOD DEEDS) , works without faith is meaningless , and faith without good deeds in hypocrisy (unless there are certain circumstances that prevent doing the works) , Sura 103 of the Quran teaches explicitly the concept of salvation in Islam:

1. By (the Token of) Time (through the ages),
2. Verily Man is in loss,
3. Except such as have Faith, and do righteous deeds, and (join together) in the mutual teaching of Truth, and of Patience and Constancy.

Does this sound like salvation by works ? verse 3 gives the first condition for salvation "faith" , it is the first requirement for anyone who wants to be saved , you don't even need reach this Sura , its written all over the Quran ! and somehow this "former devout Sunni Muslim" did not know this.

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"Salvation based on scales. (Surah 17:13-14)"

I've already shown the concept of salvation in Islam , and our salvation is not "based" on the scales , Ergun is so ignorant of Islam he only knows a few words and concepts , he knows the term "scales" , he searched the Quran for it and labeled it as our concept of salvation.

All Muslims know that the Shahada (our creed) and our faith outweighs any bad deed (except for shirk) , as long as you are sincere ,you have faith and proved that faith through your works , you are saved.

The 2 verses Ergun quotes are not an explicit teaching of salvation, they are narrating to us what will happen on the day of judgment.

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"Salvation based on a lifetime confession of faith in Allah and his messenger Muhammed (Surah 1:2-4).........Salvation based on a personal confession of faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord.(Romans 10:9-13)"

Notice what Ergun did , he is making sure that the word "personal" is used in the Christian side of the comparison and uses the word "life long" with the Islamic side , does this man even know the conditions of the Shahada ? The Shahada is meaningless without these critical conditions :

1-Al-`Ilm [العلم]: Knowledge of the meaning of the Shahadah, its negation and affirmation.
2-Al-Yaqeen [اليقين]: Certainty – perfect knowledge of it that counteracts suspicion and doubt.
3-Al-Ikhlaas [الإخلاص]: Sincerity which negates shirk.
4-Al-Sidq [الصدق]: Truthfulness that permits neither falsehood nor hypocrisy.
5-Al-Mahabbah [المحبة]: Love of the Shahadah and its meaning, and being happy with it.
6-Al-Inqiad [الإنقياد]: Submission to its rightful requirements, which are the duties that must be performed with sincerity to God (alone) seeking His pleasure.
7-Al-Qubool [القبول]: Acceptance that contradicts rejection.

The second part of the Shahada carries several conditions as well:
1-To believe in the Prophet and in whatever he said and conveyed in his message as the seal of the prophets.
2-To obey him in whatever he commanded.
3-To stay away from or avoid whatever he commanded Muslims not to do.
4-To follow or emulate him in our 'ibadah (worship), akhlaq (manners), and way of life.
5-To love him more than you love yourself, your family and anything else in this world.
6-To understand, practice, and promote his Sunnah in the best way possible, without creating any chaos, enmity or harm.

All these conditions prove that the Muslim shahada is as personal as anything else.

Note : Ergun Caner does not know the Shahada as proven over here.

The verse Ergun refers to have nothing to do with the topic in hand , they does not mention prophet Muhammad (pbuh).

2. Praise be to Allah, the Cherisher and Sustainer of the worlds;
3. Most Gracious, Most Merciful;
4. Master of the Day of Judgment. (Sura 1:2-4)

I have no idea why he referred to these verses , perhaps to give an impression that he can refer to something in order deceive the simple Christian reader.

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"God is impersonal; therefore, obedience to the five pillars is most important.(Surah 2:277) "

We do not believe that God is impersonal and I am sick of this argument ! Christian Islamophobes , just because you believe that God committed suicide on a cross does not make him a personal God , you can claim and claim and claim , that will never make it true , you can call what you have a relationship , but Jesus never called it that nor do the 4 gospels , unlike what we find in the Quran :

"It was We Who created man, and We know what dark suggestions his soul makes to him: for We are nearer to him than his jugular vein." (Qur'an 50:16)

In a hadith Qudsi , Allah says if a believer comes to him walking , he comes to him running , if this is not a personal relationship I do not know what is , but it is defiantly not cosmic child abuse and murder.

The verse Ergun refers to actually refutes his whole case , Sura 2:277

"Those who believe, and do deeds of righteousness, and establish regular prayers and regular charity, will have their reward with their Lord: on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve."

This verse actually teaches the concept of salvation in Islam , there is the belief , the deeds , and the reward , I agree with the Ergun that this verse teaches that the pillars of Islam are important , but the pillars mean nothing if there is no faith.

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"God is personal and incarnate; therefore,relationship with our Heavenly Father is most important (Isaiah 9:6; John 20:28)"

Why did Ergun mention Isaiah 9:6 ? This verse does not prove that God is incarnate nor does it point to Jesus, for a detailed analysis of Isaiah 9:6 please read this.

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"Unconditional love based on the blood of Jesus Christ.(Romans 5:8)"

⁴ You are not a God who takes pleasure in evil;
with you the wicked cannot dwell.
⁵ The arrogant cannot stand in your presence;
you hate all who do wrong.
⁶ You destroy those who tell lies;
bloodthirsty and deceitful men
the LORD abhors. (Psalm 5:4-6)

²³ You must not live according to the customs of the nations I am going to drive out before you. Because they did all these things, I abhorred them. (Leviticus 20:23)

¹³Just as it is written: "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated." (Romans 9:13)

What a great all loving God !

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"Heaven is pictured as men sitting on couches being served wine by perpetual virgins.
(Surah 4:57)"

This is only one image out of many , where are the verses on the gardens , the comfort , the hadiths ? yes Muslim men will be served wine and will enjoy MARRIAGE in heaven , so will women.

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"Allah only saves those whom he wants. (Surah 14:4)..........God saves all those who will receive Jesus Christ as Savior.(2 Peter 3:9; 1 John 2:2; Luke 19:10)"

Lets quote the verse

"4. We sent not an apostle except (to teach) in the language of his (own) people, in order to make (things) clear to them. Now Allah leaves straying those whom He pleases and guides whom He pleases: and He is Exalted in power, full of Wisdom."
Now the context is clear , Allah saves and leaves astray based on their reaction to his revelation , how is the different from the Christian perspective ?

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"Salvation is never guaranteed (outside of jihad and martyrdom).(Surah 3:157; Hadith 1.35)"

How many times do I have to explain the concept of salvation in Islam ? we as Muslims have the assurance that we are saved , because the promise of God is true and he promised salvation to all those have faith , but salvation is conditional , you must die a Muslim in order to be saved that is why we don't walk around shouting "we are saved !" , we do not know the future , perhaps I might commit apostasy , shirk , blasphemy....etc , only arrogant people like most evangelical Christians can make this absurd claim , because it contradicts the bible when it says :

By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain. (1 Corinthians 15:2)

Paul puts a condition for salvation , you must hold to the word he preached in order to be saved , this is not different from the Islamic perspective of conditional salvation.

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"Muhammed himself did not know his eternal destiny. Why follow a man who does not know God’s plan for his eternal life? (Hadith 5.266)"

This claim is as false as it gets ! please consult this amazing article by Bassam Zawadi.

More Evidence Proving That Ergun Caner Is A Fake [Glossary of Arabic Terms]

2010-06-16T12:17:00.009+03:00

By Chaud

[Introduction] [Glossary of Arabic Terms] [Islam vs Grace] [Jehovah God vs Allah] [Jesus Christ vs Muhammad] [Jihad vs Religious Liberality]

"Glossary Of Arabic Terms"

There are some serious errors in this PDF , no former Muslim who speaks Arabic can make these mistakes but the problem does not stop there , Ergun has made some fatal factual errors ,and major theological errors as well.

Some of these terms are defined from Ergun's theological point of view , this PDF is not supposed to be an apologetic paper , it is a GLOSSARY OF (Islamic) ARABIC TERMS ; meaning Ergun's PDF was supposed to provide definitions for Islamic terms from the Arabic language and from it's Islamic definition , not from Ergun's superstitions.

Now to the errors and objections:

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"ALLAH: The God of Islam."

Is this an Arabic definition or blunder from Ergun's mind ? Where can we find an Arabic dictionary or even an Islamic dictionary that defines the word "Allah" [الله] as "The God of Islam" ?

Any Muslim or former Muslim knows that the word "Allah"[الله] means "The One God" , all Arabic speakers know that "Allah"[الله] is the standard Arabic word used for God , it was used by Arabic speaking pagans and still used by Arabic speaking Muslims , Christians and Jews.

Islam does not teach the term "God of Islam" to begin with , anyone who knows the religion of Islam knows that it teaches that Allah [الله] is also the God of all people , Jews , Christians...etc , but some people have made false claims against Allah (swt) , they worship idols , men , animals , man-made doctrines...etc , this never meant that the one God Allah [الله] creator of the heavens and the earth is not their God because he created them , and on the day of judgment they will be judged by him.

This definition Ergun raises a lot of problems , if Allah [الله] means "The God of Islam" then what can explain this ?

1- The usage of the word Allah [الله] in the Old Testament:

[فِي الْبَدْءِ خَلَقَ اللهُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالأَرْضَ" [ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ 1:1"

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." [Genesis 1:1]

So according to Ergun , in the beginning "The God of Islam" created the heavens and earth , this is coming from someone who called Allah (swt) a false idol.

2- The usage of the word Allah [الله] in the New Testament:

[لأَنَّهُ هكَذَا أَحَبَّ اللهُ الْعَالَمَ حَتَّى بَذَلَ ابْنَهُ الْوَحِيدَ، لِكَيْ لاَ يَهْلِكَ كُلُّ مَنْ يُؤْمِنُ بِهِ، بَلْ تَكُونُ لَهُ الْحَيَاةُ الأَبَدِيَّةُ" [ﻳﻮﺣﻨﺎ 3:16

"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life." [John 3:16]

So according to Ergun , "The God of Islam" gave his one and only son ? This man rants on how Allah and Jehovah are not the same because of this in most of his public talks , his claims on this topic have been addressed here.

3- The usage of the word Allah [الله] in the trinity.

We all know the trinity is a fundamental difference between mainstream Christianity and Islam , yet Arab Christians use the word Allah [الله] to refer to God and the persons who make up the God-head.

الله الأب meaning God the Father

الله الابن mean God the Son

الله الروح القدس meaning God the Holy Spirit

So do 3 "Gods of Islam" make up the God-head Ergun believes in ?

4- The usage of the word Allah [الله] by Ergun himself.

For example in one Ergun Caner's gibberish sprees , claiming to be speaking Turkish (or Arabic) to his father he says "Isa Ibn Allah" , so is he saying that Jesus is the son of "The God of Islam" ?

If Ergun defined the word Allah [الله] correctly , he would have never got into this huge mess.

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"AYISHA: Muhammed’s wife, married to him at age six. She was also the daughter of Abu Bakr."

This is no a sufficient definition I expect from a scholar of religion , the marriage (or engagement) was establish when she was 6 but the consummation was when she was 9 , Ergun left this detail out to deceive the people reading it in order to spread his false propaganda.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 58, Number 234 (bold emphasis is mine):

Narrated Aisha:

The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became Allright, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, "Best wishes and Allah's Blessing and a good luck." Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah's Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 58, Number 236:

Narrated Hisham's father:

Khadija died three years before the Prophet departed to Medina. He stayed there for two years or so and then he married 'Aisha when she was a girl of six years of age, and he consumed that marriage when she was nine years old.

What Ergun stated was not the full definition of who Aisha is in Islam , adding "he and consummated the marriage when she was 9" is not hard , but Ergun leaves this out to spread his falsehood , or because he does not know this !

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"BEHESHT: “Paradise.”

Oh dear God ! What is this ? This is not Arabic ! I have no idea what this word is or which language it came from.

The Arabic word for paradise is "Jannah" [جَنّة] , it used over and over in the Quran ! how can a former Muslim not know this ? how can a person claiming to be a speaker of Arabic make this mistake unless he never spoke Arabic his entire life.

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"DHUL-HIJJAH: Islamic Holiday, called the “Day of Arafat.” "

There are multiple factual errors here.

1- "Dhul-Hijjah" is a month on the Islamic calender , this is the month of the annual pilgrimage to Mecca, again when no warfare or fighting is allowed. (source)

2- We do not have a holiday called Dhul-Hijjah , in Islam we ONLY have 2 holidays , Eid Al-Fitr and Eid Al-Adha.

3- The Day of Arafat is not an Islamic holiday either , that is the day in which the people making pilgrimage stand on the Mount Arafat and worship God , it is recommend for Muslims around the rold to fast that day but all this does not make the day of Arafat a holiday.

Ergun confuses the month of Dhul-Hijjah with the holidays and religious events in it , this begs the question , did Ergun celebrate any major Muslim holiday in his life ?

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"INJIL: The New Testament Gospels, redacted and revised in the Quran."

1- Injil [إنجيل] in Arabic means "the good news", not "The New Testament Gospels" which is [أناجيل العهد الجديد] in Arabic.

In the Arabic usage of the word Injil [إنجيل] (and Islamic in some cases) , it can mean "The New Testament Gospels" depending on the context but if this was supposed to be a glossary of (Islamic) Arabic terms , then he should also mention that "The Injil" in Islam is the revelation given to Jesus (pbuh).

2- When Ergun says "redacted and revised in the Quran" , this is true because we as Muslims believe that the Quran abrogates the Gospel of Jesus Christ (pbuh) and it corrects the current New Testament Gospels by bring the original message of Jesus (pbuh) and exposing its falsehood.

The reason why I am objecting to this is because this unscholarly definition does not convey sufficiently the meaning of Injil [إنجيل] in Arabic or in Islam , but leaves the reader in a state of confusion.

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"ISHMAEL: First son of Abraham through Hagar, Sarah’s maidservant. Muslims believe Allah has a covenant with Ishmael, not Issac. Genesis 16: 1-16."

Readers , believe me when I say I can't write a better joke than this ! Did Ergun read the Quran once in his whole lifetime ? was he a Muslim ? the answer beyond any reasonable doubt is NO !

He says "Muslims believe Allah has a covenant with Ishmael, not Issac" , this is false , we Muslims believe in the prophet hood of Issac (pbuh) and Ishmael (pbuh) , Allah (swt) made a covenant with both of them , we do not make any difference between them , we respect them both equally and revere them both as prophets who were chosen by God to deliver his divine message.

The Muslim position regarding both prophet Issac ,prophet Ishmael and all the prophets (peace be upon them all) as the Quran says :

"Say: "We believe in Allah, and in what has been revealed to us and what was revealed to Abraham, Isma'il, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and in (the Books) given to Moses, Jesus, and the prophets, from their Lord: We make no distinction between one and another among them, and to Allah do we bow our will (in Islam)."" (Sura 3:84 , bold and underline is mine)

Former Muslim ? I don't think so.

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"JIHAD: “Holy fighting.”"

This mistake is usually made by fake ex-muslims who resent Islam , just like Ergun.

Jihad in Islam has multiple and a wide definitions depending on context , but there is not a single authoritative definition that says "Holy fighting" , in the context of war , Jihad does mean to fight back the enemy in the name of God , but this is no the greater meaning of Jihad in Islam or Arabic , for more about this please read this (recommended reading before you continue)

In the Arabic language Jihad means "to strive" or "to struggle" , in Islam it means to strive for righteousness , for example it takes "Jihad" [جهاد] to resist alcohol .

The problem with Christians who adhere to the false definition is that they do not know the same word "Jihad" [جهاد] in their bible , and in the Arabic New Testaments to be specific. (Source)

Luke 22:44
وَإِذْ كَانَ فِي جِهَادٍ كَانَ يُصَلِّي بِأَشَدِّ لَجَاجَةٍ، وَصَارَ عَرَقُهُ كَقَطَرَاتِ دَمٍ نَازِلَةٍ عَلَى الأَرْضِ.

Philippians 1:30
إِذْ لَكُمُ الْجِهَادُ عَيْنُهُ الَّذِي رَأَيْتُمُوهُ فِيَّ، وَالآنَ تَسْمَعُونَ فِيَّ.

Colossians 2:1
فَإِنِّي أُرِيدُ أَنْ تَعْلَمُوا أَيُّ جِهَادٍ لِي لأَجْلِكُمْ، وَلأَجْلِ الَّذِينَ فِي لاَوُدِكِيَّةَ، وَجَمِيعِ الَّذِينَ لَمْ يَرَوْا وَجْهِي فِي الْجَسَدِ،

1 Thessalonians 2:2
بَلْ بَعْدَ مَا تَأَلَّمْنَا قَبْلاً وَبُغِيَ عَلَيْنَا كَمَا تَعْلَمُونَ، فِي فِيلِبِّي، جَاهَرْنَا فِي إِلهِنَا أَنْ نُكَلِّمَكُمْ بِإِنْجِيلِ اللهِ، فِي جِهَادٍ كَثِيرٍ.

1 Timothy 6:12
جَاهِدْ جِهَادَ الإِيمَانِ الْحَسَنَ، وَأَمْسِكْ بِالْحَيَاةِ الأَبَدِيَّةِ الَّتِي إِلَيْهَا دُعِيتَ أَيْضًا، وَاعْتَرَفْتَ الاعْتِرَافَ الْحَسَنَ أَمَامَ شُهُودٍ كَثِيرِينَ

2 Timothy 4:7

قَدْ جَاهَدْتُ الْجِهَادَ الْحَسَنَ، أَكْمَلْتُ السَّعْيَ، حَفِظْتُ الإِيمَانَ،

Hebrews 12:1
لِذلِكَ نَحْنُ أَيْضًا إِذْ لَنَا سَحَابَةٌ مِنَ الشُّهُودِ مِقْدَارُ هذِهِ مُحِيطَةٌ بِنَا، لِنَطْرَحْ كُلَّ ثِقْل، وَالْخَطِيَّةَ الْمُحِيطَةَ بِنَا بِسُهُولَةٍ، وَلْنُحَاضِرْ بِالصَّبْرِ فِي الْجِهَادِ الْمَوْضُوعِ أَمَامَنَا،

Go to any English translation of these verses , somehow it will always have a positive meaning of struggling and putting effort for the truth , did the Arab Christians make a mistake ? because according to Ergun , it seems like Jesus was on an unjustified violent holy war , Paul was on an unjustified violent holy war , and all Christians are commanded to go on a violent unjustified holy war as well.

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"JINN: Angels of Allah."

What the.....??? This is hilarious !

Jinns are not the Angels of Allah ! where did this guy learn Islam from ? Muslims ! don't send your kids to the "madrassa" Ergun attended as a child !

The Angels of Allah in Arabic is [ملائكة الله] , Jinn is [جن] , do they look alike ? do they even have the same meaning ? how can any one claiming to be a former Muslim make this mistake ? perhaps one of Ergun's victims...oh ! I mean "students" wrote this glossary.

Jinns [جن] are beings created from fire , invisible to the human eye , we know about them from the Quran:

"He created the human from a clay, like pottery. And the Jinn He created from a smokeless fire." (Sura 55:14-15 , bold and underline are mine)

Angels [ملائكة] are created from light according to Islam.

Ergun Caner's PDF says:

"MINARET: Prayer tower in the Mosque, where the muazzein calls Muslims for rakats."

Ergun was doing great until the last word "rakat" , only an amateur who never prayed the Muslim prayer would make this mistake.

A Muazzein calls the Muslims for "SALAH" [صلاة] (prayer) not "rakat"[ركعات] (this word is the plural of "raka" [ركعة]. )

A "raka" [ركعة] is a certain stage in the prayer [صلاة] , this a picture of a Muslim doing a "raka" [ركعة] :

Ergun mistakes the general prayer with a certain stage in it , and people want me to believe he was a devout Muslim ?

Ergun Caner's PDF says :

"SAWN: Fasting during Ramadan. One of the five pillars."

This is one of Ergun's biggest mistakes , my friend Muhammad Khan (creator of the Fake Ex-Muslims website , and the Ergun Caner videos on youtube) used a clip of Ergun using this term as if it is the real Islamic term IN ARABIC , and now he enlists this mistake here , this is not the Arabic word for fasting ,it doesn't even come close to the real Arabic term.

The word for fasting during Ramadan is [ صيام ] (Siyyam) .

The word above in Arabic becomes [ صوان ] .

Do they even look alike ? I can't believe Ergun said this in public !

Conclusion

Ergun never spoke Arabic a day in his life , Ergun was never a Muslim a day in his life , this "glossary" is a beckon of intellectual dishonesty and deceit.

Response to "Arabs Don’t Want Palestinian Conflict to End"

2010-05-02T18:57:00.004+03:00

By Chaud

Hussein's article can be found here (All rights for the original post goes to him)

Frankly this post is too short and confusing to make such a claim , it goes into different topics which are irrelevant to the Palestinian conflict , however I will do my best in.

"An Egyptian sociologist and the founder of the Ibn Khaldun Center for Development Studies in Cairo, Saad Eddin Ibrahim, a Muslim, says Arab countries do not want the Israel-Palestinian conflict to end because they have “vested interests.”"

This is wrong , ARAB LEADERS do not want to end this Palestinian conflict , many of these "leaders" are dictators who sold out their own people and allied themselves with western dictatorships and terrorists , but the Arab public view wants to end the conflict.

The truth is that The United States of America , Israel and some country called Micronesia vote against the 2 state settlement every single year while the remaining countries that vote for the 2 state settlement , who REALLY does not want to end the conflict ? The Zionist Jews and their supporters based on their satanic scriptures that teach that God is so racist he has "chosen people" , he kicked out and destroyed nations so his "chosen people" can live happily ever after , I seriously doubt if any Zionist cares about one Palestinian because in the Zionist ideology the end of the conflict is to destroy the Palestinians , no wonder Arabs and Muslims reject such a state and such an ideology.

"these countries were the architects of the present-day nightmares that Israelis and Palestinians live through. They urged Palestinian leaders to reject the two-state solution in 1947, resulting into Palestinians living as refugees in their own land."

Lets examine this western propaganda influenced lie.

1- Why on earth should the Palestinians or Arab countries accept the 2 state solution of 1947 ? There is no good reason and no decent human being on this planet will accept such an injustice if he/she was in that situation , just because a number of Jews "survived" the so called "holocaust" and migrated to Palestine does not entitle these Jews and the Jews abroad to have a state of their own on land that doesn't belong to them , therefore I do not any fault in rejected this so called solution at that time.

2-Palestinians live as refugees in their lands BECAUSE THE ZIONISTS STOLE THEIR LAND , COMMIT ALL KINDS OF TORTURE ,GENOCIDE AND TERRORISM AGAINST THEM , is this the result of rejecting an unfair agreement , or is it the result of western supported Zionist-Jewish terrorism ?

3-The architects of the current nightmare Palestinians and non-zionist Jews live are no more than the creators and supporters of the satanic state of Israel itself.

For Hussein to successfully launch this lie , he must show us that the 2 state solution of 1947 was the best solution for its time and by rejecting it the Arab leaders are directly responsible for the current conflict, that Jews actually have a right to establish their own state on Palestinian lands WITHOUT appealing to ancient Judea and the Jewish existence in the land before the Romans kicked them out because events that happened 2000 years ago are not valid arguments to create a whole new state and dislocate it's people today , let alone all the terrorism committed against them.

"I went to school with some Palestinian Muslims and Christians. Some of them still live in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. I hope and pray for this conflict to end soon."

So do I.

"I believe that Israel has a right to be a country in the Middle East."

I believe the satanic state of Israel does not have a right to exist as a country in the Middle East , it never did and will , and I am not convinced by the argument Zionist apologists use.

"and the Second Coming of Jesus Christ does NOT depend on the rebuilding of the Temple on the Temple Mount."

Here is where it gets confusing , I thought Hussein supports the satanic state of Israel's existence (frankly I think he does that because he is anti-Muslim , not because he is an objective thinker when it comes to politics) , anyone who supports the satanic state of Israel is a Zionist , however Hussein is distancing himself away the Zionist Christian ideology which calls for the Jews return to Palestine , and rebuilding of the temple in order for anti-christ...opps ! I'm sorry "Jesus" to come back.

I have no idea where Hussein stands , is he is a Zionist Christian or not ? perhaps he supports the existence of the satanic state of Israel itself politically , but does not believe Zionist Christianity , if this is his stand then he is the first I've ever met who holds this idea.

"However, the Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock have no right to be on the Temple Mount either, because, contrary to what Muslims say, the Hadith shows that Prophet Muhammad did not ascended to the seven heavens from there. He actually had a dream that he was in Jerusalem prior to the alleged ascension. Why any Muslim would shed his or her blood over Muhammad’s dream or vision causes me to wonder."

A clear case of double standard hypocrisy , I have a question.
Hussein rejects the Muslim theological claim about the Aqsa and Dome of the Rock, then on what is he resting the case for whatever he believes should be or was on the temple mount ? mainly how Jesus will rebuild the temple, does he base that belief on historical grounds ? heck no.

If you understood and answered the question , then you will have to conclude that this is double standard hypocrisy.

Now as for the night journey , I will writing a whole article on this in the future inshalla since Hussein and many other Christians claim it was a dream , when the Quran , the evidence and hadith point to 2 conclusions , either a physical assent or a spiritual assent (his spirit left his body) , a "dream" was never a dominant and legitimate argument explaining the night journey itself , for more on this please read.

"Arab countries want this conflict to continue because they benefit financially from the plight of their fellow Arabs in Palestine and Lebanon refugee camps."

Or because their "leaders" sold out.

Has Hussein ever been into a refugee camp ? No state can make money out of those settlements , I actually live near them so I know what they are exactly.

"Islam and Muslims claim the victim status for a reason."

I hope Hussein provides that reason so we can discuss it , and we are victims of what exactly ?

"From the widely known claim that Christians and Jews removed references to Prophet Muhammad in the Bible"

True , Christians and Jews altered their scriptures in various ways , from Jews altering their scriptures to deny that a gentile prophet will be sent (because of their racist belief that they are some kind of "chosen people") all the way to Christians claiming that "That Prophet" who is mentioned in the bible is some holy spirit who guides them , lives inside them or whatever.

"to Muslims being “randomly” screened at airports."

Actually they are being upfront about it , there is nothing "random" in it , anyone who has been in the small white room in the back of JFK airport knows exactly what I mean .

"Lastly, non-Palestinian Arabs do not want this conflict to end because they do not want the world to look at the Islamic ideology a fresh."
This is so absurd I have no response to such ignorance , what is the evidence for this ? I would love to find a historian or a political scientist that backs up this theory.

"Had this conflict not being constantly in the news, the debate would have shifted to the prophethood of Muhammad, the infallibility of the Qur’an and the legitimacy of the Islamic ideology. The cracks in the Crescent would have been carefully scrutinized."
As if these topics haven't been discussed in the past and will be discussed in the future , in fact we welcome these discussions as the Quran says :

Say: "Produce your proof if ye are truthful."

"Non-Muslims would not have been buying into the current propaganda that essentially misleads the masses to focus only on the first 12 years of Islam and ignore the last 10 years which defines authentic Islam."
First of all Muslims are not ashamed of the of the prophet hood of Muhammad (pbuh) , because it all defines authentic Islam , no Muslims solely focuses on the first 13 years or the last 10 , they see the Islam holistically in the light of all 23 years , not as 2 different phases as anti-islamic propaganda wants it to be.

In reality , the Meccan period focused on ethics and spirituality because it is the foundation of Islam , while the Maddinan period without neglecting ethics and spirituality focused on other issues as well like state laws and politics , both periods are authentic Islam weather Hussein likes it or not.

"We should start asking tough questions for the sake of peace in Palestine."

A person who supports the satanic state of Israel and still calls for peace in Palestine ? that has got to be the biggest contradiction I have ever seen ! No supporter of the satanic state of Israel wants peace with the Palestinians or peace in Palestine , they want "peace for the Jews" in the "Jewish state of Israel" with Palestinians either destroyed or out of the "promised land".

"Hopefully, with the end of this conflict, the right questions about Islam will be asked."
We all want this conflict to end , but this does not prevent anyone from asking questions about Islam.

Quoting Zayd from the comment section of Hussein's original article :

It is clear that it’s you Hussein who want not only the conflict not to finish but Islam to disapear, not only from Palestine so that “the Second Coming of Jesus Christ does NOT depend on the rebuilding of the Temple on the Temple Mount” but from the entire planet. What civility and tolerance ..

I totally agree.

Response to "Facts withheld-Death of Prophet Muhammad"

2010-04-30T20:17:00.010+03:00

By Chaud

I was going to write a full refutation for Hussein Hajji Wario's article entitled "Facts withheld-Death of Prophet Muhammad" (All rights belong to him) , but the most astonishing thing occurred , Hussein provided it for us by quoting brother Bassam Zawadi's article on the subject ! I recommend reading Hussein's article first and checking out the links before reading this response , Bassam's article is more than enough to refute Hussein's assertions in regards to the death of the prophet Muhammad (pbuh) , if the prophet indeed died from poison , it was no less than a miracle.

"Does the Prophet's Death from Poison Disprove His Prophethood Or Was It An Honorable Death For Our Beloved Prophet? By Bassam Zawadi

Now I will respond to what is not addressed in Bassam's article , again I strongly recommend reading the article above.

Hussein quotes are in BLUE.

"Do you think Muslims’ hatred for Jews is only because of the Palestinian conflict? Think again. What Muslim scholars do not want you or ordinary Muslims to know is that a Jewish woman carried out a plan that eliminated Prophet Muhammad because he had terrorized her people."

Hussein is comparing apples to oranges right from the beginning , how does a death that occurred 1400 years ago lead to so called "Jewish hate" ? Muslims are anti-Zionists , anti-Zionist never meant anti-Jew.

More on this , if Muslims "hate" Jews because of this incident , can Hussein explain how the Islamic empire welcomed all the Jews fleeing from Christian persecution in Europe ? How Jewish and Muslim Palestinians lived in complete peace and harmony together in Palestine prior to the Zionist occupation of 1948 ? these are all historical events happened AFTER the death of the prophet Muhammad (pbuh), where is the hate ?

Linking the death of prophet Muhammad (pbuh) to "Jewish hate" is absurd beyond reasoning.

The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) did not "terrorize" the Jews , in fact that woman was from Khaibar , who broke their treaty and instigated other tribes to join them in a conclusive assault upon the Muslims , they were even preparing a full assault on Madina at the time of the battle , who is the real terrorist in this story ? certainly not Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) who honored the treaty and did not assemble armies to attack the Jews of Khaibar first.

For more refutations on the alleged "Hate of Islam towards the people of the book" , please read this article.

"She even declared to him, “if you are a prophet then the poison would not harm you.” He ate it and died from its effects about three years later. He said at his death, “O ‘Aisha! I still feel the pain caused by the food I ate at Khaibar, and at this time, I feel as if my aorta is being cut from that poison.”"

Question : What is the authority of this declaration ? Absolutly nothing.

A random Jewess declaring a falsification test , who is this woman ? is she inspired by God ? is the scripture she is basing this test on inspired by God ? it's a random claim with no authority , why should any Muslim take her claim seriously ?

Again we notice what brother Bassam pointed out in his article , the hadith Hussein quotes does not say the prophet's main reason for his death is the poison.

"The Hadith does not imply “old age” as the cause of his death nor does it cite “old age” at his death. Prophet Muhammad’s own words don’t “imply” but prove his death, “I still feel the pain caused by the food I ate at Khaibar, and at this time, I feel as if my aorta is being cut from that poison.” This is an indisputable confession that poison indeed killed him."

Absolutely not ! this hadith does not "prove" his death by poison nor is it a "confession" , notice the hadith says "I STILL FEEL THE PAIN...." indicating that at the time of his death , he was still feeling the same pain he had for years , this pain is not new to him , if the poison was supposed to "finally" kill him at that point , he would've said something indicating that the pain is increasing , or that a new symptom is taking place because of the poisonous effect.

Old age , fasting and other factors are determined by cross referencing other hadiths with each other.

"Sahih Bukhari, the most authoritative Hadith collection in Islam, which Muslims enlist its help in explaining, among many incriminating issues in Islam, the contradictions in the Qur’an, must be wrong to state that Prophet Muhammad felt the effects of the poisoned sheep he ate at Khaibar at his death and it didn’t contribute to his demise."

Sahih Bukhari does give us the hadith about the poisonous effects , but does not give us conclusive evidence that the the sole reason of his death was the poison.

Seems like Hussein does not know the role of hadith in Islam.

"Muslims I know use every trick they can find to defend Islam. Some of them say that Prophet Muhammad fasted before his death and they get this information from the same source, the Hadith that they dismiss when it incriminates Muhammad. Their source that he fasted before his death is unreliable because they dismiss it when it deals with how felt “the pain caused by food” he ate at Khabair at his death."

No Muslim I know of uses such a methodology , no Muslim scholar rests the whole prophet's death narrative solely on him fasting before the event and solely on the poisonous effects , but we clearly see Hussein playing the game of cherry picking narratives here , not Muslims.

"Apparently, only when it suits Islam that is when a source is reliable. It is similar to when they quote the Bible to try to make a case for Prophet Muhammad, like how he was supposedly prophesied in the Gospel, but dismiss the Gospel as corrupt when it comes to its central message of salvation through Jesus Christ."

That is not the case whatsoever , the sources of Islam are verified through the critically examining the narratives itself , the transmitters , what the Quran has to say , other hadiths....etc , so it is not "when it suits Islam".

The position of Islam towards the bible is clear , corrupted but contains some truth , Muslims seek to find that grain of truth , the fact that Muslims dismiss the "central message of salvation through Jesus Christ" is because it's a complete contradiction of the nature of God and how he deals with sin , even according to the Old Testament !

Conclusion

The so called evidence presented by Hussein is :

1-Not sufficient to conclude that the sole reason of the death of prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was the poison , and even if the prophet (pbuh) did die from poison , it wasn't because he was a false prophet nor was it because he "terrorized" her people , if it was anything , it was a miracle.

2-Does not prove that Muslims are somehow denying the poisoning incident.

Addendum

The reason why I added this addendum is because Hussein brought to my attention some factors he believes I should have taken into consideration.

Hussein is having a debate with a certain Muslim brother in the comment section of his this article , they are discussing many different issues and Hussein frankly isn't bringing any new objective arguments to the table see for yourself and judge (rehashing arguments like the mariamite trinity and the sister of Aron) , this is a public discussion between those two and I do not wish to get in the middle but I will say that Muslims have been successfully refuting many of Hussein's allegations for 1400 years now , however they did discuss some issues related to the article itself , I will be responding to those comments , and I will be responding to paragraph he edited at the end of his article.

Paragraph edit:

"The reason Muslim scholars do not admit that Prophet Muhammad died as a result of poisoning at Khaibar is because the Jewish woman declared to him that if he were a genuine prophet, eating the poisoned sheep would not have affected him. With the legitimacy of Islam at stake, I understand why they pick and choose which Hadith to believe."

Muslim scholars don't even pay attention to this so called declaration as an authoritative , legitimate claim , again I will repeat my question , on what authority can this woman make such a declaration ? the legitimacy of Islam is not at stake whatsoever.

Again , I recommend all the readers to read Bassam Zawadi's article as quoted in the beginning of this article.

Comment Responses:

"Regarding the death of Jesus, Ghulam Ahmad Pervaiz, in a commentary on Suratul Al-Imran, 3:55, said, “Thus, that nation became divided into two parties, one supporting the truth and the other opposing it. The opponents started using secret means and plans in order to lay their hands on Jesus. Countering this, God produced hidden ways and means of saving him, and it is evident that the means devised by God are superior in every respect. Their final plan was to have Jesus arrested and crucified, so that he would, according to them, die in disgrace and humiliation. But God said to Jesus: Be not perturbed, this conspiracy of theirs can never succeed…”

Why did this have to happen? It is because Allah would not let his prophet suffer because people were inflicting the pain on him against Allah’s plan."

No , I have already shown that prophet's can suffer , the reason why Allah (swt) saved Jesus (pbuh) was to end their conspiracy (Just like I explained in my original rebuttal from the Quran itself).

What I find interesting is that the Muslim scholar actually agrees with me but it seems like Hussein misunderstood him , the Muslim scholar quotes what the disbelievers wanted to do to Jesus - which is to kill him in a disgraceful manner- but when Allah (swt) responded to Jesus (pbuh) he said : "this conspiracy of theirs can never succeed" , the target and reason for the divine intervention was to destroy their conspiracy , not because "prophets don't suffer".

More on this , Hussein indirectly agreed with me , he said " It is because Allah would not let his prophet suffer because people were inflicting the pain on him against Allah’s plan.""

EXACTLY ! if you plot against Allah(swt) and his plan , Allah(swt) will plot against you , and in this case the plot was saving Jesus (pbuh).

Response to "One thing Muslims would not tell you"

2010-04-30T18:45:00.018+03:00

By Chaud

Hussein Hajji Wario's original post can be located here please read it before you proceed with this response, all rights for the original post belongs to Hussein.

Hussein quotes are in BLUE.

"The Jesus Muslims believe in, the one mentioned in the Qur’an and the Hadith, is not Jesus Christ. Therefore, Muslims do not believe in Jesus Christ. They do not believe in Jesus Christ because Jesus Christ suffered and died on the cross"

This is no more than a re-hash of the old "The Jesus you believe in is not the Jesus we believe in" argument , to a certain degree this is true , Muslims and Christians don't believe in the exact same Jesus down to every detail however both Muslims and Christians believe in the existence of the historical Jesus , each one of our scriptures (the quran and the bible) makes certain claims about Jesus (pbuh) , this does not mean they (the quran and the bible) are not speaking of the exact same historical figure , I will demonstrate what I mean using the following analogy :

"Beth was convicted for murder , the family of the victim believes she is guilty because her finger prints were on the gun but the family of Beth believes she is innocent because Beth was framed by her husband who tricked her into grabbing the gun earlier that day"

In this case , both families are speaking of the same person (Beth) , but each family has its own set of ideas about the figure in question , this does not mean both families are not speaking about the same figure , similarly Muslims and Christians share many details about Jesus (pbuh) but differ on others , so if we want to approach this matter holistically , then yes Muslims and Christians do not believe in the same Jesus since their beliefs on Jesus (pbuh) and his ministry conflict with each other however this approach is flawed because both Christians and Muslims are speaking about the same historical figure.

"while the “Jesus of Islam” never suffered or died because as a prophet of Allah, he could not suffer or die a horrible death. That is the teaching of Islam."

Islam definitely teaches that Jesus (pbuh) did not die on the cross.

That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah";- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not [Sura 4 : 157 , YUSUFALI Translation of the Quran]

but the reason Hussein gives us is false in the light of Islam , the Quran does not say that Jesus (pbuh) did not suffer because he was a prophet of Allah (swt) , Islam teaches that the prophets (peace be upon the all) suffered ridicule , rejection , hardships and even physical assaults because of their missions , Jesus (pbuh) is no exception.

Allah (swt) in his wisdom deals with certain evildoers who try to plot against him by plotting against them as a punishment.

And (the unbelievers) plotted and planned, and Allah too planned, and the best of planners is Allah. [Sura 4 : 157 , YUSUFALI Translation of the Holy Quran]

This is the reason why Allah (swt) saved Jesus (pbuh) according to the Quran , we can see a similar case in the story of prophet Abraham (pbuh) , how his people tried to burn him alive but Allah (swt) saved him from their plan.

"Fie upon you, and upon the things that ye worship besides Allah. Have ye no sense?" , They said "Burn him and protect your gods, If ye do (anything at all)!" , We said "O Fire! be thou cool, and (a means of) safety for Abraham!" , Then they sought a stratagem against him: but We made them the ones that lost most!" [Sura 21 : 67-70 , YUSUFALI Translation of the Holy Quran]

The case of Jesus (pbuh) is no different from the case Abraham (pbuh).

A prophet's mission is to proclaim the truth Allah (swt) has sent , the Quran does not teach that prophets can not die a horrible death on the hand of their enemies just because they are prophets^[1] , for example the Quran accuses the Jews many times of killing their own prophets.

When it is said to them, "Believe in what Allah Hath sent down, "they say, "We believe in what was sent down to us:" yet they reject all besides, even if it be Truth confirming what is with them. Say: "Why then have ye slain the prophets of Allah in times gone by, if ye did indeed believe?" [Sura 2 : 91 , YUSUFALI Translation of the Holy Quran]

As to those who deny the Signs of Allah and in defiance of right, slay the prophets, and slay those who teach just dealing with mankind, announce to them a grievous penalty. [Sura 3:21 , YUSUFALI Translation of the Holy Quran]

They (also) said: "(Allah) took our promise not to believe in an apostle unless He showed us a sacrifice consumed by Fire (From heaven)." Say: "There came to you apostles before me, with clear Signs and even with what ye ask for: why then did ye slay them, if ye speak the truth?" [Sura 3:183 , YUSUFALI Translation of the Holy Quran]

Allah(swt) in his wisdom knows the best in this matter.

"However, one thing that you should know, and Muslims do not tell anyone, Prophet Muhammad died a horrible death. He was a prophet of Allah, and you think he was spared from anguish, right? Not quite. He suffered for more than three years and died. A Jewish woman poisoned him; he suffered from complications for more than three years and died a terrible death. Now there is a prophet of Allah who the Hadith shows died a horrible death."

Hussein is aware of this article (I strongly recommend reading it for true facts) since he quotes it over here.

"Does the Prophet's Death from Poison Disprove His Prophethood Or Was It An Honorable Death For Our Beloved Prophet? By Bassam Zawadi"

"Muslims should quit denying that Jesus Christ died and resurrected because Jesus Christ is not the “Jesus of Islam” who, in spite of all the excellent attributes he had more than Prophet Muhammad, played a second fiddle to Muhammad. What a joke!"

Once we are presented with sufficient facts about the alleged "death and resurrection" of Jesus (pbuh) we will stop denying these so called "truths".

Prophets in Islam have different titles and attributes , these titles and attributes do not determine how great a prophet is , what determines that is the mission of that prophet and according to Islam no prophet had a greater mission than Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).

"Only Muhammad would claim to be getting revelations from God to refute something like the death of Jesus Christ, which happened 600 years before Muhammad was even born, and then set the conditions for how a prophet of his god should live and die (honorably) and then die in a miserable way. That is Islam for you."

The "death" of Jesus Christ (pbuh) has been challenged centuries before prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was sent , we know this from the writings of early church fathers and the extreme diversity of 1st century Christianity.

The fact that the events in question happened 600 years before prophet Muhammad (pbuh) does not mean anything as long as the evidence for the Quran being the word of God still stands strong , it doesn't matter if the time difference is six hundred or six million , and this is not fallacious or false reasoning even from the Christian side , according to the Christians Moses (pbuh) allegedly wrote the first 5 books of the Bible aka "The Torah" or "The Pentateuch" ^[2] , in that book we find the alleged stories of prophets like Noah (pbuh) , a question comes into mind , how long is the time difference between prophet Moses (pbuh) who is allegedly writing these stories and prophet Noah (pbuh) ? it had to be several or dozens of centuries Allah(swt) knows best , yet we see the Christians accepting these stories on the basis of revelation , Muslims are no different.

Conclusion

In the light of Islam , all of Hussein's arguments are false and unreasonable to begin with ,Muslims have no problem with the prophet Muhammad's death weather it was from poison or not , Islam does not teach that prophets don't suffer or do not die on the hands of their enemies , no wonder Hussein thinks Muslims "don't tell you" this "one thing".

Footnotes:

[1] I do not deny that some Muslims use the argument Hussein is trying to refer to , mainly that "death by crucifixion is a horrible death thus Jesus (pbuh) was not crucified" however I am not convinced by this argument in the light of what I presented and history , there are better ways to refute the crucifixion.

[2] Although Christians believe prophet Moses (pbuh) wrote the first 5 books of the Bible (Genesis , Exodus , Leviticus , Numbers & Deuteronomy) but in reality Moses (pbuh) did not write those books as we have them today , we as Muslims do not deny that the original Torah was revealed to Moses (pbuh) , quoting from Dictionary of the Old Testament: Pentateuch by David W. Baker and T. Desmond Alexander:

"Although biblical scholarship is deeply divided on the issue of how the Pentateuch was composed, there is widespread agreement that the Pentateuch, as it now stands, is an edited work and not a piece of literature that was penned... by one individual" [Pages 61-62]

"While the long-standing tradition of Mosaic authorship is based upon clear statements that Moses was responsible for writing substantial parts of the Pentateuch, the weight of evidence suggests that Moses probably did not compose the Pentateuch as we now have it... This is not to say that the Pentateuch's claims concerning Moses' literary activity should be rejected. On the contrary, such assertions ought to be respected and given serious consideration, which unfortunately all too rarely happens," [Page 70]

Addendum

His website states, “A Research Institute was established in 1408 Hijrah at the Islamic University of Al-Madinah Al-Munawwarah as “The Center for the Services of the Prophet’s Biography.” I was selected to work there and was entrusted the duty of preparing an encyclopedia on the subject of the life history of the Noble Prophet (sallallahu’alayhi wasalaam)…”

Now tell me, the Saudi government gave this Muslim scholar the task of preparing an encyclopedia on Prophet Muhammad’s life. He only mentioned poison once in his biography on Muhammad. He did not even aver that a Jewish woman had given the poisoned lamb to Muhammad. Is he a credible Muslim scholar? Does he meet your demand for a “credible” biographer of Prophet Muhammad? Why didn’t he mention the poisoning and the condition the woman gave of a prophet?

How many times did the prophet (pbuh) have the poison ? ONCE ! there is no need to keep mentioning it over and over again as if it was the sole reason of the death prophet Muhammad (pbuh) , the evidence does not show that.
I did not check out this biography to be honest , but if so , then the Muslim scholar is in fault.

"By the way, aHadith I linked to in the article show that the Jews woman was testing Prophet Muhammad to see if he were a genuine prophet and poison would not have affected him. Muslim scholars have written about his death but they do not show that the intention of the woman clearly was “if you are a prophet then the poison would not harm you.” Is it fair to say since he died of eating this poisoned sheep he was a false prophet?"

And on what authority did this Jewess test prophet Muhammad (pbuh) ? she made a allegation , but no Muslim or Muslim scholar would take it seriously as a criteria for prophet hood unless she or any Jew and Christian can provide any kind of authority for her claims , and no it is not fair to say he died of eating the poisoned sheep because they evidence does not suggest the poisoning to be the sole reason of the prophet's death.

This all reminds me of the alleged "true believer test" in the gospel of Mark , it says true believers will drink poison and not die ^[1] , 'till this day we haven't seen anyone take this test , does this mean all the Christians in the world are disbelievers ?

Footnotes :

[1] The passage from Mark 16:17-18 is seriously doubted to be a part of the original gospel according to Mark , so it is possible to find Christians denying this test.

Refinement ? Give Me A Break !

2010-04-11T10:25:00.010+03:00

By Chaud

Answering-Islam is a major Christian propaganda website , I checked it out a few times in the past and for some reason I felt like checking it out again , only to come across an article written by Timothy Ibrahim , then I remembered seeing this name on the list of Zakaria Botros's live testimony section , I had not doubt it was him.

Anyone who is familiar with anti-islamic propaganda will instantly see how bad this article is , how it doesn't make any sense , appeals to emotion , uses double standards and distorts facts to the highest level.

Since the author "would be delighted" to hear from us readers, I'll be happy to oblige, I hope Timothy has the ruqyy-ee (رقيّ) [English Translation:"Class"] he was speaking of in his article.

I checked out both English and Arabic versions , the Arabic version has more material to work with , I don't know why the article wasn't translated as a whole into English, never the less I will respond to both articles ,beginning with the English article on Answering-Islam , Inshalla next month I will have enough time to respond to the additions in the Arabic article on An-Naqid.

From what I understood , Timothy is trying to prove that if a Muslim wants to refine him/herself , then Christianity should be his/her choice not Islam since Christianity holds the keys to self refinement not Islam , I find this claim absurd and laughable and I will demonstrate why I think so.

It seems like Timothy forgot a very important historical fact , that civilizations throughout history had , has and will have their ups and downs , frankly I'm sick of missionaries trying to link the current status of Muslims to Islam itself , forgetting that most of them suffer from dictating rulers who sold out ,occupation ,hateful agendas from within and from afar, what surprises me is that Timothy is an Arab , he should know better than that.

Lets begin

Timothy quotes are in BLUE.

"Ever since I was a little Muslim boy, I heard everybody around me admonishing each other to go after “refinement”. A mother would admonish her son who acted embarrassingly, “khalīk Rā`ī خليك راقي”, which is: Be refined! "

Nice introduction.

"As Arabs, we have always admired Western countries for their phenomenal achievement in technology, liberty, democracy and definitely their “ruqyy-ee رقيّ” (refinement)."

This is surprising ! Seems like Timothy is putting his own experience and feelings and attributing it to "all arabs" and "always" ? I wonder which Arab "admired" the western world during the Islamic golden age of phenomenal achievement in technology , liberty , democracy and refinement ?
There is no need to deny that many Arabs do admire the western world for different reasons , Timothy's generalization is what I object to , personally I admire and respect anyone who has the dedication for self refinement, but I do not see the west as the example of self refinement.

"We have always hoped for something better than what was already the norm, frustrated terribly by the marginalization of the individual. In classic Egyptian movies, we have been charmed by their “refined” habits of etiquette and how a lot of families spoke French even at home, in order to cultivate higher standards of refined living. On the other hand, there was the screaming shouting of the Muslim call to prayer and people yelling at one another, which is an every day occurrence in the Muslim world."

Now I'm not ashamed to admit what I am about to say , this type of mentality is the reason why Arabs are not progressing , it's a shame to see that Timothy had (or still has I do not know) this mentality.

"Hoped" ??? Why hope ? Hope does nothing , it is actions of refinement that will refine the Arabs , many Arabs sit around doing nothing "hoping" something will happen just like Timothy did , instead of doing something to inspire refinement and a good example , watching movies and getting "fascinated" doesn't help out either.

I too see how bad the situation is , but instead of "hoping" I took action and refined myself through critically examining why this happened and seeing what I have to do and this is what Islam has taught me to do , Islam never taught anyone to sit around hoping something better will happen.

Well if Timothy doesn't like the Muslim call to prayer , then can he please contact the church next door to make them stop ringing their bells everyday ?

As if there is no shouting going on in the western world ! I hope Timothy visits New york city one day , then we'll see how "quiet" the western world is.

"Jesus Christ has come to bring refinement and elevate us as Arabs to a refined humane behavior."

I thought Jesus came to "die for our sins" not to elevate Arabs to refine humane behavior , and if that is the case ,until the prophet Muhammad (pbuh) came to the Arabs how come they were still the backward , barbaric , uncivilized people they were when Jesus left them ?

"He also identified himself as “gentle and humble in heart” (Matt. 11:29) and such was his living as people witnessed his going about doing good to all without differentiation (Acts 10:38). While some people are greedy for power in this world, Jesus simply declares that “my kingdom is not of this world” (John 18:36)."

I do not deny that Jesus (pbuh) was not all of this , what I object to is the "Divine Jesus" of the Old Testament , a racist "god" who has "chosen people" , sends prophets only to them and has the audacity to condemn other nations he didn't send prophets to (because he is a racist) for their idol worship ! this "gentle and humble in heart" God ordered the death of women and children and destruction of nations , where was this lovely God Timothy speaks about hiding during those times ? the Old Testament and its "God" will always be the reason why I will never accept Christianity.

Dear reader , please remember what Timothy did just now , he defined Jesus (pbuh) using what he said about himself and what the bible says about him , with this methodology in mind I will use this later on expose his double standards.

"He is not coming to set up a theocracy of Christian ideology but rather reigns by His redeeming love over human hearts"

If Timothy was an atheist I would've understood why he would object to a theocracy , but Timothy is a believer in God who objects to living in a state where God and his commandments are the highest authority , and evens goes to the extent where he claims his God never tried to establish one , unbelievable.

On what basis does Timothy assume Jesus did not come to set a theocracy ? just because Jesus never reigned as a ruler of over people does not mean he didn't preach any laws to follow that can be integrated into politics and governments thus creating a theocracy of his particular ideology , for example which christian supports gay rights ? divorce ? the pro liberation of pornography ? dealing drugs ? once Jesus "reigns by his redeeming love over human hearts" by default the christian "cleansed heart" is against all of this based on what Jesus preached , and if the majority of citizens are christian they will ban these things and influence other changes in their states based on their faith , if this is not a theocracy in action what is ?

"Muhammad, on the other hand, came to rule and dominate, for he was hungry for power."

This is where the double standard hypocrisy begins.

Muhammad (pbuh) came as a mercy to all man-kind ,to spread the knowledge and worship of the one true god , if his objective was to rule and dominate because he was hungry for power , why didn't he accept the pagan offering ? the pagans offered him riches , money , women , they would've made him a king ! according to Timothy this is a "mission accomplished" , but prophet Muhammad (pbuh) refuted him 1400 years ago when he refused this offering thus destroying his claim.

Now you all remember how Timothy defined Jesus (pbuh) and his character , he used what Jesus said about himself and what the bible teaches , with this methodology in mind , I have a question to ask , how did Timothy conclude that Muhammad (pbuh) "came to rule and dominate, for he was hungry for power" based on what the Quran teaches and what prophet Muhammad (pbuh) said about himself ? the answer is clear , by his false reasoning and backwards logic , not by the same standards he applies to Jesus and expects us Muslims to follow through with as if he did nothing wrong.

Now lets apply Timothy's standards on prophet Muhammad (pbuh) , The Quran says :

"It is part of the Mercy of Allah that thou dost deal gently with them Wert thou severe or harsh-hearted, they would have broken away from about thee: so pass over (Their faults), and ask for (Allah's) forgiveness for them; and consult them in affairs (of moment). Then, when thou hast Taken a decision put thy trust in Allah. For Allah loves those who put their trust (in Him)." [Sura 3:159]

"And Verily, you (O Muhammad) are on an exalted standard of character" [Sura 68:4]

"We sent you not (O Muhammad), but as a Mercy for all creatures" [Sura 21:107]

"Most certainly, you (people) have in the messenger of Allah an excellent pattern (of behavior)" [Sura 33:21]

The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) said about himself in the following narrations :

"Allah has sent me as an apostle so that I may demonstrate perfection of character, refinement of manners and loftiness of deportment." [Muwatta; Musnad; Mishkat]

"I was sent to perfect good character" [Muwatta]

Based on all this , using Timothy's standards I have no idea how he came up with his conclusion.

The character of prophet Muhammad (pbuh) does not fit with the character of a power hungry man as Timothy is trying to tell us , for more please consult this article over here which talks about the simplicity of the life of prophet Muhammad (pbuh) although he was the ruler of Madina and he had the Muslim treasury under his disposal , does this sound like a "power hungry man who came to rule and dominate" ?

As a side note I want to say that perhaps Timothy came up with this conclusion because of the wars fought by prophet Muhammad (pbuh) , again once you study history I have no idea how can anyone claim that prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was "hungry for power" , prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and the Muslims did eventually pick up the sword to fight back those who are creating chaos in the land , defend themselves ,to protect the weak , end oppression , stop persecution and establish peace after God permitted them after 13 years of prosecution in Mecca , and history confirms all these motives for the wars of prophet Muhammad (pbuh) to be valid , just because prophet Muhammad (pbuh) did fight in battles for these causes does not disqualify him as a prophet , belittle his status or make him a "hungry for power man who came to rule and dominate".

"Scholars of “modern” Islam run up against a wall as they reduce Islam to a mere spirituality as those of Buddhism and Christianity."

I personally do not know any of these scholars and I stand against those "Muslims" who claim Islam should be modernized , these "Muslims" never understood what Islam is to begin with, Islam is perfect the way it is , it does not need any change to fit any period of time.

"But Islam is both dogma and ideology, a Quran and a sword, faith and politics, faith and Shari’ah شريعة. Islam without the Islamic law الشريعة الإسلامية would be a mutilated religion, not the real thing; a pathetic, gutted, emaciated form of religion that has nothing to do with the real Islam that is explicitly stated in the Quran."

And...? What is the point ?

Yes Timothy in Islam we have laws and a code to follow just like all civilized , REFINED people have , this world is not a lawless jungle , and as a believer in God if I seek to find which religion is the truth and can refine me as a human being , I would expect God to reveal laws on how to be the best human being you can be , how to create the best society , how to deal with situation A , B , C...etc along with spirituality , the existence of moral , social , governmental , financial and other laws to live by in a religion (Islam for example) does not mean the religion is not true , if all I got is spirituality and no practical laws (just like Christianity) how on earth can I say this religion can refine anyone ?

"The modern movement to attempt to modernize Islam, to bring it up to the level of other faiths, forces the stripping of the core of the teachings of the Quran, leaving Islam bared."

The modern movement is trying to bring Islam DOWN to the level of other faiths.

"Islam’s basis and foundation is not about the spiritual relationship with Allah, but that of an agenda, an ideology and a political movement."

and Timothy is supposed to be a former Muslim ?

Islam is based on 5 pillars (5 year old kids know this , I'm surprised Timothy forgot them) the very first pillar is to accept there is no God but Allah and Muhammad (pbuh) is his messenger , in this pillar Muslims are required to believe in God , and one who believes in God does what ? believers in God establish a relationship with God and Islam provides and defines this relationship as submission to God, without this relationship , why would any Muslim follow the commandments ? or do anything God tells him to do ? why would a Muslim love God if there is no relationship as a basis for his/her faith ?

Yes , Islam has an agenda , an agenda of spreading the worship of the one god so all man kind can be saved , the avocation of universal brotherhood and rejection of all differences in race , color , language and nationality thus destroying the plague of racism , other "Islamic agendas" like giving charity , taking care of the orphans , feeding the homeless , creating a law that ends all poverty (Zaka) ,what a dangerous "agenda" Islam has for man kind.

Yes , Islam does have an ideology and Islam integrates itself with politics , so what ? we are clear about that and not hypocritical like Timothy is , assuming his faith has no place for ideological thinking and politics .

The fact that Islam's "agenda" , ideology and political stance are NOT in the pillars of Islam is sufficient to prove Islam is based on a spiritual relationship with God and accepting him (the first pillar) before following his commandments (other pillars) , Islam is based on the acceptance of God to begin with , not what Timothy suggested.

"The embellishment on the part of Western academic institutions has been but a futile attempt to civilize it."

So western academic institutes have been trying hard to civilize the Muslim world, not dominate it and introduce their secular degenerate ideals , yeah I believe you Timothy.

"Even if we concede Islam to be a form of spirituality amongst all these religions of the world, I venture as a former preacher of Islam to confidently state that Islam is the most degenerate form of spiritualities."

This is coming from someone who believes God loves the world so much he killed his only son to save humans from a sin they are not responsible for nor was God's "son" responsible for , this is supposed to be better than what Islam offers ?

Major Yeats-Brown says:

"NO HEATHEN TRIBE HAS CONCEIVED SO GROTESQUE AN IDEA, INVOLVING AS IT DOES THE ASSUMPTION, THAT MAN WAS BORN WITH A HEREDITARY STAIN UPON HIM: AND THAT THIS STAIN (FOR WHICH HE WAS NOT PERSONALLY RESPONSIBLE) WAS TO BE ATONED FOR: AND THAT THE CREATOR OF ALL THINGS HAD TO SACRIFICE HIS ONLY BEGOTTEN SON TO NEUTRALIZE THIS MYSTERIOUS CURSE." ["Life of a Bengal Lancer"]

This is only one example out of multiple issues.

Where do we find such filthy spiritual beliefs in Islam ? is there anything more pagan and degenerate than such a belief ? imagine a religion that bases its whole theology on this belief , can such a faith provide any kind of positive spiritual growth and refinement ?

I would like to ask Timothy to please provide some examples on how Islam provides the most "degenerate form of spirituality" and to show me how Christianity provides a better alternative ?

"When we are terrified into obedience out of fear and intimidation by Hellfire, where Allah is bribed with prayer, fasting and austere practices"

Did this guy read the Quran ? did he really preach Islam ? what is this junk ?

As much as the Quran speaks about hellfire , it also speaks on paradise , did Timothy the "former preacher" forget to read those verses ?

Islam teaches that God should be feared with faith , and he should be loved , as a Muslim I obey Allah out of love for him and what he did for me , that doesn't mean that I don't have a certain amount of fear that works as a deterrent to keep me away from what is forbidden , and this is the stance of the majority of Muslims.

A few examples on what the Quran says :

"But give glad tidings to those who believe and work righteousness that their portion is Gardens beneath which rivers flow. Every time they are fed with fruits therefrom they say: "Why this is what we were fed with before" for they are given things in similitude; and they have therein companions (pure and holy); and they abide therein (for ever)." [Sura 2:25]

"Be quick in the race for forgiveness from your Lord and for a garden whose width is that (of the whole) of the heavens and of the earth prepared for the righteous." [Sura 2:133]

"And We shall remove from their hearts any lurking sense of injury: (they will be) brothers (joyfully) facing each other on thrones (of dignity)." [Sura 15:47]

and DOZENS of other verses in the Quran speaking of heaven , these verses encourages Muslims to do the commandments out of love and desire to please Allah (swt) and win this paradise to be with him.

The reason why I do not believe Timothy is because if he took the time to read the Quran , he wouldn't have written such a ludicrous argument, over all the Quran is balanced , it does speak about hell and it does speak equally about heaven , what the Quran is trying to convey is a message of balance between the desire to go to heaven and fear of going to hell , Timothy understood the Quranic message in a very wrong way to begin with.

Which God really gets "bribed" ? The God of the Quran who holds people accountable for their actions and their sincere submission to him by following the commandments (praying , fasting , other practices) as a measure to judge man-kind , or the God Timothy believes in , who doesn't hold anyone accountable as long as you believe he killed his son for you , which of these 2 really sounds like a bribe ?

"what is that compared to a God we meet in Christ who gently knocks at the door and simply says, “If you will let me in, I will enter”? (Revelation 3:20) If we shut the door in God’s face in the Bible, He will not fume with anger. He will simply move on in sadness (Luke 4:30) as the loss will be only ours, left behind."

I have 2 points on this :

Timothy employs the same double standard he used with prophet Muhammad (pbuh) , but this time it's against Allah (swt) ,notice the double standard , Timothy is using what the bible says about his God (and does a poor job in it , I'll demonstrate in point #2) , so with this methodology in mind , how did Timothy conclude what he said about Allah (swt) based on what the Quran says ? In the previous response I showed how Timothy ignored verses in the Quran and never understood the message of the Quran concerning hell and heaven to begin with.
So basically the God of the bible is knocking on my heart and if I reject him he will not be angry he will be sad , is this before or after he throws me into the lake of fire for all eternity ? what a lovely way to express sadness , throwing people into hell !

"While Jesus came to offer “life”, Islam came to offer “death”."

"Islam came to offer death" ? I would love to see how this is possible when Islam explicitly teaches the sanctity human life.

The Quran says :

"O you who have believed, do not consume one another's wealth unjustly but only [in lawful] business by mutual consent. And do not kill yourselves [or one another]. Indeed, Allah is to you ever Merciful." [Sura 4:29]

"Say, "Come, I will recite what your Lord has prohibited to you. [He commands] that you not associate anything with Him, and to parents, good treatment, and do not kill your children out of poverty; We will provide for you and them. And do not approach immoralities - what is apparent of them and what is concealed. And do not kill the soul which Allah has forbidden [to be killed] except by [legal] right. This has He instructed you that you may use reason." [Sura 6:151]

A great verse in the quran reminding the Muslims of what Allah (swt) has revealed in the revelations sent to the children of Israel and ordaining it on them.

"Because of this, we decreed for the Children of Israel that anyone who murders any person who had not committed murder or horrendous crimes, it shall be as if he murdered all the people. And anyone who spares a life, it shall be as if he spared the lives of all the people. Our messengers went to them with clear proofs and revelations, but most of them, after all this, are still transgressing." [Sura 5:32]

and other verses , I fail to understand how Islam offers "death" when we have such clear verses about the sanctity of human life.

"Jesus spoke extensively about this rich term “life” that is almost another name for God Almighty. To believe in Him guarantees us “eternal life”, i.e. life that flows directly from God and is as eternal as God is. It is “life” that has the adjective “eternal” for coming with it. In Jesus’ statement of purpose, he defines for us the reason of his coming, “I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full” (John 10:10)."

Timothy does not tell us what does he mean by "eternal life" , people gain eternal life by being saved , eternal life means going to paradise and living there , its has nothing to do with life as we know it today.

for a 3rd time Timothy uses double standards , just a while ago he accused Islam of offering "death" , where is the evidence from the Quran that Islam offers death since he is using the bible to prove that Christianity supposedly offers life ?

In further responses , we will see what kind of evidence Timothy has to offer to support this claim.

"As a Muslim, I did everything out of terror of Allah and for the sake of the Hereafter with no certainty or security about anything."

I already addressed the first part of this statement , so I will answer the second part .

Again , I am wondering if Timothy ever read the Quran or studied Islam , because here is no way this man was a former preacher of Islam.

Allah (swt) promises over and over in the Quran that believers who are sincere will be rewarded , and the promise of God is true , did Timothy skip all those verses?

I believe that salvation is conditional , no one knows weather they will die as a believer or not , so claims of being saved right now is arrogant bogus falsehood.

"But now that I am a Christian, I know that my present matters a great deal to God and I don’t have to do everything in the hope of a “prize” in the end but the present as it is matters immensely to my Lord. Christ wants to make my present life so meaningful; he wants me to live life to the full and not just pay my dues so that I might have a “cushioned seat” in a fancy train. He wants me to enjoy life and to be “fully alive” by having my life joined to His life, as we become “flesh of his flesh and bone of his bones” (Ephesians 5:32- 33). Everything in Christianity is about life and how to live it with enjoyment to the full and in the presence of God. He wants us to have life in relationship with him, not in fear of him."

As if this is not taught in Islam !

Islam doesn't impose rituals and worship all day long and doesn't allow Muslims to enjoy this life as Timothy is saying , again I am having a big difficulty accepting that Timothy was a former preacher of Islam.

If we take prayers for example , Muslims pray 5 times a day , all 5 together consumes 1 hour a day maximum , what do Muslims do with the other 23 ? they live life , go to work , pursue an education , start families , visit their neighbors ,maintain social relationships , see the world enjoy it to fullest as Allah (swt) says in the Quran :

"Say: Who has forbidden the adornment of Allah which He has brought for His servants and the good things of His provision?" [Sura 7:32]

The prophet Muhammad (pbuh) said :

"Allah likes to see the signs of His favour (bounties) on His servant"

Living life and enjoying in a way that is acceptable is not forbidden in Islam.

"In Islam, on the other hand, this life is to be despised since الدنيا لا تساوي عند الله جناح بعوضة i.e. “Life for Allah is not even worth the wing of a mosquito”."

We already saw how Islam does not forbid enjoying life and does not see life as a "despised" thing , but what is the deal with this grossly out of context quotation Timothy gives us ?

This hadith is speaking about what this life is worth to Allah (swt) in comparison to the life after , the key word here is "comparison" , all hadiths that compare this life to the life after speak in this context and this language, so how does this hadith and other similar hadith teach that this life is to be despised when other verses from the Quran and hadith that speak of this life with no comparison to the life after teach that we are to enjoy life ?

"Khalid Ibn Al Walid, chiefly commanding the army of Mohammad, acknowledged death as the driving force for practicing Islam. One of his famous statements calling on the infidels to convert to Islam is this: “Submit to Islam and be safe. Or agree to the payment of the Jizya, and you and your people will be under our protection, else you will have only yourself to blame for the consequences, for I bring the men who desire death as ardently as you desire life.”

This letter was written by Khalid to the Persian Governor of Mesopotamia before invading it , and the Muslim conquests to these lands were to over throw the tyrant governments who were oppressing the weak, if these tyrants accepted Islam then their reign of oppression will come an end therefore the text of the letter is valid in the context of the Muslim conquests, I don't want to go into the history of the Muslim conquests now so I will go back to the reason why Timothy quoted this letter.

Timothy is trying to show us that Muslims acknowledge death as a driving force to practice Islam , how does death drive me to give charity to the poor ? I have no idea , the quote is out of its context.

In times of war , warriors are driven by the honor of martyrdom in Islam , on a battle field a Muslim warrior does his/her best and wishes for that honor , this thinking belongs to the battlefield not everyday life , how is this different from the Christian mentality when Christians were killed for their faith in several eras as history records ? People in certain situations prefer death over life , this does not mean their religion teach that life is worthless.

"No wonder, then, when a Muslim becomes so devout in his Islamic belief, he would desire death as ardently as we, Christians, would desire life."

Bogus conclusion based on an out of context quote , and doesn't Timothy realize he just insulted his ancestors and fellow Christian martyrs with this quote ?

The history of the Coptic church in Egypt tells us about the "Era Of Martyrdom" -which was exactly before the Muslim conquest to Eypgt- in that period of time Christians were subjugated to the worse forms of death imaginable , they were thrown to starving lions , burnt alive in boiling oil , tortured , beaten to death , and Timothy wants to convince me that these heroes (Yes , I consider them heroes and I respect their dedication to their faith) were actually supposed to desire life over death ?

I repeat what I said , people in certain situations prefer death over life , this does not mean their ideals acknowledges that life is worthless.

"This has been true of Islam throughout the centuries since its ominous inception. As Samuel Zwemer eloquently put it, “From the outset it [i.e. Islam] had in it the germs of death – a neither the character of the Koran nor of its Prophet have in them the promise or potency of life that will endure.”"

I fail to see how this is true according to Islam and history , and Timothy 'till now didn't show us how Islam over all advocates death over life.

"Is it any surprise, then, that the more religious a Muslim becomes, the more somber and gloomy he looks?"

Who are these "somber and gloomy" religious Muslim ? I personally do not know any and if I get to meet a "somber and gloomy" religious Muslim one day, I will quote the following hadiths proving that such attitude is not Islamic , the more religious a Muslim is, the more joyous his/her looks should be according to the Sunnah of the prophet (pbuh).

The prophet Muhammad (pbuh) said :

"Smiling in the face of your brother is charity" [Jami At-Tirmithi]

Abdullah ibn haarith,radi Allahu 'anhu,said :

"I have never seen any one who smiled more than Allah's Messenger" [Jami At-Tirmithi]

Jarrir ,radi Allahu 'anhu, reported :

"Since I embraced Islam Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) never refused to see me and he did not see me but with a smile on his face." [Sahih Muslim]

What excuse do these gloomy Muslims have to be what they are ? I have no idea but its not Islam.

"Muslims will achieve this “ruqyy-ee رقيّ” (refinement) progress and civilization as they value the present for its worth, as a gift of God to receive from the hands of Christ, Giver of life, in that each day is a gift of the Lord and we do not have to wait till the end of life in order to realize the purposes of God. Because Muslims believe in the here and the now, believe in the sanctity of life and the autonomy of the individual instead of utilitarianism, then we can, indeed, hope for a better life in the Muslim world."

Muslims already acknowledge that life is a gift from God and do not wish to waste it for no good reason , what is left for Muslims to do in order to reach this “ruqyy-ee رقيّ” (refinement) is to start practicing Islam correctly.

Islam acknowledges the sanctity of life like I already showed from the Quran I doubt Timothy read , and I find no fault with the balance Islam teaches between individualism and utilitarianism , Islam does not teach either of those 2 extremes , but a rational mix between the both according to the situation a Muslim faces.

"To force our values on others produces nothing but hypocrites. In the parable of the Prodigal Son, as the son is on his way out of the door, we do not see the Father getting in his way and trying to force Him to do what is right. In Christ, our Maker respects our free will and He allows us to make the choice. Even when He created man in the beginning, he knew fully well that this man would some day oppose His will and fight against His design. Nevertheless, He went ahead and created man. Let us make man in our image, He said.

The first time I got the gospel of Luke in the mail from my American pen friend, it didn’t have the word “Bible” on the cover. Rather, the cover had this interesting title “Joyous News of the Greek Physician Luke” الأخبار المفرحة للطبيب اليوناني لوقا. I could not help but wonder, “Who in the world is this Luke? And why would a Greek physician take interest in me as a person?” And what type of “joyous news” would he have to share with me, Ibrahim Arafat? Finally it dawned on me, the coming of Jesus Christ into the world, the coming of God in person in Christ, is, indeed, this joyous news. That is why the apostle of the heart set free, Paul, would make it a commandment, even an order to “rejoice” always as he says in Philippians 4:4. "

I got no objection because this has nothing to do with the topic , but that doesn't mean I accept the bible verses he quoted nor do I accept the apostleship of Paul , Timothy is trying to preach his personal experience , he has a right to do so , he will do this more often since he has nothing else to say.

"As a Muslim, I have often wondered to myself why most of the “pious” Muslims came out of the mosque with frowning, gloomy looks"

I gave a response to that , and I'd like to know which Mosque did Timothy go to ? I'd love to invite Timothy over to my mosque and introduce him to some real pious Muslims.

"while everything I encountered in Christianity was always about joy. I got jealous and wanted to be like them and have what those Christians have. Their Savior, in His most excruciating moments on the Cross, lifts His eyes towards the Father and intercedes in prayer for them, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing” (Luke 23:34). This was the manifesto for the civilization of forgiveness, founded not by fanciful, dreamy, all-too-platonic mottos, but it cost Christ His own redeeming, saving, atoning blood. He practiced first what would be preached later on."

I'm not going to go into a huge rant about happy and gloomy Christians in relation to Christianity itself like Timothy tried to do in the case of Islam , I do not need to stoop that low , and I will not go into preaching mode because I do not need to ,but I would like to thank Timothy for quoting Luke 23:34 and for all the acknowledgments he made to its impact because prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was reported to say after he was subjected to brutal assaults and scrutiny :

"O God! Forgive them and guide them to truth, for they do not know"

I agree with Timothy completely , this is a manifesto for the civilization of forgiveness, founded not by fanciful, dreamy, all-too-platonic mottos.

"It is Christ who is the actual standard for Christianity, not Caesar or Prince Charles or President Bush, for Christianity is only Christ, the person in all He said and did."

Of course he is ! no Christian wants to deal with old testament and help us Muslims understand it without using the same double standards used against Muslims.

"As a Muslim, I have always longed to live as a refined human being, like those we would see in Western media."

What kind of Muslim was Timothy ? which Muslim does not see the greatest example of ethics and refinement in prophet Muhammad (pbuh) ? what makes this worse is that Timothy claimed to be a former preacher ! perhaps he was busy watching western media , he should have been reading the Quran , books of hadith and authentic biographies instead.

"But how can that ever be when Islam is all about oppression?"

any evidence so far ? none.

"Refined people have responsible freedom as their starting point, not oppression or fear."

Islam has that , no problem.

"Allah in Islam is all about subjugation. To be a Christian happens by willingly and joyfully submitting to Christ. Allah in Islam, however, subjugates people to follow Islam."

My dumpster has less trash than this !

When a Muslim declares his Shahada (testimony of faith) , there are conditions for it to be valid like sincerity , knowledge , love...etc , where is the subjugation Timothy speaks of ? this is what happens when someone looks for refinement in western media , he/she ends up becoming the best example of ignorance , arrogance and double standard hypocrisy.

"One American brother who converted to Sufi Islam and found his “niche” there told me over the phone that Allah says in the Quran “وَلَهُ أَسْلَمَ مَنْ فِي السَّماواتِ وَالأْرْضِ طَوْعاً وَكَرْهاً” i.e. All creatures in heaven and on earth were subjugated to Him, whether they like it or hate it (Family of Imran 3:83)."

Out of context verse and a faulty translation , lets see the context .

"Do they seek for other than the Religion of Allah?-while all creatures in the heavens and on earth have, willing and unwilling, bowed to His Will (Accepted Islam), and to Him shall they all be brought back." [Sura 3:83]

the words "طَوْعاً وَكَرْه" does not mean "subjugated to him" as Timothy falsely said , it means "willing and unwilling" , the context further explains, the verses before this verse was speaking of the pagans and people of the book who rejected the revelation of God and his religion , this is the verse where Allah (swt) uses a language of wonder and challenge to question their disbelief and informs them that all creatures submit to Allah (swt).

As for who the people willing and unwillingly accept Islam , Imam At-Tabari gives us multiple meanings for it , they all agree that Muslims , prophets , angels are those who submitted willingly , but those who are unwilling could be the disbelievers on the day of judgment , the hypocrites , those who submitted to another God not knowing they submitted to Allah (swt) in a false way , and others.

I challenge Timothy to show us how Allah (swt) subjugates people into believing in him as if Sura 109 doesn't exist !

"I once said to a dear friend of mine, a former Muslim who was groomed to be a Muslim scholar, that I resent mostly in Islam that aspect of subjugation and oppression, to which he replied, “يا أخي والله محمد أجبرنا على الإسلام وما لنا من خيار وأجبرنا على دخول الجنة مكبلين بالسلاسل دون اختيار منا لذلك” i.e. “Oh brother, Mohammad forced Islam upon us and we had no choice; he forced us to enter paradise shackled in chains and we had no choice in the matter”. Actually, there is a famous hadith (tradition) narrated by Mohammad that states that, “عجبت لأقوام يساقون إلى الجنة بالسلاسل وهم كارهون‏” i.e. “I have marveled at people who are led to Paradise shackled in chains while they resent it”."

Timothy still didn't provide a single teaching in Islam that supports subjugation and oppression.

Note : Timothy gives us a couple of what he think is evidence in the Arabic version of this article , I will respond to that Inshalla next month.

Timothy's friend's opinion holds no water since no valid evidence has been provided , and I have a question to Timothy's friend , did Muhammad (pbuh) knock on your door one day and force you into Islam ? where do these former Muslims get this rubbish from ? How the hell did a 7th century prophet force a 21st century man into Islam ? these are all baseless rants and false rhetoric , now lets discuss the false hadith Timothy quotes.

Not only is that hadith in complete contradiction with the Quran and there is nothing to back it up , but the only scholar gave any credibility was Al-Albani , and he even didn't consider it to be authentic , he considered it a "hassan" hadith , which means it has its own minor deficiency , and this hadith is considered as one of the hadiths Al-Albani gave credit to by mistake (source).

So I can safely conclude the hadith is false based on the Quran and internal evidence from the science of hadith.

"People thrive better as they operate out of freedom, not oppression."

I agree , but what does this have to do with Islam ?

"How can we dream of a civilized Muslim world when people are stripped of the simplest of things, to choose their own actions without being stoned for it?"

I have no idea what Timothy is referring to here , but as long as the Muslim world has its tyrants and people still don't examine Islam properly , no wonder they do not have a choice in many matters , the question is where does Islam teach the limitation of choice ? and stoning those who make choices ?

The problem is that Timothy's argument is a false one , and he must rely on the current state of Muslims to support this false argument , a tactic that never works as long as Islam's pure teachings exist , I will convert to Christianity right now if Timothy can prove his imaginary Islam to be the true Islam.

"While I love purity of heart as through it I get to “see” the Lord (Matthew 5:8), I don’t want anybody to “make” me pure; I don’t want it to be the pressure of religion or society but I would rather have it develop as the fruit of the longing of my heart for the Lord whom I love and wanted to be united with. It has to come from within. In Matthew 23:25, Jesus denounced that false “show” of external morality, “You clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of greed.”"

Another attempt to preach his faith , not that I don't mind but I just realized until now Timothy did not show us how can Christianity refine anyone.

I agree with Jesus (pbuh) , hypocrites of this nature are exactly what he said , so Timothy please work on your inside and try to write something less hateful and more into facts than this article next time.

"How can we hope for a civilized Muslim world when the woman is permitted to be beaten in the Quran (Women 4:34)?"

Yes , a law that allows a husband to strike his wife with a tooth brush 3 light strikes that doesn't leave any bruises as a last resort , how barbaric.

We all need to remember that prophet Muhammad (pbuh) never hit his wives , he encouraged Muslim to use this "barbaric" solution as an extreme last resort , its not the picture Timothy wants to paint for us at all.

For more information on wife beating in Islam I recommend Dr.Jamal Badawi's book "Wife beating in Islam" along with these articles.

"In surat Sād 38:44 in the Quran, Job is ordered by God to beat his wife, “‘Take in thy hand a bundle of rushes, and strike [your wife] therewith, and do not fail in thy oath.’"

Lets see the full story :

"Therefore, Iblis became desperate. He consulted his helpers, but they could not advise him. They asked: "How is it that your cleverness cannot work against Ayub (Job), yet you succeeded in misleading Adam, the father of man, out of Paradise?"

Iblis went to Ayub's (Job's) wife in the form of a man. "Where is your husband?" he asked her.

She pointed to an almost lifeless form crumpled on the bed and said: "There he is, suspended between life and death."

Iblis reminded her of the days when Ayub (Job) had good health, wealth and children. Suddenly, the painful memory of years of hardship overcame her, and she burst into tears. She said to Ayub (Job): "How long are you going to bear this torture from our Lord? Are we to remain without wealth, children or friends forever? Why don't you call upon Allah to remove this suffering?"

Ayub (Job) sighed, and in a soft voice replied: "Iblis must have whispered to you and made you dissatisfied. Tell me, how long did I enjoy good health and riches?"

She replied: "For eighty years."

Then Ayub (Job) asked: "How long am I suffering like this?"

She said: "For seven years."

Ayub (Job) then told her: "In that case I am ashamed to call on my Lord to remove the hardship, for I have not suffered longer than the years of good health and plenty. It seems your faith has weakened and you are dissatisfied with the fate of Allah. If I ever regain health, I swear I will punish you with a hundred strokes! From this day onward, I forbid myself to eat or drink anything from your hand. Leave me alone and let my Lord do with me as He pleases."

Crying bitterly and with a heavy heart, she had no choice but to leave him and seek shelter elsewhere. In this helpless state, Ayub (Job) turned to Allah, not to complain but to seek His mercy: «"Verily, distress has seized me, and You are the Most Merciful of all those who show mercy."

So We answered his call, and We removed the distress that was on him, and We restored his family to him (that he had lost), and the like thereof along with them - as a mercy from Ourselves and a Reminder for all who worship Us."» Surah 21: 83-84

Almighty Allah also instructed: «And remember Our slave Ayub, when he invoked his Lord (saying): "Verily! Satan has touched me with distress (by losing my health) and torment (by losing my wealth)!" Allah said to him: "Strike the ground with your foot: This is a spring of water to wash in, cool and a (refreshing) drink." And We gave him (back) his family, and along with them the like thereof, as a Mercy from Us, and a reminder for those who understand. »Surah 38: 41-43

Ayub (Job) obeyed, and almost immediately his good health was restored. Meanwhile, his faithful wife could no longer bear to be parted from her husband and returned to him to beg his forgiveness, desiring to serve him. On entering her house, she was amazed at the sudden change: Ayub (Job) was again healthy! She embraced him and thanked Allah for His mercy.

Ayub (Job) was now worried, for he had taken an oath to punish her with a hundred strokes if he regained health, but he had no desire to hurt her. He knew if he did not fulfill the oath, he would be guilty of breaking a promise to Allah. Therefore, in His wisdom and mercy, Allah came to the assistance of His faithful servant, and advised him: «And take in your hand a bundle of thin grass and strike therewith (your wife), and break not your oath." Truly! We found him patient. How excellent (a) slave! Verily, he was ever oft-returning in repentance (to Us)!"» Surah 38:44" (Source)

The story gives us the reason why Job (pbuh) had to discipline his wife and how the mercy of Allah(swt) really works , Job (pbuh) did not want top hurt his wife with 100 lashes , so Allah(swt) allowed him to strike her once with grass , the word [ضِغۡثًا] does not mean "rushes" , it means "a bundle of wet grass" , how barbaric ! Job (pbuh) is beating his wife with grass.

I fail to see what Timothy is implying based on the evidence.

The prophet Muhammad (pbuh) said :

"The more civil and kind a Muslim is to his wife, the more perfect in faith he is."

"As usual, Allah is invoked in the Quran too many times to gratify the wishes of the male, even if this is to reduce the female to such a demeaning position."

I challenge Timothy to bring me one example of a demeaned position of women in the Quran , because I can swear the bible contains the following :

The pain of a woman during childbirth is God's curse because of Eve's transgression (Genesis 3:16).
Women must never teach or have authority over a man, because according to the Bible, Eve sinned first and not Adam (1 Timothy 2:9-14)
Wives must obey their husbands, like they obey God (Ephesians 5:22, Colossians 3:18)
Women are to be silent in church as it is forbidden for them to speak in Church and they must be obedient. If they had a question they must ask their husbands because it is a shame for women to speak in Church (1 Corinthians 14:34-35)
Men are the head of women just as Christ is the head of man (1 Corinthians 11:3)
Men are the image and glory of God, while women are the glory of man (1 Corinthians 11:7)

If Allah (swt) in the Quran wanted to "gratify" the wishes and desires of men to point where he demeaned women , then why did Allah (swt) order responsibilities on man ? the man must provide for his wife and other women he is responsible for like his mother or sisters if not married, the man is obliged pay for the woman's wedding gift (dawry) , the man must protect his wife and other women he is responsible for....etc , I am 100% sure no man at any time enjoyed such responsibilities , let alone wish for it.

"One has to just look in Western Medieval art and see how woman is portrayed in all of her beauty without any insecurity on the part of the male. Societies thrive as man securely allows the woman to be empowered and achieve her highest potential, fully acknowledging her individuality as a human being."

There is no religion on earth that empowered women and gave them security more than Islam , Islam gave women their rights , allowed them to pursue higher education, allowed them to start business , work...etc and acknowledges them as independent human beings.

Timothy is trying to imply that man in Islam views women as 2nd class citizens , this is false , how ever the bible gives us the perfect plan on how to make women 2nd class citizens.

So according to Timothy western medieval art that portrays women in her full beauty is something good , I guess we should acknowledge pornography as a form of liberating art as well , in fact , it empowers women !

"Christianity has made this possible as in Christ there is no male or female but Christ is all in all (Galatians 3:28)."

What can Timothy say if I quote a Quranic verse that is similar to the Biblical verse he quoted ? can he object then expose his own double standards again ?

"O Mankind! We have created you from a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know one another. Verily, the most honorable of you in the Sight of Allah is the believer who has Taqwa (piety and righteousness). Verily, Allah is All-Knowing, All-Aware." [Sura 49:13]

"It is only when the dignity of the human being is fully honored, regardless how sinful and filthy this human might be, that we can, then, hope for a civilized, progressive society."

No religion did a better job in honoring human dignity and create a civilized ,progressive ,productive society more than Islam.

"Every time Mohammad was brought a woman who committed adultery, he ordered that she be stoned."

I must correct Timothy , MARRIED MAN OR WOMAN , we do not have gender discrimination in Islam , the punishment for adultery differs in Islam according to weather someone is single or married ,doesn't Timothy know this ?

If the man or woman is single then the penalty is 100 lashes , if the man or woman is married then the penalty is stoning to death.

Muhammad (pbuh) was following the law God gave , after full investigation if the charges are true then the correct punishment must take place , and these laws also work as a deterrent , I am sure we would have less porn , less AIDS and more morality if this law was implemented correctly.

so its not "every time" as Timothy said , and I still find Timothy being a double standard hypocrite , if he has a problem with following the law of God , then why doesn't he object to the old testament ? I am sure countless women got stoned in those times because of his god Jesus , where was the forgiving Jesus who allegedly saved a woman from getting stoned ? lets suppose he actually did that , he saved one women , but ordered the death of countless back in the old testament , I find this God to be a hypocrite , not a source of refinement for human beings.

"Jesus, on the other hand, would look with full compassion on the woman who was caught in the act of adultery and confront her enemies, “Which of you is without sin, let him stone her first.” Then, he gently looks at the woman and says, “Go and sin no more.”"

Again , I am only assuming this story actually happened , this story is a another well known interpolation which is not found in the earliest manuscripts .

No , I do not find the actions of Jesus here appropriate at all , in fact Jesus here has no regards to human civilization whatsoever, in civilized societies we have laws that should be followed , breaking these laws out of compassion leads to the degeneration of society and its sense of justice , we have a lot of that in the Muslim world ! this story brings Jesus out as a sinner , another question , why is Jesus NOW breaking a law he gave in the old testament (assuming he is god) ? to show compassion ? he could have not given the law in the old testament and save himself from becoming a hypocrite God.

Based on this supposed saying of Jesus, why don't we find refined Christians demanding the release of murderers , rapists , killers , thieves , drug dealers...etc ? they are sinners as well , just like the woman , and if the "sinless" one did not punish the woman , on what authority do "refined Christians" like Timothy have to punish these people in the first place ?

Christian like Timothy and other preachers quote such stories and sayings that they do not follow to throw them against non believers , how pathetic.

"Christianity keeps human dignity and elevates it while Islam in the Islamic law reduces the individual to a fly or a mosquito or a despicable nothing."

I already gave several verses that refutes this , Islam does not view individuals as a worthless low being , that is Timothy's make believe , fairytale version of Islam.

I'll add another verse to further refute this claim:

"Verily we have honored the children of Adam. We carry them on the land and the sea, and have made provision of good things for them, and have preferred them above many of those whom We created with a marked preferment." [Sura 17:70]

"As we are clothed with Christ, we look at sinners in all walks of life with deep compassion. This sinner is I. Sin is residing in all of our hearts and that is why the Blood of Christ cleanses us. The difference between me and the worst sinners is not that I am “better” or “holier” than them but that this “other” person had the chance to act out their sins while I am just guarded by and carried along by the grace of Christ."

More preaching....

"Christianity teaches me to escape this self-righteous attitude of Islam towards sinners and gently put myself in their shoes. Those “others”, unpleasant and sinful as they may be, are actually I."

Christianity teaches that you are evil and in need of redemption because you are a sinner who inherited sin from the first man who ate a fruit , and this is the religion that is supposed to respect human dignity and elevate humans ? unbelievable.

I find no fault in the self righteous attitude of Islam , Islam teaches man is born pure , we are not to view ourselves as evil , sinning machines whose good deeds are like filthy rags as Christianity teaches , and we should race with each other by performing good deeds and practice the best of ethics and moral to remain as pure as we can , and in Islam and Christianity , we both believe that sinners are in need of forgiveness from God weather believer or disbeliever.

No , other sinners are not me , I pay for my sins , my sins are my sins , every soul pays for its sins , other sinners are not I , and I am not other sinners , I thank Allah(swt) I do not have such a backward belief like what Timothy believes.

Which belief can really refine human beings and view them as dignified individuals ? a belief that presupposes you are evil or a belief that presupposes you are pure ?

"Arthur Rimbaud puts it beautifully, “Je est un autre” i.e. “I am the other”, the other is I. Christ fulfilled this when He, the Word of God, took on our human flesh and shared our humanity to the fullest degree, except for sin of course, and permitted us to receive his own “life” and take part in His divine nature."

I can go into a long discussion on how it's impossible that Jesus is God , that God never became a man , and God does not need to share humanity in its nature in order to be humble and support his creation , but this is not what we are discussing , again this is Timothy trying to preach.

What I find hilarious is that the alleged story of Jesus and woman Timothy quoted previously brings Jesus out as a sinner , if he was sinless then he would've stoned her according to the law of God , but he didn't which means he was a sinner , and if he was sinless and didn't stone her knowingly , then he broke the law of God thus making him a sinner.

"his is only to say that the greatness of Christianity lies in the fact that God who made man is actually fully siding with man, for man, and it delights Him that man be fully alive, not a crushed maggot or a slave as it is the case in Islam."

Well if Timothy's God is delighted man is alive how come he tried to kill them all in the times of Noah ?

This statement is pure garbage , Allah (swt) never viewed man a crushed maggot.

Submission , worship and service to Allah (swt) is not something bad , it is glory at its best , if Timothy knew how Muslims view their relationship with Allah (swt) he would've came up with something better than what all Christian haters of Islam say.

"St. Irenaeus eloquently expresses that, “Vivens homo gloria Dei; vita hominis, visio Dei.” i.e. “The glory of God is the living man and the life of man is the manifestation of God.” When we say that we want to give glory to God, in Islam this means that man is a negligible thing while in Christianity this means God’s longing for man/ woman to be alive, actually fully alive. His ego in Islam is inflated by crushing man"

Where is the evidence ? Timothy has nothing but false rhetoric and worthless comparisons.

I have already shown how Allah (swt) honored man and never neglected him , in fact if Allah (swt) wanted to crush man , why did he sent prophets ? and I challenge Timothy again to bring me some evidence for this garbage , show me how Allah's ego is inflated by crushing man.

"while in Christ God experiences Kenosis, i.e. self-emptiness, that is, He Almighty actually empties Himself of glory and takes on the form of a servant and dies for man on the cross. This is the ultimate expression of His divine solidarity with humans. He comes down all the way to their level and manifests Himself as the All-Humble God (Philippians 2:7)"

and does this make him some a better "god" ? this God is so unforgiving he can't forgive a man who ate a fruit , this God deserves death on a cross because its all his fault and I am not thanking him for it , assuming Christianity is true.

" as much as He is the Almighty, all-powerful God. People don’t have to work too hard to earn His approval but they are loved as they are, and His atoning love is all they have to receive, live by and enjoy forever."

I agree , all people have to do to win his approval is repent , and follow the commandments , it's not hard at all .

Conclusion

We have examined what Timothy -"former preacher of Islam- believes are key elements in the refinement of human beings , he assumed these elements do not exist in Islam , but as I have shown they exist in greater detail , Timothy used plenty of double standards and lies to conceal the glorious truth about Islam , I will repeat what I said in the beginning , I have no doubt in mind that Jesus (pbuh) preached the best of ethics and refine humane behavior suitable for the people and period he was sent to , I do not deny the ethics taught by Jesus (pbuh) in what the Christians today call the gospels and their impact , but when it comes to refining humans , no religion has taught higher ethics , standards , morals , laws and theology than Islam , no religion has a better example than prophet Muhammad (pbuh) when it comes to refine humane behavior that is suitable for all man kind , for all places and all time , Christianity might offer temporary refinement to people who never heard of Islam , but Christianity can not offer refinement to a Muslim , Islam is the pathway of refinement to a Muslim.

To all those who do not understand what I am talking about , I invite you to investigate the teachings and laws of Islam , and see for yourself why this religion is the only religion that can offer the ultimate refinement for you , me and all man-kind.

Israeli Terrorism Against America

2010-03-30T20:50:00.001+03:00

A very informative video by Dr.David Duke , it's a shame most Americans don't know about these attacks.

Please visit his website.

Taking Jews and Christians As Friends , Answering The "Ex-Devout Sura 5 Muslim"

2010-03-22T14:45:00.007+02:00

By Chaud

Fake Ex-Muslim Dr.Ergun Caner in one of his videos claims that he was a "Sura 5 Muslim" who never took Jews and Christians as friends , I have never heard of "Sura 5 Muslim" nor have I ever met one because no such Muslim exists , no Muslim who knows his/her religion understands the verse quoted from Sura 5 to mean what this Fake and many other critics of Islam want it to mean, each and everyone of them bases this false claim over a mistranslation of an Arabic word.

Sura 5 Verse 51

[يَـٰٓأَيُّہَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُواْ لَا تَتَّخِذُواْ ٱلۡيَہُودَ وَٱلنَّصَـٰرَىٰٓ أَوۡلِيَآءَ‌ۘ بَعۡضُہُمۡ أَوۡلِيَآءُ بَعۡضٍ۬‌ۚ وَمَن يَتَوَلَّهُم مِّنكُمۡ فَإِنَّهُ ۥ مِنۡہُمۡ‌ۗ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ لَا يَهۡدِى ٱلۡقَوۡمَ ٱلظَّـٰلِمِينَ]

[O ye who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for friends. They are friends one to another. He among you who taketh them for friends is (one) of them. Lo! Allah guideth not wrongdoing folk.]

The Arabic word in red "AWLIYA" ( أَوۡلِيَآءَ‌ۘ ) singular "Wali" (ولي) is associated with different meanings like alliance , guardianship , friendship , it can also mean king , sovereign , chief and many other different meanings according to the context its being used. (Source)

Unfortunately some translations of the Quran uses the word "friends" , but in the context of that verse the best translation is "guardian" or "allies" not "friends".

The Quran uses the word "Wali" (ولي) meaning "protection and guardianship" in regards to Allah (swt) in Sura 2 verse 257 and in Sura 3 verse 122 .

Other uses in the Quran include Sura 17:33 which deals with taking innocent lives , it uses the word "Wali"and translated as "authority" .

It's clear now that the word "Wali" (ولي) has a broad meaning , to determine which meaning should be used and understood we must go back to the historical context.

Dr.Muzammil Siddiqi writes in regard to the historical context :

"It is obvious that Jews patronize the Jews and Christians patronize the Christians , so why not Muslims patronize Muslims and support their own people . This verse is not telling us to be against Jews or Christians , but it is telling is that we should take care of our own people and we must support each other. In his Tafsir , Imam Ibn Kathir has mentioned that some scholars say that this verse was revealed after the battle of Uhud when Muslims had to set back . At that time , a Muslim from Madina said "I am going to live with the Jews so I shall be safe in case another attack comes on Madina ." , and another said "I am going to live with Christians so I shall be safe in case another attack comes on Madina" . So Allah (swt) revealed this verse reminding the believers that they should not seek the protection from others , but should protect each other (See Ibn Kathir , Al-Tafsir , Vol 2 page 68) "

The historical context makes it clear that the word "AWLIYA" ( أَوۡلِيَآءَ‌ۘ ) does not mean "friends" , it means "guardians" or "allies" .

Muhammad Asad writes :

"As regards the meaning of the "alliance" referred to here , which explains the reference to a believer's loss of his moral identity if he imitates the way of life of, or-in Quranic terminology-"allies himself" with, non-Muslims. However, as has been made abundantly clear in 60: 7-9 (and implied in verse 57 of this Surah), this prohibition of a "moral alliance" with non-Muslims does not constitute an injunction against normal, friendly relations with such of them as are well-disposed towards Muslims. It should be borne in mind that the term wall has several shades of meaning: "ally", "friend", "helper", "protector", etc. The choice of the particular term - and sometimes a -combination of two terms-is always dependent on the context." (Asad, The Message of the Quran)

Imam Al-Qurtubi states in his commentary on Sura 5 verse 51 :

One explanation is that this is referring to the hypocrites : 'Oh ye who believe outwardly' , and they used to assist the polytheists and tell them about the secrets of the Muslims. As-Suddi said that this verse came down during the Battle of Uhud when Muslims were afraid that they were going to lose the battle and wanted to ally themselves with the Jews and Christians. (Source)

Since I am answering the "Ex-Sura 5 Muslim" I won't go into the rest of the verses dealing with the topic of alliance and friendship in Quran , by showing that Sura 5 itself does not teach that Muslims should not take Jews and Christians as friends , I believe this is satisfactory.

Islam makes it clear that friendship and good relations with Christians and Jews (in fact with all man-kind) is allowed and advocated , we should co-exist peacefully , but we should not take them as close companions , allies or guardians if it leads away from the path of Islam or to moral degeneration , and such a close companionship is recommended if by one's moral character you are leading your friend to the path of Islam , what I find hilarious about the claim Dr.Caner made is that the bible teaches the exact same thing , see here.

I recommend the reader to check out this short video dealing with this misconception.

Western Diplomats Walk Out On Ahmadinejad Speech On Racism

2010-03-12T17:25:00.003+02:00

I wonder why they left ? I guess the reason is obvious.

Bridges' official response to screening the Islamophobic film Fitna in the British House of lords

2010-03-11T18:55:00.001+02:00

Taken from Bridges Foundation , original post over here.

“Fitnah is worse than killing” Exposing Wildes’ manipulation of the Quran
Sometimes the west fall into the trap of defaming Islam for political reasons, because they are trying to get at a group of people who happened to be Muslims, so they defame and attack the whole religion to get at this small group of people.
This article is an attempt to prove to the reader that Geert Wilders abused his audience’s ignorance of the Arabic language to inject his own convoluted misinformation about Islam and the Quran, while pretending to be telling the truth, and I want to rely on logic and evidence, I want not to appeal to emotions but rather to appeal to the reader’s sense of logic, I want the statements that I make to be justified on the basis of sound logic.
What is the meaning of Fitnah in Arabic? The Quran says: “Fitnah is greater than killing”(Quran 2:217)
Fitnah means oppression in religion, i.e. persecution of so called “heretics”. And I strongly believe that the goal behind producing such film is “Fitnah” or causing oppression in religion for a group of people who represent more than 20% of the population of this world.
Scriptures have always been abused by both followers and deniers, we can not then lay blame and rebuke only on Muslims who misunderstand or misrepresent the Quran but we should also lay similar blame and rebuke on those who manipulate the Quran and abuse it from among non Muslims.
In this article I will prove to you that the producer of FITNAH is all the time attempting to deceive his audience pushing them to oppress Muslims in their religion. In the beginning he used the verse 8:60 presenting it as a verse promoting terrorism. He played the verse using the background of 9/11 horrific scenes while highlighting the words “strike terror in the hearts of the enemies”
The entire verse reads:
“Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies, of Allah and your enemies, and others besides, whom ye may not know, but
whom Allah doth know. Whatever ye shall spend in the cause of Allah, shall be repaid unto you, and ye shall not be treated unjustly.”
But you know what? Wilders used a magical ON/OFF switch of the subtitles, starting the translation at a certain point and ends it at another in a way that gives a completely different meaning than that meant by the Quran.
“Prepare for them whatever force and calvary you are able of gathering, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies, of Allah and your enemies,” And all of a sudden he stopped, he stopped the translation alone, while the verse continues in Arabic saying “and others besides them, whom ye do not know, but whom Allah doth know.”
Did he do that on purpose by not showing “and others besides them, whom ye may not know”?? Now let me ask: how can someone fight people whom he doesn’t know as the verse states?? This verse actually encourages Muslims to have a strong army in order to avoid war rather than making war, to the enemy think twice before attacking them. The terror mentioned in the verse is striking fear of defeat in the heart of an enemy be known for Muslims or unknown for them, a fear that deters him from fighting Muslims.
But the producer intentionally took these words out of context, and he used bits and pieces to serve his goal and deceive his audience.
In the same vein, Muslims could also run horrific videos for innocent Muslim children killed after air raids in Iraq and in Afghanistan and play in the background this verse from the Bible
“Think not that I have come to send peace on the earth; I came not to send peace but a sword. For I have come to put a man against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law: And a
man will be hated by those of his house. (Mathew 10: 34-36)
Or the other verse where Jesus says:
“And as for those who were against me, who would not have me for their ruler, bring them here, and slay them before me.” (Luke 19:27)

But Muslims never did that, because it is very childish, to use the scriptures this way, scriptures should be dealt with from cover to cover, not by playing the cut & paste game to take words out of its context to defame and demonize the religion.
Wilders repeated same trick again with verse 47:4. He intentionally used bits and pieces, taking words out of context and not translating the whole Arabic verse which Arab audience can still hear in his film.
The verse was followed by the beheading of Kenneth Bigley, a British civilian who was slain in Iraq, which was condemned by all Muslim groups and scholars including the Muslim council of Britain. But of course this is something that he doesn’t mention in his film.
Again he used the verse in a way that encourages killings and beheadings of innocent people, the verse reads:
“So when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners, and afterwards either set them free as a favor or let them ransom (themselves) until the war terminates. That (shall be so); and if Allah had pleased He would certainly have exacted what is due from them, but that He may try some of you by means of others; and (as for) those who are slain in the way of Allah, He will by no means allow their deeds to perish.”
This verse, in fact, encourages Muslims to fight fiercely in war, but allows no killing of prisoners of war. The verse makes it clear that POWs should either be set free out of generosity or ransomed in exchange for Muslim POWs or for money to compensate war expenses.
But Wilders used the magical switch again, stopping the translation before the part that allows killing only during war. He again did not show the part that prevents killing prisoners by limiting the options of dealing with them after war as explained above.
He just mentioned it like that: “Therefore, when you meet the unbelievers, smite at their necks and when you have caused bloodbath among them bind a bond firmly on them” As if the Quran is telling Muslims to cut the necks of the unbelievers when they meet them in super markets not at war.
The question is why did Mr. Wilders translate a part of the verse and left the rest?
Was it intentionally to mislead the audience or unintentionally out of his ignorance?

Again and again the same thing happens with the words of Sheikh Aed Al-Qarny a renowned Muslim scholar, the Arabic speaking people can hear him saying in Wilders’ movie: “The real Jihad is that against the occupier , houses and youth will be sacrificed they will lose their heads in the path to victory”
But again Wilders is playing his dirty game, manipulating the translation, abusing the ON/OFF switch in his hand, he started the subtitles like that:
Houses and young men must be sacrificed. Throats must be slit and skulls must be shattered. This is the path to victory.
Of course ignoring the very first words that Arab speaking audience heard “The real Jihad is that against the occupier” And then the footage of a beheading, misleading his audience, by not translating for them the very first phrase “The real Jihad is that against the occupier”
I want to remind Europeans of when the Nazis occupied France and Poland and other countries, how were those people able to liberate their countries, ask the French they will tell you through "La resistance." Well, that is exactly what this scholar was saying “The real Jihad is that against the occupier” But deceiving the audience is Wilders’ main goal.
The film is also full of instigation against European Muslims by showing the bar graph starting with 54 Muslims in Netherlands in 1909 increasing to 1400 Muslims in 1960, then 450.000 in 1990, then 944.000 in 2004, then suddenly the graph jumps to 54 Million Muslims in Europe, from 54 individuals to 54 Million, but the 54 was the number in Holland alone while the 54 Millions is the number in Europe. Why didn’t he start the graph from the beginning with the number of European Muslims, which would have been in Millions, it is because he wants to shock the non Muslim audience and make them feel threatened in their countries.
Bringing a Muslim who refuses to practice adultery and homosexuality to show him as an example of a non integrating individual, is an insult to every Dutch. Does Wilders mean that every Dutch commits adultery and is a homosexual? Can’t a Dutch be loyal to his wife and be straight (feel inclined to the opposite sex)?
Wilders Said at the end of the film that in 1945 Nazism was defeated in Europe is inaccurate because someone like him is a parliamentarian in a European country.
The Quran states that the original sin is not an apple eaten from a tree, but rather the essence of racism that Satan showed when he refused to prostrate for Adam, saying to God: "I am better than him, u created me from fire and you created him from clay" Is it not the same as I am white and he is black, I am European and he is Arab, I am Arab and he is Indian.

But God expelled him out from paradise saying you can’t act as a racist here, which means that racists have no place in Paradise
Racism is the first sin and the biggest challenge that is challenging humanity today and the Quran dealt with it in the verse “Surely the most honored of you in the sight of Allah is the most righteous of you” not the men or the whites or the Arabs or the Jews.
Now let me state the following remarks:
1-The people who are working to destroy this world on both sides are not taking one day off, so how can we?
2-They are scaring us from each other, making use of our IGNORANCE about each other
3-Therefore ignorance becomes our ENEMY
4-But No one learns unless he/she admits his/her ignorance and sense the need for learning and here comes the 1st Problem on the way of learning.
5-People don’t admit their ignorance because they think it is an insult, while actually ignorance is not LACK of INTELLIGENCE but rather LACK OF INFORMATION. I have no problem admitting my ignorance about Hinduism
6-The second problem on the road of learning, is learning from Who? If anyone wants to learn how a certain dish tastes, he should ask someone who tasted that dish, therefore it is unfair to learn about Islam from third parties, I assure you that unreliable sources have made Islam by far, the most misunderstood religion in the world.
As Muslims we have fanatics who hijacked Islam and gave it a bad name with their terrible actions, but at the same time there are Europeans who hijacked Europe and are giving it a bad name by their terrible actions.
Take Denmark as an example, 3 years ago, the word Denmark was a synonym for the words tolerance & peacefulness, but today few Danes gave it a bad name, today the word Denmark for more than 1.5 Billion Muslims means hatred and racism, even though most Danes are nice and welcoming people.
The question is: Are Dutch people going to allow few of them to hijack Netherlands and give it a bad name?
The problem is that at the time Muslims are facing their fanatics, debating with them all the time and clearing themselves from them, trying to build the bridges between Muslims and non-Muslims. Not many Europeans are doing the same to their fanatics.

This is the time to challenge the west do the same, clearing them selves from fanatics and racists, debating with them and building bridges from their side.
I am afraid the gap between Muslims and non Muslims is widening quickly, and sane people on both sides should start working together to bridge that gap before it is too late.

Arab Muslims Accepting Christianity ? What Christian Authorities Have To Say.

2010-03-05T10:59:00.015+02:00

By Chaud

Note before reading : For the record I don't deny that some Arab Muslims become Christians , perhaps 1-5 every year , I do not deny that some converts to Christianity are truthful people , this paper is addressing the frauds only.

A Special Thanks to FakeExMuslims.com for posting my article here on their website , its a website that exposes mainly Dr.Ergun Caner and other fake converts like the ones I speak of in this article , please visit.

The never ending propaganda of evangelical Christians sinks into a new low , now they are claiming Arab Muslims are accepting Christianity in high numbers !

I was browsing youtube , and I discovered its full of videos trying to promote that ARABS are accepting Christianity ,like some of the convert testimonies on "A Muslim Journey To Hope" along with some news reports and random clips.

What we never often hear is what the Arab Christian religious authorities have to say about these "converts" , the following is a document written by a number of Egyptian pastors and priests , it was sent to Anba.Bishoy (Anba : is a high religious position in the Orthodox Coptic Church , equivalent to "bishop" in English. ) a well known authority in the Orthodox Coptic church in Eygpt , he serves as a pastor of several churches ,the secretary of the Holy Counsel and as the President of Saint Dumyanah monastery .

Note : It is claimed by evangelists and christian missionaries that Eygpt contains the highest number of converts to Christianity from Islam.

This is the document in Arabic (click to enlarge) :

Translation (emphasis,underline and brackets are mine) :

" Respected Anba.Bishoy , Secretary of The Holy Counsel , Bishop of The Diocese of Dumyat and Al-Barari , President of The Saint Dumyanah monastery.

Grace and Peace ,
Respected , we have already sent you many letters concerning the converts to Christianity some of our churches are accommodating and welcoming (into their care) , and we demanded your excellency to expel these converts from the care and protection of the Coptic Church for the following reasons :
Some of them accepted Christianity for the sole reason of getting a baptism certificate in order to migrate elsewhere under the claim of religious oppression and persecution , we have sent you via fax a list of their names.
Many of them want to make a high income (off their conversion) thus their acceptance of the Christianity is more like a job than accepting Christianity by faith and conviction , it's not a Church's obligation to support unemployed people who desire a better life without doing any work.
The huge amount of trouble and shameful scandals these converts are involved in , like the involvement of the convert Carmen in a forbidden relation with Boula Fu'ad -The Pastor of The Bilina Church- and the involvement of Makaree Yunan -The Pasor of The Azbakiyeh Church- in a sexual relationship with the convert Zainab in which her husband the convert Muhammad Hijazi filmed them and blackmailed Father Makaree into paying him , a list of the amounts Muhammad Hijazi blackmailed has been sent to you .
Respected , the majority of these converts are of weak and hesitant natures , they are willing to sell their most precious for money ,there is no reason for the Church to protect or support them , there are other Christians who deserve our priority (attention) over these converts ,and I wish knowing that my wish will never come true , if his holiness the Pope can offer Shiek Al-Azhar an exchange of converts , we take one convert and they take ten.

Respected ,We hope you consider the issue of these converts seriously.

Issued on Sep 6th 2008 . "

I got nothing more to add , even Christian authorities are noticing that many these "converts" are gold digging frauds with no morals and dignity .

Can evangelists and missionaries who make all kinds of crazy claims like "Jesus is doing miracles among the Arab Muslims" be as honest as these Coptic priests and church fathers are ? Only time will tell .

The Holocaust Card - Norman Finkelstein

2010-02-15T16:37:00.003+02:00

This is small clip from "American Radical: The Trials of Norman Finkelstein" a documentary about Dr.Norman Finkelstein .

I have to say the holocaust card - as the Jews like to play it - does not make sense whatsoever , how does the massacre of people (Jews included) back in World War 2 equals the demand to support Israel (and excuse this satanic entity of a state) in and for its atrocities here and now in 2010 ?

But I have to give the girl my acknowledgment , she is a great actress and the best example brainwashed Zionist .

Frankly I think Zionist Jews should be happy to be called "Nazi" , because by comparison with Nazi Germany , this is a complement .

Quoting user damien from this entry (as if he/she took the words out of my mouth) :

"What the Nazis and the imperialist slaughter of the Jewish people in Europe have to do with the brutalization and occupation of the Palestinians(funded by the US)is truly beyond me.Perhaps people studying at these universities(degree factories) need to each be given a copy of Howard Zinn’s magnum opus and asked to work out how history really works.Very easy really-colonial settler state stealing land,torturing and imprisoning at will = Israel. Oppressed people = Palestinians.The violence of the oppressed should never be compared with the violence of the oppressor.They are not equal.And the constant harking back to World War 2 is just nuts.Are there no other precedents?The war against the Native Americans?The situation in South Africa?The invasion,occupation and dispossession of the Aborigines here in Australia?Of course,these precedents are never referred to as they are not used ad nauseum like the Saving Private Ryan view of history which our ‘betters’ use to blind us to the truth."

"Refuting David Wood on Tafsir of the Quran" By Ozzycda

2010-02-10T10:09:00.000+02:00

Thanks to brother Collin for allowing me to share the video , and I thank him for his efforts , may Allah (swt) accept.

Brother Collin made an excellent 35 minute video in response to another video on youtube which was a segment from "Jesus or Muhammad ?" , a tv show on the Aramaic broadcasting network which aims to evangelize Muslims here in the middle east (and horribly failing....) . Brother Collin's video is worth listening to , he deals with many of the major errors of Sam Shamoun (answering-islam.org) and David Wood (answeringmuslims.com) in dealing with Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Methodology of Understanding the Quran and The Abrogation Myth (Sura 9:29 abrogating Sura 2:56), along with other points .

I have a couple of comments :

1- Tele-Evangelism in the middle east has been going down the drain ever since Muslims have been calling live Tv shows and exposing ( in many cases "humiliating" ) the host and speakers , especially on channels like Sat 7 , Mu'jiza and ABN , its seems to me like Sam and David are what they call their "big guns" unfortunately for them Muslims in the Middle East are still not falling for it, and frankly resorting to David Wood and Sam Shamoun to evangelize English speaking Muslims in the Middle East is desperation at its best.

2- Usually The Muslim doesn't have a chance to speak and explain him/herself while the christian can do what he/she wants , I don't know if this happened in the original video but since I watch Christian missionary Tv all the time , its hard not to notice this (This happens a lot on Al-Hayat) .

3- I find the name of this show highly offensive , "Jesus or Muhammad ?" , what the hell ? Muslims don't have a concept of 'this prophet or that' , Muslims believe in Muhammad and Jesus Peace be upon them both , and follow them both , this show should be called something a bit closer to the reality of the whole thing.....hmmm...something like :

"Muhammad or The Mythical Man-God of the New Testament ?"

Now that's more like it !

4- David's acting skills are awesome.....Abrogation !!!!!! yeah David exposed Islam ! , he really knows how to sound scholarly when making erroneous mistakes , David does a nice trick in the video where he uses an actual case of abrogation to build up a case for the abrogation myth , not knowing that abrogation ONLY DEALS WITH LAWS AND RULINGS (Shari'a) RELATED VERSES , not with original teachings of Islam like Sura 2:256 , listen to Collin's video to see what I mean , When will christian apologists learn that Sura 2:256 IS NOT EVEN ABROGATE-ABLE ? , this is a long topic but to sum up the whole thing in a nut shell , Abrogated verses must not contain any of the attributes and names of Allah (swt) according to scholars , because abrogation is "cancellation" , and you can't cancel God nor can any verse cancel his own being and attributes , its illogical for God to cancel one of his attribute because God doesn't change , lets take at look at Sura 2:256

[ لَآ إِكۡرَاهَ فِى ٱلدِّينِ‌ۖ قَد تَّبَيَّنَ ٱلرُّشۡدُ مِنَ ٱلۡغَىِّ‌ۚ فَمَن يَكۡفُرۡ بِٱلطَّـٰغُوتِ وَيُؤۡمِنۢ بِٱللَّهِ فَقَدِ ٱسۡتَمۡسَكَ بِٱلۡعُرۡوَةِ ٱلۡوُثۡقَىٰ لَا ٱنفِصَامَ لَهَا‌ۗ وَٱللَّهُ سَمِيعٌ عَلِيمٌ ]

[ Let there be no compulsion in religion. Truth stands out clear from Error; whoever rejects Evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things. ]

This verse doesn't even satisfy the conditions for abrogation , if this is abrogated , then some scholar who didn't understand the Quran correctly is actually saying that Allah doesn't hear and know all things , which is absurd and rejected by all Muslims , Collin goes into more detail .

5- By the end of the video , I don't think anyone can believe David and Sam deal with the Quran in an honest way , or even a scholarly way.

6- "BAD DAVID WOOD" , LOL !

Here is the video :

Brother Collin's Youtube Page (subscribe , his videos are great and full of useful info) .

http://www.youtube.com/user/ozzycda

Brother Collin's Blog (check it out , his book collection is recommended) :

http://ozzycda.blogspot.com/

Allah(swt) swearing by his own creatures in the Quran...or is it the Bible ?

2010-02-07T18:23:00.000+02:00

By Chaud

When reading the Quran we can obviously see that God is the supreme being , there is doubt about it , this is represented in many verses in the Quran , for example :

[ ٱللَّهُ لَآ إِلَـٰهَ إِلَّا هُوَ ٱلۡحَىُّ ٱلۡقَيُّومُ‌ۚ لَا تَأۡخُذُهُ ۥ سِنَةٌ۬ وَلَا نَوۡمٌ۬‌ۚ لَّهُ ۥ مَا فِى ٱلسَّمَـٰوَٲتِ وَمَا فِى ٱلۡأَرۡضِ‌ۗ مَن ذَا ٱلَّذِى يَشۡفَعُ عِندَهُ ۥۤ إِلَّا بِإِذۡنِهِۦ‌ۚ يَعۡلَمُ مَا بَيۡنَ أَيۡدِيهِمۡ وَمَا خَلۡفَهُمۡ‌ۖ وَلَا يُحِيطُونَ بِشَىۡءٍ۬ مِّنۡ عِلۡمِهِۦۤ إِلَّا بِمَا شَآءَ‌ۚ وَسِعَ كُرۡسِيُّهُ ٱلسَّمَـٰوَٲتِ وَٱلۡأَرۡضَ‌ۖ وَلَا يَـُٔودُهُ ۥ حِفۡظُهُمَا‌ۚ وَهُوَ ٱلۡعَلِىُّ ٱلۡعَظِيمُ (٢٥٥ ]

[ Allah! there is no Allah but He―the living, the Self-subsisting, Eternal. No slumber can seize him nor sleep. His are all things in the heavens and on earth. Who is there can intercede in His presence except as He permitteth? He knoweth what (appeareth to His creatures as) Before or After or Behind them. Nor shall they compass aught of His knowledge except as He willeth. His Throne doth extend over the heavens and the earth, and He feeleth no fatigue in guarding and preserving them. For He is the Most High, the Supreme (in glory). (255) ] Sura 2 :255

[ هُوَ ٱللَّهُ ٱلَّذِى لَآ إِلَـٰهَ إِلَّا هُوَ ٱلۡمَلِكُ ٱلۡقُدُّوسُ ٱلسَّلَـٰمُ ٱلۡمُؤۡمِنُ ٱلۡمُهَيۡمِنُ ٱلۡعَزِيزُ ٱلۡجَبَّارُ ٱلۡمُتَڪَبِّرُ‌ۚ سُبۡحَـٰنَ ٱللَّهِ عَمَّا يُشۡرِڪُونَ (٢٣) هُوَ ٱللَّهُ ٱلۡخَـٰلِقُ ٱلۡبَارِئُ ٱلۡمُصَوِّرُ‌ۖ لَهُ ٱلۡأَسۡمَآءُ ٱلۡحُسۡنَىٰ‌ۚ يُسَبِّحُ لَهُ ۥ مَا فِى ٱلسَّمَـٰوَٲتِ وَٱلۡأَرۡضِ‌ۖ وَهُوَ ٱلۡعَزِيزُ ٱلۡحَكِيمُ (٢٤) ]

[ 22. Allah is He, than Whom there is no other god;- Who knows (all things) both secret and open; He, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.

23. Allah is He, than Whom there is no other god;- the Sovereign, the Holy One, the Source of Peace (and Perfection), the Guardian of Faith, the Preserver of Safety, the Exalted in Might, the Irresistible, the Supreme: Glory to Allah. (High is He) above the partners they attribute to Him.

24. He is Allah, the Creator, the Evolver, the Bestower of Forms (or Colours). To Him belong the Most Beautiful Names: whatever is in the heavens and on earth, doth declare His Praises and Glory: and He is the Exalted in Might, the Wise. ] Sura 59 : 22-24

and others .

Yet a number of christian critics of Islam tend to attack the concept of God in Islam with a certain allegation that goes like this (or close to it) :

"If the God of the Quran is supreme , why do we find him swearing by creatures and creations that are lower than him ? "

Such a claim has been put forth by many Christian apologists like my favorite missionary Rashid did in several episodes questioning Islamic monothiesm and the concept of God in Islam and Christianity , along with a youtube video he posted discussing the Quran in the Moroccan ascent and Anis Shorrosh in his debate with Shabir Ally entitled "Allah or Trinity" .

I've only seen Arabic speaking Christians put it forth , 'till this day I haven't seen an non-Arabic speaking using it in a public debate, the reason is that they understand the different meanings of the letter "waw" "و" in the Arabic language , one of these meanings is "waw al-qasam" "واو القسم" , which is used for swearing.

to answer this allegation first we look at the biblical God , and I'm surprised to find him doing the exact same thing :

[ The LORD has sworn by the Pride of Jacob : "I will never forget anything they have done. ] Amos 8:7

Therefore there is no good reason for any Christian to object against Allah (swt) swearing by a lower creation , since he swore by the pride of Jacob in the Old Testament , and pride is definitely a lower creation created by God, and God is still to supreme being in the bible , the case is closed .

"Islamic Monothiesm And Missionary Desperation" - An Introduction To Up Coming Article Series.

2010-02-01T21:17:00.000+02:00

By Chaud

It seems like missionaries are desperate to find any 'stick' to beat Islam with , some fools are actually making the claim that Muslims are Mushriks (Shirk: Associating God with another in his divinity and attributes) according to Islam or according to common logic , I was scrolling down Daring Question episodes when I saw number of episodes which are implying the same charge ,those episodes are :

and because I'm on the same topic I'd like to turn the tables on Rachid and refute the following episode as well :

Episode 064 "The Concept of "Tawheed" in Christianity".

I saw other episodes that can be related and linked to this topic , like their criticism of the Kaba' , Jesus in Islam and Christianity , The Basis of the Incarnation Doctrine...etc , but for now I'll be dealing with the episodes that go straight into the topic like these 4 episodes I mentioned , the other episodes will be scheduled for a later time .

I find this objection to be hilarious coming from a trinitarian ! and one who is supposedly an ex-muslim , I'll be busy checking out their arguments for a while , See you all later .

" A 7th Century War On Terror " By Adnan Rashid

2010-02-01T20:35:00.000+02:00

By Adnan Rashid

This article is borrowed from 'Hitten Institute'

'What is there now, I ask of delight in this world? Everywhere we observe strife; fields are depopulated, the land has returned to solitude…And yet the blows of Divine justice have no end, because among the blows those guilty of evil acts are not corrected…’ [1]
These are the words of Pope Gregory the Great (c. 594) who was a contemporary of the Prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him). He was clearly wishing for divine justice to emerge in order to correct the evildoers i.e. the Lombard tyrants in this case. The Divine intervention was at hand:
“And We have sent you (O Muhammad [SA]) not but as a mercy to mankind”[2]
And mercy he was. The Messenger of Allah received the above revelation not long after the disturbing plea of the Pope and this revelation was a signal for the Prophet to initiate a war against terror and tyranny. Islam emerged as a power and in a very short period of time took over large portions of land from the surrounding establishments. Prophet Muhammad died in 632 CE and exactly a century later in 732 CE the Muslims had reached as far as Southern France and Northern China. This was the largest and the fastest expansion the world had ever known and it was made possible only by the justice and mercy the Muslims had to offer, as will be amply demonstrated in the following paragraphs.
It may be puzzling to some who may question how the Muslims were able to conquer such a large portion of land so rapidly without much difficulty? A Muslim believer would give an easy and simple answer to this question by quoting the Qur’an:
“Allah has promised those among you who believe and do righteous good deeds, that he will certainly grant them succession (to the present rulers) in the land, as He granted it to those before them, and that He will grant them authority to practise their religion which he has chosen for them(Islam).”[3]
History testifies that this is precisely what occurred and here one must note that the Arabs, at the time, were the least able people to achieve this, primarily, due to the lack of military equipment and resources. Carole Hillenbrand, a leading Arabist/historian from the University of Edinburgh, confirms this:
‘Much ink has been spilt on the phenomenon of the Islamic conquest, but few firm conclusions can be drawn…It seems unlikely that the Arabs possessed military superiority over their opponents. Certainly, they had no secret weapon, no new techniques. Indeed, in some military spheres they were inexperienced; they allegedly learned siege warfare, for example, from the Persians. They were also unfamiliar with how to fight naval engagements.’[4]

Even the contemporary Christian writers could not offer a reasonable explanation and attributed this rapid expansion of the Islamic governance to Divine intervention. John Bar Penkaye (690 CE), a contemporary of the early Islamic conquest, had this to say:
‘We should not think of the advent (of the children of Hagar) as something ordinary, but as due to divine working. Before calling them, (God) had prepared them beforehand to hold Christians in honour; thus they also had a special commandment from God concerning our monastic station, that they should hold it in honour. Now when these people came, at God’s command, and took over as it were both kingdoms, not with any war or battle, but in a menial fashion, such as when a brand is rescued out of the fire, not using weapons of war or human means, God put victory into their hands in such a way that the words written them might be fulfilled, namely, “One man chased a thousand and two routed ten thousand.” How otherwise, could naked men, riding without armour or shield, have been able to win, apart from divine aid, God having called them from the ends of the earth so as to destroy, by them “a sinful kingdom” and to bring low, through them, the proud spirit of the Persians.’[5]
Byzantines and the Persians were utterly uprooted by these ill-equipped nomads. European scholarship is still perplexed about the causes that led to the early Islamic conquest. To a sceptical historian or a conditioned rationalist, Divine intervention could never be entertained as a logical or even a scientific hypothesis. Such people require a historical justification, which is based upon political and socio-economic factors.

Tolerance or Terror:

In light of this there is a very reasonable explanation: The Muslims, when expanding, treated the non-Muslim inhabitants of vanquished nations with a previously uncharted level of tolerance, which in consequence encouraged the non-Muslim societies to embrace the approaching armies with open arms. Professor Thomas Walker Arnold gives an interesting account of such an occurrence. He states:
‘When the Muslim army reached the valley of the Jordan and Abu Ubaydah pitched his camp at Fihl, the Christian inhabitants of the country wrote to the Arabs, saying: “O Muslims, we prefer you to the Byzantines, though they are of our own faith, because you keep better faith with us and are more merciful to us and refrain from doing us injustice and your rule over us is better than theirs, for they have robbed us of our goods and our homes.” The people of Emessa closed the gates of their city against the army of Heraclius and told the Muslims that they preferred their government and justice to the injustice and oppression of the Greeks…The fear of religious compulsion on the part of the heretical emperor made the promise of Muslim toleration appear more attractive than the connection with the Roman Empire and a Christian government…’[6]
Perhaps, it was these facts, which persuaded Thomas Arnold to conclude:
‘Of forced conversion or anything like persecution in the early days of the Arab conquest, we hear nothing. Indeed, it was probably in a great measure their tolerant attitude towards the Christian religion that facilitated their rapid acquisition of the country.’[7]
So the Muslims were in fact seen as liberators from the Roman/Byzantine tyranny. As far as the Syrian Christians were concerned, the Muslims were carrying out a noble war on terror.

Syria rescued from the Byzantine terror:
Dionysius of Tel-Mahre, a Jacobite (or a Syrian Orthodox Christian) patriarch from 818 to 845 CE, also gave some reasons of this preference of the Muslims over Romans by the people of Syria. He stated in his chronicle, which covers the period from 582 to 842 CE, that Heraclius mustered 300,000 troops from Armenia, Syria and the Roman heartlands to expel the Muslims out of Syria. Muslims decided to withdraw to reform their war strategy. However, whilst withdrawing, the Muslims decided, out of fairness, to refund the money, which they had taken as tribute from the Syrian Christians to protect them from any form of oppression:
‘Abu Ubaydah, whom Umar had put in command of the Arabs, ordered Habib b. Maslama to return to the Emesenes the tribute which he had exacted from them with this message: “We are both bound by our mutual oaths. Now we are going to do battle with the Romans. If we return, this tribute is ours; but if we are defeated and do not return, we are absolved of our oaths.” So they left Emessa for Damascus; and the emir Abu Ubaydah ordered Saeed b. Kulthum to return the tribute to the Damascenes likewise…To them he said: “ If we return victorious we shall take it back. But if we are defeated and prove powerless to save you from the Romans, here is your tribute, keep it. We for our part shall be absolved of the oaths which we have sworn to you.”’[8]
One must note that this was taking place in 7th century Syria where plunder, robbery and injustice were a common occurrence and what is mentioned above is quoted from a mid 9th century Christian source (which testifies that the Muslims did not abuse power and they did not betray the trust Christians bestowed upon them). Thomas Arnold adds, from an Islamic source (Abu Yusuf, Kitabul Khiraj [The Book of Taxes]), that
‘In accordance with this order, enormous sums were paid back out of the state treasury, and the Christians called down blessings on the heads of the Muslims, saying, “May God give you rule over us again and make you victorious over the Romans; had it been they, they would not have given us back anything, but would have taken all that remained with us”’[9]
It would be fair to assert here that those Muslims acted in accordance with the teachings of the Qur’an:
‘Verily, Allah commands that you should render back the trusts to those, to whom they are due; and that when you judge between men, you judge with justice. Verily, how excellent is the teaching, which He gives you! Truly, Allah is ever all- Hearer, all-Seer.’[10]
Dionysius of Tel-Mahre confirms the accuracy of Abu Yusuf:
‘So the Arabs left Damascus and pitched camp by the river Yarmuk. As the Romans marched towards the Arab camp every city and village on their way which had surrendered to the Arabs shouted threats at them. As for crimes the Romans committed on their passage, they are unspeakable, and their unseemliness ought not even to be brought to mind…The Arabs returned, elated with their great victory, to Damascus; and the Damascenes greeted them outside the city and welcomed them joyfully in, and all treaties and assurances were reaffirmed. ’[11]
It is very clear from Dionysius’ testimony that the Romans were extremely oppressive towards the non-Chalcedonian Christian population of Syria, which caused this population to prefer the Muslim tolerance over the Byzantine terror. Muslims, in most, cases treated the minor Christian sects of Syria with maximum justice and sympathy, which enabled all parties to live in peace for the first time for a long time. For most of the Jacobite and Nestorian Christians in Syria, Muslim arrival was a God sent retribution against the Byzantine terrorist establishment.

Egypt saved from the Chalcedonian persecution:
The same seems to have taken place in Egypt where, according to Dionysius, the Coptic Patriarch submitted Egypt voluntarily to the Muslims:
‘We have found in the tales and stories of Egyptians that Benjamin, the Patriarch of the Orthodox in Egypt at the time, delivered the country to the Arab general Amr b. al-As out of antipathy, that is enmity, towards Cyrus, the Chalcedonian (Byzantine) Patriarch in Egypt.’[12]
This enmity, however, was due to the persecution of the Orthodox Church in Egypt at the hands of the Byzantine Church. John of Nikiou (690 CE), who was a Coptic bishop in Nikiu (Egypt), confirmed the testimony of Dionysius:
‘When Muslims saw the weakness of the Romans and the hostility of the people to the emperor Heraclius because of the persecution wherewith he had visited all the land of Egypt in regard to the orthodox faith at the instigation of Cyrus the Chalcedonian Patriarch [in office 631/2-41], they became bolder and stronger in the war…And people began to help the Muslims.’[13]
And in some cases the Egyptians refused to fight the Muslims at all [14]. One must keep in mind that these are contemporary Christian sources testifying that the Muslims were actually being helped by the Egyptian Orthodox Coptic Christians to put the Chalcedonian Byzantine Christian persecution to rest. Alfred J. Butler, a leading authority on the history of Egypt, believed that the Muslim arrival benefited both Christian factions by enabling them to live in peace together under the Islamic protection:
‘After all that the Copts had suffered at the hands of the Romans and the Patriarch Cyrus, it would not have been unnatural if they had desired to retaliate upon the Melkites [the Romans]. But any such design, if they cherished it, was sternly discountenanced by ‘Amr, [the Muslim conqueror of Egypt] whose government was wisely tolerant but perfectly impartial between the two forms of religion. Many facts might be cited in proof of this contention…So that the two forms of Christianity must be imagined as subsisting side by side under the equal protection of the conquerors.’[15]
It is evident from the testimonies cited above that the Muslims came as a mercy for the wider Egyptian population. The Coptic Christians in Egypt were also a target for the Byzantine terror and it was this terror which caused the Copts to join the Muslims against their co-religionists. ‘Amr bin al-‘Aas (may Allah be pleased with him) had established a peaceful abode for all parties and this he did by implementing the Shariah Law in Egypt. Thus the real operation “Enduring Freedom” was accomplished successfully in the land of Pharaohs.

Spain liberated from the Visigothic tyranny:
Muslims landed in Spain in 711 CE and many sources testify that they were welcomed by the population, as their reputation preceded them. This was due to the severe persecution afflicted upon certain communities by the Visigothic Kings. Under these kings’ rule (following their conversion to Catholicism from Arianism), the Jewish community, in particular, was severely oppressed. The Catholic hierarchy in Spain held many ecumenical councils to solve political and religious disputes and in these councils (many held in Toledo), severe edicts were issued against the Jews of Spain. One of the clauses in the text of the proceedings of the 4th Council of Toledo (633 CE) states,
‘We decree that the sons and daughters of the Jews should be separated from the company of their parents in order that they should not become further entangled in their deviation, and entrusted either to monasteries or to Christian, God fearing men and women, in order that they should learn from their way of life to venerate the faith and, educated on better things, progress in their morals as well as their faith.’ [16]

Zion Zohar, an American Jewish historian, confirms the Jewish appreciation of the Muslim arrival in this way:
‘Thus, when Muslims crossed the straits of Gibraltar from North Africa in 711 CE and invaded the Iberian Peninsula, Jews welcomed them as liberators from Christian Persecution’. [17]
And what did this liberty bring for the Jews in the subsequent centuries? Was this liberty similar to the one the U.S government has delivered to the Iraqis, resulting in mass murder and abuse of prisoners, or was it a freedom that was deeply ingrained in Islamic values such as justice and tolerance? Zion Zohar has an answer:
‘Born during this era of Islamic rule, the famous Golden Age of Spanish Jewry (circa 900-1200) produced such luminaries as: statesman and diplomat Hasdai ibn Shaprut, vizier and army commander Shmuel ha-Nagid, poet-philosophers Solomon Ibn Gabriol and Judah Halevi, and at the apex of them all, Moses Ben Maimon, also known among the Spaniards as Maimonides [who is Known as the second Moses among the Jews].’[18]
Thus the Jews were treated with fairness and Justice in Islamic Spain unlike the rest of Europe and it was this fair treatment which produced the famous Golden Age for the House of Jacob, which they appreciate to this day.
Heinrich Graetz, a 19th century Jewish historian expressed similar sentiments regarding Muslims in Spain:
‘It was in these favourable circumstances that the Spanish Jews came under the rule of Mahometans, as whose allies they esteemed themselves the equals of their co-religionists in Babylonia and Persia. They were kindly treated, obtained religious liberty, of which they had so long been deprived, were permitted to exercise jurisdiction over their co-religionists, and were only obliged, like the conquered Christians, to pay poll tax (Dsimma)’[19]…Jewish Spain became “the place of civilization and of spiritual activity- a garden of fragrant, joyous, and happy poetry, as well as the seat of earnest research and clear thought.” Like the Arabian Christians (the Christians who lived amongst the Mahometans) the Jews made themselves acquainted with the language and literature of their conquerors, and often got precedence over them. But whilst Arabian Christians gave up their own individuality, forgot their own language- Gothic Latin- and could not even read the creeds, and were ashamed of Christianity, the Jews of Spain were so little affected through this contact with Arabs, that it only served to increase their love and enthusiasm for their mother tongue, their holy law, and their religion. Through favourable circumstances Jewish Spain was in a position at first to rival Babylonia, then to supersede it, and finally to maintain its superiority for nearly five hundred years.’[20]
In Islamic Spain, even the Christians preferred Islamic government (based upon Shariah Law) over that of the Franks. This assertion appears to be quite reasonable when the views of Reinhart Dozy, an authority on the early Islamic Spain, are taken into consideration:
‘The unbounded tolerance of the Arabs must also be taken into account. In religious matters they put pressure on no man…Christians preferred their rule to that of the Franks.’[21]
Ulick R. Burke, a prominent historian specializing in the history of Spain, reached a similar conclusion:
‘Christians did not suffer in any way, on account of their religion, at the hands of Moors…not only perfect toleration but nominal equality was the rule of the Arabs in Spain.’[22]
This tolerance had an immense impact on the Christian population of Spain, many of them converted to Islam and those who did not adopted the Islamic culture in regards to literature and lifestyle. This is emphatically substantiated by the 9th century Spanish Christian writer, Paul Alvarus (who was writing in the 850’s at Cordova):
‘The Christians love to read the poems and romances of the Arabs; they study the Arab theologians and philosophers, not to refute them but to form a correct and elegant Arabic. Where is the layman who now reads the Latin commentaries on the Holy Scriptures, or who studies the Gospels, prophets or apostles? Alas! All talented young Christians read and study with enthusiasm the Arab books; they gather immense libraries at great expense; they despise the Christian literature as unworthy of attention. They have forgotten their own language. For every one who can write a letter in Latin to a friend, there are a thousand who can express themselves in Arabic with elegance, and write better poems in his language then the Arabs themselves.’[23]
Most of the aforementioned opinions indicate that the Muslim arrival in Spain liberated the masses from a deep slumber of ignorance and oppression. Prior to the Islamic emergence, the Catholic Spanish establishment was known for persecuting the Jews and minor Christian sects. The Muslims changed all of that and what followed was the appearance of a true renaissance that enabled Jews, Muslims and Christians to live in peace for centuries. Maria Rosa Menocal, one of the authorities on medieval European literature, decided to title her work (which describes how the Abrahamic faiths co-existed peacefully during the Islamic era) the “Ornament of the world”[24]; the phrase was used by Hroswitha (a 10th century German nun) to describe Islamic Spain[25]. Thus, Islam came as a mercy for the people of Iberian Peninsula, who welcomed the new rulers as liberators for the tyranny of the Visigoths.

A 7th century War on Terror:

One may question as to why was it that the Muslims were invading these lands and removing the already existing governments from power? It must be recognized that most of the 7th/8th century powers were guilty of oppression against their own subjects. The Qur’an provides one of the reasons, which caused the early Muslims to intervene:
‘And what is wrong with you that you fight not in the cause of Allah, and for those weak, ill-treated and oppressed among men, women and children, whose cry is: “Our Lord! Rescue us from this town whose people are oppressors; and raise for us from You one who will help”’[26]
The Muslims were thus charged to carry out a war on terror in order to liberate the weak and oppressed and they duly fulfilled the Qur’anic injunction (it has been substantiated above that the populations of some of the countries Muslims took were severely oppressed by their rulers and it was due to this reason that they welcomed the Muslims as liberators). However, in this 7th century war against terror there was no oil or re-construction/destruction contracts involved. An objective approach to the subject will lead to similar findings. Perhaps the views of the Nestorian Patriarch of Khurasan in the 7th century, Ishoyabh III, will help elucidate upon this more. He addressed a letter to Simeon, the Primate of Persia, where he wrote:
‘and the Arabs, to whom God at this time has given the empire of the world, behold, they are among you, as ye know well: and yet they attack not the Christian faith, but, on the contrary, they favour our religion, do honour to our priests and the saints of the Lord, and confer benefits on churches and monasteries.’[27]
Usually exploitation and plunder of resources follows an invasion, as can clearly be seen in the case of the colonial period and modern day Iraq (Iraq’s most precious Baghdad museum was plundered following the US invasion (2003) and the 7000 years history of Mesopotamian civilisation was lost). Did Muslims follow the same precedence? Adam Smith, the 18th century founding father of modern capitalism (whose portrait is illustrated on the back of the current £20 note), did not think so:
‘The ruin of the empire of the Romans, and, along with it the subversion of all law and order, which happened a few centuries afterwards, produced the entire neglect of that study of the connecting principles of nature, to which leisure and security can alone give occasion. After the fall of those great conquerors and the civilisers of mankind, the empire of the Caliphs seems to have been the first state under which the world enjoyed that degree of tranquillity, which the cultivation of the sciences requires. It was under the protection of those generous and magnificent princes, that the ancient philosophy and astronomy of the Greeks were restored and established in the East; that tranquillity, which their mild, just and religious government diffused over their vast empire, revived the curiosity of mankind, to inquire into the connecting principles of nature.’[28]
Adam Smith (1723-1790) was one of the most outstandingly intelligent economists of his time. His works such as “The Theory of Moral Sentiments” and “An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations” are thought to be among the cornerstones of Western literature. The latter work (which is the most popular work in the field of economics to this day) seems to be very much concerned with an inquiry into how certain nations acquire prosperity. Some of the ways of acquiring prosperity and scientific advancement, which he expressed in the aforementioned quote, are security, the sense of tranquillity and justice; and Adam Smith believed that the mild, just and religious government of the Muslim Caliphs (who governed with Shariah Law) revived the curiosity of mankind to attain all kind of benefits from nature. The critics and the so called modern reformers of Islam need to pay heed to Adam Smith’s words and see whether he was reasonable in his conclusion in this regard. If Islam enabled mankind to achieve a high level of prosperity in those days, it still contains the potential to repeat the same today. One has to observe, in the light of history and contemporary reports, whether the present war on terror really is a war on terror or the 7th century Islamic war on terror better qualifies to be called “a war on terror”. If one was to examine objectively, one will find the 7th century war on terror to be a better choice, as today we do not see any positive outcome of the so called “21st century war on terror” but in the 7th century Muslims weakened the Byzantine, Persian and Visigothic terror to replace it by what, in the case of Spain, Adam Smith describes as scientific enlightenment for Europe:
“The victorious arms of the Saracens [Latin synonym for a Muslim] carried into Spain the learning as well as the gallantry, of the East; and along with it, the tables of Almamon, and the Arabian translations of Ptolemy and Aristotle; and thus Europe received a second time, from Babylon, the rudiments of the sciences of the heavens. The writings of Ptolemy were translated from Arabic into Latin; and the Peripatetic philosophy was studied in Averroes [Ibn Rushd] and Avicenna [Ibn Sina] with as much eagerness and as much submission to its doctrines in the West, as it had been in the East.”[29]

References

[1] Pope Gregory I quoted by Mohammad Farooq Kemal, The Crescent vs The Cross, Lahore, 1997, P. 7.
[2] The Quran, Surah AL-Anbiya 21, verse 107.
[3] The Quran, Surah an-Noor 24, verse 55.
[4] Carole Hillenbrand, Muhammad and the rise of Islam, The New Cambridge Medieval History, 2005, vol 1, p. 340.
[5] John Bar Penkaye, quoted by Walter E. Kaegi, Byzantium and the Early Islamic Conquest, Cambirdge, 2000, p. 216.
[6] T. W. Arnold, Preaching of Islam, London, 1913, p. 55.
[7] Ibid, p. 132-4.
[8] Dionysius of Tel-Mahre, The Seventh Century in the West-Syrian Chronicles, tr by Palmer, Liverpool, 1993, p. 156-7.
[9] T. W. Arnold, Preaching of Islam, London, 1913, p. 61.
[10] The Quran, Surah 4 An-Nisa, Verse 58.
[11] Dionysius of Tel-Mahre, The Seventh Century in the West-Syrian Chronicles, tr by Palmer, Liverpool, 1993, p. 157.
[12] Ibid, p. 158
[13] John of Nikiou, quoted by Petra M. Sijpesteijn, Egypt in the Byzantine World, Cambridge, 2007, p. 442.
[14] Ibid, see footnote 28.
[15] Alfred J. Butler, The Arab Conquest of Egypt and the Last Thirty Years of the Roman Dominion, 1902, Oxford, p. 447-8.
[16] The Jews in the Legal Sources of the Early Middle Ages, edited by Amnon Linder, New York, 1997, p.488.
[17] Zion Zohar, Sephardic & Mizrahi Jewry, New York, 2005, p. 8-9.
[18] Ibid, p. 9.
[19] H. Graetz, History of the Jews, London, 1892, Vol 3, p. 112.
[20] Ibid, p. 220.
[21] Reinhart Dozy, A History of Muslims in Spain, 1861 (reprinted 1913, 2002), Delhi, p.235.
[22] Ulick R. Burke, A History of Spain, London, 1900, vol I, p. 129.
[23] Paul Alvarus quoted by Maria Rosa Menocal, Ornament of the world, New York, 2003, p.66.
[24] Maria Rosa Menocal, Ornament of the world, New York, 2003.
[25] Stanley Lane-Poole, The Moors in Spain, London, 1920, p. 144.
[26] The Quran, Surah An-Nisa 4, verse 75.
[27] Ishoyabh III quoted by T. W. Arnold, Preaching of Islam, London, 1913, p. 81-82.
[28] The Essays of Adam Smith, London, 1869, p. 353.
[29] Ibid, p. 354.