Islam's hateful and violent core is the perfect panacea for violent and criminal misfits, and that's why so many violent criminals are converting to Islam in the West.....
In the West, Islam is very attractive to violent hateful and socially misfit individuals. Here are some examples.
NICK RILEY
One such individual in England is Nick Riley—a fat misfit, who was rejected by the girls, whom he was attracted to. He started hating those, who were able to make out. The miserable and unhappy slob wanted to kill the successful happy people around him. He found Islam and loved its ideology of hate, violence, murder and suicide-bombing and the great reward of sex with 72 virgins with swelling breasts for killing kuffar promised by Allah for bloodshed. He could get something in paradise, which he desired badly but was unable to get here. He communicated with jihadis in Pakistan and planned a suicide bombing mission. Here is a news report video on him:
FRITZ GELOWICZ AND DANIEL SCNEIDER
They were two weirdoes and misfits, who were attracted to Islam for its very violent God and prophet, and the guarantees of joys in paradise for killing and bloodshed... They formed an Islamic terror-cell with two other misfit converts and planned a 9/11 to kill hundreds of kuffar. Unfortunately, they were caught before their adventure.
 Ringleaders Fritz Gelowicz (left) & accomplice Daniel Schneider |
Ringleader Fritz Gelowicz was sentenced to 12 years, his German accomplice Daniel Schneider – both converts was given 11 years and two other men were jailed for five years for their roles in a plot to detonate explosives 100 times more powerful than those used in the 2005 London bombings. (That’s ALL?)
The four men were known as the ‘Sauerland cell’, after the tourist region where they stockpiled massive amounts of chemicals for the bombs.
MERILLE
Merrile was another Belgian misfit, who was attracted to Islam for its violence and rewards for suicide bombing. She married a suicide-bombing aspirant Moroccan man and both died for Allah in Iraq and are enjoying 72 virgins in paradise now (she must be bisexual).
MIREILLE, who was born in Belgium to a white, middle-class Christian family, blew herself to pieces last month in a suicide bombing near Baghdad…
In one of the most extraordinary tales of Islamic radicalisation, she is thought to be the first white Western woman to carry out a suicide bombing.
Belgian investigators, who arrested 14 people associated with her. She was from the southern Belgian town of Charleroi and converted to Islam and married an aspirant suicide bomber.
Her Belgian documents show that she travelled with her husband to Iraq. On November 9, she blew herself up in a car bomb. Her Belgian passport was near by. Her husband was killed by American troops in a separate incident.
Al-Qaeda recently appealed for white converts to become suicide bombers, because it was easier for them to travel and evade detection before carrying out their attacks.
Seven of those arrested were Muslim converts of native Belgian origin. One of the chief suspects held yesterday was a male Belgian convert to Islam, police said. “We know these groups are always planning attacks.”
ISLAM IS ATTRACTIVE TO VIOLENT ONES, BECAUSE IT IS A RELIGION OF KILLING & DEATH
Violent jihad is the requirement of being a Muslim and the only guarantee to get paradise is by killing and getting killed for Allah. Fighting is prescribed for all Muslims. Very severe punishment is promised for those, who refuse to carry out violent jihad to kill the kuffar.
ISLAM CELEBRATES ONLY DEATH
While everyone loves music, singing, dancing, socializing and watching TV and movies Islam strictly prohibits all these fun activities and insist on salat (prayers) and reciting the Quran instead. While all other religions celebrate colourful festivals in which men and women socialize, sing, drink and dance, Islamic holidays are about killing, commemorating deaths and massacres. Following are the Islam’s three biggest holidays:
EIDUL AZHA
This is Islam’s most colorful holiday, somewhat comparable to Hindu festival of colors called “holi”. The difference is that the color here is only red... Every Muslim is required to cut the throat of a goat, cow or a camel. While men cut the throats of these animals, the women and children celebrate the sight of gushing blood from the dying animal by the shouts of “Allah u Akbar”. On this holiday, you see blood, hides and insides of stomach every where on streets, in backyards and front yards, even in bathrooms in some cases (especially in western countries where public beheading of animals is prohibited).
ASHURA
Ashura commemorates the bloodshed and killing of Muslims by other Muslims. This day Prophet’s grandson and his companions were brutally killed by other Muslims. On this day Muslims beat themselves bloody with their hands, chains, and knives and even cut their children with blades to bleed them. The whole town gathers to participate in this bloody spectacle... This year in Karachi, the ashura procession was bloodier than usual as a suicide bomber blew himself, and killed dozens of men, women and children.
EIDUL FITRI
Although there is no bloody activity on this holiday, but it celebrates "incredible" victory Muhammad achieved at the Battle of Badar. The Battle of Badar was an occasion of killing and beheading of non-Muslim relatives, old friends and neighbours by Prophet Muhammad and his pious disciples.
That day brother killed brother, nephew killed uncle, cousin killed cousin, son killed father, and old friends and neighbors killed each other. At the end of the battle, the Prophet threw all the dead relatives and friends in a pit and addressed them while jubilant Muslims shouted ‘Allahu Akbar’.
Muslims, to this day, follow this prophetic tradition of killing kuffars all over the world. Latest fad is to kill even Muslims of different sects (whom they consider kuffar) by suicide-bombing them in a mosque, while they offer congregational salat.
Set as favorite
Bookmark
Email this
Hits: 3943
Comments (114)
Subscribe to this comment's feed
written by vbv , March 05, 2010
Very true,indeed. In India ,too,most of the criminal elements are muslims. And yet we have muslims like Zakir Naik proclaiming from his pulpit that "islam is the solution for humanity"! Some solution, packing everyone to the socalled "hereafter" of islam in a jiffy and claiming Allah's 72 whores in the imaginery 'jannat'. What surprises me is that westerners are easy cannon-fodder for this kind of idiocy and zombiedom!
written by Hisham , March 05, 2010
As usual excellent article by Ayesha. Here in USA the dawah is by far most successful in prisons where all kinds of criminals thieves, rapists and killers convert to islam. Many of these converts are recruited by islamist cells and send to Yemen and Pakistan for jihad training. Adam Gadhan was also a misfit who moved to Pakistan and became spokesman for Al Queda,
written by duh_swami , March 06, 2010
From article...a believer always tries to make others believe in what he/she believes in.
That's me OK...If everyone agreed with me, the world would be a better and peaceful place...Yep...And you don't have to pay me...I will save the world for free...Yep...
I only have one objection to the article, almost all the references to 'Christianity' were from the OT...While some Christian ideology is a carry over from the OT, there was no 'Christianity' prior to the birth of Jesus...
St Augustine did make the remark that there never was a time Christianity didn't exist, but there is no central figure or details given, just his opinion...
Christians have learned how NOT to conduct themselves by studying the OT...
They learn HOW to conduct themselves by studying the NT...
One example...Deuteronomy 22:23-24 about stoning...This was not a declaration of a 'Christian' God because Christianity did not exist, unless God was hiding behind a mask...This verse is muted by Christians who became 'enlightened' and decided that this was not a good way to deal with a problem.
Jesus started the ball rolling with the 'those without sin cast the first stone'...That didn't mean much to the heathens he was talking to, but future Christians understood it, which is why Christians don't stone people today...
Once the 'Church' took over, it took longer for Christian enlightenment...As soon as Christianity became the law of the land, Europe plunged into the dark ages...But it was not Christianity that made it dark...It was greedy and brutal men who managed to gain power in the Church...So there were torture dungeons, burnings at the stake and lots of other atrocities...Christianity itself had nothing to do with it...But enlightened Christians saw that these incidents were bad, evil even, and rejected them...That's why Christians don't burn heretics on a stake today...anyone who does that, is not a Christian, but a despot, and a depraved one at that...Christianity opposes despotism...
That's one significant difference Islam is despotic...Christianity is not...
I'm not a Christian, but I do know what side of the bread the butter is on...
That's me OK...If everyone agreed with me, the world would be a better and peaceful place...Yep...And you don't have to pay me...I will save the world for free...Yep...
I only have one objection to the article, almost all the references to 'Christianity' were from the OT...While some Christian ideology is a carry over from the OT, there was no 'Christianity' prior to the birth of Jesus...
St Augustine did make the remark that there never was a time Christianity didn't exist, but there is no central figure or details given, just his opinion...
Christians have learned how NOT to conduct themselves by studying the OT...
They learn HOW to conduct themselves by studying the NT...
One example...Deuteronomy 22:23-24 about stoning...This was not a declaration of a 'Christian' God because Christianity did not exist, unless God was hiding behind a mask...This verse is muted by Christians who became 'enlightened' and decided that this was not a good way to deal with a problem.
Jesus started the ball rolling with the 'those without sin cast the first stone'...That didn't mean much to the heathens he was talking to, but future Christians understood it, which is why Christians don't stone people today...
Once the 'Church' took over, it took longer for Christian enlightenment...As soon as Christianity became the law of the land, Europe plunged into the dark ages...But it was not Christianity that made it dark...It was greedy and brutal men who managed to gain power in the Church...So there were torture dungeons, burnings at the stake and lots of other atrocities...Christianity itself had nothing to do with it...But enlightened Christians saw that these incidents were bad, evil even, and rejected them...That's why Christians don't burn heretics on a stake today...anyone who does that, is not a Christian, but a despot, and a depraved one at that...Christianity opposes despotism...
That's one significant difference Islam is despotic...Christianity is not...
I'm not a Christian, but I do know what side of the bread the butter is on...
written by duh_swami , March 06, 2010
The above comment was for the tread on Christian Islamic comparisons...It would not post there so I posted it here...
written by duh_swami , March 06, 2010
You would think the west, especially America has wealth of violent misfits...Well it does...But few are attracted to Islam...More are attracted to drugs...This is largely an immigration problem in America...Most of the violence, but not all, is committed by legal and illegal immigrants and drug criminals...Freedom has a few undesirable results...for instance, because of 'freedom of religion' Islam has built mosques all over the place, and operate them tax free...Freedom of religion also guarantee's recruitment of violent unrepenting criminals in prison, into Islam...Many of these have turned to violent jihad when they are released...
Then you have the stupid kufr who is open to Islamic manipulation...There seem to be quite a few of these...I could name some, but the article has already done it...But there are more...
Then you have the stupid kufr who is open to Islamic manipulation...There seem to be quite a few of these...I could name some, but the article has already done it...But there are more...
written by duh_swami , March 06, 2010
I must be on drugs myself...I'm sure I posted to and article about Islamic, Christian, comparisons, and now it's gone...Either that or Allah has infected my computer like a virus...Since Allah has zapped my puter before, anything is possible...
written by Kazi Abul Firoz , March 06, 2010
Islamic politics create divions within Muslim community. Divisions create hates and violences. Violences give rise to bloodshed. Bloodshed in the name of Islam misleads non-Muslims to consider Islam as the ideology of violences. It is true that some ancient Arabic and African tribal Beduwin and Wahabi brutal cultures and traditions were included into Islam. Those Beduwin and Wahabi ancient uncivilized cultures are followed by Wahabi motivated narrow minded Islami groups such as Taleban, Al-Qaeda and their supporters of different Islamic parties. In this world, Christians and Jews are easily taking chances of the violences created by Islamic extremists. But Islam does not mean Muslim and Muslim does not mean Islam. Islam is the ideology which includes Al-Ehudy (Jews), Krestan, Al-Musolman etc. Muslim has more than 70 sects. Only one group of Muslims are making violences that they want to isolate Muslim dominated countries from Christian dominated countries. But there are millions of Christians who also want the same thing that they want to be isolated from Muslim countries. So, Muslim Talebans are not very much different from those Christian Talebans. Muslims should moderate Muslim Talebans and Christians should moderate Christian Talebans.
written by Truth Detector , March 06, 2010
You are mistaken when you say that criminals of the West converted to Islam. These criminals were already converted and they proved it by practicing the evils of Islam, rape, killing, robbery, all sorts of violence before taking a new name. The only difference is that these Western criminals gave themselves a different name, Islamists or Muslims. There is no difference between the Western Mafia and Islam. Both, the Western Mafia and Islam are practicing criminal activity.
written by duh_swami , March 06, 2010
You are spamming...posting the same comment on many threads...You have lost any credibility you might have had...
written by Truth Detector , March 06, 2010
duh_swami, I didn't read your post, but your comparison of Christianity and Islam was probably wrong, and that's why it was probably taken off. You have to be truthful when you post here and anywhere. There are some "authors" here that are saying that Allah and the God of the Ten Commandments are one and the same person. They are not. If you compare the New Testament, I'm a Catholic, you'll see that the New Testament is far different than the Qur'an. These two books are complete opposites. So let's be good and honest; otherwise, we will not conquer the evils of Islam. If you're going to be dishonest, you might as well leave this site.
When I write something that seems outlandish to some people, it is not at all outlandish because I can prove methotically every statement I write. And if you wish clarification, I would be glad to give it to anyone. For example, I can prove the following very easily if anyone wants clarification:
WE MUST DESTROY THE CRIMINAL ACTIVITY OF ISLAM BEFORE THE CRIMINAL ACTIVITY OF ISLAM DESTROYS US.
When I write something that seems outlandish to some people, it is not at all outlandish because I can prove methotically every statement I write. And if you wish clarification, I would be glad to give it to anyone. For example, I can prove the following very easily if anyone wants clarification:
WE MUST DESTROY THE CRIMINAL ACTIVITY OF ISLAM BEFORE THE CRIMINAL ACTIVITY OF ISLAM DESTROYS US.
written by Reed Wilson. , March 06, 2010
Duh-swami, ou write 'One example...Deuteronomy 22:23-24 about stoning...This was not a declaration of a 'Christian' God because Christianity did not exist, unless God was hiding behind a mask...This verse is muted by Christians who became 'enlightened' and decided that this was not a good way to deal with a problem'.
You will agree that NT endorses OT. We find in Matthew 5 as under:
17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.
duh-swami, religions are not followed in their spirits. If one feligion was followed, there was no necessity of another messenger. This is what God tells me.
So we should not blame religions for the misdeeds of those who distort religion and malign it.
You will agree that NT endorses OT. We find in Matthew 5 as under:
17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.
duh-swami, religions are not followed in their spirits. If one feligion was followed, there was no necessity of another messenger. This is what God tells me.
So we should not blame religions for the misdeeds of those who distort religion and malign it.
written by duh_swami , March 06, 2010
Truth detector...since we both know that criminals in US prison are recruited and convert to Islam in prison, the main difference between their pre-Islamic behavior and their conversion is Shahada...
A change in the name always signals a change in the life...The life of Islam is activity to remove all obstacles to the spread of Islam...Violence is not the only method, but it is very popular...
A change in the name always signals a change in the life...The life of Islam is activity to remove all obstacles to the spread of Islam...Violence is not the only method, but it is very popular...
written by Clement- The Islam- Watch Pastor' , March 06, 2010
If you ad seen that post you would have known why I am thanking Mr Khan for removing it. Although my reaction to it was easily posted anyone who saw it will agree that such articles need not be posted in a site like this. As for this guy talking of Christian Talibanism I wonder why people just want to drag Christianity into any evil association that calls itself a religion. Unfortunately Christianity does not fall within the category you should call a religion not to talk of a violent religion like Islam. True Christianity is a relationship with the Creator of this universe. We related to Him as his dear children adapted to his family through the atoning sacrifice of the Messiah Jesus Christ. We are now children not slaves like lslam, He is our father. We love him (not fear him) and keep his instructions. He loves us by given us free salvation to live with him through out eternity. we love both those who love us and those who hate us we want them to know our heavenly father so that He can do them good, not evil like the god of Islam who had predestined some people without any fault of theirs to hell and some and the murderers and jihadist to be in his brothel of sexual orgies in hell called the garden what an evil god Allah is
written by karan , March 06, 2010
for me personally ...........as a hindu ..who would i like to sit beside ........christ or muhammed ??? ...........its always christ ..............so the debate ends ...........christians and muslims .......are free to argue ...but i will always choose christ ..........end of story ..............and btw i love jews ............i dont know wat that makes me .......a hindu-jew-christo islmophobic ......maybe .watever.....
written by duh_swami , March 06, 2010
Truth Detector...duh_swami, I didn't read your post, but your comparison of Christianity and Islam was probably wrong, and that's why it was probably taken off.
You must have a reading and comprehensive problem...My post is still here...above...None of my posts were removed...It was the entire article that was removed by the editor...Your accusing me for being wrong without reading the post is jumping the gun...Why don't you read it first and THEN complain?
You must have a reading and comprehensive problem...My post is still here...above...None of my posts were removed...It was the entire article that was removed by the editor...Your accusing me for being wrong without reading the post is jumping the gun...Why don't you read it first and THEN complain?
written by lw1 , March 06, 2010
In Great Britain elections are coming soon. I asked the above question to a politically correct candidate.He went away without answering.
written by Shibli Zaman , March 06, 2010
Qazi Saheb, Islam does not have any sects. Islam is following quran and life of of Prophet Mohammed (pbuh). Most muslims follow a custom made islam suiting to their own agenda or liking and inclinations . Dont blame islam for the sects.
written by Clement- The Islam- Watch Pastor' , March 06, 2010
“duh-swami, religions are not followed in their spirits. If one religion was followed, there was no necessity of another messenger. This is what God tells me.” which messengers is Reed talking about here, Yahweh has never sent human messenger, his messengers has always been angels and he only sent prophets only from the tribe of Israel his covenant people and Mohammed was not one, may be he meant Allah’s messengers the pirate of Medina, even if God lacks prophet materials in Israel definitely he could not have used an Arab terrorist, a pirate , a womanizers and sex perverts and padoephilier as a prophet.
If you read correctly the sermon on the mount recorded in Matt 5,6,7 from where you quoted you would have discovered the riches of Christ teachings. What do you understand by Christ being the fulfillment of the Law ? There are basically two types of law the ceremonial of law of animal sacrifices and rituals which Christ fulfilled by his offering himself on the cross thereby abolishing all ceremonial law. No law of animal sacrifice and all that goes with it are of any effect any more. Secondly the Moral law represented by the Ten commandment this one has not be abolished instead he expanded its true meaning by saying “ you have heard what was said in the old time but I say unto……….” At the end he summarized the Ten Commandments by saying is same as saying love God and love your neighbor as yourself. Can you see how not a ditto from the law was without been fulfilled? Not in the perverted sense in which you quoted and used it. So please be schooled and please when we are talking of God messengers or prophets don’t count Mohammed for he was never one.
If you read correctly the sermon on the mount recorded in Matt 5,6,7 from where you quoted you would have discovered the riches of Christ teachings. What do you understand by Christ being the fulfillment of the Law ? There are basically two types of law the ceremonial of law of animal sacrifices and rituals which Christ fulfilled by his offering himself on the cross thereby abolishing all ceremonial law. No law of animal sacrifice and all that goes with it are of any effect any more. Secondly the Moral law represented by the Ten commandment this one has not be abolished instead he expanded its true meaning by saying “ you have heard what was said in the old time but I say unto……….” At the end he summarized the Ten Commandments by saying is same as saying love God and love your neighbor as yourself. Can you see how not a ditto from the law was without been fulfilled? Not in the perverted sense in which you quoted and used it. So please be schooled and please when we are talking of God messengers or prophets don’t count Mohammed for he was never one.
written by duh_swami , March 06, 2010
written by Shibli Zaman
Qazi Saheb, Islam does not have any sects.
Uh huh...You can view the 72 sects of Islam and a short explanation of their differences here...
http://engforum.pravda.ru/archive/index.php/t-107548.html
Qazi Saheb, Islam does not have any sects.
Uh huh...You can view the 72 sects of Islam and a short explanation of their differences here...
http://engforum.pravda.ru/archive/index.php/t-107548.html
written by Wagamama , March 06, 2010
Clement, the Editor of this website removed that article by Lennard James because the author had copied everything from my article. I informed the Editor of the same in the comments section, but was not published. Here is what I wrote to the Editor:
To the Editor of this website : After knowing the truth, do you still think it should be published under Lennard James' name? If you are honest and respect true journalism, then republish the whole article under my name as I have done the original research and had published it first elsewhere before Lennard James published it on your site. I hope honesty prevails and truth alone triumphs.
Therefore, the true cause of depublishing that article is intellectual piracy and nothing else.
To the Editor of this website : After knowing the truth, do you still think it should be published under Lennard James' name? If you are honest and respect true journalism, then republish the whole article under my name as I have done the original research and had published it first elsewhere before Lennard James published it on your site. I hope honesty prevails and truth alone triumphs.
Therefore, the true cause of depublishing that article is intellectual piracy and nothing else.
written by Andrew,X. , March 07, 2010
To Ayesha. You write "Islam's hateful and violent core is the perfect panacea for violent and criminal misfits". and you continue a chargesheet against NICK RILEY. You say "girls rejected him". How you say that? Are you not afraid of libel proceedings against you? What is your source of 72 virgins? Nowhere in Koran.
written by Reed Wilson. , March 07, 2010
For information.
Sects are considered as Shirk in Koran. When requested, I will quote reference. The concept of 72 sects is in a Hadith. The narrator/compiler of that Hadith, while enumerating, counts 79 contradicting his own enunciation. Belieiving Hadith is also Shirk.
Sects are considered as Shirk in Koran. When requested, I will quote reference. The concept of 72 sects is in a Hadith. The narrator/compiler of that Hadith, while enumerating, counts 79 contradicting his own enunciation. Belieiving Hadith is also Shirk.
written by Reed Wilson. , March 07, 2010
To Clement. I give here the definitions of prophet.
1. One who prophesies, or foretells events; a predicter; a
foreteller.
[1913 Webster]
2. One inspired or instructed by God to speak in his name, or
announce future events, as, Moses, Elijah, etc.
[1913 Webster]
3. An interpreter; a spokesman. [R.] --Ex. vii. 1.
[1913 Webster]
4. (Zool.) A mantis.
[1913 Webster]
School of the prophets (Anc. Jewish Hist.), a school or
college in which young men were educated and trained for
public teachers or members of the prophetic order. These
students were called sons of the prophets.
[1913 Webster]
You say that "Yahweh has never sent human messenger, his messengers has always been angels and he only sent prophets only from the tribe of Israel his covenant people". Give a reference from Yahweh to support this judgement.
Tell me if Abraham, Issac, Jacob, David, Solomon were prphets? If so, then do they fall under the definition given above?
If Bible is Message off God, I think they all were messengers. Pls. correct me.
1. One who prophesies, or foretells events; a predicter; a
foreteller.
[1913 Webster]
2. One inspired or instructed by God to speak in his name, or
announce future events, as, Moses, Elijah, etc.
[1913 Webster]
3. An interpreter; a spokesman. [R.] --Ex. vii. 1.
[1913 Webster]
4. (Zool.) A mantis.
[1913 Webster]
School of the prophets (Anc. Jewish Hist.), a school or
college in which young men were educated and trained for
public teachers or members of the prophetic order. These
students were called sons of the prophets.
[1913 Webster]
You say that "Yahweh has never sent human messenger, his messengers has always been angels and he only sent prophets only from the tribe of Israel his covenant people". Give a reference from Yahweh to support this judgement.
Tell me if Abraham, Issac, Jacob, David, Solomon were prphets? If so, then do they fall under the definition given above?
If Bible is Message off God, I think they all were messengers. Pls. correct me.
written by duh_swami , March 07, 2010
From post above...Sects are considered as Shirk in Koran.
Where does it say that? I see lots of shirker Muslims posting here, so the appropriate aya would help clear up any misunderstandings...
Where does it say that? I see lots of shirker Muslims posting here, so the appropriate aya would help clear up any misunderstandings...
written by duh_swami , March 07, 2010
Not in the perverted sense in which you quoted and used it. So please be schooled and please when we are talking of God...
'Perverted huh...I understand I don't know as much about God as you do Clement...The rev Hensley once said...'Everybody knows more about it (God religion) than you do, and if they get a chance, they will tell you all about it'...Does that shoe fit?
As far as I am concerned, the Bible is a profound book, but what is profound about it can be condensed to about two pages of gems...The rest can be read or not read...And as far as being schooled...I read the Bible five times and did bible translation comparisons...I studied with Jehovah Witnesses, Mormons, Seventh day Adventists, Protestants, evangelists and Quakers...I also studied Hindu Vedanta, with Swami Chinmayananda, I have read most of Gita and some upanishads I also am adept at the Qaballah, and various forms of Ceremonial magick, witchcraft, black and white magic, and other occult practices...I have been studying Islam for 8 years...I think I am well schooled enough to make an educated opinion or statement of fact...If you see something as 'perverted', this is in your head only and illustrates your own lack of schooling...
'Perverted huh...I understand I don't know as much about God as you do Clement...The rev Hensley once said...'Everybody knows more about it (God religion) than you do, and if they get a chance, they will tell you all about it'...Does that shoe fit?
As far as I am concerned, the Bible is a profound book, but what is profound about it can be condensed to about two pages of gems...The rest can be read or not read...And as far as being schooled...I read the Bible five times and did bible translation comparisons...I studied with Jehovah Witnesses, Mormons, Seventh day Adventists, Protestants, evangelists and Quakers...I also studied Hindu Vedanta, with Swami Chinmayananda, I have read most of Gita and some upanishads I also am adept at the Qaballah, and various forms of Ceremonial magick, witchcraft, black and white magic, and other occult practices...I have been studying Islam for 8 years...I think I am well schooled enough to make an educated opinion or statement of fact...If you see something as 'perverted', this is in your head only and illustrates your own lack of schooling...
written by Clement- The Islam- Watch Pastor' , March 07, 2010
You are correct none of those listed are prophets in the traditional sense they are only prophet in Islam. Even Adam, Lot, Alexandra the Great were all Islamic prophets. Is funny isn’t it? If messenger means Courier, envoy, or herald God has never used Humans as currier only Angel are messengers like in the case of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, an Angel was sent to the Parent of Samson, Angel was sent to Joseph and Mary to deliver message about the birth of Christ and to Johns Parent and an Angel was also sent to give John the Book of Revelation. These are God’s Curriers. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are the Jewish Founding fathers or patriarchs they are never considered among the prophets but they have some prophecy credited to them in one way or the other as Patriarchs you can not deny them that.
David and Solomon were kings not prophets, they also write some spiritual books but that did not make to them to occupy the office of prophets as you rightly said. Prophets words in the bible are often distinguished when ever they speaking on behalf of God with such phrase as “The word of the Lord came me saying,” “Thus said the Lord” “ hear O Israel “ “ The Lord said to me” None of such phrase can be found in the Quran. Mohammed has never prophesied and all the message he claim Allah gave him to warn people he never allowed such words to stand between him and money, sex and power he broke all of them. Which kind of messenger was that.
David and Solomon were kings not prophets, they also write some spiritual books but that did not make to them to occupy the office of prophets as you rightly said. Prophets words in the bible are often distinguished when ever they speaking on behalf of God with such phrase as “The word of the Lord came me saying,” “Thus said the Lord” “ hear O Israel “ “ The Lord said to me” None of such phrase can be found in the Quran. Mohammed has never prophesied and all the message he claim Allah gave him to warn people he never allowed such words to stand between him and money, sex and power he broke all of them. Which kind of messenger was that.
written by Machmoed , March 07, 2010
I don't know as much about God as you do Clement.
It's believing/assuming, not knowing.
It's believing/assuming, not knowing.
written by Reed Wilson , March 07, 2010
To Clement.
My question was "Tell me if Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David, Solomon were prophets? If so, then do they fall under the definition given above?
Your answer is "You are correct none of those listed are prophets in the traditional sense they are only prophet in Islam. Even Adam, Lot, Alexandra the Great were all Islamic prophets".
It seems that you did not reply my question with your characteristic confidence. I have to deduce from the reply that they were not prophets in Christianity. You are telling me that they did not do prophesy or foretold the events. They were not even inspired or instructed by god to speak in His name.
They were not messengers either, according to your claim. Then, please tell me what they are in Christianity?
I will appreciate if you reply my question without indulging in giving details about Islam and Muhammad. Thank you.
My question was "Tell me if Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David, Solomon were prophets? If so, then do they fall under the definition given above?
Your answer is "You are correct none of those listed are prophets in the traditional sense they are only prophet in Islam. Even Adam, Lot, Alexandra the Great were all Islamic prophets".
It seems that you did not reply my question with your characteristic confidence. I have to deduce from the reply that they were not prophets in Christianity. You are telling me that they did not do prophesy or foretold the events. They were not even inspired or instructed by god to speak in His name.
They were not messengers either, according to your claim. Then, please tell me what they are in Christianity?
I will appreciate if you reply my question without indulging in giving details about Islam and Muhammad. Thank you.
written by Ali , March 07, 2010
I do not know Ayesha's sources, but it does not take a rocket scientist to figure out that the fat hatful wierdo could not have been too popular with pretty girls and must have been rejected regularly.
Quran mentions virgins with swelling breasts and 72 virgins is mentioned in hadiths. What is mentioned in hadiths is real history, what is in quran is fiction created by a violent sex maniac suffering from schyrtzophenia. Even referring to such a book is an insult to a thinking man. But then muslims are not allowed to think for themselves anyways.
Quran mentions virgins with swelling breasts and 72 virgins is mentioned in hadiths. What is mentioned in hadiths is real history, what is in quran is fiction created by a violent sex maniac suffering from schyrtzophenia. Even referring to such a book is an insult to a thinking man. But then muslims are not allowed to think for themselves anyways.
written by rationalist , March 07, 2010
This is to prove that Quran has scientific errors, and so Muhammad was not a messenger. Someone forwarded me this. I wanna test Quran scholars now.
Quran 36. 38-40: And the sun runs his course for a period determined for him: that is the decree of (Him), the Exalted in Might, the All-Knowing. And the Moon,- We have measured for her mansions (to traverse) till she returns like the old (and withered) lower part of a date-stalk. It is not permitted to the Sun to catch up the Moon, nor can the Night outstrip the Day: Each (just) swims along in (its own) orbit (according to Law).
What happened to the orbit of the earth? Nothing is mentioned abt earth's orbit in Q book. Allah thought the sun and the moon revolved around the earth. And therefore Muhammad believed in geocentric theory.
Musalmans, it is time to evaluate your faith in Quran.
Quran 36. 38-40: And the sun runs his course for a period determined for him: that is the decree of (Him), the Exalted in Might, the All-Knowing. And the Moon,- We have measured for her mansions (to traverse) till she returns like the old (and withered) lower part of a date-stalk. It is not permitted to the Sun to catch up the Moon, nor can the Night outstrip the Day: Each (just) swims along in (its own) orbit (according to Law).
What happened to the orbit of the earth? Nothing is mentioned abt earth's orbit in Q book. Allah thought the sun and the moon revolved around the earth. And therefore Muhammad believed in geocentric theory.
Musalmans, it is time to evaluate your faith in Quran.
written by Machmoed , March 08, 2010
It's amusing to see how people believe scriptures are devine. As long as people deny reality they won't succeed in finding the truth and the truth is God is not in scriptures or religions...all these materials are made by human imagination. Reed, you have to study other books than the bible/qor'aan etc. These are not considered to be scientific and are not based on reality. Qor'aan sais injiel is given to Jesus....wrong (God gave Jesus no scripture. Qor'aan sais moses is given Tauraat...wrong....he is not given anything.....jews and christians believed that in ancient times but now no serious scholar or scientist believe this. The Qor'aan sais Jesus is not crussified.....wich one…there were several christs in that time…more than 5 christs were crussified. In the jewish scriptures (100 years before jesus time) it tells us that Joshua ben pantera or ben maryam hanged on the night before eastern…..the story is interesting cause Meryem his mother was raped by a roman soldier (pantera). In the jewisch scriptures it doesn’t say that maryam (maria) is a virgin, but an unmarried woman. This is the reason translators made a prostitute out of this because in that time an unmarried woman with a child was considered a bad woman.
If you add all these stories…only one conclusion can be made…it’s all human imagination. I’m not saying a deity doesn’t exist, but the deity I’m believing in is different. The source is capable of doing anything…so he can guide you if you truly ask for it.
If you add all these stories…only one conclusion can be made…it’s all human imagination. I’m not saying a deity doesn’t exist, but the deity I’m believing in is different. The source is capable of doing anything…so he can guide you if you truly ask for it.
written by Reed Wilson , March 08, 2010
Welcome Rationalist. It's pleasant to find one on this site.
I will not prove you wrong. Your question is "what happened to the orbit of earth" with respect to verse 36:38-40.
In the cited verse movement of sun and the moon are discussed. We know their motions are independent of each other - both rotation and revolution. When a body is given circular motion, both centrifugal and centripetal forces develop and act upon it.
Since earth movement is not discussed in 36:38-40, the earth's orbit was also not mentioned.
I don’t think you have any objection to "sun cannot catch the moon" and vice versa.
Like all planets in our solar system, the Earth is in an elliptical orbit around our Sun. In Earth's case, its orbit is nearly circular, so that the difference between Earth's farthest point from the Sun and its closest point is very small. Earth's orbit defines a two-dimensional plane which we call the ecliptic.
I think, Machmoed is most suitable person on this site for asking such questions. The reason is, he knows arabic and translators make blunders.
Thanks for considering me capable of answering ANY question.
I will not prove you wrong. Your question is "what happened to the orbit of earth" with respect to verse 36:38-40.
In the cited verse movement of sun and the moon are discussed. We know their motions are independent of each other - both rotation and revolution. When a body is given circular motion, both centrifugal and centripetal forces develop and act upon it.
Since earth movement is not discussed in 36:38-40, the earth's orbit was also not mentioned.
I don’t think you have any objection to "sun cannot catch the moon" and vice versa.
Like all planets in our solar system, the Earth is in an elliptical orbit around our Sun. In Earth's case, its orbit is nearly circular, so that the difference between Earth's farthest point from the Sun and its closest point is very small. Earth's orbit defines a two-dimensional plane which we call the ecliptic.
I think, Machmoed is most suitable person on this site for asking such questions. The reason is, he knows arabic and translators make blunders.
Thanks for considering me capable of answering ANY question.
written by Reed Wilson , March 08, 2010
To Rationalist. Please observe that if we remove the () in the translation of 36:38-40 it becomes lot easier to comprehend. Moreover he had no right to make insertions. Isnt it?
written by Clement- The Islam- Watch Pastor' , March 08, 2010
Reed Wilson I have answered your Questions Read my post carefully.
Abraham, Isaac and Jacob these are the Jews patriarchs through whom the covenant with the Jews was establish they the reference point of God introducing himself to the later Generation. When God appeared to Moses he introduces himself as the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob, subsequently that has been the identity of how to know who was speaking. That was why we know that it was not Yahweh that appeared to Mohammed at the cave of hijra he would have introduced Himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. These people spoke with God face to face. Abraham was called the friend of God and father of the faithful. Some of them even prophesied but this was before the office of a prophet was created in Israel and it did not make them prophets. Jacob even prophesied about Christ coming to take over the sceptre of leadership from Judah on his dying bed Gen. 49:10 I like connecting my answers Mohammed and the Quran because your understanding is limited to what the Quran and Mohammed told you about God and about prophets or messengers.
If Muslim will put away pride and come to Christians to learn as directed by Mohammed himself they would have learned a great deal about Yahweh. I like your questions I hope you are sincere to know the truth. David and Solomon were kings not prophets all the same God used them. David wrote most of the Psalms and Solomon write the Ecclesiastes and the book of proverbs. They were not used because they were holy or sinless but by the grace of God. The Bible equally recorded their sinful acts and their godly acts. Not the way Muslim understand, according the Muslim understanding if God uses a man that man must be sinless regardless of any sinful acts of that man it does not count against him. Like in the case of Mohammed all his criminal acts were ratified by Allah have righteous acts. It was not like that with the Judeo-Christian God. He does not condone sin and sin must be punished, it does not matter who committed it, a prophet, an Angel, messenger or what ever.
Abraham, Isaac and Jacob these are the Jews patriarchs through whom the covenant with the Jews was establish they the reference point of God introducing himself to the later Generation. When God appeared to Moses he introduces himself as the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob, subsequently that has been the identity of how to know who was speaking. That was why we know that it was not Yahweh that appeared to Mohammed at the cave of hijra he would have introduced Himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. These people spoke with God face to face. Abraham was called the friend of God and father of the faithful. Some of them even prophesied but this was before the office of a prophet was created in Israel and it did not make them prophets. Jacob even prophesied about Christ coming to take over the sceptre of leadership from Judah on his dying bed Gen. 49:10 I like connecting my answers Mohammed and the Quran because your understanding is limited to what the Quran and Mohammed told you about God and about prophets or messengers.
If Muslim will put away pride and come to Christians to learn as directed by Mohammed himself they would have learned a great deal about Yahweh. I like your questions I hope you are sincere to know the truth. David and Solomon were kings not prophets all the same God used them. David wrote most of the Psalms and Solomon write the Ecclesiastes and the book of proverbs. They were not used because they were holy or sinless but by the grace of God. The Bible equally recorded their sinful acts and their godly acts. Not the way Muslim understand, according the Muslim understanding if God uses a man that man must be sinless regardless of any sinful acts of that man it does not count against him. Like in the case of Mohammed all his criminal acts were ratified by Allah have righteous acts. It was not like that with the Judeo-Christian God. He does not condone sin and sin must be punished, it does not matter who committed it, a prophet, an Angel, messenger or what ever.
written by Andrew, X. , March 08, 2010
Ali. Ayesha should have given sources or else she was an eye-witness. This is requirement of quality writing.
'Swelling breast' is attraction or repulsion? Where in Quran? We can check from the text.
'Swelling breast' is attraction or repulsion? Where in Quran? We can check from the text.
written by Jacob , March 08, 2010
The killing of Shia by Sunni is spreading rapidly in India. It is just question of time before it engulfs the whole of India. See the following link....
http://arabnews.com/world/article22487.ece
http://arabnews.com/world/article22487.ece
written by Machmoed , March 08, 2010
Mohammad did exist and was capable of uniting the arabs and brought them the unity of God.
But is that true? For some, this question will appear blasphemous — to many Muslims, the details of Muhammad’s life are articles of faith, crucial to their understanding of themselves as Muslims and followers of the One True God. Questioning such details amounts to questioning the basis of Islam and the identity of Muslims — a daunting enough task that many Western scholars choose to avoid many of the difficulties in an effort to be polite and, perhaps, make up for past Western imperialism.
It is instructive to compare this situation to the search for the “historical Jesus.” This concept is much more common and accepted in the Christian world than any quest for an “historical Muhammad” is in the Muslim world. A lot of work was done in the late 19th century, particularly in Germany, on treating the gospels like other forms of ancient writing. Since then, a great many books and journal articles have been written trying to discover who Jesus “really” might have been, all assuming that the gospels don’t give the whole story and, perhaps, are inaccurate in some or many places.
The process has gone so far that many Christians today have become skeptical of the naive approach which treats their scriptures as if they could be taken totally at face value. This is naturally rejected and criticized by Christian fundamentalists. Indeed, the comment that someone is following “German Higher Criticism” (even if the target has never heard of it) is a common insult. Despite this, the skeptical approach is fairly well entrenched in Christian scholarship.
But what about Islam? Where is the “Muhammad Seminar” which might serve as the equivalent to the “Jesus Seminar?” Where are all of the books and articles which take a more critical approach towards the sources of information we have about early Islam and the life of Muhammad?
Actually, this material does exist, although not in great quantity. But there is one new source for people who want to learn more and aren’t able to easily find the rare book on the subject. It is “The Quest for the Historical Muhammad,” edited by Ibn Warraq and just published by Prometheus Books. This book contains a series of articles by scholars in the field, describing not only the various problems and issues, but also the work of other scholars.
You wanted a acadamical approach of islam etc. I'm sure ibnu warraq is great. He is not interested in Mohammad actually, because he and a lot of others believe he didn't exist as the oerthodox vision tells us. His mentor was the famous montgomery watt (a great orientalist). Read also works of revisionists and dissidents from Germany.......you will know more after this.
But is that true? For some, this question will appear blasphemous — to many Muslims, the details of Muhammad’s life are articles of faith, crucial to their understanding of themselves as Muslims and followers of the One True God. Questioning such details amounts to questioning the basis of Islam and the identity of Muslims — a daunting enough task that many Western scholars choose to avoid many of the difficulties in an effort to be polite and, perhaps, make up for past Western imperialism.
It is instructive to compare this situation to the search for the “historical Jesus.” This concept is much more common and accepted in the Christian world than any quest for an “historical Muhammad” is in the Muslim world. A lot of work was done in the late 19th century, particularly in Germany, on treating the gospels like other forms of ancient writing. Since then, a great many books and journal articles have been written trying to discover who Jesus “really” might have been, all assuming that the gospels don’t give the whole story and, perhaps, are inaccurate in some or many places.
The process has gone so far that many Christians today have become skeptical of the naive approach which treats their scriptures as if they could be taken totally at face value. This is naturally rejected and criticized by Christian fundamentalists. Indeed, the comment that someone is following “German Higher Criticism” (even if the target has never heard of it) is a common insult. Despite this, the skeptical approach is fairly well entrenched in Christian scholarship.
But what about Islam? Where is the “Muhammad Seminar” which might serve as the equivalent to the “Jesus Seminar?” Where are all of the books and articles which take a more critical approach towards the sources of information we have about early Islam and the life of Muhammad?
Actually, this material does exist, although not in great quantity. But there is one new source for people who want to learn more and aren’t able to easily find the rare book on the subject. It is “The Quest for the Historical Muhammad,” edited by Ibn Warraq and just published by Prometheus Books. This book contains a series of articles by scholars in the field, describing not only the various problems and issues, but also the work of other scholars.
You wanted a acadamical approach of islam etc. I'm sure ibnu warraq is great. He is not interested in Mohammad actually, because he and a lot of others believe he didn't exist as the oerthodox vision tells us. His mentor was the famous montgomery watt (a great orientalist). Read also works of revisionists and dissidents from Germany.......you will know more after this.
written by ha ha ha .... , March 08, 2010
Islam says that their prophet is rahmatan fil alam'in (grace for the whole universe). How come? He never even put his feet on the moon as Neil Armstrong did in 1969. What a big mouth !!!!
written by Reed Wilson , March 08, 2010
To Machmoed.
Please direct all such academic questions to an appropriate person.
You perhaps know me by now. All the names you mention, mean nothing to me. They may be giants otherwise.
When talking religion, talk of the scriptures.
If you don't believe scriptures, no more debate.
If Bukhari was to be believed, he should be elevated to the status of messenger of God and his book as scripture. They should have courage to do this.
They give the protocole without status. Strange or not?
For surity, there are three measures, divine, observation and logic.
Meanings of Mathabat is different. It is the original point where we come back after going away from it. As mean position in a simple pendulum. Thob and thawab are also from the same root. Dress is called thob as it is repeated or comes back to the body. Thawab is also return. The word Mathaba is very good choice there.
Please direct all such academic questions to an appropriate person.
You perhaps know me by now. All the names you mention, mean nothing to me. They may be giants otherwise.
When talking religion, talk of the scriptures.
If you don't believe scriptures, no more debate.
If Bukhari was to be believed, he should be elevated to the status of messenger of God and his book as scripture. They should have courage to do this.
They give the protocole without status. Strange or not?
For surity, there are three measures, divine, observation and logic.
Meanings of Mathabat is different. It is the original point where we come back after going away from it. As mean position in a simple pendulum. Thob and thawab are also from the same root. Dress is called thob as it is repeated or comes back to the body. Thawab is also return. The word Mathaba is very good choice there.
written by Healer_999 , March 08, 2010
What proof you can give about Koran was reveled to a man? What was his name? What was the mode of communication? How can any one say it is divine?
written by Machmoed , March 08, 2010
Mathabat means also sanctuary in the very sentence!
you wrote: If you don't believe scriptures, no more debate.
What kind of acadamical thinking is this...how can you find out if a scripture is devine when at the start it is considered as devine....you can't.
you Wrote: You perhaps know me by now. All the names you mention, mean nothing to me. They may be giants otherwise.
They are giants in comparison with what you are debating now. They know arabic better than we do and some are specialized in more languages like hebrew, aramic.seriac etc. and it's acadamical...it's not about believing but about knowing.
It seems Reed, that you don't wanna know some certain things.Things wich are proven to be not true...like the story we're talking about....this story contains also the qor'aan. Why would the qor'aan be true while we know the rest is not (orthodox vision etc). Why would the arabs lie if the qor'aan was devine?
you wrote: If you don't believe scriptures, no more debate.
What kind of acadamical thinking is this...how can you find out if a scripture is devine when at the start it is considered as devine....you can't.
you Wrote: You perhaps know me by now. All the names you mention, mean nothing to me. They may be giants otherwise.
They are giants in comparison with what you are debating now. They know arabic better than we do and some are specialized in more languages like hebrew, aramic.seriac etc. and it's acadamical...it's not about believing but about knowing.
It seems Reed, that you don't wanna know some certain things.Things wich are proven to be not true...like the story we're talking about....this story contains also the qor'aan. Why would the qor'aan be true while we know the rest is not (orthodox vision etc). Why would the arabs lie if the qor'aan was devine?
written by Reed Wilson , March 08, 2010
Machmoed.
Quran divine or not - it is one belief. Believing is a phenominan. To my memory I never discussed this. Or it escaped my feilding?
Yes, If you don't believe scriptures, no more debate. It can be mooted if it was divine.
I mean the topic of the debate will change.
Till today we talk this was objectionable and that was objectionable. This debate ends.
Friends come up with reservations about certain verse. This debate will end.
Quran divine or not - it is one belief. Believing is a phenominan. To my memory I never discussed this. Or it escaped my feilding?
Yes, If you don't believe scriptures, no more debate. It can be mooted if it was divine.
I mean the topic of the debate will change.
Till today we talk this was objectionable and that was objectionable. This debate ends.
Friends come up with reservations about certain verse. This debate will end.
written by Machmoed , March 08, 2010
If i believed scriptures are devine than it would make an blasphemist out of me...i don't want to tell lies about God. I'm telling you the whole time....there are errors in it due human fabrication. No-one objected to the qor'aan in that time...it wasn't new at all. No revelation and if there was to whom?
you wrote: Yes, If you don't believe scriptures, no more debate.
Who is believing them?...no one on this site exept you. Clement believes in christian scriptures and you believe in qor'aan as a devine scripture and maybe in the rest of abrahamic scriptures as devine, like qor'aan thinks they are....but we know they are not...maybe only inspired, but no revelation from God to humanity. You're funny sometimes.
We know these religions created so much bloodshed and I don’t wanna believe God is responcible for this…because he is when we believe he revealed it to us.
Religion was created by man for the following reasons :
1. To unite the people in order to achieve survival of man. At that time there was no law no order and no integration of people into nations etc. Religion provided a set of rules in a time of lawlessness and prevented unnecessary conflicts. The word 'religion' = re+legion which means to reform a 'legion' which is defined as : A great number; a multitude.
2. In order to get a mass of people to achieve something they have to believe in a common entity. Man cannot believe man as he sees any other man as essentially equal to him. Hence a higher level entity - GOD - had to be invented who would hand down the rules to be obeyed.
3. To provide explanations for all the natural phenomenon observed by man and by doing so to focus his mind and prevent its wayward wandering.
4. At that time there was no science to explain the unexplainable and no law or police to keep the masses in line. Also it was literally a time of darkness - an era of DOS - if you will, so there was great fear in the human mind which had to be suppressed to achieve the twin aims of any living being :
A) Survival of Self.
B) Survival of the Species.
you wrote: Yes, If you don't believe scriptures, no more debate.
Who is believing them?...no one on this site exept you. Clement believes in christian scriptures and you believe in qor'aan as a devine scripture and maybe in the rest of abrahamic scriptures as devine, like qor'aan thinks they are....but we know they are not...maybe only inspired, but no revelation from God to humanity. You're funny sometimes.
We know these religions created so much bloodshed and I don’t wanna believe God is responcible for this…because he is when we believe he revealed it to us.
Religion was created by man for the following reasons :
1. To unite the people in order to achieve survival of man. At that time there was no law no order and no integration of people into nations etc. Religion provided a set of rules in a time of lawlessness and prevented unnecessary conflicts. The word 'religion' = re+legion which means to reform a 'legion' which is defined as : A great number; a multitude.
2. In order to get a mass of people to achieve something they have to believe in a common entity. Man cannot believe man as he sees any other man as essentially equal to him. Hence a higher level entity - GOD - had to be invented who would hand down the rules to be obeyed.
3. To provide explanations for all the natural phenomenon observed by man and by doing so to focus his mind and prevent its wayward wandering.
4. At that time there was no science to explain the unexplainable and no law or police to keep the masses in line. Also it was literally a time of darkness - an era of DOS - if you will, so there was great fear in the human mind which had to be suppressed to achieve the twin aims of any living being :
A) Survival of Self.
B) Survival of the Species.
written by duh_swami , March 08, 2010
While we are busy talking about divine this and divine that, the Religion of Peace strikes again...
Lagos, Nigeria (CNN) -- The death toll from weekend violence in central Nigeria climbed to more than 200 Monday after members of a machete-wielding Muslim group attacked mostly Christian villages, officials said.
These mobs clearly misunderstand Islam...They must be taking direction from those fake and unimportant hadith...They couldn't be stimulated to this violence from the Quran...Could they?? 9:5...8:12...47:4, 8:39, 5:33...others...
Lagos, Nigeria (CNN) -- The death toll from weekend violence in central Nigeria climbed to more than 200 Monday after members of a machete-wielding Muslim group attacked mostly Christian villages, officials said.
These mobs clearly misunderstand Islam...They must be taking direction from those fake and unimportant hadith...They couldn't be stimulated to this violence from the Quran...Could they?? 9:5...8:12...47:4, 8:39, 5:33...others...
written by Machmoed , March 08, 2010
Duh_Swami: We keep this sort of bullshit actions if we keep believing it's God's will. As long people believe God revealed scriptures, they will believe that God ordered them to convert the other...by all means.
I'm sick and tired to hear God this, God that....leave God alone...like priests should leave children alone...oh sorry the priests are just showing the love of God to the children. Mohammad might done this 1400 years ago, some so-called christians/catholics are doing this in the 21th century.
God is ours too, not only to christians, muslims etc. My God didn't talk to humans or the so-called prophets or messengers...they didn't do a great job.......people forgot everytime according to the god of scriptures...he made forget them.
Let's cut the bullshit about god of love/god of hate etc. Jews think christians are blasphemists. Muslims think jews don't believe in the right God. Christians believe JHWH is the same while a jew knows it's not. Let's cut all the bullshit right here and get rid of those scriptures as being the truth.
Bruce Sheiman once wrote:
Unfortunately for fans of religion, the Christian gospel is not primarily interested in religion. To be sure, the New Testament talks about religion. It discourages sexual license and other forms of immorality. It encourages patience, kindness, and other virtues. It tells believers how to worship aright. There is nothing unusual in all this—all religions have similar admonitions. In this respect, the New Testament is realistic. It doesn't pretend that the common rules of morality and social concern don't apply to the church. It understands that groups of people, even if you call them churches, have to behave themselves if they're going to get anything done!
But this sort of thing, religion, does not stand at the heart of the New Testament message. The gospel isn't primarily about helping individuals to live the life they've always wanted; it tells people to die to their yearning for self-fulfillment. It is not about helping people feel good about themselves, but telling them that they are dying. It's not about improving people, but killing the old self and creating them anew. It's not about helping people make space for spirituality in their busy lives, but about a God who would obliterate all our private space. The gospel is not about getting people to cooperate with God in making the world a better place—to give it a fresh coat of paint, to remodel it; instead it announces God's plan to raze the present world order and build something utterly new.
I'm sick and tired to hear God this, God that....leave God alone...like priests should leave children alone...oh sorry the priests are just showing the love of God to the children. Mohammad might done this 1400 years ago, some so-called christians/catholics are doing this in the 21th century.
God is ours too, not only to christians, muslims etc. My God didn't talk to humans or the so-called prophets or messengers...they didn't do a great job.......people forgot everytime according to the god of scriptures...he made forget them.
Let's cut the bullshit about god of love/god of hate etc. Jews think christians are blasphemists. Muslims think jews don't believe in the right God. Christians believe JHWH is the same while a jew knows it's not. Let's cut all the bullshit right here and get rid of those scriptures as being the truth.
Bruce Sheiman once wrote:
Unfortunately for fans of religion, the Christian gospel is not primarily interested in religion. To be sure, the New Testament talks about religion. It discourages sexual license and other forms of immorality. It encourages patience, kindness, and other virtues. It tells believers how to worship aright. There is nothing unusual in all this—all religions have similar admonitions. In this respect, the New Testament is realistic. It doesn't pretend that the common rules of morality and social concern don't apply to the church. It understands that groups of people, even if you call them churches, have to behave themselves if they're going to get anything done!
But this sort of thing, religion, does not stand at the heart of the New Testament message. The gospel isn't primarily about helping individuals to live the life they've always wanted; it tells people to die to their yearning for self-fulfillment. It is not about helping people feel good about themselves, but telling them that they are dying. It's not about improving people, but killing the old self and creating them anew. It's not about helping people make space for spirituality in their busy lives, but about a God who would obliterate all our private space. The gospel is not about getting people to cooperate with God in making the world a better place—to give it a fresh coat of paint, to remodel it; instead it announces God's plan to raze the present world order and build something utterly new.
written by Reed Wilson. , March 08, 2010
To Clement. You say "Abraham, Isaac and Jacob these are the Jews patriarchs through whom the covenant with the Jews was establish they the reference point of God introducing himself to the later Generation".
I can read carely your post as many times you want. I can not make out the status of these gentlemen, including Abraham, in Christianity out of your post.
You ignored my request "I will appreciate if you reply my question without indulging in giving details about Islam and Muhammad".
I think you are avoiding a clear cut reply.
If you say that Yahvweh is my God also and the blood of Jesus Christ covers my sins als,o I will not contest.
I am not calling for any more answers from you.
I can read carely your post as many times you want. I can not make out the status of these gentlemen, including Abraham, in Christianity out of your post.
You ignored my request "I will appreciate if you reply my question without indulging in giving details about Islam and Muhammad".
I think you are avoiding a clear cut reply.
If you say that Yahvweh is my God also and the blood of Jesus Christ covers my sins als,o I will not contest.
I am not calling for any more answers from you.
written by Machmoed , March 08, 2010
Abraham means in hebrew language the father of many. As for Ishma-el it means God (=El) listen! Arabic and hebrew are like sister languages (if God's name was Allah than a part of the names of angels would also be allah in their names, but they are not. God is in the names of Gabr-el, Izraf-el, Micha-el and even Isra-el etc etc etc. So the name of the scriptural God is El.
written by Armed Believer , March 08, 2010
I guess what I need is an example of a religion being armed where the religion wasn't tyranical.
Christianity was forcibly disarmed by secularists before the European Renaisance could happen. Before that, no one ever could have imagined the Pope teaching peace....and it wasn't just Catholics.
In the New World, early protestant settlers found themselves isolated from law, and they regularly used stocks for folks who violated the sabbath, hung witches and other heretics.
But, take away their guns, and their civil authority, and even Protestant Christianity becomes a religion of peace and enlightenment.
Today, Islam is armed and in civil control of large parts of the world. It is predictable Muslims would be violent and warlike.
But Christianity wouldn't? okay... there must be an example of a time and place where Christianity did not descend to whatever level of violence they could, when they could... maybe somebody could tell me what that example might be.
Today, Christians have very limited access to violence and making theologic law. Muslims have high access to power, and so they're the troublesome ones.
I can agree all about all the bad stuff about Islam... I just can't accept the idea of Christianity being inherently less evil and violent... unless of course someone has an example of such.. I do try to keep an open mind.
The difference is being armed. An armed religion is always going to kill people.. and I don't know that it makes a difference which god is involved.
That's what I think.
Christianity was forcibly disarmed by secularists before the European Renaisance could happen. Before that, no one ever could have imagined the Pope teaching peace....and it wasn't just Catholics.
In the New World, early protestant settlers found themselves isolated from law, and they regularly used stocks for folks who violated the sabbath, hung witches and other heretics.
But, take away their guns, and their civil authority, and even Protestant Christianity becomes a religion of peace and enlightenment.
Today, Islam is armed and in civil control of large parts of the world. It is predictable Muslims would be violent and warlike.
But Christianity wouldn't? okay... there must be an example of a time and place where Christianity did not descend to whatever level of violence they could, when they could... maybe somebody could tell me what that example might be.
Today, Christians have very limited access to violence and making theologic law. Muslims have high access to power, and so they're the troublesome ones.
I can agree all about all the bad stuff about Islam... I just can't accept the idea of Christianity being inherently less evil and violent... unless of course someone has an example of such.. I do try to keep an open mind.
The difference is being armed. An armed religion is always going to kill people.. and I don't know that it makes a difference which god is involved.
That's what I think.
written by Healer_999 , March 08, 2010
I guess it has a lot to do with dogma attached to religion. In certain sense Islam and Christianity are same, but then they are poles apart too.
Jesus and Mohammad can not be compared to each, it is Jesus teachings of non Violence that made reformation successful, political and rational ideas flowed.
What hinders Islam from reformation is life of Mohammad it self. And Islam it self. A true word(super dogma, I call). If a country like Saudi Arabia with high GDP supports primitiveness, we can comfortably say Islam can never change.
It is impossible for Islamists to carry on like this, fault lines will show up. Right now, their oxygen is victim status believed by many Muslims to be real and worse non Muslims too think this way. At some point people do recognize what is Islam actually.
Muslims just have to be asked hard questions, real hard. Most important one is why are they demanding special rights in other countries (non Islamic) when they deny basic rights to minorities in their countries, if they exist, because many have succeeded in cleansing them.
This line of argument behooves non Muslims to understand this supremacist Islam.
Jesus and Mohammad can not be compared to each, it is Jesus teachings of non Violence that made reformation successful, political and rational ideas flowed.
What hinders Islam from reformation is life of Mohammad it self. And Islam it self. A true word(super dogma, I call). If a country like Saudi Arabia with high GDP supports primitiveness, we can comfortably say Islam can never change.
It is impossible for Islamists to carry on like this, fault lines will show up. Right now, their oxygen is victim status believed by many Muslims to be real and worse non Muslims too think this way. At some point people do recognize what is Islam actually.
Muslims just have to be asked hard questions, real hard. Most important one is why are they demanding special rights in other countries (non Islamic) when they deny basic rights to minorities in their countries, if they exist, because many have succeeded in cleansing them.
This line of argument behooves non Muslims to understand this supremacist Islam.
written by Clement- The Islam- Watch Pastor' , March 08, 2010
Reed what else do you want me to say since I have told you all you need to know about Abraham yet you don't understand.
The Reason why we know God today was because Yahweh called Abraham and revealed Himself to him and made a promise or covenant with him and his descentants- the Israelites through whom the Messiah was to come - Jesus Christ. He was the father of our faith in God. let me quote from the New Testament to bring home my point and rest my case.
Gal 3:6-9
"
6 Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.
7 Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.
8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.
9 So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham."
KJV
Please go ahead and tell us what you want to say about Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. I know your Quran call them Prophets but we know them as the founding fathers our faith if in that sense they are called prophets I have no objections but they are more than just the traditional prophets according to the difinition of that office.
The Reason why we know God today was because Yahweh called Abraham and revealed Himself to him and made a promise or covenant with him and his descentants- the Israelites through whom the Messiah was to come - Jesus Christ. He was the father of our faith in God. let me quote from the New Testament to bring home my point and rest my case.
Gal 3:6-9
"
6 Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.
7 Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.
8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.
9 So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham."
KJV
Please go ahead and tell us what you want to say about Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. I know your Quran call them Prophets but we know them as the founding fathers our faith if in that sense they are called prophets I have no objections but they are more than just the traditional prophets according to the difinition of that office.
written by duh_swami , March 08, 2010
Civilian Christians in the US are some of the heaviest armed people in the world...In the first three months of the Obama administration Americans (mostly Christians) purchased enough guns and ammo to arm two full size armies the size of China's...
A.B...But Christianity wouldn't? okay... there must be an example of a time and place where Christianity did not descend to whatever level of violence they could, when they could... maybe somebody could tell me what that example might be.
They can, at this moment descend into all the violence that they could, but they are not...Why do you think that is?...You have some strange ideas, you must be a Muslim...
A.B...But Christianity wouldn't? okay... there must be an example of a time and place where Christianity did not descend to whatever level of violence they could, when they could... maybe somebody could tell me what that example might be.
They can, at this moment descend into all the violence that they could, but they are not...Why do you think that is?...You have some strange ideas, you must be a Muslim...
written by Reed Wilson. , March 08, 2010
Clement. Thank you. Why you were shy of telling that Abraham was neither Prophet nor a messenger but he was founding father of Christianity in Christianity.
You did not spell out the status of Isaac and Jacob in Christianity. Never mind.
Quran doesn't address them as prophets.
You did not spell out the status of Isaac and Jacob in Christianity. Never mind.
Quran doesn't address them as prophets.
written by Ali , March 08, 2010
Anderson , you muslims accept the Quran , rants of a killer and rapist , as words of God without a proof or single witness witness who saw Mohammed talking to Gibraeel or Allah, and live a life based on it and many (including your prophet)go rape captured women and kill kuffar based on quranic ayas . Are you not acting as if you personally witnessed Allah dictating quran to Mohammad ?..But you get offended and want proof from an amateur unknown weeekrnd satire writer of an unimportant comment about a evil killer who almost killed dozens of innocents.It is totally unimportant whether the slob was ever rejected by girls, important is that his conversion to islam and planning a bombing mission based on violent quranic teachings. Ayesha posted a video to prove that fact. About the swelling breast aya here it is.
78:33(George Sale) and damsels with swelling breasts, of equal age with themselves.
Yes muslim translators avoid using words like swelling breasts out of embarassment. They are all brainwashed like you. Read non muslim translation like Sale, Arberry etc.
78:33(George Sale) and damsels with swelling breasts, of equal age with themselves.
Yes muslim translators avoid using words like swelling breasts out of embarassment. They are all brainwashed like you. Read non muslim translation like Sale, Arberry etc.
written by Clement- The Islam- Watch Pastor' , March 09, 2010
You Said “Quran doesn't address them as prophets.” You should call them messenger then and that should be wrong too, because based on the definition of a prophet as outline by you and based on the definition of a messenger as outlined by me, you will agree that they are not messengers even Mohammed was not qualified to be called a messenger of God.
1.God used Angel not human as his messengers and spoke to Angels directly to pass his messenger to the intended destination but he sent prophets among the humans because the lived among the people to guide the people.
2.God did not speak to Mohammed directly except through an Angel, he should best be called the messenger of Angel not of God and if speaking to one directly by God was the criteria for been a messenger of God then all Jews prophets are messenger of God for God spoke to them directly and not only through an Angel.
3.A messenger must not necessarily be from his nation or his people and does not need to live among the people but must go back to whoever sent him. Angels delivered the message of God and go back to God but prophets delivered the message and remain with the people to continue to guide them through predictive prophesy and by living a holy life among the people. This is distinguishing factor between a messenger and a prophet.
4.Let use this criteria to test if Mohammed was a prophet or a messenger:
a.He could not have been a messenger because he was not an Angel, if we considered him as a messenger because the message was not his, but he did not receive it from God but through an Angel and there was no proof that the Angel was from God.
b.He could not have been a messenger of God because the spirit that spoke to him never introduced himself as been from God rather it terrorised Mohammed to want to commit suicide and the Angel in one of the hadiths was said to be the enemy of the Jews( God chosen people )can you belief this? Only Satan is the enemy of God chosen people as we know it even today.
c.He could not have been a prophet because God never spoke to him directly besides he never prophesied nor live a godly life among his people. He never used the power of God to bring relief among the people like healing the sick, delivering the oppressed by the devil, providing food and water to his people, instead he lived as a criminal among the people a terrorist, a rapist, sex pervert and a paedophile. His life was exactly opposite of what should be that of a prophet.
1.God used Angel not human as his messengers and spoke to Angels directly to pass his messenger to the intended destination but he sent prophets among the humans because the lived among the people to guide the people.
2.God did not speak to Mohammed directly except through an Angel, he should best be called the messenger of Angel not of God and if speaking to one directly by God was the criteria for been a messenger of God then all Jews prophets are messenger of God for God spoke to them directly and not only through an Angel.
3.A messenger must not necessarily be from his nation or his people and does not need to live among the people but must go back to whoever sent him. Angels delivered the message of God and go back to God but prophets delivered the message and remain with the people to continue to guide them through predictive prophesy and by living a holy life among the people. This is distinguishing factor between a messenger and a prophet.
4.Let use this criteria to test if Mohammed was a prophet or a messenger:
a.He could not have been a messenger because he was not an Angel, if we considered him as a messenger because the message was not his, but he did not receive it from God but through an Angel and there was no proof that the Angel was from God.
b.He could not have been a messenger of God because the spirit that spoke to him never introduced himself as been from God rather it terrorised Mohammed to want to commit suicide and the Angel in one of the hadiths was said to be the enemy of the Jews( God chosen people )can you belief this? Only Satan is the enemy of God chosen people as we know it even today.
c.He could not have been a prophet because God never spoke to him directly besides he never prophesied nor live a godly life among his people. He never used the power of God to bring relief among the people like healing the sick, delivering the oppressed by the devil, providing food and water to his people, instead he lived as a criminal among the people a terrorist, a rapist, sex pervert and a paedophile. His life was exactly opposite of what should be that of a prophet.
written by Reed Wilson. , March 09, 2010
To Clement. My curiosity was about the status of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in Christianity. You, at last, informed me that Abraham was founder of Christianity in Christianity. Thanks.
You are lord of enviable vocabulary and master of using it.
Now you are telling me about messenger hood and prophet hood of mohammad. Have not you told me enough about him? He was womanizer. He was a rapist. He was a child molester. He was a plunderer. A big list of attributes!
Among mohammadans there are many who don’t run out of praises for him. Round the clock praising him! This is the only obligation and requirement of Islam for them
Mohammad is dead for more than 1400 years. The abuses and praises are no more affecting him.
If mohammad and Allah were two, the latter will admonish him for not delivering the message vide 74:3. "And declare greatness of your lord".
You are proving that he was neither messenger nor prophet. Even if you prove otherwise, it will lead to many strange combinations such as prophet and rapist, messenger and womanizer etc.
Clement, the regime we are in, no religion is in its original shape and form. There are contaminants in them. Absurdities, to the extant of pornography, are forced in every religion. No exception. If you rise and point out, hounds will be after you. People are getting fed up of the form of religion they have. They are winding it up and look forward for secularism or atheism. This is understandable reaction.
You are lord of enviable vocabulary and master of using it.
Now you are telling me about messenger hood and prophet hood of mohammad. Have not you told me enough about him? He was womanizer. He was a rapist. He was a child molester. He was a plunderer. A big list of attributes!
Among mohammadans there are many who don’t run out of praises for him. Round the clock praising him! This is the only obligation and requirement of Islam for them
Mohammad is dead for more than 1400 years. The abuses and praises are no more affecting him.
If mohammad and Allah were two, the latter will admonish him for not delivering the message vide 74:3. "And declare greatness of your lord".
You are proving that he was neither messenger nor prophet. Even if you prove otherwise, it will lead to many strange combinations such as prophet and rapist, messenger and womanizer etc.
Clement, the regime we are in, no religion is in its original shape and form. There are contaminants in them. Absurdities, to the extant of pornography, are forced in every religion. No exception. If you rise and point out, hounds will be after you. People are getting fed up of the form of religion they have. They are winding it up and look forward for secularism or atheism. This is understandable reaction.
written by Clement- The Islam- Watch Pastor' , March 09, 2010
Frankly speaking Reed, you don't look like the typical Muslim fanatics for they hardly remained cool in the midsts of that barrage of attack on their prophet. Before you know it will begin to call you names and fatwa for you. In that you are different. I believe the difference between p and b are beginning to immerge in your sub-consciousness.
Though I would prefer that when you apostatize you should become a Christian. You will gain nothing in becoming an atheist, a free thinker, a moralist or a humanist because you will still be carrying the risk of uncertain eternity waiting for you but Jesus has removed that risk of future uncertainty for those who believe him and follow his teachings. Cheers.
Though I would prefer that when you apostatize you should become a Christian. You will gain nothing in becoming an atheist, a free thinker, a moralist or a humanist because you will still be carrying the risk of uncertain eternity waiting for you but Jesus has removed that risk of future uncertainty for those who believe him and follow his teachings. Cheers.
written by duh_swami , March 09, 2010
Clement sez...Though I would prefer that when you apostatize you should become a Christian. You will gain nothing in becoming an atheist, a free thinker, a moralist or a humanist because you will still be carrying the risk of uncertain eternity waiting for you...
Afraid to take a gamble Clement? While I think Christianity is a suitable substitute for some Muslims, it is still a substitute...Your remarks about Jesus as a cure for an uncertain eternity...is based on 'faith' only...There is no way you can 'know' that Jesus promises will come true after death, you can only 'believe' it by the mechanism of faith...There is no way you can transfer your 'faith' to another...
No one ever got anywhere by anothers accomplishments...
By 'uncertain eternity, you probably mean that those who do not accept Jesus are going to be sent to Allah's furnace room...Somehow I don't believe that because I take 'nothing' on faith...
Afraid to take a gamble Clement? While I think Christianity is a suitable substitute for some Muslims, it is still a substitute...Your remarks about Jesus as a cure for an uncertain eternity...is based on 'faith' only...There is no way you can 'know' that Jesus promises will come true after death, you can only 'believe' it by the mechanism of faith...There is no way you can transfer your 'faith' to another...
No one ever got anywhere by anothers accomplishments...
By 'uncertain eternity, you probably mean that those who do not accept Jesus are going to be sent to Allah's furnace room...Somehow I don't believe that because I take 'nothing' on faith...
written by Machmoed , March 09, 2010
That's why i already wrote: i hope that there were millions of individuals like Reed. He is not attacking with hellfire and that sort of garbage. He is a humanist, but i know he appriciates believer in God more. Whatever you do Reed, just believe in yourself and in your God (not the arab God or some god of others). If then like Clement is inviting you to christianity....and it is your choice, then that would be beautiful. If you don't want to follow any religion and it is your choice..well that would be also beautiful. As long as it is your choice....not because of God, Christ, Allah, messengers or whatever, but because of you. Then you will know your God. In my language it never sais God...God is non existent in my language. It always is called MYGOD and it's one word.
written by duh_swami , March 09, 2010
'God' is not a name, it is a title...Allah is a name...God with no name is singular...
That's why all the descriptions of God in the Bible are singular...God 'is' Love...God 'is' Life, God 'is Light, God 'Is' Peace, God 'is' Spirit...What is common among those
is that they are all singular and have no opposites...Love...Hate is not the opposite of Love...The opposite of hate is 'like'...You either like something or you can hate it...There is no opposite of death, death is the absence life, not the extinguishing of life, just as Dark is not the opposite of light, it is the absence of light...Science and artists know that black is not a color, it is the absence of color, where white is the combination of all colors...Peace is not the opposite of war...Truce is the opposite...Everyone stays armed to the teeth waiting for someone to slip up...While truce may be better than war, it is not peace...
Islam is the opposite of 'God'...Allah is a name signifying a duality...Allah is not Love, Allah generates no Light, Allah prefers death to Life, there is nothing peaceful about Allah, and he certainly is not spirit...
That's why all the descriptions of God in the Bible are singular...God 'is' Love...God 'is' Life, God 'is Light, God 'Is' Peace, God 'is' Spirit...What is common among those
is that they are all singular and have no opposites...Love...Hate is not the opposite of Love...The opposite of hate is 'like'...You either like something or you can hate it...There is no opposite of death, death is the absence life, not the extinguishing of life, just as Dark is not the opposite of light, it is the absence of light...Science and artists know that black is not a color, it is the absence of color, where white is the combination of all colors...Peace is not the opposite of war...Truce is the opposite...Everyone stays armed to the teeth waiting for someone to slip up...While truce may be better than war, it is not peace...
Islam is the opposite of 'God'...Allah is a name signifying a duality...Allah is not Love, Allah generates no Light, Allah prefers death to Life, there is nothing peaceful about Allah, and he certainly is not spirit...
written by Reed Wilson. , March 09, 2010
Machmoed. You write "If then like Clement is inviting you to christianity....and it is your choice, then that would be beautiful".
Clement is inviting me to Christianity on the assumption that I was not.
Clement is inviting me to Christianity on the assumption that I was not.
written by Machmoed , March 09, 2010
I agree totally agree with you Duh_Swami. I believe that everyhing exists because of the other. There would be no light without darkness and no white without black. One of the reasons Darwin didn't believe in the scritual God is because of absence of love in nature. When he begun to study the laws of nature, he knew that God was not the god of the scriptures. When Einstein begun to understand the mightiness of the whole universe and it's laws, he knew the God of the scriptures is a foolish and childish God. Everyone sees God like people see them selfs. So the reason Allah seems to be as we believe is because the arabs were also harsh and oppressive etc. in that time....ignorant might be the correct word and most of them still are.
written by Machmoed , March 09, 2010
Reed, are you a christian in the sense of believer in one God or are you a real christian believing Jesus died on the cross for the sins of mankind?
I think the first one, but i agree it is an assumption of mine.
I think the first one, but i agree it is an assumption of mine.
written by Healer_999 , March 09, 2010
It is typical of Muslim translators to hide certain things like Jihad, Qital and fitna (it is literally absent in all translations offered by www. USC.edu). Even with the absence of these words you can feel cruelty when you read Koran.
Thank you Ali for giving names of non Muslims who translated Koran. Are they available online like Ali, Pickthal and Shakir?
Recently I came across another translation available online, that is Al-Hilali. It is OK I guess. Lets check how wrote 78.33.
"And young full-breasted (mature) maidens of equal age";
I guess it is OK.
Thank you Ali for giving names of non Muslims who translated Koran. Are they available online like Ali, Pickthal and Shakir?
Recently I came across another translation available online, that is Al-Hilali. It is OK I guess. Lets check how wrote 78.33.
"And young full-breasted (mature) maidens of equal age";
I guess it is OK.
written by duh_swami , March 09, 2010
I use this site for Quran translations...Works fine for me...
http://www.quranbrowser.com/
http://www.quranbrowser.com/
written by Clement- The Islam- Watch Pastor' , March 10, 2010
You wrote :
“...Your remarks about Jesus as a cure for an uncertain eternity...is based on 'faith' only...There is no way you can 'know' that Jesus promises will come true after death, you can only 'believe' it by the mechanism of faith...There is no way you can transfer your 'faith' to another...” This comment is based on the belief that faith is based on something abstract not real or not true but that is wrong. The reality of the God of the Bible is not contestable.
Yahweh demanded for faith in him only after he has proved his power to his chosen people the Israelites and through out their history as recorded in the Bible it was full with divine power intervention in the affairs of men. The same thing in the New Testament, Christ being the fulfilment of more than 300 prophesies he also demonstrated power even over death and promised to come again after his body ascension into heaven with eye witnesses’ account that is not deniable.
Currently we see miracles signs and wonders being done in preaching the gospel of Christ in accordance to that mandate. Also we see the tiny state of Israel being surrounded by the hordes of about 1.4billion Mohammadans trying to push them to the sea and annihilate them for 6 decades now but are unable because of the covenant God made with them. This is no fictions or day dreaming, this is reality. Definitely faith in such a God is not blind faith. Since Jesus lived on this earth and was true to his word to the end simple logic will conclude that the eternity will be as he said.
On the contrary I see no hope for those who despised this God ignoring him or try to reach him on their own ways and terms. The Bible calls it human wisdom. In this I see groups like the atheists, the humanists, the free thinkers, the moralists etc. Human history has not shown that man if left alone can be better off by him self, morally, socially even politically rather he will end up destroying himself completely from the face of the earth. How will man know that lying is bad if God has not say, or how will man know that fornication, adultery, homosexuality, false witness, covetousness, murder, hatred, polygamy was not good for him if God has not said so? For these and others I don’t see man knowing God on his own as Machmoed and others would want us to believe without faith in God’s revelation in the Bible.
I think the most rational thing to do is to put one’s faith on God that has proven his case beyond any reasonable doubt like the God of the Bible. As no rational business man would want to maximise his risk instead of minimising it. I see the risk of uncertain future eternity being reduced to almost zero by the God of the Bible and of Christ. I would rather belief Christ than to rely on human wisdom. What about you?
“...Your remarks about Jesus as a cure for an uncertain eternity...is based on 'faith' only...There is no way you can 'know' that Jesus promises will come true after death, you can only 'believe' it by the mechanism of faith...There is no way you can transfer your 'faith' to another...” This comment is based on the belief that faith is based on something abstract not real or not true but that is wrong. The reality of the God of the Bible is not contestable.
Yahweh demanded for faith in him only after he has proved his power to his chosen people the Israelites and through out their history as recorded in the Bible it was full with divine power intervention in the affairs of men. The same thing in the New Testament, Christ being the fulfilment of more than 300 prophesies he also demonstrated power even over death and promised to come again after his body ascension into heaven with eye witnesses’ account that is not deniable.
Currently we see miracles signs and wonders being done in preaching the gospel of Christ in accordance to that mandate. Also we see the tiny state of Israel being surrounded by the hordes of about 1.4billion Mohammadans trying to push them to the sea and annihilate them for 6 decades now but are unable because of the covenant God made with them. This is no fictions or day dreaming, this is reality. Definitely faith in such a God is not blind faith. Since Jesus lived on this earth and was true to his word to the end simple logic will conclude that the eternity will be as he said.
On the contrary I see no hope for those who despised this God ignoring him or try to reach him on their own ways and terms. The Bible calls it human wisdom. In this I see groups like the atheists, the humanists, the free thinkers, the moralists etc. Human history has not shown that man if left alone can be better off by him self, morally, socially even politically rather he will end up destroying himself completely from the face of the earth. How will man know that lying is bad if God has not say, or how will man know that fornication, adultery, homosexuality, false witness, covetousness, murder, hatred, polygamy was not good for him if God has not said so? For these and others I don’t see man knowing God on his own as Machmoed and others would want us to believe without faith in God’s revelation in the Bible.
I think the most rational thing to do is to put one’s faith on God that has proven his case beyond any reasonable doubt like the God of the Bible. As no rational business man would want to maximise his risk instead of minimising it. I see the risk of uncertain future eternity being reduced to almost zero by the God of the Bible and of Christ. I would rather belief Christ than to rely on human wisdom. What about you?
written by Machmoed , March 10, 2010
I don’t see man knowing God on his own as Machmoed and others would want us to believe without faith in God’s revelation in the Bible.
How come Jesus knew God on his own?
You only can find God by your own...you also found God on your own...when you made the choice to believe then you begun to understand chritianity/Jesus/God and you found bible is the fullfillment of your believe. How you felt about God, was represented by the bible...right? I could be wrong Clement, but i really believe you can know him by knowing thyself. Did Jesus not say you have to be born again to know him. In india you have a lot of Sadhoe's. They have almost the same teachings as christ had. When they want to become a Sadhoe they must be reborn...this means a celebate life, no family (only family are the guru's and sadhoe's), they have to give away everything materialistic and they also say, you have to be born again. They are great....the only thing is that they smoke opium to be closer to their God.
How come Jesus knew God on his own?
You only can find God by your own...you also found God on your own...when you made the choice to believe then you begun to understand chritianity/Jesus/God and you found bible is the fullfillment of your believe. How you felt about God, was represented by the bible...right? I could be wrong Clement, but i really believe you can know him by knowing thyself. Did Jesus not say you have to be born again to know him. In india you have a lot of Sadhoe's. They have almost the same teachings as christ had. When they want to become a Sadhoe they must be reborn...this means a celebate life, no family (only family are the guru's and sadhoe's), they have to give away everything materialistic and they also say, you have to be born again. They are great....the only thing is that they smoke opium to be closer to their God.
written by Machmoed , March 10, 2010
To my understanding Allah is not a name but a title. The name of allah is Hubal...indirectly (see hadieth and the grandfather of Mohammad praying to Hubal aka Allah)! Allah is from al ilaah and it means the God (Eli in judaism). In judaism the title of God/Allah is called Elohim. JHWH is it's/his name.
written by Clement- The Islam-watch Pastor , March 10, 2010
I believe you are matured enough to know what is good for you.
I am praying that God will open the light of the Gospel of Christ to shines in your heart which is the only hope and the only way to escape the damnation that is to come upon the children of disobedient. His teachings are humanistic enough that even if there is nothing like hell or heaven or judgement or even if salvation is by works not a gift of God as said in the Bible, you would have nothing to fear or loose.
But those who reject faith in God gift of salvation through Christ, and depended solely on their good works or self wisdom to know him and it turns out that Jesus was right they will loose greatly without remedy and they will come to realisation only when it is too late. I would not like you to take that risk. It is an unwise decision to take that risk. You may want to contact me on This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it '> This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
I am praying that God will open the light of the Gospel of Christ to shines in your heart which is the only hope and the only way to escape the damnation that is to come upon the children of disobedient. His teachings are humanistic enough that even if there is nothing like hell or heaven or judgement or even if salvation is by works not a gift of God as said in the Bible, you would have nothing to fear or loose.
But those who reject faith in God gift of salvation through Christ, and depended solely on their good works or self wisdom to know him and it turns out that Jesus was right they will loose greatly without remedy and they will come to realisation only when it is too late. I would not like you to take that risk. It is an unwise decision to take that risk. You may want to contact me on This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it '> This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
written by duh_swami , March 10, 2010
Clement...The reality of the God of the Bible is not contestable.
Yes it is...The reality starts in the Bible and that's where it ends...
'Faith' according to dictionary.com...
2. 'Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence'.
Another definition is belief in the unseen and unknown...
So what you have is the blind belief in something you can't possibly 'know' about...You can only 'believe' in it...You can prove nothing...But that does not stop you from talking a lot about it just the same...
You are perfectly entitled to believe in 'faith'...I am equally entitled to think that this 'faith' is a mental mechanism only, and has no basis in reality, and because of that qualifies for the title, 'Childhood wish fulfillment fantasy'...
If God really exists as you claim, show me some proof...But I already know you have no proof, all you have is words...If your faith was transferable to others, you would be the 'Savior'...Are you the 'savior' Clement? Do you have some special powers given to you by faith?...
I was not born yesterday, Clement, and I know which side of the bread the butter is on...How do you account for the Bible suggestion, that ' In all your getting 'get understanding'...Understanding requires no faith...Jesus remarked, O yea of little 'understanding'...This is because 'understanding' is superior to belief...Beliefs are always in flux...You can believe something today and not believe it tomorrow (this is the process of both conversion, and apostasy)...A correct understanding is solid, once you 'understand', you are on solid ground...Beliefs are a never ending slippery slope...Belief in God is just that, a belief...Faith...Many have it but few can justify it, because its base is unknown, unseen, and has no material, or logical proof...When you get some of those...write back...I would be interested in proof, I'm not interested unsubstantiated faith and belief...
Yes it is...The reality starts in the Bible and that's where it ends...
'Faith' according to dictionary.com...
2. 'Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence'.
Another definition is belief in the unseen and unknown...
So what you have is the blind belief in something you can't possibly 'know' about...You can only 'believe' in it...You can prove nothing...But that does not stop you from talking a lot about it just the same...
You are perfectly entitled to believe in 'faith'...I am equally entitled to think that this 'faith' is a mental mechanism only, and has no basis in reality, and because of that qualifies for the title, 'Childhood wish fulfillment fantasy'...
If God really exists as you claim, show me some proof...But I already know you have no proof, all you have is words...If your faith was transferable to others, you would be the 'Savior'...Are you the 'savior' Clement? Do you have some special powers given to you by faith?...
I was not born yesterday, Clement, and I know which side of the bread the butter is on...How do you account for the Bible suggestion, that ' In all your getting 'get understanding'...Understanding requires no faith...Jesus remarked, O yea of little 'understanding'...This is because 'understanding' is superior to belief...Beliefs are always in flux...You can believe something today and not believe it tomorrow (this is the process of both conversion, and apostasy)...A correct understanding is solid, once you 'understand', you are on solid ground...Beliefs are a never ending slippery slope...Belief in God is just that, a belief...Faith...Many have it but few can justify it, because its base is unknown, unseen, and has no material, or logical proof...When you get some of those...write back...I would be interested in proof, I'm not interested unsubstantiated faith and belief...
written by duh_swami , March 10, 2010
I hate it when I write something on this site and it disappears, before it's posted...
I wrote about faith and belief in God, it got lost so I'm not going to bother writing it again...Lets just say I strongly disagree, with your position...
I wrote about faith and belief in God, it got lost so I'm not going to bother writing it again...Lets just say I strongly disagree, with your position...
written by Ayesha Akram. , March 10, 2010
To All.
I feenecessity to post my following message which I had earlier posted for Machmoed and Clement, the pastor.
We all know that:
Islam means submission or obedience to Allah
A muslim means one who submits his will to the will of Allah
Not all the Muslims are muslims
There are muslims among the Muslims.
Similarly there are muslims among the Christians;
Not all the Christians are muslims.
There are muslims among the Jews
Not all the Jews are muslims.
The list of ethnic religious communities and their sects is long;
There are muslims among them all.
Allah says that He has given same Deen, through all the Messengers, to the Mankind. .
That deen He named as Islam.
Christians celebrate Christmas;
Christmas has no mention in Bible;
Not all Christians celebrate it as Birthday of Christ;
Not all believe Jesus as only son of God;
Not all believe he was born on Christmas;
Muslims celebrate Milad un Nabi;
It has no mention in Quran;
Not all muslims believe that Muhammad was only beloved of Allah;
Not all Muslims believe that the Messenger was born on Milad un Nabi;
Muslims celebrate Eids;
They don’t need a cover of Quran for that to justify.
Celebrations have no embargo;
I can celebrate even my own birthday;
The restriction is that everything should be within limits;
Within limits of the will of Allah;
What is forbidden is zulm of all manifestations;
Shirk is greatest of them all.
Tell Christians to read Bible;
Tell Muslims to read Quran;
Tell Jews to read Torah;
Tell Hindus to read Vedas;
Don’t desert them;
They have them all.
Greet them on their celebrations..
I feenecessity to post my following message which I had earlier posted for Machmoed and Clement, the pastor.
We all know that:
Islam means submission or obedience to Allah
A muslim means one who submits his will to the will of Allah
Not all the Muslims are muslims
There are muslims among the Muslims.
Similarly there are muslims among the Christians;
Not all the Christians are muslims.
There are muslims among the Jews
Not all the Jews are muslims.
The list of ethnic religious communities and their sects is long;
There are muslims among them all.
Allah says that He has given same Deen, through all the Messengers, to the Mankind. .
That deen He named as Islam.
Christians celebrate Christmas;
Christmas has no mention in Bible;
Not all Christians celebrate it as Birthday of Christ;
Not all believe Jesus as only son of God;
Not all believe he was born on Christmas;
Muslims celebrate Milad un Nabi;
It has no mention in Quran;
Not all muslims believe that Muhammad was only beloved of Allah;
Not all Muslims believe that the Messenger was born on Milad un Nabi;
Muslims celebrate Eids;
They don’t need a cover of Quran for that to justify.
Celebrations have no embargo;
I can celebrate even my own birthday;
The restriction is that everything should be within limits;
Within limits of the will of Allah;
What is forbidden is zulm of all manifestations;
Shirk is greatest of them all.
Tell Christians to read Bible;
Tell Muslims to read Quran;
Tell Jews to read Torah;
Tell Hindus to read Vedas;
Don’t desert them;
They have them all.
Greet them on their celebrations..
written by duh_swami , March 10, 2010
From above...A muslim means one who submits his will to the will of Allah
Not all the Muslims are muslims
There are muslims among the Muslims.
Hmm...It looks to me like, according to that, that there are apostates among Muslims...And I thought all Muslims were equal...Of course we already know that some Muslims are superior to other Muslims...The Arab Muslim is especially elevated...
So submitting the will to the will of Allah does not guarantee equality of Muslims, but renders some unequal...Or some Muslims are just a little more equal than other Muslims...Are Arab Muslims superior to the 'Raisin headed' abeed?
Sounds a bit like racism...Is Allah a racist? He didn't create Islam for abeed, nor for the oriental, nor the white kufr, he created it for Arabs...Actually it was Mahound who did that, and he did not have one un-Arabic thought in his head...
It was only when he was running out of local villages and caravans to rob, that he decided to spread the word of Allah outside Arabia...So we get aya's like 8:39... Caesars treasuries appealed a lot to him, so he set out to loot them...
So Islam is not satisfied by just accommodating all these different types of Muslims, it seeks to rob and kill them...
Not all the Muslims are muslims
There are muslims among the Muslims.
Hmm...It looks to me like, according to that, that there are apostates among Muslims...And I thought all Muslims were equal...Of course we already know that some Muslims are superior to other Muslims...The Arab Muslim is especially elevated...
So submitting the will to the will of Allah does not guarantee equality of Muslims, but renders some unequal...Or some Muslims are just a little more equal than other Muslims...Are Arab Muslims superior to the 'Raisin headed' abeed?
Sounds a bit like racism...Is Allah a racist? He didn't create Islam for abeed, nor for the oriental, nor the white kufr, he created it for Arabs...Actually it was Mahound who did that, and he did not have one un-Arabic thought in his head...
It was only when he was running out of local villages and caravans to rob, that he decided to spread the word of Allah outside Arabia...So we get aya's like 8:39... Caesars treasuries appealed a lot to him, so he set out to loot them...
So Islam is not satisfied by just accommodating all these different types of Muslims, it seeks to rob and kill them...
written by Ali , March 10, 2010
As Swami already responded, http://quranbrowser.com/ is the best. In case it is off on a particular day , you can find those translations on line individually.
written by Clement- The Islam-watch Pastor , March 11, 2010
Ayesha said "Tell Muslims to read Quran; " God forbid bad thing I will not and I cannot do that. Come to think about it, we are enjoying your comments here because you are ignorant of what the Quran says. If you know what the Quran said about you as a woman we would have missed you. You will not be here asking questions which the Quran forbids you to ask, you would have been in a tent like covering that will not allowing you the freedom to go anywhere except your husband house only and that for only two purposes: satisfying his sexual need and making babies for him.
You see the more a Muslim man become a Quran reader it does not take time for him to begin to grow bears and it does not take time to become a terrorist, a polygamist, a child abuser like his prophets. So Ayesha we want as many ignorant Muslim like you so that we can live at peace with one another.
Can you imaging what the world would look like if the 1.4billions of the so called Muslim of the world follow the teaching of the Quran? What do you think if all the Muslim men that bear the name Mohammed actually behave like Mohammed not to talk of 1.4billion people, you better not imaging the outcome with only less than 1% of 1.4bill being terrorist and we are all in chaos and in great danger. If you are not going to apostatize and leave the cult of Islam please remain ignorant of the demands of that Book.
We love you we don't want you to become a terrorist.
You see the more a Muslim man become a Quran reader it does not take time for him to begin to grow bears and it does not take time to become a terrorist, a polygamist, a child abuser like his prophets. So Ayesha we want as many ignorant Muslim like you so that we can live at peace with one another.
Can you imaging what the world would look like if the 1.4billions of the so called Muslim of the world follow the teaching of the Quran? What do you think if all the Muslim men that bear the name Mohammed actually behave like Mohammed not to talk of 1.4billion people, you better not imaging the outcome with only less than 1% of 1.4bill being terrorist and we are all in chaos and in great danger. If you are not going to apostatize and leave the cult of Islam please remain ignorant of the demands of that Book.
We love you we don't want you to become a terrorist.
written by Machmoed , March 11, 2010
Thank you Aisha Akram.
It is well written, but is it true?
Allah says that He has given same Deen, through all the Messengers, to the Mankind. .
That deen He named as Islam.
I missed the following in the sentence above.....he named as islam and made them every time to forget. He is allknowing and powerfull.
I do not agree.....because who told you that Allah has said that.......all we know about the messenger and Allah is from the arabs, and we know they lied about a great deal and still you are propagating their invention, wich they stole from others as those others stole it from others...it is a proces since we were created.
I don't know why muslims keep telling lies about God. Are you serious...is the qor'aan in allighnment with todays science. Every muslim must suffer from jahil brains...it's unbelievable how you can believe such crap.
It is well written, but is it true?
Allah says that He has given same Deen, through all the Messengers, to the Mankind. .
That deen He named as Islam.
I missed the following in the sentence above.....he named as islam and made them every time to forget. He is allknowing and powerfull.
I do not agree.....because who told you that Allah has said that.......all we know about the messenger and Allah is from the arabs, and we know they lied about a great deal and still you are propagating their invention, wich they stole from others as those others stole it from others...it is a proces since we were created.
I don't know why muslims keep telling lies about God. Are you serious...is the qor'aan in allighnment with todays science. Every muslim must suffer from jahil brains...it's unbelievable how you can believe such crap.
written by Healer_999 , March 11, 2010
Your post does't make any sense.
Allah, to whom you submit, tells completely another line, wage Jihad.
I really wish you read Koran and then talk.
Allah, to whom you submit, tells completely another line, wage Jihad.
I really wish you read Koran and then talk.
written by Ayesha Akram , March 11, 2010
Machmoed. Machmoed ,
Thank you machmoed for liking and disaggreeing my scribbling.
We are thinking on different planes. You ignore what you disagree.
You can rename the name of deen.
You can rename Allah.
Please post your wordings and concept. Also tell me what what you aggree out of my composition?
written by Ayesha Akram , March 11, 2010
To Clement. Thank you for welcoming. This site attracts me. It is to tell truth about Islam. This is very important.
Please tell me if apostatization is means to an end or it is an end in it self?
I see five frustrated Bengali apostates as founders of the site. What is there destination? Will they become atheist or become Christian. They can become Hindu. I find very good things in Vedas. Whatever, but they should become something instead of being in abeyan.
Clement, what are you doing on this site. You are Christian, isn't it? Look out of place. Why don’t you baptize the Bengali founders of the site?
You may like to tell me what Bible says about a woman? I will appreciate.
Please tell me if apostatization is means to an end or it is an end in it self?
I see five frustrated Bengali apostates as founders of the site. What is there destination? Will they become atheist or become Christian. They can become Hindu. I find very good things in Vedas. Whatever, but they should become something instead of being in abeyan.
Clement, what are you doing on this site. You are Christian, isn't it? Look out of place. Why don’t you baptize the Bengali founders of the site?
You may like to tell me what Bible says about a woman? I will appreciate.
written by Machmoed , March 11, 2010
Dear Ayesha Akram,
I liked your composition because it is about individuals. An individual muslim behaves different than a muslim who operates in an umma/ group. If the individual stops being an individual, he/she stops using what they got. That’s why i always say that believing in God is personal and no one should interfere...no prophets/messengers/ no scriptures or whatsoever...God/nature is alive and kicking and he/nature brought us where we are. As long as we ignore reality like most muslims do, then reality is going to ignore us.
You wrote: you ignore what you disagree......could you motivate the question? I believe all religions (to reform a legion) are man-made...especially when we agree on the attributes of the almighty. We humans believe God is capable of everything and knows everything from the beginning to the end. I don’t see this in religions. All i see is excuses how to understand his word and till today nobody really has. All i see is a god who is not in controll.
If we believe God is eternal and unchangeable then why did he manifestate himself through different characters in a very short time.
You can rename the name of deen.
You can rename Allah.
Deen in the beginning of islam it meant like “the right/straight path”. In the beginning muslims were not called muslims but ahl al-islam . Islam meant like collectivness/ unity.
Rename Allah? Why would a deity need a name. I mean a name is given to distinguish one from the other. Rename Allah wouldn’t change the attributes man gave to him. Everything wich you describe or define is actually a limitation. The best definition a scripture ever gave about God is “Iam that i am” and that’s it.
I liked your composition because it is about individuals. An individual muslim behaves different than a muslim who operates in an umma/ group. If the individual stops being an individual, he/she stops using what they got. That’s why i always say that believing in God is personal and no one should interfere...no prophets/messengers/ no scriptures or whatsoever...God/nature is alive and kicking and he/nature brought us where we are. As long as we ignore reality like most muslims do, then reality is going to ignore us.
You wrote: you ignore what you disagree......could you motivate the question? I believe all religions (to reform a legion) are man-made...especially when we agree on the attributes of the almighty. We humans believe God is capable of everything and knows everything from the beginning to the end. I don’t see this in religions. All i see is excuses how to understand his word and till today nobody really has. All i see is a god who is not in controll.
If we believe God is eternal and unchangeable then why did he manifestate himself through different characters in a very short time.
You can rename the name of deen.
You can rename Allah.
Deen in the beginning of islam it meant like “the right/straight path”. In the beginning muslims were not called muslims but ahl al-islam . Islam meant like collectivness/ unity.
Rename Allah? Why would a deity need a name. I mean a name is given to distinguish one from the other. Rename Allah wouldn’t change the attributes man gave to him. Everything wich you describe or define is actually a limitation. The best definition a scripture ever gave about God is “Iam that i am” and that’s it.
written by Clement- The Islam-watch Pastor , March 11, 2010
I have posted here time without number inviting both the atheist, the free thinkers and all the apostates of Islam to Christ .You can read my discourse with Read Wilson, Machmoed, Duh_swami on this matter.
In as much as it doesn’t really bother me what one wants to believe it bothers if one with is brain intact, and all the senses working decided to place is eternal destiny in the hand of Mohammed and the Quran. I May not know all the details of other belief system, and they are harmless but not with Islam. I know that Islam is fake it can not be from the omniscient the omnipotent and the omnipresent , the ever loving and merciful God of the universe that one I am sure of .
I can only pursuant you to come to Christ but it is left for you to decide for your self.
The woman Status in the Bible:
A woman is one of two pillars that God made to build a family and society not five pillars. The man and the woman are equal in what God has created them to do except where positional responsibility matter. Eg. the Man is the leader of the union, the wife is to reverence and honor the husband while the husband love and cherish the wife. It is a life of mutual respect and love for each other.
But you know this important institution has been bastardised in the Quran. Mohammed has to alter the marriage formulary of Yahweh of 1+1=1 to mean 1+4+ X=1 where x is equal to unlimited number of slaves women, girls and house maids 4 is the maximum legal wives a man can have. The reasons for this was because he never saw a world where there will be short supply of women, since his jihadist will continued render families of infidels fatherless. The only permanent solution according to saint Mohammed is to change Yahweh’s original plans for families to be like an animal kingdom where is everything goes.
For proper understanding of what the Bible says about women you can compare the status of women in the West where the Bible influence there their life style and those in east where the Quran influence there life style and the Difference will be clear.
In as much as it doesn’t really bother me what one wants to believe it bothers if one with is brain intact, and all the senses working decided to place is eternal destiny in the hand of Mohammed and the Quran. I May not know all the details of other belief system, and they are harmless but not with Islam. I know that Islam is fake it can not be from the omniscient the omnipotent and the omnipresent , the ever loving and merciful God of the universe that one I am sure of .
I can only pursuant you to come to Christ but it is left for you to decide for your self.
The woman Status in the Bible:
A woman is one of two pillars that God made to build a family and society not five pillars. The man and the woman are equal in what God has created them to do except where positional responsibility matter. Eg. the Man is the leader of the union, the wife is to reverence and honor the husband while the husband love and cherish the wife. It is a life of mutual respect and love for each other.
But you know this important institution has been bastardised in the Quran. Mohammed has to alter the marriage formulary of Yahweh of 1+1=1 to mean 1+4+ X=1 where x is equal to unlimited number of slaves women, girls and house maids 4 is the maximum legal wives a man can have. The reasons for this was because he never saw a world where there will be short supply of women, since his jihadist will continued render families of infidels fatherless. The only permanent solution according to saint Mohammed is to change Yahweh’s original plans for families to be like an animal kingdom where is everything goes.
For proper understanding of what the Bible says about women you can compare the status of women in the West where the Bible influence there their life style and those in east where the Quran influence there life style and the Difference will be clear.
written by Healer_999 , March 11, 2010
Your view of founders of this website is at the best is ludicrous. How can you be sure that they are even apostates apart from Mr. MA Khan, editor.
Why do they have to convert to other religion? Is religion such a necessity? What do they teach?
Trust me it is not easy to write something meaningful and credible, it takes lot of time, which cuts in to life of these people.
When I wrote a post in the section of 'The true Nature of Islam' by 'Nonie Darwish' to show Koran ordains warfare against non-Muslims, it took at least more than one hour. I have to search for relevant passages from my scribble book and then I have to paste from online sites of Koran to add credibility to my post. (I suggest you to read).
And for these people it is much more time consuming since they have much wider audience and are under constant scrutiny by Muslims like you for errors, so they can not afford to make a mistake.
Now, is religion so compulsory? What do they teach?
Do not steal, do not lie and other ridiculous things. These are basic principles for any society to build stable society and make progress.
Do religions firmly reject warfare? Show one religion except Buddhism? In fact in the name of God, they do support.
Basic principles of Morality were added to make these religious doctrines attractive to common people.
By the way Islam destroys even these basic principles and that is the central message of this website.
Anyway, it is courageous on your part to come back.
Why do they have to convert to other religion? Is religion such a necessity? What do they teach?
Trust me it is not easy to write something meaningful and credible, it takes lot of time, which cuts in to life of these people.
When I wrote a post in the section of 'The true Nature of Islam' by 'Nonie Darwish' to show Koran ordains warfare against non-Muslims, it took at least more than one hour. I have to search for relevant passages from my scribble book and then I have to paste from online sites of Koran to add credibility to my post. (I suggest you to read).
And for these people it is much more time consuming since they have much wider audience and are under constant scrutiny by Muslims like you for errors, so they can not afford to make a mistake.
Now, is religion so compulsory? What do they teach?
Do not steal, do not lie and other ridiculous things. These are basic principles for any society to build stable society and make progress.
Do religions firmly reject warfare? Show one religion except Buddhism? In fact in the name of God, they do support.
Basic principles of Morality were added to make these religious doctrines attractive to common people.
By the way Islam destroys even these basic principles and that is the central message of this website.
Anyway, it is courageous on your part to come back.
written by Clement- The Islam-watch Pastor , March 12, 2010
I have written your reply but administrator has not finished reviewing it. As a Christian I here to tell the Apostate of Islam that hope is not lost although Islam is found to be fake, there is truth though in the True Abrahamic faith. Although Mohammed plagiarised the Judeo-Christian scripture he did not take anything of substance out of it. The Mian message of Yahweh is still intact and you can only find it in the Bible and that is Love.
written by Ayesha Akram , March 12, 2010
To Clement. Plagiarization is defined as 'To use and pass off (the ideas or writings of another) as one's own'. Mohammad did not claim the authorship of Quran. Therefore, it is not plagiarization.
You did not tell me on woman in Bible. You say you replied and was detained by the administrator. May be it is included there. I am looking forward.
You did not tell me on woman in Bible. You say you replied and was detained by the administrator. May be it is included there. I am looking forward.
written by Clement- The Islam-watch Pastor , March 12, 2010
I have sent even a shorter version about women status in the Bible this three times now but still it did not go through. May be the administrator does not want such questions answered on this site. But you can contact me on
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
'>
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Cheers
Cheers
written by Ayesha Akram. , March 13, 2010
To Clement.
Thank you. I will consult Bible. I also feel that we should not seekk help in understanding the scriptures. They are for individuals.
I hope you have ageed me on plagiarization! Thank you again for your email address.I will communicate there also when I need.
Thank you. I will consult Bible. I also feel that we should not seekk help in understanding the scriptures. They are for individuals.
I hope you have ageed me on plagiarization! Thank you again for your email address.I will communicate there also when I need.
written by Ayesha Akram , March 13, 2010
Machmoed. You write "Deen in the beginning of islam it meant like “the right/straight path”. In the beginning muslims were not called muslims but ahl al-islam . Islam meant like collectivness/ unity". I have no problem in believing it. How do you say that?
Do you know what Christians were called in the beginning?
Do you know what Christians were called in the beginning?
written by Clement- The Islam-watch Pastor , March 13, 2010
I don't think I agreed with you on the issue of plagiarization and only ignore it because I believe you are joking. Even an unintelligent person who reads the Quran and the Bible and know that the Bible is older than the Quran for at least 600 years will know the source of most of the Quran stories. You don't need to be a prophet to know that Allah, Gabriel and Mohammed as depicted in the Quran are one and the same person Mohammed. Please don't be deceived there is nothing divine in that garbage called the Quran. Mohammed only used those names to serve his purpose at his time that was end of it. He did not even have a plan that that rubbish will survive up to this time. The Arabs only capitalized on people’s ignorance to use it expand their imperialism is not in dispute.
written by Clement- The Islam-watch Pastor , March 13, 2010
Let me briefly say that a woman has great respect and value in a bible friendly environment than a Quran friendly environment. See the West and the East is enough to draw an informed assessment of the woman in the Bible.
Marriage is dehumanised in Islam to the level of the lower animals who actually do not marry in a real sense of it but do copulate and procreate. It was meant to stand on two legs a man and a woman but Mohammed said it could stand on five legs a man and four females (a kind of animal kingdom), it was meant for life until death do us part but Mohammed said you can keep changing wives as many times as you want but you can bang any unmarried maids or slaves without limit
That was why he has to alter the marriage formulary of Yahweh of 1+1=1 to mean 1+4+ X=1 where x is equal to unlimited number of slaves women, girls and house maids 4 is the maximum legal wives a man can have.
Marriage is dehumanised in Islam to the level of the lower animals who actually do not marry in a real sense of it but do copulate and procreate. It was meant to stand on two legs a man and a woman but Mohammed said it could stand on five legs a man and four females (a kind of animal kingdom), it was meant for life until death do us part but Mohammed said you can keep changing wives as many times as you want but you can bang any unmarried maids or slaves without limit
That was why he has to alter the marriage formulary of Yahweh of 1+1=1 to mean 1+4+ X=1 where x is equal to unlimited number of slaves women, girls and house maids 4 is the maximum legal wives a man can have.
written by Ayesha Akram , March 14, 2010
Clement. I have done some searching from the Bible and found following verses concerning women:
Leviticus 21:9, Deuteronomy 25:11-12, Nahum 3:5-6, Leviticus 12:5,
Numbers 5:27-28, Numbers 31:16-18, Isaiah 13:15-16,Deuteronomy 22:24,Isaiah 7:14, Deuteronomy 22:28-29,Ephesians 5:22-24, Genesis 3:16, Hosea 13:16.
By reading the above citations, I feel that some miscreants of pre Jesus period have done mischief with Bible. I can understand that Bible must have enemies, the enemies of truth. Do you know anything about it?
I will however seek your guidance on other issues.
On plagiarization, you ignored assuming I was joking with you. What a serious joke! You give me the correct definition of plagiarization or accept what I said.
Leviticus 21:9, Deuteronomy 25:11-12, Nahum 3:5-6, Leviticus 12:5,
Numbers 5:27-28, Numbers 31:16-18, Isaiah 13:15-16,Deuteronomy 22:24,Isaiah 7:14, Deuteronomy 22:28-29,Ephesians 5:22-24, Genesis 3:16, Hosea 13:16.
By reading the above citations, I feel that some miscreants of pre Jesus period have done mischief with Bible. I can understand that Bible must have enemies, the enemies of truth. Do you know anything about it?
I will however seek your guidance on other issues.
On plagiarization, you ignored assuming I was joking with you. What a serious joke! You give me the correct definition of plagiarization or accept what I said.
written by Clement- The Islam-watch Pastor , March 14, 2010
I said you are joking because you said because Mohammed did not claim authorship of the Quran so he did not plagiarised it. And I told you Allah was only used as a tool to achieve what Mohammed craved for- sex, money and power. Your definition was ok but the application was wrong. So Allah, Gabriel and Mohammed are the same person. For the mere fact that he disclaimed the authorship did not mean that he was not the author. All evidences at our disposal point to him as the author.
Especially when you considered all the self-serving verses, Mohammed was caught swearing in several places in the Quran and you know that the Almighty God does not swear by any other. He was caught praising Allah and even Allah praising or praying for Mohammed can you imaging that. The book itself can not be attributed to a divine personality because it lack context chronology and full of contradictions. I gave a few examples of contradictions which you promised to respond but up to now you are not able to refute them. On what ground do still hold the Quran as divine?
Especially when you considered all the self-serving verses, Mohammed was caught swearing in several places in the Quran and you know that the Almighty God does not swear by any other. He was caught praising Allah and even Allah praising or praying for Mohammed can you imaging that. The book itself can not be attributed to a divine personality because it lack context chronology and full of contradictions. I gave a few examples of contradictions which you promised to respond but up to now you are not able to refute them. On what ground do still hold the Quran as divine?
written by Clement- The Islam-watch Pastor , March 14, 2010
As for references on women I believe you did not read them otherwise you would not have quoted some of them. At any case you only quoted one reference from the New Testament which is the Current covenant that is still in force and that reference did not demean a woman only said women should love and submit to their husband the condition for the mutual love relationship that is supposed to exist between husband and wife. Those reference that has to do with the punishment of women in the OT who committed sins only point to the fact that even in the old Testament sin was punished physically but in the News Testament physical punishment for sin is suspended until the last day When God shall bring it to judgement but now people can escape the judgement if they accept Christ atonement for their sins before the judgement day
written by Elsa Hugerhuis. , March 14, 2010
To Clement.
You should be grateful to the Lord that Ayesha confined to mentioning the references only and did not spell out the respective texts from the Bible. It was dignified of her.
I am sure she read them. She made some comments also. She didnt want to humiliate.
If you read those references, you may also not like to give detail of them on these pages.
You should be grateful to the Lord that Ayesha confined to mentioning the references only and did not spell out the respective texts from the Bible. It was dignified of her.
I am sure she read them. She made some comments also. She didnt want to humiliate.
If you read those references, you may also not like to give detail of them on these pages.
written by Dr. U , March 14, 2010
before writing anything I just want to see if my comments will appear on this blog...
written by Machmoed , March 17, 2010
@ Aysha Akram,
The reason scholars/scientists know that muslims were called ahl islam is because they have found hundreds of papyri from that time, wich a ruler called his nation like that. You see Aysha, the story you believe in is from much later date than the stories i'm telling you. No i don't know what christians were called. I'm only interested in the beginning of islam because this period seems to be locked. Muslim countries do not allow archeological people to see what's there. The question is what is it they are afraid of?
Aysha: do you believe that the messenger and his compagnons prayed to Ka'ba while it was full of other gods? (approx. 360) and this my friend for 6 years (624 till 630).
The reason scholars/scientists know that muslims were called ahl islam is because they have found hundreds of papyri from that time, wich a ruler called his nation like that. You see Aysha, the story you believe in is from much later date than the stories i'm telling you. No i don't know what christians were called. I'm only interested in the beginning of islam because this period seems to be locked. Muslim countries do not allow archeological people to see what's there. The question is what is it they are afraid of?
Aysha: do you believe that the messenger and his compagnons prayed to Ka'ba while it was full of other gods? (approx. 360) and this my friend for 6 years (624 till 630).
written by Ayesha Akram , March 18, 2010
Machmoed. You say "The reason scholars/scientists know that muslims were called ahl islam is because they have found hundreds of papyri from that time, wich a ruler called his nation like that".
Why papyri? There are so many post Islam books. Is there any such mention?
We dont need fossils for a history of 14 hundred years.
Who are they? They all are telling lies.
Why papyri? There are so many post Islam books. Is there any such mention?
We dont need fossils for a history of 14 hundred years.
Who are they? They all are telling lies.
written by Machmoed , March 18, 2010
2 Aysha Akram,
Why Papiry?
You ask silly questions but it's allright. The answer is very easy. The books you mention are very coloured...muslims wrote them and you know i don't believe them anymore don't you. I have very good argumants for that also.
Let's focus on papiry. Papyri was used a lot in those days. They have found hunderds of these and for now they just beginning to undestand those times. You say they lie...i don't think so, because they show the evidence and they are no jews or christians..so they don't have to lie for propagating something else. I don't take knowledge from religionists for credit, I'm sceptical towards devine scriptures, because they are not devine according to me and many others. If you want to know more about papyri then you have to go to the university of Leiden in Holland. There is Dr. Petra Seijpentijn (or something like that) who is the expert on this. Actually you lied when you said they are lying. They have no reason to lie...but you do,,i'm afraid.
Why Papiry?
You ask silly questions but it's allright. The answer is very easy. The books you mention are very coloured...muslims wrote them and you know i don't believe them anymore don't you. I have very good argumants for that also.
Let's focus on papiry. Papyri was used a lot in those days. They have found hunderds of these and for now they just beginning to undestand those times. You say they lie...i don't think so, because they show the evidence and they are no jews or christians..so they don't have to lie for propagating something else. I don't take knowledge from religionists for credit, I'm sceptical towards devine scriptures, because they are not devine according to me and many others. If you want to know more about papyri then you have to go to the university of Leiden in Holland. There is Dr. Petra Seijpentijn (or something like that) who is the expert on this. Actually you lied when you said they are lying. They have no reason to lie...but you do,,i'm afraid.
written by Ayesha Akram , March 18, 2010
Machmoed. You seem to be genious. To find reply of a silly question you are directing me to Dr. Petra Seijpentijn (or something like that). Good ou did not ask to go to North Pole.
'The answer is very easy'. You seem to be adventurous too.
Good luck.
'The answer is very easy'. You seem to be adventurous too.
Good luck.
written by Healer_999 , March 18, 2010
You just come and then go. But, ultimately it is your wish. You know what even when I am busy, I visit just to know where is Reed.
Are you from India? If, I invite you to a forum called sukhdukh.com.
Are you from India? If, I invite you to a forum called sukhdukh.com.
written by Reed Wilson. , March 19, 2010
To Ayesha Ahmad.
Your article does not justify its title.
Quran does not prescribe muslims to celebrate EIDUL AZHA, ASHURA and EIDUL FITRI you have listed. Not even the messenger's birthday.
God tells us that this world is not our permanent abode. He has created this world for trial and for short listing and He has created a better and permanent world for those who were found fit. He has shown us the straight path leading to fitness and has given us option to choose the right path.
God wants us to FOLLOW HIM ONLY through following his messengers and through following his scriptures.
We can celebrate our each day of following God that brings us nearer to salvation or Jannah in muslim parlance.
Whatever Mohammadans are doing is not essentially Islam. Similarly whatever Hindus, Christians, Jews etc are doing is not essentially divine and not according to respective scriptures. Islam is that is mohammadans were practicing by way of following God according to Quran. Lot of SHI has intruded in all religions.
Your article does not justify its title.
Quran does not prescribe muslims to celebrate EIDUL AZHA, ASHURA and EIDUL FITRI you have listed. Not even the messenger's birthday.
God tells us that this world is not our permanent abode. He has created this world for trial and for short listing and He has created a better and permanent world for those who were found fit. He has shown us the straight path leading to fitness and has given us option to choose the right path.
God wants us to FOLLOW HIM ONLY through following his messengers and through following his scriptures.
We can celebrate our each day of following God that brings us nearer to salvation or Jannah in muslim parlance.
Whatever Mohammadans are doing is not essentially Islam. Similarly whatever Hindus, Christians, Jews etc are doing is not essentially divine and not according to respective scriptures. Islam is that is mohammadans were practicing by way of following God according to Quran. Lot of SHI has intruded in all religions.
written by lw1 , March 19, 2010
'He has shown us the straight path leading to fitness and has given us OPTION to choose the right path.' No he hasn't. There are numerous examples of the intolerance and hatred towards non-believers in the Quran. You have to find them yourself. If he had truly given us OPTION, he would not tell the believers to forcibly convert the non-believers, and show so much hatred towards the non-believers.
written by Demsci , March 20, 2010
Reed Wilson wrote:
"Whatever Mohammadans are doing is not essentially Islam. Similarly whatever Hindus, Christians, Jews etc are doing is not essentially divine and not according to respective scriptures".
I understand that you mean that not ALL of what Mohammedans are doing is not essentially Islam. Because what you now wrote only means that the confounded religion does have no essential influence on whatever Mohammedans are doing. If that is so, why are people bothering with it anyway?
But if you mean that the bad actions by Muslims are not caused by Islam, but that God sent Mohammed with the Islamic message to improve the thinking and behavior of mankind, the burden of proof would be on you, and that notion is refuted on this site in countless details AND overall conclusion.
But I am glad that Muslims like you are now considering at least parts of the Islamic tenets and teachings as false, or obsolete, or not very nice, like you do with the Hadiths. Or only cultural. I hope this reasoning will eventually lead the vast majority of Muslims to fully submit to and give their loyalty to Democratic rules, values, government system, which is the most important to me.
But at the same time you cannot demand from us to trust on this possibility blindly and forbid us to investigate all of Islam and all the behavior of its followers and prepare for some kind of "worst-case-threat" of Islamic tenets and teachings.
That means that some kind of "best-case-peace" also may be possible. But as a prey-animal cannot afford to wait until it is sure if a potential predator will kill it or turn out to be a harmless creature, we cannot afford to close our eyes to the worst-case-possibility.
It would be like a buffalo prioritizing not insulting lions on the possibility that they MIGHT or might not attack, over defending itself. And the tell-tale-signs of attack already have been given! Only not yet the certainty.
"Whatever Mohammadans are doing is not essentially Islam. Similarly whatever Hindus, Christians, Jews etc are doing is not essentially divine and not according to respective scriptures".
I understand that you mean that not ALL of what Mohammedans are doing is not essentially Islam. Because what you now wrote only means that the confounded religion does have no essential influence on whatever Mohammedans are doing. If that is so, why are people bothering with it anyway?
But if you mean that the bad actions by Muslims are not caused by Islam, but that God sent Mohammed with the Islamic message to improve the thinking and behavior of mankind, the burden of proof would be on you, and that notion is refuted on this site in countless details AND overall conclusion.
But I am glad that Muslims like you are now considering at least parts of the Islamic tenets and teachings as false, or obsolete, or not very nice, like you do with the Hadiths. Or only cultural. I hope this reasoning will eventually lead the vast majority of Muslims to fully submit to and give their loyalty to Democratic rules, values, government system, which is the most important to me.
But at the same time you cannot demand from us to trust on this possibility blindly and forbid us to investigate all of Islam and all the behavior of its followers and prepare for some kind of "worst-case-threat" of Islamic tenets and teachings.
That means that some kind of "best-case-peace" also may be possible. But as a prey-animal cannot afford to wait until it is sure if a potential predator will kill it or turn out to be a harmless creature, we cannot afford to close our eyes to the worst-case-possibility.
It would be like a buffalo prioritizing not insulting lions on the possibility that they MIGHT or might not attack, over defending itself. And the tell-tale-signs of attack already have been given! Only not yet the certainty.
written by Reed Wilson. , March 20, 2010
To lw1. You write "If he had truly given us OPTION, he would not tell the believers to forcibly convert the non-believers, and show so much hatred towards the non-believers".
On what basis you are saying all that? Is it in Quran? Not known to me.
On what basis you are saying all that? Is it in Quran? Not known to me.
written by Reed Wilson. , March 20, 2010
To Demsci.
Thank you for understanding me.
Do you read Quran? It is necessary to read Quran for talkig about Islam.
Please excuse me for a hasty reply.
Thank you for understanding me.
Do you read Quran? It is necessary to read Quran for talkig about Islam.
Please excuse me for a hasty reply.
written by Stephanie , March 21, 2010
http://newstime.co.nz/2010/kor...idels.html
“… Jihad is a vital pillar of Islam and any Muslim who disagrees with it is not a Muslim anmore …”
The hate against the kuffar (“unbelievers”), apostates & dissenters bind Muslims to Islam
… without hate Islam will die!
“… Jihad is a vital pillar of Islam and any Muslim who disagrees with it is not a Muslim anmore …”
The hate against the kuffar (“unbelievers”), apostates & dissenters bind Muslims to Islam
… without hate Islam will die!
written by Demsci , March 21, 2010
Hello Reed, I did read bits and peaces of the Quran, but not much.
I am for the expansion of Democracy and hope many Muslims will eventually willingly embrace it. And be more loyal to that than to Islam if Islam contradicts it, as it now seems, at least in part, to be doing. And to discuss Democracy & Islam I think it is first and foremost important to understand all essential Democratic values and rules first. And I think I understand those pretty good.
But now I agree that the whole of mankind also needs to understand Islam very very well, as well as the interpretations and "Islam-inspired" thoughts & actions of Muslims. But I admit to rely on fellow-democrats, many of them ex-muslims, for that. I feel that our "team" takes care of Quran-knowledge already well enough and I take my clues from other "team-members", but also try to be honest, open and curious about what Muslims have to say about both Democracy and Islam.
I am for the expansion of Democracy and hope many Muslims will eventually willingly embrace it. And be more loyal to that than to Islam if Islam contradicts it, as it now seems, at least in part, to be doing. And to discuss Democracy & Islam I think it is first and foremost important to understand all essential Democratic values and rules first. And I think I understand those pretty good.
But now I agree that the whole of mankind also needs to understand Islam very very well, as well as the interpretations and "Islam-inspired" thoughts & actions of Muslims. But I admit to rely on fellow-democrats, many of them ex-muslims, for that. I feel that our "team" takes care of Quran-knowledge already well enough and I take my clues from other "team-members", but also try to be honest, open and curious about what Muslims have to say about both Democracy and Islam.
written by Machmoed , March 21, 2010
I thought you want to know, papyri are much more reliable because most of them ordinary people wrote them. This is the best way to recreate a civilaization of those times. Why are you wishing me goodluck, i made the journey already.
written by lw1 , March 22, 2010
Perhaps you know Quran better than thousands who have killed countless number who refused to convert to Islam.
written by Kazi Abul Firoz , September 13, 2010
Dear readers,
I never wrote comments in this website. I wrote comments in Bangladeshi News Papers. Someone who is very much anti-Christian or very much anti-Muslim replaced my comments here.
I wrote the same comments everywhere because this is my SLOGAN. I strongly believe that this SLOGAN should be the only slogan for intellectual Muslims and intellectual Christians to prevent the hate criminals from spreading hates.
In my life, I mixed up with very fundamentalist MUSLIMS and latter in the western countries with very fundamentalist CHRISTIANS. If I tell lies to you, you are requested to complain to your GOD however you believe. But please do not use abusive words. I found that there huge number of fundamentalist Christians in the west who are not less hate criminals than Muslim fundamentalists.
Still most of the Christian fundamentalists do not know nor even want to know the reasons of TERRORISMS. During Soviet Union, many of the muslim countries were in favor of Soviet Union, and that was a pain for USA and its allies. To tackle the SECULAR and COMMUNIST Muslims, USA organized Islami RADICAL GROUPS through SAUDI ARABIA. From Chechnya to Afganistan, allthrough, Islami Radical Groups were led by USA through Saudi Arabia. After the collapse of Soviet Union, USA rejected them. This made them angry at USA. Another reason was Palestine issue. Palestine people became victims. During second world war, Jews people were not killed by Muslims. Jews were killed by Europeans across the Europe. Why did USA bring the survived Jews to the crowded lands of Palestine? Why did USA drive away those Palestine people? When still the international law called the occupied lands are illegal, how can the western people support the illegal occupation?
Noted, during Soviet Union time, USA did not use Christian Radical Groups to kill secular and communist Christians in Europe. But USA used the Radical Islami Groups to kill secular Muslims. USA supported Jamaate Islami party and Pakistan in 1971 to kill millions of people in Bangladesh. Do western people dare to call USA as terrorist? USA helped ISLAMI RADICAL groups from Chechnya to Afganistan to kill communist Muslims, did the Western people dare to call USA as terrorist?
I never wrote comments in this website. I wrote comments in Bangladeshi News Papers. Someone who is very much anti-Christian or very much anti-Muslim replaced my comments here.
I wrote the same comments everywhere because this is my SLOGAN. I strongly believe that this SLOGAN should be the only slogan for intellectual Muslims and intellectual Christians to prevent the hate criminals from spreading hates.
In my life, I mixed up with very fundamentalist MUSLIMS and latter in the western countries with very fundamentalist CHRISTIANS. If I tell lies to you, you are requested to complain to your GOD however you believe. But please do not use abusive words. I found that there huge number of fundamentalist Christians in the west who are not less hate criminals than Muslim fundamentalists.
Still most of the Christian fundamentalists do not know nor even want to know the reasons of TERRORISMS. During Soviet Union, many of the muslim countries were in favor of Soviet Union, and that was a pain for USA and its allies. To tackle the SECULAR and COMMUNIST Muslims, USA organized Islami RADICAL GROUPS through SAUDI ARABIA. From Chechnya to Afganistan, allthrough, Islami Radical Groups were led by USA through Saudi Arabia. After the collapse of Soviet Union, USA rejected them. This made them angry at USA. Another reason was Palestine issue. Palestine people became victims. During second world war, Jews people were not killed by Muslims. Jews were killed by Europeans across the Europe. Why did USA bring the survived Jews to the crowded lands of Palestine? Why did USA drive away those Palestine people? When still the international law called the occupied lands are illegal, how can the western people support the illegal occupation?
Noted, during Soviet Union time, USA did not use Christian Radical Groups to kill secular and communist Christians in Europe. But USA used the Radical Islami Groups to kill secular Muslims. USA supported Jamaate Islami party and Pakistan in 1971 to kill millions of people in Bangladesh. Do western people dare to call USA as terrorist? USA helped ISLAMI RADICAL groups from Chechnya to Afganistan to kill communist Muslims, did the Western people dare to call USA as terrorist?
written by Kazi Abul Firoz , September 13, 2010
I believe that the protests against the ISLAMI RADICALS are also good for COMMON MUSLIMS. During Soviet Union, secular Muslims and Communist MUSLIMS also struggled to tackle ISLAMI RADICALS. But it was not possible because of the western GREEDY politics. If US did not support ISLAMI RADICAL GROUPS, this terrorism would not have grown up to this. So, Politics of Christian countries are responsible for the present conflicts.
For more than two hundred years, most of the Muslim countries were ruled and colonied by Christian Countries. For example, Malaysia was colonied by Netherlands, Pakistan, Afganistan was ruled by Britain. French ruled most of the African and Arabic Muslim majority countries. Italy ruled and colonied Lybia. Thus, most of the Muslim countries were ruled by CHRISTIAN COUNTRIES. Who did FIRST WORLD WAR? It was a war made by CHRISTIAN COUNTRIES and killed millions of people in the world. It was not a war against Muslim and it was not made by Muslim. Who did SECOND WORLD WAR? It was Christian who made the war and killed millions of JEWS across Europe. Who used NUCLEAR BOMBS to Japan? It was Christian countries. If any Christian wants to deny whimsically, it is not possible because this is history. Wasn't Hitler Catholic Christian? Didn't most of the Catholic Christians support Hitler? Hitler killed Jews from the sense of his religious confront as a Christian. Hitler was even mentioned in his speeches. So, did Muslims declare CHRISTIAN as TERRORIST because of Hitler? Even fundamentalist Muslim did not declare that Christian was TERRORIST. So, now, because of the RADICAL ISLAMI GROUPS produced by USA during Soviet Union to kill secular Muslims, how can you Christians declare MUSLIM community as TERRORIST? Do you have any priniciple in mind to ask yourself?
For more than two hundred years, most of the Muslim countries were ruled and colonied by Christian Countries. For example, Malaysia was colonied by Netherlands, Pakistan, Afganistan was ruled by Britain. French ruled most of the African and Arabic Muslim majority countries. Italy ruled and colonied Lybia. Thus, most of the Muslim countries were ruled by CHRISTIAN COUNTRIES. Who did FIRST WORLD WAR? It was a war made by CHRISTIAN COUNTRIES and killed millions of people in the world. It was not a war against Muslim and it was not made by Muslim. Who did SECOND WORLD WAR? It was Christian who made the war and killed millions of JEWS across Europe. Who used NUCLEAR BOMBS to Japan? It was Christian countries. If any Christian wants to deny whimsically, it is not possible because this is history. Wasn't Hitler Catholic Christian? Didn't most of the Catholic Christians support Hitler? Hitler killed Jews from the sense of his religious confront as a Christian. Hitler was even mentioned in his speeches. So, did Muslims declare CHRISTIAN as TERRORIST because of Hitler? Even fundamentalist Muslim did not declare that Christian was TERRORIST. So, now, because of the RADICAL ISLAMI GROUPS produced by USA during Soviet Union to kill secular Muslims, how can you Christians declare MUSLIM community as TERRORIST? Do you have any priniciple in mind to ask yourself?
written by Kazi Abul Firoz , September 13, 2010
I strongly support of any movement against the RADICAL ISLAMISTS who are much more threats to GENERAL MUSLIMS than other communities. RADICAL ISLAMISTS one day can kill each other taking small differences between Shia and Sunni. But the way the CHRISTIAN RADICALISTS are preaching in the website is nothing but a hate propaganda. I have questions to those Radical christian elements:
01. Do you know most of the Muslim countries were dominated and colonied by Christian countries for more than one hundred years? From Arabs to Malaysia, all countries were under colony of Christian countries. For example, Malaysia was colonied by Netherlands. Pakistan, Afganistan was colonied by British. Iraq was colonied by British. Other Arab countires were colonied by French and Italy. Weren't those colonial activities some sort of TERRORISM?
02. Who did First world war and second world war? It was Christian countries which made First world and second world war. Who killed millions of Jews in Europe? Nazis were also Christians.
03. Laden is terrorist and its ISLAMI RADICAL supporters are also terrorists. But why are you Christians preaching lies commonly that Muslim community is terrorist? Wasn't Hitler a proud of his Catholic Christianity which killed millions of JEWS across Europe? Did Muslims call the whole Christian community as TERRORIST because of Hitler?
04. USA is a Christian oriented country, isn't it? US killed thousands of people by using NUCLEAR BOMBS in JAPAN. Did Muslim call Christian as Terrorist? What did US do in Iraq? Why did you make such a war based on false propaganda and cursed views?
RADICAL ISLAMISTS were used by USA through Saudi Arabia to kill Muslims of Soviet Union supporters and now USA is fighting its own products. So, why are you RADICAL CHRISTIANS preaching the common abusive propaganda against whole Muslim community?
01. Do you know most of the Muslim countries were dominated and colonied by Christian countries for more than one hundred years? From Arabs to Malaysia, all countries were under colony of Christian countries. For example, Malaysia was colonied by Netherlands. Pakistan, Afganistan was colonied by British. Iraq was colonied by British. Other Arab countires were colonied by French and Italy. Weren't those colonial activities some sort of TERRORISM?
02. Who did First world war and second world war? It was Christian countries which made First world and second world war. Who killed millions of Jews in Europe? Nazis were also Christians.
03. Laden is terrorist and its ISLAMI RADICAL supporters are also terrorists. But why are you Christians preaching lies commonly that Muslim community is terrorist? Wasn't Hitler a proud of his Catholic Christianity which killed millions of JEWS across Europe? Did Muslims call the whole Christian community as TERRORIST because of Hitler?
04. USA is a Christian oriented country, isn't it? US killed thousands of people by using NUCLEAR BOMBS in JAPAN. Did Muslim call Christian as Terrorist? What did US do in Iraq? Why did you make such a war based on false propaganda and cursed views?
RADICAL ISLAMISTS were used by USA through Saudi Arabia to kill Muslims of Soviet Union supporters and now USA is fighting its own products. So, why are you RADICAL CHRISTIANS preaching the common abusive propaganda against whole Muslim community?
written by John , October 04, 2010
The commenter by the name of Firoz is clearly either practicing taqiyya or is ignorant of his own religion. This type of Muslim will exclusively refer to Christian colonization, imperialism and zionism, but will NEVER recognize Islamic colonization. There is no such thing as a radical muslim or a "general" muslim, all are one under Allah once they submit to Allah's will as commanded by him in the Koran. Most victims of Islamic terror are heretical Muslims or liberal muslims who are murdered for not following Allah's will. Free will in Islam is limited to not contradicting or violating any of the principles in the Koran. On what basis do you conclude that it is only Christians who are on this site revealing the truth about Islam? There are also many atheist kafirs who are opposed to Islam, as under Islamic law atheists do not have the right to exist. Furthermore is this critique of Islam by an alleged Christian based on a biblical foundation or a Koranic foundation?
Did you know that there wouldn't be any Muslim nations if it was not for Islamic imperialism in which all non-muslims are forced to submit to Islam? Do you realize that the spread of Islam has been based on imperialism, violence, financial incentives and other forms of coercion? Do you realize that most modern day Arabs are not Arabs by blood, but instead Arabized berbers, Egyptians, Assyrians, Babylonians, etc who were forced to speak arabic and give up their pre-islamic culture, traditions, languages and pre-islamic heathen religions? Do you realize that the native peoples of North Africa were subjected to genocide by the Arab muslims as the Native Americans were by the European christians? Do you realize that when Muslims become rulers of Malaysia they forced the native kafirs to convert to Islam under the penalty of death? Why should the Arab nations be under continued occupation by Islam? The Christians have long since left those regions. Actually Afghanistan was never colonized by the British, but both Pakistan and Afghanistan were colonized by the Islamic invaders to South Asia who forced the native Buddhists and Hindus to convert to Islam. That is why today Buddhism is nearly non-existent in the traditionally Buddhist regions of South Asia (i.e Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh). Do you realize that still to this day kafirs are being murdered in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh for not submitting to Islam? Do you realize that the native Mesopotamians were subjected to a cultural genocide by the Arab muslims?
Did you know that there wouldn't be any Muslim nations if it was not for Islamic imperialism in which all non-muslims are forced to submit to Islam? Do you realize that the spread of Islam has been based on imperialism, violence, financial incentives and other forms of coercion? Do you realize that most modern day Arabs are not Arabs by blood, but instead Arabized berbers, Egyptians, Assyrians, Babylonians, etc who were forced to speak arabic and give up their pre-islamic culture, traditions, languages and pre-islamic heathen religions? Do you realize that the native peoples of North Africa were subjected to genocide by the Arab muslims as the Native Americans were by the European christians? Do you realize that when Muslims become rulers of Malaysia they forced the native kafirs to convert to Islam under the penalty of death? Why should the Arab nations be under continued occupation by Islam? The Christians have long since left those regions. Actually Afghanistan was never colonized by the British, but both Pakistan and Afghanistan were colonized by the Islamic invaders to South Asia who forced the native Buddhists and Hindus to convert to Islam. That is why today Buddhism is nearly non-existent in the traditionally Buddhist regions of South Asia (i.e Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh). Do you realize that still to this day kafirs are being murdered in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh for not submitting to Islam? Do you realize that the native Mesopotamians were subjected to a cultural genocide by the Arab muslims?
written by John , October 04, 2010
Do you realize that prior to the British mandate Iraq was ruled by the Turkic Islamic imperialists of the Ottoman empire? As was Egypt? Muslims in India were in engaged in constant war against the Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, Sikhs, etc and still are to this day. Pakistan and Bangladesh are creations of Islamic imperialism. There is no historical basis for the land of Pakistan. It is literally an artificial nation state concocted for Muslims only and sponsored by the British imperialists. In fact if it hadn't been for the British imperialists Pakistan and Bangladesh would most likely be under Hindu/Buddhist/Indian rule to this day. The time at which the British came to the subcontinent was a time when Islamic power was actually decreasing in India. The British Christians unwisely created the Islamic terror states of Pakistan and Bangladesh and are now suffering the consequences of it ironically enough in their native Britain. The Arabs colonized the native North African Berbers. Discrimination against Berbers has always been much stronger under Arab Islamic rule. Islam spread through terror to begin with. The Christians would not have able to colonized Islamic lands if it wasn't for Muslims colonizing parts of Dar-al-Harb and converting it into Dar-al-Islam.
Your next point is equally fallacious. The Islamic Ottoman Empire was allied with Germany during WW1. The Islamic Ottoman empire went on to commit a genocide of millions of Armenians, Assyrians and Greeks. The Ottomans used the war as a pretext to stage the genocide. Millions more Christians than Jews were killed during World war 2. Hitler accused the Jews of betraying Germany in World war 1 and later interned them in concentration camps for treason against the German people. On a similar note Mohammed accused the Banu Qurayza Jews of betraying him and had them enslaved and/or killed as punishment. The Banu Nadir Jews along with all other Jews and Christians were forced to leave the Hijaz after 650 when it became illegal for non-Muslims to inhabit the area with the exception of Jeddah which was open to Jewish merchants. Let's not forget about the Sultan of Morocco Moulay al-Rashid who burned down synagogues and expelled the Jews from Sus. The litany of crimes against even the 'people of the book' by Muslims goes on.
Your next point is equally fallacious. The Islamic Ottoman Empire was allied with Germany during WW1. The Islamic Ottoman empire went on to commit a genocide of millions of Armenians, Assyrians and Greeks. The Ottomans used the war as a pretext to stage the genocide. Millions more Christians than Jews were killed during World war 2. Hitler accused the Jews of betraying Germany in World war 1 and later interned them in concentration camps for treason against the German people. On a similar note Mohammed accused the Banu Qurayza Jews of betraying him and had them enslaved and/or killed as punishment. The Banu Nadir Jews along with all other Jews and Christians were forced to leave the Hijaz after 650 when it became illegal for non-Muslims to inhabit the area with the exception of Jeddah which was open to Jewish merchants. Let's not forget about the Sultan of Morocco Moulay al-Rashid who burned down synagogues and expelled the Jews from Sus. The litany of crimes against even the 'people of the book' by Muslims goes on.
written by John , October 04, 2010
Most modern-day Christians in the West, Eastern Europe and Latin America are not in favor of implementing Biblical law and committing terror on non-christians as they've largely come to reluctantly accept secularism and ignore certain elements of the bible. The same cannot be said for the majority of Muslims worldwide who support Sharia law and endorse the murder of infidels. Mohammad was a proud Muslim who personally executed 900 Jewish men in Mecca, all the surviving Jewish women and Children were ordered to be taken as slaves and their property confiscated. The only Jewish men spared were those who converted to Islam. The difference between Mohammad and Hitler is that Mohammad was the founder of Islam who is regarded as the ideal man of Allah in the eyes of Muslims. All Muslims are taught from birth to aspire to be like Mohammad. Hitler was just a common man.
The USA is officially a secular kafir nation that recognizes the separation of church and state as do most of the nations in Europe and Latin America. Would you have preferred the USA fire bombed Japan like they did in Germany where even more Japanese would have been killed? Why so much concern for the buddhist, shamanist and polytheist kafirs of Japan anyhow when they would be put to death under Islamic law?
Most of the casualties in US-occupied Iraq have been the result of Shia/Sunni violence. Muslims massacring other Muslims. How many American troops have been suicide bombers? It is not the fault of the Americans that Sunnis and Shias cannot behave. How did the Arab Saddam treat the Kurds? He was committing an actual genocide. Why do Muslims wage Jihad based on Koranic propaganda and curse kafirs to death in the name of Allah?
Muhammad was the first Islamic terrorist. He was a pedophile, thief, murder and caravan looting bandit, all in the name of Allah. The Wahhabists were supported by the West, that is correct, but certainly not all Islamic terrorists are wahhabists. The Wahhabists were not used to kill Muslims, but heretical Muslims and secularists who had deviated away from Islam under secular Communist influence. Why does the Koran preach abusive propaganda against infidels and kafirs and the non-believers of Dar-al-harb as a whole?
The USA is officially a secular kafir nation that recognizes the separation of church and state as do most of the nations in Europe and Latin America. Would you have preferred the USA fire bombed Japan like they did in Germany where even more Japanese would have been killed? Why so much concern for the buddhist, shamanist and polytheist kafirs of Japan anyhow when they would be put to death under Islamic law?
Most of the casualties in US-occupied Iraq have been the result of Shia/Sunni violence. Muslims massacring other Muslims. How many American troops have been suicide bombers? It is not the fault of the Americans that Sunnis and Shias cannot behave. How did the Arab Saddam treat the Kurds? He was committing an actual genocide. Why do Muslims wage Jihad based on Koranic propaganda and curse kafirs to death in the name of Allah?
Muhammad was the first Islamic terrorist. He was a pedophile, thief, murder and caravan looting bandit, all in the name of Allah. The Wahhabists were supported by the West, that is correct, but certainly not all Islamic terrorists are wahhabists. The Wahhabists were not used to kill Muslims, but heretical Muslims and secularists who had deviated away from Islam under secular Communist influence. Why does the Koran preach abusive propaganda against infidels and kafirs and the non-believers of Dar-al-harb as a whole?
written by Fida Likhon , December 16, 2010
Duh Swami was suffering from Hindu Caste problems. Now he converted into Christian but again he became another hate criminal. Problem is Duh Swami is mentally sick.
Write comment
This content has been locked. You can no longer post any comments.
