If you're new here, you may want to get regular updates via如果你是新这里，你可能想通过定期更新 RSS feed RSS提要 . 。 Thank you for visiting!谢谢您的访问！

Or: The Case of A Pot Calling The Kettle Black 或者：黑案例壶锅调用的

In one of their pages, Answering Islam had made the在他们的一个网页，做出了回答伊斯兰教 following claim以下索赔 with the clear intention of “poisoning the well” where Muslim sites are concerned:以“中毒明确意图以及”在穆斯林圣地方面：

On “Answering Islam” we will purposely not use atheist articles against Islam , since we know ourselves more connected with Muslims on the basis of our common belief in one God, than with atheists who are mocking both of our faiths. 关于“伊斯兰回答：” 我们会故意不使用反伊斯兰无神论者的文章 ，因为我们知道自己的时间更多连接穆斯林与上帝的基础上在一个我们共同的信念，比无神论者谁是嘲笑我们的信仰都。 Our goal is not the attack and destruction of faith in God, but that our Muslim co-believers in the Creator God will come to recognize the full truth of what God has revealed about himself and His will for our life. 我们的目标不是攻击和破坏信仰上帝，但我们的穆斯林共同的造物主上帝信徒会来充分认识真理透露什么上帝对自己的生活和我们对他的意志。

(emphasis are our own) （重点是我们自己的）

The rest of the page goes on to either debase or discredit Muslim websites for their dependency on “atheist” material and preaching about the lack of “conscience” on the part of Muslims to abandon atheist material (notwithstanding the fact that most of the links on their page are either broken or no longer exist).页面的其余部分则由于他们的“无神论”的材料和对“良知的穆斯林的一部分”缺乏说教依赖放弃无神论材料（到任何贬低或诋毁穆斯林网站尽管事实上，大部分的连结他们的网页是不是破裂或不再存在）。

Unfortunately, Answering Islam does not seem to practise what it preaches.不幸的是，伊斯兰教回答似乎没有言行一致。 Of late they have been relying on atheist material from hostile anti-Islamic websites in order to further近来他们已经从敌对反伊斯兰网站无神论者物质依托，以进一步 their goal他们的目标 of “the presentation of the truth and genuine Christian scholarship” . 对“”的演讲真理和真正的基督教奖学金 。 Is it considered “the presentation of the truth” to rely on material from which they themselves denounce its source — known atheist websites openly hostile to Islam such as是否认为“的”陈述事实的材料， 他们依靠自己的谴责源头-著名无神论者网站公然敌视伊斯兰教如 Freethought Mecca自由思想麦加 , ， Mukto-Mona Mukto -莫娜 and和 Faithfreedom International Faithfreedom国际 – to the extent that they are being used freely and widely throughout their articles? - 对他们正在使用他们的文章在整个自由和广泛程度如何？

One of their team members — despite the so-called “official policy” of Answering Islam to never resort to atheist material — even had the audacity to state in an e-mail dated January 21st 2004, as follows:他们的团队成员之一，尽管所谓的“官方回答伊斯兰教政策”，以从未诉诸无神论者材料 - - 甚至在一封日期为2004年1月21日的邮件中厚颜，如下：

From: sam shamoun [sam_shmn@hotmail.com]来自： 萨姆萨姆[sam_shmn@hotmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 3:00 AM发送：星期三，2004年1月21日上午03:00

To: nadirahmedassalafi@*****; sbwus@*****; silas333@hotmail.com致：nadirahmedassalafi @*****; sbwus @*****; silas333@hotmail.com
Cc: jokatz@gmx.de ; menj@******; usman11@*******; islm4evr1@*******; cyberapostle99@*******; noorullah48@*******抄送：jokatz@gmx.de; menj @******; usman11 @*******; islm4evr1 @*******; cyberapostle99 @*******; noorullah48 @ * ******

Subject: RE: PROOF: Silas & his gang are *Heretics*…Read: REFUTATION:主题：RE：证明：西拉斯和他的团伙是*异端* ...阅读：驳： MUHAMMAD MUHAMMAD对 'S SUICIDE ATTEMPTS的自杀企图

Ah huh, sure you will.啊嗯，相信你会的。 You meant to say that you will begin your Spring Comedy Tour soon. See how Answering Islam, FreeThought Mecca and FFI expose this fraud …你的意思是说，你将开始你的Spring喜剧旅游很快。 查看如何回答伊斯兰教麦加自由思想和FFI揭露欺诈 ...

So much for their touted “reliance” upon genuine Christian scholarship.这么多的号称“真正的基督教奖学金后，自力更生”。 The e-mails we have bolded above belong to three prominent team members of Answering Islam : Sam Shamoun, “Silas” and Jochen Katz, respectively.在电子邮件上面我们已经分别属于粗体成员回答三个突出团队伊斯兰教 ：萨姆萨姆，“西拉”，并约亨卡茨。

It is also clear that despite the (worthless) “pledge” of Answering Islam, they have used atheist literature for many years against Islam.同样清楚的是，尽管（不值钱）“承诺的回答伊斯兰”，他们已经用了多年无神论反对伊斯兰教文献。 For example, a prominent atheist author they are fond of quoting is the Marxist-influenced Iranian, Ali Dashti .例如，著名作家，他们是无神论者引用喜欢的就是马克思主义影响的伊朗， 阿里达什蒂安 。 Here is what Jochen Katz said five years ago when defending his use of Dashti in a这里是5年前的约亨卡茨说，当他的辩护中使用达什蒂安 newsgroup posting新闻组发布 dated 02/07/1999:日期1999年2月7日：

Obviously, his expertise on the Old Testament is somewhat lacking. 显然，他的遗嘱专长是老有所欠缺。 :-) That doesn't mean his knowledge of the Qur'an and Islamic :-)这并不意味着他对伊斯兰的古兰经和知识 history 历史 is similarly shallow. 同样是浅。 I never recommended his book for learning about the Bible. 我从来没有建议他对书的圣经学习。

Hence, this begs the following question: If we Muslims are not supposed to use atheist material because they reject the concept of God, then why does it make sense for the Christian missionaries to make use of material from groups who openly reject their religious belief system, ie the Jews , in their attacks against Islam?因此，这引出了以下问题：如果我们穆斯林不应该使用无神论者材料，因为他们拒绝神的概念，那么为什么要为基督教传教士从群体意识，使谁公开反对他们的宗教信念系统使用的材料， 即犹太人 ，在对伊斯兰教的攻击？ The Jews, though they do believe in God, openly reject the Prophethood of犹太人，但他们都相信上帝，公开拒绝了先知 Jesus耶稣 (P) in toto and their literature are riddled with the most abusive and insultive words against him and Mary (P). （P）的托托和他们的文学与对他和玛丽（P）的最大侮辱和insultive字百出。 Yet, the Answering Islam team have an uploaded version of Geiger's book on their website many years ago!然而，有一队回答伊斯兰教的书上传的版本盖格在他们的网站很多年前！

We at bismikaallahuma.org are firm in our stand that valid scholarship –regardless of whether its source is Muslim, Christian or otherwise — will be used to defend Islam from the missionary onslaught. bismikaallahuma.org我们在坚定我们的立场， 有效的奖学金，否则无论其来源是穆斯林，基督徒或-将被用来保卫伊斯兰教的冲击从传教士。 As much as we disagree with the fundamental beliefs of Atheism, Judaism, etc., we shall not hesitate to quote from them if their argument is proven valid with the proper scholarship backing up a particular argument.尽管我们不同意无神论，犹太教等的基本信念，我们将毫不犹豫地引用他们，如果他们的论点被证明具有适当备份特定参数奖学金有效。 If “Answering (Attacking-) Islam” wishes to use material from the heathen who are even against their faith, that is totally up to them.如果“回答（进攻-）伊斯兰”希望利用他们物质上的异教徒，甚至对谁是他们的信念，即完全达到。 But why accuse and lambast Muslims for something which they themselves adopt and use freely?但是，为什么指责穆斯林和揍的东西， 他们自己采取和自由使用？ Is this the case of a pot calling the kettle black?难道这就是一个五十步笑百步锅呢？

In conclusion, it is clear that the issue here is not whether Muslims are sourcing material from the “heathen” or otherwise, but that when their arguments get sharper from relying on genuine scholarship (no matter the source), the missionaries have no answer to them and therefore resort to poisoning the well.总之，很显然，现在的问题不是是否是穆斯林采购从“异教徒”or其他材料，但是当他们的论据从真正意义上的尖锐奖学金（无论是源）依赖，传教士都没有回答他们因此诉诸中毒良好。 Even if Muslims do use atheist material, it simply means that they are simply adopting “Answering (Attacking-) Islam's” methodology, and that those behind Answering Islam are proven to be hypocrites when they demand that we do not use their methodology.即使不使用无神论者穆斯林材料，它只是意味着他们只是采取“回答（进攻-）伊斯兰教的”方法，而伊斯兰教的背后回答被证明是伪君子当他们要求我们不使用它们的方法。 Furthermore, their deception are also exposed when they lie about not using atheist sources because it “contradicts” their belief system, and yet they still use works the likes of Dashti and even anti-Christian sources to attack Islam.此外，他们的欺骗，也暴露出他们撒谎时不使用无神论者来源，因为它“违背”自己的信仰系统，但他们仍然使用作品的达什蒂安甚至反基督教来源喜欢攻击伊斯兰教。 So why is it okay for them to use such sources and not okay for Muslims in general to follow their methodology?那么，为什么它是为他们好利用这些资源，而不是一般的好穆斯林跟随他们的方法？

The author is the co-founder and executive editor of Bismika Allahuma . 作者是共同创始人和执行Allahuma主编Bismika。 His personal blog may be accessed at 他的个人博客，可以访问 Pendapat Kritis Pendapat克里蒂斯 . 。