david wood the cross-dresser

Chop­ping Down Mis­con­cep­tions : David Wood’s Islam Super­high­way Twist

Intro­duc­tion (2005): From Ori­gins to Observation

From the begin­ning of Ori­en­tal­ism, the Chris­t­ian mis­sion­ar­ies have been assum­ing that Islam is head­less” enough to be attacked and scru­ti­nized with a feroc­i­ty that one can only con­clude bor­ders on fanati­cism. These mis­sion­ar­ies proved then that they do not have the brains to acknowl­edge their own headless­ness. One such exam­ple is David Wood, a recent zeal­ous recruit by the ever-intol­erent Answer­ing Islam, whose only amaz­ing abil­i­ty is his extreme bel­liger­ence, and what can only be described as fanat­i­cal intol­er­ence, towards a faith dif­fer­ent from his. This is a review of one such arti­cle.

Mr. Wood begins by saying :

Muham­mad’s empire of faith has man­aged to thrive in the mod­ern world for one sim­ple rea­son : Mus­lims have kept Muhammad?s dark past a secret. Indeed, they have gone beyond keep­ing it a secret ; they have some­how con­vinced them­selves (and many oth­ers) that Muham­mad was an out­stand­ing moral exam­ple, per­haps even the great­est moral exam­ple of all time. Per­pet­u­at­ing this fraud has been, in my opin­ion, the most stu­pen­dous decep­tion in world history.

We are sure that it has been such a very large secret” that the inci­dents exposed” in Mr. Wood’s bel­liger­ent piece were actu­al­ly record­ed in some recent con­tem­po­rary biogra­phies of the Prophet Muham­mad(P). Mr. Wood should con­sid­er read­ing the late Mar­tin Ling’s Muham­mad : His Life Based on the Ear­li­est Sources”, M. H. Haykal’s The Life of Muham­mad” and Safi­ur Rah­man Mubarakpuri, The Sealed Nec­tar” and see whether these emi­nent writ­ers have con­cealed even a frac­tion of the Prophet’s (P) life. Such sweep­ing asser­tions does not do jus­tice to the fact that the Prophet’s life was born in the full light of his­to­ry”, as one his­to­ri­an once said1.

Yet Mr. Wood con­tin­ue to per­sist in this mind­less big­otry, and says :

The dif­fi­cul­ty here is that, no mat­ter how loud­ly a Mus­lim shouts these objec­tions, they have no pow­er to over­come the his­tor­i­cal fact that Muham­mad was a rob­ber and a mur­der­er.2

One should not throw stones at glass hous­es, and sim­i­lar­ly one could say the fol­low­ing for the Judeo-Chris­t­ian faith :

    The dif­fi­cul­ty here is that, no mat­ter how loud­ly a Jew/​Christian shouts these objec­tions, they have no pow­er to over­come the his­tor­i­cal fact that Moses was a rob­ber and a murderer.

Mr. Wood has not proven any­thing apart from an asser­tion that, in his view, what the Prophet (P) did was rob­bing and murdering”.


Intro­duc­tion Update (2023): Evo­lu­tion of an Islamophobe

Fast for­ward to 2023, eigh­teen years since the ini­tial obser­va­tions were penned. Since mak­ing his claims in 2005, David Wood has not only con­tin­ued his cri­tiques against Islam, the Prophet Muham­mad, and the Quran, but he has also cap­i­tal­ized on the surge of social media plat­forms, notably YouTube. Tran­si­tion­ing from writ­ten con­tent to dig­i­tal, he has mor­phed into an infa­mous YouTu­ber, using the plat­for­m’s wide reach to ampli­fy his views. David Wood, who self-pro­claims as a Chris­t­ian apol­o­gist run­ning an organ­i­sa­tion with the late Nabeel Qureshi called Acts 17 Apolo­get­ics, has been a con­sis­tent, polar­iz­ing pres­ence with his stri­dent cri­tiques against Islam, the Prophet Muham­mad, and the Quran. Yet, to grasp the depth and the con­tours of his argu­ments, it is cru­cial to under­stand the dra­mat­ic highs and lows of his per­son­al and pro­fes­sion­al life.

In a chill­ing episode from his past, David Wood bru­tal­ly attacked his step-father with a ham­mer. This act, severe in its vio­lence, cul­mi­nat­ed in his insti­tu­tion­al­iza­tion and the sub­se­quent diag­no­sis of anti-social per­son­al­i­ty dis­or­der. Sig­nif­i­cant­ly, David Wood does not shy away from admit­ting that he has been diag­nosed as a psy­chopath. Such rev­e­la­tions, while offer­ing a glimpse into his tumul­tuous psy­che, make it chal­leng­ing to accept his self-tout­ed role as a moral and the­o­log­i­cal compass.

Fur­ther com­pli­cat­ing David Wood’s per­son­al nar­ra­tive is the trag­ic loss of one of his chil­dren. How­ev­er, what has raised eye­brows in sev­er­al quar­ters is his deci­sion to lever­age this tragedy for finan­cial gain. By appeal­ing to the Chris­t­ian pub­lic’s com­pas­sion, David Wood solicit­ed funds for funer­al expens­es”, amass­ing an eye­brow-rais­ing 214,702 USD at the time of writ­ing. This action has prompt­ed many to ques­tion the sin­cer­i­ty of his motives and the authen­tic­i­ty of his moral posturing.

David Wood money grab

Pro­fes­sion­al­ly, David Wood’s per­sis­tent focus on Islam often veers away from con­struc­tive crit­i­cism and teeters on the brink of an unhealthy obses­sion. His pat­tern of mis­rep­re­sent­ing scrip­tur­al vers­es, decon­tex­tu­al­iz­ing his­tor­i­cal events, and deliv­er­ing them in a man­ner strate­gi­cal­ly aimed at tar­nish­ing Islam’s image indi­cates an approach mired in intel­lec­tu­al dis­hon­esty rather than gen­uine scholarship.

Despite this evolv­ing plat­form, the polemics of David Wood remain famil­iar. His cri­tiques, whether from 2005 or 2023, show a sim­i­lar trend. He tends to mis­rep­re­sent scrip­tur­al vers­es, decon­tex­tu­al­ize his­tor­i­cal events, and aims strate­gi­cal­ly to tar­nish Islam’s image. What fol­lows are some of his recur­ring claims against the Prophet (P). As with his ear­li­er cri­tiques, they aren’t nov­el, and their rebut­tals have been avail­able for long.

The fol­low­ing are some of the claims that he has charged against the Prophet (P). Do note the nature of the polem­i­cal trend employed by Mr Wood. They are nei­ther new” nor have they not been dis­cussed or answered aeons ago. What we will do here is to repro­duce some of the charges, and pro­vide a link to a fur­ther dis­cus­sion on the issue. This is to demon­strate to Mr. Wood and his mis­sion­ary pals that their tired, old rep­e­ti­tions are not unfa­mil­iar to us, and to send a mes­sage that we are not inter­est­ed in rein­vent­ing the wheel and waste our time in respond­ing.

Address­ing Key Alle­ga­tions : A Clos­er Look At David Wood’s Claims

The fol­low­ing are some of the claims that were made.

Claim #1 : When Muham­mad began receiv­ing his rev­e­la­tions, his first impres­sion was that he was pos­sessed by demons

Ver­dict : Manip­u­la­tion of Facts

Response : The nar­ra­tive that Prophet Muham­mad ini­tial­ly believed his rev­e­la­tions were from a demon­ic source is a gross mis­in­ter­pre­ta­tion of his­tor­i­cal events. Schol­ar Al-Nowai­hi metic­u­lous­ly dis­cuss­es the Prophet’s pro­found sense of respon­si­bil­i­ty and the rig­or­ous self-scru­ti­ny he under­went upon receiv­ing his revelations :

It is impor­tant to real­ize that when that search cul­mi­nat­ed in his hear­ing the voice of Gabriel in Mount Hira, at the age of forty, he did not has­ten to believe in his rev­e­la­tion or become con­vinced of it overnight. He passed through a peri­od of con­sid­er­able doubt and fear, ter­ri­fied lest it be only the wicked trick and cru­el jest­ing of Satan, and he need­ed the whole­heart­ed sup­port of his faith­ful wife Khadi­ja to over­come his fears. I ven­ture to sug­gest that this was an attes­ta­tion of his integri­ty ; a delib­er­ate impos­tor bent upon decep­tion would not have gone through those ago­niz­ing ter­rors. Fur­ther­more, a care­ful read­ing of the ear­ly suras of the Qur’an shows that, even after he was con­vinced of the authen­tic­i­ty of his rev­e­la­tion, it was only with great reluc­tance that he accept­ed the awe­some bur­den of his mis­sion, and only after he was dri­ven by an over­pow­er­ing sense of the duty which he could not shirk.

This peri­od of intro­spec­tion and doubt, far from sug­gest­ing a demon­ic influ­ence, show­cas­es his deep moral integri­ty and the seri­ous­ness with which he approached his prophet­ic mis­sion. His reliance on Khadi­ja’s sup­port fur­ther illus­trates the human aspect of his expe­ri­ence, rein­forc­ing the authen­tic­i­ty and sin­cer­i­ty of his encounter with the divine.

Fur­ther Insight : For more on the Chris­t­ian mis­sion­ary abuse of the Fatrah inci­dent, see The Fatrah : Inter­mis­sion of the Prophet Muham­mad which pro­vides an in-depth explo­ration of this crit­i­cal phase, debunk­ing mis­con­cep­tions and high­light­ing the emo­tion­al and spir­i­tu­al chal­lenges the Prophet faced, affirm­ing his unwa­ver­ing com­mit­ment to truth and righteousness.

Claim #2 : Muham­mad sup­port­ed his fledg­ling reli­gion by rob­bing people

Ver­dict : Manip­u­la­tion of Facts

Response : The accu­sa­tion that Prophet Muham­mad sup­port­ed his fledg­ling reli­gion through rob­bery is a dis­tor­tion of the ear­ly Mus­lim com­mu­ni­ty’s efforts to sur­vive and defend them­selves against aggres­sive adver­saries. The his­tor­i­cal con­text of these actions, often labeled as raids, was fun­da­men­tal­ly about secur­ing the nascent Mus­lim com­mu­ni­ty’s sur­vival against eco­nom­ic sanc­tions and hos­tile threats. Islam­ic jurispru­dence and his­tor­i­cal records clar­i­fy that these actions were con­duct­ed with­in the eth­i­cal bound­aries of war­fare and were aimed at coun­ter­ing unjust aggres­sion rather than unpro­voked banditry.

Fur­ther Insight : The arti­cle The Leg­is­la­tion and the Begin­ning of Jihad delves into the nuances of these events, dis­tin­guish­ing between defen­sive mea­sures and the alleged crim­i­nal­i­ty, pro­vid­ing a bal­anced his­tor­i­cal and eth­i­cal analysis.

Claim #3 : Muham­mad was often ruth­less towards his adversaries

Ver­dict : Falsehood

Response : Con­trary to the claim of ruth­less­ness, the Prophet Muham­mad’s (P) inter­ac­tions with his adver­saries were marked by prin­ci­ples of mer­cy, for­give­ness, and strate­gic patience ; this is a fact recog­nised by the most vir­u­lent of his con­tem­po­rary ene­mies. Numer­ous instances in Islam­ic his­to­ry, includ­ing the amnesty grant­ed to the peo­ple of Mec­ca fol­low­ing its con­quest, under­score his com­mit­ment to for­give­ness over vengeance. This approach was not a sign of weak­ness but a pro­found demon­stra­tion of his strength and the Islam­ic prin­ci­ple of com­pas­sion, even in the face of grave injus­tices and hostility.

Fur­ther Insight : For more refu­ta­tions to accu­sa­tions of the so-called​“bru­tal­i­ty” of the Prophet (P), see What About The Killing of Ka’ab bin Al-Ashraf ? and The Killing of Abu Afak and Asma’ bint Marwan ?

Claim #4 : Muham­mad had far more wives than even his own rev­e­la­tions allowed

Ver­dict : Manip­u­la­tion of Facts

Response : The Prophet Muham­mad’s mar­riages are often cri­tiqued with­out under­stand­ing their social, polit­i­cal, and eth­i­cal con­texts. Each mar­riage served dis­tinct pur­pos­es, includ­ing forg­ing alliances, pro­vid­ing pro­tec­tion to wid­ows, and estab­lish­ing social reforms. The spe­cial pro­vi­sion allow­ing him more than the pre­scribed lim­it of wives was a divine direc­tive, acknowl­edg­ing the unique cir­cum­stances and respon­si­bil­i­ties entrust­ed to him. These mar­riages, far from per­son­al indul­gence, were acts of social wel­fare and diplo­ma­cy, reflect­ing the Prophet’s role as a leader and reformer.

The injunc­tion on the lim­i­ta­tion of wives does not apply to the Prophet’s (P) wives. As they had attained a high stature in the Mus­lim com­mu­ni­ty of believ­ers (Ummul Mu’­minin or​“Moth­ers of the Believ­ers), it would be noth­ing short of an injus­tice to deprive them of their sta­tus by divorc­ing them and hence con­demn them to humil­i­a­tion. For the Prophet’s(P) mar­riages, a sep­a­rate law was giv­en to him, name­ly that he may not mar­ry any more women after this rev­e­la­tion was revealed.

Fur­ther Insight : For more on the Prophet Muham­mad’s wives, see Why Was The Prophet Polygamous ?

Claim #5 : Muham­mad con­sum­mat­ed a mar­riage to a nine-year-old girl

Ver­dict : Manip­u­la­tion of Facts

Response : The mar­riage of Prophet Muham­mad (P) to Aisha (R) is one of the most con­tro­ver­sial top­ics, often crit­i­cized with­out a prop­er under­stand­ing of his­tor­i­cal and cul­tur­al con­texts. This union, agreed upon by both fam­i­lies, was in line with the norms of 7th-cen­­tu­ry Ara­bia and car­ried sig­nif­i­cant social and polit­i­cal impli­ca­tions. Aisha’s age at the time of her mar­riage is dis­cussed with vary­ing per­spec­tives with­in Islam­ic schol­ar­ship, empha­siz­ing the neces­si­ty to con­sid­er the soci­etal norms of the time. Fur­ther­more, Aisha’s own accounts reflect her active and cru­cial role in Islam­ic his­to­ry, as a schol­ar and leader, chal­leng­ing sim­plis­tic por­tray­als of her as mere­ly a child bride.

Fur­ther Insight : For more on Muham­mad’s rela­tion­ship with Aisha, see The Young Mar­riage of Aishah which nav­i­gates through his­tor­i­cal, cul­tur­al, and schol­ar­ly dis­cus­sions, offer­ing a nuanced view of Aisha’s role and the nature of her mar­riage, coun­ter­act­ing preva­lent mis­con­cep­tions with a well-round­ed his­tor­i­cal analysis.

Claim #6 : Muham­mad had a con­temptible opin­ion of women

Ver­dict : Out­right Falsehood

Detailed Response : The claim that Prophet Muham­mad held a con­temptible opin­ion of women stark­ly con­trasts with his teach­ings and actions, which sig­nif­i­cant­ly improved wom­en’s rights and sta­tus in soci­ety. Islam intro­duced rev­o­lu­tion­ary rights for women, includ­ing inher­i­tance, edu­ca­tion, and the right to con­sent in mar­riage, which were rad­i­cal for the 7th cen­tu­ry. The Prophet’s own rela­tion­ships with women, char­ac­ter­ized by respect, kind­ness, and equi­ty, serve as a mod­el with­in Islam­ic teach­ings, under­scor­ing the esteemed posi­tion of women in Islam.

Fur­ther Insight : For more on the Islam­ic view of women, see The Posi­tion of Women in Islam. It explores the trans­for­ma­tive impact of Islam­ic teach­ings on wom­en’s rights, detail­ing the Prophet’s sig­nif­i­cant con­tri­bu­tions to ele­vat­ing wom­en’s sta­tus in soci­ety and chal­leng­ing nar­ra­tives that mis­rep­re­sent his views.

Claim #7 : Muham­mad is unique among prophets in that he is the only one to receive a rev­e­la­tion, pro­claim it as part of God’s mes­sage to man, and lat­er take it back, claim­ing that it was actu­al­ly from Satan.

Ver­dict : Out­right Falsehood

Response : The alle­ga­tion regard­ing the so-called​“Satan­ic vers­es” is a con­tentious issue, large­ly prop­a­gat­ed by ori­en­tal­ist lit­er­a­ture with­out sub­stan­tial Islam­ic cor­rob­o­ra­tion. This nar­ra­tive mis­rep­re­sents a com­plex the­o­log­i­cal dis­cus­sion and has been crit­i­cal­ly exam­ined and dis­missed by the major­i­ty of Islam­ic schol­ars. The integri­ty of the Qur’an­ic rev­e­la­tion, as pre­served and trans­mit­ted through metic­u­lous oral and writ­ten tra­di­tions, stands in direct oppo­si­tion to claims of alter­ations or satan­ic influence.

Fur­ther Insight : For more on the Ori­en­tal­ist fan­ta­sy regard­ing this unau­then­tic tra­di­tion, see Those Are Their High-Fly­ing Lies Indeed

Hence from these mere selec­tive claims”, Mr. Wood tries to con­clude that :

These are just some of the facts that Mus­lims have been keep­ing secret, but they are enough to make any rea­son­able per­son doubt the valid­i­ty of Islam.

On the con­trary, the alle­ga­tions that were hurled and repeat­ed ad nau­se­am by the mis­sion­ary is noth­ing new. They have been dis­cussed, debat­ed, and refut­ed by Mus­lim and non-Mus­lim schol­ars time and time again. Mr. Wood is per­haps igno­rant of the copi­ous amount of mate­r­i­al on these issues and who can blame him ? Per­haps he has been liv­ing in a mono-cul­ture all his life and has nev­er come across a sin­gle Mus­lim on the street.

Yet he continues :

The truth about Muham­mad has been one of the world’s best-kept secrets. For cen­turies, it has been vir­tu­al­ly impos­si­ble to raise objec­tions about the char­ac­ter of Muham­mad in Mus­lim coun­tries, for any­one who raised such objec­tions would (fol­low­ing the exam­ple set by Muham­mad him­self) imme­di­ate­ly be killed.

And it was pos­si­ble to raise issues of doubt about the char­ac­ter of Jesus (P) in the Span­ish Inqui­si­tion and Cru­sades era, for exam­ple ? Mr. Wood is try­ing to pull wool” over his read­er’s eyes, with­out a doubt.

Con­clu­sions

We will not make secret of the fact that review­ing Mr. Wood’s arti­cle (not to men­tion his series of Chris­t­ian bel­liger­ent non­sense) has been noth­ing but a most tire­some exer­cise. Mr. Wood tries to cast the illu­sion as though crit­i­cism” of the Prophet(P) is some­thing for­eign or alien to the Mus­lim world. On the con­trary, attack­ing Islam has been as old as the found­ing of Islam itself and crit­i­cism” of the Prophet(P) as old as Ori­en­tal­ism itself.

We also demand evi­dence from Mr. Wood about his claim that any­one who raised such objec­tions would…immediately be killed”. What is the proof of his sweep­ing state­ment ? In which coun­tries are these peo­ple killed for their crit­i­cism” and what is the nature of their so-called crit­i­cism”?

Yet Mr. Wood con­tin­ues with :

In the end, Islam will fall, for the entire struc­ture is built upon the belief that Muham­mad was the great­est moral exam­ple in his­to­ry, and this belief is demon­stra­bly false.

Unfor­tu­nate­ly for Mr. Wood, Islam does not rise or fall on a sin­gle indi­vid­ual. It is true that the Prophet Muham­mad is held in the high­est esteem. It is actu­al­ly more true to say the fol­low­ing about Christianity :

    In the end, Chris­tian­i­ty will fall, for the entire struc­ture is built upon the belief that Jesus was the God-incar­nate, and this belief is demon­stra­bly false.

Indeed, count­less indi­vid­u­als and groups have secret­ly wished for Islam’s down­fall from past to present. How­ev­er, we are not dis­turbed by the secret desires of Mr. Wood and his bel­liger­ent Chris­t­ian mis­sion­ary pals to see Islam’s destruc­tion. There is no rea­son to believe that Mr. Wood and his pals will suc­ceed where their more knowl­edge­able” pre­de­ces­sors in the likes of Mar­goli­uth, Muir, Zwem­mer and Pfan­der had failed before.

And with that, we say that only God knows best !Endmark

Cite this arti­cle as : Mohd Elfie Nieshaem Juferi, Chop­ping Down Mis­con­cep­tions : David Wood’s Islam Super­high­way Twist,” in Bis­mi­ka Allahu­ma, Octo­ber 18, 2005, last accessed March 19, 2024, https://​bis​mikaal​lahu​ma​.org/​p​o​l​e​m​i​c​a​l​-​r​e​b​u​t​t​a​l​s​/​d​a​v​i​d​-​w​o​od/
  1. Ernest Renan (18231892), over a cen­tu­ry ago, con­fi­dent­ly pro­nounced that Islam was born in the full light of his­to­ry.”[]
  2. e.g. Num­bers 31[]

Comments

42 responses to “Chop­ping Down Mis­con­cep­tions : David Wood’s Islam Super­high­way Twist”

  1. Brandon Avatar
    Brandon

    And it was pos­si­ble to raise issues of doubt about the char­ac­ter of Jesus(P) in the Span­ish Inqui­si­tion and Cru­sades era, for exam­ple ? Mr. Wood is try­ing to pull wool” over his reader’s eyes, with­out a doubt.”
    My wife has Chris­t­ian ances­tors who were mur­dered by Roman Catholics dur­ing the Inqui­si­tion. They took a cru­ci­fix affixed to the end of a sword and rammed down their throat.
    You may not lever­age the actions of sin­ful human beings as being com­mand­ed of God – espe­cial­ly when Scrip­ture con­demns such behav­ior. Love your ene­mies and pray for those who per­se­cute you” come to mind.
    I would encour­age you not to con­fuse Catholi­cism with Christianity.
    We know that Muham­mad was a false prophet because 1) He claimed God has no Son and 2) The new tes­ta­ment, which Muham­mad affirmed, affirms that you must repent and believe in the Son of God to save you from the wrath of God. 3) If the Bible is false, Islam is false because Islam affirms the Gospel. 4) If the Bible is true, Islam is false because the Gospel con­demns Islam. 5) There has been no cor­rup­tion of the Gospel because we have exam­ples of the Gospels that pre­date Muham­mad and they agree with the man­u­scripts that we have now. 6) No known tex­tu­al vari­ant sig­nif­i­cant­ly mod­i­fies any major Chris­t­ian doc­trine. At the least 1) Jesus real­ly died at the cru­ci­fix­ion 2) Jesus real­ly rose from the dead 3) You must repent of your sin and trust only in Jesus to save you. 4) Jesus is God 5) You can­not earn God’s favor by per­form­ing works. You sinned against God. How can you expect any work you pro­duce to undo that which is offen­sive to God ? If you vio­lent­ly mur­der some­one, how can you undo it ? Look, judge, I do great things. I’ve done all these great things!” A good judge would throw that out because you’re not being judged on your good works but on what laws you have bro­ken. Any­one who has ever sinned (includ­ing Muham­mad) requires a sav­ior from their sin. If we reject our only way to be made right with God, then we remain con­demned before God. Please don’t rely on sup­press­ing the truth. Since when has sup­press­ing the truth ever lead any­one to the truth ? Cry out to Jesus to save you from your sin. He loves you ! <3

  2. Saint Gundy Avatar
    Saint Gundy

    The author should chal­lenge Wood to a debate. Chop him down in per­son, rather than hid­ing behind an article.

  3. Goldie Avatar
    Goldie

    A Chris­t­ian woman rec­om­mend­ed that I read David Wood to know more about the real lies of Mus­lim” (because I stat­ed that I liked the reli­gion, but don’t plan on con­vert­ing). She stat­ed he was a well-known schol­ar on Chris­tian­i­ty and Mus­lim, and a con­vert. Frankly, I dis­agree about the real lies” by Mus­lim schol­ar­ship for a vari­ety of rea­sons after a year of research, lis­ten­ing and read­ing (because I was sick of the gov­ern­ment and war-mon­gers who noto­ri­ous­ly lie to the Amer­i­can peo­ple to wage a war, and against a most­ly respectable peo­ple). Any­way, I did a quick look-see on this Wood char­ac­ter. I saw he was diag­nosed as a sociopath who tried to kill his own father, among oth­er ques­tion­able things. I already know that noth­ing changes sociopaths, only that they are clever liars to appear nor­mal to naïve peo­ple. Evil peo­ple know no bounds to their lies and dam­ages. They assess weak­ness­es of oth­ers to do their dam­age. And cer­tain­ly he’s no schol­ar by any stretch of the imag­i­na­tion. So I told her this, and asked her on what basis she believes a man like Wood was worth his salt ; because of Paul’s sto­ry on the road to Dam­as­cus (as many rot­ten peo­ple use this as accept­able rhetoric to bad behav­ior and a sud­den change)? Why, yes ! God can do any­thing ! (except she just told me that all things are pos­si­ble by God, but we have to ask what is rea­son­able, and a sociopath or mass mur­der­er (Saul) sud­den­ly changed by God is not rea­son­able). How easy to lie once you’ve jus­ti­fied killing oth­ers. God did­n’t change Saul, he was a Greek through and through, and cer­tain­ly not a real Jew, not that I could see. The Jews would be appalled at Saul’s claims of being taught by a well-respect­ed teacher who would­n’t teach to Saul what Saul claims. I think Saul’s change” was a clever ploy. I also point­ed this out to her. Any­way, I will not waste my time lis­ten­ing to clever liars and those who dam­age oth­ers with no con­science, nor believe them if I do hap­pen to hear/​read them, and cer­tain­ly not sociopaths. I shudder ! 

    Chris­tians want to believe these Pauline sto­ries from less than trust­wor­thy sources using the Once upon a time I was a hor­ri­ble per­son and god saved me and now I’m all bet­ter”. How con­ve­nient for them, while those they dam­aged have no recourse or jus­tice and usu­al­ly shat­tered lives. Peo­ple haven’t done their home­work on Saul/​Paul. They haven’t raised their stan­dards to stop lis­ten­ing to sick mind­ed human beings telling them what they want to hear, despite the real­i­ty of bad motives and bad char­ac­ter. I’m not required to believe or trust Wood on any counts of his own admis­sions of his his­to­ry. Hon­esty with a bad his­to­ry does­n’t make one a per­son of integri­ty. That’s a fool’s belief and fan­ta­sy. I just can’t imag­ine ANY wise God pick­ing a per­son of less than good char­ac­ter and stan­dards of living/​thinking to rep­re­sent Him, His wis­dom and words. Peo­ple must think so lit­tle of their God (and cer­tain­ly don’t know their God) to accept these men (and many oth­ers, among them Saul of Tar­sus) as hav­ing any knowl­edge, truth and inter­nal exam­i­na­tion to speak on behalf of their God. Thank you for shar­ing the facts of this per­son”, Wood, who I find cringe­wor­thy and abhor­rent. Amaz­ing how some peo­ple will excuse any­thing or any­one if it serves their own bias­es, beliefs and igno­rance of real­i­ty with­out exam­i­na­tion. Thank you for giv­ing me the space to share.

  4. FullArmor Avatar
    FullArmor

    In which coun­tries are these peo­ple killed for their crit­i­cism” and what is the nature of their so-called crit­i­cism”?
    This line from the CONCLUSION of this arti­cle made me won­der if you are real­ly a reli­able author. Were you born yes­ter­day ? Are you sure you know what you are talk­ing about ? Yes, in the US and oth­er West­ern coun­tries, you will still live. But think again. think again. You don’t know what you are talk­ing about… In some coun­tries, a sim­ple tweet will cost them their lives. They (peo­ple) will dis­ap­pear like a bub­ble. And social media like Face­book, web­sites expos­ing your belief are blocked. Why ? Because you can’t stand the truth. The Truth will set you free. John 8:36 So if the Son (Yeshua) sets you free, you will be free indeed.”

  5. Richard Avatar
    Richard

    Jim Ols­son there is no way you were a true Chris­t­ian in the past — more like a luke­warm reli­gious per­son who called them­selves a Chris­t­ian, but nev­er actu­al­ly fol­lowed Christ. Many West­ern­ers are like that, brought up in Chris­tian­i­ty but nev­er tru­ly com­mit­ted them­selves to God, because they nev­er even under­stood them­selves, this world, nor the neces­si­ty of God’s sav­ing work. True Chris­tian­i­ty is not a reli­gion, it nev­er was. If you left Chris­tian­i­ty, you left a reli­gious Chris­tian­i­ty” of this world, not true Chris­tian­i­ty which is life upon this Earth in the light of the Creator.

    You aren’t an ex-Chris­t­ian accord­ing to how the Bible defines a fol­low­er of Jesus Christ, you are an ex-Chris­t­ian accord­ing to how you your­self define a Chris­t­ian — which is a wrong def­i­n­i­tion. You can only leave Christ, if you were nev­er a fol­low­er of His in the first place. This means that you did not even know God, nor His free gift of life. For no per­son with a sane mind, a pure heart, a strong soul leaves that state and accepts the des­ti­tute state of an atheist.

    The evil you com­plain about in this world and blame God for, was always meant to hap­pen and to be unleashed. The Scrip­tures have always point­ed towards that. If you were a Chris­t­ian you would have known that evil was not of God, nor pro­mot­ed by God, but of Satan and pro­mot­ed by that fall­en enti­ty through fallen/​corrupt humans — who do every­thing but fol­low God — just as you your­self have done by aban­don­ing God. Instead of draw­ing clos­er to Him in your dark hour, you have left him and tak­en it upon your­self to address evil by your­self — my friend, all who do that, they end up being con­sumed by the evil of this world, lest they go along with its agen­da and enjoy its rewards, but for a time.

    Athe­ism has poi­soned your mind with the idea that this world has a future. It does not !
    Satan NEEDS humans to believe in a future utopi­an unit­ed world that will pro­gres­sive­ly get bet­ter”, so that you can build that world for him. He wants to rule this world and to use humans as slaves.
    The UAE and Chi­na are bril­liant exam­ples of utopia build­ing nations build­ing the world that Satan wants.

    This world is pass­ing away. The only rea­son why it still exists, is for the Cre­ator to save as many souls as possible.
    You have been deceived, like every­one else who has not the Son of God, into the belief that this cur­rent world can be fixed and that world peace can be achieved.
    Have you not read the Bible, that all this was meant to come to pass, includ­ing a false world peace. Which will deceive count­less souls, lead­ing them to their per­ma­nent destruction.
    Many will indeed be con­fused and not know where to turn to, they will turn to their own rea­son­ing, and in doing so, choose death. For there is no sav­ing grace in the knowl­edge of man, but in the pow­er of God !

    And the pow­er of God is revealed in Jesus Christ the Sav­iour of the world.

    As for the Jews not being pro­tect­ed by YHWH, they aban­doned Him, remem­ber ? When they reject­ed Christ 2000 years ago. And they have been in con­stant tur­moil since then. They will be so until Lord Jesus Christ comes for them at the end of this age, to save those who accept Him. It is not God who failed, it is humans who failed and keep fail­ing, by leav­ing God and seek­ing out their fall­en ten­den­cies or var­i­ous ungodly/​demonic teach­ings. Many Jews in this cur­rent time are com­ing to Christ, they are real­iz­ing their rab­bis have lied to them, they are real­iz­ing that the world is falling apart at the seems and that no thing of this world is going to save, ben­e­fit or help any­one, except God Himself !

    If Jeho­vah tru­ly exist­ed, and they were tru­ly his cho­sen” peo­ple, would he not have have pro­tect­ed them through time?”

    The Jews were the cho­sen peo­ple of God, before they aban­doned Him and chose to fol­low the very teach­ings that God had been warn­ing them about for over a 1000 years pri­or to Christ. Their reli­gion of Judaism is no longer a reli­gion that sole­ly stems from the teach­ings of God, but from the teach­ings of demons. They fol­low the Tal­mud and some add the Kab­bal­ah. They were cho­sen due to their puri­ty, com­ing from Noah, for the Mes­si­ah to incar­nate into and for them to be His priest nation, a whole peo­ple who would have gone forth across the world teach­ing the god­less nations of the world, the way of God and His sal­va­tion. But they reject­ed that mighty gift, and now they are being pun­ished. Thus the respon­si­bil­i­ty for teach­ing sal­va­tion fell on Chris­tian­i­ty. The Jews were giv­en every­thing, yet they still reject­ed the good­ness of God and thought of them­selves Naaah, we are bet­ter than God, we our­selves are Gods!”

    Stop the mad­ness, drop reli­gion, if there is a god, ANY god, let him or her come to us and beg OUR for­give­ness for not step­ping in and set­tling mat­ters in a more peace­able fash­ion long ago.”

    This is the weak­ness of man : that man would fear in his mind and his heart more for the life of his flesh than for the life of his true self — the inner image of God called the spir­it and the essence of the self called the soul. Mate­ri­al­ism has over­come you, thus loss of faith and true knowl­edge is its fruit. You see inverse­ly now, the world has repro­grammed you, to seek your life and the life of this per­ish­ing world. But Jesus tells you that every man who seeks to save those things is guar­an­teed to per­ish, because they have invest­ed them­selves in that which is cor­rupt, in that which is evil, in that which must per­ish. Have you for­got­ten Jim, that those who seek to save their life will lose it, but those who lose their life for Jesus Christ and for His gospel shall save it.

    Beg God for for­give­ness Jim, for giv­ing into the doubts of the frail human mind and the fears of the fall­en human flesh. For if every per­son did as you are sup­posed to do now, God would step in, but He will not inter­fere with those who rev­el in evil and call them­selves good. He will not break your free will to enjoy the rewards of war, which come from a god­less peo­ple who know not God, who mock God, aban­don God at every turn, and dis­obey His law when it suits them. God IS the Prince of Peace, but that peace shall be reserved for those who hum­ble them­selves before an eter­nal Cre­ator, not for those who think they can out­smart Him, when even as they hate Him in one moment, He upholds their life, so that they may turn, repent, receive life, grow, mature and real­ize how wrong they were to ever disbelieve.

  6. Jim Olsson Avatar
    Jim Olsson

    After 1400 years of pray­ing to Allah, where has it got­ten Mus­lims ? Sun­nis, Shia, Kurds are all at each oth­er’s throats ; Pales­tine is get­ting pushed around by Israel ; Syr­ia is lying in a heap of ruins ; Hezbol­lah is mad as hell (they always are); Afghanistan and Iraq were over­thrown by the U.S.; Colonel Khadaf­fi got his just desserts ; Iran is cruis­ing for a bruis­ing ; Ergo­dan had to run a crooked elec­tion to stay in pow­er ; the Rohingyas got boot­ed from Myan­mar, Isis and al Qae­da recruits have been killed in droves, not to men­tion all the col­lat­er­al dam­age”, i.e. inno­cent vic­tims used by Baathists and the Repub­li­can Guard and such who were killed as human shields…”

    Allah seems to be seri­ous­ly get­ting his butt kicked by Jehovah.

    After 3,000 years of pray­ing to Jeho­vah, where has it got­ten the Jews ? They’re cap­tives in a nar­row strip of land which would be inde­fen­si­ble with­out the heavy hand and arms of the Unit­ed States to swat away pesky invaders. They num­ber only 14 mil­lion peo­ple today as they have endured con­stant per­se­cu­tion from their ear­li­est mem­o­ry. If Jeho­vah tru­ly exist­ed, and they were tru­ly his cho­sen” peo­ple, would he not have have pro­tect­ed them through time ?

    Jeho­vah seems to be get­ting his but kicked by every Führer, Pon­tiff, and Imam.

    I’m an ex-Chris­t­ian, now athe­ist, and all I want is what’s best for the world. These ancient beliefs are just that… ancient beliefs. They’re super­sti­tions built on hearsay, rec­ol­lec­tions and pos­tu­la­tions, but none of them are help­ing move the world toward a bet­ter tomorrow. 

    It could be argued that Chris­t­ian mis­sion­ar­ies do some good, but could­n’t sec­u­lar peo­ple do just as much good ? They could. Islam no doubt funds char­i­ties for this and that, but could­n’t the same peo­ple act just as kind­ly with­out the Islam­ic pre­tense ? They could.

    Every­one needs to ignore the gods just as they ignore us. It seems that they need us much more than we need them. Can you imag­ine a world his­to­ry with­out the Inqui­si­tions, the witch tri­als, the holy wars and cru­sades, with­out the jihads and fat­wahs, with­out the ludi­crous Papal decrees ? Two thou­sand years of this non­sense, (and two thou­sand more if you believe the Old Tes­ta­ment bat­tle his­to­ries) and where has it got­ten any­one ? Who’s win­ning ? More impor­tant­ly, who’s los­ing ? I can tell you who is los­ing, and that is the ordi­nary Mo or Joe who just want to raise a fam­i­ly and enjoy life.

    The cliché about insan­i­ty, that is, doing the same thing over and over and expect­ing dif­fer­ent results, well, to my eye, we’ve had 4,000 years of doing things over and over, and here we are, no fur­ther than we were 4,000 years ago, except we have bet­ter weapons, dif­fer­ent tac­tics, new par­tic­i­pants, and mil­lions of poten­tial new vic­tims should the big two reli­gions ever engage each oth­er in earnest.

    Stop the mad­ness, drop reli­gion, if there is a god, ANY god, let him or her come to us and beg OUR for­give­ness for not step­ping in and set­tling mat­ters in a more peace­able fash­ion long ago.

  7. Jack Avatar
    Jack

    Why did­n’t you quote any sources in your arti­cle ? All you did was claim David Wood is a liar”, you did noth­ing to refute David, who quot­ed Mus­lim sources to prove all of his claims (That Muham­mad was a mur­der­er and a thief, and was pos­sessed by demons).

  8. P. Spencer Avatar
    P. Spencer

    That, my friend, is not my point. While I can­not speak direct­ly for Mr. Wood, I am hor­ri­bly offend­ed’ (how loose­ly do we use that term ;) ) that you would put all Chris­tians under an umbrel­la like the author has done here. To clar­i­fy, you just said that if I want­ed to be tak­en sin­cere­ly I would have to dis­tance myself from Mr. Wood’s com­ments… excuse me if I’m wrong, but if I’m here to defend’ Mr. Wood, why would I dis­tance myself from him ?

    As to Ashar’s com­ment, I would glad­ly agree. Chris­tian­i­ty is dif­fer­ent and against human nature. The very idea that God would love total­ly depraved crea­tures so much that He would take on their like­ness, and die in one of the worst ways ever known to man to save them, is total­ly unique. That’s part of what sets Chris­tian­i­ty apart from every sin­gle reli­gion on earth, includ­ing Islam. As to your premise, that is absolute­ly out of con­text. The Bible also has laws for things like that. Try read­ing the Old Tes­ta­ment for starters.

    In Christ, Philip

  9. Ashar Avatar
    Ashar

    I am work­ing with a chris­t­ian mis­sion­ary orga­ni­za­tion since last 10 years. I have nev­er felt for a sin­gle moment that i should con­sid­er this eli­gion as a true reli­gion. I am Mus­lim, but after join­ing this orga­ni­za­tion, thanks to Allah, that my beleif on Islam has become firm. Jesus says, if some one slaps on your one cheak, turn the oth­er towards him to slap on that as well, if some one takes your coat from you, offer him the shirt too. I ask, if i go to any chris­tians house and kid­nape his doughter for sex, will he fol­low me with his oth­er doughter to offer???????? nev­er pos­si­ble coz its against nature of man. So, chris­tian­i­ty for me, is total­ly against nature

  10. islamispeace Avatar
    islamispeace

    Your whole premise, my dear Philip, is absurd. You made a com­ment here crit­i­ciz­ing the author of this arti­cle for using cer­tain words to refer to the mis­sion­ary David Wood, when what you should have done, if you want­ed to be tak­en seri­ous­ly, was dis­tance your­self from Wood’s com­ments. You will notice that in my ini­tial response to you, I did not refer to Jesus_​follower specif­i­cal­ly (except when refer­ring to the admin­is­tra­tor’s com­ments) but to Chris­tians who use insult­ing ways to preach to Mus­lims. You have refused to dis­tance your­self from these mis­sion­ar­ies (are they fol­low­ing the Bib­li­cal way of preach­ing??). That is enough for me to con­clude that you are not inter­est­ed in dia­log and discussion.

  11. P. Spencer Avatar
    P. Spencer

    First of all, I used the argue­ment that you should be respon­si­ble for all mus­lim com­ments to show you how absurd it would be if I had to answer for Jesus fol­low­er. Appar­ent­ly you did­n’t catch that, so i reit­er­at­ed that here. Sec­ond­ly, if you pay atten­tion to the Bible you will see that mis­sion­ar­ies aren’t a sec­ondary group inside Chris­tian­i­ty, all Chris­tians are called to be mis­sion­ar­ies some­where. So to try to sin­gle these peo­ple out under that guise is absurd.

    Sin­cere­ly, Philip Spencer

  12. islamispeace Avatar
    islamispeace

    Mr. Wood’s lit­tle arti­cle assumes many things. He not only insults the Prophet Muham­mad (pbuh) but accus­es Mus­lims of hid­ing” his ver­sion of the truth” about him. In oth­er words, he believes Mus­lims are deceiv­ing not only them­selves but the whole world. Does this not reg­is­ter as an insult to 1.5 bil­lion Mus­lims, in your mind ? You do not dis­tance your­self from these com­ments but you insist that Mus­lims apol­o­gize for the words used by some Mus­lim apol­o­gists, even though those words are direct­ed at the lying mis­sion­ar­ies, not Chris­tians in general ?

    You say that Jesus-Fol­low­er’s com­ments are his own, and there­fore, you can­not be held respon­si­ble and nei­ther can oth­er Chris­tians, yet you insist that I as well as oth­er Mus­lims be held respon­si­ble for the com­ments made by oth­er Mus­lims AND asso­ciate Islam with them as well. I think any rea­son­able per­son can see the hypocrisy in that.

    My expe­ri­ence has taught me that many peo­ple will project them­selves as being respect­ful and will­ing to learn about Islam, but their beliefs and inten­tions are quite the oppo­site. Jesus-fol­low­er is an exam­ple. In the above posts, he projects him­self as some inno­cent guy who just wants dia­logue with Mus­lims, but if you are famil­iar with his pre­vi­ous posts, you would know that that is just a smoke-screen, that he is not inter­est­ed in dia­logue, but to attack and defame Islam and Mus­lims. Now, I am not accus­ing you of being decep­tive in your inten­tions, but I found it quite odd that you are insis­tent on Mus­lims watch­ing their tongue” so to speak, yet you do not say the same about your fel­low Chris­tians. If you had done that, I guar­an­tee you that I would not have respond­ed with sus­pi­cion and crit­i­cism. I am not angry at you, just dis­ap­point­ed. As I have made clear in many of my posts, I do not defame or attack Chris­tian­i­ty or Chris­tians in gen­er­al, but when it comes to indi­vid­u­als who resort to big­otry and lies, I have no sym­pa­thy or respect.

    Peace be upon you.

  13. P. Spencer Avatar
    P. Spencer

    You are side-step­ping around my point. In the excerpt that is post­ed on this site, the only two terms he used were rob­ber and mur­der­er. He also puts out proof to sup­port his argu­ment, and while I don’t mind if you cor­rect his argu­ment and defend Muham­mads hypo­thet­i­cal hon­or, you have used those two terms to open a flood gate of insults against Mr. Wood him­self. What does that say about Islam ? Does he call you a mis­guid­ed, dis­il­lu­sioned, moron for believ­ing in Islam ? As to Jesus Fol­low­er’s com­ments, I thought we had already estab­lished that I can­not take respon­si­bil­i­ty for those. He will have to defend his own hon­or. I am ask­ing you to debate with ME, not Jesus Fol­low­er. The fal­la­cy behind that is clear. We can both point out peo­ple on both sides of the prover­bial line, and say that they are biased’ or over­ly aggres­sive in the terms they use when accus­ing indi­vid­u­als or sug­gest­ing things about them. But we would get nowhere. The more I debate with you, it seems like you get more aggres­sive in your name call­ing and accu­sa­tions. What does that say about Islam ? My bias is not what needs to be ques­tioned here, its yours. After read­ing the debate between you and Jesus Fol­low­er and spend­ing time talk­ing to you, I begin to see that no mat­ter the lev­el of respect I main­tain when talk­ing to you, this might just degen­er­ate into a one sided bar­rage of insults and lit­tle hacks and cuts like those dis­played in your pre­vi­ous posts and the posts of the admin­is­tra­tor. Again, what does that say about your reli­gion ? Are you assum­ing an air of superiority ?

  14. islamispeace Avatar
    islamispeace

    Yeah, of course, your bias blinds you from con­demn­ing Mr. Wood” for his offen­sive remarks against the blessed Prophet Muham­mad (pbuh), but you cry foul when a Mus­lim responds to such garbage by refer­ring to that moron’s argu­ments as Chris­t­ian non­sense.” If you were not so biased, you would have con­demned his ridicu­lous state­ments and dis­tanced your­self from them, but alas, you failed to do that and have done your faith and your brethren who do not resort to such big­otry a great disservice.

    Con­cern­ing the Cru­sades and the Inqui­si­tion, if you are refer­ring to my com­ment to Jesus-fol­low­er, per­haps you don’t real­ize that it was he who accused Islam of being respon­si­ble for the mur­ders of many peo­ple, sim­ply because the peo­ple who were respon­si­ble claimed to be Mus­lims. My response to this absurd state­ment was that peo­ple claim­ing to be Chris­tians have done ter­ri­ble things too, like the Cru­sades and Inqui­si­tion, and of course the Rwan­da geno­cide. Read the whole state­ment before you make absurd alle­ga­tions. I was not the one who accused Chris­tian­i­ty of doing hor­ri­ble things. It was your broth­er” who resort­ed to such idi­ot­ic state­ments. And of course, in typ­i­cal fash­ion, you failed to con­demn that as well. Bravo !

  15. P. Spencer Avatar
    P. Spencer

    Please for­give me, but besides rob­ber and mur­der­er, I see no oth­er names,good or bad, Mr. Wood uses for Muham­mad. May I ask one more ques­tion, why do you always point to the Cru­sades and the Inqui­si­tion ? Do you know the actu­al his­to­ry behind the Cru­sades ? Also, if we have to take respon­si­bil­i­ty for all of our fac­tions, Catholic extrem­ists’ per say, then why don’t you have to take respon­si­bil­i­ty for mus­lim extrem­ists ? Could­n’t I just point back to 911 and all of the bomb­ings every­where and use that as a way to say that Islam is a vio­lent religion ?

  16. islamispeace Avatar
    islamispeace

    Oh please. Do we have to tell you that Mus­lims do not regard the New Tes­ta­ment as the authen­tic words of Jesus (pbuh)? Accord­ing to Islam, Jesus (pbuh) nev­er claimed divin­i­ty. Period.

    Con­cern­ing your broth­er”, you should know that this is not the only top­ic he post­ed on. He has post­ed else­where, and it was already clear from his rhetoric that he was a self-absorbed, nasty per­son. That was not emo­tion and sheer dis­dain” lol.

    I should tell you that I have many Chris­t­ian friends, so I do not regard Chris­tians as hate-mon­gers”, although there are many. What struck me as odd about your ini­tial response was that you were point­ing the fin­ger at Mus­lims for using what you call defam­a­to­ry names” but you did not con­demn the lan­guage used by the mis­sion­ary which this arti­cle dealt with, espe­cial­ly since it is sup­pos­ed­ly not in line with the way a Chris­t­ian should act. My point is that you should con­demn your brethren for using defam­a­to­ry names” regard­ing Islam and Mus­lims, before you crit­i­cize Mus­lims for respond­ing to such trash.

  17. P. Spencer Avatar
    P. Spencer

    For­give my absence. Are you telling me that Jesus did not believe in the Trin­i­ty as God’s true state ? all over the New Tes­ta­ment, Jesus refers to God the Father and the Holy Spirit,and includ­ing him,all three dif­fer­ent aspects of one God. Jesus also refers to Him­self as I Am’, the same name God the Father uses in the Old Tes­ta­ment. Also, in the admin­stra­tor’s com­ment between posts 20 and 21, he refers to Jesus as a half-naked roman crim­i­nal swing­ing from a cross.” I for one, con­sid­er this offensive,and while I am not going to slan­der Mus­lims, because Jesus him­self has required that we love those who hate us, I do believe that any casu­al observ­er may find this argu­ment a bit lop­sided due to your admin­stra­tion’s and this web­site’s con­stant attempts to humil­i­ate the real Faith (Chris­tian­i­ty) and paint Believ­ers (Chris­tians) in gen­er­al as hate-mon­gers. As for my assumed broth­er’s posts ear­li­er, I can­not accept respon­si­bil­i­ty for those because I did­n’t say that,and yes he should of rephrased those, but he obvi­ous­ly did­n’t start it and was react­ing out of emo­tion and sheer dis­dain. In Christ and with respect. [ I am not going to con­tin­ue that childs game ;)]

  18. islamispeace Avatar
    islamispeace

    To P. Spencer,

    I have yet to see you con­demn the hate speech of your Chris­t­ian brethren. You have made two com­ments about the prob­lems you have with some of the things the Mus­lims on this web­site have said, but have not made any com­ments about the things Chris­tians have said.

    With regard to the Admin­is­tra­tor’s com­ments to Jesus-fol­low­er (who is him­self an incred­i­bly hate­filled per­son), he was not slan­der­ing the Prophets, he was reject­ing the trin­i­ty, some­thing all Mus­lims do. Your com­ments seem to sug­gest that the Prophets Moses and Jesus believed in or men­tioned the trin­i­ty as being God’s true state, when in real­i­ty, they did not.

    In Islam with great respect, but THAT is wain­ing also ;-)

  19. P. Spencer Avatar
    P. Spencer

    Go and Burn in Hell when you die. You filthy Trini­tar­i­an pagan wor­ship­per of a naked man.” HATE SPEACH ? Don’t Mus­lims them­selves rec­og­nize the prophet­ic author­i­ty of Moses and Jesus ? Why slan­der your own prophets ?
    Again in Christ with great respect, but that is wain­ing- P. Spencer

  20. P. Spencer Avatar
    P. Spencer

    To begin with I would like to say that you deem Chris­tians intol­er­ant” and beliger­ent,” yet you use terms such as Chris­t­ian non­sense” and oth­er defam­a­to­ry names. So haven’t you proved his point ? You have smoth­ered his argu­ment in irrel­e­vant attacks and slan­dered the man him­self. If you are so tol­er­ant, why have you shout­ed him down in such a way ? I am very inter­est­ed in these dia­logues and will sure­ly fol­low this one.
    In Christ and with great respect, P. Spencer

  21. islamispeace Avatar
    islamispeace

    Hel­lo Sara,

    Mus­lims say peace be upon him” to show respect to the prophets. You are right to say that they already have peace in Heav­en. But we send wish­es of that peace to them from our­selves. It shows our respect towards them.

  22. Sara Avatar
    Sara

    Islamis­peace
    You seem very edu­cat­ed in mat­ters con­cern­ing Chris­tian­i­ty and Islam, I admire that. I just want­ed to ask you some­thing, why do you say peace be upon him” after men­tion­ing a prophets name ? I ask this because I am not a mus­lim and I am real­ly intrigued to know why, see­ing as they should already be shroud­ed in peace as they are in heav­en ? I hope that you can help me under­stand this. You can email me the answer on tene10e@​yahoo.​co.​uk

    Thank you

  23. islamispeace Avatar
    islamispeace

    Broth­er Admin, has J_​follower’s post been delet­ed ? Please post it so that our dis­il­lu­sioned Chris­t­ian friend can be edu­cat­ed. Jazak Allah Khair.

    [Admin : His post will not be pub­lished because (1) it has exceed­ed the lim­it of char­ac­ters that we allow for com­ments to be post­ed, (2) he abus­es and insults Mus­lims at every junc­ture in his post, resort­ing to false­hood and decep­tion which are a reflec­tion of these wor­ship­pers of a half-naked Roman crim­i­nal swing­ing from a cross, (3) we are work­ing on a refu­ta­tion of the claims that he has aired, so there is no need to pub­lish them when his lies will be exposed soon.]

  24. J_follower Avatar
    J_follower

    it looks like my response to you is not get­ting post­ed, but I will just e‑mail you islamispeace

  25. islamispeace Avatar
    islamispeace

    The answer is of course NO. the rea­son for that answer is that I sim­ply don’t believe that GOD would order such thing. I also believe that Moses could have used GOD as a rea­son to exe­cute his plans. He sim­ply could have eas­i­ly said that It’s GOD’s order to kill the babies where in fact GOD had nev­er ordered such act. Again, this is the OLD tes­ta­ment. anoth­er point to make about this is the fact that you are call­ing GOD names, which I think is bal­sphe­mous. The GOD of the old tes­ta­ment is the same GOD that you pray for ! isn’t it ? it’s the GOD of the Old tes­ta­ment that all mus­lims agree is the one and only GOD. that’s why I said your argu­ment is weak because you are basi­cal­ly bash­ing on your own GOD. Now, if you think that Allah is not the same GOD as the GOD of the Jews then you are an infi­del yourself!!”

    Are you then say­ing that the Old Tes­ta­ment is wrong ? I don’t know many Chris­tians who would say that the Old Tes­ta­ment is wrong about cer­tain things. Are you a lib­er­al Chris­t­ian ? Are you also claim­ing that Moses (pbuh) was a liar ? How can you say that when it is sup­posed to be your belief that the Old Tes­ta­ment, specif­i­cal­ly the 5 books of Moses, were dic­tat­ed by God to Moses who then dili­gent­ly wrote it down?! In essence, by call­ing Moses a liar, you are also call­ing God a liar, since it is Chris­t­ian doc­trine that He dic­tat­ed the Pen­ta­teuch to Moses ! In the eyes of most Chris­tians, espe­cial­ly devout Catholics and Evan­gel­i­cals, you are the infi­del ! It is a fun­da­men­tal belief in Chris­tian­i­ty that the Old Tes­ta­ment is God’s unal­tered, unadul­ter­at­ed, word. Any Chris­t­ian who does not believe this is con­sid­ered to be not Chris­t­ian. Every copy of the Chris­t­ian Bible, no mat­ter what ver­sion, has two parts : the Old Tes­ta­ment and the New Tes­ta­ment. This is fact. If you say that the Old Tes­ta­ment is not entire­ly cor­rect, which your response def­i­nite­ly sug­gests, then you are deny­ing that the Chris­t­ian Bible is the pure word of God. Sure­ly God’s word would not have even a shred of false­hood in it, and yet you say that the sto­ries of infan­ti­cide men­tioned with­in the pages of the Old Tes­ta­ment are false, even though the sto­ries appear Num­bers, one of the 5 books of Moses, which were sup­pos­ed­ly dic­tat­ed to Moses by God.

    As for me, I have no prob­lem with your claim that God nev­er ordered such bru­tal­i­ty, although I dis­agree that Moses (pbuh) would have lied. You see, J_​follower, I believe that while God did send down the Torah and the Psalms, I believe that they have been cor­rupt­ed by human hands. Your answer seems to sug­gest this as well. Is that what you are claim­ing ? Has the Old Tes­ta­ment been cor­rupt­ed by human hands ? Also, I do not think that I am blas­phem­ing, because I do not believe that God ordered the mur­der of infants ! There­fore, I don’t think that the verse men­tion­ing the slaugh­ter of inno­cent babies is God’s word, and that means that I am not blas­phem­ing against God ! I think your assump­tion is out of place here. It is sup­posed to be your belief that the Old Tes­ta­ment is the unal­tered word of God, and hence every­thing that is in it is from God, includ­ing the mer­ci­less infan­ti­cide. Final­ly, when I ini­tial­ly asked you why God” (not real­ly God, because those vers­es are not from Him), did such a thing, you did not say He did­n’t.” You said I don’t know!” Why did you change your posi­tion ? First, you were neu­tral, admit­ting that you had no idea why God ordered infants to be put to the sword (in effect admit­ting that it was done), but now you say that he did not give such an order. Instead, you sug­gest that Moses (pbuh) could have sim­ply lied, which also means that God lied. To back up this claim, you offer no evi­dence. Why the sud­den 180-degree turn ?

    Obvi­ous­ly I am mak­ing you angry by ask­ing hon­est ques­tions, but For your infor­ma­tion, First I am an edu­cat­ed man and I was born in an islam­ic dom­i­nat­ed coun­try in the mid­dle east. I fin­ished my high school edu­ca­tion in the mid­dle east, and now I live in USA, so I def­i­nite­ly know what I am talk­ing about when it comes to islam­ic his­to­ry (we had islam­ic his­to­ry class­es for like 10 years). I sat numer­ous times in the Islam­ic reli­gion class­es and I prob­a­bly know about Islam as much as I know about the Bible, and Let me tell you that I am not impressed at all with it ! I prob­a­bly know islam­ic his­to­ry more than chris­t­ian his­to­ry itself because I lived my first 17 years in the mid­dle east study­ing islam­ic his­to­ry for most of that time in school!”

    On the con­trary, you are not mak­ing me angry. You are mak­ing me laugh, because you try to pass your­self off as some­one who has thor­ough­ly stud­ied Islam­ic scrip­ture and under­stood it, when in real­i­ty, it is fair­ly obvi­ous that you have not. I will prove this ; con­tin­ue read­ing, please.

    Again with your blas­phe­my, you talk about the GOD of the OT like it is not your GOD!! you know as I know that mus­lims sup­pose­ly pray and believe for the same GOD the Jews and Chris­tians believe in. Any­way, I answered this point above, so there is no need to stress it. The rea­son why I post­ed my ques­tions to you in response to your ques­tion is that First,I tru­ely did not hear of that sto­ry as I told you that I always stud­ied the NT as a chris­t­ian and nev­er the old testament.”

    Again, I don’t think I am blas­phem­ing because I believe that the Old Tes­ta­ment as it exists today is not God’s unal­tered mes­sage. If any­one is blas­phem­ing, it is you because you, as a Chris­t­ian, must accept EVERY word of not only the New Tes­ta­ment but also the Old Tes­ta­ment, unless you are a lib­er­al Chris­t­ian. But then again, lib­er­al Chris­tians have no prob­lem with say­ing that the New Tes­ta­ment also has many problems.

    To be hon­est with you, some­times I come to the belief that mus­lims prob­a­bly tried so hard to bash on the new tes­ta­ment but could not real­ly find any­thing wrong with it (except of course that Jesus is GOD), so they fig­ured they would bash on the OT instead.”

    Actu­al­ly, there are many prob­lems with the New Tes­ta­ment as well. You seem to be of the naïve opin­ion that prob­lems” only exist in the form of vio­lent vers­es, such as the vers­es men­tion­ing infan­ti­cide. Of course, this is not true. The New Tes­ta­ment has log­i­cal prob­lems, archae­o­log­i­cal prob­lems, con­tra­dic­tion prob­lems, etc. etc. If you would like, I can pro­vide you with some exam­ples, and there are quite a few of them.

    I already told you why the OT is there, there is no need to men­tion my answer again. there is a rea­son why they call it the OLD testament.”

    All I have read so far is that the sto­ry of infan­ti­cide which the Old Tes­ta­ment talks about is false. That means the Old Tes­ta­ment is false. Is that your answer ?

    The NT is what chris­tian­i­ty is based upon. Sec­ond, the sto­ry that Allah would allow the prophet to mar­ry any women he wants and allow him an infi­nite num­ber of slaves is com­plete­ly out-of-hand if you ask me. To a neu­tral per­son who hears the sto­ry of a man, who claims prophe­cy, to have slave women that he could sleep with any­time he desired is com­plete­ly unac­cept­able for a prophet of GOD. What makes you think I shouldn’t believe that it was the prophet’s lust for women and abnor­mal abuse of his pow­er and word over peo­ple that drove him to allow him­self to mar­ry all these women and allow him­self women slaves (also alow­ing mus­lims slave cap­tives as well). Of course the mus­lims were prob­a­bly furi­ous with the idea that a prophet would do that, so he invent­ed a verse that allows him to do it. Now that sounds a lot more log­i­cal than your expla­na­tion, and that’s what I tru­ely believe. Muham­mad does not need a verse from GOD to allow him to mar­ry girls for alliances, he sim­ply could have done it with­out a verse, but the mus­lim crowd prob­a­bly were ask­ing too many sus­pi­cious ques­tions so he came with a verse to jus­ti­fy it ! you men­tion this fact in what you said here”

    Here we go again. Your fool­ish igno­rance has done you in once more. Any stu­dent of his­to­ry knows that in the pre-Islam­ic days, there was no lim­it to how many women a man could mar­ry. Your fool­ish assump­tions, besides not being backed up by evi­dence, do not prove any­thing, only your own lack of knowledge.

    In a soci­ety where there were no lim­its on mar­riage, and a man could mar­ry as many women as he want­ed (hun­dreds even), it was a rev­o­lu­tion­ary con­cept that a man could mar­ry only up to 4 wives, pro­vid­ed that he care for and love each wife equal­ly. If he could not do that, then he could mar­ry only one. This idea was unheard of in the pre-Islam­ic days. Fur­ther­more, Muham­mad (pbuh) was a mar­ried man before he became a Prophet. He was mar­ried to one woman, and that was Khadi­ja (may Allah be pleased with her). He remained mar­ried only to her until her death, and all of his chil­dren, except for one, were from his mar­riage to her. In a soci­ety where he could have mar­ried as many women as he want­ed, he remained with one. Think about this. In the prime of his youth, where one would except a per­son to be sex­u­al­ly active, Muham­mad (pbuh) had only one wife. Why would he wait for old age to take more wives when he could have sim­ply done so before, even before he became a Prophet ? He cer­tain­ly did not need a verse to allow him to mar­ry more women, because that was already the norm in Ara­bia ! The pur­pose of the verse is explained by Ibn Kathir in the excerpt I gave you before. It was meant to draw a line in a soci­ety where there was no line. It was meant to put lim­its on and to rebuild the insti­tu­tion of mar­riage , which was in sham­bles because of the prac­tices of, not only the pagan arabs, but the Chris­tians and Jews as well.

    To fur­ther demol­ish your absurd log­ic, here is a list of Muham­mad’s wives. Notice that many of them pro­posed to him and some were quite old, as old as 65 years. Khadi­ja, his first wife, was 40 years old when she pro­posed to Muham­mad (pbuh), who was at the time a 25 year old mer­chant work­ing for her :

    http://​anwary​-islam​.com/​w​o​m​e​n​/​p​r​o​p​h​e​t​s​-​w​i​v​e​s​.​htm

    Now, you obvi­ous­ly are of the view that the Chrisit­ian Bible pro­hibits polygamy. I have heard this before and have nev­er seen any Bib­li­cal evi­dence that this is so. Do us all a favor and edu­cate” us on the Bible’s views regard­ing polygamy. Does it real­ly say explic­it­ly that a man can mar­ry only one wife ? If this is so, why did the founder of Protes­tantism, Mar­tin Luther, not ever express­ly for­bid the prac­tice, which was also com­mon among Catholics ? Good luck with this one !

    I was able to get around to read the links you pro­vid­ed, and I can’t tell you how much I loved those two links spe­cial­ly the sec­ond one. I want to thank you because it proves my point even fur­ther. Here is a mul­sim woman that reads the Quran and can’t find an answer to her ques­tion. her ques­tion was what do I get in Heav­on as opposed to the Man”. the answers that were pro­vid­ed basi­cal­ly said noth­ing. it only said that women will enter heav­on, and to me that is not an answer, the sheikh stat­ed the obvi­ous, I mean I would hope that after all women have done to human­i­ty they would at least have a chance to enter heav­on!. the woman was won­der­ing why would GOD allow polygmy on earth and then allow it in heav­on. She obvi­ous­ly hates polygmy and can’t stand the idea of it. I don’t believe she got her answer. I believe you lost her as a mus­limah. Her ques­tions were right on the spot, and the answers were any­thing but impres­sive (oh, women will in fact enter heavon..but they still get to watch their hus­bands prac­tice polygmy). on the con­trary, chris­tian­i­ty does not allow polygmy on earth, and no mar­riage in par­adise which is yet anoth­er point where chris­tian­i­ty is bet­ter. So Basi­cal­ly, you might think you actu­al­ly have answers to every­thing, but if non of these answers make sense to the human being, then it’s not an answer.”

    Well, first, I would like to see indis­putable evi­dence that Chris­tian­i­ty does not allow polygamy. I hear Chris­tians say that, but they nev­er actu­al­ly show where it says that. The usu­al vers­es they bring are from the Gospel of Matthew, but those spe­cif­ic vers­es talk about divorce, not polygamy. So, where exact­ly does it say that polygamy is not allowed ? Appar­ent­ly, it was allowed for the Israelites. Oh, but you are going to claim that the Old Tes­ta­ment is wrong, right ?

    As for the links I pro­vid­ed, I feel they effi­cient­ly answered the ques­tion. How­ev­er, you, in your blind bias, will not accept any­thing because your mind is already made up. You are lost in your satan­ic bias. The links said it clear­ly that women who do good will enter Par­adise and will enjoy it along with their hus­bands. They will not have the abil­i­ty to have sex with oth­er men, because in Heav­en, they will still be mar­ried to their hus­bands. It would not make sense to allow the women to have sex with oth­er men, besides their hus­bands. Anoth­er impor­tant point to men­tion is that it is not incum­bent upon the men to have as many vir­gins as they want. Some men may not want to have any­one oth­er than their wives. It is just like in this world. Some men would rather not mar­ry 4 wives. It is not incum­bent upon them to do so. The same applies to Heaven.

    anoth­er good ques­tion would even be, why would GOD have vir­gins in heav­on any­way ! Heav­on is not mate­ri­al­is­tic nor it is a place where you can get vir­gins. Jesus was asked about this, and he said that in Heav­on there is no mar­raige and no mate­ri­als. Believ­ers will be able to see their GOD again, and that should be good enough for them after liv­ing with­out the abil­i­ty to see their lord (think about it, all peo­ple nowa­days have not seen GOD).”

    Real­ly ? The Chris­t­ian heav­en is not mate­ri­al­is­tic ? Then I sup­pose Jesus was lying when he promised his dis­ci­ples that in heav­en, there are man­sions, and that they will have the hon­or of liv­ing in those extra­ga­vant man­sions ? It says this clear­ly in John 14:2 – 3. Now don’t try to deny it. Don’t make your­self look even more fool­ish. The Chris­t­ian heav­en is materialistic.

    Wine does not make you intox­i­cat­ed unless you abuse it ! Abus­ing any­thing at all will make you sick any­way. for exam­ple if you over eat cac­tus you will have diges­tion problems..etc(there are many exam­ples of over abus­ing any drink or food that will make you sick) there is no rea­son to not allow drink­ing wine if you tell the peo­ple not to abuse it. on the oth­er hand the Bible allows drink­ing but in mod­er­a­tion. some chris­tians even choose not to drink at all, but that’s their choice.”

    The wine of Heav­en will not need to be drunk in mod­er­a­tion.” A per­son could drink as much as he/​she wants and will not be intox­i­cat­ed, because in Heav­en, there will be no such thing, just as there will be no crime, anger, hatred, dis­ease, or death. If the Bible allows alco­hol even in mod­er­a­tion, it offers no warn­ing to preg­nant women to not drink ! It is a med­ical fact that there is no safe or mod­er­ate” amount of alco­hol when a woman is preg­nant. The alco­hol caus­es severe men­tal retar­da­tion in fetus­es, not to men­tion addic­tion in many when they are born. Here is a link which explains FAS (Fetal Alco­hol Syndrome):

    http://​fam​i​ly​doc​tor​.org/​068​.​xml

    A notable excerpt : Will it hurt my baby even if I don’t drink every day ?

    Yes. Even small amounts of alco­hol can be harm­ful. Because no amount of alco­hol can be con­sid­ered safe, preg­nant women should avoid all alco­hol dur­ing the entire pregnancy.”

    Does the Bible come with a warn­ing that preg­nant women should not drink ? Is there some­thing along the lines of a Sur­geon Gen­er­al’s Warn­ing.” May be some­thing like Jesus’ Warn­ing : Con­sum­ing alco­hol dur­ing preg­nan­cy may cause birth defects?” I think not.

    Is chris­tian­i­ty pro-life ? yes it is. you see chris­tians all the time in this coun­try (USA)denouncing abor­tion and stem cell research. on the oth­er hand, islam is the one that is not pro-life as we see Moth­ers stomp­ing over the love for their chil­dren, send them to be Mar­tyrs and die for the sake of Allah. Islam is pro-life ? that’s a joke right?! I am not an expert on this top­ic but it’s obvi­ous. If Islam is pro-life it would not pro­mote vir­gins and wine to encour­age humans to kill them­selves to go to heav­on. Osama bin Laden said it out loud The US val­ues Life, we (mus­lims) val­ue death””

    You are damn right that you are not an expert. You are just as igno­rant and big­ot­ed in your beliefs than most Chris­tians I have come across. It is always fun­ny when peo­ple like you admit they are not experts,” and yet they still some­how feel that they have fig­ured every­thing out and that they know more about Islam than Mus­lims do, even though they have nev­er actu­al­ly stud­ied Islam in detail ! How hilar­i­ous ! I chal­lenge you to back up your slan­der­ous claim that Islam encour­ages humans to kill them­selves to go to heav­en.” Show me your evi­dence or stop spew­ing your lies.

    okay, the rest of ques­tions I asked were asked to show a point that I don’t believe in any­more. I am sor­ry I got car­ried away when I heard the sto­ry you pre­sent­ed and rushed to come up with an answer, and I should have not done that. Any­way, I answered the point you made about Moses. The Bible does pro­vide answers to the ques­tions I asked.”

    No, you did not answer the ques­tion. All you did was say what you thought was a pos­si­bil­i­ty. You pro­vid­ed no evi­dence. In addi­tion, by say­ing that you do not agree with the Old Tes­ta­ment that God ordered infan­ti­cide, you are in turn deny­ing the Old Tes­ta­men­t’s divine roots, which is a cor­ner­stone of Chrisit­ian belief.

    Notice that I have not quot­ed the Quran when I talked about the birth of Jesus. I have a mus­lim friend, who con­vert­ed to chris­tian­i­ty, that told me this fact. he is also from the mid­dle east. he told me that the Quran in ara­bic says that the holy spir­it was blown into mar­ry, which he thought total­ly proves father, son, and holy spir­it con­cept. That proves that Jesus is not human there­fore he is GOD.”

    You claimed that the Quran says that Jesus was divine. You were proven wrong. As for your friend, he is clear­ly wrong in say­ing that it was the Holy Spir­it, which the Quran says was Gabriel and not the Spir­it of God, that was blown into Mary. On the con­trary, it is writ­ten that the Holy Spir­it (Gabriel) blew the soul of Jesus into Mary, as God had commanded.

    I couldn’t agree more with you on this point. sure not every­thing that looks like a mir­a­cle is a mir­a­cle, but when you have a man with no vision, goes to church to pray, gets up the next day com­plete­ly cured, and the doc­tor is com­plete­ly amazed because he knows the man was blind, I sure believe that this is a chris­t­ian mir­a­cle. Plus we’re only talk­ing here about one mir­a­cle. there are a lot more mir­a­cles. The Nation­al Geo­graph­ic chan­nel had a show on chris­t­ian mir­a­cles few months ago. They said that they found 67 con­firmed mir­a­cles right at the end of the show.”

    It does not go unno­ticed that you com­plete­ly avoid­ed talk­ing about the so-called mir­a­cles that occurred in India in the 1990s. There is even a Hin­du tem­ple in Toron­to where it is claimed that many peo­ple have been healed by the pow­er of god­dess Sridur­ka.” Are these mir­a­cles or some­thing else alto­geth­er ? Should we think like you and start wor­ship­ping Hin­du idols ? Even the Romans claimed mir­a­cles as being signs of the divine pow­er of their gods. The pagan Roman his­to­ri­an Cor­nelius Tac­i­tus wrote about an alleged mir­a­cle per­formed at the hands of the Emper­or Ves­pasian. This mir­a­cle” is men­tioned in Tac­i­tus’ 2nd cen­tu­ry work The His­to­ries.” Accord­ing to Tac­i­tus, Ves­pasian mirac­u­lous­ly healed two men, and that this mir­a­cle” was wit­nessed by many peo­ple, and that it was made pos­si­ble by the inter­ven­tion of the pagan god Ser­apis. Should we take this as proof that Ser­apis is a true god ? I cer­tain­ly will not. The so-called Chris­t­ian mir­a­cles cer­tain­ly are not proof to me that Chris­tian­i­ty is the true reli­gion or that Jesus is God either.

    Now, I know that Muham­mad did not per­form any mir­a­cles. That’s a lie. he was asked to per­form a mir­a­cle to prove him­self, but his answer was that the Quran was his mir­a­cle. To a man like me who under­stands ara­bic very well, I can tell you that the Quran might be a good piece of lit­er­a­ture, but it’s no mir­a­cle. it is just a book, and there have been oth­er ara­bic writ­ings that are way bet­ter than the Quran. for exam­ple, poets like Ibn-Jareer and Faraz­dak have awe­some ara­bic poet­ry. the only prob­lem is that no one in the ara­bic world dares to chal­lenge the quran.”

    A lie, is it ? Real­ly ? Here is a list of his mir­a­cles, for your read­ing pleasure :

    http://​thetruere​li​gion​.org/​m​o​d​u​l​e​s​/​w​f​s​e​c​t​i​o​n​/​a​r​t​i​c​l​e​.​p​h​p​?​a​r​t​i​c​l​e​i​d​=​106

    So, who is lying here ? Me or you ? Or is it that you are not a liar, just abhor­renl­ty igno­rant of Islam ? I think it is the lat­ter in this case. What do you think ?

    When I said that we are not so dif­fer­ent, I was try­ing to be nice and respect­ful. I am try­ing to con­duct a good con­ver­sa­tion with you. I have many mus­lim friends that I have great respect for. I love mus­lims, I love all human beings, I respect all reli­gions and all beliefs. I am a chris­t­ian, and this is what chris­tian­i­ty is. that’s what Jesus taught us. he taught us to love with no restric­tions. No where in the new Tes­ta­ment it tells chris­tians to fight the unbe­liev­ers and kill them. NO where in the NT you find Mar­tyrs get­ting vir­gins, boys, and wine in heav­on for killing inno­cent peo­ple. That’s the prob­lem with Islam. this is what I am fighting.”

    If you want to be nice and respect­ful, here is a lit­tle tip : try not to spew your lies about Islam. I chal­lenge you once again to show indis­putable evi­dence from the Quran or Hadiths which say that Mus­lims go to Heav­en for killing peo­ple.” You are fight­ing the truth, not evil. The evil is com­ing from you, because you are try­ing to entin­guish the light of Islam with your satan­ic lies. Of course, you will nev­er suc­ceed, inshaAllah !

    Sex with cap­tive women and slave women is per­mit­ted not only for the prophet but also for mus­lims Quran…23:1 – 6 this fact, in my opin­ion, is a proof (one of many) that the Quran can’t be the word of GOD. Just ask your­self my fel­low mus­lim : What GOD is this GOD that is going to allow such an uneth­i­cal act!! It’s in the Quran and you can’t deny it. I want you to answer this. I answered you on your point, so please tell me why would GOD allmighty all-pow­er­ful all-for­giv­ing and lov­ing allow mus­lims to have sex with their cap­tives with­out mar­riage and with­out even say­ing if they want­ed” at least.”

    First­ly, you have not answered my ques­tion. You actu­al­ly changed your answer from before. I guess you real­ized that a book which you are sup­posed to believe is the unal­tered word of God is actu­al­ly not, you were forced to change your posi­tion from neu­tral­i­ty to com­plete denial.

    The issue of con­cu­bines has been a pop­u­lar tar­get of non-Mus­lim attacks on Islam, espe­cial­ly pathet­ic Chris­tians like you. Con­cu­bines are tak­en dur­ing times of war only and if they are impreg­nat­ed, they are auto­mat­i­cal­ly free, as are their off­spring. In the Old Tes­ta­ment, con­cu­bines were tak­en by the most devout men and noth­ing is writ­ten which would sug­gest that God was unhap­py with their actions. But again, the Old Tes­ta­ment is wrong, even though God is the one who is sup­posed to have inspired or dic­tat­ed it, or so you are sup­posed to believe.

    Why does the Quran allow the man to beat his wife ? why Women in Islam can­not divorce, and have no choice in that deci­sion at all. the man does not even have to go to Sheikh/​Mosque/​court to divorce a woman. he can sim­ply say you are divorced”, and to make mat­ters even worse, the man is allowed to bring the woman back as long as he did not say you are divorced” three times. if he says it three times, then the woman has to sleep with some­body else before she comes back to him. this is the truth and is prac­ticed in all Islam­ic coun­tries, and I think is very shameful.”

    I am so sick and tired of your lies. Islam gives women the right to divorce, just as it gives them the right to inher­i­tance and kind treat­ment from their hus­bands. In truth, it is Chris­tian­i­ty which pro­hibits divorce alto­geth­er, which means that nei­ther the hus­band or the wife can sep­a­rate. If that means that a woman has to stay with an abu­sive hus­band, then so be it. Islam, on the oth­er hand, is a prac­ti­cal reli­gion which per­mits divorce, but con­sid­ers it a great dis­hon­or. But, women do have divorce rights (Sura An-Nisa : 128). Read this arti­cle to edu­cate your­self and to free your­self from your own lies :

    http://​twf​.org/​L​i​b​r​a​r​y​/​W​o​m​e​n​I​C​J​.​h​t​m​l​#​d​i​v​o​rce

    As for beat­ing wives, it is allowed only as a last resort against a rebel­lious wife, if oth­er means fail. Regard­ing the man­ner of beat­ing, it is to be light. Ibn Kathir’s com­men­tary on the part of Sura An-Nisa:34 con­cern­ing beat­ing one’s wife says the following :
    beat them) means, if advice and ignor­ing her in the bed do not pro­duce the desired results, you are allowed to dis­ci­pline the wife, with­out severe beat­ing. Mus­lim record­ed that Jabir said that dur­ing the Farewell Hajj, the Prophet said :
    (Fear Allah regard­ing women, for they are your assis­tants. You have the right on them that they do not allow any per­son whom you dis­like to step on your mat. How­ev­er, if they do that, you are allowed to dis­ci­pline them light­ly. They have a right on you that you pro­vide them with their pro­vi­sion and clothes, in a rea­son­able man­ner.) Ibn Abbas and sev­er­al oth­ers said that the Ayah refers to a beat­ing that is not vio­lent. Al-Hasan Al-Bas­ri said that it means, a beat­ing that is not severe.”

    by the way, your nick name islamis­peace. Is Islam real­ly a peac­ful religion?”

    It is a great name, isn’t it ? I chose it for a rea­son. I just love it when peo­ple ask me islamis­peace, is Islam real­ly peace­ful?” Trust me when I say this : you are not the first one to ask me this ques­tion. In fact, just a few months ago, a Chris­t­ian named Mariyyah” asked me this same ques­tion on this same site. She has yet to respond to my last response to her. Any­way, I chose the name because it is rel­e­vant to the times and because it sticks out. It encour­ages non-Mus­lims to start ask­ing ques­tions. They ask me if Islam is so peace­ful, then why does the Quran say such and such?” They assume that I am just some poor Mus­lim that has nev­er read the Quran, and who just believes that Islam is true because I have been told that by my par­ents or imams and that I dare not ask ques­tions out of fear of being killed. How wrong they are !

    I ask them to bring forth any vers­es which, in their con­fused minds, are some­how unjust” or vio­lent.” Those poor fools then bring forth man­gled vers­es with parts miss­ing in a des­per­ate effort to not look stu­pid, but they do. They look stu­pid when they are shown that the vers­es they quot­ed are quot­ed out of con­text or only in parts, with oth­er vital parts miss­ing. Do they do it on pur­pose ? I think some of them do, but most of them are just igno­rant. They don’t know any bet­ter because they have been led to believe cer­tain things by their priests and min­is­ters. I doubt that many of them have much knowl­edge on their own reli­gion, let alone Islam. You are one of them, aren’t you ? You obvi­ous­ly have nev­er read the entire Chris­t­ian Bible, since you admit­ted that you had nev­er heard of the Old Tes­ta­ment sto­ries of infan­ti­cide before.

    we see live con­trary exam­ples every day that proves Islam is not a peac­ful reli­gion. here are few facts : More peo­ple are killed by Islamists each year than in all 350 years of the Span­ish Inqui­si­tion com­bined. Islam­ic ter­ror­ists mur­der more peo­ple every day than the Ku Klux Klan has in the last 50 years.More civil­ians were killed by Mus­lim extrem­ists in two hours on Sep­tem­ber 11th than in the 36 years of sec­tar­i­an con­flict in North­ern Ire­land. Mus­lims claim that their reli­gion is Hijacked by the ter­ror­ists, but I am a guy who does not think so. the prob­lem is with­in the Quran itself. NO Human on this plan­et kills oth­ers then rais­es his holy book to jus­ti­fy his killing except a mus­lim. Also, anoth­er fact that proves that Islam is not peace­ful is the Con­verts to the reli­gion itself. why is it that so many West­ern Con­verts to Islam flip from being a nor­mal human being to be an extrem­ist. All of a sud­den Ara­bic is the holi­est lan­guage on the plan­et, Amer­i­ca and the Jews are the ene­my so they want to slaugh­ter as many of them as pos­si­ble includ­ing women and chil­dren, and they want to con­quer their land and take their women cap­tive. why is that trend only unique to Islam ? I have nev­er seen or heard of a chris­t­ian Con­vert that does any of these shame­ful actions. You can talk about how Islam is peac­ful all day long, but the facts, real­i­ty and the Quran, with no doubt, will prove you wrong.”

    So let me get this straight. Essen­tial­ly, you are argu­ing that since peo­ple claim­ing to be Mus­lims have killed more peo­ple than peo­ple claim­ing to be Chris­tians (and that is in recent times), that means that Islam is inher­ent­ly evil and vio­lent. Is this cor­rect ? You don’t deny that Chris­tians have done evil things, and you even gave some exam­ples like the Span­ish Inqui­si­tion. You obvi­ous­ly do not see how insane­ly absurd and utter­ly idi­ot­ic this argu­ment is. But I will play this game of yours, just to humor you. Let me show you a few exam­ples, just from the 20th cen­tu­ry, where Chrisi­tians have com­mit­ted some of the worst crimes in human his­to­ry, both in terms of the hor­rif­ic nature of these crimes and the num­ber of peo­ple who were either killed, wound­ed or gen­er­al­ly neg­a­tive­ly affect­ed. These are events which you have over­looked, per­haps inten­tion­al­ly. The most obvi­ous one that comes to mind is the Holo­caust. The mass mur­der­ers were pre­dom­i­nate­ly Chris­tians, were they not ? How many peo­ple died in the Holo­caust ? Thir­teen mil­lion, six mil­lion of which were Jews. Anoth­er inci­dent of mass mur­der in which Chris­tians were the main cul­prits was the eth­nic cleans­ing which took place in Bosnia and Koso­vo. Hun­dreds of thou­sands were killed, includ­ing 8,000 Mus­lims at Sre­breni­ca alone. Yet anoth­er episode of mass mur­der in which Chris­tians took an active role was the Rwan­dan geno­cide, in which 800,000 peo­ple were killed. Catholic cler­gy and nuns, as well many Protes­tant church­es have been impli­cat­ed in aid­ing the mur­der­ers. This star­tling rev­e­la­tion has led many peo­ple in this pre­dom­i­nate­ly Roman Catholic coun­try to turn to Islam, because they could not find it with­in them­selves to for­give and for­get the role of the Catholic church in the inhu­man­i­ty which shook Rwan­da in the 1990s. Before the geno­cide, Islam account­ed for around 4% of the pop­u­la­tion. Now, it accounts for 14%. Mus­lims are hailed as heroes in Rwan­da, because so many of them risked their lives to save peo­ple, regard­less of their ethnicity.

    We have only seen three instances, and just in the 20th cen­tu­ry, where Chris­tians engaged in bar­bar­ic behav­ior and played a role in the deaths of mil­lions of peo­ple. If one stud­ies the whole his­to­ry, one finds even more grue­some exam­ples of Chris­t­ian bar­barism. Sor­ry, J_​follower, but your absurd log­ic fails yet again.

    islamis­peace, I am glad we are talk­ing about this. it’s good to debate things as it opens your mind to things you prob­a­bly nev­er looked at before. thanks”

    You obvi­ous­ly have not looked at Islam with­out your Chris­t­ian bias. It is kind of hard, J_​follower, to open your mind to things you…never looked at before” if you don’t have an open mind, don’t you think ? ;-)

  26. Jesus_follower Avatar
    Jesus_follower

    Islamis­peace,

    Nice to hear from you too.

    you said,“So let me ask you now : Do you accept the fact that Jesus, who is god to you, was the one who ordered Moses to kill infants ? A sim­ple yes or no answer would be sufficient”

    The answer is of course NO. the rea­son for that answer is that I sim­ply don’t believe that GOD would order such thing. I also believe that Moses could have used GOD as a rea­son to exe­cute his plans. He sim­ply could have eas­i­ly said that It’s GOD’s order to kill the babies where in fact GOD had nev­er ordered such act. Again, this is the OLD tes­ta­ment. anoth­er point to make about this is the fact that you are call­ing GOD names, which I think is bal­sphe­mous. The GOD of the old tes­ta­ment is the same GOD that you pray for ! isn’t it ? it’s the GOD of the Old tes­ta­ment that all mus­lims agree is the one and only GOD. that’s why I said your argu­ment is weak because you are basi­cal­ly bash­ing on your own GOD. Now, if you think that Allah is not the same GOD as the GOD of the Jews then you are an infi­del yourself!!

    you said,“As for the rest of your entry, I would advise you to not quote from the Quran if you have no under­stand­ing of Islam­ic his­to­ry or have any com­mon sense. For instance, you asked why God allowed Muham­mad (pbuh) to mar­ry more any woman he desired.”

    Obvi­ous­ly I am mak­ing you angry by ask­ing hon­est ques­tions, but For your infor­ma­tion, First I am an edu­cat­ed man and I was born in an islam­ic dom­i­nat­ed coun­try in the mid­dle east. I fin­ished my high school edu­ca­tion in the mid­dle east, and now I live in USA, so I def­i­nite­ly know what I am talk­ing about when it comes to islam­ic his­to­ry (we had islam­ic his­to­ry class­es for like 10 years). I sat numer­ous times in the Islam­ic reli­gion class­es and I prob­a­bly know about Islam as much as I know about the Bible, and Let me tell you that I am not impressed at all with it ! I prob­a­bly know islam­ic his­to­ry more than chris­t­ian his­to­ry itself because I lived my first 17 years in the mid­dle east study­ing islam­ic his­to­ry for most of that time in school !

    you said,“First, the fact that you posed this ques­tion in response to my query of why the Chris­t­ian god ordered the mur­der of infants is fal­la­cious. You admit that you do not know why infants are slaugh­tered at the order of your god. How­ev­er, Mus­lims under­stand exact­ly why God allowed not just Muham­mad (pbuh), but all Mus­lim men to mar­ry more than one wife. For Muham­mad (pbuh), the lim­it was not set at four, as it was for the believ­ing men.”

    Again with your blas­phe­my, you talk about the GOD of the OT like it is not your GOD!! you know as I know that mus­lims sup­pose­ly pray and believe for the same GOD the Jews and Chris­tians believe in. Any­way, I answered this point above, so there is no need to stress it. The rea­son why I post­ed my ques­tions to you in response to your ques­tion is that First,I tru­ely did not hear of that sto­ry as I told you that I always stud­ied the NT as a chris­t­ian and nev­er the old tes­ta­ment. To be hon­est with you, some­times I come to the belief that mus­lims prob­a­bly tried so hard to bash on the new tes­ta­ment but could not real­ly find any­thing wrong with it (except of course that Jesus is GOD), so they fig­ured they would bash on the OT instead. I already told you why the OT is there, there is no need to men­tion my answer again. there is a rea­son why they call it the OLD tes­ta­ment. The NT is what chris­tian­i­ty is based upon. Sec­ond, the sto­ry that Allah would allow the prophet to mar­ry any women he wants and allow him an infi­nite num­ber of slaves is com­plete­ly out-of-hand if you ask me. To a neu­tral per­son who hears the sto­ry of a man, who claims prophe­cy, to have slave women that he could sleep with any­time he desired is com­plete­ly unac­cept­able for a prophet of GOD. What makes you think I should­n’t believe that it was the prophet’s lust for women and abnor­mal abuse of his pow­er and word over peo­ple that drove him to allow him­self to mar­ry all these women and allow him­self women slaves (also alow­ing mus­lims slave cap­tives as well). Of course the mus­lims were prob­a­bly furi­ous with the idea that a prophet would do that, so he invent­ed a verse that allows him to do it. Now that sounds a lot more log­i­cal than your expla­na­tion, and that’s what I tru­ely believe. Muham­mad does not need a verse from GOD to allow him to mar­ry girls for alliances, he sim­ply could have done it with­out a verse, but the mus­lim crowd prob­a­bly were ask­ing too many sus­pi­cious ques­tions so he came with a verse to jus­ti­fy it ! you men­tion this fact in what you said here

    (those (slaves) whom your right hand pos­sess­es whom Allah has giv­en to you,) means, the slave-girls whom you took from the war booty are also per­mit­ted to you.’ He owned Safiyyah and Juwayriyah, then he man­u­mit­ted them and mar­ried them, and he owned Ray­hanah bint Sham‘un An-Nadariyyah and Mariyah Al-Qibtiyyah, the moth­er of his son Ibrahim, upon him be peace ; they were both among the pris­on­ers, may Allah be pleased with them”

    I asked you,“Why would GOD give the man 72 vir­gins in heav­on and not the woman?”

    I was able to get around to read the links you pro­vid­ed, and I can’t tell you how much I loved those two links spe­cial­ly the sec­ond one. I want to thank you because it proves my point even fur­ther. Here is a mul­sim woman that reads the Quran and can’t find an answer to her ques­tion. her ques­tion was what do I get in Heav­on as opposed to the Man”. the answers that were pro­vid­ed basi­cal­ly said noth­ing. it only said that women will enter heav­on, and to me that is not an answer, the sheikh stat­ed the obvi­ous, I mean I would hope that after all women have done to human­i­ty they would at least have a chance to enter heav­on!. the woman was won­der­ing why would GOD allow polygmy on earth and then allow it in heav­on. She obvi­ous­ly hates polygmy and can’t stand the idea of it. I don’t believe she got her answer. I believe you lost her as a mus­limah. Her ques­tions were right on the spot, and the answers were any­thing but impres­sive (oh, women will in fact enter heavon..but they still get to watch their hus­bands prac­tice polygmy). on the con­trary, chris­tian­i­ty does not allow polygmy on earth, and no mar­riage in par­adise which is yet anoth­er point where chris­tian­i­ty is bet­ter. So Basi­cal­ly, you might think you actu­al­ly have answers to every­thing, but if non of these answers make sense to the human being, then it’s not an answer.

    anoth­er good ques­tion would even be, why would GOD have vir­gins in heav­on any­way ! Heav­on is not mate­ri­al­is­tic nor it is a place where you can get vir­gins. Jesus was asked about this, and he said that in Heav­on there is no mar­raige and no mate­ri­als. Believ­ers will be able to see their GOD again, and that should be good enough for them after liv­ing with­out the abil­i­ty to see their lord (think about it, all peo­ple nowa­days have not seen GOD). Com­pare that to the Quran where it

    pic­tures Heav­on like a sex-house basi­cal­ly (vir­gins, Wine, …etc, and the women get non of it) the idea of hav­ing vir­gins and wine in heav­on is not appeal­ing. Chris­tian­i­ty por­trays Heav­on in a much bet­ter sense.

    you said,“the wine of Heav­en will not cause intox­i­ca­tion. Surah al-Waqia:18 – 19 explains”

    Wine does not make you intox­i­cat­ed unless you abuse it ! Abus­ing any­thing at all will make you sick any­way. for exam­ple if you over eat cac­tus you will have diges­tion problems..etc(there are many exam­ples of over abus­ing any drink or food that will make you sick) there is no rea­son to not allow drink­ing wine if you tell the peo­ple not to abuse it. on the oth­er hand the Bible allows drink­ing but in mod­er­a­tion. some chris­tians even choose not to drink at all, but that’s their choice.

    I won­der if you have the answer to this ques­tion : Is your god tru­ly pro-life ? You may not know why your god does the things he does, but we sure do.”

    Is chris­tian­i­ty pro-life ? yes it is. you see chris­tians all the time in this coun­try (USA)denouncing abor­tion and stem cell research. on the oth­er hand, islam is the one that is not pro-life as we see Moth­ers stomp­ing over the love for their chil­dren, send them to be Mar­tyrs and die for the sake of Allah. Islam is pro-life ? that’s a joke right?! I am not an expert on this top­ic but it’s obvi­ous. If Islam is pro-life it would not pro­mote vir­gins and wine to encour­age humans to kill them­selves to go to heav­on. Osama bin Laden said it out loud The US val­ues Life, we (mus­lims) val­ue death”

    okay, the rest of ques­tions I asked were asked to show a point that I don’t believe in any­more. I am sor­ry I got car­ried away when I heard the sto­ry you pre­sent­ed and rushed to come up with an answer, and I should have not done that. Any­way, I answered the point you made about Moses. The Bible does pro­vide answers to the ques­tions I asked.

    So, the moral of the sto­ry is don’t try to mis­quote the Quran to fit your own beliefs. The Quran is the pure word of God and sep­a­rates the truth from false­hood. Jesus was not divine. He was a man who wor­shipped God. That is it.”

    Notice that I have not quot­ed the Quran when I talked about the birth of Jesus. I have a mus­lim friend, who con­vert­ed to chris­tian­i­ty, that told me this fact. he is also from the mid­dle east. he told me that the Quran in ara­bic says that the holy spir­it was blown into mar­ry, which he thought total­ly proves father, son, and holy spir­it con­cept. That proves that Jesus is not human there­fore he is GOD.

    I believe that Prophet Muham­mad (pbuh) and all the oth­er prophets per­formed mir­a­cles. They were a sign of their divine mis­sions. But, not every­thing which seems like a mir­a­cle is a miracle.”

    I could­n’t agree more with you on this point. sure not every­thing that looks like a mir­a­cle is a mir­a­cle, but when you have a man with no vision, goes to church to pray, gets up the next day com­plete­ly cured, and the doc­tor is com­plete­ly amazed because he knows the man was blind, I sure believe that this is a chris­t­ian mir­a­cle. Plus we’re only talk­ing here about one mir­a­cle. there are a lot more mir­a­cles. The Nation­al Geo­graph­ic chan­nel had a show on chris­t­ian mir­a­cles few months ago. They said that they found 67 con­firmed mir­a­cles right at the end of the show.

    Now, I know that Muham­mad did not per­form any mir­a­cles. That’s a lie. he was asked to per­form a mir­a­cle to prove him­self, but his answer was that the Quran was his mir­a­cle. To a man like me who under­stands ara­bic very well, I can tell you that the Quran might be a good piece of lit­er­a­ture, but it’s no mir­a­cle. it is just a book, and there have been oth­er ara­bic writ­ings that are way bet­ter than the Quran. for exam­ple, poets like Ibn-Jareer and Faraz­dak have awe­some ara­bic poet­ry. the only prob­lem is that no one in the ara­bic world dares to chal­lenge the quran.

    When I said that we are not so dif­fer­ent, I was try­ing to be nice and respect­ful. I am try­ing to con­duct a good con­ver­sa­tion with you. I have many mus­lim friends that I have great respect for. I love mus­lims, I love all human beings, I respect all reli­gions and all beliefs. I am a chris­t­ian, and this is what chris­tian­i­ty is. that’s what Jesus taught us. he taught us to love with no restric­tions. No where in the new Tes­ta­ment it tells chris­tians to fight the unbe­liev­ers and kill them. NO where in the NT you find Mar­tyrs get­ting vir­gins, boys, and wine in heav­on for killing inno­cent peo­ple. That’s the prob­lem with Islam. this is what I am fight­ing. I don’t care if you pray for a rock, but don’t hit me with it. As long as you don’t impose your reli­gion on peo­ple, I don’t have a prob­lem with that. Let me tell you some­thing, when I lived in the mid­dle east for 17 years and heard mus­lims say that it’s okay to force an Israeli woman into sex dur­ing war because she is an ene­my”, I nev­er looked at it so mys­te­ri­ous­ly, but when I came to the unit­ed states and thought about it, I could not believe that a reli­gion that claims to be from GOD, and a prophet that should be a great exam­ple for his fol­low­ers would allow such a hor­ri­ble thing. Sex with cap­tive women and slave women is per­mit­ted not only for the prophet but also for mus­lims Quran…23:1 – 6 this fact, in my opin­ion, is a proof (one of many) that the Quran can’t be the word of GOD. Just ask your­self my fel­low mus­lim : What GOD is this GOD that is going to allow such an uneth­i­cal act!! It’s in the Quran and you can’t deny it. I want you to answer this. I answered you on your point, so please tell me why would GOD allmighty all-pow­er­ful all-for­giv­ing and lov­ing allow mus­lims to have sex with their cap­tives with­out mar­riage and with­out even say­ing if they want­ed” at least. Why does the Quran allow the man to beat his wife ? why Women in Islam can­not divorce, and have no choice in that deci­sion at all. the man does not even have to go to Sheikh/​Mosque/​court to divorce a woman. he can sim­ply say you are divorced”, and to make mat­ters even worse, the man is allowed to bring the woman back as long as he did not say you are divorced” three times. if he says it three times, then the woman has to sleep with some­body else before she comes back to him. this is the truth and is prac­ticed in all Islam­ic coun­tries, and I think is very shameful.

    by the way, your nick name islamis­peace. Is Islam real­ly a peac­ful reli­gion ? we see live con­trary exam­ples every day that proves Islam is not a peac­ful reli­gion. here are few facts : More peo­ple are killed by Islamists each year than in all 350 years of the Span­ish Inqui­si­tion com­bined. Islam­ic ter­ror­ists mur­der more peo­ple every day than the Ku Klux Klan has in the last 50 years.More civil­ians were killed by Mus­lim extrem­ists in two hours on Sep­tem­ber 11th than in the 36 years of sec­tar­i­an con­flict in North­ern Ire­land. Mus­lims claim that their reli­gion is Hijacked by the ter­ror­ists, but I am a guy who does not think so. the prob­lem is with­in the Quran itself. NO Human on this plan­et kills oth­ers then rais­es his holy book to jus­ti­fy his killing except a mus­lim. Also, anoth­er fact that proves that Islam is not peace­ful is the Con­verts to the reli­gion itself. why is it that so many West­ern Con­verts to Islam flip from being a nor­mal human being to be an extrem­ist. All of a sud­den Ara­bic is the holi­est lan­guage on the plan­et, Amer­i­ca and the Jews are the ene­my so they want to slaugh­ter as many of them as pos­si­ble includ­ing women and chil­dren, and they want to con­quer their land and take their women cap­tive. why is that trend only unique to Islam ? I have nev­er seen or heard of a chris­t­ian Con­vert that does any of these shame­ful actions. You can talk about how Islam is peac­ful all day long, but the facts, real­i­ty and the Quran, with no doubt, will prove you wrong.

    islamis­peace, I am glad we are talk­ing about this. it’s good to debate things as it opens your mind to things you prob­a­bly nev­er looked at before. thanks

  27. islamispeace Avatar
    islamispeace

    Hi Jesus-fol­low­er,

    My email is pak_​doc1203@​yahoo.​com. Feel free to con­tact me. I have had email con­ver­sa­tions with Chris­tians before. In fact, I am rou­tine­ly con­vers­ing with a friend from Cana­da who is Christian.

  28. Jesus_follower Avatar
    Jesus_follower

    I will get back to you islamis­peace, I don’t know if the admin­is­tra­tor will let me post as he delet­ed some of oth­er posts although I don’t think that I am being non-fair or dis­re­spect­ful to mus­lims, but I will get back to you. if you could pro­vide me with your e‑mail, we could have a much bet­ter con­ver­sa­tion. thanks

  29. islamispeace Avatar
    islamispeace

    Jesus_​follower,

    Nice to hear from you.

    Your argu­ment is very weak as you are ask­ing me why did GOD order some­thing!! the answer is : I don’t know!.”

    In your pre­vi­ous entry, you said who cares!” with regard to the Bible sto­ries of infan­ti­cide. You also added that, as a Chris­t­ian, you fol­low Jesus. OK, good. So let me ask you now : Do you accept the fact that Jesus, who is god to you, was the one who ordered Moses to kill infants ? A sim­ple yes or no answer would be sufficient.

    As for the rest of your entry, I would advise you to not quote from the Quran if you have no under­stand­ing of Islam­ic his­to­ry or have any com­mon sense. For instance, you asked why God allowed Muham­mad (pbuh) to mar­ry more any woman he desired. First, the fact that you posed this ques­tion in response to my query of why the Chris­t­ian god ordered the mur­der of infants is fal­la­cious. You admit that you do not know why infants are slaugh­tered at the order of your god. How­ev­er, Mus­lims under­stand exact­ly why God allowed not just Muham­mad (pbuh), but all Mus­lim men to mar­ry more than one wife. For Muham­mad (pbuh), the lim­it was not set at four, as it was for the believ­ing men. By the way, polygamy is promi­nent in the Bible as well, and as far as I know, no verse exists in the New Tes­ta­ment which pro­hibits polygamy. So why did God allow Muham­mad (pbuh) to mar­ry more than one wife, you ask ? First, it is impor­tant to note that verse 52 of the same sura you quot­ed says the following :

    It is not law­ful for thee (to mar­ry more) women after this, nor to change them for (oth­er) wives, even though their beau­ty attract thee, except any thy right hand should pos­sess (as hand­maid­ens): and Allah doth watch over all things.”

    There­fore, he could not mar­ry any woman he desired.” Make sure to read all rel­e­vant vers­es before com­ing to a conclusion.

    Sec­ond, com­mon sense tells us that as a states­man, Muham­mad (pbuh) had to be con­cerned about polit­i­cal alliances and who his friends and ene­mies were. What bet­ter way was there to forge alliances than by mar­ry­ing women from dif­fer­ent tribes or nations ? That is one of the rea­sons why he was per­mit­ted to mar­ry more women. But in case you are not pleased by this answer, con­sid­er the words of Ibn Kathir regard­ing the verse you mentioned :

    Allah says, address­ing His Prophet that He has made law­ful for him of women his wives to whom he has giv­en the dow­ery, which is what is meant by their due”, which is used here, as was stat­ed by Mujahid and oth­ers. The dow­ery which he gave to his wives was twelve and half Uqiyah (mea­sures of gold) so they all received five hun­dred Dirhams except for Umm Habibah bint Abi Sufyan, to whom An-Najashi, may Allah have mer­cy on him, gave four hun­dred Dinars (on behalf of the Prophet ) Safiyyah bint Huyay, whom he chose from among the pris­on­ers of Khay­bar, then he set her free, mak­ing her release her dow­ery. A sim­i­lar case was that of Juwayriyah bint Al-Harith Al-Musta­laqiyyah — he paid off the con­tract to buy her free­dom from Thabit bin Qays bin Sham­mas and mar­ried her. May Allah be pleased with them all.

    (those (slaves) whom your right hand pos­sess­es whom Allah has giv­en to you,) means, the slave-girls whom you took from the war booty are also per­mit­ted to you.’ He owned Safiyyah and Juwayriyah, then he man­u­mit­ted them and mar­ried them, and he owned Ray­hanah bint Sham‘un An-Nadariyyah and Mariyah Al-Qibtiyyah, the moth­er of his son Ibrahim, upon him be peace ; they were both among the pris­on­ers, may Allah be pleased with them.

    (and the daugh­ters of your pater­nal uncles and the daugh­ters of your pater­nal aunts and the daugh­ters of your mater­nal uncles and the daugh­ters of your mater­nal aunts) This is jus­tice which avoids going to either extreme, for the Chris­tians do not mar­ry a woman unless there are sev­en grand­fa­thers between the man and the woman (i.e., they are very dis­tant­ly relat­ed or not at all), and the Jews allow a man to mar­ry his broth­er’s daugh­ter or his sis­ter’s daugh­ter. So the pure and per­fect Shari‘ah came to can­cel out the extremes of the Chris­tians, and per­mit­ted mar­riage to the daugh­ter of a pater­nal uncle or aunt, or the daugh­ter of a mater­nal uncle or aunt, and for­bade the excess­es of the Jews who allowed mar­riage to the daugh­ter of a broth­er or sis­ter which is an abhor­rent thing.”

    The last por­tion offers anoth­er answer to the point you raised.

    Why would GOD give the man 72 vir­gins in heav­on and not the woman?”

    The fol­low­ing should answer your question :
    http://​www​.isla​m​on​line​.net/​s​e​r​v​l​e​t​/​S​a​t​e​l​l​i​t​e​?​p​a​g​e​n​a​m​e​=​I​s​l​a​m​O​n​l​i​n​e​-​E​n​g​l​i​s​h​-​A​s​k​_​S​c​h​o​l​a​r​/​F​a​t​w​a​E​/​F​a​t​w​a​E​&​c​i​d​=​1119503544706

    http://​www​.isla​m​on​line​.net/​s​e​r​v​l​e​t​/​S​a​t​e​l​l​i​t​e​?​p​a​g​e​n​a​m​e​=​I​s​l​a​m​O​n​l​i​n​e​-​E​n​g​l​i​s​h​-​A​s​k​_​S​c​h​o​l​a​r​/​F​a​t​w​a​E​/​F​a​t​w​a​E​&​c​i​d​=​1119503549252

    why would GOD have wine in heav­on, but not on earth for muslims?”

    Because the wine of Heav­en will not cause intox­i­ca­tion. Surah al-Waqia:18 – 19 explain this quite clearly :

    With gob­lets, (shin­ing) beakers, and cups (filled) out of clear-flow­ing fountains :

    No after-ache will they receive there­from, nor will they suf­fer intoxication:”

    The point here is that you are incor­rect in assert­ing that we have no idea of why such things are as they are. In con­trast, you admit that you have no idea why Jesus (your god) is so blood­thirsty in the Old Tes­ta­ment, but so lov­ing in the New Tes­ta­ment. You admit that you have no idea why Jesus (your god) ordered Moses to mur­der infants. I won­der if you have the answer to this ques­tion : Is your god tru­ly pro-life ? You may not know why your god does the things he does, but we sure do.

    why did GOD cre­ate adam and eve in the first place. why wouldn’t he just go with­out them ? Do you think he cre­at­ed them to enter­tain himself?!!”

    Sura Ad-Dhariyat:56 – 58 says the following :

    I have only cre­at­ed Jinns and men, that they may serve Me.

    No Sus­te­nance do I require of them, nor do I require that they should feed Me.

    For Allah is He Who gives (all) Sus­te­nance,- Lord of Pow­er,- Stead­fast (for ever).”

    Anoth­er ques­tion which appar­ent­ly the Bible does not answer for you, but the Quran answers for Muslims.

    Adam and eve were cre­at­ed with­out sex­u­al inter­course, but it says in the Bible (and maybe in the Quran, not sure) that GOD cre­at­ed them!! GOD cre­at­ed them just like he cre­at­ed the uni­verse. It wasn’t the same thing with Jesus, as you know and I know, that a holy spir­it descend­ed on Mary. Jesus was not created!!”

    I don’t where you get this infor­ma­tion from. The Quran says that Jesus was cre­at­ed. Sura Al-Imran:59 proves this :

    The simil­i­tude of Jesus before Allah is as that of Adam ; He cre­at­ed him from dust, then said to him : Be”. And he was.”

    As for the Holy Spir­it descend­ing” on Mary, the Quran does not say this. It says that the Holy Spir­it, which is Gabriel (as), came to Mary and gave her the good news of a son. He then blew the soul of Jesus into her and she became preg­nant, as Sura At-Tahrim:12 states :

    And Mary the daugh­ter of Imran, who guard­ed her chasti­ty ; and We breathed into (her body) of Our spir­it ; and she tes­ti­fied to the truth of the words of her Lord and of His Rev­e­la­tions, and was one of the devout (ser­vants).”

    So, the moral of the sto­ry is don’t try to mis­quote the Quran to fit your own beliefs. The Quran is the pure word of God and sep­a­rates the truth from false­hood. Jesus was not divine. He was a man who wor­shipped God. That is it.

    Also, to prove Chris­tian­i­ty even more, Chris­tian­i­ty is the only reli­gion, that I know of, where mir­a­cles in the name of GOD still hap­pen even nowa­days!!. I wit­nessed one myself, and just this past christ­mas CNN, the news chan­nel (Ander­son Coop­er), report­ed a chris­t­ian mir­a­cle where a blind man recov­ered his vision to 20/​20 after being in a chrurch pray­ing (the next day, he was cured)”

    I won­der if Ander­son Coop­er would have shown the so-called mir­a­cle” that occurred in India in the late 1990s, when Hin­du idols were slir­p­ing milk from spoons in front of hun­dreds of shocked on-look­ers. Prob­a­bly not. So, should we all be like you and start wor­ship­ping these idols ? God for­bid. Of course, I am not say­ing that I don’t believe in mir­a­cles. I believe that Prophet Muham­mad (pbuh) and all the oth­er prophets per­formed mir­a­cles. They were a sign of their divine mis­sions. But, not every­thing which seems like a mir­a­cle is a mir­a­cle. When a stat­ue of the vir­gin Mary begins to weep tears of blood in some church, I don’t take that as a sign that I should join the Catholic church and start pray­ing for Mary’s inter­ces­sion to save me.

    As for your claim that you and I are not so dif­fer­ent, I respect­ful­ly dis­agree. We are very dif­fer­ent. I don’t wor­ship Jesus as God’s man­i­fes­ta­tion on earth and that God referred to that man­i­fes­ta­tion as His son.” You and I are, unfor­tu­nate­ly, very different.

  30. islamispeace Avatar
    islamispeace

    Hi Jesus_​follower,

    Unfor­tu­nate­ly, I am suf­fer­ing from a stom­ach virus, so my response to you may take some time. I am in the mid­dle of it. I will get back to you as soon as possible.

  31. Jesus_follower Avatar
    Jesus_follower

    Reply to islamispeace :

    Your argu­ment is very weak as you are ask­ing me why did GOD order some­thing!! the answer is : I don’t know!. I mean, you’re a mus­lim, so think about it, why did GOD then allow your prophet Muham­mad to mar­ry any woman he desired (Quran 33:50),Really!! why would GOD care about the prophet’s wives ? Why would GOD give the man 72 vir­gins in heav­on and not the woman ? why would GOD have wine in heav­on, but not on earth for mus­lims ? why would GOD…on and on from the Quran and the Bible. You don’t know why GOD does things the way he does them, you might take a guess, but you are nev­er sure. there are cer­tain­ly many ques­tions with­out an answer. why did GOD cre­ate adam and eve in the first place. why would­n’t he just go with­out them ? Do you think he cre­at­ed them to enter­tain him­self?!! you can’t tell, and you can’t have answers to all ques­tions you might have. GOD cre­at­ed Adam and Eve. Adam and eve were cre­at­ed with­out sex­u­al inter­course, but it says in the Bible (and maybe in the Quran, not sure) that GOD cre­at­ed them!! GOD cre­at­ed them just like he cre­at­ed the uni­verse. It was­n’t the same thing with Jesus, as you know and I know, that a holy spir­it descend­ed on Mary. Jesus was not cre­at­ed!! He is GOD, and there are many places in the Bible that says just that. Mary just car­ried the child!! even the Quran itself says the holy spir­it descend­ed down(in ara­bic as far as I know, I don’t know about the Eng­lish trans­la­tion). Of course I take Jesus as my moral exam­ple. He is to be tak­en as a great moral exam­ples as I can’t find any bet­ter teach­ings than his. The New Tes­ta­ment is filled with Tol­er­ance to oth­ers, love, and peace. There is no where in the NT that tells chris­tians to wage wars against the unbe­liev­ers. Chris­tian­i­ty was spread by 12 stu­dents of Jesus. they tell us the sto­ry of when GOD came onto earth for the peo­ple. I cer­tain­ly believe it. Also, to prove Chris­tian­i­ty even more, Chris­tian­i­ty is the only reli­gion, that I know of, where mir­a­cles in the name of GOD still hap­pen even nowa­days!!. I wit­nessed one myself, and just this past christ­mas CNN, the news chan­nel (Ander­son Coop­er), report­ed a chris­t­ian mir­a­cle where a blind man recov­ered his vision to 20/​20 after being in a chrurch pray­ing (the next day, he was cured), and many oth­er mir­a­cles hap­pen in the name of christ (GOD and only one GOD). In my coun­try, Syr­ia, many mus­lims even go to the chris­t­ian cathe­drals believ­ing they will be cured and healed, and they do ! I have heard many of them talk about it!! Thank GOD we live like broth­ers down there, and I myself have many great mus­lim friends that I love and still talk to them every now and then, but the impor­tant point to make here is that Jesus is not human as the Quran and the Bible don’t dis­agree on that point. To my knowl­edge, this is a proof that he is GOD. So I pray for one and only GOD just like you do. it is just that I rec­og­nize that it was GOD that came down (Jesus) just like what the Stu­dents of Jesus told us, so there is real­ly not much dif­fer­ence between me and you. Let’s enjoy pray­ing to the Lord ! Love and Peace.

  32. islamispeace Avatar
    islamispeace

    Jesus_​follower said the following :

    we are not try­ing to hide what moses did. who cares!! we fol­low Jesus and the new tes­ta­ment. the New tes­ta­ment replaces the old tes­ta­ment. It’s fun­ny how any time you mus­lims try to bash on the bible, you go and bash on the OT. The quran itself has many sto­ries from the old tes­ta­ment. We are called chris­tians, not Jews. our book is the new tes­ta­ment. the only rea­son the old tes­ta­ment is part of the bible is because it pre­dict­ed the com­ing of Jesus, and that’s it. Jesus is our moral exam­ple and he is unmatched by any prophet or human.”

    The prob­lem is that you believe that Jesus is God. There­fore, it was Jesus who ordered the mur­der of infants. Appar­ent­ly, he did­n’t see any­thing wrong with slic­ing up babies (so much for being pro-life). If he is your moral exam­ple,” kind­ly explain why he ordered Moses to mur­der chil­dren. The fact is that as a Chris­t­ian, you are in denial about the bar­bar­ic acts por­trayed in the Bible. The OT is not just part of the Chris­t­ian Bible because it pre­dict­ed the com­ing of Jesus.” It is part of the Chris­t­ian Bible because Chris­tians believe that it is the unal­tered word of God. The New Tes­ta­ment sim­ply serves to replace much of the Old Tes­ta­ment, but that still does not change the fact that the Chris­t­ian god, who is Jesus, did call for infan­ti­cide, and did not con­sid­er it a sin.

    one thing I don’t under­stand about my mus­lims broth­ers is the fol­low­ing : It does not take a schol­ar to con­clude that Jesus is God from the quran itself. Just ask your­self as a mus­lim, how was Jesus born ? it’s clear­ly stat­ed in the Quran as it is stat­ed in the bible that Jesus was born with­out sex­u­al inter­course, which clear­ly says that he is not human.”

    And one thing I can’t under­stand is how Chris­tians mis­in­ter­pret Jesus’ birth as some­how being a sign of his divin­i­ty. Jesus (pbuh) was not the only one who was born with­out one man and one woman hav­ing sex­u­al inter­course. The first humans, Adam and Eve (pbut), were also born with­out the need of two indi­vid­u­als hav­ing sex. Both came into exis­tence with­out the need for par­ents. Jesus (pbuh) came into exis­tence with the need for a moth­er. That is how he was born. There­fore, his birth, while mirac­u­lous, was not at all unique. Based on your argu­ment, it seems more plau­si­ble to wor­ship Adam and Eve as gods, rather than Jesus. Of course, that is blas­phe­my of the high­est cal­iber. There is only One God, and all glo­ry is His. This God is not called Jesus.” He is called Al-Rah­man, Al-Rahim, the one and only Allah. He is the only one wor­thy of wor­ship. Jesus (pbuh) is His ser­vant, and bows only to Him, just as you should.

  33. Jesus_follower Avatar
    Jesus_follower

    Admin, there is no need to swear at chris­tians like that. if some­one swears at mus­lims, please accept my apol­o­gy for it. I am sor­ry, and any abu­sive lan­guage is not real­ly need­ed as we should all have a con­struc­tive conversation.

    Sec­ond, we are not try­ing to hide what moses did. who cares!! we fol­low Jesus and the new tes­ta­ment. the New tes­ta­ment replaces the old tes­ta­ment. It’s fun­ny how any time you mus­lims try to bash on the bible, you go and bash on the OT. The quran itself has many sto­ries from the old tes­ta­ment. We are called chris­tians, not Jews. our book is the new tes­ta­ment. the only rea­son the old tes­ta­ment is part of the bible is because it pre­dict­ed the com­ing of Jesus, and that’s it. Jesus is our moral exam­ple and he is unmatched by any prophet or human.

    one thing I don’t under­stand about my mus­lims broth­ers is the fol­low­ing : It does not take a schol­ar to con­clude that Jesus is God from the quran itself. Just ask your­self as a mus­lim, how was Jesus born ? it’s clear­ly stat­ed in the Quran as it is stat­ed in the bible that Jesus was born with­out sex­u­al inter­course, which clear­ly says that he is not human. for a human to be born, an inter­course has to take place between a man and a woman. No per­son on this plan­et ever was born like Jesus was born;FROMSPIRIT. it’s so easy to real­ize that the holy spir­it came down on Mary and pro­duced Jesus from noth­ing. It’s in the Quran and in the bible as well. that’s why we, chris­tians, say that Jesus is part human and part GOD, and it is loud and clear in the Quran itself. all you need to do is sit down and think about it!! if he is not human, then he is GOD as I don’t think there is any­thing in between. you are either human or GOD!!

    again, I apol­o­gize for any mis­con­duct by any­body who claims to be a chris­t­ian and going and insult­ing any­body else includ­ing muslims.

  34. bosvark Avatar
    bosvark

    mac­in­tol­o­gist, where did you find those extracts from the Chris­t­ian Bible, you know as well as I do that it’s not in there… There’s noth­ing to fear from the Chris­t­ian Bible, why don’t you read it so you can have some idea what you’re talk­ing about when you do crit­i­cise it ?

    The admin mes­sage regard­ing hate lan­guage against mus­lims is quite inter­est­ing : It seems fine to have hate lan­guage post­ed at non-mus­lims, but not the reverse… The term for that is hypocrisy”.

  35. sam Avatar
    sam

    [Admin : Delet­ed for hate lan­guage against Mus­lims. Go and burn in Hell when you die, you filthy Trini­tar­i­an pagan wor­ship­per of a naked man.]

  36. islam Avatar
    islam

    Most of your above links dont work and major­i­ty of your arti­cles have disappeared :(

    Can you restore them ?

    E.g What About The Killing of Ka’ab bin Al-Ashraf ? and The Killing of Abu Afak and Asma’ bint Mar­wan?) Links dont work :-|

  37. Christian Avatar
    Christian

    The dif­fi­cul­ty here is that, no mat­ter how loud­ly a Jew/​Christian shouts these objec­tions, they have no pow­er to over­come the his­tor­i­cal fact that Moses was a rob­ber and a murderer.”

    Us Chris­tians do NOT deny this fact as it real­ly does not mat­ter, as Jesus Christ the son of the only liv­ing true God is who we follow.

  38. macintologist Avatar
    macintologist

    source :http://​spl​.hax​i​al​.net/​r​e​l​i​g​i​o​n​/​m​o​s​es/

    > Inter­est­ing­ly, in God’s law to Israel the pri­ma­ry dis­tinc­tion between
    > rape and con­sent was whether a woman screamed for help.

    Apples and oranges ; the laws you cite (which are bad enough as they are) deal with rape of Israelite women, in sur­round­ings where help was
    avail­able. If no one was around, that stan­dard did­n’t apply. Obvi­ous­ly, for cap­tive vir­gins of an ene­my the men of which had already been slaugh­tered, there could be no pos­si­ble help, and thus no rea­son to scream for help. Are you seri­ous­ly sug­gest­ing that because of that,
    those women were not raped ? Why do you have such trou­ble acknowl­edg­ing that the israelites saved ene­my vir­gins as sex slaves, and that god
    con­doned this prac­tice ? Three times now you’ve respond­ed, but have nev­er answered that repeat­ed­ly-asked ques­tion. Does the bible embar­rass you in that regard ?

    >Inter­est­ing­ly, in God’s law to Israel the ?>pri­ma­ry dis­tinc­tion between rape
    > and con­sent was whether a woman screamed for help.

    I can just imag­ine one of these women say­ing : Oh, you’re the nice foreign
    man who bru­tal­ly mur­dered my father, moth­er, broth­er and friends and razed
    my town to the ground. You want me as your bride ? Oh, I am so thrilled that
    you asked me!!! Praise God !

    If the par­ents had to show the blood stained bed-sheet of the first night as proof of the girl’s vir­gin­i­ty (as direct­ed in the law of Moses) there might be a slight prob­lem if the hus­band had killed both her par­ents as com­mand­ed by God … and, of course, if one had to make the woman bleed on the wed­ding night then it real­ly would­n’t hurt her at all … much …because God would pro­tect her from pain. I can imag­ine what a joy­ous cel­e­bra­to­ry wed­ding it must have been for these cap­tured brides”. It might help if you used your God-giv­en brain now and then.

    –There is not even one verse in the NT that con­demns what you have read above.

  39. macintologist Avatar
    macintologist

    mac­in­tol­o­gist

    WARNING :
    This post con­tains explic­it descrip­tion of vio­lence which may be upset­ting to some readers.

    A quote from the Chris­t­ian Bible (also in the Hebrew Bible):

    In the fol­low­ing sto­ry, you see through the eyes of Moses. You are Moses.

    It is a joy­ous day for you. The war against the Mid­i­an­ites is fin­ished, the Lord God has blessed you, and you have been vic­to­ri­ous. You have tak­en all the women of Mid­i­an cap­tives, and their lit­tle ones, and tak­en the spoil of all their cat­tle, and all their flocks, and all their goods, as the Lord com­mand­ed you.

    Two of your sol­diers come towards you, between them there is a young Mid­i­an­ite woman. They grasp her shoul­ders and clothes tight­ly to pre­vent her from escap­ing. In her arms, she pro­tec­tive­ly holds her small baby. See­ing this, you tell your sol­diers to hold her, and you stride towards her. As you reach for her baby, she strug­gles to free her­self, but your sol­diers hold her well.

    The baby cries as you grap­ple with him, try­ing to pull him away from his moth­er. Sud­den­ly, you give the moth­er a heavy slap across the face. In the moment when she is stunned, you pull her baby away from her. Her voice thick with emo­tion, she says, Please don’t take my baby ! PLEASE ! Please I beg you!”

    With­out answer­ing her, you car­ry the cry­ing baby away, but order your sol­diers to bring the moth­er. After a short walk, you reach a rocky patch of ground that is lit­tered with jagged beige stones of medi­um size. Using both hands, you raise the baby, still cry­ing, above your head.

    The moth­er screams fran­ti­cal­ly, NOOOO!!! PLEASE DON’T KILL MY BABY ! I beg you ! I will do any­thing for you, any­thing ! PLEASE!!”

    You ignore her pleas. With all of your strength, you hurl the baby towards the stones. The moth­er cov­ers her face with her hands, unable to look at the immi­nent death of her baby. There is a loud crack­ing sound as the baby’s skull hits a rock and breaks, along with oth­er frag­ile bones. How­ev­er the baby does not die instan­ta­neous­ly. His arms and legs slow­ly twitch as his blood starts to seep out of his bro­ken body and stain the rocks and the ground with bright red­ness. After some time, his body ceas­es twitch­ing, and he is dead.

    The moth­ers legs have col­lapsed, and she has fall­en to the ground. Tears are stream­ing down her face mak­ing dirty streaks, and her body is shud­der­ing with uncon­trol­lable sobs.

    You look at what you have done, and you feel hap­py. You smile at your sol­diers. You feel hon­ored to be serv­ing the almighty God. You turn to face your peo­ple, and you say unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive ? Now there­fore kill every male among the lit­tle ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women chil­dren, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.”

    You gaze with approval as a group of your men kick the legs out from under­neath a Mid­i­an­ite girl of about 14 or 15 years of age, caus­ing her to fall to the hard ground. She screams in ter­ror and kicks fran­ti­cal­ly, but your men hold her arms and legs, stretch­ing her out on the ground. One of your men pulls up her dress and exam­ines her hymen, pok­ing and prod­ding with dirty fin­gers splat­tered with dried blood from ear­li­er activ­i­ties, in an attempt to deter­mine whether she is a vir­gin and thus whether she will be killed or kept alive for the plea­sure of the men.

    Sat­is­fied that she is a vir­gin, your men then pro­ceed to throw dice to deter­mine who will have sex with her first. You nod, and praise and thank the Lord for all that He has giv­en you today.

  40. islam Avatar
    islam

    Where is this arti­cle, The Young Mar­riage of Aishah” why was it pulled down or has it been shifted??

    http://​www​.thetrue​call​.com/​h​ome

  41. admin Avatar

    I’m sor­ry, we don’t have such an arti­cle in the first place. Could you please explain ?

    Best regards.

  42. acey Avatar
    acey

    Where is your Islam­ic Threat Indus­try” post­ing ? Please repost.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *