Friday, August 21, 2009

Osama Abdallah Defines Situations Where Men Should Beat Their Wives

Now we're getting somewhere. Everyone knows that Islam allows wife-beating. The difficulty that arises is determining when wives should be beaten and to what extent they should be beaten by their Muslim husbands. Muslim apologist Osama Abdallah has attempted to deal with this difficult topic for us. Osama writes:

There are several reasons why a man NOT ONLY SHOULD BEAT HIS WIFE, but beat the day lights out of her as well! Here are some of them:

Note: I personally love my wife very dearly, and appreciate her infinite patience and sacrifice with me and my Islamic activities. She is BY FAR not a woman that would fit in the following category, because she is an honorable woman:

1- In the days of swords and tribal societies, the man's honor is his wife. If the woman is loose and flirty, then she could cause for her husband to end up in a mortal combat with another individual, by the sword, or for her entire family or even tribe to go to war with another. So women can be disasterous if they choose to.

DAVID AND BETHSHEBA, AND THE DISASTER:

You know the story of David and Bethsheba in the Bible. You know that she could've stopped that animal from causing for her husband to get killed. But because she was a whore, she allowed herself to sleep with another man while she was married. If she didn't like her husband, then she should've divorced herself from him first, and then went off to play with someone else. She would still be a whore anyway, along with him, but she would not have caused for her husband to get killed by David's conspiracy. A GREAT EXAMPLE THAT PROVES THAT WOMEN'S SNARES ARE QUITE DANGEROUS. If Bethsheba was my sister, then believe me, all of her brothers, including myself would skin her alive along with her boyfriend.

2- The woman is the mother, sister, and daughter. But most importantly, she is the mother of the children, and if she is not responsible enough to care for the house and the children, especially in the old days, then she could bring catastrophe for the entire family. On average, the father is usually busy working all day to bring money and food. The mother, on the other hand, has the responsibility to care for the children and to raise the sons and daughters right. If your son is constantly in the streets, then he could GET KIDNAPPED, RAPED, KILLED, or end up with the wrong group. YOUR DAUGHTER could also end up getting pregnant or raped. The bottom line is that the mother is everything! If she is irresponsible and careless, then her offsprings will be in great danger, especially if the father is always out working.

3- The woman who has a filthy mouth and always defies her husband, especially when he is a good and reasonable person, can and will bring harm upon herself, because let's face it: Men are, on average, 5 to 10 times stronger than women. A wise woman would not want to enter into a physical confrontation with her man, especially during the old days, where men were extremely big on honor and pride. A woman challenging his dignity could end up getting hurt very very bad.

These points, by the way, go for all religions, and not just Islam. You have to leave your current mentality of where you have no problem with your sister having a boyfriend and losing her virginity, to the mentality of the honor, pride, dignity, and tribal ruling, and male dominance.

AGAIN, PLEASE KNOW THAT I LOVE MY WIFE, and I am certain that none of my points above would apply to any honorable woman who cares for her children and husband.

Also, I personally agree that many men out there DESERVE TO BE PUNISHED SEVERELY! It is not always the woman's fault.

I hope this helps.

Take care,
Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com

So there you have it.

(1) If a woman is loose and flirty, she should be beaten (or "have the daylights beaten out of her," or be "skinned alive"). Note: Osama's comments on David and Bathsheba are quite interesting. Christians typically place all or nearly all of the blame on David (as I would), while Osama's finger is pointed primarily at Bathsheba.

(2) If a woman isn't taking care of her children properly, she should be beaten (or "have the daylights beaten out of her").

(3) If a woman uses bad language, especially of her husband (when he doesn't deserve it), she should be beaten (or "have the daylights beaten out of her").

These are Osama's claims, and I am convinced that he is explaining the Muslim view quite accurately.

167 comments:

Ryan S said...

""If Bethsheba was my sister, then believe me, all of her brothers, including myself would skin her alive along with her boyfriend.""

Yup more evidince of Islam's Satanic origens

Jesus said unto them, Let him who has no SIN cast the first stone

The Fat Man said...

Osama again let me just say how great it is that you are being so honest. But I do have a question. You said in your comment that

"Also, I personally agree that many men out there DESERVE TO BE PUNISHED SEVERELY! It is not always the woman's fault."

Thats great that you dont always blame the woman. But can you show us in the Quran or even in the Hadeeths where a wife can beat her husband?

David Wood said...

I think he means that many men should be punished by law enforcers. Is that right, Osama?

Fernando said...

The Osama The Great Abdallah... long timme since you did nott deserv a thread specialy for you... last time, I recon, was on to know who was the worst muslim debator... I eben remember thate you ordered professor Wood to take the votation out off this blogg... whate are you going to do now?

Maybe you can say you're wordes were bad understod since theire meaning can onlie bee understood by those who speak antient arabian...;

Or maybe you can say thate the factt thate there're no inconsistebcies in your words they mustte bee true...;

Or perhaps you can say thate, since the total number off letters in your post when counted from the beggining is the same when counted from the end, your wordes musst bee true because we habe a numerical miracle...;

Another possibility is to say thate your wordes are absolutelly and eternaly preserved in the cyberspace and so they must bee teh same thate were foreber withe allah, and being so theu mustt bee true...;

Another tactic woulde bee to say thatte when a mad man looks into them withe bery attention he'll eben beliebe he's cured since no one can bee as bad as you, so he might habe here a scientifical muracle...;

So, my friend The Osama The Great Abdallah: you habe several options... which onne will you choose?

p.s.: remeber: youre pathe will certanly bee followed by several other muslim apologists thate are trying to emulate your worke... huge responsability... it mighte take you some time... glad thate you habe an obedient wiffe thate does nott require to bee beate, otherwise you'ld bee to tired to work out whate course off action too choose...

Yahya Hayder Seymour said...

David,

I consider the Westboro Baptist Church to be more biblically consistent than your post-Renaissance spun and tumble dried understanding of Christianity, but hey I'm sure someone could accuse me of being ever so slightly biased.

That person would have a point, just as any ímpartial by-stander can see this is merely feeding into your rhetoric.

Oh and in regards to getting more donations, try getting Ali Sina and Robert Spencer to advertise you, it'll certainly help ;)

Yahya Snow said...

Crikey...

Why all the Osama Abdallah bashing???

Why not leave him be?

I thought it was low of this site to have a cheap shot at Abdallah in the form of a biased poll (asking whether he was the worst apologist, or something childish like that)

I ask you all, is it 'Christian' of you to attack Abdallah in such a sustained fashion?

Am I also correct in saying that this site even accused Nadir Ahmed of violence towards his ex-wife? Is that the time of behaviour a religious person would involve him/herself in? Cheap attacks? How sad!

Is that what Christian debate is about nowadays? Cheap shots against the individual?

For the record and in order to give a more balanced view of Abdallah (something Christians in this forum are unwilling to do, even though this would be the fair thing to do), I believe Abdallah to be a good family man and I view him to be more moral and upright than many on this forum. Abdallah to me seems like he has a kind heart and he is not materialistic. He could have made a great deal of money if he opened up his site for donations but he did not. This, to me shows he is sincere. Alot of us could learn from Abdallah's selfless attitude, including myself.

With regards to this comment (attributed to Abdallah), I am not sure whether Abdallah said this comment as I do not trust this site as a reliable source of information as it is agenda-driven as well as other reasons. Also, what is the context of the 'saying' of Abdallah. I do think Abdallah should be allowed to explain his views and then these postings should be removed as it is unfair on Abdallah to open up a whole new niche which will only serve to do injustice to Abdallah.

I do think many people on this forum are unfair when it comes to their dealings with abdallah. I hope these people will rethink their attitudes.

PS..one of the reasons why I am posting this comment is due to the fact that Abdallah seems to get outnumbered by 'critics' and thus leaving him in a difficult situation. Christians always ask; what is the moral thing to do? Well, it would be what I am doing, standing up for the one who is being wronged (Abdallah is being wronged now and has been wronged in the past by many on the net). Christans, please rethink your stance.

Thanks.

I hope all of you have a great month. It is the great month of Ramadan now. Allah is Great and I thank Him for this Ramadan.

Also, if there are any non-Muslims thinking about becoming Muslims, plese do this now and benefit from this great month and start fasting. You will feel spiritually uplifted, Insha'Allah.


Defending Islam at
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.com/

Yahya Hayder Seymour said...

Oh and you might want to tell your Buddy "Ryan S" that the particular passage he's talking about:

"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" is not in the earliest manuscripts and is considered a pious interpolation by the vast majority of textual critics, I believe even Dr. James White would concur.

The Fat Man said...

Yahya Snow said...
Why all the Osama Abdallah bashing???

Who is Bashing Osma in this thread. I for one am really impressed with Osma's honesty. I noticed it in a previous thread but didnt say anything because I thought it might of been a fluke. But this is the second instance so it has gone from fluke to fad, lets see if it can become a trend.

David Wood said...

Yahya snow said: "Why all the Osama Abdallah bashing???"

Notice the pattern.

(1) Osama posts a comment, on this blog, giving the situations where wife-beating is acceptable.

(2) I place his comment in a separate post for further discussion.

(3) Muslims accuse me of Osama-bashing.

Has anyone noticed that, no matter what happens, Christians are always at fault and always to blame?

Yahya Snow said: "I am not sure whether Abdallah said this comment as I do not trust this site as a reliable source of information as it is agenda-driven as well as other reasons."

Well, you can read Osama's comment yourself in the comments section of the post about women in Afghanistan. BTW, please give me some examples of posts in which I have fabricated quotations by Muslims in order to make them look bad. (You should have plenty of examples, since you've said we're not trustworthy.)

Yahya Snow said: "Am I also correct in saying that this site even accused Nadir Ahmed of violence towards his ex-wife?"

No, we didn't accuse Nadir of violence towards his ex-wife. His ex-wife accused him of violence towards her, and we reported it. (I know, I know. When Muslims act violently, we're supposed to be quiet about it.)

Yahya Snow said: "I do think many people on this forum are unfair when it comes to their dealings with abdallah. I hope these people will rethink their attitudes."

Wow. Osama comes on this site and posts links to such intriguing articles as "Christians Are Cum-Lickers," and we're not allowed to say anything in response.

Notice, once again, the Muslim view. Osama is free to post the most offensive comments he can dream up against Christians and Christianity. But Christians must be extremely respectful in return. This represents the Islamic mindset as a whole. Islam can do anything in the world--even slaughter unbelievers. But unbelievers had better be quiet about it. (Note that these claims aren't coming from terrorists hiding in caves. They're coming from Yahya Snow, one of the most reasonable Muslims who comments here. The attitude seems to be everywhere in Islam.)

The Fat Man said...

David Wood said...
I think he means that many men should be punished by law enforcers. Is that right, Osama?

David that seems to be the point. If the Quran\Islam makes Men and Woman equal. As some musims claim (Ethshaam Gulam) Then how come the Quran allows husbands to Punish their wives, but wives must appeal to the legal authorities (other Men) to punish their husbands.

Im not talking about physical confrintation. For instance Osama basicaly said the place of a wife is in the home. Rearing the children, cooking, cleaning and of corse providing the services of a TILTH.

So why doenst the quran have a verse that says if a woman is treated unfarily by her husband she can go on strike. Deprive him of her cooking, cleaning and TILTH services?

The Fat Man said...

Yahya Hayder Seymour said...
"Oh and you might want to tell your Buddy "Ryan S" that the particular passage he's talking about:"

Funny I was actualy going to do just that, when I saw your post. So thanks for pointing that out to Ryan S. Saved me from typing.

shafsha said...

Beating !!! I dont think that people would even beat their animals, and Now we see that islam teaches Beating Human !!!

David Wood said...

Yahya Seymour said: "I consider the Westboro Baptist Church to be more biblically consistent than your post-Renaissance spun and tumble dried understanding of Christianity, but hey I'm sure someone could accuse me of being ever so slightly biased."

It was unavoidable, really.

(1) Osama admits the truth about Islam.
(2) David points out the fact that Osama admitted the truth about Islam.
(3) Yahya, in a fit of rage against David, attacks Christianity as a response.

What does Christianity have to do with this post? Nothing at all. So why the pointless and silly insult? It's simple really. That's all Yahya knows how to do lately. (The alternative would be to refute Osama, but since the evidence is on Osama's side, insults are all that remain.)

The Fat Man said...

David Wood said...
"This represents the Islamic mindset as a whole. Islam can do anything in the world--even slaughter unbelievers. But unbelievers had better be quiet about it. (Note that these claims aren't coming from terrorists hiding in caves. They're coming from Yahya Snow, one of the most reasonable Muslims who comments here. The attitude seems to be everywhere in Islam.)"

I have always said Islam is toxic. We can draw the islam out a little at a time like poison from a wound. Or give them a overdose of that toxin and let them vommit it out.

I support the overdose method. I wonder how are revert friends would react if all of a sudden they lived under Islam. Not the islam of their fantasies, but the real hardcore Mohamed style islam.

I wonder how they would feel about their non muslim family members and loved ones being subjegated into Dihmi status, being publicaly humulated, forced to walk in the gutter, wear special clothing, spit on in disgrace. I wonder how they would feel about the public floggings, the public exicutions, the dismemberment.

I often ask muslima reverts if their child came home one day and said "Mom I'm gay" would they practice Islam on their own child. The response's I get are varried. From the cold blooded, yes they should be killed it is Allahs will, to "No may Allah forgive me".

Muslims must be given the full dose of Islam. Not just a little at a time. Like other toxins and poisons, the body develops a tolerence to the poison if it is administered a little at time. the same is true for Islam. The develop over time a tolerence to bile that is Islam.

I gurontee you if muslims were given a full measure of Islam. Very few would want to convert to it. It would no longer be sexy, and exotic.

The Fat Man said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Yahya Hayder Seymour said...

Yes David,

the thing to do would write an in depth dissertation on this highly contextual issue refuting hermeneutically, historically and contextually the post provided by Osama Abdullah who is so backed by the Islamic sources (despite the fact I see you Christian Apologists claiming he rejects all extra-Qur'anic sources half the time), and then post it here on this blog for all you intellectually in tuned serious students of Islamic Studies.

On the other hand I could just remember I am addressing a polemicist who runs a blog that links to such highly acclaimed academic sources as Robert Spencer, Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Norman Geisler (who is about as scholarly as his references in his book). Yeah, I'll stick to opting for my serious and honest comment.

Shame and the beauty is, you won't be disproving my comment anytime soon either =)

David Wood said...

Well, I guess that clarifies Yahya's position. "If I'm not going to refute the point, I'll just toss out a few insults and leave!"

Ryan S said...

I quoted Osama Adballah...

""If Bethsheba was my sister, then believe me, all of her brothers, including myself would skin her alive along with her boyfriend.""

Yup more evidince of Islam's Satanic origens

Jesus said unto them, Let him who has no SIN cast the first stone:

Yahya Seymore responds...

"" Yahya Hayder Seymour said...
Oh and you might want to tell your Buddy "Ryan S" that the particular passage he's talking about:

"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" is not in the earliest manuscripts and is considered a pious interpolation by the vast majority of textual critics, I believe even Dr. James White would concur.

""

Did someone just let a Camel walk by while strainging out a nap?

So Yahya it by no means offends you that Osama would want to skin alive his sister? but that you are offened Jesus Christ command to forgive?
Let me tell you a personal story, my daugther in fact rebelled and became pregnant, Yes I was angery and offened by that stupid act, she shamed her self and has reaped the consequences of that incident.

But to this day I have the love of my daugther, and a beautiful grandson- I would never consider skining her alive as that Sick and twisted Osama would or pour acid onto face in some twisted perverted sense of "honour" as some Pakistai muslims would do.

What perfection do you have to judge another to be put to death? when your own sins deserve death? God sees hatred in the heart as murder, secret lust as adualtery, theft, and all liars will have their place in the lake of Fire?

Are you and Osama so clean and holy to be judge over another and send them to death when your just as guilty yourselves?

You too will stand naked before God with all your motives and thougts exposed to the one who cannot be bribed or fooled and Judges righteously.

Truly someone that KNOWS they are forgvien cannot hate another for the same offense they where gulity of also

So Mr Yahya and Osama if you are truly without sin... you pick up the knife and skin alive your sisters while they scream and cry for mercey

Fifth Monarchy Man said...

Osama said:

You have to leave your current mentality of where you have no problem with your sister having a boyfriend and losing her virginity, to the mentality of the honor, pride, dignity, and tribal ruling, and male dominance.

I respond

Why in the world do you come to the conclusion that these are the only two options? In your mind either one has no problem with sin or one results to “tribal ruling, and male dominance”

I never cease to be amazed at the differences between Christianity and Islam. The Bible
speaks of another (better) option. That it never occurred to you is very telling..........


Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish.
(Ephesians 5:25-27)


Notice a Christian is commanded to give himself up for his wife like Christ gave himself up for us. This self sacrifice coupled with the Word will result in her being holy and with out blemish.


No beating necessary.

I also find it fascinating that your first and third “reasons” are all about a husband believing himself wronged by his wife.

Instead of physically retaliating when we are wronged the Christian man has another calling…………

For to this you have been called, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, so that you might follow in his steps. He committed no sin, neither was deceit found in his mouth. When he was reviled, he did not revile in return; when he suffered, he did not threaten, but continued entrusting himself to him who judges justly.
(1 Peter 2:21-23)

Christian women have a similar command........



Likewise, wives, be subject to your own husbands, so that even if some do not obey the word, they may be won without a word by the conduct of their wives, when they see your respectful and pure conduct.
(1 Peter 3:1-2)



I can’t see how anyone could possibly say we worship the same God

peace

Yahya Hayder Seymour said...

Mr. Wood, I believe you are playing naive now so let me give you hand.

My original point can be reiterated with the following points:

A) We can all misrepresent religions we don't particularly care for (or in your case actively work in ministry to proselytise) by finding someone who claims to speak in the name of that religion and says something people won't like, then claim he is representative.

B) You are hardly the impartial judge of what and who represents Islam authentically and your comments are really undesired.

Lastly vis-a-vis your latest comment, I am well aware that you are quite the poetic licenser but it is slander to impute words onto me in quotation marks when in reality I had never uttered them nor expressed them.

Yahya Snow said...

@David Wood...

Erm David, you seem to be very theatrical...perhaps you would like to use this quality in delivering an apology for slandering me...think about it.

Also, David (as a bright chap) I would have thought you would have realised my criticism was geared towards the sustained nature of the poking at Abdallah that has become a regular feature of this forum. These attacks on Abdallah have not all come from you, in fact you may have been one of the lesser culprits.

I dismissed it all as "childish"..yes David, you are childish..as evidenced by your school yard slander against me.

Let me ask you...do you think the way this site (including yourself) treated Nadir Ahmed in a Christian way? David, if I was of your ilk then I would theatrically proclaim that childish and bullying behaviour as typical Christian behaviour (endorsed by the Bible) but I have no axe to grind, no hate-agenda to work off and I have to be just as that is next to piety.

I ask you to be just too.

Also, David pointing out Nadir's past skeletons in the closet is a dangerous game to play as we all have bad pasts (skeletons in the closet)...I am sure you do too, I am sure you would dislike it if people began to expose your past..yes/no?

I will play to the audience, like you do David:)
Has anyone noticed that David Wood would hate for his personal past to be divulged yet he has no qualms in doing the same to Nadir Ahmed? Hypocrisy? Is this Christian? Is this the way a representative of the Christian community should behave? Is this the type of behaviour which will encourage David's supporters to give financial support to David and his projects? (If so..I wonder what type of supporters he has)

Also where are all the Christians to speak against David and the other Christians who rounded on Nadir unfairly?

Where is the Christian objection to this relentless onslaught against Osama Abdallah? I really do think it is unfair on Abdallah to subject him to this type of abuse.


David, please stop with the theatricals. If Abdallah did post such material then I am sure he has regretted it and Muslims have admonished him and condemned it. We all make mistakes, don't we David...just like you made a mistake in slandering me, or your childish mistake of bringing Nadir's private information to a public forum etc...

Mutual respect..is that too much to ask for?

Again, I know this post is not in your favour David, but I do hope you allow it. I am not trying to be malicious, I am simply stating a more just case and highlighting perceived injustice and hypocrisy. I am sure you can take constructive criticism, I certainly hope you can utilize this criticism and incorporate any good that arises out of self-evaluation, subsequent to this critique, into your manner.

thanks

Peace, I am so excited about fasting. I am staying up in order to pray a special prayer and eat for Ramadan.

I wish you all a lovely Ramadan, both Muslims and non-Muslims...i genuinely do, from the bottom of my heart.

May allah guide us all. Ameen

Yahya Snow said...

@Fatman

You said:
'I have always said Islam is toxic. We can draw the islam out a little at a time like poison from a wound. Or give them a overdose of that toxin and let them vommit it out.'

I just hope you do not live anywhere near me, the UK (you frighten me, you really do, I just hope Allah keeps Muslims safe from your hatred).
I also ask you to get to know a few Muslims and befriend them and challenge your misconceptions and stereotypes.


Defending Islam at:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.com/

Prophet said...

Yahya Seymour says :
"Oh and you might want to tell your Buddy "Ryan S" that the particular passage he's talking about:

"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" is not in the earliest manuscripts and is considered a pious interpolation by the vast majority of textual critics, I believe even Dr. James White would concur."

lol, no, John 7:53-8:11 is inspired Scripture. Even James White's buddy Calvin agreed.

John 7:53-8:11 is found (1) in many Greek uncials and minuscules mainly of the Majority or Byzantine text-type, (2) in the ancient versions or translations: Old Latin, Vulgate, Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, and Ethiopic, and (3) in the writings of the Church Fathers: Didascalia, Ambrosiaster, Apostolic Constitutions, Ambrose, Jerome, and Augustine.

Jerome (AD 340-420), the translator of the Latin Bible called the Vulgate, said this about the pericope de adultera: “. . . in the Gospel according to John in many manuscripts, both Greek and Latin, is found the story of the adulterous woman who was accused before the Lord.” Jerome considered the pericope genuine, and included it in his Vulgate."

20th/21st Century man relying on what has survived from hundreds of years ago claiming the authority to declare Scripture inspired or not? I don't think so.

frency varghese said...

Osama?Is he from india,or pakistan? may be a bangaladeshi, leave olone those small countries aroudn these big ones.Or for sure from MIDDLE EAST. I mean coutries that have hindu, muslim population. Only in these countires men are saints and women are sinners. This is a typical south asian outlook. Husbands r the bosses. they think they work hard where as women should sit at home cook food, look after children, should not look at other men, wear a burkha and stuff like that. Men think they r saints and women are the cause of all evil. It is always the poor lady's mistake whatsoever. Men can commit anything but are smart enough to blame women. When men commit adultry its bcos thier wives dont care enuf for them. Osama has a typical hindu or muslim outlook and that too not modern but a traditional ancient one. . .

frency varghese said...

Osama's concept of sin " do whatever u want but never get caught" And only adultry committed by women are punishable. Men do whatever u want!!!
Wanna ask osama a question. has he never in his life looked at a woman with lust???????

Ed said...

Someone said Osama Abdallah is a nice good family man, etc., etc. Well, as I recall, Hannah Arendt wrote a book called The Banality of Evil, which in part involved studying the Nazis as family men. Lo and behold, she found that the Nazis were sometimes very nice, good family men. And so what. Abdallah can be as nice as he wants to other Muslims, or to wives he considers well-behaved. That doesn't change the fact that he believes women should be skinned alive, or have the daylights beaten out of them, if they don't behave as he, in his disgusting pseudo-wisdom, thinks right. I hope the spiritual world enlightens him before he does too much damage with his monstrous opinions.

It's one thing to be born into Islam. That's not a choice, or not clearly so. And ignorance can also lead one to choose Islam when one has not been born into it. But as more time goes by, Islam becomes a choice and a matter of knowledge. And therefore in the long run, I think what Islam attracts, is not ignorant persons, but evil men who find in Islam a divine warrant to engage in oppression, violence, torture, and domination, of non-Muslims and women.

nma said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Mike said...

OK, I've been watching this from the sidelines for way too long. Time for me to get in on this.

Yahya Seymour, David believes and proclaims the Gospel presented in The Bible, for example in 1 Corinthians 15. I know you believe The Bible has been corrupted, but do you really believe your Koran which came about 600 years after Jesus is really an accurate guide to the truth about Jesus?

I'm very familiar with Westboro Baptist Church. I used to live near Topeka, Kansas where they are located. How in the world are they more Biblically consistent than David? Sometimes I wonder if the Westboro cult is closer to Islam than True Christianity, due to the hate that both groups (westboro and Islam) preach.

nma said...

Yahya Snow,

You said:Why all the Osama Abdallah bashing???


Why not? His postings are so crooked that he deserves it. He, like all other Muslim apologists, dishonestly twists the Biblical verses beyond recognition. He abuses Christians and Christianity.

Your response has lots of manipulative words and phrases like "bashing", "Is it Christian" etc., the only purpose of which are to induce guilty feelings. You seem to have a problem hearing the truth.

You said:I believe Abdallah to be a good family man and I view him to be more moral and upright than many on this forum. Abdallah to me seems like he has a kind heart and he is not materialistic.


Yeah, Right!

The Fat Man said...

Yahya Snow said
"and Muslims have admonished him and condemned it."

When? Where? Did I miss something. I havent seen a single muslim condem what Osama has said. Not a one. This is the closet any muslim has come but it is preceeded with the escape clause "If Abdallah did post such material then I am sure he has regretted it"

Notice the IF. Also how do you know he has regretted it. I see no evidence of that, did he post something that i missed where he said I regret what I wrote. He did post a correction when he called David a animal. He did not mean the Muslim version of David but the Jewish\Christian David.
In regards to his post you give Osama glowing praise, saying amoung other things "I believe Abdallah to be a good family man and I view him to be more moral and upright than many on this forum." Is that your condemnation of what he said?
And this is a classic response "I do think Abdallah should be allowed to explain his views and then these postings should be removed as it is unfair on Abdallah to open up a whole new niche which will only serve to do injustice to Abdallah." I thought thats what Abdullah did do. He gave a very good explination of his views on beating woman.

Here is what we have seen muslims do so far on this post in regards to what Osama has posted.
1. Attack David Wood accuse him and other Christians of attacking Osama becasue we respond to what he posts.
2. Attack and accuse David Wood of lying on matters not related to Osama, and or his post.
3.Bring in the Westbur Church for some reason as if that is relavent to what Osama has posted.
4. Point the finger at a Christian for posting a Textual Variant from the Book of John. BTW, Ryan S, excellent response to Yahya Seymour on that.
5. Rinse, re spin and repeat.

So where in any of these posts did any muslim condem what Osama posted on wife beating? Can you show us? Or are you just speaking your fathers natural toung?.

The Fat Man said...

Yahya Snow said to the FatMan
"you frighten me, you really do, I just hope Allah keeps Muslims safe from your hatred)."

Well lets see why you would be frightened of me. I support muslims in their desire to be allowed to practice Sharia law on themselves in the west.

I want US forces to withdraw from Iraq and Afganistan ASAP. I really dont see why US men and woman should sacrafice blood and treasure to bring Muslims into the 21st Century.

If a muslim loves death more then I love life I say }good for him". And becaue I'm such a good guy I will try to help him obtain the object of his love. BTW Yaya Snow care to be the first to sign up with my new Company Martyrdom Match Makers? We gots Virgins.

So yes Yahya Snow I can see how this would frigten you as a westernized muslim living in the west. No one wants to live under that 7th century Arab Barbarity. known as Sharia law.

And dont worry I dont live in the UK, I live in the USA were we have freedom even the freedom to bare arms. Kaffirs with Guns every muslims worse nightmare.

The Fat Man said...

Yahya Snow one more thing, Before you accuse me of insighting violence against muslims. Notice I said I want all US troops out of Iraq and Afganistan. I also do not think any terrorist, even your Sheik Osama bin Ladden should be executed if he is ever brought to american justice.

Nakdimon said...

David Wood: So why the pointless and silly insult? It's simple really. That's all Yahya knows how to do lately. (The alternative would be to refute Osama, but since the evidence is on Osama's side, insults are all that remain.)


Thats why I said that Islam is pathetic. When facts are laid on the table all the Muslim can do is attack others for no reason instead of dealing with the facts.

I actually hoped better from Yahya, since he has been one of the very very few that acted contrary to my expectation of Muslim behaviour on a couple of instances. But allas... some things just will never change.

Nakdimon

Zen said...

To Yahya Snow:

You call this post "Abdalla bashing" and then you claim you are taking the "just" position by standing up for Abdalla .

Before you can stand up for justice, you need to identify the imbalance or injustice done first. Your only claim to injustice is simply that a new post is created out of Abdalla's public comment. Without verifying facts, you accuse this site of posting a fabricated comment from Abdalla and then you go on a tirade about how un-Christian David is for posting a "lie".

Read your comments so far. You will observe that you are the one doing the bashing based solely on your unfounded accusations. After you were told where to find Abdallah's original comment, you didn't even have the grace to check for yourself! Instead of, at the very least, acknowledging your unjustified bashing, you took the easy way out by indirectly apologizing for Abdallah. What's more remarkable about you is you didn't include yourself among the "Muslims [who] have admonished him and condemned it". Please, don't give the excuse that you don't know if Abdallah's comment is fabricated or not. If you have any real sense of justice and fairness, go look for yourself. His comment was posted on August 21, 2009 at 11:56 AM under the Women in Afghanistan (August 19) post.

For someone who is supposedly an ambassador for justice and fairness in this site, you sure are failing miserably.

I am not trying to be malicious, I am simply stating a more just case and highlighting perceived injustice and hypocrisy. I am sure you can take constructive criticism, I certainly hope you can utilize this criticism and incorporate any good that arises out of self-evaluation, subsequent to this critique, into your manner.

Have you looked in the mirror lately?

For all your comments so far, you have yet to address the original post. What's your position on Abdallah's comments? What does an enlightened Muslim such as yourself have to say about it? Are Abdallah's comments in line with the teachings of Islam? As an individual Muslim, what's your position on beating women up?

I'm not asking these questions to provoke you into an unpleasant exchange of insults. I am sincerely curious. Consider it my balanced way of responding to this post.

Osama Abdallah said...

David Wood,

Thank you for proving that you are quite and too desperate. There are few points to expose you on before I give the detailed links that deal with wife-beating in Islam:


1- I never pointed the finger at Bethsheba alone. I said that the David of the Old Testament was an animal for killing her husband. But the point remains that have she stopped it from the beginning, then none of this would've happened.

2- I did make it clear that much of what I said applies TO THE DAYS OF THE SWORDS.

3- As to the beating of the woman, according to the Glorious Quran, she is to be "beaten" after the 2nd warning. Now while some scholars use the Hadiths to interpret "beat" as "leave", since there are Hadiths that say that, but most of the scholars claim that the beating is physical. I've written two detailed articles for both cases at:

http://www.answering-christianity.com/beating_yes.htm

http://www.answering-christianity.com/beating_no.htm


Both articles are part of the main article:

http://www.answering-christianity.com/beating.htm

I didn't know that a very quick and casual post of mine, that wasn't detailed enough nor thought through enough, would explode to become an official Islamic Source and Reference. Man, talk about desperation!

AGAIN, MY POINTS WERE ON THE DAYS OF THE SWORD. I did say in a later post, in the same thread, that today WE HAVE TO FOLLOW THE LAW.

And Ryan S, good for you buddy. I am sure you don't mind your sister sleeping with many men and even getting pregnant without marriage. This is the Christianity that you live in in the West. Good for you!

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com

Osama Abdallah said...

"Thats great that you dont always blame the woman. But can you show us in the Quran or even in the Hadeeths where a wife can beat her husband?"

Can you show me where they Say she can't beat her abusive husband? And on average, could she really physically?

You're too blinded with hate, you can't even think straight.

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com

Osama Abdallah said...

"1- In the days of swords and tribal societies, the man's honor is his wife. If the woman is loose and flirty, then she could cause for her husband to end up in a mortal combat with another individual, by the sword, or for her entire family or even tribe to go to war with another. So women can be disasterous if they choose to."

This is a quote of mine that further proves that the CONTEXT OF ALL OF MY POINTS was for the days of the sword, and that YES, loose women's snares could and did bring disasters in the past. This is not to say that men are faultless. Many men deserve to be punished severely by the Law, especially that since women couldn't physically carry out such punishment. There are Hadiths that give general punishments:

Narrated Abu Burda Al-Ansari: "I heard the Prophet saying, 'Do not flog anyone more than ten stripes except if he is involved in a crime necessitating Allah's legal Punishment.' (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Punishment of Disbelievers at War with Allah and His Apostle, Volume 8, Book 82, Number 833)"

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com

David Wood said...

Osama,

You have nothing to be ashamed of, so there's no need to try to change the obvious meaning of your comments. I posted your words because you are entirely correct in what you say about Islam. Muslims only object to what you've said because they are ashamed of Islamic teachings. All of your points can be defended using Muslim sources, so don't give in to peer pressure.

Osama Abdallah said...

"3- The woman who has a filthy mouth and always defies her husband, especially when he is a good and reasonable person, can and will bring harm upon herself, because let's face it: Men are, on average, 5 to 10 times stronger than women. A wise woman would not want to enter into a physical confrontation with her man, especially during the old days, where men were extremely big on honor and pride. A woman challenging his dignity could end up getting hurt very very bad.

These points, by the way, go for all religions, and not just Islam. You have to leave your current mentality of where you have no problem with your sister having a boyfriend and losing her virginity, to the mentality of the honor, pride, dignity, and tribal ruling, and male dominance."

My respected par, Mr. David Wood,

Anyone with the least brain can see that my statement was in general, and not specific to any Islamic ruling or even any religion!
I was referring to the average men, who most likely do not follow their faith religiously, and would violate it instantly. The wives of these men should be wise enough to not enter into any physical confrontation with them, especially in the old days as I mentioned above.

Man, again, talk about being desperate!!

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com

Osama Abdallah said...

"Osama,

You have nothing to be ashamed of, so there's no need to try to change the obvious meaning of your comments. I posted your words because you are entirely correct in what you say about Islam. Muslims only object to what you've said because they are ashamed of Islamic teachings. All of your points can be defended using Muslim sources, so don't give in to peer pressure."

David,

I whole-heartedly agree that if the beating is physical, then it wouldn't be with a tooth brush or siwak. THIS IS ALL MAN-MADE!
However, as I mentioned above, there are Hadiths that define "beat" as "leave", and there are interpretations that define "beat" as a physical beating. I've written two detailed articles on BOTH CASES and I've given the links above.

IN EITHER CASE, the "beating" should not happen before the 2 warnings. She couldn't get beaten before that. This is according to the Holy Quran, not according to me.

Please visit the links that I gave above for ample quotes and proofs.

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com

Fernando said...

Professor Wood saide: «Yahya, in a fit of rage»...

preciselly the dignose I made when saw your debatte withe him... I eben presented a small compilation off Yahya's behaviour to a fellow psychriatrist and the dignosis was simillar: we're in the presence off a bery, bery, bery viollent person thate showld bee helped in one way ore another...

Fernando said...

Yahya Snow said: «and Muslims have admonished him and condemned it»... where? and when I pointed some problems with Osama you eben tryied to sillence me accusing off lack off respect... hipocrisy and lyies from you Yahya Snow, butt thates whate we shoulde expect from you: nothing more, nothing less... please: in this "holy" mouth off yours (another pagan practice I reconn) do continue to follow the examples off muhammad and the qur'an: thate will show more, and more whate the true face off islam is...

Fernando said...

The Osama The Great Abdallah: as professow Wood saide: do nott feel the need to justify your words... they're the true muslim truth... justte continue to defend itt: islam's future depend onn itt...

Ilena said...

a normal person would never beat/hit his pet. a normal person loves his wife more than his pet. wife beating has no excuse. even when it comes after 2nd warning. perhaps, this doesn't make sense to u bc ur a guy, but it sure makes a lot of sense to me bc i am a woman. how abt beating ur mom instead of ur wife!? for me this is just a legalisation of domestic violence. but still, i certainly don't believe that kuran comes from god, so it's up to muslims to defend their man-made law, which to each sane person doesn't make sense.

And Ryan S, good for you buddy. I am sure you don't mind your sister sleeping with many men and even getting pregnant without marriage. This is the Christianity that you live in in the West. Good for you!

osama it's high time u stopped judging us bc u ain't god. what some1 does or doesn't is none of ur business. islam floggs adulteress. west doesn't pass judgement on the sexual life of other ppl. for me 2nd option is more human, but still i know that u would be honoured to be able to flog that poor woman. there is no person without sin in this world. let's never forget that!

ubiquitouserendipity said...

osama said: blah, blah, blah, blather, blather...

ubiquitouserendipity says:

i am a man for G_d, family, and country. i think i have common sense, though i don't always refer to it. oh well... i love humanity, life,,, i respect women because they are the life-bearers. little children are more delicate than any flower.

there are two (2) reasons that i believe a man should be separated from his life force:

1. the hurting of children (pedophiles should be shot in the public square by the closest relative of the victim). no second chances.

2. men who beat women, after their first warning: they should be beaten from their living state by women who take pleasure in curb-stomping cowards. what goes around comes around, you reap what you sow, kinda' logic. >semi-sarcasm off<

that is not the Christian in me (though Jesus did say that it would be better to have a millstone tied to your neck and be dropped in the sea if you harmed children). the Christian in me prays for the salvation of all mankind. but only those who come, do.

the man speaking above is an american. as a member of humanity i believe that the eradication of mohammedanism, from western societies, is necessary for peace to be even a possibility in this world. i would that all men lived in peace. but i do not believe that mankind can survive the islamisation of the world.

just look to the middle east, where mohammedans are eating themselves alive. they victimize their little girls and women, and turn their children into walking bombs. they glorify killing and death. the sunnis blow up the shi'ites, and vice versa, and the arabs continue to enslave women from around the world and blacks from africa. if we in the west were to rise to the challenge, close our borders to mohammedan countries, and deport all mohammedan non-citizens, regardless of support, sponsorship, family, blah, blah, blah, the islamic world would implode in 20 years.

remember folks, the mohammedan world doesn't have the gnp of spain or portugal. they can't produce a pencil, a piece of paper, or a cogent thought which enhances mankind to write down on that paper they import with that pencil they import. they try to take credit for "discovering" the zero (0). but actually the persians and chinese developed, independently, the zero (0) concept. so the mohammedan world has actually contributed, not zero, but less than zero, NOTHING, to mankind's betterment.

Jesus Christ is the Way, the Way of Peace. let us choose to live peacefully, each and every man. but if you choose to not live in peace, you will not be allowed to violate our peace unchallenged.

may the G_d of love and light, Hashem Adonai, draw you to His Son by the power of His Holy Spirit. Yehoshua ha Meshiach. Peace, in His love, papajoe

Adam said...

"Men Should Beat Their Wives"

This common In India and Pakistan.
I heard a lot of good thing for women in Islam.
But if any one of you visit India or Pakistan You will see how double standard islam stands for.

After 9/11 islam is the only religion which spend large amount of money in PR, Advertisment to Promote islam in the west and win few converts. Later Make a video and uplink it on Islamic Channel showing a White Men or Christians are converting to islam in USA. Men like Zakir Naik and Associates have also made good fortune. Zakir International islamic schools are for Rich muslims.

I like what Jesus Christ said to Similar Kind of people 2000 years ago.
Matthew 23:14-15
"How terrible it will be for you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You devour widows' houses and say long prayers to cover it up. Therefore, you will receive greater condemnation!

"Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you travel around on sea and land to make one Convert; and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as yourselves."


The plight of muslim sisters in my country is bad.

I am posting some link which will help Non Muslim and Western Islamist. My call especially goes to western muslim in the first world.

The imfamous Imrana Case.

'Imrana rape case is defaming Islam'
http://www.expressindia.com/news/messages.php?newsid=50546

2)Chronology of Imrana case

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/NEWS/India/Chronology-of-Imrana-case/articleshow/2208796.cms

3)Muslim women in Indian society

http://www.indianmuslims.info/articles/asghar_ali_engineer/articles/muslim_women_in_indian_society.html

4)Shah Bano case

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shah_Bano_case

5)Muslim women in India are in miserable condition: Uzma Naheed

http://www.twocircles.net/2009jun24/muslim_women_india_are_miserable_condition_uzma_naheed.html

6)‘Education can improve status of Muslim women’

http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/Education-can-improve-status-of-Muslim-women/246647/


I don't hate muslim but I do dislike the Wahabbis.

minoria said...

Only got a quick look but from the looks of it it has to do with hitting a woman for a certain reason.I always go to the Koran.Later on Muslim experts,often out of mercy,decided to put in conditions.

CUT OFF THE HANDS OF MALE AND FEMALE THIEVES

In SURA 5:38.That is all he text says.But later they decided it applied only to adults,not to children(there are children who steal).I think maybe also if it was due to hunger and not greed then it didn't apply,though I am not sure.But that came later.Others had mercy and put in conditions.

HIT WIFE(sura 4:34)

That is ALL the text says.So out of mercy later Muslims put conditions.They could NOT eliminate the text 100%,but they added that a husband could hit her only if he did not cause a wound.

But AGAIN,the text does NOT put any condition:

1.About not breaking her bones.
2.Or "only hit once,not 5 times in a row."

What happened was that later,more merciful guys came along,and put conditions not found in the Koran,and said that was that.

WHY STAY WITH 4:34?

Because the Koran itself says its words can not be changed:sura 6:115/10:64/18:27.

Yahya Snow said...

Fatman..

Calm down please. This is one of the more annoying things about evangelical Christian forum, their is too much emotion and very little objective analysis.

Fatman, your political views are immaterial. I stated you 'frighten me' due to what you said, allow me to remind you, you said:

'I have always said Islam is toxic. We can draw the islam out a little at a time like poison from a wound. Or give them a overdose of that toxin and let them vommit it out.'

That is rather scary, hence my fright and concern. You seem to be very emotional here.

NMA

That is not very adult in my view, you (correct me if I am wrong) want to attack Abdallah because he attacks Christians and Christianity?


ZEN

I am not accusing this site of forging quotes. All I said was that I do not trust this site unless I verify their information. This (I did not elaborate why earlier) is due to the lie/slander David Wood (site owner) levelled at me and Nabil Qureshi (another site owner) claiming to be an ex-Muslim when he was never a Muslim. This is enough for anybody of a reasonable disposition to distrust this site.

I have a full time job, I have studies, applications and other scholarly and social functions to see to. I simply do not have time to be trawling over this site and following spats of this nature with such scrutiny. Hence my reluctance to find and compare Abdallah' orignal 'statement'. Abdallah can explain his views.

I ask everybody to stop asking me about Abdallah's views. Ask him! He is more qualified to speak about his views.

All I attempted to do (and will continue to do) is be fair to Abdallah and stand on his side as he seems to be unfairly victimised by many. I ask again (ironically in an emotive fashion:)) is it Christian of you to treat Abdallah with such disrespect and dishonour?

Whilst I am in the business of asking questions, allow me to restate a few unanswered questions (hmm, I wonder why you avoided these questions), I asked them previously, no answer was forth coming, they still stand:

Let me ask you...do you think the way this site (including yourself) treated Nadir Ahmed in a Christian way? David, if I was of your ilk then I would theatrically proclaim that childish and bullying behaviour as typical Christian behaviour (endorsed by the Bible) but I have no axe to grind, no hate-agenda to work off and I have to be just as that is next to piety.

I ask you to be just too.

Also, David pointing out Nadir's past skeletons in the closet is a dangerous game to play as we all have bad pasts (skeletons in the closet)...I am sure you do too, I am sure you would dislike it if people began to expose your past..yes/no?

I will play to the audience, like you do David:)
Has anyone noticed that David Wood would hate for his personal past to be divulged yet he has no qualms in doing the same to Nadir Ahmed? Hypocrisy? Is this Christian? Is this the way a representative of the Christian community should behave? Is this the type of behaviour which will encourage David's supporters to give financial support to David and his projects? (If so..I wonder what type of supporters he has)

Also where are all the Christians to speak against David and the other Christians who rounded on Nadir unfairly?

I hope we can all come to a better understanding this RAMADAN. I hope you all have a great Ramadan.


Defending Islam at
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.com/

Spencer said...

David,

Why are you ignoring my emails?

shafsha said...

Osama with a great insight about the quran and islam in general said: [AGAIN, MY POINTS WERE ON THE DAYS OF THE SWORD.]

Yes, exactly, thats what everyone here is saying, that quranic and islamic teaching are no longer valid in the modern world !! they are too outdated that even the muslim followers are saying that this was back in the days where sowrds were used. TRUE !!

MuslimPhantom said...

I do not like this. This is utter garbage. It's disgusting how anti-Islamic people distort the meaning of some innocent words. I do not like this. You Christians are to self-centred in a humanitarian moral. I do not like this. The word of Allah (swt) is above all the human mediocrity expressed in western values. If He said that it is our duty, as true believers in the path of the Prophet (pbuh), to do so and so, we’ll do, no matter the consequences to our image. We, Muslims, do not use cosmetic rhetoric to promote our religion. Osama Abdallah is one of the greatest Muslim’s apologists in the world. He’s only being attacked due to his success and work. I do not like this. He deserves more respect as Yahya Snow said before being attacked by the pack of hungry islamophobes that gather around this blog with that spectral Fernando as its head. I do not like this. I’m here to protect the honour and dignity of all Muslims and of Islam. Do not continue to bash Osama Abdallah. If you have anything to say, please do so, but do not point out any fingers against any Muslim or Islam itself. Of course Islam is above any critic since it’s the only true religion, nevertheless you, Christian wolfs, should not draw upon yourselves the wrath of Allah, the Most Gracious, the most Beneficent and the Most Merciful. Osama Abdallah: do not feel discouraged: you’re doing a great job, and me, the Muslim Phantom, will never allow this to be forgotten.

Zen said...

IN EITHER CASE, the "beating" should not happen before the 2 warnings. She couldn't get beaten before that. This is according to the Holy Quran, not according to me.

Osama,

Let's cut the bull and go straight for the issue here. The objections your comments are receiving are directed toward the Quran-sanctioned delivery of physical harm to a woman. What is difficult for me to fathom is that Islam finds justification for such an act. Why?

Isn't it more godly to feel compassion for men and women who stray from the moral path? Calling a promiscuous woman a "whore" is in itself a judgment on her. It's a holier-than-thou attitude that betrays your very submission to the merciful Allah. As an enlightened Muslim, why do you take the position of a judge instead of the position of a brother who opens his heart to a lost sister? Compassion is an element of submission wherein you pray for those who are lost and try your best to call them back to the right way; and if they refuse to listen, you leave the rest to Allah. Please correct me if I'm wrong about my understanding of "submission" in this context. What is the Islamic response toward a Muslim (and even a non-Muslim) who deviates from Islamic mores? I'm interested to hear what you have to say.
---
From your comments, I take it that you've met and personally know women who are morally loose. Have you taken the time to try to understand, at least, one of them? Some of these women do not have a positive image of themselves and having multiple partners is their way to validate their worth. It is an absolutely unhealthy solution, but it doesn't merit condemnation from those who disagree with it, either. The compassionate thing to do, at the very least, is give "immoral women" the benefit of the doubt. My point is, it is essential to take into account a persons humanity--and human nature, in general--before making judgments--especially contemptuous ones--of anybody.
---
In the case of Bathsheba, I'm also curious. The Bible does not say whether or not she was aware of King David's plot to kill Uriah. Neither does it say that Bathsheba willingly and without grief married the king. Does the Quran say what she knew and felt about the whole thing? Please point me to the Quranic text. I'm willing to read it to educate myself about your references.

~Zen

dolls like us said...

Women should not be beaten ever men beating women need ot get beaten up badly . Children should never witness this type of violence it hurts children and scars them for life think of the kids .

nma said...

Osama Abdallah said...
Man, again, talk about being desperate!!

Yeah,Right! We all are desperate to beat our wives. It is so much fun! But what stand in our way are the two highly difficult warnings that the (un)holy (in)glorious Quran dictates.

The Fat Man said...

I was really boored this morning and I was cleaning out the history of my browser when I noticed the link to Ethshaams Blog. So I popped in to see how are friend was doing and found this little nugget.

"Allah works in mysterious ways. Yesterday Me and My friends were playing basketball and eating pizza till 1:30 AM at our big and beautiful mosque right here in Michigan. We lost track of time and started heading home, but then we started to discuss The Big Bang Theory (*) (man I love that Show-- Sheldon LOL). All of a sudden a woman starts running away from something, sits down and starts to cry. Me and my other two best friends debated what to do-- finally I went up to her and asked " Hey-- You need help" She explained she was just beaten by her husband, she was doing coke and drinking way too much and she had to get home. So me and my friends drove her home-- and she told us she was Christian. This made me feel so blessed to be a Muslim. It made me feel so blessed to follow the truth-- ISLAM. After that I realized Christians need to be told the truth--- that Christianity is wrong and Islam, its the truth. So I apologize to Brother Osama Abdullah for making fun of him on the Answeing Muslims Blog. Accept my apology Osama and let's work for the cause and defense of Islam-- Non Muslim People need Islam. May Allah's blessings and peace be upon all of you. Thanks."

Now I posted it in this section of the blog to point out a few things. First to demonstrate to muslims how to properly admonish someone. This coke head, alchoholic is not follwoing Christ. She is wrong if she thinks she can snort cocain, and drink herself into a stupper and still be considered herself in the body of Christ. I dont think any Chritian in this blog would disagree with me on that. See muslims thats how you do it. See that wasnt so hard.

Secondly Ethshaam you said you told her the truth, I hope you told her that she wasnt following Christ by what she was doing and quoted all the relevent verses from the bible to demonstrate to her that she was in error if she claimed to be following christ.

If someone came up to me at a BBQ pork festival, with a baby back rib in one hand and a 12 OZ Bud in the other and said he was a muslim I would tell him the truth. That he wasnt following the Quran or Mohamed. Its called integrity. A quality that is lacking in muslims.

Ethshaam you said that you and your two best friends debated on what to do after seeing a woman running away from somethig in tears. Debated on what to do? What's there to debate? ITs 1:30 in the morning a WOMAN obviously in destress and three muslims are sitting around debating on what to do. To most people not under the influence of islam there would be no need to debate on what to do. To ask her what was wrong, does she need help, should you call the police or a ambulance? These things would of just come natualy. Also she tells you she was just beatin by her husband and you drive her back to her abusser? Good to know shilvery is not dead in islam.

Finally since this COKE SNORTING ALCHOLIC CHRISTIAN was beatin by her husband I have to ask Osama and even Ethshaam. Did the husband have the right to beat his wife, to SKIN HER ALIVE, to BEAT THE CRAP out of her according to the standards that Osama has established. Is that why you drove her back to her abussive husband to get smacked around some more?

The Fat Man said...

Ethshaam blog continued. Also notice I did not attack Ethshaam, call him a liar etc.. I delt with what he posted and did not accuse him of making the whole thing up.

Prophet said...

1- In the days of swords and tribal societies, the man's honor is his wife. If the woman is loose and flirty, then she could cause for her husband to end up in a mortal combat with another individual, by the sword, or for her entire family or even tribe to go to war with another. So women can be disasterous if they choose to.

In this scenario we have Osama's troglodyte rationale convicting before the commission of the offence. It could happen, therefore the husband is given the right to be the judge of the guilt and executioner of the punishment.

While it may have had some relevance in some primitive societies (and I think his generalisation is simplistic to say the least), he forgets that islam claims that this comes from their god who they believe is the uncreated creator of us all. Hardly the profound wisdom of a "god" who is not confined within our time/space continuim.

2- The woman is the mother, sister, and daughter. But most importantly, she is the mother of the children, and if she is not responsible enough to care for the house and the children, especially in the old days, then she could bring catastrophe for the entire family. On average, the father is usually busy working all day to bring money and food.

Another simplistic generalisation from the profound intellect found within the islamic worldview. Fact is, women have always had to work outside the home to assist the providing for the family. It was the wealthy whose wives had that privilege. Further, these homes and providing sustenance were huge jobs in themselves in such societies.

3- The woman who has a filthy mouth and always defies her husband, especially when he is a good and reasonable person, can and will bring harm upon herself, because let's face it: Men are, on average, 5 to 10 times stronger than women. A wise woman would not want to enter into a physical confrontation with her man, especially during the old days, where men were extremely big on honor and pride. A woman challenging his dignity could end up getting hurt very very bad.

I repeat my answer to point one and add that this troglodyte worldview also insults primitive man. There is no historical context for these claims, other than the islamic one.

Islam claims to be universal and for all time yet it exhibits an insular and stagnant intellectual outlook confined to the 7th Century arabic society imposed by mohammad and his band of Persian criminals on the previously matrilineal society. In order to strip these people of their inherent culture and impose mohammad's aggressive and patrilineal society, brute power was the rule.

These points, by the way, go for all religions, and not just Islam. You have to leave your current mentality of where you have no problem with your sister having a boyfriend and losing her virginity, to the mentality of the honor, pride, dignity, and tribal ruling, and male dominance.

Another gross generalisation from the islamic knuckle-dragging troglodyte worldview. Simplistic and ignorant, such "male dominance" societies as we find in islam are aggressive and violent both within and on their borders. With polygyny, they require invasions to herd back women from other societies as polygyny is an imbalance of the natural order, these invasions also assist in killing off some of their excess young males who, unable to have even one wife, are cause of strife within the society.

While an interesting story on the history channel of times past, these societies have no relevance at all today. Islam fails to live up to its claim of being universal and for all time - unless that means that the creation of humans was simply for the purpose of killing and enslaving each other according to who had the power.

There have also been many examples of excellence and achievement in history to think our purpose is just to destroy.

Sepher Shalom said...

Osama said: "And Ryan S, good for you buddy. I am sure you don't mind your sister sleeping with many men and even getting pregnant without marriage. This is the Christianity that you live in in the West. Good for you!"

I guess in the world Osama lives in, if you don't beat a woman she will be promiscuous and get pregnant.

Osama, I recommend you move back to the world the rest of us live in. It's called reality.

minoria said...

Hello Osama:

I had read something about that the Arabic word translated as "to beat/hit" or IDRIB can also mean "to leave."

In fact a Muslim woman called LALEH BAKHTIAR translated 4:34 as " to leave them".For that her Koran translation was prohibited from being sold in the bookstores of ISNA(Islamic Society of North America).


I say,whatever makes the world a better place.But practically no expert would agree to it.But there is a small chance that for 1,400 years they were all wrong.

APOSTASY

I know some Muslims say Aisha was really 17 or 18 when she slept with Mohammed.They have their arguments.Others reject all the hadiths that go contrary to the Koran even if the isnad is infallible.

Others don't agree that the "no compulsion in religion"part has been abrogated.So no death for apostasy.And they say that "kill them" by Mohammed only referred to the time of the 10 year Meca-Medina war.Then to change religion was practically to become a traitor,to go to the pagan side.

A LIFE OF ITS OWN

As Robert Spencer has said,the thing is NOT really if the Aisha story is true(we can't be sure 100%)or if Mohammed actually meant kill apostates in a universal way or not.The thing is that MOST Muslims accept it as true(even if there is a chance it is not).

True,there are some Muslims who reject the Aisha story,others reject death for apostates.They can cite their historical-logical reasons.But unfortunately they are a MINORITY.We non-Muslims have to deal with Islam as it is today.Maybe 100 years from now the minority in Islam will become mainstream.

MAHDI

You are a Sunni,so you don't believe the 12th imam went into a cave or well and will one day wake up and conquer the world for Islam as the Mahdi.

But AHMADINEJAD of Iran DOES believe it.And also that by beginning a world carnage using the nuclear bomb he will speed up the coming of the Mahdi.

Again,the thing is NOT if the Shiahs are right about Islam and the Sunnis wrong.It is that they actually BELIEVE they are right(even if they are wrong)and in a Mahdi.And some actually believe that by starting WW III they will speed up his appearence.

As I said before,others can believe what they want,but the limit is violation of human rights.

Ehteshaam Gulam said...

David,

Heard your sick. Get better man.

Thanks,
Ehteshaam Gulam

The Fat Man said...

Yahya Snow I am calm. Let me explain what I mean by "'I have always said Islam is toxic. We can draw the islam out a little at a time like poison from a wound. Or give them a overdose of that toxin and let them vommit it out."

First the islam is toxic part.
Look what islam does to the mind it has infected. Look at the Post I just did on old Ethshaam.

Its 1:30 in the morning, he and three other muslims see a woman running down the street crying. They actualy took time to debate on what to do? WHY WOULD THEY NEED TO DEBATE and WHAT WHERE THEY DEBAITING?

For others not under the influence of the Toxin. This is a no brainer. Nothing to think about or debate.

Also look at what Osama Posted on Wife Beating. You can critisize David Wood for re posting what Osama typed, you can critisize us christians for commenting on what he typed. But can you or any other muslims critisize Osama for what he typed? Or tells us if you agree or disagree with what he typed on wife beating and the reasons for it.

I'm still waiting for the admonishment from muslims that you claimed happened. Again show us where any muslim admonished Osama for what he typed.

You see Yahya Snow you are under the influence of the Toxin which is islam. It clouds your judgment, distorts your morals, and suppress any ethics you may have.

No for the draw it out like poison from a wound. I simply ment we can spend time drawing it out and exposing it a little at a time,which is what is being done by this blog and debates. We are holding you up to a mirror to look at what you believe. I know it is painful and disgusting. But instead of lashing out and blaming christians and attacking God and his church. Instead of calling God a liar. Maybe you should look into that mirror and look at what islam really teaches. Look past the sugar coating, look deeper then just sweet syruping candy layer. And instead look at its core.

Now for what I would like to see. Muslism in the west under the taliban islamic rule in the west. I wonder how long you would last as a muslim sir living under true islam. And yes it is true islam. Because true islam is established by those who have the shapest sword. The bigest gun, and more importatly it is established by those who are willing to use those swords, and guns on anyone who stands in there way.

Tell me Yahya Snow which one of the freedoms you enjoy would you give up to live under Sharia Law?

The Fat Man said...

Osama Abdulla, I have read your points over very carefully and I have just one question. Why not just divorce the woman in your scenerious instead of beating her. I meen obvioulsy this type of woman is not one any man should be married to. So since Islma allows men to divorce there wives with just saying "I divorce you three times" then why stay married to such woman in the first place? Why go through the effor of beating them after you warn them twice.

The Fat Man said...

In college I had to take a few humanities classes. I took one on Human Sexuality. A great deal of the corse mateiral was on sexual deviation from the norm.
One of the topics we discussed in this class was Dominet/Submissive in sado massocist sexual practices.

I seem to recall that the majority of Men who like to play the submissive masocist role with woman are in fact powerfull men. And those men that practice the Dominent Sadist role are in fact very weak, emasculated men in their daily lives.

Just some food for thought for those muslim men in the blog who think beating their wives is a sign of Masculinity.

The Fat Man said...

minoria I just read your post in regards to what musims believe. I have to say it is spot on.

The War of Compulsion highlights the problem with Moderate Muslims.

After Mohamed died some of the tribes that were subdued refused to pay the Zakat tax to Mecca. They still believed they were muslims, they prayed 5 times a day and still gave the Zakat, they just felt that the Zakat should be localy applied instead of sending it to Mecca to be latter distributed back to the local comunitiy.

In affect they said that it was only under mohamed that the Zakat had to be paid to a central authority. Since Mohamed was dead there was no reason to continue doing this.

This caused Abu Bakr to fight the war of compulsion. Others disagreed with him including Uthman. But Abu Bakr said "By Allah, even if they refused to give a single dinar I would fight them".

The point I'm making here is to Yahya Snow, Yahya Seymour, Ethshaam and a few others. Thats fine if you have your own peacful tolerent flavor of islam. I wish you luck on that. However those that don't share your views will fight you to establish their flavor as the dominent view of Islam. And this type of fighting is up close, personal, and bloody. If you want your peacfull tolerent westernize version of islam to exist then your going to have to get wet, very wet.

I dont see the so called moderate muslims doing this. What makes them moderate is the same thing that is going to make them victims.

Fernando said...

Yahya Snow saide: «I ask everybody to stop asking me about Abdallah's views»...

non the less you felte the urge (a real emotional thingue) to defende him before... that's why we asked you somethings... actions habe reactions dear Yahya Snow...

Fernando said...

Yahya Snow asked: «is it Christian of you to treat Abdallah with such disrespect and dishonour»...

telling the truth and denoncing someone perversities is being desrespectefull and disnonoufull only to those who hatte the truthe and perversities...

butt iff you sai you are nott here to defende Osama, why do you persiste in doing so? Itt looks you agree withe him; unless you woulde habe had words to denounce his appalling statements... another clue to your personalitty...

Jesus himself called persons "foxes" and "whitewashed tombs", so whate we are doing is quite Christina: we do nott do this (and niether did Jesus) to offende, rather to pointe someone's deseases so he can recognise them and search help... announce and denounce withe respect and love are the pseudonimus off Christiann mission...

The Fat Man said...

Yahya Snow Said ....
"All I attempted to do (and will continue to do) is be fair to Abdallah and stand on his side as he seems to be unfairly victimised by many."

HOW HAS HE BEEN unfairly victimisied? The guy posts a essay on why it is OK to beat your wife in islam. And you say he is being victimized?

Yahya Snow said
"Let me ask you...do you think the way this site (including yourself) treated Nadir Ahmed in a Christian way?"

As someone who is repsonsible for obtaining the information on Nadir. I would say yes, Nadir was delt with in a Christian fassion.

First Nadir was warned a number of times to stop his public temper tantrums agains Christians and also against other muslims. He was told this not only by Christians but by musims as well. He did not listen.

Second, everything that David Posted on Nadir is true. I know this because Im the one who drove the 100 miles to the court house and spent the $15 dollars to obtain the print outs that I scanned and sent to David Wood.

If you want I can send them to you as well so you can verify.

Secondly I have been rebuked by David more then once. First time was gentle when I was told to behave twords Ethshaam. The second time was when I posted a comment that contained a refference to Yahya Seymours wife keeping me company in hell. David responded with "UNACCEPTABLE FATMAN" and it was. He also had me take the post down wich i did, and reposted it with out the offensive comment. I bring this up to demonstrate to you ust how fair Davis is to muslim posters.

Finaly, your inssesant rant about publishing Davids skelatons. I got news for you, we Christians have a different view of sin then muslims. We do not believe like muslism do that as long as you dont get caught it is ok to sin. We beleive in exposing our sin to the light, to publicaly confess them. I have heard David a few times witness to what his life was like before he became a Christian. I say this only to point out how foolish you sound.

Yahya Hayder Seymour said...

Fernando

You have stated several times vis-a-vis myself and I have let it slip without comment until now, the following:

"Professor Wood saide: «Yahya, in a fit of rage»...

preciselly the dignose I made when saw your debatte withe him... I eben presented a small compilation off Yahya's behaviour to a fellow psychriatrist and the dignosis was simillar: we're in the presence off a bery, bery, bery viollent person thate showld bee helped in one way ore another..."


Well Fernando, other than that the fact that you clearly are more interested in amateur psycho-analysis as opposed to engaging with people's arguments, this is actually known within the circuit of debates and discussions as "Argument Ad Hominem".

Secondly, I have avoided indulging in attacking you personally but let's get one thing clear, If anyone observes your immature entry onto this blog carefully, I'm sure a psycho-analysist might comment upon your behaviour negatively, It seems to illustrate an inferiority complex, you kept describing me as "Miss" and making cheap slanders about how I looked and for no reason what so ever.

There, please pull the log out of your own eye.

Lastly you know what the extremely ironic thing is, whilst I might be very scottish in temperament (heated), I'm not actually violent. I haven't beaten anyone up before nor been physically violent on anyone since embracing Islam with the exception of one self defence case in 2006.


Just watch my first debate with Wood (if Arabic Christian Perspective ever plan to release the tape), then if people want to talk about violence they can.

Fifth Monarchy Man said...

Muslimphantom said:

I do not like this. This is utter garbage. It's disgusting how anti-Islamic people distort the meaning of some innocent words. I do not like this.

I respond:
Please clarify the meaning of his words and explain the distortion.

The way I understand it Osama is saying that there under certain circumstances according to Islam it is permissible to beat your wife. Is this correct or not?

I know very little about Islam and perhaps it is possible that due to our cultural differences that I am misunderstanding his comments or the Koran.

Here is the text

sura [4:34] The men are made responsible for the women, ** and GOD has endowed them with certain qualities, and made them the bread earners. The righteous women will cheerfully accept this arrangement, since it is GOD's commandment, and honor their husbands during their absence. If you experience rebellion from the women, you shall first talk to them, then (you may use negative incentives like) deserting them in bed, then you may (as a last alternative) beat them. If they obey you, you are not permitted to transgress against them. GOD is Most High, Supreme.

It looks like it is saying that wife beating is acceptable to me. What am I missing?
Peace

Osama Abdallah said...

Peace be upon you dear Muslim brothers and sisters,

Here is a verse from the Bible, from among many in the link below, that will expose some of the Jews' and Christians' nuisance and hypocrisy on this board:


NOTE: THE GLORIOUS QURAN, to them, IS FALSE FOR ALLOWING WIFE BEATING AFTER THE 3RD WARNING! Ok, very good. Let us look at the Bible then, which Christianity is built on, because certainly, if the Bible is false, then Christianity is false:

Deuteronomy 25:11-12 "And in case men struggle together (in a fight) with one another, and the wife of the one has come near to deliver her husband out of the striking one (to save her husband), and she has thrust out her hand and grabbed hold of his private (the other man's groin), she must then get BOTH HER HANDS CUT OFF, and the eyes of the men must feel no sorrow."

If a woman tries to save her husband from a beating by grabbing the other man's private parts to lift him off her husband, THEN BOTH HER HANDS MUST GET CHOPPED OFF.

NOTICE, NOT EVEN ONE HAND. NO. BOTH HANDS MUST GET CHOPPED OFF!

Please visit: href="http://www.answering-christianity.com/view_of_women.htm

Now I'd like to see them answer this one. If they don't, then they have proven that they are one of the following:

1- Ignorant of how the Bible views women, which Islam is far better than it.

2- Hypocrites if they knew about it and continued to bash Islam anyway on a law that is quite realistic and normal.

Let's see how false Islam is, to them, after they comment on this verse.

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com

Fifth Monarchy Man said...

Osama,
You said:
I had read something about that the Arabic word translated as "to beat/hit" or IDRIB can also mean "to leave."
I respond:
This brings up two things
1) The difference between beat and leave is huge they are almost opposite terms. How can the Koran be the final Word from God and an infallible guide to life when it can be interpreted in such divergent and contradictory ways on such a basic topic as how to deal with a rebellious wife?
2) If leave is the correct meaning this is yet another example of the profound ethical differences between Christianity and Islam. Yahweh hates divorce and Allah considers it a proper way to deal with an unruly wife.
amazing

Peace

Osama Abdallah said...

ubiquitouserendipity said:

"i am a man for G_d, family, and country...

there are two (2) reasons that i believe a man should be separated from his life force:

1. the hurting of children (pedophiles should be shot in the public square by the closest relative of the victim). no second chances."

David Wood,

Here is a red-neck republican war mongering Christian who believes in having a close relative kill a guilty pedophile.


How about writing an article that exposes Christianity's followers David?

ubiquitouserendipity, a pedophile or anyone, if he raped through sexual intercourse, then his punishment is death according to Islam. But if he didn't, then flogging is the fair judgement. But anyway, I am glad that you and many other Jews and Christians on this board are exposing yourselves.

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com

Fifth Monarchy Man said...

Osama says:

If a woman tries to save her husband from a beating by grabbing the other man's private parts to lift him off her husband, THEN BOTH HER HANDS MUST GET CHOPPED OFF.

I respond:


1) This is just factually incorrect, the text does not say both hands.
2) This civil/ceremonial injunction was given only to specific nation living 3 thousand years ago in which being ceremonially clean was critically Important. It was vital because this was the nation that was to give rise to the messiah the savior or the world and the only mediator between a unclean world and a holy God. In this nation even the hint that God would wink at uncleanness would have had cataclysmic effects on the eventual salvation and reconciliation of the world.
3) No Christian has ever said that this law is to be followed by Gentiles living under the New Covenant. This point is made over and over again in our scripture I’m sure you know that so why do you find it necessary to mislead? Is it because you find what your schripture says indefensible?

Peace

minoria said...

Regarding DEUT 25:11-12,it is a strange law.But even the "cut off both hands" can be interpreted to not mean that literally.

There is the eye for an eye,tooth for a tooth passage in the Torah.However in another passage it is said that for X injuries one has to PAY an amount of money.Not that if you broke somebody's leg you had to get your leg broken.

DIFFERENT VIEWS

The SADUCEES interpreted eye for eye,tooth for tooth literally.But the PHARISEES,who were the majority and most popular,interpreted it as "the PRICE of an eye for the loss of an eye".Jesus in MATT 23:1-3 says to follow the PHARISEES.He was God,he knew what the correct idea was.

DEUT 25:11-12

There is something implicit not stated about the woman grabbing the man's private parts.I believe the text is not just referring to grabbing it and that's it,but permanently damaging it,destroying it.

So "both hands are to be cut off".Again,like in the eye for eye,tooth for tooth thing,is it meant to be literal?Since Jesus certainly didn't accept eye for eye as literal,but the PRICE of an eye,then in light of PRECEDENT I can say it means the PRICE of 2 hands ( a very high amount of money)for having done something very damaging to a man's private part.

minoria said...

Hello David:

If,as Ehteshaam said,you are ill,then recover soon.Right now I will send an email to Governor Crist of Florida BEFORE Sept 3rd,so that in her hearing that day she will not be sent back to Ohio.

She is safe FOR NOW.But we must keep up the pressure.Please everybody send another email to him telling him to let Rifqa stay with the Florida Department for Families and Children.Email address is:

Charlie.Crist@MyFlorida.com

And David and Nabeel,I have recommended answeringmuslims.com to several people.I sent them links to your blog.And will continue to do so.

Fernando said...

Hi Yahya Seymour...

1) I explainned at least two times thate I called you, in the first times off mine in this blogg, "miss" nott because I inttended to call you a women (which you're nott obviously...) butt juste because my english was, then, nott as good as today... I eben asked your forgiveness for thate... to sadd you camme ounce again withe thate poor event off mine insted off answering my demand I made ober and ober again (see bellow); butt iff you did is because you still fekt offended, so I aske you again my forgiveness: my english was a trapp for my thoughts... (p.s.: to sad you did nott eben spelled a worde to criticise "Gay Muslim" or "Muslim gay" when he beggan treatting, as I well remebrer, a girl...)

2) my behaviour is as childish as any perosnn who chooses to bee foonie in order to denounce others acctitude and behaviour: "ridendo castigat mores"... nothing more, nothing else... other likke several muslims arounde here choose to bee violentt and doing treats... to sad you choose to say I'm behaving badly...

3) no, I dis nott choose to psychanalise anyone, nor intended to attcak you (I eben was nott writting to you, rather making a reinforcement uppon others words)... bothe in this and in the therad off your debate withe Professor Wood, as I remember, I told thate this is nott onlie my opinion, rather the onne off a fellow psychiatrist who workes at the university where I teach (here is, withe his agreement, it's email: perrusj@gmail.com)... you cannot hide whate you are unless you habe a loot off practice, and above all you cannot prevent other to see whate you are: the viollence off yours iff perfectly expressed in your actitudes and wordes...

you also saide to watch youre firste debate with Professor Wood... coulde you please allow us to see itt? thankes...

finally... here's whate I asked ou several times:

«Narrated Abu Dhar: allah's apostle said, "Someone came to me from my Lord and gave me the news that if any of my followers dies worshipping none along with allah, he will enter Paradise." I asked, "Even if he committed illegal sexual intercourse and theft?" He replied, "Even if he committed illegal sexual intercourse and theft» (Bukhari 2.329)

p.s.: you can attack me wheneber and whereber you want...

Fernando said...

Osama The Great Abdallah... your coooment on Deuteronomy is why I say you're the muslim apologistt per antonomasy:

1) when speaking about islam, let's twist to the Bible;

2) when speakin aboutt the clerar teaching off islam, let's twist the meaning off the Bible text;

3) when speanking off the barbarity off islam, let's ignore thate Christians do nott libe according to the OT law, reather by the onne off the NT;

to sad The Osama The Great Abdallah, to sad...

shafsha said...

Deuteronomy 25:11-12 "And in case men struggle together (in a fight) with one another, and the wife of the one has come near to deliver her husband out of the striking one (to save her husband), and she has thrust out her hand and grabbed hold of his private (the other man's groin), she must then get BOTH HER HANDS CUT OFF, and the eyes of the men must feel no sorrow."

Osama, Thx for showing us your ignorance.

But God promise sons of Israel that the Messiah will come from their generations. So taking out someone ability to have generation, is a grest crime, cause first you stopped someone'e ability to have a offspring, plus you are going against God promise and will.

And personally I really doubt that if lady did that to you you will be happy to let her go !!!

So this law is to protect the community.

Would you show us what is wrong with this ?! and if u understood this point, I encourage you to remove this lie from your website, not because we are offended, but to give some crediability to your site that is ful of lies, and I hope you will try to be sincere and honset for one time, instead of your deception ( as we already seen i the story of the Kabba)

** BTW are you doing now this pagan rotuals of fasting ramadan ?!! would you tell us why on earth do muslim fast ramadan other than they are following pagan practices ?!

Fernando said...

So... The Osama The Great Abdallah...

I know you wont takke this annother STUPID argument from your site (since you did nott donne itt in any off the previous times all your arguments were many times reffuted aroiunde here), butt I'll explain itt to you...

the law off levirate is nott apliede anymore to Christians.. Jesus eben criticized thate practice and the beleibes inherent to itt... this is the context off your quote off Dt. 25,11f... this is the context off these verses (see the previous ones: Dt. 25,5-10)... it's na disputte between a woman thate had lost her first women and now is involved in a disputte between two brothers: one thate is her new husband (teh onne tahte assumed the responsability to takke care off her) and another onne thate demande that responsability to him... butt since the practicec thate originated the conflict does nott stand anymore between the followers off Jesus, thate commandement do nott stand anymore...

Osama: do you whate another try on diverting the attentions? Please do so...

Fernando said...

Hi Muslim Phantom...

so... now I'm a spectral figure... hummm that means I'm a gost, maybe eben a jinn... how beautifull is to take these kind off kind wordes (in islam's standars) from muslims like you... keep them cumming...

Locrian said...

Part:1

I don't post often as I have very little time for Muslim ignorance. And yes I said ignorance. I'm not to call my brother a fool without good reason, but Muslims are not my brothers, so lets get that clear right now. Yahya asks if this is really "Christian" attitude, and though Christ never dealt with subject as clearly as Muslims would like. We do see that Christ minced no words when it came to the Pharisees and false teachers. We also know that that in 1Kin 18:27 that Elijah openly mocked the worshipers of Baal as well as Baal himself, so taking lead from that, it's perfectly fine to mock that which mocks the true God and Saviour: Islam and Muslims. This is a spiritual war for your souls, and to be honest, I wish some Christians would quit painting the Earthly Jesus as some pushover. The Word wasn't to be played with before the few 33 years on this earth, and isn't to be toyed with now.

With that said, let us address this idiot Abdullah that has issued a challenge, already proclaiming victory for his lord of this world Shaytan.


He said: "Here is a verse from the Bible, from among many in the link below, that will expose some of the Jews' and Christians' nuisance and hypocrisy on this board:"

Reply: Bring it on



He said: "NOTE: THE GLORIOUS QURAN, to them, IS FALSE FOR ALLOWING WIFE BEATING AFTER THE 3RD WARNING!"

Reply: A tired and baseless claim often spewed by Muslims, you'll never see them translate this correctly. The verse clearly states: الرِّجَالُ قَوَّامُونَ عَلَى النِّسَاء بِمَا فَضَّلَ اللّهُ بَعْضَهُمْ عَلَى بَعْضٍ وَبِمَا أَنفَقُواْ مِنْ أَمْوَالِهِمْ فَالصَّالِحَاتُ قَانِتَاتٌ حَافِظَاتٌ لِّلْغَيْبِ بِمَا حَفِظَ اللّهُ وَاللاَّتِي تَخَافُونَ نُشُوزَهُنَّ فَعِظُوهُنَّ وَاهْجُرُوهُنَّ فِي الْمَضَاجِعِ وَاضْرِبُوهُنَّ فَإِنْ أَطَعْنَكُمْ فَلاَ تَبْغُواْ عَلَيْهِنَّ سَبِيلاً إِنَّ اللّهَ كَانَ عَلِيًّا كَبِيرً

What does "wa" or "و" mean? Where is the Arabic word for then or next? Where is any mention of any "warnings"? I think it's obvious we have a man here that feels no shame in adding to his text to say what he'd like them to say.

The Quran commands Muslims to go to the scholars for the interpretations of the Quran, and since we obviously can't trust a man that adds his own words to his supposed holy works, I would like any of you Muslims out there besides Osamma (since it's obvious he lies with impunity) to show me where Ibn Abbas or Al Jalalayn, or some real scholar of Islam shows this system of warnings. Rubbish. Absolute rubbish.

Locrian said...

Part:2

He said: "Ok, very good. Let us look at the Bible then, which Christianity is built on, because certainly, if the Bible is false, then Christianity is false:"

Reply: Great. I'm glad you feel this way. Because here we have established at least some criteria from which to judge both works; I think This only fair. If we're to hold the Old and New Testament to this, then the Quran follows suit as well.



He Quotes: "Deuteronomy 25:11-12 "And in case men struggle together (in a fight) with one another, and the wife of the one has come near to deliver her husband out of the striking one (to save her husband), and she has thrust out her hand and grabbed hold of his private (the other man's groin), she must then get BOTH HER HANDS CUT OFF, and the eyes of the men must feel no sorrow."

He says: "If a woman tries to save her husband from a beating by grabbing the other man's private parts to lift him off her husband, THEN BOTH HER HANDS MUST GET CHOPPED OFF."

Reply: I guess first off I have to say: "So what?" You have to love the stupidity of Muslims to bring up the Laws of Moses that no Christian has ever been expected to follow. They just don't seem to get it. The whole of Moses' books was to the house of Israel, and was a covenant that was temporary (Jer. 31:31-34, New covenant started John 19:30 and last eternally) until God's plan of a Messiah was fulfilled. Does a law that both Christians and Jews (despite their rejection of Christ) have in their books justify the modern day laws of Muslims? Here we have a law dealing with the marriage section of Moses laws, that imposed a stiff penalty for women that would stop the lineage of that man by possibly destroying his ability to have children. God looks heavily on sins in the Old Testament, and the morality of a woman that would defile herself with touching another mans privates with the intention killing his descendants was/is abdominal in the eyes of the Lord. But, he had to. This is what it took to be a just and Holy being. Does this compare to a Muslim man simply "fearing disobedience"? Well of course not. Kick and scream all they like about the Old Testament, we aren't bound by the dietary, ceremonial, and judicial laws that Moses gave to a rebellious band of stiff necked, wont-mind people.



He said: "Now I'd like to see them answer this one. If they don't, then they have proven that they are one of the following:

1- Ignorant of how the Bible views women, which Islam is far better than it.

Reply: It's not us that are ignorant. We're easily able to discern between the first and last covenants. And most normal people will have a problem equating destroying a man's ability to "procreate" with "fearing disobedience". Put it this way: If today I go out to the mall and a woman kicks me in the nads does she go to jail? By the same token: Who goes to jail if I think my wife is fooling around and I beat her? Now the laws have changed much to the women favor from the old times, but the laws today still remain just. Whoever the aggressor is goes to jail.

Locrian said...

Part:3

He said: "2- Hypocrites if they knew about it and continued to bash Islam anyway on a law that is quite realistic and normal.
Let's see how false Islam is, to them, after they comment on this verse.
Osama Abdallah"

Reply: I could still bash this Islamic law even if I was writing this in 20ad. I have no problem with the harshness of God's Laws and his justice in the Old Testament. God laid it out: If you want to be holy enough to be in my presence in the final days this is what you have to do. And if you can't do this (and he knew we couldn't abide by every law throughout our whole lives), you'll have to believe that I will send you a Saviour and in My Word.

Our problem with Islam lies solely in the fact "It is finished". There is no other revelation by a true God that instructs us that to this very day " ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them and, refuse to share their beds, and scourge them" as well as there is no law telling us that if a woman today hurts a man in that foul way that she should have her hands chopped off.

PS to Staff: I have no idea why you guys allow this idiot to post links back to his own site. Anyone familiar with the site knows he rarely, if ever, references his articles to anything but sources within his own site. The more links the search engine bots sees for a site, the higher ranking that site becomes. This is why Osamma rarely links outside his site, but often post his site links else where. I realize you may do this for others in the interest of fairness, but come on: We're talking about Osamma Abdulah here.

Krishnaraj said...

Isaiah 29:12 And the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I am not learned.


Nabeel your previous debate, you spoke about the revelation. The Bible spoke about the revelation to muhammad much earlier than 10 centuries.

Krishnaraj said...

Rival to the Bible

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/7651105.stm

Fernando said...

And here's some pictorial example off the core muslim respectt to women:

How respectefull is islam to women: an historical accountt...

justte remember muhammad is THE example to follow bie all muslims eben now... this is bery sad... butt I habe witnessed several times in my liffe whate Abdallah saide... one time one woman in the local mosque I attended (one off the more respectefull one in thate country) as betten by several men untill she became bleeding only because the snized upon her husband... there were 10 men beatting her whille several other (includding me...) were shoitting "allahu Akbar"... her cryies were sillenced by these shoutting... she shoulde habe benn taken to the local hospital butt she was leftt there, near the wome's door off the mosque, so other women shoulde see her...

butt one off the most disguisting thingue I eber heard in thate same mosque (and in a nother one a month latter...) was the Iman teaching thate it was nott only OK, butt rather "saintly" to urinite inside a womens body after realising the semen in there... how "saintly" can sucha thing be? whate kind off believbes can bee on the source off such practice?

I eben cry, nowadays, for whate my two sisters suffer on the hand off theire muslims husbands... one off them went, recently, to live in Malasia: she had the hoppe she coulde finde a bigger support from the local muslim community there; butt she soon realized thate whate women were experiencing there was eben worst than whate she was suffering... just in the first month, 12 married women went to the hospittal due to habbe been beeten by theire husbands... and insted off seeing muslims truing to educatte people likke Osama Abdallah, they rather point out the words off other who denounce this un-human threatment... that's really sad...

islam is, for bery persons, a cult of death, hatred and barbarism: let's all hoppe that it will erode as well from the exterior (withe the force off pointing these relitties in sites likke this) as from within withe the force off all these muslim despised women all arounde the world...

Fernando said...

Justte some hadiths thate express whate muhhamad thought off women:

Bukhari Book 11, Hadith 2045:

«Narrated Ma'qil ibn Yasar: A man came to muhammad and said: I have found a woman of rank and beauty, but she does not give birth to children. Should I marry her? He said: No. He came again to him, but he prohibited him. He came to him third time, and muhammad said: Marry women who are loving and very prolific, for I shall outnumber the peoples by you»... as I saide: women are considered machinnes to bear children... she mustte be a loving one justte to admitte this reallity...

Bukhari Book 12, Hadith 2170:

«Narrated AbuHurayrah: muhammad said: Anyone who incites a woman against her husband or a slave against his master is not one of us»... a women is to her husband, as a slave to his owner...

that's why I fear for the saffe off all muslim women... bie the way: we do nott see many arounde here, do we?

Fernando said...

Heppp... Yahya Snow seems bery ethical person aroude here, butt in an antient thread start saying tahte Christians corrupted the message off Jesus (unitarism) in order to defende the Trinity tahte, according to him, is a pagan reallitty...

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=6590312557191237519&postID=4539133506858704513

how many times will we see this? this is: how manu times will a muslim

say that the Trinity is pagan?;

say that the Trinity is a form off polytheísm?;

say that the Jesus' teachings were currupted?;

say that he is an ethical person and behave in the oppositte sense on the backs?;

we alrerady habe the answer, don't we? whille he (against all logical, historical and theological facts) continues to beliebes in the statements made in the qur'an...

this just saddens me... I grew upp as a muslim hearing thate ALL Chrsitians were canibals since Jesus gabe His body to bee eaten; thate Christians beliebed women to bee the devil incarnated; thate Christians were the cause off all evils thate existed in the worls; thate the Gospels were re-written in the 8th century to erase all ebidences for the comming off muhammad; thate men went to the moon only to deny the words off muhhamad taht the moon was a miror made off glass; and so on...

glad I'm no more following whate some people consider to bee the most barbaric and full off lies religion in the world...

shafsha said...

Brother fernando quoted hadiths thate express whate muhhamad thought off women.

Well probably u have quoted the most clean ones, there ones that clearly said that women are like dogs and donkeys, another said women are like satan / devil !! plus that the are less inteligent and less religious !!! and most of the hell inhabitants are women !!!

Fernando said...

Krishnaraj...

where is any refference in the Bible thate tehre was a refference to any revelation to muhammad? coulde you present a single evidence for this claime off yours?

In Is. 29,12, God is saying thate the visions he gaves to some prophets and seers are like a closed physical book given to a person thate can read (Is. 29,11) or an phusical open book given to someone who can't read: they are nott hable to undestand whate they contein... that's whate was happening: God was speaking to them in visions (HE was nott giving them some sort off book to bee read...) butt they were nott being hable to understand those visions... glad Isaih was hable to do so and saide whate God wanted to bee understod...

so: Krishnaraj, where is any refference in the Bible thate tehre was a refference to any revelation to muhammad? coulde you present a single evidence for this claime off yours?

Zen said...

Krishnara -
Thank you for posting that BBC article. I'm interested to see what new scholarship will come out of this find.

IslamSINS said...

I didn't bother reading another Osama lunatic screed. I can actually opine without wasting time on his ignorance because everything I needed to know about Osama I learned within 15 minutes of reading his first Islamic "defense".

I find it curious that, 600 years before Muhammad's cult, walked our Lord, Jesus Christ. Was 1st century Israel more civilized than 7th century Arabia? Evidently! We find no teachings of Christ about "whipping women" into submission; hiding them under a gunnysack to keep the men from being driven into a sexual frenzy; no disciple taught that women are to be ridden like a cow or a camel, or that they nullify a prayer if they walk in front of someone, and a host of demeaning opinions about women that reduce them to half-brained dogs and donkeys. Once Khadijah died, Muhammad was able to unleash his misogyny without restraint, and the Muslimahs have been suffering ever since.

What a wretched cult. It destroys Muslims from the cradle and throughout eternity. It evokes every emotion in me but tolerance. That will never be a question in my mind. Mumammad is the destroyer of souls and that identifies his true "god" as Satan.

Semper Paratus said...

Osama,

Some scholars interpret "cut off both her hands" to mean "leave." ;)

The Fat Man said...

Osama Abdullah,
First I find it interesting that you take offense with Sepher Shalom saying he thinks Child Molesters and Child Killers should be put to death. But you dont take offense with Mohamed doing what he did to 9 year old Aisha. I guess in islam its ok for Pedaphiles as long as they mary their victims.

Now for my response on your attack on God's word.

Rashi Comentary.

If… men… are fighting together: they will eventually come to blows, as it is said:“[to rescue her husband] from his assailant.” [The moral here is:] Peace cannot result from strife. — [Sifrei 25:160]

You shall cut off her hand: [This verse is not to be understood literally, but rather, it means:] She must pay monetary damages to recompense the victim for the embarrassment he suffered [through her action. The amount she must pay is calculated by the court,] all according to the [social status] of the culprit and the victim (see B.K. 83b). But perhaps [it means that we must actually cut off] her very hand? [The answer is born out from a transmission handed down to our Rabbis, as follows:] Here, it says לֹא תָחוֹס,“do not have pity,” and later, in the case of conspiring witnesses (Deut. 19:21), the same expression, לֹא תָחוֹס, is used. [And our Rabbis taught that these verses have a contextual connection:] Just as there, in the case of the conspiring witnesses, [the literal expressions in the verse refer to] monetary compensation (see Rashi on that verse), so too, here, [the expression “You must cut off her hand” refers to] monetary compensation. — [Sifrei 25:161]

So there you have it Abdullah, I can see now why you have a problem with these verses.
1. Becasue Peace can not come through Strife. Which the opposite of what Musism believe.
2. The Woman is to be fined for the embarresment she has casued the victim, and not be beatin or have her hand cut off.

Sepher Shalom said...

Krishnaraj said: "Isaiah 29:12 And the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I am not learned.


Nabeel your previous debate, you spoke about the revelation. The Bible spoke about the revelation to muhammad much earlier than 10 centuries."


Krishnaraj, you are displaying the utter desperation of Muslims to find Muhammad somewhere in the Bible, but he is not there anywhere. Let's look at the context of Isaiah 29:12:

In 29 verses 1 & 2 we find the context of who is being spoken too, "Woe to you, Ariel, Ariel, the city where David settled! Add year to year and let your cycle of festivals go on. 2 Yet I will besiege Ariel; she will mourn and lament, she will be to me like an altar hearth."

The person being spoken of in verse 12 must be an inhabitant of the City Of David (Jerusalem), and it is someone that keeps the "festivals" of Jerusalem. Only an Israelite keeps the feasts and festivals in Jerusalem. Muhammad was not an inhabitant of Jerusalem, and Muhammad was not an Israelite. Now let's look at the verse before, and verse after what you quoted:

"11 For you [*you refers to the Israelite inhabitants of Jerusalem*] this whole vision is nothing but words sealed in a scroll. And if you give the scroll to someone who can read, and say to him, “Read this, please,” he will answer, “I can’t; it is sealed.” 12 Or if you give the scroll to someone who cannot read, and say, “Read this, please,” he will answer, “I don’t know how to read.” 13 The Lord says: “These people come near to me with their mouth and honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. Their worship of me is made up only of rules taught by men."

So, verse 11 shows us the people being spoken to are the inhabitants of Jerusalem [refer back to verses 1 & 2], and verse 11 shows the scroll will also be offered to someone that can read, and won't be able to read it because the scroll is sealed. Verse 13 shows us the people spoken to honor G-d with their lips but their hearts are far from Him, and they follow nothing but the traditions of men.

If you want to apply verse 13 to Muhammad and the Muslims and admit your hearts are far from G-d while you only honor him with your lips, and that you follow traditions made up by men, please by all means feel free to say that.

The fact is, verse 12 is not about Muhammad, and the Muslims are still desperate to validate their false prophet and false Quran. Also, what does any of this have to do with the Quranic injunction to beat your wife? This looks to me like the desperate attempt of a Muslim to sidetrack the dialogue away from the heinous command of Surah 4:34.

The Fat Man said...

Krishnaraj said...
First your link did not work. Try reposting it again.

Second you just demonstrated a classic muslim attack on the bible. Quoting a single verse out of a entire book of the bible, ignoring the context of that verse. So lets look at the context.

The chapter opens with a WOE, a Woe on Areil the city were David Encamped. This is the Temple In Jerselum. The verse also says the Festivals will be cut off, meaning the sacrafices perfomred in those festivals will be rejected.

The next veres deals with Jerselem will be surrunded with Death like the Temple is surrunded with dead animals of the sacrafice.

The verses continue speaking about the Calamity that is to happen and then we reach Verse 11. Which says that all the visions will be sealed up, even if it is written down and given to someone who can read he will not be able to read\Understand it becasue it is sealed.

Then we have verse 12 the verse you have ripped from its context. If the book is opened and then given to someone who can not read or understand the language it is written in, he still will not be able to understand it becasue he can not read or understand the language the book is written in.

Verse 13 talks about why this is happening. Becasue the people worship God with there lips, and they fear god as a comandment from men, and not out of love for the LORD.

Verse 14 Brings it all home and says that becasue of this God will continue to obscure his visions, and that Wisdom of wise men shall be lost and understand of his Genious shall be hidden.

See what happens when you put a verse into its propper place and propper context.

Questions for you. Are you saying that Mohamed did not understand the meaning of the quran when it was revealed to him? Are you saying that Mohamed could not understand Arabic, are you saying that the quran casues men to be stupid, and that the quran is a obscure and not understandable?

Fifth Monarchy Man said...

Zen say's,

Thank you for posting that BBC article. I'm interested to see what new scholarship will come out of this find.

I say

No need to wait you can explore it in detail here

http://www.codexsinaiticus.org/en/

It is a wonderful testimony to the fact that the Bible we read today is reliable and preserved.You can easly compare any verse to the Bible you have today.

This amazing text was hand written long before Mohammad's time.

Anyone Christian or Muslim can look for themselves to see what was in the Torah and gospel that Mohamed commanded us to go to to verify the claims of his book.


peace

Semper Paratus said...

Brothers and Sisters,

If you would, please excuse Osama, he has to get busy at the Miracle Faketory because if he doesn't production will start dropping off and the demand by some gullible Muslims for more miracle claims will not be met. As can be seen from the link above, another one of his products recently had to be recalled and so it is critical at this time for him to get busy trying to get the bugs worked out (if he can) and get the ball rolling again.

Your attention to this matter is appreciated. :p

minoria said...

Hello Fifth Monarchy Man:

You are right,the text does not say "both hands".I did not check the text but accepted it as given by Osama.I hope he corrects it if it is in his website.That came as a surprise.It really did.

minoria said...

Hello Fernando:

Thank you for sharing us your experience of growing up as a Muslim and the teachings you received.

Each case is different and there are Muslims who received better teachings and others who got worse teachings.

ARGUMENTS USED BY TERRORISTS TO RECRUT YOUNG MEN

If you haven't done yet,read the book JOURNEY INTO THE MIND OF AN ISLAMIC TERRORIST by MARK GABRIEL.

He is an Egyptian,like MAGDI ALLAM.He was a professor at Al-Azhar University.He lost faith in Islam while there.For that he was thrown out and tortured by the police.They thought he was a secret convert to Christianity...but he wasn't.Of course he denied it.

HIS BEST FRIEND BECAME A TERRORIST

Then Mark Gabriel was still a Muslim but against the Islamic terrorists.That doesn't mean he was against Shariah law or cared about human rights for the Christians of Egypt.Later his friend was captured and tortured and left terrorism.He went to Saudi Arabia where he became a Christian and was later executed.

Mark Gabriel was almost an atheist for one year after leaving Islam.Then he became a Christian.His book is the only one that gives the ARGUMENTS that convince young men to become Islamic terrorists.

Again,Mark Gabriel,when he was a Muslim,was NOT convinced by their arguments.So his book is not really if the terrorists have the right interpretation.It is about WHAT arguments are used to convince many.

nma said...

Yahya Snow,

You said...
NMA

That is not very adult in my view, you (correct me if I am wrong) want to attack Abdallah because he attacks Christians and Christianity?

Why is it not very adult to call someone a habitual and compulsive liar if that someone lie habitually and compulsively? Osama's postings and website are full of habitual and compulsive lies. Even Jesus called the hypocrites "serpents and brood of vipers!"

Krishnaraj said...

Changes in the Bible....

http://www.codexsinaiticus.org/en/codex/significance.aspx

Krishnaraj said...

As it survives today, Codex Sinaiticus comprises just over 400 large leaves of prepared animal skin, each of which measures 380mm high by 345mm wide. On these parchment leaves is written around half of the Old Testament and Apocrypha (the Septuagint), the whole of the New Testament, and two early Christian texts not found in modern Bibles. Most of the first part of the manuscript (containing most of the so-called historical books, from Genesis to 1 Chronicles) is now missing and presumed to be lost.

The Septuagint includes books which many Protestant Christian denominations place in the Apocrypha. Those present in the surviving part of the Septuagint in Codex Sinaiticus are 2 Esdras, Tobit, Judith, 1 & 4 Maccabees, Wisdom and Sirach.



http://www.codexsinaiticus.org/en/codex/content.aspx

Krishnaraj said...

In facts there are the Apocrypha too and some 2 more books of the new testament.

There are not in the todays Bible...

Why is David wood and Nabeel very silent. Wake up

The Fat Man said...

Semper Paratus I wish I would of read your response to Krishnaraj before I started typing mine. I could of just said "What Semper Said" and been done with it :)

The Fat Man said...

Krishnaraj said...
Changes in the Bible....

I see we have another muslim link poster. Krishanaraj what Changes can you point them out to us instead of just posting a link?

minoria said...

From what I know the Sinaiticus has at least one book not accepted but that is no problem since the Christian position is that God guided the church in determining the right books.And so that extra book or extra 2 books found in Sinaiticus(and I think it is not in the other one,the Vaticanus)is only in the case of that one bible.

CONSPIRACY

Perhaps one might AGAIN think in terms of CONSPIRACY.I gave a long,detailed argument how based on the presence of embarassing material in the gospels,the idea of a conspiracy to ADD FAVORABLE INTERPOLATIONS does not hold.

WHY?

Because the embarassing parts go 100% against the PROPAGANDA ARGUMENT(people invented favorable things(Jesus prophesizing his death-resurrection in 3 days,destruction of Temple and Jerusalem,miracles).If you are going to invent for propaganda,WHY not take out counter-propaganda passages?

I overlooked to add the following embarassing parts(work in progress):

1.Jesus says on the cross:"My God,my God,why have you abandoned me?"in MARK 15:34/MATT 27:46

2.Disciples fled when Jesus was arrested:MARK 14:50/MATT 26:56

3.Jesus says:"Why do you call me good?" in MARK 10:18/LUKE 18:19.

ANOTHER DETAIL AGAINST THE CONSPIRACY THEORY

Two of the 4 gospels(half of the works)are attributed to people who NEVER KNEW Jesus:MARK and LUKE.

If there was a conspiracy then WHY attribute 2 gospels to them,there was no propaganda value.It would have been better to attribute them to PETER,JAMES,MARY MAGDALENE,THOMAS,or even PAUL.

LATEST BOOK BY MARK GABRIEL

It looks good.It looks like it is in the form of a coffee conversation between Mark Gabriel and Mohammed himself,I suppose in a cafe.

It's COFFEE WITH THE PROPHET:A 21st Century Encounter with the Prophet of Islam.There one gets to know the good and the bad about Mohammed as told by Mohammed himself.

It is similar to MUHAMMAD MEETS PAUL by MICHAEL LICONA,an imaginary debate by them.

nma said...

Hi The Fat Man,

You said: Second you just demonstrated a classic muslim attack on the bible. Quoting a single verse out of a entire book of the bible, ignoring the context of that verse. So lets look at the context.

All those Islamic websites excel at one thing, that is, pulling the wool over the readers' eyes.

Semper Paratus said...

Okay, for some reason the link didn't work. Try here. If that doesn't work, then go here:

http://answering-islam.org/authors/katz/rebuttals/ac/water_life.html

Ehteshaam Gulam said...

I heard David Wood is in critical condition and needs surgery. Hope you get better David-- and hope the surgery goes well.

Thanks,
Ehteshaam Gulam
http://www.answering-christian-claims.com

Fifth Monarchy Man said...

Hey Krishnaraj

Do you have a point of some kind?
Have you checked out the text for yourself and compared it to a modern Bible?

It is the same Bible we have today. There are no variants that affect any doctrine of Christianity. If you disagree please present your evidence. The text is there for all to see.


The Apocrypha are fine orthodox books that are valuable for learning context of the OT scriptures and background of the New Testament and Barnabas and Hermes are some of my favorite writings. You can learn a lot about what the earliest Christians believed from them and you won’t find any support for the Muslim Jesus.

It’s important to remember that Just because you find a book included with scripture it doesn’t not mean that the book was ever considered scripture. My favorite systematic theology and a copy of Pilgrim’s progress as well as the 1644 lbcf are almost always with my Bible but I don’t consider them scripture.

Peace

David Wood said...

Ehteshaam said: "I heard David Wood is in critical condition and needs surgery."

Actually, I'm sitting in my living room watching Seinfeld. (It's interesting how quickly rumors spread!)

I did go to the doctor about some pain in my right side. I'll need surgery sometime in the next month or so because of some gall bladder stones, but they sent me home because it's not an emergency.

Sepher Shalom said...

Osama said: "If Bethsheba was my sister, then believe me, all of her brothers, including myself would skin her alive along with her boyfriend."

So, Osama is in favor of "honor killings". Interesting.

I am wondering Osama, since Rifqa Bary is an apostate, would you agree with her parents conducting an "honor killing" on her?; or are you only in favor of "honor killings" when the issue is sexual in nature?

Fernando said...

Doctor Wood: glad tos ee thate you are OK... may God help you...

Fernando said...

Krishnaraj said: «Why is David wood and Nabeel very silent. Wake up»... dear Krishnaraj: your posts and wordes do nott need any more comments... whate the BBC wrote is utter ignorance aboutte whate is understood bie Christians as "revelation", "inspiration", "inerration", "preservation"... all off these notions are TOTALLY diferent from those in islam which are, indeed, much more easy to grasp to those persones who wrotte articles like these with utter ignorance... none off any off your points consist in a simple difficulty to Christianity, no matter what Bart Ehrmans sais... not a single one off them... butt I'm bery glad to see thate you're paing attention to these facts: eben these manuscripts were not destroied and they are cherished and studies and made public... on the other hand Uthman made the destruction we all know, two off the manuscrips off the qur'an thate had discrepeancies and here in England were made to desapear some years ago, and so one...

Fernando said...

Dear Zen... in your small bio you say: «Religion is not the path to salvation. Christ is. Hence, I'm not a follower of religion; I'm a follower of Christ»...

coulde you, please, say whate you understand by "religion"? Thankes...

Ehteshaam Gulam said...

Seinfeld sucks-- Friends is where its at.

Zen said...

Fernando said:
Dear Zen... in your small bio you say: «Religion is not the path to salvation. Christ is. Hence, I'm not a follower of religion; I'm a follower of Christ»...

coulde you, please, say whate you understand by "religion"? Thankes...


Hi, Fernando. I prefer to answer you in my own space. I don't want to hijack the current topic. :D Thanks for asking.

Zen said...

minora -
I just want to thank you for pointing out Mark Gabriel and Michael Licona. I've never heard of them before and now I have, thanks to you!

Krishnaraj said...

What do you people mean.

Is it not important that the Bible be Preserved and Kept as God wanted it to be.

How can the Bible be true when people have altered it as per their needs

Zen said...

Fifth Monarchy Dude -
Thank you for the link also. I find the BBC article biased, almost derisive. However, I think it also highlights the fact that despite all the scrutiny the Bible has been through for hundreds of years, it still continues to speak to Christians and others alike.

Krishnaraj and others, we, Christians, don't revere the Bible in the way that you revere the Holy Qur'an. God's message is in and comes through the Bible, but, ultimately, it resides in the heart. That's the reason why you don't see Christians leave Christianity in droves when new texts are brought forward for scrutiny.
---

Fernando -
On your personal account: I could've sworn we didn't grow up in the same country, but such is the north and south reality of our beloved country. I pray you will find a way to help your female relatives out of their horrible circumstances.
---

OumAmir said...

David-

Gall stones! Ugh, you have my complete and total empathy. I needed emergency surgery last year for that very reason as gallstone very nearly killed me.

If you are getting your gallbladder completely removed, make sure the doctors give you a perscription for heartburn meds.

Take care, and if you feel like you need immediate care, don't let the doctors tell you otherwise.

The Fat Man said...

Krishnaraj said...
"Is it not important that the Bible be Preserved and Kept as God wanted it to be.

First Krishnaraj, God did preserve his word and kept it the way he wanted it to be. He did this by the rapid production, copying and transmission of the texts. Speaking of just the New Testament, the Texts were copied and transmitted by multiple people, in multiple areas, separated by hundreds if not thousands of miles. He preserved it by making sure there was never one person or one group of people at any time in history that had control of the text. Making it impossible to corrupt.

Something you as a Muslim can not claim about your Quran. Your text the Quran was controlled by one person “Uthman” and one group of people copied in one place. The evidence that Uthman’s revision changed the Text of your Quran is overwhelming. Missing and forgotten surahas etc…

Now for your next accusation.
“How can the Bible be true when people have altered it as per their needs"

First you must demonstrate who exactly changed what and for what needs? Just posting biased articles on the internet is not good enough. Examine the text, tell us what was changed, who changed it and for what reason. Demonstrate to us that these alleged changes corrupted the meaning of the New Testament. Show us for instance any text that says Jesus was not crucified and did not die on the cross. Until you can do that there is no need to respond to your empty accusation.

ubiquitouserendipity said...

Osama Abdallah said...
ubiquitouserendipity said:

"i am a man for G_d, family, and country...

there are two (2) reasons that i believe a man should be separated from his life force:

1. the hurting of children (pedophiles should be shot in the public square by the closest relative of the victim). no second chances."

David Wood,

Here is a red-neck republican war mongering Christian who believes in having a close relative kill a guilty pedophile.

How about writing an article that exposes Christianity's followers David?

ubiquitouserendipity says:
osama has the ball, he shoots,,, CLUNK! You’d have been closer had you called me a “wet-backed libertarian peace-nik.” my paternal grand-parents came from mexico in ’26. my father was born in the lettuce fields around visalia, ca. so i’m a 2nd generation american of mexican heritage,,, hardly a red-neck. my mom was one of the first caucasian members of the naacp in stockton, ca in the ‘50’s. my family was very active in democratic politics in our community. i worked on rfk’s campaign,,, and my mom talked to him on the phone a couple of hours before his assassination. i’ve been a social liberal most of my adult life, and have voted democrat most of my adult life. though never again after that smarmy appeaser who is in the white house. my eldest sis is married to a filipino (my two beautiful nieces are filipino/mex, cuac-american), my youngest sister is socially and culturally black African. her child (another beautiful niece)and grandchildren are of African descent. i’m an old hippy. i protested in the streets of northern california, for field workers rights, with cesar chavez. I also enlisted in the army 8-25-71, the day after my 21st birthday (yes, today is my bd, i’m 59, thank you). Upon my enlistment I took an oath to defend my country and constitution against enemies both foreign and domestic. Do you know anything at all about that oath of allegiance and defence? Probably not, so here: the oath is not abrogated upon discharge from the military. I am still bound by that oath to defend and protect my homeland.

As for the pedophile killing: as a child victim of sexual abuse, as a man who has worked diligently to heal from the psychic trauma, I’ve worked with victims male and female, avocationally, and professionally. a man I befriended 20 years ago, became my “best” friend. I was his best man, and he named his son after me (he told me not to honor me, but to honor his son). He was an adolescent mental health case manager in miles city, and was fooling with his clients. Though he didn’t sexually violate me or any of my children, I have struggled hard to forgive him, because he violated our friendship. I do not believe he deserves a second chance. So yes, I would that the legal statutes demanded that pedophiles be euthanized. I think that your problem with this is not my particular stance per se, but the fact that your mohammed would be wearing a lead hole in his forehead for his sexual predilections for the profane (having sex with children), not to mention the bizarre (didn‘t he get off on the aroma of menses?).

by the by pumpkin,,, david wood is not responsible for the personal life experiences or beliefs of other Christians. we do agree on the fundamentals of the faith. but, seeing as how you are mentally lock-stepped by your god mohammed, you wouldn’t understand folks having differing opinions on social, cultural, and legal matters, based upon their life experiences.

continued~

ubiquitouserendipity said...

~continuing

and then… Osama Abdallah said...

ubiquitouserendipity, a pedophile or anyone, if he raped through sexual intercourse, then his punishment is death according to Islam. But if he didn't, then flogging is the fair judgement. But anyway, I am glad that you and many other Jews and Christians on this board are exposing yourselves.

Osama Abdallah

ubiquitouserendipity says:
please osama,,, these good folks have been shooting down your falsehoods about your god mohammed and his barbaric teachings since you showed up here. anything you say has the ring of a LIE. Rape is essentially legalized in your failed belief set. That’s why you spend so much time foraging around in the garbage looking for an excuse for what you believe.

in the past two weeks i’ve been hiking in the beartooth mountains, cavorting on the yellowstone and east rosebud rivers (there’s more history on the yellowstone river than there is in 1400 years of you guys running around killing ‘cuz your god hates). and last week i had my beautiful grand-daughter cecelia for 5 days so that mom and dad could have some time alone. so i'm in a good mood. i read one of your posts a couple of weeks ago in which you stated that i was "about to explode," or some such ad hominemish drivel. if i explode dude, it won't be from a bomb belt, it will be out of gratitude and an overwhelming of love.

osama, what does Alif, Lam, Mim mean? it should be perfectly clear in arabic. help a fella’ out, and tell me what this “glorious” verse means, will ya’?

a thought osama: allah is not G_d. allah is a contingent being. allah cannot love unless he is loved. G_d so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son… (previous to my belief,,, and yours should you graciously be saved) so, since allah is dependent upon the actions of man to express himself, allah is obviously not G_d. Baruch Hashem Adonai. Yehoshua ha Meshiach.

your ball

May the G_d of eternity, the everlasting Father, by His Holy Spirit, reveal His Self to you in the Person of Jesus Christ, amen

Peace, in His love, papajoe

Fifth Monarchy Man said...

Krishnaraj said...
"Is it not important that the Bible be Preserved and Kept as God wanted it to be.

I say:

look for your self

The gospel of John 1:1-18 from Codex Sinaiticus


:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 He was in the beginning with God.
3 All things came into being through him, and without him came into being not one thing that is in being.
4 In him is life, and the life was the light of men.
5 And the light shines in darkness, and the darkness comprehended it not.
6 There came a man, sent from God; his name was John:
7 this man came for a testimony, that he might testify of the light, that all through him might believe.
8 He was not the light, but came that he might testify of the light.
9 That was the true light, which, coming into the world, gives light to every man.
10 He was in the world, and the world came into being through him, and the world knew him not.
11 He came to his own country, and his own people received him not.
12 But as many as received him, to them gave he the right to become children of God, to those that believe on his name,
13 who were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of a man, but of God.
14 And the Word became flesh, and tabernacled among us, and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the Only Begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.
15 John testified of him and cried, saying: This was he of whom I said: He that comes after me has been advanced before me, because he was before me.
16 For of his fullness have we all received, and grace for grace;
17 for the law was given through Moses, the grace and the truth came through Jesus Christ.
18 No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has made him known.

looks to me like God has preserved his word and he did not need to have a goverment body burn books inorder to do it.

peace

Alex Albert said...

Hey...

There was a muslim booth put up in Lehigh University which again had the same verse of 5:32 from the quran.

I know it has become commonplace here but if anyone wants a copy...I can scan it across....

Royal Son said...

Just a little observation. It seems that the conditional love a man shows to his wife in Islam matches the conditional love Allah shows to those who submit to him.

On the contrary, God's perfect unconditional love is demonstrated in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

God bless you all.

ashraf said...

Ramadan Kareem to Shiakh Osama & Yahya.

brother krishnaraj, these born agains will never answer your questions infact no one can give acceptable or reasonable explanations to your questions. because there are so many funny and ruthless versus and stories available in their holy book. Osama just mentioned only one verse form their holy book and see here,each born again is giving different interpretation.

Against women rights we can show plenty of versus from holy bible but we can't get any meaningful answers from these born agains.

so brother krishnaraj please keep on questioning? lets see the funny explanations.

minoria said...

Hello David:

I am glad you are OK,really.We were all worried about you.Again,glad you are better.

Hello Zen:

I am glad you gor to know something new,MICHAEL LICONA and MARK GABRIEL.Yes,they are good writers.I still haven't been able to buy COFFEE WITH THE PROPHET.But it must certainly contain inforamtion I already know,but for BEGINNERS it must be an eye-opener.

Again,thawhy I give out info,maybe others here don't know.I read WHAT'S SO GREAT ABOUT CHRISTIANITY by DINESH D'SOUZA ( you can find his debates with atheists in youtube).

You may not agree with everything he says but he rites WELL.That was also why I gave the info about Emperor JULIAN who in 362 AD triedtorebuild the Temple(for a third reconstruction)in order to prove Jesus was a false prophet and failed.

SEVERAL writers wrote about the event,one was even the emperor's admirer and supporter the pagan historian AMMIANUS.

They should teach that stuff in Sunday school.I really doubt they do.I never went to Sunday school,but before I became a Christian I asked several who had been going to a born-again church questions about this and that.They could not give me answers.They had never investigated.I had to discover everything all by myself,for the fun of it,for the challenge.

Fifth Monarchy Man said...

Asharf said:
Osama just mentioned only one verse form their holy book and see here,each born again is giving different interpretation.

I respond

Do you understand the difference between interpretation explanation and application?

All the Christians here have give the same interpretation and application of the text we only differ (slightly) on the explanation.

It’s likely that any given text will have multiple overlapping explanations because there is often more than one reason for an author to make a statement

Let me give an example. When Allah told you to beat your rebellious wife. He might have been interested in the continuance of male dominance or he might just like hurting people or he might be genuinely interested the wellbeing of society.

Opinions will vary on his reasons but they don’t change the interpretation or application of the text.

The same goes for Deuteronomy 25:11-12 it’s possible to disagree about the reasons that God made this law for the nation of Israel. It’s even possible that two different reasons might be correct at the same time.

However competing reasons for the giving of a text are not the same thing as different interpretations of the text.

All Christians as far as I know agree on the interpretation and application of the text in question. This is a far cry from the Islamic disagreement about whether “beat” means "leave"


Now do you understand?

peace

The Fat Man said...

ashraf said...
"brother krishnaraj, these born agains will never answer your questions infact no one can give acceptable or reasonable explanations to your questions."
What questions has he asked? The only thing or any other muslims including yourself does is make accusations, and then claims victory.
ashraf said
"Osama just mentioned only one verse form their holy book and see here,each born again is giving different interpretation."
can you show us how any of us differed in our explianation? The fact is that all of us gave various explination that are all consitintly the same.
Here is a challange for the muslims. Can you give us a interpretation of Surah 60:1-5. Lets see how many different interpretations you muslims come up with. Just to let you know not even your greatest islamic scholars agree on what these verses are taling about in regard to what your prophet forbid himslef and what was disclossed. As a matter of fact Ibn Kathir has two different explinations in his Tasfir.
ashraf said
"Against women rights we can show plenty of versus from holy bible but we can't get any meaningful answers from these born agains."
Ok we are waiting for those verses. Can you show us those verses? And more inportantly demonstrate to us that you have read are explinations instead of just accusing us of not providing any explination.
Well have fun attacking GOD, Calling GOD a LIAR, Insulting Christ Disciples. I'm sure it pleases your allah.

Sepher Shalom said...

ashraf said: "we can't get any meaningful answers from these born agains.

so brother krishnaraj please keep on questioning? lets see the funny explanations."


I would much rather see your 'funny' attempt to turn "born agains" into a pejorative.

Ashraf, unless you are born again you will be forever separated from the Kingdom of Heaven and die in your sins. Bow the knee to Yeshua, your only Salvation by whom all things were made, and flee the wrath of a Holy and perfectly just G-d.

The Fat Man said...

Yahya Snow and all the other muslims. I am still waiting for you to demonstrate that you either Admonish Osama for his beliefs on beating woman, or that you support them. Why are you guys so Silent on this.

If you do not believe as he does, then isnt he misrepresenting your islamic faith. Isnt he the one who is fuelling the flames for us "Islamaphobes"

nma said...

ashraf,

Unless you are born again, since you have heard about Jesus, you are destined to burn in Hell beside your false prophet Mohammed.

Maybe you don't know this, but ask Muslims questions about the Quran, each will give different interpretations. That is why some Muslims insist on Jihad and some others pretend that Islam is a religion of peace.

Krishnaraj said...

Oh People.

You say Man is in the Image of God?

That then shows that God is Finite and not omnipresent.

The Fat Man said...

David just got done watching the last hour on ABN, man you should of advertised.

minoria said...

Just saw SAMI ZAATARI's video in response to Nabeel and David's second video on the Dearborn incident.In essence he says that since Muslims in the US are only a few million among 300 MILLION then there is NO danger.

JEWEL OF MEDINA

By SHERRY JONES,a novel about AYSHA and MOHAMMED,their well-known story(to us).I would say 95% of non-Muslims have never heard of it.

It was supposed to be published in the US by RANDOM HOUSE.But later it decided NOT to,out of fear.

And what about the book about the "cartoons that shook the world"?Not published because Yale Press said it didn't want to have BLOOD on our HANDS?

Does Sami know reality?

JEWEL OF MEDINA AGAIN

It was then taken up by a British publisher to be published in the UK,not the US.Then the HOME and OFFICE of the publisher was BURNED by angry Muslims.I don't know if they will publish it or not.

There is SELF-CENSORSHIP regardig Islam and Mohammed in the West.You DO NOT see that regarding Jesus and Christianity.Not at all.

For how long?For as long as Islam exists.

SHARIA LAW IMPOSED DE FACTO

There free criticism,discussion and talk of Islam and Mohammed and the Koran is suppressed:in Egypt,Algeria,Syria,Morocco,etc.

So the same has in general happened in the West.Only a few really speak up,and THOSE FEW are rarely discussed on ABC,NBC,CNN,BBC news,etc.So,yes,a few fanatical Muslims,ready to kill,can impose Sharia Law on the West.I hope Sami denounces it.

ashraf said...

Sepher Shalom said...

Ashraf, unless you are born again you will be forever separated from the Kingdom of Heaven and die in your sins. Bow the knee to Yeshua,

Hi Sepher Shalom, this is the major sickness of you born again, to enter the kingdom of heaven don't associate partners to god almighty. this is first commandment given to you guys by your hand made god Jesus, please read your bible with more attention to know how to enter kingdom of heaven.

you quote:
Bow the knee to Yeshua

what about other two gods of you?

nu said...

Krishnaraj:
What do you people mean.

Is it not important that the Bible be Preserved and Kept as God wanted it to be.

How can the Bible be true when people have altered it as per their needs


1) You've been TAUGHT that the bible was altered by people for their own needs, and you've BELIEVED what you were TOLD.

Unless you are personally sure that whoever taught you this NEVER LIES, it would be a good idea if you did your own investigating.

Unless of course you are comfortable with what you were taught and you don't feel a need to put it to the test. But then the issue would then be that you WANT to believe this, and not that it is TRUE.

2)Don't you wander where God was when the first two books of his revelation (the Torah and Injil) were altered by people? How come those books were perverted and yet he has managed to preserve the koran? Where was his "preservation -power" at the time of the first books?

3)why did a NEW revelation have to be made? Why wasn't the old "perverted" one taken and "cleaned" up? If God is great (Allah Akbar) how could mere humans ruin his words and force him to start something new? How can MAN pervert GOD'S words? You can only spoil what you have power over- so how could God's words be spoiled by men, so spoiled in fact, that he discarded them and revealed some new ones.

So Krishnaraj, and Osama,and are you SURE those words you are explaining to us are GOD'S words on the matter of husbands beating their wives? GOD'S WORDS?? If they could be altered once,couldn't they be altered again? I wouldn't be so confident in a 'replacement' if the reason it exists is because the original was robbed and spoilt. How do i know this one will be well-guarded?

Fernando said...

Hei ashraf... none off the presented interpretations are difefrent from each other: they are all different aspects off the same reallity: thate was a contextual rulle apllied anly to the levirate law thate existed whille the Jews were waitting to the Messiah... He came and so tahte rulle do nott persiste anymore...

more: can you presentt more verses off those you saide the Bible were full off against women? thankes... Osama's and Krishnaraj's comments are so vacuus: maybbe you can do better... butt we all know you can't... don't we?

Fernando said...

ashraf saide

1) we associate to God;

2) we habe 2 gods...

so, we habe two possibilities (since bothe off the previous realities are false):

1) ashraf is ignorant;

2) those who thaught him are ignorant...

ashraf... please: do continue to express whate a commum muslim believes aboutt Chriatianity: thate gibes an amazing portrait off whate allah, muhammad, islam and muslims are... thankes...

Sepher Shalom said...

Krishnaraj said: "Oh People.

You say Man is in the Image of God?

That then shows that God is Finite and not omnipresent."


Quote us the verse where the Bible says that, Krishnaraj, and then we can begin to discuss what the text means in context, and in its original Hebrew.

Sepher Shalom said...

ashraf said: "Hi Sepher Shalom, this is the major sickness of you born again, to enter the kingdom of heaven don't associate partners to god almighty."

I don't set up any "partners". I have one G-d. I also do not have a "sickness". Of course, one can only assume you would fashion such a straw-man, since your Quran and its author are completely ignorant of what the Bible teaches [and it resorts to cheap name calling, just like you].


"this is first commandment given to you guys by your hand made god Jesus, please read your bible with more attention to know how to enter kingdom of heaven."

I suggest YOU read it. The first Commandments explicitly states we are to worship only YHWH. You g-d Allah is not YHWH, hence all Muslims break this commandment by worshiping a false g-d.

"you quote:
Bow the knee to Yeshua

what about other two gods of you?"


Another very lame straw-man. I have only one G-d. The real question is: What about your Quran that allows you beat your wife, and Osama that thinks its a good idea to beat them, and in certain circumstances "beat the daylights out of them"? Stop diverting the topic of the thread with feable straw-man attacks, and perhaps, as The Fat Man pointed out, either agree with Osama or rebuke him for mishandling the Quran. Of course, I understand your desire to not stay on topic considering the position you are in.

nma said...

Ashraf,

What about your three Gods Allah the Satan, false Prophet Mohammed and the man-made book called Al-Quran?

Osama Abdallah said...

"Krishnaraj said: "Oh People.

You say Man is in the Image of God?

That then shows that God is Finite and not omnipresent."

Quote us the verse where the Bible says that, Krishnaraj, and then we can begin to discuss what the text means in context, and in its original Hebrew."

Sepher Shalom,

Christianity is no more than a blasphemy. Trinity is no more than a man-made lie.
The image of GOD Almighty in the Bible is one who possesses:

1- Knowledge of good and evil.
2- One who remains Rightous.
3- One who does Good.


When one possesses these characteristics, then he has the image of GOD Almighty in him. Read what your Bible says at:

http://www.answering-christianity.com/let_us.htm

Remember this verse from the Bible:

"God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man, that he should change his mind. Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfill? (From the NIV Bible, Numbers 23:19)"

Jesus is not GOD Almighty, nor has GOD Almighty ever become a human (man). Again, Christianity is no more than a blaspheme.

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com

mkvine said...

This is terrible; Osama first says that in "tribal societies" the woman could cause her husband to "enter a mortal combat." The problem is that, we are not in "tribal societies" anymore. I thought the Qur'an was given for all people for all times. I disagree entirely with his all the reasons he gives for beating you're wife; the last two points he makes are very ridiculous. You beat your wife because she is a bad parent? There are other ways of solving the issue, like taking her to a Parenting class. Also, beating your wife for bad language is one of the worst things you can do. She will lose respect for you and will probably curse you even more.

Ehteshaam Gulam said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ashraf said...

sepher shalom said:
Another very lame straw-man. I have only one G-d.

brother do you mean that, you don't believe trinity? if it so, i appreciate you man.please preach the same to other christians to get rid off the trinity concept which was initiated by satan.i wish you all the best brother.

Fernando said...

ashraf: I have only one God and beliebe in the Trinity... do you wantte to tell me why the previous woulde deny the latter? perahps withe your insight ans intellegence on these subjects you can make me a muslim again... thate woulde bee greatte for you wouldn't it be? so: please: explainne me why...

p.s.: bye the way: your silence on this thread subject makkes me wonder thate you agree in beatting on'es wiffe out off daylight... thankes for makiing thate clear...

Zen said...

This is getting out of hand, y'all. With all the insults that are being thrown around in these threads, I cringe at the thought that they are coming from people of faith. I wish you don't allow these exchanges to turn into a wicked abuse of each other and each other's religion. I'm grateful for the valid points and differing perspectives presented here, but it is rather off-putting when the debate is reduced to pointless wrangling.

"We have just enough religion to make us hate, but not enough to make us love one another." ~Jonathan Swift

Yahya Snow said...

Fat Man

Finaly, your inssesant rant about publishing Davids skelatons. I got news for you, we Christians have a different view of sin then muslims. We do not believe like muslism do that as long as you dont get caught it is ok to sin. We beleive in exposing our sin to the light, to publicaly confess them. I have heard David a few times witness to what his life was like before he became a Christian. I say this only to point out how foolish you sound.

August 23, 2009 3:21 AM

Fat Man..If you continue to misrepresent me I will cease communicating with you. I am very busy and have no desire to waste time batting off strawman comments.

I have not been ranting about David's skeleton's. I just stated that David would not like it if somebody dug his skeleton's out and put them on the net like he has done to Nadir Ahmed. It is unfair on Nadir. That is all.

Fat Man, if you and David are so into divulging your sins in public then why don't you not give us a rendition of David's and your sins?

Anyhow, enough of that already.

Concerning the wife-beating, I plan to write about it. I am very busy this month though.

Peace.

May Allah guide us all. Ameen.

Defending Islam at:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.com/

nma said...

Osama,

If you think the Bible is corrupt, why are you quoting from it only in order to polish your lies?

Osama Abdallah said...

"I suggest YOU read it. The first Commandments explicitly states we are to worship only YHWH. You g-d Allah is not YHWH, hence all Muslims break this commandment by worshiping a false g-d."

Sehper Shalom,

Yahweh is a Hebrew word. It means "Al-SAMAD" in Arabic,
and It happens to be one of Allah Almighty's 99 Divine Attributes in Islam, and it is also mentioned in the Noble Quran.

I've exposed the many foolish and shallow-minded arguments that get thrown out against Islam using this ridiculous point at: http://www.answering-christianity.com/allah.htm.

Ironically, no where in the ENTIRE NEW TESTAMENT is GOD Almighty referred to as Yahweh, which the exception may be of using the expression "Hallaluyah", which is originated from Hebrew anyway and was adopted by Aramaic. JESUS HAD ALWAYS referred to GOD Almighty as Allah throughout the NT.

Again, visit the link to see ample absurdities being debunked on this topic.

THE BOTTOM LINE IS THIS:

1- Islam's GOD Almighty is the GOD Almighty of the entire Universe.

2- The Hebrew Yahweh, which means the Eternal, is only a Hebrew word, and other languages are not obligated to use it. Certainly, the NT's disciples and followers never used it!

3- Those who continue to use this foolish point against Islam only demonstrate how ignorant, shallow, gullible and naive they are.

4- And when they insult Islam's GOD Almighty and say He is a false god, they are committing blasphemy.

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com

minoria said...

Here is something that intrigues me:

TWO ERRORS IN SURA 10:

The Koran can't be the word of God because in sura 10:85-100 it says:

A)That the pharaoh of egypt got drowned when chasing moses and the Jews but before he died he REPENTED or pretended to repent and:

B)that Allah told pharaoh that his body would be preserved for the future as proof that he was Allah.But then it tells Moham. that if "you have doubt about what we have REVEALED to you ( which would include A and B) then ASK those who have READ the BOOK (Bible) before you".(christians and Jews).

But when you check the bible neither A nor B is in there.Isn't Allah supposed to know EXACTLY what is in the Bible? Then how could he make such a mistake?If Moh. had asked the Jews and Christians about A and B they would have told him,NO,that is NOT in the Bible.

THE PHARAOH'S CORPSE FOUND

There is nothing in there about:

1) the pharaoh repenting,nor:

2)any prophecy concerning his body.

Many Muslims say the body has been found,is in a museum and that is proof that we have a prophecy fulfilled and that the Koran is the word of God.Even granting that as true,still Allah has made TWO undeniable mistakes here,he should have known what is in the bible.In fact A and B are found in NO Jewish or Christian writings before 610 AD:neither in the Targum.Qmran documents,Talmud,and no Christian writers mention such incidents

Fernando said...

someonne who's name the charity I feel toward rue muslims makes me aboid reffering saide: «It is unfair on Nadir»...

thates the logic thate subsistes in the refusal off some bery proeminent (and nott so proheminent) muslims to cohoperate withe the authorities: "yes I know thate thate bro killed and raped and stealled, neber the less he's a bro and I'll never do anything against him... it woulde bee unfair..."...

unfair to whom? to the perpretator or the victims? on which side is thate someonne who's name the charity I feel toward rue muslims makes me aboid reffering? He mighte say thate he's on both sides, butt can it bee? can it really bee so? I habe all the dounts in the world... butt we haeb to make a discount on this someonne who's name the charity I feel toward rue muslims makes me aboid reffering: he's someone driven bie his temperamental feelings and nott by any rational purpose, and thates too sad to see... to sad... may Jesus, our God, help him...

Ehteshaam Gulam said...

Minoria said:

B)that Allah told pharaoh that his body would be preserved for the future as proof that he was Allah.But then it tells Moham. that if "you have doubt about what we have REVEALED to you ( which would include A and B) then ASK those who have READ the BOOK (Bible) before you".(christians and Jews).

My Response: The Quran clearly says the Bible is corrupt:

http://answering-christian-claims.com/What_the_Quran_says_about_the_Bible.html

Sepher Shalom said...

Osama,

I have neither the time nor inclination to interact with your comments to me at this time....but while we are waiting for my schedule to free up, perhaps you could respond to some of the things that have been said in this thread about your approval for wife beating, and implicit approval of "honor" killings [since you admitted you would skin Bathsheba alive for sleeping with David if you were her brother].

I doubt you will want to get the thread back on track considering the vile and reprehensible things you have condoned and admitted you would participate in, rather, you will prefer to rail against the Trinity and other such things. Typical.

nma said...

Osama Abdallah said...

4- And when they insult Islam's GOD Almighty and say He is a false god, they are committing blasphemy.
No, they aren't committing blasphemy, but they are speaking the truth. The Quranic Allah is the great deceiver, namely, the Devil.

minoria said...

Hello Ehteshaam:

I always take the minimalist position,or almost always.I will take your position the Koran says the Bible is corrupt.Yet Muslims still say it has truth in it,like Mohammed in the Bible.

JUST SECONDS BEFORE

So 10:85-100 has VERY SPECIFIC info.It gives 2 details about the Pharaoh:he repented,his body would be preserved.Then right away it tells Mohammed that if he has a doubt about the REVELATION (presumably that would include the 2 details given JUST SECONDS before) then ask those who read the Bible.

MUSLIM ANSWER

I have been told that due to an Arab word used before it just means " a question in general,not every detail."It could be,I am open to it.But it would have to be confirmed to me by several NON-MUSLIM experts on Arabic.By experience the Muslim experts consulted are not the most impartial.Again,that is the Muslim answer,and it could be true.That is as far as I know.

ALSO

As David Wood noted in a debate noted the phrase used about the Pharaoh is "but today we save you in your body".The logical idea is it means the Pharaoh would not die physically,would survive.Not that his body would be killed but not be lost and mummified.

DROWNED

Suras 28:40/17:103/43:55 say clearly that Pharaoh was drowned,but "save you in your body"is more logical as "not let yu die". It would have been more logical to say "but TODAY we SAVE your BODY"

Instead "but today we SAVE YOU(you,Pharaoh)in your BODY(save you physically,you will not die)" is less logical to use.

SAVE YOU IN YOUR SPIRIT

It means by logic you will go to heaven,even if your body dies.So the same for saving you in your body meaning your body will not die.

Fernando said...

Ehteshaam Gulam said: «The Quran clearly says the Bible is corrupt»...

dear Ehteshaam Gulam: the qur'an coulde eben say thate the sun does nott exist and thate woulde nott bee the true... muslims only habe the statement from the qur'an to say this... abery historical and archeological ebidence shows otherwise... who'll you trust? facts or myths? ebidences thate can bee seen by anyone (belieber or not belieber), or only by those who habe faithe in a book (and that's nott idolatry?) thate was dictated by a lyier, a murderer, a theft, a womaniser, a person who had sex with a 9 lunar years baby, a suicidical?

just think aboutt thate mie dear Ehteshaam Gulam... may Jesus, our God, help you...

Nakdimon said...

"God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man, that he should change his mind. Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfill? (From the NIV Bible, Numbers 23:19)"

Jesus is not GOD Almighty, nor has GOD Almighty ever become a human (man). Again, Christianity is no more than a blaspheme.


Osama, are you even reading the verse that you are quoting? Somehow, all muslims do is read “God is not a man” and then stop reading altogether. But the text says that God is not a man THAT HE SHOULD LIE. And God is not a son of man THAT HE SHOULD CHANGE HIS MIND. This verse says nothing more than “God is not like man, who lies and changes his mind all the time”. God is faithful and you can trust Him on His word. When God speaks He acts on it and when he promises He keeps His promise. Read it again:

"God is not a man, THAT HE SHOULD LIE, nor a son of man, THAT HE SHOULD CHANGE HIS MIND. Does he speak AND THEN NOT ACT? Does he promise AND NOT FULFIL?

This text is nothing more than a contrast between God’s faithfulness and man’s unfaithfulness. When will Muslims stop quoting irrelevant texts and start learning doing good scriptural exegesis?

As for Christians “blaspheming” by claiming that God comes down in the form of a man. Here is something for you to chew on:

6 Then the woman went to her husband and told him, "A MAN OF GOD came to me. He looked like an angel of God, very awesome. I didn't ask him where he came from, and he didn't tell me his name…18 He replied, "Why do you ask my name? It is beyond understanding." 19 Then Manoah took a young goat, together with the grain offering, and sacrificed it on a rock to YHWH. And YHWH did an amazing thing while Manoah and his wife watched: 20 As the flame blazed up from the altar toward heaven, Mal’ach YHWH ascended in the flame. Seeing this, Manoah and his wife fell with their faces to the ground. 21 When Mal’ach YHWH did not show himself again to Manoah and his wife, Manoah realized that it was Mal’ach YHWH. 22 "We are doomed to die!" he said to his wife. "WE HAVE SEEN GOD!"

So, Osama, who did Manoach say he saw? Can you do proper exegesis?

Nakdimon

jhamel said...

its very hard for me to understand why muslims treat women this way......but hey am not suprised because muslim texts tell muslims that women are defficient in intelligence and equate them to dogs......by the way am new here and may the glory of GOD be revealed.

Fernando said...

dear jhamel...

welcomme to this blog... your comments are always welcome... may God bless you and your familie...

Master Phase said...

I shouldn't insult the mentally handy caped people but I am begining to think Osama is a bit mentally retarded. Osama why do you keep inserting your foot in to your mouth? Anyways love this blog thought I would start posting comments thanks for fighting the good fight guys.

God Bless
Pastor Brian

donna60 said...

Mr. Abdallah's discourse on women called to my mind Neitzche's famous quote. "You are going to women? Do not forget the whip."

To which Betrand Russell remarked that "9 out of 10 women would get the whip away from him and he knew it."

donna60 said...

Mr Abdallah, if you are reading this, and I hope you are. You should remember that Bathsheba mothered five royal children altogether. One of them, Nathan, was in the lineage of Mary, and Solomon was in the ancestry of Joseph. That means that two of her sons were in the ancestry of Jesus.

I would think that Bathsheba was just fine in the eyes of our Creator. He liked her just fine.

When I get to heaven, I hope Bathsheba thinks that I am worthy enough to be friends with. (I hope you get to heaven, too, by the way.)