Saturday, September 18, 2010

Pastor Speaks the Truth about Islam

... and yet he has to defend himself from being called "uninformed, unchristian, and unamerican." Are they ever going to give up playing the "You're a bigot!" card whenever someone speaks the truth about Islam?

42 comments:

Tom Gilson said...

Here's the Steve Blow column Dr. Jeffress was referring to, and also a response he wrote following this message.

Note the way Blow's response (a) ignores everything Dr. Jeffress said in the video, except for one thing, and (b) even for that one thing, simply repeats his earlier accusation with no evidence to back it.

I wouldn't mind seeing even more of Steve Blow on this topic, because the more he says, the more credible Dr. Jeffress becomes.

Renrutkram said...

What would you say to those who argue that Christianity has been (and in some parts of the world is still being) used to "incite violence" and "oppress women"?

Jabari said...

At least we have someone who is bold enough to speak the truth, regardless of what people say about him.

Tizita said...

You know what every time i hear Pastors speak abt islam i get this rush of joy that i never feel.

It brings so much joy to me to hear that more and more churches are being awoken to the truth abt islam. Even my church finished a basic study on islam, and hopefully the will do it again & expand on it.

Jesus said: "You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you FREE!" Amen!

Nathan said...

Thanks for posting this. A great encouragement that there are those who are willing to stand in such a way.

Marouane said...

The American legislators in the 19th century, put 7 year old as the age of consent. They were not Muslims.
The pastor is not uninformed, he just misuses the information. Christians have no guidance but their humanist conjecture.

characterbuilder said...

Bless the Lord for this godly leader who did not buckle under the pressure or the criticism of a columnist who chose to misrepresent his statements.

Brother preachers... stand in the pulpit and proclaim the truth in Love. Be strong and courage do not tremble or be dismayed for the Lord your God is with you...

Tom Gilson said...

Renrutkram,

I would say

(1) show me the evidence it's happening--especially that it's happening with any frequency in comparison to Islam; and

(2) if it's happening at all, it's contrary to Christ's example, unlike Mohammed's.

No one says Christianity never gets co-opted for evil. But if it happens, it's clearly a violation of Christian principles as they're presented in Scripture and as they've unfolded over the centuries. Is the same true for Islam?

Bartimaeus said...

What a wonderful contrast be between this Past Dr. Jeffries and Terry Jones.

Steve Blow should blow it out ear.

Bartimaeus said...

Marouane said

The American legislators in the 19th century, put 7 year old as the age of consent. They were not Muslims.
The pastor is not uninformed, he just misuses the information. Christians have no guidance but their humanist conjecture.

I always amazed how Muslims justify the wicked and vile acts of the pedo-file Mohammed by referring to the sins of others.

The differnce is almost everything Mohammed did is condemned is the Scriptures and is totaly against the teachings and examples of the Lord Jesus.

1moremuslim said...

Here are some information for the Pastor.
In the Jewish old and modern tradition, a girl who reaches 12 year old, celebrates Bat Mitzvah. Which simply means, she is responsible for her actions, she is fully under the law, and , she is eligible for MARRIAGE! Jesus and Mary, being a Jews, they observed these regulations and rules.
About what Jesus have said about harming a child, I would suggest to you to read what Jesus have done to children in the old testament.

characterbuilder said...

Marouane said...
The American legislators in the 19th century, put 7 year old as the age of consent. They were not Muslims.
The pastor is not uninformed, he just misuses the information. Christians have no guidance but their humanist conjecture.

Some questions for you...

1) Could you please site your sources. You have made an assertion now please demonstrate that you are basing it on an historical fact.

2) Even if your assertion is true what does that have to do with Mohammad's marriage to a child bride?

3) Does your sighting of a supposed 19th century law justify Mohammads actions? It that your point?

4) Final question: Do you support the marriage of men older man to a child bride? Yes or NO.

Thank you.

Nabeel Qureshi said...

Marouane--

Can we get some proof and surrounding context?

Tom said...

@Marouane,

Come to Jesus. 19th century legislators are not an example for you to follow. Christ Jesus alone can guide you and lead you into The Kingdom of Heaven - here on Earth - and for all eternity.

You came here because, whether you like it or not, The Only Living God in Christ is calling you to Himself.

Yes, I agree with you if you say: 'leaving Islam is difficult'. However, there are many wonderful examples of people who have successfully put down the lies of Mohammed - you also can let go of Islam.

Wherever you live, you can invite the Christ of God into your heart and life and have within you His power of Transformation. He will not leave you nor forsake you.

Find for yourself a copy of God's Only Holy Word: The Bible. Read it. Study it. Pray over it. Tell Lord Jesus that you sincerely repent of your past life and ask Lord Jesus to be present with you and to speak to you. If you're sincere, His Holy Spirit will live in you. But don't play games - this is as real as life can be.

You may think that you came here to try to refute Nabeel or David or Pastor Jeffress and we all will defend your privilege to think whatever you choose - so long as you don't conspire to destroy our freedom to think and act as we choose.

However, I want to assure you that Jesus Christ is calling you to Himself - and that's something you cannot refute, Marouane (and neither can I).

And, when you know Christ Jesus well enough to really understand who He is you'll be glad you came to "AnsweringMuslims.com". All of us who comment here look forward to welcoming you into the Family of the Only Living God in Christ.

KAFIR AND PROUD!
MAY JESUS CHRIST BE PRAISED!!

marouene_najar said...

You are welcome Nabeel,

The American colonies followed the English tradition, and the law was more of a guide. For example, Mary Hathaway (Virginia, 1689) was only nine when she was married to William Williams. Sir Edward Coke (England, 17 century) made it clear that "the marriage of girls under twelve was normal, and the age at which a girl who was a wife was eligible for a dower from her husband's estate was nine even though her husband be only four years old."

"Encyclopedia of Children and Childhood in History and Society". http://www.faqs.org/childhood/A-Ar/Age-of-Consent.html.

So people, stop dishonoring your ancestors.

The age of consent in Delaware USA, was 7 year old, most of the states have 10 year old just 200 years ago. So please, be Christians all that you want but stop being ignorant of history.

http://chnm.gmu.edu/cyh/teaching-modules/230?section=primarysources&source=24


Folks, go to wikipedia under " Age of consent" and LEARN!!!

Traeh said...

It seems questionable whether Muhammad acknowledged there was any minimum "age of consent." The whole notion of "consent" in sex in the Islamic context is questionable, because Muhammad had female sex slaves and did not think a husband had to gain the consent of his wife in order to have sex with her. Muhammad thought nothing of doing all sorts of things without consent of other directly involved parties.

Apparently Ayatollah Khomeini thought it was permissible for a man to use even an infant for sex (but not intercourse). Did Khomeini get that from core Islamic texts?

Here's a video of a Muslim cleric explaining how Khomeini had a "temporary marriage" with a 4-year old girl with the permission of her parents.

AYATOLLAH KHOMEINI AND "TEMPORARY MARRIAGE" WITH A FOUR-YEAR OLD GIRL

As for the United States in the 19th century, I don't know if the following is accurate. It's from Wikipedia in an article on age of consent:

In the United States, by the 1880s, most states set the age of consent at ten or twelve, and in one state, Delaware, the age of consent was only seven. Women reformers and advocates of social purity initiated a campaign in 1885 to petition legislators to raise the legal age of consent to at least sixteen, with ultimate goal to raise the age to eighteen; the campaign was successful: by 1920, almost all states had raised the age of consent to sixteen or eighteen.[4][5]

In consummating the marriage with Aisha when she was 9, Muhammad showed himself to be a reflection of the ignorance of his time, which often did not see that it is abuse for a 54-year old man (Muhammad) to have sex with a 9-year old.

We recently heard the story of the 8 year old in Yemen who went to a court and petitioned for a divorce (and got it). And we find men in Yemen and some other Muslim nations claiming a right to marry underage girls because, after all, Muhammad did it. And that's the problem: Muhammad is taken by Muslims as an example for all time.

The Fat Man said...

Marouane said...
"The American legislators in the 19th century, put 7 year old as the age of consent."

You have demonstrated a great deal of ignornace.

First question what "American legislators" was it state or federal?

I already know it could not be Federal because of the 10th amendment to the constitution.

So the next question is "What State Legislators ever said a seven year old had the right to consent to marriage?"

The answer to both questions is NONE. I believe that the youngest age of consent at any time in any state was 14 and only with parental permission.

Putting the facts all aside I find it interesting that Muslims have to appeal to Kuffar to justify there sense of right and wrong.

In other words even if your false alegation was true we are still Kuffar. Why are you appeling to kuffar laws to justify your own laws.

Let me put it another way "You wicked people in the west are doing the same thing that our holy prophet from God did so that makes it OK"

Finally you have demonstrated not only your ignorance of the American legal process but also demonstrated that English is not your first language.

Legislators are people who make laws while Legislation is the law itself. So your statement that "American legislators in the 19th century, put 7 year old as the age of consent." simply means that there were some law makers who put the age of consent at 7. This does not make it law.

So your false statement should of read "American LEGISLATION"....

Fernando said...

Renrutkram said that Christianity nowadays incites violence... can you present facts? thanks...

Fernando said...

1more(ignorant)muslim said...

«In the Jewish old and modern tradition, a girl who reaches 12 year old (...) is eligible for MARRIAGE!»...

that does not mean they get marriage... more: in Jesus time, 90% of women married in the early twenties and few (less than1%) did so under 16 year old... just read some scholar studies on the subject of jewish marriage and gibe upp on dawa books full off lies...

«Jesus and Mary, being a Jews, they observed these regulations and rules»...

meaning whate? thate Jesus and Mary married when His wife was 12 and Mary married Joseph when she was 12? really? Can you present any proof of thate? I mean: ANY, just a single one... on the other hand the filthy (yes: filty) prophet off yours had sex with a 8 solar years old girl...

«About what Jesus have said about harming a child, I would suggest to you to read what Jesus have done to children in the old testament»... oh... another ignorant muslim talking about he does not know... why are they so keen on expressing their dumbness? can you say us all whate Jesus did on teh Old Testament (thate same Old Testament thate muhammad saide thate it was not currupted unlike wahte you ignorant muslims believe nowadays)?

minoria said...

Hello Tom Gilson:
Thanks for the information.But first, greetings to Nakdimon and others who are Jewish,it was YOM KIPPUR yesterday,Sep 18,the holiest day in Judaism,the Day of Atonement.Soon in about 10 days it will be SUKKOTH or the Feast of Tabernacles,that lasts a week and commemorates the 40 years Moses was in the desert with the Jewish people.

But getting back,what STEVE BLOW does is so TYPICAL of people who live with their heads in the sand,who ignore reality,very sad.

minoria said...

Hello 1moremuslim:

You said in JEWISH tradition a girl could get married at 12.I think you are correct.

BUT...
In JEWISH tradition,as in MUSLIM tradition the MAN has to have a DOWRY to give to her.Money.The NT says JOSPEH was a TEKTON,which means he was a LANDLESS man,a day laborer,so only above a slave in status,he was very poor.


Richard Carrier(an atheist,no firend of Christianity) in an article of his says he believes it took Joseph years to acquire the required dowry.In short,if Joseph was well-off he could have married Mary at 12 but if he wasn't he would have had to wait for years till he had the dowry,at which time she would have been older.We don't know how old she was,and circumstances make people change habits.I wouldn't be surprised she was 18 when she married him.

Plus we are talking about a HUMAN tradition,a Jewish one here,the Bible doesn't say to get married at 12.

Zack_Tiang said...

I agree with most of everyone here...

Marouene, you're only getting yourself deeper into quicksand here..

Assuming your allegation is accurately true, you're appealing to a 19th Century incident to justify an act committed over a millennium ago.

And your conclusion, "So people, stop dishonoring your ancestors." really makes me wonder your line of thinking here..

SO, because our ancestors did it, therefore we must continue to do it? What about you? Were you born Muslim? Were your parents? Your grandparents? Your great grandparents? Your great great great ancestor?
If your ancestors weren't born Muslim, what are you doing disappointing them and being a Muslim?

Tom Gilson said...

You're missing the point, almost everyone here, focusing in on whether so-and-so condoned 7-year-olds being forced to marry. Sure, it's a good question and an important one in its place, but it's not the main thing here.

The main thing is the way Steve Blow absolutely misrepresented Dr. Jeffress, twisting his beliefs, ignoring at least half of what he told him in the interview, presenting him in a completely false light, and called him un-American, un-Christian, uninformed.

And then (see my first comment above) when he's challenged on it, he niggles on one point, just exactly the way some of you are doing here, paying no regard to how he has been caught in a blatant and reprehensible lie (to borrow his own word and turn it back on him).

This is not what journalists do, this is what issue-advocates do when they have the power of a position on a newspaper where they think they can get away with saying anything they choose to say. He's using his power to propagate a lie, or actually a whole series of them. The issue of child brides was just one of them. Steve Blow tried in his follow-on to make it the whole issue, and some of you have fallen for it. The issue is the lie.

And why is Steve Blow defending Islam anyway? How well-informed is he? Does he actually establish his position that child marriage is uncharacteristic of Islam? Do we have any reason to think he has a clue what he's talking about? He's just flinging accusations without the slightest backup of fact or evidence. Maybe he's fallen for a lie himself. How would he know? Has he checked it out? We have no evidence that he has done so.

Now, look at Dr. Jeffress's response. He's smiling. He's strong, and he's not caving in, but he's gracious (more than I'm being here, I'll admit). Look at the contrast between the reporter and the pastor. Look at which one of them is willing to take the matter point by point and give it some thoughtful analysis. Look at who's evidencing some rationality of argument.

This is what counts. Look at that, and then if you want to come back and talk about the rest, you'll have it in context where the rest of it makes sense to talk about.

Tom Gilson said...

You're missing the point, almost everyone here, focusing in on whether so-and-so condoned 7-year-olds being forced to marry. Sure, it's a good question and an important one in its place, but it's not the main thing here.

The main thing is the way Steve Blow absolutely misrepresented Dr. Jeffress, twisting his beliefs, ignoring at least half of what he told him in the interview, presenting him in a completely false light, and called him un-American, un-Christian, uninformed.

And then (see my first comment above) when he's challenged on it, he niggles on one point, just exactly the way some of you are doing here, paying no regard to how he has been caught in a blatant and reprehensible lie (to borrow his own word and turn it back on him).

This is not what journalists do, this is what issue-advocates do when they have the power of a position on a newspaper where they think they can get away with saying anything they choose to say. He's using his power to propagate a lie, or actually a whole series of them. The issue of child brides was just one of them. Steve Blow tried in his follow-on to make it the whole issue, and some of you have fallen for it. The issue is the lie.

Tom Gilson said...

And why is Steve Blow defending Islam anyway? How well-informed is he? Does he actually establish his position that child marriage is uncharacteristic of Islam? Do we have any reason to think he has a clue what he's talking about? He's just flinging accusations without the slightest backup of fact or evidence. Maybe he's fallen for a lie himself. How would he know? Has he checked it out? We have no evidence that he has done so.

Now, look at Dr. Jeffress's response. He's smiling. He's strong, and he's not caving in, but he's gracious (more than I'm being here, I'll admit). Look at the contrast between the reporter and the pastor. Look at which one of them is willing to take the matter point by point and give it some thoughtful analysis. Look at who's evidencing some rationality of argument.

This is what counts. Look at that, and then if you want to come back and talk about the rest, you'll have it in context where the rest of it makes sense to talk about.

Fernando said...

marouene_najar told to go to Wikipdiab to learn... sure... that's like going to Disney book's to know aboutte the history of the World or, as that matters, to the qur'an to know aboutt God...

1moremuslim said...

The FAT MAN:

I am not an American, and English is not my first language... Shame on me! How can I live with such disgrace!! At least, I can read my holy book in my own language, and I don't rely on human faulty translations.

Minoria:

Are the Jews in days of Jesus Pedophiles, for allowing their Girls to be married at 12?
You are relying on human law, which changes over time, the Age of consent depends on which state you live in, would you become pedophiles by moving from state to state.
In apocrypha Mary was 12 when she gave birth, Catholic didn't say " Oh! what a shame!!!!" I am not saying it's true, but Catholic, like this Mr Bean, had no problem with it.
And about harming a child, a direct you to the OT, and tell me what Jesus have done to Children.

minoria said...

Hello David:

I again posted in jihadwatch about your trial(plus gave my contribution),the need for funds(plus 3 links:to "Original Burn the Koran DAy","Sharia in US","Of Mosques and Men".It is the FOURTH comment for the article about CAIR giving an award to HELEN"Jews get the HELL out of Palestine"THOMAS.

One favor:I tried to comment on Yahya Snow's blog but after logging in when I pressed(like 6X)"publish your comment"I always get "Do you want to navigate away from this page?".Very strange.Can you post this so 1moreMuslim and Ibn will know I answered their questions,at least partly,thanks.

Hello 1more muslim:

I am glad you speak French,the most beautiful language in the world.As I said before if Nabeel is wrong then he is wrong but I can only say yes or no 100% on NT matters.About avraidire.eu it has alot of themes,there are purely Christian themes,then articles for atheists,about Islam.Regarding Islam it is in 2 categories:
1.About the jihad danger to human rights(and you would agree with me on that,correct?That they are AGAINST human rights,you don't actually agree with their crazy ideas) and:
2.About Islam(Koran,Muhammed) properly,no reference to jihad,politics.
3.If there is something you do not like about avraidire.eu in X article you can post and there is NO MODERATION.Unless the comment has foul language,it is NEVER taken out.In fact I have never known of any comment being DELETED(all have used good-enough language).Some articles are by Antoine,others by me and others by others.

To IBN and 1moremuslim:

When you analyse the Koran you see it has good advice but then puts in a condition,that raises a red flag.So for Ibn,that would not be ignorance but being perceptive.
Concerning the NT,look at it as a PURELY HUMAN document and see if the CONSPIRACY THEORY holds:
1.Look at MARK and we at least know SOMEBODY(even if not Mark) wrote it.What does THAT book say?

a.It says Jesus was God.(in the conspiracy theory it is an INTERPOLATION(not by "Mark") or PROPAGANDA by "Mark")
b.Jesus says THREE TIMES he would be killed and resurrect on the 3rd day(again,interpolation or propaganda)and that the Jerusalem Temple would be destroyed(interpolation or propaganda)
c.Jesus does MIRACLES(again,interpolation or propaganda)

Yet:
The book has parts that are AGAINST propaganda(Jesus says "Why do you call me good",he doesn't know the Last Hour,on the cross he says "My God,why have you forsaken me",his family thinks he is mad,etc)

In ANTIQUITY 90% of people were ILLITERATE(according John Dominic Crossan,Jesus Seminar)so it would have been very easy for the Christian leaders to FALSIFY the book,yet they kept those passages.

The SAME for LUKE,MATTHEW and JOHN.There is the science of MATHEMATICAL PROBABILITY and it would be low for it to happen to ONE BOOK but for 2,then 3 ,then 4,the probability of the leaders getting together in the night and FABRICATING an OFFICIAL VERSION(with interpolations and taking out parts)is very low.

SO?

That is ONE REASON why scholars says 99% of the gospels have been preserved like the ORIGINAL version.Not that it is true,only that it has been preserved.

Regarding the citation Antoine makes reference to the dreams of Muslim religious leaders that with Muslim immigrants Europe will become Muslim.That is a fact.
Again,you can comment there and there is NO MODERATION,the comment appears right away.

Fernando said...

1more(ignorant)muslim saide:

«At least, I can read my holy book in my own language, and I don't rely on human faulty translations»...

oh... you belong to the 10% of muslims in the world thate do know whate they are recitting... thats twice as bad: these are forgiven because they do not know whate theirs book teels them; you, on the other hand, do know, and being so you are twice as guilty off following a develish book full off hate, intolerance, violance, sexual inmorality and so on... more: any Christian can read the Bible in its original language and translations are not devices off distortion, rather something inherent to the virtuality off God's Word...

«Are the Jews in days of Jesus Pedophiles, for allowing their Girls to be married at 12?»...

no, they did not! the girl had to at least 12 and had to have her first menstruation and developped her body to be hable to have children (something thate did not resume to menstruation)... more: do you understand the differance between 12 an 8 years old?

«You are relying on human law, which changes over time, the Age of consent depends on which state you live in, would you become pedophiles by moving from state to state»...

The Bible is clear my friend: marriage is between a man and a women (not a girl) with all thate implies in psychological and biological reallity: always the Church respected the civil rulles and laws, butt always celebrated marriage on those conditions...

«In apocrypha Mary was 12 when she gave birth, Catholic didn't say " Oh! what a shame!!!!" I am not saying it's true, but Catholic, like this Mr Bean, had no problem with it.»...

can you present a single book you called apocrypha followed by the Catholics? I mean: just ONE... if you do so, I'll convert to islam... more: if you beleve in the apocrypha on thate subjet, I'm sure you'll also believe when they say Jesus was God...

«And about harming a child, a direct you to the OT, and tell me what Jesus have done to Children»...

spitting words to the wind do not make you wise or truthfull.. ounce again: can you tell us all (since it looks like you know so much aboutte the OT) whate Jesus did on teh Old Testament (thate same Old Testament thate muhammad saide thate it was not currupted unlike wahte you ignorant muslims believe nowadays)? Don't run away...

Silvy Mendonsa said...

How do we know Jesus is the eternal savior and every human should try and imitate Jesus (not Muhammad). Look at his actions and the way He lived His life while taking a human form. Every generation finds His actions morally correct and the words he spoke touches one's heart.

Now look at Muhammad, Oh! you have to understand the historical context.. Oh! you have to see the cultural background... Oh! He was at war .. Oh ! these are laws from Allah that cannot be questioned.

minoria said...

Hello 1moreMuslim:

Ok,you asked if I would consider a girl getting married at 12 to be pedophilia.If there is no sex involved then no.
I know in Jewish law she had to wait for 1 YEAR after the marriage for there to be a consummation.But 13 is too young and that would be pedophilia.I think it is the same among Muslims,the girl lives with the parents for 1 year,no sex.
Now Fernando has made reference to works that Jewish girls married later than 12.

About the PROTOEVANGELIUM OF JAMES(125-150 AD)it says Mary was 12,Joseph 90.Now that is strange,why NINETY YEARS of age?
The REASON is that book wanted to promote the PERPETUAL VIRGINITY of Mary,a 90 year old man would be IMPOTENT.Scholars reject the book as beig reliable(though it could have a relible bit of info regarding the names of Mary's parents)because it makes MANY MSITAKES regarding JEWISH customs.

ABOUT THE CHILDREN IN THE OT
I think you refer to the Cananite children ordered to be killed by God.First they all went to heaven.
Second,as WILLIAM CRAIG stated,God is the CREATOR of life,we didn't create ourselves.So he can take it away suddenly,through an accident,earthquake,heart attack,etc.
He who created something has the right to uncreat it.
In that case he decided to use humans,something very rare.
That is the classic explanation used.

The Squirrel said...

Renrutkram said...
"What would you say to those who argue that Christianity has been (and in some parts of the world is still being) used to "incite violence" and "oppress women"?

I would say that all you need to do is look at a world map. The only places on this planet where women have any real rights are the places with long Christian traditions -- mainly European nations and nations settled by European Christians. Women do no have much in the way of rights in Asian, Africa, or the Middle East. (& Please not that this is due to cultural-religious reasons, and not due to 'race' or 'color', which are artificial distinctions based much more on evolutionary philosophy and not on Biblical exegesis.)

Squirrel

cosmik said...

Europe, US, and now Australia... soon the whole world?

http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/6798741-australia-protest-against-the-setting-up-of-an-islamic-center

Rose said...

It is unfortunate that he had to defend himself. He did a great job, though! He was well-spoken and right on the money.

FaroCelestial said...

I'm glad you posted this.

Royal Son said...

1moremuslim - Mary was 12 in the Apocrypha????

Are you kidding me? The apocrpha comprises the INTERTESTIMENTAL books - and were written PRIOR to the incarnation of Jesus Christ.

You are propagating tales which have no basis for authority, no roots back to antiquity, and yet we are supposed to believe in those more so than the earliest writings about Jesus' life mentioned in the gospels. Please tell me how this can be.

Documentation and sources please.

Fernando said...

Hi brother Squirrel... great hairdoo you have in your icon... glad to see you arounde here... Hope to see more posts from you...

Mike A Robinson said...

A.M. may have already posted this link and it may not be anything new, but it is a concise and cogent review of the book "Closing of the Muslim Mind."

http://www.nationalobserver.net/2010/83_6_book_reilly.htm

goethechosemercy said...

Marvelous video, and very true.
If you are a Christian, and you are honest with yourself, you must conclude and say that Islam is a profane religion, and the utterance of a false prophet. It's just that simple, and any Christian who cannot assert that is deceiving him or herself.

goethechosemercy said...

Marouene--
You can judge the progressiveness of a society not by what it has, but by what it has left behind.
The practices and crimes of the past Christendom do not excuse the crimes and practices of present day Islam.

funnyface187 said...

sorry to but in on the thread but i could not help but notice .One poster kept typing this.

And about harming a child, a direct you to the OT, and tell me what Jesus have done to Children»...
Now because some of the posters do not have a great command of the English Language (of wich this is my Mother tongue) i am confused if it was to direct one to scripture showing that our Lord either spoke of or physically harmed a child ;this cannot be because JESUS was born some centuries after the last Prophet of OT penned the last word .If it was to show as i said it didnt happen i apologise.
One more point if this Allah is the same God as that of Abraham and Moses did HE not walk and talk in eden with Adam and Others (Enoch).
Now i am not upto date with script and verse but when the messenger of God appeared in the ot and the nt were the recipients of that message not filled with love and warmth . Where as Mohammed was struck with fear and convulsion on more than one occassion .

minoria said...

Hello:

I have not commented a bit due to a debate I am having with an atheist.And he knows alot of science and only likes what can be verified.I told him a bit about the work of GARY HABERMAS on the existence of evidence that there is LIFE after DEATH.See his conference on the evidence,this guy is one great communicator:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oy2FKqx2ew4

A REQUEST MADE BY A MUSLIM
I was asked(during a debate in yahya's blog about the gospels)to ask answeringmuslims if they can check and verify on the arguments presented on yahya snow's blog by bassam and 1moremuslim about that in the original Arabic the words attributed to Ibn Sad "The people have been guilty of deceit in the reading of the Qur’an” do not exist.
They affirm it is incorect,and so if when you can you can check into their arguments to see if their case is solid.
Thanks in advance.