Sunday, November 21, 2010

Was Islam Designed to Satisfy Muhammad's Desires?

Generally, we don't post pictures of Muhammad here unless it serves an important journalistic purpose (e.g. showing people the cartoons that Muslims are willing to kill over). The following video makes an important point.

It's ironic that the primary reason Muslims forbid images of Muhammad is that such images may lead people to worship Muhammad. The reason this is ironic is that Islam is an utterly Muhammad-centered religion. Many Qur'anic revelations seem to have no purpose other than satisfying Muhammad's desires. Thus, while Muslims go to great lengths to avoid giving Muhammad honors that only God deserves, by assenting to the Qur'an, they have already deified Muhammad.

54 comments:

Sophie said...

No one is going to bow down and worship a shifty-looking man with a glove puppet.

The Apologetic Front said...

I wonder how many will die as a result of this video?

Yusuf Alamo said...

In The Name of Allaah,
The Most Gracious,
The Most Merciful.

Peace be unto you.

@TPF:

In your last post you asked:

"I wonder how many will die as a result of this video?"

Allaah willing, none. May Allaah guide us all.

Ameen.

Salaam

Sophie said...

'My Lord! leave not one of the disbelievers on earth! If you leave them, they will mislead your slaves...' This must be the voice of Muhammad, not Allah - who would Allah call 'My Lord'? Who are the believers slaves to if not Allah? I thought the Quran was meant to be revelations from Allah for Muhammad to repeat, or am I wrong about that?

David Wood said...

Yusuf,

Thank you for not freaking out over the image of Muhammad. Most of the Muslims who contact me (even the peaceful ones) tend to lose it over things as silly as cartoons.

You've earned an Acts 17 Golden Reward Ticket. If there's a topic you're particularly interested in, feel free to write 500-1000 words on the topic as an introduction for everyone. I'll post your essay as an article, and people can discuss it in the comments section.

Sophie said...

There it is again!

'Verily, We have made lawful to you your wives and those captives whom Allah has given you as war booty'.

If Allah was speaking, he would've said'...We have made lawful... whom We have given...'

If Gabriel was speaking, he would have said 'Allah has made lawful... whom Allah has given...'

Who is meant to be speaking here? I have found reading the Koran very confusing because I can't always tell who is meant to be talking, and sometimes it is hard to tell whether the verse is directed at Muhammad or everybody.

Sophie said...

Yeah, Yusuf is cool. Looking forward to reading whatever he has to say :-)

minoria said...

Yes,also looking foward to anything Yusuf Alamo might write.By the way Alamo is the name of a kind of tree.And a Catholic mission in Texas was called the Alamo,which later became the place of a battle where Davy Crocket was killed in 1836.

Anthony Rogers said...

Yusuf,

I would like to put in my recommendation that you spend your Golden Reward Ticket on the subject of the Lord appearing to Abraham, a fact that rules out any and all claims by Muslims that Islam is part of the Abrahamic tradition.

cmclvr said...

There is no doubt that the so called divine revelations are plain secretions of Mohammed's mind to serve his selfish desires. A brief history of his grand deception which we all understood thanks to wonderful sites devoted to telling the truth like yours will prove the point beyond doubt.

It is common that many people hear internal voices and its contents have something to do with their pathological and psychological make up and will even disappear after being treated with suitable drugs.. This is what Mohammed experienced and was terrified of the voices he heard. Unfortunately, Mohammad's first wife, Khadija, termed these as divine voice just to calm down the terrified young husband. This brilliant twist given by his wife gave him the idea of donning a Prophet's role to fulfill his lust for power, wealth and sex by terming his hallucinations as divine revelations. First, he tried to emulate a typical prophet by making a mess of all the biblical contents he managed to memorize hearing from Jews and Christians. Unfortunately, a phony person had no chance of convincing intelligent and discerning people projecting himself as a Prphet without performing some miracle like the earlier Prophets did. He was frustrated and longed to settle scores with those who rejected him, specially, the Jews.

He could not think of doing it in any other way other than resorting to crime and violence. The only recourse left for him was to brainwash thugs and illiterates by converting them to killer gangs. He decided to become the first person to gain prophet hood based on crime and violence in history. This is not possible without providing divine sanctity and approval to everything that are immoral, sinful and criminal acts like murder, loot and rape. He did it with two childish concepts that amazingly worked.. First, he created an un-Godly killer God, Allah. Next, like a child, he called himself and his thugs as believers loved by this God who loves to hate those who do not believe Him! Further, he said, Allah gives outlandish after life booty to its followers who go after the job of converting the rest to believers compared to those who prefer to be just his slaves. It did not occur to morons that time as well as to followers even today as how to accept a God who is so weak, unsure and helpless that He desperately needs the help of its brainwashed followers to force others to believe in Him at any cost when he himself is supposed to be the creator of all living beings. What is the justification advanced by the wily Mohammed to circumvent this logical question asked even by his illiterae thugs? He used the same age old trick – unbelievers have gone astray and Allah desires to bring them back on track or punish them for refusal to obey! Even this trick would not have worked for long. Then, what is the ultimate trick that worked? He converted the criminal and violent ways of going after unbelievers as a lucrative divinely sanctioned activity of killing, looting, pillaging, forcing slavery and committing rape! This is unparalleled in human history. Thus, the world’s first ruthless Mafia Criminal gang with a Mafia rule book was born 1400 years ago and Mohammed became the richest war lord in the Arabian desert.

The world is still reeling under the effects of this mental virus bomb that is more deadly than an atomic bomb. Its followers are its biggest victims and it is very difficult to open up their eyes as the brain washing by this religious virus has mutated in to several virulent forms and sunk deep to the DNA level of its followers due to passing of it for generations for more than 1400 years. Mohammed’s lies are so easy to understand by rationalists, agnostics and atheists. But, it is difficult for those born with religious inclination. It is long way before a solution to this seemingly incurable problem can be found.

hugh watt said...

Muslims object to being called "Mohammedans" because they say they do not worship him. These Hadith may answer why many disagree with their denials.

Muslim: Book 30: Hadith 5761 Anas b. Malik reported that Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) used to come to our house and there was perspiration upon his body. My mother brought a bottle and began to pour the sweat in that. When Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) got up he said: Umm Sulaini, what is this that you are doing? Thereupon she said: That is your sweat which we mix in our perfume and it becomes the most fragrant perfume.

Why did he not object to this?

Muslim: Book 30: Hadith 5760 Anas reported that Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) had a very fair complexion and (the drops) of his perspiration shone like pearls, and when he walked he walked inclining forward, and I never touched brocade and silk (and found it) as soft as the softness of the palm of Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) and I never smelt musk or ambergris and found its fragrance as sweet as the fragrance of Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him).

Bukhari: Book 7: Volume 66: Hadith 378 Narrated Asma’ bint Abu Bakr:
I conceived ‘Abdullah bin AzZubair at Mecca and went out (of Mecca) while I was about to give birth. I came to Medina and encamped at Quba’, and gave birth at Quba’. Then I brought the child to Allah’s Apostle and placed it (on his lap). He asked for a date, chewed it, and put his saliva in the mouth of the child. So the first thing to enter its stomach was the saliva of Allah’s Apostle. Then he did its Tahnik with a date, and invoked Allah to bless him. It was the first child born in the Islamic era, therefore they (Muslims) were very happy with its birth, for it had been said to them that the Jews had bewitched them, and so they would not produce any offspring.

hugh watt said...

2-2

Muslim: Book 31: Hadith 6091

We said: Allah’s Messenger, we have readily accepted them. Then Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) called for a cup of water and washed his hands in that and face too and put the saliva in it and then said: Drink out of it and pour it over your faces and over your chest and gladden yourselves. They took hold of the cup and did as Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) had commanded them to do. Thereupon Umm Salama called from behind the veil: Spare some water in your vessel for your mother also, and they also gave some water which had been spared for her.

In Muslim: Book 23: Hadith 5057
Muhammad spits in food which was eaten by his followers.

Ablutions Bukhari: Book 1: Volume 4: Hadith 171 Narrated Ibn Sirrn:
I said to ‘Ablda, “I have some of the hair of the Prophet which I got from Anas or from his family.” ‘Abida replied. “No doubt if I had a single hair of that it would have been dearer to me than the whole world and whatever is in it.”

Ibn al-Sakan narrated through Safwan ibn Hubayra from the latter's father: Thabit al-Bunani said: Anas ibn Malik said to me (on his death-bed): "This is one of the hairs of Allah's Messenger, Allah's blessings and peace upon him. I want you to place it under my tongue." Thabit continued: I placed it under his tongue, and he was buried with it under his tongue." [al-Isaba fi tamyiz al-sahaba (Calcutta - 1853), Vol. 1, Page 72]

If this is not idolatry, what is? Had this behavior been applied to any other person Muslims would call it just that!

Btw, which one of the talented Act17 team is playing the piano? Nice fingers:}

APB said...

To david wood

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/11/22/oklahoma.islamic.law/index.html?hpt=T2


Arguments to take place in Oklahoma over ban on Islamic law in courts

Yusuf Alamo said...

In The Name of Allaah,
The Most Gracious,
The Most Merciful.

Peace be upon you.

@Mr. Wood:

Praise be to Allaah. No problem, sir.

Astaghfir'Allaah, It doesn't make sense for me to lose all faculty of reason over an alleged picture of The Prophet Muhammad (Peace and Blessings Be Upon him), a man whom I have never seen.

Praise be to Allaah, I feel very humbled that anyone would want to read something that I (an ordinary lay muslim) wrote.

Allaah willing, please remember that I am still a new muslim. Subhana'Allaah, this means that I am not a shaykh, an imam, or an ustaadh.

I am by no means qualified to teach about matters of Islaamic jurisprudence.

Yusuf Alamo said...

In The Name of Allaah,
The Most Gracious,
The Most Merciful.

Peace be unto you.

@Mr. Wood:

Allaah willing, allow me a bit of time to choose a topic that my teachers would feel I am adequately able to explain.

Allaah willing, it is more than likely that the topic will be about a fundamental or rudimentary aspect of the deen.

Praise be to Allaah, I appreciate your respect and good manners. It is pleasantly refreshing to receive such treatment from a fellow New Yorker.

Thank you, and salaam.

Yusuf Alamo said...

In The Name of Allaah,
The Most Gracious,
The Most Merciful.

Peace be unto you.

@Sophie:

In your previous post you commented:

"Yeah, Yusuf is cool. Looking forward to reading whatever he has to say :-)"

Praise be to Allaah, I appreciate your kindness and respect. I'm flattered. Thank you.

Salaam.

Yusuf Alamo said...

In The Name of Allaah,
The Most Gracious,
The Most Merciful.

Peace be unto you.

@minoria:

In your last post you commented:

"Yes,also looking foward to anything Yusuf Alamo might write.By the way Alamo is the name of a kind of tree.And a Catholic mission in Texas was called the Alamo,which later became the place of a battle where Davy Crocket was killed in 1836."

Praise be to Allaah,
The Lord of all the Worlds.

Thank you for your kindness and respect towards me. Allaah willing, please know that I tend to reciprocate such good treatment.

Salaam.

Yusuf Alamo said...

In The Name of Allaah,
The Most Gracious,
The Most Merciful.

Peace be unto you.

@Anthony Rogers:

In your last post you stated:

"I would like to put in my recommendation that you spend your Golden Reward Ticket on the subject of the Lord appearing to Abraham, a fact that rules out any and all claims by Muslims that Islam is part of the Abrahamic tradition."

Allaah willing, to which textual source are you referring to? The Bible or The Qur'aan?

Allah willing, please forgive me for any unintented disrespect for what I am about to say.

If you are referring to the Bible, then you should understand that since I am a muslim, I do not rely on the Bible as an accurate source of information or guidance.

Praise be to Allaah, this is why I have never spoken about the Bible or referenced it's verses in anything I've posted on this blog.

I have simply never needed to because the christians on this blog do a fine job of that themselves.

Allaah willing, if you are referring to The Qur'aan, please inform me about which ayats concerning Prophet Ibraheem (Peace and Blessings Be Upon him) you are talking about. Thank you.

Salaam.

Anthony Rogers said...

No offense taken, Yusuf. Thanks for confirming that Islam represents a complete departure from the faith of Abraham and rests solely in the say-so of one man who came several millennia after Abraham.

Yusuf Alamo said...

In The Name of Allaah,
The Most Gracious,
The Most Merciful.

Peace be unto you.

@Anthony Rogers:

In your last post you stated:

"No offense taken, Yusuf. Thanks for confirming that Islam represents a complete departure from the faith of Abraham and rests solely in the say-so of one man who came several millennia after Abraham."

[2:135] And they say, "Be Jews or Christians, then you will be guided." Say (to them, O Muhammad Peace be upon him ), "Nay, (We follow) only the religion of Ibrahim (Abraham), Hanifa [Islamic Monotheism, i.e. to worship none but Allah (Alone)], and he was not of Al-Mushrikun (those who worshipped others along with Allah - see V.2:105)."

[3:95] Say (O Muhammad SAW): "Allah has spoken the truth; follow the religion of Ibrahim (Abraham) Hanifa (Islamic Monotheism, i.e. he used to worship Allah Alone), and he was not of Al-Mushrikun." (See V.2:105)[3:67] Ibrahim (Abraham) was neither a Jew nor a Christian, but he was a true Muslim Hanifa (Islamic Monotheism - to worship none but Allah Alone) and he was not of Al-Mushrikun (See V.2:105).

[3:65] O people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians)! Why do you dispute about Ibrahim (Abraham), while the Taurat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel) were not revealed till after him? Have you then no sense?

[6:161] Say (O Muhammad SAW): "Truly, my Lord has guided me to a Straight Path, a right religion, the religion of Ibrahim (Abraham), Hanifa [i.e. the true Islamic Monotheism - to believe in One God (Allah i.e. to worship none but Allah, Alone)] and he was not of Al-Mushrikun (see V.2:105)."

[2:130] And who turns away from the religion of Ibrahim (Abraham) (i.e. Islamic Monotheism) except him who befools himself? Truly, We chose him in this world and verily, in the Hereafter he will be among the righteous.

hugh watt said...

I'd like to see Yusuf write something about the benefits Islam has had upon humanity. I know I'd read it.

hugh watt said...

Perhaps his thoughts on this:
Muslim schooling-'anti-Semetic

Sophie said...

If you're worried that you won't do justice to the topic because you're not a scholar, Yusuf, perhaps you could write from personal experience; for example, you could write about what was the deciding factor in your decision to commit to Islam, or what kind of imapact Islam has had on your life, or something like that. Although that might need a very thick skin to write about something personal like that because inevitably it will be criticised and picked apart in the comments section, and it might feel like an attack on you personally. Ah well, it was just a thought.

Anthony Rogers said...

Yusufy, thanks again for confirming that Islam rejects all of God's recorded dealings with Abraham in the past in favor of the unattested and unacredited claims of one man to be proclaiming the faith of Abraham. It is quite revealing that the very person that Muhammad appealed to in order to argue for the truth of his message over that of Jews and Christians, actually experienced and believed things that are antithetical to Islam but yet comport perfectly with what was realized and accomplished in the Lord Jesus Christ in the New Testament.

If Abraham was really the spiritual father of Islam, then of course you would have no trouble believing in the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ, for this is not something Abraham did. Abraham rejoiced to see the Lord Jesus in his day, but like the Jews of the first century who repudiated Jesus' teaching that He appeared to Abraham (John 8), so likewise Muslims repudiate it today. Nay, they even go beyond unbelieving Jews and deny even the possibility that God can assume a human form in order to converse with people like Abraham, the friend of God.

Anthony Rogers said...

Part 1/2

Yusuf,

To further expatiate on what I am saying, you have agreed that Islam rejects and therefore ignores the preperatory steps that God took in the gradual unfolding of His desire to tabernacle among men, and this shows us at least a couple of very important things: 1) it shows that Islam is not on a continuum with the truth as it was known to and by Abraham; and 2) it explains why Muslims cannot even adequately process the Christian belief in the incarnation.

Just as the Old Testament says God appeared to Abraham, so it likewise tells us that God appeared to many others. Moreover, it tells us that God Himself ordered for a tabernacle to be built and later a temple where He may dwell in the midst of His people, which was surrounded by all sorts of other things that also foreshadowed what God would do when He would become incarnate and accomplish all that He had promised to do on behalf of His people.

God's desire to dwell in the midst of His people, commonly called by scholars the Immanuel principle, is the central promise and chief benefit of God's covenants with man. As the prophet Isaiah said, this great truth would be realized in a virgin born son, who would be Immanuel. And as the apostle John declared of the Lord Jesus: "The Word became flesh and dwelt [lit. Gr. "tabernacled"] among us...the law was given through Moses, but grace and truth [i.e. the reality the shadows of the Mosaic law pointed to] came in Jesus Christ."

This is why Jesus said at His appearing, "one greater than the Temple is here", and is also why He spoke of His body as God's Temple. In fact, Jesus said by His tabernacling among us, that the Temple and its services would be rendered obsolete, for their intent was realized and fulfilled in His person and the work He was about to complete. As He said to the woman at the well, worship would no longer be oriented towards the temple at Jerusalem, but true worship will be in terms of the realities they signified, i.e. true worship of the Father will be in Spirit and in truth, the latter of which points to the reality embodied in Jesus over against the shadows that prefigured it. Finally, because the Jews, according to the predeterminate plan and foreknowledge of God, would destroy God's true Temple, the Lord Jesus Christ, Jesus promised that their earthly temple would be destroyed. As a consequence of ignoring everything that came before so that they did not recognize Him at His coming, the Jews of that day rejected the Lord of Glory. This was something they intended for evil, but God ordained it for our good, for the salvation of His elect. For reason of rejecting Him, the Lord Jesus taught that their own house or temple was being left to them desolate and was shortly thereafter going to be destroyed.

Anthony Rogers said...

Part 2/2

You are in the same predicament. You reject what God said to prepare the world for His coming. But like the Jews you want to ignore it and pretend you are a follower of the faith of Abraham. Nothing could be further from the truth. In rejecting what came before you also reject Jesus for who He really is, and in rejecting Jesus for who He really is you are enmeshed in things that are not only not the reality to which God was leading His people through the temple and its ceremonies, but you are not even clinging to things that are a shadow of those realities. Indeed, you are clinging to pale images of shadowy figures and ceremonies which themselves point to but still fall short of those realities.

In the place of Christ, you not only do not bow down in the direction of the location where God set His name and dwelt in the midst of His people, i.e. the temple that was in Jerusalem, but you bow down towards a place that He never chose, never set His name, and never even dwelled in. This is a woeful position to be in, but I hope you will see in what I have said a light at the end of the tunnel and will begin to make your way towards it and away from the dark shadows that now enshroud you and keep you from seeing Him for who He truly is - God With Us.

Yusuf Alamo said...

In The Name of Allaah,
The Most Gracious,
The Most Merciful.

Peace be unto you.

@hugh watt:

Praise be to Allaah,
The Lord of the Worlds.

Subhana'Allaah, the last time I checked, no one had a monopoly on humane, ethical, or moral conduct. Not muslims, not christians, not jews, and no, not even atheists.

Allaah willing, by the same token, I have yet to find anyone who has a monopoly on inhumane, unethical, or immoral conduct. Not muslims, not christians, not jews, and no, not even atheists.

I find it arrogant when people seem to think that they are above being under a moral microscope simply because they are muslim, christian, or jewish.

The minute someone calls them out on their misconduct, that person (or persons) runs the risk of being labeled islaamophobic, anti-christian, or anti-semitic.

(*What makes a person semitic anyway?)

Regardless, I'm not the type to jump the gun and accuse someone of this based on a personal bias or suspicion. I would prefer to gather enough information available to me before eventually coming to a reasonable conclusion.

Salaam.

mike said...

@ Anthony,
where did you get you apologetics degree? Whereas Yusufy got his Golden ticket, you get an official F. Your thesis is ridiculous. Your failure to make sense rests in the fact that you are unable to step outside of your Christian mindset and worldview. You cannot even entertain the idea that perhaps the accusations you pose against Islam can be used against you as well. How many athiests believe that the bible in its entirety is a fairytale? Despite what you say your evidence is no stronger than that of a Muslims. We both rely on our Holy Books. I know you are now going to begin by making up more asenine comments about Islam. Honestly, we dont expect anything less from you. No offense intended btw, just as you dont intend any offense towards mohamadens.

Anthony Rogers said...

Mike,

Let's just assume that since I can at least spell "Muhammadan", then perhaps my credentials might exceed your own. Indeed, if I ever wrote "Mohamadens" on a paper, even with all the different spellings of that word that are acceptable even in academic circles, I would have been marked off for it. If I went on in the paper to ignore the argument of someone I was supposed to be responding to, and if I simply asserted something as asinine as "that's ridiculous", as if that is an argument of some sort rather than just a naked assertion fully exposing the prejudice of the one making it, then you can be sure I would have been given an "F".

So, if you don't mind, I think I will restrict myself to speaking with Yusuf. He has already demonstrated that his character is a good bit better than that of many Muslims, some of whom have no hesitation in reminding us what Islam is all about.

Sophie said...

Mike.

Anthony has given an argument for the continuity of the message of the Bible. He has shown how the human temple of Christ's body is, biblically, a continuation of the Jewish temple. He has shown that jut as Abraham saw God manifest as a Man, so the first century Jews saw God manifest as a Man. He has shown that just as was prophecied in the Old Testament, the Immanuel ('God With Us') came to earth.

The key here is continuity; that Anthony has presented a case for the continuity of the New and Old Testaments, whereas Muhammad can show no such continuity with the Old Testament - in order to show even the faintest, most unreliable shreds of continuity between the Old Testament and the Koran, Muslims have to dismiss almost all of the OT as corrupted. A lot of Muslims would be too scared of the repercussions from family members to even read the OT; that's how far apart Islam and the OT are. That's how little the Koran has in common with the Old Testament. Christians don't have to dismiss it as corrupted (without being able to give any real evidence of where, how, why etc.); in fact, Christians can make a case for the two books being one continuous story. That was Anthony's point.

You'll say that my argument is invalid because atheists would see both the Koran and the Bible as nonsense - well, if you present the facts to an atheist, even if they think both religions are total nonsense, if they had to go with the odds and pick one book that was slightly less nonsensical, slightly more likely to have anything to do with an actual guy called Abraham, then they would pick the Bible every time. There is NO possible evidence of continuity between what we know of Abraham and the Abrahamic faith written about in the Old Testament, and Islam, invented in Arabia, by a pagan, and if you can't see that then your capacity for basic reasoning has been torn to ribbons by Islam or by something else. If you seriously think that reason or probability has absolutely no place in faith because 'we both rely on our Holy Books', then you may as well start believing anything you like, start believing YOU are God if you like. Me? With your casual disregard for rationality, I'd start believing that my life's mission is to cajole Meatloaf, Chuck Norris and Anne Widdecombe (fierce British politician) into forming a brand new real-life A Team with me, and then I'd realise it was too difficult a task and just sit and eat chocolate til I was sick as an act of reverence towards my new god, Dave. Or Brandy, or Staplegun, or whatever I choose to call my god/s.

No offence, of course!!!

helen said...

how convenient

Paul Hubert said...

I would have LIKED to see Qur'an 'chapter and verse' cited in the video.

Lately, I've decided that MOCKERY is NEVER to be the response of ANY Christian, based on Jesus words in Matthew 5:22.

I appreciate the INFORMATION, but citations would have provided AUTHORITY to them.

David Wood said...

Paul,

Qur'an references were in the corner.

thereligionofconquest said...

Hi Anthony, I would like to point out that as a recent convert to Islam, Yusuf is no more qualified to be a "spokesperson" or "representative" for Islam than a recent convert to Christianity would be for Christianity. It would be unwise for anyone to look to any recent convert to any religion to "confirm" or not confirm the basic tenets of that faith. They are just babes.

Yusuf has won my respect because he is intuitively following the biblical mandate that not many should be religious teachers because they are held to higher accountability. I have been a Christian for over 20 years and I am still sometimes uncomfortable "teaching". I can easily defend the faith against a false teaching but if I was on a blog that was mostly Muslim and was asked to submit an "essay", I would not have done so 10 years ago. Of course I think Yusuf is following a false faith and a false God, but he does have much respect for the things of God. In my book, that is highly commendable. TWO THUMBS UP TO YOU MR. YUSUF!!!

I have been checking out this new site I found (http://www.citizenwarrior.com/) and I have learned from it that sometimes we win by loosing, and sometimes we lose by winning, when we are trying to persuade or convince others.

Be Blessed Brother,
damon

Anthony Rogers said...

Thanks, Sophie, that was very well said.

hugh watt said...

Yusuf:

Try to understand from my angle. To hate someone based upon ethnicity, makes that person[s] 'anti'whoever. Muhammad hated Jews because of their ethnicity, +ians because he misunderstood our beliefs. Try to think of it in terms of skin color or gender. Why then should we not only condemn Muhammad and Muslims, by their association with Islamic teachings, with being anti-Semitic?

Here's the full Panorama. This is what Muslim children are being taught. What kind of a world are these young minds being moulded to live in?

British schools, Muslim rules.

Let's see if there's a Muslim backlash against those feeding Muslim children this stuff. Let's see if the parents rise up and say how disgusted they are by this. Let's see if Muslim politicians in the U.K are outspoken against it, and what they do about it.

hugh watt said...

Damon:

Yusuf is no spring-chicken Muslim. He's been around the Islamic block already. I would not ask him to go deep into Islamic teaching, but simply ask him to give a reasonable outline as to why he became a Muslim after rejecting his parents beliefs. He's said something in the past about it. Perhaps if he chose to write an article explaining why he decided to follow Islam and why he rejects +ianity, then we'd have a fair reason to challenge him on those things. Likewise, if I were asked by a Muslim blog to say why I believe +ianity and reject Islam, I'd jump at the opportunity, no worries.

Anthony Rogers said...

thereligionofconquest,

Thanks for pointing out what is not disputed by me, i.e. Yusuf is a very respectable fellow. However, in my book, that eminently qualifies him to write an essay about why he is a Muslim or how he accounts for things like God appearing to Abraham, especially when the latter is a crucial stepping stone for Christianity and is absolutely precluded by Islamic presuppositions. Better to let him speak now with as much respect as he has, then to wait until Islam works itself out into all corners of his thinking, and the respect that we commend today turns into the hostility that is all too common among Muslims whose attitudes are more consistent with that encouraged by the Sunnah of Muhammad and the example of the earliest Muslims. Indeed, perhaps this gesture of extending to Yusuf such an opportunity because he has such a good attitude will encourage him to maintain this posture in the future even after other inducements have come his way that would seek to make him behave like a curmudgeon ("Do not take Jews and Christians for your friends", etc). Furthermore, I think it is better to get him thinking and conversing about subjects as crucial as the one I mentioned before he digs his heels in very deeply.

In any event, I didn't give Yusuf the now famous "golden ticket", though I did affirm my respect for Yusuf's attitude and do concur with David in his decision to allow Yusuf to write an essay of his choosing to be featured on the blog.

Furthermore, my suggestion that Yusuf write on Yahweh appearing to Abraham is based (in part) on Yusuf's comment in another thread, to which I would draw your attention: here

If Yusuf chooses to write on another topic (or no topic), that is, of course, completely up to him. Far be it from me to play Slugworth and try and take his golden ticket from him. He has earned it.

Finally, Yusuf is already commenting on his religion in the comments section. He has also said he will consult with his Imam with respect to any topic he decides to write upon on the main page. I think this overcomes your concern that Yusuf not presume to be a teacher.

I hope you can agree and at least give one thumb up to David's decision and maybe even another thumb up for the topic I suggested. That way we can at least take consolation in the fact that we have two thumbs up between us.

Regards,

Tony

thereligionofconquest said...

Hi Hugh, my first thought was that I would like to see Yusuf give his testimony as to why he chose Islam over Christianity rather than a doctrinal treatise on any subject because of course if he consults his Imam he will just be regurgitating Dawa propaganda. Likewise I feel that would be a great launching to a good conversation. But, I believe to say Yusuf "confirms" anything, as if he is any other than the recent convert he says he is, is just folly in the same manner as to say that Islam says Jesus is God manifest in the flesh if Yusuf happened to be ignorant enough of his faith to make that claim (slim chance - I know). Every Christian I know has been very eager to give their testimony the day they where touched by the Lord, but where not qualified to confirm or deny anything concerning doctrinal stances until after much independent study.

Hi Anthony, Thanks for the link to Yusuf’s comment in the other thread. I read that before but did not make the correlation.

Does it matter if someone cannot spell Mohammedan or not ( I hope my spell check caught that correctly - least I be disqualified)? How does spelling relate to the content? And does it matter if the privilege extended to Yusuf by David is "famous" or not? Sounds like hyperbolic and superlative rhetoric to me because lets face it, who knows about Yusuf’s Golden Reward Ticket besides us here on this blog?

My point is that Islam and it's teachings are what they are whether Yusuf confirms or denies any of it and it does not foster good dialogue to act like Yusuf is an authority when he is not. It does not seem to me your being even handed because we must realize that if you or myself say anything that is contrary to orthodox Christian doctrine it does not validate or invalidate orthodoxy. What Yusuf believes or says is irrelevant to what Islam is and teaches. That is all I am trying to point out.

In my heart I first gave two thumbs up to David for what I thought was a very classy move and I still give two thumbs up to Yusuf but I cannot extend a thumbs up to your suggestion (even though it is a great suggestion) because of the way you approached it by acting like anything Yusuf says has any kind of authority and represents what Islam teaches. I think he should be free to submit his essay on any topic he feels comfortable writing about, not coerced into a topic of your liking that he may not want to write about.

I would love to see everyone here take the content of Yusuf’s essay to task but it is my opinion that your methodology might cause Yusuf to not even cash in his ticket. It would be pertinent to ask, do you agree that it was a classy move for David to give Yusuf his Golden Reward Ticket?

Hi Yusuf, please make sure you take advantage of David’s offer and write on what you want to, I would love the civilized dialogue.

Be Blessed ya’ll (not bad spelling or grammer - I’m from Texas)
damon

Yusuf Alamo said...

In The name of Allaah,
The Most Gracious,
The Most Merciful.

Peace be unto you.

@Sophie:

In your previous post you stated:

"If you're worried that you won't do justice to the topic because you're not a scholar, Yusuf, perhaps you could write from personal experience; for example, you could write about what was the deciding factor in your decision to commit to Islam, or what kind of imapact Islam has had on your life, or something like that. Although that might need a very thick skin to write about something personal like that because inevitably it will be criticised and picked apart in the comments section, and it might feel like an attack on you personally. Ah well, it was just a thought."

Praise be to Allaah,
The Lord of the Worlds.

I certainly don't feel as if I am above critism. In fact, I welcome constructive critism regardless of whom it is from.

All gratitude is due to Allaah for the diversity of thoughts, opinions, and critisms that I have received (on a myriad of subjects) from the various teachers I have had throughout my life so far.

Praise be to Allaah, I understand that much (if not all) of what I was taught was intended for my growth, benefit, and well-being.

Allaah willing, I pray that I will always be grateful to Allaah for those teachers and loved ones who have contributed to my tutelage and upbringing. Ameen.

Subhana'Allaah, it took me seven years (from 2001 until 2008) of study and self-introspection before I accepted Islaam. Praise be to Allaah, I believe that it was the hardest (and best) decision of my life.

Allaah knows best, I don't think that I am ready to explain seven years worth of research and reflection in the space of only 500 to 1,000 words.

Allaah willing, someday I might.

Until then, I don't believe that it is important how I became a muslim. I believe that it is more important that I am a muslim and (because of that) I bear the responsibility of striving to uphold the moral teachings of my newfound faith.

Salaam.

Paul Hubert said...

David,

re: Qur'an references in the corner - thanks, I found them. I JUST got new glasses, perhaps THAT had something to do with it. Also, the contrast was poor.

Anthony Rogers said...

thereligionofconquest,

This will be my last reply on this. I am going to win by losing, as you suggested before in another connection, and break off this discussion as unprofitable. You can continue to pursue this on your end if you feel the need to:

First, I wasn’t chiding you for not knowing how to spell anything. My remark was to Mike who made a point of dismissing the substance of what I said by asking a rhetorical question about my credentials, which you will see I did not provide. In other words, I made the same basic point that you pretended needed to be made to me, i.e. the substance of what people say is more important than their ability to point to their academic accomplishments. Of course I could have taken your approach in another comment and let everyone know how long I have been a Christian, what schooling I have received, whether or not I am now qualified to teach, and how easily I can defend the faith, but that kind of answer would only feed the (false) assumption of the person I was responding to. In short, I wasn’t talking to you, and context is all important. I’m sorry you missed these two points.

Second, as I am sure you can imagine, I found unconvincing your claim that you were in agreement with David in your heart of hearts that Yusuf be granted the opportunity to write on the blog and that it is irrelevant who offered Yusuf this opportunity. You commended Yusuf for his reticence to try and teach on Islam, and imputed to me the assumption that by encouraging him to take the opportunity to write something I was tacitly saying that he is somehow an official spokesman for Islam, a word you put in quotes as if you were quoting me (You weren’t!!!). But again, it was David who extended to Yusuf the invitation to write something, and so it was really to David that your words of criticism – never mind your heart for the moment, which none of us can see – naturally apply, at least primarily.

Third, As for your claim that you simply disagreed with the way that I introduced a possible subject for Yusuf to write on, I can hardly see why. Here is all I said:

"I would like to put in my recommendation that you spend your Golden Reward Ticket on the subject of the Lord appearing to Abraham, a fact that rules out any and all claims by Muslims that Islam is part of the Abrahamic tradition."

For my part, I simply can' see anything wrong with how I broached the idea. I’m sorry you saw it differently. Perhaps you can go over that sentence a few times and see if yours was a charitable reading of what I said. I will leave it to you to decide if you still need to see something that isn’t there. Thankfully others do not appear to have taken it that way.

Semper Paratus,

Anthony Rogers

CharlesMartel said...

Something tells me Anthony won't be extending Damon a Golden Ticket to write on the blog any time soon. Maybe he can take a lesson from Yusuf Alamo and not read things into what others are saying in the future and not be so divisive with other brothers. Just a thought.

CharlesMartel said...

Sorry for the ambiguity, but "he" above refers to Damon.

Damon Whitsell said...

Hi Charles. Thanks for using my proper name and for the heads up to take another look to see if I am misunderstanding anything. Maybe because it is late and I am tired, but I still don't see it.

Hi Anthony, I just read everything here again and I'll read through it again tommorow to see if I can get a better grip on things. I'll just tell you that it upset me that you said twice Yusuf "confirmed" something about Islam, and I don't see where he "confirmed" what you said, even in the other post comments you linked to. So did he confirm these things in other threads besides this and the one you linked to? Or am I just not seeing it here or there?

It also rubbed me wrong that you infered that Mikes mispelling disqualified what he said about your thesis. So it could be that I was reacting with pure emotion and I am too tired to connect all the dots and context together.

Simply put, it looked to me that you where being a jerk to Yusuf and Mike, but maybe it was me that was acting like a jerk. I'll have to look at all this tommorow when perhaps I'll be understanding and thinking more clearly.

:)
Be Blessed Ya'll
damon

hugh watt said...

If Yusuf can't explain in 400-500 words why he became a Muslim - which to me shows a weak believer- may I suggest an essay explaining his reasons for not accepting +ianity. This, I feel will show more how he thinks, or does not.

I can't help but notice how this thread has strayed from the main header. There's so much more to say on this.

Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 173:

Narrated Jabir bin ‘Abdullah:
The Prophet said, “If you enter (your town) at night (after coming from a journey), do not enter upon your family till the woman whose husband was absent (from the house) shaves her pubic hair .”

Why? What does this have to do with God? There's so many Islamic teachings that seem to suit Muhammad nicely.

Yusuf Alamo said...

In The Name of Allaah,
The Most Gracious,
The Most Merciful.

Peace be unto you.

@hugh watt:

In your previous post you stated:

"Try to understand from my angle. To hate someone based upon ethnicity, makes that person[s] 'anti'whoever. Muhammad hated Jews because of their ethnicity, +ians because he misunderstood our beliefs. Try to think of it in terms of skin color or gender."

Praise be to Allaah.

How could you say that the Prophet Muhammad (Peace and Blessings be upon him) hated the Jews in his country because of their ethnicity?

He (Peace and Blessings be upon him) and they were both ethnically arab.

How can you say that he (Peace and Blessings be upon him) hated Christians because he misunderstood their beliefs?

He (Peace and Blessings be upon him)certainly understood Christian beliefs more than enough to convince Negus the King of Abyssinia and Heraclius the King of Byzantium.

Subhana'Allaah, with all due respect, has anyone before me ever informed you that he (Peace and Blessings be upon him) didn't hate either of these men?

You closed out this post by stating:

"Why then should we not only condemn Muhammad and Muslims, by their association with Islamic teachings, with being anti-Semitic?"

I would like to answer this question properly. However, before I do, I would appreciate knowing what makes someone Semitic or not.

Allaah willing, would you be so kind as to inform me what makes someone Semitic?

May Allaah guide us all. Ameen.

Yusuf Alamo said...

In The Name of Allaah,
The Most Gracious,
The Most Merciful.

Peace be unto you.

@hugh watt:

In your last post you ommented:

"If Yusuf can't explain in 400-500 words why he became a Muslim - which to me shows a weak believer- may I suggest an essay explaining his reasons for not accepting +ianity. This, I feel will show more how he thinks, or does not."

Praise be to Allaah, The Giver of Bounty.

Allaah willing, in the event that I am weak in belief, then I pray that Allaah strengthens and increases my belief. Ameen.

Allaah willing, in the event that I am weak in knowledge, then I pray that Allaah strengthens and increases my knowledge. Ameen.

Praise be to Allaah, as far as choosing an article topic, I already have. Allaah willing, I am almost through and it should be completed by this weekend.

Subhana'Allaah, I have been a guest on this blog for more than a year. Allaah willing, since my time here, haven't I always articulated how I have felt?

May Allaah guide us. Ameen.

hugh watt said...

1-

Yusuf:

"He (Peace and Blessings be upon him) and they were both ethnically arab."

What makes a person "ethnically Arab?"

"How can you say that he (Peace and Blessings be upon him) hated Christians because he misunderstood their beliefs?"

Who are the "Polytheists?"

"I would like to answer this question properly. However, before I do, I would appreciate knowing what makes someone Semitic or not."

I'd like you to A properly, you've not attempted to as yet.

"Allaah willing, would you be so kind as to inform me what makes someone Semitic?"

I could but, if you re-read my posts you'll see I was talking about Muhammad's/Islam's anti-Semiticism, not what makes a person Semitic. Read this:

"You don't see it, do you?? This is not about Muslims and Islam. And it's not about shoe bombers and diapers bombers, WHOM BY THE WAY WERE HIRED BY THE CIA TO PULL THESE "TERRORIST" PRANK (yes, there were no terrorist attempts)! This is about conditioning people, especially the next generations to come, like that 12-year old boy, TO SUBMIT TO THE NEW NEW WORLD ORDER! The zionists' NWO is the new system that will rule all. These fabricated reasons that they tell you about today are nothing but a bunch of hogwash BS."

A Muslim said this. Notice how he makes the "zionists" out to be up to no good but he doesn't point out that Islam's main sources demand a Sharia World Order! It's bad when it's the "zionists" or others, but not when it's Islam,right? Not surprisingly, he didn't come back on that.

"Allaah willing, in the event that I am weak in belief, then I pray that Allaah strengthens and increases my belief. Ameen.

Allaah willing, in the event that I am weak in knowledge, then I pray that Allaah strengthens and increases my knowledge. Ameen."


I'll take the second part, since this is my point.
How strong were you in your knowledge about +ianity when you decided to reject it? Let's see if you were strong, or wrong.

"I have been a guest on this blog for more than a year. Allaah willing, since my time here, haven't I always articulated how I have felt?"

Strong, or wrong?

hugh watt said...

2-2

Btw, since this thread was primarily about Muhammad's personal wants, will you explain what this has to do with anything other than his personal fetishes?

Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 173:

Narrated Jabir bin ‘Abdullah:
The Prophet said, “If you enter (your town) at night (after coming from a journey), do not enter upon your family till the woman whose husband was absent (from the house) shaves her pubic hair .”

Why? What does this have to do with God? There's so many Islamic teachings that seem to suit Muhammad nicely.

Yusuf Alamo said...

Part II

Third, 6th century Arabians during the dark ages didn't have knowledge of proper hygenic practices before the advent of the Prophet (Peace and Blessings be upon him). It only makes sense that when the system of Islaam came into being during the time of Prophet Muhammad (Peace and Blessings be upon him) that a tremendous emphasis was put on purification and cleanliness. (i.e. the washing before every prayer, the washing before and after intimate relations with spouses, the washing after disposal of wastes, etc.) The proof of this is from the Noble Qur'aan:

[2:151] As We have sent among you a Messenger (Prophet Muhammad) from yourselves, to recite to you Our verses and to purify you, who will teach you the Book and Wisdom, and teach you that of which you have no knowledge.

[2:222] And they ask you about menstruation. Say: It is a discomfort; therefore keep aloof from the women during the menstrual discharge and do not go near them until they have become clean; then when they have cleansed themselves, go in to them as Allaah has commanded you; surely Allah loves those who turn much (to Him), and He loves those who purify themselves.

[5:6] O you who believe! when you rise up to prayer, wash your faces and your hands as far as the elbows, and wipe your heads and your feet to the ankles; and if you are under an obligation to perform a total ablution, then wash (yourselves) and if you are sick or on a journey, or one of you come from the privy, or you have touched the women, and you cannot find water, betake yourselves to pure earth and wipe your faces and your hands therewith, Allah does not desire to put on you any difficulty, but He wishes to purify you and that He may complete His favor on you, so that you may be grateful.

Also, from the authentic Sunnah:

Sahih Al-Bukhari No. 5266 - Narrated Abu Qatada: Allah's Apostle said, "When you drink (water), do not breath in the vessel; and when you urinate, do not touch your penis with your right hand. And when you cleanse yourself after defecation, do not use your right hand."

Allaah willing, you can imagine that after coming home from a long journey (probably working to provide for the family) and not seeing his wife for awhile, one of the three things a man might want to do is have lawful intimate relations with his wife (and vice versa). The other two things would probably be to wash up and play with his children if he has any. Now, it wouldn't necessarily be in that order, but I hope you get what I am conveying to you. Another thing that should be noted is that in Islaam, part of a spouse's religious duties is to fulfill the phyical needs of their mate at any time they request it, except during the prohibited period of fasting during the month of Ramadan, during menses, or if they have a severe illness of any kind. The Proof of this is from the Noble Qur'aan:

[2:223] Your wives are as a tilth unto you; so approach your tilth when or how ye will; but do some good act for your souls beforehand; and fear Allaah. And know that ye are to meet Him (in the Hereafter), and give (these) good tidings to those who believe.

Also, from the authentic Sunnah:

Narrated Talq ibn ‘Ali:

“The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: ‘When a man calls his wife to his bed, then she should respond, even if she is at the oven (baking bread).’” (Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, 1080, classed as saheeh by al-Albaani, no. 927, in Saheeh Sunan al-Tirmidhi).

Yusuf Alamo said...

CONCLUSION

Mr. Watt, I gave you a very thorough answer to your question. It may not be an answer you like or agree with, but that is the answer of what the Hadeeth has to do with Allaah. Wives are ordered by Allaah and His Messenger to obey their husbands in all lawful acts. To a lesser degree, wives have similar rights over their husbands. The Proof of this is from the Speech of Allaah:

[2:228] Divorced women shall wait concerning themselves for three monthly periods. Nor is it lawful for them to hide what Allaah Hath created in their wombs, if they have faith in Allaah and the Last Day. And their husbands have the better right to take them back in that period, if they wish for reconciliation. And women shall have rights similar to the rights against them, according to what is equitable; but men have a degree (of advantage) over them. And Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise.

Also, from the Prophet Muhammad's last sermon (Peace and Blessings be upon him):

"O People, it is true that you have certain rights with regard to your women, but they also have rights over you. Remember that you have taken them as your wives only under Allaah's trust and with His permission. If they abide by your right then to them belongs the right to be fed and clothed in kindness. Do treat your women well and be kind to them for they are your partners and committed helpers. And it is your right that they do not make friends with any one of whom you do not approve, as well as never to be unchaste."

Allaah and His Messenger (Peace and Blessings be upon him) knows best. Salaam, sir.

Yusuf Alamo said...

In the Name of Allaah,
the Most Gracious,
the Most Merciful.

Peace be unto you.

Since you didn't tell me what a Semite was, I looked it up, and then cut and pasted it from Wikipedia here:

In linguistics and ethnology, Semitic (from the Biblical "Shem", Hebrew: שם‎, translated as "name", Arabic: ساميّ‎) was first used to refer to a language family of largely Middle Eastern origin, now called the Semitic languages. This family includes the ancient and modern forms of Akkadian, Amharic, Arabic, Aramaic, Ge'ez, Hebrew, Maltese, Phoenician, Tigre and Tigrinya among others. As language studies are interwoven with cultural studies, the term also came to describe the extended cultures and ethnicities, as well as the history of these varied peoples as associated by close geographic and linguistic distribution.

My question is this; how could Prophet Muhammad be an anti-Semite when he was an Arab, and Arabs are Semites according to this definition?

Oh, Yes, and the Jews of Madinah were Arab. Look it up.

Salaam.

hugh watt said...

"In linguistics and ethnology, Semitic (from the Biblical "Shem", Hebrew: שם‎, translated as "name", Arabic: ساميّ‎)"

Shem= Semitic= Hebrews= Jews. Muhammad hated Jews= Hebrews= Shemites= Semitic.

"Third, 6th century Arabians during the dark ages didn't have knowledge of proper hygenic practices before the advent of the Prophet (Peace and Blessings be upon him). It only makes sense that when the system of Islaam came into being during the time of Prophet Muhammad (Peace and Blessings be upon him) that a tremendous emphasis was put on purification and cleanliness. (i.e. the washing before every prayer, the washing before and after intimate relations with spouses, the washing after disposal of wastes, etc.)"

S.33:21 Verily in the messenger of Allah ye have a good example for him who looketh unto Allah and the Last Day, and remembereth Allah much.

So Muslim women do this today after their husbands take a long journey away?

Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 173: Authentic Sunnah!

Narrated Jabir bin ‘Abdullah:
The Prophet said, “If you enter (your town) at night (after coming from a journey), do not enter upon your family till the woman whose husband was absent (from the house) shaves her pubic hair .”

So pubic hair is unclean? What does shaving pubic hair prevent? This is not about my likes or dislikes, Yusuf. S.33:21, do Muslim women still do this as a command from Allah?

Muslim: Book 31: Hadith 6091

We said: Allah’s Messenger, we have readily accepted them. Then Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) called for a cup of water and washed his hands in that and face too and put the saliva in it and then said: Drink out of it and pour it over your faces and over your chest and gladden yourselves. They took hold of the cup and did as Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) had commanded them to do. Thereupon Umm Salama called from behind the veil: Spare some water in your vessel for your mother also, and they also gave some water which had been spared for her.

What are we to learn from this? What does his saliva achieve?