Thursday, October 25, 2012

Why Did Muhammad Wear Women's Clothing?

According to Islam's most trusted historical sources, Muhammad used to dress up in his wives' clothing. Indeed, Muhammad even received revelations while dressed in his child-bride Aisha's garments, making him the world's first and only cross-dressing prophet. Can this really be God's last messenger? Can we trust the Qur'an when parts of it came to Muhammad while he was cross-dressing?


For Sources and Responses to Objections, See the Following Articles:

97 comments:

Unknown said...

please make your points quicker and without so much repetition. we do not have all day.

David Wood said...

Please make your comments less boring. I don't have all day.

Jose Joseph said...

To unknown according to what objective standard is David Wood and Sam Shamoun are obligated to make their points much more quicker and are not permitted to be repetitive?
And secondly David Wood is simply answering you according to your folly. Since you have arbitrarily made up a standard David Wood is simply giving you a dose of your own medicine.

Zack_Tiang said...

Look forward to watching this. =D

TA said...

I have a question that has arisen from the video on Obama's dilemma. Sorry for posting it again here--it's just that I posted it there so late no one is answering.

I have always heard that the Arabic word for "mischief" is "fitnah" in verse 5:32. However, David and Sam are saying something like "fassat" (sorry if I have transliterated incorrectly). Can someone explain? I do not know anything about Arabic and would like to be explaining this verse correctly to people. Are there two words for "mischief" and if so how are they different?

Thanks.

Truth said...

what??? a cross-dresser prophet??? i never knew it!!!! ha h ah ah ah
all muslims should leave islam at this one point. did muhammad use nail polish and lipstick too??? did CHRISTIAN PRINCE make any video on this?? he( CP ) should make a video on this. a cross dresser prophet???? and muslims kill gays instead of killing muhammad?????

Sam said...

TA, the word fitnah is more commonly translated as trial or tribulation. But even if it could be rendered as mischief, how would this affect the meaning of fasad? Do we not find words which are synonyms for one another? Moreover, if you go to the commentary of Ibn Kathir and read his statements concerning Q. 5:33 and 2:11-12, as I explained in the show, you would see that the definition which I gave for fasad came from him. Check this article out for further details, especially near the end: http://answering-islam.org/Shamoun/badawi_tolerance.htm


_ said...

HAHAHAH!!!!!

Beyond anything that could be called bizarre.

I wonder what Muhammad lovers think about their boy wearing little girls's clothing WHILE GETTING REVELATIONS!!!!

The hilarity of this is indescribable HAHAHAHA

Witness said...

Oh my God! Somebody has made a music video of the Prophet Muhammad. Whoever has done this, I am requesting you take it down immediately. This will cause unnecessary death and turmoil.

For those who want to see the video, here is a link:

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nuBWHNsClP0

_ said...

Ok, watched.

D.Wood is funny to see you unable to keep your bearing. I don't blame you. I also would never be able to keep a straight face listening to something as bizzare as a so called prophet of God wearing women's underwear.

But why would a man wear women's underwear?

Did it arouse him? was it a fetish?

This is definitely deviant behavior.

concernedforusa said...

Hi David and Sam:

It was incredible show and I enjoyed every minute of it. Thank you very much for your knowledge and dedication.

I have one question to you, and this question really bothers me.

I've been studying Quran really hard for two years now. I have no doubt that Islam has a Satanic origin. This so-called religion was not just man-made, although I have no doubts that Muhammad invented many verses for his own benefit.

But ultimately it was Satan who inspired this religion. This was the same evil spirit, Satan, who almost strangled Muhammad in the cave. This so-called religion definetely has a Satan's stamp on it.

If I can see it so clearly, why Muslim scholars cannot? I am not talking about regular Muslims who do not know Quran, Hadith, Sira literature or Tafsir. I am talking about Muslim scholars who really know.

I understand that you are not psychologists or psychiatrists and it is very difficult to understand other people's mind and way of thinking. But maybe you can suggest me to read some article or book. I would really appreciate it.

Thank you and may God bless you and your families.


Murtadd said...

Its amazing that he still had time to "dress up" between his beheadings, robbing of caravans and his sexual escapades.

Muhammad didn't do things halfway, according to the following hadith he also use to urinate like a woman.

Abu-Dawud Book 1, Number
14: Narrated Abdullah ibn
Umar: When the Prophet (peace_
be_upon_him) wanted to relieve
himself, he would not raise his
garment, until he lowered himself
near the ground.


In Christ, for Christ,by Christ

murtadd.wordpress.com

عبدالله عرب said...

Hi what you say is a big lie and this Suspicion

ok I hope you can understand arabic or make someone to translate it for you

the full answer is here ::

http://www.elforkan.com/7ewar/showthread.php?t=13585

عبدالله عرب said...

hello
all you say is a big lie
and here is the proof

I will give you the link but this research is in arabic and I can't translate it

it explains that Muhammad wasn't wearing his wife's but the hadith tell us that he covered him self with a Quilt ( you use it while sleeping) and you need to correct your information about the hadith because there are difficult arabian words which is hard to translate .
http://www.elforkan.com/7ewar/showthread.php?t=13585

try to translate it .

عبدالله عرب said...

second ... Do you know that jesus was naked !!!!!!!!!! ( it is in the bible )
search for the bible of john 5/13
or 13/5
you will find it

Emil Bengtsson said...

John 5:13 "But he who was healed didn’t know who it was, for Jesus had withdrawn, a crowd being in the place."

John 13:5 "Then he poured water into the basin, and began to wash the disciples’ feet, and to wipe them with the towel that was wrapped around him."

IZAKDAVID13 said...

Some Muslim Apologist, Shafay Islam, tried terribly to give a rebuttal to this video, and at the end did what this guy عبدالله عرب ( Abdullah Arabs) try's to do and discredit our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by saying 'Jesus wore Mary's clothes too...'

Quote
Secondly, Shamoun should also know that Jesus was also wrapped in Virgin mary clothes. Does it means he cross-dressed?

Luke 2:7 " and she gave birth to her firstborn, a son. She wrapped him in cloths and placed him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn "
End quote.

I responded...


Luke 2:7 " and she gave birth to her firstborn, a son. She wrapped him in cloths and placed him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn "

The difference is Jesus was at this stage a newborn baby incapable of making the decision of which clothing or cloths to wear, Mohummad was a grown man capable of making adult decisions.

Failed in that attempt to discredit The Lord Jesus Christ.

Also no where does it mention that the cloth that Mary wrapt The Lord Jesus in was 'her clothing' as you claim. That is either a blatant lie, or you have no idea what you are talking about.

http://bible.cc/luke/2-7.htm ....for numerous translations, that prove you wrong.

σπαργανόω (sparganoó) refer specifically to swaddling cloths, a Hebrew traditional way of wrapping babies.

Also failed in that attempt to discredit The Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

Your rebuttal should be towards Islamic scholars who have interpreted the Arabic words to 'women's garments.'

Here is the definition of mirt according to Al-Mu’jam Al-Waseet (The Intercessory Dictionary), second edition, 1972, part 2, p. 864:

Mirt - a dress from wool or cotton that is used as an Izar or a cover by a woman.

I could go on to discredit you further, but you are doing a great job of that yourself.

Your points are moot, Your argument is therefore rendered invalid.

I hope that you come to the see the light one day, keep searching for the truth & have a happy Eid Al-Fitr.

God Bless.


Izak

Here is the link:
http://islamiat101.blogspot.com.au/2012/08/was-muhammad-croosdresser.html
~~~~~

To Abdullah Arabs, the verse that you are referring to is John 13:4 where Jesus was preparing to wash his Disciples feet. A quick search of the Greek concordance will tell you that he took off his outer garment or coat.

Once again, no where does it mention that Jesus was naked in that scripture. There are scholars who believe that he may have been naked on the cross, but that is conjecture.

God bless guys.

Murtadd said...

Muslims have become really desperate to defend their "peaceful" religion(cult) but to no avail.

Let's explore the muslim mentality for a while.

Muhammad rode on a camel. The devil rode on a camel. Therefore muhammad is the devil.

In Christ,for Christ,by Christ

Murtadd.wordpress.com

Cristo Te Ama said...

@Unknown
You said :"please make your points quicker and without so much repetition. we do not have all day."


Why? we all love the show, we watch it with all the patient in the world..

Cristo Te Ama said...

@عبدالله عرب said...

"second ... Do you know that jesus was naked !!!!!!!!!! ( it is in the bible )
search for the bible of john 5/13
or 13/5
you will find it"

John 5:13 "The man who was healed had no idea who it was, for Jesus had slipped away into the crowd that was there."

John 13:5 "After that, he poured water into a basin and began to wash his disciples’ feet, drying them with the towel that was wrapped around him."

I don't see Jesus willingly or not being naked in any of these verses, yet even if we assume that while being murdered on the cross he might be naked (which is not the case) it was not his decision, he didn't want that, it would've been because of the Romans humilliating him, but that's not the case of Muhammad,he dressed like a woman because he was a wicked man, and abviously not a prophet!!


Peace

Sam said...

Brother Izak, the Muhammadan was simply rehashing Osama Abdallah's garbage which we refuted here: http://answering-islam.org/Responses/Osama/diaper_garment.htm

So use this and pass it on.

TA said...

Sam,

Thank you for your explanation and link. Yes, of course there can be synonyms. I simply wanted to have some additional information so that I understand correctly. (I thought perhaps fitnah and fasad might be related to each other somehow, for example.)

Osama Abdallah said...

Sam Shamoun,

You're nothing but a buffoon who knows that its an Arabic idiom that even the pagan Arabs used. But you just don't want to be honest to your readers and listeners.


I am working on a new rebuttal for you that will throw this video of yours in the trash. And after I am done with thoroughly refuting it, then I'd like to challenge you on a TV debate between me and you, or between me vs you and David Wood. Maybe we can further discuss it to show your viewers how dumb your arguments are.

And of course, the worst and dumbest argument of all that you bring is your challenge to Muslims on "Tawheed" in the Glorious Quran. LOL, that really is the funnist one indeed.

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com

Anthony Rogers said...

Osama, you are right, refuting the Qur'an on tawheed "is the...funnist indeed." What makes your spelling blooper even more "funni" is that blogger has spell checker.

Anthony Rogers
www.alwaysapleasurerefutingosama.com

Osama Abdallah said...

Osama, you are right, refuting the Qur'an on tawheed "is the...funnist indeed." What makes your spelling blooper even more "funni" is that blogger has spell checker.

SHOULD READ

Osama, you are right, refuting the Qur'an on tawheed "is the...funnist indeed." What makes your spelling blooper even more "funni" is that THE BLOG has A spell checker, WISE GUY :).

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com

Tom said...

Okay. I haven't seen any other commenters bring out the truth regarding why Mohammed wore women's clothing. It's amazing to me that no one else has revealed this and I'm surprised that it wasn't brought out in the Jesus or Mohammed show. No, it wasn't just about insights from Allah. Sam and Dave, you really need to do s'more research on this - but the Monty Python song explains it best.
Poor Mohammed was a frustrated Lumberjack (not a lot of trees in the Saudi).
Find the lyrics here:

http://www.guntheranderson.com/v/data/imalumbe.htm

or here:

http://orangecow.org/pythonet/sketches/lumbsong.htm

All revelations in Aisha's green garments aside, Mohammed probably never got to cut down even a pine tree. Women's clothing was as close as he could come to being a Lumberjack (and he SO wanted to be "Okay"). Poor guy spent all his time hacking at people instead of trees. (sniff) Had to sleep with his dead Auntie (sniff, sniff). They didn't even HAVE a "Victoria's Secret" store back in those days.

Monty Python understands Mohammed - like no one else.

KAFIR AND PROUD!!

Search 4 Truth said...

Sam and David, Please i beg you to invite Osama on the show publicly. Do it live on the show. And then when he doesnt show up again he will be an even bigger laughing stock then he already is!

_ said...

Well Osama that's a strange idiom.

Did you miss the part of the video where it was stated the some of your best scholars admit that Muhammad liked wearing women's underwear.

Anthony Rogers said...

Osama,

Blogger is the name of the service that hosts this site. Spell Checker is the name of the program that tries to help prevent you from looking stupid. Although I inadvertently failed to capitalize the words (a different point then you tried to correct me on), you had to deliberately decline the spelling suggestion when you created your comment. But look at the bright side: at least you accepted its correction of the word "buffoon" this time and didn't write "baffoon" like you usually do.

In any event, that was all in good fun. What isn't funny is the fact that you would try and dress up Muhammad's fetish for female clothing as if it were not as unsightly as it really is. By the way, since your prophet is the example Muslims are to follow, can we assume that you dress up in female clothing as well? This adds a whole new meaning to the question your wife must ask when she goes shopping: "I wonder if my husband would like this outfit?"

Radical Moderate said...

Osama Abd-FooL-la


Whether it is true that it is a Arabic idiom or not is not really an issue for me. The fact that Allah revealed his, as you say NOBEL Quran to Mohamed when he was in the bed of Aisha is problematic for number of reasons.

1. When your prophet first got his revelation he ran to his first wife Kadijah. The specter, I'm sorry demon, I'm sorry Angel, only left after Kadijah removed her shift. So this specter, demon, or Angel was scared away by a woman.

So question why was this being to bashful to stick around when Kadijah removed her shift but could reveal revelation when Mohammad was in bed with Aisha?

2. Do you know what Surat and ayah were revealed in Aisha's bed?

3. Since you Muslims pride yourself about knowing the most mundane detail about your prophet including how he went to the bathroom. Can you tell us what he was doing in Aisha's bed when the revelation came to him.

Was there a preferred position that the this being preferred?

And I can go on from there but discussing your disgusting prophets sex life makes me feel dirty.

I hope you can answer me.

Thanks

David Wood said...

If Osama wants to claim that this was a common Arabic idiom, I'm sure he can provide numerous classical Arabic writings that use this idiom.

Radical Moderate said...

Osama Abd-Fool-La

Another point is that your as you say the "Noble" Quran ordains polygamy but only if you can treat your wives fairly.

So the question is, if the "People" where only giving the goods to Mohamed when he was giving it to Aisha and since he only got his revelation on when he was getting it on with her. Then how was Mohamed, the "Angel" or Allah treating Mohameds other wives "Fairly"?

Shouldn't his other wives have gotten the same amount of stuff from the people? Shouldn't they have gotten the same amount of REVELATION from Mohamed?

So even if you can prove that Mohamed did not wear Aisha's clothes there is still a whole lot more wrong with Mohamed then his transvestism.

عبدالله عرب said...

this is a reply against David wood
you are lying again , david wood .
and DON'T translate our language like you want

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDJzofEZ3CY
I want David wood to reply personaly
and the word (mert) means in arabic (Quilt ) which you use when you sleep
Quilt is for all

Osama Abdallah said...

"KAFIR AND PROUD!!"

RESPONSE:

I know you are. This is another Prophecy that the Prophet of Islam, peace be upon him, made about the ONE-EYED DAJJAL (ANTI-CHRIST). His sign will be the one eye, and he will write on his forehead "KAFIR".
This is, yet, another Arabic idiom. The dajjal is here and indeed, his symbol is the ONE EYE.

Also, the Arabic word, Kafir, is among the top Arabic words that are:

1- Being introduced into the other world's, especially the Western world's, languages rapidly.

2- It's become very popular and very heavily used among the Islamophobes.

So yes KAFIR, you are no more than a slave to the ONE-EYED DAJJAL (ANTI-CHRIST). Look at the back of the dollar bill and see his symbol in your face. Also, see how the one eye is all over the Western world's main institutions. Visit:

1- http://www.answering-christianity.com/911_is_the_biggest_lie.htm

2- http://www.answering-christianity.com/one-eyed_dajjal.wmv


So yes, Kafir and proud, you're here with your brethrens in pornography, blasphemies and hypocricy. In Judgement Day, however, you'll be all over each others in blames and animosity.

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com

Osama Abdallah said...

If Osama wants to claim that this was a common Arabic idiom, I'm sure he can provide numerous classical Arabic writings that use this idiom.

RESPONSE:

Even the Holy Quran made a similar idiom between the believing men and women. It's Arabic language. The Prophet of Islam forbade men to wear:

1- Gold.
2- Silk.
3- Look faminine.
4- Talk faminine.


Wait for my rebuttal.

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com

IZAKDAVID13 said...

@ Sam
"Brother Izak, the Muhammadan was simply rehashing Osama Abdallah's garbage which we refuted here: http://answering-islam.org/Responses/Osama/diaper_garment.htm

So use this and pass it on.

October 26, 2012 11:44 AM"

Thank you for the link. I pray that many muslims are set free by the telling of the truth, preaching of the Gospel and exposing the lies of the false prophet Mohummad. God willing millions will come to Christ before it is too late, due to your ministry and the diligent work of like minded Christians.

God bless you and David...come to Sydney, Australia soon.

Murtadd said...

1 John 2:22
.
Who is a liar but he that
denieth that Jesus is the
Christ? He is antichrist,
that denieth the Father and
the Son.

According to this verse ALL muslims are LIARS and ANTICHRIST.

Can we really trust the word of these muslim taqqiyah specialist.

Another PROUD KAFIR by the standards of Jesus Christ and not a caravan robbing sex maniac. To avoid confusion I'm talking about Muhammad.


In Christ, for Christ, by Christ

Murtadd
murtadd.wordpress.com

Zack_Tiang said...

I think Osama is using the word 'idiom' wrongly in his interpreting the 'one-eyed Dajjal' topic..

The Holy Bible said...

Deuteronomy 22:5

The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God. King James



“A woman must not wear men's clothing, nor a man wear women's clothing, for the LORD your God detests anyone who does this.” Deuteronomy 22:5 NIV

Sam i have a link form you.

http://www.searchthescriptures.com/newsletters/foundations.htm

What is true about the true teaching of Jesus KJV or NIV?

Cristo Te Ama said...

@Osama said:

"The Prophet of Islam forbade men to wear:

1- Gold.
2- Silk.
3- Look faminine.
4- Talk faminine."

Yeah he forbade to have more than 4wives yet he had 11 at once, he forbade to break your promises, yet he did it just to have sex with the slaves, we all know that there is a law for Muslims and another law for Muhammad, he was not the example to follow, he was the exception (that's weird considering he was suppose to be "a prophet")

BTW Osama all that "one eyed dajjal" comes from some reliable Hadiths? and if they do, why isn't that in the quran if it's that important, why would your God reveal such a important matter in a such unreliable source like the Hadiths (considering you believe Jews have corrupted many of it haha), the Antichrist and the false prophet are Mahdi and your Isa.. don't worry you will "win" only for 7 years, then the only god YHWH will make his justice over the earth.

Cristo Te Ama said...

roger said:

"This adds a whole new meaning to the question your wife must ask when she goes shopping: "I wonder if my husband would like this outfit?""

Hahahaha!!

Osama Abdallah said...

"1 John 2:22
.
Who is a liar but he that
denieth that Jesus is the
Christ? He is antichrist,
that denieth the Father and
the Son.

According to this verse ALL muslims are LIARS and ANTICHRIST."

RESPONSE:

We are the ones and the truly ones who believe Christ to be the "Son of God". Wow, now how is that so?? "Son of God" in ancient times meant no more than a righteous Servant and Choosen one of GOD Almighty.
We Muslims believe this 100%, while the infidels believe otherwise, including the Christians.

So how is it so with the Christians? The Christians believe in nothing but empty and false man-made lies. The Jews of course consider Christ a bastard, born from a whore who was slept with a Roman soldier and had him.

*****Muslims are the ONLY ONES ON THE FACE OF THIS PLANET who believe in Christ the way GOD Almighty intended. Watch this 8-minute video from the late Sheikh Ahmed Deedat as he explained this very point in great details:

http://www.answering-christianity.com/did_jesus_claim_to_be_god_when_he_said_iam.wmv.

To thoroughly understand this, visit: http://www.answering-christianity.com/convert_christians.htm.

Islam is the Divine Truth, Christianity is false. Did you also know that Salam, Islam, Muslimays, Muslimeens are written hundreds of times all over your Bible, in both the Old and New Testaments? Believers in your Scriptures were called Muslims, and their religion is Islam. That's the only title that was given to the submitters to GOD Almighty in your Scriptures.

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com

aaron said...

OSama is back yet he keeps running away

hey Osama are you going to ever answer me about adam is 90 feet tall article? or your 1 conrintheans 5:5 ?

I bought NASA evidence and proved you wrong.

Still waiting

عبدالله عرب said...

some one is saying that prophet Muhammad has married a lot of wives !!!!!
now you will know why did he do this

http://www.islamcan.com/common-questions-about-islam/why-did-the-prophet-muhammad-marry-many-wives.shtml

and this site will be very useful to you , DW to learn what is the real islam

2- to osama Abdallah ::: good work you know a lot even I am surprised that you are a conspiracy theorist .... revealing the truth about the freemasons is hard , isn't it ?? so, I will join to reply on those christians and their lies which I have never heard about !!! and please I which we could contact
3- to aaron ::: I tell you Adam was 90 feet ... and if you want I will show you pictures which is real ( not photoshop ) just tell me and I will bring it for you ... giant skeletons which is more than 80 feet

aaron said...

@دالله عرب

Lol have you ever visited What OSama wote on that adam is 90feet tall page? he attributed to earth was once larger

here is the formula for earths gravity

g=GM/(R^2 )

if earth grew larger then gravity would be less and people would be even taller now due to increase radius and same amount of mass.

also lets go through the evolution tree from paleontology

Homo habilis who lived 2.4-1.5 million years ago were no more than 150 cm tall. Their ancestors, the Australopithecus, were just about 100 cm tall

also let me point out that photo you refered to was doctored. also the creature could not biologically stand.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com.au/news/2007/12/071214-giant-skeleton_2.html

Foolster41 said...

@Osama:

Osama said: "Islam is the Divine Truth, Christianity is false"
And
"Muslims are the ONLY ONES ON THE FACE OF THIS PLANET who believe in Christ the way GOD Almighty intended"

So then. You keep saying this, but I've yet to see you provide the "original" Christian scriptures that confirms the islamic version of Christ (Funny, it seems you keep running away when asked). This would be amazing since our original scriptures that contradict the Quoran were written
500 YEARS BEFORE the birth of MOHAMMAD! Could you please provide these, since you are so confident you are right, they must exist. You wouldn't be lying and making things up would you? (like, say slandering people,, slandering Christians and misrepresenting what they believe, i.e. 1 Chron 5:5 etc!).

You either have to have us believe that 1.) There was a major conspiracy to change the doctrines of Christianity from it's "true" form, destroying all the documents from the 1st to 7th century that agree with the "original islamic version" of the gospel, and it was completely and perfectly covered up in a way that even Mohammad and his followers don't mention, nor do any secular historians of a major theological shift during the 7th century. or 2.)Christians or Jews went back in time, to corrupt the gospel to make Mohammad look foolish or 3.)You are a liar, once again making things up trying to cover the fact that what you believe is a big sham.

Well, which is it? 1,2 or 3?

aaron said...

@بدالله عرب s
further more even if it was true you should still be condemning OSama for lying about the process which means muslims are not above using deceit to convince others.

Radical Moderate said...

Awww look everyone Osama made a new friend isn't that cute lol

Radical Moderate said...

Look everyone what Osama's knew friend wrote...

3- to aaron ::: I tell you Adam was 90 feet ... and if you want I will show you pictures which is real ( not photoshop ) just tell me and I will bring it for you ... giant skeletons which is more than 80 feet


Oh these two will get along just great since they are both FOOLS lol.

Hey Osama's new friend you might want to check with Osama on this since he learned his lesson a long time ago lol.

The people at Faithfreedom.org played a April Fools joke on him a few years ago, and he fell for it just like u did. Thats probably where u got those photo's.

But hey you are proving that you will believe anything as long as its not the truth.

Radical Moderate said...

Arron great article I had no idea the hoax spread that far. Here is info on the hoax that faithfreed.org played on Osama a must see lol.

Osama Abdulla proves he is a Fool-la and the 90 foot adam

aaron said...

@دالله عرب
meant by earth smaller not larger.
IF eart was once smaller end mass is pretty much the same if i expand it the gravity would be less if one was to allow the world to expand.

therefore osama doesn;t know a thing about science

Traeh said...

David Wood used to repeat many of his statements two or three times in different ways, and I loved the way he did that. It was part of what a fabulous educator David is. However.

However, in this video, or was it in another recent video, David seemed to repeat himself sometimes five or six times in different ways. For me personally, that is too many times, though for his foreign-language audience perhaps, it's just right.

Traeh said...

Bed vs. garment

What about the term in English that combines "bed" and "garment"?

In other words, "bed clothes," which means "bed covers," i.e., sheets and blankets.

So couldn't the Muslim sources mean that Muhammad was in his wives' bed covers/bed clothes, i.e., wrapping a sheet or blanket around him? Consider that clothes and sheets were somewhat similar in form in those days.

David Wood said...

When we mean bed clothes, we say bed clothes. There's nothing about a bed in the context of the passage. Muhammad says he was in Aisha's garments, which is why Aisha Bewely and others translate it that way. If Muhammad meant "bed" when he said he was in Aisha's garments, he must be the worst communicator in history.

bob said...

A means of discerning the Spirit of Truth and the spirit error; a simple test.

THE KORAN SAYS
Surely they are kafirs who say, "Allah is the Messiah, son of Mary." 5:17

People of the Book [Christians]! Do not overstep the boundaries of your religion and speak only what is true about Allah. The Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, is only Allah's messenger and his word which he sent into Mary was a spirit from him. Therefore, believe in Allah and his messengers and do not say, "Trinity."
Hold back and it will be better for you. Allah is only one God. Far be it from Allah to have a son! All the heavens and earth are his. Allah is the sufficient as a protector. The Messiah does not condescend to be Allah's servant, nor do his favoured angels. 4:171

Surly they blaspheme who say, Allah is the third of the three [The Trinity], for there is no god exept Allah, and if they do not refrain from what they say a grievous penalty will fall on those who disbelieve. 5:72

The Koran denies Christ's death and resurrection.

They said, "We killed the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger." But they did not kill him or crucify him, although it appeared so to them [the person crucified was not Jesus but a "double"]. And those who argued about it were in doubt concerning him. They had no clear knowledge about him and only went with opinion. They did not really kill him, but allah lifted him up to himself. 4:156

1JOHN 4:1-3 SAYS
Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world.
By this you know the Spirit of God; every spirit that confessesthat Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God, and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God. And this is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard was coming, and is now already in the world.

"Thus says the Lord, the King of Israel, and his Redeemer [the Son, Christ], the Lord of hosts: 'I am the first and the last; besides me there is no God.'" Isaiah 44:6 (repeated by Christ in Rev 1:11)

Islam has always used the name of Jesus in making itself seem benign and brotherly when gaining a foothold in Christian cultures (and also in its response to the accusation of being anti-christian). It has been employing this technique for 1400 years.

Traeh said...

David, is there a consensus among scholars of classical Arabic that the choice of "bed" is bizarre and completely off track for that Arabic word? That's all I need to hear. Maybe you and Sam said that, and I missed it.

Muhammad says he was in Aisha's garments, which is why Aisha Bewely and others translate it that way.

If "others" translate it that way, it is not necessarily meaningful, unless perhaps those others represent some kind of consensus among scholars of Arabic. Does most everyone except Khan and dawagandists think "garment" is right, and "bed" completely without basis for the Arabic word in question?

If Muhammad meant "bed" when he said he was in Aisha's garments, he must be the worst communicator in history.

Only if the Arabic word in question has no connection to the word "bed." Maybe I missed it, but what I heard was that you and Sam cited a few other translators who choose "garment." You did not claim that Khan is alone or in the minority among scholars of classical Arabic or that "bed" is considered bizarre or random or unequivocally wrong among those experts.

I don't know Arabic, but was merely making a reasonable guess that a word translated by one person as garment, and by another as bed, could sometimes mean bed clothes, which in English means bed covers. Didn't people sleep in their cloaks long ago?

You say "bed" could not mean "bed clothes," i.e., "bed covers," but I believe I've heard precisely that synecdoche used on occasion in English.

David Wood said...

Type "thawb" into Wikipedia and see what it says.

Murtadd said...

@ Osama,

Wow since when do muslims believe Jesus to be the Son of God. I thought you muslims believed he was merely a SLAVE of allah. No wonder the ummah is so confused.

Anyway check out the following website where renowned christian apologists explains this;
answering-islam.org/Silas/sonofgod.htm, answering-islam/Silas/son2.htm and also the esteemed Sam Shamoun's article on answering-islam.org/Shamoun/q_jesus_sonship.htm.

Are we christians really believing in false man made lies? What audacity.
That disgusting prophet of islam himself confessed that he fabricated your quran but you still follow him straight to hell.

Tabari 6:111 " I have FABRICATED things against God and have imputed to him WORDS which he HAS NOT SPOKEN" (emphasis mine)

Oh the old Ahmed D'idiot hogwash. All of Deedat's crap was rebutted by John Gilchrist long time ago. Muslims seem to be good at recycle garbage.You don't see Gilchrist's name as a cross reference on muslim websites, why?

What!!! Islam is the Divine Truth, Christianity is false. By whose authority? Oh let me guess, from allah, to gabriel, to muhammad, to scribes.
You muslims really got the message loud and clear. Apart from the part lost during muhammad's delusions when he was bewitched. Bukhari 6:60:658.

Osama also said," Did you also know that Salam, Islam, Muslimays, Muslimeens are written hundreds of times all over your Bible, in both the Old and New Testaments?

Can you provide references to this so whe can verify you claim?


Osama, are you mental? Were believers in our Scriptures really called Muslims, and their religion is Islam? Ok, let me try this, Believers in islam were really called christians and their religion is christianity!!!

No wonder the ummah is so confused.

In Christ, for Christ, by Christ
murtadd.wordpress.com

Osama Abdallah said...

Radical Moderate,

I see that lying is a way of life for you. Typical christian and islamophobe.

The reader can compare your lies to what I actually have on my article at: http://www.answering-christianity.com/adam_90_feet_tall.htm.

So much for this trash being "Christ-like".


Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com

Cristo Te Ama said...

@Osama said
"We are the ones and the truly ones who believe Christ to be the "Son of God". Wow, now how is that so?? "Son of God" in ancient times meant no more than a righteous Servant and Choosen one of GOD Almighty."

Ok these next verses are way more ancient than the Quran and all the Muslims lies that came after it, and check what i meant for people in that time to say "son of God"

Mark 14:61 But he held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, and said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?

62 And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

63 Then the high priest rent his clothes, and saith, What need we any further witnesses?

64 Ye have heard the blasphemy: what think ye? And they all condemned him to be guilty of death

So i suppose they didn't consider "son of God" as just a simple servant of God. but let's check more ANCIENT verses.

John 10:29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. 30 I and the Father are one.”

31 Again his Jewish opponents picked up stones to stone him, 32 but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?”

33 “We are not stoning you for any good work,” they replied, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.”

34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods”’? 35 If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be set aside— 36 what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’?

-Check the higher meaning of "son of God", also notice the way he speaks of himself, not just like a mere human servant, he even says "I and the father are one" also check the word "sent into the world"

BTW Osama can just a "chosen one" say John 16:13 But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come. 14 He will glorify me because it is from me that he will receive what he will make known to you. 15 All that belongs to the Father is mine. That is why I said the Spirit will receive from me what he will make known to you.”


We would guess that it should be the other way: "all that i have belongs to the father" if you are just a mere human servant.Also it's funny because you Muslims believe Jesus was talking about Muhammad in these verses, so Jesus owns Muhammad? Muhammad received the messages from Jesus instead of Allah? or Allah and Jesus are the same?

Yet we can find Jesus speaking about Muslims in the Bible:

"the time is coming when ANYONE who kills you will think they are offering a service to God. 3 They will do such things because they have not known the Father or me. 4 I have told you this, so that when their time comes you will remember that I warned you about them."

Just like Muslims screaming Allah hu akbar while murdering, raping, stealing kaffirs, Yet believing they are good people and they are doing a favor to God..!!

Dios Os Bendiga!!

aaron said...

@OSama
http://www.answering-christianity.com/adam_90_feet_tall.htm

You still believe that rubbish? have you studied science. the only reason smaller planets had less gravity is due to its mass and radius which fits into this formula

g=GM/(R^2)

you write about what you do not under stand

tell me what newton three law of motion and his law of universal gravitation is. and do you know what gravity is ?

http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/k-12/airplane/wteq.html

read NASA disagrees with you

as you can see here newton's law of motion F=MA is substituted into universal gravitation formula to work out gravity of earth. this is due to

gravity =acceleration

"The reader can compare your lies to what I actually have on my article"

LOL you wrote that the earth was once smaller resulting in less gravity. since Earths mass is constant if the radius expands we would have less gravity. so we are taller now then before if this was true


So osama you are the liar

its funny How you pretend to know what know nothing about.

aaron said...

@osama

Further more osama, I noticed you ran from me all the time. when i post up nasa evidence up.

had you been comparing the 2 different planet with different masses and radius the normally the bigger planet has more gravity but we are talking about the same planet which is called earth and since we have a constant mass this cannot apply due to one variable being the same.

Osama you are still avoiding answering me.

Gregory said...

I saw a video some time back about transvestites in Iran gettin sex changes. Their imams had no problem with the change...... Its just so sad that these people can't see the unholiness of the koran or its prophet. I guess that is what happens when people are taught from childhood on not to ever question the koran or the prophet. The very earliest muslims must have saw what a scam it was, but wanted to keep it going so they could continue to rape and plunder and get slaves etc.

Osama Abdallah said...

Aaron the High School Kid,

I don't need to further respond to you, because I used NASA and Harvard University scientists, and provided other scientific sources to back up everything I said in my article at: http://www.answering-christianity.com/adam_90_feet_tall.htm.

You made your case. The reader will decide.

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com

Osama Abdallah said...

"@ Osama,

Wow since when do muslims believe Jesus to be the Son of God. I thought you muslims believed he was merely a SLAVE of allah. No wonder the ummah is so confused."

Response:

No my dear, it's not us. It's you and your empty religion that don't know how to define ancient idioms and ancient terms.

This is extremely important for you to know and see! I therefore advise you to visit: http://www.answering-christianity.com/convert_christians.htm
and read about Yaweh the Son nonsense that Christians invented.

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com

bob said...

For proper science, visit creation.com

Traeh said...

David,

Wikipedia refers to a thawb or thobe as a garment, but Wikipedia does not touch on the question of whether people slept in their cloaks and wraps.

Do you know the classical Arabic terms for the various kinds of covers used for sleep in Muhammad's time? If you don't, then that puts your case somewhat in doubt, doesn't it?

You've established pretty firmly that the primary meaning is "garment." But that's not enough. Do you have evidence

1) that the terms you talk about in the video as meaning "garment" were not sometimes used in Muhammad's time to also signify covers worn in bed?

2) that the one kind of cover did not often function in practice as the other kind, i.e., a personal wrap as a sleeping cover?

I'm all for exposing the lunacy of Muhammad, but in this particular case I'm wondering what you can answer to these questions.

aaron said...

@osama the truth challenged

are you suggesting what NASA putted up on its site is contradictory to its scientist says? (thats stupid in the way that now you can't depend on NASA as a source because it makes them unreliable)

Also OSama your article only covers the effect that gravity on bigger and smaller planets has but not HOW AND WHY it works that way.

http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/k-12/airplane/wteq.html

Covers why it works that way. which chucks your claim in the bin. IF i was to apply the mechanics of how gravity works on what you claim it would not fit into the laws of physics that Newton has created. these are the same laws that NASA use to calculate escape velocity.

David Wood said...

Traeh,

You're simply being silly. The word means "garment." The lexicons say it means "garment." Muslims translate the word as "garment." Even Wikipedia says it means "garment." If you're going to say, "Well, PROVE TO ME THAT NO PERSON HAS EVER SAID IT MEANS SOMETHING ELSE, AND PROVE TO ME THAT IT COULDN'T HAVE MEANT SOMETHING DIFFERENT, AND PROVE TO ME THAT IT COULDN'T MEAN 'BED' IN SOME UNKNOWN TIME, OR ELSE YOUR CASE IS WEAK" then I'd say you're being unreasonable. I really don't have time for this nonsense.

Sam said...

Traeh, time for you to find another blog to play your silly little games. Don't waste our time here with your nonsense.

aaron said...

@OSama further more it gets worst for you. I showed your claim to other people who have taken physics and astro physics with me in university and high school. Osama you have been judge and you have lost.

so now Osama what will it be?

if the earth was once smaller which caused gravity to smaller while retaining same mass. meaning your your sources contradict itself and unreliable( Also Ironic that you turn to them if they do contradict)

Or gravity acts as i pointed pointed out and NASA scientist are right and consistent with their information that they put in to their site

Lose Lose situation for either way . Win WIn situation for me Osama

aaron said...

@Traeh

when someone makes a claim in any law of court and presents his evidence since you are the defendent the onus of proof shifts to you to show us where other people used it otherwise

Osama Abdallah said...

David Wood,

Thawb also means ceiling, hood, or the metaphoric thing that covers you. It's a language that is derived from the life syle of living under tents.

The Holy Quran Says that Believing men are LIBAAS (clothes in classical Arabic) to the Believing women, and the Believing women are LIBAAS to the Believing men. See Noble Verse 2:187.

Also, LIBAAS is used for a situation that encompasses the entire community:

‏16:112 وضرب الله مثلا قرية كانت امنة مطمئنة ياتيها رزقها رغدا من كل مكان فكفرت بانعم الله فاذاقها الله لباس الجوع والخوف بما كانوا يصنعون

‏25:47 وهو الذي جعل لكم الليل لباسا والنوم سباتا وجعل النهار نشورا



Furthermore, THAWB, which was part of LIBAAS was used by the pagan Arabs to also mean something that encompasses. The following video clip will demonstrate for you an example on how the pagan Arabs used this word, THAWB:

www.answering-christianity.com/zir_salem_clip_episode_22.wmv

I am still working on the rebuttal. These are only simple examples that I am giving. Just remember that this is BEDUIONS AND LIVING UNDER TENTS style of language. Words such as THAWB, MIRT AND LIBAAS are used to encompass and to cover.

So the Prophet, peace be upon him, was in the LIBAAS OF AISHA metaphorically, meaning that he was IN HER HOME.

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com

David Wood said...

Funny, I just opened Muhammad Mohar Ali's lexicon of Qur'anic Arabic, and he defines "thawb" as "dress, clothing, garment, apparel." But suddenly, when Muhammad says he he liked to dress up in Aisha's "thawb," we're all supposed to assume Muhammad didn't mean the obvious.

Too bad, Osama. Your prophet lost the benefit of the doubt when he had sex with a little girl. Wait, are we supposed to assume that "consummate" means something different here?

Osama Abdallah said...

I also would like to add that the Jewish Law doesn't apply to anyone, except for the Jews. In the Jewish Law, you are also to be put to death if you simply raise your voice on any of your parents.

So even if we take the absolute worst case scenario, and say that the Prophet did put on his shoulders his wives' garments IN THEIR OWN PRIVATE HOMES, this this doesn't mean that it's the end of the world. I mean after all, garments back then with the bediuons looked all similar, and they were made from animal skins and wool. We're not talking about bras here.

So, while I sincerely believe that the language of the narrations that you guys brought forth was metaphoric as I will thoroughly prove, insha'Allah, but still even if the Prophet put a garment on him that was used by any of his wives, then this still doesn't really mean anything. The Jewish Law is very strict in somethings and was only put for the Jews. Only the Jews are obligated to follow it. EVEN CHRISTAINS SAY THEY DON'T HAVE TO FOLLOW IT. Otherwise, can you honestly tell me here that anyone who raises his voice on any of his parents should be put to death under the Christian Rule?

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com

Foolster41 said...

Osama: You never did answer my question, how can the Quran claim Jesus as a prophet of Islam when the only surviving texts of Christianity from aro0und 500 years before mohammad was born contradict everything islam claims? (I.e that Jesus was crucified, that jews worship Ezra, the Christians believe that Mary is in the trinity etc.)

Also, are you going to finally apollogize for the violence you've called for against Christians ("bloodbath"), libels and name calling, such as against me (wanting hate crimes to happen), and or your misrepresentation of Chrisitan doctrines (all the while claiming people are misrepresenting Islam which seems very hypocritical). No? Then you're posistion as any kind of scholar or person who's sanely listened to is utterly MOOT. Why should we listen to a juvinille, dishonest hate monger?

(And saying I'm the one that's a hate monger (which I beleive you've used as a "defense" before) is NOT a defense. it in no way makes the terrible things you've said go away. You really do need to fess up if you expect people to take you seriously.)

My guess is, you'll just ignore this, like you did my post above, and every other post before it calling you on your dishonesty and nastiness.

Murtadd said...

@ Osama,

No my dear Sir,it is you and your ummah that follows an empty religion.
Islam is founded solely on the "revelations" from your "prophet"

I put it to you that your "prophet" is a liar and a fake by his own admission.

He admitted to fabricating your quran. Tabari 6:111. See my blog murtadd.wordpress.com under the title Muhammad: Truthful or deceiver.

This prophet of you said Nigella and black cummin is the cure for ALL disease.See bukhari 7:71:591 and sahih muslim 26:5489. Last time I checked the world is still full of disease. Its probably the CHRISTIANS fault, metaphorically speaking of course.

This "prophet" of yours was also proven to be a false prophet by a Jew named Abdullah ibn Salaam in Bukhari 4:55:546.

And you muslims use this person to discredit other religions because he claims islam to be the truth. Absolutely disgusting.

Muhammed is a LIAR and a FALSE prophet and I'm not speaking METAPHORICALLY.

In Christ, for Christ, by Christ

Murtadd
murtadd.wordpress.com

Traeh said...

I'll respond to David, then below that, to Sam.

David,

You seem to be taking offense where none was given, and in response call me silly for asking sincere questions. As a teacher in your classrooms, do you tell your students they are silly when they ask questions, and say that you don't have time for their nonsense?

Well, I've long been done with rolling over for teachers who behave obnoxiously.

You said,

"You're simply being silly. The word means "garment." The lexicons say it means "garment." Muslims translate the word as "garment." Even Wikipedia says it means "garment." If you're going to say, "Well, PROVE TO ME THAT NO PERSON HAS EVER SAID IT MEANS SOMETHING ELSE"

Liar.

Here's what I said

"Do you have evidence that the terms you talk about in the video as meaning "garment" were not SOMETIMES used IN MUHAMMAD'S TIME to also signify covers worn in bed?"

I asked for evidence that the term was not used with another meaning SOMETIMES in MUHAMMAD'S TIME, and you pretend I asked for "PROOF" that "NO PERSON" has "EVER" used the term in another way.

Why create a strawman, David?

I guess your purpose in creating a strawman was to make my question look impossible to answer and meaningless to answer -- If, as you claimed, I was asking, "Can you PROVE that NO PERSON, EVER, used the term that way" well, then of course proof would be impossible, and more to the point, who would ask for such proof, except an idiot, since, after all, suppose one could prove that one person in hundreds of millions had used the term in the different way under consideration? It would be a meaningless lone usage and irrelevant to the discussion anyway. What a foolish question! But not the one I asked.

David, if you don't have time to answer beginner questions, don't be a turd. Just don't answer. Or tell me they were answered in the video and I should watch it again, or tell me to go read your or Sam's debates with Muslims about it.

So distractions can be avoided here folks, I'm not an apologist for Islam. Here's my little anti-Islam website: Quoting Islam

Now, to Sam.

Sam, you said,

Traeh, time for you to find another blog to play your silly little games. Don't waste our time here with your nonsense.

Sam, I've had a few interactions with you before, and had a similar experience, unfortunately. I was not playing little games or big games, so you can shove that where the sun don't shine. I've noticed a truly sick tendency in you to sometimes attribute bad faith or ill will to others when they are simply asking questions. Maybe that's the polemicist's neurosis. Fine, see a psychiatrist, or a priest, don't take it out on me.

And if you think my questions are nonsense questions, Sam, then why don't you ignore them, or just kindly tell me to look at x website or x comment or article, or whatever. But as for your attributions to me of bad faith or ill will, I rather think the shoe is on the other foot. Look to it.

Don't get me wrong. I love watching you on Jesus or Muhammad. I love your truly vast knowledge of Islamic texts and Christian scripture, and your astounding ability to marshal it and articulate it. I've learned a great deal from you and expect to learn more. But you are far from being a wise or mature human being. As for "little games," there is one that is part of your pattern: with the slightest excuse, you take offense, which, conveniently, gives you your justification for attributing ill will and all kinds of horrible qualities to people who are not immediately agreeing with you. Thus you seek to buttress your arguments with ad hominem, and pretend the ad hominem is justified by the trumped up prior "offense" given to you. That's playing games.

gabriella oak said...


This topic certainly seems to have got Osama's juices flowing. He can barely contain his excitement.
#pretty-in-pink

Traeh said...

aaron,

You said,
"when someone makes a claim in any law of court and presents his evidence since you are the defendent the onus of proof shifts to you to show us where other people used it otherwise"

You are assuming this is a debate in court between opponents, rather than a discussion between teacher and student. I do not think of David as my opponent, in court or elsewhere. I was asking him questions as a student hoping for clarifications. In a classroom, the onus is not necessarily on one side or the other. It's shared in some fashion between teacher and students. Since David knows so much, I was trying to pick his brain for clarifications of my questions. You seem to think I want to prove David wrong. Not so. The opposite in fact. I was trying to prove to myself that he's right, and hoping he might help me to do so.

bob said...

A distinction between the general commands given to all of mankind and some of the numerous and seemingly odd commands which were specific and unique only to the nation of Israel in the time of Moses (Mosaic laws) in the Old Testament i.e. Deuteronomy and Leviticus.

The reason for these numerous laws, rules and regulations, was that, being the nation through which the Messiah; the Christ, was to enter the world, Israel needed to be kept separated from, and undefiled by the idolatrous and often vile practices of the pagan tribes that surrounded them.
In other words, Israel needed to be kept in one piece in order to get Christ to the cross. This can be seen in the genealogy of Jesus in Mat 1:1 and also in Luke 3:23-38, which goes all the way back to Adam.
And Satan, being well aware that the Son, the Redeemer, christ, had been promised through a line of the descendants of Israel, did his best to sabotage this line by any means possible. This being the central theme of the Old Testament. And this is also the reason for God's sometimes severe judgement and even extermination of some of the surrounding pagan tribes, whom satan recruited and was working through in trying to ruin God's plans for the redemption of mankind.

Many of the Mosaic purity laws concerning food, drink, etc. were specifically put in place for Israel only (even then, some rules or standards were only for the priesthood, so that they were clean enough to enter into the inner sanctum of the temple, the holy of holy's, where God's presence resided. In other words, the peoples representatives before God were required to be neat and tidy out of respect to God) until the time of Jesus and in no way apply to us today.
Only those universal commandments and prohibitions in the Old Testament which are also found in the New Testament apply in today's world.
For example, some prohibitions that universally apply to everyone (they dishonour God because we are made in his image) are:

Do not be decieved. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor those who participate in homosexuality, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners wil inherit the kingdom of God. 1Cor 6:9, 10

Whereas, Mosaic rules concerning food and drink are dealt with as follows:

So he said to them, "Are you thus without understanding also? Do you not percieve that whatever enters a man from outside cannot defile him, because it does not enter his heart but his stomach, and is eliminated, thus purifying all foods?" Mark 7:18, 19

It is what is in a man's heart that defiles him, not what he eats or drinks.

"For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders, thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, licentiousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness. All these things come from within and defile a man." mark 7:21-23

Continued next comment...

bob said...

Despite this, there are some whose concience will be offended by the idea of eating certain foods, but that is a personal thing and cannot be used to judge others; nor can those who eat certain foods judge those who don't.

For one believes he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats only vegtables. Let not him who eats despise him who does not eat, and let not him who does not eat judge him who eats; for God has recieved him.
I know and am convinced by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of itself; but to him who considers anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean. Romans 14:2, 3, 14

In other words, one should not offend the other with what they do or don't eat, but keep it to themselves...

Do you have faith? Have it to yourself before God. Happy is he who does not condemn himself in what he approves. Verse 22 (The rest of chapter 14 in Romans has all the finer points)

...because on this subject, it is a case of each to their own.

Therefore let no one judge you in food and drink, of regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths. Colossians 2:16

Alcohol

The Bible makes it quite clear in many places that it is the EXCESS consumption of wine leading to DRUNKENESS that causes problems...

Wine is a mocker, intoxicating drink arouses brawling, and whoever is led astray by it is not wise. Proverbs 20:1

...not with the consumption of wine itself within its proper context and quantity...

Here is what I have seen: it is good and fitting for one to eat and drink, and to enjoy the good of all his labour in which he toils under the sun all the day's of his life which God gives him; for it is his heritage.
Go, eat your bread with joy, and drink your wine with a merry heart; for God has already accepted your works... Ecclesiastes 5:18; 9:7

...that is, for our health.

He [God] causes the grass to grow for the cattle, and vegetation for the service of man, that he may bring forth food from the earth, and wine that makes glad the heart of man, oil to make his face shine, and bread which strengthens man's heart. Psalm 104:14, 15

It should be noted however, that the wine that is referred to in scripture was, in general, reasonably mild in strength (unlike much of the commercially produced wine of today); it was also diluted with water to balance its flavour and strength, and was usually only consumed at meal times as the above verses describe.

Osama Abdallah said...

"This topic certainly seems to have got Osama's juices flowing. He can barely contain his excitement.
#pretty-in-pink"

LOOLLL, glad that you're not one of my 4 wives, Gabriella!! hehehhehehe. Couldn't imagine what you would've made out of me.

Radical Moderate said...

Osama Abd-Fool-la

Accuses me of being a liar, then posts one of his articles as proof.

To bad he did not post the original article.

Nice try Osama. Typical for a Truth-A-Phobe

SGM said...

@ Osama Abdallah,
In answering Gabriella, you have shown what is in your filthy heart and mind. But then again, you are following the greatest example of your prophet. How can we blame you.

Foolster41 said...

So, Osama, you're once again going to IGNORE me when I call you on your hypocracy and ask you show decency and apologize for your mischaracteriation of the bible and other people? Not really surprised.

Kira Ani McGrath said...

As I watched this I had a thought: when Islam's sources speak of Muhammad being in a wife's robe/clothes, could that be a euphemism for sex? In modern English we have the euphemism "get in his/her pants." Certainly, though, it's creepy no matter what.

Haloplex said...

Could getting into his wife's garments be a euphemism for having sex? Similar to "getting into someone's pants." The "bed" translation could be a euphemism for sex too. Similar to our "going to bed" with someone. Were parts of the Quran revealed during sex?

2/3rds through the vid. Maybe this gets covered.

Andreas Pseftis said...

You should get to the point quicker.

As a Christian you came across a childish and only interested in insulting Islam rather than stating the facts. I would recommend you get to the point without brining other 100 other negative points along the way (Such as repeating the child bride issue over and over again) . I am sure most Muslims lost interest before you made your point. We should show respect to other religions as Christians and make the point in a dignified manner. Your video will probably win no Muslim converts to Christianity but will create more 'Anti Christian Muslims ' . Remember you have Christians who live in Muslim countries think of them as well when you make your videos.

Andreas Pseftis said...

You should get to the point quicker.

As a Christian you came across a childish and only interested in insulting Islam rather than stating the facts. I would recommend you get to the point without brining other 100 other negative points along the way (Such as repeating the child bride issue over and over again) . I am sure most Muslims lost interest before you made your point. We should show respect to other religions as Christians and make the point in a dignified manner. Your video will probably win no Muslim converts to Christianity but will create more 'Anti Christian Muslims ' . Remember you have Christians who live in Muslim countries think of them as well when you make your videos as Muslims will retaliate against them.

d beall said...

It's amusing watching Muslims respond emotionally in a 2 second comment after watching a one hour step-by-step and point-by-point video with the documented sources all coming from Muslim scholars. This is what happens in cults.

Tinker Mate said...

Wshere is the proof? YOur words can not be proof. There is not even single authentic source to prove the he was a cross-designer. Prove it..

Dennis said...

Dennis !

Book of Maryum ver:33 says - 'And Salâm (peace) be upon me the day I was born, and the day I die, and the day I shall be raised alive!'

Your Quran says Christ been ressurected from the death but you people are truely blind. Mohammed was a sinner which God Almighty forgiven him of his sin just read that :Says Chapter 48:1-2 says- Verily, We have given you (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم) a manifest victory.
2 That Allâh may forgive you your sins of the past and the future,[1] and complete His Favour on you, and guide you on the Straight Path. This proves that he was a sinner and God forgave him .

And there are more verses which is availabe in the book of Maryum and Al Imran which simply says about Christ purity and holiness that Christ Jesus came from God Almighty and He is The Holy Spirit and pure and Holy and Word of God and Mercy of God those who receive Him They will recieve God Almighty.

Thanks !

Dennis Ekka said...

Quran says 3:31-31 Say (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم to mankind): 'If you (really) love Allâh then follow me (i.e. accept Islâmic Monotheism, follow the Qur’ân and the Sunnah), Allâh will love you and forgive you your sins. And Allâh is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

Through this verse it is clear that Muhammad was forgiven for his sin by God Almighty.
Thanks

haroondaniel said...

Shahi al bukari v7:h5886. Here Muhammad curse effeminate person. AND Shahi al Muslim h:2402 Muhammad himself wear Aisha cloths. Abubakar,umar and usman came n fulfilled their need n go. Must read both hadhis. Is Muhammad She Muhammad?

Shafay Islam said...

Hope IZAKDAVID13 can see this

http://islamiat101.blogspot.com/2013/10/a-response-on-was-muhammad-cross-dresser.html

Mohammed said...

You will roast in hell for what you say of the prophet of god. You insult the prophet for marrying Aishia who was ready for marriage and nearly fully devoloped? Only 100 years ago people would marry girls at 12, people don't grow same forever, today 18 is nearly fully grown in 100 years it will likely be 25 or older. People grow slower as time goes. She was like young women today. She was not small or little. In addition why didn't your Jesus marry? Why did he not marry? Was he not god in the flesh as you lie and claim? Then why didn't he marry? You say he is god in the flesh and he took that form in order to be like his people, so why didn't he marry like the people do? If you say its not befitting for god to marry then I ask is it more befitting for god to be born out of a vigina? Or to suck on his Mother brest milk. Why don't you think and stop denying truth. See how I insulted you? And this is just a touch of what is in store. Insult the messenger of god and more of this is waiting for you.