Tuesday, January 29, 2013

One Over-Medicated Muslim Demonstrates the Insufficiency of the Qur'an

The Qur'an claims to be a clear book. It also claims that its verses are explained in detail. These claims are patently false, and the number of examples one could give to demonstrate their falsehood are virtually incalculable. One of my personal favorites is that the Qur'an never clearly says that the Torah was given to Moses even though this is what all Muslims believe.(*) Muslims believe this on the basis of traditions that supplement the Qur'an, a fact that shows that the Qur'an is no more self-contained than is the unitarian deity of Islam.

In the following audio clip, Sam Shamoun brings up one of many other examples of this, challenging a Muslim who recently accosted him in a room on Paltalk when Sam was starting a lecture on an entirely different topic. 

Listen as Ijaz Ahmed, aka Calling Christians, meanders around the challenge being addressed to him, and struggles in vain to come up with anything even remotely resembling an answer, even though Sam keeps stopping him and making his challenge painfully clear, explaining his challenge in detail...something the Qur'an so often fails to do in spite of all its pompous boasting to do just that.

Since Ijaz has a penchant for blaspheming the Lord and slandering Christians, only to turn around and plead his age, immaturity, and being doped up on medication as an excuse for his behavior and lackluster performance -- possibly because he doesn't know that the more Islamic excuse to make is that he was bewitched -- Sam holds nothing back and gives it to him with both barrels. Although Ijaz appears uncharacteristically sheepish in this clip, perhaps because Sam's challenge upset his equilibrium, given that Ijaz has a sordid history behind him of blasphemy and slander, and given that he came to interrupt, he really should have come loaded for bear. 

Lest you think Ijaz has turned over another leaf, here is what he said to another person on Paltalk named Radical Moderate who, per Ijaz's request, was kind enough to inform him when his mini-debate with Sam was officially posted on Youtube.

Radical Moderate: Its up
Radical Moderate: _http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-oIEijB2rzc
CallingChristians: lol i know
CallingChristians: i already added to my channel
Radical Moderate: ok
CallingChristians: ur a bit slow lol
Radical Moderate: no just not really interested
Radical Moderate: oh I see you have already started with the distortions 
Radical Moderate: you want the whole 2 hour file
Radical Moderate: lol
CallingChristians: id gladly take the unedited version anyday
Radical Moderate: dude its 2 hours long most of it does not pertain to you
Radical Moderate: what you have is yoru discusion 
Radical Moderate: minus when you left the room
Radical Moderate: but you will look for anything but the truth
CallingChristians: lol if thats what u think 
Radical Moderate: So why do you want the 1.5 hours when you werent even in the room
CallingChristians: lol omg
CallingChristians: take ur head out of your rectum old man

As you can see, once Ijaz recovered from the drubbing he received, it was business as usual for him.

With no further ado, here is the video. Listen and enjoy!!!




14 comments:

Derek Adams said...

Here are my thoughts. Note this was done quite fast, so it's shabby but understandable.

http://www.answeringabraham.com/2013/01/exchange-sam-shamoun-vs-ijaz-ahmed.html

Radical Moderate said...

Maybe he is under medicated. The doctors are still tweaking his meds to get the right balance of brain chemistry.

Radical Moderate said...

Or maybe he is self medicated

Derrick Abdul-Hakim said...

"One of my personal favorites is that the Qur'an never clearly says that the Torah was given to Moses even though this is what all Muslims believe.(*) Muslims believe this on the basis of traditions that supplement the Qur'an, a fact that shows that the Qur'an is no more self-contained than is the unitarian deity of Islam"

What about Q5:44 and Q6:91? They seem clear to me.

Sam said...

Derrick, show me where it says the Torah was given to Moses in either one of those verses. It doesn't. Q. 5:44-48 doesn't even mention Moses, and 6:91 says the BOOK was given to Moses. It says nothing about Torah. Here they are for all to read:

Lo! We did reveal the Torah, wherein is guidance and a light, by which the prophets who surrendered (unto Allah) judged the Jews, and the rabbis and the priests (judged) by such of Allah's Scripture as they were bidden to observe, and thereunto were they witnesses. So fear not mankind, but fear Me. And barter not My revelations for a little gain. Whoso judgeth not by that which Allah hath revealed: such are disbelievers. S. 5:44

Please be kind enough to show us where this verse says the Torah was given to Moses. And:

And they measure not the power of Allah its true measure when they say: Allah hath naught revealed unto a human being. Say (unto the Jews who speak thus): Who revealed the Book which Moses brought, a light and guidance for mankind, which ye have put on parchments which ye show, but ye hide much (thereof), and (by which) ye were taught that which ye knew not yourselves nor (did) your fathers (know it)? Say: Allah. Then leave them to their play of cavilling. S. 6:91

Once again, could you be kind enough to show us where this verse says that the Book which God gave to moses was the Torah?

You have assumed that the Book given to Moses is the Torah in Q. 6:91, which proves Anthony's point, since this assumption is not taken from the Quran. You either got this from the Bible itself, or from later tradition. So thank you for proving Anthony's point. Keep up the great job of helping him to discredit the Quran.

Sam said...

Thanks Derek for that excellent analysis. And you are correct, I could have brought up better examples, which is what I intended to do if he ever got through this very simple one. That never happened, fortunately for him. :-)

CharlesMartel said...

Hi Derrick,

The former verse mentions the Torah but does not say it was sent down TO MOSES; the latter verse mentions Moses but does not say that the book he was given was the TORAH.

Please read the link I provided. It is annexed to the portion of the blog post you quoted above.

Derrick Abdul-Hakim said...

Sam,

"Derrick, show me where it says the Torah was given to Moses in either one of those verses. It doesn't. Q. 5:44-48 doesn't even mention Moses, and 6:91 says the BOOK was given to Moses. It says nothing about Torah. Here they are for all to read..."

All that proves is Q5:44-48 and Q6:91 don’t explicitly state the Torah was given to Moses. I wholeheartedly agree with you. They don’t. They (as well as preceding and succeeding verses) assume the reader has some familiarity with Judeo-Christian traditions. That much is obvious from the fact the Qur’an alters back and forth between addressing Muhammad, the People of the Book, and believers. I see Q5:44 and Q6:91 as the same, stating the same fact – God sent the Torah to Moses - for different theological purposes. I think that is clear from the contexts in which both verses appear. In that respect I wasn’t disputing Anthony’s claim that many Qur’anic verses presuppose familiarity with earlier traditions (I didn’t say much, really). Every Muslim accepts (or ought to accept) that. What is worth disputing is whether his claim cuts any theological ice. I don’t think it does.

Derrick Abdul-Hakim said...

CharlesMartel (Anthony Rogers?)

Right, the verses I cited do not *independently* provide a link between the "book" given to Moses and the Torah. Conjoined, plus a wider Qur'anic context, they provide a link but don't do so in explicit terms. If you're saying the link is provided via extra-Qur'anic material (i.e. the Hebrew Bible, Judeo-Christian traditions, Syriac epistles, etc), I don't disagree with you. I just don't think anything theologically significant follows. Incidentally, I read the page linked up (no pun intended) to your post after I sent my response. It doesn't change my position, however.

A personal question from a Muslim, if you don't mind. Why do you (or anyone else from the Answering-Islam/Muslim team) waste electronic space on people like Ijaz Ahmed (or Osama Abdullah for that matter)?

Sam said...

Derrick, first off, thank you for admitting that the Quran is incomplete since your response shows that, contrary to its repeated assertion, it doesn't explain its verses in detail (cf. Q. 6:114; 41:3 among many others).

Second, your response is problematic for Muslim dawagandists since it proves that the Quran is referring to the Scriptures which the Jews and Christians would have possessed during Muhammad's time, as you basically admitted. However, in saying this you have put to rest the oft-repeated lie by your fellow ikhwaan that the Quran IS NOT referring to the Scriptures of the Jews and Christians, but to the original pristine revelation given to Moses and the prophets. If, as you claim, the Quranic verses "assume the reader has some familiarity with Judeo-Christian traditions," then this means that the Quran is identifying the Pentateuch as the Torah and as the Book which God gave to Moses, since this is what the Jews and Christians at that time identified as the Book of Moses or the Torah. So thank you for helping us refute the lies of your fellow Muslim brothers in dawah. Much appreciated.

Third, I tend to ignore Ijaz Ahmed and Osama Abdullah, since they are nothing more than internet and cyberspace trolls looking for attention. The problem, however, is they won't leave us alone but come running to us with challenges. This is why I decided to put calling-nothing in his place.

Finally, not to be rude, but why should we waste electronic space on on you? Your shot against Ijaz Ahmed and Osama Abdallah seem to indicate that you think hihgly of yourself, at least not on the level of Ahmed or Abdallah, and therefore worthy of our time and attention. In light of this, my questions to you is, why should we assume that you are any better than them and why should we waste electronic space on you? Can you show us your ijaazah from a recognized and reputable Muslim scholar that says that you are a credentialed Muslim scholar worthy of our time to interact with?













Sam said...

Do excuse my typos and errors in grammar since I am writing these as I am trying to focus on a project which I need to finish.

Zack_Tiang said...

Ijaz is indeed a waste of time. He seeks to only puff himself up and cares only for the truth that fits his own; rather than seeking our truth and challenging his own presuppositions.

Sam said...

Any folks, I don't plan on responding here, unless I deem it to be necessary, since I need to focus on finishing my writing commitments. May our risen Lord richly bless you all.

Toll said...

The concept of the furthest mosque is vague and indeterminate.

If the Koran is consistent with it's claims it should reveal to us it's location, should it not?

If the Ummah is expanding or contracting the furthest mosque will change it's location over time. The furthest mosque of today may not be the furthest of tomorrow.

So for this reason the furthest mosque is probably in paradise as it can't be a fixed location on earth.

Allah knows best as usual.