Answering Muslims: Muslims Behead Four Apostates in Somalia

Saturday, September 5, 2009

Muslims Behead Four Apostates in Somalia

In my last post, I noted the terrorist activity of Abu Mansour al-Amriki, an American convert to Islam now waging Jihad in Somalia. Here I want to add that al-Amriki's organization, al-Shabaab (which has ties to Al Qaeda), recently beheaded four apostates for converting to Christianity. Fatima Sultan, Ali Ma'ow, Sheik Mohammed Abdi, and Maaddey Diil were in Somalia taking care of orphans when they were kidnapped and murdered by members of al-Shabaab (in accordance with the commands of Muhammad). How many people would al-Amriki have beheaded if he had remained a Baptist?

Al-Muwatta of Imam Malik 36.18.15—Yahya related to me from Malik from Zayd ibn Aslam that the Messenger of Allah said, “If someone changes his religion—then strike off his head!”

164 comments:

BlackBaron said...: But we have this treasure in jars of clay, to show that the surpassing power belongs to God and not to us. We are afflicted in every way, but not crushed; perplexed, but not driven to despair; persecuted, but not forsaken; struck down, but not destroyed; always carrying in the body the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may also be manifested in our bodies. For we who live are always being given over to death for Jesus’ sake, so that the life of Jesus also may be manifested in our mortal flesh. So death is at work in us, but life in you.

Since we have the same spirit of faith according to what has been written, "I believed, and so I spoke," we also believe, and so we also speak, knowing that he who raised the Lord Jesus will raise us also with Jesus and bring us with you into his presence. For it is all for your sake, so that as grace extends to more and more people it may increase thanksgiving, to the glory of God.

So we do not lose heart. Though our outer self is wasting away, our inner self is being renewed day by day. For this light momentary affliction is preparing for us an eternal weight of glory beyond all comparison, as we look not to the things that are seen but to the things that are unseen. For the things that are seen are transient, but the things that are unseen are eternal.
2 Corinthians 4; September 5, 2009 at 10:09 PM
Nabeel Qureshi said...: But the media told me apostasy is not punishable in Islam?; September 6, 2009 at 1:07 AM
Prophet said...: Waiting for the mass outrage from the muslim street for this insult to islam, the shooting in the back of innocent muslims in retaliation, the smashing of mosques in retaliation ... waiting .... waiting ... oh, silly me, it's not cartoons of muhammad - the man they worship more than their allah.

What is disgusting, retrograde ideology islam was, is and will be until it is reduced to nothing more than an historical oddity of barbaric man.; September 6, 2009 at 2:19 AM
mkvine said...: Mat 10:28 "Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell."

Indeed, these courageous Christians did not reject Christ even to the point of death. These MARTYRS should be an inspiration to the rest of us; to have no fear spreading the gospel of our Lord Jesus no matter what the outcome may be.

Let us pray for the Muslims who committed this atrocity, that may God forgive them and illuminate their hearts with the knowledge of the Gospel. Jesus will forgive even the worst of sinners.

However, let us not forget to keep exposing the religion of Islam for what it is. This is a violent religion that promotes hatred and justifies murder. This incident should be taken into consideration by the Judges in Florida for the Rifqa Bary case; that apostasy is worthy of death in Islam.; September 6, 2009 at 2:40 AM
Fernando said...: Welcome back BlackBaron... not seen you fore a while arounde here I beliebe... Hope everything is ok withe you...

yes... this is another expression of islam 1.0... the one thate in the west is presented to bee notr the true one... here muslims want us to beliebe we habe an islam 2.0... to sad these wester muslims are nott going to these countries to make an upgrade off thate islam 1.0, rather are sending money to there in order to keep thate same islam floroshing... may us pray to all Christians who are being persecuted and killed all over the muslim world... and let's us also pray to those muslims who are making these atrotious acts so they can habe their hearts changed...; September 6, 2009 at 4:41 AM
Yahya Hayder Seymour said...: Nabeel Qureshi,

You were Qadiyani therefore it wasn't, rather the epistemology for Shariah Law in Qadiyanism is literally via the interpretation of the "Khalifah" of Mirza Gulam Ahmed of the time who gives rulings. Therefore you didn't have to worry about apostasy.; September 6, 2009 at 9:46 AM
The Fat Man said...: Anyone else hear it? It's so loud, its screaming in my ears. Its louder then being in the front row of a heavy metal concert. Louder then sitting on the tarmac at Ohare Airport. I put my fingers in my ears and I still can hear it. Can anyone else hear it?

Its the deafing sound of silence that only comes from mslims.; September 6, 2009 at 10:42 AM
Osama Abdallah said...: Apostates in Islam: http://www.answering-christianity.com/apostates.htm

Apostates in the Bible are to be killed, even according to Jesus Christ himself in the NT: http://www.answering-christianity.com/death.htm

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com; September 6, 2009 at 12:18 PM
Sepher Shalom said...: Yes The Fat Man, you are correct. The silence is deafening. Did you notice that Yahya took the time to point out that Nabeel was Qadiani, but not a word of disaproval or regret from him on the beheadings. Interesting priorities.

By the way, greetings from Argentina! My participation on the blog is going to be sparse for a few months. Shalom shalom in the name of Yeshua.; September 6, 2009 at 4:09 PM
Ehteshaam Gulam said...: Nabeel Said:

I have been praying for Ehteshaam, as I have been since before this fiasco. He has apologised for his behavior, tainted though his apology was. I am considering how to treat him currently - it seems he does not understand kindness or gentle words, because I had sent him advice and encouragement via private messages over facebook which he seemed to ignore wholesale.

My Response: Thanks, Nabeel. I've been praying for you too to come to Islam. Yes I agree I have "issues" but who doesn't? I fully apologize to you for any offense these last few days. I hope you can accept my apology and we can move on. I don't want to be "black listed" as Nadir has been.

Nabeel said: I also figure a more stern approach might be better for him in the long run - he just doesn't seem to realize that when he goes on a rampage calling people arrogant and childlike, that he is acting arrogant and childlike! Again, he said I lost my temper while he was in the throes of losing his temper. He hasn't learned this yet, and for his sake, I'm trying to figure out how he might. He is my friend, after all.

My Response: I think we both said dumb stuff, but it's best to forget the whole thing.

Another concern I have is his desire to go into public debate with the worst arguments I've heard (rivaled only by Osama Abdallah). Even Nadir's fetal alcohol syndrome arguments are better than theirs. People like Shabbir Ali, Ali Ataie, and Farhan Qureshi have far superior arguments, and he should learn from them. I have been encouraging Ehteshaam to study with good Muslim debaters and scholars, and to pass his arguments by them before putting his reputation on the line in public. This will require a lot more than a year, especially if that year is divided in its attention through school affairs and whatnot. Hopefully he'll listen to my encouragement.

My Response: Good advice, yes I consider everything you've told me. I do listen to others, whether its Bassam Zawadi, Nadir Ahmed, Farhan Qureshi etc. I don't like Ali Ataie though. I lost all respect for him after his "Who Was Muhammad" Debate. It was bad and it put down the Holy Prophet Muhammad (p). Because of him I'll never do the topic.

But next year I would like to debate you on Was Jesus Resurrected-- do it for Clay Jones, I did promise him that debate, lol. I also appreciate your friendship-- and I hope and pray you come to Sunni Islam-- the true Islam.

Thanks,
Ehteshaam Gulam
http://www.answering-christian-claims.com; September 6, 2009 at 11:21 PM
Ehteshaam Gulam said...: I also apologize to Brother Bassam Zawadi for wrongly bringing up his name, who I meant was Sami Zaatari and not Bassam.Again Sami wrote an article about Wood here:

http://muslim-responses.com/Wood_Coward/Wood_Coward

If that doesn't work you can read the article here:

http://www.answeringmuslims.com/search/label/Sami%20Zaatari

(scroll down to the fifth post)

Bassam had nothing to do with anything. I made a mistake there.; September 6, 2009 at 11:30 PM
Osama Abdallah said...: "Another concern I have is his desire to go into public debate with the worst arguments I've heard (rivaled only by Osama Abdallah). Even Nadir's fetal alcohol syndrome arguments are better than theirs. People like Shabbir Ali, Ali Ataie, and Farhan Qureshi have far superior arguments, and he should learn from them. I have been encouraging Ehteshaam to study with good Muslim debaters and scholars, and to pass his arguments by them before putting his reputation on the line in public. This will require a lot more than a year, especially if that year is divided in its attention through school affairs and whatnot. Hopefully he'll listen to my encouragement."

Nabeel,

You know well that if Psalm 91 is talking about Jesus, then your entire faith crumbles into devistation. Yet, we do have a direct link between Jesus and Psalm 91 in the New Testament by, IRONICALLY, JESUS CHRIST HIMSELF! Along also with satan as well. Satan tried to use Psalm 91 to tempt Jesus into testing GOD Almighty to try to kill himself to see if GOD Almighty will truly send down the ANGELS TO LIFT JESUS UP FROM DEATH AND HARM as Psalm 91 precisely predicted. Psalm 91 further delcares that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty for help to protect him from death, and GOD Almighty will HONOR HIM AND PROTECT HIM FROM DEATH! This is what Psalm 91 explicitly says.

The reader can visit: http://www.answering-christianity.com/isaiah_53.htm

Nabeel, more and more I am realizing that you were never a Qidiani nor a Muslim. You were born from Christian parents and had always been a Christian all your entire life. IN SHORT, I VERY STRONGLY BELIEVE THAT YOU ARE A LIAR!

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com; September 7, 2009 at 12:11 AM
The Fat Man said...: Sepher Shalom you are also correct. Look at the posts by Osama the great Abdulla and Ethhaam. Nothing on the topic of this article. Not a word, amazing trully amazing.

Muslims its not what you say that is the most revolting, its what you dont say that trully makes one want to vomit.

Esthhaam said...

"My Response: I think we both said dumb stuff, but it's best to forget the whole thing. "

Wha exaclty did Nabeel say that was DUMB?; September 7, 2009 at 1:13 AM
Ryan S said...: Osama says:

"Nabeel, more and more I am realizing that you were never a Qidiani nor a Muslim. You were born from Christian parents and had always been a Christian all your entire life. IN SHORT, I VERY STRONGLY BELIEVE THAT YOU ARE A LIAR!

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com "

Im not sure what this has to do with Muslims murdering Christian convets other then a another delusional tactic to advoid the obvious.; September 7, 2009 at 1:52 AM
Nakdimon said...: And this is where Muslims go "Allahu Akbar"!

Like I wrote earlier: I take issue with the Islamic apologists who claim that Islam promotes interfaith dialogue and tolerance. Some apologists try to cover the intolerance of Islam by claiming that apostates may only be killed in Islamic states to prevent the apostate to persuade other Muslims to leave the faith. But they don’t realize that this just blows their entire “Islam promotes dialogue” nonsense to smithereens. Because if I as a Christian would evangelise, I would be accused of persuading Muslims away from Islam. Therefore we cant have a debate in Islamic state because I would be attempting to persuade Muslims to leave Islam. Therefore I should just shut up, not display my Bible and keep my religion to myself. And that’s where the Pact of ‘Umar comes in:

In the name of Allah, the Merciful and Compassionate. This is a letter to the servant of Allah Umar [ibn al-Khattab], Commander of the Faithful, from the Christians of such-and-such a city. When you came against us, we asked you for safe-conduct (aman) for ourselves, our descendants, our property, and the people of our community, and we undertook the following obligations toward you:

We shall not build, in our cities or in their neighborhood, new monasteries, Churches, convents, or monks' cells, nor shall we repair, by day or by night, such of them as fall in ruins or are situated in the quarters of the Muslims.

…

We shall not teach the Qur'an to our children.

WE SHALL NOT MANIFEST OUR RELIGION PUBLICLY NOR CONVERT ANYONE TO IT. We shall not prevent any of our kin from entering Islam if they wish it.

We shall show respect toward the Muslims, and we shall rise from our seats when they wish to sit.

We shall not seek to resemble the Muslims by imitating any of their garments, the qalansuwa, the turban, footwear, or the parting of the hair. We shall not speak as they do, nor shall we adopt their kunyas.

…

We shall not sell fermented drinks.

…

We shall always dress in the same way wherever we may be, and we shall bind the zunar round our waists

WE SHALL NOT DISPLAY OUR CROSSES OR OUR BOOKS IN THE ROADS OR MARKETS OF THE MUSLIMS. WE SHALL USE ONLY CLAPPERS IN OUR CHURCHES VERY SOFTLY. We shall not raise our voices when following our dead. We shall not show lights on any of the roads of the Muslims or in their markets. "

Nakdimon; September 7, 2009 at 2:09 AM
Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...: Osama wrote:

You know well that if Psalm 91 is talking about Jesus, then your entire faith crumbles into devistation. Yet, we do have a direct link between Jesus and Psalm 91 in the New Testament by, IRONICALLY, JESUS CHRIST HIMSELF! Along also with satan as well. Satan tried to use Psalm 91 to tempt Jesus into testing GOD Almighty to try to kill himself to see if GOD Almighty will truly send down the ANGELS TO LIFT JESUS UP FROM DEATH AND HARM as Psalm 91 precisely predicted. Psalm 91 further delcares that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty for help to protect him from death, and GOD Almighty will HONOR HIM AND PROTECT HIM FROM DEATH! This is what Psalm 91 explicitly says.

Elijah replies:

Osama,

I simply cannot believe your incapability of working out a proper exegesis of a simple text such as Psalm 91. Your main failure is your own ignorance of Biblical doctrine and theology in general.

Firstly, is most probable written by the prophet Moses (at least according to some Jewish traditions); secondly the Psalm specifically ascribes God's protection over God's anointed or the one who follows the true path.

Hence this chapter is not specifically a passage describing Jesus even though it includes Jesus into that category; this is why Satan in Matthew 4 and Luke 4 refers to Psalm 91 concerning divine protection of Jesus, which is obvious on various occasions. Thus Psalm 91 does not exclude the Passion occurance (Jesus' suffering and death).

Notice in verse 15 of Psalm 91 we read: 'He will call upon me, and I will answer him, I will be with him in trouble, I will deliver him and honour him'.

Now read the Gospel account, surely Jesus as a number of other anointed inviduals was protected much like a the passage describes, however, the gospel account does not describe Jesus calling to the Father for salvation; in the Garden of Gethsemane he surrounders to the will of God, which is the cup of God's wrath.

This is a pretty devastating blow on your capability of exegesis Osama.; September 7, 2009 at 3:31 AM
Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...: Osama wrote:

Nabeel, more and more I am realizing that you were never a Qidiani nor a Muslim. You were born from Christian parents and had always been a Christian all your entire life. IN SHORT, I VERY STRONGLY BELIEVE THAT YOU ARE A LIAR!

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com

Elijah replies:

That is quite an accusation Osama, however it is easier to prove that your own website was virus loaded than your claim that Nabeel was never a muslim.

Which is why, Osama, that the readers on this blog barely dare to open the frequent links to your site. I still have second thoughts.; September 7, 2009 at 3:35 AM
Nakdimon said...: Osama: You know well that if Psalm 91 is talking about Jesus, then your entire faith crumbles into devistation. Yet, we do have a direct link between Jesus and Psalm 91 in the New Testament by, IRONICALLY, JESUS CHRIST HIMSELF! Along also with satan as well. Satan tried to use Psalm 91 to tempt Jesus into testing GOD Almighty to try to kill himself to see if GOD Almighty will truly send down the ANGELS TO LIFT JESUS UP FROM DEATH AND HARM as Psalm 91 precisely predicted. Psalm 91 further delcares that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty for help to protect him from death, and GOD Almighty will HONOR HIM AND PROTECT HIM FROM DEATH! This is what Psalm 91 explicitly says.

Oh my, you have just moved into my area of expertise.

Here are some responses to some more sophisticated arguments against the reading that Isaiah 53 is about Yeshua:

http://www.geocities.com/nakdimonspage/isaiah53pt1rts.html
http://www.geocities.com/nakdimonspage/isaiah53pt2rts.html

Now to your objections.

Osama, I noticed that you keep on harping on Psalm 91 as a refutation of our reading on Isaiah 53. Your argument is totally based on hot air. What you have to do is prove that Psalm 91 is either Messianic or has anything to do with Yeshua. If you cant do that, your entire argument is just totally baseless and you have nothing to stand on.

Second, you have to prove that Isaiah 53 is NOT Messianic and cannot apply to Yeshua. If you cant do that, your argument is totally baseless and you have nothing to stand on.

Third, you keep pointing out that Satan quotes scripture, but you fail to take heed to the refutation of the Messiah. It is illustrative of your position that you take Satan’s word over that of the Messiah when it comes to the application of Scripture to salvage your utterly untenable position.

Fourth, where did you get the utterly foolish idea from that Yeshua’s faith crumbled? Can you point us to the text that says this, please?

Thanks,
Nakdimon; September 7, 2009 at 5:12 AM
guntervondeutch said...: I don't really understand why Muslims are counter arguing this here with (disputed) Christian verses outlining death for apostasy in Christendom. The defining difference between the two religions in this matter is stark and undeniable, whether or not the Bible and the Quran both say they encourage execution for apostasy is moot, the fact of the matter is that only Muslims on a worldwide and organised scale actually enact the proscription against apostates.; September 7, 2009 at 9:47 AM
Osama Abdallah said...: "Osama, I noticed that you keep on harping on Psalm 91 as a refutation of our reading on Isaiah 53. Your argument is totally based on hot air. What you have to do is prove that Psalm 91 is either Messianic or has anything to do with Yeshua. If you cant do that, your entire argument is just totally baseless and you have nothing to stand on.

Second, you have to prove that Isaiah 53 is NOT Messianic and cannot apply to Yeshua. If you cant do that, your argument is totally baseless and you have nothing to stand on."

In the link above, I already proved that Isaiah 53 is deliberately mistranslated, and it doesn't say the things that you read in it in English.

Also, it is funny that you mentioned your points above, because in the New Testament, it is Psalm 91 that is directly linked to Jesus Christ and not Isaiah 53. In fact, the Jews strongly believe that Isaiah 53 had been fulfilled centuries before Christ. But in either case, Isaiah 53 doesn't disprove Psalm 91.

"Third, you keep pointing out that Satan quotes scripture, but you fail to take heed to the refutation of the Messiah. It is illustrative of your position that you take Satan’s word over that of the Messiah when it comes to the application of Scripture to salvage your utterly untenable position."

This dumb argument that I keep getting from Christians is getting too old and too ridiculous. It further convinces me of how blind and shallow-minded you are.

No one here is taking satans words over anyone else's words. I said above that satan TRIED TO USE PSALM 91 TO TEMPT JESUS INTO TRYING TO KILL HIMSELF, BY JUMPING OFF THE CANYON OR MOUNTAIN, to see if GOD Almighty will be True to His Word and Promise of sending the Angels down to lift Jesus up so that he would neither get harmed or die. THEY WON'T EVEN ALLOW HIS FOOT TO STRIKE A ROCK. This is by the way a symbolic expression of saying that they will cover him with protection from harm and death, as PSALM 91 FURTHER PROMISES.

"Fourth, where did you get the utterly foolish idea from that Yeshua’s faith crumbled? Can you point us to the text that says this, please?"

What Jesus' faith crumbling? Go and re-read what I wrote. I said that if we establish that Psalm 91 is about Jesus Christ, WHICH IT CLEARLY IS, then your entire faith would crumble into devistation.

To the reader, please visit: http://www.answering-christianity.com/isaiah_53.htm

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com; September 7, 2009 at 11:40 AM
minoria said...: I have also noticed the silence condemning the killing of apostates from Islam by the Muslim leaders who particiate in this forum.They are real leaders of their community:Seymour,Snow,Ehteshaam.From Paul Williams blog it seems he agrees with their execution.As for Osama,I am not sure what his position is,I haven't read the articles because of the virus thing.

OTHER MUSLIMS LOOK UP TO THEM FOR GUIDANCE

Since the people mentioned are looked as models then they should already have made a condemnation.Either:

1.They agree with death for apostasy,or

2.They are afraid to getting hurt by Muslims who do if they say the contrary(now do you believe that RIFQA BARY has reasons to fear the Muslims).

TARIQ RAMADAN

Again,he is THE Muslim intellectual in the West.It is really strange how he freely condemned the suicide bombers,terrorists and death for apostasy yet his life was NEVER in danger from the extremists.

While MAGDI ALLAM(when he was a Muslim)did the SAME yet he had to live under police protection because of death threats.I believe TARIQ RAMADAN was in secret accord with the Sharia Muslims,they knew his denonciations were not "from the heart."

GULLIBLE

Then TARIQ RAMADAN went to work for PressTV,an Iranian TV channel.The Iranian government violates human rights,kills apostates,kills Bahais,gives alot of money to Hizbullah to kill civilians.

He thought Westerners would be fooled.But this time he calculated wrongly.; September 7, 2009 at 12:02 PM
Fernando said...: here we go agaisn with Osama Abdallah... islam forbides apostasy killings except is some cases... hummm... this means islam allows apostasy killings in some cases... a window 1 inch oppened is not a window closed Osama... bie the way: eberytime I risk venturing onto your site my anti-virus starts iluminating and bipping likke a Christmas tree... GET THE VIRUS THING FIXED OUT!!!; September 7, 2009 at 12:24 PM
Fernando said...: Hi brother minoria... you forgot to mention Shadid Lewis... the well famous saxophone convertion: he's also the leader off his mosque iff I remember well... he comes sometimes aorunde here, as well as Ibn... do you remember ibn? he's getting also famous arounde the muslim worls due to his "allah is not God" syllogism:

1) if God is the greatest being one can imagine;
2) we can imagine far greater beings that allah;
3) allah is not God...; September 7, 2009 at 12:27 PM
Ehteshaam Gulam said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; September 7, 2009 at 1:11 PM
MuslimPhantom said...: Assalaamu 'alaykum brother Osama: قلبي معكم وعلى أن الإسلام هو دائما في فمك والخاصة بك في الكتابة
I'm very glad to see, at last, a top Muslim apologist writing with special strength and rhetorical ability in this satanic blog again. There are too many pseudo-Muslim-apologists around here doing harm to Islam and the أمة. With your true effort and dedication to Islam the star of truth, peace and freedom will, inshallah, will guide these people to the true religion. If I can do anything to support you, please let me know. I loved your in-depth analysis of the Psalm 91. With straightforward claims like that one the christian faith will certainly crumble apart in no time. يمكنك أن تواصل عملك لسنوات عديدة ، ويبارك الله عائلتك.; September 7, 2009 at 1:48 PM
Ehteshaam Gulam said...: MuslimPhantom,

At least Osama is defending Islam-- what are you doing? And at least I am a Muslim Apologist who gets along with other apologists.

Thanks
Ehteshaam Gulam
http://www.answering-christian-claims.com; September 7, 2009 at 3:30 PM
nma said...: MuslimBantom,

Your lying bigot Osama Abdallah is lying and misinterpreting the Bible in a most silly way again! After reading his trash, ignorant muslims like you like to believe that he is a great apologist. Also, the satanic religion called Islam is not a true religion.; September 7, 2009 at 7:34 PM
Ehteshaam Gulam said...: BTW Hogan,

Since you won't email me, is there an email I can reach you at?

Thanks
Ehteshaam Gulam
http://www.answering-christian-claims.com; September 7, 2009 at 7:50 PM
Fifth Monarchy Man said...: Hey EG,

you said:

BTW Hogan,

Since you won't email me, is there an email I can reach you at?

I say:

Is your email even working?

I sent you a note a few days ago and no reply yet

peace; September 7, 2009 at 8:24 PM
minoria said...: Hello Fernando:

Thank you for the comment.I had indeed overlooked Lewis.I am also familiar with SAMI ZAATARI.Again his idea that there is NO danger of Muslims forcing Sharia on non-Muslims in the West because they are a minority is incorrect.Simply sending death threats is enough.

IBN ISHAQ

Ehteshaam does not think he is reliable.But he is our EARLIEST source on Mohammed apart from the Koran(which does not say much).120 years later.

WHY?

Why did the Muslims take so long to write a biography of him if they considered him to be the greatest?But whatever the case the Koran's VALIDITY is INDEPENDENT of Mohammed.It has undeniable errors that can not be denied(especially its claim that Mohammed is in the gospels).THAT alone is more than enough to invalidate the whole book.

JESUS' CAREER

It lasted 3 years,not 23 like Mohammed's.It was pretty much the same thing(preaching in towns)till the last week.THAT is why the gospels concentrate mostly on the teaching.I believed,based on good reasons,that MARK is from 50 AD,less than 20 years later.

But even 40 years later is still short and again the emphasis is on Jesus' IDEAS.

But even 40 years is alot better than 3X that time(120 years) to say even BASIC FACTS about Mohammed's life.

CARELESS WORK

There is ABROGATION in the Koran.Yet it is NOT ordered from EARLIST to LATEST chapter,but from LONGEST to SHORTEST chapter.

Very careless(just like waiting 120 years to say basic facts about Mohammed).So to DETERMINE which chapter came first,etc is GUESSWORK.Why such lack of organization?

Even if it had not been ordered in an ILLOGICAL order(what good does length of chapter give us?)there are errors that invalidate it.; September 7, 2009 at 8:32 PM
Fifth Monarchy Man said...: Osama,

You are confused on your reading of the psalms

The benefits offered in Psalm 91 is conditioned on the righteous ones request for aid.

Quote:
When he calls to me, I will answer him
(Psalms 91:15a)

The father would not save the Son against his will any more than he will send a man to heaven who does not want to go.

Jesus did not ask to be saved from death on the cross. If he had done so God would have saved him. It would have proven that he placed his own wishes above the father thus disqualifying him from being the messiah.

Jesus himself points this out.

Quote:
Do you think that I cannot appeal to my Father, and he will at once send me more than twelve legions of angels? But how then should the Scriptures be fulfilled, that it must be so?"
(Matthew 26:53-54)

In fact one of the reasons that God loves Jesus enough to grant him his requests is because he did not consider his own life to be more important than his mission.

Joh 10:17 For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life that I may take it up again.
Joh 10:18 No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This charge I have received from my Father."

(See also phip 2:6-11 and Matt 26:39)

besides
The fact is that God did save the Messiah from death, It’s called the resurrection !!!!!!!!!!

Quote:

this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men. God raised him up, loosing the pangs of death, because it was not possible for him to be held by it. For David says concerning him, "'I saw the Lord always before me, for he is at my right hand that I may not be shaken; therefore my heart was glad, and my tongue rejoiced; my flesh also will dwell in hope. For you will not abandon my soul to Hades, or let your Holy One see corruption. You have made known to me the paths of life; you will make me full of gladness with your presence.' "Brothers, I may say to you with confidence about the patriarch David that he both died and was buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. Being therefore a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that he would set one of his descendants on his throne, he foresaw and spoke about the resurrection of the Christ, that he was not abandoned to Hades, nor did his flesh see corruption. This Jesus God raised up, and of that we all are witnesses.
(Acts 2:23-32)

Nuff said; September 7, 2009 at 9:07 PM
Ehteshaam Gulam said...: Fifth Monarchy Man:

Really? Sorry man, can you send it again?; September 7, 2009 at 9:56 PM
Ehteshaam Gulam said...: Yeah FifthMan

I couldn't find your email anywhere... Again you can find my email here:

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

You can also learn more about me-- yeah yeah, I need a life.

Thanks
Ehteshaam Gulam
http://www.answering-christian-claims.com; September 7, 2009 at 10:01 PM
Ehteshaam Gulam said...: btw Any one else wants to email me during my long and hard semester go ahead, includes Sepmer Shamom this also includes Nabeel Qureshi and David Wood. Sorry for offending both of you in the past.

Thanks
Forever yours in Islam
Ehteshaam Gulam
http://www.answering-christian-claims.com; September 7, 2009 at 10:06 PM
The Fat Man said...: Part ONE, Resposne to Osama's folly

Osma Abdullah thank you for exposing the folly of the Muslim Position on the crucifixion of Christ.

The Quran and the Muslim position is that Jesus Christ was sent to the Jews with a message. The Jews rejected this message and then tried to foil God’s plan. They conspired to kill Jesus, by killing him they could demonstrate that Christ was not sent by God since they were able to kill him.

Ahh but Allah was smarter then the Jews, according to the Quran. He saved Jesus from death on the cross, and fooled not only Jews into believing that they had actually killed him, but allaha also deceived Jesus’ disciples into believing that he had died on the cross. Proving that he is God by out scheming \ plotting and fooling his creation. Not only is this nonsensical from a theological position, it in fact demonstrates a total lack of understanding by the Quran, and Muslims regarding the Biblical doctrine of the crucifixion, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

What Christ O Phobe Muslims fail to realize, what they can not understand is that Christ did not come to deliver a message, or a book. Christ in fact came to fulfill the message in the book. That book being the Jewish Torah, and Tanak. The fulfillment culminating in his Crucifixion, Death, and Resurrection. It is through the crucifixion, and death of Christ, the perfect atoning sacrifice, that man receives atonement for his sins. It is through his resurrection that men are saved from the wrath of God. It is not the mercy of God, to spare Christ’s blood; rather it is Gods mercy we receive, through Christ shedding his blood to make atonement and expiation for our sins.

This is the basis of the Islamic argument against the Cross. This is why Osama Abdullah uses Psalm 91, to demonstrate that God would protect his messenger from harm or disaster. Because Muslims view Christ crucified as a disaster, and for the natural man, who follows the lord of this world, that is exactly what it is, a disaster.; September 7, 2009 at 10:19 PM
The Fat Man said...: Osama's Folly Part 2

Only by looking at the Crucifixion through the complete lens of the bible, seeing it for what it is, that being the blood sacrifice needed for atonement, can we understand Psalms 91. That Christ came to save, not to be saved. That he came to shed his blood as a ransom for many. Not to have someone shed his blood as a ransom for Christ (as some Muslims believe). That the crucifixion of Christ is not the plan of evil men to thwart Gods plan, rather it is the fulfillment of a just and merciful God, to save evil men from their own destruction.

Before Christ completed his mission in his crucifixion, death and resurrection. There where many times that those around him wanted to kill him. Mathew 12:14-14. Jesus was aware that the Pharisees were plotting to kill him, so he withdraws from that place.

Luke 4:28-30 we read that after Jesus got done reading from Isaiah, the people were furious they wanted to throw him off a cliff but Jesus in verse 30 “… walked right through the crowd and went on his way.”

In Luke 11:53 we read that the Pharisees and teachers of the law began to oppose him fiercely wanting to catch him in something he might say.
In Luke 13:17 Jesus opponents those that want to catch him in something he says are humiliated by Jesus words on healing a woman on the Sabbath.

In Luke 13:31-33 The Pharisees tell Jesus to go someplace else because Herod wants to kill him. Jesus response that he will continue for two more days to heal, and on the third day he will reach his GOAL.

In John 5:18 we read that the Jews were trying even harder to kill him for he healed on the Sabbath and he was calling God his own father making himself equal with God.

In John 7:30-34, The Jews try to seize Jesus, but they could not lay a hand on him because his time had not yet come. The Pharisees try to arrest him, but as Jesus say is verse 33-34, “I am with you for only a short time, and then I go to the one who sent me. 34You will look for me, but you will not find me; and where I am, you cannot come." He then goes on to preach openly on the last day of the feast. Even though people want arrest and kill him.

So putting Psalm 93 into a Biblical perspective on the Crucifixion of Christ. We see that the father did protect Jesus from disaster. He did protect him from being physically assaulted, arrested, and killed before he had completed his mission. We can also see from the scripture that God protected Jesus from making a fool out of himself and being ensnared and trapped. Something your allah could not do for Mohamed when he revealed the satanic verses.

We also see from scripture that Jesus is alive. Something that makes those who disbelieve tremble with rage and lash out against the true living God. You Muslims are at God’s mercy, we Christians have received his mercy, in the blood of Christ.; September 7, 2009 at 10:21 PM
shafsha said...: Everytime Osama tries to comment on a post, he just throw some links to his deceptive website, and then try to divert the talk to christianity !!!

never helping himself to be honest or stay within the topic !!!

btw , r u pagan practicing ramadan fasting now ?!; September 8, 2009 at 12:25 AM
Nakdimon said...: In the link above, I already proved that Isaiah 53 is deliberately mistranslated, and it doesn't say the things that you read in it in English.

Osama, I will not go to your website since it is virus invested. But I would like to see you doing some translating of the Hebrew, a language that I speak and you don’t. Btw, I deal with all the so-called mistranslations that Jewish rabbis bring up on my website. Please give me a couple of examples of how Isaiah 53 is mistranslated.

Also, it is funny that you mentioned your points above, because in the New Testament, it is Psalm 91 that is directly linked to Jesus Christ and not Isaiah 53. In fact, the Jews strongly believe that Isaiah 53 had been fulfilled centuries before Christ. But in either case, Isaiah 53 doesn't disprove Psalm 91.

I’m Jewish and have engaged with Jewish anti-missionaries for years. I have read a good portion of traditional Jewish commentaries on Isaiah 53 and I cannot remember ever reading or hearing something about Isaiah 53 being fulfilled before the Messiah. Can you actually back up what your saying here? What source are you referring to when you say this?
Second, can you point us to where Psalm 91 is directly linked to Yeshua in the NT?
Third, since I can build a strong case for Isaiah 53 being either about the Messiah or specifically about Yeshua and you can’t build any case for Psalm 91 is either about the Messiah and specifically about Yeshua, how does Isaiah 53 not disprove your reading of Psalm 91?

This dumb argument that I keep getting from Christians is getting too old and too ridiculous. It further convinces me of how blind and shallow-minded you are.

No one here is taking satans words over anyone else's words. I said above that satan TRIED TO USE PSALM 91 TO TEMPT JESUS INTO TRYING TO KILL HIMSELF, BY JUMPING OFF THE CANYON OR MOUNTAIN, to see if GOD Almighty will be True to His Word and Promise of sending the Angels down to lift Jesus up so that he would neither get harmed or die. THEY WON'T EVEN ALLOW HIS FOOT TO STRIKE A ROCK. This is by the way a symbolic expression of saying that they will cover him with protection from harm and death, as PSALM 91 FURTHER PROMISES.

Talk about stupid arguments. You don’t even see that no matter how you slice it, you take SATAN’S APPLICATION, or rather MISAPPLICATION, of scripture and build your case on SATAN’S UNDERSTANDING, or rather MISUNDERSTANDING, while the Messiah COUNTERS that quote from Psalm 91 and debunks the application! So my argument still stands. You build your case on SATAN’S reading, but totally ignore the Messiah’s correction of Satan’s MISAPPLICATION of the verse.

Let me point you to the fact that Peter also tried this. And notice how the Messiah AGAIN identified and rebukes the spirit that made Peter say this:

21 From that time on Jesus began to explain to his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and SUFFER many things at the hands of the elders, chief priests and teachers of the law, and that he must be KILLED and on the third day be RAISED TO LIFE. 22 Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. "NEVER, LORD!" he said. "THIS SHALL NEVER HAPPEN TO YOU!" 23Jesus turned and said to Peter, "GET BEHIND ME, SATAN! YOU ARE A STUMBLING BLOCK TO ME; you do not have in mind the things of God, but the things of men." (Matthew 16)

Notice that Peter made the same argument that YOU are making here when the Messiah told him that he was to suffer and die. He says that the Messiah will never be hurt. Yeshua rebukes him and tells him that he is a stumbling block to Him. Clearly the Messiah had nothing to do with Psalm 91. He Himself totally rejects it when people try to apply it to Him and He rebukes those that try to tell Him that God will not let Him suffer. But seeing your position I understand why you would rely on Satan in support of it.; September 8, 2009 at 3:36 AM
Nakdimon said...: What Jesus' faith crumbling? Go and re-read what I wrote. I said that if we establish that Psalm 91 is about Jesus Christ, WHICH IT CLEARLY IS, then your entire faith would crumble into devistation.

Oh sorry I misread you before. But we are back at scuare 1: You have to prove that Psalm 91 is about either the Messiah or specifically about Yeshua, which you actually haven’t done. You keep claiming that Psalm 91 is “clearly” about Yeshua, but you haven’t demonstrated it in any way shape or form. In fact, as we have seen above, the Messiah repudiates any link with that Psalm whatsoever. Yet you claim it can be applied to him.

Cmon Osama, demonstrate your point!

Nakdimon; September 8, 2009 at 3:36 AM
Fernando said...: Brother shafsha: wellcome back... been away for some time...

you might have lost the attack thate the Muslim Photon did upon Ehteshaam Gulam accusing him for not being a true muslim (apologist); felling insecure he saide he supported Osama claimes that Doctor Nabeel was not a muslim eber and thate he, and professor Wood only writte lies and crap (then he tock the message out... glad I have it saved in PRTSC); butt Osama has allready saide to Ehteshaam Gulam to leave him alone, so this latter started attacking the Muslim Photon and asking forgiveness to professor Wood and Doctor Nabeel; then brother Fifth Man saide thate Ehteshaam Gulam did not answer the emails he sent him (as he does not withe all off those those I sent him); the Ehteshaam Gulam saide he dis not see them butt thate we coulde reach him trough his site thate tells he's writting a book (butt will the publisher do so when they see whate Ehteshaam Gulam as been writting here: his speach full off ignorance, lies, deception, offensive claimes and so one)...

this is getting likke a mexican soap TV program...; September 8, 2009 at 3:37 AM
KeithTruth said...: osama is a liar and his links are garbage. Islam is a lie from the pit of hell.; September 8, 2009 at 7:11 AM
The Fat Man said...: Fernando said....
"this is getting likke a mexican soap TV program...

I disagree, the Woman in Mexican Soap Orpa's are much more plesent to look at then Osama and Ethshaam :); September 8, 2009 at 8:00 AM
Dragostea said...: david or nabeel,

here i have a link for you that you might wanna see and also you can put it as a topic here on the blog. It's an article from THE SUN : http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2626703/The-British-bomb-plotter-traitors.html; September 8, 2009 at 10:36 AM
Alforreca said...: Oh, oh my... oh, oh... oh my... Osama: your comments are so intellectual... a so, so great muslim apologist... oh, oh my... Osama: if you need my help, please tell me... oh, oh...

Love is in the air, and everywhere I look around Love is in the air...

Dear Muslim Phantom... you are going through a bad road... Osama is very insecure about some things... that’s why he does not answer you back… there’re some rumours (not made public by EG… he cannot have all the copyright for all the rumour around in the net) about some aspects of Osama’s life, but around here we do not give them much credit, but one thing is sure: he does not like what your words might imply… another approach might be more successful… nevertheless I ignore which one that can be…; September 8, 2009 at 2:08 PM
Osama Abdallah said...: Dear brother MuslimPhantom,

May Allah Almighty greatly bless you for the kind and warm words akhi in Islam. Ramadan Mubarak and many Blessings for you and your honorable family, and for every Muslim reader. Same goes to brother Etesham Gulam as well.

Alforreca, I am above your childish and desperate rumors.

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com; September 8, 2009 at 2:54 PM
The Fat Man said...: From the Link that Dragostea posted.

"Despite his crucial role, Sarwar was a bumbling fool, labelled "a plonker" by his own barrister.

Computer experts found he researched "how to dig a hole" on Google before concealing bomb materials - which he could not find again."

Classic he googled how to dig a hole and then couldnt find it after he buried the explosives in the hole LOL; September 8, 2009 at 3:44 PM
Ehteshaam Gulam said...: Osama said: ...Same goes to brother Etesham Gulam as well...

My Response: Its Ehteshaam, LOL. Thanks Osama, Ramadan Kareem to you as well. I just read your article on human cloning and plastic surgery foretold in Islam--- very good stuff in proving that the Quran indeed is from Allah Almighty. Keep up the good work.

Also Hogan--still waiting on that email.

Ehteshaam Gulam
http://www.answering-christian-claims.com; September 8, 2009 at 5:58 PM
minoria said...: I understand Osama's idea of Psalm 91,but I still believe it is a case of Satan merely using MIDRASH,just like MATT and JOHN did several times.The Devil was makng a parallelism but Jesus said it did not apply to him.

DANIEL BY DANIEL?

That brings me to the idea that most scholars say Daniel was not by Daniel (440 BC circa) but invented around 170 BC.

THE THIRD IN POSITION

In the book the king of Babylonia BELSHAZAR tells Daniel that if he interprets a sign (a writing on the wall)he would make DANIEL "the THIRD in position in the government of the kingdom"(DANIEL 5:16)

ERROR?

BEFORE it was thought there was an error in the Bible.The documents showed that the LAST king of Babylonia was NABONIDUS,not BELSHAZAR.

Then they discovered archeological evidence that NABODINUS and BELSHAZAR ruled at the same time,together.

ONLY IN DANIEL

That explains WHY the king said THIRD instead of SECOND position.That info is found nowhere else in any document in Antiquity except Daniel.The Babylonians Empire had long ago disappeared by 170 BC,its royal archives hidden.

If DANIEL is from 170 BC,HOW did the author get the info?More likely Daniel is from 440 BC.; September 8, 2009 at 11:14 PM
Nakdimon said...: Since Osama Abdallah didn’t bother to give us examples of mistranslations in Isaiah 53, I took the trouble and the risk to visit his website and have a look at the reported mistranslations myself. Here is my answer to the points he raises about the mistranslations.

1 - Isaiah 53:3 says that "Jesus" is despised by all men. In Luke 10:1, Jesus has at least 70 followers, and in other verses we're told that he fed and healed thousands (John 6:9-11, Luke 17:11-19 and other verses).

First of all, Isaiah is describing the status of the servant in his suffering. In the case of Yeshua that would be during his trial and his death. He carried the suffering alone, with no one to aid or assist him. Second, I’m looking at the Hebrew of Isaiah 53:3 and I see nothing about the servant being despised by “all” men. Can you tell me where the Hebrew word for “all” is in the text? Seeing you made the claim that Isaiah 53 is mistranslated, I take it your understanding of the text must be in accordance with what actually is written in the Hebrew text. As far as I’m concerned, the word “all” isn’t even in the text and therefore point 1 is moot!

2 - In Isaiah 53:5 it says he was wounded for our transgressions. Now right away one might assume this is the death of Jesus. However it says he was WOUNDED not killed. But let us go with killed for your arguments sake. This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made a mistake so he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly what happened. And again, the verse says wounded, which further proves that Christ was never killed

And in typical Muslim fashion you read the verse and don’t bother to read on what is said about the same servant:

Verse 8 says he was “cut off from the land of the living”,
Verse 9 speaks of his grave and his death
Verse 10 speaks about giving his soul as an asham (guilt offering)
Verse 12 says he bore his soul unto death

But none of this seems to face you, doesn’t it? And you don’t even realise that you have shot yourself in the foot. You applied this verse to Yeshua and said that this proves that he was never killed, but only wounded. Herewith you have undercut everything you have said in your article regarding Psalm 91. You cant have it both ways. Either Isaiah 53:5 is about Yeshua and he was wounded, according to your reading, or Psalm 91 is about Yeshua and he was NOT wounded, also according to your reading. So, what will it be? As far as I’m concerned point 2 is moot!

3 - Isaiah 53:7 states that "he did not open his mouth". There are two possible interpretations and answers to this:

Jesus never literally spoke a single word during the crucifixion trial. This is obviously wrong because Jesus spoke during his trial with both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. And we all know Jesus' famous and final cry to GOD Almighty when he said: "Eloi Eloi lama sabachtani!", which translates: "My GOD my GOD, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46) So wrong. He did open his mouth.

Jesus did not object to GOD Almighty's Will. This is also wrong, because again, Jesus cried during the crucifixion "My GOD my GOD why have you forsaken me?", and he also prayed ENDLESSLY to GOD Almighty on the night of the crucifixion to not get crucified! (Matthew 16:39, Matthew 26:36-44, Luke 6:12) He even bowed down his face to Allah Almighty in worship endless times begging Him for a change in Decision. So yes, Jesus did object.

How about a third: He never objected to his accusers. Which is the exact understanding that becomes obvious to anyone who has any regard for the context and even for the verse itself. The verse starts out “He was oppressed”. He was oppressed by whom? His accusers. It then goes on to say “like a lamb that is led to the slaughter”. He was led to his execution by whom? His accusers. He didn’t say a word of defence himself before them. Point 3 is also moot!

cont>>; September 9, 2009 at 4:07 AM
Nakdimon said...: 4 - Isaiah 53:9 says that he made his grave with the wicked and the rich. According to http://scripturetext.com/isaiah/53-9.htm:

in his death" is also a false translation to the Hebrew Mawth. At the worst, it should be translated as "in death", making the word a symbolic one as further confirmed in the Hebrew lexicon:

in his death
maveth (maw'-veth)
death (natural or violent) [notice not "his death". It only says "death"]; concretely, the dead, their place or state (hades); figuratively, pestilence, ruin -- (be) dead(-ly), death, die(-d)."

A lot of points here:
FIRST: you look at the definition of the word “mawet” and then highlight the “figurative” sense in your article. But you don’t even regard all the other definition that your source put for you to read.
SECOND: is there a particular reason why you have scratched “his” in the “in his death” phrase in your article?
THIRD: all the lexicon says about death being figuratively is that it can ALSO be understood to be figuratively. But its foremost meaning is literal death.
FOURTH: Since you insist that “mawet” has to be figuratively and cannot in any way shape or form be literally death, can you tell us what the Hebrew word for literal death is that Isaiah should have used to give us the impression that this is a physical death and not a mere figurative death?
FIFTH: you then go to translations that aren’t translations at all. The NLT and the CEV are NOT translations, but paraphrases. You object to the word “mawet” being translated as “death”, yet you subsequently run to other translations that don’t even translate the word “mawet” at all!
SIXTH: Even the YLT translates it incorrectly, since the YLT has an improper understanding of the word at hand. The YLT reads the word “bemotaaw” to understood as “bamotaaw”. But this reading is untenable, since “bamot” (high places) are places where idol worship is being practiced. This is NOT what Isaiah is saying about the servant.
SEVENTH: The word “bemotaaw” DOES mean “in HIS deaths”. The suffix “-aaw” is third person singular in the masculine form denoting a plurality of possession.

Then you go on to say:

1. Jesus was never buried (Matthew 27:59-66, Matthew 28)! He was temporarily placed in a tomb and then his body disappeared after that. But he never ONCE was buried under ground as our dead get buried.

2. Jesus, who was never buried from the first place, was also NEVER BURIED with the wicked and the rich. His tomb was placed in an isolated area as recorded in the gospels.

The sheer ignorance you display is astounding. And I read someone praising you for your scholarship earlier in this thread. Burial in ancient days took place in tombs. There were two burials: stage one was that the body was placed in a tomb to decay so that only the bones were left and then stage two would follow, where the bones were collected out of the tomb and piled up in a small coffin and were buried. So, no, Yeshua was never buried as our dead get buried, because that was never the method that people got buried.

As for your second point, since the Hebrew in Isaiah 53 is very poetic, the words of Isaiah are open to interpretation. The words are just as probable to read, that he was buried between the wicked, referring to those surrounding graves with their dead. It can also be referring to his burial by Yosef of Arimathea and all those that were with him, since the servant is described as the Righteous One that suffers for and bares the iniquities of the unrighteous multitude. In addition, you don’t know that the grave was in an isolated area since the Gospels don’t give us that information. All the Gospels say is that the grave was new and unused. You are just making this up in order to be able to raise objections. And with that said, point 4 is moot!

cont>>; September 9, 2009 at 4:09 AM
Nakdimon said...: 5 - In Isaiah 53:10-11, GOD Almighty will prolong Jesus' life and Jesus will live to even see his offspring (his children)! And Christ will see the Light and be satisfied after the suffering of his soul. The suffering of his soul here is referring to the overwhelming fear that Jesus had and the countless cries and Prayers that he made to Allah Almighty to save him. Psalm 91 further speaks clearly on this. Also, Jesus' life was never made long or extended. He only lived for 33 years, so we're told in the gospels, and he certainly never married any woman nor had any child from any woman. Yet, Isaiah 53:10 clearly says that he will live and he will have and see his children.

Here you go again shooting yourself in the other foot. Psalm 91 says that he will not be harmed, Isaiah 53 says he will be harmed. WHAT WILL IT BE???? And then, if that wasn’t embarrassing enough, you go on to make the following mistakes:

1. You were the one that claim others mistranslate verses. Verse 10 doesn’t say that the servant will see HIS seed (zero) but that he would see seed (zera). It says nothing about the seed being that of the servant.
2. Just as in other places the word “zera” can be metaphorical and not referring to physical offspring of the subject. Such as Psalm 22:31 where YHWH is the subject, yet no one will say that the seed is His. And in Isaiah 57:4 where falsehood is the subject, yet no one will say that the seed is the physical product of falsehood.
3. If you had any regard for the context of the verse, you would see that the prolonging of his days is AFTER HE DIED, which clearly points to a resurrection from the dead. So this isn’t talking about a person that would live “happily ever after” and become old. This is talking about a person living after he had died.

So I repeat that your objection point 5 is moot!

cont>>; September 9, 2009 at 4:09 AM
Nakdimon said...: 6 - In Isaiah 53:12, we are told that Jesus' life or soul will be poured unto death. To me, given the Islamic position about Christ never got crucified, and given the symbolic speech in Isaiah 53 chapter that most of it conflicts with what really took place with Christ in the gospels, and given the fact that many early writings in Palestine and elsewhere stated clearly that Jesus never got crucified such as in the Apocalypse of Peter and other ancient texts, then my interpretation of this verse about Jesus' life being poured unto death means to me that Jesus' life will overpower death! This is indisputably proven in Psalm 91 where it states that not only Jesus will not get crucified, but GOD Almighty will also hear his cries and will send down the Angels to PROTECT HIM and SAVE HIM. And Psalm 91 also says that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty and GOD Almighty will HEAR him and HONOR him. Christ would not have been honored if he have died the humiliating death of the cross. And certainly, he would not have been "saved" either by the Angels.

Oh my, where to start:

1. There was no Palestine in the first century, the land was Israel. Palestine was not invented until well into the second century.
2. The Apocalypse of Peter is NOT an early authentic text, it is a later apocryphal book!
3. When properly understood, Isaiah 53 ONLY makes sense when applied to the description of the Messiah in the Gospels
4. You erroneously start with the a-chronological position that is the lens of the Quran and then look at what the text of Scripture allows for. It never even occurs to you that the Quran is a false book to begin with and that you have to look at how IT relates to the previous revelations and NOT the other way around.
5. Your understanding of the servant overpowering death is a correct one. But not as you put it. The chapter speaks of the rejection of the servant, his suffering, his death and his resurrection, which is how he conquers death! But you don’t allow that clear reading because of your illogical position that you have to look at what the Quran allows for and adjust the reading of the text of Isaiah to that.
6. You still haven’t shown us why we should even entertain the thought that Psalm 91 is specifically about Yeshua or even generally Messianic at all. I have challenged you about that reading to prove your point. You haven’t done so to this day. If Psalm is really “indisputably” about the Messiah, please provide the evidence to stop this despute.
7. You wrote: “Christ would not have been honored if he have died the humiliating death of the cross. And certainly, he would not have been "saved" either by the Angels”. Which is exactly why your reading is flawed. You, again, start with the illogical position that your reading of Psalm 91 is correct (without ANYTHING that remotely looks like evidence that it is), and then judge the Gospels’ claims about the Messiah based on your flawed understanding of ONE unambiguously non-Messianic Psalm.
8. As for Christ not being honoured if he died. What greater honour is there to be falsely accused of wrongdoing, then put to death by your accusers and then completely vindicated by God through resurrection and exaltation above the heavens? If you have an answer to that, I’m eager to see it.
9. You completely miss the purpose for all this suffering of the servant. The verse says: “because he bared his soul unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors; yet he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors”. Question: What did he intercede for? How did he bare the sins of many? WHY did he bare the sins of many? Who were the “many” and the transgressors? How did he intercede for the transgressors? This verse sums it all up perfectly: Through the suffering and the death of the Righteous Servant, the sins of many transgressors will be interceded for. But, of course, you will not allow for this clear reading, because the Quran doesn’t allow you to go there.

Your point 6 is moot!
cont>>; September 9, 2009 at 4:11 AM
Nakdimon said...: It then seems to me that Muslims will turn facts into fables to keep the truth claims of the Quran alive. And they will subsequently turn fables into facts to keep the Quran from being falsified.

Conclusion: Osama, your article on Isaiah 53 is grossly erroneous, contradictory, disordered, incoherent, childishly written, poorly edited and a scholarly disaster. In other words, all that work was a total waste of time. It didn’t take any effort from my part to dismantle your silly accusations of mistranslations. Take it off and give it another go.

Nakdimon; September 9, 2009 at 4:11 AM
Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...: lol Osama

I guess Nakdimon has effectively educated you

Hope you learned something

God bless everyone; September 9, 2009 at 7:02 AM
minoria said...: CORRECTION

I made an error when I stated the book of DANIEL would be from 440 BC.It is 540 BC.Sorry for the error; September 9, 2009 at 7:13 AM
The Fat Man said...: Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...

"lol Osama

I guess Nakdimon has effectively educated you

Hope you learned something"

Hogan your awfully optimistic. I would just be happy if Osma learned there was more then one John then John the Baptist. :); September 9, 2009 at 9:55 AM
Osama Abdallah said...: Nakdimon,

My detailed rebuttal will be posted in the article along with all of your points, insha'Allah (if Allah Almighty is Willing). Give me 1 day. I can already see where you have refuted yourself by trying to make certain words to must mean certain things and for certain objects such as idols. Anyway, my details are coming up, insha'Allah.

Take care,
Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com; September 9, 2009 at 11:47 AM
Ilena said...: quran says: "theres no compulsion in religion." i think its high time muslims woke up. according to this verse, apostates cannot be killed bc that act would be contrary to this verse.

furthermore, i skimmed thru osamas article on how jesus ordered for apostates to be killed. imo osama is a very hate-filled human being. its obvious that he hates everything that is christian. even some1 with rudimentary knowledge of christianity can explain that verse from matthew u quoted and which allegedly supports ur view. u have proved urself as a very weak scholar bc u just fail to see the reality presented in the bible and u make up some twisted stories of urs and present them as authentic. well, ppl in this blog refute ur claims all the time with no problem. this means that ur approach is very weak and very unscholarly.

man just take a second and look what u wrote abt our religion:

"This is certainly not a Divine Religion from GOD Almighty! It is a man-made garbage, and its self-refuting and self-contradicting book is full of historical errors, ample contradictions, and man's alterations and injections. That is why almost all of its followers are pornified whores, which, ironically, they are very proud of it too.."

this is very vile and cannot come from a good person.

p.s. great job nakdimon.; September 9, 2009 at 12:38 PM
Fernando said...: "human cloning and plastic surgery foretold in Islam"...

where? where? where? where? where? where? where is thate article? whate will be the veridict off the Muslim Photon to thate new claime invented by Osama Abdallah?...; September 9, 2009 at 1:24 PM
VJ said...: If osama had to interpretes quran in the same way i am sure he would have lost his neck by now; September 9, 2009 at 3:46 PM
Ilena said...: fernando,

heres the link , where u can find "fulfilled prophecies" in the quran.

http://www.alislam.org/library/articles/prophecies.html

and heres the link, where osama claims that cloning was prophesied in the quran:

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

and heres the link, where majority of his claims has been refuted:

http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Osama/hoaxes.htm; September 9, 2009 at 6:17 PM
minoria said...: First,my compliments to Nakdimon.He has good points regarding that Isaiah is to apply only to a SPECIFIC time in Jesus' life.,not his whole career.

Hello Ilena:

I see you have read Osama's website.Yes,it uses strong language.One sees it also in the writings of AHMED DEEDAT and SAMI ZAATARI.

On top of that one has to read Muslim comments about the Palestinian-Israel situation and the excessive language used by most Muslims,bordering on obsession,is astonishing.
I am certainly interested in the issue but the other side oftens makes borderline comments.; September 9, 2009 at 11:00 PM
Adam said...: Peace and Love of Lord Jesus Christ Be with all.

Fearing Taliban, Pakistan Hindus take Thar Express to India

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/news/india/Fearing-Taliban-Pak-Hindus-take-Thar-Express-to-India/articleshow/4992774.cms

Dear llena, I think you needed some proof of real islam as it is, as it was during the time of muhammad the prophet.

the western muslims are minority hence they speak all good about their religion and to some extent follow the laws of the land. This has nothing to with culture or geography. please remember the wahabbis are fighting hard to destroy all culture and make muslim follow islam as it is.; September 10, 2009 at 1:02 AM
Adam said...: Fearing Taliban, Pak Hindus take Thar Express to India
(Times Of India- Vimal Bhatia , TNN 10 September 2009, 02:15am IST)

JAISALMER: In the past four years, some 5,000 Hindus
may have crossed over from Pakistan, never to return. It has not been easy abandoning their
homes, sometimes even their families, but they say they had no choice: they had to flee the Taliban.

It started as a trickle in 2006, the year the Thar Express was flagged off. The weekly train starts from Karachi, enters India at Munabao, a border town in Barmer, and runs up to Jodhpur. In the first year, 392 Hindus crossed over.

This grew to 880 in 2007. The next year, the number was 1,240, and this year, till August, over 1,000 have crossed over. They just keep extending their visas and hope to become Indian citizens.

Incidentally, these are official figures. Sources say there are many more who cross over and melt in the local milieu. And officials have a soft corner for these people, most of whom have harrowing stories to tell.

Ranaram, who used to live in the Rahimyar district of Pakistan’s Punjab, says he fell prey to the Taliban. His wife was kidnapped, raped and forcibly converted to Islam. His two daughters were also forcibly converted. Ranaram, too, had to accept Islam for fear of his life. He thought it best to flee with his two daughters; his wife was untraceable.

Dungaram, another migrant, says atrocities against Hindus in Pakistan have increased in the past two years after the ouster of Musharraf. "We won't get permanent jobs unless we convert to Islam."

Hindu Singh Sodha, president of Seemant Lok Sangathan, a group working for the refugees in Barmer and Jaisalmer, says there's unfortunately no proper refugee policy in India even though people from Pakistan reach here in large numbers.

He said in 2004-05, over 135 families were given Indian citizenship but the rest are still living illegally in the country and are often tortured by police because they don't have proper citizenship certificates. "In December 2008, over 200 Hindus were converted to Islam in Mirpur Khas town of Pakistan. But there are several others who want to stick to their religion but there’s no safety for them in Pakistan."

Immigration officer at Munabao railway station, Hetudan Charan, says the arrival of Hindu migrants had suddenly increased as over 15 to 16 families were reaching India every week. “None of them admit they are to settle here but seeing their baggage, we easily understand,’’ he said.

Ravi Kumar, who was Barmer collector till his transfer two days back, said the government in 2007 had given permanent citizenship to a few Pakistani immigrants.; September 10, 2009 at 1:04 AM
Nakdimon said...: Nakdimon,

My detailed rebuttal will be posted in the article along with all of your points, insha'Allah (if Allah Almighty is Willing). Give me 1 day. I can already see where you have refuted yourself by trying to make certain words to must mean certain things and for certain objects such as idols. Anyway, my details are coming up, insha'Allah.

Oh I’m so looking forward to that, Osama. Take your time to do so. And please do bring up the idols. I can guess where you are going with that, since you don’t know how to reason these things out properly.

Nakdimon; September 10, 2009 at 2:04 AM
Osama Abdallah said...: All,

Nakdimon's points are now thoroughly refuted and debunked using ample analysis from the lexicon, commentaries and other sources in the article: http://www.answering-christianity.com/isaiah_53.htm .

Nakdimon, I added all of your points to my article and refuted them all one by one for you. You have helped me very much to further prove that your entire faith is indeed standing on hoaxes and lies.

The rebuttal is far too large to post here. Please visit the link above and see my detailed rebuttals to Nakdimon in the "Rebuttals" section.

Nakdimon, I really look forward to further exchanges with you on Isaiah 53, because I know that your entire faith is based on it, and without it, you have no faith. I look forward to further prove to you that Christianity is really standing on false pillars and hoaxes.

Take care,
Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com; September 10, 2009 at 2:24 AM
Osama Abdallah said...: The stunning Prophecy and Miracle of the Noble Quran about gender cloning and alteration of Allah Almighty's creations, and its direct relationship with the cutting of the ears can be found at:

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

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com; September 10, 2009 at 2:27 AM
Adam said...: SIKH POPULATION TARGETED

India asks Pak to act on Sikh-Taliban issue

by Surya Gangadharan IBN Live.

New Delhi: India wants Pakistani authorities to take action against the Taliban, that continues to terrorise the Sikh population in the North West Frontier Province (NWFP) over in Pakistan.

Hundered and fifty Sikh and Hindu families from the Orakzai Agency in Pakistan's NWFP have taken refuge in Gurudwara Panja Sahib near Rawalpindi. Their homes have been demolished and their valuables auctioned by the Taliban fighters of Beitullah Mehsud. All this, for failure to pay nearly $ 200,000 in jaziya (tax).

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh warned Pakistan, that they have a duty to ensure the safety of Sikhs.

But Deputy Chief Minister of Punjab Sukhbir Singh Badal is outraged by the treatment of Sikhs in the NWFP

"I have written that our Sikh brothers in Pakistan should be given security. If there is no security for them arrangements should be made to bring them to India," said Badal.

With elections a few days away this has become an electoral issue in Punjab. And the Prime Minister's intervention is being demanded.

"The Prime Minister should write to his counterpart in Pakistan and tell him to provide security for our Sikh brothers," demanded Badal.

Pakistan dismissed expressions of concern by the Indian foreign office, saying the Sikhs are Pakistani citizens. But the US State Department had something to say on that score.

Spokesman Robert Wood said, "It doesn't surprise me. Taliban are ruthless killers. This is why it's important that we, the international community, cooperate in trying to rid this region of these extremists. And the sooner we can accomplish that mission, the better,"

The Sikhs now in Panja Sahib are hopeful the current phase of military operations will enable them to return to their homes. But even if the operations are successful it's doubtful if the trend towards implementing Islamic Sharia law in the NWFP can ever be reversed. The Sikhs may never be able to return home.

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/india-asks-pak-to-act-on-sikhtaliban-issue/91665-2.html; September 10, 2009 at 4:38 AM
Adam said...: SIKH POPULATION TARGETED

India asks Pak to act on Sikh-Taliban issue

by Surya Gangadharan IBN Live.

New Delhi: India wants Pakistani authorities to take action against the Taliban, that continues to terrorise the Sikh population in the North West Frontier Province (NWFP) over in Pakistan.

Hundered and fifty Sikh and Hindu families from the Orakzai Agency in Pakistan's NWFP have taken refuge in Gurudwara Panja Sahib near Rawalpindi. Their homes have been demolished and their valuables auctioned by the Taliban fighters of Beitullah Mehsud. All this, for failure to pay nearly $ 200,000 in jaziya (tax).

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh warned Pakistan, that they have a duty to ensure the safety of Sikhs.

But Deputy Chief Minister of Punjab Sukhbir Singh Badal is outraged by the treatment of Sikhs in the NWFP

"I have written that our Sikh brothers in Pakistan should be given security. If there is no security for them arrangements should be made to bring them to India," said Badal.

With elections a few days away this has become an electoral issue in Punjab. And the Prime Minister's intervention is being demanded.

"The Prime Minister should write to his counterpart in Pakistan and tell him to provide security for our Sikh brothers," demanded Badal.

Pakistan dismissed expressions of concern by the Indian foreign office, saying the Sikhs are Pakistani citizens. But the US State Department had something to say on that score.

Spokesman Robert Wood said, "It doesn't surprise me. Taliban are ruthless killers. This is why it's important that we, the international community, cooperate in trying to rid this region of these extremists. And the sooner we can accomplish that mission, the better,"

The Sikhs now in Panja Sahib are hopeful the current phase of military operations will enable them to return to their homes. But even if the operations are successful it's doubtful if the trend towards implementing Islamic Sharia law in the NWFP can ever be reversed. The Sikhs may never be able to return home.

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/india-asks-pak-to-act-on-sikhtaliban-issue/91665-2.html; September 10, 2009 at 4:38 AM
Adam said...: This is How islam played psychologically and force people to convert in the Past and present

Taliban Tax: 150 Sikh and Hindu Families Leave Pak

Lahore | May 02, 2009

Pakistani Hindu and Sikh families, who have been targetted by Taliban for failing to pay 'religious' tax, left their homes and moved to Punjab province to take shelter as the government here today dismissed India's "verbal demarche" on the issue.

More than 150 Sikhs and Hindu families in Pakistan's North Western Frontier Province and tribal areas have moved to Punjab for shelter as the US branded the Taliban as "ruthless killers" for targetting the minority Sikh community.

"So far, over 150 Sikh and Hindu families have arrived at Gurdwara Panja Sahib in Hasan Abdal and Rawalpindi from places like Buner, Swat and Aurakzai Agency," Evacuee Trust Property Board Chairman Asif Hashmi said today.

"We have made arrangements for accommodation, food and security for the displaced Sikh and Hindu families in all five major gurdwaras in Punjab," Hashmi told PTI here.

Amid expression of concern by India over the fate of the minority comunity in NWFP after the imposition of 'jiziya' on non-Muslims, Pakistan's Foreign Office dismissed India's "verbal demarche".

"Pakistan is fully cognisant of the issue of the Sikhs and of the welfare of all its citizens, especially the minorities," Basit said.

Sikhs and Hindus had to leave their homes and properties in Buner and Swat in the NWFP after the Pakistani security forces stepped-up operation last week to flush out the Taliban from the Swat Valley.

Diplomatic sources said the issue of Sikhs being forced out of their homes in Pakistan's Aurakzai tribal agency after they failed to pay 'jiziya' or tax imposed on non-Muslims was taken up yesterday with the Foreign Office by the Indian High Commission in Islamabad. It was also taken up with the Pakistani High Commission in New Delhi by the External Affairs Ministry.

Branding Taliban as "ruthless killers," the US has said Taliban militants' demand for tax from the minority Sikh community was not surprising and provided all the more reason for international community to cooperate to rid the region of extremists.

"I've heard reports about that. It doesn't surprise me. I mean, these are ruthless killers, the Taliban," State Department spokesman Robert Wood told reporters in Washington.

"They (the Taliban) will do anything they can to upset Pakistan's and Afghanistan's fragile democracies," he said.

Pakistan's Foreign Office spokesman Basit said Pakistan had responded to India's "verbal demarche" on the issue by making it clear that the Sikhs in this country are Pakistani citizens and are of "no concern of India."

Sikhs have been asked to pay Rs 50 million a year by the local Taliban, who have destroyed their houses, forcing the minority community to move out of the Aurakzai agency where they have lived for centuries.

http://news.outlookindia.com/item.aspx?659287; September 10, 2009 at 4:42 AM
Adam said...: Afghanistan's marginalised Hindus

Despite its long history in the country, Afghanistan's Hindu minority has been pushed to the fringes of society

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2009/aug/02/afghanistan-hindus; September 10, 2009 at 4:58 AM
Fernando said...: Hipi, hip hurray for Osama's links...

they redirect us to the most flamboiante and colourous site in the Universe... when the reason lacks, one have to shout and scream visualy...

Osama: can you prove us above any doubt that muhammad recieved any revelation from Al Ilah? withoute this proof all your faith crumbles...; September 10, 2009 at 9:59 AM
MuslimPhantom said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; September 10, 2009 at 12:58 PM
MuslimPhantom said...: Good work brother Osama, and Ramadan Mubarak to you also. Now I'm sure that Nakdimon won't be able to invent any rebuttal to deny what everyone can see. I’m more and more proud of having met your site. Christianity will not have any future due to your good work. Where others have failed, I’m sure you’ll accomplish: the destruction of the entire demagogy inherent to the false christianity that exists today. As I said before: you’re one of the top Muslim apologists in the world, and this satanic blog should be grateful to experience the privilege of your presence: you’re one of the greatest luminaries in the context of the international NET. One only needs to google your name.

ان الله يمكن ان تساعد في خططك لصالح الإسلام; September 10, 2009 at 3:11 PM
Nakdimon said...: Osama, I have read your “rebuttal and refutation” and I hesitate to even respond. Do you really think that not addressing the points I raise, contradicting yourself constantly and repeating your erroneous assertions is gonna help you anything at all? I’ll see if I will respond.; September 10, 2009 at 3:36 PM
Osama Abdallah said...: Dear brother MuslimPhantom,

May Allah Almighty greatly bless you again for the kind and warm words. I am only an ordinary person my dear brother, and I ask Allah Almighty to enable you to be much better than me in everything. Ameen.

Nakdimon,

Please get serious! Now you seem to wanna resort to childish attritudes and games. I have shredded much of your points into pieces, through Allah Almighty's Divine Mercy! One example is "he was cut off from the land of the living." EVEN THE NIV BIBLE SAYS THAT THE HEBREW WORD MEANS PRISON! It is talking about Jesus being imprisoned and not dying! Even during my debate with David Wood, he used this point.

To put it simply: Your English translations are full of lies, blasphemous agendas, and ample twisting of meanings and deceptions! I really and honestly look forward to your response to my rebuttal. If not, then too bad for you.

"he was cut off from the land of the living" IS A LIE MADE BY LIARS! It doesn't say that Jesus will die and be taken out form the land of the living. All it said in Hebrew is that he will be imprisoned! Again, ironically, the NIV Bible's commentary says so.

AMPLE OTHER FABRICATIONS WERE EXPOSED in my rebuttal. May be it's time for you and every Christian here to get real and serious.

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com; September 10, 2009 at 4:15 PM
CanadanOrientalist said...: "Your English translations are full of lies, blasphemous agendas, and ample twisting of meanings and deceptions!"

The fact of translation of the Biblical Canon is simply a reflection of a bit of intellectual honesty on the part of the Christians , we do not have the complete and precise words and account of the life of Jesus, the Apostles etc & etc. What we do have is a flawed document that has been through several major revisions, that are nevertheless completely overt and easily documented in the eye of history.

The Quranic "handlers" (ie. scholars,polemicists, etc & etc) have no such intellectual honesty (or more normally, no avenue for such honesty). It is fairly clear through the work of revisionist scholars such as Wansbrough,Nevo,Puin,Crone .. bleh bleh bleh, that the Quranic text is an edited composite text that may not even have existed before the time of the Abassids (cc.120-130 Hijra)well more than 100 years after the oral transmissions of Muhammad (God bless his soul)[although this is the most extreme form of the revisionist thesis].

If you wish to read into the Christian canon some distorted theological and historical message of the treasonous jewish rebel jesus [ as attested in the new testament] who the romans just couldnt crucify [as attested by you] , then you are guilty of a bit of wishful thinking [which is common in both Islamic and Christian sides ill admit]. Simply put, aside from sketchy argumentation concerning the hebrew (which as an arab you should know that all words derived from a semitic language have a variety of meanings - i'm sure you're aware of the argument about the etymology of Islam - SLM : peace or violent submission) it's fairly clear that there is no historical and theological attestation for Islamic claims about Jesus outside of Islamic sources written by nature 6-8centuries (or more) after the actual event, or claims derived from gnostic straims of thought, developed and refuted by the earliest Christians. ;) so you'll have to adress these issues before you even open the New Testament really...; September 10, 2009 at 4:49 PM
Fernando said...: Thear Osama...

1) can you read "uproot from the house of the living (meres hayyim as in Is 53:8)" in Psalm 52,5 as thate the wicket man will "he will be set free" by YHWH as your loggik woulde imply?

2) can you read "let us cut Jeremiah from the house of the living (meres hayyim as in Is 53:8)" in Jr. 11:19 as thate this prophet's enemies woulde only want to put him in prision as your logic woulde implie? Remeber that in Jr 11:21 Jeremiah enimies do say: «Do not prophesy in the name of Yahweh or you will die at our hands!»...

iff you cannot prove thate in all these cases, speciatly in the last one, the expression "from the house of the living" means prision, all your argument will crumble...

let's see whate you habe to say... and I'm sure thate brother Nakdimon will denie, with very ease, your claims, no matter whate the Muslim Photon saies...; September 10, 2009 at 5:32 PM
The Fat Man said...: Osama Abdullah said there is no cosmetic surgery in islam.

Well thats good to know. So a person who suffers from harsh third degree burns can not have cosmetic surgery. Or what about taht woman who had her face ripped off by a dog. I guess she couldnt get a face transplant. Or what about a person who looses a lot of weight I guess they cant get there excess skinn removed. Oh dont worry that the skin is used for burn paticents because they cant get the surgery either.

I guess islam wants the woman who are horably scared for life from Muslim Mujahadeen spraying acid on them to remain scared.

What about children born with a horrable cleft pallet, or woman who have masecomy's do to breast cancer. No cosmetic surgery for them.

Oh wait but FGM, or Female circumcisoin is OK with allah.

Thanks for informaing us Osama; September 10, 2009 at 6:41 PM
Nakdimon said...: Ok Osama, you just have persuaded me to respond. Since your rebuttal was 19 pages long, I will have my response up on Saturday.; September 10, 2009 at 8:23 PM
Ehteshaam Gulam said...: Osama said

The stunning Prophecy and Miracle of the Noble Quran about gender cloning and alteration of Allah Almighty's creations...

My Response: Good stuff, can I use it for my site

Thanks
Ehteshaam Gulam
http://www.answering-christian-claims.com; September 10, 2009 at 9:13 PM
Osama Abdallah said...: Fatman,

In Islam, if someone needs treatment, then he/she is allowed to have it, even if it requires a prohibited thing. Islam is quite clear on this: The exceptions permit the forbidden.

Also, I am not sure if plastic surgeries in general are forbidden or not. Certainly, in my article, I made no mention of them: http://www.answering-christianity.com/creation_alteration.htm.

Brother Ehteshaam, you may use any article from my site as long as give the URL of the article as a reference.

Take care,
Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com; September 10, 2009 at 10:09 PM
minoria said...: Hello Adam:

What yu have said about the Hindus and Sikhs in Pakistan is terrible.That is exactly why they should be allowed to freely emigrate to the West:as people who are discriminated on religious grounds.Western politicians are so foolish,they accept alot of Muslim ECONOMIC refugees,knowing nothing about what those persons think about FREEDOM OF SPEECH(they are indifferent or against it).

WISE THING TO DO

The West,especially Europe,needs immigrants,especially because:

1.Europe has a birthrate of like 1.1.

2.The average age is 40:from Spain to Bulgaria to Russia.It needs 50 MILLION immigrants just to MAINTAIN its present population by 2050 ( 500 million)

3.So for humanitaian and pragmatic reasons it should give TOP PRIORITY to those who are BOTH :HUMAN RIGHTS refugees and ECONOMIC refugees at the same time(all non-Muslims in Muslim lands).

MALMO

It is the SECOND largest city in Sweden.25% are Muslim,yet their sector does not want to integrate and the police are afraid to enter it.If the Swedish politicians had not been so foolish is accepting Muslim economic refugees but had instead accepted human-rights-economic refugees from Muslim countries,then they would NOT have the problems of Malmo.; September 11, 2009 at 12:29 AM
minoria said...: On top of that NEWSWEEK had an article about Rifqa Bary where the reporter showed superficiality.Instead of examining the evidence against the mosque and her family Newsweek just repeated denials.That is not journalism.It is digging to DISCOVER beneath the surface.

One thing,for a magazine that is supposed to be SERIOUS,why doesn't Newsweek write an in-depth report about death for apostasy in the Koran,the Hadiths,by Mohammed,the 4 Islamic schools?
If the Rifqa Bary story was about a girl running away from a racist danger,and a white supremacist organization that believed in killing people,then Newsweek would be covering EVERY detail of its philosphy and ideology.The Muslim organizations are laughing at Newsweek.

For them Newsweek is what LENIN called "a useful idiot."That is how the world goes,I am glad I am not part of that group.The worst part is that when you show those NON-MUSLIM people why they are wrong they,out of PRIDE,refuse to apply the SAME standards to Islam they would to racism.; September 11, 2009 at 12:54 AM
Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...: Plastic surgery was practiced at least eight centuries prior to Muhammad, it was used frequently in the army of Alexander the Great and in wealthy and medical circles, in fact in Rome in the first or second century they even attempted or talked about sex change by surgery. If Muslims want us to think that the Qur'an predicts something that occurred centuries prior to islam then I fail to detect the logic.; September 11, 2009 at 3:44 AM
Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...: And Osama

I read your refutation to Nakdimon too, and I have to agree with him, utter repetition and assertations. I certainly was not impressed. I have to say that the inglorious answering-Christianity is a side far to dumb and laughable to present any divinity. If I had the time I would respond to you myself, but I will leave it with Nakdimon who is slightly more into Old Testament apologetics than I am.

Perphas my Christian brothers and sisters could arrage to have such a detailed refutation posted on www.Answering-Islam.org

Nakdimon or someone else could this be arranged with Sam Shamoun or Jochen Katz?; September 11, 2009 at 3:49 AM
Nakdimon said...: MuslimPhantom: Good work brother Osama, and Ramadan Mubarak to you also. Now I'm sure that Nakdimon won't be able to invent any rebuttal to deny what everyone can see. I’m more and more proud of having met your site. Christianity will not have any future due to your good work. Where others have failed, I’m sure you’ll accomplish: the destruction of the entire demagogy inherent to the false christianity that exists today. As I said before: you’re one of the top Muslim apologists in the world, and this satanic blog should be grateful to experience the privilege of your presence: you’re one of the greatest luminaries in the context of the international NET. One only needs to google your name.

Oh my, how do you guys read? You get more and more proud???? Maybe Dr. Nabeel can help you cure whatever it is that has befallen you.

Nakdimon; September 11, 2009 at 4:16 AM
Fernando said...: No cosmetic surgery? Onlie cosmetic surgery for medical conditions? Only iff being a women is a desease as some muslims woulde imply...

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3775321,00.html

lets not forget the treacherous and coward actions some muslims based on islam message did on this day 8 years ago...; September 11, 2009 at 5:17 AM
Adam said...: Jews are part of India since 2000 years.

India is the only land where the Jews were not persecuted.

26/11/09 terror attack in Bombay. it was for the first time in India history, when Jews were attack by muslims.

the below links an artcle on India's Jews

http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?231813

Shalom Bombay Salaam Bombay Shanti Bombay Peace Bombay; September 11, 2009 at 5:47 AM
The Fat Man said...: Osama Abdullah said...
"The exceptions permit the forbidden."

yes lots of exeptions in your relegion. I call Islam the relegion of exeptions.; September 11, 2009 at 6:36 AM
The Fat Man said...: To our muslim friends in the room. Yahya Snow, the other John Yahya Seymore, Osama Abdulla, Ethshaam and any one else I forgot. I just wanted to say on this day, a day that for the civilized world will always live in infamy.

I just wanted to wish you all a Happy Mujahadeen day, as you morn the loss of the 19 Inocent Muslims,as you celebrate their 8th year wedding anaversy to their virgins. Please make sure you save me a piece of anaversery cake.; September 11, 2009 at 6:42 AM
Nakdimon said...: Nakdimon or someone else could this be arranged with Sam Shamoun or Jochen Katz?

Hogan, I was thinking the same think. I will contact Jochen to see if there is still space on the site to begin with. lol.

I am almost finished with my rebuttal (actually repetition of my previous arguments since osama did nothing but repeating himself). It will be up either later or tomorrow.

shalom,
Nakdimon; September 11, 2009 at 7:49 AM
Osama Abdallah said...: "Perphas my Christian brothers and sisters could arrage to have such a detailed refutation posted on www.Answering-Islam.org

Nakdimon or someone else could this be arranged with Sam Shamoun or Jochen Katz?"

You can, but you don't have to. I will add the rebuttals to the article.

Also Fernando, I will address your points once I get Nakdimon's rebuttal. AGAIN, THE NIV BIBLE SAYS THE HEBREW MEANING IS "PRISON" OR JAIL.

Jesus was jailed. Plus Fernando, there is no land of the living for Jesus to be cut off from. If you refer to Heaven, well Jesus was already outside of Heaven and on earth. So Jesus being thrown in jail by his capturers is the perfect interpretation.

More details and proofs on this will be posted in the article, insha'Allah.

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com; September 11, 2009 at 3:07 PM
Osama Abdallah said...: "Plastic surgery was practiced at least eight centuries prior to Muhammad, it was used frequently in the army of Alexander the Great and in wealthy and medical circles, in fact in Rome in the first or second century they even attempted or talked about sex change by surgery. If Muslims want us to think that the Qur'an predicts something that occurred centuries prior to islam then I fail to detect the logic."

Have you even bothered to CLICK on the article? No where in the ENTIRE ARTICLE did I mention plastic surgery.

The Glorious Quran Says the following:

‏4:119 ولاضلنهم ولامنينهم ولامرنهم فليبتكن اذان الانعام ولامرنهم فليغيرن خلق الله ومن يتخذ الشيطان وليا من دون الله فقد خسر خسرانا مبينا

[4:119] `And assuredly I will lead them astray and assuredly I will arouse in them vain desires, and assuredly I will incite them and they will cut the ears of cattle; and assuredly I will incite them and they will alter ALLAH's creation.' And whoever takes Satan for a friend instead of ALLAH, he certainly suffers a manifest loss.

Today, the SOMATIC CELLS that are used for cloning, are taken from the EAR CELLS! I quoted several GOVERNMENT web site and OFFICIAL SICENTIFIC AND MEDICAL web sites that say this.

Also, cloned cattles are clipped in their ears as well.

So the Glorious Quran's Prophecy and Miracle is indeed a STUNNING ONE! Please visit: http://www.answering-christianity.com/creation_alteration.htm.

Again, I did not speak AT ALL about plastic surgeries in the article.

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com; September 11, 2009 at 3:17 PM
Richard Valencia said...: Hello!

Just wondering if you, or if you know any ministries who will, counter the Muslim prayers in DC? i'm very interested to see if i can get involved too. Thanks in advance! stay blessed!

-richard; September 11, 2009 at 3:19 PM
Fernando said...: Ho Osoma... thankes for your wordes... you saide: «AGAIN, THE NIV BIBLE SAYS THE HEBREW MEANING IS "PRISON" OR JAIL»... does it also say the same in Psalm 52:5 and in Jr. 11:19, the other two placed in the Bible where is used the same expression? I do not use the NIV, rather the original texts themselfs... butt in the Internet version of the NIV we read in Is 53:8: «For he was cut off from the land of the living»...

Or are you meaning thate siunce in the first part of Is 53:8 it speaks of "oppression" the refference to «For he was cut off from the land of the living» means prision?

a) the division of the Bible in chapters and versicles were only made centuries after Christ... thate passage («For he was cut off from the land of the living») is not directdely reffered to "oppression", rather to "He was given a grave with the wicked, and his tomb is with the rich". Why? because the dead was considered the punishement for sins... and sinse the Servent suffered the "the punishment that brought us peace was upon him" (Is. 53:5) he had to die so others would not suffer that punishement: «by his wounds we are healed»... more: the Hebrew text in Is 53:9 clearly reads: «bemôtaw»: «He was given a grave with the wicked, and his dead ("bemôtaw") is with the rich», as the text the Qumran 1Q1sª also clearly expresses... the text sais, without any doubt, thate the Servent died...

2)remember thate "meoser" (thate you say is prision) cannot be the case no matter whate the NIV mighte imply because in Psal. 107:39, the other place in the Bible where the same word appears, thate cannot be the reading: «under pressure ("meoser") of disaster and hardship»...

3) you also saide: «Plus Fernando, there is no land of the living for Jesus to be cut off from»... yes there is: Jesus did not existed priour to the Eternal Son of God became man and this human nature coulde be cut off from land of the living...

so we have:

the Servent after being opressed and judgef was detained (Is 53:8) and after he was «stricken for the transgression of my people» (Is 53:8) and, therefore, carrieng the sins of others he experienced dead: «he was cut off from the land of the living (...) (and) was assigned (...) with the rich in his death»... remenber Osama: the rich in the OT are those thate are doomed to eternel dead and who gave Jesus's body a toumb to be buried? Joseph of Arimateia, a rich person since he was a «prominent member of the Council» (Mk. 15:43)

but remember, dear Osama, the NT clearly sais two things: Jesus was the messias and Jesus died... you can doubt the previous, since you ahve to be coherent withe the basic structure of the OT text, but the latter is, at least, as historicaly solid as the existence of muhammad...; September 12, 2009 at 4:44 PM
Ilena said...: Please help to save this man's life. Please see this site for more info:

http://maryamnamazie.blogspot.com/2009/09/urgent-action-stop-imminent-deportation.html; September 12, 2009 at 5:02 PM
Fernando said...: Osama... since the man dominated catle he started cutting the ears of cattle and breading specially those with a peculliar small kind off ears because thate woulde allow the animals to grow the elements tahte would go to creatte the ears's cartilage to creatte the more important cartilage of other organs... that's known for thousand off ears... that's changing the structure off the creation...

would not allah know thate?

more: its not only from the ears thate as been taking ceels to clone animals... one can use any kind of ceels:

Cats cloned from fetal and adult somatic cells, where we can read: «DNA was extracted from ear punches or tail clippings»...

and in this article you have an umoungous list (table 1) off those parts ofd the beings thate were used to do cloning... guess which ones were the least succecefull?

Reproduction technics

would not allah know thate?

more: using cells from ears «and skin tissue are less suitable for cloning» because it creats deadly mutations saide this study:

New mutations in cloning

would not allah know thate?; September 12, 2009 at 5:07 PM
minoria said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; September 12, 2009 at 8:56 PM
Osama Abdallah said...: Fernando,

You are increasingly become a big waste of time. You obviously haven't read my article, nor even clicked on it. The ear cells are the best cells to use for cloning. This is according to ample Scientific researchers, Government websites, and scientific web sites.

The Noble Verse clearly says that man will alter the creation of Allah Almighty. Read what the Glorious Quran Says about the alteration of Allah Almighty's Creations and the slitting of the cattles' ears at: http://www.answering-christianity.com/creation_alteration.htm.

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com; September 13, 2009 at 1:47 AM
Osama Abdallah said...: Fernando,

Ironically, all of your links that you gave testify that the use of EAR CELLS was the best and closest to the original. Here is a sample quote:

"The lengths of telomeric DNA, determined from ear tissue of the
clones, were similar to that of the original bull."

Again, read my article and the Western Scientific sources that were given in it, and stop wasting everyone's time.

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com; September 13, 2009 at 2:00 AM
CosmicBoy said...: Islam is not religion. It is a teroris organization! Don't be fool by them. In fact I was shock to find out that in recent survey, 65% of Americans fill that Americans discriminated them (moslem)!; September 13, 2009 at 3:54 AM
Nakdimon said...: Osama, I decided to make this my final response to you, since it is blatantly obvious that you cant even think logically and reason properly. I copied and pasted your rebuttal to MS Word and printed it on paper. 19 pages long. I started seriously reading till page 3 and then whistled myself through the rest of the rebuttals since it was obvious that you don’t know the subject you are dealing with. Since you obviously have no desire to interact with me because you don’t address the points I’m raising at all, I will attempt to end every rebuttal section with questions so we can get straight answers.; September 13, 2009 at 11:57 AM
Nakdimon said...: Osama: Before I start thoroughly refuting your points, I must make this important point:
In the New Testament, Psalm 91 is directly linked to Jesus Christ, in the New Testament, by Jesus Christ himself, while Isaiah 53 isn't linked to Jesus by anyone. Psalm 91 said many Prophecies, and they are listed above in this article. Satan, in the New Testament, even tried to use Psalm 91 to tempt Jesus into testing GOD Almighty to try to kill himself by throwing himself off of the canyon or mountain to see if GOD Almighty will be True to His Word and Promise and send down the Angels to lift Jesus up from death and harm as precisely mentioned in Psalm 91. Psalm 91 further declares that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty for help to protect him from death, and GOD Almighty will honor him and protect him from death.

Which is exactly my point. You claim that Psalm 91 is about the Messiah but there is nothing in there that even looks Messianic. I have asked you time and again to prove that Psalm 91 is about the Messiah in general and Yeshua in particular. You still haven’t shown us anything that identifies it as such. So therefore your assumption that a non-Messianic Psalm is talking about the Messiah is erroneous to begin with and totally invalid and thus irrelevant. What evidence do you have that Psalm 91 is Messianic?

Secondly, you claim that Psalm 91 is directly linked to Yeshua. WHERE do we find that link? Satan makes that link! And the Messiah dismisses Satan’s application. Again, Osama, you are using a Satanic understanding of the biblical text and claim that you have support for your position. We have the Messianic understanding of the biblical text and you claim that we understand the scriptures wrong. Osama, why do you use Satan’s interpretation of the text and claim your reading is correct, when the Messiah rebukes Satan for misapplying the text?

Again, Isaiah 53 is no where linked to Jesus Christ in the New Testament.

Romans 15:21, Romans 10:16, John 12:38, Matthew 8:17, Romans 4:25, 1 Peter 2:24-25, Acts 8:32-33, Luke 22:37, Mark 15:28 all refer to Isaiah 53 and link it directly to Yeshua. So you are wrong. Osama, why did you say that Isaiah 53 isn’t attested in the NT, when I was able to post verse after verse showing that it is?

It is Psalm 91 that is clearly linked. Not only that, but Isaiah 53 has deliberate mistranslations and misinterpretations in it that we will see below, insha'Allah (if Allah Almighty is Willing).

That is how this whole thing started right? The accusation of mistranslations. Where are the mistranslations, Osama? Where are the misinterpretations? And where is the clear reference to Psalm 91, outside of Satan’s trivial attempt to apply it to the Messiah?

The English translations say "all". And even if we don't put "all" in the translation, it will still mean that since "some" does not exist in the text. Now, "all" here would mean most or many. But yet, Jesus was very popular by many, and he supposedly performed his Miracles in front of thousands of eye witnesses, which would've exploded his popularity among the people in no time.
So in either case, you are refuted.

Oh the bolstering of Osama Abdallah. The text says that he was despised from men. It doesn’t say “all” men. It doesn’t say that it was a specific group. It doesn’t identify the “men” so it’s open for interpretation. But it was YOU that insisted that he was forsaken by ALL men. You are inserting the word in there to make it fit your position. WHY do you do that and then bring it up as an objection knowing full well that the verse doesn’t even say that?

cont>>; September 13, 2009 at 11:57 AM
Nakdimon said...: Again, as I mentioned above in the article, "wounded" here could easily mean felt hurt spiritually, and not necessarily got physically hurt. Also, Psalm 91 doesn't mean that not a scratch will be upon Jesus. GOD Almighty's Protection to Jesus from both harm and death could easily be referring to serious wounds and not minor ones. But in either way, "wounded" here could easily refer to a spiritual one, because Jesus was probably upset because his people were about to be doomed to Hell for Eternity for rejecting his Message.

Osama, what indication do you have that the term wounded means spiritual hurt? This way you can spiritualise anything you like because it doesn’t fit your agenda if you don’t. Fact is that this isn’t spiritual wounds. The text says “by his wounds, WE WERE HEALED”. This is not about something that the servant TRIED to do, but what he actually accomplished. How do spiritual wounds heal people?

Now as to him being cut off from the land of the living, here are what your NIV and YLT Bibles and many others say:
…

It's talking about Jesus' imprisonment!
It seems quite clear to me that this quotation is referring to Jesus' arrest and him being imprisoned! He was taken away from the people and put into isolation. That's how I clearly see it. In fact, the NIV Bible in its (a) foot note above, explicitly says "From arrest". It is clearly and indisputably speaking about Jesus' arrest, which doesn't really prove anything.

No Osama, you are making claims about a language you don’t even begin to understand. Because if you did, you would see that you are reading the commentary completely wrong. I don’t think you have to understand Hebrew to see this one, just using logic will help. The phrase “from arrest” is referring to the first word of the verse, namely “me’otser”, which means “from oppression”. THAT word can be read as “from arrest”. It has NOTHING to do with the servant being cut off from the land of the living. So the point remains and it is up to you to show that the cutting off is not talking about cutting off from life.

Verse 9 speaks about the servant being assigned a grave, which is true. Jesus today has a grave and it is empty. Nothing refutes Islam here. As to "his death" my detailed refutation to this lie is further down.

Oh my, is this the reasoning that is supposed to prove your case and debunk mine? Of course his grave is empty, because he was raised from the dead! And Jesus TODAY has a grave? Where? Not according to the NT and not according to Islam because he was supposedly taken up by Allah, right? About verse 10 you wrote:

cont>>; September 13, 2009 at 11:58 AM
Nakdimon said...: You are sadly a victim of the false interpretations and lies that are given to you. Here is what the NIV Bible comments:
1- From http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=isaiah 53&version=NIV:
10 Yet it was the LORD's will to crush him and cause him to suffer,
and though the LORD makes [c] his life a guilt offering,
he will see his offspring and prolong his days,
and the will of the LORD will prosper in his hand.
c. Isaiah 53:10 Hebrew though you make

The Hebrew doesn't say "the LORD makes". It says "you make"! It is talking about people and not GOD Almighty.

Osama, I would advice you to stop making bombastic statements like “You are sadly a victim of the false interpretations and lies” and start coming up with real substantial arguments? The word “tasim” (you will make) can refer to either God or to the servant. It can go either way. The word “tasim” is both 2nd person masculine as well as third person feminine (as the word nephesh/soul is feminine). So again you are making things up. It doesn’t matter what it refers to, the meaning is the same. His soul would be made an asham (guilt offering). So my point still stands since you have shown nothing but misunderstanding of what either the text says or what the commentaries say about the text.

Furthermore, here is what the YLT Bible says:
2- From http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=isaiah%2053&version=YLT:
10And Jehovah hath delighted to bruise him, He hath made him sick, If his soul doth make an offering for guilt, He seeth seed -- he prolongeth days, And the pleasure of Jehovah in his hand doth prosper.
Do you see any crucifixion in here? It's talking about Jesus getting bruised by his enemies (again minor injuries that are not fatal), and that it caused to get sick. And then it says that if his soul were to be a guilt offering, which proves that it wasn't make a guilt offering.
Your point is again soundly refuted!

More assertions without backup. Osama you are again contradicting yourself. Is Yeshua bruised by his enemies according to this verse, or is God going to protect him from any harm as you claim about Psalm 91? If this is the quality of your “sound refutations” then responding to you has no meaning. You are doing enough damage to yourself. Where do you get the idea from that the bruises are “minor and not fatal” when the text says that he was “CRUSHED because of our iniquities”? How is crushing someone a “minor” injury?

He poured his soul unto death means that he overpowered death! He killed death. He defeated death. Sure, he was saved and lifted by GOD Almighty from the cross. He was victorious over death.
1- From http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=isaiah 53&version=YLT
12Therefore I give a portion to him among the many, And with the mighty he apportioneth spoil, Because that he exposed to death his soul, And with transgressors he was numbered, And he the sin of many hath borne, And for transgressors he intercedeth.
Here we see that Jesus faced death. But he never died! Isaiah 53 doesn't claim it at all, and Psalm 91 clearly declares that Jesus will cry out to GOD Almighty to protect him from death, and GOD Almighty will save him and honor him!

How do you get from someone being exposed to death or being poured out unto death, like the text says, to “he never died” as you claim? And again, why do you link Psalm 91 to the Messiah when it is not a Messianic Psalm? Can you finally answer that question? Why should we believe that Psalm 91 is Messianic at all and why should we believe it is about Yeshua, when He Himself repudiated the link to that Psalm from His own mouth?

cont>>; September 13, 2009 at 11:58 AM
Nakdimon said...: But Jesus in the New Testament did object to the crucifixion. He did beg GOD Almighty to save him, and according to Psalm 91, GOD Almighty did save him. But either way, your point here doesn't disprove anything.
As to him being led like a lamb to the slaughter, sure, they wanted to kill him through crucifixion, but he was never crucified nor killed:
… (The Noble Quran, 4:156-159)"
Now compare the Noble Verses to Isaiah 52:13 "...he will be raised and lifted up....". Notice that Isaiah 52:13 did not say "....he will be RESURRECTED and lifted up...." Not even once, did the Old Testament predict for the foretold Servant to be raised to GOD Almighty after death. There absolutely no mention of any sort of resurrection in the Bible's Old Testament what so ever.
And again, Psalm 91 clearly says that GOD Almighty will protect him and save him from death, and He will honor him.

Then by that token, I challenge you to show us where the word “tawheed” is in the Quran. Since that word isn’t explicitly mentioned in the Quran, Muslims have fabricated the teaching of Tawheed! If you are going to demand explicit words and will not allow for description of a concept, then Tawheed is a hoax, a later Muslim invention that has nothing to do with Allah or the Quran.

Second, you are repeating a point that I have already refuted. The context makes it blatantly clear that the text is talking about his accusers and NOT God. He didn’t object to his ACCUSERS who are referenced to in the text. Can you even think logically? The verse starts out “He was oppressed”. He was oppressed by whom? His accusers. It then goes on to say “like a lamb that is led to the slaughter”. He was led to his execution by whom? His accusers. He didn’t say a word of defence himself before them.

Lastly, Surah 4:157 is itself ambiguous. Some Muslims claim that there was a crucifixion but that the Messiah didn’t die. You claim that the Messiah was not crucified at all. Furthermore, the text allows for a crucifixion and a death. The objection is to the JEWS claiming that they killed the Messiah. NOTHING on the ROMANS doing the killing. It merely says “but they [i.e. the JEWS] killed him not for certain”. So we can easily say that the Quran denies the JEWS killing the Messiah but doesn’t object to the ROMANS executing him and therefore he DID die at the hands of the ROMANS and was after that raised up to Heaven, which is exactly what happened according to our beliefs. Yes the text of 4:157 is that obscure! And then Allah goes on to claim that those that differ with him are full of doubt and have no certain knowledge and follow nothing but conjecture. But reality is that those that AGREE with Allah have no clue what actually happened at the crucifixion.

This is because no where in the entire Old Testament does it say that the Messiah will actually die! All you have is figurative expressions about him:
1- Facing death, or getting exposed to death.
2- Having a grave assigned to him.
3- And now, "in death" or "in his death" doesn't at all mean that he will die.

WOW, so
1 he is EXPOSED TO DEATH, which means he died,
2 then he is assigned to A GRAVE, which means he died,
3 and when the text says that he is IN HIS DEATH, which means he died,
Your conclusion: he DIDN’T die.

Sorry Osama, but how on earth can anyone take you seriously? So when Allah says
1 I am ALONE.
2 I have NO PARTNERS
3 and I have NO SON”
we can conclude that Allah has eternally existed with his Son at his side?

This is exactly how you reason with this text! And this is the reason why I didn’t even wanted to waste my time addressing you.

And as for your claim that nowhere does it say that the Messiah will actually die. I suggest you read Daniel 9:26 that says “y’careth Mashiach we’ein lo” (Messiah will be cut off and will have nothing). So much for your bogus claims.

cont>>; September 13, 2009 at 11:59 AM
Nakdimon said...: Here is what the NIV Bible says:
From http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=isaiah 53&version=NIV
9 He was assigned a grave with the wicked,
and with the rich in his death,
though he had done no violence,
nor was any deceit in his mouth.
10 Yet it was the LORD's will to crush him [1] and cause him to suffer,
and though the LORD makes [c] his life a guilt offering,
he will see his offspring and prolong his days,
and the will of the LORD will prosper in his hand.
c. Isaiah 53:10 Hebrew though you make
[1]. This note is mine. In the Arabic it says: وَمَعَ ذَلِكَ فَقَدْ سُرَّ اللهُ أَنْ يَسْحَقَهُ بِالْحَزَنِ, which literally translates as: And despite this, it delighted Allah to crush him with (ample) grieve!
Here is how I read these verses:
The servant was assigned a grave to die in despite the fact that he has done no violence.

I don’t care what the Arabic says. Just as you don’t allow translations when it comes to the Quran and insist on the original Arabic text, I will hold you to that same standard when it comes to the original Hebrew text of the Bible. Besides, this destroys your reading of Psalm 91, which you keep contradicting at every turn. Will he be crushed or will no harm befall him at all, as you have said over and over again?

The servant will have ample grieve in him due to the doom of his people. Remember! Psalm 91:8 says that he will see the punishment of the wicked with his eyes!

Why should I entertain the thought that Psalm 91 is about the Messiah and particularly about Yeshua? I am asking for the one hundredth time.

I only quoted what the lexicon said as you also quoted me above. But in either case, I have proven that the "death" here is definitely symbolic.

That is actually false! The lexicon does NOT scratch the “his” in the phrase “in his death”. YOU have done it for a specific reason. Why have you done that? In addition, where have you proven that “death” is symbolic? You have insisted that it does because you need it to be, to salvage your untenable position that the servant didn’t die. I have asked you what word should be used to denote actual death. You haven’t answered. Please entertain us with that word that denotes literal death.

False! Death throughout the Bible is many times symbolic. It is so symbolic that you can't even know for sure, from your Bible, whether Hell is an actual Fire or a place of complete death and cease of existence. This confusion is caused primarily by the too much use of symbolic speeches for death, grave and other key words.

And therefore you conclude that it MUST be symbolic here? What an illogical conclusion! The overwhelming number of occurrences, if not all, of the word mawet is literal death. Please do tell me where in the Tenach death is “symbolic”. And please show how the word here is supposed to be figuratively, since the chapter talks about the literal suffering through agony and eventual death of the servant.

cont>>; September 13, 2009 at 12:02 PM
Nakdimon said...: Also, according to the Lexicon, maweth meant "high places" in other Biblical verses:
in his death-Hebrew, "deaths." Lowth translates, "His tomb"; bamoth, from a different root, meaning "high places," and so mounds for sepulture (Eze 43:7). But all the versions oppose this, and the Hebrew hardly admits it. Rather translate, "after His death" [Hengstenberg]; as we say, "at His death." The plural, "deaths," intensifies the force; as Adam by sin "dying died" (Ge 2:17, Margin); that is, incurred death, physical and spiritual. So Messiah, His substitute, endured death in both senses; spiritual, during His temporary abandonment by the Father; physical, when He gave up the ghost.
because-rather, as the sense demands (so in Job 16:17), "although He had done no," &c. [Hengstenberg], (1Pe 2:20-22; 1Jo 3:5).
violence-that is, wrong.

Notice that Adam did not literally die. The "death" here is symbolic.

This is why you should not engage in apologetics. You use a source to try to refute others, but because you don’t understand a word that the scholars of the source are actually saying, you end up placing references in your article that debunk the very point you try to prove and support the very point you object to. And your audience reads your sources just as bad as you do. Read the reference again. After it tells you that maweth means “deaths” it goes on to say

“Lowth translates, "His tomb"; BAMOTH, FROM A DIFFERENT ROOT, meaning "high places," and so mounds for sepulture (Eze 43:7). BUT ALL THE VERSIONS OPPOSE THIS, and the Hebrew HARDLY ADMITS IT.”

Do you now see what the commentary is saying? It says that the word that Lowth mistranslates comes from a DIFFERENT ROOT. In other words, it MISREADS the actual word in the text, therefore MISTRANSLATES THE TEXT and attributes an incorrect meaning to it. Furthermore, you reference says that this reading is opposed by all other references and that the Hebrew doesn’t admit the reading “bamot”, which is exactly what I wrote about the YLT misunderstanding “bemotaaw” (in his deaths) for “bamotaaw” (his high places). Then it goes on to say:

Rather translate, "after His death" [Hengstenberg]; as we say, "at His death." THE PLURAL, "deaths," INTENSIFIES THE FORCE; as Adam by sin "dying died" (Ge 2:17, Margin); that is, INCURRED DEATH, PHYSICAL AND SPIRITUAL. So Messiah, His substitute, ENDURED DEATH IN BOTH SENSES; SPIRITUAL, during His temporary abandonment by the Father; PHYSICAL, when He gave up the ghost.

Did you see what is said here? The word is in plural because it covers both areas, physical and spiritual. Your source supports a physical death! It would be wise if you would actually read and thoroughly study your sources before you actually use them.

Your points above are all refuted above, and you're only left with desperation and confusion.

Wow, are you familiar with the saying about the pot and the kettle? Because I’m actually not the one that is dependant on lexicons and translations, you are. If anyone is caught confused and desperate it is you, not me. You are the one that constantly contradict yourself.

cont>>; September 13, 2009 at 12:03 PM
Nakdimon said...: You're trying to force a certain meaning of a word upon a verse, and this meaning is not supported at all throughout the chapter!

I’M forcing meanings upon verses? You mean like interpreting constant references to the servant’s death to mean that he didn’t die, right?

Also, as I demonstrated amply and thoroughly above, both Psalm 91 and Isaiah 53 and 52 and other chapters clearly state that the Messiah will be lifted up and honored and protected from death and harm.

Actually Isaiah 52:13-15 doesn’t support your position at all, just like the other references by the way. It says that the Messiah will prosper and high and lifted up. The loftiest language is used in Hebrew: hineh yaskeel avdee YARUM, weNISA weGAVAH ME’OD. (behold, my servant will deal wisely, he will be exalted and lifted up, exceedingly high. Compare this with Isaiah 6:1) And then in the very next verses (14 and 15) it says what he will go through before his exaltation: that he will be marred beyond human form and that nations will look to him and be dumbfounded. So, you are in a dilemma, since both Isaiah 53 backed up by Isaiah 52:13-15 stand in direct conflict with Psalm 91. Yet you want them all to relate to the same person. This position is untenable! You have Isaiah 52 and 53 in one corner and Psalm 91 in another. Either Psalm 91 is about the Messiah or Isaiah 52 and 53 are about the Messiah. You cant have it both ways since both are mutually exclusive. Which one is about the Messiah, Osama? Either Psalm 91 is about the Messiah (which you have yet to demonstrate that it is) and half of your article covering Isaiah 52 and 53 is nonsense or Isaiah 52 and 53 are about the Messiah in which case the other half of your article covering Psalm 91 is nonsense! What will it be, Osama?

But regardless, I don't think this point is that relevant. Defining what burial is, and whether or not placing Jesus in the tomb is considered burial is irrelevant here. The main point is whether or not he actually was crucified and whether or not he actually died.

Well if that point isn’t relevant then why did you even bring it up at all? Obviously because you did think it was relevant, since you want to throw everything, including the Kitchen sink, at whatever we believe.

And as to the prolonging his life is after he dies, this is a perfect example of the type of hog wash and absurdities that Christians invent and call faith and theology. All of your points had been based upon speculations and ridiculous absurdities. My refutations to you, on the other hand, are based on solid proofs that prove that Jesus was never prophesied to actually die. It just talked about him facing death, but never actually to die.

And that solid proof is a Psalm of which you cannot prove that it is at all Messianic?
That solid proof is claiming that psalm 91 is directly linked to Yeshua in the NT but you fail to address the fact that SATAN applied, actually misapplied, the Psalm to the Messiah?
That solid proof is Psalm 91 of which the Messiah himself says he has nothing to do with?
That solid proof is claiming that the servant never died, when there are multiple references to the servant’s death, burial and atoning for the sins of others by being sacrificed?
That solid proof is posting references in your article that totally oppose your viewpoint when read properly?
That is the solid proof you have for your position?

cont>>; September 13, 2009 at 12:03 PM
Nakdimon said...: 1- The Philistines, and the people of Palestine, existed long before Moses and his followers ever migrated to Palestine. But this is a seperate topic altogether and is irrelevant to us here.

The Philistines have nothing to do with Palestinians. The name “Palestina” was given to the region by the Roman emperor after the Jewish revolt in 135 AD. After that it remained a region under autonomy of different countries until 1948 when the state of Israel was established once again, giving it back the name that it had and under the people that last souvernly ruled the country before the name was changed to Palestina by the Roman authority. Had the Roman emperor decided to call the region “Vomit” the Palestinians of today would be referred to as “Vomitans” or something like that. The name of the place doesn’t link the people of today that are called by that name to the people of ancient times.

4- Another blasphemous and worthless opinion from you.

Osama, the point is that my claim is just as valid as your claim, if I would invent my own religion, claim that my religion confirms your religion, but tell you that your book has been altered in order for my religion to look deviant. In other words, I use my books to judge if your books are true, without proving that my book is true. Don’t you think that I have to judge MY religion by YOUR book, since your book comes before me and I appeal to it? This is exactly my point and there is nothing blasphemous or worthless about it. In fact you would raise the exact points that I am raising now, if the shoe was on the other foot.

5- "Your understanding of the servant overpowering death is a correct one. But not as you put it." Thank you for openly admitting that my interpretation is correct and is quite possible! I already demonstrated why my interpretation is the right one above. But thank you for demonstrating how confusing and ridiculous your Bible's use of the words.

Of course I admitted that the servant conquered death through his resurrection. Because verse 12 comes after the other verses that say he was bruised, crushed, and killed. So logically if someone undergoes death and after that is alive, you may conclude that he was raised from the dead. Or am I making no sense here?

6 through 9- I already covered all of this in the article above. But in regards to Jesus interceding for the transgressors, it could be as little as a simple request or prayer for them. Did not Jesus, in the New Testament, pray to GOD Almighty and say: "Father forgive them for they know not"?

Wow, and WHERE did he say this?? ON THE CROSS! But he was never crucified, right? See how you just keep shooting yourself in your own foot? Either he was on the cross and he said this, which refutes your argument, or he didn’t say this since he was never on the cross, which refutes your argument. Either way your argument is worthless. Osama, what will it be?

As to Jesus bearing the sins of many, it is referring to him being burdened by the sins and the wickedness of his people. This is why the second half of the sentence says "and he made intercession for the wicked," because he loved them so much that he wanted to seek a second chance for them with GOD Almighty. He carried their sins for them before GOD Almighty to seek intercession for them. This is what the verse is exactly saying.

No, you are again, reading things that aren’t there. It doesn’t say “he wanted to seek a second chance”. It says he interceded for their transgressions. The intercession was made and completed. The text says he was bruised because of our transgressions, crushed because of our iniquities, led like a lamb to the slaughter, but you claim that no harm was done. It says that by his wounds we were healed and you claim that he merely was burdened by their sins? What wounds is spoken about here?

cont>>; September 13, 2009 at 12:04 PM
Nakdimon said...: I invite you and the reader to visit: The Overwhelming Scientific Miracles of the Noble Quran to see how our Holy Book is indeed a Divine and True Miracle from GOD Almighty, and is His True and Living Word.

All these nonsensical claims of science in the Quran are amply addressed and proven false on numerous other websites and even in the debate you had with David Wood. You see something about dust in a verse and claim that this is about the Big Bang. Those arguments are just so farfetched its ridiculous to even claim science in that book. The Quran makes a lot of claims and cant back it up:

Quran claims to be detailed, but it leaves out a lot of details so that it is incoherent on a lot of points without the Hadith.
Quran claims that Jews believed in Ezra as the son of God when no Jew ever believed that
Quran claims we believe in the Trinity of Father MOTHER and Son, when no Christian in the history of mankind has believed this
Quran appeals to apocryphal and heretical Christian writings and tells them as they are historical events
Quran appeals to uninspired Jewish writings and mistakes them for scripture and claims Allah inspired them
Quran thinks that we believe that Yeshua being the Son of God means that God had sex with Mary in order to have Yeshua
Allah refutes himself by claiming that he cannot have a Son since he doesn’t have a wife, but when Mary asks how she possible can have a son when she doesn’t have a husband, Allah claims its perfectly fine and that its easy for him. Then why object that you cant have a son because you don’t have a wife?

And I could go on and on. The only “miracle” the Quran has is that so many people still believe in that book.

And then you go on a rant about the Bible. My favourite part is this one:

Paul never even met Jesus Christ in person while the latter was on earth. It is falsely claimed that Jesus appeared to Paul while Paul was on his way to Damascus after the "crucifixion" (Acts 9:2-4. Note: Paul's name used to be Saul. Yet, Paul admittedly wasn't even sure whether the Holy Spirit was inspirning him or not).

Man Osama, how do you know that “it is falsely claimed that Jesus appeared to Paul”? Were you there? NO! Was anyone you know there? NO! What source do you base this on? You claim this on no other basis than that you don’t like Paul. And what does his name have anything to do with it? Just total irrelevant points. Oh well, I’m talking to a guy that doesn’t know the difference between John the Apostle and John the Baptist after having shown repeatedly that those two are completely different people and STILL doesn’t accept the correction. Who am I kidding, right?

Nakdimon; September 13, 2009 at 12:05 PM
MuslimPhantom said...: No, I'm not writing to anybody to same anyone who according to my faith deserves to die. The point is to know what is more important: human values or the divine ones? I do not have any doubt: my choice is to be with Allah, not with the UN’s (that decrepit organization that is persecuting Muslims brothers all over the world) code of human rights.

And what is the problem with beheading people? Did not the founder of the house of the jewish messiah beheaded someone? All jews and christians are hypocrites. I would rather live with a shark than with the moral code of a bible inspired person. Do you know what? The problem with the decreasing number of christians is that you have departed from the true message of Allah. He’s punishing you all for having changed His code of conduct (penalties for apostasy and women’s excessive freedom and so on) for a human centred one: flowers and candies for all the people who what to leave christianity and women who walk around like whores and so on…

So: instead of asking me to call to this or that person, do try to call to your god… perhaps he’s sleeping… maybe you’ll all have, at Allah’s hands, the same fate of those Baal worshipers that were made fun by that prophet of your’s…; September 13, 2009 at 1:28 PM
The Fat Man said...: Some muslims lying is like taking a drink of water, and killing is aa easy as breathing.; September 13, 2009 at 3:09 PM
minoria said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; September 13, 2009 at 3:33 PM
minoria said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; September 13, 2009 at 11:20 PM
Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...: Nakdimon,

You are doing a good job both nailing and publically exposing Osama Abdallah, but as I said before it would benefit the Christian-Muslim debate greatly if all this material was posted on a website as a proper article.

Could you check this out with Answering-Islam.org; September 14, 2009 at 3:18 AM
Fernando said...: Osama... how does the sentence you quoted -- "The lengths of telomeric DNA, determined from ear tissue of the clones, were similar to that of the original bull" -- make them the bestt and closest source to the original? thak can bee achieved by ANY kind off tissue... butt noone will kill a bull to take cells from his heart... duuuu... and you're wronge the table I presented shows crearly that the sucess off clones animals taken from ears are the least able to succed... whant more articles? more profs about your errors? it's fine withe me... I just habe to descend to the second floor of the University Building where I teach and ask someone from the biologigy departement for thate... butt ounce more: whate is the "miracle of the qur'an" for relating a practice (cuttings animal ears and, therefore, changing the natural order off creation) thate exited for centuries?

p.s.: and I erad your article and gave it to read to professor James Qwuan who saide thate, ignoring the religious believes, if it was an essay from one student of him he woulde give him an F-...; September 14, 2009 at 3:28 AM
Nakdimon said...: Hogan, I have already contacted Jochen. I'm waiting for his response.

rgds,
Nakdimon; September 14, 2009 at 7:09 AM
VJ said...: Great refutation nakdimon...

you certainly owned osama.

although his points are not even worth reading.
haven't seen such a dishonest person like him.
its not strange though,,what can i expect when his god himself is a deceiver.; September 14, 2009 at 9:19 AM
Ilena said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; September 14, 2009 at 9:27 AM
Ilena said...: " The point is to know what is more important: human values or the divine ones? I do not have any doubt: my choice is to be with Allah, not with the UN’s (that decrepit organization that is persecuting Muslims brothers all over the world) code of human rights."

isnt it strange that HUMAN INSTINCTS and VALUES r above those of allahs in this case? how can a morality of mere humans be above that one of some1 who calls himself god?

"And what is the problem with beheading people?"

i guess nothing if the only LAW in ur life u stick to is the one established by muhammad and his imaginary friend.

" All jews and christians are hypocrites. "

thnx. this is worth knowing. especially when it comes from a person who justifies death penalty for apostasy.

" He’s punishing you all for having changed His code of conduct (penalties for apostasy and women’s excessive freedom and so on) for a human centred one: flowers and candies for all the people who what to leave christianity and women who walk around like whores and so on…"

look how some1 is so WELL TAUGHT in christianity. jesus said that the one who was without sin should cast the first stone. i still fail to see how we misinterpret his message.

"So: instead of asking me to call to this or that person, do try to call to your god… perhaps he’s sleeping… "

nope. he aint sleeping. i guess he was only sleeping in that case when we were "CHANGING" his words. shame on us.

p.s. for starters u dont have a proof that god actually exists. for this reason its wrong to establish those barbaric sharia systems bc theres no freaky way that 100% citizens of 1 country r convinced muslims. etc etc

i was surprised by ur post. i thought that human life was more worth in islam. but i guess i was wrong. allah LIKES only those who love him first and those who obey him without questioning his absurd decisions. i think ur doing a great job here. congrats.; September 14, 2009 at 10:07 AM
Osama Abdallah said...: Nakdimon,

Give me one day and I will have all of your points all refuted, again, insha'Allah (if Allah Almighty is Willing).

In regards to my debate with David Wood, I invite every single reader to watch it at: http://www.answering-christianity.com/quran_miracles_debate_osama_abdallah_vs_david_wood.wmv to see how Islam was proven to be the Divine and True Religion of Allah Almighty.

As to Ezra being called the son of GOD by the Jews, yes they did, and you are ignorant. Visit: http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Contrad/External/ezra.html. I also have more proofs on this which I will provide, insha'Allah.

As to the rest of your points, like I said, give me one day, and I'll washed it all away for you insha'Allah, again.

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com; September 14, 2009 at 5:43 PM
minoria said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; September 14, 2009 at 11:15 PM
nma said...: MuslimBantom said.
All jews and christians are hypocrites.

That's funny. The real hypocrites are the ones that claim that Islam is a religion of peace. Islam is a demonic relgion that preaches violence and your Allah is Satan himself.; September 15, 2009 at 12:51 AM
The Fat Man said...: Nakdemon great job. It is always a learning experiance talking and reading what you write.

I like your response to the muslim argument of Pslam 91. I attacked it from a different approach but I have to say your use of scripture is spot on. The muslim believes the Devil when Jesus rebukes the Devil. Good job.; September 15, 2009 at 1:11 AM
Nakdimon said...: Osama, I will give you all the time you want, but I will only bother to respond to your rebuttal if you will explain the clear contradictory readings of your regarding Psalm 91 in one corner and Isaiah 52 and 53 in the other corner. And also if you explain why we should take Psalm 91 as referring to the Messiah in general and Yeshua in particular, when Yeshua, in the NT, rebukes Satan for applying that verse to Him.; September 15, 2009 at 3:15 AM
Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...: Osama,

Firstly, your refutations on Nakdimon are so far based upon reitaration and your own eisegesis into the words. Its easy to continue arguing when you merely repeat yourself.

As to your case of Ezra being called the Son of God by the Jews, I think you are again revealing your lack of skills to perform effective assessments of a subject.

Firstly let me say that I don't find it surprising that certain Jews might have referred to Ezra as the Son of God, so I am not in full agreement with all Christian apologists here; keep in mind though I do not say that this happened.

If certain Jews applied the 'Son of God' title to Ezra, the Qur'an is certainly wrong to give the impression that this is tantamount to 'the Son of God' title ascribed to Jesus, that is certainly a problem.

We do not have a problem that Solomon was entitled the Son of God, or that the angels are entitled the Sons of God or that Isral or Adam were the Sons of God. From that standpoint some might have ascribed similar titles to Ezra.

However, the problem with this claim is firstly that the use of this title is clearly separate from the way the title applies to Jesus, who according to the Gospel which the Qur'an favorites, namely the Gospel of John, came from God into the world, who is the Word of God, is with God, shares the glory with God and is God and the Son of God in the sense that he was sent from heaven to earth (John 10).

There is simply no comparison with Ezra here, hence if the author of the Qur'an assumed that the Jews considered Ezra in the same way as the Christians recognise Jesus, this is a serious error.

The second problem that emerges, is simply that there is no credible evidence that the Jews ever termed Ezra 'the Son of God'.

Your reference to Newby for example, merely states that we can 'imagine' that 'Ezra' 'could be termed one of the Bene Elohim'.

Firstly, Osama, this is not an evidence, but a scholarly guess or presumption; nothing in this quote provides evidence that Ezra was actually termed the Son of God.

You muslims seem to have an ambition for quotes and utilizing quotes as evidence.

If you have ever engaged (not in your typical hunt for quotes and phrases for speculative arguments) but actually historical research, you might have known that credible assessments ought to be based upon primary sources, then secondary source,

but in his case you have none of the kind;

what you have presented are quotes, and mere quotes are of no significance.

Furthermore, if Newby is correct, we may also ask why the Qur'an merely referred to Ezra as the Son of God, why did the Qur'an not clarify that the Jews in Arabia possessed a long list of these sons of God?

Seems that the author of the Qur'an was limited in his knowledge!

Furthermore, has it not occurred to you that Newby is only considering Ezra here as possible being termed as such since the Qur'an makes the claim.

But in that case Osama, you ought to realise that this is not an evidence but a possibility based upon a claim.

Hence to conclude my response, you have failed miserably to provide any evidence that the Jews in Arabia ever termed Ezra the Son of God.

Here the Qur'an simply reveals its limitation in failing to clarify Newby's idea that a range of characters were termed such among some Arabic Jews not only Ezra. The Qur'an also proves itself in error by presenting Ezra's title as the Son of God in comparison with how the title applied to Jesus.

Hence you have proved nothing and only revealed two more Qur'anic errors.

Thanks Osama Abdallah; September 15, 2009 at 3:54 AM
Nakdimon said...: Osama, that article of the Islamic Awareness website on Ezra is nothing but a hoax and a desperate attempt to salvage the Quran from this blatant error that it contains. The only credit that we should give the Islamic Awareness is that they actually tried. When I address this error in the Quran with Muslims, they give me this link EVERY TIME. They actually think that this link solves their problem. However, it has been taken apart several people on several websites such as this one: http://www.sillyallah.com/2008/01/ezra-uzair-and-next-quran-error.html

The verse says:
SHAKIR: And THE JEWS say: Uzair is the son of Allah; and THE CHRISTIANS say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!

You see what they do on the Islamic Awareness website? They take a verse from the Quran that speaks of the Jews universally and then apply that verse to a small imaginary community in Yemen. But NO ONE really knows if that group actually existed at all since there is not a trace of that tribe. That seems to be the hallmark of all Islam’s claims:

The Torah used to teach Islam BUT ITS LOST
The Injeel used to teach Islam BUT ITS LOST
There used to be evidence for Islam BUT ITS LOST
There was a tribe in Yemen that substantiate Islam’s claims on the Jews believing that Ezra is the son of God BUT THEY’RE LOST

Everything that is supposed to support Islam seems to conveniently get lost! Truth of the matter is that that tribe is just totally made up for the sole purpose of making Allah look good, but until Muslims actually come with the proof that substantiate their claims, this argument completely fails.

The article appeals to this from the Encyclopaedia Judaica, which is actually the strongest piece of evidence in the entire article:
“H. Z. Hirschberg proposed another assumption, based on the words of Ibn Hazm, namely, that the 'righteous who live in Yemen believed that 'Uzayr was indeed the son of Allah.' According to other Muslim sources, there were some Yemenite Jews who had converted to Islam who believed that Ezra was the messiah. For Muhammad, Ezra, the apostle (!) of messiah, can be seen in the same light as the Christian saw Jesus, the messiah, the son of Allah.”

Did you see that? This is the best that Islam has to offer as “proof” that Jews view Ezra as the son of God. It says that someone proposed another ASSUMPTION. And what is this ASSUMPTION based on? The words of Ibn Hazm. Who is Ibn Hazm? Where does he get his information from? No one knows, but Ibn Hazm lived almost half a millennium years after this verse was supposedly revealed. Obviously he noticed the incorrect statement here, probably got his nose rubbed into it by a Jew or Christian, and needed to reconcile the verse with reality. But in all seriousness, taking a claim from an Islamic apologist and bombard it into evidence to substantiate your claim, is a BIG stretch and can be qualified as nothing more or less than begging the question.

Nakdimon; September 15, 2009 at 2:46 PM
Osama Abdallah said...: Nakdimon,

First of all, much of your history and manuscript are long gone. You can't disprove Islam by pointing out that an Islamic claim does not exist in your sources.

Second, read what your sources say about Ezra:

From: http://wesley.nnu.edu/biblical_studies/noncanon/summaries/2esdras-notes.htm

"The Second Book of Esdras is an apocalypse that attempts to explain why God allowed the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem to be destroyed by Gentiles in AD 70. The book claims to report seven visions of Ezra the Scribe concerning ethical issues and the problem of evil and suffering. The first three revelations (3:1-9:25) concern the angel Uriel's instructions to Ezra about the spiritual-moral realm. In the fourth revelation (9:26-10:59), Ezra witnesses a mourning woman change into the heavenly Jerusalem. The fifth and sixth revelations (11-13) condemn the Roman Empire and forecast its destruction along with other evil Gentile nations by a messiah. The seventh revelation (14) describes Ezra's role in producing the books included in the canonical Scriptures (the 22 books in the Hebrew Bible) and the (70) apocryphal books. This revelation closes with Ezra being taken into heaven without dying. Chapters 1 and 2 and 15 and 16 are generally recognized as subsequent Christian interpolations."

The reader can also visit my article on Ezra at: http://www.answering-christianity.com/quran/qb005.htm

More will be put forth in my rebuttal to you, insha'Allah.

As to your other points above, I don't know if you even read all of my article that I gave you at: http://www.answering-christianity.com/isaiah_53.htm, because most of the things you said are already thoroughly refuted in there.

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com; September 15, 2009 at 4:36 PM
Fernando said...: Osama... can you presente a SINGLE source thate says that Ezra was considered by the jews as a son of God, or as the Son of God in the absolute termm as Jesus was? One SINGLE evidence please... juste ONE... thanks...

p.s.: I'm sorry butt you have not dealt withe the points I cleraly made aboutte Is. 53... wanna trie to do so? I'll be right here...; September 15, 2009 at 4:44 PM
CanadanOrientalist said...: "First of all, much of your history and manuscript are long gone."

LOL - You want to argue MSS just try to argue that the 7th century Uthmanic recension of the Quran still exists, just try. Let's hear you mention the Topkafi and Samarkand MSS, let's hear you blather about supposed MSS held at Al-Madinah LOL. The Quran is the least cohesive religious text in MSS studies period.

EPIC FAIL.; September 15, 2009 at 5:03 PM
The Fat Man said...: I noticed we havent heard from our muslim friends from across the big pond. John and the other John Seymore.

I'm wondering if they were in the street battles for islam that happend in Great Brittin over the weekend. I'm sorry how bigoted of me, I mean the Peacful pro islamic rallie against the evil British Nazi's.

http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1184614595?bctid=39599909001; September 15, 2009 at 10:25 PM
Nakdimon said...: First of all, much of your history and manuscript are long gone. You can't disprove Islam by pointing out that an Islamic claim does not exist in your sources.

Osama, the problem is that you don’t have anything from the Jewish and Christian history to support your claim, but you have nothing from the secular history to support it either. Not a SCRAP! You can try to hide behind the “it is lost”-tree as long as you want, but as I have said in my previous post, that is all that Islam has! All Islam can say is “oh our claims are nothing but true, but the evidence for each and every claim that we make is lost!”

Sorry, Osama, but considering the strong claims that Islam makes for itself, that just will not do. It is hilarious to think that Allah claims that everything that he wants comes to pass, but then lets everything to substantiate his claims go LOST but it so happens to be that everything that contradicts his claims is PRESERVED. You have to have an amazing amount of chutzpah to support the massive imaginary evidences of Allah and present them as clear proof and then on the other hand brush aside the enormous amount of clear evidence that is at our disposal to the contrary of Allah’s claims and present them as lies.

As for your attempt to support the Ezra error in the Quran. Again, Osama, what does that futile piece of evidence, if you at all can call that, prove? It says that Ezra is taken up into heaven without dying. Does this prove that he is the Son of God in Esdras? NO! In the Tenach Eliyahu (Elijah) is taken into heaven without dying. Does this make Eliyahu the Son of God? NO! So what does it prove? NOTHING! So again, you have absolutely NOTHING in Esdras that supports Allah’s claim that Jews believe that Ezra is the Son of God. In fact, in the book of 2 Esdras, Ezra has a vision about someone standing in the midst of a crowd and this is what the angel says to Ezra:

So I asked the angel, and said, Sir, what are these?
He answered and said unto me, These be they that have put off the mortal clothing, and put on the immortal, and have confessed the name of God: now are they crowned, and receive palms.
Then said I unto the angel, WHAT YOUNG PERSON IS IT THAT CROWNETH THEM, and giveth them palms in their hands?
So he answered and said unto me, IT IS THE SON OF GOD, whom they have confessed in the world. Then began I greatly to commend them that stood so stiffly for the name of the Lord. (Chapter 2:46-48)

So Ezra is NOT the son of God even in the book of 2 Esdras! He sees some one else who is identified as the Son of God. So I repeat, you have NOTHING to salvage Allah from this gross error and grievous lie that he uttered against the Jews. According to your own book you should throw it out and regard it as profane:

[Surah 4:82] And if it [the Qur’an] were from any other than Allah, they would have found in it many a discrepancy.

And to think that Allah claims that Jews lied about him makes Allah an “omniscient” hypocrite, an “omnipotent” liar and the biggest deceiver of all times, dragging over a billion people today to their doom.

Nakdimon; September 16, 2009 at 4:14 AM
Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...: No

Osama Abdallah, cannot present even one evidence or source that Ezra was termed the Son of God,

all he has is that a apocryphical book claims that Ezra was taken to heaven, yet this fails utterly to support his claim.

Well, this was only one of Osama's articles from the answering-Christianity website, in fact one of his articles he has been boasting about, this was also a typical example of how low in reliability and high in speculation his articles are.

So we are gona ask Abdalla one more time to provide a credible evidence that Ezra was termed the Son of God.; September 16, 2009 at 4:33 AM
Fernando said...: Osama... just some amaizing and incredible scientific miracles presented in the Holy Bilble thate were unheard at the time of its reading:

Jeremiah 33:22: “As the host of heaven cannot be numbered”... Eben today, scientistes admitt thate they do nott know how many stares there are, butt they know tahte meteorites are not missiles from allah...

1 Corinthians 15:41: "for one star differs from another star in glory"... only in the XX century scientists admited this reallity...

Ecclesiastes 1:6: «The wind whirls about continually, And comes again on its circuit»... the antient people, as muhammad did, believed thate the air stoped circulating sometimes...

Job 28:25: "To establish a weight for the wind, And apportion the waters by measure"... a clear refference to the major principle of hidrodinamics: the Bernoulli rulle can be cleraly seen hear... antien people, and nuhammad, thouhgt thate the air did not habe height...

and so onne... Osama... youre lossing ground iff your faithe is based in the scientific miracles off the qur'an... we Christians do not need this stuff, butt is greatt to realize its existence...; September 16, 2009 at 5:11 AM
Osama Abdallah said...: "Well, this was only one of Osama's articles from the answering-Christianity website, in fact one of his articles he has been boasting about, this was also a typical example of how low in reliability and high in speculation his articles are."

Hogan,

Now you're resorting to desperate lying, once again. I never boasted about this article about Ezra. Show us the proof. We're all waiting....

The only ones who are living in speculations here are you and your people. You have nothing, and you believe in nothing but man made stuff.

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com; September 16, 2009 at 8:48 AM
Nakdimon said...: Jeremiah 33:22: “As the host of heaven cannot be numbered”... Eben today, scientistes admitt thate they do nott know how many stares there are, butt they know tahte meteorites are not missiles from allah...

LOL Fernando. This one is hilarious.

But in all candor, how on earth can non-material beings be harmed by material things? Even Allah should know in all of his ignorance that that doesnt add up!

Nakdimon; September 16, 2009 at 9:26 AM
Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...: Nakdimon wrote:

But in all candor, how on earth can non-material beings be harmed by material things? Even Allah should know in all of his ignorance that that doesnt add up!

Elijah replies:

I am fare more puzzled over how a jinn who flies close to the speed of light cannot escape a meteorite or a star or a supernova.

Furthermore if a Jinn intended to escape to heaven with such a speed and avoid the stellar material, it is an easy matter as our planet is located at the edge of our galaxy.

Such a jinn could simply take off straight to heaven within the empty space that encompases the space between the galaxies.

Nope the author of the Qur'an was not a scientist.; September 16, 2009 at 10:15 AM
Osama Abdallah said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; September 16, 2009 at 10:24 AM
Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...: Osama Abdallah wrote:

Hogan,

Now you're resorting to desperate lying, once again. I never boasted about this article about Ezra. Show us the proof. We're all waiting....

Elijah replies:

You want evidence that you boasted about your Ezra article?

Well, everyone, we don't have to wait much longer:

"As to Ezra being called the son of GOD by the Jews, yes they did, and you are ignorant. Visit: http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Contrad/External/ezra.html. I also have more proofs on this which I will provide, insha'Allah."

So here we all see that Osama actually did boast about his article and I am therefore not a desparate liar.

Osama wrote:

The only ones who are living in speculations here are you and your people. You have nothing, and you believe in nothing but man made stuff.

Elijah replies:

Man-made what and which speculation? Do you mean things such as metorites throwns at devils or jinns that fly in the space?

Maybe you should include your Qur'anic science here Osama, maybe the jinns in the Qur'an are not meant to be viewed as spiritual beings maybe they are UFO's, at least such can be impacted by stellar material, even though it remains unlikely that such creatures would not be ready for such space matter.; September 16, 2009 at 10:25 AM
Osama Abdallah said...: "But in all candor, how on earth can non-material beings be harmed by material things? Even Allah should know in all of his ignorance that that doesnt add up!"

and
"Man-made what and which speculation? Do you mean things such as metorites throwns at devils or jinns that fly in the space?

Maybe you should include your Qur'anic science here Osama, maybe the jinns in the Qur'an are not meant to be viewed as spiritual beings maybe they are UFO's, at least such can be impacted by stellar material, even though it remains unlikely that such creatures would not be ready for such space matter."

This is thoroughly refuted and exposed at: http://www.answering-christianity.com/shooting_stars_lie.htm

The Glorious Quran remains Miraculous.

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com; September 16, 2009 at 10:31 AM
Osama Abdallah said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; September 16, 2009 at 10:43 AM
Fernando said...: Brother Nakdimon (bie the way: good work on Is 53... I tried the simple aprouch, butt I think thate eben that one is too complicated to Osama) saide: But in all candor, how on earth can non-material beings be harmed by material things?...

whate? habe you not herad of the misterious black matter that exists in the universe and can be whatever I choose to say it is? and do you knowt know thate thought is mighter (and so can harm) than the sword?

hummm... I guess you habe not been reeding Osama's site... ;); September 16, 2009 at 11:16 AM
Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...: Seriously I am not getting on to Osama's website again, whenever I do my computer starts acting weirdly.; September 16, 2009 at 11:44 AM
Fernando said...: Brother Hogan.... I know whate you mean... the lastte time I went there due to the miracoulous ear cutting experience in animals I clicked in a link and was redirected to a p*rn site... I guess Osama made a mistake withe the use off the "Crtl+c" and "Crtl+v" and placed other thing thate he was seing at the moment... I do not know... butt I'm also decided, since the PC I use is from the University I teach, nott to go there anymore withouts a sort of super-NASA anti-virus...; September 16, 2009 at 11:58 AM
Osama Abdallah said...: "Brother Hogan.... I know whate you mean... the lastte time I went there due to the miracoulous ear cutting experience in animals I clicked in a link and was redirected to a p*rn site... I guess Osama made a mistake withe the use off the "Crtl+c" and "Crtl+v" and placed other thing thate he was seing at the moment... I do not know... butt I'm also decided, since the PC I use is from the University I teach, nott to go there anymore withouts a sort of super-NASA anti-virus..."

My dear Fernando,

I thought that lying was against your faith. Please provide me the link of where you were redirected to a porn site.

If this was a joke from you, then my apologies. Joke is certainly accepted. But it still puts a bad picture about my site out there. I sure hope by GOD Almighty that the so-called porn site wasn't my article at: http://www.answering-christianity.com/x_rated.htm">. LOOOLLLL!! If it is, then this is extremely funny indeed :-).

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com; September 16, 2009 at 3:27 PM
Fernando said...: Dear Osama... we habe our desagrements, I often denounce your lack off intelectual value and many other times I joke, with kindness with you as when I used to call you The Osama the Great Abdallah, butt neber I lied about anything... yes: it was aboutte the post you ounce placed aboutt the preservation off the qur'an... I cliked on one link in tha page your provided link directed me and was surprised by a p*rn site... I do not remember which one it was, butt you might find it... I do no not know if it was amistaken or other thingue... thats a problem with you... aboutte the pseudo-porn in the Bible... thate always make me laugh... reeally it does... it only expresses whate you, muslims, know about the Bible and Christianity... its sad your ignorance... to sad...; September 17, 2009 at 6:12 AM
Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...: Well, I have not experienced any pornographic links from Osama's site, but I am not completely at ease with his website.

Lately we have seen several Christian websites been attacked by islamic internet terrorists and as to my knowledge several computers of Christian missionaries have been under attack as well.

In fact the internet website of but one Christian organization I am aquainted with has been attacked this year by approximately a hundred computers, based upon what they were doing they were a spot target for the religion of islam.

It appears to me that the internet debating and evangelism has become more that just dialogue, the muslims have lately turned dawah into a cyber war.

Some islamic websites are up simply to catch information from Christian and others who access it; this information could include names, adresses, etc. Some of my close missionary friends have experience that every piece of information has been detected somehow by someone; which gives us a good reason to be extra careful.

Since many Christians so far have been warned by virus protection systems that answering-christianity was implanting a trojan horse on the computer (that was certainly my experience for quite a while) answering-christianity is not a safe website to enter. That is just the way it is.

Osama says that his website is safe, the problem is simply, how can I know for sure.

He may even post some or other information that supports his claim that the whole thing is an innocent error, however with the technic and islamic adherers being inside every post of our society even the internet how can we even trust such a claim.

Furthermore, McAfee may no longer detect any danger with answering-christianity but McAfee does not detect all dangerous websites anyway, in fact at least two websites which McAfee in past had assured me were safe were in fact not safe, so even using the virus protection systems is not entirely safe.

I would say any suspicion is sufficient reason not to access such a website and a warning against such a website ought to be shared with everyone, particularly if we risk revealing secret information to our muslim friends.

This is why we have a problem looking up his links. I would appreciate if Osama posted the text on the blog instead. He needs to understand that a number of readers on this blog feel uneasy about accessing his website; September 17, 2009 at 10:50 AM
Osama Abdallah said...: My dear Fernando,

I do not visit sites. I think you confused me with someone else.

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com; September 17, 2009 at 8:37 PM
Fernando said...: Osama... ok... I'll trust you... neber the less do also truste me: them maybe you were attacked by some malicious virus that made me being redirected to thate kind of sites when clicked on the link provided in your site... it happens... the problem I was reffering persists: you habe virus ans other stuff that can be harmfull to those who visit it...; September 18, 2009 at 4:27 AM
Osama Abdallah said...: Fernando,

You know well that there are no viruses on my site. You also changed your words in the last two posts. You first said that you were directed to a porn site from my cloning and cutting of the cattles' ears Prophecy and Miracle article, and then you changed it to the Preservation of the Noble Quran article. These are your quotes from the last two posts from you:

"....the lastte time I went there due to the miracoulous ear cutting experience in animals I clicked in a link and was redirected to a p*rn site...."

AND

"it was aboutte the post you ounce placed aboutt the preservation off the qur'an... I cliked on one link in tha page your provided link directed me and was surprised by a p*rn site"

I think you got me confused with someone else. Also, if you were directed to a porn site, it might also be a virus already existing in your web browser that FORCED YOU TO ENTER INTO THE SITE. The previous site that you were on (mine in this case) was irrelevant.

Please do a full scan on your computer. I use McAfee and it works well all the time. I run into virus infested sites all the time, because I do heavy research on the net for my web site. McAfree is great in warning me about these sites, AND FIREFOX BROWSER is great in blocking them completely. I also do heavy research using the many books that I purchased.

Trust me, I DO NOT go to porn sites, Fernando. Plus, I am happily married, walhamdulillah (all thanks to Allah Almighty Alone).

Take care,
Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com; September 18, 2009 at 1:24 PM
Adam said...: IN ATTENTION ALL MUSLIM

ANOUCEMENT
THE GREAT MUSLIM CHRISTIAN MAY HELD IN INDIA

Who is Evading the Debate- Janab Akbar or Sakshi? You Decide

http://www.sakshitimes.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=394&Itemid=42

PROPOSED AGREEMENT BETWEEN SAKSHI APOLOGETICS NETWORK AND NICHE OF TRUTH FOR PUBLIC DEBATE

http://www.sakshitimes.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=393&Itemid=42

Update: Christian Muslim Debate at Calicut on October 2009.

http://www.sakshitimes.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=385&Itemid=42

Sakshi: An Apologetics Network

just to inform you how Indian Muslim Daawa preachers run to debate Christian Apologists.

Thank you all at Answering Islam and act 17.

Praise the lord for all that he is doing to expose the cult of Kaaba; September 18, 2009 at 3:00 PM
Fernando said...: Dear Osama... thanks for the feedback...

1) yes, the last time I went to your computter was due to the supposed ear cutting thate implies cloning...

2) thate time I nott only stopped in thate page butt followed to also remembering somethings you saide in previous threads aboutte the supoposed preservation off the qur'an...

so: where's the lie? Osama... I think you're projecting on other your costum atitudes... sorry to know thate...

no... no p*rn in my site... I'ma Christian... and iff I was redirected to a that kind off site bie kliking in your site it was due to some problem IN YOUR computer... not in the one off the University I used...

p.s.: the fact you are marruied, and happili as you saide, withe your wife does not deny:

1) the possibility tahte you see p*rn sites... that is allowed by islam as you know... islam eben allows temporary marrieges to thate sort off things...

2) thate your site, due to the fact thate it's infested by virus, had a cripted message thate redirectd those who cliked in thate peculiar link to a p*rn site...

so, dear Osama, the proiblem persistes: your site is dangerous...; September 19, 2009 at 2:42 AM
Osama Abdallah said...: Fernando,

I've been trying to help you save face and get out of this embarrassing predicament in peace. But you insist on taking this further and embarrass yourself more. There is no porn on my site, nor does my site direct anyone to a porn site. It was you who fabricated this altogether as a silly joke! The problem is Fernando is that your joke is a too heavy one to bare. You're hitting me very hard with it and you're making up a false image about me that I am innocent of. The bottom line and the truth here are: THERE IS NO PORN EXPERIENCE THAT YOU HAD! I am sure your university would've had a filtering system to block the porn site right before it reached you. This is pretty standard today in libraries and schools and universities. Please end this Fernando and don't joke like this again please. I mean come on man!! Me directing my readers to porn sites? Why???? And for what??? And please give us that URL from my site that had directed you there.

Take care,
Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com; September 19, 2009 at 4:05 AM
Osama Abdallah said...: "1) the possibility tahte you see p*rn sites... that is allowed by islam as you know... islam eben allows temporary marrieges to thate sort off things..."

This is a strike under the belt Fernando. Not only you lied about me, but now you're also lying about Islam as well.

Well Fernando, guess what? One of the reasons why my site is one of the top and the best ones out there among the Muslim sites is because I didn't leave a single topic that I didn't cover. All Praise and Thanks are due to Allah Almighty Alone! I did cover this topic very well for the sick liars like you, Fernando. Here it is:

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

The Glorious Quran states clearly that all of your body parts will testify for you and against you before Allah Almighty in the Day of Judgement. All of those dollars that one stole, and all of those lustful looks that one looked at another woman, and all of those strikes that one struck himself in masturbation are recorded.

So no, you're a liar, and Islam does not allow watching pornography.

Please give us that URL from my site that supposedly directed you to the porn site. We're all waiting Fernando.

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com; September 19, 2009 at 4:11 AM
Osama Abdallah said...: Typo:

bare = bear; September 19, 2009 at 4:34 AM
Fernando said...: Dear Osama...

I'm not seekink to save my face and am not kiding in this aspect... by any means...

I'm just trying to show to you and everyone arounde here thate going to your site is dangerous: either due to the virus or/either to the paralel links to which one may be redirected... sorry to say thate...

yes the PC in my University do block porn, butt they not block islam sites tahte have some sort of fishing devices to redirect to some sorte off p*rn sites... eben the best protected PC's, like the one in my University, are vulenreble to this or tahte sort off cleaver way to do redirections...

aboutt islam allowing porn... juste see: http://english.bayynat.org.lb/Jurisprudence/sex.htm... just some quoute:

«if a husband or a wife, or both suffer frigidity in the absence of any means of treatment, whether natural- through mutual excitation -or through medication, and if the only treatment is watching pornographic scenes, then this will be permissible»

ounce again:

a) islam is the religion where everything is forbiden EXCEPT is all sort off circunstances...

b) whate a clever way to escape with porn... hey... it'sn for medical and intimacy reasons... why not drink camel's urine?; September 19, 2009 at 2:44 PM
Osama Abdallah said...: Muta is also forbidden according to the Glorious Quran:

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

The Glorious Quran Says that depending on one's intentions, his termination of the marriage MIGHT BRING SIN UPON HIM. It all depends on the situation and the intention.

Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, also said: Among all of the lawful things that Allah Almighty allowed, the most detested one to is divorce. Divorce and/or termination of marriage is not to be done irresponsibly, because IT WILL BRING SIN UPON YOU!

As to why Muta was allowed temporarily, it is very similar to why alcohol was also allowed temporarily in Islam. It was a gradual process to free that certain society from certain addictions and traditions. It was also to prevent raping and adultery among Muslim men when they traveled for hundreds of miles on foot for the, sometimes, years away from their wives. Temporary marriage was allowed for them, and then was forbidden for good altogether.

Read the link for more details.

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com; September 19, 2009 at 3:32 PM
Osama Abdallah said...: Fernando,

I have already exposed your lie by providing your two contradictory quotes above.

As to my site being dangerous and full of viruses, I will let McAfee, One of the TOP THREE virus-removing softwares in the world testify to my site:

http://www.siteadvisor.com/sites/answering-christianity.com?version=2&core_ver=1.0&pip=true&premium=false&client_ver=3.0.1.147&client_type=IEPlugin&suite=true&aff_id=105&locale=en-us&os_ver=5.1.3.0

We all know Fernando that you had no such experience. From my end, this silly exchange is over. I've provided all of the evidence that silenced you.

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com; September 20, 2009 at 3:03 AM
Fernando said...: Dear Osama... just 2 points:

1) I woulde love to see that islam was at least the half you say it is... it woulde be, nevertheless, violent, misogenic, despotic, tyranical, untruthfull and so one, butt woulde be musch better that the true islam we all kbow from its sources and true ortodox believes... unfortunatelly you are not THE islam, nomatter whate yoy say in your dawa attempts... sorry for thate...

2) so, you want proofs thate your site as virus? Ok... I'll provide them... anytime I'll go there and be warned aboutt a virus I'll do PrtSc so everyone can see thate... not thate is needed (many other persons have experienced the same problem when going to your site), butt I'll do it...

p.s.: you saide: «your two contradictory quotes above»... only in your mind... If I say I went to visit New York and in that trip I caught H!N! virus it does not imply I caught it in new your rather on thate trip... and thate trip might nott be limited to New York... understandable enought for you?; September 20, 2009 at 6:44 AM
Osama Abdallah said...: "1) I woulde love to see that islam was at least the half you say it is... it woulde be, nevertheless, violent, misogenic, despotic, tyranical, untruthfull and so one, butt woulde be musch better that the true islam we all kbow from its sources and true ortodox believes... unfortunatelly you are not THE islam, nomatter whate yoy say in your dawa attempts... sorry for thate..."

You know what the problem that you and 99% of the Christians on this board have? You think you're too smart! No religion and no community on the face of this earth is worse than Christianity and its followers. Go and look at your people and see how low they are, by the wholesale.

And oh yeah, on your camel urine point, even the pills that you take today for headache are made from animals' urine. Visit: http://www.answering-christianity.com/urine.htm.

Osama Abdallah
www.answering-christianity.com; September 20, 2009 at 12:35 PM
Fernando said...: Dear Osama...

«And oh yeah, on your camel urine point, even the pills that you take today for headache are made from animals' urine»... and many other elements that can help healing... like pork liver, dog intestines and so one... I wonder, then, why these animals are haram... the problem is THE DRINKING of urine as a good medicine as watching porn is to muslims in some circunstances... another FORBIDEN BUT ALLOWED muslim rule... butt then I do hope you do not do either (watch porn and/or drink urine's camel) when you habe an headache, or tootheach... butt why do you do not do thate?

about islam versus Christianity all the evidences are agains you Osama... I know muslims do habe the tendency to rewritte the history, butt this time eben you, withe your amaizing and fertil imagination, cannot deny history... islam spead by teh sword, eliminated antient cultures wherever it whent, killid million of peoples, spreads (based in its sources and orthodox jurisprudencial schools) violence against non-muslims and women and homossexuals and little young girls and black people and specialy the only true God: the Holy Trinity...

Sorry Osama...; September 20, 2009 at 3:18 PM
Adam said...: ATTENTION PEOPLE

News from Pakistan

GOJRA 7 MEN WOMEN BURNED ALIVE PAKISTAN

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yz3uewno6Hs

GOJRA Christians massacre was due to hate announcements from Mosques A Shocking Report

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bXnLtuEPI-Q&NR=1; September 22, 2009 at 10:08 AM