Is Islam Polytheistic? – James White refutes Sam Shamoun

watch Shabir Ally’s brilliant comments at the end



Categories: Bible, Christianity, God, Islam, Islamophobia

76 replies

  1. How many religious studies scholars have characterized Islam as a polytheistic religion? Sam’s lack of education leads him to say the darndest of things! There are many who can’t afford but here is Sam living in the US where plentiful opportunities for cheap and accessible education abound and he chooses to remain an uneducated prick.

    Liked by 1 person

    • There you go again condemning Muhammad to hell! If being uneducated is a grounds for rejecting someone then why do you believe your illiterate, uneducated whore-monging, women-raping, adultery-committing profit? Man, talk about an inconsistent troll!

      And please put me in place by showing your cowardly face in my paltalk room and try to use these arguments, whether from Shabir or anyone else, to shame and refute an uneducated person like myself, But we both know you are not man enough to do it, don’t we? 😉

      Like

    • Shamoun:… being uneducated is a grounds for rejecting someone…

      Unless the uneducated person happens to be a Prophet which you are clearly not. Also, your fetish for attacking the Prophet (saw) is getting worse. Seek help you sicko.

      Like

  2. Truth be told from a biblical perspective what Muslims do to Mohamed is idolatry and yes polythestic since it makes Mohamed a “partner” with Allah in its creeds.

    Tell me Kmak do you love Mohamed with all your heart mind soul and body?

    Like

    • Bobby boy: truth be told from a sane and educated perspective what you call “polytheism” is just a figment of your Trump supporting imagination.

      Like

    • Paul stop being such a Trump-O-Phobe.

      But lets look at the foundation Creed of Islam, the Creed of Judaism, and the Creed of Christians.

      For Islam it is the Shahada in Arabic “I bear witness There is no god but Allah. and Muhammad is the messenger of God.

      Compare that to the Shema of Israel

      “Hear, Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is One.”

      Notice a difference? Notice whats missing in the Shema, no mention of Mosses, no mention of any prophet no mention of any human being. Only to God full stop.

      Where as in Islam Mohamed is partnered with Allah in the testimony of faith.

      Now for Christianity

      “yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live..”

      Notice the difference, here Jesus is central here Jesus Christ is whom all things came (where created) and through whom we live (the originator of life).

      So in this creed you would say we worship JESUS or we make Jesus equal to the Father and you would be right because we DO.

      So you see how Mohamed is elevated beyond what any Jew would do for any prophet. (Including rabid Zionist Jew Rabbi Tovia Singer) and the same can be said for the Christian Shema.

      Like

    • nothing in your uneducated rant anywhere near suggests Muslims are polytheist or think Muhammad is God.

      Like

    • Yah Paul I wouldn’t expect you to understand, I mean it is a little above your level of comprehension. Sorry I can’t dumb it down for you any more than I have.

      Like

  3. That’s right: Tell me Kmak do you love Mohamed with all your heart mind soul and body?

    Of course not. That’s how I love Allah. At least I hope I do.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Kmak yes thats how you love God. Funny is that I have spoken to many Muslims who say they love Mohamed more than anything even their own lives. Yah sounds like worship to me

      Like

  4. lol oh my goodness…lolol.. this has to be the most foolish desperate attempt from the Christological polytheists to feebly argue Muslims elevate our Prophet Pbuh as a god besides Allah.lol…im going to make myself some popcorn…😂

    Liked by 1 person

  5. We corrected Sam Shamoun here on this blog a couple of years ago on this issue. Sam Shamoun will not listen because he has not education in both Islam and Christianity. He does not have any qualification either. He appears to be uneducated and can’t take any education now like how Nabeel Quraish and David Wood completed their Doctorate.

    Nabeel and David are liars about |slam, but will not support Sam Shamoun on this one because they are educated and Sam Shamoun is not educated and cannot be educated may be because of his stomach issue. Sam Shamoun must spend time praying for his lord Jesus Christ to heal him, otherwise Jesus does not love Sam and Jesus coming down to love his followers does not affect Sam Shamoun.

    Thanks.

    Like

  6. Now let’s see if anything Yahyatroll cited refutes anything I said.

    Allah said: “AND I HAVE TAKE YOU TO MYSELF AS MY BELOVED AND INTIMATE FRIEND (habiban wa khalila).” The narrator said: It is written in the Torah: Habibullah “Allah’s Beloved.”

    I have sent you for all people without exception, a bearer of glad tidings and a warner.

    I have expanded your breast for you and relieved you of your burden AND EXALTED YOUR NAME IAS AM NOT MENTIONED EXCEPT YOU ARE MENTIONED WITH ME.

    I have made your community the best Community ever brought out for the benefit of mankind.

    I have made your Community in truth the first and the last of all Communities.

    I have made public address (al-khutba) impermissible for your Community UNLESS THEY FIRST WITNESS THAT YOU ARE MY SERVANT AND MESSENGER.

    I have placed certain people in your Community with Evangels for hearts.

    I HAVE MADE YOU THE FIRST PROPHET CREATED and the last one sent and the first one heard in My court.

    I have given you Seven of the Oft-Repeated which I gave to no other Prophet before you.

    I have given you the last verses of Sura al-Baqara which constitute a treasure from under My Throne which I gave to no other Prophet before you.

    I have given you the Kawthar.

    I have given you eight lots: Islam, Emigration (al-hijra), Jihad, Charity (al-sadaqa), Fasting Ramadan, Ordering Good, and Forbidding Evil; and the day I created the heavens and the earth I made obligatory upon you and upon your Community fifty prayers: therefore establish them, you and your Community. (Al-Sayyid Muhammad Ibn ‘Alawi al-Maliki, Islamic Doctrines & Beliefs: The Prophets in Barzakh, The Hadith of Isra’ and Mi‘raj, The Immense Merits of Al-Sham, The Vision of Allah, translation and notes by Dr. Gibril Foaud Haddad [As-Sunna Foundation of America, 1999 second edition], pp. 88-90; capital emphasis ours)

    Allah exalts and expands Muhammad’s fame:

    And during a part of the night wake up for its recitation – a supererogatory service for thee. It may be that thy Lord will raise thee to an exalted station. S. 17:79

    Did We not expand thy breast for thee and lift from thee thy burden, the burden that weighed down thy back? Did We not exalt thy fame? S. 94:1-4

    Sunni writer G.F. Haddad comments on the last passage:

    “And [have We not] exalted thy fame?” (94:4) Mujahid said: “MEANING, EVERY TIME I [Allah] AM MENTIONED, YOU [Muhammad] ARE MENTIONED.” Ibn Kathir mentioned it in his Tafsir. Al-Shafi`i narrated the same explanation from Ibn Abi Najih and so did Ibn `Ata’ as cited by al-Nabahani in al-Anwar al-Muhammadiyya min al-Mawahib al-Laduniyya (p. 379). Al-Baydawi said in his Tafsir: “AND WHAT HIGHER ELEVATION THAN TO HAVE HIS NAME ACCOMPANY HIS NAME IN THE TWO PHASES OF WITNESSING, AND TO HAVE HIS OBEDIENCE EQUAL HIS OBEDIENCE?” (The Prophetic Title “Best of Creation”)

    It is quite clear that Allah exists for Muhammad’s please and satisfaction.

    Yep you have convinced us that you folk aren’t really man worshipers and idolaters.

    Like

  7. Here are some more goodies for you guys! This is taken from one of my articles.

    MONOTHEISM AND THE ISLAMIC CREED

    God’s true Word, the Holy Bible, lists several creeds, or confessions of faith, which all true believers are required to affirm. One of the major and most popular creeds of the Holy Bible is the Shema (Hebrew- “Hear”), a confession of faith affirming the unity of God:

    “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might.” Deuteronomy 6:4-5

    This confession is repeated by the Lord Jesus in Mark 12:29-30. The NT also contains some creeds which true Christians are required to confess:

    “because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved.” Romans 10:9-10

    “yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.” 1 Corinthians 8:6

    “There is one body and one Spirit–just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call– one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.” Ephesians 4:4-6

    The official Islamic creed, the confession of faith which Sunni Muslims are required to affirm, places Muhammad alongside Allah:

    Ash hadu al la ilaha il Allah-u, wa ash hadu an-na Muhammad-ar Rasul Allah

    The English rendering is:

    There is no god worthy of worship except Allah and Muhammad is His messenger

    Here is another version:

    Ash-hadu anla ilaha illal-Lahu Wahdahu la Sharika Lahu wa-ash-hadu anna Muhammadan abduhu wa rasuluhu

    And its translation:

    I bear witness that there is none worthy of worship except Allah, the One, without any partner. And I bear witness that Muhammad is His servant and His Messenger.

    The ahadith record Muhammad as purportedly saying:

    Narrated Anas bin Malik:
    Once Mu’adh was along with Allah’s Apostle as a companion rider. Allah’s Apostle said, “O Mu’adh bin Jabal.” Mu’adh replied, “Labbaik and Sa’daik, O Allah’s Apostle!” Again the Prophet said, “O Mu’adh!” Mu’adh said thrice, “Labbaik and Sa’daik, O Allah’s Apostle!” Allah’s Apostle said, “There is none who testifies sincerely that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and Muhammad is his Apostle, except that Allah, will save him from the Hell-fire.” Mu’adh said, “O Allah’s Apostle ! Should I not inform the people about it so that they may have glad tidings?” He replied, “When the people hear about it, they will solely depend on it.” Then Mu’adh narrated the above-mentioned Hadith just before his death, being afraid of committing sin (by not telling the knowledge). (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 3, Number 130)

    Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu’minin:
    The Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) Said: The blood of a Muslim man who testifies that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah’s Apostle should not lawfully be shed except only for one of three reasons: a man who committed fornication after marriage, in which case he should be stoned; one who goes forth to fight with Allah and His Apostle, in which case he should be killed or crucified or exiled from the land; or one who commits murder for which he is killed. (Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 38, Number 4339)

    Qadi ‘Iyad notes in relation to this creed:

    Qatada said, “Allah exalted his fame in this world and the Next. There is no speaker, witness nor anyone doing the prayer who fails to say, ‘There is no god but Allah and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah.'”

    Abu Sa’id al-Khudri related that the Prophet said, “Jibril, peace be upon him, came to me and said, ‘My Lord and your Lord says, “Do you know how I have exalted your fame?”‘ I said, ‘Allah and His Messenger know best.’ He said, ‘When I am mentioned you are mentioned with Me.'”

    Ibn ‘Ata quoted a hadith qudsi saying, “I completed belief with your being mentioned with Me.” And another one which says, “I have made your mention part of My mention so whoever mentions Me, mentions you.”

    Ja’far ibn Muhammad as-Sadiq, “No one mentions you as the Messenger but that he mentions Me as the Lord.”

    The fact that mention of the Prophet is directly connected to mention of Allah also shows that obedience to the Prophet is connected to obedience to Allah and his name to Allah’s name. Allah says, “Obey Allah and His Messenger” (2:32) and “Believe in Allah and His Messenger.” (4:136) Allah joins them together using the conjunction wa WHICH IS THE CONJUNCTION OF PARTNERSHIP. IT IS NOT PERMITTED TO USE THIS CONJUNCTION IN CONNECTION WITH ALLAH IN THE CASE OF ANYONE EXCEPT THE PROPHET.

    Hudhayfa said that the Prophet said, “None of you should say, ‘What Allah wills and (wa) so-and-so wills.’ Rather say, ‘What Allah wills.’ Then stop and say, ‘So-and-so wills.'”

    Al-Khattabi said, “The Prophet has guided you to correct behaviour in putting the will of Allah before the will of others. He chose ‘then’ (thumma) which implies sequence and deference as opposed to ‘and’ (wa) WHICH IMPLIES PARTNERSHIP.”

    Something similar is mentioned in another hadith. Someone was speaking in the presence of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and said, “Whoever obeys Allah and His Messenger has been rightly guided, and whoever rebels against them both (joining them together by using the dual form)…” The Prophet said to him, “What a bad speaker you are! Get up! [Or he said: Get out!]”

    Abu Sulayman said, “He disliked the two names being joined together in that way BECAUSE IT IMPLIES EQUALITY.”… (pp. 7-8)

    It is related that ‘Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, said to the Prophet, “Part of your excellence with Allah is that He has made obedience to you obedience to Him. Allah says, ‘Whoever obeys the Messenger has obeyed Allah’ (4:80) and ‘If you love Allah, then follow me and Allah will love you.'” (3:31) it is related that when this ayat was sent down, people said, ‘Muhammad wants us to take him as a mercy IN THE WAY CHRISTIANS DID WITH ‘ISA,’ so Allah revealed, ‘Say: Obey Allah, and the Messenger.'” (3:32) (p. 9)

    “… He coupled his name with His own name, and his pleasure with His pleasure. He made him one of the two pillars of tawhid.” (p. 27)

    Ibn ‘Abbas said, “Written on the door of the Garden is: I am Allah. There is no god but Me. Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah. I will not punish anyone who says that.” (p. 90)

    Another source provides further attestation that Muhammad didn’t like it when people used the conjunction wa (and) when associating him with Allah:

    Further, a man once said to the Prophet … “What Allah and what you will.” He … said, … Do not say, ‘What Allah and what Muhammad will.’ Rather say, ‘What Allah wills and then what Muhammad wills.’ (Ibn Qayyim al-Jauziyyah, Zad-ul Ma’ad fi Hadyi Khairi-l ‘Ibad [Provisions for the Hereafter Taken From the Guidance of Allah’s Best Worshipper], translated by Jalal Abualrub, edited by Alaa Mencke & Shaheed M. Ali [Madinah Publishers & Distributors, Orlando Florida; First edition, October 2001], Volume 4, p. 285)

    Sunni Muslims have clearly deified Muhammad by making it mandatory to confess his name alongside their confession of Allah’s unity. Thankfully, not all Muslims accept this confession since they realize that it is blasphemy and idolatrous. As one Muslim put it:

    Verse 3:18 states the First Pillar of Islam (Submission): “God bears witness that there is no other god besides Him, and so do the angels and those who possess knowledge.”

    This most crucial pillar has been distorted. Millions of Muslims have adopted Satan’s polytheistic version, and insist upon mentioning the name of Muhammad besides the name of God. However, the Quran’s great criterion in 39:45 stamps such Muslims as disbelievers: “When God ALONE is mentioned, the hearts of those who do disbelieve in the Hereafter shrink with aversion, but when others are mentioned with Him, they become satisfied.”

    I have conducted extensive research into this criterion, and I have reached a startling conclusion: the idol worshipers who do not uphold the First Pillar of Islam as dictated in 3:18 are forbidden by God from uttering the correct Shahadah. They simply cannot say: “Ash-hadu Allaa Elaaha Ellaa Allah” by itself, without mentioning the name of Muhammad. Try it with any idol worshiper who claims to be a Muslim. Challenge them to say: “Ash-hadu Allaa Elaaha Ellaa Allah.” They can never say it. Since this is the religion of Abraham (2:130, 2:135; 3:95; 4:125; 6:161; 12:37-38; 16:123; 22:78; Appendix 9), the ONLY creed must be “LAA ELAAHA ELLAA ALLAH (there is no god except the One God)”. Muhammad did not exist on earth before Abraham.

    A Gross Blasphemy

    There is no greater blasphemy than distorting the Quran to idolize the prophet Muhammad against his will. Verse 19 of Sura “Muhammad” (47:19) states: “You shall know that there is no god except the one God.” Shown below is a photocopy of the regular logo of a Muslim publication THE REVIEW OF RELIGIONS (The London Mosque, 16 Gressenhall Road, London SW18 5QL, England). Using the Quran’s calligraphic style, the publishers of THE REVIEW OF RELIGIONS added the phrase “Muhammad Rasool Allah” in such a way that gives a false impression that such is the Quranic statement of 47:19. What a blasphemy! (Quran: The Final Testament [Authorized English Version], Translated from the Original by Rashad Khalifa, Ph.D., Revised Edition, 1992; Appendix 13: The First Pillar of Islam (Submission): “Laa Elaaha Ellaa Allah” (No god except God), pp. 427-428; also available online)

    This is unlike the Christian confessions. Since the NT teaches that Jesus is Lord in the sense of being Yahweh, the biblical writers didn’t consider it a compromise of true monotheism to expand the Jewish Shema to include Jesus within the Divine identity. To them, Jesus wasn’t a creature whom they were deifying it, but was God’s eternal Word and Wisdom who became man for our salvation. Islam, however, explicitly denies that Muhammad is anything but a creature. To, therefore, include him alongside God in the creedal confession of faith is a severe compromise of pure monotheism, being an explicit act of associating a finite creature with God, what Islam considers to be the unpardonable sin of shirk (Cf. surah 4:48, 116). To top it off, the Islamic creed is not even explicitly formulated within the chapters of the Quran, but is derived from later Islamic sources such as the hadith literature.

    Yep, you really got us believing that you are not Muhammad’s worshipers!

    Like

    • Paul’s Pal

      What qualification or authority do you have? to write that article? Christians used to enjoy your shit articles. Now they are wise and know what you write are shit and they no longer take you serious.

      Thanks.

      Like

    • You got my articles confused with your quran and sunna since they are both full of “shit”, which us why you have Muslims leaving your religion in droves since they no longer take your profit seriously. Just ask this guy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DR7_YQ53lfI

      Like

    • It is an indisputable fact that ALL Muslims believe that God is God and Muhammad is a mere creature. The Quran clearly reaches this too.

      Your cut and paste job is just worthless mischief making

      Liked by 1 person

    • Paul’s Pal

      Paul Williams, Yusuf Estes, Joshua Evans, Susan Carland of Australia, Khalid Yasin, Dr. Ingrid Matson, Abdul Rahim Green, Abdulah Kunde, Mohammed Ali, Cat Stevens, Dr. Jefferey Liang, Dr. Jerald Dirks(Christian Deacon(former), Masters of Divinity, Dr. Gary Miller, Hamza Yusuf, and many more notable Muslims are now Muslims scholars and some happen to know the difference from the two religions to the University level in case of Paul Williams. Research shows Islam is the fastest growing religion.

      Because of your limited academic knowledge and research and also trying to fool Christians and take your pay from them, you keep vomiting this nonsense.

      Thanks.

      Like

    • Williams, please stop accusing me of cutting and pasting when I clearly stated that I am quoting from my own articles and rebuttals. So I am simply copying and pasting stuff that I personally wrote down and which took me a lot of time to produce. Thank you.

      Like

    • oh shammy sham…thank you kindly for you great work in collecting all those lovely hadiths that expressed the honor, love and respect that Allah and us Muslims have for our beloved Prophet p..😊.. ill use these helpful quotes to share the love respect and honor when giving dawah… but shammy sham..the hilarious presumptions you spin in reference to those quotes to proclaim Muslms worship Muhammad p lololol..😂 reflect you are one sad desperate misguided soul that is imposing your own polythestic eisegesis or mishandling of the quotes to beget a bogus laughable bogus argument lolol… you have soooooo conveniently left out many verses from the Quran and hadith that obliviates your false presumptions….

      here is one of many that actually trashes everything you have said😉

      The moment The Prophet died, Abu Bakr praised and glorified Allah and said, ‘No doubt! Whoever worshipped Muhammad, then know Muhammad is dead, but whoever worshipped Allaah, then Allaah is Alive and shall never die.’

      Then he recited Allaah’s Statement:

      (O Muhammad) Verily you will die, and they also will die. [Qur’aan (39:30)

      Abu Bakr also recited:

      Muhammad is no more than an Apostle; and indeed many Apostles have passed away, before him, If he dies Or is killed, will you then Turn back on your heels? And he who turns back On his heels, not the least Harm will he do to Allah And Allah will give reward to those Who are grateful. [Qur’aan (3:144)

      Yep, shammy you really need to learn the basics of Islam to understand believing that we are not Muhammad’s worshipers!…😉

      Liked by 2 people

  8. The final one for now. Unless noted otherwise most of our quotations will be taken from a classical Sunni work, Kitab Ash-shifa bi ta’rif huquq al-Mustafa (Healing by the recognition of the Rights of the Chosen One), authored by a Muslim scholar named Qadi ‘Iyad Ibn Musa al-Yahsubi. We will be using Aisha Abdarrahman Bewley’s English translation, published by Madinah Press (Inverness, Scotland, U.K., third reprint 1991, paperback). All capital emphasis mine.

    OBSESSIVE MUSLIM BEHAVIOUR AND DEVOTION TO MUHAMMAD

    The worship which Muslims gave (give) to Muhammad can be seen from situations where his followers would drink Muhammad’s urine and smear his spittle on themselves, thinking that they would receive a blessing or a cure as a result of it!

    One of the scholars concerned with reports about the Prophet and his qualities related that when he wanted to defecate, the earth split open and swallowed up his faeces and urine, and it gave off a fragrant smell.

    Muhammad ibn Sa’d, al-Waqidi’s scribe, related that ‘A’isha said to the Prophet, “When you come from relieving yourself, we do not see anything noxious from you.” He said, “‘A’isha, don’t you know that the earth swallows up what comes out of the prophets so that none of it is seen?”

    Although this tradition is not famous, the people of knowledge still mention the purity of his faeces and urine…

    There was also a time when Malik ibn Sinan DRANK HIS BLOOD on the Day of Uhud and licked it up. The Prophet allowed him to do that and then said, “The Fire will not touch you.”

    Something similar occurred when ‘Abdullah ibn az-Zubayr drank cupped blood. The Prophet said, “Woe to you from the people and woe to the people from you,” but he did not object to what he had done.

    Something similar is related about when a woman DRANK SOME OF HIS URINE. He told her, “You will never complain of a stomach-ache.”

    He did not order any of them to wash their mouths out nor did he forbid them to do it again.

    The hadith of the woman drinking the urine is sound. Ad-Daraqutni follows Muslim and al-Bukhari who relate it in the Sahih. The name of this woman was Baraka, but they disagree about her lineage. Some say that it was Umm Ayman, a wooden cup he placed under his bed in which he would urinate during the night. One night he urinated in it and when he examined it in the morning there was nothing in it. He asked Baraka about that. She said, “I got up and felt thirsty, so I drank it without knowing.” The hadith is related by Ibn Jurayj and others.

    The Prophet was born circumcised with his umbilical cord cut… (pp. 35-37)

    Note that the drinking of blood is a clear violation of God’s true Word, the Holy Bible:

    “If any one of the house of Israel or of the strangers who sojourn among them eats any blood, I will set my face against that person who eats blood and will cut him off from among his people. For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it for you on the altar to make atonement for your souls, for it is the blood that makes atonement by the life. Therefore I have said to the people of Israel, No person among you shall eat blood, neither shall any stranger who sojourns among you eat blood. Any one also of the people of Israel, or of the strangers who sojourn among them, who takes in hunting any beast or bird that may be eaten shall pour out its blood and cover it with earth. For the life of every creature is its blood: its blood is its life. Therefore I have said to the people of Israel, You shall not eat the blood of any creature, for the life of every creature is its blood. Whoever eats it shall be cut off.” Leviticus 17:10-14

    “but should write to them to abstain from the things polluted by idols, and from sexual immorality, and from what has been strangled, and from blood… For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these requirements: that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell.” Acts 15:28-29

    They even violated the commands of the Quran!

    He has only forbidden you what dies of itself, and blood, and flesh of swine, and that over which any other (name) than (that of) Allah has been invoked; but whoever is driven to necessity, not desiring, nor exceeding the limit, no sin shall be upon him; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. S. 2:173 Shakir

    Forbidden to you is that which dies of itself, and blood, and flesh of swine, and that on which any other name than that of Allah has been invoked, and the strangled (animal) and that beaten to death, and that killed by a fall and that killed by being smitten with the horn, and that which wild beasts have eaten, except what you slaughter, and what is sacrificed on stones set up (for idols) and that you divide by the arrows; that is a transgression. This day have those who disbelieve despaired of your religion, so fear them not, and fear Me. This day have I perfected for you your religion and completed My favor on you and chosen for you Islam as a religion; but whoever is compelled by hunger, not inclining willfully to sin, then surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. S. 5:3 Shakir

    Say: I do not find in that which has been revealed to me anything forbidden for an eater to eat of except that it be what has died of itself, or blood poured forth, or flesh of swine — for that surely is unclean — or that which is a transgression, other than (the name of) Allah having been invoked on it; but whoever is driven to necessity, not desiring nor exceeding the limit, then surely your Lord is Forgiving, Merciful. S. 6:145 Shakir

    He has only forbidden you what dies of itself and blood and flesh of swine and that over which any other name than that of Allah has been invoked, but whoever is driven to necessity, not desiring nor exceeding the limit, then surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. S. 16:115 Shakir

    Muhammad and his followers were therefore guilty of sinning against God. Iyad continues:

    When Quraysh sent ‘Urwa ibn Mas’ud to the Messenger of Allah in the year of al-Hudaybiyya, he saw the unparalleled respect which his Companions displayed towards him. Whenever he did ‘wudu they ran to get his leftover ‘wudu water and nearly fought over it. If he spat they took it with their hands and wiped it on their faces and bodies. If a hair of his fell they ran to get it. If he commanded them to do something, they ran to do his command. If he spoke, they lowered their voices in his presence. They did not stare at him due to their respect for him. When he returned to Quraysh, he said, “People of Quraysh! I have been to Chosroes in his kingdom, and Caesar in his kingdom and the Negus in his kingdom, but by Allah, I have not seen any king among his people treated anything like the way Muhammad is treated by his Companions.” …

    Anas said, “I saw the Messenger when his hair was being shaved. His companions were around him and whenever a lock fell, a man picked it up.” (Iyad, pp. 236-237)

    The sahih ahadith narrate the same thing:

    … Before embracing Islam Al-Mughira was in the company of some people. He killed them and took their property and came (to Medina) to embrace Islam. The Prophet said (to him, “As regards your Islam, I accept it, but as for the property I do not take anything of it. (As it was taken through treason). Urwa then started looking at the Companions of the Prophet. By Allah, whenever Allah’s Apostle spat, the spittle would fall in the hand of one of them (i.e. the Prophet’s companions) WHO WOULD RUB IT ON HIS FACE AND SKIN; if he ordered them they would carry his orders immediately; if he performed ablution, they would struggle to take the remaining water; and when they spoke to him, they would lower their voices and would not look at his face constantly out of respect. Urwa returned to his people and said, “O people! By Allah, I have been to the kings and to Caesar, Khosrau and An-Najashi, yet I have never seen any of them respected by his courtiers as much as Muhammad is respected by his companions. By Allah, if he spat, the spittle would fall in the hand of one of them (i.e. the Prophet’s companions) who would rub it on his face and skin; if he ordered them, they would carry out his order immediately; if he performed ablution, they would struggle to take the remaining water; and when they spoke, they would lower their voices and would not look at his face constantly out of respect.” (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 50, Number 891)

    Qadi ‘Iyad states that this veneration and worship doesn’t cease now that Muhammad is dead:

    It is just as necessary to have esteem and respect for the Prophet after his death as it were when he was alive. This means to show it whenever the Prophet, his hadith or sunna are mentioned, when anyone hears his name or anything about his life or how his family and relatives behaved. It includes respect for the People of his House (ah al-bayt) and his Companions…

    Abu Humayd said, “Abu Ja’far, the Amir al-Mu’minin, had a dispute with Malik in the Prophet’s mosque. Malik said to him, ‘Amir al-Mu’minin, do not raise your voice in this mosque. Allah taught the people how to behave by saying, “Do not raise your voices above the Prophet” (49:2) He praises people with the words, “Those who lower their voices in the presence of the Messenger of Allah.” (49:3) He censures people, saying, “Those who call you…” Respect for him when he is dead is the same as respect for him when he was alive.”

    “Abu Ja’far was humbled by this. He asked Malik, ‘Abu Abdullah, do you face qibla when you supplicate or do you face the Messenger of Allah?’ He replied, ‘Why would you turn your face from him when he is YOUR MEANS and the means of your father, Adam, to Allah on the Day of Rising? I face him and ASK HIM to intercede and Allah will grant his intercession. Allah says, “If, when you wronged yourselves, they had come to you.”‘” (4:64) (pp. 237-238)

    Here is a man who faces Muhammad’s grave when he prays, and actually prays to Muhammad in order to ask him for intercession!

    And:

    When there were many people around Malik, he was asked, “If only you would appoint someone to whom you could dictate and then he could make the people hear.” He replied, “Allah said, ‘O you who believe, do not raise your voices above the voice of the Prophet.’ (49:2) The respect due to him when he is dead is the same when he was alive.”

    Ibn Sirin used to laugh at times but when the hadiths of the Prophet were mentioned in his presence he became humble. When a hadith of the Prophet was recited, ‘Abdu’r-Rahman ibn Mahdi commanded them to be silent, saying, “Do not raise your voice above the voice of the Prophet.” He interpreted the above as meaning that the people must be silent when the Prophet’s hadiths are recited, just as if they were listening to him speaking. (p. 239)

    Praying for Muhammad and visiting his grave also violates the Holy Scriptures which prohibit believers from contacting the dead:

    “When you come into the land that the LORD your God is giving you, you shall not learn to follow the abominable practices of those nations. There shall not be found among you anyone who burns his son or his daughter as an offering, anyone who practices divination or tells fortunes or interprets omens, or a sorcerer or a charmer or a medium or a wizard or a necromancer, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the LORD. And because of these abominations the LORD your God is driving them out before you. You shall be blameless before the LORD your God, for these nations, which you are about to dispossess, listen to fortune-tellers and to diviners. But as for you, the LORD your God has not allowed you to do this.” Deuteronomy 18:9-14

    “And when they say to you, ‘Inquire of the mediums and the necromancers who chirp and mutter,’ should not a people inquire of their God? Should they inquire of the dead on behalf of the living? To the teaching and to the testimony! If they will not speak according to this word, it is because they have no dawn.” Isaiah 8:19-20

    Now what was that about you guys not being Muhammadans!

    Williams keep reposting the garbage and trash of folk like YahyaSlime and watch me obliterate it.

    Like

    • Williams you really need to insist that “Intellect” change that name since he is a great insult to intellectualism. Note how he keeps harping about what academic credentials I have EVEN THOUH MY ARTICLES ARE FILLED WITH QUOTATIONS FROM ISLAM’S GREATEST SCHOLARS TO BACK UP MY POINTS!

      And to expose this inconsistent troll why does he comment on the Bible WHEN THE MAN IS AN IGNORAMUS WHO HAS NO DEGREES IN BIBLICAL EXEGESIS, LANGUAGES ETC.!

      You see what an inconsistent troll this child is!

      Like

    • Paul’s Pal

      I do not write articles. I ask questions like how can God be man? How can 3 persons/beings be 1 person/being? That’s all. I also bring verses that Jesus said anyone who will not let him rule them be killed.

      I do defend Islam by bringing what the Quran says like “fight those who fight”, “stop fighting them if they stop fighting you” etc. That is what I do. I do not write articles on a subject I am not well qualified in like what you do.

      You are a liar and is not qualified to write articles on Islam and Christianity. Nabeel and Wood are qualified to write articles on Christianity even thought they are liars but you are not.

      Go to Zaytuna University for some Arabic and Introduction to Islam. I am sure Hamza Yusuf will not charge you for that.

      I do have some qualifications.

      Thanks

      Liked by 1 person

    • SAM YOUR ARTICLES ARE FILLED WITH GREAT QUOTATIONS FROM ISLAM’S GREATEST SCHOLARS THAT WILL BE HELPFUL AND USED WITH THE RIGHT EXEGESIS, EXPOSITION AND EXPLANATION OF THE QUOTES IN THE LIGHT OF TOTAL CONSIDERATION OF ISLAMIC THEOLOGY 😉 xox..

      Liked by 1 person

  9. Paul’s Pal

    You said;
    Williams, please stop accusing me of cutting and pasting when I clearly stated that I am quoting from my own articles and rebuttals. So I am simply copying and pasting stuff that I personally wrote down and which took me a lot of time to produce. Thank you.

    I say;
    What academic qualification do you have? What authority to you have? to be writing articles about Islam and Christianity? You can do that to Christian site but not Islamic site.

    Listen to what our scholars look like.

    You idiot Paul’s Pal, who has no qualification and no vocational or technical qualification either to keep lying to Christians for their money. Shame on you.

    Thanks.

    Like

  10. 1) If Jesus is God then he has all the attributes and qualities of YHWH
    2) YHWH is said to be eternal and without beginning or end
    3) If YHWH is eternal and without beginning or end the YHWH can’t die
    4)Jesus did die
    5)Therefore Jesus isn’tYHWH

    Am I missing something? Btw, I am not a Muslim.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Jason

      Thanks. Ken Temple, one of our Christian friend here agreed with me that Jesus does not have the attribute to generate the Son like the Father is generating the Son. So, Jesus does not have all the attributes of YHWH. I do not understand why Ken still remains a Christians by accepting Jesus does not possess all the attributes of YHWH?

      Another Christian friend madmanna, agreed with me that if God is One and possesses all His attributes, then no person and no one must possess all His attributes. He also agreed with me that One God generating another God = 2 Gods.

      I do not see why madmanna also still remains a Christian. Worshiping 2 Gods which is against the Bible and it is polytheism or in the case of Ken worshiping Jesus who does not have all the attributes of God(YHWH).

      Thanks.

      Liked by 1 person

    • perfectly sound reasoning.

      Like

    • So then Trinitarians end up in a bad dilemma,yes?

      1) Jesus died for the sins of the world
      2) God can’t die
      3)Therefore,either Jesus died, and thus isn’t God
      Or
      4)Jesus didn’t die and there is no sacrifice for the forgiveness of sin

      Either way the Trinitarian is stuck on one horn or the other.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Anything that comes from a Muslim is NOT I repeat NOT sound reasoning.

      Intellect please explain how “attribute to generate the Son like the Father is generating the Son” is an attribute of Divinity?

      Like

    • spoken like a true bigot Bobby

      Like

    • This is pre-emptive comment to what Ken Temple will say with regards to my comments about him and madmanna.

      My friend Ken will always insist, Jesus has 2 natures God-Man even though there is no clear statement from the whole Bible that says Jesus has “2 natures”.

      Fully God and Fully man is an impossibility. The Bible agrees to that. A fully man will die whether death means cease to exist or not. It is not about what death means but it is about God will not die. God will not die according to Bible so God cannot be Fully man according to the Bible because God will not die but man will die.

      Christians(Trinitarians) will insist we must accept what they believe i.e. God can become a man and Jesus has 2 natures. I will tell them, that is o.k. so we must accept the other God-Men like Emperor Haile Selaissie, Sai Baba and so many God-Men as well because that is the Trinitarian believe in that God can become a man.

      Jay Smith at speakers corner with Shabir accepts God can become fully GOAT, astagfurillah. May God have mercy on Jay and other Trinitarians who think God can become a man, goat, worm etc. God in His divine majesty cannot become something that will disqualify Him to be God. It is an impossibility for God to become fully man.

      We do not believe God can become fully man and die for someone’s sin. Accepting that possibility will open the can of Gods as Dr. Shabbir Ally told Nabeel Quraish and his Christian audience.

      If that possibility is there, then God will not be wicked to reveal himself to Christians alone. God loves and He revealed himself to Hindus in the form of Sai Baba, Emperor Haile Selaissie to Rastafarians and even Ali to some Shite.

      It is unacceptable to accept God can become a man, goat, worm or die or has 2 natures in fully God and fully man.

      Thanks.

      Like

  11. Who here reads Shamoun’s long cut-and-paste jobs?

    Liked by 1 person

    • Christians used to read Sam Shamoun’s shit, but I bet they have stopped, so he wants market by advertising them here.

      Over my dead body to read articles from an uneducated person who is not a prophet and is not qualified in the field he is writing the article.

      Thanks.

      Like

    • I think its fair to say: absolutely no one.

      Like

    • At the surface his writings looks impressive but once you spend time to read it is just irrelevant mendacious ramblings usually followed by skewed conclusion.

      Liked by 1 person

    • You should since you have no problem reading Muhammad’s long cut-and-paste jobs since most of his Quran is nothing but copy and paste from the myths, lies and absurdities which ignoramuses like you believed were historical. Don’t believe me? Just as Muhammad Asad: http://answeringislam.net/authors/shamoun/rebuttals/williams/quran_fables.html

      Like

    • Paul’s Pal. Modern scholarship of the Quran is moving away from the borrowing theory. Try to keep up you uneducated prick.

      Like

    • oh dear here we go again..typical bogus cheap comments from shammy sham the mischief maker lol..

      no we shouldn’t shammy sham since you have no problem reading and believing the fables and myths in the Gospels such as the mythical Jesus I AM sayings conjectured in the stories of Jesus in the GJohn and mythical dead rising and walking out of the tombs in the fables narratives in GMatthew …all myths, lies and absurdities which ignorapolytheists like you believed were historical…lolol.😂 Consistency and integrity in reasoning , therefore, demand that you shammy sham apply this same type of criticism to these specific Gospel stories and conclude that such tales are nothing more than legends and myths which bogus authors tried to pass off as history. It seems that neither these authors nor their ‘holy spiri’ could tell the difference between fairy-tales and actual history….

      and btw both M Asad and Y Ali commentaries have received some criticisms in reference to their comments and opinions about certain Quranics verses… the deficiencies are their opinions not the Quranic Text😉

      Like

    • The Gospel is nothing but myths, lies and absurdities which ignorpolytheists like you sammy believed were historical. Don’t believe me? example?..Just ask NT scholar and shammy sams Pal Dr. Licona who wrote:

      “It can forthrightly be admitted that the data surrounding what happened to Jesus is fragmentary and *could possibly be mixed with legend*… We may also be reading poetic language or *legend* at certain points, such as Matthew’s report of the raising of some dead saints at Jesus’ death “(Mt 27:51-54)

      “There is somewhat of a consensus among contemporary scholars that the Gospels belong to the genre of Greco-Roman biography (bios). Bioi offered the ancient biography great flexibility for rearranging material and inventing speeches in order to communicate the teachings, philosophy, and political beliefs of the subject, and they *often included legend*. Because bios was a flexible genre, it is often difficult to determine where history ends and* legend begins*.” 😘

      Licona, Michael. The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2010. 185-186.

      Like

    • wait wait sammy!!!…one more darling from your NT scholar Dr.Licona..lol…Dr Licona claims to believe in the general reliability of the Gospel narratives “even if “some embellishments are present.” He rightly states, “A possible candidate for embellishment is John 18:4-6” when Jesus claimed “I am he” in John 8:58, where the guards “drew back and fell on the ground.”!!…😘 lol…

      *Licona, Michael. The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach.

      Like

    • As stated earlier shammy kindly apply consistency and integrity in your reasoning , and therefore, i command that you shammy sham apply this same type of criticism to these specific Gospel stories and conclude that such tales are nothing more than legends and myths which bogus authors tried to pass off as ‘history’..lolol… It seems that neither these authors nor their ‘holy spirit’ could tell the difference between fairy-tales, legends and actual history….😎

      Like

  12. apologies for this off-top, but can anyone say whether Walid Saleh is a Muslim or not (Lebanese Christian)?

    Like

    • He wrote an article on the concept of death in the Quran and said in the conclusion that he would like to be buried as a Muslim.

      Like

  13. That’s Right

    You said;

    Thats Right

    July 3, 2016 • 12:19 am

    Anything that comes from a Muslim is NOT I repeat NOT sound reasoning.

    Intellect please explain how “attribute to generate the Son like the Father is generating the Son” is an attribute of Divinity?

    I say;

    Thank you for giving me the opportunity to explain what an attribute is. First we will go to the dictionary as every language is agreed upon a dictionary of that language. You can use Greek to correct me. I am using English language.

    noun
    noun: attribute; plural noun: attributes
    ˈatrəˌbyo͞ot/
    1.
    a quality or feature regarded as a characteristic or inherent part of someone or something.
    “flexibility and mobility are the key attributes of our army”
    synonyms: quality, characteristic, trait, feature, element, aspect, property, sign, hallmark, mark, distinction; informalX factor
    “he has all the attributes of a top player

    Source: https://www.google.ca/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=what%20is%20attribute

    My dear friend That’s Right, attribute has so many synonyms and it means quality, feature and characteristics.
    Do you deny one of God characteristics/quality/feature is not do die? Do you deny this?

    The Bible said God is One.

    That one God has all His attributes. madmanna agreed with me that, if God is One and possesses all His attributes, then no person/being/man/woman/God-Man will possess ALL HIS(YHWH’S) attributes.

    Ken Temple agreed with me that the one of the Father’s attribute is to generate the Son. Because they are only 3 persons, the Son cannot generate the Father because the Father is not generated/created.

    So, the Son does not possess ALL THE ATTRIBUTES of the Father and therefore the Son(Jesus Christ) is not God.

    Take note: God is one and possesses ALL HIS ATTRIBUTES AS ONE GOD. Jesus does not have the attribute to generate the Son but only the Father has and so Jesus does not possess all the attributes of God(YHWH). Jesus does not know the hour but God knows i.e. The Father knows and so Jesus is not God.

    Thanks.

    Like

    • Intellect thank you for posting the definition about what an Attribute is, and yes I do agree that God has attributes. But that does nothing to address my question. So I will repeat it.

      How is the “attribute to generate the Son” an attribute of Divinity?

      Like

  14. That’s Right

    You said;

    That’s Right

    July 3, 2016 • 11:15 am

    Intellect thank you for posting the definition about what an Attribute is, and yes I do agree that God has attributes. But that does nothing to address my question. So I will repeat it.

    How is the “attribute to generate the Son” an attribute of Divinity

    I say;
    Thanks again, for engaging in a respectful dialog. That will send us somewhere for at least respect each other while asking questions.

    I did not say “attribute to generate the Son” is divinity. What I explained is God is One according to the Bible. Agreed. You cannot deny this one.

    That one God has all His attribute. Because He is One He possesses all His attributes. One of his attributes according to Ken Temple is to generate a Son(Jesus Christ) i.e. the Father who is God generating the Son( Jesus Christ). Because the persons of the Trinity are LIMITED to 3 persons, so the Son cannot generate the Father because the Father is not generated but the Son is generated.

    So, the Son does not possess the ALL THE ATTRIBUTES OF GOD i.e. to generate a Son or himself and so he is not God. madmanna agreed with me that if God is One and possesses ALL HIS ATTRIBUTES no one/person/being/God-Man/Jesus etc. can possess ALL HIS(GOD) attributes.

    Again, it is only a divine being that can generate a Son who is also a divine Son from eternity, so it is an attribute of divinity. I am not a divine Son from eternity and you are not so we are not divine sons from eternity.

    Can you have an attribute of generating a son who is a divine Son from eternity?

    No.

    No one except a divine being and the one being generated/created cannot be God because no one generates/creates God

    Thanks.

    Like

    • Intellect again I have to ask

      Why do you think that “One of his attributes according to Ken Temple is to generate a Son(Jesus Christ) i.e.” Is an Attribute of God? In other words why must the son posses this Attribute in order to be God?

      Like

  15. Paul’s Pal

    You said;

    Paul’s Pal

    July 3, 2016 • 1:36 pm

    You should since you have no problem reading Muhammad’s long cut-and-paste jobs since most of his Quran is nothing but copy and paste from the myths, lies and absurdities which ignoramuses like you believed were historical. Don’t believe me? Just as Muhammad Asad:

    I say;
    Very foolish, idiot and useless Sam Shamoun. Who decides what myths are? What is the criteria you use to call some stories myths? from your Church Fathers? Idiot, do you think everyone believed in your Church Fathers.

    What is the proof God came down to tell the Church Fathers what a myth in His stories are? Your criteria is not anyone’s criteria.

    The criteria for Muslims, Jews and Christians is “God is One” not 3 persons 1 God, God-Man, 2 natures, hypostatic union etc. those are myths and lies but not some one who preached God of Abraham is One, Only and Alone and He must be worshiped. That is what Prophet Mohammed preached and Jews from that time till today accept Mohammed message and some convert but others hold him in high esteem.

    Except satan like you Sam Shamoun, the Christians we deal with here respect prophet Mohammed.

    Thanks.

    Liked by 1 person

  16. “The fact that mention of the Prophet is directly connected to mention of Allah also shows that obedience to the Prophet is connected to obedience to Allah and his name to Allah’s name. Allah says, “Obey Allah and His Messenger” (2:32) and “Believe in Allah and His Messenger.” (4:136) Allah joins them together using the conjunction wa WHICH IS THE CONJUNCTION OF PARTNERSHIP. IT IS NOT PERMITTED TO USE THIS CONJUNCTION IN CONNECTION WITH ALLAH IN THE CASE OF ANYONE EXCEPT THE PROPHET.”

    These articles of his are bad! Mixing primary, secondary and tertiary sources without any historical methodology(none of the points raised lead to the conclusion anyway). After all, if we are talking about his understanding of polytheism we are begging the question and if we are trying to say the Muslims are internally inconsistent with their own definition we have horrid non sequiturs.

    This point, in his copy and paste posts (he wrote these articles so he has the right to do it ! There you go) is so bad that I had to mention it. Let’s use some set logic. We take the conjunction as an indicator of those that are a members of a set (“conjunction of partnership”) in this case. The set is defined as those whom we obey.

    Well does not that not follow if the Messenger of God is inspired by God himself ?

    How would that make the Prophet divine ? In fact how does that prove that the Prophet is even taking on attributes of God independently and without authority ?

    Let’s take it sequentially. This would imply a conditional of sort. You must obey God first and then after that you can obey his Prophet. Ingenious here. If that is the case what recourse do you have to God except through his Prophet ? Strange conditional here ! (I have to think of alternative counterfactuals here hmm).

    Thanks for this one. This is really a bad polemic !

    Like

    • lol sammy articles on this issue was so absurd i actually was laughing out loud lol…has to be one of worst mode of argumentation and compilation erroneusly attempted by Sam ive read recently!..absolutely feeble!😉…wish i had the time and access to a PC to directly engage and dismantle his falsehood here…unfortunately im replying on my phone to write quick replies here..wont have access until a few weeks after ramadan…but ill eventually get to those bogus articles and expose Sam’s falsehoods…😉

      Like

    • You know there is something drastically wrong when a follower of Muhammad pretends to appeal to logic to make his case!

      Since black stonian has decided to wax eloquent, in order to pretend that he knows a thing or two about logic, I can’t help but respond. First, note that the stone smoocher only quoted a part of the citation I gave. Let’s see what he conveniently left out and why:
      “The fact that mention of the Prophet is directly connected to mention of Allah also shows that obedience to the Prophet is connected to obedience to Allah and His name to Allah’s name. Allah says, ‘Obey Allah and His Messenger’ (2:32) and ‘Believe in Allah and His Messenger.’ (4:136) Allah joins them together using the conjunction WA WHICH IS THE CONJUNCTION OF PARTNERSHIP. IT IS NOT PERMITTED TO USE THIS CONJUNCTION IN CONNECTION WITH ALLAH IN THE CASE OF ANYONE EXCEPT THE PROPHET.

      “Hudhayfa said that the Prophet said, ‘None of you should say, “What Allah wills and (wa) so-and-so wills.” Rather say, “What Allah wills.” Then stop and say, “So-and-so wills.”’

      “Al-Khattabi said, ‘The Prophet has guided you to correct behaviour in putting the will of Allah before the will of others. He chose “then” (thumma) which implies sequence and deference as opposed to “and” (wa) WHICH IMPLIES PARTNERSHIP.’

      “Something similar is mentioned in another hadith. Someone was speaking in the presence of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and said, ‘Whoever obeys Allah and His Messenger has been rightly guided, and whoever rebels against them both (joining them together by using the dual form)…’ The Prophet said to him, ‘What a bad speaker you are! Get up! [Or he said: Get out!]’
      “Abu Sulayman said, ‘He disliked the two names being joined together in that way BECAUSE IT IMPLIES EQUALITY.’…” (Qadi ‘Iyad, Kitab Ash-shifa bi ta’rif huquq al-Mustafa (Healing by the recognition of the Rights of the Chosen One), translation by Aisha Abdarrahman Bewley [Madinah Press, Inverness, Scotland, U.K.; third reprint 1991, paperback], Part One. Allah’s great estimation of the worth of his Prophet expressed in both word and action, Chapter One. Allah’s praise of him and his great esteem for him, Section 1. Concerning praise of him and his numerous excellent qualities, p. 8; capital emphasis ours)

      The full quotations highlights the fact that the conjunction is used to affirm EQUALITY, as well as PARTNERSHIP. Therefore, his claim that Muhammad was inspired which somehow justifies obeying him as one obeys Allah is nothing more than a red herring and confuses a question of fact with a question of relevance, SINCE THE FACT STILL REMAINS THAT THIS STILL ENDS UP MAKING MUHAMMAD EQUAL TO HIS FALSE GOD! In fact, the true definition of Islam isn’t simply surrender/submission to Allah, but perfect/complete surrender to Muhammad’s every whim and desires!

      But no, by thy Lord! they will not believe till they make thee the judge regarding the disagreement between them, then they shall find IN THEMSELVES no impediment touching THY verdict, BUT SHALL SURRENDER IN FULL SUBMISSION. S. 4:65 Arberry

      But no! by your Lord! they do not believe (in reality) until they make you a judge of that which has become a matter of disagreement among them, and then do not find any straitness IN THEIR HEARTS AS TO WHAT YOU HAVE DECIDED AND SUBMIT WITH ENTIRE SUBMISSION. Shakir

      Here we are told clearly and plainly that a Muslim must fully surrender to Muhammad with a complete submission!

      Lest Muslims accuse of us distorting the meaning of this specific citation here is how some of Islam’s renowned commentators interpreted this reference:

      But no, (fa-la, the la is extra) by your Lord! They will not believe until they make you judge over what has broken out, has become mixed up, between them and find in themselves no inhibition, [no] constraint or doubt, regarding what you decide, but submit, [but] comply with your ruling, in full submission, without objection. (Tafsir al-Jalalayn; bold and underline emphasis ours)

      The following Sufi Muslim author writes:

      When the best generation of humankind ever to walk the earth realized that the Lord of the Heaven was addressing them directly with His timeless Speech in the language which they had mastered better than any human nation ever mastered a language, they realized that not only had Allah Almighty deputized the worthiest of them as the carrier of the final Message to humanity, but He had also made belief in that most honorable, most distinguished, and most accomplished Messenger – our liege-lord Muhammad – an integral condition of belief in Allah Himself by saying repeatedly “Believe in Allah AND the Messenger.”

      They also heard Allah again and again command them to “Obey Allah AND the Messenger.” They also realized that Allah Almighty stressed to them that this Messenger was their paramount model of behavior and of belief in Allah and the Last Day. They also heard and understood it meant they had to follow him and love him before they could claim to follow and love Allah.

      They further understood the required levels of following the Prophet properly and truly on which one’s actual belief in Allah Most High depended: {But nay, by your Lord! they will not believe (in truth) until they make you judge of what is in dispute between them}. But to make the Prophet judge is not enough, this must be done without any mental reservation toward the Prophet and his decision: {and find within themselves no dislike of that which you decide}. Even this unalloyed acceptance of the Prophet’s judgment is not enough, there must be full embrace of the heart, mind and soul for the Prophet: {and submit with full submission} (4:65)! (Gibril Fouad Haddad, The Story of Hadith – On Obeying, Following, Imitating, And Loving Prophet Muhammad; bold and underline emphasis ours)

      And to show what happens to any Muslim who refuses to fully submit to
      Muhammad here are the comments of renowned Sunni exegete Ibn Kathir:

      One Does not Become a Believer Unless He Refers to the Messenger for Judgment AND SUBMITS TO HIS DECISIONS
      Allah said…

      Allah swears by His Glorious, Most Honorable Self, that no one shall attain faith until he refers to the Messenger for judgment IN ALL MATTERS. Thereafter, whatever the Messenger commands, is the plain truth that must be submitted to inwardly and outwardly. Allah said…

      meaning: they adhere to your judgment, and thus do not feel any hesitation over your decision, and they submit to it inwardly and outwardly. They submit to the Prophet’s decision with total submission without any rejection, denial or dispute. Al-Bukhari recorded that `Urwah said, “Az-Zubayr quarreled with a man about a stream which both of them used for irrigation. Allah’s Messenger said to Az-Zubayr…

      <> The Ansari became angry and said, `O Allah’s Messenger! Is it because he is your cousin?’ On that, the face of Allah’s Messenger changed color (because of anger) and said…

      <> So, Allah’s Messenger gave Az-Zubayr his full right when the Ansari made him angry. Before that, Allah’s Messenger had given a generous judgment, beneficial for Az-Zubayr and the Ansari. Az-Zubayr said, `I think the following verse was revealed concerning that case…

      ’” Another reason in his Tafsir, Al-Hafiz Abu Ishaq Ibrahim bin `Abdur-Rahman bin Ibrahim bin Duhaym recorded that Damrah narrated that two men took their dispute to the Prophet, and he gave a judgment to the benefit of whoever among them had the right. The person who lost the dispute said, “I do not agree.” The other person asked him, “What do you want then?” He said, “Let us go to Abu Bakr As-Siddiq.” They went to Abu Bakr and the person who won the dispute said, “We went to the Prophet with our dispute and he issued a decision in my favor.” Abu Bakr said, “Then the decision is that which the Messenger of Allah issued.” The person who lost the dispute still rejected the decision and said, “Let us go to `Umar bin Al-Khattab.” When they went to `Umar, the person who won the dispute said, “We took our dispute to the Prophet and he decided in my favor, but this man refused to submit to the decision.” `Umar bin Al-Khattab asked the second man and he concurred. `Umar went to his house and emerged from it holding aloft his sword. He struck the head of the man who rejected the Prophet’s decision with the sword and killed him. Consequently, Allah revealed…

      . (Tafsir Ibn Kathir; capital)

      A companion of Muhammad is struck down in cold blood for simply refusing to fully submit to his prophet’s decision!

      So what was that about logic? 😉

      I have more for this pseudo-intellect in the next post.

      Like

    • Here is the second part of my response to stonian kisser.

      As far as wa is concerned, this conjunction isn’t merely used in terms of obedience, since it is also used in respect to Muhammad being Allah’s partner in fame, status, love and adoration.

      Muhammad made it mandatory for his followers to love him more than anything, even more than their own lives, loving him just as much as they do Allah:

      Say, “If your fathers, your sons, your brothers, your spouses, your clan, and money which you have gathered, a trade in which you fear a decline, and homes which you enjoy; if these are dearer to you than God AND His messenger and striving in His cause, then wait until God brings His decision. God does not guide the wicked people.” S. 9:24 QRT

      Narrated Anas:
      The Prophet said, “Whoever possesses the following three qualities will have the sweetness (delight) of faith:
      1. The one to whom Allah AND His Apostle becomes dearer than anything else.
      2. Who loves a person and he loves him only for Allah’s sake.
      3. Who hates to revert to Atheism (disbelief) as he hates to be thrown into the fire.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 2, Number 15)

      Narrated Anas:
      Allah’s Apostle said, “Whoever possesses the (following) three qualities will have the sweetness of faith (1): The one to whom Allah AND His Apostle becomes dearer than anything else; (2) Who loves a person and he loves him only for Allah’s Sake; (3) who hates to revert to atheism (disbelief) as he hates to be thrown into the Fire.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 85, Number 74)

      With the foregoing in perspective I now challenge stone kisser to quote a single Quranic text where any true prophet grouped himself with God as an equal object of love and devotion. Cite a single passage where someone other than your false prophet demanded that the people love him and God more than anything else in existence.

      To make matters worse, Allah also made Muhammad’s pleasures/desires equal to his own>

      They swear to you by Allah in order to please you, while Allah AND his Apostle are most entitled that they should seek HIS pleasure (yurduhu). S. 9:62

      The word yurduhu is singular and yet, as the context makes it clear, it is used in relation to a dual subject, namely Allah and Muhammad his apostle. In other words, if this is not simply yet another grammatical error, then the singular is presumably being employed in order to group Muhammad and his deity together in their pleasure, in what pleases them.

      This is reflected in the way some of the English versions of the Quran translate this particular text:

      “… while God AND His messenger IS more worthy to be pleased if they were those who acknowledge.” Quran: Reformist Translation (QRT)

      Notice here the use of the singular verb is, as opposed to are.

      “… the while it is God and His Apostle WHOSE pleasure they should seek above all else…” Muhammad Asad

      “… But it is more just that they should please God and the Apostle…” N. J. Dawood

      To make matters worse, it is clear from other passages that Allah himself seems to have gone out of his way to make sure that his messenger was satisfied and happy. For instance, in order to please him Allah made sure to make Muhammad rich:

      Your Lord will give you and you will be pleased. Did he not find you an orphan and He sheltered you? He found you lost, and He guided you? He found you in need, so He gave you riches? S. 93:5-8 QRT

      Did He not find you poor and enrich you? Dawood

      Allah also changed the prayer direction just so that Muhammad would be happy:

      We have seen thee [O Prophet] often turn thy face towards heaven [for guidance]: and now We shall indeed make thee turn in prayer in a direction which will fulfil thy desire. Turn, then, thy face towards the Inviolable House of Worship; and wherever you all may be, turn your faces towards it [in prayer]. S. 2:144 Asad

      “Many a time have We seen you turn your face towards the sky. We will make you turn towards a kiblah that will please you…” Dawood

      Allah even allowed Muhammad to have more wives than his own followers, and permitted him to have any woman that offered herself freely without having to pay a dowry. Muhammad was also given the freedom to visit whichever wife he so desired, and even postpone seeing any one of them if he so wished:

      O prophet, We have made lawful for you the wives to whom you have already given their dowry, and the one who is committed to you by oath, as granted to you by God, and the daughters of your father’s brothers, and the daughters of your father’s sisters, and the daughters of your mother’s brothers, and the daughters of your mother’s sisters, of whom they have emigrated with you. Also, the acknowledging woman who had decreed herself to the prophet, the prophet may marry her if he wishes, as a privilege given only to you and not to those who acknowledge. We have already decreed their rights in regard to their spouses and those who are still dependants. This is to spare you any hardship. God is Forgiver, Compassionate. You may postpone whom you will of them, and you may receive whom you will. Whomsoever you seek of those whom you have set aside then there is no sin upon you. Such is best that they may be comforted and not grieve, and may all be pleased with what you give them. God knows what is in your hearts. God is Knowledgeable, Compassionate. S. 33:50-51 QRT

      Allah’s willingness to satisfy and please Muhammad didn’t go unnoticed by his child bride:

      Narrated Aisha: I used to look down upon those ladies who had given themselves to Allah’s Apostle and I used to say, “Can a lady give herself (to a man)?” But when Allah revealed: “You (O Muhammad) can postpone (the turn of) whom you will of them (your wives), and you may receive any of them whom you will; and there is no blame on you if you invite one whose turn you have set aside (temporarily).” (33.51) I said (to the Prophet), “I feel that your Lord hastens in fulfilling your desire and wishes.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number 311)

      OUCH!

      Now what was that about logic? ROFL!

      Still not done with polytarian since I have more in the next post.

      Like

    • This is my third post to paganarian. Note what this idolater wrote:

      “How would that make the Prophet divine ? In fact how does that prove that the Prophet is even taking on attributes of God independently and without authority ?”

      Note the straw man argument here, and the red herring. But this is typical of one who follows an illiterate pagan masquerading as a prophet whose god boasts of being a greater deceiver than Satan himself.

      First, I challenge him to cite a single Quranic verse which says that it is shirk to associate a partner or equal with Allah independently from the islamic deity or without his authority. Better yet, please cite a text which says that it is not shirk for a Muslim to ascribe a partner to Allah as long as s/he believes and affirms that the partner in question is totally dependent upon Allah and has been granted such status by Allah’s authority.

      Secondly, it is apparent that this neophyte hasn’t bothered studying his own sources (as corrupt and satanic as they are) since, had he done so, then he would have been aware that Muhammad attributed to himself some of the very unique names of his false god:

      A messenger has come to you from yourselves, concerned over your suffering, anxious over you, towards those who acknowledge he is kind, compassionate (raoof raheemun). S. 9:128

      INDEED, there has come unto you [O mankind] an Apostle from among yourselves: heavily weighs – upon him [the thought] that you might suffer [in the life to come]; full of concern for you [is he, and] full of compassion and mercy towards the believers.

      The words raoof raheemun appear only five other times, and always in relation to the Islamic deity:

      God has pardoned the prophet and the emigrants and the supporters that followed him in the darkest moment, even though the hearts of some of them nearly deviated, but then He pardoned them. He is towards them Kind, Compassionate. S. 9:117 QRT

      All this is from God ‘s favor upon you and His mercy. God is Kind, Compassionate. S. 24:20 QRT – cf. Q. 16:7, 47; 59:10

      Interestingly, there are certain Muslim sources which candidly admit that the text of Q. 9:128 explicitly testifies that Allah has given Muhammad some of his own divine characteristics:

      “… the objectification of Muhammad reaches its peak in Surah 9, which is indubitably one of the latest Madinan surahs. It repeatedly refers to ‘Allah and His Messenger’ (9.1, 3, 7, 16, 24, 29 etc.) and the penultimate ayah (9.128) describes the Messenger as ‘all-pitying all-merciful’, qualities which are elsewhere ascribed to Allah.” (Neal Robinson, Discovering the Qur’an: A Contemporary Approach to a Veiled Text, 2nd edition, [Georgetown University Press, Washington, D.C. 2003], p. 244)

      And:

      One of the men of knowledge, Al-Husayn ibn al-Fadl, said, “He honored him with two of His own names: the compassionate and the merciful (rauf, rahim).” The same point is made in another ayat: “Allah was kind to the believers when He sent among them a Messenger from among themselves.” (3:164)…

      Jafar ibn Muhammad [as-Sadiq] said, “Allah knew that His creatures would not be capable of pure obedience to Him, so He told them this in order that they would realize that they would never be able to achieve absolute purity in serving Him. Between Himself and them He placed one of their own species, CLOTHING HIM IN HIS OWN ATTRIBUTES OF COMPASSION AND MERCY. He brought him out as a truthful ambassador to creation and made it such that when someone obeys him, they are obeying Allah, and when someone agrees with him, they are agreeing with Allah.” Allah says: “Whoever obeys the Messenger has obeyed Allah.” (4:80)

      As-Samarqandi explains that the words a mercy to all the worlds mean for both the jinn and mankind. It is also said that it means for all creation. He is a mercy to the believers by guiding them, a mercy to the hypocrites by granting them security from being killed, and a mercy to the unbelievers by deferring their punishment. Ibn Abbas said, “He is a mercy to the believers and also to the unbelievers since they are safe from what befell the other communities who cried lies.” It is related that the Prophet said to Jibril, “Has any of this mercy touched you?” He replied, “Yes, I used to have fear about what would happen to me, but now I feel safe because of the way Allah praised me when He said, ‘Possessing power, secure with the Lord of the Throne, obeyed, then trusty.’” (81:21) (Qadi Iyad Ibn Musa al-Yahsubi, Kitab Ash-shifa bi ta’rif huquq al-Mustafa (Healing by the recognition of the Rights of the Chosen One), translated by Aisha Abdarrahman Bewley [Madinah Press, Inverness, Scotland, U.K., third reprint 1991, paperback], Part One. Allah’s great estimation of the worth of his Prophet expressed in both word and action, Chapter One. Allah’s praise of him and his great esteem for him, Section 1. Concerning praise of him and his numerous excellent qualities, pp. 4-6; capital emphasis ours)

      Again:

      Section 14. On Allah honouring the Prophet WITH SOME OF HIS OWN BEAUTIFUL NAMES and describing him with some of His own Sublime Qualities

      … He has preferred our Prophet Muhammad since He has adorned him with a wealth of His names in His Mighty Book and on the tongues of His Prophets…

      One of His names is the Praiseworthy (al-Hamid). This means the One who is praised because He praises Himself and His slaves praise him. It also means the One who praises Himself and praises acts of obedience. The Prophet is called Muhammad and Ahmad. Muhammad means praised, and that is how his name occurs in the Zabur of David. Ahmad means the greatest of those who give praise and the most sublime of those who are praised. Hassan ibn Thabit indicated this when he said:

      It is taken for him from His own name in order to exalt him.

      The One with the Throne is praised (Mahmud) and he is Muhammad.

      Two of Allah’s names are the Compassionate, the Merciful (ar-Ra’uf, ar-Rahim). They are similar in meaning. He calls him by them in His Book when He says, “Compassionate, merciful to the believers.” (9.128) (Ibid., Chapter Three. On The Sound And Well-Known Traditions Related About The Immense Value Placed On Him By His Lord, His Exalted Position And His Nobility In This World And The Next, pp. 126-127; capital emphasis ours)

      Once again, what was that about logic? 😉

      The woes of this stonian are just beginning. Check out my next post.

      Like

    • In this fourth post, I am going to show that the conjuction wa is used to join Allah in his fame, worship and bounties.

      To begin with, the Quran identifies Muhammad as the very voice of his god!

      O you who have believed, obey Allah AND His Messenger and do not turn from HIM (‘anhu) while you hear [his order]. S. 8:20 Sahih International

      The Arabic word anhu is a 3rd person masculine singular object pronoun, even though the passage expressly mentions two objects, namely Allah and his messenger. As such, it is unclear whether the pronoun refers back to the nearest antecedent, e.g. Muhammad, or whether it is actually pointing back to Allah himself. It would have therefore been more correct to employ a dual pronoun i.e. “and turn not from them,” in order to avoid such ambiguity.

      However, it may be the case that Muhammad deliberately employed the singular pronoun in order to emphasize the fact that to obey him is the same as obeying Allah, since his commands are Allah’s commands and vice-versa. This in turn means that Muhammad is the human voice of his deity, a fact which is further confirmed by the next verse:

      O you who have believed, respond to Allah AND to the Messenger when HE calls you (da’akum) to that which gives you life. And know that Allah intervenes between a man and his heart and that to Him you will be gathered. S. 8:24 Sahih International

      The Arabic term da’akum is a 3rd person masculine singular perfect verb, despite the fact that the passage is an exhortation to respond to the call of both Allah and Muhammad. Grammatically, it would have been more correct to employ a dual verb “they call you.”

      As it stands, the singular must be seen as another attempt by Muhammad to place himself on the level of deity by making his calling to the believers virtually the same as Allah calling out to them to hear and obey. This not only associates Muhammad with his lord, but also makes him out to be identical to Allah, e.g. Allah’s call is Muhammad’s call and Muhammad’s call is Allah’s call since they are basically one and the same.

      This also explains why answering Muhammad’s call takes precedence and priority over prayer itself, just as the following tradition shows:

      Narrated Abu Said bin Al-Mu’alla:
      While I was praying in the Mosque, Allah’s Apostle called me but I did not respond to him. Later I said, “O Allah’s Apostle! I was praying.” He said, “Didn’t Allah say—‘Give your response to Allah (by obeying Him) and to His Apostle when he calls you?’” (8.24)…” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number 1)

      Instead of commending the man for worshiping Allah, Muhammad actually chides his companion for not setting aside his prayers in order to beckon to his prophet’s call. Muhammad even goes as far as to cite Q. 8:24 to prove that the Quran itself testifies that immediately responding to his call is more important than praying to Allah. This provides irrefutable proof that a Muslim’s relationship to Muhammad takes priority over his relationship to Allah.

      Now which Muslim would dare say that Muhammad did not understand the meaning of Q. 8:24? Which Muslim would want to claim that Muhammad misused this verse and sinned against his lord by behaving in an arrogant and blasphemous way, ascribing to himself a position that the Quran does not give to him?

      In any case, this narration shows that Muhammad placed himself on the same level as his own god, if not actually even higher than the Muslim deity. At the very least, it shows that Muhammad’s calling is virtually identical with the very voice (in fact, the human voice!) of Allah himself.
      Thus, to beckon to the Muhammad’s summons is to obey the call of Allah since to hear the sound of Muhammad’s voice is to listen to Allah himself, just as the following verse demonstrates:

      He who obeys the Messenger (Muhammad), has indeed obeyed Allah, but he who turns away, then we have not sent you (O Muhammad) as a watcher over them. S. 4:80 Hilali-Khan

      This explains why the Quran groups the two together through the use of singular pronouns. It basically comes down to Muhammad making himself out to be the human image and representation of his deity!

      In these next examples, we see Allah making Muhammad his partner in dispensing grace:

      If only they had been content with what God AND His Apostle (Allahu WA’rasooluhu) gave them, and had said, “Sufficient unto us is God! God AND His Apostle will soon GIVE us of His bounty (Allahu min fadlihi WA‘rasooluhu): to God do we turn our hopes!” (that would have been the right course). S. 9:59 Y. Ali

      They swear by Allah that they did not speak, and certainly they did speak, the word of unbelief, and disbelieved after their Islam, and they had determined upon what they have not been able to effect, and they did not find fault except because Allah AND His Apostle ENRICHED them out of His grace (Allahu WA’rasooluhu min fadlihi); therefore if they repent, it will be good for them; and if they turn back, Allah will chastise them with a painful chastisement in this world and the hereafter, and they shall not have in the land any guardian or a helper. S. 9:74 Shakir

      As if the blasphemies couldn’t get any worse, there are narrations which not only claim that Muhammad is an essential of Islamic unitarianism (more like satanism), and not only is his name written on Allah’s throne and everywhere in paradise, but that he is also the reason why Adam was created!

      “… He coupled his name WITH HIS OWN NAME, and his pleasure WITH HIS OWN PLEASURE. He made him one of the two pillars of tawhid.” (Ibid., Chapter One: Allah’s praise of his Prophet, Section 9. Concerning the marks of honour given to the Prophet in Sura al-Fath, p. 27; capital emphasis ours)

      And:

      “Ibn ‘Abbas said, ‘WRITTEN ON THE DOOR OF THE GARDEN IS: I am Allah. There is no god but Me. MUHAMMAD IS THE MESSENGER OF ALLAH. I will not punish anyone who says that.’” (Ibid., Chapter Three: On the sound and well-known traditions related about the immense value placed on him by his Lord, his exalted position and his nobility in this world and the next, Section 1. What has come concerning his place with his Lord, the Mighty and Majestic, his being chosen, his high renown, his being preferred, his mastery over the children of Adam, the prerogative of the ranks he was given in this world and the blessing of his excellent name, p. 90; capital emphasis ours)

      Certain narrations go so far as to claim that the reason Allah forgave Adam for sinning against him by eating from the forbidden tree is because the latter invoked the name of Muhammad which he saw written on the legs of Allah’s throne! Allah further told Adam that had it not been for Muhammad the Muslim deity would have never created the first man!

      Al-Bayhaqi cited the following hadith in his book “Dala’il an-Nubuwwah” (Signs of Prophethood): Narrated ‘Umar Ibn al-Khattab: the Prophet said: “When Adam committed the sin, he said to Allah, ‘O My Lord, I ask You with reference to Muhammad to forgive me’. Allah said: ‘O Adam! How did you know about Muhammad, for I have not yet created him?’ Adam replied, ‘O My Lord, when You created me, I looked up and saw inscribed on the legs of the Throne the words: There is no God worthy of worship except Allah and Muhammad is His Messenger. I knew that you do not attach to Your name but the name of the dearest of Your Creation.’ Allah said to Adam, ‘You have spoken rightly, Adam. Muhammad is the dearest of My Creation. I have forgiven you because you asked by Muhammad. AND HAD IT NOT BEEN FOR HIM, I WOULD NOT HAVE CREATED YOU.'” This hadith was narrated by al-Hakim who also classified it AS SAHIH (authentic). Among the transmitters of this hadith is ‘Abd ar-Rahman Ibn Zayd Ibn Aslam. Al-Haythami said: “This hadith was reported by at-Dabarani and in its chain of transmitters are people I do not know. Al-Hakim was therefore mistaken in classifying this hadith as sahih because he himself criticised ‘Abd ar-rahman Ibn Zayd Ibn Aslam in his book ad-Du’afa, so how can he state the authenticity of the hadith after he had criticised him?!!” (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Part 1, Surah Al-Fatiah Surah Al-Baqarah, ayat 1 to 141, Abridged by Sheikh Nasib Ar-Rafa’i [Al-Firdous Ltd., London: Second Edition 1998], p. 107, fn 10; capital emphasis ours)

      And:

      Abu Muhammad al-Makki, Abu’l-Layth as-Samarqandi and others related that when Adam rebelled, he said, “O Allah, forgive me my error BY THE RIGHT OF MUHAMMAD!” Allah said to him, “How do you know Muhammad?” He said, “I SAW WRITTEN IN EVERY PLACE IN THE GARDEN, ‘There is no god but Allah, MUHAMMAD IS THE MESSENGER OF ALLAH.’ So I knew that he was the most honoured creation in Your eyes.” SO ALLAH TURNED TO HIM AND FORGAVE HIM. It is said that this is the interpretation of the words of Allah, “Adam learned some words from his Lord.” (2:27)

      Another variant has that Adam said, “When you created me, I lifted my gaze to Your Throne AND WRITTEN ON IT WAS: ‘There is no god but Allah, Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah,’ so I knew there would be no one held in greater esteem by You THAN THE ONE WHOSE NAME YOU PLACED ALONGSIDE YOUR OWN NAME.” Allah then revealed to him, “By My might and majesty, he is the last of the prophets among your descendants. IF IT HAD NOT BEEN FOR HIM, I WOULD HAVE NOT CREATED YOU.” It is said that Adam was given the kunya, Abu Muhammad. Some people say that it was Abu’l-Bashar (the father of mankind). (Qadi ‘Iyad, Ash-Shifa, Chapter Three: On the Sound And Well-Known Traditions Related About the Immense Value Placed On Him By His Lord, His Exalted Position And His Nobility In This World And The Next, Section 1: His place, p. 89; capital emphasis ours)

      Hence, these quotes testify that Allah conjoined Muhammad’s name to himself not only for the purpose of fulfilling the promise he made in Q. 94:4 that he would exalt the fame of his messenger:

      Did We not exalt your mention? For you are mentioned where I [God] am mentioned in the call announcing [the time for] prayer (adhān), in the [second] call to perform the prayer (iqāma), in the witnessing [‘there is no god but God, Muhammad is His Messenger’] (tashahhud), in the Friday sermon and in other instances. (Tafsir al-Jalalayn)

      (And exalted thy fame) and raised your voice with the call to prayer, supplication and testification of faith, such that you are mentioned just as I am? And the Prophet said: “Yes, indeed!” (Tanwîr al-Miqbâs min Tafsîr Ibn ‘Abbâs)

      But also because Muhammad’s deity wanted to make him his partner in the areas of salvation!

      Yep, your response was so bad it made Muhammad’s quran look intelligent and coherent by comparison!

      I got one more post for you in order to teach you a lesson to never pretend to be logical or intelligent.

      Like

    • Here goes my final post in response to this charlatan masquerading as an intellectual.

      In this post I am going to prove that Muhammad’s partner in salvation and in granting forgiveness of sins. In fact, I am going to demonstrate that Muhammad is Islam’s real savior.

      To begin with, note that Allah’s forgiveness and love are given only to those who obey Muhammad:

      Say, (O Muhammad, to mankind): If ye love Allah, follow me; Allah will love you and forgive you your sins. Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. Say: Obey Allah and the messenger. But if they turn away, lo! Allah loveth not the disbelievers (in His guidance). S. 3:31-32 Pickthall

      This next passage even claims that Muhammad not only has the power to forgive sins and save believers from a painful destruction, but that he is also the only guardian that Muslims have!

      O our people! respond to Allah’s SUMMONER and believe in HIM. HE will forgive you some of your sins and guard you from a painful doom. And whoso respondeth not to Allah’s SUMMONER he can nowise escape in the earth, and he hath no protecting friends (awliyaa) instead of HIM. Such are in error manifest. S. 46:31-32

      The pronouns all point back to Allah’s summoner, who is supposed to be Muhammad, since he is the nearest antecedent or object in the context. As such, the verse is not referring to Allah, but to Muhammad as the one who is able to save and forgive sinners!

      Here are a few more translations which help make this point clearer:

      O our people! accept the Divine CALLER and believe in HIM, HE will forgive you of your faults and protect you from a painful punishment. And whoever does not accept the Divine CALLER, he shall not escape in the earth and he shall not have guardians besides HIM, these are in manifest error. Shakir

      Our people, respond to the one who calls you to God. Believe in HIM: HE will forgive you your sins and protect you from a painful torment.’ S. 46:31 Abdel Haleem

      O our people, hearken to the one who invites (you) to Allah, and believe in him: He will forgive you your faults, and deliver you from a Penalty Grievous. Y. Ali

      It is abundantly clear that the one who is said to forgive sins and save people from a painful torment, and who is the only guardian anyone has, is supposed to be Muhammad, the so-called divine caller or summoner that Allah has sent.

      The hadiths reinforce this by singling out the fact that Muhammad will actually deliver people out of hell itself:

      Narrated ‘Imran bin Husain: The Prophet said, “Some people will be taken out of the Fire through the intercession of Muhammad they will enter Paradise and will be called Al-Jahannamiyin (the Hell Fire people).” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 76, Number 571)

      And:

      “‘… So they will come to me, and I will ask my Lord’s permission to enter His House and then I will be permitted. When I see Him I will fall down in prostration before Him, and He will leave me (in prostration) as long as He will, and then He will say, “O Muhammad, lift up your head and speak, for you will be listened to, and intercede, for your intercession will be accepted, and ask (for anything) for it will be granted”: Then I will raise my head and glorify my Lord with certain praises which He has taught me. Allah will put a limit for me (to intercede for a certain type of people). I WILL TAKE THEM OUT and make them enter Paradise.’

      “(Qatada said: I heard Anas saying that), the Prophet said, ‘I will go out and take them OUT OF HELL (Fire) and let them enter Paradise, and then I will return and ask my Lord for permission to enter His House and I will be permitted. When I will see Him I will fall down in prostration before Him and He will leave me in prostration as long as He will let me (in that state), and then He will say, “O Muhammad, raise your head and speak, for you will be listened to, and intercede, for your intercession will be accepted, and ask, your request will be granted.”’ The Prophet added, ‘So I will raise my head and glorify and praise Him as He has taught me. Then I will intercede and He will put a limit for me (to intercede for a certain type of people). I will take them out and let them enter Paradise.’

      “(Qatada added: I heard Anas saying that) the Prophet said, ‘I will go out and take them OUT OF HELL (Fire) and let them enter Paradise, and I will return for the third time and will ask my Lord for permission to enter His house, and I will be allowed to enter. When I see Him, I will fall down in prostration before Him, and will remain in prostration as long as He will, and then He will say, “Raise your head, O Muhammad, and speak, for you will be listened to, and intercede, for your intercession will be accepted, and ask, for your request will be granted.” So I will raise my head and praise Allah as He has taught me and then I will intercede and He will put a limit for me (to intercede for a certain type of people). I will take them out and let them enter Paradise.’

      “(Qatada said: I heard Anas saying that) the Prophet said, ‘So I will go out and take them out of Hell (Fire) and let them enter Paradise, till none will remain in the Fire except those whom Quran will imprison (i.e., those who are destined for eternal life in the fire).’

      “The narrator then recited the Verse:– ‘It may be that your Lord will raise you to a Station of Praise and Glory.’ (17.79) The narrator added: This is the Station of Praise and Glory which Allah has promised to your Prophet.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 93, Number 532v)

      In fact, the Quran explicitly teaches that Muhammad’s intercession is an essential and necessary aspect for receiving forgiveness:

      It was by the mercy of Allah that thou wast lenient with them (O Muhammad), for if thou hadst been stern and fierce of heart they would have dispersed from round about thee. SO PARDON THEM AND ASK FORGIVENESS FOR THEM and consult with them upon the conduct of affairs. And when thou art resolved, then put thy trust in Allah. Lo! Allah loveth those who put their trust (in Him). S. 3:159

      We sent not an apostle, but to be obeyed, in accordance with the will of God. If they had only, when they were unjust to themselves, COME UNTO THEE AND ASKED GOD’S FORGIVENESS, AND THE APOSTLE HAD ASKED FORGIVENESS FOR THEM, they would have found God indeed Oft-returning, Most Merciful. S. 4:64 Y. Ali

      Take Sadaqah (alms) from their wealth in order to purify them and sanctify them with it, and invoke Allah for them. Verily! YOUR INVOCATIONS ARE A SOURCE OF SECURITY FOR THEM, and Allah is All-Hearer, All-Knower. S. 9:103 Hilali-Khan

      They only are the true believers who believe in Allah and His messenger and, when they are with him on some common errand, go not away until they have asked leave of him. Lo! those who ask leave of thee, those are they who believe in Allah and His messenger. So, if they ask thy leave for some affair of theirs, give leave to whom thou wilt of them, AND ASK FOR THEM FORGIVENESS OF ALLAH. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. S. 24:62

      So know (O Muhammad) that there is no God save Allah, and ask forgiveness for thy sin and for believing men and believing women. Allah knoweth (both) your place of turmoil and your place of rest. S. 47:19

      Now these passages place this charlatan and pseudo-unitarian in quite an embarrassing dilemma. Since the Quran is supposed to be a message for all peoples at all times, how then can any Muslim benefit from these passages seeing that their profit is now dead? How can Muhammad pray, save and/or pardon his community seeing that he has been worm food for approximately 1400 years? Doesn’t this prove that large portions of the Quran have been made null and void by Muhammad’s death, which therefore implies that it is not a message for all humanity since it is a text that is contingent upon the existence of a man who is now dead and buried? And doesn’t this again elevate Muhammad’s importance over that of the Quran, and even Allah himself, since Allah needed Muhammad to make what is supposed to be his uncreated speech relevant?

      One more time, what was that about logic and bad polemics?

      You really must feel stupid right about now.

      Like

    • OPEN CHALLENGE TO THIS PAGAN NEOPHYTE MASQUERADING AS AN UNITARIAN.

      Please put me in my place and expose me with your dazzling logic and knowledge of Islam by coming to my paltalk room and having a debate with me on whether you guys are really monotheists or pagans and man worshipers, who have turned a false profit into a god alongside your false god.

      Since I won’t bother to return here and waste more time on your stupidity and deceit, you can email me at sam.shmn@gmail.com with a time and date when you can appear in my room to finally silence me for all to see and hear. We will post a recording of our debate on youtube for all to see how your logic was able to shame me and exonerate Allah and his profit.

      Like

    • lol😉😉😉 sammy absolute awesome posts….thank you soo much for collecting all those fantastic quotes from the Quran and Hadith that beautifully exemplify the love respect and honour that Allah has bestowed on our beloved Prophet P. Those wonderful quotes also emphasize why it is important to follow the our Prophet in the proper way to worship Allah alone😉

      however the negative feedback is your bogus commentaries and false interpretations and presumptions on the quotes throughout the posts only clearly reflect your polytheistic eisegesis and feeble attempt to create a drastically wrong arguement shows your incompetence about Islamic theology.. lolol.. the same bogus ‘logic’ and false polytheistic eisegesis you apply to the bible that truly reflects you are a polytheist wondering in a maze of error and confusion.. May Allah cure you sammy.ameen😀…

      please post more quotes on this topic they are immensely useful to share when giving dawah to Christians in the light of proper Islamic exegesis that essentially expose how truly misguided you are😉

      Like

    • Omar, thank you for your kind words and indirectly agreeing with me that unitarian was really stupid for pretending to wax logical in order to brush aside my arguments as bad polemics. Like I said friend, keep reading my articles and rebuttals because they will help you see that the problem is not with me, but in your sources sine they do conclusively prove that Islam is really the religion of taking a dead man and turning him into a god and the human manifestation of the god he claims spoke to him. Besides, you reading my articles shows you have good taste.

      Anyway, take care and be blessed!

      Like

  17. Another masterpiece from former Muslim Ismail a.k.a. Converted2Islam, where he again exposes how filthy and immoral Islam truly is. Enjoy! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSV-0HdiFEM

    Like

    • Sounds almost like Numbers 31 to me.

      Like

    • No Kmaky your confused about Num 31 that contextually is discussed with other interrelated biblical traditions and verses for your consideration here:

      http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0ahUKEwi1xqv4msPNAhWMj5QKHXULB6QQFggaMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.answering-christianity.com%2Fkarim%2FKarim_-_articles_islamic_answers_-_part_3%2FBiblical%2520law%2520permits%2520rape%2520of%2520female%2520captives.pdf&usg=AFQjCNG6KzQltaipc2zpUsmG8ifwZVJnPw

      Biblical laws commanded by your preexisting Jesus god the Son, according to your christological polytheism.. 2 b continued..😉 and this is off topic in this thread btw…

      Like

    • KMAK, you mean it sounds like your child-marrying, married/single women enslaving and raping profit. Here is your answer concerning Numbers 31, taken from one of my rebuttals. Enjoy!

      BEGIN
      We now turn to the second text. First, here are Miller’s comments regarding Numbers 31:

      Right off the bat, though, there are several obvious historical errors in these brief statements, and several assumptions that have no warrant whatsoever in either the text itself, or in the historical background of the ANE. The passage will be difficult enough to our sensibilities as it is, but let’s first ‘weed out the chaff’ among these allegations. [These ‘easy’ errors, however, in themselves might not be enough to exonerate God, so we will to dig deep into the passage/situation to surface the actual ethical issues and dynamics.]

      [ … ]

      First of all, there was no ‘test for virginity’ needed/used. In spite of the elaborate/miraculous one created by the later rabbi’s (ingenious, but altogether unnecessary) using the Urim and Thummim (!), the ‘test for virginity’ in the ANE was a simple visual one:

      Was the female pre-pubescent?
      Was the female wearing any attire, jewelry, or adornments required for/associated with virginity for that culture?
      Was the female wearing any attire, jewelry, or adornments required for/associated with non-virginity for that culture (e.g., veil indicating married status)?

      Because virginity was generally associated with legal proof for blood-inheritance issues in ancient cultures (e.g., land, property, kinship, relationships), virginity itself was often marked by some type of clothing (e.g., the robe of Tamar in 2 Sam 13) or by cosmetic means (cf. the Hindu ‘pre-marriage dot’); as was more typically non-virginal married status (e.g., veils, headwear, jewelry, or certain hairstyles). Of course, non-virginal unmarried status (e.g., temple prostitutes and secular prostitutes) were also indicated by special markings or adornments (e.g. jewelry, dress—cf. Proverbs 7.10; Hos 2.4-5).

      For example, the erotic art of the ANE shows a consistent difference in hairstyles between women and sacred prostitutes:

      “In fact, the physical characteristics of the women on the [erotic] plaques are totally different from those of other female representations in Mesopotamian and Syrian art. As with the clay figurines, they are frequently naked and their hair is loose—none of these traits is to be found in statues or seals that represent women…These groups [associations of cultic prostitutes] were defined by a generic name [the ‘separated ones’], while their specific names of individual associations hinted at their garments, which were particularly luxurious, or odd, their coiffure, or to their general appearance, which distinguished them from other women.” [OT:CANE:2526]

      Some of these patterns varied by culture/age:

      “Once married, women were not veiled in Babylonia. Legal texts imply that married women were veiled in Assyria.” [OT:DLAM:135]

      “The bride was covered with a veil that the groom removed. Married women were not veiled in Babylonia but seem to have had a special headgear; legal texts, however, suggest that married women were veiled in Assyria.” [OT:CANE:489]

      In other words, the process of identifying the females who were (a) not married and (b) not prostitutes, either sacred or secular, would have been relatively straightforward—at the precision level required by the event.

      Secondly, the accusation that these girls were for “sex slave” purposes contradicts what we know about the culture and about the event. [But at least one of the writers above—to their credit—added the word ‘presumably’, realizing that the text doesn’t actually say anything about it…]

      1. Most girls were married soon/immediately after they began menstruating in the ANE (circa 12 years of age), and since infant and child mortality was so high, the average age of the girls spared would have been around 5 years of age or slightly lower (life expectancy wasn’t a straight line, with childhood risks so high). Of all the horrible things ascribed to Israel in the OT, pedophilia is the one conspicuous omission. That these little kids would have been even considered as ‘sex slaves’ seems quite incongruent with their ages.

      And, at this tender age, they would not have been very useful as ‘slaves’ at all! Children raised in Israelite households were ‘put to work’ around this age, sometimes doing light chores to help the mother for up to four hours per day by the age of 7 or 8 [OT:FAI:27], but 5 is still a bit young. Instead, the Israelite families would have had to feed, clothe, train, care, protect, and shelter them for several years before they could make much contribution to the family’s existence and survival. [Also note that ‘slavery’ in the ANE/OT generally means something quite different from “New World” slavery, which we normally associate with the word ‘slavery’, and most of what is called that in popular literature should not be so termed. See qnoslave.html for the discussion and documentation.]

      2. Unlike the Greeks and Romans, the ANE was not very ‘into’ using slaves/captives for sexual purposes, even though scholars earlier taught this:

      “During the pinnacle of Sumerian culture, female slaves outnumbered male. Their owners used them primarily for spinning and weaving. Saggs maintains that their owners also used them for sex, but there is little actual evidence to support such a claim” [OT:EML:69]

      3. And the Hebrews were different in this regard ANYWAY:

      “This fidelity and exclusivity [demands on the wife] did not apply to the husband. Except among the Hebrews, where a husband’s infidelity was disparaged in the centuries after 800 BC, a double standard prevailed, and husbands were routinely expected to have sex not only with their wives, but with slavewomen and prostitutes.” [WS:AHTO:39; note: I would disagree with the remark about ‘after 800 bc’ because that dating presupposes a very late date for the composition of the narratives under discussion…If the narrative events occurred closer to the purposed times, then this ‘disparagement’ applied earlier in Israel as well as later.]

      4. Even if we allow the age range to be older, to include girls capable of bearing children, the probability is that it was not sex-motivated, but population/economics-motivated, as Carol Meyers points out [“The Roots of Restriction: Women in Early Israel”, Biblical Archaeologist, vol 41):

      “Beyond this, however, the intensified need for female participation in working out the Mosaic revolution in the early Israelite period can be seen in the Bible. Looking again at Numbers 31, an exception to the total purge of the Midianite population is to be noted. In addition to the metal objects which were exempt from utter destruction, so too were the “young girls who have not known man by lying with him” (Num 31:18). These captives, however, were not immediately brought into the Israelite camp. Instead, they and their captors were kept outside the camp for seven days in a kind of quarantine period. (Note that the usual incubation period for the kinds of infectious diseases which could conceivably have existed in this situation is two or three to six days [Eickhoff 1977].) Afterward, they thoroughly washed themselves and all their clothing before they entered the camp. This incident is hardly an expression of lascivious male behavior; rather, it reflects the desperate need for women of childbearing age, a need so extreme that the utter destruction of the Midianite foes—and the prevention of death by plague—as required by the law of the herem could be waived in the interest of sparing the young women. The Israelites weighed the life-death balance, and the need for females of childbearing age took precedence.”

      [But note that the traditional rabbinic interpretation of the passage is that all females which were capable of bearing children were killed—not just those who actually were non-virginal. This would drive the average age quite low, although the Hebrew text offers only limited support at best for their interpretation.]

      [I should also point out that the “for yourselves” phrase (31.18) is NOT actually referring to “for your pleasure”, but is a reference to the opposite condition of “for YHWH” which applied to all people or property which was theoretically supposed to be destroyed in such combat situations. The herem (or ‘ban’) specifically indicated that all enemy people or property which was ‘delivered over to YHWH’ was to be killed/destroyed. By referring to ‘for yourselves’, then, in this passage, means simply ‘do not kill them’. This can also be seen in that this ‘booty’ was not ‘for themselves’ actually, but was distributed to others within the community.]

      [ … ]

      5. The 32,000 girls who were absorbed/assimilated into Israel would have been actually a small number. According to the distribution of them, the 12,000 ‘soldiers’ received 16,000 (half of them), making an average 1.5 per household. The other half (16,000) was distributed throughout all of Israel, meaning that very few families would get one. This would still have been some hardship for the Israelite families, who at this time are still nomadic peoples without any material base from which to live. More than one commentator has noted that this seems to be a surprise act of mercy, and it is interesting to note that Whiston, in a footnote on his 18th-century translation of Josephus’ account of this passage [Antiq, VII] argues that this sparing of the little girls is a surprise of mercy, given the practical demands of this type of combat in the OT/ANE (which we will discuss later):

      “The slaughter of all the Midianite women that had prostituted themselves to the lewd Israelites, and the preservation of those that had not been guilty therein; the last of which were no fewer than thirty-two thousand… and both by the particular command of God, are highly remarkable, and shew that, even in nations otherwise for their wickedness doomed to destruction, the innocent were sometimes providentially taken care of, and delivered from that destruction”

      Later, when Israel was more established and settled in the land, and had adequate economic means, they would be able to absorb all the women and children (from hostile-but-conquered foreign cities), but at this early stage this was quite an impossibility. They had no need for “slaves,” nor means to support them at this time. (Source: http://www.christian-thinktank.com/midian.html)

      One point we would like to add to Miller’s comments is regarding the statement of Numbers 31:40 that ‘32 of these virgins were given as tribute to the Lord.’ The context explains what this exactly means:

      “The LORD said to Moses, ‘Take the count of the booty that was taken, both of man and of beast, you and Elea’zar the priest and the heads of the fathers’ houses of the congregation; and divide the booty into two parts, between the warriors who went out to battle and all the congregation. And levy for the LORD a tribute from the men of war who went out to battle, one out of five hundred, of the persons and of the oxen and of the asses and of the flocks; take it from their half, and give it to Elea’zar the priest as an offering to the LORD. And from the people of Israel’s half you shall take one drawn out of every fifty, of the persons, of the oxen, of the asses, and of the flocks, of all the cattle, and give them to the Levites who have charge of the tabernacle of the LORD.’ And Moses and Elea’zar the priest did as the LORD commanded Moses. Now the booty remaining of the spoil that the men of war took was: six hundred and seventy-five thousand sheep, seventy-two thousand cattle, sixty-one thousand asses, and thirty-two thousand persons in all, women who had not known man by lying with him. And the half, the portion of those who had gone out to war, was in number three hundred and thirty-seven thousand five hundred sheep, and the LORD’s tribute of sheep was six hundred and seventy-five. The cattle were thirty-six thousand, of which the LORD’s tribute was seventy-two. The asses were thirty thousand five hundred, of which the LORD’s tribute was sixty-one. The persons were sixteen thousand, of which the LORD’s tribute was thirty-two persons. And Moses gave the tribute, which was the offering for the LORD, to Elea’zar the priest, as the LORD commanded Moses. From the people of Israel’s half, which Moses separated from that of the men who had gone to war- now the congregation’s half was three hundred and thirty-seven thousand five hundred sheep, thirty-six thousand cattle, and thirty thousand five hundred asses, and sixteen thousand persons- from the people of Israel’s half Moses took one of every fifty, both of persons and of beasts, and gave them to the Levites who had charge of the tabernacle of the LORD; as the LORD commanded Moses. Then the officers who were over the thousands of the army, the captains of thousands and the captains of hundreds, came near to Moses, and said to Moses, ‘Your servants have counted the men of war who are under our command, and there is not a man missing from us. And we have brought the LORD’s offering, what each man found, articles of gold, armlets and bracelets, signet rings, earrings, and beads, to make atonement for ourselves before the LORD.’ And Moses and Elea’zar the priest received from them the gold, all wrought articles. And all the gold of the offering that they offered to the LORD, from the commanders of thousands and the commanders of hundreds, was sixteen thousand seven hundred and fifty shekels. (The men of war had taken booty, every man for himself.) And Moses and Elea’zar the priest received the gold from the commanders of thousands and of hundreds, and brought it into the tent of meeting, as a memorial for the people of Israel before the LORD.” Numbers 31:25-54 RSV

      Thus, the context shows that the virgins who were set apart for the Lord were to be given to God’s ministers, the priests.

      As one can see from the preceding data, the laws prescribed in the Holy Bible are actually for the benefit and protection of the woman’s honor and integrity. This is unlike Islam, which permits Muslims to rape and sell slave women at will:
      http://answering-islam.org/Silas/femalecaptives.htm
      http://www.muhammadanism.org/Hadith/Topics/Adultery.htm
      http://answer-islam.org/Rape.html

      Thus, what Osama thought was justification for the perverted practices of his religion, actually backfires against him and shows just how vastly superior God’s true Word, the Holy Bible, truly is in comparison to the Quran.
      END

      Like

  18. lolol..another erroneously desperate attempt from shammy sam to post bogus presumptions he shares with his misguided friend that again lacks contextual integrity and alo cunningly share selective quotes misplaced from the context of the Prophet’s (PBUH) marriage with Sayyidah Safiya (RA)…I’ll text a quick response shortly inshallah to illustrate how gullible and foolish sam truly is..and who continues to wonder in a maze of error..😉

    Like

    • That’s Right

      You said;
      Intellect again I have to ask

      Why do you think that “One of his attributes according to Ken Temple is to generate a Son(Jesus Christ) i.e.” Is an Attribute of God? In other words why must the son posses this Attribute in order to be God?

      I say;
      Because, according to Ken Temple God the Father generates/creates the Son from eternity. Don’t you believe the Father in Trinity is God?

      If God is one according to the Bible, then He must POSSESS ALL HIS ATTRIBUTES. Jesus does not have some of the attributes of God the Father like knowing the day of judgement and so Jesus is not God.

      Thanks

      Like

  19. There’s a papyrus in the Rylands collection which is dated to 250CE which shows evidence for Mary-devotion amongst Christians. Noticeably this evidence earlier than any evidence for the Trinity.

    Like

  20. Sam, you keep posting from the Ex Muslim (Ex Christian fella), you do realise he condemns the Bible?

    Like

    • You do realize that this video again displays why I say you are a repulsive liar and deceiver, who can only quote people out of context and grossly pervert people’s words, since you are just as vile and wicked as your god and profit, right?

      Now will you finally give me a time and date so we can see how well you do twisting my words and butchering Deuteronomy 21:10-14, as you try to justify and excuse your wicked profit’s enslaving and raping married women?

      TIME AND DATE!

      Like

    • Shammy sham you do realize that this video as well as all the posts artices and comments on other threads here again displays why we say you are a repulsive liar and deceiver, who can only quote people out of context and grossly pervert people’s words, since you are just as vile and wicked as a misguided polytheist right?

      we have already refuted you over and over especially how well you do twisting our words and butchering Deuteronomy 21:10-14, as you try to justify and excuse your pre-existing god the son that commanded the enslaving and raping of married women😉

      Like

    • Actually what these posts do is expose your vileness, insults, abuses, hate and blasphemies which you shamelessly hurl at non-Muslims. They will further show how Christians like me are not intimidated by your bullying tactics and/or your abuse, but won’t hesitate to give you a taste of your own medicine so you can learn what it feels like to be on the other end. Now when you guys learn to respect other people’s faiths and stop insulting their beliefs and scriptures, then will you have others treat you with decency and respect.

      So thanks for exposing your inconsistency and utter blindness to the filth and venom you and your ikhwaan spew regularly here on William’s blog, only to whine and complain when others give you a taste of your own medicine.

      Like

    • no sammy actually what our posts do is expose your vileness, insults, abuses, hate and blasphemies which you shamelessly hurl at Muslims. They will further show how Muslims like me are not intimidated by your bullying tactics and/or your abuse, but won’t hesitate to give you a taste of your own medicine so you can learn what it feels like to be on the other end. Now when you guys learn to respect other people’s faiths and stop insulting their beliefs and scriptures, then will you have others treat you with decency and respect.

      So thanks for exposing your inconsistency and utter blindness to the filth and venom you and your ikhwaan spew regularly here on William’s blog, only to whine and complain when others give you a taste of your own medicine.😉

      Like

  21. Williams, I again want to thank you for being fair enough to allow me to post my series of replies without deleting them. You truly are a scholar and gentleman.

    Believe it or not – and I am not just saying this- you happen to be my favorite “Muslim” polemicist. For some reason, I just have a lot of love for you.

    Anyway friend, I need to go back to my other commitments. Lord willing, I will talk to you soon.

    Like

    • Br Williams, thank you for being fair enough to allow sam’s posts and series of replies without deleting them that has provided us with an opportunity to continuously expose Sams lies and misguidance for the benefit of the Muslims😉

      And sammy please come back quickly. Lord willing, we will wait to continuously expose your bogus reputations. Sammy i have learnt so much from you over the years that has aided me to give dawah to Muslims on how to engage your feeble attempts to create myths about Islam 😘

      Liked by 1 person

    • He’s probably getting paid for placing his “articles” on Muslim websites. The longer the post, the more he’s cashing in. At the end of the day they are all in it for the money. Remember: the Islam-bashing industry is a growth market.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: