Category Archives: FAQS

Neither Shaken nor Stirred: The Qur’aan and Science on Alcohol Consumption

Posted on by Leave a comment

Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem
بِسۡمِ ٱللهِ ٱلرَّحۡمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ ,

Though it is evident that wine has a few medical benefits, scientific researches have proved that the harms of wine and alcohol in general exceed by far their benefits, both on the individual and social levels, even among moderate drinkers. And surprisingly this is how Quran addresses Wine:

“They question thee about alcohol (wine) and games of chance. Say: In both is great sin, and some utility (benefits) for men; but the sin(harms) of them is greater than their usefulness.” –  Qur’aan : Surat al-Baqarah (2) : 219.

Thus alcohol in Islam is forbidden (haram).
Science confirms this Qur’aannic fact:

WEDNESDAY, May 2 (HealthDay News) — While it might help your heart, drinking even moderately could shrink your brain, U.S. researchers say.

Alcohol is more harmful than heroin or crack when the overall dangers to the individual and society are considered, according to a study in the Lancet. 

Moderate drinking shrinks the brain: researchers at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and other institutions found a link between low to moderate alcohol consumption and a decrease in the brain size of middle-aged adults.

‘Moderate’ drinking is harmful to younger people, says study.

Alcohol Linked to Cancer Risk in Women: Study Shows Even Low-to-Moderate Drinking Raises Risk of Cancer.
Feb. 24, 2009 — Women who drink as little as one alcoholic beverage a day — be it beer, wine, or hard liquor — have an increased cancer risk, a study shows. Based on their findings, the researchers estimated that alcohol could be to blame for 13% of these cancers in women.

The largest ever study published in 2009 reveals that as little as a glass of wine a day may be too risky for women.

Alcohol increases breast cancer risk.

Alcohol effects on Fetal Development: Fetal alcohol exposure is a leading cause of birth defects and developmental disorders. Recent estimates of the number of US children affected by fetal alcohol exposure range from 1 per 2,000 live births to 1 per 100 live births.”

Alcohol is the worst attack on society: Alcoholic drinks are much more dangerous than drugs. According to a home survey on Alcohol and Drugs from the National Plan on Drugs, alcohol is the substance that is consumed most by a population between the ages of 15 and 64, with a consumption prevalence of 78.7 per cent.

Alcohol and drug abuse also poses a public health risk. The abuse of these substances causes a variety of cancers, diseases, and other health problems. Each year, society pays $16 billion in healthcare costs due to drugs and alcohol.

This article authored by Brother Muhyiddine of Dubai.

wa Allaahu Alam.
[and God knows best.]

Prophetic Miracle of Muhammad {saw}: Desert Arabs Competing in Building Skyscrapers

Posted on by 3 comments

Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem
بِسۡمِ ٱللهِ ٱلرَّحۡمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ ,

“The Hour will not be established-till the people of the desert (the camel shepherds) compete with one another in constructing high buildings.”
Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) on the minor signs of the last day.

On being asked on the signs of the last day, the Prophet (peace be upon him) mentions: “you shall see the barefoot, naked, penniless shepherds competing in constructing high buildings.” This hadith describes people who become rich all of a sudden and then build not for need but only in competition.

The Gulf Arab States, enjoying the proceeds of record-high oil prices, are rushing to build the tallest tower in world, reports Kuwait Times.

As reported by MEED (Middle East Economic Digest), Saudi Arabia has been the latest among the Gulf States to join the race, with a plan to build a 1600m tower in the Red Sea City of Jeddah. The project, which is expected to surpass the super-tall skyscrapers in the neighboring Dubai and Kuwait, confirms that the competition is on, to build the world’s tallest tower in the Gulf region.

Among all other super-tall structures that are under construction around the globe, none exceeds 700m in height. MEED says that although the companies involved in the Saudi-based project are kept secretive, it is said that Britain’s Hyder Consulting and Arup are working in a joint-venture, and the cost of the project is expected to cost up to $10 billion. The tower, known as
“Mile-High Tower” will have the US Engineering giant Bechtel as construction manager, and Saudi-based Omrania as the project architect.

Read more on the planned tower at this link.

This article provided by Brother Muhyiddine of Dubai.

wa Allaahu Alam.
[and God knows best.]

Early Christianity: Diverse Doctrines and Beliefs

Posted on by 3 comments

Our Brother Alexus, from Lebanon, has braved the threats of his Christian neighbours and has been able to compile a succinct yet extremely detailed introduction to Christianity. If you’re a Christian or Muslim, it presents the beliefs of Christianity in an objectified format, comparing some of the propositions of the Bible with the proclamations of the Qur’aan. As part of our Christmas Special, this post will be made into a page and this will be made into a freely downloadable and distributable PDF file, God Willing. Please look forward to the updated link in this post for the PDF download link.

Download this in PDF form: [Currently Offline]

                         Christianity: A Brief Introduction                   

 

Opening Statement: Seriously, did you know?
Did you know that ancient Christians—dating from the very earliest centuries, believed there were 2 different Gods, 12, 30, or even 365?

Obviously, many people today would argue that such views could not be Christian. Yet, what is striking is that these people who believed in such things claimed to be “Christians”. They even insisted that their teachings were taught and maintained by Jesus (may God be pleased with him) himself. Ironically, they could appeal to written proof, for they, each group, possessed documents allegedly penned by Jesus’ own apostles.

So how diverse was Christianity, one may ask?

What is Christianity: The Creed?

In order to define Christianity, one would have to examine its creeds. Firstly, what is a creed? A creed is a statement of belief—usually a statement of faith that describes the beliefs shared by a religious community and is often recited as part of a religious service. The word derives from the Latin: credo for “I believe” (because the Latin translation of the Apostles’ Creed and the Nicene Creed both begin with this word).

Of course there are many creeds, including:

-Old Roman Creed

-Nicene Creed

-Apostles’ Creed (based on the Old Roman Creed).

-Chalcedonian Creed.

-Athanasian Creed.

-Tridentine Creed.

-Masai Creed.

-Credo of the People of God.

One of the most widely used creeds in Christianity is the Nicene Creed, first formulated in AD 325 at the First Council of Nicaea. It is the first council which explicitly stated the imperative belief in the divinity of Jesus and the trinity.

It could be summarized as follows:

  • Jesus Christ is described as “God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God,” proclaiming his divinity. When all light sources were natural, the essence of light was considered to be identical, regardless of its form.
  • Jesus Christ is said to be “begotten, not made”, asserting his co-eternalness with God, and confirming it by stating his role in the Creation. Basically, they were saying that Jesus was God, and God’s son, not a creation of God.
  • He is said to be “from the substance of the Father,” in direct opposition to Arianism. Eusebius of Caesarea ascribes the term homoousios, or consubstantial, i.e., “of the same substance” (of the Father), to Constantine who, on this particular point, may have chosen to exercise his authority.

The council did not completely solve the problems and establish the criteria of the Christian faith—this is why many councils were executed later on such as the First Council of Constantinople and the council of Ephesus and many others.

So what do Christians exactly believe: The six points.

In light of the aforementioned, the Christian set of belief can be simply divided as follows:

  • The Divinity of Jesus—He is at the same time fully Divine and fully human.
  • The Trinity—the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Three persons yet One God who share equally the Glory and substance of the one and only God, Almighty.
  • The Original Sin
  • The crucifixion—aka the Cross.
  • The resurrection
  • Salvation.

Before we begin: The Structure.

My focus during this lecture will be based on the first 3 points: The Divinity of Jesus, the Trinity and the Original Sin. I shall discuss these three topics in light of:

1)      The Biblical Scripture—the Old and New Testament.

2)      The Quranic Scripture.

3)      The Logical Perspective.

The Divinity of Jesus: A Fact or a Fiction?

It is noteworthy to mention that there is not a single verse in the Biblical Scripture where Jesus says he is the Almighty God or order worship. This very statement should give us a long pause. If Jesus was indeed God, why didn’t he simply say so? Was he shy? Did he feel awkward? Or maybe was he afraid? A Christian might say: Jesus did not immediately proclaim divinity simply because it is a hard concept on humans to grasp—hence, he did it in a gradual manner. Many difficulties arouse from that response:

1)      There is no gradual process as Jesus did not claim divinity. How could there be a gradual process when the end result is not attained?!

2)      Jesus claimed inferiority rather than equality par rapport to the Creator.

Jesus (pbuh) was a Jewish prophet sent to the Jewish community, a follower of the Jewish law and a devout worshipper of the Jewish God. What’s the issue with Divinity then? The idea that God became a man, a God-man is not a thing just reserved to Christians. Buddhists teaches that God revealed himself in Buddha, Druze claim Al Hakem was God incarnate and Alawites assure that Ali is simply, the Almighty. Ironically, even today, you still find some people declaring divinity. Dr. Jose Luis De Jesus Miranda who recently appeared during a Cnn interview is an example. As a matter of fact, this notion stems from the idea that out of humility and love, the Almighty God decided to take human form to feel and experience what humans go through. To that view, the Holy Quran clarifies, in Surah 67, Ayah 14:

أَلَا يَعْلَمُ مَنْ خَلَقَ وَهُوَ اللَّطِيفُ الْخَبِيرُ

“Should He not know what He created? And He is The Ever-Kind, The Ever-Cognizant.”

We ask why would God need to be a human in order to understand us? Does God really require becoming what He created to understand every aspect? A weird and incomprehensible concept.

Humility? Are we to perceive humility by seeing God, Almighty going to the toilet? Having a round of beat? Or by being spat on? Is this what defines humility. To this blasphemous and atrocious notion, we say:

سُبْحَانَهُ وَتَعَالَىٰ عَمَّا يَقُولُونَ عُلُوًّا كَبِيرًا

“Glorified is He, and High Exalted above what they say!”  (Holy Quran 17:43).

The List: Christianity, a tale?

Before moving in depth, I would like to share the following list. These are religious icons whose myths share many or most of the attributes of Christianity fairy tale most of them including resurrection:

* Chrishna of Hindostan
* Budha Sakio of India
* Salivahana of Bermuda
* Zulis, or Zhule, also Osiris and Orus, of Egypt
* Odin of the Scandinavians
* Crite of Chaldea
* Zoroaster and Mithra of Persia
* Baal and Taut “The only Begotten of God,” of Phenecia
* Indra of Tibet
* Bali of Afghanistan
* Jao of Nepal
* Wittoba of the Bilingonese
* Thammuz of Syria
* Atys of Phrygia
* Xamolsix of Thrace
* Zoar of the Bonzes
* Adad of Assyria
* Deva Tat, and Sammonocadam, of siam
* Alcides of Thebes
* Mkado of the Sintoos
* Beddru of Japan
* Hesus or Eros, and Bremrillah, of the Druids
* Thor, son of Odin, of the Gauls
* Cadmus of Greecde
* Hil and Feta of the Mandaites
* Gentaut and Quexalcote of Mexico
* Universal Monarch of the Sibyls
* Ischy of the island of Formosa
* Divine Teacher of Plato
* Holy One of Xaca
* Fohi and Tien of China
* Adonis, son of the virgin Io, of Greece
* Ixion and Quirinus, of Rome
* Prometheus of Caucasus

Some specifics on a few in ascending order of age (ALL of which predate christianity):
Dionysus, Greece, 500.B.C.
* Born of a virgin, on Dec. 25th
* Performed miracles with his disciples, such as: turning water into wine
* Common names: “king of kings”, “god’s only begotten son”, “alpha and omega”
* Upon death, resurrected

Krishna, India, 900 B.C.
* Born of a virgin
* Birth heralded by a star in the east
* performed miracles
* Upon death, resurrected

Attis, Greece, 1200 B.C.
* Born of a virgin, on Dec. 25th
* Crucified
* Dead for 3 days
* Resurrected

Mithra, Persia, 1200 B.C.
* Born of a virgin, on Dec. 25th
* Had 12 disciples
* Performed miracles
* Dead for 3 days
* Resurrected
* Nicknames: “the truth”, “the light”
(Sacred day of worship of Mithra was Sunday)

Horus, Egypt, 3000 B.C.
(Sun anthropomorphized)
* Born of virgin, on Dec. 25th
* Birth heralded by star in the east that was followed by 3 kings
* Teacher at 12
* Baptized at 30 and began ministry
* Had 12 disciples
* Performed miracles: healing sick and walking on water
* Nicknames: “the truth”, “lamb of god”, “the light”, “the good shepherd”
* Crucified
* Dead for 3 days
* Resurrected

A God-man: Debunked!

I shall present now 15 main points arguing why Jesus cannot be divine tackling it from 3 ways accordingly as already explained.

The Judgment Day.

1) Mark 13:32 read:

“”No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.”

This statement not only assures to us that Jesus is ignorant concerning the Judgment day—a thing which is incomprehensible—it raises another problematic issue: How does Jesus know and doesn’t know? It is like saying a part of God knows while the other has no idea! How can this be?

Adam Clarke, a biblical scholar, who wrote the famous “Commentary on the Bible” says:

“To me it is utterly unaccountable, how Jesus, who knew so correctly all the particulars which he here lays down, and which were to a jot and tittle verified by the event – how he who knew that not one stone should be left on another, should be ignorant of the day and hour when this should be done.  I cannot comprehend, but on this ground, that the Deity which dwelt in the man Christ Jesus might, at one time, communicate less of the knowledge of futurity to him than at another. However, I strongly suspect that the clause was not originally in this Gospel. Its not being found in the parallel places in the other evangelists is, in my opinion, a strong presumption against it.”

Barnes’ Notes on the Bible read:

“Neither the Son – This text has always presented serious difficulties. It has been asked, If Jesus had a divine nature, how could he say that he knew not the day and hour of a future event? In reply, it has been said that the passage was missing, according to Ambrose, in some Greek manuscripts; but it is now found in all, and there can be little doubt that the passage is genuine.  Others have said that the verb rendered “knoweth” means sometimes to “make” known or to reveal, and that the passage means, ‘that day and hour none makes known, neither the angels, nor the Son, but the Father.’ But then it is natural to ask where has “the Father” made it known? In what place did he reveal it?’”

Where did the Father makes it known asks Barnes—No where.

Therefore, how come God does not know when the hour of Judgment is? Allegedly speaking and for the sake of the argument—did He lose His powers when He became a man? If yes, then are we still to consider Him as God? If not, what makes him divine then?

The Glorious Quran strictly refutes this absurd statement:

إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَا يَخْفَىٰ عَلَيْهِ شَيْءٌ فِي الْأَرْضِ وَلَا فِي السَّمَاءِ

“Indeed, from Allah nothing is hidden in the earth nor in the heaven.” (Holy Quran 3:5)

وَمَا كَانَ رَبُّكَ نَسِيًّا

“And your Lord is not forgetful.” (Noble Quran 19:64)

إِنَّمَا إِلَٰهُكُمُ اللَّهُ الَّذِي لَا إِلَٰهَ إِلَّا هُوَ ۚ وَسِعَ كُلَّ شَيْءٍ عِلْمًا

“Your Ilah (God) is only Allah, the One (La ilaha illa Huwa) (none has the right to be worshipped but He). He has full knowledge of all things.” (Glorious Quran 20:94).

A helpless unreliable God?

2) John 5:30-2

“I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me. “If I testify about myself, my testimony is not valid. There is another who testifies in my favor, and I know that his testimony about me is valid.”

Indeed, one huge can of worms is opened by this verse. Firstly, how can God do nothing by Himself? This is truly a weird unsolved enigma. Secondly, the Biblical Jesus is declaring that his judgment is right—why? Because he is following not his will but the will of God which is according to Christians his will. So in other words, not his will but his will. In short, why are his words true—simply because he abide not by his will but by his will. Do you perceive the difference?

Did anyone, seriously anyone, grasp what was being said here? I guess not.

Finally, the last part—“If I testify about myself, my testimony is not valid”. Can anyone imagine God testimony as invalid? Does this refer to “Lying”? Are we really to believe that? Nonetheless the ultimate problem here is the issue that God is testifying about himself yet insisting that if it relates to Him— “If I testify about myself”—it is wrong. Illogical.

A possible desperate Christian answer might be that God/Jesus is referring to his human nature. I would say, it would have been better to remain silent than to give this ridiculous answer, simply because:

–          You are asserting that by becoming a man, God testimony became invalid yet he was still God whose testimony is even above the word “Valid”—how can this be? How can God words or worse—his testimony valid and not valid at the same time?

–          How can we know when Jesus is talking in his human or divine nature?

–          By assuming that God words became unreliable, this would mean that He would have uttered lies. Istaghfor Allah.

–          Whether it was his human or divine nature—that does not refute the mere fact that it was God—hence still God testimony.
Now, what does the Quran says concerning God testimony:

قُلْ أَيُّ شَيْءٍ أَكْبَرُ شَهَادَةً ۖ قُلِ اللَّهُ ۖ

Say (O Muhammad SAW): “What thing is the most great in witness?” Say: Allah. (Holy Quran 6:22)

While in what relates to the statement “I can of mine own self do nothing”, Allah, the greatest says:

قُلْ أَتَعْبُدُونَ مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ مَا لَا يَمْلِكُ لَكُمْ ضَرًّا وَلَا نَفْعًا ۚ وَاللَّهُ هُوَ السَّمِيعُ الْعَلِيمُ

Say, “Do you worship besides Allah that which holds for you no [power of] harm or benefit while it is Allah who is the Hearing, the Knowing?” (Holy Quran 5:76)

 

 

So how many Gods are there?

3) Mark 12:29

“And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord”

John 20:17

“Jesus said to her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brothers, and say to them, I ascend to my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.”

Apparently, according to both these verses, Jesus has a God. How is that so? Doesn’t Christians believe in just one God—a Three Godhead? Or is it Two Gods now? Jesus and his “God”? Nonetheless, It is shiny clear according to Mark 12:29 which is basically a quote of Deuteronomy 6:4 that God is One.

Strikingly, Adam Clarke and Barnes are quite silent about this verse. I will quote another commentary, the well known Gill’s exposition of the entire Bible, as it seems to be exclusively interesting:

“God was his Father, not by creation, as he is to angels, and the souls of men, and therefore is called the Father of spirits; nor by adoption, as he is to the saints; nor with respect to the incarnation of Christ, for, as man, he had no father; or with regard to his office as Mediator, for as such he was a servant, and not a Son; but he was his Father by nature, or with regard to his divine person, being begotten of him, and so his own proper Son, and he his own proper Father;”

According to Gill, Jesus is not a “created” son as par rapport to his Father yet the Bible mentions Jesus as God firstborn—in other words, a created being. Obviously, God is not born, nor will He ever will be. Additionally, this latter tells us that God was a Father to Jesus by nature—What does Father by nature really means, one may ask? The Almighty God is at the same time a Father to himself and a Son—to himself? Surely, Christianity is one big mes.

Finally, Jesus is described and believed to be “Begotten”, a word which literary refers to the sexual mean of reproduction. Not only Jesus was shaped and created in his mother’s womb—this word unfortunately denotes an unworthy description related to the Almighty one really do not wish to open that door.

We have noticed how Jesus refers to his God, “My God and your God”, it is fascinating now to see what the Quran says concerning that issue:

لَقَدْ كَفَرَ الَّذِينَ قَالُوا إِنَّ اللَّهَ هُوَ الْمَسِيحُ ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ ۖ وَقَالَ الْمَسِيحُ يَا بَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ اعْبُدُوا اللَّهَ رَبِّي وَرَبَّكُمْ ۖ إِنَّهُ مَن يُشْرِكْ بِاللَّهِ فَقَدْ حَرَّمَ اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ الْجَنَّةَ وَمَأْوَاهُ النَّارُ ۖ وَمَا لِلظَّالِمِينَ مِنْ أَنصَارٍ

“They do blaspheme who say: “Allah is Christ the son of Mary.” But said Christ: “O Children of Israel! worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord.” Whoever joins other gods with Allah,- Allah will forbid him the garden, and the Fire will be his abode. There will for the wrong-doers be no one to help.” (Holy Quran 5:72)

ذَٰلِكَ عِيسَى ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ ۚ قَوْلَ الْحَقِّ الَّذِي فِيهِ يَمْتَرُونَ مَا كَانَ لِلَّهِ أَن يَتَّخِذَ مِن وَلَدٍ ۖ سُبْحَانَهُ ۚ إِذَا قَضَىٰ أَمْرًا فَإِنَّمَا يَقُولُ لَهُ كُن فَيَكُونُ وَإِنَّ اللَّهَ رَبِّي وَرَبُّكُمْ فَاعْبُدُوهُ ۚ هَٰذَا صِرَاطٌ مُّسْتَقِيمٌ

“That is Isa (Jesus) son of Maryam, in word of truth, concerning which they are wrangling. In no way is it for Allah to take to Him a child. All Extolment be to Him! When He decrees a Command, then He only says to it, “Be!” and it is.  And surely Allah is my Lord and your Lord, so worship Him. This is a straight Path.”

He is blaming himself now?!

4)  Mark 15:34   

“And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? which is, being interpreted, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?”

To me, it is one of the best biblical verses. I will draw first what is happening here. As a matter of fact, after being sentenced to death by crucifixion by Pontius Pilate, Jesus was nailed to the cross, where according to the Gospel of Mark; he was silent—unknowing what was happening to him—in a complete state of Shock!

Back to our issue, two points are actually raised here:

-To whom is Jesus talking to?

-Why is he blaming himself?

Apparently, either the Biblical God talk with himself—ask himself or even now blame himself—or something is really fishy going on here? I would say both.

Yet ironically, the bigger critical point here: Why is God blaming himself that he left himself to feel pain—all by himself? How could any normal, rational being believe this?

What do Christian missionaries present as response to this serious dilemma? A smart response is that Jesus was simply quoting Psalms 22, an Old Testament verse which to some extent is similar to that verse—a quote said by David. It may sound as a smart response from a shallow look but we examined carefully—it would seem so ridiculous. Ironically even though it is incomprehensible how David suddenly became Jesus—the passage if read carefully, one would undoubtedly note that it could not refer to Jesus—nonetheless, even if I would want to take it as a Prophecy—I am too nice—still that does not solve the issue. Just saying it is a prophecy simply means that it was known to happen yet it does not present a logical answer why Jesus was blaming himself?! In other words, a prophecy or not—Jesus still blamed why God left him, oddly himself—on the cross? The problem still stands!

To sum up: Difficulty arouse not only with the idea of a suicidal God—we have a biblical God that is not aware of what is going on, talking with himself and strikingly blaming himself why he killed himself—Fantastic.

The Quran:

وَقَالُوا اتَّخَذَ الرَّحْمَٰنُ وَلَدًا لَّقَدْ جِئْتُمْ شَيْئًا إِدًّا  تَكَادُ السَّمَاوَاتُ يَتَفَطَّرْنَ مِنْهُ وَتَنشَقُّ الْأَرْضُ وَتَخِرُّ الْجِبَالُ هَدًّا  أَن دَعَوْا لِلرَّحْمَٰنِ وَلَدًا  وَمَا يَنبَغِي لِلرَّحْمَٰنِ أَن يَتَّخِذَ وَلَدًا  إِن كُلُّ مَن فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ إِلَّا آتِي الرَّحْمَٰنِ عَبْدًا لَّقَدْ أَحْصَاهُمْ وَعَدَّهُمْ عَدًّا وَكُلُّهُمْ آتِيهِ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ فَرْدًا

“They say: “(Allah) Most Gracious has begotten a son!” Indeed you have brought forth (said) a terrible evil thing. At it the skies are ready to burst, the earth to split asunder, and the mountains to fall down in utter ruin, That they should invoke a son for (Allah) Most Gracious. For it is not consonant with the majesty of (Allah) Most Gracious that He should beget a son. Not one of the beings in the heavens and the earth but must come to (Allah) Most Gracious as a servant. Indeed He has already enumerated them, and He has numbered them with (exact) numbering. And everyone of them will come to Him singly on the Day of Judgment. (Noble Quran 19:88-95).

5)  Matthew 4:1-11; Luke 4:1-13

“Then Jesus was led by the Spirit into the desert to be tempted by the devil.”

Out of the four Gospels—only three mentions this incident and just two of them describe specifically what happened. While Mark is content with a general statement—John completely omits it. Therefore, our focus will be stressed on Matthew and Luke who narrate this fascinating story but with a slight difference which we will examine it shortly.

Apparently, the Spirit which is understood to be the Holy Spirit—One of God’s distinct personality that forms the trinity—has directed Jesus (himself?) for his temptation. One by just reading this would normally ask: God lead himself for his own temptation? Really?

We are told that Jesus was tempted for 40 days and during this period he fasted (Matthew 4:2; Luke 4:2)—obviously, so that his concentration be focused and ultimately avoiding sinning. Seeing Jesus has not succumbed—the Devil then uses his last three most powerful moves:

-He tells him to change stones into bread so that he could eat (Matthew 4:3; Luke 4:3)

-He takes him to the top of the temple and order him to jump  (Matthew 4:5-6; Luke 4:9) saying if you are the son of God—you will not be harmed—as the angels will prevent you from falling.

-Finally, he takes him (again?) to a very high mountain, showing him all the kingdom of the world and assuring him if he worships him—all what he has seen will be his. (Matthew 4:8-9; Luke 4:5-6).

From where do I begin—ah that seems a hard task.

I will divide my argument into five points:

I)  Mark, Matthew and Luke flat out contradict what James tells us in his epistle. As a matter of fact, according to James (1:13) “God cannot be tempted and nor does he tempt with evil”. A simple straightforward contradiction.

II) As already mentioned, Jesus fasted for 40 days. Quite interestingly, after that period, it is said that he became “Hungry”. Can anyone imagine a hungry God?

III) We read that Jesus was one time taken to top of the mountain and another to the high mountain—I honestly ask: Is Jesus a sack of potato that Satan throws from one place to another? Wake up Christians!!! This is the Almighty we are talking about.

IV) How could Satan have any effect on God, Almighty? How can he have power over His creator? And telling God to worship him? Seriously? Christians, do you realize what you are saying?

V) The book of Hebrews tells us that Jesus was tempted “in every way just as we are” (Hebrews 4:15). Now this is one bizarre terrible statement. Every way? Are we to believe that God thought of raping a woman? Throwing an old woman from a cliff? Or maybe dancing naked?

One way to reconcile this is to claim that Jesus did not sin, thus temptations did not have any effect any him. The issue is not whether he sinned or not—rather, the temptation. Whether he fell to Satan or not is irrelevant to the point discussed here.  Finally and as usual, you have the man part answer. It was the human part of God that was tempted. I don’t understand how that really solves the issue. First, do Christians, each time they face a difficulty, immediately shout: HUMAN PART! Second, on what basis? Third, even if we would want to accept that it was the human part that was being tempted—still it means that GOD WAS TEMPTED!According to the basic Christian belief, both the human and divine nature is both God.

The Quran:

وَرَبُّنَا الرَّحْمَٰنُ الْمُسْتَعَانُ عَلَىٰ مَا تَصِفُونَ

“And our Lord is the Beneficent Allah, Whose help is sought against what you ascribe (to Him).” (Noble Quran 21:112)

Good or not?

6) Luke 18:19; Matthew 19:16-17 and Mark 10:17-18

 

Consider the story of the rich young ruler. A story narrated by the first three Gospels. John here too—omits that story. Actually, the man is rich according to all three accounts, but only in Matthew he is said to be young and only in Luke he is said to be a ruler. Does that mean we are facing a contradiction here? Not the least. A contradiction occurs when two (or more) statements in relation to a subject conflict—one of them has to be wrong—which is not the case here.

Now, this young rich ruler approached Jesus by referring to him by the words: “Oh good teacher”. Jesus then asks him: Why are you calling me good? Only God is good! In other words, Jesus refused to be set on the same level of the Almighty—to be even put in a comparison. So how could God be not good but still good? He is not good but yet only he is good? A World of contradictions.

Another striking point to be considered is to compare these accounts. A process called by Christian scholars “Redaction Criticism”—which aims to point out how a Gospel author modified a story and why? It is noteworthy to mention that scholars believe that Mark was the first Gospel to be written, Luke and Matthew followed it and finally John. It is also believe that Matthew and Luke have considered Mark as one of their source. By comparing, we find that Luke agrees with Mark word for word. Yet let us read how Matthew renders the story:

“Now a man came up to Jesus and asked, “Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?”Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, obey the commandments.”

One of the interesting things about this passage is that the man who approaches Jesus uses the term “good” in both accounts but in Matthew he uses it to refer to the deed he must do, whereas in Mark and Luke he uses it to refer to Jesus. As a result the ensuing dialogue in Mark makes sense: Jesus by asking refuse to be compared to God while in Matthew the flow of dialogue seems a bit flow: Why would Jesus object to the man asking about what is good, on the ground that God is only good?

One may ask, why did Matthew alter the text? Obviously, Matthew did not like the issue that Jesus was claiming to be inferior to God and realized that this would cause a serious problem so what did he do? He changed the text.

Jesus, a prophet?

7) Luke 24:19:

“What things?” he asked. “About Jesus of Nazareth,” they replied. “He was a prophet, powerful in word and deed before God and all the people.”

Matthew 21:11:

“The crowds answered, “This is Jesus, the prophet from Nazareth in Galilee.”

Matthew 13:57:

And they took offense at him. But Jesus said to them, “Only in his hometown and in his own house is a prophet without honor.”

In the first two verses, we notice Jesus being referred to as a “Prophet” once by Cleopas, the brother of Joseph, the huband of Mary and another by the crowds. Yet what is striking is that in the last quotation, Jesus even refers to himself as a Prophet!!! As a matter of fact, when Jesus began preaching in the Synagogues, in his hometown—Nazareth, he was immediately rebuked by the Jews—his own people. Hence his words: “Only in his hometown and in his own house is a prophet without honor.”

Hence, the question now begs itself: Is Jesus a Prophet or God? Or could he both? Firstly, what is a Prophet? A Prophet is a person who conveys another person message. In religion, it refers generally to an individual who delivers a certain revelation to people. If Jesus was God, how would he be a Prophet? A prophet to whom? To himself? That seems pretty much absurd and illogical.

One answer I presume would be: Jesus was a prophet to the Father. He was delivering his Father message.

Counter-argument:

Yet Jesus and his Father are the one and same God. Hence, when a person says Jesus as a Prophet was simply transferring what the Father or his Father said is like saying God is transferring his own words.

Therefore, logically Jesus has to be either God or Prophet—and obviously, from the Biblical and logical perspective, the latter is to be picked.

Let’s go to the Holy Quran:

يَا أَهْلَ الْكِتَابِ لَا تَغْلُوا فِي دِينِكُمْ وَلَا تَقُولُوا عَلَى اللَّهِ إِلَّا الْحَقَّ ۚ إِنَّمَا الْمَسِيحُ عِيسَى ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ وَكَلِمَتُهُ أَلْقَاهَا إِلَىٰ مَرْيَمَ وَرُوحٌ مِّنْهُ ۖ فَآمِنُوا بِاللَّهِ وَرُسُلِهِ ۖ وَلَا تَقُولُوا ثَلَاثَةٌ ۚ انتَهُوا خَيْرًا لَّكُمْ ۚ إِنَّمَا اللَّهُ إِلَٰهٌ وَاحِدٌ ۖ سُبْحَانَهُ أَن يَكُونَ لَهُ وَلَدٌ ۘ لَّهُ مَا فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَمَا فِي الْأَرْضِ ۗ وَكَفَىٰ بِاللَّهِ وَكِيلًا

“O people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians)! Do not exceed the limits in your religion, nor say of Allah aught but the truth. The Messiah ‘Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), was (no more than) a Messenger of Allah and His Word, (“Be!” – and he was) which He bestowed on Maryam (Mary) and a spirit (Ruh) created by Him; so believe in Allah and His Messengers. Say not: “Three (trinity)!” Cease! (it is) better for you. For Allah is (the only) One Ilah (God), Glory be to Him (Far Exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belongs all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth. And Allah is All-Sufficient as a Disposer of affairs.” (4:171)


Circumsized, ate and evidently went to W.C?
8) Luke 2:21

“And when eight days were accomplished for the circumcising of the child, his name was called Jesus, which was so named of the angel before he was conceived in the womb.”

Is anyone not familiar with the meaning of the word “circumcised”? Just in case, circumcision simply means:

“Male circumcision is the surgical removal of some or the entire foreskin (prepuce) from the penis.”

Seriously, I am even ashamed of myself by saying this. How could anyone attribute such a thing to the Almighty God? He had the dirty part of his genitals cut? Dirty and this part? Unfortunately, Christians do not realize the extent of blasphemy they are uttering by believing that God was a man, a fully human being. We Muslims cannot but to say:

سبحان الله و تعالى عما يصفون

Praise is He highly on what they describe.

Now concerning the issue of Jesus eating and hitting the toilet, I would like to quote the Quran to show how God, Almighty deals with such subject, we read:

مَّا الْمَسِيحُ ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ إِلَّا رَسُولٌ قَدْ خَلَتْ مِن قَبْلِهِ الرُّسُلُ وَأُمُّهُ صِدِّيقَةٌ ۖ كَانَا يَأْكُلَانِ الطَّعَامَ ۗ انظُرْ كَيْفَ نُبَيِّنُ لَهُمُ الْآيَاتِ ثُمَّ انظُرْ أَنَّىٰ يُؤْفَكُونَ

“The Messiah, son of Mary, was not but a messenger; [other] messengers have passed on before him. And his mother was a supporter of truth. They both used to eat food. Look how We make clear to them the signs; then look how they are deluded away from the truth.” (Glorious Quran 5:75)

Consider the eloquence of the Quran and how it smoothly and intellectually delivers the message. The verse says that both Mary and Jesus ate food and obviously what does the person do next? It’s the toilet’s time.

Hence, the Quran strictly refute that nonsense but as we have seen in a beautiful eloquent manner. Al Hamdulilah.

The Quran says:

قُلْ أَغَيْرَ اللَّهِ أَتَّخِذُ وَلِيًّا فَاطِرِ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ وَهُوَ يُطْعِمُ وَلَا يُطْعَمُ ۗ قُلْ إِنِّي أُمِرْتُ أَنْ أَكُونَ أَوَّلَ مَنْ أَسْلَمَ ۖ وَلَا تَكُونَنَّ مِنَ الْمُشْرِكِينَ

“Say, ‘Is it other than Allah I should take as a protector, Creator of the heavens and the earth, while it is He who feeds and is not fed?” Say, [O Muhammad], “Indeed, I have been commanded to be the first [among you] who submit [to Allah ] and [was commanded], ‘Do not ever be of the polytheists.’ ” (Holy Quran 6:14)

And finally,

لَيْسَ كَمِثْلِهِ شَيْءٌ ۖ وَهُوَ السَّمِيعُ الْبَصِيرُ

“There is nothing whatever similar unto Him, and He is the One that hears and sees (all things).” (Noble Quran 42:11).

God changed his mind?
9) Matthew 26:39; Mark 14:36; Luke 22:42

“Father, if you are willing, please take this cup of suffering away from me. Yet I want your will to be done, not mine.”

According to the Christian teachings, specifically the Original Sin, no matter what a person does, no matter how much he prays, fasts, does good deeds—he is doomed to eternal Hell. What was the solution according to Christianity? God had to take human form—Jesus, to be crucified and ultimately to take all the sins of the world with him by dying. That may seem a bit weird but according to this faith—God did it according to his very own will. That was the only solution after all.

Ironically, Luke 22:42 tells us another thing. Here we notice Jesus praying to God, Almighty (himself?) not to die by taking away this “Cup of suffering”. In Luke, he simply asks once while in Mark, he insists three times!!!Now, doesn’t that K.O all the Christian faith apart? If God, Almighty willingly decided to go on a suicide mission—considering that it was the only solution plausible—Why did he suddenly change his mind? Are we to believe that God changes his mind now too? Although the Bible clearly mentions otherwise (Numbers 23:19).

Finally, Jesus says:”Your will to be done and not mine”.

We again here face a terrible nonsense. We note that:

-Jesus is talking with himself.

-Praying to himself.

-Asking himself to spare him from the mission.

-And for the final touch down, hoping that God’s will which is his will be done but not his will.

There is nothing I could say apart: Fantastic!

The Quranic perspective:
God is not a man: Is it that hard to understand?

10) Numbers 23:19; Samuel 15:39

“God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should change his mind.”

A simple straightforward fact: God is neither a man nor the son of a man. Why can’t Christians understand that? Who was Jesus? A pious God-fearing man and the son of Mary. Actually, God, Almighty since the beginning of time has sent Prophets with good news, with the message of Tawheed, the message of La Ilah illa Allah—there is no god but Allah warning mankind not to associate partners with God and not to worship the sun, the moon, the nature and of course—humans.  Nonetheless, thanks to Christianity—we are wrapped back to the ancient times.

A Christian rebuttal to this point might simply be:

“The verse says that God is not a man and not the Son of man—however, it does not say that God can never be a man or the Son of Man.”

Counter rebuttal:

This argument fails to perceive that the Old Testament is filled with verses that say that God is this or that and those verses remain true for eternity as Christians themselves will concede in their theology. What do I mean?

Let us take Deuteronomy 6:4 as an example.

“Hear, O Israel! The LORD is our God, the LORD is one!”

To be consistent the proponents of the first rebuttal must now say that it is possible for God to be 1000 instead of echad(one) in the future if He so wishes. I do not think any reasonable Christian will agree to that.

And finally for my K.O point, Psalms 102:27 assures that God is the same, yesterday, today and tomorrow:

“But you remain the same, and your years will never end.”

Muslims sometimes when shocked by a certain thing say:

سبحان الدي يغير و لا يتغير

Praise is to Him that [causes] change but is never changed.

wa Allaahu Alam.
[and God knows best.]

Christmas: The Origins [Shaykh Abdullah Hakim Quick]

Posted on by Leave a comment

Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem
بِسۡمِ ٱللهِ ٱلرَّحۡمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ ,

What are the origins of Christmas? See what a historian, social activist and modern explorer has to say on this subject. It’s a pleasant introduction into a 25 minute video that goes indepth into the history, politics and theology behind the day of Christmas. Shaykh Abdullah’s speaking style is both simple and extant (to the point), yet his speech is not condemning, in fact it’s quite inviting, with that we invite both Muslims and Christians to watch his video:

For the more enthusiastic seeker with a few minutes extra to spare, the Shaykh has authored a wonderfully written article:

Since earliest times the inhabitants of the Northern countries have observed that there is a period during the year when the days begin to lengthen and the cold begins to strengthen.  This event is the Winter Solstice, the turning point when winter having reached its zenith, has also reached the point when it must decline again towards spring.  Thus, December 21st is the shortest day of the year.
It was on or about December 21st that the Ancient Greeks celebrated the Bacchanalia or festivities to honour Bacchus the god of wine.  In Ancient Rome the Saturnalia of festivals in honour of Saturn, the god of time, began on December 17th and continued for seven days.  Both festivals ended in drunkenness, obscenity and disorder.  The Druids observed this season in their great roofless temples at Stonehenge and Avebury in England.  Torches were lit and strange pagan ceremonies were enacted in honour of the Sun god and to cut the Mysterious Mistletoe to which they gave god-like powers.  Even the Ancient Egyptians celebrated this mid-winter in honour of Horus, the son of Isis, born at the close of December.

The Ancient Germanic tribes celebrated the pagan feast of the 12 Night from Dec. 25th to Jan. 6th.  The conflicts between the active forces of nature were represented as battles between the gods and plants.  The winter was the Ice-Giant, cruel and unruly, and darkness and death followed him.  The Sun god and the South Wind were symbols of light and life.  At last Thor, the god of the Thunderstorm riding on the wings of the air hurled his thunderbolt at the winter castle and demolished it.

In Scandinavian countries, great fires were kindled to defy the Frost King.  The followers of Mithra, throughout the Northern countries, called this period sol invictus representing the time of the victory of light over darkness.  Mithra, for them, was not only the Sun god, but the Mediator between mankind and the Supreme Being.  His birthday was celebrated on the 25th of December.  Sunday, the seventh day of the week (for seven was his number) was consecrated to him, and known as the Lord’s Day long before the Christian Era.

The roots of the Christmas observance, therefore, go deeply into the folklore of the early pagan traditions.  What we may read of Christmas in ancient days finds its flower in the past  and present customs of Western Civilization.  We should clearly understand one important fact.  Christmas is not the actual date of the birth of Jesus (p.b.u.h), but a compromise with paganism.  The Gospels say nothing about the seasons of the year when Jesus was born.  On the other hand, they do tell us that shepherds were guarding their flocks in the open air.  Hence, many of the early leaders of the Church considered it most likely that the nativity took place either in the late summer of early Fall.

This and countless facts point to the conclusion that Christmas (Dec. 25th) actually has nothing to do with Jesus (p.b.u.h.) and Mary (p.b.u.h.), the humble of servants of Allah who abstained from the world and submitted entirely to their lord. Christmas has actually incorporated into itself all the pagan festivals; Greek, Roman, Druid, German, Scandinavian, etc., and given them new meaning.  The wild revels of the Bacchanalia, the Saturnalia, and the Twelve Nights survive in a milder form in the merriment that marks the season of Christmas today.

“Christmas gifts themselves remind us of the presents that were exchanged in Rome during Saturnalia.  In Rome, it might be added, the presence usually took the form of wax tapers (candles) and dolls – the latter being in turn a survival of human sacrifices once offered to Saturn.  It is a queer thought that in our Christmas presents we are preserving under another form one of the most savage customs of our barbarian ancestors!  The shouts of ‘Bona Saturnalia’, which the Roman people exchanged among themselves are the precursors of ‘Merry Christmas!’ The decorations and illuminations of our Christians churches recall the temples of Saturn, radiant with burning taper and resplendent with garlands”

SANTA CLAUS
Today, when Christmas is mentioned, most people immediately think of Santa Claus. The image of Jesus, the son of Mary ((Peace be upon them) is secondary and sometimes lost in the merriment and materialism. The prices in the market place go up and we find that people are spending thousands in order to buy gifts for their friends and neighbours. Most Christians fall into debt that can last for the greater part of the year.
The problem that comes during the Christmas season for Muslims and non-Christians is that there are a number of contradictory symbols. Some of these symbols reveal an animistic religious base but others appear to be monotheistic. At the top of all of them is Santa Claus. One might then ask ‘What do pagan festivals have to do with the innocent, loveable Santa Claus?’

“Actually, in every one of these festivals, the leading figure was an old man with a large, white beard.  In the Bacchanalia, the chief god was not actually the young Bacchus, but the aged, cheery and decidedly disreputable Silenus, the chief of the Satyrs (Half man, half animal figures of Greek mythology) and the god of drunkards.  In the Saturnalia, it was Saturn, a dignified and venerable old gentleman, the god of Time.  In the Germanic feasts it was Thor, a person of patriarchal aspect, and a warrior to boot.” So, although the main figure of the Christian festival was supposed to be Jesus, the child-god born to an innocent woman, the pagan ways of the past were too strong in the hearts of the Christians to be easily dismissed.  The earlier gods were replaced by Saint Nicholas, an austere Christian Bishop who was born in Turkey in the 4th Century A.D., and became the patron Saint of children throughout the Western World.  The name Saint Nicholas has now been abbreviated to Santa Claus and even his image has changed, but one fact remains crystal clear; this merry, mystical figure that flies through the air in a reindeer-drawn sleigh is the re-incarnation of a pagan deity that is very much alive today in the minds of men.

WHY DOES SANTA COME DOWN THE CHIMNEY?
“The early Germans considered the Norse Hertha or Bertha, the goddess of domesticity and the home.  During the winter solstice, houses were decked with Fir and Evergreens to welcome her coming.  When the family and the serfs gathered to dine, a great alter of flat stones was erected and here a fire of Fir bough was laid.  Hertha descended through the smoke, guiding those who were wise in Saga to foretell the fortunes of those persons at the feast.  We learn from this story of Hertha and the reason why Santa Claus comes down the chimney instead of in at the door.”

THE CHRISTMAS TREE AND THE YULE LOG
In just about all times and continents, we find records of the worship, at some former period, of a tree as a divine object.  The Pagan Scandinavians called their greatest and most famous tree (the Ash tree) Yggdrasil.  Nobody had ever seen it, but everybody believed in it.  It was supposed to have been so big that it had three roots, one in heaven, one in hell, and one on earth.  According to Scandinavian mythology, when the roots of Yggdrasil are eaten through, the tree will fall over and the end of all things will have arrived.  The Anglo-Saxon Druids adopted this mythology and during Christmas period chose Yule log which they blessed an proclaimed that it should be ever burning.  This custom has survived and the Yule log is burnt throughout England.  The origin if he sacred tree may have been developed in Ancient Egypt and other older societies.”  Egypt had one in the palm, which puts forth a shoot every month.  From Egypt the custom reached Rome, where it was added to the other ceremonies of the Saturnalia.  But as palm trees do not grow in Italy, other trees were used in its stead.  A small fir tree, or the crest of a large one was found to be the most suitable because it is shaped like a cone or pyramid.  This was decorated with twelve burning tapers lit in honour of the god of Time.  At the very tip of the pyramid blazed the representation of a radiant sun placed there in honour of Apollo, the sun-god to whom the three last days of December were dedicated.”

HOLLY
“Some people believe that the word “Holly” is a form of the word “Holy” because of the association of these evergreens with Christmas.  This is not the true derivation, however.  Holly is merely a variation of Holin, Hollin, or Holm.  The name Holme is now used for a kind of oak.  This tree was admired by the Druids who believed that its evergreen leaves attested to the fact that the sun never deserted it. It was therefore, sacred.  It was also believed to be hateful to witches and is therefore, placed on doors and windows to keep out the evil spirits.”

CONCLUSION
This is only a glimpse at the incredible amount of distortion and paganism that has been incorporated into the Christmas doctrine and disseminated throughout the world in the name of love, giving, and the purity of the Virgin Mary and Jesus (Peace be upon them). Somewhere along the line when the Christians were being tortured and killed in Roman coliseums, somebody made the decision to make it easy for the northern people to accept these teachings. So what comes about is an adaptation and a change so that you actually have the Christmas ceremony which once represented Pagan images of nature, images based upon the worship of the sun, or the worship of the created things, now in the monotheistic religion.

It is interesting to note that as late as 1647, Britain’s Puritan Parliament had Christmas ceremony banned as pagan. St. Nicholas appeared in early European folklore as another character, sometimes known as Beowulf , or Nick or Nikker. He was said to be a demon or the evil spirit of the north. Descriptions of him show him when humanoid as an aged creature with a flowing white beard. By The 16th century, the term had become more specific, the Chrisitianized:”Old Nick” or even “St. Nicholas” meant the devil proper. In the Bible, Isaiah 14:13, the devil’s throne was in the north. Satan presided over the winter’s darkness. So the character representing evil for the northern Christians was transferred into the figure of Santa Claus. He was often covered with red fur or driven in a sleigh by winged snakes.

If Santa Claus now is flying all over the world giving gifts to children what happened to the labour of their mother and the father?  Why is Santa Claus coming down the chimney? That is because there was a belief in ancient Scandinavia that a goddess of flames would come into the home.  And so this confusion now is all put together on the Christmas occasion and people have forgotten about Isa (p.b.u.h).

In the Islamic understanding, Isa or Jesus (p.b.u.h), the son of Mary (p.b.u.h)was a very humble person who possessed only one or two changes of clothing. He used to walk bare foot most of the time. He renounced the life of materialism and wanted people to move away from focussing on gold and silver. He encouraged the Children of Israel to have spirituality and to remember the Creator.  According to most Christian and Muslim theologians, the actual birth of Jesus the son of Mary (p.b.u.h) was in the summer.  In a Qur’anic chapter called Maryam ( Quran 19:16-40), there is a detailed discourse on Mary (p.b.u.h).  She is depicted as a very pious individual who spent most of her life fasting.  When the angel Gabriel told her that she would have a son, she couldn’t believe it. He informed her that it would happen by the power of God who would breath his spirit into her she would become pregnant; and she did.  She went out of the city to a remote area.  In the Quran, 19:24-25, Allah (swt) sent the angel to tell her that water will come under her and then to shake the palm tree and rutuban janniyya, the ripe dates, will fall down from the tree.  The Arabs knew that the ripe dates come in the summer time. Even the Christians agreed with this because, according to their traditions, the shepherds were putting their flocks outside.  And in the area of Bethlehem and Nazarath this could only be done in the warm weather.

Therefore, it is basically agreed upon that Jesus (p.b.u.h.) was a humble, simple, non- materialistic person who was born in the summer.  What is happening now is a cleverly contrived mixture that is moving more towards the celebration of immorality and materialism than piety and God-consciousness.

Allah has revealed in the Blessed Qur’an , Surah An-Nisaa (157-9), the following verses:

…And because of their sayings: We killed the Messiah Jesus son of Mary, Allah’s messenger, but they killed him not nor crucified him. It appeared so to them. And lo, those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture. They killed him not for certain. But Allah took him unto Himself.  And Allah is ever Mighty, Wise.  There is not one of the People of the Book but will believe in him before his death, and on the Day of Resurrection he will be a witness against them.

In Surah Al Ma’idah is the following:

The Messiah, son of Maryam is but an Apostle; Apostles before him have Indeed passed away. And his mother was a truthful woman. They both used to eat food.  See how We make the communications clear to them, then behold, how they are turned away. Say: Do you serve besides Allah that which does not control for you any harm, or any profit? And Allah is the All Hearing, the All Knowing.

Say: O followers of the Book! Be not unduly immoderate in your religion, and do not follow the low desire of people who went astray before and led many astray and went astray from the right path.

Shaykh Abdullah Hakim Quick : Source

wa Allaahu Alam.
[and God knows best.]

Muslims & Christmas – Etiquettes and Rulings: Shaykh Mumtaz ul Haq [db]

Posted on by One comment

Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem
بِسۡمِ ٱللهِ ٱلرَّحۡمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ ,

As Christmas dawns upon us yet again, Shaykh Mumtaz ul Haq [db] has prepared for the Muslims and non-Muslims some Naseeha (advice) on the rulings of the etiquette of Christmas. Can Muslims wish non-Muslims, “Merry Christmas“, “Happy Holidays“, “Season’s Greetings“? How are Muslims supposed to respond to such greetings? All answered in the video below:

Provided in an emergency upload by the Hanafi Fiqh Channel, this video is of utmost importance to Muslim and non-Muslim relations. It assists in helping to foster good relations, understanding where our cultural norms and values differ and how to avoid awkward moments. Please spread insha Allaah, so that many can benefit from it!

As an addendum, here is Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen’s fatwa on saying, “Merry Christmas”:

Responding to Merry Christmas by Shaykh ibn ‘Uthaymeen (rahimahullaah)

Question:
What is the ruling o­n congratulating the disbelievers o­n their Christmas celebration? And how do we respond to them if they greet us with it. And is it permissible to go to the places where they are having celebrations for that purpose. And does the person (Muslim) take a sin if he does the aforementioned without any intent? Rather he o­nly does it being courteous, or due to shyness or due to being put in an awkward situation, or due to some other reasons. And is it permissible to resemble them in this?

Answer: 
Congratulating the disbelievers o­n their Christmas celebration or other than that from their religious holidays is not permissible according to the consensus. As was related by Imaam Ibn Al Qayyim, may Allaah have mercy upon him, in his book “The ruling o­n the people beneath the Muslim protection”, when he said: “As for congratulating the disbelievers for their religious ceremonies that have kufr (disbelief) attached to it, then it is not permissible according to the consensus. For example congratulating them for their holidays or their fasts, so the person says, “May you have a bless holiday”, or he wishes them well for their holiday or something like that. So this, if the o­ne who says it escapes from falling into kufr (disbelief), is (still) from the impermissible things. And it is o­n the same level as congratulating them for prostrating to the cross. Rather it is a greater sin with Allaah. And it is a more severe abomination than to congratulate them for drinking alcohol and killing someone, committing illegal sexual intercourse and things of this nature. And many of the people who don’t have any deen(or respect for the deen) fall into this. And he doesn’t know the ugliness (evil) of what he has done. So whoever congratulates a person for committing sins, or innovations, or disbelief, then he has exposed himself to the hate, wrath (anger) of Allaah.”

(Shaykh ibn ‘Uthaymeen (rahimahullaah) continues)

So congratulating the disbelievers o­n the religious holidays is not permissible, as shown by the proof brought by Ibn Al Qayim (rahimahullaah). Because in it, (congratulating the kufar o­n their religious holidays) is an approval for what they are upon from their kufr ceremonies, and showing them that you are please with it. Even if the person is not pleased with the actual kufr itself, it is also not permissible for the Muslim to be pleased with kufr ceremonies, or to congratulate them for it. Because Allaah the Exalted is not pleased with that, as Allaah the Exalted says,

“If you disbelieve, then verily, Allaah is not in need of you, He likes not disbelief for His slaves. And if you are grateful (by being believers), He is pleased therewith for you.” (AzZumar 39: 7)

And the Exalted says,

“This day, I have perfected your religion for you, completed My Favor upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion.” (Al-Ma’idah 5: 3)

So congratulating them with this is haram whether this person is your co-worker or not. So if they greet us with their holiday greeting we don’t respond to them with it, because it’s not our holiday, and they are holidays that Allaah is not pleased with, and because it is something that is either innovated in their religion, or it was legislated but has since been abrogated by the deen of Islam that which Muhammad peace and blessing be upon him, was sent with to all of the creation. And He (Allaah) says about it (Islam)

“And whoever seeks a religion other than Islam, it will never be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be o­ne of the losers” (Aali Imran 3: 85)

And for the Muslim to accept their invitations to these occasions (holiday celebrations) is haram (Impermissible). Because this is worst than congratulating them with it, because this would entail participating with them in this. Also it is haram for the Muslim to imitate the disbelievers by establishing celebrations for these occasions, or to exchanges gifts, or to distribute sweets, or trays of food, or to stop work or anything like this. Due to the statement of the Prophet, peace and blessing be upon him, “Whoever imitates a people is from them”. Shaykh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymeeyah, may Allaah have mercy upon him, said in his book, “Follow the straight path and oppose the path to the fire” that “Imitating them in some of their celebration causes happiness in their hearts for what they are upon from falsehood. And it is possible that this might encourage them to take advantage of this opportunity to humiliate the weak minded”.

And whoever does anything from this is a sinner. And it is the same whether he did it being courteous, or seeking friendship, or due to shyness, or any other reason, because this is from being deceitful in the deen of Allaah. And this is from the reasons that reinforce the psyche of the disbelievers and to make them proud of their deen.

Source of Fatwa.

wa Allaahu Alam.
[and Allaah knows best.]

29 Sexually Explicit, Profane and Dirty Stories and Verses in the Bible

Posted on by 3 comments

Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem
بِسۡمِ ٱللهِ ٱلرَّحۡمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ ,

While it is no hidden secret that the Bible contains some of the most perverted, gross and indecent stories of sexual decadence in history, most people are unaware as to the severity of its contents. This post is not intended for audiences under the age of 18, or if you’re older than 18 we still don’t suggest you pervert your mind with these abhorrent tales of sexual escapades as done by the Bible’s “holiest” men. In fact, one of the most anti-Islamic propagandists, the uneducated and disillusioned “sam shamoun”, who is known for his incoherent ramblings and insulting tirades against Muslims, was embarrassed by Br. Shabbir Ally when confronted with a Children’s Bible and its sexual contents:

What’s worse for Christianity, is that sam isn’t alone, his partner in crime, david wood also has admitted that there are many things he great dislikes from his own scripture, as he has said, “there are many things which bother me that are in the Bible“:

You may often wonder why it is that motels and hotels, especially run down and shady rooms for rent businesses, have kept Bibles in the drawers by the bedside. It isn’t any secret that the Bible is full of sexual tales, essentially it’s hardcore pornographic literature, it’s good for business, no one gains sexual morality from reading the Bible, but it sure does stir one’s fantasies:

(1) Then went Samson to Gaza, and saw there an harlot, and went in unto her. – Bible : Judges (16) : 1.

(2) And they made their father drink wine that night: and the firstborn went in, and lay with her father; and he perceived not when she lay down, nor when she arose. And it came to pass on the morrow, that the firstborn said unto the younger, Behold, I lay yesternight with my father: let us make him drink wine this night also; and go thou in, and lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our father. And they made their father drink wine that night also: and the younger arose, and lay with him; and he perceived not when she lay down, nor when she arose. Thus were both the daughters of Lot with child by their father. –  Bible : Genesis (19) : 33 – 36.

(3) And it came to pass, when Israel dwelt in that land, that Reuben went and lay with Bilhah his father’s concubine: and Israel heard it. Now the sons of Jacob were twelve. – Bible : Genesis (35) : 22.

(4) And Judah saw there a daughter of a certain Canaanite, whose name was Shuah; and he took her, and went in unto her. –  Bible: Genesis (38) : 2.

(5) And Judah said unto Onan, Go in unto thy brother’s wife, and marry her, and raise up seed to thy brother. And Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother’s wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother. –  Bible : Genesis (38) : 8 – 9.

(6) When Judah saw her, he thought her to be an harlot; because she had covered her face. And he turned unto her by the way, and said, Go to, I pray thee, let me come in unto thee; (for he knew not that she was his daughter in law.) And she said, What wilt thou give me, that thou mayest come in unto me? And he said, I will send thee a kid from the flock. And she said, Wilt thou give me a pledge, till thou send it? And he said, What pledge shall I give thee? And she said, Thy signet, and thy bracelets, and thy staff that is in thine hand. And he gave it her, and came in unto her, and she conceived by him.  – Bible : Genesis (38) : 15 – 18.

(7) And when she had brought them unto him to eat, he took hold of her, and said unto her, Come lie with me, my sister. And she answered him, Nay, my brother, do not force me; for no such thing ought to be done in Israel: do not thou this folly. And I, whither shall I cause my shame to go? and as for thee, thou shalt be as one of the fools in Israel. Now therefore, I pray thee, speak unto the king; for he will not withhold me from thee. Howbeit he would not hearken unto her voice: but, being stronger than she, forced her, and lay with her. –  Bible : 2 Samuel (13) : 11 – 14.

(8) So they spread Absalom a tent upon the top of the house; and Absalom went in unto his father’s concubines in the sight of all Israel. – Bible : 2 Samuel (16) : 22.

(9) Thou hast played the whore also with the Assyrians, because thou wast unsatiable; yea, thou hast played the harlot with them, and yet couldest not be satisfied. –  Bible : Ezekiel (16) : 28.

(10) And they committed whoredoms in Egypt; they committed whoredoms in their youth: there were their breasts pressed, and there they bruised the teats of their virginity. – Bible : Ezekiel (23) : 3.

(11) And Aholah played the harlot when she was mine; and she doted on her lovers, on the Assyrians her neighbours, Which were clothed with blue, captains and rulers, all of them desirable young men, horsemen riding upon horses. Thus she committed her whoredoms with them, with all them that were the chosen men of Assyria, and with all on whom she doted: with all their idols she defiled herself. Neither left she her whoredoms brought from Egypt: for in her youth they lay with her, and they bruised the breasts of her virginity, and poured their whoredom upon her.  – Bible : Ezekiel (23) : 5 – 8.

(12) And when her sister Aholibah saw this, she was more corrupt in her inordinate love than she, and in her whoredoms more than her sister in her whoredoms. She doted upon the Assyrians her neighbours, captains and rulers clothed most gorgeously, horsemen riding upon horses, all of them desirable young men. Then I saw that she was defiled, that they took both one way, And that she increased her whoredoms: for when she saw men pourtrayed upon the wall, the images of the Chaldeans pourtrayed with vermilion, Girded with girdles upon their loins, exceeding in dyed attire upon their heads, all of them princes to look to, after the manner of the Babylonians of Chaldea, the land of their nativity: And as soon as she saw them with her eyes, she doted upon them, and sent messengers unto them into Chaldea. And the Babylonians came to her into the bed of love, and they defiled her with their whoredom, and she was polluted with them, and her mind was alienated from them. So she discovered her whoredoms, and discovered her nakedness: then my mind was alienated from her, like as my mind was alienated from her sister. Yet she multiplied her whoredoms, in calling to remembrance the days of her youth, wherein she had played the harlot in the land of Egypt. For she doted upon their paramours, whose flesh is as the flesh of asses, and whose issue is like the issue of horses. Thus thou calledst to remembrance the lewdness of thy youth, in bruising thy teats by the Egyptians for the paps of thy youth. – Bible : Ezekiel (23) : 11 – 21.

(13) My people ask counsel at their stocks, and their staff declareth unto them: for the spirit of whoredoms hath caused them to err, and they have gone a whoring from under their God. –  Bible: Hosea (4) : 12.

(14) I have seen an horrible thing in the house of Israel: there is the whoredom of Ephraim, Israel is defiled.  – Bible : Hosea (6) : 10.

(15) Rejoice not, O Israel, for joy, as other people: for thou hast gone a whoring from thy God, thou hast loved a reward upon every cornfloor. –  Bible : Hosea (9) : 1.

(16) And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent. – Bible : Genesis (9) : 21.

(17) And he stripped off his clothes also, and prophesied before Samuel in like manner, and lay down naked all that day and all that night. Wherefore they say, Is Saul also among the prophets?  – Bible : 1 Samuel (19) : 24.

(18) Then David returned to bless his household. And Michal the daughter of Saul came out to meet David, and said, How glorious was the king of Israel to day, who uncovered himself to day in the eyes of the handmaids of his servants, as one of the vain fellows shamelessly uncovereth himself!  – Bible : 2 Samuel (6) : 20.

(19) So shall the king of Assyria lead away the Egyptians prisoners, and the Ethiopians captives, young and old, naked and barefoot, even with their buttocks uncovered, to the shame of Egypt.  – Bible : Isaiah (20) : 4.

(20) And beheld among the simple ones, I discerned among the youths, a young man void of understanding, Passing through the street near her corner; and he went the way to her house, In the twilight, in the evening, in the black and dark night: And, behold, there met him a woman with the attire of an harlot, and subtil of heart. (She is loud and stubborn; her feet abide not in her house: Now is she without, now in the streets, and lieth in wait at every corner.) So she caught him, and kissed him, and with an impudent face said unto him, I have peace offerings with me; this day have I payed my vows. Therefore came I forth to meet thee, diligently to seek thy face, and I have found thee. I have decked my bed with coverings of tapestry, with carved works, with fine linen of Egypt. I have perfumed my bed with myrrh, aloes, and cinnamon. Come, let us take our fill of love until the morning: let us solace ourselves with loves. For the goodman is not at home, he is gone a long journey: He hath taken a bag of money with him, and will come home at the day appointed. With her much fair speech she caused him to yield, with the flattering of her lips she forced him. He goeth after her straightway, as an ox goeth to the slaughter, or as a fool to the correction of the stocks; –  Bible : Proverbs (7) : 7 – 22.

(21) Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled, and their wives ravished.  – Bible : Isaiah (13) : 16.

(22) And, lo, he hath given occasions of speech against her, saying, I found not thy daughter a maid; and yet these are the tokens of my daughter’s virginity. And they shall spread the cloth before the elders of the city.  – Bible : Deuteronomy (22) : 17.

(23) While the king sitteth at his table, my spikenard sendeth forth the smell thereof. A bundle of myrrh is my well-beloved unto me; he shall lie all night betwixt my breasts.  – Bible : Song of Solomon (1) : 12 – 13.

(24) Thy two breasts are like two young roes that are twins, which feed among the lilies.  – Bible : Song of Solomon (4) : 5.

(25) I am a wall, and my breasts like towers: then was I in his eyes as one that found favour.  – Bible : Song of Solomon (8) : 10.

(26) But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves. – Bible : Numbers (31) : 18.

(27) This thy stature is like to a palm tree, and thy breasts to clusters of grapes. I said, I will go up to the palm tree, I will take hold of the boughs thereof: now also thy breasts shall be as clusters of the vine, and the smell of thy nose like apples; – Bible : Song of Solomon (7) : 7 – 8.

(28) And David sent messengers, and took her; and she came in unto him, and he lay with her; for she was purified from her uncleanness: and she returned unto her house.  –  Bible : 2 Samuel (11) : 4.

(29) Thy two breasts are like two young roes that are twins. – Bible : Song of Solomon (7) : 3.

As a special treat, this website has pictorial depictions of the Bible’s sexual literature, it’s a bit awkward at first but it really brings to reality the obscene acts that this, so called, “holy scripture” contains.

wa Allahu Alam.
[and God knows best.]

Atheism: Belief in the Inconsistent.

Posted on by Leave a comment

Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem
بِسۡمِ ٱللهِ ٱلرَّحۡمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ ,

In light of modern militant atheism, let’s take a logical, analytical and methodological approach towards understanding their position for the purpose of coming to a common understanding to develop our da’wah. To begin with, we must first comprehend what atheism is and is not, that is to define it.

Theism – the belief (ism) in a God (theos).
Atheism – the disbelief in (a) God(s) or the negation (denial) of belief in (a) God(s).

The “a” is a negation of the statement, just as would find in:

Gnostic – a knower.
Agnostic – one who does not know.

It is as this point I’d like to introduce the basis for atheism, the cardinal belief of the atheist:

“God(s) do(es) not exist, because their exists no evidence for this (these) God(s).”

The typical response to such a statement, is usually to create arguments, premises, statements that in someway try to present God or the existence of God as a logical position. This is problematic because the statement of the atheist is by innate nature, inherently flawed. That is to say, their position is flawed, the question is flawed, so the answer will definitely have flaws. Therefore, the response to such a statement should not be an attempt to refute it, as the atheist has already concluded their position:

(If) there is no proof for God => (then, this implies that) God does not exist.

This is called a logical implication, taking the form (if) A (then) => B.

The proper response to such a statement, should be to question their “if”. What does this atheist mean, by “evidence”?

Do they mean philosophical? Super natural? Empirical? All of the above?

Usually, atheists have to create philosophical arguments to defend their empirical reasoning. Meaning, the evidence they seek is empirical. Empirical evidences is defined as that which can be seen, touched, heard, smelled and tasted. More or less, it has to be something which one can directly interact with, in a physical sense.

At this point, as a Muslim, I have to categorically dismiss such a notion of God. This atheist, believes in the disbelief of a God that Islam neither condones nor promotes. Muslims believe in Allaah, who is more or less described as being a non-physical, incomparable being, of which we cannot comprehend, because this Allaah is unlike anything we know and our minds can only generate concepts which are relative to what we see, hear, touch, smell and taste because we as humans function by these mechanical attributes in this world. So the atheist, is disbelieving in a concept of God that we as Muslims also hold to be irrational.

I am not condoning the belief of the atheist, but it is as this occasion, we can begin to understand what form our da’wah has to take towards them. Let them know, that their concept of God, is greatly flawed and thus their arguments towards such a God we wholly reject.

They may then pose the question, if God is all seeing, should God not have 1000 eyes?

Taking my advice from above, why should God need eyes to see? Eyes are built to function in this world, for which we are limited in numerous ways. The eyes of the Christian God only saw the Israelite kingdoms while being tempted by Satan. In this regard, we accept that human vision is greatly limited, which ever being has a human eye, cannot be all seeing, or in this regard, all knowing, as the eye is not meant to function as such.

So then the question presents itself, if you don’t know the nature of this God, how can you know that this God exists. If God is not a physical being, then what is God? How would one be assured that what you don’t see, feel, hear, taste or smell, exists?

I’d like to say that that’s also an inherently flawed question, which we will answer by using the age old method of proof by contradiction through analytical deduction by way of conversing their statements through an analogy:

“How do we know that Alexander the Great (insert any historical figure here) existed?”

None of us, have ever touched, seen, heard, smelled or tasted Alexander. So the erroneous concept of the onus on being on theists to present such a case to suit empiricist concepts is out of the window. If you believe that a historical figure existed without fulfilling the above criteria, then you cannot demand that the only evidence to prove God’s existence should be that which you also cannot use to substantiate your belief.

So what do we rely on to confirm that Alexander the Great existed? Why, the historical record of historians, reliant upon numerous narrations of his conquests, victories and losses. The vast amount of testification to this person’s existence or any other historical person’s existence, really depends upon the mass flow of historical information from the people at his time and after his time, attesting to his existence. Therefore, with that logic, we must also confirm that God exists, just as the reasoning for Alexander’s existence is used to confirm his. The testification of thousands at their specific time in existence to God’s works throughout our history, is testament to His existence. We simply use the same method that we used to substantiate the existence of Kingdom’s, historical figures, or events.

If the atheist presupposes that we cannot use the same method, then we must question their objective integrity. Are they questioning to understand, or questioning to display their character flaw of hypocrisy? What is good for you, is it not also good for me?

wa Allaahu Alam.

Prophetic Cure: The Fly’s Cure

Posted on by Leave a comment

Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem
بِسۡمِ ٱللهِ ٱلرَّحۡمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ ,

Prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him) said: “If a fly falls down to your vessel, drown it then remove it, for one of its wings has the ailment and the other has the cure,”

The surface of flies is the last place you would expect to find antibiotics, yet that is exactly where a team of Australian researchers is concentrating their efforts.

Working on the theory that flies must have remarkable antimicrobial defences to survive rotting dung, meat and fruit, the team at the Department of Biological Sciences , Macquarie University, set out to identify those antibacterial properties manifesting at different stages of a fly’s development.

“Our research is a small part of a global research effort for new antibiotics, but we are looking where we believe no-one has looked before,” said Ms Joanne Clarke, who presented the group’s findings at the Australian Society for Microbiology Conference  in Melbourne this week. The project is part of her PhD thesis.

The scientists tested four different species of fly: a house fly, a sheep blowfly, a vinegar fruit fly and the control, a Queensland fruit fly which lays its eggs in fresh fruit. These larvae do not need as much antibacterial compound because they do not come into contact with as much bacteria.

Flies go through the life stages of larvae and pupae before becoming adults. In the pupae stage, the fly is encased in a protective casing and does not feed. “We predicted they would not produce many antibiotics,” said Ms Clarke.

They did not. However the larvae all showed antibacterial properties (except that of the Queensland fruit fly control).

As did all the adult fly species, including the Queensland fruit fly (which at this point requires antibacterial protection because it has contact with other flies and is mobile).

Such properties were present on the fly surface in all four species, although antibacterial properties occur in the gut as well. “You find activity in both places,” said Ms Clarke.

“The reason we concentrated on the surface is because it is a simpler extraction.”

The antibiotic material is extracted by drowning the flies in ethanol, then running the mixture through a filter to obtain the crude extract.

When this was placed in a solution with various bacteria including E.coli, Golden Staph, Candida (a yeast) and a common hospital pathogen, antibiotic action was observed every time.

“We are now trying to identify the specific antibacterial compounds,” said Ms Clarke. Ultimately these will be chemically synthesised.

Because the compounds are not from bacteria, any genes conferring resistance to them may not be as easily transferred into pathogens. It is hoped this new form of antibiotics will have a longer effective therapeutic life.

http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2002/10/01/689400.htm

wa Allaahu Alam.

« Older Entries Recent Entries »