Category Archives: CL Edwards/ Calling Muslims

CL. Edwards Responds: Certainty in Jannah

Posted on by 10 comments

Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem
بِسۡمِ ٱللهِ ٱلرَّحۡمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ ,

Mr. Edwards decided that he wouldn’t respond to the entire post, so he’d just post a comment because as in his own words, my exposition was “too long”. Not a problem, let’s see what estranged concept he brings to the table this time:

Edwards' Comment

His question is rather absurd, but to humour him, the answer is quite simple. Only God can for a certainty determine where I will go. I do not know the future and I don’t speak on behalf of God. However, the Qur’aan tells us what we need to believe in and what we need to practise upon to gain Jannah and as Muslims we strive towards that, knowing that God’s mercy is greater than His anger. It’s absurd to say, “yes”, because I am not God, I do not know the future and I do know what God’s judgement upon me will be, as I, like all other humans, are a sinner.

The Qur’aan does not make it difficult though, so what does a Muslim need to act upon and believe to gain heaven?

This is the Book; in it is guidance sure, without doubt, to those who fear Allah;

Believe in the Qur’aan, use it as a form of guidance, so that we develop taqwa (God consciousness).

Who believe in the Unseen, are steadfast in prayer, and spend out of what We have provided for them;

Believe in what Allaah has ordained for us and what He has told us, but which we have yet to know or experience. Perform praise and worship of God and live life within the means He has provided for us in a righteous way.

And who believe in the Revelation sent to thee, and sent before thy time, and (in their hearts) have the assurance of the Hereafter.

Belief in the Qur’aan, Injil, Tawrah Zabur, Suhuf al Ibrahim. As for assurance of the hereafter:

(And in the Hereafter they are certain) that is the resurrection, the standing (on the Day of Resurrection), Paradise, the Fire, the reckoning and the the Scale that weighs the deeds (the Mizan). The Hereafter is so named because it comes after this earthly life. – Tafsir ibn Kathir : Suratul Baqarah (2) : 4.

Lastly:

They are on (true) guidance, from their Lord, and it is these who will prosper.

Meaning:

(They are) refers to those who believe in the Unseen, establish the prayer, spend from what Allah has granted them, believe in what Allah has revealed to the Messenger and the Messengers before him, believe in the Hereafter with certainty, and prepare the necessary requirements for the Hereafter by performing good deeds and avoiding the prohibitions.

(And they are the successful) meaning, in this world and the Hereafter. They shall have what they seek and be saved from the evil that they tried to avoid. Therefore, they will have rewards, eternal life in Paradise, and safety from the torment that Allah has prepared for His enemies. – Tafsir ibn Kathir : Suratul Baqarah (2) : 4.

Therefore the Qur’aan is extremely clear, it essentially spells it out for all Muslims, that sincere belief and God sanctioned actions would secure one a place in heaven. Of course Mr. Edwards doesn’t believe in this doctrine. He believes that no matter what he does, he gets to go to heaven, which brings up the question, does God reward sin? Funny enough, his friend and long time partner in crime (of deceit), Antonio Santana did admit to us that God rewards sinning in Christianity:

Antonio - Skype Convo

It’s absolutely nonsensical for one to say he knows where he is going in the afterlife merely based on some inconsistent and incoherent belief of “salvation in Christianity”, which has been thoroughly refuted here. They’re self claimants to their own misigivings, even the Jesus of the Bible lets it be known that merely believing in him will not benefit you in the least:

“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. – Bible : Matthew (7) :21.

So who are these people who won’t go to heaven then?

The sense of this verse seems to be this: No person, by merely acknowledging my authority, believing in the Divinity of my nature, professing faith in the perfection of my righteousness, and infinite merit of my atonement, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven, shall have any part with God in glory. – Adam Clarke’s Exegesis : Matthew (7) : 21.

In fact, the Bible wages sin and deceit for the one who speaks on God’s behalf, specifically when it comes to God’s will (judgment, doings etc):

Will you speak wickedly on God’s behalf?  Will you speak deceitfully for him?- Bible : Job (13) : 7.

The meaning of this verse is made much clearer by a scholarly Christian’s commentary:

“In order to support your own cause, in contradiction to the evidence which the whole of my life bears to the uprighteousness of my heart, will ye continue to assert that God could not thus afflict me, unless fragrant iniquity were found in my ways; for it is on this ground alone that ye pretend to vindicate the providence of God. Thus ye tell lies for God’s sake, and this ye wickedly contend for your maker.” – Adam Clarke’s Exegesis : Job (13) : 7.

See, Job in this verse or rather, this chapter, is condemning the people to whom he was sent to preach. It is because they began to play God and judge who is righteous and sinful among themselves. Decided who God afflicted and whom God did not afflict with punishment. They claimed because Job was afflicted, that he was a sinful man (yet it was not the case, he was purer than them all), whereas they perverted the truth (much like Mr. Edwards) and cast righteous judgement on themselves:

“Will you speak wickedly for God?
As he suggests they did, they spoke for God, and pleaded for the honour of his justice, by asserting he did not afflict good men, which they thought was contrary to his justice; but: then, at the same time they spoke wickedly of Job, that he being afflicted of God was a bad man, and an hypocrite; and this was speaking wickedly for God, to vindicate his justice at the expense of his character, which there was no need to do, and showed that they were poor advocates for God…”- The New John Gill Exposition of the Entire Bible : Job (13) : 7.

Well, atleast through Biblical means, his own scripture and by extension his own God, has deemed him a wicked and hypocritical man. Casting judgement on himself (for righteousness) whereas condemning others, when he does now know what God knows is in their hearts. I suppose he needs to be rewarded with Grace for his sin. God rewarding sin, what a joke.

wa Allaahu Alam.
[and God knows best.]

Refutation: A clear Quranic contradiction in Ta-Ha surah 20 verses 83-97

Posted on by One comment

Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem
بِسۡمِ ٱللهِ ٱلرَّحۡمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ ,

Response to: A clear Quranic contradiction in Ta-Ha surah 20 verses 83-97
By: C.L. Edwards from Calling Muslims website.

The ill reputed author, Mr. Edwards is at it again. This time he is claiming a contradiction in the Qur’aan and quite funnily, borrows the argument of Abraham Geiger which most Orientalists have used against Islam, since some 200 odd years ago. His argument isn’t new or is it of any academic value. However in the name of exposing his indecent affinity towards absurdity, we shall engage his argument step by step and refute him. He begins by asserting that these verses supposedly have a contradiction:

“(When Moses was up on the Mount, Allah said:) “What made thee hasten in advance of thy people, O Moses?”He replied: “Behold, they are close on my footsteps: I hastened to thee, O my Lord, to please thee.”  (Allah) said: “We have tested thy people in thy absence: the Samiri has led them astray.” So Moses returned to his people in a state of indignation and sorrow. He said: “O my people! did not your Lord make a handsome promise to you? Did then the promise seem to you long (in coming)? Or did ye desire that Wrath should descend from your Lord on you, and so ye broke your promise to me?” They said: “We broke not the promise to thee, as far as lay in our power: but we were made to carry the weight of the ornaments of the (whole) people, and we threw them (into the fire), and that was what the Samiri suggested. “Then he brought out (of the fire) before the (people) the image of a calf: It seemed to low: so they said: This is your god, and the god of Moses, but (Moses) has forgotten!” Could they not see that it could not return them a word (for answer), and that it had no power either to harm them or to do them good? Aaron had already, before this said to them: “O my people! ye are being tested in this: for verily your Lord is (Allah) Most Gracious; so follow me and obey my command.” They had said: “We will not abandon this cult, but we will devote ourselves to it until Moses returns to us.” (Moses) said: “O Aaron! what kept thee back, when thou sawest them going wrong, “From following me? Didst thou then disobey my order?” (Aaron) replied: “O son of my mother! Seize (me) not by my beard nor by (the hair of) my head! Truly I feared lest thou shouldst say, ‘Thou has caused a division among the children of Israel, and thou didst not respect my word!'” (Moses) said: “What then is thy case, O Samiri?” He replied: “I saw what they saw not: so I took a handful (of dust) from the footprint of the Messenger, and threw it (into the calf): thus did my soul suggest to me.” (Moses) said: “Get thee gone! but thy (punishment) in this life will be that thou wilt say, ‘touch me not’; and moreover (for a future penalty) thou hast a promise that will not fail: Now look at thy god, of whom thou hast become a devoted worshipper: We will certainly (melt) it in a blazing fire and scatter it broadcast in the sea!” – Suratul Ta-Ha (20) : 83 – 97.

So what is his argument? In summation:

“There are many details in the Quran that differ or are missing from the original account in the Bible, one of which is a person named al Samari. Now the name as-Samari literally means “The Samaritan a person who comes from Samaria”……..The problem in all this is this event in the history of the nation Israel happened over 600 years before the area of Samaria came into existence. To add to this colossal blunder early Muslims(the Salaf) are recorded as explaining that this as-Samari came from a Israelite tribe called Samaria…no such tribe has ever existed.“

To begin with, he implies that the original account is from the Bible, one must point out that he is referring to the Old Testament, therefore that begs the question, which Canon or Codex of the Old Testament is he appealing to this time? Here’s a short list for him to choose from:

(1) Samaritan Scrolls.
(2) Qumran/ Essene’s Scrolls.
(3) Greek Septuagint (LXX).
(4) Masoretic Text.
(5) Massorah Oral Tradition.
(6) Eastern Orthodoxy’s varying Canon’s (Coptic Canon versus Ethiopian Canon….etc).

After he’s played a game of lottery with “God’s word”, the next step is to determine if the Bible’s historical accounts are valid to establish the veracity of a particular historical event. This of course is easily laid to rest with a resounding no, by consensus of most Biblical scholars, to validate this claim, here’s a few quotes:

The original copies of the NT books have, of course, long since disappeared. This fact should not cause surprise. In the first     place, they were written on papyrus, a very fragile and persihable material. In the second place, and probably of even more importance, the original copies of the NT books were not looked upon as scripture by those of the early Christian communities. – (George Arthur Buttrick (Ed.), The Interpreter’s Dictionary Of The Bible, Volume 1, p 599 “Text, NT”.)

To begin with, how can it be logically sound, that if the people at the time of the Bible’s authoring, rejected it as a scripture (inspired by God, contains absolute truth), much less as a historical document (if it isn’t an absolute truth, then it’s fickle truth), how can you expect us, some 2000 years or so later to accept such historical claims?

He says: Complaints about the adulteration of texts are fairly frequent in early Christian literature. Christian texts, scriptural and nonscriptural, were no more immune than others from vicissitudes of unregulated transmission in handwritten copies. In some respects they were more vulnerable than ordinary texts, and not merely because Christian communities could not always command the most competent scribes. Although Christian writings generally aimed to express not individual viewpoints but the shared convictions and values of a group, members of the group who acted as editors and copyists must often have revised texts in accordance with their own perceptions. This temptation was stronger in connection with religious or philosophical texts than with others simply because more was at stake. A great deal of early Christian literature was composed for the purpose of advancing a particular viewpoint amid the conflicts of ideas and practices that repeatedly arose within and between Christian communities, and even documents that were not polemically conceived might nevertheless be polemically used. Any text was liable to emendation in the interest of making it more pointedly serviceable in a situation of theological controversy. – (H. Y. Gamble, Books And Readers In The Early Church: A History Of Early Christian Texts, 1995, Yale University Press: New Haven & London, pp. 123-124.)

The Bible, clearly as a historical document is said to have been emendated (improved with bias) according to each sect’s understanding of it. What’s worse is that the first person to ever canonize and codify the Bible (canonize – to say what is scripture, codify – collected to be arrange in some order) emendated his own version, enough for him and his followers to be persecuted (see: Marcion’s Canon). With the above quotes and subsequent historical lesson, there is no basis for us to accept the account of the Bible, none whatsoever. It is merely wishful thinking and an appeal to emotion that CL Edwards seeks.

His second error, is that he incorrectly, which was his purpose, defines the term: “As-Samiri” (السَّامِرِ‌يُّ).

We do ask Mr. Edwards, on what authority do you have to give the absolute definition of the term above? Are you an expert in the field of Arabic or Hebraic Etymology? From where is your certification in these fields derived? To answer on his behalf and rightly so, nowhere! Therefore we assume he’s probably appealed to the fallacy of appeal to authority (to Orientalist Christian Scholarship). In his desperation for trying to find an error in Al Qur’aan ul Kareem, he has inadvertently exposed his lack of honesty, integrity and self respect. Thus, we do request that he come to terms with these self deficiencies.

Let’s continue by trying to grasp the history of this Samiri, so we can know who he was or from where he came:

“Samiri’s name as generally believed, was Musa Ibn Zafar. Ibn Jarar has narrated from Sayiddina Ibn ‘Abbas {ra} that Samiri was born in the year when under the orders of Pharaoh all male Israili children were to be killed. His mother, fearing the worst, put him in the hallow of a cave and covered its mouth.” – Tafsir Maa’riful Qur’aan, page 144.

Now that we’ve established some form of historical context to this person, his lineage does go back to the time of Moses (Musa alayhi as salaam), so this person did exist at the time of Moses. In that context, why is he called “As Samiri”, well, there are two probablities here:

(1) It could be a place from which he came.
(2) It could be a title due to his beliefs.

Earlier Islamic sources tend to cite both (1) and (2) as their understanding of the person named As-Samiri, that being, he came from a people who were worshipers of the cows:

Sayiddina Ibn ‘Abbas {ra} says that he belonged to a nation of cow-worshippers who somehow reached Egypt and pretended to join the religion of Bani ‘Israil whereas in actual fact he was a hypocrite. (Qurtubi) – Tafsir Maa’riful Qur’aan, page 143.

Where did they come from, if they were not from around Egypt?

“According to Sayddina Sa’id ibn Jubair {ra} he was a Persian from the Kirman province.” – Tafsir Maa’riful Qur’aan, page 143.

Now this logically makes sense.

(1) The Samiri was born during the time of Moses.
(2) The Samiri was from Persian (Mesopotamia) and was brought to or near Egypt when a group of Persians migrated.
(3) Persia is near the Indus Valley River Civilization (known cow worshipers), in fact, they share similar cultural traits (languages, religions, dress).

Therefore it is logical to assume that the Samiri is a person who was from among a people who worshiped cows, and who had migrated to near Egypt. The entire narration from the Qur’aan makes sense when compared to basic history. Of course one had to be objective and look outside the inconsistent and incoherent Biblical tradition and really accept the historical narrative as it exists through modern historical interpretations.

The historical context is easy to grasp, the Samiri was a cow worshiper with Mesopotamian origins (from which his religion came) through the Indian peoples (Indus Valley Civilization – known cow worshipers):

In the case of Egyptian and Harappan civilizations, there exists considerable evidence that the two societies, which flanked Mesopotamia on the west and east, respectively, had continuous trade contact with the cities of Sumer and, in the case of Egypt, political and military contacts as well. So the channels for the diffusion of technology and ideas certainly were there. It should probably be stressed at this point that a certain amount of diffusion and cross-fertilization is critical to the development of any civilization and no society has developed in total isolation. Whatever the degree of borrowing, however, every civilization adapts and applies ideas, technologies and institutions to its own physical environment and cultural heritage. – (The World’s History (Volumes 1 and 2 – 2nd Edition), Chapter 3 (River Valley Civilizations), Page 11 – by Howard Spodek.)

Therefore in conclusion, the Biblical claim is that a city known as Samaria did not exist until some 700 years after Moses, therefore the Samiri people could not have existed. Whereas historical knowledge (go figure, the Bible contradicts history) indicates that the Mesopotamian, Harappan (Indus Valley Civilization) and the Egyptians all shared a common and integrated history some 1500 years before Moses (Civlizations from 3000 BCE, Moses from 1500 BCE) and the incident of Pharaoh.

We therefore propose that Mr. Edwards rescinds his absurd, infantile, petulant, irrational and ignorant arguments and perhaps, for the good will of his humanity, cease to embarrass himself and his archaic faith.

wa Allaahu Alam.
[and God knows best.]

Refutation: Can I trust that Islam will get me into Heaven?

Posted on by 8 comments

Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem
بِسۡمِ ٱللهِ ٱلرَّحۡمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ ,

Response to: Can I trust that Islam will get me into Heaven?
By: C.L. Edwards from Calling Muslims website.

It is always interesting to read how Extremist Christians, anti-Muslims think. One such person is the propagandist Mr. Edwards. One of his more recent attacks against Islam, sponsored by his inanity rests on the topic of Salvation. Let’s take a look at what he says:

Most Muslims believe they will enter Jannah(Islamic heaven) based on their confession of the Shahadah(Statement of Faith) and doing good deeds, like Praying, giving Zakat(Charity) etc. Most Muslims fill some assurance they will make it into Jannah despite knowing they sin just like every other human being, because of their status of being Muslims. But consider these facts taken from authentic Islamic sources.

What is quite funny is that Mr. Edwards begins his intellectually fraudulent discourse by appealing to the fallacy of hasty generalization, and then he quite expectedly, rests his assertion upon not a single citation, to show atleast some majority of Muslims believe what he asserts. It is a common problem for persons who are wholly uneducated in Islam to understand the vast topic of Salvation within the faith. To begin with, Muslims do not believe that “despite sinning”, that we gain heaven. We believe that through repenting for our sins and through God’s mercy that He will grant us Jannah (Paradise):

Our Lord, and make us Muslims [in submission] to You and from our descendants a Muslim nation [in submission] to You. And show us our rites and accept our repentance. Indeed, You are the Accepting of repentance, the Merciful. – Suratul Baqarah (2) : 128.

Except for those who repent and correct themselves and make evident [what they concealed]. Those – I will accept their repentance, and I am the Accepting of repentance, the Merciful. – Suratul Baqarah (2) : 160.

What’s even more embarrassing for him, is that the Qur’aan also clearly states that Allaah does not accept those sinners who do not repent from their evils, for they would be punished:

And that repentance is not of those who constantly commit sins, and when death approaches one of them, he says, “I repent now”, nor of those who die as disbelievers; for them, We have kept prepared a painful punishment. – Suratul Baqarah (4) : 18.

So Mr. Edward’s assertion is contradicted by the Qur’aan which clearly states that only those who sincerely repent gain His mercy of Jannah and those who sin and do not repent are to be painfully/ severely punished. He then goes on to say:

Yet he doesn’t tell them forcertain that if they do good works they will be forgiven.

After quoting Suratul Hujurat (49) : 14 about an ayat of hypocrites, Mr. Edwards continued to display his ignorance of Islamic theology. The problem here is that he is saying, Muhammad {saw} doesn’t guarantees these people heaven (as from the context of the ayah), because he (Muhammad {saw}) wasn’t sure of his own salvation. While that is an entire topic by itself, his interpretation is wrong. The proper theological exegesis (interpretation) of this ayat is that Muhammad {saw} is addressing munafiqeen (hypocrites), thus their doing of good works is hypocritical, therefore it will not avail them in the least:

The ignorant said, “We have accepted faith”; say, (O dear Prophet Mohammed – peace and blessings be upon him), “You have surely not accepted faith, but you should say ‘We have submitted’, for faith has not yet entered your hearts; and if you obey* Allah and His Noble Messenger, He will not reduce the reward of any of your deeds; indeed Allah is Oft Forgiving, Most Merciful.” (* By accepting faith and then obeying the commands). – Suratul Hujurat (49) : 14.
“According to Imam Bahgawi, this verse was revealed in connection with the Tribe of Banu Asad. A few members of that tribe came up to Prophet Muhammad {saw} in Madinah during a severe drought. These people were not sincere believers. They had expressed their Islam merely to demand help from the Muslim Sadaqat funds. As they were not believers in the real sense of the word, they were unaware of Islamic injunctions and manners. They spread filth and excrement on the streets of Madinah.” – Tafsir Maar’iful Qur’aan, page 148.   

He then forwards his ill fated premise based on his clearly laughable eisegesis (intellectually fraudulent interpretation), by ignoring the context of the ayah (hypocrites and their actions), he mistakenly (due to ignorance) attributes it to a hadith where it is said:

…..He (Muhammad {saw}) said, “As to him, by Allah, death has overtaken him, and I hope the best for him. By Allah, though I am the Apostle of Allah, yet I do not know what Allah will do to me,”….. – Sahih al Bukhari : Volume 5 : Book 58 : Hadith 266.

He then on the same note goes on to make some statements of the same understanding:

……So we see that one may consider themselves Muslim, even a believer(Mumin) but you have no objective way of really knowing if you truly are in Allah’s eyes, at least until you die and are resurrected. Not even Muhammad himself could be sure what his fate would be……

To begin with, the hadith in Sahih Al Bukhari is not referring to whether or not Muhammad {saw} will be granted Jannah as he himself says he would cross the Pulsiraat (the bridge between being judged and the gates of Jannah) first:

Allah will call them, and As-Sirat (a bridge) will be laid across Hell and I (Muhammad) shall be the first amongst the Apostles to cross it with my followers. – Sahih al Bukhari : Book 12 : Hadith 770.

As for the statement that He does not know what the Lord of the Worlds (Allaah) will do to him, then I do not see the problem with the statement, it is referring to the ‘Ilm ul Ghayb (Knowledge of the Unseen):

“Say: “None in the heavens and the earth knows the Ghaib (Unseen) except Allaah, nor can they perceive when they shall be resurrected” – Suratul Naml (27) : 65.

“And with Him are the keys of the Ghayb (all that is hidden), none knows them but He. And He knows whatever there is in the land and in the sea; not a leaf falls, but He knows it. There is not a grain in the darkness of the earth nor anything fresh or dry, but is written in a Clear Record” – Suratul An’aam (6) : 59.

Even this is confirmed in the Bible, that God knows, or God’s knowledge is not equal to man’s knowledge:

“No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.” – Bible: Matthew 24 : 36.

Mr. Edward’s arguments are so completely devoid of any logical reasoning, I consider it child’s play to have to write this rebuttal. I am deeply discontented with his challenge, a simple reading of the Qur’aan dispels all of his arguments and knowledge of some of the most common ahadith are enough to lay his inanity to rest, however let’s see more of what this propagandist has to offer:

“Here is more conclusive proof that no matter how hard you believe or how many good deeds you strive to do for Allah, He may decided to over ride what you have done and damn you to Hell anyway! Please read this authentic hadeeth that says, its your destiny not your faith or works that determine your end in Islam. “

What was his conclusive proof? A hadith that says that a good man can do evil, and in the end go to hell, whereas an evil man can do good and then go to heaven:

“Abdullah (b. Mas’ud) reported that Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) who is the most truthful (of the human beings) and his being truthful (is a fact) said: Verily your creation is on this wise. The constituents of one of you are collected for forty days in his mother’s womb in the form of blood, after which it becomes a clot of blood in another period of forty days. Then it becomes a lump of flesh and forty days later Allah sends His angel to it with instructions concerning four things, so the angel writes down his livelihood, his death, his deeds, his fortune and misfortune. By Him, besides Whom there is no god, that one amongst you acts like the people deserving Paradise until between him and Paradise there remains but the distance of a cubit, when suddenly the writing of destiny overcomes him and he begins to act like the denizens of Hell and thus enters Hell, and another one acts in the way of the denizens of Hell, until there remains between him and Hell a distance of a cubit that the writing of destiny overcomes him and then he begins to act like the people of Paradise and enters Paradise.” – Sahih Muslim : Book 33 : Hadith 6390.

God is all knowing, therefore God knows what a person’s life is destined to be, part of being all knowing, is to know the past (to us), present (to us) and future (t0 us). However God knows the past, present and future. Therefore God will know what will happen to persons. A man may be a believer and then up becoming a disbeliever (acting like the people of the fire). It makes perfect sense, this has nothing to do with God removing ‘aql (free will) from man and damning them to hell. It has to do with God knowing what will happen to these two sets of people, one may start as a believer and end up as a disbeliever and vice versa.

Mr. Edwards then returns with his deceits once more:

“……but Islam teaches that everyone will enter Hell Fire, not just non-Muslims.”

You can pretty much predict the ayat he would use:

” Not one of you there is, but he shall go down to IT; that for thy Lord is a thing decreed, determined.” – Mr. Edward’s interpretation of Suratul Maryam (19) : 71.

What does “go down to it” even mean? They ayah is referring to the Siraat or the Bridge which one would have to cross over to go to Jannah, as referenced above:

Allah will call them, and As-Sirat (a bridge) will be laid across Hell and I (Muhammad) shall be the first amongst the Apostles to cross it with my followers. – Sahih al Bukhari : Book 12 : Hadith 770.

Which is why the ayah really says:

“Not one of you but will pass over it: this is, with thy Lord, a Decree which must be accomplished.” – Suratul Maryam (19) : 71.
وَإِنْ مِنْكُمْ إِلَّا وَارِ‌دُهَا ۚ كَانَ عَلَىٰ رَ‌بِّكَ حَتْمًا مَقْضِيًّا

Look at the difference between his statement, and what the Qur’aan actually says, for him to fight against Islam, as the Christian he is, he had to reinterpret the ayah and reject the real meaning! Perhaps he can show us where in the Arabic which I provided above it says everyone will enter hell. The challenge stands Mr. Edwards. What’s funny is how over enthusiastic he became after he incorrectly quoted the ayah:

“Did you catch that? Everyone will go down into “it”  and the context tells you the “it” that is being discussed is Hell.”

Somehow I have a very strong notion that he will not be able to defend his errors when confronted with them. It is clear as day that he has emendated (changed for the purpose of bettering his argument) the interpretation and English text of the Qur’aan. It is indeed a shameful plunge into the realms of intellectual dishonesty that this Extremist Christian Polemic has ended up within.

He then goes on to state:

“Islam offers no sure way of ever saving yourself, no assurance of salvation, because even if you think you really believe and have done goods, you can not know for sure until you die and are resurrected and find out if you get rescued out of Hell.”

Actually, the very second page (Chapter 2) of the Qur’aan would like to differ, how funny is it that the refutation for his statement comes from the second Surah of the Qur’aan? The very first 5 lines (ayat) are the answer to his question:

“This is the Book; in it is guidance sure, without doubt, to those who fear Allah; Who believe in the Unseen, are steadfast in prayer, and spend out of what We have provided for them; And who believe in the Revelation sent to thee, and sent before thy time, and (in their hearts) have the assurance of the Hereafter. They are on (true) guidance, from their Lord, and it is these who will prosper. – Suratul Baqarah (2) : 2 – 5.

He then goes on to further contradict Islamic sources:

“And your Shaykh, your Imam, not even Muhammad himself can save you.”

Whereas the hadith says:

“The Messenger or Allah (may peace be upon him) observed: So they would come to me and I would ask the permission of my Lord and it would be granted to me, and when I would see Him, I would fall down in prostration, and He (Allah) would leave me thus as long as He would wish, and then it would be said: O Muhammad, raise your head, say and you would be heard; ask and it would be granted; intercede and intercession would be accepted.” – Sahih Muslim : Book 1 : Hadith 373.

He has been fully refuted, as usual, he ends his posts with erratic, misconstrued and illogical posts from the Bible, specifically about Jesus being the source of salvation for their sins, this has been previously responded to in this article.

Can Mr. Edwards respond in an academic manner to this post or shall he Call Muslims yet not be able to answer them?
wa Allaahu Alam.
[and God knows best].

Recent Entries »