Tag Archives: 2014

China’s Violent Christian Cult [BBC]

You won’t find this as an example of religious extremism on David Wood’s site or on Atlas Shrugs. I’d like to emphatically state that this cult is not representative of all Christians or of the Christian faith. What this video is an example of, is the end result of radical, violent, hateful figures who prey on those who don’t agree with their extremist rhetoric. Humans partake in religion, humans are violent, religious humans can be and will be violent – it’s human nature and they’ll justify their violence through whatever philosophy or ideology or religion that allows them to do so. What people like Sam Shamoun and David Wood are afraid to come forward and say is that Christians have been and can be violent too. It’s just under reported. They will celebrate and gladly announce how the Christian Church is growing in China, but they will never say that it as a result of violent, hateful Churches like these, producing cults!

Maybe someone can shoot David Wood or Pamela Geller an email and ask them why they don’t also highlight the growing trend of violent Chinese Christian cults?

and God knows best.

ISIS’ Most Persecuted: Muslims

ISIS, or IS as it now calls itself has earned a notorious reputation for the blood letting it’s members thrive upon. Reports of threats and abuses towards Christian minorities and the Yazidi minority have captured the hearts of co-religionists worldwide. There will be many victims of IS’ wanton disregard and care for human life, but the greatest victim of all would be Islam and its adherents. This understanding has not yet manifested itself in the hearts and minds of those willing to condemn the violence. The problem therefore, is that the greatest victims of IS have been overlooked, forgotten and disregarded. If we are to truly care about the victims afflicted by the violent plague of IS, then surely we must also be concerned about the Muslims who have to live among them, live under their rule and give allegiance to a leader they were forced to accept.

We must remember, that IS’ new state is based on primarily Muslim dominated lands, towns and cities. This would lead us to cc-2014-syriawarunderstand that a vast majority of the bloodshed is occurring in Muslim lands, towns and cities. There homes are no longer safe for them, as entire towns and cities become battlefields for the foreign fighters against the governing forces. Everyone seems to understand the plight of the minorities in the conflict, but not the main victim themselves. This is troubling. If we are to care only about minorities, then can we say that we truly detest persecution? President Obama authorized bombing raids when the Yazidis were being massacred by IS, yet did nothing while IS violently rampaged through Iraqi and Syrian cities.

The problem persists in part because those in the West see the Iraqi infighting as sectarian violence and so those Muslims living in Iraq are the cause of the problem. This however, is trivializing the issue. Muslims are not the problem, Muslims are the victims of the problem – an insurgency fostered by a failed Iraqi war led by NATO forces. This though, is not merely my opinion but the opinion of US State Department Officials, US Military Strategists and the journalists who have been following the war since its inception – as documented in this PBS Frontline Report: LOSING IRAQ. Former Secretary of State, Hilary Clinton directly blames the Obama administration’s foreign policy for the devastation now raging throughout Iraq.

Saleel wa Sawarim – the IS movie depicting andvideo logging their militant endeavors to spread their state, demonstrates the violence towards fellow Muslims, regardless of religious beliefs that they are willing to undertake in order to achieve their goals. Video clip after video clip gives us just reason to state that Muslims are IS’ greatest victims. Whether their deaths come through drive by shootings, martyrdom-suicide operations, mass executions or sniper fire – the fact remains that the most amount of blood being spread is by that of Muslims. It’s not Christian armies, NATO armies or Yazidi armies that are committing soldiers in the fight against IS, rather it is the Muslim Sunni Tribes who are placing their lives at risk to protect themselves and the religious minorities being persecuted by IS. Therefore, it should not be said that Muslims are the cause of IS or that Islam is to blame, when the truth on the ground is that the only peoples to commit troops to the cause are Muslim Sunnis. We should not condemn Muslims as terrorists, rather we should praise the efforts of the Muslims who are not complicit in IS treachery but are fighting them, one battle at a time.

and God knows best.

Noah Movie Review (Russell Crowe, 2014)

Thursday past, I saw Noah starring Russel Crowe with two Christian friends, one Hindu friend and myself – the Muslim. There wasn’t much expectation from any of us that this Hollywood blockbuster would tie itself down to using the Biblical narrative, but it was definitely a possibility. Please note that anything after this sentence may contain spoilers. This movie could either be a hit or a miss and that’s mostly dependent on the angle the movie took and how well held together the plot was, but I think public perception plays a major factor when using book based narratives – especially when it’s a book read by one of the world’s largest faiths.

So let me cut straight to what we all want to know. Was the movie good and was it Biblically based? No and definitely no. About 3 – 4 minutes into the film, Noah and his family have met stone beasts who are fallen angels (mentioned in the DSS, but what they are and what role they have played is up for anyone’s interpretation), the beasts definitely do mythicise the flood event as they are used as a tool to explain how the Ark of Noah was built, an ark that gigantic at the historical time it is believed to have been constructed according to this movie, is explained by angels trapped in stones with a hate-love relationship with mankind. For the first minute or two, after seeing these stone beasts, we definitely knew that it would not be smooth sailing from here. Prophets in the Biblical based stories are sinfully human, in the Islamic narrative, they are morally ideal leaders of their communities anointed by God. Given that dichotomy, the representation of Noah in this movie will still upset both sets of Christian and Muslim believers as Noah is vilified throughout this film as arrogant, unloving, cold-hearted.

Noah, a Prophet of God – atleast in this movie doesn’t seem to have the one thing he should – a connection with God. He never understands God’s intentions for him, God’s intention for the world, God’s intention for him and his family, God’s intention for a post-world flood and the movie ends with Noah’s defiance of what he perceived to be God’s message. Then, within the last few minutes, Noah realises that after being drunk (don’t worry I’ll get to the Curse of Ham soon) and segregating himself from his family as self punishment for disobeying his understanding of God’s message, that Shem’s children will now repopulate the world, instead of him killing them as he had intended. Personally speaking, I don’t think vilifying Noah as some sort of ignorant who is too arrogant and self loathing to understand anything, and then throwing in a rainbow at the end of the movie, fixes their interpretation of the Noah character. It certainly does not excuse them and both Muslims and Christians will walk out of this film disliking it.

Now, the question on my mind was, how would they represent Noah being drunk and naked post-flood and would Ham’s curse be enacted in this movie? Well Ham’s curse wasn’t in the movie, but Noah was drunk and somewhat naked. So this completely disconnected me from the rest of the movie, well besides the stone angel beasts and Noah having virtually no relationship with God throughout the entire movie. In conclusion, they could’ve named the movie anything with the same storyline and it would’ve been received as a mediocre film. Instead they named it after Noah, thus tying some expectations with it from large sections of the international religious and irreligious communities. Almost everyone knows some portion of the flood narrative, so it was not in their best interest to divert from the Biblical story much and they did divert from it so much so, that the only thing tying Noah to this movie’s story is the name of the male lead character.

Waste of time. Waste of money and undoubtedly offensive to any Christian who may have picked up their Bible or bothered to read the Old Testament, or to any Muslim who certainly knows the story. Even for a secular movie goer, the movie isn’t worth your time or money. It seems as if the ship has sailed on this movie.

Exclusive Interview: Shaykh Mohammed Awal on James White and Da’wah Advice

Yesterday I sat down with the erudite scholar, Shaykh Mohammed Awal and we had a quick interview. Most importantly, he speaks on the controversial issue surrounding the cancellation of his debate with James White, the fascist and petulant behaviour of the cross dresser David Wood and anti-immigrant migrant, Sam Shamoun.

Please share this interview inshaAllaah (God Willing).

and Allaah knows best.

Pastor Samuel Green: Human will overpowers God’s will

I’m not sure how many Christians would be willing to agree with Pastor Samuel Green’s view that humans can perform actions which God has not willed into existence or permitted. In essence, the Pastor is teaching that human will, overpowers God’s will. Do Christians agree with the Pastor’s message that humans are greater than the Christian God?



If the creation of God, can overcome the will of their Creator, then as humans – we are more powerful than the weak Christian God. This is not a polemical claim, this is based on the doctrinal statements of Pastor Green.

and Allaah knows best.

Do Christians believe in the message of the Jewish Books as Samuel Green thinks?

Discussion between myself and Pastor Samuel Green:

Pastor Green Caught Lying

Pastor Green Caught Lying

Pastor Green as seen here is unable to demonstrate evidences for a claim he repeats ad nauseum. The Pastor in his attempts to discredit Islam, claims adherence to the messages of the Jewish Prophets, however, the case which has been made by me is, if he is indeed adhering to their message – where is the evidence for this?

As can clearly be seen, Jewish Orthodox beliefs as rooted in the Torah, Psalms and Prophets do not preach what the heretical and apostate Jewish sect of proto-orthodox Christianity teaches. Therefore, the Torah, Prophets and Psalms are not only in disagreement with Pastor Green’s message, they inadvertently disprove the Christian faith’s claims of beliefs rooted in the Jewish scriptures.

and Allaah knows best.

Dr. Shabir Ally responds to James White’s Complaint of his event with Dr. Crossan (Of the Jesus Seminar)

James White asked:

 But, I will say this—it will be a kindly discussion.  Having engaged in nine debates total with these gentlemen, I know at the very least it will be pursued in a kindly fashion.  But I remain confused as to its real reason.

Dr. Shabir Ally has responded by saying:


Some of you have wondered how we may respond to those traditional Christians who think that Dr. Crossan does not represent them, and that therefore we should not be engaging in dialogue with Dr. Crossan. In answer to that, we should say that Christianity is quite diverse, and no one person can speak for all of Christianity. Any Christian scholar with whom we have a dialogue will probably have both supporters and detractors. Indeed, this has been my experience over the years.

The various denominations are well known. If, for example, we have a dialogue with the Catholics, the Protestants may say that they were not represented. The obvious solution to this problem is for us to have dialogues with both Catholics and Protestants and with all the other denominations, as much as time will permit.

More to the point here, there is a concern that since Dr. Crossan is liberal in his criticism of the Bible, and he does not represent traditional Christian beliefs, he is not suitable for dialogue. But here again we should realise that Christians span a wide spectrum from ultra-liberal to ultra-conservative. Again, the solution is for us to have dialogues one after another with persons representing various shades of the full spectrum.

Because the conservatives are louder in their complaints when we engage with someone who does not represent them, we may get the impression that the conservatives are the only ones who deserve to represent Christianity. But we should realise that even among conservatives some do not represent others. Some are not conservative enough for the others. I have at times been convinced that I am debating with a conservative Christian only to be surprised later at the complaint from other conservatives that the person I debated with is not a true Christian, or something of that nature.

It so happens that we are not the ones who invited Dr. Crossan to come to Toronto. He was going to be here anyway. We just tagged on the dialogue to make maximum use of his presence here. He was invited by a church that falls under the umbrella of United Church which is one of the largest Christian denominations in Canada. Many Christians will be paying to attend his lectures in that church. There he will be delivering a series of five lectures on various aspects of his research into the historical Jesus. Even if some of those Christians disagree with him, some others, at least the Christians who invited him to speak in their church, obviously feel that his findings should be shared. So, he does represent some Christians.

In fact, I feel that Dr. Crossan represents many Christians today. Some of us Muslims tend to assume that Christians generally hold on to traditional views about Jesus. But you may be surprised to find that one important leader and scholar after another confesses that they no longer believe in some significant aspects of the tradition. For example, many no longer believe that Jesus died for their sins. They think it would be odd of God to demand and receive a human sacrifice. Many no longer believe that Jesus is the Son of God in a literal sense. They actually believe that he is a man and a prophet.

This tendency to reject things in the Gospels has shifted to the far left. Many no longer believe that Jesus performed the kinds of miracles described in the Bible and the Quran. Many no longer believe in the virginal conception of Jesus. This extreme may be surprising to many Muslims. But, as I have pointed out in several of my debates, once one starts looking closely at the Gospels, as one must, one sees enough problems to make one hesitate to accept the major claims about Jesus.

If we did not have the Quran, we too would have been skeptical of the claims made about Jesus in the Gospels. Hence our responsibility is to share the message of the Quran with our Christian friends. And we need to share this with all Christians, not just the ones who refuse to look at the problems in the Gospels. It is our hope that some of those who reject traditional faith in Jesus because of the problems in the Gospels may embrace Quranic faith in Jesus. And those who refuse to see the problems in the Gospels’ depiction of Jesus may see a clearer light on Jesus shining from the Quran. So, let the dialogue continue and proliferate.

Most interestingly, a comment left under Dr. Shabir’s post highlights just how much of a problem Dr. Crossan can be for the Christian faithful:

Dr. Crossan is an actual monotheist — He believes Jesus was a prophet and nothing more … He criticizes the traditional beliefs about the Bible and about Jesus. In fact it was Dr. Crossan and his companion Dr. Borg that set my mind free from these blasphemous beliefs which ultimately lead to my reversion to Islam. Mainstream Christians will say he doesn’t represent them — and that’s 100% correct. Because he uses his critical thinking abilities and has authentic faith not blind faith. He studies and dismantles the Bible and Christian doctrine and looks at it for what it really is not what he believes it to be. He is a scholar and let me tell you from first hand experience… Christians do not like scholars, they prefer a preacher who can tell them what to believe instead of a scholar that will tell them to think for themselves. May Allah guide us all.

It is with great interest that myself and the larger Christian-Muslim dialogue community looks forward to the Dr. Shabir Ally and Dr. Crossan event.

and God knows best.

Samuel Green – Does Islam Allow Muslims to Worship Prophets?

Samuel Green has been caught lying once more, here’s a brilliant video by Br. Yahya Snow:

Samuel claims to be a speaker and reader of Arabic, yet any individual who speaks or reads Arabic, will know that the Duroof Shareef is not a prayer to Muhammad salallaahu alayhi wa salam:


O Allah, let Your Blessings come upon Muhammad and the family of Muhammad, as you have blessed Ibrahim and his family. Truly, You are Praiseworthy and Glorious. Allah, bless Muhammad and the family of Muhammad, as you have blessed Ibrahim and his family. Truly, You are Praiseworthy and Glorious”.

Clearly, the prayer begins by addressing God and asking God to do something. It’s very funny that Pastor Samuel who claims to understand the Arabic language to the extent he can spot errors in classical Arabic, that he cannot understand what Allahumma means.

Exposed? Surely so!

and God knows best.

Recent Entries »