Masjid-ul-Aqsa: Muhammad’s Error

Temple of Solomon was build in 960 BC.

There is a hadith that reports Muhammad one night, rode on a winged horse that took him from Masjidu’l Haram (the temple of Ka’ba) to Msjidu’l Aqsa (in Jerusalem) and from there to the seventh heaven where he was shown the hell and the paradise and then taken to the presence of Allah. This story that is commonly accepted by All the Muslims and is known as Mi’raj is also confirmed in the Quran

Glory to (Allah)
Who did take His Servant for a journey by night,
From the Sacred Mosque to the Farthest Mosque.

— Quran 17:1

Here we are not going to talk about the absurdity of such trip. If God is omnipresent why one would have to go anywhere to meet him. If Muhammad could travel from Mecca to the palce of Allah, riding on a winged horsy, and come back in one night, then Allah’s throne must not be too far from Mecca. I wonder how come no one has found it yet?Is God inside the universe or outside of it? If inside it, then he is contained by it and therefore cannot be infinite. If outside it, then he must be billions of light years away from us and no winged horsy can reach his throne in one night and come back. And if He is omnipresent, like air in the atmospher, then one does not need to go anywhere to meet Him. God must be where you are right now. This story is simply fairytale. Its very existance belies Muhammad lack of understanding of the concept of omnipresense.

We are not also going to ask why Muhammad had to stop at Jerusalem before going to Heaven. Is there a gateway to Heaven in Jerusalem?The problem we want to discuss is that Masjid’ul Aqsa “the Farthest Mosque” did not exist at the time of Muhammad.First Temple on that site was built in 960 BC, allegedly by Solomon to house the Ark of the Covenant which his father, David, had brought to Jerusalem. The temple was burned to the ground by the Babylonians in 586 BC.The Second Temple was rebuilt by Herod in 20 BC

Here we are not going to talk about the absurdity of such trip. If God is omnipresent why one would have to go anywhere to meet him. If Muhammad could travel from Mecca to the palce of Allah, riding on a winged horsy, and come back in one night, then Allah’s throne must not be too far from Mecca.  I wonder how come no one has found it yet?

Is God inside the universe or outside of it? If inside it, then he is contained by it and therefore cannot be infinite.  If outside it, then he must be billions of light years away from us and no winged horsy can reach his throne in one night and come back. And if He is omnipresent, like air in the atmospher, then one does not need to go anywhere to meet Him.  God must be where you are right now.  This story is simply fairytale. Its very existance belies Muhammad lack of understanding of the concept of omnipresense.

We are not also going to ask why Muhammad had to stop at Jerusalem before going to Heaven. Is there a gateway to Heaven in Jerusalem?

The problem we want to discuss is that Masjid’ul Aqsa “the Farthest Mosque” did not exist at the time of Muhammad.

ark of the covenanat

First Temple on that site was built in 960 BC, allegedly by Solomon to house the Ark of the Covenant which his father, David, had brought to Jerusalem. The temple was burned to the ground by the Babylonians in 586 BC.

The Second Temple was rebuilt by Herod in 20 BC

The Second Temple was consecrated in 515 BC, rebuilt by Herod in 20 BC and destroyed by Titus in 70 AD.

The Dome of the Rock (Masjid-ul-Aqsa) was built im 691 AD.

When Caliph Omar Ibn al-Khattab conquered Jerusalem in 638 AD, he performed a prayer in the site where Temple of Solomon used to stand.  It was Caliph ‘Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan who built a mosque on that site around 691 A.D.

Muhammad’s alleged Mi’raj took place around the year 621. There is 70 years gap between Mi’raj and the construction of Masjid ul Aqsa.  [This is reported in The Concise Encyclopedia of Islam, Harper & Row, 1989, p. 46 and 102.]

How could Muhammad mention Masjid ul Aqsa when such a mosque did not exist? Either Muhammad did not know that that temple was destroyed in 70 AD or the Quran is manipulated and “enriched” years after the death of its author, permitting the fables that were constructed around Muhammad after his death to creep into his book.

In my opinion the former is the case. Muhammad was an unlettered man. His knowledge was limited to what he heard from others – story tellers and priests. His references to historic and Biblical stories are sketchy. He throws a name hear and mentions an event there and often makes mistakes. This is to be expected of a man who is not acquainted with books and whose only source of knowledge is hearsay.

Muslims may argue that “Masjid’ means any place of worship (sojda), that is why the prophet refers to the temple of Solomon as Masjid. In that case, all churches, synagogues and the Zoroastrian Ateshkadehs are Masjids. During the time of Muhammad there were many such “Masjids” built in cities much farther than Jerusalem. (i.e farthest from Mecca or Medina) and the Masjid’ul Aqsa actually was not the farthest mosque.

This, is an obvious blunder of Muhammad so much so that many Islamic scholars, including Yusuf Ali are of the opinion that by Masjid’u’ Aqsa, it is intended the SITE of the building and not the actual building.

This apologetic line could have been a way out of the dilemma if it were not for the following hadith, which unequivocally asserts that Masjid’ul Aqsa was an actual building which existed in the time of Muhammad.

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 55, Number 636:

Narrated Abu Dhaar:
I said, “O Allah’s Apostle! Which mosque was built first?” He replied, “Al-Masjid-ul-Haram.” I asked, “Which (was built) next?” He replied, “Al-Masjid-ul-Aqs-a (i.e. Jerusalem).” I asked, “What was the period in between them?” He replied, “Forty (years).” He then added, “Wherever the time for the prayer comes upon you, perform the prayer, for all the earth is a place of worshipping for you.”

This hadith presents yet another problem. According to Muslims, Masjid’ul Haram (Ka’ba) was built by Abraham who lived in 2000 BC and the Temple of Solomon (the site of the Msjid ul’Aqsa) was built about 958-951 BC.  There is a gap of over 1040 years between the dates of the construction of the two buildings.

You may also like...

No Responses

  1. siddharth says:

    You are right misbah , many of the puranas were adulterated . Though in parts some still have original texts , atleast that is my understandng.

  2. Ali Sina says:

    Islam's god was none but Muhammad's alter ego. He invented his deity for his own purpose, just as you may invent another alias while chatting in a forum on the Internet so it can backup and validate anything you say. The more your elevate the status of this fictional alias of yours the more credit you get. If you an fool people into believing this secret alias of you is God, you can make them do anything for you. Muhammad's followers were a bunch of ignoramuses. The tragedy is that 1400 years later 1.5 billion otherwise sane people follow that charlatan and think he was a prophet of God.

  3. Nasr says:

    Islam is about submitting to One God (Elah Wahid as referred in Quran). The same One God worshiped by gentile prophet Noah and all Israelite prophets but CERTAINLY IS NOT the same God of Romans that belief in Triune Oneness God.

    Mosque can just be a ground placed with a stone to mark its boundary. For mosque is referring to place of prayer (bow/postrate etc) The oldest mosque is in Mecca, where the second oldest mosque is in Jerusalem.

    Was not surprised at an article that view God as a man. Of course the author will not agree at Mightiness of God permitting His Servant to ascend and in return in just one night . For the author believes God need become His own creation that is a man, and die on a cross to give salvation. And later wake again and go back to sky. 

  4. Rajesh says:

    http://www.islaminindia.org/uncategorized/why-doe
    Even assuming that God chose Muhammad as his Prophet and wants all humans to follow Islam and is so concerned about tiny humans believing in His Messenger and obeying His Messenger that he will throw all those who don’t do so in Hell forever, there are very easy ways for an Omnipotent and Omniscient being like God to do so. Of course, again it must be remembered that this is like the Creator of all the Oceans of the world insisting that tiny invisible viruses on a drop of water somewhere down the Pacific Ocean believing in the Prophethood of a fellow virus. Let us assume that Islam is true and God indeed wants people to follow Islam- and that Muhammad was indeed a Prophet.

    Why doesn’t God do anything today to prove that Islam is true? Muhammad claimed that one night, he rode on a winged horse that took him from Masjidu’l Haram (the temple of Ka’ba) to Msjidu’l Aqsa (in Jerusalem) and from there to the seventh heaven where he was shown the hell and the paradise and then taken to the presence of Allah. This story that is commonly accepted by Muslims and is known as Mi’raj is also confirmed in the Quran

    Glory to (Allah)
    Who did take His Servant for a journey by night,
    From the Sacred Mosque to the Farthest Mosque.
    – Quran 17:1

    There are many problems with this story which we will not look right now, but just mention that many of Muhammad’s followers left him after he made this claim, realizing that he was lying. But some Muslims, blinded by faith have tried to defend this as well. And in this, they say “Belief in supernatural things will make others know that such a trip is possible”. (Actually, such pathetic arguments from amateurs like the person who has tried to defend Muhammad’s Miraj will only make the desperate defenders look even more silly). But the point here is- Belief in Supernatural things. If God is capable of doing supernatural things like Muhammad’s Miraj, why does not do anything supernatural NOW to simply prove that Islam is true? Why people like Dr Zakir Naik are needed to ‘understand Islam’ (whereas Zakir Naik is a showman with excellent memory using ridiculous arguments to promote his own business) today and answer many questions- such as “Who created God?” (Ridiculous analogy and laughable arguments by Zakir Naik) or “Why doesn’t God show himself?“

    Today, God doesn’t have to show himself to prove that Islam is true. He can rearrange stars so that at night they read “Islam is true. Follow it. I, God, have rearranged stars so as to make mankind know that my religion is Islam”. Simple and clear! Or he can send angels down to earth such as Gabriel and make them say to humanity, “We are sent by God to show mankind that Islam is true.” Or he can raise Muhammad from his grave and make him appear before everybody and say “God has raised me again to show mankind that Islam is true”. Of course, there are many ways in which God can send his message and convey that Islam is true. He can do some things which are undoable by humans- like first telling humanity that he will be splitting the moon and then splitting it, and then again re-joining it, or declaring to mankind that he will show that something can enter a blackhole and come out of it (send an angel there and bring him out and show mankind this) or stopping the rotation of a planet like Mercury around the sun! But absolutely nothing of this sort is done. This writer recalls talking to a Christian classmate in college about proof that Jesus was the SON of God. She said, “If God gives proof, then everyone will belief. The true test of faith is to believe without proof”. If that is the case, then it is admitting that there is NO PROOF AT ALL that the religion is true! Will a true God send messengers without proof when there are hundreds of charlatans and imposters and hoax prophets? But then, some other Muslims say that Quran is the proof that Islam is from God. Now if God does give proof that Islam is from Him, then surely He can do so in many ways some of which are mentioned above!

  5. Rajesh says:

    (continued)… And as we have seen Dayananda Saraswati say earlier “Why does this verse inculcate faith in Mohammad along with that in God, when the Mohammadans profess to believe in none but God, and hold that none is worthy of sharing homage with Him ? Hence they can not call God Incomparable. If it be argued that this verse only teaches that people should have faith in Mohammad as a Prophet, we should kike to know where is the necessity of Mohammad (being regarded as a Prophet). If God cannot accomplish his desired object without making him His Prophet, he is certainly powerless.” (p. 672 of Dayananda Saraswati’s book Satyartha Prakash of 1875, English translation) “Now (the Mohammadan) God Himself has made Mohammad His partner (in Divine honours, etc.) and has Himself declared this fact in the Quran. God is so much attached to Mohammad that He has made him His partner even in paradise. It is useless to call the Mohammadan God Independent when He is dependent upon Mohammad for every little thing. Such things can never be found in a revealed book.”

    Dayananda Saraswati continues “Now reader mark ! How clever Mohammad is ! He makes his God say in this verse that God will love those who follow Mohammad and even their sins will be forgiven. This shows that the heart of Mohammad was not pure. It appears that Mohammad (made or) had the Quran made in order to serve his selfish interests.” (p. 670)

    “Now mark the prejudice of God and of His Prophet ! Mohammad like other men of his stamp, was well aware that if he did not stamp his religion with divine authority it would never flourish, nor would he or his followers be able to obtain help and power which might help them to live a life of ease and luxury. All this goes to show that Mohammad knew only too well how to compass his selfish ends and to deprive others of their due-a fact which proves that he was no well-wisher of humanity. Such a man can never command the trust and confidence of good and enlightened men.” (p. 674)

    “Who but the Mohammedan God would be so unjust in fighting and helping others to do the same and so active in causing breaches of peace ? Now look at this religion, which sanctions wholesale robbery for the benefit of the Prophet ! Are these people any better than thugs ? God participates in the crime of robbery when he takes his share of the loot. He brings disgrace on Himself by favouring such dacoits. We are at a loss to understand whence came such a book, such a God and such a Prophet in order to disturb the happy relations between different nations of the world and thereby, inflict great suffering on them. Had not such faiths flourished in the world, all would have lived in peace with each other.” (p. 680-81)

    As we have said, imagine us as the creator of the vast Pacific Ocean. The earth is like a drop of water in the ocean of all the oceans of the world. Then humans on earth are as insignificant as ants. Imagine some very very small viruses (so small that they are invisible) in a drop of water somewhere down the Pacific and if one of the viruses claims to other viruses that he is our Messenger and that we keep making it legal for that virus to dissolve his oaths, marry his foster son’s wife, legalize him to marry slave girls, loot etc!

  6. Rajesh says:

    Continued…
    Isn’t Allah nice to his prophet? He rebukes him for banning himself to have sex with Mariyah when Allah has made this lawful to him. Then he tells his beloved prophet that he does not have to keep his words just to appease a bunch of women. Go ahead Allâh has already ordained for you the dissolution of your oaths. Allah even tells his beloved prophet to divorce all of his uppity wives if they are not obedient and content with his sexual escapades and marry lots of other women who will be better.

    Any person with an iota of common sense will know that Muhammad made up these verses to serve his cause. It is here that Aisha is reported to have said “Truly your God seems to have been very quick in answering your prayers”.

    2) In one case, Muhammad wanted to have intercourse with the wife of his foster son Zaid. Here Allah revealed the following in the Quran:

    33.37 “Behold! Thou didst say to one who had received the grace of Allah and thy favour: “Retain you (in wedlock) your wife, and fear Allah.” But you did hide in your heart that which Allah was about to make manifest: you did fear the people, but it is more fitting that you should fear Allah. Then when Zaid had dissolved (his marriage) with her, with the necessary (formality), We joined her in marriage to you: in order that (in future) there may be no difficulty to the Believers in (the matter of) marriage with the wives of their adopted sons, when the latter have dissolved with the necessary (formality) (their marriage) with them. And Allah’s command must be fulfilled. “

    How wise! The noblest institution of child adoption is annulled because Muhammad wanted to have sex with the wife of his foster son. When this incident is brought up, many Muslims claim that Muhammad did nothing, God commanded him to marry the wife of his foster son, in Chapter 33, and God’s order had to be followed!

    There are so many such passages in the Quran.Below are given just two more.

    “Prophet, We have made lawful to you the wives to whom you have granted dowrise and the slave girls whom God had given as booty; the daughters of your paternal and maternal uncles and of your paternal and maternal aunts who fled with you; and any believing woman who gives herself to the Prophet and whom the Prophet wishes to take in marriage. This privilege is yours alone, being granted to no other believer. We well know the duties we have imposed on the faithful concerning their wives and slave-girls. We grant you this privilege so that none ,ay blame you. God is forgiving and merciful. (Quran 33:50 )

     You may put of any of your wives you please and take to your bed any of them your please. Nor is it unlawful for you to receive any of those whom you have temporarily set aside. That is more proper, so that they may be contented and not vexed, and may all be pleased with what you give them. (Quran 33:51 )”

    This also carries another very important thing “Slave girls whom God had given to you as a booty are lawful to you”. This means that God supports the institution of slavery and gives slave girls as gifts to Muhammad. Firstly, no God can be a supporter of slavery, this line itself is a clear proof that the Quran is not from God, since nowhere does it oppose slavery and institutionalizes slavery. This also conclusively disproves the claim by some Muslims that Muhammad ended slavery or that Islam abolished slavery. And secondly, Muhammad made up these verses to serve his own cause.

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

  7. Rajesh says:

    http://www.islaminindia.org/uncategorized/was-all
    Belgium-based world famous scholar Dr Koenraad Elst has written in a chapter “How to deal with Islam” in his book “BJP vis-a-vis Hindu resurgence” (Voice of India, 1997): “This fact becomes more than obvious when one studies the context in which these revelations come to Muhammad. One finds that Allah never fails to confirm what his Prophet is planning to do in order to serve the latter’s cause in a particular situation. Aisha, the favorite wife of the prophet had seen through the game and summed up her observation reported by all orthodox traditionalists “Truly your God seems to have rushed in answering your prayers”. Dayananda Saraswati was not wrong when he characterized the Allah of the Quran as Muhammad’s domestic servant.”

    However, here one sentence must be added. It is not easy for a Muslim (i.e. a Muhammadan) to bear much criticism of Muhammad (let alone see Muhammad for who he was). It is like telling a child that his father is a rapist, murderer and a thief. A child who adulates his father will not be able to accept it even if all the proofs in the world are shown to him. He will instead call you a liar, hate you for hurting him, curse you and may explode in anger and hit you physically. A Muslim will genuinely believe that Muhammad was the MOST PERFECT person, kind and compassionate, merciful. He will genuinely believe that Muhammad was a champion of women’s rights (even though the truth is exactly the opposite), that Muhammad stopped the practice of female infanticide, that Arabs used to quarrel with themselves and get drunk, Muhammad banned drinking of alcohol, united the people and improved their lives and showed them the true path to God, banned slavery and freed people (whereas the reality is exactly the opposite, Islam and Muhammad enslaved people). A Muslim would generally admire and respect Muhammad more than his own parents. To understand this matter, a Christian reader should imagine being told that Jesus was a rapist, murderer and a thief, or a Buddhist being told the same about Buddha, or a Dalit being told the same about Ambedkar. A Hindu should imagine being told the same about Chhatrapati Shivaji, Swami Vivekananda, Krishna, Rama etc. That is why Pakistan has the draconian Blasphemy Law (which gives death for insulting Muhammad). We saw recently how a Governor was shot dead by his own bodyguard for supporting scrapping of the Blasphemy Law and how the murderer was treated like a hero, that the judge who sentenced him to death had to flee Pakistan. The Danish cartoons on Muhammad in early 2006 also shook the whole world resulting in nearly 100 deaths worldwide. This shows how strong the spell of Muhammad is on Muslims.

    Coming to Muhammad, there are so many cases which can be told as proof that Muhammad made up the verses to serve his own cause.

    1) One day Muhammad visited one of his wives, Hafsah, the daughter of Omar. He saw Mariyah, Hafsah’s Coptic maid. He sent Hafsah out telling her that her father wanted to see her. When she went out, he called Mariyah and had sex with her in Hafsah’s bed. Hafsah found out that her father had not send for her and returned to find her illustrious husband, naked, between the legs of her maid. She screamed and started making a scandal. Muhammad tried to calm down his hysteric wife and promised her not to approach Mariyah again while pulling up his pants, and asked her to keep the incident, a secret. Hafsah informed Aisha who with a group of other co-wives confronted Muhammad. Then Muhammad claimed, God revealed Surah 66 Tahrim (‘Banning’) in which he “rebuked” Muhammad telling him:

    Q.66: -5.
    1. O Prophet! Why do you ban (for yourself) that which Allâh has made lawful to you, seeking to please your wives? And Allâh is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.
    2. Allâh has already ordained for you (O men), the dissolution of your oaths. And Allâh is your Maula (Lord, or Master, or Protector, etc.) and He is the All-Knower, the All-Wise.
    3. And (remember) when the Prophet (SAW) disclosed a matter in confidence to one of his wives (Hafsah), so when she told it (to another i.e. ‘Aishah), and Allâh made it known to him, he informed part thereof and left a part. Then when he told her (Hafsah) thereof, she said: “Who told you this?” He said: “The All-Knower, the All-Aware (Allâh) has told me”.
    4. If you two (wives of the Prophet SAW, namely ‘Aishah and Hafsah turn in repentance to Allâh, (it will be better for you), your hearts are indeed so inclined (to oppose what the Prophet SAW likes), but if you help one another against him (Muhammad SAW), then verily, Allâh is his Maula (Lord, or Master, or Protector, etc.), and Jibrael (Gabriel), and the righteous among the believers, and furthermore, the angels are his helpers.
    5. It may be if he divorced you (all) that his Lord will give him instead of you, wives better than you, Muslims (who submit to Allâh), believers, obedient to Allâh, turning to Allâh in repentance, worshipping Allâh sincerely, fasting or emigrants (for Allâh’s sake), previously married and virgins.“ [Tarikh Tabari also see Bukhari3.43.648 ]

  8. Rajesh says:

    (Continued…)
    Firstly, Muhammad dictated the Quran to his followers, who noted it down in many places. According to Islamic tradition, the Qur’an was originally written on palm leaves, on shoulder-blade bones of camels and on stones. There was no single copy of the Quran existing during Muhammad’s own lifetime in a written form! Muhammad was asked many times by Meccans to perform any miracles to prove that He was a Messenger of God, such as making his God flow rivers of milk, and Muhammad used to say “I cannot perform any miracles, I am only a mortal messenger. My only miracle is the Quran.” (Muhammad need not have had to perform any miracles, couldnt GOD have flown rivers of milk to prove Muhammad’s Prophethood to the people?) But this ‘only miracle’ of Muhammad also was not present in his own life-time in a proper book form!

    As a matter of fact, even this tradition, that Othman ended everything and finalized the Quran before AD 656 and that nothing has changed in the Quran ever since, is also wrong. Wansbrough (“Quranic Studies” Wansbrough, J. Oxford, 1977) showed that far from being fixed in the seventh century, the definitive text of Koran had still not been achieved even as late as the later part of the ninth century. Thus, a statement of Muslim creed, Fiqh Akbar I, dated to the middle of eighth century, does not refer to the Koran at all, which is quite surprising. The ninth century also saw the first collections of the ancient Arab poetry seeing the light of day, in which too there are instances of manipulation, as alleged by some scholars. In fact, there is a strong opinion among many scholars that the Quran was actually finalized in AD 933.

  9. Rajesh says:

    http://www.islaminindia.org/uncategorized/why-did
    Why didn’t God turn Muhammad into a scholar overnight and provide him with good stationery to record the Quran instead of relying on Muhammad’s supporters’ memory, many of whom got killed in the Battle of Riddahs (Apostasy) since AD October 632 and forcing them to write the Quran on palm leaves, stones and other such places? One basic question that will be asked is this- “Why did Allah choose Muhammad as a vehicle or medium to record the Quran when Allah knew that Muhammad was illiterate? Or at least, why did Allah not turn Muhammad into a great scholar overnight and provide him with good stationery to record the Quran?”

    The Quran is what Muhammad dictated. In the translation of the Quran by Mohammed Marmaduke Pickthall, (Pickthall’s translation is considered as very authentic) the following things are mentioned in the “Introduction” before the Quran’s first chapter: “All the surahs of the Koran had been recorded in writing before the Prophet’s death, and many Muslims had committed the whole Koran to memory. But the written surahs were dispersed among the people; and when, in a battle which took place during the Caliphate of Abu Bakr- that is to say, within two years of the Prophet’s death-a large number of those who knew the whole Koran by heart were killed, a collection of the whole Koran was made and put in writing. In the Caliphate of Othman, all existing copies of surahs were called in, and an authoritative version, based on Abu Bakr’s collection and the testimony of those who had the whole Koran by heart, was compiled exactly in the present form and order, which is regarded as traditional and as the arrangement of the Prophet himself, the Caliph Othman and his helpers being Comrades of the Prophet and the most devout students of the Revelation. The Koran has thus been very carefully preserved.” (Page xxviii of Pickthall’s translation of Quran, Madhur Sandesh Sangam, New Delhi, India, 1995)

    Sadly for them, the information given in this translation by British Muslim Mohammed Marmaduke Pickthall clearly proves exactly the opposite. Carefully read the sentences written in bold by us. “But written Surahs were dispersed among the people”. What is the guarantee that all Surahs were compiled and none were lost? Or that no extra Surahs were added which were not there? Arabic is a language where the whole meaning of the sentence can change with the slightest change in shape of the alphabet. In this translation of the Quran, Pickthall also admits “Within 2 years of the Prophet’s death a large number of people who knew the whole Koran by heart were killed”. Here he is talking of the Battle of Riddah (Apostasy) in Arabia in late 632- early 633 AD when Arabia rose in revolt against Islam and gallantly fought Muslims . In this battle, the Muslims would have surely lost and Arabia freed from Islam (and perhaps the whole world) had it not been for treachery from Muslims when the woman leading the Apostates (Salma) was killed treacherously, and seeing her dead the soldiers lost courage. Islam’s victories in India and in many other places were also largely due to treachery (Example, Muhammad Ghori defeated Prithviraj Chauhan in AD 1192 through treachery, after losing for the first time, in 1190-91 he was pardoned and allowed to go with the promise that he would not attack again, which he duly violated, and attacked Prithviraj at night and this is how Islam began its rule in India). But though the non-Muslims lost, a large number of Muslims were killed in this battle, many of whom had learnt the Quran by heart, which has been admitted by Pickthall. “In the Caliphate of Othman, all existing copies of surahs were called in, and an authoritative version, based on Abu Bakr’s collection and the testimony of those who had the whole Koran by heart, was compiled…” This shows that there were many different versions of the Quran in use by that time, during Othman’s rule (644-656 AD). Othman ordered all other versions to be destroyed. Now the very fact that within so few as 20 years of Muhammad’s death there were different versions of the Quran and there was no one to check or guarantee that Othman’s version was exactly as Muhammad said! That is, Othman had to do the job of compiling the Quran which should have ideally been done properly by Muhammad. If God sent Muhammad down to the people with His Message and his book if guidance viz the Quran would he have made it so difficult for the humans? He would have first made Muhammad a scholar capable of reading and writing overnight, being the Almighty and then provided Muhammad and all Muslims good stationery to record the Quran instead of relying on Muhammad’s companions to write on palm leaves, on shoulder-blade bones of camels and on stones and memorize it, and then have a large number of those who had memorized it killed in the Battle of Riddah….(Continued)

  10. narcole1919721 says:

    Zhalimness is actions that hurt others. You have 4 categories, good moslems, bad moslems, good infidels and bad infidels. My choice is, to be with good moslems and good infidels, not with bad moslems, not with bad infidels. And i wont be with bad infidels to fight bad moslems. Good infidels face the same problems like good moslems. What happened to hamas leaders son, that hes against bad moslems, and chose to be with infidels. But he didnt really know that hes mistaken by fighting good moslems too, and hes supporting bad infidels. He cant differ which good or bad from both sides. Prophet said, the progress of moslems after he died would get worse and worse. Cos moslems follow infidels and not unite with all moslems. The analogy is like a dog being attacked by a group of wolves, the dog will lose. But if the dog unites with other dogs, the wolves will lose. So good moslems should unite with good moslems. Moslems will get good progress when they have good moslem leaders to unite them.

  11. Demsci says:

    Thanks for telling us this. So you moved away from fasiqin dhallin Muslims; those who criminally or unwittingly misused or misunderstood Islam. But what is zhalimness?

    Any way;when there are 4 categories of humans; Good and Bad Muslims, Good and Bad Infidels, I take it that you will choose for Good Muslims and against Bad Infidels, but will you also choose Good infidels over Bad Muslims (these dhallin, fasiqin, zhalimining Muslims)?

    I think you should. And that many "Mukmins' (Good Muslims?!) should. And help reform Islam and put "Mukmin's" in authority and separate from the bad Muslims, siding with the democratic infidels and their governments.

    This is what Daniel Pipes hopes Muslims will do. This is what I hope somehow 17 million Egyptians showed, by opposing the Muslim Brotherhood-government of Morsi on 30 june. Also in Syria the FSA is now distancing itself from the Muslim Brotherhood-rebels of Al Nusra, ISIS.

  12. Sakat says:

    Because Mohammed knew he is emulating dogs in every respect so he thought others should believe it as his own invention,he prohibited Muslims from domesticating Dogs.I want you to make aware the missing link ,so i brought dog here as example .If you don't like ,bring some other animal like donkey or swine instead ,problem is over.

  13. narcole1919721 says:

    Among 1000 people, there only 1 who is really mukmin. so making mukmin country seems a hard idea. such country is in heaven. The day when good people separated from bad people in akhirat.

  14. narcole1919721 says:

    Another option for mukmins is hijrah. to separate themselves from munafiqin dhallin mushrikin fasiqin and zhalimin. Like prophet did from mecca to medina. like i just did too. there were munafikin dhallin mushrikin fasiqin zhalimin too around me. they just cant stop trying to hunt me as their victim. iv tried everything to remind them, but their sins blind their hearts. So i hijrah to new place where i find better muslims. they apply islam well and better than others. this option is better than war or fights. everyone has right whether to hijrah, to keep reminding but still being hurt, or to fight zhalimness to defend themselves. this dunia is a test.

  15. narcole1919721 says:

    I did tell its normal in ancient time. *rolls eyes*

  16. narcole1919721 says:

    Why talking as if humans are dogs? we are humans and different. find better example.

  17. Guest says:

    @chuck,

    Then you have to come back to the basic structure: Allah – the Prophet – the authority. We are supposed to follow the authority. If the authority, after due process of legal forming, declares slavery illegal, then it is illegal. And it becomes Islamic law that has to be upheld and enforced. This does not violate the Quran injunction. 

    Regarding zakat, yes, one of the eight beneficiaries of zakat money is slaves so that they can be freed. I guess that includes non-Muslim slaves. I am presenting it to show that, despite the permissibility of having them, freeing slaves is encouraged in Islam since its early days.

    Observing the way you form your opinion regarding slavery i.e. by quoting the Quran directly, may I add that the same methodology is being applied in many parts of the Islamic world where some people tend to issue fatwa through a short cut process. They just read the Quran and hadith but forget about the obligatory process of consultation (i.e. wa amru hum shuura baina hum) with those who are knowledgable about Islamic legal scholarship that has developed in the last 1400 years. This  kind of process leads to issuance of fatwa which is shallow and irrelevant to today’s life and, unavoidably, has created misunderstanding even among Muslims themselves.

    Therefore, my suggestion to everyone who is interested in knowing more about Islam (myself included) is to go ahead read the Quran and then consult with Muslim scholars. These scholars are now increasingly becoming available in many learning centers in many parts of the world. A short cut process may not serve to increase proper understanding of the religion, but it surely can help fertilizing misunderstanding and enmity among people, Muslims and non-Muslims.

  18. chuck says:

    @Guest,
    //Yes, the basic Hukm is still valid, but its interpretation and implementation may change from time to time. //
    Which doesn't change the basic Islamic tolerance of keeping slaves or having sex with the female slaves including married ones (No such facility for the women though). The basic point was the validity of such extra-marital sexual relationship from a Islamic or moral point of view, not some national/legal point of view.

    //And please don't forget that part of zakat money is supposed to be used to free slaves.//
    Both muslims and non-muslim slaves? And how is that relevant here?

  19. Sakat says:

    @chuck
    I am shocked to read her above post really,i wonder is it possible to brainwash to this extent ,awesome.It is beyond my conception.

  20. chuck says:

    //You are wrong. Muslims are supposed to follow Allah, the Prophet, and those who are in authority among you (wa uli al amr min kum). If the authority decides that slavery has become illegal, than it is also illegal from the Islamic law perspective.//
    In the order you have mentioned and hence not absolutely. Since Quran allows it, it is still valid despite a formal legal injunction (so it may not be lawful but the Hukm is still valid)

  21. Guest says:

    @chuck,

    //By the way, some of the Muslim majority countries are the very last countries which have formally made it illegal.//

    You are right.

    //It is not illegal in the Islamic sense, irrespective of a modern, humanist formalism. //

    You are wrong. Muslims are supposed to follow Allah, the Prophet, and those who are in authority among you (wa uli al amr min kum). If the authority decides that slavery has become illegal, than it is also illegal from the Islamic law perspective.

    //Are you suggesting that the Muslim countries which have made slavery illegal making foolof themselves? //

    No, I am not suggesting that. I was refering to the guy who according to you //just give her a dollar and say she is your slave … in private//. This kind of guys are making fool of themselves.

    //Thanks for suggesting that the Islamic law, which apparently is based on the counsel of Allah himself, is not so inviolable after all.//

    Islamic law is being violated everyday. Muslims engage in corruption, in adultery, in cheating, etc. Law enforcement is not an easy thing, especially if we do not have the power and the tool to do it. Muslims are aware of these and don't pretend that they do not exist. FYI, Muslim countries are working among themselves and with non-Muslim countries to eradicate poverty which is considered to be the main cause of corruption.

  22. Sakat says:

    @Demsci
    They will not progress even the day our sun transformed into supernova,it is their fate but of course the human tragedy.See her above post ,'she was sleepy so she felt it to go to occupy hind seat',i ask why? That shows either you are bored of listening Mohammed's bravery (already see earned lot of information about Mohammed here on this site)or as usual she and all others victim of compulsory attendance (implied). I think none in the audience was interested to know about great Mohammed ,you can make out from their leaving the place and following this lady in that gathering will confirm that .It is like hot water ,when you drank accidentally,you cant swallow either or through it out ,such is the fate of these Muslims ,we can only extend our sympathy for them.

  23. Sakat says:

    No wonder 'Hard truths are hardly told" those who are unable to digest them running from it ,i am not surprised at your post dude,bye too.

  24. chuck says:

    @Sakat,
    I don't think her father will wait for her consent. Her consent doesn't have much 'legal' value in this matter. It is shocking that she doesn't consider such a hypothetical marriage (or desire of marriage) between a child of 6 and her father despicable. But what can we do?

  25. Sakat says:

    Since your father is young at the age of 56 so you will consent him raping 6 year kid,oh!!! awesome thinking, weirdo.

  26. Guest says:

    @chuck,

    I have not had time yet to investigate this matter further. Thanks for suggesting an answer, which seems to be consistent with the Islamic injunction which prevents women from engaging in polyandrous relationship.

    I know that in some Muslim countries there are sharia courts which run parallel to public courts of law. The judges in the sharia courts are specially trained in handling sharia cases, including those related to marriage. These judges are appointed by the Government.  It is quite common these days that Muslim women file for divorce for any reason, and if the women are not satisfied with the verdict of the first sharia court they can take the case to the sharia court of appeal, etc. Now we can see  that although the right to  divorce remains with the husband, the sharia court can intervene in a very decisive manner and, accordingly, the right of women is being addressed and protected in a more satisfactory manner.

    There are people who abuse the formality of law. Your illustration, i.e. //just give her a dollar and say she is your slave … in private// can happen. But I do  not think it is legal. In many (if not all) Muslim countries slavery is illegal. They are just making fool of themselves. 

  27. Guest says:

    @Demsci,

    Increasingly Muslim women are joining the work force, and that requires them to leave home and be with other people (men and women) during the working hours. This leads to them establishing new friendships. There is no probibition for that. However, a married man going out with a married woman just to enjoy time being together is frowned upon. 

  28. Demsci says:

    //" Im against democracy which supports freedom in everything like animals. "//

    I trust that you have thought this through and can explain this in detail.

    And such an attitude I actually respect.

    Let a few Islamic states, like Saudi Arabia, exist, if they will never attack Democratic states to make them Islamic too,

    Let all who prefer a fully Islamic state over a fully Democratic state migrate to states like Saudi Arabia and

    Let  Democratic states deport die-hard islamists to such states and let such states take them in.

    While democratic states take in citizens of Islamic countries who can be truly loyal to it's democratic societal system and government, over and above being loyal to some kind of Ummah of any Islamic state. 

    In such a way fully Democratic states and Islamic states can coexist in peace and people can go live in the countries they prefer and can be actually loyal to.

  29. chuck says:

    @Demsci,
    //Noooooo. I joked that extra (more) marital sex (sex inside marriage) that THAT would increase happiness. //
    Learnt your lesson? Don't ever joke with a 'guest'.

  30. Demsci says:

    //"This showed democracy too in islam."// Perhaps a very little bit, but incomparable with full democracy nowadays. Who of the total population were allowed to vote? Were the woman or slaves allowed to vote? Was the voting tradition sustained in the Caliphate? Of course not. Call it primitive, restricted and shortlived democracy then if you must call that democracy.

  31. Demsci says:

    I, as Darwinist, do believe in progress of mankind, albeit irregularly, in starts and fits, and in the overall big picture, and in many respects; especially in the last 200 years. Also in governmental system, leadership and in average character and morality of mankind and of course in longevity, health and wealth.

    But you, do you believe Muslims progressed in 1400 years Islam? Did their governments, character, morality etc. improve or basically stay on the same level? Which is what you seem to think when you indicate when you mention a group of bad leaders, unwisely chosen or allowed to rule by Muslims. Were the present-day leaders no better or even worse than previous ones in your opinion? Or were they, despite everything, on average, better than previous ones? Or at least, are Islamic societies now better than in the past?

    If you do not believe in some kind of progress of Muslims in 1400 years, can you realistically expect progress from Muslims in the 21st century or until judgment day? 

  32. Demsci says:

    Nice, you think deep. But do you believe in some kind of progress for humanity?
    In your case until judgement day, in mine until mankind future demise (hopefully a loooooong time away).

    And since you seem idealistic and like to educate and improve the knowledge and behavior of Muslims, do you believe in some kind of progress of Muslims?

  33. Demsci says:

    I like people to be more free to have serial monogamy. And I also like to point out that it is most of the time unrealistic that 1 partner can satisfie all the needs of the other partner sufficiently all by him/ herself, while prohibiting a partner to find satisfaction in the company of someone else as augmenting the relation with the primary partner. But of course, I exclude sex from this augmenting a partnership with 1 human with friendships with other humans.

    Is it not the case that in Islam especially women already are prohibited from even augmenting their partnership with their husband with friendships with other men, by talking to them and going out with them? Isn't Islam too fearful of adultery and far too restrictive in relations between married women and men, different from their partner?

  34. Demsci says:

    With that out of the way, I see that you say: sex outside marriage is a horrible act, it is hurting the cheated partner immensely. And in Islamic law it is forbidden and punishable.

    But I agree with Chuck, about root cause being dissatisfaction with partner. And I say no to laws against adultery.

  35. Demsci says:

    Noooooo. I joked that extra (more) marital sex (sex inside marriage) that THAT would increase happiness. I think no one disputes that.

    The next time I wrote extra-marital sex, I wrote about sex outside of marriage.  Do you get it now, i did not say that THAT would increase happiness.

  36. narcole1919721 says:

    Lol. you are talking about age here. my dad is 56, but he looks young. Many people thought hes my brother or husband. my little sis is 14  years younger than me, but she looks 4 years younger than me. my little brother is 5 years younger than me, but he looks 5 years older than me. And many young persons are more mature physically and mentally than old ones. Age is only numbers. sakat, dont bring budhism or weird religions here. 

  37. Sakat says:

    Have you ever seen an ant having sex with a honey bee,even this could be beyond the thinking capacity of animals ,but human can have sex with any other animal ,there are term used for this, like bestiality,sodomy etc .,in that respect human is different from any other animal.He can have sex with 6 year old toddler when he is too old to have sex .This only human can do ,therefore we are not animal.At least they have there own morality,we are not ,we are prophets .

  38. Sakat says:

    If you think you are not animal,but a human ,then why? Mohammed did not understand this ,why he married a toddler of 6 when he was 52 .There is an old dog with my domestic servant ,some time it tries to have sex with even with 15 day old puppy ,now tell me in what way that dog is different from your prophet Mohammed.Do you have any answer for this .

  39. narcole1919721 says:

    *yawns* i almost fell asleep in tarawih cos sleepy in front row. so i moved to the last row behind. But people misunderstood and thought i was going home, so many stood and went home just after seeing me moved. I moved not to go home, but to continue tarawih in comfier place. After some tafakur, i made conclution, since i was infront and the first who moved, people behind followed. My tafakur point is that, in this case, i was a leader. A leader who led followers in wrong way, i even made them misunderstand, i gave bad model, eventhough my intention was good. Using same analogy, about how to create better muslims, we need good, better, even best muslims as leaders, as good models for other muslims to follow. But see the fact now, most muslims leaders are fasiqin, munafiqin and dhallin right? See saddam, khadafi, morsi, arab kings and presidents. Most of them were chosen not bcos of their 3lm in religion, but only cos of money, heirs, military experiences, sweet tounges, etc. After prophet died, abu bakar was chosen as caliph cos of his 3lm, cos of his good deeds, and people trusted him. Ali didnt get enough vote at that time. If only votes for ali as many as shiite followers these days, then he could have been the first caliph. This showed democracy too in islam. In good way. Im against democracy which supports freedom in everything like animals. Humans have aqal. Animals dont have it. They just have nafsu. They do anything what they want. Why should we act like beasts? If you think you are animal, then dont wear clothes now, and live in forest. Have sex with anything you want, eat anything, kill anything, hurt anything. Follow your nafsu. But im sorry, im not animal, im not darwinist. Im a human, i have law, rules in life. The rules are made just like a mother holding her childs hand very tight when crossing the road, so that wont get hit, so that wont get hurt, so that wont regret. Like a mother who wants her child safe. If the mother let the child cross the road alone, and not prevent it, means she doesnt love her child. So you are the child who thinks of freedom, and careless about everyone, even yourself. you just wanna be free. thats all you know and you want.

  40. Sakat says:

    If you are not animal then who you are , Do you think human beings are not animal.What you want to establish here .Do you mean to say the color of your blood is different from the color of the blood of any other animal on the planet.Sorry no westerner will waste their time here for discussion/debating this ugly Qur'an ,only Asians would do this, that is our nature.

  41. Sakat says:

    /Islam allows polygamy, but not incest. Islam allows divorce, but not incest./
    Other belief only allows polygamy,there is no discretion in it,that is final.I can proudly say they are incest free ,but not with Islam ,your post itself is full proof of that .

  42. Guest says:

    Sakat,

    Islam allows polygamy, but not incest. Islam allows divorce, but not incest. 

    Sakat, I think you have to revise your position regarding incest. Incest is not a good thing. Your position is wrong. Your metaphor of a mother dog have sex with its puppy is not something that justifies the conduct of incest. You are not animal. You are a human being. Please behave like a normal person. 

  43. Guest says:

    @chuck,

    In Islam, a woman can always go to the court of law and file for a divorce.

    If a man is not satisfied with his wife, sexually or emotionally or for other reasons, he too can go to the court and file for divorce, and then he can marry another woman. In the old days, when slavery was still common the man could also approach his female slave, and it did not constitute adultery.

    I don't have ready answers to your last two questions. It goes without saying that you can google them. 

  44. Guest says:

    @Demsci,

    This is also OK. But you seem to be erratic today …

    So, basically you state that sex outside marriage is good for happiness, and it is not against democratic law. Certainly everyone has the right to pursue happiness and, by following your logic, that pursuit can be in the form of sex outside marriage, which, according to you, can be hurtful to your spouse. 

    In Islam, sex outside marriage is haram/forbidden, and marriage is consensual and sacrosanct. If during marriage a wife feels that her husband forces her into non-consensual sex and it is not acceptable to her, she can discuss it with the husband and if nothing changes she can go to the court of law and file for a divorce.

  45. Sakat says:

    @chuck
    On the spot !!!!,however he knew some one will come up like this ,so he disappears from his 'Guest appearance.',under such circumstances.

  46. chuck says:

    @Guest,
    The root cause of adultery, assuming all are mentally healthy, is dissatisfaction from the other half. Suppose a muslim women isn't sexually or emotionally satisfied with her husband. What legal recourse does she have in Islam/Sharia? Now reverse the gender, suppose a man isn't satisfied with his wife, what are his avenues? Can a man satiate himself with his female slaves? Will it constitute adultery? Can a woman do likewise (satisfy her sexual urges with a male slave)? Will that constitute adultery? 
    Answer each of them.

  47. Guest says:

    @Demsci, adultery is a form of dishonesty. It is cheating. It is extra-marital sex. I can safely say that in Islam it was, is and will continue to be forbidden and punishable. 

  48. Demsci says:

    I am sorry again, but the 2nd time, when  I said Extra-marital sex I DID mean sex OUTSIDE marriage sex, as you meant it, and  I said THAT was not against democratic law, but that I thought it was indeed against Islamic law. I was playing with words. sorry.

    I think no law anywhere is against more sex inside marriage? Although, now that I think of it; In theWest even in marriage sex has to be consentual, BOTH partners have to be willing.  While I read that in Islamic law, when a man demands sex, a woman is not allowed to refuse him. Is this true?

  49. Sakat says:

    'No, I am not.
    Please do not assume what is true to you is true to others.'
    My evaluation is based on nature,you cannot deny we are animal like other animals .A mother dog gives birth to many puppy's ,when they reach to puberty they do have sex with their own mother ,own sisters and brothers .Do you found making them doing distinction ,like my mother ,brother ,sister etc for not to have sex.Though you may openly say you are not like (your conscience mind) incest but unconsciously you too is an incest (because it is animal instinct after at work ,rubbing moral ointment on surface is not enough).I can say other people like westerners may not find meaning in the term 'incest' ,because they do it openly like other animal so their mind always be sound .But Muslims are follower of Mohammed and he was definitely an "incest" his all actions speaks it loudly ,since his follower emulates him they are equally incests.

  50. Sakat says:

    @Guest
    Your statement will not change the ground reality ,only Muslims can marry 6 to 10 year old girls and during intercourse they will die too and,also to marry 4 wives at a time.Even there is an opportunity to divorce a old wife for new young one .Still do you think this is not the 'concept of incest in its practical form',oh!! come on mate.

  51. Guest says:

    That is OK Demsci. So, you like more sex inside marriage. So do Muslims.

    And you said: //But it [i.e. more sex inside marriage] is against Islamic law, isn't it?//
    My opinion is that more sex inside marriage is not against Islamic law. Did you find any reference to the contrary? Please share.

  52. Sakat says:

    @Demsi
    /But both sides should also consider: "OMG, how come I and my side did not know this, poor us, let's learn, let's change if appropriate"./
    Yes this is exactly everybody's wish here except Muslims ,because they are not trained to think beyond the parameters of Mohammed,Islam and Allah.I bet that lady is not pron to think in that fashion.If anybody ask clarification/doubt ,she try's to evade by saying you can find answer by reading Quran in Arabic.only ,poor justifications.

  53. Demsci says:

    @Sakat,

    Yes, I completely agree, And I add that a Buddhist like you and a "Aarwinist" like me are natural allies.

  54. Sakat says:

    Demsi
    /" If someone who thinks hes muslim by bothering other innocent non muslims, and the place for them to worship in peace, means that person is fasiq. and islam curses fasiq muslims for disobeying what original islam taught."/
    When the Bamiyan Buddha's were destroyed none of the OPEC country came forward to condemn it .And on the other weak when the Bombs were blasted at Mahabhodi Temple and Mahabodhi Tree ,none of these innocent Muslim in the world found it to be condemnable .Moreover the link of the terror out fit point it to Pakistan ,a Muslim country always foments terror attacks through out the world.

  55. Demsci says:

    " you should admit that theres democracy too in islam"

    The crucial point to me is: Can real full Democracy flourish under a supreme Islam, (or only under some interpretations of it)? And can Islam, (or only some interpretations of it?) flourish under real full Democracy? If the answer to both is yes, my problem with Islam would be solved.

  56. Demsci says:

    "You have a habit in dhal way when paraphrasing."

    I don't understand. Didn't you explain that "dhal" means "wrong, but convinced being right"? So basically misunderstanding? Did I misunderstand you?

  57. Demsci says:

    Narcole: "you have no knowledge about original islam. all you know are from untrusted sources."

    But knowledge about original Islam is not our primary goal. That is protection of our societal system/ our people from, say, "Islamic supremacists". And yes, protection of religious minorities in Islamic countries, expansion of our societal system at the expense of Islam (this is called competition, and we want to do it only in a fair, free, democratic way, do Muslims want to do it only in a fair, free, democratic way?).

    I again emphasize that it is so-called "Islamist" Muslims, in your mind perhaps the "Fasiq's or Dhal" Muslims, that interpret and practice Islam in harmful (or if you will in competitive) ways to our societal system and people. And we REPORT this!

    So; if you are going to correct us Counterjihadists, make sure you also try to correct "Islamic supremacists".

    If you can't do that, then make sure you side with fellow democrats against fellow Muslims who pose a threat to democratic societal system and people.

    If you can't do THAT, at least admit that you won;'t do that and honourably warn the democratic people. 

  58. Sakat says:

    How many dimension an 'absolute' has got,is their way to realize it.

  59. Demsci says:

    Narcole: "The reverse is for you, of course," Yes, we too think something like: "OMG, how come these Muslims do not know, poor them".

    But both sides should also consider: "OMG, how come I and my side did not know this, poor us, let's learn, let's change if appropriate".

  60. Demsci says:

    @Narcole, I read your comment. So a fasiq is perhaps a willful lawbreaker and a dhal a "misunderstander".  But in Islam who decides? The Ummah exists, but does not function at all like a state, with laws and law-enforcement.

    We cannot hold Muslims accountable for what other Muslims do. But when violent Muslims do terrorist and oppressive actions upon non-Muslims, especially in Muslim countries,

    then from those actions Islam prophits and Islam's religious competitors, like Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, Darwinism etc. suffer. And because for many people religion is of paramount importance, which they naturally want to promote, that means that many Muslims prophit from violent misdeeds of other Muslims and non-Muslims suffer from them.

    And it seems to me that when bad deeds done by "bad", "fasiq or dhal" Muslims hurt other religions and their followers, when these others themselves do NOT hurt Islam and it's followers,

    then it would be honourable that "Democratic Muslims" clearly and irrevocably side with other democratic people against anti-democratic Muslims. Or if this they will not do, can they at least clarify if there indeed can exist "democratic Muslims" or not.

    It is also honourable of Muslims to warn the rest of mankind that Muslims do not intend to submit to real democracy ever if that would be the truth.

  61. Demsci says:

    Narcole.: "still offending All muslims?" No, and I never did this. So I ask you; Do you consider criticism on a part of Islam, or on a part of the behaviour of a part of Muslims, as something that

    – is about ALL MUSLIMS?
    – is offending?
    – If so do you then consider that offending is always a bad, morally reprehensive, act?

    Because such an attitude to me indicates that you like censorship and do not endorse full freedom of speech. Or to be more precise freedom of speech that some find offensive. But who is going to decide then, for all, what is or is not offensive? Such an attitude as you seem to have here can be turned against you.

    I am all for freedom of so-called "offensive" speech (everybody is for freedom of nice, friendly speech). But I recognize some privacy-borders. But  on internet, in media, newspapers, magazines people have no right NOT TO BE OFFENDED, in my opinion.

  62. Demsci says:

    "Does democracy mean freedom to hurt others?"

    Democracy is complicated, but it means giving more power to more people and so less to dictatorial rulers and elites. But it also means to protect minorities. We have parliaments which, in response to everyday societal events and development, can make/ improve laws.

    About hurting others; I am sure in Democracy it is never allowed to hurt others fysically.

    But we question the right of persons, to not be hurt, so to be protected by law, from hurt, that is entirely non-violent, psychological.  Though we do protect a certain measure of privacy.

    And freedom also means not belonging by law to one's marriage partner, who we do not want to be a "master"  or "jailer" of his/ her partner.

    Nor would we want to condemn every person to be partner to another person for entire life, after wedding, if this is the will/ decision of only one of the 2 partners.

  63. Demsci says:

    @Guest, sorry, with extra maritalsex I meant more (extra) sex inside marriage (=marital sex). 

    I do not like extra-marital sex either, it is just my opinion that this should never be forbidden and punishable by law.

    Yes, I remember Monica Lewinsky and Bill Clinton. I remember that at the time I thought it was outrageous to even investigate this, let alone prosecute this. As I thought Clinton had done no real illegal thing. But he had lied, yes, even under oath, OK. But still, I personally was appalled by and loathed those who made such a big spectacle out of this, and so damaged the American government so unnecessary, so unjustified.

  64. narcole1919721 says:

    The reverse is for you, of course, as the objects.

  65. narcole1919721 says:

    We have shariah as law here. but sadly dhalin play shariah and the hakim. how many judges in this world got bribed and brainwashed? so again, as muslims, we have to attend majlis ta3lim to stop this. i always ask people to attend majlis ta3lim. But most are lazy, even sick of my nagging. but this is my jihad. jihad doesnt mean always with blood. seeking knowledge is jihad, not being beggar is jihad, being a teacher is jihad. and many more of jihad. education is important to stop wars. swords, guns and bombs are cruel, and last option only for defence. and god didnt create us for dropping each others blood. He gives us honor as khalifah on this earth to take care this earth with good living.

  66. narcole1919721 says:

    You have a habit in dhal way when paraphrasing.

  67. narcole1919721 says:

    No, you should admit that theres democracy too in islam, but not as free as urs in zhalimness.

  68. narcole1919721 says:

    Hello demsci, still offending All muslims? is all in your mind only about war and bombs? count how many muslims in this world? did they do these all? Such wars created  by dhalin people. fasiq means a muslim who knows something bad or wrong, but still doing it. dhal means a muslim  who thinks something wrong is right,  and feels innocent about it cos he doesnt think hes wrong. hakim should punish zhalim fasiqin whose  actions hurt others. but about dhalin, we should educate dhallin to make them realize what they did was wrong. if we punish dhalin when they feel innocent, they will attack us too for thinking that we zhalim innocent people. This revenge will never end. but can you tell which group al qaeda is? some even say they are munafiqin, hypocrites. some say, its a mix of all groups. my opinion its a mix. there muslims, mukmins, munafiqin, fasiqin also dhallin. can we punish all? first of all, we must be able to differ. problem is, even many muslims and non muslims still confused how to differ. So im here to socialize this.

  69. Guest says:

    Narcole, what is "perve"?

  70. Guest says:

    @Demsci, in my view extra marital sex is not leading to happiness. People who do extra marital sex do it secretly, they don't want it known by others. At one point President Clinton was brought to impeachment court because of his extramarital affair. 

  71. Guest says:

    //Muslims are accustomed to it ,it wont make difference to them//

    This is a representation of yourself. No, Sakat, Muslims are not accustomed to incest. We condemn it. Muslims distinguish incest (which is illegal ) from non-incest sexual relationship (which is halal as long as it is done intra-marital).

  72. Guest says:

    //See we all are incest in one way or other //

    No, I am not. 
    Please do not assume what is true to you is true to others. 

    //some people dare and some people do it mentally//
    Do you dare? Or do you do it mentally? — sorry if this is too  personal. You don't have to answer.

    //The same with the victim he/she may revolt//
    So, you say that one side of the insect relationship is a victim. And you, according to your own admission, are an incest. This means you have no problem victimizing other people sexually. Other people being your mom, daughters, sisters, grandmothers (you are a man, right?) … Again, my apology for being very rude.

  73. Demsci says:

    Narcole:
     "but i disagree with non moslems whose opinions against original quran, even without ever knowing original quran,"

    But N, the situation is more complicated than that. Ali Sina, Robert Spencer and other counterjihadists very often and endlessly express opinions about tenets and laws of Islam, that are awkwardly similar to what, say "islamist", Muslims say, believe and practice.

    It is just that the counterjihadists are against those tenets and laws of course and the "Islamists"  are in favor of them. But both counterjihadists and Islamists often believe and write exactly the same opinion on some tenets and laws of Islam.

    For example about the deathpenalty for apostasy. Robert Spencer often quotes a number of Islam-apologists who say Islam does not have the deathpenalty for apostasy, of Islam (and Shabeer here also keeps copy-pasting this).

    But then Spencer points out that all 4 schools of Sunni Islam; Shafi-Hanafi-Hanbali-Maliki are in favor of deathpenalty for apostasy. As well as large proportions of Muslims in various countries, be they Islamic or Democratic, which is seen in polls.

    So, it just makes no sense that some Muslims only contradict Counterjihadists with courage. What is needed is somehow a real meaningful separation between "Islamists" and say, "Fully Democratic Muslims", who then side,  on important issues with other Democratic people against other Muslim people. And that means giving up on the worldwide Ummah. Are you prepared to do that? If not, what good are your  assurances to non-Muslims?

    Or: "If you correct us, also correct your "fasiq"  Muslims, in a clear irrevocable way.

  74. Demsci says:

     "omg how come these persons didnt know, poor them,i should tell them"

    Fair enough, is the reverse also true? I mean, do you ever think: "OMG, how come I did not know what these persons know and they tell me with their comments"?

  75. Demsci says:

    Narcole;
    //"If someone who thinks hes muslim by bothering other innocent non muslims, and the place for them to worship in peace, means that person is fasiq. and islam curses fasiq muslims for disobeying what original islam taught. how could you against islam who against fasiqin? you have a right to punish those fasiqin. "//

    Interesting thoughts. If I would parafrase your words for showing you Democratic laws, then I would rewrite them something  like this: "If someone, no matter who (s)he is, commits crimes against innocent people, no matter who they are, it means that person is tried and if convicted is considered criminal". For acting against democratic law. How could anyone, any Muslim, be against a democratic law against crime? Democratic judges have a right to punish criminals, Muslims included.

    I like to point out that here too the influence of Democratic laws on your mind is shown.

  76. Demsci says:

    Narcole: 
    "but dont repeat what those fasiqin did by attacking people who are not involved in their action. if you do that this will never end."

    Well said and I agree and add that that is a very important principle of our Democratic constitutional state. You probably think Islam taught you this principle, but I think you learned from Democratic culture.

  77. narcole1919721 says:

    Absolute means hakikat…and quran is about oneness…*gives u flower*

  78. narcole1919721 says:

    Guest..u perve

  79. narcole1919721 says:

    Sakat..ur sleep talking….mm.

  80. Sakat says:

    See we all are incest in one way or other ,some people dare and some people do it mentally. The same with the victim he/she may revolt, in that case the perpetrator is punished according to penal law or he/she may not come out openly ,in that case he/she may become accustomed to it or bring end ( if too emotional )to their life .Muslims are accustomed to it ,it wont make difference to them ,they don't know self respect ,their day begins with sex and ends up as well ( he may be 80 years or 30 years and the victim may be 6 year or 90 year old woman, it is immaterial) .

  81. Sakat says:

    How your Qur'an deals with the concept of "the Absolute" and "the Duality" let us begin with this (this is fundamental science ,every Hindu's as well a Buddhist know about this).

  82. Sakat says:

    No i am spreading facts in its entirety, there is nothing intentional in it .

  83. Sakat says:

    Answer to your question lay's in my above post itself ,please read it once again.

  84. Guest says:

    What's your opinion about extra-marital sex? Is it legal?

  85. narcole1919721 says:

    Science and religion are one in holistic way. science is part of religion. science is 3lm, knowledge. religion too. so none in original quran contradicts science cos quran is science itself. if u find contradictions, tell me, ill show you its just translation errors.

  86. narcole1919721 says:

    You mean ur intentionally triggering visitors to curse you? for what purpose, spreading hatred? 🙁 is this what budha taught you? :'/

  87. Sakat says:

    This is called psychology baby ,you may not understand ,acquiring knowledge about psychology is not enough ,you have to use it effectively .I know average mentality of your clown ,don't worry you may laugh but they will (visitors ) curse me and ,at the end i will laugh at you and them ha ha ha.

  88. Sakat says:

    We know how to end this baby ,that's why we take refuge in science and not in any God ,you are way behind us,the day of reckoning will come soon .Then you will realize ,how fools you were ,we don't want to disturb you now ,let you sleep hiding your head in the sand hahaha.

  89. Sakat says:

    Hell with your Islam ,i am a Buddhist and your cult had blasted bombs at my beloved Maha Bhodhy tree,that cannot be pardonable ,i wish could bomb both your ugly places of worship ,don't worry some body will do that in future.

  90. narcole1919721 says:

    Quran is rahmatan lil 3alamin. its universal. i agree that all moslems should learn quran more so that wont get misled by opinions. but i disagree with non moslems whose opinions against original quran, even without ever knowing original quran, and refuse to get to know but having negative subjective opinions. and non moslems who attack real moslems for their negative thinking and fitnah. we cant force others to take what we take.  this is the correct meaning of faith freedom. Let others believe what they want. as long as not hurt others. if someone hurts you or ur family, you may avenge that person only. you cant kill his family.

  91. narcole1919721 says:

    Ciao, i gotta sholat n prepare iftar. hold ur comments. dont distract my focus, x.x i always think "omg how come these persons didnt know, poor them, i should tell them" after reading ur comments while doing tasks 😮

  92. Sakat says:

    Tell your 1.5 billion brothers and sisters to read Arabic and understand Quaran first,and not to divulge in Dava with Non-believers about your Quran and Islam in their language and,upon seeking clarifications by them,don't tell them to read Quaran in Arabic .We don't have time to read Arabic that ,ugly language only for understanding Quaran ;reading and understanding of which will not create employment for me.

  93. narcole1919721 says:

    You only make other muslims laugh at you when reading this, sakat. you know very little about fadhilah from these 3amal, once you find out yourself ull embrace islam no matter what ignorants say. I forgive you sakat, cos you didnt know yet.

  94. Sakat says:

    @Chuck Thanks.

  95. narcole1919721 says:

    All ur accusations are fitnah we already know about. no matter how hard you try ull only embarrass urself with ur ignorance. people who know just can laugh. dont embarrass urself more. you have no knowledge about original islam. all you know are from untrusted sources.  i even doubt you have source.

  96. Sakat says:

    Look how vulnerable you are in answering simple questions,again red-herring ha ha ha.

  97. narcole1919721 says:

    Die first, sakat. Ull meet izrail and see the proof.

  98. Sakat says:

    /Dear moslem brothers and sisters/
    Hie!!! you all followers of this unproductive cult let me remind you, life comes only once and you should enjoy it ,don't go after this cult ,keep your mind attentive ,use your sound mind don't waste your time praying and eating and ugly fasting .Night fasting is very good ,then your body needs minimum calories but day fasting only mad can do .There is nothing called hell and heaven exist don't sacrifice (don't become human bombs) your life for acquiring 72 virgins in that hereafter life .Only psycho like Mohammed can think such antique things to fool you. He has enjoyed heavenly pleasures here on earth and you are the one who will be deprived of that .

  99. narcole1919721 says:

    I asked why, and you should explain it in original arabic quran. If ur unable, means u talk fitnah.  nobody likes fitnah in this world, not even you. How would you feel if i fitnah ur wife zina and ur kid is haram jadah from ilegal sex with neighbor?

  100. chuck says:

    Well said Sakat!!

  101. narcole1919721 says:

    Everybody can write and publish what he wants. Like islamic banks and conventional banks. Conventional banking is haram or forbidden in islam. but do we force close the banks? its clearly told that its clear the diference between good and bad. It depends on the person to chose what he wants for himself as individual. if those sections wanna do what they like, let them, as long as not disturb or hurt others.

  102. Sakat says:

    /Why keep talking about illegal sex, rape and pedo?/
    Because these are fundamental tenets of Islam and Mohammed in other words ,these terms sine-qua-none of Islam.

  103. Sakat says:

    We know you all Muslims are living in fools paradise and we are least bothered about you and your cult Islam ,provided you live peacefully with co-inhabitants of this planet ,however you are not doing that ,our research took us to Quarn for all this violence of Muslims .We are living our life on facts and research and our messiah,s preachings so ,we don't believe any tall claim of hell and heaven of any musketeer , he has to come with proof first.When human started reasoning and questioning he has reached this modern era.See how you people are out dated ,this is because your cult is primitive applicable only to stone age people.

  104. narcole1919721 says:

    Why keep talking about illegal sex, rape and pedo? Its fitnah which people at his time would deny. Did you find any literature at that time with such comments?  you even support sodomi. go to dead sea. its sign for homos. the lowest place on earth.

  105. narcole1919721 says:

    In the very beginning of quran, its already told about those who believe in ghaib which eyes cant see.  our eyes are limitted. dogs eyes are designed to be able to see evils, chicken cocks eyes are designed to see light of angels. elephants and dolphins also have designed waves which human cant see nor sense. the concrete proofs you want to see is only by experiencing death first. once you experience it, theres no way back for repent. the door is closed.

  106. Sakat says:

    Then why? your imam,s ,mullahs,Hakim's do not discard the Quaran translated in other languages ,why cant your blasphemy is inoperative here ? ,you can bring blasphemy law against Salman Rushdie for Satanic Verses then why not against Pig tel ?.Don't try too fool us your Quaran is criminal manual ,it talks about crimes more than peace.

  107. narcole1919721 says:

    Its you the liar. cos its you who said he saw god. he decided to die cos he wanted to see god after he passes alam barzakh. this dunia is tests for humans and jins for those who believe in ghaib. those who use aqal. those who have intelligence. those who read. those who do good and those who think good.

  108. I-HATE-ISALM says:

    narcole1919721,
    What did Muhammad go to heaven for if he did not see allah?That proves that he was a liar for he said he saw allah praying. Were Muhammad's eyes designed to see ghaib? Show proof of that. Let me say it again that on the night of Muhammad's miraj/mirage, he was in bed with his recently widowed cousin, Umm Hanni. Fearing resentmwnt for such a despicable behavior, he concocted the miraj hoax. The claim to have made a round trip to Jerusalem in one night elicited more than skepticism among his followers except Abu Bakr the gullible. Muhammad would later have a 'revelation' that even first cousin can be married. That way he covered his tracks just in case his evil deed came to limelight.

  109. narcole1919721 says:

    Are u confused about simple terms, then how could you attack arabic quran without knowing its terms? dajjal translations and intrepretations always have flaws. so if u curse them i wont blame you. just dont name it quran or what prophet brought. cos its only ORIGINAL in arabic. keep making up stuff with english and other languages from editors. Alquran will always be original cos its one language and cant be EDITED. Even sholat is still and always in one original language. So argueing about quran with persons who dont even understand its own one original fus7a is useless.

  110. narcole1919721 says:

    And i repeat, no one ever saw god using eyes. so if someone says he ever saw god then hes a big liar. our eyes arent designed to see ghaib. if you want to see ghaib,  you have to pass alam barzakh first. dont worry. its near. 🙂

  111. narcole1919721 says:

     Prophet Muhammad shollallahu 3alaihi wasallam went to mi3raj, not to see god. He was invited to travel heaven, hell and the secrets. He also went there to receive wahyu of sholat, but also to meet prophets and take their advice. And he went to masjidil aqsa cos it was the first qiblat for sholat before ka2bah. And gate of heaven isnt only there. Raudhah is also gate of heaven, zamzam well also gate of heaven, mukmins grave also gate of heaven. You should learn more about asbabun nuzul in kitab. Why keep asking why this and that? Cant you see real 3ulama still calm? Why? Cos they know the answers already, cos they read real kitabs. And they dont care about fame by telling that they are prominent scholars. If you wanna know where is god read kitab about ruh by sheikh naem as saufi. Its very clear explanation. About the existance of masjidil aqsa, lol then how could moslems and hanif followers pray before if not know where masjidil aqsa. They all knew already where prophet solomon resided. Why asking silly questions which people knew the answers already and show ur lack of reading? Its not hard for prophet Muhammad shollallahu 3alaihi wa sallam to know where, even if its destructed. He even knew the tomb of moses near mecca. Where none of jews and christians could find. And you only quoted yusuf alis intrepretation, and didnt mention according to "which muslims" about the year. And which muslims who were alive at that time who directly said that. How could you put some year which you even werent born there at that time? What have you learned in persia, sir? 

  112. Sakat says:

    @Narcole,You know what are you talking ,be meaningful and clear in your terms ,don't bring your circular reasoning all the time ,accept that you are unable to defend your Islam logically ,it is not your fault understand because the whole doctrine Islam is based on illogical garbage.If your sheiks are knowledgeable let them bargain here in this site.

  113. narcole1919721 says:

    Sigh. where all these questions come from? mr Ali. come to my place. ill bring you to my sheikhs. they are old, some died already. sign of qiyamat is the death of 3ulama with their 3lm. ur old too, use time left to meet them as long as you all still have time. i understand how you got misled this far. you never read authentic kitabs and u never met real sheikhs. i wanna answer all ur questions here, they are very simple. but ur followers hacked me and make my typing slow as slug. typing one letter even so long. sly, isnt it? 

  114. showbbbeeeeme says:

    please show us a quote of the description he gave.

  115. azad says:

    the Quraan will never lie for all those idol worshipers you will see Allah's anger in this world and the hereafter for blasphemy Ameen.

  116. DPhysicist says:

    Poor Mo… he never knew that centuries later he will be screwed up through reasons…

  117. @zippelius says:

    Diphthong "wa" at the opening ayah Q17:2 tells us that the person mentioned in the verse is the same person addressed in the earlier verse. This is a fact that Ibn Kathir overlooked when he cooked up the justifications for Isra' Mikraj.

    Throughout al Qur'an, verses on the so called "Night Journey" are always associated with story of Moses.
    2:51
    Yet, when we summoned Moses for forty nights, you worshiped the calf in his absence, and turned wicked.

    7:142
    We summoned Moses for thirty nights, and completed them by adding ten. Thus, the audience with his Lord lasted forty nights,. Moses said to his brother Aaron, "Stay here with my people, maintain righteousness, and do not follow the ways of the corruptors."

    One has only to read Q20:9-16 to get the gist of the story.
    20:9
    Have you noted the history of Moses?

    20.10
    When he saw a fire, he said to his family, "Stay here. I have seen a fire. Maybe I can bring you some of it, or find some guidance at the fire."

    Sorry, there's no evidence as far as al Qur'an is concerned, to the story of Mohammed performing the Night Journey and flying on Buraq to the heaven. It's simply another form of syncretism influenced by Greek/Persian mythologies.

    Regards,
    Zaki

  118. Dwito says:

    The legacy of both these mosques had started from the time of Adam.

    Did Adam start the legacy? Pl. explain.

  119. SorrowSnake says:

    Q17.1 does talk about Muhammad, Ibn Kathir writes:

    "(1. Glorified be He Who took His servant for a Journey by Night from Al-Masjid Al-Haram to Al-Masjid Al-Aqsa, the neighborhood whereof We have blessed, in order that We might show him of Our Ayat. Verily, He is the All-Hearer, the All-Seer.)

    Allah glorifies Himself, for His ability to do that which none but He can do, for there is no God but He and no Lord besides Him.

    ﴿الَّذِى أَسْرَى بِعَبْدِهِ﴾

    (Who took His servant for a Journey) refers to Muhammad" http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_conte

  120. Zaki says:

    Q17:1 has nothing to do with Muhammad. The person referred in the verse is Moses. This can be confirmed simply by reading the next passage after Q17:1, i.e Q17:2

  121. Medical says:

    hello there and thank you to your info ? I?ve definitely picked up something new from right here. I did however experience some technical issues using this web site, since I skilled to reload the site a lot of instances prior to I may just get it to load correctly. I have been considering if your web host is OK? No longer that I’m complaining, but sluggish loading cases times will often have an effect on your placement in google and could injury your high-quality ranking if advertising and ***********

  122. John K says:

    I really admire Walid Shoebat. I listened to his 90 minute lecture on YouTube, which is split into 10 or so minute segments.

    For those of us who have been reading the Bible for a long time, but are not familiar with Muslim culture, there's a lot of material in the Bible that is just plain mystifying – like who knows what is means or how it will be fulfilled.

    But once you look at it through Muslim eyes, it all gets very obvious. The same happens with the Book of Mormon. If you read it as the Nephites representing Western Civilization, and the Lamanites, Gadianton Robbers and secret combinations as representing Muslims, it opens up a whole new understanding.

  123. Raks says:

    Allah is notin but satan according to Bible,some quotes from Bible…
    i ask all ppl to go through walid shoebat's prophecy videos in youtube where he has
    explained in detail.

    some verses from Bible.

    John 8:58-59 Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am."

    John 10:30 I and the Father are one.”

    1 John 5:7-7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

    1 John 2:22 Who is the liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a man is the antichrist–he denies the Father and the Son.

    Isaiah 46:9-11 "Remember the former things, those of long ago; I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me.10 I make known the end from the beginning,from ancient times, what is still to come. I say: My purpose will stand, and I will do all that I please.11 From the east I summon a bird of prey; from a far-off land, a man to fulfill my purpose. What I have said, that will I bring about; what I have planned, that will I do.

    Psalm 83:4-7 They have said Come and let us cut them off from being a nation; that the name of Israel may be no more in remembrance For they have consulted

    1 John 4:1 Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world.

    John 16:2 They will put you out of the synagogues. Indeed, the hour is coming when whoever kills you will think he is offering service to God.

  124. John K says:

    Very interesting. Thanks for sharing these resources.

  125. Sanada_10 says:

    And no proof, just the word "possible".

  126. Raks says:

    Dude!
    The Supreme Leader who is the cause and governor of all creation who protects and saves sinful mankind, He Himself appeared upon the earth wrapped in a body that is Holy and without sin. (Rig Veda 10.125)

    Death and Suffering about Jesus Christ:

    Rig Veda 10.90.7, 15: “The sacrificial victim is to be crowned with a crown made of thorny vines”

    Yajur Veda 31: “Before death, He should be given a drink of Somarasa”(an intoxicating herbal juice)

    Sama Veda, part 2 (Thandiya Maha Brahmanam): “God is the ruler of people. He will offer His body as a sacrifice, for His people; for the remission of their sins.”

    Brhadaranyaka Upanishad 3.9.28: “His hands and legs are to be bound to a yoopa (a wooden pole) causing blood shed”

    Ithareya Brahmanam 2.6: “None of His bones be broken”

    Maha Brahmanam 4.15: “If you want to be delivered from the sin, which you commit through eyes, mouth, ears and mind, bloodshed is necessary. Without shedding the blood, there is no remission for sin. That must be the blood of the Holy one. God is our creator. He is our King. When we were perishing, He came to save us by offering even his own body on our behalf.”

    Ithareya Brahmanam: “After death, His clothes are to be divided among the officers”

  127. Sanada_10 says:

    Provide the historical fact about Kaaba, not the belief.

  128. Sanada_10 says:

    It's funny for people these days to be confused when using words. That's not "in fact" but "in belief".

  129. John K says:

    Yet you bring ignorance to people who have studied and expect us to respect you?

  130. a person says:

    Mr. Ananda,

    I have the earnest desire to appreciate your comment. However, it is very unfortunate for me that I cant do this simply of the point that your comment has shown either your utter disregard of what are the teachings of Islam or your ostensibly lack of knowledge on this score. Whatever the case may be, I would like to let you know that you have got know about the basic tenets of Islam to great extent.

    You might be right to some extent as to whether the last prophet incorporated some of the pagan ideas. The so-called pagans , you must know, were not pagans for eternity. In fact, they were the descandents of Ibrahim, who propounded the ideology of monotheism in Arab. And what you also must know that those arabs though were the successor of Ibrahim were deviated and indulged themselves in idolatry forsaking and forgetting the true teachings of the sages.Muhammad (SW) simply took them to their root – the basic belief of humanity.

    It seems that you are an indian origin. If you are, I would like you to study the 30 basic teachings of Vedas…

    Ignorance is a curse.

    Thanks.

  131. Arya Anand says:

    No proof at all. Muslims believe in heaven because Muhammad told about it. It is Muslims' circular argument!

  132. Arya Anand says:

    "… Muhammad used to pray in Kaba…"

    Muhammad used to sacrifice animal to the idol of Uzza one of the daughters of Allah the Arab pagan deity. Islamic rituals are nothing but Arab pagan rituals. Muhammad gave a monotheistic twist to such pagan rituals and called it Islam his religion of submission.

  133. a person says:

    Cant it be that right after 40 years of Kaaba , Al AKsa was built-a place of worship???. It is certainly possible. Think about the proximity of these two places. We cant here talk about the temple of solomon which no doubt could be built in the same place where the mosque was first built. We have the history of this that the temple was destroyed several times but rebuit again. Therefore, brining to diametrical opposite accounts to find out a contradiction itself is a monumental task which Sina has taken so vigorously only to find that he completely misunderstoof the whole thing….

  134. a person says:

    ___"This hadith presents yet another problem. According to Muslims, Masjid’ul Haram (Ka’ba) was built by Abraham who lived in 2000 BC and the Temple of Solomon (the site of the Msjid ul’Aqsa) was built about 958-951 BC. There is a gap of over 1040 years between the dates of the construction of the two buildings."____Now at first glance, this argument might seem a very intriguing one. Howvever, if we ask him about the dates he's mentioned what would be his answer. The quranic and hadiths supposed dates should not be convoluted with that of Bible. If anyone does that this wont be taken as granted.

  135. a person says:

    …______Now coming to his reasoning regarding the hadith..which is …__Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 55, Number 636:____Narrated Abu Dhaar:__I said, “O Allah’s Apostle! Which mosque was built first?” He replied, “Al-Masjid-ul-Haram.” I asked, “Which (was built) next?” He replied, “Al-Masjid-ul-Aqs-a (i.e. Jerusalem).” I asked, “What was the period in between them?” He replied, “Forty (years).” He then added, “Wherever the time for the prayer comes upon you, perform the prayer, for all the earth is a place of worshipping for you.” _

  136. a person says:

    _Ali Sina also fails to take into account that why Muhammad(SW) chose that mosque in stead of other places of worship. The thing which can easily be understood that the temple was built of a prophet which renders it a great respect and in comparison to other places it is regarded highly

  137. a person says:

    Firstly, regarding Masjidul Aksa, Ali sina's article cant help but remain a self-contradictory one. Let me put into effect one or two of the problems..____Ali sina tried to deny the claim of Muslims as to what was called a Masjid. __He said__…………………"Muslims may argue that “Masjid’ means any place of worship (sojda), that is why the prophet refers to the temple of Solomon as Masjid. In that case, all churches, synagogues and the Zoroastrian Ateshkadehs are Masjids………….____I must ask him whether he thought about the fact that Muhammad(SW) used to pray in Kaba which at that time was not regarded by non-Muslims as Masjid but Muslims did. Nobody can deny that. Now why then cant the Masjidul Aksa be reagarded as a place of worship, that is to say A Mosque as we know historically that the place exist there. And he gave the date for us…. First Temple on that site was built in 960 BC, allegedly by Solomon to house the Ark of the Covenant which his father, David, had brought to Jerusalem………..There is every reason in favour of Muslims understanding when it is known undoubetly that the temple of Solomon was built centuries before the advent of the prophecised last prophet…___

  138. Sanada_10 says:

    By the way, auntie. Have you read Q 3:7? I know you avoided it again.

  139. Sanada_10 says:

    You wrote, “Miss, you are so proud of your many references so I assume you must have noticed that there have been so many Arab-speaking Jews and Christians or other disbelievers living since the days of Rasulullah who obviously have shown disbelieves in him. Again, I am asking you. Any of them has dared to meet the challenge?”

    No kid, I am just stating fact and you are silenced with that reference, you envied me. The challenge itself is weird and illogical, that’s why people thought that’s useless. One verse is enough, right? Just make a proclamation that Devil is the god and ihsan is the messenger, he who created all these stupidity and ranting, is the stupidest example of a devil messenger. There, challenge is done. Want more? Here:

    1. Can’t you see o disbeliever, how marvelous the messenger is, he who always runs from your challenge is the best creation for muslim.
    2. Protect us from the stupid way.
    3. Shame to the devil and his messenger, master of its own feces
    4. This is the book, in it is a confusion, full of doubts, and to those who ridicule Allah
    5. When the time is over, slay all muslims and cut off their ears. Indeed, they are the lowest of the low.
    6. The disbelievers are like dragon, high and mighty, in it lie the strength of logic.
    7. I.I.S
    8. When it is said to them, “Al Buraq is lightning”, they say, “it is laser”. Woe to them, they know not the limit of their stupidity. Lying is a breakfast to them.
    9. Do they not look at the earth and its round shape?
    10. Do they not observe the big cat, how quick it destroys its prey? This is the sign of the devil, for those who believe.
    11. A.O.M
    12. Truly, he watches nothing and read nothing. Empty is his mind
    13. (The devil messenger) frowned and run away.
    14. They say, “We can sense allah”. This they set forth to thee, only by way of assumption: yes, they are deluded people, not knowing their own limit.
    15. Produce my challenge, if you are truthful.
    16. M.I.F
    17. Woe to every coward and troll.

    Go google, kid. This is like Purana and Kalki thingy, you post but you don’t read. Oh, and change “they dare” to “they ignore”. No one cares about the insane, right?

    You talked about A => I refuted with A => You couldn’t answer and diverted it to B. Come on auntie, have some balls will you?

    So, what’s the conclusion of the “observation”? You haven’t touched my evidence at all, auntie. Stop acting like a kid.

  140. Sanada_10 says:

    You wrote, “is the only thing that can lead one to sensing God's existence”

    For your own record, Islamic monotheism came from reference, not from sensing god’s existence. Where did Umar get this? It’s from reference. Who? It’s from Muhammad. Where did Muhammad get that? It’s from reference too. Which one? It’s from older religions. Sensing god is like sensing other gods and myths. Put other names in there and you’ll get the same result.

    You are not sensing anything about god. You are assuming god’s existence using your human’s limited nature and Islamic mindset (this too is already explained in indo site).

    You wrote, “Here is a question for you to answer using your ability to do much reading”

    A question? From you who don’t answer anything? Well, I’ll be damned. The earth must be flat right now.

    You wrote, “After 14 centuries, have you seen anyone with an abundance of references dare to meet this very simple challenge?”

    You can look anywhere and you’ll find Islamic critics from 7th century until now. One thing doesn’t change though. Muhammad and his followers loved/love to kill the critics.

    Dude, to know the fakeness of Islam is easy and not even a challenge. Start to think logically and objectively. You didn’t dare to discuss the issue and started this irrelevant rant.

    Here’s my counter challenge:

    1. Have you seen someone with references who can prove that Muhammad is a prophet logically?
    2. Have you seen someone with references who can disprove Sina?
    3. Have you seen someone with references who can do my challenge on Islamic pseudoscience?
    4. Can you even refute my argument and reference?

    Come on auntie, let’s play truth and dare.

    You wrote, “To make just one verse like those in the Quran.”

    Hah? Read it, kid. It’s everywhere already if you even bother to read. Google it and you’ll find plenty.

    I don’t think making verses in Quran is a challenge, unless you think that a god who was making many mistakes and scientific blunders needed to be challenged.

    “Who can make mistake like this?”, It’s funny, isn’t it?

    You wrote, “For your info, this is one of the challenges from Allah for those in doubt about it.”

    I’ve known that from 3 years ago. You are too late, auntie. Don’t divert the issue will you? Everyone will see that you are a coward.

  141. Sanada_10 says:

    Let’s do some comparison on your hypocrisy:

    Prithvi => taking about pedophilia in pedophilia page (relevant) + suicide bomb as supplement => you said that it’s irrelevant

    Me => talking about “observation” in Miraj page (relevant) => turned out to be “submission” => you protested, not because of the meaning of “observe” but because of “submission” itself => the real irrelevant response by you.

    Got it, auntie?

    You wrote, “Whose do you think they are? a human being's? the mercy and grace of many gods with a leader who cooperate among themselves to fulfill human needs?”

    It’s not Allah, that’s for sure. Oh please, save the irrelevant lecture, auntie. You are a coward who didn’t dare to read my post about “god and its attribute” and you are proven to be a monologue muslim again and again. You don’t read anything but you force others to accept your silly brain.

    Why don’t you go back to indo site and answer my points in “Saya Mempelajari Kebenaran Quran”. That will be relevant. You shouldn’t run from one discussion and fired irrelevant bullet in another discussion, kid.

    You wrote, “Actually that is the beauty of Quran, miss, inviting all mankind to be the slaves of the only Creator of all things. An invitation that people with the right minds would have no objection to.”

    Nope, becoming slave of allah means becoming Muhammad’s pet. Do you know logic? If Allah is a god then we humans are already his “slaves” whether muslim or not, invited or not, so no need for conversion, unless… (I’ve explained it in indo site).

    Right minded people? Incorrect, only people with insane mind can follow a narcissist, a pedophile, a robber, a rapist, a slaver, an assassin, and a mass murderer. Islam is intolerant and violent religion, only evil and retarded human follow it.

    Looking for lust and greed for booty? Choose Islam
    Looking for little children? Choose Islam
    Looking for plenty of sex and many women? Choose Islam
    Looking for bigotry and fascism? Choose Islam
    Looking for misogyny? Choose Islam
    Looking for killing? Choose Islam
    Looking for stupidity and want to become stupid? Choose Islam

    Auntie, I’ve already told you that your rhetoric and gung ho style is complete rubbish. Any religionist can say what you say, kid.

    You wrote, “You said I lacked of reference”

    Yes, you do. You lack reference, logic, and gray cell in your brain.

    You wrote, “Ha ha, can you name one who does not?”

    Me, auntie and that’s proven with your irrelevant and emotional rambling.

    You wrote, “Don't you realize how stupid you sound if you say that reference (maybe here what you refer to is much reading, huh?)

    Oh, of course I realize something. I realize that you, despite of all your big talk and ad hominem, still cannot refute me.

    Game time, let’s analyze your words:

    Me => stupid according to you (about reference)
    You => who can’t answer my reference => stupider than me => retarded.
    Me => normal
    You => not normal

    Touche, kid.

    Reference is a source of information, authority and fact, kid. For example, when I talked about “observation”, I searched the meaning, the context, the commentary and the multiple translations. I don’t use feeling and emotion like you, kiddo.

    Reference = referring to a matter for decision or settlement or consideration to some authority. In this case the authority and the decision come from muslim scholars themselves. Who are you? You are not scholar, you are a kid.

    Islam came from reading, kid. All muslims on this earth are reading it, not knowing it. Don’t worry stupid auntie, I know you have inferiority complex and will make future mistake judging from this post alone.

    Where does Buraq come from? From reading hadith
    Where does Allah come from? From reading Quran
    Where does “observation order” come from? From reading Quran
    Where does laser come from? From your lying mouth

    Kid, you are so pathetic.

  142. Sanada_10 says:

    Relax auntie. I am not you, remember? Also my points still remains unchallenged.

    Dude, you still don’t get it? Still want to divert the issue here? Still cherry picking your opponent’s argument? Still adding irrelevant topic, eh?

    The OOT keeps building up when talking to you. Do you even know why you can’t convince anyone here, including “you know who”? It’s because you don’t have reference at all. You only use your feeling.

    For example, you responded “satanic angel” in bible with nothing, just a personal belief which doesn’t even have any reference. For your information:

    Info 1: Satan can disguise himself as angel in the Bible
    Info 2: Satan can only manipulate information in the Bible. He has no power at all
    Info 3: Muhammad was acting like a possessed man when divinely inspired and the angel was very rough when the first time they met.
    Info 4: In the Bible, no prophet had that kind of “possession”, not even one.

    What will you get from all of these?

    You wrote, “Miss, you are talking as if – with your brain – you knew anything about everything. If you want people to think that you are a smart dude, then you are on the right path. Keep it up. But to us, what you are doing is what we call the act of idolizing one's mind.”

    Auntie, careful when typing something coz you have made one more mistake. We are talking about Islam here, not everything so the correct words will be:

    “You act like you know everything about Islam” and I’ll reply, “Yes, I do”.

    I never said that I am all smart and never intend to make that impression, but if you feel that way then it’s just your slow brain that did the opinion, like Einstein’s relativity right? I am just a normal guy but when compared to a retarded auntie like you, of course I’ll become smart. Any informed person can become smart when discussing Islam with you. With my objective brain, I know Islam is proven to be false and I know too that you don’t dare to discuss that part. This is what I call “envy”. Why? It’s because you feel inferior when facing me.

    Idol? No, I am not idolizing one’s mind, I am “idolizing” fact and that’s called objectivity.

    You wrote, “You don't even know at what exact time you will have to go to the bath room the next morning to waste something you are now digesting, yet you consider your self smart and qualified enough to judge Allah and Rasulullah.”

    Irrelevant answer fueled by an offended feeling of a narcissist who fails to answer anything. Don’t worry, I’ve seen this. True, I don’t know the future but so did Muhammad/Allah. And when I found out that Muhammad was a liar, everything is easy, kid.

    Fact is fact and knowing/not knowing the future won’t change a fact. Man, you are so stupid.

    You wrote, “You argued that for us to observe is to be the slaves of Allah.”

    Of course, it’s because Islam means submission and your primary duty is to worship Allah alone. You yourself had said that this world (a drop of water) is nothing compared to the hereafter (an ocean). Ah, having amnesia, aren’t you?

    Knowledge or science is worldly and has nothing to do with hereafter.

    You wrote, “What is so wrong with a status of being an Allah's slave especially when I look around I see people and all other creatures are practically living in His Grace and Mercy?’

    Auntie, I was not discussing that part, remember? The topic is about the “observation” order and the correct one is “slave of allah” not “science”. I see that you don’t mind so I’m right again.

    Oh, playing assumption, aren’t we? When I look around I see that Allah is not god and Muhammad is false prophet. Or you can put any god as subject and you’ll get the same result. What’s wrong with “slave of allah”? A lot, kid but we are not talking about that specific topic, aren’t we? You are a naughty OOT auntie.

  143. Abdullah ihsan says:

    @ sanada

    O now you know at what exact time tomorrow you will waste the thing in you?

    It is you who are not thinking. I posted my opinion about Miraj but you came up with the idea of observing as means to the slaves of Allah. I agreed to that in my next reply, what's wrong? Muslims are proud to be slaves of Allah, no doubt about it.

    My question remains:

    Have you seen anyone, be it Arabic-speaking Jews or Christians or other believers dare to meet the challenge of making just one Surah (epistle) like those in the Holy Quran? The challenging verse can be found in the Surah named Albaqarah.

    You speak Arabic perhaps? Dare to do the challenge? Or you want to compose it in a different language, please feel free to do so.

    Remember miss, you haven’t been here to challenge me…. you are here because you want to challenge the authenticity of the Quran. So here we give you a clue on how that can be done as the Quran says.

    Make just one Surah like it and that's all.

  144. Sanada_10 says:

    Dude, all I know is your stupidity and this is proven again through your irrelevant answer.

    Auntie Ihsan, you are surely very clueless. Why you are clueless, it’s because you don’t read, you only see and reply what you want to reply.

    You misunderstand almost everything, be it Quran, hadith, and my posts:

    1. Promotion is mistaken as “asking back up” (I’ve explained it) => relevant with Miraj
    2. Logical argument is mistaken as Hindu/Christian argument => relevant with Miraj
    3. Myth (impossible) is mistaken as science (possible) and ignoring other myths => It is Miraj
    4. Vedic science is mistaken as Purana’s and the topic is mistaken too => relevant with Miraj

    And that’s only in this very page. There are plenty more in other pages, ex: Thief parable, ops.

    You refused to read that:

    1. No Miraj or physical journey in Quran
    2. Buraq means lightning not laser, and lightning has been used as a symbol since ancient ages
    3. Other religions have “science” too
    4. Quran has committed scientific blunder about universe.
    5. My evidence in indo version stays untouched.

    It’s like teaching a kid here, a stubborn and lazy one. You have to repeat again and again because the kid refuses to understand anything outside his mind. Have you ever talked about these 5 points? No, you only repeat your own refuted posts and ignore the rest.

    This is fact whether you like it or not,

    Allah swt never ever uttered the word ‘buraq’. Give the credit where the credit is due.

    But, is monologue fan going to read all of these? No, the auntie of the market will keep misunderstanding and cherry picking these vegetables. I am looking forward to reveal your future blunders and that’s definitely will happen, mark my words. Don’t forget the exchange, bibi Ihsan

    PS: Feeling is not reference, do some thinking will you?

    Challenge? To mass murderer and assassin like Muhammad? Where is your common sense, auntie? (I expect a reading problem again)

  145. Abdullah ihsan says:

    @ sanda

    Miss, you are talking as if – with your brain – you knew anything about everything. If you want people to think that you are a smart dude, then you are on the right path. Keep it up. But to us, what you are doing is what we call the act of idolizing one's mind.

    You don't even know at what exact time you will have to go to the bath room the next morning to waste something you are now digesting, yet you consider your self smart and qualified enough to judge Allah and Rasulullah.

    You argued that for us to observe is to be the slaves of Allah.

    What is so wrong with a status of being an Allah's slave especially when I look around I see people and all other creatures are practically living in His Grace and Mercy? Whose do you think they are? a human being's? the mercy and grace of many gods with a leader who cooperate among themselves to fulfill human needs?

    Actually that is the beauty of Quran, miss, inviting all mankind to be the slaves of the only Creator of all things. An invitation that people with the right minds would have no objection to.

    You said I lacked of reference. Ha ha, can you name one who does not? Don't you realize how stupid you sound if you say that reference (maybe here what you refer to is much reading, huh?) is the only thing that can lead one to sensing God's existence. Here is a question for you to answer using your ability to do much reading

    After 14 centuries, have you seen anyone with an abundance of references dare to meet this very simple challenge? To make just one verse like those in the Quran. For your info, this is one of the challenges from Allah for those in doubt about it.

    Miss, you are so proud of your many references so I assume you must have noticed that there have been so many Arab-speaking Jews and Christians or other disbelievers living since the days of Rasulullah who obviously have shown disbelieves in him. Again, I am asking you. Any of them has dared to meet the challenge?

  146. Sanada_10 says:

    Pseudoscience exists in almost all religions and you are evading that, kid.

  147. Sanada_10 says:

    You wrote, “I know that this information is placed in the hearts of all missionaries to refute Muhammad’s prophecy”

    Funny, it is in bible and their job is to believe it. Put muslim in there and the result will be the same. By the way, I did tell you that Muhammad doesn’t exist in Bible, right? If you don’t have the gut, just say so, kid.

    Option A: You have the gut => go to FFI.org (don’t forget to send signal)
    Option B: You don’t have the gut => just scram to your mommy.
    Option C: Pretend no to read it and continue cherry picking my post

    You wrote, “That is how they have been trained to defend their beliefs as they’ve seen no other successful way of doing so except maybe by donating to very poor Moslems when rich Moslems don’t do reversely”

    This is irrelevant answer, auntie. Trained to belief? This is very ironic words coming from a believer. Says who? Rich muslims spread their propaganda in the west, seeking converts and creating terror.

    Nope, actually their faith about satan has a mix of reality in it. Let’s say, they are not 100% wrong.

    You wrote, “You too have the right to say whatever you wish about this highly honored man,”

    Oh, of course but your assassins are lurking everywhere and Muhammad, the assassin, didn’t like that.

    Correction: change “whatever you wish” to “simply fact”. I am not you, remember?

    You wrote, “the messages he brought to human race remains: Observe….. keep observing”

    Oh, the word of ignorant believer, it’s very “touchy” yet lacking of reference. No, the message is to become slave of allah. Knowledge is worldly and not important.

    The truth is, Allah said, “Observe … keep observe … until you find that I don’t know anything…”

    You wrote, “And man will find out how nothing they are in His Mightiness and Knowledge. Then, shouldn’t we all just bow down to Him?”

    Nope, there is only fake god proven by scientific blunder and human defect. Bow down? That’s just human perception and emotion (I have explained it and you’ve avoided it). Your persuasion and gung ho style is rubbish, why? You didn’t read anything.

    Fact 1: I am debating you with solid logic and reference
    Fact 2: You are opining me with nothing but rhetoric and feeling

    Q.E.D.

  148. Sanada_10 says:

    Got it, auntie? Man, you are so stupid but proud, you replied but you didn’t get my point at all. My past words are proven again and again. Which one? Here:

    1. “Orang aneh menganggap orang lain juga aneh, orang gila menganggap orang lain juga gila.”

    2. “Nanti kalau gue bersugesti sebaliknya, anda bakal protes lagi. Kan sugesti bisa dilawan dengan sugesti”

    3. “Ini sih bukan bodoh lagi, tapi terbelakang”

    4. “tak bisa membalas yang besar lalu berkonsentrasi penuh pada yang kecil, seolah-olah yang kecil bisa menghapus yang besar. Semakin terdesak semakin banyak kesalahannya.”

    PS: It’s not my fault that you are so stupid, it’s the religion, Islam.

    You wrote, “I don’t understand why you said that you’re not”

    That’s just your slow brain, heck, you couldn’t even understand simple thing like “Jewish company”. If you ever bother to take time and understand my words, you wouldn’t say this. Don’t get trap with “parable” and “argument”, this is the playground for grown up, kid.

    Question for you: Do you feel the urgency to reply? If yes, then you are short minded, if no, then you are retarded. I feel that the second is more accurate judging from your replies all this long.

    You wrote, “Anyhow, who cares about your religion? I don’t. Do you?”

    True, I don’t care about religion except religion that creates violence like Islam. If you didn’t care you wouldn’t even cherry pick and say this part. Oh, I see you care about your own brain capacity, that’s why you asked this to me. This is what I call “envy”.

    Logic lesson:

    There are 5 topics, A chose only 1 out of 5 and concentrated on that only. Then A said, “I don’t care about it”.

    You wrote, “Of course it’s legal for you to have faith in that made-up satan-related story”

    If that’s a made up, Islam is a made up too. It’s legal and reasonable to say that Muhammad is a devilish prophet like in Hindu scripture, ops.

    You wrote, “You are free to believe as you are free not to believe it”

    Touche, but Islam is not about that.

    You wrote, “What I do believe is that satan has no capability to look like Rasulullah.”

    No, I was talking about Jibril, not Muhammad. Satan can appear as an angel of light in the bible and Muhammad was his victim and victimizer. I know this dream thingy. This is from Bukhari, right? Come one, circular logic from hadith is not going to help you.

    You wrote, “For more, Rasulullah Muhammad himself would have said big NO to a satan appearing like an illusory angel asking him to agree that Allah has a son.”

    Circular logic, of course the thief would not admit his own deed. The prison would be full of them if they started to admit.

    Note: There is no angel telling that in Quran or hadith. Check mate again, kid.

  149. Sanada_10 says:

    You wrote, “Ha ha miss, a Christian friend of mine once mentioned this to me”

    Auntie, it is Bible not your Christian friend. Your friend got it from Bible. Laughing when you don’t know anything is a shameful act, a narcissistic one.

    You wrote, “The difference between you and my friend is that he brought up this issue in a gentle manner making me more than happy to respond to him.”

    Auntie, it’s clear you don’t even understand me. Hah? Using gentle manner and at the same time talking that allah is a demon to the muslims? What for, Mr. Oxymoron? I am a person without a mask, unlike you. Allah swt never teach muslim to be gentle to non muslim and I, for all this long, is talking about fact and fact hurts.

    You wrote, “By you saying this very same thing I see that you too are a Christian”

    And by saying this, I see that you are so stupid. Why? Here, my past words to you:

    Quotes 1, taken from “Saya Mempelajari Kebenaran dari Quran”:

    “Mati mengenaskan itu fakta seperti Yesus juga, cuma sugestinya yang berbeda”

    “Iman itu cuma seperti membalikkan telapak tangan, mudah buatnya tapi mudah pula nolaknya.”

    “Perspektif iman Kristen => mati mengenaskan dan merupakan hukuman tuhan karena sudah mengubah ajaran Kristen. Pengikut nabi palsu dari setan memang begini nasibnya.”

    “Perspektif logika/objektif => mati menyakitkan, terlebih bila kita melihat cara membunuh orang2 yang dimaksud (yang jelas2 bukan ninja professional) di mana mereka harus “memastikan” kalau targetnya benar2 mati”

    “Yesus itu guru spiritual”

    “Lho, gue pernah bilang ya kalau gue mengakui ketuhanan Yesus?”

    Quotes 2, taken from “Mesjid Al Aqsa kesalahan Muhammad”:

    “Maksud Sina tuh, buat apa membahas mitos karena ini sama saja dengan membahas naga, ular berkepala delapan, yeti, peri, kebangkitan, siluman tengkorak, garuda, hanoman, star trek, alien, vampire, dll.”

    “Apanya yang senseless dengan trinity atau kebangkitan?”

    Quote 3, taken from “Penyaliban dalam Quran”:

    “Alkitabpun begitu karena harus dibandingkan dengan cerita2 rakyat di timteng sebelum agama yahudi ada.”

    “Kalau bicara logika “kenyataan” sih gampang karena cerita2 di dua buku itu tidak mempunyai bukti”

    “Kalau secara iman mah semua orang juga bisa, mau dia nabi betulan bisa, mau dia nabi setan juga bisa, mau dia nabi dewa juga bisa, apalagi nabi batu.”

    Quotes 4, taken from “Mariyah, Budak seks Rasul suci:

    “Game time! Waktunya bersugesti kayak anda:”

    “Ingat, apapun yang anda sangkal, gue bakal pakai cara persis kayak anda, yaitu cara iman.”

    Sigh, this means you didn’t really read this particular part. What a coward.

    And last but not least, the quote I took from my own words right above it in this very page,

    “Faith means believing without evidence. Like allah swt is a devil, that’s faith too. Jesus is god, that’s faith”

    “How about from now on, I’ll have faith that Muhammad is a true prophet from the great Satan” (Look closely at the first sentence, kid and read it carefully)

  150. Sanada_10 says:

    You wrote, “Observation is proven to be the very basic natural way by which modern sciences have been and will always be revealed”

    Sure, that’s natural and has nothing to do with god’s order. Does god order you to eat?

    You wrote, “These days, still through observations, certain scientists have tested the Quran against the latest technologies.”

    No one test it. If you have a credible source, then you can present it. Talking is easy. Who are “certain scientists” here?

    You wrote, “Some have confirmed its authenticity while some haven’t”

    This is dubious statement. Citation needed

    You wrote, “There is of course nothing wrong with it as technology keeps advancing.”

    There is a lot of wrong in it.

    You wrote, “There is still so much to be revealed in that we all call mystery.”

    Yoi, it’s revealing the blunder of Quran. One thing for sure, Buraq is not one of them.

    You wrote, “By this I mean to say that this most amazing miraculous journey called Miraj is actually still wide open for further observations and scientific studies by all mankind”

    No, it’s not. I’ve given you the proof including Quranic reference. Have you read Arda Viraf? I know you haven’t coz you love to ignore everything that don’t conform your mind, even Quran itself. Pseudoscience has no place in real science.

    You wrote, “Allah permits that even if the observers happen to be disbelievers.”

    Citation needed. Explaining the obvious is not a merit but common sense, ex: Egypt and Persia. I know you will misinterpret this again. Come one, I deliberately do it this time.

    You wrote, “However, some faithless people living by these modern technologies are still easily convinced to hastily conclude this highly scientific event as fairytale.”

    And some faithful people are so easy to believe fairy tale such as dragon, vampire, monster, angel, buraq, etc. Dude, it is a fairy tale and scientifically impossible. Many people have shown you that but you didn’t dare to read. Read the evidence, kid, read.

    Fact 1: Changing “lightning” into “laser” is not scientific but a big lie.
    Fact 2: Putting Buraq into allah swt’s mouth is also big lie.

    You wrote, “Most people living in the 7th century might have simply thought so, but not today’s scientists.”

    Today scientists never believe nonsense in Quran. Are you even aware of this?

    Note: Allah swt didn’t care about it, he was just angry at these ignorant people. This is what will happen when the ignorant tries to each another ignorant.

    You wrote, “You wrote too long, but I was aware that you said”

    Incorrect, I wrote long but relevant post and you cherry picked the safest words from it. Worse of it, you again and again misinterpreted it. So this is the correct words:

    You wrote the detail from my mistakes and I will only answer things that I can answer, the things that I can’t, I won’t answer it.

    Understand, auntie? Change “too long” to “proportional” and “aware” to “afraid and confused”.

  151. Sanada_10 says:

    I see you still don’t read anything. What the heck, you are like that anyway.

    You wrote, “You are right; it's not possible to do that.”

    Yup, I am always right when talking to you.

    You wrote, “In modern societies like today’s, whether they realize it or not, people are applying what the Quran repeatedly suggests them on how to dig up technologies, which is by observing all of His creations.”

    Not true, allah swt told muslims to observe his creation to know that he was the one who created it, not for seeking knowledge. If this is applied then other gods who are older than allah are right too and I have shown you some examples.

    This is what you call “human nature”. Human is a very curious creature and always wants to know everything. Human is also very needy and this trait can be destructive. Necessity is the mother of invention and not all inventions lead to goodness. All of these came from human itself not from any god. Ironically, if I take your silly argument to be right, then allah swt who had told muslim to observe the universe is, in fact, proving himself that he is not god. Religions and gods come from this human nature not the other way around. I’ve discussed it in Indo version but you are too afraid to respond. It was human who gave birth to nowadays god/gods.

    This is just one example from Surah 88:

    17. Do they not look at the Camels, how they are made?-
    18. And at the Sky, how it is raised high?-
    19. And at the Mountains, how they are fixed firm?-
    20. And at the Earth, how it is spread out?

    In here, allah swt ordered humans to observe:

    1. The camel, Ibn Kathir says:

    “(Do they not look at the camels, how they are created) Indeed it is an amazing creation, and the way it has been fashioned is strange. For it is extremely powerful and strong, yet gentle, carrying heavy loads. It allows itself to be guided by a weak rider. It is eaten, benefit is derived from its hair, and its milk is drunk.”

    2. The sky, Ibn Kathir says:

    “and at the sky and how it has been raised.'' Meaning, how Allah raised it in such magnificence above the ground. This is as Allah says,

    (Have they not looked at the heaven above them, how we have made it and adorned it and there are no rifts on it)”

    3. The mountain, Ibn Kathir says:

    “(And at the mountains, how they are rooted) meaning, how they have been erected. For indeed they are firmly affixed so that the earth does not sway with its dwellers. And He made them with the benefits and minerals they contain.”

    4. The earth, Ibn Kathir says:

    “(And at the earth, how it is outspread) meaning, how it has been spread out, extended and made smooth. Thus, He directs the bedouin to consider what he himself witnesses. His camel that he rides upon, the sky that is above his head, the mountain that faces him, and the earth that is under him, all of this is proof of the power of the Creator and Maker of these things. These things should lead him to see that He is the Lord, the Most Great, the Creator, the Owner, and the Controller of everything. Therefore, He is the God other than Whom none deserves to be worshipped.”

    Dude, allah swt didn’t tell you to search science, he was showing off his so called ability and never realized the blunder. Want another? Here:

    Q 67:19 Do they not observe the birds above them, spreading their wings and folding them in? None can uphold them except [Allah] Most Gracious: Truly [Allah] Most Gracious: Truly it is He that watches over all things.

    You wrote, “All famous scientists be it Islamic and other scholars in the past or those living today have practically done that.”

    At first, you took specific verse containing the “science” but now you only rely on “observe” word. What’s the matter?

    No, Islamic scientist in the past didn’t use Quran or “observe” order. They used their own nature and other past works such as Indian, Greek, Chinese, Persian, etc. None of them came from, of what we call now, Saudi Arabia.

    Islamic scientists in present day? Who? The one who learnt nuclear from kafir?

  152. Sanada_10 says:

    Dude, can you at least answer anything here?

    You wrote, “Then, there was this girl I’ve been talking to who brought up these scriptures”

    Oh, the envy, I can feel it. Auntie, you aren’t discussing anything, you ignore everything. Your illogical statement never stops, does it?

    Fact 1: I had demolished your Miraj
    Fact 2: You didn’t do anything about Hindu science (from Veda) and Bhavishya Purana is irrelevant answer, it’s a different topic, different logic and different source
    Fact 3: Your Bhavishya Purana is fake
    Fact 4: After knowing it, you’re evading it. What happen if you don’t know it? You’ll keep messing with it. Why? Clue: Your double posts about it, one in here and another in indo site.
    Fact 5: In muslim mindset, not answering equals to answering.

    Now, what do we “get” from all of “these”?

    Answer 1: Hindu science is correct
    Answer 2: Muhammad is a devil
    Answer 3: Islamic science is wrong.

    You wrote, “I modestly replied to let her see that the scriptures seem to mention Rasulullah Muhammad’s prophecy.”

    An illogical and irrelevant reply which is proven to be a devil according to Hindu belief but alas you didn’t dare to read. As I recall, your modesty is limited, am I right? Dude, I’ve seen that.

    You wrote, “Personally, I certainly have no clue whether or not Hindu’s teachings was once Islam”

    The reverse would be more logical.

    You wrote, “But the fact is a few Moslems start to believe that the two religions originated from the same God especially when such a belief is based on certain Hindu’s scriptures about the descriptions of kalky avatar which nowadays are somewhat related to Rasulullah”

    Yeah, if everyone is simple minded like you. Go look the difference between Kalki and Muhammad. Monologue fan like you never want to hear the truth.

    You wrote, “For everyone, this may or may not be true.”

    It is not true. There is no “maybe” in it.

    You wrote, “The way I see it, this issue is still open for discussions the way Miraj is open for further scientific studies.”

    That would be “true” as long as you ignore all of your opponent’s arguments and all evidences presented to you.

    Note: Islam has been proven false with science. You are talking about hadith, a man made book which is similarly false.

    You wrote, “What I do believe is Muhammad is His Messenger”

    I do know that he is not. Knowing is fact, believing is faith.

    You wrote, “And what I understand is that Allah says that the ‘expert readers’ of His Other Holy books would recognize Rasulullah Muhammad like they recognize their own son. “

    This is illogical and narcissistic.

    You wrote, “I just want to think that the prophecy of the prophet must be clearly written to them. “

    There is no Muhammad in Hindu scriptures or in Bible. You only see what you want to see, like a kid.

    One more: Look at what Misbah had recently said,

    “But when u try to figure out where and when that part of bhavishya purana was born, then u will end up with a big laughter.”

    And compare it with my older post to you,

    “Give me each translation from each book first, including the source, the word by word explanation, the context, and the DATE when it was made”

    Dude, you are pathetic, a big laughter indeed.

  153. Sanada_10 says:

    Wrong again dude, in this context muslim love to lie. I was talking about proof and limited context, auntie.

  154. Abdullah ihsan says:

    @ sanada

    Wrong.

    Your statement would sound better if you had quoted :" Common people love to lie." The adjective is common, miss. They could any person in any ethnic, in any religion, any nation.

  155. Abdullah ihsan says:

    @ sanada

    Which part do you think that I have misunderstood you? Please don’t go too far. This article is about Miraj which sina claimed to be absurd. He clearly says that it is impossible.

    Just briefly, miss. In this era, any new technology is likely to be possible. Just think about current technologies and let your imagination tell you how they are advancing in the future. Today, maybe man is still not able to accurately prove Miraj although signs of its being possible are already there. Amplified light (Laser) is just a beginning. This tell us that man can do something to light. But that is not important, miss.

    What are the messages in Miraj?

    It tells us about the highest technology that ever happened to man. But its other message is no less important. It wants us to learn that no matter how advanced technology can be, one, day, man shall return to Him, to Allah, his Owner.

    Note reply:

    No, you’re wrong. I never cared about what you believe. Its yours.

  156. Sanada_10 says:

    In other words, muslim loves to lie.

  157. Sanada_10 says:

    You are surely cherry picking my post again. No, you have misunderstood me again. Go read my post again. Your god told you to observe his creation to justify his divinity, like any god did, not showing science. If you still don't get it I'll explain later.

    Nope, I am not a Christian if you even bother to read, not just seeing my post. Do some thinking first, will you?

    First, you thought that I am a Hindu and now I'm a Christian. Dude, you are so clueless but you act like you know something.

  158. Sanada_10 says:

    Kalki thingy has been refuted if you even bother to read something.

  159. Abdullah ihsan says:

    @ Misbah

    Thank you for reminding me.

    Although curious, I am not that much concerned about Rasulullah being mentioned in Hindu’s scriptures. It would be some experts’ tasks to present this argument. However, it is said in the Quran that Allah has mentioned him in all of his previous holy books. Then, there was this girl I’ve been talking to who brought up these scriptures. I modestly replied to let her see that the scriptures seem to mention Rasulullah Muhammad’s prophecy.

    Personally, I certainly have no clue whether or not Hindu’s teachings was once Islam. But the fact is a few Moslems start to believe that the two religions originated from the same God especially when such a belief is based on certain Hindu’s scriptures about the descriptions of kalky avatar which nowadays are somewhat related to Rasulullah. For everyone, this may or may not be true. The way I see it, this issue is still open for discussions the way Miraj is open for further scientific studies.

    What I do believe is Muhammad is His Messenger. And what I understand is that Allah says that the ‘expert readers’ of His Other Holy books would recognize Rasulullah Muhammad like they recognize their own son. Most muallafs have found it true as they had spent so much time reading the Torah and the Bible. In the case those particular Hindu’s scriptures , supposing that it were true, I just want to think that the prophecy of the prophet must be clearly written to them.

    Thanks again for your suggestion.

  160. Abdullah ihsan says:

    @ sanada

    You are right; it's not possible to do that. In modern societies like today’s, whether they realize it or not, people are applying what the Quran repeatedly suggests them on how to dig up technologies, which is by observing all of His creations. All famous scientists be it Islamic and other scholars in the past or those living today have practically done that.

    Observation is proven to be the very basic natural way by which modern sciences have been and will always be revealed. These days, still through observations, certain scientists have tested the Quran against the latest technologies. Some have confirmed its authenticity while some haven’t. There is of course nothing wrong with it as technology keeps advancing. There is still so much to be revealed in that we all call mystery.

    By this I mean to say that this most amazing miraculous journey called Miraj is actually still wide open for further observations and scientific studies by all mankind. Allah permits that even if the observers happen to be disbelievers. However, some faithless people living by these modern technologies are still easily convinced to hastily conclude this highly scientific event as fairytale. Most people living in the 7th century might have simply thought so, but not today’s scientists.

    You wrote too long, but I was aware that you said:

    “How about from now on, I’ll have faith that Muhammad is a true prophet from the great Satan. This is legal too, right? You know that satan only have information and can appear as an angel, don’t you? Check mate, kid.”

    Ha ha miss, a Christian friend of mine once mentioned this to me. The difference between you and my friend is that he brought up this issue in a gentle manner making me more than happy to respond to him. By you saying this very same thing I see that you too are a Christian, but I don’t understand why you said that you’re not. Anyhow, who cares about your religion? I don’t. Do you?

    Of course it’s legal for you to have faith in that made-up satan-related story. You are free to believe as you are free not to believe it. What I do believe is that satan has no capability to look like Rasulullah. For more, Rasulullah Muhammad himself would have said big NO to a satan appearing like an illusory angel asking him to agree that Allah has a son.

    I know that this information is placed in the hearts of all missionaries to refute Muhammad’s prophecy. That is how they have been trained to defend their beliefs as they’ve seen no other successful way of doing so except maybe by donating to very poor Moslems when rich Moslems don’t do reversely. You too have the right to say whatever you wish about this highly honored man, but the messages he brought to human race remains: Observe….. keep observing. And man will find out how nothing they are in His Mightiness and Knowledge. Then, shouldn’t we all just bow down to Him?

  161. Misbah says:

    Dear friends,

    Before you base your arguments on that source called bhavishya purana, I would request you to dig into a bit. I have been a muslim like that and used to quote this thing as the ultimate evidence for the authenticity of Muhammed.

    But when u try to figure out where and when that part of bhavishya purana was born, then u will end up with a big laughter.

    Muslims when they ruled India, just added it. That script called bhavishya purana is not a complete book handed since ancient ages. It has been edited and added to up until a few centuries ago.

    You dont believe me? if you are sincere and methodical in your research, look it up yourself.

    Misbah

  162. Sanada_10 says:

    He's already done that but you refused to see. No, it is not possible to do that.

  163. Sanada_10 says:

    The game of copy paste? Acting like amateur? Why not? Here:

    Bhavishya Purana : The Prediction of Islam And Muhammad

    According to Bhavishya purana

    Mahamada (Incarnation of Tripurasura the demon) = Dharmadushika (Polluter of righteousness)

    Religion founded by Mahamada = Paisachyadharama (demoniac religion)

    Bhavishya purana (futuristic mythology)(Circa 3000 B.C)

    Bhavishya Puran: Prati Sarg: Part III:3,3 5-27

    Shri Suta Gosvami said: In the dynasty of king Shalivahana, there were ten kings who went to the heavenly planets after ruling for over 500 years. Then gradually the morality declined on the earth. At that time Bhojaraja was the tenth of the kings on the earth. When he saw that the moral law of conduct was declining he went to conquer all the directions of his country with ten-thousand soldiers commanded by Kalidasa. He crossed the river Sindhu and conquered over the gandharas, mlecchas, shakas, kasmiris, naravas and sathas. He punished them and collected a large ammount of wealth. Then the king went along with Mahamada (Muhammad), the preceptor of mleccha-dharma, and his followers to the great god, Lord Shiva, situated in the desert. He bathed Lord Shiva with Ganges water and worshipped him in his mind with pancagavya (milk, ghee, yoghurt, cow dung, and cow urine) and sandalwood paste, etc. After he offered some prayers and pleased him.

    Suta Goswami said: After hearing the king’s prayers, Lord Shiva said: O king Bhojaraja, you should go to the place called Mahakakshvara, that land is called Vahika and now is being contaminated by the mlecchas. In that terrible country there no longer exists dharma. There was a mystic demon named Tripura (Tripurasura), whom I have already burnt to ashes, he has come again by the order of Bali. He has no origin but he achieved a benediction from me. His name is Mahamada (Muhammad) and his deeds are like that of a ghost. Therefore, O king, you should not go to this land of the evil ghost. By my mercy your intelligence will be purified. Hearing this the king came back to his country and Mahamada (Muhammad) came with them to the bank of the river Sindhu. He was expert in expanding illusion, so he said to the king very pleasingly: O great king, your god has become my servant. Just see, as he eats my remnants, so I will show you. The king became surprised when he saw this just before them. Then in anger Kalidasa rebuked Mahamada (Muhammad) “O rascal, you have created an illusion to bewilder the king, I will kill you, you are the lowest…"

    That city is known as their site of pilgrimage, a place which was Madina or free from intoxication. Having a form of a ghost (Bhuta), the expert illusionist Mahamada (Muhammad) appeared at night in front of king Bhojaraja and said: O king, your religion is of course known as the best religion among all. Still I am going to establish a terrible and demoniac religion by the order of the Lord. The symptoms of my followers will be that they first of all will cut their genitals, have no shikha, but having beard, be wicked, make noise loudly and eat everything. They should eat animals without performing any rituals. This is my opinion. They will perform purificatory act with the musala or a pestle as you purify your things with kusha. Therefore, they will be known as musalman, the corrupters of religion. Thus the demoniac religion will be founded by me. After having heard all this the king came back to his palace and that ghost (Muhammad) went back to his place.

    The intelligent king, Bhojaraj established the language of Sanskrit in three varnas – the brahmanas, kshatriyas and vaisyas – and for the shudras he established prakrita-bhasha, the ordinary language spoken by common men. After ruling his kingdom for 50 years, he went to the heavenly planet. The moral laws established by him were honored even by the demigods. The arya-varta, the pious land is situated between Vindhyacala and Himacala or the mountains known as Vindhya and Himalaya. The Aryans reside there, but varna-sankaras reside on the lower part of Vindhya. The musalman people were kept on the other side of the river Sindhu.

    On the island of Barbara, Tusha and many others also the followers of Isamsiha were also situated as they were managed by a king or demigods.

  164. Sanada_10 says:

    You wrote, “Like you have imitated, sina claimed the impossibility of a travel of billions of light years to be done just over night”

    Yup, if he accepted that then why not accept other impossibilities in other religions and folklores? You have to be fair, Mr. One Perspective. If you want to be a skeptic at least show some balanced thinking. You are clearly forcing your belief to others, just like your prophet.

    It’s simple dude, as long as allah swt continues to make blunder after blunder about universe, this Buraq’s case is of course fake. Ah, I forgot, allah swt never mentioned any Buraq, silly me.

    You wrote, “Any one without faith will”

    That’s obvious, kid. Faith means believing without evidence. Like allah swt is a devil, that’s faith too. Jesus is god, that’s faith. God is one, that’s faith. God is many, that’s faith. Allah swt is angry, that’s human. Muhammad is false prophet, that’s fact. You are stupid, that’s fact. It’s easy to play like you. Wait, I’ve done this to you and yet you repeated it. Oh dear, oh dear, there is no end to your stupidity.

    How about from now on, I’ll have faith that Muhammad is a true prophet from the great Satan. This is legal too, right? You know that satan only have information and can appear as an angel, don’t you? Check mate, kid.

    You wrote, “Aside from the confirmed command for Shalat, the messages might have also implied an upcoming foremost sophisticated outer space technology which at present time proves to become harder to deny. Not to mention its potential progress ahead. It is just one of the countless technologies of Allah which surely surpasses that of human race yet is still possible to be scientifically observed, and perhaps, to a much lesser degree, can be applied by man sometime in the future.”

    Take it easy dude. You are talking way out of your league. Allah swt will be confused reading it. Here, a faith game:

    1. allah swt is true => other gods are true too => still muslim is so stupid because they fail to find this => kafir is so clever because they don’t need allah swt to find it => I don’t like stupid people => Nah, I’ll prefer other religion.

    2. allah swt is wrong => that will explain everything.

    Don’t think too hard, dude because Allah swt never does. I’ll close it with this verse:

    Q 3:7. He it is Who has sent down to thee the Book: In it are verses basic or fundamental [of established meaning]; they are the foundation of the Book: others are allegorical. But those in whose hearts is perversity follow the part thereof that is allegorical, seeking discord, and searching for its hidden meanings, but no one knows its hidden meanings except Allah. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: "We believe in the Book; the whole of it is from our Lord:" and none will grasp the Message except men of understanding.

    Unlike you, I know allah swt.

  165. Sanada_10 says:

    You wrote, “. Make him more aware of the diversity of human languages and cultures so he won’t be too arrogant with his arguments and insults towards Islam.”

    Sadly, this language is pretty much useless to him. Hmm, arrogance and insult? Nope, it’s just the truth, dude, like your 3 caliphs, ops.

    You wrote, “He may claim to have seen people of his own and visited some eastern and western cultures for his references, but he has overlooked Moslems in Indonesia who truly and deeply love Islam”

    Nope, Indonesia is not true Islam and it has been mixed with local value. Hey, I’ve already posted this, you monologue fan. Ideology is what matters, not the people. Loving Islam means loving allah swt and Muhammad, not love in true sense. And since Muhammad is evil then …

    Note: everyone tends to overlook garbage, isn’t it? I mean, the level of indo muslim’s knowledge of Islam is so poor. They can’t even read Arabic or understand verses.

    You wrote, “These people, whom I am a part of, are not descendants of the Prophet Muhammad nor are they Arabs, but to be frank to you all….. some Islamic scholars have much hope in them for future Islamic rise. Insya Allah. All they need is a fair, truthful, and strong and capable leader.”

    No one asks, you know. Yoi, every muslims want Islam to rise and that means evil rises. No, all they need is blessing from their god, but since their god is fake, then … Your opinion is too common, lying around like …

    You wrote, “About an article challenging the truth of the miraculous journey awarded to our prophet Muhammad with a discussion on laser in it? Why not?….”

    Sure, why not answer my posts about that? Why do you call this “truth”? Why not “falsehood”? Why not this, why not that. Why not give all myths an equal share? Why not discussing what Quran says about this? Why not discussing atomic bomb in Hinduism? There is a plenty “why not” in this world. The fact remains, kid: you still can’t answer the main point on the article. This is a trait of a coward.

    You wrote, “we look forward to reading such an article if sina decides to write on it. But when he does, please tell him not to forget to enclose scientific reasons why he’s had denials on the event.”

    Great, if he decided to do that. I’m bored with old articles anyway. On the mean time, why not answering my rebuttal on that? Let’s say, your obvious blunder on the meaning of “Al Buraq”. The answer is clear, dude. To go to space with laser and using physical body is scientifically impossible. My turn, explain it scientifically on how a human can do that. By the way, Just Dan had answered you but you chose to ignore it and gave irrelevant answer, so there is no need to enclose it.

    How about the meaning of “Abdullah”? This is true since the proof is right here but hey, you are a monologue fan.

    You wrote, “Not just merely calling it a fairytale”

    It is a fairy tale, kid. Until you can prove it on the field, it stays as it is.

    You wrote, “I do agree that its time line does count and thus is open for critics, but the voyage it self should also be brought up thus leaving room for debates on why such an event is in any way impossible in the view of the latest, rapidly advancing technology of human race.”

    Really? It’s because I have alternative explanation to that. Want to know? Come on, think hard, auntie. I know you can, can’t you? If the timeline is false then the voyage which is more crazy and impossible is of course false too, not to mention that Quran never says anything about Buraq. Remember, Islam is supposed to be perfect and clear, not creating holes and confusion. Only man made religion has this.

    You are intoxicated with hadith material, oh poor sunni kid.

  166. Sanada_10 says:

    Come on, this is all you got? I thought you want to answer me or something. Man, you are so clueless, aren’t you? I have put the “?” mark and you didn’t realize it. Sigh, stupid people love to play smart.

    You wrote, “Look, you are asking for some sort of back up just because you want to counter my fad writings about Miraj.”

    Oh, mind reading wannabe, great. Judging from your style of writing, I already knew you have only one perspective, so this doesn’t surprise me. Let me get this straight:

    Fact 1: I have countered your post about laser
    Fact 2: You didn’t counter back but coming here just to protest
    Fact 3: You love to change the meaning of everything, be it Quran, Hadith, or even my post.
    Fact 4: This site contains old Islamic pseudoscience, it’s boring since it already exists everywhere and proven to be false.
    Fact 5: There is no Miraj in Quran and allah swt never uttered the word “Al Buraq”..
    Fact 6: Ignorant people are overwhelming informed people and this topic is needed to be known since the other side will keep preaching it to the gullible masses and they are not bright. It even enters Youtube which most people visit.
    Fact 7: The logic of a man, who emotionally calls me “woman”, is clear for any rational person to see what kind of intellect you have.
    Fact 8: Your behavior of leaving discussion when beaten too much makes me think that you are an easy foe, no help is needed.
    Fact 9: People who don’t have confidence don’t answer anything. Who is that exactly?
    Fact 10: There are so many unanswered points from various topics that you owe me.
    Fact 11: When you play fair you’ll find plenty of “science” in other religions.
    Fact 12: You love to play monologue. You ignore opponent’s answer and argument thus making you to repeat the old refuted argument of yours. Kids love to do these.

    From all of these facts, no one needs help when dealing with you. Don’t put your attention only to yourself, Mr. Narcissist.

    Fad writing you said? That’s true, your writing is just a prank, nonsense, and crazy to logical people, in fact, all science in Islam are like that. That’s why it never shows up on Indonesian national TVs unlike FFI.org, but what about gullible masses? How about their intelligence, their knowledge, or their tendency to fall on this trickery? How about some “serious” debates about it? Like Campbell and Naik did on prank like this. Not to mention the presence of social sites like twitter or facebook which prank can be dangerous and destroy someone’s name. Never underestimate falsehood since it has been proven to mislead billions and unlike you, I think with broader perspective.

    Done studying? How about you start to answer my posts about laser?

    You wrote, “Why? You don’t sound as confident here as you did on the Indonesian’s site. What’s happened? getting a little shaky about your faith maybe? It’s only me who debated you, not an Islamic scholar.”

    Dude, which part indicates that I wasn’t confident? Was it the part when I showed your blatant lie? Or was it the part when you didn’t have any answer? The thought of winning is always in your mind, isn’t it? Yes, it’s only you who debated me. That’s why it’s so easy. Islamic scholar? Nope, the difference is not too big. None of you can prove anything actually. Maybe I should convert to Hinduism, what do you think?

    This makes me think that it is you who doesn’t have confident. Why?

    Fact 1: You protested multiple times on Sina but always indirectly and only in Indo version.
    Fact 2: Instead of answering my points on Indo version, you chose to come here and misinterpreted my posts like you did on Buraq.

    What’s the matter? Afraid?

    You wrote, “Don’t worry too much about my comments, ms sanada. Let sina read them for him self (maybe with a help from his translator) and have him learn a little Bahasa, ha ha”

    Hmm, I don’t worry about you (obvious) but I’m worried about the level of gullible masses. Muslims are known to have low intelligence because of Islam, you know.

    Sina? Maybe he isn’t interested with laser since “the jump” is too crazy, even beginner like Just Dan can see your level. In fact, he has surpassed you just in few days. Let’s say he’s leveling up but you stay the same. What I want is something new, not just repeating old articles and Sina has the habit of putting old materials in here. I’m bored.

    Knowing bahasa will do him very little since this language doesn’t have high value on international level. Translator will suffice, Auntie Ihsan. Ehm, can you buy me vegetables? I know you love to shop in market and cherry picking it. This is proven unlike yours.

    Are you laughing? About what? Bahasa? Sadly, that’s true.

  167. Sanada_10 says:

    Do you know anything about Hinduism? No, of course you don’t, you can’t even understand your own religion let alone this. I’m sure Hindus in this site can answer this. Actually, Islam said nothing about Hindu or India but Hinduism can say everything about Arabia including the kaaba. This means that you should convert to Hinduism, the most completed religion which had predicted Adam, Moses, Noah, Buddha, Jesus, Muhammad, Ali, Bahaullah, and even Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (Pretending mode on). Great huh?

    The funny thing is, muslims are desperate and feel proud to cling on Hinduism but Hindus just want to let them go, they never want to be equated with muslim or Islam. “Let go of my hand!”, “No I need you! Please don’t let go!”. It’s funny to see the monotheist begging so hard for the polytheist to help.

    Relying on other religious scriptures shows weakness on Islam because by itself, Islam cannot be proven to be true. Do you know that Muhammad is, in fact, never predicted in Bible? No, I didn’t dig it from someone else. I had discussed it myself in FFI.org, unlike you. Dare to go there? Let’s go then.

    Oh yeah, one more merit from Hinduism, Yoga. Does Islam have this kind of thing? Of course no, Islam only knows how to destroy the mind and body for the sake of allah swt. Friday is the best day to start building anger and frustration to kafir, thus creating violence, burning, killing, you name it.

  168. Sanada_10 says:

    Great, another mind reading wannabe, let’s see:

    First of what? 10 to 5?

    Off topic? Since when do you keep staying on one topic only? Remember “Jewish company”? Remember your difficulty on grasping my sentences?

    Dude, you really have a serious issue on how to read something. Do you see my post? Yes, you are, in fact, seeing my post, but do you really read it? No, you don’t. That’s why there are so many errors and repetitions in your post. Are you sure you are wearing the right glasses? Not from the street, right?

    Here, I repeat again:

    Even if I pretended that you are right, I will choose Hinduism because it has more than Islam.

    Which part in this sentence that you don’t understand? I also copied some Hindu science to show that pseudoscience is not only in Islam and if you want more than you can try other religions. These days, people like Zakir Naik love to generate lies and word games just for money and convert. When asked to reverse the pattern, none of these people can do it. The problem is, can you do it? So far, you are evading my challenge.

    Yeah, I can see that you weren’t the one who dig it. You only copied and pasted it. Whose book is that? From that many Hindu scriptures in your list, you only give me one unclear translation? Or that’s the only thing you can get since you were just copy posting another person’s post? And that Steven Ronsen thingy, why is it always stick on that translation? Give me each translation from each book first, including the source, the word by word explanation, the context, and the date when it was made. Oh, and that translation of yours is funny indeed. It only shows that Hindu scriptures can predict who is going to come and doing things. That’s the only thing you have brought, nothing else in there. Did it talk about Monotheism? Nope. Or Muhammad is the true prophet? Nope. Or Allah swt is god? Nope. Or Islam is scientific? Nope and trust me, I know this is false.

    Pretending that the translations or even the sankrit words are correct:

    – An illeterate teacher => duh, even the typo is included, you amateur. Nothing extraordinary, this is only a teacher
    – and he will give religion => Religion is many, not all of them are right, heck it can be all of them but one is wrong, at least according to this.
    – to his fifth-class companion => What is the meaning of this? Pagan? I doubt it.Maybe it means the caste system and it describe the fifth class which is the untouchables, polluted laborers (the outcast)
    – (Steven Ronsen, 1996) => Does anyone here have the reference that doesn’t mention this guy? This is important.

    etan mitrantare mleccha acaryena samanvitah Mahamad iti Khyatah siyyagrasva samanvitah.

    Mahamaad means: maha = great and maad = deceiver, wicked

    Mleccha:

    1 A barbarian,a non Aryan ( One not speaking the Sanskrit Language or not conform in to Hindu or Aryan institutions),a foreigner in general

    2 An Outcast, a very low man,

    He who eats cow's meat, and speaks a lot against shastras and he, who is also devoid of all forms of spiritual practice, is called a mlechha.

    3 A sinner, A wicked person, A savage or barbarian race

    In the end, I only see an illiterate teacher (not prophet) bringing religion (not every religion is right) to his pagan brothers (assuming this is right). What kind of religion? It’s the same paganism of course, worshiping stone, idolizing a mortal, doing weird ritual, committing many scientific blunders, etc.

    Conclusion from this amateurish copy paste: It doesn’t show that Muhammad is a prophet bringing true religion or any form of monotheism. It only shows an illiterate common teacher bringing a common religion to his common pagans. Wow, that’s some truth.

  169. Abdullah ihsan says:

    @ Just Dan

    Why is it so hard for you to answer my question? Here, let me make it easier for you:

    Is it possible for any scientist to invent just anything without prior observation? They key word in the Quran is to observe.

  170. Abdullah ihsan says:

    @ sanada

    First… a little out of topic just to confirm your statement.

    May I assume that your bringing up Hindu's holy books in the Indonesian’s site means that you believe them? If so, read these other scriptures:

    Atharva Weda , Kanda 20, Sukta 127, Mantra 1 – 3. Bhavishya Purana, Parva 3, Kandha 3, Adhya 3, Sloka 5 :

    etan mitrantare mleccha
    acaryena samanvitah
    Mahamad iti Khyatah
    siyyagrasva samanvitah

    translated to English as:

    "An illeterate teacher will come along,
    Mohhamed by name, and he will give religion
    to his fifth-class companion"

    In the Indonesian version the last verses are clearly translated into …”he will give religion to the pagans."

    I did not dig these ones up. A Hindus posted them for discussions

    These parts foretold about Muhammad's prophecy long before the Torah and Bible did. They mentioned him by name. Brief and clear.

    Are you going to say that these parts are not authentic while the science ones are?

  171. Just Dan says:

    Yes Mr. Ihsan. I hate to break this to you but Quran is not a book of science.
    Quran is impossible to be scrutinized and tested against scientific logic.
    Scientific logic is evolving. Quran can not.
    And i believe that the timeline in this particular story is impossible.
    Furthermore in Miraj, i simply can’t believe Muhammad’s claim about he being transported to High Heavens riding a human-faced pegasus in the speed of light (even faster). Against the laws of physics. And my offer stands, Muhammad was either lying, or he just had series of psychotic episodes. Sorry. 🙁

  172. Sanada_10 says:

    Yo, Abdullah Ihsan, running away from me is not good you know since you didn't respond on this LASER thingy but coming here and misinterpreted my post, this is shameful and narcissistic behavior. What can I say, you follow Muhammad. Even if I pretended that you are right, I would prefer HInduism since it has more than Islam. You dig? PS: Mine is not called faith.

  173. Sanada_10 says:

    Yup, they can only follow kafir's invention. This is what we will get when debating amateur. Pay attention to the method they used. Sun can rests, hilarious.

  174. Sanada_10 says:

    Nope, Quran follow modern science. Do my challenge first then talk,.

  175. Sanada_10 says:

    Dude, I've refuted you but this so called science is new to this site so it will be good for ignorant people to read it. I am promoting it not seeking help. Care to do my challenge?

  176. Abdullah ihsan says:

    @ Just Dan.

    Are you sure about your statement? the Quran is much more than just a scientific book. Modern Science followed the Quran. Like I told you in Indonesian site, Allah repeatedly invites man to observe his creations. Observe….. is what He asks man to do.

    Have you found any inventor who had not done any observation prior to his invention?

  177. Abdullah ihsan says:

    @ sanada

    Look, you are asking for some sort of back up just because you want to counter my fad writings about Miraj. Why? You don’t sound as confident here as you did on the Indonesian’s site. What’s happened? getting a little shaky about your faith maybe? It’s only me who debated you, not an Islamic scholar.

    Don’t worry too much about my comments, ms sanada. Let sina read them for him self (maybe with a help from his translator) and have him learn a little Bahasa, ha ha. Make him more aware of the diversity of human languages and cultures so he won’t be too arrogant with his arguments and insults towards Islam. He may claim to have seen people of his own and visited some eastern and western cultures for his references, but he has overlooked Moslems in Indonesia who truly and deeply love Islam. These people, whom I am a part of, are not descendants of the Prophet Muhammad nor are they Arabs, but to be frank to you all….. some Islamic scholars have much hope in them for future Islamic rise. Insya Allah. All they need is a fair, truthful, and strong and capable leader.

    About an article challenging the truth of the miraculous journey awarded to our prophet Muhammad with a discussion on laser in it? Why not?…. we look forward to reading such an article if sina decides to write on it. But when he does, please tell him not to forget to enclose scientific reasons why he’s had denials on the event. Not just merely calling it a fairytale. I do agree that its time line does count and thus is open for critics, but the voyage it self should also be brought up thus leaving room for debates on why such an event is in any way impossible in the view of the latest, rapidly advancing technology of human race.

    Like you have imitated, sina claimed the impossibility of a travel of billions of light years to be done just over night. Any one without faith will. But to us, this seemingly unbelievable length of time spent for the ‘miraculous travel’ is just a matter of WHO permitted such travel and the message(s) associated with it. Aside from the confirmed command for Shalat, the messages might have also implied an upcoming foremost sophisticated outer space technology which at present time proves to become harder to deny. Not to mention its potential progress ahead. It is just one of the countless technologies of Allah which surely surpasses that of human race yet is still possible to be scientifically observed, and perhaps, to a much lesser degree, can be applied by man sometime in the future.

  178. Arya Anand says:

    Yes. They are supposed to return the Dome of the Rock to Israel but this group of so called free mind Muslims( actually they are not free mind thinkers like other Muslims) are just a small fraction of the vast majority of traditional Muslims. They are the hopeless people following mirage. So they can't just do anything in the matter. TL

  179. Just Dan says:

    I don’t think muslims debate science, Sanada.
    They can’t grasp it. Even if they do. They’re against Holy Quran and ullemas.
    Science and Quran don’t match.
    They simply won’t accept science. Try teaching Quantum Physics to a camel. If somehow they accept, they’ll become apostates. All the talk about Quran’s greatness will tumble.

  180. Sanada_10 says:

    Mr. Sina, how about you begin an article involving another Islamic pseudoscience called “LASER” in Surah 17:1 (?) dan Isra Miraj hadith, “Al Buraq” which had been claimed as “solidified light” just like in “noor” case. There is a don … oh, I mean a muslim who boldly said this to you. Although quite ridiculous, it will be interesting to see new claim like this since “egg shaped” or “embryology” are too common, repetitive, and boring.

  181. drjikhan says:

    Ali Sina… u are definitely an imbicile… When Suleman AS built the so called temple, it was by the orders of Allah… a sacred place for the muslims of that era….. and u know it very well that we consider and respect all the prophets and consider all the people who believed in any of the prophet and Mohammad PBUH as the last prophet as muslims…. so the building that u call a temple, was a masjid at the times of Suleman AS and will remain so… so technically, Quran is and was never wrong in this case…. that is if i take ur argument that the temple was the first place that was ever built on that place to be true, for which u have no evidence to prove…. just a few claims by the jews who think that it was a temple and not a mosque…..

  182. drjikhan says:

    That he heard Allah's Apostle saying, "When the people of Quraish did not believe me (i.e. the story of my Night Journey),
    I stood up in Al-Hijr and Allah displayed Jerusalem in front of me, and I began describing it to them while I was looking at it."

    —Collected by Muhammad al-Bukhari, Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 58, Number 226[15]
    and this occured when a non-muslim who had been to jeruslam before asked about the structure of the mosque from Mohammad PBUH just to prove that he was lying…. and that non-muslim and all other non-muslims then stopped alledging him…..

  183. everin says:

    Talat What same message ? " To kill the infidels and the enemies of GOD " What nonsense r u spewing ?

  184. John K says:

    I know for a fact you have NOT studied the Quran and Sunna in as much detail as Dr. Sina. And that's a fact you can take to the bank. $50,000 worth if you take Dr. Sina's challenge.

  185. John K says:

    And who cares what Islam says about Jesus? Islam is a medieval death cult from a barbarian culture. Like it's really credible.

  186. John K says:

    You obviously haven't spent much time reading on this site because it is full of scientific refutations of the Quran. Have you actually read the Quran yourself? I can understand ignorant Muslims defending the Quran when they haven't read it, but anyone who has read it can see that Allah is obviously Muhammad's puppet to justify his evil desires for murder, loot, and rape.

    Muhammad's plagiarism of Christianity, Judaism, Zoroastrianism and Arab paganism was not very skillful. Comparing the Quran with the original sources shows that his recollection of those sources was primitive at best, giving only the barest outlines of the stories and totally leaving out the spiritual content. You really need to do something about your distorted perception of reality.

  187. John K says:

    Your story also shows a fundamental ignorance about the doctrine of Atonement and the prerequisite of repentance.

    You are really wasting your time with your childish stories. Grow up and get a life.

  188. John K says:

    How could anyone with such a superficial knowledge as yourself possibly think you are in the same league with scholars who are intimately familiar with Islams core texts?

    This is truly the Audacity of Ignorance.

  189. KKR says:

    This is a Joke, tomorrow anyone can make a new story…….i believe this is an Evil Cult and the followers will all go to hell.

  190. talatmd78 says:

    It is very simple. Islam says that all of the prophet brought the same message but few people corrupted these ideas and changed the verses as well as teaching of them for their own interest to subjugate commoners. If we see to Bible, We would see more than 66,000 errors agreed by Bible society and all of them made by human intervention. A simple example, gay Marriage was not valid even few years ago. Now it is valid by the church. I have seen you have given example that Abraham was during 2000 BC. How do you know through Genesis. Then calculate the entire homo sapiens existence in earth as per Genesis. Whereas scientists have found skulls from 15 millions year agos era. The question is, Sciense is even a variable. From time to tome it is been changed. But only quran is as it is and it will be. I would suggest you to have soft feelings for all muslim. I really appreciate you cause you feel that The muslims should be helped from erroneous Quran. But you can not do this in this way. You have to study Quran in details and then try. That will be more fruitfull and hope that May ALLAH will give you hidayah. Otherwise you would be able to help all muslims to be more faithful.

  191. talatmd78 says:

    Islam is the only religion where all the prophets mentioned in Torah and Bible are been regarded as same like Mohammed. Islam is saying that From Adam till Muhammad, everybody is having the same agenda, In the name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful
    Say: He is Allah, the One and Only!
    Allah, the Eternal, Absolute;
    He begetteth not nor is He begotten.
    And there is none like unto Him.

    That means Islam is saying Jesus is not as ALLAH’s son. He is a prophet and creation of ALLAH as well as slave of ALLAH. Same for Uzair, Same for Mohammed.Same for all of us.

  192. talatmd78 says:

    Coming to the main point. You are saying that Mohammad(Sm) is an unlettered man. That is his strength. How come an unlettered man relinquish so many Bible & Torah inscription and statement which were even intentionally hidden from commoner Christian and Jews. You can not produce even a single example of any western writer who claimed that these stories been heard by Mohammed cause even commoner jews & Christians were been put in ignorance intentionally for these facts by the Rabbis & Church. Not only that, How come an unlettered man provided that challenge to create a single verse as like Quran and for last 1400 years, no Single honorable Rabbi & Bishops did not able to answer. How come still now not a single person was able to prove a single error and deviation in Quran. There are so many How comes. I would say to you brother, why not you find out those above mentioned things try to make a verse as like Quran. I guess you know that even if you change a single letter in Quran that will spoil mathematical beauty of Quran. Just few examples are here http://www.quranwonders.com/2009/10/21/the-miracl….

  193. talatmd78 says:

    I am quite curious about your remark for Miraj. Let me tell you one story, There was a king who is very much kind to his people. He was having only one son as heir of the Kingdom. But the people are not as kind as like the king. One day three people were been judged for rape, Man slaughter & theft and got the verdict to be slaughtered for their ill doings. The king felt pity for them and offered his son instead of those infidels and released them. The judges slaughtered the prince instead of them. The King told the people that since I have persecuted my own son in favor of your misdoing, As a Prince He took away all of your sin and you are now free from all prosecution. So just Mourn for him. My story ends here. If you find this story is believable( As you believe for Jesus or Uzair), then I don’t see your point of expressing disbelieve on Miraj.

  194. talatmd78 says:

    Dear Brothers,
    The common law is that if you want to judge neutrally anyone or any practice, you need to know them briefly. One example is that John and Lida were arguing for an ice cream. Peter was passing them wearing a vanilla sky shirt and just heard that john is saying Lida that ” I love vanilla one”. Now if Peter thinks that John is loving his shirt, that is not the actual case. In this case, You need to know the very basic thing of Islam and you would find yourself in shame for your ignorance. I found your mentioned Hadiths are like my examples. You do not have basic idea about Islamic knowledge. The legacy of both these mosques had started from the time of Adam. That’s why I am really helpless to control myself from out bursting a laugh to read you explanations about dates.

  195. John K says:

    Good. Then they can give the Dome of the Rock back to Israel.

  196. Hamid says:

    Has any Muslim seen heaven to make such a claim? Where is the proof?

  197. Truth Lover says:

    Some Muslims in free-mind.org forum claim that this farthest Masjid refers to Masjid in heaven!

  1. 12 March, 2011

    […] Sumber: “Mesjid Al Aqsa” – Kesalahan Muhammad […]

  2. 28 May, 2011

    […] “Mesjid Al Aqsa” – Kesalahan Muhammad GA_googleAddAttr("AdOpt", "1"); GA_googleAddAttr("Origin", "other"); […]

  3. 11 December, 2011

    […] There are many problems with this story which we will not look right now, but just mention that many of Muhammad’s followers left him […]

  4. 19 December, 2011

    […] To read the original article, click here […]

Leave a Reply